Subject: Official designation?
Author:
Posted on: 2009-01-05 05:02:00 UTC
I don't believe I've seen those referenced before.
-
Cult of the Smut Carver-permission? by
on 2009-01-04 03:17:00 UTC
Reply
May I use the Cult in an interlude? My idea was for Warren to come across a luckless pair of its cultists carving a scene from Celebrian into a wall. He would then go completely nuts, as that series led to his suffering a mental breakdown before he joined the PPC, and attack them... Thoughts?
-
Another Question& a Wars! Sue by
on 2009-01-04 20:43:00 UTC
Reply
The question:
What's the Star Wars universe's official designation?
The Stu:
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/4651314/9/Family_Bonds
Someone forgot to tell the author that the roles of annoying kid and wesley are filled quite well by the canons, thank you very much. -
well by
on 2009-01-05 04:25:00 UTC
Reply
I believe it's just known as the SWverse, Star Warsverse, etc....or the GFFA, for Galaxy Far Far Away.
-
Oh, oh my... by
on 2009-01-05 04:30:00 UTC
Reply
So I could make an official designation (as is true for the Batman verse)?
I know what the fan names are, but I was referring to the Flower's NATO alphabet/random string of numbers and letters version... -
Official designation? by
on 2009-01-05 05:02:00 UTC
Reply
I don't believe I've seen those referenced before.
-
Re: Official designation? by
on 2009-01-05 05:09:00 UTC
Reply
All continua have an official designation, as laid out by the Flowers. I've seen multiple different references to this...
Here's the only one I can remember off the top of my head:
http://community.livejournal.com/tawaki_ppc/9504.html
FJÆ-4432-120-BK-1 is the Batman verse. -
I've only seen that reference. by
on 2009-01-08 02:36:00 UTC
Reply
Of course, there is another referencing system, which is where we get World One (ie, the Real World).
As I recall from (read: I've just checked) Tawaki's mission 29, the long version is the Despatch Continuum Identification Code, presumably usually used internally by Despatch, who need to be precise about these things. The World One etc version seems to be used primarily by the DES. Both of them are apparently gaining more currency (New Caledonia has been described several times as in World One, I think, and obviously Tawaki's used the long form) but I don't think either of them are standard.
My current theory is that the DES are numbering worlds which have doors to HQ (with Earth being World One out of courtesy; presumably Origin was World Zero), while Despatch are trying to be organised about it. Most of the rest of the PPC doesn't care either way.
However, as stated, that's just how I'm mentally rationalising it. It may be right, it may be wrong.
hS -
Hmm by
on 2009-01-05 05:12:00 UTC
Reply
Well, I've seen far more where the consoles and the Flowers just referred to the continua by name.
-
Re: Hmm by
on 2009-01-05 05:15:00 UTC
Reply
I suppose the Agents could just know what the letter strings mean or geuess from the fic itself...
-
Or it's schizo tech by
on 2009-01-05 05:20:00 UTC
Reply
You know? Not all consoles might do it the same way, owing to how odd the PPC is. I'd assume there'd be more than one filing/designation system, and good old temporal uncertainty did the rest, so now they're in use at the same time. Confusing is PPC HQ's stock in trade.
-
So if we've learned one thing... by
on 2009-01-05 05:25:00 UTC
Reply
it's that continuity is all but impossible?
-
Continuity in technology, anyways... (nm) by
on 2009-01-05 06:52:00 UTC
Reply
-
Sorry, but no. by
on 2009-01-04 11:15:00 UTC
Reply
I abhor it and anything associated with it. Even if I didn't, Huinesoron would smite me if I gave you the Permission. Try something else, please!
-
...I was under the impresison that the Cult wasn't 'allowed' by
on 2009-01-04 04:26:00 UTC
Reply
Not outright banned, but there was some fuss with permission regarding the person who created it - I forget who - and I thought the entire thing was abandoned. Though that may have been what prompted hS to make his clear definition of what PGs don't do.
No thoughts to help you ther, Ugolino. I never much liked the idea of that cult in the first place. Sorry. -
I created it. It's dead. by
on 2009-01-04 11:07:00 UTC
Reply
It was never meant to be more than a nusiance organization in the first place (as well as an explanation for the mentions of unemployment in the New Caledonia town when PPC Canon explicitly stated that the PPC is in a constant state of underemployment). The only way that I could write anything about it again is if I get Permission(which is impossible for the time being) and write at least one mission(also impossible). While my writing career is not ended, I don't think I can risk messing up any established Canon (PPC or otherwise) for the time being.
-
So... by
on 2009-01-04 18:51:00 UTC
Reply
that's a no?
Just for the sake of accuracy, I'd like to point out that the Cult either exists or is believed to exist by several Agents. That makes it canon, unless it's retconned out as a myth or something... -
It is retconned out as a myth ! by
on 2009-01-05 10:12:00 UTC
Reply
I don't want it, I think it's a bad idea as well (thank you kgarret, have some chocolate) and I don't want it mentioned again. I'm sorry, but I'm going with the majority of the Boarders. Have some consolation prizes, if you want.
-
Re: It is retconned out as a myth ! by
on 2009-01-05 16:04:00 UTC
Reply
I see.
-
I should have itacalized 'is'. by
on 2009-01-06 11:22:00 UTC
Reply
Also, I'm sorry. Again. I just don't like being reminded of my old crimes against the PPC Canon.
-
Again, I'm sorry. by
on 2009-01-05 10:15:00 UTC
Reply
Please...
-
Don't bother, it was a bad idea. (nm) by
on 2009-01-04 12:17:00 UTC
Reply
-
Me, too. by
on 2009-01-04 09:24:00 UTC
Reply
I think the verdict was that it had gone too far and was not to be taken any further, and I don't think it was ever really PPC canon (insofar as such a thing exists at all). My feeling is that mentioning it would have the flavor of a joke in poor taste, but then, I was never a fan, either.
~Neshomeh -
I agree with you. (nm) by
on 2009-01-04 11:09:00 UTC
Reply