Brasil

[quote name='AzureWolf][font=book antiqua][size=2][color=blue]The picture you have there is a from a four-person gameboy version of the thing[/color][/size'][/font][/quote] I believe it's a bit farther back than that, actually, lol. The screengrab that Mimmi included here doesn't quite have GBA-quality graphics. ;)

I tossed around a few different approaches here, I guess. One normal distance, and two close-ups/medium shots. #1 [center][img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21363&stc=1[/img][/center] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [left]#2[/left] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [center][img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21364&stc=1[/img][/center] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [left]#3[/left] [center] [/center] [center] [/center] [center][img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21365&stc=1[/img][/center] I'm partial to #2, to tell you the truth, but it's your choice, heh. Hope these are adequate anyway, though.

*reads Midnight Rush's outlandish and absurd ego trip of a reply* Right...didn't even bother to try to actually reply to any of my points...right... Like James has said, in writing a paper or thesis statement, it's incredibly important to pay very close attention to the words used and the meaning of those words, because even though many people do not realize this, changing one word for another that seems identical can change the meaning of a sentence rather drastically. Something as simple as "outcome" versus "resolution," for example. Those two words are not interchangeable. They seem like they mean the same thing, but they don't...far from it, really. When I was writing my Ahab/Smith paper, I was paying an insane and anal-retentive amount of attention to the finer details like word usage, and that anal-retentive attention paid off, because I nabbed a perfect score on it, with numerous comments from my instructor regarding both the ideas and the language itself. One particular instance was "Nice distinction" when I spoke of the Ahab/Whale and Smith/Neo dualities. I had to make sure that I placed the characters in the appropriate places, because...let's face it. Ahab/Whale and Neo/Smith duality just would not have made sense, because it would have been implying that Ahab=Neo and Whale=Smith, when, clearly, it was the other way around. That seems like a minor and inconsequential detail in a paper, but it's not, likewise in the Terminator 2 thesis. Like Ahab/Smith, there needs to be very particular language used, because just a simple switch in word positioning can alter an entire page or so. And, really, this is a point that many, many people don't understand, I think, because they're simply not thinking in those mindsets of evaluating [i]why[/i] something is phrased a certain way, instead being more concerned with going on some self-righteous, self-indulgent, ego-stroking "literary" tirade. I think some people need to start thinking about everything regarding writing when they're looking at a piece. Similar to film in that you're not only engaging in the dialogue, story, and characters, but also in the lighting, editing, pacing, camerawork, etc, when reading a piece of writing, you're looking at more than just what the words on the page are. You need to pay attention to form, content, language, execution, direction, focus, ideas, etc. There's a much larger picture in writing, a larger picture that too many people don't even begin to see because they're so concerned with what one tiny dot of ink is doing.

Drix said pretty much everything I'd say, except the part about eyes open. Now, I'm not sure how this girl feels about it, but I'd actually advise against the eyes open thing. I'd agree that the potential to have a positive eyes open kiss is there, but I think the potential for it to turn out to be a negative or awkward experience is a tad stronger. I'd say just play it safe and do the romantic "sweeping-her-into-your-arms-and-firmly-but-gently-placing-your-lips-on-hers-in-a-sweet-eyes-closed-kiss" thing. That was a lot of dashes, heh. Sorry about that one, lol. But yes. Further down the line, try the eyes open, but getting weirded out on a first kiss is never good.

AC/DC definitely is a good choice. They're pretty damn awesome. The Live CD is simply breathtaking. I'd actually also suggest The Best of Ocean Colour Scene: Songs From The Front Row. They're a British band that reminds me of The Beatles in some respects. They've got good melodies, great guitar, terrific beats, and some fantastic vocals and lyrical ballads.

[quote name='Midnight Rush']That is good, nothing really wrong that I see. I, however, would write it like this-[/quote]Let's see. ^_^ [QUOTE]Judgement day is not hindered (word usage: suggesting its eventuality anyway) in Terminator 2 (I do not believe you need a comma here because it is it is not an appositive and a continuation of the opening clause)[/QUOTE][url="http://webster.commnet.edu/grammar/commas_big.htm"]http://webster.commnet.edu/grammar/commas_big.htm[/url] The comma usage is correct. You could theoretically omit the comma, but it may lead to sentence flow confusion, and would most likely interrupt the pacing, as well. Also, "Judgment Day" is a proper name in the context of T2, so both words are capitalized. [QUOTE]because the actions, conflict, and resolution (word order/usage: I put actions before conflict because it rolls off of the tongue in a more fluid manner;[/QUOTE]Think about the order more logically. I'm not going to start with the action (the middle); I'm going to start with the initiation, the start of the conflict itself, because without the conflict, there is no action. [QUOTE]resolution is a superior word[/QUOTE]But it isn't the correct word. "Resolution" implies a success. That's why there's a "solution" in there. There is neither success nor solution in T2, because the humans are secondary characters. "Outcome" is a more or less neutral term, a blanker word, one that does not convey any type of success at all. [QUOTE]of the films is assumed, it is not needed)[/QUOTE]"Of the films" is needed, actually, as I'll be making references to events throughout the Trilogy, though the [i]main[/i] focus will be on T2. [QUOTE]are not directed (humans certainly do affect things, although they do not dictate them) by man (succintness), the pawn; but rather by the Machines,[/QUOTE]"Dictated" is the appropriate word, and here's why. "Directed" has an entirely different meaning than "dictated." "Directed" simply means "guided." "Dictated," on the other hand, is a total, all-encompassing strangle-hold on every single aspect of a situation. "We're living in a dictatorship." The Machines dictate the conflict, the actions, and the outcomes, because the Machines are Fate, an unstoppable force. [QUOTE]the symbol of fate (no caps needed, as in Western thought, fate is not an entity, rather a intrisic agency of life),[/QUOTE]Fate in the Terminator Trilogy, and T2, especially, is capitalized, because it is personified in the Machines, and becomes a very real driving force behind the series. Fate becomes its own character/element in the films, justifying the capitalization. [QUOTE]thus the human action to change the flow of events is an excercise in futility. (I end it differently for 2 reasons: because of this causes a pause in the thought, not needed or wanted, and alter the future is not exactly correct, as the humans do in small ways. They do not however, alter the primary course of events)[/QUOTE]Problem here is, they are never able to alter the future at all. They aren't even able to alter things in small ways. The setting of the Finale in T1 is Cyberdyne for a reason. Sarah Connor is unable to kill Dyson (opportunity to alter the future) for a reason, and that reason is because she is a human; she is not a Machine. She feels. "There doesn't have to be a war!" is yet another example of the humans being unable to alter minor details, something as simple as saving Kate's father's life. He still dies. "Alter the future" is actually quite correct, because the humans' focus throughout T2, and to a partial extent in T1 and T3, is to change the future, to alter it. Sarah is obsessed with preventing Judgment Day, a day that will happen in the future. "Futile gesture" is a more appropriate term, because the humans aren't exercising any type of strength. To exercise is to do, to use, and they have no effective action at all. Anything they attempt is only a gesture, something looking good but having no substantial meaning behind it, hence, "futile gesture." [quote]I got a 98% in comp 1 and Comp 2, and I hope that I have been a help to you. Feel free to use what I have, to use a piece of it, or any other ideas derived from it without citing credit whatsoever.[/QUOTE]Good job in the Comp 101/102. I'll be sure to keep that in mind in my 400 and 500 level English courses.

I'm posting because I'm bored, primarily. Normally, I wouldn't even bother in a Ninja Gaiden thread, or a thread where the last reply was Mid-October, anyway, but...the Comp Lab is dull right now, so here we go, lol. I played NG for a few hours when I rented it, and I was amused with it for a while. I may have posted in this thread already, I'm not sure, heh. But the game's okay. It's not anything terribly orgasmic, and honestly, I feel the NES originals to be far superior...not graphics-wise, but from a gameplay standpoint, 2D Ninja Gaiden feels much more natural. Part of this is the camera. Even in the first few levels, I constantly wanted to be able to lock the camera in a side-view to handle the jumping, and the constant swerving got on my nerves, as well. It seemed that every ten feet or so in the rock basin, I'd be dealing with a new camera angle. In-doors wasn't much better, if any better at all. Now, I'm not incompetent at games, and I know my way around 3D pretty well, and even then, I was finding that when I happen to check out a corner, and the camera closes in on Ryu's head, not even angled in the direction of the enemies during combat, there's definitely an issue there regarding Camera AI. Yes, all the player has to do is avoid the corners, and this is pretty simple battle strategy, but even then, the camera movement in the Pre-Patch shouldn't punish the gamer for drifting into the corner, and that's pretty much common sense in game design, if I do say so myself. The gamer should avoid the corners to avoid getting pinned by enemies, not to avoid getting pinned by the camera. So, even based on just that one instance, I think there were some significant problems with the Camera AI.

