1  ...  12  13  14  15  16  17  ...  42  |   Order by default

Aug 4, 2002, 8:59pm

There's not much to enjoy when the features simply aren't there, linn. And it's hard to make it better when the people running AW are incompetent at dealing with its users as they are at developing the software.

The problem is that at one time Rick used to actually care about what AW's citizens (non-paying) thought about AW and where it was going. Ever since JP came onto the scene, AW has basically took a nosedive into the dirt due to JP's greed and tyrannical stranglehold over AW simply because he has money to push Rick around and make him his "whipping boy". Oh, sure, after COF went public and became AWI/AWCI/AWC they gave the illusion they cared about its users with Lucrustia's pathetic little community offerings et al, but any old-time user could see RIGHT through this facade and knew it wouldn't last--at least I could anyway--and same with the way Rick and JP (though JP mostly, I suspect) did business.

Perhaps now Rick and JP will start focusing on AW's users by letting them know where THEY want AW to go but at the same time allowing user/citizen input to also shape and mold AW's future--and not on becoming even more greedy if they truly want AW to succeed. If not, I suggest Rick and JP sell AW to someone who actually has a vision for AW and go do something else already.

[View Quote] > I have yet to find any company who gives it's customers inside inf o LOL
> yall get real out there and enjoy what we have maybe even make it better
> instead of whinning!

[View Quote]

Aug 9, 2002, 8:34pm

Er, no, those are spelling differences, not intensity differences. "Worst" is more extreme than "worse"; and there is no "worser" or "worsest".

[View Quote] >
> They are interchangable. Much like the British colour and the American
> color, honour -- honor, etc.

Aug 9, 2002, 9:11pm

[View Quote] > is more extreme than "worse"; and there is no "worser" or "worsest".
>
> That made no sense. You said they're not intensity differences then say
> they are.

Um, perhaps if you weren't so quick to cut out what I was replying to you would understand the context. Go back and reread it. I was referring to your spelling differences (hence why I said "those are spelling differences"). The difference between "worse" and "worst" isn't JUST one of spelling but of intensity also.

> They are interchangable though, as says the couple of dictionarys that I
> have looked at in the past 10 minutes. They have the exact same meaning,
> just different spellings.

Don't know what kind of wacky dictionaries you're using but dictionary.com says "worse" is a comparative (http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=comparative) while "worst" is a superlative (http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=superlative).

Aug 10, 2002, 12:02am

[View Quote] > "Worst"
> would understand the context. Go back and reread it. I was referring to your
> spelling differences (hence why I said "those are spelling differences").
> The difference between "worse" and "worst" isn't JUST one of spelling but of
> intensity also.
>
> Move on through, that's not what it says. Read it again yourself.
> "...those are spelling differences, not intensity differences. 'Worst' is
> more extreme than 'worse'." By using extreme you're saying that are
> different intensities, but in the sentence earlier your just said they're
> not different in intensity. I think you put the "not" in the wrong spot.

Nope, my grammar is fine; you simply don't understand it. I am making a distinction between spelling and intensity differences in reference to what you, again, obviously didn't read:

"They are interchangable. Much like the British colour and the American color, honour -- honor, etc."

The British and American spelling differences are what I'm referring to. Duh.

> says "worse" is a comparative
> (http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=comparative) while "worst"
> is a superlative
> (http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=superlative).
>
> That's nice, did you put in worse and worst themselves? It shows identicle
> information even using that as one of my "wacky dictionaries". Right on.

Wrong on; you don't seem to have very good reading comprehension, Bowen. Agent already explained this.

Aug 10, 2002, 12:05am

Um, Bowen, stop being lame. Punctuation is MUCH more lax than word usage and spelling. It doesn't matter if there are 1 or 2 spaces after punctuation; I use 1 simply because it's more efficient and less typing. <shrug> I also put punctuation not originally in the quote OUTSIDE of the quotation marks because it too is more efficient and exact. Get over it and learn how to use words correctly--which is what this thread is about.

[View Quote] > did return.
>
> OH NO! You forgot the two spaces after your colons. Oh no, after the
> elipses too! Why pick on my use of grammar other semanticle mumbo jumbo if
> you don't follow it strictly yourself?

