bickster Posted September 16, 2009 Moderator Share Posted September 16, 2009 Seeing as theres been a few the last couple of days And another Poll to annoy Rob always amuses me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villahero Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 Tell me what it means and i might join in !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briggaman Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 Necromancy (pronounced /ˈnɛkrɵmænsi/; Greek νεκρομαντία nekromantía) is a form of magic in which the practitioner seeks to summon "operative spirits" or "spirits of divination", for multiple reasons, from spiritual protection to wisdom. The word necromancy derives from the Greek νεκρός (nekrós), "[[dead]", and μαντεία (manteía), "prophecy". However, since the Renaissance, necromancy (or nigromancy) has come to be associated more broadly with black magic and demon-summoning in general, sometimes losing its earlier, more specialized meaning. By popular etymology, nekromantia became nigromancy "black arts", and Johannes Hartlieb (1456) lists demonology in general under the heading. Eliphas Levi, in his book Dogma et Ritual, states that necromancy is the evoking of aerial bodies (aeromancy). :shock: Although I am sure this is the use in this case: In modern time necromancy is used as a more general term to describe the art (or manipulation) of death, and generally implies a magical connotation. Modern séances, channeling, Spiritism and Spiritualism verge on necromancy when the invoked spirits are asked to reveal future events. Necromancy may also be presented as sciomancy, a branch of theurgic magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 16, 2009 Author Moderator Share Posted September 16, 2009 When people drag up old topics from before the ark (usually because they have a poll attached). You read them and you think Eh? then you look at the dates and its years ago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villahero Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 ahhh...bit like the Chris Moyles one then ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 16, 2009 Author Moderator Share Posted September 16, 2009 ahhh...bit like the Chris Moyles one then ? Yep exactly like that one, but there was another one where Blandy compares the price of football to gigs (which on reading it made me think blandy had got tickets to see Sigur Ros and not invited me, until I read my own post later on and it clicked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidlewis Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 it's for people that think Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter are "plausable" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimTheVillan Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 The Class 'system' requires constant debate I say .... :-) Mass debate even. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AshVilla Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 id defo use necromancy if it would help me out and actually worked the idea of commanding an army of undead minions to do my bidding has always appealed to me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjw63 Posted September 16, 2009 Share Posted September 16, 2009 Grrrrr, necromancy and polls :evil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted September 17, 2009 Author Moderator Share Posted September 17, 2009 Grrrrr, necromancy and polls :evil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted September 17, 2009 VT Supporter Share Posted September 17, 2009 No, I think it's great. There are some really good threads back there that get missed by lots of people just because they aren't on the front page. As an history buff (and an old git to boot) I despair of the obsession with the contemporary, to the exclusion of anything older than yesterday. Bring back more old threads, I say! Time present and time past Are both perhaps present in time future, And time future contained in time past. If all time is eternally present All time is unredeemable. What might have been is an abstraction Remaining a perpetual possibility Only in a world of speculation. What might have been and what has been Point to one end, which is always present. Footfalls echo in the memory Down the passage which we did not take Towards the door we never opened Into the rose-garden. My words echo Thus, in your mind. But to what purpose Disturbing the dust on a bowl of rose-leaves I do not know. Other echoes Inhabit the garden. Shall we follow? Quick, said the bird, find them, find them, Round the corner. Through the first gate, Into our first world, shall we follow The deception of the thrush? Into our first world. There they were, dignified, invisible, Moving without pressure, over the dead leaves, In the autumn heat, through the vibrant air, And the bird called, in response to The unheard music hidden in the shrubbery, And the unseen eyebeam crossed, for the roses Had the look of flowers that are looked at. There they were as our guests, accepted and accepting. So we moved, and they, in a formal pattern, Along the empty alley, into the box circle, To look down into the drained pool. Dry the pool, dry concrete, brown edged, And the pool was filled with water out of sunlight, And the lotos rose, quietly, quietly, The surface glittered out of heart of light, And they were behind us, reflected in the pool. Then a cloud passed, and the pool was empty. Go, said the bird, for the leaves were full of children, Hidden excitedly, containing laughter. Go, go, go, said the bird: human kind Cannot bear very much reality. Time past and time future What might have been and what has been Point to one end, which is always present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 I thought it meant sex with dead people :oops: couldn't work out why that would annoy Rob ..technically they haven't said "No" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Grrrrr, necromancy and polls :evil: I concur with the Cider Man. Dragging up polls and threads from years ago. Why? just confusing and largely pointless, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qwpzxjor1 Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Grrrrr, necromancy and polls :evil: I concur with the Cider Man. Dragging up polls and threads from years ago. Why? just confusing and largely pointless, IMO. I disagree. In fact, I think polls are the best to drag up. I remember one being brought up a while ago which was something like 'who would you most like us t to sign?' and most of the votes were with Carlton Cole. Quite a few people went off on rants about how shit he was for us and just because he's playing well now doesn't mean he'll fit into our system.. and then it was pointed out this thread was made 2 games into his loan spell with us, when he looked like he was gonna be the next Dwight Yorke. Amusing, and interesting to see how opinions have changed over time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Grrrrr, necromancy and polls :evil: I concur with the Cider Man. Dragging up polls and threads from years ago. Why? just confusing and largely pointless, IMO. I disagree. In fact, I think polls are the best to drag up. I remember one being brought up a while ago which was something like 'who would you most like us t to sign?' and most of the votes were with Carlton Cole. Quite a few people went off on rants about how shit he was for us and just because he's playing well now doesn't mean he'll fit into our system.. and then it was pointed out this thread was made 2 games into his loan spell with us, when he looked like he was gonna be the next Dwight Yorke. Amusing, and interesting to see how opinions have changed over time. true, but i find them very confusing! also, they do provide a big opportunity for points scoring. Not sure whether that's a good thing, or a bad thing, TBH (depends what i've posted) :winkold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heystally! Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 I'm going to wait a few years until someone drags this up topic from out of nowhere to point out "Oh, the irony!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connell Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 i bet someone will drag this one up in about a years time. well lad, whats the craic in 2010? if theres some time travellers out there, will you come back in time and tell me the lotto results for the euromillions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 Grrrrr, necromancy and polls :evil: I concur with the Cider Man. Dragging up polls and threads from years ago. Why? just confusing and largely pointless, IMO. a couple of reasons. 1) A lot of people would not have been members of this site when that topic/poll was discussed. If its worthy of debate, then let the new members also debate it. 2) Rather than start a new thread about the same topic, might as well continue the old thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted September 17, 2009 Share Posted September 17, 2009 It doesn't irritate me at all, the opposite in fact. I particularly like re-reading threads that involve making predictions about stuff. There are some canny folks on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts