#tumblr dot com the app and website

[lady-harrowhark]

1-800-R-U-SLAPPIN

[corvimae]

i love how often tumblr recommends a blog i'm already following "you might like their posts" yea thats why i have them show up on my dash actually

[pyreo]

Ok so you know when you're presenting a scenario in the narrative that your audience is supposed to disagree with. and, you know, 'shaking my head while reading on the train so everyone knows I don't agree' etc, you aren't presenting this for children, the audience is supposed to know what's going on.

good writing doesn't have something in-universe that points out when bad things are bad.

but there is a loophole.

if you want to make sure, if you feel like adding a failsafe to make sure nobody starts throwing accusations, you have the character with the incorrect view say something else, earlier or in the same scene, that is wildly, brutally obviously incorrect.

you brand them with the idea that they are Wrong and the audience will absorb that trait and apply it to everything else they do.

There's a great example of this in the Sopranos episode "Christopher", about christopher columbus and how defensive people are about him, where Tony disagrees with his son's columbus-critical school book. Tony rants "he discovered America, is what he did. He was a brave Italian explorer", with absolute conviction. But just a moment ago, Tony tried to excuse columbus's actions by saying that 500 years ago everyone was less aware - "people thought the earth was flat, for crying out loud", when arguments about the shape of the earth belong to ancient Greece, around 300 BC.

He also then mentions something about "remember when we went to Florida - the heat? and those bugs?" seemingly implying that mass murder is as excusable as swatting annoying insects. an abhorrent, disgusting view - informing us in concrete terms that Tony's impassioned defense of columbus is based on flimsy logic and his mentality is flawed.

another example I like is The Nicest Kids In Town from Hairspray. a toe-tapping number about the vast opportunities for young people in 1950s Baltimore - as long as you're white!

You'd better come on down and meet the nicest kids in town! Nice white kids who like to lead the way

Other than a little zoomed-in emphasis on the singer, it's just baked into the song. It's got the same jaunty beat as everything else. So just in case you somehow didn't get how amazingly racist this situation is, Corny Collins goes on to sing:

Every afternoon drop everything, Who needs to read and write when you can dance and sing! Forget about your algebra and calculus, You can always do your homework on the morning bus, Can't tell a verb from a noun- They're the nicest kids in town!

Playing it as a joke is a good way to couch the meaning, but this is no holds barred irresponsible in a way that explains why parents don't want their children watching Corny's show. But the link is there - this guy jokingly insists that children should watch tv instead of learning to read and write. With that in the same song, are you going to trust him on any other topic? On the racial divide of 1950s america? He's the face of the show, and given the time period, what he sings isn't shocking in-universe - but it should be outside of that, and his regressive humour clues you in that the correct stance is opposing this guy.

so there you go. if you want an audience to be assured a character is in the wrong... just... make them unbelievably wrong about something unrelated.

[saturnitepumpkinhead]

I've watched 270+ horror films. Here are my favorites of all time.

Hell video, proudly served, posted late. There are more than 30 films on this video, and if you count the Saw Franchise as 9 movies in one entry, there's actually 44. I couldn't tag all the movies though :(

[imwritesometimes]

what a good day to remind everyone if you thought the tiktok stunt was gross and despicable and chilling, the only way to put your money where your mouth is is to terminate your fucking account

[kneecap-homicide]

When will Tumblr stop making us block each other so we can return from the war bro 😔

Cant, too busy crying and throwing up over tumblr live

[staff]

Boop Breakdown

Well, you did it. You booped. You booped all over your dashboard with reckless abandon, your finger gnashing away at the boop button, much like a lovely raccoon discovering a glorious half-eaten baked potato. A treasure was presented, and you knew you deserved it. You deserved to boop. Collectively, you booped 142,566,897 times. To repeat: one hundred forty-two million five hundred sixty-six thousand eight hundred ninety-seven boops were had on tumblr dot com the website and the app.

Specifically: 

Normal boops: 119,204,929

Self boops: 12,645,652

Cat boops: 7,925,241

Super boops: 2,095,231

Mischievous, aka evil boops: 695,844

One particularly boopable Tumblr was booped a total of 874,212 times. To be so rich in boops is a blessing. The Tumblr that gave the most boops found it in their heart to bestow 127,073 boops upon those they found worthy. 

Over 500,000 Tumblrs were booped and booped back in return. And for what? What would drive so many to boop? Does Tumblr yearn for the boop mines? Well, yes. And also the guts, the glory, the prestige, and, of course, the badges. Oh, how you worked for those badges:

Booper participants: 229,881

Booper enthusiasts:  85,548

Booper supers:  67,571

Hold your heads high, Tumblr. You booped until you couldn’t boop anymore. You created incredible fanart, invented a whole new genre of -sonas, and even created your own premium, high-end awards. It was noble, it was boop. We hope you boop yourself, and boop for boop. Boop, boop boop? Boop, boop. Boop boop boop, boop boop; Boop! Boop! 

Boop,

Tumblr

[viridiblox]

Ahhhhh

every once in a while i learn some wild new piece of information that explains years of behavior and reminds me that i will never truly understand everything about my ridiculous adhd brain

[44cowboycryptid44]

7 days away from a year, and I still can’t even to begin to conceptualize how to live my life anymore. Every time I try I feel like I’m going to die from how much it hurts to go through the motions. Everything is what it used to be and nothing will ever be the same anymore, and I don’t know who I am or how to do this.

[lady-harrowhark]

if they want me off this website they’re gonna have to kill me first

[sp0re-speaks]

Hey did you guys know about Tunglr.com

[plumadesatada]

@hobbular get peer-reviewed you clown 👌

“The first note known to have sounded on earth was an E natural. It was produced some 165 million years ago by a katydid (a kind of cricket) rubbing its wings together, a fact deduced by scientists from the remains of one of these insects, preserved in amber. Consider, too, the love life of the mosquito. When a male mosquito wishes to attract a mate, his wings buzz at a frequency of 600Hz, which is the equivalent of D natural. The normal pitch of the female’s wings is 400Hz, or G natural. Just prior to sex, however, male and female harmonise at 1200Hz, which is, as Michael Spitzer notes in his extraordinary new book, The Musical Human, ‘an ecstatic octave above the male’s D’. ‘Everything we sing’, Spitzer adds, ‘is just a footnote to that.’”

— “Symphony of a Thousand Millennia“ from Literary Review

[undasura]

every time someone calls websites an "app" because they only use mobile i want to throw them into space like tumblr dot com especially is first and foremost a website and it's the worst one.

[foxglovecove]

I’m genuinely curious about this because things on tumblr dot com have changed since I joined 84 years ago

[deathzgf]

i ' d like to add to this ! sorry if it ' s a bit repetitive But

as anotherhumaninthisworld mentioned , if you simply want a list , wikipedia has a list of political groups in the french revolution ( key word : groups !!! not parties !!! again , like anotherhumaninthisworld mentioned , they don ' t really fit the modern definition of a political party ; i tend to use groups in reference to clubs , societies , & groups as a general term because they were all Groups but there were also actual things called groups . this is getting confusing i ' m so sorry . basically , using the mountain & the jacobin club as an example , the mountain was a political group , the jacobin club was a political club and also a political group and was ( sort of ) within the mountain , but the mountain was not a political club ) with their own summaries & own separate pages ; however , some are not mentioned

for example , the bretin club has no mention despite being the roots of the jacobin club & present at the estates - general ( aka the start of the revolution , therefore a political group in the french revolution ) ( + maximilien robespierre ' s first political club )

another thing i feel is important to mention is the fact that these political groups were always merging & splitting & fucking around . the absolute messes of revolutionary french politics can Usually be categorised into the big three political groups : the girondins , the marsh ( or the plain . i like to call them the marsh because it ' s fucking funny ) , & the mountain

here is a visualisation of the groups in the 1792 national convention with red representing the left wing mountain , gray representing the central marsh , & blue representing the right wing girondins

fun fact : the terms left wing & right wing came from where the different political groups sat in the national convention

even though they ended up right wing , the girondins actually formed the jacobin club with the mountain when it first was founded :p

and since for some reason france let teenage girls run the country they started beefing bad and the girondins and montagnards broke up

so the jacobins were primarily montagnards But , like in anotherhumaninthisworld ' s first graphic , there were non montagnard jacobins

after more teenage girling some slut named georges danton & my beautiful wife camille desmoulins softblocked maximilien robespierre on twitter dot com and split from the jacobins to create the cordelier club which louis antoine saint - just responded to with a call out thread

despite the twitter drama the cordelier club was still part of the mountain , just less left i Guess

a few more shitty takes later out comes the dantonists & the herbertists from the cordeliers & the robespierrists from the jacobins

the dantonists & herbertists were still cordeliers & the robespierrists were still jacobins but not all cordeliers or jacobins were dantonists , herbertists , or robespierrists but they were ( almost ) all montagnards ( like i said earlier , not all of them were montagnards but like . Most people consider them all montagnards because who gaf ( i gaf ) )

i promise i will shut up soon ( lie ) but i am going to yap about the marsh now sorry

i lowk don ' t know if they would be considered part of the marsh but they were central & the marsh was central so fuck it we ball . anyways . more merging ! yay ! ok so we have established the jacobin club right we know the jacobins our good old friends right Well . like how some split into the cordelier club to be Less Left , some split into the Feuillant political group to be even less left than the less left club . the feuillants were not just a split from the jacobins though ; it also merged the friends of the monarchist constitution with the Society of 1789 & ofc the moderate jacobins and then the clichy club happened which i am not going to get into because i literally just found out they exist whilst researching the feuillants for this But i will research it if anyone is interested ^___^ i do know however that they were right wing , despite the preceding feuillants being centrist

post 1794 were , of course , the thermidorians and all their bullshittery & napoleon bonaparte & average french shenanigans including the conspiracy of equals who were former jacobins & people inspired by the jacobins who failed in a coup d ' etat to overthrow the directory & start the ussr but french

rip the equals you would have loved karl marx

pre 1789 there was the society of the friends of the blacks who continued through the french revolution & were abolitionists

i think this covers everything i wanted to add ??? sorry if it ' s a bit all over the place but feel free to ask about anything if anything was confusing :3

How many political parties were there during the revolution?

Because duo to the popularity (I mean by popularity "the most influential" like "Jacobin" and "Girondins" etc. ) I start to forgot that was there more political parties so could you tell us about them and their most notable achievements ?

It is hard to really talk about political parties when it comes to the French Revolution, at least not in the way in which we today think of the term, with worked out ideologies and party programs for each and everyone. Furthermore, some of these ”parties” are not like the others. Jacobin, Cordelier and Feuillant all refer to people belonging to a certain political club, paying money for their membership, whereas girondins, montagnards, thermidorians, enragés, hébertists (and robespirreists that are not mentioned in the chart) all are loose compounds of people that pushed for (or were at least said to push for) the same political changes, and often were personal friends as well. The vagueness of all of this has lead to debates not only regarding what each group really stood for, but even who really belonged to them. My understanding of these groups is honestly not much deeper than what can be read on wikipedia (each group already has its own page) but to shortly summarize:

Jacobins — members of the Jacobin Club (Society of the Friends of the Constitution) which was founded in 1789 and shut down in November of 1794. It’s main quarter was on rue Saint-Honoré in Paris, but unlike the Cordeliers and Feuillants, it also set up sister clubs out in the provinces. This makes the Jacobins the biggest political group throughout the revolution in terms of official members. When it comes to ideology, the club’s first set of official reglutions, passed on February 8 1790, stated that ”the object of the Society of Friends of the Constitution is: 1, to discuss in advance the questions which must be decided in the National Assembly; 2, to work towards the re-establishment and strengthening of the constitution according to the spirit of the preamble above; 3, to correspond with other Societies of the same type which may be formed in the kingdom” as well as that ”loyalty to the constitution, dedication to defending it, respect and submission to the powers it has established, will be the first laws imposed on those who wish to be admitted to these Societies.” However, as the revolution radicalized, so did the Jacobin club.

