Helios 37 - The February Chill

[Freddie]

Political Mudpit by Thanatos
The Ethos, Mores, et Monastica by _Pontifex_
The Basement by Freddie
Coliseum by Elzabar
Universitas Ludus Olympus by JP226
Editorials by The Black Prince, Lord Rahl
Page 3

The 2nd edition of the ‘new’ Helios is upon us and this is the part were as editor I’m expected to write some witty introduction or opening statement. I’ve never quite worked out how my predecessors namely Sundance Kid, Tom Paine and Scorch and editors from paper based magazines have gone about this process. Do they choose to talk about a personal experience? Current affairs? Something of note from one of the reporters? It’s all a bit of mystery to me and I’ve pondered this question now donkey’s years ever since I picked my first copy of Nintendo Magazine back in the early 90’s. Oh well I guess if your not sure what to write I guess you can always talk about it, lol.

Now I’ve got that over with I’ll hand you over to perhaps the Helios most reliable and consistent contributor, bar myself of course (sorry Thanatos but I’ve been doing this longer you have).

The Political Mudpit

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

“War…. War never changes…”

Of course it doesn’t, and neither does humanity’s love to hate!

Welcome, welcome, one and all, to the Political Mudpit, our wonderful little cesspool of filth that everybody’s come to adore and despise.

I hope you’re hungry, because we’ve got such wonderful morsels of haute cuisine, complete with anger, insults, and anguish!

Don’t worry, put this dishcloth over your head, it’ll protect you from the mudflinging. Let’s take a gander around the pool, shall we?

First up, a thread about Microsoft charged with monopoly violations!

Oh Microsoft, Microsoft, Microsoft, when will you ever learn? Or more to the point, when will the European Union? Let’s see what the OP had to say:

Microsoft was formally charged with monopoly abuse by Europe's top antitrust authority, the European Commission, over the way it bundles the Internet Explorer browser with Windows.

The move follows an unsuccessful attempt by U.S. authorities nine years ago to strip Internet Explorer (IE) of its unfair advantage over competing browsers. European authorities were more successful in their prosecution of Microsoft over similar antitrust offenses five years ago, fining the company over €1.6 billion and ordering it to change the way it does business.

The Commission's charges were delivered to Microsoft's headquarters in Redmond, Washington, last Thursday in the form of a formal statement of objections. The company is studying the charges and will respond within the next two months, as is usual in European antitrust cases, it said.

The new charges are the first of many anticipated against the company in the wake of a failed court appeal by Microsoft last year against the original European antitrust ruling.

The latest statement of objections follows a relatively short investigation, one year long, sparked by a complaint from Opera Software, a Norwegian browser developer.

Opera CEO Jon von Tetzchner welcomed the Commission's decision to press charges. "It's clear they are taking this very seriously," he said in a phone interview on Saturday.

However, he still doesn't know if the Commission pursued both aspects of his company's complaint against Microsoft: In addition to complaining about the bundling of IE into Windows, Opera also pointed out that the software giant was undermining open software standards on the Internet.

"Its a problem for companies like ours if Microsoft doesn't support the open standards we all apply, because many Web sites are designed to work with IE, which means our browsers won't always work out of the box," he said.

IE is still the most widely used internet browser, although its market share dipped below 70 percent globally in 2008, according to Web analytics company Net Applications. In December, Opera's share was around 0.71 percent.

Von Tetzchner said he hopes the Commission doesn't apply the same remedy it did in its last ruling, when it ordered Microsoft to offer a second version of Windows alongside the regular version of the software, but without a bundled copy of Windows Media Player .

Many of you reading this right now are prob using internet explorer. The EU is taking this way too far. Microsoft has the right to bundle because Microsoft design and produced these products. Same thing if this Opera company developed its own OS and released it with its own Media player and browser.

Where will these charges stop at. Will Live Messenger be next, what about the games included with the OS like chess and solitaire. Seriously these charges are absolutely ridiculous imagine that if Microsoft loses then European versions of Windows will come without Media Player and without a internet browser. Or worse Windows will come equip with 20 different internet browsers or messengers or media players.

A burst of angry denouncements against the EU shortly followed thereafter:

Yeah, this is pretty retarded.

Expect more of it.

Eu needs more money

shadyrome, I thought the same thing too when I first read it.

What? How do they expect people to connect to Internet and get other browsers if there is no browser installed on their new computer?

It's not free or fair in anyway if the EU places such a stupid and costly restriction. In the end we the consumers will suffer.

I often wonder how such supposedly smart people can be such idiots, bad EU bad!

It's just another example of the EU doing something which doesn't have to be done, just for the sake of exercising power. I use firefox and chrome, and do millions of others. It is easy to get if the person didn't like IE, and in fact IE is losing it's market share.

Fact is the average PC user doesn't care, they just want to go on the internet, Microsoft is convenient and easy to use and understand.

This is ludicrous... Seriously... adding one of your own products to one of your own products is a monopoly? Give me a break.

Bad move by the EU, now one of the most powerful companies hate you

Sheesh, EU looking to go to the microsoft money well again. I suppose with current economic crisis its understandable but really EU should just go "give us half your stuff MS!" and get it over with.

Yeah it is stupid, may as well complain about the make of a radio in new car you bought or the tires etc. Im using Chrome right now, it took an astonishing 2 minutes to d/l, install, import bookmarks etc. Maybe the EU would like to see it so when you turn on a pc you are greeted by an a:> prompt again and the machine basically be useless until you purchase a ton of additional software. Thanks but Ill pass.

Future Filmmaker had some interesting trivia in regards to the latest lawsuit scandal:

You know this same issue has already been taken to court in the US ten years ago, right? This has to be like the 7th time Microsoft has been charged with monopoly violations.

In the end, GrnEyedDvl summed it up best:

Funny how all this talk about "free" software turns into multi million dollar lawsuits.

You build a free browser. You want to distribute it. But not that many people download your free browser because IE is already built into Windows.

Just how are you harmed?? You make less money now?

Several people made car analogies. Fine lets run with that. Does Ford now have to offer their car with Kenwood, Sony, Alpine, and every other makers stereo?

This talk about Microsoft not conforming to someone else's standards is BS too. Who creates the standards here? People who are anti Microsoft to begin with.

In every other business model in the world, the market sets the standards. The market in the computer industry has its own model just like every other market, and that model says that Microsoft has the best platform for client side applications, and that Unix/Linux has the best platform for web server applications. I am sure some of you are going to disagree with that, and that's ok. Your personal choice is your personal choice.

But dont let your personal choice try to dictate to an established market.

Well said, well said. At any rate, it’s agreed that it’s a stupid move on the EU’s part.

Next up, Bush commutes the prison sentences of two former Border Patrol agents!

On his final full day in office, President Bush issued commutations for two former border patrol agents convicted in 2006 of shooting an undocumented immigrant who was smuggling drugs at the time.

The prison sentences of Ignacio Ramos and Joe Campean will now end March 20.

Ramos had received an 11-year prison sentence; Campean had received a 12-year sentence

Responses at first were supportive of the move:

About frigging time, I really thought they would be among the first two flagged during the final weeks of his presidency...was shocked they werent and were worried he'd not do anything. Wish it had been a full pardon though.

Huzzah!

wow a Bush decision I can support

This is great news. Ramos and Compean never actually deserved their sentences in the first place. They were just doing their jobs. It's completely understandable why they would shoot the drug smuggler.

Later posts however, turned up some troubling facts about Ramos and Compean:

The sentences were commuted.

They're still felons convicted of unprofessional brutality, so I can't see this in any way supporting their cause (whatever that is).

Yep your right, all they got out of this was early release. Maybe Obama can reverse some of this, pardon maybe. Is it possible. However, would he IDK, maybe not.

Why should he, though? Maybe the sentence was harsh (which was why it was commuted), but why a pardon?

Are they not guilty of their crimes?

My guess is that there is something in the prosecution files that irks the border patrol or Homeland Sexurity. No ther reason for the to have gone until the end of the Bush term. Perhaps some evidence that was not admissable or withheld to protect an informant.

From the 5 minutes I've spent on Google and Wikipedia, it seems they shot at an unarmed suspect (apparently it was said the suspect made a motion to turn and fire, yet the accounts seem to say he was shot in the buttocks and damaged his urethra, which would be hard to do had they shot him from the front and not at his back). But then the charges layed out say the two cleaned up the scene, removed spent bullet casings, did not file a proper report and lied about the situation to their superiors.

I can't see the case for their innocence being overwhelming.

Troubling thoughts indeed. It’ll be interesting to see what happens after they’re released from solitary confinement.

But no more unhappiness, it’s time for (yes, you guess it) Thanatos’s Muddiest Thread Award! (We love dirt!)

This award goes to the thread that’s the most muddiest at the time of writing, complete with total bias, blatant favoritism, and posters who don’t care that they haven’t changed their underwear in the last ten days!

This edition’s award goes to…. Obama’s Inauguration!

Honestly dear reader, knowing how politically charged the Mudpit is, was there ever any doubt that this would be chosen for the award?

It didn’t help that the OP’s post didn’t exactly set the most…. er, shall we say, serious of moods:

HAZAH! About time ol Bushy got out of Office, people now will start to actually like the US. Some 3 million people are coming to the Inauguration.

It didn’t take very long until things got completely out of hand:

If Europe and co. like us, then we're in serious trouble.

Beginning Jan 20th, welcome to the USSA.

Saddest day in American history. It's probably the modern-day version of 476 A.D..

Not only is America the most envied nation on earth, it's become the laughingstock as well.

What are you talking about? We have been the laughingstock since Bush choked on a pretzel.

January 20th 2009 will go down in history as the the first day of the USA as a second rate power.

I didn't realize Obama was magic and he could single handily reduce the military power of the US, its economic power (still I think 5 time's higher than the next nation), its diplomatic power and its population in a single day.

Logic tried to prevail….

Give the guy a break. He hasn't even done anything worthy of your contempt yet. And this is coming from someone who didn't vote for him, and isn't particularly happy he is going to be president. I'm going to hold my criticism till he does something worthy of it.

And as for those that think he is going to unleash a new ere of peace and economic security, remember he is just a man, and that the president is not some all powerful dictator that can make anything come to pass. He will be bound by the same restraints in office as every president before him.

I guess my point is, why have any pre-conceived notions? I'm waiting to see what he actually does before I form an opinion.

Take it easy

Good grief, shouldn't people WANT this man to succeed instead of throwing bitter comments at him? His supporters went a bit over the top - well McCains supporters went a bit over the top too, so what? We're facing a huge global economic crisis, and the USA is dealing with war in two countries. I want this man to do whatever he can to help the USA, and the world. Why can't people see past their own political beliefs and just hope their president can succeed?

… but then it got murdered. Messily.

America will no longer be a capitalist nation. We will be socialist just like the Europeans. We will bilk the rich for all their worth and since now more than half of the population will no longer pay taxes they will vote for more spending as it wont cost them anything. The rich will hide their money. Game over. Even now parts of Europe have seen the folly of socialism and are turning back towards capitalism

Yeah, we all live on collective farms and follow a 5 year plan.

I'm not sure wether your joking or not when you say that European nations are'nt capitalist. And I'd love to know where all these socialist countries are, I certainly don't live in one.

No, actually he believes it, just trace back on his posts for years. Europe is a big red communist land and USA is the land of the free and the brave, but it's now all gone, there is a 'communist' in the White House and to make it worse he is a "black muslim". Bush was the last "great" president of USA. That's what you get out of the opposition.

Hail the emperor

Propaganda begins

What a bunch of Lemmings. They dont realise their attending their own funeral. And this is the most disgusting racist BS Ive seen in years and its being applauded.

I had to turn off Rush as he was airing this crap. It makes me physically ill just thinking about america signing its own death warrant and then celebrating it. This will go down as the day America died and the dreams of the founders were dashed forever.

Actually Rush, people have stopped being lemmings. They decided to vote for the candidate with a message, vs the old white guy. They have voted for a leader who represents ALL Americans, not just the privilieged whites. They have elected a leader who will not waste America's prowess foolishly like a cowboy.

Rush, you will be having a very unhappy rest of your life unless you come to grips with the fact that America has returned to the ideals it was founded on.

Good luck.

Rush and VC, the day either of you or anyone like you are elected to presidentship i will shoot myself. The only true evils are old dogmas and adherence to outdated beliefs in non-existant entities.

America isnt even close to following the constitution anymore and as far as Im conserned we have an illigitimate government and have had so for quite some time. If the government doesnt follow the law why should we follow their laws? In my 60 years Ive seen so much freedom go down the tubes here.

I could go on and on, let me just take a peek at the next ten pages or so…

Yeah, it just keeps going on forever. It’s all the mud you could ever want!

Dive right in folks!

And once again, you make me proud, TWC! Thanks for showing everyone just how enlightened all of us are! You should be so proud.

And now, we must say goodbye for now, dear reader, until next edition.
In the meantime, give me back that dishcloth. You won’t need it anymore.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Actually, you can have it. Think of it as a really valuable memento of your trip here.

See you next edition!

Calling the Political Mudpit a ‘little cesspool of filth’ may be taking the decline of the quality of debate in the mudpit a bit to far but never the less a very comprehensive coverage.

Next up is my trusty right hand man Pontifex bring us a round of the Ethos, Mores, et Monastica forum.

The Ethos, Mores, et Monastica

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ethos Mores et Monastica

Hello! Welcome to our Helios! As always the EMM has been a hotbed of controversy, interesting debate, and dare I say..evangelizing? On the subject of evangelization, a thread caught my eye seconds before this was written, I hadn't expected to include this, as it isn't particularly compelling, but it makes sense.

For the amount of debate, argument, and general energy put into defending your religious views, how many individuals have you in fact convinced to think as you do? Behold!

Of course, I guess if convincing people was easy we wouldn't have as much fun butting heads. Speaking honestly though I would doubt there are very many that can claim to have changed the beliefs of another individual entirely. My experience has always been that religious beliefs (or lack thereof) can be taught, can be learned, but cannot be believed unless the individual is entirely open to believing.

Let's move on and explore the role of religion as a comfort, or potentially a way to escape depression. Discussion occurred here.

Now, sure, religion could conceivably give hope to those that have none, depending on the message of the religion and if it compatible with the kind of message a potential convert wants to hear. This has been one of the great recruiting methods organized religion has been able to use to attract converts. The message that most teach are appealing to the point many are unable to refuse promises of things like eternal life in utopia. Whether or not these teachings are true is very disputable, and frankly I am surprised at the amount of people that are willing to accept teachings like this. Would it be well, amazing if a heaven exists? Yes! Taking a step back though, how much of this fantasy is just that- a fantasy? How much of this has been exaggerated throughout history to the point it is at now?

Amazingly, some even believe that the life we live on earth is miserable in comparison to the life to be lived in heaven. The question is how do we know? Is our faith to be so strong that we are so willing to move quickly into the next life, a life we don't even know for sure exists?

Interesting stuff! But we have ground to cover, so let's push on!

Evil and good, are these notions simply defined individually? Essentially, the answer is no. Generally speaking, our definitions of what is right and wrong, what is good and what is evil are communally shared ideas. This is a result of our upbringing and what we have been taught by our peers, meaning (what could be our international) society. Murder is an evil. There is one concept that is more or less agreed upon. In order to kill another human, an individual is often forced to find an excuse to justify that action. Based on the reason, the action may or may not be justifiable, but the point is that the perpetrator acknowledges that the act is evil.

Now, if an infant could be raised abreast from society, deficient of any kind of moral upbringing or indeed without parenting (isn't likely) could he or she conceivably have a different view of what is good and evil? To some extent yes, of course, but a scenario like that is so unlikely to happen because we are designed in such a way that we need parents to teach us the world around us in our early years, and knowledge will be imparted no matter what. There isn't much chance of a drastically differing view of good and evil appearing simply because the circumstances from which it would be produced are too extreme.

And now for this edition's completely unbiased cartoon:

I hope some of you enjoyed that as much as I did. Contrary to popular belief, I have been told the Helios isn't an objective news source. Rest assured I have my agents on the lookout for biased reporters.

We will wrap up with an altogether boggling discussion on the origin of morals and other queries.

Interestingly enough, this topic addresses the seeming futility of prayer. God seems to make his decisions completely deaf to human pleas for a certain outcome. Isn't this a little bit selfish of an all loving God? Christianity has long been the largest faith in the world (not to say it hasn't gone unopposed in many areas). But as the number of Muslims quickly rises to reach and possibly even pass Christian levels, how will our society be impacted? How will one faith claim to be greater than the other? Are not both worshiping the same God, the God of Abraham? Decisions, decisions.

Once again this will all boil down to personal choice and which faith is more believable.

Well, my candle has all but burnt out which means this is the end, for now. This issue has been a pleasure to write as a result from the many interesting topics that have risen from the compost pile of the old. I urge all of you to participate in discussion and create your own topics- who knows, you may even get a mention next time!

A special shoutout goes to Kiljaden. Keep up the good posts!

-Pontifex

Excellent commentary for perhaps the most difficult forum to cover, I’ve always found interesting when in the face of adversity or helplessness people will quickly turn to religion to find answers One such example is in the movie War of the Worlds (60’s version) towards the end of the film the sciencetists haven taken refuge in the church.

Now for my favorite part of the Helios, The Basement!

The Basement

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Even as editor I’m still covering the basement, at least this way I can guarantee at least one report will be on time for the Helios publication. For this show I’ll be looking at LCD monitors, new PC builds, the Windows 7 Beta and Google Chrome.






The screen above looks like an ordinary LCD screen, the finish is matte and if you didn’t like matte you can buy screens with a glossy finish such as this one. And in this thread Wheelchair asks,

Which do you prefer to be a charactistic of your monitor? Glossy or Matte?

I myself prefer Glossy, I just bought a SamSung T220 22" monitor, which is glossy.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Both have advantages but personally I prefer matte as my screen sits opposite a window and during the summer the sun can shine directly onto the screen, since mine is matte reflections and shadows are greatly reduced. However judging by the poll results gloss is the winner.

Why would you ever not want glossy? Yeah, glare can be an issue, but my gaming environment is easily regulated in that respect.

When I buy a new monitor, it will be a Samsung, and will be glossy. Maybe even the touch of color series like my HDTV. I bought that TV specifically because of the quality of the image, in part due to the glossy panel.

Another positive aside from sheer image quality, is that scratches are often able to be buffed out. I had a 2-1/2 inch scratch on my 46" touch of color Sammy, have no idea how it got there, but it buffed out with the included microfiber shammy.

Glossy on my Gaming desktop, but Matte on my work laptop.
Works like a charm

Yetanother popular thread by Wheelchair, this time he is singing the praises of Google’s new web browser, Chrome.

Yeah, I'm usually not the one to change my ways after a year or 2, I JUST downloaded Chrome and I am really impressed by the UI, speed, and everything! It's a pretty Browser.

I find things considerably faster, and I like how when you go to type something in a chatbox it highlights it in Orange, very nice.

Also when you open GC theres a page that has "most visited" with a screenshot of the page and its easy to pickout which site you like.

Me Likey!

Even TWC’s chief engineer Simetrical can’t wait to give it a try.

I'm waiting for Chrome to work on Linux. And, preferably, for extensions to work.

It would also appear Chrome is winning round some die hard Firefox users as well.

I'm using it at the moment and although I was a firefox fanboy as such, I have sort of been converted. The only thing that I can see that is absent is the scroll thing. Where you click the middle mouse button and it scrolls up and down, where has that gone?

I've been using Chrome for a couple of months now, I think either in late November or early December and I've really been liking it.

I think the best feature is that every tab or rather every site runs as a different process so you only lose a lil bit of your surfing when one tab crashes. It also means you can make every tab a new window or vice versa: it's great!!! I usually use that feature at least once a day; it's great for temporarily opening a lot of tabs from one site or for copying something from one tab to another.

If anyone is interested you can download it from here.





With the release date of Empire Total War the Basement is getting swamped with threads with people asking for advice on new builds for Empire Total War. Well if you are one of those people I suggest you take my advice which I have posted in countless threads.

Looking to build a PC for Empire Total War? Wait until the game comes out so it can be benched marked.

Or at least wait until the demo comes out. Anyway one of these thread was started by chobski.

I was hoping to get a new rig back in august but due to monetary and time constraints aka uni life I never got round to buying one, which seems to have benefited me somewhat as prices seemed to have dropped a fair bit in the last few months! anyway in april i'm getting a much appreciated cash boost from the powers that be and hopefully ill be able to invest in a new rig for ETW at last (hopefully!). So to the matter at hand i wanted to run some system specs by you lot here to get a feeling how you think the system might run ETW, bearing in mind its not out and benchmark tested which i understand!

Intel® Core 2 Duo E8600 2 X 3.33GHz 1333MHz (heard that dual would be better for gaming than quad atm?)

ASUS® P5QL: DDR2, SATAII, PCI-e x16, 3 PCI, 2 x PCI-e x1 (hoping its quad core compatible incase I later want to upgrade)

4GB CORSAIR XMS2 800MHz (2x2GB)

250GB SERIAL ATA II HARD DRIVE WITH 8MB CACHE

512MB RADEON HD 4850 PCI Express + DVI (tempted to upgrade to a 4870 if the cash allows!)

already got the monitor and keyboard, mouse etc.

At least he understands the game hasn’t been benchmarked yet, and it’s no use trying to guess the performance based on games like RTW and M2TW since Empire uses a whole new engine with real time physics, complex naval battles etc.

Although this thread in particular got out hand with the debate weighing up the pro’s and con’s of faster hard drives and the benefits of RAID 0 arrays, it was suggested that he upgrades his video card to a HD4870 or better and google shopping is a good place to find the best prices for hardware.

In another related thread,

This is a question that has been really buging me and it's one I really want to know.
Am I ready for Empire?

I have an 2.4 Ghz Processor, an 8600GT 256MB graphic card and 3 GBs of RAM, but am I ready?

If Creative Assembly’s minimum specifications are to be believed then his system should run the game.

You should be able to play it but only on low settings and small unit sizes and don't expect the game to fly either.

In all honesty though know one knows how well the game will play until the final game is released and benchmarking can be carried out.

Still not convinced by VISTA? Are you still holding on to XP like a child holding onto their mother as if it’s their first day at school? Well I can hold my hand up to that, but come the summer that won’t be the case, we all have to leave to nest at some point and after playing around with Windows 7 Beta I’ve finally accepted that windows XP time has now come and gone.

Thanks to Pent uP Rage for the links.

...is now on Fileplanet. Check it out if you're brave enough.

Just a heads up!

So far opinions on Microsoft’s latest brain child have been very positive.

It's not quite as stable, but I am very impressed by it. It certainly runs much faster than Vista, and I'm surprised that it supports more of my favorite older games.

I'm very impressed... But I also want to see OSX 10.6, Snow Leopard from Apple, which is supposed to similarly be streamlined and much faster.

It's very stable, More stable then XP dare I say...but I guess that's not very hard

I've been using Windows 7 for 3 days and so far it's been really stable and most of my games run on it which is great. Only thing is that Google Chrome doesn't run on this which is really not Windows fault anyway...

Well that last point was pleasing to read, even in this Beta stage games are currently stable so when switching to Windows 7 users will hopefully experience a smooth transfer, which didn’t happen with Vista or XP when it first came out.

It has to said, how different is Windows 7 then Vista? Is Windows 7 just Vista with a new service pack added and a tweaked interface? It could be Vista is seen as brand that has been terminally damaged by bad press and the release of Windows 7 is an attempt to bury the bad PR even though a lot of the issues that came with Vista have now been resoleved.


That’s all from me, I hope you enjoyed reading it, now I have to create the page 3!

And that Page 3 can be found at the bottom of the Helios for you to boggle at.

Next up is Coliseum. It’s the Coliseum of the 21st century all the fun of Roman times but without the blood and guts.

Coliseum

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Evening, welcome to the Helios, and welcome to the Coliseum report. Let's dive in! And coming up is the great [user]Erwin Rommel[/user]'s report on the brand spanking new World Alliances!

Ah yes, some of you may have noticed that I didnt had any new articles to comep up with to waste your time. Well the current SA is dead people, and a restart is in place but things are still getting adjusted here and there, minor tweaks for my faction page for example which unfortunately didnt make to it to have its own intro, a sad loss to the Helios............

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=591

My new faction, I have moar better ships pics than they do!

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=688

Now enough about that. Now maybe after a couple of clicks in the new post button hopefully looking at the boring threads listed hoping to have something spark you're interest, you may encounter some faction titles that will caught you're eye, like:

Le Royaume de France
Imperio Espanol
The Hapsburg Empire of Austria and Hungary

Sometimes near each other.

Wait a minute have we stumbled into a new mod like ETW in the works!!!!111 ZOMG!!! This is so kewl!! WOW! They even have a complete set of factions all the way to Qing China! THis will be a great mod ever!

WRONG. You kid just stumbled into another universe of the deep receses of TWC, this time not occuring in outer space but in 1715. Ladies and Gentlemen allow me to present to you the new brainchild of Aetius. World Alliances 1715.

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=560

Mayber we got tired of waiting for ETW or I dunnoh, but boy was it cool to do some historical if's of having to interact with real people managing there own little turf. Of course battle results may come slow since the mods handle that but the intrigue and the interaction and RP play is still interisting enough.

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=598

I mean hell, Sidmen here took the reigns of the TOkugawa Shogunate and within 2 years proppelled it to a new Western Power, years in advance, and now they control SEA and has a ridicolous trade monopoly. Britain commanded by Eric is out of India possibly for good.

THats not even half of it, then theres the funny story about the new;y proclaimed Mexican Empire, I lost count how many times it tried to deal back and forth between New France and the THirteen Colonies before eventually going back to Spain

Somethings though will always remain the same albeit somewhat. And that is the Great NOrthern War, how fitting that Carl Dobeln will take the helm of the Swedes along with Hansduet against Holger Danske's Danish Kingdom.

As for me, things are turning quite differently. I command the vast Qing Dynasty. And everything is megalomaniac in proportions, I have 26 unit types, 4 fully independent armies to reflect the historical 8 Banner Army and more interesting is that I have a trade fleet to rival tha of any western power. But of course they're only junks

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=208175

I own Macau now, guess I'll have to build the casinos myself. Screw westernization! Bah, western barbarians, the great Banner of the Qing will triumphantly fly down the capitals of their nations as my victorious Eight Banner Army crush down there wig wearing ribbons and lace and pink stockings troops!