Aug 10, 2002, 12:54am

[View Quote] > and spelling. It doesn't matter if there are 1 or 2 spaces after
> punctuation; I use 1 simply because it's more efficient and less typing.
> <shrug> I also put punctuation not originally in the quote OUTSIDE of the
> quotation marks because it too is more efficient and exact. Get over it and
> learn how to use words correctly--which is what this thread is about.
>
> Efficiency is your excuse for much, but it won't make it proper written
> English.
>
> That use of lame is slang by the way, that's not proper English.
>
> Hey if you want to nitpick, I'll nitpick back. You must spell out words
> that are less than or equal too ten, but not less than negative ten.

Oh puhleaze...now you're being REALLY lame--properly lame, even. You're talking about Analglish, not English. Informal English isn't so lame, but you had better know the difference between "worse" and "worst".

> That's fine, because if it wasn't there you usually don't put it in if it's
> a quote. Unless you're taking part of a quote, in which case you lead and
> end with an Ellipsis with no spaces.

Why did you capitalize "ellipsis"? Silly Bowen, English isn't for you.

> I was being efficient in my own terms though. I was simply saving myself a
> fraction of a second by reaching upward to hit the E rather than reaching
> upward and across to hit the T.

Uh huh...efficiently wrong, you mean.

> If he had just said to himself, hmm maybe he misspelt that, T and E are
> really close together and I understand what he's saying and so does every
> other person that speaks english. He didn't need to post that, which
> clearly would've have started this. That's obvious, even I would've noticed
> that doing that would've caused useless garbage.

Oh, so you admit you made a mistake now? How funny you expect other people to accept your mistakes when you in your hypocracy don't accept others. Drive through, hypocrite-boy!

> I'm sure you'll retort with something like, "You could've admitted you were
> wrong." But, I've yet to even see you do that when you're wrong.

When have I been wrong? ;)

> Or most other "men." Yes that is sexist because I notice most females admit they
> will, but most guys rarely do. Don't restate the obvious that that's a
> generalization, because I used most, not all.

Good god you're a geek. Get over it already.

Aug 10, 2002, 5:08am

[View Quote] > talking about Analglish, not English. Informal English isn't so lame, but
> you had better know the difference between "worse" and "worst".
>
> Lame - unable to accomplish the task; disabled.
> slang. - weak; unsatisfactory

Very good; have you figured out which one you are yet? I'll give you a hint: both. Drive through...

>
> Subtle emphasis, why do you capitalize unimportant words like JFK2 did?

Which words did I incorrectly capitalize? "English" is a name of a language (among other things); hence why it's capitalized.

>
> So are most of your "efficient" actions. One space instead of two is
> "efficiently wrong." As is not spelling out numbers less than 11.

Hardly; you better go look up the word "efficient", sport. You're getting desperate for arguments.

> to accept your mistakes when you in your hypocracy don't accept others.
> Drive through, hypocrite-boy!
>
> If it makes you happy, sure. Hypocrite boy should not be hyphonated.

Uh, it's a compound word, idiot. Back to Grammar 101 with you.

>
> The issue with security for one. It's obvious that it was an sdk function
> to get the object password.

And how was I wrong in asking about it, hmm? No wrongness there, Bowen. More of your lameness...

> Functions like these are not overlooked and are
> put there for a reason, even if they're not documented. Some of the public
> ones aren't documented either. Andras is right, leave that stuff be, it
> wouldn't have been just left in there. Give the programmers some credit,
> even if you don't think they're that great. They wouldn't have left
> something that gives away object passwords to uncreditied bots or
> applications.

Well how am I to know since I don't program (hence, I don't use the SDK) and given AW programmer track record it wouldn't be beyond them to make such an error. Credit is EARNED, not given mindlessly away.

>
> Says he who plays games all the time and is the self proclaimed "expert" on
> them.

I never claimed I was an expert at games; and I hardly play them all the time--in fact, I don't like many computer/video games. <shrug>

> By the way, stop changing the "reply to newsgroup." If you don't like what
> I'm saying that's fine, ignore it then. It makes no emphasis on your point
> either. Just get's rather annoying to have to change it whenever I reply to
> you when you don't like the discussion.

Just keeping you own your toes, sport. Take your own advice and don't reply to this message, hypocrite.

Aug 11, 2002, 7:17am

Current usage dictates "worser" to be incorrect--PERIOD. Get out of the 16th and 17th centuries, and don't expect some 12-year-old interview to support your argument. Take a basic English grammar class and get a clue.

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Aug 11, 2002, 7:53pm

Look, twit, why even bother responding in the first place if you're just going to be a snotty snob about it? Get over yourself already and lose the attitude, twit.

[View Quote] > I guess you jerked your knee before you actually digested the post. I was simply stating the obvious which is backed up by Oxford and Fowler (current by the way) which supports your original premise ya ning nong. That is
> that the word "worser" is indeed a vulgar and merely a literary survival. Learn to read for context Eep.

> If your going to be a pedant, at least be good at it.
>
[View Quote]

Aug 12, 2002, 5:19am

Don't bother as you're now filtered. Enjoy being ignored, twit!

[View Quote] > Eep the pot is calling the kettle black :o)
> I've had years of watching your psuedo-pedantic behavior and grammatical anarchy decline with each thread to your final resort of name-calling. After watching you struggle to support your arguments with something more than
> mud-slinging, I thought perhaps you could use a bit of well-sourced material to uphold your claims. (i.e.: worser). I made the mistake of concluding that with your obvious superior intellect well armed, that you could make an
> actual argument rather than just flapping your e-lips.
> Alas, as your most recent posts reveal, it is not a lack of material or your misdirected education that is your demise. Rather, your name-calling discloses a thorough lack of imagination on your part.
> Cheers,
> Kit (the ultimate pedant)
> P.S. It's great fun correcting people isn't it Eep. It's almost as satisfying as the experience of making fun of someone or mud-slinging, but its slightly more socially acceptable. So, if you'd like a bit more of your own
> medicine, please reply.
>
[View Quote]

Aug 12, 2002, 5:03pm

He hardly "burnt" me, Syntax; he's just being a trolling moron and I tire of him. <shrug>

[View Quote] > Wow...I must say, this is one of the best burns I have seen on Eep in a long
> time. Also, since he filtered you, it looks like you got to him.

Aug 13, 2002, 11:36am

Hopefully the idiot'll go into a troll feedback loop: troll-baiting himself, the troll.

[View Quote] [View Quote]

Aug 13, 2002, 9:49pm

Hardly; it's simply of being tired of dealing with a broken record. <shrug> Get over it.

[View Quote] > kit <dominicl at clear.net.nz> kirjoitti
> viestissä:3D577F9E.188660AB at clear.net.nz...
> epithets.
>
> I got a deja vú , this must be the classical eepish "hit-and-run" of which I
> have had my share of in the past also. You insult the other and then filter
> him/her, before the other get a chance to say anything back. I guess this
> kind of behaviour occure when one is afraid of loosing the battle.

Aug 15, 2002, 7:46am

http://tnlc.com/rw/files.html#exporters

[View Quote] > 2. Are there any exporters/importers for Maya to RWX? I've been trying to
> make some avatars in notepad but its just WAY too hard, and plus I already
> have some good Maya models I've made..

Aug 16, 2002, 1:10am

The limit used to be according to http://tnlc.com/rw/measurement.html#cell :

"full vertical: -327.67m to +327.67m (655.34m); current building depth/height (hopefully this will be increased in the future, considering you can move beyond these limits from -350m to +2000m)"

Don't know when it changed...

[View Quote] > Whoops wasn't reading that fully :) Actually wasn't the limit 350 in both
> directions? I'm not sure....
>
[View Quote]

Aug 16, 2002, 8:31am

Just a heads-up for anyone still using Netscape Communicator 4.x (I can't stand Netscape 6.x+) with Windows 2000 and you're getting frustrated with cached pages taking forever to display when moving back/forwards: use version 4.79. Unfortunately, table-intensive pages still freeze the program while loading.

Aug 16, 2002, 12:29pm

I'd say 3D cartoons are "drawn" better than anime and other 2D cartoons. ;) Anime tends to be quite silly what with the limited movement (animation) and exaggerated expressions (bulging eyes, dumbed-down kiddie characters, teardrops, etc).

[View Quote] > There's a helluva lot more to anime than what they show on Cartoon
> Network, y'know. Be a little adventurous and you might be pleasantly
> surprised. And if you say American cartoons are drawn any better, then
> you truly have no idea what you're talking about. :P
>
[View Quote]

Aug 17, 2002, 8:47am

Violence and sex are the biggest anime components, as that picture illustrates.