[quote name='ChibiHorsewoman][color=darkviolet']I guess should appologize for the title of the post, but I couldn't think[/color][/quote] Hmm... Anyway, I'd made a post in my MyO a while back after my lawnmower had a disagreement with a couple of bunnies who had made a nest in the front lawn. Now, I'm not a cruel person, but the incident pissed me off to no end. I was actually pretty distraught, especially when the mother bunny refused to help one of her young, because she was so spooked. It really tore my heart to pieces. Even though I'll always say PETA can blow me, I find still find it terrible. I mean, who in their right mind would seemingly glorify chopping up a bunny? I know I wouldn't, and my update showed that. I look at things like this, and I'm probably echoing lava lamp and Charles here, but even though I think PETA has their priorities a bit skewed, that doesn't mean I'm going to celebrate slaughtering animals, regardless of what kind of a moving vehicle I'm using, lawnmower, car, whatever. Now, granted, there are [i]some[/i] (but not many) humorous instances of roadkill; I remember this one time when I was driving down one of the roads in my neighborhood, and a squirrel ran out in front of me--correction, along the side of me--and about a second later, my rear right end thumps up. "Yep," I said, "There it goes." But I don't celebrate that. I do acknowledge the happening, however, and I do regret it happened, but I'm not going to go telling people how outlandishly bizarre or funny it was, because death isn't funny, unless you're talking about Kill Bill, Pulp Fiction, or really any other QT film, but this is because he mocks violence; he doesn't glorify it. So, I think that's something to consider here. We shouldn't be glorifying or celebrating violence, but acknowledging it happened, talking about it maturely if we feel the need to, and moving on.

Okay, I'm posting this because I'm pretty much looking for feedback on this. I've got a paper due in my Sci-fi Film course, and my thesis statement is the following: [quote]?Judgment Day is not prevented in Terminator 2, because the conflict, actions, and outcome of the films are not affected by humans, instead dictated by machines, the symbols of Fate in the Terminator films, and because of this, any human effort to alter the future is a futile gesture.?[/quote]What do you all think? Any suggestions, comments, reactions? Anything in there you disagree with?

I'd just like to say something here really quickly. The problem as I see it--and as most would see it if they were to take a few minutes and think about it--isn't Religion or Christianity or what-have-you. The real problem with any "Religious practice" is not Religion itself, but in the application of Religion. And, as we can see from history (9/11, Crusades, et al), the application of religion is really what taints it, not from the actual Religion itself, though there's some pretty questionable stuff in the Bible/Qu'ran/Torah/etc., it's the people...the followers...that spin it; it's the application that's skewed, not the Religion itself. Just a point I'd like to make. :)

Er, yeah. I watched Ridley Scott's Alien earlier, and it's sci-fi/horror, yes, but I came out of it feeling all warm and fuzzy inside. I don't know why, either. It shouldn't--[i]dear God, it shouldn't[/i], lol, but it does. Perhaps it's the acting, the writing, the set design, but everything just clicks, you know? It really is a whole film, and I suppose that's what makes me giddy and such after watching it, cause it's always an experience, heh. I guess what made it even cooler and more enjoyable was when my [i]entire[/i] class jumped when [spoiler]Dallas runs into the pesky houseguest in the airducts[/spoiler]. It was [i]awesome[/i]. College students, mind you, jumping at [i]Alien[/i], a sci-fi/horror film from the late 70s. It was beautiful. Some of them jumped again near the end, when [spoiler]the Alien reaches out for Ripley in the escape pod. Pity, actually. I wanted to see more of Sigourney Weaver clad only in those tight undergarments...lol[/spoiler]. But yes. Do any of you feel that any part of The Alien Saga is Warm and Fuzzy? And if so, why? I'm seriously wondering if I'm just weird.

In a word, Desi, "fantastic." There are so many great lines to glean here, but I think "l33t virus" is my favorite. Wonderful stuff, Desi. Just wonderful. I don't use that adjective often, either, so consider that a special compliment, haha.

Oddly enough, I was originally thinking of putting in that adjective use, so you and I were thinking along the same lines there, Kei. I revised the poster slightly, shifted some stuff, made Shin bigger (that sounds wrong, lol), and placed some fun little descriptory things. I think the minor changes are vast improvements, honestly. The movement/re-sizing makes the title at the top "jump" more, and the text fits very well. [center][URL=http://img55.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img55&image=ShinmaruvsTheWorld.jpg][IMG]http://img55.exs.cx/img55/2761/ShinmaruvsTheWorld.th.jpg[/IMG][/URL][/center]

[center][url="http://img74.exs.cx/my.php?loc=img74&image=ShinmaruvsTheWorld.jpg"][img]http://img74.exs.cx/img74/2761/ShinmaruvsTheWorld.th.jpg[/img][/url][/center] I just whipped this thing up in the past hour or so. I had the urge to do a really retro 50s B-movie sci-fi poster, and figured Shinmaru vs The World (Shin's running gag thing in his MyO) was the perfect subject.

[quote name='Zeta']Legalizing it would free up law enforcement and keep children away from the drug trafficking. With it under government regulation all an underage person would have to do would turn to an 18 year old (if that is the chosen age lets say) and ask for him to buy some. That is what people do with cigarettes. It would be no different. The plus to this would be that it would keep children/teens away from the drug market, keeping them away from much harder drugs like cocaine and heroin.[/quote] I just want to make sure I'm understanding your point here. You're saying that it's okay to make it easier (but safer) for children to buy drugs that are currently illegal for a reason. I think there's some confusion about what drug trafficking really is, too. [url=http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/concern/drug_trafficking.html][u]Drug Trafficking[/u][/url] I think everyone here should note that "drug trafficking" is defined as what is essentially an illegal method of acquiring drugs. If we were to adopt your suggestion, Zeta, we [i]would not[/i] be removing drug trafficking from the equation. We would only be removing the druglords. That's it. The drug trafficking would still be very prevalent, only now, drug trafficking would be run by 18-year-olds. 18-year-olds would become the new druglords. Sciros, under Zeta's "plan," there's still going to be a drug market. [quote name='Zeta']The key to legalizing marijuana is smoking it responsibly.[/quote] The key to using marijuana to begin with is smoking it responsibly, but it doesn't seem like anyone is using it responsibly now, anyway.

I'd just like to add something to what Solo has said, regarding the public prominence of alcohol versus Mary-Jane. I was at a college party back in 2001, and there was heavy, heavy marijuana use there. Probably half of the party was smoking, and more than 3/4 of the party left...meaning, didn't spend the night, meaning, drove home. Considering just that one incident that probably gets repeated fairly often, something tells me that people aren't going to be all that sensible after smoking pot. I mean, we hear about so much drunk driving...what's there to suggest that if marijuana is legalized, we won't hear about or have increased incidents of people driving while high? I know I don't have that kind of faith in humanity to where I'll convince myself that people are suddenly going to stop the "Oh, I've kicked back a few, but I can still drive perfectly fine" schpiel. And, just one other thing about the "If you legalize it, people won't do it as much" argument...if you were to walk around a college campus, either in the dorms, in the parks, in off-campus apartments...you're going to see a hell of a lot drinking, smoking (both cigarette and pot). Now, if it's so prevalent already, and people light up a cigarette even on their way to campus, what do we think is going to happen if marijuana is legalized? People are going to be lighting up a fat one on their way to class. We shouldn't have to say this, but that is not a good thing.

I picked up this compilation earlier tonight, and I'm fairly impressed by it. Some really great stuff in there, and some iffy stuff. We've got Primal Rage, MKII and III, Total Carnage, and Xybots (which is incredibly good, surprisingly) and then we're given stuff like...something pretty forgettable...Xeno-somethings. But probably the game that makes the entire compilation worth getting is "NARC." This isn't the game that came out a year ago or so. No, this is a side-scroller "Tough on Drugs" mindless shooter from the early 80s, but even that doesn't do the game justice. I'll include some screenshots. [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21300&stc=1[/img] [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21301&stc=1[/img] [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21302&stc=1[/img] [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21303&stc=1[/img] [img]http://www.otakuboards.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21304&stc=1[/img] No, your eyes do not deceive you; those are [i]dead, flaming bodies being propelled up into the air from a rocket launcher[/i]. The car there has more of a function than a simple ride into the chaos; you can run people over, and fire at the same time. If there was ever a gratuitous use of violence/sex/drugs in any game ever, that is NARC. Enemies include Pimps wielding shotguns, druggies ninja-leaping around as they throw syringes (yes, [i]syringes[/i] at you), cowboys with...something that shoots. So...yeah. MAT2 is really fun to begin with, with Gauntlet II, Primal Rage, MK, etc, but NARC clinches it. You've got to check this compilation out, lol. It's insane.

Really, I don't even see why there's a debate over this. The actual physical and mental impairments of both Nicotine and marijuana cannot be contested, and they're both dreadfully harmful in their own particular ways. I mean, let's face the facts. They're both horrible for a person's health and have some pretty nasty adverse reactions for each of them. Why is there a debate about which is worse, or which should be legalized over the other? They're both absolutely dreadful on various levels, lol.

Last I checked, Sox were up 8 to 1 in the 6th or 7th, so unless the Yankees pull something spectacular, the Sox may be going to the World Series. No matter who wins, though, it was a [i]fantastic[/i] post-season series. The last three games were just unbelievable, regardless of who won them. I think my favorite moment out of the games I watched was Game 6, where it came down to the wire. Bottom of the...nth Inning, lol. Sox were at bat. Two outs. Full count. Man on third, man on second. If there ever was a perfect strike, that was it. It was beautiful. I just checked on Comcast.net. Top of the 7th, Sox up 8 to 1, still. I believe the Sox are batting, as well. Correction: Make that Bottom of the 9th, Sox up 10 to 3, Yanks batting, no outs yet. 3-2. *whistles* EDIT: The Sox are goin to the Series. That was awesome.

SolarPrinces, like I said, I award points where points are due, and honestly, Kerry earned those points. Historically, I've been Centrist...Neutral, Moderate, etc, and I've viewed debates/speeches/talks/etc from a more or less unbiased platform. I lean towards Kerry because he's simply saying the more sensible thing, you know? Tell you the truth, I'm really not that big a fan of either of them. I think that while Kerry has a better idea of what's going on lately, he's not the solution to everything, but he's coming across as the better choice on a lot of really important issues (Abortion, Education, Job Reform, Healthcare Reform, for example). I kind of look at the whole Pro-Life argument as pretty null and void for the most part, actually, because there are Pro-Lifers constantly saying how we need to protect innocent life and so on, but it seems like they don't realize we can just walk not even four blocks north from Rutgers-Camden and see people who desperately need our help, right this very second. Perhaps it's just me, but I'm not seeing much being done to improve those people's health. I don't mean to turn this into some melodramatic bleeding-heart Liberal-fest, as I absolutely loathe that phrase, even being a Moderate, but there are people not even thirty minutes away from where I live that most of the time are just scraping to get by. Something tells me that their Healthcare isn't what it should be, either. So, it's like...when I hear that everyone in America is all fine and dandy, or getting back on the right track, getting good Healthcare and so forth, and when I know for a fact that there are people in Philly, Camden, really any city in our country, that are sick and can't get the medical attention they need, I simply can't believe that the quality of US Healthcare is all that good at all, honestly. There are people still suffering from medical troubles, and just coming from me...I find that very unacceptable. And, really, I feel like most domestic issues are getting horribly mishandled, like they're getting ignored when it comes to the War on Terror. I look at it this way: If we don't keep Domestic America healthy, there won't be any America to protect.

