Jump to content

Lulu

Member
  • Posts

    179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Lulu

  1. Once I killed all my sea-monkey shrimp by accidently dumping a vegetable leaf covered in hosein sauce into the tank. They had eggs and babies, too. . . The other time, I think I overfed them.

    Sea-monkeys were so fascinating. . .

  2. khuchu.gif

    Khalazdad as a Puchu! Khuchu!

    I think I did a pretty good job this time. Goodness knows I'm a sucky pixeler, but I'm proud--it's Khalazdad as I've always imagined him! The beard and some other things did give me trouble, but it turned out. . . wonderful!

    By the way, if it's hard for some of you to interpret, this is the scene where Khalazdad enters the House of Liquid Dust, and the dust surrounds him, and blood starts pouring out of his pores. Gosh. . . it even looks like Khal's own picture. . . I'm so proud.

    post-1687-1219457606_thumb.jpg

    ^his picture, might I refresh your memories

    It's even complete with my mouse-drawn signature by my right hand (I'm left-handed). Beautiful.

    But I'll be truthful; this isn't completely original. But isn't it a difference enough? n____n; Sucky pixelers must use their bases. . .

    m_8ecb31671c2c767d28bb8b57f06bae80.jpg

    H-eh. . . and if the background looks familiar, well--don't sue me! Is it copyrighted?! Well, uh, it's, I disclaim it! Okay?

    But it is beautiful, isn't it. . . @_@

    KHUCHU! KHUCHU! KHUCHU!

  3. ~_~ I know I asked this a while ago, when the this announcement first came out:

    Because several players abuse this page by just clicking the links and not voting, the activity here will be monitored on a random selection of players and from time to time players will be selected for a permanent ban of this page (plus other penalizations) If you dont care to vote where it is to vote and just click the links for the credits dont do it because you will lose more than you gain by doing this. Errors you get on these links should be reported asap. Thank you for understanding.

    But then I was gone for a while, and I can't find the topic now, so:

    For convenience, I used to click all the links and then use the bonuses given from the links right away, due to the counter. I often attack people to add to my VP in addition to the bonus or try to use my extra VE, and only vote on the sites after the counter has reset (meaning, after 10 mins have elapsed).

    What I'm asking is, now that the voting is being monitered, does it matter if I don't vote on those sites until a while later? Is there a specific period of time in which I should vote after clicking the link?

    Another thing: Glaistig and I share the same IP address. Because of that, sometimes one of our votes aren't counted on the sites. Would we be mistaken for abusers because of this as well?

    It would probably help if I knew how the whole voting thing is monitered. :l I mean, if it's done manually, then my voting after 10 minutes have elapsed probably wouldn't really matter unless someone just happened to check in between my clicking on the link and my voting, and the chances are probably not likely, since it's just a group a time, but I could still be mistaken. . . or if it's done automatically in some way--ah, whatever. :) I can't think through these things.

    Anyway, if someone could tell me whether these things matter, that would be great. Sorry for my roundabout way of explaining u_u;

  4. Come now, you little dolt. Acknowledge your stupidity for suggesting that my post would suggest to others that I thought that RJ attacked for personal gain. Now, why? Why would it sound like that? A normal person would be able to understand me perfectly. Understand in the first place that whether or not RJ attacked for such reasons is irrelevant, and that I'm logical enough to know that as near anyone would. But I forgive your stupidity. We all have in ourselves stupidity, you know. It's not like the stupid person is at fault, as that stupid person is earnest and honestly believes what he stupidly thinks. It is just annoying. In fact, saying one is stupid isn't really an insult.

    Just because you are a relative does mean I have the liberty to take for this sort of message, dear Lu. I am in the process of bringing you up, whereas to others I don't have the obligation, and in fact, that sort of action would be offensive and unwanted. At least on the forums, which isn't meant for that at all but rather the discussion of the game.

    I must disagree. In fact, I suspect many normal persons would conclude that in your post, you were referring to RJ while avoiding the use of his name. It would be relevant, because then he would support the fact that there are those who do attack for personal gain, and therefore it must be officially recognized that they should restrain from like actions. You say, why should they be allowed, if there is no purpose? I say, why should they put out a rule, if there is no purpose (nobody that actually would break that rule). Examples are good.

    @"stupid" part: Well, if you say so. Just makes you all the more stupid for asking me whether I am, then. But then, aren't we all? :P:D;)

    Now I must say that I refuse to continue any further in this unproductive squabbling over meanings.

  5. Why you little! It's implied, you little thing, that if I don't say RJ attacked for personal gain, I don't mean that he did. Are you stupid? I say what I mean only, and I only mean what I say. And I say most of what I think, too. Didn't I just say that I didn't care much at all about that, and was only talking about the issue at hand? Why would someone think I'm trying to incriminate RJ when I don't say he's done something wrong?

    /is happy now after railing against display of irrational thought by Lu.

    ~_~ I didn't say you meant to. People don't know that you only mean what you say, though (as if). Therefore, I meant that your post was likely to make people believe you were referring to him, and so sounded like RJ attacked for personal gain.

    Hey! I protest against this person! "Are you stupid?" Isn't that a slight, for her to ask that (rhetorically)? Offensive as defensive, not a very nice tactic. Just because I'm a relative doesn't mean liberty can be taken like that; would you say that to anyone else? :P

  6. I didn't say you said that. I meant you made it sound like that. I agree that the problem is that it is allowed, though.

    I also agree if I were to be thought I was attacked by an RPC for personal game, I wouldn't quit just because I got defeated (that's clearly stupid), but because the fact that RPCs are allowed to do so without repercussions is just plain annoying and pointless.

    Happy? :l

  7. I agree with Glaistig that it can't hurt to just officially say that RPCs are to refrain from attacking lower MP levels for personal gain (there have been a few incidents). I also agree if I were to be attacked by an RPC for personal game, I wouldn't quit just because I got defeated (that's clearly stupid), but because the fact that RPCs are allowed to do so without repercussions is just plain annoying and pointless.

    Likewise, I still don't see how RJ's attacking to "educate" the players or something like that really helps. I do think that Glaistig makes it sound like RJ attacked for personal gain as well, though, when that hasn't been made clear (that I could tell).

    And I also feel that the shift towards roleplaying that MD has taken might not fit all players. I think it would be nice if MD could bring more non-roleplaying stuff by, since it's been focusing on it for a while, but I believe that will happen anyway. The part I'm worrying about is having to see half the people I know pretending to be solely in MD whenever I log on, and having to play along with them should I ever decide to communicate with them. Sure, a little pretending is fine, I suppose, but I think too much is possible. I don't want all of MD to be roleplaying.

  8. Well other than one other thing which Was HIGHLY Unethical, That incident is the only I have heard of, and the only one Since I became an RPC myself...

    The other thing I Spoke of hasn't had a Clear Offender so I can't speak much of it...

    I don't know, I've heard of a few things, like RPCs banning people they find too annoying temporarily. No, I am not talking about only Robin Hood, others too. Usually it's because the players are complaining about something in a way that irritates the RPCs. I don't know whether that would be considered regulation or abuse, but I do believe I've received the impression that the RPCs that banned based it heavily upon their own irritation and not on whether it was disrupting the game or something like that.

    I can see sensibility in RPCs having won their statuses and being given the status for privilege, but I think they also serve as regulators. I suppose the question is how much space they are left to judge for themselves. Personally, I think a loose guideline like what Glaistig suggested can't hurt that much, if there isn't one yet. Can't hurt to just throw one out, you know.

  9. MTG is Magic: The Gathering, a TCG (not sure if that's the correct term; I mean, the "trading" part) where apparently ea. card is assigned to one of five? colors; decks based on certain combinations of colors are used for different strategies.

    At least that's what I've put together. I haven't played it, but it seems pretty popular (esp. on MD; there was a whole MTG signature thing going on). I think I can imagine what it's like, since a lot of card games are based on colors/elements like that (maybe after it). I also used some cards for a stupid school project where I had to collect references to Greek Mythology. . . 200 of them. :'D.

    The other day, the library was hosting a Magic: The Gathering tournament or something. Too bad I couldn't participate. I guess I should try playing the online version. >_>; I'm not great at card games anyway.

×
×
  • Create New...