I'm still here, and I've been through a fairly decent amount of entries.

Again, sorry about how long I'm taking. I have a bag of excuses as to why I'm taking so long, but I've never been very good at playing the violin. Your patience is appreciated to say the least.

Put very simply, I love film. I don't know anything about Twilight other than it being about vampires. It's never really appealed to me, but given the subcultural associations that even I would have to be at a low point to not pick up on, I can understand the rationale on some levels behind your decision. It's a shame you made the decision in this way, but if it works for you, then that's great really, anything that speeds up that awkward process. I'd love to create something that comes from myself too. I don't know who or what to blame right now though, so your head is screwed on tighter than mine.

About not being to be "taught" film: I agree and I disagree. Having a film course at the center of your study can provide some useful prompts, but a lot of it is up to you, as far as I see it. I'm too depressed, honestly, to bother talking about it right now.

At 11/22/09 07:41 PM, RydiaLockheart wrote: I would have ruled out a film major anyways due to the fact the degree is about as useful as a fine arts or music theory degree. Both of those are worth jack shit. Go with something you can actually get hired in after getting the degree.

I'm doing creative writing and film. I wanted to surpass myself by studying something doubly worthless.

Extra line reserved so I don't end on a negative thought and sound like I need the attention.

Out of interest, did she explain the sort of work behind the point? It seems pretty stupid to me that she would write up a quick note without explaining itr a little or giving the students something to work from themselves. I don't really know much about the topic in question: was she right? If so, then wehatever ideology the teacher might use in her teaching is quite irrelevant really. The curriculum is important obviously, it's been designed to simplify what needs to be learnt so you can put a couple of words on a future application. That doesn't really mean that the learning has to stop there. Do you feel like your own learning is restricted as a result of the teacher's own ideas?

You'll find that this sort of thing is increasingly important in academic study as you move on. It's even pointed out by the tutors on one of my creative writing courses. They explain that different tutors will assign different readings because of differing tastes. I find that interesting personally, but even if it does make a student feel uneasy for some reason, they are kind of expected to read other things too... you know, doing some casual outside stuff is practically a requirement for lots of courses, school or college.

But there's always something to work towards in our education systems, and as a result, one person's ideology can never really dominate the learning process, not in today's western world (and that makes it sound like an extremely rigid as a concept - feminism in itself, as much as lots of people like to treat it on par with Satanism due to attention grabbing tabloids and collection of uninformed amateur rants on the Internet, is a very varied theory). Take into account what Evark said, because that's important, but it's good to try and get more out of the whole process because of all the "real reasons". Oh, and education helps us focus. Seriously, all of what I read in books or online, or wherever, it's good to apply to a bit of discussion. You know, I say that reassuringly to myself more than anything.

If she didn't explain the point thoroughly, then she doesn't sound like a particularly good teacher. If she mentioned this one point, explained it, and you concluded this is because she's a "feminist", why? As much as a lot of us, myself included, like to believe that one person can be summed up in one word with "ism" on the end, it doesn't really work that way. Contexts are good. Contexts aren't everything. Contexts can be distracting.

And finally, the bulk of historical interpretation when it comes down to it is... yep, opinion-based, and that's probably a gross understatement, I can't be bothered with figures and estimations or whatever. That's what we learn, that's what's interesting, that's what makes us all wait one more day for death.

Sorry for any mistakes.

At 11/19/09 03:58 PM, leftBrain wrote: I'm curious, what routes to University are there other than the academic one?

From what I've been told when I've asked about it in the past, some degrees can take more practical qualifications into consideration. It gets a bit sticky though, because it often varies from course to course/uni to uni. Some universities don't accept certain qualifications, and some courses require to be interviewed or even take an additional test before being considered. If you look up different courses on UCAS, you'll find more information there - just some casual browsing gets you some knowledge. Some courses work via the UCAS tarriff, as in, they'll say you need so-and-so amount of points to apply. A list of what counts here is found here (I'm guessing BTECs are popular A-Level alternatives); the amount of points you receive for different qualifications are found here.

A-Levels are the most popular though because they work in a similar way to degree courses (and, erm, they potentially get the institution a decent amount of funding out of this popularity). They're obviously more academically focused. Some A-Levels have degree-styled courseworks too, that are kind of designed to make the transition a bit easier.

Hope that helps in some way.

I wouldn't know exactly what information schools keep (and for how long they keep it) without making a couple of unfounded guesses. I'm led to believe they have things about you on file for some time, so they can be contacted as reference points if neccessary, but I seem to remember people using different routes when it came to referencing for employment. Unfortunately I'm not particularly experienced in that department.

However, qualifications... oh boy. A-Levels are the most direct route to university at the moment. What do yo get to do at university? Well, you get a degree hopefully, to begin with. That sticks two or three letters in your CV that let you in on more employment oppurtunities... or so, in theory. Uni does more than that in essence: you're allowed to focus your study on something, or some things, that you're interested in, and the social side can't be batted away so easily. A-Levels aren't the only ways of getting there of course: just the academic way, and we're still on that being the most appropriate way in the mainstream.

Better exam results also help a school, because they apparently need to stay competitive in a market in order ot provide the best education. Think back to when you started school. How often did you hear exam statistics being read out? That's what it means. Parents and guardians are consumers. As much as it should, in a perfect world, be otherwise, the whole process needs to be sold. When you take your exams, I'd say not to think about numbers, but it's a numbing thought nonetheless.

Two thoughts, put basically. I'm sorry I didn't look at your main point, but frankly, unless someone's linked to something and pointed stuff out, I don't really know.

At 11/19/09 10:21 AM, Lizzardis wrote: I'm not sure if there are any more...But that is the only one I know of apart from Unilever.

I mentioned three more above, and made a very unsubtle reference to a fourth. If you're interested, check out this site for a couple more examples and details and the Wikipedia article , which could probably be listed in a Star Wars/Flash Gordon style (stealing from Michael Moore: also relevant here, I maintain). I'm very much aware it's by no means the first time I've posted the first link on the BBS, but whatever, it's quasi-relevant as long as we're on the topic and hating ourselves for living with it. It's an anti-TNC group focusing on McDonald's, but that page has articles on some of these other nice people we're talking about. OH yeah, it's biased as fuck. Interesting too!

At 11/19/09 09:41 AM, Scarab wrote: Arguably, all advertising serves only one concrete purpose: sell, sell, sell. I don't think acknowledging that is entirely cynical either, even as we throw other readings out of the window, like we just love to do in this day and age.

Going back over this, I realised I worded it rather clumsily.

What I mean to say is that all types of advertising will be attempting to push their products, it's the primary concern. I know what you're thinking Mr. Reader: why is this guy being so condescending? That's one of the most obvious things I've ever heard, the idiot. What I mean to point out is that the image's meanings are drawn out by us (this is, obviously, why some adverts break taboos and/or become controversial, why some adverts go on to evoke nostalgia, and so on). It feeds into the sale... or it may not, because you might not read the specific symbols that way. I've almost made advertising a social science by just lazily extending the sentence, but yadda yadda.

Like I say, I don't think being aware of the structure or presence of TNCs is a particularly jarring factor when we look at adverts, whatever our ideological conclusions are, aside. I believe it says less about the adverts, and more about capitalism in general as it looks today, where everything is so close and enticing, yet so unfamiliar, discomforting. I think it's hard to account for that presence amongst us lowly individuals... so we retreat back into our minds, watch some TV, and...

... which cleaner should I buy? Palmolive, or Ajax?

I'm not aware of the viral videos you're referring to, but I know the marketing strategies of those two products. They do conflict to a very bizarre degree, definitely, when you consider they're both owned by Unilever. The same principle applies in lots of different areas of commerce too with different TNCs (see other giants like SmithKline Beecham, Nestle, PepsiCo, etc.), and although the supposed ideological oppositions between the marketing campaigns between companies owned by the TNCs may not be distinctly different like the example here, it does make the individual think a little bit about branding. I remember as a child, we used to compare different sweets, drinks, whatever, and there would be different strengths and weaknesses attatched to all of it. To begin with, it just all-out confused me when I found out a lot of the competition was all operated by one huge corporation.

Arguably, all advertising serves only one concrete purpose: sell, sell, sell. I don't think acknowledging that is entirely cynical either, even as we throw other readings out of the window, like we just love to do in this day and age. Other readings, as one view puts it anyway, are forced out by us, the consumers. An advert can fling an image at us, but it won't necessarily label itself as a social concept: we make the rest up as we go along! Deny it as some might, shrug it off as part of a "delusional, childish conspiracy" maybe, but it's a strong part of western hemisphere life in the 21st century... erm, unfortunately.

At 11/18/09 03:37 PM, TheUnwisePoet wrote: I just read the entire bible and after that I said, pure bullshit... the bible should be something positive to read, but it was not, it's just about how powerful God his, and Jesus Christ life, and the bullshit he said... also a virgin can't have a son if it's not adopted... so christianism is pure fraud...

As far as realism and my own thoughts on religion go, you shouldn't need to lean on a realist factor for something to help you in life. I know, it's one of the most terrible things about this era. People will come out of a sci-fi movie complaining that it wasn't realistic. People will criticise a video game where a character takes one too many bullets to put to sleep, saying it's not realistic. However, when it comes to religion, I think we have a responsibility to decide whether or not to adopt the symbolism that's found all over just about every scripture.

So Christianity has its principles in stories that need to be assessed according to your own situation, with different roles ascribed to different people. That's a more postmodern way of looking at it and using what's there to help yourself, but I think it's acceptable if that's your reading of it. I've admittedly never read the entire Bible, or the scripture of any other religion, but I still have passages I look up now and then. Not all of them directly appeal to me. Some of them are actually quite frightening, but they make me think. Christianity has inevitably influenced me in more ways than one. Given the predominance of American, Canadian, British and Australian (erm, et al. users here, I know I'm not alone in this on the BBS.

It's okay that your style of thinking may not match the fundamentals of Christianity, or religion as a whole. This era is filled with differing ways of thinking - you'll have something to ascribe to, even if you, as a person, find yourself to feel quite negatively about some things. What do you like to read/watch/listen to, for instance (think to yourself!)? I know you said, "we're only Gods of ourselves" or something, I don't really believe that. Hell, I don't even read many psychological works like that, because as far as I'm concerned, human thought comes from somewhere... and that may be something psychic... which will have developed some other way! We're all influenced and motivated by different things, social, cultural, political, economic, etc.

Opinions are rife as a production of today's world. That's why I wasn't too pleased to read you'd ripped a Bible up, if you don't mind me saying. If I'm going to be annoyingly idealistic for a moment, the abstract beliefs that exist as beads of brain treacle in our heads don't hate other hate other thoughts in theory. Humans do that - and no, I'm not going to get political and specific here. I've already moaned and lectured for long enough.

At 11/18/09 01:34 PM, TheReno wrote: I was gunna write for the nover comp but I decided against it. Like if I cant get 3rd in a short story contest amungst a small group of people, how will I fare with a novel and a large group? When Im good enough to get a 3rd place or maybe second in these comps, I will consider writing a novel.

Without being too aware of the idea (and I don't know if I've mixed this up with anything), I think the novel idea is intended to help you flex your creative muscles and to develop the sorts of ways your literary techniques may develop themselves, and to try and have a go at writing a more extended piece without throwing in the sort of routine a more experienced novelist might use, although I'm very much aware that good novels can be written quite quickly, editing and getting different ideas out there in the mix can take longer can therefore affect how long/what, but this sentence is already overlong ownpjfgoj[.

It serves the same purpose as these competitions in a way, and while the core group of writers on Newgrounds is undeniably smaller at present than the groups of artists, programmers and musicians, there's still talent here. And I'm not just saying that because I feel "obligated to", or whatever the cynic might shrug off with, and I'm not making strangely unflattering excuses about my own writing ("oh my own writing's really good, but I've never won because a couple of people are slightly better!"). I'm reading through the entries to this competition now, and while I'm shaky with some of the principles in action, there's some good stuff in here. Genre tastes aside, this contest has had a good deal of quality submissions from you guys.

I wouldn't undermine yourself as a writer if you didn't place in the top three. I've not read your entry yet, but we'll see how it all turns out in the end. I've only ever placed as high as 4th - I like to tell myself that I can improve on that, but I've had some ideas also that would be totally inappropriate for one of these competitions going off their lengths and popular themes so far. That said, I would say try not to think of these things as a means of guiding your talent. Creative writing is so open - your abilities can be developed so frequently in different ways.

Sorry about the wait in judging. I'm still not very far at all unfortunately. Things have popped up this past week and... well, I shouldn't make excuses really. I've had a couple of issues that relate to the competition itself, getting myself confused and so on, again, not really relevant. I'll try to get more than a few entries done tomorrow and in the days after that, but I don't know. It sucks, I'm sorry.

At 11/16/09 09:24 PM, InsertFunnyUserName wrote: I've said for a while that I think these extra additions to the rules in the form of blogs and forum threads should be linked to in the rules page. Although some may seem to be common sense, they're not always thought about as such. Posting /thread is acceptable on other forums, so users coming in with other forums' experience may think that that's the case here. They may not connect it with non-constructiveness, especially if it proceeds constructive content.

Oh yeah, I definitely agree with the fact that some of them should be flagged up a bit clearer in the rules page, and I've probably said so before myself, especially regarding the sorts of things listed in Zerok's blog. Going through the thread so far, this has clearly been an issue for some people when being banned and so on. Without really having much evidence from personal experience, I'm guessing a "banned phrase" like /thread is subject to have a heftier ban tagged onto it than... erm, let's just say, another spammy phrase, but one not so popular to have warranted some words from a mod. I suppose a worry is that, with blogs, they do have a possibility of being deleted at some point, creating a dead link. Maybe the meat of it can be put elsewhere, stripped a little? It's still subjective stuff to a degree for lots of different reasons, as those of us who have spent/wasted enough time will know (different interests, time spent on BBS, overall attitudes, etc.). However, most (hopefully a majority) of us come here casually: like you say, it's nice to have a few more standards while being aware that sometimes you may find some difference... and that with a bit of time you can learn how not to end up on the bad end of this.

Yes, "bad end" indeed.

Perhaps what the rules page needs is a sort of sample box of phrases that could get you into trouble with those moderator people. Most of them fit one big reason: because it's not discussable. This thing wouldn't need to be too big, and I think right there, you've just cemented over a hole where Zerok's blog or Forum Rules, Clarified or one of the many other threads jumped out and did their own things. You might even have just a quick link after some of the more tricky rules that people have had trouble with, like a link to NEVR's blog next to the rule on backseat modding (something like what I've shoddily put together below maybe?). Problems that people have had regarding trickier things like the f-word probably need to be discussed elsewhere (probably already concluded)... or at least, the user can be aware that it can be a shaky thing that may get you banned... but that probably occurs naturally, I don't know.

***

It's hard, I'm kind of trying to be balanced so we don't get "Oh, the mods never tell us what's right and the forum sucks" vs. "Oh, the users don't have enough common sense and the forum sucks", because we've had elements of that in this thread and... well, lots of other times on the BBS. Everyone ends up in tears and you have to avoid your main meanie for a year before things die down. God forbid if there's nowhere to sit in the canteen.

At 11/16/09 08:04 PM, BabiesAteMyDingo wrote: Is it possible, for a first time warning, or for minor offences to offer something like a 2 hour suspension whereby the user would ideally have to re-read the Forum rules.

Ideally, it might be worth pursuing a coded solution whereby users can be placed on a probation period whereby if they break a rule they are then forced to re-read the rules which they broke before they can post again. Since this is beyond the mods control I won't go into here.

Like you say, these sort of ideas are interesting, but hard to implement unfortunately, for good reason. The staff aren't likely to go out and start inventing wacky new ways of changing the technical stuff behind the BBS when they have lots of projects that are frankly more important, even interesting, from most views. As far as I'm aware (and I think I'm aware - I WENT TO SCHOOL IN THE 2000S), the BBS clock always operates via EST, no matter what time zone you're using NG in, giving any sort of time option a bit of a problem. Like what's already been discussed in this thread, it's something that's unfortunate and can't really be helped at the end of the day. As ever, what I'll push is just a casual reminder of the rules for some, obviously understating things from certain points of view.

Like I say, nice ideas, but they're hard to work practically. Without being a mind-reader, I think this is something the mods have tried to tone down in this thread because... well, it's impossible, really.

If I may I just want to raise one small issue about the moderators. Why some will ban you for 1 day if you break a minor rule (let's say for example Backseat modding), but others will issue a 3 or even 5 day ban for the same offence.

Are there not rules or guidelines by which mod's moderate by?

I have seen on Sanjay's post some rules he has set out regarding moderation of the forum, but this doesn't seem to apply 'across the board' if that make sense.

Rule subjectivity is something that's haunted this thread almost since the beginning. Unfortunately, while Internet forums happen to be built on subjectivity, it's something that can't really be avoided when we start looking at the nitty-gritty. Other examples mentioned in this thread that I went through some time ago for no particular reason include Zerok's rule blog and Forum Rules, Clarified for the curious.

