Charles

Everyone reflects on their lives from time to time; if they say they don't, they're either lying or very shallow. My only difference in opinion here rests with personal belief. I feel that the answers to such intimate questions only come with time and self reflection. You know, as we grow older, our reasons for living change considerably. That is, I doubt one's priorities at sixty compare to their own at age twenty. So, we have to live life to weigh it. It's only when we begin to approach the twilight of our lives that we can look back and analyze everything accurately. That's the way we should determine what our place in life is, I think. It's a conclusion we should all reach for ourselves instead of relying on anyone, including God, to simply give us the answer. I can't even categorize rhetorical questions regarding peer attraction with that subject though. Those questions do have readily attainable answers you can find through relationship building. That is, by actually speaking with people and feeling them out.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by sixthcrusifix [/i] [B]Mitch bugs the crap outta me too! My problems are one thing, But mitch, maybe she didn't put a brief synopsis of the book in there, BECAUSE YOUR THE ONLY person in the world who knows what that means! Besides, maybe the thread was targeted specifically to people who have read the book and not you! god, [/B][/QUOTE] Okay you, I'm going to have to grab you by the ear and pull you aside for a moment. Mitch is only doing his job; he's thoughtfully asking the individual that initiated this discussion to provide further elaboration on the subject and he's also introducing suggestions to increase the relevancy of their posts. I fully support him in this situation. And, quite frankly, it's this sort of attitude that you're displaying that really bugs the crap out of me. I appreciate member insight on how our staff operates, but you're being blatantly rude and ignorant. If you have a problem with how Mitch applies the rules, you can either speak with me directly or approach Mitch himself. Either way your concerns will be met. Public sarcasm is neither mature nor desirable in this circumstance. Now, if [i]I'm[/i] "bugging the crap" out of you, be sure to let me know and we'll see what we can do about that chief.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Shinken [/i] [B]Just like every year, I'm definitely going to get some Christmas money this year, and I'm planning on purchasing Need for Speed: Underground for the PS2. I've already seen the reviews on X-Play and in Official Playstation Magazine, but I'm still not sure whether or not to buy it. So- should I buy it or not? I don't want to end up wasting $50 on a hunk of junk. (Although I do trust the two other sources, I still need a third opinion. :drunk: ) [/B][/QUOTE] I was considering purchasing it when it first out but decided against it. Reason being, I played the Xbox version on display at EB and the frame rate was noticeably choppy. That iteration is the most stable in that area, mind you. I also didn't appreciate the total lack of police presence in the one Need for Speed that should have one. Underground racing isn't complete without the threat of a reckless high speed police chase. Midnight Club II handled that aspect very well. Lastly, the game seems to suffer from a lack of variety in the environments. Which, of course I can't fault it for all too much because illegal street racing usually [i]does[/i] take place in a city environment at night. It?s just that I become rather bored staring at the same locales too often. In the end, I'd recommend it though. Although I don't own it, I can guarantee it's not "junk." The NFS franchise is reliable at its worst and outstanding at its best. This probably fall somewhere in-between. I still might look into picking it up in the future because of the online mode. If you want to make the safest possible purchase, you should rent both Need for Speed: Underground and Midnight Club II; see which one you prefer over the other. They're both quite different fundamentally and worth a try. Who knows which one might suit your tastes.

I'm a real otaku, yes. My friends and I dress up as our favorite anime characters on Tuesday and Thursday nights. Conventions aren't necessary for such a thing. We then proceed to act out scenes from our favorite anime; if we become bored of that, we partake in bouts of anime trivia. And, of course, we've constructed several shrines in which to we store our obscure memorobilia. In school, I was picked on for carrying around an anime lunch box--I was a senior in high school at the time. I'm also a member of fifteen other anime message boards where I enjoy fifteen different anime-related screen names. When people speak to me online, I call them a "baka" compulsively. Last but not least, I'm attracted to female anime characters as if they were real. On especially lonely nights, I dream of marrying them. Plus I frequently masturbate to hentai. In the end, I know as much about anime as I do music. So that makes me an otaku. Love me for it.

