Trutharchivist

All right. Another random ramble! This time, my excuse for avoiding the forum is low traffic - there aren't many people following it. The again, what I mean to tell here is mainly exposition to Judaism - and at least three of my followers are Jews themselves, while I think at least one of the others already knows what I meant to say. Which make this ramble's point a tad more moot than it would be otherwise.

Anyway, tomorrow's Pesach, AKA Passover, and since there isn't much Jeish knowledge floating around this forum, I thought I'll explain about it a little. Depending on the interest, I might go on to start a series of essays I'm actually capable of writing with no farther research - simple essays, about Jewish holidays and their meaning. So, if you're interested in that - do say so. To the Jews I'll say: do check to see if I forgot something important.

Anyway, let's begin.

Pesach (as it will be referred to in this essay, wording explanation later) is the first holiday in the Hebrew calendar of the Tanakh (=Old Testament, for Christians), in which the first month of the spring is also the first month of the year. Nowadays, the Hebrew calendar year is considered to start six months earlier - hopefully we'll get to that in another day. Anyway, random interesting fact: the ancient Roman calendar, an ancestor of the modern Gregorian calendar, also used to start at spring in March - January and February apparently didn't exist. Which I'm still having trouble understanding, but it works with December being the 10th month.

But that's just about the time. Why, and how, do we celebrate Pesach?

Well, according to the Tanakh, the Exodus of the Israelites from Egypt - our nation becoming a nation and gaining its freedom - happened on the 15th day of the first month. Nowadays, this month is known by the name "Nissan" - a name from Messopotamia. This was the conclusion of the Ten Plagues with the Plague of the Firstborn - at exactly midnight the night before, all the Egyptian firstborns died, leading to the Pharaoh of the time deciding to let the Israelites go. During the day before, the Israelites were required to sacrifice a lamb for each family and spread its blood on their lintels. G-d promised them that if they'd do that - He will pass over their houses and protect then from the Plague. Or that He'll step on their houses, figuratively - both interepretations of the word are possible. The sacrificial lamb was known as the Pesach sacrifice, and was observed for generations as long as the Temple (or the Tabernacle before it) stood.

There are a lot of rules about the Pesach sacrifice. Some of them differred between the original first sacrifice and how it was observed later, but most don't. Either way, nowadays it's not practiced, so we'll go on to the things that are practiced.

During this day, and the week following it (starting from sunset the day before and ending after the stars come out on the seventh), it is forbidden for Jews to eat anything leavened. Or, well, anything leavened that is made from one of specific five kinds of grains. Either way, that ends up being very limiting to one's diet. One is not allowed to hold leaven during this week, too - we burn it the day before. The 1st and 7th day are also Yamim Tovim (lit. "good days"), which means all work is forbidden except for things required to make food. And during the first evening, at the night we were supposed to eat the Pesach lamb (oh, yeah, it's the kind of sacrifice you eat, forgot to mention that), we make a Seder.

What is a Seder? The literal translation of the word is "order", and it's kind of what this is: an organized evening plan, that includes mostly a retelling of the Exodus, along with eating certain foods as reminders for specific things: Carpas, which can be any one of a myriad of vegetables, is mostly an appetizer (eaten a very long time before the feast); Matzah, unleavened bread, to remind us how our ancestors didn't have time to let their bread be leavened before exiting Egypt, and as a "food of the poor", that was probably all our ancestors cold afford during their slavery time (that last part of the explanation is a tad more iffy); and Maror, a bitter vegetable - most people eat lettuce, some eat Horseradish or other vegetables - this one is to remind us of how bitter and hard it was for our ancestors in slavery. We also eat some sort of sandwich of the two last ones together, because when the temple existed we were to do so with those and the sacrificial lamb. In addition, we drink four glasses of wine throughout the Seder, each at a different point - some, myself included, drink non-alcoholic, natural grape juice (I can't stand wine). We pour another glass that is supposedly for Eliyahu (Elijah) the Prophet. This part is... kind of a long story. Suffice it to say there's a specific reason why we drink four glasses, and the same reason could indicate on five instead of four.

