Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
61
Information Kiosk / Re: Want To Be Unbanned
« on: June 06, 2008, 11:52:14 pm »I'll upload all vids to youtube.Well, for starters, how about emailing me your Sonic Rush photos?
I was more concerned with:
Quote from: elecmouse101 at 6:10:24
I'm even uploading some vids now. Just unban me and proof WILL come.
Which means he has videos on youtube by now but he won't show us them or something. :(
62
Hiya Folks / Re: Hey!
« on: June 06, 2008, 10:34:52 am »
Hello Sorreltail and yes PPA you are and always is. No amount of crying wolf will help you now.
63
Competition Central / Re: itt I need a break from TSC...
« on: June 01, 2008, 04:50:45 pm »
At these last couple posts.
64
Bugs / Attachments
« on: May 31, 2008, 10:03:37 pm »
The attachment option still works but, it is missing it's text.
65
Competition Central / Re: Sonic 2 Ultimate
« on: May 31, 2008, 09:08:22 pm »
5 seconds into the hack reveals that Sonic runs faster than normal.
66
Competition Central / Re: STOP IT SMIZZLA
« on: May 29, 2008, 10:06:51 pm »I bet it would take him one month at the rate he is going if that's true.
Quote from: mike89
At this rate he'll be there in approximately six days, so he'll be stopped soon enough.
67
Gaming and Grazing / Re: Any MegaMan Battle Network players?
« on: May 29, 2008, 07:42:02 pm »Quote
it's supposed to be a platformer, and if you dont like that, too bad.
Where in his post did Crowbar say he did not like Mega Man as a platformer?
Quote
Seriously, stuff like BN is the main reason megaman is almost as dead as crash bandicoot.
This would be true if it weren't for the fact that the Battle Network series was a success. Its one thing to say something but its another thing to say something just out of hate.
Quote
It's one thing to take the same concept and come up with some new material, but it's a whole nother thing to change the entire fucking formula.
Tell me what the Mega Man formula is since you're so upset about it (anything besides shooting platformer since there is many of those running around).
Quote
Every other fanboy comment that can't cope with change like "it's supposed to be a platformer"
Just stfu.
68
Gaming and Grazing / Re: Any MegaMan Battle Network players?
« on: May 28, 2008, 08:21:39 pm »
Battle Network would've been a lot better without the random chip stuff.
69
Emerald Challenges / Re: 74647's emerald giveaway
« on: May 25, 2008, 12:01:04 pm »
Already have mine thanks to copy paste and MS Paint.
70
Beef / Re: I would like to have my competition name changed.
« on: May 21, 2008, 07:38:15 pm »Oh yeah well...Green is lame >:O
Green is close to brown and brown is the color of shit.
Green = lame. Horrid lies.
Green =/= brown.
Your pidgey avatar is shit by that logic noob.
71
TUSC News / Re: BOING!
« on: May 21, 2008, 07:03:11 pm »
Needs less physics hacks and more real hacks.
72
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 17, 2008, 05:41:22 pm »
The Prosecution stated before this trial that the previous trial was indeed on whether or not RPG was willing to do work. No objections were raised. The Prosecution even stated it numerous times and no objections were raised (one post might be an objection to the claim but its hard to say for sure).
73
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 17, 2008, 04:14:58 pm »Ooooh, like the file was the only piece of evidence in the trial. There was a lot more pieces of evidence the prosecution had up his sleeve but did not have the chance to show it due to that post (see: Top Tens).The case wasn't that Mr Gasmask always did work, just that he was capable of it. You'd failed to rebut that point.Quote from: Rick_242Note the underline; "hardly any" != none.Quote from: DouglasI raised the point that neither the defence nor the prosecution should be in charge of the judge, and that suddenly rendered you incapable of producing any evidence for the case? Fail.
The trial in this case is whether or not the defence and prosecution are corrupt. Not that they shouldn't have been in control of the judge. If you examine the posts made with the judge made by the defence and prosecution there is hardly any corruption in it.
Looks like you are the one who really fails.
Your Honour, this is an admission that corruption was present, and as I have said it is for you to decide the magnitude thereof and what the repercussions should be. I have nothing more to add.
Quote
The case is that RPG is being accused of not wanting to work and not if he did not need to fill out the Results/Comments section! So far, all my evidence show that he, RPG, does not want to work while you are trying to prove the wrong thing!
No. The case was that he did not want to do any work. If you're going to say something along the lines of "The topic title says capable which means the case was whether or not he could do work," the topic title can work both ways, its just a matter of diction. "Lol you don't want to do work" "BS, I can do some work." | "Lol you can't do any work" "BS, I want to do some work." The more likely option would, of course, be wanting to do work.
Now you're just nitpicking at word choice. Say there was some, if any, corruption present, surely there must be some evidence that has such small traces of corruption and if so I request that you present such evidence for examination.
74
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 16, 2008, 07:48:23 pm »
Ooooh, like the file was the only piece of evidence in the trial. There was a lot more pieces of evidence the prosecution had up his sleeve but did not have the chance to show it due to that post (see: Top Tens).
The trial in this case is whether or not the defence and prosecution are corrupt. Not that they shouldn't have been in control of the judge. If you examine the posts made with the judge made by the defence and prosecution there is hardly any corruption in it.
Looks like you are the one who really fails.
Quote from: Douglas
I raised the point that neither the defence nor the prosecution should be in charge of the judge, and that suddenly rendered you incapable of producing any evidence for the case? Fail.
The trial in this case is whether or not the defence and prosecution are corrupt. Not that they shouldn't have been in control of the judge. If you examine the posts made with the judge made by the defence and prosecution there is hardly any corruption in it.
Looks like you are the one who really fails.
75
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 15, 2008, 08:47:17 pm »My rudeness is irrelevant to the matter at hand - that of whether or not Mr Gasmask or Mr 242 deliberately corrupted the system for their own ends.
That's the problem, the systems were not corrupted to their our own ends. The recess did not do anything except prolong the trial. You can't call that corruption. The other post:
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3406.msg34870#msg34870,
in no way shows any corruption. Allow me to explain. The trial at that time was whether or not Johan Gasmask could be capable of doing any work. The Prosecution at the time was supposed to prove Mr. Gasmask guilty of not being able to do any work. However, the trial shifted from proving Mr. Gasmask guilty to this leaving the Prosecution unable to get his guilty verdict. The shift was due to the post mentioned above. If the Prosecution really was using the judge for his own corrupted ends then...
He would not have made that post!
76
Wikkity! / Re: ITT PPA is not a furry
« on: May 12, 2008, 10:02:08 pm »
[insert sprite here]
Hm I see. Though to be honest Serene stated that she wanted to do this on her own (for the time being anyway). I will fix the error I have made on Friday. I have personal matters to attend to this week so I will be unable to be present in court until Friday.
Hm I see. Though to be honest Serene stated that she wanted to do this on her own (for the time being anyway). I will fix the error I have made on Friday. I have personal matters to attend to this week so I will be unable to be present in court until Friday.
77
Wikkity! / Re: ITT PPA is not a furry
« on: May 12, 2008, 12:15:42 am »
Rule #2 from Law book states: Evidence submitted in court must be relevant to the case.
It is relevant so it may be used. Also, you are not the defence in this case nor has your service been asked. The Prosecution requests that the jury refrain from such outbursts.
It is relevant so it may be used. Also, you are not the defence in this case nor has your service been asked. The Prosecution requests that the jury refrain from such outbursts.
78
Wikkity! / Re: ITT PPA is not a furry
« on: May 11, 2008, 07:16:02 pm »
...
Ok I'm getting tired of this.
1: All you're doing is looking at the face. The graph uses a face merely as representation. 50% of object/person having animal parts = furry. Look at Katt again. Half of her body has animal parts meaning she is a furry.
2: Whatever the reason it does not excuse the fact that he did so. A murder is a murder whatever the cause would be analogous to this.
3: The last tid bit of my statement was more or less a joke. If the Judge agrees with the defense then this piece of evidence will be dropped.
4: Don't be stupid. Knuckles on Sonic is the main thing being displayed here. You'd have to be blind not to see this. Knuckles spanking Sonic does not require brain power or a "corrupted mind" to make such a connection. Such connection is displayed:
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3295.msg33814#msg33814
Even if you say its not a connection being made tell me what the civilian is thinking. The only logical reason has been stated before. I also demand a penalty for personal accusation against the prosecution while providing no evidence whatsoever.
5: It may be true that PPA wasn't thinking of a race for the girl but that is irrelevant. Fang + girl = furry no matter what the race of the female is. It is also difficult to overlook such an obvious detail... twice.
6: Even more lies. I conducted a survey before you objected to what I said and this was the result:
It would have taken more than a glance or two to notice that she did not wear pants. Starly a.k.a. RPG has a reputation of having a very perverted mind. Even he was not able to make this connection. I doubt I need to spell out the rest for you.
7:
The clear contradiction is this:
If he isn't personally interested why is he insistent that Sonic x Amy be the only pairing while everything else is unacceptable?
8: That is completely irrelevant because he questions the moral issues of bestiality and necrophilia, not furry. My point still stands.
9: I'm afraid you misunderstand me, you have bat wings and pointy ears. The pointy ears alone don't make you a furry and in fact its is understandable to neglect such a thing. However, judging from the look of your bat wings one can assume you are part bat which means the pointy ears are due to bats also having pointy ears.
http://www.greenexpander.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/a-horseshoe-bat.jpeg
The Prosecution demands that the defense provide evidence for their claims. So far the defense's case has been a matter of objecting to my evidence and saying that the defendant meant "something else" when he made those remarks. The Prosecution grows weary of this tactic and requests that the defense present evidence to their claims to make a valid argument!
Ok I'm getting tired of this.
1: All you're doing is looking at the face. The graph uses a face merely as representation. 50% of object/person having animal parts = furry. Look at Katt again. Half of her body has animal parts meaning she is a furry.
2: Whatever the reason it does not excuse the fact that he did so. A murder is a murder whatever the cause would be analogous to this.
3: The last tid bit of my statement was more or less a joke. If the Judge agrees with the defense then this piece of evidence will be dropped.
4: Don't be stupid. Knuckles on Sonic is the main thing being displayed here. You'd have to be blind not to see this. Knuckles spanking Sonic does not require brain power or a "corrupted mind" to make such a connection. Such connection is displayed:
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3295.msg33814#msg33814
Even if you say its not a connection being made tell me what the civilian is thinking. The only logical reason has been stated before. I also demand a penalty for personal accusation against the prosecution while providing no evidence whatsoever.
5: It may be true that PPA wasn't thinking of a race for the girl but that is irrelevant. Fang + girl = furry no matter what the race of the female is. It is also difficult to overlook such an obvious detail... twice.
6: Even more lies. I conducted a survey before you objected to what I said and this was the result:
Quote from: Survey
[12:45:25] <Rick> also RPG
[12:46:04] <Rick> did you notice that Blaze did not wear pants when you first saw her or did you not?
[12:46:09] <Starly> Nope
[12:46:11] <Starly> IN fact
[12:46:19] <Starly> It never occurred to me until you just said it lol
[12:47:18] <Rick> Groudon how about you?
[12:47:29] <Groudon> Same as RPG.
[12:47:51] <Rick> yeah me neither
It would have taken more than a glance or two to notice that she did not wear pants. Starly a.k.a. RPG has a reputation of having a very perverted mind. Even he was not able to make this connection. I doubt I need to spell out the rest for you.
7:
Quote from: Serene
And yet again, he doesn't not feel aroused or even personally interested in it.
The clear contradiction is this:
Quote from: PPA
Sonic x old-school Amy. Everything else fails hard.
If he isn't personally interested why is he insistent that Sonic x Amy be the only pairing while everything else is unacceptable?
8: That is completely irrelevant because he questions the moral issues of bestiality and necrophilia, not furry. My point still stands.
9: I'm afraid you misunderstand me, you have bat wings and pointy ears. The pointy ears alone don't make you a furry and in fact its is understandable to neglect such a thing. However, judging from the look of your bat wings one can assume you are part bat which means the pointy ears are due to bats also having pointy ears.
http://www.greenexpander.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/a-horseshoe-bat.jpeg
The Prosecution demands that the defense provide evidence for their claims. So far the defense's case has been a matter of objecting to my evidence and saying that the defendant meant "something else" when he made those remarks. The Prosecution grows weary of this tactic and requests that the defense present evidence to their claims to make a valid argument!
79
Wikkity! / Re: ITT PPA is not a furry
« on: May 11, 2008, 01:29:11 pm »
What now indeeed.
...
The "Fuck You" action does not lie Ms. Serene. You are clearly delusional and desperate. Allow me to show you why.
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2460.msg26238#msg26238
This post was made by your client PPA. Note at 50% it states that the person/animal in question is a furry. Katt clearly is at least 50% animal. Thus she is a furry. Your client even made a poll asking if she was a furry and if he was too for liking her to which more than half of the votes claimed yes.
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2576.msg26699#msg26699
It is clear about one thing. PPA is a pervert as he has admitted that much. That does not excuse the fact that he did in fact take a picture of Tikal's panties. If he did in fact wanted to point that it was amusing he would've made a post like SkyL did or at the very least just take a normal pic of Tikal because she wears a skirt and not pants (the post in question claimed Tikal did not wear pants, it would have been equally effective just to take a pic of Tikal's regular outfit).
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3317.msg33637#msg33637
I admit you do have a point there but, it does not change the fact that he is a furry. Everyone seems to think so and even the NPCs of an RPG think so.
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3295.msg33801#msg33801
That is not how this is going to go down. The picture in question shows Knuckles riding on top of Sonic which is understandable (somewhat) but, the problem in this is how Knuckles's hand is positioned. It is positioned in a way that makes him spanking Sonic's rear end!
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3310.msg33506#msg33506
Regardless this implies that he is a furry because Fang + woman = furry. Simple math. unless you meant Fang + human girl = bestiality. The choice is yours but either it leads to the defendant being a furry.
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26419#msg26419
Tell me why did he point out the fact and how did he notice this fact. Most people don't give this a glance until pointed out.
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26413#msg26413
http://mobianwarrior.tripod.com/sonic_sally_copy.jpg
Sally in this picture is clearly not naked. Why would PPA claim she is naked? The only logical reason would be if he had seen her naked a some point. The sexual pun is question raises this point: there are many other puns to make but he chose a pun involving sex with an animal. Why? The answer is because he is a furry. Don't even think about furthering the point of a hypothesis. The scientific method requires one to make a hypothesis then collect data through experimentation. I don't think I need to point out what this means to you.
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26385#msg26385
Yeah I don't really understand this one either. He seems to be talking about Blaze taking her clothes off. The next bit is the most interesting part.
Quote from: PPA
BECAUSE UNLIKE THE MALE CHARACTERS, THEY ACTUALLY HAVE ANY.
Yeah he seems to be fond about pointing out female body parts. Especially animal body parts. See:
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26413#msg26413
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26419#msg26419
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2576.msg26699#msg26699
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2657.msg28067#msg28067
It seems you don't understand. Furry isn't limited to sex but can cover romance between animals as well. He admits that he would see Sonic x Amy (old school) above everything else. Also:
Quote from: Serene
And isn't it a furry's (referring to human members of the fandom) desire to mate with an animal or somehting resembling an animal? Why would P.P.A. call exactly this urge morally questionable if he himself was a furry?
That was a response to this: http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2657.msg28067#msg28067
Nowhere in there did he ever state that he morally questioned it and he did not do so anywhere else. The only thing that even comes remotely close is him saying he is not a furry.
For the last part I'm sorry, here is a clearer picture:
http://img383.imageshack.us/img383/6025/ppaisfurryevidence2zk0.png
The wings on your back aren't the only inhuman part of your body, your ears are too. Do you know any humans with pointy ears? At most you classify as furry but, I'd have to classify you as semi-furry. Not sure about the "hat" never seen it being taken off in Riviera. I assumed they were part of your body. May you show us clip that disproves this?
81
Wikkity! / Re: ITT PPA is not a furry
« on: May 11, 2008, 12:22:12 am »
Edgeworth
The Judge left!?
Press Fuck You Court Records
FUCK YOU!
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2460.msg25356#msg25356
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2576.msg26699#msg26699
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3317.msg33637#msg33637
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3295.msg33801#msg33801
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3310.msg33506#msg33506
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26419#msg26419
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26413#msg26413
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2547.msg26385#msg26385
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2657.msg28067#msg28067
82
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 08, 2008, 09:02:04 pm »
I'm afraid that is the problem. Let's review shall we?
Quote
Court is adjourned! Bailiffs, please remove the attorneys from this court.
We were about to be held in contempt of court. If he was really going to give us a chance to explain why would he hold us in contempt of court? Which brings us to our next point.
Quote
I therefore order a full judicial enquiry into the affair with the involvement of Mr.s 242 and Gasmask to be probed, at which point we will see if this whole affair was as a result of incompetence or genuine corruption - the latter, of course, will result in full criminal proceedings being brought.
He had no intention of listening to our story because he had decided that we were already guilty.
Even if he did say that he was going to give us a chance to explain our stories it doesn't matter because he had no intention of actually listening to us because he had already decided we were guilty. Had he remained judge this trial would be over which raises the question of who really is corrupt. The defendants or the witness himself?
83
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 08, 2008, 08:24:46 pm »
Subsequent protests were made by both attorneys after the court had been adjourned. None were connected to the actual case, and I had already made clear this opportunity would exist for them to explain their actions, and frankly I could have found both in contempt for this behaviour.