While I'm not a mod, the general rules that we see at the top of each board are telling each mod how to go about their business (this gets iffy in certain cases, specifically the f-word problem, see sig) and as far as I see it, the additional blogs and threads you'll see around should be, erm, kept in mind shall we say, if you want to avoid being banned from the BBS. Most of the "hidden rules" are, at the end of the day, common sense: don't just post "/thread", because that's silly anyway. More sketchy ones can indeed be learnt by experience, but it's probably healthiest in when taking care of a/an confused/angry/hungry user, to politely point them in the direction of useful resources like the sorts of things linked above and mentioned by you.

Like I say, universal majigs on the Internet are hard to pull off... but in my experience, it's more important to have this general idea than it is to have an explanation of every single rule that ever single moderator must work to every time that rules is broken.

My thoughts, though this is red red wine in an '80s style, red red wine in a modern beat style maybe.

At 11/16/09 08:28 AM, citricsquid wrote: I have a question, what's claiming JSA Like? I intend to do to the job centre tomorrow, but I've been told that they don't really give a shit about you getting a job. If possible I'd like to get a job over claiming JSA, but I really don't know what to expect. What's your experience with the job centre been like? Do they try and help you to get a job?

While I've never been on the JSA, I have had some experience with the job centre back in my home town before. It wasn't too bad, what I had to actually do. The staff there pointed me to different places and told me what I should be doing, and the material there was pretty useful, even if I did end up going through the whole year unemployed. That wasn't so much their fault, rather my fault. I had very little to offer (even more so than I have now), and I'd basically left it too late before Christmas of that year. Everywhere around had sent out ads weeks ago, and so most of the slots were already filled. That said, I'd also recommend getting around and just giving a few CVs out. The time I spent doing that might've been wasted, but it's how most people I've known in the past have gotten their jobs. A combination of the two maybe? I don't know, I can't really say for sure.

As for whether the job centre give a shit about you: I'd also say that's a bit iffy. They're, in theory, paid to give a shit and to offer you advice. The people I spoke to did their jobs fine, but like someone said, it probably varies from centre to centre if we're talking about attitudes.

Another thing is that superstores (supermarkets especially) seem to be hiring on a permanent basis... but yeah, that's a sticky subject in so many ways. Sainsbury's was one of the few places I got anywhere, even after I'd left everything else too late.

At 11/16/09 11:31 AM, citricsquid wrote: The funny thing is I felt exactly like that when I was 14. Although in part it's right and there are dicks claiming because they're lazy, there are genuinely people who need JSA to live and don't want to be on it. Oh England.

Yeah, I know what you mean. I can see myself needing to do similar things in the future, negative connotations aside. It's just that those connotations seem to win out with everyone except yourself... especially when you're young. I bet a couple of people I knew in school have needed the JSA without foreseeing it three years ago, silly, uninformed assumptions on my part aside.

Now I play the blame game regarding the causes of those connotations so I can feel intelligent :(

I don't see many new movies at the cinema for two distinct reasons: firstly, I don't usually have a good amount of money. Just about every cinema that's ever acted as my local has been pretty expensive, so while I'm very passionate about films, it's sometimes quite tricky trying to get me to see one. I've been meaning to hit up the Odeon in Southampton for some time, but I never seem to have a good moment. I look forward to checking that out anyway.

My second reason is one that some people have already hinted at: I'm not usually very interested in what mainstrewam cinema is made of today (though I realise this a horrendous sweeping statement). I've not seen either of the Transformers films. Going to see them just never crossed my mind. The last film I saw new at the cinema was Inglourious Basterds, and honestly, I thought it was great. You might call out the irony in that Tarantino places great emphasis on re-working his favourite genres and styles from past decades, but a film made today will always say something about today. Inglourious Basterds doesn't say a word about 1964-66 or so... Hell, you probably shouldn't even think about in terms of World War II.

I'm not one for CGI particularly, so I can't talk so much on the subject. As much as I'm grudgingly accepting this though, Avatar looks mighty interesting as far as that front goes.

On a different level, I find it amusing that any "problems" with the mainstream Anglo-American cinema of today is coming about as a result of the youth, at least amongst you guys. When Hollywood was probably at its lowest in the late '60s, it was arguably the differing tastes of the time's youth that saved the impact of the whole thing. I love studying that era of film - it's just strange to see this happening now, and erm, slightly depressing in different views.

I could name more than a few films from this decade that I've enjoyed though. Some of them were better than others, some even tried to bring moderate-to-left political ideas on contemporary issues to the forefront (cough, In The Valley Of Elah, it's a shame it was sloppily executed as far as imagery goes, and its general failure as a product points to another difference between now and the era I talk about above). I don't think cinema is suffering a crisis, and while the mainstream may have elements of being only used as a market, I'm one of those guys that believes film will always be an art form in some way - more so in the works of some directors more than others... but authorship isn't everything right?

I'll post again in about five minutes with something stupid I've forgotten.

You might want to look through this thread where the basics of the system are outlined, and people have been asking questions about the thing, so there are some answers in there too.

Someone else may have a better link to post, but I think them eat of the idea is in that thread.

Without any evidence to really back me up, I'd say it's not only possible for children to develop strange reaction habits as a result of "abuse", but also quite probable unfortunately, given incessant, more extreme circumstances. Look at feral children for instance. They make good extreme examples of severe problems arising as a result of not developing how we'd expect - famous cases like Genie stand out here under the "abuse" category. A more recent example would be Danielle.

What you're talking about might fit under the horrible cases of shellshock that soldiers experienced after trench fighting in World War I. This video shows some examples of World War I specifically, but similar things have happened in other conflicts to just about everyone. Remember those scenes with the boy's mother in Goodnight Mr. Tom? Yeah, something like that, only not in a fictional work.

Less extreme examples, I wouldn't know where to start, but if we take what's here, I'm sure it can be condensed down into something we people could associate with. I still jump at loud, deep shouts. It could be claimed that that's because my parents used to shout at me a lot, and that would make me scared. Observing a bit one-sidedly, they didn't shout at my brother so much, and honestly, if they did that now, he'd probably talk back in some cases. I just shudder when people shout near me. It's not the behaviour that those shellshocked soldiers faced by any means, but it's something I've developed, I think. I have a similar flinch when people touch me unexpectedly too, rare as that is, some just do it casually, and I am quite possibly a little frightened for that moment.

Lack of biological research, but fned[w.

"The most important words in the English language are not 'I love you' but 'It's benign.'" - Woody Allen, Deconstructing Harry.

I feel like that sometimes, I have to admit. I've never really been in a relationship, so I can't really speak from that point of view unless I step into a fantasy world built on prediction and what little experience I have, but I think the phrase has considerable emotional weight attatched though. Even in a more casual context, when I've said those words to people before, I've wanted it to mean something at least. I expect nothing more than an equally casual response, but with the right moment, I've been made happy because of that phrase. I hope it makes me happy again, but maybe I'm being a weeny bit too optimstic there. At the very least, I hope I've not lost all ability to feel something when those words start getting thrown around.

Us language speaking humans, such silly people.

I don't animate (at least not on Earth, I've got this routine gig helping with the torture of animation greats down in Hell where I get some time to shine), but I'm going to guess that you include creative writing in "creative stuff".

Honestly, the motivations that get me through a piece of work vary depending on how I feel at times. At worst, I'd quite possibly be motivated because I have to have something produced, for work or to meet a deadline of something I want to get in to. That really stifles some parts of me in a way, but it does get something down, even if that something is off the top of my head, unedited and just cliche, uncreative, rigid, etc., you get it.

Just saying "passion" probably doesn't explain it properly. I love literature, and while I may hate what I come up with at times, I think I'm putting an idea into movements already underway (even with animation, I'd advise you to look around, see what thoughts and ideas other people have come up with: it's like inspiration, only from a more critical perspective, if that makes sense). One thing that gets me going is looking around online and finding something that makes me say, in my mind, "No, I don't agree with that.", and nothing stops me from making a creative response to that. So in conclusion, conflict is a great source of inspiration as a general field.

I'll admit to another motivation of mine too: the need to feed my own ego. I won't lie, I absolutely love it when someone looks at me with a smile on their face, their eyes half-closed and says, "Wow, that's quite good actually." And I return the favour (obviously we'd actually review each other's stuff usefully, but it's important to start with a positive, if just simply for the ego's sake). With animation, this obviulsy comes about in the reviews from anonymous Internet users.

That's me extremely briefly anyway; it's not really worth going any further. I think this can be appropriate for animation too, so hopefully this helps, and good luck!

My university provides every student living on-campus with a Bible, both testaments. It's part of your inventory, so selling it or whatever you feel is appropriate for the book is a no-no if you plan on getting your deposit back at the end of the year. The institution has a Christian foundation, and there's actually an old chapel on campus that really stands out as the symbol for this.

I definitely wouldn't call this prejudice though, not even in your case, provided you were being at least half-serious in some way. I'm pretty sure the library here has copies of other scriptures (and other religiously based material that strictly aren't examples of scriptures), and like people have said, you should check yours if the presence of a Bible bothers you that much. The lack of a Satanic Bible, like what's also been said, is hardly surprising if you look at the numbers in organised religion and the functions they can fulfill.

Besides, libraries have so much information within them. There's no way you could be forced to use the religiously-based material in your own time, unless of course, the school is doing that. That's the sort of thing I have qualms about, but it's there if anyone wants to use it in the meantime. I mean, I've used my bible a few times since I moved here for different reasons, but it's not the book I grab off the shelf every day. For the past two days, that's been Fight Club's honour.

Those are some interesting ideas, to say the least. I can't really add anything to those off the top of my head, but the concept of Facebook/widget styled apps for the userpages is a really cool one I think, especially because it's so open-ended, like most of the things NG is founded upon in relation to creativity. You could leave a tab or window open that shows your userpage, and from there you could possibly play around with some things, like... an audio portal radio for example. Like other Internet based random radio stations, you could choose which genres you'd like on your playlist, and you'd get randomly selected submissions from that playing, allowing you to favourite or skip any of them that come up quickly. Maybe you could have little features like that built into the chat too. On the subject of the chat, I get the impression that the real-life chat will have different rooms, which seems like a nifty little idea, working in a similar nature to the current forums and such. I think the Bytesize styled Flash would be very much home in the app format too, if that were to ever come back into the mix.

I've taken hypothetical to mean basic here, but now I'm thinking how awesome it would be to have every pre-production tool you'd need, in-browser, on Newgrounds. Example, someone could write a script and stick it in some sort of "script portal", where artists can look and make contacts; voice-actors are cast similarly. Whether things like that will ever pan out that way in reality (mostly in regards to scripts), it's uncertain, but it would be a great way to challenge yourself and hopefully gain something at the end I think!

At 11/9/09 01:15 PM, Sheizenhammer wrote: A 'mature' forum.

This is another idea I think would work quite well in an ideal world, and that concept of using a scouting system similar to the art portal is actually quite a refreshing one. I've certainly never seen it before. That would make a considerable amount of users happy I think, though there would be some rifts amongst some. At least it would be backed by Newgrounds though: most of the user-created forums made to cater to that crowd tend to die off after the initial buzz (or get mindlessly criticised for "being a forum about a forum", which is silly, because it's hardly being used to discussed the BBS), though some have survived a few years.

As long as the British definition of "mature" is used, if we're going by ages. Otherwise I'll be locked out of a exclusive community! It would be like every episode of Frasier where they don't get invited to the opening of a trendy restaurant/wine bar, only I make more of an arse out of myself trying to get in, making several alts and using those to stir up good words about myself on General before getting caught by some older user.

At 11/8/09 11:38 AM, MattTheParanoidKat wrote: FYI: Please for the love of all that is holy, do not I repeat DO NOT give my story a grade, do not give it a rating between 0-10 or 1-10. It's obscene when reviewers do this, and there is no rational behind this other than if it's a big number it's good, if it's a small number it's bad, if it's neither it's okay. It's also gratuitously obscene when you give ratings with a decimals. It's sickening. Look, when you do that you're not rating the numbers out of ten, in reality you're rating them on a possible 100.

This is partially why I've tried to lower the significance of the number scores in my reviews when I've judged in the past. I do give numbers, and the numbers are pretty indicative of how I felt about the story, but I feel their primary responsibility is to help me in sorting out which entries I put into my top bunch to put up for prize consideration. I wouldn't like just giving a number at all, and as slim as some of my reviews may seem at times, I like to think it's one of those situations where everybody wins in some way.

At 11/8/09 11:55 AM, WritersBlock wrote: I quickly got sick of centering and capitalising the name, then hitting enter then tabbing three times then writing the line then hitting enter twice then centering and capitalising the name then hitting enter again then three tabs again and yadda yadda yadda (pic below).

This is mostly what got me into Celtx, that, and learning about some more of the technicalities of script-writing that I'm still unfamiliar with. Celtx's greatest feature in the writing section is its quick key scheme. If you're writing a scene heading, pressing enter will take you to writing some action. Pressing tab now lets you insert a character name, pressing enter then gives dialogue space, and so on. It's all displayed at the bottom of the screen quite helpfully.

As for whatever bells and whistles that come withi it, I probably wouldn't bother at all. I tried using yWriter quite recently, for the novel I've started writing for NaNoWriMo, but I've found the notepad to be much more convenient for planning and drafts. Simply put, just writing a standard story, something like Microsoft Word or Open Office Writer cover everything I need, and, like I said before, I can set it out exactly as I want it, without anything being hideously in the way.

Yeah, I haven't looked much further than the writing sections on Celtx. Why should I, being honest? I have no need for them. I use notepad/Word for most of my plans and drafts too, as like you say, I've grown accustomed to how they work over several years and I can easily play around with them. As far as Celtx goes, some of its "Master Catalog" elements may or may not be of any use to you. Once you create a character, you're given a screen that's almost set up as a screen you get when you register for website membership, allowing you to put some detail about the character in. Like I say, you might not find that useful - I've not really used it enough yet myself, being honest. I want to meet the challenge of coming up with some script ideas that could possibly be used for Flash. We'll see then, I hope!

And I bet Celtx won't pay up now because of that penultimate remark of mine :(

At 11/8/09 11:22 AM, WritersBlock wrote: I don't really know much about politics and history, so I'd most certainly have a different reading of the story than yourself, however, I always find it interesting to see the various subjective interpretations of a single text, however I feel like you've objectified your ideas on the text really well and provided readers like myself with a lot more to think about when my day comes to read Animal Farm (and to some extent, Nineteen-Eighty Four, too).

Oh yeah, I love discussing subjective interpretations of reading. Despite what I've been saying in this thread, Animal Farm actually does has a couple of characters and events in particular that are more ambiguous, and so are interesting to discuss, without me revealing more to you at this stage. Even some of the political context can be played with a little bit, and like I said, it is quite adaptable as a message, however "outdated" it may seem.

However, I should hope that my ability to analyse texts like this will improve in the future, as I'll be spending the next two years going through Literary and Cultural Studies at university. After one semester, I've found the benefits to be very rewarding, and it's certainly given me a keener eye for classic literature, modern classics, or even the postmodern literary fiction of today.

Definitely. The exact same things have happened to me. I'm partway through my first semester at university. The different ways of analysing texts, while taking their toll on me as theoretical principles at times, are interesting, and it makes you think more about your own writing, like we're both interested in. Like you say, it's all a great motivation to go out and read and watch a variety of different things from different eras and cultures.

I certainly look forward to the day where we can openly discuss this sort of thing in a writing/literature forum, as per the quite recent news announcement.

Again, I know exactly what you mean. Honestly, I do get quite excited about it! I want to challenge myself a bit with it too, and I think discussion's great for that. Example, I was reading about Russian Formalism and I was thinking a bit cautiously about it, downright negatively almost. After speaking to someone, I began to realise that the concept of the "genreless" has a great dollop of Russian Formalism right in the middle of it. Then you appreciate the theories on a different level, not just the creative works!

I know, I need to lie down for a minute or two ;)

Shit, sorry about the delays in my judging. I've been fairly busy with assignments and everything, but that can't account for everything, so apoligies to all. As always, I'm going to try and give some feedback to everyone with my scores once the winners are announced, so that's something to look forward to. I'd hate having to cut my feedback down as a result of time, but it's not fair to keep everyone waiting as a result of laziness. I'll get down to some now.

I planned out a story for this contest that I might very well develop in the future, with some compulsory elements toned down a little. That's something I've directly gotten out of this contest, it's all good. As ever, reading to write here, so I'll get myself stuck in now.

Just as a final note, I'm also looking forward to the collaborative contests featuring writing segments, very much so. These contests are great tools for everyone here, at least I like to think as much.

I've posted this link before I think, but I'll flag it up now for anyone interested: Celtx. It's a free software that works for different methods of pre-production (writing, storyborards, etc.). It's assisted me with script formatting quite greatly actually. While formatting's probably not the most important thing on Earth at this sort of stage, it might help you flex your muscles in regards to script writing. It might take a while to get the hang of, but I've been using it for random drafts for a couple of weeks, and you might find yourself slipping into it quite easily. I'm still starting out though! I believe it's quite easy to share with others using Celtx too.

(Hope the example comes out okay - I literally wrote this off the top of my head!).

What was I doing? Oh yeah, entry reading.

