venomai

And why should it be the job of citizens to enforce the law? Are you kidding? There exist a number of governmental agencies that make it their duty to uphold and enforce the constitution. :idea: Giving guns to citizens isn't the only way to uphold the constitution, and if it were, the United States would be a much more dangerous place than it is today.

Are you referring to the Osaka school massacre, which left 8 dead from a kitchen knife? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osaka_School_Massacre I'd imagine it would have been considerably more difficult to kill 34 adults on a stabbing spree than it would be to kill 8 children. :|

Just like we can create a situation where people don't pollute the Earth, fight wars, murder each other... :?:

Let me get this straight... Women shouldn't have the choice to work as, say, a call girl? You know them better than they know themselves? :lol: I'm not completely sure who or what you're comment is aimed at. And what about females dominating submissive males, as in "malesub" pornography? In what context is it inappropriate? Inappropriate to you, or to a child, maybe, but obviously not to the viewers nor those willingly participating in it. I think the answer lies in whether or not these sites have a negative effect on the public. A quick snippet from Wikipedia summarizes some interesting findings: [hide=]Japan, which is noted for its large output of rape fantasy pornography, has the lowest reported sex crime rate in the industrialized world, but some attribute this to the emphasis on a woman's "honor" in Japanese culture, which makes victims of sex crime less likely to report it (e.g. chikan[14]). However, a 1995 study comparing crime statistics since 1972 when pornography changed from totally prohibited to freely available with no age restrictions found that:[15] "sex crimes in every category, from rape to public indecency, sexual offenses from both ends of the criminal spectrum, significantly decreased in incidence. Most significantly, despite the wide increase in availability of pornography to children, not only was there a decrease in sex crimes with juveniles as victims but the number of juvenile offenders also decreased significantly. We hypothesized that the increase in pornography, without age restriction and in comics, if it had any detrimental effect, would most negatively influence younger individuals. Just the opposite occurred. The number of victims decreased particularly among the females younger than 13. In 1972, 8.3% of the victims were younger than 13. In 1995 the percentage of victims younger than 13 years of age dropped to 4.0%; a reduction of greater than 50%. In 1972, 33.3 % of the offenders were between 14-19 years of age; by 1995 that percentage had decreased to 9.6%."[/hide] Another interesting snippet: [hide=]For the countries of Denmark, Sweden and West Germany6, the three nations for which ample data were available at the time, Kutchinsky analyzed in depth the crime statistics and pornography availability for the years from approximately 1964 to 1984. Kutchinsky showed that as the amount of pornography increasingly became available, the rate of rapes in these countries either decreased or remained relatively level. ... In Denmark homosexual child molestation decreased more than 50 percent from 1966 to 1969 (Ben-Veniste, 1971). These decreases in sex crimes involving children are particularly noteworthy since in Japan, as in Denmark, for the time under review, there were no laws, and still are no laws, against the personal non-commercial possession or use of pictures of children involved in sexual activities; so-called "child-porn" (Kutchinsky, 1985b); pp. 5; Anonymous, 1998a).[/hide] More research certainly is necessary before we can come to a solid conclusion on the effects of such "deviant" pornography, though. Catering to the expectations of the public is not a valid excuse if the works are shown to have a detrimental effect on society. As of yet, unless I'm mistaken, no significantly negative effects have been found from casual viewing of pornography. While the majority of prostitution and pornography will be aimed at a male audience (perhaps due to biological and evolutionary reasons), there is a growing female audience for male pornography and prostitution.

Looks cool. :thumbup: I like the outlines, they just need to be cleaned up (i.e. not so shaky) in a couple areas. Can we see the original?

Looks great. Keep it up! :)

Apologies for the poor source, I had rushed to find it. Here is a better article (by Weitzer) with proper citing. [hide=]... [a] comparison of 29 prostitutes in New Zealand (27 of whom worked as call girls, escorts, or in massage parlors; 2 worked the street) and an agematched sample of nonprostitutewomen found no differences between the two groups in physical health, self-esteem, mental health, or the quality of their social networks (Romans et al., 2001) ... Another study found that call girls, brothel workers, and massage parlor workers generally were handling themselves well, manifesting good emotional controls, being well aware of conventionality, and doing well in the occupation of their choice, whereas streetwalkers exhibited significant psychological problems (Exner et al., 1977: 483). ... Research on streetwalkers and call girls in California and legal brothel workers in Nevada found that 97% of the call girls reported an increase in self-esteem after they began working in prostitution, compared with 50% of the brothel workers but only 8% of the streetwalkers (Prince, 1986: 454). Call girls expressed positive views of their work; brothel workers were generally satisfied with their work; but street prostitutes evaluated their work more negatively (Prince, 1986: 497). Similarly, a study of indoor prostitutes (most of whom worked in bars) in a Midwestern city in the United States found that three-quarters of them felt that their life had improved after entering prostitution (the remainder reported no change; none said it was worse than before); more than half said that they generally enjoy theirwork (Decker, 1979: 166, 174). In The Netherlands, three-quarters of indoor workers report that they enjoy their work (Dalder, 2004: 34). Research on 95 call girls in Sydney, Australia found that they were generally emotionally healthy (Perkins and Lovejoy, 1996). All of the escorts studied by Foltz (1979: 128) took pride in their profession and viewed themselves as morally superior to others: they consider women who are not in the life to be throwing away womans major source of power and control [sexual capital], while they as prostitutes are using it to their own advantage as well as for the benefit of society. And an Australian study found that half of call girls and brothel workers felt that their work was a major source of satisfaction in their lives, while 7 out of 10 said they would definitely choose this work if they had it to do over again (Woodward et al., 2004: 39). Other studies of indoor work report that the workers felt the job had at least some positive effect on their lives or believed that they were providing a valuable service (Brents and Hausbeck, 2005; Bryant and Palmer, 1975; Chapkis, 1997; Farley and Davis, 1978; Lever and Dolnick, 2000; Lucas, 1998; Verlarde and Warlick, 1973; West, 1993). ... As Lucas (1998: 320) concluded from her interviews with escorts and call girls, these women had the financial, social, and emotional wherewithal to structure their work largely in ways that suited them and provided . . . the ability to maintain healthy self-images. In sum, although certain aspects of the work are disliked, indoor workers are more likely than street prostitutes to describe positive aspects of their work.[/hide] Source: http://www.bayswan.org/New_Directions_prost.pdf Research so far has not found this to be the case. The same article discusses the community impact of indoor prostitution: [hide=]Street and off-street prostitution have very different effects on the surrounding community. Indoor prostitution has little, if any, negative impact on the environment and, if discreet, there is normally little public awareness of it (Reynolds, 1986).4 Arecent examination of legal brothels in Queensland, Australia, found that they had no negative impact on the local community (Crime and Misconduct Commission, 2004).[/hide] The aim of legalization is not to throw streetwalkers indoors. Perhaps this would be a side-effect of legalization, though. It would be interesting to see more research on this. A stretch, if you ask me. The same could be said about legalization of drugs. You can already pay for sex (legally) in many jurisdictions. This shouldn't translate to "Kids, if you have the money, you can do absolutely anything to a girl." If this is the attitude of your children, I would seriously question the parent's involvement in forming that attitude.. Sounds similar to the anti-pornography arguments. It's more likely that the male dominance seen in the mass media, the porn industry, sex work etc. caters to a pre-existing ideology about gender roles, rather than creates or fuels that ideology.

What exactly do you mean? And, like I said, your evidence is based on correlation, not causation. You made claims of marijuana use leading to a lack of motivation and lung disease, and I responded with sources casting doubt on such claims. Although the site touches on a broad number of claims, it does address both of your claims. Here are the two specific responses in question. My apologies for not highlighting them earlier. [hide=]For twenty-five years, researchers have searched for a marijuana-induced amotivational syndrome and have failed to find it. People who are intoxicated constantly, regardless of the drug, are unlikely to be productive members of society. There is nothing about marijuana specifically that causes people to lose their drive and ambition. In laboratory studies, subjects given high doses of marijuana for several days or even several weeks exhibit no decrease in work motivation or productivity. Among working adults, marijuana users tend to earn higher wages than non-users. College students who use marijuana have the same grades as nonusers. Among high school students, heavy use is associated with school failure, but school failure usually comes first. . . . Moderate smoking of marijuana appears to pose minimal danger to the lungs. Like tobacco smoke, marijuana smoke contains a number of irritants and carcinogens. But marijuana users typically smoke much less often than tobacco smokers, and over time, inhale much less smoke. As a result, the risk of serious lung damage should be lower in marijuana smokers. There have been no reports of lung cancer related solely to marijuana, and in a large study presented to the American Thoracic Society in 2006, even heavy users of smoked marijuana were found not to have any increased risk of lung cancer. Unlike heavy tobacco smokers, heavy marijuana smokers exhibit no obstruction of the lung's small airway. That indicates that people will not develop emphysema from smoking marijuana.[/hide] Why is intoxication relevant to the legality of a substance? Hell, the right dose of caffeine can be intoxicating. If fast food burgers had an intoxicating effect, would you be against them being legal? Age restrictions come with the territory of legalization. It's utterly ridiculous to assume that those advocating for law reform wish to allow children to legally purchase these drugs. And, for the record, age restrictions of legal marijuana has already come up in this thread. Your source is a joke. :lol: It does not list the works cited, and its arguments are primarly dependent on the false assumption that correlation implies causation. Give me some sources (with proper citations) that are not reliant on correlation alone. Your claims hold no weight at the moment.

Street prostitution is what we typically think of when we use the term, but it's a poor representation of prostitution as a whole. In North America, indoor prostitution makes up a huge portion, if not the majority, of the market. Source: Prostitution: Facts and Fictions by Dr. Ronald Weitzer

Now those are good typography sigs. :thumbup:

I'm really laughing here. :lol:

I agree that marijuana/alcohol can be seen as "gateway drugs" in the sense that their use may lead to the desire to experience other mind-altering substances. However, this is generally not how society understands the idea of a "gateway drug". I reject the gateway effect ("habitual use of a soft drug leads to 'hard' drug addiction and crime") for a number of reasons. First and foremost, the more popular soft drugs tend to be illegal, so an element of crime already exists. Secondly, the vast majority of marijuana users, even chronic marijuana users, does not become 'hard' drug users. Thirdly, the main argument behind the gateway effect is correlation -- which we know does not imply causation. Both you and warri0r missed the intention of my post: that suggesting correlation as the sole support for the gateway drug theory is ridiculous as it can be applied to any drug (including caffeine). Which is why I ended my post asking for "some other" form of support. Sources, please? This increase in chance is, again, based on a correlation. Consider that people who abuse drugs are more inclined to smoke cigarettes than the general population. It would be valid to conclude, based on this correlation, that smokers have a higher chance of abusing (other) drugs than do non-smokers. However, attempting to use this correlation alone to suggest that cigarette smoking leads to drug abuse would be a post hoc fallcy. Somebody with an addiction to alcohol will physically and mentally crave more alcohol -- not more opiates or cocaine. You don't seem to understand the idea of addiction. Take cigarette addiction, for example, which is driven by nicotine. People who are addicted to cigarettes depend on them to suppress withdrawal symptoms throughout the day (including cravings, irritability, etc). As dependence increases, so too will frequency of use. However, an increase in dependence does not necessarily lead to an increase in dose potency. If it did, cigarette addicts would be seeking out nicotine tablets, needle injections, etc. rather than merely smoking progressively more frequently. Also, an addiction to nicotine does not make the user seek out entirely different classes of drugs (e.g. cocaine and opiates) in order to get their 'fix'. Such drugs, although they may allow the individual to take their mind off the withdrawal symptoms, would not be seen by the body as a proper substitute for nicotine. Hah. :lol:

Things like resize, filters and gradient tools defeat the purpose of pixel art. It also results in a pretty bad look -- life is not shaded in linear gradients. No part of a pixel sig should be shaded with linear gradients. [Things like line, marquee, etc. are fine to use, but you shouldn't depend on them to create figures and scenes.] We aren't saying you can't use filters and effects -- by all means go ahead -- we're saying that isn't what pixel art is. It's like trying to call a canvas painting a stone sculpture. These are two different types of art, made with different tools and techniques. You've gotta be willing to accept and listen to our advice without exploding into rage -- criticism can be a lot harsher than the stuff posted here. None of us are insulting you, we are just frustrated that you ask for our advice only to ignore it.

