Shining Armor, you lucky bastage.
What pray tell is a bastage?
Life is simple: it has no nontrivial normal subgroups.
At least they're both fireproof. But, given that they live in a tree library, that might become a problem.
They're tree proof too.
Life is simple: it has no nontrivial normal subgroups.
Actually, that does exist, somewhat. Though, it's more like Twilight tries to write a trashy romance novel, and it told to write what she knows, so all of the characters are then thinly veiled expies of her friends, and the descriptions are filled with science-based idioms and metaphors. I believe it's called The Naked Singularity.
There's also
Friendship is Witchcraft.
Life is simple: it has no nontrivial normal subgroups.
Hmmm, to watch this show or not to watch it? That is the question I'm dealing with.
How is that even a question?
Life is simple: it has no nontrivial normal subgroups.
De Lancie, you mean.
![[up] [up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png)
Not really a question as a decision that he feels must be made, I guess, story.
edited 7th Aug '12 4:29:50 PM by Drenius
Journalism is just a gun. It's only got one bullet in it, but if you aim right, that's all you need.
Well Blossom makes sense as a last name for Lotus.
Life is simple: it has no nontrivial normal subgroups.
I'm glad the professors who conducted the study did so with the level of professionalism that they would conduct any other sort of study. It easily could've been a biased exercise in how "abnormal" or "damaged" the fandom was, but instead was balanced and both fairly insightful and respectful.
Journalism is just a gun. It's only got one bullet in it, but if you aim right, that's all you need.
Fuck. That will not go well.
Nah, the majority of the responses are going to be in the "I don't like/partake in it, but I don't condemn those who do" area, I bet.
Well, I've always thought the ideal of a study is to examine the thing being studied in an unbiased fashion, Seraph, rather than argue for one side of an argument or another, or to serve as a reaction to public opinion. You might be arguing that too but the way you phrased it made it seem as if the study was reactionary in order to prove to non-fans that the brony community is not comprised of freaks. Of course, that may just be me.
edited 7th Aug '12 4:54:24 PM by Drenius
Journalism is just a gun. It's only got one bullet in it, but if you aim right, that's all you need.