Kanami

*waiting to see how "Fail" the "Stagger" ripoff is going to be*

As awesome as that is Vamp, you sure you're in the right comp? XD *See's "Duck" in the splice, but other parts seem to be from other mugs (either that or customing)*

Nyeh, saw the entry, didn't notice it was an update. Ah well, as long as things remain sensible then I suppose. @April Not the damn collar phase again XD

As I've said before, I don't agree with the "hackbox" limitation, so the "hornguy" from a few comps back was fine in my book. The monkey/horse is a bit excessive IMO (looks more custom then splice) but it's still fine as it technically is a "splice" (if you look at it closely). My issue is with Spoons entry, which isn't a "mug" but "mugs" A rather poorly done one at that, but it's clearly just done for laughs Regardless I don't participate in SF's splice comps often enough to complain or argue, so I'll just throw in an entry and piss off :/

I agree with Spoon in one sense and don't like the idea of restricting entries to "hackbox" limitations. However I don't really like the idea of "creative liberty." MC from FEEF recently made a emblem/symbol thing out of the splice set, and as interesting as it was, it really didn't belong in the competition (and was disqualified). Entries should be one (single) character, portrayed in a similar fashion to FE's mugs. @Spoon :/ Where'd you get that idea from?

To clarify, has this been overturned? Or are you sticking to it? The post is old, but regarding the "robot" like Demons, Shanice was already approved and in play at the time :/ PS: I have no intentions of removing this post, so the ending just got spoiled if the later XD @Sage Apparently, he had a conclusion planned, just no events planned in between. Resulting in deviation. Don't know how tight-knit the plot is now. But I have to assume Phoenix is doing better. If not... well.... he sucks XD

I really don't need to know this Phoenix, but are you sticking to Snowys fail plot, or is there going to be a more decent ending? I'd ask if the ending makes sense, but it's been proven before that our definition on "sense" and "logic" are at times contradictory.

Wasn't a bad day, It was during the beginning of term4. The guy'd been pissing me off since day one of the school calendar :/ So he sort of had enough enemies around the school for people to understand my side XD Was seriously disturbed when the school nurse told me "good job" after she made me apologize to the guy and made me say sorry. (Away from the victims ears) That said, just want to point out I'm not super strong/fast or anything. *Doesn't want to come off as the "I'm a black belt, with lightning fast attacks and can beat you all up" types* Though just to illustrate what kind of guy he was, there was one incident early on in the year when he licked the teachers chair during class (to be funny?) another where he smashed open the container of mercury after being told not to drop the container (he tossed it at a group of girls nearby. And another time he threw potatoes into the deep fryer from three feet away because he was scared of the oil spitting on him...... Psych? Are you really 14/15? Or did you go to my school? @Phoenix Your feeling it is correct? Read the underline again. And then your comment XD

@Magister Can't be screwed learning D&D, and youtube.... meh, I'm not into spamming forums of hosting sites with crap that no one cares for.... well I did it here, but that was a special exception. As for interesting reads? Suppose I could go get a few books from the local library. Please don't insult the donkey :( And if you meant it in the derogatory sense, then that's an insult to all ass's out there :/ @Psych I actually have to agree with you. (Unfortunately) Kiryns come off as too sensitive, or intolerant to certain issues for me as well, but in your case you often go too far. You're like me, only you make a lot less sense and have an inferior brain. (Not being elitist, a dog chasing its tail has a superior brain to you sometimes) @Purg Saying what one wants if fine and all (and usually my preferred method) but there's seldom point in it when the people you're talking to don't want to listen. Snowy for example would have been useless to convince regarding such a matter. Phoenix... well he'a a brickhead, so I don't know, depends on how he feels regarding the issue originally. But it's been proven before that he doesn't accept criticism or challenges to his authority well at all. In all honesty? If I was Psych, I would have gotten the hint and left the RP by now. (Mine was more boredom then irritation). But it's quite clear that he's not wanted here by the majority. @Magister again If the majority hate your target, it's usually safe to bash them. In grade... 10? I fractured a guys neck and got off with a 1 week voluntary detention. (Was asked to come in to placate angry parents) which I complied with due to it being in an air conditioned room XD. *One of her greatest achievements*

If you're paying 400 dollars an hour for school, I hope you become the next Einstein or something since I sure as hell don't want to pay that much for a basic education. (Even a private one). As for walking into walls, I find that's what the dropout kids do with their lives. As horrible as the education system is, it's still better then nothing. Now slamming your head against the wall... well that's another matter completely. @Death You don't have to use those drugs on yourself you know....

Not that I have any authority in the matter or anything, but Reika stabbing a Halton soldier after it's dead makes perfect sense to my original concept of Reika. She probably wouldn't go as far as slicing off fingers and keeping them as keepsakes, but it wouldn't at all be awkward for her to make sure that the deceased can't get a proper burial/be recognized. @Psych ban Lmao XD @Phoenix I'm just that bored, had to resort to online games lately to prevent myself from picking up a new hobby (staring at the ceiling/blank screen)

*Starts reading another few pages of the RP* .... Yes, I'm that bored XD

Hmm the thing is, it's easy for someone to say Depression > Shrink Feeling sick > Hospital/Doctor etcetc But those services aren't exactly free. Sure it's better to be safe then sorry, but I knew a woman who went to see a shrink for 12 weeks because she thought she was depressed, she burned so much money, she was eating crap all and her health declining during that period (poor poor people). Was she depressed? Not really, just going through a tough time in life. I agree that at the "self-harm" level, money isn't probably as important as your life. But referring people to go deal with professionals everytime something comes up isn't exactly useful. A good portion of shrinks around my area are completely useless, even if you're willing to make an effort. They'll sit there, ask occassional questions, and take your money. A bit like how kids bitch to their friends about their problems and get a "Yeah, that sucks" response. Only in this case they're taking money. As I said before, I'm interested in why someone would self-harm, be scared that they're doing it, seek helf, and continue doing it. Perhaps it was just a (good) lapse in your current judgment.

Fursecution? XD *Bursts out laughing* Can't agree with your post though, countering hate with pride doesn't work. If anything I think it emphasizes the "them versus us" mentality. Sure it'll boosts an individuals thoughts at first. But in the long run it really isn't going to help. A good example of balance is parenting. If your mother spoils you to death, and your father spend his time abusing you verbally/physically. You're not going to even out in between, you're going to be completely dependant on some people, and constantly afraid of others. +100 and -100 doesn't necessarily equate to a perfect neutral. Forcefully being proud of something also leads to idiocy. Religion being a great example. "God loves gays" just doesn't work. I don't really care who, or what claims to know the "thoughts" of a divine being. But while the bible does hint at "God" hating gays, there's nothing in there about loving them. Frankly, if God loves us all equally, then he hates none of us.... depreciating the value of the love But even with religion aside, both parties for and against an issue resort to ridiculous remarks to get people to sway to their side. I was reading about a few countries that still follow the "Sunday is rest day, shops are closed" policy. But a few of the remarks were hilarious. For: People want to go shopping as a family, shopping is a chance for the family to get together and communicate with their wallets and bond. (Honestly? Shopping? A family bonding experience? Surely there's better activites that can be done on a Sunday other then shopping?... Wait, don't those shops need to be run by workers who... umm you know, have families?) How many of you jump(ed) up in excitement when your parents say they going to do the groceries? Against: People will focus on going shopping resulting in a diminishing sense of community as less people will participate in social events like local sports matches. Cause obviously, we HAVE to go shopping if the stores are open (....Who here or anywhere would join their local sports group if the shops were closed 3~4 days a week? And if you played sports and enjoyed it, would it really matter that you can't go shopping on one day?) Very much off topic now, but the thing is. Saying one thing, just to counter another. Doesn't really balance things out. It's contradicting one groups opinion (even if they're wrong) by laughing in their faces. And it's a "take that" maneuver. Instructor: Turn Right here Driver: *Intentionally takes a sharp left* ..... *Fail* XD

I'm more interested in why you find the need to harm yourself, Is it a way to wash away (or hide) some sort of shame/guilt, I've heard of cases where people harm themselves to get back at people. (My parents are horrible, I'll show them how mean they were to me by harming/killing myself) But this doesn't seem to be the case for you. Stress is most likely a contributor, but there's definetely something else involved, people don't start harming themselves purely out of stress (though they do lash out at others) To me, it sounds like some warped form of depression and self blame. Whether it be justified or not is another matter. Only thing I can say is to not take life so seriously, you only live once, no point being all self-hate/remorseful about it. I usually don't like referring people to go see a shrink, since a lot of people aren't willing to change, and psychology is useless unless you're willing to change. Sure you can be tricked into thinking positively, but the after effects aren't so pretty if you suddenly lose faith in that positivity, 2 weeks or 10 years down the track.

