Scotty

Winner winner chicken dinner!

Well she's already got Word of Edward that undead aren't an issue, so she's just taking care of the "dead" part.

It's got more spikes, but I would expect having the bulk of the hammer wood made it easier to handle. Though Susan's summoned hammers probably aren't actual weight anyway. The vampires in EGS aren't undead though.

Fried chicken skin is the best part of the chicken. :P~~~

In Susan's case, she was recently given reason to think about her insecurities and how they affect her socially, to the point where she's trying to not let physical contact bother her. It would make sense if she would be looking at how she reacted to questionable sanitary conditions of things. Though maybe the two are connected, like other people touched those surfaces so if Susan touched those surfaces, it'd be as if dozens of people had just touched her?

I'll admit, there is a lot of posturing that happens after a tragedy. But it would be prudent to try to make the necessary changes so that more tragedies wouldn't happen. Use all that energy from trying to look good for the cameras for actually going over the amendment and determine if it's being interpreted accurately. The thing is though, even if there wasn't a political statement being made here, it still generated a level of fear that any ISIS suicide bomber would do, and I can't see how we shouldn't treat it as any differently, an act of terror is an act of terror. The vegas shooter might not have had any political reasons for doing what he did, but he still had the intent of killing as many people as he could before anyone could get to him, and then killed himself which would suggest that he didn't want to give them the satisfaction of either taking him alive, or killing him themselves. To me, that's terrorism. But they do have control, it's called the media, it's been explained on numerous occasions why they do what they do and how it's not aimed at the military, but if the general public choose to ignore that then who's actually being disrepectful here? It goes back to that mentality of deciding who's allowed to get away with certain actions. I get that people want to be able to defend themselves and their country and have the ability to oppose a tyrannical government. That much is a given. But how can you guarantee the right to do so when that right can be misused so easily. That's why I said earlier that I felt that the 2nd Amendment was being abused, the shooter used his right to buy the guns which he then used to kill fellow Americans. He single handedly turned the 2nd Amendment on itself. If that can't be prevented, is it really worth having? To be able to have an effective 2nd Amendment, everyone, EVERYONE, should be held responsible for the safety of not only themselves, but their fellow citizens, no matter if they're white, black or LGBTQ or any other groups. But that would require dealing with more than just the 2nd Amendment part of the constitution. In terms of Collections, there's a level of responsibility in the care and display that greatly differs depending on the collection, usually it correlates to the potential harm a collection can do to others. As far as I can tell, no one has ever gone on a killing spree where the method of killing was by giving everyone severe papercuts with MTG cards, so of course no one is going to be demanding regulations on how many cards you can own, though the game itself is regulated pretty well at least in tournament settings. Someone with a sword/knife collection would of course be expected to take care in how they store and display pieces as well. And while yes, crimes committed with knives are very numerous as well, attackers with knives or swords don't get anywhere near the kill counts as attackers with guns. Guns allow attackers to kill from a distance without immediate danger to themselves, that's what makes them scarier.

The last time we saw Diane and Charlotte, Diane was apologizing for the way she treated her, of course Charlotte coming to Diane's defense helped, but it still made her think twice about what she said. I don't think she'll say anything judgemental to Susan about it, she might start to think about it, but then catch herself before actually saying anything. I wouldn't be surprised if Susan said something first, like "You must think I'm weird for being like this, not exactly a good first impression." And maybe in response, Diane tells Susan about how she used to string boys along and adding that she's not perfect either. Might be a bottle of hand sanitizer in her coat pocket?

It was a comic convention, I think there was some anime though, at the very least they did have some Lucky Bunny Bounty stuff.

In the context of EGS, that's a theory in the same sense that "water turns to ice if you get it cold enough" is a theory... But then we wouldn't have this slay:

Turns out ST:Discovery was picked up by SPACE for airing in Canada, so if anyone wants to watch that but refuses to sign up for CBS's streaming service.

It was in Canada on various channels over the years CityTV took on the nickname "The Federation Station" and aired reruns of TNG DS9 and Voyager in pairs of 2 episodes from Monday to Friday until SPACE became Canada's sci-fi channel.

I didn't say anything about it being when it originally aired, she could have still seen the rerun at a young age.

One possibilty, and this goes towards Susan's love of Star Trek, the character Reginald Barclay was a known Hypochondriac and in the episode "Genesis" he's given a synthetic T-cell to try to boost his immune system which ends up causing him and the rest of the crew to "de-evolve". If Susan was young enough when she saw that episode, it might have left a lasting impression on her, she might even subconsiously emulate Barclay's behaviour.

That's the real problem, people state that they need to be able to defend themselves, but when the enemy has assault rifles, the people demand that the 2nd amendment allow them to have assault rifles. The problem is, the US military is so large and so advanced, that that the general population would have no hope in hell to overthrow the government if the government has the full support of the military. That doesn't make be feel any safer that there could be an American citizen that's either mentally unstable or just says "F my life" and wants to take as many people down with them. That's already been happening in terms of Law Enforcement shooting first and asking questions later, a black kid playing around with a toy gun? "Oh, I didn't know it was a toy until after I killed them", another black person arrested or killed for carrying a firearm in an area where open carry is allowed with no provocation other that "I felt threatened by him having a gun". This is why athletes are taking knees during anthems, if the 2nd amendment is for all Americans, then this "cherry picking" of which Americans it applies to is violating that. I really hate to say this, but I wonder if the US as a culture is mature enough to have the 2nd amendment if it can't be responsible with how it treats it's citizens. And sorry to change the subject, but the US Commerce department just slapped an 80% "Anti-Dumping" duty on Bombardier on top of the 220% countervailing tariff, so when Bombardier goes to deliver it's planes to Delta, the US would essentially get the planes not only for free, but Bombardier will be paying the US to take them.

Sarah was able to do that to Susan, though that wasn't canon.

I don't disagree with that, there's definitely a need to find out what caused the person to act the way they did, but also there's a need to find out how they were able to do it, how easy it was to get that many weapons into a hotel room, but you can't ignore how easy it was for the person to obtain all those weapons. "We do NOT want to do that fresh on the heels of a tragedy because that's when impulsive, "act in haste, repent at leisure" sort of lawmaking is done." We don't? So a major natural disaster happen, that kills hundreds or thousands of people and millions or billions in damage, and we shouldn't try to think of ways to prevent it from happening again? If an office building collapses despite conforming to building codes, shouldn't those codes be revised? If hundreds of people get sick because food/water was contaminated, should we not look at improving quality control and sanitation protocol? A lot of times laws and codes are made based on the assumption that it's good enough, until it's suddenly not, laws and codes set up 200 years ago are based on how many people there were in the country, how tall buildings were, and how much pollution affected the food supply, those laws and codes could not hope to survive long as expansion took place, but more often than not, it took for something to fail to make people revise those laws and codes. With the 2nd Amendment, it seems to go the other way, people are lobbying for it to be easier to own a gun, any gun they want, and as many guns as they want, and to be able to carry them wherever they want. That's not the culture I feel the 2nd Amendment was intending to make. The quote of "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" is the first part of the 2nd Amendment, but everyone's focused on the second part "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." So we have a bit of a paradox in that how can you regulate something, while at the same time...not regulate it, because regulation means restriction, which would be an infringement. As it stands now, there is no actual militia in the US it's all in the various branches of the US armed forces. So what really is the purpose of the 2nd Amendment? Why is it so important that people hoard guns? Of course that's how terrorism works, but the government isn't treating the vegas shooting as terrorism, if the shooter wasn't an American citizen everyone would be clamouring at the government to close borders and ban immigration as it was already close to doing recently. Terrorism is terrorism, no matter who commits the act, and it needs to be dealt with equally. I dunno if the concert itself was a gun free zone, but the hotel that the shooter stayed at was a gun free zone, no one checked him for guns though and he carried 10 bags of them in. and even if the concert wasn't gun free, from where the shoot was located, it wouldn't have mattered if 1 or 10 or 50 concert goers had guns with them, they wouldn't have located where the shots were coming from quickly enough and they'd most likely get picked off before they had a chance. the security guard that attempted to get to the guy after hearing the first few shots was shot himself before he got to the door because the shooter had a camera in the hall to warn him. In the image I posted, yes they likely didn't intend on being disrepectful and aren't aware that it was, but the football players and teams are making a point in that how can they respect something that doesn't respect them, so the best way to tell everyone how they feel, is to show everyone that they can't stand like Americans if they aren't treated like Americans. It's one thing to apply a mentality to a game or comic, or film. But an entirely different thing when it applies to real life circumstances. I can handle reading about 30th century mercs, I can handle playing a game where you shoot up other players. What I can't handle is knowing someone has a stockpile of guns in their house with absolutely no guarantee that they won't go on a shooting spree in 5, 10, 15 or so years because they one day said "F it!"

And I'm sure that people would say that if you must control the types of guns a person can own, then you must control the types of vehicles a person can drive, but isn't that already the case for vehicles? I mean, in Canada, we have vehicles classified under different categories based on size, weight, purpose, etc, the G license is for cars and trucks weighing up to 11000kg and can tow up to 4600kg, a D license allows for vehicles over 11000kg (though same towed restriction), class F and C are for transit buses (F being max 24 passenger, C for more the 24), E and B class for School purpose buses (E being max 24 passenger, B for more than 24) Incidentally, each class is tiered rather than specific to the types of vehicles they allow, so a B license would count for being qualified to drive G, D, F, C and E class vehicles. A class A license is needed for tractor-trailers or trucks larger than 11000kg and towing more than 4600kg and counts toward a G, D and a lot of time you hear the term A-Z license which means the driver is qualified to drive large trucks equipped with air brakes. I know from some American friends who are truckers that they had to go through some rigorous training to be able to drive a transport so I'm under the assumption that there a similar licensing system. It's not easy for just anyone to get a hold of a large truck and be able to run over a crowd of people, and chances are a person who's unqualified to drive a large truck might end up damaging the truck and making it undrivable before they can get to the crowd. And for smaller vehicles, well it happened in Charlottesville and there were some fatalities, so do we go back to horse and buggy for travel? Walking? The purpose of the 2nd Amendment was so that the US could have "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" and while this is probably purely just an outsider's view of things, I look at whats been happening over the past 20 or so years and I can't for the life of me believe that "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" exists. If being able to hoard guns is supposed to make things safer, why does the idea of traveling to the US scare me? There were at least 4 Canadians killed in the Vegas shooting, I have family and friends that have traveled to Vegas numerous times, they could have been caught in that. The main argument for taking a knee is that people consider it disrepectful to the flag and military, except that members of the military have state that taking a knee is the best way to go for those that want to protest against something they believe is unjust. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/09/25/anthem-kneeling-isnt-aimed-veterans-and-other-nfl-protest-misconceptions/701409001/ No one seems to be bothered by the fact that the American flag gets much more disrepect from the general populace outside of football teams. Quote from https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/8 " (d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery." It goes back to what I said about the 2nd Amendment and my view that it's not being applied in the way it was intended. The Vegas shooter was reported to have had 47 guns, many modified with extended magizines, the guy apparently was able to walk into the hotel where there were signs posted saying that weapons were prohibited, carrying ten bags full of weapons, and proceeded to set up his hotel room with surveillance cameras and no one thought to question it? I would imagine that someone might have offered to help carry some of it and were refused, or was allowed and found the bags rather heavy? Either way that should have raised a number of questions. You think there's nothing wrong with people saying "there's no such thing as overkill"? I would argue that the Vegas shooting was overkill, that even if miraculously only 1 person died in that, it was overkill, because it didn't need to happen. Same goes for the Orlando shooting last year, and other mass shootings that have happened. Incidentally, it wasn't on the Official EVE Forums that these were being posted in, the group had it's own website and forums, so the moderators were also members, and some even participated in that thread, it was like how ToH participates these forums: Sort of.

I though Walter did a pretty good job of being a mature Chekov in the Trek films, in the series you could tell he was a rookie officer, but in the films you could tell he had years of experience. Frakes did a pretty good job at portraying both William and Thomas. It made sense for Thomas to be the way he was because of the situation he was in, he thought more about surviving as well as the people he cared about, while William end up focusing more on career. (incidentally I wonder if the William/Thomas plot was inspiration for Elliot/Ellen, considering the latter are duplicates of the former, and Thomas ended up going rogue though Ellen failed to go rogue) To be honest though, I think Brent Spiner was the most creative in terms of the number of different character types he could portray, not only did he do the Data/Lore stuff really well, but there was that one episode where Data took on the personalities of numerous people from an ancient civilization.

I was basing that response on the possibility of Justin's theory being true and Susan and Diane's affinities and appearance was due to Magic thinking it'd be dramatic. throughout the comic I got the impression that everything that was happening, all the drama, was created by the characters and Magic was adjusting to fit what was happening by rewarding those who are willing to take chances (Ellen's super amped up beam transforming Vlad into Vladia, Nanase fighting for Ellen and getting her guardian form, Ellen seeing that Nanase was about to sacrifice herself and choosing to stand with her thus being allowed to copy the guardian form, etc). The stuff like spontaneous hair colour changes and such are there to remind us that Magic does have a lighthearted sense of humour for after the drama. Justin's theory would suggest that Magic only cares about drama and would go as far as to set up a situation to see what happens later. Of course, all evidence from Pandora's meeting with Heka and her behavior afterwards very strongly implies that she had learned that Susan and Diane are related to Adrian, even Jerry's renewed eagerness to make sure nothing happened to Susan, after his meeting with whom I'm certain was Pandora, reinforces that. Kinda? What I meant was, because Diane didn't know that Susan dyed her hair, she could still assume that Susan's hair was black and that any hint of blue might be dismissed as the way light hits it or maybe there isn't enough light to show the blue tint. Yes natural hair colours do have more variety in EGS but that still doesn't mean someone wouldn't mistake one colour for another sometimes.

