Place Your Rants Here

Game Stop

I just wanna go on record and say I absolutely hate Game Stop. And here are my reasons why.

1) Back then we had a lot of video game based stores that sold new, used, as well as retro based games. And it was convenient and the people who work in such places were very friendly and cool. But Game Stop had to go around and buy off like 90% of these places and turn them into Game Stop, as well as create more Game Stops to the point that everywhere you go, theres a Game Stop. They pretty much created a monopoly to where there are little to no competition. And it's nearly the only game store you can go to other than Play N Trade, Game Over, or whatever may be in your area if you are lucky.

2) The supposedly new games are not new! All the cases to the game are empty, stickered to all hell at times, put on a shelf, with all the CD based games put into little paper sleeves where they can easily get scratched in a drawer behind the counter. These games being sold as new have been played by the employees as they are allowed to rent them from the store at times. So when you buy the game for the whopping retail price of $59.99, the game is searched into a drawer containing numerous copies of the game crammed into each other, pulled out with the paper sleeve, slipped into the case with the paper sleeve, and the case is taped together. As if there aren't enough stickers on the case already. So when you get home and open it, you will conveniently find that you have the manual, but not the inserts that originally came with the game, as well as find your game to have light to heavy scratches, as well as fingerprints and smudges.

3) The brand new games taken back to the store by pissed off customers or customers that have beaten the game are resold for, get this, $55. Would you really wanna buy a used game for $55 over $60 for new?

4) Customers just purchasing a game are constantly hassled to buy magazine subscriptions, preorder for new games coming out, preorder new game consoles coming out, and constantly hassled to take a Game Stop Power Card. And the employees are forced to do this by management. If they don't sell enough of them for just 3-4 days a week, they are fired.

5) No more retro games. WTH! All Game Stop sells are new and used games for the current console generation. So you won't find NES, Super NES, Genesis, Gameboy, Gamegear, Turbographx-16, Sega Saturn, Dreamcast, N64, Game Cube, PS1, and just recently PS2 are no longer sold. Why is that? People still play them, and there are numerous collectors out there (myself included), not to mention most retro games go for a lot of money on eBay, even more than new games at times. Little Samson for the NES goes for $700 average, Myriad 6-1 for the NES goes for over $3000, Megaman 1 for the NES goes for about $45-$55, Earthbound for the SNES goes for about $100, and I can go on and on. If the corporation new these prices on the online markets then....nvm they shouldn't cause all theyll do is screw it up.

6) It is considered to be the top 10 worse places to work at unless you are a manager then you get better treatment such as paid vacations and outstanding pay, where as the regular employees are getting minimum wage and get treated like crap.

7) The Game Stop corporation doesn't care about the employees nor care about the games. All they care about is profit. They want to maximize their profit by one method. And that is sell, sell, sell. If a customer walks into the door and picks out a game or two, the employees have to force all this other crap on you such as preorders, subscriptions, or new games that came out. Its a joke. If Game Stop doesn't want to care other than money, then I shouldn't care to walk into the store.

8) Trade In value. It is a joke. If you beaten a game and wanna take it back, they will only give you $24 for it, and resell it for $55 or if in good enough condition, $60. Yea they can resell it as new and get away with it! Or if its an old game, or lets say you bring in 3-4 old games and they give you, if youre lucky, $5. What?!! Then they can resell the games for anywhere between $20-$40 depending how popular the game is. Some Game Stops are worse. There are some that will not even give you cash, but just in store credit at that price. If its a console, if its complete, they will give you just $20 for your console, and resell it for $250-$300 depending on its condition. So if you go there to buy a new console or used console, don't expect it to work like new because it probably won't.

So all in all, if you want new games, just goto walmart or kmart. If you want used games, or retro based games, hit up your local fleamarket, or try online such as eBay, Amazon, or Craigslist. Even though online you may find games from time to time overpriced, sometimes you get really lucky and find that one game that slips through the cracks at a very affordable price. And one last thing, screw Game Stop!

Or, you can simply download emulators and ROMs for free online :)

It's just you... the GameStops around here have been pretty good to me... new games are just that... .new... still sealed in their factory shrink wrap. The only time they "go to the drawer" is for a used item, and each and everyone is in it's own CD sleeve. We then inspect the disc for any significant scratches. I've been to two local GSs and they've been very helpful and knowledgeable everytime. I think it's just like any large chain retailer... you're going to have a few bad apples and a few good ones and a whole lot somewhere in between.

