bonesiii

As awesome as he is, Kopeke does not make a good chronicler.

Well, I almost voted for Kapura, and if he -did- for sure get to keep the travel power, probably would have, lol, but sans that, I have to disagree. Kopeke is an excellent choice. Reezins:

1) Observative. Dude, he built a Wahi-wide ice-lense security system in MNOG, lol. He... sees all.

[ominous]He is watching you.[/ominous]

Chroniclers need to be observative, and observative types are more likely to want that sort of job. Kapura's observative enough--he makes those cool riddles with what he's observed, which is a plus. But ya can't beat a Wahi-wide security system, sorry.

[Good point -- Kapura is not all behind here, however. He watches while he practices, hence him seeing Tahu's canister wash up on the beach, plus he made a good scout in the BA1 prologue. May not beat Kopeke here, but he is still very observant from what I've seen]

2) Silence is a virtue--a Chronicler that want to spend all the time in the spotlight being the one making history isn't doing the best job of chronicling. Witness Takua, XD. Someone who's willing to be quiet is probably going to notice a lot more, and with Kopeke's history of noticing things, I have no doubt he would have a greater understanding when chronicling. I think many people are confusing talkativeness with wanting to write a lot--I disagree, just from how I am. I don't like talking much in real life, but I love writing. Kopeke way ahead of Kapura here.

[Kapura is not very talkative at all. Notice how his sentences are short, to the point, and he never wastes a word. He spends a lot of his time alone, simply practicing, watching, contemplating. His talent of speaking with hidden messages seems like a good contribute when figuring out the meaning of events, too.

Also, Kopeke is not shy at all -- he seems very cold, much Kopaka, so I doubt he'd be willing to go around and ask people about events and other stuff, like Takua would. Kapura seems nicely balanced here, as he actually will speak if needed.]

3) Staying alive. The biggest issue to me, besides wanting the job or having skills needed, is the ability to stay alive. So as not to end up like Kodan. This -would- be Kapura's main advantage, if that power is useable, as he could "teleport" away from enemies (well, if he has enough advance notice, at least, since he'd have to slooooow down to do it, which is a weakness). Assuming it can't be used in story though, Kopeke spent tons of time out in the Wahi on Mata Nui, unlike most Matoran who stayed inside the Koro's walls for protection.

Being quiet is also helpful, as he'd be more aware of possible danger around him--same for being observative by nature.

He's also tough enough. Chronicler's company. Both relatively tied here, but I consider Kopeke at least a little better at staying alive.

[Try look at how fast Kapura avoided the Rahi attacks in the Kini Nui mini game in MNOG. He also maged to escape from Ta-Koro during the initial Bohrok attack, saving the entire village by bringing the Toa there. And the Charred Jungle seems like a dangerous place, too -- Kapura definitely has strong courage with him calmly asking if Takua was the Makuta.]

5) Desire to travel. Kapura and Kopeke tied here. Both spent tons of time outside Koro when possible.

[Yup -- Kapura will even travel to any village to find Takua when Vakama requests it!]

6) Carving. Obviously, Hafu wins here, XD. But I've seen no evidence Kapura's the kind of guy who'd want to sit down and carve out records. He'd probably prefer to... practice. But Kopeke carved in ice all the time, including that spy-lense, and carving that key. Kopeekee wins here.

[Agreed here. Still, pondering and contemplating seems like Kapura's thing, so that would come in handy when chronicling.]

7) Real World parallel. I'm a lot like him. I'm a reporter. Go figure. Of course, not sure if that's close to universal, lol, but this is my view I'm talking about, so it counts. That's a Kopeke.

8) ...

That's Kopeke 7, Kapura 3 (give or take).

To be fair, we can throw in a 9:

9) Cool speeches. Obviously, Kapura wins, so whatever he writes might be interesting enough to actually bother reading it, XD. Note: #8 is "Mysteriousness", at which Kopeke and Kapura are close to tied--Kopeke might not have cool speeches, but characters of few words can be even more mysterious than those with many riddles. Kapura, of course, makes up lost ground with the whole traveling thing, whether it can be in story or not--Greg doesn't even know what it means, XD. So Kapura wins this round, and cool speeches. However, neither of these are important to being a chronicler, in my view--they're simply crowd pleasers, heh. So, count is something like this:

Kopeke 7, Kapura 4 (2 + .5 + .5). Kopeke still wins.

[Well, speaking with hidden wisdom in his words, as Vakama put, seems like a good skill when observing and recording events. No biggie here, agreed, but Kopeke's words seem much more plain, which could be problematic when chronicling. However, as you said, could be only when speaking.]

So to me, only way Kapura would win is if that power definately could be in the official story, which would be suuuuch a crowd pleaser it's worth a 4 all by itself, pushing Kappy up to 8. XD

So remember. Vote Kopeke. He is watching you.

[And Kapura may be right behind you before you finish that sentence! -Ikk]

Hate to say it, but you seem to forget the universal fact of varying personal tastes. What may be "crud" to you is often "really cool" to someone else, and vice verse. And at the -same- time, you also seem to forget that not everybody is trying to make a Mona Lisa, lol. No offense--I understand what you're trying to say. Constructive criticism is fine--pointing it out even in really good pieces is fine, as long as you understand that there's no obligation on the artist to be perfect or even anywhere near it. IMO calling it "crud" is not.

Hey now, didn't catch that XD. Nice. Still, unless Greg can find out what it means, probably it won't actually be in official stories themselves...

I remember when people were saying the exact same thing about the Inika and Piraka. In '08 I bet people will feel the same about those sets too and begging to go back to these designs.

I never heard anything really horrible about the Piraka. Some people thought the teeth were weird, but no one was negative. The only negatives of the Inika were masks, but they were changed.

 

The only one this logic can apply to is Umbra -- but I, personally, did like the first image we saw. Like I said in the topic, I usually look for all the positives, but there are far too few in these Mahri.

Oh, no, it was definately true of the Piraka and Inika too. And the Visorak, Hordika, Toa Metru. It's been this way for several years, because LEGO's been moving away from the tastes that you often see here and more towards the core fanbase. Of course, from what I've seen, BZP reaction the Barraki has been mostly positive, interestingly, kinda like it was with the Rahkshi.

-- He has a special ability which comes very useful when travelling. By lots of practicing, he has learned the secret art of covering great distances by moving very slow!

For the record, that part may not be able to make it into any actualy story, if that's important for anyone's vote. Greg doesn't know what was meant by it, and the one person who apparently did, Bob Thompson, isn't with the company anymore.

OK, so you've defined "cool", now define "ruthless" and "elegance". I don't know about you, but I think that some of these things are based off of your personal tastes, which you try so hard not to use.

No, no. I don't use my personal tastes to form any "LEGO should" opinions. That's not the point of this entry--it's simply to try to define my tastes here. This one is about my tastes. Again, read the first paragraph, it makes this clear.

At the same time, though, I do seperately have the opinion that this basic taste is the majority taste--you and I have discussed that at length before, so hopefully you understand that. But don't misunderstand, not saying that I know for a fact this is how every "majority" Bionicle fan would define it. I can't really know that anyways. This is just me.

Some of these things that you say are elegant sure don't look elegant to me.

Yes, Kraggh, that's because our tastes are different. As for Mantax, I meant the sweeping back, things, whatever the word is, at the back of his head. Before, I had thought his head was just this blocky thing, but with that pic, I see it's actually flattened, drawn out, with those two "tentacles" going off the back, which is more pleasing to me.

Probably this may also have to do with me being able to accept more variety as pleasing, so I can see elegance in a Piraka where perhaps you can't (which is OK, don't misunderstand). That's why I made that poll on Set Variety, link in sig--I was curious if that was just me, and it seems it's not. Someone in the Sets forum recently called the 2001 Rahi and Toa "truly graceful", but in my tastes, that's the last word to apply. Yet for that person, it's the right word, and it's the word he "should" use, at least if that's how he meant it (although he -did- clarify wasn't the best word, I think... lol, but that's beside the point). Make sense? That is all a matter of taste, and it's definately OK for you to see it differently.

just simply didn't think that they "cool". The word itself is nothing but a personal taste, and as accurate as you can get to describing its meaning is "what you think is very interesting."

Lemme see if I can make this clear--it's because words like this mean different things to different people that I need to try, somehow, to show people visually what I mean when I use it. Make sense? Not to say that [pompous]"this is the 'official' definition"[/pompous], but that it's what little old me happens to mean when I use the word.

Now that you have defined "cool", define "ruthless" and "elegant".

All three are defined best I know how to with the images above. If it helps, though, Kraggh, let me try to rephrase in one sentence, though it will be somewhat long:

Because I know that tastes vary and because I know that they're all equal, I know that even though the kind of thing I like is intense and won't be liked by others, there's nothing wrong with it, just as there's nothing wrong with what they like, and I am therefore not afraid to enjoy what I like, and not hold back--the best word I know to describe the well-aligned curves and spikes and serrations/feathers/teeth/etc. is "elegant" but most people think of "elegant" as laid back, held back, "dainty" and whatnot--I say no--I'm not just gonna enjoy "Laid Back Elegance", I'm gonna go all out, really enjoy it, take it up a few levels, up more levels, to Ruthless Elegance!

Does that help, lol? Boy, that went long. I'm saying, since I know there's nothing wrong with it, I'm not afraid to delve deeply into the "elegance" or "cool" or "coolified" or whatever the word to use, hence, "ruthless."

And at the same time, I think everybody else is free to delve just as deeply into what they like too! If you like, as Ikki put it, "Technified Power" (I think that was the quote), then celebrate it! It's OK!

Kraggh, Bonesiii is of course expressing his personal opinon

Yes, but for clarity's sake, VK, I wouldn't use the word "opinion." I'd just say that it's my "taste" or my "preference." I use the word "opinion" for things like "LEGO should" opinions, which this is not. Less confusing that way, I think.

I think what he's trying to say is that you can combine ruthlessness and elegance.

That's... almost it, but I'm not saying it's good to be ruthless in a moral sense, lol. Second paragraph of entry talks about that, incidentally.

I'm saying the elegance is good (for me) when it's ruthless; doesn't hold back. Not that the ruthlessness is good when it's elegant, XD. Although I suppose in the sense of enjoying the scariness of villains in an mere storyline, that's OK too. In that sense, I would agree with how you put it, yes.

I also don't think bonesiii is saying that the Toa Nuva/Toa canisters were NOT cool. I think they were cool, yet I agree wholeheartedly with bonesiii's point. What he's trying to explain is that 'new' and 'different' and what can be associated by many as "NOT BIONICLE!" can be BIONICLE, and can be cool.

This is good analysis--this is thought provoking stuff here, heh.

How I would say my view of the Mata/Nuva (in my tastes), is that they were "cool" to a degree, but they were holding back. They weren't quite "ruthlessly" elegant, as it were, make sense? Again, in my tastes. So basically I liked them, but not as much as an Inika or a Piraka, or a Barraki.

Why would a Bionicle customer buy a set? Because its' ugly? No, because to that customer, the set is cool. I got Kalmah and not Mantax because I thought Kalmah was cool and Mantax was not as cool. I got Bahrag, not Boxor, because I thought Bahrag was cooler than Boxor. So, if the majority of customers is buying the Piraka and Inika, they must think they're cool, or they wouldn't really be buying them. Bonesiii's personal views on what is cool must be what the majority thinks, because if they didn't think the sets were cool, BIONICLE's sales would be going down, and BIONICLE would be headed in the direction of your topic a while back; downhill.

Yes, when it comes to my actual opinion, I agree with that, but i want to be clear--I'm not saying that my tastes always coincide with the majority. For example, I love brown sets, as do a lot of my fellow BZPers, but most fans don't like them. Brown sells worst, which is why it was discontinued (mostly--Carapar is actually largely brown though, and not coincidentally he's the only Barraki I actually have so far *glares at thin wallet*). I also am not liking these Mahri launchers, and although guns are cool, I usually like swords better, so it's very possible the launchers might sell OK simply because they're guns, going against my tastes too. So please don't think I'm defining the "Official Bionicle Majority Taste" here or whatever, lol. It's just that usually, this general idea seems to be what most fans like.

And heck, I'm not even happy with that, per se. I mean, for me, it's great. I'm getting sets I love. But at the same time, I do wish reality could work differently so that you guys (those with different tastes, such as "Technicism", like gears for you, Kraggh) could have sets you like better too. And if the tables were turned, and most fans shared your taste, not mine, I wouldn't mind, for myself, that much. It would be a bit dissapointing, but I'd be happy you guys could get what you like. And for a long time, before I found BZP and found out that things like Rahi hadn't sold as well as I'd assumed they did, I always thought the tables were turned, and I was in a minority, heh. And I was OK with that.

What bonesiii is saying, Kraagh, is that ruthless and elegance are two normally different things. But in many cases, they can combine. He used the sun as an example. A ruthless source of body-burning, skull melting heat, yet so elegant in its form.

In that sense, yes. That's what I'm saying. Of course, without examples, it's so hard to define. In fact, maybe the pictures alone can't do the job, heh, since there's a lot of confusion I'm getting in the comments, XD. But still, I think there's a part of this that has to resonate with someone who shares my tastes to really see it like I see it, since this is an entry about taste, not about logic. So don't feel bad that you don't see it that way, Kraggh. Nothing wrong with that.

And bonesiii, I recently saw some new ToyFair pictures from Wednesday, which you can find around brickshelf, and I've changed my views on Hewkii and some of the Mahri. THey look quite cool, and I they aren't as prototype-looking as the ones from the Saturday night. Hewkii's mask is smoother and much more elegant.

Glad to hear that. I had seen a better pose before on another site, BTW, which shall remain nameless here, but that did give me a better angle on it. That may be part of what's going on here. Time shall tell. Angle often affects initial opinion, heh.

Just cause the PIraka look evil and vicious, doesn't meant they're ugly. They're ruthless, yet elegant, and so can be cool.

Yes--now to get closer to what I meant, though, this can apply to good guys too. They definately shouldn't be ruthless, of course. But they can be elegant. And I personally like it when they push that elegance to the extreme, being ruthless in that sense, not in behavior. (I say "they" but of course it's set designers only--so far in the story the Toa have never controlled their looks.)

Visorak-Kal, you mistook the meaning of "ruthless elegance". You thought that ruthless and elegant were two different words describing something that is cool. But actually, "ruthless" is describing "elegance". Look at that tree, it wasn't ruthless.

That's correct; that's what I meant as far as which word modifies what, lol. VK's point does stand for enjoying villains in a story as said above, and I hadn't thought of that. That is true too. But yes, to look at the tree, what I'm saying is it's elegant (to me), but it's beyond what most people think of with "elegant" because they are thinking "dainty" or "held back elegance." So it's "ruthless elegance."

Anyway, I am used to Bonesiii being 100% logiton, so naturally I thought he was saying what was logically cool.

Oh, there's no such thing, IMO. This is why I said, in comments for the "Why I Do What I Do" entry, that logic and emotion must both be present, IMO. A "logical" definition of cool would mean nothing without emotion and taste to produce pleasure. A computer is logical, but it cannot understand a concept like "cool", just like it can't be happy or sad.

The one way I could see there being such a thing is if all human beings universally responded the exact same way to each type of entertainment--that there was no such thing as varying taste and we were all the same. Frankly, I'm glad we're not because life would be boring that way, heh. No, it's definately a matter of taste.

Remember, Kraggh, that "I like" statements are considered outside logic. I've made this crystal clear in the Debate Terms guide--this is why I keep asking people to read it so we can avoid this kind of misunderstanding, XD. I am a logician, yes, but as one, I understand that personal taste is outside logic (it's another term for "I like"). Therefore, there's no way to logically define "cool" for everybody. The best we can do is define what it means to each of us, individually. Hence this entry....

Anyways, hope this isn't too long.

Edit: Just oooone last comment, which is totally going into too much depth, XD:

Bonesiii is by nature a logician, so you thought he wasn't describing personal taste.

For the record, I'm not "by nature" a logician... I had to learn that it's the best way to become one. I was as illogical as anyone else when I was a little chillun, XD. No offense to the little chilluns... I do consider myself lucky to have been given the right opportunities to see this. Ultimately I had to choose it, against my own ego and selfish nature. At the same time, i discovered that in another sense, it -is- my nature in that it seems best for humanity in general. After all, we have both emotions and the most advanced brains in nature--why not use the brains too?

But yeah, getting deeeep here XD.

Again, I can't really respond to the rest of what you say without making sure you understand first where I'm coming from, and understanding where you are coming from too... The main mistake you seem to be making appears to be that you don't think truth exists as an absolute, which I can easily disprove, but I do not want to presume that that is what you meant, and it doesn't sound like it, from your first PM...

 

*long comment, lol*

 

 

Just wondering, did you mean "disaprove"? Anyway, I meant that as a fact about the human mind and nothing outside of that. I think that it takes more than just looking at it your way, I think you have to ]i]want]/i] to look at it your way and truly feel it. I'm trying to keep this post short, as I usually get confuciong and end up making less sence when I make them long, unlike you do.

 

 

By the way, what's the code for that Spock emote? Oh and your not him? Blast, there goes my theory .

Lol. Well, Kraggh, that's a good point, and that's why I try so hard to help people see why it's desirable. Of course, I don't always do a great job of it, XD. But look at me--I'm a pretty happy guy, and it ain't 'cuz I'm well off or anything in ways people usually think of it. A lot of people go through life miserable, blaming their misery on outside bad luck and the like. Financially, my family ain't doing suh well, ya know, but I am not miserable--not to make a sob story, XD, but my point is, I really think this is a recipe for a better outlook on life. Really, I think it's how humans are supposed to be.

Code for any image can be found, BTW, by right-clicking, clicking Properties. At least on PCs XD. Specific code for old Vulcy:

http://www.majhost.com/gallery/bonesiii/Emot/iheartlogic2.gif

And no, I meant "disprove." I mean, if you did think that there are no absolutes, I disagree, and I could easily show why I disagree, beyond a shadow of a doubt. In case you're curious, it's because that statement is an absolute--"There are no absolutes" contradicts itself. Heh. Disprove means to do the opposite of prove--to show that something cannot be true. Hope that helps...

That's okay, GMan. And glad I could clear that up, DV. Yeah, probably not worded the best... maybe I should edit that first paragraph?

Gman had the same confusion, DV--what I'm saying is, this is how I, personally, define "cool" when I use that word (since many people have asked me how I define it, as I said in the first paragraph). Not saying other people don't define it differently. Remember, though, this taste (or the general idea) seems to be the one usually shared by most Bionicle fans, so it seems to be to be worth the time to try to sit down and define it somehow.

So, no, I'm not saying this taste is "better" than yours--remember I consider all tastes to be equal. On an individual basis. But as we've been over countless times before, since they're all equal, they're like a vote, so what's best for Bionicle's health is the majority. That's why I am saying this is the majority taste. The big picture I'm saying that most complainers miss is that fact--they often think their own taste is more important for Bionicle to target over everybody else's, but it is just impossible in the real world.

Hope that clears that up...

I agree ! I love the style of the more recent sets. The Piraka were my favorite canister villains - that is, until the Barraki came out. I'm glad current sets are selling so well. The Rahkshi back in '03 were amazing partly due to the spines - and all the qualities they possessed - and more - that appealed to me came back in full force with the Barraki. And the Piraka were unique in their own way - never has there been a line of canister sets like them in Bionicle history.

 

I really like the whole coolified style, and hope that Lego keeps it up. All six of the Toa Mahri have amazing masks, and the Inika before them were great - my favorite Toa. And the sets have a great realism about them - it's the ultimate advancement of Bionicle, in my mind; the potential of the line realized.

 

This is all, of course, my personal tastes. But I'm glad that Lego is marketing towards them, and even if the demand for a more robotic look among the majority becomes strong in the future, at least I'll have a collection from '06 and '07. Even though Lego sometimes makes decisions that don't appeal to me, on the whole, they've created a great line. So hooray for Bionicle !

Yeah--it is a good feeling when we're in the group of tastes LEGO's marketing to. That's what makes me wish that reality could be different and somehow they could also please the minority tastes--I have been there of course back with things like gears that I didn't like, and when there's something like that that I dislike, it makes me feel like Bionicle isn't as good as it could be, in feelings, though as a logician I at least know that's only true for me personally for sure. But it's definately a good thing that Bionicle -is- focusing on the majority, for the reason you said. Hopefully it can be a consolation to the minority tastes in some small way.

Hahli has fins, not wings. Gosh, why is it so hard to understand that (Yes, I'm being serious)? Everyone keeps sayin' things like "Why does a Toa of Water have wings? They're under water, too, what use wiill they have?" It's annoying. They're fins. And you're just the unlucky one who I decided to finally say it to, ToM.

I agree that the Bionicle lines is cooler right now....I don't understand why people keep complaining.

Well, I understand it--everybody's different, and to people who aren't into this style, it's not as "cool" in the other sense of the word. Being a fan of something can be very emotional, and people miss things that were powerful forces in their lives in some ways. I don't blame them for complaining about that. It can be hard to step back and look at the big picture.

This is one of the best blog entries I have seen in a long time. (Okay, not that long, blogs just started. )

 

I really like your blog, Bonesii, you delve int othe deeper meaning of BIONICLE. I like you as a BZP person (although I don't know you) because you try to find that which is deeper than the outside. I like to do that as well.

Thanks, VK!

I don't look at the Mahri alone; I look at what led to the Mahri and how they fit in to the BIONICLE franchise. I agree wholeheartedly on soem points, not so on others. I agree that BIONICLE is headed in the right direction, and that "cool" can be determined by so many things that we consider everyday. Take the sun for example. As you showed, the sun looks like a Zamor sphere. It looks like a Zamor sphere. But it's not.

 

The Barraki were one of the greatest genius BIONICLE ideas ever. Taking oceanic creatures and combining them with BIONICLE's mechanical style, in essence humanizing them. You now have Pridak, Mantax, Ehlek, Carapar, Takadox, and my personal favorite, Kalmah.

 

Where I disagree is the Mahri. I believe the direction was right. Scuba-diver heroes, in essence. Cool. But as they say, right idea, bad execution.

We agree there on some points. BTW, I've just posted an in-depth analysis of Diosjenin's topic-post, here, including the details on what I see as problems with the Mahri--I'm interested in your thoughts on that.

Scuba divers are not fish, and while the idea to mix them was "cool", they don't look that great. (Granted, they are prototypes, and the person who posed them tried to make them look bad. )

Yes--that Jaller pose is especially awful. XD

The Cornak blasters (official name) are okay. I can't say I'm crazy about them, but I wasn't crazy about Squid Launchers at first, but once I got the hang of them, they're actually quite great. But the blasters just seem too big, too bulky.

That's fair enough. My main problem with the blasters (BTW, are you sure it's Cornak with an "n"?) is the look, and I thought the squidders looked alright--but if the blasters fire better, might outweigh that.

I had thought they looked bulky too, but I'm not as sure, re-checking a few of the farther back pics from Toyfair--at certain angles they seem skinnier than at others. Not sure...

The Mahri themselvse hold mixed feelings. Again, right idea, bad execution. Jaller looks great. Hewkii's mask, IMO, looks horrid. A lot of the designs lack, such as Kongu. Two collectible launchers, and no personal weapon?

 

What I look for in BIONICLE is the innovative, the new, and the just plan awesome. The Barraki had that. The Inika had that. The Piraka had that. The Bahrag had that. Umbra had that. Vezon and Fenrakk had that. The 2007 Titans have that. The Mahri don't for me. Jaller, Hahli, and Hewkii have nice designs. (Excluding Hewkii's mask.) But the ones I like have the innovative, the new, and the plan awesome. The rest do not. Hewkii's arm is a new, great idea. Hahli's wings, amazing. Jaller, just plan awesome. Nuparu, lacking. Matoro, not so well done. Kongu, lacking. See what i mean?

Heh, it's ironic that you don't like his mask. I've seen that a lot here--maybe that should be the subject of a poll. (Personally my sig is full though. :-P)

Yeah, I can see that, definately, though I don't mind Kongu except for a bit more armor, plus the launcher design itself--I don't mind the two launcher idea itself, and in a way it's fitting for an air Toa. For Matoro, the tubes are the main thing that I don't like. I love the shoulder armor, Toa-foot body design, and hunchback differentiation.

But I agree with you that BIONICLE remains strong, remains innovative as a whole franchise, and remains, well, just plan cool.

 

And by the way, those pictures are awesome.

Thanks, heh. Took a whole day to find 'em all.

GMan--I'm PMing you about your flame comment before I make any attempt to try to reply to that here. I hope you rethink that behavior.

[Edit: I've recieved your reply, and I'm glad to here you did not intend to flame and you see your mistake. Thank you. ]

Mahria, I just saw a group named Mahria,

And suddenly my sight,

Will never be the same again!

 

 

Anyway, I agree with you on a lot of these points. They are very hideous in some ways, like how Hewkii's color scheme is messed up with the red, the silver, and the greenish color on the mask. The Mahri should have been a lot better, but I guess we won't get what we wanted in this group. However, I do disagree with you on the masks, but we're all entitled to our own opinion.

 

Speaking of opinions, it seems for every opinion on these guys, there's an extreme opposite. Very interesting. They're turning out to be quite controversial.

That's perfectly normal, Advocate. Happens every year with every set. It's because it's not really "opinion" but "taste" and "preferance." Different people have different preferences. So where someone sees Hewkii's mask as ugly, someone like me sees it as rad cool, lol.

Personally, overall I am really excited about them, since there's a lot of "cool" in them. I'm not very happy with the launcher though, and I agree about the color scheme problem that causes. But that's still a matter of taste, and that doesn't necessarily amount to an actual problem.

The only problem I see with the analogy is that it's the man's opinion that affects how the tree looks (Not man, but the society as a whole), because a toy company bases their products on our likes and dislikes. But other than that, the analogy is perfect. I love parables. Like the parable of the man, his son, and a train. That's heartbreaking.

This is true, heh. My point was more that as individuals focusing on our tastes to decide our "should" opinions is illogical, so it probably wouldn't fit very well to have a huge crowd in the forest, lol. But yes, that is very true.

As I am a duelist, literaly, I am the kind to see things as a game and sport. This is just the way I am. I know this is not in concordance with your 'teachings', Master Jedi, but I find it rather effective when I use it. You may dissagree, or state that I have only fought weak debators, but I find the view of the debate as a sport (And ,henceforth, use defensive stances in debates.) as a rather good means of debating. It allows me to calm down my nerves; to realise in my mind that the world is not going to explode (Hehehe, ) in my face in the form of the opponents replies.

 

I am sorry, but the teachings that I recieve with my sword make me use defesive strategy, even though it does not seem realistic to you.

Again, nothing wrong with all that--what I'm disagreeing with is the idea there there is "elimination" with debates. You understand that? I mean, when you lose debates, there's no reason you shouldn't be able to debate again, especially if you can admit when wrong.

And I know you're joking, but I'm not really saying this is "teachings" -- it's just my opinion, and I don't claim it's 100% fact. It's just that everything you're raising, I've already considered in-depth years ago, and I really think that in some ways, I'm seeing this issue a little more clearly. But you probably think the same thing, lol--this is why logic is the key, because even when figuring out issues of logic, wisdom, and everything, logic is the key.

This is one thing I want to emphasise on: The difference between wisdom and knowlege. Now, as you are a logician, most likely do not need my stating this, but I must point out that you use too much knowlege and not enough wisdom in your debates.

Lol. Well, I'd disagree, of course, but to debate that point would require us to define "wisdom." I'm not sure how you're using the word; it may be different from how I use the word. To me, logic is the key to wisdom, as well as understanding; I do not, actually, see knowledge as the most important thing. This is why I'm a logician, lol. Knowledge without wisdom can be very dangerous, actually--just as one (very extreme) example, a lot of the senior staff of Nazi Germany had a lot of knowledge. But they lacked wisdom, and believed things that were just plain rediculous, logically speaking. And it got waaaay out of hand, deadly out of hand.

When it comes to "Bionicle wisdom", I see my view as the wise one. Not for egotistic reasons, but because countless debates have gone on about the issues such as the ones in Kraggh's topic, and logic always supports the opinions I now hold in the end. Of course, that's because I have been wrong many times, and have changed my mind, as I described in the blog entry. And so far, nobody's ever been able to show logically that I'm wrong now, though they have tried, oh how they have tried. To me, this means that it's "wisdom".

However.

I would agree that I have not been as "wise" as I could be in presentation. (As I said.) One of the main problems is that each different person responds better to a different presentation style, but still, I could do better in ways that aren't related to that; trying my best. But despite these flaws that I admittedly have, the challenge I can always raise is this: "Regardless of what you think of me, look at my logic. Unless you can show that I have made a logical mistake, I believe anybody can see that I am right, if they have an open mind." Logic is the key to wisdom, whether it is me or my opponent who needs wisdom, or both, lol.

Now back to what I was saying: In my opinion, your use of facts is a bit much. Facts are based on knowlege and does not allow the investigation of opinions, but wisdom does, and it gives a user of wisdom an edge, as he can come close to the other's thinking. This can be used to a great extent to corner the other's thinking. Of course, this is only my opinion of your style...

Well, I think I do that, actually. Again, though, I think in terms of wisdom, the most important thing to make clear is that I am basing my opinions on sound logic, because that is what matters in the end, regardless of debate style.

Arghhh! I cannot get the stupid quotes to line up. But I think that you can identify my words among yours. I will try to make it more translatable.

I blame Survurlode. Yes, it was understandable.

Your way of 'Truth-Seeking Debates' is great, but not to be confused with casual discussion of tastes, I think.

I agree. (I explain this very clearly in the Debate Guide.) I think that confusion is what causes most of the problems in debates, actually--that's why it's important for us to be clear about what we mean.

This was part of what I felt caused problems in your "Downfall" topic, Kraggh, for example--that word doesn't, to most people, mean that you're talking only about tastes. You posted recently that you meant more of "downhill", but that word has the same meaning to most people, from what I've seen. Just one example, but it's a good one, I think, of the kind of confusion that makes a lot of "taste-discussion" posts look like "opinion-discussion" posts.

Before I reply, I want to clear up part of what I meant, as I just said in a PM:

...what I meant about feeling better [when proven wrong] was this: To me, understanding reality is very important, and cool. I like science, for example, and philosphy, theology, all that kinda stuff. I enjoy trying to understand the world (among other things). So to me, if I find out that I was "wrong" about something, all it means is there was something I didn't, in the past, understand very well, and being proven wrong and being able to admit it, and accept the more realistic opinion means that now I understand the world a little better. To me that's really cool, and that's why it pleases me. I don't mean to say that being "owned" makes everybody feel better--it definately doesn't. I guess, to me "truth-seeking debate" has nothing to do with "owning" so if both sides see debate this way, there's no risk of feelings being hurt.

And to people thinking like that PMer--let me tell you, one of the most exhilerating experiences possible is admitting when you're wrong.

Ok, well that was fun wasn't it? Crushed, flattened and absotively posilutely disproven! Ok, this can be closed now.

Well, I doubt that feeling of being proved wrong is really that good....And I don't know why, but I sort of feel that being proved right can bring us closer to the truth than being proved wrong; there can be infinite wrong theories/points, but there can only be one truth. A wrong theory only gives us an example of a misconception, but a correct theory brings us the truth, and facts. So, what's so great about being proved wrong? Of course, my post has many flaws(compared to bones' blog entry, lol), but still, I think that being proved wrong isn't great.

I don't think you understood quite what I am saying, DQ... Let me quote something that ccso said in an older version of the S&T rules from before I was a staff member, and that I've kept around in my version of those rules, that I think helps explain:

This is also a forum where we can post our ideas and theories about Bionicle and where others can agree or disagree with them. Just because someone disagrees with you about your theory or idea doesn't mean they are attacking you. The discussion helps us make better theories. So if someone is saying they don't believe you or that you are wrong, read what they posted and then respond with your own arguments, not names or other flaming. As always, flaming will not be tolorated.

Now, as I've said in the Debate Terms Guide, "opinions" are also like theories, except not about Bionicle or a storyline, but about reality itself (see the Dictionary.com definition provided in the "Opinion" section in the guide, orange link in sig). Debate is all about different people with different opinions talking amongst each other about those opinions. I really think if we look at debate the way ccso is saying about theory discussions, it's a better experience, and even being proven wrong "helps us make better" opinions. And at the same time, it helps avoid flame, which is also something that's important to me when I'm posting in a debate topic, especially being a moderator.

Does that make sense?

Now to be clear, I'm not talking about taste, or preferences, or likes and dislikes. That stuff isn't a matter of logic, but just of preference. When it comes to Bionicle, I'm talking about figuring out what actually helps or hurts Bionicle's health as a franchise.

If someone were to lose a debate, would that person lose his pride in himself? If this were so, then that person would not be able to combat in another debate as well as in the previous one. On the other hand, if that person were to win the first debate, then his pride would be able to be exploited in the debate to come.

Well, it depends on what you mean by "pride", Emperor? Do you mean "self-esteem"? Or do you mean "ego"?

If you mean self-esteem, then what I'm saying is, if you look at debate my way, then that isn't a problem. Because losing a debate is just as good as winning--and either way, debate helps sharpen our logical skills, and helps us be more confident in the next debate. If you look it as defensive debate, and you look at it as important not to "lose", then yes, it can hurt your self esteem--but my whole point is that if you look at it my way, it can't.

If you mean pride in the negative sense, in terms of egotism, I've already talked about that in the blog entry--hopefully you understand why that is a bad thing...

Now, if the debator were to win the first and lose the second, then he would, in theory, 'lose face' and not want to partake in a debate for a long time. This is a natural occurence (one that I am familiar with, too) and is a symbol of 'natural selection; the debator was not good enough to proceed to the next debate.

Again, this looks at debate as a "game"--almost like football seasons, lol. It just doesn't work that way, at least not on a forum like this. You are not banned for losing a debate, lol, and you still have the right to speak your mind, as long as it's done respectfully. Who wins or loses debate depends (or it should) on logic, so if I was wrong once, but now I come to a new debate, and logic is on my side in this one, what possible problem could I run into? What could stop me from speaking my mind there too? And how could having lost one debate have anything to do with my logic in the new debate?

