PMBD

Simsweb pl? Are they pay or not?
They´re speaking Polish over there.  So it´s very "easy" to  understand how the dl-thing works.    :D  
And they have a section called PaY.  :D   So, well to me it´s sounds like they´re charging for atleast some of theire downloads...
http://forum.simsweb.pl/index.php?
http://forum.simsweb.pl/forumdisplay.php?f=87

(Evil concept.   Since not all too many of us are able to understand Polish, they can, without any trouble charge money in "silence").
Seen plenty of theire updates on Sims2 Marktplatz. But not been able to dl.
http://88.198.25.207/forum/board.php?boardid=14&sid=c541ffa14357dd78988ad787106f12a8

I attempted to register to see if I was able to download the "pay" stuff, but was rejected for using proxies.

Edit: They are pay. http://forum.simsweb.pl/showthread.php?t=6763

unless you give your credit card number, they can't possibly be charging you without your knowledge???

Aww Doursim you´re really a nice little girl, thanks for telling us all.  :D
Have a nice day!

they are about half pay half free. and little to no english. they post their updates in english on other forums though to try to entice people over there to buy their stuff.
none of it is all that special though, i mean you can get similar stuff for free on mts2 and elsewhere.
would be more trouble than its worth for someone to go over there and try to get the files to add to the booty, unless that person understands polish lol

Yeah, there are pay downloads, but it's not paypal or something. You just have to send SMS message. So I think that people not from Poland can't download it. So if someone really want that stuff I can download it. But I think it's not worth. I saw better creations.

With a post count in the single digits, you've got some fucking nerve - and it's not the kind of nerve we're looking for around here.

Post count should not govern what you are and are not allowed to say. If one party can be sassy so can the other. I've seen much, much worse and there's no reason for you to try and moderate this poster.

That being said I think it was a miscommunication about the 'money being drawn in silence' bit. I think the original poster meant that they could draw more than once without one knowing it as opposed to draw to begin with without one knowing it. But this is why paysites are evil.

I was commenting about how he was asking if it was pay at all.  If you don't give you credit card info... well you know the rest :)  Sass is fine round here.  But you have to be careful because more often than not it makes you look like the fucktard. :\

I think this was the part that someone could misinterpret as a question about whether the site could charge money in any sort of sneaky way.
Perhaps that was just a rhetorical question? If so, I missed that part, too. It sounded like a query.

I think that most of us know that in real life, weirdos and aliens don't probe our thoughts and steal our credit card information while we browse the Internet. Well, OK ... if you don't have an AV system, spryware program or firewall on your computer you might be asking for something nasty to wind up on your machine, or if you like posting your credit or other personal info anywhere and everywhere, you might be asking for it. HOPEFULLY, most people don't do that!

But surprisingly, one or two people I've met actually do think that, even now.  I've met them. And it is possible that one or two might actually visit this forum and ask a question like, "Could someone get my credit card info if I stumble on their site?" Strange, but possible.

One woman I met claimed that some guy stalked her teenage daughter and knew personal information about the girl, even though the girl claimed she didn't give any out, and Mom believed her 100%. The woman actually took the computer and locked it in the trunk of her car! Turned out the little angel DID blab all about herself while chatting with this pervert. That was how he found the info.

Now, now ... Doursim was only trying to help, I believe. I'm glad to see you're not going to lock the computer in your trunk now. :)

*:lol: @ silver*

The meaning of my post was mostly to say that a third party telling someone what they can and cannot say is bad. I know that Doursim is perfectly capable of taking care of herself. I've seen her claws. They're scary.

... Etc... I cannot be assed to post. I want to play! ^^

What's the magic number for sass?

I just... need to check.

Sorry, MizzKitty! I was referring to scribble's post. But we all know that paysites wouldn't stoop so low as to incur recurring charges every month without your permission .... riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight?  :roll:   :D

Geez, I think that would be a pain if I have to end the payments using  Polish! I know exactly 15 words in Polish, and none of them involve the words, "Stop charging me, you bastards!"

Wow! 15 words, that's a lot! :D
"Stop charging me, you bastards!" -> "przestańcie ściągać ode mnie kase, dranie!" (I don't know if the polish letters will show up here, so you can write it without polish letters, they will understand it -> "przestancie sciagac ode mnie kase, dranie!") :D

Whatever you have + 100.  Always.  Same goes for sarcasm as well, apparently.  :wink:

Bite me, MizzKitty. You don't waltz into a forum and bitch out longstanding members. If the person wasn't happy with the response, he or she should have ignored it until he/she knows people better around here.

I'm downloading stuffs from simweb.pl, i found it listed in the sims2 official site, so ea not only tolerates paysites but let them "advertised" in the fansite list.
The forum is hard to navigate because it's divided by creator and not by type of item, so if you're looking for a dress you must look into each creator section. There are good stuffs, creators i like, they have something in the pay section but they are posting their other good stuffs for free in other sites (mts2, insim, and also the free section of simsweb.pl). Pay items are not many and they are all in the pay section, you can't download them if you don't have a subscription (i mean you're not charged after downloading). Subscriptions can be one time or recursive and paypal is accepted.
I noticed that this site is becoming well known, they post updates in many forums advertising the premium section.

Time of registration and post count are not connected. So which is it? And I would really prefer for you to try to keep your tone civil :P I have no intention of biting you. It's just not sanitary.

A little off topic, but I was looking through SimsWeb's forums and saw this: http://forum.simsweb.pl/showpost.php?p=174333&postcount=1

BLAGAM POMOCY!!! PROBLEM Z KODEM !!!!!!

I think I want that smiley with the water shooting out of its eyes.

I'm so confused now!  Are YOU better than ME because you have a higher post count, or am I better than YOU because I've been here longer?   :roll:

And I suppose you could wash chlyn first and then gargle with listerine after the biting, but it sounds like more trouble than it's worth.   :lol:

I win!!! Kick both their arses.  :lol:

And based on a ratio of post counts v. join dates - I must be better than Quinctia.

Since you seem to place so much importance on post count and seniority, then let me be the first to say don't bring this elitist fucktardism here. People have always been allowed to register and say whatever they have to say, and as long as it's not "i can haz pegy hare???" or something equally inane, it's never counted against them. We're willing to engage in civilized discourse with paysite owners seeking to understand our position and individuals on the fence between the two sides, so a little sarcasm here and there from new blood isn't even remotely significant.

Now, excellent work making yourself look like an ass even though you've certainly been here long enough to know better.

If I need to have an actual post number +100 before I can be sassy and sarcastic....damn, I'm in a shit-load of trouble!!  SAWWY!! :P

Man I was cool four months ago... And it took you THIS long to appreciate it?  :lol:

AND this is why Necromancy is a bad thing.

The other night I watched one of those Masters of Horror movies, about this lady who sleeps with her zombie dead boyfriend guy and all his dead buddies.
Yeah.

zombie orgy? That's... mildly disturbing.

Didn't notice that at all!

Feel free to spam me with cat macros.  :lol:

*pats Aquamarine on back*
You didn't do it...lol.
Very disturbing.
I watched from the corner of my eye with a bucket handy.
I still don't know why they thought it was a horror flick, but it did scare me...lol.

Yes, it does sound horrible. Normally I just laugh at supposedly scary movies.

Don't zombies eat brains or something? I might sleep with a vampire if all he did was nibble a little. But, it's a totally different story if I have to wake up with my brains outside of my body. While there sits my boyfriend and all his friends eating them like ice cream. :)

I'm pretty sure that if your brains were outside your body being snacked on by your boyfriend and his friends that you wouldn't be waking up. Although you likely would have become a zombie as well so I guess you could get mad about it, or at least drool on his shoulder in an irritated fashion.

What's that movie by Steve Jackson where the zombies are going at it and almost immediately have a zombie baby? Braindead?

Gawd, that movie is generally disgusting, though...  :lol:

We shall forgive you this time (I didn't have a Kitteh Necromancy Macro. LMAO)

Are you kidding me?  I love seeing things like this:

Person A (low post count and/or newly registered):

This is my opinion.  [Insert opinion.]

Person B (high post count and/or registered +2 months):

[Insert quote of A's post]

Who the fuck are you?

Person A never posts again.
Person B sleeps well, knowing they are superior to all newbies because they were there first and have pressed the submit button more.

Also, a zomby kitty.  Yay.

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v253/Not_You/e77ecee5.jpg)

Now you don't think I'd get mad about that? Especially if their not sharing with me and I am now a Zombie. They are my brains you know. I just keep picturing night of the living dead. Brains....brains....brains.

Oh and PS I don't drool when I eat, it's very impolite.

Greedy zombie boyfriends...they are just the worst! I suppose that if you don't drool, you'll have to either groan, shuffle or lean in an irritated fashion in order to show your displeasure.

(http://icanhascheezburger.wordpress.com/files/2007/07/128285394416562500brrraaaiiinnnss.jpg) (http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/07/30/brrraaaiiinnnsss/)

I made this just for you! :lol: The Cheezburger site is useful for something. At least adding captions.
(http://i161.photobucket.com/albums/t202/KayNii/128337841255625000OhLawdNecrom.jpg)

Oh, that was a good one.  Don't bother with the second series of Masters of Horror - I could shit more horrifying things than that.  :D

*silently hands calalily the fresh bog roll and exits room to give her privacy in making the next scary movie*

I don't know what would be scarier - you producing that movie or the movie itself.  :shock:

Cala, you crack me up..lol.
Thanks for the heads up on season 2, though. I was thinking about buying it as well, but now I know it ain't worth it.. :lol:
You can just come use my toilet and we'll all be entertained for hours...or atleast until it gets flushed. :lol:

I've never understood why people found vampires sexy. Okay, if I slept with one, he might be sufficiently... rigid (ehh, I kill me!) but other than that vampires are dead. So it would be having sex with a dead body. An animated dead body, but still dead. And their body temperature would be close to the room temperature. Eww! And no heartbeat. :shock:

I cannot even begin to describe how disturbing I find the whole concept. I'm not calling HawkGirl or anyone else who likes vampires a pervert, but have you really thougth about it. I mean, really? :roll:

Obviously not as throughly as you have.  :lol:

My shits aren't at all terrifying - they're boring - but Masters of Horror 2 was more boring than my shits.  Although I'll come to your house and pinch one off for your weekend entertainment if you like  :lol:   It's not a good horror movie if you can guess the ending in the first five minutes, and it's full of horrible oversexualising of characters.  

Every single MoH2 was full of sex - not enough gore - it's got to do with the recent "sex and death" move - because they get the same rating for gore as they do for sex, they think they have to appeal to the pervy teenage boy demographic.  There was one that bored me to tears, which for 45 minutes showed a man and his mistress (and he was fat, hairy, and looked smelly) fucking all episode, and I forget why, he goes crazy and starts skinning her. LAME.

I watched most of them hoping for some of the truly great horror stories like the first series, but every single one sucked. They just suckity suck suck sucked.  

But a good horror movie I would recommend is "The Descent" - made by the same director who made "Dog Soldiers" - which I think personally rocked. Mucho nuevo concept, true jump out of your skin moments, and plenty of good violence.  :D

As for the vampire thing - it depends how warm you like your bodies.  Maybe that's important to some, but here in sweaty Australia, I dream of a half frozen man.  As for the whole "dead body" thing - he's not decaying - sex with a zombie would be icky, but sex with a vampire - that would be fine.  No falling off bits anyway.   :shock:

It's the whole "killer" thing that would put me off a vampire.  I wouldn't object to anything else but the killer thing - to come in and give you a kiss hello with the blood of some waitress or school kid on his lips - ugh!

Hehe, I think way too literally. :lol:

Seriously, I started thinking about this when I read some Deception Pass and all the fangirls were like: "OMG, Tristan and James are so sexy!!!11!" and I just wanted to scream at them: "They are not sexy, they are dead!!!"

The whole killer aspect is of course a huge turn off, I was thinking that if I'd have sex with a vampire it would have to be one of the reformed ones, a la Angel or Spike, but then realised that it would still be icky because they are dead. :lol:

The Descent was great! The first part of the movie was as scary as the second part (when the boogie men showed up) I had the squeemies just watching them nearly be buried alive and roping over the crevasse.

I am crazy for zombie movies....hope Resident Evil (the 3rd part) is scary.

roflmbo, ok now you just went and made me choke on my coffee. I was just saying if I had to choose between a zombie and a vamp. It would have to be the vamp at least I wouldn't walk down the street with part of my brains hanging out looking for more brains to eat, all slumped over and green looking. That's just not a pretty picture.  :twisted:

LMAO
Yeah, The Descent is awesome, I bought that one, too. I'd seen it first, though, so it was a GOOD buy...lol. The first time the damn creature pops up beside her I threw popcorn all over the bed. I swear the bowl just jumped out my hands, I swear!
Then I had a lovely time picking kernals out of my hair... :shock:

I adore a good horror flick. I think my favorite would have to be IT. I know it was made for TV and it's full of bad acting...lol...but as IT was the first book I ever read that gave me nightmares, at age 8, it's a personal thing, I suppose.

Right-o.
 :wink:

Ry, that is funny! But have to admit the clown was creepy as hell in IT.

REST STOP is a good one. Was on SCi-Fi channel.....Joey Lawrence was in it. When the girl had to shoot him.....oh my....nearly jumped up into the ceiling fan! The weird family does make me think of Jan tho...

No, no, no Hawkgirl! You can't just measure the benefits of being a zombie or a vampire on purely aesthetic concerns! As a vampire, while you may look cool, you have to pay out or steal in order to afford your clothing and fancy hair products. Which means either working the graveyard shift, running some internet scam site, or becoming a really good pickpocket, gambler and/or thief (unless, of course, you were some kind of count before it happened).

Admittedly, you have hundreds of years to perfect these skills, but they aren't going to be there when you've just turned and you're stuck in the outfit you wore the night you were bitten. Sadly, that outfit was put together for "80's night" at your local bar and consists of a Whitesnake t-shirt, acid wash miniskirt and cowboy boots (not to mention the wall of bangs you teased your hair into). As well, because you are so fashionably out of date (and not attractively so) none of those snobby old vampires are going to want to give you a hand (those jerks!).

Meanwhile as a zombie, while you might look terrible, be surrounded by flies, and smell like aged cheese, you can behave however you want (yes, I admit, that behaviour will consist of dragging yourself around city streets looking for brains). Other zombies are not judgemental and so there's no need to worry there, and there is no need to fit into regular human society. As well, you get hurt, you don't even feel it, which is a handy benefit over being a vampire because they look like they are in pain when they get injured even though it heals up okay.

See alia, you're not the only one who can think about this too hard.  :oops:

Yeah I love a good scary movie even the cheesy ones like the Lost Boys. Right now my favorite horror movie is Stay alive. It about a video game that will kill you if you play it. They even based the villain in the game on a 16th century countess that did a lot of horrible things. Though of course being an American movie they took her and moved her to America.
   Oh, I hate the movie it, I absolutely can't stand clowns. I am scared to death of them.

I still think I'd rather do a vamp - no mess, no fuss, and have to steal vs. brains needing to be put back in?  Not to mention the whole regeneration that vamps have, vs. the permanent damage that zombies get.  Cut off a vamps hand, it regenerates. Cut off the zombie hand, it's off forever.  Furthermore, zombies are deeply stupid - they don't even try to stop anyone's evil schemes - they hold gas bottles above their heads etc.  

As far as what you wore - that's only a concern if you ever bought or wore anything miniskirt, acid wash, whitesnake, or cowboy.  The worst I could wake up in would be black, or wine, or darkest blue.  In fact, I am perfectly suited to be turned into a vampire at any time - I have the lipstick colours and eyeliner and everything - I probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference - except I'd stop tanning.  :lol: I am always dressed for the occasion.  Not to mention, who would ditch flying for lurching?

I just saw "The Descent" two nights ago - I avoided it because I confused it with "The Cave" which sucked. Almost spilt my coffee when she's in the eating chamber.  I also loved 28 days later - just the best movie.  Another favourite at the moment is "The Wicker Man" - not the lame 2006 version, which again, suckity suck suck sucked, but the 1973 version with Christopher Lee.

And for my alltime bad schlock horror - "The Lair of the White Worm" - replete with dick biting vampire type bitches, and bad bagpipes obsession - starring Richard E. Grant and pretty boy guy from "Bridget Jones diary".

To Ry:  We all float down here...

While it is true that vampires will regenerate missing limbs and the like, you have to imagine that they are going to scream like babies the minute that bit of flesh is chopped off. Plus, they're out of action until it comes back or someone is kind enough to send them some vampire morphine or some such thing. The zombie on the other hand, while that leg is not going to come back, is probably not going to care. Lost your arm in a zombie feeding frenzy? Who cares! Maggots are eating your calf muscles? Whatever! Peter shot you in the stomach? All's well!