-tg

-- edit - although your advice is sound... especially in the resale area... but I have issues giving money to WalMart.... :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

Or, you can simply download emulators and ROMs for free online :)

---

I'm a collector though, and prefer the real thing. Collecting them is the fun part. You'll find games here and there, then eventually you'll run into them complete in box! And once in a blue moon you'll run into the super rare games worth a lot of money, or even factory sealed. As you add more and more to your collection, you end up with a nice library of games, and you can in time create your very own game room! However having a bunch of roms is not that fun. Its like Magic the Gathering. You collect a bunch of cards, and eventually you end up running into these rare cards out there. Some are very valuable. Just having a couple of them that are very valuable makes you feel pretty stoked knowing you have them. But if they were digital cards, it would be no big deal, enough to make you shrug to it and be like "ehhh". Its not the same feeling. Having the physical copy of them is very nice. And you get that nostalgic feeling every time you pop em into your console and start playing.

Now if you are really lucky as a collector, you end up running into Nintendo World Championships for the NES (Grey Cart value - $8000, Gold Cart value - $30000) or even Stadium Events for the NES ($45000-$90000). These are the Holy Grail amongst NES collectors, and its worth the investment. Overtime the value of these increases even more as the years go by. Thats pretty much when you can cash in and retire early. Or even buy a nice house. Lets see if you can do that with roms :bigyello:

Wow. I had no idea this was such a deep hobby. Apologies if my comment seemed dismissive.

It is interesting though. From a programming perspective, these games are incredibly simple yet they have come to acquire so much value over time because of scarcity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob Roman

Place Your Rants Here

---

Not only does the PA Turnpike STILL suck they now charge almost $40 in tolls to drive the length of America's crappiest highway.

PA highways, in general, seem to be pretty crappy. The toll has always been impressive, though.

My Sat-Nav won't stick to the window.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

My Sat-Nav won't stick to the window.

---

http://www.gpscity.com/rammounts

I did buy a dashboard mount for it. It came with a sticky rubber base that didn't stick.:mad:

Society

Our entire society is turning upside down. Everyone is constantly on Facebook, tweeting, texting, as well as looking at meaningless memes on their smartphones, tablets, and computers, rather than socializing with the individual in front of them. How often do you go to a restaurant and find people around you with their iPads and smartphones, hardly socializing? People are walking across the streets staring at their phones rather than paying attention to whats ahead or what car maybe incoming. The way our food tastes is no longer as flaverful, because we have people out there, even our own government, banning things such as transfats, and removing sugar from sodas, replacing them with corn syrup. From what I was told by my Argentinean girlfriend, food tastes so much better in Argentina because nothing is processed and everything is made fresh. When she came to America, everything she tasted was tasteless in comparison. My guess is food must be better everywhere else in the world. TV is also contributing to our downfall as a society, with horrible reality tv, always talking about sex, celebrity gossip, and constantly telling you what you should wear, how you should look, and what is popular. Even music is going downhill. All the pop music out there isn't even about the music, but instead image. The music itself is either crappy ghetto horribly executed rap music, Britney Spears style which focuses more on singing rather than focus on the song in general and has a girly like feel to it, and horrible dance club style music. At least back in the 90's, the rap music was actually very good, girly like pop music didnt exist until the late 90s and was only listened to by kids and teenagers, and dance club music was amazing with the Latin freestyle and incredibly catchy songs. All the real talent is gone. And record companies are stuffing this crap down our throats telling us that these are hits and this is popular. Even Hollywood is going downhill as more crappy movies are coming out than good movies. And more bad directors producing crap all for the sake of money, such as Michael Bay. He focuses more on special effects and CGI than the movie itself because thats what sells. He also takes what use to be popular and nostalgic to many people and does his own twist on it, thus ruining it for the watcher, such as Transformers and soon, even Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Could it be that our society is being dumbed down and totally transformed? To where we can't understand something unless we Google it? Because I remember that society was much better than this more than a decade ago. What do you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob Roman

Society
The way our food tastes is no longer as flaverful, because we have people out there, even our own government, banning things such as transfats, and removing sugar from sodas, replacing them with corn syrup.

---

In the case of the tomato, the flavor was bred out of them because the industry needed a more durable tomato for transport. There has been a push, in some places, to recover the old fruit. As for sugar vs. corn syrup, I always assumed that was a price decision.

Quote:

---

From what I was told by my Argentinean girlfriend,

---

Have you been , "hiking the Appalachian Trail"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob Roman

Society

Our entire society is turning upside down. Everyone is constantly on Facebook, tweeting, texting, as well as looking at meaningless memes on their smartphones, tablets, and computers, rather than socializing with the individual in front of them. How often do you go to a restaurant and find people around you with their iPads and smartphones, hardly socializing? People are walking across the streets staring at their phones rather than paying attention to whats ahead or what car maybe incoming. The way our food tastes is no longer as flaverful, because we have people out there, even our own government, banning things such as transfats, and removing sugar from sodas, replacing them with corn syrup. From what I was told by my Argentinean girlfriend, food tastes so much better in Argentina because nothing is processed and everything is made fresh. When she came to America, everything she tasted was tasteless in comparison. My guess is food must be better everywhere else in the world. TV is also contributing to our downfall as a society, with horrible reality tv, always talking about sex, celebrity gossip, and constantly telling you what you should wear, how you should look, and what is popular. Even music is going downhill. All the pop music out there isn't even about the music, but instead image. The music itself is either crappy ghetto horribly executed rap music, Britney Spears style which focuses more on singing rather than focus on the song in general and has a girly like feel to it, and horrible dance club style music. At least back in the 90's, the rap music was actually very good, girly like pop music didnt exist until the late 90s and was only listened to by kids and teenagers, and dance club music was amazing with the Latin freestyle and incredibly catchy songs. All the real talent is gone. And record companies are stuffing this crap down our throats telling us that these are hits and this is popular. Even Hollywood is going downhill as more crappy movies are coming out than good movies. And more bad directors producing crap all for the sake of money, such as Michael Bay. He focuses more on special effects and CGI than the movie itself because thats what sells. He also takes what use to be popular and nostalgic to many people and does his own twist on it, thus ruining it for the watcher, such as Transformers and soon, even Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Could it be that our society is being dumbed down and totally transformed? To where we can't understand something unless we Google it? Because I remember that society was much better than this more than a decade ago. What do you think?

---

Ahh the good old days...where did they go?

“The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers.

- Socrates (470 – 399 BC)

I think what you are lamenting could be said by every generation in the context of the time period they grew up.

My rant...I hate people that shoot down other people's rants :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob Roman

Society

Our entire society is turning upside down. Everyone is constantly on Facebook, tweeting, texting, as well as looking at meaningless memes on their smartphones, tablets, and computers, rather than socializing with the individual in front of them. How often do you go to a restaurant and find people around you with their iPads and smartphones, hardly socializing? People are walking across the streets staring at their phones rather than paying attention to whats ahead or what car maybe incoming. The way our food tastes is no longer as flaverful, because we have people out there, even our own government, banning things such as transfats, and removing sugar from sodas, replacing them with corn syrup. From what I was told by my Argentinean girlfriend, food tastes so much better in Argentina because nothing is processed and everything is made fresh. When she came to America, everything she tasted was tasteless in comparison. My guess is food must be better everywhere else in the world. TV is also contributing to our downfall as a society, with horrible reality tv, always talking about sex, celebrity gossip, and constantly telling you what you should wear, how you should look, and what is popular. Even music is going downhill. All the pop music out there isn't even about the music, but instead image. The music itself is either crappy ghetto horribly executed rap music, Britney Spears style which focuses more on singing rather than focus on the song in general and has a girly like feel to it, and horrible dance club style music. At least back in the 90's, the rap music was actually very good, girly like pop music didnt exist until the late 90s and was only listened to by kids and teenagers, and dance club music was amazing with the Latin freestyle and incredibly catchy songs. All the real talent is gone. And record companies are stuffing this crap down our throats telling us that these are hits and this is popular. Even Hollywood is going downhill as more crappy movies are coming out than good movies. And more bad directors producing crap all for the sake of money, such as Michael Bay. He focuses more on special effects and CGI than the movie itself because thats what sells. He also takes what use to be popular and nostalgic to many people and does his own twist on it, thus ruining it for the watcher, such as Transformers and soon, even Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Could it be that our society is being dumbed down and totally transformed? To where we can't understand something unless we Google it? Because I remember that society was much better than this more than a decade ago. What do you think?

---

My rant: People who don't use paragraphs.

Quote:

---

<p>



</p>

paragraph's

---

My other rant: people who use apostrophes in the wrong place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by invisibleduncan

my other rant: People who use apostrophe's in the wrong place.

---

There, FTFY

Damned birds pooping all over my brand new Mustang! And not a single splotch on my 12 year old beater van. I swear they know the difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBigB

There, FTFY

---

*Slap*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InvisibleDuncan

*Slap*

---

*Duck's*

Quote:

---

Because I remember that society was much better than this more than a decade ago.

---

No, you don't! Society wasn't any better or worse a decade or a decade of decades, or a decade of decades of decades ago. You'll find complaints about how people don't socialise any more, how everything's about sex or fads or hero worship, and generally how everything's going to Hell in a handcart in the literature of every era since writing began. I once gathered together quotes on the state of society from writers from the 400 BC to the present day, modernised the language so that any clues to age were removed, and asked a bunch of people to identify what periods were being talked about. Needless to say, there guesses had no more accuracy than random!

Memory is an unashamed liar. It is to be trusted no further than you can jump wearing a lead suit! What you remember is a comforting illusion designed specifically for the purpose of obscuring the sheer tedium, frustration, pointlessness and misery of real life! We are predisposed to believe that all that went before was better than it was and thus better than it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by homer13j

Damned birds pooping all over my brand new Mustang! And not a single splotch on my 12 year old beater van. I swear they know the difference.

