A Number of Cold Reptiles

junicorn

day 15

"A planned community in Arizona has used time-honored Mediterranean strategies to keep temperatures down and attitudes high.

Western civilization has grown remarkably climate conscious over the last 20 years, but not when it comes to building, civic planning, and especially zoning. Perhaps the interiors of buildings are becoming more climate adapted, and in some cases the facades as well, but in a way that’s a little like inventing a freezer designed to keep ice cream frozen while sitting next to a fire.

Wooden or concrete boxes arranged side-by-side across leveled ground with sprawling, largely treeless gardens and concrete sidewalks alongside wide, blacktop roads is simply a culture of construction that has to be abandoned if living in a world of 2°C or higher annual temperatures [or, hopefully, less than that, but nonetheless likely over 1.5°C] is to be tolerable.

Fortunately for Arizonans, change may have finally arrived in the form of a carless, planned community that looks and feels like a Greek island village.

In the Phoenix suburb of Tempe, Culdesac has arisen as a 17-acre mixed-use neighborhood from the ground up to stay cool and local, taking the concept of the 15-minute city, where anything a resident might need is only 15 minutes away, and putting a Mediterranean spin on it.

Buildings are tall, thick, and totally white. The residential areas look like they were built atop of the ashes of the Phoenix zoning code burnt in effigy. Crammed together, they create narrow streets and alleys that are almost constantly shaded, through which wind is channeled and accelerated in passing.

Windows open towards each other, allowing wind that enters one building to exit into another, while the total lack of asphalt means that the ground temperatures are a staggering 50-60°F lower than pavements beyond the limits of Culdesac.

No privately-owned cars are allowed to enter the neighborhood, in which electric bikes, robotic mini taxis, and light rail shuttle people around town, to downtown Phoenix, or out to the airport.

The street life is lively—there are no cars to bisect movement between the 21 different businesses and eateries, among which is a James Beard Award-winning Mexican restaurant, DIY ceramic business, and some stores run out of apartments—a big no-no under Phoenix zoning laws.

“Once you pull the cars out,” Architect Daniel Parolek who designed Culdesac, told BBC, “there’s so much more opportunity to make a vibrant, thriving community.”

His inspiration was sun-soaked locales like Italy, Greece, and Croatia, where town centers were designed before the automobile and before air conditioning.

Technically speaking, the entire Culdesac neighborhood is one apartment complex, but the paseos, or little alleyways, open up into plazas of open space exactly liked one would expect in a little village in the Cyclades.

Because no one has to jump in a car to get from place to place, people run into each other, sparking conversations, relations, and breaking through the counterintuitive phenomenon of big city loneliness, which in Phoenix hits particularly hard.

“Culdesac Tempe has shown that people do want to live car-free in the US, even in a metro area like Phoenix that’s often seen as the poster child for car dependency,” says Erin Boyd, Culdesac’s government relations and external affairs lead. “This success has shifted the conversation around what’s possible in American development.”

The Rodeo Rule: you only have to do it for the first time once.

The Rohan Rule: if you are at a social function full of new people and you want to be liked, find someone doing important work like setup or food prep and offer to help.

The Tutorial Mode Rule: to navigate an unfamiliar situation where you fear you will mess up an interaction, preface the interaction by mentioning that you've never done this before, and let them know if you have a specific concern or question.

The Rocket Science Rule: most new things you want to try seem very complicated but are simple when taken step by step.

The [X] Will Remember That Rule: if you need to make small talk with the same person on a regular basis, try to save one fact or current event in their life from a given conversation and bring it up next time you talk.

Don't get me wrong: I investigate warnings, and I act on them if they're true and relevant. But callout posts are, on a very fundamental level, not about what people say they're about. There are exceptions, but generally speaking they're made for one or more of the following reasons:

OP didn't like the subject to begin with (often for bigoted reasons), and they wanted a reason, and a following, to justify and validate that.

OP wanted to gain popularity, so they made themselves look like either a victim, a hero, or both.

OP wanted to claim victim status in a private falling-out in order to preserve good standing with their own friends/their community.

OP didn't like what the subject was saying, and wanted to silence them (often for bigoted reasons).

OP genuinely just wants "revenge" on the subject, or otherwise wants to ruin their reputation and have them sent harassment.

Again, there are exceptions: there are "callouts" that just unravel a subject's lies, or point out problems in already public actions. If OP is claiming to have been personally victimized in a legitimately serious way, and especially one that indicates the subject might be a danger to others, I'm definitely more willing to believe it- one obvious example being sexual violence.

But oftentimes, callouts are incredibly personal, misleading, emotionally manipulative, blatantly untrue, or all of the above.

This person came to me on anon; I have absolutely no way of knowing what their motives are or how trustworthy they are. There is no credibility or accountability here.

And I did read the post. Lo and behold, it's riddled with emotionally manipulative language, false accusations, and the biggest reaches I've ever seen:

"DON'T READ THIS CALLOUT, IT'S SO TRIGGERING TO EVERYONE, JUST TAKE MY WORD FOR IT. But the proof is here if you REALLY don't believe me"

"Proof" is a scarce handful of screenshots taken out of context that contain emotionally evocative language, but do not support the accusations at all.

Some accusations are genuinely just weird logic leaps with no support, others are matters of personal opinion obviously driven by bigoted motives.

OP themselves expresses very publicly that they believe people who are marginalized in the ways the subject are, who speak on that marginalization, should be silenced.

I try to assume good faith here, and I want to believe this anon was just guilt-tripped and manipulated by the post in question. I don't hold any ill will here.

But anon, I want you to ask yourself:

Are the accusations you're making something you have personally investigated and found to be true?

Does this person deserve the harassment and ostracization they will likely receive as a result of your accusations?

Will you hold yourself accountable for the damage you've caused if you're wrong?

アカウント作り直したので過去絵中心にボチボチ更新していきます。

I have re-created my account.

My creator name is Nishiki Suzumori.

I will update mainly illustrations I have drawn in the past.

The cover reads "Pocahontas defiled Americans." A standard tone for a video cover.

The next thing I saw gave me goosebumps

To be honest, I was skeptical of the video, so I decided to check the comments first to make sure I wouldn't hear a lot of discriminatory words.

One user wrote (shortly):

"I still partly understand the complaints about the cartoon. *the user then listed things they would like to see in the cartoon*."

The author of the video responded:

"Then people just need to stop asking for inclusivity, so they don't get offended later because they were somehow portrayed incorrectly in a Disney cartoon."

This is a very strange answer... 🤨 This simply doesn't make sense.

What kind of "asked inclusion" can we possibly be talking about when this author's statements contradict inclusion, as if saying:

"You want to be included in story? Then don't dare criticize how you're portrayed."

texas tech's quartback, brendan sorsby, was investigated for sports gambling. i know sports betting is all the rage right now, but athletes themselves are not allowed to do it. it is Rule Number 1 and it is the highest priority rule for the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), who governs all athletic programs at about 1,100 colleges in the US.

the invesitagetion of sorsby revealed that, not only did he place more than 9,000 sports bets when he himself was a collegiate athlete, but 40 of those bets were AGAINST HIS OWN TEAM when he was playing at indiana university. immediately, this threatens the integrity of the sport, and especially because indiana is the hottest team right now as the defending national champion.

the NCAA, which is largely a sham organization these days (they've truly lost their grasp and college athletics are the wild west now) actually enforced their Number 1 Rule and told sorsby his career is over, that he would never play college football again (and, subsequently, that he would never get drafted into the NFL because his college career was cut short).

well, because the NCAA is a husk of its former self, sorsby and texad tech immediately took this to court. MANY athletes have learned these past few seasons that if you can find a judge who's a fan of your team, you can get any NCAA ruling overturned. that's exactly what texas tech did. they filed a suit in Lubbock, where the university is located and where every judge is an alum of texas tech. so sorsby was granted an injunction and will now only be suspended for the first 2 games od the 2026 season (which are alwayd against no-name teams that will be destroyed regardless of who's suspended).

every other school in the country immediately went on the defensive because this is a very clear integretiy issue. so nebraska and georgia (sic em dawgs) released statements saying that all currently-scheduled competitions witb Texas Tech in ANY sport will be canceled and there will be no future schedulings. at least 3 of the major conferences (SEC, Big 10, Big 12) , who account for almost all division 1 sports teams in the country, are also in discussions about cancelling comtests. Texas Tech is part of the Big 12, and there is serious talk of all other teams in the conference shutting texas tech out.

now would probably be time where i say that texas tech is one of the wealthiest programs in college football becaise there is a single billionaire alumnus pouring money into the program with hopes of essentially buying a championship. so texas techs integrity has always been questionable. anyway, the university president put oit a statement that he doesnt care that sorseby violated regulation and that texas tech will sue any school that refuses to play them because it jeopardizes their championship prospects if they're umable to play any games.

ESPN is breathlessly reporting on his treatment for gambling addiction and discussing professional teams who should draft him

which, of course, entirely overlooks the abandonment of any sense of morality or ethics of those teams' management, or the broadcast network that makes fucking bank on controversy as well as nfl football.

1. Some readers left comments that was basically their headcanon about the characters.

"Oh, but they are xxx" "They are not like that", etc

2. Some begged me not to make the characters do this or that. One of these comments was longer than the chapter itself.

"Please don't make A do xxx", etc.

3. Some told me they hate the top character and they don't deserve the bottom, and made effort to let me know each time I update.

4. Some told me they hate me because I tend to end each chapter with cliffhanger. I'm not a native English speaker and the word 'hate' is such a strong word in my native language, it makes me sad each time someone put it in the comment.

I already added the tag 'Dark A" to imply that my portrayal of the top character is not the sweet kind. There are a lot of fics in the same fandom which portrayed the bottom character as doomed and miserable. I also added a note at the latest chapter that I'm just writing fic that I want to read, and while I appreciate the interest, I don't appreciate such comments. I still get them. "Please do not make Dark A that Dark!"

I don't get what I've done wrong...

At this point, I'm considering on deleting the fic or just discontinuing it.

Where did I go wrong...?

Oh anon *hugs* You didn't do anything wrong at all!!! 💗

You wrote a story you were interested in. You tagged it to indicate what you were writing. You even added an author's note to make it clear. You did everything right.

The problem here is that people are reading your fic when they don't actually want to. I don't know why anyone would spend time reading something they don't like because that's a waste of time and energy.

I suspect that someone out there is encouraging people to leave these comments on your work in order to harass you into stopping. That's often the root cause when there are multiple people leaving these kinds of comments.

I recommend changing the settings on your work so that only logged-in users can comment on your work. You can do this in the privacy settings of the fic itself. You can also disallow all comments if it feels safer for you.

You can also go to your work and look at the comments. Every comment from a logged-in user will have a Block button on it.

Once you block a user, they will no longer be able to comment or kudos on your fics. In my opinion, these particular readers have probably lost the privilege to comment on your fics.

If you change your mind later, you can unblock them from your Preferences page.

There are people out there who don't like dark fic. That's okay. They don't have to read it. What's not okay is trying to make you stop writing it.

I totally understand if you decide you want to delete or orphan or just abandon the fic, anon. You were writing this because you enjoyed the story. You didn't write it to hear people tell you they hate it.

Curating your comments helps discourage bad faith actors from acting. When they see others complaining or harassing you, they're more likely to harass you as well--strength in numbers and all that. I would delete every negative comment you don't like (and the full thread of comments on them if you have those and want to delete them) after blocking every user who has harassed you. Then turn comment moderation on.

Deleting their negative comments and making it hard for their negative comments to go public will overall kill the "movement" to harass you, especially if you give it no attention. Which you shouldn't! These people are acting in malice and don't deserve your attention.