Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Installment #12 of... well, you don't care so why bother

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
April 13, 2004 5:45:38 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

In case anywhere out there is still tangentially interested...

------------

The air started blur as if it was hot and ripples formed on its
surface. It pretty much resembled the lake you just threw a stone in,
but water doesn't tend to sit vertically in midair and hardly ever had
such a ghostly glow to it either. Elias hesitated a moment, but then
took a deep breath and stepped though the portal. It felt as
unpleasant as ever with the added sensation of wet feet. Quite odd.
Normally he'd rather have taken the coach, and if the leaders of the
order knew he'd probably have a lot to explain, but who cared. There
were things you just had to do and this was one of them. He turned
around, just in time to see this side of the portal fade and
eventually vanish; for a long time he stared at the spot it had been
in, before realizing why his feet felt so strangely wet. Maybe, but
just maybe he should have been a bit more careful about the portal
coordinates; it wasn't like he was in the wrong place, but there were
times when a few metres did make a difference. Well, it could probably
have been worse. Slowly he waded to the river bank. He just hated the
portals.

Laiva finally decided that she wasn't getting any sleep this night,
whatever she did. There was but one thing to do; admittedly the
probably most stupid one, but that was something she'd have to live
with. Hopefully. Laiva got up and prepared to pay the village another
visit.

With dried boots and a snow white cloak Elias sneaked towards the
village. He perfectly melted with the snow on the ground and even the
most observative watcher would have had problems seeing him. Then,
suddenly he heart a low, muted sound. He absolutely didn't like it,
not at all.

There was a second. A third. And another one. And another one. On and
on it went. Laiva didn't know what it was, but it made made her
shiver. It almost was as if the hill lands were calling for her. A
call she rather felt than heard, a call and a warning in one.

Without making a loud Elias slid past house. Slowly, step by step he
approached the edge of the building, closer he went and even closer
until hardly a arms length separated him from the crowd and, finally,
he could see the village square. Damn, why did things always have to
get more complicated than they even were?

At the same time Laiva was approaching the other end of the village.
She carefully avoided any noise, although nobody would have heard
anything anyway as the beating sound was still filling the air. It had
grown louder and louder the closer she came to the village and Laiva
eventually recognized it as the sound of heavy drums. She hadn't been
able to tell at first because of the muting and the echos, but now it
was obvious. However, this knowledge didn't comfort her at all. If the
villagers made such a noise it couldn't be a good sign. Laiva laid
down and started crouching upwards th small hump in front of her; the
village had to be right behind it. When she finally reached the top of
the hump she was in for a surprise; you'd have expected the villagers
to hide in their houses now more than ever, but obviously some kind of
celebration or ceremony was going on. There didn't even seem to be any
guards; how could they be so careless? Or didn't they have to care,
because they were the ones to be careful about, like werewolves or
vampires? That'd surely explain a lot. Perhaps she should leave now
and let the villagers be whatever they were.

------------

Nope, no more death threats. I've given up hope.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
April 14, 2004 1:18:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 13:45:38 +0000, emmel wrote:

> In case anywhere out there is still tangentially interested...

What's this, is it that thing with the wolf whose name began with M?

--
Alex Watson
http://www.zen24203.zen.co.uk/
Emails to alexwatson at froup dot com, not deadspam.
Anonymous
April 14, 2004 10:47:02 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

And when it was 2004-04-13, illusion
<pan.2004.04.13.20.18.29.941902@deadspam.com> was created,
stating that Alex Watson <alexwatson@deadspam.com>
uttered in alt.games.creatures:
> On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 13:45:38 +0000, emmel wrote:
>
>> In case anywhere out there is still tangentially interested...
>
> What's this, is it that thing with the wolf whose name began with M?

Yes...
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Related resources
Anonymous
April 14, 2004 4:49:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnc7nrfv.jd.the_emmel*whatever*@storm.mlnet...
> In case anywhere out there is still tangentially interested...
>
> ------------

*bends to reading and correcting*

> The air started blur as if it was hot and ripples formed on its
> surface.

'blurring', and air doesn't have a surface. Though you might want 'The air
started blurring as if it were hot and ripples forming on its surface.', but
that's ambiguous... 'The air started blurring as if it were hot, {the view
through it} rippling{ like the surface of a pond{ after a pebble has been
thrown in}}.'. How's that? (The {} bits can be taken out or left in as
desired.}

> It pretty much resembled the lake you just threw a stone in,
> but water doesn't tend to sit vertically in midair and hardly ever had
> such a ghostly glow to it either.

....Skah. Didn't read ahead before suggesting the metaphor... How about
'The resemblance was uncanny, except for the fact that water doesn't tend to
rest [etc.]'?

> Elias hesitated a moment, but then
> took a deep breath and stepped though the portal. It felt as
> unpleasant as ever with the added sensation of wet feet. Quite odd.

Hmmm. *mind percolates* Elias... Wasn't that the name of the teacher?

> Normally he'd rather have taken the coach, and if the leaders of the
> order knew he'd probably have a lot to explain, but who cared.

Good... 'who cared' could be replaced with something else, though. *nods*
'but [word] to them', for example, or 'he didn't care about them' or
something else... Hrmm.

> There
> were things you just had to do and this was one of them. He turned
> around, just in time to see this side of the portal fade and
> eventually vanish; for a long time he stared at the spot it had been
> in, before realizing why his feet felt so strangely wet.

*suggest removing the word 'in', there, after 'been'*

> Maybe, but
> just maybe he should have been a bit more careful about the portal
> coordinates; it wasn't like he was in the wrong place, but there were
> times when a few metres did make a difference. Well, it could probably
> have been worse. Slowly he waded to the river bank. He just hated the
> portals.

*laughs*

'it wasn't as if he was in', 'He hated {using} portals.'. *considers, then
nods;* Probably remove the {using} in the suggestion. *nods again,
continues reading interestedly*

> Laiva finally decided that she wasn't getting any sleep this night,
> whatever she did. There was but one thing to do; admittedly the
> probably most stupid one, but that was something she'd have to live
> with. Hopefully. Laiva got up and prepared to pay the village another
> visit.

*nods; continues reading interestedly*

> With dried boots and a snow white cloak Elias sneaked towards the
> village. He perfectly melted with the snow on the ground and even the
> most observative watcher would have had problems seeing him. Then,
> suddenly he heart a low, muted sound. He absolutely didn't like it,
> not at all.

Hmm. 'toward', not 'towards', I think... 'melded' would be better than
'melted', though 'His visage perfectly melded' would be even better. And
'seeing him'--'making him out'. And remove the 'absolutely'.

*can guess what will happen... is still enjoying it*

> There was a second. A third. And another one. And another one.

'A third. And another one. And yet another one.'

> On and
> on it went. Laiva didn't know what it was, but it made made her
> shiver. It almost was as if the hill lands were calling for her. A
> call she rather felt than heard, a call and a warning in one.

'for' or 'to'? 'both call and warning in one' (though optional). Oh, and
'but it made her shiver'.

> Without making a loud Elias slid past house.

*winces. Just... winces*

'noise' or 'sound', not 'loud'... and 'past a house'.

> Slowly, step by step he
> approached the edge of the building, closer he went and even closer
> until hardly a arms length separated him from the crowd and, finally,
> he could see the village square. Damn, why did things always have to
> get more complicated than they even were?

'closer he came', 'hardly an arm's length', 'than they already were'.

> At the same time Laiva was approaching the other end of the village.
> She carefully avoided any noise, although nobody would have heard
> anything anyway as the beating sound was still filling the air.

Possible alteration: 'as the beating sound still filled the air'.

> It had
> grown louder and louder the closer she came to the village and Laiva
> eventually recognized it as the sound of heavy drums. She hadn't been
> able to tell at first because of the muting and the echos, but now it
> was obvious. However, this knowledge didn't comfort her at all.

Possible alteration: 'this knowledge didn't comfort her in the least'.

> If the
> villagers made such a noise it couldn't be a good sign.

Hmm. 'villagers were making such a noise'?

> Laiva laid
> down and started crouching upwards th small hump in front of her; the
> village had to be right behind it.

'Laiva lay down and started crawling up the small hump', or 'Laiva crouched
down and started crawling up', or 'crouched down and started moving up'.

> When she finally reached the top of
> the hump she was in for a surprise; you'd have expected the villagers
> to hide in their houses now more than ever, but obviously some kind of
> celebration or ceremony was going on.

Hmm. Suggestion: In either the first occurance or the second, replace
'hump' with 'mound'. Not both.

> There didn't even seem to be any
> guards; how could they be so careless? Or didn't they have to care,
> because they were the ones to be careful about, like werewolves or
> vampires? That'd surely explain a lot. Perhaps she should leave now
> and let the villagers be whatever they were.

*nods, satisfied*

> ------------
>
> Nope, no more death threats. I've given up hope.

*laughs* HOOWAH BUBHOSH STORY-THINGAMAJIG!

Elias... Will have to learn more about him. *much curiosity*

....And, er, it may just be my imagination... but isn't this a
little...short...for an installment?

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
April 14, 2004 7:29:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

And when it was 2004-04-14, illusion
<c5j8gg$8pc$1$830fa79f@news.demon.co.uk> was created,
stating that Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web>
uttered in alt.games.creatures:
>> The air started blur as if it was hot and ripples formed on its
>> surface.
>
> 'blurring', and air doesn't have a surface. Though you might want 'The air
> started blurring as if it were hot and ripples forming on its surface.', but
> that's ambiguous... 'The air started blurring as if it were hot, {the view
> through it} rippling{ like the surface of a pond{ after a pebble has been
> thrown in}}.'. How's that? (The {} bits can be taken out or left in as
> desired.}

s/ formed on its surface.//

(sed syntax - documentation available with every good operating system;
and windows is *no* good os)

>> It pretty much resembled the lake you just threw a stone in,
>> but water doesn't tend to sit vertically in midair and hardly ever had
>> such a ghostly glow to it either.
>
> ...Skah. Didn't read ahead before suggesting the metaphor... How about
> 'The resemblance was uncanny, except for the fact that water doesn't tend to
> rest [etc.]'?

Nothing to be done here, IHMO.

>> Elias hesitated a moment, but then
>> took a deep breath and stepped though the portal. It felt as
>> unpleasant as ever with the added sensation of wet feet. Quite odd.
>
> Hmmm. *mind percolates* Elias... Wasn't that the name of the teacher?

Seems I tricked you. That's the first time I use the name.

>> Normally he'd rather have taken the coach, and if the leaders of the
>> order knew he'd probably have a lot to explain, but who cared.
>
> Good... 'who cared' could be replaced with something else, though. *nods*
> 'but [word] to them', for example, or 'he didn't care about them' or
> something else... Hrmm.

No, that's change the meaning.

>> There
>> were things you just had to do and this was one of them. He turned
>> around, just in time to see this side of the portal fade and
>> eventually vanish; for a long time he stared at the spot it had been
>> in, before realizing why his feet felt so strangely wet.
>
> *suggest removing the word 'in', there, after 'been'*

s/it had been in/it had been/

>> Maybe, but
>> just maybe he should have been a bit more careful about the portal
>> coordinates; it wasn't like he was in the wrong place, but there were
>> times when a few metres did make a difference. Well, it could probably
>> have been worse. Slowly he waded to the river bank. He just hated the
>> portals.
>
> *laughs*
>
> 'it wasn't as if he was in', 'He hated {using} portals.'. *considers, then
> nods;* Probably remove the {using} in the suggestion. *nods again,
> continues reading interestedly*

'the portals' - it's more specific than just your every day portal and
refering to the order's portalling system

About the 'just'... I dunno what's wrong with that.

>> With dried boots and a snow white cloak Elias sneaked towards the
>> village. He perfectly melted with the snow on the ground and even the
>> most observative watcher would have had problems seeing him. Then,
>> suddenly he heart a low, muted sound. He absolutely didn't like it,
>> not at all.
>
> Hmm. 'toward', not 'towards', I think... 'melded' would be better than
> 'melted', though 'His visage perfectly melded' would be even better. And
> 'seeing him'--'making him out'. And remove the 'absolutely'.

s/He perfactly melted/The cloak blended in/

> *can guess what will happen... is still enjoying it*
>
>> There was a second. A third. And another one. And another one.
>
> 'A third. And another one. And yet another one.'

Um, no? I don't see why I should jump from one to three here. The yet
sound goo, though.

>> On and
>> on it went. Laiva didn't know what it was, but it made made her
>> shiver. It almost was as if the hill lands were calling for her. A
>> call she rather felt than heard, a call and a warning in one.
>
> 'for' or 'to'? 'both call and warning in one' (though optional). Oh, and
> 'but it made her shiver'.

s/made made/made/
s/, call and/, both a call and/
'for'.

>> Without making a loud Elias slid past house.
>
> *winces. Just... winces*

Yikes!

> 'noise' or 'sound', not 'loud'... and 'past a house'.

Without making a sound Elias slid into the shadow of a house.

>> Slowly, step by step he
>> approached the edge of the building, closer he went and even closer
>> until hardly a arms length separated him from the crowd and, finally,
>> he could see the village square. Damn, why did things always have to
>> get more complicated than they even were?
>
> 'closer he came', 'hardly an arm's length', 'than they already were'.

s/closer he went/closer he came/
s/a arms length/an arm's length/
'already' isn't quite right either. It be should something like 'more
complicated than he had already feared'. In fact, I thibk that's it.

>> At the same time Laiva was approaching the other end of the village.
>> She carefully avoided any noise, although nobody would have heard
>> anything anyway as the beating sound was still filling the air.
>
> Possible alteration: 'as the beating sound still filled the air'.

s/was still filling the air/still filled the air/

>> It had
>> grown louder and louder the closer she came to the village and Laiva
>> eventually recognized it as the sound of heavy drums. She hadn't been
>> able to tell at first because of the muting and the echos, but now it
>> was obvious. However, this knowledge didn't comfort her at all.
>
> Possible alteration: 'this knowledge didn't comfort her in the least'.

No, I think I'll leave it.

>> If the
>> villagers made such a noise it couldn't be a good sign.
>
> Hmm. 'villagers were making such a noise'?

s/villagers made such a noise/villagers were making such a noise/

>> Laiva laid
>> down and started crouching upwards th small hump in front of her; the
>> village had to be right behind it.
>
> 'Laiva lay down and started crawling up the small hump', or 'Laiva crouched
> down and started crawling up', or 'crouched down and started moving up'.

Yes, yes, you're so right...
s/laid down and started crouching upwards th/crouched down and started
crawling up the/

>> When she finally reached the top of
>> the hump she was in for a surprise; you'd have expected the villagers
>> to hide in their houses now more than ever, but obviously some kind of
>> celebration or ceremony was going on.
>
> Hmm. Suggestion: In either the first occurance or the second, replace
> 'hump' with 'mound'. Not both.

s/hump/mound/
whereever...

>> There didn't even seem to be any
>> guards; how could they be so careless? Or didn't they have to care,
>> because they were the ones to be careful about, like werewolves or
>> vampires? That'd surely explain a lot. Perhaps she should leave now
>> and let the villagers be whatever they were.
>
> *nods, satisfied*

Yep, that's the part you already knew.

>> Nope, no more death threats. I've given up hope.
>
> *laughs* HOOWAH BUBHOSH STORY-THINGAMAJIG!

It's not funny. I'm pretty much giving up. It probably wouldn't make
much of a change if we used mail instead of the usenet. Let's face it:
AGC is dead. It one of us went on vacation now (well, actually I *am* on
vacation until the 19th, but that's another thing) we could as well
trash the whole place.

> Elias... Will have to learn more about him. *much curiosity*

Curiosity is good. And justified...

> ...And, er, it may just be my imagination... but isn't this a
> little...short...for an installment?

It is, but the text I already had ready for posting doesn't really work
after the enourmous alteration I had to make to the last one and it
wasn't that good anyway. In any case you are still pointing out 15 to 20
points in this little piece (which makes me damn uncomfortable; really,
I feel stupid).
Well, fact is I have to rewrite a lot of the stuff and if you still
remember me talking about hypothermia sometime last year... you haven't
yet read that part, have you? I'm hopefully getting to it in the next
installment, though. It's a shame - I finally got around to automatizing
the reformatting of the whole stuff (postscript, or pdf with a single
command) and I'm not too sure I'll ever really have need of it. Things
are pretty slow anyway; you know how long we needed to discuss the last
bit out and it's almost ages since I started writing the whole thing.
Things have happened in the meantime; about everything has changes in RL
and AGC isn't even any more a shadow of what it once was. As I said
before wiriting emails wouln't make any difference. I pretty much doubt
if there are even any more lurkers. All that's left is hand full of
memories of the better times. Damn, I *hate* that. AGC was... well, a
nice place to be and stuff, you could even call it a home if you wanted
(yes, I *am* a pretty weird guy and quite mad as well, I'd say) but look
at it now. Too many web forums, they can easily cover what AGC used to
do and there isn't that much of CL left anyway. I mean just look at it.
Things went downhill when people were disappointed by C2 and after Steve
Grant left... Well, enough ranting.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
April 15, 2004 7:06:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnc7qlu1.21i.the_emmel*whatever*@storm.mlnet...
> And when it was 2004-04-14, illusion
> <c5j8gg$8pc$1$830fa79f@news.demon.co.uk> was created,
> stating that Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web>
> uttered in alt.games.creatures:
> >> The air started blur as if it was hot and ripples formed on its
> >> surface.
> >
> > 'blurring', and air doesn't have a surface. Though you might want 'The
air
> > started blurring as if it were hot and ripples forming on its surface.',
but
> > that's ambiguous... 'The air started blurring as if it were hot, {the
view
> > through it} rippling{ like the surface of a pond{ after a pebble has
been
> > thrown in}}.'. How's that? (The {} bits can be taken out or left in as
> > desired.}
>
> s/ formed on its surface.//
>
> (sed syntax - documentation available with every good operating system;
> and windows is *no* good os)

.......Right.

(No OS is good OS!)

(...and just to check, did you catch the 'blurring' bit?)

> >> It pretty much resembled the lake you just threw a stone in,
> >> but water doesn't tend to sit vertically in midair and hardly ever had
> >> such a ghostly glow to it either.
> >
> > ...Skah. Didn't read ahead before suggesting the metaphor... How about
> > 'The resemblance was uncanny, except for the fact that water doesn't
tend to
> > rest [etc.]'?
>
> Nothing to be done here, IHMO.

Bah. Well, I still support a change of 'hardly ever'... 'rarely', say?
Yes, that might be good... *nods* 'and rarely had such a ghostly glow to
it either'.

> >> Elias hesitated a moment, but then
> >> took a deep breath and stepped though the portal. It felt as
> >> unpleasant as ever with the added sensation of wet feet. Quite odd.
> >
> > Hmmm. *mind percolates* Elias... Wasn't that the name of the teacher?
>
> Seems I tricked you. That's the first time I use the name.

Oh, well. /Is/ it the teacher?

> >> Normally he'd rather have taken the coach, and if the leaders of the
> >> order knew he'd probably have a lot to explain, but who cared.
> >
> > Good... 'who cared' could be replaced with something else, though.
*nods*
> > 'but [word] to them', for example, or 'he didn't care about them' or
> > something else... Hrmm.
>
> No, that's change the meaning.

What's the meaning? (oh, and 'changing', not 'change')

> >> There
> >> were things you just had to do and this was one of them. He turned
> >> around, just in time to see this side of the portal fade and
> >> eventually vanish; for a long time he stared at the spot it had been
> >> in, before realizing why his feet felt so strangely wet.
> >
> > *suggest removing the word 'in', there, after 'been'*
>
> s/it had been in/it had been/

*nods slightly*

> >> Maybe, but
> >> just maybe he should have been a bit more careful about the portal
> >> coordinates; it wasn't like he was in the wrong place, but there were
> >> times when a few metres did make a difference. Well, it could probably
> >> have been worse. Slowly he waded to the river bank. He just hated the
> >> portals.
> >
> > *laughs*
> >
> > 'it wasn't as if he was in', 'He hated {using} portals.'. *considers,
then
> > nods;* Probably remove the {using} in the suggestion. *nods again,
> > continues reading interestedly*
>
> 'the portals' - it's more specific than just your every day portal and
> refering to the order's portalling system

Ohhh.

> About the 'just'... I dunno what's wrong with that.

....I have to admit, I don't exactly know either, but I still definitely
suggest 'He hated the portals.'.

> >> With dried boots and a snow white cloak Elias sneaked towards the
> >> village. He perfectly melted with the snow on the ground and even the
> >> most observative watcher would have had problems seeing him. Then,
> >> suddenly he heart a low, muted sound. He absolutely didn't like it,
> >> not at all.
> >
> > Hmm. 'toward', not 'towards', I think... 'melded' would be better than
> > 'melted', though 'His visage perfectly melded' would be even better.
And
> > 'seeing him'--'making him out'. And remove the 'absolutely'.
>
> s/He perfactly melted/The cloak blended in/

*nods* Good... And what about the 'absolutely'?

> > *can guess what will happen... is still enjoying it*
> >
> >> There was a second. A third. And another one. And another one.
> >
> > 'There was a second. A third. And another one. And yet another one.'
>
> Um, no? I don't see why I should jump from one to three here. The yet
> sound goo, though.

Yeep. I was addressing only that portion of it... *alters his suggestion*

And if by 'goo', you mean 'good', then hoowah! *happiness*

> >> On and
> >> on it went. Laiva didn't know what it was, but it made made her
> >> shiver. It almost was as if the hill lands were calling for her. A
> >> call she rather felt than heard, a call and a warning in one.
> >
> > 'for' or 'to'? 'both call and warning in one' (though optional). Oh,
and
> > 'but it made her shiver'.
>
> s/made made/made/

*nods*

> s/, call and/, both a call and/

Hmm. Good. *nods*

> 'for'.

Ahh. Just checking.

> >> Without making a loud Elias slid past house.
> >
> > *winces. Just... winces*
>
> Yikes!

*nods slightly*

> > 'noise' or 'sound', not 'loud'... and 'past a house'.
>
> Without making a sound Elias slid into the shadow of a house.

That's good. *nods*

> >> Slowly, step by step he
> >> approached the edge of the building, closer he went and even closer
> >> until hardly a arms length separated him from the crowd and, finally,
> >> he could see the village square. Damn, why did things always have to
> >> get more complicated than they even were?
> >
> > 'closer he came', 'hardly an arm's length', 'than they already were'.
>
> s/closer he went/closer he came/
> s/a arms length/an arm's length/

*nods*

> 'already' isn't quite right either. It be should something like 'more
> complicated than he had already feared'. In fact, I thibk that's it.

Ehh. *peers at it slightly* Remove the 'had' (because of the 'why did
things always have to'), and it could work. *nods* And are you sure
'suspected' wouldn't be better than 'feared', here?

> >> At the same time Laiva was approaching the other end of the village.
> >> She carefully avoided any noise, although nobody would have heard
> >> anything anyway as the beating sound was still filling the air.
> >
> > Possible alteration: 'as the beating sound still filled the air'.
>
> s/was still filling the air/still filled the air/

*smiles*

> >> It had
> >> grown louder and louder the closer she came to the village and Laiva
> >> eventually recognized it as the sound of heavy drums. She hadn't been
> >> able to tell at first because of the muting and the echos, but now it
> >> was obvious. However, this knowledge didn't comfort her at all.
> >
> > Possible alteration: 'this knowledge didn't comfort her in the least'.
>
> No, I think I'll leave it.

Hmm.... *nods* Okay.

> >> If the
> >> villagers made such a noise it couldn't be a good sign.
> >
> > Hmm. 'villagers were making such a noise'?
>
> s/villagers made such a noise/villagers were making such a noise/

*nods* (As a general rule of thum, when I make an alteration, I generally
leave an unaltered bit at each end, to show where it fits in with the rest.)

> >> Laiva laid
> >> down and started crouching upwards th small hump in front of her; the
> >> village had to be right behind it.
> >
> > 'Laiva lay down and started crawling up the small hump', or 'Laiva
crouched
> > down and started crawling up', or 'crouched down and started moving up'.
>
> Yes, yes, you're so right...
> s/laid down and started crouching upwards th/crouched down and started
> crawling up the/

*small hum of happiness*

> >> When she finally reached the top of
> >> the hump she was in for a surprise; you'd have expected the villagers
> >> to hide in their houses now more than ever, but obviously some kind of
> >> celebration or ceremony was going on.
> >
> > Hmm. Suggestion: In either the first occurance or the second, replace
> > 'hump' with 'mound'. Not both.
>
> s/hump/mound/
> whereever...

*nods* One of the two places. Your choice.

> >> There didn't even seem to be any
> >> guards; how could they be so careless? Or didn't they have to care,
> >> because they were the ones to be careful about, like werewolves or
> >> vampires? That'd surely explain a lot. Perhaps she should leave now
> >> and let the villagers be whatever they were.
> >
> > *nods, satisfied*
>
> Yep, that's the part you already knew.

*nods*

> >> Nope, no more death threats. I've given up hope.
> >
> > *laughs* HOOWAH BUBHOSH STORY-THINGAMAJIG!
>
> It's not funny. I'm pretty much giving up. It probably wouldn't make
> much of a change if we used mail instead of the usenet. Let's face it:
> AGC is dead. It one of us went on vacation now (well, actually I *am* on
> vacation until the 19th, but that's another thing) we could as well
> trash the whole place.

Bah. While we remain, AGC is not dead. (Speaking of which, how is aglami
doing? Do you know?)

....And in any case, mail is less efficient. And others poke their heads
back in here from time to time.

> > Elias... Will have to learn more about him. *much curiosity*
>
> Curiosity is good. And justified...

*smiles*

> > ...And, er, it may just be my imagination... but isn't this a
> > little...short...for an installment?
>
> It is, but the text I already had ready for posting doesn't really work
> after the enourmous alteration I had to make to the last one and it
> wasn't that good anyway.

Ahh.

> In any case you are still pointing out 15 to 20
> points in this little piece (which makes me damn uncomfortable; really,
> I feel stupid).

Sorry. But corrections are bubhosh. *nod nod*

> Well, fact is I have to rewrite a lot of the stuff and if you still
> remember me talking about hypothermia sometime last year... you haven't
> yet read that part, have you?

Er, I don't think so. *racks brain*

> I'm hopefully getting to it in the next
> installment, though. It's a shame - I finally got around to automatizing
> the reformatting of the whole stuff (postscript, or pdf with a single
> command) and I'm not too sure I'll ever really have need of it.

Hmm. Well, it could prove useful. *nods*

> Things
> are pretty slow anyway; you know how long we needed to discuss the last
> bit out and it's almost ages since I started writing the whole thing.
> Things have happened in the meantime; about everything has changes in RL
> and AGC isn't even any more a shadow of what it once was. As I said
> before wiriting emails wouln't make any difference.

....Wait, you were talking about emails? Sorry... Different argument,
needed, then.

Those who do 'pop in' from time to time may still read, and still
appreciate. If nothing else, it will leave an archive in Google Groups.

> I pretty much doubt
> if there are even any more lurkers. All that's left is hand full of
> memories of the better times. Damn, I *hate* that. AGC was... well, a
> nice place to be and stuff, you could even call it a home if you wanted
> (yes, I *am* a pretty weird guy and quite mad as well, I'd say) but look
> at it now. Too many web forums, they can easily cover what AGC used to
> do and there isn't that much of CL left anyway. I mean just look at it.
> Things went downhill when people were disappointed by C2 and after Steve
> Grant left... Well, enough ranting.

*nods sadly* Steve Grand... The equivalent of Ultima's Richard Garriott
(is that his last name?). Every great work, great action, has one driving
vision behind it... When it's something like a book, or a computer game, or
a series, it's so complicated that only that one person truly understands
it. And if that person leaves... No hope for it. I suppose his leaving
was CL's death knell.

Do you know if he's ever considered picking up where he left off?

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
April 28, 2004 6:35:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

<snip>
> > >> What freaking useserver are you using?
> > >
> > > Didn't I say this before...? Outlook Express. And no, I won't be
> offended
> > > if you shudder. Not exactly, at least.
> >
> > ::shudder::
> > But I was talking about the newsserver. Not the client.
>
> Oh. pop3.beeb.net, I think. Though I could be confusing it with the
> email-related thingamajig.
<snip>

Further research has suggested news.demon.co.uk to be a more accurate
listing.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
April 29, 2004 6:27:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-04-28, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
><snip>
>> > >> What freaking useserver are you using?
>> > >
>> > > Didn't I say this before...? Outlook Express. And no, I won't be
>> offended
>> > > if you shudder. Not exactly, at least.
>> >
>> > ::shudder::
>> > But I was talking about the newsserver. Not the client.
>>
>> Oh. pop3.beeb.net, I think. Though I could be confusing it with the
>> email-related thingamajig.
><snip>
>
> Further research has suggested news.demon.co.uk to be a more accurate
> listing.

Yes, I should have figured that. It's not there isn't a pretty obvious
entry in the header or something... (or many for that matter)
Hm, it locks which computer I'm posting from as well. Didn't notice that
before...
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 1, 2004 2:34:10 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-04-29, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:

Damn system went offline while trying to post this yesterday. It's still
freaking slow, but at least up...

>> >> >> >> >> >> [The air started blur as if it was hot and ripples formed
> on
>> > its
>> >> >> >> >> >> surface.
>> >> >> >> >> >> It pretty much resembled the lake you just threw a stone
> in,
>> >> >> >> >> >> but water doesn't tend to sit vertically in midair and
> hardly
>> >> > ever
>> >> >> > had
>> >> >> >> >> >> such a ghostly glow to it either.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> TO
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> The air started to blur as if hot and ripples formed as if
> it
>> > was
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> >> surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water
> doesn't
>> >> > tend
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> >> >> sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow
> to
>> > it
>> >> >> >> >> >> either.]
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > ...Hmm. First: 'as if' repeated too close. Second: Would
>> >> > suggest
>> >> >> >> > 'had
>> >> >> >> >> > just thrown' instead of 'just threw', and 'into' instead of
>> > 'in'.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Seceduled for later.
>> >> >> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the
> ones
>> >> >> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water
> doesn't
>> >> >> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow
> to
>> >> >> it either.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That should do the job (I hope). What do you think?
>> >> >
>> >> > Definitely does the job of the 'as if's, but there's still the issue
> of
>> > the
>> >> > 'you just threw a stone in'/'you had just thrown a stone into'.
>> >>
>> >> Not sure...
>> >
>> > Would you care to elaborate...?
>>
>> Erm, wait a sec...
>> ::goes to www.dict.org::
>> Ah. (I _hate_ it when I have to do this. You should think that isn't
>> necessary any more, but... I just *hate* it.)
>
> Sympathy.

Not that it helps in any way, but thanks.

>> I'm not sure wheather I prefer "had thrown" over "threw" and in fact I'm
>> not even sure if my one is wrong. Though it possibly is...
>> Ignore the chaoting style of the prvious sentence. It's pretty much as
>> chaotic as my thinking.
>
> Ahh. What are you thinking about?

Erm...

Anyway, what about the time form issue above?

>> >> <snip>
>> >> > How long do you think this might continue if we don't <snip> it?
>> >>
>> >> Huh? What?
>> >
>> > *speaks carefully as to not start it up again* We were... ah...
>> > repeatedly triggering each other to take part in certain act- *is unable
> to
>> > stop from yawning* Oh, skahit.
>>
>> And once again it worked. Really interesting; it's a social thing, you
>> know. People that are easily effected by that kind of thing are said to
>> be very emotional.
>
> *finishes yawning once has read the background: procedes to main response*
>
> *amusement* Maybe that says something about the players of Creatures games.

Could be. Could very well be. (Or it's just tiredness.)

>> >> >> With dried boots and a snow white cloak Elias sneaked towards the
>> >> >> village. He had put on a snow white cloak, letting him blend in with
>> > the
>> >> >> snow covered ground; even the most observative watcher would have
> had
>> >> >> problems seeing him. Then, suddenly he heart a low, muted sound. He
>> >> >> absolutely didn't like it, not at all.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ahh. First: Replace 'put on a snow white cloak, letting him blend
> in
>> > with
>> >> > the' with something along the lines of 'put on the cloak in order to
>> > blend
>> >> > in with the'. How's that? In any case, the 'snow white' bit was
>> > redundant.
>> >>
>> >> Hm, you are right about the 'snow white' bit, but I don't really see
>> >> your problem with the rest of it.
>> >
>> > By 'the rest' do you mean that which is below, or everything above
> except
>> > for the 'snow white'? Because if you only remove it, then... Oh.
> Yes...
>> > Yes, if you just changed part to 'dried boots Elias', then the rest fits
>> > together nicely (as well). *nods slightly*
>>
>> Ah. Good.
>
> Ahh.

Beh.

>> >> > Second, I'd suggest removing 'absolutely'. And thirdly... here it's
>> >>
>> >> Erm, yes. We already agreed on this one, didn't we?
>> >
>> > Agreed on removing it? If so, then that's good, but if an example is
> given,
>> > I attempt to address all apparent problems with it. *nod nod*
>>
>> Yes, I think we already agreed on removing it.
>
> Hoowah! *happiness*

Now I just have to remember that...

>> I know, I just don't like them [colons] very much. They look awkward
>> in the text.
>> I know, stupid argument, but that's the way I feel about it. It somehow
>> interrupts the flow of words. A hard interrupt (I really shouldn't make
>> jokes about DOS, I really shouldn't.)
>
> Hmm. *unforunately doesn't get the joke, as he knows very little about DOS*

Oh, it's just... I instantly connected hardware interrupts with DOS.
Don't really know why, it's quite odd actually.

>> >> >> Well, anyway... I'm too lazy to
>> >> >> look it up in google as well. Things are a *lot* easier if you can
> use
>> >> >> your own comp for getting online...
>> >> >
>> >> > *nods happily, and gratefully pats first his monitor, then his
> computer*
>> >>
>> >> You happy guy (or whatever).
>> >
>> > Heh. *looks happy*
>>
>> Then again, you have much more freedom as a student (at university). And
>> a lot more work to do as well...
>
> Depends on what you mean by 'freedom', really.

Yeah, I guess you are right.

>> >> >> >> > Well, it's not as bad a sign as me vomiting blood, for example.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> But pretty close... that's what you wanted to say, eh?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Erm, not exactly. (Hrmm... tiredness versus vomiting blood?
> Let's
>> >> > think
>> >> >> > about this...)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm smelling blood...
>> >> >
>> >> > That would be on your end, then. Or do you have some equipment I
> don't
>> > know
>> >> > about?
>> >>
>> >> It's a question of where I've been stading at that time, isn't it?
>> >
>> > ...three years in(/to) the future?
>>
>> I don't mix very well with time travelling. You should remember that.
>
> That was my point. (Yes, self... just say it in a blunt enough way and
> they'll/he'll take it as fact...)

I'm not entirely sure what you just said...

>> >> >> >> >> > (Just to check, do you know what vmail stands for?)
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Video mail? Al least that's one of it's meanings.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > *nods* Yep. In the specific example, a holographic 3D (4D,
>> >> >> > techinically)
>> >> >> >> > projection of the person appearing in mid-air...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi!
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Oh, erm, sorry...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *looks amused* Basically that, yes, except in the case I'm
> thinking
>> > of
>> >> > it's
>> >> >> > /above/ the projector. Directly [above].
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I know, they had those, too.
>> >> >
>> >> > ...They did? I was referring to the ones from Deus Ex: Invisible
>> > War...
>> >>
>> >> Almost everyone copies starwars to some degree. (Remember the scene
> what
>> >> they had the death star plans on such a device and were standing around
>> >> it?)
>> >
>> > Good point. I think. But this wasn't a 'battleplans' sort of
>> > thingamajig... it was just wide enough to project a miniature image of
> a
>> > person speaking above a keyboard. Only slightly wider than the
> very-small
>> > person.
>>
>> Well, I like it bigger. Much bigger :-)
>
> Well, holosuites are fine if you're into that sort of thing.

Well, StarTrek is fun... you can always laugh about the complete failure
of common sense/science. It's quite entertaining, but you definitely
don't have to think about it seriously - unless you want to make fun of
it, that is (see abovve).

>> >> >> But R2D2 is waaaaaay cuter.
>> >> >
>> >> > Heh. *remembers two conversations: the one, a cross between Star
> Wars
>> > and
>> >> > Oliver Twist, and the other some people wondering about which game/s
> to
>> > rip
>> >> > off next*
>> >> >
>> >> > (The first: "You've got to pick a pocket, artoo.", the second "Grand
>> > Theft
>> >> > Artoo".)
>> >>
>> >> ::D oesn't know what to answer::
>> >
>> > Erm?
>>
>> Yeeesh?
>
> ....breaking...up....ca...ear....u....ksssssssssshhhhhhhhhh......

The person you are calling is not available at present. Please call
again later.

>> >> >> ...I talked about writing some new stuff that hadn't been posted
> then
>> >> >> (and isn't posted today as well). *And* I asked if hypothermia
> sounded
>> >> >> right. It's just... nobody ever listenes to what I say.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ahh. Didn't I reply to it at the time? Anyway, I see what you
> mean...
>> >> > probably nothing wrong with it. *considers* What about a fever?
>> > Though
>> >> > possibly that's slightly overused.
>> BTW fever or cold is a bit too weak a word for that. Wait and
>> see. (In two installments or so.
>
> Ooo. *eyes widen, leans closer to screen interestedly* (Delirium?)

Well... No! I won't spoil it for you.

>> At the current speed that could happen
>> in one or two month...)
>
> Bah. Oh, well.

Actually that sound pretty fast for me.

>> >> >> ::starts weeping::
>> >> >> [1], that'd look quite stupid around here, but you get the general
> idea
>> >> >
>> >> > *pats sympathetically* Does it help that it was a year ago, and I
> have
>> > a
>> >> > much worse memory than I would like?
>> >>
>> >> Hey, *I* am the one with the seriously bad bad bad memory here, OK?
>> >
>> > *laughs* ...Two people, competing over who has the worst memory...
>>
>> And me winning. <g>
>
> ...Huh? Winning what? Who are you? /What/ are you? What am /I/? What
> does 'what' mean, anyway!?

42? Ah, the great riddles of the universe.

>> >> > Eh. In Thief--I recently was able to get it and Thief II: The Metal
>> >> > Age--what did you think of the inside-out well and the upside-down
>> >> > waterfall?
>> >>
>> >> Erm... (I never finished it, OK? I didn't exactly finish the first one
>> >> either.)
>> >
>> > BAH! Bubhosh games! *considers* ...Well, the second was worse than
> the
>> > first. But the two things I was referring to were in the first game...
>>
>> Hm, in that labyrinth house? That was just crazy.
>
> Augh. I know what you mean... In the words of Billie Adams, 'Just look at
> this funhouse.'. However, though it had the same sort-of style as the house
> (won't say more because would be giving away spoilers), it was much closer
> to the end, in a much less 'labyrinthian' setting. Sort-of, at least.

Yeah, I think I know what you are talking about (generally, never
touched that level, though).

>> You know one of the
>> things I'm worst at is navigating. I need a decent map to find my way.
>> You can figure out yourself what such a level means to me, can't you?
>
> Sidhe. *nods* I could more-or-less recognize the places and/or entrances
> at which I had been, and /I/ kept getting confused and/or discovering new
> things...

Holy Shee!

>> >> >> >> >> >> >> He's happily(sp?) toying with his monkey... erm, ape
>> > nowadays.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > Correct spelling. And try not to call
>> > orang-utans/orangutans
>> >> >> >> > 'monkeys'
>> >> >> >> >> >> > around the Librarian. Not that he's here, but still.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Oh, I don't think Strika'd care if I said 'monk... OUCH!
> Looks
>> >> > like
>> >> >> > I'm
>> >> >> >> >> >> in the wrong book...
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > *pat pat*
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > ...And who's Strika?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> ::cries (of agony)::
>> >> >> >> >> Go, look thingy!
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > ...What?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Would you please consider looking in the story and then come up
> with
>> >> >> >> some incredibly good explaination why I shouldn't quit right now?
>> >> > Thanks
>> >> >> >> in advance. The author.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *racks brain; sees association*
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Explanation: Because readers, while perhaps forgetting some small
>> > bits
>> >> > when
>> >> >> > concentrating on the all-bubhoshness of the rest, still greatly
>> >> > appreciate
>> >> >> > it. And it's not good to leave a story unfinished.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I know, I know. I liked that character, though; you'll see more of
> him
>> >> >> eventually. Not necessarily much, but still.
>> >> >
>> >> > ...Okay, now you've got me curious. *goes searching with Google
> Groups*
>> >>
>> >> And?
>> >
>> > Memories were refreshed, and I realized what I'd been doing wrong: I'd
> been
>> > trying to remember a librarian for the place where she took the test.
>> > *wonders, in your universe, what the qualifications had to be to become
> a
>> > ghost*
>> >
>> > Rulg.
>>
>> Pretty stubborn. Or damn ignorant; I think it's a mixture of both when
>> it comes to him. Is writing 'me' instead of 'him' in the previous
>> sentence freudian?
>
> You'd have to ask him.

He... how do I tell you... deceased? Gone? Left this world for a better
one?

> No, I don't really know what that last 'him' refers to, either.

"I think it's a mixture of both when it comes to _me_."
Does that clear it up?

> *tries carefully to work out exactly why you were saying that (and ignorant
> in which respect) above*

I first wrote it with "me" in it, you see...

>> >> > Hmm. *daydreams about learning programming languages*
>> >>
>> >> Just do it, do it while you actually have time for it. Pascal is a nice
>> >> start (as long as you dfon't take it too serious). Fortran is a nice
>> >> choice as well (90, *don't* try 77). C is pretty useful, C++ might be
>> >> worth considering, but I strongly suggest learning C first. Java might
>> >> be nice. And perl's not such bad a choice either. I have no personal
>> >> experience with Python, but some people absolutely love it. Don't touch
>> >> Visual* and .NET, though and forget about BASIC (not that I'd call it a
>> >> programming language).
>> >
>> > *nods slightly* Many things to do, so little time... thingamajig...
> Most
>> > definitely thingamajig. *nods slightly again*
>>
>> If you need some help, I'll be pleased to give you some pointers.
>> Programming is sooo cool.
>
> *envies* The advice I've gotten thus far (IIRC) suggests attempting all
> such on a computer running either Linux or Unix. This being a Windows
> machine... well.

You can very well do it on windows. The OS isn't really that important,
though Linux makes a damn good development system.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 3, 2004 7:23:54 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-02, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:

The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the ones
on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water doesn't
tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to
it either.

>> >> >> > 'you just threw a stone in'/'you had just thrown a stone into'.
>> >> I'm not sure wheather I prefer "had thrown" over "threw" and in fact
>> Anyway, what about the time form issue above?
>
> (To question avoidance: BAH!)
>
> Hmm. *considers for a while* At least for now, my best conjecture is
> that... no, wait, that's not right. Hmm. *thinks some more* Maybe it's
> because 'threw' is more a present tense thingamajig... 'He threw it into a
> lake.', 'He had thrown it into a lake.'. The first seems to be describing
> something that's currently-happening in the
> describing-something-that-has-already-happened, whereas the second is the
> describing something that's already-happened in the
> describing-something-that-has-already-happened. You see what I mean?

Not so sure... you usually *do* use simple present if you are talking
about an acting that (can) happen repeatedly or at no specific point of
time, don't you.
Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in better...

>> >> I know, I just don't like them [colons] very much. They look awkward
>> >> in the text.
>> >> I know, stupid argument, but that's the way I feel about it. It somehow
>> >> interrupts the flow of words. A hard interrupt (I really shouldn't make
>> >> jokes about DOS, I really shouldn't.)
>> >
>> > Hmm. *unforunately doesn't get the joke, as he knows very little about
> DOS*
>>
>> Oh, it's just... I instantly connected hardware interrupts with DOS.
>> Don't really know why, it's quite odd actually.
>
> Hmm. *quotes*
>
>
Quote:


<snip>

>


<bg>
Where did you find that?

>> >> >> >> Well, anyway... I'm too lazy to
>> >> >> >> look it up in google as well. Things are a *lot* easier if you
> can
>> > use
>> >> >> >> your own comp for getting online...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *nods happily, and gratefully pats first his monitor, then his
>> > computer*
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You happy guy (or whatever).
>> >> >
>> >> > Heh. *looks happy*
>> >>
>> >> Then again, you have much more freedom as a student (at university).
> And
>> >> a lot more work to do as well...
>> >
>> > Depends on what you mean by 'freedom', really.
>>
>> Yeah, I guess you are right.
>
> (Hoowah being right!)
>
> Thingamajig. *nods sagely*

Having your own letter box?

>> >> >> >> >> > Well, it's not as bad a sign as me vomiting blood, for
> example.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> But pretty close... that's what you wanted to say, eh?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Erm, not exactly. (Hrmm... tiredness versus vomiting blood?
>> > Let's
>> >> >> > think
>> >> >> >> > about this...)
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I'm smelling blood...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > That would be on your end, then. Or do you have some equipment I
>> > don't
>> >> > know
>> >> >> > about?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> It's a question of where I've been stading at that time, isn't it?
>> >> >
>> >> > ...three years in(/to) the future?
>> >>
>> >> I don't mix very well with time travelling. You should remember that.
>> >
>> > That was my point. (Yes, self... just say it in a blunt enough way and
>> > they'll/he'll take it as fact...)
>>
>> I'm not entirely sure what you just said...
>
> ....That was my intention. *see previous paragraph... sort of...*

Oh, reversing madness. I like it.

>> >> >> >> >> >> > (Just to check, do you know what vmail stands for?)
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Video mail? Al least that's one of it's meanings.
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > *nods* Yep. In the specific example, a holographic 3D (4D,
>> >> >> >> > techinically)
>> >> >> >> >> > projection of the person appearing in mid-air...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi!
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Oh, erm, sorry...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > *looks amused* Basically that, yes, except in the case I'm
>> > thinking
>> >> > of
>> >> >> > it's
>> >> >> >> > /above/ the projector. Directly [above].
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I know, they had those, too.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ...They did? I was referring to the ones from Deus Ex: Invisible
>> >> > War...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Almost everyone copies starwars to some degree. (Remember the scene
>> > what
>> >> >> they had the death star plans on such a device and were standing
> around
>> >> >> it?)
>> >> >
>> >> > Good point. I think. But this wasn't a 'battleplans' sort of
>> >> > thingamajig... it was just wide enough to project a miniature image
> of
>> > a
>> >> > person speaking above a keyboard. Only slightly wider than the
>> > very-small
>> >> > person.
>> >>
>> >> Well, I like it bigger. Much bigger :-)
>> >
>> > Well, holosuites are fine if you're into that sort of thing.
>>
>> Well, StarTrek is fun... you can always laugh about the complete failure
>> of common sense/science. It's quite entertaining, but you definitely
>> don't have to think about it seriously - unless you want to make fun of
>> it, that is (see abovve).
>
> Hmm. *nods slightly: remembers a part with guns that could shoot through
> walls, and communications that went back in time, /neither of which were
> ever again used for any practical purpose/*
>
> ...Wait. Weren't we talking about Star Wars before?

Erm, actually we were talking about v-mail...

>> >> >> >> But R2D2 is waaaaaay cuter.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Heh. *remembers two conversations: the one, a cross between Star
>> > Wars
>> >> > and
>> >> >> > Oliver Twist, and the other some people wondering about which
> game/s
>> > to
>> >> > rip
>> >> >> > off next*
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > (The first: "You've got to pick a pocket, artoo.", the second
> "Grand
>> >> > Theft
>> >> >> > Artoo".)
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ::D oesn't know what to answer::
>> >> >
>> >> > Erm?
>> >>
>> >> Yeeesh?
>> >
>> > ....breaking...up....ca...ear....u....ksssssssssshhhhhhhhhh......
>>
>> The person you are calling is not available at present. Please call
>> again later.
>
> The Win 16 Subsystem has insufficent resources to continue running. Click
> on OK, close your applications, and restart your machine.

<g> Press any key to continue...
<key>a</key>
Do you want to save before exit?
<key>n</key>
Are you sure?
<key>n</key>

Some day I'll get myself a shirt with that one...

>> >> >> >> ...I talked about writing some new stuff that hadn't been posted
>> > then
>> >> >> >> (and isn't posted today as well). *And* I asked if hypothermia
>> > sounded
>> >> >> >> right. It's just... nobody ever listenes to what I say.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Ahh. Didn't I reply to it at the time? Anyway, I see what you
>> > mean...
>> >> >> > probably nothing wrong with it. *considers* What about a fever?
>> >> > Though
>> >> >> > possibly that's slightly overused.
>> >> BTW fever or cold is a bit too weak a word for that. Wait and
>> >> see. (In two installments or so.
>> >
>> > Ooo. *eyes widen, leans closer to screen interestedly* (Delirium?)
>>
>> Well... No! I won't spoil it for you.
>
> Okay. Just don't die and leave no records about what was going to happen.

Well, I'll do my very best.

>> >> At the current speed that could happen
>> >> in one or two month...)
>> >
>> > Bah. Oh, well.
>>
>> Actually that sound pretty fast for me.
>
> *tries to think of a way from distracting from ever-lengthening expectation
> dates*
>
> ...Behind you! A three-headed monkey!

The only three-headed monkey around here are you. Kinda. (markus, ghul,
rupert...) Erm, make that more-that-two-headed whatever...

>> >> >> >> ::starts weeping::
>> >> >> >> [1], that'd look quite stupid around here, but you get the
> general
>> > idea
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *pats sympathetically* Does it help that it was a year ago, and I
>> > have
>> >> > a
>> >> >> > much worse memory than I would like?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hey, *I* am the one with the seriously bad bad bad memory here, OK?
>> >> >
>> >> > *laughs* ...Two people, competing over who has the worst memory...
>> >>
>> >> And me winning. <g>
>> >
>> > ...Huh? Winning what? Who are you? /What/ are you? What am /I/?
> What
>> > does 'what' mean, anyway!?
>>
>> 42? Ah, the great riddles of the universe.
>
> (What universe?)
>
> *humour*

Universe 'humor' not found in database. Care to try again?

>> >> You know one of the
>> >> things I'm worst at is navigating. I need a decent map to find my way.
>> >> You can figure out yourself what such a level means to me, can't you?
>> >
>> > Sidhe. *nods* I could more-or-less recognize the places and/or
> entrances
>> > at which I had been, and /I/ kept getting confused and/or discovering
> new
>> > things...
>>
>> Holy Shee!
>
> *pat pat*
>
> *also is reminded in that part in Speaker for the Dead... "I'm not holy.
> Tell her." "...She didn't say 'holy'."

I think I completely fail to enjoy this obref for reasons connected to
me not knowing "Speaker for the Dead".

>> >> >> >> > Explanation: Because readers, while perhaps forgetting some
> small
>> >> > bits
>> >> >> > when
>> >> >> >> > concentrating on the all-bubhoshness of the rest, still greatly
>> >> >> > appreciate
>> >> >> >> > it. And it's not good to leave a story unfinished.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I know, I know. I liked that character, though; you'll see more
> of
>> > him
>> >> >> >> eventually. Not necessarily much, but still.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ...Okay, now you've got me curious. *goes searching with Google
>> > Groups*
>> >> >>
>> >> >> And?
>> >> >
>> >> > Memories were refreshed, and I realized what I'd been doing wrong:
> I'd
>> > been
>> >> > trying to remember a librarian for the place where she took the test.
>> >> > *wonders, in your universe, what the qualifications had to be to
> become
>> > a
>> >> > ghost*
>> >> >
>> >> > Rulg.
>> >>
>> >> Pretty stubborn. Or damn ignorant; I think it's a mixture of both when
>> >> it comes to him. Is writing 'me' instead of 'him' in the previous
>> >> sentence freudian?
>> >
>> > You'd have to ask him.
>>
>> He... how do I tell you... deceased? Gone? Left this world for a better
>> one?
>
> Ah, but how do you know I wasn't being tricksy with my usage of 'he'?

Because you didn't capitalize it. Refering to any entity able to tell
you about the dead without capitalization is blasphemy and will usually
result in learning about it than you asked for.

>> > No, I don't really know what that last 'him' refers to, either.
>>
>> "I think it's a mixture of both when it comes to _me_."
>> Does that clear it up?
>
> Er... not exactly. I think I've forgotten something important along the
> lines of this conversation. What were we talking about...?

Paragraph staring 23 lines above this one.

>> > *tries carefully to work out exactly why you were saying that (and
> ignorant
>> > in which respect) above*
>>
>> I first wrote it with "me" in it, you see...
>
> *tries to remember that for future constructive usage*

NAJISBU

>> >> >> > Hmm. *daydreams about learning programming languages*
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Just do it, do it while you actually have time for it. Pascal is a
> nice
>> >> >> start (as long as you dfon't take it too serious). Fortran is a nice
>> >> >> choice as well (90, *don't* try 77). C is pretty useful, C++ might
> be
>> >> >> worth considering, but I strongly suggest learning C first. Java
> might
>> >> >> be nice. And perl's not such bad a choice either. I have no personal
>> >> >> experience with Python, but some people absolutely love it. Don't
> touch
>> >> >> Visual* and .NET, though and forget about BASIC (not that I'd call
> it a
>> >> >> programming language).
>> >> >
>> >> > *nods slightly* Many things to do, so little time... thingamajig...
>> > Most
>> >> > definitely thingamajig. *nods slightly again*
>> >>
>> >> If you need some help, I'll be pleased to give you some pointers.
>> >> Programming is sooo cool.
>> >
>> > *envies* The advice I've gotten thus far (IIRC) suggests attempting all
>> > such on a computer running either Linux or Unix. This being a Windows
>> > machine... well.
>>
>> You can very well do it on windows. The OS isn't really that important,
>> though Linux makes a damn good development system.
>
> Hrm. How does one start?/How do you reccomend one should start?

By knowing what he wants to do with it. Then choosing a language
iaccording to that and starting to gather information.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 4, 2004 8:13:34 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnc9cp0i.aor.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x8.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-05-02, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>
> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the ones
> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water doesn't
> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to
> it either.

Is this another of those 'not meant for other to reply to'? If not, see
discussion below on 'threw' or 'had thrown'...

> >> >> >> > 'you just threw a stone in'/'you had just thrown a stone into'.
> >> >> I'm not sure wheather I prefer "had thrown" over "threw" and in fact
> >> Anyway, what about the time form issue above?
> >
> > (To question avoidance: BAH!)
> >
> > Hmm. *considers for a while* At least for now, my best conjecture is
> > that... no, wait, that's not right. Hmm. *thinks some more* Maybe
it's
> > because 'threw' is more a present tense thingamajig... 'He threw it
into a
> > lake.', 'He had thrown it into a lake.'. The first seems to be
describing
> > something that's currently-happening in the
> > describing-something-that-has-already-happened, whereas the second is
the
> > describing something that's already-happened in the
> > describing-something-that-has-already-happened. You see what I mean?
>
> Not so sure... you usually *do* use simple present if you are talking
> about an acting that (can) happen repeatedly or at no specific point of
> time, don't you.

('simple present'?) Ripples come from something which had happened (almost)
immediately before...

> Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in better...

*relief*

> >> >> I know, I just don't like them [colons] very much. They look awkward
> >> >> in the text.
> >> >> I know, stupid argument, but that's the way I feel about it. It
somehow
> >> >> interrupts the flow of words. A hard interrupt (I really shouldn't
make
> >> >> jokes about DOS, I really shouldn't.)
> >> >
> >> > Hmm. *unforunately doesn't get the joke, as he knows very little
about
> > DOS*
> >>
> >> Oh, it's just... I instantly connected hardware interrupts with DOS.
> >> Don't really know why, it's quite odd actually.
> >
> > Hmm. *quotes*
> >
> >
Quote:

>
> <snip>
>
> >

>
> <bg>
> Where did you find that?

A message board, though I don't know if the poster was copying it or wrote
it himself.

*smiles*

> >> >> >> >> Well, anyway... I'm too lazy to
> >> >> >> >> look it up in google as well. Things are a *lot* easier if you
> > can
> >> > use
> >> >> >> >> your own comp for getting online...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *nods happily, and gratefully pats first his monitor, then his
> >> > computer*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> You happy guy (or whatever).
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Heh. *looks happy*
> >> >>
> >> >> Then again, you have much more freedom as a student (at university).
> > And
> >> >> a lot more work to do as well...
> >> >
> >> > Depends on what you mean by 'freedom', really.
> >>
> >> Yeah, I guess you are right.
> >
> > (Hoowah being right!)
> >
> > Thingamajig. *nods sagely*
>
> Having your own letter box?

Who needs smail/pmail when you have email?

> >> >> >> >> >> > Well, it's not as bad a sign as me vomiting blood, for
> > example.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> But pretty close... that's what you wanted to say, eh?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Erm, not exactly. (Hrmm... tiredness versus vomiting
blood?
> >> > Let's
> >> >> >> > think
> >> >> >> >> > about this...)
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I'm smelling blood...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > That would be on your end, then. Or do you have some equipment
I
> >> > don't
> >> >> > know
> >> >> >> > about?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> It's a question of where I've been stading at that time, isn't
it?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ...three years in(/to) the future?
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't mix very well with time travelling. You should remember
that.
> >> >
> >> > That was my point. (Yes, self... just say it in a blunt enough way
and
> >> > they'll/he'll take it as fact...)
> >>
> >> I'm not entirely sure what you just said...
> >
> > ....That was my intention. *see previous paragraph... sort of...*
>
> Oh, reversing madness. I like it.

Hoowah! *grins*

> >> >> >> >> >> >> > (Just to check, do you know what vmail stands for?)
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Video mail? Al least that's one of it's meanings.
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > *nods* Yep. In the specific example, a holographic 3D
(4D,
> >> >> >> >> > techinically)
> >> >> >> >> >> > projection of the person appearing in mid-air...
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi!
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Oh, erm, sorry...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > *looks amused* Basically that, yes, except in the case I'm
> >> > thinking
> >> >> > of
> >> >> >> > it's
> >> >> >> >> > /above/ the projector. Directly [above].
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I know, they had those, too.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > ...They did? I was referring to the ones from Deus Ex:
Invisible
> >> >> > War...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Almost everyone copies starwars to some degree. (Remember the
scene
> >> > what
> >> >> >> they had the death star plans on such a device and were standing
> > around
> >> >> >> it?)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Good point. I think. But this wasn't a 'battleplans' sort of
> >> >> > thingamajig... it was just wide enough to project a miniature
image
> > of
> >> > a
> >> >> > person speaking above a keyboard. Only slightly wider than the
> >> > very-small
> >> >> > person.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, I like it bigger. Much bigger :-)
> >> >
> >> > Well, holosuites are fine if you're into that sort of thing.
> >>
> >> Well, StarTrek is fun... you can always laugh about the complete
failure
> >> of common sense/science. It's quite entertaining, but you definitely
> >> don't have to think about it seriously - unless you want to make fun of
> >> it, that is (see abovve).
> >
> > Hmm. *nods slightly: remembers a part with guns that could shoot
through
> > walls, and communications that went back in time, /neither of which were
> > ever again used for any practical purpose/*
> >
> > ...Wait. Weren't we talking about Star Wars before?
>
> Erm, actually we were talking about v-mail...

Right! Deus Ex: Invisible War. And it's worth playing Deus Ex first.

> >> >> >> >> But R2D2 is waaaaaay cuter.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Heh. *remembers two conversations: the one, a cross between
Star
> >> > Wars
> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > Oliver Twist, and the other some people wondering about which
> > game/s
> >> > to
> >> >> > rip
> >> >> >> > off next*
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > (The first: "You've got to pick a pocket, artoo.", the second
> > "Grand
> >> >> > Theft
> >> >> >> > Artoo".)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ::D oesn't know what to answer::
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Erm?
> >> >>
> >> >> Yeeesh?
> >> >
> >> > ....breaking...up....ca...ear....u....ksssssssssshhhhhhhhhh......
> >>
> >> The person you are calling is not available at present. Please call
> >> again later.
> >
> > The Win 16 Subsystem has insufficent resources to continue running.
Click
> > on OK, close your applications, and restart your machine.
>
> <g> Press any key to continue...
> <key>a</key>
> Do you want to save before exit?
> <key>n</key>
> Are you sure?
> <key>n</key>
>
> Some day I'll get myself a shirt with that one...

Hmm. I have the strange feeling that there's something inherently humourous
about that that I don't understand...

> >> >> >> >> ...I talked about writing some new stuff that hadn't been
posted
> >> > then
> >> >> >> >> (and isn't posted today as well). *And* I asked if hypothermia
> >> > sounded
> >> >> >> >> right. It's just... nobody ever listenes to what I say.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Ahh. Didn't I reply to it at the time? Anyway, I see what you
> >> > mean...
> >> >> >> > probably nothing wrong with it. *considers* What about a
fever?
> >> >> > Though
> >> >> >> > possibly that's slightly overused.
> >> >> BTW fever or cold is a bit too weak a word for that. Wait and
> >> >> see. (In two installments or so.
> >> >
> >> > Ooo. *eyes widen, leans closer to screen interestedly* (Delirium?)
> >>
> >> Well... No! I won't spoil it for you.
> >
> > Okay. Just don't die and leave no records about what was going to
happen.
>
> Well, I'll do my very best.

Hoowah!

> >> >> At the current speed that could happen
> >> >> in one or two month...)
> >> >
> >> > Bah. Oh, well.
> >>
> >> Actually that sound pretty fast for me.
> >
> > *tries to think of a way from distracting from ever-lengthening
expectation
> > dates*
> >
> > ...Behind you! A three-headed monkey!
>
> The only three-headed monkey around here are you. Kinda. (markus, ghul,
> rupert...) Erm, make that more-that-two-headed whatever...

*smiles* We are a Triad, not a monkey. And it would be a three-bodied
<whatever>, and of course that's only if you don't count Snaga and the Hub.

