Author Topic: Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?  (Read 30130 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Just got this in an email today... I haven't posted in awhile so I apologize in advance if its already been discussed.

Pretty nice graphics for a flash app, and the inclusion of Nintendo mascots was a nice touch.  

Offline vudu

  • You'd probably all be better off if I really were dead.
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: -19
    • View Profile
How long does this game go on for?  I just beat world 3 and I'm already bored.
Why must all things be so bright? Why can things not appear only in hues of brown! I am so serious about this! Dull colors are the future! The next generation! I will never accept a world with such bright colors! It is far too childish! I will rage against your cheery palette with my last breath!

Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Wow, Nintendo needs to slap PETA with a big lawsuit.
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline Ian Sane

  • Champion for Urban Champion
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
I'd suggest someone make an anti-Peta game is response but Burgertime is probably already sufficient.

Offline vudu

  • You'd probably all be better off if I really were dead.
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: -19
    • View Profile
Alright, I beat the game.  It was dull.

There are five levels total.  My final score was 90,600, which was good enough to earn me 2nd place among all "recent" scores.  Not sure what that means.  

If anyone cares, the secret code to play as Pam is GOPAM!
Why must all things be so bright? Why can things not appear only in hues of brown! I am so serious about this! Dull colors are the future! The next generation! I will never accept a world with such bright colors! It is far too childish! I will rage against your cheery palette with my last breath!

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
I too went though the game.  I don't recommend it.  Strangely enough, I did not see anything mentioning that the various characters and concepts were Nintendo copyrights...

Also, who's brilliant idea was it to name one of the main characters "Nugget"?
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Wow I hope Nintendo sues their asses off, what a terrible rip off of a game.

Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: UncleBob
I too went though the game.  I don't recommend it.  Strangely enough, I did not see anything mentioning that the various characters and concepts were Nintendo copyrights...

Also, who's brilliant idea was it to name one of the main characters "Nugget"?


"Nugget" was my brother's pet name, given to him by my older cousin when I was like, 9. My bro was nugget and I was nibble. My older cousin was bite and her younger sister was cupcake.
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Mashiro
Wow I hope Nintendo sues their asses off, what a terrible rip off of a game.


Umm... did you guys that are saying this play the game at all? Mario, Luigi, and Dr. Mario are actually in cutscenes in the game, this is fairly obviously either a collaborative work between Nintendo and PETA or some sort of licensing deal.


Offline UERD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Highly doubtful. PETA does this kind of stuff all the time.
"I'm looking for shrunken heads w/ DVD playback options. I figure I can hang them in my car like dice. Will you help me?"
- thatguy

"Can you shoot out customizable fireballs? Then why should your Mii be able to?"
- vudu

Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
And there's no copyright information.

Also, while it's OK to parody something (in this case KFC), you can't use one trademark to parody another.
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
Quote

Originally posted by: Mashiro
Wow I hope Nintendo sues their asses off, what a terrible rip off of a game.


Umm... did you guys that are saying this play the game at all? Mario, Luigi, and Dr. Mario are actually in cutscenes in the game, this is fairly obviously either a collaborative work between Nintendo and PETA or some sort of licensing deal.


I dunno. . .

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Guys, I'm telling you, there's no way this was done without Nintendo's knowledge. PETA and Nintendo have been on very good terms for quite some time. They gave Nintendogs an award and almost every give-away contest they have for their site for school children has Nintendo merchandise (including one late last year where they were giving away Wiis and Zelda: TP)


Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
Yeah, and then Yoshi says he refuses to let Mario order him around any more.  I thought it was clear that Mario and Yoshi are friends and partners!  Besides, Yoshi can drive!  He's smart enough to say no if he doesn't want something to happen!

I'm almost certain they did this without Nintendo's permission.  The were no copyrights or trademarks listed, and Nintendo is pretty protective of their star mascot outside of their intended use.  They don't like to give the guy away to just anyone, and usually, they only do it when it should benefit them a lot.  Making an enemy out of KFC/Pepsi is not their idea of a good business deal.  Nintendo had nothing to do with this.

Also, the point of the game is not to educate you about how chickens are treated at KFC.  The true point is to make the inside of KFC look disgusting to anyone who plays, so that when he or she thinks of KFC, he/she things of a dirty, greasy, rat and bug filled restaurant.  That became pretty obvious once you get in the building.  The entire thing disgusts me, because it's pretty underhanded, especially when you consider the high chance that if KFC were to give away their chickens to PETA, PETA would likely anesthetize them in a van a few yards away.  Such a wonderful organization, huh?

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Also Mario and Luigi being shown with their arms broken from playing "too much" Wii doesn't seem like something Nintendo would do.

Offline UERD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Also, the point of the game is not to educate you about how chickens are treated at KFC. The true point is to make the inside of KFC look disgusting to anyone who plays, so that when he or she thinks of KFC, he/she things of a dirty, greasy, rat and bug filled restaurant. That became pretty obvious once you get in the building. The entire thing disgusts me, because it's pretty underhanded, especially when you consider the high chance that if KFC were to give away their chickens to PETA, PETA would likely anesthetize them in a van a few yards away. Such a wonderful organization, huh?


PETA is the definition of underhanded, like how Jack Thompson operates: making false claims, bad associations (like how Bioshock was developed by Rockstar, supposedly), demonization of the enemy, and general all-around sensationalism.

I had a few good satire flash games in my collection, but I don't think they'd be wholly appropriate to link to here. Besides, I lost the links a long time ago.
"I'm looking for shrunken heads w/ DVD playback options. I figure I can hang them in my car like dice. Will you help me?"
- thatguy

"Can you shoot out customizable fireballs? Then why should your Mii be able to?"
- vudu

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
I'm simultaneously fascinated by the amount of hate there is for PETA, and vaguely creeped out by it.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
I'm simultaneously fascinated by the amount of hate there is for PETA, and vaguely creeped out by it.


Creeped out about the hate for PETA?  Do some real research.  The people in charge are terrible people.  The ideas they have are criminal.  The things they do to animals are inhumane.  A good start might be a special Penn and Teller did on PETA in some HBO-ish series.  It'll help you understand why reasonable, educated people hate PETA.  Although, to be fair, there are a lot of people out there that are ignorant to PETA's darker ideals.  Initially, people think the group would be for animal protection, a great cause.  However, PETA typically euthanize mistreated pets, rather than rehabilitate them.  They actually don't believe in pet ownership.  They think animals one-and-all should be treated entirely like our equals.  There's lot's of contradiction between what they do and what they say.  They are a terrible group.

A comparable instance, though I don't know if it was PETA organized or not, was an issue recently voted on in my hometown a few years ago.  The issue was whether or not to restrict tying up sow (female pigs) when they give birth.  Several people in the town thought that this was a cruel thing to do from hearing it initially.  The truth, however, is that a sow might eat her young under stress.  This act was for pigs protection, as they could be eaten, but due to misinformation and ignorance, many did not perceive the law this way.

Unfortunately, I do not know how the vote turned out.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Dude... 99% of the people in the world are terrible people. Surely we can't be expected to hate them all.


Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
I do.
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: UncleBob
I do.


I do.


Does that mean we're married?

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
I think my wife might object to that.
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
Dude... 99% of the people in the world are terrible people. Surely we can't be expected to hate them all.


No, 99% of people in the world are flawed.

Anyway, really, look at some of the stuff PETA does. Like adopting animals from shelters, then euthanize them in a van and drop the bodies off in a river. I'm serious.
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
Dude... 99% of the people in the world are terrible people. Surely we can't be expected to hate them all.


No, 99% of people in the world are flawed.

Anyway, really, look at some of the stuff PETA does. Like adopting animals from shelters, then euthanize them in a van and drop the bodies off in a river. I'm serious.