The members' accounts you're describing have been deleted for one reason or another. If you notice a username or title that reads "Guest" that account is no longer active.

Well, it depends. Unlike Microsoft's approach with the Xbox, Sony doesn't have a central network for the Playstation 2. Online gaming is developer reliant. Having said that, most online titles don't require an online fee. There are always exceptions, such as RPGs or the online version of Hot Shots Golf, that will require a subscription costs, but for the most part you won't have to worry about it. I myself have finally entered the world of online PS2 gaming and--it's pretty good. You obviously have your fair share of lamers who say stuff like "[insert name] is gayy" but when you actually get a game going it's a blast. It's just a shame that I've discovered I suck at games compared to a lot of people. :blush: Thus far, I've only played Tony Hawk's Underground, Tiger Woods 2004, and ATV Offroad Fury 2 over broadband. My name on Tiger Woods is actually [b]OtakuBoards.[/b] Represent. ^_^ Today I hope to pick up Socom II to help flex my online muscles a bit. It'd be great if I could find some other OtakuBoards members with those games. I think Tony has SSX3, and I definitely enjoy that game, so perhaps I'll think about picking that one up eventually.

Chris went for a lionsault off the top rope but slipped, and came down directly on his head. He lost feeling in his left arm for the rest of the match but worked through it. ^_^ Here's my question: [b]Which part of the new Ric Flair DVD was censored from the European version?[/b]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Teammayhem [/i] [B]I said... DON'T REMIND ME! Grrr... [/B][/QUOTE] Don't be so pithy. He said--ELABORATE! lol Shinmaru asked you to clarify your comments for a reason. Here on OtakuBoards we like to see members put a certain degree of effort into their posts. Vague comments hardly contribute to a discussion. At least not in a possible way. I know you were responding playfully, but please try to recognize when a moderator is trying to do their job and comply instead of simply ignoring their requests and going on about just as you were. If you're unable to do so, I suggest you opt to simply not post any further on the subject. It'd be a nice gesture. ^_^ You may also want to read our rules. Doing so would help you avoid any more mishaps. Yes, a good number of your posts have left a lot to be desired, so this would be a good course of action for you. Trust in Charles.

I don't agree with that at all--but it's just my opinion. I'm positive there are copious amounts of people who believe HBK should retire. I'm just not one of him. From where I stand, he still has a lot to give to the business. He?s both entertaining and capable of positively influencing the younger talent. Personally, I'm thankful for every match I get from Shawn Michaels. HBK is one of the most charismatic, taleneted individuals to ever lace up a pair of wrestling boots--and I think he deserves credit where credit is due. His storied career is nothing short of inspirational. Since returning, he's delivered [b]numerous[/b] unforgettable performances. I bought SummerSlam 2002 and Wrestlemania XIX on DVD [i]just[/i] for his matches alone. He came back from a career-ending injury and wrestled how a legend should wrestle. He managed to defy age and injury. When Michaels got back into that ring, he didn?t go through the motions and tarnish his reputation. He [I]wrestled[/I]. Which brings me to this point: [quote][b]5) Wrestlemania XIX Anyone watch his gay entrance with the stupid confetti bazookas? Y2J should've have one. Jericho was dominating the whole match. Where did he pull all that stamina from?[/b][/quote] I was disappointed that Jericho didn't win; but not so much so. It didn?t ruin the match for me. Did Y2J [I]really[/I] desperately need the rub? I don?t think so. Jericho is one of those special individuals who is able to get over on his charisma and presence alone. He's similar to The Rock, in that respect. Losses don't have much of an effect on him. Furthermore, HBK did eventually put Jericho over on Raw. But all that doesn't even matter in regard to the point I?m trying to make. You're quick to criticize HBK for trivial things, like the entrance choreography prior to his Wrestlemania XIX match, while failing to recognize the brilliance of the match itself. I don?t know what you were watching, but the match I saw easily stole the show. If you didn't appreciate the efforts of both men involved, I don't know how you can even begin to call yourself a wrestling fan. There was no domination on either side. No man carried the other. It was a back-and-forth old school wrestling match where each man contributed equally. Y2J and HBK complimented each others? styles nicely. To be honest, it's something I'd like to see more of. So, yes, Michaels is notorious for not always doing the right thing, but I still respect him because I know he's one of the best--ever. And he?s welcome on my television screen as long as he desires to be there.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Teammayhem [/i] [B]It seems that enemies from FF7 and Metal Gear Solid are popular, doesn't it? [/B][/QUOTE] They're two of the most widely embraced games worldwide, so it's not surprising. And Sephiroth seems to be the only enemy that receives praise in Final Fantasy VII for some reason. It's a shame too. If you think about it, Rufus Shinra is a much more interesting individual. Metal Gear Solid, to its credit, did have a cast of terrific antagonists. All were well-rounded and interesting. When I killed them, I actually [i]cared.[/i] Bowser still stands as the greatest enemy to grace a video game, regardless. His perserverence is something I must respect. Plus, he's always willing to temporarily bury the hatchet with Mario and fight by his side, should it be to his benefit. It's quite clever of him. ^_^

