The PPC Posting Board - Latest posts

SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS

Backslash: "Whew! Normally this is the part where I'd throw a major fit for ending up in second place, but I'll just suck it up this time around because nothing I can say will ever change anything by this point. Almost half of us died by complete accident, including me, and the victor most likely managed to remain the last one standing by sheer dumb luck rather than, from what Whitney told me, that epic battle that concluded last season. Whomever was in charge of this whole thing probably wasn't doing a very good job, at least as far as I know. For my taste, I'm glad to be not only in the top three like Whitney was last time - higher-ranking than her, in fact! Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Whitey - but also to not have to worry anymore about getting myself killed! Huzzah!

"...I am never doing that ever again."

A thing we may want to keep in mind in the course of this discussion is that no rule can ever perfectly account for every hypothetical scenario. There's always going to be the potential for cases that fall outside the norm. So, we should try to cover what's most likely to occur, and not worry too much about the outside chances. If/when they come up, we should maintain the flexibility to interpret the rules as needed. That way we don't get ridiculously specific things like prohibiting unmarried women from parachuting on Sunday. (This is apparently a real law in Florida.)

So, if the rule were a one-year statute of limitations, and we clearly observed someone deliberately waiting one year to harass someone, that would, IMO, give the rules against harassment precedence over the statute of limitations. It would reveal a level of cold, calculating malice that we would certainly not wish to tolerate.

Also, I think most things that would warrant an exception to the statute would be permaban-worthy in the first place. Threats, abuse, etc.

So, that's my case.

~Neshomeh

(Yay, shiny!)

... it sounds like you're saying that if someone attacks someone, apologises, then attacks them in the exact same way a year later, the victim shouldn't point at the first incident and say 'uh hang on they clearly just plain hate me'.

Assuming the incident wasn't something that enters One Last Chance territory, which I guess would be different (but how different? If I got a Last Chance warning in 2007, and was good for ten years, would I face an instaban for doing the same thing again?)

It's not an easy question. I guess that's why I asked it.

hS

* <<< This is your gold star for being the first person to post!

I completely agree there needs to be some sort of statute of limitations. However, your half-life suggestion would mean that the longer someone has been here, the longer their parole has to be in order for something to be dropped. If you or I managed to really offend someone, it could still be thrown in our faces for five or six years (!) after the fact. Even if someone's been here, say, four years, that's two where they have to be a saint if they don't want the old thing dredged up again.

I'd say, if someone has gone a year without any repeat of the offensive behavior, that's probably a reasonable amount of time after which most things ought to be let go. That also means that if you've got a grievance with someone, you've got a full year to bring it up and seek a resolution or else get over it and move on. I would hope that adequately addresses the needs of both sides.

I'm sure others will have different ideas, though.

~Neshomeh

P.S. I probably won't be able to contribute much until Thursday, when I have a day off. I am not abandoning the discussion. {= )

(Reminder that you're absolutely allowed to redo the same summary as someone else.)

Oh, take me back to the start
Ginny tried to protect Harry from his own mind. It played tricks on Harry the same as Tom still played tricks on Ginny.

"Preciousssss..."

Ginny Potter (nee Weasley) sat bolt upright in bed. That hissing voice, the sudden chill down her spine, could it be... but he was dead, gone to dust years ago--!

"No, I won't let you have him; you can't!"

"But I can, precious, and I will."

That was Harry! Ginny swung her legs out from under the covers, fumbling for her wand. Her husband was fighting... someone or something... and she was damned if she was going to let him do battle by himself.

"He's ours, my preciousss," the something hissed, and with an icy shock Ginny realised two things: the evil voice was also Harry's... and James wasn't in his crib.

White-faced, teeth clenched, and wand extended, Ginny crept up to the bedroom door. Beneath Harry's argument with... she refused to consider what it could be that would twist her husband's voice into that hissing parody that summoned back her darkest nightmares... she could hear the soft burbling of her son. He was in there, with... that... and that seemed to be winning the fight.

Ginny drew a slow, deep breath, braced herself, and then shoved through the door, a Petrificus Totalus on the tip of her tongue. If Harry had been taken over, she had no time for half measures-!

She stumbled to a halt, staring down in bewilderment. Harry Potter knelt on the floor next to their clearly-enthralled baby, wrestling with his own hand. "No!" he exclaimed. "You're not allowed to tickle him!" Then, making the most ridiculous face, he hissed, "I am the greatessst tickler, precious, you can never sssstop me!"

James made a bubbling noise, reaching out one chubby hand towards his father's wriggling fingers. Harry chuckled, patted his cheek, then looked up at Ginny.

"Sorry, love," he said, smiling clean up to his eyes, "he was fussing, so I brought him in here... did we wake you?"

---

Because there's nowt better than turning angst into fluff. Hey, it said she tried to...

hS

Now doc needs to go fight Mattman so I can find out who I'll be losing to. ;)

hS

Keeping Issues Private

I don't know what we can do about this. We've rewritten the Constitution so many times to try and highlight it. Heck, even this thread's precursor barely got a handful of replies, and I can hardly believe that they're the only outstanding issues. I don't know.

Ignoring Complaints

I agree that this is a problem, and that the desire to not stir up more trouble is probably mostly responsible. We need to be sharper on this - probably not immediately if there's a broader argument, but after a couple of weeks. Which is basically what I'm doing here, heaven help me.

Abandoning Discussion

Please. Don't. Do. This. >:(

Bearing Grudges/Lack of Reform

These could have been lumped together as 'patterns of behaviour' (yes, that old bugbear). That's a concept which has previously been used to justify attacks as 'I remember you doing this thing twice, years back, therefore I interpret everything you do in that light', but it can also be a real problem: people who do something, apologise, and then do it again six months later.

I don't feel that it's reasonable to require an apology to be accepted before it counts. If the apology is recognised as sincere by the PPC community, then a grieved party who refuses to accept it (either by specifically rejecting it or by not replying) is being unreasonable; actions they take stemming from that refusal might be attacks under the Constitution.

I do think that throwing in a quick reminder (after an apology) that under the Constitution, doing the same thing again might lead to a ban, would be a good idea - it makes it clear that we're not just saying 'you apologised so we'll forget all about it'. This can be done by anyone - it doesn't need to be Official Language, just a note to say 'we remember this happened, make sure you change'.

And, uh, then we need to remember it happened, and hold them to that apology. If they keep doing the same thing over and over, or if they start acting in a way that suggests they don't feel bad over what happened, we should revisit the problem.

(Am I done? I mean, haha no, but I think I'm done for this hour or so.)

hS

Coordinating in Private

I really dislike this kind of thing. There can be legitimate reasons to do this - I remember a few Permission Giver email chains which went 'this person has been turned down so many times, what are we doing wrong/how can we get the point across', and I've seen a few 'this person is upset, pls email them' in my time - but when it's used to attack someone or stir up resentment against them it's just... bad. Don't do it. :(

I don't know if it's punishable. I don't know if it could be, unless it happens in the Chat. If it is, I think it's probably better to focus on the actual behaviour (talking about people behind their backs) than the specific nature of it.

Assuming Authority

I recuse myself from the first half of this discussion. :-/ For the second: I think saying 'I've done a lot of work with this concept, so please talk to me before changing anything' is okay. Saying 'I have plans for this so lay off' isn't. But it's not bannable.

Argument from Oldbie

I... honestly haven't seen this. I remember a bare handful of people shutting down requests for them to calm down with 'you weren't there, you don't know how bad it was', but apart from that I don't think this is an actual thing. When someone behaves badly, we make them apologise, whoever they are.

A far more likely bias is 'how much you like/know someone'. A relative newbie who's on the Discord can get a lot of support against an oldbie who stays on the Board, whichever side is right, purely because the Discorders (Discordians?) know them better.

Splitting the PPC Community

I feel this is bad behaviour. I think attempts to do it should probably be whacked with a hammer. I may have strong Opinions about this.

hS

Battlefield Mentality/Lashing Out

This is specifically highlighted in the Constitution (Article 3), and I feel it's something that should be dealt with at the time. I don't accept the idea that you shouldn't tell someone to calm down when they have a legitimate case against someone else, though I do acknowledge that doing so without also supporting that case is bad behaviour.

