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!





Photo

Taste Reset Bars Exercise

Posted by bonesiii , Oct 15 2009 · 398 views

Etcetera

Today the Bones Blog brings you a simple psychological exercise I have often found beneficial, which can help you learn to enjoy new things better. Bold is for the basic points.


This was originally posted in response to someone who argued for imposing negative personal tastes on others. I do not agree with imposing tastes on others, but in reply to him I pointed out that by that logic, we could argue that it's far better for the majority to try to change the disgruntled majority to like what they dislike. I had a long leadup to the following pointing out that obvious flaw in the person's argument, which I don't want to quote here.

Suffice to say, I do think encouraging others to try to enjoy things better is a good thing, as long as you keep in mind they might not be able to, genetically (many tastes are learned, and thus can change by choice to some degree). Full context here.

One thing from there to keep in mind here is that the point of entertainment is NOT as some make it to find as many things to complain about as possible, but instead to find as many things to enjoy as possible. smile.gif Not that all complainers consciously think otherwise, but many seem to behave as if they subconsciously think this.

For criticism to truly be constructive, this is one of many things you have to keep in mind (the other main one being considering what the majority wants, not just what we each personally want).

Also keep in mind that negativity is not some whimsical fantasy harmless mindset -- it involves poisonous emotion-chemicals and mind-patterns that can have minor and sometimes serious side effects. Anything we can do to avoid negativity (without fearing constructive criticism or honesty, mind you) is beneficial. So it's in the interest of possibly helping yall improve in this way that I bring you this entry. smile.gif

So, on to the exercise:

-------------------------------------

I have a mental exercise I go through all the time, where I envision a "pitch volume bar [I mean, a group of bars, technically]".

If you ever seen this setting control in some music programs on the computer or on sound boards or the like -- different pitches have different controls, so you could for example make bass pitch low volume but higher pitches higher volume, or turn up the moderate bass only, or turn up only the lowest bass for a subwoofer effect, etc.

The point of this is that some of the bars I've seen display a center line, and positive levels of volume above that center line are green bars extending up above it (representing positive tastes here -- but specifically tastes I have developed, NOT genetic tastes, -- yet I consider all of tastes to be developed for the sake of the exercise; read on), and others are negative red bars extending below it (representing negative tastes).

As I encounter something new, I have a preset taste setup, with some tastes being already set to positive, and others already set to negative. If I'm used to something, for example, I might react negatively to an "opposite" style. If I got used to primitive setting for example on Mata Nui, I might have allowed myself to develop a strong affection for that style by the very method of developing a strong dislike for the opposite -- advanced style.

So when Metru Nui comes along, I might be tempted to dislike its style. The bar for that taste is hanging down, red.

But in the exercise, I temporarily forget about whether my dislike is genetic or not, and I purposefull throw out all my tastes for a moment. I equalize all the taste bars at zero, neither green nor red, so all I have is a simple flat line across the board, with no bars at all but with little "dashes" of yellorange along the line.

Then, I apply four rules as steps in this order:

1) Imagine all the bars going up simultaneously into the green.

2) Imagine them all going UP ALL THE WAY.

3) Thus imagine myself enjoying the new thing.

4) Then, allow some bars to access my genetic tastes and sink down a little if needed to be more accurate to my "real" tastes.

So some taste-bars will be lower than others, but I try to remove the reds, see? Others are farther into the green.

This accomplishes all these things:

1) It deletes my learned negative tastes.

2) It also eradicates negativity, which is harmful to the psyche and even to the body, replacing it with beneficial emotions that improve the mind, attitude, emotions, sanity, and even physical health (due to placebo power).

3) It even strengthens my learned positive tastes!

4) It allows me to learn new positive tastes.

5) It also allows me to be more honest and true to my actual genetic tastes.

It's possible that as time goes on one or two of the genetic negatives will sink into the red as I get bored with the style or whatnot. If so, I will let it happen, because I tried, most times, in favor of moving on to enjoy other things that are into my positive tastes.

(This would represent leaving Bionicle/BZP, if you find that there's nothing for you, or at least leaving the feedback topics on BZP since you simply accept that it's not for you. [Also, you could avoid feedback topics about the specific aspect of Bionicle that displeases you and that objectively has been shown that it shouldn't change due to the majority liking it, but go into feedback topics about other things, etc.)]

Even so, the negative tastes won't be so far down into the red, because I am focusing on other things I do like. smile.gif Overall, I will still be practiciing healthy positivity.


I dunno if this works for other people, but it's certainly worth a try.

-------------------------------------

Now, this doesn't have to, of course, be done exactly how I envision it. Though envisioning something does help, at least for visual people like moi. The basic idea is, consciously throw away your learned tastes when you're encountering something new, and try as top priority to enjoy it to the fullest. smile.gif

I have the theory that using this basic method, it's possible to enjoy virtually all styles for what they're worth. It could also be that I simply have a genetic preference for variety more than other people, I dunno. So far I have never found a style I cannot like at least a little, and many styles I used to dislike I have come to enjoy.

  • 0



To fully understand the following, read bonesiii's full post on It's Not Me, It's You

(Switches to British accent)
And now for a professional review:

Hurrah bonesiii! Quite a delightful essay if I do say so myself. A long and possibly taxing read, but one still ultimatly worth it. It leaves the reader with a sense of sorrow, and injustice, mainly because so few people will be reading this now that the forum has been abandoned. Jolly good thing you put most of that on your blog then. I found myself come to agreement to many of the points, points which I don't believe I can ever make again with a clear concience now that I know my words can never be said with the same eliquence and clarity as you just said them, and to try and make one of those points would just be injustice to the author tongue.gif I have certainly had a new insight with some of you points, and tried your excersice. However, it just reconfirmed that I infact dislike high-tech styled societies in the way Bionicle presented it because I was in fact so young that my taste was completely molded by early Bionicle.

This all ties in wonderfully into the age discussion, because it would appear I disliked future years because of the ones past. This is probably happening with new fans, who I know realize must dislike change more than us older folk. If Bionicle changes, they may dislike it because their set of likes were determined possibly exclusively by the thing that is being changed, which means almost no change can be good change. Now obviously this isn't entirely true, or no one would have liked the Rahkshi. But there is some wisdom to be gained here, I know that all my unexplainable quirkes in taste have derived from Bionicle. I LOVE flash animation to no end, and especially ones that harken to the MNOLG and Bohrak animations. Why do I love it? No good reason, except that the original animations produced by Bionicle gave me such imense joy that I now associate all flash animations with that. Most of my other loves have similar origins. Interesting how this world works, no?
    • 0
Replied to your post here, Achillax. To specific things besides that:

QUOTE
It leaves the reader with a sense of sorrow

Darn, that's exactly the opposite of what I wanted to leave you with. tongue.gif XD But I know what you mean, yeah.

QUOTE
However, it just reconfirmed that I infact dislike high-tech styled societies in the way Bionicle presented it because I was in fact so young that my taste was completely molded by early Bionicle.

That's a very good point. I'd say that's somewhat true of me too. I really enjoyed Metru Nui, but I was a bit dissappointed in thinking that they could have put plants in more places and focused on a fused nature-tech style more than they did. And ironically 2001's example is why I had that reaction. Both because of the same sort of thing you said, and because I had enjoyed MNOG's semi-canon technology among nature aspects, which didn't usually get adopted by actual canon.
QUOTE
This is probably happening with new fans, who I know realize must dislike change more than us older folk. If Bionicle changes, they may dislike it because their set of likes were determined possibly exclusively by the thing that is being changed, which means almost no change can be good change. Now obviously this isn't entirely true, or no one would have liked the Rahkshi. But there is some wisdom to be gained here, I know that all my unexplainable quirkes in taste have derived from Bionicle. I LOVE flash animation to no end, and especially ones that harken to the MNOLG and Bohrak animations. Why do I love it? No good reason, except that the original animations produced by Bionicle gave me such imense joy that I now associate all flash animations with that. Most of my other loves have similar origins.

Yeah, I agree with that. I'd have added a clarification if you didn't (about the Rahkshi for example), but you did, so yeah. smile.gif
    • 0
Bonesii, this quite frankly is amazing. I have never read anything in my life before that is so logical... Just how do you think of such things? tongue.gif
    • 0
What... are you talking about?

Really, I don't think it needed to be quite so complex, but anyway, I agree that you should try to enjoy something as much as possible. When I see a set review, I sometimes find myself trying to like the set's cons and disliking the pros listed in the review. The result is that I get to write a rebuttal for something like Click. biggrin.gif
    • 0
It may interest, you, bones, to know that I had no intent of imposing negative views on others :B

Think you rather misunderstood what I wrote there.
    • 0
Photo
Shadow Kurahk
Oct 15 2009 04:12 PM
QUOTE(LewaLew @ Oct 13 2009, 11:52 AM)
Really, I don't think it needed to be quite so complex, but anyway, I agree that you should try to enjoy something as much as possible.

If you haven't noticed already...that's bonesiii's thing. tongue.gif

-SK
    • 0
QUOTE(Fuegan @ Oct 15 2009, 06:01 AM)
It may interest, you, bones, to know that I had no intent of imposing negative views on others :B

Think you rather misunderstood what I wrote there.

Well, I had a feeling you didn't personally plan on it. tongue.gif But you did appear to say that if it happened, it would be okay. That's what I'm disagreeing with.

QUOTE(9 @ Oct 15 2009, 05:12 PM)
QUOTE(LewaLew @ Oct 13 2009, 11:52 AM)
Really, I don't think it needed to be quite so complex, but anyway, I agree that you should try to enjoy something as much as possible.

If you haven't noticed already...that's bonesiii's thing. tongue.gif

-SK


Yeah. tongue.gif
    • 0
As usual, bones, you've created another thoughtful and fascinating article. However, I'm not exactly certain of what constitutes "setting your tastes to neutral" to you when it comes to media. You see, while I personally believe that the the quality factor of books, movies, etc is largely opinion related, I'm also under the opinion that there are certain cases where works are good or bad. That is, there are times when someone's taste is simply wrong - and all of these situations relate to one thing: an increasement in the level of morally objectional content.

An example is the current array of comic books from Marvel and DC, the two major superhero comic makers in America. Although I haven't read nearly as many graphic novels as some, I have read enough to notice that there is a drastic difference in tone between the early comic books and the more recent ones. While comic books from the 60's and so forth are generally simpler and less multilayered, they also tend to rely far less on excessive violence and other negative things to tell their stories. In contrast, many modern comics use what is known as "shock value" to sell their stories. Basically, in order to attract readers, they rely on twisting the previously established characterizations of the heroes and other characters as much as possible, turning them into darker, grittier, and more "mature" versions of their original selves. In the process, they basically throw out decades of previously established content and rely totally on shocking and horrifying the audience into buying more comic books. This change in tone has made most comic books today extremely unpleasant to read IMO, and it also has the affect of making them inapropriate for younger people.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that, while setting our tastes to neutral is usually a good practice, there comes a time when we should draw the line at how our favorite characters and media forms are being changed by recent developments, especially if these developements negatively affect the product as a whole. I'm not saying we should react badly if a hero experiences a difficult period of his life in the story - I'm only suggesting that we should not just let it slide by if one of our favorite characters suddenly is turned into a sadistic murderer for the sole purpose of shocking the readers with graphic violence and over-the-top storylines. To me, making the tone of a story darker is only good if the writer is doing it for actual storyline purposes, rather than just for "shock value." Because seriously, a big problem with much of today's entertainment (particularly comic books and video games) is that "gorier and more explicit" = "more mature." And I sure don't think you'd agree with that, bones. tongue.gif

~~END~~
    • 0
QUOTE
However, I'm not exactly certain of what constitutes "setting your tastes to neutral" to you when it comes to media. You see, while I personally believe that the the quality factor of books, movies, etc is largely opinion related, I'm also under the opinion that there are certain cases where works are good or bad.

Well, I'm not talking about producing anything. I'm talking about reactions to what has already been produced.

A writer (or whatever) must try to appeal to some kind of tastes. You are absolutely right about that. If they fail to appeal well to the tastes they were aiming for, that's bad. Etc.

But what I'm talking about is as fans, viewers, readers, whatever, reacting emotionally to what we see, read, hear, etc. Learning how to be better able to appreciate a wider variety of styles. smile.gif


QUOTE
That is, there are times when someone's taste is simply wrong

Wrong. Actually, yes, I think there may be situations in which a taste can be misused, but taste is inherently subjective. "Wrong" is simply not within the realm of a person's taste.

