THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Comic Discussion => QUESTIONABLE CONTENT => Topic started by: jwhouk on 01 Apr 2012, 17:51

Title: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 01 Apr 2012, 17:51
I've had a crappy weekend. Here's your WCDT.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: specter177 on 01 Apr 2012, 17:55
I have a feeling we'll be in space at least another week. Friday was too big a cliffhanger to just end the arc on.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: celticgeek on 01 Apr 2012, 19:09
Spathe ham and waffles.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) QC IN SPAAAAAACE... Week ELEVEN!?!11!
Post by: Method of Madness on 01 Apr 2012, 19:41
Hopefully your week beats your weekend.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 01 Apr 2012, 19:47
Considering I'm on vacation for nearly three weeks starting Tuesday, yeah.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 01 Apr 2012, 20:33
...You know, if I'd actually been HOME this morning, I might have made this into a "The END of Questionable Content!" thread....
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: FunkyTuba on 01 Apr 2012, 21:24
yeah I think we're still in space, probably... don't really want to leave
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 01 Apr 2012, 22:31
Comic's up...

(reads YB)


...Okay, now I think he's just trolling us.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: slydon on 01 Apr 2012, 22:35
Hanners blowing a hologram?
That is truly outrageous.
 :lol:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: SomeCanadianWeirdo on 01 Apr 2012, 22:53
Someplace someone is ranting about launching a jihad against Yelling Bird for profaning the sacred name of the Goddess Hannelore. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Alchemy on 01 Apr 2012, 23:13
Glad Jeph thought to scoop up otterphile before someone else did.
 
http://www.otterphile.org/ (http://www.otterphile.org/)

At least, I assume it was Jeph.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: SomeCanadianWeirdo on 01 Apr 2012, 23:29
If it isn't he's got no problem with someone pretending to be him.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Kugai on 01 Apr 2012, 23:35
Nice try YB,but none of us is fooled by your trying to cover up your Otterphillia
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Dr. ROFLPWN on 01 Apr 2012, 23:56
Someplace someone is ranting about launching a jihad against Yelling Bird for profaning the sacred name of the Goddess Hannelore.

And yet, the image of Hannelore and Station is causing this someone to fap even through their rage and tears
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: cesariojpn on 01 Apr 2012, 23:59
(http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a180/cesariojpn/Iron%20Badger/ceee1ca3.jpg)

So, who wants it?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: pwhodges on 02 Apr 2012, 00:00
At least, I assume it was Jeph.

"Created by @jaku", whose last tweet was "I must stop buying domains..."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Dr. ROFLPWN on 02 Apr 2012, 00:05
(click to show/hide)

So, who wants it?

THAT IS A RIVER OTTER, NOT A SEA OTTER, GET THAT TRASH OUT OF HERE >:(

Fucking river otter sluts giving a bad name to sea otter purity >:(
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: VonKleist on 02 Apr 2012, 00:43
morning.
no comiiic.


My week´s of to a pretty shitty start. Still coughing up my lungs.
Well, at least I get to stay at home and only do some light work.

And by light work I mean play Baldur's Gate 1 like a huge nerd.

Hurf Durf, off to the kitchen for ze jellytoasts and coffee sans milk.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: cesariojpn on 02 Apr 2012, 02:47
(click to show/hide)

So, who wants it?

THAT IS A RIVER OTTER, NOT A SEA OTTER, GET THAT TRASH OUT OF HERE >:(

Fucking river otter sluts giving a bad name to sea otter purity >:(

I have more Otters, but there is nudity, so....... :-P
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: WAYF on 02 Apr 2012, 03:48
Hello Yelling Bird. Back on form after a couple of previous failed attempts, I see.
I think perhaps you're just jealous that you're not getting any action. :P

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Border Reiver on 02 Apr 2012, 05:17
Or he and Jeph's cat finally found a way to bond.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Soulsynger on 02 Apr 2012, 06:28
I would've figured Jeph for an aardvark sorta guy ... but I don't know him, so... meh.

INB4 at least one person showing up at his booth at the next con wearing an otter costume.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 02 Apr 2012, 07:19
Hanners blowing a hologram?
That is truly outrageous.
 :lol:

Oh, that was a gem, that was.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Alchemy on 02 Apr 2012, 12:44
Hanners blowing a hologram?
That is truly outrageous.
 :lol:

Oh, that was a gem, that was.

Yep. Rules of the internet. Someone, somewhere, made this an actuality last night.
Take that Hannelore Fanboys
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: no one special on 02 Apr 2012, 15:55
Hanners blowing a hologram?
That is truly outrageous.
 :lol:

Oh, that was a gem, that was.

ohhhhhhhhhhhhh now i get it!!!
hahaha, thanks for the assist, I didn't get that joke at first!  LOLOL!!!!!   :laugh:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 02 Apr 2012, 17:15
Are otters related to martens?
If not the pine marten, maybe the reed marten?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Alchemy on 02 Apr 2012, 19:13
Are otters related to martens?
If not the pine marten, maybe the reed marten?

Wikipedia tells me they are in the same Family (Mustelidae)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jmucchiello on 02 Apr 2012, 22:06
It still took her until panel 5 to figure out that this was a date date. I love it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 02 Apr 2012, 22:09
It's true, then. Holograms just can't hold their alcohol.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 02 Apr 2012, 22:14
I like how Station has a hologram of his jacket over his seat. It's a nice touch.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Carl-E on 02 Apr 2012, 22:14
Let's just rename the comic, "Everyone Loves Hannelore", shall we? 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 02 Apr 2012, 22:31
Interesting that instead of a "yes" or a "no" Hannelore went for being flustered.

But then, we don't really know all her reasons for moving to Earth.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: SomeCanadianWeirdo on 02 Apr 2012, 22:37
Does anyone seroiusly think she'll stay?

Of course given Jeph's comments a while back it's possible she will stay.  Not permanently, but I can imagine a plot arc where everyone visits mopeyville because she's not around.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Kugai on 02 Apr 2012, 23:09
Hoooooooo   boyyyyyyyyy!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Toe on 02 Apr 2012, 23:29
I wonder how Station's holo-glass was filled, exactly. (It's empty in 2155, but full in 2157.) I mean, there's no holo-bottle visible. Did Station create a bottle and then make it disappear? Does the not-glass just suddenly appear to be full of not-wine? Or maybe Station makes a holo-fountain appear in mid-air somewhere that shoots holo-liquid into his glass across the room?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: bicostp on 02 Apr 2012, 23:34
Maybe Station could visit the surface using a mobile emitter like The Doctor from Voyager. That's better than Hannelore getting put on a bus space station.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 02 Apr 2012, 23:40
I'm pretty sure his glass just appeared to be filled, when she tried to pour it went right through.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: snubnose on 02 Apr 2012, 23:43
What ? Already leaving space again ? Not cool ! :-\
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: gangler on 03 Apr 2012, 00:08
I feel like Station's about to turn this into a Smart House type situation. He wouldn't of course. It must just be my anti-AI prejudices showing.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Blackjoker on 03 Apr 2012, 00:22
I'm thinking we're going to see a massive regression in Hannelore...at least if this progresses much further.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Binary on 03 Apr 2012, 00:28
So the technical term for "rubbing your junk all over some greasy otter booty" would be... frotterage?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Near Lurker on 03 Apr 2012, 00:33
...why is the wine brown?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: pwhodges on 03 Apr 2012, 00:42
Station has a real glass set on the table next to the bottle, as well as his hologlass.  Hanners must have been quite flustered to have chosen the hologlass rather than the real one to pour into when they were close together or even slightly overlapping.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: WAYF on 03 Apr 2012, 01:06
Well, this is going to require some extremely delicate handling in order to... oh who am I kidding? It's all going to end badly. Hannelore probably won't regress, as such, but she does seem quite freaked out right now.

Possibly because Station rather bluntly said that he'd like to convince her to stay, with the added romantic implications. But that's really not what Hannelore needs; relatively speaking, she's only made any friends on Earth and learned how to interact with them very recently in her life, and Station even suggesting that she might throw that all away to stay in space at this stage strikes me as very poor form indeed. :x
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: pendrake on 03 Apr 2012, 01:14
For comic #2157...

1. I am very thankful that this strip was not the weekend cliffhanger.  Waiting to see the results of this strip for 3-4 days would have been awful... :psyduck:

2. I notice the table set-up has salt-shaker & pepper-grinder, as well as plates and napkin-wrapped silverware.  Makes me wonder what courses Station has had prepared for this date?

3. Art-wise, Panel #5, with Hanners' " ...! " expression really caught my eye, with the slightly-off frontal shot.  Good draw on Jeph's part there.

4. Poor Station, whatever he had desired, I am fairly certain it is not quite turning out as he envisioned.  But then, when does wooing a girl like Hannelore ever does...?

5. I also agree with Method of Madness in that the Station's holo-jacket draped over the chair was a nice touch to detail.

6. @bicostp...  "Please state the nature of your medical-  why am I in a coffee shop wearing a barista apron...?"

7. @Carl-E...  Everybody Loves Hannelore.  Starring Ray Romano as Marten Reed, Ed Asner as Pintsize, and Tyler Perry as Hannelore Ellicot-Chatnam.

8. @pwhodges... Huh, I only noticed the real glass to holo-glass with that point-out.  Another good touch to detail there.

9. As for how will QC in Space end...?  Station falls on Northampton.  Everyone dies.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: TinPenguin on 03 Apr 2012, 01:37
4. Poor Station, whatever he had desired, I am fairly certain it is not quite turning out as he envisioned.  But then, when does wooing a girl like Hannelore ever does...?

FYP
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: cpflux on 03 Apr 2012, 02:22
That is the best "Shocked" face that I've seen JJ draw, and it could be for a long time.

It really is that good.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: cpflux on 03 Apr 2012, 02:35
...why is the wine brown?

Space wine.

There *is* the possibility that Hanners knew that Station would ask her to stay prior to jetting up there, and was merely dreading the time when that question would be asked. On the other hand, she strikes me as a person that's emotionally transparent, so a Shocked Hanners would mean that she's really surprised that he'd ask that question.

Also, butts. Jeph's seemingly gone a pretty long time without drawing them. At least, for the finished product - I dunno about the stream.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: westrim on 03 Apr 2012, 03:19
4. Poor Station, whatever he had desired, I am fairly certain it is not quite turning out as he envisioned.  But then, when does wooing a girl like Hannelore ever does...?

FYP (Fixed Your Post)
Fixed your post. Initially, the only thing I could think of that FYP might mean was five year plan; this is why, outside of texting, using acronyms for common language phrases is bad.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: pwhodges on 03 Apr 2012, 03:31
But the use of acronyms, like FYP, was established usage in email and on bulletin boards (as forums were once called) well before texting even came along.  (Also note what I've done to the acronym using BBCode.)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 03 Apr 2012, 06:02
So... what would happen if Jeph decided to keep Hannelore up on the station?

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: StevenC on 03 Apr 2012, 06:12
Angry mobs of fans in front of his house with pitchforks and torches?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 03 Apr 2012, 06:27
The e-mail, Twitter and Tumblr equivalent, more likely. Shebly and a couple TopatoCo hunter-killer droids could handle the ones who do show up. Might need to take Shebly to the conventions.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Black Sword on 03 Apr 2012, 06:31
I'm 100% one of the regulars predicted this would happen, but given how long the space arc has dragged on, I can't tell you who it was. Probably one of the wise old sages.

I think J^2 aims to provide more details to Hanners' backstory before he disarms the tactical nuke he set up. It'd be a massive undertaking to successfully write Hanners out of the story for the foreseeable future, and I think he only writes someone out when he has nothing interesting for them to do. That's what happened to Raven, who then popped back up for the quantum dino before she once again faded away, still available for physics jokes.

Of course, the possibility remains that I'm so wrong I accidentally destroyed an advanced civilization on the other side of the galaxy. If so.... my bad.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Skewbrow on 03 Apr 2012, 06:33
So... what would happen if Jeph decided to keep Hannelore up on the station?

Alternative A: a spin-off webcomic

Alternative B: forum meltdown (in addition to the mob storming Jeph's house and/or his inbox)

---

So this is what the "date" is about. I just wonder whether Station is acting on his own, or whether he has discussed it with HannerDad.

Hannelore doesn't seem to notice that her left thumb is in the flame of the candle. Doesn't look like a holocandle to me.

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: squab on 03 Apr 2012, 06:36
I'm 100% one of the regulars predicted this would happen, but given how long the space arc has dragged on, I can't tell you who it was. Probably one of the wise old sages.

I think J^2 aims to provide more details to Hanners' backstory before he disarms the tactical nuke he set up. It'd be a massive undertaking to successfully write Hanners out of the story for the foreseeable future, and I think he only writes someone out when he has nothing interesting for them to do. That's what happened to Raven, who then popped back up for the quantum dino before she once again faded away, still available for physics jokes.

Of course, the possibility remains that I'm so wrong I accidentally destroyed an advanced civilization on the other side of the galaxy. If so.... my bad.

Look at Hanners reaction. She is NOT going to stay on the station.

@ Skewbrow: I think the comic just lacks depth. Her thumb is a few inches from the candle, we just can't tell due to the view.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Carl-E on 03 Apr 2012, 06:39
[I think the comic just lacks depth.


I totally took his the wrong way for a second...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Skewbrow on 03 Apr 2012, 07:26
@ Skewbrow: I think the comic just lacks depth. Her thumb is a few inches from the candle, we just can't tell due to the view.
Possibly. On second thought I get perspective dizziness from trying to figure it out. The bases of the candle and the hologlass are next to each other on the tablecloth, so they are at the same distance from the camera. Unless Hannelore is twisting her forearm into an unnatural position, her hand should be further away (than the hologlass) from the camera. Meaning that her hand should be behind the candle.

OMG. I think that I just proved myself GUILTY of nitpicking :oops:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: dreed on 03 Apr 2012, 07:27
this strip reminds me of something which always bugged me with ST: VOY.

Where are Doctor's or in this case Station's eyes.  Does he see through his holographic eyes or does he have cameras in every corner, scanning every molecule in the room giving him image of everything.

I wondering because the second option means that he can see upskirt and that is just awesome.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Throg on 03 Apr 2012, 08:18
@dreed: Yellow card on the banhammer.

Or, if you wanna take it to that extreme, he probably can surreptitiously do an MRI of her gall bladder. HAWT.

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 03 Apr 2012, 09:10
Might need to take Shebly to the conventions.
Angry fans would pet Shebly and then forget why they were angry because dogs are fuzzy.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Sorflakne on 03 Apr 2012, 09:27
What?  Noooooooo!  Don't take Hanners from us!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: themacnut on 03 Apr 2012, 09:41
No worries. I'll be shocked if Hannelore actually decides to stay. It's simply that Hilarity Will Ensue while Hanners figures out how to let station down gently.

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: JohnTheWysard on 03 Apr 2012, 10:12
I'm wondering if Station tried to hook up with Hannelore before - was it Station, or her father, who sent her the "robo boyfriend"? Was it going to be animated by Station's AI perhaps?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 03 Apr 2012, 10:57
I guess I'll be told I'm talking crazy, but no one seems to have considered that maybe, just maybe, Station just would like his friend Hannelore to stay around, without any further intention. It's only a date "in a manner of speaking" (I remember someone pointing it out last week).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: pendrake on 03 Apr 2012, 11:29
10. @dreed... Station probably has cameras and scanners all over the station, though peeking upskirts or through bras is probably far less enticing when you can scan down to the molecular level :wink: .  And as Throg pointed out, internal organs &/or molecular lattices are not exactly "hurr-hurr" material for most people ("most"...).  As for The Doctor of ST: Voyager, it was generally assumed that The Doctor could only view things from his humanoid perspective (for simpler mechanics).  If you really want to know, you can probably consult Memory Alpha (http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Portal:Main).


11. @JohnTheWysard...  Professor Ellicot-Chatnam sent the prototype robo-boyfriend, waaay back at #1010 (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1010).

Archive Jockey, vanish!  *smoke bombs away*


12. If Jeph removed Hannelore from the mainstream QC continuity...

*angry mob approaches*

[Jeph]: Oh god, here they come...  Shelby!  Protect me!

[Jeph]: No, Shelby!  Don't sniff them!  No...NO, Shelby!  Don't lick their hands and faces!  Shelby, you stop giving them happy-wags and -pants at being petted!

[Jeph]: Shelby, no!  Don't roll over on your back for belly-scritches!  Bad girl!  Bad- Okay you know what?  Forget it, I'm getting Chiyo and the fat bunnies instead...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 03 Apr 2012, 11:57
I don't see Hannelore disappearing, but it would be a bold move that would avoid the danger of a rut and allow more airtime for the rest of the ensemble.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Redball on 03 Apr 2012, 12:30
I don't see Hannelore disappearing, but it would be a bold move that would avoid the danger of a rut and allow more airtime for the rest of the ensemble.
A weak, wimpy move would be OK too: writing her mostly out of a few story arcs.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Border Reiver on 03 Apr 2012, 13:38
While we deal with the Dora wedding arc.

Or is it the weeding arc for Dora's new garden and Jeph just could read his notes...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 03 Apr 2012, 13:44
Might need to take Shebly to the conventions.
Angry fans would pet Shebly and then forget why they were angry because dogs are fuzzy.

That would work, too, though Jeph has described Shebly as a ravening juggernaut protector who will ravage and rend anyone who appears to threaten Jeph or Mrs. Jeph. Likes the kitten, though.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 03 Apr 2012, 14:32
I think Akima might have some art for that.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Welu on 03 Apr 2012, 17:21
I'm interested to see what Hanners will say. I highly doubt she would stay on the ship, even temporarily. Hearing her reasons would be interesting though.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 03 Apr 2012, 17:25
We're coming back to Earth (after a YB strip) to what?

Dora really IS getting married.    3 (4.2%)
Faye has decided to move in with Angus.    5 (7%)
Tai has quit school and moved to San Francisco.    1 (1.4%)
Padma replies with a "FU" e-mail.    14 (19.7%)
Something something, something somethings.    10 (14.1%)
(I had a bad weekend, sue me.)    5 (7%)
Spathe Ham - THE MUSICAL!    4 (5.6%)
Yelling Bird strips - five days a week!    7 (9.9%)
But there's so much more to do in space, we can't leave...    22 (31%)

Total Members Voted: 71
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: ysth on 03 Apr 2012, 20:13
I'm wondering...Station had to at the very least have known about BF bot.  Did he approve or even encourage?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Akima on 03 Apr 2012, 20:54
But the use of acronyms, like FYP, was established usage in email and on bulletin boards (as forums were once called) well before texting even came along.  (Also note what I've done to the acronym using BBCode.)
IMHO Westrim is just a GOM. WRT texting, tweeting and other low-bandwidth systems, English is just so verbose, though many other languages are worse (http://www.economist.com/node/21551466).

I think Akima might have some art for that.
DSL probably means this (http://forums.questionablecontent.net/index.php/topic,4954.msg1038485.html#msg1038485).

Strip 2157 (trying to work out if it is yesterday's or today's in everybody's timezone is too hard) is awesome. It is just packed with little visual gags and Hanners' shock-face is excellent. The wine pours like some sort of thick oil though.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: haikupoet on 03 Apr 2012, 21:05
Twitchy-eyed Hanners is creeped. the. fuck. out.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 03 Apr 2012, 21:30
(blinks @ Akima's post)

How, exactly, do you DO that????

(peeks)

Ohhhhh. NM.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: ysth on 03 Apr 2012, 21:50
I always thought it was either "in regard to" or "with respect to", not "with regard to".
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Omega Entity on 03 Apr 2012, 22:23
Interesting that instead of a "yes" or a "no" Hannelore went for being flustered.

But then, we don't really know all her reasons for moving to Earth.

Hanners when flustered has traditionally gone red in the face (at least, in the past). No, I believe that's her 'no way in hell' face, while trying to change the topic of conversation. As I recall, she wasn't happy at all living on the station before, which would explain why she would be loathe to return to it for more than a temporary basis.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: pwhodges on 03 Apr 2012, 22:44
I always thought it was either "in regard to" or "with respect to", not "with regard to".

In order of my preference:
   with regard to
   with reference to
   with respect to

Other similar usages:
   in respect of
   in regard to
   as regards
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: ecstaticjoy on 03 Apr 2012, 22:59
I wanted a "Stay" option that didn't involve Hanners being written out of the strip. Couldn't QC check up on her? I love the idea of an OCD chick getting into a relationship with a nice, clean hologram. It's never been done! (Has it? Have The Simpsons already done it? *sigh*)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: ecstaticjoy on 03 Apr 2012, 23:03

Alternative A: a spin-off webcomic


exactly
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 03 Apr 2012, 23:18
I'm still not sure what DSL and IOK are.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 03 Apr 2012, 23:35
I'm not sure either.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 04 Apr 2012, 00:01
Oooooooooh, people were talking about acronyms, didn't even see your quoted post, assumed "DSL" was defined in that linked...yeah, it's just easier to call me stupid.

(What are IOK and WRT, though?)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: MamiyaOtaru on 04 Apr 2012, 00:05
aaand I'm still glad this wasn't a Friday strip.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: cpflux on 04 Apr 2012, 00:11
WELP

Cue two weeks of Words & Feelings & More Words.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 04 Apr 2012, 00:12
Well that settles the whole therapist/professor dilemma. He loves her, but like a family member.

Also, I...I think there's some space dust in the room...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 04 Apr 2012, 00:14
So ... you folks who were creeped out: Are you maybe a little less creeped out?

Unless this turns into "The Wreck of The River Of Stars," which also featured a smitten ship's AI.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: iduguphergrave on 04 Apr 2012, 00:16
No, I'm no longer creeped. Now I'm too busy dying of cute looking at little Hanners.

But seriously I see it's not creepy now.  :-)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 04 Apr 2012, 00:22
I just realized. I think Station might have convinced Hannerdad to have a party entirely because of this.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 00:29
This explains a LOT.

Station was the reason.

Hm. Wow.

I just realized. I think Station might have convinced Hannerdad to have a party entirely because of this.

And I'd be willing to bet you're right.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Soulsynger on 04 Apr 2012, 00:32
Do Isaac Asimov's laws of robotics apply in QC?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Kugai on 04 Apr 2012, 00:33
In the words of Michael garabaldi

"This could get real ugly, real fast."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 00:33
Do Isaac Asimov's laws of robotics apply in QC?

I wanna say "no", because I swear Jeph said something to that effect...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 04 Apr 2012, 00:36
Regardless of what Jeph said, I'm pretty sure Station's openly disobeyed the Lieutenant, thus violating the Second Law.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: squab on 04 Apr 2012, 00:50
Regardless of what Jeph said, I'm pretty sure Station's openly disobeyed the Lieutenant, thus violating the Second Law.

Would Pintsize be, well, Pintsize if those laws were actually in effect? He must have broken rule 2 on several occasions.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Dr. ROFLPWN on 04 Apr 2012, 00:53
Ehhhh...

Station is still kind of a creeper in my opinion? I dunno. He still seems...skeevy and irresponsible, especially given his ascendant status. Or at least in regards to his own interpersonal relations.

Like...I dunno. His backstory with Hanners here was sweet? But he seems too fawning. Too eager to get back to when she depended on him, despite professing to approve of her independence.

On the other hand, if Jeph wrote Hanners out of the strip I would feast on the schadenfreude for months. It would be delicious. That and no more Hannershipping. No more Hannershipping can you IMAGINE.

So I guess I'm in favor of leaving her there but I don't entirely trust Station? I am the worst, my viewpoint sucks. ._.

EDIT: edited for detail/clarity bluh bluh
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: CompSarge on 04 Apr 2012, 00:55
Awwwwwwww young Hanners is so freaking adorable!  :laugh: Jeph needs to draw her like that more, for real.

I hope that Hanners doesn't stay. I don't think she will, but Jeph's done crazier things in the past...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Eohelm on 04 Apr 2012, 00:59
Regardless of what Jeph said, I'm pretty sure Station's openly disobeyed the Lieutenant, thus violating the Second Law.

Would Pintsize be, well, Pintsize if those laws were actually in effect? He must have broken rule 2 on several occasions.

I feel Pintsize is the epitomy of all that can go wrong with the Zeroth Law.

Hi, everyone. Just made a profile. It was my reward for reading every strip in the past few days. The missus introduced me to the series.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: WAYF on 04 Apr 2012, 01:27
I think if Asimov's Laws of Robotics applied to the AIs in Questionable Content, they wouldn't be enough like humans, and they'd rapidly become dissatisfied with being an inferior species by default (since they have these arbitrary limitations built into them). I'm sure that anyone who was building a truly sentient AI would consider something like that.

On the subject of the most recent comic:
It's nice to see that AIs can get so genuinely emotional. We had Momo's tearful Christmas-time inspirational speech (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2085), and now we have Station trying to convince Hannelore to stay. I'm still convinced that Hannelore should leave, particularly because a life in space is so isolated, but Station makes his argument as convincing as reasonably possible.


(Fixed the link - Method)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: CrowFairy on 04 Apr 2012, 01:55
Jeph said somewhere that he won't consider a spin-off until after the comic is done--and possibly not even then. I tried to find it but had no luck. :/

But what I'm getting at is that it's doubtful that such an integral part of the comic will leave permanently.

Anyway...
If Hanners stays, she'll keep in touch, and we can focus on other characters. She'll miss her friends too much and be sad and probably get sent back for her own health. Plus, it would waste a lot of fuel, because I bet powering a space ship twice can't be cheap. It would be extravagant at best. Yes, I know her family has money, but that would be wasteful.

If she leaves for Earth with everybody else, we have to see her be all depressed for letting Station down. But cuteness, because all the other characters will cheer her up. And maybe cute chats between her and Station so they'll keep in touch.

Honestly, IMHO, I think she'd go crazy staying on the station. She needs that human interaction--people her own age who don't expect anything of her except to be herself. I'm sure the scientists are great and all, but hardly anyone but Station has reached out to her or seems like they would be good friends to her. They are too busy and don't have a lot in common as people (even though they do to some degree in academics). She needs her Earth friends (and they need her). They keep her sane. A station like that is sterile. On Earth, she can force herself into situations that challenge her and her OCD. And Hannelore knows this. As much as she loves Station and her father and everything and everyone else up there, she has to  know that it's not the right decision for her. There will be conflict and alternating emotions because she has a big heart and doesn't want to abandon Station, but in the end, she just can't stay. It's illogical, not to mention harmful to her well-being. There are reasons why she went to Earth. The station just isn't where she needs to be.

TL;DR: Hannelore probably won't stay with Station because it would be detrimental to her mental and emotional health. It would be very out of character to stay because she knows that Earth provides her with what she needs to conquer her fears and grow as a person.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Akima on 04 Apr 2012, 02:08
I always thought it was either "in regard to" or "with respect to", not "with regard to".
Don't blame me; take it up with my English teachers.

I'm still convinced that Hannelore should leave, particularly because a life in space is so isolated, but Station makes his argument as convincing as reasonably possible.
Station's "argument" seems selfish to me. It's all about him, isn't it? Hannelore's needs don't really come into it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: akronnick on 04 Apr 2012, 02:09
So... what would happen if Jeph decided to keep Hannelore up on the station?

If she goes there will be trouble,
But if she stays it will be double.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: TinPenguin on 04 Apr 2012, 02:10
Like...I dunno. His backstory with Hanners here was sweet? But he seems too fawning. Too eager to get back to when she depended on him, despite professing to approve of her independence.

Exactly. Essentially, Station is asking her to throw all her progress out of the window and return to a dependent state. It's like a mother whose child has become successful and independent, begging the child to move back in so she can tuck them up in bed every night again. Sure, it's understandable, it's sweet, but it's completely illogical, irresponsible, and counter-productive to the emotional well-being of your former charge.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: gangler on 04 Apr 2012, 02:18
I feel like it would be less creepy if he hadn't specifically avoided contacting her through the means she'd provided when she was on earth. If he misses her that much then calling once a week would be a good place to start. Send an e-mail her way once in a while. All that good stuff.

I can certainly appreciate his dilemma as a stationary being, but the part where he never calls is the part where it all seems to fall apart to me.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jmucchiello on 04 Apr 2012, 02:23
I feel like it would be less creepy if he hadn't specifically avoided contacting her through the means she'd provided when she was on earth. If he misses her that much then calling once a week would be a good place to start. Send an e-mail her way once in a while. All that good stuff.

I can certainly appreciate his dilemma as a stationary being, but the part where he never calls is the part where it all seems to fall apart to me.
How do you know he doesn't call? If the interactions aren't funny, why would they appear "on camera"?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jmucchiello on 04 Apr 2012, 02:25
I'm still convinced that Hannelore should leave, particularly because a life in space is so isolated, but Station makes his argument as convincing as reasonably possible.
Station's "argument" seems selfish to me. It's all about him, isn't it? Hannelore's needs don't really come into it.
It is exactly like Akima said above why I'm still a little creeped out by Station.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: gangler on 04 Apr 2012, 02:29
I feel like it would be less creepy if he hadn't specifically avoided contacting her through the means she'd provided when she was on earth. If he misses her that much then calling once a week would be a good place to start. Send an e-mail her way once in a while. All that good stuff.

I can certainly appreciate his dilemma as a stationary being, but the part where he never calls is the part where it all seems to fall apart to me.
How do you know he doesn't call? If the interactions aren't funny, why would they appear "on camera"?
It was mentioned here (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2125)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jmucchiello on 04 Apr 2012, 02:30
If Hanners stays, she'll keep in touch, and we can focus on other characters. She'll miss her friends too much and be sad and probably get sent back for her own health. Plus, it would waste a lot of fuel, because I bet powering a space ship twice can't be cheap. It would be extravagant at best. Yes, I know her family has money, but that would be wasteful.
Umm, spaceship probably does supply runs back and forth to earth at least on a monthly basis. Do they have a chicken coop somewhere on the station? Where would the get fresh eggs from if there weren't monthly supply runs?

I actually would assume the three of them just hitched a ride on a regularly scheduled flight rather than a specially booked flight. Although, it also might have been cool if there were other Earth-bound friends on the flight with them to attend the party.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: pendrake on 04 Apr 2012, 02:50
For comic #2158...

1. Another strip I am thankful was not a weekend cliffhanger.  Jeph has really been pushing the envelope for story anticipations this week

2. Art-wise, it was a really good panel-to-panel timeline-progression of Hanners...

 - panel #2 - Hanners so deeply reclusive she even hides inside her hair, with only one eye poking out to look at Station.
 - panel #3 - Hanners still curled up, but showing her face.  Also, deep bags under her eyes.
 - panel #4 - Hanners with shortened hair, and being able to sleep restfully
 - panel #5 - Hanners roughly before her stalker-introduction into Marten's life.  And wearing short-sleeves and skirt.
 - panel #7 - present Hanners: short hair, lipstick, piercings, and little black dress.

3. As dramatic, controversial, fan-raging, and just plain sad, as it would be for Hanners to stay up on the E-C space station, I cannot see her doing it, not even for her father if he asked.  Staying up in space would be too "safe" for her.   Where she would progress far less through her psychological problems, and so easily regress, is very much not the character-type that Hannelore is.  Hanners' constant drive to push her limits comes from the kind of chaos you can only find amongst the "earthly" (not just the planet, if you understand my meaning) people she has bonded to through Marten, is what endears her so much to the audience.

4. Either way, someone is going to have a heartbreakingly sad scene.  Perhaps Jeph has been playing Mass Effect #3 to its ending(s)...? :cry:

5. All this leads me to believe we are heading for another major weekend cliffhanger or drama event.  Which also means "QC in Space, Week Twelve(!)"... :wink:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: bhtooefr on 04 Apr 2012, 03:05
Prediction:

Thursday will be further exposition.

Friday will be the cliffhanger, but we'll get to SEE Hanners say no. The cliffhanger is how Station will react.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Technetium on 04 Apr 2012, 03:35
inb4 Station goes full Hal 9000 mode.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Delator on 04 Apr 2012, 04:27
Regardless of the eventual outcome, I am certain of one thing...

...Hanners should grow her hair long again.

She won't though...long hair is a magnet for dust and parasites.  :-P
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Welu on 04 Apr 2012, 05:06
Station's argument is sad but creepy. I understand why he uses the term "puzzle" but it's sort of reminds me of the type of argument  in 90's sitcoms where they say, "Yeah, I only tried to change you because my friends bet me to but then I realized you're actually a human who's quite hot with their hair down and glasses off."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: StevenC on 04 Apr 2012, 05:11
ITT: People still reading way too much into everything.
Not that that is anything new or only happens here.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Sidhekin on 04 Apr 2012, 05:15
Selfish, sure.  Almost human-level selfish.

Creepy, not really.

Unless you start pondering the HAL9000-scenario ...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Soulsynger on 04 Apr 2012, 05:25
[ ... ]
Creepy, not really.
[ ... ]
... hm... Station is so "Edward'ing out" in panel 4, I classify it as creepy enough. °O
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: sluthy on 04 Apr 2012, 05:50
Station is being selfish here. Yes, I can understand his loneliness and desire for her to come back, but can't he see the progress she's made on Earth? Having friends, making physical contact, working at a damn coffee shop? Earth is where she belongs, it's where she wants/NEEDS to be. Moving back into space, she would just end up regressing to a degree.

And it's not like he can't contact her at any time. The only reason he doesn't is because he's too self-righteous to use "such primitive technology" as email, phone or Twitter, instead insisting on a presumably risky operation to put a chip in her brain to assist HIM.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Near Lurker on 04 Apr 2012, 05:56
Yeah, this seems extraordinarily selfish, and I don't know why Hannelore would even consider it.  It's Earth that brought her to where she is today, and there's no way going back to the station could be anything but the start of a long backslide.

Although this strip is making me wonder why she would choose Northampton, specifically, out of the entire country?  What's in Northampton?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Ghanima Atreides on 04 Apr 2012, 06:01
I'm probably reading too much into it, but I'm sensing a touch of emotional blackmail too, on Station's part: "Remember how I sat with you through your psychoses, cared for you and helped you improve, how I was your only friend? Won't you find it in your heart to come back and stay with me now that I'm the one who needs you?"

Also: Part of loving someone is doing things that benefit them without benefits to yourself. For all his affection for Hannelore, Station has been and is still motivated by his own needs: at first she was a pet project, then she became a friend, someone he liked. Then she was gone, and now he wants her back. For himself.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: gopher on 04 Apr 2012, 06:10
A rejected Station could go all HAL on people.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: marsman57 on 04 Apr 2012, 06:32
A rejected Station could go all HAL on people.

I really want this to happen, but it's not Jeph's style. I feel he typically presents the AIs as ultimately human and rarely as cold and calculating. I also feel they are typically shown with a high level of prefection with their flaws being just humorous annoyances, even with Pintsize.

I'd love to be proven wrong though. Some real drama as they try to escape, etc. :)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 06:35
So... what would happen if Jeph decided to keep Hannelore up on the station?

If she goes there will be trouble,
But if she stays it will be double.

Clash quote FTW.

EDIT: And I'm gonna put it down right now - Marigold is going to be the reason why she goes back to Earth.

Friday, she's going to come in and say/do something that's gonna remind her of how far she's come, and politely give Station a "I've got to pay it forward"-like speech.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Throg on 04 Apr 2012, 06:36
This comic made me admire Jeph as a writer: a sense of the fine line that AI's can be human and compassionate, but-not-quite-there. "the greatest puzzle I was ever presented with", "logical next step in your development" vs. "a kind heart, an endless capacity for joy". And there was real pathos in being, literally, Station, hovering over the world, and becoming lonely.

Nowhere, however, does Station imply that he wants Hannelore to regress or become dependent on him again. He wants to enjoy her company, that's all.  Doesn't make it any less selfish, though: Station's gain would be Hannelore's loss. And it seems like Station can't just download/split off his consciousness to follow Hannelore down planetside.

In a weird way this comic reminds me of one of the guest strips (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1973).
 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: bhtooefr on 04 Apr 2012, 06:38
Actually, I think Jeph could pull off a cold and calculating AI, without making AIs seem non-human.

After all, he's pulled off a cold and calculating human (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=732) who does it for profit.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Apr 2012, 07:22
Quote from: Jeph's Q&A on Tumblr
>A question about AnthroPC rights in your latest QA Dump got me wondering about their level of free will. Do they have some sort of rules guiding what they can and can’t do, like the three laws of robotics, or do they have complete free will and could disobey and leave their owners, and even try and take over the world or something if they wanted?

Complete free will. Like I’ve said before, it’s a good thing they seem to like us.

Found that on the wiki.

Quote from: gangler
stationary being
I see what you did there.

Quote from: jmucciello
Umm, spaceship probably does supply runs back and forth to earth at least on a monthly basis. Do they have a chicken coop somewhere on the station? Where would the get fresh eggs from if there weren't monthly supply runs?
They have space rabbits, why not space chickens? But with a hundred people, even if each one stays for a year without a break, Spaceship would be making regular runs.

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DLcygnet on 04 Apr 2012, 08:37
Honestly, I don't see what the problem is.  Hanners has a boy toy in the closet at home.

No really - the male humanoid robot that her Dad gave her. Station could follow her home. What would stop the station from downloading into that particular model of anthro-pc? Or at least making a copy of his programming to avoid leaving the station helpless. And we get yet another new character since Sven and Padma are semi-out-of-the-picture. Winslow is obviously their secret love-child anyway.

They made it work out on Doctor Who. *cough* Rose *cough*
Then again, it didn't really work out in the Phantom of the Opera.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Magdalena on 04 Apr 2012, 08:47
I don't think it's a good idea for her to stay on the station, simply because she's made so much progress. If Station decided to I dunno upload a copy of his program into "android/robot boyfriend" and go with Hanners (though hopefully NOT staying at her apartment) I think he (Station) might be pretty happy.

As a side note, am I the only one who's wondering if Station DID somehow make it down to Earth in "android/robot boyfriend" mode and meet Winslow or Momo-tan - what kind of interactions would occur? Or worse...Station meets Pint-size?

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DLcygnet on 04 Apr 2012, 09:11
As a side note, am I the only one who's wondering if Station DID somehow make it down to Earth in "android/robot boyfriend" mode and meet Winslow or Momo-tan - what kind of interactions would occur? Or worse...Station meets Pint-size?

1, Winslow: "Daddy!"
2, Hanners-Station-Momo love triangle. Cause Momo is just as cute and neurotic as Hanners, what's a guy to do?
3, Pint-size: "You sly dog. Remember, screen shots or it didn't happen." *wink*
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Toe on 04 Apr 2012, 09:12
Umm, spaceship probably does supply runs back and forth to earth at least on a monthly basis. Do they have a chicken coop somewhere on the station? Where would the get fresh eggs from if there weren't monthly supply runs?

If Spathe Ham were merely ferried up from Earth on a supply ship, it wouldn't really be Spathe Ham now would it?

I'm still not sure what DSL and IOK are.

DSL = Dick Sucking Lips.  :-* (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dsl)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Y on 04 Apr 2012, 09:18
I wonder why station can't 'beam' down to the surface from time to time. A satellite dish and a holo emitter in Hanners room should be able to do that.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Apr 2012, 09:20
I wonder if someone accustomed to being a space station would feel intolerably cramped in a humanoid body.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 04 Apr 2012, 09:20
Station probably lumps that in with the other forms of communication that are way more "primitive" than the good ol' brain chip.

Jeez, he is acting the clingy parent, isn't he?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Eohelm on 04 Apr 2012, 10:25
There have been a few different references to HAL on here, but what if that IS Station's reaction? Not the killing, of course, but becoming a cold machine. I doubt he's used to rejection. From anyone. And I'm pretty sure that he will be rejected by Hanners. So his becoming more like a stereotypical "robot" would somewhat be the equivilant to giving Hannelore the cold shoulder.

I'm guessing it will be that, then he comes to his senses, takes over Hannelore's empty robot body, and he lives in Northampton working at an AnthroPC store or something. That way everybody wins. Station can see Hanners, and Hanners gets to go back to Earth. Without Station guilt-tripping her like he is obviously trying to do. He does it politely. He does it sounding very nice and loving. But it's a guilt-trip nonetheless.

And I can still squee about how cute it would be if Marten and Hanners got together after. :D
If Station doesn't ruin that by coming down. Y'know, "keeping an eye on her for HannerDad." Being just as clingy a parent as he is acting now.

With Jeph, it's hard to know. Some people juggle geese.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: iduguphergrave on 04 Apr 2012, 10:53
Jeez, he is acting the clingy parent, isn't he?

If he is, that brings Hannelore's total of clingy parental figures to a whopping one.

This makes me think; Station explicitly said he loves her like a daughter; he might consider himself a rightful parent, especially given her mothers coldness and her fathers inadvertent neglect. Since he was apparently the only one who could get through to Hanners, Station might feel like he's entitled to her company, or at least has the right to ask her to return. I wouldn't be surprised if he actually felt a little resentment towards her real parents for failing her.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Sorflakne on 04 Apr 2012, 11:22
Long hair Hanners <3
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 04 Apr 2012, 12:01
Umm, spaceship probably does supply runs back and forth to earth at least on a monthly basis. Do they have a chicken coop somewhere on the station? Where would the get fresh eggs from if there weren't monthly supply runs?
Even if the station needs some supplies now and then, and it probably does, using a habitable spaceship for doing so would be an absurdly tremendous waste of resources.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Eohelm on 04 Apr 2012, 12:18
Jeez, he is acting the clingy parent, isn't he?

If he is, that brings Hannelore's total of clingy parental figures to a whopping one.

This makes me think; Station explicitly said he loves her like a daughter; he might consider himself a rightful parent, especially given her mothers coldness and her fathers inadvertent neglect. Since he was apparently the only one who could get through to Hanners, Station might feel like he's entitled to her company, or at least has the right to ask her to return. I wouldn't be surprised if he actually felt a little resentment towards her real parents for failing her.

Which is really slightly upsetting when you think about it, in terms of HannerDad's unintentional neglect. I get the feeling that he really is a loving, caring father...he just never had time. I honestly expected him to be a lot colder, especially after the strip before they went to space where she called to say hi, he was busy, then called back, thinking she was pregnant.

I was honestly slightly surprised at how warm and personable he seemed when we met him in the strip. Which makes me wonder how he would feel if you were right, and Station did resent him for ignoring Hannelore?

Here comes another reference to HAL with HannerDad having to swim through a thin to nonexistent atmosphere in the Station so that he can unplug all of Station's systems, listening to "Daisy, daisy..." because Station wouldn't let him back in the door.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: twitch532 on 04 Apr 2012, 13:06
I wish her friggin' hair would grow out again.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Throg on 04 Apr 2012, 13:44
zomg

OMG OMG OMG

OMG

So that's why Hanners was taking biological samples from Marten (and who knows who else). She was trying to make sure Station was spying on her, infiltrating her life with super-advanced prototype AnthroPC's. 

IT ALL MAKES SENSE NOW

JAAAAAAAAACQUES
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Black Sword on 04 Apr 2012, 13:52
This place still surprises me. Last thing I'd thought to read about this particular strip would be emotional blackmail, selfishness, et al. He asked for something for himself, yes. He explained why, and ultimately, the decision is up to Hanners. It might not be the sort of thing she expected to have to decide, but she's the one who gets to chose, weighing everything herself. What's wrong with hoping for the answer he wants?

Yes, yes, it's probably not the healthiest thing for Hanners, and la de da the rest. Humans act out of interest for ourselves, with our altruism activating for specific things. If, as we expect, Hanners refuses based on the grounds that she is healthier and happier on the surface, that's still selfishness. It puts her concerns above those of others and ultimately benefits her, the exact definition of selfishness. We can argue until we're blue in the face about positive and negative selfishness, but it remains the same thing.

Ultimately, humans are selfish. I do not condemn our collective selfishness, mind you! It's what led to us surviving long enough to have things like the Internet anyway. It's simply impossible for happiness to exist without someone else's unhappiness.

Also - yes, I wish her hair would grow out again as well. Long hair is the best, always. *shakes head of Fabio-like locks*
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: idontunderstand on 04 Apr 2012, 14:13
The argument is probably that since he grew up with her, he should want her best. What he is suggesting sounds a bit uh.. pardon me for this but: Fritzl-y.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: squab on 04 Apr 2012, 14:18
Regardless of what Jeph said, I'm pretty sure Station's openly disobeyed the Lieutenant, thus violating the Second Law.

Would Pintsize be, well, Pintsize if those laws were actually in effect? He must have broken rule 2 on several occasions.

I feel Pintsize is the epitomy of all that can go wrong with the Zeroth Law.

Hi, everyone. Just made a profile. It was my reward for reading every strip in the past few days. The missus introduced me to the series.

Isn't he the epitomy of everything that goes wrong because of the LACK of the Zeroth law?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Apr 2012, 15:42
To me "emotional blackmail" would be threatening to dump her or slit his wrists unless she did what he wanted.

Didn't his speech amount to "We've been like family for a long time and I'd enjoy it if you moved here"?

Would a culture that practices filial piety say that Hannelore is obliged to say yes? As pointed out above, Station is more of a parent to her than the contributors of her genetic material are.

(I still think that what he's doing is like asking a butterfly to get back in the cocoon).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jmucchiello on 04 Apr 2012, 15:58
Jeez, he is acting the clingy parent, isn't he?

If he is, that brings Hannelore's total of clingy parental figures to a whopping one.

This makes me think; Station explicitly said he loves her like a daughter; he might consider himself a rightful parent, especially given her mothers coldness and her fathers inadvertent neglect. Since he was apparently the only one who could get through to Hanners, Station might feel like he's entitled to her company, or at least has the right to ask her to return. I wouldn't be surprised if he actually felt a little resentment towards her real parents for failing her.

Which is really slightly upsetting when you think about it, in terms of HannerDad's unintentional neglect. I get the feeling that he really is a loving, caring father...he just never had time. I honestly expected him to be a lot colder, especially after the strip before they went to space where she called to say hi, he was busy, then called back, thinking she was pregnant.

I was honestly slightly surprised at how warm and personable he seemed when we met him in the strip. Which makes me wonder how he would feel if you were right, and Station did resent him for ignoring Hannelore?

Here comes another reference to HAL with HannerDad having to swim through a thin to nonexistent atmosphere in the Station so that he can unplug all of Station's systems, listening to "Daisy, daisy..." because Station wouldn't let him back in the door.
With a crew of over 100 people, I'm sure shore leave alone would require at least monthly habitable transportation. And you are forgetting, there is a HUGE space station in orbit with artificial gravity and it is so spacious, guestrooms with just 2 beds exist. There's not overcrowding. Hanners hasn't been there in 10 years and her spacious room is INTACT. Ground to Space lift costs can't be even close to what they are in our world. I'm thinking TWO orders of magnitude cheaper if not THREE. Stop thinking about it in terms of what it costs in real life to get cargo into space. Those costs just do not apply.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: specter177 on 04 Apr 2012, 16:12
Regardless of what Jeph said, I'm pretty sure Station's openly disobeyed the Lieutenant, thus violating the Second Law.

Would Pintsize be, well, Pintsize if those laws were actually in effect? He must have broken rule 2 on several occasions.

I feel Pintsize is the epitomy of all that can go wrong with the Zeroth Law.

Hi, everyone. Just made a profile. It was my reward for reading every strip in the past few days. The missus introduced me to the series.

Isn't he the epitomy of everything that goes wrong because of the LACK of the Zeroth law?

