Messages

I won't apply either, for eight things. Anyone else?

-MillsJROSS

Sorry it took me so long to get to this. I generally get to do a lot of my work during weekends, but these past few weekends I've had other obligations (My grandmother turned 80...woo!). Good news...now there's an official place to go, should you want to help me during the game making process. If not, there's still an official place you can go...but I'd rather not say it here.

Jobs

I've also fixed the magazine link to volume 2 on my main page...it took me two weeks to realize it was linked incorrectly. If you have any problems filling out an application, complain through my comment system, or just send me a PM. Thanks!

-MillsJROSS

I had fixed the link, once Ryan made me aware of it, and just didn't take the time to say so in the edited post.

Yes, I'm looking for character sprite artists. I'll probably work on a new section in the website for applying/contacting me about this position next week, as I need to create some formal process for getting someone on the team (it's just me and Ace so far), as well as, defining the role they will play more clearly. I'll update this thread when that information becomes available on the website. It'll make me take time to work on the website a little, which I always find entertaining.

Sorry I couldn't put a more substantial puzzle in this week's magazine, but I was running short on time. I'll post the solution to the riddle sometime next week, too.

-MillsJROSS

New Month, new Issue. Bump.

The Adventunare Times Volume 1, Issue 2

-MillsJROSS

Don't forget to dress for aligators.

-MillsJROSS

Put me down for having a vehicle. I also might be coming with plus one, depending on how long I can hold a relationship, and whether or not she'd like to be submerged in nerdom.

I'm game for the James Randi thing, and I'll take a crack at the million. I do this amazing thing where I talk to the dead. They don't talk back, so the conversation has awkward pauses, but they don't seem to mind.

I don't know how I feel about going to Disney during the mittens event, but sometime before or after would be awesome. Those of us in Florida should do a gloves event that scouts out cool things to do for mittens sometime between now and Mittens.

-MillsJROSS

...let's at least agree that Israel is using excessive force.
A full-scale military invasion, killing more than a thousand civilians and laying waste to tens of thousands of buildings, as a response to home-made rockets that all-in-all killed 8 people?

That's exactly what we (at least you and I) disagree on. I think we can both agree that the loss of life, no matter the number, caused by war is sad and unfortunate. Where we differ is that you attribute the 1000+ lives that were lost in Gaza as Israels fault. I put the brunt of the blame back to Hamas.

I mean, 8 people...come on.

This is exactly the argument I don't like. You can repeat a number as many times as you want. The number of people Hamas killed is irrelevant. Their actions, sending bombs into civilian targets, is what is relevant. It's not like if Israel killed the same number of people as Hamas does, that everything is OK. Israel is defending its borders from a threat that could kill more of their own citizens if left unchecked. Should they let some number of their own civilians die, just so we can have even numbers?

But 99% of the residents of Gaza are not terrorists and don't shoot missiles at Israel.
Just like 99% of the residents of Iraq are not terrorists and had never done anything to hurt the US/UK.

Israel isn't bombing 99% of Gaza. Their aim is at military targets that are embedded in civilian hotspots. While drawing a comparison between the U.S. and U.K. seems to make parallels, it fails to really encompass one thing. The reason I don't like our (US/UK) involvement in Iraq, is we are defending ourselves from a vague enemy with the threat of some unknowable future attack. Israel is fighting a more tangible enemy where the threat of attack is today or tomorrow, and the means of that attack is starring them in the face.

Well, I think a strong argument can be made for any underdog nation applying less-than 'honorable' tactics in order to sway the battle in their favor; they are, afterall, heavily outclassed.

I'm not arguing whether the tactic is honorable or not. If they want to continue using that tactic at the cost of lives of their own people, then that is their decision to make. My argument is only that when those civilians are killed, we should be laying blame on the people who decided to put a buffer of innocent people between them and enemies.

-MillsJROSS

Unfortunately for you these dates are very accommodating to my summer schedule....so I'm still coming.

-MillsJROSS

The problem with your justification are that you're distilling context to present hard facts, and drawing a conclusion from a comparison of numbers. When the truth is you need to take away the filter and look at why things are happening.

Say I tell you that you kill 1 billion germs every time you brush your teeth. But, in your life, they've only caused a few cavities and some sore gums. Without any context one might side with the germs. Until one observes, that the germs are going to always, always, always eat and cause decay to our mouth. So we need to take harsh action to make sure our mouth stays intact. Because, with clean teeth and a healthy mouth we have the potential to live longer. I'm not trying to say Hamas are germs here, that would be erroneous. What I am trying to show is that without any proper context one can draw a bad conclusion.

What truly can't be justified is putting military offensive facilities near and around populous civilian areas. Bombing another country, and trying to get sympathy for your cause because of the death count. Justify that for me and I might agree with the numbers you've provided.

-MillsJROSS

No, because the terrorists didn't and don't value life the same way. They wanted as many innocent people killed, because to them, there are no civilians. Everyone of us is evil and needs to be destroyed.

You know Mills, I found your arguments for Israel to be quite moderate until I read this, and it says much about your way of thinking.

You don't actually think that terrorists label an entire people as evil, do you?  Couldn't it be that, maybe, possibly, they attack people because those people are interfering with their way of life, as America has done by meddling in Middle Eastern affairs for decades, including (but not limited to) the post-Desert Storm blockade of Iraq that has cost the country thousands (perhap millions) of lives from lack of food and medicine?

I think you're over-generalizing what I'm saying, or rather taking the term Terrorist to mean Palestinians. I'm positive there are plenty of people in Gaza who do not label all of the Israeli people as "evil", and have a strong desire for peace that entails living side by side. Just as I know that there are plenty of people in Israel who feel the same way.

However, the action of Hamas sending in bombs to purposefully hit civilian targets...not military targets, not an area that poses a physical threat to them...shows, to me, that they must not value life the same way. Maybe they don't think of the Israeli's as evil, but they definitely don't seem to be valuing the people they're bombing at all.

But I think Hamas is 100% responsible for all civilian deaths caused by Israel bombing their military installations.

Come on, man, bias aside, this can't possibly be your opinion?

I'm not really sure why you don't understand how that is my opinion. I understand that there is a plight in Gaza. I understand they live in squalor. I understand that they're angry at Israel's existence. I do have mixed feeling as to whether or not Israel should have become a state. But if I started shooting people, with a gun, and someone cut off my hand in the exchange. I can blame the person who cut off my hand till I'm blue in the face, however, if I didn't start shooting...I'd still have a hand. I'd hold myself responsible for the lost appendage. 100% responsible.

When we look at the death toll, it is lopsided. I don't disagree. However, it's not like Israel is surrounded by friends, and just has one neighboring country that it's at war with. It has to defend itself off from many countries. So, when they bomb military targets, they have to think how good their defenses will be after a military strike. Will they have enough resources for this or that. It's not like this is a short term war.

Israel is playing a long term game. They can't just send in a "strategic" attack that reduces lives if it entails weakening their military force the next time around. It's far more "strategic" to use long-range weapons that damage military targets quite well.

As I said before...it's awful that innocent people are dieing. It is. I don't think Israel is absolved of all guilt. However, I'm far more angry at the people who build bombs and military manufacturing plants near civilians, than the people who are destroying those buildings. There's a deep history to draw blame for or from either side in this conflict. Whether or not Israel should have been made a state or not is irrelevant in that it did and is. I just think that people are villianizing Israel's actions, in this one exchange, without a thought at a bigger picture. That Israel doesn't have the convenience of longer military attacks that save as many lives as possible, isn't considered, or is just thrown out the window. Both parties share responsibility and blame for this war, overall. But the civilian count would be a lot less if there weren't military installations built within civilian hot spots. So in the context of the original post...I see exactly why Israel is doing what it's doing, and I object to comparing a death toll to determine blame.

War sucks.

-MillsJROSS

If someone throws a rock through your window, you don't bulldoze their house; and furthermore, if they hide in another house, you don't bulldoze that house too.

Do you really think this is an accurate analogy of what's going on in Israel. I sure as hell don't.

Truthfully, I'm completely appalled by some arguments used by Israel-supporters. "But we warn them before we bomb!" Wow, thank you, if only CIA had been warned before terrorists flew into the World Trade Center, it would have been all fine and dandy (oh wait, they were warned).

