bonesiii

Question: I take it this has nothing to do with BZPicture?

Okay I'll look at the subjects:

Blogs/Forums/FrontPage You are a staff member for two of them...

Reference Master/Reporter/Moderator That confirms what is said above

Something about a question mark brick... Clueless on that one

A blue mask, possibly Dume's Dume's back?

Avatar: Definition: A deity in human form. I'm guessing Tohu related...

Tohu Tohu's going to invite you to his holiday house

Okay, I think that's everything, now I wonder how it fits together. I'll leave a bolded comment next to each clue. I need to ask one more question: Is this about you mainly?

Does this name have anything to do with it?:kanohi_ehkuata

1) No.

2) I am. That is not the answer.

3) You've seen an important angle, but see above.

4) The brick has already been found. I'm tempted to give Ca'gerrin cookies just for finding it, heh... Although it's only part of one of the levels of Mystery.

5) The blue mask is not Dume's.

6) Can't answer it.

7) See #6.

8) No. I'm involved, though (obviously).

9) I suppose, but you'll probably never be able to decipher the name. It's just the name I gave the mask.

Does each of the three levels have something to do with the three BZPower areas?

 

Congratulations! You found the brick! What does it mean?

 

BIONICLE are becoming separate from LEGO

1) Not directly. Only in the fact that there is a "three" in both of them.

2) Lol.

Well, remember what I said about guessed, Bioran. I wanna see how the evidence leads you to that theory.

Changed my mind. There is one more clue that I think I can and should give you guys:

And I'll give one more soon. Theeeeen probably all for today.

Hm.... But what about the eyes? Unless... Hapori Tohu isn't fully formed yet, and it will take time to construct him? That just helps my BCC theory, so, yeah.

 

 

The invision thingy sounds promising.... But it's too confusing.

BBC is not involved.

No, not that brick. It's not a photograph. It's an illustration, and not a "brick" in the traditional sense. Also, not a real LEGO brick. Here's another clue:

A Kanohi isn't a brick in the traditional sense.

 

And I just found this:

 

 

Looks vaguely Dume-ish to me.

 

 

~D

Congratulations! You found the brick! What does it mean?

Hapori Dume.

 

Yeah, I just came up with a big theory, but the forums froze and it was deleted, so... I'm not retyping it. Basically the eyes are Dume's, and he's taking over BZP from Tohu.

Ouch. Well, since you say you did have a lot of content, lemme answer it.

No, Dume is not taking over again. At least, if he is, I don't know about it.

Man I've been missing out being grounded.

 

OK well lets see since it's about an image hosting site I'd say B-Shelf possibly. An avatar could be what would be put up on the site. Disk of time would mean that it would be possible too speed up or slow down time until this. Could this be first image of a new gallery? Adding a new division is also my guess too. Your jobs would possibly mean that a new site would need new staff. Also if there would be a new brick with the end of the mystery could that be the logo of the new site and the brick on your shelf? In conclusion I guess that there will be new division on BZP that would be an image hosting part with new staff and a new logo that would be the brick Bones is describing and as we are a Bionicle site the brick could be a mask as the Wiki has the Ignika as it's logo. Also it could be poissible that B-Shelf will be fused with BZP but I doubt that.

I will answer what I feel I can.

1) Correct, it is brickshelf I am talking about. The "brick" was on my brickshelf, and Ca'gerrin found it.

2) Adding a new division... depends on how you look at it. Yes and no.

3) There is no new website, although the idea of the brick as a logo is valid.

4) Since you put it together as a theory, I can answer. No, I am not talking about a new image hosting part. The image hosting aspect has been discovered; the image is the clue now. That image is the face that the eyes belong to.

5) Oh, definately not bshelf merging.

No. That was some time ago, wans't it? The disk of Time could bring that occasion from the past to the present!

 

Hapori goes to the forums, Time to the front page.... HAPORI TOHU'S PHYSICAL MANIFESTAION WILL APPEAR ON THE FRONT PAGE, FROM AN IDEA OF A MEMBER (BBC) IN THE FORUMS.

 

Oh!

Good theorizing. But sorry, no. This isn't about the BBC (that has really nothing to do with my jobs).

*wracks brain*

This is killing me...

Can we have another clue?

Probably not.

