Jump to content

  • Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Welcome to BZPower!

Hi there, while we hope you enjoy browsing through the site, there's a lot more you can do if you register. The process is easy and you can use your Google, Facebook, or Twitter account to make it even faster. Some perks of joining include:
  • Create your own topics, participate in existing discussions, and vote in polls
  • Show off your creations, stories, art, music, and movies and play member and staff-run games
  • Enter contests to win free LEGO sets and other prizes, and vote to decide the winners
  • Participate in raffles, including exclusive raffles for new members, and win free LEGO sets
  • Send private messages to other members
  • Organize with other members to attend or send your MOCs to LEGO fan events all over the world
  • Much, much more!
Enjoy your visit!

Posted Image


Click to ToggleParticipate in our raffle!

Hi, Guest. Come take a look and participate in our raffle:

Chima 2014 Big Raffle
Chima 2014 New Member Raffle
Chima 2014 Little Raffle





Photo

We're All Smart -- Brain Allocation Theory

Posted by bonesiii , Jan 16 2009 · 544 views

Debate


The Brain Inequality Theory (The BIT lookaround.gif)

"I'm not very smart. Smart people. He was a genius. 'I'm pretty sure my IQ is higher than yours!' He has a low IQ. You're stupid."

Our culture is permeated with such statements. We have a basic theory that many people are much smarter than others. Some are smart, some are dumb, and this can be measured.

And that's it. It's thaaaat simple. To quote Threepio -- "We're doomed." That's the theory, if you're part of "the less-than-smart".

Worse, many people attach extreme emotional ideas to this theory. It varies a lot -- I've seen one person on BZP say he was offended that I brought out the truth of a particular debate (which even he said I had done), because "people don't want to be reminded others are smarter than them" (close paraphrase). He essentially thought only incorrect ideas should be allowed, so we don't offend dumb people. (Laugh, but he appeared to be serious. :-P) On the flip side, people who think they're dumb feel miserable about it, or people act arrogant because they think they're smart, etc..

Perhaps even worse than this, though, many people feel not that much emotion about it at all -- they just accept that they're dumb, nothin' they can do about it, so they think they aren't capable of accomplishing much in life. So they don't try.

And tons more stuff. I've only scratched the surface here of the consequences of this common theory of intelligence.


I think it's incorrect.


There might be some truth to it, but the vast majority of people, in my opinion, have the same brain capacity. When it comes to genetic definitions of intelligence, if a TRULY objective measure of intelligence could be formulated, I think everybody would measure roughly equally.

It's just that we're wired to use our intelligence in different ways.




The Brain Allocation Theory (The BAT :-P)

I've had this theory for a while, and it's based on a lot of different things. Note that I DO have an above average IQ, and people generally think of me as "smart" -- so I can "get away with" saying this. tongue.gif (But then, I can't for the life of me remember what my IQ is, so maybe I'm in the dumb category after all! ohmy.gif)


Essentially, people are forgetting about a key, Key, KEY aspect of existence. That is allocation.

Allocation essentially means that different amounts of a resource are channeled into different areas.

I first learned of this term from a (demo of a) Star Trek videogame about Klingons (yes, you correctly conclude I'm a geek :-P), and I think the example is one of the best so I'll use it here. (The demo was so fun I never bothered to buy the whole thing lol.)

Your spaceship has a certain level of energy. Roughly the same as other ships. You go through various scenarios, and one of your main jobs (aside from firing weapons and steering and such) is to allocate that energy into different major aspects of your ships.

If you're in battle, you allocate more energy to weapons and shields. If shields are down, you allocate your energy to weapons, but if you're seriously damaged, allocate it to the engines and flee. If you're traveling in relative safety, allocate more energy to engines. If you're traveling through a thick atmosphere, like that of a gas giant, allocate for shields. If your ship is damaged and you've either won the battle or fled to avoid destruction, allocate towards repairs.

Certain circumstances are more common than others. So this game also had "macros." These were specific preset arrangements of energy allocation that you could select from a list, and the various levels of everything would automatically adjust for the ideal for that situation.


Another example is money. When you make budget decisions, you allocate your money into different areas. Yet another example is time. You allocoate your time into different areas, but most people have roughly the same lifespans, wake-sleep cycles, etc. so roughly the same amount of time.

Intelligence defined objectively, then, is IMO this:

Intelligence: All-inclusive capacity of the brain to process, to think, generally equal for each member of a species.

How smart you are in different areas by this theory is a matter of allocating the amount of intelligence you have as a human being into different areas. Each of us has our own "macro." And to a degree we can even choose to reallocate (we can take classes, practice, etc. new skills to become "smart" in new areas; the limit is basically our own personal taste that is more genetic).




How do we allocate our brains?

Personal taste drives most of the differences in how we use our intelligence. I am into "heady" things (as people call them, though just about everything involves the head :-P), like logic and observation and physics and suchnot, and into art and storytelling and stuff like this. Someone else might be more into mechanics -- as often comes up in Bionicle debates, heh and not be into fiction at all. Someone might be into cooking, another into psychology, etc. Whatever.

IQ tests tend to be biased towards a particular type of this intelligence, especially spatial/mathematical/geometric/linguistic. They are written by people who think of themselves as smart, and are into written stuff and tests and whatnot. Other people who aren't into that sort of thing, naturally, aren't usually motivated to make up such tests. If they ever thought of making a test, it would come out quite differently.

Doesn't make one actually smarter or the other not. It's simply allocation.


Another factor that's often misunderstood is brain size. People think that big brain = smart. They think you can measure skulls and report on intelligence objectively (barring brain damage).

Wrong. Big brain does generally equal more memory capacity (though I have a large brain and my memory sucks, so go figure). But it also equals slower processing speed (that's me man!). A smaller brain means you can come up with smart decisions way faster.

This is why rats are smarter than donkeys. For example.

Again, it's an allocation thing. Smaller means smarter in one way, larger means smarter in another.




"WHAH? This Theory is BATty!"

"But bones, but bones," you might be thinking, "What if some people ARE smarter than others, in addition to allocating their intelligence?"

I realize that if we take the Klingon Warship analogy, it's possible that one ship will have more total energy to allocate around. If we take money, some have more, some have less. If we take time, some die early. Could it be this way with human intelligence?

Well, that very well might be true. But my observation, as a "smart guy" (:-P) and an Observer of People Because I'm A Writer (an OPBIAW....) has been that it's generally not true.

How to accurately measure this? No idea -- measurements are devised by people, and people have biases. Perhaps an IQ test that more accurately represented different types of intelligence could do this. I have heard countless news reports about other people noting the fallacies with IQ tests -- maybe reform in this area will happen soon. Maybe it's already happening and I've missed the news. :-P

My sense is that all human beings tend to have about the same, nonetheless.



Just look around, and more importantly look at yourself, when you've been told you're smart or when you've thought "I am dumb."

At least for me, people tell me I'm smarter than average all the time, and yet there are lots of very average typical things that most people are capable of that I'm simply not. Mainly, I look at how fast people around me can react to things and it's amazing to me -- I am slow. Plus with an abysmal memory. People talk about the ways they forget things as they approach/reach their elderly years, and my reaction is, "Dude, that's been me since First Grade!"

Yet other things for me are so easy it's like preschool to me that tons of grown adults can't even hope to do. Art, for instance. I just naturally know what to do when it comes to art -- barely even had any education in this area, though I must give cred to a particular genius (:-P) who used to work for Disney that wrote a book that helped me and whose name and book title I forget lol -- whereas other people say things like "I can't even draw a straight line." I remember (vaguely :-P) one time I drew a perfect circle when I was very young. A grown adult thought it was amazing. I thought that was amazing.

I also remember one time at a fair or some such event (I forget lol) there was some challenge where you look in a mirror and move your finger across a five-point star backwards. I just did it instantly and thought nothing of it, but the person running the event was astounded, though it was later in the day and apparently many people had tried it. I was the first, she said, to do it right the first time, and easily at that. I didn't even need to hesitate, which is apparently unusual. And everybody around was similarly amazed, including my family.

I was frankly astounded that everybody couldn't do it.

If we're all honest with each other, we are all at various times amazed at what others' brains allow them to do compared to us, and also at times amazed that they can't do things we consider easy.

Access your memory banks (it's probably easy for you :-P) and you'll see it's true. :-)




Mental Handicaps

What about mental illness or "handicaps"?

Well, it might depend. Certainly many mental handicaps make normal living difficult. Many such people are way more dependant on normal people to survive than others.

But many are also happier people. Us "smart" people tend to have a lot worse emotional outlooks and friendliness issues, or at least that's my understanding. Yet the so-called "handicapped" often seem to naturally grasp what we cannot -- that happiness is important. In this area, IMO many "mentally ill" people are healthier mentally than the so-called normal.

It's a generalization, though, and maybe not even accurate overalll -- it's not like I've met every such person on the planet. Certainly brain damage does seem to make sense as something that would reduce overall intelligence. But I suspect it has more to do with the type of mental illness.

For example, many result in a smaller percentage of the brain being used, yet that can also result in incredible skill in a particular area. Which makes sense given allocation -- their brain becomes less able to do anything, so it specializes in something. In that smaller area, brain signals have less ground to cover, which means faster thinking. So at least with that skill, they are thus smarter than most people.

So on this issue, my conclusion is, I'm really not sure. But at the very least, us 'smart people' exaggerate how much smarter we are than the mentally handicapped.



Mental Laziness

There is also the matter of mental laziness. I DO think we can do a wrong by choosing NOT to think. Your genetic intelligence might just be fine, but you choose instead not even to use that brain you've got. Mental excercise, vitamins, and various such things also, of course, matter. These are choices that each individual makes -- something they have control over.

Ultimately, our goals in terms of opinions and thought and such should always be to try to find the truth. If a person actually isn't wired to understand how to find a particular truth, fine -- but there's no excuse in my view for those who act offended that someone else has done a better job at finding the truth because they don't want to be reminded other people are "smarter." Trying to find the truth is something anyone can do, even if they ARE "dumb", and being willing to appreciate the mental work others have done and learn from them is important too.

That's a pride issue, not an intelligence issue.


On the other hand, there's also education to consider. If someone is never TOLD that they can think, they often actually believe it. And of course, if they are not given at least a basic logical education they're gonna have a harder time at life *ahem, folks who are in charge of education, ahem*.

So in other words, even mental laziness might not be entirely the fault of the person.

In general I advise a respectful, helpful attitude towards people you think aren't thinking as much as they should (and you might not know all their circumstances or time issues either). Condescension, I have concluded, almost never works anyways. I think this is a big part of why. (And I can say that from personal experience -- I've had a condescension problem for a long time and still something I struggle with. I can't think of a single time when it actually helped rather than hurt. Could be my memory.)




Making Fun of the Dumb

Alright, we all do it. Let's just get that admission out of the way. Hard not to sometimes. XD

Personally, my rule of thumb is, if it's a true mental handicap, or even what I believe to be an allocation issue, it's really NOT funny.

If it's mental laziness... well, on some levels it's sad, and maybe not their fault. On another level, sometimes you just have to laugh to keep your sanity, though. :-P


But mean-spirited approaches to intelligence... against either dumb OR smart... even if we assume the BIT theory is right and my BAT theory is wrong for the most part... What's the point?

I've always wondered this, you know, you see the typical teen of my generation make fun of someone they think is [insert intelligence-related insult here] in terms of genetic intelligence, insult them. Seriously, what the heck is the point of that? If it's genetic, why is smarter necessarily better and dumb necessarily worse? At least in any sense that it makes sense to make fun of them?

I think that has more to do with maturity than intelligence -- frankly, it's stupid. :-P If the BIT theory is right, everybody's intelligence is different anyways, so the chances are, you're not all that bright yourself brainy. (Is my general reaction, heh.)

AND! If human beings in general are concerned with finding the truth -- the ways of living that lead to peace and pleasurably lives for as many people as possible if not everyone -- then isn't the DUTY of the "smart" to use their intelligence to help the "less smart"? At least in my way of thinking, that is the case.

For a "smart" person to make fun of the dumb is to proclaim "I don't want the help of others smart than ME, and I accept that they're allowed to make fun of me."



For example, Einstein is credited with so much in science that has improved our understanding of the world -- his brilliance helped the rest of us. (Note that he's another key evidence of BAT -- he actually had a rare mental illness that made him strangely deficient in many normal areas. He had weaknesses that made even him equal to the rest of us (IMO), it's just that he allocated a lot into the areas of thinking that led to his original discoveries in science.)

Genius inventors HELP the rest of us.




Making Fun of the Allocated Different

If my BAT theory is right, making fun of or looking down on others for being what we deem "dumb" makes even less sense. Our own allocation of our intelligence is basically arbitrary and beyond our control -- ruled by our genes for the most part and also often by our life situation, culture, etc.

So if we are smart in a particular area, who are we to say that's the "right" area? What about the areas we're dumb in? Are we to be chided for being dumb in those areas? We usually reject those areas simply because they're "not me" -- but that's just how you happened to come out.

What's more, society as a whole is most likely benefitted by variety, not hurt.

Think about it -- if we were all clones of each other whose brains were all allocated into the same areas, then we would all have the exact same strengths and weaknesses.

Strengths? Fine and dandy, we'd all have to compete for the same sorts of jobs (:-P) but as a society we'd be unshakable....

In those areas.

But if a society's weaknesses are not balanced by variety -- if everybody in a society cannot meet a particular challenge -- then that makes each member of that society extremely vulnerable.

For example, if everybody was a farmer only, great, we'd have plenty of food. But what about times of draught? What about war? Where are your planners that stockpile food in case of shortage? Where are your strategists, those who can defend the farmers?

We could propose that all humans would be farmers. So no wars -- at least not wars of any noticeable success. :-P Okay, wunderbar. But farming in ancient times before modern equipment was challenging, and the slightest weather or pest challenge could risk your very livelihood. In some areas farming is nigh-impossible.

Engineers, inventors, chemists, traders, etc. all make life better for different people the globe over, taking food to those who cannot farm it, making equipment, pesticides, and crop additives that increase yield and thus improve security against disaster, and all manner of things. Farmers get intellectual and imaginative stiumulation from producers of art, fiction, TV, whatnot.

We could even propose that everybody being farmers would NOT mean less war, but more -- when nature-caused disaster strikes, many might raid other farms. No food-allocation planners exist to provide food for those stricken with such luck, so the temptation to do that might be higher.

With no philosophers to figure out that war is generally harmful to both sides more than helpful, with nobody to stem the need for war in the first place, with no variety, war just might be more rampant, more painful, thus deadlier, and to add insult to injury, with no historians or teachers to tell the farmers that such wars don't often have success, constant even when they fail all the time.


In the real world, nobody's tastes are that narrowly defined, and overlaps occur often. In the areas of self-expression, you might think we wouldn't tolerate other people's tastes at all, but the human brain also tends to get bored with the same old, same old. We often WANT to see expressions of tastes totally different from our own, at least when we are honest about it, and we don't want to have to make it ourselves usually. It's more fun when you don't see it coming, when its source is beyond you.


In other words, different people make the world a safer and more interesting place.

I suggest gratitude towards those who are different from you. smile.gif



Benefits of BAT

IF I'm right (and the truth matters, certainly), then the benefits are multifold. I doubt I'm thinking of all of them. :-P


For one, we can get off this ridiculous "you stupid person hahaha!" train. At least for genetic intelligence. tongue.gif And even in the other cases, it's really hard to instantly know whether someone actually is dumber than you objectively. You might think so at first, but what if YOU'RE the one allocated poorly for the subject in question -- what if the other person is the wise and you the fool? Does making fun of the 'dumb' really make sense, given this?

As a result, we could have a much more peaceful world where we see a simple and very important reason to respect others. Most of us claim we want peace -- this is a HUGE way we could make it.

(If we all believe it and practice it. Which, I know *sigh* is unlikely. But each of us can take up this standard for ourselves, and set an example for others. :-))



Self-esteem makes a heck of a lot more sense under the BAT theory. You might not seem as smart as other people... but you ARE! You just might not have yet found out in which way you are.

Don't let people tell you you're dumb. Don't believe it. Don't tell yourself you're dumb. You are smart. :-)




It becomes easier to not just tolerate but respect and appreciate different people's preferences and tastes. You see something you don't like, and instead of writing it off as dumb and whining about how miserable you are, it can actually be interesting to you on some level. You can learn to appreciate and even be fascinated by other people's differences.



It becomes easier to have an open mind. When someone says something you disagree with, it's harder to justify writing it off as "dumb." It gives you pause.

Forces you to think.

"What if they're right? What are the reasons they are this way? Is this just a taste difference and it's subjective? Or are they better able to understand something objective that I'm missing? Can I learn from them?"



Debate becomes a lot more respectful and useful. Debate is no longer about showing off who's smart and who's dumb for pride reasons. It's just about who's correct and who's not. (And IMO even that isn't right -- it's about WHAT is true and WHAT is false, not about the "who" at all -- but that's another issue.)




Summary

Most people think there are "smart" people, "dumb" people, and a range in between. They believe in "I have a higher IQ so I'm smarter" kinds of thinking.

Methinks that's false.

I think everybody has roughly the same amount of intelligence, but we allocate it into different areas. We channel it in different ways.

Some are artists, some are engineers, some are tacticians, others are one thing, still others another, and everybody has so many different tastes and strengths and weaknesses in so many different combinations...

But objectively, all are (roughly) the same level of intelligence.

And IQ tests are biased. tongue.gif

End summary. 'Sthat short enough? laugh.gif

  • 0



We all shine on, bones, we all shine on.

(Tell me if you get the song reference. tongue.gif)

|MX|
    • 0
Photo
Takua the Wanderer
Jan 16 2009 12:32 AM
Yay! I'm smart! _icon_joy_.gif

Anyway, I notice that when we call someone dumb (or at least when we poke fun at it), we tend to be making fun of their lack of common sense. Like in a lot of comedies/comics, they're funny because they all have no common sense. So is that part of allocation, or do people just have plenty of common sense and just choose to ignore it? tongue.gif
(Not sure what my point is here)

And I'm just wondering; what if you're allocated towards something that's kinda unhelpful? To use the warship analogy, what if you allocate all of it into... say... wallpapers. I can't really imagine something being useless in real life, but hypothetically... shrugs.gif
    • 0
QUOTE(-MX- @ Jan 16 2009, 01:28 AM)
We all shine on, bones, we all shine on.

(Tell me if you get the song reference. tongue.gif)

|MX|

It sounds familiar. I will cite my bad memory now... *cites bad memory*

QUOTE(Takua the Wanderer @ Jan 16 2009, 01:32 AM)
Yay! I'm smart! _icon_joy_.gif

Anyway, I notice that when we call someone dumb (or at least when we poke fun at it), we tend to be making fun of their lack of common sense. Like in a lot of comedies/comics, they're funny because they all have no common sense. So is that part of allocation, or do people just have plenty of common sense and just choose to ignore it? tongue.gif
(Not sure what my point is here)

And I'm just wondering; what if you're allocated towards something that's kinda unhelpful? To use the warship analogy, what if you allocate all of it into... say... wallpapers. I can't really imagine something being useless in real life, but hypothetically... shrugs.gif

That's probably more mental laziness or perhaps poor education. tongue.gif Or maybe just lack of experience... So might be some age discrimination issues there. tongue.gif

IMO nothing is objectively unhelpful. I mean, look at me, I'm an artist and a writer. A ton of people think people like me are pointless. But unhelpful to whom? And in what situation? Speaking for myself, the barebones machinery of life alone is not enough to make life worth it, not enough to maintain sanity. Work, eat, sleep, reproduce, die. It's not enough, and who among us really wants only that? We want expression and enjoyment in life too, and art and fiction are major ways to do that. We want love, we want joy, we want fun, we want MORE.

We want wallpaper. tongue.gif Who is to say that an expert wallpaperer is worth nothing? Who is to say that that person is not just as valuable, objectively, as Albert Einstein? What if quality wallpaper is a key part of what maintains many people's sanity?


Now if someone is allocated, literally, only for evil, harmful purposes... well, IMO that's not actually possible. Evil comes about when we aren't balancing our allocations properly -- our strengths to bolster our weaknesses -- and for deeper religious/worldview reasons that we can't get into here. We are all capable of evil, but I don't think anyone is "born evil." Thinking you didn't mean this, but throwing it out there anyways. smile.gif If a person has strengths, then IMO they serve a useful purpose in existence.

Besides, at the very least they could get a boring job to pay for wallpapering their own home to maintain their own sanity. tongue.gif Like a hobby. Even if satisfying our own needs for entertainment and self-expression is the only benefit because of a certain social/cultural/economic issue, that is still fulfilling a need. smile.gif

I'd reference the movie Happy Feet, in that regard. smile.gif

    • 0
Photo
Torchflare1234
Jan 16 2009 01:51 AM
Even you can be a genius.[/smokeythebearvoice]

tongue.gif
    • 0
My school's grading system will disagree with you. It's whole point is to separate people into those who are smart, a few in between, and those who others can shout, "U FAIL!" at. And apparently it's a totally legitimate system. tongue.gif

I digress. Bones, your brain capacity seems to be put towards writing easy to read entries, but making them so long that people start scrolling to the bottom to see if it actually ever ends... I mean, interesting read. laugh.gif

music.gif
    • 0
Well done, Bonesiii.

Personally, I have to agree with this. I've never done well with test and the likes very well myself, but I usually do rather well when it actually comes to actual useful, practical knowledge. For example; the first time I ever held a colt .45 1911 pistol, I instantly figured out how to operate it, despite not really knowing what was what beyond the more universal features(and it has quite a few unique things about it); on the other hand, I've seen some people react to firearms in such an uncertain way that they think it will spawn an intelligence of it's own and kill them. While that's probably more of a factor of who has an unreasonable phobia, I can say that what I've learned about practical, helpful things is more useful to me than the junk they ask me about in tests. In fact, History,Biology(to a degree) and Language are about the only things I pay attention to in "school", and then only the actual important things, because they're the only thing that will likely even have actual benefit to me; knowing how to divide by zero(which some mathematicians claim is possible) isn't really going to help me if I'm going to be stuck out in the wilderness, or working on computers, or whatever.

And really; most of my friends and family(well, distant relatives that I consider friends and the likes) are what "most people" consider to be rednecks, and they have a boatload more common-sense and logic than some of these people from the city I run into; not to say city-folk aren't generally bright, but you get what I'm saying. Said relatives don't know who the 23'rd president of... whatever foreign country is, but they know more down-to-Earth things that help out more when it comes to practical things.

Anyway, thanks for posting this. Reminded me of something I forgot to do. *glomps Bonesiii*

...

And no, that wasn't it.


Anyway, decent job writing this entry. I found it very informative.




-Ngakunui
    • 0
"Because we all *beat*
Shine *beat*
On *beat*
*rest*
Like the moon *beat*
And the stars *beat*
And the sun *beat*

Also
    • 0

QUOTE(Takua the Wanderer @ Jan 16 2009, 07:32 AM)
Yay! I'm smart! _icon_joy_.gif





QUOTE
Anyway, I notice that when we call someone dumb (or at least when we poke fun at it), we tend to be making fun of their lack of common sense. Like in a lot of comedies/comics, they're funny because they all have no common sense. So is that part of allocation, or do people just have plenty of common sense and just choose to ignore it? tongue.gif
(Not sure what my point is here)







QUOTE
And I'm just wondering; what if you're allocated towards something that's kinda unhelpful? To use the warship analogy, what if you allocate all of it into... say... wallpapers. I can't really imagine something being useless in real life, but hypothetically... shrugs.gif




QUOTE(bonesiii @ Jan 16 2009, 05:36 AM)
Genius inventors HELP the rest of us.







And just for the heck of it:
» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «

<o> <o>
    • 0
QUOTE(BCii @ Jan 16 2009, 11:23 AM)
(Mass of Calvin and Hobbes comic strips)

You win forever.
    • 0
Photo
Jenny Quantum
Jan 16 2009 03:33 PM
I've held these beliefs for a couple years, but never even thought of making theories about it, let alone an essay. =P

However, indeed, there is no actual way to measure intelligence. One may be good at accounting and math, while the other is good at lying and panhandling. I guess I'm seen like a Thomas Aquinas IRL, though I refuse to be seen as such. xD

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaalms... ._.



However, there is one thing that remains in the air: finding truth is one thing, but using that truth is something else. Compulsive debaters will indeed find truth (providing they are humble enough to realize that, lol), but that does not mean they will actually do anything with it except put it in their memory bank. I knew a guy like that...


And no, make it longer.

~EW~


On another semi-related note, what form of Certainty do you support? Y'know, like Empiricism, Epistemology, etc.
    • 0
Photo
Great Being #1
Jan 17 2009 04:14 PM
What about age? Are you implying babies are as smart as old people? How would little kids allocate soooo much as to be as smart as others? Wouldn't it be still possible to add energy to yourself rather than just allocating it?
    • 0
Photo
Jenny Quantum
Jan 17 2009 04:55 PM
A baby would have immense potential energy for intelligence, while an old fart would have immense, um, kinetic (o.O) energy. They both have equal intelligence, just different forms of it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, though, bony. tongue.gif

~EW~
    • 0
I'm the definition of this.

I am pretty smart. But I am pretty stupid at the same time.

Cause I do say one thing thing that's useful and smart, and second later I can do or say something else that's really stupid/mean/annoying/ticks people off. (sometimes I accomplish this by doing it all at once..

And sometimes it's on purpose. Which is stupid in of itself. )
    • 0
QUOTE(Xtra Carbon Copy Justice)
making them so long that people start scrolling to the bottom to see if it actually ever ends
I totally did that. ohmy.gif


QUOTE(Great Being #1)
Are you implying babies are as smart as old people? How would little kids allocate soooo much as to be as smart as others?
Baby cries; adult comes running. Baby reaches for dangerous object; adult has to react quickly. Leave it to a baby to destroy what adults have painstakingly built to be childproof; adults have to make childproof objects in the first place. Who's smart now? Besides, at some point, both might be toothless and in diapers. tongue.gif

I'm going to call you "brains aye-yai-yai." Could you possibly make these things any longer? happy.gif

©1984-2009 Toaraga EAM

    • 0
Overall it's a noble and plausible idea. Every person has different strengths and weaknesses but on the whole everyone is equal.

But there's one error: Why should this allocation be limited to intelligence? Isn't it more logical that the strengths themselves are being allocated rather than only the intelligence? Instead of being a genuis you could also be a multi-talented sportsman. You also have to consider that the brain does not only determine someone's intelligence but also their skills, ethics and personality. Still, you wouldn't say they are the same thing as intelligence.
    • 0
QUOTE(EmperorWhenua @ Jan 16 2009, 04:33 PM)
I've held these beliefs for a couple years, but never even thought of making theories about it, let alone an essay. =P

However, indeed, there is no actual way to measure intelligence. One may be good at accounting and math, while the other is good at lying and panhandling. I guess I'm seen like a Thomas Aquinas IRL, though I refuse to be seen as such. xD

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaalms... ._.



However, there is one thing that remains in the air: finding truth is one thing, but using that truth is something else. Compulsive debaters will indeed find truth (providing they are humble enough to realize that, lol), but that does not mean they will actually do anything with it except put it in their memory bank. I knew a guy like that...


And no, make it longer.

~EW~


On another semi-related note, what form of Certainty do you support? Y'know, like Empiricism, Epistemology, etc.

Well, acting on that truth is important too. One thing in that vein though -- many people seem to think that's the stage at which they should close their mind. I.e. people become set in their ways. It's possible to act on something you actually think is true, then find out later it isn't, and regret your actions.

So what I'm saying is, personally at least I always want to make especially sure I've actually found the truth before I act on it much.

And I'll have to research your final question as it must be in some subject I never studied. tongue.gif (Or forgot lol.)


QUOTE(Great Being #1 @ Jan 17 2009, 05:14 PM)
What about age? Are you implying babies are as smart as old people? How would little kids allocate soooo much as to be as smart as others? Wouldn't it be still possible to add energy to yourself rather than just allocating it?

Sure, but I'm talking mainly about genetics leading to intelligence.