This is a record of all the posts you've made. Would you be kind enough to point out where this opportunity to explain our actions was mentioned?
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3406.msg34855#msg34855
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3406.msg34875#msg34875
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3406.msg34880#msg34880
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3406.msg34883#msg34883
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3406.msg34888#msg34888
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3406.msg34890#msg34890
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3406.msg35003#msg35003
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=3406.msg35007#msg35007
84
Wikkity! / Re: ITT PPA is not a furry
« on: May 06, 2008, 07:55:37 pm »
The Prosecution wishes to submit some evidence Your Honor.
Also the prosecution can edit posts? Why did I not know I could do that?
:sad face:
85
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 05, 2008, 09:35:32 pm »The other half of the defence is ready Your Honor.
Incidentally the Prosecutor I am defending is in an ill state. He has requested I take his place.
86
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 03, 2008, 08:44:22 pm »Interestingly enough this all leads back to our original case. Allow me to show you why.
Mr. Gresham stated that the court is corrupt and his evidence was that we had control of the judge. We being the Defence and Prosecution. This is but a belief with no evidence that we were manipulating the judge to our advantage. If we had real control of the judge then the trial would be over with the opposing party losing in the beginning of the trial.
You also stated that Mia Fey is dieing is a spoiler which was proved not because it is revealed in the beginning of the first game.
Another point you made was that the Defence cannot cross examine when you declared that court is adjourned. There are to problems with this. 1. The Defence objected to the adjourning which means that the session isn't over and he can still cross examine due to the Defence's right to cross examine anything the witness says. 2. You simply adjourned court. The trial will still continue until a verdict is reached. Furthermore the court is still not adjourned.
Lastly, you are a self proclaimed judge. You have no power in this court because you are a witness! You weren't the judge in the beginning of this trial, you were a witness who barged in here during the beginning of our second session.
Now how is this related to our original case? Simple, RPG can work as shown through him contradicting every single one of your testimonies. In fact the only one in here who hasn't done their homework is you Mr. Gresham! You didn't know any of the above mentioned because you were too lazy to look up facts before making ludicrous decisions.
The Prosecution accuses the witness, Mr. Gresham, of being incapable of working!
What is your response witness!?
87
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 03, 2008, 07:47:46 pm »I'm afraid what you just said is flawed, very flawed.
First off, "well why don't you do better" was never said but rather that you should find us a judge so we wouldn't have to do the judging.
Secondly, spoilers? There isn't anything that can be considered a spoiler except for Mia Fey being dead which isn't a spoiler because it is revealed in one of the beginning cases.
Thirdly, I did present evidence if you look at the url given in one of my first posts RPG did not nag Thorn even though he said he would. Months ago.
Fourthly, I believe the judge said:
Quote from: Judge
Mr. Gresham didn't support his claim even though he knew this was a court of law. Wouldn't that make him the one not capable of working rather than the defendant?
I did not meaning you are accusing yourself of not doing any work. Not I.
Fifthly, the above reason being that I was slandering you has been shown that you've slandered yourself which means you have to pay all legal fees for slandering yourself and may be in disbarment for serious "professional" misconduct.
Sixthly, the stated reasons for probing cannot be carried out because the judge simply does not wield that much power in a court of law. Only the prosecution may even come close to such a thing.
Lastly, genuine corruption? You gave no proof or evidence whatsoever that the court was corrupted so from we can tell it is only baseless conjecture from a witness. Which shows that you are incompetent.
Clearly, the "professional judge" has lost all credibility. The Defence and Prosecution have made their points quite clear.
88
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 03, 2008, 07:04:52 pm »Fair? Well he is the one who brought it up. If he has a problem with it he should be prepared to solve the problem otherwise he shouldn't have brought it up.
Also I am afraid the previous post is horrendously incorrect because Mia Fey is dead.
89
Wikkity! / Re: ITT COLD, HARD, UNDENIABLE PROOF
« on: May 03, 2008, 06:48:05 pm »
The Defence's claim is sustained. Mr. Gresham please find us an independant judge. Does the Prosecution have any views on the matter?
The Prosecution agrees with the Defence.
90
Beef / Re: Why is rolken banned.?
« on: May 03, 2008, 06:30:27 pm »
http://www.soniccenter.org/forum/index.php?topic=2762.0
If the court may look at the url mentioned in the article you'd find a reason why Rolken has been banned.
The Sonic Center v3.9
Copyright 2003-2011 by The Sonic Center Team.