Best part is how the silverback is eyeballing the females, playing it cool when it's his turn, but then chickens through, just like everyone else

Silverback proof silvered back glass!

I'm surprised the mirror survived the silverback!

Also don't thump your chest in front of a small silverback.

*eia, nature - don't thump your chest in view of a large silverback

That's a made up scenario. No-one is ever going to have an electorate of 100 voters, I only used that figure to make the math easier.

But let's multiply everything by 100, so we have an electorate of 10000 with 3334 votes needed to get elected (much more realistic).

In your scenario, white tiger has 666 surplus votes.

The 1600 people with "no second choice" are ignored, and the votes are split 3 ways (222 votes each) to Orange Tiger, Silverback and Monkey (who's not even running in the electorate ).

edit: fixed the math

What happens if white tiger gets 34 votes with 6 to orange tiger, 6 to silverback, 6 to monkey, and 16 to "no second choice"?

There's no assumption going on, the electorate decide who their second choice is.

To make things easy, let's imagine an electorate of 100 voters, with 3 representatives and a 33% threshold.
So let's say 60 people give White Tiger their no.1 and among those people, their second vote is spilt 40 to Orange Tiger and 20 to Silverback.

So White Tiger has 27 surplus votes. Those surplus votes are divided by proportion to Orange Tiger and Silverback.

So in this case Orange Tiger gets 66% of the surplus vote and Silverback 33% giving them 18 and 9 votes respectively.

They have a silverback at Berlin Zoo that does this all the time. He sits perfectly still right by the window until he draws a big enough crowd of kids and parents, then BAM! he hits his fists against the window and scares the shit out of everyone. Short clip (poor quality) of it here. I am sure it is pure frustration and not fun for him though.

Poor creatures.

That being said, here is one of him hurling grass at the workers.

Wow, I think I would be terrified with a silverback that close. He obviously did the right thing by keeping his head bowed to show submission before the silverback, but still... yikes. Exciting!

I wonder if they think he is sad or scared or something. Grooming is not just for removing parasites and combing fur. It is a social bonding reinforcement and is occasionally used to calm or console another gorilla. At 2:46 the silverback gently prods the youngster away from the man and gives him a slight push as if to say "leave him alone". Whatever the reason, it's a fascinating thing to watch. Love the look the silverback gives John at 5:13.

Hey. It's Errol Flynn. Aside from Kong, he's probably my second most favorite misunderstood monster.

Be sure to let me know when that movie you mentioned a while back comes out.

Cheers.

In reply to this comment by laura:
So who's the guy in your profile pic? It can't be you, you're a silverback gorilla. A big one, too.

>> ^imstellar28 I agree with what you are saying, but you are wording it in a misleading way. Its not more wrong because of the inherent "weakness" of each person, it is more wrong because the same act of violence will cause more damage to a weaker person.
There are two variables here: Force and Damage; "Violence" is a description of both variables. The same leg sweep which makes a small girl bash her head on the ground probably wouldn't be much more than an annoyance for a large man. Same force, different damage.
In your head, you are probably imaging the same force against a man, which really isn't a fair comparison because you must also consider the damage inflicted. Weaker people will always require less force per unit of damage inflicted, so I can see why one would (erroneously) focus on the "strength" of the victim.
A more accurate statement would be:
"I think that most of us believe that more violence is more wrong than less violence"
Which of course we can all agree on.


I disagree with your breakdown. The violence isn't worse against the woman just because it will hurt her more. It's worse because she can't fight back and can't defend herself. And in the case of a leg sweep like this, assuming it is successful, it's actually going to hurt a lighter person less than a big guy. My toddler does this to himself every day as he strides around the room (although not on concrete).

It's patently offensive to bully the weak. That's what this is about.

That's why it's outrageous when a cop tasers a child. Not because it hurts the child more (it probably doesn't), but because the child is harmless to the cop.

If this guy swept a Silverback Gorilla off its feet and hurt it badly, it wouldn't bother me so much, because I know the Gorilla is going to get up and tear him limb from limb.

Well, technically it's a TROOP of silverback apes, not a gaggle, but the scene was funny anyway...

>> ^Payback:
Amazing what you'll do for entertainment when you're trapped for the rest of your life in a 600 sq ft cage. Can't upvote in good conscience considering the "habitat". Sorry.


Save the sappy sentimental environmentalism for pet stores and puppy mills. Gorillas in captivity are given more range than they need in the wild. Do some research and you'll find that once a male gorilla locates a group of females (who only migrate in rare cases), that's that, they're all pretty well settled. You see the little doors in the background? Those are to let him out into his range. Btw, zookeepers NEED to give gorillas this range, or else they would die. Also, this is a silverback who never would have developed into such without the requisite female harem and range I have described above.

Honestly, moral outrage should come from a place of higher knowledge, not ignorance.