![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I have to admit that listening to someone bitch about twinks on Furcadia (for those of you who don't rp/don't know, DON'T ASK) and how they're having to eject someone for eyebleedingly bad colour choices for eyes and then they describe their own character to explain why someone else is going to get their butt kicked proves to me that I am, simply, shallow and want to have a mad passionate affair with grammar and sort of help Thesaurus through the crisis it goes through every time it's raped.
When the description of said char is this one, you wonder which part of the moral high ground they think they occupy.
"Elegant fae's peltage consists of a dark yet glossy palomino hue, rare and rather exotic. Only two markings reside on form, blaze of white down forehead and white socks on pillars. Cream white tassle and flaxen neatly cut. Amethyst optics showing two sides, calm and graceful and haughty youth willing to show what she could do. A red ribbon adorning tassle, stay in front."
I shit you not. I had to read the post four times (and was in the middle of a really stroppy comment) before I realised that was HER character.
But when the post contains this - "Anyway, I was lounging around, ejecting morons with eye burning colors or being stupid and not using the right avatar (Description says wolf, they play as a horse, idiots.)" - you kind of assume that their char doesn't have "amethyst optics showing two sides."
Or at least I do. But I've been wrong before.
OHMYGAWD it makes me hurt!
EDIT: 12 comments in and the original post has been edited to remove the description because all the comments are about the descrip. At least one other person (who bothered to post) had the same confusion as me. OP has defended descrip as "better than most".
This is not the same as making it "good".
I give it 20 comments before it's bahleeted.
No one's deleted their journal on my account lately...*considers*
When the description of said char is this one, you wonder which part of the moral high ground they think they occupy.
"Elegant fae's peltage consists of a dark yet glossy palomino hue, rare and rather exotic. Only two markings reside on form, blaze of white down forehead and white socks on pillars. Cream white tassle and flaxen neatly cut. Amethyst optics showing two sides, calm and graceful and haughty youth willing to show what she could do. A red ribbon adorning tassle, stay in front."
I shit you not. I had to read the post four times (and was in the middle of a really stroppy comment) before I realised that was HER character.
But when the post contains this - "Anyway, I was lounging around, ejecting morons with eye burning colors or being stupid and not using the right avatar (Description says wolf, they play as a horse, idiots.)" - you kind of assume that their char doesn't have "amethyst optics showing two sides."
Or at least I do. But I've been wrong before.
OHMYGAWD it makes me hurt!
EDIT: 12 comments in and the original post has been edited to remove the description because all the comments are about the descrip. At least one other person (who bothered to post) had the same confusion as me. OP has defended descrip as "better than most".
This is not the same as making it "good".
I give it 20 comments before it's bahleeted.
No one's deleted their journal on my account lately...*considers*
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
From:
no subject
No one's deleted their journal on my account lately...*considers*
Have you considered the sacrifice of newborns to attract the sympathies of the LJ goddess?
From:
no subject
This fine-boned mare's palomino coat is darker than usual, yet still glossy and pleasing to the eye. The white blaze down her nose and white socks seem brighter for it, as do her flaxen mane and tail. Her eyes are the color of amethyst, and her gaze is a curious combination of calm grace and the brash confidence of youth. A red ribbon adorns her tail, a warning to any who would venture too close to reconsider their intentions.
Which seems really quite reasonable, if still a little over the top to me.
And I haven't thought of that! *orders deluxe box of babies on ebay* Seriously, it's been a while. I think...three people have deleted their journal to prove a point to me.
I also think that they failed to prove the point they MEANT to, but they certainly did prove the immaturity point.
From:
no subject
Yes, well, what other point CAN you prove by deleting a journal? Though, if that was their reaction, arguing would've still led to the same conclusion.
From:
no subject
I think the point they were trying to make is that I'm MEEN and I HURTED THEIR FEELINGS!!111eleventyone But I could be wrong.
From:
no subject
that is all.
From:
no subject
Little did I know, someone was raping GrammarMan!'s corpse in a nearby alley.
From:
no subject
The sad thing is, I was on furcadia briefly ohhh... 8 years ago?
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
However, I'm the type of person who (gently) mocks and teases because well.. that's just who I am. ;)
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Christ. If I were gonna change my name on the journal, that would be right behind Ingeborg, Mistress of the Dark.
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Or what?
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
From:
no subject
Unfortunately, you have to take the bad with the good.
From:
no subject
Great band name!