[View Quote] > Anime is based on visual bangs, flashes and Music rather than detail, Hell look at Sailor Moon, it had a best selling album out of all the music thats never been beat (Cartoon wise). My MP3 collection contains about 20 of the tracks from Digimon series 1 to 3 as well, as well as about 120 MB of the SM CDs (I really should clear them out anyway) but the idea is to create a flash and get people existed with the battle scenes as you can see from this picture http://galileo.spaceports.com/~mralpha/anime_1.jpg there are also other "pre-resiquites" to anime characters appart from the noses and the tear drops to show worriedness, fright, sarcasm etc.

Aug 17, 2002, 4:22pm

Mmm, blue hair...<drool>...on Asian chix...<froth> ;)

[View Quote] > Dont forget long purple / blue hair and large purple swords.
>
[View Quote]

Aug 17, 2002, 4:25pm

Goob, I said violence and sex are the BIGGEST anime components, not the ONLY anime components. Come on, man...read more carefully...and reply to the correct post (and don't quote sigs), ya newb. ;P

[View Quote] > *rubs temples* Now see, this is exactly the kind of crap I was talking
> about. People who've only seen a few dumbed-down, Americanized anime
> shows think that's all there is to anime, so they jump on all the
> stereotypes and automatically label it crap.
>
> Are there some anime shows that are just about sex and violence? Sure,
> but then, so are quite a few American shows as well. Does that mean
> Hollywood is all about sex and violence? Some might think so, but that
> just isn't the case. Just as Hollywood covers the entire spectrum of
> shows and movies, from innocent kid stuff to outright porn, so too does
> anime.
>
> At any rate, I don't care if you hate the stuff on Cartoon Network or
> whatnot, that's fine. (Personally, I hate most of it too.) But don't
> disparage an entire medium just because of a few bad shows. That's all
> I'm saying.
>
[View Quote]

Aug 18, 2002, 7:47pm

Sorry, but you're simply wrong, Goob. I've seen enough anime over the years (been watching since Akira came out in the mid 80s) and even the "cutsy" stuff (Pokemon, Urusei Yatsura, Sailor Moon) are HEAVILY laden with sex and violence. If you don't agree, you're obviously not watching enough anime. Sure, there MAY be a FEW series that don't have sex and violence (sorry, CCS has both--if you don't think little girls in short skirts is sexy, you're a fag ;) ) but I can't think of one off the top of my head and that hardly negates anime mostly being about sex and violence (which it is).

[View Quote] > And I'm telling you that just isn't the case. There are some anime shows
> that are all sex and violence (i.e. hentai), an there are some shows
> that have zero sex and violence (i.e. Card Captor Sakura), just like
> American shows/movies. The only thing that differentiates anime from
> American cinema is the drawing/animation style (i.e. big eyes, small
> mouth, weird hair, etc.) and Japanese cultural references. Those are the
> ONLY components that make anime anime. Any other components can be
> readily found in all forms of entertainment in varying degrees. You
> can't say sex and violence are the biggest components of *any* medium,
> much less anime, because those things merely define a sub-section of the
> medium, not the entire medium.
>
[View Quote]

Aug 19, 2002, 2:16am

[View Quote] > Sadly were only human but its true, but apparently they do em where they are old 2 to stop the laws on child protection etc o.o i wouldent know, ive only watched a few anime cartoons, nothign like THAT.

Nothing like what? Name one anime you've seen that DOESN'T have some degree of sex and violence in it and I'll be QUITE surprised...

> Eep: if you don't think little girls in short skirts is sexy, you're a fag.

Huh? I do; hence the implication of why I even wrote it. If you're attempting to quote me, try using quotes next time.

[View Quote]

Aug 19, 2002, 2:23am

[View Quote] > Sorry, Eep, but I only prefer girls that are legal (Sakura's barely 12
> yrs old!). Maybe it's different in your neck of the woods, eh? :P

<chuckle> Oh how naive you are about Japanese culture, Goob. Do you know they have panty vending machines (some used, from what I've heard) there? Japanese culture has a HEAVY little girl fetish (of course Asian females in general tend to be petite waifs anyway).

> And apparently, this whole argument depends on your definition of "sex
> and violence". If you think kids running around in skirts constitutes
> "sex" and cute little monsters duking it out in battle equals
> "violence", then you really need to get out more. :P

Um, by "sex" I don't necessarily mean actual sex, you idiot; simply sexual...sexuality. Come on, man, learn to extrapolate. And if you don't think Pokemon has violence, YOU are the one who needs to get out more. How often is Team Rocket "blasted into space"? Duh...they have to be HIT (violence) by something to be pushed, you know.

> I will readily admit that there's sex and violence in a lot anime, but
> you have to remember where it comes from. Violence was practically a way
> of life for the Japanese culture until very recently (within the past
> 50-75 years) and they aren't as uptight about sex as we Americans; they
> just see it as another aspect of life.

Uh huh...so are you now agreeing with me that sex and violence are the biggest components (not ONLY or ALL!) of anime?

> But again, just because a lot of it may have varying degrees of sex
> and/or violence doesn't make it a necessary component for being anime.

I never said they were NECESSARY components for BEING anime; simply that they ARE the biggest components OF anime. Helps to understand English, Goob...

> One could also make the argument that Hollywood is all about sex and
> violence, but that wouldn't be anymore true than anime. It all depends
> on what you watch and how you interpret it, really.

Um, Hollywood IS MOSTLY (not "all") about sex and violence--if you can't see that, you truly are clueless.

God damn, dude, do you just like to argue or something? At least TRY to offer support for your arguments...

[View Quote]

Aug 19, 2002, 12:55pm

Dude, learn how to quote correctly (still); all these extra blank lines are unnecessary. I've had to remove them yet again...

[View Quote] [View Quote] Thank you for proving my point: sex sells; hence, it's a major anime component.

>
> Well dur, I knew you weren't talking about flat-out sex. So much for
> extrapolating. As for violence, I suppose next you'll tell me that
> Looney Tunes is rife with violence! "My God, it's poisoning our
> children! When will it end?!" :P Give me a break.

I'm hardly the first person to make a case for violence in cartoons--it's a well-known fact there is an excessive amount of it. <shrug> I shouldn't have to mention video/computer game violence either but I will just to support my point even more.

>
> I'm agreeing that sex and violence can be found in lots of anime in
> varying degrees. But that doesn't mean it's the "biggest" component. If
> you made the argument that sex and violence are part of Japanese
> culture, which is really the biggest component of anime, then maybe
> you'd have a case.

Um...I've already made that argument (which you proved above), silly. <chuckle> Might want to take a critical thinking class, Goob...your logic is severely lacking.

>
> See above.

ditto

>
> So then, anime isn't "all" about sex and violence either, meaning sex
> and violence isn't the biggest component. I never said Hollywood doesn't
> have its share of sex and violence, but S & V isn't its BIGGEST
> component any more than it's anime's.

Sure it is; sex and violence sells. Here are various links:
http://borgman.enquirer.com/gallery2/tvrating_gallery.html (cartoon satire)
http://www.cultsock.ndirect.co.uk/MUHome/cshtml/media/violab.html (violence research)
http://www.cultsock.ndirect.co.uk/MUHome/cshtml/media/porno1.html (pornography--sex research)
http://www.probe.org/docs/sex-viol.html (sex and violence on TV)
http://www.media-awareness.ca/eng/issues/stats/issvio.htm (Media Issues: Media Violence)

I could go on all day listing links to studies, research, basic common facts, etc, etc, but I'm only going to go so far to prove the point to you--if you don't get it already, you're even more clueless than I first suspected. <shrug>

>
> I could ask the same about you...

Huh? I've BEEN CONTINUALLY proving my points while you have not.

> At any rate, all I'm saying is you can't paint anime with such a broad
> brush any more than you can do it to Hollywood. Then again, I suppose if
> you truly believe what you're saying, that might explain a lot of
> things, since you apparently must avoid all forms of entertainment. ;P

No, I just avoid the stupid forms--of course stupidity is relative but if you can't see how sex and violence are mainstays/staples/integral components to media (anime or otherwise), YOU are the one who apparently must avoid all entertainment forms...

Don't bother replying unless you can actually back up what you spew, please. I tire of "debating" with you.

Aug 19, 2002, 8:03pm

OK, Goob, for a laugh, what do YOU think are the biggest anime components, hmm? I have yet to see you present a logical supportive argument yet!

[View Quote] > *rubs temples and groans* Fine, I give up. This was never supposed to be
> a sex and violence argument, but if you want to turn it into that, then
> save it for another thread. The ONLY point I was ever trying to get
> across was that they aren't the BIGGEST components of anime, or any
> other entertainment medium for that matter. They *are* components, yes,
> but not the biggest ones. Perhaps if you could see past all the skirts
> and swords, you'd figure that out.
>
> --
> Goober King
> Everyone, on 3! 1... 2... 3... EEP IS A PRUDE! :P

Fuck off, putz.

Aug 19, 2002, 8:58pm

What do you think make up most of the Japanese cultural references, Goob? Fight and battle scenes--ninja warriors, clans, family honor, et al--aka, violence. As for drawing style, that's a given and is not a "component" per se; components in the context as I've been defining them are themes, plot devices, subject matter, etc--not the LOOK of something.

Keep laughing, jughead--you must think you're a riot. I just think you're ineptly incompetent at even the most basic forms of debate. <shrug>

And you STILL don't know how to configure your newsreader. Netscape 6.x must be even shittier than I thought. Pathetic...glad I don't use it!

[View Quote] > Then you need to take your own advice and take some Reading
> Comprehension classes. I already told you that the biggest components of
> anime, which actually define anime, are the drawing/animation style and
> Japanese cultural references. (which, you might argue, could include
> some of the sex and violence stuff) Everything else in anime is
> secondary to those two components, otherwise it would be "just another
> cartoon".
>
> Ok, my turn to laugh! Let's see that rebuttal! :D
>
[View Quote]

Aug 20, 2002, 6:12am

[View Quote] > You never "defined" anything; all you said was, and I quote, "Violence
> and sex are the biggest anime components". Not plot devices, not subject
> matter, just "components". And don't give me that "implied" BS of yours,
> as you never made any mention of plot or story until now. (especially
> since the picture you were referring to was a still image, with no plot
> or story to it whatsoever) Sorry if I can't read your mind.

Uh, I simply used the pic as a representative example of anime, of which it most certainly is.

> Still, I suppose it's comforting to know you haven't changed a lick.
> Learn well, young grasshoppers: When the tiger loses his teeth, he
> resorts to attacking your posting methods. When that fails, the beast
> must use his last resort: Plugging his ears and singing "La La La I
> can't hear you!!" This is also known as the Magic Filter. Take heed, my
> sons, and you will defeat the beast. ^_^

Seems YOU are the one pulling these tactics, Goober Kook, not me. I'm continually providing support for my points while you are not. And here is even MORE support to disprove your denial that sex and violence aren't anime's largest components: http://www.abcb.com/parents/ (note how many more titles are listed as PG, mature, and X--which should tell you something if they have to separate "mature" and hardcore porn--than G--of which many still contain sexuality and violence). You lose...again. Just how much anime DO you watch anyway, Goob? You sure as hell have NO clue as to its content!

> At any rate, I'm sure the NGs are just dying to hear you get the last
> word, so knock yourself out. I can only say the same thing 10 different
> ways. If you still can't get it, then I guess there's nothing else I can
> do for you. I'm done.

Look in the mirror, cheesehead.

[View Quote] <shrug> You were only laughing at yourself, idiot.

Aug 20, 2002, 10:50am

Psst, Google's better.

[View Quote] > http://www.zenith-studios.com/search/
>
> :D << Made it
>
> Please submit any urls you may have

Aug 20, 2002, 6:16pm

Huh? Never heard of it...and there's a reason for that--because it most likely sucks. ;)

[View Quote] > "eep" <eepNOSPAM at tnlc.com> wrote in news:3D6235B6.696954F at tnlc.com:
>
>
> tsk, FAST Search & Transfer all the way!

Aug 20, 2002, 6:13pm

Eh, they're still Asian, whether or not they have slanted eyes--they still speak Japanese (unless dubbed). ;)

[View Quote] > Disnt we say further up that most anime characters (exspecially the girls) are not drawn asian? :P
>
[View Quote]

1  ...  12  13  14  15  16  17  ...  42  |   Order by default