PLAYERS TASKS PRAXIS TEAMS EVENTS
Username:Password:
New player? Sign Up Here
Gadget
Level 1: 10 points
Alltime Score: 3427 points
Last Logged In: June 24th, 2009
TEAM: BRCØ

Gadget

Freak
Burner
Volunteer
Commissioner
Problem Solver
Scapegoat
Idealist
Father
Me


90 degree cam
Fronts
Garth Brooks
Wrong Holiday 3
BRC0 Proof Sheet
Backs
time_capsule2.jpg
the knife
Ja Son
Hair Mail

Completed Tasks


Friends


Tasks Created


Terms

(none yet)

Texts

posted by Gadget on March 28th, 2007 2:15 PM

Do you have some photos of the taped off areas?

posted by Gadget on March 20th, 2007 11:34 PM

Ditto to what star5 said. It's a cool font, but it's not your own alphabet.

posted by Gadget on March 19th, 2007 12:06 AM

Cracks me up!

posted by Gadget on January 21st, 2007 1:14 AM

Arrr! No pirates to speak of?

posted by Gadget on October 25th, 2006 2:24 AM

I've had quite a few arguments with myself about the "legal channel" portion of this task submission. Here's my reasoning.

If you accept the common belief that defacing US currency is illegal, then my defacement of US currency was, in fact, illegal. On the other hand, a legal channel for defacing US currency is to do it in such a way that the bills are not rendered unusable. Given that the defacement is not readily visible to the naked eye and that I was able to spend the bills, I think it's safe to say that they have not been rendered unusable. As a result, one could conclude that the act of defacement was illegal yet it was performed through a legal channel. The problem is, if I go with this argument, then I start to question whether this defacement is really illegal at all. That's a slippery slope as I start to question if anything can be both illegal and legal at the same time.

My impression is that this task is really about finding creative ways to ride, and sometimes cross, the fine line between what's legal and what isn't. I feel that I accomplished that completely. None-the-less, I value your criticism, waterdragon, so keep it coming if you still disagree.