rpanons | 006

Rundown:

rpanons is an anonymous community for role-play related topics. This place serves as a forum for game discussions, canon discussions, RP solicitations (ATP, game ads, open memes), and advice. The occasional off topic comment is inevitable, but please keep heated social and political topics to their respective communities. Posting them here will only get them frozen. Subsequent threads made to bypass a freeze will then be deleted.

Temporary Change: To reduce the strain on Dreamwidth's servers new entries will go up when a post reaches 5,000. "One of our biggest load problems is entries that have a high number of comments -- loading those entries causes a big hit -- and we've been seeing an increase in the number of entries with lots of comments lately. If even a few high-traffic journals or communities started opening new posts when comments reached 2000 or 2500 instead of letting the post run until it hit the maximum number of comments, it would definitely help." - DW_News

Rules:

Do not post pornographic or shocking images.
Do not share private entries, plurks, chat logs, etc.
Do not use this community as your social/political/hatespeech soapbox.

Concerns?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Okay. This is not an appropriate debate technique. Nobody's accusing you of being mamachan just because you're taking their side in this matter (and this isn't preterition, I genuinely don't think you're them because of how clearly divergent your writing styles are). Please don't accuse independent anons of being me just because they're on mine. You've accused separate anons now, both of whom have key differences from my arguments that make the idea I'm them preposterous. The first conceded "actual canon" was on mamachan's side, which of course flies in the face of the entire main thrust I've been making for half a dozen or so comments now. The second brings in several perspectives which, were you and I better acquainted than the moderately uncomfortable intimacy of slapping each other across the virtual face with panels, you would notice as distinct from the targets where I would take aim were I speaking without the veil of civility upon my face. As it is, that veil is still firmly on, so I'll be brief.

Kanaya told Eridan not anymore repeatedly in one chat log; as the second anonymous victim of mistaken identity has said, this implies a past state that has led Eridan to "Take My Help For Granted". Many people are saying "she didn't auspisticize, she just bugged and fussed and meddled and mediated and pacified", but if this does not constitute auspisticism, what does? I'm not really sure how many times I can flog this hoofbeast, so I'm going to simply state what I think that the logical interpretation is: Kanayao8<(Vriska/Eridan) was a thing at some point in the past. By the start of SGRUB, it has ceased to be a thing for a while now. Later in SGRUB, Kanayao8<(Vriska/Tavros) was a thing instead, but abruptly ceased to be in the wake of "Kanaya: Deal with your own crisis." These relationships may not have been the desired one of anyone involved, nor necessarily successful relationships, but relationships they were all the same.

What I'm having trouble understanding is why a debate on this is going on at all, not because of canonicity or anything (this is technically shipping, of course we're going to argue about canonicity until the cows come home), but because I've never seen this questioned before anywhere else, and in the Home-"what if Sollux Captor were Lord English"-stuck fandom, that's saying something.

but because I've never seen this questioned before anywhere else

Really.

That's your huge issue with this.

Just because no one ever questions you on anything (and who is unless you bring it up in a situation like this? Your cast? They're probably all your friends.) does not mean you are right and it is pure and true. People are giving you express proof, and you are twisting it. You've shown a clear Eridan bias throughout this conversation (crying because Hussie said a character THAT KILLED THE GIRL HE WAS IN LOVE WITH is a terrible bastard, really?). That's fine. You can like Eridan. Don't let that taint your view of canon or your character or how you play her.

Jesus Christ, when fifteen people are telling you the same thing, you'd think you'd stop and say, "Hey, maybe they're onto something here." We don't all have Eridan hate-boners, btw.

JFC THIS.

I like Eridan a lot. He's funny as hell and awesome to read in canon and most games. He's not a good person, but he's a fantastic character. No one is disagreeing because they hate him.

I'm not talking about having never been personally questioned, or the consensus within my cast. What I'm talking about is that in every other forum where I've seen Homestuck discussed -- tumblr, MSPAF, et cetera ad nauseam -- the complete consensus has been that Kanaya was in those auspisticeships. It's been taken all those places as a plain canon fact, on the bass of the explicit evidences I've presented repeatedly and which has been through just as much twisting by your side ("hypothetical"?) as you accuse me of. This is why I'm bringing up the presence of debate as surprising. Because I'm surprised.

I'm not accusing any of you of having hateboners, that was a separate anon, and I wasn't crying over the moral assessment. I was distraught over the statement that Eridan intended to "help" with the matriorb by destroying it, because that significantly changes the reading of the scene (ille est, an actual intent to help) to a much more sinister and depressing one.

The irony of all this is that the whole point to mentioning Kanaya at all in the first place in the essay was to emphasize the degree to which Eridan had alienated himself from his friends -- regardless of whether they were ever in an auspisticeship or not, everyone in this debate is agreeing she wasn't helping him out anymore by the start of canon. Your complaints really should be directed towards my essay itself, which I wrote in less time than some of these comments and really wasn't ever intended for scrutiny this intense.

Okay, dude, but when someone who's never played a character before asks for help and you add something in explicitly contradicted by canon, people are going to correct you. And multiple people are correcting you. Is it more likely that all ten of us are wrong or that you are?

I've talked about Kanaya with other people before and I'd never seen that interpretation until you talked about it. Neither of us seeing these interpretations or a lack of them makes us right on this, because they're still interpretations and not canon fact.

You having that interpretation and not being contradicted on that before is not the issue here, you saying that it is for sure canon when it isn't confirmed is. For other Eridan players it might be bad for them to go into a cast and assume that their Kanaya player has the same interpretation of events, imagine how awkward that would be for an Eridan player to come in and have him mention an old relationship at some point that another player doesn't even think happened. If both that Eridan and Kanaya player agree on that that's cool, but saying an Eridan player should automatically assume that is not.

I would also advise not to use Kanaya's helpful behavior as a basis for saying that she was for sure in a relationship with Eridan and Vriska. You can say that her helping others out in canon is just helping without it turning into a relationship. One of the biggest things that would potentially keep her out of that relationship at any point in time is that trolls don't seem to accept having their partner in more than one relationship readily and Kanaya was already in a quadrant with Vriska. And her keeping Vriska from doing things with both Eridan and Tavros could be seen as more of her doing things from a moirail perspective than an auspistical one. She has to keep Vriska out of trouble with everyone and make sure she's not hurting anybody, that's her job as a moirail, it doesn't automatically mean that she was mediating in a way that's appropriate for another quadrant.

Again, you can interpret Kanaya as having been in that quadrant anyway, it's an interpretation I'd disagree with, but that's okay as long as everyone else who is involved with that point in playing has the same interpretation as you do.

This is still not something you want to tell Eridan players it's okay to assume though. For that matter you don't want players of other characters to automatically assume this without talking to their fellow players either.

006

Re: still not convinced you aren't tendtoenunciate

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject