It's time for round two!!

What's with the 'innocent victims'?

This poll is rigged!

About time. I was thinking you'd forgotten

.........BeaStkid, the goat would never resort to such low tactics as to rig a poll I'm surprised at your suggestion.........Ok, CJ hand over the money, I made good on my end of the deal.

Actually, "Innocent Victims" was on the original poll (go look if you don't believe me). Shadowgod was well aware of this, as he was in favor of just shortening it to victims. I remember this, because, in search of a Shadowgod quote for my sig, I asked "So, you just prefer to have victims?" but he caught on as to what I was up to...

Now, were I adding things, I'd have added "Royalists" becuase Shadowgod is, of course, the King of Evil Cliffhangers.

Given you're a queen, I become Royalist Caprican!

And I like the sound of Luminati. Sounds like a sect!

Take care,
Ieshwar

I may be seeing things but I could have sworn when I checked in earlier and there were seven votes it was shadows four iliminati three.

Now still seven votes yet Innocent victims has one

hrmmmm distressing

like anyone is innocent; honestly.

.......Yes, I'm afraid the goat is not so innocent afterall

When I voted, it was 2-2-1, and my vote put "Shadows" ahead by 3-2. I guess someone voted for luminati since then?
Honest, I haven't tinkered with the poll...


I'm pulling for "Shadows" to win.

I could be wrong it was a small screen after all.

Yet I'm still distressed... shadists didnt even make it on the list

Aww, but Luminati did... And Luminati is winning. I still like "shadows" though. After all, isn't it logical that the leader of The Shadows would be Shadowgod?

I could argue for luminati the same way. What is a shadow with out light?

see look at me going all sentimental and calling all y'all my light

Awww, I never saw "Luminati" that way. That's cool.. Why, it's almost enough to make me stop rooting for "shadows".

So, oh shadowy one, how long should the poll stay open for? How about until new year's?

I always saw Luminati as being short for Illuminati -- which is an old game of world domination by secret societies. A lot of fun

well that too... but my spin is better so SHHHHhhhhh!



New years sounds great who knows I may even have something to ring in the new name with

(yeah that psst. thing but MAJOR changes )

Well with that point, I have decided , I too was a bit dissapointed without the Shadists option, but I at least can live with this one.

Do you own a copy of the game? I've got a copy of the deluxe edition, but it says it's for ages 12 and up so I have a few more years before I teach the boys how to play, and the joys of having the Boy Scouts of American taking control of the IRA, and the Trekkies destroying the IRS....

sadly no, but the Illuminati themselves were a secret society some number of years ago. Depending on which conspiracy theory you buy into they are still around pulling the strings on everything.

Yes, they would stay in the shadows , methinks. I'll also mention that Shadowgod proposed that name himself, and here I find out that it has connections to world domination plots? Hrmmm, perhaps Shadowgod is even more evil that we thought? Nah, couldn't be...

Hrmmm, on the other hand, his blog post does mention that he oft sympathizes with the villains in a story.... Hmmm....

I sympathize with sympathetic villains. And lets be fair here shall we, In no way was Gollum (smeagol) or Grendel the villains of either Lord of the Rings or Beowulf. They were (are) tragic characters, that in some way are there to make you realize that not everyone who is perceived as bad is bad. Sure neither of them were peaches by any means. Yet there was something so pathetic about their lives that a viewer is forced to sympathize with them.

I dunno maybe I just suffer some sort of literary Helsinki syndrome.

Ahhem: the Helsinki syndrome is starting to sympathize with your captors.

I just think that it's very highly interesting that the master (and King) evil cliffhangers sympathizes with villains. And come to think of it, after all the nasty things Richard did in LiS, he pretty much got away with it. And Catherine too, (pretty much) and of course the detective.
Hmmm, so, in your stories Villains get their way, do they? Tsk, tsk... And of course, you do enjoy leaving your readers hanging, more evil there... Hrmmm... Yeppers, he's eeevil...

CJ, being an avid reader, you're failing to admit that characters don't hold you captive? Sure there may be no gun in your face, but honestly in the moment your well being depends on their well being. Isn't this a form of captivation? Therefore my use of Helsinki syndrom above was correct ~ metaphorically.

Once again you completely gloss over the bulk of the last post, prefering instead to pull out the sound bites that are the most pleasing to you. Thus taking any and all comments out of context. One only needs to look at wildones comment in your sig to see how truthful that statement is.

I sympathize with sympathetic villans. its hard to skew such a stement, but Im sure you will... again

And! How can you claim Richard didn't get his in the end. He may not be in jail, but some consequences are so much worse then that. He alienated his only son, and in the process of doing so he figured out that it was something he probably didn't want to do. as for Cathrine and Raul, what concern are they to the protagonists. the were only a danger to them through Richard and even then only indirectly at best. Fucousing anymore of the readers time and emotion on them would have been wasteful.

OMFG!!! ROFLMAO!!!

Well, yes, I do admit that characters (yours especially) are indeed captivating, but I feel that's more in the metaphorical rather than the literary sense. And also, it is not quite normal for people (other than you) to be so captivated by, and identify so strongly with, Villains.

Of course, one must look at this from an authorship angle; an author must, in some ways, identify with all their characters, who are, in turn, a piece of them. This, of course, makes me wonder about you due to your penchant for having such nasty villains.

And me? Gloss over? I'd never do such a thing! As for Wildone's comment, all I'm doing is quoting him. He did say that, as well he should, becuase it's true.

Agreed, Richard did face some adverse consequences, but what of Catherine? True, the protagonists did not even know of them, but, does that means they should be let off the hook? You simply can't have an antagonist doing all manner of nasty, evil things to the protagonists and then let them ride off into the metaphorical sunset! Shame on you!

Tsk, Tsk, you just don't see your eeevilness, do you? Denial is more than just a river in Egypt, ya know.

I disagree.

It depends on your definition of villain. In any contest, the "other side" is depicted as the villain, but very, very few people are completely good or bad. There are redeeming points in everyone if you look -- even CJ

A flawed person who is on the side against the story's hero can still be a worthwhile person in their own right. To use some literary examples from a well known author:

Shylock, from The Merchant of Venice
Macbeth, from Macbeth
Iago, from Othello

All of these are villains in the stories, but they are so rich that it's possible to see things from their point of view. It is quite within reason to admire them and to feel sorry for them.



Again, I have to disagree. I don't identify with all of my characters, even though I wrote all of them. Equally, authors of murder mysteries and horror stories don't necessarily identify with all the characters in their stories, (though I have to wonder about H.P. Lovecraft).

Hmmm, I think I can recall a few of your characters that you posted many, many, many times in their defense in FTL. Such as Eric, The Reverend, The Sheriff, etc.



Really? The Scar, Dimitri, Vladimir, etc.....



How about posting the whole post




Um, kettle........pot........black



Steve

Ahh, true, I agree that much depends on the definition of villain. In many cases, there are multiple aspects, and the "villain" has redeeming characteristics. (OK, being serious here). There's a big difference, say, between a misguided action and a malicious one, even given the same results.

On the other hand, I guess it depends on the author. I think I mis-spoke, instead of "identify with" I should have said "able to think like, and see the world from their perspective". I've heard that one problem some crime investigators have is that the need to think like their adversaries (such as serial killers) gets to them. In my case, I only try and do this for major characters, but I've found it helps give them more depth, as well as consistent behavior. I guess I just assumed all writers do this?



Aww, well, Steve, I'd love to reply to your comments regarding me defending characters, but as this is Shadowgod's forum I really can't discuss my stories here.

Now, as for posting your whole post, I'm sorry, but I have no idea where to find it..

Now, Steve, are you seriously saying that Shadowgod is not evil?

So -- you have a quote in your signature, but you can't prove it's a legitimate quote? Isn't that sort of fraudulent? I think Wildone would be well within his rights to insist you remove it unless you can show him where it came from...

ACK!! No, I don't want to have to go search through Wildone's enormous, overwhelming volume of posts (He's a postaholic, you know). to find one quote!!! But it really is a direct quote!

I also don't see the issue here; isn't being in a lurker's sig sort of unlikely to be noticed anyway?

CJ, while you were writing this post, I was indeed searching through my posts . And guess what, I could not find a post on 10/03/07 in which I said any such thing. So.....unless you can produce the post in full, I'm afraid you will have to remove the said quote.

Thanks in advance ,

Steve

Then you didn't look very hard!

The post is HERE
And don't bother editing it, it's quoted in the following post and I have a screencap as proof. ;p

So, the quote stays.

And now that's settled How are we doing on Shadowgod's fan's name? Hrmmm, Luminati has a huge lead. Looks like that's the clear favorite at this point!

Hrmm, Too late, i know, but I just thought of the perfect name for Shadowgod fans and readers: The hanging.

Excellent! Now CJ can amend his signature to put the quote in context, so everyone can see that the statement was made very much tongue-in-cheek and not to be taken seriously.

Huh? But, but, but, I can't! There's a limit on how many characthers you can have in your sig, and so I'm very limited in what I can display.

Besides, isn't this a bit of a tempest in a teapot? I mean, we're talking about a lurker's sig... It's not like anyone ever sees it... Sort of like complaining that color of something that's to be buried underground.

According to my perusal of the HTML source code produced by the forum, you've got plenty of characters to spare -- no problems at all with including the full text of the quote


We are talking about a person who has more than 5% of the total posts at GA. More posts than any other person. More posts than any two other members cmobined, excluding Myr, AFriendlyFace and myself. We are talking about a significant visibility of your signature....

Ahhh, but I plan on resuming my old practice of announcing and linking my current chapters in my sig. I also sometimes use to to plug GA events such as the Anthology. So, that leaves no room.

And, ummm, Graeme, your scurrilous accusation regarding my post count cannot go unchallenged! (err, could somebody challenge the Echidna on this, please?)

Surely you wouldn't call into question my precious reputation as a quiet and shy forum lurker?

CJ, in no way do I want you to be prevented from announcing chapters or promoting things here at GA. So may I suggest just a few extra words in your sig like "full post here ". I'm sure that 3 little words won't adversely affect your future plans on your sig .

I'm here to help in case you need any other suggestions .

Steve

Ahh, but did you know that the HTML code and the full URL count towards the character count? That's actually over 100 characters, just for the link you proposed!

I really don't see why you object to an accurate, verbatim quote being buried in an obscure lurker's sig??

You can use http://tinyurl.com to reduce the size of the URL. I assure you, you can easily include the full post in your signature, or a link to the full post You don't have to be shy -- you can do it! I know you can

I do ude Tinyurl in my sig sometimes, LoL! But, it's only good for six months...

And anyway, I think the quote, as it stands, is so much more meaningful.

Not true. Tiny URL claim that the URL's they give never expire. Where did you get that six month figure from?

My links stopped working after 6 months..

I remembered it as being six months, but you're right, they now claim it never expires. MAybe it changed?

Last day for voting.... unless we call it on Graeme's timezone...

Go for Lost Cause's timezeone -- Hawaii That give people more time.

Well, it looks like Luminati won!

Heh, far too late now... But I should have proposed Cremnophiles