#macro-level issues

[knowlesian]

“how dare people demonize my favorite character! they’re a saint and here’s my extensive and nuance-free take on why they have never done a single thing wrong. related, here’s my equally extensive and nuance-free rant about how a character who isn’t my favorite is a dumb bitch and deserves to die” is one of those stances i see constantly and will never quite understand

like my friend you just did the exact thing you’re mad about a n d its equal but opposite mirror! you even did both at once, which is honestly kind of impressive

[pinejay]

i'm listening to disjointed sections of the 3 body trilogy again and thinking abt the basic tenant that the need of a resource, no matter how great, doesn't bestow upon u the right to take it from another. the trisolarans are willing to colonize earth bc they fear a hypothetical albeit very real possibility of their own planet getting swallowed by a sun. but it's still an act of colonialism to just come to earth and slash and burn and slaughter. reminds me of ender's game and the formics terraforming the planets they expand to. how the justification for space colonization is always the right of personal survival and proliferation, at the cost of native life. (and also, humanity's fear for personal survival against a perceived threat as the recurrent justification for war and xenocide.)

beyond the very obvious parallel to modern day settler colonialism, it also brings to mind reproductive rights, and how the govt shouldn't be able to borrow your body to carry a child, even if the child has to die. doesn't matter how sentient a fetus can get. u shouldn't be forced to donate your organs to save someone else's life.

[a-space-for-mimi]

"The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him." - Proverbs 18:17 ESV

[prokopetz]

Folks talking about the weirdness of late 1990s/early 2000s forum culture usually focus on the macro-level stuff – the inter-forum beefs, the raids, etc. – but on a personal level they were often even more unhinged. Like, many popular forums had recurring issues with people putting on the persona of a Sickly Artist (often claiming to have a heart condition, though just as often the nature of their ailment would be left unspecified), building a following based on the idea that they were this gentle, tortured artistic genius who could kick the bucket any time, and eventually "dying", only to return a few weeks later in a different Sickly Artist persona and start the whole thing over again. Many of the worst offenders went through this cycle multiple times. Sometimes they weren't even real artists, and were simply misrepresenting someone else's art as their own, which was much easier to get away with because Google Image Search wasn't yet a thing.

[manonamora-if]

The 100% Good Twine SugarCube Guide!

The 100% Good Twine SugarCube Guide is a coding guide for the SugarCube format of Twine. It is meant as an alternative to the SugarCube documentation, with further explanations, interactive examples, and organised by difficulty. The goal of this guide is to make the learning curve for new SugarCube user less steep, and provide a comprehensive and wide look over the format.

VIEW / DOWNLOAD THE GUIDE!!!!

The Guide is compartmentalised in (currently) four categories:

THE BASICS or the absolute basics to start with SugarCube. No need for extra knowledge. Just the base needed to make something.

THE BASICS + adding interactivity, and creating a fully rounded IF game May require a bit of CSS knowledge (formatting rules)

INTERMEDIATE MODE adding more customisation and complex code Will probably require some CSS knowledge, and maybe some JavaScript

ADVANCE USE the most complex macros and APIs Will surely require some JavaScript/jQuery knowledge

Note: The Advanced Use includes all the APIs, macros, and methods not covered by the previous categories. This includes code requiring very advance knowledge of JavaScript/jQuery to be used properly.

Each category explains many aspects of the format, tailored to a specific level of the user. More simpler explanations and examples are available in earlier chapters, compared to the later ones.

If something is unclear, you found a mistake, you would like more examples in the guide, or would like a feature covered, let me know!

The Guide currently covers all macros (as of SugarCube v.2.37.3), all functions and methods, and APIs. It touches upon the use of HTML, CSS, JavaScript and jQuery, when relevant. It also discusses aspects of accessibility.

The Guides also provides a list of further resources, for the different coding languages.

The Guide is available in a downloadable form for offline view:

HTML file that can be opened in Twine

.tw file that can be opened in Twine

source code, separating the chapters, .js and .css files

GITHUB REPO | RAISE AN ISSUE | TWINE RESOURCES TWEEGO | TEMPLATES | CSCRIPT 2 SG GUIDE

Twine® is an “an open-source tool for telling interactive, non-linear stories” originally created by Chris Klimas maintained in several different repositories (Twinery.org). Twine is also a registered trademark of the Interactive Fiction Technology Foundation.

SugarCube is a free (gratis and libre) coding format for Twine/Twee created and maintained by TME.

VIEW / DOWNLOAD THE GUIDE!!!!

As of this release (v2.0.0), it is up to date with the version 2.37.3. If you are looking for the guide covering SugarCube 2.36.1, you can find it on my GitHub.

Note: the Guide is now complete. There won't be further substantial updates.

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

WIBTA for breaking up with my boyfriend because he likes my body?

TW for ED but please hear me out:

My bf (30m) and I (28f) have been together for a little over 5 years. When we got together I had an extremely stressful and physically demanding job. Shortly after our relationship started I relapsed with an eating disorder that had been a problem since prepubescence; I started restricting heavily at age 11 and had struggled with it on/off since then.

After quitting that terrible job and regaining some agency in my life, I spent a couple of years really focused on recovery. Without giving specific numbers (cause triggering) I'll say that I was extremely underweight to an unhealthy level for at least a year and experienced severe health complications because of it. I nearly died from heart problems and had a big wakeup call that caused me to change my whole life. I've done the work of recovery without medical help (history of omission with doctors) but have had support from my bf, and am currently at the highest weight of my life.

at a recent checkup my Dr talked a lot about "healthy lifestyle" and mentioned my weight gain over the past couple of years. I'm still within the "normal" range for my height and build, but the after visit summary/chart notes denoted risk of becoming overweight. Idk if my Dr would have brought it up if my history of ED was in my chart, (and I did switch primary care practices a few years ago, so they weren't treating me at my thinnest) but it still shook me a bit and I will admit to feeling very triggered.

The job I moved to is quite sedentary compared to the previous terrible one - I wfh, and very rarely have to be on my feet or do strenuous activity. In addition, I have chronic pain issues that make exercise difficult, and so historically have just restricted to maintain/lose weight because it's easier for me physically to just be hungry than to work out. I didn't want to go down that road again though because of how intense and scary it got last time.

My bf is a personal trainer and specializes in working with low ability clients and people recovering from long illness/injury. When I told him that I wanted to start exercising more often and get a good cardio routine going, he was really excited and started immediately putting together an "action plan" (what he calls it w his clients idk) for me. Then he mentioned how I'd need to add on a bunch of meal supplements and snacks to avoid losing weight and I got upset.

We're a plant-based (vegan) household and live with a roommate (bf's friend) so mostly eat/cook communal dinners and have various breakfast & lunch plans on hand, so we already eat pretty healthy and make sure to have a good balance of macro/micro in the meal plan. My intent was to eat the same but increase my activity level to get out of the danger zone without restricting. I don't generally snack and rarely eat dessert, just the 3 squares.

I told my bf that I needed to lose weight and be more active according to my doctor, and that I wasn't comfortable with having protein supplements, smoothies, and snacks in addition to regular meals because that would defeat the purpose. He got really sad and said that he likes the way my body is now, and while he supports being more active, he doesn't want the size of me to change. His exact words at some point were "you look so good now, I love the amount of you that there is and I like the way you jiggle." It kind of made me feel sick and wonder if he has like a secret size fetish or something?

So I've been thinking of breaking things off with him and moving in with a friend or back in with my parents, but idk if this is actually a red flag or just the disorder talking? He did help me a lot with recovery but if he's going to keep me from being healthy or wants me to gain even more weight then maybe it's better to leave - would this be an asshole move? I honestly don't know.

[wolven91]

Getting A Lift

When humanity lost their planet, they were first shipped to the Galactic Community ringworld, close to the centre of the galaxy to be registered and welcomed into the GC..

At first, most humans believed that would be their new home once they were granted citizenship. That was quickly dispelled as they were told that ‘no, you can’t stay here’. Most humans thought themselves like the refugees of old; unwanted in places of sanctuary, but nowhere they could go that was safe where they could live a life. 

But that wasn’t the case. Quite the opposite in fact.

Humanity *was* desired. More so than they ever dreamed. So much so, that every inhabited world, regardless of race or location, sent a demand to the GC that they would host humanity as a safe haven and wouldn’t take ‘no’ for an answer. The GC was looking at the legitimate prospect of galaxy-wide upheavals in both demands and accusations that the ringworld was ‘keeping’ the humans to themselves.

Coupled with the fact that all the humans corralled into one location meant that no one missed ‘the odd one or two’ going missing from the crowd, the GC had compounding problems with kidnapping and potential riots. Thankfully, a solution appeared to them, answering most if not all issues. 

They could ensure humanity had protectors and satisfy as many of the requests as possible by deploying ‘The Scattering Initiative’. 

Humans would be sent to all corners of the galaxy where a single human could be placed under the watchful eye of whomever was charged with looking after them on the macro level. A single human per planet or station. Coupled with ‘The Guardian Initiative’, with a near army of newly trained individuals whose roles were to ensure the humans were kept safe and healthy on the individual level to be deployed with them or sent to where they ended up.

Problem was, as Tom was discovering, not everyone understood the differences in humanity and the vast differences, both physical and psychological between humanity and the rest of the galaxy. 

Tom was in the library, a huge sprawling complex that had its own tram system just to get a patron from one section to another. He’d asked for some sort of book that might help him get a grasp on the history of the galaxy. The hornless male librarian had instantly known what kind of text he was looking for and had described the section, the shelf and the book number he was looking for without having to look anything up on a computer. 

Tom made the mental note to ask about implants or the state of subtle augmentations because no way were all librarians that eldritch without some kind of help. 

Problem was, now that he was here, stood staring up at the tall shelves that carried hundreds of books, he realised that the one he needed was the bright blue one, far out of his reach. 

The man looked down at the shelves and considered climbing them, the wood looking sturdy enough to hold his weight. 

Until a shadow descended upon him. 

“Staying out of trouble handsome?” Came the melodic tone of Wolshan, the taurian lady who had been assigned to be Tom’s ‘guardian’. 

Taurians were large creatures, or at least their women were. In some strange twist, whereas in times before, human men were the protectors and soldiers of humanity, it was the taurian women who filled that role for the aliens. 

At a staggering seven or even eight feet tall, the women were huge creatures, usually with muscles to match. Their bovine faces did not detract from the body that made Tom’s eyes linger, perhaps longer than they should. Not that Wolshan cared. It was rather obvious she relished in the fact that Tom enjoyed what he saw. 

The taurian stepped forward, her cloven feet ‘clopping’ on the hard floor like stilettos until her body pressed into Tom’s back, forcing him to grab onto the shelve in front of him, least he be shoved against it by the abs of his supposed ‘guardian’. 

“This one?” She asked, pointing a clawed finger at the blue spine. 

“Yeah.”

“Alright then, grab it.” She ordered before strong hands slipped beneath his arms and effortlessly lifted the grown man up into the air until he was level with the book he wanted. 

“You don’t have to.. Eh.. lift me. You could have just grabbed it you know?” The man explained, grabbing the book and sliding it out with a quiet whisper of the hard covers sliding across one another. 

He was suddenly pulled into the chest of the taurian as she pressed her lips against his cheek, her massive arms wrapping around his middle while she hugged him to herself. 

“Yeah, but you have to do things for yourself and I get to do this. Is that so bad?”

‘No, no it really wasn’t’ Tom thought, be stayed quiet, long enough for a throaty, knowing chuckle to come from Wolshan. 

[waitmyturtles]

I've Caught Up With Wandee Goodday, and here are some cons and pros (aka, am I ever burnt out on GMMTV)

HELLO. I'm back temporarily from my summer travels (before I travel again!). I was in Thailand! I should have brought a box of chappals to chuck at the GMMTV building for where Wandee Goodday has gone. Anyway, I need to process my thoughts on this show, so here we go. (And I apologize, I have NOT looked at the tag for this show, so I don't know if I'm repeating what other people are saying here.)

PROS

CONS

1) This show had so much brainrot potential! Remember the first, like, four episodes? Potential homophobia in multiple workplaces? Delicious bisexuality? Ace storylines??? Wandee's PUTZ deception and manipulation? Yak going along with it, why?? There was a lot going on here, a lot we could have chewed on.

I've been sitting on my historical review of Golf Tanwarin's The Eclipse for my Old GMMTV Challenge for about two months now because I can't get over how pissed I was that that show took some unnecessary, and frankly insensible, turns in part to showcase the damn center ship of First and Khao. I don't think Golf's WG has taken similar turns specifically to center the GreatInn ship, per se -- I just think the writing got messy and lazy right before WG's midpoint in general, and punched a lot of the excitement I had about the show right before I paused around episode 8.

Wandee Goodday is an EXCELLENT example of how Thailand's hourlong QL dramas could be made INCREDIBLY more impactful, by way of forced editing and clarity, if Thailand could follow Japan's suit by making 10- to 12-episode series with 30-minute episodes.

The Dr. Ter storyline was over before it actually, really ended, in, what episode was that, 9 or 10. It was over! Why drag it out? In Japan, that storyline would have been two episodes, mayyybe three, MAX. Shirasu Jin was barely in Kieta Hatsukoi for an episode before he was banished. Takeda Kouhei barely made it through two episodes of Minato's Laundromat 2 before he went bye bye! We don't need these middling dudes. There was enough happening with Dee and Yak to not need this Ter shit! Sorry, LOVE YOU PODD, but Ter was made irrelevant so early on, and then they actually had to work together on a huge case?! And NOW HE'S CHEESING ON TAEM? Like, no. We don't need this.

2) There's still a lot of confusion and conflict between Dee and Yak by last week's episode 11. Dee's got issues receiving love! This is big.

(By the way. Showing Dee ONE video of his parents cheesing on him as a newborn is NOT THE WAY to explain away future parental neglect as an older child. YIKES.)

I love that Yak wants to invest in Dee, and we do see Dee doing a lot of reciprocating there to Yak, but this parental neglect reveal, along with still not knowing enough about the back story of Dee's parents dying, is out of order and not helpful to me getting enough knowledge about Dee for me to feel a holistic sympathy towards him. This makes me wonder if romance is really Golf Tanwarin's bag: if Golf didn't have to focus so much on the DeeYak/YakDee romance, could we have gotten better emotional representations of these guys, gotten a better picture of WHO THEY ARE, before they got into each other? Maybe? I dunno.

3) Considering that homophobia in systems seems to be a theme that Golf is interested in, why did the show drop Yak's concern about being out vis à vis his boxing career? Showing up at the hospital early on, in front of Ter's people, was already a big risk that wasn't given consideration; and now Dee's gone ahead and put the big pre-match smooch on full display by episode 11! I know Yak's gone full tilt for Dee, but I think we needed to put a bow on Yak's early macro-level concerns about being out for that loop to be closed.

[I feel like I have similar concerns here about 23.5 as well, so I'd like GMMTV to know (REMEMBER BAD BUDDY????) that you can have romance and big social commentary in a show at the same time without sacrificing lovely, intimate moments. Neither 23.5 nor Wandee Goodday needed to scrap heavy emotional moments for social media memeable clickbait.]

TL;DR this show, this script, could have been so good, there was so much there by way of storylines.

ANY FUCKING WAY.

PROS

1)

I CANNOT BELIEVE THIS SHOW WENT HERE WITH THOR. THIS IS DISSONANCE, THIS IS CONFUSING! THIS IS MAGNIFICENT.

And the follow-up scene with the FABULOUS Fluke Nattanon. Fucking Thor. He's so good. They're so wasted in this show!

2) Great Sapol and Inn Sarin. There's a con here: the elephant pants do nothing for Great's butt. But otherwise, Great, and Inn as well, are DELIGHTS. THEY ARE GOOD ACTORS. They are wasted on this script. I hope they never work together on a GMMTV show again. If they're ever paired again (which I hope they're NOT, down with the ships), I hope they can get cast in a big ol' queer lakorn, à la JamFilm, and escape the need for the meme moments.

The thing is, about Wandee Goodday, is that if you admit you're into the show FOR THE DUDES, then I get why this show is watchable (AND IT'S WHY I'M FINISHING IT, GODDAMNIT), because the actual intimate moments ARE lovely. They're just not coherent with everything that we should know about these guys by the end of a series, and that makes me sad.

Anyway, this show ends this week, and that's it! I wish GMMTV's shop had had the WG items in stock when I was there in person; fuck these shipping fees, I want the Phadetseuk shirt so bad! If I had known this would be a kind of light and fluffy watch, I would have set my expectations WAAAYYY differently, and I would have likely had a better time watching this. As it stands now, I'm better suited to enjoy the finale, so I'm glad I got these complaints out of my system, and I'll say sayonara to all these dudes in full ogle mode later this week.

[emblemxeno]

If we're being honest, I got a lot of issues with Ingrid because I feel like she has the wrong character development

Her support with Dedue is realizing that she shouldn't apply her negative view of Duscur onto every Duscurian indiscriminately

That kind of thing works for Oboro because Nohrians really did kill her parents

But, Duscurians didn't actually cause the death of Lambert or Glenn, so her development should've been to learn that all those years of hatred were misdirected, and she hated them for no reason

It also didn't help that Dimitri states multiple times that Duscur didn't commit the crime, and Ingrid is still ignorant about it

I have this unhinged hatred of the Faerghus Four as a concept because every time, it's like they're consciously refusing to acknowledge the importance of Dedue in Dimitri's life in the present "Oh, these are Dimitri's childhood friends. Of course, they're close." Yeah, sure.... They're totally closer to Dimitri than Dedue is in the present.... *Internal screaming*

Combining these because my answer to both is similar!

In my opinion, it showcases how 3H's writing philosophy is ultimately shoddy in its foundation. The backstories, supports, and character-to-character dialogue itself is great in theory, but execution it clashed with what both FE usually tries to do and what 3H desperately wants to do.

FE typically has characters join chapter to chapter, with important ones having plot moments, while side characters fall to the background once their designated chapter is up. But this isn't at the cost of character interaction, pre-established relationships, and the micro-to-macro worldbuilding precisely because they're not overly important. You can have canon romances, friendships, familial relationships, etc. because that's all supplemental side material.

3H was written in a way in which the characters were all connected to its grandiose world, to the point where Fodlan itself can be almost considered a character. Multilayered backstories that infer key points in the narrative, each character no matter how trivial having opinions on how the world works, shifting dynamics, etc.

The problem though is that these two philosophies clash already at base, but also run into the problem of FE's gameplay integrated story elements.

None of the Faerghus Four can meaningfully comment on their relationship with Dimitri during a story cutscene because they can die. Ingrid can't meaningfully change her perspective on Dedue or Duscur beyond her supports because she can die. Therefore, all you get are (admittedly pretty good) supports, the monastery dialogue, and other tidbits intentionally disconnected from one another so as not to be important enough to write around potential death. The comments they do get in cutscenes were intentionally written in a way to be surface level and easily replaced. Look at the FEdatamine site for example, where conclusions are reached by Byleth, the lord, the unkillable retainer, and other important story figures, with numerous possible instances of "if X character is alive they comment this, but if X character is dead this line is skipped."

That is proof of how sloppy 3H's writing is in foundation when you think about it long enough. The game that has such an intricate world, thorough details, and fascinating story beats, is actually extremely bad at delivering a story, especially an FE story. Being the judgmental and petty cunt that I am, 3H gets a pass most of the time a) most don't care or bother to care about actual stuff like this and b) the game has the aesthetics of being a down to earth, gritty, serious narrative. The foundational issues don't matter when you have Edelgard yapping about "THE CREST SYSTEM", dark character circumstances, and intriguing mysteries to solve in part 1.

People want the appearance of sophistication, especially after Awakening and Fates bent a lot of rules to fuck around with their respective stories. It's why Engage, despite not having nearly as many basic issues at conveying its plot and is actually extremely good at being a Fire Emblem story (e.g. more character being able to actually die, pre-established relationships, chapter to chapter joining, not nearly as much centering on Alear as the ultimate decider on a character's fate compared to Byleth), is panned because... why? Its bright aesthetic? Its good dragon vs evil dragon plot? Its softer or humorous moments?

Hell, even its call backs to past FE games is called cheap, soulless, or a gateway to gacha (one video I saw even described it as something like "when art becomes obligation" or some such nonsense), despite it LITERALLY being the prime anniversary title. The main character is the Fire Emblem, and the writers-through Lumera-wish a happy birthday to Fire Emblem!!! What about that is lacking heart and soul?

But yeah, again, I preface that I'm a judgmental asshole who proudly proclaims that the audience (at least the western one) has for years been too obsessed with yearning for darker serious aesthetics of FE's past (despite said past being wackier than they remember), that when a new game has them in overflowing spades, the many fundamental video game writing issues do not matter as much anymore.

Aesop for the day: Serious tones and aesthetics are not automatically better than lighter, heartfelt, or funny ones. You still have to write well for a story to be good.

EDIT: Funny enough this is also why Three Hopes is a more comfy environment for the Fodlan cast's in terms of tangible development, because the things the writers want to do with that game's story complements its gameplay. Because KT is better at making Warriors plots than FE plots.

[windvexer]

How do you feel about using multiple spells for a single goal? Doing wealth spells one after another until you're out of difficulties, for example, versus doing the one and letting it be?

I've got a chapter in a book I'm probably never going to publish about this. It's long. tl;dr: hell yeah cast a lot of spells for one thing, that's a great idea. Upg alert, etc.

Compound Magic: Many Hands Make Light Work

Compound magic is the phrase I’m using to discuss two similar ideas.

The idea is that if working one act of magic can affect our physical world to any degree, then working multiple acts of magic on the same subject can affect it to a greater degree.

This works at both the macro and micro levels.

By “macro,” I mean casting entire spells to influence various situations.

If you’re casting a home prosperity spell, casting multiple prosperity spells tends to be more beneficial than casting only one. Following our Witch-as-Monarch metaphor, you can cast spells that are like geologists seeking resources, like road-builders to strengthen trade routes, or like festival celebrations to revitalize your citizens.

More literally, if there is a situation that is resistant to change or in need of serious transformation, you can build a spellcasting altar dedicated to that single issue.

Spellcasting altars are useful in the practical sense that if you’ve got a whole altar for it, you might not forget that it’s something you wanted to work on.

They’re also very useful in the magical sense that as you dedicate a new “counsel room” to this topic and begin filling it with advisors, knights, heroes, spies, managers, and agents, and then continuously empower your Allies to work on your behalf through dedicated spellwork, all of these powers begin to compound and support each other.

In other words: the action of casting multiple spells can have additive or supportive effect which helps all the spells work better.

Not only this, but spells can begin to file away the rust on a situation and get the gears working - but run out of energy before the mechanism is truly brought to life.

If a single spell didn’t appear to manifest as desired, that doesn’t mean it didn’t do anything. It could mean that the situation was improved behind the scenes, laying a better foundation for success for your next spell.

Therefore, compound magic also means cleverly assigning spells to loosen up a situation and prepare it for change, to banish potential roadblocks, to protect the desired outcome, to empower the desired aspects of the situation, to bind the unwanted aspects, and so forth. In this manner, casting compound magic doesn’t necessarily mean to cast prosperity-generating spells over and over – it can also mean to cast banishings, protections, cleansings, and so forth, in the pursuit of prosperity.

This may all sound like a lot of work, but recall that we’re talking about very resistant situations, or situations in need of a lot of transformation before they suit your tastes. However, I hope you’ll agree with me that this concept in general actually really helps take a load off, because:

If your strategy is to work multiple acts of magic, then no single act of magic you work ever has to be perfect, or even exceptional.

Spellcasting anxiety is very real, and in my opinion boils down to the worry not only that unless everything is perfect then everything is ruined, but furthermore, that if any single spell doesn’t work it means the practitioner is a fraud.

If you instead adopt the mindset that it’s quite alright to need to work three or four acts of magic to influence a sticky situation, each spell feels less like you’re an actor making your debut performance in front of a judgmental audience, and much more like you’re going to try and treat the problem with a vinegar spray first, but if that doesn’t lift the bonds that’s quite alright because you’ve got a baking soda scrub to try next.

This isn’t to say that I think every single situation is going to require multiple spells to make the magic “work.” Far from it. But I don’t find there to be any utility at all in assuming every situation should be fixable by only one spell, and if that spell fails then there’s something wrong.

Overall, I find that the witch who often engages in acts of magic to keep the home safe and prosperous will find that this compound effect begins to work organically, and that over time all acts of magic eventually lead to an enchanted life, to greater or lesser degrees.

On the “micro” side of this concept we can examine the enchantment of a single object or formula.

Instead of considering that we can use multiple spells to influence a situation, we can see that we can work many smaller acts of magic over time to produce a single powerful spell.

Think about woodburning a very hard, difficult piece of wood. During the first session you may only get an outline of the design before you’re exhausted and in need of a break. The wood is still imprinted upon, but it’s far from the completed project you envisioned.

During the next woodburning session, and the next, the design is slowly filled in until it meets your standards of satisfaction.

This is conceptually very similar to re-casting the same enchantment over and over on a single object until desired results are obtained.

This is extremely useful for the pragmatic witch who may not have the ability to plan out spells on specific times and days, or who must act now without every ideal ingredient on hand.

And not only that, but it’s also useful for the witch who would just like to have some fun with magic and doesn’t want to twiddle their thumbs waiting for the most ideal possible moment to act.

If a witch would like to work up a pot of Noontide Shield Oil (pg. 34), but the working felt less than lustrous, the formula can simply be re-enchanted again next Sunday to deepen and solidify the enchantment. Or, suppose the original oil had to be worked in less than ideal conditions, or perhaps even with entire ingredients missing: the missing ingredients can be added later on, the spell re-cast over the same vessel in more ideal conditions, and so forth.

The same goes for any spell vessel, formula, charmed ingredient, or enchanted object.

These things can be fully re-enchanted by performing the original spell over again, switching focus from adding ingredients to empowering and instructing ingredients already added.

But they can also be encouraged in more minor ways, especially through regular feeding (pg. 9).

I think it’s important to note here that we’re basically talking about cooking. A chicken soup where you have to omit the chicken, and then shred up rotisserie leftovers and just add it to the broth when having leftovers, is not going to produce identical results as if you had been able to cook the chicken in the soup.

Either way, you’ve still got chicken soup - it's just that an enchantment made in the most ideal conditions is not going to be identical to an enchantment made in non-ideal conditions and later fortified.

So I don’t believe that it’s correct to say that ideal conditions don’t matter. I think they do matter, and that practitioners will notice an appreciable improvement if they are able to work with ideal circumstances.

But I also believe it’s correct to say that if you continuously re-cast enchantments towards the same objects and formulas over and over again, while supplementing missing or lacking factors, over time that enchantment deepens and becomes more permanent and more powerful.

Just like macro compound magic, I think that this helps reduce the difficulty in working powerful enchantments. You don’t have to work yourself up to exhaustion casting a single powerful enchantment that wipes out your ability to work magic for three days. You can meter your energy and pour out small amounts of your power, when needed or as desired, and slowly build up powerful magics around you.

Then, when an important “macro” situation arises, consider how it would feel to be able to reach for a variety spell vessels and formulas you’ve already been empowering for months, keeping them fresh and alive through periodic attention and feeding. Things begin to feel much less like a witch alone in a room, and much more like an empowered monarch surrounded by Allies.

[five-thousand-loaves-of-bread]

why are autistics without intellectual disability so quick to distance themselves from those who do?

*unbolded version under the cut*

i see this most often in autistics who are (labeled) level 1/"high functioning"/"aspie" (yes i know the three don't always equal one another yes i know hans asperger nazi). this of course happens with all autistics without intellectual disability (ID) but see most with them.

this is largely rhetorical question.

see so many autistics without ID say things like "i'm autistic not STUPID" and get so offended when someone even imply or genuinely ask if they have ID.

"i'm autistic not [r word]," "i'm autistic but not like those kinds of autistic." all implying they're the "good" kind of autistic that deserve respect and rights and there is group of autistic who are "bad" (read: not palatable enough) who should be bullied and denied rights and locked away and mocked. often these are autistics with ID and autistics who are visibly stereotypically autistic who don't have ability to mask.

understand wanting to correct someone when they think wrong information of you, like you thought i have ID but i actually don't, just like you thought i have depression but i actually don't (just example not personal about me). but often when these autistics say "i'm autistic not STUPID" and variants, they often mean more than that. some autistic people without ID get so offended when people think they have ID. so offended at the idea of being associated with ID. like "how DARE you assume i have ID and are like those people."

so quick to separate self from people with ID. like they have the plague or something.

or. sometimes see autistics without ID talk about an autistic person with ID. talk about an "ugly" (unaccepted, not cute symptom) symptom and say "oh that's not the autism that's ID. autistics don't do that." and act as if there is a clear beginning and end to where the autism ends and where the ID begins. there is not.

or when autistic with ID gets mentioned. everyone focus on the autism and not the ID. or think they can speak about said autistic person with ID's experience just because they themselves are also autistic even though they don't have ID.

or "actually many autistic people have above average intelligence!" which is objectively true but 9/10 times this gets brought up to derail the conversation. yes many autistic people have high IQ (online autism space oversaturated with them), but what is left out is there is nothing wrong with having average IQ or low IQ/intellectual disability.

or. when bring up people w ID and/or autistics with ID, will say "IQ is a inaccurate/racist/colonial/ableist measure" and stuff like that. which is objectively also true! or "don't say you're stupid, you're actually very smart, there are many types of intelligence!" but the issue is when you are bringing these topics up. because yes IQ bad measure, intelligence subjective, BUT ALSO current society have specific types of intelligence they value (and this cannot be denied no matter how much you derail the conversation), AND there is nothing wrong with being "not smart" "stupid" "dumb" "unintelligent" etc. there is nothing wrong with having ID. admit that. why are you (general you) having such a hard time admitting that, to the point you will say everything else before admitting to that?

or say "[r word] is slur towards autistic people so i as an autistic person (without ID) are allowed to reclaim it." when no. r word is not slur towards autistic people. just because it has been used against you doesn't mean it means you. r word is an outdated medical term for intellectual disability, aka mental [r word]. not yours.

many many microaggressions (and macro aggressions tbh too)

autistics with ID are one of the more marginalized more vulnerable autistic population, more likely to be in bad conservatorship, more vulnerable to all kinds of abuse, less autonomy, no privacy, seen as completely incompetent, etc. particularly many have carers and are expected to fully trust and be completely vulnerable to other people and have no personal time no privacy.

autistics with intellectual disability are still autistic. they're not going anywhere.

i say this is rhetorical question because largely know why autistics without ID do this. especially level 1/"high functioning"/"aspie." because think are closest population to nondisabled neurotypical society, on the edge of nondisabled neurotypical society, expected to function well but do not. just "normal-looking" enough to be let in but not normal enough to be truly included, to thrive. many trouble. many trauma. and intelligence is one of the few things many feel proud to have feel positive to have. even feel superior to have. so have internalized ableism towards self but also internalized ableism towards intelligence.

BUT. your trauma or autism still don't justify your ableism. you are still responsible of educating self about ID and unpack ableism about intelligence and ID.

your trauma or autism doesn't justify your ableism you're just ableist

...

unbolded:

i see this most often in autistics who are (labeled) level 1/"high functioning"/"aspie" (yes i know the three don't always equal one another yes i know hans asperger nazi). this of course happens with all autistics without intellectual disability (ID) but see most with them.

this is largely rhetorical question.

see so many autistics without ID say things like "i'm autistic not STUPID" and get so offended when someone even imply or genuinely ask if they have ID.

"i'm autistic not [r word]," "i'm autistic but not like those kinds of autistic." all implying they're the "good" kind of autistic that deserve respect and rights and there is group of autistic who are "bad" (read: not palatable enough) who should be bullied and denied rights and locked away and mocked. often these are autistics with ID and autistics who are visibly stereotypically autistic who don't have ability to mask.

understand wanting to correct someone when they think wrong information of you, like you thought i have ID but i actually don't, just like you thought i have depression but i actually don't. but often when these autistics say "i'm autistic not STUPID" and variants, they often mean more than that. some autistic people without ID get so offended when people think they have ID. so offended at the idea of being associated with ID. like "how DARE you assume i have ID and are like those people."

so quick to separate self from people with ID. like they have the plague or something.

or. sometimes see autistics without ID talk about an autistic person with ID. talk about an "ugly" (unaccepted, not cute symptom) symptom and say "oh that's not the autism that's ID. autistics don't do that." and act as if there is a clear beginning and end to where the autism ends and where the ID begins. there is not.

or when autistic with ID gets mentioned. everyone focus on the autism and not the ID. or think they can speak about said autistic person with ID's experience just because they themselves are also autistic even though they don't have ID.

or "actually many autistic people have above average intelligence!" which is objectively true but 9/10 times this gets brought up to derail the conversation. yes many autistic people have high IQ (online autism space oversaturated with them), but what is left out is there is nothing wrong with having average IQ or low IQ/intellectual disability.

or. when bring up people w ID and/or autistics with ID, will say "IQ is a inaccurate/racist/colonial/ableist measure" and stuff like that. which is objectively also true! or "don't say you're stupid, you're actually very smart, there are many types of intelligence!" but the issue is when you are bringing these topics up. because yes IQ bad measure, intelligence subjective, BUT ALSO current society have specific types of intelligence they value (and this cannot be denied no matter how much you derail the conversation), AND there is nothing wrong with being "not smart" "stupid" "dumb" "unintelligent" etc. there is nothing wrong with having ID. admit that. why are you (general you) having such a hard time admitting that, to the point you will say everything else before admitting to that?

or say "[r word] is slur towards autistic people so i as an autistic person (without ID) are allowed to reclaim it." when no. r word is not slur towards autistic people. just because it has been used against you doesn't mean it means you. r word is an outdated medical term for intellectual disability, aka mental [r word]. not yours.

many many microaggressions (and macro aggressions tbh too)

autistics with ID are one of the more marginalized more vulnerable autistic population, more likely to be in conservatorship, more vulnerable to all kinds of abuse, less autonomy, no privacy, seen as completely incompetent, etc. particularly many have carers and are expected to fully trust and be completely vulnerable to other people and have no personal time no privacy.

autistics with intellectual disability are still autistic. they're not going anywhere.

i say this is rhetorical question because largely know why autistics without ID do this. especially level 1/"high functioning"/"aspie." because think are closest population to nondisabled neurotypical society, on the edge of nondisabled neurotypical society, expected to function well but do not. just "normal-looking" enough to be let in but not normal enough to be truly included, to thrive. many trouble. many trauma. and intelligence is one of the few things many feel proud to have feel positive to have. even feel superior to have. so have internalized ableism towards self but also internalized ableism towards intelligence.

BUT. your trauma or autism still don't justify your ableism. you are still responsible of educating self about ID and unpack ableism about intelligence and ID.

your trauma or autism doesn't justify your ableism you're just ableist

[beybuniki]

since the climax focused more on conflicts on a micro level, i'm hoping the epilogue is going to focus on conflicts on a macro level, would love to see the societal/structural consequences

and since the league's agenda was all about societal issues, i'm so sure they're gonna come back. idk what role they'll play but yeah none of the main antagonists are dead why would they lkdfm

[olderthannetfic]

Throwing my hat into the ring on the F/F issue because why not? There are a lot of reasons why, on a macro-level, F/F is less common on ao3 and in 'fanficdom' as a whole, though it really can vary by fandom, a *lot*, as I know firsthand.

Beyond anything else though, I suppose what I really, really want, is an F/F equivalent to James/Regulus or Theodore Nott/Harry Potter - I use HP examples mainly because I'm familiar with them more, but I've seen the phenomenon in other fandoms - where there's this just... intense upswelling of interest for a slash-ship between two seemingly utterly random guys, one or both whom might be exceedingly minor or entirely posthumous.

Like, while the rhetoric when people bitch about 'Any Two Guys'/Fandom Ghost/Migratory Slash Fandom, and similar complaints (i.e. about the seemingly inexplicable popularity of a non-canon slash ship versus the canon one) has a metric tons of problems in terms of how a lot of people talk about it, I want more F/F ships that have that same vibe to become weirdly juggernaughty in their fandom, explicitly becoming super popular despite one or both characters being virtually nonexistent in the main text of the source material.

That's all I really want. I mean, no, that's not all, but just once, just once, I want to watch, in real time, an entire fandom go 'wait what?' about some absolutely batshit non-canon F/F crackship that somehow becomes huge.

But F/F shippers just don't seem to bring that same energy to the table as M/M shippers. Hell, *I* don't really bring that same kind of energy to the table. I can't bring myself to do that sort of shipping, generally, though I have with one ship.

So where the hell does that energy even *come* from? Is it just the sheer size of M/M and the long history of it on ao3? The bigger a thing is, fanficdom-wise, the faster it tends to grow and all, but still.

Why do F/F shippers tend to glom more onto the canon or 'nearly canon' stuff to the (relative) exclusion of what looks like - to outside observers - throwing random guys at each other and seeing who sticks to each other? (Yes, I know that's not really what happens, but that wouldn't be what would happen for this hypothetical F/F either, but it would sure look like it from the outside)

--

The closest is the hilarious rise of Creamsicle art and cosplay, though that wasn't that huge in the end.

I think m/m fandom is particularly used to everything being subtext and repurposing various intended-as-platonic dynamics. There can be less of a focus on direct representation at times.

Those ships are just mega rare though. We talk about them all out of proportion to their actual frequency. Het shippers have a wealth of canon ships and shipteased options, but they occasionally go in for wacky crossover ships. Get a big enough group and some of this will show up.

[stillness-in-green]

current feelings on the state of the manga (in general), predictions, worries, fears? Is there anything about the final war arc and those first few epilogue chapters that you liked?

Current feelings on the state of the manga:

Image macro reactions aside, it's not like there's nothing? In the epilogue thus far, I like the single panel we get of Gentle and La Brava reuniting. I really like Spinner calling Deku a murderer and Deku not arguing the label. I like the first half of Spinner's breakdown. And in the last war arc, I’m sure there was stuff I liked; you could probably find any number of things in my chapter posts for such time as I was doing them.

The trouble is that the stuff I liked by and large didn’t go anywhere, or actively got shitted up in the long run.

To pick the example that springs most readily to mind, I loved the bit in Chapter 379, where Shigaraki devours Vestige!AFO from the inside out.  It was satisfying, vindicating, and perfect on basically every level—and then it went nearly nowhere for forty chapters until it got undone anyway.  That latter point is the big issue, of course: VFO wound up coming back anyway, one last sucker punch from the fucking possession plot that scuttled the ending more generally.

But it’s not even just the possession plot’s return.  It’s the way the story and Deku just adamantly refused to engage with Shigaraki on his own terms and as his own person.  He was still chatty as hell, but, as @codenamesazanka outlined here, Deku just didn’t talk to him in return.  Deku has only one solution for Shigaraki—punching him into submission—and so the narrative never even bothered making him try to engage Shigaraki in conversation.  Instead, Shigaraki had to be reduced to a problem that punching could solve.

There are even a bevy of smaller annoyances like Shigaraki’s writing sometimes veering into cartoon supervillain caricature, as when he gloats that Deku and the world are about to watch All Might die in Chapter 404, only for the narrative to show why he's wrong literally a single page later by starting to explain the metaphysical but still sharply literal power of Wishing Energy, undermining both Shigaraki's character writing and the threat he poses when the bulk of Deku’s fight with him still lay ahead!

To me, that’s the story of the whole endgame.  Even the things I like—Shigaraki’s return, the PLF advisor’s fiery speech at the hospital, Ochako vindicating Toga’s pain, Monoma in general, Kurogiri choosing Tomura in the end—just don’t go anywhere that’s ultimately satisfying.  It’s hard to really call them “things I liked” when they were so squandered.

[oneknightstand-if]

As has been mentioned, I've been using it since the very beginning and it's come up in discussion several times on this blog at this point, so I'm giving my current opinions on it as a coding function.

Some parts of the game used it heavily while some parts used it lightly as I tried to determined which way of coding was more time efficient. After using it for two years, I've pretty much come to the conclusion that outside of certain circumstances, widespread use of multireplace is a waste of time for me.

There may be people who can easily parse the wall-of-text paragraphs that multireplace tends to create...

"In some of my worst dreams, I'm stuck in a memory of @{trauma the children of our band being dragged off to the Harrower|the children of our band starving last winter|a dying child|my followers, when…when I failed them|my followers dying|an old comrade dying|someone I had to kill|an old friend trying to kill me|a friend being Harrowed|a helot girl being Harrowed|being inside a Harrower|Plektoi coming for me|Theurges raining fire down on us|being locked in a dungeon|being poisoned|being speared in this arm}."

But those people aren't me.

I end up introducing a butt-load of typos and errors using multireplace that seriously slows down my editing phase (and is also more likely to get past me into the public beta). Most reported spacing issues (missing a space, a space where it shouldn't be) were caused by multireplace.

I also end up wasting time if I start using multireplace as a simple if/else replacement and then decide, no, I actually want to add in more conditionals/flag variables/do something more intricate that multireplace can't do, so have to go back and redo the whole coding from scratch again.

It also hampers the function of Random Test, that if you set up an if/else conditional that's impossible in the game, Random Test can let you know that line is never reached. It can't do the same with multireplace.

Since multireplace only saves vertical space (which is only going to save you a couple kilobytes per file if that) and line length isn't something that's advertised in the published games, time/bug efficiency > spacing efficiency for me.

So outside of preset macros such as pronouns & bond levels for characters, I've been mentally slapping myself to try and get out of the habit of using it over if/else statements at this point.

[eros-thanatos89]

It's 4am and I can't sleep, so now is as good a time as any to ramble about media, right?

I've been thinking about The Wire a lot recently. Probably in large part because @geitonas has recently been creating some truly wonderful fanart for it.

I've touched on this a little bit here:

https://www.tumblr.com/eros-thanatos89/754142518674882560/i-just-rewatched-breaking-bad-s1e6-crazy-handful?source=share

But for some reason, I was thinking about how when Breaking Bad first aired, there was so much discourse around comparing and contrasting it to The Wire. And for whatever reason, the big controversy seemed to be around "which show is better?"

But I think that's such a flawed way of thinking about it! They're both fantastic shows that tackle similar issues: drugs, the war on drugs, the effects that drugs and the trade have on people and communities, crime, greed, flawed institutions, etc...But they both have different focal points and ways of approaching those ideas.

Breaking Bad is of course, primarily a character driven show about Walter White and his downward spiral as his ego and greed draw him deeper and deeper into the violence and brutality of the drug trade and criminal life. And how his choices affect everyone around him. The show touches on some of the same things as The Wire, like what leads people to engage in crime, how drugs and the drug trade harm people and communities, and how the war on drugs was harmful to society. But the show is primarily focused on how the characters change over time due as they each "break bad" in their own ways. It is interesting that it's mainly focused on primarily white, middle class characters who choose to turn their backs on their "normal, respectable" lives and delve into the criminal world. So there is some explicit and implicit exploration of white privilege and the way law enforcement responds to some criminals and communities vs others.

The Wire, on the other hand, is primarily focused on the city of Baltimore itself and the many complex issues that lead to "urban blight" and issues like gangs and drug trade in the inner city. The first season is more or less a standard police procedural, albeit with much higher quality writing. But each successive season peels back another layer of the city (the docks and international involvement in crime, the underfunded and over-stressed school system, local politics and corruption, local media and media corruption, the gangs themselves and the issues caused by urban ghettos). I haven't rewatched The Wire in its entirety in a while (guess what I'm about to go do...) but it really is a masterful big-picture look at the war on drugs and inner city crime. I was in college studying sociology when Breaking Bad was wrapping up and all the drama and discourse was going on and I started watching The Wire out of curiosity to see what all the fuss was about; and I was so struck by what a sociological show it is. I think it's still the only show I've seen that really examines such a layered macro-level look at policies and institutions and urban life.

I don't know why at the time, everyone was so obsessed with pitting these two shows against each other! I like to view them as kind of in conversation with each other. The Wire is slightly older (premiered 2002, while BB premiered 2008) but they both offer a glimpse into the early 2000s and attitudes around crime and policing and addiction at that time. They're both prestige television at its best: incredible writing, acting, production...and they tackle so many similar themes and issues in very different ways, which makes them compelling to think about side by side.

I'm probably rambling and having a hard time articulating this...

But if you love Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul, and you haven't seen The Wire, chances are you'd love it!

If you enjoy both, or you want to chat about both/either, come talk to me. I love blabbering on about this stuff. Clearly.