If nothing else, Calalily, you at least have to admire that zombie tenacity. Nothing gets them down! Most vampires I've seen spend all of their time moping around their crypts (although I admit there must be some exceptions here). As for your outfits, you may be prepared but that doesn't mean everyone is. I also think that there must be vampires just bored enough to wait around until they see someone in baggy sweatpants and a t-shirt with the Tasmanian Devil on it, and then turn them just for kicks. At any rate be careful if you decide to go out in that "Members Only" jacket you own is all I'm saying.

The (first) Wicker Man is a great and hilarious movie, and a personal fave of mine. I'm not sure it compares to the amazing "Burnt Offerings" (1976), though. "Burnt Offerings" has both Burgess Meredith and Bette Davis in it, and has the greatest line ever, "They've got Ding dongs! A whole case of them!" (or something like that). Priceless.

roflmao @ Calalily and Mando. I think I am going to stick with Calalily on this one. I run around in jeans and a t-shirt so I should be good to go for at least another 100 years. If not, I'll start my own little vampire army and make them do all the work. Run by the blood bank, etc...(thanks for the hint)guess I'll have to make sure a doctor is one so I can stock up on vampire moraphine. Couldn't get those zombies to do a thing, they'd just look at you like your stupid. Can't walk. I don't imagine they'd be great conversationalist either with their brains oozing out the side of their heads. So there you'd sit for 1,000's of years going brains or oooooo. Still not a pretty picture.

The ethical vampire only kills The Evildoer...rapists, murderers, drug dealers, etc. (LeStat, Betsy Thompson, etc.)

Lestat isn't consistent, though, at least not in the books before Blood and Gold (I have all books, just haven't felt like Anne Rice in years) ... I mean, he tries to only off evil-doers, but it's like really bad sex: He gets off but he doesn't get satisfied. It's when he kills an old innocent lady who reaches out and thinks he's an angel that he really feels ecstasy.

Also, Lestat is evil. In an innocent way that doesn't really mean the harm but he is. Which is personally why I love him. ;D

Mmmm vampires... Have to agree to disagree with you there, alia. I have a huge thing for vampires. They aren't really dead, more like they used to be people and now they're demons / magical beings and don't need trivial stuff like body heat, breath and heartbeat.

Also, can you imagine their stamina?

It all depends on if you have any design on that t-shirt at all, I'm afraid. If there's the Dukes of Hazard car, or "I'm With Stupid" written on it, I think you're in trouble. Plus, keep in mind that if you have a vampire army doing all of your work for you, you're going to have to have a place for them to sleep off the daylight and afford to keep them kitted out in the latest vampire fashions. I certainly hope that you have crates full of black leather pants, ruffley shirts, and 18th century jackets somewhere, otherwise you are going to have a mutiny on your hands!

As for vampire morphine, fine, I'll give you vampire morphine (although I'm pretty sure I just made it up :lol: ). However, zombies don't need morphine, vampire or otherwise, as they feel no pain. Come on, no pain!

I'd just like to add that I just snorted Tim Tam through my nose from reading this derailment. Particularly this one:

I vote vampire too. Just bite me while I'm young, I can't imagine it would be easy to get a facelift or botox when you're undead.

Another great point. Bet Zombies can't do the wild thing. Plus to kill a vamp you have to drive a stake through their heart, which means it must be beating for them to get blood to the good parts. If they're pumping blood, they also are probably not all cold and clammy. So voila another point for vamps ;) Great job! Now what Mando. What your zombies got in that area? lol

PS right now my T-shirt has Mickey Mouse on it. He'll never be out of fashion. ;)

And I do - I just am not so tenacious that I would cling to or choose such a life.  As for the regeneration - after a couple of hundred years, it would be a "usual" pain. All the regeneration is pretty instant - or at most, a day or two.  Not to mention flying - who could give up flying, turning into mist.



Yeah, they say that, but there's sure to be some crime for which you could be convicted that they justify what they do.  A killer judging ethics?  Someone who wants you for food deciding whether you're worth killing?  An evildoer deciding your level of evilness and then dealing out vigilante justice.



Agreed - but not as much trouble as you think.  Go to the nearest goth club, get the one most out of their mind on ecstasy, and drink him/her and steal his/her clothes.  Not only a victim, with usually very expensive clothes, but someone with plenty of money.  And if you're dressed right once, an unlimited supply of victims to go with you willingly.



Bet even if they could they're not good.  If having a leg cut off means nothing, then you're probably not going to feel anything much anyway.  Vampires are smart and cunning, and thus know how to use what they've got.  Not to mention that penetration is their method of feeding - they're so practiced at it.  :lol:

Besides, what if certain zombie appendages came of mid ride?

This thread has become thoroughly amusing to follow. Do go on. ;)

Still painful, especially at first. Even worse if you're hanging out with some vampire army who doesn't want to stop for the trainee who cries like a baby everytime he or she loses a limb. You'll end up getting left in the cemetary to have to deal with the local vampire hunters all on your own, in your Whitesnake t-shirt and acid wash skirt with a half-regenerated limb. Terrible!

Fine, I'll give you flying and being mist. However, while you may have some neato powers you're still going to have to hang around with some vampire you don't like for hundreds of years. You know, someone who tells you long unending stories about when he was in France in 1110 and how he would try to go hunting in apple fields, but the local Lord had forbidden people from eating apples because he thought it caused blindness, so he had to be really cagey and catch them on the way home from apple burnings, blah, blah, blah. Of course, since all the humans you know are dead and all the other vampires you know are the ones that forced you to wear that Whitesnake t-shirt for 3 decades, you sit and listen to his sorry stories while he weeps. Not to mention the fact that since he's apparently at war with the other local vampire king, and because you were seen with him once at a party, a bounty has now been placed on your head as well.

Zombies=no irritating conversation. You still get all the benefits of zombie companionship (a shared goal, a strong group dynamic) without all of the minuses of vampire companionship (super competitive, long, boring stories about hunting humans in apple fields).



Yes, but if you were the type of person who would wear a "Dukes of Hazard" t-shirt you probably are not also skilled at seduction, victim on ecstacy or no. Plus, like I said before, all those other vampires who turned you for fun are hardly going to make it easy for you, I mean it's a lot less entertaining for them if you end up being skilled at being a vampire. That's why they chose somebody wearing socks and sandals!

As for zombies having sex, disgusting. Grow up the lot of you, this is a serious and important discussion. :lol:

You've just invented the Zombie strap on? lol



I agree! lol  I'm waiting to hear Mando's explanation on how a Zombie is gonna ask for viagra with a vocabulary of brains and ooooo. They're going to need something to get that body part moving since they really are undead/deader than a door nail.



Now look if your expecting me to spend the next 1,000 plus years with this Zombie, this is very important. Brains or no brains don't know if I could go that long. ;)

Oh, they are sure to do that - they'd lose something in the banging.  That's of course, should drool and bodily fluids dripping all over you be something you would desire.  :shock: I would never sleep with someone I had to sew back together at the end.



Yeah, but you'd become like that Duggar woman who has 17 children - it'd be par for the course, and sure it would hurt, but hell, you're used to it.



Well, vampires have a reputation for being lonely wanderers, so it seems you can ditch them - just ditch the lot - make new friends, or just plain old get on the internet.  :lol:



Group dynamic? As in bashing each other with stuff, lurching into each other and eating each others' brains.  Not a strong group dynamic - just a school of piranhas with the same goal in mind.  Not to mention there is no brain to appreciate this benefit - you're a mindless brain eating shell.



Well, if you're going to turn people based on making fun of them, you're fully prepared for the stupid and boring consequences.  I certainly wouldn't turn someone who was going to annoy the shit out of me for the next few centuries - and then keep them around.  But again, loners - so turn who you like, laugh for a week, ditch them.

You've got to make it to that "so crazy it doesn't hurt anymore" point first, meaning you've got to survive the first few centuries before your vampire "friends" get irritated with you.



You might be able to ditch the Apple Hunter, but it will be somewhat more difficult to ditch that bounty on your head. Switch allegiances and you'll discover that the new vampire lord you're hanging out with, Irvine the Horrific, is really into "Trading Spaces" and macrame.



Haven't you seen those George Romero movies? Admittedly, at the beginning it's all messiness and disorder, but by the end you're taking over shopping malls and swarming through cities all together as one big happy group. Whether they appreciate this on any deep or meaningful level is unimportant, those kind of worries are unnecessary so long as their basic needs are met. Vampires may be smart, but are they happy Calalily, really?



Vampires have nothing but time, which is exactly proportionate to the time the awkward have. Eventually, some bored vampire somewhere is going to change over some "Crossroads" fan for laughs, and that same "Crossroads" fan will be so desperate for companionship that they will make that vampire's life a living hell. The vampire will often believe that he/she has gotten rid of the irritation, but eventually (probably several times a century) that fan will track him/her down and bore that vampire for at least a year with stories about Britney's acting abilities and readings of terrible teenage poetry. I imagine that an adult "Crossroads" fan must have at least zombie level tenacity.

I've always had a problem with this motivation for vampires. If you were a vampire, why would you take the time to find criminals for a snack when there is a kindergarten next doors? Why would you care when all people are just cattle for you? They are all going to die sooner or later, so why not make it a bit sooner?  :roll:

Besides, killing is killing, no matter who/what does it, and it is WRONG.
I could forgive a person who killed somebody and repented it, but I cannot forgive something that hunts down people for food/sport.

And since I am bored, I came up with this list of vampires vs. zombies:

Vampires:
Cons
- dead
- constantly hungry
- lethal allergy to sunlight
- writing/having to listen to bad poetry
- feel pain
- having to pretend they're human
- moping and self-pity
- costs of maintaining a proper vampire lifestyle
- can get caught up in the power struggles of the vampire community (possible fatal results)
- bumping into the same people over and over again over centuries
- possibly hunted by vampire hunters and other vampires

Pros
+ better fashion sense
+ can have sex
+ better conversations
+ can turn into mist or rodents
+ can fly
+ regeneration
+ can have minions

+/- loners

Zombies:
Cons
- dead
- constantly hungry
- bits falling off
- no brains
- smell
- flies
- limited vocabulary
- messy (drooling, dropping spare body parts and oozing bodily fluids all over)

Pros
+ indestructable (until they fall to pieces)
+ don't have to worry about what to wear
+ easily accepted by their peers
+ feel no pain
+ no need to fit into the human society
+ tenacity and unity of purpose within the group as well as shared goals (Thanks for this, Mando!)

So... Although being a zombie does not sound very attractive, I think zombies are probably happier with what/who they are.  :lol:

I would say that this whole thing depends on what type of vampire or zombie, you might become. Are we talking about the standard Dracula type vampire, or those hideous From Dusk Till Dawn vampires? Are these slow lumbering Resident Evil zombies or fast Dawn of the dead zombies?
 I would still want to be a Vampire either way. As far as why they would chose derelicts well for one; police in any given city are far less likely to pay as much attention to a dead corpse of a rapist than a room full of school kids.
Also who says they have to kill their pray when feeding? They can just take what they need from a few different vessels and leave them living.

Ok if we have to choose, I'm going to be a vamp like the girl in Evolution. She could go out in the daylight after the second one. But instead of hunting Werewolf/Liken. I'm gonna rid the world of all those oozing zombies.  :twisted:

Well you could certainly try, Hawkgirl, but considering the rate at which zombies reproduce you would likely have something of a fight on your hands. As a matter of fact, you might find yourself joining the zombie ranks soon enough, in that I am unaware of a zombie resistance factor in vampires. Oooh! Then you could be a super zombie, with the ability to shuffle and break buildings and turn into mist! Still no sex as a zombie, though (unless you're using those "Living Dead" movies as your zombie basis :lol: ).

Mando, I'm sorry, but there is a terrible flaw in your defense of zombies and it is this:

After a certain amount of decomp and taking untold quanitites of day to day damage (zombies don't seem to get the whole 'DUCK!' thing), their monacles would absolutely not stay in place anymore, necessitating the use of a long range staple gun type weapon you'd have to invent, probably.

Whereas vamps - they'd make the monacle look goood.  

I'm not at all partial to the undead in any form, but at least vamps can make smalltalk.  And zombies scare the shit out of me.

Ha! You forgot I have a doctor in my army. I'll have him invent a Zombie vaccine. Guess I should bite a weapons expert so I can have long range weapons, and won't have to get all the goo all over me, never know what's in that stuff. I'll also have to bite someone that owns their own tailoring shop. I think a father and son team should be good for that one so I can just keep cycling them. Father dies (pretend) Son comes in to save the business as time goes by son is replaced with father to show aging. Rinse and repeat. That way I've taken care of the clothing problem. Only other problem is how to handle the blood bank I'll have to think on that one for a bit. Can't have my army running around making a bunch more vamps. That's all we need some Buffy wannabe chasing us down.

Fire. Fire takes care of all of them. Fire when fighting the undead is your friend. Fire.

Much more effective against vamps than zombies.

You set a vampire on fire and it burns like a torch.

You set a zombie on fire and it still comes after you while it burns.

Hah! Zombies laugh (okay, groan and shuffle) at fire! Vampires on the other hand....

HawkGirl, I certainly hope that your speed and recruitment skills are up there, seeing as Doctors work in hospitals and hospitals have morgues. Plus, you'll need an area where you can do testing and research that will remain unmolested by zombie attack, maybe Pescado will rent you some space in his bunker (don't count on it though). The tailor idea is a good one, although if the world is being overrun by zombies, convincing people that your tailors are the same person will probably be the least of your problems.  

As for the monocle problem, JFed, I admit I will have to give that some thought. If nothing else, zombies will never remove the monocle on purpose (decay and bullet wounds will do that, I suppose), while vampires will take it off the moment it is not stylish anymore. Then where will I be, sobbing like that vampire who loves people that love apples (I will have to look into your invention suggestion though, maybe some kind of super glue based monocle gun).

No side switching necessary - loner.  And I'm sure that macrame would break the boredom of hundreds of years with the same blood/wardrobe acquiring agenda.



That's like saying the flu is one big happy family - it takes over the entire world a couple of times a year - but no one wants to get or be the flu.  I take brains over mere existence at all times - if I was a slobbering brain dead person confined to bed, I would want to be killed toot sweet.




Bonus is, if unfashionable, they put it in a drawer (cause a couple of hundred years brings plenty of investment returns to the modern bright vampire) and when it comes back into fashion, they pop it on again.  Zombies - nearly all have face damage, that glass is going to take their eye out, and it will be lost forever.  Not to mention the lurching - likely to dislodge the monocle, if no squinting muscle control to affix placement of monocle is to be had.

AND vampires are often depicted in top hats.

Ah, but the killing of humans can be worked around if one wants to put forth the effort. A little nibble here, a little nibble there works just as well. And I suppose if one really wanted to, they could feed mostly on other large animals instead of humans.

Oh no, now one can't believe that.  It's like saying a pirate in a rum factory would only take a little sip from each bottle, and NOT stow 6 wherever he could fit them.  Vamps are going to eat people - they're like kids in a lolly shop.  They would maybe start out with good intentions, but then become so lazy.  Look at how often those sims go for a cup o' ramen - vamps will be eating people whole.

Oh yes, I'm sure that 'new' vampires would be much like a kid in a lolly shop. However, over the years one can learn some manner of restraint. It just isn't practical to your continued existence to go on a killing spree every time you get hungry.  ;)

Yes, and depending on what vampire lore you go by, you can also gather yourself a herd to drink from anytime you wish. Bonus for them in some vampire stories being drank from feel wonderful.  So no need to kill anyone if you have a willing supply.

Zombies can't invent anything! They have no brains, they can't even talk. How they gonna invent a super glue gun? Is it one O or two Oo's for hand me that diagram? We need no bunker we will live in a castle, plenty of room for a lab. It will also have a moat that has spikes like Vlad did, except with Zombies. Impaled, starving to death, drooling. Let it serve as a warning to any Zombie that thinks he can get through. We shall be the people's hero. No human wants to walk around looking like those things. Even guys that think it's cool, will get over that quick when they find out no more wild thing, women want nothing to do with them. Women Zombies can't wear make-up, then there is the fact if they try to brush their hair it's going to fall out, if there is even any left from the Zombies feasing on their brains...I'm telling you, it's just not a pretty picture.

HawkGirl, zombies don't care about looking good or about attracting other "good looking" zombies. They care about brains, lurching, and taking over shopping malls, small farms, and/or cities. Being considered hot is not a priority, and honestly by the time you're a zombie those kind of shallow concerns would no longer matter to you. I also never said I would invent the monocle gun as a zombie, because if I were a zombie my obsession with monocles might likely end (although, I'd still probably be obsessed with them). The question of vampire and monocle may seem like a win for the vampires, but it would break my heart to know that they are simply hiding them away until the moncle becomes valuable or stylish again.

Calalily, there does seem to be some sort of rudimentary intelligence in zombies which could overtime develop (recognition of places and areas, vague rememberances of wrong doing, etc.). If there is absolutely no brain activity occuring why is the only way to stop them a bullet to the head? As for vampires, while that vampire may not have to hang around with a new vampire lord, he/she still has to do something about that bounty the macrame fan put on his/her head. It'd be seriously annoying if you had to skip out of town everytime you were seen at some party with a vampire about to be taken out in some kind of undead coup. I also have to agree with you that it would take some time for that vampire to build up a bit of restraint in his/her feeding, and the guilt would likely make one even mopier than usual (depending on the vampire of course).

I don't think you would.  Many people go missing every year - you'd just have to be careful about who does go missing.  Criminologists estimate that based on population size, at any one time, 9 serial killers are operating in Australia - and there are hundreds of thousands of homeless people the world over.

I would call the concept that vamps wouldn't kill us "the dream of meat".  It sounds nice, and is certainly good press, but I don't think it would happen.  We could do amputations on chickens and cattle, and then provide them with wheelchairs to live out their lives, but we don't do it - we kill them wholesale.



I want more from eternity than vagueness and rudimentary.  Vampires can go to great art galleries and sit in libraries, get into the best clubs, and fuck the classiest people.  Zombies wouldn't be able to lurch past the doorman.  Not to mention that zombies are known to be zombies as soon as you look at them - there's no way to stop the screeching "Zombie" everywhere you go.  The vamp can go incognito if they want, and rest from the tiresome screams of the populace.



Motor function is controlled by the brain - that's why they're stopped.



This is only providing that there are feuds - like in Underworld. And this is usually characterised by snarkiness and the occasional killing of a faction.  If there were some kind of bounty situation, well, it's just the way of life, and far better than drooling your way through the world, with your brains hanging out.

And just how do you know this for a fact? I can't imagine even a zombie wanting to walk around and not do the wild thing for 1,000's of years. If I were a Zombie? I wouldn't want to diddle one with body parts missing, well other than their brains maybe because that's kinda unavoidable. I'm also quite sure for the female zombies they still worry about female baldness. I heard through the grapevine, even in the Zombie community, it's not very becoming. Especially if your looking for a mate.

There's only one thing to do now, and you know what it is, don't you??

(http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2007/05/lolmitten.jpg)

The assumption somewhat made here (and by HawkGirl in her later post, naughty ladies!) is that zombies would care about all of the things that humans (and by extension, vampires) find necessary for a pleasant life. I can't imagine a zombie (or at least most zombies) would really care about being unable to appreciate fine art, a good haircut, or sex. As a human not having these things might mean that one's life seems unfulfilled, but as a zombie I'm guessing that it barely rates a "meh". Of course this all depends on what zombie mythology you're running by (I'm working off of a George Romero mythos, I guess :lol: ) as being a voodoo zombie would probably be pretty crap.

As for living for all eternity, I think that being aware and confronted constantly by the passage of time while you remain unchanged could be torturous. While a zombie can't appreciate good literature or affection like a vampire can, I think having to live through the deaths of all your family and friends (vampire and otherwise) and only being connected to the outside world in the smallest way possible and being entirely aware of this disconnection would be incredibly depressing. Not to mention how boring it would be, hundreds of years of the same conversation, same books, same entertainment, same world, ugh. Eventually you're going to see everything there is to see, not to mention having to live with the suffering of others on earth, and the guilt of being a mass murderer (and if you are unsympathetic, hundreds of years of boring vampire arguments). Death is scary, but who really wants to live forever, or at least live forever as a "human" on earth.



I am willing to bet that there would be feuds considering how boring life would be after a few hundred years. Did you ever have to sit in a room with someone you didn't like for a few hours; now stretch that out to a month, and then a year and then decades. Eventually you're going to get annoyed at each other and start yelling and fighting (or at least I would). As well, purely to make their next few years tolerable, I imagine that vampires would set up fights to pass time (although I doubt anyone would admit to "boredom" being the reason for a vicious blood feud). As Sartre said, "Hell is other people".

That's where the zombie holds no appeal for me - there is no desire for the life that they have - they are no more than viruses.  I mean, if you care about nothing, why would you choose to spend more time like that?  I would choose consciousness with all it's pleasure AND pain rather than oblivion if I also had to be alive.  



At which point a vampire can walk into the nearest fire or the nearest bit of sunlight.  No mess, easy clean up.  Zombies are not as fortunate - they need to rely on lurching into the nearest mob (which of course they do anyway - and what if they wanted to live) and hoping that someone has the skills to know how to kill them.  They are unlikely to ever formulate enough skills and nous to find, load, cock and put a gun to their own heads - they are reliant on others to kill them.



Ah, yes, but if it alleviates the boredom, there's some kind of pleasure derived from the involvement in conspiracy, fighting and clandestine plans.  If said actions become boring or hellish in and of themselves, see above paragraph.

I guess this where we'll have to agree to disagree (at least on this point :lol: ). While I think the first few hundred years might be entertaining enough as a vampire, I would think that a life like that would eventually feel meaningless and intolerable. Although, if I were a vampire I could always make myself into a zombie at this point, at least to be part of an evolving, changing species :wink: .



We can't say for certain that this is a fact, as there does appear to be some indication in (current pop-culture based) zombies of an at least basic memory and the ability to learn. We are unable to determine how much zombies would evolve out of this early, simple minded state as there is no way to really measure this in the long term (considering that most human cities that suffer a zombie attack tend to be destroyed and devoured with few uninfected survivors). However, in their currently known state zombies don't have the same problems with morality, boredom, and the need for a "fulfilled" life that vampires have. As well, in this known state zombies would not need to know how to kill themselves; why would they need or want to? They are separate from human (and vampire) concerns, and even in an "evolved" state would likely formulate different methods for measuring a successful life.

As for "wanting to live" in the cases of humans fighting off zombie attacks, I'm not sure that there is a fair way to answer that point. There are likely as many humans who don't want to be vampires. In either case the affected persons would need to give up all attachments to their former existence. What humans may or may not want beforehand is not really applicable, as it is their changed state that is the matter of discussion.  



Or as Pescado would say, MOAR FIGHT!

I totally agree that existence would be dead boring after a couple of hundred years.  Although, I could happily tolerate that if it meant learning new stuff, and living all kinds of lives that I can't now.  I mean, I am 33, and halfway through a Ph.D. in criminology.  I would love to do other degrees, such as history, ancient history, religious studies, more sociology, law, chemistry, physics - and those are just the ones that I want to do right now.  But seeing as I don't want to die with "Undergrad Student" as my occupation, I picked my horse and now have to go with it.  

If I were a vampire, I could do all these things, and other things that interest me - live in Venice and do art restoration, all kinds of things.  I would also be interested in things like plumbing (anything apart from retail and customer service).  My life isn't going to continue that long - and so I can't do it.  I could survive as a vampire for quite a long time just learning all the things that currently exist in the world - and then I'd have to catch up with what had been invented while I learnt the sum of current human knowledge.  I'd have no time whatsoever for petty feuds.  Either way, I like MOAR fight - or at least being an observer of MOAR fight.

When I'm finished, or bored, or can't bear going on anymore, it's a quick walk into the sunlight, and I'm done.



Basic memory and ability to learn combined with possible eternal life - not good.  If I have to live forever, I better be able to learn new things easily, have the ability to fly, move fast, act normal and turn into mist (as well as the accompanying mind control and reading powers) and not just be a simple being wandering around.......forever.



Again, the empty, or less than full shell wandering around - might as well reincarnate as a chicken.



No - I meant if the zombie had a desire to live - if they even develop that - it doesn't matter because the mob will decide for you - and you can't hide your brains hanging out, or the lurch in your step. If you want to live as a zombie, a monocle isn't going to hide the gore and injuries, and the top hat will be greasy and soiled.  You would be a virtual prisoner in your hidey hole - take one step out and the mob kills you with fire.

I'd far prefer to be afflicted with vampirism than zombification, myself. Vampires tend to retain their personality and intellect and physical appearance.

There are also different types of vampirism, not all of which result in inevitable death for victims (though some can be just as nasty: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_vampire ).

I think adapting to a vampire lifestyle and deriving enjoyment from it would depend on how attached one is or was to things, in life, that vampires can't easily enjoy. If you happened to be a very gregarious sort, and outgoing, you would no doubt miss various human companions as they inevitably died on you. If you tend to be a solitary character by nature, however, you wouldn't mind as much, as you wouldn't form deep emotional bonds in the first place. If you tend to get lonely or bored easily, being a vamp is not for you. If you enjoy your own company and manage to entertain yourself with ease, you'd adapt better.

In philosophy of mind, zombies are hypothetical persons who lack full consciousness but behave otherwise just like other people; thought experiments involving them are often used as metaphors for doubting the existence of minds besides one's own. They are referred to as philosophical zombies or "p-zombies". (wiki)

Again, it is a choice between having a functioning consciousness and possessing self-determination, or merely existing and either being entirely a creature of electrical impulses remaining in the brain pan / someone else's will.

Either way you are dead, but in one case your physical form is preserved and your will and consciousness remain, and in the other your physical form degrades and you are a mindless horror. In the former case, it is possible to attempt to adhere to a moral code and to make the best of the situation, and in the latter, your impulses drive you to be a predator and you lack the consciousness or ability to choose not to harm others.

Longevity and the instinct towards self-preservation is not part of the zombie mythology. Eventually the shell being propelled about falls apart or is consumed by others of its kind, or destroyed by its intended prey. Conversely, longevity and doing anything to continue to survive is one of the major themes in the vampire mythos.

Neither state is ideal, but if one is not interested in maintaining an identity or in self-preservation, zombification would definitely be the less lengthy ordeal. You might do gross things, but "you" wouldn't be around to apply moral judgment or feel pangs of conscience about your behaviors. You'd certainly be free from worldly cares and any personal responsibility.

Vampirism would come with its own challenges, but ultimately the monster you became would still depend to a great extent on the type of person you were before you were infected / transformed.

Also, a small investment in several banks would quickly, to a vampire's mind, multiply into enough financial resources to allow you to adapt in style to your new situation.

If I have to be an undead monster, I'd prefer not to be smelly and have bits of me dropping off, and I'd prefer to be able to make conscious choices about my behavior and interactions with others. If I'm going to be a ruthless predator, perhaps I deserve to feel a little guilt.  :twisted:

Malkavian!!! (Vampire: The Masquerade)

YES, I so love Makavians! Though Right now my favorite clan to play would be The Daughters of Cacaphony.

I prefered Brujah for V:M.
The punks were my style..lol.

The vampire benefit of clean and easy suicides? Is that good? As a zombie I would not need to worry about desperation like this at all. Even working off of my idea of an evolved zombie, the requirements, culture and mental capacity would likely develop very differently from humans. I do believe that zombies show a capacity for community and shared goals; as such a zombie would always have a place in the larger group and might not be confronted by misery, loneliness or despair that a “thinking” creature like the vampire would be (loner or no).


While super powers might seem like a good trade off for an eternal existence, I think the novelty might wear off after the first thousand or so years. As a zombie, I would no longer be myself, but I think the capacity zombies have for change is at least as interesting as any vampire knowledge or magic.  



That depends on how long the mob itself survives, again keeping in mind how quickly the zombie “infection” is spread. Again, a zombie “desire to live” seems to be more of a developing trait, and we don’t really know how this would actually resolve itself as yet. As well, if you become a zombie, I doubt concerns about your appearance are going to be on the top of your agenda. Concerns like this seem really connected to our own human fears of losing consciousness, or becoming something that we don’t recognize. I guess I’m interested in the mythology of zombies simply as an example of newly developing (although, yes, hostile and unreal) species. I think that there is more room for growth as a zombie simply because they are ever changing and there are no limits to what they could eventually become because they are so inhuman.  



As humans, it is difficult to imagine a life without the trappings (both good and bad) of human existence, and the general belief would be that it would be better to have an eternal existence that holds on to those things with which we are most familiar. I just want to raise the point that being tied down to a (half)human existence for eternity, and being aware of how much you aren’t connected to the "real" world could be quite pathetic.



That’s part of the problem here then, we haven’t actually nailed down which vampire mythology we are working from. There are a whole host of vampire (or at least life/blood-sucking) mythologies, several of which have an existence at least as “mindless” as that of a zombie.  



I think that vampires are at least as horrifying as zombies. Creatures which, for all intents and purposes, are aware enough to understand what they are doing (via general human morality) is wrong, but choose to continue in their current fashion anyway. Vampires seem (for the most part) to cling to the scraps of human existence entirely for their own self interest and benefit (for example, being rich, cultured and dressing well will attract more victims to your lair). For myself (and I will admit this is isn’t a valid outside argument :lol:), I could forgive a zombie for turning my family into zombies simply due to the fact that I know that, at least at “rebirth”, they have very little control over their behaviour. I would find it very difficult, on the other hand, to forgive a vampire who turned (or killed) my family and friends as that would have been a conscious and willful decision on the vampire’s part. They sound to me like a race of super-powered psychopaths; hardly something I would consider a benefit.

However, you can tie neither group down to basic human standards of behaviour, as after their undeath neither group is human.  We have to accept that neither zombies nor vampires are living anything even remotely like a real human life, no matter how well they mimic it. The assumption is also made that zombies are solely “mindless horrors” who have no hope of developing any kind of consciousness. This is belied by the zombie mythology that I am working off of (again, George Romero), as zombies in his films are often shown to develop intelligence, sense of community and instincts for self preservation. I could think of zombies as a developing species of a sort, which I actually find more interesting (from my outside human standpoint, of course) an existence as there are no limits to how zombie “life” could develop. A vampire, to me, seems like a miserable creature who has to live off of scraps of his/her old human life in order to make their way.  



I addressed some of this in the above paragraph. Generally (again, in the zombie type I am working form), zombies tend not to attack each other. Close to dead and injured humans, yes, but each other, not so much. You could argue that this is simply because they feel no desire for dead flesh, or from a developing sense of community, both are valid based on current zombie culture. The fact that zombies will also eventually (re)die isn’t necessarily a bad thing as it implies a “natural” life cycle for them. Nothing should last forever, in my opinion. As well, I’m not sure that “doing anything to continue to survive” is really an admirable trait, considering what that might require of a thinking creature. Humans are not supposed to live forever, and extending one’s life through artificial, violent or magical means seems both pointless and selfish. Desiring to be (and fighting to remain) locked at the point one was at in death, unchanging, for eternity is difficult for me to understand. To me, it sounds like an unending nightmare.


Edit: Added a word, and fixed a couple of stupid grammatical errors (yes, I am aware there are probably several more)

The insane wise men were the ones I liked! As you can tell...

Yes there is truth in your ramblings, of all the cammie clans Malks are by far the best. I like the Daughters because they are a little off as well, plus have the added bonus of shattering people with screams.

To chose ambling oblivion over thinking - never.  I could never do that.  I stated that my main purpose would be knowledge, with the added benefit of periodic donning of monocles and tophats.  I could never choose the limited capacity that zombies, by virtue of their condition (ie. brains falling out) have.



A thousand years is good - more than I'll ever get.  I doubt highly that zombies, with their body decomposing and having bits knocked off will ever have that much time.  Not to mention that zombies require swarms.



Under the 28 days scenario, that was a long time, and many zombies were killed in that movie.  One is not always guaranteed to be the lucky survivor of either camp.



It's not about appearance - it's about subterfuge.  But monocles and tophats lose all relevance if there is no interest in them.  That would be a sad thing.



No, for me it is not the fear of losing consciousness, but the recognition of how long eternity really is.  If I am going to have to face that horror, I would rather concentrate on the benefits, such as skill building, knowledge acquisition and all the cool supernatural powers as a trade off to what I am having to face.

To trade off a community existence with a discrete purpose, and the joy of family, particularly those born from my body for a more hideous style of community, with the family born from my actions seems a dreadful tradeoff.  If I have to shamble through eternity - and never die - I'm not going to trade for something similar, but with more faults - like bits coming loose and never being able to go into the public domain, or use my brain for anything other than a hive mind and co-ordination.  MOAR compensation is necessary.

Again, I would no longer be myself as a zombie, I would be something entirely new. As such, my original human self would not be trapped in a shambling, "mindless" existence, my new self would be. I will state again that there has been indications of developing intelligence in current zombie themed work, and what seems like the capacity for more complex thought. I don't believe, based on the mythology that I'm working off of, that zombies would remain in that new-born, simplistic state forever. Since the physiology of zombies isn't really understood that well (or has only been defined based on human terms), we don't really know if they require the brain or body in order to function the same way that humans or vampires would (although to actually exist it seems like they require bodies at least).



A thousand years is also an awfully long time to continue in my current existence, unchanged. Whatever knowledge or skills I might obtain would be overshadowed, for me, by the fact I would be tied to the earth forever unable to interact in any real way with the outside world. I would be miserable eventually, no matter how much I was able to gain. As for zombies, what I've noticed is that after the zombie transformation they seem to reach a kind of stasis point after which there is no further degeneration. If a zombie was already infested by flies, or had a limb blown off then, yes, the loss of vital parts and eventual (re)death could be a result, but simply being a zombie does not mean that all of your "bits" are eventually going to fall off.

As for swarms, that's not necessarily a bad thing. It's simply an example of that emerging zombie community spirit! :lol:



I'm working off of a George Romero scenario, where zombie "infestation" happened very quickly despite human skill and knowledge. While it's true that there would be grave (ha, ha, I'm so funny) loses on both sides, I'm still probably going to put my money in the zombie camp. Vampires don't come off well in an "us versus them" scenario either, especially considering their more limited numbers. While powerful, they do have liabilities that are easy to take advantage of.



This assumes that zombies would actually care about fitting in to human society in order to hide among them, or to be more effective predators. I see no indication that zombies (again, the type I'm using as an example) feel the need to develop a skill like this. They are also not entirely without subterfuge, especially when working alone, as they are known to hide in dark shadows, small spaces, and closets in order to stalk their victims. As a zombie swarm subterfuge is entirely unnecessary, heavily armed humans or no. However, I must concede to your point that the loss of an appreciation for top hats and monocles is tragic.



I agree that the recognition and experience of living for eternity is a horrifying thing, and I would prefer not to face such an existence at all. The zombie that I would become is not the me that was but is a new and distinct creature. As this new "life" would be based on new rules, I would not need to be hampered by my past life or have to confront that fear. I could continue on, free from human or vampire limits, in whatever new culture develops.

Might as well be dead - if the original self is burnt away, choice loses all relevance.  There's longer survival with the vampire - that is you - or the instant snuffing out of your personality.  If I wouldn't be around to enjoy the new self, then I would not make the choice to be that way.



For me, extra time for skill building would be the bonus that takes away the rub of eternal life.  It may not be enjoyable over the long term - and thus that's where the ease of suicide becomes another added benefit.



No, this is basic animalistic predator behaviour - no more.  We might want to ascribe some sort of community ideas, but they're basically paysites milling around until they join the mighty TSR.



The other problem with this is the animation of dead flesh - for vampires, that is sustained by blood - without it the body dies.  Zombies however, are animated regardless of how much brains they consume, and it is possible that the animation and consciousness continues after the brain is gone, and the body can't move.  Trapped forever in the cage of the flesh so to speak.  I would take the quick and sure death over the possibility of that any day.  

 

I lament the loss of tophats and monocles around the world.  But some sort of subterfuge is necessary to survive the human mob - or to rather be the last person converted - this is the only guaranteed method of survival.  There could be 3 vampires in my neighbourhood, but I'll never know - they have the survival advantage of subterfuge.



Agreed - I would never willingly choose such a thing, but given a choice, would not throw away the benefits of vampirism (despite the faults) in order to keep vestiges of pleasure - rather than ditch my personality and consciousness and give my body over to an infection to drive around.



If the zombie is not you, your consciousness, then it is not a valid choice - you have the choice of vampire or oblivion. Zombies provide the body to something else that is not, in essence, you - and so there can be no choice to become a zombie.

Very very interesting discussion  :wink: As it stands, it looks like most people prefer vampires? Well vampires have been portrayed more and glamourised more in the media so you are more likely to prefer a vampire. But in the origin of both creatures, they are actually very very similar...depending on what you read, of course, but genuinely are created by another being and are the living dead, whose only purpose is to in some way prey of humans. Meh its just the media (and by media i mean modern day films, and mostly romantic victorian books) has glamourised vampires more. Oh the power of the media..

I've heard a theory that a vampire 'being' is not the one of the former human, but that of a demonic spirit. The human spirit is killed, and the soul and body are preserved and occupied by the demon. This entity is a faulty trinity, because one of three does not belong there, and has forcefully entered and destroyed the original. Therefore it dies but is not really dead.

Human: human spirit, human soul, human body --> life
Death of a human: spirit dies, soul moves on, body dies, trinity broken
Vampire: demonic spirit, human soul, human body. forcefully formed, therefore not fully sustainable. A sort of halflife.

Something like this should be killed out of mercy.

I don't glamourise them at all - but faced with two bad choices, I have considered which has the most desirable traits.  I am working from the general body of mythology of vampires, including the Transylvanian legends concerning them - which are not at all favourable, as well as the Albanian ideas of vampire spirits (which resemble Lord Voldemort in his incorporeal form - feeding on the blood of small creatures - souls that are bound to the earth, angry and tormented).  

I also take into consideration the legends surrounding Vlad Teppes (Vlad the Impaler) as well as Elizabeth Bathory, and Vera Renczei (sp?). I have purposefully not mentioned Anne Rice, as I think this is a romantic fantasy - that of superhuman strength and little drawbacks.  I am also considering the deeply stupid vampire of popular myth - the one with the easily twitched curtains, and random peices of wood that can be made into a makeshift cross.

I am also considering some of the West African tales of zombies, those poisoned by hougans and made into slaves, as well as some of the Vodoun legends concerning them, and some of the writings of medieval "mages" who believed that they existed.  I'm also going on the modern idea of infection as a way in which the "zombie virus" may be transmitted.



That's the main theory on Buffy the Vampire Slayer.  It doesn't show up in any mythology that I have currently read - and it gets quite obscure, so it's possible I haven't read it.  :D

Rumors of our demonic nature have been highly exaggerated. ;)

Well, you choose awareness and I'll take oblivion, I guess :lol:. I'm not sure that it would be preferable to be confronted with an unending life if I'm actually experiencing it. I don't know that easy suicide is really a benefit, I would prefer not to ever have to make a choice like that (especially if it is my only choice). Thanks for stating which set of mythologies you are working off of as it helps to define where the argument is coming from. For vampires (and for zombies, too) there are so many different interpretations and stories, all of which are updated and changed constantly. I suspect that the development of both creatures in folktales, mythology, film, and literature came from similar fears over death, the afterlife, and consciousness.

I still argue that zombies wouldn't merely remain thoughtless, uncontrolled monsters, but that is entirely tied down to whether you buy into the genre of film that I am working from. I find the development of traits over time of zombies a really interesting premise (even though, yes, they are an imaginary creature), and I feel that they are less locked down to the strictures of their previous lives (e.g. through reasons emotional, financial, etc.).

I will say, though, that while the vampire may retain memories and personality traits from the original person, I don't think that the vampire is "you" anymore than a zombie would be. The fact that the vampire does not consider itself human, and may see humans as "cattle" as Calalily put it leads me to believe that this new creature is something else. It may mimic the personality, desires, and interests of the original human, but I actually think that this is a false connection.

However, if the only valid choice is one that the original person must make in full consciousness (and in both cases that choice is problematic), we must determine what a person actually is, where the "soul" (for lack of a better term) resides. Is it in memory? While vampires have more complete and developed (human-like) memory, zombies also display this same skill (i.e. remembering places they used to go, people who had hurt them in the past, etc.). Is it in personality? Again, while further developed  in vampires, zombies also show a movement towards developing distinct personalities. Is it in the ability to appreciate the finer things in life? While vampires have it all over zombies in that case, I think this could be seen as an unfortunate attachment to the original human (a person that the vampire never truly was). Is it in our thoughts and desires? In both cases, the main desire seems to be for food, and while the vampire may be a more sophisticated hunter they are no different than the zombie in this case. There are whole hosts of traits that we attribute to humans that we can weigh both vampires and zombies by to determine how much like humans they are. However, neither group is human, no matter how well they imitate a human life. While the vampire may be acting in a fashion that you would and enjoy some of the same things that you do, it does not mean that it is necessarily you (all general "you"s here, of course).



Poor Vlad! A hero in his home country and connected forever to a Gothic horror story in the rest.



We are working off a similar idea about the infection method, but I (obviously) don't see the modern day zombie as simply a transfered virus that can act in only a simplistic way with no hope of consciousness. We also don't know that it is a "virus" in a true sense, as all recently dead humans (zombie killed or no) seem to be affected (think of Night of The Living Dead and the cemetery scene). Perhaps a zombie bite is simply very poisonous and means a quick death, with the zombie state simply being some kind of newly developed genetic trait. However, the popular conception at the moment seems to be a zombie "virus", so in the interest of fairness I guess I have to stick with that.:lol:  

I still think that the general reticence here to becoming a zombie is somewhat (and not necessarily in your case Calalily as you are working off of numerous mythological sources) related to our fear of being physically  unattractive. As humans we want to be seen as attractive (for the most part anyway) in order to improve our lives (for ease of attracting mates, for example). Vampires have all of these finer qualities, as well as super powers and appear to retain their original personalities and memories. Zombies are grotesque, smelly, and no longer function in a recognizable, understandable human way. In my case, I think that is part of their charm, the fact that they are able to (or are forced to) throw off shallow appearance based desires and are still part of the larger group. Again, this is very inhuman (and even very unnatural as a whole), and I believe part of the reason they horrify us.

My husband said it's grunge vs. horror.  Eh - trying to explain the draw of this debate to someone else - won't try my luck with anyone other than the hubby.  :lol:



That's the difficulty with the zombie - they really don't change from any of the sources - they are mindless and a state to be feared - used very effectively by the powers that be in all those countries.  "Put a toe out of line, and it's service and doing my bidding, and eating flesh for you."  The modern ideas of infection are quite kind - as are the ideas of community, as the original zombie is mindless - a tool to be used.



I've only ever seen this in BTVS though - nowhere else.  The vampire is overtaken by unnatural desires, but at worst, it is merely an addition, rather than a replacement to the soul.



In both cases in mythology, the soul is trapped in the body.  Whether the personality accompanies it is the difference between vampires and zombies.



He might have been a brutal bastard, but he was just the brutal bastard needed to get his country out from under the control of the Turks.  Without him, Transylvanian identity within Romania wouldn't exist as a separate culture we know today.



The desire in all the movies, is so strong that it overrides the previous memories.  The virus makes them a shell based on ease with which they kill those they love, and the fact that they mill in public places.  Those with a vestige of what it means to be human do not randomly mill around looking for food in a giant group - this is an ineffective food gathering strategy.



I do agree with the general theory that vampires are more "attractive" - the dream of meat is one little story that we can tell ourselves.  That they would see us as something more than just a meal - and would love us and cherish us for our life, and pick some other nebulous victim we can't name to feed on.

Vampires and their needs, in reality, are far more heinous than the worst serial killer we could consider.  Nightly victims - whether through assault or actual killing (which is entirely plausible considering the missing and homeless) they brutalise on a daily basis.  The dream that *maybe* they wouldn't harm us is not realistic.  They are like John Wayne Gacy, and Jeffrey Dahmer, and the Green River Killer, all rolled into one - never resisting their desires, but harming others on a daily basis.  

One of the best things illustrated by BTVS was the carnage that they leave behind them - real people with real deaths - forever eating their way through the throats of centuries, with little regard for life, or respect for those things we value.  If one is outside a community, they are less likely to understand, abide and respect those standards - that's why we want to destroy paysites.  They cannot understand the common values of this community, and see themselves as outside the rules.  

Vampires are the same, but they have been placed outside their community by virtue of their difference, and their need to prey on the community (again, paysite owners).  They would have little regard for the community, and for the people in it.

It would be difficult which is why I haven't even tried :lol:.



Admittedly, unlike you, I am working from one particular zombie genre and am ignoring all the rest, including any ancient or modern folklore. Yes, the original zombie was oftentimes either a spirit desperate for revenge or a slave attached to a cruel master due to wrongdoing in life (as explored in some of Wade Davis' work, for example). I feel like the genre I am working with (although it is heavily based in American pop culture and not in older zombie mythology) is a generally accepted conception of them, at least in North America where I live. In the films I am working from (again from America's most well known and enduring zombie movie director, George Romero), there are indications of newly forming intelligence and more complicated thought processes.

As examples (because I probably should give some), in "Dawn of the Dead", zombie Stephen is well aware of where Fran and Peter are hiding and leads the other zombies directly to them. In "Day of the Dead", the zombie Bub is the most sympathetic and kind hearted character in the film and even learns how to shoot a gun (something that would require more than just base impulse control). In the recent "Land of the Dead", the zombie named Big Daddy continues on with this more self aware behaviour, as he is able to learn how to use a firearm as well and is able to "teach" his zombie compatriots survival skills. As well, Despite their supposedly uncontrollable desire for living human flesh, Big Daddy and his zombie group ignore the masses of easily killable humans living outside of the walled city once the structure of the city falls . If nothing else, he certainly seemed like he hated Dennis Hopper's character :lol: (is it obvious that I'm a fan of George Romero, yet? I thought so).

I am working off of modern stories such as this one to form my conception of zombies as I feel they are equally valid as the old style zombies. However, even in older folktales zombie type creatures were not necessarily just slaves to a master (for example, revenants, draugr, and several types of Japanese Yōkai), and some seemed to possess rudimentary intelligence and personality (otherwise how else to pursue those who had done them wrong, or protect their valuable treasure). Plus, didn't you ever see that "Thriller" video? Because apparently zombies love to dance. :lol:  



I was trying to avoid citing BTVS as that seemed to be the writer's way of explaining that schism of personality, but I have to agree with that idea that the vampire you become is not the human you were, no matter how closely your personality is imitated. Becoming a psychopathic killer living solely for it's own desires and ignoring the needs of the community for its own self benefit would be an "unnatural desire", indeed.



Unlike vampires, zombies don't even try to pretend to be human (although that may be more because they haven't developed that particular skill), and so trying to measure them based on acceptable human standards of behaviour or logic can be tricky. As I said before, their actions are incomprehensible simply because they are almost "a-human", so they don't behave in an understandable fashion. However, it doesn't necessarily follow that they are entirely mindless simply because their behaviour is abnormal or doesn't follow a human pattern of logic.



Exactly. Incredibly brutal, and not something I would have any desire to become simply because the other choice didn't seem like it would be as entertaining at first.  



Well done, Calalily! I am impressed by your skill at relating this debate to the original point of this site :lol: .

There are no complicated thought processes though - basic swarming activity is not complicated.  It is the thing that social creatures do - I wouldn't consider meerkats a great thing (although a cute thing) to become - and they have rudimentary understanding of the benefits of social creatures.  This doesn't indicate intelligence, merely a survival strategy, and perhaps not an effective one in light of the predator humans who can find a big group to pick off.



Yes, but here, the zombie is still basically a creature of revenge.  That particular zombie seems to have regained rather than gained the skills needed to survive.  I suspect in this kind of form, zombies regain limited benefits that are residual human knowledge, rather than new knowledge.



But even by the standards of evolutionary beneficial actions, this is a stupid move.  No animal with a predator (such as humans with guns) is going to choose an ineffective strategy such as the swarm.  Their urge here is more in line with the virus modus operandi - to infect others, with a side order of revenge.



All scoundrels in history can be related back to the paysite owners!  :lol:

I think the capacity for revenge, and the ability to access older memories (not to mention the, at least basic, skills to use this knowledge) are indications of more complicated thought processes, and considering that these abilities seem to develop slowly over time (brand new zombies seem unable to function in intelligent ways, although they do appear to retain some memory) we have no idea where this development would stop or where the cap on intelligence is for the zombie.



Admittedly swarming is not fantastic hunting or survival technique, and is generally attributed to creatures who work within the societal structure of the hive, however as I said before, this swarming behaviour seems an early (meaning newborn zombie) technique. There are indications that more effective survival strategies are developed by zombies the longer they exist (see my examples in the last post). As well, the fact that the "infection" spreads so quickly (and is, in most films, untreatable) is itself a survival "skill" for the zombie. While they will lose several of their number attacking a human defended post, only a small number (like one) of humans need to be bitten in order to introduce the "virus" and increase their numbers. This gives the humans a very few choices, either become zombies, exile that individual to the zombie wastelands, keep them locked up in hopes of finding a cure, or to kill them now or to kill them later after they have changed. At any rate, it is a moral quandary and will always mean the loss of at least one of their group (keep in mind that at times the "infection" spreads so quickly that they might not have time to make any of these decisions). That sounds like a fairly effective survival (and reproduction) strategy to me, for the group if not the individual.



In that, I agree!  :lol:

I think we can.  If they are indeed, merely regaining old abilities, then their development and intelligence has the same cap and limits as that of human beings - just far slower.  If they were something altogether new, then it might be a mode for differential development - but as they are really only regaining what they once had, and making use of it - then their development is capped and slowed.



Again, if this is regaining formerly held skills, it is reversion to the old survival strategy - which is a social group formed for protection.  In humans though, it leads to breeding cycles, social connections, empathy and altruism - without empathy and altruism (such as helping the sick - as opposed to revenge) then there can be no cohesion as a social group.



That is not an effective survival strategy for the zombie - merely for the virus.  Viruses need to spread - it is their primary code - zombies may need to eat (brains) but they do not need to make more zombies.  Making said food supply into competition for food is a deeply stupid survival strategy.

Not to mention, that this is an ineffective breeding strategy.  If zombies are to continue, and dead bodies have a limited life span (there's a wonderful thing called "skin slippage" after 5 months due to liquifying tendons and membranes holding the skin to the body) then killing all humans is ineffective.  You will be the last of your kind.  

It would be far more effective to hide, and then pop out and bite someone, and breed - zombies and humans living in tandem.  But since zombies cannot lurch into public, and have a seemingly insatiable need for brains, they are unlikely to be able to do this.