Category: Musings

Roleplayers – The Good

1) Most of the characters I’ve played :)
2) Luca aka Lucky (Burning Post II)
3) Liric Alycari (Forgotten Kingdoms) – In a sea of mostly well-meaning mediocre-to-pretty-good, his ‘good’-to-‘great’ stands out.
4) Cahir Kerrigan (Forgotten Kingdoms) – Pretty good-to-good.
5) Ariel le Orban (The Inquisition: Legacy) – Emotes are solid and efficient without being just-for-show long, character is defined.
6) Karston ab Broderick (The Inquisition: Legacy) – Pretty good-to-good.
7) Orlando op Cavallari (The Inquisition: Legacy) – Good, and I’m glad I was able to get the name since I only vaguely recalled it.

Roleplayers – A Thrusting Probe

This is to explain some upcoming entries on different roleplayers out there.

Roleplayers will be listed by character, not person, since I don’t know the people and since a person can sometimes have more than one character.

All information given will be MY PERSONAL SUBJECTIVE OPINION AND/OR SATIRE.

All noted comments and specifics (actions, mistakes, reactions from other players…) will be accurate to the best of my ability

The change I hope to provoke? Stopping sh1tty roleplay.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Same-Day Edit: I have removed some categories and left the necessaries.

And if you enjoyed roleplaying with me, thank you.

Peace.

FAIR USE: CRITICISM – A meeting of two equals, portrayed well by both.

Film Imitates Hagakure – Part Eleven

“…Among the maxims on Lord Naoshige’s wall there was this one: ‘Matters of great concern should be treated lightly.’ Master Ittei commented, “Matters of small concern should be treated seriously.” Among one’s affairs there should not be more than two or three matters of what one could call great concern. If these are deliberated upon during ordinary times, they can be understood. Thinking about things previously and then handling them lightly when the time comes is what this is all about…”

FAIR USE: CRITICISM – A good example of the above, in film form.

Film Imitates Hagakure – Part Ten

“…When in a more sophisticated area it is natural that one’s disposition be affected by different styles. But it is vulgar and foolish to look down upon the ways of one’s own district as being boorish, or to be even a bit open to the persuasion of the other place’s ways and to think about giving up one’s own. That one’s own district is unsophisticated and unpolished is a great treasure. Imitating another style is simply a sham…”

FAIR USE: CRITICISM – A character portraying the above very well; maintaining his “disposition” despite being surrounded by that of another.

Robert The Bruce Disowns His…Parent. Can’t Really Blame Him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqF0T8pSStM

7/25/16: Ok, so someone got this very brief clip removed because they have really small testicles. Well, maybe, you never know.

ANYHOO: The reference here is near the end of the movie when Robert the Bruce runs up the stairs; bloodied, angry, and disbelieving…he simply cannot believe that what has been done, has been done. I’m not sure whether he’s more apalled, disgusted, or just plain incredulous.

But, basically, every word/tone/expression shows that he finds his father revolting: horrific, a disgusting abomination almost beyond belief and understanding; an entity that he feels great shame of being any relation to.

And then, eventually, accepting what is, he very calmly states that the hatred, bitterness, etc that he feels are not “him”…they are the natural moral reaction to horrific, disgusting behavior; he puts such behavior of others behind him, moving on as he firmly and forever closes the door on that portion of his life.

Magnificient!

I dunno if I’ve said this one before, but it’s kinda sad that the two greatest and most successful military leaders in the history of France are an illiterate 18-year-old peasant girl with no military training whatsoever, and a midget with a complex.

No offense to midgets.

Or illiterate 18-year-old peasant girls with no military training.

She is one of my heroes, after all.

Film Imitates Hagakure – Part Eight

“…there is one transcending level, and this is the most excellent of all. This person is aware of the endlessness of entering deeply into a certain Way and never thinks of himself as having finished. He truly knows his own insufficiencies and never in his whole life thinks that he has succeeded. He has no thoughts of pride but with self-abasement knows the Way to the end. It is said that Master Yagyu once remarked, “I do not know the way to defeat others, but the way to defeat myself.” Throughout your life advance daily, becoming more skillful than yesterday, more skillful than today. This is never-ending…”

FAIR USE: CRITICISM – An example of pride and over-confidence; led up to well via cuts to/from other scenes, and portrayed well by John Travolta and that guy who played Carla’s sleazy ex-husband.