Truthfully, it offends me that you're appalled by this. Calling ahead and letting the civilians know, is definitely an indication that Israel wants to reduce the amount of civilians that are killed/injured. Many of these civilians choose to stay for martyrdom.

The CIA might have had information regarding 911, but it's not like the terrorist called them up, and told um. "Hey, we're going to destroy the your world trade center. You might want to let your employees take vacation time, or whatever..." No, because the terrorists didn't and don't value life the same way. They wanted as many innocent people killed, because to them, there are no civilians. Everyone of us is evil and needs to be destroyed.

When Hamas, or like minded terrorist organizations, kill, they don't give one iota that that person wasn't involved in the Israel government in any way. It's a victory! When Israel kills, they're aiming at military installations, not people. They're not cheering the fact that people died.

Lastly, Israel's attack is, as usual, counter-productive, since it will only increase the support for Hamas.

Except, they've destroyed 30+ military strongholds in Gaza, and have been crippling Hamas. Will groups come back again? Yes. But most of the people who will support Hamas as a result of this, were probably supporting them already.

Now I don't pretend to be unbiased here. I'm Jewish and I went to Sunday school and have been taught Israel's history inside and out. I made my birth-right trip there 8 years ago. However, I do not necessarily think Israel should have been made into a Jewish state. It's not like we can pretend it was peaceful there before it was a state, though. It's been a bed of war and destruction for many years.

It's also not like the state doesn't want peace, though. But how can you maintain peace when groups only goal is your destruction. There is nothing you can give them. There is nothing you can say to them.

In these bombing you can evidently see that Israel values the lives and well being of their citizens. They're not willing to do more tactical missions that perhaps would save lives of the enemy, but extend their military and incur more of a loss from their side. Let's not pretend, though, that they just are bombing things left and right, without caring about civilian casualties. Yes, the casualties are uneven. But since when did having equal casualties make war and violence a just and right thing?

-MillsJROSS

The truth is there is no peace, and there will not be peace. Not when  you have groups, like Hamas, whose ultimate goal is to eliminate Israel. Don't pretend Israel has never tried diplomacy. What diplomacy will work against groups like that?

It's not Israel who is constructing weapons manufacturing plants within the heart of civilians. If anyone is to be blamed for this, it's Hamas. It's not like Hamas doesn't know that if they launch a missile from a school, that there won't be repercussions. They want Israel to kill civilians. They want you to feel sorry for those people, and get angry at Israel.

They use the same tricks over and over and over again. Frankly, I'm sick of it. It sucks that civilians have to be put in harms way. But I think Hamas is 100% responsible for all civilian deaths caused by Israel bombing their military installations. I don't think Israel can do no wrong...but I don' think Hamas has done a single bit of good.

-MillsJROSS

Yes, of course this is nothing to do with Israel's own actions. They'd have deliberately missed their targets if only those darn Palestinians didn't keep throwing themselves in front of the missles and bullets at the last millisecond.

I'm sorry, but if I was given a warning that 24 hours from now my building was going to be bombed. I think I'd be somewhat responsible for my death if I decided to stay. I'm not saying Israel is innocent, and that there aren't other options, but there is no amount of diplomacy that is going to fix some of these groups. And if we really want to talk about awful things, how about the atomic bombs of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which killed MUCH more than a mere 1,000 civilians.

-MillsJROSS

A bomb is a bomb is a bomb...to argue that this bomb crosses a line, is a fairly moot point. As far as civilian casualties...while it is indeed sad, the heart of the problem is the fact that the other guys like to hide their weapons in hospitals and schools. I'm not condoning the use of white phosphorous, but I don't condone throwing insults at one another either. What this article might be leaving out, is that Israel has been warning civilians before they bomb a building. This could be a case where they didn't, I don't know. Frankly, the other team tends to like getting in the way of bombs to collect their virgins, and ensuring that Israel constantly has bad PR.

-MillsJROSS

I have a whole flock of sheep that would like to share a word or two with AGA...But I don't blame AGA...I just blame his strange family traditions.

-MillsJROSS

You don't have to apologize. But money is certainly not the case here. The case is that you like meat, you like a certain amount of meat, and you're not willing to change that. There are foods that you can buy more of to supplement eating less meat that ARE cheaper. The truth is, it's just not something you care about. Which is perfectly an acceptable attitude, just don't complain that is has to do with your income.

