Hurin

Thanks for the clarification and the valuable feedback. gmail and hotmail addresses should now be working again. The culprit was an overzealous ban filter that was applied a while back. I've redacted some of your previous post since we'd sorta prefer it if folks registered normally instead of circumventing things. If you can, send me a PM with your email address and I'll manually update your account with it. Best, H

Both of those services tend to spam filter message board registration confirmations. Did you check your spam filters for each? And, I have to ask, if you never got the emails, how did you post this? H

It sure is odd that directly connecting without the router used to work. But now does not. All you can do is keep hassling them unless you have an alternative ISP in the area. Unfortunately, for broadband, there are usually only two choices in each area. . . the phone company (DSL) or the cable company.

Personally, I'm just surprised that a router has trouble passing standard http content over stanard ports to only one site. Especially now that even the replacement router is also behaving in the same way. I doubt the router make/model is the only factor. To me, it seems likely that there is some other factor at play. Whether that factor be a local issue to your computers/network, your ISP, or even something even less obvious, I have no idea. But hopefully a different make/model router will disperse whatever confluence of factors you are currently having that is causing this bizarre behavior. I personally use a Linksys WRT54G (rev 2 I think). And I've never had any trouble. I try to use Linksys whenever I can. However, if you'd like to try another brand, I've had decent experiences with Netgear and D-Link. Here's a couple of cheapies ($40). You might try them: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16833127079 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16833122016 Good luck!

Just didn't want to say anything for certain until it is certain. It being only Q1, I figured there could be some changes (more or less tampo printing) between now and Q3 when they hit the web store. Perhaps even just to differentiate it from the WF "exclusive."

That particular seam can vary from valk to valk. Just deploying the landing gear (which presses up against the pilot seat for friction) causes expansion of that gap. For this reason, many have found it necessary to "slice" the "kite" sticker that is put there so that it can move freely. But the kite does get a little distorted by the gap. I believe these are tampo-printed before they are put together when the fuselage is in separate halves. So, given how variable that gap can be from valk to valk, they possibly don't tampo print it because (if they aren't very, very careful) the kite halves may not match up after the parts are put together. And, at least with a sticker, you can place it and slice it and be sure (after manufacturing) that it is straight, and undistorted. So, that's all guess-work. . . but that's why I and others hypothesize that the seam might be the cause. I assume there is some problem. Otherwise, I would think they would have tampo-printed it along with most of the other markings. That's not to say that no seam has ever been tampo-printed in the history of toy-making.

I suppose the ones available later through the web store could be different. But for the WonderFest exclusive, reports seem to indicate that there is a lot of tampo printing. The legs have the U.N. Spacy (yeah!). But there are some noted exceptions: 1. No 'UN SPACY' on the gun 2. No 'Kite' symbol on either side of fuselage under the cockpit (perhaps due to seam) 3. No 'No Steps' 4. ? But looking at the hi-res images at this auction, it looks like they even printed (or pre-decaled?) the pilot name and tons of the little stuff. So, I'm personally quite impressed. I would have liked to have had the gun UN SPACY-ied. . . but maybe they didn't want to piss off the folks who prefer it not to be (accurately) upside-down in battroid mode. I've always wanted a (1/48) VF-1 valkyrie with the "U.N. Spacy" printed on the legs. . . even after-market stickers/decals never looked quite right to me. Here's hoping we can get them some day. H Edit. . . the two high-res shots from that auction. Note the pilot name and intake markings on an (apparently) unopened item.

No it will be short (for me). Don't call people a-holes (especially when they in no way deserve it). Don't call people fools (especially when they in no way deserve it). Try not to always need a boogey-man or a conspiracy theory for a toy being more expensive than you think is reasonable. People should be allowed to recommend valk dealers without you bizarrely attacking them. People should be allowed to discuss how much they are willing to pay without you bizarrely attacking them. People should be able to sell a super-rare valk without you calling them a-holes. And people should be able to buy a super-rare valk without you calling them fools. And before certain folks with a "savior" and "fight the power" complex interpret that the wrong way. . . you and I both know I won't ban you merely for doing any of the above. I will merely point it out. And I will check your reasoning. And I will provide an alternative view. This, too, is also called having an "opinion." And when you respond as you did to reasonable criticizm of your opinion, I'll provide context as to why you didn't respond reasonably but with an attempt to turn it completely personal.

Interesting. So, again, you had nowhere rehetorically to go in your argument or point of view. . . so now you're just blatantly calling names and possibly even threatening other members (I'll leave that to the interpretation of the staff). Jeez dude. . . I note that you began taking this tac just as soon as it was pointed out that you weren't being terribly honest regarding your mischaracterization of your prior posts. As usual, rather than acknowledge it, you just starting getting more and more personal and begin the flippant, taunting posts. Again, typical. It's sad that you can't just "put me in my place" now with some well-reasoned words. Instead, we get veiled references to physical violence. How utterly pathetic. I concede that I did say that he would be known by the company he keeps. So you've got a valid point there and I had overlooked it since the rest of the paragraph went on to focus on a different concept entirely. However, in your rush to try to paint me with my own brush, you overreach in that I don't really think that my warning someone that their "supporter" may not actually have their best interests or their point of view at heart (but is rather motivated by a prior grudge) is really about cliques or "hight school." That's your interpretation that you're retroactively placing back on me. As for "intellectual dishonesty". . . both of you practice it in spades without even knowing it. Jenius, for example, loves to say that what he said doesn't necessarily mean something. . . but then spends the next several posts dodging any attempt to get him to actually then say what he did mean. Until finally, we discover that we pretty much had him pegged all along. Too many of you guys treat arguments and disagreements as a game. Instead of stating your position and marshalling reason and evidence to back it up, addressing conflicting views, and reasonably and honestly debating the merits of each point, you seem to think the point is to avoid having your position explicitly spelled out or just wishing away your points when they are no longer convenient for you. And whenever these avoidance techniques eventually fail you, then you just start bashing the guy who's finally cornered you or pointed out the flaws in what you've argued or the dishonest way you're now recharacterizing it. All of that is very clearly on display above. Repeatedly. Best, H Edit: Here's another good example. Jenius would have us believe that he had only posted repeatedly for the purpose of "consistently encouraging you and DND to move on?" When I quote himself back to him and point out that the content of his posts doesn't match that characterization. . . without skipping a beat, --while just dimissing the snarkiest/sarcastic/aggressive quote-- he merely re-fashions his characterization of his prior posts as "Jeebus guys quit your whining" as though that was how he originally characterized them. That's essentially just trying to subtly "move the goalposts" by not acknowledging that there is actually a distinct difference between encouraging people not to fight and stating: "Jeebus guys quit your whining." It's classic misdirection and yet another in a long line of examples of how you can't have a reasonable, honest debate because you have no interest in actually owning up to your words or being honest regarding their meaning.

Note: Some posts were moved to here. (which is now open) From this point onwards. . . discuss the toy.

No, the contents of the thread itself is evidence of you not "doing well." When you weren't whining about word choice, you were coyly trying not to have your point of view pinned down. It took a very long time for you to even lay out your point of view because you preferred to take issue with people gleaning your point of view from what you had already said (as was done accurately, btw). You repeatedly mischaracterized what you had said (just like your new friend) in order to sway things, and when you were called on it, you began childishly taunting. . . until. . . finally. . . with nowhere else to go and after repeated requests, you actually addressed some points. . . and revealed that all the earlier "gleaning" that had been done was essentially accurate. Fine, it's open again. Have at it. But your tone sure was different in your PM to me shortly thereafter. LOL. I explained my rationale for locking it. You had no complaints at the time. And, indeed, as I said, you had been repeatedly telling everyone in that thread that you wanted to take it to PM. Yet you were never willing to be the first to do so. So why would you be upset if I locked it? You could just PM me. Could it be that you're one of those types who constantly has to get the last word even as you hypocritically scream at everyone else that they should be PMing you their responses? Again, this is another perfect example of you being dishonest and just recharacterizing your past statements to paint you in a better light now in hopes that nobody will actually remembe what you have said. I remember: Which ones of those were actually encouraging us to move on? And which ones were subtle, sarcastic digs? They all look like "fuel for the fire" to me. You interpret them that way because you don't value honesty or taking responsibility for your own words. I naively think that people should own up to what they've said instead of ignoring it or disingenuously recasting them as soon as they become inconvenient for them or uncomfortable. When people who are intellectually honest take part in a disagreement, usually some form of understanding can be reached. That's not the case here (or in our prior discussion) because you and those like you don't actually own up to your words or what they actually mean. Instead, you constantly obfuscate, dodge, and weave as soon as things start getting uncomfortable. That's the problem. I think you would take fairness, honesty, and the intellectual rigor of your points of view more seriously if you weren't anonymous. Well, note that you're the first to bring up "clicks" [sic] and "high school." I merely pointed out that I wasn't suprised by your commenting here given our recent discussion. And that he should possibly consider that it is less about what he's saying than it is about some animus on your part. Perhaps I'm wrong. But then again, considering your outburst here, perhaps I'm not. Heh. . . "cowardly". . . how long have you been harbouring that?

