Re: [GRIMDARK] Fallout Equestria: Project Horizons Discussion

[O. Hinds]

Oh, well lemme ask you ask you a question Hinds. if the reason this is okay is because she was raised in 99, that's where she picked it up, how would reading that as 99 is okay or at least this aspect of 99 is okay be inaccurate? Because the reason I've been given that this is okay is because 99 put that in her. No other reason.

Ah. Okay, here I think that there might be confusion between between "okay (in character)" and "okay (morally)". That it comes from 99 is support for the former, not the latter. The moral question is basically whether she was capable of giving informed consent here (it's a bit more complex than that, but I think that that's by far the biggest consideration), and while that builds on her experience in 99, it also builds on her experiences since leaving.

@atikin:
Ah, well-put, I think.

@Last:
Hm. I'm gathering that you believe that this is a fundamental wrong of such great magnitude that no context can make acceptable? And you believe that there is a fundamental difference if all participants are underage?

@SilentCarto:
Ah, thank you.

Not sure what happened with "tips towers" there...

A typo of some description, I think; it's been corrected to just "tips".

So... pony battle bards are a thing? And the Legate knows it?

Not the first time the story's mentioned it. :)

Heh. Boo and Pythia in the same room? Causality doesn't have a chance.

:)

[SilentCarto]

Also, just one thing that came up in my mind a few days ago. Something about what BJ saw in an earlier chapter... And what just appeared at the end of the latest chapter...

Umm, so what did she see when she died for the second time ;D:

I don't think so. It was Luna. The screams came every time the lightning struck to the center of the Tokomare, and we found out later that the lightning was Cognitum's helpers keeping Luna's soul contained.

Then, green lightning flashed from that immense wall and tore through the sea of motes.  Even I screamed as an agony I’d never known flashed across me.  It wasn’t a physical pain so much as a sense of profound violation.  It felt like being nailed back in the Seahorse again.  The green lightning flashed again and again into the center of the sea, and the scream peaked once more.
...
The lightning flashed, and that anguished scream rolled out across the sea of souls like a wave.
...
Whatever the lightning was targeting lay right in the middle of this sea.  Slowly, the motes thinned out more and more until…
No…
It couldn’t be!
A dozen bolts of lightning struck the center, and for the first time I realized that the scream Lacunae had been hearing hadn’t been a what.  It was a who.

Then, with a metallic clunk, the lift had reached its destination: a large round platform in the very middle of the swarm of souls.  
...
Six unicorns, one standing at each point, were trying to keep a ball of brilliant white contained in the middle.  Green lighting from their horns raked across it, forcing it back whenever it drifted.  The black robes they wore were a little much.

This is the same scene from opposite perspectives.

[Guest]

@Last:
Hm.  I'm gathering that you believe that this is a fundamental wrong of such great magnitude that no context can make acceptable?  And you believe that there is a fundamental difference if all participants are underage?

...Hinds what context would you come across a 12 year old and an adult about to have sex, with you having the power to stop it and go "Nah, that's perfectly fine" and turn a blnd eye? And obviously there are a ton of advantages that come with age. Namely you're probably stronger, larger and more intellligent than you're younger self. There is obviously the potential for exploitation beyond the initial yes or no. It feels so alien to have to explain why this is wrong.

Also "(in character)" what? Either you keep missing the point where I don't think the story should be changed or your intentionally ignoring it at this point for some unknowable reason. Why do you feel the need to argue that point? Because I'm not arguing against it for the last time.

Edit: Think I misunderstood you. Crossed out appropriate parts as a reminder once again to myself to think before typing.

[atikin]

SilentCarto, you've got a point there. However, I think it's not exactly the same. It's the Eater who makes the souls suffer and gets energy by doing so. It's very possible the soul in the center of the Eater is Luna, but what makes her really trapped and suffering is the Eater and not the unicorns, who just hold her still, I suppose.

[O. Hinds]

...Hinds what context would you come across a 12 year old and an adult about to have sex, with you having the power to stop it and go "Nah, that's perfectly fine" and turn a blnd eye?

Well, this context, for instance.

There is obviously the potential for exploitation beyond the initial yes or no.

And then Blackjack would splatter him.  In this context, I'd be, if anything, much more worried about her abusing him.

Now, to be clear, I think that the age of consent is a useful construct.  Judging every single case that came up individually and with the requisite thoroughness would be impractical.  That's doesn't mean that there's some magical switch, though, which flips at eighteen (or sixteen, or whatever; the age of consent also appears to vary rather a lot with culture).  It's a good general policy to assume that people below the age of consent shouldn't be having sex with people above it, but it's not completely impossible for someone below the age to handle it as well as or better than a comparable adult.  What happened in the rocket was sex in a safe environment where all participants had plenty of information about what they were doing and claimed to consent.  If we assume that they weren't lying (and Scotch certainly wasn't, since she initiated it), then the only question is whether Scotch was mentally mature enough to be capable of giving consent.  Well, she's seen sex when it's meaningful, she's seen it when it's recreation empty of deeper emotion, she's had sex with people her own age, she's seen (or at least heard) sex that was very much not morally good, she's probably talked with other foals in Chapel who've been raped (and then there's her father), she's killed people in battle, she's saved lives, she's been instrumental in rebuilding a town as a part of its leadership...
You can say, of course, that it was wrong for most of that to happen to someone here age, and I'd certainly say that it was bad for many of those things to have happened.  Given that they did happen, however, that, however painful and regrettable her growing up so fast may have been, it did nevertheless take place, I'd say that Scotch is mature enough that she could indeed consent to this.
I'll also say that, even if she wasn't (as I suspect you'll still think), a filly in the Wasteland and probably also in 99 can make much more stupid and dangerous mistakes than this.

It feels so alien to have to explain why this is wrong.

It feels alien to me that you seem to be considering a worthy and widely-applicable simplifying assumption to instead be a fundamental truth.  Yes, in most cases you're likely to come across here, it's correct.  Yes, even when you're not sure, it's better to err on the side of it being correct because that has a much lower risk of harm.  Yes, the law generally treats it as always correct, which offers a further restriction if internal morality is insufficient (which is of course the point).  People vary so greatly, though, that I don't see how it makes sense to say "Yes, this is always completely true with no exceptions at all possible".

[atikin]

Hinds, very well put. That's exactly what I was talking about. Couldn't say it better.

[O. Hinds]

Oh, thanks.

[Guest]

...Hinds what context would you come across a 12 year old and an adult about to have sex, with you having the power to stop it and go "Nah, that's perfectly fine" and turn a blnd eye?

(1.) Well, this context, for instance.

There is obviously the potential for exploitation beyond the initial yes or no.

(2.) And then Blackjack would splatter him.  In this context, I'd be, if anything, much more worried about her abusing him.

Now, to be clear, I think that the age of consent is a useful construct.  Judging every single case that came up individually and with the requisite thoroughness would be impractical.  That's doesn't mean that there's some magical switch, though, (3.)which flips at eighteen  (or sixteen, or whatever; the age of consent also appears to vary rather a lot with culture).  It's a good general policy to assume that people below the age of consent shouldn't be having sex with people above it, but it's not completely impossible for someone below the age to handle it as well as or better than a comparable adult.  What happened in the rocket was sex in a safe environment where all participants had plenty of information about what they were doing and claimed to consent.  If we assume that they weren't lying (and Scotch certainly wasn't, since she initiated it), then the only question is whether Scotch was mentally mature enough to be capable of giving consent.  Well, she's seen sex when it's meaningful, she's seen it when it's recreation empty of deeper emotion, she's had sex with people her own age, she's seen (or at least heard) sex that was very much not morally good, she's probably talked with other foals in Chapel who've been raped (and then there's her father), she's killed people in battle, she's saved lives, she's been instrumental in rebuilding a town as a part of its leadership...
You can say, of course, that it was wrong for most of that to happen to someone here age, and I'd certainly say that it was bad for many of those things to have happened.  Given that they did happen, however, that, however painful and regrettable her growing up so fast may have been, it did nevertheless take place, I'd say that Scotch is mature enough that she could indeed consent to this.
I'll also say that, even if she wasn't (as I suspect you'll still think), a filly in the Wasteland and probably also in 99 can make much more stupid and dangerous mistakes than this.

