#that I'm probably never going to publish

[lucica-stuff]

Dragon Hierarchy

So, the last few weeks I've been pretty sucked in by the HTTYD fandom. I've always been a fan, but this time it's gotten really bad 😅.

And rewatching the movies/shows, reading the many fanfics on ao3 and writing my own stuff for it (that I'm probably never gonna post), made me think of something. How are dragon hierarchies structured?

Since there doesn't seem to be much information canon-wise about it, I've made up my own headcanons. And I'm interested in further discussions.

1. King

Or as we know it, The Alpha. The highest position in the dragons' hierarchy. We know that the Bewilderbeast is the 'The King of Dragons'. According to fandom.wiki, the dragons under his care are called 'Primals'. Every dragon, including Queens, falls under his jurisdiction.

They are described as providers, protectors and, as we know, possess the unique abilty to manipulate other dragons' minds, which is why they naturally become alphas in the hierarchy (keep in mind that this doesn't need to be the case e.g. Toothless). The position can only be earned through challange, but due to the Bewilderbeasts behavior and personality traits, such challanges are not likely to happen. A dragon can only become King/Alpha if they have won the challange against a Bewilderbeast, although they don't get the species-specific abilities.

Furthermore, since Bewilderbeasts are actually described as a rather reclusive type of dragon, they don't take much part in their nest's daily life. Exception to this could include: providing food/shelter and settling disputes. But otherwise, they don't do much.

2. Queen

They rule over a nest of dragons. Like the King, their job is to protect the dragons within their nest, but in comparision to the King their main job is to nurture. Their job is to take care of the nest's inhabitants. I would like to call them 'Life Givers', so you can better picture what I'm trying to get at.

The Queen of a nest is usually the strongest and most nurturing dragon, who has proven that they are able to provide the best (e.g. the Fireworm Queen). They are either appointed or become the Queens by nature. Queens are usually female because of their natural instincs to nurture their nest and take on the role of 'Mother to All', but a male dragon can also become Queen if they have proven themselves (this does not mean that they are a King).

I would like to point out that the Red Death is an exception of this, not the rule. I believe that the Red Death (as a species) has similiar abilities to the Bewilderbeast or the Death Song, but in contrast to the Bewilderbeast, they don't have the ability to manipulate/command other dragons. The Red Death from httyd1, used fear to abuse her abilities and position as Queen to get the dragons within her nest to do her bidding.

3. Nest

Which is ruled either by a King or a Queen, consists of a flock (or many flocks) of dragons. These nests are made up of different dragon species, where either a pack/herd of dragons join or a solitary dragon joins for survival benefits.

Nests may be formed for the benefit of many different species.

4. Herds/Packs

Some dragons are not suited for solitary life, which is why they form packs or herds. It's for survival as well as socialazing.

Packs or herds may appoint a dragon as their leader, but it's not required. Furthermore, they may also decide to join a nest to gain benefits.

5. Solitary Dragons

Some examples to which dragon species form packs or herds.

Herds: Thunderdrums, Smothering Smokebreaths, Terrible Terrors, Gronkles, Razorwhips

Packs: Changewings, Night Terrors, Dramillions, Speed Stingers

As we know - mostly from the shows/series - that some dragons far more enjoy a more solitary kind of life.

However, they may decide to join a nest or form a flock with other dragons. A good example for this is the Monstrous Nightmare or the Hideous Zippleback, which we have seen either lives solitarily or joins other dragons for survival advantages. This depends on how social their species is.

Boneknapper Dragon/Armorwing

Typhoomerang

Death Song

Skrill

Cavern Crasher

Thank you for reading! ❤️

[causenessus]

hi! i'll keep this short

i came to the realization everytime i've disappeared from tumblr to "take a break" i never really have because of other things going on in my life (which, duh, this isn't my whole life) but! i also realized that if i never actually take the time to recover and rest and think about things i should be writing i'll never feel better. so! i'm (once again)(but now more formally) going on hiatus until maybe may! i might pop in for spring break or earlier if i feel like it, but until then, not really any writing from me! with that being said, i'll still be around, doting on my moots (i.e. like, dorothea <3 wyr <3 and bug <3) because i love them so much and i will probably also post chapters of present ever so often! the reason being (i'm going to try to make this make sense but it may only make sense to me but i'm aware of how contradicting i am to me five seconds ago when i said i need to take a break from writing) present is a very personal fic for me that i've worked on for years at this point. what i'm posting now are chapters i wrote months ago after I've read over and edited them (or in the case of the upcoming chapter, i did randomly add it in and had to write it from the ground up last week lmao) but if it isn't obvious, present is a work i'm very passionate about and am just posting in case anyone else enjoys it but it feels like it's a work that is very individualized just for me and it doesn't cause me any stress or anxiety. on the topic of individualization, although i am of course so so thankful for all of the support and people that follow me, i do sort of miss when my blog and world were a lot smaller. it's something i feel like i only get when i get to reply to people in comments, but other than that, all the numbers and people on my feed give me a lot of anxiety. the hq (smau fandom especially) fandom or at least how much i'm (was) involved in it has grown exponentially and of course i'm happy about that but it's a bit too much for me. i'll be taking a huge step back from the fandom and any hq works i've written at least in the meantime, but that's not to say they'll never be finished! but i either need to grow to handle the bigger audience that now reads my works or wait for things to grow a little smaller again :) i hope to still be able to read my moots works but forgive me if it takes me a bit or i never get to them! i think at the least i'll still like them to show my support <3 thank you if you read my long ramble! i love you all <3

oh also i'll probably post self ship moodboards and the beginning of my reading list (thank you again dorothea for the idea <3)! but again, I think you get the idea by now; I want to go back to doing this for me! so this is a tiny little goodbye now i'm leaving for you all with forehead kisses and flowers and love notes and mwah <3 i'll see you around!

[its-all-papaya]

i feel like beach read is like. soooo all over the place from a vibes/world-building perspective. both of my published plot fics felt so consistent and fully-formed to me as universes during their writing processes and i KNOW beach read's universe in my mind, but i feel like i'm doing a much worse job of developing it for readers. and that's probably bc there are like 18 plotlines, but nutcracker fic was also sort of that way and IT felt sooo smooth and cohesive. idk man ! idk. this fic might be more of a collection of thoughts and scenes than it is a really constructed narrative. writing is like. so difficult. for me.

[kanerallels]

Girl help my brain won't brain AGAIN

[a-haunting-of-endermen]

Ahhhhhh criminy. I'm getting cold feet on that fic I've been writing :(

[fridayyy-13th]

i really need to stop staying up late when my intrusive thoughts come up again, they always get worse at night. i wanted to do some writing, but i procrastinated too long and now i feel too bad and when i tried, i couldn't focus. so i'm gonna try and go to bed.

[calyroco]

I have truly been spoiled by the ease of accessibility of scans for manga and u.s. comics because when I try to look for scans for let's say a belgian comic it is not as convenient to find the pages from over the years all neatly arranged on a dedicated site

[endwersed]

Would you be willing to share the details of the Sterek story you're working on right now? Assuming you are working on one, of course!

Sure thing! As a general rule, I'm always working on something - or, probably more accurately, trying to half-work on like 5 projects all at once 😅

At the moment, I'm attempting to keep all of my focus on my A/B/O AU, where humans are considered second-class citizens to werewolves in society. The plot is a little difficult to summarise as a lot happens - but essentially, the first half of the story is set when they are 18 & 22 and they enter into a secret relationship, and the other half of the story is 10ish years later where they must learn how to trust and love again.

This is what I have marinating in my AO3 drafts right now:

[j-esbian]

frustrating how so many craft books have a section about "how to sell what you've made"

like on one hand i get it because the person writing the book has obviously made their craft a full-time job. and they might have some tips and tricks that might be useful, and there are people out there who might be trying to start a small business out of it

but on the other hand it's just exhausting and feels like another voice saying "what's the point of having a hobby if you're not going to monetize it"

[sureuncertainty]

hopefully it's just tonight but i haven't written at all in the last couple of days and i tried again tonight and it didn't work AGAIN i just can't get myself to write idk sometimes i really feel like the sequel to silence agenda is literally never ever going to actually get written and there's no point in even trying

[viiisenyas]

god every time i find myself being self-deprecating about wanting to write bizarre shit, i just breathe in and remind myself that it's for me.

[pitzer]

I love this person

“Occasionally I’ll have a beer after work and break out the sketchbook. But I had wanted to be this great painter. I wanted to do these grand things: big, huge oil paintings. But those days of painting all the time were such a roller coaster. There were these periods of extreme depression, followed by manic states of trying to put myself out there. I couldn’t do it anymore. I mainly felt sorry for my dad. I know it was rough for him. My mom hadn’t wanted me to go to art school. She wanted me to do something more practical, but my dad said: ‘No. This is what he wants to do, and I want to support his dream.’ And then I abandoned it. That was the first time I had to deal with real failure. A lot of times when you’re an artist, it’s your job, it’s your lifestyle, it’s your entire fucking identity. It wasn’t like I failed to do a thing. It was like: I failed to be something, you know? It was a failure to live up to what I thought was my destiny. But then on the other side of that, there was this figuring out that there was nothing wrong with me the entire time. I didn’t need to be something else to have meaningful friendships, or a good relationship. I didn’t need to be something else to be loved and cared about. After work tonight I’m going to meet up with a person who’s in love with me, and I can’t wait. And that person met me long after I gave up on being a full-time artist. They met me when I wasn’t even a chef yet. I was a piss-poor, part-time line cook. But even then, they decided I was worth it. So you know, there’s something there. There’s something there that’s enough.”

[theladygazingatemptiness]

.

[the-hwaelweg]

Working in publishing, my inbox is basically just:

Article on the Horrors of AI

Article on How AI Can Help Your Business

Article on How AI Has Peaked

Article on How AI Is Here to Stay Forever

Article on How AI Is a Silicon Valley Scam That Doesn't Live Up to the Promise and In Fact Can't Because They've Literally Run Out of Written Words to Train LLMs On

[sophiamcdougall]

You're a reasonably informed person on the internet. You've experienced things like no longer being able to get files off an old storage device, media you've downloaded suddenly going poof, sites and forums with troves full of people's thoughts and ideas vanishing forever. You've heard of cybercrime. You've read articles about lost media. You have at least a basic understanding that digital data is vulnerable, is what I'm saying. I'm guessing that you're also aware that history is, you know... important? And that it's an ongoing study, requiring ... data about how people live? And that it's not just about stanning celebrities that happen to be dead? Congratulations, you are significantly better-informed than the British government! So they're currently like "Oh hai can we destroy all these historical documents pls? To save money? Because we'll digitise them first so it's fine! That'll be easy, cheap and reliable -- right? These wills from the 1850s will totally be fine for another 170 years as a PNG or whatever, yeah? We didn't need to do an impact assesment about this because it's clearly win-win! We'd keep the physical wills of Famous People™ though because Famous People™ actually matter, unlike you plebs. We don't think there are any equalities implications about this, either! Also the only examples of Famous People™ we can think of are all white and rich, only one is a woman and she got famous because of the guy she married. Kisses!"

Yes, this is the same Government that's like "Oh no removing a statue of slave trader is erasing history :(" You have, however, until 23 February 2024 to politely inquire of them what the fuck they are smoking. And they will have to publish a summary of the responses they receive. And it will look kind of bad if the feedback is well-argued, informative and overwhelmingly negative and they go ahead and do it anyway. I currently edit documents including responses to consultations like (but significantly less insane) than this one. Responses do actually matter. I would particularly encourage British people/people based in the UK to do this, but as far as I can see it doesn't say you have to be either. If you are, say, a historian or an archivist, or someone who specialises in digital data do say so and draw on your expertise in your answers. This isn't a question of filling out a form. You have to manually compose an email answering the 12 questions in the consultation paper at the link above. I'll put my own answers under the fold. Note -- I never know if I'm being too rude in these sorts of things. You probably shouldn't be ruder than I have been.

Please do not copy and paste any of this: that would defeat the purpose. This isn't a petition, they need to see a range of individual responses. But it may give you a jumping-off point.

Question 1: Should the current law providing for the inspection of wills be preserved?

Yes. Our ability to understand our shared past is a fundamental aspect of our heritage. It is not possible for any authority to know in advance what future insights they are supporting or impeding by their treatment of material evidence. Safeguarding the historical record for future generations should be considered an extremely important duty.

Question 2: Are there any reforms you would suggest to the current law enabling wills to be inspected?

No.

Question 3: Are there any reasons why the High Court should store original paper will documents on a permanent basis, as opposed to just retaining a digitised copy of that material?

Yes. I am amazed that the recent cyber attack on the British Library, which has effectively paralysed it completely, not been sufficient to answer this question for you.  I also refer you to the fate of the Domesday Project. Digital storage is useful and can help more people access information; however, it is also inherently fragile. Malice, accident, or eventual inevitable obsolescence not merely might occur, but absolutely should be expected. It is ludicrously naive and reflects a truly unpardonable ignorance to assume that information preserved only in digital form is somehow inviolable and safe, or that a physical document once digitised, never need be digitised again..At absolute minimum, it should be understood as certain that at least some of any digital-only archive will eventually be permanently lost. It is not remotely implausible that all of it would be. Preserving the physical documents provides a crucial failsafe. It also allows any errors in reproduction -- also inevitable-- to be, eventually, seen and corrected. Note that maintaining, upgrading and replacing digital infrastructure is not free, easy or reliable. Over the long term, risks to the data concerned can only accumulate.

"Unlike the methods for preserving analog documents that have been honed over millennia, there is no deep precedence to look to regarding the management of digital records. As such, the processing, long-term storage, and distribution potential of archival digital data are highly unresolved issues. [..] the more digital data is migrated, translated, and re-compressed into new formats, the more room there is for information to be lost, be it at the microbit-level of preservation. Any failure to contend with the instability of digital storage mediums, hardware obsolescence, and software obsolescence thus meets a terminal end—the definitive loss of information. The common belief that digital data is safe so long as it is backed up according to the 3-2-1 rule (3 copies on 2 different formats with 1 copy saved off site) belies the fact that it is fundamentally unclear how long digital information can or will remain intact. What is certain is that its unique vulnerabilities do become more pertinent with age."  -- James Boyda, On Loss in the 21st Century: Digital Decay and the Archive, Introduction.

Question 4: Do you agree that after a certain time original paper documents (from 1858 onwards) may be destroyed (other than for famous individuals)? Are there any alternatives, involving the public or private sector, you can suggest to their being destroyed?

Absolutely not. And I would have hoped we were past the "great man" theory of history. Firstly, you do not know which figures will still be considered "famous" in the future and which currently obscure individuals may deserve and eventually receive greater attention. I note that of the three figures you mention here as notable enough to have their wills preserved, all are white, the majority are male (the one woman having achieved fame through marriage) and all were wealthy at the time of their death. Any such approach will certainly cull evidence of the lives of women, people of colour and the poor from the historical record, and send a clear message about whose lives you consider worth remembering.

Secondly, the famous and successsful are only a small part of our history. Understanding the realities that shaped our past and continue to mould our present requires evidence of the lives of so-called "ordinary people"!

Did you even speak to any historians before coming up with this idea?

Entrusting the documents to the private sector would be similarly disastrous. What happens when a private company goes bust or decides that preserving this material is no longer profitable? What reasonable person, confronted with our crumbling privatised water infrastructure, would willingly consign any part of our heritage to a similar fate?

Question 5: Do you agree that there is equivalence between paper and digital copies of wills so that the ECA 2000 can be used?

No. And it raises serious questions about the skill and knowledge base within HMCTS and the government that the very basic concepts of data loss and the digital dark age appear to be unknown to you. I also refer you to the Domesday Project.

Question 6: Are there any other matters directly related to the retention of digital or paper wills that are not covered by the proposed exercise of the powers in the ECA 2000 that you consider are necessary?

Destroying the physical documents will always be an unforgivable dereliction of legal and moral duty.

Question 7: If the Government pursues preserving permanently only a digital copy of a will document, should it seek to reform the primary legislation by introducing a Bill or do so under the ECA 2000?

Destroying the physical documents will always be an unforgivable dereliction of legal and moral duty.

Question 8: If the Government moves to digital only copies of original will documents, what do you think the retention period for the original paper wills should be? Please give reasons and state what you believe the minimum retention period should be and whether you consider the Government’s suggestion of 25 years to be reasonable.

There is no good version of this plan. The physical documents should be preserved.

Question 9: Do you agree with the principle that wills of famous people should be preserved in the original paper form for historic interest?

This question betrays deep ignorance of what "historic interest" actually is. The study of history is not simply glorified celebrity gossip. If anything, the physical wills of currently famous people could be considered more expendable as it is likely that their contents are so widely diffused as to be relatively "safe", whereas the wills of so-called "ordinary people" will, especially in aggregate, provide insights that have not yet been explored.

Question 10: Do you have any initial suggestions on the criteria which should be adopted for identifying famous/historic figures whose original paper will document should be preserved permanently?

Abandon this entire lamentable plan. As previously discussed, you do not and cannot know who will be considered "famous" in the future, and fame is a profoundly flawed criterion of historical significance.

Question 11: Do you agree that the Probate Registries should only permanently retain wills and codicils from the documents submitted in support of a probate application? Please explain, if setting out the case for retention of any other documents.

No, all the documents should be preserved indefinitely.

Question 12: Do you agree that we have correctly identified the range and extent of the equalities impacts under each of these proposals set out in this consultation? Please give reasons and supply evidence of further equalities impacts as appropriate.

No. You appear to have neglected equalities impacts entirely. As discussed, in your drive to prioritise "famous people", your plan will certainly prioritise the white, wealthy and mostly the male, as your "Charles Dickens, Charles Darwin and Princess Diana" examples amply indicate. This plan will create a two-tier system where evidence of the lives of the privileged is carefully preserved while information regarding people of colour, women, the working class and other disadvantaged groups is disproportionately abandoned to digital decay and eventual loss. Current and future historians from, or specialising in the history of minority groups will be especially impoverished by this.