1
$\begingroup$

Found two Horned Humanoid Questions... From oldest to newest... I can't find a point of differentiation, except mine, the older one, requiring it be neither "horns = sexy" or actually being a fungus growing on humans or something.

How would I evolve horns on humans?

Horned Humanoids?


Do we merge them? Do I somehow stick my differentiation into my title? Not sure how to be concise with that...

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Considerations:
Q2016 specifies horns. Q2018 specifies a broader range of protuberances including antlers and perhaps teeth (tusks) as well.

That is a point of differentiation, but it is one of detail rather than substance. Whether the underlying mechanism is bone, tooth or hair, the desired result, getting humans to have hard bits sticking off, is identical.

The queries are so identical that everyone in responses and comments, including Q2016 OP are dancing around the issue of these protuberances only being on the humans' heads! Interesting, really.

Conclusion:
Obviously, the standard practice is to VTC close Q2018 as a duplicate. A technical victory for Q2016, though the point is moot as neither query has been active in years.

I would suggest that the Mod Squod merge Q2018 into Q2016. I'd really like to see more merging of duplicate queries as I'd consider that the logical next step. As it stands, it seems that duplicates just get closed and are then abandoned. Sometimes they have good answers. Sometimes the duplicate is in and of itself a better question!


I've got the ball rolling by VTC Q2018 as duplicate and suggesting a merger.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ By "dancing around", do you mean my big quote in my question's OP? I just have a habit of big quotes. $\endgroup$
    – Malady
    Jun 16 at 16:45
  • $\begingroup$ The Mods can merge questions? I had no idea... $\endgroup$ Jul 13 at 19:22
  • $\begingroup$ @JBH -- Yes indeed! I wish they'd do it more often (here especially). It makes no sense to close a query for being a duplicate, and then just leave the duplicate and its responses out there as a separate question. $\endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    Jul 17 at 19:04
  • $\begingroup$ @Malady -- Sorry for the delay! No, I meant that everyone was assuming that the horns would grow upon the head and thus be useless because they'd weigh a human's head down, stress the spine, require massive neck muscles, etc., etc. NO ONE mentioned sporting horns on one's upper arms in the region of the shoulder or on the lateral wrists or ankles or knees & elbows. All of which would be great places for small offensive horns! No one mentioned defensive horns along the back or abdomen. $\endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    Jul 17 at 19:12
  • $\begingroup$ Haha. Wow. I just come on line, and you respond! Great timing! ... I think it's because "horns" on arms or something aren't usually called horns, but spikes or spines or something? $\endgroup$
    – Malady
    Jul 17 at 19:15
  • $\begingroup$ @Malady --- "Horn" just refers to the keratinous origin of the material. In cows, they call extra growths of the hooves "horns" as well. Good timing indeed!, and well met! I think spikes and spines is more a matter of taste in nomenclature, though I'd imagine those as really long, thin appendages. I'm thinking of short growths --- on a human, maybe two inches or so. Just enough to do some damage without being to susceptible to being damaged. $\endgroup$
    – elemtilas
    Jul 17 at 19:17

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .