Oh I know that was for the quote part as those are very much also describing a “source”

Edit: Would you feel better if I change the verbiage to “I wasn’t given a good source” or “validated source”?

Yes, and that is also why you look up quotes and sources.

You can type all that, still funny when you know that a quote with a name is a source. Since you know the quotes source is that named person. Not really relevant if it is a correct quote or not, as a sourced lie is a thing as well.

I mean its right there in your own example “…to cite, offer, or bring forward as evidence or support.”

Those were quotes… not sources. I specifically ignored them because they were unsourced.

said Lt. Col. Simon Ritchie, a dermatologist

I am really trying to square this circle…

They aren’t making them specifically worse just for the military.

Well… about that.

Don’t sully Dr.Evils name.

You can have some meth, as a treat.

And wildly dishonest to try and spin every campaign as having some choice on whether or not to deploy violence. To top it off, the flat out writing off of all unsuccessful non-violent campaigns as if they don’t matter (even though most failed campaigns of these types result in people in cells regardless of if violence was employed or not)

And unless they have very good parameters there have to be countless non-violent and ineffective campaigns.

If you did this as a ratio of failures over success the non-violent numbers would be sky high compared to the violent ones, the rate of failure would indicate violence is the way.

This whole thing seems like a really wordy way of saying “don’t resist”.

…all violent and nonviolent campaigns from 1900 to 2006 that resulted in the overthrow of a government or in territorial liberation. They created a data set of 323 mass actions.

323, in over 100 years. And they are exuding campaigns that did not work? I would assume there have been 10s of thousands of protests in that time that where non-violent and also ineffective. Why are they not included? What would make a campaign go from non-violent to violent? What constitutes a campaign, is it non-violent in whole or only part? I would check but I need to buy their book.

I can not even think of any movement that resulted in territorial or government change that did not involve some form of violence. This study does not seem to pass the sniff test.

Too bad I will not see it. It seems like it was a zany place.

Turtle rape as a tasteful statue was not on my expected things to encounter today, but somehow I am glad I did.

Such a silly move. Like shooting yourself in the foot to sell more bullets

Do a small test with a single user, take the amount of spillage then times it by the pissing population and average numbers of wees a day.

How else will you scratch that itch in your lungs?

I still use it on my living room PC to this day. No issues so far (steam still works fine as well).

Just like anything make sure you have backups and watch your accounts.

CUBE

Thats the joy of the time sink the game is. I wish to find at least one more game like it I can really get into.

Oh yes, the learning curve is almost a wall.

From The Depths.

Half off, stupid time sink.