It feels so alien to have to explain why this is wrong.

(4) It feels alien to me that you seem to be considering a worthy and widely-applicable simplifying assumption to instead be a fundamental truth.  Yes, in most cases you're likely to come across here, it's correct.  Yes, even when you're not sure, it's better to err on the side of it being correct because that has a much lower risk of harm.  Yes, the law generally treats it as always correct, which offers a further restriction if internal morality is insufficient (which is of course the point).  People vary so greatly, though, that I don't see how it makes sense to say "Yes, this is always completely true with no exceptions at all possible".

[Disclaimer: I edited your quote to add four numbers. It doesn't change anything you said it's just it's much easier than adding a bunch of quote tags. I don't have the ability to copy/paste so it's a much bigger pain in the ass then you might think]

1. This is context is fine to you, even though Scotch has gone through 99's sex ed. That that is the PRIMARY reason this is happening. It's way way way ahead of her maturity. A system that abuses children to sexualize them early to control them? By somber's admission. Unless you're arguing that this would have happened without 99. Which seeing as everyone myself included is saying this scene makes sense because of 99 I don't think that's an argument you can win.

2. No she wouldn't. Let's not pretend she didn't forgive her rapists (or Rose's rapist, or Twist and countless other women's rapist) even when one of them seemingly continued to rape after she let them go. Besides who cares if she would splatter him, the damage is done. There is not a time machine they can take to go back to the pre-exploited time.

3. You know she's way, way younger than that, right? You act as if she's a seventeen year old who had sex the night before her eighteenth birthday. No there isn't a magical switch. But once again Hinds are you as intelligent as your twelve year old self? Are you larger and stronger? Unless you suffer from some specific diseases, (one which seems pretty beneficial, I obviously don't think your dumb of course. So if that were true you'd have to be a damn genius kid.) these reasons are universal and would persist even in the wasteland. It's not confined to culture.

4. Really it seems like you're trying to shame me for this, but it's not going to happen. I'd suggest a different tactic.


Before it seemed you were arguing for the correctnesss of the scene, the accuracy of it. Now you seem to be arguing the morality of it? Is that correct? I know you converse with Somber often, is that part of the reason you're arguing the morality* of it? On his behalf? I'm not judging, I was just going with the assumption at least part of the reason this scene exists was as an illustration of how terrible 99 was. If you and somber are of the opinion that this scene is morally fine than that assumption is wrong.

Edit: *I of course don't mean the morality of including the scene, just to be clear. Wouldn't call you guys bad for touching on any subject matter.

[O. Hinds]

[Disclaimer: I edited your quote to add four numbers. It doesn't change anything you said it's just it's much easier than adding a bunch of quote tags. I don't have the ability to copy/paste so it's a much bigger pain in the ass then you might think]

No problem.  Thank you for stating that, though.

1. This is context is fine to you, even though Scotch has gone through 99's sex ed. That that is the PRIMARY reason this is happening. It's way way way ahead of her maturity. A system that abuses children to sexualize them early to control them? By somber's admission. Unless you're arguing that this would have happened without 99. Which seeing as everyone myself included is saying this scene makes sense because of 99 I don't think that's an argument you can win.

Hardship can build maturity.  People generally don't grow up quickly because they have good, safe, happy childhoods; they do it because they need to.
And if you're arguing that she isn't mature enough to have sex at all, why do you object more to her doing it with a (reasonably) responsible adult in a closed environment with Blackjack right there for security than to doing it with two ponies her own age (and, by your argument, presumably similar immaturity) in a location unknown to us with unknown security?

2. No she wouldn't. Let's not pretend she didn't forgive her rapists (or Rose's rapist, or Twist and countless other women's rapist) even when one of them seemingly continued to rape after she let them go. Besides who cares if she would splatter him, the damage is done. There is not a time machine they can take to go back to the pre-exploited time.

But she might.  She's been through a lot, and Scotch is precious to her.  And no, that wouldn't repair the damage, but that isn't the point; the point is that she wouldn't need to do it in the first place, because Bastard isn't that crazy.  Blackjack is a deterrent.

You know she's way, way younger than that, right?

Yes.  Though I'll point out that she's over the ages of consent some human cultures have had.

You act as if she's a seventeen year old who had sex the night before her eighteenth birthday.

...I don't see how, sorry.

No there isn't a magical switch. But once again Hinds are you as intelligent as your twelve year old self? Are you larger and stronger? Unless you suffer from some specific diseases, (one which seems pretty beneficial, I obviously don't think your dumb of course. So if that were true you'd have to be a damn genius kid.) these reasons are universal and would persist even in the wasteland. It's not confined to culture.

Of course.  As I've said, multiple times, I think (and I apologize that I now seem to be getting rather irritated), there is a reason this exists.  Because it is usually right.  Usually, however, does not mean always.  Like all such rules, it is a simplifying assumption.  And there is nothing wrong with that; simplifying assumptions are vital tools.  Ideally, every case and potential case would be judged individually.  We don't have the resources for that, though, and so we make a rule based on what we have observed to usually be the least incorrect views and responses.  This is one specific case, though, and we do have the luxury of judging it individually.  Is this the best of all possible worlds for Scotch?  I highly doubt it.  Was it, though, in the environment she's actually in, compared to the other options she actually had and looking at the projections of its effect on her future, all that bad?  I would say no.  I would in fact say, based on her reaction and the talk she had with Blackjack afterwards, that this was a net positive experience for her that didn't hurt her and will likely improve her ability to make good decisions in the future.  Again, I think the person to worry most about here, given what the chapter established, is Bastard, and he, as I recall, still seemed pretty much okay.

Also, I'll reply to something you said earlier about this showing Blackjack as poor mother material:  Which is best?  A mother who doesn't provide her children with useful information, then ignores their mistakes, a mother who clamps down on them so much that, while they don't have a chance to make the mistakes, they miss out on more harmless and productive things and end up with a worsened parental relationship, or a mother who, while they may be freer about certain things than you'd like, makes sure that, whatever her kids are getting up to, they're doing it safely and with the consent of everyone involved?

4. Really it seems like you're trying to shame me for this, but it's not going to happen. I'd suggest a different tactic.

A, sorry; I don't see that, though, and I certainly wasn't consciously attempting it.  I hadn't even started to get really frustrated then.

I think "It feels alien" is a good summary, really.  We're clearly operating with significantly different points of view, to the point that we seem to be having some trouble understanding each other, and the belief that the other person's point of view is flawed.  For my part, I am interested in learning more about your point of view, but, while I can see how it could lead to harm, I don't consider it likely to be really dangerous.

Before it seemed you were arguing for the correctnesss of the scene, the accuracy of it. Now you seem to be arguing the morality of it? Is that correct?

Um, yes, but aren't you the one who shifted the topic?  We established that you thought that the scene was not wrong in the aspect of being in-character and fitting the story, but you still spoke of wrongness in it.  What wrongness did you mean, if not moral wrongness?  My apologies if I have misunderstood you on this.

I know you converse with Somber often, is that part of the reason you're arguing the morality* of it? On his behalf?

No, I'm just looking at the scene itself and combining it with my other knowledge of the universe.

