Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by JavaTigress

  1. Well... This states my thoughts pretty well. BESIDES which, even IF we go by " 'GONs' are Lugia "... I would assume that Lugia,being a very RARE pokemon, would only successfully give you a baby LUGIA a small percentage of the time.
  2. The only WAY this could be worth-while is IF the limits on them were lifted entirely WHICH I, quite frankly, don't see happening. Increased, maybe, but NOT lifted totally. The GONs are supposed to be very powerful and rare dragons, after all, so it makes sense if they aren't as common as some other breeds. AND it makes sense if the don't 'reproduce after their kind' the way other dragons do ( Or not often?) So... that is another nope from me.
  3. This. Very much this. I have no issue with the possibility of repulsing being possible.
  4. That is very likely true. AS someone pointed out... some dishes are meatless by nature, while OTHER dishes can be made with or without meat ( like pizza!). AND as that same individual pointed out, some cuisines make far less use of meat than others do.
  5. For MYSELF, myself, personally... I am not a vegetarian,much less vegan ( unrepentant omnivore, here. ) THAT being said I don't think there is anything inherently WRONG with making that choice.... just that I don't think I could, myself, personally. I WILL also comment that I think the behavior of the 'meat-eaters' that @Herk mentioned was pretty reprehensible. JUST because I choose to eat meat ( and dairy and eggs ) doesn't mean that there aren't other ways of thinking and points of view on the matter. People may have a variety of reasons for choosing NOT to partake in meat. AND IF I disagree with them it doesn't mean that I shouldn't' treat others who happen to think about it differently than I do with respect. In FACT, even IF I DO normally eat meat I wouldn't be opposed to TRYING the veggie dishes, necessarily. Who knows! If you try them you may even FIND that you actually LIKE some of those meatless dishes, whether you are a full time vegetarian or NOT. IMHO, they shouldn't have created so much DRAMA about it.
  6. I am not sure about furs, but as far as leather goes, I have no issues with its use. I always had the idea that , as @Fuzzbucket says, LEATHER primarily comes from cattle who were raised for meat anyway. It seems to ME that it is better that, if a cow is going to become a steak either way, the hide is put to some use. At said, if the leather itself is a landfill problem, It WOULD be good if we either had a better way of disposing of it .... or of reusing it. Furs... furs, as I said, I am less sure of. THAT said, it seems to ME that this law wouldn't stop someone who really WANTS a fur coat or such from going to another city to buy it. THEREFOR in my view sort of a silly law in that it achieves NOTHING. the people that don't believe in wearing fur are already NOT going to be buying it, and this law ISN'T going to change the hearts and minds of the people who believe it is OK to use fur and leather.
  7. That, actually sounds like a perfectly reasonable way to deal with it, to be honest. I am not sure why that ISN'T how it is handled , already, to be honest.
  8. To be FAIR , though, @Alrexwolf, that situation isn't really JUST on 'pro-lifers'. Matter of fact, I am totally in favor of someone being able to decide to be sterilized if they feel that that is the best choice. I have no problem with preventing a pregnancy BEFORE one exists. I think , more to the point, Docs are AFRAID that if they allow a person to go through with something like that, and that individual later changes their mind, well... that they will be held liable. People sue over some pretty silly stuff AND it isn't difficult for me to imagine this from the Doc's perspective. I am not saying you are WRONG about it being a problem ( I very much believe that it is... if a person NEVER wants kids and KNOWS they NEVER, ever will, why can't they make that choice? Certainly I find that preferable to abortion if/when pregnancy results.), just that docs may have their ( not totally pro-life related...) reasons for taking the stand on it they do... unfortunate though that may be.
  9. This is what I thought , too. At the very least it isn't NEW and has been there since I have owned any vampires on my scroll.
  10. AND I think there really ISN'T an excuse for the situation you mention... where someone has literally NO idea how pregnancy even HAPPENS. Certainly not if they are an adult.
  11. At isn't a bad solution in my OWN opinion,BUT I feel like some folks on here are wanting something a bit more...permanent.
  12. Not YOU specifically.... but society at large often seems to imply it. Perhaps I ought to have been clearer, there. AND I will admit that that WANTING sex isn't precisely irresponsible... though I think it can certainly be indulged in irresponsibly, I think we can agree. Ats why I DO think people should be taught HOW to do it responsibly (USE BC if they aren't trying for a baby, be aware of STDs, that kind of thing!) Because there CAN be consequences to it, if it isn't handled carefully. And , sometimes, saying 'NO' is absolutely a valid choice.
  13. Scuse me! I don't see the need for the snarky tone here. I believe their point, which is a valid one, BTW, WAS that choosing NOT to have sex is a perfectly POSSIBLE and valid choice. I get SOOOOOOOoooo sick of sex being touted as the be-all, end-all of human existence. ( FULL disclosure, I believe I am an asexual.) Abstinence is a perfectly valid choice... and many people seem to forget that. I would ADD that there might be a variety of reasons that a person might choose to abstain....without it being because they are 'holier-than-thou' OR unable to get a partner.maybe they just don't WANT to have sex? Maybe they don't currently feel ready? Maybe... any NUMBER of things. THAT being said, I do get your point about it being a powerful instinctive drive for most people and DIFFICULT at best for most people to control. Mistakes can be made and experimenting by young people can and DOES happen. PERSONALLY I would rather see better and more effective birth control... and perhaps better knowledge on how to properly use it. I personally believe that that would prevent many abortions. As far as when life begins...I believe it happens at some point before birth, though I fully understand there isn't really scientific evidence for that, necessarily.
