You do not come whit preset words and actions to be triggered by those words like fluffys do
I have to agree with you there. They are pointless. But growing up in the suburbs, if I had to chose between a lawn and a fluffy, I’d chose a lawn every time. Definitely biased in this instance.
But that’s such a weird thing to argue about. I’m definitely a “lawn person” (lol), but I can 100% admit they are a luxury commodity that takes up precious resources (land and water).
Also, I officially apologizing for agreeing with McGee (in this instance), you asked for no abuse and I derailed with a non-abuse loophole answer anyway.
5 Likes
Well in your headcanon. Lets keep that in mind.
Exactly. I’m one of those people who take fluffies a bit more seriously, and I do enjoy the SIms for that kind of content.
2 Likes
Not words but there are images programmed in by your parents, genes and life to specific stimuli, unless your computer is also somehow alive if you program it, humans are image based fluffies are both vocal and image based.
3 Likes
Nah fuck you and your head cannon answer
1 Like
Like that response wasn’t original it was pregenerated by your mind based on multiple past experiences with Occulus. He threatens your transferrence object with his own.
4 Likes
Yes. Hence the obnoxiously chidish “Bazinga”. I hope that’s obvious enough that we don’t need to implement a mandatory “/s” rule.
5 Likes
Of all sad words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these, “L.AVaught was right again.”
5 Likes
Course I am fucker, I’m always right about everything ever, in existence, forever.
4 Likes
Their is the difference fluffys are programmed whit words and actions to those words a human has evolved to react to specific stimuli but we can change how we react to those stimuli a fluffy can not all fluffys will always act the same to the same stimuli
kinda narrow-minded, isn’t it?
2 Likes
For me, they’re more like a source of entertainment or cheap protein. I’d treat them somewhere between livestock and family pet, I suppose.
3 Likes
No because in most canons you can teach a fluffy to care for a poopie babbeh even if it’s hard, so that argument fails unless when you can stick your hand into fire and feel no subconscious pushback.
6 Likes
I lean child. The Asperger Daddeh comics were really funny to me because the joke was treating the fluffy as a rational being, which is how I’d do it. I think they’d be able to learn a whole lot, and therefore be more entertaining, with appropriate interaction. That makes fluffy ownership more of a hobby than a regular pet relationship in my universe. Teaching them is like a game where the enemy is biologically programmed stupidity.
7 Likes
Of course it was original it did not exist till I typed it
oh the wise one, tell me, how can someone achieve your level of rightness about everything ever, in existence, forever?
5 Likes
Yes but the response was already in your mind with only specifics not existing in your head pre meditated. Judging by most of your posts you tend to disagree with Occulus and assuming we use basic logic that a computer can work with then it’s not that original. It’s a stock response made up of If then statements triggered by external objects.
@Mr_Owl Be born me.
5 Likes
That would assume that teaching a fluffy to care for poopie babies is not a feature meant to teach children morality
What, a disapointment! : D
1 Like
And yet I knew exactly what you were typing before you finished it
5 Likes