EPTdamn TL+ expired. should i renew when some of the features don't work here and i seem to be on this site more now? also "Purchases of 6 / 12 months will include 1 / 2 months worth of free gift tokens that you can send to another user by gifting a post." I've done this at least a couple times and never seen this free gift tokens.
Off-Topic General Discussion - Page 3991
| Forum Index > The Shopkeeper′s Inn |
|
ComaDose
Canada10357 Posts
damn TL+ expired. should i renew when some of the features don't work here and i seem to be on this site more now? also "Purchases of 6 / 12 months will include 1 / 2 months worth of free gift tokens that you can send to another user by gifting a post." I've done this at least a couple times and never seen this free gift tokens. | ||
|
Seuss
United States10536 Posts
On January 13 2015 01:23 Scip wrote: SHUSH Monte nobody asked you so what is the case about JonGalt? :3 Let me satisfy you by telling my jury duty story. I can discuss it since the case ended in half a day. + Show Spoiler + The last time I had jury duty I actually got selected. This was exciting because every other time I've shown up for jury duty it's been a monumental waste of my time. The basics of the case were pretty simple. The defendant had been at fault in a car accident with the plaintiffs. The accident was fairly tame, but the plaintiffs claimed that the accident had exacerbated once-healed back/neck injuries which in turn had resulted in large medical bills that they wanted the defendant to pay. Now the judge informed us that he expected the case to take at least four days, probably a week or more. The defense lawyer, who was sharp enough cut diamonds, had other ideas. Because of his brilliance and a little help from underprepared plaintiffs we got to head home by noon. After several hours of legalese explaining what we, the jury, were supposed to discern and how we were supposed to evaluate the information we were given, the first plaintiff took the stand and was examined by their lawyer. It was pretty straight forward stuff about the accident, the injuries, and the cost to the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff their old injuries had been fully addressed over a year ago, which would mean the accident caused the injuries' recurrence and thus make the defendant responsible. When the defense lawyer began his cross-examination he very calmly and deliberately began going over the details of the old injuries and the plaintiff's medical history. It seemed fairly innocuous until he got to the plaintiff's medications. When the plaintiff first suffered their original injuries they'd been prescribed a controlled pain killer, a narcotic, to address their back and neck pain. The defense pointed out that the plaintiff had continued to fill this medication even to the present date, a full year and a half past when the plaintiff was claiming their old injuries had ceased to be a problem. On its own that contradiction would have probably secured a favorable result for the defense, but they didn't just leave it at that. When the plaintiff claimed they hadn't been using the medication all that time the defense smelt blood and went in for the kill. The prescription had been refilled multiple times past when the plaintiff's injuries had supposedly been addressed, if he wasn't using the medication why was he refilling it? Why tell your doctor you're still in pain to continue the prescription when you aren't? Why throw money away like that? The defense lawyer asked the questions as casually as someone asks whether they can substitute a soup for their side salad, but the plaintiff quickly broke. The plaintiff's lawyer should probably have raised an objection to try and stop the train wreck, but instead they just watched it unfold with the rest of us. Pressured, flustered, and desperate the plaintiff finally stood up red-faced and angrily shouted, "I was giving them to my wife!" Before I could process what had happened the bailiff had escorted us to the jury room and repeated the judge's strict orders to remain silent and discuss nothing until called for. For twenty minutes we sat in the room, overflowing with curiosity but completely unable to do anything but sit there and wait. Finally the judge himself came to the room and informed us that the case was over, we could all go home. The plaintiff had, in stating that he'd given his prescription to his wife, confessed to a federal crime on the stand. Whoops! | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On January 13 2015 01:16 Seuss wrote: Front-end webdevelopment usually involves a javascript library (jQuery is the most common, newer stuff like AngularJs or Ember is becoming popular) and a lot of AJAX calls to retrieve JSON data. HTML is little more than the skeleton these days, with the Javascript and CSS doing all the heavy lifting. If you want to throw something together quickly as a proof of concept Bootstrap is very helpful. Thanks I will look it up! | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On January 13 2015 02:14 Seuss wrote: Let me satisfy you by telling my jury duty story. I can discuss it since the case ended in half a day. + Show Spoiler + The last time I had jury duty I actually got selected. This was exciting because every other time I've shown up for jury duty it's been a monumental waste of my time. The basics of the case were pretty simple. The defendant had been at fault in a car accident with the plaintiffs. The accident was fairly tame, but the plaintiffs claimed that the accident had exacerbated once-healed back/neck injuries which in turn had resulted in large medical bills that they wanted the defendant to pay. Now the judge informed us that he expected the case to take at least four days, probably a week or more. The defense lawyer, who was sharp enough cut diamonds, had other ideas. Because of his brilliance and a little help from underprepared plaintiffs we got to head home by noon. After several hours of legalese explaining what we, the jury, were supposed to discern and how we were supposed to evaluate the information we were given, the first plaintiff took the stand and was examined by their lawyer. It was pretty straight forward stuff about the accident, the injuries, and the cost to the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff their old injuries had been fully addressed over a year ago, which would mean the accident caused the injuries' recurrence and thus make the defendant responsible. When the defense lawyer began his cross-examination he very calmly and deliberately began going over the details of the old injuries and the plaintiff's medical history. It seemed fairly innocuous until he got to the plaintiff's medications. When the plaintiff first suffered their original injuries they'd been prescribed a controlled pain killer, a narcotic, to address their back and neck pain. The defense pointed out that the plaintiff had continued to fill this medication even to the present date, a full year and a half past when the plaintiff was claiming their old injuries had ceased to be a problem. On its own that contradiction would have probably secured a favorable result for the defense, but they didn't just leave it at that. When the plaintiff claimed they hadn't been using the medication all that time the defense smelt blood and went in for the kill. The prescription had been refilled multiple times past when the plaintiff's injuries had supposedly been addressed, if he wasn't using the medication why was he refilling it? Why tell your doctor you're still in pain to continue the prescription when you aren't? Why throw money away like that? The defense lawyer asked the questions as casually as someone asks whether they can substitute a soup for their side salad, but the plaintiff quickly broke. The plaintiff's lawyer should probably have raised an objection to try and stop the train wreck, but instead they just watched it unfold with the rest of us. Pressured, flustered, and desperate the plaintiff finally stood up red-faced and angrily shouted, "I was giving them to my wife!" Before I could process what had happened the bailiff had escorted us to the jury room and repeated the judge's strict orders to remain silent and discuss nothing until called for. For twenty minutes we sat in the room, overflowing with curiosity but completely unable to do anything but sit there and wait. Finally the judge himself came to the room and informed us that the case was over, we could all go home. The plaintiff had, in stating that he'd given his prescription to his wife, confessed to a federal crime on the stand. Whoops! HAH that's great The one time I've been called, I had to tell my teachers I'd be out for the day, and drove an hour home to CT. When I got there, we sat in the room for a while, watched the intro video, and then a group of people got called (myself included) and told to go to another building a couple blocks down. We do, wait another hour (all this time, I'm just reading ASoIaF), they call some more names (this time I'm not included), and tell everyone else to go home. I get out of there just before noon, and on my way back to my parents', I get pulled over doing 45 in a 25. The cop sees me wearing some decently nice clothes (collared shirt and khakis - didn't wanna be the scrub on the jury), I tell him I was only in the area cuz I had to take time off from school for jury duty. He acknowledges it and just tells me to slow down. I should tell this story at parties. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
Did you like your free cancer? | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On January 13 2015 02:23 Ketara wrote: lol Soniv posted in the strategy section. Did you like your free cancer? pls, that was cathartic I always laugh when people think Annie has mana issues | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
But even still, I find it hard to believe that a Tear is necessary for that on top of an ROA. It seems to me that if the enemy champion is actually letting you spend all that mana on max Q's to hit him over and over, he's probably an idiot and dead way before you run out of mana. | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On January 13 2015 02:26 Ketara wrote: Well they're talking about playing her top as a "bruiser", which I would assume means maxing Q, last hitting with autos, and using Q on the enemy champion every 4 seconds to keep him away from creeps. But even still, I find it hard to believe that a Tear is necessary for that on top of an ROA. It seems to me that if the enemy champion is actually letting you spend all that mana on max Q's to hit him over and over, he's probably an idiot and dead way before you run out of mana. Nah, doesn't matter. You should still be last hitting with Q much of the time, and if you do, it's a 2 second cd. Just gotta be smart about timings and take advantage of stun cycling. Tear is shit on Annie. It just is. But this isn't necessarily a conversation I want to have here lol. | ||
|
ketchup
14521 Posts
| ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On January 13 2015 02:34 ketchup wrote: Many of the issues of the strategy forum would be addressed if posters were a lot more accepting of new ideas/different ideas than their own. The biggest issue I've seen there for the problem threads is that most of them are not. As in having a discussion and defending ideas isn't bad, but there is an ongoing issue with posters not being able to handle criticism. It can be difficult to accept criticism about something you think you know a lot about. It took me a long time to accept that MS quints on Viktor were REALLY good in S2. | ||
|
phyvo
United States5635 Posts
| ||
|
JonGalt
Pootie too good!4331 Posts
On January 13 2015 00:50 JonGalt wrote: JonGalt's Jury Duty Live Report - Day 1 Light flurries dusted my recently purchased 2012 Ford Fiesta. Scowling at this dreary weather, I cleared Jenny free of the cold damp snow using a patriotic looking oven mitt - a constant reminder to buy an ice scraper sometime soon. As I drive 30 minutes through my upstate New York county I snicker at the thought of becoming a rural juror. The chuckle is short lived as there are no parking spots and I am forced to pay for a meter that will surely run out before I am allowed to depart from my civic duty. Slightly cold, a Jack Reacher novel in my pocket, and munching on a Fiber One bar - I am ready for the bureaucracy that the New York State's legal system has in store for me. After a brief security clearing, I find myself in the courtroom looking for a seat. Most are taken as I scan the room, so I saunter towards the jury box where I situate myself in the front row. After a few minutes, I'm given a small scantron form to fill out regarding the date, my birth year, and other trivial census questions. Finding myself with nothing to do I peruse the threads of liquid legends until a woman announces we will be watching an orientation video. I settle myself in to the short film and after 20 minutes the movie concludes; I now know the basics of being a juror. Rumors of additional free parking makes its to my ear and I immediately excuse myself to eradicate the fear of a potential parking ticket. Making it back to the courtroom just in time, the judge enters and gives us the rundown of the trial that will commence throughout the week. Individuals who have reason to be excused now meet with the judge as the rest of us await the qualification process to begin. Annoyed at the inconvenience of being called in to jury duty, I'm hoping to be counted out of the final twelve - but a small part of me is excited at the prospect of being an angry man. As I wait for my pepperjack cheeseburger with a side of pasta salad I ponder over my recent events in the courtroom. 21 potential jurors were called upon randomly, sadly none of them me, to assess their qualifications as impartial judges concerning the fate of the defendant. The judge asked the collection of civilians a flurry of questions while the rest of us silently prepared our own answers. It was during this time I read a few chapters of the afore mentioned novel accompanying me in my pocket before dozing off. The judge gave a recess for lunch and now here I am, slightly more rested from my late night of failing promos to Silver III and slightly more annoyed my RNG luck did not put me up in the jury box where I can hopefully be excused from this patriotic, important, but very inconvenient duty that is hindering my journey to Challenger. Oh how I wish to discuss details of the defendant vs. us, the people of New York state - but for now that is outside the parameters of the law I choose to abide by. | ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
| ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On January 13 2015 02:40 jcarlsoniv wrote: It can be difficult to accept criticism about something you think you know a lot about. It took me a long time to accept that MS quints on Viktor were REALLY good in S2. I think the general TL population also pushes out criticisms in really bad ways (i.e. blunt), especially in the past. These days I see dramatic improvements though. | ||
|
WaveofShadow
Canada31495 Posts
Medical reeeeeaaasonssss | ||
|
Scip
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On January 13 2015 03:14 WaveofShadow wrote: I'll never have to do jury duty. Medical reeeeeaaasonssss I'll never have to do jury duty thanks to being born in a civilized country | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On January 13 2015 03:15 Scip wrote: I'll never have to do jury duty thanks to being born in a civilized country Idk man, Putin just needs a couple more countries to get to you. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
| ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
| ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
| ||
| ||