I think I've given enough clues for the moment. Anything else I give for a while will be answers to questions, so there might be slight clues involved in that too.

Edit: Actually, I think it won't hurt to release two more clues. See the next post.

Just a bit of speculation.

 

Content Block Clue #1: There is a brick on my shelf. Speculation: Brickshelf is an image hosting site. Does the riddle

have to do with an image hosting site? Such as InvisionGallery?

 

Content Block Pic # 1: Hapori Tohu's head. Speculation: An Avatar?

 

Content Block Pic #2: Disk of Time. Speculation: A specific date?

 

Content Block Clue #2: Picture of eyes. A question asking the definition of "avatar" Answer: A physical form.

Also, an image. Like in a gallery. Such as InvisionGallery.

 

Comment Clue #1: What are the three divisions of BZPower? Answer: Home, Forums, and Blogs.

Conclusion: Maybe adding a fourth division? InvisionGallery?

 

Comment Clue #2: What are my three jobs, divided by slash mark? Answer Reference Keeper/Reporter/Moderator.

Conclusion: Maybe bonesiii getting another position? Gallery Moderator?

 

Comment Clue #3: If Lego made this brick at one end of what the mystery is about, it would have one Lego stud.

If Lego made it at the other end, it wouldn't. Answer: Still not sure what this means.

So does this have to with InvisionGallery?

 

 

~D

Good, the first full-fledged theory. Here's the answers in a row:

1) It has to do with an image hosting site, yes.

2) It involves an avatar in the online sense, yes.

3) No specific date has been set for sure.

4) It involves an image in a gallery. It doesn't involve a physical form, because this is a website (and it isn't a MOC).

5) You're closer, but I'd have to say your answer reminds me of something applies in a sense you don't intend.

6) No. I will not be taking on a new job.

7) Possibly.

The mystery is... that in some time..... Hapori Tohu.... will descend from the fog..... into the forums.....

 

Yeah. I think I got it.

Well, he's already done that, hasn't he?

Gravitan -- You can have as many guesses as it takes. But you have to show how the clues lead to the answer. Pretend this was a theory in S&T -- you need to show how evidence leads to that conclusion.

Okay, forgive me for my noobishness. XD

 

Anyway, just for clarity...

 

Based on those two (and only those two) clues in this entry, I figured that since the answer must have something to do with your jobs and the forums, either we'd be getting a new one which you would moderate, or you would become a GM, therefore modding all the forums.

 

But now there's this avatar thing that came out of nowhere, so I think what I came up with is probably not the answer(s).

Correct, neither of those are the solution, for the reason you stated.

Edit: Well, lemme rephrase. Neither is correct in the sense you intended it.

Well, after reading all the clues, I'm beginning to wonder.

Is HT gonna become a Moderator or something? I mean, the 'primary forums' part, and the 'what are my 3 jobs' part, all make me wonder.

 

I doubt that's the answer or anything.

You've put some of the clues together towards your theory. I'm curious about how the Disk of Time and the eyes play a role in that theory. How about the latest clue?

Omi -- Okay, okay, you can play if you PM me only. If you or other staff figure it out, you'll get the cookies via PM, but you wouldn't be allowed to tell anybody else -- a non-staff member would still get to figure it out themselves.

BTW, I baked a whole batch of cookies, so the winner gets the batch, not just one. Well, missing about five...

I DID IT! I SOLVD THE RIDDLE!

 

[bonesiii: Ha ha. No, that is the cookies you get if you solve it. Not the solution. The brick on my shelf has been there for months, and I just put that picture up. Plus, that was on maj. Nice try though. ]

See my comment.

Wait a sec...

 

An Avatar Of Hapori Tohu?

 

As in a physical form?

 

 

~D

I think I'm going to have to pull back on commenting. I am not going to answer that one, unless you can show how all the clues lead up to that. Remember you must incorporate all the clues. So:

Can't answer it.

Always wanted to say that.

Gravitan -- You can have as many guesses as it takes. But you have to show how the clues lead to the answer. Pretend this was a theory in S&T -- you need to show how evidence leads to that conclusion.

Ca'gerrin -- You're close. But this use of "avatar" has multiple definitions. That is only half of it.

Laughin -- You're much closer. That has to do with the other half. How could it apply to BZPower?

No, not that brick. It's not a photograph. It's an illustration, and not a "brick" in the traditional sense. Also, not a real LEGO brick. Here's another clue:

Don't forget the original pieces to this puzzle, the three images.

Laughin -- it might help to start by quoting a dictionary.

Reference Master/Reporter/Moderator

 

?

 

 

~D

You've obviously completed the first step -- each clue is visible if you hover your mouse over these question mark images.

(Or just quote the post and look at the code of it.)

D.Q, it has something to do with BZPower, because this blog entry is in my BZPower category. Try to answer the riddles in the hidden clues, and you'll be on the right track.

One more clue. Remember, this is a hidden clue:

This puzzle can be solved using these hidden clues. First non-staff member to win gets a cookie. I guess. Staff isn't allowed to play.

Well, here's another clue:

Please see my post in your topic, Adventurer -- you got it! Congrats. And BTW, you're being cited as "er", not "ess".

Edit: And I've changed my mind about what my next entry will be. The things I mentioned are still on the to-do list, but I know what the next entry will be. Not going to say what, but I will give you a clue. Look at my sig.

Say someone had committed an evil act before and they felt incredibly guilty afterwards, couldn't that prevent them from doing something similar again?

Most certainly. Some criminals will commit a crime only once, then feel that they have learned their lesson and move on.

Yep, and I believe I said that, didn't I?

But what I'm pointing out is, in that case guilt is the motivating force, but it motivates that person to basically create a new "moral" for themselves: "I won't do that again". Make sense?

Correction os the spelling of a certain word: Kakistocracy.

 

That sounds better.

Yarr.

But what does heshe decide? I'm just saying, the judge doesn't actually cause the act to be good or evil -- it's the motives of the "acter" that do that. But sure, the judge is important. But not for what I was talking about. Basically, the judge doesn't determine the actual truth of the event he's judging. He just forms his own opinion and then consequences for whatever that opinion is follow. Or she. Or they, etc.

Let's look at a hypothetical situation:

 

Take a deep breath. Close your eyes. Tight. I SAID CLOSE THEM!

I have no eyelids, remember?

... -.-

 

Okay, now, there is a person who has killed someone in a rage because the killee killed his dog (man's best friend, remember?). So, the judge sits before him, gavel in hand. It is the judge who will decide on the fate of the criminal

No arguments there.

and decide whether he is guilty or innocent

Argument there. He will decide whether he is guilty or innocent in the eyes of the court. And that will be what decides his fate (well, part of it). That doesn't mean the judge actually causes the man to be either guilty or innocent, in reality. See what I'm saying? In this example, the actual act is done long before the judge even enters the picture, and it is during that act that "real" built or innocence, in terms of selfishness or not, is formed.

The question then becomes if the court/judge/jury will accurately recognize that guilt or innocence (or, more realistically, something like a "not guilty" verdict which doesn't technically judge either way). And of course, that matters to the guy -- it is his fate we're talking about, after all. So not arguing that. Just saying, what determines his fate isn't necessarily his actual guilt or innocence -- it's the court's opinion about his guilt or innocence.

(No jury; this is a kangaroo court. What? Yes, that is a term given to courts that have only a judge.) What will he use to figure out the "truth?"

 

The Judge: Is he impartial? Is he negative? Has his affiliation been damaged? Has (heaven forbid) recived bribes? Is ne a noob or a old-timer at the proffesion? Is he upright?

 

The Circumstance: Was the act done under vile pretence? Was it in concordance with the laws, both supernatural and earthly? Was the act done under pressure, anger, spite, etc?

 

The Philosophies: This sums both the above together. Was the killer a thinker or doer? What was his life like? Was he agressive or passive? Is the judge either of those, too?

Good sumup of all those.

With these things in mind, the answer to the hearing is obvious if you use the choices in the corresponding grid. That is why I view those three things as the things that determine good and evil in earthly prespective (the other being Godly).

Well, no arguments with that wording. I'm simply not talking about a perspective at all, but about the actual truth (which IMO happens to always coincide with the Godly perspective ). Of course, in reality we can never know that, at least this side of the grave, but in fiction, we can, because the author (like Greg) can just tell us.

Though they do not determine the logical truth, they determine the truth that would make or break the fate of the killer.

 

Naturally, it is only one example of the truth behind TJ's saying.

