James

[color=#811C3A]Erm, yeah...he wasn't a hero in the sense that he went around and killed bad guys. He was a hero because he overcame "the use of the sword" and utilised a peaceful solution. I think that opinions can be wrong, in the sense that you may not have totally understood the film and its purpose. But if you don't like it, you don't like it. Sometimes understanding it more helps you to at least appreciate it more -- but even then, you may not get enjoyment from it. It's a bit like Shakespeare. I don't really enjoy reading Shakespeare at all -- but I appreciate the exquisite language and detail apparent in his plays. So I can appreciate it, but I may not actually enjoy it in terms of entertainment. Note: Chill. It's just a discussion. When someone responds or disagrees, it doesn't necessarily mean they're flaming you. But at the same time, people are allowed to dislike things, even if they may not totally understand them. Let's be mature, people. ^_^[/color]

[color=#811C3A]Okay, thanks to everyone for signing-up. I'm going to be closing sign-ups soon, so if anyone has anything to change/add/etc, please do so promptly. Just a note to Wondershot about your character, bear in mind that Reploids are not biological. They are synthetic. So, if your character is able to produce a biological substance internally, he presumably wouldn't be drawing from his own internal biological structure -- but perhaps generating such material could reduce his energy in some other way (ie: it takes a certain amount of processing power to create even simple biological material, so this may make him tired). I only mention that because there are some reasonably strong dividers between what is and isn't possible in the world of Maverick Hunters. So I'm really just trying to give you a way to explain what you've chosen, without actually having you change your choice. I'll post a list of those who were successful very soon. [b]Edit:[/b] Please be aware that the names for certain things have changed as per the RPG's B-Spec nature. The changes are as follows: [b]Sygnosis 40 Virus[/b] is now known as [b]X-Virus[/b]. [b]Sygnosis X[/b] is now known as [b]X-Hunters[/b]. [b]Cyan[/b] is now known as [b]Auricom[/b]. These changes have been made to bring this RPG a little more in-line with the two older versions (for example, Maverick Hunters and X-Hunters will work together in some missions, potentially).[/color]

[color=#811C3A]In terms of presents, the only thing I want for Christmas is that new Matrix box set. Yum. That'll keep me going for a while, lol. Other than that, there isn't much else. There are a bunch of games I'd really like to buy, but I'll get to those eventually. There are just too many for little ol' me to afford. Thank god Nintendo DS isn't out here yet, because that'd be yet another thing I can't afford.[/color]

[QUOTE=Lore][size=1] If... male + female is the defining criterion for marriage, as many people make it out to be, then any incestual (or otherwise, there have been other examples in this thread) relationship is okay. [/size][/QUOTE] [color=#811C3A]Exactly. This is why the slippery slope argument doesn't work. I could say to you "You can't have marriage between a man and a woman, because that would open the floodgates for fathers marrying daughters, uncles marrying nieces and brothers marrying sisters." So really, this kind of logic could chase its tail all day. As human beings, surely we have the ability to make key distinctions (as has been made about beastiality and so on -- the comparison there is something I actually find quite shocking). I just wanted to make that addition, because I think that you have really understood one of the key problems I have with that type of argument.[/color]

[QUOTE=Boba Fett][color=green]This whole slippery slope thing... What about marriages that last weeks, even some as brief as days? Marriages in Las Vegas that take place while everyone involved is drunk? Wouldn't you think such marriages are just as problematic, if not much more so, than a stable homosexual marriage? And while we're talking about marriage and government, since when does the government "marry" people? I thought church and state were separate. If people don't support gay marriage in their nation, that's their prerogative. However, they should attempt to follow their own constitution and the guidelines for government that it lays out.[/color][/QUOTE] [color=#811C3A]Yes, thank you. I don't buy the "slippery slope" argument at all. Nobody is talking about having family members marry or polygamy or anything. All we're talking about are two consenting adults, who are in a stable relationship, who want the same rights that other couples have. That's a pretty simple concept. I mean, if marriage is between a man and a woman...what's stopping me marrying my sister? Or having a marriage of opportunity between myself and my female college roommate? The issues are all the same on both sides. In terms of government/church, marriage is definitely a religious event -- however, the purpose of marriage in society is primarily a legal one. If you get married in a church but the state doesn't recognize you at all and you have no legal benefits of marriage, then you might as well not be married (other than for the point of delcaring your commitment). See what I mean? So, whether it gets called "marriage" or "civil unions" or whatever -- gay people should be granted some of those basic legal rights. Again, I'm not asking for churches to recognize these unions, nor am I saying that churches should be responsible for marrying couples. The church doesn't need to be put in that position, as a religious institution. But the government should be looking out for everyone, to provide equal protections under the law. But really, I've mentioned all of the reasoning and logic behind my argument in previous threads. I think those of you who have followed those threads in the past have probably read those more detailed posts/reasonings. So yeah. I think this thread has actually generally gone very well, but at this point it's getting a bit repetitive. But I won't close it or anything, if you guys still want to discuss the topic. But I'm out, I think. I'll discuss it with you again in a few months. ~_^[/color]

[QUOTE=ThatOneOddDude] [spoiler] In the end, the king is spared. They could have left it at that. I would have still not liked it, but not hate it. Then the most horrible thig happened. The hero died. Dead. Gone. The king should have spared him! Or if he haldn't, the hero could have blocked the D@M# arrows![/spoiler] [/QUOTE] [color=#811C3A][spoiler]If he'd blocked the arrows, that would kinda have been ridiculous in the context of the story. From what I remember, the King didn't spare Jet Li (I forget his character's name), because sparing him would have diminished the King's position in the eyes of his court. As a result, he would not have been in a position to bring peace to China. Remember, Jet Li tells the King that he [i]doesn't[/i] want to assassinate him, because the King is the only man who can unite the different factions in China. This is why the scene is so tragic. It's like Anna and the King. The King wants to spare the hero -- but he is bound by his office not to do so. In other words, he really has no choice, because he has to follow a greater good.[/spoiler] In regard to the lake fight...I agree that it was a bit slow, but it was beautifully shot. It had a lot of meaning. [spoiler]I particularly loved the moment when he disregarded the battle to brush the water droplet off his lover's cheek. Although he was in a battle to the death, he still put himself at risk to ensure that his loved one -- his most prized treasure -- would remain comfortable and "perfect". The fact that Jet Li avoided hitting him was also great, it showed a strong sense of honor and a respect for their love.[/spoiler] So, yeah, the movie was slow in parts (and some people just won't like that regardless). But the slowness wasn't there for clumsy reasons or anything; it was a movie that had great philosophical significance, much of that significance being evident in the more subtle imagery.[/color]

[color=#811C3A]I only have one question. If the Government does not recognize a marriage, what makes it a marriage? At least, in a legal sense. I say that because the main reason for gay marriage to be pushed forward (other than the simple question of equality for all people) is to allow partners certain basic rights (ie: hospital visits, rights relating to the death of a spouse and so on). I mean, if a legal basis were to be created, I assume that the government should acknowledge it. I understand people not wanting the church to recognize it -- but the government is different. I'm sure the government probably recognizes a lot of things that people disagree with, but it does so as a matter of equal rights under the law. So I'd tend to make the distinction between government and church. If churches choose not to recognize such things, that's fine -- they're private institutions that are generally able to make their own rules and codes of conduct.[/color]

[QUOTE=Adahn][font=Courier New][size=2][color=blue][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]In every male-male homosexual act, one partner is active, and one is passive. One penetrates, and the other is penetrated. If you want to read more into it, I suggest Plato's [i]Symposium[/i]. If people are offended by what I say, I can't help that. I'm just basing my statements off of what I [i]know.[/i][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff][/color][/size][/font] [font=Courier New][size=2][color=#0000ff]I don't know how things are done today, and I don't care to know. The active/passive part of it, however, cannot be contradicted.[/color][/size][/font][/QUOTE] [color=#811C3A]o_O;; So you are now defining the sexual acts that EVERY homosexual couple undertakes? That is highly, [i]highly[/i] presumptuous. I guarantee you, not every homosexual relationship involves either penetration or clearly defined active/passive roles. That's yet another stereotype and it isn't even being presented here with very much of a purpose. Even if it were true, there's no real point to it. I think that DarkOtakuBoy said it best -- people shouldn't be judged based on their sexuality (just as I wouldn't judge a straight couple for doing something "kinky" in their bedroom or whatever), or their race, or their nationality or whatever else. They should be judged on their character first and foremost. I think that regardless of people's views, that is surely something people will agree on, at a basic level.[/color]

[color=#811C3A]Cool stuff, sweetreyes. You're more than welcome if you're still interested in the RPG. Thanks to everyone for their continued support -- this chapter will end soon, and then we'll be introducing The Daughter.[/color]

[quote name='ScirosDarkblade]James I'm [i]FROM[/i'] the USSR. I was born there, and my parents spent most of their life there. China was "our own backyard" even more so than it is yours. Don't try to measure credibility by proximity.[/quote] [color=#811C3A]I only mention it because Australia has a very large Chinese population. And I've never heard any of them lable China as anything other than Communist -- it is commonly accepted that China is a Communist state, in this region of the world, at least. Nobody is saying that China practices "pure Communism" or whatever you want to call it -- but no country really practices "pure Capitalism" either -- modern democracies such as Australia and the United States have some socialist elements to them, at least in ideological terms (if not direct economic terms, hence the welfare systems in both nations). China's subversion of the "capitalist class" is part of what dictates their Communist government agenda. You only have to talk to residents of Hong Kong to get a clear indication of that.[/color] [quote=ScirosDarkblade] The bottom line here is that communism was never practiced. The only "form" that was, was the definition (b) form, which is socialism with a communist ideology. But in practice that is socialism, not communism. Communism is a socioeconomic condition, and it is the existence of [i]that[/i] that is in question. Not the ideology.[/quote] [color=#811C3A]As I've mentioned, Communism could be considered an extension of Socialism. My point is that when people label China as Communist, they are [i]not[/i] incorrect -- there is a significant element of truth in that statement, particularly if you talk to dissidents who have been expelled from the country due to their "class", or their social status, particularly as it relates to being a perceived threat to the Communist Party.[/color] [quote=ScirosDarkblade] James you know there is mutual respect here. I don't know what you saw as blatant rudeness, but whatever, I can't even go back and check at this point. As for the "going to serve me well," unless you mean it as a threat don't even bother to mention it.[/QUOTE] [color=#811C3A]It's possible to debate without being rude. I felt that some of your comments were more than a little uncalled for -- it's possible to have a substantive debate without instantly being rudely dismissive of another's point of view. My point is that such behavior isn't compatible with what we desire to see at OtakuBoards. So, if you want to continue debating/discussing here, I expect you to demonstrate a reasonable level of respect for others. That's all I'm saying -- and it applies to everyone, not just yourself.[/color]

[QUOTE=Sciros Darkblade] James don't argue with me on this. It's not incorrect. The government called itself socialist. It's not a mistake on my part nor is the USSR an improper name. How the heck can you tell me that the USSR was not socialist? [/quote] [color=#811C3A][b]Edit:[/b] Apologies, but I clicked "Edit" on your post, rather than "Quote". V_V If you'd like to edit and earlier post of yours with your earlier response, please feel free to do so. Okay, let's clear this up a little bit. Firstly, I am not trying to argue that Socialism and Communism do not overlap. Socialism and Communism have many similarities -- but they are different, physically and ideologically. Communists essentially believe that when the working class and its allies are in a position to do so, they must fundamentally change the character of the state. That is, a "Capitalist class", which reigns over a worker class is replaced by a "worker class", which regins over the Capitalist class. The goal is to essentially destroy a Capitalist class to create a classless society. The key here is that Communism cannot be built from existing Capitalist systems. In order for Communism to function, the old economic machinery needs to be destroyed and replaced. Critically, the old ruling class must be given no opportunity to have a voice or power in society -- that group is to be resisted wherever it rises. Socialism is slightly different. Socialism doesn't go quite as far as Communism -- it is possible to maintain the machinery of the Capitalist state. Socialists do not tend to view Capitalism in the same way as Communists. That is, they don't tend to view it as a system where the "Capitalist class" maintain a dictatorship over the working class (where Communists do). Instead, they view Capitalism as being a reasonable system, where its resources can be directed however the ruling group at the time wishes. Under this environment, it is not necessary to go out there and crush the old Capitalist class. Instead, Socialism can work within the boundaries of a Capitalist, democratic system, to make incremental change. Most critically, Communists applaud the Soviet Union. Why? Because they view it as the achievement of "true" Socialist ideals (as mentioned, Communism is more or less an extension of Socialism). Whereas [i]true socialists[/i] tend to condemn the Soviet Union, because it hasn't actually built the ideal kind of Socialism that they are looking for. It has, instead, moved much closer to being a Communist state (particularly during Stalin's reign -- and particularly if you compare it to states like China). So, I think you probably could argue that the USSR never practiced Communism -- however, you could also argue the opposite. If you look at the USSR's political structure (particularly its violent system of re-education), you could argue that there was a consistent attempt to avoid the old "ruling class" from returning to power. China is an even more clear example -- China is definitely a Communist state, with the Communist Party as its government. I don't know what Chinese you've been talking to, but any Chinese people I've ever known (and there are a hell of a lot in my country), regard China as a Communist state. In terms of Communism and its application, you only need to look at China's revolution, [i]particularly[/i] the burning of books and the imprisonment of intellectuals. Don't forget that Communism isn't just about the application of economic principles, it also involves a political ideology that actively attempts to subvert a perceived "Capitalist class". In all reality, this conversation could go on forever. It could go on forever because, as mentioned, Socialism and Communism are [i]almost[/i] one in the same. This is why it isn't terribly erroneous for people to use the word "Communism", even though it could be said that there are varying degrees of Communist elements in Socialist nations (and vice versa). I just want to be that much clearer, because I'm not some ignorant fool who is spouting off without knowing my facts. This is particularly true in the case of China, which is in my own backyard -- an American from the other side of the world, telling me that China is not a Communist state, simply doesn't ring true with me. Also, I would ask you to try and be a little less abrasive with your responses. If you're going to have a discussion with me (or anyone else), I espect a basic level of respect to be going on here. Lacing your posts with blatant rudeness is not going to serve you well here.[/color]

[color=#811C3A]Best chapter ever! I love the characterizations...and somehow I really love the inclusion of the Greek fisherman's cap. lol This chapter is particularly well written and it's really funny. It actually made me laugh to myself quite a few times, hehe. Excellent work. ^_^[/color]

[color=#811C3A]I agree with what you're saying -- but only to a certain extent. The whole "only wanting things to go their way" describes Israel as much as it describes Palestine. Afterall, it's only now that Israel is actually withdrawing settlements...and doing that requires both political parties to form a coalition government, simply to get the bill passed. So, even in the political sphere, it's practically impossible for the governing party to have such legislation passed. And yet, the withdrawal of settlements is really quite a small aspect of what would be a comprehensive peace plan. I mean, it's controversial in Israel (for some), but it's far less controversial than the question of Jerusalem, for example. I will say one thing, though. I'm really happy that Marwan Barghouti (apologies if his name is spelled incorrectly, I'm forgetting the spelling at this late hour) has withdrawn his bid for president of the PLO and has stated that he is backing Abbas. Abbas is a moderate and although he's not the most charismatic man on Earth (he could probably make a sloth die of boredom), he is at least moderate and very interested in democracy and legitimate government. So, that's a positive sign for things to come.[/color]

[QUOTE=Zeta]But yet the Palestinians had a chance for peace, and they didn't take it. [/QUOTE] [color=#811C3A]My understanding (upon having read more about it) is that the deal in 2000 actually ignored several key issues (Jerusalem and refugees in particular). We always hear about the "90%" of land that was being offered to Arafat...but I almost view that as a side issue. I think the question of borders is really not something that couldn't be negotiated somewhat easily (relatively speaking). You have to realize that had Arafat accepted the deal, he would most likely have faced armed opposition by some groups at home. Had a conflict occurred, it may have even sparked a civil war. Having said that, I think that Arafat's refusal to accept the deal was a disappointment. But we have to keep this in context -- there are reasons why the deal wasn't accepted, some legitimate, some not legitimate. You could argue that he should have "done the right thing" regardless of the pressure...but if that pressure threatens a wider conflict, it becomes a more difficult question. Bear in mind, I'm not even saying that Arafat didn't accept the deal for unselfish reasons -- I know that he's as big a corrupt political opportunist as someone like Saddam Hussein. However, we should take care not to simplify the issue. In regard to your comments, I can only once again repeat that the Israeli government dishes out terrible punishments to Palestinean civilians (and many, many more innocent Palestineans die than Israelis). Again, I am not attempting to say that one side is "better" than another, or anything like that. Both sides are equally at fault -- you have extremists on both sides who don't want peace and who actively work against it. However, it's no good to simply list the atrocities of one side. Where you can talk about suicide bombing statistics, I can talk about military checkpoints, intimidation and mass abuse. It's a back-and-forth cycle. And peace can't be achieved until that cycle is broken. [/color]

[color=#811C3A]The thing is, "homosexual" is almost used erroneously here. I mean, we aren't really even talking about the sheer act of sex itself -- we're really talking about a whole relationship between two people. I mean, nobody would want their relationship and their rights to be devalued. Nor would they want to be treated unfairly and with inequity as a result of the way they are. I agree with you that some parades and stuff are really terrible PR for the "gay community" (which itself is a highly erroneous term -- gay people are not in some secret league or something, lol). The problem is that this stereotype is the view of all gay/bisexual people, but it doesn't really represent the majority -- and the majority are just regular people, they aren't running around waving banners in your face or something.[/color]

[color=#811C3A]I never really had any problems with the film's length. It goes for the pretty standard time -- it's definitely not a three hour saga, but that isn't always necessary. Actually, it felt like a long movie to me...perhaps this is because it had some very slow moments. But slow isn't necessarily bad; Hero does it well. In regard to everything else, the action is probably on bar with Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. The only thing is that the action is a little bit more "artistic", for lack of a better word (as in, we often get more of a focus on slow motion movements and close-ups and so on). However, the colours really works to its advantage, in the sense that it provides a gorgeous context for many of the battles. The story, like Crouching Tiger, isn't particularly complicated or anything. I mean, I'd go so far as to say that it's a bit of a no-brainer. However, it's nonetheless a beautiful story -- as just about all Chinese legends are. It focuses on the beauty of small and great things alike. So, it definitely comes recommended from me, but primarily if you enjoy Chinese films. If you didn't like Crouching Tiger at all, it'll be tougher to get into Hero (although I think I did prefer Hero in the end).[/color]

[color=#811C3A]Primarily, I'm just glad that this trial is over as a result of the insane media coverage of it. I can't help but wonder how many other things have gone uncovered due to this trial. Anyway, I don't really care much about the verdict, except to say that I don't think death is harsh enough. It's painless and the easy way out. I'd rather have him rot in prison for his entire life, with everything that it brings (ie: the violence and other things). At least that'd give him a taste of what he did to his poor wife and son.[/color]

