Tidus44

I don't find many (just the one) of the quest lines in Skyrim abhorrent or to be avoided but, I do like examining the moral and ethical dilemmas the various quest lines present to the player and have even used some from Skyrim in the university classes I teach (its amazing how many students play TES games). Its fascinating how individuals justify their choices - pro or con. The game wouldn't be as fun I think without such dilemmas being present. And even though I don't have much of a dilemma in playing through the various quests, the one quest I cannot do and avoid like the plague is "Laid to Rest" in Morthal. The first time I ran across that quest I was so shocked I was ready to delete the game off the computer and never play Skyrim again.

Totally agree.

I don't believe that book exists in Skyrim. Its a book in Oblivion, but not Skyrim.

Actually, I thought this was a pretty good question. About a year ago I found out there was a fencing club/group where I live that has a qualified instructor in Historical European Martial Arts and who teaches German Longsword techniques. I joined because being a TES fan I had often wondered about how hard would it be to handle a sword and it looked like a fun way to exercise. I was a bit surprised at the weight of the sword and believe me when I say my shoulders, elbows and wrists certainly let me know that using a sword isn’t the easiest thing in the world. I have gotten to where I am sparring now and it isn’t easy, but it sure is fun. I have used a bow (a recurve/long bow) for a number of years and am reasonably proficient with it, so bow use wouldn’t be a problem for me. Given the above, I could probably do OK – at least hunting for food and probably defending myself to a degree if I were to be transported to the Skyrim world. Clothes might be an issue as winding up in Skyrim in pants, T-shirt and slippers might make survival a bit of an issue, but I am used to cold weather (prefer it actually) and I am quite capable of survival in the bush so I doubt that would cause me much of a problem. It would depend on where one appeared in Skyrim. Showing up in Haafingar, Winterhold or the Pale might make it a bit more difficult, as would the Reach, but show up in Whiterun or the Rift, it might be somewhat easier to survive. I would certainly get to a town, preferably one with a mine or a mine nearby as I would think one could easily find a job (menial for sure) that would provide a few septims a week and at the very least room and board for work. I would think that gaining skills, such as blacksmithing, would not be overly difficult either as the owners would most likely readily take on a helper in exchange for instruction, so gaining rudimentary skills would be possible. Careful excursions in the immediate area of the town would also allow one to gather plants/ingredients to sell and given the country side in the game one could easily run across a weapon or some item that could be sold to raise funds or used to further one’s advance to becoming an adventurer. While it may take a few years, I think I’d probably make out pretty well as an adventurer in Skyrim.

Doesn't seem to be anywhere else to post this so.... Happy New Year. Any resolutions? Mine are: Learn the ways of the ForceTake a ring to MordorGet a letter from HogwartsTrain a dragonTravel with the DoctorWork with BatmanVisit AsgardSit on the Iron ThroneFly Serenity Whats on your agenda this year?

While I appreciate that there are movies about a US President being assassinated, pretty much every movie made that had an assassination plot against a US President (or other head of state) involved a fictional character. The movies I can think of that referred to actual heads of state were based on actual events or were a serious examination of events that did or that may potentially impact society. In any case, the movies did not advocate assassination, didn’t make fun of the idea of assassinating a head of state and had at least some thought provoking questions raised. The other movies didn’t make fun of a real (living) head of state or treat the assassination as a joke, which is what this movie seems to do. Again, I don’t deny that freedom of expression should be defended, but to what degree? If a movie made fun of pedophilia should it be defended as freedom of expression? The free expression of ideas and opinion is not just entertainment. Opinions influence individuals and even society as a whole and the freedom to express an opinion also holds with it responsibility and accountability. Or is it that anyone should be free to express any idea or opinion they want without any limitation, restriction, responsibility or accountability? I see at least one conspiracy raised here in the thread, so I’ll raise another. What if the movie was made to deliberately provoke North Korea into retaliating in order to start a war? Is this freedom of expression that should be defended? How offensive does a movie have to be and to whom before it should not be defended as freedom of expression? And while the movie in question is just a stupid movie that holds no interest for me and I couldn’t care less if it was shown or not; and honestly I don’t even care what it may provoke North Korea to do in retaliation, I only raise the question as something that I ponder, not as something I advocate as reason not to defend freedom of expression.

While I do believe in the right of freedom of expression, I do ponder where this movie falls in regards to that right. I have seen the question raised numerous times regarding, "How would the USA feel about a film that was about a plot to assassinate the President?" and I do wonder what the reaction would be if such a movie was made. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights regarding the freedom of speech and expression do not offer an open ended right to express any idea or anything. There are limitations on freedom of expression and I would suggest that if the movie didn't cross a line, then it was pushing the boundary pretty hard. One of the limitations that the Declaration identifies is the "offence principle". This came about through a number of incidents such as the Danish newspaper cartoons portraying Mohammed, the movie "Jerry Springer: The Opera" and the movie Behzti. The declaration recognizes that offence can be very deeply felt and its consequences can be damaging. The principle suggests that consideration of how offensive something is should consider the motives of the speaker, the number of people offended, community interests and the extent to which the material could be avoided. It also considers who expresses the view. There is a significant difference between an individual expressing a view and a corporation that has global finance, global reach and close relationships with governments. The Declaration does consider the levels of responsibility that would be expected from an individual and those of a global corporate media differ. I don't say that Sony and the movie makers are wrong, but I do question if it was absolutely necessary to make the movie as it was made and if the intent was to be offensive. There is a fine line between offending someone and satire or a parody.

Work like you own the company.

Surprise your spouse, not your boss.

pathophobia - A fear of disease.

Sony let theater companies decide whether to play the movie. Rogen and Franco cancelled all media appearances for their movie. Sony Pictures cancelled the release after the big movie/theater companies and distributors decided not to show the movie. Sony should take further losses financially by releasing a movie no one is going to show? I doubt Sony made the decision on fear, but more so on financial concerns, and especially concerns about getting sued into bankruptcy if something should happen at some theater. As for the theater companies, I don't see how one can be critical of them for cancelling either; it's not like there isn't a plethora of nutbars out there who may be inspired to do something at some theater. After all, no theater in North America has ever had someone walk in and start shooting people have they? How critical would people be if Sony and theater companies did show the movie and some wack job killed people at some theater? The whiners would be complaining about how irresponsible Sony was releasing the movie. Sony and the theater companies are in a no win situation no matter what they do. Better to not release it than to open the door for every crazy to have an excuse to do something.

The comparison was eluded to in the previous thread. It was brought up in response to people being panicked because of it being something that is mostly fatal, but which they can contract just by being around someone who is infected. In short the "Someone coughed in the room and now I've suddenly gotten ebola" stupidity which was prevalent at the start and was the leading edge of the paranoia. In response I drew the comparison between this "deadly infectious disease that you cannot prevent on an individual level" and deaths from drunk driving which; while being something that individuals usually have no control over, and while having more deaths annually just in one country, you don't see anyone refusing to go about their lives in fear of. I didn’t follow the previous thread very far and probably should have gone there to see what the specific point was about.

The term refers to very fine solid or liquid particles in air. In referring to ebola in most instances it is liquids (body fluids) that may be sprayed into the air, as by cough or sneeze. The one report referenced by the website identifies the US Army as having an interest in ebola as a possible biological weapon and they (as well as others) are likely still looking at ebola as a possible weapon. And biological weapons do tend to have aerosol delivery systems.

Watched the entire video (33 minutes wasted) and read through the website and the referenced web pages and there wasn't one thing anywhere that I wasn't told in regards to ebola when I was in Africa in September/October. There wasn't one thing that I have not been instructed on since returning to Canada and my job as an emergency responder. Yes, ebola is an issue that has emergency responders doing some planning IN CASE an ebola patient is found on a emergency call. No one is predicting some huge outbreak so don't make anything out of it other than what it is, precautions just in case the unexpected does happen. There wasn't one thing that I have not already read in public information made (readily) available by Health Care agencies. Because good information is ignored by the sensationalizing media, ignorant politicians and petty, self important bureaucrats, it does not mean there is some conspiracy or no good information. And honestly, if you get your health advice from the media or politicians or some conspiracy website, then you probably deserve what happens to you. Considering how much good and accurate information is available and information that the website totally ignored or deliberately misinterpreted, one would have to be pretty dim to believe the website has any motivation other than to spread misinformation in order to cause fear and support some idiotic theory dreamt up in a delusional stupor, ("StormCloudsGathering", now there's a website that isn't in conspiracy mode and has nothing but 100% accurate information). They should be in the "Sensationalism run amock" (amok) thread. As for how many people one thing or another kills, I fail to see what is the point. Is it preferable to be killed by ebola or a drunk driver or some other event one can take precautions to avoid? I didn't see anything of value or an update on the website, just more misinformation from another website on a mission.

vernacularize: to translate into the natural speech peculiar to a people. Been trying to translate a Toyota HiLux repair manual to Portugese and Makhuwa. Taking way longer than I thought.

biometeorology - The study of how the weather affects people. What’s the difference between weather and climate? You can’t weather a tree, but you can climate. When the fog burns off it won't be mist. My two favorite weather sayings.

Why do ghosts say "boo!"? boo is the present infinitive of boāre (latin) and means; to cry aloud, bellow, roar or bray. Boāre; breeze, scent, fragrance, (obsolete) exhalation of breath; stench And why would a ghost speak in latin? Because its a dead language.

Beautiful cold and wonderful snow for the last two weeks. Not a cold snap, just normal weather where I am. Since I was away all of October I didn't get any leaves raked or picked up before the snow hit. Damned things clog the snow blower.

aesthete: one who cultivates great sensitivity to beauty.

