Depending on how the 'crying moe' effects you, this is either the ultimate stress toy or killer-rage fuel. I'd say there's hours worth of fun to be had here, personally.
The idea is fun -- light teasing and reasonable punishment for a change, instead of torture, murder, and disproportionate retribution. What I don't understand is why, if he's annoyed by its crying, he'd try to make it cry more, instead of stopping it -- by violent or non-violent means.
Also lol at the suggestion that torture and "disproportionate retribution" is not a reasonable punishment against a yukkuri. And you can't murder a bun.
But the anon said at the start that he was annoyed, rather than entertained, by its crying, so "it's entertainment" doesn't work in this case. I'm not objecting to making it cry in general... just the fact that it seems to make no sense here when the anon would apparently be motivated to stop its crying -- whether by giving it a playmate/toy, or by smashing it, taping its mouth shut, or something else violent/abusive.
Murder is the intentional killing of a sapient being. I'm not sure how it being a "bun" changes that. Nor am I certain why it being a yukkuri makes torture or punishment far out of scale to the wrong inflicted "reasonable."
Also, your trolling me here and on the group because I like yukkuris rather than liking to torture them, and prefer to discuss their biology and mental properties rather than ways to torment them is getting old. I'm not going to explode, no matter how much you do it, so please get your "lulz", or "drama", or whatever it is you're after somewhere else.
lulz. Yukkuris themselves don't make any sense, and they have properties which make people not act all that reasonable, either. But you should know that.
If that's your definition of murder as well, might as well classify hunters, farmers and fisherman as murderers. Of course, only person I ever knew to do that was a member of PETA.
(btw, disagreement is not trolling and I've never discussed how to torture them. Cool drama bro)
And of course, one thing that's missing is the result. We have the setup, we have the climax, but no aftermath. For all we know, it might have worked. (We also don't know anon's ultimate purpose; if his purpose is to scare the ko away, he might very well be successful.)
Hmm... this crying Reimu seems to be like the ones from post #13583 Judging from which, it might be his intention is to frighten it, and genuinely make it cry.
"Disagreement" also doesn't involve you seemingly actively seeking me out to belittle me, mischaracterizing my points, and generally being rude. Such as when you characterized me as categorizing all harm to yukkuris as abuse, when you complained about the length of my posts, when you suggested I get out of the fandom because I don't enjoy it the way you do... am I forgetting anything?
Also, you make an invalid comparison to try to make me look foolish. I specified sapient creatures. Which doesn't include fish or animals (at least, none that we're aware of). It does, however, include humans, youkai, and yukkuris. And if you argue that it should only apply to humans, rather than sapient beings in general... then killing youkai isn't murder, either. An odd position to take, to be sure.
^^ You're forgetting that this isn't the place to start drama wars. Also lol conspiracy theories.
Might as well elaborate. I didn't tell you to get out because you didn't enjoy it the same way I did, I said if you can't stand the idea of violence against yukkuris, then it's best if you leave. It's pretty clear that you can't. Let's look at post #14354 Despite the fact that in this case, the slaughter of the yukkuris is necessary to protect the human territories, you state that is "completely senseless slaughter", "excessive", "a death trap for the sake of a death trap", and then stating your intention to create a "revenge fic" that involves the people defending their homes being punished for doing so.
Ah, but you know the icing on the cake? "I like yukkuris too much for stories that end like that to be anything but upsetting to me. " You better be prepared for a lot more.
You continue to leave out the part where I calmed down, and after discussing it with Toawa, decided that it was ultimately justified and I'd responded too harshly originally. And this isn't the first time I've pointed out that's happened to you, yet you persist in ignoring that part You continue to belittle me -- and have since even before the particular postings that seem to attract so much of your ire -- and continue to selectively respond to my posting history to characterize me as a deranged, irrational harpy, rather than someone who had a strong reaction to a nasty twist ending and over-reacted -- which is what I actually was.
This is why I characterized you as trolling. Now, if you could kindly obey Toawa and take this back to the group, as I attempted to, rather than continue to disrupt OYP, I -- and I think the other posters here, although I can't speak for them with certainty -- would be most grateful.
I wouldn't. I like to watch the sparks fly. Especially when people pull out the "yukkuri aren't sapient because they're edible" chestnut, which is endless lulz. But I'm probably in a distinct minority here, so never mind.
First, the law's definition of murder says that for it to be murder, the victim has to be human. Yukkuris aren't human, and killing them would, at the worst, be animal cruelty.
Second, if you expand the definition of murder to include non-humans, how many thousands of nameless fairies have you gunned down without batting an eye playing Touhou by now?
Yeah, my fairy kill count has to be massive by now. The thing is though, doesn't it say somewhere that the fairies constantly respawn somewhere else eventually anyway? So no matter how many times I replay stage 1, my kill count is never really climbing. Those fairies don't count =)
^Nah, in games where things respawn you have to kill them first to get them to do so. In fact, respawning is based around killing.
^^^^Of course I don't include where you "calmed down" as it took someone else to actually make sense. The first reaction is the truest show of character. I do have great respect for Toawa, a good contributor to our community, but seeing as you've basically admitted that you disliked OYP because they might disagree with you, it's much more interesting to keep it here. Plus it results in great lulz.
Anyway, >>First, the law's definition of murder says that for it to be murder, the victim has to be human. is what I was getting at. Sure, you can say that they're "sapient", and I wasn't denying that. They're talking, walking stressballs. If you call murder the "killing of a sapient being", then sure, scientists are murderers under that definition. An odd position to take, to be sure. I don't think anywhere in the world legally defines murder like that.
>> but seeing as you've basically admitted that you disliked OYP because they might disagree with you
Uhm... where did I do that? I'm not just denying this after-the-fact to look better. I honestly have no idea what you're talking about here. My best guess is that it's somehow related to my saying that it was rather a shock going from the viewpoint on the fandom the Church of Latter Day Yukkuris provides to this site, which... isn't a value judgment, but simply a statement of fact. As was saying that this sudden shift and seeing the depths and popularity of yukkuri abuse was initially upsetting to me.
My only other guess was when I suggested that I can't speak for the other posters here with certainty. Another statement of fact. I can try to intuit their feelings, but they're not a hive mind, and I'm not a representative of said communal entity, so anything I say is nothing more than an educated guess.
>>The first reaction is the truest show of character.
Or it could just be a knee-jerk response to something they find unpleasant, prior to actually considering it, and it's merely a show of them at their basest, lowest level, rather than a fully-rounded presentation of all aspects of themselves.
Similarly, although they have a strong influence, first impressions are actually a poor judge of character, since you've only seen one aspect of them and can't judge them as a full person.
>> If you call murder the "killing of a sapient being", then sure, scientists are murderers under that definition. An odd position to take, to be sure.
Uhm... I question whether you know what sapient means. It means a thinking, feeling, reasoning, self-aware being on a level similar to a human. The only animals on Earth besides humans that might qualify as sapient are some of the other great apes, and even that's debatable. If you count sapient beings, few if any scientists are "murderers."
Distinguishing between "sapient being" and "human" in real-life laws is pointless, as there's no recognized sapient beings in real life besides humans.
Also, speaking of Touhou... not only do I believe it's established that fairies don't "die" in the same sense as humans (it's a temporary inconvenience, rather than permanent ending of their life), but I believe it was similarly established that the "Spell Card" system used in the Windows games is a form of non-lethal combat -- which is why bosses and midbosses can show up in multiple games, or multiple times in a single game.
Anyway, Tea... I don't appreciate you damning me forever for one incident you dislike. Most of my comments here and in the group have been polite and reasoned. I over-react on one occasion, and suddenly, it appears that nothing can convince you that I'm anything but a shrill, irrational, hateful, self-righteous person.
Oh, and Theodoric, I realized another issue with your statement. You're referring to fairies I gunned down. In the sense I was speaking of, I haven't gunned down a single fairy. They're fictional, and I'm real -- we're at two different levels of fictionality. However, yukkuri-torturing anons are at the same level of fictionality as the yukkuris they torture, or else it would be impossible. They're equally "real", so considerations of the morality of their treatment of "real" yukkuris is very different from discussion of the morality of people at OYP enjoying pictures thereof -- which isn't my thing, but I have no moral objection to.
