James

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by cloricus [/i] [B] His comments on Australian Story about the girl being the one to make the advances on the other priest may have been true, but are [b]not[/b] the sort of thing that you say on national television, especially since the girl in question was under the age of consent. That was a bad call on his part, but not worth losing your job over. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]I don't think anyone can defend this at all. How can what he have said been true? Whether or not the girl made advances is utterly irrelevant -- for him to bring it up (and to suggest that [i]she[/i] was the cause of the relationship) is the most immature and damaging thing an adult of his position can possibly say. That alone indicated to me that, at the very least, he doesn't understand the dangers involved with child sex offences in the church. I do agree that his actions [i]during[/i] the course of his job were nothing to be fired over. And I also agree that the whole "he raped me" claim was absolutely bogus. Having said that, I don't think he should ever have been hired. And as soon as his failure to protect children became evident, he [i]should[/i] have been sacked immediately. There is no excuse for him continuing in his job after that revelation. What he did was nothing short of supporting a paedophile. And I don't know about you, but I [i]don't[/i] want my Governor General to be a paedophile supporter in any way. I mean, we can sit here and talk about technicalities (what he did or didn't do during his tenure), but to me that is irrelevant. It's also irrelevant to the majority of Australians. Most people wanted this guy to go because of what had been revealed about his past. I mean, we're not talking about some personal thing that he did in his private life here -- we're talking about a highly damaging act that was a massive breach of trust. It's only compounded by the fact that he was an archbishop. Basically, I don't think he should be the Governor General, regardless of the technical issues surrounding this story. I would rather see a prominent doctor (someone akin to Victor Chan) as the G-G. There are so many people in Australia who have done more for the community (and for the world) than Dr. Hollingworth. And those are the people who've missed out, ultimately. They deserve the chance this time around (and I'm sure Prime Minister Howard is considering several of them).[/color]

[color=#808080]Well, fan fiction was [i]never[/i] relpaced or discontinued. If you actually read the description of our Literature forum, you'll find that you can post any fan fiction in there. ^_^[/color]

[color=#808080]Hm, some of you are choosing rather obscure characters. I think we're kind of going for more well-known characters here. Oh well. [b]Character name:[/b] Mario [img]http://www.shineget.com/mariofly.gif[/img] [b]Reason for choosing character:[/b] I [i]love[/i] Mario. He's my digital father. How much more do I need to say? ~_^ [b]My knowledge of this character:[/b] I've been playing Mario since the arcade days. And I've played every Mario game religiously since that time (hell, I even played "Mario Teaches Typing" in school lol). So my knowledge is pretty extensive I'd say. Plus, I've [i]met[/i] Mario myself and seen him in action - I know his little quirks. ~_^[/color]

[color=#808080]Well, if you want to discuss the Governor General issue, you could always do that in the Otaku Lounge forum. That way, all Aussies can easily see it.[/color]

[color=#808080]Our rules do state that posts should be coherent. But moreover, we expect people to make an effort. Generally, we don't expect [i]perfect[/i] English and such. If we did, a lot of people wouldn't be here (as Semjaza pointed out). However, sometimes people post poorly (lack of punctuation/grammar/etc) simply because they're lazy. And they refuse any suggestion to improve their post quality -- or at least to post with more effort. I've noticed that a lot of people who start out with poor posting quality end up posting very well within a couple of months. That is, people who actually stick with it rather than give up. And I've spoken to some of those people over AIM - they seem to be pleased that OB encouraged them to improve on their English. So I don't think it's a [i]bad[/i] thing to encourage better posting quality all-round.[/color]

[color=#808080]I can only concur with what everybody else here has said. Obviously, most of you guys understand my reasoning. And I think, lik me, you're probably tired of these threads popping up every five seconds. It's not that we [i]shouldn't[/i] have these debates. It's that the very few who are prepared to have intelligent discussion are often bombarded with pointless posts from others. Neither I nor other Moderators have the time to sit through the thread and monitor every single issue. People start accusing others of being intolerant of religion, or intolerant of science or whatever. I wish the situation was different, but it's not. And right now, I'm not prepared (as with many others) to see these discussions pop up so frequently. It's not hard to find threads on evolution -- if you can't find them by searching, find them by going back over old pages. I guarantee it won't take you long to find something. In any case, I think the reasoning for this closure has been explained into the ground. Everybody pretty much understands the situation, I think.[/color]

[color=#808080]I remember watching a TV show about the children of gay parents. One guy was sitting in a feminine way and everyone assumed him to be gay. But he wasn't. He pointed out that in his household, the traditional male/female expectations were shattered. And thus, he was never bound by a particular social restraint (what it is or isn't acceptable for a man/woman to wear, etc). And I found that interesting. It singlehandedly proves that you can't really "act gay" or "act straight". Being butch as a male means nothing -- you could be the most rampant homosexual on the planet and be more butch than Arnie. lol At the same time, you could be very delicate and feminine yet still be completely heterosexual. Society tends to enforce these kind of "policies" about what is acceptable for men/women and what isn't. Basically, I don't think any of it matters. I've known gay people to be very masculine and straight people to be utterly feminine and wimpy. lol Really, it makes no difference. It's all down to the individual, not to the gender or sexuality.[/color]

[color=#808080]Basically, I think my response here is going to be pretty predictable, in the sense that we have had this very thread repeated on numerous occasions. The biggest problem facing threads such as this is that [i]very[/i] few people are greatly informed about the scientific/biological information surrounding evolution as well as the full account of creation from the bible. Thus, these discussions tend to become a circular back-and-forth. I am not saying that debates/discussions of this nature aren't allowed, but I'd like to have some kind of reasonable space between each resurgence. The most recent thread on evolution may not be in this first page, but I assure you that you'll find several by doing a search. And by doing a search, you'll be able to find quite a great breadth and depth of opinion and speculation on the subject. I apologize if anybody disagrees with my decision, but there are cases where I feel it's necessary to keep things more closely monitored. [/color]

[color=#808080]I'll just address each one point by point. 1) The regional forums are a good idea in principle, but I think that they'd be carving up forums like Otaku Lounge for no real reason. Regardless of geography, people are mostly going to be discussing the same things. So I don't think that geography should be the catalyst for these forums. 2) File sharing is, in principle, a good idea. However, it wouldn't work here. Why? Because if you're simply holding data on OtakuBoards and then transferring it, you're only using OB as a data transfer service; not as a communication tool. Remember, it's [i]posts[/i] and the words within them that are important. If we had a place where people just upload and download from various locations, there would be next to no discussion. Plus, the size of files that can be attached to OtakuBoards are limited at a certain point. These limits are imposed by us, so that reasonable amounts of our resources are being used. 3) The homework thing is the idea with the most potential. And some people have asked about homework in Otaku Lounge and such. However, I don't think I'd want to put this kind of feature on OtakuBoards -- I'm a bit worried about such an idea. I feel that some members spend plenty of time on OB as it is and so, using OB as a homework resource might only compound that. But that's not my major concern. People who use OB to find information can't always be sure that the information they're given is accurate. Afterall, you're relying on what others tell you as opposed to doing your own research. And in particular, the people who give you answers and advice are sort of "cloaked" by the Internet itself -- so there is really no accountability. You really can't be sure that you're getting sound information. Also, OtakuBoards is really more of an entertainment destination. If kids are going to be studying and doing homework, OtakuBoards should probably be switched off while they work. I'm sure parents would prefer it if kids were working with live teachers/tutors and doing their own research, rather than relying on the advice of people on a message board. That's a kind of longwinded response, but I hope it makes sense. I hope that you and others will continue to make suggestions, though. Believe me, I take them all into account and I'm always looking for something unique and innovative for OtakuBoards. So whether or not you're successful, it's worth putting the ideas out there anyway. You never know what might get picked up.[/color]

[color=#808080]I find that there is a lot of misconception about Nintendo going online. People come away with the impression that Nintendo simply doesn't [i]want[/i] to make online games and such. But it seems to me that Nintendo is making some very significant efforts to find a suitable way of going online (one that results in zero fees for the consumer). Satoru Iwata said that online gaming should be free - that you should only have to pay for the game and nothing else. That's the only option Nintendo sees for online gaming and thus, they have to find a way to make it profitable for themselves. But anyway, I can't say much more other than what Tony's already said. He summed it up pretty well I'd say. ^_^[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Voodookanaka [/i] [B]u registered in like v2 or sumfin, that gives me like more than 2 years longer than u (under names manga guy and manga man) One will be sure to only use the Queen's proper English from now on, ey' what? anyway this is way off topic, ill attach another pic i did, there skins from an old net game. i made them in the image of the royal flush gang off batman, heh. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]You have no idea when I was around, based on that statement. But that's beside the point. I run OtakuBoards. Even if you [i]did[/i] have some kind of weird seniority over me in that sense, it wouldn't make a difference. You're using this site and therefore you're using it on our terms. End of discussion. Secondly, I really don't appreciate the rudeness. You've totally brushed off my several attempts to calmly urge you to pay more attention to your post quality. You talk about speaking in appropriate English and then you revert back to your original posting style. I'm sorry, but at some point the hammer has got to drop. You've reached that point.[/color]

[color=#808080]Well, wiccans obviously exist. Witches also exist, but I don't believe that they have any kind of supernatural powers. I mean, I guess that really falls in line with my general philosophy. I don't think that a witch can cast a spell on you, just as I don't think that Benny Hinn (hope I've spelled his last name correctly) can heal people. Although, if you are practicing "magic" in your own home (or even publicly), I don't care. But if you start charging money for the promise of healing people or casting spells...well, I think that's really dishonest (even if you believe you have the power). But I suppose that's an issue for another day.[/color]

[color=#808080]I think it just comes down to people's individual personalities and maturity, more than anything -- at least if you're talking about the frequent rule breakers. Other than that, I think everybody knows that I expect Moderators to explain why they've closed a thread when they do close one. We [i]always[/i] need to be explaining why a particular action is against the rules and such. We always need to repeat it over and over, so that it becomes known to everyone. Generally speaking, I think that's being done pretty well. [/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Voodookanaka [/i] [B]ya longer than u, my post quality has always been low, its not gettin any worse, im from yorkshire, i type how i speak, if i use inverted commas to correct my words does that make it better? like eg; gettin' = getting [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]Longer than me? lol. In any case, I'm not going to argue with you. Your post quality is something that you've been reminded about before. And obviously, there are only so many reminders that can be given. Using inverted commas is totally irrelevant - that's really nothing but picking at straws. I'm talking about your post quality in general terms. All I ask is for a little more effort in the future; I don't see that as unreasonable.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Sara [/i] [B][SIZE=1]Maybe for you or for me...but twelve year old kids who just want something to do after school aren't going to do that. [/SIZE] [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]And that is [i]exactly[/i] why, as I said above, we provide leeway for people who make minor mistakes after joining. People are very, very rarely banned based on their first mistake - usually they are reminded to be aware of how things work and more often than not, there are plenty of members around to remind them of specifics too.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Voodookanaka [/i] [B]omg its me! sorry, dint mean to double post, just looks remarkably like me, sorry, i think ive erm...... XD i love that smiley, lookin for photo lookin for photo...... nope, maybe tomorrow [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]Voodoo, please do [i]not[/i] double post. You've been here long enough to know the rules. And I urge you to clean up your post quality; it's really getting very lax. [/color]

[color=#808080]I basically agree with what you're saying. The rules provide a basic level of coverage over the site - a basic view of what we consider to be acceptable and unacceptable. However, since the time the rules were developed, various common practices have evolved. And these common practices have been adopted by the community at large. I think it's fair to say that [i]most[/i] forums are in a similar situation there. And it's true that new members won't necessarily understand these procedures/courtesies without actually having spent some time at the site. So, most forums have their little quirks, I suppose. And not all forums (I'd actually say very few) will write a comprehensive list of these courtesies. Most of the time, the membership expects people to understand most of these courtesies because they expect new members to be observant. At OtakuBoards, we are frequently reminding people, on a daily basis, of our most important courtesies (whether it's about Introduction threads or some other issue). And because we do that, we expect that observant members will have some sense of how things work. I know that when I visit a forum, I never just dive in and do what I want -- I usually take a look around and see how things work. I'd say that's a pretty common practice on most web forums these days. So there are two sides to the coin. On the one hand, staff shouldn't jump down a member's throat [i]if[/i] their rule violation isn't mentioned within the rules page. But by the same token, it doesn't take much effort to see our enforcement of these "unwritten rules" (as most forums have at least one closed thread on the first page, which is an introduction or something else -- you know what I mean).[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by SUBVERSIVE [/i] [B]sorry for double post but its an attachment thing. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]Go take a look at our rules. ~_^ You are not allowed to double post here, regardless of whether or not you're using an attachment. This is a [i]really[/i] clear rule violation - you even knew that you were breaking the rules and you still did it. lol We've become too lax lately. If I see something like this again, I will raise the possibility of banning you amongst the staff. Please don't do it again.[/color]

