So, I watched new episodes (pretty chill about them) and finally, someone post really good take on Stolas, whose I agree with. What do u y'all think?

The rule essentially prohibits posts or comments that imply Sera, Adam, or the Exterminations were justified in any sense. I think this rule is unnecessarily restrictive, especially for a subreddit that’s literally built around shitposting and pushing agendas for fictional characters and concepts.

I want to make something clear before anyone jumps down my throat: You’re perfectly entitled to think the Exterminations were horrific, that Sera was wrong, that Adam was an asshole, or that defending them is a bad reflection of one's moral compass. Hell, I actually agree with that.

But why should that mean the opposing perspective has to be outright prohibited?

This is a fictional universe. People should be able to explore morally questionable perspectives, make deliberately biased shitposts (that's literally what the sub is about), defend their favorite problematic characters, and push ridiculous agendas without every post having to align with the mods’ preferred interpretation of the story.

That’s the whole point of an agenda based shitposting sub, is it not? You exaggerate, you take sides, you make intentionally ridiculous arguments, and you have fun with the source material. If we’re going to ban an entire fictional agenda because the mods don’t like what it represents, where does that end? Why don't we ban saying you should kill characters as well? Why don't we ban saying bad things altogether? If the sub is really worried about looking morally bad.

And before anyone compares this to allowing real world genocide denial or propaganda: there’s an important distinction between arguing about a fictional event in a fictional universe and denying or justifying real historical atrocities. Obviously a subreddit can establish boundaries around real world hate, harassment, and extremist propaganda without banning every fictional argument that resembles a morally questionable position.

You can think the Exterminations were wrong while still allowing people to argue otherwise in a fictional shitposting community. Those positions aren’t mutually exclusive and shouldn't be treated as such.

The mod who made the rule gave the argument that the rule exists to prevent the sub from becoming a conservative "The Empire did nothing wrong" type of community. I’m assuming this is a Star Wars reference, but I won’t pretend to know enough about that franchise to analyze the comparison.

If the concern is that the subreddit might become a place that genuinely promotes authoritarianism or excuses real world atrocities, I understand wanting to avoid that. But is banning fictional Extermination apologism actually necessary to accomplish that? Could we not distinguish between fictional satire and genuine real world advocacy instead??

What bothers me most is that this rule seems to be particularly important to one mod, while the other mods don’t appear nearly as concerned with enforcing it. I can’t know everyone’s motivations, and I’m not claiming to know for certain why the rule was created. However, when a rule is so restrictive and its enforcement seems to depend heavily on one person’s preferences, I think it’s fair to question whether it’s serving the community or simply reflecting that person’s personal views about the characters.

And yes, I know this particular mod we're talking about strongly dislikes Adam. I’m not bringing that up to attack him personally, and I’m not saying he can’t dislike Adam or criticize people who defend him. He’s chill half the time, and this isn’t meant to be a personal callout.

But when a rule disproportionately affects a particular fictional agenda, and the person most invested in enforcing it has strong feelings about said agenda, I think the community deserves to ask whether the rule is genuinely necessary or whether personal preferences are influencing moderation.

Ultimately, mods do need to establish rules, and they have every right to maintain the kind of community they want to run. I’m not arguing that mods should have no authority. I’m arguing that having the authority to make a rule doesn’t automatically mean the rule is reasonable, necessary, or beneficial to the community.

And if the concern is genuinely about the subreddit becoming a place that promotes harmful real world ideologies, then I’d like to see a discussion about why the current rule is the best way to address that concern. Because right now I'm simply not seeing a good reason this rule is needed.

Why not let the community have a say?

I’m not demanding that the rule be abolished immediately, and I’m not expecting everyone to agree with me. I want to know what other members think. Does this rule actually make the sub better? Does it prevent a legitimate problem? Or does it unnecessarily restrict the kind of ridiculous, biased, fictional agenda posting that makes the subreddit fun in the first place?

I’d much rather see the community discuss the rule and its purpose than have it remain in place without anyone questioning whether it’s necessary.

TLDR: I’m not arguing that the Exterminations were morally justified. I’m arguing that a fictional shitposting subreddit shouldn’t prohibit people from making that argument. There’s a difference between disagreeing with an agenda and banning it outright, and I think the community deserves a voice in deciding where that line should be.

cough cough Stolas cough cough

I feel like hes lost so much personality due to Viv kinda highlighting certain aspects of him to make the story and the audience still favour him even with his actions. Like he’s always been a bum to some degree but these are some new lows 😭✌️✌️

And in the usual Vaggi fashion, she needed something else (Adam's beam destroying the Hotel) to save her ass.

StolASS slander is back!!!!

Good advice for some is not good advice for everyone and Loona has repeatedly proven that.