That's horrible.

Now I hate PETA too.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: UncleBob
I think my wife might object to that.


As far as we know, those could have been your toes in the red socks!

Offline Spak-Spang

  • The Frightened Fox
  • Score: 39
    • View Profile
    • MirandaNew.com
PETA also directly funds and supports the Animal Liberation Front (or is it Group) that is actually a terrorist group that believes it is ok to bomb corporations and use violence to protect and save animals and the environment.


Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
As a pacifist I'm certainly not comfortable with their willingness to use violence to advance their agenda, but again that's true of way more than 99% of the population. I see no reason they should be singled out for any unique hate that mankind at large doesn't have coming to him.



Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
As a pacifist I'm certainly not comfortable with their willingness to use violence to advance their agenda, but again that's true of way more than 99% of the population. I see no reason they should be singled out for any unique hate that mankind at large doesn't have coming to him.


Excuse me, but while it's true that 99% of people aren't perfect, that doesn't mean that it's normal for people to adopt animals, kill them and drop them off in dumpsters.
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline Deguello

  • Cards makes me ill.
  • Score: 3
    • View Profile
The problem with PETA is that it is redundant.  There already existed a body for the protection of animals when they formed.  It's called the Humane Society of the United States, and they are the ones with real vision and real results, while PETA acts like a bunch of terrorists sometimes.

They also have a confused message in which they deride animal shelters, but ADOPT and then KILL animals for some reason that has not been made clear.



In fact, here's a picture of some of them.  Yes those are kittens.  They are the very monsters they claim to fight.  
It's time you saw the future while you still have human eyes.

... and those eyes see a 3DS system code : 2750-1598-3807

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
I don't think the issue against Peta is that they use violence and are terrible people.  I think the issue against Peta is that they claim to be morally superior to anyone who so much as thinks about killing an animal (say, to eat it or something), meanwhile they do things that most "normal" people would consider to be pretty horrible.

I remember seeing a Peta pamphlet once that was 'marketed' toward children about how your daddy is a killer because he fishes and eats the fish and that you should keep your puppies and kittens away from daddy because you never know when his need to kill might kick in.

Direct from Peta's FishingHurts.com website: http://www.fishinghurts.com/pdfs/DaddyKillsAnimals.pdf

Apparently, there's another one, about Mommy being a killer.

"Keep your doggie or kitty friends away from mommy-she's an animal killer!"
http://www.furisdead.com/pdfs/mommykills.pdf  
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline Ian Sane

  • Champion for Urban Champion
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
"The true point is to make the inside of KFC look disgusting to anyone who plays, so that when he or she thinks of KFC, he/she things of a dirty, greasy, rat and bug filled restaurant."

Well that is already kind of what I think of when I think of KFC.  This one location in Abbotsford anyway.

I don't like PETA because they're extremists.  It's really that simple.  Plus I like eating meat and having a pet and don't see ethical issues with either.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
On another note, why don't they protest carnivorous animals?  After all, if they see animals and people as equals, and people kill animals and animals kill animals, shouldn't they be angry at the animals, too?

Offline Ian Sane

  • Champion for Urban Champion
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
"On another note, why don't they protest carnivorous animals?"

Because that would just expose the huge flaw in their ideology of course.

Offline vudu

  • You'd probably all be better off if I really were dead.
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: -19
    • View Profile
This is necessary.  This is necessary.

Life feeds on life feeds on life feeds on life feeds on........
Why must all things be so bright? Why can things not appear only in hues of brown! I am so serious about this! Dull colors are the future! The next generation! I will never accept a world with such bright colors! It is far too childish! I will rage against your cheery palette with my last breath!

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
As a pacifist I'm certainly not comfortable with their willingness to use violence to advance their agenda, but again that's true of way more than 99% of the population. I see no reason they should be singled out for any unique hate that mankind at large doesn't have coming to him.


Excuse me, but while it's true that 99% of people aren't perfect, that doesn't mean that it's normal for people to adopt animals, kill them and drop them off in dumpsters.


No, but its always something, isn't it?


Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
What?   You're making no sense, now.  Do you at least see what we're saying here?  That PETA does horrible things, more often than not, much more grotesque than the things they protest?

Offline capamerica

  • ^______^
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
PETA is a pure Evil group. End of Story don't even try to make them out to be anything less.
I highly recommend watching the first episode of season two of Bullshit. Everything you need to know about PETA is in that.

The people who run PETA have a very warped sense of reality, They support killing people, and setting off bombs at research labs and people's homes, They are nothing less then a group of terrorist.
As its been said already once, they will kill poor animals just because they feel that animals are better off dead then in the care of people.
They see Chicken farms as being worst then the Holocaust. Seriously they had a set of ads that compared the two. What sicko sees chickens been in the same boat as the Jewish people?

I think its highly unlikely Nintendo has any connection with PETA, they are to dirty of a group to be even remotely connected with.
"Alright, you know what? I'm just giving in and looking at the breasts."
Crow ~ MST3K
<BR>-- I like my food like I like my women Chinese, Japaneses, Korean, Filipino, Vietnamese and Hot! --

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
I have no idea how you guys can build up this much rage in a thread about a flash-based 2D platformer with chickens in it. Its fascinating though.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
We know about the organization responsible for the flash-based 2D platformer.  Do you not understand what we're telling you about PETA, here?

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Far be it from me to not defer to the Penn and Teller crowd on who is worth hating... I'm just saying PETA's hypocrisy and violence seem pretty much par for the course in the modern era.

Offline UERD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Yeah, but that doesn't excuse them. If everyone around you suddenly decided that babies were an acceptable form of cuisine, would you join in?
"I'm looking for shrunken heads w/ DVD playback options. I figure I can hang them in my car like dice. Will you help me?"
- thatguy

"Can you shoot out customizable fireballs? Then why should your Mii be able to?"
- vudu

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
I think you have some delusions about people and humanity.  I seriously think you need to consider seeing a psycologist, guidance counselor, or someone like that, and just talking to them for a little while.

Also, I've only watched that one episode of Penn and Teller, believe it or not.  Are you a member/sympathizer of PETA?

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: UERD
Yeah, but that doesn't excuse them. If everyone around you suddenly decided that babies were an acceptable form of cuisine, would you join in?


Of course... I just find it fascinating that people can work up so much PETA hate in such short order...  

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: UERD
Yeah, but that doesn't excuse them. If everyone around you suddenly decided that babies were an acceptable form of cuisine, would you join in?


Of course... I just find it fascinating that people can work up so much PETA hate in such short order...  

Offline UERD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
To be honest, I was a little surprised as well.
"I'm looking for shrunken heads w/ DVD playback options. I figure I can hang them in my car like dice. Will you help me?"
- thatguy

"Can you shoot out customizable fireballs? Then why should your Mii be able to?"
- vudu

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: thatguy
I think you have some delusions about people and humanity.  I seriously think you need to consider seeing a psycologist, guidance counselor, or someone like that, and just talking to them for a little while.

Also, I've only watched that one episode of Penn and Teller, believe it or not.  Are you a member/sympathizer of PETA?


I wouldn't have stayed away from the site so long if I'd known it could be so entertaining:

It took just 27 hours between me linking a flash app of a 2D platformer with Mario characters in it, on a Nintendo-themed forum mind you, to the suggestion that I should see a psycologist (sic) on the basis of my insufficient hatred for the guys who made the flash app.

Lord help me, I did not see that coming.

Offline capamerica

  • ^______^
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
I'm just saying PETA's hypocrisy and violence seem pretty much par for the course in the modern era.


Your kidding right? I guess it's on par if your comparing them to Al-Qaeda. =/
"Alright, you know what? I'm just giving in and looking at the breasts."
Crow ~ MST3K
<BR>-- I like my food like I like my women Chinese, Japaneses, Korean, Filipino, Vietnamese and Hot! --

Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
No, but its always something, isn't it?