Very well, agreed.

Of course, this is my view on the issue on a very limited scale. But I never said philosophers were the most logical people on earth.

Never was a truer statement uttered.

But, I have my opinion, you can have yours. ( ) j/k

 

~EW~

Ha ha.

Question: What stops people from doing evil things that actually benifit them? Is it:

1) Morality

2) Guilt

3) Public Image

If your answer is a combination, can you tell me which is the major factor

Well, I'm going to approach this question in several ways, A. First (the numbering is for my points, not your list, to be clear):

1) The question is so deep and it is asking about the "real" truth I was mentioning above in my response to EW. I also mentioned that it's impossible for us to know that "real" truth about someone else for sure. So everything I say about my opinion on your question has to be taken with a grain of salt (even by me), because you're asking something I could really only know if I was telepathic and could read every mind of everybody alive now, and who had lived in Earth's history. I ain't, I can't. Just so you know.

But of course there are ways to get good clues and hints about what it is for each person, because our thoughts usually manifest in something others can see/hear/etc. So I'll give it a shot.

2) Before we even get to the multiple choice part, I have to take issue with the question itself. Can we be sure that "evil" things really do benefit the evildoer, overall? Not to get into religious stuff, but there's a concept that evil can be attractive, and even fun at first, but then you find out you were deceived and the results are far worse than the "good" you may have felt at first. So evil would end up harming the evildoer far more than it benefits them.

The question would probably be better phrased, "What stops people from doing evil things that actually benifit them, at least in the short term?"

3) I don't think the best way to approach this topic can be done in the way that you asked. You want me to tell you which is the most important factor. I think the most important thing to realize about the answer is this:

It's all of the above, and quite possibly more, plus it will vary from person to person.

You're going to have individuals who don't care about guilt, they live in the now, but the public image will stop them (unless the public doesn't know, they might reason). You're going to have individuals who believe someone knows everything they do, so they will pay attention to morality. You can have subsets of these -- those who think the public will always find out, or those who would avoid evil only because of fear of punishment from someone who they believe knows everything. You will have those who suffer guilt from past "evil", and decide they will avoid "bigger" evil to avoid bigger guilt. You'll have some who have guilt only when they're caught in public. On and on this can go.

So yeah. No easy answer.

4) Buuuuut, to take your question as you asked it, I want to focus on Bionicle here for now, and I want to add an option. #4, love of good. The best example I can give is of a Toa who really wants to do whatever he can to protect the Matoran, and so he's willing to risk his life protecting them. For a Toa, it is arguably "evil" to flee danger rather than confronting it -- you know, the old superhero quote "with great power comes great responsibility."

That might not sound as dramatic as a Toa having to choose between killing an enemy who doesn't need killed or not -- but it's a far harder decision when you think about it. The Toa making the "we don't kill" choice has the upper hand if he can actually choose. The Toa who has to decide whether to fight or flee probably doesn't have that. To him the choice may be like this: "Flee and be safe and comfortable", or "Fight a very dangerous enemy and probably die in vain". Now that ain't easy. In that case, I think you can have guilt, and you can have morality. You can have public image if there's any public left to form an image. But can you see that the love of good can also be a powerful motivating force here?

5) But to move totally in line with your question as you asked it, I think the major factor has to be morality. Simple process of elimination:

#3 -- Public image? Most people think that they can get away with a lot more than they actually can, and there are still those, like Jack the Ripper, who totally escape the public eye (at least, his real identity -- if memory serves anyways ). No, public image isn't very powerful at all. People who rely on this will do anything they can get away with. And many will do things that are evil, yet actually enhance their public image. But let's not get political here.

#2 -- Guilt? Yes, this is very powerful. To a lot of people, this is certainly a factor. But guilt only comes after you do something, and until you've experienced it, you may think it wouldn't be that bad. Also, people can simply ignore their conscience and literally convince themselves that they have nothing to be guilty about. And different "crimes" will have people have less or more guilt. So think about the Toa who is facing a powerful foe, and kills him. Like with the Toa Inika during that one test -- they didn't even think about guilt until they had "killed" the illusions. If those illusions were real, all the guilt in the world wouldn't help them. But certainly, it does play a powerful role.

#1 -- Morality. Morality is basically a system where you identify what actions are considered good and evil, and the results you believe come from them. This covers both public image and guilt, because a system of morals is what you basically need in order to avoid the bad side of those things anyways. Take the Toa Inika example. Guilt in that case certainly helped them form a newer sense of the "Toa don't kill" moral. So guilt can lead to a new morality. But a morality that already exists can be taught and that way, the killing can be avoided in the first place.

Also, morality is the only one of these three that deals with the love of good -- if you care for the Matoran, for example, your system of morals ("Duty") tell you that you should go and face the evil, whether in vain or not, and at worst go down to the grave with honor. Public image isn't about that at all -- it's basically selfish, and fickle (look at LoMN with the fake Dume; the public image there was that the Toa were bad guys but they did the right thing anyways). Guilt is somewhat about that, but again, if you decide "I can't do this, I'd live with the guilt all my life", that is a moral, not actual guilt itself. Guilt comes after you've done the evil act, and you wish you hadn't so that the Matoran could be safe. And it is, again, selfish, because you pity yourself for having to be depressed by guilt.

Morality is the only one of these three that says "Okay, this is what I must do for the good of everybody involved" and can produce that result everytime, preventing the act of evil, if it's followed.

Okay; thanks. I'm glad you clairified that for me.

 

No problemo. You're welcome.

If we can nominate yourself, I nominate my new theory about Mata Nui's awakening

I'm thinking about it. The one argument against it is... everybody was already saying that. But you do have many good quotes, best evidence collecting for it so far (as usual ). I'm out of time for today. I'll leave you in suspense to see what I decide later.

Sorry, I don't find it funny. When I have to wake up to PMs from people who are taking it seriously and asking me if that's a legit model, then I have to waste my time looking into it and telling them it's fake. He not only posted it as legitimate, but argued with people who said it wasn't, which I think is carrying a joke too far.

 

Greg

Yes, but he wrote TIF at the begining, which stands for This Is Fake.

 

MB has spoken

I have never heard that acronym before, and I have been a staff member here for a few years now. So it would be unrealistic to expect everybody to know what that meant (or worse, intentionally relying on that). As far as I would guess, "TIF" is a mispelling of "TIFF", the file type.

I'm not going to comment on the entry -- I'll leave that to the blog staff -- but that argument doesn't hold water. To me the question, why post a prank, when it is the beginning of October, nowhere near April? At best that is highly unwise.

Brevity is the soul.

A note on The Second Makuta theory that got this award: It violates, from my experience, the Fallacy of Proof From Silence. If I recall from a quote in my logic textbook, it states that even if it is highly likely, no proof can be derived from something like "I can't answer that." Hence why I usually don't make theories based upon that.

If you could please explain why he got it? I might be wrong, but I'm pretty sure I memorized that fallacy pretty well...

 

There wasn't silence in that case though. I will agree that is a weak point in the theory; the other reasoning he listed is the main reason why it won. He connected dots in ways nobody else had, and then his questioning of Greg was more of a side feature, albeit one that attracts attention.

However, Greg has been known to have a habit of saying "no" when members' questions are definately a "no", but a lot of times "can't answer it" when they're close or correct. So it's certainly not proof, but it can be taken as evidence. I've argued against topics that rely on this method, because Greg can simply choose not to discuss a particular topic at all if he chooses. However, that was only one part of the theory. And it wasn't silence. So still a valid piece of evidence in this case.

Good question, though. One thing you should remember, BTW, is the difference between "proof" and "evidence", at least as defined in S&T. "Proof" is much stronger, but evidence merely means a possible indication, which doesn't "prove" but does give apparent credence to a theory. Proof in S&T is considered reason to call something a "fact", which is much stronger than a theory. Even fallacies can sometimes be evidence in the right context.

For example, Ad Populum is the fallacy that the majority opinion must be right (in essence). If a commercial cites as evidence for its product being good that it is popular, that is not proof that you should buy it. But it can be reason to consider it -- after all, if many people like something, it's statistically more likely that you will too. So that's a case of evidence, but definately not proof. I've mentioned this idea in the Debate guide (orange link in sig in case you haven't read it), where there's at least one more example, I believe.

Yep, I agree. You get the award. And congrats to Bioran too for his Truth of Karzahni theory.

Thanks, Night Terror, for that suggestion -- I agree and it's been awarded! Congrats, A.

I have a couple of questions:

 

1)Can you nominate yoursef?

2)Can you nominate closed topics that aren't that old that were presented well?

3)How about A and B together?

4)Why didn't I think of this to be your new entry?

5)Oh and Bones will the next one be a ELS one? Those are awsome!

I renumbered your questions, cuz "B_)" is the smily B) and I must needs have space after the paren...thesis... thesi? these?.

1) You can absolutely nominate yourself. As long as you keep in mind there's no guarantee nominations will get the award. The criterion are basically the things in the S&T rules and guidelines pinned topic about theories, so if a topic of your own looks like it fits those guidelines, you probably stand a good chance. ("You" being either "you" or anybody else that would go this route.)

2) I suppose, but if they're closed, it's hard to be sure how to deal with it in terms of awarding -- I'd have to open it, post, then close it and this would be the only place to comment on that. So, you can nominate, but it's going to be harder for that to win.

3) Sure.

4) Good question.

5) I've got a couple different things in mind for my next entry. I was thinking about a History of Gimmicks in Bionicle, since there's this misconception that gimmicks started with lightup eyes and the like. Probably either that or ELS. Or something else I haven't planned yet. But for the moment the evil homework creepeth so delays shalt chokest the life out of mine blogge. Good thing it's undead...

Parenthesio? ...thesahk? ... thesoid?

Awesome.

 

Just Awesome.

 

One thing that would be nice though, is when the many pilgrims thing comes in you should make him count:

Pilgrim: 1, 2, 3... Oh! 6 Billion People!...

 

And... May I actually ask my teacher to present this to the school?

 

The Disousa

Sure! As long as you give credit (I'm sure you would, I just have to say it ). In what capacity?

 

I'm not planning on really revising this anymore, but I suppose that would be cool, about the pilgrim thing. Although 6 billion is a bit much, given that it's roughly the current population of the Earth and this takes place long before now, eh?

That's the fun part. Load's'a people!

 

And if this is a long time ago... How come there is Climbing Gear, drinking problems and Mountaoin Gear Books?! Just a thought...

True, lol. But comics do that all the time -- I still say 6 million is too many... Six thousand?

On Assembly. In front of the whole school... He... I'll give credit, don't worry.

Man, now I'm nervous. Go ahead -- and lemme know what parts draw laughs. If any.

And can I change it to have slight differences? Yeah, I'm probably asking a lot... He...

 

So can I?

 

The Disousa

Sure, as long as you send me or post the changes (you can just email it to bonesiii@gmail.com or PM it to me). Just 'cuz I'm curious what you'd change.

GB, this is about logic, understanding and good versus evil, not Evel Lord Survurlode, the Orca, THE Chief Gremlin and the now nonexsistent bubblewrap trap. If you had anything to say about that, you could have just posted in his profile with all due sillyness, not an important discussion.

 

But what can I say? I am not a smart skeleton.

Well now you just reminded me about the defeat of the bubble wrap, so yeah.

Seriously, if we made a list of blows dealt to Survurlode and his minions lately, what would it be? Really, his only success is that every once in a while we still slow down. A little. A tad.

Anyways....

In no particular order:

Not sure I agree with the idea that the law "cannot mean anything to it" though. The laws do change the circumstance, although they ideally shouldn't.

 

I agree with the quote from Thomas of Jeffer though. Law isn't justice -- what is it though? Well, it's just what the elites of one society happen to decide they want everybody to act. Even in a "democracatic republic" like America (not to get too political here though ) It's abstract, and often not rooted in real practicality or logic, heh.

True, but I was thinking about the actual intention, not the actual act. In that case, my comment is still valid.

Fair enough.

And there is a name for such a goverment: kakistracacy. You should look it up, if you have not done so already.

Hwatever you say dude.

Well, I agree wholeheartedly that the circumstances matter, but I don't see the judge as that relevant -- basically because I'm talking about the "actual truth" sort of thing. If someone chooses an action for selfish reasons, it might be that no "judge" can recognize it or know it, but that doesn't change the action.

 

Differences in how some people or cultures "judge" can change the circumstances, though. Like with the shrunken heads example, that obviously changes how you act, and it can change what you might consider selfish. I assume that society would pressure you to feel guilty for resenting the elitism of those with the shrunken heads. Under those circumstances, it would be possible to hold grudges for selfish reasons, even though the root cause isn't the fault of that person.

 

But it's the circumstances that define that. If someone stands up against that discrimination for selfless reasons; to stand up for justice (which applies to far more than just that someone), a "judge" in that culture would appeal to the tradition as a basis to say "you are committing evil here". But that judge would quite simply be wrong.

The judge is rather important. Right now, we are all making judgements on good and evil. Some judges are indifferent, other impartial. Whenever we view an act, we judge it. That effetively makes us judges (hence the name ^^). Of course, how we viw the matter relies of philosophies of individuality and POVs on the actual act. So, actualy, the judge is important in every matter, as heshe is mormaly the deciding factor.

But what does heshe decide? I'm just saying, the judge doesn't actually cause the act to be good or evil -- it's the motives of the "acter" that do that. But sure, the judge is important. But not for what I was talking about. Basically, the judge doesn't determine the actual truth of the event he's judging. He just forms his own opinion and then consequences for whatever that opinion is follow. Or she. Or they, etc.

In a courtroom, a judge is even more important, as he is the immediate deciding factor and can be currupt (especially with the problematic law thing), so he can certainly make wrong decisions on the matter, even highliting his impotance more.

 

As for the German schooling example, that was entirely based upon current times and events. I do indeed speak German (as I am German. Well, half German), and Germany currently banned homeschooling in favor of more orthodox public methods, blaming the parents of brainwashing their kidns when the actualy performed academically advanced.

 

Ich sehe. I guess I'm not up on my current German events enough... That's too bad. Homeschooling is proven to be effective (though it might certainly vary depending on the parent) -- I'm a case in point. I literally would not be a logician if I hadn't been homeschooled for a few years. They don't teach logic in these schools, you know; the Prof in Narnia is right on.

 

Yep, I agree with all of that. BTW, did you mean "beliefs"?

I heard a rumor once that you were homeschooled at one time or another, I juste never felt like bothering you about a petty thing like that, or worse, make it an arguement with others. Well, now I safely know for sure that you were indeed HSed.

 

Remember, I hate typos.

 

 

~EW~

I shalt duly remember that. Thus, you typed "juste".

Hey I was giving him ideas for the next blog entry so it does belong here as this was where he told me that if I get something good he'll do it.

Here there, whereeverwhere. I don't care.

Rhyme not intended.

Awesome.

 

Just Awesome.

 

One thing that would be nice though, is when the many pilgrims thing comes in you should make him count:

Pilgrim: 1, 2, 3... Oh! 6 Billion People!...

 

And... May I actually ask my teacher to present this to the school?

 

The Disousa

Sure! As long as you give credit (I'm sure you would, I just have to say it ). In what capacity?

I'm not planning on really revising this anymore, but I suppose that would be cool, about the pilgrim thing. Although 6 billion is a bit much, given that it's roughly the current population of the Earth and this takes place long before now, eh?

I don't look at it that way, Janus -- one of the things I bring up in complaint topics all the time is the difference between each of our individual tastes and the tastes of the majority; i.e. between what each of us wishes LEGO could do, and what LEGO objectively should do to please the majority.

This isn't a complaint topic, though. It's an entry basically summing up where he stands in Bionicle. Of course it's his tastes. It's his Blog. He's not asking Lego to change everything just for him. And everything stated is subjective, not objective.

I knew someone would say that, lol. Yes, it was the phrase "State of Bionicle" that confuses that issue, but he was clear about that. These are the comments in his blog entry, where we say what we think/feel in response. As I said:

So there's not that much to say in agreement/disagreement with this entry, because it's clearly what you prefer. You are entitled to prefer that. But.

 

So all I can really do is give my take on these issues, rather than your opinion of them per se.

I'm joking with the "But", BTW.

X, that is how I felt about Metru Nui too -- it was in many ways "fantasy tech", more magic than technology feeling (at least to me but I realize I'm weird 'cuz I'm a physics geek here so I know what is and is not possible with real world tech in Bionicle). Metru Nui always struck me more as a mysterious, exhilerating paradise city made totally out of this mysterious protodermis, with magical machinery than a "hi-tech metropolis" as the complainers usually characterized it. Aaaand lovin it.