N10op
I'm not really embarrassed about making the thread, but rather about the way I handled the silly responses.
darth_ender said:
D'oh! No, no trap there. In my mind I was thinking those pawns were oriented differently, facing me directly, and thus I was on the side of them. I guess because of how you lined them up.......I feel sheepish. I don't suppose you'd...let...me............
If you do it before my dad moves, then yes, I guess I can let you cheat, just this once...(you're lucky this isn't a real war).
Had you told me you had such a little one in your home? I don't recall. That's cute. How old is the little guy? I don't know if I've ever asked, but how many kids are in your family? Where do you fall in line? My parents had 8 and I'm number 7. We have 4, but this will have to be it for us, as I think I've mentioned to you before.
I think I've mentioned all that a couple times here, but no harm in saying it all again (especially since it appears you've entirely forgotten an embarrassment of a thread I created a while back). The mentioned midget is eight months old now (I believe you congratulated me when I mentioned his birth back in January). He's number seven, like you, and I'm number one. Between the two of us there are two girls followed by three boys.
Px10wx
I hope I'm not falling for an obvious trap...
As for school, that's going very well so far, thank you. Homework is very minimal (which is nice, but it means less French practice, so I've begun reciting lists of vocabulary every day). I'm learning French reasonably quickly and can now figure out just about everything my math teacher says since there's a lot of repetition in math class. Understanding my peers is significantly harder than understanding my teachers, because the former tend to speak less clearly (i.e. slurring words, speaking quietly or quickly, etc.) and often with a strong accent, since I'm frequently with the immigrant students.
How's that baby of yours? Ours has recently discovered a correlation between some of his actions and our laughter and has begun to intentionally entertain us. :D
And on our side of things, I was missing that pawn you mentioned above, and my dad moved a lance instead of dropping another on the board beside it (that's what happens when you don't keep track of captured pieces ;)). So all three of us had some sort of problem or other with our boards.
I hope not. That was done in the PT and who knows how many times in the EU. It's time for something new that doesn't involve sith and people falling to the dark side.
N-11rs
A certain pair of droids had better be in the next episode for a good reason...
Alright, large "rumour" tags. Maybe people don't think the rumours have any truth in them and it's true that they're largely speculation, but some people would like to be warned about it before reading. The guy who wrote the article about that rumour, which is a huge spoiler if it has truth in it, warned his readers. I don't think it would do any harm to do the same.
EDIT: As for my crystal ball, "Always in motion is the future", so I caught the end of the credits for Episode VII. :(
Mild spoilers ahead:
I'm onto season two of Downton Abbey (no making fun of me for watching it...), and while the show is often enjoyable, it's unfortunate that it's such a soap opera. Why can't at least one relationship be stable? But no, everyone's unfaithful in their marriage, or loves someone besides the person they're supposed to be marrying, or loves someone but not the person they're marrying, etc., etc. No one seems to be happy with their marriage, though the reality is that many, if not most, people are able to have a fairly happy marriage without cheating and ruining it. Maybe it's just because the show deals with the aristocracy and that's the norm, but when, for instance, Edith helps out a farmer, why does she have to end up kissing him and being overly familiar, straining the relationship between the farmer and his wife?
Much of what I'm complaining about seems to be shoehorned into the story and out of character for the characters involved. It seems that whoever wrote the episodes felt it necessary to add things like Lord Grantham kissing a maid just for shock value, since it serves little purpose in the story and doesn't jive with his established character. It was foreshadowed a bit, but still managed to feel forced.
Anyway, I realize it's just a show, but I think it would be far stronger and more enjoyable without the above-mentioned aspects of it.
Agreed. Please put large spoiler tags on each of your posts, the two of you...
Jetrell Fo said:
Okay, if Dennis Muren could make full motion dinosaurs for Jurassic Park in 1993 that looked awesome, why did the CGI in the 1997 Special Edition films have to SUCK Bantha oysters?
:)
...Bantha oysters? :P
I would have posted it myself earlier, were it not for the fact that my screen is too short to show the whole board at once (zooming out knocks everything out of alignment).
EDIT: I forgot to add that ender has a rook and I have a bishop in hand.
N-12op
Bingowings' post wasn't much of a complaint. There's nothing offensive in it at all. Why don't you read it, rather than making assumptions (it's a humourous story, hence my "LOL").
I don't want the movies to focus on anything political. The OT handled that well by only having references to the political situation and the dictatorship being overthrown at the very end. The PT had too much focus on political corruption and the political aspect of war for Star Wars movies, which made it a lot less fun to watch. The ST should focus on the adventures of the characters and the battles between the good guys and the bad guys.
LOL! Now, if some devout old lady had expressed offence at you "mocking Jesus" or suchlike, any annoyance you would have had about a cross not just being a cross would have been justified. Likewise, if I had had to design a flag for an imaginary country, and chose to make it rainbow-coloured, I would have had no right to complain about any monopoly over rainbows. :D
I don't think either of them were really being hostile, Warb. Jumping down my throat, maybe ;) but as I noted, I fully deserve what Ryan threw at me. I appreciate the support, just be careful not to do the same thing as bkev did (i.e. reading too much into people's posts).
I must admit I deserve every bit of correction and criticism for the way I worded my post, since I tend to be very technical and critical myself...
I see where you're coming from now. I didn't anticipate people picking apart my complaint so much, so I summed up the exercise (which as I understood it was just to distinguish cold from warm colours)...um...a completely different way...
OK, OK, my original post was an abuse of the English language, art, and the past. Just cut me some slack already! ;)
Ryan McAvoy said:
"Hate" is a very strong word, something like "It's funny how the rainbow has... because in art class today" would seem more appropriate but clearly you feel very strongly about how the Gay community have used this symbol to represent freedom.
I suppose I should watch the way I word things more carefully. Colloquially, at least where I'm from, "I hate how..." is generally just taken as hyperbole.
By the way, if you think that that art exercise "belonged in kindergarten" you weren't paying attention. It's one of many such exercises designed to get you to think differently*. By putting them in rainbow order you failed to understand the question, so it might have been better to pretend it was a deliberate mistake to make a political point and so look like you were an avant-garde genius LOL.
Distinguishing warm from cold colours and practicing shading was all the exercise was. I guess kindergarten is a gross exaggeration, but it's something I've had to do numerous times in the past (and kindergarten feels close enough to grade 6). The rainbow does indeed go from warm colours to cold colours, so I'm not sure I understand why you think I failed to understand.
If I had pretended to do it on purpose, I might have gained points in my teachers eyes, but I prefer to do that the hard way. :D
TV's Frink said:
I've never seen Donnie Darko, so thanks for running it for me. ;-)
Do you mean like a drug-run? Did he illegally obtain you a copy? That kind of thing is frowned upon here. >:(
I think you misunderstand me then. (And it was I who ordered the colours in rainbow order, not a kindergartener. It was part of an exercise in art class that I thought belonged in kindergarten, so that's where that word came in).
I also would be equally annoyed if the rainbow was strongly associated with something else, and somebody thought I was making a statement about that. Or, had I drawn another symbol, for example, a crescent moon with a star beside it (presumably in a picture of the night sky) I would have been equally annoyed to have it associated with support of Islam, despite the fact that I have no problem with Islam itself.
It has nothing to do with the gay issue itself. Nor is it the fact that they chose to represent themselves with a rainbow that annoys me, just that that symbol has become so strongly associated with that movement that I can't order colours in a certain way without someone thinking it's a political statement.
Or, heaven forbid, a clone.
I hope the same. I forgot to mention something before complaining about rainbows.
Will it be implied that his turn to the dark side is because he doesn't care anymore and figures he'll just wake up the same way again, only to find he's broken out of the time loop?