Ltfairy

It's not that we think it can - it simply can. It's not that we think it can - it simply can. I am honestly astonished that you still don't get it. Yah, I'm wondering why as well. If that is what you mean, then are you saying that everything in this world can be interpreted and biased? Would it be better if you give me an example of something (a statement) that cannot be interpreted and cannot be biased? Perhaps I will understand better in that sense.

You see, the way horscopes are writen though makes it so that many people will be able to see that trait, even if it isn't very dominent. For example, people don't like to say they do bad things. Horscopes back up that point. If you look at something that says you are good at handling money you will most likely sit there and think "hey, I am good at handling money!" and think of all the times you were good at it. [as I've stated before]. I don't think you would sit there and think "man, I'm really bad at handling money, I just spent all this money on something I didn't need". You see, the thing is is it is probaly going to be a fairly half and half thing with many people. Unless you flat out suck with handling money there are probaly some instances that you did good, and as a human you want to reinforce that good thought. You don't want to say "I didn't do that" because its a negative idea. You also see how most horscopes are generaly "positive" (except for perhaps a few things that are neutral). Why does it never say "This person is bad at handling money"? Its because, again, as a human you don't want to beleive that. You want to be reinforced with the idea that you are a good person, and horscopes reinforce that fact. Are you "truly" saying this? A scientist says that we are made out of cells. He can then show pictures, live demonstrations [showing cells under a microscope] and can generaly PROVE it is right. Also science is not vauge. It does not say "humans are made out of a lot of things". That can be interpeted, yes. "Humans are made out of cells" really can not be interpeted. Its clearcut. Its the same thing as me saying "thats a dog" and pointing to something that is clearly a dog. It is a dog, there is no arguing that. The statement is not vauge at all. :/. You should have expected something like this to have sparked some kind of conversation. That's totally not true, horoscopes says I'm too critical, and I admit that I am. Trust me, if you are reading a proper horoscopes book, it will tell you things from both sides. Ok, let me give you something from the horoscopes book. "Virgoes give you the impression that they are always in deep thoughts." I have also asked my friend if I was like that, and they said yes. So do you think that statement above can be interpreted and biased? Another one. "Virgoes criticise a lot, and picks on the smallest mistakes." Take note that it is a negative statement. I asked around, and people who are close to me said I was like that sometimes. Again, do you think this statement can be interpreted and biased? I don't think that any of the analysis is *that* vague. An example like "Virgoes like to think a lot" is vague, but "something like "Virgoes give you the impression that they are always deep in thought" is not vague. Read some poetry. What BlueLancer just said reminded me of an entry in the Devil's Dictionary (which I rather think should be called "Lucifer's Lexicon" (having no guide to diction, but then I guess that's not as catchy): I do read poetry, and I admit that I have to do lots of interpretations. But astrology is not as vague as poetry, where the writer likes to give vague sentences with lots of meanings inside it. So I see absolutely no need to interpret the analysis, reason being that the meaning presented is clear enough.

I am surprised you still don't understand after the number of times I have repeated myself. You did interpret it when you read it. I already explained how they can be. They can be told that astrology works. It is even just implied that it works by their being presented with a horoscope to read. Yes it does, if you can't explain why horoscopes aren't accurate for every single person in the world then it is no better than rolling a dice to decide their personalities. No, I said that to you it might as well be magic. You can't explain how it is happening so for all you know it is magic. Anyway, have you come to a decision on who is right about when birth is? You say when you exit the womb (an event which lasts more than several seconds - you still haven't responded to that) yet kelem_ryu says it is when you take the first breath - who is right? Seriously, what is written in there is in there, why would I need to interpret it? And may I know, what is your definition of interpretation? So what if they are told that it works, they can still not believe in them unless they actually seeing that it works. How are they biased in that case? I'm sure they aren't that dumb to believe it just because the astrologer says so. Ok, so I'm not that good at astrology, but I am following a book written by a famous astrologer. If you want an answer, just go and find someone who can really understand astrology, and who will not lie about it to explain to you. Ok, and may I know how does it make horoscopes biased? Recalling back what you did doesn't mean that "I'm gonna recall back and try to make this astrological reading fit me.", if I were that person, I would just be like "Ok, if I'm like that then I'm like that. If I'm not, then I'm not." I accept it when the astrological readings tell me that something is true, and denies it when it isn't. It's not as if I'm gonna try my best to make everything I read fit me. How is it biased then? If interpretation is going to make things that biased, then everything in this world needs to be questioned. Every scientific fact can be interpreted, does that mean all of them are biased? This argument wasn't initiated by me, and I didn't expect it to become like this. As I have said before, I'm not forcing anyone to believe in it. Just take it as a form of entertainment, and not take anything too seriously (if you don't believe in it). If you still have any more arguments against it, either send me a PM, or just ignore this thread.

