World's Greatest Draft (1 Viewer)

[Uncle Humuna]

the Beatles are #1 in the performer category absolutely...but two American jazz musicians next?Really?taking into consideration the whole world?sorry, I think both those picks are reaches...

I don't think so. I think most of the Musicians/Performers will come from American or Britain.

I agree, but we're talking on a world scale, not on an American scale...I seriously doubt Louis Armstrong or Miles Davis could go to Eastern Europe or Asia and play in front of stadiums...

They both did.

 

[Fennis]

I select as my rebel, Maximilien Robespierre

cool pick. Someone I dont know enough about, and will add it to my list to better understand.

 

[thatguy]

Love and hate the Elvis pick, as it was my hope to land him both the GAD draft and this one. You suck Andy D. You truly, truly suck.

Love the Princess Di pick and I hadn't even considered her.

Both are very worthy celebrities, and I think Elvis is second only to The Beatles as a Musician/Performer, though people pimping Armstrong would disagree.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

the Beatles are #1 in the performer category absolutely...

but two American jazz musicians next?

Really?

taking into consideration the whole world?

sorry, I think both those picks are reaches...

I look at their respective catalogues and have little doubt who I'd put in first place, and it's not the charming boys from Liverpool.(Admittedly, I'm liking the minority here.)

then you are by far judging by your personal view of what music you like instead of what music is most known/beloved on a world scale...

I love the Beatles, but I think a lot of the Beatles magic can be credited to outstanding audio engineering in the studio. Miles Davis is a giant and is not a reach by any reasonable standard.

From the 3rd post illustrating what the category is about.The greatest performers of music in world history. For this category and this category alone I will allow more than one person to be drafted at once; I am thinking specifically of modern rock bands.

 

[Uncle Humuna]

the Beatles are #1 in the performer category absolutely...

but two American jazz musicians next?

Really?

taking into consideration the whole world?

sorry, I think both those picks are reaches...

Jazz is ENORMOUSLY popular around the world, especially in Europe Belgium.

Fixed.I've already made my feelings known in other threads that i don't get jazz.

I can appreciate the superb skill of Armstrong & Davis and I know Uncle H likes them, but to equate the popularity of Jazz with the Beatles is a losing argument.

Playing skill, different story.

No argument here (regarding popularity), and if the category were weighted toward popularity, The Beatles (whom in the past, I was fanatical about - almost to the point of worship, and who I still love and hold in the highest regard) would be the clear-cut #1.It's just my view of what makes a great musician places less weight on popularity.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

My intention was to go BPA for the villain category late in the draft, but when there's a guy on the board responsible for possibly one million deaths in round eight, the value is too great to pass up.

8.02 - Pol Pot - Villain

Wiki

Great, great pick.Evil, evil *******

 

[timschochet]

Brahms is one of those huge names among composers that I know nothing about. I'm sure if you played me a familiar melody I would say, "Oh yeah, so that's Brahms!" But he's not someone I could pick out. There's still so many great names to be taken in this category. Brahms is certainly big though.

 

[thatguy]

So I bump my guy with a lengthy writeup, and still no love. Ya'll suck.

 

[FUBAR]

just got back, pick coming soon...

 

[timschochet]

Brahms is one of those huge names among composers that I know nothing about. I'm sure if you played me a familiar melody I would say, "Oh yeah, so that's Brahms!" But he's not someone I could pick out. There's still so many great names to be taken in this category. Brahms is certainly big though.

I have no doubt that you know Brahms' Lullaby.

That one I know.

 

[Fennis]

So I bump my guy with a lengthy writeup, and still no love. Ya'll suck.

Trying to be drafted as a villain?

 

[Ozymandias]

Brahms is one of those huge names among composers that I know nothing about. I'm sure if you played me a familiar melody I would say, "Oh yeah, so that's Brahms!" But he's not someone I could pick out. There's still so many great names to be taken in this category. Brahms is certainly big though.

In concert halls they usually talk of the 3 Big B's. Bach, Beethoven and Brahms. Of course, you know his lullaby; but his Academic Festival Overture is great, his violin concerto is extremely challenging for the violinist, and his 4 symphonies are part of the standard repertoire for any major orchestra.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Ok, I'm going rebel here. For now. I may move this guy later but I really want him on my team and I'm following the Yankee23fan rule for the draft here in taking him.

I select as my rebel, Maximilien Robespierre

This would also make a fine villain, IMO.