Just as a question, why do you seem to think humanity is evil? Sure we're not fully perfect, but we aren't fully evil, either. Looking at only the bad is just as bad as looking at only the good. There's a lot of gray in between, and men can be heroes just as often as they can be villains.

And as for the PETA hate, as shown already in this thread, it's pretty obvious that PETA is insane.
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
No, but its always something, isn't it?


Just as a question, why do you seem to think humanity is evil? Sure we're not fully perfect, but we aren't fully evil, either. Looking at only the bad is just as bad as looking at only the good. There's a lot of gray in between, and men can be heroes just as often as they can be villains.

And as for the PETA hate, as shown already in this thread, it's pretty obvious that PETA is insane.


If only you could reconcile those two paragraphs with one another...

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
Just because there's one group of people who are insane doesn't mean everyone is.  That's why I think you need a little bit of therapy.  That's the kind of thinking it takes to destroy yourself from the inside-out.

Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
If only you could reconcile those two paragraphs with one another...


How are they irreconcilable?

PETA is an organization that tries to be good, but goes too far. Their objectives seem fine, as they present themselves as an animal rights group, but their methods are terrible.

Does that mean mankind is evil? No. There are dozens of other animal rights groups that are much less hypocritical.
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: thatguy
Just because there's one group of people who are insane doesn't mean everyone is.  That's why I think you need a little bit of therapy.  That's the kind of thinking it takes to destroy yourself from the inside-out.


In other words "you don't agree with me, so you must be crazy", right?


Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
If only you could reconcile those two paragraphs with one another...


How are they irreconcilable?

PETA is an organization that tries to be good, but goes too far. Their objectives seem fine, as they present themselves as an animal rights group, but their methods are terrible.

Does that mean mankind is evil? No. There are dozens of other animal rights groups that are much less hypocritical.


I never said mankind was evil... I just said that 99%+ of people are hypocritical about one thing or another and that I found it intensely curious how unhinged people were getting in a thread about a 2D Flash-based platformer.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
No, in other words, I've seen people tear their lives apart because they've had your mindset.  I am merely trying to warn you that the outlook you have now is a dangerous and unfulfilling one.  You should attempt to adjust it, before it's too late.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: thatguy
No, in other words, I've seen people tear their lives apart because they've had your mindset.  I am merely trying to warn you that the outlook you have now is a dangerous and unfulfilling one.  You should attempt to adjust it, before it's too late.


Adjust it in what way? How much do I have to hate PETA to qualify as normal?  

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
Now, to be fair, I doubt anyone on this board decided that they hate PETA because of the flash application, you linking to it or because of your post.  I bet most of us already know that PETA isn't a very respectable group of people.  So, when you come here and post something about PETA, don't be surprised if people reply negatively about it.

I mean, if you came on here and posted a flash game made by Islamic terrorists where the goal was to fly planes into buildings and kill infidel Americans, people would probably get worked up over that one as well.  It's not that we *hate* the flash game or your post, it is that PETA has proven, multiple times, through their actions, that they, as a group, are one of the worst "rights" groups out there.
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline S-U-P-E-R

  • My Butt is Ready :reggie;
  • Score: -63
    • View Profile
    • oh my god
Yeah, soon as I saw Mario and crew in this, I said, someone gonna get sued.

Also, PETA are a bunch of psychos, support your local humane society

Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
I love you guys. You're awesome. I ever tell you that? It's true.
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline Spak-Spang

  • The Frightened Fox
  • Score: 39
    • View Profile
    • MirandaNew.com
I personally have a problem with any group that believes Animals are more important man.

And this does just go into the environmental arguments like man's progress is destroying the world (which they believe) but PETA is willing to take drastic actions to ruin peoples lives to protect animals.  And that is not right.

It isn't right for lie about KFC and try to destroy their reputation because they don't like how KFC handles their chickens.  If it is bad enough for the Food and Drug Administration to get involved don't you think they would have?

It is not right for the company to support the terrorist Animal Liberation Front, who has bombed and sabotaged corporate offices and work sites because they believe it is killing animals.

It is not right that PETA, brought legal action against a poor farmer who accidentally killed an endangered spotted owl, and lost everything, his land, his home, a pretty hefty sum of money, because "The spotted owl has made this land its home, their for it must be protected."

It is not right that PETA, speaks about the ills of corporate testing and killing animals, but then their own shelters kill 100s of animals because they just have too many...hey why not give those animals that you are going to kill to some medical testing clinics so perhaps we can cure some life threatening human diseases, oh that is right...that is cruelty  to animals, but just killing them isn't.

It is not right that they go to public events with kids around and do yell obscene things about how they are murders.

It is not right that they are actively seeking federal action to ban the eating of all animals.

Basically, I think PETA was an organization that started out good  (Like Most) but was taken over by the crazies that believe in this stuff.  
Here is a fun positive fact about PETA.  PETA I believe was the first organization to take on child abuse because there was no organization protecting children at the time...which is sad and tells you something about our society, we are more willing to protect animals than children.

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Spak-Spang
hey why not give those animals that you are going to kill to some medical testing clinics so perhaps we can cure some life threatening human diseases, oh that is right...that is cruelty  to animals, but just killing them isn't.


Well, to be fair, there are things much worse than death...

Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: UncleBob
Now, to be fair, I doubt anyone on this board decided that they hate PETA because of the flash application, you linking to it or because of your post.  I bet most of us already know that PETA isn't a very respectable group of people.  So, when you come here and post something about PETA, don't be surprised if people reply negatively about it.

I mean, if you came on here and posted a flash game made by Islamic terrorists where the goal was to fly planes into buildings and kill infidel Americans, people would probably get worked up over that one as well.  It's not that we *hate* the flash game or your post, it is that PETA has proven, multiple times, through their actions, that they, as a group, are one of the worst "rights" groups out there.


I don't agree with everything PETA does either, but the repeated comparisons to al-Qaeda seem a bit... over the top... if you don't mind my saying.

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
An extremist group that believes in using violence and killing innocents to force others to agree with their point of view?

Naw, I don't see the connection either.
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Using violence to force others to agree with one's point of view hardly seems extremist. As I said before... 99%+ of people are willing to do that.

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

99%+ of people are willing to do that.


97.3% of all statistics are made up.

Also wouldn't 99%+ mean 100%?

Quote

Using violence to force others to agree with one's point of view hardly seems extremist.


Lawl . . .  

Offline Arbok

  • Toho Mikado
  • Score: 5
    • View Profile
    • Toho Kingdom
Quote

Originally posted by: Mashiro
Also wouldn't 99%+ mean 100%?


Technically no, it could be 99.5%, for example.
Toho Kingdom

@romero_tk

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
True . . . good point.

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
Using violence to force others to agree with one's point of view hardly seems extremist. As I said before... 99%+ of people are willing to do that.


I'm going to have to disagree with you on that statement and that statistic.

Perhaps I'm just in the smaller >1% of sane, rational humans that don't resort to blowing up innocent people just because they disagree with what I think.

Lucky for you (and your family), 'eh?
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline Ian Sane

  • Champion for Urban Champion
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
"Using violence to force others to agree with one's point of view hardly seems extremist. As I said before... 99%+ of people are willing to do that."

I guess I make up that less than 1%.  I had no idea that virtually everyone around me will use violence against me if I have a different opinion than them.

That statment just sounds outright INSANE.  At worst people might THINK about using violence to force others to agree with them.  Sometimes when someone disagrees with you it's not irregular to think to yourself "jerk, I oughta punch him in the face" but few people actually go beyond that.

Though even if that was the case I still wouldn't tolerate it.  I really don't care what the majority thinks.  If it logically seems wrong to me then I think it's wrong even if the rest of the world disagrees with me.

Offline Bill Aurion

  • NWR Forum Loli
  • Score: 34
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Using violence to force others to agree with one's point of view hardly seems extremist. As I said before... 99%+ of people are willing to do that."

I guess I make up that less than 1%.  I had no idea that virtually everyone around me will use violence against me if I have a different opinion than them.

Holy crap, put me in that less than 1% as well...

*is now scared of being randomly stalked and attacked for disagreeing with assorted NWR posters*
~Former Resident Zelda Aficionado and Nintendo Fan~

Offline ShyGuy

  • Fight Me!
  • *
  • Score: -9660
    • View Profile
Put me smack dab in the middle of the 99%. You are wrong, and I am willing to kill you because of it.

Offline Ian Sane

  • Champion for Urban Champion
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Well I will resort to violence as a means of protecting the lives of other humans.  Since PETA regards animals as of equal standings as humans I guess I can kind of see how in their minds it would be no different.  But then they do dumb stuff like taking animals from shelters and killing them which is like breaking someone out of prison and then gunning them down so they don't have to deal with the hardships of life as a fugitive.  That gets into "I decide who lives or dies" thinking which, ethics or morality aside, is dangerous since it renders everyone's life as invaluable.  Beyond being selfish or evil it's just foolish since you promote the idea that someone else can decide if YOU die.

Plus if PETA really thought animals and humans were equal then it would be wrong for them to decide anything about the animals involved.  If the animal wants to risk dying in the wild or wants to return to being a pet if they're equal to us that must be allowed.  PETA are no less the animal slave masters than the rest of us.  That's why they're extremists.  They regards themselves as above the rest of us.  It's not about animal rights it's about PETA being in charge.  It's the meglomaniac that wants to make the world a better place by being supreme dictator.  

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
If that statistic were true we would all already be dead and the world we be devoid of human life as we would have killed each other by now.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: ShyGuy
Put me smack dab in the middle of the 99%. You are wrong, and I am willing to kill you because of it.


I think I'm in the 99%, too.  In my fantasy experiences, I've thrown ShyGuys at each other to kill them, eaten them, put them in my mouth and spit them out, thrown fire at them, stomped at them, and done several other things, all to ShyGuys.

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
Yeah, but is that because you disagree with ShyGuy or just because you don't like him in general?
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"Using violence to force others to agree with one's point of view hardly seems extremist. As I said before... 99%+ of people are willing to do that."

I guess I make up that less than 1%.  I had no idea that virtually everyone around me will use violence against me if I have a different opinion than them.

That statment just sounds outright INSANE.  At worst people might THINK about using violence to force others to agree with them.  Sometimes when someone disagrees with you it's not irregular to think to yourself "jerk, I oughta punch him in the face" but few people actually go beyond that.

Though even if that was the case I still wouldn't tolerate it.  I really don't care what the majority thinks.  If it logically seems wrong to me then I think it's wrong even if the rest of the world disagrees with me.


You may well be in that less than 1%... who knows. But yes, virtually everyone around you will use violence against you (or suppose someone else using violence against you) in some case if you disagree with them or refuse to obey them.



Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Mashiro
If that statistic were true we would all already be dead and the world we be devoid of human life as we would have killed each other by now.


That... doesn't follow at all.


Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Ian Sane
They regards themselves as above the rest of us.  It's not about animal rights it's about PETA being in charge.  It's the meglomaniac that wants to make the world a better place by being supreme dictator.


The megalomaniac or... in modern parlance, the voter.


Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Arbok
Quote

Originally posted by: Mashiro
Also wouldn't 99%+ mean 100%?


Technically no, it could be 99.5%, for example.


Yeah... I don't have an exact figure... I know it is less than 100%, but in my experience it is also considerably more than 99%.

The odds that a random person will not use violence against you if it is to his benefit, or won't at least support someone else using violence against you if it is to his benefit is way way longer than 100 to 1. Hence, 99%+

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
Seriously dude, regardless of your thoughts on PETA, you seriously need to consider seeking out help.  Like, real, professional help.  If you really think that 99+% of people will resort to violence to force their point of view on other people and you have such a deep hatred for human kind, you've seriously got some issues.

Look, I hear ya man... I hate the human race too... but there's the healthy, rational "I hate everyone because I work in customer service and I see how stupid everyone is" kinda hating everyone, then there's your totally not rational thoughts...
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

That... doesn't follow at all.


Ok let's break it down then shall we?

Quote

Using violence to force others to agree with one's point of view hardly seems extremist. As I said before... 99%+ of people are willing to do that.


You're saying 99% (or more) people on the earth are willing to resort to violence in order to make others agree with themselves.

So that means (based off of the population number 6,613,714,003) 6,547,576,863 (rounding up) people in the world would be willing to resort to violence in order to FORCE people to agree with them.

You know what happens when lots of people try to force lots of other people to believe in their viewpoint? War.

That's really all war is. 2 differentiating view points that can only be solved through violence. So pretty much 6,547,576,863 people would be poised for battle to make their point proven . . . I don't think the population would last very long.    

Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
You may well be in that less than 1%... who knows. But yes, virtually everyone around you will use violence against you (or suppose someone else using violence against you) in some case if you disagree with them or refuse to obey them.


Where did you pick up this theory? Really, I would like to know, as this is just so alien to me. This is the first time I've heard of it, and it just seems odd. I've been in lots of arguments and debates, but I've never had anyone pull out a baseball bat and beat me to a pulp.
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
You may well be in that less than 1%... who knows. But yes, virtually everyone around you will use violence against you (or suppose someone else using violence against you) in some case if you disagree with them or refuse to obey them.


Where did you pick up this theory? Really, I would like to know, as this is just so alien to me. This is the first time I've heard of it, and it just seems odd. I've been in lots of arguments and debates, but I've never had anyone pull out a baseball bat and beat me to a pulp.


Don't feel bad, since its the philosophy of way, way less than 1% of the population most people wouldn't be familiar with it. I wasn't really intending to start a big philosophical discussion when I posted that link to the flash game in this thread by the way, I just thought it was a quaint (if overly simple) little game that had a bunch of Mario characters in it doing silly things. I know a lot of people don't like PETA, but I wasn't expecting the overt comparisons to al-Qaeda and really... I didn't know where else to go with discussion at that point.

Anyhow, the philosophy from which such consequences would follow is the philosophy of Leo Tolstoy.  

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
I think you sharply misunderstand Tolstoy and the political, social, and religious environment of which he lived.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: UncleBob
Seriously dude, regardless of your thoughts on PETA, you seriously need to consider seeking out help.  Like, real, professional help.  If you really think that 99+% of people will resort to violence to force their point of view on other people and you have such a deep hatred for human kind, you've seriously got some issues.

Look, I hear ya man... I hate the human race too... but there's the healthy, rational "I hate everyone because I work in customer service and I see how stupid everyone is" kinda hating everyone, then there's your totally not rational thoughts...


I don't hate the human race at all... I'm just realistic about them.

Lets break it down a bit (and I apologize to the foreigners here, but this breakdown will be America-centric)

How many people want violence used, either by the state or private forces, to prevent abortions?

How many people want violence used, either by the state or private forces, to prevent gay people from marrying?

How many people want violence used, either by the state or private forces, to prevent racism?

How many people want violence used, either by the state or private forces, to prevent Mexicans from entering the country?

We can continue this list virtually ad infinitum: Dog fights, to protect intellectual property, to protect the environment, to stop the environmentalists, to stop interracial marriages, to spread democracy, etc.

Now on the other hand, how many people are there who would never use violence to advance some agenda, and would never want someone else doing so in their name?  

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: thatguy
I think you sharply misunderstand Tolstoy and the political, social, and religious environment of which he lived.


