Cantousent

I'm quite glad that you aren't a spelling nazi of any type. I would be forced to ridicule you were that the case.

Whether or not God is the prime cause, we still look for answers. Even if you believe in a higher cause, there is very little doubt that science serves a useful purpose in our society. Scientists, believers, disbelievers, and inbetweeners, are noble in their endeavors and we should not be so quick to belittle their efforts just as they should not belittle our conviction. On one hand, the world would be a smaller, darker place without science. On the other hand, faith that cannot withstand intellectual honesty does not deserve to live. That's not so much a comment on the debate. I don't think the debate can be avoided. Rather, it's a nod to you, meta, for fighting the good fight. Not all convictions are driven by religion.

I meant Heroes. BTW: Might and Magic VI was the highlight of the series. World of Xeen was great, though. I loved the whole series, except for the accursed Might and Magic IX.

Get Might and Magic 3. Might and Magic 4 was an inferior product.

Your alignment is Chaotic Doofus.

Oh, bite me, meta. The Pope would probably declare you a heretic if only he'd read my emails. ...And I only use the razor when I need a shave. This discordia thing kind of sucks. It also blows. How's that for Chaos?

Okay, here's a rough idea for how we proceed. First of all, the main question as I see it is this: how elaborate do we want to be in terms of plot? I like the idea of writing a story where the participants communicate by message board trying to discover a way to escape some difficult situation. It has a lot of elements that could make it quite appealing. The problems involved in such a story are not insurmountable. On the other hand, I would rather start out with something simple. For instance, we could have a group of core characters who develop an online friendship. These characters could communicate about a variety of issues throughout many threads. Some characters might move around from one thread to another. Other characters might make a single post in a particular thread. The core group will be involved in every or virtually thread. Some threads might be short. Some threads will be longer. Every so often, one of the core group will start a thread about something personally significant and others will respond. Interspersed between the more dramatic threads will be some lighter threads concerning a variety of topics, from humorous to frivolous to philosophical. That way, we can have our cake (a cogent narrative) and eat it too (freeflowing thought). What do you think?

He wasn't serious when he wrote it. ...And I don't believe you, sire, are serious in agreeing with it. However, I do have a hankering for baby-back ribs.

I wouldn't worry about it. Most of us here are arrogant about something or another. ...And most of the folks here seem pretty intelligent to me. Maybe that's just by comparison.

...And dripping with irony. It's sad to think that many people took this treatise seriously and were aghast. The basic characteristics of both good and evil are fairly well accepted. Sure, any intelligent person has the capicity to argue the fine shades, but the rough outline of good is both well known and accepted by the mass of people. The vast majority of folks realise that murder is evil. The question revolves around the circumstances of murder. Is it murder to blow yourself up for the greater glory of Islam? Is it murder to execute a prisoner? Is it murder to slaughter livestock for use as food? The issue can be as cloudy as you want to make it. Sophists can always turn any question into a two sided argument, for or against. That's all well and good. ...But there's a reason the devil renders payment in asbestos bills. Be wary of making him your client.

I, for one, do not have any problem believing that you're an intelligent fellow. On the other hand, I don't view intelligence as the best indication of personal quality. A sharp mind is a real benefit in this world. It is not, however, the only benefit. In fact, it is not the best attribute. We value intelligence because it is the differentiating feature that separates mankind from other animals. ...But intelligence does not ensure happiness. Hell, nothing ensures happiness. Our innate intelligence, along with virtually all of our innate attributes, are decided long before we are born; bestowed upon us by the capricious nature of fate. Who can truly be proud of intelligence when it is the gift of chance? Be proud of personal bravery. We school ourselves to bravery. Be proud of kindness. We decide to be kind. Be pround of honor. We struggle to maintain our honor. Our intelligence? That's a gift, not a decision. There is no cause for pride. The nature of our characters is more important than the nature of our minds. Luckily, you seem to be a decent sort. That, Mr. Wiggin, says far more about you, and for you, than any IQ test ever will.

I prefer to prepare first, but I'm willing to try stream of consciousness. I'm also not interested in owning the project. Someone will probably need to take charge, but, when we get to that stage, someone will. Whoever it is, it won't be me. What I will do, however, is write down a more or less detailed plan as I see it now. Then we can hash out what our actual working plan afterwards.

I have no problem believing that Ender Wiggen is smarter than everyone else.

I think we should use posts as posts are written. That means mostly first person, but some of it can be third person in much the same way Gromnir writes. ...Or wrote when he actually frequented the fora. As for the story, it must be something that can be expressed in terms of a message board. We'll be confined to a relatively small number of main character, but much more than in a traditional novel. There will be an abundance of minor characters. As far as actually getting the story in shape, we should just get an idea going and then run with it. For instance, should every bit of text come in the form of a message board post? How ambitious are we in terms of plots and sub-plots? How do we decide what we're going to do in the first place? Vote? I'll get together something tonight or tomorrow and then submit it for tinkering. In the meantime, we have one suggestion for a story and another discussion for perspective. If anyone has another idea, then speak up!

Oh, I don't mind a bit of spam in the thread. I view this topic as something similar to a message board DnD game. This is the discussion thread and we'll start an actual story thread later. We can discuss strategy in this thread and then use the other thread for the actual writing. ...Or cutting and pasting of existing posts. I'd like to create an actual story, though, and that makes it hard. Message board drama! If it can be done using letters, and it has been done, then there must be a way to fashion a complete story using message board posts. The only difference is that I'd like to use the resources we have here: people. We have a variety of styles and opinions from which to choose. Anyhow, it's deep sea fishing time for me. Hopefully, someone comes up with the perfect plan before I come back. Otherwise, we'll have to go with Jaguars' idea.

I take it that no-one likes the idea. That, or no-one takes it very seriously. Dammit, I'm taking my ball and going home!

Yes - and here's your story: Kumquatq Wars Episode III : Revenge of the Chimp <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You nut

Endeavor, always, to live beyond the limits of your brother's expectations. The story has some tried and true elements, and I suspect that a good writer could take those elements into a successful story. There's no real way to assess your story from what you've written in your first post. On the other hand, my advice is: try. The attempt will almost surely be as valuable as success. Try, and if your story is never published, you will yet enjoy the fruits of your labor. If your story is published, those fruits will be all the sweeter.

Okay, I was hoping to interest some of you in a little project I've been considering. Here it is: I would like to write a story in which the plot unfolds on a message board. It will be like an epsitolary novel. I don't know where we could start, and I suspect that we will be forced to mix and match responses between various threads, but I think we could pull some of the posts as written. Others will provide a good basis with minor changes. This would be a feel good project, not some serious endeavor over which to argue and feud. Anybody else find the idea intriguing?

I wonder if "hello" threads are agains the forum rules. Of coruse, I don't care. Howdy. Welcome to the forum. The folks are nice, the brawls are quickly over, and we hardly ever have shoot-outs here at the Obsidian fora. Grab a beer, pull up a chair, and join the fun.

The days of Wing Commander. I had a friend who loved the series, but, alas, I've never played.

Let me wax poetic for just a moment. I don't have a vested interest in proving the existence of God by citing matter, energy, or brain functions. For my faith to have personal meaning, it must be driven by conviction beyond earthly means to defend. I'm just trying to figure out what drives the longing of my heart. Why should I yearn for things I can neither name nor understand? I spend my days in constant contemplation, searching for answers when I don't even know the questions. I'm asking all the wrong things, but the other questions I hear don't make any sense either. In the meantime, there are others asking nothing at all. I should be envious, because my questioning doesn't seem to give me peace of mind or happiness. Nevertheless, I'd rather live my life longing for answers and never finding them. Why laugh or cry? Why hate or love? I gaze at my navel, but my navel never has an answer for me. If our navels answered our questions, undoubtedly we'd worship our navels.

Are you writing to us from the future or something? Do religions really get knocked around so much that they end up a hunted minority, rather than the dominant, all-powerful majority that they are in my poor little 2005 version of America? Please tell me if that's the case, because I just might quit smoking to try and make it long enough to see it. Ah, but this is exactly what I mean: "Please tell me if that's the case, because I just might quit smoking to try and make it long enough to see it." Will it be worth it to see such times because this is the reality for which you wish the most? I don't want to see such a reality. I wouldn't want to see a time where atheists are denied office because they don't believe in God. It's not a matter of persecuting atheists that interests me. On the other hand, as a believer, I don't want to see religious people treated shabbily. ...And my biggest worry is that so many religious people have treated atheists shabbily that many of the atheists would like a little payback. We're all here arguing about what we foresee. I don't see religious people ending up being hunted down and destroyed. I don't worry about some later day Nero feeding Christians to the lions. ...But there are atheists outraged by being marginalized or downright persecuted, and the depth of their hatred does scare me. Maybe partly because, while I completely disagree with their position, I understand very well what drove them to such an extreme view. This is where you misunderstand me. I see the current landscape as a way of promoting false faith. What I'd like much better is intellectual honesty. I'd like folks to profess only the faith they genuinely possess. I'm willing to take folks at their word, and I truly believe both Kerry and Bush are honest adherants to their resepctive faiths. I suspect, however, than many making the so-called "baby Jesus" stump speeches are using religion rather than believing in it.

Ah, well, I tend to find a way to argue with folks who have the same opinion. It's a rare gift, I assure you.

My point, and do me the favor of actually understanding my post in the way I mean it, is that religious organizations should be treated no differently than anyone else. If the Christian Brothers of Islam decides to back a candidate, then it should have every right to do so. It's not likely folks will be able to keep candidates from citing religious beliefs while campaigning, nor should folks be compelled to refrain from citing religious beliefs. The thing is, if we say it's okay for Neo-Nazis to express their beliefs politically, why should the same opportunity be denied Neo-Christians? ...Or Muslims? ...Or the Death knights of Kryn? All of the above should have the right to express an opinion regarding a candidate or measure. Why should Neo-Nazis, who have a far more damaging message for our democracy, be given free reign just because they don't include God in their message? For that matter, why should atheists have free reign to speak against religions in a political format while religions should be denied a voice? This is the sort of thing that irritates me. The Christian Coalition, with whom I disagree as often as I agree, should have the right to support candidates and advocate a political position. They just shouldn't enjoy tax exempt status while they do so. On the other hand, I don't know if the Christian Coalition is tax exempt or not. They don't factor into my decisions at all. I know more about what the Christian Coalition advocates because of the uproar from their enemies than I do from the organization itself. Here's my take on it, however. Tax exempt status should be rescinded for those organizations who actively campaign either for or against any candidate or party. This would really put a damper on religious organizations to the right and left. Separate church and state. That's all well and good. ...But don't make religious folks second class citizens. ...Or simply place hard-core religious organizations on the left and right in a category separate from religion. After all, some of these organiztions really don't appear to be all that spiritually motivated in the first place. They appear to be solely political organizations in religous clothing.