Interested in advertising on Derpibooru? Click here for information!
Help fund the $15 daily operational cost of Derpibooru - support us financially!
Description
No description provided.
Subjects of Equestria! We are pleased to kick off the Nightmare Night Festivities and the 14th anniversary of the return of our beloved Princess Luna! Join us in celebration!
Corection: if not, I repeat “Fluffy dont eat it”.
Martini is worst fluffy.
It’s okay. I’m glad we got this mess sorted out.
Ah, I can understand that. I’m a bit touchy too, but moreso with people who think that fluffy pony is a fetish, or that hugboxers/abusers must be mentally ill because of what they fictionally like. I’m sorry for misunderstanding you!
I’m sorry for being harsh on you. I’d encountered numerous anon ponies on this site that made me bitter towards them. At least, when it invokes fluffies.
Also, I had no idea what the creator’s rules were. Please understand that I take the fluffy concept too seriously.
As for the tags, I’d fix it.
Fine, here’s my actual name. What a difference.
It’s tagged incorrectly, by the way. If you go to the source and look at the tags the actual artist gave it, you’ll see “Luigi artist:MagnetMike safe sketties”. No impending death, and none of the comments even imply death or negativity in the slightest.
I’m not saying that you can’t take fluffy pony seriously. But you have to play by the creator’s rules. If it’s a realistic storyline like Maroonfall, bring real-world logic into it. If it’s a reality-bending Fan Martini story or a Tom and Jerry abuser-fluffy story, you can’t start applying real-world logic and say ‘this isn’t funny, it’s animal abuse!’
Look at the tags. There is one called: impending death. Despite being in a cartoony setting, the fluffy dying this way is horrible.
Murderous anons are scum. Incompentent owners, however, are just incompetent. I give them more leeway as they are not doing abuse intentionally.
Let me tell you two things.
First: I have a tendency to take things seriously. Especially when it involves the unjust abuse of beings, fictional or not, who cannot truly defend themselves.
Second: Until you decide to use an actual name, I shan’t take your comments seriously. At all.
But why? Why can’t a cartoon have a story and not just be silly? Why are murderous anons/incompetent owners and different from malicious Elmer Fudds/Yosemite Sams with better win records?
And really, how can you say that the fluffy won’t survive when it’s a cartoony picture (smiling sun, classic TNT in sketti) and it’s a fluffy pony (cartoony by nature?)
I’m not new to fluffy pony. I’ve been viewing them for awhile now.
The first two examples you proposed are okay with me as long as they are simply silly. The last one is inexcusable.
Will this fluffy survive being hit by this impending explosion? No, it will not. That’s why this picture annoys me.
Um, you must be new to fluffy pony. They do function on their own kind of cartoon logic. They drown by looking at water, end up in high places they can’t have climbed to and are so saccharine that ordinary people become murder-monsters just by meeting them.
It’s like Friendship Is Magic; some stories are very serious and realistic, others are completely silly. You can do both with talking pastel ponies.
Fluffies do not function on cartoon logic. If they did, then this would be very funny.
No, it’s hilarious! You have to be quite the stick-in-the-mud to not find this at least silly.