That's it for the basic practices of the holiday, I think - I'm a bit tired when I write this, so I might've forgotten something important, but I rather think I only left out non-obligatory practices (not talking about legumes, or the Hallel, or... IDK). Something else that is important in relatio to the Seder: it's all centered around the telling of the story of Exodus, especially to one's children to keep the traditions going. Due to that, there are many practices that are mostly to keep the children awake and to make them ask questions.

Honestly, I planned to write here about the importance of questions in Judaism, but it's getting late and this status update is already long. So, suffice it to say I think questions are very important and encouraged in Judaism.

Anyway, that has just been a try at randomly explaning Pesach to gentiles. Honestly, it's kind of the most central holiday in Judaism - though Hannukah is somewhat more known, probably due to it often conciding with Christmas. As a matter of fact, Hannukah is one of the lesser holidays.

Anyway, thank you for reading, and have a good day. 

So, I'm going to pretend a lot of people are going to read this. In truth, there's a slight chance this'll be another swing-and-miss where no one reads (or reacts) to it. It could be that some of my followers read and reply. I would bet on a "people read but don't reply, just drop upvotes", considering this is the reaction to any status update that is longer than three paragraphs. So maybe I should just keep it short or something...

Anyway, this time I'm going to do a "don't judge a book by it's movie" rant. You'd think it'd be wasted on the avid book readers who make up most of the Shard; that's what I think, at least, but why not ignore that too? I mean, if nearly no one reads this, nearly no one is going to protest and say they never judge a book by it's movie. They'll probably tell the truth. But today, I actually want to talk about average to good movies, that people don't know are adaptations.

Fine, I'll admit it. Even though my list of books I've read is huge, I can't really say I've read many books which got this treatment. There's apparently a Jurassic Park book, and I've never read it or watched the movie. There are far more than a handful of others that got actually such good films as adaptations that the original was forgotten. Did you know the Prestige was based on a book? An example I can sadly note I've watched but not read. And that's a pity. I really should read this book. I'm not sure what's the situation with World War Z - maybe with that the book is just as famous, maybe not.

But here, I want to lay down some films that're based on books that I have read, and that went to be better known than the source material: Howl's Moving Castle, the Secret World of Arrietty (the original book is called the Borrowers), How to Train Your Dragon and perhaps Home (originally the True Meaning of Smekday, too). With Arrietty and HtTYD I'm afraid I've found the books because of the movies, too.

I'm not here to say those movies aren't good; but I'd defenitely say they strayed from the source material, far enough that I'll consider every one of them an independant work of art from the books that happens to share names and a small amount of charcterization from the books. So don't get me wrong - I loved most of those movies (Home being an exception here, but I'm not getting into that). But... When I read a book, and then I learn that it has been adapted, what I want is not a different story with similarly named characters and some plot points from the books. I want to see, as much as possible, the same story, translated to another medium. And it's true that at least three of those gave us amazing stories and the world will be lacking without them, but... I kind of wish those adaptations never existed, at least sometimes. Now that they're there, no one is going to make an actual adaptation of the book.

Take the Jungle Book, for example. Or Peter Pan. Or heck, Alice in Wonderland is only out of place here because it's hard to say it has any plot in the first place. All three of those bring to your heads, almost immediately, the Disney animated movies. And if there's one thing I don't trust Disney with it's loyalty to the source material (though I hope this trend will change with Percy Jackson) - just look at the Black Cauldron, or Artemis Fowl, or heck - every single fairy tale these guys put their hands on. And the live action remakes just make sure that the image in your head is going to be that same image they placed there. So right, the exmples I brought were actually Studio Ghibli and DreamWorks. But that's because I don't want to start thinking over Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland or the Jungle Book to make sure the differences were significant, and considering the Black Cauldron thankful relative failure (I wouldn't want to see too much defiling of one of my favorite book series) it's hard to say the movie is better known than the book. And I didn't mention Shrek because I've never read the book.

Pause while you gasp at the realization Shrek is loosely based on a book.

Actually, I'm starting to sense a pattern. Maybe DreamWorks in general are great at expanding on existent ideas and making them work even though they changed the source material beyond recognition. Studio Ghibli seemed decent at it on two occasions so far at least, too! Anyway, there's the "there's never going to be a loyal adaptation" angle, which is sad in and of itself, but also... How many people have seen those movies and never even bothered thinking about the fact they're based on books? How many of my imaginarily large audience even knew all those movies were based on books? My eldest brother said he watched Howl's Moving Castle and so doesn't want to read the book. Maybe it's because he has a lot on his reading schedule and it really didn't catch his eye (and it probably says something about how much he trusts me when it comes to book recommendations), but in any case - he lost a story that, in my opinion, is great. And I'm sure I did too by not reading the Prestige, Shrek, and many other books I didn't even know existed. I just... really wish more people would know about the books, because they're awesome. Especially the True Meaning of Smekday, which I'm not sure could ever really be translated to the big screen. 

Anyway, that has just been your latest rant from a slightly depressed Trutharchivist. Hope you liked it. Maybe I should've tried making YouTube videos about it or something. Anyway, have a good day.

Honestly, at this point, I should probably just go to sleep.

So, I'm going to pretend a lot of people are going to read this. In truth, there's a slight chance this'll be another swing-and-miss where no one reads (or reacts) to it. It could be that some of my followers read and reply. I would bet on a "people read but don't reply, just drop upvotes", considering this is the reaction to any status update that is longer than three paragraphs. So maybe I should just keep it short or something...

Anyway, this time I'm going to do a "don't judge a book by it's movie" rant. You'd think it'd be wasted on the avid book readers who make up most of the Shard; that's what I think, at least, but why not ignore that too? I mean, if nearly no one reads this, nearly no one is going to protest and say they never judge a book by it's movie. They'll probably tell the truth. But today, I actually want to talk about average to good movies, that people don't know are adaptations.

Fine, I'll admit it. Even though my list of books I've read is huge, I can't really say I've read many books which got this treatment. There's apparently a Jurassic Park book, and I've never read it or watched the movie. There are far more than a handful of others that got actually such good films as adaptations that the original was forgotten. Did you know the Prestige was based on a book? An example I can sadly note I've watched but not read. And that's a pity. I really should read this book. I'm not sure what's the situation with World War Z - maybe with that the book is just as famous, maybe not.

But here, I want to lay down some films that're based on books that I have read, and that went to be better known than the source material: Howl's Moving Castle, the Secret World of Arrietty (the original book is called the Borrowers), How to Train Your Dragon and perhaps Home (originally the True Meaning of Smekday, too). With Arrietty and HtTYD I'm afraid I've found the books because of the movies, too.

I'm not here to say those movies aren't good; but I'd defenitely say they strayed from the source material, far enough that I'll consider every one of them an independant work of art from the books that happens to share names and a small amount of charcterization from the books. So don't get me wrong - I loved most of those movies (Home being an exception here, but I'm not getting into that). But... When I read a book, and then I learn that it has been adapted, what I want is not a different story with similarly named characters and some plot points from the books. I want to see, as much as possible, the same story, translated to another medium. And it's true that at least three of those gave us amazing stories and the world will be lacking without them, but... I kind of wish those adaptations never existed, at least sometimes. Now that they're there, no one is going to make an actual adaptation of the book.

Take the Jungle Book, for example. Or Peter Pan. Or heck, Alice in Wonderland is only out of place here because it's hard to say it has any plot in the first place. All three of those bring to your heads, almost immediately, the Disney animated movies. And if there's one thing I don't trust Disney with it's loyalty to the source material (though I hope this trend will change with Percy Jackson) - just look at the Black Cauldron, or Artemis Fowl, or heck - every single fairy tale these guys put their hands on. And the live action remakes just make sure that the image in your head is going to be that same image they placed there. So right, the exmples I brought were actually Studio Ghibli and DreamWorks. But that's because I don't want to start thinking over Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland or the Jungle Book to make sure the differences were significant, and considering the Black Cauldron thankful relative failure (I wouldn't want to see too much defiling of one of my favorite book series) it's hard to say the movie is better known than the book. And I didn't mention Shrek because I've never read the book.

Pause while you gasp at the realization Shrek is loosely based on a book.

Actually, I'm starting to sense a pattern. Maybe DreamWorks in general are great at expanding on existent ideas and making them work even though they changed the source material beyond recognition. Studio Ghibli seemed decent at it on two occasions so far at least, too! Anyway, there's the "there's never going to be a loyal adaptation" angle, which is sad in and of itself, but also... How many people have seen those movies and never even bothered thinking about the fact they're based on books? How many of my imaginarily large audience even knew all those movies were based on books? My eldest brother said he watched Howl's Moving Castle and so doesn't want to read the book. Maybe it's because he has a lot on his reading schedule and it really didn't catch his eye (and it probably says something about how much he trusts me when it comes to book recommendations), but in any case - he lost a story that, in my opinion, is great. And I'm sure I did too by not reading the Prestige, Shrek, and many other books I didn't even know existed. I just... really wish more people would know about the books, because they're awesome. Especially the True Meaning of Smekday, which I'm not sure could ever really be translated to the big screen. 

Anyway, that has just been your latest rant from a slightly depressed Trutharchivist. Hope you liked it. Maybe I should've tried making YouTube videos about it or something. Anyway, have a good day.

Honestly, at this point, I should probably just go to sleep.

So, I'm going to pretend a lot of people are going to read this. In truth, there's a slight chance this'll be another swing-and-miss where no one reads (or reacts) to it. It could be that some of my followers read and reply. I would bet on a "people read but don't reply, just drop upvotes", considering this is the reaction to any status update that is longer than three paragraphs. So maybe I should just keep it short or something...

Anyway, this time I'm going to do a "don't judge a book by it's movie" rant. You'd think it'd be wasted on the avid book readers who make up most of the Shard; that's what I think, at least, but why not ignore that too? I mean, if nearly no one reads this, nearly no one is going to protest and say they never judge a book by it's movie. They'll probably tell the truth. But today, I actually want to talk about average to good movies, that people don't know are adaptations.

Fine, I'll admit it. Even though my list of books I've read is huge, I can't really say I've read many books which got this treatment. There's apparently a Jurassic Park book, and I've never read it or watched the movie. There are far more than a handful of others that got actually such good films as adaptations that the original was forgotten. Did you know the Prestige was based on a book? An example I can sadly note I've watched but not read. And that's a pity. I really should read this book. I'm not sure what's the situation with World War Z - maybe with that the book is just as famous, maybe not.

But here, I want to lay down some films that're based on books that I have read, and that went to be better known than the source material: Howl's Moving Castle, the Secret World of Arrietty (the original book is called the Borrowers), How to Train Your Dragon and perhaps Home (originally the True Meaning of Smekday, too). With Arrietty and HtTYD I'm afraid I've found the books because of the movies, too.

I'm not here to say those movies aren't good; but I'd defenitely say they strayed from the source material, far enough that I'll consider every one of them an independant work of art from the books that happens to share names and a small amount of charcterization from the books. So don't get me wrong - I loved most of those movies (Home being an exception here, but I'm not getting into that). But... When I read a book, and then I learn that it has been adapted, what I want is not a different story with similarly named characters and some plot points from the books. I want to see, as much as possible, the same story, translated to another medium. And it's true that at least three of those gave us amazing stories and the world will be lacking without them, but... I kind of wish those adaptations never existed, at least sometimes. Now that they're there, no one is going to make an actual adaptation of the book.

Take the Jungle Book, for example. Or Peter Pan. Or heck, Alice in Wonderland is only out of place here because it's hard to say it has any plot in the first place. All three of those bring to your heads, almost immediately, the Disney animated movies. And if there's one thing I don't trust Disney with it's loyalty to the source material (though I hope this trend will change with Percy Jackson) - just look at the Black Cauldron, or Artemis Fowl, or heck - every single fairy tale these guys put their hands on. And the live action remakes just make sure that the image in your head is going to be that same image they placed there. So right, the exmples I brought were actually Studio Ghibli and DreamWorks. But that's because I don't want to start thinking over Peter Pan, Alice in Wonderland or the Jungle Book to make sure the differences were significant, and considering the Black Cauldron thankful relative failure (I wouldn't want to see too much defiling of one of my favorite book series) it's hard to say the movie is better known than the book. And I didn't mention Shrek because I've never read the book.

Pause while you gasp at the realization Shrek is loosely based on a book.

Actually, I'm starting to sense a pattern. Maybe DreamWorks in general are great at expanding on existent ideas and making them work even though they changed the source material beyond recognition. Studio Ghibli seemed decent at it on two occasions so far at least, too! Anyway, there's the "there's never going to be a loyal adaptation" angle, which is sad in and of itself, but also... How many people have seen those movies and never even bothered thinking about the fact they're based on books? How many of my imaginarily large audience even knew all those movies were based on books? My eldest brother said he watched Howl's Moving Castle and so doesn't want to read the book. Maybe it's because he has a lot on his reading schedule and it really didn't catch his eye (and it probably says something about how much he trusts me when it comes to book recommendations), but in any case - he lost a story that, in my opinion, is great. And I'm sure I did too by not reading the Prestige, Shrek, and many other books I didn't even know existed. I just... really wish more people would know about the books, because they're awesome. Especially the True Meaning of Smekday, which I'm not sure could ever really be translated to the big screen. 

Anyway, that has just been your latest rant from a slightly depressed Trutharchivist. Hope you liked it. Maybe I should've tried making YouTube videos about it or something. Anyway, have a good day.

Honestly, at this point, I should probably just go to sleep.

Skiddo is my new favorite pokemon

That is all

So, in case anyone cares:

I actually started working on my Faunologos book! It's going to be one about humans that will feature the magic system. So far I've written a tad over 2000 words, and even if it doesn't seem like much - I actually wrote something. And I have plans for what's next. This is basically the first time I allow myself to be optimistic about the whole ordeal.

Don't worry, though, it'll fie off quickly.

Thank you for reading, and have a good day!

Am I a Brony?

Well, I'm aware that one came out of nowhere, but I have a point with this question, so please hear me out. Personally, my answer to the above question - which I'm the only one asking - is actually no, I'm not. I intend to elaborate here a bit on why that is. But Trutharchivist, don't you have a blog here? Why use a status update? Well, my blog is for different things, like trying to explain the history of Judaism in the previous two-three centuries. I don't want to digress there. So, without lingering any further, let's begin.

Since I opened with that, I guess I'll start with the Brony situation. Bronies are defined as fans of My Little Pony (specifically Friendship is Magic) who are outside the regular target demographics of little girls. Mostly, we're talking about adult men at around their early twenties. I am, indeed, a men at my early twenties, and I've been watching MLP: FiM and adjacent content a lot lately. That, supposedly, places me under the definition of a Brony. So why am I in denial about it?

But here's the thing: I do like MLP: FiM, but I wouldn't call myself a fan of it. Or, well, not a very dedicated fan. You see, I tend to go through various temporal obsessions during my life. A few of the more severe ones include Harry Potter, Tolkien's Legendarium, possibly Percy Jackson and, yes, MLP: FiM. I have a somewhat extensive knowledge on those franchises, but not as extensive as more dedicated fans. I can tell you approximately what happened during the First Age of Arda, how Voldemort found Barty Crouch Jr. to infiltrate Hogwarts, How Percy reacted to meeting Echidna (and who's the Greek Mythology hero that defeated the monster he faced back then) and what musincal the song "Best Night Ever" from the first part of MLP: FiM's season one finale references (though it has more to do with liking said musical than liking the show...). I can randomly quote the Inheritance Cycle, Discworld or random stuff from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (and it's not just 42). I'm also exaggarating a bit to sound impressive, but I do randomly quote books sometimes. Oh, and there's a person or two out there who view me as the resident Marvel expert (not around here). My point is, though, that all those won't be in my "most favourite" list (though all will be in my favourites); they had their effect on me, but I don't see myself as a part of the fandom. Same may well go for Sanderson books, BTW: I may read the Cosmere as it comes out, but I don't consider Sanderson's books to be necessarily the best I've ever read.

My point may be mute after all that I said, but in the end, the fandoms I most identify with are the smallest ones I'm a part of. Perhaps the Underland Chronicles, Diana Wynne Jones' books, Anne of Green Gables... A few small books that caught my eye and - dare I say it - my heart. (Not necessarily just books, though.) MLP: FiM may or may not join this more exclusive group of media that had deep influence on me, but it isn't there yet. Which is why I don't see myself as a Brony, or Potterhead, or Whovian or whatever weird fandom name those others have: I'm not that much invested in those Fandoms for the long run, or not invested very deeply. My latest obsession is MLP: FiM. Who knows what I'll get into next?

Hope it made sense! Thank you for reading, and have a wonderful day!

-Your faithful student, Twilight Sparkle- no, wait, that's not right...

Ahem! -yours, faithfully, Trutharchivist, AKA Ookla the Questioning?

Am I a Brony?

Well, I'm aware that one came out of nowhere, but I have a point with this question, so please hear me out. Personally, my answer to the above question - which I'm the only one asking - is actually no, I'm not. I intend to elaborate here a bit on why that is. But Trutharchivist, don't you have a blog here? Why use a status update? Well, my blog is for different things, like trying to explain the history of Judaism in the previous two-three centuries. I don't want to digress there. So, without lingering any further, let's begin.

Since I opened with that, I guess I'll start with the Brony situation. Bronies are defined as fans of My Little Pony (specifically Friendship is Magic) who are outside the regular target demographics of little girls. Mostly, we're talking about adult men at around their early twenties. I am, indeed, a men at my early twenties, and I've been watching MLP: FiM and adjacent content a lot lately. That, supposedly, places me under the definition of a Brony. So why am I in denial about it?

But here's the thing: I do like MLP: FiM, but I wouldn't call myself a fan of it. Or, well, not a very dedicated fan. You see, I tend to go through various temporal obsessions during my life. A few of the more severe ones include Harry Potter, Tolkien's Legendarium, possibly Percy Jackson and, yes, MLP: FiM. I have a somewhat extensive knowledge on those franchises, but not as extensive as more dedicated fans. I can tell you approximately what happened during the First Age of Arda, how Voldemort found Barty Crouch Jr. to infiltrate Hogwarts, How Percy reacted to meeting Echidna (and who's the Greek Mythology hero that defeated the monster he faced back then) and what musincal the song "Best Night Ever" from the first part of MLP: FiM's season one finale references (though it has more to do with liking said musical than liking the show...). I can randomly quote the Inheritance Cycle, Discworld or random stuff from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (and it's not just 42). I'm also exaggarating a bit to sound impressive, but I do randomly quote books sometimes. Oh, and there's a person or two out there who view me as the resident Marvel expert (not around here). My point is, though, that all those won't be in my "most favourite" list (though all will be in my favourites); they had their effect on me, but I don't see myself as a part of the fandom. Same may well go for Sanderson books, BTW: I may read the Cosmere as it comes out, but I don't consider Sanderson's books to be necessarily the best I've ever read.

My point may be mute after all that I said, but in the end, the fandoms I most identify with are the smallest ones I'm a part of. Perhaps the Underland Chronicles, Diana Wynne Jones' books, Anne of Green Gables... A few small books that caught my eye and - dare I say it - my heart. (Not necessarily just books, though.) MLP: FiM may or may not join this more exclusive group of media that had deep influence on me, but it isn't there yet. Which is why I don't see myself as a Brony, or Potterhead, or Whovian or whatever weird fandom name those others have: I'm not that much invested in those Fandoms for the long run, or not invested very deeply. My latest obsession is MLP: FiM. Who knows what I'll get into next?

Hope it made sense! Thank you for reading, and have a wonderful day!

-Your faithful student, Twilight Sparkle- no, wait, that's not right...

Ahem! -yours, faithfully, Trutharchivist, AKA Ookla the Questioning?

I have succumbed to the pressure of choosing an Ookla name and have chosen one on a whim, Thankfully my whims usually turn out okay, 31% of the time.

Happy birthday!

Happy Birthday!

Happy birthday, Trutharchivist! I hope you have a wonderful day!

Happy birthday, Trutharchivist!

Re-reading Harry potter at age 16 for the first time is a ride 

spoilers for philosopher's stone and some later bits of Harry Potter as well (but does anyone even need this warning at this point) 

I apologise for my spelling and grammatical errors 

Re-reading Harry potter at age 16 for the first time is a ride 

spoilers for philosopher's stone and some later bits of Harry Potter as well (but does anyone even need this warning at this point) 

I apologise for my spelling and grammatical errors 

For those of you who are interested (I'm looking at you, @Nathrangking and @ixthos (I'll tag you later, can't tag to people on mobile for some reason): I posted the first entry in my series about the history of Judaism through the Age of Enlightenment. Hope you'll like it.

Can somebody tell me what the Insanity Clinic for the Moderately Brandofandonitis Afflicted actually is? At first glance it doesn't seem to be a RP; what's going on there? 

Can somebody tell me what the Insanity Clinic for the Moderately Brandofandonitis Afflicted actually is? At first glance it doesn't seem to be a RP; what's going on there? 

Can somebody tell me what the Insanity Clinic for the Moderately Brandofandonitis Afflicted actually is? At first glance it doesn't seem to be a RP; what's going on there? 

I said it here originally, so I thought I'd close it here too: remember a year and a half ago, when I told you my levels of activity might go down due to the IDF? Well, I'm finishing my active servitude there in about a week and a half. More accurately, I have about a week and a half while still technically in active servitude that I go home, and then I'm officially finished - well partly, but it's complicated. So I just might be a little more active! Though chances are I won't, not by much.

I said it here originally, so I thought I'd close it here too: remember a year and a half ago, when I told you my levels of activity might go down due to the IDF? Well, I'm finishing my active servitude there in about a week and a half. More accurately, I have about a week and a half while still technically in active servitude that I go home, and then I'm officially finished - well partly, but it's complicated. So I just might be a little more active! Though chances are I won't, not by much.

I said it here originally, so I thought I'd close it here too: remember a year and a half ago, when I told you my levels of activity might go down due to the IDF? Well, I'm finishing my active servitude there in about a week and a half. More accurately, I have about a week and a half while still technically in active servitude that I go home, and then I'm officially finished - well partly, but it's complicated. So I just might be a little more active! Though chances are I won't, not by much.

I said it here originally, so I thought I'd close it here too: remember a year and a half ago, when I told you my levels of activity might go down due to the IDF? Well, I'm finishing my active servitude there in about a week and a half. More accurately, I have about a week and a half while still technically in active servitude that I go home, and then I'm officially finished - well partly, but it's complicated. So I just might be a little more active! Though chances are I won't, not by much.

I said it here originally, so I thought I'd close it here too: remember a year and a half ago, when I told you my levels of activity might go down due to the IDF? Well, I'm finishing my active servitude there in about a week and a half. More accurately, I have about a week and a half while still technically in active servitude that I go home, and then I'm officially finished - well partly, but it's complicated. So I just might be a little more active! Though chances are I won't, not by much.

The Peter Jackson LOTR movies are superb! I watched Fellowship today (extended version, of course) and I've been savoring every moment. The music, the landscapes, the cinematography, the sets...all of it is completely breathtaking. I'm blown away every time I watch these films.