Hoch

I do enjoy when people try to view the Cold War in isolation. If you are a country as the US was which was fundamentally opposed to communism there was no choice but to support 'the other guy'. -Hoch

Of course he speaks English. Idiot. -Hoch

Perhaps one of you non-McCain supporters or one that leans towards the Republican Party can explain to me why you seem to gravitate towards Obama, who by all accounts is left of centre as compared to all the Republican candidates. -Hoch A propos, I would split this thread.

That's an interesting prediction Ail. With respect to Huckabee, I think you run into the problem of the state primaries that are up for grabs. No doubt his support is with the core conservatives of the Republican party but most of the core has already voted. I do not think we will see that much support for him outside of this core. This is also why McCain is in a better position, not to mention the fact that he has quite a good lead anyway. Hillary Clinton running as an independent is a wee bit of a stretch. And when I say 'wee' I really mean to say not bloody likely. If she doesn't grab the prize for the Democrats, which I think she will, she may try to eat crow and take the number two job (not out of the question; likely--doubtful). I think the Republican Party would rather see Clinton over Obama. For the most part, Republicans hate that woman and I mean hate. Some would rather chew off their own foot before voting for her. So I would not ex- pect anyone crossing party lines with her. But Obama may be able to grab the Republicans that straddle the fence. In short, diehard Republicans may not see eye-to-eye with McCain on some issues but at least he is not Hillary Clinton. They can live with him. If you take into account that historically Republicans vote more often in the gen- eral election (the Dems have been doing better than ex- pected in the primaries) than Dems Hillary would be a godsend. Though I still have my doubts that a Republican will be back in the White House. Funny election this time around. Just my two pence, -Hoch

Hahahah! I am a barrister Though IP law does not form part of my practice. -Hoch

People should not concern themselves with the legality or illegality of SS. The reason for this is that the costs involved in initiating a claim would far outweigh the benefits that a person initiating that claim would receive. Also, there is an issue of enforceability. But do not take this to mean that you should not adhere to international copyright laws -Hoch

Unless one of the Admins want to move/split this thread, I'm closing it because there is not much else to write about concerning an SSC matter. For the avoidance of doubt, BanG is only effective as the BanG Op executing the ban. -Hoch

What he said Just to add, torture is explicitly prohibited in the US and, gasp, under international law. Hence the ref- erence. No need to pretentious. -Hoch

Perhaps you could elaborate on what you think the similarities are because I can see none. Also by your own admission the Hyperspace map you complain of was changed, albeit a little. I understand that in the past Hyperspace has had numerous problems with Stray. Therefore, I find it difficult to believe that they would accept a map from him. Cheers, -Hoch

In the past, I have worked on torture cases in the Hague, and generally speaking international law lawyers agree that what is suspected to have gone on in Guantanamo Bay may, in law, amount to torture. But that is the easy bit. Note that I intentionally used the word 'suspected' because independent verification is difficult to come by. Contrary to what many of you might have read in the press the legal position is far from certain (see below). The hard part, or the difficulty lies in being able to enforce the applicable laws against torture. Namely, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Punishments or Treatment (1984) though others exist. This is compounded by the fact that the status of Guantanamo Bay in inter- national law is not precisely defined. On this point, this is more of a political debate, but international law is ultimately a slave to its political masters. On this basis, I think it would be wholly inaccurate and a gross exaggeration to state that prisoners in the US risk torture and abuse without making reference to the believed actions in Guantanamo Bay. Ultimately one must recognise that because you have to add this caveat that the United States profile against torture is diminished. Nonetheless it is necessary to make this distinction so as to accurately portray the position of torture in the US. The US has long been a trailblazer in securing human rights save for the black-eye that is Guantanamo Bay. Therefore in my opinion it is wrong to use the interna- tional law axiom that what is not explicitly prohibited is inferentially permissible in an either or situation involving torture and the US. -Hoch

Sorted. -Hoch

In response to that I can say for my part that I routinely check the list of blocked players. If I see a name that has been caught in a netban but have yet to submit a ticket, I will banfree them. I should note that those banfree'd this way occurs less frequently, mainly because of the tighter re- strictions placed on lvl 1 BanG Op's and constant attempts by the BanG Admins to ensure every ban only blocks the deserving player, i.e. removing macID etc. The system is of course not perfect, but in my opin- ion the amount of players banned on the SSC network is not a reason for any decline. Local bans is a separate issue. -Hoch

lol, was that part not obvious? You knew it was going to happen. Just like you knew the main character was going to die. It's all in the !@#$%^&*le -Hoch

The wife and I went to see this over the weekend. I had no interest, because I knew it would be like 28 Days Later (in concept), but she insisted. Verdict: if you must rent it. Not worth spending the extra money to see it at the cinema. The acting was stiff, the plot thin and terribly predictable. Will Smith can do better and has done better work. -Hoch

I just love threads that show my age Let me see when I was growing up we had: Atari 2600 Atari 5200 Nintendo w/the gyro robot (!@#$%^&* thing still works!) Super Nintendo Nintendo 64 (only to play Goldeneye) I stopped buying games consoles after the N64. Though the missus bought a Nintendo DS Lite a couple of months ago. PC, Mac, laptop etc. All that jazz! -Hoch

And this is the problem with people that do not properly read or quote what is written: For the avoidance of doubt, unless prior consent is given, only a net BanG Administrator may net ban a player for a period exceeding 365 days. In any event, a ticket has been submitted on this matter and it is being handled. -Hoch

As this is a local ban and not a net ban you will have to take it up with Hyperspace staff. Though if I am correct that the local ban ID is #174, then that ban has already expired. -Hoch

TnzFRV1LwIohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnzFRV1LwIo Perhaps this has been posted already, but when I first saw this months ago I remember thinking to myself 'how random is this.' I still like it -Hoch

The information has been updated. Creemy, unless you want to submit another ticket and dispute the netban, I am closing this thread. Cheers, -Hoch

If whomever wishes to dispute the netban, then they should fill out a netban dispute ticket. In the ordinary course of events this is what should be done. So far no one has complained about the ban. For the avoidance of doubt, this ban was a copy from a TW ban and Ghost Ship made the copy. Whilst you may find using Cheat Engine unfair neither Ghost nor myself for that matter do. -Hoch

Hahaha good call! Perhaps Polix would do us a favour and correct the spelling (dispute; not dispuste) -Hoch

The US Federal Reserve main task is to curb the rise of inflation or prevent deflation... -Hoch

The Clinton years were marked by budget surpluses (1998 - 2001). However, there were many reasons why this was so. The first, and most obvious, was the tax increases that Clinton pushed through Congress in 1993 and 1994. Secondly, when the Republicans took over Congress in 1995 they and Clinton agreed to curtail spending. Thirdly, there were increased net flows of tax revenue due to the rising stock market. However, when the dot.com bubble burst in 2000 a lot of that evaporated over night. As to why the Bush Administration has not generated budget surpluses, the reasons are also quite obvious. Firstly, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Secondly, and related to the first, Bush had to spend extra money on military hardware because the Clinton Administration had reduced spending for defence. Finally, Bush pushed through a $1.3 trillion tax cut. The budget surpluses forecasted by the CBO had to be revised when Bush's expenditures were taken into account. Needless to say, the overall budget deficit is beginning to come down. But the national debt, under both presidents, has not yet been paid down substan- tially. That is the greatest cause for concern. -Hoch

Okay, I'll be more blunt since you did not answer my question the first time around: Put up or shut-up. For the avoidance of doubt, I tire of reading posts with players complaining of abuses in the system without them actually providing a scintilla of info- mation to support their allegations. This information need not be given in public, but it should at least be given. -Hoch

I felt somewhat conflicted when I read this article. Mainly because it conflicts with the figures sighted by Alan Greenspan in his autobiography. To that extent, there is a marked difference between the federal debt to the public and amounts that are reducible. My instincts tell me to believe the man that held the US economy in his hands, rather than the author of this article. Yet one cannot ignore the fact that the US needs to pay down the debt, no matter what level it is at. -Hoch