However, there ARE things babies are smarter at than adults. Prime example is language-learning ability. Young children's brains are wired to basically do a Sherlock Holmes times 10 analysis of the sounds and actions they see around them in order to deduce what sounds mean what and how to pronounce them.

By a certain age (which I forget...), that language-learning hyper-ability switches off, and as a result it is much harder for an adult to learn a language, even if they've never learned one before, and especially a second language. Children that learn two languages very early grasp them much more quickly than adults.

Also, children's brains aren't as stuffed with distracting info and stresses, plus their brains are a bit smaller, meaning faster in general.

So there at least some areas where objectively babies are as smart as adults. Now, yes, experience and mental exercise improves upon adults' intelligence, though. And of course if you count knowledge, that's a different story. tongue.gif

But overall, yes, it's a matter of allocation. The adult allocates more space to memory and knowledge and experience and thinks more slowly, while the baby does the opposite. Objectively it's roughly equal, I contend.


QUOTE(EmperorWhenua @ Jan 17 2009, 05:55 PM)
A baby would have immense potential energy for intelligence, while an old fart would have immense, um, kinetic (o.O) energy. They both have equal intelligence, just different forms of it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, though, bony. tongue.gif

~EW~

Kinetic? tongue.gif

QUOTE(Toaraga @ Jan 18 2009, 03:28 AM)
QUOTE(Xtra Carbon Copy Justice)
making them so long that people start scrolling to the bottom to see if it actually ever ends
I totally did that. ohmy.gif


QUOTE(Great Being #1)
Are you implying babies are as smart as old people? How would little kids allocate soooo much as to be as smart as others?
Baby cries; adult comes running. Baby reaches for dangerous object; adult has to react quickly. Leave it to a baby to destroy what adults have painstakingly built to be childproof; adults have to make childproof objects in the first place. Who's smart now? Besides, at some point, both might be toothless and in diapers. tongue.gif

I'm going to call you "brains aye-yai-yai." Could you possibly make these things any longer? happy.gif

©1984-2009 Toaraga EAM


I could try... tongue.gif


QUOTE(TOA BIONUI @ Jan 18 2009, 08:57 AM)
Overall it's a noble and plausible idea. Every person has different strengths and weaknesses but on the whole everyone is equal.

But there's one error: Why should this allocation be limited to intelligence? Isn't it more logical that the strengths themselves are being allocated rather than only the intelligence? Instead of being a genuis you could also be a multi-talented sportsman. You also have to consider that the brain does not only determine someone's intelligence but also their skills, ethics and personality. Still, you wouldn't say they are the same thing as intelligence.

Allocation certainly extends far beyond intelligence. I'm talking about the brain specifically in this article. Sports involve the brain just as much as "heady" things. Muscle memory for example. Yes, you excercise the muscles, but everybody else does that or doesn't too -- a writer exercises the fingers and suchnot. (Sometimes too much; carpal tunnel yadda.) So yes, there is plenty of allocation involving the body too, but that is a seperate matter from the brain. I'd definately say that whether you're into math or sports more is much MUCH more about your brain than your body. Your tastes and such.

Part of the problem here is just that "intelligence" can be such a subjective word. In terms of genetic intelligence, knowledge doesn't count as "smart," though in everyday English people talk about it as if it was. And to a degree it IS -- knowledge can help you make wise decisions.But I also often point out that ignorance shouldn't be confused with stupidity -- ignorance just means you don't happen to have knowledge, or the right knowledge, which can be other people's fault as much as yours, and you can overcome it. Genetic "stupidity" would be something you probably couldn't overcome much.

So I'd just caution that there's room for disagreement there just in terms of how you define "smart."
    • 0
Photo
Jenny Quantum
Jan 18 2009 08:02 PM
QUOTE(bonesiii @ Jan 18 2009, 12:32 PM)
QUOTE(EmperorWhenua @ Jan 16 2009, 04:33 PM)
On another semi-related note, what form of Certainty do you support? Y'know, like Empiricism, Epistemology, etc.

And I'll have to research your final question as it must be in some subject I never studied. tongue.gif (Or forgot lol.)



QUOTE(EmperorWhenua @ Jan 17 2009, 05:55 PM)
A baby would have immense potential energy for intelligence, while an old fart would have immense, um, kinetic (o.O) energy. They both have equal intelligence, just different forms of it.

Correct me if I'm wrong, though, bony. tongue.gif

~EW~

Kinetic? tongue.gif

waaht?



Um, yeah, I couldn't find a better word. I mean, what's the opposite of potential energy? tongue.gif

~EW~
    • 0
QUOTE(bonesiii @ Jan 18 2009, 09:32 PM)
QUOTE(TOA BIONUI @ Jan 18 2009, 08:57 AM)
Overall it's a noble and plausible idea. Every person has different strengths and weaknesses but on the whole everyone is equal.

But there's one error: Why should this allocation be limited to intelligence? Isn't it more logical that the strengths themselves are being allocated rather than only the intelligence? Instead of being a genuis you could also be a multi-talented sportsman. You also have to consider that the brain does not only determine someone's intelligence but also their skills, ethics and personality. Still, you wouldn't say they are the same thing as intelligence.

Allocation certainly extends far beyond intelligence. I'm talking about the brain specifically in this article. Sports involve the brain just as much as "heady" things. Muscle memory for example. Yes, you excercise the muscles, but everybody else does that or doesn't too -- a writer exercises the fingers and suchnot. (Sometimes too much; carpal tunnel yadda.) So yes, there is plenty of allocation involving the body too, but that is a seperate matter from the brain. I'd definately say that whether you're into math or sports more is much MUCH more about your brain than your body. Your tastes and such.

Part of the problem here is just that "intelligence" can be such a subjective word. In terms of genetic intelligence, knowledge doesn't count as "smart," though in everyday English people talk about it as if it was. And to a degree it IS -- knowledge can help you make wise decisions.But I also often point out that ignorance shouldn't be confused with stupidity -- ignorance just means you don't happen to have knowledge, or the right knowledge, which can be other people's fault as much as yours, and you can overcome it. Genetic "stupidity" would be something you probably couldn't overcome much.

So I'd just caution that there's room for disagreement there just in terms of how you define "smart."


Apparently we both mean the same thing but use different words and definitions. I totally agree on the sports point; suppose it was a bad example.
Let's put it like this:

- Everyone's brain has the roughly same output.
- Some people allocate more output into classical intelligence (mainly logic thinking).
- Allocation into other fields is not related to classical intelligence but results in other positive qualities.

Does this match your perception as well? smile.gif
    • 0
QUOTE(TOA BIONUI @ Jan 19 2009, 09:44 AM)
Apparently we both mean the same thing but use different words and definitions.

That's usually the case with apparent disagreements. smile.gif


QUOTE
I totally agree on the sports point; suppose it was a bad example.
Let's put it like this:

- Everyone's brain has the roughly same output.
- Some people allocate more output into classical intelligence (mainly logic thinking).
- Allocation into other fields is not related to classical intelligence but results in other positive qualities.

Does this match your perception as well? smile.gif

Yes -- I would just be careful to clarify that the third point is also objectively a type of intelligence. And that it's not worse or better than classical intelligence.

And that's a good way to label it, BTW -- classical intelligence. We did not always know what we know about the brain, after all.
    • 0
You know rereading this, I'm surprised you didn't stick a Batman joke or a Dark Knight reference. tongue.gif
    • 0
wait, have you ever heard of the "multiple intelligence" theory? this sounds alot like that.

anyway- rebuttal time.

i agree with this for the most part, but--

You say that academic 'failures' can be attributed to "mental laziness", but what can you say causes "mental laziness"?
Isn't choosing to not use the potential for intelligence you have a reflection of a lack of it to begin with?

Also, isn't choosing to allocate ones brain in follies and relatively inconsequential meanderings as opposed to significant works a reflection of ones intelligence too?

I believe that the root of the differences is in the focus of the person in question. people who tend to stay focused on 'small' issues will appear less intelligent to those who focus on relatively larger ones. in a group where every one is focused on things like style, etc. everyone will be on about the same level. same with everyone at say, some sort of scientific convention. but members of the scientific convention would be more likely to look down on the other group than vise versa. the ones with a "smaller" world view would be labeled as the less intelligent ones.

that was really just of the cuff, so forgive me if it doesn't read right or doesn't make sense.

Pg
    • 0
My mom taught me how to read when I was little. This probably contributed to me being able to start kindergarten early. Which I didn't end up doing. Don't ask.

Also, I suppose people would get more allocation if teachers didn't teach the same things over again every year and claim it is a new thing. Last year, my math class (note that I'm a grade ahead in math) was mostly filled with stuff I had already learned. The math teachers even skipped most of a chapter that was full of new stuff, saying "Oh, you'll learn that next year!" As a result, I ended up with an A+. An easy A+. I even did many of the challenge assignments. If they would change the math classes so that they are filled with new things instead of old things students have already mastered, I think people would gain more intelligence in that area.

It probably also depends on genetics. My dad is good at math. I'm good at math. I didn't have any particular interest in math until I was put a grade ahead in it.

Also, I don't have any particular interest in sports. I'm six feet tall, and I'm fourteen, so adults sometimes ask if I play basketball. I actually am terrible at basketball. I'm also terrible at volleyball, football, baseball, and everything else we've done in P.E. except track (100 meter run, 200 meter run, and high jump), because throughout my life I've loved to run. So out of those, track is the only thing I'm interested in and the only thing I'm good at.

All in all, your theory makes quite a bit of sense.
    • 0
QUOTE
You say that academic 'failures' can be attributed to "mental laziness", but what can you say causes "mental laziness"?
Isn't choosing to not use the potential for intelligence you have a reflection of a lack of it to begin with?