I wonder if Dan had Diane say "black" intentionally though. Diane didn't know that Susan died her hair and could have easily mistaken the very dark blue for black.

Ashley's fantasy can be taken as a political statement made by Ashley, but I don't believe that it was ever Dan's intention to make it an actual political statement. The fact that he allows his characters to have certain political views in the world they live in, does not have to reflect on actual politics in the world we live in. Maybe Dan's walking a very thin line in this case, but I think if he wanted to make an actual statement, he'd take a more serious approach like having characters discuss the issue, rather than having someone write up a fantasy where the issue is swept under the rug by way of magic. I guess I should have been more clear that the tweet I linked was suppose to be separate from the previous discussion, not an extension of it. I guess it didn't help what with the way I ended the previous paragraph, I saw the tweet just before I saw your response and I wanted to respond back to you as well as comment on the tweet, sorry. I was mainly ridiculing the fact that she(Kennedy) brought up the idea of "truck control" as it seemed apparent that she didn't consider the fact that vehicle registration, licensing, insurance, and training/testing exists which is what people want with gun control. What bugs me is that the constitution was supposed to have been put in place to ensure that US citizens had the freedom to live without fear of oppression and that they all had the chance to be successful, and yet I can't shake the feeling that people have ignored parts of it in favour of abusing other parts and I firmly believe that the freedom of speech (as in not enough people heed #1357) and second amendment have been getting abused quite a bit lately. And it really bugs me when I hear people talking about their gun collections like it was some sort of e-peen contest, seriously, back when I played EVE online regularly, there was a corp I was with who's forums had a thread dedicated to members posting pictures of themselves sitting in a room surrounded by guns and ammunition boxes with the sentiment that there was no such thing as overkill.

While that is a valid statement, I think what makes this different, is the fact that Ashley would never actually do something like that, but at the same time she would be expressing a desire that certain people in power could see how laws they they make affect others. I sure Ashley isn't the only one that does so and the fantasy likely varies from laws affecting equal rights, to health care, to....well....it can only get darker, right? In other ....news...: It must be nice when you have other people to drive you places so you don't know what it's like to own and operate a vehicle....

The thing is though, Dan did warn us on Monday to wait till Wednesday to find out where he was going with it, people still immediately thought he was making a political statement when he wasn't. He was creating a backdrop for a character who was creating an exaggerated political situation for the purpose of a fantasy fiction. And to top it off, the joke was made that Ashley would be the one that would be getting comments about it being a political statement. Is there really a political statement being made here?

It's possible, the only evidence we have of Noriko's appearance is from a flashback, I would suspect that Tedd's memory of what his mom looked like might be deep in his subconscious and that he might not even realize that he designed the form in her image. I don't expect Edward to have kept any photos of Noriko out for people (including Tedd) to see.

I doubt she'd be mad at Susan, there's no reason to as she just met her, she might be frustrated by the situation though. Consider a little over "2 weeks ago" when Diane got the Private Message from Susan and how she felt after reading it, she seemed pretty sure that Susan must have been her sister, but now she was told about Magic having a flair for the dramatic and she might be questioning whether this has been one big troll*. I wonder if Susan will mention Justin's theory about it, and if so I wonder if Diane will ask how Susan know's Justin. Also gotta wonder if Susan will mention anything about the growth spurt being possibly due to her awakening as well since Diane already mentioned Susan being taller. I also wonder if Diane will say anything about being the one that defended Elliot in the comments and being the one that Susan messaged. *To be honest, I'm not sure if Magic would troll like that. Making someone's hair colour different from what they'd expect is harmless, Two rival wizards who trained together looking similar is also fairly harmless. But making everyone believe that 2 people are related and then being "HAHA Fooled You!!!" is pretty cruel. Magic has a flair for the dramatic yes, but I don't think it goes out of it's way to create drama**, but would rather reward those that face situations in a dramatic fashion. In the case of Susan's awakening, Magic didn't cause it to happen, but rather rolled with what was happening because it was dramatic so I put the effect it had on her hair as harmless. **One could argue that making it known that you're about to change the system would be creating drama, but I wonder if the WoM wanting magic to be known to only a fraction of the population would be because it wants to keep dramatic moments from becoming too common and devaluing whatever cool stuff that could happen. If everyone knew about magic, it wouldn't be long before things that were once considered miracles to become "meh it was just magic" and magic would become stale and boring. The WoM might accept responsibility for causing some drama in that case.