At 11/7/09 08:02 PM, knightsofthecircle wrote: The way I see it, Animal Farm's main point was this: No one person or persons should have the sole power of a government, whether it be a Monarchist, Communist or Dictatorshipist sense. In a way, I think Orwell had the same viewpoint as the Founding Fathers did during the American Revolution. That all power(s) dealing with local, state and federal government should be dealt with the general public.

That's an interesting point of view, and it obviously fits in with what Orwell saw as a socialist and as a British writer in WW2. Who the corruption and autocracy correlates with (like I say, I'm maintaining the view for now that Animal Farm is a satire whose message isn't easily applicable across such a varied field of socio-political theory) I'm not always sure, with reference to what people have read as the Tehran conference scene at the end. Obviously there's Napoleon, but I think naming the other humans as either Nazis or Churchill/Roosevelt, is a tricky one... a consideration that questions the view I've backed! From what I know, Orwell was a critical theorist at heart, so it could've really been all of the above, with the "WW2 sequence" (where the farmers try to invade Animal Farm) aside for now.

Also, I think he also meant that if people feel oppresed long enough in a government, they will rebel against their leaders once the time is right. That's what happened to the British government, that's what happen to the U.S.S.R and that's what's going to happen to North Korea.

Yeah, that's a good point too, and that falls in line with some forms of critical theory, primarily the more traditional forms of Marxism. It's a message he probably would've actively injected from the very beginning. It's interesting you bring up North Korea, because as a country using an offshoot of Stalinism as its principle political ideology. In particular, this brief article sounds far too eerily familiar to moments in Animal Farm. As interested as I am in North Korea, I'm not entirely sure whether a reversal on the specifics will take place in the near future, but maybe I've not seen all the facts?

At 11/7/09 08:07 PM, RydiaLockheart wrote: Wow dude, where have you been?

While the themes of the story are pretty straightforward, my main reason for making this thread was a discussion about possible left-based responses to the situations we have today and receiving that line in response. I'm interested in seeing whether others believe that to be relevant... or a silly way of steering the discussion.

However, if you're speaking to me directly, I've not used the politics forum extensively in some time, though I should get into it again. I enjoy it ;)

Wait, who am I again? Ah, well...

At 11/7/09 08:10 PM, ripoffhitman wrote: I read it a year ago, thought it was ok. It's just explaining that even though people hated the government they had, they simply gave all their power to certain people to make a new one, which gave them the same exact problems they had before. Instead of a shitty monarchy, they had a shitty communist government.

This intrigues me. I believe Orwell specifically has the undertones of Animal Farm taken into the foreground (for the reader) once Napoleon takes power for himself. While the rest of the animals certainly fought to defend the farm under Snowball's command (Russian civil war), I'm not sure they give Napoleon the power to makes his own style of rule. With the dogs, terror is brought in forcefully. I think it's purposefully detatched from the concept of "power-from-below", or whatever the actual correct term is, once again given Orwell's disillusioned stance.

I also believe that Animal Farm, falling in line with the specific correlations again, doesn't do so "shitty" as far as output is concerned, using the windmill (cities like Gorky at the time?) and the absurd amount of economic strength built up by the first five-year plans under Stalin. But yeah, obviously quite shitty on the humanist side of things where Orwell lived.

***

Most of this post is probably very obvious to anyone who's read the book (and yes, I'm aware I'm a moron), but again, the reason why I bring it up is because more than a few people have tried to peel it off from its stickiness in history and apply it elsewhere. Then you open the book and well, for me, the words are all in the wrong place and the characters are different, non-sensical. It's not how I read everything, but Animal Farm is a classic example of a book I think it's neccessary to have this context majig about.

At 11/7/09 07:29 PM, Mikay wrote: Snowball didnt deserve the way they treated him.

It's funny that you should say that, because given Orwell's own shaping as a moderate socialist (from what I gather), it's probably something he wanted us to at least be wary about, never mind feel sorry for as the story progresses. Snowball has quite often been displayed somewhat as a mean-spirited character in versions I've glimpsed at, but with that aside, it's always been maintained that he's more intellectually constructive, if less bureaucratically able and charismatic than Napoleon. Can you imagine Animal Farm with portraits of Snowball dotted around the place? Maybe you can, I don't know, but it's a thought that should be pushed a little more, at least from my biased point of view. This backs up my point really. It might be altogether inaccurate to simply place Trotsky and Stalin in place of Snowball and Napoleon respectively within the story, but the obvious references are there, and Orwell's doing that for a reason, from his own ideological position.

Again, I've seen many discussions around on the principles of socialism that just end in that Animal Farm quote. Putting this sort of thinking in to mind, I just don't think it's all that relevant to say the least. The rest is all above.

In typing out this thread, I considered whether or not it belonged in the Politics forum. I decided against posting there, as most of the material covered there is either of a contemporary (often American) nature, or discussing abstract ideas in practice. This is supposed to be a brief discussion on a piece of fictional literature, and although this particular story, as I'm about to argue, is specifically and politically tied, it's just not Politics material. Sorry guys, but I think it's a popular enough story to have some thought here. Background stuff on the story can be found on the net if it's at all important to you.

I first read Animal Farm, a couple of weeks ago, after it had been sitting on my "must-read list" for some time. My main motivations for reading it included the usual lust for just getting to grips with various examples of modern classic literature, but I had some other reasons to read this story too - in particular, my own socio-political interests of the past few years, and because of my Mum. My Mum loves the phrase "all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others". Back at home, we've had some political discussions before over dinner. My Dad's brought up his sort of thinking at my age before, and I've brought up my own, and I personally don't think the sort of things I think of in terms of progression could be termed as "communist", though I think that's the same for a vast amount of kidders, haha.

