Just a though.

*Just a thought.

At 1/11/08 01:45 AM, Darkside7000 wrote:

At 1/11/08 01:42 AM, Crazy-Inovation wrote: Aw, fucking hell. I dont like it.

It looked cool at first, but then they added the big yellow score icon. Fucking shit. Also I think they removed the "3/10 people found this review usefull" and just replaced it with "Helpful" and "Unhelpful"

I like the new look. The score values in big font is a nice touch. I also like the buttons "+/-/*" for voting on the vote thingie.

One problem though: I think it's a bit difficult to tell which set of "+/-/*" goes with which person's review when looking at the expanded list, so I anticipate I may give the wrong score to the wrong review some time soon because of this issue until I get used to the fact that it's always coming under the review it references. My guess is this may happen to some other folks that are new to the interface or the system as well.

I would recommend the interface get a minor modification - maybe a little pointer thingie going up, or a tiny arrow pointing up right before the "no users have weighed..." text. Or maybe just a little bit more empty space between each review that would seperate them more noticeably.

Just a though.

Hello,

I can't seem to find a way to check my previously posted reviews and BBS posts. I'm thinking the idea was to have them accessible by clicking on one's user name and then clicking on the section in the bottom-left corner that shows the review counts to get a list of them, right? Well I click on that, but it doesn't do anything, just moves the open page up a bit as opposed to popping a pop-up.

I don't think my settings are preventing any popups, so perhaps the problem is in the code? Just thought I'd check.

Thanks.

I can't use send PMs through Newgrounds, I post text and subject etc, but when I click on send it tells me to agree to some terms of posting etc. Fine, but the problem is that the terms are not available for accepting, which is unlike other NG pages that ask for this sort of thing.

It's just a big witchhunt, and it'll pass like the Japanese internment did, and after that it'll just be something to be ashamed of for generations to come, nothing new here.

I think society itself here is borderline extremist in its world views. If you compare our nation's political leaning to the world as a whole, we really have centrist/moderate right (democrats) and extremist right (republican) by global standards, the other world views are a minority.

If there's any coverup, then I guess it must be the ones catering to the extremists, and Fox news can fill that niche, if other media did as well, then it would cause problems on a global scale if we blatantly appear talibanized.

At 6/17/06 10:35 AM, -poxpower- wrote:

At 6/17/06 10:09 AM, CamelBJE wrote:

Exactly, Science does not stop for politically correctness and sensitivity. If the evidence does shooow such results, then live with it.

Yeah but the people who will oppose this are obviously those who it doesn't advantage, namely arabs, black people and hispanics.
A group of people known for their pacifism and quietness.

arabs are mostly white einstein, they're only black in the southern regions, and blatantly european northside, it's over twenty nations.

and the study said subsaharan africa so adding hispanics to the list says more about you than the topic at hand.

worst thing they ever done was existed.

lol

Yeah I see what you're saying, but I think this is an unproven theory considering the relative low cost of healthcare elsewhere. It's not as if covering everyone in the country is the only thing that changes in terms of healthcare dynamics. Think of the give and take.

Lets theorize:
- We could possibly have more patients and less emergency cases, since prevention is not expensive anymore so less people wait until things get out of hand and they're lying on an operation table or something. That can easily lower healthcare costs.
- With the focus being around healthcare instead of funds and expenses in public hospitals, the administrative costs of healthcare can significantly drop, saving hospitals millions if not billions every year. Also with that kind of focus, the quality of healthcare might actually improve - not in terms of professionals, but the end results of having less administrative complexity and more direct treatment with less ties to financial issues - so everyone could reap these indirect benefits of universal healthcare that places such as Sweden (number 1 in health care in the civilized world) and Canada.

This is all theory, other nations are doing great with it, and the rich people still travel around and pay for special treatment at private ones so they can skip waiting in line with the less wealthy.

Also, imho, the reason congress is not moving anywhere with healthcare is because they have to be careful not to step on too many toes or they lose the support of this or that lobby that's helping fund political campaigns. In a sense, the interests of the lobbies and special interests are what politicians are looking after, not the general public, realistically speaking. Sometimes the two interests don't go hand in hand, and the public is not as organized/coherent as a lobby with unified funds and agendas.

This would probably be the biggest obstacle to universla health care, insurance companies that make a killing off of the current system would never have it, that's for sure, but the public itself can be receptive to the idea (%75 figure quoted). In the end, politicians will do what's in their interests or get replaced by ones that are more in line with political forces' demands.