o_O;;;; Charles knows when you are spamming. He knows when you're online. He knows this thread isn't right so he's gonna close it and tell you to do something better with your time.

Just because it was viewed 111 times doesn't mean it's worth reposting. ~_^ You can't win the affection of every female. If she's as shallow as you say she is, you're probably better off without her. As wrist cutter pointed out previously, you're being very contradictory here anyway. It's so blatantly obvious. The way you describe her, this girl has a terrible personality, but you're infatuated with her because of her looks alone. Do you see the problem here? lol But, whatever. Although you've made an effort to be more understandable this time around, I don't see much potential for this thread. We've had heaps of predictable discussions about superficiality. I'm ready to give the subject a rest for the time being--and this time, I'm swallowing the key. [b]Edit:[/b] Also, stop double posting, please. You've been directed to read the rules--so do so. We're only going to give you so much leeway here. Use the edit button to add content to your posts if you wish to do so.

Perhaps I'm wrong--but I'm almost certain this was removed from the DVD. I've not watched it in some time, but from what I last remembered, the dust was pixelated in the newly released version of the film so that you couldn't see the spelling--or at the very least, they've further obscured it. But, yeah, this news is so old it's certainly a non-issue at this point. It shouldn't have been a problem to begin with in my opinion. Some people just have too much time on their hands.

As long as the WWE markets itself towards casual viewers instead of satisfying its diehard fan base the product will suffer. Their philosophy is that their dedicated fans will invest in the product no matter what. Instead they opt to attract [i]more[/i] fans such as the people flipping through the channels, or football fans displaced when the season ends, for example. Because they're not necessarily trying to please those of us who tune in every week, it's natural that they generate the same repetitious segments week in and week out. Let me explain. I'm an experienced wrestling fan; I've watched it for years. Due to my familiarity with it, I can easily foresee how things are going to go. It's obvious to me who's going to go over in a match. The cruiserweight is rarely ever going to get a rub from the larger stars. Triple H is going to win. The Dudley Boyz are going to do the same [b]boring[/b] spots they've been doing for years. Surprise tag team partners are no longer a big surprise. I know that that referee is going to get knocked unconscious by a glancing blow only to magically come to just in time for the heel to take advantage of underhanded tactics. I was [i]certain[/i] that something was going to happen to prevent Foley from wrestling Orton last week. I know that when someone comes running out with a chair during a match and the announcers say "Oh yes! It's time for some payback," the guy is going to hit his own friend and join forces with the enemy to "surprise" us. I've especially grown fond of how every wrestling promo for stipulation laced matches repeats the stipulations a dozen times because of the average viewers' attention span or lack thereof. I've also grown tired of tag team matches on Raw--especially in the main event. Six man tags in substitution of singles feuds just aren't exciting anymore. Anyone familiar with World Championship Wrestling during its prime knows that [i]they[/i] knew how give the fans a main event. Most of the main events on Raw aren't exciting anymore--not in the least. Rarely do we ever see a [b]clean[/b] match air in its entirety--especially when Evolution is involved in any capacity. Which is a shame really. I remember when Randy Orton worked his program with Shawn Micheals. It was incredibly important that HBK put him over properly. Instead, the finish saw Orton scoring the pinfall thanks to a pair of brass knuckles. Jim Ross himself was careful to emphasize "Randy Orton didn't beat Shawn Micheals, the brass knuckles did." Which brings me to my next point: rarely do older stars put the younger ones over properly--on either brand. It's not necessarily the older stars to blame either. The booking team and/or Vince McMahon are just set in their ways. They're afraid to try innovation. It's a critical flaw, one that's costing them as we speak. Contrary to my tone thus far, I believe that WWE is more enjoyable and in a better situation than it has been in recent memory. It has a wealth of breakout young talent on the cusp of stardom. I've been high on John Cena since he adopted the rapper gimmick. I've told people that he has the potential to be the next Rock. Contrary to many of WWE's older stars, he appeals to today's demographic. The same thing could be said of former star Jeff Hardy. Other guys like Christian, Matt Hardy, Test, Spanky, The World's Greatest Tag Team, The Bashams, Paul London, Batista, Orton, Maven, Cade, Jindrak, Shannon Moore, and La Resistance are starting to emerge. Well, at least in my eyes as far as presence and match quality go. To be honest, however, many of the guys on that list are far from getting the time of day with the WWE right now. Matt Hardy is one of those guys. I was very disappointed when he switched brands. I understood his desire to do so; he wanted to be with his girlfriend. What can you expect? But, if this guy was being misused on SmackDown, it's obvious he's not going to emerge on Raw as a main event player--[i]despite[/i] Micheal Hayes being one of the bookers. The roster is just too saturated on the Raw brand right now. And that's a crying shame. He has an endless wealth of potential. Guys like RVD have even given up--they've admitted as much in interviews. Despite WWE programming being better recently (with great surprise returns that cater to the fans), this problem will ultimately persist. They need to invest time and effort into these younger guys. I'm tired of Triple H, Undertaker, and Stone Cold Steve Austin (and he's not even an active wrestler!) lol Although Triple H deserves acclaim in the industry, he's preventing so many good things from happening. For example, WWE was building a champion vs. champion angle for Goldberg and Lesnar for Wrestlemania XX. With Triple H having defeated Goldberg, much of the steam for that match will be evaporated--if it even happens at all. The world title just doesn't mean anything to me anymore. I'm not even frustrated with Triple H being champion. I've just lost interest completely. To be blunt, I doubt I'll even follow angles involving Triple H. Now that I've rambled on for so long, I'll sum it up. WWE is in a good position because some of its younger guys are starting to make it. We're seeing interesting angles, such as Jericho/Christian and Trish/Lita (I predicted this one was well) and we're also seeing more of these younger stars get matches on pay per view cards. They liven things up. Plus, the WWE has done fan-friendly things, like bringing back Foley and Rock. On the negative side of things, their programming is stale and a lot of the responsibility for generating entertainment is placed on the shoulders of the wrestlers [b]in the ring[/b]. The WWE is also stuck in its ways with who it decides to put over and how they do it. Their last big flaw is their inability to utilize talent correctly. RVD, Matt Hardy, Booker T, Hurricane, Ultimo Dragon, Eddie Guerro and Chris Benoit (who faces the FBI on SmackDown) this week are but a few of the many who could be handled better. I've actually scored pretty good (floor level) seats for the Royal Rumble. So that should be a lot of fun. I just need to come up with some cool signs. Thus far I'm thinking about: 1) Push Triple H 2) Push RVD you Goddamn morons 3) I just wet myself 4) OtakuBoards 5) (written on back) I bet you can't see past my sign.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Dan Rugh [/i] [B]I'm wondering if you get to add people to your party like you did in Paper Mario. That would be cool, but I doubt it'll happen [/B][/QUOTE] Yeah, you're right. No parties this time. But, it's not something I miss. Although I've not had the chance to play the game recently, I [i]know[/i] it's something I'll finish. At first I was a bit concerned about the control scheme, but the game does an outstanding job of easing you into the thick of things. I'm very happy this discussion was revived. Quite honestly, we're talking about the best original effort to grace the GBA since Wario Ware Inc. and Metriod Fusion. It's quite charming; I think it's the personality literally overflowing out of this little cart that makes it so much fun to play. I'm also happy that the platforming isn't hampered as much by the perspective as some made it out to be. The world's design is too good to be bothered by such a thing. Combine that with boss battles more challenging than Final Fantasy X-2, and you're talking contender for RPG of the year here. At least in my opinion anyway. lol Knights of the Old Republic is probably the only thing that comes close. Maybe I'm biased though. I just love handheld games from Nintendo. When they're pulled off right there's a certain magic to them missing from many GameCube games even.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Haze_Gundam006 [/i] [B] Now did you really ban Bloodsin? Or was he even a real member? I really like Charles' screen name. ^^ Nice Job on yet another hilarious banner. ~Haze [/B][/QUOTE] Yep, he is (or was, rather) a real member and I banned him. :) But, more importantly, I'm glad that someone actually likes my screen name. Thanks! ^_^ As far as the banner is concerned, I think it's very funny. We generally don't publicly parade banned member images around the site. However, it's based on a major turn of events that certainly needs commemorating. This banner preserves it well! I too especially like the red stamp. I think it's a neat little effect. I'm too sure why my text is bold, but that's only a minor complaint. Overall, this banner/avatar combo is clean and simplistic. He did it fairly quickly too.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Bloodsin [/i] [B]Not nearly as ironic as something that's useless having its own thread in a nom-useless zone. Spam's not that hard to deal with. Just reply to them with death threats. [/B][/QUOTE] Phew. And [i]that[/i] is the most satisfying two [i]seconds[/i] I've ever had. Merry Christmas BS! ^_^;; Anyway, my greatest trouble came with AOL. My email account was constantly flooded with spam of all kinds. The mail control options were only temporary solutions. Somehow, spammers were able to bypass them quite easily. In the end, I was so discouraged, I simply stopped checking my mail. It was too bothersome to sort through all the junk. Some of them were quite cleverly labeled too. They would title them as if you knew them. After a while it was easy to spot, but when I first started using the Internet, it fooled me. It's not such a problem anymore though. I'm very careful about spreading my email address around.