He makes a great villain, but I have the #1 in that category already in Hitler. I still may move Hitler to leader and shuffle some other stuff. Right now my goal is to get "my" guys and deal with positions later.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

If this is wrong I will delete this post but as Villain's go(Me Judging the category)I am looking for sick and twisted over body count and even body count shall be looked at rated over population of the area or world. Killing 50 people out of 100 is far better body count than 1 million out of 1 billion. I love the points Larry is making they are solid take heed all.

This is intriguing.So if I take the Butcher of Luxembourg because he killed 3 people it's a better pick than Mao?Body count has to be a significant factor, if not the defining one.How do you argue that someone is more villainous than Stalin & Hitler when their body counts are so extraordinary?Pol Pot has a better percentage body count, but gut feel says he ranks behind the other 2.I've got someone in mind for this category, but am not sure how it be received under this criteria.

 

[Uncle Humuna]

So I bump my guy with a lengthy writeup, and still no love. Ya'll suck.

Maxwell is definitley top-10 in the composer category, but I'd only put him top-50 as a musician.

 

[FUBAR]

forget the write-up, way too much to say on this one. So links instead:

Pope John Paul II Leader

Move Attilla the Hun to villain.

ETA: I might move him to celebrity, but leader for now.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

I select as my rebel, Maximilien Robespierre

cool pick. Someone I dont know enough about, and will add it to my list to better understand.

He is the physical embodiment of everything that can go wrong with a democratic revolution. He was a man of the people that left his judgship because he couldn't order an execution. He fought against the tyranny and monarchy of the crown and instead favored a more liberal and free society. And once he got into a position to make those goals a reality, he became worse then the totalitarian monarchy. He was the perfect example of a revolutionary gone wrong.He is also the foreign proof of just how wrong Thomas Jefferson and his world view was. Jefferson truly thought that an alliance with France was perfect for this country because our cousins there were starting their own democratic revolution. We could the beacon that leads France, who then is the country that changes the world. Jefferson clung to that vision so much that he almost destroyed this country with his terrible foreign policy. And there was consistently one man who stood up to him. John Adams.

But, back to Robespierre - here is everything that can go wrong in revolution. How great were our founders who so easily could have fallen into the same traps he did? It all started as a movement for the rights of the people. It ended with bloody executions across that made the streets run red.

 

[Uncle Humuna]

If this is wrong I will delete this post but as Villain's go(Me Judging the category)I am looking for sick and twisted over body count and even body count shall be looked at rated over population of the area or world. Killing 50 people out of 100 is far better body count than 1 million out of 1 billion. I love the points Larry is making they are solid take heed all.

This is intriguing.So if I take the Butcher of Luxembourg because he killed 3 people it's a better pick than Mao?Body count has to be a significant factor, if not the defining one.How do you argue that someone is more villainous than Stalin & Hitler when their body counts are so extraordinary?Pol Pot has a better percentage body count, but gut feel says he ranks behind the other 2.I've got someone in mind for this category, but am not sure how it be received under this criteria.

I could see why body count could be arbitrary.In a way, it's just a measure of success, which is fairly independent of one's evil nature or intent.

 

[mad sweeney]

Larry. You're using historical context to defend Luther while ignoring it with regard to villain. Hitler and such may not be empiracally more evil than atilla but the difference between social expectancy or standards are much higher now than then. Were supposed to be more civilzed than barbarous now. So these modern expectations make what might have been normal into something abominable. Then of course there are people who go beyond the norm of villainry in any era like Mengele.

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

Remember, I am NOT slotting either Mao or Lenin as "villians". Mao is a "Leader" like it or not, and Lenin is a "rebel".

As I said before, Mao led his people through a the first real guerilla war against the Japanese in the 30s and then a civil war against Nationalist Chinese forces in the 40s. He transformed a rural people into an industrial one. He led his forces (not directly) against UN forces in Korea and damn near put US butts in the ocean at Pusan. (He certainly killed a lot of Marines at the Chosin Resevoir).

Lenin rebelled against the oppressive Czarist regime and serfdom of the Russian peasant. His Revolution threatened to spread around the world., and did go to China, Eastern Europe, Cuba and elsewhere. Almost India, Greece and Italy. Y'all forget how many Leninist there were in America during the Depression.

These guys may have broken some eggs, but you need to break eggs to make an omelet.

Preach Comrade DC ThunderLike I expalined the other day, Lenin walked into a similar situation to Hitler.

A country in utter ruin.

There is no suggestion at all that he wanted to wipe out races, in fact he made many pro Jewish speeches at a time when it was not popular to do so.

Lenein was a true believer in uniting the Proletariat and however misguided some may think his policies were, he had honest intentions. As DC Thunder said, eggs have to be broken to make omelettes

Only the most ignorant and downtrodden people can believe the lies and slander that are spread about the Jews. … It is not the Jews who are the enemies of the working people. The enemies of the workers are the capitalists of all countries. Among the Jews there are working people, and they form the majority. They are our brothers, who, like us, are oppressed by capital; they are our comrades in the struggle for socialism. Among the Jews there are kulaks, exploiters and capitalists, just as there are among the Russians, and among people of all nations… Rich Jews, like rich Russians, and the rich in all countries, are in alliance to oppress, crush, rob and disunite the workers

 

[higgins]

So I bump my guy with a lengthy writeup, and still no love. Ya'll suck.

That was going to be my next pick -- so it's you who suck...

 

[FUBAR]

Is it a sign of insecurity when we if noone comments on our pick?

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Is it a sign of insecurity when we if noone comments on our pick?

John Paul II was one of the top guys I was going to look to slot in the religious category. He's a solid pick that does belong to be here.

 

[thatguy]

So I bump my guy with a lengthy writeup, and still no love. Ya'll suck.

That was going to be my next pick -- so it's you who suck...

That's more like it.

 

[Uncle Humuna]

the Beatles are #1 in the performer category absolutely...but two American jazz musicians next?Really?taking into consideration the whole world?sorry, I think both those picks are reaches...

I look at their respective catalogues and have little doubt who I'd put in first place, and it's not the charming boys from Liverpool.(Admittedly, I'm liking the minority here.)

then you are by far judging by your personal view of what music you like instead of what music is most known/beloved on a world scale...

I love the Beatles, but I think a lot of the Beatles magic can be credited to outstanding audio engineering in the studio. Miles Davis is a giant and is not a reach by any reasonable standard.

um...all of that audio engineering in the studio was actually done by the Beatles themselves... (well... sorta)

Actually, while they had many ideas of what they wanted to do,George Martin and Geoff Emerick were the ones who actually made them a reality and GM was 'the man behind the curtain'.

 

[larry_boy_44]

forget the write-up, way too much to say on this one. So links instead:

Pope John Paul II Leader

Move Attilla the Hun to villain.

ETA: I might move him to celebrity, but leader for now.

I'm not sure the pope really qualifies as a "leader" for this... at least not modern popes (popes from the middle ages where they had standing armies have a much better argument)

 

[larry_boy_44]

Larry. You're using historical context to defend Luther while ignoring it with regard to villain. Hitler and such may not be empiracally more evil than atilla but the difference between social expectancy or standards are much higher now than then. Were supposed to be more civilzed than barbarous now. So these modern expectations make what might have been normal into something abominable. Then of course there are people who go beyond the norm of villainry in any era like Mengele.

but we aren't more civilized...I'm not using historical context to justify Luther, I'm using the natural crappiness that all humanity shows in everything to justify Luther's bad because of the huge amount of good that he did...if Luther wouldn't have done the good that he did, I wouldn't have an issue with saying he was a bad person, but he did do a lot of good, and it, at minimum, evens out the bad...In Luther's case I'm more saying all people are crappy and his good outweighs his bad...

 

[Arsenal of Doom]

This is another pick I've waiting on patiently, as I have him right up near the top of my Intellectual list. He's made a both a broad contribution history and also a very specific contribution to one area of political thought and discussion. He's also a rare case of an intellectual from antiquity who's writings are still relevant to his area of influence in an un-synthesized form.

Thucydides - Intellectual

Thucydides (c. 460 B.C. – c. 395 B.C.) (Greek Θουκυδίδης, Thoukydídēs) was a Greek historian and author of the History of the Peloponnesian War, which recounts the 5th century B.C. war between Sparta and Athens to the year 411 B.C. Thucydides has been dubbed the father of "scientific history" due to his strict standards of evidence-gathering and analysis in terms of cause and effect without reference to intervention by the gods, as outlined in his introduction to his work.[1]

He has also been called the father of the school of political realism, which views the relations between nations as based on might rather than right.[2] His classical text is still studied at advanced military colleges worldwide, and the Melian dialogue remains a seminal work of international relations theory.

More generally, Thucydides showed an interest in developing an understanding of human nature to explain behaviour in such crises as plague, genocide (as practised against the Melians), and civil war.

"... the first page of Thucydides is, in my opinion, the commencement of real history. All preceding narrations are so intermixed with fable, that philosophers ought to abandon them, to the embellishments of poets and orators. " - xxxxxxx

Link to a good article on the modern influence of Thucydides

Thucydides, the Ancient Greek historian of the fifth century B.C., is not only the father of scientific history, but also of political "realism," the school of thought which posits that interstate relations are based on might rather than right. Through his study of the Peloponnesian War, a destructive war which began in 431 B.C. among Greek city-states, Thucydides observed that the strategic interaction of states followed a discernible and recurrent pattern. According to him, within a given system of states, a certain hierarchy among the states determined the pattern of their relations. Therefore, he claimed that while a change in the hierarchy of weaker states did not ultimatley affect a given system, a disturbance in the order of stronger states would decisively upset the stability of the system. As Thucydides said, the Peloponnesian War was the result of a systematic change, brought about by the increasing power of the Athenian city-state, which tried to exceed the power of the city-state of Sparta. "What made the war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused Sparta," Thucydides wrote in order to illustrate the resulting systematic change; that is, "a change in the hierarchy or control of the international political system."

...

The impact of Thucydides' work upon scholars of the Cold War period consists evidence for the relevance of his realist theory in today's world. In fact, while his Peloponnesian War is chronologically distant from the present, Thucydides' influence upon realist scholars in the post-1945 period, and in turn upon American diplomacy, is direct. Specifically, the foundations of American diplomacy during the Cold War with regard to the struggle between the two superpowers and the ethical consequences or problems posed for smaller states caught in the vortex of bipolar competition are derived from his work.

...

Finally, the end of the Cold War requires a re-examination of Thucydidean scholarship and the theories of interstate behaviour which are derived from his work. Furthermore, if there is to be a new world order, the United States must recognize that the dynamics of interstate relations are constantly fluctuating. While there may be certain constants in the behaviour of states and individuals, the possibilities for interaction, cooperation, and conflict are always constant, and often present themselves in new and previously unknown forms. In this case, the study of history is only a guide, not a prescription. If the work of Thucydides is considered in these terms, it will truly be considered a possession for all time, just as the author had intended.

 

[larry_boy_44]

am I up?

 

[FUBAR]

forget the write-up, way too much to say on this one. So links instead:

Pope John Paul II Leader

Move Attilla the Hun to villain.

ETA: I might move him to celebrity, but leader for now.

I'm not sure the pope really qualifies as a "leader" for this... at least not modern popes (popes from the middle ages where they had standing armies have a much better argument)

Since 1929, they do.Vatican City /ˈvætɪkən ˈsɪti/ (help·info), officially the State of the Vatican City (Italian: Stato della Città del Vaticano), is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome, the capital city of Italy. At approximately 44 hectares (110 acres), and with a population of around 900, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area.

The Pope is ex officio head of state and head of government of Vatican City, functions dependent on his primordial function as the bishop of the Archdiocese of Rome. The term Holy See refers not to the Vatican state but to the Pope's spiritual and pastoral governance, largely exercised through the Roman Curia. His official title with regard to Vatican City is Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City.

The papacy is a non-hereditary, elective monarchy, chosen by the College of Cardinals. The Pope is also a monarch, meaning he has total legislative, executive and judicial power over Vatican City. The Pope is elected for a life term in conclave by cardinals under the age of 80.

 

[larry_boy_44]

forget the write-up, way too much to say on this one. So links instead:

Pope John Paul II Leader

Move Attilla the Hun to villain.

ETA: I might move him to celebrity, but leader for now.

I'm not sure the pope really qualifies as a "leader" for this... at least not modern popes (popes from the middle ages where they had standing armies have a much better argument)

Since 1929, they do.Vatican City /ˈvætɪkən ˈsɪti/ (help·info), officially the State of the Vatican City (Italian: Stato della Città del Vaticano), is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome, the capital city of Italy. At approximately 44 hectares (110 acres), and with a population of around 900, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area.

The Pope is ex officio head of state and head of government of Vatican City, functions dependent on his primordial function as the bishop of the Archdiocese of Rome. The term Holy See refers not to the Vatican state but to the Pope's spiritual and pastoral governance, largely exercised through the Roman Curia. His official title with regard to Vatican City is Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City.

The papacy is a non-hereditary, elective monarchy, chosen by the College of Cardinals. The Pope is also a monarch, meaning he has total legislative, executive and judicial power over Vatican City. The Pope is elected for a life term in conclave by cardinals under the age of 80.

oh COME ON!

I hope the leader judge rips this pick to shreds, because leading Vatican City does NOT make you a great head of state no matter what else you do...

 

[higgins]

LB44 is taking too long for this pick. As draft moderator, I penalize LB44 by mandating that his 1.02 pick of 'Jesus' be changed to 'Jesus with an ear infection and missing one claw'. Judgers should judge accordingly...

 

[FUBAR]

forget the write-up, way too much to say on this one. So links instead:

Pope John Paul II Leader

Move Attilla the Hun to villain.

ETA: I might move him to celebrity, but leader for now.

I'm not sure the pope really qualifies as a "leader" for this... at least not modern popes (popes from the middle ages where they had standing armies have a much better argument)

Since 1929, they do.Vatican City /ˈvætɪkən ˈsɪti/ (help·info), officially the State of the Vatican City (Italian: Stato della Città del Vaticano), is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome, the capital city of Italy. At approximately 44 hectares (110 acres), and with a population of around 900, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area.

The Pope is ex officio head of state and head of government of Vatican City, functions dependent on his primordial function as the bishop of the Archdiocese of Rome. The term Holy See refers not to the Vatican state but to the Pope's spiritual and pastoral governance, largely exercised through the Roman Curia. His official title with regard to Vatican City is Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City.

The papacy is a non-hereditary, elective monarchy, chosen by the College of Cardinals. The Pope is also a monarch, meaning he has total legislative, executive and judicial power over Vatican City. The Pope is elected for a life term in conclave by cardinals under the age of 80.

oh COME ON!

I hope the leader judge rips this pick to shreds, because leading Vatican City does NOT make you a great head of state no matter what else you do...

When the leader of the country is the Pope, being that person could (and in this case does) make you a great head of state. Besides, we aren't judging on "head of state", the category is LEADER. Are you really going to argue that the Pope isn't a strong LEADER? I will probably change him to celebrity anyway, he was the most recognized person worldwide for 27 years.

 

[larry_boy_44]

I have a science question...

can someone who knows a lot about science agree to answer my question that maybe should be very basic, but is very very not basic with a basic answer?

lol

(read: I need a ruling on someone's qualification to be a scientist)

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

If this is wrong I will delete this post but as Villain's go(Me Judging the category)I am looking for sick and twisted over body count and even body count shall be looked at rated over population of the area or world. Killing 50 people out of 100 is far better body count than 1 million out of 1 billion. I love the points Larry is making they are solid take heed all.

This is intriguing.So if I take the Butcher of Luxembourg because he killed 3 people it's a better pick than Mao?

Body count has to be a significant factor, if not the defining one.

How do you argue that someone is more villainous than Stalin & Hitler when their body counts are so extraordinary?

Pol Pot has a better percentage body count, but gut feel says he ranks behind the other 2.

I've got someone in mind for this category, but am not sure how it be received under this criteria.

I could see why body count could be arbitrary.In a way, it's just a measure of success, which is fairly independent of one's evil nature or intent.

I can see that if it's in the hundreds or the thousands, but when it's in the millions it stands up and begs to be noticed.I'm sure some of the most evil people in the world killed only 1 person or some may not have killed anybody, but try justifying that persons villainy.

Body count can't be explained away.

 

[Ozymandias]

forget the write-up, way too much to say on this one. So links instead:

Pope John Paul II Leader

Move Attilla the Hun to villain.

ETA: I might move him to celebrity, but leader for now.

I'm not sure the pope really qualifies as a "leader" for this... at least not modern popes (popes from the middle ages where they had standing armies have a much better argument)

Since 1929, they do.Vatican City /ˈvætɪkən ˈsɪti/ (help·info), officially the State of the Vatican City (Italian: Stato della Città del Vaticano), is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome, the capital city of Italy. At approximately 44 hectares (110 acres), and with a population of around 900, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area.

The Pope is ex officio head of state and head of government of Vatican City, functions dependent on his primordial function as the bishop of the Archdiocese of Rome. The term Holy See refers not to the Vatican state but to the Pope's spiritual and pastoral governance, largely exercised through the Roman Curia. His official title with regard to Vatican City is Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City.

The papacy is a non-hereditary, elective monarchy, chosen by the College of Cardinals. The Pope is also a monarch, meaning he has total legislative, executive and judicial power over Vatican City. The Pope is elected for a life term in conclave by cardinals under the age of 80.

oh COME ON!

I hope the leader judge rips this pick to shreds, because leading Vatican City does NOT make you a great head of state no matter what else you do...

You've really got to control your emotions, Larry. You argue for your picks ad nauseum, and now you're hoping that other's picks will be "ripped to shreds".Pope Paul is arguably someone who helped bring down Communism. He encouraged the Poles in their defiance of the Soviets, and helped bring about the end of that crime against humanity known as Communism. Take some Valium.

 

[larry_boy_44]

forget the write-up, way too much to say on this one. So links instead:

Pope John Paul II Leader

Move Attilla the Hun to villain.

ETA: I might move him to celebrity, but leader for now.

I'm not sure the pope really qualifies as a "leader" for this... at least not modern popes (popes from the middle ages where they had standing armies have a much better argument)

Since 1929, they do.Vatican City /ˈvætɪkən ˈsɪti/ (help·info), officially the State of the Vatican City (Italian: Stato della Città del Vaticano), is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome, the capital city of Italy. At approximately 44 hectares (110 acres), and with a population of around 900, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area.

The Pope is ex officio head of state and head of government of Vatican City, functions dependent on his primordial function as the bishop of the Archdiocese of Rome. The term Holy See refers not to the Vatican state but to the Pope's spiritual and pastoral governance, largely exercised through the Roman Curia. His official title with regard to Vatican City is Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City.

The papacy is a non-hereditary, elective monarchy, chosen by the College of Cardinals. The Pope is also a monarch, meaning he has total legislative, executive and judicial power over Vatican City. The Pope is elected for a life term in conclave by cardinals under the age of 80.

oh COME ON!

I hope the leader judge rips this pick to shreds, because leading Vatican City does NOT make you a great head of state no matter what else you do...

You've really got to control your emotions, Larry. You argue for your picks ad nauseum, and now you're hoping that other's picks will be "ripped to shreds".Pope Paul is arguably someone who helped bring down Communism. He encouraged the Poles in their defiance of the Soviets, and helped bring about the end of that crime against humanity known as Communism. Take some Valium.

I like the pick of Pope John Paul II... He was a great man who did many great things...But he doesn't qualify as a great head of state by what we used to define head of state...

 

[Big Rocks]

I have a science question...can someone who knows a lot about science agree to answer my question that maybe should be very basic, but is very very not basic with a basic answer?lol(read: I need a ruling on someone's qualification to be a scientist)

I can help if needed. I can't tell you if he's a good pick since I'm the category judge, but I can help determine whether he would fit into the category or not.Sending PM...

 

[FUBAR]

forget the write-up, way too much to say on this one. So links instead:

Pope John Paul II Leader

Move Attilla the Hun to villain.

ETA: I might move him to celebrity, but leader for now.

I'm not sure the pope really qualifies as a "leader" for this... at least not modern popes (popes from the middle ages where they had standing armies have a much better argument)

Since 1929, they do.Vatican City /ˈvætɪkən ˈsɪti/ (help·info), officially the State of the Vatican City (Italian: Stato della Città del Vaticano), is a landlocked sovereign city-state whose territory consists of a walled enclave within the city of Rome, the capital city of Italy. At approximately 44 hectares (110 acres), and with a population of around 900, it is the smallest country in the world by both population and area.

The Pope is ex officio head of state and head of government of Vatican City, functions dependent on his primordial function as the bishop of the Archdiocese of Rome. The term Holy See refers not to the Vatican state but to the Pope's spiritual and pastoral governance, largely exercised through the Roman Curia. His official title with regard to Vatican City is Sovereign of the State of the Vatican City.

The papacy is a non-hereditary, elective monarchy, chosen by the College of Cardinals. The Pope is also a monarch, meaning he has total legislative, executive and judicial power over Vatican City. The Pope is elected for a life term in conclave by cardinals under the age of 80.

oh COME ON!

I hope the leader judge rips this pick to shreds, because leading Vatican City does NOT make you a great head of state no matter what else you do...

You've really got to control your emotions, Larry. You argue for your picks ad nauseum, and now you're hoping that other's picks will be "ripped to shreds".Pope Paul is arguably someone who helped bring down Communism. He encouraged the Poles in their defiance of the Soviets, and helped bring about the end of that crime against humanity known as Communism. Take some Valium.

arguably?XXXXXX once said ‘The collapse of the Iron Curtain would have been impossible without John Paul II’.

 

[FUBAR]

I like the pick of Pope John Paul II... He was a great man who did many great things...

But he doesn't qualify as a great head of state by what we used to define head of state...

Great LEADER doesn't require that his state be especially strong.

 

[Ozymandias]

arguably?

XXXXXX once said ‘The collapse of the Iron Curtain would have been impossible without John Paul II’.

I believe he was arguing that.

 

[larry_boy_44]

I like the pick of Pope John Paul II... He was a great man who did many great things...

But he doesn't qualify as a great head of state by what we used to define head of state...

Great LEADER doesn't require that his state be especially strong.

1. Leaders This would be the heads of state, whether king, prime minister, dictator, president, etc. The men (and women) who run countries.

Vatican City is only a "country" because all land has to be identified as part of a country and they don't want it to be part of Italy...choosing John Paul II as a head of state is taking advantage of an unintended technicality at best...

 

[John Maddens Lunchbox]

Somehwere Mario Kart is fuming at Larrys arguing when he could be picking.

Larry if you are waiting/dithering/debating why not let Mario pick his 2 then you can make both of yours?

 

[larry_boy_44]

8.19 Muhammad ibn Musa Khwarizmi, scientist

Muhammad ibn Musa Khwarizmi (محمد بن موسى ابو جعفر الخوارزمي‎ - Muḥammad bin Mūsā Abū Ǧaʿfar al-Ḫawārazmī) was a Persian mathematician, astronomer and geographer. He was born around 780, maybe in Khwārizm, in Uzbekistan, which was then part of the native Iranian-Khwarizmian Afrigid dynasty[6], and died around 850. He worked most of his life as a scholar in the House of Wisdom in Baghdad.His Algebra, written around 820, was the first book on the systematic solution of linear and quadratic equations. Consequently he is considered by many to be the father of algebra, a title some scholars assign to xxxxxxxxxxxxx. In the twelfth century, Latin translations of his Arithmetic, which explained Arabic numerals, introduced decimal positional number system to the Western world. He was among the first to use zero as a place holder in positional base notation. The word algorithm derives from his name. He revised and updated Ptolemy's Geography as well as writing several works on astronomy and astrology.His contributions not only made a great impact on mathematics, but on language as well. The word algebra is derived from al-jabr, one of the two operations used to solve quadratic equations, as described in his book.

- invented algebra- introduced "decimal positional number system" to the Western world- one of the first to use zero as a placeholder in positional based notation- "algorithm" is devised from his names- also did great work in geography, astronomy, and language

 

[FUBAR]

I like the pick of Pope John Paul II... He was a great man who did many great things...

But he doesn't qualify as a great head of state by what we used to define head of state...

Great LEADER doesn't require that his state be especially strong.

1. Leaders This would be the heads of state, whether king, prime minister, dictator, president, etc. The men (and women) who run countries.

Vatican City is only a "country" because all land has to be identified as part of a country and they don't want it to be part of Italy...choosing John Paul II as a head of state is taking advantage of an unintended technicality at best...

He qualifies for the category, period. How the judge evaluates his category is up to him once a person qualifies.

 

[flysack]

He is the physical embodiment of everything that can go wrong with a democratic revolution. He was a man of the people that left his judgship because he couldn't order an execution. He fought against the tyranny and monarchy of the crown and instead favored a more liberal and free society. And once he got into a position to make those goals a reality, he became worse then the totalitarian monarchy. He was the perfect example of a revolutionary gone wrong.

He is also the foreign proof of just how wrong Thomas Jefferson and his world view was. Jefferson truly thought that an alliance with France was perfect for this country because our cousins there were starting their own democratic revolution. We could the beacon that leads France, who then is the country that changes the world. Jefferson clung to that vision so much that he almost destroyed this country with his terrible foreign policy. And there was consistently one man who stood up to him. John Adams.

But, back to Robespierre - here is everything that can go wrong in revolution. How great were our founders who so easily could have fallen into the same traps he did? It all started as a movement for the rights of the people. It ended with bloody executions across that made the streets run red.

This is one of the silliest digressions I've read. I can only guess it's a former argument you lost, and can't let go.

 

[flysack]

This is another pick I've waiting on patiently, as I have him right up near the top of my Intellectual list. He's made a both a broad contribution history and also a very specific contribution to one area of political thought and discussion. He's also a rare case of an intellectual from antiquity who's writings are still relevant to his area of influence in an un-synthesized form.

Thucydides - Intellectual

Thucydides (c. 460 B.C. – c. 395 B.C.) (Greek Θουκυδίδης, Thoukydídēs) was a Greek historian and author of the History of the Peloponnesian War, which recounts the 5th century B.C. war between Sparta and Athens to the year 411 B.C. Thucydides has been dubbed the father of "scientific history" due to his strict standards of evidence-gathering and analysis in terms of cause and effect without reference to intervention by the gods, as outlined in his introduction to his work.[1]

He has also been called the father of the school of political realism, which views the relations between nations as based on might rather than right.[2] His classical text is still studied at advanced military colleges worldwide, and the Melian dialogue remains a seminal work of international relations theory.

More generally, Thucydides showed an interest in developing an understanding of human nature to explain behaviour in such crises as plague, genocide (as practised against the Melians), and civil war.

"... the first page of Thucydides is, in my opinion, the commencement of real history. All preceding narrations are so intermixed with fable, that philosophers ought to abandon them, to the embellishments of poets and orators. " - xxxxxxx

Link to a good article on the modern influence of Thucydides

Thucydides, the Ancient Greek historian of the fifth century B.C., is not only the father of scientific history, but also of political "realism," the school of thought which posits that interstate relations are based on might rather than right. Through his study of the Peloponnesian War, a destructive war which began in 431 B.C. among Greek city-states, Thucydides observed that the strategic interaction of states followed a discernible and recurrent pattern. According to him, within a given system of states, a certain hierarchy among the states determined the pattern of their relations. Therefore, he claimed that while a change in the hierarchy of weaker states did not ultimatley affect a given system, a disturbance in the order of stronger states would decisively upset the stability of the system. As Thucydides said, the Peloponnesian War was the result of a systematic change, brought about by the increasing power of the Athenian city-state, which tried to exceed the power of the city-state of Sparta. "What made the war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused Sparta," Thucydides wrote in order to illustrate the resulting systematic change; that is, "a change in the hierarchy or control of the international political system."

...

The impact of Thucydides' work upon scholars of the Cold War period consists evidence for the relevance of his realist theory in today's world. In fact, while his Peloponnesian War is chronologically distant from the present, Thucydides' influence upon realist scholars in the post-1945 period, and in turn upon American diplomacy, is direct. Specifically, the foundations of American diplomacy during the Cold War with regard to the struggle between the two superpowers and the ethical consequences or problems posed for smaller states caught in the vortex of bipolar competition are derived from his work.

...

Finally, the end of the Cold War requires a re-examination of Thucydidean scholarship and the theories of interstate behaviour which are derived from his work. Furthermore, if there is to be a new world order, the United States must recognize that the dynamics of interstate relations are constantly fluctuating. While there may be certain constants in the behaviour of states and individuals, the possibilities for interaction, cooperation, and conflict are always constant, and often present themselves in new and previously unknown forms. In this case, the study of history is only a guide, not a prescription. If the work of Thucydides is considered in these terms, it will truly be considered a possession for all time, just as the author had intended.

AOD continues to rock this draft.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

He is the physical embodiment of everything that can go wrong with a democratic revolution. He was a man of the people that left his judgship because he couldn't order an execution. He fought against the tyranny and monarchy of the crown and instead favored a more liberal and free society. And once he got into a position to make those goals a reality, he became worse then the totalitarian monarchy. He was the perfect example of a revolutionary gone wrong.

He is also the foreign proof of just how wrong Thomas Jefferson and his world view was. Jefferson truly thought that an alliance with France was perfect for this country because our cousins there were starting their own democratic revolution. We could the beacon that leads France, who then is the country that changes the world. Jefferson clung to that vision so much that he almost destroyed this country with his terrible foreign policy. And there was consistently one man who stood up to him. John Adams.

But, back to Robespierre - here is everything that can go wrong in revolution. How great were our founders who so easily could have fallen into the same traps he did? It all started as a movement for the rights of the people. It ended with bloody executions across that made the streets run red.

This is one of the silliest digressions I've read. I can only guess it's a former argument you lost, and can't let go.

It's historical fact.

 

[flysack]

I like the pick of Pope John Paul II... He was a great man who did many great things...

But he doesn't qualify as a great head of state by what we used to define head of state...

Great LEADER doesn't require that his state be especially strong.

1. Leaders This would be the heads of state, whether king, prime minister, dictator, president, etc. The men (and women) who run countries.

Vatican City is only a "country" because all land has to be identified as part of a country and they don't want it to be part of Italy...choosing John Paul II as a head of state is taking advantage of an unintended technicality at best...

He qualifies for the category, period. How the judge evaluates his category is up to him once a person qualifies.

He absolutely qualifies as a leader. (I wrote more, but deleted it because I said I wouldn't comment during the draft)

 

[flysack]

Larry, where did you pull that quote defining leaders?

Is it from this draft or some foreign source?