case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2015-12-14 06:38 pm

[ SECRET POST #3267 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3267 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05. [repeat]


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________


11.


__________________________________________________



12.













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 050 secrets from Secret Submission Post #467.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ], [ 1 - random advertisement for porcelain doves ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

IA

(Anonymous) 2015-12-15 12:31 am (UTC)(link)
That is a problem I find with litmus tests.

Especially when they talk about/advise against doing a thing and even if something only TECHNICALLY fits, even if it makes sense in context and they're like "doesn't matter, still bad"

Obviously a test can't account for every situation and some excuses people will make for doing a thing may not be good. But rigid absolutism isn't the answer.

The context and details of something actually matter a lot.

Re: IA

(Anonymous) 2015-12-15 03:06 am (UTC)(link)
+1 YES. Thank you.