Best posts made by GreenFlashlight

@jennkryst Are you talking about Exalted Essence?

I was all excited when I saw the marquee said McDonald's had chicken for breakfast, but it's literally just McChicken patties on either a dry-ass biscuit or a McGriddle.

@surreality said in surreality's playlist:

Once people openly admit to ongoing intentional harassment, and that doing you as much harm as possible is ethical, moral, and just, it'd be foolish to stick around, so I'm not doing that.

Is this something you want to talk about and/or warn others in the community about? Forgive me, but I have trouble telling the difference between vagueness meant to encourage questions and vagueness meant to discourage questions.

Vampire is kind of intended as a deconstruction of vampires as a concept, and god knows deconstructions tend to attract fans who totally miss the point and just think yeah man killing people for food is awesome!

@Ganymede said in RL things I love:

Are we starting to call Republicanism a religion now?

I hadn't intended to go there, but since you bring it up, I think there's a serious argument to be made.

@hedgehog said in Weird or unrealistic gaming... stuff:

Doctor Astronaut Supermodel Pastry Chef Forensic Scientist Barbie.

And her counterpart:

Evil Sex Slave Doctor Astronaut Supermodel Pastry Chef Forensic Scientist Skipper.

I hate that I think I know exactly whom you are talking about.

I got into writing because I am a reader and monkey see, monkey do. I have never tried to publish a story because I will never personally believe I am good enough at anything to deserve recognition for it, but I took classes, I've read books about writing, I've kept journals, all that.

The only thing I can say to answer the question about what I learned that improved my ability to create is, I have failed. I have failed a lot. I have failed over and over at attempts to capture a feeling in words, and I have used those failures to avoid failing in quite the same ways again. I don't really feel qualified to give advice, but since you ask for it, my best advice is this:

Every painting is a self-portrait. Sometimes, you are going to paint yourself in ways that show you to be very ugly. You have to be willing to be ugly because without that ugliness, there's no truth in anything you write.

@mietze said in Weird or unrealistic gaming... stuff:

Old fashioned girls and boys names seem to be extremely popular right now.

Yeah, last time I checked a list of popular baby names in America, a lot of them seemed like names my grandparents' generation had.

@Tashly Similar. I am an aural thinker, not a visual one. Pictures do not come easily to me, and I don't know what color my friends' and family's eyes are.

Also, your avatar suggests you have excellent taste.

@carma said in Weird or unrealistic gaming... stuff:

It's somewhat dissociating to RP with a character who has my RL name.

To this day I'll occasionally see someone addressing a character who has my name and I'll think they're talking to me. I'll physically freeze while my brain screams, "WHO DOXXED ME?!"

...Now that I say it out loud, I wonder if I need to talk to someone about why I interpret that as such a threat.

It's not that I can't see things at all in my head. For instance, I had a very clear visual in a dream last night* that I'm still holding onto. But when I think, it's in words, not images, and I think that's part of why I was always shit in art classes.

*I forget the context but I think I was watching some kind of action movie. A big, lumpy monster, based heavily on the Hermetic Evolved (now there's an obscure reference) was getting shot in the back by a hero with a submachine gun, and I can still see the pattern of the bullet holes as the hero swept their gun to try to control the kickback. I can see the look of angry contempt on the monster's face as it turned around, grinding its teeth in an exaggerated chewing expression before spitting out a mouth-sized gob of lead because it had somehow sucked the slugs through its body into its mouth; because its inner flesh was somehow fluid and protean enough to allow such a thing, even though the bullet holes remained in its outer hide, which I could see despite the monster having turned to face the camera because dream logic.

@betternow said in Weird or unrealistic gaming... stuff

Really? https://www.everything-birthday.com/name/f/bianca

Yes, really. That site is lying. Literally no one named after 1990 is named Bianca. In 1989, a mutation occurred in every human's genes that deactivates the region of a person's brain that allows them to think of that name as a potential name for their child or themselves. That mutation has bred true 100% of the time ever since, so we may safely conclude no future generations shall have people named Bianca, either.

@Ganymede said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

Sweet Jesus, when did people cower from adversity?

When have they not?

@too-old-for-this Very well, then I will be as sincere and literal as I know how to be.

When I originally wrote the sentence "No one born after 1990 is named Bianca," I was aware that it is an inaccurate sentence, but the hyperbole of it seemed useful to illustrate the dissonance I perceive when I see names that were popular in older generations being given to characters who are not of that generation. The hyperbole seemed so plain to me it did not even occur to me that so many people would think I must have been literally arguing that all parents in every part of the world regardless of circumstances came to a silent but unanimous and presumably telepathically agreed-upon decision on December 31, 1989 that no one would ever name a child Bianca again.