I'm usually not against attention whoring for a cause, but gay parades are an exception. Because it falls into a small niche of personal issues I have with being the damsel in distress. Preaching "Look, we're oppressed and victimized by society" will warrant only one response from me, and it's sure as hell not a sympathetic or friendly one. I've said it with religion plenty of times, but keep your damn sexuality(religion) to yourself. Essentially gays who make a public scene about their sexuality are discriminating against themselves. Contrary to common belief, discrimination isn't always accompanied by negative connotations. Letting the pregnant woman take your seat on the bus is a form of discrimination. The woman could be perfectly fine standing, but due to her status "pregnancy" you've decided to treat her differently. A more common example is the elderly. I've actually seen an old guy get really pissy when a young man offered him his seat persistently when the senior had insisted he was fine standing. Crying out that you're different, and that you're victimized, is separating yourself from the majority, and asking to be perceived differently, creating special parades for your sexuality is not "equal." While I wouldn't be surprised if there was "sex parades" occurring in private, I haven't had to put up with public displays of heterosexuality and don't see why homosexuality is something to be proud of, it's different sure, but you wouldn't be any less "valueable" even if you were heterosexual. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Equal rights is a myth, there's no such thing. People are different regardless of whether they like it or not, and while I support "fair treatment" the womens movement in developed nations hasn't resulted positively at all IMO. The following example illustrates the stupidity of women. I was on the bus heading home from college one day when I noticed the couple sitting across from me arguing about something, it seemed relatively peaceful at first but eventually escalated to the point where the two started shouting at eachother, unfortunately the bus driver decided to keep out of their business and five minutes later they were at eachother throats telling eachother all sorts of hateful things. (Was actually pretty amusing from my perspective). Eventually the woman lost her temper and slapped the guy across the face, I'm not talking about a friendly gentle tap, but a full swing, loud smack, and a swollen cheek afterwards. Obviously the man didn't appreciate this and was raised his hand as well, and the womans response? "You can't hit me, I'm a woman" <_< Apparently, men are expected to be gentlemen even if they are dealing with a complete bitch. The woman then continued to taunt the man with comments like "Are you scared of hitting me?" and "Come on, I dare you, I'll just show your parents what you did to me." Eventually the man got off the bus (probably a few stop earlier then he wanted) while the woman yelled "spineless shit" out the window <_< Now I'm not saying giving females equal rights was a bad thing, it's just that giving more rights to people without taking something away just doesn't work. In terms of gays, if homosexuals want to date and makeout in normal pubs, and be accepted, they're going to have to broaden their own "gay pubs" to accomodate heterosexuals too. Equal rights is about balancing rights, not levitating ones groups right up to the same level in some areas. /rant

Well, it's proven that IRC does nothing, in game doesn't have any effect but at least there's a higher chance it'll get read. I don't think it's entirely Sages fault that you people can't take a hint.

How is it possible to view it as anything else? It's true that there's no point in making laws if they can't be enforced. However this contradicts your later statement against murder "we still try to minimize it". Are you honestly trying to convince me or at least advocate that slandering the dead, and wishing people death(eternal punishment) isn't rude? It must be me misinterpreting your statement, because surely this isn't about how one perceives the issue. Though if there is a bright side to wishing people death, let me know. Maybe they'd stop sooner if they were deterred from doing so in the first place? People don't give up when they get ignored, especially if they feel strongly enough about the issue to make a public display out of it. If anything, then public ignoring them would fuel their anger and they'd try to "get in our faces" by utilizing more extreme measures. What you're essentially saying is that since it's their "right" to protest, they should be allowed to protest however they please as long as it doesn't step on the toes of the law. And any decent law student will admit that the law does not cover everything it should, and it obviously doesn't cover every situation it should. If the media advocated hatred as directly as these people are doing, the station would probably be closed down, if the media ever say "kill all those damn Arabs, or genociding black people is a good idea" and get away with it.... well it does prove me wrong, but it also proves how stupid human beings are. I feel like I'm arguing against religious fanatics here <_< Why does something have to be illegal to be wrong? Since you people seem to be so unwilling to accept that you don't need to cross the law for an act to be wrong, let me accept this remark, Yes, make this act of protesting "ILLEGAL!" make it illegal so that someone can stop it, and make the punishment a slap on the wrist for making a public scene. If it's the only way to get people to prevent this sort of behavior then it's the method which should be adopted. Fortunately for me, where I live, as abysmal as this country is, the security guards do step in and tell teenagers who are being a nuisance to move along. And it's not necessary for a authoritative body to step it and ask them to stop.

