THE THING HAS BEEN DONE.
e: fixed typo in title.
ee: Also many thanks to those in chat (you know who you are) who came up with the names for both the ice cream and dad.
THE THING HAS BEEN DONE.
e: fixed typo in title.
ee: Also many thanks to those in chat (you know who you are) who came up with the names for both the ice cream and dad.
As I said in chat, this is a phenomenal tale that comes closest to my actual interpretation of Wondertainment insofar. Well done, you've earned my +1
You're damn skippy. Doctor Steel is but an avatar of Wondertainment! We shall be its Toy Soldiers, to bring forth a new age of Fun, Joy and Whimsy!
Scary thing is, if this was a bit darker in tone, his song "Lament for a Toy Factory" could fit rather well.
I hope she kicks the Factory's ass.
dis
(this is better than it has any right to be, it's great)
I wish I could upvote this twice.
It's just so whimsical!
I'll be honest with you djoric, I'd have given you a +1 just for the corgis alone. The rest of the story was just the sweet sweet icing on the corgi cake.
I never even entertained the idea of characterizing Dr Wondertainment. I mean I've never been opposed to the idea, per se, but I sorta liked the nebulous undefined nature of whether there even was a doctor, or if they were human, or what their deal was.
But now there's this. And it's everything I could ever have wanted Dr Wondertainment to be. +1
Huh, upvote added for characterizing Dr. Wondertainment and being kind of interesting in doing it, too.
Huh, upvote removed after seeing yet another "lol bees" reference (a.k.a. the "your mom"/"that's what she said" of the Foundation).
Looking forward to more, not looking forward to stupid references for the sake of stupid references.
That is the stupidest, most petty, and smug downvote reason ever.
Except for the part where I didn't downvote, so there's that.
If it had said "the Factory is cakes and the cakes are lies," my feelings would have been the same. I don't like unfunny, played-out references being shoehorned into stuff, as it usually feels forced and throws off the story for me. It might be "petty," but I'm not getting "stupid" or "smug." A stupid reason for downvoting (or neutral voting, as the case may be) would be "you used the letter 'r' too many times" while smug would be, I dunno, "needs moar Flaubert references, pleb."
I know several pettier ones off the top of my head. ;)
EDIT: It doesn't really help that he didn't downvote. People are allowed to vote as they please so long as it's based on the article itself.
Living the dream, or dreaming the life?
And strictly speaking, the only actionable or malicious sort of downvote would be one where someone were to say, for example, "I don't like the way Pata H complains about other people's downvoting habits, so I'm going to downvote everything they ever write because I've decided I don't like them." That would definitely be stupid and petty, and against Site Rules. Just about everything short of that (including all the ones Gaffney mentions above) are perfectly allowed. A downvote is an expression by a reader that what is being written does not meet up to his or her expectations of what should be on the site or on the page. That might include typos, use of "amnesiac", or reference to Zoroastrian astrology.
reference to Zoroastrian astrology
This is a bit late, but I have downvoted things in the past for innaccurate representations of Achaemenid civilization.
Because, honestly who confuses the Shahanshah with a "Caliph!?" Who!?