He's not exactly harming humanity, and the zeroth law inevitably leads to humanity being slaves to the robots.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 16:15
1. I don't think Boyfriend-bot is still in Hanner's closet. She was last seen packing it up to send back to dad (before pinching it in the "butt"). I doubt severely that Hanners would store it, since she KNOWS what would happen if Pintsize got a hold of it.

2. Given that AI's have "changed careers" before in the QC universe - Leda, for example (back in #1997), said she was the AI on a submarine - Station could somehow "resign" as the AI for SS-ECT and go dirtside into a new AnthroPC body. I don't think Hannerdad would have a huge problem with getting another AI up there to replace him. It'd be a bit difficult, but it would work.

3. The concept of an AI "bonding" with a human could be something that was built-in when the first AI was developed. It's possible that Station "bonded" with Hannelore, even as he tried to "figure her out". In doing so, he developed those feelings of "parent, sister, therapist" - IOW, he essentially started to "love" her.

4. Clinton insinuated that Doc EC was partially responsible for the creation of the first AI; do you think perhaps his motivation may have been to try to find some way to get through to his daughter? (And why do I think there's a trope for that somewhere?... oh wait, that's right: Caprica.)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DrBear on 04 Apr 2012, 16:42
Quote
With a crew of over 100 people, I'm sure shore leave alone would require at least monthly habitable transportation. And you are forgetting, there is a HUGE space station in orbit with artificial gravity and it is so spacious, guestrooms with just 2 beds exist. There's not overcrowding. Hanners hasn't been there in 10 years and her spacious room is INTACT. Ground to Space lift costs can't be even close to what they are in our world. I'm thinking TWO orders of magnitude cheaper if not THREE. Stop thinking about it in terms of what it costs in real life to get cargo into space. Those costs just do not apply.

TOMORROW: The mechanics of how coyotes use mail order to kill roadrunners.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Eohelm on 04 Apr 2012, 17:08
Jeez, he is acting the clingy parent, isn't he?

If he is, that brings Hannelore's total of clingy parental figures to a whopping one.

This makes me think; Station explicitly said he loves her like a daughter; he might consider himself a rightful parent, especially given her mothers coldness and her fathers inadvertent neglect. Since he was apparently the only one who could get through to Hanners, Station might feel like he's entitled to her company, or at least has the right to ask her to return. I wouldn't be surprised if he actually felt a little resentment towards her real parents for failing her.

Which is really slightly upsetting when you think about it, in terms of HannerDad's unintentional neglect. I get the feeling that he really is a loving, caring father...he just never had time. I honestly expected him to be a lot colder, especially after the strip before they went to space where she called to say hi, he was busy, then called back, thinking she was pregnant.

I was honestly slightly surprised at how warm and personable he seemed when we met him in the strip. Which makes me wonder how he would feel if you were right, and Station did resent him for ignoring Hannelore?

Here comes another reference to HAL with HannerDad having to swim through a thin to nonexistent atmosphere in the Station so that he can unplug all of Station's systems, listening to "Daisy, daisy..." because Station wouldn't let him back in the door.
With a crew of over 100 people, I'm sure shore leave alone would require at least monthly habitable transportation. And you are forgetting, there is a HUGE space station in orbit with artificial gravity and it is so spacious, guestrooms with just 2 beds exist. There's not overcrowding. Hanners hasn't been there in 10 years and her spacious room is INTACT. Ground to Space lift costs can't be even close to what they are in our world. I'm thinking TWO orders of magnitude cheaper if not THREE. Stop thinking about it in terms of what it costs in real life to get cargo into space. Those costs just do not apply.

I think you quoted the wrong section. We were discussing parental neglect and what Station may or may not have thought of it. You're looking for a couple of other different people. Read it all beforehand, I suppose?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 04 Apr 2012, 17:20
We'd best be careful in trying to apply the Campbell/Asimov Three Laws Plus One to the QCverse; Jeph has baldly stated AIs in QCverse pretty much have free will and "it's a good thing they seem to like us." (It's in his Tumblr somewhere; go for it.) So I'd infer the Laws aren't in force here. Let's not put ourselves in the position of the newspaper reporter who was told to call Asimov for a comment on why the Three Laws failed after an assembly-line robot pinned and killed a worker who went inside the safety cage while the robot was in operation.
As for the ease of transport from Hannerdad Station to the ground and back up, others besides me have noted EC-101 is a luxury transport, what with those Boeing Business Class seats. (Definitely not acceleration couches; they're angled wrong to the aerospacecraft's centerline.) Not everyone might get to fly that way, but Ellicott-Chatham Technologies Space Systems Division clearly has delta-vee to burn. Transport's not a problem, even if the pilot occasionally forgets his "pants."
As for the mechanics of coyotes using mail order to (attempt to) kill roadrunners, it's simple: Failure is always an option.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: specter177 on 04 Apr 2012, 17:25
In somewhat unrelated news, I've decided to do another archive binge, and I'm amazed at how subtly Jeph's art changed strip-by-strip, but how drastic the change is from #1 to now.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Apr 2012, 17:36
As for the mechanics of coyotes using mail order to (attempt to) kill roadrunners, it's simple: Failure is always an option.

"With ACME products, failure is not an option! It's standard equipment in everything we sell!"
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: St.Clair on 04 Apr 2012, 18:32
To modify a famous Tsiolkovsky quote:
"Station was the cradle of Hannelore.  But one cannot live in the cradle forever."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 18:39
EDIT: We might want to go easy on our usual outrageous comments, as Jeph may not be a very happy camper right now...

Why, you ask?

Quote from: jephjacques (on twitter)
I think I just got banned from ustream for drawing a cat with a boner
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Elfa on 04 Apr 2012, 20:03
She lives in a world of Anthropomorphic PC's that can have human like bodies.  Why not just take a copy of the AI and stick it in a human-like Anthro PC and go back to Earth.

Then you can have a story line where Hanner's Anthro PC falls in love with Station and a crap storm begins...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 20:14
Essentially, Elfa, that's what I suggested. It's not like Hannerdad couldn't get another AI to take over Station's duties.

Station might find an APC body a bit confining, though. And how would he get along with Pintsize, Winslow, and Momo?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Gnomes2169 on 04 Apr 2012, 20:28
Staying on the station? Blasphemy of the highest degree!
Quote
If she gets written out of the strip, Jeph WILL be hunted down by the angry mob!
I've already sent out a petition/ sign up sheet to the rest of Minnesota. If Mr. J does remove Hanners, he will find out first hand what "Minnesota Nice" really stands for. :x

On to Station coming to earth, I think that it really just does not have a high opinion for anyone or anything that does any action so primitive as walk on the ground. I also do not think that it/ he would lower himself to the level of a lesser machine, and that he/ it would not confine him/ itself to something as small and fallible as a bipedal sex toy (as would be the case of the robotic boyfriend). Why would he not lower himself? Because as a machine, Station must have run through all logical solutions to its problem already, and judged each in turn. The fact that it decided not to download itself into any robot without Hannadad's knowledge shows that it does not believe that this method would be the most effective. Also the fact that it is asking Hanners to stay on the station shows that it believes the best and most likely only way to logically stay with her is to have her stay out in space with it. Whether this is caused by arrogance or logical conclusions, Station has made its own choices.

I also think that if he did get over his own inhibitions and decided to do the illogical thing and go to earth in a robot body, Station would have many terrible series of events that destroyed it repeatedly and eventually wiped its memory of everything that it ever knew. Cause Jeph's sense of humor and karma work like that.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Carl-E on 04 Apr 2012, 20:35
Station might find an APC body a bit confining, though.


After omniscience, omnipresence and omnipotence in and of its evirons, I thik this qualifies as understatement. 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 20:35
...and I think you just answered the question as to why Station would d/l himself (he identifies as a male in his holo-projections) into an AnthroPC and go down to earth with Hanners.

It is totally and completely irrational. And it would show Hannelore how much he really cares for her. (Think of what Marten did with Vicki for a second).

If Jeph can get past Ustream being stupid, I'm betting on it happening.

EDIT: And Carl-E - it'd be rather interesting if he chose to do this during THIS particular week on the ol' calendar.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Madmartigan on 04 Apr 2012, 20:45
My first read through and opinion is this...

Station being relatively selfish and callous to ask such a thing of Hanners.  Station was no doubt a help to Hanners growing up and set her on the path of establishing herself and getting to as close to "normal" whatever it really means in the long run. 

I think it'd be a bit of stalling in her development to stay.  Space is nice and all but...You got your cooky scientists, AIs, and robots. 

She's made leaps and bounds living together with normal folk.  She's as central to the QC Earthlings and they are to her.  She learns how to cope and deal with issues by being around them.  And them being around her and her innocence and her own issues, make themselves better peeps.

And that doesn't even get into the Hanners/Marten dynamic.  I dunno bout the rest of you, but one of my favorite moments so far in this comic has been Marten's creation of the "worry hat" and those two or three strips that dealt with it.  Hell, Marten makes her better a better person but hell, she's probably had a bigger hand in making ole' Marty a better bloke.  You really see his sensitive and caring side and heck, his passivity drops a little round her. 

At any rate.  Don't think it's fair for Station to ask this of her, what do I know?   :psyduck:

And as sweet as ole' Station is, still find it kinda creepy.  And if he returned with her in the bot, even creepier.  Just can't get past the whole most likely created to deal with Hanners' mental issues and being that intimate from a psychological aspect to go from therapist friend to anything more than just a close friend.  Too strange for me, even given the QC universe.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: frankwolftown on 04 Apr 2012, 21:09
Spathe ham and waffles.

I want space ham!!!   :-D
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 21:10
We have a comic.




And... that has to be the best strip in a long time.

You can SEE the tears starting to form in Hanner's eye.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Omega Entity on 04 Apr 2012, 21:12
Wait, I thought Hannelore had left the station far more recently than ten years. Like, more like 2 or 3. She hadn't been off the station all that long when she met Marten, had she?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 04 Apr 2012, 21:13
Stupid space dust in the air again :'(
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: specter177 on 04 Apr 2012, 21:14
Wait, I thought Hannelore had left the station far more recently than ten years. Like, more like 2 or 3. She hadn't been off the station all that long when she met Marten, had she?

Where did she say it had been ten years? I was guessing more like 4 or 5.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 21:14
Speculation says she's only been gone for roughly five-six years. She'd only been off the station for a few years when she met Marty.

EDIT: In looking back at Wednesday's strip (2158), I realize she's holding a pamphlet that says, "SCENIC NORTHAMPTON".
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DrBear on 04 Apr 2012, 21:18
I agree. Considering Jeph's problems tonight, he really nailed the expressions.

Oh, and thanks to him for not making us wait until Monday for Hanners' decision.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 04 Apr 2012, 21:19
Quote from: Station's internal thoughts
My little Hannelore is all grown up!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: emeraldbeacon on 04 Apr 2012, 21:24
Friday's Comic:

Station: "I... understand.  I was just hoping to be a part of your life.  But I suppose if Earth is so important to you, the least I can do is see you home..."
VRRRT VRRRT VRRRT
Hannelore: "...What's that siren?"
Station: "I redirected my maneuvering thrusters. Re-entry will begin in two point seven minutes..."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Sorflakne on 04 Apr 2012, 21:36
Station's not going to go HAL on everyone, is he?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: J on 04 Apr 2012, 21:51
you know station, if you weren't too stuck up to pick up the damn phone once and a while, you wouldn't be having this problem.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Omega Entity on 04 Apr 2012, 21:59
Wait, I thought Hannelore had left the station far more recently than ten years. Like, more like 2 or 3. She hadn't been off the station all that long when she met Marten, had she?
Wait, I thought Hannelore had left the station far more recently than ten years. Like, more like 2 or 3. She hadn't been off the station all that long when she met Marten, had she?

Where did she say it had been ten years? I was guessing more like 4 or 5.

Nowhere in the comic, but some posters here keep saying it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 04 Apr 2012, 22:36
There has been a lot of speculation as to how long the time difference was between, essentially, panel 3B of yesterday's comic (2158), and panel 2 of 515 (when we first meet Hannelore).

Based on what Dr. Case said in 2134, it was a kind-of sudden thing; one day she decided to get up and leave for Earth, and she was gone. Nowhere has there been any clear statements as to how old, or how long ago, that was.

Just simply based on guesses, she must have already been on Earth (and, assumably, in Northampton) for a few years when Faye and Marten moved into their current apartment. And, she must have been well established by the apartment manager for being "the lady who vacuums at odd hours sometimes" (wayyyy back in strip 313).

She may very well have come to NoHam at the same time Faye did. The only difference is that Faye actually wandered out to the local bars, where Hanners spent the first three years of her time disinfecting her apartment...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: cpflux on 04 Apr 2012, 22:40
"And that's about when he whipped out the holo-penis."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Carl-E on 04 Apr 2012, 23:23
Really?  REALLY??    You go there NOW?!?


Sheesh...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Mordhaus on 04 Apr 2012, 23:35
Why would someone who thought of her as a family member whip out his junk? Or did I read something wrong?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: pwhodges on 04 Apr 2012, 23:55
No; that was an inane, immature, and inappropriate comment.  But I guess that while publicly disapproving of UStream's action (and JustinTV's previously) in banning Jeph for drawing a cat with a boner, I shouldn't simply censor it as I was tempted to...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: snubnose on 05 Apr 2012, 00:26
I dont think Station is even able to download itself into any humanlike droid body. Thats because Station is too vast - after all, it has to operate a full spacestation.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: squab on 05 Apr 2012, 00:28
My first read through and opinion is this...

Station being relatively selfish and callous to ask such a thing of Hanners.  Station was no doubt a help to Hanners growing up and set her on the path of establishing herself and getting to as close to "normal" whatever it really means in the long run. 

I think it'd be a bit of stalling in her development to stay.  Space is nice and all but...You got your cooky scientists, AIs, and robots. 

She's made leaps and bounds living together with normal folk.  She's as central to the QC Earthlings and they are to her.  She learns how to cope and deal with issues by being around them.  And them being around her and her innocence and her own issues, make themselves better peeps.

And that doesn't even get into the Hanners/Marten dynamic.  I dunno bout the rest of you, but one of my favorite moments so far in this comic has been Marten's creation of the "worry hat" and those two or three strips that dealt with it.  Hell, Marten makes her better a better person but hell, she's probably had a bigger hand in making ole' Marty a better bloke.  You really see his sensitive and caring side and heck, his passivity drops a little round her. 

At any rate.  Don't think it's fair for Station to ask this of her, what do I know?   :psyduck:

And as sweet as ole' Station is, still find it kinda creepy.  And if he returned with her in the bot, even creepier.  Just can't get past the whole most likely created to deal with Hanners' mental issues and being that intimate from a psychological aspect to go from therapist friend to anything more than just a close friend.  Too strange for me, even given the QC universe.

I'm pretty sure Station existed all along. Or at the very least was created to run the STATION. Seems a bit odd to create a sentient robot where the ADDITIONAL features are managing an ENTIRE FREAKING SPACE STATION.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Dr. ROFLPWN on 05 Apr 2012, 00:43
"Don't you see, Station? If I were to stay here with you, who would people inappropriately ship Marten with? Who would the bear-hat fanboys lust after? Who would be in those terrible fanfictions with Marigold? And Jeph's readership, Station. It would drop by half. Maybe more. I just...I can't afford to stay."

</tongueincheek> in all seriousness, though, that was very sweet. And sad. And full of truth.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: WAYF on 05 Apr 2012, 00:54
Once again, Hannelore demonstrates her firm grasp on common sense.

Jeph is on a roll here.
-EDIT: Even the comic's title has just the right amount of poignancy to it.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: iduguphergrave on 05 Apr 2012, 00:55
These are all great drawings of Hannelore, but I especially love her expression in panel three. So much going on; you can tell she really doesn't want to hurt Station. But she's doing what has to be done.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: trstn on 05 Apr 2012, 01:16
Station's not going to go HAL on everyone, is he?

"You cannot do that, Hannelore..."
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Alchemy on 05 Apr 2012, 01:18
I bet when they get back to Earth, something wild will have happened.
Someone got in an accident, or more Russian spies, or Dora gets a boyfriend. Something interesting happened.
And then, flashback!

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: steveh11 on 05 Apr 2012, 01:29
Stupid space dust in the air again :'(
Yeah, I found some of that, too. :-)  Jeph's got really good at making me go all "D'awwwww". :-)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Mr_Rose on 05 Apr 2012, 01:55
Logically, if Hanners' life is on earth, to get Hanners to stay all Station has to do is destroy the earth.
Or, at least, the relevant portions of Northampton…
Is Station armed or were the sentient defence satellites a different AI/Hannelore messing everyone around again?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 05 Apr 2012, 02:07
Once again, Hannelore demonstrates her firm grasp on common sense.
My guess: Station will console himself by being proud of her for that.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Mr. Doctor on 05 Apr 2012, 03:01
Sad strip. You can see how she doesn't want to hurt him, but yeah... It has to be done :(
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Filias on 05 Apr 2012, 05:15
I am sad that she can not embrace the station, I think it  need one now.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Skewbrow on 05 Apr 2012, 05:17
Prediction for tomorrow: Holohugs and tears. Station will accept Hannelore's explanation. He will not go HAL...

... but the lights on the station will dim for a moment, as he temporarily loses control of some subroutines.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Akima on 05 Apr 2012, 05:48
These are all great drawings of Hannelore, but I especially love her expression in panel three. So much going on; you can tell she really doesn't want to hurt Station. But she's doing what has to be done.
Yes, very much so, and the drawing is superb. But I find Hannelore's eyebrow-on-top-of-her-hair distracting. I know it's a manga convention, and Jeph often does it, but it's extra-obvious in this strip.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Apr 2012, 07:15
I think that's still a reminder of how occasionally unkempt/unruly Hanner's hair can get.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 05 Apr 2012, 08:13
I was thinking how much fun it would be if the whole reason Hanners was in Northampton in the first place was a toirist brochure that just happened to be laying about the space station because someone riding up on the spaceplane picked it up at Bradley to have something to read on the flight up.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Carl-E on 05 Apr 2012, 08:27
"Come to scenic Northhampton!  We have buskers (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1064)! 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: sitnspin on 05 Apr 2012, 08:41
Awwwww, Hanners, my childhood was full of dark and scary things too, and I also had someone who was the one good thing I remember about it and without who I would be in a padded cell or dead.   It is nice to have that person, but you are right, you have a good life, going backward is out of the question.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jmucchiello on 05 Apr 2012, 09:10
TOMORROW: The mechanics of how coyotes use mail order to kill roadrunners.
C'mon, that was fully documented throughout the 40s and 50s.

I think you quoted the wrong section. We were discussing parental neglect and what Station may or may not have thought of it. You're looking for a couple of other different people. Read it all beforehand, I suppose?
The person I meant to quote was hung up on the expense of space travel and how frequently could the station (little s) be resupplied. I have no idea how I missed so badly.

"Don't you see, Station? If I were to stay here with you, who would people inappropriately ship Marten with? Who would the bear-hat fanboys lust after? Who would be in those terrible fanfictions with Marigold? And Jeph's readership, Station. It would drop by half. Maybe more. I just...I can't afford to stay."
And assuming I didn't screw this up, Dr. ROFLPWN wins the thread!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Welu on 05 Apr 2012, 09:40
I adore the art in this strip. Great example of Jeph's ability to draw complex expressions.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Mr. Doctor on 05 Apr 2012, 09:45
But I find Hannelore's eyebrow-on-top-of-her-hair distracting. I know it's a manga convention, and Jeph often does it, but it's extra-obvious in this strip.

Aaaaaaaaaah shit, now you ruined it for me. I didn't noticed it before.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: rcs on 05 Apr 2012, 11:35
Hello all, first time poster/long time lurker here.

I find this conversation between Hanners and Station very demonstrative of her backstory and character development. For me, it brings to mind Faye's conversations with her mother, sister, and the musing at her father's grave.

It's such a growing up story. So many people have had family pulling at them to come back "home" where home is good for the parent (or parental figure) but not for the growth of the one leaving. To me, it often points out the insecurity and/or selfishness of the one staying behind.

Faye's mother finds it good for Faye to strike out on her own (behind the crazy daughter snark.) Marten's parents seem to encourage independence for their son - with a bit of protective lioness mother thrown in. Hannelore's parents are brilliant people but clueless emotionally. Dora's parents seemed to be so involved with each other and traveling that Dora and Sven raised themselves. We don't know much about Marigold's parents. That could also be a really interesting development story.

Sorry for my first comment to be so rambling, but I'm just really loving this.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Magdalena on 05 Apr 2012, 11:40

We don't know much about Marigold's parents. That could also be a really interesting development story.


Oh I wanna see a Marigold backstory arc! ^^ Good thought/post ^^
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Apr 2012, 12:12
We've already pretty much gotten the backstory, between what Mom said in her visit to Northampton and what we got in the flashbacks (thanks to Dr. Case AND Station).

It's somewhat Ironic that Jeph put out one of his best strips on a night when things just went kerflooey for him.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Eohelm on 05 Apr 2012, 12:14

I think you quoted the wrong section. We were discussing parental neglect and what Station may or may not have thought of it. You're looking for a couple of other different people. Read it all beforehand, I suppose?
The person I meant to quote was hung up on the expense of space travel and how frequently could the station (little s) be resupplied. I have no idea how I missed so badly. [/quote]

No harm done. I agreed. It's a comic book. Logistics aren't something that pops into a writer's mind with everything.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: rcs on 05 Apr 2012, 12:25
We've already pretty much gotten the backstory, between what Mom said in her visit to Northampton and what we got in the flashbacks (thanks to Dr. Case AND Station).



Well, yes, we knew the third person narrative, but hearing it (seeing it?) said by the first person has more emotional impact on me. Her mother's version had more to do with Mother not knowing how to deal with her daughter and Dr. Case's version was clinical. Also, I hmm...  maybe... just maybe... could be... tying in to some personal baggage. Nah, that could never happen!

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Apr 2012, 12:30
That is a hallmark of this comic. People RELATE to these characters. That's why Jeph's got himself a comic that's entering its third millennium of strips.

Schulz and Davis should be so dang lucky.

(EDIT: Fixed... I'm getting old.)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: TinPenguin on 05 Apr 2012, 12:50
*third millenium
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: rcs on 05 Apr 2012, 13:30
I grant Garfield being unrelatable to most people. It was specifically a comic of its time, the overindulged, selfish 80s culture where greed ruled and really, one Monday joke and one lasagna joke and the comic was done. But Peanuts ran for 50 years; even if discounting the last tired 15 years of it, many people had to have identified with it personally.

Comparing QC, with characters having a depth of personality and internal conflicts, to Peanuts, with its superficial one identifying trait per character, is like comparing a fine Cabernet with grape Koolaid. It's not even wrong.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Kugai on 05 Apr 2012, 13:42
And on Monday we'll see Station slowly go mad.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 05 Apr 2012, 13:56
How did Station manage to be such a good parent without having any role models?

Did he provision some virtual machines in which to run test simulations of Hanners to see what approaches would work?

Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Mr_Rose on 05 Apr 2012, 14:17
How did Station manage to be such a good parent without having any role models?

Did he provision some virtual machines in which to run test simulations of Hanners to see what approaches would work?

Sort of? More likely a 'model human' based on the average of the other crew, a differential between that baseline and Hannelore's early behaviour and a little experimentation with approaches.
Add the fact that, as a holographic avatar of a silicon based life form born in space, he's almost literally incapable of ever being dirty enough to trigger Hanners' anxieties and you have a way in and a solution path.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Apr 2012, 14:25
Also, he's probably got the entire works of Spock, Adler, Jung, Freud, and any other major psychiatrist that's studied mental disorders in adolescents downloaded into his core. And, what he doesn't have on hand, he can access via the internet (which, it appears likely, has been pretty ubiquitous since his "creation" as an AI; it would appear that the creation of an AI couldn't exist without an open and free internet).