I'm not a fan of the books; I've never touched them. But, I have been a devout fan of the films. Because I've not been spoiled by reading the material the movies were based on, one could argue that I can't appreciate it to its fullest. But, I beg to differ. There was nothing to influence my opinion of the trilogy in a film format. I was experiencing the magic for the first time. Y'know? And I had nothing to complain about. I've heard it stays fairly close to the source material and only takes liberty here and there. The fact that I've never read the books, means I'm not married to anything in them. So, I didn't have that to be concerned about. I'm just in awe of these movies. Critics keep calling them "the best films of our time." I won't try to argue it. The epic scale these stories bring to the table is amazing. I've already bought the extended versions of the first two DVDs in the series, and I can't wait for the third. I never get tired of them despite their length. The character growth is perfect. [i]The Lord of the Rings[/i] is quite simply an artistic masterpiece. I can't extol the beauty of the imagery enough. Almost every sweeping scene is a marvel to behold. They could be paintings. The battle scenes themselves were even more awe-inspiring than the machine battle in [i]The Matrix Revolutions[/i]. That's quite an achievement seeing as how that battle is head and shoulders above any other depiction of fantasy war out there. The battles in the LotR movies invoked a greater sense of emotion for me than any other fiction-based war sequences. I was only bothered by how drawn-out the ending was. I assumed, after reading reviews, that critics were only complaining for the sake of finding a fault with the movie. Especially since I'm highly skeptical of critics' opinions. Unfortunately, it is a legitimate gripe. People in the theater were even sighing as false ending after false ending played. It didn't ruin the movie though. I, myself, really didn't want it to end.