Also it seems people seem to be under the impression that universal healthcare means there's no private heathcare for the rich people as well. you can have it both ways, check this out:

"
And lets face it, a UHS for the US couldn't be worse than the current situation. The US currently:

* Spends $752 more per patient on admin costs than Canada

* Spends more as a %age of GDP on healthcare than every other industrialised country (15%). Twice the dollar amount of the next highest, the Swiss. By contrast, Sweden, ranked #1 by the OECD and WHO spends less than 10%.

* Ranks only 23/30 in the most recent OECD assessment for life expectancy

* Ranks only 24/30 in the OECD survey for infant mortality, only beating those bastions of medical care, Poland, Mexico, Hungary, Turkey and the Slovak Republic. Sweden delivers premature babies at around the same rate as the US, but they're mortality rate is almost half.

* Again comes 24/30 when it comes to disease adjusted life expectancy (years lived free of disease). Again chasing ex-Soviet block countries and Mexico in a race to the bottom.

(source: http://arstechnica.c...ars/2005/10/25/1631

)

Incompetent staff is possible too, but to the point of refusing treatment that's pretty bad.

Well he was denied treatment and died, he didn't have his insurance card and that's all the receptionist cared about, end of story.

Like I said, it's a boring topic, I lived in many countries, some with universal health care, and I can say from experience that it's a better system in most cases.

"Why should I pay for someone else's healthcare" is a pretty selfish thing to say, but that's encouraged in our society so no blame there, we didn't earn the "ugly american" moniker for nothing. It's all about the individual to the extreme.

Sure I'll give you that, but that's still better, for him as well as for the people in front of him imho. Most of my friends don't go to the hospital even while having health insurance because they're afraid of the potential costs. With free healthcare they might be complaining about long lines instead, but at least they'll be in a clinic waiting for treatment instead of at home or in their cubicles hoping they recover from whatever they are inflicted with.

If you're not rich, pay for your own bills, and you got sick every now and then, you'd probably know what I'm talking about I'm sure.

I think so too. I'm tired of paying so much for health insurance "tax" that I never use, and when I actually need it it's not enough.

I don't wanna get involved too much in this sort of discussion cause it's boring, but I'll tell you my negative experience with not having free health care here...

My friend died at age 22, he was a year away from graduating with a degree in computer graphics design. He was so young. He had a soar throat and was a person with asthma. He died of an asthma attack and on the ambulance.

Two hours before that, he was refused service at the hospital by the receptionist, he forgot his insurance card and they told him to sit for 15 minutes and fill some papers out, then they told him they can't treat him anyway.

To me it looks like he died cause the whole insurance bs is getting out of hand and hospitals are becoming more like lawyer driven corporate entities rather than real treatment facilities, and that's just sad, treatment shouldn't only be a luxury for rich people.

That just imho.

At 5/2/05 09:42 PM, VerseChorusVerse wrote:

At 5/2/05 09:37 PM, Allam wrote: Live by the sword, die by the sword they say.

Do they say that? =P

lol Yeah man, they do ;)

What a nice world we live in but dont worry every superpower of the world was hated
Roman Empire, Imperial China, Mongol Empire, Ottoman Empire, British Empire, Soviet Union, United States, and like all before you, you will fall and another one will take your place.

I highly doubt considering the present day with all of the advances.

On the contrary, I think it'd probably take a few seconds because of it.

Live by the sword, die by the sword they say.

The UN was a great entity when they went along with practically everything we wanted, but when we went too far and they drew the line they sudenly became the bad guys and the brainwashing machine sent the message to its loyal citizens that the UN is bad, and behold it worked like a charm.

Our country is falling into fascism. Blind faith in a leadership made up of corrupt politicians and self denial. Just because the corrupt politicians this time represent religious rednecks doesn't mean it's better than any other group of politicians, but I guess yelling jesus and terrosim every five minutes is good enough to keep the sheep from straying aside it seems.

Not as funny as poeple walking on water rofl.

Neato, a civil post about religion turning into a mud-slinging contest, way to go V-man lol, I love our religious freaks, to the point indeed rofl ;)

Kinda intersting that jesus is supposed to come down and save muslims as opposed to mohammed though...

Ok then, carry on folks...

what's wrong with wasting one's life?

weird topic :P

I don't think you can tell people not to have sex, it's the frickin 21st century, some societies decided to let sex be an individual's decision rather than the state's, end of story really.

That aside, I think sex these days is really tarnishing the meaning of love, I enjoy replacing every occurrance of "love" by "fuck" in songs, you should try it, makes it more to the point usually lol.

They're ok sometimes, but man there are waaay too many of them these days, sorta kills the genre if you know what I mean :P