For past incidents where the person has backed down (afterwards), I don't think we need to look at it again now, though if they've done it repeatedly it may be worthwhile. Times when someone has gone attack-dog and then just fallen silent and never apologised may need a look.

Personal Issues Elsewhere

I... don't know. On the one hand, the idea of 'he flamed my story BAN HIM FOREVER' sounds really bad to me. On the other hand, ignoring stalking behaviour off-site and asking the stalkee to stay in the same space as the stalker sounds equally bad. I don't know.

Jumping to Conclusions

Don't do this. Just... don't do this.

I don't think individual past incidents of this need to be dealt with now, particularly when the jumper apologised for it. I think that if someone does this repeatedly, it's probably worth considering if they need to have it specifically raised as a concern; I don't know that it's a banning offence.

hS

Disrespecting your Betas

My view here is that by asking for a beta, you obligate yourself to listen to and respect their views - but not to actually do what they say. Not waiting a reasonable time for them to offer their opinion on your story is bad, but if you disagree with them on how your story should look, you have the final say. It's best to offer them a chance to retract their name as a beta, though.

I don't think this is a disciplinary offence, frankly. It's a question of polite courtesy, not something we need to punish.

Bad Conduct as a Beta

I don't feel that this should be punishable in itself. After all, a beta has no control over the document - at any time the writer can just kick them off and move on.

But it's entirely too possible for the 'bulldozing' to turn into bullying behaviour, whether through insults ('you're not listening because you're stupid') or simple power dynamics (oldbie/newbie, extrovert/introvert, even male/female). And that is a ban discussion in the works, and if it's gone unresolved before, it should be resolved now.

Not Taking Concrit

I feel that this is bad behaviour, but not something for punishment. Taking concrit well is a hallmark of a good writer - when someone fails to do it, we should politely but firmly encourage the correct behaviour.

Falling Short of PPC Standards Elsewhere

I do not feel that we have the right to police people's actions outside the PPC community. Is it a bit hypocritical to write badfic while being in the PPC? Sure. Might mentioning it on the Board lead to you not getting Permission? Also sure. But it's not a bannable problem, at all.

hS

We've had a fair number of incidents where people have dredged up things that happened years ago, when nothing had happened in between. Given that people can change - and particularly since a lot of PPCers are still teenagers, who are noted for changing fairly rapidly - I think we need to put a cap on this sort of thing.

Rather than giving a precise number of years, can I suggest 'half their time at the PPC' as a ground rule? If someone did something more than half that time ago, and they haven't repeated anything of the sort, it really shouldn't be dragged up or used as evidence against them.

~

Entirely separately, this thread is likely to produce a number of precedents for what is/isn't considered bannable behaviour. We've had a few others recently. I'm vehemently against cluttering the Constitution with them, but a 'Concilliary' page on the Wiki might be a good place to collect them. On the other hand, it might promote legalistic thinking and be a terrible idea, I dunno. It's not a suggestion I'm particularly invested in. (Obviously it would be a 'behaviours not names' page.)

hS

This is quite possibly the oldest PPC game, so if this is your first experience of it, it's got a long history. The rules are simple:

-I post a set of bad, plothole-ridden, and just plain weird summaries taken from Fanfiction.net.
-Without reference to the original story, you pick a summary and write a short fic which meets the description, makes a coherent story out of it, and is also highly amusing.
-Multiple people can respond to the same summary, so there's no need to claim. (Nor is Permission needed - while it's certainly possible to have PPC agents in FtP fics, it's not common.)
-Have fun! This is a game, it's about fun.

I've taken these summaries from the top 5 categories each in Movies and Books over on FFN, to get a nice range. I've also added ((little notes)) after each one, because I… like the sound of my own typing? I'unno.

Oh, take me back to the start (Harry Potter): Ginny tried to protect Harry from his own mind. It played tricks on Harry the same as Tom still played tricks on Ginny.
((Starting you off easy...))

Runaway Twin (Twilight): Bella and Edward don't expect to have a baby, but Bella is surprised when she finds out she has twins. After both twins are born, one twin runs away, and they don't know what to do. They look for Renelle, but she is nowhere to be found. When she bumps into the Cullens one day, her life changes.
((You could've had one where the Cullens watch Harry Potter, but I thought that was a bit too meta.))

