#wanky bullshit

[emacrow]

The Watchtower found a enormous floating crystallized casket in space. Part 1

And the corpses unside still has a heart beat...

When danny became the ghost king, as a precaution in cause the Disband GIW were to find his dead body and possibly desecrated and dissect it. He had put plans to send his corpse into the middle of space of another dimension for safekeeping until later. Frostbite help made a special casket large enough as he had told Danny that his corpse body will grow into his true form.

He gotten help from the ghostly arachnids to make the finest silk clothes for his corpse along with extinct flowers across the ghostzone. That even got Dani and Dan wanted to leave their corpses with danny for safekeeping and to keep him company.

That was literally eon ago in time in Danny's dimension timeline..

Only until the casket bumped into watchtower.

There was three bodies whom seem to be sleeping in a cuddle like pile, holding each other hands. A white hair man, a teenage boy and a young girl wearing royal like silk clothes, floating aurora like crowns on their heads, and flowers extinct yet still thriving in the casket as they remain blooming.

Only for superman to say something that made everyone panic a bit.

"One of them has a very slow heart beat.."

[prokopetz]

Folks act like "maybe the author isn't the final authority about what their work means" is some wanky post-modern nonsense and not a simple recognition that a lot of authors are perfectly prepared to bullshit about their own work. Like, leaving big-name popular media aside, I have personally encountered authors being actively disingenuous about their own work for all of the following reasons:

A true answer wouldn't fit the image they've cultivated.

They've decided they like the explanation the readers/viewers have come up with better than what they actually had in mind.

Something that was originally intended as a standalone work ended up growing into a franchise or series, and now they're pretending that was the plan all along for some reason.

They don't want to admit that the bit you're asking about is genuinely just a plot hole.

The real answer gets into some shit they don't care to discuss, so they've prepared a cover story to explain away the parts they don't want to talk about.

Their politics have changed since they wrote it, but they don't want to acknowledge that, so they're constantly trying to re-interpret everything they've ever written to be perfectly consistent with whatever their positions are this week.

They wrote it decades ago and they honestly don't remember what they were thinking at the time, so they're just making shit up; sometimes they also don't remember what shit they made up the last time, so the answer is different every time they're asked.

The work in question is at least partly autobiographical and they can't tell the truth without confessing to a crime in the process.

Most of the good bits are plagiarised and they don't really understand it themselves.

They're lying to you on purpose, for evil reasons.

[blingblong55]

HOLY SHIT

INTERACTION WITH FERAL GRIM AND GENERAL SHEPARD WHEN?!

But seriously!! Think of the potiental!!!

Gen Shepard goes down to see who this "Grim" is and why Graves and his shadows are so fucking terrified, only to find none of the 141 or KorTac on base. So, he looks where anyone would look after not seeing a member of either teams in the halls, the kitchen/breakroom. What does he find? A dark room with two glowing eyes staring at him from the darkest corner. Old white man is spookyed, but turns on the light. He finds grim, legs on the ceiling and hands on the wall staring at him, and when I say General Shepard shits enough bricks to build a goddamn mansion when grim start growling you bet I fucking mean it!

He tries (and fails) to not look scared because he's a military General in the greatest nation God dammit!

Gen Shepard yells at grim to "get the fuck down and stop acting like a damn freak!" To which they do, like a damn demon from any of the conjuring movies mind you, and lunges at General Shepard once on the ground.

Cue chase scene of grim barking and making feral noises while running after General Shepard on all fours, this was of course recorded as he was screaming like a little bitch

Now if anyone reports grim to him, he just let's them be and waits for the flashbacks he got by simply heading their name to stop.

Lesson? Don't fuck with grim if the 141 or KorTac don't like you

Also grim has taken 3 bullets directly to the chest and only got more enraged, when asked how they felt, they responded with "my chest feels wonky, like my lungs are 2 water balloons and my heart is beating to some pop song. Otherwise fine!"

A/N: I read wonky as wanky 😭😭

I totally agree with this though Grim would literally haunt the dreams of General Shephard, like the shit he saw as a soldier is not as bad as that chase.

"Sir, Grim bit another soldier-"

"I don't want to hear it," he responded, Was he tired of the bullshit? yes, he always was but it's better to leave you and bite another soldier than to bite him. I mean he is old after all so let's just let him enjoy his last years on Earth. (Not really he deserves hell tbh)

He still has horrible nightmares about you, it's like those black and white films that are like 'scary' but he actually gets mini heart attacks at times.

You are now the reason his kids want to take him to a therapist and put him on meds.

[russilton]

"George is never going to be asked to apologise for those fans is he?"

You HAVE to be joking…………. Those few George fans who don't like Lewis are one of the most marginal groups with no online presence, and you never see such a level of nastiness and hate from them, while TeamLH are the biggest and most aggressive fanbase in the sport. Big enough to bully Mercedes into making apology posts for nothing.

And the fact Lewis faced abuse does not excuse him of making remarks that fuel the conspiracy theories and homophobic comments against George, his TEAMMATE. But I'm not surprised you're once again making excuses for him. Lewis knows, George knows, and everybody knows what's been going on because it's impossible to miss. Lewis never respected George and he continues to show that. You'd be better off following the opposite of those you mentioned. Quit pretending you care about George, and just rep Lewis.

“Shitty George fans are a marginal fan base you never hear from” bullshit, proven by the fact you’re still here. You are so pathologically obsessed with making yourself angry to prove a point you FOLLOW me, and you’re going to choke on your own tongue.

I love George, his fans actions are not his fault— but you know who I’ve received the most inter fan abuse from? It’s George’s.

Lewis fans who disagree with me don’t give a shit what I think and they move on, it’s the George Fans who have come back to my inbox, misgendered me, called me slurs, told me I need to take my gay little hands elsewhere and that George would never support the causes I did. More than once I’ve been told that these people are glad George will never care about those issues and they’re glad he didn’t go woke. Go back and look at the past wanky anons I’ve had I can count the amount of bad Lewis ones on one hand (becuse they just block me like adults) vs George fans desperate to make themselves seem better than it

People who call themselves george fans who are just “Lewis critical” will openly parrot racist adjacent dog whistles here without blinking. I once watched one of the biggest George blogs on this website say they were glad Lewis was leaving and some brand were leaving with him because George would bring “classy” brands back to Merc instead. The subtext there was anything but fucking subtle and it’s directly out of the playbooks of white pundits who said that any things Lewis did off the track were “unprofessional”

Your high horse is a fuckin Shetland pony dude, and you’re ankle high in horse shit trying to pretend it’s not there. Don’t try to piss on my boots and tell me no one you know can pee, George is as responsible for his fans shit behaviour as Lewis is for his, and the odds of him being asked about it are slim to none

One groups shitty behaviour may be louder but it doesn’t mean you aren’t shouting worse shit behind them.

