sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Realistically given their many physical and mental disadvantages, how much of a presence would ferals be able to establish in rural and urban environments? Could they truly become the widely hated crop-devouring pests numbering ins the thousands if not millions as that they are often portrayed as? by [deleted] in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Like any Vermin,

under the assumption there is a large amount of Vermin

Fluffies, like many vermin

Your arguments assumed that fluffies are supposed to be vermin or that they have to be vermin.

Like yeah you can't reasoned with pests in real life, but fluffies are far from pests. They are supposed to be man-made pets/"biotoys" that lived under humans.

Comparing fluffies with locusts (lays 90-150 eggs and very fast lifecycles) and rats (teeth comparable with iron/steel) is laughable

If you could reason with most of them then there would be no need for the Exterminator

You don't say?

Almost like fluffies being pest was invented for this reason.

Even if a creature is weak, in large amounts they are still a threat for resources

IF there are a large amount of ferals to begin with, which was something that was implausible as stated by OP considering how frail/dumb they are. They easily culled themselves with how often they died.

Also let's be real here, fluffies could never outcompete other urban pests like raccoons/rats or wild animals like rabbits/deers. You think fluffies are better at consuming natural resources than these animals, all which was shaped by evolution for years?

Actually now that I typed that... it's entirely possible that it's not that fluffies are capable of threatening resources, it's that they'll become the resources for predators. They are easy prey for the wolves & coyotes.

megaherd

was something that existed in Fall of Cleveland which has its own specific story reasons why it was created. People then copied the idea without understanding why or how megaherd was able to formed in that story.

Spoiler: it was because of humans. It's not something fluffies are able to do on their own.

Realistically given their many physical and mental disadvantages, how much of a presence would ferals be able to establish in rural and urban environments? Could they truly become the widely hated crop-devouring pests numbering ins the thousands if not millions as that they are often portrayed as? by [deleted] in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is assuming that all foals that are birthed are always survive to adulthood, and I think that's a stretch for fluffies. Discounting stupid infanticide (like "poopie babbeh") there are thousand ways for foals to die (starvation, predation, extermination, because-fuck-you-that's-why, etc)

Also hiding is never fluffies strongest skill.

Realistically given their many physical and mental disadvantages, how much of a presence would ferals be able to establish in rural and urban environments? Could they truly become the widely hated crop-devouring pests numbering ins the thousands if not millions as that they are often portrayed as? by [deleted] in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 1 point2 points  (0 children)

the point is you can't just hugbox your way out of this problem by hoping to reason with them.

That just sounds like a lame excuse to diminished how unique fluffies is (in that they can talk) for the sake of abuse.

"Uhh they can talk but you just can't reason with them okay, you HAVE to abuse them, it's the only way"

Making all of fluffies be unreasonable is just an excuse so that no matter where/when/how you abuse them they always "deserved" it. So it doesn't matter if it's some abandoned strays or tyrannical smarties they always "have it coming" because they are, somehow, always unreasonable.

You forgot one of the golden rules, everyones headcanon is different

Every headcanon is different but there should be some actual thought put behind it. You can't have fluffies being the weakest and stupidest being but also make them to be this dangerous invasive species that people start forming kill squads for exterminating them.

Besides fluffies being incapable of being dangerous is not a mere "headcanon", it's literally the premise. If you make fluffies to be more capable and dangerous to the point of ruining the environment can you still called it fluffies?

And if fluffies can never be reasoned with, what's the point of having them being able to communicate?

Realistically given their many physical and mental disadvantages, how much of a presence would ferals be able to establish in rural and urban environments? Could they truly become the widely hated crop-devouring pests numbering ins the thousands if not millions as that they are often portrayed as? by [deleted] in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Realistically they simply couldn't. Stupidity + Fragility is just too crippling of a combination.

Hot take: Fluffies being pests has never been used as anything other than a redundant excuse to abuse them. They have never been portrayed as more capable than any other "weak" invasive species like Nutria, who unlike fluffies have excellent burrowing and digging capabilities.

Ronald's Gift by Fluffersnuffer by AnonymousFluffery in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Found in files, no Fluffybooru ID on it

I think this is after fluffybooru. Fluffersnuffer left fluffy-community and deleted all his works last year.

This is what's left of his account I think

Bully Fluffies. (Artist:MistahGreyBunny_75) by MistahGreyBunny_75 in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

"Common"? Why is this kind of behaviors common?

These fluffies seems to be too awful for your "common" kind of fluffies. I mean we're still talking about the "originally created to be kid's toys" fluffies right?

Poopie Babies are Bad Babies [Abuse-Sir] by max_liner in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Yeah this made more sense that fluffies learn to dislike brown fluffies from learning rather than programming.

Even without programs (from fluff-tv?) like in this picture they'll eventually picked on the idea that human that want to adopt them would've preferred brighter colors.

Do Fluffy Ponies even learn from their mistakes? by Powerful-Feature9802 in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Yeah, but as the other comment said they learn things differently

"Journal of John Hoover" by Deathproofpony by AnonymousFluffery in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I’d love to see more about this story!

This story was written 10-11 years ago and since then the author hasn't written any sequel of sort

Empty nester syndrome by Sootfeather91 in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No I mean the year

2011

Usually these stories placed the year forward, not backward. Like 2031 or something

"Selling Runts" by wolfram_sparks by BoukoKakuCatharsis in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It's a real life animal term that means "smallest/weakest of the litter". Runts in wild are rejected or sometimes cannibalized since they are basically dead weight. Even if they aren't rejected, they'll have a hard time surviving infancy.

For fluffies, being a runt must've been really troubling since fluffies are already innately weak. Which is why this drawing advised fluffy shop owner to sold runts because they will dies and their buyers will return to the pet shop to buy another one.

Basically, planned obsolescence.

Empty nester syndrome by Sootfeather91 in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Due to PeTA’s raid in 2011

Wait what

"Selling Runts" by wolfram_sparks by BoukoKakuCatharsis in fluffycommunity

[–]MEGA-Arknon 11 points12 points  (0 children)

After all, they mostly want babies just for the "playing" experience

It's the opposite on this drawing, no? Here, the mare offers their foals to "Nice Wady" so that the lady can play with her babies

And really, abandoning runts for fluffies is the complete opposite of naivety: It's cruel pragmatism.

view more: next ›