Well, I'm sure Warbler will let you have your move back. I was going to say something, but I didn't think you'd see it until you got home anyway.
P-12h
I would suggest a template. It's hard to get anywhere without one and easy to get stuck without having an idea of what's coming next.
I really enjoyed it, but don't you think the first two thirds or so are a bit too reminiscent of the opening of A New Hope? Of course it won't be as noticeable with the rest of the story afterward, but maybe that's something to think about for a future draft. I think parallels work well, but be careful not to overdo them.
Bump.
(Just so it can be with the rest of 'em)
darth_ender said:
Well, my point was to develop your pieces. Warbler had pieces stuck in relatively unhelpful positions. Right now I'm still bringing pieces out. Look what I have available thus far, and what more I can develop soon. My position leaves me with opportunities, choices, and I wish to maximize my choices. I don't know if you'd want to say so here, and I won't change my move anyway, even if you clearly have a superior idea in mind, but what would you have done instead?
I thought I had something, but upon closer examination, what you're doing seems to be either better than, or no worse than, the alternatives.
*warble*
I mean, *sigh*
Two off topic posts...
Nope, this thread doesn't stand a chance.
February 7:
A.D. 1238: The Russian city of Vladimir is burned by Mongols.
A.D. 1935: Monopoly (I assume the board game is meant) is invented.
A.D. 1971: Swiss men finally accept women's right to vote.
I had no idea they were that far behind.
I hate the sight of rotting dead people. Dead people are OK, but rotting dead people are less okay. I hate the sight of maggots/worms even more. I've can handle them better than I used to, but I was freaked out by even the centipede things in AOTC the first few times I watched it. Wormy things crawling out of rotting dead people is a terrible combination and I have trouble stomaching that kind of thing.
I'm sure it isn't an unusual repulsion that I have, but that kind of thing wrecks my enjoyment of movies. Even reading about writhing, slimy slugs makes me feel slightly sick. However, it isn't really a phobia. I do have a slight fear of stepping on slimy, squiggly things in places like gardens, but I'm not afraid of seeing such things on screen.
Anybody? Anybody...?
I'm sure I can't be the only one. :P
EDIT: I guess I should be more patient. After all, my most successful thread started out this way. :)
Frink, are you sure you don't mean "I was born in '22"?
So did I, but I'm happy enough. Fart jokes throughout his ridiculous edits would have ruined them.
B-9j
To you or someone else?
Wait, what have I done?! Now I'm going to lose my free king...
FK-11h
That wouldn't be a "fan" edit though. To be a fan edit, it has to be edited by a fan, not a creator or owner of a work.
R-8h
Last move, as I really should be in bed now.
R-8j
I'm sure I mustn't be the only one around here who watches these things, so for those of you who do so, care to share your favourite debates (with a Youtube link if available) and debaters, with some reasons for liking and disliking them?
I like Richard Dawkins a lot as a debater, as he seems to have a fairly good grasp of most religious concepts that other atheists seem to have trouble with. He can be quite condescending at times, however, which is a point against him, but other times he is quite polite and far less condescending.
Christopher Hitchens was not as great as many say he was, in my humble opinion. He had a good sense of humour, but his habit to repeat the same old things over and over makes him tiring to listen to after a while (I don't mean within debates). He also tended to have terrible arguments against the existence of God, and a poor ability to refute arguments for God's existence. Christopher chased a lot of red herrings around and made many ad hominem attacks (not against those he debated, but against members of Christianity, as their behaviour apparently largely discredits the religion) He did make a lot of good points though. I think he was quite arrogant and judgmental, but he was a great guy notmuchtheless. ;)
Sam Harris is a quite articulate debater, but he also chases red herrings around all over the place. I haven't seen many of his debates, so I can't say much more about him or tell if the red herring thing is universal to his argumentation.
William Lane Craig is a decent debater on the other side, but from what I've seen of him, his arguments and rebuttals aren't great. I think his reputation is better than it ought to be, but maybe I've just seen the wrong side of him.
Dinesh D'Souza is a decent debater with some good arguments. Some arguments he makes aren't that great though, so he isn't one of my favourites.
John Lennox is one of my favourite debaters on the Christian side with one major flaw: his argument that the existence of morals depends on the existence of God. That in itself could be a viable argument, IMO, but he uses it poorly and can't seem to see the other side. I enjoy listening to him though, and since he seems to have a personal relationship with God as well as an intellectual one, so much the better.
John Carroll is another atheist debater I really enjoy. He has very good arguments and isn't arrogant and condescending like so many others. He's also interesting to listen to, as he has a sense of humour and is quite articulate.
There are others, but their names escape my memory and I don't have much time to write more at the moment.
OK. I would probably play it that way too, despite the fact that I've been advised not to do that (in a different situation, I'm sure), but I was curious since you made an earlier suggestion to use each and every turn to your advantage (my paraphrasing, of course) and this seemed to go against that advice.
Alright, if you insist. :)
FK-11e
I really hope I didn't miss something because I don't want to lose that piece, especially with my lion already gone.
Is there any real advantage to mirroring so many of each other's moves? Wouldn't it be more advantageous to make a unique move, ender, and gain the upper hand a bit?
Thanks, I see that I didn't mean "regardless," as I moved the other dragon king which would have made me safe. However, since I should have been paying more attention, I'll let you have it and continue on with the move P-3g.
^I love the contrast.
Porn site--File from Church...
:P
Warbler said:
RicOlie_2 said:
February 5:
A.D. 1649: Charles II inherits the throne of England.
curious, wikipedia has the date as February 6, 1649 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_II_of_England
Interesting. According to that, then, both he and his brother inherited the throne on the same day of the year.
The date(either February 5 or February 6) marks the date when the Parliament of Scotland proclaimed him kind. It is arguable that he was King since the time his father's head was cut off on January 30, 1649. It is also arguable his was king since the English Parliament voted unanimous to recognize Charles II as King on May 2, 1660. May 8, 1660 is yet another date that could be argued as that was when was proclaimed King in London. Moreover, he arrived in London on May 29, 1660 and that is the day that marks the first assembly of King and Parliament together since the abolition of the English monarchy in 1649 and it is also the day that Wiki marks as the start of his reign(and consequently the date I put in my list of the Monarchs of England http://originaltrilogy.com/forum/topic.cfm/Random-Thoughts/post/467230/#TopicPost467230 ). Finally, his coronation took place on April 23, 1661.
All those different dates... It's no wonder history is such a mess to sort out with everyone dating things differently and disagreeing on when certain things began (i.e. dating a reign from the date one's predecessor died instead of from the person's coronation or dating the end of a war from the end of fighting instead of from an official armistice).
February 6:
A.D. 1627: Huguenot rebels sign the Peace of La Rochelle with France.
A.D. 1685: The Duke of York becomes both King James II of England and VII of Scotland upon the death of his brother, Charles II.
A.D. 1911: The first old age home opens in the U.S.
A.D. 1918: Britain grants the right to vote to women over 30.