I keep stating this, but why the hell does everything have to be illegal to warrant punishment? Her act of stealing is indeed not acceptable, but her circumstances should be taken into consideration as well. She commited a crime, and thus should be punished, though note the distinct difference between stealing a car and a loaf of bread, (other then the price). If you'd like to argue against the jury system, I'm game :/ I don't know why you bothered to post this, we all should know that it's impossible. I am in the minority, constantly :/ And they're not making a case against themselves by seeming like stupid primitive thugs? Waving Allah in our faces is supposed to make us not accept the typical views on them, right? Discrimination isn't the worst thing in the world, and you're quite clearly putting too much value into it. Being in the minority doesn't equate to being looked at differently. If we change the scenario a bit, lets change those muslim protesters with British citizens. Would the criticism that would be incited be able to use the "discimnation" argument? Overall, it's the "I'm black, and you're saying I broke into the house solely due to my race" argument, when the accused was caught in lurking around the vicinity at the time of the break in, and was acting "suspiciously" Ignoring them isn't any different. Racism is impossible to eliminate anyway, so gagging them and feeding their martyrdom isn't a bad thing IMO. Some may actually stop out of fear of being punished. It doesn't make anyone wrong, it's a matter of opinion afterall. However it does illustrate the meaning of numbers. You foolishly seem to think that their actions were "peaceful" so let me put it this way, if you get angry and trash your room, that is an act of violence, it's you're room, it's your belongings but it doesn't change the fact that you lashed out at your surroundings. No laws were broken, you're saying the act is peaceful, because no laws were broken? Definition of Violence: To cause harm, injury or destruction through mental of physical means. Not a definition of violence: Breaking a law. Setting fire to a national flag is an act of violence, setting fire to a symbol of importance is also an act of violence. As both are causing destruction to an object.

Well, as the Archie Bunker example shows, religion doesn't stop at the individual. It's not exclusive to religion either. If I find a game I like, I'd introduce it to my friends hoping they'd like it to. And even if they didn't I'd continue playing it which in connection would devalue our friendship. Extreme? Yes, but the devalue comment isn't completely wrong. I'd personally wonder "why they enjoy the game so much when it's so boring" and as a result I'd be thinking that the friend plays crappy games. Not a fatal blow a friendship but it does detract, as minimal as it is. Religion is pretty much the same, people aren't going to find something they like and then be content with keeping it to themselves. Especially when is supposedly defines you as a person. (I've seen accomodation advertisments which say "females preferred, Indians only, homosexual friendly, Catholics only") I admit, a good portion is able to keep their religion to themselves, but with the concept of believers will go to heaven, non-believers to hell. Well it's inevitable that one would claim superiority to the other.

Voted Lumi, First time I've thought a FE character looks nice. Speaking of which, I'm surprised Reaper didn't enter this one. Monkey is funny, but not something I prefer in a splice comp, Waq's is awesome as usual >_<

*Points to herself* ..... Unlikely.

It doesn't need to be considered in a broad sense to be considered violent, I'm not sure why you're clinging to the letter of the law (rights) in your defence, and then commenting that another legal definition is "broad" Not sure about your personal experiences but if that's you're view you probably don't have a proper understanding of "bullying" I read a post on another forum recently, so I suppose I'll copy that over. It's not clear who started the rumor but if it was done with the intention of harming the poster mentally or socially, it constitutes as bullying, no? In this case, it is causing misery and harm. Misery in the form of mental incapability, and harm in the form of lost trust between friends. (aka Friendships). The thing with your comment is, (and every comment out there) that it's using human judgment, if human judgment isn't used to determine if anything illegal happened, what can we use? An automated machine which doesn't consider the circumstances? A mother stealing food to feed her starving kids, and a woman stealing jewelery both constitute as theft, and both would be sentenced equally by a machine, while some leniency might be shown with human judgment, even if the sentencing is the same, the machine would penalized the mother, and not take into consideration what happens to the kids afterwards. I find the act of arguing against the use of "human logic" to be absurd. :/ What different reaction? Obviously it's not something to smile about, if you're not asking them to suppress their feelings. If I wished for your loved ones to "burn in hell" you might shrug it off as some stupid internet kid ranting at you, but would the emotions within you from such an act be positive or negative? I don't understand why everything has to go to court/prison with you people. I've seen a group of dodgy looking teenagers hanging around the shops constantly, and a security guard will come along and ask them to move along, not because they're comitting crimes or breaking rules, but because people don't like them being there. (They're there when I start work 9AM and still there when I finish 6PM if left alone) <_< I keep restating this, but why must "rights" come into everything? Why can an action be made against a person(s) unless they've comitted some heinous crime or infringed on someones rights? The idea of "no crime has been committed so no action should occur" is very mechanical, it's equal sure, but it doesn't work in practice. The protest in this topic served no purpose other then to indicate to the public that a group of people wanted another to burn in hell. If this isn't racism, I'm not sure what is. It's not a protest against war, it's a protest about the people who died during war. <_< I personally don't put much value on human life since I'm more concerned about the living, but acts like this are not only slandering the dead, but promoting social division and hostility. Not a good thing to have in ones neighborhood. :/ Okay first and foremostly, how can something make someone "miserable" but not "unhappy?" :/Numbers is the first thing that comes to mind, using SF as an example, lets say I think you're an idiot who spams the boards and I don't want you here. You can probably shrug that off pretty easily, now what if the over half the forum members shared my belief and wanted you gone? Would you be able to shrug that off just as easily? Presentation and objective are another, having an idea and voicing it to people is one thing, making a public demonstration is another. When you're demonstrating, you're not just expressing an opinion. You're making a point and promoting it. It's not a case of "I have an opinion, you have one too" but a case of "This is fact, do something about it" Which in connection results to demonstrations usually being done to make another party do something about the problem,

So essentially, religion fucks things up again? "God" is there anything you haven't screwed up? It's a rather current view you have their though, in the past people just considered it wrong, and that society allowing it would be akin to society condoing homosexuals. If you asked a parent, they'd properly prefer a heterosexual child over a homosexual. But while those attitudes persist, they have become significantly less prominent. The thing with marriage is, is it's a religious thing which has been ingrained into societys clockwork. IMO religion needs to stay within the confines of religion and stop extending its filthy paws into the other areas like politics, law, and other societal values. Marriage is like an official form of being partnered up. Why people need this "security" is beyond me, but apparently it's a nice thing to have. Overall it's not so much the "tax benefits" and such that people get riled up over, but the general belief that allowing it would be condoning the action which would lead to an increase in something they don't want happening. Governments in kind are worried about losing power if they legalize it as it's still not accepted completely within the community.

Most countries with a decent justice system would acknowledge that "violence" doesn't exclusively refer to physical violence. For example if I told my ficitious child that he was unwanted, useless and that I wished he'd die. Apparently that constitutes as verbal violence/abuse.In comparison, if my fictious husband had served and died serving his country (assume he's a british soldier) I'm sure those placards are just as offending. It's not a matter of getting upset, I don't know where you people get the idea that people will "stop" if you ignore them. Since it seldom actually happens. In most cases it escalates to the point where someone ends up hurt or even dead. School bullying being a great example. If you ignore the bully, he's not going to get bored and go away. At least, not before he causes you some serious grief. So your solution is to suppress your natural feelings and let people walk all over you? Don't you have "rights" against that? I'm actually completely serious when I say you people discard "reasonability" for the sake of your "rights" too often. I'm not too big a supporter of social cohesion, but letting people do whatever they want is not a "solution" to a complication.I'm not too fussed about my neighbor saying "God, British soldiers are horrible, I wish they'd all burn in hell" since that's his opinion, and as you all keep preaching, he has the right. A public demonstration is a completely different matter though. Having an opinion regardless of how "wrong" it is, is fine. However putting that into action and trying to convince others or venting frustration that the world around you sucks isn't doing any good, more so if you're trying to convince the public not an individual.