Life is a privilege; it's something many people take for granted or throw away. But, at the same time, it's a miracle we can never fully understand. It's something we always question and explore, something we try to validate with meaning. Sometimes life is an upwards struggle; it can even be downright unfair. There are things we wish we could change, and other things we hold on to, and minutes we'd like back. People treat one another badly on a daily basis. I?m sure everyone has said something they regret; they wish they could go back in time and take it back. But, you see, that's what's so beautiful about life: it's a learning experience. You just kind of have to move on and take what you've acquired with you and apply it to other situations so you don't repeat the same mistakes. Basically, life is a tough nut to crack anyway, though. It's is a time for us to figure out what we hope for and it's a time to develop the perseverance to live inside that hope. There are almost always difficulties along the way, sure. But, isn't life all about meeting them? I'm not always optimistic. Sometimes I watch the news and I'm ashamed over the way people live. I see it with my own eyes sometimes firsthand. There are just genuinely bad people that like to hurt others. I'm sure we can all list 'em. It's all you ever hear about from the media. They rarely ever show how people's characters are defined coming out of something like that though. Because people do genuinely care about one another and have the courage to come out of bad times (like the families who've lost children due to the war in Iraq, for example) they come away with a greater understanding of just how much they mean to one another--and how precious life is. There are a lot of people who have to go on with the hope that things will get better for themselves--and if they really want it to, it will. So yeah, there are times when I think life sucks. I have bad days, days where I'd rather just stay in bed. And, I think that people in general leave a lot to be desired. But, eh, growing as a individual and becoming wiser is definitely something I'm thankful for having the opportunity to do. I probably wouldn't be able to enjoy all that life has to offer or suffer through all that perils that life brings with it if I could life a thousand times, but I have this time. It may sound overly poetic and corny. It's special to me, though.

To be honest, I'm almost insulted at how easily people can sit here from the relative safety of their [i]parents'[/i] computers and blithely discredit the removal of a lingering source of instability that has dogged the U.S.-led reconstruction effort. I honestly don't know how people can say that the war is in vain when Hussein's regime is long gone and most of its former leaders, now including Hussein himself, are either in custody or dead. Saddam was a cruel, ruthless dictator--and a murderer. He's made his own people suffer. If that isn't justification for war, I don't know what is. I could elaborate on this point and list the terrible things he?s done, but it'd be a waste of time. It'd just be overlooked anyway--as it already has. I will admit it is true that a stable democracy remains far from realized. I know that while rebuilding is under way, Iraq remains torn by a violent insurgency, political gridlock and economic underperformance. But, with this in mind, people need to realize that there will be no quick exit from Iraq. A lot has been accomplished; a lot remains to be done. How anyone can ignore this simple logic is beyond me. Do you expect a devastated nation to magically heal itself immediately following the capture of one individual? Don't be silly. Some of you are the last people in the world who should be commenting on the issue at all. It's obvious. Which leads me to my next point. Iraq will [i]not[/i] revert back to a dictatorship. That's possibly the most ignorant comment I've read. But, considering the thread it's located in, I won't commit to that statement. lol Do you really believe the world would allow such a thing to happen after all that's occurred? Give me a break. Despite the kaleidoscope of problems Iraq is facing, their council has already proposed a series of nationwide caucuses to choose members of a new transitional assembly which will in turn choose a new interim government. Here is further proof: [quote][b]According to the data, Iraqis overwhelmingly agree on the importance of free and fair elections (87% very important, 8% somewhat important), that people should abide by the law and that criminals should be punished (90% very important, 4% somewhat important), that groups should share power in government (89% important for ethnic groups, 87% important for religious groups), that Iraqis should have the right to criticize their government (86% very or somewhat important), that media should report without government censorship (78%), and that there should be equal rights for women (50% very important, 21% somewhat important).[/b][/quote] Here's the point everyone should embrace: Saddam's capture was an important symbol. He was found in a hole, a mess of a man, hiding like the people who were forced to live in fear of [i]him[/i] and his regime. He was reduced to the cowardly rat he truly is. His capture is a great victory to those who endured a living hell because of him. Having said that, it's time to close this thread. It's become far too ridiculous for me to allow it to continue. Let's face it--we can't have a discussion when most of the people involved have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. Although I'm weary about doing away with this because of the possibility of new information presenting itself, I see no other choice. Sad.