I apologize for the double-post after already making a giant post, but it just occurred to me that Tea might have been talking about the fact that I'm upset about him "disagreeing" with me, in which case there's two issues with that:
a) Tea does not represent OYP as a whole.
b) I don't particularly dislike Tea, though I am annoyed with him.
c) It's not the disagreement that annoys me -- it's that it's done in a rude, dismissive, belittling manner, and involves selectively choosing my actions and statements in order to paint me in as negative a light as possible.
Note to self: When you realize a third issue, go back and correct the listing of the number of issues, to avoid looking foolish. (And now it's a triple-post! Yay. x.x; Should really be more careful)
>>Distinguishing between "sapient being" and "human" in real-life laws is pointless We could consult a dictionary instead. The definition might be more generous, using "person" instead of "human", but the jist is the same; for a killing to be murder the victim has to be a person. Even with that slack, the definition doesn't stretch enough to cover yukkuris.
A yukkuri is not a person. Therefore, killing a yukkuri is not murder. End of story.
Hint: posting a 3 pages long rant on how you're right, other people are wrong, and how you're being wrongly persecuted by everyone, doesn't actually help your reputation.
Actually, that depends on how you define "person." Person is normally defined as "human", which would indeed exclude yukkuris -- and any number of other sapient beings, both fictitious and potentially existent -- but definition 4 at Dictionary.com -- listed as the philosophical definition -- describes it as "a self-conscious or rational being", which would make yukkuris people. They aren't very bright, but they are aware that they exist as a discrete entity and are, in a limited fashion, capable of reasoning.
Even if we do restrict personhood to humanity, and thus the act of murder to humanity, thus making it impossible to murder -- among other fictitious and potentially real entities -- cyborgs, sapient extraterrestrials, uplifted animals, elves, dwarves, and youkai... the fact remains that regardless of the term you choose to use, unless one takes an arbitrarily species-centric viewpoint, killing any sapient creature is not a substantially different act from a moral perspective.
that's a facepalm @ the yukkuris are people comment. Yukkuris are not people, end of story. No need to try to redefine an imaginary object as anything more than an imaginary object.
Whether you want to define yukkuri-killing as murder should be reserved into a fanfic where you explore consequences and reprecussions for said "murder". I'd be all up for reading something like that.
I like how most of these points basically involve ignoring the reality of things and looking at everything from some deep, philosophical perspective. Which of course, results in the facepalm worthy statements above.
As for ignoring the reality of the situation... the reality is that yukkuris are entirely fictitious, rendering violence against them merely violent media, no more or less moral than any other violent media, and rendering any discussion of their properties, mental capacity, biology, etc. pointless. Going strictly by the reality of the situation is thus, significantly much less fun than considering the hypothetical situations ensuing from treating them as if they were real entities. Which was the assumption behind pointing out that they meet the philosophical definition of "personhood." Technically speaking, they don't, simply because they don't actually exist, and thus can't think or reason, just be represented as doing such. They're "characters" or "fictional constructs", not "people". I should have specified that base premise in my statement, but thought it was implicit. I apologize.
And now, I abandon this discussion thread as I've been planning to for a while. ... Hopefully. At the rate I'm going, I don't hold out a lot of hope for that eventuality.
I never said I was being wrongly persecuted by everyone. I just said I was being misrepresented by Tea. As far as I can tell, no-one else here has misrepresented me or belittled me, so I have no issue with anyone else here... and my issue with Tea amounts to "I'd like them to stop." As for saying "I'm right and everyone else is wrong"... yeah, that actually was basically what that amounted to. That's what debating is -- saying "I'm right, you're wrong, and here's why."
As for why the anon is scaring a yukkuri when it's crying apparently annoyed him:
The page seems to be an advertisement. real world ads have dumber things, like people modeling the regular way to do something, except they're too clumsy to use a BLANKET.
Yeah, there are sooo many of those. Especially when it comes to kitchen gadgets. "Congradulations, because you don't have our device, you've just spilled a massive quantity of food everywhere because you apparently don't realize that you actually possess *two* hands, and could have used one to stabilize the jar while opening it."
Heh, I hear what you guys say. I can see some pretty entertaining use for this, still... buy a load of koyukkuris, and as they get settled in at home, chuck in puff reimu and scare the hell out of them.