#this was a very good and entertaining read!!!

[raleighrador]

I think there are some real concerns around LLMs - I’m personally more concerned about the environmental and energy impact, but attribution of training content is also important.

That said - it seems to me to reflect an oddly puritanical interpretation of IP rights which in general is something I’m not settled about on.

I only write Star Wars fanfic. I’ve read tons of Star Wars fan fic. I’ve also read every EU/Legends novel ever published and many of the new canon novels. Many of them multiple times.

Everything I write is painfully derivative - as most fic is. Anyone who has read enough Star Wars and enough fic on AO3 will be able to read my work and say “ah, this author likes XYZ fic and published works”.

We’re all just regurgitating and slightly transforming material we’ve consumed, material created by others. It genuinely isn’t clear to me why that is substantially different to what a GPT does.

In fact given the mechanics of how GPTs work, the pathway they follow to create a sentence is likely less plagiarised than any pathway I follow.

I also think the point about transformative labour is interesting. Writing something au natural is definitely differently painful and frustrating and rewarding than using a GPT. It’s also more effort as a general rule but not in the universal way the above thread implies.

Regardless - I can see how the above is relevant for the writer by why does it matter to the reader? I read and enjoy stories because I think they’re good and entertaining, not because I think the author worked hard. There are many, many stories that I am sure the author worked very hard on but I think they’re bad and boring and I don’t enjoy them and I won’t read them.

As a writer I choose to do most of my writing au natural because it’s a fun hobby. As a reader I don’t care. And if you read my stuff I don’t expect you to care about my effort.

That takes me to the third point which is how people actually use GPTs. I’m sure some people are just plugging in a single prompt and then publishing whatever comes out. I think that’s probably quite rare.

I use GPTs for ideation and editing. I frequently (and I think this is common) first conceive of fics as a very particular interaction or scene that I want to write but I don’t always have an idea of the context that gets there. Sometimes for longer fics I’ve got a whole series of these scenes half baked but no story to tie them together. Plugging these into a GPT and saying “help me come up with an outline for a story that coherently links these together” is very helpful.

Same for editing. “Please fix any grammar or spelling issues in the below text” does the same thing a human editor does but better and faster and also I don’t know any humans I could ask to edit my work.

Both of these use cases are something that a person could do, many people do get people to help with them, and it’s utterly unclear to me what the moral difference between asking ChatGPT and asking the chat on discord is.

I’d be fascinated to know if this same visceral hatred of LLMs and GPTs extends to non-creative writing. I use these things ALL THE TIME to write emails and draft working documents and review documents etc. it has made me more productive, means my job takes less time, and gives me more time to write derivative Star Wars fan fics. Is that also bad and immoral? Should I get a new job because I’m clearly bad at and don’t enjoy my job of corporate laptop tip tapping to do to the way Adam Smith intended?

just saw a fanfic on ao3 have a dedication for chatgpt... that section is meant for your horny perverted mutual who proofread your work, you violated sacred law and you will be torn apart and laid bare btw

[sgiandubh]

Delulu vs. trululu

As expected, promo for the overall stodgy TCND just started in NYC, including with this released and then quickly deleted Instagram pic, shared by the Sassenach Spirits' account:

Not the cleverest marketing & sales move, if you ask me. Knowing this fandom's usual bigot and/or scoffing triggers (which I tend to think S & team do, and rather very well), why even entertain lurid speculation and, by the same token, an unnecessarily juvenile image of The Co-founder? Oh, how I wish they'd step up their game a bit and perhaps be more coherent with that fresh, witty sales approach that first caught my eye!

Why. A rhetorical question that never grows old, as far as SC are concerned. Take for example the latest interview released yesterday by the Fangirlish.com website, which is barely a blurb in the great Instagram tapestry. 6k followers do not a great media outlet make, I believe and they've been around since 2011 (!).

Perhaps on design or perhaps because both of them DGAF anymore, we were treated to these parallel public statements on a rarely brought about and carefully censored calibrated topic: personal lives.

[Source: https://fangirlish.com/2025/01/12/interview-sam-heughan-and-caitriona-balfe-on-jamie-claires-growth-in-outlander/]

While C ambiguously mentions what Claire's character brought to who she is now, she is probably throwing to the scrapheap that constipated but convenient braggadocio that she was 'totally able to separate between Claire and herself'. Something we kept on reading ad nauseam from EFH to the Remarkable Week-end and beyond. She now readily acknowledges she has led 'this project alongside S', all the while - which is even more telling - 'assuming everything that implies'. For some reason, I doubt she simply meant the rather decorous EP functions, but also the entire emotional burden of it all, to which this damned fandom is not exactly a stranger. As we have long surmised, they are in this thing together and they did it together (been together, loved together, lived together, lied together...) all along this tortuous path. Cue in the usual venom that they can't stand each other anymore, I don't really care, at this point in time.

S dutifully obliges as C's sounding board and takes it the needed (but completely unnecessary, Narrative-wise) extra mile: JAMMF has given him 'an incredible relationship, one I never thought I’d have'.

Surely he does not mean Flukenzie Floozy or the entire Fitness Harem panoply, Ha-wa-wee 🐰and Dubai Burlesque included. And she could have rectified on the spot or poked fun at him or anything in between. Yet, she did not: surely Tracula is again the 'very understanding' character of that plot!

Why even bring it up all of this now? Why even mention personal stuff both of them have a rather appalling PR management of, from unnecessary exposure to gaslighting an entire fandom and probably also the kitchen sink?

For the sake of an ending series?

Oh, come on - give me a break, here. We are neither delulu, nor stupid.

PS: Thank you for the pic. You know who you are ;)

Later edit: I am told with good reason that is was not Sassenach Spirits which posted that pic, but the Instagram user @stevieme88 - a bartender at that last SS event in the US. He then proceeded to go private again, but the pic was downloaded and shared by that very well informed vigilante account, which then chose to tag Sassenach Spirits (why?).

Gracias a ti, siempre.

[brf-rumortrackinganon]

I’m starting to think people being too obsessed with Meghan even to hate her is not a good look on the royal family. It just elevates Meghan to the level of a rival. You all keep saying she will fade into irrelevance, which isn’t unlikely, but rooting for her to fail is just giving her ammunition to play victim and gain sympathy from the public. We should all wish Meghan success for her ventures. I think she’s naturally going into Fergie territory with her ventures. It’s her trajectory. I was just reading about Fergie being a producer on The Young Victoria. I didn’t even know Martin Scorsese was a co-producer on the film. It even won an Academy award for Best Costume Design. Fergie achieving these things was never seen as a threat to the royal family, so Meghan going into media production and lifestyle business shouldn’t be also. I know there’s a difference in that Fergie never declared war on the royal family, or Fergie never exaggerated her fame and popularity by making claims the way Meghan did. But what I’m saying is, if you all are determined that Meghan will be put in her place and fade into irrelevance, you all should not act too afraid of her.

Most of us aren’t rooting for her to fail. Yes, there are some people here who do want her to fail but what can I do about them? I’m not blocking them because I disagree with the things they say and the names they call her and it does frustrate me that those people are lending me a reputation by association I don’t want. The rest of us - myself included - genuinely want Meghan to succeed because then, we hope, she’ll be happy enough with her own success to leave the BRF alone and stop trying to compete with them.

But Meghan isn’t the kind of person to find happiness in her own work. She likes being the best and she’s driven by competition to be the best. For someone like Meghan, the grass is never greener on the other side because they’re always comparing to someone else or what should have been.

No one is afraid of her. Not anymore. Really and truly. Meghan has the bark and energy of a mad chihuahua but it’s all a house of cards one angry foot-stomp away from collapsing. If she spent more time being her authentic self instead of pretending to be someone she isn’t, no one would actually care about her. But she doesn’t; she focuses too much on maintaining her illusion that we can all see it really is just an illusion with a crumbling facade.

And no one thinks Meghan being in the lifestyle entertainment business is a threat to the BRF. It’s different strokes for different folks - Meghan’s audience is people who like the breezy cutesy California celebrity activism chic stuff. The BRF’s audience is everyone who likes pomp, circumstance, and history. Two very different user audiences. What we *do* think about Meghan going into the lifestyle and entertainment biz is that she’s doing it by copying aesthetics and traditions from her time in England - time she has repeatedly said she’s hated, traditions and aesthetics she’s said she hated - and emulating people she’s called racist, ignorant, and unfriendly. All we’re doing is calling out the two-sided hypocrisy. Fergie isn’t a hypocrite so Fergie gets left alone to make her movies, write her books, and no one cares.

She will fade into irrelevance with time. You seem to think that means she will disappear from the public space and become a recluse. That’s not what irrelevance means. Irrelevance means she does something, no one notices, or they notice and it’s barely a blip on the radar. We’re not there yet. And we’re not there yet because Meghan still has the kind of money, access, and Sussex Squad supporters that literally spam social media and the internet with ‘pay attention to me’ content any time she breathes. But Meghan does lose relevance by the day. More and more people lose interest in her with every PR scheme she concocts. It’s a marathon, not a sprint, and we’ve barely reached the halfway point and there are still the hills to go.

Since you keep bringing up Fergie, this is the difference between her and Meghan: Fergie doesn’t care that people don’t care about her. She’s happy doing her own thing with her family beside her. Meghan does care. Meghan, possibly, cares too much about getting attention because everything she does she does with the intent of getting attention and of making sure that we know she’s involved. If she didn’t care about the attention, she’d just be doing these things already, no Netflix programming or lifestyle merch necessary. By contrast, Fergie doesn’t - just look at the fact that you didn’t know about her involvement in Young Victoria or how Hollywood the production is.

As I’ve been saying all weekend, what you see on social media is not what reflective of real life away from the internet. Meaning the only place Meghan is relevant and has this kind of power is social media. IRL, not many people are actually paying attention to, or care about her and that’s her kiss of death. It’s happening as we speak as more people see her wildfire “visit” for the PR it was.

A quick interjection here. I have no problem with the Sussexes aiding the relief effort or viewing the destruction in their own backyard. My problem is that they show up with the intent of publicity, talking only to the authorities on the ground and not actually helping or volunteering with anything. Serve meals, sort donations, make phone calls, talk to people who lost their homes instead of the staff that came with you, and don’t fucking pose for group photographs to mark the occasion when the fires are still raging and they’re still finding bodies!

Lastly, if the BRF can withstand Republican or colonialist attacks on their existence in person, they can withstand a bunch of nobodies in the cult of personality around an ex-member because they’ve done this before…and those ex-members were their abdicated king and Diana. Meghan is not on the same scale as either of those individuals (despite what she believes of herself) so the BRF will be just fine.

Well, this ended up being much longer than I thought. I think this will be it on the current topics because it’s still way too Sussex for my liking. I really did mean it when I said I wanted to pull back from the Meghan focus.

[veinsfullofstars]

Okay I've seen it mentioned a couple times now but I gotta ask.....

what's the Library Turtle?

Oh? Would you perhaps be referring to-

-known more colloquially as the Library Turtle? Well, I'm glad you asked!

In the CFAU, it’s a little interstellar lending library that travels all around the local star system, collecting, trading, and sharing a wide assortment of books, magazines, music, and other sources of knowledge and entertainment between the various interplanetary communities. The elderly duo that owns the library have been running it for quite some time, visiting Popstar in particular few times a month. As for the proprietors themselves…

First, we have the lovely Ms. Paige, a tiny owl-like lady with a witchy aesthetic and a grandmotherly disposition, as patient and wise as you’d expect given her librarian title (as long as you don’t damage her books, that is). A former teacher and very well-traveled, she is a wealth of general knowledge and information, always happy to answer questions when she can or, barring that, to find the book that will. (She also has a bit of a weakness for gossip, even if she won’t admit it.) On occasion, she’ll regale the children with a story or two, folktales and epics and even anecdotes from her own travels (though, few tend to believe such fantastical yarns). She’s also rather spry for her age, often seen carrying improbably tall stacks of books without breaking a sweat. She claims it’s because she always remembers to eat her greens, or exercise regularly, or get a good amount of sleep every day. The answer seems to vary each time she’s asked about it.

We also have the illustrious Sir Apple Tortsworth IV, Esq. - or Sir Tort for short - a large tortoise-like creature who co-owns the library with Paige. He is an easygoing old man of few words and fewer hurries, perfectly content to take the twilight years of his life at a leisurely pace (even if others don’t always meet him at his speed). On land, he stands on four sturdy legs, while, in the air, he transforms them into flippers that let him soar with grace and ease, even with the weight of a whole library on his shell (well… some of it, anyway). He’s happy to chat when prompted, his words thoughtful and eloquent, but he generally prefers to sit back and observe while Paige does the talking for them both. She claims that he’s actually quite the chatterbox when he wants to be (and a sassy one at that). Then again, she also claims that he was once a highly-decorated knight. And a certified lawyer. And a four-star chef. He’s yet to confirm or deny any of these claims. Mostly he just smiles and sleepily admires the scenery, humming old songs from his youth.

The kids love when the Library Turtle comes to visit the village, even the ones not so inclined to reading. As interesting as their homeland can be, there's something exciting about learning what goes on in the cosmos beyond. Paige never fails to find something to interest them, even if it's just another one of her famously tall tales. And Sir Tort is more than happy to listen when one of them has news to share or just needs an ear to confide in. And, whenever the kids have questions about anything - their home, the world beyond Popstar, their families and neighbors, even the two of them - Paige and Sir Tort always make time to answer to the best of their abilities.

Sketch started 01/09/25, sketch finished 01/14/25. | Childhood Friends AU Masterpost

[ineffectualdemon]

Separating Art from the Artist doesn't mean "I'm going to ignore everything this person has ever done in their life and pretend they are a pure good person"

It means when evaluating the work on its technical and artistic merits, you need to separate from your opinion of the artist as a person (good or bad) from the actual work

It's an exercise in looking past your bias both negative "this person kicked a puppy!" And positive "this person saved a puppy!"

It's about not rating art down just because the artist is someone you dislike but also not rating up art just because you like the artist

It's also one part in the process in dealing with art critically

Let's say an artist painted flowers

He also is a serial cheater

His cheating has nothing to do with how well he painted those flowers on a technical level

You can call the painting well done with good use of colour and light and it's not endorsing his cheating

Similarly if someone who is well known as the nicest guy in the world creates a dog shit painting to be judged, then judging it on artistic merits and finding it lacking is not attacking their character

Because the truth is bad people can make good art and it's fine to find the work objectively good and appreciate it for what it is separate from the artist on a technical and artistic level

Now there is a point when you're going to have to take into account the person who made it but that's a different step in critical analysis. That also doesn't mean you have to throw out their work and never touch it again

It means engaging with it critically

I have said it before but a series of books that was important to me as a child I read again after finding out some really horrible stuff the author (David Endings) did to his adopted children (who luckily were taken off him and he and his wife were banned from having children)

And I read it critically. I could see why I enjoyed it. The dialogue was witty and fun. The political intrigue was intriguing. The battle scenes were exciting and descriptive .

It was well written. That is separating the art from the artist. The books were well written and entertaining. I can say that honestly

HOWEVER I hadn't read these books in a very long time and I was reading them critically. And yeah how he wrote children was... uncomfortable. It wasn't full on but there are parts that I brushed off as being set in fantasy medieval time period as "what parents might have done" when I was a kid. But as an adult with more education it was...not great.

But that's not what I noticed the most. What I noticed more was the racism, particularly against Asians, and rampant antisemitism in the books. It was so in your face I was surprised I didn't really notice it as a kid. And to be honest I couldn't even get to the end of the series I was reading because it was so intensely racist.

I probably won't read them again because it was so full on racist.

Saying that I have also read Sherlock Holmes critically. They are again well written. They also have racist storylines and characters pop up. I still can, and do, read them. What makes it different? Well the time period when it was written makes a difference. I expect a book written in in the late 1800s by a well off white man to be racist. Also it is considerably less racist then Eddings. With Sherlock Holmes stories a racist bit will pop up occasionally and I will go "ah. Racism. Duly noted"

With Eddings it was racism stacked on racism with added racism and a sprinkling of child abuse for added flavour

Bad people make good art

Sometimes the shit they did that means they aren't a great person has nothing to do with their art.

Like a guy who cheats but also draws sick ass dragons

Those aren't related. You don't have to be faithful to draw a sick ass dragon.

And sometimes it does.

Like a guy who cheats who built his entire career about how much he loves monogamy and being faithful and has that as major themes in his work. His actions will have a major affect on how his work is seen

But also if you own idk a painting by that person that you got for your wedding to symbolise you and your spouses devotion to each other. You can still see it that way if you want to. Because it has meaning to you separate from the artist who made it.

I think you have to accept that sometimes things you love are made by people you don't like. Don't put creators and artists on pedestals and don't tie the emotions that their creations gave you to them being "good"

[fivelila]

Hi! First of all, I absolutely adore reading your take and insights on Five's feelings throughout the years before the subway. It's hard for me to believe he only fell for her through boredom and survival because they were trapped in time. There's just too much indicators in the series that points otherwise and your post sums it up so beautifully.

I'm really curious to see your take on Lila's perspective since you were so insightful with Five's. What her journey could potentially be?

One thing I thought was interesting was her reaction with Diego finding them in the cafe. Lila laughed and came clean about the situation right away. At that point, I don't know if she consciously entertained the idea of Five being anything else (poor Five). Diego meanwhile decided to focus on the fact that Five is in the CIA while he's only a delivery guy (a good symbolism of the relationship dynamic among these 3 and foreshadow maybe?). Five being a better fit for Lila than him, a fact that Diego recognizes but hates.

Another thing I thought was interesting was back in S2 when Five revealed he put Diego in the asylum to protect him and Lila thought it was sweet. I just feel anyone else (even the other siblings) wouldn't agree with his decision but Lila could already be seen as being very in tune with his reasoning.

Anyway I don't know if you are still active on this fandom (I know I arrived late to this then everyone else) so am happy to hear what you think if you feel up for sharing!

Oh, thank you for your question and your insights. It’s been a long time since I received such an interesting question, so it truly made my day. Lila and her feelings for Five... that’s actually a bit more complicated. But I’ll try to share my perspective on how I see it in the context of the whole story.

I think Five caught Lila’s attention right from the start. Not romantically, but as someone who was, in a way, "cut from the same cloth." In many ways, they were similar—they could challenge and provoke each other, keeping one another on their toes. Beyond that, Five had a reputation within the Commission, and I think that, in some way, impressed Lila. She wanted him to notice her and to acknowledge her in some way.

Lila was raised to fulfill expectations. It probably felt good to receive praise and recognition from someone she perceived as an authority. I’ve often had the feeling that Lila wanted to be seen by Five for exactly this reason. Yes, Five appeared visually young, but his intelligence and overall demeanor gave him a strong aura—an aura of an old soul. He had the ability to naturally take on a leadership role when needed.

I think that if Five had been physically older at the time they met, there might have been something romantic or physical between them much sooner. And maybe the parents plot wouldn't be there, who knows. However, because of his youthful appearance, that possibility probably didn’t cross Lila’s mind for a long time. I mean, she was naturally drawn to him, but not in that way.

On the other hand, Diego was someone she was physically attracted to—he likely represented the possibility of a fresh start. But honestly? From the beginning, she thought he wasn’t particularly bright, and when it came to romantic dynamics, they weren’t on the same wavelength (a feeling that only deepened over time). In any case, the unexpected pregnancy changed things significantly.

And then there are Lila’s parents. It’s understandable that Lila went through a strong phase of hatred. But at the same time, when she learned the full circumstances, she could understand it better (since perhaps she herself had, at some point, been in a similar role to Five’s, thanks to the Commission). Even though they have another confrontation afterward, I think Lila had already partly forgiven him by then.

Their ability to collaborate despite everything highlighted their strengths as a team, even though they both kept up the pretense that being in each other’s company was unpleasant. Still, considering how short the time frame was (S2+S3), it’s notable that Lila was later quite friendly toward Five. Despite their constant teasing, there’s no apparent hatred between them anymore. Also, the scenes from S3 are a strong foreshadowing of things to come.

Then we have the six-year gap, during which Lila married Diego and took care of three children. Unfortunately, we saw so little of that period. Still, I think Lila had likely been struggling with dissatisfaction in the relationship for quite some time, and her dynamic with Diego was significantly strained.

And it was Five whom she chose as her partner in crime. This is just speculation, but I believe they might have grown closer over the years. As Five grew physically older and Lila became increasingly disillusioned with her relationship, she might have started to see him in a slightly different light.

Anyway, I believe her feelings fully surfaced in the subway, perhaps after a few months. (Though my headcanon is definitely that she had several thoughts about him even earlier...) But certainly not because Five was her current distraction or part of her survival. There was something there from the very beginning, but circumstances significantly influenced how things developed.

I think she finally realized just how deeply compatible they were. I am absolutely certain that Lila loved him. Not just because of all of that, but also because of what she was able to forgive him for (her parents) and the way she looked at him revealed what he meant to her...

I think it's a great shame that we are missing many cut scenes that would have revealed even more of this very interesting story.

[moonlight-yuyu]

pls can u do rhe ateez astrology for skz? thank u v much btw yongchan is a cute shipname

✩SKZ Hyung Line Astrology Chart Reading✩

BangChan

✩Chan's a generally sociable person

✩He's really approachable because of his innocent aura

✩Chan's peace loving and he loves a somewhat balance in his life

✩He likes sharing his thoughts in general with others

✩Because Chan likes being in relationships he tends to marry quite young

✩He mainly feels safe and secure while being in a partnership

✩Chan's a rather pleasing communicator

✩Diplomancy runs naturally while he's speaking

✩Chan's generally good at making connections

✩He loves challenging himself to do the impossible

✩Chan tends to have a somewhat black or white philosophy of life

✩His loner-like aura is very attractive 

✩Chan can be easily bored and need a somewhat change frequently

Minho

✩Minho's a really intense person

✩He tends to have his own mind and for others it’s nearly impossible to get him to do some things 

✩Minho just knows what he wants and he has plenty of willpower

✩He's very fixed in his opinion and his idealism is running strong 

✩Minho's observant and curious and generally very clever 

✩He needs personal space and freedom and he likes spending time with himself 

✩In communication Minho's passionate 

✩He's especially passionate about giving other real advice and help

✩Minho's naturally suspicious

✩He loves challenging yourself to do the impossible

✩Minho tends to have a somewhat black or white philosophy of life

✩He's a productive and a busy person because he's really goal oriented

✩Minho likes getting things done quickly and that’s why he'll do many things at a time

✩He's quite protective of his ideas

Changbin

✩Changbin wants to change the world to make it a somewhat better place

✩He tends to have big dreams rather than littel ones

✩Changbin's really loyal and traditional in some way

✩When he feels comfortable he likes being the center of attention

✩But Changbin's not necessarily outgoing

✩He likes entertaining others and like being the „class clown“

✩Changbin communicate with feeling and sensitiviy

✩He can be very subjective and personal

✩Changbin's mediative and reflective

✩Love for him would be centered to the physical world and creating comfort

✩Changbin's solid and comfortable all around

✩In a relationship he would need a certain measure of predictability and dependability

✩Changbin's blessed with an observation skill

✩He's a passionate communicator 

✩Changbin's just passionate about giving other advice and help

Hyunjin

✩Hyunjin tends to be a little hard on himself

✩He's adaptable and very open minded and super understanding 

✩Hyunjin expresses himself in arts, music and drama

✩He can be describe as warm and dreamy 

✩Hyunjin can take care of his daily life pretty well like paying his bills or running errands 

✩He likes feeling useful and needed

✩Hyunjin tends to be impulsive and likes taking actions in general

✩He doesn't like living in the past and can forgive rather quickly

✩Hyunjin likes having fresh new ideas in life and a life which will be boring would be horrible for him

✩He tends to lack some self-confidence at times but he just feel most content in a simple life 

✩Hyunjin can feel easily overwhelmed by pressure and stress 

✩He's reliable and trustworthy

✩Hyunjin's dreamy and soft-hearted

✩He's sweetly playful and a little moody at times

✩Hyunjin wants others to know that his love for them is unconditional

[sammis-svsss-brainrot]

I was initially drawn to Scum Villain because I had just finished all 4 volumes of TGCF that were out at the time and I enjoyed them enough, and my good friend @theleafyankle (who reblogged enough Hulian art to get me into TGCF in the first place) told me the only MXTX novel that was completed in English was Scum Villain so I started reading

My first read through I was already way more entertained than I had been with TGCF, I think because there were less names for me to keep track of and less concepts I was unfamiliar with because this was my first foray into Danmei and there's a lot of things I was unfamiliar with, but having Shen Yuan as a narrator made things a lot easier to process

It wasn't until joining the fandom officially I think that made things click in my brain about how much I love this series, I knew it was intended to be satire but I hadn't realized the sheer depth of complexity that MXTX managed to put into four books and once I started peeling back the layers from the very obvious "Oh hahaha student/teacher relationship but flipped in an insane way where we should be more worried about the teacher than the student" and our obvious unreliable narrator and realizing how much Shen Yuan is constantly lying to himself and the reader there was just mmmmm so much going on that was too good to pass up

And then my other friend @skirm-the-terrible read Scum Villain and I think that really sealed the deal with me being obsessed with this series because I had someone I could constantly text ideas back and forth with

I think there was at one point where we were having a conversation and I said something along the lines of "MXTX really took all the worst parts of me, put them into fictional characters, amplified them by a thousand and went 'what if someone still loved you through it all, not just in spite of all your flaws but because of them?'" and that's still a thought that makes me sob and probably the reason I'm most drawn to these characters and this story in the first place

A Question for Svsss fans:

I'm genuinely curious, for all the scummies out there what is it about SVSSS that piqued your interest and resonated with you? And how does that differ from MXTX's other works?

(I doubt that I'd get a lot of answers with my follower count, but responses would be greatly appreciated and would make me very happy. 👍)

[sixty-silver-wishes]

so this is more of a personal thing for me but today, I’ve been thinking a lot abt the neil gaiman thing and reflecting on the artists I admire. I’ve been wanting to check myself and how I think about these people. and recently, I’ve been really into will wood’s music, so I’ve sort of been coming back to that. I just drew a piece of fanart for wood and mailed it to him (he has an address for fanmail on his public website), and given this is a rare interaction with a public figure for me, that’s what’s been on my mind.

while considering all this, I’ve noticed that will wood appears to be very clear about his boundaries, which is something I can respect. he’s particular about how he can be contacted and when he’s okay with being photographed/filmed. his website states that he may not respond to fanmail, even though he tries to read it. I’m not saying all this automatically makes him a great person; I don’t know the guy, and beyond sending him a piece of art to a public PO box, I don’t have any interest in interacting with him further. at the end of the day, all he is to me is a talented entertainer. but what does stand out to me is how clearly he established boundaries. neil gaiman didn’t do that.

now, I’m not saying that will wood is the Good Celebrity to neil gaiman’s Bad Celebrity. that would be a weird thing to say. I’m also not saying “at least I have This celebrity!” or that I’m somehow a better person for being a will wood fan. what I mean to do is to evaluate the celebrities I admire, and check the degree to which I admire them. but the more I do that, the more striking the contrast is to me between how wood and gaiman treat their respective relationships with fans.