Song of the Sea (Percy Jackson): (Percabeth AU) Long ago, when pirates ruled the sea. There was a great and violent rivalry between the Pirate King and Warrior Queen, but what is better to end hate than love.
((Pirate King. Warrior Queen. Don't say I never give you anything.))

Asking About the Sunset (Lord of the Rings): 3 days after they leave Rivendale, the Fellowship is setting up camp for the night, but they won't rest in peace. Pippin is bothering everyone with a question that is very ridicules! Will Pippin ever get his answer? Please read and review!
((I passed over one about an elf 'with the heart of a dwarf' for this one, so make it good!))

150th Hunger Games A part of ourselves (Hunger Games): This Hunger Games will be crueler than any other. Just when they thought the Capitol couldn't get worse it did just that. SYOC open. Form on my profile,
((Apparently 'future Hunger Games' is far and away the most common story in the fandom.))

Family Reunited (Star Wars): What happened between to Obi-Wan and Athena during Order 66 and can they reunite with all their loved ones.[One-Shot in between Kidnapped and Rescued]
((OMF(orce) Percy Jackson crossover?!?!))

A Little Unsteady (Avengers): It's been three days since Loki joined the Avengers Initiative, two months after the battle of New York City. Loki's body decides to kick off the celebrations by fainting...multiple times. How will the other Avengers react to this new development? And will Loki feasibly be able to join the team if his problem continues? Reviews are candy!
((Reviews are candy! Yeah, I passed over a Harry Potter crossover for this.))

Ocean's Eyes (Pirates of the Caribbean): Cassandra Holbrook doesn't belong in 18th century Port Royal. But she'll do her damn best to fit in, saving her adopted sister from pirates with the help of a pirate and blacksmith, all while pissing of her crush included.
((I have no idea what I've just read. But at least the dreaded character 'JACKXOC' doesn't make an appearance.))

The Omnikinetic (X-Men: The Movie): What happens when Artemis, the virgin goddess, has a child- the grandchild of the Wolverine? Eliza Howlett, half mutant and half god, was born for one reason: to bring humanity and mutants together. She's entrusted to her father, Chase, who is to raise her and protect her; but when her mother returns briefly and Chase dies after a series of mishaps, Eliza must set off on her own.
((OMM(utants) PERCY JACKSON CROSSOVER?!?!?!?!))

The Return? (High School Musical): I know I know, it's a note xD. BUT I'M TELLING YOU RIGHT NOW. If you do not read this and you read my stories, you will A. Probably not have a story you like updated B. Miss out on some pretty chill stuff C. Miss important information
((I know nothing about High School Musical, so here's a summary that doesn't either. ^_^))

Have fun!

hS

Disrespecting your Betas

This has come up a few times in a few different ways. The two most prominent are:

-Asking someone to beta, then posting the story before they've given the go-ahead. Sometimes their name stays on the piece (falsely implying that they've completed the betaing), others it's removed.

-Not taking comments by your beta seriously. Sometimes a beta makes a suggestion, only to have it flatly ignored for no actual reason. This can feed over into 'Not Taking Concrit'.

Bad Conduct as a Beta

This can take several forms, but the most common is trying to bulldoze over the writer's objections to reshape their story according to your ideas. It can also include being asked to beta a specific aspect, but unilaterally extending that to the rest of the story.

Not Taking Concrit

There are two ways this tends to manifest:

-Ignoring concrit. Sometimes, people have an issue with their story pointed out to them and react by saying 'well, it's published now, so whatever'.

-Overreacting to concrit. There have been incidents where criticism (constructive or otherwise) has been interpreted to mean that the fic should be taken down immediately, when this wasn't the intent of the critic.

Falling Short of PPC Standards Elsewhere

If a PPCer unapologetically writes a (non-PPC) badfic and refuses concrit, should the PPC act in some way? What if they engage in canon-breaking roleplay, or other such forms of 'fanfic'?

Battlefield Mentality/Lashing Out

Tending to happen as an effect of one of the other issues, this is where someone reacts to a perceived attack on themselves or another by getting highly aggressive. They may engage in personal attacks on the people they perceive as wronging them, and usually don't back down until the conversation has gone quiet.

Personal Issues Elsewhere

There have been incidents where two PPCers have had an incident elsewhere on the Internet. If this occurs, should they be expected to pretend nothing has happened while in PPC spaces? If one party attacked the other (in a way that had nothing to do with the PPC), should the PPC community consider this behaviour as a possible banning offence?

Do the answers to these questions change if the incident happened before the people in question joined the PPC?

Jumping to Conclusions

The Constitution specifically warns against assuming the worst of people. Despite that, misunderstandings that could have been resolved by asking have turned into large-scale arguments. Even the little ones, the times when someone jumps on something only to back off a post later, contribute to the problem.

This also includes the other kinds of making assumptions - assuming someone is innocent because they say so (without getting the full story from the other side), and assuming that because someone says something about another person it must be true.

Coordinating in Private

Sometimes, when someone does something that another person disagrees with, the latter will take to emails, PMs, or private chats to try and gather support for taking action against the perceived perpetrator. This may include individual or group discussions, and should probably include discussions on the Chat about incidents on the Board.

Assuming Authority

Sometimes members of the PPC create authority for themselves, issuing demands to other members of the community or to the PPC at large. This also includes attempts to lay claim to a section of the PPC canon, which is broadly speaking open to everyone.

Argument from Oldbie

The issues that have been suggested regarding people's length of time in the community can be broken up as:

-Long-time members of the PPC community may use their length of membership as an argument in itself, rather than having a genuine case to make.

-Newer members of the community may listen preferentially to oldbies, regardless of the relative value of their arguments.

-It may be difficult to take any disciplinary action against long-time members of the PPC, due to their length of membership.

-Conversely, disciplinary action may be taken too quickly against newbies, particularly when they're in conflict with someone who's been here longer.

Splitting the PPC Community

There are two things I'm putting under this heading:

-Creating a private, semi-private, or otherwise non-open space under the PPC banner. This doesn't include having a private chat with someone, or even several someones, but is about making a new PPC forum, chatroom, or other such location which is intended for PPCers, but isn't open to all PPCers.

-Holding decision-making discussions in such a way that the entire community doesn't get to contribute. This is most obvious through the chat, but can also occur in private emails, or on the Wiki (because people don't generally browse the Talk pages).

Keeping Issues Private

With alarming frequency, people are popping out and saying 'I've had so many problems with this person!', when the PPC community as a whole hasn't had a clue about it. What can be done to help people raise their problems sooner, rather than letting them build up?

Ignoring Complaints

Sometimes, when someone raises a concern, whether because of the way they do so, the personalities involved, or other discussions cutting in over them, those concerns are not discussed. Obviously this needs to avoid Jumping to Conclusions; a middle ground is needed.

This also includes the possibility that complaints which do not include specific allegations and/or a specific call for action can be ignored.

Abandoning Discussion

The Constitution specifically makes resolving issues the responsibility of everyone in the PPC community. Despite this, discussion of many incidents tends to peter out before a conclusion is reached. If someone is refusing to apologise for their actions, but is doing so without attacking anyone else - particularly if they have been attacked during the discussion - it is rare for anything to be done about it.

Equally, when several votes are called in succession, the later ones get far fewer votes, whether or not they are as important as the earlier.

Bearing Grudges

If someone has acted badly, recognised that they have done so, and sincerely apologised, the Constitution makes it clear that they get a second chance. On occasion, people have brought incidents like this up much later, revealing that they did not consider the situation resolved. The acceptability of this may depend on whether the apology was explicitly accepted at the time.

Covered under this is the question of how long has to pass before someone can be assumed to have changed, and therefore (absent other evidence) it's unreasonable to throw the same thing in their face despite the time passing.

As part of this discussion, it might be good to consider whether the 'second chance' concept requires a formal warning, or whether it can be assumed to be delivered along with the apology.

Lack of Reform

When someone does something that isn't itself One Last Chance/banworthy, but does require an apology, there is an expectation that they will improve their behaviour after apologising. If they continue in the same fashion afterwards - either immediately or after an interval of better behaviour - it is rare that anything new is done about it.

