AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > Anime Discussion > Older Series > Retired > Umineko

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-04-19, 23:53   Link #28501
Kylon99
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
Excuse me. This is a section of a previous post hi-lighting major quotes in EP1 and 2 that was cut out for length.
You can find the original post here.

Spoiler for Theme 1: Adult vs. Child:
Kylon99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 04:21   Link #28502
Captain Bluebeard
Detective, Witch, Pirate.
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ruins of the Golden Land
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
Yea, except he didn't carry through on his side of the obligation. You can't learn how to play a game via observation of the players are cheating.
Well, I wonder about that...I wouldn't call it cheating, rather, it'd be more accurate to call it a nasty trick, which was the whole point of Umineko as a mystery. For example, if you figure out Shkannon, then all the pieces for most closed rooms start falling into place, and it becomes clear 'Oooh, so that's what all this mumbo-jumbo about life and death and revive endlessly etcetera was all about...'
__________________

It's tough to be blue...
Captain Bluebeard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 04:51   Link #28503
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
That does being up a thought.

Lets say you play chess with one person. You shows him most moves but neglects to mention other moves that pieces can do leading to win every match. Is that really cheating or just within certain information to keep an advantage? You did not really break any rules.

I do think that is basically what Ryukishi/Beatrice's game was. A chess-like game completely made by her allowing her to create/reveal the rules or even bend them on a technicality.
It's more like castling without explaining what you just did while the other player got up to get a snack, or mating without verbally announcing it.

Both of which are illegal.

Quote:
Yeah, three personalities existing in one body, but personalities can commit suicide or be told by another personality to cease to exist. (Abandoned, dead, future cut off, perhaps would be more accurate.)
You...didn't read most of what Renall said. He totally addressed this. If you're going to lean on 'suicide', then Murder isn't viable. Shannon and Kanon were murdered, which requires a violation of will.

Quote:
The problem is you're thinking of normal people and how normal people define death. You need to think from Beatrice's point of view instead and how she defines death, especially death for 'furniture.'
You can't use a character's quirks to justify Ryukishi's fuck ups; he wrote her.

To use a very extreme example, if I have a character say that black people should've accepted being slaves, and then never correct the character or reprimand their behavior, then as an author I am validating their viewpoint by not countering it. If an apologist says "You have to understand that it's the CHARACTER who's racist", that doesn't matter. I wrote them that way and the character's racist views were glorified by his own narration but never challenged by any other force in the story. My novel would be advocating slavery.

Quote:
By the way, is it entirely possible to solve the detective mysteries (the closed room murders and so on) in the story without Shkannon?
No. Logic Error.

Quote:
Well, I wonder about that...I wouldn't call it cheating, rather, it'd be more accurate to call it a nasty trick, which was the whole point of Umineko as a mystery. For example, if you figure out Shkannon, then all the pieces for most closed rooms start falling into place, and it becomes clear 'Oooh, so that's what all this mumbo-jumbo about life and death and revive endlessly etcetera was all about...'
Except, as Renall and I brought up countless times, it creates a plot hole.

To continue the chess analogy, if you tried to, say, move your knight in a way which checks my king but is an illegal move, and I call you out on it as an illegal move and explain how the knight really does move...

And then you realized that I did almost the exact same thing earlier and took advantage of your ignorance...

Then I'm in the wrong. The personality death thing is the worst kind of plot twist because Ryukishi tried so much to protect it to the detriment of his novel; people guessed it early on so he had to keep doing bullshit stunts to maintain the mystery and preserve the sensationalism that if you go back and look closely at what he did, he ended up fucking up some of the mysteries with plot holes and technical contradictions that ruins Umineko as a finished product, practically assuring that over the test of time it will be forgotten as a mediocre piece of work.

The worst part of it is that he could've fixed all of this so easily, with only the slightest of semantic changes. Shannon and Kanon no longer exist or I can revive furniture with my magic or fucking something.

And there's really no point trying to justify it because we know for a fact he's messed up before. He's forgotten ENTIRE DOORS in closed room mysteries.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 07:45   Link #28504
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
In EP1, Kanon's death makes anything, that is not ShKanon(Trice), very unlikely.

After all:
All of the survivors have alibis! Let us include the dead as well!! In short, no kind of human or dead person on the island could have killed Kanon!
Kanon did not commit suicide
Kanon did not die in an accident!


So without Shkanon(Trice), the only other solution is that Kanon died by an illness or some other kind of natural death.
I could understand this possibility for Jessica, because of her Asthma, but for Kanon there were no signs of any strange illnesses.

Although... to be fair It was never said that Kanon was dead to begin with. So maybe this part would still be possible in some way... but as AT said, the EP6 solution would have to be VERY twisted, to work without ShKanon(Trice)
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 13:20   Link #28505
Wanderer
Goat
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
Re: ShKanontrice and red death, I think that there is some kind of "Yasu" who dominates over all personas, but this "Yasu" has no identity and in that sense is not really a person. The result is that whoever is "real"/"exists"/"a person" is whichever "Yasu" persona interacts with the outside world. The other personas continue to exist as fantasy (but not "exist" for the red, since they are, after all, fantasy), which explains why they talk to each other. Essentially, they are all each other's "invisible friends".

This is, of course, quite similar to what Kylon99 and others are saying, as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
What precisely is the difference, philosophically, between the body of Kanon acting like Kanon and treating Jessica as if it were Kanon but actually "being Beatrice," and it simply being Kanon?

There is no observable or discernible difference. There is no rule that lets us know whether it "really is" Kanon. Do you not see how this permits Ryukishi to do or say anything he wants in this situation, if we accept what you're saying as true? He can literally have Kanon be present and acting like Kanon and then wave his hand and declare that Kanon was not there.
It's a fair concern, but one that applies to any and all magic scenes. How much of the escape from the underground prison in Alliance was even remotely true, for example?

As for Kanon and Shannon's revival in EP3, earlier in that episode we saw how finite magic made a vase appear not to be destroyed even when it was (but ultimately the result could not be changed). So it's not like there isn't a hint that even if Kanon and Shannon appear alive that they aren't. Zombie Kanon in EP2 is a hint for this, too. So yeah, not sure that a dead personality can actually revive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UsagiTenpura View Post
The statement about being the 18th human is sorta a title. It's not really any different from saying something like "I am the golden witch, Beatrice" in red (followed by something like "Im sorry there are no witches on this island").
Wow, never thought of it that way. It cleans up that whole issue nicely.

Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyZone View Post
In EP1, Kanon's death makes anything, that is not ShKanon(Trice), very unlikely.

After all:
All of the survivors have alibis! Let us include the dead as well!! In short, no kind of human or dead person on the island could have killed Kanon!
Kanon did not commit suicide
Kanon did not die in an accident!


So without Shkanon(Trice), the only other solution is that Kanon died by an illness or some other kind of natural death.
I could understand this possibility for Jessica, because of her Asthma, but for Kanon there were no signs of any strange illnesses.

Although... to be fair It was never said that Kanon was dead to begin with. So maybe this part would still be possible in some way... but as AT said, the EP6 solution would have to be VERY twisted, to work without ShKanon(Trice)
KnownNoMore's videos have non-ShKanontrice explanations for both of these situations (not that I'm endorsing either of them by any means; you can only imagine how silly such answers would have to be- although he's dead serious about them).
Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 13:30   Link #28506
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kylon99 View Post
The problem is you're thinking of normal people and how normal people define death. You need to think from Beatrice's point of view instead and how she defines death, especially death for 'furniture.'
That's the most idiotic thing I've seen posted all last sentence. Do you understand what "ordinary meaning" is, and why convention is important in understanding terms?

"Dead" means a particular thing, unless we have been conditioned to believe that a different meaning applies. It is not a "clever trick" to use a word that differs from the ordinary meaning of the word. Semantics are important because red text made them important. No matter what status you use, it has to be clear that its application has a certain meaning.

That's an egregious sin unto itself, but Ryukishi does himself one worse by using "dead" in a singular statement to refer to five individuals, three of whom use an entirely different definition of "dead" from the special one he intended. Do you suppose, hmmm, just maybe, that this was intentional in order to confuse someone who assumes - as all rational normal people do - that when a person uses a single term to describe a set, the same meaning applies to all of the entries in that set? Because under normal circumstances, doing otherwise is a mark that the writer is insane.

It's excessive syllepsis. "The lightbulb and my grandmother are dead." It's only cute when it's a poetic turn of phrase. It doesn't belong in technical language. Although now I have an idea for a forgery character who composes poetry entirely in red text.

Example of the problem: The door is the only way to get in and out of the room. The door is locked. The door was locked from the time before the victim was murdered up until he was discovered. During that time, the door remained absolutely locked, with no exceptions! Incidentally, and unknown to you as the reader, I have chosen to define the word "locked" to mean "made out of wood." But only for this door. If I say a different door was "locked," I actually mean it was locked, not made of wood. The solution to this murder is that the killer opened the door, killed the victim, and left through the door, which remained made of wood the whole time.

There is nothing even remotely honest about this. But okay, let's say Ryukishi acknowledges that. He changes the ep3 First Twilight red to "no longer exist." Even so, we now have the problem that the special rule used to exempt Shannon and Kanon from permanent death applies to everyone else equally. We can posit that, somehow, Genji remains alive. This is an inescapable problem that arises from trying to be too clever. "Dead" doesn't mean "dead" in one instance, therefore we cannot know with any degree of certainty that it doesn't mean that in every instance. Ergo, nobody ever biologically dies. How can I possibly assume otherwise?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyZone View Post
Although... to be fair It was never said that Kanon was dead to begin with. So maybe this part would still be possible in some way... but as AT said, the EP6 solution would have to be VERY twisted, to work without ShKanon(Trice)
Actually this is the only fair interpretation, Shkanon or otherwise. Kanon didn't die. Beatrice merely outlined the means by which he didn't die, all of which are true, because he wasn't dead. This works just fine regardless of the status of Kanon as an existence.

Had every implementation been this carefully fact-checked, it'd actually function as a concept. It'd just be stupid, which it still is, just stupid and not also broken.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 13:58   Link #28507
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
The thing is, that in the forgery, "dreams become reality". This means Yasuda's "fake murders" become "real murders" in the forgery.

The metaphor becomes reality on the gameboard, just as you become "real heroes", when playing pen&paper RPGs... oh wait... pen&paper RPGs got a "gamemaster" too, what a concidence... but even then you are still humans at some bigger table. (Beato's Meta room and the witches' Battlehall or however they are called)

The only problem is, that Battler figures out way too late that it is really just a game...

And to expand on that, Umineko is like a TV series, that is about 2 authors, who write:
1) (About some teenagers, who play pen&paper mystery RPGs,) about a rich family that got trapped on an island in a storm.
2) Fictional stories about a "real" girl, that was reported missing.
And at the end the authors meet that girl
the end.
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 13:59   Link #28508
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
That doesn't fix the problem whatsoever. If anything, it only makes it less excusable.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 14:35   Link #28509
Kylon99
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
You...didn't read most of what Renall said. He totally addressed this. If you're going to lean on 'suicide', then Murder isn't viable. Shannon and Kanon were murdered, which requires a violation of will.
Well, there's the other part of the sentence which I said, one personality told the other to cease to exist. Or, 'die.' I could imagine both ways are possible. From Our Confessions, it seems Shannon will shoot herself in the head sometimes, or in some of the episodes, Beatrice can kill off Kanon or Shanon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
To use a very extreme example, if I have a character say that black people should've accepted being slaves, and then never correct the character or reprimand their behavior, then as an author I am validating their viewpoint by not countering it. If an apologist says "You have to understand that it's the CHARACTER who's racist", that doesn't matter. I wrote them that way and the character's racist views were glorified by his own narration but never challenged by any other force in the story. My novel would be advocating slavery.
I don't see Ryukishi validating Beatrice at all though. I see him saying she must die for her sins of wanting to kill everyone.