[color=#808080]You're right, Mitch. You're exactly right. The only reason this discussion has even continued, in my view, is because we're now talking about issues that are kind of moving away from the core question. But fundamentally, I think the question is really pointless. Whether or not we deserve to be here is irrelevant, because none of us (or anyone) can make that determination. We're here because we're here, as Mitch points out.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DarK DeatH [/i] [B]OK, if you wanna tell me that humans do good to the environment, you can keep your words to yourself then, because that's not smart... I mean, animals kill other species, but they don't do enough to bring extinction to other species, do they? No. Also, the ozone layer hole is something made by US... Like stated by someone here already, the polution started, let's say, half century ago right? So, why DID it start at all? If humans were evolving, why would that happen? Wouldn't that be "walking backwards" instead of forward? [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]Well, this comment shows me that you don't seem to understand the whole idea of why pollution even exists. Before the industrial revolution, we were polluting but not to a great extent. The industrial revolution is largely what triggered big industry (well, it's entirely the cause of big industry I guess). But of course, at that time, our knowledge of modern technology was limited. We were physically [i]unable[/i] to produce technology that was as clean as it is today. So that is also a process of evolution. We were never in a position to just snap our fingers and make environmentally friendly technology. Technology developed over many decades during the last century and now we're in a far better position than we've been over the last couple of decades. You can't dismiss all mankind by saying that we pollute the world and therefore we don't deserve to exist, period. That's just wrong - it's factually wrong. As I said before, I could sit here and list the thousands upon thousands of initiatives that are in place right now, designed to protect the environment and encourage sustainable development. All of those programs, without exception, are part of our positive contributions to the planet at large. I'm not trying to say that man has a totally positive impact - mankind [i]is[/i] largely responsible for harming nature in various ways. But to dismiss all mankind and say that we don't deserve to exist is a bit extreme, to put it mildly.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DeathBug [/i] [B] The ecosystem would change with our without us; we're just smart enough to want it to remain the same. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]I don't really agree with that. This isn't about stopping changes in the ecosystem's cycles or anything. In fact, I'd say that's a totally irrelevant issue. lol This is about harming the environment - killing other species off and polluting land/air/water, etc... I don't think people want the Earth to remain the same as such, they just want it to be healthy and to be, for lack of a better word, "normal" (ie: like it was before we polluted it in any way).[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DeathBug [/i] [B] What is happening here is that what's-there-name that started this thread is unhappy because the world apparently does not meet their standards. I say, tough beans. We should be greatful that we're in such a position of security that we can find fault with the way things work. [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]I understand what you mean and I think you make a valid point. However, I think it's reasonable to make these criticisms. As an intelligent race of beings, we should be able to be self-critical and to understand our flaws and correct them. And, as individuals, I think it's fair to analyze what we're doing to the planet and improve the situation if we can. It's [i]because[/i] we're so intelligent that we are harming the planet...but it's also because we're so intelligent that we can do something about it. We could throw up our hands and pollute and be fat and comfortable until we all become extinct...but obviously, that's a very selfish way of living. And it's contradictory to our ideas of right and wrong on a basic level, I suppose.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DeathBug [/i] [B]That's my point. The effects would be negative to *us* and our envioronment right now, but what if a new little critter comes along that thrives on carbon monoxide? [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]Well yeah, that's true. But it's also kinda dismissive. I mean, what we're talking about is how we affect other living things that exist right now. I could go out and murder everyone I see, with the thought that "Oh well, they'll die anyway eventually". See what I mean? So, for this particular discussion, I think it's reasonable to talk about the effects that we're having at the moment.[/color]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DeathBug [/i] [B]Ahh, rhetoric... Why are humans so arrogant as to think that anything we do will seriously effect the Earth in the long run? [/B][/QUOTE] [color=#808080]Actually, I'd say that arrogance goes the other way. We'd be arrogant if we assume that what we do [i]doesn't[/i] effect the environment around us. There is far too much evidence out there to suggest that what we do [i]does[/i] have negative impacts on the environment. And we do know that pollution can have long term consequences. Of course, I don't think that we will have severe longterm consequences because I think that mankind is always improving technology to be more suitable for the environment. But if we stay the way we are and refuse to improve technology in that direction, there can be no question that the effects would be negative.[/color]

[color=#808080]Well, yes...that's true. It is for our own good. But I think we've come to realize that what's in our interest is also in the planet's interest, so to speak. People generally don't want to live in a polluted world where technology is so sterile and impersonal. So yes, these advancements are driven largely by what we feel is right for our own species. But by the same token, we've made a lot of efforts that are specifically designed to protect certain environments and other species. Most developed nations have strict laws about zoning and such, largely due to the protection of the environment (including certain species). If we were that selfish, we probably wouldn't care about protecting species other than our own. So, I think there is an element of truth in both perspectives.[/color]