Minas Tirith Forums Create a New Topic  Reply to this Topic
profile | register |
search | faq | avatars | citizens
donate | about | library
  This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
Minas Tirith Forums » New Line Cinema's Hobbit » PJ Banned From The Hobbit ! (Page 2)
Author Topic: PJ Banned From The Hobbit !
Roll of Honor Neytari Took-Baggins
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 490

posted      Profile for Neytari Took-Baggins   Author's Homepage   Email Neytari Took-Baggins   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Wiki was here under another name before he was Wiki.

But I don't think he and Archer are the same person. Archer doesn't strike me as the type to hide behind a puppet to say what she really thinks. She'll just tell us.

From: California ainrofilaC | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Witch-King of Angmar
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 4899
posted      Profile for The Witch-King of Angmar   Email The Witch-King of Angmar   Edit/Delete Post 
Neither do I, and I think you're not only annoying, but deluded.
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LyraLuthien Tinuviel
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 5173

posted      Profile for LyraLuthien Tinuviel   Author's Homepage   Email LyraLuthien Tinuviel   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
*changes name of column to 'Archer is WiKi's puppet master*

If I've successfully annoyed WiKi, then my work here is done.
[]

From: GreyHavens via Puget Sound | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Witch-King of Angmar
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 4899
posted      Profile for The Witch-King of Angmar   Email The Witch-King of Angmar   Edit/Delete Post 
Not you-- nice try, though. The only "puppets" are PJ's.
From: Los Angeles, CA, USA | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Dread Pirate Roberts
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 2117
posted      Profile for The Dread Pirate Roberts   Email The Dread Pirate Roberts   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Wait, we can change our names?!? []
From: Blacksburg, VA | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LyraLuthien Tinuviel
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 5173

posted      Profile for LyraLuthien Tinuviel   Author's Homepage   Email LyraLuthien Tinuviel   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
You can change your screen name, but not your log in name.
And all screen names are recorded and reserved, so you can't change it back, and no one else can use anything you've ever used.
It's in the FAQ.

From: GreyHavens via Puget Sound | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor Neytari Took-Baggins
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 490

posted      Profile for Neytari Took-Baggins   Author's Homepage   Email Neytari Took-Baggins   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Look at some of the early pages of the book-phile thread. There is a poster who is almost certainly Wiki under a different name.
From: California ainrofilaC | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Thingol of Doriath
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 2718

posted      Profile for Thingol of Doriath   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
TulkasOfArda

This page is especially delightful... []

From: Sverige! | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Dread Pirate Roberts
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 2117
posted      Profile for The Dread Pirate Roberts   Email The Dread Pirate Roberts   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
[]

WGW is THE MAN!

From: Blacksburg, VA | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Archer
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 3857

posted      Profile for Archer   Email Archer   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:

Why don't you and Wiki meet up and double-direct it. I'd like to see that.

I wanna see some art instead of all you talking about it, dammit. So make it.

I really want to ignore this comment, just on its over-use by many PJ fans and lack of original response and thought behind it, and the fact that its been answered to just as often (even on these forums if you took the time to pay attention). But I won't ignore it; you won't be that lucky today, har har!

No offense, but this is about one of the most simplistic and illogical statements that regularly makes its rounds among the PJ fanboys. You have to consider the dynamics that divide the artists from the art critics, you know. There is a difference. In other words, you don't have to know how to paint the Mona Lisa to understand and appreciate its artistry -- or the lack of it in a paint-by-number copy.

But I'll go one further, just for you. I would truly bet big money that some of the harshest critics of Jackson's LotR films, given the same access to the same materials and production that Jackson had, could very likely create a far better, deeper, and less adolescent interpretation than Jackson, hands down. Most of the people who dislike the films do so because they can clearly see where the film grates and chaffs, and most have the same kinds of complaints about it—so it would be easy to zero in on the dumb parts and avoid them. All you need from that point is an understanding of Tolkien’s text, (beyond the superficial action-adventure) a sense for the witty and poignant, an understanding of Tolkien’s attitude and philosophies, and an understanding of good story-telling in general. I’ll wager you there are a few who meet those qualifications among the films’ critics. In fact, I’ll wager there is a much higher percentage of them among the films’ critics than among the general population, since it’s likely their sense of artistry that causes the film to chaff on them.

Really, to say "let's see you make a better one" is just plain silly. After all, most people don’t have access to major studio resources. Even more significant, most people don’t have to be president or prime minister to know when those particular office holders aren’t doing a good job. Bet you didn’t think about that one in your headlong rush to spout that tired mantra of anti-film critics: “Let’s you make a better one.” Tell you what. Instead of me to making a better LotR film, why don’t you just go improve on everything out there in the world that needs improving, since there is much that obviously does, and that would be a better use of resources that no one has in the first place. I’d call that a fair request, by your own standards. []

And here’s a closing thought on the subject: perhaps to some, the question isn’t whether critics could make a “better” LotR film, since some people’s idea of what makes “better” may vary significantly. After all, a six or eight year old will tell you that the PowerPuff girls are “better” than Lawrence of Arabia, so there’s a good chance that no matter what, Jackson’s film would always be “better” to you than anything I could make.

quote:

edited for this gem of idealism:

quote:Let's hope from now on the film powers

Yeah...keep hoping....

You know why all those "artsy" movies get made? They're low budget. And they can be low budget because there's not a whole world to recreate. It's set in the real world. Sure, a fantasy movie can be done on a low scale....BBC has done some amazing adaptations of period pieces and they don't have a crazy a$$ budget. I'm not saying it can't be done, but the people who make the really artsy, quirky, independent movies (like Wes Anderson, etc) are more likely to read literary fiction and stay far far away from the fantasy genre. Sure, Tolkien has more in line with older styles of writing than modern writing (of course, since he pretty much set the modern fantasy genre going), but even he....he's not the best writer of all time. In fact, there are a lot of problems with Tolkien's writing (too wordy, too descriptive, etc.) He's not O'Henry Prize winning material. That doesn't bother me but those independent movie goer-movie maker types....I dunno....at least in the older generation, don't seem to me like they're avid readers of Tolkien. They may have read it once, sure, but aren't as into it and probably less inclined to want to make a movie about it. In fact, I wouldn't want them too. Because they'd just put their own spin on it like everybody else.

Now hold on there, Red Rider. I didn't say the film should be made as some kind of cutting-edge Indy, now did I? I said it should be artful--and that doesn't mean "an artsy film," like some kind of avant-garde film noire. Ya right: Frodo in a fedora walking down an empty dark street, musing over the power of the ring. Er, you do get the difference don’t you?

Damn, I get the impression you believe there are action films and then very conceptual artsy films, and nothing in between. Well here’s a tip: there are films made for the general population that avoid becoming adolescent or appealing to the lowest common denominator, and offer up something besides the usual action, FX, romance, and monster/horror, and cliff hangers, while remaining mainstream nonetheless.

Likewise, there are a few directors who understand the difference between a poignant scene and one fraught with sentimental appeals. There are a few directors who can create tension without a clichéd cliff-hanger. There are even a few of them who can infuse their story with layers of meaning—and not just rip off an idea and simplify it to middle school standards because they can't understand what is really being said (read in this a somber Aragorn who understands and grimly awaits the darker things that must befall before he can become king--who is sadly turned into the very clichéd, reluctant and baggage-ridden, Prozac refugee, who is afraid to take the kingship because of some pathetic, post-traumatic stress syndrome lack of confidence). That's where an understanding of literature and composition would come in.

You’d have to understand what creates clichés, melodrama, low-brow humor, and sensationalism—and avoid them. You’d have to respect the era and spirit the text was written in and not go the box-thinker way and try to drag it into some silly modern present, just to be “politically correct.” This has about all the true political correctness of earlier western culture trying to “westernize” everything foreign and not giving merit to an idea just because it is different. Tolkien lived and functioned in a very different world than we do today. That should be respected and upheld, because it has its own rare beauty, just as it is. And that is what I mean by “artful.”

And you’d have to understand that a good story transcends its genre. So that it’s not necessary to get a “fantasy” nerd to direct.

Look at a director like Peter Weir. He's made a wide variety of films, with vastly different settings, yet his ability to tell a moving story shines through the more superficial nature of its genre. It might be set in modern times; it might be set three hundred years ago. Yet the depth of his characters and resistance to clichéd plot lines and stupid cliff-hangers, and even political correctness, I dare say, make his films truly artful and classic, just as much as it makes them "grown up," Even his action scenes are only there to make a point, never gratuitous, and never over-sensationalized (read here Legolas on the Oliphaunt.) And in films like Master and Commander, he doesn’t feel the need to add any silly “girl power” to appeal to the masses. Yet this film stands as one of the most interesting and critically acclaimed too. So much for the necessity of political correctness and “girl power.”

