cheap VS Efficient

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Still wrong about the Gulf. For one thing, there were safety measures in place that would prevent it, but they failed. For another thing, their first plan (Top Hat) only failed due to a buildup of undersea gas, which was unforeseeable. Furthermore, the entire issue of whether it was BP or a contracted group is cloudy and a tangled mess; acting as if it is as simple as greed is grossly oversimplifying a major issue. It wasn't just "them being greedy" it was also the fact that security procedures failed, certain things were damaged and not reported by other companies that were contracted out, and unforseeable circumstances.

In a larger scale, sure, doing whatever might be problematic. But what does that have to do with a game, at all? The game has set rules and a set objective. Real life isn't a game, and making it out to be is grossly oversimplifying life in order to somehow make a point about video games. You can't define life with rules; it's far, far too complex. Video games *are* defined by their rules. There's no point to making up rules for them.

Alright, I'm done arguing with you about games, because there's no getting through to you. However, you have no room to call me ignorant about the Gulf when A.)I can be at the Florida shore of it in an hour, and have spent a significant portion of my life on that shore, B.) you said the top kill procedure was the first failed attempt -- it was the third -- and c.) You made the mistake of calling the top kill procedure a top hat procedure for crying out loud. By the way, there was nothing unforseeable about there being enough pressure in an oil well for a little bit of mud and rocks to be pushed out. They've been trying hail Mary plays since their real first attempt to fix it, wherein they put a giant box with a pipe to siphon off the oil over the leak that, surprise surprise, wound up frozen up in a way that pretty much any engineer could have told them would happen. They tried it a second time before going to the top kill, and the same thing happened then, too.

What's more, they knew when they built the rig that if they wound up with an honest to God leak, none of the procedures they had for stopping one would work at that depth. BP may not be the only company involved, but they bear the brunt of the burden simply for building wells so far off shore. Further, why do you think those nebulous other companies weren't properly maintaining the safety measures, and why they didn't report it? it was cheaper. Corporate greed, corporate selfishness, corporate "it's not against the rules, so I'm going to do it."

First off, I live in Louisiana, so stop giving me all the bullshit about how you're so knowledgeable because you live close to the gulf. Second off: There is, in fact, a top hat procedure. Are you really that ignorant? The top hat procedure was when they attempted to put a giant cap on it, blocked by undersea gasses, not because it froze. Top kill was when they sprayed "mud" (not really mud, but something similar) and then cement to fill it up.

Anyway, you're ignored; this is off topic and you're being willfully ignorant and strawmanning me out almost as bad as the guy who compared me to Hitler.

If I'm on your ignore list, you won't read this, but you're wrong about the "top hat" thing. They didn't call it that, they just said they were going to put a cap on it. And it was ice crystals, here's some proof [http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37008288/]. You may be partially right about it being natural gas, but it was solid, frozen natural gas crystals, not pressure from it in gaseous form. You may live in Louisiana, but the comments you've been making sound like you've been ignoring the news. The TV at my house is almost always on a local news channel, a national news channel, or CSPAN. I'm staying informed; it sounds like you aren't.

Edit: I found out what you were talking about with the "top hat" method. You were referring to the containment dome method, but there is one called top hat. The thing is, it was a media name for the second dome they lowered, and one that wasn't really used on the news at that. I have actually found a couple of sources referring to the first one as "top hat," but those were all published well after the actual procedure. The ones from the time of the actual attempt almost exclusively referred to the first one as a "containment dome," and at least on the channels I was watching, they referred to the other one as "another containment dome." So no, I'm not "that ignorant," I've been following the names as they've been given, not in articles written after the fact.