You just aren't getting it...

You can try this one: http://www.cutandpastescripts.com/ I'm not sure on the limit. :?:

The typography absolutely kills it. - Never use any of those fonts ever again. - Use fewer fonts and keep capitalization consistent between headers. - Don't put random words together for the sake of having some text. - Don't fade certain lines of text unless you've got a good reason. - Don't stick text in each corner unless you've got a very good reason.

What. The. Hell? We aren't in preschool any more... Sorry. :|

Well, of course it doesn't use the same compression algorithm as JPG... That doesn't mean the image isn't compressed. :lol: Maybe you are looking for the words lossless and lossy?

Pixels are made with the pencil tool. No filters, no resizing, no layer effects. The image is detailed pixel by pixel, hence the name pixel art. :) I suggest making the whole thing in Photoshop. It's easier for saving, layering, zooming, etc.

Your thinking of the "typography sigs" often found on fanboards. The vast majority of these types of sigs require no effort or typographic talent (nor any creativity) -- it's simply a mishmash of seemingly random words and fonts squeezed into a sig. Here are some links on what you might call 'real' typography: http://www.noupe.com/css/css-typography ... tices.html http://ilovetypography.com/2007/09/19/1 ... ypography/ http://www.fortysomething.ca/mt/etc/archives/007298.php

How many of those hard drug addicts also drank coffee? :lol: Correlation does not imply causation. You'll need something else if you wish to argue that marijuana is a gateway drug. I agree with you, but the coffee comparison is pretty ridiculous. For one, going to buy coffee has little to no chance of exposing you to people willing to sell you hard drugs. Neither does alcohol, particularly among adults. Yet, solely because a correlation has been shown with hard drug use, Rien_Adelric claims that alcohol is the "foremost of gateway drugs." Correlation does not imply causation, whether it is alcohol, marijuana or coffee. On the other hand, exposure to "harder" drugs in the purchase of marijuana may be more appropriate grounds for an argument. :) In my opinion? Marijuana can be a "gateway drug" in that some individuals who use it may become more interested in experiencing a wider variety of highs that can only be obtained from other drugs, and its purchase does often enable us to this wider variety of substances. This is, of course, highly dependent on the individual -- in my experience, the vast majority who will smoke marijuana do not purchase it from dealers, nor do they show much more interest in other drugs than the average non-smoker.

How many of those hard drug addicts also drank coffee? :lol: Correlation does not imply causation. You'll need something else if you wish to argue that marijuana is a gateway drug.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=inkscape+tutorial

It's worth adding the original (and, in the world of computer graphics, much more commonly used) understanding of the word in the field of computer graphics. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rendering_ ... r_graphics) Huh? Uncompressed images are huge. PNG supports both 8-bit and 24-bit, and it also is compressed with the DEFLATE algorithm (same algorithm used in zlib). APNG is a PNG that supports animation. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEFLATE_(algorithm)

Vector art refers to a graphic that can be scaled infinitely without any quality loss. Essentially, a vector is a lot of different points that, when connected and filled with a colour, create an image. Rescaling the vector simply repositions the points. In more general terms, e.g. on fanboards, "vector art" uses path-based tools (such as the pen tool in Photoshop or Adobe Illustrator) to create or add to a "raster" graphic (jpg, gif, etc). "Vectors," in this sense, are often created by tracing or filtering a photograph (such as the OP). Typography deals with the art of text/type. On fanboards, once again, the term is used differently, where it basically translates to "a mismash of different text and often meaningless sentences squeezed into the dimensions of a tag."