In fact, I would counter that being able to admit when I'm wrong shows that I am, in a sense, better able to approach a new debate. If I come into debate, and everybody knows I can admit when I'm wrong, then they must work doubly hard to debate me--because they cannot just pretend that I say things despite knowing I'm wrong. Does that make sense?

So in short: A debate is a fight for honor and should be treated accordingly. A debate is to win, although, like you said, if you are obviously wrong, it is time to bail out.

Okay, then let me put it to you this way. I say that I am right on this (just as a hypothetical, I mean). I think that I have strong logical reasons to back me up; for example, years of experience with debates on BZP and seeing the results of the "defensive" way of looking at it (it often ends up in flame wars). Now, if that be the case, to me, a "defensive debater" is "obviously wrong", as it were. Do you see how I'm looking at it?

I'm not being 100% serious with this hypothetical, though, because I understand the view of debate as a fight for honor. This is a little better than plain old defensive debating, but see, you still need to realize that there can only be two basic kinds of debate--truth-seeking or defensive. I view debate as an activity demanding honor as well, but I do not view it as a "fight." That attitude is what leads to flame, in my experience, and that is bad. To me, making sure I'm being logical is the matter of honor. It doesn't seem honorable to me to just defend my view no matter what, which is what defensive debaters seem to do. So I think you're basically seeing this the same way, but I'm just not clear on if you agree that defensive debate isn't good?

As an extra measure to my reply, I believe in debating or arguing for a c[a]use or meaning. Any debates I enter are because I have a reason to doubt the other's judgement.

I agree. Nothing wrong with that. What I'm saying is, I think it's also important to be clear in your mind that you could actually be wrong. For example; the cause in a typical Bionicle debate might be to show that removing gears was actually a good decision for the health of Bionicle, because I believe that logic supports that view better than the opposite. The meaning being that the goal in that debate is to figure out what is actually helping and what isn't.

One example is in a religeous debate; if I have reason to enter, or if the other's belief is dissagreeing with mine and I believe that my logic is superior, I will fight to the death. Almost all the debates I enter are either for a greater good or for honor. I am a duelist, and I adore an honor-related fight. If honor is the prize and I have the advantage, then I will duel 'till the end.

Nothing wrong with all that--I am simply suggesting that if it can be shown that you were wrong, then the honorable thing to do is admit it. And that there is no dishonor in being wrong, if you can admit it. (Especially because once you admit it, and take up the more right opinion, you become right!)

Instead, in my mind, there is dishonor in sticking to an opinion that is clearly wrong, as shown in logical debate. To be clear--this doesn't mean we should not have "faith", whether in the religious sense of that word, or just in the sense that we might run into a situation where someone seems to have disproved the idea, but you sense that something is off and that you're missing something. In real life, this happens all the time--a person might feel intimidated by someone they're debating, and simply not be able to think of the right response fast enough. Usually, if you hold your ground in cases like this and think it over afterwords, you think of what you should have thought of, and realize you were right--that is, that the opponent was using a logical fallacy. "Faith" in that sense and in the religious sense is very good. Again, logic there is the key as well.

But online debates are different--we have time to proofread, to analyze more in-depth, and think of those things to say. It's not like spoken debate--and we can even analyze the exact structure of the opponent's logic and find the fallacies. That's why it's doubly important to understand logic well, really whether spoken or not.

Now, some debates and duels are for fun -- one example of this is the 'Downfall of Bionicle' topic, in wich I was directed to this blog entry, that I join for pleasure. I enjoy the action of a debate, and just love a debate or arguement in wich I think I can contribute somewhat.

Okay, but I hope you see why such a complaint topic/debate should not just be for fun. I understand that debating is fun and all, but are you implying that it doesn't matter in that topic who's right and who's wrong? That would be unwise... I don't want to presume that I understand what you mean by this, however, so I won't overthink this too much...

So I actually agree with the PMer in most areas, but not all. I suppose there is not much I can say about his thinking, as you have already covered it.

 

~EW~

Pretty much it appears I agree with you, actually, and I don't think you're agreeing with the PMer as much as you might think--you based your view on reasoning, as you said. I just think that you're still looking at it partly in terms of "defensive" debate, which isn't as good. You recall for example what I said about that in the "Debate" section in the Debate Terms Guide, for example? About how defensive debate can be used to justifcy flaming, and other lesser things like that? We agree that that is bad, right?

Kraggh--you appear to have misunderstood a lot of what I'm saying, and I've PMed you about this. It's difficult to compose a coherent reply to your comment without clearing up what I am saying first, so I'll hold off until you reply to my PM (my second one, that is).

As far as human emotions go, see here:

This isn't a dry, boring, robotic life, being a logician.

I think that we have brains for a good reason (the reasons I think this get into religion, which we cannot discuss here, but regardless of that, we do have brains, not just emotions). Emotions aren't there to rule us--but then perhaps you did not intend it that way anyways. In terms of taste, I've talked about this a lot, but you really need to read the Debate Terms Guide to understand what I'm talking about.

If you read that and still don't understand what I'm saying, Kraggh, then my question to you is, if I "don't feel human emotions", then why exactly am I a fan of Bionicle? Bionicle is entertainment--why exactly am I here talking about entertainment in the first place if I don't feel emotions? I hope you see how... strange... that idea is... (No offense. )

I good way to sum up how I look at it is to compare to the old Star Trek idea of Vulcans--aliens who, being unhuman, tried to suppress all emotion and lived as robotic-like logicians (hence the I am not Spock joke, if you didn't understand that, lol). The vulcans often stated that humans were defined by emotions, and vulcans by logic.

That is not my view in the slightest--though the general goal of being logical is of course good. I believe that logic and emotion are both vital to humanity. Emotions are like a sense, like vision, like hearing, and they can help you understand the intent of what someone says (though this gets confusing, unfortunately, on the 'net), as one example (among hundreds). Yet, we cannot let our emotions rule us, because that would make us less than human (IMO)--it would basically make us animals--in fact, that would be like a form of robotism. We would only be able to do what our emotions programmed us to do. Emotions are really just chemical reactions, you know. Also, because different people have different personal tastes, and because by definition no one taste is better or worse than others, different things would please different people--and they would be "ruled" to do radically different things. That can get dangerous, because if we cannot control our actions, what happens when we get violent?