Stay tuned as I chart my progress to assert the Mandate of Heaven to all this barbarians and to finally rull All Under Heaven.

Thanks Rommel, you saved my ass from handing in a crappy article! Now with that out of the way, lets continue our search through the Alliances Gateway. Where we stumble upon National Alliances (the names here are original, aren't they?). John Adams' attempt at his own Alliances game, set in the years before World War I. It has already received a fair bit of support, check it out if you're interested.

Us losers in the Coliseum are still playing 20 Questions; so far we've found out that he is a male Roman general that was alive during the late republic, and that he was pro-senate. See if you can figure out who squigian is talking about.

Well, it may be because I'm lazy, or it may be because Freddie is holding a gun against my head and telling me to hurry up with my article, but whichever reason it is, I think I should probably end the article here. So, see ya'll next time!

One of these days I will learn how those Alliance Gateway forum games work.

Now for the second time in a row the newest edition to the Helios is our sports coverage take it away JP!

Universitas Ludus Olympus

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

And where would the world, and the Helios for that matter, be without sports? It would be a a more oring place, that's for damn sure. So in helping provide a little less boredom, I'm here to bring you the sports report. Maybe I should get myself a nifty tag with JP's Sports Report or something...

First up, the NFL. Season long threads are always fun to look at. Now that the Superbowl is upon us and the Arizona Cardinals and Pittsburgh Steelers are pitted to do battle, how many of us actually saw this coming six months ago...

Mango posted back in August who he felt was going to the playoffs:

Actually it leaves 7 spots, because of the wild cards. I was just going by the ones that I'm 95% sure will go to the playoffs.

If I had to guess, based on performance last season and offseason moves, I would guess:

AFC
Pats
Colts
Chargers
Steelers
Jaguars
Browns (I think they break out this year)

NFC
Cowboys
Seahawks
Vikings
Saints
Giants
Panthers (hopefully)

But there's always teams that do far differently than expected

For his AFC predictions, neither the pats, jaguars or browns made it to the playoffs. And the breakout browns finished 4-12. On the NFC side, the cowboys, seahawks and saints did not make it either.

NFC Division winners:
West 49er's
East Dallas*
North Detroit
South New Orleans*
Wild Cards: Seahawks, Bucks

AFC Division Winners
West San Diego*
East New England*
North Pittsburgh
South Jacksonville
Wild Cards: Bills, Colts

And CDM missed completely with the NFC, not one of those teams made it to the playoffs... ouch. On the AFC side outside of the colts, san diego and pittsburgh none of those teams made it either.

But alas, it's easy to poke fun. I myself felt at the time it was going to be the Pats repeating thier trip to the superbowl only to come away with a W this time around. It was not to be as their starting QB, Mr Tom Brady went down with injury the first game of the season... and wrecked my fantasy team while he was at it. What is amazing is that no one in their right mind would have thought the Arizona Cardinals would ahve been a team to make it to the super bowl. A team who's organization was barely run better than that of Al Davis' Oakland Raiders. But 2008 seems to have been the year of Cinderella stories, first we had Tampa Bay Devil Rays making it to the World Series, a notoriously bad team, and now we have the Card's getting hot at the right time and possibly bringing home the Lombardi.

Now that the Super Bowl is actually upon us, and set to kick off in t minus five and a half hours as I write this... we have the Gunslinging, veteren Kurt Warner with two potent wide recievers squaring off against a defense that ranks number one in nearly all categories, the ressurected steel curtain of Pittsburgh led by Troy Polamalu.

On Pitts D versus Kurt Warner...

I'm not saying the Steelers don't have good D. I'm saying you cannot beat the Cardinals passing attack through coverage, you have to try and get pressure on Warner.

Unfortunately Warner has a 128 QB rating and has been sacked five times, pressure seems to be something he likes. And others threw their own comments into the mix...

I like Big Ben and the Pitts D but i think its the Cards year w/ Warner leading Boldin and Fitz running rampant and even Edge contributing.(Good work from the Rookie Hightower also)
It will be close 21-27 Cards upset.

Im very confident in the Steeler's defense and Dick Lebeau, and they'll get the job done as long as Roethlisberger and the offense play like theyve been playing.

And we are able to sample more or less that this game is going to come down to Warner versus the Pitt's D. A few thigns to keep in mind, Whisenhunt, the coach of Arizona, was a former Offensive Coordinator for the Pittsburgh Steelers and if anyone knows that D it's this guy. He also has a very powerful offense to use.

In other sports news, Swedish Boxer Ingemar Johansson is dead. There is a thread on it http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=222173

There is also discussion as to whether or not the best "keeper" or goalie in the sport of Soccer is Gigi Buffon. Now I am no expert in the realm of soccer. Tried playing it when I was younger, didn't care for it much, so realize I have no idea what I'm about to post and comment on...

What? He's not even the best Goalkepper around now. Just goes to show that all these official football federations don't have a clue when it comes to rankings

Surprise surprise, the media doesn't watch the sport they cover. I could not tell you how many times I've come across bogus articles and found that the actual writer or writers could give a "explicative." They do these stories on who they crown as the best ever when it's nothing more than an incoherent babbling nonsense proving they don't know what they are talking about. You see it in sports like College football, that crown the Ohio State Buckeyes season after season as somehow the "best." Luckily soccer, or football, is a sport where winning get's you places. There is no crazy BCS system here.

The debate moved on:

buffon is the best goalie of the last 30 years.. but he's not the best goalie ever

I wouldn't say so. Casillas and Shay Given are better in my opinion. I don't really see what makes Buffon "good"

What crap! Schmeichel is the greatest ever!

But Augustus Lucifer once again, I think he did this in another debate the last time I covered the sports forum, pointed out a technicality:

It was not a poll by fans. Best ever is deceiving though, because it clearly states that it only factored in keepers since '87.

In the end the TWC community could not come to agreement. And it wasn't surprising, the best of anything in sports is simply an opinion. It's all in the eye of the beholder.

So how much money do sports stars actually make? Well, it's not entirely accurate when you here some star sign a contract for a trillion dollars and think that's alot of money he's getting. Depending on the sport he may not be getting any money at all:

Freddie posd the question:

How much does a top US football (not soccer) player transfer for? How much do they get paid a week/month/year?

And surprisingly, the response was comparatively not a whole lot. For instance:

And Football salaries are extremely complex. As Justinian said, Ben Roethlisberger made $27.7 million this year, but his contract is something like 8 years, 110 million, so he doesn't make that much every year.

Football players contracts can be tweaked to pay different amounts year by year, to help manage the NFL salary cap, which is far more strict than the NBA cap. Also only the "Signing bonus" money usually between 20% and 30% of the contract, is guaranteed. If you perform poorly one year, you can be forced to restructure your contract for less money. On the other hand, if you perform well, you can hold out for more money.

and:

With every sports league around the world using different systems to sign players, comparing salaries is difficult at best. For instance, NFL contracts are only good up to literally the very day of release. You may sign a 10 year hundred million contract, but if your released 3 years in, you'll only see the money due to you in the first 3 years unlike the NBA or MLB. I'm personally kind of scared about the upcoming labor contract in the NFL btw. I see a strike or possibly a lockout approaching in 2011 not to mention an uncapped year in 2010 could let all hell break loose if the CBA isn't extended or renegotiated by then.

Contracts for players in American football are based on a number of things, yards, cathes touchdowns etc etc. The only garantee is the signing bonus, and those can be quite large but no where near the hundreds and millions that football stars seemingly get paid. In the NBA or the MLB or Soccer (football) abroad, American football players are poor by comparison, or atleast can be.

And finally, I know last article I promised I'd follow the diet laid out. I did, sort of. What I found was instead of going through the numbers and fine tuning the diet, just set a basic target. For me, because I want to get back to my optimal weight of 160, i've only consumed 1500 calories a day, give or take. I've lost about 8 pounds in the last two weeks, but I also exercise 5 days a week. If you want to lose alot of weight target 1500 calories daily. Want to maintain? Shoot for about 2500 and if you want to lose just a little, hit up 2000. Simple recipe for success, atleast it has worked for me.

On a side note, I actually came across a natural appetite suppresser, using light (not extra virgin) olive oil, take a couple teaspoons of that daily and you'll forget to eat. And for those that need group help or looking for a reason to lose weight and get in shape, check out the http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=221188

That about does it, until next time -JP

Wow I’ve been quoted in the sports forum that has to be first. And I have to admit as sad as it is for an Englishman to say this I wanted to watch Super Bowel this year but work alas took priority.

Editorials by The Black Prince, Lord Rahl, The Sundance Kid

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ramblings of the Kid
Episode II

Randomly generated start point (RGSP): Snow

I bloody love snow. And let's face it - who in England doesn't? We worship our occasional blizzards as divine signals from the heavens, yet what are we really playing and fooling around in? That's right. Frozen rain. Doesn't sound so appealing now, hmm? But the thing is, despite Britain's love of the snow, nowhere else in the world reacts quite like the British. The north dismisses it as an everyday occurrence. The Mediterranean do likewise in the mountains, yet down on the Italian and Iberian beaches they would **** their pants if it snowed. In Africa, they would have a heart attack. In the USA, they see it as an inconvenience. Well, today in Britain, it snowed. The reaction was incomparable to any of these. Children and other children many years different in age revelled together in it, where usually they would have avoided each other completely. A sixty-year-old man threw a snowball at his wife and nearly died laughing (in my opinion a fantastic way to go). My old PE teacher built a snowman for his 3-year-old son. Nothing is quite so good as the public reaction to snow in Britain. Which, let me say, is entirely different to the governmental reaction. They literally **** bricks. After cancelling nearly every form of public transport, they ran around the Council buildings like headless chickens, while everyone frolicked in the snow. Some people.

However, this is the only thing the British react well to. The following paragraph is a list of things the British react terribly to. Ahem. Books in hardback, free local newspapers, any decision made by the government they voted in, immigrants, mentioning Princess Diana, different kinds of immigrants, mentioning Madeleine McCann, a third type of immigrants, leaving lewd answerphone messages, SMS-speech, fifty pound notes in their own sterling currency, blunt pencils, young people, old people, anyone in between these age groups, themselves, each other, the rest of the world, toasters which burn toast, toasters which don't pop up the toast and it falls back in, toasters in general, mentioning slavery and the Empire, mentioning any military or political British defeat however relevant, the French, the Germans, the Scots, the Welsh, the Irish, the English, anything changing the slightest bit, American imports, happiness in general.

On the tangential subject of nationality, I hate the fact Americans call themselves "German" or "English". Several members here do it, and unless you were born there, or at the very least have parents from there, it doesn't cut the mustard mate. I don't give a flying fish that your great-great-great-uncle was from Scotland, that does not make you related to William Wallace! So your grandfather's wife was from France? You are in no way derived from Louis XIV! A Babylonian immigrant from the War of Independence, you say? Oh, pardon me, your eminent majesty, do you want me to dust off the old palace for you? No. No, no, no. You are American. Deal with your mundaneity.

On the subject of Babylon, I was actually pained to find out someone I know didn't know it was an ancient civilisation - rather, a slang term for breasts. I mentioned it in passing; I forget the conversation, yet he found it hilarious and almost went to join the old man from paragraph one who died laughing before he realised no one else was. I mean, hell, it was ripped out of him for being such an idiot, but I'm pretty scared how little people know today. I did a pub quiz last thursday at my local, with four mates, as the "history and general knowledge guy". I appreciate I know some pretty stupid stuff only useful in pub quizzes or to answer questions to save your life at the hands of a maniacal sadist while dangling over a boiling pit of lava, but the things they were amazed at were silly. Some examples: Name a city in Israel which isn't Jerusalem. Tel Aviv. Whoa! Okay, maybe not common knowledge. Stupider, you say? How about: What language did the Romans speak? Latin. Cripes! This one was actually said amidst cries of "No! Italian! Coz Rome is in Italy!" Stupider still? Here's the clincher: Which came first - The first Printing Press, or the First Bible. The First Bible. They asked me how it would be made without the printing press. With a sigh, I showed them my pen, then got another drink.

That's all for Ep-two. Kid out, y'all.

TSK

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

In the last edition of the Helios I ranted on my religious thoughts. This time I will be ranting on (yet again) the most unusual and confusing thing to the male sex: WOMEN. I know that some of y'all might have read my previous rants on women in earlier Helios editions. Hopefully this one will be as enlightening.

So I hear a lot that Man has not yet come close to discovering and understanding the oceans around our planet. Our oceans are supposed to be a sort of "last frontier" (even though that's what Alaska is supposed to be too) for humankind. We know a lot about marine life but every time we learn something it simply gives us more questions. Well I don't believe any of that! We've discovered the power of the atom, have computers that can do 10^{99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999} calculations a second, and have even set foot on the moon, but there is still one thing that "we", us men, have not come close to understanding. No matter what technology is developed, no matter how long we study, and no matter how much we try to wrap our brains around a chaotic cloud of illogic (is that a word?), we still do not know the female sex. It's sort of like what Gandalf says in Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, the only good LOTR in my opinion, "Hobbits really are amazing creatures. You can learn all there is to know about their ways in a month, and yet after a hundred years they can still surprise you." If you simply replace the word "Hobbits" with "Women" then the quote makes a lot of sense, fantasy or not. Now, I am not expert on women. But that doesn't mean that I can't try to question the bewildering things they do. Since I can't myself answer my own questions that I have about women then this editorial here will basically be myself explaining why I don't understand this and that, and then I will attempt to define what would make sense. I've posted these on Facebook and they incite some debate.