in appropriate settings, celebrities interacting with fans can be a really good thing. it also matters how they interact- keeping things consensual and comfortable for all parties involved is important, along with a healthy amount of personal distance. celebrities, however benign, still hold a power imbalance that they need to mediate.

neil gaiman and amanda palmer weren’t doing that. they were privately contacting fans, considering them “friends,” and attempting to establish personal relationships with them, which in some cases led to abuse. gaiman’s liberal use of personal interaction on tumblr also built up a form of parasociality to shield himself from accusations. based on the vulture article, palmer seemed irresponsibly oblivious to (or at least in denial of) her and gaiman’s power imbalance with fans. gaiman was aware of it, and used it to do horrible things.

in this respect, this contrast between him and wood becomes even starker when you consider their fanbases consist of similar demographics. gaiman’s audience was obviously much larger, but both found audiences with young, often queer and/or neurodivergent people, who are also very active online, have alternative tastes, and lean progressive politically.

I myself fit into those demographics. many of my friends do. I’m also aware that we tend to be susceptible to parasociality. many people in these groups are desperate for connection and seek out role models, because it can be hard for us to find places to fit in.

someone like will wood could easily take advantage of that specific audience, and their frequent willingness to form connections with their idols. I’m sure his boundaries are largely about protecting himself and his own mental health (which is great!), but by setting them, wood protects his audience as well. that doesn’t make him a saint or whatever, but nonetheless, it’s something I want to point out. gaiman’s audience is very similar demographically to wood’s, but instead of discouraging inappropriate means of interaction with this particularly vulnerable crowd, he fostered them. gaiman encouraged parasociality with people he knew could easily fall into it, and used it to further his abuse.

anyway, I guess that’s my reflection for today. again, I’m not intending to make a case for idolizing will wood, or for derailing the conversation from gaiman’s abuse and the victims. if anything, I’m just sort of stunned by the extent of gaiman’s parasociality, especially when considering this contrast that demonstrates what he could have done to discourage it.

[nolshru]

eh, I always see this disclaimer, so even though it absolutely goes without saying - none of this is legal advice, it is just a bored law student talking about something interesting, and much of this has a high likelihood to be incorrect, don't listen to me for any reason other than entertainment pleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepleasepl

so, I was reading the Discord terms of service when I noticed the "don't do anything else that's illegal"

and like, "'anything else that's illegal' means 'anything else that's illegal'" is just... really silly - this is completely unenforceable

so, how do we define illegality? for most legal systems its really easy, all crimes are statutory in most of them, and actually beyond that, most of them have criminal codes, so it can be easily resolved for a country like Germany, or France, or Italy by saying "for the purposes of this document, 'anything else that's illegal' refers to any offense listed in the criminal code of the user's country"

this doesn't *really* work, though, because many countries, particularly those in common law systems, such as England and Wales, the USA, or Australia, do not have criminal codes (though, there are some common law systems with criminal codes, like Canada (maybe including quebec? honestly don't know, it doesn't use the same legal system as elsewhere in Canada), these are rare), common law's law based on precedent means that a good deal of crimes aren't even statutory to any real extent (oh, just for the sake of it, and me having this knowledge, Scotland doesn't have a criminal code - this is just relevant because it's both a civil and common law system, so ye, unsure about any other hybrid system (oh, Quebec is back, hi Quebec))

this term remains unenforceable, really, like, what constitutes illegality just isn't defined, so, what would some alternatives be? (all of these will be relevant to Scotland, because I know Scotland best)

Option 1: For the purposes of this document, "anything else that is illegal" refers to statutory offenses not otherwise described in this document

this doesn't include all crimes, but it includes a lot of the most serious crimes, such as not reporting how many female salmon you have in your fish farm, not keeping records on fish sales for 3 years, or catching a sea fish that are the wrong size (I tried to find specifics, but Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 was very vague and I really don't want to keep looking through fish related legislation) - I think this is probably my preferred solution, but like, it really does not apply to every law, common law is a huge aspect of how criminality is described in Scotland - notably, the writings of Baron Hume are excluded, which like, until fairly recently was the source of crimes as serious as rape and serious sexual assault, so like, yeah, it's definitely not a perfect solution, there's probably other cases like that

Option 2: For the purposes of this document, "anything else that is illegal" refers to any behaviour that Discord considers to be illegal

this works, but it gives Discord uh... a lot of power that I wouldn't want it to have - surprised this *isn't* what Discord says, but like, I'm glad it isn't

Option 3: For the purposes of this document, "anything else that is illegal" refers to <list of things that are considered illegal>

this also works, but I think it's weaker and less effective than option 1, inclusio unius est exclusio alterius, after all, if you don't include something like "not informing customers as to the origin of fish sold", then you are impliedly giving permission to users that they are allowed to do that, so I really don't like this solution

Option 4: keep as is

I like this solution 2, sure it's unenforceable, but like, so are arbitration clauses and those are everywhere - even if you can't enforce a term in a contract, it's still a term in a contract, and people aren't just going to breach it because they can, it's like, fine and stuff

anyways, that was fun, bye

[butmakeitgayblog]

No I *do* think Lexa would've become a shell of herself if Clarke had died. I think that would've changed her in a way that there was no coming back from.

Lexa, at her core, is an extremely tender soul. I remember someone once asked me for clexa who would be the puppy and their black cat girlfriend, and I thoroughly stand behind my answer that in fact Lexa is the puppy. She is tough and hardened in spite of her softness. Indra claimed that Lexa was a good Heda because she was calculating, and while that is true, I argue a large part of why she was such a good and revolutionary Heda was because of just how much she cared.

She cared about her people. She cared about their safety and their happiness, and she took on the mantle of having to make the tough calls and set aside her own emotions to push forward to what ultimately get them to a place where they could enjoy life. "Concede a battle to win the war," "Victory stands on the back of sacrifice." She was always talking about herself too. She was always willing to be the bad guy and bear their shame and their guilt for the ultimate good of her people.

But if she had lost Clarke that day?

While I do think she would've continued in her agenda for her people, I think in a lot of aspects Lexa rather than Heda would've become unrecognizable to those who knew the girl beneath the crown. Lexa would've shut off for good, just as she had tried so hard in vain to do before. Because she had Costia, her first love. Her last breath of innocence stolen away by the weight of her station.

And then there was Clarke. Her equal in every measure. Someone who Lexa could turn to and know she understood that very same weight. Someone who carried the same blood splatters and jagged pieces of a broken heart, just trying to survive long enough to remember what it felt like to be whole again. Someone who she knew could take care of herself, who she wanted so badly to believe wouldn't be a target specifically because of Lexa, but rather because Clarke was her own force of nature in the world. (Read: A menace)

Clarke was a chance.

She was a chance that maybe, someday, Lexa's feelings wouldn't get someone killed. Maybe Lexa, the real Lexa, could actually be soft with someone, and love them without feeling as though her love was a bounty on their head.

So if Clarke had died, that'd be it. Game over. Never again would Lexa let herself even entertain the idea of caring about someone beyond an abstract want for a good outcome, much less actually allow herself to grow close to them. I see pleasant, but cold. Aloof even beyond her Heda mask, because it wouldn't even be a mask anymore. That would just be her.

Empty.

Still Heda. Still driven by her task. Still moving and fighting for the goals she (and Clarke, always Clarke) had yet to achieve.

But empty in her victories.

That little puppy of a woman who fake-limped her way into our lives would've built a wall around her heart so tall and so strong, no one would ever find a way in again.

And I think she would've been perfectly happy with that, because she's had innocent love, and she's had the soul calming, feeling like you can finally breathe again simply because they're in the same room kind of love. And with someone like Lexa, I don't think she'd have any interest in trying to find anything else.

Hi )

I read your takes on Clexa and I am fangirling at how accurate I think they are. So I would really like to hear your thoughts on something, if you don't mins.

Imagine if accursed 307 went a little bit different at the end and Titus' aim was a bit surer and he got his target. So Lexa heard a commotion and went to investigate, she opens doors only to see Clarke's shocked face. Followed by Clarke's limp body fall into her arms. There is a lot of blood, Clarke is unresponsive and there is Titus, 10 feet away with a smoking gun.

What would be Lexa thoughts, emotions?

What will she do next, considering current political situation?

What do you think she will be doing if the wound is fatal?

Oof

Well 1. Thank you 🥹

And 2.

I think Lexa's initial reaction would've been complete shock and terror. That's what it was when she heard the shots from her room and you know that because rather than reaching for a weapon or armor or calling for her guard, she disregarded all of her training and all of her knowledge of power, and simply had to get to Clarke as fast as possible.

Heart pounding, terror stricken, she just had to get to Clarke.

And I don't think her initial reaction would've been any different if she had stumbled upon a wounded Clarke in thah room.

But that only would've been an instantaneous response that was then shed away, because she is so used to reacting on her feet. The gunshots posed an unknown threat, so admittedly it got the best of her (actually shitty writing got the best of her because she absolutely would not have done that but hahahhaha anyway ����). But blood? Pain? She knows those intimately. She knows what to do with that. She's been in innumerable battles and delt with injuries and gore and so on from such a young age, and everything we ever saw of her showed that even when she was startled, her brain was always going at the speed of lightning. While everyone around her is still accessing a situation, she's already taken it all in and is mentally 10 miles down the road in terms of what she's going to do.

With that in mind, I think Lexa's next reaction would be to tend to Clarke, plain and simple. It would've been the instinctual thing she did - reach for her, run to her, scoop her up and be there to comfort just as she always did whenever she felt Clarke needed her. She would've shouted not only for Titus to get a healer, but also she probably would've bellowed for anyone within earshot to find a healer while she herself administered first aid (ya know more than just pouring water on it dO YOU HEAR ME TALKING CLARKE DO YOU FUCKING HEAR ME)

*deep breath*

..... Anyway....

Emotionally speaking?

I think it would've probably been the most terror stricken she's ever felt in her life.

Because she can accept her own death. In fact has accepted the reality of it since she was first called. She has overcome the loss of her people, the potential loss of her power. Lost her own innocence and her first love. Has overcome the pain of having to take the life of her most trusted ally by her own hand and pretend it didn't bother her at all.

But I think the chaos of that moment would've kind of snapped everything into focus. Because while it's one thing to accept the danger in the abstract idea of sending Clarke back to Arkadia with a sweet kiss on her lips and a prayer that she'll be ok so that one day they'll meet again, it's another horror entirely feeling the warm finality of her death seeping out of a bullet wound and onto her hands.

Losing another lover? One she loves deeper than she ever thought possible? Her equal in every regard?

I just think she would have felt the most scared she'd ever been in her life. The most desperate. The most powerless...

As for what she'd do next, I don't think whether Clarke lived or died would've changed anything in respect to Titus.

I think she would've killed him.

Whether in that room or in a public execution, either way he would've died by her hand for personal reasons and political reasons, and I think rightfully so on both accounts, because consider how it would make her look in the eyes of her people.

He not only directly disobeyed her orders and went rogue with his own plans, he made an attempt on a clan ambassador's life without order or tangible justification. Lexa had not only publicly vowed that Clarke would be under her protection while in Polis, but she gave orders that they had until sundown to be back at Arkadia.

And he just said fuck it, fuck you, Imma do what I want.

In him doing that, he would've made Lexa not only look weak, but also look as though she wasn't even in control of her own direct subordinates. If someone as heralded and protected and trusted by the throne as the Fleimkepa can get away with subverting Lexa's rule... why should anyone else bother listening to her? Why shouldn't anyone else make attempts on any life they so wish? He would have effectively undermined every single thing she and her unified rule over the coalition stood for.

And on top of everything, Clarke is not just anyone.

She is Wanheda.

If Clarke died and Lexa didn't kill Titus, then that would indicate that Titus now has power over death. That coupled with him blatantly usurping Lexa's command? Uhhhhh. No. Can't let that stand. Not for a single second.

If Clarke lived and she didn't kill Titus, then that would indicate that anything Lexa says is free for challenge because she obviously does not follow through with consequences for direct crimes. Clarke's life is now even more free for the taking to any who should be so bold. The kongeda means nothing because Lexa's power is no longer absolute. Obviously, she can't let that stand either.

So really that bald bitch signed his own death warrant the second he picked up that gun, no matter the outcome. But also, no matter the outcome, for every bit he spewed his bullshit about Clarke weakening Heda, those actions alone would've severely hurt her image on the political stage regardless of the fine details.

Because now she's open to even more murmurings of deferential treatment to Clarke, specifically, but also to the Skaikru as a whole by sheer association. Her allegiance to the coalition vs Clarke and Co. would be questioned and antagonized and tested at every turn (more than it already was.)

Inevitably it all would've been a clusterfuck, and civil war on Lexa and the coalition would've become inevitable I think.

And frankly????

That would've been A Lot more interesting to watch than the slop that they gave us 🙄

[queenimmadolla]

As an Astrologer, allow me to hypothesize:

I do think Sagittarius is correct, BUT I think he’s a Sagittarius rising since our rising sign is the energy we put out and how the world sees us. Aries is a good guess, but I don’t think they’re quite as free spirited as Sagittarius. They’re as intense as a fire sign, yet as free spirited as an air sign. Their energy is so sunshine-y even when they’re experiencing the worst. In order to make bad or difficult situations better, everything is a game or a quest to them. They’re generally seen as rebellious due to their loyalty to their desires and vision they have for their own lives.

It’s hard to guess moon sign since we’re given limited examples of his emotional process, and the examples we do have are under really dramatic circumstances that might make anyone behave erratically. My guess is Scorpio moon though. They’re loyal to their friends, and are good at picking up on how other’s feel. They’re observant and resourceful which allows them to land on their feet. They’re also somewhat moody, and don’t like being emotionally vulnerable unless pushed to the brink. I’ve noticed that many of them are touchy with the people they care about or they don’t understand personal space quite as well as others do. They’re also generally creative.

And for sun sign, I’m going with Leo. They’re hellbent on being themselves, and they genuinely don’t care who has a problem with it. They’re comfortable with attention, and are comfortable being a leader in a situation that garners them a lot of attention. Push comes to shove and they’re going to step up for their friends, even if they’re scared or complaining about it. They’re super entertaining and oftentimes theatrical. Whatever they’re doing though, they’re infectious. Leo suns definitely are the ones that are loyal enough to sacrifice themselves for the group too.

TL;DR In my professional opinion I think he’s a Leo sun, Scorpio moon, and Sagittarius rising. I could literally hypothesize character birth charts all day so I just had to throw my two cents in lmao 🤭

I can see what you can with someone of these points, so I’m not gonna undermine you. HOWEVER, maybe we need to do another study on Scorpios because I have yet to meet one who actually displays genuine loyalty, the majority I have met have proven to be quite manipulative and I’m not even joking lol though their level of self preservation is sometimes admirable.

BUT I WILL DIE ON THE SAGITARRIUS SUN HILL!

[phantomoftheorpheum]

"X fell first, Y fell harder," or, in James Beaufort's case, he fell first and harder. I mean, he literally got like .2 seconds of compassion from Ruby and boy dropped like a fucking stone.

[ipostmysimpingstuffanonymously]

My entry for the SatoSho Discord Weekly Prompt: Just Friends

[kagoutiss]

green beetle black beetle

[spookygibberish]

Dogstock are typical of what are often deemed the ‘evil’ races in many other fantasy works. They were created by some higher force to be slaves, they are carnivorous by nature, they resemble animals other than human in dentition and build. They growl and bite and walk behind.

The Uhasr (a dogstock culture) are descendants of such slave-infantry that was abandoned when the empire that used them to capture the steppes decided the land wasn’t so profitable after all, and more pressing matters drew their attention elsewhere. Like tools left spent on the ground, the unneeded, excess dogstock were left to survive on their own in Hochkiskuph. The native peoples, of course, did not welcome them any more, or see them any less as oppressors when the hand released the lead. To the Hochkiskuph peoples, the Uhasr are a predatory ghost, an echo that consumes them even in absentia. To the Uhasr, one human is much like another, differing in number and equipment, but never in essence. Uhasr are a species of wild animal with a human face. Humans are prey on two legs. Humans smoke and poison uncovered dens on principle, Uhasr abduct and consume men and women and children all the same.

A common trend I have noticed in media which aims to humanize monsters, is that it often relies on passivity. Humanity is contingent upon kindness. The monster that is A Person only so long as they are a harmless thing at heart, something which can be understood and befriended. Their violence is reluctant, their hearts noble. Grace is a concession to the dominated. Only the toothless beast, declawed and pinioned and caged, is one which has earned its personhood. The ontological enemy supersedes the ontological man.