Which has fuck all to do with anything when he said that you would multiply the number on the die by 1 million dollars.
How do you have a 10% chance of losing your million if no roll is an actual zero?
WW2???
Oh wait - the Germans saw this photo of Neville Chamberlain carrying an umbrella, mistook it for a Lee-Enfield rifle, concluding that the British were mobilizing for war, and of course mobilization means war in the DD lexicon, so Germany had no choice but to invade Poland in self-defense.
You’re a genius moron.
I think that’s just a typo.
ETA: Reported DrDeth’s post to have the typo corrected.
That was pretty clearly a typo, but a pretty embarrassing one. He’s been talking about WWI all along.
Just wait…he’ll find it hard to resist claiming that Germany was a victim in the leadup to WW2 as well, like he did previously.
Oh wow. I was tempted to take a dig at the WW2 typo but decided against it, and separately considered earlier in the thread letting him in on the secret that Poland started WW2 by attacking a German radio station at Gleiwitz as a joke at his eagerness to believe utter horseshit. I guess it actually is possible to overestimate just how much of a moron he is. Love to see him explain his way out of that one. Wait, actually I’d rather not.
It is generally deduced from the historical record that Mark Twain was NOT actually in favor of any “crackpot spelling reform ideas.” Yes, he did serve on the commission that DrD’s Wikipedia link leads us to. But the facts don’t especially support DrD’s claim that Twain was a big supporter of simplifying English spelling.
Twain’s writings suggest that he had a rather jaundiced view of the whole affair; he says many things about spelling, at least some of which are clearly tongue-in-cheek. Given the variety of his speeches and writing that mentioned spelling, it doesn’t seem fair to choose any one quote to sum up his views. But here is a sampling of his writing on the subject. It’s pretty clear he doesn’t really think that attempts to reform English spelling truly make sense.
Since I never said that, you are correct. France and Russia simply declared first- maybe about a day. The war was happening anyway- very likely. The Black Hand starred WW1 by the assassination.
Again, see you take it out of context- also note;. **Fault lies with Serbia. ** Fault lies with A-H. Fault lies with Russia.… WWI was a clusterfuck. Certainly Germany shoulders the blame- about 1/6th of it. Saying is was only Germanys fault is overly simplistic.
They were all at fault- every one of those imperialist colonial warmongering nations. Germany, France, Russia, AH, even the UK, They all have part of the blame.
Which is why I asked: . "If the d10 means that 0 is not ten but zero, I don’t re-roll, but otherwise- why not? See, I didn’t assume.
Bowling a score about about 100 is not weird or unusual.
You do a favour for an eccentric billionaire. In recompense she offers you the chance to roll a fair 10 sided die labelled 0 up to 9. She tells you you can either keep your first roll or have one reroll and keep the second roll. She will then multiply the roll by $1 million.
There are no tricks or loopholes, just treat it as a fair deal
Your first roll is a 1, do you reroll?
Where does it say you have a 10% chance of losing your million?
Oh, and he used an alternate spelling of flavor. But I guess it is all right if others do it, like dribble there,
Favour is not an alternate spelling you doofus. It is the unambiguously correct way to spell it in Britain, (and South Africa)
Hey dumbass: no, they’re not. Because France planned to attack and reconquer Alsace-Lorraine from Germany the next time they fought a war with Germany does not mean they started a war with Germany. Germany started a war with them, and Russia, and Belgium, and dragged in Great Britain by violating Belgium’s neutrality.
Seriously, @ASL_v2.0 is spot on:
By your standards of dividing responsibilities, the victim of domestic abuse is 1/2 at fault for the violence. Ukraine is 1/2 at fault for being invaded by Russia; I mean there are two parties in the conflict and that’s how responsibilities for wars happening are apportioned, am I right?
Again, I didnt say that. They were all at fault. Now, France did doctor the books to make it look like Germany declared war first, which is a dick move and shows some guilt, but all those imperialistic warmongering nations started WW1. So, no Germany did not start with war with France. France declared first. That doesnt mean Germany doesnt share guilt. See, this is your problem- you refuse to differentiate fact from opinion. After being shown that your opinion is wrong with facts and cites, you just run here to the Pit and whine, like the poor loser you are. And GB had already started anti-German propaganda years before as "those nasty Huns dared to build a navy. "
Nope. The abuser is at fault. Putin is at fault for attacking Ukraine. Nazi Germany started WW2.
But again- it is not “my standards”- I quoted two books by respectable authors. Authors who had found out France doctored the books and lied. The whole “Germany is 100% at fault for starting WW1” is bullshit, and has been discredited- by facts. Not opinion- facts. Something you seem to be allergic to.
Shards from exploded irony meters are now orbiting the Earth.
And France shares the blame. 
I dont like to admit I am wrong. But I accept it- if the facts and cites are there. Name calling and head in the ass opinions do not sway me.
The author of Sleepwalkers is interviewed here:
He writes:
Clark: A friend of mine asked me this the other day. He said, “Let’s draw up percentages of responsibility” and he wanted it divided up between Germany and France and Russia and so on. I think if we are looking at the July crisis itself and it was a crisis provoked by the assassinations, then I think the “Blank Check,” [eds: Germany’s open-ended offer of support to Vienna] I would put that at the top of the list.
The next one is the Russian mobilization. I think the Austrian declaration of war has to come fairly high up as well. In the end I would be apportioning the responsibility fairly evenly.
But the thing is, it’s not just about the July crisis. The July crisis occurs after the assassination, but by the time the assassination occurs the Balkans is already very seriously stirred up and the international situation is already very unstable and the peace is very fragile.
The reasons for the fragility of peace, those reasons are very complex and they also have to do with great power manipulations. Why are the French paying the Russians? Why did the French in autumn 1913 agree to pay the Russians the largest loans in the history of finance? These are the largest international loans ever, and whose purpose is to grow a vast Russian Army of 2.8 million men with quadruple strategic railway lines leading to the German front. That’s not a very good way of keeping the peace.
I’d be interested in a quote from Clark about France’s declaration of war.
Agreed. They fucking define you.
Good cite, and yes, if you see above, I listed the “carte blanch” ( “blank check” is another way of putting it)Germany gave AH as one of the main causes. German does bear its share of fault for the war.
How often do I name call? A couple times here.
And I give cites- a LOT of cites. Not just my opinion as Dissonance here does,
I think I was reacting to the paraphrase offered in this thread. Of course, it’s an absolutely stupid question if zero doesn’t mean zero. The question couldn’t possibly be, “Would you roll if there is zero risk of losing anything but a large chance of increasing your haul?” Why would someone ask that as a mental exercise?
But not a big deal…
Have you met a conservative and discussed tax brackets?
Yes, of course. As anyone who has ever read a thread I’ve participated in knows I never cite anything. It practically defines me. And gosh do I hate being corrected on facts. It’s not like I’ve thanked people for providing factual corrections.
You’re delusional and projecting. Everyone here knows that, with the possible exception of you. Maybe I should cover my keyboard in spittle again calling you a shitweasel. Oh wait, that’s you again.