Gromnir

any info would be much appreciated. as we noted above, Gromnir gots some double talk from a few folks on the subject... 'nuff for us to be able to tell that they really didn't know and were just guessing. HA! Good Fun!

she is dead and white... so she meets two of Gromnir's pre-reqs for consideration. a couple of the pieces from "In America" is okie dokie... but we ain't a big fan otherwise. HA! Good Fun!

have gotten a couple different answers from some o' our tech savy friends, and we won't get a chance to talk to our IT yoda pal 'til monday, so maybe somebody here can help Gromnir unravel a knot for us. we got a hdtv and we got an hd receiver and we watch hd programming, but as Gromnir paid something like $80 for his component cables a year or so ago, we never bothered to use our new(er) tv's hdmi interface. nevertheless, we finally decided to get rid o' some 'o the tangle o' cords we got and hooks up an hdmi cable. the thing is, there is a huge range in prices for hdmi cables and Gromnir can't get a straight answer as to why one cable is better than another. digital signal doesn't degrade, right? you either got signal, or you don't... so why is Monster hdmi cables retailing for something like $140 U.S.? other hdmi cables is as little as $30... or even less. ... anybody know what makes one hdmi cable better than another... if anything? thanks in advance. HA! Good Fun!

noteworthy is fact that we know of a couple published authors who post at obsidian not named darque. most likely to change screen name in hopes of avoiding his past: hades most likely to live in a studio apartment with a dozen cats: gabrielle most likely to quit obsidian only to be rehired less than 2 years later: josh HA! Good Fun!

"No, you insist that I was making others look bad to try and become a moderator myself. However the fact that I spoke well of others and argued that while none of us were perfect, I could see others becomming moderators actually fully contradicts the picture you are trying to paint." ... talk

you is nuts. the fact that you wrote half 1 does not change fact that you wrote part 2. you is the guy resorting to non-logic. Gromnir claimed that you talked bad 'bout fellow posters modding potential and talked self up. you say we misconstrue and such. Gromnir shows you the crumbs on your shirt and hands. ender still trys to avoid responsibility. ... the fact that you say nice things 'bout some of your fellow posters does not mean that you did not do the things we claimed that you did. for chrissakes, if you hadn't shown why you would make a crappy mod before, you sure has now. HA! Good Fun!

*sigh* the fact that you said those things does not change the fact that you also talked yourself up and others down. "Hades and Volourn are funny, and I like them as people, but they posting personas troll way too much to be mods. "Baley loves spam too much. "No one would take jodo seriously as a mod. "And nurbs has posted and stood behind racist remarks. " you got amnesia or is you just being stoopid? look, you made a mistake... or you didn't. is an opinion... but WHAT you said ain't an opinion. bah... is like arguing with a 5 year old, "Did you take the cookie?" asks Gromnir o' the child with crumbs on his shirt and face. "No." is the child's reply. ... "as for 'fin' and the implied inconsistency ... the 'grass is always greener'" what implied? is inconsistency that you has admitted to and Gromnir is surely not implying neither. am coming straight out and saying that fin treats different posters different... which should not bother fin as this is something you has admitted to in the past. as to the grass being greener... no, it ain't always greener. if fin treated all the same... treated folks fairly, then the ad hoc approach would not sudden becomes the greener pastures. nevertheless, we is done with this. for the most part fin is a perfectly adequate mod, and as long as things is as dead as they is now, no doubt fin will continue to fulfill his/her duties well enough. not a rousing endorsement maybe, but fin does keep it impersonal (mostly,) and does try to stay below radar

did you or did you not give reasons why ender would make a good mod? did you or did you not identify why other folks would be bad mods? we misconstrue nothing in this thread or in your post. as to eldar comments 'bout fin... fin, for the most part, is unobtrusive. this is a skill most mods not seem capable of learning and it would serve them well. the less you seem to mod, the less you will have to mod. also, fin never seems to make stuff personal... which is something that even a few of the obsidian/bis/interplay folks has failed at. unfortunately, fin gots some wacky notions. he will smite a perceived threat, and then refer to board rules/guidelines as justification... while at the same time admitting that he will apply those rules and guidelines ad hoc and different depending on situation and the posters involved. smote and smite away says Gromnir, but use board rules as justification when you admits that the rules is different for each person based on fin's opinion of 'em? yeah, right. if the rules ain't the same for everybody then they ain't really rules at all. if you not at least pretend to try and treat everybody equal, they will see you as treating them unfairly... and they will be right. personally, we believes that fin and the other mods would be better served by uniformity o' purpose and execution. there is few folks on the board at the moment, so it ain't a big deal, but if this board gets as much traffic as the old ip boards did... those were the times when fin ran into problems... and people recognized and complained of manifest unfairness. *shrug* have mentioned this before... have pointed out that we worked as a kiddy prison guard for a while. it were a job that Gromnir were very good at. had respect of our peers and the kids... well, we had the respect of most of the kids... all save the girls in d-unit. female juvenile detainees is notoriously foul and they cry and wanna discuss stuff. ack. what made Gromnir such good staff with the kids were that : 1) it was known that nobody ever got over on staff Gromnir 2) staff Gromnir were not afraid to "put hands on" when needed and most important, 3) staff Gromnir treated everybody the same this board ain't much different than Juvenile Hall, and the mods is like staff dealing with unruly reprobates. HA! Good Fun! p.s. Gromnir fun fact #108: the best behaved kids in juvenile hall is the murderers and rapists. these is the folks that will be having extended stays in juvenile hall and so they is more likely to try and get along with staff. is the young kids who is only gonna be in the hall for a week or so that is the worst

is no fun if Gromnir has to argue both sides, but to help commie along... the threshold questions for ep is where one should search. facial neutrality and what is burdens o' fundamental rights is such questions... and our comment 'bout chicken sacrifices in florida is quite useful too. *shrug* can't keep doing both sides o' this. HA! Good Fun!

rationalize all you want. we see a post where you is saying why ender could be a mod and why others folks shouldn't. if you wanna be mod then don't talk bad 'bout fellow posters... claim that you is just giving an opinion not make no difference at all. opinions is what starts most of the arguments on these boards. HA! Good Fun!

this post seems to be reason 'nuff not to ever consider ender for mod status. don't ask to be mod. don't tell folks why you should/could be mod. those things not get you made mod anyway. you wanna be a mod? Gromnir got the keys to being chosen as mod, so listen up and learn. 1) be here most o' you clowns got that part down, so it ain't much o' a burden. the thing is that the obsidian folks is gonna choose folks who has shown that they can and will be here much of the time. 2) be helpful when n00bs and fellow posters has questions, never be shy 'bout posting links to developer quotes or applicable news sites 'n such. if a mod answers questions that satisfy folks then those is questions that developers not have to deal with. am not saying that developers intend to answer most or even many fan questions, but if fans is constantly ignored then the devs get a bad rap (e.g. troika.) fan mods answer takes pressure off of developers to waste time on boards answering inane questions

arlington heights is your guide. arlingngton heights factors identify how a court can divine invidious intent. 'course knowing the words and the factors ain't 'nuff. understanding how those factors has actually been used by the Court is what legal analysis of an ep question is all 'bout. ... regardless, if somebody say that arlington heights don't apply to an ep question, they is almost assuredly showing that they don't know a damned thing 'bout ep. HA! Good Fun!

not by a long shot. don't work like that. you pretty much gotta show that the legislators who passed the law wanted wiccans and satanists to feel bad or suffer. get yourself actual congressional records where legislators said, "those damned witches are a blight on society, so let's add, "under God," to the pledge." how likely is that? w/o actual intent you is pretty much gonna have to use a first amendment free excercise or establishment clause basis to show that the legislator's intent were discriminatory... so why use ep when you is gonna have to go 1st amend anyways? even so, you is going at this thing in parts rather than seeing the whole. 1) learn what is the threshold questions... especially what makes for a class distinction 2) review the major ep cases since arlington heights and divine rule from those cases 3) get somebody to exlain to you the three levels o' scrutiny ep is 'bout 2 weeks of con law in second semster, but you can teach self in a few days... as long as you has somebody explain some o' the more subtle nuances. the thing is, just 'cause you see the words Equal Protection, it does not mean that everybody gets treated the same under the law... just as "Congress shall make no law," in the first amendment context does not actually mean that Congress cannot make laws which abridge free speech. just 'cause you think you understands something in english does not mean that you understand something in law. HA! Good Fun!

Howso? You're free to disagree with me, though I'm not sure if you do. If you want to talk strict constitutional interpretation, I would say that there's plenty of leeway in the past judgments of equal protection cases - which have primarily dealt with race - to be expanded to this. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> look, you don't know what you is talking 'bout. honestly. you just haven't studied the cases and tht is getting more and more obvious. ep does apply to everybody... you is reading wrong... but that ain't your fault this time. gotta have whole case to comprehend. first, read arlington heights and washington v. davis... then find out about chickens sacrifices in florida... is a RELIGIOUS ep case. you need to show actual discriminatory INTENT, and that is almost impossible to get. is not the race distinction that kills you... is the necessity of INTENT. disparate impact is not enough. HA! Good Fun!

oh geez... the friggn' circle starts all over again. HA! Good Fun!

do you know what a "legitimate" govt. intrest is in terms of Constitutional Construction? the only way it ain't legit is if it violates establishment or free ex clause... and again, arlington heights kills you. "Proof of racially discriminatory intent or purpose is required to show a violation of the Equal Protection Clause." disparate impact has evidentiary value, and nothing more. for chrissakes, why you think rhenquists' cf cite of arlington heights in deshaney caused such an uproar? HA! Good Fun!

recall what happened in washington v. davis? and that were with suspect classes. what level o' scrutiny does wiccans get in an equal protection case? remind us? not strict. not even intermediate. rational basis? HA! argue ep and lose. HA! Good Fun!

Well, you gave me permission, after all. And I've said repeatedly that I don't use the First Amendment to justify removing "under God" from the Pledge, but rather equal protection and equal rights. It seems an infringment of both if one group - those who believe in God - are favored over another in terms of a national oath of allegiance. How are atheists, Satanists, Wiccans, and all those other wackos given equal consideration? They're not. P.S. I wasn't aware I needed to spell it out. Then again, I should've figured. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> fine, run down the arlington heights factors and show us how this is an equal protection issue. HA! Good Fun!

Wow. Man. You two want to book a room or something? One of those heart-shaped tubs? Go report some posts somewhere and let the grown-ups talk. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> don't you just love the hypocriscy o' some folks? you do know that you is gonna lose some serious jr. moderator points for attacking 213etc. like that. *shrug* there is a few folks that gots the chops and the integrity to be taken serious in a moderator role whether they is mods or not. silvermoon on the old interplay boards was such a person. she almost never got invloved in the petty brawls that would break out on the boards. you could tell that she were really trying to help. silvermoon would ask folks to stop fighting, and they did. on the other hand, folks who so easily succumb to the kinda behavior that they profess to wanna stop is... not need go further down that path? leave the modding to the mods. without a tag you needs respect to be taken serious. HA! Good Fun!

You're the one writing the theses, man, so I'm curious as to which one of us is actually getting worked up on the issue. Rail away at my reading comprehension skills all you like, but you've got to give me some credit; it's not always easy to wade through crap written by a guy pretending to be an ork, or whatever it is you do. It's a cute motif, I'll give you that. What do you want to discuss about the First Amendment, exactly? We disagree on interpretation. Not all that much more to say, is there? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> theses? HA! sorry chum, but you is the guy/gal that got offended by the kida posts we made and felt you had to address our mean nature. surely Gromnir ain't the one worked up... amused is more like it... especially since you has kinda gotten involved in the very thing you were trying to moderate Gromnir 'bout. and yeah, we can criticize your reading comprehension skills. if you got the idea that Gromnir were 'gainst attacking your opponent then your reading comprehension has gotta be for crap. sorry, but we were anything but subtle or unclear on that issue. as to chalking up disagreement on interpetation of Constitution as being moot... it is moot only if you believe it to be so. if Constitutional interp issues were simply matters o' differing opinion then there would be no need for a Court in the first place. so far we ain't seen any but ss actually attempt to discuss Constitutional interp issues. what does pledge mean and why is it good or bad... have seen lots of that. have seen folks ask whether seperation o' church and state is a good thing or not... but as to actual Constitutional interp, we has seen almost nothing. HA! Good Fun! ps thought you had some observations 'bout our alma matter?

never does Gromnir berate folks for having a different opinion. you should pay closer attention. bad reasoning and mischaracterizations and general foolishness? sure, we give folks a hard time 'bout such, but we got nothing 'gainst folks having an opposing view. got a first amendment question in there? HA! Good Fun!

Wait a minute. What do you want anyone to say? You wrote the Constitution, buddy, so you're well aware of precisely what was intended by it. You don't think the separation of church and state exists, and you're not going to change your mind, so what the hell's the point in arguing with you? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> more strawman crap. lord only knows where/how you clowns come up with this junk... and just so we is straight, we not give a damn 'bout your characterizations of Gromnir. got to town on insults o Gromnir. not bother us in the least. for chrissakes, growup. is just words on a message board... and as you point out, Gromnir most certainly DID note earlier that such characterizations do not strenghten or weaken an agrgument. 'course we also noted that there is a fine tradition o' insulting folks in debate... even ghandi got in some quotable shots. so the conclusions some folks wanna draw from Gromnir statements on the subject o' personal attacks is... odd. poor reading comprehension? nevertheless, attack away... though this continued line o' debate o' commie's is tending to makes him look a little hypocritical, no? personal attacks on Gromnir not bother us in the least. is silly to get worked up over such stuff. however, characterizations of Gromnir arguments better be accurate or you can expect more lumber to come your way. after all, the only thing worth arguing 'bout is the argument. try to wrap your mind 'round that one. on a side note, Gromnir is curious 'bout "choice reflections" o' our alma mater. those is always amusing... and as we got multiple degrees from multiple universities, we offer much opportunities. have at it. ... and still nobody wanna actually talk 'bout first amendment. go figure. HA! Good Fun!

for chrissakes... got commie prentending to play mod and saying nothing and we got col poking holes in arguments nobody made and as far as we can tell, nobody has agreed with. *shakes head sadly* is getting pathetic. thread is dead or dying, that is for sure. HA! Good Fun!

don't have a best side. be that as it may, you still ain't a mod. got any insight on the issue, or you just wanna talk 'bout Gromnir being a meanie? what a joke. "As for your insulting characterizations - you should keep them to yourself. " why? if the characterizations is accurate... now, does anybody wanna talk first amendment, or you wanna continue to whimper and moan? HA! Good Fun!

funny, we didn't notice a mod tag next to your name... the guy misrepresents Gromnir position to a ridiculous degree... or he/she is so clueless 'bout Constitutional construction that he actually believes what he is saying. in either case, the posts is worthless... his for being misrepresentations or ignorant to an extreme degree and yours for not even remotely being 'bout the debate in question. HA! Good Fun! p.s. if you wanna become a mod then we suggest you ask fin or fergie... 'cause you ain't built up 'nuff respect on your own for Gromnir to take you serious as a self-appointed mod.