Cheating In The NFL – Commentary/Satire by Puppy

First off: Yes. Of course.

That out of the way…

There are two extremes on this issue…like the far left and the far right.

The far left wants anarchy, the far right wants Nazi Germany.

Both = insane.

Now, as with most things the real truth/reason is somewhere in between.

Applied to the NFL:

There are two types of insane idiots on the Patriots/them being punished:

1) The complete in-denial apologist fans who refuse to believe ANY accusation against the Patriots can be ANYTHING except the act of an envious hater. This…is insane and idiotic.

2) The complete in-denial hatred-spewing fans who believe, wholeheartedly, that the Patriots are the root of all NFL evil. They, and they alone, are the corrupting force amongst a sea of pure, naive innocence. Noone else cheats…just the Patriots. This…is insane and idiotic.

Vis for both groups:

Me, I’m somewhere in the middle. All teams cheat (including the Patriots) just like all politicians lie. Come on…it’s just common FRICKIN sense. If you get caught, you get punished. Period.

To try to educate those who are probably too idiotic and ignorant TO BE educated (cuz hey…you gotta try), read the following and ATTEMPT to make a connection. HINT: Robert Duvall’s character is “every other NFL team besides the Patriots when the Patriots get caught and they don’t”.

*Duvall* I’ve never done this. In 45 years of practicing, I’ve never waited in a corridor for a jury.
*Travolta* I always do.
*Duvall* I can tell. You’re good at it. You seem so at peace doing it. What do you think? Is it good they’re out this long?
*Travolta* For who?
*Duvall* For me, of course. You can never tell. It could mean anything. It could mean jury duty’s more fun than working at the post office…
*Travolta* It’s bad for both of you.
*Duvall* You think? Well, here’s my take…
*points at other man* Guilty.
*points back at himself* Not guilty.
That’s what they’re going to say.
…
It’s going to come down to people, like always.
You FOUND someone who saw him dumping stuff.
You didn’t find ANYONE…who saw me. *gentle headshake and smile*

10/16/16: FAIR USE: CRITICISM – Good clip from bad movie. Signature removed. (housekeeping)

Film Imitates Hagakure – Part Six

“…It is said, “When you would see into a person’s heart, become ill.” When you are sick or in difficulties, many of those who were friendly or close to you in daily life will become cowards. Whenever anyone is in unhappy circumstances, you should above all inquire after them by visiting or sending some gift. And you should never in your whole life be negligent toward someone from whom you have received a favor. By such things the consideration of others can be seen. In this world the people who will rely on others when they are in difficulties and afterwards not give them a thought are many…”

FAIR USE: CRITICISM – One character displaying the above towards another in a mostly mediocre film (except for said first character).

Film Imitates Hagakure – Part Five

“…Always the pretentious, self-asserting notables turn their backs on the man just as his eyes are closing in death…”

FAIR USE: CRITICISM – Example number 237 of how/why 1) Patrick McGoohan did a really good job of acting in ‘Braveheart’ and 2) The character he portrayed – Edward Longshanks – was not a very nice guy.

Film Imitates Hagakure – Part Four

“…In the words of the ancients, one should make his decisions within the space of seven breaths. Lord Takanobu said, “If discrimination is long, it will spoil. ” Lord Naoshige said, “When matters are done leisurely, seven out of ten will turn out badly. A warrior is a person who does things quickly.” When your mind is going hither and thither, discrimination will never be brought to a conclusion. With an intense, fresh and undelaying spirit, one will make his judgments within the space of seven breaths. It is a matter of being determined and having the spirit to break right through to the other side…”

FAIR USE: CRITICISM – This clip is an example of the quote in movie form; you can figure out for yourself how. It’s a powerful clip because it foreshadows what would seem to be the “final showdown” between the two main characters.

Film Imitates Hagakure – Part Three

“…Recently, people who are called “clever” adorn themselves with superficial wisdom and only deceive others. For this reason they are inferior to dull-witted folk. A dull-witted person is direct. If one looks deeply into his heart with the above phrase, there will be no hidden places. It is a good examiner. One should be of the mind that, meeting this examiner, he will not be embarrassed…”

FAIR USE: CRITICISM – A somewhat-interesting part of a great movie; showing the true character of one of the characters in a convincing manner.

Film Imitates Hagakure – Part Two

“…In China there was once a man who liked pictures of dragons, and his clothing and furnishings were all designed accordingly. His deep affection for dragons was brought to the attention of the dragon god, and one day a real dragon appeared before his window. It is said that he died of fright. He was probably a man who always spoke big words but acted differently when facing the real thing…”

FAIR USE: CRITICISM – One of the highlights of the movie and a great example of the above. Also, if you try to get this removed allow me to criticize you: you’re an a$$hole.

Hurricane Of Wills – Unfinished

“Courtesy…”

“Courtesy is not for inferiors.”

“Courtesy is for everyone…”

“Nobody speaks to me that way.”

“That’s another one of your problems!
Nobody’s told you that you’re an uncivilized savage,
a vicious child in a woman’s body,
an arrogant monster…”

*slap*

“That’s no way to treat someone
who’s telling you the truth.”

11/3/16: Edited for form and punctuation and very minorly for content – no change to overriding theme. That’s right, FORM, CONTENT, INTERRELATIONSHIPS…

From Star Trek II

“We are assembled here today to pay final respects to our honored dead. And yet it should be noted that in the midst of our sorrow, this death takes place in the shadow of new life, the sunrise of a new world; a world that our beloved comrade gave his life to protect and nourish. He did not feel this sacrifice a vain or empty one, and we will not debate his profound wisdom at these proceedings. Of my friend, I can only say this: of all the souls I have encountered in my travels, his was the most… human.”

The Obvious Ones Are So Much Easier To Write

To all the CA/A’s fervently protesting the inclusion of “God” in the pledge of allegiance: Why aren’t you also protesting the inclusion of “with Liberty and Justice for all”?

I mean, the main argument to remove “God” from the pledge is that not all students believe in God/God may not exist.

But even that argument acknowledges (barring the insane extremists) that it’s at least POSSIBLE that God exists, and that SOME students may believe in God.

Who is stupid/ignorant/insane enough to believe that ALL people in the United States receive EXACTLY THE SAME “Liberty” and “Justice”?

Therefore, it’s a false statement. One with more evidence of being false than the statement “God exists”.

Where’s the quest-for-truth-telling fervor about that?

And more importantly, why don’t you take the time you’re wasting on a “pledge” that few students (I know…I was one once) take seriously and spend it on a legitimate Secular Humanist cause?

Like…I don’t know…something involving Liberty or Justice.

And to the CA/A-lemming argument “Well, this involves Liberty”…please. Let’s be serious here. If a student doesn’t believe in God, since they’re chanting in unison, they can say “Cthulu” or “The Devil” or “Joe Schmoe” or “flabbityfloobity” under their breath and noone will notice OR give a d@mn.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Confessions Of A Mouth-Breather

After incessant droning, dull, computerized mostly CA/A propaganda, I have come to realize that I AM in fact a Mouth-Breather.

I must admit that I am also a Nose-Breather, sometimes a Mouth-And-Nose-Breather, more likely a Mouth-Breather when my nose is stuffed up, and more likely a Nose-Breather if my lips have been sewn shut by that ‘Crazies’ doctor.

In addition, I am admittedly a Finger-Toucher, a Hand-Grabber, an Ear-Listener, a Nose-Sniffer, a Lip-Kisser, a Mouth-Swallower, a Taste-Buds-Taster, a Lung-Breather, a Foot-Stepper, a Legs-Walker, a Middle-Finger-To-Obnoxious-CA/A’s-erector, a Naughty-Bits-Waste-Matter-Excretor, and of course a Mind-Thinker.

So if any pseudo-intellectual CA/A (or other random lunatic) labels you a “Mouth-Breather”, be thankful, and simply refer to my handy guide on CA/A’s.

Thank you.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Allan Muir: How One Sentence Can Wreck An Article

So I’m reading an article about the Bruins by a writer named Allan Muir, and he’s making a lot of decent points: they’re getting old (some of them), their defense needs to be better on both ends, they need more scoring, etc…

And then, either because he’s trying very hard to make a point in order to “sell” his article, or because he actually believes it, he writes this:

“The Bruins’ forwards are also short of spark; only rookie David Pastrnak seems capable of generating anything creative.”

