You keep thinking that *hastily turns laugh into cough*

You beat me to posting the screen :P Thanks guys, you were really great - we won even with that mult on our team and up against a team of Mammoth/Titan druggers towards the end, which shows how skilled you guys were in that battle :3

Nice idea, but nope :P

Agreed. :@

I would presume not, in order to avoid encouraging flooding. Though I once had a post in a topic quoted 12 times before the mods closed it :lol:

Already? *sigh* Congrats anyway :P

Congrats - well phrased xD

Whilst that may be true in general terms, I'd say that more of the famous artists would've been right-handed, since most people are right-handed. Obviously, there's nothing saying that if you're right-handed, you can't be artistic or creative - it's more of a personality issue. Think about it that way ;) I'm right-handed, but my twin sister happens to be ambidextrous (though mainly left-handed in terms of writing). Confusing ^_^

Actually... "The United States is the world's largest manufacturer, with a 2010 industrial output of approximately $1,696.7 billion. In 2008, its manufacturing output was greater than that of the manufacturing output of China, India, and Brazil combined, despite manufacturing being a very small portion of the entire U.S economy, as compared to most other countries." And most of this manufacturing is high-cost engineering, so here, the OP is wrong - most the 'latest electronics' will come from China. However, I actually think the OP has a point; though manufacturing is a small part of America's economy, it's still (surprisingly to some) the world's largest manufacturing country. "So why do so many Americans think the U.S. doesn’t make anything anymore? Part of the reason is that we’re deceived by what we see everyday. Shopping through your local Target, you’re going to see a lot of “Made in China” labels on things like clothing or electronics. The U.S. tends to make stuff that requires more technology and engineering know-how, like planes, semiconductors and machinery. Basic economics tells us that is exactly how things should be. Since China has so many, low-wage laborers, there is no way high-wage America can possibly compete in products that require teams of workers to manufacture, like toys, apparel, consumer electronics, and a lot of other stuff you’ll find on Wal-Mart shelves. Making such products in the U.S. would simply be too expensive; companies that did so would not be able to compete with cheaper imports made in lower-cost economies. But the U.S. still is very competitive in the types of products that demand a high level of technology, engineering and capital to produce. In such industries, wages don’t matter quite as much, and the U.S. can capitalize on its clear advantage over emerging markets like China in expertise, technology and innovation. That’s why the U.S. sells Boeing aircraft to China, and the Chinese sell blue jeans to Americans." Though China takes part in a load of low-cost manufacturing, that particular type of manufacturing is a lot less valuable in general. Bit of an Economics lesson for you all - the OP's post seems to hold some truth :P

Looks like this could be the first time a clue is unsolved after 48 hours... ^_^

Hmm... I see what you mean. If you consider there to be little point including records with limits on such a basis, then I will support that decision.

Only the moderator and Consultant positions have an age restriction, I think.

Nope.

Yeah, well figured out xD Clue updated.

Haha, you're not the only one :rolleyes:

You can be under 16 and legally use the forum/chat. However, what that really means is that you confirm you agree to, and are subject to, the rules and regulations that those who are 16+ would be upon using the forum/chat. So basically, you can't go "Don't ban me for insult because I am only 9 and I am immature please forgive me" and expect that to work, since you will be treated as an adult user with a sufficient level of responsibility under the application of the rules. (EDIT) This is my interpretation, anyway. I myself am actually 15 years of age, and there are 'underage' staff members who have been accepted by due process ^_^

Nope. BTW, the forum automatically censored part of the name >.<

Correct! Clue updated.

No need to be so negative. Post your application here, and a clan might see it. Alternatively, you could apply for a team here, which would be more suitable for someone of your level :)

^My mistake - that won't usually happen, but this time I'd forgotten I'd already used Lhamster for a clue, yes. Correct, clue updated. Thanks to @Remaine//@silhouette for the banner ^_^

Correct - clue updated.

Nope :P Close, but not quite. Whilst those two words can refer to a person, they're not titles.

Incorrect.

Interesting battle - just taking this as a bluntly honest example of both good and bad sportsmanship: - An unsporting loser: It became apparent that @C-130SkyTrain was clearly not playing properly when he discovered he was on the losing side (which to me, as a player who tries to put effort in whether winning or losing, was pretty disappointing to see). Pretty annoying to see my hopes of reinforcement dashed; I was under the impression he'd joined to play to his full ability, not half-heartedly. - A mult: The shouted profanity into the battle chat as he failed to do anything with his M1 Rail and Mammoth. - An unsporting victor: Nice to see that @KillerXenaRider felt the need to continuously drug against a team consisting of just one active player, arguing that "he needed the crystals"... even when doing so, he still finished bottom of his team. - A decent victor: Negatives aside, @gagasas was a player who seemed to be mature enough not to get involved, and simply played well for his team, nabbing the only gold which fell during the duration of the battle. Clearly a skilled player. - A sporting victor: showed excellent sportsmanship, not least by correctly interpreting my sign language (in which I shook my turret from side to side to indicate a ceasefire :lol: Of course, this was ignored by Killer, even when pointed out by Arch, who also strongly discouraged Killer's drugging as unsporting (but to no avail). He always brought the game to a halt when the number of players on both teams became uneven, and was gracious enough to allow me to cap a flag towards the end of the battle, during Killer's drugging rampage. So, when you lose or win a battle, which category do you think you'd fall under? How many of you are sporting players, going above and beyond the norm? Or how many of you give up upon losing, or drug to distort and destroy gameplay? Personally, I think what this shows is that a skilled player is not always determined by one's score or D/L, but by one's attitude towards other players (whether having won or lost). BTW, the examples given were only for this particular battle. Maybe these players are normally better/worse, but looking at this single battle, this is what I observed.

Right again - clue updated!