A healthy human mind has a balance of the two, in my opinion. When it comes to debate, logic must be central. When it comes to viewing/reading entertainment, emotion should be central (as two examples). To me, logic really means nothing without emotion, because if we can never feel pleasure or pain, then what point is there in logically figuring out things like right and wrong in the first place? And in the same way, emotion means nothing without logic--it's really just chemical reactions that if allowed to rule us uncontrrollably can cause a lot of harm. So we need to balance the two. You get the idea?

Anyways, this is getting really deep here, XD. The way we balance them is by choosing to like what we like, and not apologizing for that--but at the same time, respecting others' ability to like different things, and accepting that, logically, companies must appeal to majority tastes (for example). In other words, by seperating our emotions and tastes from our "should" opinions.

Again, I can't really respond to the rest of what you say without making sure you understand first where I'm coming from, and understanding where you are coming from too... The main mistake you seem to be making appears to be that you don't think truth exists as an absolute, which I can easily disprove, but I do not want to presume that that is what you meant, and it doesn't sound like it, from your first PM...

*long comment, lol*

Thanks a lot for all these pics, GMan (though stop sneaking around )! These Takadox pictures are definately a lot better than the ones in the front page article currently--the body design looks fine in them but I wasn't as impressed in the other pics. I'm really curious about Pridak now, because he seems least impressive to me from the pics so far, and I'm seeing a lot of people agreeing with that (though that can't be taken as an indicator of the fanbase--I just wanna see better pics ).

And Carapar looks even more awesome even then I thought. One question--do you see that main color on his head, shoulder armor, body, leg armor etc. as brown in person? Or yellow that sorta fades into brown? The front page pics make it look more like yellow fading to brown, but yours seem more like brown itself with yellow structure pieces elsewhere.

Sorry Bones, what did you call the Reference project again?

 

~ ~

I didn't call it anything. 'Cuz it's still classified.

Leon Uris. Will have to remember to look into who that is.

Thanks again to all you guys--about half of your suggestions are in the article today. Probably the other half gets the next one.

BTW, it turns out Greg did NOT say the Lost Land isn't the 2007 location. So it still might be--not sure what the quote Vader Hater saw and I thought I saw was, but apparently that is not confirmed. So I just didn't address that issue in the article, though perhaps next time I should debunk the myth that he confirmed it, lol.

Edit: Another from Darnzerf: Keetongu a DH--from the erroneous DH Guide cover.

Darnz: Bionicle words can be different in different languages- They are the same in all countries.

Hmmm... it's been online for at least a few hours today... and BZP's server is still running? Could yonder Evil Spike really have been vanquished?? *crosses fingers*

Ez seems to be doing alright--I was afraid she might start giving up as dogs often do (and I've witnessed this in the past with my uncle's dog when another of his dogs died, so I know). I think we're lucky in a way that she wasn't that close to Penny, being adopted recently, and being very used to switching owners and leaving other dogs behind a lot. The one I've noticed acting differently is Hunter, actually. She comes downstairs more now, but she still looks over at Penny's spot, expecting Penny to be there. But no.

Tis cool. So, when's the sledgeracing coming in?

I think we've got a version 2.1 just about ready, though I dont' remember if Ojh got that game done or not come to think of it... Hopefully that will be in a few days.

The programing in this is excelent. I'm trying to still figure it all out. The sprites are great. Did you make the Matoran ones bones, because I think I've seen the bases before.

I made the Matoran sprites, yes. Not sure if the body is original--might be based on the size and shape of one someone else did. Not sure though--not based enough to really be from it though. Pretty much Ojh and I looked for good Matoran sprites, didn't like any we found, so I drew the most set-style ones possible (Mctoran that is).

The maps, especially on the earlier levels though, could use some work. They're all square-ish *shudders*

Ojh has been fixing up many of the previous level Wahi/hut interior graphics for this update. I believe all the Wahi are pretty much done, although I still have to have a look at how he did Po-Wahi to see if I agree with it.

Good RPG =)

 

I could tell you've been involved because of the bones-style humor *coughtiribombacough* I bought a bottle of air ^^

Lol, that one was Ojhilom's idea, I think, the bottle of air. Tiribomba of course had to be in there, yes, that was me.

You should, like, make the Le baddies in the fighting room Baby Gukko's =D

 

-T

XD.

And many thanks, bngi, for that walkthrough! (Which is added to the second post of the topic in case anybody wonders where.)

Can't read some of your post, Bones. Can't see some of the screen.

Yeah, the blogs seem to

do that.... Tis a big annoying,

yeah. I assume you have a

very small monitor.

(You can read this?)

Try selecting text to copy and

past it into something like Notepad;

might help...

Or get a wider monitor.

Vahiki, the disproof is as simple as Greg saying so. I'm pretty sure I saw the quote too. Though that's one I'd definately check with him on first anyways before writing it. Probably I won't include that one though, not for now. That's future storyline a long ways off for the moment.

Aha!

 

I just got to the part where I break something in frustration and check the Walkthrough. But there is none, so I'll look around Ko-Koro.

 

~SS

In fact, there is a walkthrough... Clicketh.

Methinks he means for Ko-Koro, and that isn't done yet.

If anyone wants to write one up, would be appreciated! I liked it better when MotR did the first walkthrough as opposed to if I would do it, since it's more true to what you guys would experience rather than just a bunch of spoilers from the designer(s).

And MotR's busy, I believe.

Oh. I thought he meants people have stopped reading his blog. My bad.

Ah. Glad to hear that. Still, though, let's stop posting here, kay, guys?