So, if someone finds themselves able to enjoy something that some other person (be they just a random joe or a high-falutin' Critick tongue.gif) finds displeasing, even if the producer of it WANTED to appeal to the Critick but failed, then that's good. At least in entertainment -- where the whole point is to be entertained. smile.gif If I as a fan of any entertainment am pleased by it, then personally that is a good thing.

The only way a taste could "be wrong" is if it spurs you to do an act or believe a thing that lies in the realm of objective right and wrong. Example -- if you enjoy adrenaline-laced battles in fiction, you could channel that into real life martial arts study, sparring sports, or you could wrongly channel it into harmful violence. What is wrong is NOT REALLY the taste, but how it is channelled. smile.gif

QUOTE
and all of these situations relate to one thing: an increasement in the level of morally objectional content.

Absolutely. But I'm talking about things that clearly lie outside of the realm of morals. Remember that morals lie soundly inside the realm of logic, so these cannot logically be subjective (though some try to claim so; their arguments contradict themselves, i.e. "there are absolutely no absolutes" and such nonsense). Personal taste, however, lies outside the realm of logic.

QUOTE
Basically, what I'm trying to say is that, while setting our tastes to neutral is usually a good practice, there comes a time when we should draw the line

See, there doesn't need to be a line in the realm of personal taste. Setting your tastes to neutral cannot equate to setting your moral beliefs to neutral. The very reason setting tastes to neutral works is because it IS subjective, and outside the realms of logic and morals. smile.gif

In fact, many moral problems come up when people confuse taste with morality. IMLogicalO, the two issues, though connected in some ways, are definately two separate realms. (And it's not really just my opinion but a basic factual tenet of logic, one of those basics that is so clearly true it actually proves itself and all arguments against it inherently contradict themselves.)

QUOTE
at how our favorite characters and media forms are being changed by recent developments, especially if these developements negatively affect the product as a whole. I'm not saying we should react badly if a hero experiences a difficult period of his life in the story - I'm only suggesting that we should not just let it slide by if one of our favorite characters suddenly is turned into a sadistic murderer for the sole purpose of shocking the readers

I agree with you there. But often it's hard to know for sure what the author's purpose is. I've seen lots of people whine about Matoro's death as supposedly merely intended for shock value, missing the clear good moral lessons to be learned from it, etc. They pretend to be telepathic to know what the author's "sole purpose" was, missing that there might be more than one purpose, or assume blindly that the purpose is bad. Violence for example -- if it's portrayed as wrong, it being featured in a story is not necessarily bad, depending on the age and temperment of the target audience, but portraying unjust violence as good would of course be wrong.

And some people, apparently from what they have said, actually do react badly when bad things happen in story, which IMO makes no sense, since stories are about conflict.

But again, what I am talking about is PURELY issues of style. Whether a set has gear joints or ball joints has nothing whatsoever to do with morals or objective quality -- it's purely a matter of taste. smile.gif Whether kiddy style of voice-acting or more realistic styles of voices are done is also purely a matter of taste. Etc.

So, if something is not so clearly a matter of taste only, be careful with it. Absolutely. In that case, look at how much is taste and how much is logic/morals, and separate the two. smile.gif

QUOTE
To me, making the tone of a story darker is only good if the writer is doing it for actual storyline purposes, rather than just for "shock value."

Well, it depends on how you define darker. If you mean dark as in, putting the good guys under an even more frightening threat, that can be done just for style purposes. Bionicle made such a change, judging that previously its story wasn't quite scary enough. Its bad guys' threats weren't believable. That isn't necessarily "storyline purposes" depending on what you mean, although it isn't really shock value either IMO.

Going "dark" by portraying evil actions as good, though, would be morally wrong.

QUOTE
Because seriously, a big problem with much of today's entertainment (particularly comic books and video games) is that "gorier and more explicit" = "more mature." And I sure don't think you'd agree with that, bones.

Right. The problem with explicit violence/etc. is that it's very difficult for it to be done without being gratuitous, and thus indirectly glorifying unjust violence.

However, for example there are some modern Christian writers who do not shy away from blood and guts in their stories where it would logically occur, and I have no issue with this (because of how a certain Book treats the issue tongue.gif) because it's done not for gratuitous reasons but for various good reasons. Making the enemy more believable, realism, increasing the frighteningness, condemning their actions, etc. So I don't think explicit is absolutely bad, if it's handled right and is for the right audience. (For Bionicle it would be bad, IMO; explicit violence/etc. should never be seen by kids.)
    • 0
So, just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, are you basically saying that any crictical survey of any form of entertainment is in a sense already wrong, as by criticizing something you are claiming that it's not just an opinion that it's bad? And if so, does this mean that criticizing productions that are obviously shoddy and poorly made (technically speaking) is wrong as well?

I'm just having a hard time trying figuring out what the extent of your beliefs are concerning this issue, as I don't know you personally and don't know what you feel. As an example, if a twelve year old girl went up to you and said "Hannah Montana is waaaay better than boring Lord of the Rings," what would your response be? Because I don't think you can really make a logical argument supporting that proverbial girl's statement unless you use the argument that "since it's her taste, it's not wrong or right."

I think the reason I'm rather put off by this kind of extreme is because I fear that a widespread acceptance of it would encourage laziness and a lack of originality in all forms of media. That's not to say that's already a problem, but if no one even questioned the quality of any sort of production (under the belief that it's totally a matter of taste), then unoriginal, poorly produced media would run rampant, and quality works would be obscured. After all, if there's no clear definition on what is "high quality entertainment" and what is not, then the biggest factors in how a show or movie or whatever woud succeed is how much money and time the producers poured into advertising it to people and drowning out the competition. That, of course, is exactly the reason why fads like Hannah Montana are so popular - because the producers are so rich that they don't need to make a high quality product to succeed. By claiming that it's only an opinion as to whether things like this are good or not, are we only encouraging this kind of market behavior?

Keep in mind, I'm still not sure whether this is your opinion or not, as I don't know how far you're taking this kind of view. Care to enlighten me? tongue.gif

~~END~~
    • 1
QUOTE
So, just to make sure I'm understanding you correctly, are you basically saying that any crictical survey of any form of entertainment is in a sense already wrong, as by criticizing something you are claiming that it's not just an opinion that it's bad?

No, I'm saying nothing of the sort. :P I'm saying what I said, which I thought was clear... but let's review.

1) The goal of entertainment is to enjoy what you can. This should be everybody's top priority. (Some make a mistake, apparently, here by acting as if the goal of entertainment is to find stuff to whine about.)

2) Everybody has different tastes, and that's not only fine, but good. :)

3) Fully constructive criticism should focus on what will please the majority (at least on issues that are totally subjective, as most things with Bionicle are, and most other style questions), as opposed to what will merely please the person speaking.

4) Constructive criticism is also helped by explaining constructively what you personally want -- and if you are displeased by something, don't just whine about it, suggest better alternatives. Even if you're not thinking about the majority, suggesting alternatives is still very important. It could be that what you suggest is worth trying out, and might even please the majority better too.

5) Reporting "just for the sake of saying so" what pleases you and doesn't please you is good too, as long as you keep it reasonable and respectful of others, and don't treat your personal taste as a "LEGO should" opinion. For example, topics asking your favorite character, least favorite, favorite set, etc. These are purely "your personal reaction" questions, and that is good.

6) Finally, if you are intitially displeased by something, but as far as you can tell, it's merely a style thing, you might wanna try out my taste reset bars exercise, or something along those lines, to give the new thing a fair chance. You might actually like it. :) And that would be good all around -- you are happier, you don't need to communicate displeasure to others (although people often say something like "I didn't like this at first but it grew on me" etc.), and you certainly don't need to get into all the illogical mixing of "LEGO should change this because I personally dislike it" stuff. :)

But of course that's totally up to the individual to decide for themselves.

QUOTE
as by criticizing something you are claiming that it's not just an opinion that it's bad?

The only case in which that might be partly true is when people make blanket statements that people infer to mean "LEGO should" opinions, when they didn't actually mean to say that. In that case the advice is NOT "just plain don't criticize" -- it's "word things a little more clearly; when you're just talking your own personal taste, make it clear by saying something like 'Personally, I don't like...' etc.".

Sometimes people actually were implying LEGO should opinions with that. That too is a mistake -- the answer to it is, what LEGO should do doesn't depend on only one person. But that does NOT mean there's anything wrong with simply saying "I personally didn't like this".

QUOTE
And if so, does this mean that criticizing productions that are obviously shoddy and poorly made (technically speaking) is wrong as well?

The problem is that people often act as if they're omniscient or telepathic, and assume things are shoddy or poorly made, when they're really not -- they're just not aimed at that person. Aimed at someone else, with different tastes.

But this is beside the point. Criticizing is not wrong. Even if you're making logical errors in your complaint, if you don't post it or say it, nobody can see it to point out your mistake and help you improve. :) Posting the complaint, IMO, is more important than having everything right about it, 'cuz then we can debate from there. If you ARE right that it's shoddy production, then the debate will bear that out. (Of course, if there's a lack of objectivity in the debate, it is pretty useless, but anyways. :P) On the other hand, any advice we can give to how to better think through complaints BEFORE posting is helpful too.


Criticizing with a wackily negative attitude is wrong, however, yes (and against BZP rules). But even with this, it's not like it's a crime -- if you post it, that also gives us a chance to help you (generic "you", I mean), which is better than "you" just quietly stewing. Especially on BZP, a warning for a minor flame is better for "you" than letting it build up to a banworthy offense later. And what is wrong there is merely the attitude. Not the act of criticizing itself. The way it is done. Flaming instead of mere criticism.

QUOTE
I'm just having a hard time trying figuring out what the extent of your beliefs are concerning this issue, as I don't know you personally and don't know what you feel.

Well, have you read my past blog entries on these subjects? Check out the important entries link to the right (it's out of date, but most of the important entries on this topic are old ones, so are there). I've tried to sum them up above, though.

QUOTE
As an example, if a twelve year old girl went up to you and said "Hannah Montana is waaaay better than boring Lord of the Rings," what would your response be?

XD I'd probably just laugh. :P And then I'd say something like, "Well, I don't know anything about Hannah Montana, so I can't judge." XP Or "whatever floats your boat" or the like.

And, you mean in real life? In real life, there's no time to explain all this stuff about personal taste. And I doubt a twelve-year old girl would want to hear it, lol. (Depends on the person.) On the 'net though I might briefly sum up the basics about personal taste.



QUOTE
Because I don't think you can really make a logical argument supporting that proverbial girl's statement unless you use the argument that "since it's her taste, it's not wrong or right."

I think the reason I'm rather put off by this kind of extreme is because I fear that a widespread acceptance of it would encourage laziness and a lack of originality in all forms of media.

Can you backtrack on this part and explain what you mean by the pronouns? What's the "this" of "this kind of extreme" there? I have said nothing even remotely extreme, so I'm a little confused by that statement. And what's the "it"?

BTW, although as I said I can't judge since I know virtually nothing about Hannah Montana, it's plain as the nose on Gimli's face that HM is targeted at a different audience than LotR. :P

If there's some kind of moral objection to HM, then okay, but I have no idea.

Also, what do you mean about laziness and lack of originality?
QUOTE
That's not to say that's already a problem, but if no one even questioned the quality of any sort of production (under the belief that it's totally a matter of taste)

I guess I'm not sure what you're saying, or what it has to do with this entry. Who said anything about "never questioning quality"? I guess I'll just refer you to my above answers for now.

QUOTE
then unoriginal, poorly produced media would run rampant, and quality works would be obscured.

So... are you saying that if everybody was pleased, there would somehow be a... problem? :P I mean, thinking about that, does it make any sense to you?

Just to make sure, we are crystal clear that we're NOT talking about issues of morality or objective issues like story logic or the like, right? We're only talking about issues of style, issues of personal taste here.

For example, when I was a kid, I used to dislike... okay, I know this sounds very random, but stick with me :-P ... real-world electric poles. I loved scifi and fantasy worlds that had nothing of that style. And real-world (as in American style) houses. Just bored the heck out of me, and thus I didn't like them.

But using this exercise, I have come to appreciate that style for what it's worth. I can now see it more clearly; realizing that though a wooden electric pole isn't very cool looking in a scifi/fantasy style, if you look at it a different way, you can actually see it as cool in its own way. It's cheaper, and that frees up resources for other more useful things. And houses are designed that way for similar reasons. (Although if I ruled the world I'd still opt for nonflammable, tornado-resistant domes. :P) Whereas a lot of scifi/fantasy styles throw in cool looking appearances, but things that aren't really very practical, and when you think of it like that, realistic can even be MORE desirable than the more fantastic styles.