[font=Courier New][color=seagreen][size=3][color=black]"[/color][color=black]Snake Tales"[/color][/size][/color][/font][font=Courier New]Briefing Room 7:30 am A previously neat stack of manila envelopes stamped ?[color=red][b]CLASSIFIED[/b][/color]? were slapped down onto the cold marble table, where they promptly slid into disarray. ?This just came in over the hot wire from our contact in Philadelphia. It?s a film festival, but he suspects compromise.? ?Details?? Nikki inquired as the other agents each opened an envelope and began examining the photographs, memorandum, and print-outs that painted an eerie and all-too familiar portrait of a Black-Ops. ?Approximately four weeks ago, two of our field operatives intercepted a transmission that detailed what we suspect to be a plot to assassinate a prominent figure in the entertainment industry, a Mr. David Jones. If Mr. Jones looks familiar, he should. He believes himself to be a political activist and has become increasingly critical of the current administration and is a rather large thorn in their sides.? ?Oh, I remember him,? Alex interjected, ?he?s an asshole.? ?That may be true, but it is not our place to judge. I founded this organization to combat terrorism and act as the counterweight to the English Department. I did [i]not[/i] found this institute to provide you with ammunition to justify your Ideological crusades. We are here because we strive to keep order, and [i]not[/i] attack public figures.? ?But what is ?terrorism,? as defined by our handbook,? Alex replied. ?If you wish to be part of this mission, to be part of this team as a whole, both in conflict and in times of peace, then I suggest you put your personal convictions aside and focus your energies on the task set before us.? D. turned back to the full assembly. ?Our correspondent believes this film festival is merely a cover for an assassination to take place. His suspicions seem to be confirmed, unfortunately; David Jones has been requested to attend the festival as the guest of honor, perhaps to serve as a special guest judge, in addition to the three already presiding.? ?Potential suspects,? Nikki said. ?Nothing concrete. Our analysts suggest Marabou, a radicalist group most well-known for its image rather than accomplishments, but they have never hinted at nor executed at a level of this notoriety before. They have claimed responsibility for a number of economic assaults and various hijackings; they have long expressed distaste for the economic policies of particular governments, including criticizing our own administration. Because of this, I personally doubt they have any involvement in this situation.? ?Then...why are they suspect #1,? Marie asked. ?Because evidence is evidence,? D. replied. ?These documents and photographs implicate Marabou more than any other organization on the Hot-List. They have been designated as the prime suspect from thorough examination of these enclosed files, and therefore, their involvement will be considered above all else.? ?I don?t like it,? Alex protested. ?What?s there to like,? Marie replied. ?It?s too clean, too open-and-shut. Just seems too obvious, that?s all.? ?You know, Esten, life isn?t all about deeper meanings behind things.? ?Oh?? ?Yeah...maybe in the movies, there?s some criminal mastermind behind everything, pulling all the strings, but here in reality, try accepting the simplest explanation.? ?If the simplest explanation works and I?m wrong, fine. If [i]you?re[/i] wrong, however, and we go after Marabou based on material that I can pluck out of my [i]-ss[/i], we?re getting royally f-ck-d.? ?You two, cut it! Both of you cool down,? D. ordered. ?The deadline is in two weeks. That is all the time you have. There will be no extensions distributed. Do you [i]get me[/i], Tom?? ?Loud and clear, D.? ?What does the Activation List look like,? Nikki wondered. ?First-ring network. Keep the numbers down. We don?t need the entire staff to know about this. I understand your individual entry methods may vary, but I will make one thing absolutely clear: [i]no terroristic threats[/i]. Z and M are still unsatisfied with that operation. Steele, do [i]you[/i] get me?? ?Yeah, I got it.? ?Good. The time is now 8:00 am. This briefing never happened.? The agents began gathering their notes and papers, filing them neatly into their briefcases, then quietly exited the room. There were three agents that remained, seated at the table. ?Activate Hyzer?? ?Yes. I know he?ll be interested, Alex,? Scott replied. ?I?ll see him this afternoon.? ?Cool. Chris, tell him to meet us in the Lounge after hours.? ?Okay.? ?I?m hungry. Want to get some breakfast?? ?Yeah.?[/font]

Two things here. One, about Kerry mentioning Cheney's daughter. The question posed was "Is Homosexuality a choice?" Bush's response was a total cover, lol. "I don't know." [i]Of course[/i] he knows what the real answer to that question is, lol. It's not a choice. If it were a choice, you'd see countless people jumping the fence, as it were. If it were a choice, you wouldn't have millions of people who are totally confused about their sexual orientation and sexual identities in life. That's the bottom line here, and Bush certainly believes it's a choice, lol. Kerry's response, his mention of Cheney's daughter, was no personal attack at all on anyone. I'm not sure if anyone paid attention to Kerry's response on that point, but I believe it went something like this, "If you were to talk to Vice President Cheney's daughter, who is a lesbian, she would tell you that she's just being who she is." I don't know if anyone here gave that statement any thought as to what it meant, but Kerry was saying that Homosexuality isn't a choice; it's just how some people are. It's just people being who they are. Two, I'm hearing people praising Bush because they were able to piece together what he was saying...and then criticize Kerry for being too vague. I'm going to suggest that people should treat both candidates equally here. If someone praises Bush because they can understand what he's saying because they're piecing things together in their own minds, Bush is being vague, lol. In the same breath, those people then criticize Kerry for being vague, but did these people actually give Kerry the same kind of consideration and benefit of the doubt that they gave Bush? I have a feeling the answer is a pretty big "No." I know it's difficult for most, but at least look at the debates objectively, and judge the candidates performances equally and objectively. People have said that they have no idea where Kerry stands on particular issues, and I have a feeling one of these issues is Abortion. Let's see what Kerry said, heh. He mentioned how he was raised Catholic, brought up on Catholic values, etc, but then said that he simply can't allow his religious convictions to dictate what he does concerning other people's lives in the case of Abortion. That's pretty clear to me that he's Pro-Choice. I'm not Pro-Kerry and I'm not Pro-Bush, but I do award points where points are due, and I sense that both sides here aren't giving points where points are due. Now, about this whole job issue...I'll just mention that in no way did Bush [i]actually answer[/i] the question about getting Americans back their jobs, instead going on and on about improving the quality of Education in America. If you were to just look up a few posts at my extended analysis of No Child Left Behind, you'll see just where I stand on Bush's "I'm Improving American Education" nonsense. I agree that our Education system can be improved upon, but NCLB is going to [i]crumble the system[/i]. Really, there's no way in hell that Bush could possibly be well-informed about things and still think he's helping Education. And it's unfortunate that Kerry didn't go after Bush about that, because it was a point that [i]needed[/i] to be made: Bush isn't helping Education at all, and an improved Education still isn't going to magically win back American jobs, either. If jobs are being outsourced/lost to foreigners because foreigners work for less, what makes anyone think that educating Americans further will reverse that trend? And especially when the President's idea of improving Education is NCLB?