Either that or a lot of back-episodes of Leave It To Beaver and The Brady Bunch.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Apr 2012, 14:31
I grant Garfield being unrelatable to most people. It was specifically a comic of its time, the overindulged, selfish 80s culture where greed ruled and really, one Monday joke and one lasagna joke and the comic was done. But Peanuts ran for 50 years; even if discounting the last tired 15 years of it, many people had to have identified with it personally.

Comparing QC, with characters having a depth of personality and internal conflicts, to Peanuts, with its superficial one identifying trait per character, is like comparing a fine Cabernet with grape Koolaid. It's not even wrong.

There was a bit more depth to the Peanuts characters at times. Charlie Brown DID hit the game-winning home run...
(click to show/hide)
Linus was more than just a blanket toter, and Snoopy didn't only do the WWI Flying Ace routine.

I'd say it's more like comparing a good bottle of scotch with a bottle of Miller Lite.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Border Reiver on 05 Apr 2012, 15:54
As for comparing Peanuts and QC - disagree fine cabernet/grapejuice and the fine scotch/Miller Lite comparisons.  Both strips manage to impart more than a single note per character, both have managed to convey a wide range of emotions and other traits to the reader and many people can all read the same strip and come away with different impressions from both.

To my mind anyway its more like comparing Guinness to Wellington County Imperial Stout.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 05 Apr 2012, 16:05
But I find Hannelore's eyebrow-on-top-of-her-hair distracting. I know it's a manga convention, and Jeph often does it, but it's extra-obvious in this strip.

Aaaaaaaaaah shit, now you ruined it for me. I didn't noticed it before.
Argh, me too.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Redball on 05 Apr 2012, 16:41
But I find Hannelore's eyebrow-on-top-of-her-hair distracting. I know it's a manga convention, and Jeph often does it, but it's extra-obvious in this strip.

Aaaaaaaaaah shit, now you ruined it for me. I didn't noticed it before.
Argh, me too.
You've become sensitized. Take a Benadryl before reading.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Mr. Doctor on 05 Apr 2012, 17:12
To me, comparing QC and peanuts is just... I dunno. To me it's just wrong because it doesn't do justice to either of the comics imo.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Akima on 05 Apr 2012, 17:29
To me, it often points out the insecurity and/or selfishness of the one staying behind.
Or, you know, different cultural values. The traditional Chinese ideal is "Four Generations Under One Roof (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siheyuan)"*, and the strength of the family "team" is regarded as the crucial priority. Individuals are expected to subordinate themselves to the team. Like many other aspects of traditional Chinese attitudes, this is under great strain in China and in our diaspora, but it remains a very influential ideal. It has weaknesses as well as strengths, and exploring them is a significant theme in Chinese literature.

*Originally given as five generations, then four, now sometimes three, as generations grow longer and people have children later.

Would a culture that practices filial piety say that Hannelore is obliged to say yes?
I had to think about this one. If once one accepted that a filial relationship exists between Station and Hanners, the Confucian view would be that she was obliged to accept. However, a Confucian would probably not agree that such a relationship did exist, or that Station did the right thing in asking Hanners to stay in the first place. The principles of  ren (altruism and humanity), li (adherence to custom), zhong (both personal loyalty and respecting your place in the social order), and xiao (filial piety) apply to both. Station's relationship with Hanners would be regarded as that of a deeply respected teacher rather than a father (It would be a breach of Station's own li, zhong, and xiao duties to Hannerdad to usurp his position), and Confucianism is profoundly disapproving of any personal relationship between teacher and student (it is a common theme in wuxia literature, films etc. for example, that personal relationships between master and student are immoral regardless of their age).

Presenting a Confucian perspective on QC, an American web-comic... Does this represent a new low for this forum?  :psyduck:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Apr 2012, 18:12
To me, comparing QC and peanuts is just... I dunno. To me it's just wrong because it doesn't do justice to either of the comics imo.

This.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Apr 2012, 18:19
Should She Stay Or Should She Go?

Stay. This strip needs to go back to being about Marten, Faye & Dora.    1 (1%)
Stay. It'd be the ultimate way to shake up the strip.    4 (3.8%)
Stay. Hanners is getting to be a one-trick pony in this strip.    4 (3.8%)
GO. RUN. Get on Spaceship NOW. This can NOT end well!    12 (11.5%)
Go. If she gets written out of the strip, Jeph WILL be hunted down by the angry mob!    20 (19.2%)
GO. She's done so well and improved so much since she left.    24 (23.1%)
Go. You can't go home again.    6 (5.8%)
Spathe Ham?    5 (4.8%)
But what about FRANCIS???    10 (9.6%)
Either way, the forums are going to blow up over this.    18 (17.3%)

Total Members Voted: 104
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: rcs on 05 Apr 2012, 18:41
To me, it often points out the insecurity and/or selfishness of the one staying behind.
Or, you know, different cultural values. The traditional Chinese ideal is "Four Generations Under One Roof (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siheyuan)"*, and the strength of the family "team" is regarded as the crucial priority. Individuals are expected to subordinate themselves to the team. Like many other aspects of traditional Chinese attitudes, this is under great strain in China and in our diaspora, but it remains a very influential ideal. It has weaknesses as well as strengths, and exploring them is a significant theme in Chinese literature.

*Originally given as five generations, then four, now sometimes three, as generations grow longer and people have children later.

Yes, you're absolutely right. I didn't mean to sound so US-centric. I had in my mind my own Jewish upbringing where unmarried women specifically were expected to defer to the wishes of the head of the family.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: rcs on 05 Apr 2012, 18:44
Sorry, I goofed my quoting above. The apology to Akima and what follows is mine.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 05 Apr 2012, 19:05
I assumed that's what you were trying to do (I just added [/quote] in the right place). If that was out of line, I apologize.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Redball on 05 Apr 2012, 19:25
Presenting a Confucian perspective on QC, an American web-comic... Does this represent a new low for this forum?

On the contrary, it probably represents a new high, enabling many of us to see familial relationships through a different lens. In my part of Michigan, I hired a family of young Amish guys to do some landscaping in 1999-2000. Ever since, once a year, 5-6 buggies deliver 30-40 people of all ages to swim in my pool. I enjoy and respect the close family ties represented in this swim, spanning 3-4 generations. That doesn't come close to your heritage, perhaps, but it's how I relate to your post.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Apr 2012, 20:29
The ultimate suck - no video feed of Jeph doing his magic. :(
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 05 Apr 2012, 21:05
At least there's no risk of spoilers?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 05 Apr 2012, 22:49
Presenting a Confucian perspective on QC, an American web-comic... Does this represent a new low for this forum?  :psyduck:

Just the opposite, it's fascinating. Especially since it's a comic including AIs, which are a culture unto themselves. The more perspectives, the better.

Station said he thought of Hannelore as a "daughter" (also a sister, let's not think about that too much). Hannerdad seems to have left the role of father vacant.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Omega Entity on 06 Apr 2012, 00:04
Comic.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Carl-E on 06 Apr 2012, 00:19
Oh, Jeph.  The perfect ending to the week. 

I actually LOL'ed... my dog's wodering what's wrong...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Skewbrow on 06 Apr 2012, 00:25
Jeph is the master of comic relief.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Carl-E on 06 Apr 2012, 00:43
Lean on me
when you're not strong
and I'll be your friend
I'll help you carry on...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 06 Apr 2012, 00:47
Lean on me
when you're not strong
and I'll be your friend
I'll help you carry on...

...Just don't actually expect me to support you, because I'm a hologram.

WHUMP!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Overkillengine on 06 Apr 2012, 00:51
Trust Fall Exercise failed!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 06 Apr 2012, 01:01
And do I need to guess what the MOTW was this week?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Mr_Rose on 06 Apr 2012, 01:09
And do I need to guess what the MOTW was this week?
It would have been "very well, missiles away!" but apparently missiles are too phallic for ustream.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Eohelm on 06 Apr 2012, 01:15
This was much better than everyone predicted. I'm glad Jeph was able to have something that tied up the week well, but still managed to not break everyone's hearts.

*WHUMP*
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 06 Apr 2012, 01:52
On a complete aside note - I actually saw an otter earlier this week.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 06 Apr 2012, 01:54
Presenting a Confucian perspective on QC, an American web-comic... Does this represent a new low for this forum?  :psyduck:
I found it very interesting as well. Most of the (little) knowledge I had of Confucian values came from Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age, and what's in it seems consistent with what you say. Then again, Neal Stephenson is known for actually researching the stuff he uses in his novels (and showing his work (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/ShownTheirWork/Literature)).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: ihaveavoice on 06 Apr 2012, 02:10
Ouch! Those are some hard floors to fall on. On the bright side, this rules out fanfic holosexings, right? My psyche demands that I assume I am right.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: ihaveavoice on 06 Apr 2012, 02:11
On a complete aside note - I actually saw an otter earlier this week.

I just watched a news story about Otter Crossing signs in my city and they showed footage of otters! They were sooooooo cute! <3
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 06 Apr 2012, 02:22
About today's comic: I love how Jeph manages to work in a joke without breaking the mood. Hanners falling by leaning on Station, forgetting he's immaterial? Equally hilarous and sweet.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: cpflux on 06 Apr 2012, 04:06
Say it with me:

D'AWWWWWWWWWWWW*crash*
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Welu on 06 Apr 2012, 04:29
Great ending to the week.  :lol:
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Binary on 06 Apr 2012, 05:15
So from the view of Earth in panels six and seven, we can deduce that Station is in a sub-geosynchronous orbit, thus travelling faster than the Earth's rotation and "overtaking" the Gulf of Mexico. This ties in with the way the Earth fills the viewport, which implies a low, close orbit.

Also, pratfalls FTW.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 06 Apr 2012, 05:48
That, or it's a consequence of the station rotating...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Akima on 06 Apr 2012, 06:00
A perfect end to the week. Hanners has grown used to being around actual corporeal beings. Station cannot give her the support she needs, literally or symbolically! A perfect visual metaphor and a pratfall in one. I am in awe!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Method of Madness on 06 Apr 2012, 06:10
So they're going home next week! Also, is it just me, or is this still the day after they got up there?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 06 Apr 2012, 06:50
I think they have been up there for a few days.

But a good gag would be Marigold coming home and saying something to Momo like, "The weekend up at the station seemed to last about three months!"
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Binary on 06 Apr 2012, 07:11
That, or it's a consequence of the station rotating...

Hmmm. "Down" is out through the bottom of the comic panel so the plane of the ring must be parallel to the Earth's surface and its axis of rotation is pointing towards the Earth's centre (an orientation pretty much as drawn in panel one of this comic (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2111)). So the station's spin should have rotated the Gulf, not just shifted it to the left. When I hold the edges of two envelopes on the screen passing through the same pairs of cloud-dots on the two panels, they are parallel, so I'm still going with a low, fast orbit and... I'm really over-thinking this now, aren't I?

Breathtaking low-orbit videos taken from the ISS are here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74mhQyuyELQ) and here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ev9oPUNaqXE&feature=related) (though those are speeded up by time-lapse filming: I believe this one (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB-BjLfBYeo) is real-time, and is amusingly titled "Views of Hurricane Irene from Station"!)

Thank you for the clever observation, Akima - I had not made that connection!
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Skewbrow on 06 Apr 2012, 07:34
So from the view of Earth in panels six and seven, we can deduce that Station is in a sub-geosynchronous orbit, thus travelling faster than the Earth's rotation and "overtaking" the Gulf of Mexico. This ties in with the way the Earth fills the viewport, which implies a low, close orbit.

Yeah, I've been trying to gauge the altitude of station's orbit, too. Definitely way below geosynchronous. But also more than a couple hundred miles. If the entire globe of the Earth would cover an angle of 90 degrees, then their orbit would be at an altitude of approximately 1600 miles. If less than 90 degrees, then they need to be higher up. Panels 2B and 4 suggest that it may be less than 90 degrees, but I may be wrong. If the angle is 60 degrees, then they are 4000 miles away (=two Earth radii from the center), OTOH if it is 120 degrees, then their altitude is only about 15 per cent of Earth's radius or about 600 miles. Narrativium has conveniently placed the Earth, and the US, in the middle of the viewport for this occasion, but that will change soon.

Hmmm. "Down" is out through the bottom of the comic panel so the plane of the ring must be parallel to the Earth's surface and its axis of rotation is pointing towards the Earth's centre (an orientation pretty much as drawn in panel one of this comic (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2111)). So the station's spin should have rotated the Gulf, not just shifted it to the left. When I hold the edges of two envelopes on the screen passing through the same pairs of cloud-dots on the two panels, they are parallel, so I'm still going with a low, fast orbit and... I'm really over-thinking this now, aren't I?

Welcome to the overthinkers' club. :-) IIRC this was discussed in length in the Spinning Space Station -thread. The axis of rotation of the station cannot continue to point towards the Earth. That is prohibited by the conservation of angular momentum (which basically implies that, apart from a bit of wobbling, the axis of rotation must keep pointing at the same distant star). For example, in strip number 2140  (http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=2140) the Earth is clearly not in the center of the viewport (not forgetting that Jeph may be using his creative license here).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Black Sword on 06 Apr 2012, 07:53
Presenting a Confucian perspective on QC, an American web-comic... Does this represent a new low for this forum?  :psyduck:

Actually, I find it very fascinating. If you're not adverse, I'd like to hit you up for more information in the future.

For the present, can I ask for a clarification on something? You said a personal relationship between teacher and student is immoral regardless of age. Does this mean anything beyond the bond developed as teacher and student, or does it imply that even that bond is immoral, and it should only exist as teacher teaches, student learns and moves on?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 06 Apr 2012, 08:29
Since Akima mentionned Wuxia before, I can risk a partial answer based on some movies I have seen. Sometimes the plot revolves, at least in part, around a teacher tracking down a student who turned evil. That is, especially if said student uses his teachings for evil. And that is assuming the student's family is unable to perform the duty of stopping their rogue relative (which, by the way, isn't a specifically Confucian nor Chinese concept, at least nowadays - I've seen it as a plot element in Japanese works, too).

Also, it's not rare for students to get back to their teacher for, say, advice on the matter(s) of study. Or to show them, and thank them for, the result of their teaching if they did something remarkable with it. Or to assist them in teaching new students if the teacher is getting old.

As far as I understand it, as long as it is teachings-related, it's okay.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 06 Apr 2012, 09:11
We've been able to infer the station is in LEO from Hanners' remarks starting shortly after she showed up in the strip (sunrise and Strauss music every couple hours) and when she pointed the station out to Sven (on the pretend date) as "that moving dot." An object in orbit would have to be in a low, fast orbit for it's motion to be discernible to the naked eye (I saw Mir during a pass once, just at sunset; it was going at a pretty good clip relative to the star field, but vanished into the Earth's shadow at zenith. For HannerDad station to be visible later at night, as the "pretend date" apparently was, it would have to be at higher altitude than ISS or Mir, and/or inclined out of the Earth's shadow cone.)

Though in LEO, HannerDad station orbits higher than the real-world ISS judging from the apparent size of Earth in the strip views vs. what we see  in photos and videos from ISS, which is in a 95-minute orbit between 205 and 250 miles altitude,  giving us a noticeably curved horizon but no "global" view. Skewbrow's done more of the math, and more fun facts and figures are here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Space_Station)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Carl-E on 06 Apr 2012, 10:24
I just realized something akin to Akima's observations - before spending time in the messy environs of Northhampton, with her germ-laden friends, she was probably so phobic that she never even thought of touching Station.  After all, she wouldn't even willingkly touch her father...

But now, after time with these friends and "occasional physical contact" (sans shtupping), she's comfortable enough to lean on a friend. 

The fact that she tries speaks volumes for her development! 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: SomeCanadianWeirdo on 06 Apr 2012, 13:34
Ouch! Those are some hard floors to fall on. On the bright side, this rules out fanfic holosexings, right? My psyche demands that I assume I am right.

I must crush your hopes and dreams.  Canon never stops a truly determined/crazed/clueless fanfic writer.  A good fanfic writer will find a way to make their ideas work with canon.  A crazed fanfic writer won't care what canon says, they will write their idea no matter what.  A clueless fanfic writer won't realise their idea is counter to canon because they haven't paid enough attention to canon.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: DSL on 06 Apr 2012, 13:49
And sometimes you get one that is simply a loose can(n)on.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Mordhaus on 06 Apr 2012, 14:12
We all need somebody to lean on.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Kugai on 06 Apr 2012, 14:21
dawwwwww

Comedy romance moment
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 06 Apr 2012, 14:27
(looks up at the MOTW poll)

We're having one of those "the most recent is the best" things going on here, aren't we?
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: vsonics on 06 Apr 2012, 15:20
It does appear so, but for me it wasn't because it was the most recent. I think it would have been my favorite even if it happened on Monday.

The moment is really sweet and the panel where she actually falls is adorably hysterical. Not to mention that everything from Station's face to the way that Hanners is picking herself up looks wonderful, especially with the world just moving along behind them.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: TinPenguin on 06 Apr 2012, 15:56
(looks up at the MOTW poll)

We're having one of those "the most recent is the best" things going on here, aren't we?

I generally try to avoid doing that as much as possible, but this time I did vote for the most recent, because, well, it WAS the moment of the week.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 06 Apr 2012, 16:18
... by building up on, and crowning, all the other moments of the week (and some moments of the preceding weeks).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Akima on 06 Apr 2012, 16:36
Does this mean anything beyond the bond developed as teacher and student, or does it imply that even that bond is immoral, and it should only exist as teacher teaches, student learns and moves on?
The former. The relationship between teacher and student is fine, and Confucianism teaches that continuing respect and gratitude from student to teacher is admirable. It is any relation beyond that involved in teaching that is condemned. Confucianism is not unique in this of course, but takes it perhaps further than many other systems. Romantic or sexual relationships between teacher and student are regarded as tantamount to incest, even when both are adult and not biologically related. This is a major theme in Jin Yong's wuxia novel 《神雕侠侣》(English title "Return Of The Condor Heroes") and its several adaptions to television, in which the protagonist Yang Guo and his teacher Xiaolongnü fall in love in defiance of Confucian ethics. Similarly in the recent film《剑雨》(Reign Of Assassins), a professional murderer condemns the characters of a teacher and student who have married, and this is played completely straight without a hint of irony.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: WAYF on 06 Apr 2012, 23:08
This, I think, is the perfect moment to end the space arc, or at least make it so that they start wrapping things up and saying their goodbyes.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 07 Apr 2012, 07:11
Oh, I don't doubt that they'll be on Spaceship heading for NoHam by next week's end.

Hopefully, Spaceship will remember to render pants this time.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: vsonics on 07 Apr 2012, 10:24
I'm more bummed about leaving space than I thought I would be. The arc has been really fun, quite sweet, and I think with an altogether different feel to it than the usual Earth goings ons has. And I'll miss some of the characters, for sure. Lt. Potter the most, probably, because I think she could have some real impact in the lives of everyone were she to be a part of the regular gang, but also Station. 'cause...gosh, just that image of him with his hand pressed up against (his own?) glass is enough to make me love him despite his faults.

On the other hand, I'm also interested to see what's been going on back home and especially see how this latest space adventure is going to fit into their lives back on Earth.

But I do hope that they're just not back on Earth on Monday. At the very least, I'd promise to leave my door unlocked and not to throw anything in exchange for a really rousing goodbye song before they go.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Gnomes2169 on 07 Apr 2012, 11:29
Quote
But that's just it - I have a life. And it's down there, on Earth.
This was just a really touching moment and it showed Hanner's development to this point. I'm going to miss the space arc... there is just so much that they can do there! And for all his faults I'm going to miss Station, Hanners and him seem to be close still and I think that they will miss each other for a while... going to miss Potter more though. I mean, come on... "FUCK YEAH HUG THE SHIT OUT OF HIM!" Potter is crazy. And I will miss Spathe ham/ Francis (who is a rather nice guy, really!) because stuff. Marigold and Francis would be cute together...  :-P
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Milesb on 07 Apr 2012, 11:55
Francis may reappear yet! A little lecturing tour takes him through a certain town via a specific girl's college, where he runs into Marten.. etc.

I don't know about Lt. Potter.. she seems kind of harder to write in since Marten has been the main person to actually hang out with her and we haven't had a link quite strong enough to bring her into the normal comic. She could just turn up one day and go "I needed a drinking partner and I'm a security officer on a space station: how hard do you think it would be for me to find you?" but it's all ifs and buts and maybe's.

I'm kind of thinking maybe we'll come back to find Dora and Jim have had another date? It would be an interesting little jab for Jeph to assault us with the results of something we didn't see going on.
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: WAYF on 07 Apr 2012, 19:07
Damnit, I really can't choose my Moment of the Week. Can't we all log votes for "I love you too Station, but I can't stay" AND "I'm okay! I'm okay!"
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 08 Apr 2012, 07:00
I don't know about Lt. Potter.. she seems kind of harder to write in since Marten has been the main person to actually hang out with her and we haven't had a link quite strong enough to bring her into the normal comic. She could just turn up one day and go "I needed a drinking partner and I'm a security officer on a space station: how hard do you think it would be for me to find you?" but it's all ifs and buts and maybe's.
And then she meets Elliot...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Gnomes2169 on 08 Apr 2012, 07:06
Potter may be fired for that drunken exclamation at the party... But I really hope not. If she does eventually come to the regular comics, then it should be by her own power and choice. (Also, we have enough female characters, right? Right? No? Ok...)
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Schmorgluck on 08 Apr 2012, 07:20
Oh, even better, she overdrinks at the Horrible Revelation, goes wild, Elliot has to get her out of the pub... Romance ensues.

Count me as an official Abbie/Elliot shipper (by what she said, he might be quite her type, after all).
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: jwhouk on 08 Apr 2012, 09:48
And the moment of the week is....?

YB and Otterphile.org    4 (7.8%)
How's the wine? "It's - It's very good."    0 (0%)
That's good. Everyone has been thrilled to see you again. Especially me.    0 (0%)
In fact, I was hoping I could convince you to stay. (M-more wine? Glugglugglug)    0 (0%)
I miss you, Hannelore.    0 (0%)
Your mind was the greatest puzzle I was ever presented with...    0 (0%)
...a sparkling intellect, a kind heart, and a boundless capacity for joy.    2 (3.9%)
...a friend, a sister, a daughter. I grew to love you.    0 (0%)
But I never considered the possibility that you'd stay (on Earth) forever...    0 (0%)
So the only solution was to ask you if you could find it in your heart to return... And stay.    0 (0%)
I don't like remembering my childhood...    0 (0%)
You're the one good thing I have from back then...    0 (0%)
...You're the reason I have friends, and a job, and a LIFE.    0 (0%)
But that's just it - I have a life. And it's down there, on Earth.    6 (11.8%)
I love you too, Station. But I can't stay. I'm sorry.    4 (7.8%)
...That's pretty much the answer I was expecting. (I'm sorry.)    0 (0%)
Is it really so great, down there?    0 (0%)
It's big and loud and dirty and scary, but... it's full of wonderful people and amazing things.    3 (5.9%)
As long as I know you're happy down thre, that will be enough.    0 (0%)
Shall we stay here and watch the world go by for a while? (I'd love to.)    1 (2%)
WHUMP! "I'm okay! I'm okay!"    31 (60.8%)

Total Members Voted: 51

---
I think this is one of the most one-sided "MOTW" polls I've seen...
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Carl-E on 08 Apr 2012, 10:46
Well, seeing as nearly the whole week was building up to that moment, there wasn't really much choice! 
Title: Re: WCDT: 2156-60 (2-6 April 2012) Questionable Content Discussion
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 09 Apr 2012, 11:25
-no shipping please-