Mrebo

You give yourself good constructive criticism. I do see what you mean. I was at first confused by an alien female Organa, expecting (of course) to see Leia's adoptive father we hear so much about in the OT. So making sure she is a consistent presence makes sense. It is a tough thing to do...you inspired me to open up by word doc, I have these two story lines of characters ostensibly on the same side, and very male heavy. Did that issue inspire you to go with the strong female Organa?

Your droid idea might just work after all, I look forward to seeing how else they crop up.

There were lines and moments where I thought, there's something familiar about this place, but I couldn't put my finger on it, so I thought you struck a pretty good balance there.

My first outline's finale went in the direction of a WWII-inspired night before the war, lovers in the city, then looking out over the view on Coruscant, the next day the big battle is won, but the implications of a start of war are bittersweet. The sentimentality (and visions of Lucasian love scenes) has demotivated that idea...but what I'm trying to say is that the bittersweet aspect resonates with me as it's the story of old and new ties strained.

Finishing it is a big deal!

Bingowings said:

Time Travel.

bingo

TV's Frink said:

darth_ender said:

I'm sorry, but the "abortion should be legal in all cases" mentality is equally pervasive and annoying.  But neither you nor I completely hold to those arguments (as mentioned before, I personally allow for some, albeit few and limited, exceptions--and I doubt you feel that abortion should have no restrictions).  Still, I'd always rather err on the side of caution, even in my giving way to the other side.

I was referring more to Ferris' post, although you did complement it.

The "abortion should always be legal" side is much smaller, btw.  There are very few people who think it's fine to abort a fetus at 39-1/2 weeks just for the hell of it.

They might not think "it's fine," but they (according to ender's link 25% of people) think it should be legal, including the current president.

Warbler said:

Ferris, I am curious what is your stance on frozen embryos and stem cells?  I am curious about every body else opinions on this as well. 

What we don't want is to create an industry of creating embryos for the sake of using them for science. I agreed very much with Bush's views on the matter:

I have concluded that we should allow federal funds to be used for research on these existing stem cell lines, where the life-and-death decision has already been made.

ferris209 said:

What really boggles my mind though, are people who are perfectly fine with the murder of an innocent baby, but rally and spends millions of taxpayers dollars getting death penalty cases tied up in court. 

Also, many are all concerned about the suffering of those who are put to death, it's to the point now that being put to death is just as easy as peacefully going to sleep. A far cry from the horror and terror their victims often experienced in their last moments on earth.

Yet, these very same people do not consider, or have concern for, any potential suffering or pain a baby may go through when he/she is aborted.

So, by some peoples logic, a heinous murderer who chose to do what he did which resulted in his predicament must have zero chance of suffering, unlike their victim. However, the potential suffering of a baby who had no choice whatsoever in the matter is of no concern, que sera sera.

That kind of logic is just twisted and disgusting to me.

I wholeheartedly agree. I considered using abortion as an example of the normative power of law over in Politics. In the absence of Roe v. Wade, I can't imagine so many people being so okay with abortion.

Bingowings said:

Thank heavens he is still heterosexual.

Our greatest sense of relief.

Glad you are living, Dayv.

I read it in toto a few days agogo ;]

There were certain images and lines that made me go "oooh, I like that"

I can see this as a graphic novel pretty well, which I think is a good thing about the imagery.

The format worked for me because I've had the same struggle, not wanting to conform to a screenplay format but not having a full-blown novel either.

I'm not sure about the R2/3PO cameo :p But then again...I want them as full-fledged characters in my version.

It's really hard to give constructive criticism! It all worked coherently, made good connections between characters, good story. My creative energies have been near zero for awhile since there's so much I need to be doing, but once I can get my story more coherent, my own approach will hopefully add something to the thinking about the prequels.

On a different, more futile note, actors cross my mind to play the roles. Arthur Darvill was one for Obi Wan, but I mostly dismissed the idea early on, but looking again, I think he could make a worthy choice.

walkingdork said:

Monolithium said:

darth_ender said:

As Warbler says, you can swing your arm all you want as long as you don't hit someone else.  Abortion, to me, hits the unborn child in the face.  Your free will should not extend so far as to reduce that of someone else's.

Until it is separated from the Mother, it doesn't get individual rights.

word.

Anti-word.

An assertion is not an argument and answers no argument.

Some of the assertions made in the abortion debate have some component of truth. Which is why they have a superficial charm and will be repeated.

Mono is correct that fetuses do not have the rights guaranteed to individuals (as under our Constitution). While corporations are given legal personhood, fetuses are not. Food for thought.