MK: Deception has been getting quite stellar reviews lately. I've not had the chance to play it, as it's an Xbox/PS2 exclusive, as my Xbox is very much dead, and as my brother's PS2 is in his room, a part of the house I never venture into, out of fear of some monster devouring my soul. Come to think of it, some of Dan's friends never returned after hanging out in there, which mildly frightens me. But in the reviews I've read of Deception, the main game/Online play seems to be the best part of the game. I hear it's [i]incredibly[/i] fine-tuned and provides a previously unrealized level of gameplay in the MK series. It sounds fast, brutal, unforgiving, and funny, of course. There are parts of the game that are pretty hilarious, apparently, and this only increases my urge to play Deception, because, let's face it. Pain is funny, and MK excels in inflicting pain, so therefore, it's funny. Plus, who wouldn't laugh their -ss off when they Shadow Kick some unsuspecting fool through a wall, to have him land some fifty feet below, where the fight continues? It's just fun stuff. I'm not terribly excited about Konquest mode, though; it doesn't strike me as anything innovative or all that entertaining, really. But Kombat Chess and Puzzle Kombat...I'm looking forward to that. :D It's Mortal Kombat meets Chessmaster. How can you go wrong? Simply, you can't.

[quote name='Lore']Siren, love, a gentle reminder that the vast majority of the board has not "studied Educational Psych, Educational Theory, Multiple Intelligence, etc, on any basic level." ...and they don't necessarily want (or need) a lecture.[/quote] I know this, Sara, but sometimes, people need to be educated about the particulars of a topic. Otherwise, they're not going to be able to talk about it with any reasonable depth or accuracy, similar to No Child Left Behind, eh? Okay, you had asked a few questions regarding some things here. My source here is the following: [url=http://www.users.muohio.edu/shermalw/mi_gardnernew98.html][u]Definitions and analysis of Multiple Intelligence[/u][/url] [quote]Siren, you say that he's comparing different types of intelligence. I understand some of what you're saying, but I don't understand how you're getting all this from his post. He doesn't say anything about different kinds of intelligence--he claims that intelligence has nothing to do with a grasp of language, not that one kind of intelligence outweighs another.[/quote] Yes, I'm saying he's comparing and discussing different types of intelligence. I'd like to call our attention to the following: [quote name='Adahn]If a person [u]does not have a perfect grasp on what is[/u] commonly recognized as [u]necessary to present thoughts and ideas[/u'], does that make that person or that person's posts unintelligent? I think that, if anything, it makes them more intelligent.[/quote] Now, while his comparison of "more intelligent" may be a bit off (though, we may see later that it's actually not so skewed), he is making a distinction between two different types of intelligence. We read the first paragraph there, where he talks about someone who does not have a perfect grasp on "conventional" methods of communication. This deals with interaction. The person Adahn is describing isn't quite "with it" when it comes to talking/interacting with people. To put it in a nutshell, these people lack social skills. These "social skills" are also known as Emotional Intelligences, a sub-division of which is Inter-personal Intelligence, which is "the capacity to understand and interact effectively with others." Inter-personal Intelligence, however, is only one out of approximately 8 different Intelligences. Let's examine Adahn's second paragraph there, where he talks about the person's thirst for knowledge, and the drive: [quote]Their desire to know is so great that [u]they will suffer the hardships of being misunderstood or pointed out as less than perfectly literate to get their ideas across[/u] for their own benefit, and the benefit of others.[/quote] This "desire to know" is an interesting idea, because it does not relate to anything regarding Inter-personal Intelligence. If we look at the Inter-personal Intelligence qualities, there is no mention made of any driving motivation to seek a greater knowledge. The Inter-personal Intelligence is External, as it were. It deals with those around the individual. The Internal Emotional Intelligence is [i]Intra[/u]-personal Intelligence, the characteristics of which are heavily, heavily focused on self-reflection, metacognition, and deep emotional/intellectual/cognitive processes. This is the "desire to know" that Adahn was talking about. It's a drive--a thirst--for knowledge, and last year, when I was heavily involved in this Intra-personal development, most here can attest to the fact that I seemed very, very "out there." But even though I was acting like I had gone crazy, gone off the deep end, as it were, I was actually bettering myself, and enhancing my knowledge and understanding of my self. And after I had trained myself further in the Intra-personal Intelligence, I was better off, because I better understood myself, and how I worked. Then, I was able to assist others in this. Actually, just this past Fall, in fact, I met with a classmate once a week to help her better cope with stress. So, it (Intra-personal Intelligence, what Adahn was describing) appears to be a useful tool when it comes to improving lives, and those who study Metacognition and the various other functions of that particular discipline of Multiple Intelligence do improve themselves, which could be likened to becoming "more" intelligent than those around them. Now, I'd like to briefly (because it's getting to be 4 am) talk about Verbal/Linguistic Intelligence, which "consists of the ability to think in words and to use language to express and appreciate complex meanings." I think V/L Intelligence can be applied to both types of Emotional Intelligence, actually, but there is a slight difference in the application. If you look at those various authors listed under V/L Intelligence, you'll notice there's a fairly wide range of styles, from Dr. Seuss to Franz Kafka, to James Joyce, E.E. Cummings, Poe, even Tolkien. Though I may anger some LOTR fans here, Seuss fans, and Poe fans, those authors' ideas are relatively simple and easily accessible when compared to the likes of Joyce, Kafka, and Cummings. I don't think one can say that The Cat In The Hat is on the same level of complexity of say, Finnegan's Wake or Ulysses. This distinction is where the differences between Inter-personal and Intra-personal Intelligences are important. It's not unreasonable to say that Seuss or Tolkien is much more Inter-personal, while Joyce and Cummings adhere more to Intra-personal Intelligences. I look at it this way: you can give Cat In The Hat to a 4th grader and they'll read it themselves for the most part. You give that same 4th grader a copy of Finnegan's Wake, and they'll freak. Same goes for something by Socrates. Socrates was put on trial for saying something others couldn't understand, yet he didn't back down. From what I've heard, he was actually pretty indignant when he was on trial, insulting the jury and so forth. It's not that his ideas were bunk, either; they're actually very astute observations about the nature of society and so forth, and are still pretty relevant today. I'm going to say two more things, then I'm off to bed. One...sometimes, the world just isn't ready for something. Usually, that something is a higher level of thinking. You can see this throughout history, and see it in this thread, actually. Some people just aren't ready for certain types of Philosophy and approaches to the world. This isn't a bad thing, necessarily, but it is unfortunate. I think that's where Adahn's comments are coming from, actually: some people are just ahead of everyone else, but their ideas get minimized because they don't know how to express them appropriately (the Inter-personal Intelligence). Two...an example I'd use for the duality of the Inter-personal vs Intra-personal is...a "Yes-Man" versus Socrates. I hope I answered your questions? :)

