meow.

refseek.com

www.worldcat.org/

link.springer.com

http://bioline.org.br/

repec.org

science.gov

(Asking this assuming the out of lore reason why you haven't killed too many people yet is because you don't wanna nuke the overarching storyline of the search for a cure and such? As well as not ruin the experience for others ofc because massacring everyone wouldn't be too fun for said everyone and their chat)

this is gonna be fun

Derapchu would’ve been the first to go immediately. Right away on session 2. Maybe I would’ve played it safe since broad daylight and the typical zora scheme is playing innocent to gain intel, but sadly… he had it coming… nobody calls me homeless and gets away with it… When becoming friends with Jaw and his bunch I probably would’ve stilled played it safe. A 3v1 is still a tough battle especially without proper weapons, plus I wasn’t sure just how big their group was (with magic and stella sticking to them a little). I’d go to the church and look for chuck and that interaction probably would’ve been the same. Zora wanted to get on their good sides so. I managed to catch snowbird alone at the end of the session, but before getting anywhere we were interrupted so probably no kill there. the first interaction I get in session 3 is with woogie and jaws group. By this point I had plenty of supplies, and in the moment, I really wanted to kill woogie in front of everyone… I probably would’ve only downed him and taken his gun but… yeah idk… the guns do a lot of damage so I was unsure and didn’t wanna do it. I also wasn’t sure how lava worked with the downing stuff and didn’t wanna accidentally kill him but yeah. I think Zora would’ve either taken the fight and not cared without that factor or play it the way I did. Either way fits her I believe, but I think knocking woogie and have everyone beg me to spare him would be more her style. I manage to get roped into spideys team for a bit, and knowing they were searching for a third member of their group made it hard to kill the both of them. I strongly considered not caring and killing them anyway, buttt that’s mean so I wouldn’t but realistically Zora would. I also considered at least taking down Johnathan to escape while sitting with spidey but of course didn’t want to end schpoods story too soon. If I only downed him he would’ve told everyone so I played the hostage role. there was a moment where we got separated from spidey and I had the perfect opportunity to kill Johnathan while he was in some dog house. Had there been no meta morals, I would’ve absolutely jumped at the chance and burned him to death right then and there. Squiddo’s knife moment was also a cool, but too many people nearby… didn’t wanna chance it… Squiddo canonically to her knowledge doesnt know I tend to play the innocent card so she probably figured we could fight them both off together… (made this up just now but yeah) eventually my stream crashes which in lore is me disappearing to take a nap because I went wayyy too long without sleep so. When I return to session 4 I find a ton of people alone. The key moment is the ikea journey with grayleigh and meagon. I would’ve probably still left them alive, but definitely would’ve played with the idea of killing them. The thought only kind of crossed my mind, I just felt like I’d feel too bad ooc betraying them like that. Zora would’ve though she’s worse than me. She would’ve enjoyed it too and also done it wayyyy sooner. While leaving, I found 4C and would’ve killed him without a worry. That’s such an easy one. Then I do like a million things I don’t really remember but I end up with Thomas alone for a second! Absolutely would’ve killed him too. That’s an easy one. Disappearing after the mutant attack? Soooo easy. I also had the chance to go with jaw to find ish or whatever earlier in the session, I probably would’ve done that and then just killed him. People would’ve seen I went alone with him, so I’d probably just lie and say he died to zombies. Whether they believed me or not is up to chance but I probably wouldn’t care. With the numbers this dwindled I was wayyy closer to just wiping them all out 1 by 1 without needing more info so.

FUCK HARD

FUCK FAST

FUCK BADLY

NEVER USE GENERATIVE AI

CREATE JOY

MUSIC ALWAYS

PSPSPSPS AT KITTIES ON THE STREET

YUMMY SOUP

go see the doctor about that thing

BE TRANSGENDER

KISS YOUR FRIENDS

EAT CHEESE

NEVER KILL YOURSELF

Found out it would take place in rhe 1820s to early 1830s in the English countryside (this is during the Industrial Revolution to it would make sense why the area surrounding oakhurst is pretty isolated). I Also found that Legs would have likely fought in either the American revolution on the British side or in the French Revolution ( on the loyalists side but that wouldn’t make sense so I’m calling American rev); war wouldn’t have been industrialised at that point, with that first instance being the use and invention of the Maxime gun in the 1890s. Sausage would have written the book “The Vampyre” (written by John Polidori in our world), which would make sense of his romantic idea of vampires, and it was published in 1819, so there would have been time for it to get famous.

I also found out that Scott would have likely been turned around 630-790, this is in accordance to the Anglo-Saxon idea of the ‘dangerous dead’. Scott should have been buried around 1160-1230 (you’ll understand the specifics in a moment). Then 400 years later we have Owen being turned from 1560-1630, this is because the height of the witch hunts in Britain and colonial American were around that time, and when the towns folk burnt Lewis it was because of the occult. Note: vampire accusations did not become prevalent until 1721, starting in east Prussia, which would explain why avid latches onto the idea of the vampire rather any other supernatural creature (ignoring avid’s previous experience with what he thought was a vampire), because vampires would have been the new supernatural big bad.

If we add 200 to Owen’s time, we end up roughly at 1860-1930, but we can assume Owen is giving a rough estimate of his time asleep, and it wouldn’t make sense with Legundo’s time line. Another piece of evidence is that avid makes mentions of taking a bath, which we as the audience can assume are medicinal baths for his injury; medicinal baths saw a rise in popularity from 18th to 19th centuries (according to the NHS), yet Legundo makes no rebuttal against bloodletting when Owen talks about previous treatments he’s had. This is because, while the scientific revolution would have ended ~1687, Rudolf Virchow’s collection on cellular pathology was not published until 1858, which spelled the end for humoral medicine. In addition, the first ‘modern’ surgery, by that I mean antiseptic surgery, did not happen until the late 1860’s; Legs makes no mention of modern surgical or medical practices such as washing hands (in accordance with Louis Pasteur’s germ theory) or blood transfusions (discovered in 1818 by Bludnell, but not successful enough to be widely practiced): see BBC bite size and AABB.org.

After all of this I can therefore conclude that the Vampires smp series, if in our world, would take place some time between 1820- the early 1830’s.

I can’t believe I just spent 30 minutes doing this. The hyper fixation goes crazy.

here’s the closeted furries “hey man… can u bum me a cig” and “the one uncle nobody invites to the family reunion but SOMEONE keeps telling him where it is anyways”

if you want an idea of what john is like, imagine hau from pokemon sumo

ALSO the ppl who kept asking me for trans thomas art, HERE he’s trans in this au (; 

ft John:

The tower upright;; closely associated with violent change, disruption, danger and destruction, ((according to someone who knows more about tarot cards than i do))

brought to you by the idea that in past life, his TCD skin reopened the scars he had from the apocalypse

But.

What is so much worse than vigilante violence without accountability is systemic violence without accountability. The most prolific vigilante in the world, hell the most prolific serial killer in the world, could not kill as many people per day as the CEO of United Healthcare is responsible for.

Because UHC has 157,000,000 "customers". I put customers in quotes because I am technically a UHC customer through my employer, but this is not a decision I have any say in or literally any alternative options to. The US mortality rate is about 257 out of 100,000 people per year. The average mortality rate in OECD nations (when people talk about "first world" nation statistics this is often what they mean) is 215 out of 100,000. And about 90% of deaths are due to medical issues as opposed to accidents. (Speaking of which, did you know more than 10% of deaths these days are from covid? Fucking hells.)

Now if you mutiply by 0.9 and subtract the OECD average from the United States average and, that very roughly gets you the proportion of deaths in the United States due to medical differences between the United States and other first world countries. If you multiply that by the number of UHC customers, you get about 60,000 people dying of preventable causes a year.

60,000 totally preventable deaths a year

Now the existence of United Healthcare is not the only difference at play here, there are poverty differences, exercise differences, diet differences, sleep differences. But studies are pretty unanimous that the strongest controlling factor for health is not exercise or diet or even sleep, it's quality of and access to healthcare. Even insofar as poverty controls for health, that's mostly as a determining factor of stress, diet, sleep, and *healthcare access*. So we might generouslh say that UHC is responsible for only half of those deaths. 30,000 people a year.

If even 1% of that is the CEO's personal fault, he killed about a person a day for profit.

That's not even getting into those impoverished and left destitute. If we had a justice system which treated violence appropriately, which had consequences for the murder of one's fellow human for personal reasons, the CEO of UHC would have been tried at the Hague and hanged until dead.

And the excuse that he was only acting as shareholder pressure dictates? That's just the "I was only following orders" excuse except somehow even thinner. Because wcan recognize that a military officer under direct orders from high command has a moral duty to not comply with crimes against humanity, and that they can be executed for such crimes regardless. And the idea that a company executive who took a voluntary position, making decisions about how to benefit shareholders economically, explicitly for personal profit, is somehow less responsible for the death they cause than a military officer in war is just absurd.

The sheer scale of injustice here is difficult to even imagine. Every day that these health insurance executives go without being tried at the Hague is an astonishing affront to justice.

So when somebody says that vigilante violence is bad, and that it would be bad if the CEO's killer got away? Forgive me if I just don't take it that seriously. Unless they've been advocating every day for the criminal justice system to see the executives of every private health care company in the United States brought to justice, I think maybe they're concern isn't actually about appropriate societally stabilizing justice for violence. I think it's maybe just a desire for things to feel stable and normal and not like a powder keg about to explode.