adios

How about reducing the 1st one to 15/16 and enforcing the second one strongly. There are plenty of countries with a lower drinking age than the UK without the associated problems and the US has a serious binge drink culture with a higher age limit.

I don't get it. It was the tall one and the round one arguing that reminded me of them for some reason, nothing as abstract as tights.

I do, but that's good advice, thank you; I think I need something like a $600 BR for that. I've been very disciplined so far, I'm still on 3.40 SnGs at the moment and stayed in the play money for quite a while. I'll no doubt start with the lowest available and go from there, currently finishing off Small Stakes Hold 'em - Miller/Sklansky/Miller which is a good read on that level. I'd recommend it as worthwhile even if people aren't planning on playing Limit.

Because it's invariably unrealistic, affected, stagy, overly dramatic shite. Your analogies are getting worse btw. Do you seriously have that much of a problem with live theatre?

Is it working? Try working out the price of your designer labels in terms of African babies' lives. That's real poverty btw, and why I have limited sympathy with the quality of education in comprehensives. I think while adversity brings out the best in people, the social welfare net seems to do the opposite. Not that I'm suggesting doing away with it.

OK Ive had a look at sixth sense, I dont really trouble the software forum much.Its not really any use for tournaments its just for table selection on ring games. You would need to get a big database of hands before it would do you much good If you have got pokertracker you probably want to have a look at PAHUD, which is a real time heads up display which shows vpip etc of opponents. It can be useful to get reads on who is loose or tight which is obviously good for knowing who to steal against etc I'm going to give 1/2 limit a go, so that's what I'd be interested in that for. I'm only demoing Poker Tracker at the moment (thousand hand limit), but I think I'll end up getting it, I think I've already spotted some leaks, after a casual glance, but I'd need a few more thousand hands in there before I confirmed anything. I'll have a look into this HUD business, I read something about them, but it is all really rather complicated sometimes. Will check out PAHUD, cheers.

Yeah, and Village People are the straightest band in rock. Hmm, says the uber film nerd. Well that's random. As random as saying the theatre is gay? I was alluding to the fact that someone who is pretty obsessed with one arts medium should be so dismissive of another. btw

Because the people who have the influence decide whether that tax goes to the schools. In my experience, SB, the people you're worrying about don't give half as much a fuck about you, worry about your own family first. We're not going to change anything, anyway. EDIT: Actually, you've already said that's what you're doing!

There's a huge thread over at 2+2 on Sixth Sense, might be worth a look. I'll most likely give the free trial a whirl once I've settled on a few other tools. I think it's 15 dollars a month at the level I (and probably the rest of us) would be playing at. I've loaded some of my SnG stats into Poker Tracker, and even for those it looks pretty indispensible! I was only reading about ICM yesterday, interesting stuff. PokerStove is great fun.

Says the oirish work-at-home hermit in France. I'm not home schooled, though, Rotundington.

Wonderful ideals, totally impractical, if even fair. You expect people who work their arses off to provide the same opportunities to their children as someone who does the bare minimum? Don't forget to tell the last one out to turn out the lights, because those remaining won't be able to afford it. To turn yout point around why should waste of space kids get a lift in life from hard working parents? If people's only motive in life is to leave a "stash" for the kids after death then I think thats sad - you should enjoy the fruit of your own work and hope that your kids can look after themselves. Inherited wealth propogates class, power and everthing else thats unfair in this country. That Faith School thread reminded me of something I knew I'd meant to respond to. Why do you draw the conclusion that because parents want to spend their wealth on a better life for their children that that is the sole motivation for their existence? On the other hand to expect them not to want the best for the most important thing in their lives is a bit silly. While we're on the subject of how sad the focus on materialism is, I assume you also have a plan to administer parental love only in even doses, otherwise this whole system is dreadfully unfair. What, you're only equalising the material wealth and then allowing some kids to grow up fantastically wealthy in other and (surely in your eyes) more important ways? To answer your first question: because there's no other way to do it. Are you suggesting a world where every parent can only provide the same for their child, what about when they want a loan, what about when they want some help starting their new business? What about living in a nicer house than their poorer counterparts? If you don't stop the flow of advantage before the parents' death, it won't achieve anything; and none of these policies will work unless you do it on a global scale. And Bridget although you have completely miscontrued my point, you do raise an interesting one. Why do you think some people are poor and others not, specifically a family line?

The harsh reality is, giving a kid a good rearing at home, gives him an unfair disadvantage in a normal school environment. Manners? Are you taking the piss? Not to mention the teachers, Jesus Wept!

I think the home schooling/social interaction is a myth to a certain extent. I agree that you're going to get some parents with an agenda, who use home schooling as part of a scheme to keep their kids locked up; but used in tandem with after-school sports and activities, interacting with the kids on their street, I don't think it's really an issue. I would consider it if I ever have kids, but in principle it must be as bad as private schools. I think it's a shame that we have to look for alternatives, but until we live in a world where things are actually ideal, why shouldn't we strive for the best for our families.

btw PokerPants, are you SpongeBobXXXX where the Xs represent numbers (3 or 4 digits if I remember correctly.)

What about home schooling?

Is it because you is differently abled? EDIT: Shit, just seen the Dime Bar thread, edited for Patrokles' benefit.

Just been looking at some poker software, anyone got any comments on: -Poker Stove -Sixth Sense -Poker Tracker -SnG Power Tools ?

Are you suggesting the children should decide whether or not to go to a faith school, until they're old enough to decide for themselves?

Where do you draw the line with parents' decisions? If a child is being physically abused, that is within the jurisdiction of the courts, I assume that is not up for debate. If indoctrinating a human being into a mind-set before it can possibly choose or even understand it, could there be an argument for mental abuse with long lasting effects? The God of your modern, inclusive religions would surely encourage people to wait until they are old enough to decide for themselves before rushing into a decision about worshipping him. Children can be taught good values, and then choose if they'd like to add a bit of hocus pocus when they're old enough to drink, or die for their countries. Would that be such a bad thing to have written into the constitution? On your second point, Science is not flawless, it can sometimes even be closed-minded about things, but it is the best system of discovery that we have, constantly striving for answers, re-evaluating, evolving as new information becomes available. Religion has evolved in the same way as fairy stories do, but more perniciously, as often misused as a tool of politics and hate. Why are you equating two of the most different things imaginable with each other?

Slightly below average week?

Would you like him to comment?

I had to do that a couple of years ago, never regretted it.

I basically don't get any to my personal account, a little to my second account, and a shed load to my gmail account. I'm very selective who I give my information to, and I can get the silly cunts who sell on my second account in a lot of trouble, as I usually know who's done it. PS If you've got your email address anywhere in text format on the internet, that's te single biggest problem.

It's actually a misnomer, it's unsolicited commercial email (UCE), but that doesn't have much of a ring to it. I think spamming was originally something that involved pretending your email was from a different source address than it really was, which a lot of spammers do/did. But now even search engine results are considered "spammy" if there's a lot of commercial junk there.