Shambles and shenanigans

[Object personification in autism: This paper will be very sad if you don’t read it]

link to the article

And finally, FINALLY! having it spread out on the bed atop a dark contrasting color enabled me to see just what was so wrong that it was abandoned to the thrift:

Ch8 and join to make ring.

Into ring, Ch5, (tc, ch2)x7, sl st into 3rd chain of ch5 to join [8 tc spokes]

Ch4 or chainless starting tc, (3tc into sp, tc into tc) around, 3tc into sp, sl st to join [32 tc]

Ch4 or chainless starting tc, tc in same st, tc in next 3 st, ch2, (2tc in 1 st, tc in each of next 3 st, ch2) around. Sl st to join top of 1st ch/tc. [8 repeats

Ch4 or chainless starting tc, tc in same st, tc in next st, ch1, 5tc in same st, sl st back through ch1 just made, tc, 2tc in last st before ch sp, ch2, (2tc in tc, tc, ch1, 5tc in 1 st, sl st back around ch1 just made, tc, 2tc in last st before ch sp, ch2) around, sl st to join [8 repeats]

***that was a weird row, here’s a top view of one of those 5tc bobbles to show how you connect back to that ch1 behind the 5tc to force them to puff out

Ch4 or chainless starting tc, tc in same st, tc in next 2 st, tc into joining st behind the top of the 5tc bobble, tc in next 2 st, 2tc in last st before ch sp, ch2, (2tc in same st, tc into joining st behibd bobble, tc in next 2 st, 2 tc in last st before ch so, ch 2) around, join

Ch4 or chainless starting tc, tc in same st, tc, ch, 5tc bobble, join around ch1 behind, tc in next 3 st, ch, 5tc bobble, join around ch1 behind, tc, 2tc in last st before ch so, ch2, (2tc in same st, tc, ch1, bobble, join, 3tc, ch1, bobble, join, tc, 2tc in same st, ch2) around, join.

Ch4 or chainless starting tc, tc in same st, 2tc, tc in bobblejoin st, 3tc, tc in bobblejoin st, 2tc, 2tc in last st before ch so, ch2, (2tc in same st, 2tc, tc in bobblejoin, 3tc, tc in bobblejoin, 2tc, 2tc in last st before ch sp, ch2) around, join.

Ch4 or chainless starting tc, tc in same st, tc, ch1, 5tc bobble, join, 3tc, ch1, 5tc bobble, join, 3tc, ch1, 5tc bobble, join, tc, 2tc in last st before ch sp, ch 2, (2 tc in same st, tc, ch1, 5tc bobble, join, 3tc, ch1, 5tc bobble, join, 3tc, ch1, 5tc bobble, join, tc, 2tc in last ch before ch sp, ch2) around, join.

Ch4 or chainless starting tc, tc in same st, 2tc, tc in bobblejoin, 3tc, tc in bobblejoin, 3tc, tc in bobblejoin, 2tc, 2tc in last st before ch sp, ch2, (2tc in same st, 2tc, tc into bobblejoin, 3tc, tc in bobblejoin, 3tc, tc in bobblejoin, 2tc, 2tc in last st before ch sp, ch2) around, join

That’s the most of it. I need to stare at the triangle bits to sort out how they attach and how many stitches and such, but I am Le Tired

This bitch

A) remind me and I will look at it, whilst better rested and under better light

2) I write all the above straight to post without double checking or edits. If my abbreviations don’t make sense lmk. If I have egregious typos lmk. If anybuggy does a test make by following these instruction, I would dearly like to see it!

this is what i got by following it as you wrote- i did use US dc for the main body since they seem to match the height in the photos a little more, but kept the US tc for the bobbles to make them puff out more

going by the photos, it almost looks like they attached entirely new strands of yarn for the triangles/lacy bits, but that didn't seem right based on how fiddly it would be (especially for a blanket) or based on how it's coming apart, so instead i tried doubling back with chains, tc, and sc to create it

so for mine the last round was:

ch 3 or chainless starting dc, dc 1 in same sp, dc 13, 2dc in last st before ch sp, ch 2, (2dc in same st, dc 2, place marker, [dc 5, place marker] x 2, ch 4, turn, tc 1 in 2nd marked/center st, ch 8, tc 1 in same st as previous tc, ch 4, sl st to 1st marked st, ch 1, turn, sc 1 in top of same st as sl st, sc 4 in ch4 sp, sk tc, [sc 5, ch 3, sc 5] in ch8 sp, sk tc, sc 4 in ch4 sp, sc 1 in last marked st, dc 1, 2dc in last st before ch sp, ch 2, 2dc in same st, dc 13, 2dc in last st before ch sp, ch 2) around

(separated out for readability since that was a block of text)

You can do it

You can be people who create also, the magic is inside you

If your magic requires permission for activation purposes, I provide that now. Proof! It is I, your fairy craftmother, activating in you the ability to go fuck around with stuff and learn from all the things that go wrong, and keep trying things, and watch other people make things and ask them questions sometimes too, so that you can learn from their shit, and just.

My cousin lost his best friend of 20+ years because the friend's girlfriend decided he shouldn't see anyone else. For years my cousin was leery about anyone else starting romantic relationships, and acted kinda jealous and resentful.

I had to make clear boundaries with my now-husband, explaining that I was NOT going to be investing all of my limited emotional energy into our relationship, he had to be willing to share. And my emotional energy is VERY limited, so he struggled! If I hadn't been so very very aromantic, and had spent as much time with him as he wanted, my other relationships would have suffered greatly. As it was, people had to get used to a changed dynamic with me - he came everywhere, because it was easier to get out of the house when he was dragging me.

a showcase for young/early career British acting talent and tv production talent in the UK

fiercely moral and borderline communist Saturday night family telly that's engaging for all ages

slightly parochial

12-14 episodes per series

cheap

Things Doctor Who should not be

open to any kind of input from any kind of USamerican

oops all stuntcasting

lvl 2: the plural version of octopus is octopi because if a word ends with "us" the plural version replaces the "us" with "i" e.g. cactus -> cacti and fungus -> fungi

lvl 3: actually, that rule is only for latin words. octopus is a greek word and the correct plural is octopuses or octopodes

lvl 4: actually, language is descriptive not prescriptive. since enough people over time have used octopi as the plural for octopus, it's a valid plural

You are transported back in time and into the body of a young noblewoman in the 1400s. Your parents have married you off to an awful, abusive, rapist husband whom literally no one else would marry despite him being very high nobility because he's that terrible. You successfully produce a baby boy and then plan to murder this man for the good of everyone and yourself. Here is the question: do you think you could murder him in a way that is undetectable to the historical people around you? Note: they aren't stupid, you are the prime suspect as the battered wife AND you can't just say poison. Where are you going to buy poison? Do you know anything about poison actually? NO GOOGLING! You were sent back without a plan!

Edit: my notes are full of murder. I love you all

Edit: to clarify about the poison, you can use poison if you actually know how to identify it, I'm saying you can't just go "Poison!" with no knowledge about poison. Buying it probably means they know that poison and you're caught. Your personal knowledge when you read this post is all you have.

Another point of clarity: You went through all that trouble to have a baby without modern medicine so you could get the sweet house after your husband died. That's why you can't be caught. No disappearing.

Edit again: Air embolisms are going on a high shelf because the syringe won't be invented for 350 years. Prove to me that you could make one from scratch, lol

on survival

Thanks, Anon!