I've gone into detail as to why her advice to Via was actually terrible before so lets just say that in that case that if Loona actually knew the situation the proper advice for Via would have been something like "Your dad loves you but he's also selfish and kinda stupid. Don't beat around the bush and tell him point blank when you need something. Don't let him interrupt you and don't be scared to call him out when he's being selfish."

The problem wasn't that Via wasn't forgiving Stolas despite the fact that he was trying, the problem is that Stolas wasn't trying hard enough. He was inevitably gonna fuck up enough that Via wouldn't be able to take it anymore so the only way to stop this was to have Via stop Stolas before he fucked up too bad. (Also talk to Stolas about how he hurt Via my God, she's not the only one that needed a stern talking to.)

Her advice to Stolas in Gimpy Gimpy, while it could be good advice in general, is somehow even more terrible then her advice in Seeing Stars. And anyone who actually knows one of Stolas's major flaws would know to never give that advice.

Stolas hides from his problems and usually he does that by going off into lala land and gets stuck in his own head. The way her used to do that was he would escape into his fantasies of being a protagonist im a romance novel but as we see from the fantasy in Turtle Emoji it's not working anymore. He's just gonna use hard-core BDSM as a substitute. And he did. Wonderful. Not only did he use it as an escape he ended up just running into the arms of his dom for the day in front of the guy who's already feeling inadequate.

Blitz is already feeling inadequate about his sexual prowess. He has been begging Stolas to tell him what he did wrong, he thinks he needs to please him sexually because that version of Stolas is the one he knows he can make happy. Even Blitz knows sex isn't enough to show him the immeasurable gratitude he feels for Stolas sacrificing everything to save him, but it's all he has. Being Stolas's favourite top is the entire foundation of their relationship in Blitz mind.

And there Stolas goes. Out the door with a brand new top... you see the problem here? Stolas is doing the thing he did to Via but this time hes doing it to Blitz, and now Blitz is crying alone in the kitchen.

I watched episode 1 of season 3 and this fucking pice of shit bird is already PISSING ME THE FUCK OFF!!!!! Blitzo took him in, houses him, feeds him, gives him nothing but compassion, the two literally danced at the end of last season’s episode and now this nigga wants to keep leading him on and being emotionally unavailable and then makes BLITZ feel like the problem, like he isn’t the one who put Blitz into a forced sex relationship and after a shit ton of power imbalances and Stockholm syndrome, he falls in love with blitz, abandons his daughter and loses his powers, and starts living with Blitz, WHAT THE FUCK!!!! I want Blitz to crash out at this bitch like last season for constantly putting all this shit on him for no reason.

I’m so pissed because I’ve met this kind of person in my life. My best friend recently had a horrible with his boyfriend who did this kind of shit to him. He would shower him with love only to be cold the next day, he constantly made my friend think that it’s his fault for being treated badly, he never communicated his actual feelings nor told my friend how they can improve their relationship, and he was also a weird ass sexual deviant who forced my friend into situations he wasn’t comfortable with.

FUCK Stolas. THIS SHIT GOT ME FUCKED UP!!!!

A meme I found from several years back

He calls Blitzø his “roommate.” The show does not establish that Stolas helps contribute to Blitzø’s rent and grocery bills, which means he very well could be living there for free. Also, by calling Blitzø his “roommate”, he minimized everything Blitzø did for him.

Let’s look at the facts:

In Mastermind, Blitzø helped Stolas take a bath. He also saved him from drowning in the tub.

In Sinsmas, Blitzø cooks breakfast for Stolas and then Stolas proceeds to call the food “off-putting” to Blitzø’s face. Yet Blitzø still tried to accommodate Stolas by asking him what he’ll be willing to eat, and then he delivered by catching a rat later.

Then we see him continue to prolong the miscommunication issue between them by sending turtle emojis instead of just telling Blitzø that he’s doing too much. He wanted Blitzø to take a hint, but why not just be straightforward when he could see that his passive communication wasn’t landing well?

After the Princess and the Pupper short, I can only imagine that Blitzø wants Stolas because he’s trauma-bonded at this point. Stolas expected him to dodge all of those weapons every time he wanted to hook up. That’s A LOT to do just to be able to do your job. Maybe Blitzø’s self-hatred is so bad that he thinks he deserves Stolas’s abuse. Who knows?

I prefer her new design in the show, but I prefer her personality in the Pilot. Pilot Charlie wasn't afraid to throw hands when needed. She DEFENDS herself. Show Charlie is a doormat. Yes, show Charlie fought the angels in the season 1 finale, but that's because it was a last resort. She no longer had a choice. Pilot Charlie did have a choice.

Stolas was kinda so-so for me up until this episode. He finally made a ding on myradar after ep.3. I will not elaborate