Guestbook

guestbook | home

Welcome to the Cave of Dragonflies guestbook.

Off-topic discussion is allowed, but spam is not; please make sure all your messages are of substantial meaning that at least somebody would be interested in reading and responding to. That being said, obviously I appreciate comments relating to The Cave of Dragonflies, whether they are error reports, questions, suggestions or whatever else you might want to get across.

Rude, offensive or otherwise inappropriate messages will be deleted on sight. Repeat troublemakers will be banned altogether. Please keep any websites entered into the website field reasonably family-friendly.

Users can use BBCode (forum code) to format their messages:

A fun little treat: the spam verification Pokémon at the bottom of the form has a 1/8192 chance of being shiny, the same as in the games prior to the sixth generation. If you get a shiny, congratulations! Feel free to brag in your post (but try to keep the rest of the post meaningful).






132



Messages

Anybody with Admin below their name is definitely me or a trusted person. I myself will always sign as Butterfree. If somebody signs under that name but does not have the Admin label, it is most likely an impostor.

Pages: 1

Butterfree
Admin
Website: The Cave of Dragonflies
Commenting on: 07-25-08

Yes, the old theories are still available where they used to be if people want to access them. I don't like taking content permanently off the Internet.

[10/08/2008 12:55:18]

eeveefan
Commenting on: 07-25-08

I like your theories better, but…. I put dragonflycave.com/genetics.apsx

and the old theory was there =o

[09/08/2008 21:05:15]

Butterfree
Admin
Website: The Cave of Dragonflies
Commenting on: 07-25-08

Yeah, I know. I don't know what else to make it. D: Well, maybe I should make it about that game, once I get it up.

[30/07/2008 22:02:33]

camerupt
Commenting on: 07-25-08

The poll asking whether or not you should take the fan theories down is still there.

[30/07/2008 21:30:43]

shadow_lugia
Commenting on: 07-25-08

Wow. Great job on the new style, I love it. I think I'll be using this instead of Shiny Umbreon from now on!

[29/07/2008 18:42:02]

Lucy
Website: Genetic-Anomaly
Commenting on: 07-25-08

Okay, so…I'm new to this site, there are several things I have to say. First of all, I love-love-love it. Thanks so much, Butterfree, for your perfectly-named sprite downloads. (I was wondering if you had the icons, or knew where I can get them? The only good place I know is Pe2k, and for some reason parental controls won't let me in.)



Two, I never read the fan theories, but for you people being angry about them being taken down, Butterfree didn't even necessarily have to put a poll. She could have just taken them down. So at least she gave people the option, even though it was technically her choice in the first place!



Third…without genitals, how would Pokemon reproduce? Honestly. They don't go through binary fission and just split, and hey, there's another! So don't be so immature about the discussion.

[28/07/2008 18:56:49]

EvilPenguin
Commenting on: 07-25-08

*does not appreciate being called a sick fuck* *whistles nonchalantly *

[28/07/2008 01:32:51]

Butterfree
Admin
Website: The Cave of Dragonflies
Commenting on: 07-25-08

I'm sorry, but I really can't see what is so terribly wrong with assuming that Pokémon reproduce sexually for the purposes of theorizing about their genetics, particularly since we do know that two sexes exist (why would they otherwise?).



You know nothing about whether Pokémon have genitals. It is quite an obvious fact that if they have genitals, they would not be drawn on in the official art, so saying you can't see them there proves nothing. You're welcome to just think of Pokémon as reproducing through some mystical phenomenon or whatever if you feel like it, but the thing is that that view isn't very open to intelligent theorizing about anything. Since I'm creating a theory to begin with, I must assume they reproduce by some sensible and scientifically explainable means.



(Also, I know a lot of nice people who look at Pokémon hentai who would not appreciate being called sick fucks.)

[28/07/2008 01:09:53]

combee
Commenting on: 07-25-08

Pokémon don't have genitals. In fact, nobody has ever seen a pokémon lay an egg, so you can also assume that nobody has seen pokémon having sex. Therefore, the purpose of genders is unknown, ja? Whilst pokémon can breed, nobody knows how. Unless you look at pokémon hentai, you sick fuck.

[27/07/2008 22:32:16]

Butterfree
Admin
Website: The Cave of Dragonflies
Commenting on: 07-25-08

I don't really see physical gender differences as being anything worth explaining specifically, to be honest. We already know how the sex is determined; the physical gender differences are just part of what the ruling sex strands do, just like the formation of genitals would be.



And why would more options to keep them up be needed? o_O If you want to keep them, having one option to express that will work just as well as having multiple options.

[27/07/2008 00:57:18]

ArtificialFlavour
Commenting on: 07-25-08

It doesn't explain physical gender differences, which would be nice.



How come there weren't more options to keep them up?

[27/07/2008 00:53:00]

Kahlen
Commenting on: 07-25-08

I think the new theory is really interesting(though I had to read it again to understand it more fully). Good job^.^



Also, I agree that it's better to take down the old theories.

[26/07/2008 20:45:29]

Ketsu
Commenting on: 07-25-08

*head explodes* That was confusing. Well, I'm taking Biology next year, maybe that will clear it up. And welcome back, Butterfree!

[26/07/2008 15:26:42]

Butterfree
Admin
Website: The Cave of Dragonflies
Commenting on: 07-25-08

(Also note that there are three options which basically amount to "Yes, you might as well take the fan theories down (perhaps with some reservations)" while there is only one for "No, don't take them down", so naturally the votes against are more concentrated in the latter; all three "for" options taken together are more than the naysayers, even discounting everybody who voted "Your site, your call".)

[26/07/2008 13:06:28]

Butterfree
Admin
Website: The Cave of Dragonflies
Commenting on: 07-25-08

As it happens, I was watching the poll results from the beginning. At the start, overwhelmingly more people believed it made sense to remove them; later, after the update explaining why I wanted to take the fan theories down disappeared from the front page, the ratios were distorted by the fact that new voters didn't know why I wanted to take them down anymore. I made a list of carefully-explained reasons to take them down and thus obviously felt previously inclined to want to take them down (which, by the way, is what all those voters saying "Your call" were voting for, so it is extremely unfair of you to dismiss all those people as "lame"). The poll was for seeing if people generally wanted to keep the fan theories anyway, which they didn't. You can still access the theories at the same URLs that they used to be; I'm just not going to consider them sections of my site anymore.

[26/07/2008 12:20:14]

Sneasel
Commenting on: 07-25-08

A couple of things… First of all, didn't many of the votes (not including the lame "You Call" one) voted to keep the fan theories. I was one of those voters and I would prefer to have the old fan theories then your new theory.

[26/07/2008 05:25:48]

Aerilic
Commenting on: 07-25-08

*bangs head on biology textbook* Nooo not this again!



Although that always did puzzle me…

[26/07/2008 02:50:15]

Pages: 1