That does not mean that the law can or should disregard the fetus, which is the intended implication of the assertion. I've expressed the view that I don't know exactly where the legal lines can always be drawn. But I lean in the direction of drawing them to protect human life. To me, abortion should be a legal exception, not a legal rule.

ender makes the good point that

Rights are simply what we as a society define as morally correct and not.  Somehow abortion advocates believe that these rights do not come till birth or 20 weeks gestation or whatever.  I believe that these rights are inherent to all, regardless of their development.

As in that other discussion, morality and law are not always (or even usually) perfectly in sync - and that's okay - but I think morality should be a motivating part of the law. If a person doesn't recognize the moral value of a developing human, I don't know how to convince them.

It does get tricky if we say there are individual rights for developing humans because many of us accept there are situations where termination of pregnancy should be allowed. If a woman's life is on the line, does she need a judge to sign off? What if a judge decides - against the doctor's advice - that the likelihood of harm and death to the mother is insufficient? Is Plan B a violation of an embryo's rights or is it more like a condom?

What about cases of conjoined twins, where separation is likely or certain to kill one of those individuals? I don't think anyone will deny that conjoined twins have individual rights. In that foreign case, a court decided - against the parents' wishes - that the twins were to be separated (because they would both otherwise die). The parents wanted to let nature takes its course rather than choose to kill one of their children. Should the courts have had no say? If so, what about the rights of one or both children? How were the rights of the killed child respected? These are not easy questions, even where we recognize individual rights.

I ultimately agree with ender, even if there are not individual rights in an absolute or constitutional sense, we do recognize a concept that animals have a semblance of rights and we should do the same for developing humans.

Go back and make it happen. I want to be proven wrong about time travel.

Wheeeeee!

Can we discuss time travel? Or is that too awesome for this thread?

Listen to CP3S and Tyrphanax. althor1138 is blunt but he's right. If you're serious, you make a change. Get the therapy, move to Canada, do whatever needs to be done to get you on the right track. Don't blame, stereotype, and put down others.

And write more Star Wars if that brings you joy. I'm catching up on my reading of that forum.

Tyr and Bingo are right. You need to walk out on the limb, take the risks and get involved anyway you can. A lack of confidence seems to be the main thing holding you back. One little thing I'd add is not to wait. Not because you're going to be leaving soon or anything else. So what if you leave soon, at least it will be socializing experience. Like Tyr says, NO excuses.

At 20 I was similarly situated romantically, it will work out once you get to socializing and meeting people. There is nothing wrong with being a virgin. The cure is a desirable experience, so find a girl it will really be desirable with, not just a one-off check of a box, or a substitute for a relationship. Also consider dating sites, okcupid or something. There are girls out there in similar circumstances.

You have geeky pursuits - share them with others. Magic players are typically willing to teach others since they then have someone else to play with, someone else to attend tournaments. Comic shops that hold tournaments are especially willing to get you hooked. Not a great way of meeting girls, of course, but it can be one outlet for socializing. Even if you're terrible at something like Magic, most are pretty tolerant about it.

Also, don't beat yourself up too much when things don't go well.

I've only ever been to a single party at my college and that felt like a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for somebody like me. It led to nothing.

Experience will help dispel this feeling. Parties generally result in nothing, except that you hopefully had a good time. I understand the hope that it will provide the big breakthrough and the  launching pad for all future socialization (maybe even a girlfriend), but it generally doesn't happen that way.

Also, if people can't tell that you're having a good time - even if they like you - they are less likely to extend further invitations. You need to reach out to them, talk to people on facebook, stay in contact, be engaged when you do hang out.

For recreational activities, consider climbing/hiking - very big around eastern Tennessee anyways.

You're at that 'finding yourself' place. Either you sit around hoping something happens or you make it happen. It's great that you know what career you want. But when you finally do kiss a girl and you're on top of the world, you may well feel that she is 'the one,' since finding another would be so improbable. It's a normal feeling, but you cannot expect or rely on any single experience to be the fix you need. Enjoy each experience for what it is. You happiness has to come from something more than that.

Getting the confidence is hard, so listen to Bingo, let go of worrying and thinking and just go.

I saw the video linked on a site with the text, "Go [Blank] Yourself, George Lucas" and wondered what he had done to the OT this time...

It was amusing at times - like the matte painting bit - but it's hard not to feel as if Lucas continues to squander Star Wars. I agree with Ziggy and others that I don't see the value in making this an official and ongoing production.

What did I say about digging up the dead!?

This is a game me and my SO play - 'Do you know who died?'

Director of Top Gun Tony Scott jumped off a bridge today.

Russia always scares me. Some potential insights into the sentencing.

Wait...this is real?

TV's Frink said:

Big ups to my wife for sending me here:

http://mckaylaisnotimpressed.tumblr.com/

ALLOL

Okay, that was pretty funny.

I apologize in advance for the following, but it keeps cracking me up (Canadian synchronized swimmer Elise Marcotte):

TV's Frink said:

Sheesh, this place use to have a sense of humor.