My point is that you can't. Therefore it is no more credible than magic. You do believe in astrology. You cited your horoscope as being accurate. Thus, your 'proof' is flawed. People are told that astrology works - that can give bias to their interpretation of that first reading. You are hardly in a position to tell me what will and will not stand, when you are unable to explain how astrology works, other than it being magic. If you know that it isn't biased then you accept that almost anyone can make any reading apply to them through interpretation. Firstly, I read it from a book, and I didn't interpret it myself. Second, no one can be biased when they are reading something new for the first time. Thirdly, telling you about how it works has nothing to do with whether it is believable or not. (And I am arguing that it is believable) Fourthly, I never said it was magic.

Ahh, so which of you is right? kelem_ryu said that it is when you first take a breath. He's read 24 books on the subject. Also you are wrong, since coming out of the mother's womb is a drawn out process. Not possible, since you were coming out of the womb for more than several seconds. You haven't said how the position of the stars affects your character traits - only that they do. Why not say HOW they affect character traits? Look at the video Mercifull posted. That shows how people interpret horoscopes to apply to them. Look at it. Look at it. Seriously, even if I were to tell you how this thing works, is it gonna mean anything? If I manage to tell you how it works, are you gonna say "Oh, ok. I'm convinced. This whole horoscopes thing is true."? And I don't want to repeat myself. No one who reads horoscopes the first time believes in it, so in no way can they interpret it. That means your saying about it being biased is not true and will not stand. I don't have to watch the video, because I know that it isn't biased from the beginning.

This is very simple. Pay attention and you may finally understand. An astrologer publishes an analysis of a person's character. A person who believes in astrology reads that analysis. That person, because they believe in astrology, subconsciously interprets what is said so that it can apply to them. Example: "x is impulsive when it comes to shopping" - the reader will think of times when they have been impulsive. Because they don't want to see their belief structure come crashing down they subconsciously interpret things to apply to them. Another example: "x is careful with money" - the reader will think of times when they have been careful with money, not calling to mind all those when they haven't. Because they don't want to see their belief structure come crashing down they subconsciously interpret things to apply to them. It happens with all beliefs, faith healing, alternative medicines, fortune-telling and so on. Because a person WANTS it to apply to them, they interpret it so that it can. That is one of the reasons self-reporting is considered inaccurate in psychological experiments. There is no exact time of birth. Birth is drawn out over several minutes. It takes that long for a baby to come out of the womb, from the time the top of it's head emerges to the time the umbilical cord is cut. You have still not said how it works. You have only said that it does. You have said that it controls aspects of you, that is not saying how it does that. You have not said WHY your character traits are already determined, or how. I am not interpreting horoscopes to see whether they apply to myself or not. I am looking at the subject critically and objectively with regards to evidence of how it works. There is no room for bias since my opinion has not entered into it. That is totally not true. One can never believe in something unless one reads it and what it says is true. It's the same for horoscopes. When one person decides to read it, it can't be that the person believed it right from the start. If that's the case, what you said is not going to stand. The person who just started reading it is no way biased. For me, it's the same. When I first started reading horoscopes, I did not believed it, neither did I know what it was about. For me, time of birth is the time when you come out from your mother's womb, and no when else is it birth time. Astrology also takes that as time of birth. Read again, your character traits are determined by your time of birth, the place you were born and the position of the stars at the time of birth. That is "how" your character traits are determined. Did you even read what I said earlier? Are you sure there isn't even a tinge of your own opinion in it? Well, I do believe there is. :shock: You are serious about believing in magic aren't you? I am not the one proposing something which cannot be proven. You can easily get the info from relatives present at the time of birth, it's not impossible. My father, for example, has taken down the exact mins and secs I was born. Strangely enough, I don't see how these room of people interpreted the way they want it to be.

I don't know how many times I've said this now, it is getting boring because you still don't understand. People who believe in astrology are biased. They can interpret things to apply to them. Self-reporting is not a reliable form of evidence because of this bias. I never said anything about lying about their personalities. Why not say *roughly* how it works then? Fortunately the real world does, and that's why astrology is confined to sideshows and gossip magazines nowadays. Hmm, ok. But I'm sure that no astrologer can make horoscopes just by self-reporting, reason being that they can't possibly have the character traits of everyone in this world. But those astrologers managed to make it so that everyone has character traits from these twelve horoscopes. They probably did a worldwide research and analysis, to be able to come up with all that analysis, which means they didn't do self-reporting. Wait, let me get this clear first. You mean people as in the astrologers, or those who just read horoscope books and believes in them? If it is astrologers you are referring to, what I said above already shows they didn't do self-reporting. If you are talking about people who just read and believe in horoscopes, there is no way to do self-reporting. Firstly, the analysis is already written in the horoscope books. They can only refer to it and determine if it applies to them. Unless they write horoscope books by themselves, which is impossible to accomplish if they just do it by self-reporting, they can never do self-reporting. Regarding how it works, I shall try to explain. When you are born, your character traits are already determined. It is determined by the place you were born, the exact time (mins and secs) you were born and the position of the stars at the time of birth. Horoscopes (sun sign) are the basics of your character, it controls your sub conscious reactions and actions. Rising sign is like your mask, and it is what others feel about you. Any more things you want to ask?

It is not black and white. You have already said that people can have elements from other horoscopes, yet you have not explained what determines what characteristics they have or in what circumstances they can have these extraneous characteristics. Quote where I said that. You cannot trust peoples' own judgements on whether a prediction applies to them. They are biased and can make almost anything apply to themselves if they want to. How many times do I have to say this? This. Is. Not. Proof. You've still not explained how any of this works. It's just the same as kelem_ryu - you're sitting there saying "it works, honest!" with no explanations. Are you kidding me? It's not in black and white? Then what are those horoscope books called? I don't think I have to repeat what kelem already stated. What he said about those birth charts are what determines if you have traits from other horoscopes. That is not proof. That is people who believe in astrology applying things to themselves. By your rationale, someone who believes in god saying that god answers their prayers/talks to them is objective proof that god exists. The newspaper astrologers started out just like you. They just wanted to turn a fast buck, if you're going by how people claim predictions apply to them then the newspaper astrologers must be the most accurate of all. Look at the words in bold, from what I interpreted, you are saying that I started out just like them, trying to turn a fast buck. That's equivalent to saying that I'm doing all this for money. Sorry if I misinterpreted it. So you are saying that people cannot trust that they are a certain kind of person (like they are humourous) even if it's so obvious? It's just ridiculous. You know who you are best, how can you say that "Oh, it's just my own judgement of what kind of person I am, so I shouldn't believe in it."? No one can be that fake can they, denying who they really are? As I am not an expert in astrology, I can't say *exactly* how it works, but the fact that what it said about me is true already convinced me. I don't need any more facts, thank you.

That is not proof. That is people who believe in astrology applying things to themselves. By your rationale, someone who believes in god saying that god answers their prayers/talks to them is objective proof that god exists. The newspaper astrologers started out just like you. They just wanted to turn a fast buck, if you're going by how people claim predictions apply to them then the newspaper astrologers must be the most accurate of all. If the fact that it applies to people is not a proof, you might as well be saying that I am to deny that I am a person with good analytical skills and am down to earth because that's what the horoscopes said that applies to me.. Are you saying that? Because I know that I am like that, and the fact that it applies to me already convinced me that it is possible and is a concrete proof. Besides, horoscopes is something that is written down. Different from believing in god, it is in black and white and can be seen with our eyes. But god cannot be seen, and that already makes it not possible to compare it with astrology. So you are saying I am doing this to earn money? How am I supposed to earn money just by posting it on tip it? Most newspaper astrologers give analysis of your daily life, which makes it not reliable at all, as it can be easily changed. I can even say that their prediction of how your whole year's luck is not accurate, as it is not something we can predict accurately. But analysis of a person's character is different, first it can be proven by the person himself. Let's say an astrologer analyses a person's character, that person can easily find out if it is true right on the spot. Character isn't something that changes easily, neither is it something that an astrologer can falsely claim to be true. I'm not forcing you to believe in any part of it, but I also want to prove it to you that it is believable.

Astrology is not possible at all, how can the position of planets affect peoples' personalities? I'm sure the newspaper astrologers believe they are right and you are wrong. That's how erroneous belief in something works - you think that your belief is right and all others are wrong, just look at all the religions that think their god is the only true one and all the others are false. The simple explanation is that you're both wrong. I do not need to provide evidence for my claims that your 'predictions' (predictions of peoples' characters) can apply to more than 1/12th of all people because they are true prima facie. That means that the burden of proof is upon you to support your claims which are contrary to common sense. That's how the burden of proof works - you're claiming something that is not true at face value, therefore it is up to you to prove it. Trust me, if this whole horoscopes thing is just a ridiculous thing that isn't true *at all*, no one will believe it. The reason that it is true is the fact that it does apply completely to people (not everyone), as in, everything said about their own horoscope is true. Don't tell me that those that thinks it is true are just wierd people imagining it to be true. It's not an imagination, it's something that is right in front of the eyes. In the horoscopes book, it says that I am someone who is good at analysing and am pretty down to earth, and it's completely a fact. The newspaper astrologers are doing it for money, while I'm just doing it for pure interest. Who do you think is more reliable? Of course they will claim they are correct, if they claim they are wrong, who will still spend money on it? You have to realise that they can twist facts around just for their own profit, no matter how misleading it can be. Regarding your point stated earlier, if the whole astrology thing should start at the time of conception, real astrologers will have already corrected their mistake. Just like in a science experiment, I'm sure the scientist will correct his mistake when he finds what he is doing is wrong. The fact that the astrologers did not do it is because what they previously did did not turn out to be an error. It can be testable. Just take a (large) group of people born under the same horoscopes, and let them take a personality test, I'm sure there are at least half of the people with similar answers to the questions. Ok, so how does the fact that Pluto no longer is a planet affects the accuracy of astrological readings? It's not as if it's not there anymore. It's just not termed as a 'planet'. Again, what are you trying to say here about Uranus, Neptune and Pluto? Yah, their names might have been a vote, but how does it affect the accuracy of astrological readings? If your saying that this whole thing needs proof, we already have plenty. First, the horoscopes thing pretty much applied to me. Second, it also applied to some people who posted here, and there will be more who find that it applies to them. What more concrete proof do you need? The fact that it applies to people already shows that it is true, and is possible. What about the rest 50% that have a birthday? What I mean by apply here is the fact that it applies to them 100%. As in everything said in their own horoscope (virgo for me) is true for them. As for the rest, they will have character traits from other horoscopes, but there won't be a case where none of their character traits is in the horoscope readings.

It's not magic, and it has nothing to do with it. It's a study of stars and how they affect the people born under that period of time. I am not sure how it works, but it does apply completely to 50% of the people worldwide. Think again, if it is that vague, horoscopes would not have existed at all. Let's say horoscopes is a theory, if it is that vague, do you think there is still a point in studying it? The ones in bold that you said is not possible at all, how can someone be without character? Well, that's what businessmen are like. You can't do anything about them can you? They have the money and they can publish anything they want, and they will definitely want to publish something that appeals to the general crowd. Unless you are government authorities, you can't do anything. Well, I would love to, but it's not possible. I can't possibly travel around the world campaigning for it. I don't have that power, neither do I have the resources.

I can ask you the same thing, can you say that my analysis of the character of these 500,000,000 Leos is so general that it applies to *everyone* in this world? Hold on a moment. are you still arguing your stand, or did you just change your stand of argument? You were arguing that my analysis is too general, and here you are asking me if my analysis is general enough to include the 500,000,000. Aren't you contradicting yourself here? And didn't I point out above already? Read again what I said. I said it's both sided, so no matter which side you are on (whether you think it's too general, or whether you think it isn't general enough to include everyone under the same horoscope), it's not a valid argument.

I know 8 Leo's (myself included), 5 of which I have known for over 6 years. None of us are even remotely similar. A horoscope that covers all of us without being so vague it covers every person on the planet is essentially impossible to write. That's only 8 people, but there are billions in the world, can you say all of them are like what you said? I should put myself more clearly, there are similarities and differences in character, but never are all of them similar or different. Horoscopes are both sided, pointing out the similarities you have with people born under the same horoscopes, and at the same time, differences between you and people from other horoscopes. Did I ever mention *anywhere* that I am going to let this horoscopes thing control *every* single move of my life? The reason I read it is because I get to know myself better, and what has that got to do with controlling my future? Yup, libra for you. :) Libras are a group of perfectionist. They love all things which are sweet and beautiful, and likes to seek for freedom. They have attractive looking complexions, and usually have a sweet smile. They are very popular, but they prefer to keep a distance from others. For male libras, they like girls with good facial features and lots of common interests. For female libras, they like knowledgable guys who are respectable of others, looks are also an important criteria. Do you know what vague means? It means 'can apply to everyone' in this context. That means that I could give a horoscope like this: "Has two arms, two legs, hair growing out of the head, two eyes, likes eating, enjoys the intake of fluids" - that can apply to 99% of people. It is still vague though. Understand yet? There is a difference between freedom and independence. Please don't confuse yourself. You know a very small minority of guys then. It is still painfully vague. Because there is no method to it. It is a case of providing vague statements to which people who believe in the magic of astrology can say "oh that applies to me!" It is BS because you have said that people of different zodiac signs can have traits from others. That is like my speculating about the appearance of someone whom I've never met saying "he could have brown hair, but it may also be black, blonde or red - he may also be a woman." Gotcha! :P That's why horoscopes is still believable, not 100%, but still to a certain extent. When someone who believes in something self-reports then it is not evidence of success. They are biased and can easily interpret your vague statements so that they apply to themselves - that is not accuracy; it is being vague and open ended. Can I repeat myself again, no one character trait can apply to *everyone*. If that's what vague is, then it isn't vague, reason being that the character of one person can never be the character of *everyone*. Ok, so my example isn't that good. Nevertheless, are you 100% positive that *everyone* in this world likes to seek freedom? Is there any statistical evidence that says it's true? No I presume, so again, you can never say that "likes to seek freedom" applies to *everyone*. Let me say this clear, what you are saying is that my analysis can apply to everyone, and here above darkrick has pointed out that it's impossible. One of you is arguing that my analysis is no way accurate as it can be applied to everyone, and the other says that it's no way accurate because even people from the same horoscopes can be different. So I shall make myself clear. An analysis can never apply to everyone. People born under the same horoscopes can still be different, but at least 50% of them share similar traits (I'm talking about people in the world here, where there's a high posibility). Does that answer your question? It is different at times, and similar at others, but it's never just similar or just different. Which means none of your arguments stand, as what you are saying is that it is similar to everyone's character. Darkrick's argument doesn't stand either, as there are still people who are born under the same horoscopes and share similar traits. Libras are a group of perfectionist. They love all things which are sweet and beautiful, and likes to seek for freedom. They have attractive looking complexions, and usually have a sweet smile. They are very popular, but they prefer to keep a distance from others. For male libras, they like girls with good facial features and lots of common interests. For female libras, they like knowledgable guys who are respectable of others, looks are also an important criteria. Taurus are a group of extremely shy and strong people. They seldom throw temper, and when they do, it can be destructive. Even though they are shy, they can withstand a great amount of pressure, and are unafraid of failures. They are also independent, and can do almost anything by themselves. For male taurus, they like talented and gentle girls. For female taurus, they like guys who are willing to improve and are mature in their thinking. Virgo are a group of kind-hearted perfectionist. They want everything to be perfect, and they pick on even the slightest fault. They are pretty down to earth, and have good analytical skills. They mature at an early age, and are careful of the smallest details. They are rather shy, but have a strong determination. Even though they appear to be weak and gentle, they have an inner strength much greater than what others think. They are full of determination, and have pure thinking of their life. Once again, I'm repeating myself here. The horoscopes I am talking about here has nothing to do with predicting your future, it's just a way of letting you know why you behave in a certain way to things. It makes you realise some of the similarities you have with people (not *everyone*) born under the same horoscope, and the differences you have with people (not *everyone*) born under different horoscopes.