[QUOTE=ScirosDarkblade]Siren, "more intelligent" is not a comparison of intelligences in the context you borrowed that expression from. Return it, lol. As for this support in favor of multiple intelligences, well you're not necessarily arguing against anyone in this thread. Adahn though seemed to speak about intelligence in its general sense, but basing its level on something very specific. That is what invited opposition. So, again, until Adahn tells us that he was making a distinction between aspects of intelligence (which would actually conflict with the "more intelligent" expression if you think about it), there's no reason to futher discuss this.[/quote] Why do I get the feeling that you've ignored my previous posts? I'm going to repeat what I've said previously: [quote=Siren]Call me crazy, but I don't see how anyone doesn't realize what Adahn is saying here. He's talking about various types of intelligence. His first focus is on a deficient Verbal Intelligence, but through a drive to learn, to interact, etc, that person develops another intelligence: This right here is focusing on Emotional Intelligence, or Interpersonal/Intrapersonal Intelligence, the interest and desire to interact, to discuss, to connect with people.[/quote] [quote name='Adahn']Their desire to know is so great that they will suffer the hardships of being misunderstood or pointed out as less than perfectly literate to get their ideas across for their own benefit, and the benefit of others.[/quote] Now, if you've studied Educational Psych, Educational Theory, Multiple Intelligence, etc, on any basic level, you will see a remarkable similarity between what Adahn said above, and what Emotional Intelligence relates to. Furthermore, because he used "more intelligent" when discussing those two different types of intelligence (they [i]are[/i] different types, Sciros, regardless of what you want to believe here), he was comparing intelligences in the context I "borrowed [the] expression from." To deny it further is denying the facts. And it's not that I'm arguing against anyone here; I'm just correcting a mass misinterpretation.