[foreignobjecticus]

Tried to mock Henry the Fifth yesterday by bullshit-quoting Churchill because I was claiming to have forgotten Henry the Fifth, and then proceeded to quote Henry the Fifth word for word in a bad Churchill accent.

How mortifyingly wanky

[spurious]

Fic Writer 20 Questions

Thank you for the tag, @wonkyelk & @sga-owns-my-soul!

How many works do you have on AO3?

103, a number which recently shot up due to me posting all of my random tumblr ficlets to my AO3 account lmao. Previously it was, like, 70.

2. What's your total AO3 word count?

267,356

3. What fandoms do you write for?

Currently it's pretty much all SGA all the time over here. I am enjoying dabbling in Genshin when the mood strikes though, love the yuripeans <3

4. What are your top 5 fics by kudos?

Twenty Questions

Ink and Wings

Five Times Rodney (and John) Visit the Millers

Solitary in a Wide Flat Space

Abercrombie & Rodney

5. Do you respond to comments? Why or why not?

Yes! I try to, at least, though sometimes my responses are painfully delayed. I like hearing what people think about a story, I want them to know their comments are loved and appreciated, and sometimes you end up getting into a discussion like back in the Good Old Days on LJ.

6. What's the fic you wrote with the angstiest ending?

Man I really do not write a ton of stuff that doesn’t end happily /just went through all my fics

Angstiest ending of things I've posted is probably either the Kanjani superheroes AU or the apocalypse akame fic? Has my tolerance for writing lengthy angst lessened with age?

7. What's the fic you wrote with the happiest ending?

As I said above, most of my stuff seems to have relatively happy endings. If I were to pick I might say O I Think We Should Be Brethren, because it takes the longest and hardest journey to the ending, which makes it feel more impactful to me.

8. Do you get hate on fics?

I got one "hate" comment on the Kanjani cannibalism fic from someone who thought I was sick and needed therapy, or something to that effect. Otherwise, nope.

9. Do you write smut? If so what kind?

Yes. I would say my smut wheelhouse is kinky porn with feelings, I guess?

10. Do you write crossovers? What's the craziest one you've written?

I do not.

11. Have you ever had a fic stolen?

Not that I know of.

12. Have you ever had a fic translated?

I believe one or two of my fics in Johnny's fandom were translated into Russian and/or Chinese?

13. Have you ever cowritten a fic before?

Not to completion!

14. What's your all-time favourite ship?

how dare you make me choose between my children

15. What's a WIP you want to finish, but doubt you ever will?

Story I started for a fic exchange in, like, god...2014 or so? In which Yoko kisses Hina, then hits his head and wakes up in a world that's just a shamelessly silly amalgam of J-drama tropes. Sometimes I read through the doc and go "man i wish the author would update"

16. What are your writing strengths?

Sensory description, wanky poetic bullshit, smut, scenes with no more than two people in them, banter-y dialogue

17. What are your writing weaknesses?

Endings, complex plots, ensemble casts, scenes with three or more people in them, transitions, being a complete baby about taking criticism, endings, endings

18. Thoughts on writing dialogue in another language for a fic?

I don't see a reason for it? You either need to add a gloss with a translation (if your POV character and audience are intended to understand it), at which point you may as well just write "Screw you, McKay," Zelenka said in Czech; or you want it to be incomprensible to the reader, at which point you may as well just write Zelenka muttered something in Czech as he stomped away. If your reader happens to understand the language you've written in and you're not confident in it, they'll be annoyed by the weird grammar you've gotten from google translating it, and even if you are, you're losing the effect of someone having said something that your POV character shouldn't understand.

......................apparently I have an Opinion on this? who knew.

19. First fandom you wrote for?

Cardcaptor Sakura, when I was like 13? I may have posted it on FF.net but if there's a god it's been lost to the sands of time. I do not think it was very good.

20. Favourite fic you've ever written?

Shouldn't be surprising at this point for me to pick O I Think We Should Be Brethren for this, right? I just think it's neat.

Tagging (I've seen this one circulate a fair bit so apologies if you've been multiple-tagged): @audioletter @sparrowsarus @texasdreamer01 @luredin @alienfuckeronmain

[queerspacepunk]

set your sights a little higher - #02

ofmd | ed/stede | heist!au

> #01 (inconvenient timing)

i did another one!

#02 (a cask of utter bullshit)

Ed stares at the reinforced glass door set into the kitchen floor, and the staircase spiralling down beneath it and thinks – not for the first time – that one of the worst parts of this job is how often he has to bear witness to the evidence of people having way too much money.

Fucking thing's not even locked.

To be fair, the mansion itself had had pretty decent security. Beefy enough that they'd ended up going in while it was occupied (not Ed's favourite and the reason Izzy's on perimeter for this one) just for the slight relaxation of the measures that brings.

He's even had to tie a black bandana over his face just as a reminder not to mutter away to himself and risk setting off the billionaire-owned smart home software.

The stairs down to the wine cellar are alarmed, or they would be if the owner had remembered to reset it after heading down for a bottle earlier that day, but Ed still skips the step that would trip it off.

Below, he finds more wine than any one household can be expected to drink, and a lot it looks like isn't even intended for drinking, given the way it's displayed.

Gaudy, ostentatious, and wanky. Helpful though, because it means Ed doesn't have to do much looking to find the bottle he's after, set up as it is as the centrepiece of the back wall.

This is, perhaps, the only actually tricky part of the whole thing. The case is locked, which is no real issue. The keypad takes four digits where the others in the house take six, and it doesn't take the fucking kraken to figure out what those'll be. But it's also alarmed, and given the owners dont seem to plan on drinking it, there wasn't a way to get them to leave it unlocked.

Finally, a fucking challenge.

Ed pulls out the thoroughly coded index card he's got dangling from a lanyard around his neck. Makes him look like a fucking nerd, but it's better than dropping the damn thing and leaving evidence behind.

If he unlocks the case without opening it, and disconnects the cable at the right moment while holding down the keys to reset the code, opens the door and reconnects it within 2.7 seconds then theoretically the main security system it's linked to won't register the disconnection.

He puts in the code and waits for the indicator light to flash green, but it just gives him an angry beep. Ed tries again, slowly, making sure he's putting the right number in.

Two angry beeps.

He checks the keypad over. It doesn't get enough use for wear, but when he shines the bluelight torch over it there's a faint pattern of oil on the keys matching the wear pattern of all the other keypads in the house.

"Try '1234'."

Ed nearly bangs his head on the case as he jolts at the voice, spinning on his heel to find the Gentleman-fucking-Robber perched on what must be an entirely decorative barrel in the corner, sipping delicately from a wine glass.

"Even these fuckers aren't stupid enough to pick 1234 as the lock code for an $80,000 bottle of wine."

"Oh, they didn't," Stede says brightly, "but you have to actually reset the code after you've tricked the alarm or it'll go off when you shut the case and I couldn't be bothered to think of anything clever."

Given Ed hadn't been planning on closing the door after himself, that part of things hadn't been much of a concern.

Ed rolls his eyes, "so you got in here, tricked the alarm, got the case open and closed it again without taking anything, just for the drama."

"Heavens no," Stede says, and holds out a bottle, "swapped it for a fake first."

Ed turns back to the display case. It's a fairly good fake. Not good enough that it'll pass muster when it's taken out and inspected - it's hard to replicate aging like that, but it's good enough.

Stede drains his glass and then hooks it into what is apparently a fucking custom-made wineglass holster and hops off the barrel.

"Shall we?"

Ed just stares at him.

"Honestly, you can have it," Stede assures him, "it's not a trap. I wasn't lying in wait down here to brick you in or anything. I just happened to get here first and thought I'd save you the trouble."

Growling under his breath, Ed turns back the the case and punches 1234 into the keypad. At least he knows the alarm trick will work.

The indicator light finally goes green and Ed gets the alarm connection arranged in one hand so he disconnect it while the other is plugging in the reset sequence.

The keypad gives a trill and Ed pulls the cable, flicks the door open and uses two hands to click the cables back together, and waits.

He has no idea how long ago Stede got here, and two code resets that close together might trip the main system anyway, but he hears nothing, and there's no warning message in his earpiece from Fang, so Ed lets out a breath and grabs the fake out of the case.

"Here," he says shoving the fake at Stede so he has both hands free to pull his glove off before grabbing the real bottle with his greasepaint coated palm.

"They might notice that," Stede says with a wince.

"Yeah," Ed says, pulling out his corkscrew, "they're supposed to."

"Ed-"

"That's Kraken to you, Bonnet."

Stede sighs. "What exactly are you doing?'

"What I got hired to do." Ed snaps as the cork pops out, "Client doesn't want the wine. Hates the stuff. Just doesn't want this guy to have it."

He upends the bottle and starts pouring it onto the flagstones.

"If you want a taste, now's your chance," he mutters, and Stede seems to be arguing with himself for all of a second before he's drawing his glass and holding it under the stream.

The wine trickles to a stop and Ed leans over the puddle carefully to place the smeared, empty bottle back in the open case.

"My," Stede says beside him, "that really is quite good. Want a taste?"

"Fuck off."

–-

The wine does actually taste really fucking good.

Ed's furious.

[unhingedwomandiaries]

I dyed my fucking hair again. So much for my "50 Things To Do Before 50" list and that bullshit about "breaking the cycle." What a load of wank that turned out to be. To-do List #1: Never dye your hair again. Yeah, right. Clearly past-me was having some kind of mental breakdown thinking future-me would have that kind of willpower.

The grey hairs are like little bastard terrorists, staging guerrilla warfare attacks on my scalp. Every morning there's another squad of the fuckers, standing there in the mirror like they're taunting me. "Look at us, you sad cow. We're here to remind you you're getting old."

My mom didn't go grey until she was practically menopausal, the lucky bitch. And my sister-in-laws? Christ. They're like those irritating Stepford wives with their perfect fucking natural hair color at forty-something. I bet they sacrifice small animals to maintain that shit. Meanwhile, I'm over here looking like I've got tinsel growing out of my head.

At least I went with henna this time instead of the usual chemical warfare. Last time I tried that hippie bollocks, I ended up looking like Ronald McDonald's mentally unstable cousin. But this time I chose "bruin" - which is just wanky marketing speak for brown. Proper brown though, not too far off my natural color. Though who the fuck knows what my natural color is anymore? I've been dying it since uni when someone said I looked like a Victorian ghost.

I give it three weeks before I'm back at it again. The greys are like cockroaches - you can never truly kill the bastards. They'll be back, multiplied, probably planning their revenge. And I'll be here, with my henna and my self-loathing, ready for another round. Sometimes I think they're winning this war.

[jonboudposts]

Cafe Life #6: Paula’s Cafe, Hackney

Cup of tea = £2 (if I remember rightly)

This is heaven. A full London cafe on a Sunday afternoon. The smell incomparable as a community eats, drinks, laughs and mourns, kisses and cuddles and gets ready for another week. Children play; oldies remember; wanky wannabe writers sit in the corner scribbling.

Hackney gets a lot of shit these days. In fact it always did, but for different reasons. This area is now condemned equally for the population of poor people, mostly ethnic minorities whose existence still seems to cause the Telegraph apoplexy and next to them, the incomers of more secure economic means gained through bullshit jobs. They sit in the same seats as the OGs, have the same conversations; often have the same dreams, with greater social capital to achieve theirs. Sometimes they also want to lynch the landlord and make everything fairer. They might just make it as comrades yet. Maybe.

While the economic situation is a disgrace, socially this area shows a degree of intergradation that the right hates to recognise, no matter how minor it is. This is their only battleground, even though they lost it decades ago. But their combined power in politics and economics has not sated their perverse desire for domination (actually it has driven them mad). They want the one thing they have failed at time and again – culture. They will desecrate the education system, housing and our working life to try and gain a hand over us in the one place the working class has always exercised power over society. From student grants to decent rates of benefits, they will not rest until hope is destroyed; all TV and film are costume dramas; all music in Mumford-ised.

There are an alarming number of eateries down this road now. Gentrification on full (although that is a little unfair, as some of them are not that expensive and the food is good). Paula’s stands out; a proper cafe (yes, that description is used too often in these gastric frontline reports, but I am a limited writer). The tea is strong, sometimes stewed and the food is as much about filling you with the energy to do battle for another day. For what are our lives now, in work and play, but the endless fight for leverage with the ruling class? It is starker than ever.

I could go for the full breakfast at lunchtime, or my default setting of Sheppard's Pie; but today is about tea and cherry pie. With custard, naturally. It takes the mind and body along a road to comfort in the familiar; not the hated nostalgia that has crippled the country, but a reminder of those that came before, that loved us and created that which we rely on to enrich us; from the NHS to baking pies. Homes full of warmth; work for the betterment of all. Spaces we can occupy and enjoy, with no economic incentive. It’s all connected baby.