---

It's a good argument in favor of reincarnation. Heck, if I came back as a bird, I'd be targeting shiny cars and sunbathers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

Memory is an unashamed liar. It is to be trusted no further than you can jump wearing a lead suit!

---

Yet we forget this point immediately, for the most part. Memory is everything other than what is happening at this very instant, even the first word of what I wrote is only a memory, and memory is inherently unreliable. However, it is just reliable enough that we can depend on it...most of the time, and tend to be shocked or betrayed when it proves to be wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

No, you don't! Society wasn't any better or worse a decade or a decade of decades, or a decade of decades of decades ago. You'll find complaints about how people don't socialise any more, how everything's about sex or fads or hero worship, and generally how everything's going to Hell in a handcart in the literature of every era since writing began. I once gathered together quotes on the state of society from writers from the 400 BC to the present day, modernised the language so that any clues to age were removed, and asked a bunch of people to identify what periods were being talked about. Needless to say, there guesses had no more accuracy than random!

Memory is an unashamed liar. It is to be trusted no further than you can jump wearing a lead suit! What you remember is a comforting illusion designed specifically for the purpose of obscuring the sheer tedium, frustration, pointlessness and misery of real life! We are predisposed to believe that all that went before was better than it was and thus better than it is.

---

There is a lot of truth to that and that was my point about my "youth of today" post. But...we aren't publicly burning witches anymore. That's a plus :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheBigB

*Duck's*

---

ROF'L :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

I don't know, I think that'd be pretty cool!

---

Well you would have to move to Africa for that where it is still current!!
Witches that practice black magic are burnt,
and if you are cursed by black magic you have to visit a witch doctor to get rid of it!

Quote:

---

I'm guessing that this is mostly in the 3rd world parts of Africa

---

Sadly not. Kenya and Ghana most recently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

Sadly not. Kenya and Ghana most recently.

---

Yep and Gambia too, some even label the Kenyan district of Kisii 'the sorcery belt' of Africa.

I remember the day when, to have a good rant, you had to go out into the street and stand on a corner. And not just stand, you needed to carry a box. You needed eloquence to get the attention of the one hobo willing to listen. A good ranter never let 'the man' get in the way. Or weather.

Now, it's innernet this, innernet that. Bah. what has society come to when they can't be arsed to get off their arse to give a good rant?!

And what is it with spell check?! 'arsed' is correct, but 'arse' is not?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SJWhiteley

And what is it with spell check?! 'arsed' is correct, but 'arse' is not?!

---

That a rant ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

That a rant ?

---

He's got rant control where he lives.

The child sexual abuse crimes, against children as young as 3 years old, committed by Catholic priests: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_sex_abuse_cases

Dammit! When did 'I'm a newbie' become an excuse for not exercising the simplest of study skills like reading? You give people a one page text to scan for a specific piece of information and it's like you've handed them alien technology from the 26th Century. And it's all because they're new? Do they not teach reading in school anymore or is it just any text longer than the tweet character limit that throws their poor little brains into confusion?

Specific rant - not replying to anyone in particular:

Anyone following news of JC Penny over the last couple of years should be aware of how they crashed and burned on their new marketing approach and are currently asking their old customer base to come back to them. One of the issues was they stopped the many sales they had opting for “everyday low prices”. In general their customer base did not like that and now they are having sales again. They are also running this huge “come back to us” campaign.

Last week I bought some pants there that were marked at $60.00 and on sale at $24.99. I bought a couple pair and at home found that under the $60.00 price tag was another for $35.00. I believe that to be the true price. It really scalds me that they would pull such a blatant deception.

I wrote JC Penny myself about this and haven’t heard back. I don’t belong to Facebook, twitter, or any of the latest incarnations of social media but I sure wish I could get some attention drawn to what I consider a very deceptive practice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TysonLPrice

Last week I bought some pants there that were marked at $60.00 and on sale at $24.99. I bought a couple pair and at home found that under the $60.00 price tag was another for $35.00. I believe that to be the true price. It really scalds me that they would pull such a blatant deception.

---

Most of the JC Penny stores I know of are in rapidly declining shopping malls that I tend to avoid. I don't think I've bought anything from them since the '80s.

Somewhat related: in a local used book store I recently found a rare, out of print book I had been seeking for quite some time. On the back cover was a price tag: "$15--" so I took it to the register and handed it to the store owner. He opened the book and inside the front cover was another price: $50. He rang it up at $50.

"Uhh... it says 15 bucks on the back." I said.

He flipped the book over, saw the other price tag and started mumbling "aw, gee... I don't know..." then he saw the look of pure disgust on my face and said $15 was fine.

Funny thing is I really wanted this book and probably would have forked out $50 for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TysonLPrice

...I don’t belong to Facebook, twitter, or any of the latest incarnations of social media but I sure wish I could get some attention drawn to what I consider a very deceptive practice.

---

You cannot win a media war with the Illuminati.

Hmm. Caveat emptor and all that. Although this might fall foul of advertising standards, it's not a fraud. When all is said and done they offered you an item at a price of $25 and you accepted their offer believing that to be a fair price for the item. The reasonable consumer (which is what courts have to measure by) is not affected by any previous offers and decides entirely upon the offer they are currently presented with. The onus really is on you to shop wisely, comparing prices at other outlets etc. The argument that you would never have bought the item if you'd know that it was previously offered at $35 is not going to get you very far in law.

It's not as though you discovered a previous price which was lower than the one you paid! In that case you could have required that they sell at the lower price. But their only legal requirement is to show that at some point the item was offered at $60 and you would have no end of difficulty trying to overturn the evidence of the price tag that says it was. Although your irritation is understandable, the fact remains that they have not actually done anything wrong (even if this is only on a technicality) and I would advise against a tirade over the Internet. That's the kind of thing that gets you sued!

Quote:

---

"aw, gee... I don't know..."

---

UK law is quite clear on this. The retailer must offer the lowest price displayed. Staff here are savvy enough not to leave two prices visible on anything (well, at least if they want to keep the job!)

"Hmm. Caveat emptor and all that. Although this might fall foul of advertising standards, it's not a fraud. When all is said and done they offered you an item at a price of $25 and you accepted their offer believing that to be a fair price for the item. The reasonable consumer (which is what courts have to measure by) is not affected by any previous offers and decides entirely upon the offer they are currently presented with. The onus really is on you to shop wisely, comparing prices at other outlets etc. The argument that you would never have bought the item if you'd know that it was previously offered at $35 is not going to get you very far in law."

I’m not sure where that response came from…I wasn’t crying foul of any kind as far as me being duped. But obviously my intent didn’t come across as I meant it. Part of that is probably I have closely followed the story over the last year or so and a lot of people may not have been.

What scalds me is JC Penny is supposedly trying to win their old customer base back and part of doing that seems to include “making up” a sale. The pants I’m referring to wouldn’t command $60.00 on their best day.

The whole “we are sorry please come back to us” campaign is in part based on this lie. Just marked down from $35.00 to $24.99 is good enough. They had to make up this inflated price. I just consider it insulting.

So I disagree and think they are doing something wrong. They are inflating sale savings in an attempt to say “yay! We brought sales back”. The sale prices they advertise are deliberately misleading.

So it’s not that I feel ripped off. I feel I’m being lied to.

I agree about an internet campaign not fitting this scenario. I have enough trouble keeping my foot out of my mouth here let alone taking on the whole net :bigyello:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by homer13j

Not only does the PA Turnpike STILL suck they now charge almost $40 in tolls to drive the length of America's crappiest highway.

---

I once took a trip to JFK airport to drop a friend.
The tolls I paid were close to $60.00 (to and fro). This includes the PA Turnpike, the NJ Turnpike and the Verazano bridge toll.
Funny thing is the tolls were more than the gas and I had rented a big SUV to haul luggage.

Tolls are BS. Hmmm perhaps I should revive my "You know whats BS" thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

You cannot win a media war with the Illuminati.

---

By Illuminati are you referring to the view that some people are trying to move the away from a world community founded on separate nations and freeness and towards a world ruled by an authoritarian government controlled by a single individual, which, in Christian eschatology, is typically a monarchistic theocracy controlled by the Pope (i.e false light)?

Quote:

---

in Christian eschatology, is typically a monarchistic theocracy controlled by the Pope (i.e false light)?

---

Say what now? No Christian eschatology that I'm aware of, even if it were possible to have a monarchy, a theocracy, and a hierarchy (in the strictest sense of the word) all at the same time!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

Say what now? No Christian eschatology that I'm aware of, even if it were possible to have a monarchy, a theocracy, and a hierarchy (in the strictest sense of the word) all at the same time!

---

Not sure exactly what you mean Dunfiddlin? The Roman Catholic church is all of those things, it is a theocracy which also happens to be an absolute monarchy with a relatively strict hierarchy.
See here for example "The Vatican is the only remaining absolute monarchy in Europe." source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vatican_City

In relation to christian eschatology I am referring to views such as:
"Since the 19th century, many apocalyptic millennial Christian eschatologists, starting with John Nelson Darby, have feared a globalist conspiracy to impose a tyrannical New World Order [...] They claim that people who have made a deal with the Devil to gain wealth and power have become pawns in a supernatural chess game to move humanity into accepting a utopian world government, which rests on the spiritual foundations of a syncretic-messianic world religion, that will later reveal itself to be a dystopian world empire, which imposes the imperial cult of an “Unholy Trinity” — Satan, the Antichrist and the False Prophet. In many contemporary Christian conspiracy theories, the False Prophet will either be the last pope of the Catholic Church."

The Church of Rome may have characteristics of all three but it is none of them. The truth is that neither the Pope, nor the priesthood in general rules anybody. It has neither executive nor judicial powers except in so far as it is capable of disciplining its membership (a capability which has eroded to the point of near extinction in recent years). It governs nobody. The Pope can declaim as much as he likes on what he considers wrong and proclaim to the ends of the Earth what he believes right but nobody on the planet is required to accept either as a governing principle and nobody may be tried or convicted as a result of denying it.

Even within the Vatican state, claims of monarchy, let alone absolutism, are immediately undermined by the simple fact that the Pope is elected, albeit by a very small electorate and, as has only recently been shown, the incumbent is at liberty to simply resign with no say in the identity of his successor. One might very well argue that the model is much more akin to the Presidential system of the United States, electoral college and all, than to the kingdoms of the Middle Ages, and indeed with an absence of the self-preening, politicking, and public decrying of one's opponents necessary to reach office in the so-called beacon of democracy, might even be considered a vast improvement upon it.

The absurdities of World Governing Antichrist eschatology (which I will always maintain cannot ever be described as Christian eschatology), especially those which seek to promote the Pope to the hot seat therein, have never been more obvious than now with the Vatican never so denuded of any genuine political power and the number of independent, secular nations never so great. The sooner the Christian Right wakes up to the fact that Revelations is apocalyptic, not eschatological, the better. (Well, we can dream!)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

The Church of Rome may have characteristics of all three but it is none of them.

---

You dare to argue with Wikipedia???!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

The truth is that neither the Pope, nor the priesthood in general rules anybody.

---

Disagree, the Pope is an absolute ruler, a living king of kings, the topmost Catholic kahuna, the puppet master, the guy with the bundle of birch rods; by the way what do you have to do if you happen to be catholic and have to meet with him, do you bow, lie completely prostrate on the ground in complete submission, kiss his hands or feet or something else???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

It has neither executive nor judicial powers

---

Sure the pope does, you didn't read my previously cited Wiki page did you???
"The politics of Vatican City takes place in an absolute elective monarchy, in which the head of the Catholic Church takes power. The Pope exercises principal legislative, executive, and judicial power over the State of Vatican City (an entity distinct from the Holy See), which is a rare case of a non-hereditary monarchy. The Vatican is the only remaining absolute monarchy in Europe." As a result the Vatican City "is currently the only widely recognised independent state that has not become a member of the UN."

Also from the same Wiki page:
"Vatican City is an ecclesiastical or sacerdotal-monarchical state, ruled by the Bishop of Rome—the Pope."
"Government: Ecclesiastical, sacerdotal, absolute elective theocracy"
"Independence from the Kingdom of Italy - Lateran Treaty 11 February 1929"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

Even within the Vatican state, claims of monarchy, let alone absolutism, are immediately undermined by the simple fact that the Pope is elected, albeit by a very small electorate and, as has only recently been shown, the incumbent is at liberty to simply resign with no say in the identity of his successor.

---

An "absolute elective theocracy" is nevertheless exactly that. Being able to choose one's successor is not a traditional prerequisite for a monarchy to be considered absolute, typically being based on blood lineage not personal choice, although being an absolute monarch the Pope could no doubt single handedly change the rules regarding elections at any point, if he so desires!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

One might very well argue that the model is much more akin to the Presidential system of the United States, electoral college and all, than to the kingdoms of the Middle Ages, and indeed with an absence of the self-preening, politicking, and public decrying of one's opponents necessary to reach office in the so-called beacon of democracy, might even be considered a vast improvement upon it.

---

So are you admitting that you are one of the Illuminati actively trying to replace democracy with an absolute monarchy by illusorily selling it as the next generation of democracy???

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

The absurdities of World Governing Antichrist eschatology (which I will always maintain cannot ever be described as Christian eschatology), especially those which seek to promote the Pope to the hot seat therein, have never been more obvious than now with the Vatican never so denuded of any genuine political power and the number of independent, secular nations never so great.

---

Ah, the point is that for those bent on world domination, the catholic model represents a still active and viable way to achieve such a goal!!!

Well, there's obviously no point in arguing with hyperparanoia, so I won't. But yes, I dare to argue with Wikipedia, especially where opinion is disguised as fact. It is after all a Christian duty to beware wolves in sheep's clothing!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

But yes, I dare to argue with Wikipedia, especially where opinion is disguised as fact.

---

A Wikipedia dissenter, and I thought they only formed part of folklore and urban myth!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

It is after all a Christian duty to beware wolves in sheep's clothing!

---

I am sure Wikipedia would take that as a compliment although it might also meow at the reference!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TysonLPrice

"Hmm. Caveat emptor and all that. Although this might fall foul of advertising standards, it's not a fraud. When all is said and done they offered you an item at a price of $25 and you accepted their offer believing that to be a fair price for the item. The reasonable consumer (which is what courts have to measure by) is not affected by any previous offers and decides entirely upon the offer they are currently presented with. The onus really is on you to shop wisely, comparing prices at other outlets etc. The argument that you would never have bought the item if you'd know that it was previously offered at $35 is not going to get you very far in law."

I’m not sure where that response came from…I wasn’t crying foul of any kind as far as me being duped. But obviously my intent didn’t come across as I meant it. Part of that is probably I have closely followed the story over the last year or so and a lot of people may not have been.

What scalds me is JC Penny is supposedly trying to win their old customer base back and part of doing that seems to include “making up” a sale. The pants I’m referring to wouldn’t command $60.00 on their best day.

The whole “we are sorry please come back to us” campaign is in part based on this lie. Just marked down from $35.00 to $24.99 is good enough. They had to make up this inflated price. I just consider it insulting.

So I disagree and think they are doing something wrong. They are inflating sale savings in an attempt to say “yay! We brought sales back”. The sale prices they advertise are deliberately misleading.

So it’s not that I feel ripped off. I feel I’m being lied to.

I agree about an internet campaign not fitting this scenario. I have enough trouble keeping my foot out of my mouth here let alone taking on the whole net :bigyello:

---

What I find interesting about this is that what you describe is what I always assumed that companies like that were doing. I occasionally go to some place (I forget the name, which probably would disturb their marketers to no end) whenever they send me a $10 off coupon, which they do roughly once a month. By being patient, I end up with a bunch of very cheap clothes. I think they might be noticing that I only buy a single item with the coupon, so they are wasting their time sending them to me, which might be why I haven't gotten any in a few months. The point is that they have a bunch of stuff at jacked up prices, but all of it is on perpetual sale (using digital price tags, so they can change the sale price at the touch of a key). I think that the price after the sale is probably a reasonable retail price, so I figure they are boosting the advertised price then showing a big sale that results in a reasonable retail price, which I then undercut with the coupon. It's all just a game.

While it goes against the grain to agree with Witis :o I have to say that the Vatican is a theocracy, monarchy and hierarchy. I don't think anyone would argue with the theocracy and hierarchy bits but the monarchy bit is obviously more controversial. But the only thing that a state requires to be defined as a monarchy is to have a monarch at it's head and there is plenty of historical precendent for monarchs being elected rather than hereditary. There are plenty of examples here.

Note that while the Vatican may be a monarchy the Catholic Church is not, not least because it's not a state.

As for the stuff about World Governing Anti-Christian Hegemonies... well that's just the usual Witis Whitter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

While it goes against the grain to agree with Witis :o I have to say that the Vatican is a theocracy, monarchy and hierarchy.

---

It's a minor miracle!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

I don't think anyone would argue with the theocracy and hierarchy bits but the monarchy bit is obviously more controversial.

---

I dunno the Pope's official title with regard to Vatican City is Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City,
and check out the papal crown the Pope used to wear: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pa...ems_pearls.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

But the only thing that a state requires to be defined as a monarchy is to have a monarch at it's head and there is plenty of historical precendent for monarchs being elected rather than hereditary. There are plenty of examples here.

---

Well said Funky, and from that page:
"An elective monarchy is a monarchy ruled by an elected monarch, in contrast to a hereditary monarchy in which the office is automatically passed down as a family inheritance. The manner of election, the nature of candidate qualifications, and the electors vary from case to case. Historically it is not uncommon for elective monarchies to transform into hereditary ones over time, or for hereditary ones to acquire at least occasional elective aspects."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

Note that while the Vatican may be a monarchy the Catholic Church is not, not least because it's not a state.

---

Can you go any deeper on that point and explain the difference between the Vatican City and the Catholic Church and why you believe the Catholic Church is not a monarchistic construct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

As for the stuff about World Governing Anti-Christian Hegemonies... well that's just the usual Witis Whitter.

---

Don't leave out the false prophet i.e the Catholic Church which is my main point of focus!!!

Quote:

---

Can you go any deeper on that point and explain the difference between the Vatican City and the Catholic Church and why you believe the Catholic Church is not a monarchistic construct?

---

I guess it would depend on how you define the term "monarchistic construct". Certainly the Catholic Church isn't a "monarchy" (which is what I said) because the Catholic church isn't a state. I think that's pretty cut and dried. Whether it's a "Monarchistic Construct" would depend on how you defined that term. If you define it as "a body whose leaders are a monarchy" then it's a monarchistic construct. If you define it as "a body whose members must abide by the legislation laid down by their monarchistic rulers" then it isn't because, as Dunfiddlin pointed out, the catholic church does not impose any legal obligation on its members. It merely requests that follow certain practices should they choose to be a member, and it doesn't even rigidly enforce those practices as a pre-requisite to membership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

I guess it would depend on how you define the term "monarchistic construct". Certainly the Catholic Church isn't a "monarchy" (which is what I said) because the Catholic church isn't a state. I think that's pretty cut and dried. Whether it's a "Monarchistic Construct" would depend on how you defined that term. If you define it as "a body whose leaders are a monarchy" then it's a monarchistic construct.

---

That's the point, the Catholic church is headed by an absolute monarch who is officially the "Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City" and has absolute control over the city.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FunkyDexter

If you define it as "a body whose members must abide by the legislation laid down by their monarchistic rulers" then it isn't because, as Dunfiddlin pointed out, the catholic church does not impose any legal obligation on its members. It merely requests that follow certain practices should they choose to be a member, and it doesn't even rigidly enforce those practices as a pre-requisite to membership.

---

Ah, I think you are confusing those Catholics residing in the Vatican City who are subject to the Pope's absolute legislative, executive, and judicial rule, with Catholics residing in other states (nations) who must abide by international and national democratically determined laws.

However, the problem is obvious: extend and apply the absolute elective theocratic model from the Vatican City to the rest of the world and the world falls under the absolute control of the Pope!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mCSRaRMODWE

Also, if you do not extend and apply the absolute elective theocratic model of the Vatican City, then the world does not fall under the absolute control of the pope. That's the direction things have been going for many centuries now, and it isn't likely to change.

Quote:

---

However, the problem is obvious: extend and apply the absolute elective theocratic model from the Vatican City to the rest of the world and the world falls under the absolute control of the Pope!!!

---

If things were different they wouldn't be the same! What's your point?

Extend and apply the ruling principles of China to the rest of the world and we'd all be communist slaves. Extend the plutocracy of the United States to the rest of the world and the gap between rich and poor would grow exponentially. As both of these options are millions of times more likely to occur perhaps it's time to set your watchtowers to looking in the right direction!

You set your watchtowers to keep an eye on those you have genuine reason to fear. Anarchy, being entirely mythical, to say nothing of really, really disorganised, isn't one of them. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

Also, if you do not extend and apply the absolute elective theocratic model of the Vatican City, then the world does not fall under the absolute control of the pope. That's the direction things have been going for many centuries now, and it isn't likely to change.

---

Sure, however, that was not the point that started the discussion, see post #42

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niya

You cannot win a media war with the Illuminati.

---

Hence the issue has been explored in an attempt to determine just exactly what the Illuminati is, and what level of threat they pose to society.
It is timeless issue which, in the case of the Catholic Church, has even made it into the plots of recent Hollywood films such as Angels and Demons which was set in the Vatican.

It also recently reappeared as a major issue in Australian politics when Anthony Abbott, a well known Catholic who studied for several years at a Catholic seminary, took over the leadership of the Australian Liberal Party and together with his religiously named deputy Julie Bishop seem likley to win the upcoming September elections.

Although perhaps Niya means to use the term Illuminati in a different sense?

Quote:

---

has even made it into the plots of recent Hollywood films such as Angels and Demons which was set in the Vatican.

---

You get that they aren't documentaries, right?

I hate everyone that argues endlessly about religion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

Extend and apply the ruling principles of China to the rest of the world and we'd all be communist slaves.

---

Where did you get that piece of misinformation from???
"China is a charter member of the United Nations and one of five permanent members of the Security Council."
"The 'Big Four' victors of World War II (Republic of China, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States) were the founding members of the United Nations that drafted the United Nations Charter in 1944, which was ratified on 26 June 1945 by the representatives of 50 countries."
Slavery is not legal according to U.N law, for example article 4 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights stipulates that "No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms."

Sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_a...United_Nations
http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

Extend the plutocracy of the United States to the rest of the world and the gap between rich and poor would grow exponentially.

---

The United States of America is clearly not a plutocracy, it is not controlled by a wealthy ruling class, it is a democracy where essentially any U.S citizen can run for public office and vote!
Care of the poor is always a strong electoral issue as they represent such a large segment of the voting population so I am not convinced the matter you have identified is anything other than an obvious red herring!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

As both of these options are millions of times more likely to occur perhaps it's time to set your watchtowers to looking in the right direction!

---

You seem to be saying that I should look anywhere else except at those trying to replacing freedom and democracy with tyranny and slavery!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dunfiddlin

Anarchy, being entirely mythical, to say nothing of really, really disorganised, isn't one of them. ;)

---

Anarchy is not mythical just think of ye olde pirates to see through that obvious sophistry!!!