WOW, I just asked a question and I didn’t realize it would cause such a debate.
1 Like
It’s not so much a debate as a relic of old times being grumpy and starting discourse because he has nothing better to do. This is not the first or the last time Mcgee has insisted to others that only his idea of how fluffies should be is the right one and that everything everyone does doesn’t matter or some shit like that. He is a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian. It’s best to just not engage with him.
3 Likes
Yeah, I guess this community brings out the worst.
I’ll agree that Mcgee can argue for the sake of arguing at times, even at most times, but if his comments are more than a sentence long, then there’s usually a nugget of truth here and there.
All Mcgee is saying is that if you start pulling apart the building blocks of a fluffy, you threaten to send the concept crashing down, reducing them to an uninteresting mess.
Lmao you ain’t seen shit yet
Might be interesting to have a regular discussion where all parties involved calmly provide their opinions once in a while, instead of this though.
Just saying.
The discourse has been fairly calm.
Very little name calling or mud flinging as it were, with the occasional incredulous outburst.
1 Like
One thing that has been mentioned and got me curious, @Karn…
Has the biotoy trope been present since the first instance of a fluffy?
I wouldn’t know sadly.
If I were to take an educated guess, I’d wager it wasn’t though.
Fluffies came to be from an assortment of images that slowly congealed into the concept as it were, so I’d assume that the term happened afterwards, perhaps to explain why such extreme levels of comedic violence could happen to them legally.
2 Likes
That’s implying that we were ever cohesive and could agree on a single set of ideas aside from a focus on fluffy ponies. The community has always taken something of a shotgun approach to creativity. I’d rather people have context and understanding of ideas and use them deliberately for effect rather than just to tick off mandatory boxes on a checklist. That’s part of why I prefer the mythos approach over canon. It better describes what we actually have and allows for more flexibility.
Not every idea fits every genre or every story, and people shouldn’t ftoeel that they need to try to shoehorn something in if it doesn’t add to the narrative. If something doesn’t matter to a story, then there’s no reason to bring it up for that story.
3 Likes
Intriguing.
That means that it’s likely a later addition to the building blocks of what makes a fluffy a fluffy.
I will stop myself from going down this rabbit hole, because I feel I’d just degenerate into being pointlessly contentious.
No. Like McGee said, fluffy ponies had a lower status and received less regard than regular animals, mostly in for purposes of abuse and dark humor. It wasn’t universal and varied depending on people’s whims.
https://fluffypony-blog.tumblr.com/ has good examples of some of the early stories.
1 Like
Wait.
The original pegasi could glide?
The original unicorns could cast spells?
Granted, the success rate seems low but man, I’ve got some food for brain here.
So this is what McGee meant by “you could aswell make them magical fluffies”, he knew!
I really should go back and read the older stuff like this.
It’s interesting to see the foundations of the hobby.
Darn, now I’ve gotta amend all my stories to have unicorn spellcasters.
Uum well for my two cents i think it would lead to an interesting story
1 Like
Everybody gangsta until a smarty pulls out one of this on his herdmates
1 Like
How so?
2 Likes
Maybe that different perspective and how that rule effectives different people
1 Like