Now, when Bionicle in 2006 moved to a more real-world-ish style in its advertisements, I could have been tempted to be displeased with this, merely because I wasn't used to it in Bionicle. When I let go of that, though, I can appreciate it as variety, realizing that for example, chainlink fences make practical sense, etc.

Objectively, more real-world-esque styles there are only a problem if they 1) support anything immoral, or 2) displease most fans. (Possibly 3) canon consistency, but since those styles -are- practical, I think it's plausible.) Since the Piraka were bad guys, I didn't see any moral problems with the rap styles -- if anything it portrays rappers as evil, but I didn't see it that way. Rap as a style is perfectly fine, IMO (I'm a Toby Mac fan XD). It may have displeased most fans, I don't know, although sales were way up in 06 (but the style wasn't really brought back since then). But if everybody did the taste resetting thing on it, then it would NOT displease most fans, so there would definately be no problem.

So, again it comes down to this. Unless you can show some kind of moral problem, then how can what you said make sense?

You seem to be saying that "if everybody allowed themselves to like stuff, poor quality productions would run rampant". I think you must have implied several logical leaps there to arrive at that conclusion, and I'm not quite seeing them I guess. But that aside, "quality" is an inherently subjective word, when it comes to entertainment. If everybody is pleased by the new styles, that is by definition "quality" to them. So the statement appears to be self-contradictory.

Again -- all moral issues aside. And obviously objective quality definately exists in things beyond entertainment. Car quality, etc. (Even in these areas, there are aspects that are subjective, though. A car with leather seats might be quality to someone, but poor quality to someone else. Issues of safety, iefficiency, etc. on the other hand are objective issues.)


QUOTE
After all, if there's no clear definition on what is "high quality entertainment" and what is not

I don't see the point of this statement. Factually speaking, there IS a clear definition of what is high quality entertainment. There are many such definitions. #1 is "matching the tastes of the target audience." Again -- all moral issues aside. Considering moral issues, entertainment that teaches good moral lessons (like Bionicle :D) is high quality. With things like storyline, logical story consistency would be another category.

Just about everything else falls into those categories. People often point to certain techniques used to please the majority (of target aud), and claim that these are "universal quality", but that's a misnomer. Those are merely how to have quality for that target aud. :)

And that confusion is often where debates/complaints/criticism topics and discussions center around. People take what they know about quality from something else, and apply it without thinking it through to other things.

Like with cheesy voice acting -- some people thought realistic voice styles matching human adults' intonation is objective quality, and complain about the Bionicle movies on those grounds, never considering that very young kids actually like cheesier, melodramatic voice acting better, and Bionicle movies don't get enough older viewers to outweigh that.

The basic lesson here is, there are no simple answers, no copouts work. When you're producing entertainment, you can't be so lazy that you just assume something is universal quality, and not be concerned about what your target audience majority wants. It is tempting to just want "clear definitions" that don't worry about being accurate, but it can get ya inta trouble.

That said, if you're producing something aimed at the same audience as people who have identified "universal high quality entertainment" rules, despite them being a bit confused about that, their advice will still probably serve you well, since what they are really telling you is how to please your target audience. :)

QUOTE
After all, if there's no clear definition on what is "high quality entertainment" and what is not, then the biggest factors in how a show or movie or whatever woud succeed is how much money and time the producers poured into advertising it to people and drowning out the competition.

The biggest factor is pleasing the majority. Which does, of course, naturally lead to more money. How much money and time they poured into it will mean diddly squat if they fail to please the majority -- they won't earn enough back in sales.

As far as "drowning out the competition in advertising" goes, if I read you right, that is debatable. If what they're producing really is objectively quality (which is defined as pleasing the tastes of its target audience), then lots of advertising can only be good, regardless of the competition. Otherwise, well then you get into the debatable matters. But in general, the audience pays for what it wants.



Now, you might be saying "what if everybody liked every possible subjective style?" due to my taste reset thing. You would be misunderstanding. As my blog entry made clear, at least some personal tastes come from our genetic wiring. Our natural strengths and weaknesses, which are beyond our abiility to change (although we can get better in both strengths and weaknesses in many cases). Certain people are always going to like certain things more than other things.

My taste reset thing helps you "like the things you don't already like", but it can never make you like things you're wired against as much as the things you're wired for. That will always influence sales, and so pleasing the majority taste of your target audience will always be important. (Age changes and the like factor in here too; although they do change, they change due to genetics. Also, some cultural influences of style might be basically "stuck" with us for the culture in question.)

Even if it could happen that anybody could like anything, and there would be no objective "this style equals quality for this audience", then what would the problem be? Everybody would like variety, so there would still be a market for many different styles. The specific ones that are most popular might differ from what they are now, but so what. The most popular tastes change over time anyways as culture and society changes. (Again, again, morality aside.) More people would be happier.


QUOTE
That, of course, is exactly the reason why fads like Hannah Montana are so popular - because the producers are so rich that they don't need to make a high quality product to succeed.

So, are you saying that Hannah Montana is low quality, in your opinion? Any particular reason why? Factoring that you're proooobably not in the target audience? :P (Likeisay, I know virtually nothing about it.)

QUOTE
By claiming that it's only an opinion as to whether things like this are good or not, are we only encouraging this kind of market behavior?

Z, there is no mere "claim" here. It is a proven fact that different people like different things. Personal taste is no myth. It's a real, proven phenomenon. Genetic tastes especially exist, and are good. Different people have different talents (which also means they have different weaknesses), which makes society as a whole healthier. A variety of skills, thus society can meet a wider range of challenges. It's also known (and BZPers themselves have been living proof countless times) that sometimes people develop or choose tastes that aren't genetic, or exaggerate their natural dislikes, and in those cases, having a more open mind can be better. :)

QUOTE
I don't know how far you're taking this kind of view

I'm not taking anything anywhere, as far as I know. I'm just reporting what I know, giving food for thought. :) That wording makes it sound as if I'm arbitrarily "taking" an opinion somewhere just 'cuz I feel like it -- I'm a logician. That's not how I roll. :P
    • 0
Okay, might as well use the old "quote and then add personal comments in bold" method, seeing as I have a lot to reply to. tongue.gif

QUOTE(bonesiii @ Oct 29 2009, 09:59 PM)
No, I'm saying nothing of the sort. tongue.gif I'm saying what I said, which I thought was clear... but let's review.

1) The goal of entertainment is to enjoy what you can. This should be everybody's top priority. (Some make a mistake, apparently, here by acting as if the goal of entertainment is to find stuff to whine about.)

2) Everybody has different tastes, and that's not only fine, but good. smile.gif

3) Fully constructive criticism should focus on what will please the majority (at least on issues that are totally subjective, as most things with Bionicle are, and most other style questions), as opposed to what will merely please the person speaking.

4) Constructive criticism is also helped by explaining constructively what you personally want -- and if you are displeased by something, don't just whine about it, suggest better alternatives. Even if you're not thinking about the majority, suggesting alternatives is still very important. It could be that what you suggest is worth trying out, and might even please the majority better too.

5) Reporting "just for the sake of saying so" what pleases you and doesn't please you is good too, as long as you keep it reasonable and respectful of others, and don't treat your personal taste as a "LEGO should" opinion. For example, topics asking your favorite character, least favorite, favorite set, etc. These are purely "your personal reaction" questions, and that is good.

6) Finally, if you are intitially displeased by something, but as far as you can tell, it's merely a style thing, you might wanna try out my taste reset bars exercise, or something along those lines, to give the new thing a fair chance. You might actually like it. smile.gif And that would be good all around -- you are happier, you don't need to communicate displeasure to others (although people often say something like "I didn't like this at first but it grew on me" etc.), and you certainly don't need to get into all the illogical mixing of "LEGO should change this because I personally dislike it" stuff. smile.gif

But of course that's totally up to the individual to decide for themselves.

Ah, good to see that's cleared up. Actually, I completely agree on all of these points - however, I would add that there's usually a difference between style and quality. Just about any style of media can be used in a satisfactory way - but not all shows, movies, and other products succeed in their quest to satisfy the market. The reason for this, of course, depends on a lot of things, including how well it was marketed and how engaging it is to the target audience.

The only case in which that might be partly true is when people make blanket statements that people infer to mean "LEGO should" opinions, when they didn't actually mean to say that. In that case the advice is NOT "just plain don't criticize" -- it's "word things a little more clearly; when you're just talking your own personal taste, make it clear by saying something like 'Personally, I don't like...' etc.".

Sometimes people actually were implying LEGO should opinions with that. That too is a mistake -- the answer to it is, what LEGO should do doesn't depend on only one person. But that does NOT mean there's anything wrong with simply saying "I personally didn't like this".

Agreed, and this is the way I currently approach posting when related to lego and my other interests. I'm not the kind of person that makes statements like "this set is awful, how can anyone like it?" - instead, I phrase statments like "Personally, I feel this is one of the worst sets TLC has made recently," which, while still showing my utter dislike of a set, doesn't discount other people's personal tastes.

The problem is that people often act as if they're omniscient or telepathic, and assume things are shoddy or poorly made, when they're really not -- they're just not aimed at that person. Aimed at someone else, with different tastes.

But this is beside the point. Criticizing is not wrong. Even if you're making logical errors in your complaint, if you don't post it or say it, nobody can see it to point out your mistake and help you improve. smile.gif Posting the complaint, IMO, is more important than having everything right about it, 'cuz then we can debate from there. If you ARE right that it's shoddy production, then the debate will bear that out. (Of course, if there's a lack of objectivity in the debate, it is pretty useless, but anyways. tongue.gif) On the other hand, any advice we can give to how to better think through complaints BEFORE posting is helpful too.


Criticizing with a wackily negative attitude is wrong, however, yes (and against BZP rules). But even with this, it's not like it's a crime -- if you post it, that also gives us a chance to help you (generic "you", I mean), which is better than "you" just quietly stewing. Especially on BZP, a warning for a minor flame is better for "you" than letting it build up to a banworthy offense later. And what is wrong there is merely the attitude. Not the act of criticizing itself. The way it is done. Flaming instead of mere criticism.

Again, totally agree. In fact, one of the big criterias I use for deciding whether to become a member of another site or forum is seeing whether respect of other's opinions is the general practice. If longtime members come off as rather arrogant and assertive, then I don't feel it's worth my time to discuss stuff with them, as I have neither the patience nor logical genius to engage in a sucessful debate. This is actually the reason I left one particular board about a year ago, and why I've taken a break from another.

XD I'd probably just laugh. tongue.gif And then I'd say something like, "Well, I don't know anything about Hannah Montana, so I can't judge." XP Or "whatever floats your boat" or the like.

And, you mean in real life? In real life, there's no time to explain all this stuff about personal taste. And I doubt a twelve-year old girl would want to hear it, lol. (Depends on the person.) On the 'net though I might briefly sum up the basics about personal taste.

Yeah, I know that was kind of a silly example. laugh.gif

Can you backtrack on this part and explain what you mean by the pronouns? What's the "this" of "this kind of extreme" there? I have said nothing even remotely extreme, so I'm a little confused by that statement. And what's the "it"?

BTW, although as I said I can't judge since I know virtually nothing about Hannah Montana, it's plain as the nose on Gimli's face that HM is targeted at a different audience than LotR. tongue.gif

If there's some kind of moral objection to HM, then okay, but I have no idea.

Also, what do you mean about laziness and lack of originality?

Okay, let me explain what I mean by this. Basically, I've come to a point where I generally dislike the current way the entire marketing system is set up when relating to media. To me, the biggest problem with TV, movies, and other forms of entertainment today is not that they're necessarily low quality or unoriginal, but that they generally are marketed to specific groups of people. These days, aside from perhaps Pixar, the vast majority of companies prefer to make specific products for specific groups of people, rather than focusing much of their effort on making products that people of all types can enjoy. Hannah Montana is an excellent example of this - being a sitcom aimed at pre-teen and elementary age girls, the producers have have made absolutey no effort to make it appeal to any people besides those groups. The reason for this is because, no matter what the quality of the show and scripts, girls will still watch the show in droves, and thus bring in tons of money regardless of effort.

That bothers me, because I don't see why entertainment has to be that way. You see, since targeted marking allows people to make tons of money without necessarily making a high quality product, there's absolutely no desire to make shows that appeal to all sorts of audiences. Instead of spending effort making shows that can be promoted across the spectrum, producers would rather just focus on agressive marketing directed towards one group. In fact, the opening of tastes actually applies to this as well! The belief that target audiences don't need to be challenged to try new products leads to producers giving people the same old types of shows and movies, rather than innovating. Comic books are an excellent example of this - most comic book writers today don't make any effort in making them appeal to women as well as men, as they assume that "women don't want to read comic books." Thus, they instead focus on pleasing their largely male audience in whatever way possible, even if it involves questionable moral content that pulls at their natural reactions to "certain things." (if you catch my drift).

Now, keep in mind - I'm not necessarily condemming partisan entertaiment, and I realize that certain things are far harder to market to a wide audience than others. The whole reaosn why TLC markets Bionicle just to young boys is that girls largely won't find battling robots appealing (although there are some exceptions). However, I do feel that our current society has gotten far too used to that kind of marketing, to the point where its accepted that certain types of entertaiment will only appeal to certain groups. For producers, this means that there's no need to make Hannah Montana appeal to people besides young girls and to make comic books appeal to people besides adult males - and for the consumer this leads to prejudice against people who don't follow the norm.

By and large, however, the biggest problem with this outlook on entertainment is that it breeds laziness. The whole reason that we see so many productions with Batman as a title character and so many Disney shows revolving around young musical stars is not because they're new and unique, but because they will sell no matter what. With instant success almost undoubtedly guarenteed if producers use well established characters and concepts, they often feel no need to innovate and try new things, or even to try to improve on what has already been established. Of course, this isn't always the case, and there's still innovation every year, but not nearly as much as their could be. And that's really sad.


I'll post some more comments later, but I have to cut it off right now. tongue.gif
    • 1
QUOTE
Actually, I completely agree on all of these points - however, I would add that there's usually a difference between style and quality.

Agreed. Style refers to different approaches in general, while quality refers to how well they are done. Both terms can be highly subjective, including how they relate to each other, but definately aren't synonyms in general. I do see many complainers mixing the two concepts up a lot, though; they assume some aspect of something is low quality because they don't quite realize the style it's aiming for.

QUOTE
Basically, I've come to a point where I generally dislike the current way the entire marketing system is set up when relating to media. To me, the biggest problem with TV, movies, and other forms of entertainment today is not that they're necessarily low quality or unoriginal, but that they generally are marketed to specific groups of people.

Alright, well, I've already read on, and I'll get to more of what you mean by this. But just let me make an aside here that in general, this principle here is a good thing. Different tastes get their own pleasure, rather than only having stuff designed to appeal partly to everybody. Doesn't mean you can't have the "for everybody" stuff too, but a full, healthy range of entertainment IMO should include stuff specifically designed to target certain tastes. And regardless of how common the tastes are, though naturally the less common ones are not going to capable of as much finances as the more common ones, and may sometimes be limited only to fanfics or the like.

QUOTE
These days, aside from perhaps Pixar, the vast majority of companies prefer to make specific products for specific groups of people

Well, I don't see how Pixar is the only such company to do that. But then it's so hard to judge this because tastes really are so complex and so varied and interconnected and yadda. Also, appealing to particular style-tastes is hardly a new thing. It's been done for as long as entertainment has existed. tongue.gif

But the good thing about those products that are designed for specific groups of people is that everybody is more fulfilled. When all that's available is something that's targeting everybody, most audience members are overall less pleased by it. It harmonizes less well with their soul. But things designed directly for them have a high amount of that soul-harmony that fulfills their tastes, strengthening their talents, improving the health of their psyche, making them better fit for life.

QUOTE
rather than focusing much of their effort on making products that people of all types can enjoy. Hannah Montana is an excellent example of this - being a sitcom aimed at pre-teen and elementary age girls, the producers have have made absolutey no effort to make it appeal to any people besides those groups.

In principle, what's wrong with that? Why should not pre-teen etc. girls get entertainment designed to please them especially well? Doesn't mean HM necessarily does everything right (likeisay, no idea tongue.gif), but there's nothing wrong with choosing to target a specific group.

If literally everybody was making movies and shows and whatnot that purposefully avoided trying to appeal to a wider audience, as you seem to be saying with rare exception, then maybe there'd be a problem. But a balance of both is what I see.

QUOTE
The reason for this is because, no matter what the quality of the show and scripts, girls will still watch the show in droves, and thus bring in tons of money regardless of effort.

Yes, but don't forget it's not ultimately about the money, per se. (Maybe it is for the producers of HM, but I mean this basic principle.) The best results of this are about making the fans in question happier.

QUOTE
You see, since targeted marking allows people to make tons of money without necessarily making a high quality product

That's highly debatable. Look at Bionicle for example. When it didn't do such a good job of making high quality sets, as the dominant taste style for Bionicle defines it, sales were dropping and threatening the end of the line. When quality went up in 05, 06, 07, and beyond, sales soared.

The reason why Hannah Montana is so successful, I would wager, is because it IS being high quality for that taste demographic. You, not being among that group, probably aren't well qualified to judge its quality. But there have been other things targeted at this age group, and few so successful and such a household name. That's not a coincidence, methinks.

QUOTE
there's absolutely no desire to make shows that appeal to all sorts of audiences.

Well, I can only say that personally, there's so much good fiction shows on right now, at least the channels I get, that I can barely keep up with 'em. The CSIs stand out -- they are hugely popular with a wide variety of taste-types of people. Numbers is another good example -- it's a fun show even if you're not a math whiz like the main character because it's made undertandable to everybody. Hardly in the same category as Hannah Montana lol, but they come to mind. CSI itself is one of THE most popular shows on TV right now. They're definately still genre (but genre is nothing new, or bad); they're all crime dramas, but they also have a lot of variety.

Also, don't forget the value of self-expression. If only shows appealing to a wider audience are allowed (and not just shows), then people OF taste groups aren't free to express themselves in the ways that are THEM, taste-wise.

QUOTE
In fact, the opening of tastes actually applies to this as well! The belief that target audiences don't need to be challenged to try new products leads to producers giving people the same old types of shows and movies, rather than innovating.

I don't see how that's the case. LOST, Heroes, Flash Forward come to mind as very innovative shows, though granted with the exception of FF they're not new anymore (and morality issues aside, which any of these shows may have). The problem with innovation, of course, is that it quickly becomes yesterday's innovation. But I see innovation still happening.

You mentioned Pixar, for example -- but IMO Pixar is actually appealing to a demographic as well. Remember that there's no such thing as totally separate taste-groups. If you talk about a particular kind of taste -- young girls for example -- and then another -- people who enjoy Pixar's animation style for example -- both groups are going to overlap to at least some extent. Don't forget that though Pixar has a lot of variety, they HAVE established a certain style, overall, that they go for. You can pretty much spot a Pixar film among all the theatrical releases so far, with things like the style of humans, the way the lines and curves are handled on the inanimate objects (or the animate toys and robots tongue.gif), the level of detail, the style of humor, the quality of dialogue in general, the types of cleverness, etc.

That's a big taste group that cuts across many smaller group lines, but it's still a taste group, and it's not a coincidence that Pixar includes some level of consistency from movie to movie in style. They probably believe that if they changed that style too much, they'd anger their current fans who like that style, and not gain enough new ones.


QUOTE
Comic books are an excellent example of this - most comic book writers today don't make any effort in making them appeal to women as well as men, as they assume that "women don't want to read comic books." Thus, they instead focus on pleasing their largely male audience in whatever way possible, even if it involves questionable moral content that pulls at their natural reactions to "certain things." (if you catch my drift).

I do catch it, but that's again a moral issue, and I'm talking purely about taste. Comic books could appeal largely to men/boys without sinking to that low, and frankly the comics of Bionicle are a prime example. I wouldn't know how much other comics do or don't break that moral standard, but I doubt it's literally all of them.

QUOTE
Now, keep in mind - I'm not necessarily condemming partisan entertaiment, and I realize that certain things are far harder to market to a wide audience than others.

I get that. Back to the Pixar example, though -- realize that it IS marketed. It IS partisan (a word that really belongs in politics, BTW, because it implies an objection to the other side / other sides. In the ideal world of people who understand and appreciate personal taste, there would be no objection at all but instead support for and even willingness to try out other groups getting their kinds of entertainment, morals aside -- but in the sense of Pixar is purposefully deciding not to use certain styles or types of jokes etc. it IS partisan).

It's just marketed for a taste group that is extremely common.

QUOTE
However, I do feel that our current society has gotten far too used to that kind of marketing, to the point where its accepted that certain types of entertaiment will only appeal to certain groups.

Okay, but what is wrong with that statement (in bold)? What is wrong with society accepting that certain entertainment will appeal only to certain taste-groups? That's exactly the sort of scenario I think is needed -- there needs to be MORE acceptance and understanding of varied personal tastes. If you've ever had anyone say "only babies are into Bionicle" for example, that's the sort of taste discrimination that is ended by this kind of acceptance. smile.gif

QUOTE
for the consumer this leads to prejudice against people who don't follow the norm.

I don't think that's the case at all -- projudice against people who don't follow norms is the sort of thing that comes from failing to accept the goodness of varied personal tastes. Failing to understand taste. Ignorance on this issue. That's what I fight against. If someone truly accepts that Bionicle will be enjoyed by certain taste groups, and really understands taste, then it won't surprise them or anger them in any way to learn that some adults are included in that group, not just youth -- after all, if no adults like it, then there would be no adults to produce it for the kids.

That includes fanfics, online contests; the sort of thing I produce, as well as official sets and storyline produced by LEGO. The best way to appeal to the target group is to have producers who share their tastes, at least in major ways. Someone who has a full understanding of taste would get that.

QUOTE
By and large, however, the biggest problem with this outlook on entertainment is that it breeds laziness. The whole reason that we see so many productions with Batman as a title character and so many Disney shows revolving around young musical stars is not because they're new and unique, but because they will sell no matter what.

Well, I can't argue that laziness isn't common, but I do not see any legitimate argument that appealing to specific tastes is what breeds it. Laziness is human nature, sadly. Actually, laziness has its purpose, which many people don't appreciate (been planning to do a blog entry about this, but have been too.... lazy tongue.gif). But laziness is misused, yes. Personal taste is human nature too, and personal taste is horribly abused and misused quite often. Just about anything in human nature is misused and abused by human beings all the time. You name it, there are cases of it being corrupted.

That does not mean that the aspects of human nature themselves are at fault. In fact they are very good when used properly. The real underlying mistake people make, that breeds these misuses, IMO, is a lack of knowledge of how to determine how to do things properly -- regardless of what it is exactly. (And of course I sure you can guess at what religious comments I would add to this if I could.)

QUOTE
With instant success almost undoubtedly guarenteed

That's not the case at all, IMO. Look at Pixar. Was instant success guaranteed for them? NO! They may not have known whether it would be so successful before they launched it, but they worked hard, practiced, applied their brains in innovative ways, and came up with specific styles and taste-targets to use in creating the first Pixar film. A lot of hard work, money, advertising, planning, test film shorts, discussion, experimenting, etc. went into that.

Can it be said that Hannah Montana, or CSI, or Heroes, or whatever were guaranteed to be instant successes? I say no -- they succeed at being higher quality for their target audience than other shows or whatnot, and that's why you hear about them more than other things that appeal to the same audiences.

And yet, the answer to all of the above may very well be yes in a different sense. Because they ARE quality, tastewise, for the target demographics, Pixar included, and because they were marketed well, there are physics that determine that yes, once you do everything right or mostly right you are pretty much guaranteed success.

But then arguments can be made against even that -- what if something else bigger and better had come out at the time and took off just before those things and they became seen as mere copycats and never became popular, then died?


QUOTE
Of course, this isn't always the case, and there's still innovation every year, but not nearly as much as their could be. And that's really sad.

How much could there be? I think this is the total wrong response. I think a far healthier response is to realize that there could be NO innovation, no even entertainment... in fact no human beings at all (we could all get nuked and you could be the sole survivor... okay that's unlikely but someone could be the sole survivor tongue.gif). And appreciate each new innovation for what it's worth. smile.gif

Theoretically, every single human being on the planet could be putting out their own entertainment series (and more and more are via online fiction, fan fiction, etc.), and by the logic you used there, anything less would be sad -- even anything less than each person putting out the maximum they could possibly have time for.


Also, there's nothing wrong with consistency either. I've said many times for Bionicle that there are some things that objectively should not change, at least not that often, because they're things that harmonize with the taste-group's soul more. That can be a major factor of quality; you cannot assume that only innovation equals quality. Like breathing air or drinking water compared to eating a specific type of food. Humans never get tired of breathing (fresh) air or drinking (clean) water. Well, they might very briefly, at least with water, but that boredom goes away extremely fast compared to if you're stuck eating the same food over and over.

There are many things in entertainment that operate on the same principle for certain taste-groups.

So theoretically, there could be a long time where nothing innovative is done, but certain taste groups are getting a lot of what they love most, and that could be quality for them. Of course, humans have a yearning for innovation too, don't get me wrong, but it's not like everything has to be all innovation all the time.
    • 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