DarkChaplain joined on May 14th, 2010, since that has made 3365 posts that are still accessible today, 135 of which are threads. Helping shape the community, DarkChaplain has given 6462 upvotes, and was last online on Jan 19th, 2015.
I don't think it necessarily matters if they're called icons or avatars, since google searching icons will bring up images like these
When I search for Icons on google, I get actual icon sets for PCs, to replace folder or system icons with, even when coupled with anime.
so that's just what i call them now, and many other people just call them that too.
I've seen a bunch of new users over the years refer to their avatars as icons (mainly in the context of: "how do i get icon???"). Avatar or even Display Picture are more easily grasped than Icon, which has a bunch of different uses in tech as it is.
So in a way, the use of icon is kinda misleading, especially when you consider that people offer icon collections all over the net, even for customizing your anime library (there was just another upload on nyaa for that purpose, even, and deviantart is flooded with them).
But yeah, I'd urge you to clarify the files' purpose in the OP. Maybe you made it clear on chat (I think the topic popped up a few days ago? Might be mistaken, though), but the thread itself could benefit from a bit of an explanation.
Another thing I got confused with were the lack of guidelines/format standards or consistent aspect ratio of the files on the dropbox. Are they supposed to be squared? 4:3? 16:9? 16:10? What resolutions are you looking for? So far it seems somewhat arbitrary, like with the Bakemonogatari images. The thumbnails on the box are squared, but upon clicking them, they appeared closer to screenshots.
So asking for clarification and purpose of the offered image files equals "attacking", yes? I'll keep that in mind.
See, when I read Icons, I think of these:
Since we're on a somewhat "nerdy" site, I wouldn't have been surprised to find anime icons like that. People actually make those, especially for anime libraries. Heck, I have folder icons for pretty much every series I archived at some point, and there are shitloads of icon sets floating around on deviantart as well, for games, anime, system tools, you name it.
So excuse me if I got confused by your naming conventions and asked for clarification, and explanation of how these differ from simple avatars and image snippets. Especially since a bunch of the images I saw in the collection have been floating around the net, especially on dedicated fan forums as default avatars, for years and years.
Had I known that asking for a few words of clarification would hurt your feelings, I might have considered just shaking my head and thinking my part. But then, I thought that a clarification on the collection's us
Maybe I'm just not deep enough in some sort of tumblr jargon, or somesuch, hence my misunderstanding.
because people like to use icons on instant messaging services and on websites?
So... avatars, then.
Nope, not really, since "icon" usually means something different in context of PCs.
If they are simple "pictures", then.... why not simply call them "pictures"?
Icon's for what, then? What use do they have?
I mean, I'd get proper .ico files for use as folder icons or such, but what exactly is the difference between these images and bogstandard fansite avatars?
By the way, looking into the Bakemonogatari folder, most of the images aren't even squared or anything. What's up with that?
So are these ICONS or are they AVATARS? Because there's a big difference.
So I watched this two mornings ago, and was severely underwhelmed, though my expectations weren't high to begin with.
The good thing: Lots of Celty. The bad thing: She did mostly the same stuff we'd expect from season one, apart from one scene which was rather neat.
The bad? It was basically just an episode reintroducing old characters, no matter how small their contributions. Namedrops left and right, without any real point to them. While I can appreciate why it is necessary to reintroduce characters in season 2, after such a long break, I cannot help but feel that a lot of it was wasted due to the characters being very minor and having no bearing whatsoever on the episode itself.
All of that was wrapped in Mikado's "nothing has really changed for us" monologue, which is kinda true. It is still the same tired thing. And Mikado is still an inactive, boring character.
Two new characters were introduced, another one was just shown on the sidelines. While one of those characters seems at least funny/crazy enough to be worthwhile, the movie director guy is obnoxious enough to make me want to turn off the episode after a mere 5 minutes.
And I really quite dislike the opening song. It is nowhere near as catchy as Uragiri no Yuuyake or Complication. The ending animation returned back to the first half of season one's pattern, but a lot of characters are cut off and only barely make it into the picture. Disappointing arrangement for that reason. The song didn't stick.
One nice surprise actually happened, though. I expected another brainless Izaya-Shizuo chase, but that didn't happen. Thank fuck for that.
Overall, expectedly tiresome.
Always gotta distinguish between who is riding the tragedy's coattails to further their own agenda (like Jonathan McIntosh and co are using it to drive their own ideologies), and who "is Charlie" out of solidarity and to make a stand for the western values of free speech and freedom of thought.
Notepad++, for example, is in the latter category:twitter.com/PixelJanosz/status/555395173447139329
Now you're just being intellectually dishonest, Jack. Satire is, at its core, stinging, biting, and usually also wildly exaggerrated..
Satire is a genre of literature, and sometimes graphic and performing arts, in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, ideally with the intent of shaming individuals, corporations, government or society itself, into improvement. Although satire is usually meant to be humorous, its greater purpose is often constructive social criticism, using wit as a weapon and as a tool to draw attention to both particular and wider issues in society.
A feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—"in satire, irony is militant"—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This "militant" irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to attack.
Satire is nowadays found in many artistic forms of expression, including literature, plays, commentary, television shows, and media such as lyrics.
Laughter is not an essential component of satire; in fact there are types of satire that are not meant to be "funny" at all. Conversely, not all humour, even on such topics as politics, religion or art is necessarily "satirical", even when it uses the satirical tools of irony, parody, and burlesque.
Even light-hearted satire has a serious "after-taste": the organizers of the Ig Nobel Prize describe this as "first make people laugh, and then make them think".
A group of extremists had finally had enough of waiting and protesting and took matters into their own hands
You know who else has a high percentage of muslims? Germany. And you know what? They get an excessive amount of freedoms for being muslims. They are usually allowed to take breaks for praying at work, even. They have little trouble in school and work to follow their creed. They even get benefits from the state without having to learn the language properly.
Heck, they're handing out gift baskets to people reaching a certain age here, and due to that it just came to light that my mother's neighbor has a husband, who has never, NEVER in the 17 years she has lived in that house, shown up. He's either dead or, more likely, back at "home", cashing in funds from the state here while spending nothing on our market.
But then, those families here rarely spend all year in Germany anyway. Half a year back "at home" is pretty standard for a lot of them. No surprise that the teens and kids go around not even considering this here their home country.
There's a lot of bull going on under the hood, too. Heck, they almost get away with "honour" stabbings here because "it is part of their culture". No, sorry, but sending the youngest brother to murder the sister because she dares to have a relationship her parents don't agree with (on the basis of the guy not being a muslim himself) and thus avoiding proper charges in court doesn't fly. Neither does picking fights on the streets, making neighborhoods unsafe as fuck. Not a rarity that people get knifed by those poor, poor victimized minorities here.
But the moment you point out that a disproportionate amount of stabbings, rape or muggings is perpetrated by those demographics, you're a Nazi. And that's exactly why Germany is still making concessions, still bending over - the appearance of impropriety alone gets them the nazi card from people around the world (funnily enough, France isn't excluded from that list).
Heck, due to this incident, they're already banning various satire targeted at muslim culture. This isn't even the first time that happens. Heck, back in 2005, there was a big uproar about whether one should be banning depictions of mohammed.
Meanwhile, nobody seems too bothered by depictions of Jesus on a cross, or God being a lazy fart watching earthTV all day. Nobody is calling for a Jihad there (and don't even try to argue with the Westboro Baptist Church, they're nutters, and their misdeeds go far beyond being offensive. You can't compare political satire to that kind of organized cult).
I think a lot of people seem blissfully unaware of how satire works, and is meant to work, and why it works that way.
France's existing issues towards the Muslim community didn't just spring up overnight because the rest of the planet finally got wind of it. When people have been slandered, killed, mocked, and trivialized for so long, there are going to be people who react violently to it, unfortunately.
A 2006 study found that the share of immigrants has a positive and significant impact on the crime rate, confirming that a larger share of immigrants is associated with a higher crime rate. The data implies that this may be caused by the higher unemployment, and thus worse socioeconomic conditions among immigrants. However, unemployed persons born in France are still far less likely to commit crimes than unemployed recent immigrants.
That's a french study.
According to a 2014 report, about 5,000 to 7,000 of the rapes are gang rapes. In the Muslim immigrant culture of the banlieues, gang-rapes are referred to as tournantes, or "pass-arounds"). One of the first people to bring public attention to the culture of gang rape was Samira Bellil, who published a book called Dans l'enfer des tournantes ("In Gang Rape Hell").
The Milieu is a category of organized criminals operating in France. These groups are quite often not ethnically French.
It really bottles down to this:
Although Charlie Hebdo comics are not my most favorite thing in the world and something that I personally disagree with, it doesn't mean that those people deserved to be killed.
I don't give a fuck about the magazine or comics. They are satire, and I would rather have plenty of that going around, offending people and hopefully inspiring them and others to think about the implications. Satire isn't necessarily geared towards the lowest common denominator. It uses offense to provoke reactions and ridicule things, while trying to engage people with critical thinking.
It is a genre as old as time. As are the attempts of censoring it. Back in 1599, Bishops tried to ban certain satirical books, including burning of all those found.
And let's be completely honest: If you are so very pro-social justice, equality and progressiveness, you shouldn't even be opposed to criticising those antiquated aspects of muslim culture. A lot of the bullshit that is being followed in the name of culture and religion is incompatible with modern society and human rights.
much like how the creators of South Park removed their episode that featured Muhammad's face due to the requests of Muslim viewers.
You mean, because of terror threats? And no, it wasn't the creators of South Park who censored it, it was Comedy Central.
However, the actual South Park broadcast itself ran a black screen that read "Comedy Central has refused to broadcast an image of Mohammed on their network" instead of the scene containing Muhammad's depiction, which Parker and Stone say was neutral and not intended to insult Muslims.
Parker and Stone note the contradiction in being allowed to feature a profane depiction of Jesus, while being forbidden to feature a purely benign depiction of Muhammad, but claim they harbor no hard feelings toward Comedy Central for censoring the scene, since the network confessed to being "afraid of getting blown up" rather than claim they refrained from airing the scene uncensored out of religious tolerance.
And funnily enough, previous versions of Mohammed in South Park have gone WITHOUT backlash:
Previously, Muhammad was depicted uncensored and portrayed in a heroic light in the season five (2001) episode "Super Best Friends", which resulted in virtually no controversy. Muhammad also appears among the large crowd of characters gathered behind the main characters and "South Park" sign in some of the show's previous opening sequences.
And then there's this:
Parker and Stone repeated this plot for the 200th episode "200". Again, the depiction was censored throughout the episode. After the episode aired, a leader of Revolution Muslim, an obscure New York-based radical Muslim organization, targeted South Park’s creators for satirizing issues surrounding the depiction of Muhammad. The author of the post, who goes by the username Abu Talhah Al-Amrikee, wrote on Twitter that he prayed for Allah to kill the show’s creators and “burn them in Hell for all eternity.” He also posted a similar entry on his blog and on the Revolution Muslim website. The post included a picture of the assassination of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh by a Muslim extremist in 2004 with the caption: "Theo Van Gogh – Have Matt Stone And Trey Parker Forgotten This?" He also noted: "We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh if they do air this show."
The following episode "201" censored the word "Muhammad" throughout the episode, as well as several lines from the "Super Best Friends" during the final act. According to the South Park Studios webpage, episode "201" was censored by Comedy Central after the studio delivered the episode, but before it was aired. The studio advises that the episode is not available online because they do not have network clearance to air the uncensored episode.