That idea is so wild to me that I cannot make myself feel certain that anyone who's trying to correct me actually thinks I must believe this species-wide naming taboo was enacted. Because of my uncertainty, I have framed my responses in a way that I hope is ambiguous enough they would be equally applicable whether or not their posts are sincerely intended rebuttals against what they imagine must be my honestly held accusation, or are some sort of obscure "um, ACKshually" joke of their own that I should play along with rather than take at face value. I am aware my unwillingness to simply ask my accusers if they think I actually believe the Never Again Bianca Naming Summit of 1989 happened comes off as somewhat insecure, but I decided that's fair because I actually am insecure about my ability to read the tone of these counterarguments that baffle me to a degree I have difficulty conveying, so I may as well own that. It is frustrating and shameful to me that I cannot tell these kinds of things without asking, so sometimes I just try to fake my way through it in the hopes that my sarcasm will either prompt a response that makes the correct context clear (which I guess it has, in your case, so I wish succeeding in that goal felt less shitty) or at least make the confusing attempts to correct me stop.

I infer that my chosen tactic has offended you. I apologize. It was wrong of me to try to play along with a joke that I did not understand the rules of well enough to even feel confident it was a joke. In the future, I will endeavor to remember not to do so again, but I say that with a dark certainty in my heart that I will, in some moment of confusion or frustration or panic, revert to this same maladjusted coping technique again. Because of this inevitable failure to live up to my word, I cannot in good conscience ask you to forgive me. I can only say that I am sorry for having hurt you with my selfishness and for the day I know is coming when I will do so again.

In the meantime, if you require me to delete my comments so they will not be there to continue hurting you when you read them, please let me know, and I will do so. Otherwise, I am inclined to leave them in place, as deleting posts one has been criticized for strikes me as a cowardly and egotistical thing to do.

@Rinel said in The Work Thread:

No, boss, I did not put literally what you said in a motion to be passive aggressive and send it to you with nothing else. I did it because you told me that's what you wanted in the motion and I've never done it before.

This is why people exasperate me. Jesus Christ say what you mean you compulsive liars

A year or two ago, I complained about how hard it was for me to play Starfire on a comics game because most of the other players, most especially her teammates on the Teen Titans, refused to play with me under the assumption that because they didn't know me, I was going to play her like a character in a bad porno. That was a bummer, but at the same time it felt like their refusal to play with me was doing me a favor. It wasn't because they were jerks or elitists or bad people or whatever, but because playing with then would have been a bad time for me and for them because of their attitude.

If the other Teen Titans don't want to play with me because I'm not part of their clique, then good! I'm glad they helped me to dodge that bullet instead of letting me stand in front of it.

If the other Teen Titans don't want to play with me because they have no spoons, then also good! Sucks for me, but it would suck worse to be a silverware thief.

@Seamus said in Real World Peeves, Disgruntlement, and Irks.:

@Testament I just do not get the toilet paper thing...

When you can't control the crisis you're in, you control something unrelated to feel better about yourself. "I may die of a disease my government is too incompetent to control, but at least I'll have a well-wiped ass and everyone else will have a dirty one."

If we are going to be serious about defending victims of false accusations here, people who are not stalkers but have been labeled so by evil actors, then let's get serious about it.

If a game's policy is that any claim of harassment must be proven with incontrovertible evidence, then that means we are comfortable beginning from the position that people who report abuse cannot be trusted, right? That they are liars or, at least, too mentally incompetent to understand what other players are doing to them. Since such people are so untrustworthy, their reports must be investigated, correct? That's the only reasonable thing to do. No one's saying they're liars, just that they can't be trusted.

So, investigations have to happen. And what happens if an investigation doesn't prove the accuser's allegations? You have to do something about that, right? After all, either the person is either so addicted to drama they'll convince themselves they're being harassed even when they're not, or she's out to hurt some poor innocent man for no reason. You should make a note that she made unsubstantiated claims in case she ever does it again. It can be like a strike against her, except we won't call it a strike. Maybe you should make her sit down with the person she wrongly accused so he can explain to her how it totally wasn't harassment. I'm sure with a staffer in the room to monitor it, nothing could go wrong.

Then, if she was unwilling to reconcile with and/or apologize to the man she wrongfully accused despite having been proven to have misrepresented what happened to her, you could probably form a conclusion from that, right? It means she's too disruptive to allow on your game. Doesn't really matter if she's malicious or mentally unstable; the result is the same either way. You should probably kick her off the game to prevent future drama.

It's the only way to be fair to everyone.

Not really gallows humor, but I want to share it with everyone I can.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z607zk1XX_o

@silverfox I'd guess in this context it means "a named character who is not a distinct charbit emitted by staff, or a named character who is a distinct charbit allowed to be played by more than one member of staff."