Is it the problem is that there are still people trying to force through the interpretation that she's innocent somehow? And then they think THAT's what Ryukishi is saying? That ends up putting words in Ryukishi's mouth.

Oh, I've provided all the answers I found in EP1-2 now by the way in the big post up there. There were so many quotes it's clearly not arguable that he didn't write out the whole scenario for us to understand. Even if we couldn't understand on the first read through, we could on a second.


But, I'm not sure what you're getting at though, are you saying Ryukishi advocated something very evil, such as getting away with murder? Or are you saying he allowed Beatrice to get away with using a cheat-level definition of death? To that I would agree on though, though I'm not sure that it's a cheat to the detective stuff itself. In a regular mystery genre, it's fair game, I would say, since so many hints were provided.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
No. Logic Error.
Such as? The only recent example being discussed was Kanon stalking around at the end of EP3. Which he very well could be.

The thing is, are we saying that the red won't hold? I think some of us here are saying that yes, the red won't hold to the detective mysteries. I'm starting to think the red text is purely from Beatrice's point of view. It's 'her' truth, so she tries to get away with it.

I'm not saying whether this is right or wrong though. I'm trying to figure out her rules as Bernkastel told us to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
Except, as Renall and I brought up countless times, it creates a plot hole.
Are we absolutely sure Shkannon is required to solve EP1-4 though? Which of the twilights requires that they share bodies and not simply that Shannon and Kanon were just faking? I know it's required to solve the EP6 cousin's room problem, but I view anything past EP4 as more anti-mystery. i.e. here's a way to screw up the gameboard, and accidently let slip some clues.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
That's the most idiotic thing I've seen posted all last sentence. Do you understand what "ordinary meaning" is, and why convention is important in understanding terms?
Why are you talking about "ordinary meaning?" I am certainly not. I'm taking the POV of someone who has an altered state of being. Something of which is in no way construed as 'ordinary.'

If you want to talk about what 'dead' means to everyone else go ahead, but then we're discussing different things. I agree with you what 'dead' means to all of us because hey, I don't have issues with my brain. 8) But that's not my point that I'm trying to raise... what is dead to 'Beatrice?' I think we can get a lot of ideas and meaning through thinking about the way she thinks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
There is nothing even remotely honest about this.
Sure. I can agree that Umineko doesn't feel honest, because at the end we need to look at Umineko as a whole package. And when we do, I think you need to move on from "this is cheating," to a, "Ryukishi set up some pretty strange circumstances for a character and used it to play with the red text, thereby misleading us."

So, I'm trying to ask you or anyone else, do you understand that Beatrice is not simply delusional or insane? If you understand this point, of which seems to be the answer that he's not providing, then you can undo the actual Who is Beatrice mystery, which doesn't seem to be a detective mystery at all but a regular mystery genre mystery. (Since detective mysteries require dead bodies, but figuring out who and what she is, and also how she thinks, isn't about murders. The murders are incidental.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RandomAvatarFan View Post
Who is Beato?
Virgilia talks about Endless magic, and how it affects Beato's mind. How Beato sees it as "nothing more than two sides of a coin that she can just flip over"
I was wondering about that when I was going through EP3. I can't decide if this is the actual way she thinks or if it's a cover/metaphor for something else.

Virgilia made a big deal about Beatrice not being mature enough to use Endless magic. I thought this was Tooya who was admonishing Beatrice for being too flippant about wanting to kill people for her plan, even though she may not have been. (This is early on in Tooya's thoughts and idea, after all.)

Since this takes place after Ep2, I thought that Tooya wouldn't have talked about 'Endless magic' this way, but it seems to me Endless magic is his portrayal of her when she was still naive. There seems to be an arc for Shannon and Kanon's characters where they come to know love, become human and then become *very* hard to die/kill, due to their regrets. So this 'Endless' idea feels to me to be the point before that when Beatrice thought she could spin any number of personalities and do away with them at will, since they mattered to no one but herself.

That's what I was thinking. Did anyone have any other conclusions?
Kylon99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 15:10   Link #28510
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
Well, there's the other part of the sentence which I said, one personality told the other to cease to exist. Or, 'die.' I could imagine both ways are possible. From Our Confessions, it seems Shannon will shoot herself in the head sometimes, or in some of the episodes, Beatrice can kill off Kanon or Shanon.
There are no suicides. And, as Renall already brought up, there is no way to demonstrate or prove that the personalities are actually dead, as they keep coming back whenever it's convenient. And what's the discernable difference between a 'dead' personality, and a 'sleeping' one? They can't permanently die unless the body dies. Are you paying attention at all? You're just making points Renall and I already covered and addressed.

Quote:
I don't see Ryukishi validating Beatrice at all though. I see him saying she must die for her sins of wanting to kill everyone.
He validated her playstyle in the Meta-World, which is what the problem is here. This has nothing to do with Piece!Yasu's actions or culpability.

Quote:
The thing is, are we saying that the red won't hold? I think some of us here are saying that yes, the red won't hold to the detective mysteries. I'm starting to think the red text is purely from Beatrice's point of view. It's 'her' truth, so she tries to get away with it.
That's all well and good, but that's not 'solvable'. It's dishonest and unfair and Ryukishi claims that it's valid when it isn't. He had his character cheat in order to protect his twist, and made Beatrice uncharacteristically dishonest in order to mindscrew an audience she didn't know was there.