> >> >> >> >> ::starts weeping::
> >> >> >> >> [1], that'd look quite stupid around here, but you get the
> > general
> >> > idea
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *pats sympathetically* Does it help that it was a year ago,
and I
> >> > have
> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > much worse memory than I would like?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Hey, *I* am the one with the seriously bad bad bad memory here,
OK?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *laughs* ...Two people, competing over who has the worst
memory...
> >> >>
> >> >> And me winning. <g>
> >> >
> >> > ...Huh? Winning what? Who are you? /What/ are you? What am /I/?
> > What
> >> > does 'what' mean, anyway!?
> >>
> >> 42? Ah, the great riddles of the universe.
> >
> > (What universe?)
> >
> > *humour*
>
> Universe 'humor' not found in database. Care to try again?

*virtual reality*

> >> >> You know one of the
> >> >> things I'm worst at is navigating. I need a decent map to find my
way.
> >> >> You can figure out yourself what such a level means to me, can't
you?
> >> >
> >> > Sidhe. *nods* I could more-or-less recognize the places and/or
> > entrances
> >> > at which I had been, and /I/ kept getting confused and/or discovering
> > new
> >> > things...
> >>
> >> Holy Shee!
> >
> > *pat pat*
> >
> > *also is reminded in that part in Speaker for the Dead... "I'm not
holy.
> > Tell her." "...She didn't say 'holy'."
>
> I think I completely fail to enjoy this obref for reasons connected to
> me not knowing "Speaker for the Dead".

....Read Ender's Game. Read Ender's Shadow. Not necessarily in that order.
Then read their sequals. Please.

> >> >> >> >> > Explanation: Because readers, while perhaps forgetting some
> > small
> >> >> > bits
> >> >> >> > when
> >> >> >> >> > concentrating on the all-bubhoshness of the rest, still
greatly
> >> >> >> > appreciate
> >> >> >> >> > it. And it's not good to leave a story unfinished.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I know, I know. I liked that character, though; you'll see
more
> > of
> >> > him
> >> >> >> >> eventually. Not necessarily much, but still.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > ...Okay, now you've got me curious. *goes searching with
Google
> >> > Groups*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> And?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Memories were refreshed, and I realized what I'd been doing wrong:
> > I'd
> >> > been
> >> >> > trying to remember a librarian for the place where she took the
test.
> >> >> > *wonders, in your universe, what the qualifications had to be to
> > become
> >> > a
> >> >> > ghost*
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Rulg.
> >> >>
> >> >> Pretty stubborn. Or damn ignorant; I think it's a mixture of both
when
> >> >> it comes to him. Is writing 'me' instead of 'him' in the previous
> >> >> sentence freudian?
> >> >
> >> > You'd have to ask him.
> >>
> >> He... how do I tell you... deceased? Gone? Left this world for a better
> >> one?
> >
> > Ah, but how do you know I wasn't being tricksy with my usage of 'he'?
>
> Because you didn't capitalize it. Refering to any entity able to tell
> you about the dead without capitalization is blasphemy and will usually
> result in learning about it than you asked for.

Stringsie man-fool... no, wait, that's Trickster, not Cthulhu...
*searches* Skahing Woodsie Lord.

> >> > No, I don't really know what that last 'him' refers to, either.
> >>
> >> "I think it's a mixture of both when it comes to _me_."
> >> Does that clear it up?
> >
> > Er... not exactly. I think I've forgotten something important along
the
> > lines of this conversation. What were we talking about...?
>
> Paragraph staring 23 lines above this one.

....I've already distorted the number and am too lazy and (slightly) pressed
for time to look. Oh, and I'm also tired. *nod nod*

> >> > *tries carefully to work out exactly why you were saying that (and
> > ignorant
> >> > in which respect) above*
> >>
> >> I first wrote it with "me" in it, you see...
> >
> > *tries to remember that for future constructive usage*
>
> NAJISBU

Fair enough.

> >> >> >> > Hmm. *daydreams about learning programming languages*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Just do it, do it while you actually have time for it. Pascal is
a
> > nice
> >> >> >> start (as long as you dfon't take it too serious). Fortran is a
nice
> >> >> >> choice as well (90, *don't* try 77). C is pretty useful, C++
might
> > be
> >> >> >> worth considering, but I strongly suggest learning C first. Java
> > might
> >> >> >> be nice. And perl's not such bad a choice either. I have no
personal
> >> >> >> experience with Python, but some people absolutely love it. Don't
> > touch
> >> >> >> Visual* and .NET, though and forget about BASIC (not that I'd
call
> > it a
> >> >> >> programming language).
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *nods slightly* Many things to do, so little time...
thingamajig...
> >> > Most
> >> >> > definitely thingamajig. *nods slightly again*
> >> >>
> >> >> If you need some help, I'll be pleased to give you some pointers.
> >> >> Programming is sooo cool.
> >> >
> >> > *envies* The advice I've gotten thus far (IIRC) suggests attempting
all
> >> > such on a computer running either Linux or Unix. This being a
Windows
> >> > machine... well.
> >>
> >> You can very well do it on windows. The OS isn't really that important,
> >> though Linux makes a damn good development system.
> >
> > Hrm. How does one start?/How do you reccomend one should start?
>
> By knowing what he wants to do with it. Then choosing a language
> iaccording to that and starting to gather information.

*flicker of smile appears* Creating an AIS (Artificial Intelligence
Simulacrum) that can pass a Turing Test? With the ultimate goal of creating
true AL, but starting of more simply?

Or slightly more realistically, finding out where the VR industry currently
is (or if there even /is/ a VR industry), and working on writing software
for that?

Or completely realistically, simply telling you that I don't have a clue as
to what to do in the short-term, and that the only solid ideas I have are
either dreams or largely centred around computer game development, and in
any case I have no idea what the steps to them (if they even exist, which
I'm not betting on) would require, because I have no idea of the context,
which is why I'm asking you this in the first place?

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 5, 2004 10:22:34 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-04, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnc9cp0i.aor.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x8.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2004-05-02, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>>
>> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the ones
>> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water doesn't
>> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to
>> it either.
>
> Is this another of those 'not meant for other to reply to'? If not, see
> discussion below on 'threw' or 'had thrown'...

I just cutr out those stupid litte ">" because it got unreadable. Didn't
place no brackets, did I?

>> >> >> >> > 'you just threw a stone in'/'you had just thrown a stone into'.
>> >> >> I'm not sure wheather I prefer "had thrown" over "threw" and in fact
>> >> Anyway, what about the time form issue above?
>> >
>> > (To question avoidance: BAH!)
>> >
>> > Hmm. *considers for a while* At least for now, my best conjecture is
>> > that... no, wait, that's not right. Hmm. *thinks some more* Maybe
> it's
>> > because 'threw' is more a present tense thingamajig... 'He threw it
> into a
>> > lake.', 'He had thrown it into a lake.'. The first seems to be
> describing
>> > something that's currently-happening in the
>> > describing-something-that-has-already-happened, whereas the second is
> the
>> > describing something that's already-happened in the
>> > describing-something-that-has-already-happened. You see what I mean?
>>
>> Not so sure... you usually *do* use simple present if you are talking
>> about an acting that (can) happen repeatedly or at no specific point of
>> time, don't you.
>
> ('simple present'?) Ripples come from something which had happened (almost)
> immediately before...

Erm, "you *just* threw a stone in"?

>> Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in better...
>
> *relief*

So that makes it...

The air started to blur and ripples formed, like the ones on a lake you
had just thrown a stone in, but water doesn't tend to sit vertically in
midair and rarely has such a ghostly glow to it either.

Note the subtle changes in the rest of the sentence as well.

>> >> >> I know, I just don't like them [colons] very much. They look awkward
>> >> >> in the text.
>> >> >> I know, stupid argument, but that's the way I feel about it. It
> somehow
>> >> >> interrupts the flow of words. A hard interrupt (I really shouldn't
> make
>> >> >> jokes about DOS, I really shouldn't.)
>> >> >
>> >> > Hmm. *unforunately doesn't get the joke, as he knows very little
> about
>> > DOS*
>> >>
>> >> Oh, it's just... I instantly connected hardware interrupts with DOS.
>> >> Don't really know why, it's quite odd actually.
>> >
>> > Hmm. *quotes*
>> >
>> >
Quote:

>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> >

>>
>> <bg>
>> Where did you find that?
>
> A message board, though I don't know if the poster was copying it or wrote
> it himself.
>
> *smiles*

Ah.

>> >> >> >> >> Well, anyway... I'm too lazy to
>> >> >> >> >> look it up in google as well. Things are a *lot* easier if you
>> > can
>> >> > use
>> >> >> >> >> your own comp for getting online...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > *nods happily, and gratefully pats first his monitor, then his
>> >> > computer*
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> You happy guy (or whatever).
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Heh. *looks happy*
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Then again, you have much more freedom as a student (at university).
>> > And
>> >> >> a lot more work to do as well...
>> >> >
>> >> > Depends on what you mean by 'freedom', really.
>> >>
>> >> Yeah, I guess you are right.
>> >
>> > (Hoowah being right!)
>> >
>> > Thingamajig. *nods sagely*
>>
>> Having your own letter box?
>
> Who needs smail/pmail when you have email?

Everyone who wants to order things from amazon and co?
And what the hell is pmail anyway?

>> >> >> >> >> >> > Well, it's not as bad a sign as me vomiting blood, for
>> > example.
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> But pretty close... that's what you wanted to say, eh?
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > Erm, not exactly. (Hrmm... tiredness versus vomiting
> blood?
>> >> > Let's
>> >> >> >> > think
>> >> >> >> >> > about this...)
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> I'm smelling blood...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > That would be on your end, then. Or do you have some equipment
> I
>> >> > don't
>> >> >> > know
>> >> >> >> > about?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> It's a question of where I've been stading at that time, isn't
> it?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ...three years in(/to) the future?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I don't mix very well with time travelling. You should remember
> that.
>> >> >
>> >> > That was my point. (Yes, self... just say it in a blunt enough way
> and
>> >> > they'll/he'll take it as fact...)
>> >>
>> >> I'm not entirely sure what you just said...
>> >
>> > ....That was my intention. *see previous paragraph... sort of...*
>>
>> Oh, reversing madness. I like it.
>
> Hoowah! *grins*

It reminds me of... me! <bg>

>> >> >> >> >> >> >> > (Just to check, do you know what vmail stands for?)
>> >> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> >> Video mail? Al least that's one of it's meanings.
>> >> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> >> > *nods* Yep. In the specific example, a holographic 3D
> (4D,
>> >> >> >> >> > techinically)
>> >> >> >> >> >> > projection of the person appearing in mid-air...
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi!
>> >> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Oh, erm, sorry...
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > *looks amused* Basically that, yes, except in the case I'm
>> >> > thinking
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> >> > it's
>> >> >> >> >> > /above/ the projector. Directly [above].
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> I know, they had those, too.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > ...They did? I was referring to the ones from Deus Ex:
> Invisible
>> >> >> > War...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Almost everyone copies starwars to some degree. (Remember the
> scene
>> >> > what
>> >> >> >> they had the death star plans on such a device and were standing
>> > around
>> >> >> >> it?)
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Good point. I think. But this wasn't a 'battleplans' sort of
>> >> >> > thingamajig... it was just wide enough to project a miniature
> image
>> > of
>> >> > a
>> >> >> > person speaking above a keyboard. Only slightly wider than the
>> >> > very-small
>> >> >> > person.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Well, I like it bigger. Much bigger :-)
>> >> >
>> >> > Well, holosuites are fine if you're into that sort of thing.
>> >>
>> >> Well, StarTrek is fun... you can always laugh about the complete
> failure
>> >> of common sense/science. It's quite entertaining, but you definitely
>> >> don't have to think about it seriously - unless you want to make fun of
>> >> it, that is (see abovve).
>> >
>> > Hmm. *nods slightly: remembers a part with guns that could shoot
> through
>> > walls, and communications that went back in time, /neither of which were
>> > ever again used for any practical purpose/*
>> >
>> > ...Wait. Weren't we talking about Star Wars before?
>>
>> Erm, actually we were talking about v-mail...
>
> Right! Deus Ex: Invisible War. And it's worth playing Deus Ex first.

I don't think I'm gonna do that.

>> >> >> >> >> But R2D2 is waaaaaay cuter.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Heh. *remembers two conversations: the one, a cross between
> Star
>> >> > Wars
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> >> > Oliver Twist, and the other some people wondering about which
>> > game/s
>> >> > to
>> >> >> > rip
>> >> >> >> > off next*
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > (The first: "You've got to pick a pocket, artoo.", the second
>> > "Grand
>> >> >> > Theft
>> >> >> >> > Artoo".)
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> ::D oesn't know what to answer::
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Erm?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Yeeesh?
>> >> >
>> >> > ....breaking...up....ca...ear....u....ksssssssssshhhhhhhhhh......
>> >>
>> >> The person you are calling is not available at present. Please call
>> >> again later.
>> >
>> > The Win 16 Subsystem has insufficent resources to continue running.
> Click
>> > on OK, close your applications, and restart your machine.
>>
>> <g> Press any key to continue...
>> <key>a</key>
>> Do you want to save before exit?
>> <key>n</key>
>> Are you sure?
>> <key>n</key>
>>
>> Some day I'll get myself a shirt with that one...
>
> Hmm. I have the strange feeling that there's something inherently humourous
> about that that I don't understand...

Well, it doesn't really work that good in writing, but I was trying to
catch the spirit of an UF cartoon. Some clueless user sitting in front
of the comp and pressing the A-N-Y key(s)...

>> >> >> >> >> ...I talked about writing some new stuff that hadn't been
> posted
>> >> > then
>> >> >> >> >> (and isn't posted today as well). *And* I asked if hypothermia
>> >> > sounded
>> >> >> >> >> right. It's just... nobody ever listenes to what I say.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Ahh. Didn't I reply to it at the time? Anyway, I see what you
>> >> > mean...
>> >> >> >> > probably nothing wrong with it. *considers* What about a
> fever?
>> >> >> > Though
>> >> >> >> > possibly that's slightly overused.
>> >> >> BTW fever or cold is a bit too weak a word for that. Wait and
>> >> >> see. (In two installments or so.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ooo. *eyes widen, leans closer to screen interestedly* (Delirium?)
>> >>
>> >> Well... No! I won't spoil it for you.
>> >
>> > Okay. Just don't die and leave no records about what was going to
> happen.
>>
>> Well, I'll do my very best.
>
> Hoowah!

Erm, yes.

>> >> >> At the current speed that could happen
>> >> >> in one or two month...)
>> >> >
>> >> > Bah. Oh, well.
>> >>
>> >> Actually that sound pretty fast for me.
>> >
>> > *tries to think of a way from distracting from ever-lengthening
> expectation
>> > dates*
>> >
>> > ...Behind you! A three-headed monkey!
>>
>> The only three-headed monkey around here are you. Kinda. (markus, ghul,
>> rupert...) Erm, make that more-that-two-headed whatever...
>
> *smiles* We are a Triad, not a monkey. And it would be a three-bodied
><whatever>, and of course that's only if you don't count Snaga and the Hub.

Oh, I have a lot of exercise in denying the facts I have right in front
of my eyes, you now. Not really a problem to make a monkey of you then,
eh? (Sorry...)

>> >> >> >> >> ::starts weeping::
>> >> >> >> >> [1], that'd look quite stupid around here, but you get the
>> > general
>> >> > idea
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > *pats sympathetically* Does it help that it was a year ago,
> and I
>> >> > have
>> >> >> > a
>> >> >> >> > much worse memory than I would like?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Hey, *I* am the one with the seriously bad bad bad memory here,
> OK?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *laughs* ...Two people, competing over who has the worst
> memory...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> And me winning. <g>
>> >> >
>> >> > ...Huh? Winning what? Who are you? /What/ are you? What am /I/?
>> > What
>> >> > does 'what' mean, anyway!?
>> >>
>> >> 42? Ah, the great riddles of the universe.
>> >
>> > (What universe?)
>> >
>> > *humour*
>>
>> Universe 'humor' not found in database. Care to try again?
>
> *virtual reality*

Universe 'virtual reality' not found in database. Are you sure you know
what you are doing?

>> >> >> You know one of the
>> >> >> things I'm worst at is navigating. I need a decent map to find my
> way.
>> >> >> You can figure out yourself what such a level means to me, can't
> you?
>> >> >
>> >> > Sidhe. *nods* I could more-or-less recognize the places and/or
>> > entrances
>> >> > at which I had been, and /I/ kept getting confused and/or discovering
>> > new
>> >> > things...
>> >>
>> >> Holy Shee!
>> >
>> > *pat pat*
>> >
>> > *also is reminded in that part in Speaker for the Dead... "I'm not
> holy.
>> > Tell her." "...She didn't say 'holy'."
>>
>> I think I completely fail to enjoy this obref for reasons connected to
>> me not knowing "Speaker for the Dead".
>
> ...Read Ender's Game. Read Ender's Shadow. Not necessarily in that order.
> Then read their sequals. Please.

Some day... Really, I'm lacking a bit of time here. Or rather a lot of
it.

>> >> >> >> >> > Explanation: Because readers, while perhaps forgetting some
>> > small
>> >> >> > bits
>> >> >> >> > when
>> >> >> >> >> > concentrating on the all-bubhoshness of the rest, still
> greatly
>> >> >> >> > appreciate
>> >> >> >> >> > it. And it's not good to leave a story unfinished.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> I know, I know. I liked that character, though; you'll see
> more
>> > of
>> >> > him
>> >> >> >> >> eventually. Not necessarily much, but still.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > ...Okay, now you've got me curious. *goes searching with
> Google
>> >> > Groups*
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> And?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Memories were refreshed, and I realized what I'd been doing wrong:
>> > I'd
>> >> > been
>> >> >> > trying to remember a librarian for the place where she took the
> test.
>> >> >> > *wonders, in your universe, what the qualifications had to be to
>> > become
>> >> > a
>> >> >> > ghost*
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Rulg.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Pretty stubborn. Or damn ignorant; I think it's a mixture of both
> when
>> >> >> it comes to him. Is writing 'me' instead of 'him' in the previous
>> >> >> sentence freudian?
>> >> >
>> >> > You'd have to ask him.
>> >>
>> >> He... how do I tell you... deceased? Gone? Left this world for a better
>> >> one?
>> >
>> > Ah, but how do you know I wasn't being tricksy with my usage of 'he'?
>>
>> Because you didn't capitalize it. Refering to any entity able to tell
>> you about the dead without capitalization is blasphemy and will usually
>> result in learning about it than you asked for.
>
> Stringsie man-fool... no, wait, that's Trickster, not Cthulhu...
> *searches* Skahing Woodsie Lord.

....
- - -
....

>> >> > No, I don't really know what that last 'him' refers to, either.
>> >>
>> >> "I think it's a mixture of both when it comes to _me_."
>> >> Does that clear it up?
>> >
>> > Er... not exactly. I think I've forgotten something important along
> the
>> > lines of this conversation. What were we talking about...?
>>
>> Paragraph staring 23 lines above this one.
>
> ...I've already distorted the number and am too lazy and (slightly) pressed
> for time to look. Oh, and I'm also tired. *nod nod*

Let's just forget it, all right?

>> >> >> >> > Hmm. *daydreams about learning programming languages*
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Just do it, do it while you actually have time for it. Pascal is
> a
>> > nice
>> >> >> >> start (as long as you dfon't take it too serious). Fortran is a
> nice
>> >> >> >> choice as well (90, *don't* try 77). C is pretty useful, C++
> might
>> > be
>> >> >> >> worth considering, but I strongly suggest learning C first. Java
>> > might
>> >> >> >> be nice. And perl's not such bad a choice either. I have no
> personal
>> >> >> >> experience with Python, but some people absolutely love it. Don't
>> > touch
>> >> >> >> Visual* and .NET, though and forget about BASIC (not that I'd
> call
>> > it a
>> >> >> >> programming language).
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *nods slightly* Many things to do, so little time...
> thingamajig...
>> >> > Most
>> >> >> > definitely thingamajig. *nods slightly again*
>> >> >>
>> >> >> If you need some help, I'll be pleased to give you some pointers.
>> >> >> Programming is sooo cool.
>> >> >
>> >> > *envies* The advice I've gotten thus far (IIRC) suggests attempting
> all
>> >> > such on a computer running either Linux or Unix. This being a
> Windows
>> >> > machine... well.
>> >>
>> >> You can very well do it on windows. The OS isn't really that important,
>> >> though Linux makes a damn good development system.
>> >
>> > Hrm. How does one start?/How do you reccomend one should start?
>>
>> By knowing what he wants to do with it. Then choosing a language
>> iaccording to that and starting to gather information.
>
> *flicker of smile appears* Creating an AIS (Artificial Intelligence
> Simulacrum) that can pass a Turing Test? With the ultimate goal of creating
> true AL, but starting of more simply?

That's not exactly something you want to start with, but feel free to
try. There are even some special languages for that, but nothing I can
help you with.

> Or slightly more realistically, finding out where the VR industry currently
> is (or if there even /is/ a VR industry), and working on writing software
> for that?

C++, perhaps. Still, KISS.

> Or completely realistically, simply telling you that I don't have a clue as
> to what to do in the short-term, and that the only solid ideas I have are
> either dreams or largely centred around computer game development, and in
> any case I have no idea what the steps to them (if they even exist, which
> I'm not betting on) would require, because I have no idea of the context,
> which is why I'm asking you this in the first place?

Look, you usualy start with little command line thingamajigs(sp?).
Probably solving some math problem or something like that. Things you
know exactly how to do manually (boring routine stuff). That kind of
thing.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 5, 2004 5:40:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnc9h21f.hmp.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x10.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-05-04, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >
news:slrnc9cp0i.aor.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x8.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> On 2004-05-02, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >>
> >> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the ones
> >> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water doesn't
> >> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to
> >> it either.
> >
> > Is this another of those 'not meant for other to reply to'? If not, see
> > discussion below on 'threw' or 'had thrown'...
>
> I just cutr out those stupid litte ">" because it got unreadable.

Ahh.

> Didn't
> place no brackets, did I?

*counts the double negative* No. That's why I was checking.

> >> >> >> >> > 'you just threw a stone in'/'you had just thrown a stone
into'.
> >> >> >> I'm not sure wheather I prefer "had thrown" over "threw" and in
fact
> >> >> Anyway, what about the time form issue above?
> >> >
> >> > (To question avoidance: BAH!)
> >> >
> >> > Hmm. *considers for a while* At least for now, my best conjecture
is
> >> > that... no, wait, that's not right. Hmm. *thinks some more* Maybe
> > it's
> >> > because 'threw' is more a present tense thingamajig... 'He threw it
> > into a
> >> > lake.', 'He had thrown it into a lake.'. The first seems to be
> > describing
> >> > something that's currently-happening in the
> >> > describing-something-that-has-already-happened, whereas the second is
> > the
> >> > describing something that's already-happened in the
> >> > describing-something-that-has-already-happened. You see what I mean?
> >>
> >> Not so sure... you usually *do* use simple present if you are talking
> >> about an acting that (can) happen repeatedly or at no specific point of
> >> time, don't you.
> >
> > ('simple present'?) Ripples come from something which had happened
(almost)
> > immediately before...
>
> Erm, "you *just* threw a stone in"?

That artificially makes it seems as though it was like that, but only causes
it to clash more ('had just thrown' would be the substitution in this case).

> >> Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in better...
> >
> > *relief*
>
> So that makes it...
>
> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like the ones on a lake you
> had just thrown a stone in, but water doesn't tend to sit vertically in
> midair and rarely has such a ghostly glow to it either.
>
> Note the subtle changes in the rest of the sentence as well.

Ehh. Yes... Firstly, rulg. Secondly, 'into' instead of 'in', thirdly
'had' instead of 'has' ('has' is 'direct' present tense, if that makes any
sense), and I'd suggest 'like those on a lake you had', possibly 'like those
on a lake that you had'.

> >> >> >> I know, I just don't like them [colons] very much. They look
awkward
> >> >> >> in the text.
> >> >> >> I know, stupid argument, but that's the way I feel about it. It
> > somehow
> >> >> >> interrupts the flow of words. A hard interrupt (I really
shouldn't
> > make
> >> >> >> jokes about DOS, I really shouldn't.)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hmm. *unforunately doesn't get the joke, as he knows very little
> > about
> >> > DOS*
> >> >>
> >> >> Oh, it's just... I instantly connected hardware interrupts with DOS.
> >> >> Don't really know why, it's quite odd actually.
> >> >
> >> > Hmm. *quotes*
> >> >
> >> >
Quote:

> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >> >

> >>
> >> <bg>
> >> Where did you find that?
> >
> > A message board, though I don't know if the poster was copying it or
wrote
> > it himself.
> >
> > *smiles*
>
> Ah.

*nods*

> >> >> >> >> >> Well, anyway... I'm too lazy to
> >> >> >> >> >> look it up in google as well. Things are a *lot* easier if
you
> >> > can
> >> >> > use
> >> >> >> >> >> your own comp for getting online...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > *nods happily, and gratefully pats first his monitor, then
his
> >> >> > computer*
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> You happy guy (or whatever).
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Heh. *looks happy*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Then again, you have much more freedom as a student (at
university).
> >> > And
> >> >> >> a lot more work to do as well...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Depends on what you mean by 'freedom', really.
> >> >>
> >> >> Yeah, I guess you are right.
> >> >
> >> > (Hoowah being right!)
> >> >
> >> > Thingamajig. *nods sagely*
> >>
> >> Having your own letter box?
> >
> > Who needs smail/pmail when you have email?
>
> Everyone who wants to order things from amazon and co?

Fair enough.

> And what the hell is pmail anyway?

Paper Mail.

> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Well, it's not as bad a sign as me vomiting blood, for
> >> > example.
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> But pretty close... that's what you wanted to say, eh?
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > Erm, not exactly. (Hrmm... tiredness versus vomiting
> > blood?
> >> >> > Let's
> >> >> >> >> > think
> >> >> >> >> >> > about this...)
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> I'm smelling blood...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > That would be on your end, then. Or do you have some
equipment
> > I
> >> >> > don't
> >> >> >> > know
> >> >> >> >> > about?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> It's a question of where I've been stading at that time, isn't
> > it?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > ...three years in(/to) the future?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I don't mix very well with time travelling. You should remember
> > that.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That was my point. (Yes, self... just say it in a blunt enough
way
> > and
> >> >> > they'll/he'll take it as fact...)
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm not entirely sure what you just said...
> >> >
> >> > ....That was my intention. *see previous paragraph... sort of...*
> >>
> >> Oh, reversing madness. I like it.
> >
> > Hoowah! *grins*
>
> It reminds me of... me! <bg>

Heh. *smiles*

> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > (Just to check, do you know what vmail stands for?)
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Video mail? Al least that's one of it's meanings.
> >> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > *nods* Yep. In the specific example, a holographic
3D
> > (4D,
> >> >> >> >> >> > techinically)
> >> >> >> >> >> >> > projection of the person appearing in mid-air...
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Help me Obi-Wan Kenobi!
> >> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Oh, erm, sorry...
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > *looks amused* Basically that, yes, except in the case
I'm
> >> >> > thinking
> >> >> >> > of
> >> >> >> >> > it's
> >> >> >> >> >> > /above/ the projector. Directly [above].
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> I know, they had those, too.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > ...They did? I was referring to the ones from Deus Ex:
> > Invisible
> >> >> >> > War...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Almost everyone copies starwars to some degree. (Remember the
> > scene
> >> >> > what
> >> >> >> >> they had the death star plans on such a device and were
standing
> >> > around
> >> >> >> >> it?)
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Good point. I think. But this wasn't a 'battleplans' sort of
> >> >> >> > thingamajig... it was just wide enough to project a miniature
> > image
> >> > of
> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > person speaking above a keyboard. Only slightly wider than the
> >> >> > very-small
> >> >> >> > person.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Well, I like it bigger. Much bigger :-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Well, holosuites are fine if you're into that sort of thing.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, StarTrek is fun... you can always laugh about the complete
> > failure
> >> >> of common sense/science. It's quite entertaining, but you definitely
> >> >> don't have to think about it seriously - unless you want to make fun
of
> >> >> it, that is (see abovve).
> >> >
> >> > Hmm. *nods slightly: remembers a part with guns that could shoot
> > through
> >> > walls, and communications that went back in time, /neither of which
were
> >> > ever again used for any practical purpose/*
> >> >
> >> > ...Wait. Weren't we talking about Star Wars before?
> >>
> >> Erm, actually we were talking about v-mail...
> >
> > Right! Deus Ex: Invisible War. And it's worth playing Deus Ex first.
>
> I don't think I'm gonna do that.

Pity.

> >> >> >> >> >> But R2D2 is waaaaaay cuter.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Heh. *remembers two conversations: the one, a cross
between
> > Star
> >> >> > Wars
> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> >> > Oliver Twist, and the other some people wondering about
which
> >> > game/s
> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> > rip
> >> >> >> >> > off next*
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > (The first: "You've got to pick a pocket, artoo.", the
second
> >> > "Grand
> >> >> >> > Theft
> >> >> >> >> > Artoo".)
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> ::D oesn't know what to answer::
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Erm?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Yeeesh?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ....breaking...up....ca...ear....u....ksssssssssshhhhhhhhhh......
> >> >>
> >> >> The person you are calling is not available at present. Please call
> >> >> again later.
> >> >
> >> > The Win 16 Subsystem has insufficent resources to continue running.
> > Click
> >> > on OK, close your applications, and restart your machine.
> >>
> >> <g> Press any key to continue...
> >> <key>a</key>
> >> Do you want to save before exit?
> >> <key>n</key>
> >> Are you sure?
> >> <key>n</key>
> >>
> >> Some day I'll get myself a shirt with that one...
> >
> > Hmm. I have the strange feeling that there's something inherently
humourous
> > about that that I don't understand...
>
> Well, it doesn't really work that good in writing, but I was trying to
> catch the spirit of an UF cartoon. Some clueless user sitting in front
> of the comp and pressing the A-N-Y key(s)...

Ohh. From what you wrote, it looked like the user was pressing the A-N-N
key(s), and I don't know what that stands for besides Artificial Neural
Network, so I didn't understand what was humourous. Rulg.

> >> >> >> >> >> ...I talked about writing some new stuff that hadn't been
> > posted
> >> >> > then
> >> >> >> >> >> (and isn't posted today as well). *And* I asked if
hypothermia
> >> >> > sounded
> >> >> >> >> >> right. It's just... nobody ever listenes to what I say.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Ahh. Didn't I reply to it at the time? Anyway, I see what
you
> >> >> > mean...
> >> >> >> >> > probably nothing wrong with it. *considers* What about a
> > fever?
> >> >> >> > Though
> >> >> >> >> > possibly that's slightly overused.
> >> >> >> BTW fever or cold is a bit too weak a word for that. Wait and
> >> >> >> see. (In two installments or so.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Ooo. *eyes widen, leans closer to screen interestedly*
(Delirium?)
> >> >>
> >> >> Well... No! I won't spoil it for you.
> >> >
> >> > Okay. Just don't die and leave no records about what was going to
> > happen.
> >>
> >> Well, I'll do my very best.
> >
> > Hoowah!
>
> Erm, yes.

*nods happily*

> >> >> >> At the current speed that could happen
> >> >> >> in one or two month...)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Bah. Oh, well.
> >> >>
> >> >> Actually that sound pretty fast for me.
> >> >
> >> > *tries to think of a way from distracting from ever-lengthening
> > expectation
> >> > dates*
> >> >
> >> > ...Behind you! A three-headed monkey!
> >>
> >> The only three-headed monkey around here are you. Kinda. (markus, ghul,
> >> rupert...) Erm, make that more-that-two-headed whatever...
> >
> > *smiles* We are a Triad, not a monkey. And it would be a three-bodied
> ><whatever>, and of course that's only if you don't count Snaga and the
Hub.
>
> Oh, I have a lot of exercise in denying the facts I have right in front
> of my eyes, you now. Not really a problem to make a monkey of you then,
> eh? (Sorry...)

Thingamajig. *nods sagely*

> >> >> >> >> >> ::starts weeping::
> >> >> >> >> >> [1], that'd look quite stupid around here, but you get the
> >> > general
> >> >> > idea
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > *pats sympathetically* Does it help that it was a year ago,
> > and I
> >> >> > have
> >> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> >> > much worse memory than I would like?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Hey, *I* am the one with the seriously bad bad bad memory
here,
> > OK?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *laughs* ...Two people, competing over who has the worst
> > memory...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> And me winning. <g>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ...Huh? Winning what? Who are you? /What/ are you? What am
/I/?
> >> > What
> >> >> > does 'what' mean, anyway!?
> >> >>
> >> >> 42? Ah, the great riddles of the universe.
> >> >
> >> > (What universe?)
> >> >
> >> > *humour*
> >>
> >> Universe 'humor' not found in database. Care to try again?
> >
> > *virtual reality*
>
> Universe 'virtual reality' not found in database. Are you sure you know
> what you are doing?

N.

> >> >> >> You know one of the
> >> >> >> things I'm worst at is navigating. I need a decent map to find my
> > way.
> >> >> >> You can figure out yourself what such a level means to me, can't
> > you?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Sidhe. *nods* I could more-or-less recognize the places and/or
> >> > entrances
> >> >> > at which I had been, and /I/ kept getting confused and/or
discovering
> >> > new
> >> >> > things...
> >> >>
> >> >> Holy Shee!
> >> >
> >> > *pat pat*
> >> >
> >> > *also is reminded in that part in Speaker for the Dead... "I'm not
> > holy.
> >> > Tell her." "...She didn't say 'holy'."
> >>
> >> I think I completely fail to enjoy this obref for reasons connected to
> >> me not knowing "Speaker for the Dead".
> >
> > ...Read Ender's Game. Read Ender's Shadow. Not necessarily in that
order.
> > Then read their sequals. Please.
>
> Some day... Really, I'm lacking a bit of time here. Or rather a lot of
> it.

Skah.

> >> >> >> >> >> > Explanation: Because readers, while perhaps forgetting
some
> >> > small
> >> >> >> > bits
> >> >> >> >> > when
> >> >> >> >> >> > concentrating on the all-bubhoshness of the rest, still
> > greatly
> >> >> >> >> > appreciate
> >> >> >> >> >> > it. And it's not good to leave a story unfinished.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> I know, I know. I liked that character, though; you'll see
> > more
> >> > of
> >> >> > him
> >> >> >> >> >> eventually. Not necessarily much, but still.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > ...Okay, now you've got me curious. *goes searching with
> > Google
> >> >> > Groups*
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> And?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Memories were refreshed, and I realized what I'd been doing
wrong:
> >> > I'd
> >> >> > been
> >> >> >> > trying to remember a librarian for the place where she took the
> > test.
> >> >> >> > *wonders, in your universe, what the qualifications had to be
to
> >> > become
> >> >> > a
> >> >> >> > ghost*
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Rulg.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Pretty stubborn. Or damn ignorant; I think it's a mixture of both
> > when
> >> >> >> it comes to him. Is writing 'me' instead of 'him' in the previous
> >> >> >> sentence freudian?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > You'd have to ask him.
> >> >>
> >> >> He... how do I tell you... deceased? Gone? Left this world for a
better
> >> >> one?
> >> >
> >> > Ah, but how do you know I wasn't being tricksy with my usage of 'he'?
> >>
> >> Because you didn't capitalize it. Refering to any entity able to tell
> >> you about the dead without capitalization is blasphemy and will usually
> >> result in learning about it than you asked for.
> >
> > Stringsie man-fool... no, wait, that's Trickster, not Cthulhu...
> > *searches* Skahing Woodsie Lord.
>
> ...
> - - -
> ...

<much gibberish>
Call the fire, call the red, bringsie back past not dead!
<much gibberish>
Call the water, call the blue, brinsie forth world anew!
<much gibberish, suddenly interrupted>
....no, that's him again. *bonks Jackaberry*

> >> >> > No, I don't really know what that last 'him' refers to, either.
> >> >>
> >> >> "I think it's a mixture of both when it comes to _me_."
> >> >> Does that clear it up?
> >> >
> >> > Er... not exactly. I think I've forgotten something important along
> > the
> >> > lines of this conversation. What were we talking about...?
> >>
> >> Paragraph staring 23 lines above this one.
> >
> > ...I've already distorted the number and am too lazy and (slightly)
pressed
> > for time to look. Oh, and I'm also tired. *nod nod*
>
> Let's just forget it, all right?

....Maybe. *tired*

> >> >> >> >> > Hmm. *daydreams about learning programming languages*
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Just do it, do it while you actually have time for it. Pascal
is
> > a
> >> > nice
> >> >> >> >> start (as long as you dfon't take it too serious). Fortran is
a
> > nice
> >> >> >> >> choice as well (90, *don't* try 77). C is pretty useful, C++
> > might
> >> > be
> >> >> >> >> worth considering, but I strongly suggest learning C first.
Java
> >> > might
> >> >> >> >> be nice. And perl's not such bad a choice either. I have no
> > personal
> >> >> >> >> experience with Python, but some people absolutely love it.
Don't
> >> > touch
> >> >> >> >> Visual* and .NET, though and forget about BASIC (not that I'd
> > call
> >> > it a
> >> >> >> >> programming language).
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *nods slightly* Many things to do, so little time...
> > thingamajig...
> >> >> > Most
> >> >> >> > definitely thingamajig. *nods slightly again*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> If you need some help, I'll be pleased to give you some pointers.
> >> >> >> Programming is sooo cool.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *envies* The advice I've gotten thus far (IIRC) suggests
attempting
> > all
> >> >> > such on a computer running either Linux or Unix. This being a
> > Windows
> >> >> > machine... well.
> >> >>
> >> >> You can very well do it on windows. The OS isn't really that
important,
> >> >> though Linux makes a damn good development system.
> >> >
> >> > Hrm. How does one start?/How do you reccomend one should start?
> >>
> >> By knowing what he wants to do with it. Then choosing a language
> >> iaccording to that and starting to gather information.
> >
> > *flicker of smile appears* Creating an AIS (Artificial Intelligence
> > Simulacrum) that can pass a Turing Test? With the ultimate goal of
creating
> > true AL, but starting of more simply?
>
> That's not exactly something you want to start with, but feel free to
> try. There are even some special languages for that, but nothing I can
> help you with.

No intention of starting with such. But I have no idea where I would start
otherwise, which is a reason for asking you.

> > Or slightly more realistically, finding out where the VR industry
currently
> > is (or if there even /is/ a VR industry), and working on writing
software
> > for that?
>
> C++, perhaps. Still, KISS.

....What?

> > Or completely realistically, simply telling you that I don't have a clue
as
> > to what to do in the short-term, and that the only solid ideas I have
are
> > either dreams or largely centred around computer game development, and
in
> > any case I have no idea what the steps to them (if they even exist,
which
> > I'm not betting on) would require, because I have no idea of the
context,
> > which is why I'm asking you this in the first place?
>
> Look, you usualy start with little command line thingamajigs(sp?).
> Probably solving some math problem or something like that. Things you
> know exactly how to do manually (boring routine stuff). That kind of
> thing.

Ehh. By 'command line', do you mean DOS-related? I don't really know much
about it except how to find files if I know their general location.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 10, 2004 6:44:59 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-07, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnc9m9u8.rdg.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x10.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2004-05-06, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> >
> news:slrnc9k8sb.bqq.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>>
>> On 2004-05-05, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the ones
>> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water doesn't
>> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to
>> it either.
>>
>> >> >> >> Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in better...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *relief*
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So that makes it...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like the ones on a lake
> you
>> >> >> had just thrown a stone in, but water doesn't tend to sit vertically
> in
>> >> >> midair and rarely has such a ghostly glow to it either.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Note the subtle changes in the rest of the sentence as well.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ehh. Yes... Firstly, rulg.
>> >> > Secondly, 'into' instead of 'in', thirdly
>> >>
>> >> Damn. I should already have fixed that.
>> >
>> > Hoowah! *happiness*
>>
>> NAJISBU
>
><snip>?

No, not really. Might need it later...

>> >> > 'had' instead of 'has' ('has' is 'direct' present tense, if that
> makes
>> > any
>> >> > sense),
>> >>
>> >> I'm not so sure about you, but I hardly ever see water sitting in the
>> >> middle of air - independent (sp?) from the actual point of time.
>> >
>> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about /then/, and
> possibly
>> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite the narrator
>> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't see references to
> the
>> > English countryside, for example.
>>
>> Erm, "English countryside"?
>
> Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.

No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.

>> > There's an unspoken 'At that point in time' before anything. 'From the
>> > point of view of that point in time', water rarely had such a ghostly
> glow
>> > to it.
>>
>> That makes sense.
>
> Thank you. *smiles*

::bows::

>> >> > and I'd suggest 'like those on a lake you had', possibly 'like those
>> >> > on a lake that you had'.
>> >>
>> >> Well, yes... could we forget about the 'that', though?
>> >
>> > Maybe. Why?
>>
>> I know I'm not really an authority when it comes to style, but... erm,
>> you already suggested the version without "that", didn't you?
>
> ...What? It had a 'that' before?

....

>> So...
>>
>> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you had
>> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
>> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
>
> *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I think it should be
> good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying. *considers* Ahh, I
> see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That is, 'but water
> didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other words, it's implying
> that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the part about
> throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.

You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?

> ...And no, I'm not completely certain if that actually makes any sense.
> Just worried.

Ah.

> Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken 'back then'.
> 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus 'in the point of
> time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/, they (the
> ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the first the
> description is referring to the ripples in the air at that point in time,
> while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what water does.
>
> *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my interpretation makes
> sense. Especially since I still think that it should be 'had a ghostly
> glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
>
> ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and the
> 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it the way it is,
> unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah, complicated.

Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various versions...

>> >> >> >> > Ah, but how do you know I wasn't being tricksy with my usage of
>> > 'he'?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Because you didn't capitalize it. Refering to any entity able to
>> > tell
>> >> >> >> you about the dead without capitalization is blasphemy and will
>> > usually
>> >> >> >> result in learning about it than you asked for.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Stringsie man-fool... no, wait, that's Trickster, not Cthulhu...
>> >> >> > *searches* Skahing Woodsie Lord.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> - - -
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >
>> >> ><much gibberish>
>> >> > Call the fire, call the red, bringsie back past not dead!
>> >> ><much gibberish>
>> >> > Call the water, call the blue, brinsie forth world anew!
>> >> ><much gibberish, suddenly interrupted>
>> >> > ...no, that's him again. *bonks Jackaberry*
>> >>
>> >> <eg> Don't you know any other dark deities?
>> >
>> > Set.
>>
>> I had to reread it a few times... would have spelt it "Seth", you see.
>> Yes, that one's pretty dark, I have to admit.
>
> Thank you. And, er, exactly which deity do you mean by 'Seth'?

Egyptian(sp?) deity of... evil stuff. Osiris' brother, who killed him to
get his wife and their sister Isis or something like that.

>> >> >> > Or completely realistically, simply telling you that I don't have
> a
>> > clue
>> >> > as
>> >> >> > to what to do in the short-term, and that the only solid ideas I
> have
>> >> > are
>> >> >> > either dreams or largely centred around computer game development,
>> > and
>> >> > in
>> >> >> > any case I have no idea what the steps to them (if they even
> exist,
>> >> > which
>> >> >> > I'm not betting on) would require, because I have no idea of the
>> >> > context,
>> >> >> > which is why I'm asking you this in the first place?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Look, you usualy start with little command line thingamajigs(sp?).
>> >> >> Probably solving some math problem or something like that. Things
> you
>> >> >> know exactly how to do manually (boring routine stuff). That kind of
>> >> >> thing.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ehh. By 'command line', do you mean DOS-related? I don't really
> know
>> > much
>> >> > about it except how to find files if I know their general location.
>> >>
>> >> I mean "programs that take text as imput and give you their results as
>> >> text as well". Those are usually run in the DOS Box under Windows,
>> >> though. Still, the most powerful programs have such interfaces - it's
>> >> enough to implement a reasonable interface in most cases and doesn't
>> >> distract from the real thing. It's much easier on resources as well.
>> >> Graphics are something you can do if you know what you're doing, but
>> >> command line stuff is a really good point to start. There are some
>> >> compilers that give you the text interface in a window, though. Do I
>> >> talk too much?
>> >
>> > No. Though it'd help if you talked more and started from the assumption
>> > that I know absolutely nothing about these things at present and have to
> be
>> > talked through them step by (almost) infinitesimal step.
>>
>> I think we should put that in another thread. That could be looong...
>
> How about we splice it into the JNCOBOY thread?

Permission granted. Procede to phase two.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 11, 2004 6:39:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnc9v5bg.1kg.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-05-07, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >
news:slrnc9m9u8.rdg.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x10.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> On 2004-05-06, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >> >
> >
news:slrnc9k8sb.bqq.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >>
> >> On 2004-05-05, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the ones
> >> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water doesn't
> >> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to
> >> it either.
> >>
> >> >> >> >> Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in better...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *relief*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> So that makes it...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like the ones on a
lake
> > you
> >> >> >> had just thrown a stone in, but water doesn't tend to sit
vertically
> > in
> >> >> >> midair and rarely has such a ghostly glow to it either.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Note the subtle changes in the rest of the sentence as well.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Ehh. Yes... Firstly, rulg.
> >> >> > Secondly, 'into' instead of 'in', thirdly
> >> >>
> >> >> Damn. I should already have fixed that.
> >> >
> >> > Hoowah! *happiness*
> >>
> >> NAJISBU
> >
> ><snip>?
>
> No, not really. Might need it later...

Ahh.

> >> >> > 'had' instead of 'has' ('has' is 'direct' present tense, if that
> > makes
> >> > any
> >> >> > sense),
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm not so sure about you, but I hardly ever see water sitting in
the
> >> >> middle of air - independent (sp?) from the actual point of time.
> >> >
> >> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about /then/, and
> > possibly
> >> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite the
narrator
> >> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't see references
to
> > the
> >> > English countryside, for example.
> >>
> >> Erm, "English countryside"?
> >
> > Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.
>
> No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.

Sorry. But the narrator isn't openly telling the story. There are never
(well, almost never, hence this discussion) where suddenly the reader gets
yanked out of the story being told and into the world of the storyteller.

> >> > There's an unspoken 'At that point in time' before anything. 'From
the
> >> > point of view of that point in time', water rarely had such a ghostly
> > glow
> >> > to it.
> >>
> >> That makes sense.
> >
> > Thank you. *smiles*
>
> ::bows::

NAJISBU.

> >> >> > and I'd suggest 'like those on a lake you had', possibly 'like
those
> >> >> > on a lake that you had'.
> >> >>
> >> >> Well, yes... could we forget about the 'that', though?
> >> >
> >> > Maybe. Why?
> >>
> >> I know I'm not really an authority when it comes to style, but... erm,
> >> you already suggested the version without "that", didn't you?
> >
> > ...What? It had a 'that' before?
>
> ...

Yes or no?

....And, thinking about it, I see your/my point.

> >> So...
> >>
> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you
had
> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
> >
> > *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I think it should
be
> > good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying. *considers*
Ahh, I
> > see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That is, 'but
water
> > didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other words, it's
implying
> > that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the part about
> > throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.
>
> You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?

....I'm not making any sense, am I?

> > ...And no, I'm not completely certain if that actually makes any sense.
> > Just worried.
>
> Ah.

*nods slightly*

> > Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken 'back then'.
> > 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus 'in the
point of
> > time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/, they (the
> > ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the first the
> > description is referring to the ripples in the air at that point in
time,
> > while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what water does.
> >
> > *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my interpretation
makes
> > sense. Especially since I still think that it should be 'had a ghostly
> > glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
> >
> > ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and the
> > 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it the way it is,
> > unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah, complicated.
>
> Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various versions...

Same here. But I /think/ I mean keep it 'didn't tend to sit vertically' and
'had a ghostly glow'.

> >> >> >> >> > Ah, but how do you know I wasn't being tricksy with my usage
of
> >> > 'he'?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Because you didn't capitalize it. Refering to any entity able
to
> >> > tell
> >> >> >> >> you about the dead without capitalization is blasphemy and
will
> >> > usually
> >> >> >> >> result in learning about it than you asked for.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Stringsie man-fool... no, wait, that's Trickster, not
Cthulhu...
> >> >> >> > *searches* Skahing Woodsie Lord.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> - - -
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >
> >> >> ><much gibberish>
> >> >> > Call the fire, call the red, bringsie back past not dead!
> >> >> ><much gibberish>
> >> >> > Call the water, call the blue, brinsie forth world anew!
> >> >> ><much gibberish, suddenly interrupted>
> >> >> > ...no, that's him again. *bonks Jackaberry*
> >> >>
> >> >> <eg> Don't you know any other dark deities?
> >> >
> >> > Set.
> >>
> >> I had to reread it a few times... would have spelt it "Seth", you see.
> >> Yes, that one's pretty dark, I have to admit.
> >
> > Thank you. And, er, exactly which deity do you mean by 'Seth'?
>
> Egyptian(sp?) deity of... evil stuff. Osiris' brother, who killed him to
> get his wife and their sister Isis or something like that.

Yes... that's [indeed] who I was thinking of with 'Set'. Ooo, and shall we
splice this discussion into the JNCOBOY thread as well?

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 11, 2004 7:39:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-11, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> >> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the ones
>> >> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water doesn't
>> >> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to
>> >> it either.
>> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in better...
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > *relief*
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> So that makes it...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like the ones on a
> lake
>> > you
>> >> >> >> had just thrown a stone in, but water doesn't tend to sit
> vertically
>> > in
>> >> >> >> midair and rarely has such a ghostly glow to it either.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Note the subtle changes in the rest of the sentence as well.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Ehh. Yes... Firstly, rulg.
>> >> >> > Secondly, 'into' instead of 'in', thirdly
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Damn. I should already have fixed that.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > 'had' instead of 'has' ('has' is 'direct' present tense, if that
>> > makes
>> >> > any
>> >> >> > sense),
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I'm not so sure about you, but I hardly ever see water sitting in
> the
>> >> >> middle of air - independent (sp?) from the actual point of time.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about /then/, and
>> > possibly
>> >> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite the
> narrator
>> >> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't see references
> to
>> > the
>> >> > English countryside, for example.
>> >>
>> >> Erm, "English countryside"?
>> >
>> > Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.
>>
>> No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.
>
> Sorry. But the narrator isn't openly telling the story. There are never
> (well, almost never, hence this discussion) where suddenly the reader gets
> yanked out of the story being told and into the world of the storyteller.

So, where does the "English Countryside" get in there?

>> >> > There's an unspoken 'At that point in time' before anything. 'From
> the
>> >> > point of view of that point in time', water rarely had such a ghostly
>> > glow
>> >> > to it.
>> >>
>> >> That makes sense.
>> >
>> > Thank you. *smiles*
>>
>> ::bows::
>
> NAJISBU.
>
>> >> >> > and I'd suggest 'like those on a lake you had', possibly 'like
> those
>> >> >> > on a lake that you had'.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Well, yes... could we forget about the 'that', though?
>> >> >
>> >> > Maybe. Why?
>> >>
>> >> I know I'm not really an authority when it comes to style, but... erm,
>> >> you already suggested the version without "that", didn't you?
>> >
>> > ...What? It had a 'that' before?
>>
>> ...
>
> Yes or no?
>
> ...And, thinking about it, I see your/my point.

Erm, you do?

>> >> So...
>> >>
>> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you
> had
>> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
>> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
>> >
>> > *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I think it should
> be
>> > good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying. *considers*
> Ahh, I
>> > see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That is, 'but
> water
>> > didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other words, it's
> implying
>> > that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the part about
>> > throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.
>>
>> You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?
>
> ...I'm not making any sense, am I?

Not exactly. Not to me anyway.

>> > Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken 'back then'.
>> > 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus 'in the
> point of
>> > time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/, they (the
>> > ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the first the
>> > description is referring to the ripples in the air at that point in
> time,
>> > while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what water does.
>> >
>> > *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my interpretation
> makes
>> > sense. Especially since I still think that it should be 'had a ghostly
>> > glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
>> >
>> > ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and the
>> > 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it the way it is,
>> > unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah, complicated.
>>
>> Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various versions...
>
> Same here. But I /think/ I mean keep it 'didn't tend to sit vertically' and
> 'had a ghostly glow'.

The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you had
just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either.

Erm, I'm not too sure about, but... wouldn't "you have just thrown a
stone" sound better? Probably not. But somehow it still sounds odd...

>> >> >> >> >> > Ah, but how do you know I wasn't being tricksy with my usage
> of
>> >> > 'he'?
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Because you didn't capitalize it. Refering to any entity able
> to
>> >> > tell
>> >> >> >> >> you about the dead without capitalization is blasphemy and
> will
>> >> > usually
>> >> >> >> >> result in learning about it than you asked for.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Stringsie man-fool... no, wait, that's Trickster, not
> Cthulhu...
>> >> >> >> > *searches* Skahing Woodsie Lord.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >> - - -
>> >> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> ><much gibberish>
>> >> >> > Call the fire, call the red, bringsie back past not dead!
>> >> >> ><much gibberish>
>> >> >> > Call the water, call the blue, brinsie forth world anew!
>> >> >> ><much gibberish, suddenly interrupted>
>> >> >> > ...no, that's him again. *bonks Jackaberry*
>> >> >>
>> >> >> <eg> Don't you know any other dark deities?
>> >> >
>> >> > Set.
>> >>
>> >> I had to reread it a few times... would have spelt it "Seth", you see.
>> >> Yes, that one's pretty dark, I have to admit.
>> >
>> > Thank you. And, er, exactly which deity do you mean by 'Seth'?
>>
>> Egyptian(sp?) deity of... evil stuff. Osiris' brother, who killed him to
>> get his wife and their sister Isis or something like that.
>
> Yes... that's [indeed] who I was thinking of with 'Set'. Ooo, and shall we
> splice this discussion into the JNCOBOY thread as well?

Do as you whish. As soon as we get this issue about the first paragraph
sorted aout the thread will be obsolete anyway.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 12, 2004 7:27:02 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnca1su9.beb.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-05-11, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> >> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the
ones
> >> >> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water
doesn't
> >> >> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow
to
> >> >> it either.
> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in
better...
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > *relief*
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> So that makes it...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like the ones on a
> > lake
> >> > you
> >> >> >> >> had just thrown a stone in, but water doesn't tend to sit
> > vertically
> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> midair and rarely has such a ghostly glow to it either.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Note the subtle changes in the rest of the sentence as well.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Ehh. Yes... Firstly, rulg.
> >> >> >> > Secondly, 'into' instead of 'in', thirdly
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Damn. I should already have fixed that.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > 'had' instead of 'has' ('has' is 'direct' present tense, if
that
> >> > makes
> >> >> > any
> >> >> >> > sense),
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I'm not so sure about you, but I hardly ever see water sitting in
> > the
> >> >> >> middle of air - independent (sp?) from the actual point of time.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about /then/, and
> >> > possibly
> >> >> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite the
> > narrator
> >> >> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't see
references
> > to
> >> > the
> >> >> > English countryside, for example.
> >> >>
> >> >> Erm, "English countryside"?
> >> >
> >> > Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.
> >>
> >> No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.
> >
> > Sorry. But the narrator isn't openly telling the story. There are
never
> > (well, almost never, hence this discussion) where suddenly the reader
gets
> > yanked out of the story being told and into the world of the
storyteller.
>
> So, where does the "English Countryside" get in there?

It was a random example. You/a narrator could [be] compare/comparing a
field to it.

> >> >> > There's an unspoken 'At that point in time' before anything.
'From
> > the
> >> >> > point of view of that point in time', water rarely had such a
ghostly
> >> > glow
> >> >> > to it.
> >> >>
> >> >> That makes sense.
> >> >
> >> > Thank you. *smiles*
> >>
> >> ::bows::
> >
> > NAJISBU.
> >
> >> >> >> > and I'd suggest 'like those on a lake you had', possibly 'like
> > those
> >> >> >> > on a lake that you had'.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Well, yes... could we forget about the 'that', though?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Maybe. Why?
> >> >>
> >> >> I know I'm not really an authority when it comes to style, but...
erm,
> >> >> you already suggested the version without "that", didn't you?
> >> >
> >> > ...What? It had a 'that' before?
> >>
> >> ...
> >
> > Yes or no?
> >
> > ...And, thinking about it, I see your/my point.
>
> Erm, you do?

I think so. *nods*

> >> >> So...
> >> >>
> >> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake
you
> > had
> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
> >> >
> >> > *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I think it
should
> > be
> >> > good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying. *considers*
> > Ahh, I
> >> > see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That is, 'but
> > water
> >> > didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other words, it's
> > implying
> >> > that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the part about
> >> > throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.
> >>
> >> You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?
> >
> > ...I'm not making any sense, am I?
>
> Not exactly. Not to me anyway.

Damn. What did you think (at first glance) I meant?

> >> > Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken 'back
then'.
> >> > 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus 'in the
> > point of
> >> > time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/, they (the
> >> > ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the first
the
> >> > description is referring to the ripples in the air at that point in
> > time,
> >> > while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what water does.
> >> >
> >> > *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my interpretation
> > makes
> >> > sense. Especially since I still think that it should be 'had a
ghostly
> >> > glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
> >> >
> >> > ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and the
> >> > 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it the way it
is,
> >> > unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah,
complicated.
> >>
> >> Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various versions...
> >
> > Same here. But I /think/ I mean keep it 'didn't tend to sit vertically'
and
> > 'had a ghostly glow'.
>
> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you had
> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either.

Wonderful! *much happiness*

> Erm, I'm not too sure about, but... wouldn't "you have just thrown a
> stone" sound better? Probably not. But somehow it still sounds odd...

Here 'not'. To try and answer it specifically, 'you have' is suddenly
addressing the reader in the present tense. 'ripples formed, like those on
a lake you have just thrown a stone into' suddenly springs to the reader,
and the 'suggested case' which it's comparing it to is when the reader--in
the reader's present--has just thrown a stone into a lake, whether s/he has
or not.

However, the point is to imagine the reader (though s/he doesn't think of
himself/herself as 'the reader' at the time) having just thrown a stone into
a lake /in the abstract/, /at any time/. Namely, grounded in the time of
the story.

This [explanation] may not make any sense, but it's the best I can do.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 13, 2004 6:15:01 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-12, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnca1su9.beb.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2004-05-11, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> >> >> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the
> ones
>> >> >> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water
> doesn't
>> >> >> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow
> to
>> >> >> it either.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> >> Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in
> better...
>> >> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >> > *relief*
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> So that makes it...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like the ones on a
>> > lake
>> >> > you
>> >> >> >> >> had just thrown a stone in, but water doesn't tend to sit
>> > vertically
>> >> > in
>> >> >> >> >> midair and rarely has such a ghostly glow to it either.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Note the subtle changes in the rest of the sentence as well.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Ehh. Yes... Firstly, rulg.
>> >> >> >> > Secondly, 'into' instead of 'in', thirdly
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Damn. I should already have fixed that.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > 'had' instead of 'has' ('has' is 'direct' present tense, if
> that
>> >> > makes
>> >> >> > any
>> >> >> >> > sense),
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> I'm not so sure about you, but I hardly ever see water sitting in
>> > the
>> >> >> >> middle of air - independent (sp?) from the actual point of time.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about /then/, and
>> >> > possibly
>> >> >> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite the
>> > narrator
>> >> >> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't see
> references
>> > to
>> >> > the
>> >> >> > English countryside, for example.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Erm, "English countryside"?
>> >> >
>> >> > Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.
>> >>
>> >> No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.
>> >
>> > Sorry. But the narrator isn't openly telling the story. There are
> never
>> > (well, almost never, hence this discussion) where suddenly the reader
> gets
>> > yanked out of the story being told and into the world of the
> storyteller.
>>
>> So, where does the "English Countryside" get in there?
>
> It was a random example. You/a narrator could [be] compare/comparing a
> field to it.

Ah, it's just... English countryside doesn't make much sense for me...

>> >> >> > There's an unspoken 'At that point in time' before anything.
> 'From
>> > the
>> >> >> > point of view of that point in time', water rarely had such a
> ghostly
>> >> > glow
>> >> >> > to it.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That makes sense.
>> >> >
>> >> > Thank you. *smiles*
>> >>
>> >> ::bows::
>> >
>> > NAJISBU.
>> >
>> >> >> >> > and I'd suggest 'like those on a lake you had', possibly 'like
>> > those
>> >> >> >> > on a lake that you had'.

NAJISBU

>> >> >> So...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake
> you
>> > had
>> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
>> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
>> >> >
>> >> > *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I think it
> should
>> > be
>> >> > good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying. *considers*
>> > Ahh, I
>> >> > see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That is, 'but
>> > water
>> >> > didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other words, it's
>> > implying
>> >> > that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the part about
>> >> > throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.
>> >>
>> >> You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?
>> >
>> > ...I'm not making any sense, am I?
>>
>> Not exactly. Not to me anyway.
>
> Damn. What did you think (at first glance) I meant?

At first glance? At first glance I couldn't make any sense in it, of
course. Not that it is much different now...

>> >> > Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken 'back
> then'.
>> >> > 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus 'in the
>> > point of
>> >> > time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/, they (the
>> >> > ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the first
> the
>> >> > description is referring to the ripples in the air at that point in
>> > time,
>> >> > while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what water does.
>> >> >
>> >> > *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my interpretation
>> > makes
>> >> > sense. Especially since I still think that it should be 'had a
> ghostly
>> >> > glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
>> >> >
>> >> > ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and the
>> >> > 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it the way it
> is,
>> >> > unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah,
> complicated.
>> >>
>> >> Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various versions...
>> >
>> > Same here. But I /think/ I mean keep it 'didn't tend to sit vertically'
> and
>> > 'had a ghostly glow'.
>>
>> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you had
>> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
>> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either.
>
> Wonderful! *much happiness*

Not really. Not as far as it concerns me, that is.

"The air started to blur and ripples formed, like a lake's surface after
throwing stones into the water. Water, however, didn't sit vertically in
midair and rarely had such a strange glow to it either."

How does that sound? <d&rlh>

>> Erm, I'm not too sure about, but... wouldn't "you have just thrown a
>> stone" sound better? Probably not. But somehow it still sounds odd...
>
> Here 'not'. To try and answer it specifically, 'you have' is suddenly
> addressing the reader in the present tense. 'ripples formed, like those on
> a lake you have just thrown a stone into' suddenly springs to the reader,
> and the 'suggested case' which it's comparing it to is when the reader--in
> the reader's present--has just thrown a stone into a lake, whether s/he has
> or not.
>
> However, the point is to imagine the reader (though s/he doesn't think of
> himself/herself as 'the reader' at the time) having just thrown a stone into
> a lake /in the abstract/, /at any time/. Namely, grounded in the time of
> the story.
>
> This [explanation] may not make any sense, but it's the best I can do.

It makes sense, it's just... I don't really want to think about it at
this time... Mind boggling(sp?!??) and stuff...
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 14, 2004 6:29:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrnca70n8.cu3.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x7.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-05-12, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >
news:slrnca1su9.beb.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> On 2004-05-11, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> >> >> The air started to blur (as if hot) and ripples formed, like the
> > ones
> >> >> >> on the surface of a lake you just threw a stone in, but water
> > doesn't
> >> >> >> tend to sit vertically in midair and rarely had such a ghostly
glow
> > to
> >> >> >> it either.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> >> Although I start to feel that 'had thrown' fits in
> > better...
> >> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >> > *relief*
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> So that makes it...
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like the ones
on a
> >> > lake
> >> >> > you
> >> >> >> >> >> had just thrown a stone in, but water doesn't tend to sit
> >> > vertically
> >> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> >> midair and rarely has such a ghostly glow to it either.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Note the subtle changes in the rest of the sentence as
well.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Ehh. Yes... Firstly, rulg.
> >> >> >> >> > Secondly, 'into' instead of 'in', thirdly
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Damn. I should already have fixed that.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > 'had' instead of 'has' ('has' is 'direct' present tense, if
> > that
> >> >> > makes
> >> >> >> > any
> >> >> >> >> > sense),
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I'm not so sure about you, but I hardly ever see water sitting
in
> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> middle of air - independent (sp?) from the actual point of
time.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about /then/,
and
> >> >> > possibly
> >> >> >> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite the
> >> > narrator
> >> >> >> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't see
> > references
> >> > to
> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> > English countryside, for example.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Erm, "English countryside"?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.
> >> >>
> >> >> No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.
> >> >
> >> > Sorry. But the narrator isn't openly telling the story. There are
> > never
> >> > (well, almost never, hence this discussion) where suddenly the reader
> > gets
> >> > yanked out of the story being told and into the world of the
> > storyteller.
> >>
> >> So, where does the "English Countryside" get in there?
> >
> > It was a random example. You/a narrator could [be] compare/comparing a
> > field to it.
>
> Ah, it's just... English countryside doesn't make much sense for me...

Sorry. Being in England, such examples tend to come more easily to my mind
than, for example, refences to the Polish countryside. (I've never actually
been in Poland... though since I can't remember whether you're American,
European, Canadian, etc. I don't know whether you have, either.)

> >> >> >> > There's an unspoken 'At that point in time' before anything.
> > 'From
> >> > the
> >> >> >> > point of view of that point in time', water rarely had such a
> > ghostly
> >> >> > glow
> >> >> >> > to it.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> That makes sense.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thank you. *smiles*
> >> >>
> >> >> ::bows::
> >> >
> >> > NAJISBU.
> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > and I'd suggest 'like those on a lake you had', possibly
'like
> >> > those
> >> >> >> >> > on a lake that you had'.
>
> NAJISBU
>
> >> >> >> So...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake
> > you
> >> > had
> >> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically
in
> >> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I think it
> > should
> >> > be
> >> >> > good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying.
*considers*
> >> > Ahh, I
> >> >> > see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That is,
'but
> >> > water
> >> >> > didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other words, it's
> >> > implying
> >> >> > that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the part
about
> >> >> > throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.
> >> >>
> >> >> You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?
> >> >
> >> > ...I'm not making any sense, am I?
> >>
> >> Not exactly. Not to me anyway.
> >
> > Damn. What did you think (at first glance) I meant?
>
> At first glance? At first glance I couldn't make any sense in it, of
> course. Not that it is much different now...

Skah. Well, on the 'You mean...' what was it that you /thought/ I meant,
before it dissolved into confusion and you asked me?

> >> >> > Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken 'back
> > then'.
> >> >> > 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus 'in
the
> >> > point of
> >> >> > time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/, they
(the
> >> >> > ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the first
> > the
> >> >> > description is referring to the ripples in the air at that point
in
> >> > time,
> >> >> > while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what water
does.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my
interpretation
> >> > makes
> >> >> > sense. Especially since I still think that it should be 'had a
> > ghostly
> >> >> > glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and the
> >> >> > 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it the way
it
> > is,
> >> >> > unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah,
> > complicated.
> >> >>
> >> >> Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various
versions...
> >> >
> >> > Same here. But I /think/ I mean keep it 'didn't tend to sit
vertically'
> > and
> >> > 'had a ghostly glow'.
> >>
> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you
had
> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either.
> >
> > Wonderful! *much happiness*
>
> Not really. Not as far as it concerns me, that is.

Eh. Just because it doesn't concern you doesn't mean it's not important.
*nod nod*

> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like a lake's surface after
> throwing stones into the water. Water, however, didn't sit vertically in
> midair and rarely had such a strange glow to it either."
>
> How does that sound? <d&rlh>

*buries face in hands*

That makes it sound as if it's the lake's surface that's just thrown stones
into the water. 'after stones had been thrown into'.

> >> Erm, I'm not too sure about, but... wouldn't "you have just thrown a
> >> stone" sound better? Probably not. But somehow it still sounds odd...
> >
> > Here 'not'. To try and answer it specifically, 'you have' is suddenly
> > addressing the reader in the present tense. 'ripples formed, like those
on
> > a lake you have just thrown a stone into' suddenly springs to the
reader,
> > and the 'suggested case' which it's comparing it to is when the
reader--in
> > the reader's present--has just thrown a stone into a lake, whether s/he
has
> > or not.
> >
> > However, the point is to imagine the reader (though s/he doesn't think
of
> > himself/herself as 'the reader' at the time) having just thrown a stone
into
> > a lake /in the abstract/, /at any time/. Namely, grounded in the time
of
> > the story.
> >
> > This [explanation] may not make any sense, but it's the best I can do.
>
> It makes sense,

*relief* That's good.

> it's just... I don't really want to think about it at
> this time... Mind boggling(sp?!??) and stuff...

Sympathy. Good luck.

Oh, and I think you spelled 'boggling' correctly. *smiles*

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 15, 2004 12:18:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

And when it was 2004-05-14, illusion
<c82hk7$910$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk> was created,
stating that Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web>
uttered in alt.games.creatures:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrnca70n8.cu3.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x7.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> >> >> >> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about /then/,
> and
>> >> >> > possibly
>> >> >> >> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite the
>> >> > narrator
>> >> >> >> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't see
>> > references
>> >> > to
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> > English countryside, for example.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Erm, "English countryside"?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.
>> >> >
>> >> > Sorry. But the narrator isn't openly telling the story. There are
>> > never
>> >> > (well, almost never, hence this discussion) where suddenly the reader
>> > gets
>> >> > yanked out of the story being told and into the world of the
>> > storyteller.
>> >>
>> >> So, where does the "English Countryside" get in there?
>> >
>> > It was a random example. You/a narrator could [be] compare/comparing a
>> > field to it.
>>
>> Ah, it's just... English countryside doesn't make much sense for me...
>
> Sorry. Being in England, such examples tend to come more easily to my mind
> than, for example, refences to the Polish countryside. (I've never actually
> been in Poland... though since I can't remember whether you're American,
> European, Canadian, etc. I don't know whether you have, either.)

Well, with my serious problems with the English language I'll hardly be
American. (Then again...) Anyway, I'm pretty much German. It's not
that's it's a secret or something.

>> >> >> >> So...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake
>> > you
>> >> > had
>> >> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically
> in
>> >> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I think it
>> > should
>> >> > be
>> >> >> > good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying.
> *considers*
>> >> > Ahh, I
>> >> >> > see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That is,
> 'but
>> >> > water
>> >> >> > didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other words, it's
>> >> > implying
>> >> >> > that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the part
> about
>> >> >> > throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?
>> >> >
>> >> > ...I'm not making any sense, am I?
>> >>
>> >> Not exactly. Not to me anyway.
>> >
>> > Damn. What did you think (at first glance) I meant?
>>
>> At first glance? At first glance I couldn't make any sense in it, of
>> course. Not that it is much different now...
>
> Skah. Well, on the 'You mean...' what was it that you /thought/ I meant,
> before it dissolved into confusion and you asked me?

I'm stupid./WTF

>> >> >> > Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken 'back
>> > then'.
>> >> >> > 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus 'in
> the
>> >> > point of
>> >> >> > time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/, they
> (the
>> >> >> > ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the first
>> > the
>> >> >> > description is referring to the ripples in the air at that point
> in
>> >> > time,
>> >> >> > while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what water
> does.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my
> interpretation
>> >> > makes
>> >> >> > sense. Especially since I still think that it should be 'had a
>> > ghostly
>> >> >> > glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and the
>> >> >> > 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it the way
> it
>> > is,
>> >> >> > unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah,
>> > complicated.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various
> versions...
>> >> >
>> >> > Same here. But I /think/ I mean keep it 'didn't tend to sit
> vertically'
>> > and
>> >> > 'had a ghostly glow'.
>> >>
>> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you
> had
>> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
>> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either.
>> >
>> > Wonderful! *much happiness*
>>
>> Not really. Not as far as it concerns me, that is.
>
> Eh. Just because it doesn't concern you doesn't mean it's not important.
> *nod nod*

Sorry for letting you down.

>> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like a lake's surface after
>> throwing stones into the water. Water, however, didn't sit vertically in
>> midair and rarely had such a strange glow to it either."
>>
>> How does that sound? <d&rlh>
>
> *buries face in hands*

Um, sorry? ...
::backs off and makes a break for it::

> That makes it sound as if it's the lake's surface that's just thrown stones
> into the water. 'after stones had been thrown into'.

Let's get back to the other one and keep it at that.

>> >> Erm, I'm not too sure about, but... wouldn't "you have just thrown a
>> >> stone" sound better? Probably not. But somehow it still sounds odd...
>> >
>> > Here 'not'. To try and answer it specifically, 'you have' is suddenly
>> > addressing the reader in the present tense. 'ripples formed, like those
> on
>> > a lake you have just thrown a stone into' suddenly springs to the
> reader,
>> > and the 'suggested case' which it's comparing it to is when the
> reader--in
>> > the reader's present--has just thrown a stone into a lake, whether s/he
> has
>> > or not.
>> >
>> > However, the point is to imagine the reader (though s/he doesn't think
> of
>> > himself/herself as 'the reader' at the time) having just thrown a stone
> into
>> > a lake /in the abstract/, /at any time/. Namely, grounded in the time
> of
>> > the story.
>> >
>> > This [explanation] may not make any sense, but it's the best I can do.
>>
>> It makes sense,
>
> *relief* That's good.
>
>> it's just... I don't really want to think about it at
>> this time... Mind boggling(sp?!??) and stuff...
>
> Sympathy. Good luck.
>
> Oh, and I think you spelled 'boggling' correctly. *smiles*

Well, at least one thing I did right.

FILE CLOSED.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 15, 2004 8:22:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrncabk90.4ad.the_emmel*whatever*@storm.mlnet...
> And when it was 2004-05-14, illusion
> <c82hk7$910$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk> was created,
> stating that Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web>
> uttered in alt.games.creatures:
> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >
news:slrnca70n8.cu3.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x7.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> >> >> >> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about
/then/,
> > and
> >> >> >> > possibly
> >> >> >> >> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite
the
> >> >> > narrator
> >> >> >> >> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't see
> >> > references
> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > English countryside, for example.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Erm, "English countryside"?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Sorry. But the narrator isn't openly telling the story. There
are
> >> > never
> >> >> > (well, almost never, hence this discussion) where suddenly the
reader
> >> > gets
> >> >> > yanked out of the story being told and into the world of the
> >> > storyteller.
> >> >>
> >> >> So, where does the "English Countryside" get in there?
> >> >
> >> > It was a random example. You/a narrator could [be] compare/comparing
a
> >> > field to it.
> >>
> >> Ah, it's just... English countryside doesn't make much sense for me...
> >
> > Sorry. Being in England, such examples tend to come more easily to my
mind
> > than, for example, refences to the Polish countryside. (I've never
actually
> > been in Poland... though since I can't remember whether you're
American,
> > European, Canadian, etc. I don't know whether you have, either.)
>
> Well, with my serious problems with the English language I'll hardly be
> American. (Then again...)

<dry voice>Quite.</voice>

> Anyway, I'm pretty much German. It's not
> that's it's a secret or something.

Ahh. *attempts to remember* Just because something isn't a secret doesn't
mean that it's automatically known.

> >> >> >> >> So...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a
lake
> >> > you
> >> >> > had
> >> >> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit
vertically
> > in
> >> >> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I think
it
> >> > should
> >> >> > be
> >> >> >> > good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying.
> > *considers*
> >> >> > Ahh, I
> >> >> >> > see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That is,
> > 'but
> >> >> > water
> >> >> >> > didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other words,
it's
> >> >> > implying
> >> >> >> > that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the part
> > about
> >> >> >> > throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ...I'm not making any sense, am I?
> >> >>
> >> >> Not exactly. Not to me anyway.
> >> >
> >> > Damn. What did you think (at first glance) I meant?
> >>
> >> At first glance? At first glance I couldn't make any sense in it, of
> >> course. Not that it is much different now...
> >
> > Skah. Well, on the 'You mean...' what was it that you /thought/ I
meant,
> > before it dissolved into confusion and you asked me?
>
> I'm stupid./WTF

Oh. Well, it was likely at least half my fault at wording it unclearly
(though I'm not certain how it should be worded).

> >> >> >> > Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken
'back
> >> > then'.
> >> >> >> > 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus 'in
> > the
> >> >> > point of
> >> >> >> > time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/,
they
> > (the
> >> >> >> > ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the
first
> >> > the
> >> >> >> > description is referring to the ripples in the air at that
point
> > in
> >> >> > time,
> >> >> >> > while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what water
> > does.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my
> > interpretation
> >> >> > makes
> >> >> >> > sense. Especially since I still think that it should be 'had a
> >> > ghostly
> >> >> >> > glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and
the
> >> >> >> > 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it the
way
> > it
> >> > is,
> >> >> >> > unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah,
> >> > complicated.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various
> > versions...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Same here. But I /think/ I mean keep it 'didn't tend to sit
> > vertically'
> >> > and
> >> >> > 'had a ghostly glow'.
> >> >>
> >> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you
> > had
> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either.
> >> >
> >> > Wonderful! *much happiness*
> >>
> >> Not really. Not as far as it concerns me, that is.
> >
> > Eh. Just because it doesn't concern you doesn't mean it's not
important.
> > *nod nod*
>
> Sorry for letting you down.

Erm, what? *confusion*

> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like a lake's surface
after
> >> throwing stones into the water. Water, however, didn't sit vertically
in
> >> midair and rarely had such a strange glow to it either."
> >>
> >> How does that sound? <d&rlh>
> >
> > *buries face in hands*
>
> Um, sorry? ...
> ::backs off and makes a break for it::

*pat pat*

> > That makes it sound as if it's the lake's surface that's just thrown
stones
> > into the water. 'after stones had been thrown into'.
>
> Let's get back to the other one and keep it at that.

That sounds good, I think. *nods*

> >> >> Erm, I'm not too sure about, but... wouldn't "you have just thrown a
> >> >> stone" sound better? Probably not. But somehow it still sounds
odd...
> >> >
> >> > Here 'not'. To try and answer it specifically, 'you have' is
suddenly
> >> > addressing the reader in the present tense. 'ripples formed, like
those
> > on
> >> > a lake you have just thrown a stone into' suddenly springs to the
> > reader,
> >> > and the 'suggested case' which it's comparing it to is when the
> > reader--in
> >> > the reader's present--has just thrown a stone into a lake, whether
s/he
> > has
> >> > or not.
> >> >
> >> > However, the point is to imagine the reader (though s/he doesn't
think
> > of
> >> > himself/herself as 'the reader' at the time) having just thrown a
stone
> > into
> >> > a lake /in the abstract/, /at any time/. Namely, grounded in the
time
> > of
> >> > the story.
> >> >
> >> > This [explanation] may not make any sense, but it's the best I can
do.
> >>
> >> It makes sense,
> >
> > *relief* That's good.
> >
> >> it's just... I don't really want to think about it at
> >> this time... Mind boggling(sp?!??) and stuff...
> >
> > Sympathy. Good luck.
> >
> > Oh, and I think you spelled 'boggling' correctly. *smiles*
>
> Well, at least one thing I did right.

Hoowah!

> FILE CLOSED.

Ooo. *goes to look at other thingamajig*

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 15, 2004 10:41:44 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

And when it was 2004-05-15, illusion
<c85cjo$oa5$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk> was created,
stating that Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web>
uttered in alt.games.creatures:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrncabk90.4ad.the_emmel*whatever*@storm.mlnet...
>> And when it was 2004-05-14, illusion
>> <c82hk7$910$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk> was created,
>> stating that Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web>
>> uttered in alt.games.creatures:
>> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> >
> news:slrnca70n8.cu3.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x7.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> >> >> >> >> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about
> /then/,
>> > and
>> >> >> >> > possibly
>> >> >> >> >> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite
> the
>> >> >> > narrator
>> >> >> >> >> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't see
>> >> > references
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> >> > the
>> >> >> >> >> > English countryside, for example.
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> Erm, "English countryside"?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Sorry. But the narrator isn't openly telling the story. There
> are
>> >> > never
>> >> >> > (well, almost never, hence this discussion) where suddenly the
> reader
>> >> > gets
>> >> >> > yanked out of the story being told and into the world of the
>> >> > storyteller.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So, where does the "English Countryside" get in there?
>> >> >
>> >> > It was a random example. You/a narrator could [be] compare/comparing
> a
>> >> > field to it.
>> >>
>> >> Ah, it's just... English countryside doesn't make much sense for me...
>> >
>> > Sorry. Being in England, such examples tend to come more easily to my
> mind
>> > than, for example, refences to the Polish countryside. (I've never
> actually
>> > been in Poland... though since I can't remember whether you're
> American,
>> > European, Canadian, etc. I don't know whether you have, either.)
>>
>> Well, with my serious problems with the English language I'll hardly be
>> American. (Then again...)
>
><dry voice>Quite.</voice>

Yes, pretty much.

>> Anyway, I'm pretty much German. It's not
>> that's it's a secret or something.
>
> Ahh. *attempts to remember* Just because something isn't a secret doesn't
> mean that it's automatically known.

Well, I just thought you'd have remembered. Point for me ;-)

>> >> >> >> >> So...
>> >> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a
> lake
>> >> > you
>> >> >> > had
>> >> >> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit
> vertically
>> > in
>> >> >> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I think
> it
>> >> > should
>> >> >> > be
>> >> >> >> > good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying.
>> > *considers*
>> >> >> > Ahh, I
>> >> >> >> > see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That is,
>> > 'but
>> >> >> > water
>> >> >> >> > didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other words,
> it's
>> >> >> > implying
>> >> >> >> > that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the part
>> > about
>> >> >> >> > throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > ...I'm not making any sense, am I?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Not exactly. Not to me anyway.
>> >> >
>> >> > Damn. What did you think (at first glance) I meant?
>> >>
>> >> At first glance? At first glance I couldn't make any sense in it, of
>> >> course. Not that it is much different now...
>> >
>> > Skah. Well, on the 'You mean...' what was it that you /thought/ I
> meant,
>> > before it dissolved into confusion and you asked me?
>>
>> I'm stupid./WTF
>
> Oh. Well, it was likely at least half my fault at wording it unclearly
> (though I'm not certain how it should be worded).

Yeah, I know that problem.

>> >> >> >> > Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken
> 'back
>> >> > then'.
>> >> >> >> > 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus 'in
>> > the
>> >> >> > point of
>> >> >> >> > time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/,
> they
>> > (the
>> >> >> >> > ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the
> first
>> >> > the
>> >> >> >> > description is referring to the ripples in the air at that
> point
>> > in
>> >> >> > time,
>> >> >> >> > while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what water
>> > does.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my
>> > interpretation
>> >> >> > makes
>> >> >> >> > sense. Especially since I still think that it should be 'had a
>> >> > ghostly
>> >> >> >> > glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and
> the
>> >> >> >> > 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it the
> way
>> > it
>> >> > is,
>> >> >> >> > unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah,
>> >> > complicated.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various
>> > versions...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Same here. But I /think/ I mean keep it 'didn't tend to sit
>> > vertically'
>> >> > and
>> >> >> > 'had a ghostly glow'.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake you
>> > had
>> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically in
>> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either.
>> >> >
>> >> > Wonderful! *much happiness*
>> >>
>> >> Not really. Not as far as it concerns me, that is.
>> >
>> > Eh. Just because it doesn't concern you doesn't mean it's not
> important.
>> > *nod nod*
>>
>> Sorry for letting you down.
>
> Erm, what? *confusion*

Pushing you in the great chasm of despair opening up everytime I start
arguing English with wath obviously is a catastrophe? Does that sound
familiar.

>> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like a lake's surface
> after
>> >> throwing stones into the water. Water, however, didn't sit vertically
> in
>> >> midair and rarely had such a strange glow to it either."
>> >>
>> >> How does that sound? <d&rlh>
>> >
>> > *buries face in hands*
>>
>> Um, sorry? ...
>> ::backs off and makes a break for it::
>
> *pat pat*

Thanks, that's what I needed right now.

>> > That makes it sound as if it's the lake's surface that's just thrown
> stones
>> > into the water. 'after stones had been thrown into'.
>>
>> Let's get back to the other one and keep it at that.
>
> That sounds good, I think. *nods*

Good.

>> >> >> Erm, I'm not too sure about, but... wouldn't "you have just thrown a
>> >> >> stone" sound better? Probably not. But somehow it still sounds
> odd...
>> >> >
>> >> > Here 'not'. To try and answer it specifically, 'you have' is
> suddenly
>> >> > addressing the reader in the present tense. 'ripples formed, like
> those
>> > on
>> >> > a lake you have just thrown a stone into' suddenly springs to the
>> > reader,
>> >> > and the 'suggested case' which it's comparing it to is when the
>> > reader--in
>> >> > the reader's present--has just thrown a stone into a lake, whether
> s/he
>> > has
>> >> > or not.
>> >> >
>> >> > However, the point is to imagine the reader (though s/he doesn't
> think
>> > of
>> >> > himself/herself as 'the reader' at the time) having just thrown a
> stone
>> > into
>> >> > a lake /in the abstract/, /at any time/. Namely, grounded in the
> time
>> > of
>> >> > the story.
>> >> >
>> >> > This [explanation] may not make any sense, but it's the best I can
> do.
>> >>
>> >> It makes sense,
>> >
>> > *relief* That's good.
>> >
>> >> it's just... I don't really want to think about it at
>> >> this time... Mind boggling(sp?!??) and stuff...
>> >
>> > Sympathy. Good luck.
>> >
>> > Oh, and I think you spelled 'boggling' correctly. *smiles*
>>
>> Well, at least one thing I did right.
>
> Hoowah!
>
>> FILE CLOSED.
>
> Ooo. *goes to look at other thingamajig*

Good.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 16, 2004 8:47:23 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrncacoq5.fr.the_emmel*whatever*@storm.mlnet...
> And when it was 2004-05-15, illusion
> <c85cjo$oa5$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk> was created,
> stating that Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web>
> uttered in alt.games.creatures:
> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> > news:slrncabk90.4ad.the_emmel*whatever*@storm.mlnet...
> >> And when it was 2004-05-14, illusion
> >> <c82hk7$910$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk> was created,
> >> stating that Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web>
> >> uttered in alt.games.creatures:
> >> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >> >
> >
news:slrnca70n8.cu3.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x7.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> >> >> >> >> > Hmm... I see what you mean... But it's talking about
> > /then/,
> >> > and
> >> >> >> >> > possibly
> >> >> >> >> >> > even slightly through the lens of his thoughts, not quite
> > the
> >> >> >> > narrator
> >> >> >> >> >> > talking directly to the reader. Which is why we don't
see
> >> >> > references
> >> >> >> > to
> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> >> > English countryside, for example.
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> Erm, "English countryside"?
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Actually, that's spelled correctly, believe it or not.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> No, that's not it. I have no clue what you are talking about.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Sorry. But the narrator isn't openly telling the story. There
> > are
> >> >> > never
> >> >> >> > (well, almost never, hence this discussion) where suddenly the
> > reader
> >> >> > gets
> >> >> >> > yanked out of the story being told and into the world of the
> >> >> > storyteller.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> So, where does the "English Countryside" get in there?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > It was a random example. You/a narrator could [be]
compare/comparing
> > a
> >> >> > field to it.
> >> >>
> >> >> Ah, it's just... English countryside doesn't make much sense for
me...
> >> >
> >> > Sorry. Being in England, such examples tend to come more easily to
my
> > mind
> >> > than, for example, refences to the Polish countryside. (I've never
> > actually
> >> > been in Poland... though since I can't remember whether you're
> > American,
> >> > European, Canadian, etc. I don't know whether you have, either.)
> >>
> >> Well, with my serious problems with the English language I'll hardly be
> >> American. (Then again...)
> >
> ><dry voice>Quite.</voice>
>
> Yes, pretty much.

*nods*

> >> Anyway, I'm pretty much German. It's not
> >> that's it's a secret or something.
> >
> > Ahh. *attempts to remember* Just because something isn't a secret
doesn't
> > mean that it's automatically known.
>
> Well, I just thought you'd have remembered. Point for me ;-)

Fair enough. *nods (again)*

> >> >> >> >> >> So...
> >> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on
a
> > lake
> >> >> > you
> >> >> >> > had
> >> >> >> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit
> > vertically
> >> > in
> >> >> >> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either."
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > *chews lip* That seems better in one respect... yes, I
think
> > it
> >> >> > should
> >> >> >> > be
> >> >> >> >> > good, though the 'didn't tend to' is a little worrying.
> >> > *considers*
> >> >> >> > Ahh, I
> >> >> >> >> > see it. The 'didn't there has an unspoken 'used to'. That
is,
> >> > 'but
> >> >> >> > water
> >> >> >> >> > didn't [used to] tend to sit vertically', or, in other
words,
> > it's
> >> >> >> > implying
> >> >> >> >> > that it only applied back then, but not now. Whereas the
part
> >> > about
> >> >> >> >> > throwing is referring to actions /within that time space/.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> You mean... wait, *what* do you mean?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > ...I'm not making any sense, am I?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Not exactly. Not to me anyway.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Damn. What did you think (at first glance) I meant?
> >> >>
> >> >> At first glance? At first glance I couldn't make any sense in it, of
> >> >> course. Not that it is much different now...
> >> >
> >> > Skah. Well, on the 'You mean...' what was it that you /thought/ I
> > meant,
> >> > before it dissolved into confusion and you asked me?
> >>
> >> I'm stupid./WTF
> >
> > Oh. Well, it was likely at least half my fault at wording it unclearly
> > (though I'm not certain how it should be worded).
>
> Yeah, I know that problem.

Thingamajig.

> >> >> >> >> > Ah. Another way to put it: From point of view of unspoken
> > 'back
> >> >> > then'.
> >> >> >> >> > 'but back then water didn't tend to sit vertically', versus
'in
> >> > the
> >> >> >> > point of
> >> >> >> >> > time back then, /when the ripples in the air were forming/,
> > they
> >> > (the
> >> >> >> >> > ripples) were like such-and-such'. In other words, with the
> > first
> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > description is referring to the ripples in the air at that
> > point
> >> > in
> >> >> >> > time,
> >> >> >> >> > while /then/ it separates slightly and talks about what
water
> >> > does.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > *looks at it again* ....No, I'm still not certain my
> >> > interpretation
> >> >> >> > makes
> >> >> >> >> > sense. Especially since I still think that it should be
'had a
> >> >> > ghostly
> >> >> >> >> > glow'... Hrm. Actually, that interesting.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > ...Right. If there's a way to separate the 'doesn't/has and
> > the
> >> >> >> >> > 'didn't/had', I can't see it right now. Probably keep it
the
> > way
> >> > it
> >> >> > is,
> >> >> >> >> > unless you can see something I can't. *rubs head* Skah,
> >> >> > complicated.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Erm, keep ikt *which* way? I'm loosing track of the various
> >> > versions...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Same here. But I /think/ I mean keep it 'didn't tend to sit
> >> > vertically'
> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> > 'had a ghostly glow'.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> The air started to blur and ripples formed, like those on a lake
you
> >> > had
> >> >> >> just thrown a stone into, but water didn't tend to sit vertically
in
> >> >> >> midair and rarely had such a ghostly glow to it either.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Wonderful! *much happiness*
> >> >>
> >> >> Not really. Not as far as it concerns me, that is.
> >> >
> >> > Eh. Just because it doesn't concern you doesn't mean it's not
> > important.
> >> > *nod nod*
> >>
> >> Sorry for letting you down.
> >
> > Erm, what? *confusion*
>
> Pushing you in the great chasm of despair opening up everytime I start
> arguing English with wath obviously is a catastrophe? Does that sound
> familiar.

Ah. Sort of. (And, er, 'what', not 'wath'.)

> >> >> "The air started to blur and ripples formed, like a lake's surface
> > after
> >> >> throwing stones into the water. Water, however, didn't sit
vertically
> > in
> >> >> midair and rarely had such a strange glow to it either."
> >> >>
> >> >> How does that sound? <d&rlh>
> >> >
> >> > *buries face in hands*
> >>
> >> Um, sorry? ...
> >> ::backs off and makes a break for it::
> >
> > *pat pat*
>
> Thanks, that's what I needed right now.

*smiles faintly*

> >> > That makes it sound as if it's the lake's surface that's just thrown
> > stones
> >> > into the water. 'after stones had been thrown into'.
> >>
> >> Let's get back to the other one and keep it at that.
> >
> > That sounds good, I think. *nods*
>
> Good.

Hoowah!

> >> >> >> Erm, I'm not too sure about, but... wouldn't "you have just
thrown a
> >> >> >> stone" sound better? Probably not. But somehow it still sounds
> > odd...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Here 'not'. To try and answer it specifically, 'you have' is
> > suddenly
> >> >> > addressing the reader in the present tense. 'ripples formed, like
> > those
> >> > on
> >> >> > a lake you have just thrown a stone into' suddenly springs to the
> >> > reader,
> >> >> > and the 'suggested case' which it's comparing it to is when the
> >> > reader--in
> >> >> > the reader's present--has just thrown a stone into a lake, whether
> > s/he
> >> > has
> >> >> > or not.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > However, the point is to imagine the reader (though s/he doesn't
> > think
> >> > of
> >> >> > himself/herself as 'the reader' at the time) having just thrown a
> > stone
> >> > into
> >> >> > a lake /in the abstract/, /at any time/. Namely, grounded in the
> > time
> >> > of
> >> >> > the story.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This [explanation] may not make any sense, but it's the best I can
> > do.
> >> >>
> >> >> It makes sense,
> >> >
> >> > *relief* That's good.
> >> >
> >> >> it's just... I don't really want to think about it at
> >> >> this time... Mind boggling(sp?!??) and stuff...
> >> >
> >> > Sympathy. Good luck.
> >> >
> >> > Oh, and I think you spelled 'boggling' correctly. *smiles*
> >>
> >> Well, at least one thing I did right.
> >
> > Hoowah!
> >
> >> FILE CLOSED.
> >
> > Ooo. *goes to look at other thingamajig*
>
> Good.

*nods happily*

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 17, 2004 6:43:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

>> >> >> Not really. Not as far as it concerns me, that is.
>> >> >
>> >> > Eh. Just because it doesn't concern you doesn't mean it's not
>> > important.
>> >> > *nod nod*
>> >>
>> >> Sorry for letting you down.
>> >
>> > Erm, what? *confusion*
>>
>> Pushing you in the great chasm of despair opening up everytime I start
>> arguing English with wath obviously is a catastrophe? Does that sound
>> familiar.
>
> Ah. Sort of. (And, er, 'what', not 'wath'.)

Well, there are such things as typos...

Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 18, 2004 8:31:15 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrncahjsi.mcg.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x11.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> >> >> Not really. Not as far as it concerns me, that is.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Eh. Just because it doesn't concern you doesn't mean it's not
> >> > important.
> >> >> > *nod nod*
> >> >>
> >> >> Sorry for letting you down.
> >> >
> >> > Erm, what? *confusion*
> >>
> >> Pushing you in the great chasm of despair opening up everytime I start
> >> arguing English with wath obviously is a catastrophe? Does that sound
> >> familiar.
> >
> > Ah. Sort of. (And, er, 'what', not 'wath'.)
>
> Well, there are such things as typos...

*nods*

> Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?

Maybe above. Not certain. Oh, and--prodded by the use of the 'only' that
perhaps I usually ignore--here is the 'correct' version of your sentence.

Hm, where's that long post that I wanted to reply to gone?

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 19, 2004 3:12:28 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-18, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?
>
> Maybe above. Not certain. Oh, and--prodded by the use of the 'only' that
> perhaps I usually ignore--here is the 'correct' version of your sentence.
>
> Hm, where's that long post that I wanted to reply to gone?

What only is your problem with me using "only" like that? <eg, d&rlh>
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 19, 2004 11:28:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrncamg8s.nij.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-05-18, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?
> >
> > Maybe above. Not certain. Oh, and--prodded by the use of the 'only'
that
> > perhaps I usually ignore--here is the 'correct' version of your
sentence.
> >
> > Hm, where's that long post that I wanted to reply to gone?
>
> What only is your problem with me using "only" like that?

....
Remove the first 'only'. (And it makes no sense.)

> <eg, d&rlh>

Thingamajig. *nods sagely*

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 21, 2004 10:07:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-19, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrncamg8s.nij.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2004-05-18, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> >> Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?
>> >
>> > Maybe above. Not certain. Oh, and--prodded by the use of the 'only'
> that
>> > perhaps I usually ignore--here is the 'correct' version of your
> sentence.
>> >
>> > Hm, where's that long post that I wanted to reply to gone?
>>
>> What only is your problem with me using "only" like that?
>
> ...
> Remove the first 'only'. (And it makes no sense.)

How can that only be?

>> <eg, d&rlh>
>
> Thingamajig. *nods sagely*

Erm, yes, whatever.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 22, 2004 3:20:56 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrncar74c.qd.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-05-19, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >
news:slrncamg8s.nij.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> On 2004-05-18, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> >> Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?
> >> >
> >> > Maybe above. Not certain. Oh, and--prodded by the use of the 'only'
> > that
> >> > perhaps I usually ignore--here is the 'correct' version of your
> > sentence.
> >> >
> >> > Hm, where's that long post that I wanted to reply to gone?
> >>
> >> What only is your problem with me using "only" like that?
> >
> > ...
> > Remove the first 'only'. (And it makes no sense.)
>
> How can that only be?

....

*kills you*

> >> <eg, d&rlh>
> >
> > Thingamajig. *nods sagely*
>
> Erm, yes, whatever.

*bows*

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 24, 2004 3:12:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-22, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrncar74c.qd.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2004-05-19, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> >
> news:slrncamg8s.nij.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> >> On 2004-05-18, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> >> >> Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?
>> >> >
>> >> > Maybe above. Not certain. Oh, and--prodded by the use of the 'only'
>> > that
>> >> > perhaps I usually ignore--here is the 'correct' version of your
>> > sentence.
>> >> >
>> >> > Hm, where's that long post that I wanted to reply to gone?
>> >>
>> >> What only is your problem with me using "only" like that?
>> >
>> > ...
>> > Remove the first 'only'. (And it makes no sense.)
>>
>> How can that only be?
>
> ...
>
> *kills you*

Ouch! That hurt, you know...

>> >> <eg, d&rlh>
>> >
>> > Thingamajig. *nods sagely*
>>
>> Erm, yes, whatever.
>
> *bows*

::crossbows::
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 25, 2004 12:10:15 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrncb3m4m.e0d.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x9.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-05-22, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >
news:slrncar74c.qd.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> On 2004-05-19, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >> >
> >
news:slrncamg8s.nij.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> >> On 2004-05-18, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> >> >> Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Maybe above. Not certain. Oh, and--prodded by the use of the
'only'
> >> > that
> >> >> > perhaps I usually ignore--here is the 'correct' version of your
> >> > sentence.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hm, where's that long post that I wanted to reply to gone?
> >> >>
> >> >> What only is your problem with me using "only" like that?
> >> >
> >> > ...
> >> > Remove the first 'only'. (And it makes no sense.)
> >>
> >> How can that only be?
> >
> > ...
> >
> > *kills you*
>
> Ouch! That hurt, you know...

Well, you were asking me to kill you a while ago.

> >> >> <eg, d&rlh>
> >> >
> >> > Thingamajig. *nods sagely*
> >>
> >> Erm, yes, whatever.
> >
> > *bows*
>
> ::crossbows::

*pulls crossbow bolt out of midsection, tosses to side, staggers slightly*

Ow.

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 25, 2004 6:45:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-24, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> news:slrncb3m4m.e0d.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x9.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> On 2004-05-22, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> >
> news:slrncar74c.qd.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> >> On 2004-05-19, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> >> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
>> >> >
>> >
> news:slrncamg8s.nij.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
>> >> >> On 2004-05-18, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> >> >> >> Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Maybe above. Not certain. Oh, and--prodded by the use of the
> 'only'
>> >> > that
>> >> >> > perhaps I usually ignore--here is the 'correct' version of your
>> >> > sentence.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Hm, where's that long post that I wanted to reply to gone?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> What only is your problem with me using "only" like that?
>> >> >
>> >> > ...
>> >> > Remove the first 'only'. (And it makes no sense.)
>> >>
>> >> How can that only be?
>> >
>> > ...
>> >
>> > *kills you*
>>
>> Ouch! That hurt, you know...
>
> Well, you were asking me to kill you a while ago.

Indeed, I was aware of that. It hurt nevertheless...

>> >> >> <eg, d&rlh>
>> >> >
>> >> > Thingamajig. *nods sagely*
>> >>
>> >> Erm, yes, whatever.
>> >
>> > *bows*
>>
>> ::crossbows::
>
> *pulls crossbow bolt out of midsection, tosses to side, staggers slightly*
>
> Ow.

Erm, sorry, those pesky little things are just too easy to fire
unvoluntarily(sp?).
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
Anonymous
May 26, 2004 12:43:41 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrncb6n01.j0l.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x11.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-05-24, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >
news:slrncb3m4m.e0d.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x9.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> On 2004-05-22, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >> >
> >
news:slrncar74c.qd.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> >> On 2004-05-19, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> >> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >
news:slrncamg8s.nij.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> >> >> >> On 2004-05-18, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> Hm, were's only that long post gone I wanted to reply to?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Maybe above. Not certain. Oh, and--prodded by the use of the
> > 'only'
> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> > perhaps I usually ignore--here is the 'correct' version of your
> >> >> > sentence.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Hm, where's that long post that I wanted to reply to gone?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> What only is your problem with me using "only" like that?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ...
> >> >> > Remove the first 'only'. (And it makes no sense.)
> >> >>
> >> >> How can that only be?
> >> >
> >> > ...
> >> >
> >> > *kills you*
> >>
> >> Ouch! That hurt, you know...
> >
> > Well, you were asking me to kill you a while ago.
>
> Indeed, I was aware of that. It hurt nevertheless...

Thingamajig.

> >> >> >> <eg, d&rlh>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Thingamajig. *nods sagely*
> >> >>
> >> >> Erm, yes, whatever.
> >> >
> >> > *bows*
> >>
> >> ::crossbows::
> >
> > *pulls crossbow bolt out of midsection, tosses to side, staggers
slightly*
> >
> > Ow.
>
> Erm, sorry, those pesky little things are just too easy to fire
> unvoluntarily(sp?).

Involuntarily.

involuntary // adj.
1 done without conscious control; unintentional.
2 (of a limb, muscle, or movement) not under the control of the will.
involuntarily adv.
involuntariness n.
[Late Latin involuntarius (as in-1, voluntary)]

--
The Triad
User of 'Thingamajig!'
Refractor Dragon -=(UDIC)=-
Anonymous
May 26, 2004 4:25:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (More info?)

On 2004-05-25, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
>> >> >> >> <eg, d&rlh>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Thingamajig. *nods sagely*
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Erm, yes, whatever.
>> >> >
>> >> > *bows*
>> >>
>> >> ::crossbows::
>> >
>> > *pulls crossbow bolt out of midsection, tosses to side, staggers
> slightly*
>> >
>> > Ow.
>>
>> Erm, sorry, those pesky little things are just too easy to fire
>> unvoluntarily(sp?).
>
> Involuntarily.
>
> involuntary // adj.
> 1 done without conscious control; unintentional.
> 2 (of a limb, muscle, or movement) not under the control of the will.
> involuntarily adv.
> involuntariness n.
> [Late Latin involuntarius (as in-1, voluntary)]

Erm, yes.
Thread closed.
--
emmel <the_emmel*you-know-what-that's-for*@gmx.net>
(Don't forget to remove the ** bit)

Official AGC feedback maniac

"God is playing creatures - and we're the norns."

"A hundred dead are a tragedy - a hundred thousand are statistics."

"I guess you can call yourself lucky." -
"I could, but Linda suits me a little better... :) 
Things called lucky tend to get hit by trucks."

Hi, I'm a .sig virus. Just copy me to your .signature. And don't worry.
!