Cordeliers — members of the Cordelier Club (also known as the Society of the Friends of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen) which existed from 1790 to 1795. Its head quarter was in the Cordeliers Convent (hence the name) in Paris, located on 15 rue de l'École de Médecine. The Cordeliers had lower fees in comparison to the Jacobins, and as a result, counted more working class men and women among its members. Its leaders were however still middle class. The Cordeliers are traditionally described as more radical than the Jacobins.

Feuillant — member of the Feuillants Club (Society of the Friends of the Constitution), founded on July 16 1791. The group held meetings in a former monastery of the Feuillant monks on Rue Saint-Honoré in Paris, hence the name. The club was for upholding the Constitution of 1791, which designated France as a constitutional monarchy.

Girondins (also sometimes known as Brissotins or Rolandins) — political group which existed within the Legislative Assembly and then National Convention, in particular the 29 deputies ordered arrested by said Convention on June 2 1793. Of these, 20 would be guillotined in Paris on October 31 the same year, while many others fled to be executed or commit suicide in order to prevent it across the following months. The name ”girondin” stem from the fact many of the groups alleged members originated from the department of Gironde. In the article The "Girondins" Were Girondins, after All (1988) Frederick A. de Luna concludes that the earliest labeling of girondins as girondins stem from April 1792, after which they grew to be frequently used by their enemies. The girondins themselves did however never use the name, and in the pamphlet J. P. Brissot, député à la Convention nationale, à tous les républicains de France ; sur la société des Jacobins de Paris (October 1792) Brissot even exclaimed ”Will the slanderers now remain silent? Will they stop pretending to believe and wanting to make believe in a faction of Gironde or of Brissot?” The girondins have traditionally been associated with 1, waging a pro-war campaign within the Legislative Assembly and the Jacobin club from December 1791 to April 1792 (as can be seen above, the first recorded labeling of girondins as girondins is from the same month said war was declared), pushing for a more liberal economy as well as seeking more ”moderate/less violent” solutions compared to the Mountain during the time of the Convention. However, there’s no actual safe connections between these goals and all the men tradionally described as girondins for as far as I’m aware. To give the word to Terror: the French Revolution and its Demons (2022) by Michel Biard and Marisa Linton:

Montagnards — member of the Mountain, a group within the Legislative Assembly and then especially the National Convention, so dubbed because its members occupied the highest benches of the hall of the assembly. I honestly don’t really know what defines this ”party” more than being opponents of the girondins. So while the latter are associated with being pro-war, for a more liberal economy and reluctant to ”violent/exceptional measures”, the Montagnards are instead described as anti-war, for a more planned economy and welcoming of more ”violent/exceptional measures.” However, like in the case with the girondins, were we to line up every person tradionally described as a montagnard and check up his stance on each of these three topics, I’m unsure if we would actually get a very unified result. 

Unlike in the case of the girondins, indulgents and exagères, we have proof of the montagnards describing themselves as just that. Here is Robespierre, who might as well be called the leader/heart of the ”party,” defining what a montagnard is on June 12 1794. More than anything, it may however rather illustrate how this wasn’t a properly defined group either, as I’m sure the members of every other ”party” discussed here would be willing to describe themselves in the exact same way:

Yes, Montagnards, you will always be the boulevard of public liberty; but you have nothing in common with intriguers and perverts, whoever they may be. If they try to deceive you, if they claim to identify with you, they are no less foreign to your principles. The Mountain is nothing other than the heights of patriotism; a Montagnard is nothing other than a pure, reasonable and sublime patriot.

The fall of Robespierre marks the beginning of the end for the Mountain, many of who’s members would be expulsed, executed and exiled during the thermidorian convention.

Thermidorians — the name has its origin in the journée of 9 thermidor (July 27 1794), the day Robespierre and his allies fell from power, but it is not fully clear if it is active participation in/support of said journée, or holding power during the period that followed it, which is distinguished by its step back, for better or worse, from the more ”revolutionary measures” taken during 1793-1794 that makes someone a thermidorian. In the article ”Robbers, Muddlers, Bastards, and Bankrupts?” A Collective Look at the Thermidorians (2019) Mette Harder writes that this too is a very poorly defined group — ”Beyond their individual names, there is, however, no clear sense of who the Thermidorians were collectively, how cohesive a group they became, and what exactly they hoped to achieve while in power. Their name itself adds to this uncertainty, as it is used interchangeably to describe a specific group of reactionaries and the entire Convention post-thermidor.”

Indulgents (also sometimes known as dantonists) — group associated around Convention deputy Georges-Jacques Danton, and in particular those executed alongside him on April 5 1794. Traditionally described as driving a campaign that was about softening ”the terror” as well as pushing back from dechristianization from late 1793 up until their execution. This idea is however something that has been heavily contested in more recent years, some historians concluding the Indulgents never were a coherent group with a common goal to begin with but that this was rather something contructed by their enemies in time for their trial (see for example chapter 8 — Le chef d’un groupe indulgent ? — of Danton: le mythe et l’histoire (2016) or Camille et Lucile Desmoulins: un rêve de république (2018).

Hébertists (also known as exagères) — group associated around the journalist Jacques René Hébert, and in particular those that were executed alongside him on March 24 1794. Drove a campaign for a hardening of ”the terror” and dechristianization from late 1793 up until the execution. Like with the indulgents, it’s however hard for me to say if the members themselves identified themselves as a group or if this is a post-construction.

Enragés — just read this. I honestly had trouble finding much more.

[relleytrots]

On Humanity, Tenets and Convictions

The V5 corebook does an appalling job of explaining how these mechanics fit together and what they represent; I don't think even the Players' Guide really hits it in the terms that are needed. I don't want to jack the excellent post by @vixensdungeon but nevertheless, the urge to explain things on Tumblr dot Com, the App and Website, is very strong in me this morning.

Humanity itself is objective. Each notch on the scale has defined, concrete mechanical impact on what the character can and cannot do, and these are consistent no matter what the character thinks or believes or feels, and these are universally applicable, no matter who your character and my character and her character might be. At one end of the scale your character is Literally Unplayable; at the other, they are more human than most humans, certainly than most RPG protagonists, and might as well be unplayable considering the role of the TTRPG as societally unacceptable behaviour simulator (cf. Power Kill, as usual).

Tenets are subjective but shared. They are the ethical rules on which our story operates: the things that we have agreed should provoke a moral crisis in our vampire protagonists. For Humanity loss to occur, you need these cues and triggers, these "thou shalt not" rules, and for that central fact of the game - that unlife isn't life and living it makes you less of a person - to come up in play, they need to be rules your character is going to break.

Without Tenets you have no idea what makes Humanity vulnerable and precious and worth saving; there are not many universal, objective, "doing this always gives you a Stain" rules in V5. You have to do the work here. The game needs you to decide what's horrific in order for its personal and political horror to exist at all. You cannot skip this. You cannot rely on a universal morality that isn't there and isn't shared to dictate Humanity loss. The game needs you to think about these things.

Convictions are subjective, and entirely personal. They are the "but thou must!" imperatives which allow your character (and only your character) to justify breaking the Tenets and retain a grip on their Humanity. They create the opportunity for your character to resolve their moral and ethical qualms in their own favour every so often; to stop the process of play being a nihilistic rush down the Humanity scale. VtM works if you all speedrun down to Humanity 4 and act like the usual "chaotic evil until proven otherwise" TTRPG protagonists but it aspires to make you think and feel things about that and the rules are set up to demand you meet that aspiration.

If you want a vampire game where the state of being a vampire isn't a moral issue, can I recommend Vampire: the Requiem Second Edition? A game with an objective, universal definition of Humanity and the threats to it as "experiences that remind you you are not a human being any more," and the more fundamental that reality check is, the less likely it is a character will retain Humanity when confronted with it? It's extremely tidy and doesn't demand that you establish and interrogate any of your own principles. It's not moral "degeneration," it's experiential "detachment," and that hits very differently.

Also, none of this is to do with Lines and Veils. Tenets are rules you want your characters to break. They are the substance of your morality play. They will come up in play and they will do so often. Lines and Veils are rules about what you as a player do not want to have to experience at the gaming table and they are not supposed to come up/be directly narrated. One of these things is part of a core gameplay function and one is a safety tool. Know the difference.