• posted a message on Flip cards
    Unless the transformation includes some form of zone change like the origins Planeswalkers, the transforms card is still the same game object it was before it transformed.

    So if you cast Temur Battle rage on Thing in the ice and it transformed later on in the turn the resultant awakened horror will still have double strike.

    Also as a terminology note Flip cards are cards from the old Kamigawa block like Bushi Tenderfoot/ Kenzo the Hardhearted, the correct term for cards like Thing in the ice/Awakened Horror is Double Faced Cards or DFC.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Clean comic books?
    Quote from Pokerkingdave »
    Fables is a good choice.
    If you're reading a Fables series which can be described as "lighthearted adventure stories where the good guys win (most of the time) and people aren't violently maimed", then you are reading a very different Fables series than the rest of us.


    Not to mention there are couple of rather questionable relationships in it.
    Posted in: Printed Media
  • posted a message on Donald Trump's Presidency
    Quote from DokuDokuH »

    His initial press release said that he wanted a ban on all muslims. We aren't disputing his statement, we're disputing his policy. He clarified immediately afterward what he meant, then stated he was open to exemptions FAR before Khan demanded one. As for Khan, I don't think that a foreigner with sympathetic links to pro-sharia extremism has any right to comment on our political process or advise people who to vote for. But hey, muslim extremists love democrats for a reason, now don't they.


    You are really rather uninformed. The pro Sharia law types hate Sidiq Khan due to him coming out in support of Equal marriage rights. Here it might help if you read about him not the caricature that Zack Goldsmith unsuccessfully tried to peddle during his diabolically awful campaign to become Mayor of London.
    Posted in: Debate
  • posted a message on Donald Trump's Presidency
    Quote from DokuDokuH »
    Quote from Kahedron »

    This would be an appropriate response if I was querying the numbers. I wasn't I was querying your claim that the source was unbiased so the figures were more trustworthy than any other figures that had been given in the thread. Something that you appear have to dodged in attempting to bring up the figures.

    Do you not understand the concept of methodology bias in studies? Asking voters to pick between "savior trump" and "demon-queen hillary" would be a biased poll. Asking to pick between "donald trump" and "hillary clinton" would be an unbiased poll, even if it came from fox ******* news. So, I'll ask again - where is the bias in the two papers I linked?


    Again this would be appropriate if you based your claim for accuracy on the quality of the data and the methedology.

    Quote from DokuDokuH »
    They tell us illegal immigrants are a burden on the economy, they aren't.

    They are. You're wrong.
    Who's telling lies?

    Well, I hate to point this out - but unless you're gonna show some unbiased sources, its still you and the dems. It sounds nice to say the things you're saying, but they're completely unsubstantiated by facts or logic.


    Where in the post above where you presented the papers did you make the claim that they were methedolically better than the other studies? Or did you just hope that no one would bother investigating your claim that they were not biased so superior to the other stats presented in this thread.

    Quote from DokuDokuH »

    Quote from Kahedron »
    Yet that is not what Trump said. That is what you have written around what he said. He quite emphatically said that we would ban all Muslims regardless of their origin and has subsquently had to do a number of climbdowns on the issue. All your stage dressing is just trying to hide that one central point.

    I also had a look at that law/statute you linked to not sure how relevant it is, as it not a blanket ban on people of a certain class coming into the US, just a tweaking of the requirements needed.

    Trump is prone to make hyperbolic statements, then clarify them afterward. He did this in december after issuing the press release, stating that it wouldnt apply to citizens or people already in the country. He AGAIN stated in march that there would be exceptions, which he reiterated after london's new mayor decided to weigh in on something that he has no place to comment on. More importantly, a blanket ban like that could only ever apply to non-citizens looking for visas - so assuming it means anything else simply shows a poor understanding of the law on your part.


    So you admit it then his inital plan was to ban all Muslims then. All of your fancy window dressing is post hoc and beside the point all the extremists needed was his 'I will ban all Muslims from entering the US' and they have got another weapon to use in the 'Clash of Civilisations' bull***** they want to peddle.

    As to whether it concerns him or not Sidiq Khan is Muslim, with his initial comments that he backed up in stating that he would grant Sidiq an exception how can it not affect Sidiq and why the hell should he not comment on it.
    Posted in: Debate
  • posted a message on Donald Trump's Presidency
    Quote from DokuDokuH »
    Quote from Kahedron »

    Did you bother to look at the background of the organisations who published those reports?

    I did and believe me in describing them unbiased is not a word I would use.

    Did you look at the data in the papers, or just the titles? Its simple math: what illegals pay into the system - what they get out of it results in a 100 billion dollar cost to actual americans. I linked the papers so I wouldn't have to post a paragraph on where to find and how to subtract a bunch of numbers from 50+ agencies. But hey, please show me the bias in their methodologies and I'll gladly find better sources for you.

    This would be an appropriate response if I was querying the numbers. I wasn't I was querying your claim that the source was unbiased so the figures were more trustworthy than any other figures that had been given in the thread. Something that you appear have to dodged in attempting to bring up the figures.

    Quote from DokuDokuH »
    Quote from Kahedron »

    [quote]Same thing I said earlier. Banning every Muslim from the country regardless of where they have come from and there situation is a vast over reaction to the current situation. IF he had limitied it to Middle Eastern Refugees he might have had a point and a sensible idea. BUT newsflash he didn't he unleashed his ban and his rhetoric against every muslim in the world regardless of who they are or where they are from.