And before anyone gets black and white on me again, I didn't suggest Peter Weir make The Hobbit, so don't go there. I simply named him because I want to make a point of how a good story always transcends it genre, and a good director can move easily among the genres because he understands that the medium of story telling is only an overlay. Believing that a "fantasy nerd" director is the only kind who can direct Tolkien, is not understanding the way story-telling works, and looking at it only at the more superficial levels.

Put it this way: I studied a lot of different kinds of literature, and I decided after reading Bronte and Austen that I hated Victorian literature. I could tell you in my opinion this kind of writing is absolutely terrible, full of superficial soap opera clichés of pale, fainting women, illicit love affairs, illegitimate children, blah blah blah. Good gawd, just shoot me in the head so I don't have to read this crap ever again.

But then I read George Eliot one day, and I couldn't put the book down! Even with it's pale women and illicit love affairs and silly Victorian crap. But the text was brilliant! In fact I'll say it was sublime, and she remains one of my favorite authors, interestingly in my least favorite genre. Here is an example of how a good story transcends its genre.

And just a side note--though I hate Victorian literature for the above mentioned reasons, I know some people love it. So just because I think the writing is terrible, in my opinion, doesn’t mean that it absolutely is. And neither are your statements about Tolkien's writing absolute. What relative of yours died and made you a literary critic with the authority to state what makes good and bad writing? I happen to love all the extra detail and "wordiness" in Tolkien's works. It's what separates him from the most common, and simplistic "D&D fantasy" writers like Jordan and Salvatore. And apparently I'm not the only one who thinks so. Can we say "author of the 20th century?" So there you go: one man's tripe is another man's treasure.

[ 01-17-2007, 03:13 PM: Message edited by: Archer ]

Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Archer
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 3857

posted      Profile for Archer   Email Archer   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
*notices how WiKi answered a question directed at Archer as if it were spoken to him*
*marks another point in the column 'Archer is WiKi's sock puppet'*
Not quite enough to outweigh that little piece of nastiness about feminism and chauvinism, but we'll see.

And saving the best for last, excuse me awhile I laugh my arse off at this one for a little bit. []

Ahhhhh. *wiping eyes* Okay I'm over it.

Well all I can say is there seems to be a real issue of simplistic thinking among some of the members on this board, and if I didn't think this particular mind-set was so funny, I might be genuinely offended.

Well, I’ll say this much right now: think what you want about my true identity, if it gives you something to do with yourself. Common culture loves gossip and a mystery, and if it gives you something to debate about on other forums in the wake of the DaVinci code and Erich Von Daniken’s ancient astronauts, then go for it. I think it says something pretty sad about simplicity of certain paths of thought, as according to your logic, anyone who strongly dislikes these films and voices it, must surely be one and the same person. After all there's no way there could be more than one person who hates these films and states so in no uncertain terms, could there? Yes, you are on the ball, I can see!

Well damn, it might now be for WGW who probably has access to the various profile info and IPs to have to confirm who is really not who -- oh wait a minute, WGW is also supposed to be WiKi's puppet master, I forgot. Lol, just like clockwork, you silly loons. I guess we are all one and the same, and let’s don’t forget to toss in TulkasofArda into the mix, whom because he was actually Wiki, must therefore also be me. Just call us “Legion.” []

If you only knew how absurd you sound.

But okay, just because I like your audacity and it made me laugh today, I'll pitch this to you. If you and the Pony patrons bothered to pay attention to stuff that's gone on in these boards for years, you'd realize Wiki and I have disagreed on a lot of stuff, and always have. That would have to be a bit awkward being the same person, and all. Not to mention the waste of time to my busy day building complex arguments on a public forum, and then tearing them down myself. That makes perfect sense doesn’t it? As if WiKi alone doesn’t already have enough posts here to fill two lifetimes, lol. Silly girl!

The truth is the LotR films are one of the few views of WiKi’s I agree with, plain and simple, including the fact that I happen to think the Star Wars prequels sucked big: they were downright painful to watch, gaaaaaaah, and I can assure you he has never been shy about crticizing the films I think are brilliant, the dolt.

And I also happen to think this little gem made by Wiki. . .

quote:
No, I have a problem with IDIOTS who make statements like that-- I happen to be the ULTIMATE feminist, in that I believe in women paying half for everything, earning respect on their merits rather than gender--- and in men treating them like crap if they don't. And if a women ever gets snide on me like that, I shut her down fast-- or, failing this, say goodbye and move on to the next.

I also believe in sex on the first date, and several booty-calls a week from among a pool of at least six different women at any given time-- all being the hottest and youngest that he can attract; the only exception is if a man WANTS a live-in relationship with one woman. And finally I believe a man should NEVER get married-- EVER-- since there's nothing in it for him.

