The Tenacious Unicorn Ranch / @TenaciousRanch / Steampunk Penny / Penellope Logue / Phillip Matthew Logue - Don't cry because it ended, laugh because it's still getting worse.

Who are the top three strongest characters in the Kevin Gibes Inflated Universe (KGIU) canon?

  • Gash Coyote

    Votes: 102 4.5%
  • Rioley

    Votes: 277 12.3%
  • Penis

    Votes: 408 18.1%
  • Loathsome Dung Eater Jen

    Votes: 291 12.9%
  • Boner

    Votes: 294 13.0%
  • Kevin Gibes

    Votes: 671 29.7%
  • The Elusive Earl

    Votes: 701 31.0%
  • Landon Hiscock

    Votes: 262 11.6%
  • The Korps LARP Brigade

    Votes: 200 8.9%
  • Kiwifarms Militia

    Votes: 1,122 49.7%
  • Kindness

    Votes: 650 28.8%
  • Trans Cucumber The Child Abandoner

    Votes: 306 13.6%

  • Total voters
    2,258
ive heard there are types of plants that can revitalise areas that have become basicly wastelands
would any of those costly/time consuming projects apply to this land?
because i know theres a difference between wasteland VS contaminated, and im assuming their land is moreso contaminated badly?
EDIT: IIRC its contaminated that is the real one you dont want to deal with, because youre having to remove something that shouldnt be in the soil instead of adding nutrients slowly
 
Last edited:
The banks cheapest option, if they understand the situation and state of the property would just eat the mortage as a loss. Phone the tranny and tell him it is his lucky day and the bank has forgiven his mortage. There is no more mortage and there is nothing he has to pay.
Just to avoid having to take on the property and its liabilities.
I'm not sure if it has any impact in a case like this, but Colorado is a title theory state for mortgage, meaning the underlying theory behind a mortgage is that the bank actually has title to the land until the mortgage is satisfied (unlike the lien theory the other states use where a mortgage acts as a sort of lien against the property with the mortgagee having title).

It's one of those semi-arcane differences that often makes no actual difference, but it might if the titleholder is seen as responsible for the state of the property. This title is probably like a curse at this point, like an old meth lab property, where whoever ends up with the hot potato has the legal liability.

This may be a completely irrelevant concern (and probably is), but the bank may have concerns if actually holding the title means they're stuck with it. They can't just release a lien (since they do not have one as they outright own the property until the mortgage is satisfied).
ive heard there are types of plants that can revitalise areas that have become basicly wastelands
would any of those costly/time consuming projects apply to this land?
It's possible an expert in xeriscaping (growing plants on very dry land) could view this as a challenge project. That's really the only chance of the property being saved without having to tap some state or federal environmental disaster fund.

The shit these foul troons did to this property is horrifying and despicable and yet another example of why troons should never be put in charge of anything.
 
It's possible an expert in xeriscaping (growing plants on very dry land) could view this as a challenge project. That's really the only chance of the property being saved without having to tap some state or federal environmental disaster fund.

The shit these foul troons did to this property is horrifying and despicable and yet another example of why troons should never be put in charge of anything.
this is what i was thinking, yeah. that the issue isnt adding nutrients to the soil, its removing contaminates of which there are years and years worth, of some of the worst
i know adding nutrients is sometimes as simple as planting an invasive species that adds X nutrient to the soil over X time
but i also know yeah, contamination is almost impossible to fix without increadible cost, atleast thats what youtube has taught me
 
Whilst I agree with the sentiment, I think people might be over-estimating the degree to which the authorities in the US have the power or inclination to go chasing minor environmental infractions on a ranch in the middle of Buttfuck, Nowhere.

This is a “buyer beware” type deal. But people will buy any sort of wrecked shithole property if the price is right.

It still has amazing views. There’s still a house that can be lived in with a few $$$$ of biohazard cleaning. Someone will buy it and just leave the land alone, in 20 years time it will have some vegetation again.
I think the state will be perfectly content to ignore it until the new owner needs a permit for something. If a contractor digging, let's say a new foundation or septic system, uncovers a mass animal grave or buried dumping site, that would then be on the new owner to remediate. It's also a bunch of dead animals and household chemicals, not a Superfund site or military base. That said, disposal costs are quite high in remote areas, especially considering that it's a lot of large items like cars, furniture, and demolition debris that has to be hauled out. He's more likely to get in civil trouble with the next owner over disposal costs.

Paul will need to disclose any known defects in the property prior to sale. Hiding an illegal dumping site is the perfect example. The prior owner can be held legally responsible for a portion of the cleanup costs if they've not disclosed their existence to the buyer during the sale process. Inspectors are generally protected from liability for not discovering defects that were deliberately concealed from them. The disclosure requirement also applies to as-is sales. To the new owner, there is a big difference between buying a piece of property that they know is a dump versus discovering hidden dumps after sale. Paul has already indicated on social media that he intends to hide as much of the trash as possible on site to reduce his own costs prior to sale.

Given that the squatters made a spectacle of how much they trashed the place, that puts the liability purely on Paul to disclose or risk a lawsuit from the next owner over cleanup costs.
 
Given that the squatters made a spectacle of how much they trashed the place, that puts the liability purely on Paul to disclose or risk a lawsuit from the next owner over cleanup costs.
I hope there's a lawsuit. The discovery process will be brutal (for Paul).
 
I think the state will be perfectly content to ignore it until the new owner needs a permit for something. If a contractor digging, let's say a new foundation or septic system, uncovers a mass animal grave or buried dumping site, that would then be on the new owner to remediate.
Exactly this happened to someone I knew. The owner-before-the-owner-before-the-seller had put in some kind of underground fuel oil tank that was leaking and it wasn't discovered until something needed to be done. Since the seller hadn't known about it, they hadn't concealed anything, but the actual responsible party had long ceased to exist, so the person I knew, the current owner, basically just had to suck it up.
 
Maybe the government will just claim the land, they do that sometimes with Superfund sites and similar.
I think they only do that if the party responsible for it no longer exists.

So most likely if the property's declared a superfund the EPA would just make Bonnie pay for the clean-up.
 
Not going to lie, if one were to get it for incredibly cheap, parking a camper and rehabilitating that land sounds like a pleasant way to ride out the end of the world as we know it.

You said that, but I want to remind you:
This area was inhabited by trannies for years. They do not have city sewer, just a septic tank. That means in addition to whatever dead, rotting alpaca there are, there is gallons and gallons of tranny leakage and stink ditch dischange under your feet if you walk the property.
IMAGINE THE SMELL
 
You said that, but I want to remind you:
This area was inhabited by trannies for years. They do not have city sewer, just a septic tank. That means in addition to whatever dead, rotting alpaca there are, there is gallons and gallons of tranny leakage and stink ditch dischange under your feet if you walk the property.
IMAGINE THE SMELL
Despite the histrionics, shit is shit.
 
Despite the histrionics, shit is shit.
Respectfully disagree, my dear vermin. It is troon shit, meaning that it is contaminated with synthetic hormones and any number of illicit chemicals. The residual chemicals from the Pill have long been known to affect amphibians and fish that dwell in water contaminated with 'normal' human sewerage. Between the ongoing chemistry experiments that are troons and pooners, the contamination from improperly buried animal carcasses, and the sheer amount of rubbish dumped on the property- old batteries are probably the least of what's there- the contamination of the soil and water table would be severe and extremely chemically complicated. Shit is the least of your worries on that property. It's one thing to rehab land that has been overgrazed or suffered topsoil runoff, it's quite another to clean up chemical contamination. In some cases at least, walking away is actually the best and only thing you can do.

In Lake Macquarie, NSW, it's illegal to fish or disturb the lake bottom in a significant percentage of the lake. There is huge heavy metal contamination from an old smelter factory back in the bad old days, and ultimately it was decided to just leave the contaminated soil be and let it slowly be buried and locked away under the lake's yearly silt deposits. Enough time has passed that the contaminated end of the lake is actually the healthiest part of it.
 
Last edited:
Respectfully disagree, my dear vermin. It is troon shit, meaning that it is contaminated with synthetic hormones and any number of illicit chemicals. The residual chemicals from the Pill have long been known to affect amphibians and fish that dwell in water contaminated with 'normal' human sewerage. Between the ongoing chemistry experiments that are troons and pooners, the contamination from improperly buried animal carcasses, and the sheer amount of rubbish dumped on the property- old batteries are probably the least of what's there- the contamination of the soil and water table would be severe and extremely chemically complicated. Shit is the least of your worries on that property. It's one thing to rehab land that has been overgrazed or suffered topsoil runoff, it's quite another to clean up chemical contamination. In some cases at least, walking away is actually the best and only thing you can do.

In Lake Macquarie, NSW, it's illegal to fish or disturb the lake bottom in a significant percentage of the lake. There is huge heavy metal contamination from an old smelter factory back in the bad old days, and ultimately it was decided to just leave the contaminated soil be and let it slowly be buried and locked away under the lake's yearly silt deposits. Enough time has passed that the contaminated end of the lake is actually the healthiest part of it.
Luckily (for the sake of this thought exercise), we are not talking about a heavy population or industrial facility (let alone a smelter, which are notorious for dumping leeching lead into the ground), just a fairly small population of cartoon characters. I sincerely doubt there's much in the way of body-altering chemicals in the land. Most of the cleanup would be what we see in the photos, which isn't appreciably different than your average rural meth den. I suspect that, after heavy cleanup, even the building is salvageable to some degree. That said, I'm not sure what special considerations need to be taken for the alpaca graves, but it's not like it's digging up Indian burial sites or a radioactive Zeta crash site.
 
The solution to pollution is dilution.
Remove any batteries, damaged fuel containers, etc that might be around.
Haul in some fresh topsoil to cover where critter graves are.
Plant some things that are native to the area to help prevent soil erosion.
Mulch where needed.
Wait.
The land will heal.
 
Back