I'll start off with women saying something is "cute"; more specifically clothes. For the longest time I didn't take notice of when I heard women say that some other woman's clothes were "cute" or saying something like, "Oh, that dress is cute!" However, for the last year or so I've tried to be more observant of others and understand what they are doing and why. So after hearing women comment on clothing as "cute" I attempted to decode the wording. First, what does "cute" mean? Well, whenever I think of something as cute I imagine puppies and babies (when thinking about just the word). Requirements for "cute" are as follows: young, innocent, cuddly, and conveying a sense of security. For example, some girls I consider to be "cute" rather than "hot" (this is when using the word "cute" in describing attractive females). When I think about it pretty much every single girl I've called cute has been young. Can a 45 year old woman be "hot"? You bet. Can she be "cute"? I don't think so. Unless she looks like she is in her late teens or early twenties, I don't think so. Alright, now we know what I think "cute" means. Right now you might be thinking that the definition of "cute" from women about clothes is totally different. If you're thinking that then you're in the same boat that I am.

Whenever women say an article of clothing is "cute" I've always noticed that the clothing is what I'd call "sexy". From this observation almost every time a female deems clothing as "cute", it means that the clothing shows off more. So why the distinction between the two adjectives? My theory is that, even in this overly sexually saturated world we live in, women don't want to say literally, for example, "That dress shows off a lot of back", or, "That dress is slutty and I want it." I'm guessing that they don't wish to have others see them as "slutty" or trying to be overtly sexually attractive. Because we all know nowadays that you want a girl who is very sexual (you could say "slutty")...but to you only! So instead of sounding "slutty" by saying a dress is so a female will use the descriptor "cute". I'm not bashing the adjective usage but I just think it's an interesting phenomenon that seemingly all women use constantly. It's not that the article of clothing is actually "cute". Besides, I've got Merriam-Webster to back me up! Cute: attractive or pretty especially in a childish, youthful, or delicate way. See, I'm right!

Now onto women commenting about things; especially other women. Denis Leary has a new book out (recommended for Leary fans) called, Why We Suck, and he has a section on this. Listening to it (I have the audio book) gave me the idea of writing this section of my (third) rant on women. To steal from Leary's ideas, I'll provide some statements by women and then provide what they truly mean (to us guys at least, because we all know that what women say probably isn't what they really mean).

1) [when talking about a female friend] "Oh, she is so smart!" "She won't shut the up!"
2) [if you ask a girl friend about her friend] "She has a great personality" "She looks like a donkey."
3) "She is annoying!" "Her boobs are bigger than mine and the guys pay attention to her more than me!"

I could go on and on with these but y'all get the point. If you think I'm incorrect in my translations then next time a girl says those things to you ask her if she really thinks the statements in bold. I've done so (and so has Dr. (that's right, he's a doctor) Denis Leary. Now when guys make comments then they 99.99% of the time mean what they say. For example,

1) "That movie sucked balls." "The movie was horrible."
2) "She's hot!" "I'd like to have sex with her!"
3) "That guy is an ." "He drives around in a massive truck that sounds really loud and he doesn't even haul anything, and girls like him because he buys them things. Not because he is actually a 'nice guy'."

My point is that when guys comment about things they will almost always say what they really feel about it (although rarely eloquently). If they don't then their friends will most likely immediately call them out on it and inevitably the truth will come out. Many times, although not all the time, when women talk to guys about things they don't say what they actually mean. Why? I'm not sure. I don't know what goes through their heads.

Probably the most infuriating act is regarding trying to communicate with the opposite sex. Females say that guys don't talk enough or don't talk about their feelings so that partly undermines relationships. Well, the reason why guys don't talk about their emotions a lot is because generally we try to forget about past actions and move on. Emotion is only a positive at certain times. Us males don't want to talk about our dreams and life goals because we try to stay realistic. I'd rather talk about this, the differences in men and women, than "what I want to be" because figuring out what women are thinking can help me out practically and bring much more pleasure to my life than expressing "hopes" or "dreams" that I want. Like I said, communicating with women can be a most difficult and frustrating task. It is my experience that talking frankly with girls often is not the best course of action. It is best to say, "Yeah, it looks pretty", "That's very interesting", and, "It's not your fault", instead of, "Why the hell do you want another dress? It costs way too much and I'm missing the game, remember?", "I don't care what food you ate two weeks ago at the Mexican food place", and, "Well, maybe you shouldn't have gone out with that douche bag in the first place!" While these are certainly extreme examples, my point is that to have a girl still like you, you must often "sugar coat" what you say. If a male friend doesn't think another male friend's new haircut looks good then he'll most likely let him know. "You look like an idiot", comes to mind. If he gets offended then it doesn't matter because guys will let it go and the friends will hang out the next day. If a guy is telling a boring or irrelevant story then another guy will let him know too. We say these things to each other (man-to-man) because we usually say what we think and our "feelings" take second place to actually understanding each other. Understanding each other helps build trust and respect. But when men talk to women we can no longer speak candidly. To me women want others to make them feel better rather than telling them the truth. While the former may ease the emotional state, the latter actually aids in the solution to the problem. So in my opinion the disparity is thus: Women would rather have men say what would make them feel better because understanding each other is second place to their "feelings". Me saying lies to make a girl feel better doesn't help me understand her and subsequently it will be difficult to build trust and respect. How can I trust or respect someone that I lie to in order to make them feel better? Such a relationship built upon lies is inherently flawed and possibly doomed. As long as the male keeps the "feel good" lying up then he'll most likely be safe, but if he ever slips and tells her what he really thinks then his chances become uncertain.

Now, I'm not saying that guys are better than girls in communicating or in general. In fact, males have many flaws. If I made a list of mine then it'd be volumes. My point in writing this isn't to offend or insult either. I write these rants because I like to let others know what I'm thinking and most importantly of all, I want people to really think about what I've said. Not about whether I'm right or wrong though. Read my opinions and then take those ideas and figure out your own. Obviously I don't understand a lot about women, and half the time I want to gouge my eyes out in sheer frustration from what they do, but like the saying goes, "Can't live with 'em. Can't live without 'em.", and that's certainly true for me. No matter how annoying or confusing females may be, I still love 'em! That and...I have a penis and they have a vagina...

Most (In)Sincerely,

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Queer Concern


Should Gay Be Censored?

OK, so you know how in today’s politically correct world its offensive to say something is gay and mean its rubbish.

Well too bloody right! If you call something gay and use it in that way to suggest gay things are bad then you are implying that gay people themselves are bad, or rubbish and that’s terribly offensive.