I don't understand the question -- it sounds self-contradictory. How can you have the intelligence and yet also lack it? tongue.gif Sounds like an equivocation fallacy -- you're using the genetic definition in the first part, but the overall or the choice definition in the second part. That's mixing terms.

Like I said, mental laziness can have many causes. The most innocent is just that nobody ever told you you CAN think things through more than you do. "You", I mean, not you personally. tongue.gif

Which is a major goal with this entry -- to tell yall that you CAN think. smile.gif

Is mental laziness a form of stupidity? Sure! I'm not disputing that -- that's an English definition of the word.

My point is, when you just blanketly insult someone as "stupid," they usually think you mean genetically. They think you mean they are incurably stupid. Which IMO is NOT the case.

See what I'm sayin'?


Other causes can be an emotional addiction to selfishness, pride, and such. This often happens when people have assumed their own tastes are superior, and learned by childhood or adult situations to enjoy attacking others who are different (often caused by being made fun of and getting defensive, then getting offensive). This tends to entrench their mindset, sometimes deeply.

Once a faulty and close-minded mindset is "stuck" in a person their mental laziness tends to go sky-high. Because deep down they realize that if they ever allow themselves to think it through properly, they will lose their antagonistic and twisted type of "fun".

I'm not excusing it -- but that's a pattern I have seen in countless people, and it's not ALL their fault. Sometimes they just don't know any better. They "know not what they do," if you will. (Something that, once understood, BTW, makes forgiveness a lot easier. smile.gif And makes helping them easier too. smile.gif)



Sometimes it's just sheer exhaustion. Other pressures just take away too much mental energy.

You can label all of that "stupidity", but my point with this entry is, it's not genetic. And in most cases it's curable. People simply need told, in a kind and helpful way, that it can be. Well, that's the start of the process anyways -- it also usually requires a difficult struggle with pride and alone-time to reflect and the like.




QUOTE
Also, isn't choosing to allocate ones brain in follies and relatively inconsequential meanderings as opposed to significant works a reflection of ones intelligence too?

Depends on who you ask, how they define stuff, and why. tongue.gif

Some people declare things "folly" without ever honestly investigating. So, folly on what basis? That's a key question.

Inconsequential is also a matter of opinion. Likewise, some people declare other people's life mission "inconsequential" only because they happen not to see the reasons for it.

Like I said, look at writers. Especially entertainment writers like me -- MANY people would declare (and do) my life mission as one or both of the terms you used.

And yet, through entertainment fiction, deep lessons can be taught in far more memorable ways than any other method -- that is the main reason I love what I do. Plus, of course, I believe people NEED entertainment, as a basic human mental function. smile.gif

And in your sentence, sounds like you're including "mental work ethic" in your definition of intelligence. Like I said, I'm talking about genetic intelligence.









QUOTE
I believe that the root of the differences is in the focus of the person in question. people who tend to stay focused on 'small' issues will appear less intelligent to those who focus on relatively larger ones. in a group where every one is focused on things like style, etc. everyone will be on about the same level. same with everyone at say, some sort of scientific convention. but members of the scientific convention would be more likely to look down on the other group than vise versa. the ones with a "smaller" world view would be labeled as the less intelligent ones.

Well that's all accurate, but IMO neither is smarter or dumber than the other. And in some sense neither is more important than the other either -- science of course would seem most important, and I would tend to side with them tongue.gif -- but style can also be important for the psyche. Who is to say that style is not necessary for the sanity of the human species as a whole?

QUOTE
wait, have you ever heard of the "multiple intelligence" theory? this sounds alot like that.

Don't think I have. Will look into, thanks.





QUOTE
Also, I suppose people would get more allocation if teachers didn't teach the same things over again every year and claim it is a new thing. Last year, my math class (note that I'm a grade ahead in math) was mostly filled with stuff I had already learned. The math teachers even skipped most of a chapter that was full of new stuff, saying "Oh, you'll learn that next year!" As a result, I ended up with an A+. An easy A+. I even did many of the challenge assignments. If they would change the math classes so that they are filled with new things instead of old things students have already mastered, I think people would gain more intelligence in that area.

Well, that sounds sensible. tongue.gif I dunno the specifics of that situation, but there is something to be said for practice, especially in math. tongue.gif For example I aced Calc 1 (over 100 percent) in college, but now I have tooootally forgotten it all. Just a year or two later lol.

Of course, using me as an example in memory-related issues is probably unwise. >__>



QUOTE
It probably also depends on genetics. My dad is good at math. I'm good at math. I didn't have any particular interest in math until I was put a grade ahead in it.

Oh yes, taste and different talents are almost always based in genetics. Not necessarily always, but in general. smile.gif


QUOTE
Also, I don't have any particular interest in sports. I'm six feet tall, and I'm fourteen, so adults sometimes ask if I play basketball. I actually am terrible at basketball.

Haha -- that was my situation in high school too! I was good at blocking, but nothing else, heh. I was always the tallest person in the class, but it didn't help a bit with b-ball (or any other sports in my case).


QUOTE
I'm also terrible at volleyball, football, baseball, and everything else we've done in P.E. except track (100 meter run, 200 meter run, and high jump), because throughout my life I've loved to run. So out of those, track is the only thing I'm interested in and the only thing I'm good at.

All in all, your theory makes quite a bit of sense.

Coo'.
    • 0
Your theory makes sense. Especially since I've heard many times before. biggrin.gif
They called it Multiple Intelligences. You called it the BAT theory. They're the same thing.
You might want to see this. It's a test to determine in what areas you're smartest.
-M-
    • 0

Welcome To The Bones Blog

You must understand this: that in creation, there is destruction. In destruction, there is rebirth. There is no such thing as void; all things are in flux.
--Nuju

Fave This Blog | Track | RSS | Archive
PM | Email | capnbonesiii
bonesiii (pronunciation: "bones triple 'i'")











Recent Entries

0 user(s) viewing

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Recent Comments

Skeletal Industries Teleportal

Important Entries:


Evil Lord Survurlode:
Interviews:
Chief Evil Clock -- Exclusive!
Evil Lord Survurlode
The Chief Gremlin, Minion of Survurlode
Gollaga, Enemy of Survurlode
Orca Goblahk, Ex-Minion Of Survurlode
Lawyerahk Bob, of the Dreaded Real Life Attack Wing


Powerpoint Art Guides:
Vector Art In Powerpoint: Quality, Inexpensive, Easy
Coolifying With Powerpoint Vector Art

Ions of Opine:
Character Death
Walmart is Not Evil
Stop the "Everybody Hates" Nonsense
Join Petiton for Ban Bad Grammer Toady!
BZP's "Some-won Dyed!1!1!" Culture

Chronicles of Bio:
What Most Fans Want
Focus Groups
Easy Makuta Powers Guide
2008 Is Not The End
Science Fantasy = Bionicle
Good and Evil: Points of View?
Ruthless Elegance: A Visual Guide To Cool
A Magical Forest Called Bionicle
Why Kopeke as Chronicler?

Wall of History:
History of Technicism Vs. Bioniclism
History of Set Gimmicks in Bionicle
History of Violence in Bionicle

Logic is the Key:
Criticizing Me

Dissecting Nostalgia
Friends Can Disagree
Taste Discrimination Fallacy, Taste Equality
Am I Against Free Speech?

Complaint Topic Archive
Can Opinions Be Wrong?
Why I Do What I Do
BZP Debate Terms Guide

Log of B:
Track Blog Toolbar Code


Blog Contests:
1: Pet Peeve Contest -- Help Fight Survurlode!
Pet Peeve Winners & Reward art!
2: Powerpoint Faces
.ppt Faces Winners!
3: 2nd Chances MOCs: Beasts! (BPC#1)
Beasts MOC winners
4: Monstery Mystery Powerpoint Art (BPC#2)
Unseen (Ch. 1 of slow-reveal of Monster Mystery winner)
5: Blue MOCs 2nd Chances (BPC#3)
Blue Results
6: Bohrok Kool (BPC#4)
7: Multiverse Guide Art (EMC#3.5)
EM Guide Art Results

.ppt Faces Top 3

These are the top three winning entries of the Powerpoint Faces art contest on the Bones Blog.

1st Place by Ary


2nd Place by Rangan Mercenus™


3rd Place by Thormen


The other winning entries are listed here, along with bio info about the artwork.

Skull Of Approval



Use of this image is valid only when posted by bonesiii. High quality content is requisite. The blog entry itself wins the award. If you win multiple times, you are permitted to say so whereever you display the award.

Pet Peeve Gallery

The following Pet Peeves were identified by BZPower members in a contest for use in an allergenic weapon to be used against Evil Lord Survurlode. These photos taken by me when the Peeves were in captivity. Peeve names link to full bios.

Grand Prize: Flame
By Wysp

Adult form (click thumbnail):


2nd Place: The Misinformed
By Electric Turahk


3rd Place: Ignorance
By Kopaka's Apprentice


4th Place: Corrector
By xccj


5th Place: Double Posters
By EmperorWhenua


6th Place: CAPS Locker
By Toa of Dancing


7th Place: Miwo
By Lluvio


8th Place: Endtag Argh
By Kakaru


9th Place: Blushroom
By Darkspine Neya


10th Place: TB-RPG Overlord
By Nero


11th Place: Polloflower
By The Infection


12th Place: Emoticanus
By Kohena: Great Warrior of Pie


13th Place: Toktomee
By Wyattu


14th Place: Typcgraphical Gnomelette
By Arpy


15th Place: Shortenator
By Axinian the Chronicler


16th Place: Pica'huge
By ~Kativa~


Peeves by me:

Bionicles:


Plural Apostrophe's:


Alwayzon Turnsignal:


Neveron Turnsignal:


Chalkboard Scratcher:


DoomAH:


Stolen Thunder:

Evil Lord Survurlode Says...



"Brave Knight Binkmeister thought he could banish me with new software. Ha! Lord Survurlode is immortal--I survived because I retained a connection with the One Refresh To Rule Them All. Sauron tried to survive in the telephone system with his One Ring--but that dastardly Frodo tossed it into Mount Dume. Sauron was lost. But the Refresh still exists, oh yes, and as long as it does, I live also, to bring my floods to the BZP forums!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode,
in a BZP interview


"Killeth them with kindness. That's what my mother taught me. So I figured, instead of trying to fight Brave Knight Binkmeister's attempt to overthrow me... I would instead give him the one thing he loves most. Bubble Wrap. Not only him, but all of his followers. BZP members once knew me as their common enemy. But now... am I just a kind old man who has free Bubble Wrap?"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Why in the world am I calling him Brave Knight Binkmeister?! That term sounds... nice. It makes him sound like a hero! NO!!! He's my enemy! No, no, henceforth he shalt be known as 'Cowardly Scum Binkmeister'!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Yes, my new minion, you now see the dastardly plans BZP members have--they seek to avoid my floods by getting on in the morning or the late evening, or worse, the nighttime. Sauron might have been a sleepless creature of the night, but personally I can't stand coffee. But not to worry! You, my friend, will go out and enslave the members. You will sit enthroned on their shelves, hung from their walls like a cursed mark, and wrapped around their wrists like handcuffs. Even they shalt know the constraints of time! Behold, the Evil Clock!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"What is that you sayeth, Evil Clock? BZPower is now five long years old? So what? I am thousands upon thousands of years old! I am, in fact, as old as the ocean that I command with my floods! I am even older than clocks like you! What's that? Yeah, yeah, but I just don't feel like AARP is for me..."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"What do you mean, I'm not speaking in proper Old English? I am Lord Survurlode. If I say this is Old English, it iseth!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"What doth mine eyes spyeth? I see-eth a member attempting to posteth! No! I shalt not alloweth it! Rise, ye Floodes! Riseth! ...What? No, I ameth noteth tryingeth hardereth to speaketh Oldeth Englisheth! Ye Silly Clocke!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"No, I am NOT an April Fool's Joke! Just because my power increases tenfold on that day doesn't mean my existence depends on it."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Frodo? Why would I be scared of him? He sailed off to the West--it means he died, yo! Besides, the One Refresh cannot be melted in some volcano. It would take a... No, wait... Sorry, that information is classified. Muahahahaha!"

--Evil Lord Suvurlode


"The term 'Yo' can be Old English! Yeesh!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"See, my problem is that I am far older than Old English. To me it's that newfangled slang those Anglo-Saxon types speak. You'll forgive me if I get it confused with the five million different versions that came out since then. Yes, you will. Or else."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"..."

--Evil Lord Survurlode's
Kopeke Impression


"What do you mean, it's really 'Mount Doomah?!'"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"You are getting veeery sleepy. You need more Bubble Wrap. That's right, little member. Wallow in bubble wrap forever. Say it with me now. 'Must. Have. More.'"

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Brave Knight--I mean, Cowardly Sponge Binkmeister has attempted to attacketh me once again! But lo, I am-- What? Sponge? Is that what I said? I meant Scum. Brave Scum Binkmeister-- What now? Oh, be quiet, minion."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"No, I am not a girl!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode,
on his power over water


"Muahahahahahahahaha*cough* *hack* *gurgle* ..... *ahem* Must remember to watch the evil laugh when the floodwaters get that high..."

--Evil Lord Survurlode


"Oh, that's an easy question. See, Sauron's One Telephone Ring looked like a metal ring, right? Well, the One Refresh looks like a ring made out of those green arrows... like on that refresh button up there. Wait... why am I telling you this?!"

--Evil Lord Survurlode,
in a BZP interview


"No, I do not get rusty! This is Stainless Steel! What? Yes, yes! They had stainless steel thousands of years ago. Yeesh."

--Evil Lord Survurlode

Gallery Of Explosions

Because explosions are the answer.





























Profundities

"While it's all well and good for someone to turn the other cheek in daily life, in times of great hardship another thought comes to mind instead; namely that one cannot turn a blind eye to the actions of evil and still call himself good."
---Nako



"This is a discussion forum for a reason; it's a place where opinions can be discussed and debated civilly, not where one person can claim their opinion as fact and all others as "just opinions." Every person should, however, support their opinions with facts and evidence of all kinds."




"'The challenge of being a Biological chronicler is understanding why Lego are using another method to sell better. It gets boring using the same ones all the time. Variety is the spice of selling, after all.'
— A Biological chronicler"



"I could convince a thousand people that the moon is made of cheese... and yet it would remain as rocky as ever."



"This is simple, people! If it hurts to hit yourself with a hammer, then don't do it!"



"A famous drummer sits down to do a drum solo, but he has to keep his solo up for five minutes. Does he do all his amazing stuff first? no! If he did that, he would loose all attention because the end would be so boring. If he were smart, he would start out with something simple, and then add to its complexity as he goes along, so that more people would be into it.

The point is, writing either a drum solo, or is like a mountain, the bigger the base, the higher it can get, and the more amazing it is. Think about it, when building a mountain of dirt or sand, you need to slowly create your huge base, then as you build towards the peak things get faster and easier to pile on. The High points are where the story is fast paced and we are reaching the climax--what we just left on the last mountain of story we had (the MU story arch), and now Greg is building a new story mountain for us."

Gallery Of Galaxies

~through the macroscope~































Sigisms

QUOTE
92% of people have moved on from Gregorian chants. If you are part of the 8% that still listens to real music, copy and paste this into your sig.


QUOTE
Least Favorite Edit Of Your Least Favorite Post On Your Most Favorite Day Of The Month?


QUOTE
Secret Info: The Red Star is Tahu's mobile space mansion, complete with servants.


QUOTE
Join the petiton for ban bad grammer toady!


QUOTE
9009 Ways To Say "I Heart Spam"


QUOTE
92% of all teenagers claim they're in the 8% that hasn't moved on to rap.
If you are part of the 0% that still uses real math, copy and paste this into your sig.


QUOTE
What Is Your Alter-Ego's Imaginary Friend's Least Favorite Pet Collar?

Certificates Of Approval

Various award imagery and suchnot:






(Above from Makaru; resized to fit.)










(Resized to fit.)


















The above earned twice.




















Certificates Of Approval

Part 2









Needs sized down



Needs sized down













/---------------!.!----------------\
/This blog has been approved by \
/--------------Saiph--------------\
/----------------------------------\
/-For demonstrating outstanding-\
/~~~~RHYME and REASON~~~~\
\----------------!.!-----------------/











_bonesquotes_i

QUOTE
Logic is the key.


QUOTE
I am insane. I know that I am insane. In fact, I know that I am so insane, that I am incapable of realizing that I am insane. Therefore, I know that I am not insane.


QUOTE
Forgetting things since.... umm....


QUOTE
Creativity should not be confused with nuclear weapons.


QUOTE
I heart logic.


QUOTE
Only dead things do not change. Much.


QUOTE
Pay attention now. Repeat after me. "Bones. Can. Be. Wrong."


QUOTE
The problem is, "Tradition for tradition's sake" is like flying blind in an airplane. It's like saying as you approach a mountain "But we've always flown in this direction before... why would we change direction? It isn't the tradition!"


QUOTE
Remember that -- clever absurdity, designed to harmonize with certain tastes, is the key to originality.


QUOTE
Ironicles.


QUOTE
People are like snowflakes. No two are the same.


QUOTE
Yes, the Toa will win somehow. But let me give you a challenge. Write a story. In which the good guys win, or the bad guys win, doesn't matter. But write it with only introducing the challenges that the winner must overcome, and avoid showing how the winner wins. Just set up the problem, then skip to the end:

"In the end, this character wins, somehow."

Now, do you think this is a successful format for a story, that anybody would really want to read? [...] Readers demand that you as writer have thought through the "how" of the story.


QUOTE
Where is this idea coming from?


QUOTE
Makutarahk


QUOTE
[L]et's not mince words here -- all LEGO products are toys. It's a toy company, in the toy business. There's nothing wrong with that.


QUOTE
[A] wise Daoist once said that a name is merely a label. If a person calls me a "nerd", then that is their label for me. If a person calls me a "human", that is a label. If they call me "bonesiii", that is a label. I would simply reply that, if "nerd" is the term they wish to apply to me, like "human", then so be it -- I would thus be proud of that label, because I am proud of who I am.


QUOTE
I'm not telepathic.


QUOTE
I don't know if this is just the way I'm wired, but I don't really think like "hey, wanna be my friend?" I just be myself, treat others with respect and friendliness, and those who would make good friends just sorta show up. And I really don't think like "well, you're not my friend, you are, you aren't" etc. Anybody can be my friend.


QUOTE
*revives topic, only to kill it seconds later*


QUOTE
My two pieces of eight.


QUOTE
Ha ha! Voriki myth still isn't dead? It's been so long since the constant flow of these topics stopped I guess I thought Voriki had finally kicked the bucket. Well, I hate to put another nail in the old guy's coffin, but...

Topic closed.

I Heart Logic

_bonesquotes_ii

QUOTE
Ahhhhh, the sweet smell of complaint topics in July!


QUOTE
I think Evil Lord Survurlode is out to get me.


QUOTE
Bionicle doesn't revolve around ANY one fan. Not even you.


QUOTE
Bionicle does NOT age with its fans.


QUOTE
If something absolutely has to be done for the greater good, it is by definition NOT evil.


QUOTE
Think, guys, think! You have brains! Use them!


QUOTE
Logic is not some meaningless buzzword you can throw around like pie, at least not as long as I, an actual logician, am here.


QUOTE
Common myth. The answer is: "Yes, if you are an ancient Greek."


QUOTE
Last I checked, most of us aren't ancient Greeks. tongue.gif Some of us are ancient Geeks, but...


QUOTE
Besides, show me a brown rock, and I'll use your logic on you. "That's not a rock, it's hardened lava."


QUOTE
The best symbol of stone would be gray. But it would probably sell almost as bad as brown -- LEGO needed a "flashy" color, more like what Ta, Ga, and Le Toa have.


QUOTE
Do not insult cheese.


QUOTE
Omi's right.


QUOTE
Forty-two.

(Four eight fifteen sixteen twenty-three... *ahem*)


QUOTE
Logic! Why don't they teach logic in these schools?


QUOTE
Can you imagine MNOG ending with the Turaga and Matoran executing Ahkmou?


QUOTE
So here's the question: If LEGO working harder by listening to fans is "lazy", then wouldn't they be "lazy" if they listened to you -- a fan?


QUOTE
You don't need to hate to say it.


QUOTE
Four extra letters. "Bionicle sets." How hard is that?

Actually, three extra letters since the s just moves.


QUOTE
If they are "Bionicles", then you are "History".


QUOTE
BZPers are often the exception, not the rule.

::celestial_drink::

_bonesquotes_iii

QUOTE
Of course it's cruel -- did you think bad guys were Mother Teresa?


QUOTE
It isn't like I hide it, but it also isn't like I go up to random students at college at say "Hey, I like Bionicle, isn't that something?!"


QUOTE
One man's junk is another man's treasure.


QUOTE
I had the same theory in ages past, and Greg personally disproved it.


QUOTE
The thing can destroy time, man. You guard those kinda things.


QUOTE
Brevity is the soul.


QUOTE
Which I suppose is a fancy way of saying, "I have no idea."


QUOTE
I attack my own theories. I'm weird like that.


QUOTE
If only books could be updated like web pages.


QUOTE
Bionicle was supposedly a betrayal of everything LEGO stands for, its pieces far too clunky, a horrible turn away from the more "intelligent" Technic and a total stabbing in the back of the good old brick, an insult to AFOLS, evidence of a mythical trend away from the construction toy, far too violent, etc.


QUOTE
It's really pretty simple:

Gadunka is one of the "coolest" sets ever. Most inventive, most unusual, most striking. Thus, he is horrible.


QUOTE
Of course they're weird. All Bionicle names are supposed to be weird. Show me the Bionicle name that is "normal".


QUOTE
You just completely contradicted yourself. If Mata Nui was working out great, then wouldn't Metru Nui have made less money?



QUOTE
If that's greedy, then you are greedy for driving in a car to get somewhere far away fast, for wearing shoes so you can walk at a reasonable pace without cutting your feet, using silverware to better eat your food, using a telephone to avoid having to make a trip and speak, using a computer to type a forum post when you could walk personally to everybody's house and speak what you just said over and over and over again.... At least 2000 times to account for all the possible active BZP members, and preferably about five million times -- and you'd have to go door to door throughout the whole world to even figure out which people were Bionicle fans anyways before you started confusing monks in Tibet with strange words like "Kongu" and "Cordak". All within your own lifetime, regardless of whatever else you had wanted to do in your life.

And forget speech. You have to scratch out the message with your fingernails in stone. Then maybe you wouldn't be greedy. Maybe.



QUOTE
Nobody would surprise me, so it's probably Makuta. But I went with Hydraxon, because he's a weapons master and it would make sense, no?


QUOTE
Why didn't I think of that earlier?


QUOTE
I don't just ask rhetorical questions -- I answer them.


QUOTE
I knew you'd say that.


QUOTE
You're a body with a head. So what?


QUOTE
A simple conversion is not a business plan to actually get two radically different markets to behave as if they were the same.


QUOTE
Um, hello? Are my posts invisible?


QUOTE
Universe go poof.

We All Live In An

_bonesquotes_iiii

QUOTE
I hate typing Roman numerals above three.


QUOTE
I always find these topics funny -- everybody goes in circles, pointing to the exact same aspect of the set and going "See that? So it's obvious it's horrible! How can you not see that?", and then someone else saying, "See that? It's obvious it's awesome! How can you not see that?"


QUOTE
Obviously, not everybody sees I to I.


QUOTE
They have their uses -- like if you're making a MOC that's supposed to be a light green faceless humanoid.


QUOTE
I hate it when I can't tell if someone's joking.


QUOTE
Yes, that's an excuse to be lazy.


QUOTE
Hold on just a second. I think you have things backwards. Mata Nui was not paradise -- it was a place of horror and war for a thousand years!


QUOTE
Lol.


QUOTE
I'm a logician. I can tell you that your argument does not merely sound illogical. It is.


QUOTE
Yeah, that'd be bad. Next question?


QUOTE
We'd still have wooden ducks, no plastic bricks, and definately no LEGO if change was prevented. Really, we wouldn't even have that.


QUOTE
It is unfortunate that it's this way (at least for us). But it is. We might as well come to grips with it.


QUOTE
And I walk away in peace.


QUOTE
You have no idea how many times I've read this style of opening to this kind of topic, man. I must admit I am very very tired of it.

*deeeeep breath*

*shakes head madly*

Okay, I'm good.


QUOTE
My memory doesn't go back that far.


QUOTE
If I didn't agree with something, I'd try to find out the reasons for it before doing anything else, which is something I think some people forget to do and instead they dig themselves a hole for no reason.


QUOTE
Lol, I think you missed the point -- BR isn't going to think your forum deserves approval if he has to be told it exists.


QUOTE
I'm a coolomaniac.


QUOTE
But I like spam!
Wait...


QUOTE
This is not a country. This is a website. Countries are led by governments. Websites are owned by owners. Countries are places you physically exist in, and may have difficulty leaving. Websites are places YOU choose to go. Countries are places you may be born in, or grow up in, etc.

BZPower is a place YOU sign an agreement in order to join. Blame cannot be placed on us when a member violates that agreement. And if a member chooses not to like that agreement anymore, they are free to leave at will. If a member violates the agreement they made with us, we are justified in punishing the member as agreed.


QUOTE
I'm a logician -- I think in terms of what makes sense all the time. I don't just agree -- I know why I agree, and I think my reasons are pretty sound.


QUOTE
If I'm breaking a rule, it's because I gave myself permission to allow myself an exception, thus I am not technically breaking it.


QUOTE
[A]lthough Evil Lord Survurlode does seem to be making a bit of a comeback, just like Sauron, so we might have an epic war that will spawn a novel and three giant books of a trilogy soon... but yeah...


QUOTE
I object to the wording of this question.


QUOTE
Huzzah?

I'm A Doctor, Not A Great Being

_bonesquotes #whatever

QUOTE
Ever had one of those moments where you think you just passed into an alternate timeline? This is one. ()_o


QUOTE
Rants are based on pompous egos and desire to pick a fight. Not intelligence.


QUOTE
The Monster on LOST is Makuta.


QUOTE
Cynics are some of the most naive people on the planet. They hear someone claim things are bad, and they accept it without question.


QUOTE
I'm a realist with an imagination.


QUOTE
I blame Survurlode.


QUOTE
You see a flamer, your response should not be to just flame him back -- you lower yourself to his level if you do.


QUOTE
Let's open that can of worms, as unpleasant as it might be. [...] *I'm not afraid of you, worms!*


QUOTE
"Transformation" can be as simple as a bomb rearranging a building into a debris field.


QUOTE
Far better to be proven wrong than to be wrong without knowing it.


QUOTE
I remember when I was a kid, and I was just playing around, I didn't know this stuff, so I said gas prices were five dollars at my play gas station.

My dad laughed, said gas would never be that expensive.


QUOTE
Toa carrying rifles... as they ride their space shuttles into... Klingon territory...


QUOTE
Kazi [ha]s Rahkshi staffs. (Oooh, Kazi=evil??)


QUOTE
Take an election between two candidates. Obviously, both candidates will get votes. However, one will get more votes, and one will get less. You would be, in this example, voting for the one with less votes (Mr. Olderfanson). You see why the fact that you, one person, did vote for that guy, doesn't prove that he won the election? [...] "Mr. Newerfanson" won the election.


QUOTE
o_O


QUOTE
In general, I do enjoy debates--but I don't enjoy being flamed, no. Nor do I enjoy wasting time when I have tons of PMs I need to reply to and top secret reference projects to work on and all that responding to things that could have been cleared up with more thought before posting, heh. Debates can still get tedious when it seems (please note "seems"!) that a few people refuse to approach them with an open mind.


QUOTE
<_<
>_>
<_>


QUOTE
I didn't even spell "the" right.


QUOTE
Lol. I never said I'm always right! Yeesh, what do I have to do to convince you guys I don't think that? Purposefully take wrong positions or something?


QUOTE
Guess what? I could draw before I learned to write, but does that mean I should get all huffy and insulted at the fact that not everybody shares my particular talent? This is just absurd, isn't it? Did you honestly think that everybody has the same talents and gains proficiency at the same time?