As we wonder through the dull winter sunlight with haunted looks upon all the faces. We know London like they never will. The ravers and punks use to have this city. You can still feel a subdued bass from once-abandoned buildings, now being ‘reclaimed’ by the property parasites. We loved East London when it was dangerous. I wish those cunts on social media crowing about every knife crime really could not walk these streets. They would be a nicer place without you.

Things were not always like this, I want to tell the two youngsters sitting next to us. This city can sing again to the sound of our voices, not the monied scum in the unaffordable tower blocks. The city is wounded, but not dead. Cafes are another site of political and social resistance. This is where we feed; our fuel for the class war.

[confused-robot-cat]

Remember when a far-right tosser dragged up some random bullshit about James Gunn from a million years ago because he didn't like how left-wing he felt those wanky super hero movies were and this right-wing cunt successfully whipped up a bunch of left-wing idiots into getting James Gunn fired from projects?

Remember when some dumb bitch was upset a guy realised they were both drunk and suggested maybe they shouldn't have sex because their judgement was clouded and so she got revenge by carrying a mattress around for months and the dude lost his college placement, lost his diploma, couldn't find work, and was the victim of multiple assaults and she faced absolutely no consequences for her false rape claims?

Remember when Amber Heard beat Johnny Depp and admitted to it several times and women flocked to her and got Johnny fired and blacklisted? And the courts found she was guilty but Johnny lost a libel case against a skeevy British tabloid and people used that to point to his supposed guilt even though it had nothing to do with anything?

How, uh

How come y'all never learn this lesson?

[goldensadnessdolphin]

Just finsihed A Link to the Past after finally finding a Snes Mini for a decent price. I wasn't that interested in the game as I have played A Link Between Worlds and have no nostalgia for alttp.

So of course I 100%ed it.

Come with me on a journey about what alttp is like for someone who plays it for the first time in 2023:

Short heads-up so you know where I'm coming from experience wise: Loved ALBW, loved Tunic, I play a lot of metroidvania (to the point where I play Hollow Knight multiworld randomizers with a buddy). So, while not heavily interested in alttp specifically, I do like the traditional Zelda-like games.

Notice the phrase "Zelda-like". As much as I did love Between Worlds, I never truly 100%ed it because one heart piece was too much bother. Not too difficult, too much bother. And that's something that has been a common issue between me and the Zelda series. I think it is an important series, but mostly because it's turned into several blueprints with high potential that other games jump off from. Examples include the excellent Death's Door - which you should play if you haven't already - and the aforementioned Tunic.

I'll go into problems first and then finish with the positive/in-two-minds section :3

The main issue I've always had with Zelda games was that they seem to treat mystery and resource depletion with the same gameplay priority. (now there's a wanky sentence!) What I mean by that is that they approach fights with the same mentality as they do with puzzles. Which is not ideal. Because in both cases, they make you experience a period of endurance before a payoff comes. So in puzzles, that's great! You see the puzzle, you think of an idea, that idea likely fails - because it's designed to teach you something - and in the end, you find a solution that makes you feel clever. Or at least relieved, either works for catharsis. Fights are different though. Where puzzles are mostly player focused, fights - by there nature - are mechanics focused. So if you add the typical puzzle contrivance to spread out the payoff, it can get grating fast.

A lot of dungeon rooms in alttp consist of a small handful of simple enemies and one or more HP/Magic drains. For example a few Blue/Red Baris, Helmasaurs or Hardhat Beetles (enemies that bounce you back when you attack them) and bottomless pits. Which means, even if you "do things correctly", i.e. attack the enemy when they're vulnerable, you still get punished. You generally bounce back far enough to fall in a pit or on spikes unless your positioning is the intended one. That means, you can lose health when fighting enemies, no matter who's damaging whom. If they manage to hit you, you get that damage and the bottomless pit damage, which doesn't care for invulnerablity frames.

And that'd be fine - annoying, but fine - if that setup wasn't so prevalent in the game. My perception of it may be increased because I disliked it, but it really felt like some variation of that was part of 1/2 to 1/3 of all dungeon fights, especially the Dark World ones.

This gets compounded with one-way doors, Wallmasters that reset you to the dungeon entrance or fights being on upper floors where you have to replay a significant part of the dungeon just to get back to the fight.

While there is truth in "the harder you work for a reward, the more you value it", if the reward is not proportinal to the investment, it can work against you. Which it did for me. I didn't go back to the fights thinking "ah, finally, I have sussed out the winning strategy!". I went back like "in the time I spent walking back, I would've finished the fight three times without this bullshit". Then, the reward was often just a key to continue the dungeon, so not even a real reward. You wouldn't be delighted to finally read the next chapter of a novel if someone stepped on your foot before allowing you to.

Again, none of this is because it's too hard. It's just fucking the player about.

BUT! Here is where I'll stop the whinge, and if you managed it to here, thanks mate!

Because aside from instances like that, I do think A Link to the Past is a great game. Tight enough that I felt finding secrets was managable without a walkthrough, a lot of upgrades make you feel better (hookshot and tunics, my beloveds) and it's still a very nice looking game. I genuinely don't know whether playing Between Worlds a few years before was detrimental or even helpful?! Because on the one hand, I definitely lost the wonder of experiencing To The Past 100% fresh, on the other hand it meant I was somewhat familiar with the space, if only in it's rough shape. Obviously I also adjusted my expectations, because you'd hope that a reimagining 20* years later would be a significant improvement. So I think that it actually helped me appreciate To The Past more. This time I had the luxury of focusing on the game, instead of having to soak everything in and create a memory of every important thing simultaneously.

Some things can go either way. Being able to bump my sword against walls to check if they can be bombed switches between "cool, Knawlege!" and "do I want to waste time or bombs?". Having the sword beam is cool, but it's incredibly rare to actually keep it for any length of time. While the relatively big inventory and its unique items are interesting to play with, there are some things that shine immensely, while others are very situational (ice rod? Only used it for its intended bossfight) or at worst get replaced (There is no reason to use the boomerang after you got the hookshot).

Also, the Medallions were way less powerful than I expected. Quake seemed good, but is not as effective of a room clear as you want, while I never used Bombos' and got annoyed by how useless Ether was when it was the intended solution. I expect they wanted them to be much stronger, but felt that would unbalance things. Real shame.

It's a bit sad that the upgrades to the sword and tunic don't feel like cool upgrades, but necessary to even keep the same longevity. That felt kinda backwards. However, that is a really tricky problem in general, because it needs to feel like a significant difference while still keeping the challenging aspects of the combat system.

In the end, I think a lot of design choices were a mixture of the consensus of the time and the fact, that there were a lot less games of that type out there. It's still definitely one of the better Zelda games. While I don't think this will ever be my favourite anything, I also don't think everything needs to be an extreme something for me personally. I'm glad I finally got to play it, and I generally enjoyed my time. As I said, I did 100% it :3

[caparrucia]

It's dumb but: make sure it's plagiarism and not conflicting ways of doing fandom first.

Plagiarism means taking someone else's fic, verbatim, and then claiming it as their own or presenting it in a way that implies it's their own.

However, fandom is an interaction-driven, community space. And you can't plagiarize ideas.

Using dialog and description verbatim? Yeah, you might have a case.

Using the same AU setting/relationship dynamic/headcanon post? It's probably not and even if they're basing it off the same source you think they are (which again, you can't know, because you can't plagiarize *ideas*) it's derivative and transformative, which is the whole point of fandom.

I would recommend, if the person in question is not hiding their sources, to nudge them about community etiquette. There are fandoms that are very fast paced and that thrive off going "yes and" from each other. Ideas and headcanons posted publicly are considered public property, to put it somehow, and it's understood it's a free for all. You basically share headcanons and what-ifs publicly in the hopes someone will be inspired to write the fic you want to see. There's nothing inherently wrong with that kind of fandom culture, it's just jarring if that's not how you're used to doing fandom.

A good faith interpretation is that the person in question doesn't know this fandom doesn't do things that way. It's a small ship and I assume a tight-knit community as a result and they're having a cultural shock of sorts. If that's what's happening, it's likely you can resolve this without getting into fights by de-escalating and just reaching out to explain it makes people uncomfortable to take things from their stuff without asking first.

Fandom is a hobby, a space people share to have fun. Before you escalate into a fight or a disagreement, you could try to de-escalate by appealing to community etiquette. Even if it is a bad faith scenario and the person is actively plagiarizing, by approaching in good faith you take away their plausible deniability. You didn't make it into a fight. You pointed out - gently and respectfully - that they were committing a social misstep, and by doing it gently and respectfully, you set yourself in a win-win situation:

If it's a good faith scenario, they will apologize, you will have built a bridge and avoided alienating a new potential member of your community who was, perhaps, a bit too excited and didn't realize they were causing friction.

If it's a bad faith scenario, you have put them on the spot. They can either apologize and fall in line, because you've made it clear their behavior is not acceptable. Or they can show their wanky true colors and blow up. And if they blow up, you can then as a community close ranks and block/blacklist and keep them and their wanky bullshit out. And you don't have to get into a he-said-she-said about it, because they were clearly who escalated into being violent/aggressive about things.

Look, I've been in fandom for almost 30 years. I've been plagiarized multiple times across multiple sites. And it sucks. It really sucks. It's demoralizing and it sucks the fun out of the community because it makes people less willing to share and participate. But that's kind of the point: it is a threat to your community, so my recommendation is to respond to it as a community issue, instead of as a personal fight. Because personal fights also suck the fun out of things and poison the well.

The goal is for fandom to be fun, and as satisfying as the fantasy of getting into a big row and being very aggressive/self-righteous about it feels, that too ends up drawing lines in the sand and fracturing the community, eventually sucking the soul out of it.

You should do what you think best, for yourself and your friends, but in my experience, de-escalation works best.

How many words is considered plagiarism?

I write for a small ship, and there's a new author (new to the ship but not to fanfic, they say) who not only takes inspiration from plots and headcanons of mine and other authors (which could be flattering for the writer and 'two cakes' for the reader actually) but plain reuses the exact same sentences. I am well aware that writers don't own words, but we're talking about full 10ish word long strings of text here. As I said, small ship, so all these 'similarities' stick out like a sore thumb. We never even saw this person commenting on our works. So, should WE say something? And how? It's a peaceful community, and I'd hate it if we broke that peace.

Generally speaking, plagiarism is directly copying something like 10% of another person's work and claiming it as your own. This is very much a ballpark figure and not a number that you can apply to all cases by running the word counts and doing the math. For example, with song lyrics, it's something like 2 or 3 lines.

Whatever the percentage might be in the cases you're talking about, they're very much feeling like plagiarism (rather than an homage, for example) and that's a really negative situation to find yourself in, especially when you want to keep the peace.

You have a handful of options for what to do, I think, and I'll leave it to you which one to choose.

Pretend it's not happening. Bite your tongue, grit your teeth, clench your fists and just be silently annoyed/frustrated/pissed. This will basically be your current situation, continued.

Block their works from showing up on your feed and mute their comments. The person may likely continue with what they're doing, but there won't be any fandom drama about it - at least not because of you. This way, you don't have to see them doing it.

Vague (or not-so-vague) post about it. The fandom is small and the author or a reader will likely be able to identify who you're talking about. Once the author is aware that you're calling them out, they might disappear from the fandom or it might start that drama trashfire you want to avoid. Less likely, they might edit their works and stick around.

Reach out to the author and accuse them of plagiarism one-on-one. This will probably have the same results as option 2, with the addition of maybe having screenshots of your conversation floating around your fandom.

Reach out to the author and welcome them to the fandom. Let them know that you're glad to see another writer for your small ship. Ask if they're new to AO3 and/or how long they've been writing fic. If they're new to fic or to AO3, you can let them know that they're creating an unfortunately bad first impression amongst the other authors. You can then help them navigate their new fandom waters. No fandom drama should result, and you'll get to keep an additional author for your small ship without the current frustrations. With this one, you really do want to go in with an empathizing mindset rather than a manipulative one, otherwise you'll end up screenshotted in drama like in option 4.

You can report their fic(s) to the Policy & Abuse team. PAC keeps all reports confidential, so the author would never know your name. If PAC investigates and decides it's not plagiarism after all, they'll let you know and the author will never know you sent in a report. If they decide it is plagiarism, they'll reach out to the author (still keeping your name out of it) and request that they edit their work to remove the plagiarism. The relevant fics would be hidden from view while the author edits them. If the author fails to edit them, PAC will delete them from the Archive. Whether this results in fandom drama will depend entirely on how the author reacts. Some people will make a public show about "false accusations" and others will quietly edit or delete their works. The quiet authors will likely end up leaving the fandom. The loud ones? Harder to say.

For more information on the PAC side of the plagiarism report (and how to write a report with all of the relevant info), I'll link two answers from PAC takeovers of the blog: answer 1 | answer 2

Are there any options anon has that I might have missed? What would you do in a situation like this?

[noconcernofyours]

Pinning Down My Kind of Movie

Warning: Wanky, self-indulgent ramblings about Hollywood auteurs to follow

A couple of days ago, I sat down with my housemate to watch Miami Vice (2006) directed by Michael Mann (Heat, Collateral) and starring Colin Farrell and Jamie Foxx. Since we moved into our place, my housemate has gradually been exposed to my taste in movies, and the other day, sat in front of a strung-out Colin Farrell ordering mojitos to ‘Numb/Encore’ during an undercover sting, he finally confronted me with a crisis-inducing statement: “You know, I can’t figure out what your kind of movie is.”

If I am to be totally honest, it doesn’t take much to send me into an existential tailspin, but this observation got me thinking enough to want to sit down and write about it, so here we are. My name’s Daniel and I love movies! When I was a teenager, I was certain I wanted to be a film critic, so I started writing in earnest. The problem was I wasn’t that well rounded as a viewer. I confined myself to the world of comic book movies and Disney animation. I turned my nose up at pretty much everything else before realising that I didn’t actually know much or have much to offer about film. Instead, I turned to music criticism because that’s where my knowledge base is.

That being said, I still loved movies, and as the years have gone on, I have been rapidly expanding my film knowledge and broadened my horizons extensively. I got called a “film buff” for the first time recently, which really shocked me. I still don’t feel well-watched enough, or knowledgeable enough to fit a moniker like that. Maybe it’s imposter syndrome, but I really feel like I have a way to go yet.

My Letterboxd bio includes the phrase “admirer of film nerds”, and I think that admiration informs the entire way I look at the world of film. I read a lot of reviews and listen to a lot of podcasts by smart, unpretentious film obsessives like David Sims, Griffin Newman, Katey Rich, Karen Han and Bilge Ebiri, but that same admiration also informs the kind of films I enjoy the most. In confronting the statement from my housemate, I realised that while there are some genres I gravitate to more than others, my taste in movies is largely defined by the extent to which I can pick up on a single authorial voice driving the film. A director, writer, actor, composer or cinematographer who has a real, obsessive love for their craft whose influence and personality can be felt in every layer of a film’s construction. Franchises are a different beast, but it’s usually the entries in a franchise that feel like passion projects for individual filmmakers that I love the most, which is why Iron Man 3 is by far my favourite Marvel movie.

Over the last few months I’ve started building a fairly extensive Blu-Ray collection. I love physical media because I like to have a tangible representation of the art I love, but it also allows me to physically organise my thoughts about film rather than moving things around on a spreadsheet or in my head. It has also had an effect on how I watch films. Spending money on a film makes me feel more obligated to watch it through to the end in one sitting, to not be on my phone at the same time and to pay closer attention. It’s also made my approach to picking the films I watch more considered. I’ve been hunting down the films I haven’t seen by directors I love, fuelled by newfound completionism, and I’ve been subconsciously prioritising this kind of auteur-driven mindset in a way that has revealed, over time, who my favourite filmmakers are.

So, with that in mind, let’s transform this meandering, self-indulgent think piece into a meandering, self-indulgent listicle. Here are the filmmakers that have changed the way I watch movies:

Christopher Nolan

I know this is a bit of a film bro cliché, but I promise I’m not one of those film school douchebags who’s convinced they’re going to be the next great big budget auteur. Like a lot of other people my age, I discovered Christopher Nolan through the batman movies. I was taken to see The Dark Knight by my parents when I was 10 years old, not having seen Batman Begins, and it blew my mind. For years after that, I was one of those arseholes who had a terrible Joker impression that I whipped out at parties, until I became aware of the cliché and never did it again.

In the years since I’ve watched all of his other movies and gained a new love of Interstellar and The Prestige – movies that taught me a lot about the authorial voice and interweaving a central theme into every element of a film. I also learned that just because I find it annoying when the same tropes turn up in every Quentin Tarantino movie, recurring tropes throughout a filmmaker’s catalogue aren’t universally a bad thing.

The Coen Brothers

Representation is important. The tough thing about watching films from an auteur-driven perspective is that so many of the most important filmmakers in Hollywood are approaching their films from a white, Christian, male perspective. Scorsese is a particularly difficult director for me to appreciate because so many of his films are overtly informed by his Christianity. My Jewish identity is the most significant aspect of my identity, so naturally I’m always looking for films made from a Jewish perspective, overt or otherwise.

Whilst the Coen brothers don’t always make movies about explicitly Jewish characters or subject matters, their Jewishness always comes out in their writing, particularly in the totally undidactic way they approach the subject of faith in almost every film they’ve made. Their approach to God, fate, spirituality and religion is never one of moralising certainty, but rather a questioning one, which is a fundamental aspect of Jewish existence. I feel represented on multiple levels in the films of the Coen brothers, particularly in Inside Llewyn Davis which is my favourite film of the last decade, in ways that other directors could never manage. For the same reasons I will forever be excited about the potential of the Safdie brothers.

Stephen Spielberg

Whilst the Jewishness of Stephen Spielberg is a major attraction for me (Catch Me If You Can, his moody Christmas movie, comes across as weirdly Jewish to me), the thing that has solidified the guy as one of my favourite filmmakers is his approach to telling true stories. Unlike the Coen brothers, it’s Spielberg’s self-assuredness and didacticism that fuels my love of his work. His spate of recent, politically switched-on, historical dramas (Lincoln, Bridge of Spies and The Post) are all incredible achievements in effectively giving quiet dramas about people talking in rooms the tension and stakes of great action movies.

It’s the obvious thing to say at this point that Spielberg is one of the few genuine masters of the cinematic language, but while most will point to his massive, populist movies of the 80s and 90s as the definitive examples of that, I would point to his spottier late career with its moralising and earnestness as where his most exhilarating work lies.

Michael Mann

I like that Michael Mann is uncompromising. He makes films which, based on premise and star power, should be commercial knockouts, but they almost never are. He has an incredibly clear sense of self, and like Nolan has a lot of frequently recurring tropes in his films. Michael Mann makes films about Men Making Tough Choices™. He builds detailed, intensely researched worlds and he loves crime!

There’s something special when a filmmaker can tread the same ground over and over again and never convey the same central message twice. Nearly all of Mann’s movies are gritty, neo-noir thrillers with an obsessive attention to detail, but all of them deal with a totally distinct existential question which runs through every element of the film, from meta casting to set design, to music, to Mann’s pioneering use of digital photography. I’m just obsessed!

Stephen Soderbergh

Soderbergh is a hill that I’m going to be climbing for quite some time, I think. This is a guy who is relentlessly prolific, taking on a ridiculous number of roles on set himself, and working so fast that he often churns out multiple films in a year. With limited funds and a determination to watch movies legally, my progress through Soderbergh’s filmography has been slow, but I’ve loved every one I’ve watched so far.

As much as I love the guy’s mastery of the heist movie, and the way he slips those story telling devices into a lot of his non-heist stories, I think what really gets me about Soderbergh is the way his filmmaking style always seems to feel tooled towards portraying his characters with as much empathy as possible. Often his films are about people working or learning to empower themselves and coming to terms with their own identities. Anyway, go watch Out of Sight! It’s a damn masterpiece!

Kathryn Bigelow

Kathryn Bigelow’s career is full of insane ups and downs, but as far as I’m concerned, despite the difficulties she’s had getting her movies made and seen, she has three unqualified masterworks: Point Break, Strange Days and The Hurt Locker. On this list of directors, Bigelow has perhaps the most stylistically varied body of work, but her best work, much like that of other directors that I find myself drawn to, is largely concerned with obsession. Her characters are deeply flawed, but unwaveringly driven. What I love is that despite her drastic genre change from pulpy action thriller to hyper-realistic docudrama, she’s managed to hold on to that fascination with obsession, and an acute, outsider’s understanding of masculinity and its fragility.

Kathryn Bigelow has had to adapt to keep working, but because of that, she’s managed to develop a voice and a personality that is versatile enough to withstand her career shifts, but strong enough that it hasn’t been chipped away at by the difficulties she’s faced as a woman in Hollywood.

So, what was the point of all this?

Honestly, there wasn’t one. This was a piece of self-indulgence that allowed me to navigate an idea over which I was obsessing for a little while. That being said, I think if I had read something along these lines a few years ago, I would have delved into the world of director-focused movie watching far sooner. It’s hard to quickly and easily define the role of a director in contemporary film, particularly due to the ever growing influence of studios, but in the world in which the above filmmakers operate, the director has final say over all the creative decisions involved in putting together a movie. For me, the most exciting films are the ones that clearly and effectively communicate a single creative voice. Sue me, I love auteurs.

[religion-is-a-mental-illness]

What is your opinion on Eastern religion? I find religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism to be quite logical in their philosophies as well what their “gods” represent. Not to mention some of their beliefs are scientifically accurate (for example, everything is one and the same). Also, many of those who take psychedelic drugs realize truths that they didn’t even realize were ideas from Hindu philosophy. I find that very interesting. What’s your take on Eastern religion?

First, please read:

https://religion-is-a-mental-illness.tumblr.com/post/180200447127

https://religion-is-a-mental-illness.tumblr.com/post/177232121982

I don’t know how you got from multi-armed and elephant-headed creatures, reincarnation and past-lives, and the notion of a universe not just interested in but keeping tally of karmic accounting across those multiple lives… to “logical.” There’s nothing logical about the universe’s explosions, black holes and empty vacuum having some kind of opinion or record keeping about how often I’ve held the door for people or how many times I’ve flipped the bird to someone in traffic.

(You might like to watch season 3 of The Good Place, BTW.)

With something like Newton’s Third Law of Physics, which is often classically described as “equal and opposite reactions”, this is detectable and demonstrable to the point of being measurable. We have formulas that calculate this. Superstitions like karma don’t get to ride on the coat-tails of legitimate physics, claiming to represent the same thing by being cast as simple “cause and effect” while disregarding the “magic” aspect. If they’re the same, lets see their mechanisms and formulas. How do we detect how and when an event is karmically delivered, and how do we measure the attributes being re-balanced. And how can we detect when something is not karmic reaction?

These religions have claims that are as extraordinary as the Jesus-claims of Xtians, including Hinduism’s own creator (and destroyer) gods and Buddhism’s realms, ghosts and mysticism (unless you go the new-gen full-blown Marxist route), which require substantiation just like YHWH, Kite-Boy and heaven.

some of their beliefs are scientifically accurate

The bible says that Rome exists. This is accurate. Stoning someone to death will kill them. This is accurate (duh). The bible also names a number of kings and pharaohs who have been verified. That doesn’t mean that its additional claims of a magical man who took a long weekend nap to cure an invisible disease inflicted by his sky daddy’s incompetence – are also true.

The Titanic was a real ship, and the cities it was traveling from and to are real as well. That doesn’t mean Leonardo DiCaprio died on it. Washington D.C., New York, Sydney and London exist. This doesn’t mean the film Independence Day is true. Fictional stories can be set in the the real world. Or rather, a fictional version of our real world.

The bible also describes things as falling to Earth. This is scientifically accurate. It reflects a recognition of gravity. The bible also says that among the things that fall to Earth will be stars. This is scientifically ludicrous.

The Quran describes humans reaching the moon, seemingly foreshadowing what we know about the moon not being a light embossed into the moving sky. This is both scientifically and historically accurate, as we have reached the moon, even planting a reflector on it. Except that the Quran also says that Muhammad flew to the moon and cut it into two, which is possibly the most stupid thing I’ve ever heard.

We know a great deal about the way the brain works. We know that a religionist’s ideas about what their deity wants originate from their own ego, that people with split-brain conditions can exhibit different preferences, thoughts and ideas on each side of the brain, and that consciousness is dependent upon the physicality of the brain and the human body. We know that memories are stored as protein molecules, for example. We know this through scientific inquiry, evidence and research. Thus, ghosts, reincarnation or past lives are no more scientific than heaven, hell and Xtian souls.

Even a stopped clock gets the time right once (or twice) a day. I’m willing to bet that every religion gets at least a couple of things scientifically correct - not revealed, new knowledge, of course, but contemporary understanding for the time it was written (retelling, not revelation).

But “some” doesn’t help us at all. Why, other than convenience and comfort, would we look only at the “hits” and not also the “misses,” where Buddhism and/or Hinduism spouts something scientifically ludicrous? Ignoring all the evidence that doesn’t support your claim is called confirmation bias.

for example, everything is one and the same

This is, quite frankly, meaningless to me. What are you even saying or talking about? One what, and the same what as what? I honestly haven’t the faintest idea what this either means or proves.

I can think of a half-dozen different ways to interpret this platitude and a half-dozen scientific claims you could then mash into those interpretations, in order to come to the conclusion this vague, generic cliche predicts evolution, quantum theory, cosmology, artificial intelligence and even organ transplants.

Which specific scientific process are you likening it to? If it’s scientifically accurate, where are the formulas, mathematics, verifiable processes? Or, as with Islamic Science, is it retroactive interpretation with 20/20 hindsight?

How is Buddhism and Hinduism any different? That’s an actual question. And show your work.

many of those who take psychedelic drugs realize truths

How, exactly, did they determine they were “truths”? Again, show your work. Be specific so that others can undertake the same process and come to the same conclusion.

As best as I can even tell, “everything is one and the same” is not a truth, it’s just vague poetry masquerading as depth, designed to elicit a subjective inference from the listener – which is something that has also been studied: “On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit.” It’s as generic as a psychic cold-read.

http://journal.sjdm.org/15/15923a/jdm15923a.pdf

You previously described how “some of their beliefs are scientifically accurate” (emphasis by me). Do we determine “truth” by looking at only “some” of the evidence, “some” of the facts? Just the bits that say what we want them to say? Is cherry-picking as skilfully as a Xtian and conveniently disregarding the awkward, nonsensical bits how we determine “truth”?

Here’s a truth for you: You’re now one day closer to eating your next pizza. You’re also one day closer to eating your final pizza.

These are some sites where you can discover your own (randomly generated) deep, meaningful insights:

http://sebpearce.com/bullshit

http://www.wisdomofchopra.com

“Hidden meaning is inherent in visible experiences”

“Consciousness consists of chaos-driven reactions of quantum energy. ‘Quantum’ means an unfolding of the amazing. By flowering, we believe.“

“Passion is the deeper meaning of starfire, and of us. The infinite is buzzing with ultrasonic energy.“

“The cosmos quiets immortal balance”

“A formless void is reborn in infinite molecules”

I think we all need a moment to breathe and absorb.

Seriously. Go generate a few quotes and tell me honestly if you can tell the difference between your thing and theirs.

I’m going to steal borrow a helpful list here, which is Xtianity/bible-centric, but still relevant:

In order for a statement to be Biblical scientific foreknowledge, it must fit five criteria:

It must be correct. A statement cannot be scientific foreknowledge if it is incorrect, because the scientific method necessarily eschews incorrect data.It must be in the Bible. A statement cannot be Biblical scientific foreknowledge if it isn’t in the Bible, because the only possible source of Biblical scientific foreknowledge is the Bible.It must be unambiguous. A statement cannot be scientific foreknowledge if it is ambiguous, both because science is necessarily precise and because ambiguity allows modern science to be shoehorned into ancient religion when none is present.It must have been outside of contemporary knowledge. A statement cannot be scientific foreknowledge if it was already known, because this makes the “foreknowledge” into merely “knowledge” and makes divine intervention unnecessary.It must have been outside of contemporary technology. A statement cannot be considered scientific foreknowledge if it was knowable with the technology of the time, because this makes divine intervention unnecessary.

Can you similarly meet these criteria with Buddhist or Hindu “knowledge”?

Again, I’m going to be blunt; what I’m hearing is a bunch of flowery… stuff… that is wrapped in an expectation that it gets a free pass due to being relatively exotic to western individuals (US, UK, AU, NZ, EU); not being the classic, violent Abrahamic religions; being vague and pseudo-intellectual enough to let the listener invent their own meaning (Stone Soup-style); and being passed off as “ancient knowledge.”

None of that means anything whatsoever in terms of their obligations to substantiate its extraordinary, un- and super-natural claims.

Exactly like all the others.

[opens-up-4-nobody]

...

[fxckingmoran]

Sebastian watches them leave before turning his gaze back to Jamie, watching as he settles into the seat beside. Brow lifts, lips curving into a faintly playful smirk. "I'm feeling nice tonight so I'm going to resist taking the piss out of you for that wanky drink." He lifts his beer to his lips, draining the last of it before pushing the empty bottle towards the bartender, putting in his order. "They're twats. Been watching them since they came in. Think they're on a mission to piss off everyone in the place." Wherever he goes, Sebastian tends to be hyper aware of his surroundings - It's been ingrained into him after years of training in the military and then his less noble criminal career. He likes to know potential threats. Not that a few mouthy Richmond fans are going to do anything.

"Sebastian." Hand extends to shake Jamie's, eyes watching him carefully for a moment. He's a fucking good looking bloke, no wonder people are falling over themselves to get to him. "I couldn't resist getting involved. I'm so sick of these dickheads and their opinions when half of them would trip over their own bollocks on the way to the toilet." He pays for the drinks, tapping his card before wrapping his fingers around the bottle. "Don't know how you listen to it." At one point in his life Sebastian had been full sure he wanted to go down the rugby route, try to make something of himself in the sporting industry. He's now very much aware that he doesn't have the temperament for it. "It takes a special kind of person to put up with that bullshit." He nudges his knee against Jamie's. "Besides, in my very correct opinion, I think you're one of the best players on the team. And it's not often I compliment people, so consider yourself lucky." His grin is almost faintly flirty, Sebastian being absolutely incapable of not flirting with someone attractive. "How's the rest of your night going anyway? Aside from the pricks."

Jamie Tartt's heard it all before. The praise flows easy from supporters, yes, but so do the insults. Especially when he's got a good chance, taken a good shot that's hooked just wide of the goal, a winning goal just missed, or when he passes to Sam on the wing instead of passing to Richard down the centre. That's when everyone suddenly seems to think themselves masters of the game. When you've been told since you were nine that you're shit, you'll always be shit, from the man who was supposed to nurture you, to cheer on your successes and help you overcome the obstacles, hearing it from complete strangers doesn't hurt him. It never could. He'd just nod along, let them talk until they get bored, give them a clap on the shoulder and a cheers, mate, and let them walk away to brag about how they'd just talked to Jamie Tartt. Reading it on Twitter's different, but that's beside the point. This isn't Twitter, is it, this is reality. 

He hasn't yet gotten to the 'cheers, mate' point when someone interrupts this time. The whistle catches his attention more than anything said prior; he is, at his core, a well-trained dog. It seems things are different this time. This time, a stranger dares interrupt. Bold, yes, especially when it would be two against one if things escalated, but it seems to work out for him. Jamie has to bite back a laugh, chewing at the inside of his cheek and bowing his head in an attempt to hide his smile. Blunt, yes, but it works - the pair fuck off, grumbling something or another that Jamie doesn't bother to listen to [ as if he was really bothering to listen to anything else they said that night ], and his attention turns to his knight in shining armour. He hadn't really planned on sitting down, but why not have a chat with somebody who recognises the work he puts in for his badges for club and country? Moving to the stool in question, Jamie slips onto it, adjusting the way his mostly-open button down rests against his chest. "Erm, vanilla vodka, soda, mint." If he deserves a pisstaking for anything, it's his choice of alcohol, not the way he plays. "Cheers for allat – y'didn't have t'do it, but still. Bit deserved, weren't it?" Middle and index finger tap twice against the bar, turning his head to look over at the man he's sat beside now. "Jamie. Good t'meet you."