Sheikah

Yes. Because there is no such thing as 'zero risk'. 'Massive tool' on the other hand...

It wouldn't even matter if there were 200,000 straight people with HIV out of 5 million total straight people, versus 90,000 gay people out of 1 million total gay people. The fact is that a higher proportion of gay people have the virus, which means that if, for whatever reason, 50% of the entire population of straight and gay people turned up to give blood, there would be a much higher incidence of HIV in gay than straight men. It just means that they are a higher risk group, nothing more. If you respond to this post in disagreement we can only conclude that you lack understanding of basic mathematics, and we all walk away a little wiser.

It doesn't apply to both camps, you're not understanding transmission here. If the virus is already far more prevalent in one particular community as it is, and the frequency of sexual encounters in this group per head is also on average higher, it doesn't take a genius to understand why this group is considered at greater risk of transmitting HIV. A person without HIV having anal sex with another person without HIV, and I don't mean 'unconfirmed but possibly positive' - I mean definitely negative - cannot transmit HIV. They simply do not have the virus to transmit. This is why men that have not engaged in same-sex encounters, a group statistically confirmed to have a lower incidence of HIV than gay men (at least through the means we have to confirm this), are themselves less likely to transmit HIV through anal sex to a woman.

I would be quite happy if they accepted your blood, all 100% of it.

It's nothing to do with performing the act itself. It's about who performs the act (ie. communities where the virus is already prevalent), and as frequency of anal sex with people more likely than average to have the virus increases, as does risk.

I shouldn't think that's likely, but that is somewhat irrelevant. Perhaps the Monkey doth frequent the porno too much?

I know, it always amuses me that people without the faintest whiff of knowledge regarding HIV, specifically the properties of the virus and its mode of transmission throughout the population, can have their 'opinion' on how it's so wrong. And how medical professionals who do not discriminate gays in any other sense must of course be homophobic to the core, simply refusing to allow blood from gays out of spite and not at all due to scientific evidence, years of research and professional opinions. Amusing indeed.

Ugh, grow up. The statement that seems to be circulating that gay people have more sex is not derogatory to their character, but it is a factor that increases the spread of STDs within that particular community. Please stop picking fights. It's getting old.

Yes, HIV is much more common in homosexuals than heterosexuals, at least in the more developed countries. I understand this as it is a factor to reduce risk, it is not intended to discriminate or insult people in the slightest. While anyone can have HIV, gay people are more likely to have HIV. It's as simple as that. The NHS don't know you, that you're a nice guy nor do they know what you get up to behind closed doors, which is why they aim to eliminate risks based on the current scientific understanding. As I said, they're not trying to discriminate you in the slightest so don't feel disappointed.

That's cool, I only have LBP from that selection. I think I'll be getting Infamous and Ratchet and Clank.

I'll let you know if it happens tonight.

I just think that a 3 year warranty for a manufacturing fault is unacceptable, the right call should have been to do a mass recall or at least make the warranty for that particular fault last a year or so after 360 production ceases. And hogwash, most devices I have are over 3 years old and working fine :p. My HDTV must be nearing 4-5 years old, while my PS3 was bought at launch so I'm guessing that nearly 4 years old.

You say you don't have to pay, but when it's past the 3 year warranty you do (as happened to my friend). I don't think anyone really believed otherwise that MS don't replace for free, he was just be deliberately OTT. And as for missing points, you still haven't said what issues you've had with your PS3 yet.

As someone else said, how's your PS3? No matter whether you can replace it or not, you must agree that the 360 hardware is tragic, relative to this apparent yellow light of death which just about no one I've ever head of has had. Have a launch PS3, play it a lot and even use it every day to watch TV. Whereas the RROD was pretty much known about by everyone, affecting a vast proportion of people with the original 360s.

Lol wut, this post is ridiculous. :p as long as the postage is free it's fine if it breaks down a third time! Shite parts be inside the 360.

Tbh, most of those 360 games are already out on PC, and ME2 onwards is now on PS3. I have ME1, wouldn't go back to it these days as I did think ME2 was a big improvement in terms of gameplay. Fable is good but not great also...

I have not seen this film, but never have I wanted to see a film less from watching its trailer. :p

You should be able to get that back, if you can be bothered to do some chasing.

Boo, if that price doesn't drop that will suck. Does anyone know if the Greek version a) will work on a UK 3DS and b) contains an English language option? And I guess c) somewhere that you can order Greek games from to be sent to the UK? :p I'd be tempted to order myself a Greek version as another copy for the stuff. Edit: Nvm, apparently the game would work on a UK 3DS but all the preoder items are already gone.

My friend finished with his 360 because it was out its the 3 year warranty and RROD'd, so he eventually went and bought a PS3. Let's face it, the problem is more likely to occur with age, so it wouldn't suprise me if it often happens after 3 years. Tbh I think it's a disgrace that MS don't replace any 360 that breaks from this common hardware fault rather regardless of its age. The hardware probably costs them fuck all and they'd make more money back by actually having a customer to buy games / shittily priced Kinect rather than no Xbox because they don't want to pay to have it repaired. People who use high street GAME as their primary game store are not the brightest sparks, it wouldn't surprise me if they used the fan grate as a flannel warmer.

Gold sleeve? Like a 3DS case (but cheaper)?

Yeah, hiding the post count is a good thing, on forums where it was displayed under the avatar some people would treat it as a bit of a status symbol.

You do realise that in stating it shouldn't be credible/means nothing, you seal the fate of why it shouldn't reflect actual number of posts too. You're right, it means nothing, so why argue what it should reflect? It just so happened that the top 50 posters were guessable names, thus post count has one use - the basis of this quiz, nothing more. :p

I think it makes sense since there's hundreds of playground posts with barely anything to them, whereas other board posts are typically longer and more meaningful. It basically makes post count a little more credible.

Nope, all that stuff is free on silver so you're essentially paying for nothing. Except maybe the voice chat, but that is again something that should cost nothing (and doesn't if you use teamspeak or MSN, which Microsoft even own! They clearly see Xbox users as cash cows). I think the Xbox dashboard is worse than the XMB, which is why they had to revamp it entirely once already. With the dashboard you're not as able to see all sections of the console at once, whereas the XMB neatly stores everything recognisable icons that even a novice could understand. As the saying often goes, if it ain't broke don't fix it, which is why they took the PSP menu and put it on the PS3. It was tried and tested, well liked and functional.