#sorry main tag just block me

[svtskneecaps]

i also just want to point out the qsmp members' commitment to like never letting the inactive members die. like dantdm logged on twice and is canonically dead and everyone continues to blame mysterious happenstance on him. spreen is canonically dead and yet people are still like namedropping him even tho the house façade he built has been demolished and also probably consumed by a mountain. they meme on kameto who's barely been on except that time he was a fed spy that was iconic as hell. they just immortalize their members and they're always so happy to see old faces come back and it lowkey makes me emotional lmfaoo like missa barely logged on for a while but goddamn nobody forgot his name bc philza can't go one day without mentioning him and mariana barely logs on but every time fit saw the homeless mariana in roier's city no matter what he'd stop dead and tell it "come home" and when slime came back to the server for elections after having logged off for the last like two months everyone was still excited to meet him bc the others had kept his memories on the server fresh and alive, maxo died canonically in the nuke and pierre pasted his face all over the server, luzu vanished for months and we never forgot him either thanks to the computers and foolish's wack ass family tree. like when purgatory teams were chosen and team red constantly joked about how it would be so over for the other teams once germán logged on despite the fact that germán had only ever logged on ONCE, the way they cheered when they snatched rubius in the split of green despite the fact that rubius hadn't logged on more than twice since march. they just keep the names alive all the time and it's like

it just makes me really happy to see. like it makes me really happy. like the admin team and the members alike are like 'no way in HELL are we letting your memory go' like damn once ur on isla quesadilla you really are stuck as an islander forever :D

[khihi]

if you dislike rpf and think a normal response to someone just having fun with rpf is to steal their hard work and paste it on a more public platform where the real people in question are more likely to see it then i don't think there's much help for you, i think you're probably just addicted to performative morality and are more of an asshole than you realise

[triangular-static]

look i understand if people just don't like the idea of billford, i think we have a different internal concept of what shipping means (they're not good for each other at all but i need to dissect their dynamic like a bug. you understand. it's fun) but it's fine to avoid things you don't like, good for you genuinely

however people saying they like. don't see it. like. i'm not saying there's no platonic way to read it, i'm aroace spec myself i'm all for reading things in different ways. but i do think saying they weren't partners in any queer sense at all is trying too hard to go against what the narrative is trying to say, or missing it. somehow

anyway media literacy time if a character makes a joke like this

and the previous context of that joke within the show is that it's about an ex wife. what connection do you think the text is trying to get you to make.

and that's just from a writing point of view. not even noting that from an in universe perspective ford likely knows the joke from the same source as stan. and is therefore. placing himself in that role of the joke are you seeing where i'm coming from

(not to mention bill's side of this text which is. extremely manipulative but also does not read very platonic. again, it can technically be read as platonic! bill literally can manipulate ford's feelings. but the specific wording used is very much meant to look like possessive ex partner wording whether the character means it that way or not. it's coding. look again i'm not saying it was good for them i'm just saying there was something there.)

and then there's also the divorce/break up/rock bottom input on the website. like. how else is that supposed to be read. and the corresponding page in the book itself.

the language being used here. like yes he's saying it in a joking way but then there's the other side that isn't joking which is him crying at the bar. it's the both sides (the very coded language on top of the very genuine emotions and dynamic beneath)

i know most of us are on the same page with this i've just seen a couple people saying they don't see it when this is some of the most clear cut coding i've ever seen. and these are just the things that explicitly reference a relationship off the top of my head i'm not even including the general vibes of Everything

tl;dr it's barely even subtext anymore it's all but straight up text. what's not clicking have we forgotten what coding is (lighthearted i just enjoy the phrase what's not clicking. what's not clicking)

[thatswhatsushesaid]

imagine being so bereft of joy that you cannot stop yourself from leaving this comment on a benign "look at this fun fandom mug my spouse bought me, enjoy this funny personal anecdote to go with it" post

sorry for existing i guess???

[the-way-astray]

huh what was your rant’s main argument

this post is in no way a proper response to katie's response, so i just wanna make that clear from the start. i am actually going to make one of those. so this is not that.

the main argument of my rant is not "here is a list of keefe's worst qualities, doesn't he suck? now everyone point and laugh what a shitty/annoying/cringe/whatever-else-i-said guy" (well, except for the stuff that i said was subjective, like his humor). the main argument of my rant is that keefe's worst qualities never. impact. how. he. interacts. with. the. story. not a single flaw of his has any consequences, either plot-based or relationship-based. not a single bad moment redefines him in the audience's eyes (or is meant to, as written by shannon) or in sophie's. not a single shitty height he reaches has ever ever ever ever been portrayed as negative for longer than zero point four seconds. not one thing he does has any lasting, negative consequences, not for him, not for the people around him. not one thing. not one single thing.

the thing that confuses me about katie's response is that she is well aware that this is my main gripe with keefe. i am not silent about it in the slightest. i do not care that keefe uses his empathy dubiously. i do not care that he handed the cache over at the end of neverseen. i do not care that he breaches boundaries, or that he humiliates sophie constantly, or that he's infinitely stupid and reckless, or that he can't be serious during serious moments. serious. do not give one single shit about any of these things.

what i actually care about, my unending problem with keefe's character, my main gripe, the thing that will never stop annoying me about keefe, is that these things do not result in keefe facing any consequences for doing them, nor are they even villified by the narrative.

i understand that keefe's dubious use of empathy is because of his father. i know that he ran away to the neverseen because of his mom's manipulation. i get that he breaches sophie's boundaries because he genuinely might think he's helping, and that he humiliates sophie because he doesn't know when to stop, and that he's reckless and stupid because that's his character flaw and because he's trying so hard so fight his mom and make sure she doesn't hurt anyone else, and whatever else katie pulled out in her response to explain keefe's shitty behavior. i am aware. i know this. i am not trying to argue that keefe is a bad character because he has flaws and does bad things. that would be incredibly weird.

no, my main argument is that keefe's flaws do not function as flaws, but rather just as bad traits that, half the time, shannon herself does not seem to even be aware are bad.

here is a fantastic example. okay here goes: keefe has issues regarding not knowing where the boundaries are with empathy because he grew up with his fucked-up abusive father who likely extorted information out of him the same way he does with sophie and others (and also likely because he's brainwashed into thinking the law is moral, and there's no actual law against doing this).

now that i've passed katie's test, let's play my game: name one time keefe's using his empathy has, in the long-term, affected his relationships with people. name one time it's truly demonized and made out to be a bad thing by the narrative beyond "oh the person was angry and muttered something about empaths or glared at keefe". name one time it actually affects how keefe interacts with the story. name one time this flaw, something both katie and i agree on, actually affects keefe's relationships. name one time he's sorry, name one time he learns or grows out of it, name one time it's even just made out to be a shitty thing, and not in a "oh, that's just a thing keefe/empaths do, isn't it so annoying? oh well, guess we'll all just put up with it". name one time this flaw is actually recognized by shannon as a flaw. name one time. name one single time. name it. i want to hear it.

in theory, this is supposed to be a thing the reader keeps in mind as they read all my points. i think i actually did say after one of my points something to the effect of, "i'm not actually mad about [thing], it's just that keefe never faces consequences for [thing], which does make me mad. this is also something that applies to a lot of points i make, but it would get repetitive to say that after every single point i make, so just keep in mind that that's the angle i'm coming from". maybe it wasn't as clear as it was the way i just said it now (which i will keep in mind and change during the part two rant), but yeah. none of my points are meant to be "oh look at him isn't he so [flaw]" and stop right there with no further thought. they are meant to be proof that whatever keefe did is bad, so that when i get around to the back half of the rant, i can then say that [bad thing] is never developed or even made out to be bad. so, uh. yeah. here's a few times i say this in the rant itself:

also wanted to mention this quote (from katie's response):

the reason keefe reads as flat to me is that none of his flaws ever affect how he interacts with the story, not in any long-term negative-consequence sense. you can explain and over explain why keefe is the way he is all you want, but that will never change the fact that this is fully not at all my gripe with keefe. not even a little bit. explanation does not equal justification, and certainly it does not equal consequences. where are the consequences, shannon. where are they. where. where. i don't see them. i don't think they exist, actually.

YES!!!! EXACTLY!!!! IT DOESN'T JUSTIFY IT, IT EXPLAINS IT!!!! THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M SAYING. YES. YOU GET IT. so you agree that this is shitty behavior. okay, cool. now name the place where keefe gets what he deserves for this. if this is shitty, it follows that it is a flaw, right? and if it's a flaw, it should be penalized, right? it should be made out to be a bad thing, right? now. where does this happen.

katie also makes a lot of arguments like this:

well, i actually did acknowledge fitz's main flaw at one point (exile incident, there's a screenshot a few paragraphs up), and i actually did explain why i don't think other characters (in this case, fitz) tend to be as bad as keefe. it's because there's actual development there with fitz's anger, and even if there wasn't, it's definitely vilified by the narrative. (i'd also like to say that katie responded to the bullet containing that fitz-from-exile section, but for some reason decided to cut out that section when quoting me in her response. i felt that was an important part of my argument, and that therefore its absence diminishes my point. in theory, this should not matter, but in reality, there are clearly people that are reading katie's response without reading my original post, and making judgement calls based on that.)

in conclusion, katie has made an argument. a good argument, even. one i actually mostly agree with, which is why i'm having such trouble writing a response to her essay. it's just that what she wrote is not (broadly speaking) a counterargument to what i wrote. it disproves nothing of my main point. nothing katie has told me is new information. i've read her pro keefe essay, which she knows. i'm aware that for everything keefe does that is shitty, there is a reason. genuinely it almost feels like an insult to my intelligence to imply i'm not aware of these things, especially considering shannon has a tendency to beat us over the head with the keefe pity party. i know why keefe is or does [insert flaw here]. i know exactly why it happens. i am aware. that does not change the fact that explaining why it occurs does absolute jackshit to change the objective fact that keefe's flaws are usually brushed aside or made out to be way less offensive than they really are. and honestly, if a flaw doesn't affect how a character interacts with the story, can we even really call it a flaw anymore? at that point, it's just a bad trait.

[ghost-bard]

Hiyaaa my FHsona’s silly outfits, inspired by @cloudmancy giving his fhsona fun fits!

Image I.D. in alt text!

Fun fact, the pants in the adventuring fit are just. another pair of sweatpants, but slightly modified. comfort trumps everything lets gooo, more fun facts under the cut as per the usual!

Lets seeee some fun info about him because idk its fun

the name rain is from my usn on every other social except for tumblr (and ao3 but i dont think that counts-), and they use any (and all) pronouns :]]]]

they do community service after certain school days and on the weekends

i imagine they're part of some sort of gaming club

very chill person, although they are a bit antisocial

and she's usually found playing on their switch

all in all, wow she just like me fr (but literally)

anyway, what if, teehee, i got sent some fhsonas... to maybe draw with my lil guy... and they interacted... wouldnt that be crazy... just kidding haha... unless-

[glitterfish1272]

Listen, I don't like to involve myself with drama, nor do I like to defend people that donate money to horrible people. But seeing people compare Scott Cawthon to JK Rowling and saying they're the same kind of person is just INSANE???? Let me get this straight: Scott Cawthon is not a transphobe. He does not dislike transgender people. He does not dislike gay people. He himself has said that he loves all his fans no matter what identity and sexuality they may have. JK Rowling HATES trans people. She goes on social media to spread hate. She puts transphobic content in her books. She actively wants other people to BECOME transphobic people. Scott Cawthon? He's just a dumbass. I'm not going to sit here and tell you he's a saint, because he's not. He did something very harmful, but he didn't do it TO be harmful. He said it himself that he donated to the people he did for reasons totally unrelated to their views on queer people. He is a good person at heart, he just doesn't realize the things he does with his money have much greater consequences for those that aren't what he is - a white christian republican male living in Texas. Speaking of which - I know all of those things combined typically scream "THERE ARE ONLY TWO GENDERS NO CHILD OF MINE WOULD EVER BE ONE OF THEM QUEERS" but he is NOT one of those people!! Those types of people would never intentionally include non-binary people in their products, let alone SEVERAL of them, and completely intentionally. Mangle, Funtime Foxy (and therefore also Lolbit), and Spring Bonnie are all very intentionally and canonically non-binary characters in his games. Mangle and Funtime Foxy go by both She and He pronouns, and Spring Bonnie's loading screen caption in FNAF World says "Male? Female? It's a rabbit, who cares." A piece of scum "I have no pronouns" republican would never willingly include something like this. Not only that, there is a canon wlw relationship in one of the Fazbear's Frights books. It's very minor and unimportant, but if he actively hated gay people, he would not include a gay relationship in something he is directly writing. At the end of the day, you have every right to dislike Scott Cawthon for the things he has done. You don't have to give him a cent of your money if you don't want to, and you're free to enjoy the things he creates without supporting his views. You are not a bad person for liking FNAF. But comparing Scott Cawthon to JK Rowling is absolutely absurd. They are NOWHERE near the same level of evil. He's just dumb and rich.

[mothbeasts]

sometimes I wish I wasn't a hater over such stupid things but like. it all builds up and boils over and if I can't be a hater about stupid fandom drama I'm vaguely involved in I know it will actually ruin my life. c'est la vie.

[llitchilitchi]

sometimes I wish this site had a mute option

[apfelhalm]

I ship saxloch. in the very traditional sense that I want them to bang and be happy together, but also in the sense of that there is something deeply wrong with these freaks and I want to explore that. their dynamic is incredibly fascinating and I think what makes them different from other incest ships I've had is not only that they're canon, it's one of the rare instances where the circumstances mirror how real incest might come to happen. like, this is not romantic (though I have no trouble reading it as such), this is a trainwreck. and I LOVE trainwrecks. I love all the different takes in the tags, whether they're horny or funny or analysing the grooming in a very serious way. all of it is part of saxloch to me and what makes the ship so compelling

[lavender-temult]

movie night in their box!

[queerofthedagger]

fandom/character disk horse below /lh

i really don't have strong feelings about thingol one way or another beyond the occasional, heartfelt dude or yeah that's fair, but i'll say that sometimes people will just dislike your favourite lil guy and sometimes they will like them "wrong" and there is nothing to be done about it. and i do entirely mean this in regard to both thingol and the feanorians. like this is the it wildly depends on your interpretation of the text fandom can't we just leave it at that. i am begging actually

[svtskneecaps]

feel like the global tasks sweep strat should probably be nerfed somehow. my thought would be, give each team an individual ten minute overall cooldown on global task claims. that is to say, a certain team can only claim one global task per ten minutes. say, deliver gas masks, and then in ten minutes you're allowed to deliver tea, and then after another ten minutes you can claim hot chocolate.

another teams would be able to claim a global task for bananas during this time, and their own ten minute cooldown would start.

(the global tasks can either keep their individual ten minute cooldown [i.e. after tea is claimed no one else can claim tea for ten minutes] or a slightly shorter cooldown, say 5-7 minutes)

when a global task is claimed, everyone is notified, right? if not, in my hypothetical, they will be.

then, a team trying to sweep six tasks at once would actually take sixty minutes to do, allowing another team to swoop in and have a chance to stop it in cinematic, entertaining fashion rather than tubbo having to grind resources and then log out in front of the merchant to counter this, which is boring for everyone (including the person delivering). plus, if a team cuts it down to the last second and ends up getting delayed, they physically wouldn't have time to make a delivery, meaning even being a BIT of a nuisance could be a viable strategy, even if you can't manage to kill; if you can STALL you could still wreck their plans.

that's my dream anyway idk i'm not a game designer. just think it would be interesting for most players

(i elaborate under)

red team would have to shake up their strategies, which is fun since they're a team that kinda has to rely more on strategy than outright brawn (overall the team's pvp can't be relied on unless they have carre or phil, as seen today when pierre, bad, and etoiles attacked phil cellbit foolish and baghera, and cellbit and foolish both died to etoiles in the attack, despite it being a 4 on 1 at the time. baghera was killed by bad soon after. phil was the one to get the kills. the first day, when blue attacked [niki, tubbo, and bad as i recall] carre got both kills)

the other teams would then still have a way to stop a global sweep since a sweep would have to start earlier, allowing not only more time to arrive at global to pvp about it, but ALSO allowing another team to swoop in and steal the goal out from under the team again

i'm gonna use it in a scenario bc i'm badboyhalo and i can't stop myself from making examples:

so, tonight, if the proposed cooldown was in place, bad and tubbo would both still had roughly 17 minutes when red team would have HAD to start the sweep process if they wanted all six global tasks: 1 hour until the server closed at absolute MINIMUM. more for safety's sake.

therefore, in this scenario, there's a lot to happen

blue team could wait at globals, knowing red will probably try this strategy, and attempt or perhaps SUCCEED in killing red. if they kill red entirely, the operation is a wash; red doesn't have to gear to come back from scratch and take out blue team, and even if they could, the travel time to return to globals alone would mean they wouldn't get all the global tasks, potentially meaning they don't take the lead. if blue team is unable to kill red and dies themselves or has to retreat, but succeeds in delaying red, red would face the same problem.

if red sends in all of the task items on one person, and that person dies, even if the rest survived, blue could loot the items from that person and would be able to either use the items themselves, if green is currently the owner, or could run away with the items, effectively wasting red's time and again, meaning they wouldn't get all tasks claimed even if they were able to overtake the runner and reclaim their items.

i'm unclear what would happen if red divided the task items between them since it seems like the person claiming the task doesn't have to have all (or any? again, unclear) the items in THEIR inventory in order to claim so long as a teammate is nearby with the items in their inv (evidence: pac's vod "voltei... o que tá acontecendo no QSMP?!" at roughly 3:00:00; tubbo claims tea and tea is taken out of pac's inventory. i don't know the limits of this strategy)

blue team also has time to swoop in and steal a global task out from under red during this time. say, if red team had claimed the task for 10 tea leaves, upping the price to 15 tea leaves, and then blue team snuck in and claimed the task and set the price up to 20 tea leaves, (since the proposed 10 minute cooldown on claims would be TEAM LIMITED; red's cooldown applying to red only and so on). if red waited until the last second, they wouldn't have the time to reclaim this task even if they did have the resources, possibly forcing them to start their sweep earlier to counter this possibility, at which point team members who had logged on earlier and are out of time by the end of the night, OR members who live in time zones that don't allow them to stay up until server close, may have an easier shot at participating in defending against a global sweep.

all of this DIRECT CONFLICT would make for good audience entertainment and heighten the stakes of an attempted global sweep, since it would practically have to be one team defending globals for an hour while they pipe all their resources into it, knowing that if they die another team could easily swipe their task resources and use it themselves (along with the rest of their gear). it makes it more interesting, while still mostly viable.

plus it would force more strategizing for red team which is maybe just a personal plus, i just really like seeing people planning both in advance and in spur of the moment. it's really satisfying to see how a plan comes together and succeeds or fails; plus, since red team is the main team using this strategy at the moment and their main draw and strength as a team is cohesion and communication this would be completely fucking riveting for me as a viewer so maybe this is just a personal thing. but i really really think it would be fun

but again, i'm not a game designer, or a qsmp player, or a qsmp admin, or honestly even really a gamer? so maybe i'm off my rocker and out of my gourd and this isn't viable or balanced in any way shape or form but YKNOW what is this blog except putting stupid thoughts into the void and seeing if this time the void spits back hate mail so. i'm folding this into a paper airplane and throwing it into the abyss. hopefully it made sense.

k love you appreciate you getting this far, have a good week!!

(i hope your team gets a win in dramatic fashion and celebrates together!!! i hope they come together and unleash a plan so spectacular it takes the server by storm!!! i hope it's so good it becomes a vod you go back to even years in the future!!!! i hope you have a good week!!!!!)

[chronurgy]

The problem with dai cullen for me is that.... Well it felt like his story was on a fairly consistent set of tracks in dao and da2, especially if you played the female mage origin, and then his dai story just jumped to a completely different track that didn't have much interest in interacting with what came before. So I ended up feeling like the questions I had about him and how he could grow and change from who he was in the previous games were just left hanging, entirely unaddressed, and that prevented me from really moving forward with his story. It's like they wanted to use all that background established in the previous two games to sprinkle a little spice into his dai character but didn't want to actually wrestle with what that background meant for like.... The whole rest of his deal

[nymphoutofwater]

I don’t want a romantic relationship. I don’t want a romantic partner. I want is someone in my life who’s willing to go on long walks with me. someone in my life who would sit on the porch with me late into the night. someone who would watch my old favorite movies with me and share some of their own. someone who would go to see live music with me. I want someone who’d travel with me. someone who’d go down to the beach for a weekend with me. someone to sit next to while I read or write or craft. someone who’d let me fall asleep on them.

all I yearn for is companionship. in the most mundane and beautiful ways. all I want are people in my life who love being there as much as I love having them.

[sunspinecity]

50$ to print 10 of the same skin has always been so insane to me. you're telling me it's 50$ to print....only 10.....of a single skin....and that's normal. And not only is that normal, that's what's required for a skin shop. where ppl may not even sign up for 10 runs. and then you're left in the shitter with at minimum 1-4 skins nobody wanted (not to mention if some people decide not to pay afterward) that you have to just pray someone finds & buys on the auction house. And it's 50$. Uhuh. And then that's just the artist's issue and fault and we're gonna blame them instead of the fact that a 10 print run costs as much as groceries.