I'm not judging, I was just going with the assumption at least part of the reason this scene exists was as an illustration of how terrible 99 was.

This is possible.  Somber's recent post in this thread on the subject could suggest that (and it does provide some additional information about the universe).  However, I don't think that authorial intent really comes into a discussion of the morality of an action in a work within that work's universe (rather than, for instance, as satire of something outside that work's universe) unless it is specifically the author's perspective being discussed.

If you and somber are of the opinion that this scene is morally fine

I can't speak for him with certainty, but that is at least the impression I've gotten.

than that assumption is wrong.

This, however, is another part of your perspective that I am having difficultly understanding.  I see no contradiction in the possibility of Somber writing this scene to show how terrible 99 was but at the same time thinking that the actions in the scene were, in context, acceptable.  A cause being bad does not require every single one of its effects to necessarily be also bad, in my view.

Edit: *I of course don't mean the morality of including the scene, just to be clear. Wouldn't call you guys bad for touching on any subject matter.

Thanks.  :)
I'd like to reassure you again that I mean no hostility either; though I did get frustrated at one point in this post, mostly I'm just puzzled by and curious about your views.

[O. Hinds]

Okay, let's try this: What would you have done instead?  Say it was you instead of Blackjack exiting her... scrying? to find the two of them having sex.  Ignore the questions about how that's happening, your disorientation with being there, their reaction to a new person instead of Blackjack, etc.  How would you have reacted to seeing them?

[Guest]

Also, I'll reply to something you said earlier about this showing Blackjack as poor mother material:  Which is best?  A mother who doesn't provide her children with useful information, then ignores their mistakes, a mother who clamps down on them so much that, while they don't have a chance to make the mistakes, they miss out on more harmless and productive things and end up with a worsened parental relationship, or a mother who, while they may be freer about certain things than you'd like, makes sure that, whatever her kids are getting up to, they're doing it safely and with the consent of everyone involved?

But my position isn't that she denies them any kind of education on this. Not lettting her kids engage in sexualy activity isn't the same as denying them a sexual education. Though considering where she got hers, probably best to let someone else handle that as well. Besides her being a terrible mother isn't just this, she will never settle down. Nothing about her indicates that she'll find a (relatively) safe corner of the wasteland to raise her kids. Other than a few moments when she fantasizes about it, it's almost like she's and addict fantasizing about getting clean.

And as far as ignoring goes, BJ's been known to do that to her ccompanions. I remember way back when Glory had sex with BJ (I think it was their first time together in 99) and said something along the lines of "I only ever want to do that with you." BJ ignored it, she didn't ask any questions about it and ultimately it led her to doing something that deeply hurt someone she cared for. BJ never seemed to learn from the mistake of ignoring her companions.

I mentioned before what happened with Scotch is just part of the reason I think she'd be a terrible mother. BJ would probably love her kids, but I imagine a lot of people who do aren't suitable for the role do as well. I know this isn't an issue BJ (at least not a chemical one) suffers from, but I'm certain there are plenty of parents who suffer from addiction that don't say "Good riddance" when their children are taken away.

This, however, is another part of your perspective that I am having difficultly understanding.  I see no contradiction in the possibility of Somber writing this scene to show how terrible 99 was but at the same time thinking that the actions in the scene were, in context, acceptable.  A cause being bad does not require every single one of its effects to necessarily be also bad, in my view.

Well, I'm trying to look at it from a creator's perspective and it seems like a paradox. You can't really expect it to be a good illustration of how terrible a place is and at the same time expect your readership to respond to it with apathy, can you? Those two things appear to be mutually exclusive.

[O. Hinds]

Ah, I missed the "just part" part; sorry.

Well, I'm trying to look at it from a creator's perspective and it seems like a paradox. You can't really expect it to be a good illustration of how terrible a place is and at the same time expect your readership to respond to it with apathy, can you? Those two things appear to be mutually exclusive.

Not if the "that's terrible" reaction and the "that's okay" reaction are to two different things, contained though they may be in the same scene and in many cases the same words.

[Guest]

Sorry Hinds, through all this I think you're doing your best to be incredibly patient I wanna thank you for that. But I think I'm just too stupid to get it. I still think it's a paradox. Thanks for trying to help though.

Okay, let's try this: What would you have done instead?  Say it was you instead of Blackjack exiting her... scrying? to find the two of them having sex.  Ignore the questions about how that's happening, your disorientation with being there, their reaction to a new person instead of Blackjack, etc.  How would you have reacted to seeing them?

Not sure why you're asking, you can probably guess my answer. I would attempt to stop it.

[Exodus Hero]

Thanks so much for the feed back, guys.  In other news, I am done with work, and Bronode flew all the way from Manchester to help me pack up today.  Packing up my computer and shutting down my internet, so it'll be a while before I'm back at mom's and back on line.

Very nice to meet you Wolf.  Hope the story wasn't too terrible.  Also, I dunno what's wrong with these people.  Last time I read Horizons it took only three days so... yeah...  Glad that the story has worked.  There's one last thing to resolve, then it's Blackjack vrs the eater in a game for the end of the world.  Hope I don't blow it... probably will, but you never know...

And thanks for the Kind words, Atikin.  I really couldn't write this any other way.  If Bastard had rebuffed her, or worse, humiliated her (which he very easily could have done) then she would have had no where to go from there.  She would have been alienated from everypony at that part, and the pain would have been absolutely unbearable.  The only routes from there are drug use or suicide.  Bastard knows what its like to be on the shit end of the world, and so he knew that if she wanted to do this, there was a reason, and whether he liked it or not, he'd be best to honor it.  If Blackjack hadn't been there, he then would have worked with finding out what was tearing her down and how to strengthen herself to survive it... probably by becoming a harder, snarkier, and more jaded version of herself.  

Thank you so much for the feedback, Icy and Ryx and everyone.  Also, one day I'm really going to have to just endure the same and release 'Sex Ed in 99.'  They don't want mares mothers at Scotch's age.  That can wait a few years.  They want the mares sexualized.  They want to remove intimacy, especially with males, so there's little time to emotionally bond.  What happened between P-21 and Duct Tape was only allowed because the Overmare needed her.  The queue does more than just maintain the population.  It's a powerful method of control.  By sexualizing the population en masse, they prevent sex becoming something 'special'.  The shower scene in chapter 1 wasn't restricted because it was public, although that's the defacto reason given.  It's because it was an intimate, bonding moment between two mares.  If mares were loyal and devoted to each other, the trust and unity needed to overthrow the overmare and challenge the status quo could begin and there might have been a peaceful transition of power.  Instead, the only unity was between the maintenence mares, since job cohesion was the last unifying social structure.

Stable 99 was a horrible place.  Not just for the males, though they certainly had it worse.  There were homosexual mares who were forced to go through the breeding queue just to break up pairing off with another exclusive mare.  Orgies were held not for depravity, but to reduce love and intimacy to 'who was I just with right now?  Guess it didn't matter.'  99 did almost everything it could to destroy unity and harmony... and love.  It was a good thing it was destroyed.

Anyway, time to see if I can load everything into mom's truck.  Looking forward to seeing everyone at EFNW.

Honestly what I expected from this scene was for Blackjack to wake up at some point when Scotch was talking to bastard and she was propositioning him, and knowing that she was in a bad place, would kind of open up to her and maybe explain what happened with his past love life or something and BJ would be eves dropping on the conversation. This way Bastard could have been more fleshed out, you'd see more development with Scotch where she could talk freely without worrying about what BJ thinks and it would have put BJ in an even more awkward position as she would have to come up and say she was eves dropping in the first place (and awkward BJ is best BJ... (no not like that you sicko)). Additionally it would have an interesting moral clash between the two without going into statutory rape territory that makes a lot of people uncomfortable and also breaking the idea of how old Scotch is to begin with.

Now personally, as much as I like you as a writer, I didn't like this scene not just because it creeped me out but because it broke the idea of how I, as the reader, viewed one of the characters. I believed up until I actually read the forums that she was a filly about the size of a crusader. This is a big deal because the title art has her as a filly not a yearling or mare and if you have to look somewhere else instead of the story to get the full picture you're doing something wrong. To fix this, I would say in one of the earlier chapters have her be a bit taller then one of the crusader to show that she's actually older but not too old.

Just my two cents.

[Exodus Hero]

Also, FUCK YEAH STARMETAL SWORD FINALLY BACK!

[atikin]

 I believed up until I actually read the forums that she was a filly about the size of a crusader. This is a big deal because the title art has her as a filly not a yearling or mare and if you have to look somewhere else instead of the story to get the full picture you're doing something wrong. To fix this, I would say in one of the earlier chapters have her be a bit taller then one of the crusader to show that she's actually older but not too old.

I think the cover art is what really made you think so. I always thought she's kinda older than crusaders according to the story only (before I saw the cover art and read the forum).

[O. Hinds]

Sorry Hinds, through all this I think you're doing your best to be incredibly patient I wanna thank you for that. But I think I'm just too stupid to get it. I still think it's a paradox.

I am skeptical that stupidity is the cause. While I remain curious, though, I suppose that we can simply go ahead and agree to disagree on this matter. I'm not sure how to proceed with it, anyway.

Thanks for trying to help though.

Oh, you're welcome.

Not sure why you're asking, you can probably guess my answer. I would attempt to stop it.

Aye, I did correctly guess, but I'm trying to get you to think more about this.
So, you stop it. How does Scotch feel about that? About the situation in general, about herself, and about you? How does she react?

[Tacoman587]

Hello everyone, I was kind of looking forward to going on a 10-15hr drive to the EFNW, but school graduation stuff was coming up instead. I actually wanted to go there specifically because of somber's panel. Alas, I cannot be there this weekend. However, I was wondering if anyone would be awesome enough to record Somber's panel. I would really enjoy watching it in some way.

Also, wonderfuly done chapter as always. Both sad and happy to see that it will be ending soon, always kind of wanted it to go on forever....forever...

[Guest]

Aye, I did correctly guess, but I'm trying to get you to think more about this.
So, you stop it.  How does Scotch feel about that?  About the situation in general, about herself, and about you?  How does she react?

Those are good questions. I know somber said Scotch would commit suicide if Bastard rejected her or humiliated her, but you gotta admit a hairless ape appearing from nowhere and interrupting them is a littlle bit different. Personally I think I'd be confused and distracted. But that's me, I don't know if it would make me feel anything about myself.

[atikin]

Last, and what would you do if you'd been BJ in this situation?

[O. Hinds]

However, I was wondering if anyone would be awesome enough to record Somber's panel. I would really enjoy watching it in some way.

I do not expect to have the capability for that; sorry.

Those are good questions. I know somber said Scotch would commit suicide if Bastard rejected her or humiliated her, but you gotta admit a hairless ape appearing from nowhere and interrupting them is a littlle bit different. Personally I think I'd be confused and distracted. But that's me, I don't know if it would make me feel anything about myself.

Um, that's not what I'm asking, sorry.

Last, and what would you do if you'd been BJ in this situation?

Right, pretty much (though, of course, if you'd actually been Blackjack, you'd have been, well, Blackjack, not yourself).

Ignore the questions about how that's happening, your disorientation with being there, their reaction to a new person instead of Blackjack, etc.

[atikin]

[size=33]I do not expect to have the capability for that; sorry.[/size]

 
[size=34]Why not? If Somber doesn't mind, you can record him with a telephone and post on YouTube, but he probably will mind...[/size]
[size=34]I would like to see that myself,  to be honest. And I think a lot of people will do too. [/size]

[Tacoman587]

[size=33]I do not expect to have the capability for that; sorry.[/size]

 
[size=34]Why not? If Somber doesn't mind, you can record him with a telephone and post on YouTube, but he probably will mind...[/size]
[size=34]I would like to see that myself,  to be honest. And I think a lot of people will do too. [/size]

If someone is a fast enough artist, maybe they can quickly do a large scale tapestry that captures the moment. We may need a few pounds of thread though..

[O. Hinds]

[size=34]Why not? If Somber doesn't mind, you can record him with a telephone and post on YouTube, but he probably will mind...[/size]
[size=34]I would like to see that myself, to be honest. And I think a lot of people will do too. [/size]

Oh, I don't even know if he'd mind; I just don't expect to be carrying a device capable of that.

If someone is a fast enough artist, maybe they can quickly do a large scale tapestry that captures the moment. We may need a few pounds of thread though..

:)

[Guest]

Last, and what would you do if you'd been BJ in this situation?

Right, pretty much (though, of course, if you'd actually been Blackjack, you'd have been, well, Blackjack, not yourself).

Sorry, Not sure what the point of the question is then. We know what BJ does.

[atikin]

Last, I didn't mean you being BJ as she is. More like the question of Hides. What would you like her to do instead of what she has done and how would that affect Scotch in your opinion?

[Harmony Ltd.]

However, I was wondering if anyone would be awesome enough to record Somber's panel. I would really enjoy watching it in some way.

Gotta echo this sentiment, for those of us who aren't even on the same continent.

'Cause I remember the podcast that was posted here a while ago was quite interesting, so a panel is probably going to be interesting as well.

[Guest]

Last, I didn't mean you being BJ as she is. More like the question of Hides. What would you like her to do instead of what she has done and how would that affect Scotch in your opinion?

But I don't want the story changed, I agreed that this event was accurate to the characters involved. Do you mean what could BJ have done differently to improve my opinion of her?

[Icy Shake]

However, I was wondering if anyone would be awesome enough to record Somber's panel. I would really enjoy watching it in some way.

Gotta echo this sentiment, for those of us who aren't even on the same continent.

'Cause I remember the podcast that was posted here a while ago was quite interesting, so a panel is probably going to be interesting as well.

The relevant point could end up being what the EFNW people have to say about recording, and of course the other panelists. But if it's allowed, I may see if I can at least get a cell phone recording.

@SilentCarto: On the overadvanced vocab, I hit the point where I just had to laugh at it a bit in 74, with "adumbral." I wonder now if it's connected to Luna's soul in some way, but there had been less pronounced cases before, and "adumbral" was while Blackjack was having a conversation during the mind-meld with Cognitum, not after a permanent melding had taken place.

There were some parts that kept me riveted, like hearing about the final breakup and a paternal King Awesome protecting Dawn from a lecherous, uncouth Big Daddy.

Interesting, given Dawn said it was Big Daddy "protecting her virtue" from Keeper. Which actually makes more sense, since we first met Big Daddy playing "schoolmarm" by hearing Brutus's request he do something about some mare who wouldn't take no for an answer and kept climbing into his bed, Finder seems like he would fuck just about anything with a vagina and a little bit of life in it, and King Awesome is the kind of guy who names himself "King Awesome." Easter egg? Note too that it's the very next sentence that he's claiming to be descended from Shining Armor. So if this was intentional it could have a (very, very, VERY, since your 10th-ish cousin is basically unrelated to you absent A TON of inbreeding on both sides) small effect on the chances of successful surrogacy by Grace.


So, anyone else think it could end up significant that Glory was the one who advocated against euthanizing the children in "PLAY"?

Chapter Seventy Two Running Thoughts:

Chapter Seventy Two Overall Thoughts:

Chapter Seventy Two Editing:

[Icy Shake]

Other Chapter Editing:

[Sponsored content]