Hmmmm. . . you attempted to have a point. That point was addressed. You then attempted to salvage what you were saying in an intellectually dishonest way. I pointed out the dishonesty of it. . . and now you're making vapid posts like this, hypocritically continuing to derail the thread and perpetuate the arguing. Yep. . . that's pretty much the way it usually goes with you guys. Let's get back to the toy.

Except, of course, for the part where you told me I never should have stated it in the first place. Thusly: Or the part where you said that people who feel offended should just "Man up" and ignore it. Because you find such things "boring." Quite simply, that's you stating (again) that certain opinions and viewpoints shouldn't be posted according to your sensibilities. And yet now you somehow claim that I didn't understand you and that you would never say such a thing? Wow. So. . . that's the sort of intellectual honesty I can expect from you when I disagree with you? Lovely. I guess I now see why your sympathies lay where they do. Oh, I see, you seem to think that you are in a "speaking truth to power" mode here and that somehow my role as Admin is coloring my behavior or posting style. Again, you're new. I suggest you look back on my post history. I haven't been an admin all that long (somewhere around a year). As for those "encouraging" you. . . keep in mind that people will know you by the company you keep. In threads like this that take this turn, it has always been quite common for those who haven't fared well in prior arguments/disagreements with me to take the opportunity to take a pot-shot or two. Doesn't trouble me much. Especially given the hypocrisy of it. Anyways, you can go on thinking that this is "you against the Admin". . . but it's not. I've never banned anyone or been accused of using my Admin powers inappropriately. And I'm sure most of those who've been around long enough to know would agree that since I've become an Admin, if anything, I've softened.

Actually, you appear to be only supporting the posting of certain types of "opinions." Well, first, I'm an admin. Second, who cares? While I agree that staff shouldn't engage in nakedly flaming people (and over recent months and years the staff has actually gotten quite a bit more cordial and less prone to doing so than it was years ago), staff are still entitled to their opinions as well and are welcome to contribute to discussions. Please note that I substantively addressed several flaws in DND/haterist's point of view ("every smart Japanese Macross collector" putting these on Ebay would actually be good for prices, etc.) while also placing his "opinion" in the context of several of his past similar "opinions." Now, you're a relative newcomer. So I don't blame you. . . but you sorta had to be there when (among many other episodes) haterist used to blame anyone who discussed a toy price on these forums for Yamato charging what they do. In post after post, he demanded (even in his signature) that everyone stop mentioning prices. Even going so far as to call people "a-holes" who didn't bow to his decree. Of course, it's hard for you new guys to see what he used to write (aside from where he is quoted by others) since he changed hundreds of his own incriminating posts to "Hurin is a FAG!" long ago. Interesting. Haterist can have an opinion. You can have an opinion about my opinion of haterist's opinion. But I'm not supposed to post my opinion in the first place. That's a very interesting model you've set up there. But since we're making this about "MANNING UP" now, here's an alternative view: it's essentially "unmanly" or "unwomanly" to shy away from all disagreement and conflict screaming: "Please mom and dad! Stop fighting! You make me sad!" When people express opinions, people will disagree. And they will argue. Some will argue better than others and some will sometimes feel angry when they can't just accept that they may have mispoken or said something unwise. So, they will just hedge, and obfuscate, and eventually play the victim. And, then, of course, there will be the "above-it-all" peacemakers who drop in just to talk about how nobody should ever fight. But, to borrow from your nomenclature and style, those people should probably "grow a pair." Best, H

As I amply demonstrated, I took note that you were referring to ebay sellers. I now find it interesting that you are attacking both sellers and buyers as the source of yet another one of your invented "we're being screwed by faceless enemies!" problems. Which is why I pointed out that you consider the price unreasonable. Not that you were upset that you couldn't get one. But really, if you are so dis-interested, shouldn't the question be why you need to post repeatedly about the sellers being "a-holes" and the buyers being "fools" and how both of them are mutually responsible for something so utterly terrible as a rare toy being put into the hands of those willing to pay for it? There is no hidden meaning. Your meaning is clear. Ebay buyers and sellers are screwing us all!!!! It's also poorly thought-out and a return to your earlier "haterist" form where there was always some faceless enemy to blame for some invented problem from which you were merely trying to save us all. You and I both know that I'm capable of a link-dump that will amply demonstrate all your prior profanity-laden "I'm here to save us" rants against such nefarious "enemies" as those wondering about the price of an upcoming product or those recommending reputable valk dealers who don't happen to currently reside in your signature. I too have an opinion. I have an opinion about your opinion. And I think I made a cogent case for why your opinion is poorly reasoned, founded in a weak premise, and unnecessarily antagonistic and hostile. Though, I think those who might not yet see what I'm talking about probably would find my case more compelling were they more familiar with your prior posts along similar lines. See, that's where you're wrong. There are ebay sellers who are members here. There are ebay buyers who are members here. Indeed there are ebay sellers and buyers who have bought and sold this very product. Oh, but you can't possibly be talking about them. Just as in the past, you make broad, sweeping generalizations attacking many people. . . and then play the "who me?" card when someone points it out and asks you to either retract, clarify, or apologize. You have always had a problem with owning up to the plain meaning of your words as soon as they become uncomfortable for you. We've been down this road way too many time. It has never turned out well for you. I think even you recognize that much of your past behavior was inexcusable. . . which I suspect is why you asked to have your display name changed from "haterist." In the interests of giving you a "fresh start," I agreed to do so against the better judgement of some of my peers. You really did appear to have turned over a new leaf for quite some time. But in recent weeks and months, the old-style haterist BS seems to be back. That's fine. But if the old "haterist" is back, so too will be your old display name and plenty of reminders (from me and others) of the kind of hate-filled divisive bile you regularly spewed around here when you weren't transparently trying to buy back everyone's good-will.

Oh. . . so now the ebay sellers and the buyers are the villains. Gotta have villains! The more villains the better! Somebody must be an "a-hole" and held accountable for there being a toy that isn't readily available to us and is therefore expensive. Apparently, we're now broadening that to encompass both the people providing them and the people buying them! Bravo! Why can't these just be expensive without there being people to blame and call "a-holes?" Why can't they just be out of your price-range because they're hard to obtain without someone nefariously causing it to happen? In essence, you seem to be angry that people didn't pick these up from Wonderfest and offer them up to you and all of us at cost. And, since that's not possible because of limited supply, you're also angry at people for being willing to pay more than you deem appropriate for something that is difficult to obtain. Apparently, someone is always being an a-hole no matter the circumstances. If something costs more than what you think is reasonable, there has to be someone to angrily blame. Shenanigans must be afoot! We're getting screwed by someone! Really? Every single smart Macross collector in Japan is going to be doing this?!? My goodness! One would think that there would be a lot of them available then. . . and therefore the price would come down. Can we cut the freakin' melodrama here? These are currently rare because they aren't being released widely. So they are going for a premium. There is currently no other way to get one. . . so they are expensive. If it is every widely released, it will be less expensive. And if "every smart Macross collector in Japan" begins posting these on eBay, that would actually be a good thing because the plentiful supply would cause the price to go down. Rare things are expensive. That's just the way it is. People don't need to be behaving as "a-holes" or otherwise nefariously, stupidly, or "foolishly" in order for this to be the case.

I love the subtitle to this thread.

I actually made a version of the R2 DVD with full-motion chapter selection menus w/ full music. But since I can't distribute the video snippets and audio that are used in the menus, there wasn't much point in posting it online. I showed it at MWCon a few years back. Best, H Edit: Oh, and remember, I didn't do the actual translating. I worked from a timed english script. Granted, I did change a lot and made the english less stilted and awkward (IMHO). The original script was pretty bad and it was largely reworked. But I didn't start from scratch!

I've been robbed!

This may be a case where economies of scale don't actually work out, however. If they only have limited capacity for weathering and tampo printing and adding any more capacity would necessitate further investment. . . it just may not be worth it to them. In fact, the fact that they aren't doing it would seem to indicate that it is not worth it to them. I'm going to assume that Yamato knows better what is in its best interest and has a bit more information on its capacity, financial situation, and market position than do various "experts" half a world away writing on an internet forum.

Unless, of course, the extra cost of weathering these things and tampo-printing some of the markings where this had not been done before makes these toys barely profitable for Yamato at the price point people are willing to pay.

Like you, I have no problem with willing participants voluntarily exchanging goods for currency. I also have a hard time getting worked up at a toy company for not making something. . . or not making more of it for people outside their targeted market. They'll manufacture however many they decide is best for their business needs. And they will be worth whatever they are worth to the people that eventually buy them. And nobody is going to hold a gun to anybody's head and force them to pay more than they are willing to pay of their own free will.

My mistake then. I wasn't aware that 2ndary market meant only/specifically ebayers and the like. But I can see how that makes sense. I jumped to conclusions. But, for the record, that's not why we "got into it" in the past. Far from it.

Dude. . . can you tone it down a bit. There's quite a few decent re-sellers who help us bring these over who could take offense at that. H

So if anyone is wondering why I haven't bothered to do anything with the subtitles myself. . . it's because of several reports like this. It looks like there are a lot of people out there who aren't bothered by copyright law who are already subtitling it and releasing it in complete form. My subtitle work was always just that. . . just subtitles. . . and it was up to you to graft them onto your DVD (with no video quality loss) via the instructions I provided. Some day, I might still get around to screwing around with the subtitles in the same way I did in the past. . . but at this point, there doesn't seem to be a need.