If Tolstoy was on this list you'd have already insisted he go get therapy.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
If Tolstoy were on posting in this thread, he'd know from personal experience that there can be good in anyone, even if people don't always show it.

Only a vocal minority believe in using violence for the things you listed.  These minorities combined do not equal a great amount of people, but still can generate a large amount of news.  I will admit there most people on this earth have times where they are angry, and for periods of time, might want to hurt something through violence, however, this periods of time are brief for normal people, and most of the time, self-restraint is used.

On a further note, it is also irresponsible to hold the acts of children to your beliefs, though I believe that privately, you do.  Children can be violent, rambunctious, and energetic, and often times fight because they are too immature adequately express their energy and passions in positive directions.

You have to understand that your experiences are not the only experiences.  That your eyes are not the only eyes out there, and that you could walk in other peoples shoes.  Ask me how many times I've used violence to further any of my ambitions, beliefs, or feelings.  It's none.  At some points, I might become angry, yes, but I never attempted to hurt anyone.  I think that I alone and not a representative for humanity or Americans, but then, ask me how many people I know, then ask how many of them have used violence to further their goals, feelings, or beliefs.  I know tens of thousands of people, and I can think of perhaps ten or twenty tops that I know or even believe have.

I think that if you believe you fall into the '1%' you detail, you assume that it is human nature to be violent, and to use violence as a means to justify a goal.  It is not.  It is human choice.  And the truth is, very few people make the choice for violence to happen.  When they do, they usually make the choice to do so to defend, not destroy.  Oddly enough, you have outlined scenarios where the few who are violent feel they are defending something.  Not themselves, but their god/gods.  Not themselves, but other's children.  Not themselves, but they're spouse.  Not themselves, but people in minorities whose numbers are too small for self-defense.  Not themselves, but their children's future.  Now, I disagree with using violence in these situations, but I have perspective on where it comes from, in a sense.  The defense of the beliefs and people are mishandled.

If I were a father, and a man with a weapon broke into my house, where my children sleep, those who rely on me for food, for knowledge, for strength, and for guidance, would it not be my responsible to strike down the man with the weapon?  Not for my sake, but for that of my children?  Even if I have forsaken violence in my defense, I could not be a guardian for my family if I did not protect them from the attacks of others.  Does this direct defense put me in your '99%?'  Why?  Why not?  Are my ways misguided?  What would you do in that situation?

Now, I am not a father, and I will say this:  If someone were to break into my house this evening, in an attempt to harm me, I would not attack him.  I would attempt to minimize the damage of his attacks, and I would also attempt to call the police, so that he would undergo the USA's justice system.  However, the police might attack him when they arrive.  Would this be wrong?  Why?  Should I just let a man who is walking the wrong path go on with his life?  Wouldn't that be worse than attacking him?

Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
Anyhow, the philosophy from which such consequences would follow is the philosophy of Leo Tolstoy.


Why didn't you mention that in the first place? It seemed you were condoning radical violence at first, which would have been really out there.  But now that you mention Tolstoy, your arguments make much more sense, as you're not condoning any violence or threat of violence. I still don't get the 99% theory, though. I've never heard of that before...  
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline Spak-Spang

  • The Frightened Fox
  • Score: 39
    • View Profile
    • MirandaNew.com
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
Quote

Originally posted by: UncleBob
Seriously dude, regardless of your thoughts on PETA, you seriously need to consider seeking out help.  Like, real, professional help.  If you really think that 99+% of people will resort to violence to force their point of view on other people and you have such a deep hatred for human kind, you've seriously got some issues.

Look, I hear ya man... I hate the human race too... but there's the healthy, rational "I hate everyone because I work in customer service and I see how stupid everyone is" kinda hating everyone, then there's your totally not rational thoughts...


I don't hate the human race at all... I'm just realistic about them.

Lets break it down a bit (and I apologize to the foreigners here, but this breakdown will be America-centric)

How many people want violence used, either by the state or private forces, to prevent abortions?
Violence used?  Very few actually.  Like perhaps 2-3% of the population.  Unless you consider some people that want imprisonment then that number will be higher.

How many people want violence used, either by the state or private forces, to prevent gay people from marrying?

Violence used?  Very few actually.  Like perhaps 2-3% of the population.  Unless you consider some people that want imprisonment then that number will be higher.

How many people want violence used, either by the state or private forces, to prevent racism?

Violence used?  Very few actually.  Like perhaps 5-10% of the population.  Unless you consider some people that want imprisonment then that number will be higher.

How many people want violence used, either by the state or private forces, to prevent Mexicans from entering the country?

Violence used?  Very few actually.  Like perhaps 2-3% of the population.  Unless you consider some people that want imprisonment then that number will be higher.

We can continue this list virtually ad infinitum: Dog fights, to protect intellectual property, to protect the environment, to stop the environmentalists, to stop interracial marriages, to spread democracy, etc.

Violence used?  Very few actually.  Like perhaps 2-3% of the population.  Unless you consider some people that want imprisonment then that number will be higher.

Now on the other hand, how many people are there who would never use violence to advance some agenda, and would never want someone else doing so in their name?


How many people who would NEVER use violence to advance some agenda?  Well if you take War out of the equation, then I would say 80-90% of the population.

I will admit that your results might be different if you mentioned death penality as violence and used examples like Rape, Murder, and all forms voilent crimes.




Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Why would you take war and imprisonment out?  

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: Sir_Stabbalot
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
Anyhow, the philosophy from which such consequences would follow is the philosophy of Leo Tolstoy.


Why didn't you mention that in the first place? It seemed you were condoning radical violence at first, which would have been really out there.  But now that you mention Tolstoy, your arguments make much more sense, as you're not condoning any violence or threat of violence. I still don't get the 99% theory, though. I've never heard of that before...


I mentioned that I was a pacifist fairly early on.  

Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
I mentioned that I was a pacifist fairly early on.


I know, and that made me even more confused. But that was my fault at misunderstanding your stance.
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline decoyman

  • is a raging alcoholic (and Moppy's #1 fan)
  • Score: 8
    • View Profile
Wow, this has gotten way off course. I appreciate the social debate that's going on (though I side with the people thinking that the "99% would use violence" statistic you're citing, jasonditz, is very exaggerated)...

If a "bad" person/organization does something good, should we measure that good thing based on that person/organization, or take it for its own worth?

A couple of points:
1. In this case, PETA is trying to draw attention to the fact that even animals who are to be killed to be used as food deserve humane treatment. Is this a valid stance? To me and many others, YES.
2. If KFC IS doing the things that the game claims (in-game, they failed to list any sources for this info, however), then it should be brought to light so that awareness is raised and conditions improved. This game is their vehicle for information.
3. PETA is not physically harming anyone with this game. Neither is it harming anyone emotionally (like insinuating to children that their parents are evil for fishing), and legally it's only defamation if it's not true (if my memory of Media Law class is holding up).

So. To me, this has gotten way out of hand and is missing the point/relevance of what originally started it: the game. Even if PETA is a horrible organization, this game (Nintendo copyright issues aside) has merit as a healthy means of helping incite social change, and I thank jasonditz for pointing it out.
Twitter
3DS Friend Code: 3067-7420-5671 (Aaronaut)

Offline UERD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

99% would use violence


I've heard the phrase 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' tossed around before. It's especially pertinent here. Ideas and theories are nice, but they are rather irrelevant if they have no explanatory power.

Quote

Is this a valid stance? To me and many others, YES.


It is certainly a valid stance, when taken by its own merits. Coming from an organization that is inherently against the consumption of meat in any form, however, this stance strikes me as disingenuous.

I would rather another organization be advocating for humane food practices. To raise an example: if NAMBLA started advocating for stricter immigration controls, for whatever reason, there would be a lot of conservative pundits banging their heads against their desks.

Quote

in-game, they failed to list any sources for this info, however


Therein lies the problem. PETA has shown itself to be at best, sensationalist, at worst untrustworthy in the past. And the game strikes me as far too gimmicky for an issue that should be taken a lot more seriously. To raise another example: an organization advocating stricter laws against domestic violence should not be raising awareness by creating a 'dodge the wife-beater' Flash game for random people on the Internet.
"I'm looking for shrunken heads w/ DVD playback options. I figure I can hang them in my car like dice. Will you help me?"
- thatguy

"Can you shoot out customizable fireballs? Then why should your Mii be able to?"
- vudu

Offline vudu

  • You'd probably all be better off if I really were dead.
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: -19
    • View Profile
Can't we go back to talking about the boring flash game?
Why must all things be so bright? Why can things not appear only in hues of brown! I am so serious about this! Dull colors are the future! The next generation! I will never accept a world with such bright colors! It is far too childish! I will rage against your cheery palette with my last breath!

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
Wait wait... decoyman... If I eat live babies on a regular basis, then come out and talk about how horrible abortion is, does his mean people should listen to me about how horrible abortion is (assuming I'm using real facts and all)?  I have a hard time listening to a speech from the pot about how black the kettle is....
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline vudu

  • You'd probably all be better off if I really were dead.
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: -19
    • View Profile
Two completely separate things.

If you eat live babies you've at least given the kid a fair chance.  If the baby was better equipped to get away and/or fight back it would still be alive.  Survival of the fittest, and all.

If you attack it in the womb, it's light bombing Pearl Harbor.  Poor bloke wouldn't know what hit 'em.

So ... how about that flash game?
Why must all things be so bright? Why can things not appear only in hues of brown! I am so serious about this! Dull colors are the future! The next generation! I will never accept a world with such bright colors! It is far too childish! I will rage against your cheery palette with my last breath!

Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
That's a tough assessment though, because Human babies are essentially born prematurely, and unable to care for themselves. Now a GIRAFFE baby... as soon as that thing plops out it can stand and walk around. That's fair game. (<--- notice how this line of thinking condones veal)

...incidentally, a Filipino delicacy of which I am very fond is Balut. It's duck eggs, but let grown longer than typical chicken eggs. Then we cook it. We crack open the top, drink the amniotic fluid (it's like salty warm soup!), then continue peeling the shell away to eat the yolk, some albumen, and then the half-developed duck embryo.

If you get a bad one, the embryo has feathers and is totally yucky. Otherwise, it's bones aren't developed so it just comes apart in your mouth. Tastes just like chicken!

mmm so good.
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline vudu

  • You'd probably all be better off if I really were dead.
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: -19
    • View Profile
That's the most disgusting thing I've ever heard.  I want to try it.

EDIT:  OH GOD, MY EYES

Look at that second picture; I can't imagine putting that in my mouth.  I still want to try it.
Why must all things be so bright? Why can things not appear only in hues of brown! I am so serious about this! Dull colors are the future! The next generation! I will never accept a world with such bright colors! It is far too childish! I will rage against your cheery palette with my last breath!

Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
Maybe it's because I've grown up with it, but I don't see what's so bad. It hasn't hatched yet, so it's closest comparison is to a normal chicken egg people eat everyday. But just with a little bit of duck meat and some soup included.
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
On a more crapp-rip off flash game related note:

Quote

Originally mailed by: UncleBob

Hello once again, various Nintendo of America Rep... This recently arrived to my attention and I was really, really hoping that it was not officially endorsed in any way, shape or form.  However, the repeated use of various Nintendo characters and concepts (Mario, Luigi, Peach, Bowser, sound effects like the 1-Up, etc) made me wonder...

http://www.kentuckyfriedcruelty.com/superchicksisters/index.asp

Thanks...



And the quasi-official reply from the random Nintendo of America rep who got this e-mail:

Quote

Originally replied by: Shane from Nintendo

Hello,

At this time, Nintendo is not affiliated with PETA.  I will be sure to pass along your report to our Legal Department for further review.  We appreciate your bringing this issue to our attention.

Sincerely,

Nintendo of America Inc.
Shane O'Neil



Hopefully this travesty of a game will be removed soon.  Download it while you can.  Or better yet, don't.
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Nice work unclebob=D

That translates to: "Our legal department is going to kick their sorry ass all over the place and make em take it down".

::thumbs up::

Offline Darkheart

  • Darkheart
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
I just want facts.  I see no links to research studies here that go with any of these numbers being spewed and IF you decide to give me research studies IT HAS TO BE from a REAL study, none of those college study reports.

I had several paragraphs I was writing about the issues stated on the previous page but erased it due to it being risque on breaking forum policies.  I do not want to discuss taboo subjects.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Is every Nintendo customer service rep privy to every single licensing deal the company has signed?


Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
I'm willing to bet that if there was the slightest chance Nintendo had licensed anything to PETA, the random rep would not have said something about forwarding info about the game on to their legal team.  That's not the kind of thing low level customer service reps throw around.
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #104 on: August 25, 2007, 05:14:50 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: darkheart
I just want facts.  I see no links to research studies here that go with any of these numbers being spewed and IF you decide to give me research studies IT HAS TO BE from a REAL study, none of those college study reports.

I had several paragraphs I was writing about the issues stated on the previous page but erased it due to it being risque on breaking forum policies.  I do not want to discuss taboo subjects.


Are you asking about my numbers? They're based on this:

How many absolute pacifists are there in the United States or on the planet? Everyone else, by definition, is willing to use violence in some case or other or at the very least wants someone else to do so in their name.

I'd be fascinated in knowing exactly how many of us there are either in the country or on the planet. Sadly, there is no polling data available to that effect (since a good chunk of America's pacifists are of anabaptist churches that eschew technology, I can't exactly commission a telephone poll and expect a reliable result). However I would be shocked, absolutely shocked, if it was anywhere near 1% of the population.

That'd be 3 million pacifists in the United States alone. Can there possibly be that many? My experience says absolutely not, and my own attempts at calculation, while having a pretty big margin of error, turn up at the high end about a quarter that amount: and to even get that many we need to assume that every member of the traditionally pacifist churches in the United States is an absolute pacifist.



Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
Quote

'd be fascinated in knowing exactly how many of us there are either in the country or on the planet. Sadly, there is no polling data available to that effect


Same for your claim.

Your argument has absolutely no basis of truth. And again here is your statement:

Quote

Using violence to force others to agree with one's point of view hardly seems extremist. As I said before... 99%+ of people are willing to do that.


Which, while being very broad, has no basis of being true. Nor is there any data to prove otherwise.

Hypothetical statistics fail at everything.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
I wasn't aware we had someone else with a degree in mathematics in the discussion. My estimates aren't pulled from thin air but are based on the data that is available (culled from numerous sources), and while they may be rough I can assure you that the margin of error is nowhere near so large as to make three million absolute pacifists living in the United States a remote possibility.

If you have a piece of data suggesting that this is the case I would urge you to present it... as it would be both exceedingly relevant to the discussion at hand and of considerable personal interest.  

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
But it's all hypothetical, big deal.

Hypothetically I could go out and kill 100 people, hypothetically I could never do an act of violence in my life, blah blah.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #108 on: August 25, 2007, 06:07:39 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Mashiro
But it's all hypothetical, big deal.

Hypothetically I could go out and kill 100 people, hypothetically I could never do an act of violence in my life, blah blah.


I think you may be mistaken about the definition of that word, hypothetically speaking.

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #109 on: August 25, 2007, 06:23:31 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
Quote

Originally posted by: Mashiro
But it's all hypothetical, big deal.

Hypothetically I could go out and kill 100 people, hypothetically I could never do an act of violence in my life, blah blah.


I think you may be mistaken about the definition of that word, hypothetically speaking.


How so.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
The statistics in question are not "hypothetical"... they are real statistics derived from real statistical analysis.

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #111 on: August 25, 2007, 07:27:54 PM »
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
The statistics in question are not "hypothetical"... they are real statistics derived from real statistical analysis.


You haven't provided any hard evidence that they are real . . .

You have to cite documents and such in order to build a decent argument.

Saying something is true and saying why it is without any supporting evidence =/= truth.

Offline UERD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
But those statistics don't mean a thing. If anything, there were far more people adamant against any US war involvement on December 6, 1941, than on December 8, 1941 (a day after the attack on Pearl Harbor). Maybe 1% of the US population consists of dedicated pacifists, but out of that remaining 99% there is a big, big chunk that would only agree to the military using force for the purpose of defending the nation, or use of deadly force by police in situations where innocent life is at risk.

And while any use of violence is an unappetizing prospect, the prospect of doing nothing and just allowing one's livelihood or even life taken from them without any sort of resistance is even more unpalatable. So your '99%' assertion is a straw man, designed to conjure images of masked murderers and depraved felons willing to hurt the innocent. A defensive war entails 'violence', but it is the kind of 'violence' that most people are (rightfully) willing to tolerate.
"I'm looking for shrunken heads w/ DVD playback options. I figure I can hang them in my car like dice. Will you help me?"
- thatguy

"Can you shoot out customizable fireballs? Then why should your Mii be able to?"
- vudu

Offline KDR_11k

  • boring person
  • Score: 28
    • View Profile
... let's Godwin this thing already...

Hitler said the invasion of Poland was a defensive war.

Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
Well, it was... Had he not invaded Poland, chances are, Poland would have joined Russia against Germany.

And, to be fair, Bush said the invasion of Iraq was a defensive war.

Anywhoo, I think jason is being extremist when it comes to defining the nature of people.  Just because you're not a pacifist doesn't mean you're a violent extremist.  It's not an issue of black or white.  Jason, you claim to be pacifist, but if I smacked you upside the head, would you do nothing?

If I smacked your mother upside the head, would you do nothing?

If I kicked your pregnant wife in the stomach, would you do nothing?
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #115 on: August 26, 2007, 03:40:22 AM »
Quote

Originally posted by: UERD
But those statistics don't mean a thing. If anything, there were far more people adamant against any US war involvement on December 6, 1941, than on December 8, 1941 (a day after the attack on Pearl Harbor). Maybe 1% of the US population consists of dedicated pacifists, but out of that remaining 99% there is a big, big chunk that would only agree to the military using force for the purpose of defending the nation, or use of deadly force by police in situations where innocent life is at risk.

And while any use of violence is an unappetizing prospect, the prospect of doing nothing and just allowing one's livelihood or even life taken from them without any sort of resistance is even more unpalatable. So your '99%' assertion is a straw man, designed to conjure images of masked murderers and depraved felons willing to hurt the innocent. A defensive war entails 'violence', but it is the kind of 'violence' that most people are (rightfully) willing to tolerate.


Its perplexing that you would simultaneously argue that the distinction between pacifists and non-pacifists who only use violence for what is in your estimation good reasons is meaningless and toss out a tired rehashing of the "pacifists are bad" line.

Also, just because you like some forms of violence doesn't mean my pointing out that its still violence constitutes a straw man.  

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #116 on: August 26, 2007, 03:53:08 AM »
Quote

Originally posted by: UncleBob

Anywhoo, I think jason is being extremist when it comes to defining the nature of people.  Just because you're not a pacifist doesn't mean you're a violent extremist.  It's not an issue of black or white.


I never said they were violent extremists, I said that they behave in much the same way PETA does, which is to say they've all got something for which either they are willing to use violence or for which they'd cheer someone else on in the use of violence.


Offline Sir_Stabbalot

  • Posts: 28
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #117 on: August 26, 2007, 03:53:29 AM »
There's a bit of a clash of ideologies here. Is violence ever justified? On one hand, right now it's logical to have laws in place to prevent violent crimes, but on the other hand it's still violence when enforcing it. After all, the lesser of two evils is still an evil.

Me? I don't know. The most recent example of a just war I can think of (the Allied effort in WWII) may not have been needed if an unjust war (WWI) hadn't been fought.  
"I am going away, but the State will always remain" - Louis XIV, on his deathbed.

"Chimps are like fine wine: I drink them both." - A friend of a friend of mine.

Offline UERD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Quote

Its perplexing that you would simultaneously argue that the distinction between pacifists and non-pacifists who only use violence for what is in your estimation good reasons is meaningless and toss out a tired rehashing of the "pacifists are bad" line.


No, you don't get it. Functionally speaking, a lot of people who would not call themselves pacifists will hold positions on the use of armed conflict during peacetime that are identical to those of pacifists. In certain, exceptional situations, though, their viewpoints will diverge- and that's where the value judgment comes in. There are people who protested the Iraq War, who would not be against advocating the use of force if, for example, Russia just one day sent five divisions across the Bering Strait and began razing Alaskan and Canadian cities one by one. And there are people who protested the war, who would be against using force in that situation.

Quote

Also, just because you like some forms of violence doesn't mean my pointing out that its still violence constitutes a straw man.


Yes, it is. Earlier in the thread, this is what you said:

Quote

99% of the people in the world are terrible people.

Quote

I just said that 99%+ of people are hypocritical about one thing or another

Quote

Using violence to force others to agree with one's point of view hardly seems extremist. As I said before... 99%+ of people are willing to do that.


Your definition of 'violence' or 'violent people' is clearly not the same as mine. I hardly think a defensive war counts as 'forcing a view upon someone else using violence'- unless that view happens to be 'you can't kill my family and take my land without good reason'.

So what you're saying is this:

- 99% of people are willing to use violence to force their views on others.
- 99% of people are 'terrible' (we'll take that to mean that their worldviews are wrong).

Where does that leave the 'defensive war' people? We'll take the first extreme: complete overlap between those two groups. Either sharing that 1% with the pacifists (which makes the number far too small) or in that 99% of violence-imposing people (which contradicts the definition). Neither makes any sense at all. If we take the second extreme (least overlap possible), we come to an even stranger conclusion.

Quote

The most recent example of a just war I can think of (the Allied effort in WWII) may not have been needed if an unjust war (WWI) hadn't been fought.


You're talking about the European theatre of war. We should remember that it was the Asian theatre of war that drew the US into the war in the first place.  
"I'm looking for shrunken heads w/ DVD playback options. I figure I can hang them in my car like dice. Will you help me?"
- thatguy

"Can you shoot out customizable fireballs? Then why should your Mii be able to?"
- vudu

Offline Mashiro

  • Silent Protagonist
  • Score: 1
    • View Profile
And yet Jason still does not provide citation for his so called factual numbers.

Still waiting on some sources there buddy.

Offline decoyman

  • is a raging alcoholic (and Moppy's #1 fan)
  • Score: 8
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #120 on: August 26, 2007, 08:09:29 AM »
Quote

Originally posted by: UncleBob
Wait wait... decoyman... If I eat live babies on a regular basis, then come out and talk about how horrible abortion is, does his mean people should listen to me about how horrible abortion is (assuming I'm using real facts and all)?  I have a hard time listening to a speech from the pot about how black the kettle is....


Well, that's the question, UB, and it's a philosophical one, I admit. Your metaphor is flawed, however, and a bit extreme. A better comparison would be if you regularly had abortions (gender-specific impossibilities aside, of course ), then maybe had a change of heart and went on the pill so you wouldn't have to have abortions anymore. If you then went off about how horrible abortion is, you may very well be considered a hypocrite. On the other hand, if your scientific reasoning was well-researched and accurate, why would you be any different from any of the scientists, politicians, etc. whose positive social impacts live on to this day despite their personal shortcomings?

Now, it's one thing to categorize a person. It isn't (or shouldn't, at least) be so easy to categorize a group made up of diverse individuals. PETA undoubtedly has members who aren't so fanatical and crazy – people who are genuinely trying to do the right thing. If this came from them as a means to positively promote their views, why should we not take it for what it's worth?

There are other problems with this game, but for me, the fact that it's from PETA doesn't preclude me from at least considering its worth. Come on, talk about the message's REAL shortcomings (like lack of citing evidence for these claims) before you discredit the whole thing. Saying, "Oh, it's from PETA, don't pay any attention to it," just shows shortsightedness. Come on, I'm up for debating this, but you guys are going to have to give me a better counter-argument than that.

Edit: UERD (and others) have said it well.
Twitter
3DS Friend Code: 3067-7420-5671 (Aaronaut)

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #121 on: August 26, 2007, 08:27:57 AM »
Quote

Originally posted by: Mashiro
And yet Jason still does not provide citation for his so called factual numbers.

Still waiting on some sources there buddy.


I'm too lazy to find online versions of all my sources, here's the sort of methodology used, however:

The are 300,000 Quakers on the planet, according to the Quakers themselves. They also say approximately 1/3 of them live in North America. This seems to agree with the claims of a University of Virginia study that said there are "fewer than 100,000 Quakers in the United States".

Quakers are typically a peace church... the bulk of its members would be pacifists. Since I'm interested in knowing the maximum number of pacifists there are in the United States, I'll give every member the benefit of the doubt. I'll also use 100,000 even though we know there's less. That's 100,000 people.

And then i go down the list of traditional peace churches in the United States. I get somewhere around 500,000 members of traditional peace churches.

Likewise, a cursory glance of pacifist discussions (many of which I've been a part of) reveals that the vast majority of pacifists in them are members of traditional peace churches. In my experience it's somewhere between 10:1 or 8:1 ratio. And this is without considering that a large number of those 500,000 peace church members are in churches that totally eschew modern technology and the outside world and therefore don't often engage in discussions. This suggests that there are likely far fewer than 50,000 pacifists in the united states that aren't members of traditional peace churches. The margin of error on this estimate is one of the biggest variables in my calculations though, and given the relatively small portion of pacifists I've run into in the antiwar movement and in other discussions... this is perhaps off by as much as 200,000.

My estimate of how many there most likely are is 400,000-500,000... my maximum, assuming all the margins of error are underestimations, would be around 750,000. This is 0.25% of the population of the United States. My minimum is 200,000, or less than 0.1% of the population of the United States.




Offline UncleBob

  • (PATRON)
  • NWR Junior Ranger
  • Score: 98
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #122 on: August 26, 2007, 09:34:48 AM »
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
I never said they were violent extremists, I said that they behave in much the same way PETA does, which is to say they've all got something for which either they are willing to use violence or for which they'd cheer someone else on in the use of violence.


You think 99% of the population behaves in the same way PETA does.... by planting explosives and killing innocent people because they disagree with them?
Just some random guy on the internet who has a different opinion of games than you.

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #123 on: August 26, 2007, 11:22:30 AM »
Quote

Originally posted by: UncleBob
Quote

Originally posted by: jasonditz
I never said they were violent extremists, I said that they behave in much the same way PETA does, which is to say they've all got something for which either they are willing to use violence or for which they'd cheer someone else on in the use of violence.


You think 99% of the population behaves in the same way PETA does.... by planting explosives and killing innocent people because they disagree with them?


PETA has done no such thing. I think this bizarre consensus that has developed here that PETA is essentially al-Qaeda for vegetarians is a source of a lot of the disagreement here.

Offline UERD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
RE:Nintendo, 2d platformers, evil Colonel Sanders Spiders, what's not to like?
« Reply #124 on: August 26, 2007, 11:27:05 AM »
Animal Liberation Front
Earth Liberation Front

Also from the PETA article:

Quote

Ingrid Newkirk is firm in her support of direct action. Both she and PETA have been criticized for providing financial support to Animal Liberation Front (ALF) activists when they were faced with legal action against them...PETA funds individual activists and activist groups, some with "links to extremists."[22] This includes links to the ALF and Earth Liberation Front (ELF), which the Counterterrorism department of the United States Federal Bureau of Investigation have named as "special interest extremism organizations" and "as a serious terrorist threat.[25]

Rod Coronado, a former ALF activist, received $64,000 from the group and two months later another $38,240 as a loan which has never been paid back to fund his legal defense when he was convicted of having set fire to a Michigan State University research lab in 1992. PETA claimed a tax refund from the Internal Revenue Service for the donation after the arson took place


If you want the sources, you can go to the original article, which is well-documented.  
"I'm looking for shrunken heads w/ DVD playback options. I figure I can hang them in my car like dice. Will you help me?"
- thatguy

"Can you shoot out customizable fireballs? Then why should your Mii be able to?"
- vudu

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Funding individuals and activist groups with "links to extremists" is not the same thing as launching a campaign of bombings against innocent people.  

Offline UERD

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Wasn't it you who lumped 'people willing to use violence' and 'people willing to encourage others to use violence' together? Anyways, this is worse than moral support: material support (in the form of funding). Close enough, I say. Read the article, and you will find that the 'links to extremists' are a lot less tenuous than you would make them out to be.

But I digress. We are here to make fun of Sony and complain about how Nintendo is catering only to non-gamers, not to discuss politics, after all. And I've already done my part in derailing another recent thread. So it's probably high time for me to bail out before things get any more heated.
"I'm looking for shrunken heads w/ DVD playback options. I figure I can hang them in my car like dice. Will you help me?"
- thatguy

"Can you shoot out customizable fireballs? Then why should your Mii be able to?"
- vudu

Offline jasonditz

  • Score: 0
    • View Profile
Lumped together as the alternative to pacifism, sure. We can say ham and apples are both not oranges without implying that the two are the same. Close enough, in some peoples' estimations, perhaps... but I bet we can still spot the difference between a ham and an apple if we look real hard.



Offline Kairon

  • T_T
  • NWR Staff Pro
  • Score: 48
    • View Profile
W.T.H.
Carmine Red, Associate Editor

A glooming peace this morning with it brings;
The sun, for sorrow, will not show his head:
Go hence, to have more talk of these sad things;
Some shall be pardon'd, and some punished:
For never was a story of more woe
Than this of Sega and her Mashiro.

Offline that Baby guy

  • He's a real Ei-Ei-Poo!
  • Score: 379
    • View Profile
Quote

GAINESVILLE, FL - The College Republicans of the University of Florida will be kicking off the school year by holding their 4th Bi-Annual P.E.T.A. (People Eating Tasty Animals) Barbeque at the Plaza of the Americas on UF’s campus on Friday, August 31st at 11:30am.

The group will be distributing free barbeque lunches courtesy of David's BBQ Restaurant and talking to students about the hypocritical and absurd positions of the PETA (“People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals”) organization.

The whimsical and consistently popular event does not intend to demean vegetarianism or concern for the general animal welfare, but rather seeks to highlight and debunk the radical positions of PETA and the “animal rights” movement.

Many citizens, college students especially, consider themselves supportive of "animal rights" and PETA, yet aren’t aware of the organization’s true nature. Few students are aware that the organization's president has compared eating meat to the Holocaust, referred to the human race as a “cancer” on the earth, and refused to condemn dangerous eco-terrorist groups. Few self-described animal rights activists know that PETA has “euthanized" over 14,000 animals since 1997, including many of the animals the organization "liberates" from testing facilities.


I can't remember if it said ham or apples would be served, though.  I'm debating going.