rpanons | Stick a fork in it

Stick a fork in it

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 3,000. Please refrain from spamming so we can stretch these entries for a little longer. We don't need several threads soliciting photo evidence of body parts, and we already know that we only care about yaoi. Failure to comply will only result in deletions and butthurt. "People may notice site slowdown/cache error pages. We're working on fixing. You can help: finish posts at 3k comments, not 5k or more." - Dreamwidth@Twitter

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.
Do not use this community as your social/political/hatespeech soapbox.
Do not be redundant. One page does not need three or more threads on one topic/theme.
Do not treat this comm like your personal Plurk or Twitter. Off-topic happens, but it should be open for discussion and not just a play-by-play of your life. No one cares.

Concerns?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

While all these are good points, they completely leave out the angle that Vriska and Tavros and Kanaya were -- oh right I'm sorry according to interpretation of certain panels -- in an ashen relationship. And one of the main points of an ashen relationship is that nobody involved kisses anybody else involved. "So THAT'S why she had you make this dress for her???" (004288) implies very strongly that Vriska gave Kanaya an alternate alibi about the reason that she wanted a dress -- she lied to someone she was in a quadrant in, for the express purpose of violating the contract set out by said quadrant. In this reading, Kanaya may still be blaming Vriska unfairly for actions caused by her own failure to accurately communicate what she actually wants and reacting immaturely to the results, but shes's still a thirteen-year-old girl who has, by the standards of troll culture, been cheated on in the way she would least desire.

And one of the main points of an ashen relationship is that nobody involved kisses anybody else involved.

and where was this stated in canon exactly? this sounds like a whole lot of headcanon to me.

...so do you headcanon that people who are ashen dating do kiss each other, sirmiss? Because that sounds like a much more radical conclusion to take from canon.

The canon page on the ashen quadrant (http://www.mspaintadventures.com/?s=6&p=004297) doesn't put it in quite the stark terms I do, but does state that "Falling on the conciliatory side, it has no bearing on the reproductive cycle, except for indirect ramifications." Later saying the purpose is to prevent "a fully caliginous rivalry." So what I take away from that, "fully" caliginous in particular, is that, as a main point, the relationship is non-concupiscent. On the point of whether the auspistice should be concupiscent with either other party, the other canon page on the ashen quadrant (http://www.mspaintadventures.com/?s=6&p=004300) implies their having "different romantic intentions" is detrimental to the relationship.

So basically I do think it is a very reasonable canon takeaway to say "people in the ashen quadrant should not kiss".

it's trying to prevent a fully caliginous rivalry, but if the two other trolls in the relationship are that black for each other, kissing is probably going to happen. the auspitice might be trying to prevent that, but having it happen doesn't mean that the two trolls are cheating on the auspitice.

i'm pretty sure a good auspistice isn't going to be shocked by the people they're auspisticizing kissing. that defeats the purpose of the auspisticizing, and the auspistice probably isn't going to be happy about it, but it kind of seems to come with the territory.

wow okay that was awkwardly worded. but basically i...kind of agree that the point of an auspisticism is to avoid the people who are being auspisticized kissing (or more), but an auspisticism kind of cannot happen without there being kissy feelings involved first. so the parties being auspisticized kissing? not cheating. just means the auspistice has to try to stop it happening.

Didn't you read the part about preventing infidelity to kismeses they might have as well? The goal is to prevent them from feeling so black that they would do things portraying their black relationship. So they shouldn't be so black for each other that kissing is probably going to happen. It might not necessarily be "oh they cheated on me our relationship will never be the same", but it's definitely not "oh cool bro glad to hear you two swapped spit see you on Sunday". Kissing might take place, but I don't believe the exposition supports any idea that it should be a regular occurrence in an ashen relationship.

Also, it's auspistice, with a second S.

So they shouldn't be so black for each other that kissing is probably going to happen.

without the auspistice there, the two trolls would presumably be that black for kissing to occur. otherwise there's no point in having an auspistice in the first place.

don't be petty.

Except that they have entered an ashen relationship, an agreement to not be fully caliginous, haven't they? I don't think that means "our auspistice isn't around, let's make out". Perhaps "I haven't seen our auspistice in a week, I can't resist anymore". What I mean by "that black" isn't that they don't have any kissy feelings at all -- rather, if they wanted to have a relationship involving regular kissing that badly, they would be unauspisticized kismeses. Regular concupiscent activity would constitute caliginous infidelity, which the auspistice is there to prevent, not tolerate, right?

but trolls seem like they're only allowed to have one person in their quadrants at a time

as in your moirail cannot be part of your auspictice too

why are you butthurt about other people having a different interpretation? it's not a big deal to run with the idea that kanaya might have been more effective as an auspictice and gone to that quadrant but didn't since she both thought she was still more a moirail to vriska and then had her feelings too hurt to deal with it properly

chill

Dude I put "according to interpretation of certain panels" what more do you want from me do I have to write a whole paragraph saying "this is an interpretation"

I was contributing this viewpoint because the thread is stating

And it's auspistice with an S

Frick how did half of this comment get eaten

But basically the main stream of the comments in this thread is stating *nothing* Vriska did was wrong, when lying to her auspistice to subvert her auspisticizing efforts would be kind of wrong, so I felt obligated to contribute that.

