[Shadowgod] Name poll, round 2: What should Shadowgod's fans be ca

[C James]

It's time for round two!!

[BeaStKid]

It's time for round two!!

 

What's with the 'innocent victims'?

 

This poll is rigged!

[Graeme]

About time. I was thinking you'd forgotten

[Benji]

.........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.

[C James]

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.

[Ieshwar]

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

 

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

 

Take care,

Ieshwar

[shadowgod]

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.

[Benji]

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

[C James]

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.

[shadowgod]

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

[C James]

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?

[shadowgod]

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

[C James]

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?

[Graeme]

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

[shadowgod]

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 )

[wildone]

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

 

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.

 

 

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 )

 

 

[Graeme]

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

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....

[shadowgod]

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.

[C James]

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....

 

[shadowgod]

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.

[C James]

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...

[shadowgod]

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.

[BeaStKid]

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.

 

OMFG!!! ROFLMAO!!!

[C James]

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.

 

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.

[Graeme]

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.

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.

 

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.

 

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).