There are 7 chests throughout Tamriel, each with a skeleton near it. There are other chests and boxes that are around in Tamriel that are just sitting outside near a fort or ruin, but the 7 I am interested in all have a skeleton nearby. I can only recall two, one in the pond near Fort Linchal and one in a partial ruin by Fort Gold Throat. There was a thread on this a few years back, but I can't find it and I'm not even sure if it was here at the Nexus or at Eslaf Erol's blog website (which is no longer around). Anyone recall running across a chest with a skeleton near it outside (none were in a ruin or fort or structure)? Appreciate it if you'd say where. Found them all.

saxicolous; one who lives under a rock

No one has said that ebola cannot be transmitted via the air. Ebola is not an airborne virus and the term must be understood in context of the virus and how it is spread. Airborne infection; means the virus is transmitted by its presence on particles, dust, or droplet nuclei suspended in the air and must be inhaled via the respiratory route. Direct contact means that body fluids from an infected person have come into contact with someone’s eyes, nose, or mouth; an open cut, wound, or abrasion and inhaled, ingested or absorbed. So what is the difference between airborne and direct contact mean in practical terms? If you stand 6 feet away from someone with ebola and don't specifically get contaminated by a body fluid, there is a 1% chance (or less) of getting infected. If you stand 6 feet away from a patient with measles or influenza (and you're not immune) then there's a 100% chance you'll get infected. In other words, ebola is not all that contagious. Ebola spreads by direct contact with body fluids such as saliva, mucus, vomit, feces, sweat, tears, breast milk, urine, and semen of an infected human. A person infected with ebola who coughs or sneezes may spray body fluid into the air and thus onto another person who may ingest, inhale or absorb a droplet. However, this is not airborne transmission, it is still direct contact with body fluids. The virus can be spread by breast milk and seman/vaginal fluids up to 3 months after recovery - again, this is direct contact with a body fluid. Outside of the body, the survival of the ebola virus is dependent on numerous factors such as temperature and humidity. The virus can survive for several hours on dry surfaces and may survive in blood for several days and it is believed the virus may survive up to 10 days in optimum conditions. However, exact times are unknown. Droplets from coughing or sneezing would not remain airborne very long and would drop to surfaces fairly quickly. However, again transmission by direct contact is required to spread the virus meaning someone would need to be in direct contact with a droplet and absorb, ingest or inhale it. To suggest that there is a government conspiracy in the use of terminology is simply a different form of fear mongering. As for the study, all it does is suggest the possibility of spread of ebola from pigs to farm workers in the Philippines could have occurred either by inhalation (of aerosol or larger droplets), and/or droplet inoculation of eyes and mucosal surfaces and/or by fomites due to droplets generated during cleaning processes. It does not suggest the virus spread by airborne transmission. The hype and misinformation and general stupidity of US bureaucrats and the US media who rely on emotional impact rather than science or medical fact is why people such as Kaci Hickox who pose absolutely no threat to anyone are being forced to be in isolation. The idea that an ebola pandemic will occur in North America because someone was in Africa and came into the US is just about the most ridiculous thing ever suggested.

I just got home after spending the end of Sept and October doing work with the Rangers for ASAM and for MSF in Africa. I have been in a fair number of countries in the last month traveling by aircraft, ground vehicle or walking and the only place I saw or heard the words "Ebola Scare" was in a USA newspaper at Heathrow on Friday (Oct 31) afternoon. The MSF team I was with consisted of 2 doctors (an American and a Belgian) and 4 nurses (Canadians), but there were also a number of teams in house and while conversation did include Ebola as a topic, no one was overly concerned about coming in contact with it; yellow fever, malaria and guerrillas (and driving 150 kph in a right hand drive vehicle in a convoy) were of greater concern and more likely what was going to put the hurt on someone. As for ebola becoming airborne - yeah, that and me winning the lottery two weeks in a row using the same numbers have about the same potential of occurring. There was also a fair bit of laughter from the medical people over how the CDC was handling the Dallas incident in early Oct; and while I was in the back country from Oct 21st until the 30th and had no contact with the outside world, it seems the CDC is still talking like ebola is an immediate threat to the entire planet and we are all about to die, but then treats potential contacts in the most lackadaisical way possible. I did have Immigration officials in various countries ask or I had to complete forms/questionnaires that did general screening for potential contact with ebola, but no one was freaking out over it as far as I saw or heard, except the USA. I met other travelers in Nelspruit, Johannesburg, Beira and Heathrow who were saying that the TSA was subjecting travelers from Africa to hours of interrogation and isolation and people were trying to bypass or figure out how to be dishonest in order to avoid receiving the same treatment. I didn't even get a second look from Nelspruit.immigration coming back from Nigeria, but apparently if you were anywhere in Africa the TSA was afraid of you. I'm just thankful I didn't have to go anywhere near the USA on traveling. It looked to me that the only place there was a "scare" or anyone was afraid was in the USA.

nostomania - homesickness, urge to return to familiar surroundings. Living in Canada, this isn't a common, everyday scene one runs across. Ran across this guy somewhere around the Mozambique, Zambia, Zimbabwe border area about the 22nd October. For some reason he made me want to come home and see my dogs. http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/l511/ffa1mf/20141028_075440_zpscc6a24ba.jpg

orphrey; gold or other rich embroidery.