  14. I do agree that I wish we could do more stuff with groups( which we already have!) For instance I really LIKE your suggestion of making the breeding page filterable BY GROUP ( or perhaps tags could do that?).( I'd have instant access to all my CBs when breeding, then!) AND,personally,I'd LOVE the option to highlight more groups than four! I don't think I am opposed to the idea of tags on top of that, though. They would fill a slightly different function, I think, like @angelicdragonpuppy said. BOTH could be useful tools ( And I believe groups could be made MORE useful?)
  15. Is is my take on it. HOWEVER... I am not necessarily opposed to having the option. HONESTLY, @Fuzzbucket, anyone trying to pressure ME into putting an ignore on someone I didn't feeling like would PROBABLY get a big "Yeah, RIGHT" and an ignore themselves from me. I wouldn't LET myself be pressured into it. IF I used it, it would be because I personally Wanted to do so, for whatever the reason, NOT because someone else told me I ought to. Ats my choice and NOONE else's, thanks very much. ALL of that said, I think IF would work best IF, as someone commented, anyone n ignore got mutual invisiblity to eachother. They can't see your trades and you can't see theirs.
  16. This is... a good point actually. AND ats coming from someone who KNOWS that they have had Influence fail from time to time. I have been known o use Precog EXACTLY as described here... for important stuff,anyway. As for the fails themselves... Annoying? Absolutely. Game breaking? Nah. I can totally understand the place this idea comes from. There have been a few of mine that have been quite frustrating. However... I can see this concern as well. Still, as others have said, pinks ARE more common than Aeons ( At least it appears so to me), so I dunno how HUGE of an issue this is.
  17. OK, I realize my 'problem' seems smaller than some of the stuff other folks have posted here... that said,it definitely bothers me. I enjoy chess, but at times I think I m not really good enough to warrant. Like I have a tendency to let fall by the wayside anything I don't think I am 'good at'. The issue with chess, and what makes it so emotionally distressing IS that I actually enjoy the game and don't really WANT to quit playing... but at the same time I don't feel good at it. I WANT to be good at it, but I am if I am honest with myself, , at best,a fairly average player which... in my mind isn't good enough by even a quarter. ( As if, foolish as it sounds even to me when I put it into words, only grandmasters have the right to play, in my mind) Thing is, I am unclear on what even IS good enough. Stupid, I know but there it is. My ratings number annoys me and WORSE, the more I feel compelled to try to bring that number up, the more stubbornly it stays put. As a matter of fact, when I am more relaxed ( and less focused on that stupid number and trying to bring it up ( Whether because I lost a game and therefor a few points and want to re-earn them or I have got it in my head the number itself is just plain not good enough for my liking)) my chess is actually BETTER than when I am so concerned about it. *Le Sigh* What do I even do about it? The bottom line is that I ONLY feel good about my chess when I am on a winning streak. and I take losses hard. Quitting the game isn't likely to happen, at least not permanently. I just wish I could reduce the ammount of emotional frustration and pain it brought along witht he pleasure it undoubtedly also brings
  18. Indeed.+1 I am always pretty careful when I bite, but as @Fuzzbucket said, there is always a first time for a mistake. overall, these seems a perfectly sensible suggestion.
  19. Actually, I wouldn't be opposed tot being allowed the option when the trade was set up.... and that is true even IF the original subject of this threa weren't implemented. THOUGH I can sort of see the merit of THAT also.
  20. LIKE... when you set up the trade you can set it up so that it won't ALLOW someone to offer an egg? Interesting idea.
  21. I mean, though...can't this happen, anyway? Getting egg offers when you ask for hatchies, I mean.
  22. O.o Valid points. And SOME of our dragons are described as being quite fierce and predatory ( H-Fires,for instance, or Depises) And likely wouldn't live nicely with other dragons.... yet they exist on our scrolls. I believe you are right about flavor text not being taken absolutely literally. ( THOUGH I admit when truffles first dropped I thought they might be a new rare) At said, I am waiting to see.... as long as golds have been around, truffles as a new breed would ahve to make a LOT of eggs to catch up with them. Just saying.
  23. This is my take on it... though as they Truffles are a new breed, PERHAPS the ratios haven't really caught up yet? They have only existed with us a month or two or so.
  24. What would be grand is IF there were a way to have the option either way. ( I confess I am not SURE how that could work). As some have pointed out, it really makes more sense to sort them as Undeads, as they can't go back to what they were before, and from what I was reading in the posts, here, some people don't want even the REMINDER of what they were. Giving us the option ( perhaps in our account settings?) would clear up the confusion for those that want it without unduly hindering anybody's play style.
  25. Fair Enough. And I would say that it is probably better if the dragon NOT having progeny already is a requirement for this to work for sake of existing lineages.