Guest Anonymous May 19, 2013 May 19, 2013 I think these make sense (except tulpa's, no need to define that), but I don't think it would be easy to change the way every member pluralizes tulpa, I can't really see it happening too much.
Kiahdaj May 19, 2013 May 19, 2013 Works for me, and makes sense. So why not? In the end, as long as we all agree on something, I hardly give a shit. "If this can be avoided, it should. If it can't, then it would be better if it could be. If it happened and you're thinking back to it, try and think back further. Try not to avoid it with your mind. If any of this is possible, it may be helpful. If not, it won't be."
Sands May 19, 2013 May 19, 2013 Tulpæ >æ No. The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)
Lacquer May 20, 2013 May 20, 2013 >"Oh man, you've got so many tulpa documents on your computer." This one (and the first one) doesn't apply, because you would use the singular in this case anyway. A good test I like to do is replace "tulpa" with "cat" to see if it works. "Oh man, you've got so many cat documents on your computer." As for the others: >"I have two Tulpas." "I have two cats." >"So we all have our own theories on how Tulpæ work, huh?" "So we all have our own theories on how cats work, huh?" Status: unresolved Actually, it is resolved. It's "tulpas". (this thread should be merged with the one I just linked, in fact). Also, no matter what anyone says, or how anyone pronounces it, actually going through the effort to use the "æ" character is pointless and looks horrible and pretentious.
Sands May 20, 2013 May 20, 2013 I'll just leave this here. Again. The THE SUBCONCIOUS ochinchin occultists frt.sys (except Roswell because he doesn't want to be a part of it)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.