Re: Re: Losing by Religion?

From: Alex Ferguson <abf_at_...>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 17:32:49 +0100

On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 03:12:30PM -0000, Jeff wrote:
> > On no! Any more types of Gloranthan cat-morphs and we'll have The
> > FurryMUCK High Fantasy RPG, ah tells ya!

> And this is bad, how? No reason to go slamming FurryMuck.

I must have blinked and missed the part where I slammed anything in that sentence... Perhaps "smiley insufficiency" (or some related syndriome) is at work.

> > Not exactly a huge deviation fron Canon, what with puma and cougar
> > being the same thing (unless I'm losing track of my NA kitties
> > again).

> Sure. They are the same thing and leopards, at least the ones in South
> America, are damned similar.

AFAIK there aren't any leopards in S. America. Maybe you're thinking of jaguars, which are a different species, significantly larger, yadda.

Puma and leopard, though, are even less related, being in different feline sub-families. (Or in informal terms, leopard are 'small' "big cats", and puma are large "small cats", i.e more closely related to housecats, (<ObGlorantha>a)lynx, etc.)

> One pouncing cat of about 250 lbs is very much like another pouncing
> cat of about 250 lbs.

... except to another pouncing cat of about 250 lbs, among others.

> Now tigers or lions, that *would* be different.

Actually leopards and (and jaguars) are much more closely related to either than to puma. (In Glorantha, who knows? GL/4-world taxonomy may bear little in the way of resemblance to the RW sort.)  

> Not sure if I'm seeing your complaint, sorry.

Not sure I am either. I thought I was pedanting, not complaining.


Powered by hypermail