Alpha Black

Brian Fellows wrote: . . . Mack's like 75.

Hey, I have quite a few years before I get to that age thank you! 

(Not as many as I would like though.)

scrumsguy wrote: I'm gonna pour coke on my cerial

Apple juice is good on granola type cereals.

Xscout wrote: Mack wrote: Translates to:  I believe everything I read on the internet. Translates to: Cop-out without a response available that requires thought or reading skills.  Try again son.  Nice way to get a post count, though.

Son?  Haha, you have to be joking.  Mack's like 75.

impulse! wrote: Mack wrote: impulse! wrote: Woods brought us in to this great sport. But now we need to part from it. Because tournament players provide such outstanding role models. Along with all other professional sports.......

lol @ comparing "professional paintball" to actual pro sports...

$150 for the fully loaded version! Holy crap that's a good deal.

http://www.actionvillage.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/eCS/S tore/en/-/USD/DisplayProductInformation-Start;sid=1xvH4fQm5d rHVLO8klQHSf6AXqokKXWX1M4=?ProductID=kALAqArbCw4AAAEXmhaXnJ4 K

Xscout wrote: Man Bites Dog wrote: Xscout wrote: this over-feminine culture... I need a good laugh. Elaborate this point please. http://www.worldandi.com/public/2001/October/sax.html And of course there's http://www.google.com

Translates to:  I believe everything I read on the internet.

Reb Cpl wrote: PlentifulBalls wrote: GI JOES SON wrote: wait...i thought they were just joking about doing that?edit- its a smart marketing tool since a lot of people want that look, and its cheap...but i guess i just sort of have a problem with the army doing this, it's almost like they're trying to promote paintball as a 'war game'. Seems like a desperate attempt to recruit...i'd like to back up that accusation by pointing out the giant US ARMY logo. It's not a war game? Then what the hell have I been doing at scenario's? Giving tourney players something to complain about.

Playing tag, with Military based equipment.

GI JOES SON wrote: wait...i thought they were just joking about doing that?edit- its a smart marketing tool since a lot of people want that look, and its cheap...but i guess i just sort of have a problem with the army doing this, it's almost like they're trying to promote paintball as a 'war game'. Seems like a desperate attempt to recruit...i'd like to back up that accusation by pointing out the giant US ARMY logo.

It's not a war game?

Then what the hell have I been doing at scenario's?

sporx wrote: i would try it, but i don't know if i'll like it. it looks uncomfortable. i could be wrong.

that's what she said.

Well, Im going to be honest, I didnt read every page.

But personaly I think they look kinda ugly. If anything the Army should have endorsed the x7, I mean, the x7 seems more upgradeable.

Also, I dont feel that it looks very much like an AR anyway. Cocking and overall looks just doesnt seem the same to me.

The inline bolt system if the staple of Tippmann, but instead of gimmicks like this, they should be working on an even less expensive versions of the Triumph. That was a very good idea, that they should have expanded. They should also spend more time on the propane marker.

Then again, I am not Tippmann, I do not know if they are working on those things. I dont even know if sales are slumping due to an extreme lack of innovation in the last couple of years. For all I know they could be doing better than before. If thats the case, then kudos to them.

impulse! wrote: Woods brought us in to this great sport. But now we need to part from it.

Because tournament players provide such outstanding role models.

usafpilot07 wrote: You obviously DON'T play paintball like you say you do. I've seen more blatent cheating in woodsball games than I have in tournaments, and JUST as many if not more hissy fits by older pople who think they're being cheated.

The difference is that the actions of the aforementioned folks are not broadcast by the media to a mass audience, justified as just part of the game, and glorified by their fans.

usafpilot07 wrote: Evil Elvis wrote: usafpilot07 wrote: Choosing an MOS is a joke now, as they can do whatever they want after you sign your papers. Actually no they can't. only if you go on an 'Open' contract. Please come back when you have some facts to back up what your saying. You know what, you're right. I pulled that out of my ass. I never went and talked to recruiters in high school, or took JROTC for 4 years.  Damn you're insightful.

Not sure whether that was sarcasm or not, but EE is correct.  Anyone who goes in with a guaranteed job has the right to be discharged if the service branch involved can’t put them in that job or find an acceptable substitute.  Essentially, if the military fails to fulfill their part of the bargain, they are in breech of contract.  (Note: Don’t take the recruiter’s word for what is in the contract; read it before signing.)  Will there be pressure applied to get the recruit to stay in and do something else?  Certainly.  However, if someone is so weak-willed as to succumb to such pressure then they probably need to be someplace where there is always someone to tell them what to do.

SSOK wrote: The Army's job is to kill people in the name of America, not entertain children. I'm sure they're not doing this as community service either.

They’re combining the two.  Win/win.

Is this a form of marketing the Army.  Duh. Yes it is. But I view this like I view any other form of marketing that might be aimed at anyone.  If they’re 18 or older, it’s their decision.  If they’re not, then hopefully they’re parents raised them to be discerning decision makers and with the values they intended for the children to have.  If they didn’t, then that’s on the parents.

Off-topic but related observation:  This is just like the government getting involved in video games and the internet to protect children.  The parents who are so worried should try taking responsibility (instead of abrogating it to the government) and do some actual parenting. 

Parenting Scenario:

“I don’t want my son to join the Army and am afraid that this marker and website will con him into doing so.  Oh whatever shall I do?”

Hmmm, how about not buying or allowing the purchase of that specific marker if it bugs you so much.

Reb Cpl wrote: What if, rather than The Army using paintball to attract recruits, Tippmann is using the Army to attract customers?

Those children of unwed mothers!

I just visited the website for this marker.  Must . . . join . . . Army . . . now.

Puh-leeeese.  Are the people who are so worried about the armed forces marketing potential here really so gullible that they worry about falling for it themselves?  Do they have such a lack of respect for their peers that they expect this marker to cause droves of mindless teen-zombies to mob recruiting stations?  Do they fear the idea of military service so much that they do not want the idea shared with anyone?  (The last sounds kind of mind-controlling and totalitarian to me.  Something along the lines of “I disagree with this idea so no one must be exposed to it and allowed to make up their own mind.)

Edited Note:  Saw the following from Susan and had to respond:

Susan Storm wrote: Short of telling outright lies (of which I disapprove) I don't see how pizza-based college recruiting is different than your average first date.

Recruiter's lie.


Edited by Mack - 20 January 2008 at 10:29am