The trouble is, its all about context.

Lets move away from the gay theme momentarily. Readers of the British press will recall that recently Prince Harry got in a spot of bother for referring to a fellow officer in a video as "our little P*** friend". Personally, not having grown up in the right place or the right term, I’ve never actually understood what’s offensive about that. The person in question was from Pakistan, Isn’t the P word short for Pakistani in the same way that Brit is short for British? Its always seemed to me that the term is more an accurate description of a person than an offensive and racial insult. Likewise calling a black person black… Other people quite clearly disagree with my view point, but the point is that Harry wasn’t actually trying or attempting to be offensive. He wasn’t using the term insultingly; he genuinely was referring to a friend who was Pakistani…
Likewise another Royal got into hot water for calling a dark skinned friend “Sooty” until the friend spoke up and pointed out to the press that “Sooty” actually was his nickname…

There are few things that are offensive all by themselves. For most things, it’s a matter of context. Bloody and Arse are another two good examples. Technically, both are swear words, but the forum filter allows them because they have different meanings. Arse is the label for a series of traits in our most favoured game. Bloody, whilst an archetypical English expletive is also an accurate description of a battle field or an A&E ward…

Gay is such a word and so is Queer. Back when I was at Uni (in the increasingly distant past I’m disturbed to say) One of my closest friends was from Solihull near Birmingham, and he’d come to uni with his slang already set up to use the word gay in the manner described above. He did so reflexively and without thought. He’d never had an openly gay friend before and had never had to consider his choice of words. I found his constant apologies about his use of the word more annoying than his usage, as I knew he wasn’t homophobic or intending to cause offence in the slightest. Context is all. Ultimately, he stopped doing it. Not because I kept nagging him to stop, or because I kept having a go at him over it, I honestly didn’t care, he just stopped saying it.

Queer is a little different, it has a distinct generational approach. To older gay people, Queer can be very offensive, they grew up in a time when it was the word of choice to use to insult us. Today, its more a badge of pride. For the younger generation of gay people, we take pride in being queer. One of our leading youth organisations is the Queer Youth Network. We see the word as being far more embracing and encompassing of our community than either gay or LGBT can ever be.

So now we come to the actual censorship aspect. As some of you may recall, I work for an agency of Her Majesty’s Government, answering to the Ministry of Justice. As you might expect, we have vigorous security policies and these apply equally to IT use. There are very strict protocols over what and how the internet can be used.

But I have discovered some surprising things. I am a regular reader of the Telegraph Online, and our internet guidance clearly says that news sites are acceptable. Imagine my surprise then, when in the run up to the US election, all the Telegraphs coverage of Proposition 8 in California was blocked by our filter. It was somewhat odd and repeatedly happened and I couldn’t figure out why, so I emailed helpdesk.

A couple of weeks later I get an email back from the IT Security Manager who states that it’s because the word “Gay” is filtered.

In a government organisation supposedly committed to equality and diversity, what possible reason could there be to filter that specific word. Certainly, there are many words you can place before or after the word gay that would generate restricted or offensive content. “Gay Porn” for example. Yet in any such example I could think of, the additional words would surely be filtered in their own right. This was the crux of my ongoing argument with our security manager.

He eventually relented and removed the word gay from the filter, but then I had cause, one lunch break to go to Wikipedia. I attempted to access the LGBT portal, as you do, and discovered both to my surprise and horror that the entire portal is filtered, this despite the removal of the word gay from the filter. Now I’m certain that some of the pages in the portal do indeed contain content that a filter would restrict. But why the entire portal? I have some suspicions about other words that might be in the filter and I’m looking forward with great interest to an upcoming equality workshop on sexuality where I plan to raise these issues at our Head Office.

Until then, I’m left puzzled as to why such censorship is required to exist. What possible reason could there be for filtering or censoring words such as Gay and Queer? Is it for fear of causing offence to homosexuals? Has any straight person ever wondered why there isn’t a single pro-gay organisation that uses the word homosexual in its name? There’s gay groups, lesbian groups, LGBT groups, LGB groups, T groups, Queer groups, but no homosexual groups. Odd that….

I’m still waiting for the straight world to cotton on to the fact that the word homosexual is as offensive to many gay people as the N word is to black people. Political correctness has a long long way to go before it ever proves its usefulness, and one of the things I hate most about it is that it involves censorship of the majority by the majority with no consultation of the minority groups that might be offended. If there were, there’d be no such idiocy such as Christmas being banned for fear of offending non-christians (who don’t care) and homosexual would never have become the politically correct way to refer to gay people.

Ultimately though, words alone are not offensive. In the modern age, many gay people call each other homos in a playful manner, within the community. Likewise the N word gets used within the black community. These terms are only offensive within context, and indeed one such context can be if they’re being used by the majority toward the minority. But ultimately, it’s the meaning behind the word that’s important, not the word itself, especially as words change their meaning. When my friend used the word gay, he wasn’t trying to be offensive or insulting; I knew this and wasn’t offended. Alas, its not possible to censor meaning, we can only punish those who mean to cause offence. But since that’s the case, lets get rid of ridiculous and politically correct censorship that achieves nothing, afterall, you lovely bunch of breeders, I’m sure you have better things to do!

tBP

I would like to take this opportunity to apologies The Black Prince for interpreting his previous ‘Queer Concern’ from Helios 35 and not picking up on the fact that it was in fact a musical interlude. So Aden I’m sorry.

Next up is page 3, you will have to clock the show spoiler to see who it is but to give you a clue she is up for two Oscar nominations for two different films (that’s quite a feat) and she’s British.

Page 3

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Well done to Kate Winslet, two Oscar nominations for her performances in Revolutionary Road and The Reader. It’ just a shame she couldn’t quite apply her talent to acceptance speechs. Check this out.

Well that’s it from the NEW Helios. Please leave your feedback and don’t forget to rep the reporters for there hard work!

BTW ‘thankyou so much, oh dear!’

[The Sundance Kid]

I was way better at introducing

Good work Freddie, everyone.

[Thanatos]

Oh hush Dom, you're dead, remember?

Excellent issue!

[Lord Rahl]

I should get extra pay for submitting when most didn't. Is Obama's stimulus plan going to have any effect on the Helios?

[Roman Knight]

I should get extra pay for submitting when most didn't. Is Obama's stimulus plan going to have any effect on the Helios?

He's worried Freddie will pay himself a big bonus.

[the Black Prince]

ummmm yeah Freddie, my EDIT rant at the end wasn't supposed to be published!!!!

[Freddie]

ummmm yeah Freddie, my EDIT rant at the end wasn't supposed to be published!!!!

Ok I've taken it out but really if you don't want it published you shouldn't leave it in there.

[the Black Prince]

that was for us, not the public!

[Freddie]

That's why we have discussion threads.