Would Vriska even think of her as her auspistice instead of her moirail?

when lying to her auspistice to subvert her auspisticizing efforts would be kind of wrong

this is entirely based on headcanon tho

That's why it says would be wrong

As in if it were an ashen relationship, such an action would be wrong

"oh right I'm sorry according to interpretation of certain panels"

you put it in italics

it makes it seem like you don't believe any other interpretation and are just condescendingly talking to people who don't believe they were in an auspistice

and vriska did do wrong by not telling kanaya she wanted the dress for a specific purpose like this than whatever she probably told her, but that doesn't mean they're in that relationship

vriska and tavros don't even mention it as being odd that kanaya's not there anymore or failing in auspistice duties

tell me, why would both of them have failed to mention that if they were in that quadrant?

can you see why some of us think there was no auspistice if even basic things like that aren't covered?

The thing is that Tavros brings up quadrants explicitly exceedingly rarely, despite the myriad of potential interests he has: Aradia, Vriska, Dave, Gamzee. In his Alterniabound conversation with Vriska? They talk about stairs, not "tHAT TIME, yOU TRIED TO KISS ME, aND MAKE ME HATE YOU, oR PITY YOU, i STILL DON'T KNOW,", so not talking about "tHAT TIME, aUSPISTICISM HAPPENED," makes a lot more sense. And Tavros and Kanaya are never shown to talk, so they don't bring it up then.

Likewise, the word moirallegiance is used to describe Kanaya and Vriska's relationship only once, in Kanaya's panel "meddle with moirail". Vriska herself only refers to Kanaya in relation to her with variants of "friend", and goes on in the cold shoulder conversation about how she misses her "bugging and fussing and meddling".

So Vriska does fail to mention that she and Kanaya were in the pale quadrant; if I've missed a reference please let me know, but as far as I've searched she eschews "pale" and "moirail" entirely. Her lack of explicit references to the ashen quadrant suddenly seems much less anomalous, doesn't it?

some is way more than none

...

And... none is equal to none...? If I'm reading you right. I'm reading this as "some references by Vriska to meddling and stuff do not constitute no references whatsoever to a pale relationship." But what I'm saying is that Vriska never once explicitly says "we were pale, we were moirails, what's up with that whole moirallegiance thing being over", etc., in exact words like that, as a counter to your statement that Vriska never says "we were ashen, you were our auspistice, what's up with that whole auspisticism thing being over".

but whether there were any from vriska either way, there were absolutely no references to anything ashen from kanaya, either, where there were multiple explicit references to a pale relationship from her

...huh, okay, that's actually remotely different. I mean, you and I both know on some level how preposterous denying the literal examples of auspisticism is, or at least I hope so. But, well, really this comes down to the whole old argument of "were Terezi and Karkat matesprits". And of course there was something heart-shaped in nature going on there, literally. As much as you can point out "oh my god it was only a vague and nebulous thing they were Not Matesprits!!!" for...

...for a really, really long time...

Wow, I... I'm going to go sit in the corner and ponder my life and my choices for a while, anon, I'm not even kidding here. I think I finally get it...?

no, because even then in the relationship with kanaya and vriska someone actually bothers stating what the relationship actually and it's kanaya who mentions it to eridan

kanaya in response to eridan says: GA: Overstating Our Relationship Wont Make Me Feel Very Cooperative
GA: Its Paler Red Than That Ok

none of them ever mention an auspistice

even if we're going by what vriska doesn't mention kanaya is still likely to have mentioned something since she is the type of character to mention these things as we've already seen above

she would have probably brought it up with vriska or a discussion that related to her in some way if she had that relationship

and tavros brought up his feelings with jade, he's capable of talking to people he actually definitely has feelings for

all of the people you mentioned, except for maybe dave, he didn't have confirmed quadrant feelings for except when somebody temporarily forced him to have feelings for her

why wouldn't he bring up anyone if he had feelings for them even though he was brave enough to bring up his feelings with jade, who was a perfect stranger to him? that doesn't communicate shyness at all, and even with dave if you want to interpret him as having feelings for him he was still more forward with him than any of the trolls

it communicates that tavros has probably never been in a legitimate quadrant with anyone or had an interest in them

he pretty much rejected gamzee in canon too, though he didn't use words to do it, so i don't know why he'd have any reason to bring him up out of any of them and where does he show interest in aradia? i might be missing something but all i ever saw in their logs was a solid friendship

vriska not communicating anything ever i'll give you since she's one of the least open characters when it comes to her feelings about people until pretty late in her arc, but applying that to tavros is not realistic i think from what we've seen of him in canon and although kanaya is pretty bad at this too she's more closed off about bringing feelings up but she is not shy about talking about the relationships she already has and has had

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Stick a fork in it

Re: ayrt

Re: ayrt

AYRT

Re: AYRT

+1

sa

Re: AYRT

Re: AYRT

Re: AYRT

Re: ayrt

Re: ayrt

SA

Re: SA

Re: SA

Re: SA

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

ayrt