That's REAL feminism right there.

. . .is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard in my life--right up there with the best of PJ's wit and wisdom. I even agreed with you that it was sexist, and even worse, just plain pathetic--pathetic--so much that it wasn't even worth my time responding to. It was good for laugh, but that was it, then on to the more important stuff in life.

So you'll have to pardon my rudeness over all of this, but hearing you say that you and others believe I'm WiKi's sock puppet (or vise versa, whatever the dumb notion currently is) when there is some pretty contradictory evidence leaves me wondering at your basic ability to reason. It doesn't say anything too flattering about you, and the others who can come up with such a ‘tard idea. ( tsk, tsk, Maddy, thought we were friends; Gna, quoting SSA is a bit odd and does not do much to support your claim that I am being superior, though it does make you look like you are feeling a bit insecure about that kind of thing again, lol. And yes, I do slay myself, when others like you aren’t doing it for me; WT, disliking the films makes me a wanker? Hmmm. I’ll try not to resort to name-calling you back, but it’s too bad disliking a film and standing up for it gets me rudely grouped in with someone who does like to name-call.)

But then, as far as thinking goes, I don’t think some put too much thought in anything they say, and are happy so long as they have their next Judge Judy episode to tune into, or whatever gossip trifle they can manage to drudge up on a weekday afternoon, sigh. So sorry, Lyra, but these simplistic statements coming from the Pony and endorsed here by you are rather unsettling, and that’s a real shame because I really liked your responses to Wiki's idiotic “treatise” on his particular brand of "feminism,” and now you’ve just gone and burst my bubble. [] []

Not to mention some of the forum members I thought were genuinely nice people, hmmm. [] Well, Bilbo and Frodo had to deal with gossip and bad-mouthing. I guess I’m in good company. /shrug.

But thank you, Roberts and Neytari, for your comments on my probable identity and allowing me to be an actual person! [] Glad to know not everyone jumps on the bandwagon. Neytari is actually quite perceptive about this too. I don’t have any problems saying what I feel like saying, and I seldom pull any punches when I have a notion about a topic. So why would I need a sock puppet to express anything? Be real, for gawd’s sake; it’s not like it would be any different from my original forum identity to say these things anyway, since I don’t know any of you personally—so what would I be trying to hide? And why would I change my gender of all things? Silly, just silly.

I’ve even previously posted my picture to give a face to the rants [] , so I wonder who some of you think that was. I guess it must have been a fake according to you nay-sayers, lol. Come meet me in a voice chat room if you don’t believe I’m real. Though you may not like what I have to say to you after this! [] I even challenge WiKi to do the same and spout off in his defense lol.

Oh and just on a side-note; I don’t personally believe WiKi is a reincarnated TulkasofArda. ToA was a really erratic personality that even rudely turned on WGW, if I remember it, even when WGW was trying to be fair with him. That’s something I’ve never seen WiKi do, as he just seems to ignore the good and the bad from WGW, and I get that he’s just not a people person. TulkasofArda was a bit more of a hot-and-cold type, and even sent me a PM or two to tell me he was honored to have met his match, lol, while WiKi, whoever he is in his personal life, does not strike me as being that personable or inclined to interact with anyone—-probably for the better—-and according to WGW even ignores his messages. I do still have the PM from ToA however, though in the context of all this, I have to laugh, since it was obviously me who sent it in the first place.

Well like I said, at the beginning, it’s a good thing I think this idea is pretty hilarious, otherwise I might be downright offended. Isn’t there legal recourse for this kind of defamation? Maybe. Let’s hope I continue to find it funny.

[ 01-17-2007, 03:40 PM: Message edited by: Archer ]

Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Dread Pirate Roberts
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 2117
posted      Profile for The Dread Pirate Roberts   Email The Dread Pirate Roberts   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
[] [] Archer.

[ 01-17-2007, 03:08 PM: Message edited by: The Dread Pirate Roberts ]

From: Blacksburg, VA | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Witch-King of Angmar
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 4899
posted      Profile for The Witch-King of Angmar   Email The Witch-King of Angmar   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
. . .is one of the stupidest things I've ever heard in my life--right up there with the best of PJ's wit and wisdom. I even agreed with you that it was sexist, and even worse, just plain pathetic--pathetic--so much that it wasn't even worth my time responding to.
Which was my intent exactly, in fitting response to the accusation that my hating the Arwen-scene meant "I had a problem with feminism--" which is the stupidest thing I've ever heard! It's called "illustrating absurdity."

[ 01-17-2007, 06:36 PM: Message edited by: The Witch-King of Angmar ]

From: Los Angeles, CA, USA | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Madomir
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 3084

posted      Profile for Madomir   Email Madomir   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
tsk, tsk, Maddy, thought we were friends
If we were truly friends (like RL friends) you'd know I'm quite cynical by nature and take very little at face value. I say, question everything!! I recall questioning your identity but i seem to also recall talking myself out of it. But be that as it may, I do have genuine respect for you and do consider you a friend as much as our minimal internet interaction allows so I offer my apologies for any unpleasantness I've caused you. Ordinarily I'd have sent this in a more private manner but since the questioning was public, it seems appropriate the apology should be as well.

BTW.. for what it's worth, a picture isn't really proof of anything, you could've just googled 'hottie' and posted the first pic that came up []

[ 01-18-2007, 12:07 AM: Message edited by: Madomir ]

From: northern hemisphere-ish | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Princess Keona
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 1518

posted      Profile for Princess Keona   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Neither do I, and I think you're not only annoying, but deluded.
Much pain will come to those who insult Keo's friends. []

Neytari, I think the director of Narnia did SUCH a wonderful job, I agree that he should be considered to do the Hobbit. Though, Narnia is also one of those books that's really easy to make into a movie because it doesn't have TOO much going on, and you can easily include all the major and non-major events in one film. Something that might be harder with The Hobbit, and almost impossible with LOTR.
-Keo

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Thus I live in the world rather as a spectator of mankind than as one of the species.

A sacrifice a day keeps Jesus away!

...the Mace of Keo shall strike down the nefarious Suitors of Iniquity!!! ~ Müs

From: Rivendell | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor Gna
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 3830

posted      Profile for Gna   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Well like I said, at the beginning, it’s a good thing I think this idea is pretty hilarious, otherwise I might be downright offended. Isn’t there legal recourse for this kind of defamation? Maybe. Let’s hope I continue to find it funny.
Errr...all of the examples of "libel and defamation" in the linked article refer to the reputations of named individuals and companies. Real names, real jobs.

I don't think that "legal recourse" works quite the same for naff messageboard personas and their "expertise" or sockpuppetry. []

From: Andustar | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Dread Pirate Roberts
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 2117
posted      Profile for The Dread Pirate Roberts   Email The Dread Pirate Roberts   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Point is, defaming people is illegal in many instances. Therefore it follows that civilized society views such defamation as inappropriate behavior. Conclusion: even when it is "just on a message board" it is still inappropriate behavior. Saying, "this isn't real, it is just a message board," doesn't excuse people from being called out for acting like jerks, or acting in ways that would bring legal action in the real world.

No, you probably wouldn't get sued for something you say here (or at least a suit would probably fail). Nevertheless, there is no need to engage in hostile, defaming behaviors.

Joking around is one thing. Being hurtful is another. Sometimes the only way to tell the difference is by the accompanying emoticon/smiley.

From: Blacksburg, VA | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LyraLuthien Tinuviel
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 5173

posted      Profile for LyraLuthien Tinuviel   Author's Homepage   Email LyraLuthien Tinuviel   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Archer, I wasn't even half serious when I posted that about you being a puppetmaster.

I've been accused of being a sockpuppet of Snowdog's, a puppet master of MadMatt and WitW, and a returning oldie who still hasn't been named by my accuser(s).

I don't really have a chart in which I keep track of evidences as to whether any one citizen is another person's sockpuppet.

I just think it's kind of funny that there are so many speculations about citizens having alternate accounts that if they were all true, MT might have about thirty actual people behind the nearly six thousand accounts.

Funny, as in it's an idle speculation that makes me chuckle; not as in I think anyone needs to take or threaten legal action to prove or disprove that anyone is or is not anyone else.

If I did have a chart, though, it would show that most of the posts I've read under your screen name show you backing up WiKi's opinion on some detail or other of the movie. It fuels the idle speculation.

I don't think it's necessary, though, for you to call me retarded or accuse me of defaming your character over such a thing. I do sometimes misjudge whether or not I can get away with teasing someone I haven't known long enough yet. People I have interacted a lot with on this board will tell you that I often lament the fact that I seem to be socially retarded.

I am not, however, mentally deficient, and I think that is a greater insult than my teasing indication that you and WiKi might be the same person.

I'm sorry my teasing offended you. That was not my intent.

Back on topic, though, I think it's a good thing PJ won't be directing the hobbit. He would botch it royally, just like he did LotR.

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Don't say we have come now to the end; White shores are calling.
You and I will meet again.
Across the sea a pale moon rising; the ships have come to carry you home.
And all will turn to silver glass; A light on the water
Grey Ships pass into the West.

From: GreyHavens via Puget Sound | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Archer
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 3857

posted      Profile for Archer   Email Archer   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
If we were truly friends (like RL friends) you'd know I'm quite cynical by nature and take very little at face value. I say, question everything!! I recall questioning your identity but i seem to also recall talking myself out of it. But be that as it may, I do have genuine respect for you and do consider you a friend as much as our minimal internet interaction allows so I offer my apologies for any unpleasantness I've caused you. Ordinarily I'd have sent this in a more private manner but since the questioning was public, it seems appropriate the apology should be as well.

Yes, I see your cup runneth over with respect in those Pony posts. [] []

Can't say I share the same sentiment for you anymore. Problem I see is your dislike of WiKi has spilled over onto me, which is pretty uncalled for. I'd suggest you keep your personal war between you and him, and if you can't tell the difference between my posts and his (and this applies to everyone who jumped the wagon on this one) that's your problem, I'm afraid--don't make it mine.

And yes Maddy, your cynicism is admirable, but as a tip for the future, it's a lame excuse for defamation, which I feel your claims that 1) I and a generally rude and disrespectful person are one and the same, and 2) I don't really exist, are pretty nice examples of. Sorry, but I put a lot of time and thought into my posts here, and to hear that I don't really exist is like deleting everything I've ever said. You may think it was amusing, but it caused me some real distress, absurd as it was. Maybe you should try to see it from that angle.

Well, the offer still stands for you (and any of the other Archer nay-sayers) to meet me in a public voice chat channel if you want proof I exist. Show up or shut up is what I say. [] I still invite WiKi to join up too--though considering he doesn't even answer his PM's, I doubt he'd have the cojones. []

Edit: Hey WK actually just sent me a PM, so I take back all that stuff I said about him. []

quote:

BTW.. for what it's worth, a picture isn't really proof of anything, you could've just googled 'hottie' and posted the first pic that came up []

[] []

[ 01-19-2007, 01:09 PM: Message edited by: Archer ]

Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Archer
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 3857

posted      Profile for Archer   Email Archer   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Errr...all of the examples of "libel and defamation" in the linked article refer to the reputations of named individuals and companies. Real names, real jobs.

I don't think that "legal recourse" works quite the same for naff messageboard personas and their "expertise" or sockpuppetry. []

Gna, your ignorance is showing again, as usual. I think its pretty funny that everytime you show up here, it's just to try to prove yourself more knowledgable about something--obviously because you need that kind of validation and security. They have support groups for that you know. Get some help with it. []

Do your research, you dolt. People are suing behind aliases now. Look up Yahoo. Search around, for gawd's sake. Go a little beyond the very selective arguments that you think are so peerless (still laughing at your lack of awareness of Chretien de Troyes as being the main push behind Arthurian myths). If you weren't in such a rush to jump into this thread and try to prove me wrong like your insecurity drives you to do, you might have realized that the internet is evolving, changing our culture, and dicatating the course of the law. Sorry, but defamation is defamation, like the Dread Pirate says, regardless of the name its geared at. People are starting to realize that, and acting on it legally. People also do identify with their forum avatars and aliases, otherwise they wouldn't spend so much time and energy on forums. And what hurts the alias may hurt the person behind it. Research it, you ninny.

Not to mention new laws are made every day for new situations, just like this one. Would you like to be one of the first to bring it to court with me? [] I'm game if you are. I've got nothing to lose, and at the very least an identity to gain, since at the very least it'd reveal me as being. You on the other hand. . .well, at the very least it'd expose you as the twelve-year-old gossiping school girl that you really are. []

Now get back into your little fanfics thread where your little posts count. You have no power here. *poof*

[ 01-18-2007, 04:29 PM: Message edited by: Archer ]

Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Archer
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 3857

posted      Profile for Archer   Email Archer   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Archer, I wasn't even half serious when I posted that about you being a puppetmaster.

I've been accused of being a sockpuppet of Snowdog's, a puppet master of MadMatt and WitW, and a returning oldie who still hasn't been named by my accuser(s).

I don't really have a chart in which I keep track of evidences as to whether any one citizen is another person's sockpuppet.

I just think it's kind of funny that there are so many speculations about citizens having alternate accounts that if they were all true, MT might have about thirty actual people behind the nearly six thousand accounts.

Funny, as in it's an idle speculation that makes me chuckle; not as in I think anyone needs to take or threaten legal action to prove or disprove that anyone is or is not anyone else.

If I did have a chart, though, it would show that most of the posts I've read under your screen name show you backing up WiKi's opinion on some detail or other of the movie. It fuels the idle speculation.

I don't think it's necessary, though, for you to call me retarded or accuse me of defaming your character over such a thing. I do sometimes misjudge whether or not I can get away with teasing someone I haven't known long enough yet. People I have interacted a lot with on this board will tell you that I often lament the fact that I seem to be socially retarded.

I am not, however, mentally deficient, and I think that is a greater insult than my teasing indication that you and WiKi might be the same person.

I'm sorry my teasing offended you. That was not my intent.

Lyra, being accused of being the sock puppet of people who are your friends or are generally liked, all in fun, is not exactly the same as being accused of being one and the same with a very rude and generally disliked person on this forum. WiKi has done some pretty unforgivable things on these forums, and I don't like being told he's who I really am--especially as I try to cultivate some of what he tears down.

I have a good deal of respect for people on these forums, whatever they believe in or like, even if it's the films that I hate, and have always tried to convey that respect (unless some needlebutt like Gna starts asking for it, then I'm happy to oblige). I have never name-called anyone for liking the films; I feel that is their business and right, whether I understand it or not, or whether I agree or not.

Hey, I taught the books -- do you think I harrassed my students for liking the films? Most of them did like them, you know. That would have been a cruel use of power, and plain unfair--and just petty. Everyone in my classroom knew I hated the films, but they also knew everyone's view on them was respected. Disliking the films does not mean I feel the need to attack people for liking them, and I don't believe I ever have, even on these forums. Yes, I will quickly post my disagreements, but show me where I have attacked someone personally just for liking the films. Now, if you can't see the difference between that and what WiKi posts, then like I told Maddy--that's your problem, not mine. And just because two people can really dislike the films, and therefore agree on many points, is pretty flimsy cause for thinking they are one and the same. []

Of course my posts are going to back up much of what WiKi says about the films--I feel pretty much the same about them, hello! But because he is one of the few who really dislikes them as much as I do (probably not as much as I do), it's going to sound like I'm only backing up him, out of choice, or something. Show me another film-hater, and I'll probably back him/her up too. But since WiKi is the only one that dislikes them near to the degree I do, that's who you'll hear me agreeing with. Do the math. []

Interestingly, I hear you saying the exact same thing as other members on this board consistently too--so does that make you one and the same? Because you have the luxury of getting lost among many people who share your same views, no one is going to accuse you of being the same person. But let's say you choose one of your comrades who agrees with you (or to make it more like this situation, someone really obnoxious) and then go to an all film-haters board, and I bet, given a little time, you'd be told you dont exist and you are nothing but a sock puppet. What a bugger if you are really passionate about your views, hey?

Actually, what an interesting sociology experiment that would make. Anyone game? []

It's all in the numbers, my friend, and just because there is only one other person here who strongly voices agaisnt the films, is not justified cause to assume we are one and the same. Don't think so black and white on it, please. You'll do us both a favor.

And just for your info, I didnt call you retarded. I said people on the Pony thinking WiKi and I are one and the same is a retarted idea, which it is.

Now please all of you, take your little speculations about me to PMs and private chats, if you need to give your forum life purpose--otherwise let it die. Or better yet, join me live and tell it to me personally, if you've got the bollocks.

Mmm-hmm. Thought so.

[ 01-18-2007, 01:15 PM: Message edited by: Archer ]

Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor Gna
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 3830

posted      Profile for Gna   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Gna, your ignorance is showing again, as usual. I think its pretty funny that everytime you show up here, it's just to try to prove yourself more knowledgable about something--obviously because you need that kind of validation and security. They have support groups for that you know. Get some help with it.

Do your research, you dolt. People are suing behind aliases now. Look up Yahoo. Search around, for gawd's sake. Go a little beyond the very selective arguments that you think are so peerless (still laughing at your lack of awareness of Chretien de Troyes as being the main push behind Arthurian myths). If you weren't in such a rush to jump into this thread and try to prove me wrong like your insecurity drives you to do, you might have realized that the internet is evolving, changing our culture, and dicatating the course of the law. Sorry, but defamation is defamation, like the Dread Pirate says, regardless of the name its geared at. People are starting to realize that, and acting on it legally. People also do identify with their forum avatars and aliases, otherwise they wouldn't spend so much time and energy on forums. And what hurts the alias may hurt the person behind it. Research it, you ninny.

Not to mention new laws are made every day for new situations, just like this one. Would you like to be one of the first to bring it to court with me? I'm game if you are. I've got nothing to lose, and at the very least an identity to gain, since at the very least it'd reveal me as being. You on the other hand. . .well, at the very least it'd expose you as the twelve-year-old gossiping school girl that you really are.

Now get back into your little fanfics thread where your little posts count. You have no power here. *poof*

Wow, I'm so scared, and in awe of your erudition and vast knowledge. Just as I quaked in my little twelve-year-old insecure girl shoes whenever scary ol' Black Rider X sent me nasty PMs. Your insults sound very familiar, Archer... maybe you're right about me. [] Or perhaps you're just another boring internet persona with an axe to grind perpetually. []

Dread Pirate Roberts-

quote:
Point is, defaming people is illegal in many instances. Therefore it follows that civilized society views such defamation as inappropriate behavior. Conclusion: even when it is "just on a message board" it is still inappropriate behavior. Saying, "this isn't real, it is just a message board," doesn't excuse people from being called out for acting like jerks, or acting in ways that would bring legal action in the real world.

No, you probably wouldn't get sued for something you say here (or at least a suit would probably fail). Nevertheless, there is no need to engage in hostile, defaming behaviors.

Joking around is one thing. Being hurtful is another. Sometimes the only way to tell the difference is by the accompanying emoticon/smiley.

Archer's post, which I quoted above, used several derogatory terms, and I doubt from her invariably arrogant tone that she is joking around. I would describe her posts, not just those directed to me, but to several others as well, as hostile, "defaming" behavior.

Point is, civilized society requires civility from everyone involved-if you insist otherwise, then you're applying double standards.

From: Andustar | Registered: Jul 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Roll of Honor Silmahtar
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 4806

posted      Profile for Silmahtar   Author's Homepage   Email Silmahtar   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
Archer:
quote:
In other words, you don't have to know how to paint the Mona Lisa to understand and appreciate its artistry -- or the lack of it in a paint-by-number copy.
But if you think it doesn't have a shread of aristry in it, worse, that it epitomizes the basest form of the medium, do you keep talking about it ad nauseam, or just simply look the other way?
From: Vinya-Tárilos | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Madomir
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 3084

posted      Profile for Madomir   Email Madomir   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
And yes Maddy, your cynicism is admirable, but as a tip for the future, it's a lame excuse for defamation
It's not an excuse, I mentioned my cynicism only as a means to let you know where I was coming from. Life has kicked me in the teeth often enough to make me an untrusting prick and whether I like it or not it's a big part of me and effects how I think and view other people and the world in general. But it's not an excuse. If I were using it as such I'd be trying to sidestep or at least reduce any accountability for my own words and misguided speculation, but I didn't do that. I accept the blame and genuinely feel remorseful about it, hence the apology.

quote:
Well, the offer still stands for you (and any of the other Archer nay-sayers) to meet me in a public voice chat channel
I'd rather like that, tho sadly I'm about 50% certain I don't have the technilogical do-dads to accomplish such a thing and I'm roughly 96.37% sure that I dont have the technical know-how to properly hook up those do-dads if I ever got my hands on them.
From: northern hemisphere-ish | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
LyraLuthien Tinuviel
Guard of the Citadel
Citizen # 5173

posted      Profile for LyraLuthien Tinuviel   Author's Homepage   Email LyraLuthien Tinuviel   New Private Message   Edit/Delete Post 
quote:
Archer... perhaps you're just another boring internet persona with an axe to grind perpetually. []

No, I don't think so. [] liked the films.

I would like to qualify that I don't properly belong in either the movie-phile or the raging-purist camp. I like both the movies and the films, but I prefer the books.

The films had too many things in it that were too far off from the book, and those things annoy me. But I still like to watch them, because they give me better visuals to work with than RB ever did. It used to be hard for me to 'see' the settings and characters in my mind as I read, and now it's easy.

And I don't care who thinks they were grossly inaccurate, or why.

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Don't say we have come now to the end; White shores are calling.
You and I will meet again.
Across the sea a pale moon rising; the ships have come to carry you home.
And all will turn to silver glass; A light on the water
Grey Ships pass into the West.

From: GreyHavens via Puget Sound | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Create a New Topic  Reply to this Topic Minas Tirith Forums » New Line Cinema's Hobbit » PJ Banned From The Hobbit ! (Page 2)
This topic is comprised of pages:  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic       The Red Arrow!       Admin Options: Make Topic Sticky   Close Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic

About  ~ • ~  Contact  ~ • ~  Minas Tirith  ~ • ~  F. A. Q.  ~ • ~  Help

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.6.1