Jump to content
270soft Forum

HardRight-2008 Utd. North America-Canadian Edition


Recommended Posts

It would be a hell of a lot of work. Canadian elections use ridings with about 80 000 to 100 000 people in each, so to do so, you'd have to come up with, oh, about 25000 ridings for the US, each complete with their own initial starting support for every party, names for every candidate, strength of each candidate and its own name. Plus the 308 ridings Canada already has, since the parties have changed.

You could consider 1 State= 1 Riding, but that'd be boring.

That's in part why PM4E scenarios are more based on real-life scenarios and don't try as many things as P4E scenarios, they represent a lot more work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First thing, recommand it to HRC, he's the one who's making it.

As to the recommandation, that'd cut the work down, but you'd still have to come up with initial party support for more or less 560 ridings, names for candidates (to avoid generic names like "SocialistCand" that, though a cosmetic thing, can make the game less pleasant). In short, I wouldn't want to have to do it, especially not alone.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah its not high on my list of priorities at the moment.  I am writing my Masters Thesis and working on a 2008 scenario and revamping my United North America scenario so I have my work cut out for me. :)

ILK, thesis, wait til you have to right a dissertation for a docturate, it's hell! If you want a masters thesis in World History with a focus on early 1900's Italian goverment, we could work a deal ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah its not high on my list of priorities at the moment.  I am writing my Masters Thesis and working on a 2008 scenario and revamping my United North America scenario so I have my work cut out for me. :)

ILK, thesis, wait til you have to right a dissertation for a docturate, it's hell! If you want one in World History with a focus on early 1900's Italian goverment, we could work a deal ;)

I'm writing on Canadian-American relations in the context of NORAD and missile defense. My PhD thesis will be on the reliogious right as a political movement in the United States and Canada. Have you written your PhD Swing Voter?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

It is a theory based on undisputable facts, the only reason the scientific community doesn't call it fact is because they are historically cautious of anything. If it has no way of studying something perfectly and see how it works, they will not stop calling it a theory, and since evolution is a long processus, they can't study it well. For example, black holes are STILL only a theory, even if our satellites pick some up every now and then.

Evolution is not a simple theory like the ones thrown by people when they've taken one drink too many, it is a theory that could be taken as fact because at worst, the truth will not be so far away from it, at best, the truth is it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a theory based on undisputable facts, the only reason the scientific community doesn't call it fact is because they are historically cautious of anything. If it has no way of studying something perfectly and see how it works, they will not stop calling it a theory, and since evolution is a long processus, they can't study it well. For example, black holes are STILL only a theory, even if our satellites pick some up every now and then.

Evolution is not a simple theory like the ones thrown by people when they've taken one drink too many, it is a theory that could be taken as fact because at worst, the truth will not be so far away from it, at best, the truth is it.

Actually, it is a theory based on other theories and facts that scientists themselves cannot fully agree on. Black holes are a theory, except we have very strong and very convincing evidence (that is not disputed) that they actually exist. No such evidence of that strength exists to support evolution. Sure there is some evidence, but find a room with 100 scientists and you'll end up with 100 different theories about what that evidence shows.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a theory, but it is tought uin any decent collage level history cource, the fact is that is that it has had a major impact on our society today if you deny that mantis you truley are a moron.

I've taken quite a few university level history courses and none of them covered the creation vs evolution debate. That theory is a matter for scientists to debate, not historians.

I won't bother lowering myself to your level of puerile insults.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a theory, but it is tought uin any decent collage level history cource, the fact is that is that it has had a major impact on our society today if you deny that mantis you truley are a moron.

I've taken quite a few university level history courses and none of them covered the creation vs evolution debate. That theory is a matter for scientists to debate, not historians.

I won't bother lowering myself to your level of puerile insults.

I have several collage degrees and in all of my American History classes at Georgetown they talked about, what the hell do you think the monkey trial was! it was also covered when I was getting my masters and later my docturate from columbia and cornell respectivly, at all three levels it has been talked about, every history text I have used to teach at high school has talked about it, and all other history teachers I know cover it. maybe you where not paying attention in class...

Link to post
Share on other sites
It is a theory, but it is tought uin any decent collage level history cource, the fact is that is that it has had a major impact on our society today if you deny that mantis you truley are a moron.

I've taken quite a few university level history courses and none of them covered the creation vs evolution debate. That theory is a matter for scientists to debate, not historians.

I won't bother lowering myself to your level of puerile insults.

I have several collage degrees and in all of my American History classes at Georgetown they talked about, what the hell do you think the monkey trial was! it was also covered when I was getting my masters and later my docturate from columbia and cornell respectivly, at all three levels it has been talked about, every history text I have used to teach at high school has talked about it, and all other history teachers I know cover it. maybe you where not paying attention in class...

The "monkey trial" (The State vs. John Scopes), while interesting does not fall under the realm of Canadian or relevant international history as far as I am concerned and that is probably why none of my courses paid much attention to it. Even if they did, from a historical context, it is only relevant from the point of view of the legal ramifications and not the theological/scientific debate. In other words, historians don't really care about which argument is correct, they are only conerned with the fact that such a trial took place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...