site banner
PaperclipPerfector  8hr ago (text post)   305 thread views

Friday Fun Thread for May 22, 2026

Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.

Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

A mildly-interesting two-story house design (including a version with cl*sets, plus one-story parent designs for comparison purposes): In theory (to satisfy code requirements), the living room is on floor 1 and the dining room is on floor 2. But, in practice, the room on floor 1 serves both living and dining purposes, and the room on floor 2 is just an extra living room.

Whether it makes sense hinges on how the first-floor room is reconfigured between living and dining uses. Obviously, folding tables and folding chairs are perfect for dining use. For living use, folding couches apparently are available for purchase, though I'm not sure how compactly they actually fold up. Alternatively, perhaps the folding chairs and folding couches can be replaced with comfy, headrest-equipped office chairs that can serve for both living and dining.

You censor "closet" after this comment?

You know, I really will never truly understand you.

Censoring words that are totally innocuous is a very common online joke. On /r/mapporncirclejerk, a few months ago it was extremely popular for people to say "Fr*nce", and jokingly complain in the comments that anyone who failed to do so was using coarse language in the presence of children. That trend has died out at the moment, but see also this humorous post where the use of "Gr*ece", "K*rdistan", and "Arm*nia" was hardly questioned.

Why do I enjoy calling myself a nigger without censorship on this website (past instances: 1 2 3)? I don't know. I guess I'm just being edgy for no good reason.

cl*sets

May I enquire as to why you censored the term "closets", what is the new secret most awful problematic usage of this commonplace word? And if it is so terrible a word that we must return to the 18th century habit of writing, why not replace it with "walk-in wardrobe" or some other euphemism?

I'd also say that having the kitchen and dining room on separate floors is a bad idea, unless you're going to incorporate a dumb waiter or the likes. Just take five minutes to imagine having to carry the Sunday roast upstairs. Combination living/dining room is a better idea. Or make the kitchen bigger and turn that into a combination kitchen/dining area.

May I enquire as to why you censored the term "closets"?

I personally dislike closets (which, being immovable, needlessly constrain the rearrangement of furniture) and much prefer shelving units and wardrobes. Past discussion: 1 2

I'd also say that having the kitchen and dining room on separate floors is a bad idea.

Read what I wrote again. For code-compliance purposes, the living room is on the first floor and the dining room is on the second floor—but, in everyday life, the room labeled "living room" serves double duty as either a living room or a dining room depending on circumstances, and the room labeled "dining room" serves as a living room for the people occupying the upstairs bedrooms.

I personally dislike closets

Ah, so you're French. Truely, this explains alot.

(I'm joking. This explains nothing, nor are you actually French. Unless you are, in which case it explains everything.)

I can understand the dislike, personally. Though it might be due to having to deal with some very awkwardly designed closets that I've forcibly redesigned into something approximating a walk-in wardrobe.

which, being immovable, needlessly constrain the rearrangement of furniture

And yet you design floor plans that only allow for one reasonable arrangement of furniture, if that

I don't know what you mean by that. My bathrooms and laundry/utility rooms are cramped enough that the accusation may be accurate there. But my kitchens, living rooms, and dining rooms are ample. And I believe that my bedrooms permit a few different configurations even at maximum occupancy—and how often are bedrooms at maximum occupancy anyway? (For example, the design that I am having built will have nominal occupancy of five but actual occupancy of just two.)

I'm talking about realistic configurations, not theoretical ones where you use office furniture in the living room and people always keep doors closed.

I normally do not use office furniture in the living room in my designs. I just had that idea this week, and the designs at the top of this thread are the only ones that use such rigmarole.

If you don't keep your doors closed when you're not using them, I don't know what to tell you.

One floor plan that I can't get right is a five-bay colonial with a mudroom-style entrance. Traditional foyers are designed for people who have no coats or wet boots or kids that track dirt everywhere.

I am looking at something like 13.2x8 or 12.8x8.4m (so that the footprint of the house is around 100m2). But no matter how I try, I can't design a staircase that feels natural without interrupting the regularity of the facade.

One floor plan that I can't get right is a five-bay colonial with a mudroom-style entrance. I am looking at something like 13.2 m × 8 m or 12.8 m × 8.4 m (so that the footprint of the house is around 100 m2).

Extremely lazy spitball sketch (though possibly a bit too big)

But, no matter how I try, I can't design a staircase that feels natural without interrupting the regularity of the façade.

I don't get it. What does the stairway have to do with the façade?

Traditional foyers are designed for people who have no coats or wet boots or kids that track dirt everywhere.

Just add a closet under the stairway, and/or a wardrobe next to the wall.

How do you get into the kitchen, through the master suite?

I don't get it. What does the stairway have to do with the façade?

In your plan, nothing. But if the stairway touches the external wall, it has to fit between the window openings.

But if the stairway touches the external wall, it has to fit between the window openings.

You could have a window in the stairwell, offset vertically if necessary to have it a reasonable height off the floor.

offset vertically

And this is precisely what I try to avoid.

Have you tried making the house deeper than eight meters? I'd be surprised if there were any actual colonial houses of such modest dimensions.

I also find it amusing that the colonial house plan is now colonizing Rus'.

It's colonizing me personally, no one's building them here. It's all "Mikea" clones if it has one floor and "Wright style" if it has two (and I hope you can wrap some copper wire around ol' Frank's body for some free electricity, because it's always a gloomy brick-clad cube with vertical accents).

And I can't make the house too deep, or it will be too big. I have a great 10.4x10.8 floor plan, and I want to see if I can squish it into a more oblong rectangle.

How do you get into the kitchen? Through the master suite?

The line between the dining room and the kitchen does not represent a wall.

And that's exactly what I've been trying to avoid: pathways that lead through the foyer. I want it to be semi-contained: there's the front door, maybe the door to the utility room, the door that leads to the rest of the house. No through indoor traffic.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats