1) I didn't expect it to do that, it was more of an introduction 
. More to this argument later...
2) My point was that the OED is certainly not referring to gaming stuff correctly (things like TCP/IP, mutator, UnrealED, ).
For example take UnrealED (= Unreal Editor). I'm pretty sure UnrealED isn't mentioned in the OED in the "editor section" (if such a thing exists). But it is an Editor, noone would doubt it. So it is wrong if it doesn't point out UnrealED being an Editor. I know that the OED can't explain every "proper name", so they don't care (and write) about Unreal Universe being an universe (like with UnrealED, they simply run out of space I guess). So I guess you can't apply the "rules" of the OED on proper names. Therefore my other arguments apply again.
3) Nope, I'm certainly discussing only gaming things (that's what the discussion is about), you still try to prove me wrong, so this isn't an argument unless you have successfully proven me wrong here.
So I still mean every thing I say here in it's gaming aspect. Also the word universe.
4) I don't think the word "universe" means whatever I want it to mean. I'm pretty sure about it's meaning. It's only you who can't accept that "universe" may have different meanings.
So people here could still have written their posts without looking up every word in the OED.
5) Sorry, but neither answer 1 nor 4 fits on my argument.
Since colloquial language changes all the time it could be that the OED hasn't been updated on that point, yet.
6) My point was that there's no difference for me between "universe" and "universe", so the "universe" (shorten from "Unreal Universe") sounds pretty like "universe". So we could have talked about "Unreal Universe" by mentioning "universe", how can you know?
7) <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>"No, it is updated because new words are being invented/passing into more common use"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah, like "universe" getting a different meaning. Sometimes "new words" (more exactly: new word meanings) need some time before they're added to the OED. That's obvious since these words have to be widely used before they're accepted for the OED. So the OED isn't the reference when talking about a topic (i.e. computer stuff) that changes/evolves really fast. So it is possibly not yet updated, since this word isn't enough used, yet, to be added to the OED. But the meaning is there...
8) How do you know what the proper meaning of "universe" is? There are some words having at least two meanings (one word - two meanings). The "universe" which is mentioned by you was just lucky to be found earlier than gaming universes. That doesn't mean that gaming universes don't exist. You say the "universe" is the only proper one. That's not right, it was only the first one so te definition of "universe" is in the OED not the definition of "universe".
9) I don't only want to show you that the "Unreal Universe" is an universe but that you could also mean it by referring to an universe, especially if done so on a gaming board. See #3 for related info.
9a) Let's add an argument:
The OED surely isn't right with everything. The OED is made by people, and how do you say: "Nobody is perfect." So if people work at improving the OED it is possible that they made some errors. So the OED could be wrong with some stuff you said.
10) Ok, this is obviously getting a bit longer:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>Wibblyness: If you have never played FF8, you do not know what I mean by 'wibblyness'. Everything goes wibbly,
not just your vision, and you can also float through space and walk into other times.
Can you travel through time on a Redeemer?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
OK, your vision does get wibbly when playing Stranglove (a bug in the current version). "Excessive Violence" is a mod where all the weapons are a bit overpowered, so it's wibbly in gameplay meanings.
"You can float through space..."
In DM-Hyperblast I often manage to float through space.
"and walk into other times."
Q: Ok, how do you see you walk into other times?
A: You see stuff from other time zones there. Like old weapons (U4E), old architecture (DM-Gothic or other levels (future levels, too)), old persons (the nali, for example (There is no reason that there should be a "flash" or noise when travelling through time, since the only way people ever travelled through time didn't cause such a thing, more on that topic later). Originally the Nalis were in Unreal only, not in UT, so you travel back to the times of Unreal if using them in UT.
So you travel through time (for example) if you're playing U4E on DM-Gothic with some Nalis, right?
"Can you travel through time on a Redeemer?"
"Time" is the 4th dimension. You constantly travel through time (forward), or you simply wouldn't be able to move since the time was "frozen". This is not the case, so you travel through time.
To be able to travel through time backwards you either need the stuff mentioned above or the following setting:
If you think mankind will ever be able to travel backwards in time you have to think of the "time" be arranged like a film, pic after pic...many of them. Else you wouldn't be abe to turn back the state of every atom/molecule to it's former status (which would be quite a lot of work). If you ever did this you would be transform the molekules of your "time machine" as well (and yours, too...eek), therefore rendering it useless at the time (think backwards) you invented it in the past.
So we have to imagine the "time" like a film to think of time travelling to the time before the invention of "time machines". So you could be able to hop to every pic of that film without transforming every molekule back to it's former status. So you need a device which allows you to choose the "pic" you want to travel to. This means that you'd need the other times still existent. Since I can't see them, they have to be in another universe, right?
This would render Morety's argument ("Universes and dimensions other than our own exist.") valid again.
Either the other times exist in a "parallel universe" or time travelling isn't possible.
Talk about time travelling to the future. That would surely be possible (in the "film scenario"), but not in the "transformation" one. Your device had to know all the future states of the atoms/molecules. Besides the fact that this would need another device on it's own it would need A LOT of energy.
Imagine transforming the state of the whole universe to it's future status...would need a lot of processing time for every 1/1000 second (the whole universe) and a lot of energy distributed among the universe...
So you simply can't travel through time like you think you could (not even with magic, since it doesn't exist here...tell me people in the current real world use magic and I'm going to laugh at you...
. So the only way to travel through time was like the one I told you for UT.
Loibisch
Please answer to all of my points this time even if they're not numbered. I don't want to remind you of it again.
Sorry, I normally do some spell-checking after writing a post, but I'm in a hurry this time...maybe later.
[This message has been edited by Loibisch (edited 05-23-2000).]
