Anarchs vs Camarilla
Anarchs vs Camarilla
Hello everyone, i'm feeling up for a little political debating.
Throughout the bloodlines game you meet various representatives of both the camarilla and anarch sects, camarilla being Strauss, Bertram Tung, Gary and Lacroix(although he has his own agenda) and anarchs being Nines, Damsel, Isaac and Jack.
These characters all tell you their points of view on the camarilla and the anarchs and in the end you can (naturally) decide to join the camarilla or the anarchs (or neither).
So what i want to know is basically who do you think is right and why?
I am personally going to have to go with the camarilla because they know what they are doing, the anarchs keep talking about how wrong the camarilla is but i never hear them saying anything about how they would handle things plus the camarilla are leading the jyhad against the Sabbat (of course the anarchs also do their bit but still)
Throughout the bloodlines game you meet various representatives of both the camarilla and anarch sects, camarilla being Strauss, Bertram Tung, Gary and Lacroix(although he has his own agenda) and anarchs being Nines, Damsel, Isaac and Jack.
These characters all tell you their points of view on the camarilla and the anarchs and in the end you can (naturally) decide to join the camarilla or the anarchs (or neither).
So what i want to know is basically who do you think is right and why?
I am personally going to have to go with the camarilla because they know what they are doing, the anarchs keep talking about how wrong the camarilla is but i never hear them saying anything about how they would handle things plus the camarilla are leading the jyhad against the Sabbat (of course the anarchs also do their bit but still)
I'm so serious it's comical!
Sabbat blood y sabbat
Everybody fights the Sabbat.
The Anarchs are scruffier than the Camarilla, but have the positive side of not wanting to be told what to do beyond upholding the masquerade. there is no grand-plan only survival. the cams are too political and that exposes them to the likes of LaCroix seizing power. if there is no centralsied power, it cannot be seized.
Nines is fundamentally one of the good guys - even Strauss isn't perfect and doesn't give you free training. you can earn a reward, but nothing out of generosity.
I go with the Anarchs every time.
Everybody fights the Sabbat.
The Anarchs are scruffier than the Camarilla, but have the positive side of not wanting to be told what to do beyond upholding the masquerade. there is no grand-plan only survival. the cams are too political and that exposes them to the likes of LaCroix seizing power. if there is no centralsied power, it cannot be seized.
Nines is fundamentally one of the good guys - even Strauss isn't perfect and doesn't give you free training. you can earn a reward, but nothing out of generosity.
I go with the Anarchs every time.
"All the world's a stage and all the men and women merely players"
But the camarilla have the power that is needed to uphold the masquerade, the princes control everything in a city so that if some poor schmuck with a video-camera accidentally tapes something he's not supposed to they can step in and have him removed before he gives it to the press or something
The anarchs just aren't organized well enough for that.
That and i have yet to see a good example of the camarilla's socalled "dictatorial" use of power.
The anarchs just aren't organized well enough for that.
That and i have yet to see a good example of the camarilla's socalled "dictatorial" use of power.
I'm so serious it's comical!
- Anaximander
- Posts: 367
- Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 4:47 pm
- Location: The City of Sin
- Contact:
I always choose neither. The Camarilla's attitude that everyone must obey their laws or suffer the consequences, in accordance, is more than I can stand. I value individualism and free choice.
The Anarchs, then, might seem the natural choice for me. I never join them either. For all their ranting about how much they hate the Camarilla, it seems to me that the political differences between the two groups are superficial at best. After speaking to the Anarch leaders, it sounds to me like their philosophy boils down to this: "We understand the need for the masquerade, and we follow most of the same rules as the Camarilla. But we don't like them. They're mean and icky, and they try to tell us what to do."
I would rather just go my own way, and to hell with all of them.
The Anarchs, then, might seem the natural choice for me. I never join them either. For all their ranting about how much they hate the Camarilla, it seems to me that the political differences between the two groups are superficial at best. After speaking to the Anarch leaders, it sounds to me like their philosophy boils down to this: "We understand the need for the masquerade, and we follow most of the same rules as the Camarilla. But we don't like them. They're mean and icky, and they try to tell us what to do."
I would rather just go my own way, and to hell with all of them.
".... for I had seen the Human face of the Vampires, and now I beheld the monstrousness of these Men..."
- pennypincher
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:21 pm
- Location: Australia! WOO!
- Contact:
Cammerilla ANY day.
The anarchs talk a good fight, but when it comes down to it, even if they totaly disposed of the Cammerilla, they'd just move onto the next power figure and keep going till they eventualy turned inwards like a big, stupid snake eating it's own tail and disolved into fracture, violent chaos...
Heck, who am I kidding? They are ALREADY fractured, violent chaos.
The Cammerillas laws Just Make Sense!! Don't make more vampires unless we know all about it. Theres already too many of us and we don't like having to fight each other over food and power, so lets keep ourselves to the minimum.
Don't just waltz in, tell us your here! With all our enemies abound, if you just walk in and take up shop, how are we meant to know your not one of them? Come to the prince, tell him who you are and why your here!
Show a little respect to people when your on their turf. You wouldn't walk into someone elses house, march up to their fridge, take all the food, turn on all the air conditoners and then walk out... So don't do it to us and we wont do it to you.
Don't kill each other. What are you, stupid? It's dumb, just don't do it!
If you make a new vampire, you gotta train it. If it's running around stuffing up and getting caught, it's YOUR fault. Pick your childe well and keep an eye on them till they are ready.
Masquerade, masquerade, masquerade. Don't tell folks your a vampire and people wont come around to your house wanting to burn you alive... Simple as that really.
And YES, they do enforce these laws roughly, but frankly, when it's the future of your entier race, you'd be pretty firm on them as well.
The anarchs talk a good fight, but when it comes down to it, even if they totaly disposed of the Cammerilla, they'd just move onto the next power figure and keep going till they eventualy turned inwards like a big, stupid snake eating it's own tail and disolved into fracture, violent chaos...
Heck, who am I kidding? They are ALREADY fractured, violent chaos.
The Cammerillas laws Just Make Sense!! Don't make more vampires unless we know all about it. Theres already too many of us and we don't like having to fight each other over food and power, so lets keep ourselves to the minimum.
Don't just waltz in, tell us your here! With all our enemies abound, if you just walk in and take up shop, how are we meant to know your not one of them? Come to the prince, tell him who you are and why your here!
Show a little respect to people when your on their turf. You wouldn't walk into someone elses house, march up to their fridge, take all the food, turn on all the air conditoners and then walk out... So don't do it to us and we wont do it to you.
Don't kill each other. What are you, stupid? It's dumb, just don't do it!
If you make a new vampire, you gotta train it. If it's running around stuffing up and getting caught, it's YOUR fault. Pick your childe well and keep an eye on them till they are ready.
Masquerade, masquerade, masquerade. Don't tell folks your a vampire and people wont come around to your house wanting to burn you alive... Simple as that really.
And YES, they do enforce these laws roughly, but frankly, when it's the future of your entier race, you'd be pretty firm on them as well.
I was Diablorised once. I got better.
- Confuzzled
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2005 3:39 am
- Contact:
You don't call executing someone just because he created a childe without your permision "dictatorial"?
Actually Ripe I don't. There was a clear law, and a clear penalty for transgression. The vampire in question broke the law and was aware of the consequences if caught. Certainly it is harsh, but not necessarily dictatorial, and given the nature of vampires and the relatively diffuse nature of power in vampire society, I find it difficult to imagine what sort of other sentences could be imposed.
The Camarilla's attitude that everyone must obey their laws or suffer the consequences, in accordance, is more than I can stand. I value individualism and free choice.
Aniximander, I have similar problems, but the situation is hardly unprecedented. Every nation-state has similar rules (think about Native Americans being subject to Federal US law despite not exactly being enamoured of the way that government came into being/power, or the imposition of religious uniformity in the middle ages and reformation/counter-reofrmation period), something on which international law is premised. In fact, a good argument could be made that international law itself is a similar idea. I appreciate this is a little political, and apologies to the mods, my point is merely to highlight that such ideas seem to be necessary, and that individualism and choice can function within such systems as well as outside them. Certainly there might be problems with how the Camarilla (or any other body wit power) exercises its power, but that is a different question to whether the assertion of a jurisdiction is right or wrong.
Now on more gam-related points: I find it unfortunate that the options at the end are a little limited, principally that the Anarach option is Nines (with the accompanying Damsel). Such Anarchs have clear political views with which I disagree.
On the other hand, the Camarilla are clearly going to impose their rule on me (and it is a rule with which the Anarchs often conform), so siding with them would at least mean I was on the inside, but clearly someone so young will not ascend the ranks with any speed.
My personal preference would have been to side with Isaac as an Anarch: clearly he would be manipulative of me, but not so powerful as to be able to ignore me or impose himself too readily. On the other hand, Isaac seems to be a different sort of Anarch to Nines, less political, much more of a miniature-Camarilla in Hollywood, capable of protecting what is his while the bigger players fight it out amongst themselves (especially once I persuade the Gargoyle to aid him). Certainly he is at times a little too emotional and Toreador, but at least in LA terms he is a big player capable of protecting me if required. Almost an example of localism/regionalism in politics, and as this is apparently a trend in UK political thinking, maybe it's not surprising I think that way!
range of opinions
We are going to play out our real life politics from the look of it - I am an individualist who believes in education and opportunity - the state can do good, but make it too powerful and it will be usruped to do ill. keep the state in a "service to the people" role and society is safer. although an individualist - I never work for major organisations and hate the time-serving culture - I also like being in a loose federation of like-minded people to have the opportunity of some efficiency.
the Anarchs are representative of those social/political views. Nines can be confrontational, but only in self-defence, I would suggest.
having some rules does not create hipocracy - the siring rule is not necessary and is about power & control not protecting the common good. a warning about responsibility would have sufficed.
the Camarilla may not universally be bad-guys, but they have created a system that can be usurped, which is a bad idea. once you are in a system, you lose the impetus for change.
we'll divide down political lines I reckon - true anarchists, hard-right, devolvers & centralists.
We are going to play out our real life politics from the look of it - I am an individualist who believes in education and opportunity - the state can do good, but make it too powerful and it will be usruped to do ill. keep the state in a "service to the people" role and society is safer. although an individualist - I never work for major organisations and hate the time-serving culture - I also like being in a loose federation of like-minded people to have the opportunity of some efficiency.
the Anarchs are representative of those social/political views. Nines can be confrontational, but only in self-defence, I would suggest.
having some rules does not create hipocracy - the siring rule is not necessary and is about power & control not protecting the common good. a warning about responsibility would have sufficed.
the Camarilla may not universally be bad-guys, but they have created a system that can be usurped, which is a bad idea. once you are in a system, you lose the impetus for change.
we'll divide down political lines I reckon - true anarchists, hard-right, devolvers & centralists.
"All the world's a stage and all the men and women merely players"
- pennypincher
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:21 pm
- Location: Australia! WOO!
- Contact:
Just to be clear, the Cammerilla certinaly ARE bad guys. They slaughter humans wholesale for their own purposes, the elders cling to power and play their childe against each other, and the childe return the favour by plotting to remove elders and strike out at one another... And all the while it's once again the humans who suffer.. Assasination plots removing key figures of infulence, slander prints defaming political powers, underworld drugs and money runs... It's all bad.
I was Diablorised once. I got better.
In the game
we can only judge what happens in this game. many opinions on here are based upon pnp/books - that shouldn't be so, unless the game features that information too.
the Cam in this game, are represented by Strauss and LaCroix as a rogue element.
we can only judge what happens in this game. many opinions on here are based upon pnp/books - that shouldn't be so, unless the game features that information too.
the Cam in this game, are represented by Strauss and LaCroix as a rogue element.
"All the world's a stage and all the men and women merely players"
- yrthwyndandfyre
- Posts: 786
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:30 am
- Location: 100 Miles up the butt of the world
- Contact:
To dig out an ancient quotation of mine, "Extremism is always bad". Inasmuch as it's a non-sequitur, it's probably the only one that makes sense.
I don't like the cam because they are too organised and rule-oriented. I don't care for the anarchs because they are diametrically opposed to organisation and rules. I despise Lacroix because he's a power-monger. I despise the Sabbat because they are totally chaotic. I despise the Kuei-Jin because they are insular, xenophobic, and power-mongers.
Basically, rules and organization are not de facto bad things, but they can be taken to bad extremes. Therein lies the rub. I generally go with 'none of the above', but if I had to choose, it would be the anarchs, and I would work from within the anarchs to supply a fairly liberal set of enforced laws.
In our society, I think most people would agree that murder is bad. That doesn't mean that nobody will murder anybody, though. Hence, there must be a rule, a trial, and a punishment for those who break the rule.
Anarchs in general agree with the masquerade, so its significance exists. However, as the Sabbat demonstrates, not everybody agrees with it, despite the obvious dangers of not upholding it. Hence, there must be a rule, a trial, and a punishment.
Death for siring a childe without permission? A little on the extreme side, maybe. Death for being caught siring five childer from raving psychotic serial killers? Perhaps not so extreme, now.
"The notion that a thing must exist or not exist is a primitive form of thought."
I don't like the cam because they are too organised and rule-oriented. I don't care for the anarchs because they are diametrically opposed to organisation and rules. I despise Lacroix because he's a power-monger. I despise the Sabbat because they are totally chaotic. I despise the Kuei-Jin because they are insular, xenophobic, and power-mongers.
Basically, rules and organization are not de facto bad things, but they can be taken to bad extremes. Therein lies the rub. I generally go with 'none of the above', but if I had to choose, it would be the anarchs, and I would work from within the anarchs to supply a fairly liberal set of enforced laws.
In our society, I think most people would agree that murder is bad. That doesn't mean that nobody will murder anybody, though. Hence, there must be a rule, a trial, and a punishment for those who break the rule.
Anarchs in general agree with the masquerade, so its significance exists. However, as the Sabbat demonstrates, not everybody agrees with it, despite the obvious dangers of not upholding it. Hence, there must be a rule, a trial, and a punishment.
Death for siring a childe without permission? A little on the extreme side, maybe. Death for being caught siring five childer from raving psychotic serial killers? Perhaps not so extreme, now.
"The notion that a thing must exist or not exist is a primitive form of thought."
Sic gorgiamos allos subjectatos nunc
(The Addams family motto: Gladly we feast on those who would subdue us)
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy, and good with Ketchup.
(The Addams family motto: Gladly we feast on those who would subdue us)
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy, and good with Ketchup.
- pennypincher
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:21 pm
- Location: Australia! WOO!
- Contact:
Sadly, if you tried to introduce rules to the no good, rough neck, wanna-be's of the Anarchs, they would say you were trying to "opress them" and "it's not about rules man, you don't get it".... Then they'd drain you dry and hang you upside down for laughs.
Damm worthless Anarch scum.
Damm worthless Anarch scum.
I was Diablorised once. I got better.
- yrthwyndandfyre
- Posts: 786
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:30 am
- Location: 100 Miles up the butt of the world
- Contact:
I suppose they would be entitled to the attempt, but for the vampire 'childe' that single-handedly wiped out the LA Giovanni, Sabbat, Society of Leopold, Kuei-Jin, Tong, the Prince, the Sherrif, a Werewolf, a Gargoyle, a Fiend, all of the Fiend's creations, three Plague Bearers and every Zombie in the city, all presumably in the space of a few weeks, they might want to consider that paying attention might not be such a Bad Thing. My PC did, after all, give the city back to them on a silver platter, and as Nines was quick to point out, after the arrival of the Cam, the Anarchs lost "too many". I assume there aren't that many of them left.
By the conclusion of the game, it's not as if my PC doesn't have the option of enforcing her will by sheer threat of violence, or even wiping out every last walking undead in the city and starting her own little crew.
By the conclusion of the game, it's not as if my PC doesn't have the option of enforcing her will by sheer threat of violence, or even wiping out every last walking undead in the city and starting her own little crew.
Sic gorgiamos allos subjectatos nunc
(The Addams family motto: Gladly we feast on those who would subdue us)
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy, and good with Ketchup.
(The Addams family motto: Gladly we feast on those who would subdue us)
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy, and good with Ketchup.
For those who haven't found out yet.....they are all bad to a certain point of view.....you are not human anymore, okay you might have a humanity rating that is far above anything "human" ( humanity 10 would be something even hard to reach for Jesus and most "holy men" probably never reach humanity 8 ), but that's only because it's far to easy to reach that high humanity in the game. In the original game terms "humanity 10" would be reaching Golconda, a highened state of being ( you are in peace with yourself and the universe, you don't need much, if any, blood...etc., it can take 1000's of years to reach that state ).
So what are the differences between the different political factions....in reality not that many. Even the Sabbat upholds the Masquerade, a more violant one, but they have laws and traditions too. While the Camarilla may look like the "Good Guys", they aren't really. If you want Democracy ( to a certain point ), go to the Sabbat. If you want to fight the bad guys, aka as the Anteliduvians, go to the Sabbat.....See what I mean ?
So what are the differences between the different political factions....in reality not that many. Even the Sabbat upholds the Masquerade, a more violant one, but they have laws and traditions too. While the Camarilla may look like the "Good Guys", they aren't really. If you want Democracy ( to a certain point ), go to the Sabbat. If you want to fight the bad guys, aka as the Anteliduvians, go to the Sabbat.....See what I mean ?
Lucita y Aragon, Childe of Ambrosio Luis Moncada, Childe of Silvester de Ruiz, Childe of Boukephos, Childe of Lasombra
- yrthwyndandfyre
- Posts: 786
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:30 am
- Location: 100 Miles up the butt of the world
- Contact:
[QUOTE=Lucita]For those who haven't found out yet.....they are all bad to a certain point of view.....
So what are the differences between the different political factions....in reality not that many.[/QUOTE]
's truth. Virtually no 'system' is actually perfect, so it usually means a trade-off between mutual evils. Democracy relies on popularity, but that has never equated with wisdom. If there were a perfect system, it would probably be known to a very few, and the only way they could enforce it on the general populace would be through despotism. The issue, then is, how do you tell the difference between an enlightened despot and a power-hungry monster?
The answer, of course, is you don't. You wouldn't be able to tell an enlightened despot if he crawled down your throat and ate your pancreas. A person so enlightened would have motives that virtually nobody could understand, and people reflexively oppose things they can't understand. Even if that person were doing the one thing that might ultimately result in the salvation of the entire species, they would probably be killed for it because somebody would be perplexed enough to regard their motives as irredeemably evil. Christ is a perfect case in point. His categorically stated cause? "Love thy neighbour as thyself." His reward? He got nailed to a tree.
Of course, my PC at least has the chance to fight her way out of any trouble, and has no monastic pacifistic biases that might allow her to simply lay back and take it on the chin Nines is cool and all, but he's shown my PC nothing that would keep her from tearing him in half if he got out of line.
So what are the differences between the different political factions....in reality not that many.[/QUOTE]
's truth. Virtually no 'system' is actually perfect, so it usually means a trade-off between mutual evils. Democracy relies on popularity, but that has never equated with wisdom. If there were a perfect system, it would probably be known to a very few, and the only way they could enforce it on the general populace would be through despotism. The issue, then is, how do you tell the difference between an enlightened despot and a power-hungry monster?
The answer, of course, is you don't. You wouldn't be able to tell an enlightened despot if he crawled down your throat and ate your pancreas. A person so enlightened would have motives that virtually nobody could understand, and people reflexively oppose things they can't understand. Even if that person were doing the one thing that might ultimately result in the salvation of the entire species, they would probably be killed for it because somebody would be perplexed enough to regard their motives as irredeemably evil. Christ is a perfect case in point. His categorically stated cause? "Love thy neighbour as thyself." His reward? He got nailed to a tree.
Of course, my PC at least has the chance to fight her way out of any trouble, and has no monastic pacifistic biases that might allow her to simply lay back and take it on the chin Nines is cool and all, but he's shown my PC nothing that would keep her from tearing him in half if he got out of line.
Sic gorgiamos allos subjectatos nunc
(The Addams family motto: Gladly we feast on those who would subdue us)
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy, and good with Ketchup.
(The Addams family motto: Gladly we feast on those who would subdue us)
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy, and good with Ketchup.
- yrthwyndandfyre
- Posts: 786
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 2:30 am
- Location: 100 Miles up the butt of the world
- Contact:
I'm not saying I'd off him on a whim or just out of spite, but he made it manifestly clear that he was prepared to lay a beating on me a couple of times, and that he had certain expectations of me. His saving my fanny at the trial was doubtlessly more for his benefit than mine, at least in his own mind. He says it himself right at the end (if you take no sides): "Hey, kid! We could use someone like you!" 'Use' being the operative word there.
Sic gorgiamos allos subjectatos nunc
(The Addams family motto: Gladly we feast on those who would subdue us)
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy, and good with Ketchup.
(The Addams family motto: Gladly we feast on those who would subdue us)
Do not meddle in the affairs of Dragons, for you are crunchy, and good with Ketchup.
I bow down before the inevitable kuei-jin conquerors.
More seriously, I would side with the Camarilla. I don't enjoy belonging to strictly controlled organizations with excessive rules, but I do like the idea of nearly everybody else belonging to those kinds of organizations, while I rebel against that authority to the extent that I can without getting into direct conflict. But if all the kindred are anarchs, I have nothing to rebel against and must constantly worry about the unregulated stupidity that the others are up to.
More seriously, I would side with the Camarilla. I don't enjoy belonging to strictly controlled organizations with excessive rules, but I do like the idea of nearly everybody else belonging to those kinds of organizations, while I rebel against that authority to the extent that I can without getting into direct conflict. But if all the kindred are anarchs, I have nothing to rebel against and must constantly worry about the unregulated stupidity that the others are up to.
Ultimately I chose to leave the punks to their city. If i had the choice I would have followed Beckett around for a few years and try to learn some things (but that is off topic a bit, just a bit)
Joining the anarchs just doesn't work. They belong to a group in society that is usualy called "the anti's". They are simply against anything. They have no idea what it is but they are certainly against it. As was mentioned earlier in the thread Isaac would be the best option, but eventually mob rule would take over and many would see Isaac's administration as oppression and the anti's start all over again.
The Camarilla by its nature creates power hungy maniacs. The only Kindred who become Princes have to be old and are generally elected by the Primogen of the city. This means that once in power the Prince is all powerful in their city and usually has the backing of the Primogen, so unless they do something drastic, they are unchalenged in their positions of time attained power.
The sabbat, while professing to be on a holy mission, are a bunch of mindless rabble. It is the same as when any malitia group in the world is armed by the states (PS: I am an Australian) and trained to fight whatever group the Americans want them to (this isn't just with the yanks but it is the only example i could think of). Most of the time these groups use their new power to go around raping, burning, plundering, raiding and otherwise pilfering their measily black guts out. It hapens.
The overall motto is: Give someone power and they will probably exploit it. No system really works.
But as the thread asked: Anarchs or Camarilla?: Ill go with the anarchs in the game as they didn't all join in the blood hunt.
Joining the anarchs just doesn't work. They belong to a group in society that is usualy called "the anti's". They are simply against anything. They have no idea what it is but they are certainly against it. As was mentioned earlier in the thread Isaac would be the best option, but eventually mob rule would take over and many would see Isaac's administration as oppression and the anti's start all over again.
The Camarilla by its nature creates power hungy maniacs. The only Kindred who become Princes have to be old and are generally elected by the Primogen of the city. This means that once in power the Prince is all powerful in their city and usually has the backing of the Primogen, so unless they do something drastic, they are unchalenged in their positions of time attained power.
The sabbat, while professing to be on a holy mission, are a bunch of mindless rabble. It is the same as when any malitia group in the world is armed by the states (PS: I am an Australian) and trained to fight whatever group the Americans want them to (this isn't just with the yanks but it is the only example i could think of). Most of the time these groups use their new power to go around raping, burning, plundering, raiding and otherwise pilfering their measily black guts out. It hapens.
The overall motto is: Give someone power and they will probably exploit it. No system really works.
But as the thread asked: Anarchs or Camarilla?: Ill go with the anarchs in the game as they didn't all join in the blood hunt.
- pennypincher
- Posts: 420
- Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 10:21 pm
- Location: Australia! WOO!
- Contact: