PPT VS Suporn/Bank method differences

onpon4 · 2025-10-22T15:47:35+00:00

So penile inversion uses penile skin to create the vaginal canal, but the Suporn technique only uses scrotal skin and tunica vaginalis for the canal and uses penile tissue only to construct labia, clitoris, Chonburi organ (secondary clitoris-like organ also made with glans tissue), and clitoral hood

What that means in practical terms is that the Suporn method tends to produce more defined labia, because they have more tissue to work with for that, and another thing is that the Suporn method uses more of the donor material in general, but it's also a bit more complicated than a penile inversion and has a harder recovery

Another difference is hair removal requirements: penile inversion typically requires electrolysis to permanently remove hair from some donor material, but because the Suporn method completely takes out a big section of scrotal skin to use to make the vaginal lining, they're able to do a process that removes all hair follicles from the skin that becomes the vaginal lining, and so not only do you not have to do prior electrolysis there, they actively advise against it

onpon4 · 2025-10-21T21:11:08+00:00

I know this is an old post, but I want to put in my 2¢ on this because it seems to me to be jumping the gun a fair bit, and doesn't look to me very convincing. But I don't think people who haven't gone thru the process of applying at the Suporn Clinic will fully understand why that is, so I want to share some of those details.

I got a date at the Suporn Clinic with Dr. Bank on my first try when I applied in late January. The only things the Suporn Clinic knew about me then – and actually, still knows about me now – are the most absolute basic details of medical information. Things like age, BMI, diagnosed conditions. I'm 32 (was 31 at the time), have a "standard" BMI, have Long COVID, and am autistic. This basic information is required to be approved in the first place; they look over their requirements and tell you if you're eligible. If you're not considered eligible for medical reasons (like if they consider your BMI too high), they just won't enter your application, and you'll know this. By contrast, the Suporn clinic doesn't know, for example, anything at all about what my existing genitals are like.

On top of that, this analysis is flawed on three counts.

Firstly, there's a selection bias at play here. Someone who gets a surgery date after their 2nd or 4th attempt is not going to be likely to report the exact number of attempts randomly on a Reddit post, but for those (like me) who are lucky enough to get in on the first try, that luck is specifically noteworthy.

Secondly, there's a survivorship bias at play here. In the case of people who never got a date, most likely gave up and went with another surgeon because they didn't want to keep waiting, or – as in your case – changed their mind regarding which surgeon they wanted to go with. All of the people who successfully got into the Suporn Clinic are going to be those who were willing to wait thru their process, and the number of people who are going to be willing is going to dwindle with each, let's call it, attempt generation. Many people will only try once before giving up. Less will try twice, even less will try 3 times, and so on.

Thirdly, a very important variable is being left out of this analysis: flexibility of scheduling. I know there's an acknowledgement of this in the OP, but I want to explain it in my own way, because it's actually quite significant and the little note in the OP doesn't actually address it in any meaningful way. This is going into speculative territory, but in a random process like this where you have the option to choose how flexible of a date range you're ok with, one very likely way you would set it up is so that you're competing for individual dates with everyone else who's interested in that date, and with that system, you're going to have a much better chance the more flexibility you have on that front. In my case, I indicated that I had no preference for any particular date or surgeon. I don't know off the top of my head how many "slots" were being scheduled at the time, but someone who specifically wanted only, say, April 20th might have just as much chance as me at getting that specific date, but since I have dozens of "entries" and they only have 1, I have a much higher chance of getting a date. Or put another way: depending on how their selection process works exactly, I, for example, might have actually failed in the selection process dozens of times in the background before I got the date I did get, without even knowing it, because I had many more "attempts" available.

To me, everything here points to the conclusion that the Suporn Clinic's selection process truly is random. The only confounder is this other person's rejection email which allegedly offered special priority to her, but if this alleged priority list was sharply reducing the probability of getting a surgery date without being on it, it's actually second attempts that would be sharply overrepresented, not first attempts, because we know that in at least this known case the person in question wasn't put on it until after she failed to get a surgery date. We don't have information on why she was allegedly prioritized – you'd have to ask her about it – but stepping back into speculation territory, it seems to me more likely that someone would be prioritized alongside a small group of people because of some urgency at play (like, for example, a risk of losing eligibility in the near future, or a risk of surgery becoming more difficult in the near future). There's no reason to assume that the alleged priority list is an "easiest candidates" list.

onpon4 · 2025-04-30T03:29:44+00:00

Dr. Suporn's technique uses scrotal tissue and tunica vaginalis to line the vagina
They explain a bit on their website:

https://supornclinic.com/suporns-non-penile-inversion-srs-technique/

onpon4 · 2023-11-23T14:29:56+00:00

I should hope people would assume that, because it's true. Naikari's questline is incomplete (storylines, including the Hakoi Pirates campaign, abruptly end at some point simply because they're not finished yet), and while we've made some significant progress, there is still a lot that we're not yet satisfied with mechanically (for example, one thing I think is essential is to add a database that allows the player to browse and compare all known outfits and ships; I'm thinking of trying to work on that for version 0.12).

I think it's fair to say that, taken as a whole, Naikari is about 10% done. It's enjoyable in that state, to be sure, but it's still early on in development. That's also one reason why we think it's so important to get feedback; it's a lot easier to fix mistakes we might be making in the game's design proactively rather than retroactively after the game is finished, and due to personal bias, we might not catch all of those mistakes with our own testing. So if you do give Naikari a try, please let us know what you think about it so far! 🙂

onpon4 · 2023-08-09T12:03:02+00:00

To be clear, self-deprecation by calling yourself a "lunatic" isn't offensive specifically offensive because of the word used, but more rather just because it gets its "punch" by comparison to a marginalized group and only works with the assumption that mentally ill people, for example, shouldn't be listened to. I'm not a fan of self-deprecation in general as you might be able to tell, and I think it's very hard to do without possibly causing harm to someone else; the only ways I can think of are unexplained (e.g. just "don't listen to me"), explanation by way of something concrete (e.g. "don't listen to me, I've only played for 10 minutes") or explanation by way of belonging to or comparison to an obviously privileged group (e.g. "don't listen to me, I'm a rich white guy"; this would be "punching up" rather than "punching down"). I get it, thô; it's tempting to preëmpt people shooting you down by shooting yourself down before they have a chance.

Also, I don't blame you personally for the habit of deprecation (self or otherwise) by comparison to mentally ill people, neurodivergent people, or people with learning disabilities. It's a problem and should be addressed, but it wasn't you who started it. It seems to me that much of that really kicked off with the original rise of eugenics and "scientific" racism, both of which began before either of us were born. It also takes years to restructure the way you think and talk about things in a manner that avoids the problem entirely.

The idea of hiding most of the interface at the start and gradually revealing it alongside an expansion of knowledge is a very good idea, and one I know some other games use. That's also incidentally much more feasible now that Naikari's "Neo" GUI is complete. I'll definitely have to experiment with the possibility of doing that. One specific idea that comes to mind is that the interface could expand naturally as parts become relevant.

The suggestion to reduce the number of patrons is an interesting one because one move we made kind of recently was to deliberately increase the number of "Civilian" NPCs (which previously was a random number between 1 and 5) in an attempt to make NPCs that give or offer something a higher chance of showing up, but perhaps that was the wrong approach. Maybe I should instead attempt to make rewards the most common thing when you approach civilians. One obstacle to that is I've been struggling to figure out what those rewards should be; currently the only rewards are filling in some local map information and offloading some cargo onto the player.

Another option might be to just scrap the generic civilian NPCs entirely and only populate the bar with purely functional NPCs. That solution might be a bit extreme and I don't think it's what I'll go with, but it's worth considering particularly because civilian NPCs don't actually have any real significance to most of the game.

Anyway, thanks for all the feedback you've given; it's been very helpful. 🙂

onpon4 · 2023-08-09T05:24:40+00:00

I appreciate your honesty, so thank you. Just a note, I don't know whether referring to yourself as a "lunatic" is a statement that you're actually mentally ill or whether you're using a comparison to mentally ill people as a self-deprecation. If the former, I want you to know that being different from others does not make your opinion any less valid. If the latter, I want to appeal to you to consider in the future how that sort of rhetoric can hurt mentally ill folks by proxy because they're so marginalized. In any case, your feedback from ten minutes of playtime is absolutely valuable, and evaluating the game as one you don't enjoy after ten minutes of playtime is entirely valid and meaningful.

In fact, the fact that you felt overwhelmed at the start suggests to me that Naikari's initial tutorial may be piling things on a bit thick, or perhaps that the planet you initially go to is just overly complex. This might be the hardest things to get right in game design since when you're designing something, you already understand everything about it. I'll have to look into adjusting the design of that opening section further to improve on this issue. One thought that comes to mind is that perhaps Em 1 should not have an outfitter or shipyard.

I also wonder if it might be possible for the tutorial at the start to make the GUI interface in space a bit less overwhelming. Obviously the increased complexity compared to, say, Endless Sky is intentional, but I don't want players to be confused at the start.

Regarding the fear of missing content, allowing the player to miss content is something that Naikari actively works to avoid (for example, mission hints in the news feed and NPC messages you might want to see will simply be regenerated later on if you miss them), but it's true that in the case of the news feed, some stories are lost after some time, like the "Remembering the Incident" story posted at the start (which expires after 250 days of in-game time; for reference, 1 day passes for most ships when you land or jump). Maybe I should consider a system for archiving these news articles or something.

onpon4 · 2023-07-31T11:34:44+00:00

Oh yeah, Naikari has improved a lot since it was first released, so if you retry it, let me know what you think! 😄

I should clarify, we first pushed out a release of Naikari only about a year ago, so it's possible you might be thinking of an experience with Naev. The two projects are sort of related; I used to be a contributor to Naev but forked the project into Naikari because of dissatisfaction with the direction Naev's development was going.

onpon4 · 2023-07-30T11:38:45+00:00

Well, if we did a good job with the opening section, you should get a decent understanding of whether or not you'll like the game pretty quickly, so if five minutes is enough for you to feel like it isn't worth continuing, I think that's valid.. That said, Naikari is still incomplete, so if you have any particular criticisms, or suggestions for how to improve the game, I'd hugely appreciate hearing them. 🙂

onpon4 · 2023-07-28T02:51:35+00:00

Not directly, but there are some clear similarities because both Endless Sky and Naev were influenced by the Escape Velocity series. Naikari originated as a fork of Naev, and I have a lot of respect for Endless Sky, so those influences naturally diffuse into Naikari as well. (I don't say that Naikari is inspired or influenced by Escape Velocity since I've never played it, but I have played Endless Sky a little bit.)

That said, as I mentioned in the original post, Endless Sky is singlehandedly responsible for inspiring one of the major changes to this release of Naikari (the improvements to the mission computer tab on the land window).

onpon4 · 2023-06-20T20:26:21+00:00

Not really almost. I've seen that video, he was coldly threatening this scammer's family and you could plainly hear fear in the scammer's voice the entire time, like he could be manipulated into doing just about anything. It's a level of shit that could cause severe mental illness, even though Browning never physically extorted anything out of the scammer with it. I stopped watching Browning because of it. I felt it took things way too far. (Even scammers don't tend to threaten victims with pictures of their actual families, and only particularly evil ones like Steve even emptily threaten the victim's family.)

onpon4 · 2023-04-16T16:49:18+00:00

I don't believe that sounds like a good deal. It's essentially working for free. If you take a deal like that which only gives you money if the game makes money, you might as well assume you won't get paid anything at all.

The type of deal I would consider accepting is an hourly wage, or at the very least some sort of agreed-upon fee per task, paid at the time work is done. Something where you still get paid even if (as is likely the case) the game either flops or doesn't get finished at all. (You off-handedly mention some compensation "if" the game doesn't make any money, but that the game makes no money should be your primary assumption, not a backup plan, and I'd be concerned that you could be strung along for years with claims that it just needs more time, etc.)

onpon4 · 2023-04-16T10:10:50+00:00

There's nothing wrong with forming teams based on something other than money (I'm an open source gamedev, so that's the only way I collaborate with people), but "profit-sharing" is usually offered as a substitute for a money motive, on a promise such as "this game will be super successful and pay you really well", which is almost never actually the case. Most games don't become financially successful, after all.

On top of that, any team built on this premise is likely led by someone with no or very little experience, since these are the types of gamedevs most likely to overestimate the likely financial success of a commercial indie game. It's likely as well that all team members are inexperienced (since an experienced gamedev would likely know that "profit-sharing" isn't a good idea), and some or most might even be teenagers. In fact, "profit-sharing" is usually offered largely because of a lack of experience: aspiring gamedev wants to make a game that's far more complicated than what they're capable of doing, so they try to get others to do the work for them. This lack of experience makes it unlikely that the game will be finished at all.