My point? Is Animal Farm a one-size-fits-all criticism of socialist idealism, never mind what we tend to refer to as communism? I personally don't think that's the case at all, and while I'm following the conclusions of a fair amount of readers of the story, it seems that this is the way many people have read the story. I have two reasons for this: Animal Farm's allegories are specific, its characters and events corresponding to moments in Russian history, from the civil war, to the conflict between Trotsky and Stalin in the '20s, from the show trails, to World War II and the Tehran conference at the very end. My second reason is what Orwell himself wanted to point out with the story, as far as I've been able to drag out from a bit of reading on the outside: to make it clear to British (and other western) intellectuals that totalitarianism isn't acceptable, even when it is done "in the name of socialism". Simply put, he was a disilluisioned guy, disillusioned with different parts of the idea: this story attacked more than a few of those points. It's quite a simple point today in some way, where we have easy access to different piece of historical evidence, but given WW2, people were anxious to admit to this... or maybe they were too idealistic, to the extent they were hurting themselves?

And Animal Farm, with all its rich English iconography slotted in for the sake of its allegory and convenience to the western reader, could probably be an adequate interpretation of the offsprings of Stalinism still known to us today, including Maoism (however much this has been derailed within China since 1976, or much earlier for that matter) and juche. On this level, it doesn't work as an overall criticism of moderate-to-extreme leftist ideals though, despite how its been used over the years. What Animal Farm might do is discuss what sort of issues a nation might face when working off a near-immediate transition, like the Bolsheviks were doing in 1917. Is that relevant as a way of looking forward and seeing how moderate change could be implemented? Historical study is important, but it also can't accont for everything as a result of differing contexts. Bringing Trotsky back into the frame briefly, I was talking to an online associate once about this sort of thing, and he joked that if you were to have lunch with Trotsky tomorrow, and you told him "Oh sir, I use your work to form my thoughts in the United Kingdom in the year 2009" (he understands English in this fantasy), he'd most likely laugh in your face. His works addressed Russia in the first half of the twentieth century... just like Animal Farm.

Put briefly anyway, as a way of getting this little thing off my chest. I also just watched the animated Animal Farm, and just like 443548 critics before me, I give the different ending away to a special someone's death during production. Not sure about that entirely, but I'd say it was some motivation at least.

TL:DR? Erm, George Orwell's Animal Farm is an allegory for the Russian Revolution and the development of Stalinism. Is it useful to use it as a way of explaining other lieftist theories, even the most moderate?

Personally, I've found living in halls to be much more pleasant than I imagined before coming here. My housemates are all cool, we all do our fair share of housework, and not everyone hates each other yet, which in one of my darker moods would be way more than I would've expected. I do see some similarities between our experiences in that a few of us struggle to sleep on account of others being loud. It usually comes down to drunkenness, or our Chinese resident speaking on the phone, but I've never heard him being too loud (although, I do live on the opposite side to him, which might explain that). Unfortunately, I've kept people awake numerous times, but I'm working on keeping qiet. I'd hate to be that resident.

I'm living in what's designated the "quiet zone" though, and it really is quiet most of the time. The central area of this student village gets noisier in the evenings, and I've heard a couple of examples of sleeplessness and drama about from other people. This is a small university though, I don't think it's that bad.

If it sucks that bad though, try to nudge your housemates a little, or something. It worked for me... as in me keeping everyone awake. I don't know.

At 11/7/09 11:00 AM, cast wrote: This has been another look inside Scarabs mind.

Haha, some day we'll have a BBS populated entirely by stream-of-consciousness topics about boredom, written by people who are bored or pretending to be bored. Differentiating between those two topics of user will become a key dicussion in this alternative world, this paradise.

It's the Scarabian vision!

8/10

Thanlks. I'll have to do better in order to beat Aylesford next week though.

At 11/7/09 11:01 AM, Lost-Chances wrote: I was meant to be writing about 1,500 words a day for a novel. I haven't been doing it for the past two or three days.

You'll know it already, but if you want the exercise to benefit you in its best ways, you should try to do it calmly, maybe try to be a little bit spontaneous with the schedule, but obviously not letting things pile up is a bigger motivation at this point. Keeping a rhythm going in writing for that particular project is something that scared me off, admittedly. I'm not good for rhythm at the moment, and it's something I need to pick up on if I want ot take writing further. Good luck as always however.

Procrastination is a word we tend to throw around quite a lot, and I know what you're thinking: it's one of those processes that's about as exciting to discuss as it is to actually procrastinate actively. Still, with winter starting to set in and assignment deadlines rearing their ugly heads through my open door, peering in at this messy room that desperately needs a clean in light of inspections this next week, it's all nagging at me today.

Seriously, I've got stories and articles to read (some of which are on Newgrounds!), essays to write (or, erm, plan) floors to hoover, a sink to clean and all that jazz. I've only been doing this quasi-independent living thing for about two months, so strangely enough, I don't particularly dislike doing all of these things yet. Hell, I love reading around my studies and getting work done, or at least I assure myself of that in the more frustrating cases (ugh, semiotics). It's just that I have no particular motivation to do so, thinking "oh, my washing's drying off, I need to collect it in half an hour, might as well not bother getting started yet". The more sensible side of my brain yells, "WHAT A SHITTY EXCUSE YOU LAZY BASTARD."

So yeah, if I feel like getting sensitive with a bit of imagery, and I do, I remember a week or two ago, the tree outside my window had a good deal of healthily coloured leaves decorating it. Now it's moving on. Time goes soooo fast, alalalalala.

So how often do you find yourself doing this, and how does it make you feel? I think procrastination is something that some people have a real flair for; it need no neccessarily be a grinding process that reminds you how silly you're being, especially if the alternatives are extremely comforting or extremely discomforting. If you're just putting things off today, what are you putting off, and why do you think you're doing that?

Honestly, I'm interested, but if you can guess another purpose of this thread, you get nothing. I think it's obvious on that front :)