This may be coupled with attempts to downplay their previous actions. It may also lead to their apologies being considered insincere.

Concilliary: (noun) 'A conclave intended to bring a community back together'. New coinage based on conciliar ('relating to a council'), 'conciliatory' ('intended to pacify or soothe'), and 'reconcile' ('come back together').

A month ago, events showed that there were deep rifts in the PPC community. Two long-time members left; three others have told me they want to; several more have gone very quiet. This cannot go on.

I asked everyone who felt there were past events or behaviour hanging over the community to email me in confidence and tell me what the problems were. I promised I would compile the whole lot of them and bring them to the Board for discussion. Well - here I am.

I'm taking the advice VixenMage gave last month, and starting out this process by looking at behaviours, not individuals. For pretty much every item I list, I could name at least two people who have been brought up in connection with them, so no, there are no 'veiled attack on Person Z' items here.

The issues are broken up (fairly arbitrarily) into four categories/subthreads; you don't have to reply to them all, but you should really at least think about all of them. I'll also make a 'general comments' subthread for anything that doesn't fit under one of the four; please try to keep everything in a subthread, to make things fractionally easier to navigate.

I'm presenting the problems in varying formats, without much effort at consistency, but I think for all of them we need to be thinking about the same set of questions:

-Is this behaviour the PPC should condemn? Is it a potential banning issue?
-Where it has happened in the past and gone unresolved, do we need to require apologies/bans for the perpetrators? How long after the incident is this reasonable?
-What should you, as an individual, do if you see or suspect this behaviour in the future?

A few ground rules:

-The PPC Constitution is in full force during this conversation, as in every other conversation in the PPC community.
-Please do not discuss this thread on the Discord. Having portions of the discussion 'off the record' is directly contrary to the purpose of the Concilliary.
-Everybody's opinion is welcome.
-When it looks like things are settling down, I will do my best to summarise the consensus on each of the points, and we'll proceed from there. At that point, depending on the outcome of the discussion, we may discuss individual incidents and people.
-Please don't wander off and abandon the discussion. It's important. Yes, it's going to be tiring hashing this all out, but I really believe it will lead to a stronger PPC community at the end.

hS

PS: In the interests of keeping all our sanity, I've topped and tailed this thread with two others which between them showcase what I think are the three key aspects of the PPC community: fannish geekery, excellent writing, and educated snark. If it all gets too much for you, pay a visit to one of them. :) ~hS

Victory goes to doctorlit this time round. http://replay.pokemonshowdown.com/gen7anythinggoes-566472666 Congrats and good luck with the rest of the matches!

Come and watch! http://play.pokemonshowdown.com/battle-gen7anythinggoes-566472666

(I guess spoilers for, uh, everything?)

So I'm rereading the Discworld series, and it sprung out at me that there are a lot of semi-sentient hats on the Disc.

The big two are the Archchancellor's Hat and the crown of Lancre, both of which are explicitly imbued with some of the personality of their previous bearers (the AC's Hat talks and all). But what about Rincewind's hat, which snaps him back to himself in an instant in Interesting Times? Or the Opera Ghost's mask, which has a similar effect?

Even right down to the end of the series, Pterry kept up the hat symbolism. The Shepherd's Crown features, apart from its titular talisman, Tiffany being 'crowned' by a halo of bees at one point. So I guess, really, this leads to three big questions:

1/ Are there any other explicitly-imbued hats lying around on the Disc, other than the AC's and that crown? I wouldn't be surprised if there were.

2/ What happens to Granny's hat? Does it go to Tiffany? Because if there's anyone who'd accidentally invest their headgear with part of their personality...

3/ In light of all this, do you think anyone has dared try Pterry's hat on since his death...?

hS

... that stuffed CAFs, dinosaurs, other megafauna, shiny rocks, and an option to head down to Steampunk Central are more PPCish than a bunch of art. But 'at's me.

hS

Personally I'd prefer either the Natural History or Science Museum, but like I've said before I don't really mind.

Although the other two times I've been to the Tate were quite funny. Mainly because it was with my GCSE Drama group and some of them had no sense of time and/or direction.