Welp this should be interesting. lol. Way to start off in the game, Kitty!
We need some more crues. Scooby Snacks for everyone! *passes them out* So is anyone going to at least try to profess their innocence and well, help us to eliminate them off the list or not? Someone's got to have some kind of proof they aren't the kira.
Pyro, we share the same angst over that movie. *hug* It hurt the soul. Twilight: The reason the movie was made in the first place was that Anne Rice allowed for two movies to get made which was IwtV and QotD. However, though she was allowed rights to help on the first movie, the second was not not happening until the contract nearly ran out. So the people who did the contract wanted to see a second one done but decided it wouldn't be that big a thing and so gave it to some guy to make that well, obviously knew jack crap about the whole book and took what he wanted from it. Anne Rice had no part in QotD and she herself has come short of saying it was the worst adaptation of her books yet. Of course she couldn't say much about it but nearly everyone knew she was just as unhappy with it as her fans were. As for the demon kitty... >.> ...how about just a normal cat with a bad tude? lol. I am not really putting demons into the rp but feel free to have her find some cat with a bad tude you can rp with if you want when she gets out of TWTNW. It shouldn't be too long now if people move with DiZ already. lol
Beer doesn't really taste good to me. I don't get why people like it. I'd rather actually drink something that doesn't smell like pee.
You dead people sure do talk a lot. lol
Genetics can play a part in having the instruments needed to become a really rotten person, sure. However, the same genetics and dispositions inherent in a person can also be what breaks that person free of things others in his/her family have been doing wrong. Taking a look at even some of the most notorious killers in our history, quite a few serial killers, rapists and such have had some tragic pasts with abuse, neglect, molestations, rapes and/or family members using them for things they should not. How many of those serial killers though had parents or children that were? Not many at all. Dispositions can be encouraged by mental conditions such as schizophrenia, social disorders and such but many people live with even psychopathic natures and they aren't out killing, raping or harming people. Some mental conditions get exacerbated by drug use or alcohol. Some of the nastiest murderers have been diagnosed with schizophrenia, psychopathic social disorders etc. However, there are -many- people who are similar who lead lives without pondering such dark notions, let alone deciding to carry them out. Another thing to analyze is that many of the people with mental conditions that turn into some of the most horrible murderers tend to have childhoods that are full of abuse, neglect, conflicting messages to the children, assaults, etc. Having someone with a genetic disposition towards say a bad temper and abusing that kid is certainly going to probably end up with a bad kid and worse adult unless that child focuses that energy on becoming separate from the negativity and fights to be something more positive. People without mental conditions that would be coined as genetic, but they develop later on in life from abuse etc, can have tendencies to do crimes as well and hurt others. Not every gang member or bully etc has a predisposition genetically to be that way. They are born and raised into it. Something encourages that person to decide to become that way. So though I don't rule out genetics entirely, because they do have a factor in the ways one might think, I do feel that the environment the person is raised in is also a key factor. When talking to some people who do some questionably rotten things to others, I've pretty well been told it wouldn't be that way if there was something else. It makes you wonder. Genetics in the end are the tools we are given but it's environment that teaches us which tools we are going to pick up and use the most. I don't believe anyone is -born- with an alignment or even in their lives has just one, and that's kind of a D&D (Dungeons and Dragons) term that can't apply to any normal person at all. We change our alignments constantly.
Pyrɸ - accused now but I think she's innocent. Trogdor ICSP - Shinigami Repliku サキ アマミヤ Dead and I didn't think he was but this cuts down suspects. Possibly someone knows the first name or a Shinigami eyes death. Chervalier possibly not because of not being around at all today. TrueKeybladeMaster Graxe -Dead from accusing Shades. Shades -Already been accused and released. gintasthebest Dead so rather hard to be the Kira. Why this person is dead can only be from either Shinigami eyes or the kira knows the first name. Something linked to amber. hmm. Heartless_Vice dead from a peanut. bummer. pirateking_luffy possible and has been playing around to allege the possibility. ヨシュア possible since he's not talking and he's a sneaky one. Amber - doubting it. Not her style. jettie - I'm near ready to possibly say no to jettie being the kira but still lingering on a couple things. TheChosenOne - not sure yet either way. DemoN:||D@ys possible and is popping in and out but not saying much. CarbuncleGem - accused Pyro and is dead. Nate_River - perhaps but waiting a bit more. jojo13 I have my doubts jojo is the kira for some reasons such as pulling back on accusations. Mr.Despair I think it's possible as well. Love - hmm...possibly and am pondering this one. clouddart100 - comes in and out so it leads to question. OblivionRoxas - quiet but anything is possible. Certainly intelligent enough to work this stuff out. Firekeyblade hasn't been on that I've noticed since yesterday, as Amber pointed out. Goimez - Not sure if this Kira is his style or not. Need more time. advent_of_apocalypse - pondering again on this. CreatorOftheUncreatd This Kira doesn't seem to match his style. KittyKat88 doubtful since joining the game just now. [/QUOTE] So, we're shortening the list ever more. Going to double check some things but so far this is what I've come to. Any more thoughts?
QotD is a failed movie but no, I don't really blame the actors for it except the guy who played Lestat and refused to have his hair dyed for the role. The book itself reads like it was an epic movie. I think that is the saddest thing about the movie is that the book itself is such an easy read, flowing in and out and the words just play like a movie in my mind. It was beautifully done and a way to bring all the vampires out to an epic field of battle, as well as the human characters. It was so beautifully written, it is such a shame it was not followed. As a stand alone movie, it wasn't that bad as just another vampire flick. However, it totally deviates from the book. The actors were fine for the most part, but the script was totally deviating in quite a few ways and totally skipped out on some of the most 'cinematic' moments of the book. I really couldn't complain about the performances of Lestat, Marius, Maharet and Akasha. What I could complain on was... Spoiler Lestat not having blond hair by demand of the actor. Marius not looking the part though the actor did a good job. Marius is -NOT- the creator of Lestat. That was Magnus and they could have left that in the movie. Showing a back scene with how screwed up Magnus was would have been awesome. Mekare, Maharet's sister, was nowhere in the movie. Boo. Khayman was ugly in the movie but in the book he's a very handsome tall Egyptian male and he also was wandering to get to the others. Armand was ugly. He's supposed to be a boy with auburn red hair, not strawberry blond and well, he just didn't look or feel the part at all. I ponder if Armand will ever be done right in a movie. Jesse was not an obsessed Lestat fan. Her whole portrayal was pretty wrong. Louis wasn't even in the movie. He should have been around Armand and at the concert at least. They showed NOTHING of Akasha and Enkil's past at all including how the vampires were started really. It was just let that we should know or assume something. There were so many other things wrong with the movie I could write on and on. IwaV was done much better and to date it is apparently also the only take on Ann Rice's novels that she personally liked. It was done pretty well and though there were points it deviated it did try to stay on target and also was a higher budget film. QotD had so much potential and the relationships between the characters wasn't explored as well as they showed nothing of Akasha's actual past. I have hopes someday someone who actually loves the series will redo QotD and maybe tell Lestat's story or at least do a happy merging of the two books in an epic movie but the movie either way is going to have to be more than an hour and some minutes long. QotD should have easily been a 2 1/2 to 3 hour movie if done right. Any way, best thing to do really is to read the books to know the stories. IwaV was a good movie but QotD ought to be deleted from memory as being at all connected. Not a bad vampire movie on its own but anyone who read the books is crying on how every character was raped severely. Twilight, you are right that at points some vampire stories do contradict one another but that is all because o the differing authors of each book. Lestat writes most but others also do up their own tales when David starts motivating them to. The contradictions that happen really are only because of opinions each one has so they aren't glaring or anything and you can see why when you get to know each character.
And a bag of potato chips in hand. Totally.
Well that clears the list somewhat. Some people aren't responding and since quite a few are invisible this is laying in to having more suspects than we normally might have. No detectives are really anymore trying to prove their innocence so you make this more difficult. But that is all fine and dandy. I'd say the suspects so far I line up to investigate more would be Mr. Despair, OblivionRoxas, Goimez, Pirate King, Demon. This does not mean that the others still though should not be investigated. Note to Kira: Oh Kira, thanks for the vote of confidence. I do love a good game. :) Nope, I was referring to ICSP stating that this Kira was going to be the best or some such thing earlier in posts here when I went back to review the new case. Just remarking on that. I know nothing that you guys don't and haven't spoken to ICSP at all in PM since I was being narty. So here's the list and what we have so far. Let's get to teamworking. This Kira is out for blood and even without people accusing, is doing his/her research. We do know that Trogdor first mentioned looking up people's names on the forums and such so that could make her a suspect again as well, or someone who is researching closely for this data. This Kira is a person who thinks and researches. I doubt all these kills could happen with shinigami eyes. Only one per day should happen that way, I believe. So we need to start examining more those we know have solid investigative skills such as this. We also want to ensure we aren't -helping- the kira by doing certain things he/she would to make it harder to eliminate ourselves off the list easier than just accusing and letting kira knock us off. So thoughts, people?
Actually I missed the whole last case...and now am in on this one. Let's see here. Pyrɸ - accused now but I think she's innocent. Trogdor ICSP -Shinigami - though I debate on him actually not doing something here. Repliku サキ アマミヤ Chervalier TrueKeybladeMaster Graxe -Dead from accusing Shades. Shades -Already been accused and released. gintasthebest Heartless_Vice pirateking_luffy ヨシュア Amber jettie TheChosenOne DemoN:||D@ys CarbuncleGem - accused Pyro but this doesn't necessarily excuse her just yet. Nate_River jojo13 I have my doubts jojo is the kira for some reasons such as pulling back on accusations. Mr.Despair Love clouddart100 OblivionRoxas Firekeyblade Goimez advent_of_apocalypse CreatorOftheUncreatd
Carbuncle Gem wins. Frawress Victoly!
Ah, so just CarbuncleGem then. Anywhoo, I wouldn't bother going invisible because that just raises the suspicions up any way. People PM others all the time so it doesn't necessarily mean if caught someone is the Kira. Also, ICSP loves to be invisible so we may never know when he's on till he posts. Though he is rather on around this time and fades out again and comes back in a couple hours. heh. Also, I like being stalked so being invisible would lose my stalker. *sigh*
So either two people will die..for accusing the -same- person... サキ アマミヤ and CarbuncleGem accusing Pyro...or we have a kira..or one will die or none will die and oh well. These deaths sure do take a while. And why is almost everyone but me invisible??? It makes everyone look so much more guilty.
Going to use this list and I'm back in too. Been very busy the last couple days. Rawr. Now to find new Kira that is apparently SoOoo bad that ICSP is bragging. Pyrɸ Trogdor ICSP -Shinigami Repliku サキ アマミヤ Chervalier TrueKeybladeMaster Graxe -Dead Shades -Already been accused gintasthebest Heartless_Vice pirateking_luffy ヨシュア Amber jettie TheChosenOne DemoN:||D@ys CarbuncleGem Nate_River jojoj13 Mr.Despair Love clouddart100 OblivionRoxas Firekeyblade Goimez advent_of_apocalypse CreatorOftheUncreatd So far I can only knock off two people but I do ponder about ICSP. There's been no rule that said a Shinigami also couldn't use the notebook and he's being kind of humorous saying that it's the best kira of all. If anyone is not on the list here, please speak up so we can include you so the game is fair. I am doubting it's CreatoroftheUncreated since he's been so quiet all along. Some others also haven't been around so much but can't dismiss them yet. Whoever it is, I am gathering it will be someone not of the regular responsive bunch though.
Watch the spam, guys. If there's too much more this is either being closed or moved to the Spam Zone.
Demyx's battle was out in the sunny wide open and his death ended up with a burst of bubbles and then he faded out as the others do. I didn't see anything unusual about it really. Water can make things brighter and such and it was light out.
I'd have to say that we could theorize on it, but it's really hard to think of a random outcome that makes much logical sense. I think it's nearly safe to say though that people's views back then were quite violent and even if Christianity had not evolved out of it, Islamic followers and Romans would have had more clashes or something else may have taken its place, some other religion may have been born, or just the Romans would have continued expansionism as they would have. I can't say there would be more peace or less peace because of the way the times were wrought full of fighting and not just over religion, but also expansionism. Xephos, I clearly must disagree with you here. In most religions, the clause of fighting for deities gave people many excuses to get regular people involved in atrocities throughout history. Christianity did not help in bringing peace. Peaceful people sick of war, revolutions, and changes in systems that were set up super dogmatic is the reason why we have more peace today. Members of society were sick of oppressive religions, kings that were corrupt etc. Religion didn't make people more peaceful. People made people more peaceful. This of course is also why I can't say without Christianity though that things would have faired better. With people expanding outwards more, crossing into other territories, pillaging, taking dominance over, etc the wars of Roman times weren't just about religion. The Dark Ages etc became much more focused on that issue and trying to weed 'outsiders' out. However, that too would crumble. In a way I think that it was history's time of war and if it wasn't one religion that spurned it, it may have been others, but it wasn't -just- religion and we also need to keep in mind it was people's failures to integrate, accept other societies as equals and well...care about others outside their circles off influence. It was also a great time of expansionism.
You are forgetting that during the Cold War other nations were used by all factions. It wasn't like the U.S. and Russia did nothing during that time. Afghanistan even is a show of what happened during the time. Russia needs to focus more on itself but unfortunately they seem to have an eye for expansionism instead which is only going to harm them. I agree with you that the leaders have never seemed to be able to fix the problems within Russia itself and instead many Russians have died due to the way the leaders think. Hopefully though something will turn around for them. I have friends there I do worry about when things like this happen. I'd hate to see with all the changes that have been made, we go back to the stance of the Cold War or this could actually escalate into worse.
PAW, being religious does -not- make it easier to identify a person -as- a person. That crosses over to stereotypes that I would think anyone would be upset at, whether they are religious or not, unless the person is a zealot that only prefers to be known as a religious being and show nothing else to others. It is very easy to read people whether religious or not. There are countless people that believe or don't believe in -any- religion and yet they show to others an array of depth. Christian, Buddhist, Atheist, Muslim, etc aren't ways to determine how a person will be. They are classifications and a person who declares the affiliation with any does not mean that person is a 'good' person. I don't want to think along the stereotypical lines to identify the type of person by just religion because it doesn't hold true always. I.e. Every type of religion has a stigma attached to it as does a lack of religion. Depending on the viewer, a person could judge someone unnecessarily harshly or too light based on religious affiliation and not -care- what is deeper. That's prejudice and stereotyping. Christian - a person who is devoted to God above family, friends and all else and act as though they are martyrs out to save everyone's soul while harassing them. A person that says God's will is the explanation for natural events that happen in nature and a person that chooses to believe in nothing but what the Bible tells them and calls anyone who disagrees a heretic. Hates gays, can hate race etc. - a blanket statement of prejudice that is often untrue. Muslim - Belonging to the Islamic faith, these people promote terrorism and martyrdom and take advantage of youngsters, filling their heads with ideals to hate anyone not of Islamic faith. Their way is violence and until their religion is the only one there, they will know no peace. Islamic followers look at all Western Civilizations as the devil. - another prejudiced closed-minded thing to say that is untrue often. Atheist - a person that hates God and religion and worships instead science. They are out to prove to everyone that God doesn't exist and take away any public displays of religion to push their beliefs along and try to brainwash kids out of religion through science and education. - another prejudiced and biased stereotype. Religion is -not- a way to justify things because on the same note I can say it this way, I can also go over positive on it, like this: Christian - a caring, loving individual that spreads the word of God while helping to heal the wounds of life, devoting time to charity and giving to the less fortunate. Being a caring, loyal person by rearing, you can trust them to not lie to you or leave you out to dry at your worst moments. - Some may fit this and it is still a stereotypical prejudiced statement without enough analysis. Muslim - A person devoted to an often misunderstood religion that has a different take on the monotheistic faith and takes Judaism and Christianity to the next level. Their lives are devoted strongly to their faiths and therefore their ways of life are more devoted to God, which gets others to attack them and their way of life wrongfully. They suffer by stigmas brought onto them by Christians and Jews who refuse to grow and let their faiths mature. - Many Muslims are excellent people, be assured but to write off and say none do wrong and are prosecuted by others is another stereotypical thing I hear often. Atheist - A person that disbelieves in Gods of any kind and believes that people should be charitable out of true sincerity and not for religion. A person that seeks equality for all people regardless of race, gender etc and feels that a loving nature can be found in anyone and life is to live in the time and that they've found enough evidence to suggest living life now to the fullest is better than stories of the past that probably aren't true. Being real to be real and good to be good is better than having an outside reason to do so. - There are atheists who feel this way but to be real there are also atheists who feel that people can be as good -or- as bad as you want to be because there's nothing out there to give them discipline but the law. So you see, my point is this. Religion, based on who's judging it can think worse or better of someone just because it is followed or not. It is an 'identifier' to class someone but it should definitely NEVER be a sole way of determining how a person will be because we as a people are way too judgmental on the issue of religion and we are prone to make mistakes about a person. We will often be too strong or too lenient based on someone's religious views and in seriousness I think you could learn more of a person by chatting with them on various other topics such as politics, what's going on in the world, what kind of music they like, what are their favorite entertainment things to do or hobbies, what they really feel about animal 'rights', what their views on criminals and the legal system are, etc. A person can be a great person and of any religious faith or lack thereof. A person can be a real jerk regardless of their religious background and some use the religion as an excuse. If the person isn't a 'fanatic' about the religion, using religion as an identifier fails because that person is easily going to be more complex and would want to actually be recognized for more. They want to also be seen as a talented writer, a singer, a business person, a lover of music, a lover of animals, etc. It's no wonder to me so many people feel 'no one understands them'. They won't be properly seen for the person they are if judged in this way. I have several friends who are of religious faiths or lacks of them and can say if I had judged them or they had judged me based on religion, probably right now I'd lose about at least half of my friends. Having core beliefs of being truthful, honest, loyal, benevolent, compassionate, dependable etc doesn't just come from believing in a religion and those who think so are prejudiced; easy as that. A person has to -want- to be these things to make them core beliefs. Religion or lack of it has also given people the right to be superior to others, elitist, fanatical, and has caused great wars because it's so simple to judge someone on religion apparently just as it is to judge someone based on the color of skin, gender, sexuality, etc. These other things are often viewed as wrong to judge someone by and I believe strongly that religion too is not a fair way to assess the personality of anyone. Just because a few people may be really great and claim they belong or don't affiliate with a religion is certainly not a justification to say that people of -all- that religion/or not of a religion are that way. The same holds if people do horrible things that affiliate with that religion. Not all Muslims wants to be seen as a terrorist automatically because some do that deed. Not all Christian wants to be seen as a zealous nutjob burning Harry Potter books and stealing and also picketing outside the funerals of soldiers or gay people because some do. Not all Atheists wants to be seen akin to the ones who yell down with all religions and make them illegal and send religious people to nut houses. I'd wager MOST of the people of these groups don't want this, because each of these views are of fanatical people that are not being benevolent, kind, truthful, loyal etc. Most of us just want to socialize, be happy, live our lives and not worry about labels at all; judging individuals instead of lump grouping people based on a certain quality. That's how we make friends with people who aren't of the same religions in the first place. Now if only our great leaders and those who are closed-minded would pick up on it, the world could be a better place.
