#maintained action

[cici-blog-life]

Essential Considerations for Installing Metal Push Button Switches

When it comes to installing button switches, particularly metal push button switches, there are several important factors to consider. Proper installation ensures optimal performance, functionality, and safety of the switches in your electrical systems. In this article, we will explore the key aspects that require attention when installing metal push button…

[bluegiragi]

work it out (part 2)

early access + nsfw on patreon

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Gaslight, Gatekeep, Girl found dead in a hidden room.

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[hellafluff]

Garrus' interactions with Shepard post-Thessia are so fucking well written. Everyone else is telling Shepard they're sorry or doing a soft sad voice asking if she's okay but Garrus has this moving little speech about how losing a fight isn't the end of the war and I just. He's so fucking good. He knows what Shepard needs to hear and has the experience to back up the things he says. He's so good to her

[qiu-yan]

Serious Bitch Opinion: lan wangji...would be a terrible chief cultivator. yes, he is righteous and honorable and has a stalwart moral backbone. however, when you are given the responsibility of leading others, the impeccability of your own moral character must come second to what tangible results you can actually achieve for your people. and if you want to actually achieve any tangible results, instead of getting deadlocked forever or getting done in by your political enemies, you have to learn to compromise on some of your ideals. instead of freezing out the people you find morally despicable, you must learn to cooperate with them; otherwise, you will not achieve anything. and in order to achieve your goals, you must learn that not all of your goals are achievable--that, in order to get the more important of your desired measures passed, you must give up on some others.

now, this is almost the polar opposite of what MDZS as a text champions. arguably one of the central thematic thrusts of MDZS is the importance of not compromising on your ideals, even when it would be far more pragmatic to do so. thus, if lan wangji wanted to become a leader who could actually achieve things, he would have to directly contradict one of the most important messages of the very text that valorizes him.

the moral framework employed by MDZS to evaluate its characters and convey its themes is much more focused on ideals than on results. what matters to MDZS as a narrative is ultimately not the results of one's actions, whether one's righteousness led to joy or to ruin, but rather that one attempted to be righteous even in the face of almost inevitable failure. attempt the impossible, after all. the text of MDZS does not follow utilitarian ideas; it does not condemn wei wuxian for ultimately failing to save almost anyone. rather, wei wuxian's stalwart moral character is celebrated in spite of his failures because he, unlike everyone else, tried.

unfortunately--while someone who is only responsible for their own life can attempt the impossible, someone who is responsible for the lives of millions must instead achieve the achievable.

[throwawayblog-thrwaway]

not voting isn’t “burning the system down” you absolute dipshits. if you actually wanted to burn the system down you’d literally be burning down the homes of congressmen, but most of y’all don’t actually want that, you just want to roleplay as a radical online for cookie points from the other members of your self-righteous hypocritical circlejerk.

your glorious revolution isn’t coming because you’re too goddamn chickenshit to actually revolt. go and actually fucking do something or just shut the fuck up

[ty-bayonet-betteridge]

forever thinking about how the long quiet embracing their full divinity involves The Voices coming back. like yeah being plural is basically the same thing as being a godi'll cosign that

[soup-future]

pete white being the one to finally kill jonas venture is a moment that always gets me. jonas gets killed unceremoniously, without celebration or mourning, by a side character with little relation to him. there is no consequences for this action, because it fundamentally does not matter. jonas has haunted the narrative (quite literally) up to this point, nearly every plot point in this show can be related back to him - from the creation of the venture brothers, to the birth of the monarch, to everything that happens with the guild. the show is about jonas venture, and the consequences of his actions. to have THAT man be killed by his son's weird friend from college just ... jonas would have thought he deserved a hero's death, dying for a greater cause surrounded by friends. but he did not get that, he didn't deserve it.

[electrosheep3000]

[silvadour]

[zukosdualdao]

forever on my “multiple things can be true at once” crusade because the thing about zuko’s banishment is that yes, in some ways, as zuko says, it’s probably the best thing that could’ve happened to him because it eventually led him to the right path by seeing the cruelty of the fn (and also got him at least physically out of an abusive household in which we know for a fact he was in imminent physical danger on more than one occasion.) but that can be true, and it’s also STILL true that it was an incredibly cruel thing to do, because it was fundamentally ozai simultaneously trying to isolate and humiliate zuko while keeping him under ozai’s thumb. he sent zuko on what was, at the start at least, a wild goose chase he never expected zuko to actually fulfill but that kept him constantly desperate to accomplish it. we also see, by way of zuko’s dynamic with zhao, that not only has zuko lost any social status or respect he may have once held, but his resources are decidedly, comparatively less. in banishment, zuko is not welcome in his homeland, but he isn’t truly welcome anywhere else, either, unless he hides who he is (as he has to do in book two) and you can’t tell me ozai wouldn’t KNOW that. like i’m sorry but whenever people act like this was genuine ‘mercy’ or ‘giving zuko a chance’ it is a FUNDAMENTAL misread of ozai’s intentions.

[lovesodeepandwideandwell]

One of my old nemeses is on the interview committee for this job ... Truly every day brings new heights of sanctification to be sought

[ducktracy]

are you anti "sour-puss" daffy? that characterization of him is the primary one in my head. like duck amuck is epitome of daffy in my mind.

CRACKS KNUCKLES SO LOUDLY THEY EXPLODE. i’m giving my “HEADS UP THIS WILL LIKELY BE EXHAUSTIVE” warning now because i love love love love love love love love any chance to talk and analyze and pontificate about the duck. TLDR: YES AND NO

SO. i don’t consider myself “anti sour-puss” so much as i would consider my stance “if Daffy has to be more egocentric and miserly than he usually is then i prefer a very specific set of circumstances for this to be the case”. i have warmed up to the Jones and Freleng duck of the ‘50s onward CONSIDERABLY in recent years—there was a point where i just refused to touch any Daffy short made after a certain point because i knew it would make me frustrated and sad and mad and that’s, respectfully, ridiculous!

it took me watching the Speedy and Daffy cartoons to realize that Daffy in THOSE shorts is what i thought Daffy was in the Jones and Freleng shorts. it dwindles a bit over time (compare how he behaves in The Hunting Trilogy to something like Ali-Baba Bunny, which is a short i still have yet to come around to for that reason—i don’t like the “MINE MINE MINE GO GO GO DOWN DOWN DOWN” duck very much and my issue was that i thought he behaved that way in every single cartoon after a certain point which is thankfully incorrect!), but there’s still some nuance. by the time we’re getting to shorts where Daffy is saying “HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU NOT TO STARVE ON MY PROPERTY” is when i fully throw in the towel lol

another thing that’s helped me warm up is the realization that Daffy’s personality change is not nearly as objective as it’s made out to be. he has always had an ego, he’s always been reckless, impulsive, and yes, this absolutely includes the ‘30s shorts! Chuck’s Duck is Chuck’s Duck from day one with the line “not bad for a guy that never took a lesson in his life!”.

Scalp Trouble has Daffy on an ego trip fancying himself as an army general (and there is a legitimate, honest to god small dick metaphor joke in that short because he has this huge giant sword sheath that is indiscreetly phallic in design, only to reveal a tiny little dagger), ordering people around and essentially LARPing in this role we immediately know is way too big for him. and when it comes time to battle, what does he do but spend the majority of his time cowering in a corner.

he’s always had these traits! maybe they’re a bit more primitive earlier on, some other traits are a greater priority. but Drip-Along Daffy is one of my favorite Chuck Jones shorts because it’s basically a sequel to The Great Piggy Bank Robbery. and you could argue the same with Duck Dodgers! all shorts have him fantasizing about a hero role that is clearly too big for him to fill, and he is absolutely getting the biggest kick out of assuming this role. Drip-Along is still early enough to also have this sort of innocence and unflappability (that may more accurately be described as delusion or ignorance): when Daffy gets no reception whatsoever in the bar, instead of screaming at everyone to look at him, he just marches to the next order of business and indulges in his next part of his fantasy. this NEVER would have happened had the short come out 5-10 years after when it did.

likewise, the Daffy of the ‘50s and ‘60s is still insane, it’s just a different manifestation of how that’s the case. earlier on, he’s a bit more visibly unhinged. his HOOHOOHOOing fits are a catharsis that you can just FEEL crawling up his throat and dying to get out, and in the really early shorts you can see this sort of half and half battle between cognizance and succumbing to insanity (The Daffy Doc and Porky’s Last Stand especially come to mind). it’s an insanity that relieves itself through sheer manic catharsis. as time goes on, he matures a bit, he knows how to keep better wraps on it; the manners in which he gratifies his impulses just shifts.

and also, Daffy can still very much be a sourpuss early on! Bob McKimson’s Daffy, whose interpretation is very integral in my sort of mental default of who Daffy is, can be very bitter and cynical in particular! or, again, early shorts like The Daffy Doc or Scalp Trouble where he’s more argumentative and his ego is clearly much more tender.

the seeds of what Daffy would become have all been planted, and so that’s allowed me to bristle a bit less and lower my haunches. and i am making more progress in coming around to the later shorts! i’ve been on a Chuck Jones kick recently and been watching lots of Chuck Jones Daffy shorts and enjoying them. i love Drip-Along, Duck Dodgers, Duck Amuck, Deduce You Say, Robin Hood Daffy—i’ve even come around to Rabbit Seasoning which is kind of NUTS to me because there was awhile where i was acting like Bugs and Daffy shorts killed my firstborn. “pronoun trouble” is an inside joke with my friend and dear lord i laugh every time at Daffy’s reactions to Elmer falling for Bugs’ drag act, and the ENDING!!!! omg. i love it. i’ve come around to Beanstalk Bunny as well! it’s a great short!! in getting to know the duck better and understanding how nuanced his development is, i’ve gone a bit softer which is good.

i was just chatting about this recently—i think most of the thorns in my side come from the Daffy and Bugs pair-ups. what i like best and get most out of each character, i get none of when they’re together. i’d rather see Bugs behaving and doing something else, and the same for Daffy. i’m not opposed to a sourpuss Daffy so much as i really don’t like seeing him suffer. i feel like the Bugs and Daffy shorts “punch down” a bit more on him, and i still haven’t found a way to really properly articulate this… i’ll just copy and paste what i was saying the other day here:

Daffy earlier on has all the traits above we talked about, but the difference is that he isn’t really shamed for them outright? of course we’re meant to laugh at his cowardice as he says “go… back… in again….” to the giant towering rat gangster he screamed at to confront him, we’re of course supposed to laugh at the asininity and selfishness of him dodging the draft and taking the Little Man From the Draft Board down with him by locking him in a safe and suffocating him. Daffy isn’t exactly meant to be a role model (but that still doesn’t stop me from finding his bombasm and exuberance and zest for life extremely empowering!), but there’s less narrative pushback against it. seeing Daffy be Daffy and have every action be interrupted by another character rolling their eyes going “oh brother” is where i have a problem, it just sucks the air out of the room for me. especially when Daffy is made to feel ashamed or beaten down for this as well. that’s why i enjoy shorts like Beanstalk Bunny or Drip-Along so much, ending with stuff like “it’s a living!” or being contented in his new position that is often very degrading and a direct consequence of his impulsiveness. a huge part of Daffy’s charm for me is his resilience (even if that equates to ignorance at times), if he wants something he will go to absolutely asinine lengths to get it! and i love that! his drive is so admirable! and i just feel like after awhile that resilience is lost. the issue isn’t that Daffy is a loser, as he’s lost quite a bit before that—moreso, he doesn’t have that good humor about being a loser anymore

I’M ALMOST DONE I PROMISE. but my tags in that video post, as i said in them, i watched The Million Hare the other day which is a short i very much dislike. and it’s not really out of anger or “UUUURGH NOT MY DAFFY”, but moreso it just makes me SO. DAMN. DEPRESSED.

this is the most soul sucking image i’ve ever seen. i get genuinely sad that the cartoons have devolved to starting with “characters watching TV because they’re too bored to do anything, and Bugs just joins him”. no part of this is the resilient, impulsive, manic, pleasure seeking duck that carried us through the past few decades. and this certainly doesn’t represent the wily, impish, inciting rabbit of the past few decades either! Bugs has a greater excuse since i know there’s the pattern of his domestication and Jones’ rule of Bugs minding his own business before being provoked, etc. but man. this image just represents all of my problems with the later shorts and dynamics. the characters are hollow and so are the stories and the directors are checked out or moving onto greater things, and i think all of that just coagulates and manifests in the characters.

I HAVE SO MUCH MORE I CAN SAY but i’m finally realizing i’ve gone on way way way too long and don’t even know if i answered the question all that well LOL. don’t even get me started on “modern”interpretations of Daffy… [starts ranting about how TLTS killed my family for the 80th time as i’m gently lured into the nursing home].

BUT! to answer your question! i’m not really opposed to a more cynical and conceited duck because those traits have always been there, just in varying degrees of intensity. my ideal duck is definitely one locked in the ‘40s—Frank Tashlin and Bob Clampett’s Daffy have always been my favorite, but i’ve sort of adopted a coagulation of Art Davis, Bob McKimson, Norm McCabe and Friz Freleng’s duck as my mental default. i am extremely protective and loving and fanatical of Daffy, i love him more than any cartoon character and i resonate with him more than any cartoon character! i bet he too would also spend an hour typing up a diatribe on his character evolution and how he’s been sorely misrepresented. maybe. Daffy is one of the most varied characters of all time, and it’s really hard to pin him down for this reason. i like a duck that best has a bit of a balance between his traits, and i get more chafed when he’s made more narrow and transparent and just “flanderized” (for lack of a better word) to one or two tropes that then speak louder than his character. i prefer shorts that are more sympathetic and celebratory of Daffy rather than admiring how funny he is as a loser. which, he is funny! but IUNNO. i like a more upbeat and resilient and charming duck, and he can be all of these things later on, but it unfortunately does get fleeting

[poorly-drawn-mdzs]

Cannot Unsee. Cannot Unknow.

[First] Prev <–-> Next

[s-aint-elmo]

digging out my eah content part 2: be the cupid and monsters reunion you want to see in the world

ID: a set of four digital drawings of c.a. cupid and blondie lockes from ever after high. one: blondie whispers in cupid’s ear, her speech bubbles containing monster high’s skullette and a bat, while cupid listens, wide-eyed. two: a scribbly cupid kicks down a door, tearfully exclaiming, “ghouls holy fuck” in mimicry of the phineas and ferb “mom holy fuck” meme. three: blondie winks and throws a peace sign at the camera in the foreground, while, off-screen frankie, cupid and draculaura reunite by calling out each other’s names. raven, also off-screen, wonders, “wait, didn’t headmaster grimm lock the door?” four: the screen iris outs on blondie, still winking, like the endcard to a cartoon. 

[sage-nebula]

I still stand by Lanolin, btw. Whisper and Silver had zero evidence to back their claims. Yes, they were right — but there was no way for Lanolin or anyone else in-universe to know that, and you can't both be just and arrest / assault people without evidence. The right thing to do is to defend the accused, ESPECIALLY when the prosecution has nothing to do to back their claims.

Lanolin was wrong about Duo, but her actions in that moment (given the info she had and the evidence Whisper and Silver lacked) was just. I really hope the comic doesn't try to claim otherwise.