Green Monster Games - Curt Schilling

Twobit Whore said:

I also like the solo quests leading to a group culmination. You can work on what you have up until you need a group and then try to find people for a one shot completion. You may not find it instantly, but if it"s just one group quest in your log you can work on other stuff while keeping an eye out for others. Of course that requires your game to be soloable.

Click to expand...

Definately agree. Solo steps for the most part and solo steps after the group part, even that are completable before finishing the groups parts. Can even go farther and have raid steps to for very epic quests.

Being able to get credit for quests before you have them via flags ro whatever for completing them is a step in the right direction for sure. Tryuing to find people on your step sucks. The reason it is worse ion VG is the content is bad, Noone wants to just grind in trengal for example. If the content was betetr it wouldn"t be so hard to get people in there.

Any new game even if large portions are groups based MUST have soloing for every class, or it will fail IMO.

Ukerric said:

The answer to this is quite simple: Allow people who don"t have the quest step to benefit from the quest.

Click to expand...

This is something I loved about EverQuest. Often enough you could get quest items and learn what they were for later on. If someone in my group was ignorant of a quest he could benefit from we educated him and he took the giant toes he"d looted and turned them in rather than vendoring them. It was pretty easy to get people to help you perform quests because they could go and get the items with you and get caught up later.

Quest Logs, with their system of character flags, prevents this from occurring frequently, and makes the log as much a burden as it is a benefit.

"Curt Schilling challenged Roger Clemens to come out from behind his prepared statement, calling on Clemens to surrender the final four Cy Young Awards he has won unless he obtains a retraction for his citation in the Mitchell Report as a user of steroids and human growth hormone.

In a scathing indictment of several of the biggest names in the game, the outspoken Boston Red Sox pitcher Wednesday urged baseball to strip Clemens of his statistics and records over the past decade unless he can refute the Mitchell Report, called the career of Jose Canseco a drug-aided "sham" and "hoax" and expressed concern for the sport that Clemens and Barry Bonds each has yet to clear himself amid evidence each used performance-enhancing substances."

I fucking love this about you Curt...mad props.

FOX Sports on MSN - MLB - Schilling offers suggestion to Clemens

Agraza said:

This is something I loved about EverQuest. Often enough you could get quest items and learn what they were for later on. If someone in my group was ignorant of a quest he could benefit from we educated him and he took the giant toes he"d looted and turned them in rather than vendoring them. It was pretty easy to get people to help you perform quests because they could go and get the items with you and get caught up later.

Quest Logs, with their system of character flags, prevents this from occurring frequently, and makes the log as much a burden as it is a benefit.

Click to expand...

/agree

Ages ago when I was playing a Shaman in EQ I went on a fear raid. Even though I was still quite a few steps away from it, I was able to loot the tear I would need later. Same for my Rogue, I pickpocketed the notes before I even started it. I did my Hate trip shortly thereafter. My Cleric got those stupid shards before she set foot in Lake Rathe.

There were still character flags I had to get before moving on with my quests but the vast majority of that stuff could be collected whenever. That is how quests should be. I know people like how quest objectes seemingly break up the grind and that the old way of playing EQ is probably gone for good but it would be nice to have somethings not be a shopping list.

Well technically the Mitchell Report is all hearsay. Eye witness accounts are not enough to hold someone accountable to a crime in federal courts.

I havn"t paid too much attention to this, is there more substantial proof other than a trainer talking?

Daezuel said:

"Curt Schilling challenged Roger Clemens to come out from behind his prepared statement, calling on Clemens to surrender the final four Cy Young Awards he has won unless he obtains a retraction for his citation in the Mitchell Report as a user of steroids and human growth hormone.

In a scathing indictment of several of the biggest names in the game, the outspoken Boston Red Sox pitcher Wednesday urged baseball to strip Clemens of his statistics and records over the past decade unless he can refute the Mitchell Report, called the career of Jose Canseco a drug-aided "sham" and "hoax" and expressed concern for the sport that Clemens and Barry Bonds each has yet to clear himself amid evidence each used performance-enhancing substances."

I fucking love this about you Curt...mad props.

FOX Sports on MSN - MLB - Schilling offers suggestion to Clemens

Click to expand...

Mike and Mike in the Morning are dogging Schilling pretty bad this morning. Their argument is that cheating is cheating. Baseball is a team sport. So if anyone on the Red Sox was caught cheating, according to Schilling"s logic, they entire team should forfeit the World Series during that period (including Schilling).

Its a slippery slope. How can you call in Clemens to forfeit his titles, when your team may have had help through performance-enhancers in a championship?

Draegan said:

Well technically the Mitchell Report is all hearsay. Eye witness accounts are not enough to hold someone accountable to a crime in federal courts.

Click to expand...

Some of those named in the reported admitted to using some of what was stated in the report, Pettitte"s HGH use comes to mind as does a current ESPN analysts admittance of HGH use.

Clemens as well as a few other"s are denying everything.

Apologies for the thread derail, carry one.

For all you people with blinders on who question whether or not the Mitchell Report is accurate...

You just believe whatever you want to believe. I mean seriously, it"s laughable how naive people can be when they WANT to believe something is true. Follow the money. It"s pretty simple for us who are non emotinally involved and grown-ups to see.

Clemens is an OBVIOUS suspect. His career path was just like Barry Bonds. Smaller guy, great player, magically goes from smaller guy to fucking enormous in his late 30"s, and goes from great to "all-time great" right in the middle of the steriods era.

Give me a break. He gets a pass because 1) he"s a pitcher, and 2) people like him(unlike Bonds).

Before this report even came out, you"d be a blind fool to not be suspicious at least. It"s not even remotely a stretch of the imagination.

Just ask yourself this:

What does the trainer in question have to gain by lying? NOTHING, if he lies he goes to JAIL.

What does Clemens have to gain by lying? EVERYTHING, his entire legacy is at stake. He has NO CHOICE but to lie.

Like I said, you all just believe what you want to believe. If it makes you feel better to think the evidence is too flimsy and Clemens wouldn"t do that, fine. Follow the money and open your eyes and it"s fairly obvious.

I was only speaking from a legal standpoint. You should relax.

Zhakran said:

For all you people with blinders on who question whether or not the Mitchell Report is accurate...

You just believe whatever you want to believe. I mean seriously, it"s laughable how naive people can be when they WANT to believe something is true. Follow the money. It"s pretty simple for us who are non emotinally involved and grown-ups to see.

Clemens is an OBVIOUS suspect. His career path was just like Barry Bonds. Smaller guy, great player, magically goes from smaller guy to fucking enormous in his late 30"s, and goes from great to "all-time great" right in the middle of the steriods era.

Give me a break. He gets a pass because 1) he"s a pitcher, and 2) people like him(unlike Bonds).

Before this report even came out, you"d be a blind fool to not be suspicious at least. It"s not even remotely a stretch of the imagination.

Just ask yourself this:

What does the trainer in question have to gain by lying? NOTHING, if he lies he goes to JAIL.

What does Clemens have to gain by lying? EVERYTHING, his entire legacy is at stake. He has NO CHOICE but to lie.

Like I said, you all just believe what you want to believe. If it makes you feel better to think the evidence is too flimsy and Clemens wouldn"t do that, fine. Follow the money and open your eyes and it"s fairly obvious.

Click to expand...

There are so many bad assumptions in your post it isn"t funny:

1- If the Mitchell report was so solid, why hasn"t it been presented in a court of law? Have you actually read the Mitchell report? I read enough of it to know that too much of it is based on hearsay.

In the US, you are presumed innocent until found guilty.The government should not be allowed to present partial evidence without proving it in a court of law. That"s what they do in fascist countries.

2- Following the money isn"t so simple. Some of the cases in the Mitchell report said that checks written to members of staff (like trainers and gophers) was enough evidence. Sean Salisbury on ESPN brought up the fact that when he was in the NFL, they wrote checks all the time to these guys. It might be for gas, a present for a wife, or a tip. He said around holidays, the coaching staff would encourage the players to write checks to the staff. Sean"s question was, "Are we going to assume that every pro player that ever wrote a check to a trainer or gopher is guilty? If so, that would be an incredible number of players.

3- These guys (the teams" staff) have plenty to lose. They are probably under all types of threats by the US government to cough up dirt and testify, or they get false charges put up against them. Its amazing that the federal gov"t wins like 95% of its cases. They don"t have millions of dollars to pay lawyers, so they just fold.

You can argue all you want, but there"s a reason why the gov"t isn"t pressing federal charges on more than a handful of these guys. Its because they know they don"t have enough for a conviction.I am not arguing that some of the guys are using, but to give everyone on the list a scarlet letter for life smacks of McCarthyism.

Lyrical said:

1- If the Mitchell report was so solid, why hasn"t it been presented in a court of law? Have you actually read the Mitchell report? I read enough of it to know that too much of it is based on hearsay.

Click to expand...

Well, when people named in the report as doing stuff come out and say it is accurate it does lend credence to the other claims. The reason it isn"t being used in a court of law is because NO professional athletes have ever been criminally charged after testing positive and/or being suspended for performance-enhancing drugs. In fact, many of them are prescribed the drugs "legally". They may be legal to have prescribed but if you use them you cannot play professional sports.

In the US, you are presumed innocent until found guilty.The government should not be allowed to present partial evidence without proving it in a court of law. That"s what they do in fascist countries.

Click to expand...

Yes, but this is the court of public opinion, and public opinion is what puts people in the hall of fame. It"s silly to think they will take away awards after the fact, but an asterisk is always an option.

2- Following the money isn"t so simple. Some of the cases in the Mitchell report said that checks written to members of staff (like trainers and gophers) was enough evidence. Sean Salisbury on ESPN brought up the fact that when he was in the NFL, they wrote checks all the time to these guys. It might be for gas, a present for a wife, or a tip. He said around holidays, the coaching staff would encourage the players to write checks to the staff. Sean"s question was, "Are we going to assume that every pro player that ever wrote a check to a trainer or gopher is guilty? If so, that would be an incredible number of players.

Click to expand...

It depends on the amount. 30 bucks for takeout is probably not for drugs, but several hundred or more could be unusual. I don"t think any of us here (except maybe Curt!) know what a common check amount is. The people dealing with the report do and the checks were submitted as evidence for a reason.

You can argue all you want, but there"s a reason why the gov"t isn"t pressing federal charges on more than a handful of these guys. Its because they know they don"t have enough for a conviction.I am not arguing that some of the guys are using, but to give everyone on the list a scarlet letter for life smacks of McCarthyism.

Click to expand...

The federal government isn"t pressing charges against users, only the distributors and the illegal manufacturers.

The Clemens evidence stems from the testimony of his personal trainer, Brian McNamee. He says he personally injected Clemens. This guy is also a big time scum bag.

"McNamee helped create extensive workouts for both Clemens and Andy Pettitte. McNamee was hired as the strength and conditioning coach for the Yankees in 2000 with Clemens' (and likely others) support. McNamee was not retained in 2002 after he was questioned by police in connection with an alleged sexual assault on a woman in a hotel pool late in the 2001 season. Police said the woman ingested the date-rape drug GHB. Charges were never filed against McNamee."

Jose Canseco also has ties to McNamee and Clemens career was on the downslide before he started training with him. This was Clemens PERSONAL trainer, a guy he brought with him from Toronto to NY. Andy Pettitte has already admitted he used steroids and obviously Canseco as well.

You do the math.

You can do math all you want, but it has no legal legs.

I"m not passing judgement, but if you did steroids to enhance your performance then you deserve to be run all over in the public. But I think I can give Petitte a pass because, according to him, he used it to come back from an injury. Still illegal but he allegedly did not use it to enhance his performance.

Twobit Whore said:

Well, when people named in the report as doing stuff come out and say it is accurate it does lend credence to the other claims. The reason it isn"t being used in a court of law is because NO professional athletes have ever been criminally charged after testing positive and/or being suspended for performance-enhancing drugs. In fact, many of them are prescribed the drugs "legally". They may be legal to have prescribed but if you use them you cannot play professional sports.



Yes, but this is the court of public opinion, and public opinion is what puts people in the hall of fame. It"s silly to think they will take away awards after the fact, but an asterisk is always an option.



It depends on the amount. 30 bucks for takeout is probably not for drugs, but several hundred or more could be unusual. I don"t think any of us here (except maybe Curt!) know what a common check amount is. The people dealing with the report do and the checks were submitted as evidence for a reason.




The federal government isn"t pressing charges against users, only the distributors and the illegal manufacturers.

Click to expand...

Unless the gov"t is pressing charges, it should be silent. A government official should not be able to ruin a citizen"s reputation based on proof that wouldn"t stand up in a court of law. All this amounts to is McCarthyism for the 21st century.

I can"t believe that anyone would support this type of behavior by the government or MLB. MLB knew about this problem for years and ignored it. Now they come out and take a machete to people"s reputations, and act is if this abolves them of their part in this mess.

What type of behaviour? They questioned some people and gathered "testimony" and "evidence". The Mitchell report is not something that is supposed to be used to press charges or give out suspensions. It"s a gathering of information about how bad the steroid era really was/is.

This isn"t a government thing. Bud Selig asked George Mitchell to do this.

Lyrical said:

Unless the gov"t is pressing charges, it should be silent. A government official should not be able to ruin a citizen"s reputation based on proof that wouldn"t stand up in a court of law. All this amounts to is McCarthyism for the 21st century.

I can"t believe that anyone would support this type of behavior by the government or MLB. MLB knew about this problem for years and ignored it. Now they come out and take a machete to people"s reputations, and act is if this abolves them of their part in this mess.

Click to expand...

Good post. I agree 100%. It"s not the government"s position to spear head public opinion. Leave that to ESPN.

^^ Yes, because DOING steroids is not a huge federal crime...do a little research on how close Clemens was to McNamee and how Clemen"s career rocketed to stardom after he started training with him. (yah bad pun I know)

I actually think if you took Clemens to court you would have an excellent chance on proving the charges...but what the hell would that accomplish? Spend even more tax dollars convicting someone for using steroids for him to get a slap on the wrist? lol.

You all are so funny.

This isn"t a court of law, as was pointed out.

Also, you don"t even understand what I meant by follow the money. I"m talking real, huge, life-changing, your kid"s kid"s generational type of money. I"m not talking about $2,000 for roids.

It"s the reasoning process. No one is trying fucking prove anything in a court of law.

Just think about it rationally. We"re talking professional sports contracts. Multi-million dollars GUARANTEED MOTHER FUCKERS. GUARANTEED. As long as that exists in sports, so will performance enhancing drugs.

If the athlete stands to benefit SO MUCH, to the tune of millions upon millions of dollars, or even 1 or 2 million dollars, by prolonging their career or escalating their numbers, many of them are going to do it, FACT. You don"t need any more evidence than that. A lot of people are going to, because the money is so huge.

The motivating factor is cash. You think Roger Clemens pitchs for free? Take a look at his last couple big league contracts; that"s all the incentive you would need.

Legal legs? Who gives a fuck. I"m not trying to prove a case in front of a judge and jury. I"m being realistic. If someone says it"s not about the money, IT"S ALWAYS ABOUT THE MONEY. You all who want to believe these players are innocent are living in make believe land.

I wish people would stop confusing burdens of proof. In a criminal proceeding it is basically "beyond a reasonable doubt." In a civil proceeding it is basically a "more likely than not" standard. Eyewitness testimony is not generally hearsay. Eyewitness testimony can be and often is sufficent proof. Credibility is always open to scrutiny.

But let"s be realistic, the Mitchell report pretty much fell in line with most of what many of us believed in anyway. It was no shocker. And only a naive person would think it is not the tip of the iceberg.

The bottom line is baseball never had any strong anti-drug rules. But since the whole Canseco book "scandal", things really have been moving along, The Player"s Association just can"t stall this anymore because Congress pretty much told them if Basebell doesn"t do something, Congress will.

As for purging records, well I think Costas made the suggestion of just adding a page to the era. To me records are for the individual. Who has the home run title, for example, doesn"t put food on my table. We can start questioning every era, even Babe Ruth"s where integration didn"t exist. Or compare the equipment used back then to today. Or really think players like Cy Young could ever pitch back to back doubleheaders in today"s game.

But Curt you crack me up, keep on plugging heheh.

Daezuel said:

. . .I actually think if you took Clemens to court you would have an excellent chance on proving the charges...but what the hell would that accomplish? Spend even more tax dollars convicting someone for using steroids for him to get a slap on the wrist? lol.

Click to expand...

Take him to court for what? I am no expert on drug laws, but if what he used wasn"t obtained or possessed in violation of any federal, state or local law then there is no crime. It would fall under the baseball collective bargaining agreement, which is a civil matter. Perhaps if he perjured himself somewhere (which is really what they are chasing Bonds on), but I don"t recall Clemens testifying before Congress.