Dead forum?

[-Jrabbit]

I recently posted my turnset in the current free-for-all and, after a snarky comment or two from Elephant, did a status check of the other open sxn games. Pretty scary to see that mine is the only turnset posted in the month of April.

Most recent turns posted, by game --

Us-against-Them -- April 13 by -Jrabbit
(available to whomever)

Dirty Succession -- March 30 by La Fayette
(Zedd up to bat)

Scorched Earth -- March 29 by -Jrabbit
(SG[1] due up)

O Sole Mio -- March 26 by DaveV
(Julius Brenzaida up)

2nd Sailing -- March 22 by -Jrabbit
(La Fayette up)

Lazy Summer -- March 13 by duke o' york
(Vlad seems gone, so Old n slow would be next)

Looks like 3 of the 4 most recent turnsets are mine. Starting to feel a little lonely for the good old days of RCC across several simultaneous games. (...and how ironic that we recently created a Civgroup for this...)

Where is everybody?
WTF????

[Zedd]

It has been realy slow, I have considered takeing on the free for all but have several games going on all ready. (plus my wife is kicking my butt on a MP game )

[Scouse Gits]

Sorry - I for one have not been pulling my weight of late - too much RL - not to mention marking which certainly isn't RL - I have just marked a set of 57 coursework scripts only to find that 6 students think that I am so monumentally stupid that I am unable to detect pairs of identical work!
Must try harder on the civ front...

Stu

[Elephant]

You think this forum is slow - the Strat forum, but for LaFayette's Scenarios posts, is overrun with dustballs...

[duke o' york]

* duke makes a personal note that SG is not monumentally stupid and never to copy other people's coursework.

Wish I was at university. Non-students claim that it's an easy ride, and students strenuously refute that, but from what I remember - it was. Comparatively.
Still, I'm "retraining", so I've got exams in June anyway. That may well cut down on my Civ 2 playing, but recently I've only been playtesting Cyrion's excellent Discworld scenario. Release will be imminent.
Other than that, I've checked this forum regularly, but I'm never up in any of the games I'm playing. Mind you, I'm only in a few so it won't make loads of difference if I play promptly (which I don't have a great record of doing ).

[Grigor]

6 students think that I am so monumentally stupid that I am unable to detect pairs of identical work!

That's all very well in the academic biz, but if my students decide to flagrantly plagiarize (somebody like, say, Jascha Heifetz), I will be dancing jigs from morn to dawn.

[Old n Slow]

Originally posted by Scouse Gits ...I have just marked a set of 57 coursework scripts ...

Stu

Ah yes, grading papers & exams, -- one of the lesser aspects of a former life.

From a hard core group of about six, it seems that RL has waylaid about half our numbers and the rest of the core has had RL step in to slow our participation...

But grades get turned in, tax dates occur, so one becomes finished for good or otherwise and RL ebbs even as it flows.

I'm looking forward to some "Free" tonight.

Romp is coming soon...

[Bloody Monk]

Yep, I too feel badly about not playing more in the free-for-all games. It is a particularly tough time for me right now. The consolation is that it is somewhat self induced. One of my docs has me doing a very aggressive heavy metal detox program and it is kicking my butt. The good thing is that when this is done, things have a chance to be better.

I have tried to play but can't get very far without getting bogged down and hopelessly confused over unit movement, city management, rule considerations, etc. After five hours and only two turns, I gave up on it. It was easier when the game was in an early stage.

This latest set of games has been marvellous for their vigorous and interesting rules, and the free-for-all games have great appeal too. But, no matter how interesting or challenging the game, when RL rears its demanding head, we all are brought low. Interesting that the slow down came in the winter season when things naturally slow down. So, here's to the coming Spring and renewal along all life's tangents...especially the civ one.

Monk

[debeest]

Monk, I don't know what your situation is, but I do know that for most people, metal detox is completely useful and, as you're seeing, actually harmful. Most doctors who recommend it are quacks who are stealing your money. I strongly recommend that you get a second opinion, from a doctor not aligned with the "clinical ecology" or "multiple chemical sensitivity" or "chemical detox" people. Very very few people have blood metal levels that justify treatment. Whatever your health issues, they probably lie elsewhere.

I speak as a toxicologist who has worked in occupational health for almost 20 years and had all too much experience with people victimized by these money-suckers.

By all means, please feel free to PM me if you want to discuss this without dragging everyone else through it.

[Bloody Monk]

Thanks for your input, debeest, and I'm sure that you have a generally valid point of view. But you seem to have a universal charge about this. Just because a fellow professional has a different angle of attack on a problem doesn't automatically make them blood sucking quacks, especially if it works. Or do you disagree??

Before you gratuiously condemn someone else, someone you know nothing about, perhaps you should look in the mirror. Is your interest to be helpful to me or to vent your "stuff"?? Please try to remember that chemo has short term negatives too, but some folk benifit from it. I have investigated this and the fellow has a great track record. And, not to put too fine a point on it, I am not being charged for this. So, no blood sucking here.

I wonder if this was not a freudian slip on your part,

for most people, metal detox is completely useful

....

Thanks for your concern. This is an awful and very complex situation and I have tried everything. I don't care if this isn't AMA, politically correct, especially if this leads to some improvement. I just want my life back; and to be able to civ a lot more.

Monk

[-Jrabbit]

Our thoughts are with you, BM.

[Bloody Monk]

I know, JR, and to all of you, that really matters a lot. Thanks!!

Now, lets have some activity. I, particularly, do not like the title of this thread.

Monk

[-Jrabbit]

Gonna be hard to Civ when it's 80 in April in Chicago.
Maybe during the (inevitable) thunderstorms...

[debeest]

I hope I gave no offense, Monk. My comments are based on experience with a large number of docs who offer "detox" "treatment," and my experience has been that without exception their services have been useless (my mistyping is amusing, though!), and with only few exceptions they are very expensive. (I'm glad to hear that yours is not charging you, although I'm curious how that's happening.) Moreover, most people offering "detox" have no valid scientific rationale for their claims. For these reasons, most medical organizations look askance at them. The California Medical Association, for example, has issued a formal statement saying essentially that there is no basis for the practices of "clinical ecologists."

Cancer chemotherapy, which has huge adverse side effects, has a track record of improving cancer outcome and life expectancy. A good doctor will discuss the good and the bad of it and provide the patient with a sound way to make a choice. The chemotherapy involved in removing metals from the body is less toxic, but often has serious adverse effects -- and only in very rare cases is there a therapeutic value.

My views on this are, if anything, politically uncorrect, in that I disagree with AMA stances on so many important health issues. But I do agree with them on the basic FDA stance, that treatments should be tested and should only be used if they are effective and safe enough. Metals chelation can be effective and safe in the same way that cancer chemotherapy can, but only when blood metal levels are high enough to be frankly toxic. I don't know this particular doctor's basis for this treatment -- if you do, I'd love to discuss it with you.

I do tend to be vehement about this kind of treatment, because it usually consists of nothing more than flat-out cheating people out of lots of money.

Moreover, it is almost always people in your position -- already tried everything science had to offer, and nothing has worked -- who desperately resort to untested, unproven methods for which there is no good scientific rationale or evidence. It particularly angers me that so many medical professionals take advantage of people in that position. Bad enough to have to admit that there's no explanation or solution -- far, far worse to charge lots of money for treatments that cannot be expected to work either. It sounds as if your caregiver is not in that group, but that doesn't mean there's any basis for the treatment.

Honestly, Monk, I wish the best for you, and these comments are offered in that spirit.

[Bloody Monk]

Thanks, debeest.

Now, who wants to play a game??

Monk