Anonymous
10/28/2025, 3:34:09 AM
No.11405410
>>11404240
>>11404251
I find it interesting that you both blame Clinko, because given what I've seen, I'd put the error mostly on Nerds. I'll freely admit that Clinko has an autistic obsession with Emmy, but as one cripplingly autistic retard to another, I don't hold that against him.
What is noticeable is that whenever Clinko draws a strip about Emmy, there's a solid core of cause and effect. Emmy does something stupid, it backfires into [FETISH], Emmy is punished or chastised for her mistake (usually in a humiliating way that further embellishes [FETISH]), and Emmy pledges to do better or try to be better in the future.
Nerds, by contrast, doesn't do this. He gives Emmy infinite free passes in the game to do basically whatever she wants without consequence, and her character suffers immensely for it. If a character does something stupid or wrong, the audience naturally desires some kind of karma or correction to kick in. The easiest way to make an absolute scumball is to create a jackass who slips karma. The audience will 100% loathe them by the second or third incident, guaranteed.
This is also heavily present in "pet" characters and "favorites," where certain writers will be very strongly biased towards their personally favorite character, and thus exempt them of serious consequences for their misbehavior. This favoritism invariably makes the audience dislike and resent the pet. There are plenty of examples of that in contemporary literature as well, across all genres. Bakugo from My Hero Academia, Sasuke from Naruto. Hermione from Harry Potter. The favorites play by different rules, they don't experience consequences or blame.
Emmy is very obviously the favorite character for both Nerds and Clinko, neither of them try to hide it. But all evidence from Clinko suggests that if he was in charge of the writing, Emmy would experience karma and grow as a character over time. She would suffer consequences. Nerds doesn't allow that, he keeps her in stasis.
>>11404251
I find it interesting that you both blame Clinko, because given what I've seen, I'd put the error mostly on Nerds. I'll freely admit that Clinko has an autistic obsession with Emmy, but as one cripplingly autistic retard to another, I don't hold that against him.
What is noticeable is that whenever Clinko draws a strip about Emmy, there's a solid core of cause and effect. Emmy does something stupid, it backfires into [FETISH], Emmy is punished or chastised for her mistake (usually in a humiliating way that further embellishes [FETISH]), and Emmy pledges to do better or try to be better in the future.
Nerds, by contrast, doesn't do this. He gives Emmy infinite free passes in the game to do basically whatever she wants without consequence, and her character suffers immensely for it. If a character does something stupid or wrong, the audience naturally desires some kind of karma or correction to kick in. The easiest way to make an absolute scumball is to create a jackass who slips karma. The audience will 100% loathe them by the second or third incident, guaranteed.
This is also heavily present in "pet" characters and "favorites," where certain writers will be very strongly biased towards their personally favorite character, and thus exempt them of serious consequences for their misbehavior. This favoritism invariably makes the audience dislike and resent the pet. There are plenty of examples of that in contemporary literature as well, across all genres. Bakugo from My Hero Academia, Sasuke from Naruto. Hermione from Harry Potter. The favorites play by different rules, they don't experience consequences or blame.
Emmy is very obviously the favorite character for both Nerds and Clinko, neither of them try to hide it. But all evidence from Clinko suggests that if he was in charge of the writing, Emmy would experience karma and grow as a character over time. She would suffer consequences. Nerds doesn't allow that, he keeps her in stasis.