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

nor am I, but I am also not going they can be either.   Boxing has its rules and fencing has its rules.  It is possible the rules could be different.

I don't think you're allowed to punch people in fencing or stab people in boxing.

yeah so?

I think sometimes you have to look really hard to see where the humor is hiding.

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

Warbler said:

  

What if it gets to the point where normal runners want to cut their legs off so they can use artificial limbs so they have a chance against other runners using bionic limbs.

LOL, thank you for this, I needed it.

just remember some of these guys have been willing to risk taking a drug that might make their testicles shrink, in order to gain an advantage. 

What advantage is there in having smaller...

You may not intend it, but you say some very funny things.

Warbler said:

Mrebo said:

I'm very much in agreement with Gaffer on the fencing debacle. And I think way too much is being argued based on assumptions about teh rulez.

I am not assuming anything about the rules.   I  do not know the rules.

The point at which one doesn't know something is when assumptions come into play...

That's why you're arguing with Gaffer.

Mrebo said:

I don't know why the same common sense application of the rules of the sport could not similarly be applied on appeal in fencing. I'm not going to assume they can't be.

nor am I, but I am also not going they can be either.   Boxing has its rules and fencing has its rules.  It is possible the rules could be different.

I don't think you're allowed to punch people in fencing or stab people in boxing.

Mrebo said:

And we're not talking about some subjective "common sense" of judges doing what's "fair." We're talking about abiding the rules of the sport, that all acknowledge were not followed.

I agree the rules were not followed, but that does mean you correct it by not following the rules again.

What rules? How do you know unknown rules would not be followed? Answer: assumptions.

Mrebo said:

Warbler, if you can find the rules of appeal for Olympic fencing and argue why they do not permit remedying the mistake, please do so. I know this isn't a fancy debating forum or anything...but pounding the table (metaphorically) and declaring the importance of rules without knowing what they actually are seems like a waste of time.

1. I don't think I was "pounding the table" metaphorically or otherwise.

  And I don't know that you weren't pounding it literally.

2. I never said that the rules of appeal for Olympic fencing do not permit remedying the mistake.   I only said the rules for appeal for Olympic fencing need to be followed, that they should not be ignored just fix this mistake.   Gaffer seemed to be arguing that if the rules didn't permit remedying the mistake, that we should just ignore the rules and fix the mistake anyway.  That is not how sports work.

I don't know why it "seemed" to you that Gaffer was saying rules should be ignored...when she* was arguing the complete opposite, even stressing:

Gaffer Tape said:

I wasn't arguing that if the rules didn't permit remedying the mistake that we should just ignore the rules.

The argument is that the rules of the sport WERE broken and thus to remedy the situation the erroneous decision should be reversed to conform with the rules of the sport that we DO know.

In order to argue otherwise, you need to assume there might be some other rule that either prevents such an appeal or supersedes the known time rule.

Warbler said:

  

What if it gets to the point where normal runners want to cut their legs off so they can use artificial limbs so they have a chance against other runners using bionic limbs.

LOL, thank you for this, I needed it.

My concern is that it hurts the integrity of the sport and casts a shadow over any disabled athlete who wins. They will always have an asterisk by their name and the next-placing non-disabled winner might be seen as the real, normal, winner. When one athlete is using an apparatus that another isn't, I think it sort of makes it a different sport in a sense. Maybe there will be a tennis player with bad elbows who uses some device to help him swing his arm (the strap thing Batman uses on his leg in TDKR comes to mind). The whole point of being an athlete or not is having the natural physical ability. It's sad when some people can't compete without aide - even Phelps is retiring at the old age of 27 - but that's the nature of it.

I'm very much in agreement with Gaffer on the fencing debacle. And I think way too much is being argued based on assumptions about teh rulez. Back on page 6 I posted a link about that Olympic boxing match. Despite the ref calling it for the one guy, on appeal the decision was reversed because the rules of the sport were not followed.

I don't know why the same common sense application of the rules of the sport could not similarly be applied on appeal in fencing. I'm not going to assume they can't be. And we're not talking about some subjective "common sense" of judges doing what's "fair." We're talking about abiding the rules of the sport, that all acknowledge were not followed.

Warbler, if you can find the rules of appeal for Olympic fencing and argue why they do not permit remedying the mistake, please do so. I know this isn't a fancy debating forum or anything...but pounding the table (metaphorically) and declaring the importance of rules without knowing what they actually are seems like a waste of time.

My interest in the Olympics is marginal. But I am curious whether people think the judges are often corrupt.  Two examples in the news of odd judging include the apparently perfect gymnast and the falling boxing match. I don't know how these things are scored, but those in the know appear astounded. And in such an international events with such a strong sense of patriotism and high stakes...how could they find many judges who would be impartial and unbribed?