ForumsNews and FeedbackArmor Games Mascot

104 13238
xeano321
offline
xeano321
3,087 posts
2,095

Since John has retired from Armor Games, and along with John went the iconic blue elephant that is beloved by all AG users. While this elephant was regarded as a de facto mascot, it suddenly occurred to me, why doesn't AG have an official mascot? While the choices are limited, (unless a new character is created), I was thinking maybe Sushi Cat?

What are your opinions, views, thoughts, recommendations, ideas, or suggestions? (Admins and mods, you're included (not that you need to be told you're included, since you would include yourself anyway, but I thought it would be nice for you to know you're welcome.))

  • 104 Replies
jeol
offline
jeol
3,845 posts
6,080

It's sounds correct to me. Using the word It conveys a broader sense of the topic at hand (which is ferrets) instead of referring directly to the animal.

It (is) implies only one subject, while they (are) implies many. Since the direct object (ferrets) is plural, the latter would be correct.

Sorreh; I love getting technical sometimes.
Reton8
offline
Reton8
3,047 posts
29,005

It (is) implies only one subject, while they (are) implies many. Since the direct object (ferrets) is plural, the latter would be correct.


I can't decipher this it rule. Basically the rule would be that it cannot be used as an impersonal pronoun (or be the subject of a sentence) without a prior use of a different noun for the subject and that noun must occur within the same sentence. With the exception when it refers to time, weather, or distance.

I keep seeing this, but no explanation as to why it must refer to time, weather or distance. This leads me to believe it has to refer to time, weather, or distance, when used impersonally, but I am having trouble finding a source to clarify and verify this.

Anyway, if it can be used impersonally (and be the subject of a sentence when not referring to time, weather,or distance) then you are half right. They're is totally correct in the sentence. But if it is referring to the irresponsibility of the ferrets the sentence is be correct both ways.

If, it can only refer to time, distance, or weather, when used impersonally, then you are completely right. But as a slang sentence, It's ferrets after all would still be a commonly heard type of sentence and would be something used by native speakers to English.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_(pronoun)


The word and term 'it' can be used for either a subject or an object in a sentence and can describe any physical or psychological subject and / or object.


"Everyone got its legs kicked or its feet trodden on in the scramble to get out of the carriage."


Also, this from the book Correct Writing Book; Sixth Edition (1995):

Collective Nouns:
Collective nouns are singular in form but plural in meaning. These nouns may take either a singular or plural verb: if you are thinking of the group as a unit, use a singular verb. If you are thinking of the individual members of the group use a plural verb.

Examples:
The crew is striking for higher pay. [The crew is acting as a unit.]

The crew are writing reports of the wreck. [The members of the crew are acting as individuals.]
(p. 147)

Collective Nouns as Antecedents:
With collective nouns use either a singular or plural pronoun according to the meaning of the sentence.

Examples:
The team elected Jan as its captain. [The team is acting as a unit and therefore requires the singular possessive pronoun its.]

The team quickly took their positions on the field. [Here each member of the team is acting individually.]
(p. 158)

[I wanted to show collective pronouns, because they cause some very odd sounding, yet correct English sentences. Usually such sentences are rephrased like the the crew are example could just have read, "The crew members are writing reports of the wreck." Which sounds less awkward.]

Impersonal Use of the Personal Pronoun:
Remember that pronouns are frequently used impersonally and when so used do not have antecedents. Notice the correct impersonal use of it in the statements about weather, time, and distance:

It looks like rain. [Reference to weather.]

It is now twelve o'clock. [Reference to time.]

How far is it to the nearest town? [Reference to distance.]
(p. 167)

So,
Ferrets like to live their lives irresponsibly. It's ferrets, after all.

I supposes ferrets couldn't be a collective noun. I don't think someone would ever say,"The ferrets is making a home." And, even though they are acting as a unit, the sentence is incorrect. The word are would have to be used.

But,

Ferrets like to live their lives irresponsibly. It's ferrets, after all.

could be read as:

Ferrets like to live their lives irresponsibly. It's their type of lifestyle, after all.

Irresponsibility is the antecedent and noun that it is referring to. Irresponsibility is not directly in the first sentence, but can be derived from it. Irresponsibility is a singular noun. Therefore, "It's there type of lifestyle, after all." is correct and so are the sentences Ferrets like to live their lives irresponsibly. It's ferrets, after all.

The sentence could read:
Ferrets like to live their lives irresponsibly. Irresponsibility is their type of lifestyle, after all.
Which avoids ambiguity from It's.

Search something like it's cars on Google. Plenty of results and the same singular/plural arrangement (singular it with plural cars). (You can even search "it's cars, after all".)

So the second sentence is either correct or slang. But even as slang it's a common occurrence form native speakers.

I post this, because I rarely speak a second language out of fear of being laughed at how miserable I am at it. So, when I see a "correction" to a sentence without the qualifier that the sentence could still be correct (or at least commonly used, although grammatically incorrect) I get really irked. It's a great way to deter people from using a second language.
Strop
offline
Strop
10,841 posts
6,360

Having read all that I still don't know what the appropriate construction would be, but I know that anecdotally, a lot of people these days would say "it's ferrets, after all".

Looks like you uncovered a different difficulty of English than you thought you were pointing out, eh, Sal?

Anyway, the real reason I was making this post was to say GET BACK ON TOPIC!

jeol
offline
jeol
3,845 posts
6,080

But as a slang sentence, It's ferrets after all would still be a commonly heard type of sentence and would be something used by native speakers to English.

I've never heard it stated like that. It probably would have bothered me greatly if I said 'it is ferrets' given the exclusive properties of that statement.

"Everyone got its legs kicked or its feet trodden on in the scramble to get out of the carriage."

I think it would be referring to everyone, personally, got its legs kicked. That sort of makes sense. In that case, it's (or should I say, its is) also possessive, whilst 'it is ferrets' is not.

I supposes ferrets couldn't be a collective noun. I don't think someone would ever say,"The ferrets is making a home." And, even though they are acting as a unit, the sentence is incorrect. The word are would have to be used.

That's practically what I was thinking. If 'ferrets' was referring to a specific group or surname where the 's' did not refer specifically to a plural, for instance when an object like 'family' is directly implied:

"The Lyons [family] is a great bunch."

I'm pretty sure that 'ferrets' was referring to the group-animal ferrets, in which case a reference to ferrets would be a plural instance in that the group is based off there being multiples of a certain name, not a certain name under multiples... Do you catch my drift? I feel as though 'everyone' would be the latter.

Irresponsibility is the antecedent and noun that it is referring to. Irresponsibility is not directly in the first sentence, but can be derived from it. Irresponsibility is a singular noun. Therefore, "It's there type of lifestyle, after all." is correct and so are the sentences Ferrets like to live their lives irresponsibly. It's ferrets, after all.

That's not really how I gathered it, very much at all. It seemed to me more like "It's their nature being ferrets, after all." "their* type of lifestyle" would be more of the case that they're more dependent on lifestyle and not on them being ferrets, which likely is not the case. They have a choice to change their lifestyle, but they can't make themselves not be ferrets. I suppose you could look at it as irresponsibility being tempting, but in direct correlation with ferrets it doesn't make all that much sense to me. So, in conclusion, I see that the sentence must come out one of two ways:

Ferrets like to live their lives irresponsibly. They're ferrets, after all. (Referring directly to ferrets, and their tendency to be irresponsible. Kind of a redundant statement put together, but oh well.)

Ferrets like to live their lives irresponsibly. It's irresponsibility, after all. (Referring directly to irresponsibility, because one could see the temptation to live your life irresponsibly. The less redundant statement of the two.)

Heh, sorry, Strop. Thanks for the discussion, Reton8.
Strop
offline
Strop
10,841 posts
6,360

You could have done the right thing, which was to create a separate thread in the appropriate section. To make it up to me, how about you go and do that now instead?

Cenere
offline
Cenere
13,744 posts
3,230

So, in conclusion, I see that the sentence must come out one of two ways:

Or, alternately, "It is ferrets /of which we talk), after all"...
But thank you all for stomping around in this, it was truly appreciated, and did not in any way confuse me more about something I already have trouble with.
mbbs112
offline
mbbs112
196 posts
1,150

Ya'know we should place a knight with a shield as a mascot of AG .

jeol
offline
jeol
3,845 posts
6,080

To make it up to me, how about you go and do that now instead?

For the sake of simply displacing the conversation, or in case we actually continue talking about this? Unless Reton8 had something else to say, I don't know if there was anything else to add on to that. I really didn't feel like making an entire thread just to post one reply, not to mention that it could be claimed to be based off of only a user/two. I suppose we could have moved it onto out profiles, but ... ergh. I might as well make the thread anyhow, I suppose.

I don't blame you, Cen... English is hard. Sorry for seemingly making a big deal out of this. It's slang terms, after all.

Personally, I like bunnehs.
Reton8
offline
Reton8
3,047 posts
29,005

I already made the thread, check the tavern. Also, armoured animals is a great idea. I thought the drawings were great, but as mascots should be anthropomorphic and stylized in some cartoon manner so that they are recognized more easily.

xeano321
offline
xeano321
3,087 posts
2,095

Whoah... Jeol is a grammar Nazi. *screams*

Nice to see the thread generating some discussion though, even if it's off topic.

Lulzshock
offline
Lulzshock
19 posts
2,680

I don't think we should give up the Blue Elephant yet. Would John care? If so I guess we have to, but if not I think it's perfect to keep it.

It works as a symbol for a great time in the life of AG, quality submissions from a quality creator, and we have all grown to love it.


Sometimes a flag represents History more than the present.

matrixdiscoking
offline
matrixdiscoking
131 posts
310

i have to go with simple two swords crossed behind a sheild that we have seen in so many games we love. i think that is what a AG mascot should be...something we see in every game we play on the site

Reton8
offline
Reton8
3,047 posts
29,005

i have to go with simple two swords crossed behind a sheild that we have seen in so many games we love. i think that is what a AG mascot should be...something we see in every game we play on the site

I was going to say that a a representation of inanimate object (the Armorgames logo) couldn't be a mascot. But after a quick Google search, things can be mascots.

I'm all for the crossed swords and shield (or the new yellow shield with crown ad sword) being the mascot, if it isn't already. Like you said, It is in every game.
matrixdiscoking
offline
matrixdiscoking
131 posts
310

Yeah Reton8 gets me and if the mascot was sushi cat then sushi cat would be everywhere and the website would become sushicat.AG.com

xeano321
offline
xeano321
3,087 posts
2,095

i have to go with simple two swords crossed behind a sheild that we have seen in so many games we love. i think that is what a AG mascot should be


That is not a mascot, that is a symbol. An entirely different subject.

Yeah Reton8 gets me and if the mascot was sushi cat then sushi cat would be everywhere and the website would become sushicat.AG.com


No, Sushi Cat need not be everywhere. I was thinking that maybe Sushi Cat could be associated with presenting site updates, be used as a way for administrators to communicate with users in news and updates, ETC... If the mascot were everywhere, it wouldn't be Armor Games anymore.

We should have a ferret mascot!


All the talk of a ferret mascot isn't really a mascot for AG, but rather a mascot for Ferret, I don't feel that would be very beneficial for the community.
Showing 76-90 of 104