Gotcha! :P That's why horoscopes is still believable, not 100%, but still to a certain extent. And you might know things about yourself which you have never thought of.

Virgoes are a group of perfectionist. They mature at an early age, and are able to be independent. They are good critics, and are good at analysing. They are pretty down to earth, but they always give people the impression of deep in thought when others see them. They can be pretty stubborn at times, making them unwilling to step down in times of defeat. i agree on the topic of horoscopes, i just cant understand why some people devote themselves to them religously. sorry for not contributing to your topic the way you would have liked. I have already said, it's an analysis of character traits, nothing to do with daily life or luck. At my opinion, they may have those traits but they may not show them much, or just too much, or w/e. Btw, I am Pisces .. tell me what I'm like : :ohnoes: Pisces are a group of soft-hearted, kind people. They like to dream a lot, and find it hard to motivate themselves to succeed. The pisces symbol is two fishes heading in different directions. Different from the twins in gemini, these two fishes symbolises either retreat or success (they will usually follow the current and retreat). Pisces are shy, and thus find themselves easily hurt. For male pisces, they like sweet and mature girls. For female pisces, they like guys who are handsome and smart. There you go. :) So any horoscope can have traits of any other horoscope? And there was me thinking things couldn't get any vaguer. As said before, everyone will want this (well, far more than 90%). You might as well chuck some other clever deductions in there too, like "has hair" or "walks on 2 legs". Heh, certainly not true. Isn't that a contradiction? Again, you just described everyone in the entire world. This doesn't even deserve to be called a pseudoscience. I am honestly surprised you take these things seriously - just LOOK at what you've said; even you have expressed how anything can apply to anyone. There is no method to this. There is still a difference, they aren't 100% similiar. And one character trait can *never* apply to *everyone*. Besides, some people have character traits 99% as what the horoscopes said they were, so it is not vague in my opinion. Are you sure that more than 90% of the people in the world seeks for freedom? Well, that might be true in Europe, where the people there are given lots of freedom. But it's not true at all in Asia, where many people tend to rely on their country and parents. They *tend* to be popular, doesn't mean they *like* to be popular. It's not a contradiction of the character, please don't confuse yourself. Again, are you sure *everyone* likes girls with good facial features and lots of common interest? Well, I do know some guys that don't mind anything about how their girlfriends look, or whether they have any common interests. And can you tell me in what way is this BS?

They don't have the exact same character traits, but they have *very similiar* ones. The reason behind this difference is the fact that people have traits from multiple horoscopes. Me for example, I have traits from virgo, cancer, scorpio, pisces. But most of your traits are from your basic horoscope (virgo for me), and it's not that hard to find your traits from other horoscopes as well. As requested, I will give an analysis of your father. But I can't guarantee a 100%, reason as stated above. Since your father is a libra, here it goes. Libras are a group of perfectionist. They love all things which are sweet and beautiful, and likes to seek for freedom. They have attractive looking complexions, and usually have a sweet smile. They are very popular, but they prefer to keep a distance from others. For male libras, they like girls with good facial features and lots of common interests. For female libras, they like knowledgable guys who are respectable of others, looks are also an important criteria. Aquarius are a group of passionate people. They like to form brother-sister relationships with both genders. They are pretty humorous and do not mind a lot about how they conduct their relationship with their friends. They believe that true friendship is hidden inside the heart, and it shouldn't be just on the surface. Are you sure you are a leo? Tell me the exact day you are born in. You might have gotten it wrong. Because the description was made by a bored astrologist who thought it can be applied to all the hundreds of millions of "leos" around the world who have a similar personality, curly hair and similar days (nevermind the fact that statistically most Leos are from China where curly hair is a nearly inexistant genetic trait.) Oh wait, maybe horoscopes only apply to americans. I forgot. The planets can distinguish different people and countries and nationalities. As I have said above to Anesthesia, people born under the same horoscopes do not have 100% same character traits, but they are *very similiar*. Also, I have said in the first page that I do not believe in things easily. This whole horoscopes thing have convinced me to believe in them, because what they described about me is for the most part true. Btw, I'm not an american, but an asian. Well about that "seeking freedom" part, I can be pretty sure that some people who relies on their parents a lot would not like to leave their parents and have freedom, the reason being they can't fend for themselves. Believe me, there are people who do not have the ability to take care of themselves. This character trait is deep down inside the person, but circumstances can change what the person decides to do. For the Aries part, it's the same thing. Circumstances change a person (even a person's character), how can you judge that they aren't loyal (before) even though they have finally betrayed their friends?

Your utmost welcome. Hope my analysis has changed your perspection. :

My analysis is nothing about money or how your day is going to be, it's a character analysis which I have proved to myself to be quite true. Ok, to convince you, I'll give an analysis. Virgo are a group of kind-hearted perfectionist. They want everything to be perfect, and they pick on even the slightest fault. They are pretty down to earth, and have good analytical skills. They mature at an early age, and are careful of the smallest details. They are rather shy, but have a strong determination. Even though they appear to be weak and gentle, they have an inner strength much greater than what others think. They are full of determination, and have pure thinking of their life. I read that and thought you said, "I'm a librarian," and I was like - what in the world? Anyway - I'm a Leo because that's the most awesome one there is. I also read my horoscope everyday because it's funny. I also read the horoscope of friends and family so I can make strange comments to them during the day about their horoscope. Leo are a group of confident, arrogant people. They love attention, and likes to be surrounded with people. They are energetic and passionate, and likes to be popular (usually they are). They are pretty self-centered and have curly hair (a feature that makes them look like lions and lionesses : ). Aries are a group of passionate people who loves noisy scenes. They are always full of energy, and treats their friends with 100% loyalty. They usually have a "sunshine smile", and they can brighten the days of other people. For male aries, they like clever and gentle girls. For female aries, they like energetic guys with idol looks. Self confidence is also very important Libras are a group of perfectionist. They love all things which are sweet and beautiful, and likes to seek for freedom. They have attractive looking complexions, and usually have a sweet smile. They are very popular, but they prefer to keep a distance from others. For male libras, they like girls with good facial features and lots of common interests. For female libras, they like knowledgable guys who are respectable of others, looks are also an important criteria. Here you go, have fun. :)

Being a believer of horoscopes, I am curious what horoscopes you guys are. I can perhaps give an analysis of your character, and you can then tell me how much it relates to you. The reason that I believe in horoscopes is that they have allowed me to know my strengths and weakness, and how I am unique. I'm not a person who believes in things easily, but the character analysis has convinced me. So post away! : PS. I am a virgo :P Just a reminder, what I am going to analyse is *nothing* about your daily horoscope. It's an analysis of your character traits and what makes you different from the other horoscopes.

Hmm, if that word is really going to be banned, half the rs population will be gone. Seriously, it's not much of a hassle to be called a noob, you can well give an intelligent response, both showing your maturity, and at the same time making the player speechless. What I often do is, I would give a reply like "If what you said is true, then we are all noobs, since we are all players." Trust me, it works like a charm. :

It is definitely worth it. Our willingness to sacrifice for others in times of trouble is what makes us different from animals. Helping others in game is the same as helping others in real life, and true happiness can only be achieved by lending a helping hand.

Mod Conor was really nice to let me take a pic of him. So... here he is! Enjoy! :thumbsup:

I'll try my best to go, not only to congrat you, but also to see lady heinous. :)

Deceived into thinking they have more? If you read the knowledge base, it's got enough information about player moderators (like what you have listed). Maybe if it has something like "pmods get free membership"...you become a mod then you find out there's really no free membership, that's what you call being deceived.Oh and how did you know about those other "confidential" stuff anyway? :roll: [/b] It's all in the knowledge base. :)

Oh no, you got me! :shock: When I was modded, my heart just raced like a rocket and I stared at the invitation for about 5 mins before reading it. :