QUOTE
When someone much older than you was a kid, LEGO was wooden toys. [fogie teeth voice]"These newfangled plastic things are insulting! As if there isn't money to be made in good old fashioned woodblock toys!"[/fogie teeth voice]


QUOTE
Can we sing kumbaya yet? Sing it! Koooooooo----oom---bah-----yaaaaaaaaahhhhhh.

Or something... Sing it! You don't even have to agree with me! Just sing it anyways, maaan!

Sing!


QUOTE
Your mistake is that you are thinking in terms of a simplistic "formula" of strength, and thinking that can be used to predict everything. It can't--every situation is different, and sometimes a weak Matoran might catch a glimpse of a passing Rahkshi while a powerful "Toa Ultimaultrasuper" might get blasted to bits when the same Rahkshi actually attacks. You need to be realistic--think in terms of the situation. Stories are based on that--they are a "game of seconds and inches" where dangers both big and small can occur to both powerful and weak people, and how you perform depends on your brains and the time you have to prepare more than your actual power level.


QUOTE
Why did the entirely robotic Bohrok need teeth? Someone explain how that is okay but teeth in Piraka isn't?


QUOTE
Phew. Now, to post, and see if I maxed the text limit out.

Yabo! Hahaha!

_bonesquotes #whatever.2

QUOTE
Thanks X. Thanks D. Thanks X and D. XD


QUOTE
I lazy.


QUOTE
You can make any innovation look bad if you point to the non-innovative ways (the old "normal" ways) and claim they must be followed blindly.


QUOTE
But what I don't get about it is -- why the apparent desire to kill characters off for no reason? In real life you meet tons of people who you will never meet again, and they're not dead. Is that to you a problem? I don't get it -- you'd go insane if you tried to stay in touch with every random old lady that said hi when you were walking the dog...


QUOTE
Yes, my post in this topic is product placement. So sue me.


QUOTE
In addition, high gravity affects spacetime on a fundamental level, slowing time down and bending the spatial brane. Not to be confused with the spacious brain.


QUOTE
It would create a field of electrogravimetry that would pull all nearby matter in and then make it explode. The explosion cloud would take the form of an anchovy.


QUOTE
There's only a slim chance that we exist.


QUOTE
I love taking myself out of context.


QUOTE
I think it's admirable to be careful not to offend people where it makes sense. But at some point, you have to be willing to stand up for yourself and be confident enough that if someone comes at you with an unreasonable accusation, you don't take it.


QUOTE
I think aliens invaded already and have fooled us into thinking they are mere animals who "meow".


QUOTE
Good stories aren't puppet shows. They are tales of life, with realistic characters -- people -- living out their lives, with really minimal "guiding" by the author.


QUOTE
Oh goody, a complainer to blast to oblivion.


QUOTE
To begin with, I disagree strongly with pretending it is "killing off", rather than a serious story being told, with serious themes and life in the story. Characters aren't "killed off". They die.

I find this term somewhat offensive, because it implies the writer kills the character like a TV show host telling a contestant to leave. This is not a game show. It is the events of the storyline that kill the character. That term is merely a psychological shield to avoid the emotion of the moment in the story. IMO, that's a kind of immaturity.


QUOTE
Um.


QUOTE
You can't always get what you want "now now now". Your logic makes no sense -- if you want to know what's in the books, that means you support the books' existence. Yet you apparently want spoilers to go up the day it's out, so in the countries where it is bought, people could just read the spoilers and not buy the book, risking its sales going down and the books ending, and thus no more spoilers for you to read!


QUOTE
Truth = Truth. And nothing else.


QUOTE
I had spammed ten thousand times.


QUOTE
A good comedy is a development, like a story, not a punchline. You start with a situation, and it goes in unexpected, funny ways, which leads into other twists, to a conclusion that often can be more serious than funny, avoiding random cliches and developing enough logic that it doesn't feel like you slapped random nonsense down. Comedies Forum has this bad rap of having a lot of Unfunny Stuff -- I think it's the temptation to write short punchlines drawing on typical one-liner cliches that causes this. The 300 word rule is a good basic start to avoiding that problem.


QUOTE
Dude. My voting precint is a "23". ph34r.gif


QUOTE
And what people are saying about randomosity is true -- I hope that it's not surprising that as a logician, I understand how to be funny (though I won't try in this post ). Logic isn't for Spock who refuses to smile -- you actually need logic in your comedy to make it funny. In my experience, a balance of logic and random nonsense helps -- even logic OF the random nonsense.


QUOTE
I highly recommendate it.


QUOTE
Another mistake a lot of people make is thinking a comedy must be 100% funny -- reality is that that tends to just overwhelm the reader and come off more as spam. If you look at my Survurlode interviews, for example, there is always at least one serious theme that the whole work revolves around. The serious aspects support the humorous, and vice versa.


QUOTE
*strongly approves of the use of the term "bionical"*


QUOTE
Well, my observation has always been the opposite -- more established official facts inspires MORE fan imagination -- at least with imaginative official facts. It was really only once the "gappists" starting complaining, in my observation as a 2003+ member here, about "tons of official facts" that I saw the fanfiction community here really explode with creativity.

Think about it -- imagination feuls imagination. Less imagination doesn't -- it starves imagination.

Search My Blog

_bonesquotes #whatever.3

QUOTE
How much wood would a woodwood wood if a woodwood would would wood?


QUOTE
But my point related to that isn't that I literally think it should be FULLY sun-sized. I'm just saying, there's a whole range, from a little larger than Earth, to a LOT larger, to a TONTONZILLION larger, and it's all possible if the story team just feels like it.


QUOTE
*imagines massive asteriod pulling out a pirate's telescope lol*


QUOTE
GD is NOT for storyline-only discussion. That discussion belongs in S&T.


QUOTE
S&T policies are designed for good reasons, tried, tested, and they work.


QUOTE
Sure I'm sure -- it's Bionicle. Anything's possible.


QUOTE
I never understand these claims -- how do you know what "proportionate" is for that character? He's a fictional character, made out of plastic LEGO parts.

So why get annoyed at it? When you look at a giraffe, do you get annoyed? It makes no sense to me to do so.

Besides, you're setting yourself up for it. Nobody ever told you these characters were supposed to be exactly human.

If you look at an ape, would you say it's done wrong, just because it resembles a human?


QUOTE
I plan not to, but I guess if the site shut down I'd kinda have to, wouldn't I?


QUOTE
...they usually give their jokes when they have the upper hand at the moment, though, or when they've just run into a frustrating difficulty that's not immediately dangerous, which are realistic IMO. When they're in immediate danger, I am not aware that they pause to crack jokes.


QUOTE
I strongly disagree -- everybody capitalizes their name. It's cliche.

(I do not capitalize because 1) I hate being cliche, and 2) it is symbolic of humility.)


QUOTE
I knew you'd say that.


QUOTE
Seriously though, obviously the focus groups like silver, guys -- there's no mystery, those of you portraying it as odd that LEGO keeps using the color. This is how personal taste works -- it differs, and you're gonna find yourself in the minority sometimes. Best get used to it -- that's life.


QUOTE
*lets self dp*


QUOTE
I'm not a soldier, but I know that keeping your sense of humor alive even in dangerous or serious situations can be a huge boon to keeping your sanity.

He who forgets how to laugh forgets how to live.


QUOTE
I heart silver. My favorite metallic. If I had my way, gold would be considered lesser than silver.


QUOTE
The red eye thing is the closest thing you have to evidence, but I could argue that Berix is the traitor for spending time away from the villages, or Ackar is the traitor because his name sounds like Admiral Ackbar and there was a traitor in Star Wars called Darth Vader.


QUOTE
Ultimately it comes down to this for me -- YOU choose to dissapointed or miserable.

If you expected the universe to be perfect, that was your choice, and really not very sensible of you.


QUOTE
If I as a writer were to try to appeal to the attitude you express in your post, I would feel like I am constantly walking on eggshells. Everytime I had a cool idea how to use a character, or more importantly logic told me the character naturally would be involved in something, I would have to worry about whether I shouldn't do it as it might offend someone.

That's a miserable way to write, and I wouldn't wish that on the story team, myself, or anyone.


QUOTE
QUOTE
But one thing. Everyone expects something when they do something.


Very true. For example, when I posted the above post, I expected somebody to reward me with this point, giving me an excuse to discuss it in a separate post so as to give it better focus.


QUOTE
Therefore, the more "things to expect" from a "donation or whatever the heck you want to call it", the more likely we get mooooolaaaaaaaa. Therefore good.

QUOTE
I don't see what the anology has to do with this. "Chevys" (or "Chevies") makes sense. Like "Keets" or Morby or my personal favorite for Makuta -- Terry Mack. "Biological Chronicles" referring to beings makes no sense. And as I typed this, a Chevy ad came on TV. They called it "Chevy." Seriously, exact same time.


QUOTE
QUOTE
Oh my, you're completely irrelevant metaphor makes you look sooo intelligent.


This is obviously getting out of hand, so I guess I have to close it. Also, you failed to answer my question. When a moderator asks you a question, answer it. Capisce? wink.gif

Please do not attack people like that. That is flaming, or at best trolling, both of which are not allowed.


QUOTE
What does a premier member buy?

1) YOUR right to be on here for free.

2) Their right to be on here.

3) PM perks, like poll-making, blogs, etc.

4) Proto.

No matter how you slice it, sending in that money is NOT just buying proto. Even if proto is all they want, they're still buying YOUR right to be on here for free. Yall should be grateful.

Banner

IPB Image