Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About donniecesar

  • Rank
  • Birthday June 6

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests

    My profile is in portuguese, but you may PM me in facebook in english for any personal questions and for more info on the guy.
  • Playername
    Donald Black
  1. Where should the resulting document be posted?
  2. Here's my public resign to the challenge. Due to work and college preparation I'm not even playing my regular stories in MD, so I can't afford the time to be here. I had lots of fun cracking my head agains the challenges, though. I'd like to do them for fun in another time, if they remain available. :D   Best of luck for those remaining.   Ciao!
  3. I'm still nowhere in the challenge, but I've learned a lot about cyphers and cryptography in the last 12 hours. :D   A question on the first part:      Corresponding to what? So far I believe the answer is the name of the poem, but no confirmation. I'm in story mode, so I can't find anyone in game and I have also received no message.   The answer form has three fields. I believe they must be filled with: 1: Name of first poem; 2 - Author of first poem and 3 - Author of second poem. Is that correct?
  4. I did not participate the constest because I was in story mode. Aside from my low chances of winning, it afforded 4 prizes, so,  thought, "maybe I can one". This is very misleading.   Aside from the "elogious" words between Chewett and Constatine, it is of my opinion that the rules of the challenge count as they are made public - and it said 4 prizes in the contest's page.   Pipstickz says "the challenge is not fair", but I say a challenge with moving rules is no challenge at all. Similar shifiting rules are used in shady circumstances to punish participants, so it betrays the purpose of contending and is, therefore, not a contest. Using a hyperbolic example, if Chewett decided "the new change made in the rules say Donald Black has won all the prizes, I only had no time to say it before" people here would be having a shi*fit - they would feel stolen from their time - and they would be right. That's what is happening here; the other winners (and I refer to them like this because they are) were stolen by a piece of rules that wasn't made public apropriately by whatever reasons (because to them it makes no difference) and have all right to complain.   If Chewett denies John the audience he's asking with Mur this makes this ALL THE WORST since he has:   1. Admitted the mistake was his; 2. Said he'll do nothing about it; 3. Will deny access to the resolution of a problem he has created himself, while not solving it.   It says: "Yes, I did things wrong because I had issues, but I'll do nothing about it, none of you will do anything about and if any of you tries, I'll mess it up". This is not even about the contest anymore, is about being fair.   I'm a rookie and I know many players - Chewett being an extreme case - gives a lot more time and effort to MD than me, but fair is fair. The right thing to do is to reward all winners according the the public rules, change the rules after and hold other contests in the new law. Burns, over there, said law is applied retroactively, but as far as my research led it only retrocedes in benefit of the charged - and in this case there are innocent people being punished. Put yourself in the place of the other players for a bit, ok?   Also, the restriction page, or rule page as it is, says the game provides the ability to question decisions. Not to give people the chance to question a decision is being very authoritarian: while this happens a lot in real life and in other games, this is (alledgely) a community built game and the purpose to it is making things different and fun - and there is no fun at all in being stolen from.   Now, something to remember about the intro:   This is a multiplayer adventure game, you will find here creature fights, amazing places, secret areas, puzzles to solve, alliance collaborative play, a story that changes based on your decisions , magic spells and much much more...   Let's just hope this "much more" doesn't involve "the same stuff you hear at work and from your government and that makes you feel tired with life and people all around" - that would be very anticlimatic.
  5. I liked many of the suggestions already mentioned and I won't pretend mine is better than many of them. I just think Memento is better. me•men•to (məˈmɛn toʊ)  n., pl. -tos, -toes. 1. something that serves as a reminder of what is past or gone; keepsake; souvenir. 2. anything serving as a reminder or warning.   Some things about this suggestion:   1. Mementos can be both physical and imaginary. Both a sound and an old cup of tea can bring memories back. Helps to keep feet on the ground. 2. The concept of remembering, keeping a memory alive is central to the notion of fighting viscosity. 3. Mementos can both "happen" by circunstance or be created to remember a particular situation - a notion that, I believe, supplants will or determination related suggestions, since they are too broad to allow a person through viscosity only. 4. As a skill, Memento would be less like remembering and more like "memory crafting", something that I believe is in tune with the requirement Mur proposed above - that it must be something that one can work on, is consuming and also developing. If viscosity is an "oblivion fog" roughly speaking, Memento is the ability to take what is left, polish, craft and leave behind a memory that is not only more solid, but will also be easier to remember. Like a woodworker will be better if he sculpts a particular design a few times, so will the character at sculpting his memories and, as such, the world. 5. It avoids the notion of forgetfulness as weakness: when you forget something sometimes you can't simply remember, no matter how hard you try. It's not a matter of strengh, moral resolve or even effort. Memories are things of familiarity, clues, hints... that's why I really liked the Pathfinding suggestion Change has made, although I think the name is a bit misleading at first - the path you are looking for has an exterior manifestation, but is an Inner path.   If you think the idea is pleasing, please comment and make suggestions.  :))
  6. I love this test. :D   But although it is based on the work of Jung, the test-type indicator was created by Katharine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers. This test is called Myers-Briggs Type indicator.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator   This test has many spin-offs, all very fun to study and as tools for self knowledge.
  7. Sorry, I completely forgot the print, and I've worked hard to come up with a beautiful profile these days. :D     There you are.
  8. Count me in. It will be nice to work on the character a bit further and the contest will provide a suitable opportunity to do so.
  • Create New...