[Worst Post of All Time]

He's in TPF, what do you expect? Jk <3 tpf

[Stump the Engineer]

Heh, engineering is fun. In the real world, though, engineers are simply people who could design something that needs $2 to build when the standard person would make something that needs $20 to build,

I guess that's true when you are redesigning something, but a large part of engineering is inventing something that doesn't exist. If companies didnt innovate, they wouldn't remain dominant in industry.

assuming you're not trying to build something tough like a radar or a battleship. It's not really impossible to live without them,

I think that is the whole concept behind engineering. Most projects requiring engineering are tough projects. Much tougher then the common man can just pick up and do. How do you design a plastic bottle? It has to look good, be cheap, hold water, and you have to be able to quickly mold inject it. Bottle design is surprisingly hard actually. There is a lot of thought and time goes into it. I interned at a firm that had a "bottle guy". It's more complicated then it looks. Companies can get pretty cut-throat when they produce several million bottles! The place I interned at designed Dove soaps bottle line as well as others.

Off the subject of bottles, Who designs your computers motherboard, or your car's engine?

People BUILD engines all the time. They pick out a stock block, intake manifold, carb or w/e, etc, etc. But usually people dont design their own block, cylinder heads and etc. Of course not, that is a ton of complex work. Not only does it require knowledge about engines, but it requires knowledge of gas dynamics, heat transfer, machining processes, and more knowledge that isn't intuitive unless you have an education of or extensive experience with.

[Stump the Engineer]

To follow up what mrcalkin said, I don't believe they're referring to the actual recycling process at the plant...they're most likely referring to the process of disposal at home. Crushing the bottles removes the empty space within the plastics container. To those of us that have to use bags for recycling of plastics, that's pretty important.

That's true. I didn't think about that. Most plastics don't get recycled and end up in a landfill anyway. Hence that would be a good characteristic for a bottle in a landfill to have.

[Stump the Engineer]

Engineers are not given enough credit imo.

And yeah, I saw through the bottle thing when it came out too. (though not to an extent that you have)

If the bottle is going to be recycled anyway, whats the point of having less plastic?

It is surprisingly hard to recycle plastic. You can't mix different grades of plastic, as it is very difficult (expensive) to separate different types of plastic. Not to mention, there is almost an infinite number of types of plastics. Even specific recycling garage cans I doubt get a very high return on recyclable goods. People throw whatever they want in those things.

Using less plastic just means it will cost the company less to produce the bottle. It also means that less "stuff" will require being thrown away.

[Stump the Engineer]

What's the fallacy in the first claim? Did they or didn't they reduce the amount of plastic by 30%? If the company makes more money by a process that is also environmentally friendly, isn't that a good thing?

You are correct, I guess it just bothers me that a company tries to build additional revenue off a standard industry revenue practice. It seems kind of like double dipping to me. Any company, that manufactures bottles of any kind, tries to reduce the volume of substance required to make the product, simply because it will save the company literally millions. Does that mean any of those companies give a damn about the Environment? While bottle companies probably do in some way care about the environment, I doubt saving the environment is their first corporate priority. It will take a bit more then their bottle label advertising to convince me that saving the environment is their corporate priority, which I feel their advertising implies. That said, I will concede, being humble about such revolutionary bottle design changes probably won't help their corporate missions either.

[Reality Blows]

Wow, what a bummer. I will keep him in my thoughts and prayers.

Btw, I lol'd so hard at your comment about your sig.

As a person who is proctoring rehabilitation experimental research, I'd recommend to him to see if he can get in on any experimental research. There are sometimes big risks involved with experimental research, but judging by the sounds of the severity, it would be worthwhile to consider. From my experiences, Chemo is hardly effective especially with highly malignant cancer. This is easier to say in my shoes then his, but experimental research is for the greater good of society. It kills millions each year.

You might recommend telling him to google cancer research. I am sure you could find some medical schools that PAY for patients to get experimental treatment.

[Gulf oil spill: BP and Government vs. Science]

Welcome to Capitalism.

This.

[Are There Too Many Alliances?]

I personally dont believe any alliance should disband. When you think about RL, you have small business owners and large business owners. Each do their own thing, many offer the same products and services, but is one really better then the other? Maybe you have a friend that works at one, and you just always like visiting there. His business may not have everything that you need like the local walmart or w/e, but it does have something to offer which brings you in. If the business doesnt have enough resources to sustain, then it folds up just like it does in CN. Who are you to say that another alliance should disband simply because you don't like them very much, or they dont seem to fit your concept of an adequate alliance?

I see lots of recommendations on which alliances should disband, yet I have seen no rationale posted for why alliances should disband. Why is disbandment good for CN? THat's like saying you believe there should be less corporations in the real world. That's like saying you support Monopolies everywhere. How is that good? That's not good. US has strict laws in place to prohibit that because it's a terrible inane concept.

Furthermore, I dont really agree that CN needs a minimum requirement to form an alliance. That would be against everything I have said above. If you are a nub and chose to start your own alliance, go ahead. I'd consider myself fairly experience in this game and I dont want to start a micro alliance given all the work it takes, but that's your own decision.

[The Existential Threat]

Well stated Banksy. That's what I was trying to say.

[The Existential Threat]

Ah, I see. My alliance might punch me for saying this (lol), but In Pacifica's defense, their powerblocs probably increased the life of the game believe it or not at least to some extent. They gave the world community something to hate. They gave the community more or less a goal to work towards which was simply and plainly the fall of the NPO.

I was never in the NPO. I would guess 'to be hated' was probably not the NPO's intention when they initially gained power or for a duration of being in power, but through their paths chosen that's what it finally became. I don't think you will deny members of the NPO like being the bad guys. Bilrow throws that Most hated player award around like it is a noble prize for jebus sake, and I would argue he is not the only one in NPO that tries pretty hard to be that guy no one likes. And I dont want that to sound like I am picking on the NPO. Every alliance has those people. I just think NPO is like a magnet for them. Once your alliance becomes so saturated with those mentalities, it eventually spills out in alliance policies.

That said, had pacifica gained insurmountable power as I specified in my post earlier, as will likely happen to one alliance in the game eventually. That will signify the end of the game. They will also have the unfortunate pleasure of watching the game die a slow painful death. That's what makes this game so interesting. Who is able to say someone has insurmountable power? Blocs can break. Alliances can split. Preventing global dominance is the very shred of hope that keeps a game like this alive. Alliance/bloc supremacy wont happen with the game in it's current state. That would require resources too large to manage. Global Membership will have to dwindle considerably for reasons coupled with my first post. Even as global membership approaches zero, blocs can break. Alliances can split. I heard alliance/bloc supremacy occurred in Lunar wars, but I think membership was around 8K and it took a several hundred member alliance to do it. I havent been updated on that in a while though. That might not be true

I guess you could derive from my statements that I think the NPO has been "good" for the community. If you think "good" for the game can come from being unethical, then perhaps so.

And I guess to answer your initial post more completely, the answer which you undoubtedly already know, is a combination of the generalities you have posted. Politics can be blamed, for being good and bad. More importantly, MMO's themselves by nature will not last forever. WoW will eventually reach a stagnation point and die. I think it's already reaching its stagnation point actually. EveOnline, Tribal Wars, StarSeige.......Starseige is dead

CN is not out of the ordinary. I've pondered it, and I don't think there is much you can do to significantly impact the longevity of the game. Admin's attempts with facebook "likes" and such are a bit laughable imo.

EDIT: grammar and coherence D:

[The Existential Threat]

LOL

You missed the most blatant issue. That fact being this game sucks and that most people only play it because they have friends in their respective alliances.

These games have a very typical trend. They have a mad spike when the games starts up, as there is incredible opportunity for anyone to prosper. Now it takes at least 2 years to reach the top 5% assuming you do 6 donations a month. Every month. People realize this, and dont want to keep playing for that long, (or pay that money) because the game is lame. So after about the first year or two of the games life, the game's begins to stagnate as updates become less regular. Eventually one power will reign utterly supreme, and at that point the game will more or less die, as it will no longer be fun. It hasn't reached that point yet, and will probably take another year or two before a bloc that unbalanced with power will stand, but it will happen. (As I see it right now, the game is still pretty well balanced.)

I dont see anything out of the ordinary or politically related here, but good try.