Never watched that movie, not a big fan of horror movies.
It is a horror movie right?
More of a thiller. Doesn't really rely on scaring you as much as building tension.
Anyway shouldn't we be discussing about awards here? :wassat:
Never watched that movie, not a big fan of horror movies.
It is a horror movie right?
More of a thiller. Doesn't really rely on scaring you as much as building tension.
Anyway shouldn't we be discussing about awards here? :wassat:
It was originally about awards, actually, it just got sidetracked a bit. And since there's not really much to talk about right now, why disallow a healthy conversation. It'll change in an hour when I open up new categories anyway.
@Light:
More of a thiller. Doesn't really rely on scaring you as much as building tension.
Anyway shouldn't we be discussing about awards here? :wassat:
Thanks for the answer.
Never watched that movie, not a big fan of horror movies.
It is a horror movie right?
Kind of, more like a thriller. It's an excellent movie, you should watch it immediately. Some of the most iconic characters in film history, and a few iconic quotes that are great at the dinner table. Or hell, anywhere, anytime.
The sequels are okay, but not the best. The first sequel is at least entertaining (Mason Verger <3) and necessary to complete your Ridley Scott collection, so you might as well watch that one.
Now, just a reminder as it seems appropriate. This thread is meant for mainly award related banter, and, while we do encourage all good discussion in here, if it starts getting in the way of people who would rather prefer talking about the actual awards themselves, we're going to have to put a stop to it. So please, if it starts bugging you more, do contact the Event Staff whose names you can see at the bottom of this forum and let us handle things.
And now that that's out of the way, do continue. Silence of the Lambs is a really, really good movie. Definitely worth watching.
Okay okay I will watch that someday…probably... I don't know.
On topic I think I will nominate the Rayleigh vs Norland or Jinbe vs luffy if someone doesn't do it first than me.
Zeff vs Laboon was a good match as well, I hope it'll get nominated
@Lef:
Zeff vs Laboon was a good match as well, I hope it'll get nominated
Don't worry, I was totally planning to nominate that one! I was afraid everyone else would've forgotten that match, since it was one of the earlier ones, but it's good to see I was wrong.
Don't worry, I was totally planning to nominate that one! I was afraid everyone else would've forgotten that match, since it was one of the earlier ones, but it's good to see I was wrong.
Same, that match was fantastic
The tournament people flocking into the thread makes me happy :)
^these guys get it
To remind everyone of the greatness that went down:
! gif by jabra
It was so much fun seeing a bunch of members mess with the add-a-hat poster.
^these guys get it
To remind everyone of the greatness that went down:! gif by jabra
It was so much fun seeing a bunch of members mess with the add-a-hat poster.
Yep, and you chose the right time to join the tourney.
That match must be memorable to you
Best Tournament Match & Best Filler Match now open for nominations.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Oh, Lef. I thought no one was going to nominate that. ;D
Oh, hey, it seems Zeff vs. Laboon has been nominated already, as well as Noland vs. Doflamingo, which would probably have been my second choice. You people have good taste in matches, haha!
If the category is still open tomorrow I'll nominate another match, but this is something I gotta think over for a bit and right now I gotta go, so… yeah ^^
^these guys get it
To remind everyone of the greatness that went down:! gif by jabra
http://www.m-i-u.de/images-i68767bxyl4b.gifIt was so much fun seeing a bunch of members mess with the add-a-hat poster.
I miss doing friendly campaign hijacks like that XD
I kind of missed a lot of the tournament straight after though because I had my work-related depressive spike and keeping an eye on the Big Brother game I was in was time-consuming enough. Shame because I missed some really beautiful moments.
I see Smiley got to knarf vs. Snarf before I could. Glad someone else thought of it.
Yeah so voted Moria vs. Nami. I just had too much fun campaigning for him! (Not to mention No Maam's jinx!)
I see Smiley got to knarf vs. Snarf before I could. Glad someone else thought of it.
I very much approve.
_>
Is "Fujitora vs. Secret Boss Character" a tournament match or a filler match?
Hrm.
Eligible for both, really. The entire Doflamingo Invitational was a filler tournament with a twist.
@RobbyBevard:
Is "Fujitora vs. Secret Boss Character" a tournament match or a filler match?
Hrm.
Eligible for both, really. The entire Doflamingo Invitational was a filler tournament with a twist.
Since Best Tournament Match is almost full and Best Filler only halfway, I think I''m going to swap it to Best Filler.
This means Alexander is a girl's best friend (Fullmetal Alchemist Preliminary) isn't in anymore, but maybe someone else wants to nominate it in my stead.
Since Best Tournament Match is almost full and Best Filler only halfway, I think I''m going to swap it to Best Filler.
This means Alexander is a girl's best friend (Fullmetal Alchemist Preliminary) isn't in anymore, but maybe someone else wants to nominate it in my stead.
I'll go ahead and nominate it since the one I wanted to nominate was nominated by someone else.
if Laboon couldn't win the tournament, he can definitely win here! His spirit shall shine through!!
I just randomly thought of this, but next year there needs to be a King vs. Hercule filler match.
I'll go ahead and nominate it since the one I wanted to nominate was nominated by someone else.
<3 .
Amazed no one nominated that one law match.
Can't link it or bear to say.
@Purple:
Well these examples of debates concluding based on someone admitting that they were wrong shouldn't necessarily detract from well structured posts from two different sides of an argument. If I were to evaluate a debate as to it being the "best," it would not be based on the merits of one side overwhelming the other but on the fact that both sides continually provide researched arguments for a relatively controversial topic (or enough that there's a good amount of grey area). Even in real life, I doubt that many of the best debates are ones where there is a clear winner or loser.
Not always possible on an internet forum where the atmosphere can either turn inflammatory or one side can just cut their losses and run, but this is just something to mull over I suppose when it comes to quality.
When it comes to behaviors in debate, I think the ones described here pretty much summarize my point of view:
http://boingboing.net/2013/05/22/daniel-dennet-on-how-to-argue.html
The merit of a debate would be much richer if such behaviors are adopted, in my opinion.
As for my own thought:
[hide] I wonder why we are so reluctant to admit that we are wrong when we are wrong. What could we possibly gain from so evasive and destructive a behavior? A thoughtless utterance, a half-baked idea, a careless slip-up - we all have had our fair share of blunders. Must we insist in making a fool of ourselves more than we already have, and build an image of ourselves as stubborn and opinionated, ashamed of erring and being human? What is so bad then about appreciating our interlocutor for having enlightened us, while rejoicing in our newfound clarity and knowledge? So common is this type of behavior, and so little do we understand it.
That absurd personal pride welling from within is doubtlessly a major culprit. But from outside of ourselves comes another factor, no less important: that our surroundings have not created a forgiving and supporting environment that truly encourages us to admit our falsity for our own good. And we too, when we are in the right, have contributed to creating an environment that humiliates those in the wrong. It’s an entangled interplay of personal and social elements, engendering a vicious circle perpetuated by all of its participants. Unwittingly we get caught up in the play, and so long as we haven’t got our purpose clear and our priority straight, we continue to get caught up.
It seems fitting, then, to stop for a moment and ask ourselves: for what purpose do we come here joining in a debate or a conversation? Is it to dominate the conversation, and triumphantly force our superior opinions onto others? Or is it to mingle together with our fellow human beings, to discuss what we enjoy discussing in the spirit of friendship and civility, and to further understanding, for both ourselves and others? Must we so vainly cling to maintaining an appearance of infallibility, while deep down we know that we are fallible? And must we take pride in our ability to cleverly ridicule our opponents, to brilliantly dominate them, instead of the ability to transform their opinions for the better, to facilitate growth for the benefit of the community as a whole, or the ability to admit error and better ourselves?
Every now and then we encounter an opinion that is just plain stupid, ridiculous or pretentious. A 'natural' reaction is that we laugh at it and ridicule the person holding it. But 'natural' reaction is over-rated. Sometimes it is better to pause for a second and think about the consequence of our responses, asking ourselves: Would this response be able to change the mind of our opponent, and conclude the argument for good, or would it simply repulse the other party from seeing their flaw, and unnecessarily prolong the argument? Here comes the impulse to be clever, the urge for entertainment at dispense of constructiveness, the drive to dominate others instead of helping them, which overwhelm our positive desires and take over us in an intoxicating moment of fascination.
I know many who cling to defending a half-baked, flawed passing idea at great length, partly due to the stronghold of blinding pride, and partly due to an underlying fear of humiliation. And our attitude towards them doesn't help. Instead of treating such an idea like the light-hearted silliness it is, we make a big deal out of it and subject the person holding it to utter embarrassment, which further discourages the person from acknowledging the error of their way. Wouldn't it do more good to simply point it out in a nice way?
As for when we ourselves are wrong, even when the environment is unfavorable, I think it’s important to muster courage and admit it, because it’s important to acknowledge that the discussion is fruitful and properly appreciate our counterpart, even if we don’t desire knowledge enough to feel cheerful at heart; and it’s important to be honest to ourselves. We know the right thing to do, but all too often we are lost in our own negative impulses, unless we let ourselves be ruled by reason and good will. I suppose the key in this is whether we are truly concerned with knowledge, and with the well-being of the human being conversing with us through the internet. Needless to say, online or not, they are humans with flesh and blood, and not electric current.
It’d be nice if we communicate with each other in a more meaningful way, speak to each other from heart to heart, and send our good will to one another. In the end it is no more complicated than that. This is just my opinion, anyway. ^_^
[/hide]
Disagreement is dynamic, agreement is static. Disagreement brings new knowledge, agreement does not. Disagreement builds and seeks new ways, agreement does not. Agreement can only by temporal. Agreement would be the end, disagreement is continuation.
Why would I want other people to admit they agree with me? I mean other than shallow self reassurance, and that's not really valuable.
Agreement is only needed by normative, and even than it can't stay for tu long.
I won't people to disagree with me more, especially smart people, who are able to produce good arguments. I do not want to convince others or be convinced, I wont to grow at let other grow. And for that disagreement is far, far more productive.
[hide] I wonder why we are so reluctant to admit that we are wrong when we are wrong. What could we possibly gain from so evasive and destructive a behavior? A thoughtless utterance, a half-baked idea, a careless slip-up - we all have had our fair share of blunders. Must we insist in making a fool of ourselves more than we already have, and build an image of ourselves as stubborn and opinionated, ashamed of erring and being human? What is so bad then about appreciating our interlocutor for having enlightened us, while rejoicing in our newfound clarity and knowledge? So common is this type of behavior, and so little do we understand it.
That absurd personal pride welling from within is doubtlessly a major culprit. But from outside of ourselves comes another factor, no less important: that our surroundings have not created a forgiving and supporting environment that truly encourages us to admit our falsity for our own good. And we too, when we are in the right, have contributed to creating an environment that humiliates those in the wrong. It’s an entangled interplay of personal and social elements, engendering a vicious circle perpetuated by all of its participants. Unwittingly we get caught up in the play, and so long as we haven’t got our purpose clear and our priority straight, we continue to get caught up.
It seems fitting, then, to stop for a moment and ask ourselves: for what purpose do we come here joining in a debate or a conversation? Is it to dominate the conversation, and triumphantly force our superior opinions onto others? Or is it to mingle together with our fellow human beings, to discuss what we enjoy discussing in the spirit of friendship and civility, and to further understanding, for both ourselves and others? Must we so vainly cling to maintaining an appearance of infallibility, while deep down we know that we are fallible? And must we take pride in our ability to cleverly ridicule our opponents, to brilliantly dominate them, instead of the ability to transform their opinions for the better, to facilitate growth for the benefit of the community as a whole, or the ability to admit error and better ourselves?
Every now and then we encounter an opinion that is just plain stupid, ridiculous or pretentious. A 'natural' reaction is that we laugh at it and ridicule the person holding it. But 'natural' reaction is over-rated. Sometimes it is better to pause for a second and think about the consequence of our responses, asking ourselves: Would this response be able to change the mind of our opponent, and conclude the argument for good, or would it simply repulse the other party from seeing their flaw, and unnecessarily prolong the argument? Here comes the impulse to be clever, the urge for entertainment at dispense of constructiveness, the drive to dominate others instead of helping them, which overwhelm our positive desires and take over us in an intoxicating moment of fascination.
I know many who cling to defending a half-baked, flawed passing idea at great length, partly due to the stronghold of blinding pride, and partly due to an underlying fear of humiliation. And our attitude towards them doesn't help. Instead of treating such an idea like the light-hearted silliness it is, we make a big deal out of it and subject the person holding it to utter embarrassment, which further discourages the person from acknowledging the error of their way. Wouldn't it do more good to simply point it out in a nice way?
As for when we ourselves are wrong, even when the environment is unfavorable, I think it’s important to muster courage and admit it, because it’s important to acknowledge that the discussion is fruitful and properly appreciate our counterpart, even if we don’t desire knowledge enough to feel cheerful at heart; and it’s important to be honest to ourselves. We know the right thing to do, but all too often we are lost in our own negative impulses, unless we let ourselves be ruled by reason and good will. I suppose the key in this is whether we are truly concerned with knowledge, and with the well-being of the human being conversing with us through the internet. Needless to say, online or not, they are humans with flesh and blood, and not electric current.
It’d be nice if we communicate with each other in a more meaningful way, speak to each other from heart to heart, and send our good will to one another. In the end it is no more complicated than that. This is just my opinion, anyway. ^_^
[/hide]
Yeah I agree. that's how all of us should act.
Unless someone says anything bad/wrong about any of Whitebeard pirates.
Then they deserve worse :ninja:
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
And if I'll be serious, there aren't only 'stupid' opinions. There are ones which play on our nerves, because no matter what you say to them, they still continue what they said and don't listen. People with stupid pride or overestimating themselves. So then you turn to something like that too, or simply leave. That's when
A 'natural' reaction is that we laugh at it and ridicule the person holding it.
. And it becomes worse when those kind of people argue about something you care about. Some of them even without proving.
Though in that kind of situation right decision is to simply leave.
Unless you are Ace/Roger :ninja:
Though in that kind of situation right decision is to simply leave.
Unless you are Ace :ninja:
Careful…You might end up with a fist of arguments straight through your chest. Or something. :ninja:
Disagreement is dynamic, agreement is static. Disagreement brings new knowledge, agreement does not. Disagreement builds and seeks new ways, agreement does not. Agreement can only by temporal. Agreement would be the end, disagreement is continuation.
Why would I want other people to admit they agree with me? I mean other than shallow self reassurance, and that's not really valuable.
Agreement is only needed by normative, and even than it can't stay for tu long.
I won't people to disagree with me more, especially smart people, who are able to produce good arguments. I do not want to convince others or be convinced, I wont to grow at let other grow. And for that disagreement is far, far more productive.
I disagree with you on this, then.
:P
I disagree with you on this, then.
:P
I'm delighted to read that. I would be even more delighted to know why.
It's clear from the avatars that Shipmate avoids conflict with a demure wave while DarkFalcon's eyes smolder while gazing at prey
It's clear from the avatars that Shipmate avoids conflict with a demure wave while DarkFalcon's eyes smolder while gazing at prey
What do you see from my avatar?~
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Isn't the best filler match over yet?
Also I'm highly amused at the thought I managed to partially invoke earlier.
Ahaha.
Eat that…
ohwait.
It's clear from the avatars that Shipmate avoids conflict with a demure wave while DarkFalcon's eyes smolder while gazing at prey
Expression on my avatar is direct result of my inability to draw emotions.
Expression on my avatar is direct result of my inability to draw emotions.
Expression on my avatar is direct result of my inability to cope with mornings and morons.
Disagreement is dynamic, agreement is static. Disagreement brings new knowledge, agreement does not. Disagreement builds and seeks new ways, agreement does not. Agreement can only by temporal. Agreement would be the end, disagreement is continuation.
Why would I want other people to admit they agree with me? I mean other than shallow self reassurance, and that's not really valuable.
Agreement is only needed by normative, and even than it can't stay for tu long.
I won't people to disagree with me more, especially smart people, who are able to produce good arguments. I do not want to convince others or be convinced, I wont to grow at let other grow. And for that disagreement is far, far more productive.
As with many things, it really depends on what sort of thing we're talking about and how far you take it. There is a point in arguments where if you just disagree for the sake of disagreeing that it becomes fruitless. Generally that's what most people call stubbornness, anyway.
Acknowledging agreement and being swayed over is not a sign of being static, but may actually allow for a different angle on the thought process for that subject.
Expression on my avatar is direct result of my inability to cope with mornings and morons.
ah, there my be some kind souls able to cope with morons, but it is in human nature to not be able to cope with mornings.
Best Campaign and Best Tournament Moment are now open.
I want to nominate Buggy noses but I don't feel narcissistic enough today
@metteminne:
I want to nominate Buggy noses but I don't feel narcissistic enough today
i wanted to nominate exactly that, but i'm lazy :ninja:
Best Tournament Moment - Toraish Has to Break the Luffy vs. Jinbei Tie
What do you mean "has to"? I was hoping for that result from the very beginning because I knew I was going to break it for Jinbe no matter what. ;D
And there's pretty much nothing more amazing than a late tie with the current rules.
@Toraish:
What do you mean "has to"? I was hoping for that result from the very beginning because I knew I was going to break it for Jinbe no matter what. ;D
And there's pretty much nothing more amazing than a late tie with the current rules.
Do you want me to rescind the nomination? :3
I was using "has to" just as a present tense for the moment in question, plus….for me, it was "amazing" because the match itself was intense and close, the Jinbei camp was struggling, then you, a Jinbei suppporter, come in and turn the tide at the click of a button~
Hehe, no, that was the most amazing moment in the whole tourney for me too, so I'm glad that you did nominate it. I was just checking if I had somehow made people think I wasn't partial because I sure was from the very get-go.
Looking back at all the campaigns I really find it impossible to not find the 2013 tournament as one of the best we've had. A couple of years ago I could count the numer of members who had consitently awesome campaigns … this time I find it hard to even count that, there's too many people and too many campaigns.
this time I find it hard to even count that, there's too many people and too many campaigns.
Nonsense! There's never too many campaigns!!
Until you have to choose one. I wish I could've nominated like 7 ;_;
Hard to distinguish some of the campaigns from their matches. For example, the "Add a Hat" shenanigans have already appeared for 'Best Match' but they could appear under both of these categories too.
And yes, so so many good campaigns. noob was also consistently hilarious - it's a shame there isn't a "Best Campaigner" category in that regard to be honest.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
I await page 18 of this thread and it's photoshopped yonko admins with great interest.
Actually, it was just Kaidou.
Yea, I had a huge list of things I wanted to nominate, and even during the tourney every couple of days I had to revise who I'd nominate. It does make it easier that other people seem to have the same ones in mind.
I still am waiting to see the Add a hat/whale campaigns get a nomination.
Looking back at all the campaigns I really find it impossible to not find the 2013 tournament as one of the best we've had. A couple of years ago I could count the numer of members who had consitently awesome campaigns … this time I find it hard to even count that, there's too many people and too many campaigns.
Yeah, I absolutely have to second this. I'm probably forever going to call the 2010 tournament the best we had solely due to the sheer size of that thing (it was all big - voters, characters, rounds, campaigns, it had it all) and because of some of the incredible things that I got to be a part of personally during the tournament (ending ceremonies? who do you think started that?), not to mention that I got some of my best AP friends during that tournament, but this year is definitely second only to that.
Our numbers weren't really that big this time around, but the spirit was so good and homely in how accepting and encouraging it was; there were really creative and clever campaigns everywhere; we got a massive resurgence of new active members who got into the whole community thing through the tournament's more closed environment… It was just really, really good.
All but the final, of course. That, for me, counts among the very few things that I will never forgive this forum for. But that's just me. :P
--- Update From New Post Merge ---
@Print:
it's a shame there isn't a "Best Campaigner" category in that regard to be honest.
Most Dedicated?