[QUOTE=Chabichou][color=#004a6f]Israeli soldiers have the choice to keep their guns pointed away from civilians. It doesn't take that much hand eye coordination you know! All I keep seeing in photos is Israelis pointing thier guns at women with their children. What's the point of that? They purposely pull the trigger too. Israelis kill civilians on puropse. Well I say to them: Sorry, jerks, you're gonna recieve some sort of retaliation! As for talking it out, it's happened before. Everytime, it was Israeli soldiers who broke the peace by killing civilians.[/color][/QUOTE] [color=#707875]Absolutely. It's useless for anyone to try and pin the blame exclusively on one side. Do I agree with suicide bombing? Hell no. Not only is indiscriminate killing of civilians something I abhor, but it [i]hurts [/i]the Palestinean people and perpetuates the violence. Do I agree with the horrible treatment of the Palestineans by the Israeli government (note the word "government")? Again, hell no. It fuels anger, hatred and hostility. It creates an environment for new terrorists to be generated. It adds legitimacy to suicide bombers in the eyes of many Palestineans, which is an awful state of affairs. So, to suggest that both sides are not at fault (I mean in general), is absolutely false. And it really doesn't help the issue. That's why totally impartial negotiators are always required for these two sides to deal with each other.[/color]

[color=#707875]My opinion is primarily that homosexuality is vastly misunderstood. And like anything that is misunderstood, the first reaction is fear and/or hate. In terms of whether people actually "agree" with it or not...it's a bit like the sky being blue. It's there. It is what it is. I think that each individual simply has to choose how they deal with that. People can disagree with homosexuals or the so-called "homosexual lifestyle" (which I suppose just means two men or two women being in a relationship), but they can choose whether or not they allow that opinion to actually colour the way they treat people. Or, indeed, whether they want that personal prejudice to be the catalyst for denial of rights or whatever the case may be. I have respect for those who don't approve of homosexuality but who do not allow that prejudice to actually negatively impact the way they treat others. I think that's very important. I also think it's important to acknowledge that someone's relationship (their love for each other) is as legitimate and real as the love that exists between two heterosexual people. As I've said before, nobody can really choose who to fall in love with. And for me, that concept really lies at the heart of the issue. Whether people are born homosexual or become homosexual is kind of irrelevant at this point. People can't consciously choose who to be attracted to, or who to fall in love with...so, should they choose to have a same-sex partner, it's really their own choice. It shouldn't warrant abuse, or unequal treatment in society. I mean, I know that when I've had a relationship end...I'd love to just switch off my feelings for that person and say "Okay, as of this second, I no longer love them. End of story." But think about how ridiculous that sounds. The fact is, we [i]can't [/i]control emotions in that manner. The only question is how we deal with those emotions. So, that's my view. Regardless of people's opinions on sexuality (and matters of sex in general), I am pleased that the majority of people here are still willing to be fair and reasonable in their behavior toward people, regardless of their gender or sexual orientation. At the end of the day, kindness to others doesn't hurt and can go a long way.[/color]

[QUOTE=ScirosDarkblade]NO. The Chinese Communist Party and the USSR's Communist Party both had communism in their names, but that doesn't mean that's what the government was. James, do you know what Socialism IS? Because if you did, then you'd know that [i]that[/i] was what you saw in the USSR, China, etc. And trust me, that's what they called it. The Union of Soviet ... SOCIALIST... Republics = USSR. Don't derive the type of government from the name of a political party, lol. They didn't call what they were [i]doing[/i] communism. They called what they [i]strived[/i] for, communism. That's a very significant difference, because THE REALITY was socialism. The GOAL was communism. They put it on a pedestal. They did things "in the name" of communism. But that doesn't make it the socioeconomic state. Communism never existed. Ever.[/QUOTE] [color=#707875]That's incorrect. The USSR's name is a bit like "Democratic Republic of _____". Many countries have a name like that, but aren't exactly democracies. Let's look at the actual dictionary meanings for each term. [b]Communism:[/b] [list=1] [*]A theoretical economic system characterized by the collective ownership of property and by the organization of labor for the common advantage of all members. [*]A system of government in which the state plans and controls the economy and a single, often authoritarian party holds power, claiming to make progress toward a higher social order in which all goods are equally shared by the people. [/list][b]Socialism: [/b] [list=1] [*]Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy. [/list]These are obviously more general terms. The dictionary also defines Socialism as being "between" Communism and Capitalism (which is true). So, let's look at 1b in particular. 1b is the system of Communism that both the Soviet Union and the People's Republic had adopted. China is definitely a Communist nation, founded on Communist ideals. Again, the "Communist Party" was founded with that name for a reason. Obviously China has made progress which has moved it closer to a Capitalist system. However, it is definitely not Socialist -- while individuals are able to own property and assets in China, the Chinese government still maintains strong controls and restrictions on such ownership.[/color]

[color=#707875]Yeah. It was definitely communism -- the Chinese Communist Party has that name for a reason. lol I'm not really arguing that communism is a good thing. Actually, I agree with both DeathBug and Alex. Communism is really unworkable in practice, as we've seen time and time again. My point is that the concept of communism is just a concept -- it's worthy of discussion. So I think it's fine (and probably healthy) to have a debate about the intellectual side of it.[/color]

[color=#707875][b]Name:[/b] Zaeon P. Carter [b]Callsign:[/b] Auricom [b]Age:[/b] 28 Natural Years [b]Appearance:[/b] [img]http://www.killing-bill.com/images/james/cyan.jpg[/img] [b]Personality:[/b] Auricom is a born leader. Both his mother and father were highly independent people, with commanding roles in Novus Concordia's society. And Auricom is the result. Whilst he has the ability to lead others, he is not without a sensitive side. When the time calls for it, Auricom has the ability to put emotion over logic. But generally, Auricom is a clear thinker who sees things in a very three dimensional way. He values friendship and loyalty above most else, though he does tend to put the mission at hand before his own personal needs. Auricom is, by nature, a servant of a higher cause -- in this case, the NC Defence Department. He tends to feel somewhat useless if he is without a cause to defend. [b]Biography:[/b] Auricom is, as mentioned above, a result of his family history. Auricom's father is Proteus Carter II. His famous name comes from his father, P-180. As we know from Novus Concordia's history, P-180 served the Maverick Hunters for many years of his life. And after that, he became a renound neurosurgeon. Proteus became dedicated to the preservation of life, rather than the destruction of it. In a sense, he had always lived up to his basic sense of duty, despite the original intentions surrounding his creation. When Proteus left the Defence Department to become a civilian, he took on the last name "Carter", which was a name that had been held by one of his greatest human friends, who had died several years earlier. While studying at the University of Novus Concordia, Proteus fell in love with a striking young woman named Elena Novus Carter. Elena was only just beginning her career in the world of defence -- she was, quite literally, a missile scientist. Elena was researching ballistics and advanced anti-gravitational technology. Proteus and Elena fell in love almost instantly and over the coming years, they decided to have a child. This was, of course, impossible. Proteus was a Reploid and Elena was a human being. However, new advances in robotics technology allowed Proteus and Elena to "create" a specifically-engineered child, one which took on their combined traits. Their child -- a new generation Reploid male -- was simply named, Proteus Carter II. Proteus Carter II, like his parents, became a scientist. His mother died when he turned 50. She had died from a rare disease that had attacked her neurological system. This was partly what drove Proteus Carter II's father to the field of neurosurgery. Eventually, Proteus Carter died. His son, Proteus Carter II, took up work within the defence department only five years later. And while working there, he encountered his future wife, with who he had Zaeon Proteus Carter. For years, Zaeon Proteus Carter has worked in various areas of the Defence Department. He never liked the desk jobs, though, and when offered the chance to head a special new unit (X-Hunters), he gladly accepted. X-Hunters was established in the underground of Proteus Carter II's expansive estate in New Hokkaido, on the outskirts of the city. Proteus Carter II was killed by the X-Virus just after the establishment of the X-Hunters facility. There are rumors that the creators of the virus knew of his involvement and deliberately targetted him. (Note: New Hokkaido is Japan's capital city in the current time. It is where Proteus Carter II moved after his wife's death. The estate that he owned was also owned by Proteus Carter, which is why it is now being used by Zaeon. The Reploids who are working for X-Hunters are recruited from various places in the world and for various reasons -- some worked within the United Nations, while others worked within the UN Defence Department and were sourced in that way.) [b]Affiliation:[/b] X-Hunters. [b]Primary Weapon:[/b] Twin Pheyton Blasters. Pheyton is a powerful plasma-like substance, which can be highly explosive upon impact. In addition, Auricom's highly accurate aim and physical agility allow him to operate the weapons with a strong sense of control. [b]Secondary Weapon:[/b] Retractable Beam Sabre. [b]Defensive Capability:[/b] Teleportation. Auricom is capable of limited teleportation. His synthetic body enables his action, though it requires large reserves of physical energy. In addition, Auricom cannot teleport long distance. For the most part, he relies purely on his physical agility to avoid dangerous situations. [/color]