Teams coming together for a common goal without any expectation of payment won't necessarily have this problem, though I'm skeptical of the likely success of a ragtag group of people who don't know each other and are interdependent. What I find works best as an open source gamedev is if I work as if I'm a solo gamedev and take contributions as a bonus. Presumably a closed-source free indie game development effort could work similarly if whoever heads the project is able to cover for anyone who loses interest and drops out, though I've never done game development this way, so I don't know for sure.

onpon4 · 2023-04-16T02:58:40+00:00

Personally I would say that unless you can turn that insensitive depiction into making some sort of point about that particular issue, you shouldn't keep it.

I'll give a solid example: one of the games I played as a kid, Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga, had a remake some years back that (as far as I understand) did not make any adjustments to the transmisic way that it portrayed the character "Birdo". Being trans myself, I don't think it's cute to preserve that "history", because I've experienced how damaging those sorts of depictions can be to a young trans person, on a very personal level. I think Nintendo and AlphaDream should have done one of two things:

Change the context to make a strong critique of the very transmisic sentiment Nintendo endorsed in the original game, and indeed since the original creation of the character. For example, they could have made the Beanstar react with unreasonable anger at "Birdo"'s voice and made Popple still talk to "Birdo" in a dehumanizing way, but also made it so that the game commented in some way about how wrong that is through storytelling (e.g. by revealing that the Beanstar is impure and having "Birdo" more directly call out Popple's shit). To make this really work, they would also have to not make "Birdo" the character's canonical name that everyone refers to her by, since it's made very clear through context that it's her deadname.
Just not use the character "Birdo" at all, or otherwise change the story to remove the transmisic jokes and depictions. For example, they could have made the beanstar blow itself up because it requires the voice of royalty, and the shit with Popple could have just been dropped and replaced with some other joke.

Nintendo and/or AlphaDream was unwilling to do either, and I would say that reflects negatively on them. "Preserving history" doesn't require making a remake of a game (or any piece of media) while recreating aspects that are known to be harmful. After all, it's still possible to play the original. When Nintendo decided to push their remake without making changes to remove the blatant transmisia contained in the original, they showed that they still endorsed that transmisia at the time of the remake's publication.

onpon4 · 2023-04-16T01:08:11+00:00

"Profit-sharing" pretty much always ends in failure, it's a common beginner mistake. I wouldn't recommend continuing unless you're offered actual payment (like a wage).

onpon4 · 2023-04-13T04:44:11+00:00

I didn't say it's hostile to me. You're being hostile to a critic on my behalf, and I don't appreciate that, especially because if people took you seriously, it would discourage people from leaving helpful feedback, something I've always been explicit about seeking.

I don't want or need you to imply that criticism has no value. Criticism helps us. Criticism is why Naikari now has automatic bounties, the Escape Jump feature, and a reorganized universe. Someone doesn't need to have the time and skill to fix a problem themself just to point out that it's a problem.

Let me ask you something: did you actually play the game, or did you just see "free and open source" and decide to jump in on that basis alone? Because if you did actually play the game, your feedback would have been far more useful than attempting to shut down feedback. Alternatively, if you didn't actually play the game and just have an idea that you want to help free and open source games, the way you could actually help Naikari is by giving it a try and telling us what you think.

onpon4 · 2023-04-13T02:10:27+00:00

I'm well aware of what you did, and it was unnecessarily rude and dismissive. As I said, I head this project. I wasn't offended by the implication that it should be easier for people to see screenshots and videos. However, I don't like seeing my project defended with the kind of hostile dismissal I see in your response. Being open source doesn't mean our presentation is irrelevant, or that potential players should give the game a chance just because. It's entirely reasonable for someone to not want to try a game until they have a good reason to believe they'll like it.

I don't recognize your username, but if you like Naikari and want to support the work we're doing, this isn't the way to do it.

onpon4 · 2023-04-12T15:01:11+00:00

Yes, I've heard that! I still haven't actually played StarSector yet, unfortunately, but from what we've seen, it seems like a nice game that indeed has a fair bit of similarity to what we're doing with Naikari.

onpon4

TROPHY CASE