    I don't know how to clarify this any better. THIS POLICY CAN ONLY APPLY PEOPLE SEEKING VISAS TO ENTER OR IMMIGRATE TO THE UNITED STATES ONLY. Citizens are not effected. Non-nationals already here or with prior permission to enter are not effected. We already issue relatively few visas to muslims, and in 2015 we passed a law that cuts nationals of several muslim countries out of the no-visa program and makes it more difficult for muslims to enter the county. So, outside of mass importation of muslim refugees, what incredible amount of muslims are seeking entry into the states? Trump's penchant for hyperbole may have made the release a bit much, but the practical effect of a total ban will be functionally very similar to just a moratorium on refugees.
    Fun part: Trumps ban will most likely survive judicial scrutiny.


    Yet that is not what Trump said. That is what you have written around what he said. He quite emphatically said that we would ban all Muslims regardless of their origin and has subsquently had to do a number of climbdowns on the issue. All your stage dressing is just trying to hide that one central point.

    I also had a look at that law/statute you linked to not sure how relevant it is, as it not a blanket ban on people of a certain class coming into the US, just a tweaking of the requirements needed.
    Posted in: Debate
  • posted a message on Donald Trump's Presidency
    Quote from DokuDokuH »

    They tell us illegal immigrants are a burden on the economy, they aren't.

    They are. You're wrong.
    Who's telling lies?

    Well, I hate to point this out - but unless you're gonna show some unbiased sources, its still you and the dems. It sounds nice to say the things you're saying, but they're completely unsubstantiated by facts or logic.

    Pot meet Kettle. Did you bother to look at the background of the organisations who published those reports?

    I did and believe me in describing them unbiased is not a word I would use.

    Quote from F.A.I.R »
    FAIR seeks to reduce overall immigration to a level that is more manageable and which more closely reflects past policy. Reducing legal immigration from well over one million presently, to 300,000 a year over a sustained period will allow America to more sensibly manage its growth, address its environmental needs, and maintain a high quality of life.


    Quote from wiki »


    Principles

    FAIR advocates "7 Principles of True Comprehensive Immigration Reform":

    1. End Illegal Immigration
    2. No Amnesty or Mass Guest-Worker Program
    3. Protect Wages and Standards of Living
    4. Major Upgrade in Interior Enforcement, Led by Strong Employers Penalties
    5. Stop Special Interest Asylum Abuse
    6. An Immigration Time Out
    7. Equal Under the Law

    The FAIR website contains a detailed explanation of each principle and why FAIR considers each one important.[16]



    Does that sound like an organisation that is trying to put forward a balanced view on immigration to you?

    F.A.I.R's website

    Oh and I haven't forgotten your other 'paper' I checked them out as well and found out they are an out growth of F.A.I.R so equally unbiased.

    Quote from DokuDokuH »

    Quote from dox »
    Additionally none of that makes it a reasonable act to ban all Muslims like Mr Trump wants to do.

    So, the FBI stating that syrians are a security risk AND merkel coming out and apologizing for europe's handling of immigration while admitting that it is the impetus of an insane amount of problems including huge upswings in rape and violence aren't enough of a reason to temporarily halt migration until a better system can be implemented? What the **** do you suggest then?


    Same thing I said earlier. Banning every Muslim from the country regardless of where they have come from and there situation is a vast over reaction to the current situation. IF he had limitied it to Middle Eastern Refugees he might have had a point and a sensible idea. BUT newsflash he didn't he unleashed his ban and his rhetoric against every muslim in the world regardless of who they are or where they are from.

    This has already forced him into 1 climbdown with his exception for Sidiq Khan. Will he be extending it to the Ambassadorial missions of countries like Morocco, Algeria, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia? Or will they have to pack up their Embassies and head home for the amount of time it takes for that law to get ruled unconstitutional?
    Posted in: Debate
  • posted a message on Disrupting Shoal and Ancestral Vision
    All cards in MTG have a converted Mana cost which is the sum of the mana symbols in the top right corner of the card, or 0 in the case of cards like lands or Ancestral visions.

    You can exile an ancestral vision to power disrupting shoal and it will counter any spell with a cmc of 0 like Accorder's Shield or another ancestral vision
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Mana Drain Ruling
    A spells CMC is only ever the sum of the mana symbols in the top right corner of the card. It never includes any additional costs like the commander tax.

    The only exception is if there is an x or y in the mana cost where the value you choose for x/y is added to the non-variable cost if you are casting the spell.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Donald Trump's Presidency
    Quote from DokuDokuH »

    Trump was right on this issue, according to the FBI, and the dems are wrong. Thoughts?


    That you might have a point if Trump limited his plan to people coming from Syria. Since he didn't and has been forced into yet another climbdown by saying he might be willing to grant the newly elected mayor of London an exception it would seem that he has more than slightly overreacted to the current situation. And is unfortunately stuck with another unworkable idea because his supporters love it, much like his Mexican border wall.
    Posted in: Debate
  • posted a message on Nissa, Vastwood Seer help
    Your opponent was wrong the target condition for any spells/abilities is the words directly after the word target in the text. In this case it is simply lands with no specification of whether they need to be tapped or not. If any lands are untapped when the ability comes to resolve the untap them instruction is ignored but they still become 6/6 elemental creatures.

    For a contrast check the wording on Royal assassin which does specify needs to be tapped.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.