#and with 5s its the reverse

[subconsciousmysteries]

I've noticed that people tend to collect individuals of their disintegration type

[walkingstackofbooks]

Counting on Bajor

Because not every planet will use Base 10

--

Just for fun, I've decided to headcanon that Bajor uses a Base 13 counting system - 1. because they have 26 hours in a day and 2. because it's fun. i.e. there is zero basis for this, but I don't remember any particular numerical symbolism DS9, so I figure the world's my oyster?

To start out, I found the Bajoran numbers 1-10 from this Dictionary and then added three more of my own to get up to 13:

And then, borrowing from the Babylonian finger-counting method, I adapted it for 13.

14 is ta'ir tah (one'thirteen one), 15 is ta'ir ti (one'thirteen two), 27 is ti'r tah (two'thirteen one) and so on....

(numbers that end in an "e" or "i" have lost the "i" from "ir". Bik and jik have lost their "k"s, and bant has lost its "n".)

At 13x13, or 169, we get to our next unit up which is el. Numbers higher than el are created in the exact same way, e.g:

185 is ta'el ta'ir bik (one'169 one'13 three)

750 is ke'el tul'ir pel (four'169 five'13 nine)

Now, the thing I am excited about is counting in multiples on your fingers!

(The way I've done it, I've realised the majority of Bajorans need to be left-handed, so hey, extra headcanon!)

The 3x table and 6x table are both pretty lovely :

Threes just go across one layer of your finger segments at a time - noiiice.

And sixes go down the ring and index finger segments before transferring to the little and middle finger segments.

SEVENS! Seven is a lovely times table in base 13! Look! -

Isn't that neat? 4x7 = two'13 two.... 10x7 = five'13 five... etc. And your fingers are basically doing the reverse of 6!

The others all still have patterns, just not quite as simple. But just doing them I've started to find them fairly easy to get along with with a bit of practice!

4s -

5s -

8s -

9s -

...... Anywayyyyyyyy, there is definitely more in my head here (like: Fractions!! Time!! Iconographs!!) but that's enough for today 😅

[blkkizzat]

Hi!, same anon that asked for the line tut. I appreciate you making the tut and I’ve figured out how to put the colors and everything but I’m getting stuck on the moving part…

More specifically how to set the numbers to make everything move. I know you said 15 to 20 layers so I was trying to set the location by 2’s but I think I’m just confusing myself and making it harder than it needs to be. (I tend to do that lmao.💀)

Whenever you get some time, do you think you could make a quick video? I tend to learn by seeing and then repeating and I think my brain is getting confused with the unseen steps in between. 😭

There’s absolutely no rush, whenever you get the chance! Also if 🍓🍰 isn’t taken can I have it pls? 🥺Love and appreciate you sm!! 🫶🏾

Hey aweee welcome 🍓🍰 nonny ml! yeah people suck lol. tbh they are likely insecure that if other people knew how to do it then they wouldn't need them or use their resources anymore. which is silly because it shows you who is doing this for clout and who is doing this cause they have a genuine passion for it.

Anyway!

15-20 layers would be setting the location by 7, 6, or 5s.

Ah I totally get it tho however for some reason OBS crashes my photoshop when I enter the gradient tool cause i've tried to do another gradient tutorial with gradient text and it kept freezing photoshop.

however since you know after effects there's an easier way in the video timeline of photoshop (or in after effects timeline the principles would be the same). i just know people are more use to frame animation from all the tutorials on tumblr here. you can't go back and forth between the two timelines and i also don't know an eloquent way to explain keyframes other then they are like "bookmarks" so i'm assuming you know what they are/how to use them.

GRADIENT DIVIDERS USING VIDEO TIMELINE:

i started with a 1080 x 100 canvas that you can reduce the canvas size to whatever width you want your div to be later it would just be crazy doing this on a thin af canvas.

in the video timeline this is what you want. a color fill layer and then a single color gradient layer (in the middle of transparency, notice how the upper dopplers are white that means transparency) which you will then rasterize.

2. Now that your gradient layer is rasterized you can start animating it using keyframes. You will use the position keyframe.

notice how the playhead is at the beginning of the timeline and i have used to move tool to move the gradient layer so that only the smallest bit on the left is being seen, that's when you will add the first position keyframe. then you will move the playhead to the end of the clip (to the right) and move the gradient layer to the right as well add the final keyframe.

3. You're done! i was able to take the below with giphy capture tool but it only allows you to capture like a minute lol so i cant do the entire thing with it unfortunately.

*NOTE: im manually moving the playhead back and forth across the timeline thats why the movement speeds are off/choppy and its going in reverse. im just demonstrating how if you are doing it right you should be able to see it move across the timeline without even pressing play.

4. file > export > save for web legacy as gif. (clip the canvas down to the height you want first)

this is the end result (reduced to 2.00f and 3px height):

TIP: if you want to speed up the animation just shorten the length of the animation overall. so move the brackets down to the amount of seconds you want (you can see at the top of the timeline 1.00f, 2.00f, etc, right below that is container like brackets [ ] you move). then you will drag your layer to that new end point (both layers) and you can also click and drag the keyframe to the new endpoint too. its going to default to 5.00f automatically.

hope this helps! its a lot easier if you are comfortable using keyframes. you could even add multiple colors too and have them rotate out or follow right behind each other using key frames. each color would be on its own layer or you can do multi per layer just make sure to use transparency appropriately.

lmk if you have questions!

[quodekash]

and here we see the oishi in its natural habitat, waiting in mere indifference for its contents to be spilt into the belly of its natural predator: the average bl character

these kids know what theyre freakin doing and i freaking love it

and they just have to stand there like that while they wait for a bunch of kids to draw them, this is so funny i love it so much

THEYRE SUCH DADS THE WAY THEYRE BICKERING IN FRONT OF THE KIDS I LOVE THEM

gay-ass noodles

are the noodles an innuendo or smth

i hope not because i really love noodles

HOW ABOUT WE FU-

that's basically the same thing i said

ARE THEY ABOUT TO DO THE THING IN REVERSE

HEEEEELLLLLL YESSSS

HE HAS TO STAND ON HIS TIPPY TOES TO REACH OMG THAT'S SO FUNNY

to be fair, im nearly 20cm shorter than him, so i wouldnt even be able to reach around like where phu's jawline is, even on my toes, buT THAT DOESNT MEAN I CANT LAUGH ABOUT IT

ah shoot. it has once again been multiple hours since i looked at this, but this time its because i had to eat dinner and i got distracted like twelve times and then played piano for like half an hour cos i walked past it and remembered it existed and figured i should actually practice for once. anyway lets get back into it shall we

YES YES YES YES YES YES YES YES

KISS KISS KISS KISS KISS KISS KISS KISS KISS KISS

THEYRE ABOUT TO KISS

THEY KISSED

FINALLY

AWWWW THE PHOTO WALL

THATS SO CUTE

ITS SO SWEET

I MIGHT CRY

that was off putting

that's tian

not pran

my brain was confused

anyway THEYRE HUSBANDS GHREBJKGHDB

HSDHFDSFSDH

THEY SAID THE PATPRAN THING

THATS SO FUNNY

hsghfdghdfb the spooning <33 (ft pat's line)

HSFHDFSH AND THEN TIAN DID THE PRAN THING BUT INSTEAD OF 10 HE SAID 11 THATS AMAZING I LOVE THEM SO MUCH

right you are, yod

hes such an uncle

uncle yod

i love him so much

HSDHDFSDH THE FREAKING SUNGLASSES, I CANT

YOU DORK

HE'S SUCH A DORK

TAKING PHOTOS OF HIS BOYFRIEND WHILE HIS BOYFRIEND TAKES PHOTOS OF THE FOOD

THEY DID A PHOTO BOOTHHHHH

HES SUCH A SILLY LITTLE COUNTRY DAD I LOVE HIM SO MUCH

AND THEN THE WHOLE CLOTHES SHOPPING MONTAGE- THE AMOUNT OF LOVE I HAVE FOR THEM IS ASTONISHING

PFFFFFFFT

I BE LETTING OUT SO MANY 5S RN

is. is that not what he was just wearing.

I LOVE THESE KINDS OF LINES

THEYVE GONE TO SEE THE PLAY

i'm sorry, im gonna need a whole post dedicated to the play

also im gonna run out of images very soon

brb

[saphig-iawn]

I.. I am so annoyed at how modern technology has stolen tactility from us. Everyone has become a user now. The reason why I still use an iPhone 5S is that is that has a home button, a mechanical electrical redundancy for when software fails. None of the new phones do, they got rid of it. Innovation in the smartphone sector alone is dead. We had so many wild mobile phones as tech grew, all finding ways to enhance the user experience. But now we all have shiny glass rectangles.

AND CARS I hate how cars are 2 ton iPads with terrible security now. I miss the ambient orange glow of the buttons of a car's centre console. The mint green glow in the dark numbers on the dials. And once again, its all software. There's no redundancies for anything! There are no drivers now, just users. Everything is infotainment, everything is "downloading update". There's a barrier between the driver and the car, and capitalism put it there.

I want to reverse the singularity of my smartphone. I want to pluck out its call function and give it its body back. I want to redraw its maps on something more capable. I unironically use an iPod now. I don't want my music to be on the internet. I don't want it to whisper to the algorithm and shape my world around advertisers needs. So I have a courageous little iPod Nano, with a brave 16gb, that is so happy to just play music and podcasts. No need to do anything else, and it shines in comparison to the latest smartphone.

Sorry, vent over, but yes. God i agree with you so much. and also what Subaru did you drive :3

I wish cars had more levers and switches and shit involved.

Like, if the startup sequence for my Subaru was the same as a Gundam I would be so ecstatic.

[mscastriota]

This three card spread in 1-2-3 order shows the current past, the present and the likely outcome if nothing changes.

Card 1 representing the near past is the 7 of Swords (reversed)

The suit of Swords marks change and its focus is primarily the mental processes of logic, intellect, reason, action & power which can be used for good or evil— Swords tells a tragic tale starting with the exploitation of intellect for good and ends with abject failure and disaster when intellect is used for evil.

The Sevens of each suit are less stable as they are further down on the tree of life. These cards address the desire nature: they will show something about how we desire, what we want, and how we use the force.

The 7 of Swords is called the Lord of Unstable Effort…wavering, un-commitment, self-justification, depicts theft, betrayal, dishonesty, deception and running away. Be cautious of deceit from others as well as utilizing it for one’s own gain. REVERSED: Cunning and devious behavior designed to harm other people. Disaster due to ambivalence. Seekers need to know that this card means to

Watch Out; something underhanded may be going on.

Card #2 reflecting the present state is the 5 of Coins (reversed)

The suit of Coins tells us about the physical manifestation of money, prosperity, wealth, health, security, stability & tangible possessions.

The 5s of each suit are severity or “tough love.” They each represent a test that yields a wisdom. Cabalists say the fives are the origin of evil because if the harshness, judgement, and assessment that, with necessity, comes with the 5’s is not balanced with the complete and utter gratuitous mercy of the 4’s—if the Severity of the 5’s are not checked by the Love of the 4’s then evil is the outcome. The severity of the 5’s is meant as a test to help you grow.

Specifically, the 5 of Coins, aka The Lord of Material Trouble, symbolizes worry, financial hardship, ill health, and feeling isolated. But this card is also called, “Adaptation,” because if you use the laws of the Universe, you can overcome almost anything. Looking at the people in the card, while their situation is awful, if they seek it, help is right there. The Anchor in the stained glass is called the Anchor of Hope. This card is a call to action: if they would turn inward, if they come to their spiritual source, then they could adapt.

As the 5 is in this reading, is REVERSED: real trouble with money, out in the cold, material calamity, reckless extravagance and wastefulness in the use of resources and self-indulgence.

The 3rd card representing the near future is the 6 of Wands.

The suit of Wands deals with the strength of passion, creativity energy, willpower, and character. Wands is a journey through personality traits and how they affect your plans and goals.

The 6s are connected to beauty which is at the center of the tree of life. Each of the Sixes is the most beautiful form of the suit. The sixes aim to raise you to the highest pinnacle of success with a greatness of heart.

Finally, the 6 of Wands is called the Lord of Victory. It signifies victory, good news, success on a very high level; success that is achieved with greatness of heart and public recognition. This card represents your expectations crowned with their own desire which is the crown of hope. This card urges you to be open to receiving praise.

For today:

Be aware under-handed things may have been going on

Examine yourself but turn to your spiritual source to overcome

Victory can be yours; be open to praise and recognition

[miaulogy]

☆ fnafambic (fnaf-ambeec) :

[ID: A flag with nine stripes, of which the first stripe is black, the second is grey, third one is a pattern of black and white squares, fourth one is white, and fifth one is red. The four lasting stripes are the same but in reverse order: white, square pattern, grey, and black. End ID]

I'm not very experienced with IDs, if someone wants to propose a better version that would be great! /gen

a gender related to fnaf 1's atmosphere: its hallways, office, party rooms, stage. the feeling of dread, fear, loneliness, and nostalgia tied to the game's ambience.

name derived from "fnaf" - the game -, and "ambic": from ambience.

some neopronouns for this gender may include 5,/5s, fear/fears, bot/bots, among others!

remember: you can use any pronoun(s) regardless of your gender! (o^_^)o

> 🐾 this is my first coining post! i'll open requests for term coining, neo suggestions and DNI banner making ;)

[DNI: Fatphobes, queerphobes, racists, ableists, anti-mogai, anti-endo, transmeds/truscums, terfs/swerfs/tehms, invalidate any mspec identity (including mspec lesbians/gays/straights), antisemites, proshippers/anti-antis.]

[transgenderer]

this is the lockheed c-5 galaxy, with its vast maw open. its so big you can drive a pretty sizable vehicle right up in there.

apparently it can carry six apache helicopters or five bradley tanks. also it can apparently carry this thing:

For its voracious consumption of fuel and its maintenance and reliability issues[52] the Galaxy's aircrews have nicknamed it "FRED", for Fucking[N 1] Ridiculous, Economic/Environmental Disaster.[52]

it has a bunch of design/development issues and a...pretty grisly history. some particular low points:

"After being one of the worst-run programs, ever, in its early years, it has evolved very slowly and with great difficulty into a nearly adequate strategic airlifter that unfortunately needs in-flight refueling or a ground stop for even the most routine long-distance flights. We spent a lot of money to make it capable of operating from unfinished airstrips near the front lines, when we never needed that capability or had any intention to use it." -Robert F. Dorr, aviation historian[15]

Cost overruns and technical problems of the C-5A were the subject of a congressional investigation in 1968 and 1969.[16][17] The C-5 program has the dubious distinction of being the first development program with a $1‑billion (equivalent to $7.1 billion today) overrun.[10][18]

On 17 October 1970, C-5A AF Serial No. 66-8303 was destroyed during a ground fire at the Lockheed Aircraft plant at Dobbins AFB in Marietta, Georgia. The fire started during maintenance in one of the aircraft's 12 fuel cells. One worker was killed and another injured. This was the first C-5 aircraft produced.[111]

In the final weeks of the war, prior to the Fall of Saigon, several C-5s were involved in evacuation efforts. During one such mission, a C-5A crashed while transporting a large number of orphans, with over 140 killed.[58][59]

On 29 August 1990, C-5A Serial No. 68-0228 crashed following an engine failure shortly after take-off. The aircraft took off from Ramstein Air Base in Germany in support of Operation Desert Shield. It was flown by a nine-member reserve crew from the 68th Airlift Squadron, 433d Airlift Wing based at Kelly AFB, Texas.[116] As the aircraft started to climb off the runway, one of the thrust reversers suddenly deployed. This resulted in loss of control of the aircraft and the subsequent crash. Of the 17 people on board, only four survived the crash.[117] All four were in the rear troop compartment. The sole crew member to survive, Staff Sgt. Lorenzo Galvan Jr., was awarded the Airman's Medal for his actions in evacuating the survivors from the wreckage.[111]

thats uh. thats lockheed for you :/

[funkymbtifiction]

Firstly I wanna say congratulations on almost being done with your book! I’m looking forward to reading it to solve my dilemma haha. I also wanna say I think its great you’re still taking time to respond to everyone who sends messages asking for help, I don’t think I’d have the patience nor interest to go through so many messages. If you don’t mind being bothered with mine; I’m certain I’m a 5, and I know ENTP 5s are rarer but my friends think I have a higher Ne than Ti, and I can see it because I won’t dismiss things without mulling them over first but aside from that I’m not sure. Any advice that might lead me to the right direction?

Thanks. Have only two sections left to do, then some tightening and proof-reading. The extroverts went faster, because their dominant functions are so easily explained to people -- they're "out there for everyone to see and understand." The introverts are all more subjective so it took me longer to work through them. But progress is progress. I can see the light at the end of the tunnel and it's a train.

Yeah, you're probably right. Most people aren't me and can't tolerate being asked, for the 10,000th time, what's the difference between an ENP and an INP? You don't mind me teasing you a bit, right? ;)

If you're sure of being a 5, and it fits you, and ENTP also fits you, go with it. 5 isn't as weird of a core for an ENTP as it would be for a feeling type. 5s pride themselves on their eccentric ideas, which pairs up naturally with any kind of NTP. (Was Stephen Hawking a 5? I know he was an ENTP. I see him mistyped as INTJ places and am just... like... no. The man argued a point, then wrote another paper shredding his own previous argument and reversed his position, multiple times. That's Ne-dom, folks.)

[tenleaguesbeneath]

On the one hand, I love random stat generation, especially for games where survival is not assured, but also, like, I like meeting my character for the first time when I roll for them.

on the other, 3d6 in order is a weird ritual that you do at the beginning of the game, before new players have any context for what that means.

I like the level 0 funnel I’m running. One thing that I’d change about it though is that it starts the PCs with major penalties to all stats b/c of severe dehydration; I’d change that to a straight reduction to minimum functional for all of them, and delay attribute rolling until they can drink.

Maybe even then. Maybe you get, like, roll 1d6 and 1d5 for one strength and one weakness (or a d30 table), then 3d6 twice. then you have a few choices:

- Put the better roll in the thing you’re better at and the worse in the thing you’re bad at

- Put the “reverse” of the worse roll (21 minus the roll) in the better attribute, and either the better roll or its reverse (whichever is lower) in the worse attribute.

There’s still a (not insignificant) risk that both will be about average; since results in the 9-12 range show up about half the time on 3d6, if we want to avoid this we can add another special rule, perhaps changing 3s to 2s and 4s to 5s (or even 1s and 6s) on die results that are in the 9-12 range (removing them entirely, going to a d4 marked 1,2,5,6, only reduces the odds of an average result to 3 times in 8).

Or just reroll if that happens, I guess. Since this system something changes every even number going up/odd going down, we’re only concerned with things piling into the 10-11 range. That only happens about a quarter of the time, so 1/16 on both results. which is rare enough to justify rerolling.

Then roll everything else when it comes up. If someone asks “who’s the strongest in the group” you can invite everyone who hasn’t rolled it yet to roll for strength. If people are looking for someone to try to translate an inscription, the same for intelligence.

[itcars]

Mazda Announces X-5 R-Sport Special Edition

As the world’s best-selling two-seater roadster enters its fourth decade on sale, Mazda UK has revealed the R-Sport special edition. Limited to just 150 examples, this stand-out MX-5 Convertible will feature free-of-charge Polymetal Grey metallic paint and a grey soft-top hood, while 16-inch RAYS gunmetal alloy wheels finish the unique exterior look of this special edition.

The Polymetal Grey color is a new edition to the 2020 Mazda MX-5 line up and on the R-Sport it is matched to piano black wing mirrors, while inside the R-Sport features burgundy Nappa leather seats with silver stitching, ensuring the interior has the same bespoke feel as the exterior. Based on the 1.5-litre 132ps Skyactiv-G Sport trim MX-5, the MX-5 R-Sport is the latest example of Mazda UK’s long tradition of offering personalized limited volume MX-5s.

Customers can register their interest in the £27,700 Mazda MX-5 R-Sport online now and UK deliveries will begin once the current retail restrictions come to an end. Commenting on the Mazda MX-5 R-Sport, Mazda Motors UK, Managing Director, Jeremy Thomson said: “I’m delighted that we can offer an exclusive MX-5 Convertible model to our customers. With it joining the rest of the Convertible and RF models in the line-up, we now have a great choice of MX-5s in our updated 2020 Mazda MX-5 range, which means that anyone wanting to drive a distinctive and stylish roadster can find what they need.”

Based on the 1.5-litre Sport, the R-Sport’s standard equipment tally includes navigation, Apple CarPlay  and Android AutoTM, cruise control, heated seats and climate control. In addition to the R-Sport, the updated 2020 Mazda MX-5 range features a 10-model line-up - four Convertibles and six RFs - the 132ps 1.5-litre Convertible is offered in SE-L and Sport trim, while the 184ps 2.0-liter Skyactiv-G engine is matched to Sport Tech and the new range-topping GT Sport Tech trim. As with the Convertible, SE-L and Sport trim RF’s are powered by the 1.5-litre engine, while Sport Tech and GT Sport Tech come with the more powerful 2.0-litre engine. In addition, 2.0-liter RFs in both trim levels come with the option to choose an automatic gearbox.

New for the 2020 Mazda MX-5, the GT Sport Tech flagship model is marked out by 17-inch BBS alloy wheels and Burgundy Nappa leather seats, while across the whole range the MX-5 is available with Polymetal Grey Metallic paint for the first time. The updated version of Mazda’s sports car also benefits from extra standard safety equipment: from Sport models and above, the MX-5 features Front Smart City Brake Support, Lane Departure Warning System, Rear Smart City Brake Support, Traffic Sign Recognition and Driver Attention Alert. While Blind Spot Monitoring System with Rear Cross Traffic Alert, Adaptive LED headlights and a reversing camera are standard on Sport Tech and GT Sport Tech models.

As you’d expect for a car so famed for its dynamic abilities, the 2020 Mazda MX-5 R-Sport retains the same award-winning chassis and mechanical set up as the 1.5-liter Sport MX-5. And helped by the MX-5’s lightness, performance hasn’t come at the cost of efficiency, as fully homologated to the WLTP/RDE test cycle and equipped with Mazda’s i-ELOOP and i-stop kinetic recovery and stop-start technology as standard it emits 142g/km.

[bestgun01]

Browning A5 Shotgun History

Last week's Scottish Doubles post included a photo of the Browning Wicked Wing A5, and I didn't say a word about it. The A5 is Browning's inertia pistol. It shares the square receiver of the original Auto 5 and some of its features ("fast charge" and magazine cut), but in all other respects it is a different weapon. And, as much as I like the Auto 5s (I started photographing one), the new A5 deserves to be judged on its own merits, of which it has many.

This is a cutting pistol, which makes it easy to shoot well. Inertia pistols, which do not have a gas system at the front, can have thin ends that allow the pistol to sit in your hands and aim naturally. Out of the box, no problem with stock tight leggings, the A5 focused 5 targets for me the first time I shot it, and it was no different on ducks and geese.

The helmet release button is large and easy to find in front of the trigger guard. And the magazine spring, unlike many others, is flexible enough that it's easy to get cartridges into the magazine even with cold, numb thumbs, but the pistol still feeds reliably. The trigger pressure is 7 pounds, which may bother you, but it doesn't bother me at all. The safety button is large and, like the locks on the Gold and Maxus models, it is extremely easy to reverse if you are left-handed.

Overall this is a very practical and reliable duck pistol. I took it on the Etruscan double hunt because it was a cold, snowy morning, I had to walk a lot and carry decoys, and I didn't want to put in all that effort just to get in trouble with weapons. And I didn't have one. Everything I shot, except the pigeon that tried to land near my blind, completely hit the water or ice. The pigeon was scared.

One of the biggest differences between the A5 and the older Auto 5 is the weight. My "Light 12" Belgian Auto 5 weighed 8 pounds. The 3 ½-inch A5 has an alloy receiver and weighs only 6 ¾ pounds. This is fine until you have a 3 ½-inch peel on. I don't know who kicks more with the 3 1/2, the A5 or the Benelli Super Vinci, but both are horrible. Not just big, like 3 1/2 is on other guns, but horrible. Feed the A5 a reasonable diet of 2 and 3-inch shells, and that's all you want in a duck gun.

The version I filmed is the Wicked Wing, which comes complete with a camo stock and fore-end, a weather-resistant Cerakote finish on the metal, an enlarged release bolt, and engraved extended choke tubes. It sure is an eye-catching pistol, even to me, who prefer blue steel and choke it on my shotguns. Cerakote is a strong, rust resistant finish that makes it easy to maintain.

The 3 ½-inch Wicked Wing retails for $ 1,999. I have complained about the high price of stored plastic semi-cars in the past, and I realize that part of the problem is with me, whose ideas about the cost of a gun were formed around 1982. According to inflation calculators from Internet, $ 1,999 translates to $ 762 in 1982, which puts the price in slightly better perspective for me. Still, if I were to buy an A5, and be tempted, I would skip the undeniably cool look of the Wicked Wing pattern and 3 ½ chamber, and buy a basic 3-inch black pistol for $ 1539, which was roughly $ 587 in 1982.

[dashuisofanubis]

Another ghost AU

Okay the premise for this one is sort of a what if they figured out Nina was the chosen one and performed the ritual, but its also an AU.

KT, Eddie and Willow move into a boarding house for the prestigious Ankh school. They notice there are a lot of awards and items in the school dedicated to a group of students.

It turns out that on the 7th of July, around 50 years ago, these 7 students were discovered dead. The cause was believed to be poisoning as the students were all from the same house and the two surviving students admitted to having skipped meals at the house that day. The house mother was arrested and sentenced for murder, despite rumours that she was innocent.

The truth of the tale is different:

An ancient Egyptian artefact was believed to have power beyond scientific knowledge, and, once assembled, was said to grant immortality. However, nature must maintain a balance, and for every life extended, another has to be cut short.

Despite all their research, the Secret Society were not aware of these consequences, or most likely were at some level but chose to ignore it. So, when the ritual took place and life was transferred, they had what they wanted, but at a cost.

The Immortals:

Victor Rodenmaar. Location unknown. Has been off the grid for 25 years after vanishing one night in the middle of the school year

Daphne Andrews. Still a teacher at Ankh. Taught many student's parents and has said she will retire next year for the past 20 years

Eric Sweet. Eddie's father, and a man he's always admired and looked up to. He's not what he seems, and is a lot older than Eddie believed.

Mercer, father to one of the lost students. Has realised immortality is not all it's cracked up to be. Having lost his wife 10 years ago, he lives a lonely life and regrets ever joining the society and offering up his daughter.

Jason Winkler. Joined due to degenerative illness, hoping this would be a cure. It was, and he lives a mostly happy life, when he can forget what part he played in the tragedy.

Doctor Delia. Now the CEO of the local hospital, she's experimented with her immortality, to see if there is a way to transfer part of her life to a patient. It took a lot of work, but 11 years ago, she finally had some success. 14 year old Sophia was fatally injured in a car crash, and Dr Delia used her blood in a transfusion, saving the girl.

Rufus Zeno is the final immortal. It was supposed to be Roebuck, but Rufus broke in and threatened the Chosen One, unless he got what he wanted. Wanting to save the girl, and being the only one who hadn't drunk from the cup, Roebuck sacrificed his chance.

(Had he known the girl would die anyway, it might have been different)

Rufus is out there, somewhere, and he's dangerous.

Back to the story:

(Idk what the plot really is but here goes)

The trio (Eddie, KT and Willow) discover the students used to live in Anubis House.

One night, they're playing truth or dare with their housemates: Stella, Marco, Anna, Raf and Peter. KT is dared to go down into the cellar, where she finds a secret panel. Behind it, she finds 7 balancing scales, an intricately decorated cup, and an empty bottle.

The scales have discs with names written on them. The names match those of the 7 students who died. However, the discs are only on one side of the scales, suggesting there were 7 more previously. KT takes the bottle to prove she went into the basement, and something compels her to take the discs as well, which she shows to Willow once they're back in their room.

They let Eddie know about it the next morning and the 3 begin to wonder if the students' deaths were really as they seemed.

Eddie is walking up the stairs when he trips on a loose floorboard. Annoyed, he goes to try and put it back into place when something catches his eye. It's a metal disc, tarnished with age. He cleans it up and sees the word Zeno printed on it.

He tells KT and Willow, and KT realises it must be from the scales she found. Something doesn't feel right, so they decide to investigate.

Eddie jokingly suggests they hold a seance, and despite Willows warnings, they do.

It doesn't seem to work.

The next day, Willow discovers an intruder in the house, someone who looks very similar to photos in the school...

Willow is unnerved but curious, so she says hey to them. They turn around, apparently spooked that someone can see them, and vanish.

Willow tells the others, who initially disbelieve her, but soon they come to meet the former residents of their boarding house.

The ghosts were obviously affected by their own deaths, and the fact that they're ghosts, but it's been 50 years now, so they're getting over it. They generally try to stay out of the students' ways, as they learnt that people generally freak out at the sight of ghosts.

They appeared as ghosts the same moment their lives transferred to the immortals, but were extremely weak and found it hard to keep themselves together. They were unable to dissipate completely though, something was keeping them there. They had to watch as Trudy was arrested; as their house was put out of action till an increase in students forced them to open it again 15 years later; as Victor still wandered the halls; as all the students came and grew and left while they were trapped in the house.

Unable to die, but unable to live.

Slowly, they began to gain more power, and for the past 10 years they've been able to hold a corporeal form for lengthening times, meaning they can actually do things and go places. They're capable of leaving the house for short distances and periods of time, though if they're out for too long they fade away and reappear back in the house with a killer headache.

They think (hope) this means the immortals are weakening, but it could just be they're getting used to the whole being dead thing.

Their lives were tied to the balancing scales and the person on the opposite side, so they each have some connection to an immortal

This means they get fleeting impressions/feelings from their immortal, which strengthens with their proximity.

Connected Immortal and Ghost:

Rodenmaar - Nina

Sweet - Fabian

Andrews - Amber

Delia - Alfie

Roebuck/Zeno - Jerome

Mercer - Joy

Winkler - Patricia

Amber gets the most impressions because Ms Andrews still teaches at the school

Nina and Jerome receive hardly any because both Zeno and Rodenmaar are unknowns

However, recently they've started getting fleeting emotions and visuals that aren't their own. The two missing immortals are becoming active and they're heading for the house.

The ghosts can't do much on their own so Eddie, KT and Willow have to be prepared to discover what these two immortals want and put a stop to it.

Eddie finds out that his dad was once Eric Sweet (he chose a different name after leaving the school, to distance himself), the former headmaster of the school and is horrified by the part he played in all this. A confrontation goes down.

There's a bit where they track down Mick and Mara, now in their 60s, and bring them back to Anubis House to reunite with their former housemates. It would be a really emotional scene because while most of them weren't close, you can't live in close quarters with people for a long time, without forming a bond. And when it ended so abruptly with no goodbyes...well.

They also track down the other immortals and bring them to the house to face their ghosts (literally). Ms Andrews regrets it immensely; Delia has no (some) regrets, but argues she's able to save many more lives this way, Jason is in denial.

Don't imagine immortal!Mercer finally seeing his daughter again, only she's a ghost and he caused her death. He's full of apologies, but they're all based around how he missed her, not how he cut her life short.

There would be a lot of regret and grief all round, and anger on the ghosts' part.

While Trudy probably wouldn't be alive after all this time, the trio and the ghosts want the immortals to clear her name.

Zeno and Rodenmaar arrive at the house. They're both searching for an ancient artefact hidden in the house.

(Is it the mask? Is it the Book of Isis? Robert Frobisher Smythe? Who knows? Not me.)

They also want to try and end the other because, why not. Grudges can last forever.

The trio also meet Sophia at some point, who is undergoing weird transitions as a result of the blood transfusion. Her body is fighting it while also trying to embrace it, and it causes her to randomly absorb life/energy from plants or other people. She can also transfer energy to other beings, but this causes her to collapse. She also still looks 14 when she should be in her 20s by now. The trio befriend her and try to figure out a cure.

While their existences are tainted with regret and bitterness, the ghosts still make their own fun. Sometimes they'll pull pranks on unsuspecting students, or just sit in the back of the class room to listen to the lessons like they're students again. They know for a fact Ms Andrews hasn't changed her curriculum in 50 years and can now recite her lessons by heart. They also like to play games in the house like tag or hide and seek, and they will admit its more fun when you can phase through walls.

When they reveal themselves to the trio, they enjoy tormenting them, but also help them with their games nights, charading the answers behind the other 5s backs. Everyone's had near misses with the 5, but somehow they remain oblivious to the SEVEN GHOSTS living in their house. But then again everyone else is oblivous to the fact the 5 are on some Arthurian quest.

I don't know how this story would end, but the best outcome is that they fight Zeno and Rodenmaar, and some truth comes out that Rodenmaar has discovered a way to reverse what was done and needs an artefact from the tunnels to conduct the ritual. Zeno, meanwhile has discovered another ritual that would give him the power from the other immortals to essentially make himself a god.

Naturally, both are trying to stop the other from achieving their goals.

Initially, KT, Eddie, Willow and the ghosts (and Sophia) attempt to stop both parties, but when they discover Victor's plan they work to take down Zeno. Once he's subdued (taken down by Sophia draining his energy), they summon the other 5 immortals.

Some of them take some convincing, but others are all too ready to give up this immortal life. They get time to tie off loose ends. Ms. Andrews hands in her resignation, Delia entrusts someone (Sophia?) with her work, Mercer has a long talk with his daughter, Eric has an even longer talk with his son. Victor spends his time in Anubis House, telling the kids his story and apologising for taking so long to fix his mistake.

Eventually, the ritual takes place, and the next day sees 7 new students enrolled who look uncannily like the students in the pictures.

(It takes them a while to adjust to the fact they can't walk through walls anymore)

[ill-be-istj-if-no-one-else-is]

Hello - I'm a bit confused about the impact of function stack on enneagram and I wondered if you could help. I can understand how switched dom/aux and tert/inf functions might make a type more or less likely, but how can it be the difference between "one of the most common types" and "so unlikely as to indicate a mistype"? In the case of enneagram 3, for example, it's often listed as one of the most common types for ENTPs but seems almost unheard of in INTPs. (1 of 2)

Given that INTP and ENTP have the same functions in a very similar order it seems odd to me that an enneagram could be so common in one but almost impossible in the other.  I can see how a leading extroverted function would make 3 (or 7) much more likely, but doesn't it seem like there should still be some instances of these types where the dom/aux functions are reversed?  Thank you very much (and I hope this wasn't a stupid question).  (2 of 2) 

----------------------

Hi anon,

It’s because many enneatypes have a simple correlation with extroversion or introversion (for good reason), and because function order really does make a big difference. 

A dominant introverted function means that someone will have a strong tendency to process or judge before they act, and on the flip side, a dominant extroverted function means that someone is going to be much more focused on acting in the real world than withdrawing from it, both of which have a huge impact on enneatype. 

I think the best example of this is 5 and 7 - both are head types with a great deal of curiosity and a certain acquisitiveness, but one deals with it by analyzing, observing, and then withdrawing to obsess over it (an introverted response) and one by avoiding painful things through distraction and a scattered, “experience everything” approach to the world. I suspect that put in a similar situation, an introvert would become a 5 and an extrovert would become a 7 (and I should note that while standard introversion and extroversion aren’t perfectly correlated with MBTI introversion and extroversion, they’re very closely correlated, and I also think that a tendency towards introversion/extroversion is often present in childhood in away the full function stack isn’t). As a result, Ti doms are quite likely to be 5s, but their Ti-aux counterparts, while still analytical and curious about the world, are more likely to channel these same things into 7.

Another major case is 3, and 3s are as a rule concerned with how they appear to others but specifically in the realm of being valuable and competent. This correlates highly with the extroverted judging functions. It competes with the others in its triad - 2 (being loveable) and 4 (being unique). Which is another thing to bring up - you can only have one core enneatype, so it is necessarily a zero-sum game and so a part of the answer is as simple as “there aren’t a lot of IxTP 3s because so many are 5s.” But getting back to 3: an ExTP is going to have noticeable Fe, and additionally, most thinkers aren’t really focused on 2 motivations (they may want to be liked, but they don’t have that same self-sacrificing, others needs first all the time drive) nor 4 (or rather, their uniqueness tends to manifest as being valuable and they become 3w4s). So an ExTP who is very invested in what others think of them and has that heart triad motivation will usually become a 3. 

Meanwhile, Ti-doms just...don’t care much what people think as a primary fear? They want validation - most people do - but it’s not on their radar in the same way it is for someone with high or even tert Fe. I suspect that if you managed to get a Ti-dom with a heart triad main fear they would end up being a 3 for the same reasons Ti-auxes are 3s rather than 2s or 4s, but that tert-Fe vs. inf-Fe does play a big role.

9 is another case -it’s not the most common in Te-auxes, but it’s quite rare in Te-doms, and that’s a fairly straightforward one where it’s defined by a certain inaction, which just isn’t what extroverts, especially Te doms - tend to do. An Ni or Si dom with aux Te is notably slower to act, more internally focused, and less likely to confront others than a Te-dom because Te is tempered by a function that tends to process things slowly and internally (and because their extroverted perceiving function is also lower).

I do want to quickly add - based on the information I have, 3 is one of the more common types for ENTP, so to speak but ENTP is highly concentrated in 7 and 8. The old eilamona MBTI/enneagram survey has over 50% of ENTPs enneatyping themselves as 7s, about 15% as 8s, and about 7% as 5s, and then another 6% or so as 3s (vs the roughly 1% of INTPs who say they are 3s). It’s the fourth most common but it’s not actually that common an enneatype in ENTP, it’s just more likely than say, enneagram 1. The fact that 7 is so prominent in ENTPs and then only accounts for around 1% of INTPs is a far more dramatic shift, but I hope my 5 and 7 talk covers that.

[sol1056]

S7: both here and there, pt1

The best word for S7 --- from a data standpoint --- is polarizing. 

The datasets have been pretty volatile, and that’s telling in and of itself. I’m sure by now you’ve heard about the earliest Rotten Tomatoes’ score for S7, at 13%. As word spread, I’m not kidding when I say I gleefully refreshed every five minutes to watch the votes jump up another 200 or so --- while the actual score inched upwards like molasses in January.

Crowd-sourced ratings --- Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB, Yelp, Good Reads, Amazon, etc --- aren’t unknown quantities anymore. We know the first round of reviews, the majority of the time, will produce the highest ratings. After that, it’ll slowly drop until it reaches an equilibrium (when a few votes could no longer tip the score). A break in that established pattern --- of the low votes coming in first --- is a bad sign. Displeased viewers are more likely to just turn off; it takes shit getting real --- or  personal --- to get action from the angry ones.  

A little context: the first 200 or so votes had an average of about 1.9, which is beyond abysmal. If it’d been a 2.5 to 3.0, that’d signal dislike. 1.9 is verging on serious rage --- and every time someone put out the cry that the average wasn’t climbing fast enough, it simply drew more attention to the developing schism.

S7 now has 2758 votes, 1.4 times more than S1-S6 put together. The fandom moved at a fever pitch, and many of those calls were exhorting fans to vote a flat 5. To still only get a 3.9 average means almost 700 people gave the season the lowest possible score. That’s one-quarter of the viewing populace. One-quarter. 

Let’s hypothesize the first 250 or so votes were a single cranky group. If everyone else was generally happy to give 4s or 5s, S7 would be at 91% with a 4.2 average. Without access to the actual breakdown, the only conclusion is that there was no single negative push. The anger continued, even as a larger group tried to cloak that anger with inflated values. 

And that’s just the simplest example of polarization and volatility I’m seeing in every dataset, which is why I waited a bit longer to report in. As a warning, there is no single value to say this season was good or bad; we’re going to have to consider all the data in context before we can pass judgment. 

We’ll start with the usual datasets to get a sense of estimated viewership and audience engagement and get the broad strokes. In the follow-up I’ll get into more datasets that will round things out for a fuller picture.

an explanation about Netflix ratings

For those of you just tuning in, Netflix is a black box. They never share the specific viewership data, and even the ‘trending’ is calculated based on the viewer + other various data. (Your trending on Netflix is not automatically the same list as someone else’s.) The few times anyone’s tried to capture viewing data, naturally Netflix swears the numbers are all wrong. 

The closest we can come is Wikipedia’s page analysis, which apparently correlates to Neilson ratings. That means we’re extrapolating that we could expect the same behaviors from viewers for digital shows. These aren’t the ‘real’ viewer numbers, but that’s fine. I’m using them for comparison, after all, so what really matters is the change, not the total. 

a note about the two core datasets

The wikipedia dataset and the google dataset are essentially measuring audience engagement. The drawback is that past 90 days, google’s dataset is combined into weeks, plus it’s relative. To compare multiple seasons, I’m stuck with by-week values. I prefer wikipedia’s dataset for this finer-grained look, because I can get down to the day.

However, I’ve taken the two datasets, merged by week, and compared. They map almost exactly, with a caveat, The release-week values for wikipedia are always higher than google’s by around 5%, and the between-release lull values on google are higher than wikipedia’s by about the same. The truth probably lies somewhere in the middle, but without actual numbers from google, eyeballing is it probably good enough for my purposes.

post-release tails comparison

A little over two weeks in, first thing is we check the tails, which are a measure of how long engagement lasts after a season’s release. There’ll be a peak, and then interest will taper off until it hits a threshold, usually the level of audience engagement in the lull between seasons. Sometimes, the tail is relatively flat and long (ie S6). In others, the tail is a bit steeper, indicating a quick drop-off (S3-S5). But it’s also a factor of how high the peak reached, in that some seasons will have farther to go (S1, S2) before reaching that lull threshold where the ‘tail’ ends.  

After S6 (yellow line) reversed the falling trend, S7 (dashed green line) is following the same path. If you were expecting a tremendous rise (or fall), you’d be disappointed; the surprise in S7 is that it has no surprises in this dataset. It’s holding the line established by S6, albeit at a higher engagement rate.

This graph takes the above, and adjusts so the peaks are equalized. Now we can see the tails in a better comparison. 

S7 wobbles in equal measure to balance out S6; the most we could say is that S7 is holding the line. It neither gained, nor lost. Because the two graphs above are daily, there’s a bit of noise. To streamline that, we’ll take the same data but gathered into weeks (Friday to following Thursday, as releases are always Friday). 

comparing the first four weeks of every season

Here we’re comparing the totals for the first week of all seven seasons, then the second week, etc. (S7′s data is incomplete for the 3rd week, so that green bar will probably increase.) 

Even here, there are some interesting details hiding in the data. Basically, the rate at which S6 built on S5 is pretty close to the rate on which S7 is building on S6. And the fact is... that’s not how multi-seasons stories usually work. 

comparing viewership peaks across seasons

As comparison, this is google’s interest over time tracker for House of Cards:

If a series is expected to go out with a bang, there's usually a spike for the final season, but all the seasons before will steadily degrade, and often by a regular percentage. A quick comparison of several multi-season, serial, shows (Orange is the New Black, Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt, Stranger Things, Daredevil, TrollHunters) seems to indicate the House of Cards pattern would be considered a successful show. Whenever it peaks, about 20% of those viewers will drop out, and after that, the numbers hold mostly steady, with perhaps a 5-10% drop at most. (Trollhunters breaks this mold with a 50% drop for S2, and a finale that almost matches its S1 peak.) 

With that in mind, let’s look at the rate of change from one point to another: the peak of season A to the peak of season B. They’re floating so you can see better how the drop from one affected the next. 

After S1, 31% of the audience dropped VLD. Of the remainder, 20% quit after S2; after S3, a further 20% didn’t come back for S4. This is where you can see S4's damage: 28% didn’t come back for S5. All told, between S1 and S5, 68% of the viewers quit the show. If VLD had been a Netflix original, S5 would have been its last season.

But thanks to marketing or hype, 17% of those lost viewers returned for S6, which in turn influenced the return of 22% more viewers for S7. None of the other shows had a mid-series rise, let alone a second increase. Viewership hasn’t caught back up to the levels after S2, though, but if I were to say any point turned around the sinking ship, it’s clearly S6.  

It’s too soon to say whether S7 will take that further, or if S7 is just holding onto the lead S6 put in place. We won’t really know that until S8.

weekly rate of change to see patterns

Some of the seasons peaked on the 2nd or 3rd day, so I started from that point; starting on the release date (with lower numbers) would camouflage that peak and defeat the purpose of this comparison. The question here is: can we see a pattern in viewership engagement over the first month after a release? 

With rate of change, the smaller the drop, the lower the difference. Frex, look at the 3rd and 4th weeks of S5. The difference between weeks 3 & 4, and weeks 4 & 5, is only 1%. That means the engagement level was dropping at a steady rate across those weeks. 

Now you can see the real damage: S4. Basically, a week after S4′s release, 78% of the audience checked out. Next to that, S5 regains a tiny bit of ground, and S6 increased that. So far, S7 is holding steady with S6. 

Again, S7 hasn’t lost ground, but it hasn’t really gained, either.

pre- and post-season context: measuring hype

What none of these graphs show, so far, is the context of each season. For that, we need to look across all the seasons. Again to reduce the noise (but not so much it’s flattened), I’ve collected days into weeks, starting on friday, ending the following thursday. The release week is marked with that season’s color.  

I know it’s kinda hard to see, here, sorry. To throw in a different dataset for a moment, here’s a simple track of all searches for ‘voltron legendary defender’ from May 2018 to now. 

This pattern echoes across several other datasets, btw. There’s a spike for S6, which never entirely drops off, and then we get a second spike for the premiere at SDCC. (Which is also the first time a between-season premiere has skyrocketed like that.) After SDCC, the base level stays high. 

In other words, does S7 appear as a larger spike because it began from a higher base rate? How do we compare season-to-season, when one starts at a radically elevated position compared to the rest?

The question became how to untangle hype from viewer reaction to the season. Here’s the viewership levels for S5, S6, and S7, again consolidated into weeks. 

After S5, things dropped pretty low. A week before S6, reviews, a trailer, and some wacky marketing hijinks lured a lot of people back in. Two things happened between S6 and S7 that are worth noting. 

The first, two weeks after S6, was the announcement that Shiro was no longer a paladin, and his link with Black had been severed. This weekly graph blurs the details slightly, but the drop you see in the next two light-gray columns actually starts the day after that announcement. 

The second gray bar is SDCC, where S7E1 premiered. In the gap between then and the week before release, the levels drop back to the new (higher) baseline. Excitement was high, propelling audience engagement. If hype is meant to increase engagement, and these datasets are capturing the same thing to some basic degree, there’s a value in what the pre-season week and post-season week could be telling us. 

the narrative in the data

If the week-prior is high, it means audiences are engaged due to pre-season marketing, trailers, rumors, and reviews. If the week-after is high, it means audiences are excited and engaging directly with the show itself. In other words, you could say week-prior measures how much people are buzzing or getting ready, and week-after measures how much they’re re-watching or encouraging others to watch.

For S1 and S2, the week-prior was really low. After S1 there was a splash in October, but not big enough to keep energy up through to S2. Both S1 and S2 had much higher week-after rates. The simplest reason would be that people who’d seen the season were now talking about it and raising buzz on their own, thus propelling further engagement. 

Until S7, S3 had the highest week-prior engagement --- and the first time there was a drop, comparatively, in the week-after. S4 follows that trend, with a much larger drop. S5′s before and after are close to equal, which to me says that whatever excitement was ginned up prior, the season didn’t have much of an impact one way or another. It feels almost apathetic, actually. 

S6 reverses the trend; people went into it barely more excited than they had been after finishing S5, but for the first time since S2, there was a post-release rise. Audiences were engaged again. Even with the drop from the post-season news, it wasn’t so far SDCC couldn’t rocket it back up again. But if you look at the graph above for S7, once again there’s a slight drop in the week-after. 

Given the level of week-prior excitement (especially with the SDCC spike still fresh in people’s minds), the lack of post-season buzz is noticeable. 

To get a better look, I’ve isolated the rate of change for each season, comparing week-prior and week-after. S1 and S2 had such extreme amounts (744% and 156% increases, respectively) that it torqued the entire graph. I’ve left them off so we can focus on S3 through S7. 

After S3, engagement dropped by 9%, indicating a less-enthused audience after seeing the season. S4 went further, dropping by 27%. S5 managed a small increase of 4%, and S6 increased engagement by 18%. 

S7 has a 2% drop. Not as bad as S3′s, but nowhere near the huge spike we should’ve seen, had the pre-season hype been borne out in the season itself. That excitement didn’t quite pop like S4; it’s more like a slow leak.  

comparing across datasets

One more thing before I wrap up this first post. Google’s data is on the left, and Wikipedia’s dataset is on the right, with the weeks marked that include the actual release date. (I did this in excel so the images don’t line up quite right, but hopefully it’s good enough to illustrate.)

With Wikipedia’s daily values added in a Fri-to-Thu week group, there’s only one week before a strong drop. With the Google calendar-style (Sun to Sat), S7′s second week goes even higher, and the drop is steep. 

In the Google numbers, 2/7ths of the green bar is ‘now showing on Netflix,’ and the remaining 5/7ths is the hype-based engagement levels. The same goes for the week following, which in google’s dataset is even higher; 5/7ths of that, plus the last 2 days of the week before, equal the S7 green bar on the Wikipedia dataset, on the right.   

And that means there was enough traffic in five days to propel an entire week to even higher than the week that contained the first two days of the season (which usually loom over all others by a noticeable degree). It’s even more remarkable when you look at the Wikipedia dataset, which is arranged to run from Friday to the following Thursday -- and which does have a drop-off. 

I’ll be tapping a few more datasets to unpack this anomaly, in my next post. I’ll warn you now, they paint a very different picture of S7. 

part 2 can be found here  

[splashdragon]

THE CODES OF GRAVITY FALLS

@aceofstars16: Ask and ye shall receive!

CAESAR CIPHER

Notes: This cipher is one of the most common ones in the show. Each letter is replaced with a letter three spaces before it, cycling back around for A, B, and C. It’s also really easy to read once you get the hang of it - I actually became (briefly) fluent in it while I was reading the journal.

Appears in: Season 1, Season 2, the ending credits of at least six episodes, the Journal, Lost Legends, and probably other places as well.

How to spot it: The word WKH (“the”) is a dead giveaway. Other good tells are the single-letter word L (”I”) and words with more Fs and Hs than should be legal.

ATBASH CIPHER

Notes: Of the three non-combination ciphers in this show, this one is probably the least common. Instead of shifting the alphabet, the Atbash flips it, making it less tedious to translate - you only have to know half the alphabet to get all the letter combinations (e.g. Y is a coded B and B is a coded Y).

Appears in: The ending credits of seven episodes in Season 1. I’m not sure if there are other places, but I don’t remember using it much.

How to spot it: Look for lots of Vs, Zs, and “the” (coded as GSV) .

A1Z26

Notes: Takes up more space but it’s a nice change from all the letters. 

Appears in: The last credit messages of Season 1, minus Gideon Rises. 

How to spot it: It’s numbers instead of letters. . . and when you use it, it doesn’t turn into gibberish. You also won’t get lone fives after apostrophes, since English doesn’t do that.

THE TRIPLE-DECKER

Notes: This one. . . doesn’t actually have a real name, so forgive the sandwich reference. It’s a combination cipher, so you need to use the ciphers listed above to translate it (first A1Z26, then Atbash, then Caesar). The translation key I listed is the three of those combined because I’m really lazy efficient. Use whichever you want.

Appears in: The episode credits at the end of Gideon Rises, then the journal pages at the end of Season 2′s episodes. I haven’t run into it elsewhere, as far as I can remember.

How to spot it: Start translating the credit message with A1Z26 and realize it’s gibberish. Remember one of the coded journal messages in the end tag said reverse the ciphers and take it as a clue. Feel like a genius when it works. (In all seriousness, look for the word 4-16-19, or words ending with apostrophe-5s.)

VIGENÈRE CIPHER

The best translation key I can give you on this particular disaster is the Wikipedia page.

Notes: This is as complicated as these ciphers get. I am very good enemies with this particular coding approach, because it takes literally forever to translate things, and sometimes you copy down several paragraphs worth of coded letter and then realize halfway through that one of those words has four letters instead of three so sorry about that evening you spent writing everything out but hey at least it wasn’t a waste. . . oh wait

Appears in: The season two credit messages, the journal (aka that one letter with Blendin’s picture), and Lost Legends. Each time it shows up, there’s a different code word used, and you’ll need to find that in the episode or book. I’m still looking for about half the keys, but I’m sure there’s a list you could Google up if you didn’t want to spend all that time hunting every frame.

How to spot it: Try the other ciphers and get gibberish. Alternatively, you could notice that normal letter frequency is skewed, or you could (with luck) spot the key first and make a reasonable inference.

FORDESE

Notes: This one cracks me up because there is nothing more quintessentially Ford than creating your own cipher and then naming it after yourself. The cipher does share some symbols with Bill’s journal cipher, but they’re two different codes.

Appears in: The journal, Lost Legends, and maybe some places in the show (I haven’t gone through to check that last one yet, so it’s possible the show uses its own version of this code).

How to spot it: Look for mirrored Ns, upside-down triangles, and squares with dots in the middle.

BILL’S CIPHER

Notes: Technically a combination cipher, since the code wheel in the journal translates it to A1Z26. It uses symbols very similar to Fordese. (My personal theory is it’s supposed to be a mockery of Ford’s attempts at hiding things via ciphers, and Bill takes great pleasure in using very similar code to baffle him. If you also consider that Ford was previously amused by the thought of others failing to decipher his codes. . . well.)

Appears in: The journal (the key is across from the Trust No One page). I haven’t come across it elsewhere, as far as I can remember.

How to spot it: The triangle with circles at the corners and the two circles in a sideways bracket aren’t part of Fordese. Also the lack of mirrored Ns is a pretty good clue.

Anyway, that’s everything I know of. If anyone has anything more to add, please do! I’m terrible at catching things and it’s fun to see what everyone else picks up on.