I mean, that’s just absurd. To say they need MORE offense is one thing, to say he’s the ONLY FORWARD on the team capable of offensive creativity is ridiculous. From both a having-watched them standpoint (since I have) and from a statistical standpoint. Vis:

Patrice Bergeron: 52 GP, 35 Points
Loui Eriksson: 52 GP, 31 Points
David Krejci: 33 GP, 25 Points
Brad Marchand: 48 GP, 27 Points
Carl Soderberg: 53 GP, 33 Points

David Pastrnak: 17 GP, 7 Points

Message to Allan: While it may be good copy and good fodder for readers, bringing in obviously (IMPO) faulty “points” does not make an article better…it makes it worse.

-Puppy >.< Yip!

Deflategate – After Further Review

This whole thing’s just really fcken annoying, and it’s taking the FUN out of a GAME. That’s the part everyone can agree on that likes football, unless you’re a rabid Pats-hater.

The “they would’ve won anyway” argument misses the point.

The “everyone’s doing it” argument misses the point.

If it’s proven they cheated, punish them like you would any other team and move on.

After listening to some scientists talk about the issue, it seems that there is a possibility it was a natural occurence due to weather conditions.

It’s long and way too fcken complicated, but I don’t know whether they cheated or not at this point. Chalk my previous post up to not conceiving all the possibilities, not being very good at science, and not believing Bill Belichick is a paragon of virtue.

That’s it!

Oh, and in any case…Go Pats!

-Puppy >.< Yip!

From A Patriots Fan And Non-CompleteMoron

From a man who’s spent almost his entire LIFE involved in football and who prides himself on his vast knowledge of the game, the following statement – to me – strikes me about as legitimate as A-Rod claiming he was just making a normal running motion or Sal Alosi claiming he was just stretching that knee out:

“I would say I’ve learned a lot more about this process in the last three days than I knew or have talked about it in the last 40 years that I’ve coached in this league,” Belichick said. “I had no knowledge of the various steps involved in the game balls and process that went through.”

I mean, COME ON. I’m a Pats fan, but it’s getting pretty FCKEN annoying to have to deal with this sh1t from a coach who DOESN’T EVEN NEED TO RESORT TO IT. Allegedly. I’m not saying anything, but it seems pretty fcken 6.9 to me.

I think the following video clip should be played for BB every time he enters a football stadium, on the big screen (SATIRE…SATIRE…SATIRE):

10/16/16: FAIR USE: CRITICISM – A good clip from a good movie. And it fits, yet. Signature removed, oh no. (housekeeping)

Why ALL Bullying Is Bad – A Crash Course For The CI

NOTE: This is not an “anti-intellectual” post.

Intellectual is great.

Smug, arrogant, rude intellectual is NOT.

A lot of today’s crusading intellectuals seem to me – in an Einstein-ian “rebel against religious indoctrination” sense – to be compensating for the fact that they were picked on and made fun of in the not-too-distant past for being geeky, dorky, nerdy, and/or smart.

In the not-too-distant past when they were kids, that is, and being geeky/dorky/nerdy/smart was NOT considered “cool”.

Now, was it ABSURD and HORRIBLE that people were made fun of for these reasons?

YES. No qualifications. YES. I WAS ONE OF THEM.

Does it therefore make it justifiable for the people who still harbor resentment over these childhood slights to act EXACTLY THE SAME WAY towards people they consider stupid?

NO. No qualifications. NO. I’m NOT one of them, TG/TloG.

When I make fun of someone for being stupid, it’s because they’re an a$$hole – who also happens to be stupid. But “a$$hole” is the key to the equation, not “stupid”.

Some people are less smart than others.

Doesn’t make them “less” of a person any more than being less: attractive, “cool”, popular, fashionable, successful, rich, famous…

I mean, it’s sad really: I see groups of “intellectuals” gather together at the metaphorical school lunch table and trade smart comments and make fun of all the not-as-cool “dumb” people…

And it’s DEJA VU…of the groups of jocks and preps gathered together at the school lunch table (really) trading sports and fashion comments and making fun of all the not-as-cool “geeky/dorky/nerdy/smart” people.

Everyone is ignorant of something. A true intellectual seeks to teach those that wish to learn, not mock those that haven’t yet.

The Crusading Intellectual – as the CA/A – seeks not to educate for the sake of educating. They seek to insult and degrade, for the purpose of inflating their own feelings of self-worth.

-Puppy >.< Yip!