As to Kosher killings. Slitting the throat is one of the most painless ways to go, your almost instantly become unconscious and you bleed out very fast. Even if you witnessed twitching, it doesn't bespeak of pain to the animal.

-MillsJROSS

Oh, and please don't approach an argument from the roundabout direction.  People aren't fat because they eat meat; they are fat because they eat too much garbage, like chocolate, crisps, batter fried candy bars, and just generally too much food for their metabolism altogether, so 'eat less meat because you're fat' does not hold any weight as an argument.

I think the argument isn't about being fat, but being healthy. Eating copious amounts of meat is not good for your health. As with anything, moderation is key. Meat should be used more as a side item then the main course. We can supplement meat with other cheaper items, like having more grains and beans. That doesn't mean we get rid of meat, though. Just try to eat less.

Now, if we make an attempt to eat less meat, than there is less of a demand on the market. The reason we have a lot of this cruelty is because of massive demand for meat and meat by-products. This, to me, is more important than the choice between free-range and "imprisoned" meat. I think it would have a bigger impact. It's also easier on the money belt, so you're not asking people to pay more.

The attitude, though, that the "regular meat is already packaged, and someone is going to buy it, so I might as well buy it." It's a false argument. For one, it says that your purchase is meaningless. It isn't. Demand is generated from every single consumer. There is no consumer left out, and if there was, it certainly wouldn't be you. It's logic also limited to only the past and present, when we should be more concerned with the future. Grocery stores notice wasted product, and they notice it fast. If they are left with 10 packages they need to throw out, they'll order that much less (not accounting for holidays) the next week.

I'm of the belief that humans ARE superior to animals. However, saying that it's a dog eat dog world, and that it's part of the circle of life, doesn't fly with me. Yes, a worm doesn't care about your life, but frankly he didn't go to college. Neither did that pig. But that pig is certainly as smart as your dog and cat, if not smarter. We pick and choose what animals deserve to be treated with dignity. Horses are treated better than cows. Cockatoo's are treated better than chicken. Seems rather silly to me that we should be so callous towards the animals that taste the best. So, I'll look for free-range meat from now on, because I can afford to, and I don't buy meat often, anyway. (Or Kosher meat, because Kosher rules generally provide the animal died quickly with minimal pain).

-MillsJROSS

I think it would be far more beneficial to try to appeal to people on a portion control level. We eat far too much meat (at least here in the states). Eating too much meat has negative health effects, and there's more of environmental impact in producing meat. Whereas fruits/vegetables/grains grow much faster than the years it can take to grow livestock.

I, generally, avoid meat for breakfast and lunch. With dinner I'm more prone to making vegetarian things at home, but eating meat at a restaurant. Mostly, I do this because I don't like cooking with raw meat at home, though, not because I'm health conscious.

-MillsJROSS

Interesting...I think I can only afford one major trip a year. Since Mittens is close this year, though, that does free up one major trip. I'm not going to go so far as to commit myself to coming, yet.

Another idea that you might want to toss around...what about an on-line expo? I know you lose something by not being able to meet everyone face to face. There are advantages to presenting everything online that I think are strong enough to at least consider. You don't have to worry about booking people in a hotel, since they're reaching the expo through the ol' internet thingy-ma-bob. Thus, the ticket prices can be reduced. You'd still charge people, because you'd still want to pay those people who made some sort of presentation. You can get more people to view everything.

When push comes to shove, though...face to face allows you to really meet people. You could always do both. Have the expo, but schedule on-line things in tandem. Good luck with this!

-MillsJROSS

Not really an update, but I did provide a solution guide to the puzzlers. Both were tricky, the first one was intentionally tricky, the second one was tricky because of the syntax I used wasn't necessarily clear. Next time I'll scrutinize the puzzle more and try to make the easier one easier than this last one.

Solution Guide

The full solution can be found quickly by looking for pages with brown, the other pages take you through my process to solve these puzzles. I just highlight the step, and the corresponding boxes to the step. I hope this guide is clear enough to follow. Good day.

>>Updated...fixed link. If it's still not working though, you should be able to navigate to it, via the main website (Which consequentially has been updated with a new look).

Main Site

-MillsJROSS