"I'm afraid you don't have any choice," said Mr. Wada, as he busily shuffled various legal papers. "The only thing you can do is confess and perhaps the court will be leniant." Jamie Kidd sat across from his lawyer, who was trying to make the best of a bad situation. Jamie, as he would soon discover, was only the second non-Japanese inmate at the infamous Fuchu prison. But he was nonetheless one of many who had been arrested in recent months, as a result of a crack-down on violent crime. He had spent a good deal of time in the city of Yokohama, which had been kind to him, as a result of its unquenchable thirst for almost any kind of illegal substance. Western businessmen had been highly successful in the city; many of them were ostensibly running generic import businesses that had flourished due to Japan's hunger for foreign products in recent years. Jamie's ethnicity had only made matters worse for him. Although it had been an asset for making money, it had become a liability when in custody. Even the Japanese courts seemed to be stacked against foreigners, as they'd been targeted as being the source of Japan's recent crimewave. Mr. Wada filed the papers away and leaned his elbows against the cheap metal table that sat between them. "You will be here for at least a month, until your next appearance in court," he said, as a stern expression crept across his face. "Will you be okay?" Jamie's eyes roamed across the walls and ceiling. The room was almost entirely non-descript, apart from the gruff-faced guard who was standing by the doorway. His uniform was so bland and dull, however, that he almost appeared to blend into the walls completely. "I'll manage," said Jamie. After a shower and a humiliating full-body search, Jamie was now one of them, or as close to being one of them as was possible. The guard from the interview room was walking behind him, as he carried his bedding down a claustrophobic hallway that was lined with cells on either side. Various inmates howled and spat at Jamie as he walked past. He knew that these men were thinking one of two things; either they viewed him as fresh meat, or as a lowly foreigner who would need to be put in his place as soon as possible. Either way, Jamie knew that it would be impossible to avoid a confrontation, it was going to happen sooner or later. Jamie had been in prison before; he'd been an inmate in Australia's infamous Pentridge men's prison. It was a high security prison, which had existed for well over one hundred years. He'd built up quite a reputation at home, which was partly why he finally chose to make the move to Japan. And now, he was finally in his own cell at Fuchu. Jamie had to double-take. He'd actually been given a cell to himself. He was unsure whether this was a result of his reputation, or whether he'd simply gotten lucky. But it was good news, it meant that there would be no confrontation on his first night. That night, Jamie lay on his bed, wearing his prison-issue pants and a white singlet. He couldn't sleep. Memories of his life up until that point were flooding into his mind. Upon moving to Japan, Jamie had felt that his life had finally settled down, that he'd reached a point where it would no longer be necessary to struggle. He'd struggled as a child, with abusive family members, and he'd struggled as a teenager who society had seemingly forgotten. And now, here he was, in one of Japan's most brutal prisons. A sense of hopelessness crept over Jamie, as he lay there in silence. Three of the walls in his cell were brick and were covered with scratches and nicks from sharp objects. Each scratch was a record of a murder, a rape, or a man who had gone insane with fear and despair. Jamie's only escape was sleep. His eyelids began to close, as he drifted off to a place that he could only hope would be better than where he was. But then he heard a sound. Its origin was definitely close by, perhaps a couple of cells away. Jamie's eyes snapped open and he listened intently. He could hear long, deep breaths and short, sharp breaths at the same time. Jamie sat up on the end of his bed, right near the bars and the hallway. He produced a small, orange package from his pocket. "Fuck, only one more," he grumbled to himself, as he lit up the cigarette. He took a long drag and turned his attention to the cell opposite. As a thick plume of smoke billowed out through the bars, into the hallway, he could see two very faint figures in the cell. It was only now that he noticed that the inmates were not asleep in their beds -- they were on the floor. At first, Jamie shrugged it off as being little more than two inmates who were lonely and trying to escape the horror of Fuchu in their own way. But then he saw a hand reach out from the darkness and grab one of the metal bars. Its knuckles were white. He then heard a deep voice, with a thick Japanese accent. "Be quiet," it grunted. A larger, darker hand, presumably belonging to the inmate with the deep voice, grabbed the other inmate's wrist and dragged it back into the darkness. The breathing intensified. One set of breathing remained constant and deep, while the other sounded more desperate...more terrified. Jamie sat closer to the bars of his cell and squinted. He could barely see the two figures, one much larger than the other. For a brief moment, as the larger figure's body lurched forward, Jamie noticed a tattoo on his shoulder: three snakes, intertwined, spelling the word "love". And suddenly, Jamie knew who this man was. Doppo Horigome was well known inside Fuchu. Mr. Wada had warned Jamie about Horigome and his taste for westerners when the pair had been travelling to Fuchu in the back of a police car. Horigome was the most powerful man in the prison and he commanded tremendous respect and fear from the other inmates. Jamie knew that if he were to survive in Fuchu, it would be necessary to become a feared man. The most logical way to do this would be to take out Horigome. Although it wouldn't be easy, Jamie knew that it was the only way to secure his safety in the longterm. Nobody would fuck with any man who could take down Horigome. "Having fun?" asked Jamie, as he slowly puffed away on his cigarette. He spoke in a normal tone, without regard for those prisoners who were sleeping. In fact, he suspected that many of them were probably awake -- they were either getting off on the sounds they heard from the cell opposite, or were listening in fear, waiting for their turn with Horigome. Either way, Jamie