Quote:
Are we absolutely sure Shkannon is required to solve EP1-4 though? Which of the twilights requires that they share bodies and not simply that Shannon and Kanon were just faking? I know it's required to solve the EP6 cousin's room problem, but I view anything past EP4 as more anti-mystery. i.e. here's a way to screw up the gameboard, and accidently let slip some clues.
I think it was LyricalAura who made a document going through all the Twilights and basically proving that only Shannon and Kanon could do it, and since there can only be one culprit...

Quote:
Why are you talking about "ordinary meaning?" I am certainly not. I'm taking the POV of someone who has an altered state of being. Something of which is in no way construed as 'ordinary.'
BECAUSE SHE WANTS SOMEONE WITH A RATIONAL, COMMON-SENSE POINT OF VIEW TO UNDERSTAND HER. It is completely out of character with Beatrice's motives if she's straight up fucking with Battler about one of the most core parts of herself while giving him no clues to the contrary, all the while using language she KNOWS will trip him up due to his preconceived notions of what her terms mean.

Beatrice isn't some insane schizophrenic who doesn't understand that other people don't have the same definitions of words as she does, and she rationally understands that Battler has missed out on a huge chunk of her life. She WANTS him to see through her deceptions, so why is she doing her damndest to protect this huge obstacle that gives her no benefit?

By all means, yes, present a difficult puzzle to Battler and make him struggle to overcome it. I understand that part, but don't give him a rubix cube with some of the stickers switched and get pissed off when he can't solve it.

Quote:
If you want to talk about what 'dead' means to everyone else go ahead, but then we're discussing different things. I agree with you what 'dead' means to all of us because hey, I don't have issues with my brain. 8) But that's not my point that I'm trying to raise... what is dead to 'Beatrice?' I think we can get a lot of ideas and meaning through thinking about the way she thinks.
It doesn't matter. The red truth is simply the truth and she is having an intellectual debate with someone who does not share her terminology, and she refuses to define them.

This is like a religious debate where a religious person accuses the atheist of HATING GOD, and when the atheist responds that she merely doesn't believe in him, the theist responds that everyone believes in God, atheists just refuse to admit it because they don't want to be held accountable for your actions.

Beatrice, when it comes to this 'personality death' thing, is basically the theist, because she refuses to use the same basic, argument-defining terms as her opponent out of stubbornness and deceit. Except unlike the theist she doesn't even believe the bullshit she's asking you to swallow. She's worse, because she rationally and emotionally knows that she is lying through her teeth.

Fuck that and fuck Ryukishi. Even when she was portrayed as an outright villain, Beatrice was portrayed as being honorable and fair for the sake of a fun game.

Quote:
Sure. I can agree that Umineko doesn't feel honest, because at the end we need to look at Umineko as a whole package. And when we do, I think you need to move on from "this is cheating," to a, "Ryukishi set up some pretty strange circumstances for a character and used it to play with the red text, thereby misleading us."
No, man, it's literally cheating. "Ryukishi redefined terms and gave no one any indication that he had done so, thereby deceiving everyone." My god, do you not know anything about semantics, or are you just blindly loyal? Why is it so hard to accept that Ryukishi, as a mortal, flawed human being, has done something less-than-perfect?

Quote:
So, I'm trying to ask you or anyone else, do you understand that Beatrice is not simply delusional or insane? If you understand this point, of which seems to be the answer that he's not providing, then you can undo the actual Who is Beatrice mystery, which doesn't seem to be a detective mystery at all but a regular mystery genre mystery. (Since detective mysteries require dead bodies, but figuring out who and what she is, and also how she thinks, isn't about murders. The murders are incidental.)
None of this is relevant. You know Renall and I feel that Yasu is in touch with reality and merely has emotional unbalances. She's not lolpsycho, so there's no justification for this.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 15:32   Link #28511
Wanderer
Goat
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Gnawing away at Rokkenjima
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kylon99 View Post
That's what I was thinking. Did anyone have any other conclusions?
I always thought that the Endless Magic was pretty obviously derived from the fact that Beatrice can revive and kill people "endlessly" within the cat box. I guess that means Beatrice wasn't an Endless Witch until the cat box was created. The term "Endless Witch" first appeared in EP3, right?

If we go back to the vase example, it was "not broken" until observed. This is why it's "finite" magic, since the result was verified (even if the process was unknown). However, with the Rokkenjima tragedy, peoples' life and death status remains unverified, in an "infinite" or "endless" cat box.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
It is completely out of character with Beatrice's motives if she's straight up fucking with Battler about one of the most core parts of herself while giving him no clues to the contrary,
wait what?
Wanderer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 16:11   Link #28512
Kylon99
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
There are no suicides. And, as Renall already brought up, there is no way to demonstrate or prove that the personalities are actually dead, as they keep coming back whenever it's convenient. And what's the discernable difference between a 'dead' personality, and a 'sleeping' one? They can't permanently die unless the body dies. Are you paying attention at all? You're just making points Renall and I already covered and addressed.
I'm not paying attention to both your points because I'm not arguing whether this writing this is honest, dishonest, or a crime against humanity. In fact, I generally agree with you two that this is not author honesty, but I'm not willing to use the hyperbole that's been flying around to describe Ryukishi. This is because I ended up figuring out Umineko from the clues presented anyways.


As for suicides,... I'm pretty certain Shannon shot herself in the head in EP2. But, that's beside the point you were making I think.

From my re-play through of EP1 and EP2, I'm getting the feeling that when Beatrice decides the future for a personality is cut off, that personality is dead. So, the conditions for when Shannon and Kanon's future is cut off either the end of the epitaph ceremony, where they are freed, or they are killed as one of the sacrifices. Shannon thought she had a possible future with George but then she realized that it wouldn't work out.

Beatrice's termination of her future seems to only be if someone solves the epitaph. She does her job in giving up the gold, the headship rings and probably the guns. Then she ceases to be.

I don't think Beatrice is a candidate for any murder though, so it's really just Shannon and Kanon we're talking about.

So basically, when a personality's future is dead, they are dead to her. And that's her definition. Is this a crappy definition? Yes. But I'm trying to understand what's going on here and not throw up my hands and say that everything's useless just because it feels like cheating.

It's like the discussion about lying we had awhile ago. Figuring out why someone is lying can be just as interesting. Well, why is someone cheating? It usually involves some sort of inadequacy, maybe? At this point, I'm saying that Ryukishi had Beatrice be very coy with her problem to the level of cheating for a reason. What is that reason? Is it just because she didn't want to tell, but wanted someone to figure it out? I don't know yet for sure.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
That's all well and good, but that's not 'solvable'. It's dishonest and unfair and Ryukishi claims that it's valid when it isn't. He had his character cheat in order to protect his twist, and made Beatrice uncharacteristically dishonest in order to mindscrew an audience she didn't know was there.
Well, which part is not solvable? If the red text purely describes Beatrice's POV and condition, and her condition and basically the last mystery of Umineko that Ryukishi wanted us to solve, then its solvable. Plus that and the quotes I provided. What you seem to be saying is that the detective/closed room parts of each episode is not solvable, right? But...

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
I think it was LyricalAura who made a document going through all the Twilights and basically proving that only Shannon and Kanon could do it, and since there can only be one culprit...
Wait, where did that red truth come from? There were certainly more than one culprit, considering Eva murdered some people in EP3. There can only be one *mastermind*, which is Beatrice herself; that I can agree to. If that's the case, then figuring out her POV and condition leads you to figure out that she's the mastermind, even if other people commit some murders.

It feels like he provided a path to the solution not through detective mystery means, but through understanding motive of the culprit first. I remember some people on here speculating that this was the intent, that detective novels usually lack a worthy motive. (Not that I'm saying whether this is worthy or not.)

Anyways, if someone can find it, I'd like to see that document that analyses all the twilights.


Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
Beatrice isn't some insane schizophrenic who doesn't understand that other people don't have the same definitions of words as she does, and she rationally understands that Battler has missed out on a huge chunk of her life. She WANTS him to see through her deceptions, so why is she doing her damndest to protect this huge obstacle that gives her no benefit?
Just as an aside: From EP1-2, I get the feeling she did have a time when she couldn't understand normal humans. Or rather, when she was younger, she thought her mode of existence was normal. Then she found the gold, was traumatized and the changes in her made her think she was an 'adult.' It is here in the text of EP1-2 where it seems she started to think about how other humans had multiple personalities as well, although they handled them differently. So she went from thinking everyone's like her, to thinking she's retarded and not normal, to realizing that she's not THAT different from other humans too.

Beatrice's character arc is distributed in random order throughout the episodes and that makes it very hard to follow. 8)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
BECAUSE SHE WANTS SOMEONE WITH A RATIONAL, COMMON-SENSE POINT OF VIEW TO UNDERSTAND HER. It is completely out of character with Beatrice's motives if she's straight up fucking with Battler about one of the most core parts of herself while giving him no clues to the contrary, all the while using language she KNOWS will trip him up due to his preconceived notions of what her terms mean.

By all means, yes, present a difficult puzzle to Battler and make him struggle to overcome it. I understand that part, but don't give him a rubix cube with some of the stickers switched and get pissed off when he can't solve it.
Well, Battler, or rather Tooya did solve the mystery through understanding Beatrice herself. He says that he did so after EP1-2 only. And after going through the episodes myself, I can understand how he did it. *We* may have a very difficult time though, and needed a boost from EP7, but I think if we read through EP1-2 and taken her words at face value we would've be the few people Ryukishi said had hit on the answer. (I, unfortunately, was just as unwilling to believe anything I read at the time... heh.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by AuraTwilight View Post
No, man, it's literally cheating. "Ryukishi redefined terms and gave no one any indication that he had done so, thereby deceiving everyone." My god, do you not know anything about semantics, or are you just blindly loyal? Why is it so hard to accept that Ryukishi, as a mortal, flawed human being, has done something less-than-perfect?
"Ignorant on semantics or blindly loyal." Wow... another false dichotomy. I believe you have no clue about my position, especially when I've been saying I generally agree with both of you. I remember a super hot flame war we got into because you couldn't read that I was AGREEING with you too. FFS, if I'm asking what MORE things can be or how else can we think of things, I am not automatically disagreeing with you!

Just because someone wants to argue against with you... and in my case, I am agreeing on some things and also asking for more ideas, do not label us as "Ryukishi Apologist Zealots!LOL!" Might as well call me a, ' dirty socialist' as some people from not my country are apt to do these days...
Kylon99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 16:21   Link #28513
Renall
BUY MY BOOK!!!
 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kylon99 View Post
Why are you talking about "ordinary meaning?" I am certainly not. I'm taking the POV of someone who has an altered state of being. Something of which is in no way construed as 'ordinary.'

If you want to talk about what 'dead' means to everyone else go ahead, but then we're discussing different things. I agree with you what 'dead' means to all of us because hey, I don't have issues with my brain. 8) But that's not my point that I'm trying to raise... what is dead to 'Beatrice?' I think we can get a lot of ideas and meaning through thinking about the way she thinks.
We talk about the ordinary meaning because Ryukishi knows what the ordinary meaning of the term is and he makes decisions as to whether a person like Beatrice employs those meanings.

