Ikki

Fair enough. I know you have a greater interest in American politics because the cause is a little less hopeless there but if you're ever feeling particularly bored you should have a look.

Bit of a random question but are you a member of the ALS group on Facebook? Occurred to me the other day that you might be; I don't know your real name so I wouldn't notice even if I saw you post there all the time.

interested in a H2H fantasy basketball league?

Dunno, what exact stats you are referring to tbh that measure goals conceded and defensive midfielders contribution to that. But Gerrard played a more advanced compared to Carrick even at Liverpool last season at times and you can twist stats whatever way you like without context and give equal stats the other way round too to suit your agenda. For example i remember having a argument about Xavi with someone recently and using similar sort of stats and comparison to other players without any context or understanding the roles.

Anyways, Carricks's role for Bayern is played by Martinez, In Barca by Busquets. Xavi plays the deep lying playmaker ahead of Busquets at Barca and controls the game with his passing, while Schweinsteiger's passing is not in the same category but he goes more box to box and contributes more vertically and in terms of direct contribution to goals.

Top man. Need someone to talk to/get recommendations from now duffer's gone

Earl Sweatshirt

Rate Doris?

No, the fact that the curator specifically changed how the pitch was prepared only in the areas where Warne would be pitching

Why warne sucked in India: ""I kept the square patches outside the leg stump, on either side of the wicket, really hard. It was difficult to get turn from that part as there would be no rough there."

"After that game, Warne came to me and asked why he wasn't getting the turn and others were. I told him it was because of his dodgy shoulder, that was to be operated later in the series."

Messi or MJ?

Lad, I'm currently working on a project, and was wondering if I'd be able to chat to you about a few things. Something that is repeatedly coming up, are big criticisms of the "market forces" argument to the possible solutions to the problems I'm looking at. I figured you'd be quite well-placed to offer some thoughts. Will fill you in on the full details of what I'm doing etc... if you'd be interested in having a word.

ikki,

try, Zen and the Art of Screenwriting: Insights and Interviews: William Froug: 9781879505315: Amazon.com: Books. it is my favorite.

and the standard text book around the world for script writers, Screenplay: The Foundations of Screenwriting: Syd Field: 9780385339032: Amazon.com: Books. this website, SydField.com - A Website for Screenwriters - The Art of Visual Storytelling, might also be useful.

if you really love some films, like i love citizen kane, annie hall, goodfells and inglorious basterds, you should try to download the scripts and read them.

it is going to be a fun trip. best wishes.

I'll take your avatar bet, but damn have you seen us recently? We're dire right now. You're only 2 points behind. This team is ****e.

All the best ikki. Am sure you will make a wonderful lawyer.

ikki.... havent seen you in any of the chats in a long time... are you avoiding me like plague, mate? how are you?

I don't consider having to pay a certain percent of tax to the government an onerous burden. I've paid taxes, a lot of them for **** I disagree with. Meh. It's not this massive burden and it's not oppressive. And while technically it's 'forced', you're really never going to convince me it's the same as female circumcision or an abridging of free speech. It's not going to happen. By having a social contract at all, you're agreeing to a certain set of subjective rules. In my ideal government (which the US and most western democracies are relatively close to), you'd have a certain set of rights which are inviolable and which allow most people to live in freedom and using the government to push for a certain basic level of quality of life for everyone. Feel free to have the last say.

No, I "get" it. But once I "get" it, I just don't "want" it.

I'd rather not argue about this all over again. I said I support a basic set of constitutional rights so people can live freely and that is not really up to the popular vote. The type of economic freedom that Ron Paul advocates would not be part of that document. And yes, the rest of life besides a certain set of 'inalienable' rights is certainly upto a democratic vote. That's just the price of living in a society. We are going around in circles here.

Well of course it's subjective! That's why you have a democracy. You have a basic set of rights to protect everyone, and the rest is up to society to decide!

No, I disagree. For one, I told you the different standard I apply for personal ("social") freedoms vs. personal economic freedoms. And obviously there are limits to freedoms in both cases - we just draw the line somewhere. If there is a logical reason for a rule to be imposed on society, and it happens to originate from a religion, I have no problem with it (e.g don't steal, which you can come to from both a secular or a religious, perspective). It's about at what level it becomes detrimental to the individual or society. I have limits on free speech that I can't yell fire in a theater, but that is not detrimental to my ability to express myself politically or artistically - I still live in a free society. Same with taxation, as long as the burden doesn't become detrimental to an individuals ability to live his life, I have no problem with it. As of right now, I think we are far from that level. I know Ron Paul disagrees. I did at one point as well. C'est la vie.