Jump to content

Hello, Hi, Hey: I'm $$$ richh


Recommended Posts

Thinking Thracia and Sol reminds me of the ridiculous hack he played once

It had Micaiah, Ike, Celice, Judas from Tales of Destiny 2 and was supposed to be a parody Code Geass

And that time Micky dodged a 100 hit ballista

lol I think I remember that.

Didn't know about the dodging a 100 thing though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 493.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Starman

    60032

  • Kinumi

    38629

  • Lance Masayoshi

    26279

  • Soledai

    25884

Hello you two

How goes the things?

I'm slowly waking up, but I'm good!

How are things on your end? (where are you in Xenoblade?)

Same, I just beat Mario Galaxy 2, now I'm going back and completing the bit I have left

o:!

Nice, and I'm almost done with what I'm currently playing.

I don't think I ever 100% Galaxy 2, though I did get pretty close IIRC

Thinking Thracia and Sol reminds me of the ridiculous hack he played once

It had Micaiah, Ike, Celice, Judas from Tales of Destiny 2 and was supposed to be a parody Code Geass

And that time Micky dodged a 100 hit ballista

That sounds like... quite something

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm slowly waking up, but I'm good!

How are things on your end? (where are you in Xenoblade?)

good and stuff

Nothing too important but classes

Still in Mechonis Field

Trying to make my way up

Hello, hi, hey.

I would like to ask some advice.

Would people in this thread mind if I asked for their opinion on a complicated matter (one that requires a lengthy explanation).

i can give an opinion of few words

Nothing lengthy

Classes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello, hi, hey.

I would like to ask some advice.

Would people in this thread mind if I asked for their opinion on a complicated matter (one that requires a lengthy explanation)?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvdf5n-zI14

jk man go ahead, I'll answer to the best of my ability

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcoming answers, now prepare yourselves for a wall of text.

It is regarding a Greek school exam.
For this exam we had to study a summary of (in Dutch) and certain passages from (in Greek) Homer's Odyssey.
On the exam we were given one of these Greek passages and we had to answer questions using this particular passage.
There was one question where there is disagreement between my teacher on the one hand and a classmate and me on the other hand.
The question was as follows: "Why didn't Odysseus succeed in saving his companions' lives?"
In the Greek text, the following could be read (I give it here in translation):
"But even so he didn't save his companions, though he desired to; for through their blind folly they perished, the fools, who devoured the cows of Hyperion Helios."
Some background information (provided in the summary we had to study):
In the Underworld Odysseus had consulted the seer Teiresias.
Teiresias had warned him not to slaughter the cows of the sun god Helios on the island of Thrinacia; otherwise all his companions would perish.
On the island of Thrinacia Odysseus' companions, against Odysseus' warnings, slaughtered and ate cows of Helios.
In a subsequent storm at sea all companions perished; only Odysseus survived.
The answer to the question according to my teacher should be along these lines: 'Odysseus didn't succeed in saving his companions' lives because of their own stupidity.'
A classmate of mine had answered something like this: 'Odysseus didn't succeed in saving his companions' lives because they had slaughtered cows of Helios.'
Would you count this answer correct or incorrect?
My teacher counted it incorrect, citing the Greek text: it, she says, puts more emphasis on the companions' stupidity than on the slaughtering of Helios's cows.
She says this is a question that has to be answered based on the Greek passage, not based on other knowledge of the Odyssey (like the summary we had to study); however, the eating of Helios' kine is mentioned in the Greek text and it is the direct cause of Odysseus' inability to save his companions' lives, whereas his companions' stupidity is an indirect cause.
Is it right to count the direct cause wrong and this indirect cause right?
I don't agree.
I'd like to hear your thoughts.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

good and stuff

Nothing too important but classes

Still in Mechonis Field

Trying to make my way up i can give an opinion of few words

Nothing lengthy

Classes

What do you think of Mechonis Field in general and more specifically of its track?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcoming answers, now prepare yourselves for a wall of text.

It is regarding a Greek school exam.
For this exam we had to study a summary of (in Dutch) and certain passages from (in Greek) Homer's Odyssey.
On the exam we were given one of these Greek passages and we had to answer questions using this particular passage.
There was one question where there is disagreement between my teacher on the one hand and a classmate and me on the other hand.
The question was as follows: "Why didn't Odysseus succeed in saving his companions' lives?"
In the Greek text, the following could be read (I give it here in translation):
"But even so he didn't save his companions, though he desired to; for through their blind folly they perished, the fools, who devoured the cows of Hyperion Helios."
Some background information (provided in the summary we had to study):
In the Underworld Odysseus had consulted the seer Teiresias.
Teiresias had warned him not to slaughter the cows of the sun god Helios on the island of Thrinacia; otherwise all his companions would perish.
On the island of Thrinacia Odysseus' companions, against Odysseus' warnings, slaughtered and ate cows of Helios.
In a subsequent storm at sea all companions perished; only Odysseus survived.
The answer to the question according to my teacher should be along these lines: 'Odysseus didn't succeed in saving his companions' lives because of their own stupidity.'
A classmate of mine had answered something like this: 'Odysseus didn't succeed in saving his companions' lives because they had slaughtered cows of Helios.'
Would you count this answer correct or incorrect?
My teacher counted it incorrect, citing the Greek text: it, she says, puts more emphasis on the companions' stupidity than on the slaughtering of Helios's cows.
She says this is a question that has to be answered based on the Greek passage, not based on other knowledge of the Odyssey (like the summary we had to study); however, the eating of Helios' kine is mentioned in the Greek text and it is the direct cause of Odysseus' inability to save his companions' lives, whereas his companions' stupidity is an indirect cause.
Is it right to count the direct cause wrong and this indirect cause right?
I don't agree.
I'd like to hear your thoughts.

If the question was to be based solely on that passage and not on broader knowledge of the Odyssey, then I agree with the teacher. Though I can see where you and your classmate are coming from.

Were I the teacher I might have given partial credit for that answer (is that a thing in Dutch schools?), but I'm not so IDK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the question was to be based solely on that passage and not on broader knowledge of the Odyssey, then I agree with the teacher. Though I can see where you and your classmate are coming from.

Were I the teacher I might have given partial credit for that answer (is that a thing in Dutch schools?), but I'm not so IDK.

That's what makes this difficult: these are "questions based on [this particular passage]".

Now the Greek passage doesn't explicitly say that the slaughtering of Helios' cows caused the companions' deaths, but from the way it is mentioned it's fairly obvious that this is what led to their deaths.

The question was worth 1 point.

So technically the teacher could give half a point for this (she gives half points for other questions too).

Edited by #RR Hattusili I
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcoming answers, now prepare yourselves for a wall of text.

It is regarding a Greek school exam.
For this exam we had to study a summary of (in Dutch) and certain passages from (in Greek) Homer's Odyssey.
On the exam we were given one of these Greek passages and we had to answer questions using this particular passage.
There was one question where there is disagreement between my teacher on the one hand and a classmate and me on the other hand.
The question was as follows: "Why didn't Odysseus succeed in saving his companions' lives?"
In the Greek text, the following could be read (I give it here in translation):
"But even so he didn't save his companions, though he desired to; for through their blind folly they perished, the fools, who devoured the cows of Hyperion Helios."
Some background information (provided in the summary we had to study):
In the Underworld Odysseus had consulted the seer Teiresias.
Teiresias had warned him not to slaughter the cows of the sun god Helios on the island of Thrinacia; otherwise all his companions would perish.
On the island of Thrinacia Odysseus' companions, against Odysseus' warnings, slaughtered and ate cows of Helios.
In a subsequent storm at sea all companions perished; only Odysseus survived.
The answer to the question according to my teacher should be along these lines: 'Odysseus didn't succeed in saving his companions' lives because of their own stupidity.'
A classmate of mine had answered something like this: 'Odysseus didn't succeed in saving his companions' lives because they had slaughtered cows of Helios.'
Would you count this answer correct or incorrect?
My teacher counted it incorrect, citing the Greek text: it, she says, puts more emphasis on the companions' stupidity than on the slaughtering of Helios's cows.
She says this is a question that has to be answered based on the Greek passage, not based on other knowledge of the Odyssey (like the summary we had to study); however, the eating of Helios' kine is mentioned in the Greek text and it is the direct cause of Odysseus' inability to save his companions' lives, whereas his companions' stupidity is an indirect cause.
Is it right to count the direct cause wrong and this indirect cause right?
I don't agree.
I'd like to hear your thoughts.

I'd say both answers would be true on a way.

Wait... I think if he wrote "eating, he wouldn't be a problem, but it's "slaughtering" that would be wrong.

I mean, it's implied strongly, but it's too much interpretation compared to the answer.

Then, there's a lot that is lost in translation, so we can only gives answers based on what you said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the welcoming answers, now prepare yourselves for a wall of text.

[wall of text]

hmmm

in my opinion both things do relate to each other so they could both be right

with odysseus' companions slaying the cows was due to their own stupidity

with one being more direct than the other, like i said, in my opinion, they both sound correct

but some teachers like to hear a certain thing more, and that kind of irritates me as well

but like shin said, i would at least give a little bump up in the grade for thinking out of the box for outside material other than the one you used

My search options are currently limited so I couldn't find it either

awww, poopy :/

Edited by Shockmaster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...