Moreover, Beatrice herself is being intellectually dishonest by equivocating the physical death states of Genji/Kumasawa/Gohda with the temporary fictional death states of Kanon/Shannon... unless she's asserting that all five are in fictional death states, in which case there is no point in ever believing a single true biological murder ever occurred at any point in ep1-4 because we have no such assurances and indeed, by your argument as to her use of terminology, actually should believe exactly the opposite.

You're trying to have it both ways. If Beatrice's definition of "dead" consistently doesn't mean actual physical death, then she will not refer to actual physical death and "her" definition of death as though the two are identical. If she does, she's being knowingly dishonest and attempting to mislead Battler. And if she actually knows there is a difference... and I think she does... then she knows what she's saying is deliberately confusing. So either she believes there is no contradiction or difference and is insane (which I do not believe), or she knows there is a difference and chooses to equivocate two entirely distinct states and is a liar.

In any event, she's sane enough (meta-Beato is anyway) to know that Battler does not share this meaning. Therefore, she's misleading him on purpose. You can't escape this. You're flat-out incorrect.
Quote:
Sure. I can agree that Umineko doesn't feel honest, because at the end we need to look at Umineko as a whole package. And when we do, I think you need to move on from "this is cheating," to a, "Ryukishi set up some pretty strange circumstances for a character and used it to play with the red text, thereby misleading us."
Absolutely not. I will not accept such a thing. Ryukishi himself invented his "pretty strange circumstances" and chose not to define them or provide rules for them. He also invented red text and defined it specifically. He then used one to intentionally and deceptively cheat and mislead using the other. There is nothing "clever" about setting up a system of rules and intentionally subverting them with special additional rules you didn't tell anybody. That's a child's argument.
__________________
Redaction of the Golden Witch
I submit that a murder was committed in 1996.
This murder was a "copycat" crime inspired by our tales of 1986.
This story is a redacted confession.

Blog (VN DL) - YouTube Playlists
Battler Solves The Logic Error
Renall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 16:41   Link #28514
Captain Bluebeard
Detective, Witch, Pirate.
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ruins of the Golden Land
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
We talk about the ordinary meaning because Ryukishi knows what the ordinary meaning of the term is and he makes decisions as to whether a person like Beatrice employs those meanings.

Moreover, Beatrice herself is being intellectually dishonest by equivocating the physical death states of Genji/Kumasawa/Gohda with the temporary fictional death states of Kanon/Shannon... unless she's asserting that all five are in fictional death states, in which case there is no point in ever believing a single true biological murder ever occurred at any point in ep1-4 because we have no such assurances and indeed, by your argument as to her use of terminology, actually should believe exactly the opposite.

You're trying to have it both ways. If Beatrice's definition of "dead" consistently doesn't mean actual physical death, then she will not refer to actual physical death and "her" definition of death as though the two are identical. If she does, she's being knowingly dishonest and attempting to mislead Battler. And if she actually knows there is a difference... and I think she does... then she knows what she's saying is deliberately confusing. So either she believes there is no contradiction or difference and is insane (which I do not believe), or she knows there is a difference and chooses to equivocate two entirely distinct states and is a liar.
But Beatrice's goal from the beginning was to mislead and trick Battler into accepting her as a witch. Of course she understands what she's saying is deliberately confusing. She always shows a certain result which is filtered with her interpretation of magic which is knowingly confusing and dishonest.

However, it was clearly stated that the reader should not surrender to the witch, I think that concept was made clear enough. The fact that the 'fictional' deaths were put in the same category as the 'actual' ones does not mean it was impossible to figure them out, and after all, distinguishing them would actually give it away immediately.

Quote:
In any event, she's sane enough (meta-Beato is anyway) to know that Battler does not share this meaning. Therefore, she's misleading him on purpose. You can't escape this. You're flat-out incorrect.Absolutely not. I will not accept such a thing. Ryukishi himself invented his "pretty strange circumstances" and chose not to define them or provide rules for them. He also invented red text and defined it specifically. He then used one to intentionally and deceptively cheat and mislead using the other. There is nothing "clever" about setting up a system of rules and intentionally subverting them with special additional rules you didn't tell anybody. That's a child's argument.
I'm not sure how you mean this 'definition of rules' but since it was possible to figure out, I don't quite see what you are pointing at. On the contrary, once I figured out Shkannon(trice) and started piecing together some parts of the motive -always talking on a personal level- this deception actually helped me realize it. Things like 'oh, this red is to trick you into that', or, 'that's why they're making such a huge deal out of this'. I will not deny that the rules were used to trick the readers, but in the end I believe that was the whole point, not to fall into the trap.

Even though Battler does not share the meaning of the 'deaths' Beatrice is showing, he was given hints towards figuring that meaning. There were many scenes that were seemingly unrelated to the mysteries, but tried to point towards certain directions concerning them.
__________________

It's tough to be blue...
Captain Bluebeard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 17:01   Link #28515
LyricalAura
Dea ex Kakera
 
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Sea of Fragments
I honestly don't think this is very complicated.

Rules of game boards generally:
Anyone can create furniture on their own game board.
Within the bounds of the game board, the creator's furniture properly exist as legitimate beings according to the creator's specifications.
Furniture is alive so long as their creator maintains them. As such, they can be killed in the following ways:
- Their creator dies.
- Their creator decides to stop maintaining them.
- A condition the creator established for their existence is violated, such as the destruction of a vessel.

Furniture can be revived if a condition that killed them is removed.
All other aspects of furniture, such as being "human" or not, are subject to the creator's original definition.

All of these things were explained quite openly during Ange's and Maria's subplots in EP4.

Rules of Yasu's game board specifically:
A solution to the presented serial murders must exist that relies only on human pieces.
Clues must be presented to establish the human-only solution.
The game board must conform to red truths given about it.
Shannon and Kanon are furniture. They count as humans. Their vessel is ???'s body.
Beatrice is furniture. She counts as a witch. Her vessel is ???'s body.
Any nonhuman pieces may be added, but may not participate in the human-only solution.

Literally every single thing on this list was stated outright in EP1-4 other than the identity of "???". Regarding the confusion of the person counts, in EP3 we learned that:
  • For Nanjo's murder, these 15 [including Shannon and Kanon] are dead, and Eva, Battler, and Jessica are alive but not the culprit.
  • There are no more than 18 people on the island.
  • Only humans have any relation to this game board.
If you trust Battler's direct observations that Rudolf, Kyrie, and Hideyoshi were dead, that's enough to conclude that there is a living human on the island who was not covered by those 18 names, and therefore the name count must not correspond to the person count. And, it is somehow possible to kill names without killing the owner. Note that this reasoning is possible in the exact same episode that all of the supposedly problematic "mixed death type" reds were introduced.

Then in EP4, we get the explanation of what "furniture" are, the furniture Shannon and Kanon declare that they are "human", and we learn that the furniture Sakutarou can "die". Combined with Kanon's vanishing corpse and the knowledge that Battler is viewing a game board, this should be enough to propose the existence of Creator X who maintains the furniture Shannon and Kanon.

Furthermore, even if Shannon and Kanon are revived after death in EP3, which is not necessary, this has no material effect on reasoning at all. That's because there exists a point in time at which both of them are dead and furniture can only be revived so long as their creator lives.

What about Genji and Ronove? Well, Ronove is a demon and therefore has no relation to the game according to EP3, and he wasn't introduced in the first episode anyway, but let's take a look. In EP2 and EP4, it doesn't matter because there is no relevant red truth and Genji can do anything Ronove could. In EP1, Ronove isn't covered by the red truth that Genji isn't a murderer, but Natsuhi is killed after they both get their faces shot off, so he can't be the culprit anyway. Having eliminated Ronove as the culprit, it doesn't really matter what he's doing in EP3 because we already know there's some other furniture running around doing the actual killing.

So as far as I can see, no, there isn't any cheating. Meta-Beatrice properly explained every single one of her game board's rules.
__________________
"Something has fallen on us that falls very seldom on men; perhaps the worst thing that can fall on them. We have found the truth; and the truth makes no sense."
LyricalAura is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 17:49   Link #28516
Captain Bluebeard
Detective, Witch, Pirate.
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Ruins of the Golden Land
Wow, that is a very comprehenisve analysis, I tip my pirate hat to you.
This is exactly what I've been trying to say.
__________________

It's tough to be blue...
Captain Bluebeard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 17:57   Link #28517
Kylon99
Senior Member
 
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Meta-Meta-Meta-Space
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wanderer View Post
I always thought that the Endless Magic was pretty obviously derived from the fact that Beatrice can revive and kill people "endlessly" within the cat box. I guess that means Beatrice wasn't an Endless Witch until the cat box was created. The term "Endless Witch" first appeared in EP3, right?

If we go back to the vase example, it was "not broken" until observed. This is why it's "finite" magic, since the result was verified (even if the process was unknown). However, with the Rokkenjima tragedy, peoples' life and death status remains unverified, in an "infinite" or "endless" cat box.
Yeah, this was the original definition I came to on my first reading. So I'm waffling back and forth. Could 'Endless' mean something more than just this? EP3 so far, I haven't really gleaned too much other than its major purpose was to define 'magic' for us.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
In any event, she's sane enough (meta-Beato is anyway) to know that Battler does not share this meaning. Therefore, she's misleading him on purpose. You can't escape this. You're flat-out incorrect.
What do you actually think I am 'incorrect' about? Because I agree with what you're saying. This part at least:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
she's being knowingly dishonest and attempting to mislead Battler. And if she actually knows there is a difference... and I think she does... then she knows what she's saying is deliberately confusing.
I have no problem with this statement at all. I am incorrect even though I agree with this thing you yourself advanced? Yeesh. Or did you just want a moment to stand up and declare someone else as 'flat-out-incorrect?' Or what?

The only thing is, I have given proof that despite not wanting to be explicitly honest with Battler, she has still presented enough clues to let Battle figure things out, assuming he was paying attention enough. Can you somehow go against this, to say that maybe all the quotes I listed above are somehow imaginary?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Moreover, Beatrice herself is being intellectually dishonest by equivocating the physical death states of Genji/Kumasawa/Gohda with the temporary fictional death states of Kanon/Shannon... unless she's asserting that all five are in fictional death states, in which case there is no point in ever believing a single true biological murder ever occurred at any point in ep1-4 because we have no such assurances and indeed, by your argument as to her use of terminology, actually should believe exactly the opposite.
I offered one explanation, that when a persons future is cut off, that they are technically dead to Beatrice. This is most certainly not an ordinary definition of dead, but it fits the bill of both Shannon, Kanon and normal humans. When you kill someone, their future is most definitely gone. And for a personality, when you abandon their future, it seems Beatrice is telling us they're dead to her. In fact, I remember at least one if not a few quotes from Beatrice talking about the difference in attitude Shannon and Kanon once had at meeting their deaths, as opposed to after they became 'human' by having love. And she compared that to humans, who had futures automatically, unlike them who would complain and scream at being killed. Humans could see their futures be destroyed with death. Shall I dig out the quotes?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
You're trying to have it both ways. If Beatrice's definition of "dead" consistently doesn't mean actual physical death, then she will not refer to actual physical death and "her" definition of death as though the two are identical.
So either she believes there is no contradiction or difference and is insane (which I do not believe), or she knows there is a difference and chooses to equivocate two entirely distinct states and is a liar.
You are trying to force an exclusivity in meanings for death. "Death is either this or this, but not both." Beatrice can still find one definition for death common for both, as for example I outlined above in the previous paragraph.

But even if she doesn't, I have no problem saying that she is equivocating two different states. It doesn't follow that she is a liar if one of the states is her personal, private opinion of how she can die.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
We talk about the ordinary meaning because Ryukishi knows what the ordinary meaning of the term is and he makes decisions as to whether a person like Beatrice employs those meanings.
That's all very well and good, but I'm trying to bring up the idea of an unordinary meaning of death. You seem to want to terminate at, "There can be NO other definitions! Period!" Well, I can agree that to *us* there may seem to be no other definitions. To even Battler, yes! I'm trying to say, maybe let's look at this from the perspective of a person who treats death differently.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Renall View Post
Absolutely not. I will not accept such a thing. Ryukishi himself invented his "pretty strange circumstances" and chose not to define them or provide rules for them. He also invented red text and defined it specifically. He then used one to intentionally and deceptively cheat and mislead using the other. There is nothing "clever" about setting up a system of rules and intentionally subverting them with special additional rules you didn't tell anybody. That's a child's argument.
Ah, so perhaps we come to the crux of the problem. If you will not read further into the story, then I'm sorry, but there isn't really much point of you discussing anything further, right? I mean, there is clearly more to the story than the red text and the definitions of dead. If you're stuck here, then, please, let those of us who have continued on ahead to discuss further theories and concepts unmolested. Because your opinions, while are important and valid, are not universal.

And don't say that there isn't anything further to read, as my mega post proved that there was definitely much, much, much more to read. And don't say that it isn't worth our time. Despite my suspicions that Ryukishi was being purposely deceptive about Beatrice's red text, I am still entertained by what else he may be saying in the novel.



By the way, when I say agree with you, Renall, or AuraTwilight, or anyone else on the deceptiveness Ryukishi employed, I agree in principle. However, you won't see from me the invectiveness that has been employed on this board that I've seen. I will not join in on the 'hate fest.' If you want me to agree that not just Beatrice, but Ryukishi himself has been deceptive, no problem. If you want me to share in the outrage, no, go hire your own wailing congregation.

However, you have been fairly warned by Beatrice herself:
Spoiler for Beatrice must follow some rules because of magic. However she does play tricks and she does deceive people.:


In case we don't believe Beatrice, take it from Bernkastel, who we know always tells the truth to maximum cruelty:
Spoiler for EP2 Beato's game is unfair and disgusting.:


Bernkastel told us in EP1 that we needed to learn the rules of the game. Not figure out who the culprit is:
Spoiler for EP1 To defeat Beatrice, you must expose the rules of the world and unravel them.:


It is this exploration of the rules which I believe still may hold our interests, despite now knowing both the question and the answer. Like know both a math theorm and know its proof is 100% accurate, finding out the actual steps to arrive at are also of great interest.
Kylon99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 18:06   Link #28518
AuraTwilight
The True Culprit
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: The Golden Land
Send a message via AIM to AuraTwilight Send a message via MSN to AuraTwilight
Quote:
wait what?
In the red. Context, sir.

Quote:
I'm not paying attention to both your points because I'm not arguing whether this writing this is honest, dishonest, or a crime against humanity. In fact, I generally agree with you two that this is not author honesty, but I'm not willing to use the hyperbole that's been flying around to describe Ryukishi. This is because I ended up figuring out Umineko from the clues presented anyways.
Then why are you arguing against it?

Quote:
Well, which part is not solvable? If the red text purely describes Beatrice's POV and condition, and her condition and basically the last mystery of Umineko that Ryukishi wanted us to solve, then its solvable. Plus that and the quotes I provided. What you seem to be saying is that the detective/closed room parts of each episode is not solvable, right? But...
Hindsight makes everything solvable. I'll need better than sophistry.

And you're missing the point again.

Quote:
Just because someone wants to argue against with you... and in my case, I am agreeing on some things and also asking for more ideas, do not label us as "Ryukishi Apologist Zealots!LOL!"
Well, excuse me, but it's not an indication of agreeing with someone when you argue against them and defend the thing they're criticizing without clarifying your own position until after the fact.

Quote:
But Beatrice's goal from the beginning was to mislead and trick Battler into accepting her as a witch.
No it wasn't.
__________________
When the Silent Spirits Cry: An Umineko/Silent Hill crossover fanfiction
http://forums.animesuki.com/showpost.php?p=4565173&postcount=531
AuraTwilight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 18:12   Link #28519
GreyZone
"Senior" "Member"
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Beato wanted you to solve it, so she made this game...the riddles of this tale...solvable.
GreyZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-04-20, 18:33   Link #28520
jjblue1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalAura View Post
I honestly don't think this is very complicated.
...
I agree with all you said.
The key point in that 'dead' problem is we've to figure out the solution that neither Shannon or Kanon are 'humans' in the way we define a human being normally (a single being who's the sole 'inhabitant' of his own, single body right from his birth and sole controller of it) a thing they, after all, admitted more than once saying many times they weren't humans, that they were furnitures and even that they served Beatrice.

And using the word 'dead' for an identity in a misleading manner isn't something exclusive of Umineko.
Plus Beato gave that red truth on Battler's prompting, repeating what he asked her to repeat... which is sort of funny in a fashion because he aknowledged that Shannon and Kanon were alive even through they were just 'Yasu's immaginary friends/personality/whatever'.
As he was the first to make the mistake of comparing them to humans it makes even harder to blame Beato for cheating.

To go back with the lightbulb example if Battler were to ask if the lightbulb and Beato's grandmother are dead she wouldn't be lying or cheating if she answered yes. It would be up to him to figure the lightbulb isn't a person, she isn't supposed to give him solutions.

She used misleading reds other times so it shouldn't come as a surprise.
jjblue1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:21.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.