wanted them to hear the exchange. The panting in the cell opposite continued for a moment and then everything went quiet. Jamie heard the deep voice once more, speaking in English. "Who said that?" Jamie tapped on one of the bars with his knuckle. "I did." Rustling could be heard from the cell. Horigome was hastily putting his uniform back on, no doubt. Jamie couldn't see the other prisoner, but he could hear the rusty squeak of a prison cot. He thought that the other prisoner must have crept away to his own bed, to the promise of escaping into his dreams. Finally, Horigome emerged from the darkness. He was wearing prison trousers, but was shirtless. He stood at the bars of his cell and glared at Jamie with a menacing stare. Jamie continued smoking his cigarette. He puffed smokey rings into the air, without looking at Horigome. "Another Gaijin," said Horigome with a haughty laugh. This time he spoke in Japanese, perhaps assuming that Jamie would not be able to understand him. Once again, Jamie did not regard Horigome by making eye contact. He continued to focus on his cigarette. "I've heard that you have a taste for gaijin," said Jamie. Horigome laughed to himself. This comment seemed to disarm him somewhat; perhaps he thought that Jamie was propositioning him. "You speak Japanese? Good. I like it when they can tell me how much they want it." Jamie grinned. "Your partner didn't seem too happy just now." Horigome laughed again. "My partner? No. Mickey isn't anyone's partner, he's just a piece of dirt that we pass around between us. He's nothing special at all, but at least he can get me off before I sleep." "I see," said Jamie. Horigome leaned against the bars of his cell and looked Jamie up and down. "Maybe you should join me in here, you look like you'd be good at a few things..." For the first time, Jamie turned to look at Horigome. "Maybe I should sneak into your cell one night, while you're sleeping, and force you to lay on the cold floor underneath me. Would you like that?" Horigome's grin faded. "It is your first night in Fuchu and you are already making powerful enemies." Jamie took a final drag on his cigarette and butted it out on one of the bars. "No, I just don't like rapists, especially rapists as ugly as yourself. It doesn't surprise me that you need to force them; no sane man would make the choice." At this, Horigome snarled. "You just sealed your fate, gaijin," he said. "Tomorrow, in the court yard, I'm going to punish you. And then you'll regret such insolence." Horigome then disappeared into the darkness. Jamie woke suddenly. His thick black hair was matted across his forehead. It was a recurring dream, which Jamie had been having for years. This was the result of being a sexually abused child and now Jamie was used to being woken by these dreams. The cell block was now even darker than it had been before. Moonlight filtered in through the various small openings in the walls, giving Jamie just enough light to see the corridor beyond his own cell. Again, he sat up at the end of his bed. In a matter of hours, he'd be fighting Horigome in the courtyard, in a battle that would most likely end in the death of one of them. He was angry at himself for not being able to sleep, as he knew how important it would be to maintain his energy. Horigome was enormous and it would take every ounce of skill to defeat him. Jamie sat close to the bars and lay his head against them. "Hey..." He heard a quiet voice nearby. It was coming from the opposite cell, but it wasn't Horigome. Jamie looked up and saw a man sitting on the floor, his back resting against the cold brick wall of the cell. As Jamie had earlier suspected, the man was indeed caucasian. He was relatively tall, with a slight frame. His brown hair was short and neat. He looked across at Jamie with large, deep brown eyes. "Hey...you're the new guy, aren't you?" asked the man. Jamie nodded. "Aren't you worried that he'll wake up?" The man looked over into the darkness and shook his head. "No. When Doppo sleeps, he's asleep". "I'm sorry about before," began Jamie awkwardly. "I--" Before Jamie could finish, the man interrupted. "It's okay. I'm used to it. It didn't take me long to just accept it. The more I try to convince myself that I'm better than that, the more depressing this place becomes." Jamie looked down at the floor. "Nobody deserves that," he said. "Horigome is an arrogant prick who needs to be taught a lesson." The man smiled slightly. Jamie glanced at him and then returned his gaze to the floor. "What's your name?" he said. "I'm Joshua. But I have a few nicknames in here..." "Nice to meet you, Joshua," said Jamie. Joshua's smile grew ever so slightly. Nobody in the prison had ever used his real name. For a moment, the two were silent. "Sorry for being so quiet," said Joshua, "I don't know what to talk about." "I hope I'm not keeping you awake," said Jamie. Joshua shook his head. "No, I can't sleep anyway. Besides, after tomorrow I may not be able to talk to you anymore." "I'll be okay," said Jamie. Joshua reached into his pocket and produced a small orange-yellow package. He held it up and flicked it between the bars, at Jamie's cell. Jamie reached out between the bars and grabbed it. "Heh, Red Apple. My favourite brand," he said. "You can have them," said Joshua, "I only use cigarettes to trade in here. There are a couple left. I overheard you earlier when you ran out, so I figured you could use them." "Thanks," said Jamie as he took one out and lit it up. "You're a lifesaver." "If you beat Doppo tomorrow, you'll have done more for me than you could ever imagine," said Joshua. Jamie breathed rings of smoke into the air in front of his face. "Don't worry, Joshua. I'll protect you from the rest of them."

[color=#707875]Well, we are missing Hattori Hanzo. And I consider him to be an important character. What's worse is that ColourDeaf's sign-up was so good -- it suited the character that I had in mind. So...bah. I really don't know what to do at the moment. I have to go through the sign-ups again and see what I can come up with.[/color]

[color=#707875]It's coming. Apologies, but I've been very busy. I don't want to rush a post out simply for the sake of it. Besides, I think I'm owed a little time, considering that I've been very generous with others. Part of the problem is also that someone has dropped out (well, they are simply missing) and that could be an issue. So I have to try to sort out how to deal with that in future chapters.[/color]