. More to this argument later...2) My point was that the OED is certainly not referring to gaming stuff correctly (things like TCP/IP, mutator, UnrealED, ).
For example take UnrealED (= Unreal Editor). I'm pretty sure UnrealED isn't mentioned in the OED in the "editor section" (if such a thing exists). But it is an Editor, noone would doubt it. So it is wrong if it doesn't point out UnrealED being an Editor. I know that the OED can't explain every "proper name", so they don't care (and write) about Unreal Universe being an universe (like with UnrealED, they simply run out of space I guess). So I guess you can't apply the "rules" of the OED on proper names. Therefore my other arguments apply again.
3) Nope, I'm certainly discussing only gaming things (that's what the discussion is about), you still try to prove me wrong, so this isn't an argument unless you have successfully proven me wrong here.
So I still mean every thing I say here in it's gaming aspect. Also the word universe.
4) I don't think the word "universe" means whatever I want it to mean. I'm pretty sure about it's meaning. It's only you who can't accept that "universe" may have different meanings.
So people here could still have written their posts without looking up every word in the OED.
5) Sorry, but neither answer 1 nor 4 fits on my argument.
Since colloquial language changes all the time it could be that the OED hasn't been updated on that point, yet.
6) My point was that there's no difference for me between "universe" and "universe", so the "universe" (shorten from "Unreal Universe") sounds pretty like "universe". So we could have talked about "Unreal Universe" by mentioning "universe", how can you know?
7) <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>"No, it is updated because new words are being invented/passing into more common use"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yeah, like "universe" getting a different meaning. Sometimes "new words" (more exactly: new word meanings) need some time before they're added to the OED. That's obvious since these words have to be widely used before they're accepted for the OED. So the OED isn't the reference when talking about a topic (i.e. computer stuff) that changes/evolves really fast. So it is possibly not yet updated, since this word isn't enough used, yet, to be added to the OED. But the meaning is there...
8) How do you know what the proper meaning of "universe" is? There are some words having at least two meanings (one word - two meanings). The "universe" which is mentioned by you was just lucky to be found earlier than gaming universes. That doesn't mean that gaming universes don't exist. You say the "universe" is the only proper one. That's not right, it was only the first one so te definition of "universe" is in the OED not the definition of "universe".
9) I don't only want to show you that the "Unreal Universe" is an universe but that you could also mean it by referring to an universe, especially if done so on a gaming board. See #3 for related info.
9a) Let's add an argument:
The OED surely isn't right with everything. The OED is made by people, and how do you say: "Nobody is perfect." So if people work at improving the OED it is possible that they made some errors. So the OED could be wrong with some stuff you said.
10) Ok, this is obviously getting a bit longer:
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica">quote:</font><HR>Wibblyness: If you have never played FF8, you do not know what I mean by 'wibblyness'. Everything goes wibbly,
not just your vision, and you can also float through space and walk into other times.
Can you travel through time on a Redeemer?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
OK, your vision does get wibbly when playing Stranglove (a bug in the current version). "Excessive Violence" is a mod where all the weapons are a bit overpowered, so it's wibbly in gameplay meanings.
"You can float through space..."
In DM-Hyperblast I often manage to float through space.
"and walk into other times."
Q: Ok, how do you see you walk into other times?
A: You see stuff from other time zones there. Like old weapons (U4E), old architecture (DM-Gothic or other levels (future levels, too)), old persons (the nali, for example (There is no reason that there should be a "flash" or noise when travelling through time, since the only way people ever travelled through time didn't cause such a thing, more on that topic later). Originally the Nalis were in Unreal only, not in UT, so you travel back to the times of Unreal if using them in UT.
So you travel through time (for example) if you're playing U4E on DM-Gothic with some Nalis, right?
"Can you travel through time on a Redeemer?"
"Time" is the 4th dimension. You constantly travel through time (forward), or you simply wouldn't be able to move since the time was "frozen". This is not the case, so you travel through time.
To be able to travel through time backwards you either need the stuff mentioned above or the following setting:
If you think mankind will ever be able to travel backwards in time you have to think of the "time" be arranged like a film, pic after pic...many of them. Else you wouldn't be abe to turn back the state of every atom/molecule to it's former status (which would be quite a lot of work). If you ever did this you would be transform the molekules of your "time machine" as well (and yours, too...eek), therefore rendering it useless at the time (think backwards) you invented it in the past.
So we have to imagine the "time" like a film to think of time travelling to the time before the invention of "time machines". So you could be able to hop to every pic of that film without transforming every molekule back to it's former status. So you need a device which allows you to choose the "pic" you want to travel to. This means that you'd need the other times still existent. Since I can't see them, they have to be in another universe, right?
This would render Morety's argument ("Universes and dimensions other than our own exist.") valid again.
Either the other times exist in a "parallel universe" or time travelling isn't possible.
Talk about time travelling to the future. That would surely be possible (in the "film scenario"), but not in the "transformation" one. Your device had to know all the future states of the atoms/molecules. Besides the fact that this would need another device on it's own it would need A LOT of energy.
Imagine transforming the state of the whole universe to it's future status...would need a lot of processing time for every 1/1000 second (the whole universe) and a lot of energy distributed among the universe...
So you simply can't travel through time like you think you could (not even with magic, since it doesn't exist here...tell me people in the current real world use magic and I'm going to laugh at you...
. So the only way to travel through time was like the one I told you for UT.Loibisch
Please answer to all of my points this time even if they're not numbered. I don't want to remind you of it again
.Sorry, I normally do some spell-checking after writing a post, but I'm in a hurry this time...maybe later.
[This message has been edited by Loibisch (edited 05-23-2000).]