The teaser was killer; I personally thought it was well done. Obviously, the computer rendering for special stunts is glaringly noticeable--but not more so than any of the [i]Matrix[/i] movies. And, it was used only for the most extreme of stunts from what I remember. The plot, in general, was surprisingly strong in the last Spiderman film. I don't understand how anyone can complain; it was one of the best big-screen adaptations of a comic book I've seen. Of course, there were some flaws, such as the adsence of Spider-Man's first girlfriend, but it didn't [i]ruin[/i] the experience for me. Every character was casted extremely well and it moved along at a nice pace. I don't expect any less from [i]Spider-Man 2[/i].

I have odd sleeping patterns as well! I have an odd habit of blacking out at night only to wake up the next morning. It's [i]scary[/i]. Watch me shudder. :nervous: Typically, I enjoy passing out in the early morning hours and waking up just before noon; lunch is a nifty way to start the day. Mornings are overrated. They're so boring! There's absolutely nothing to keep me occupied. Of course, work and school interfere with that ideal routine. As a matter of fact, those nuisances have forced me to adapt to an early-morning schedule lately. Because of final exams, I've had to force myself out of bed at six in the morning only to hit the books immediately. Knowledge for breakfast--and short-term knowledge at that. Now with all that over, I'll probably enjoy a good month's worth of sleeping before suffering through the adaptation process once again when the spring semester begins. But, until then, it'll be nice abandoning the bleary-eyed grizzly bear attitude I've adopted recently. No more pawing away at the dawn for me. No sir!

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by locke [/i] [B]when is the contest gonna be over? [/B][/QUOTE] Okay, try reading please. It helps. [quote][b]I will close the competition over the weekend -- probably Sunday afternoon/evening. So, you guys don't have very long to get in gear and come up with something. The winner will be credited in a site announcement, when chosen.[/b][/quote]

Here's mine. I hope I win. Yep, may as well close the thread right now.

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jinzouningen17 [/i] [B]Future #2: About the same as the one above, except instead of Trunks being able to try and save the world, he is killed by Cell and has his time machine stolen, thus no one lives except for the Jinzouningens in this timeline. [/B][/QUOTE] Actually, I'm sure that Trunks had already somehow defeated and destroyed them in this timeline (Cell said as much). That's why Cell needed to steal Trunks's time machine and travel to the past in the first place. :cool: You see, Trunks had already traveled to the past and trained for the battle with the Jinzouningens. But, because the Z senshi were unfamiliar with Cell in this timeline, Trunks hadn't trained to the extent he had in the third future you mentioned. He probably wasn't an ascended Saiya-jin. Which explains why Cell was able to dispose of him so easily in his incomplete form.