im gonna go 62 hours without sleeping and judge if it has a negative or positive impact on the quality of my text posts. the things i do for art. the things i do for art

acrylicpeach  asked:

For the anon who asked about flower pressing!!! I have the answers!!! Basically you can press flowers in any heavy object w pages, so books, journals, dictionaries are v good. OR if you wanna b all professional, u can take pieces of cardboard and stick 2 pieces of thin paper (like tissue paper) n then stick the flowers in between the paper n wrap it all up n then stick it underneath smoothing heavy! all flowers take different times so u just keep checkin on them over a few days to see!!

@ anon !! look at this quality aesthetic content ur the master of all things flowers

aoikouryuu  asked:

....I got a silly request. You know the anime character that eats like crazy...but it never affects their figure or health? [In fact = the more things+better quality food=more look improvement...] What if the RFA'S S/O [aka the MC] is like this?...But in exchange she gets hungry faster...Like she needs to eat x2 the amount an average people her age/size needs daily at least...

(idk if you wanted the entire main gang but im just gonna do 707, message me if you want the rest of the pals!)

707 watches on in amazement– and slight disgust, just a tiny bit– at how you finish off you’re third Whopper©. This was MC’s fifth meal of the day and it was only 11 o'clock in the morning.

“Don’t you think you should, ah, slow down, MC?” He tries out carefully.

Your head snaps to him and your invisible eyes narrow in a glare before 707 squeaks and ducks under the table, “Not that I’m implying anything, sweetheart! I-I just don’t want you to get a stomachache if you eat too quickly!…Yeah! That’s it!”

A growl slips through your lips and 707 is terrified for his fucking life. The only good thing out of all this is that the two of you are using Jumin’s card to pay for everything.

Somewhere in the distance, Jumin sneezes.

What is a plausible theory?

I’m not really against crack theories. They can be fun. It’s fun to imagine all sorts of twisted things and make them fit, just as a lark. But: see this. People in fandom don’t always draw hard distinctions between ‘plausible sounding’ due to surface appearances and *actually* plausible since it 'fits into the puzzle’ that the narrative provides.

The 'puzzle’ (even or especially in character-based twisty mysteries like Sherlock) is rarely about the things that can or will *happen*. It’s about *why* they would happen, the purpose that a characterization or pivotal plot point would serve in *context*. And I know this is essentially belaboring the obvious, more or less, but a lot of people in fandom have not had the education or training to really fully distinguish these things, so the quality of overall meta discussion easily suffers the more cracky or over-the-top theories gain broad acceptance and uncritical traction. These ideas (recently, it’s been EMP or Moriarty!John, among others) are like memes: they easily transcend their roots and become self-perpetuating, 'cause dismissing large chunks of contradictory canon is easier than integrating. So theories that pick out one speck of the canon and build outwards become popular. They’re easier to digest. But I think they’re the equivalent of junk food: best consumed conscientiously and in moderation, especially by anyone with an actual interest in the meta discussion side of fandom discourse.

I realize this is fandom and we’re mostly just here to play and have fun; that’s why I’m directing this at people who’re interested in thinking critically about canon in the first place. The thing with the above two theories is that they fall down in a *structural* sense, and people just kind of overlook that. People don’t seem to realize *how* important structural integrity is. That is, how important it is for 'good’ theories to utilize a diverse variety of data points within the text to create a broad-based conclusion. A good workable or canon-plausible theory doesn’t have to be 'correct’. I think that you can definitely make a theory that’s structurally sound and persuasive, but will not ultimately be canon, because there are genuinely many directions a text *could* go plot-wise. LSiT’s M-Theory is a good example of this type of theory. The characterization arcs are not so fungible, however. So a great theory sees the text as a whole, which naturally works with the arcs. Thus, a great, plausible theory is like a toy with moving parts where everything works and is 'plugged in’. Nothing is discarded, just reinterpreted. That’s what a good textual theory is; crackiness or shock value essentially optional.

Basically, I think that recognizing what a 'good’ or plausible theory looks like is important for processing 'cracky’ theories properly, and puts them in perspective. If people don’t know (as it seems many don’t), there’s a widespread confusion, wank and the frequent creation of false equivalencies. The fandom meta discourse gets derailed; the problem is, we can’t learn from each other and build any consensus to use for talking fruitfully about canon without an understanding of what the markers of a good analysis actually are. People may understand 'this is crack’ on an abstract level, but this means little if there’s no common concept of what a serious reading looks like in broad outline. Noise becomes inseparable from signal, and communication breaks down further.

This is just a very awkward attempt to provide that broad outline. In the end, I have faith that the meta ecosystem can dynamically self-adjust as long as enough alternative viewpoints exist within the discourse. In summary, look for those interlocking puzzle pieces. Here are some questions I ask myself:

  • Does this theory offer clear integration with the plot arc?
  • Does that include integration with all relevant character arcs?
  • Does this reading illuminate the text, or only simplify it?
  • Does this reading support and build on what we know, or overturn it?
  • Would this development take a step forward or backwards (note: stories almost always progress).
  • Does this meta anticipate and address possible rebuttals and/or concerns one might have?

If I answer no to most of these, essentially the theory is not plausible, and the only way I’d entertain the possibility is if the meta includes text-based support for why they think the writing is bad. If no such serious critique of canon is included, I think 'this is not bad writing’ is sufficient for a rebuttal. Simply implying that the writing may always suddenly become bad is under the category of 'unsupported claims’, and may thus be dismissed.

(((Just as a reminder, this blog is Selective and Mutuals only! Non-mutuals can send in ask memes and the like, but unless we both follow each other, I’m not down for interaction. This isn’t even a “quality” thing, I don’t judge blogs like that. I just can’t afford to try and interact with everyone who comes by, especially now that all these new blogs are popping up! Thank you for your understanding)))

Oso’s releasing so much cool and adorable new merch and every single official image is like garbage quality and it’s actually starting to really upset me? I want to make transparents and edits from not just Hesokuri wars but they’re the only ones actually putting out semi-decent quality images.

And even when they have links to other sites all it freakin’ is are sites compiling tweets of the same images I see on twitter!!! Like what? I’m getting anxious now that by the time those halloween images come out (that I am still SO EXCITED FOR) they’ll be terrible quality and all of my set plans to make things out of them will be ruined. I will probably actually cry if that happens…please, Oso staff, give me some good quality images TT_TT

cute nicknames for the signs
  • aries:ass wrecker
  • taurus:leeroy jenkins
  • gemini:absolute cactus
  • cancer:sinnamon roll
  • leo:terminator
  • virgo:memelord
  • libra:the hot one
  • scorpio:problematic fave
  • sagittarius:homosuck
  • capricorn:gay baby jail
  • aquarius:rare pepe
  • pisces:one squid