Is Oetmeal a male or a female?

Thank you for let me know.

I believe Gunter protect Oetmeal and on some reason he killed Bubbles. It's for me still unclear why, because Bubbles is also an animal-lover. He has got rats.

Oatmeal is male.

And it's been confirmed by staff that the murder had nothing to do with Oatmeal. Gunter has only had Oatmeal for a few years, but he killed his brother a long time ago. It's just that Gunter's memories of killing his brother combined with having to take care of Oatmeal now are the reasons why he doesn't eat meat anymore.

It still hasn't been explained completely why he killed his brother, we just know how it happened.

I'm kind of concerned by how many people want to convict and sentence him before there's even been a trial, and straight up don't want to know if there might have been any extenuating circumstances. That's not seeking justice, in my opinion. Good thing this is just fiction...

It's obviously not manslaughter, isn't not self-defense, and it seems too drawn-out to be a crime of passion. If Gunter stabbed or hit Bubbles that'd be one thing, but drowning him? That's not a quick death. He had time to stop and save his brother. Therefore it's premeditated murder, plain and simple. A nasty one, too.

I can only see so many 'extenuating circumstances' for that kind of murder and I still think he should go to jail.

We've still not had a formal trial nor heard his testimony. I believe it is appropriate to reserve judgment until the evidence has been properly reviewed.

Extenuating circumstances or not, murder is still a crime. No crime goes unpunished. For now, it's just simplistic in people's minds that murder = jail time. How long he gets jailed for will be determined when we know Gunter's side. Plus, I don't even think we have a true court system here on Subeta, so that'll be interesting to flesh out.

There better be some Law and Order references out to wazoo if we get a trial for a mini-event.

I kinda wonder why you even felt the need to say that...

Court is just how humans decide whether something happened or not and why based on the evidence presented. Plenty of crimes aren't reported, or people are let free when they're guilty or people are sentenced when they're innocent. Besides, the facts are written out in plain text on a website... it's not open-ended. Sure, if the staff put out more facts that completely change the story then people's opinions will change but as it is now he sounds guilty af.

Also, this IS fiction so chill. Adding to that though, even irl I had a coworker who was murdered by her ex-boyfriend and it took years for the court to reach a verdict even though everyone knew the guy was guilty. His deliberate stalling, his nastiness, him mocking her family, etc. Also there was a ton of evidence like a bloody shovel in his garage soaking in bleach, bloody tarps, blood in his car, blood in her driveway, his history of stalking her (reported to the police), etc. Though we still haven't found her remains, HE DID IT. We all knew he had before the court had finished deliberating (he was charged with first degree murder and the judge told him he was one of the most evil people he'd ever met, which is true... the man is pure evil and said "nah" when begged by the judge to tell them where he'd buried her so her family could get some closure). If someone had told me, "You don't know he's guilty, tHe CoUrT hAsN't DeCiDeD yEt I would've had some pretty choice words for them.

But, this is fiction and the evidence is even plainer to see than it was in the case of my coworker's murder soooo I hope Gunter gets dealt with properly. :D

Just saying, I would hope not to see anyone on an actual jury who has already come to such hard and fast conclusions before the trial has even begun. Is it really asking so much to remain impartial until the facts are presented in their entirety? I'm not saying he's necessarily innocent or absolved of all wrongdoing, just that we don't know all the facts of the case and it alarms me when people are so ready to jump to uninformed conclusions. Yeah this is fiction, but reactions here reflect how people behave in real life.

Oh and re: 's comment: Maybe it was mentioned because hypocrisy abounds and has been noted?

He needs a hug.

And I mean, personally, I've already explained that I'm a very biased character-liker, so "remaining impartial" is not in my wheelhouse. Now, if I didn't like either character? That'd be different. But I still don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to jump to conclusions, and have an opinion, and come up with theories, given that this is a pet site and none of it's real. But that said, we've also gotten some pretty gnarly flashbacks of some pretty nasty memories about the murder (one dark enough to need a content warning, in fact). It was clearly intentional, and frankly, no, I'm not after justice. I'm team revenge.

I'm curious to see where the lore goes, but I'm not getting my hopes up either way just in case not much ends up happening. I feel like people are going to be disappointed if we all jump on the revenge for Bubbles hype train, but who knows.

I think it's clear that none of the NPCs really know about what happened besides Gunter (and Bubbles kinda), other than the rumors that Rumi mentioned. I'm mostly interested to see how Bubbles feels about it, since he's not entirely dead and he could still see Anne if he starts remembering more about his past life and what happened. I wonder if he'll end up confronting Gunter or something.

Nobody is acting like that... people are just upset about it. Not a single person is acting like a rl murderer is on the loose. ._.

See, this is what I was talking about. You need to chill because this is a fictional thing and you're taking it WAY too seriously. Nobody else is, YOU are.

"Let the court decide"... =_= This is a fictional site and you ignored everything else I said. You especially ignored what I said about my coworker, and let me tell you... if you had carried on like, "Let the court decide! Stop assuming waaahhh" I (and everyone else who cared about her) would have lost their shit on you (and you would deserve it). I'm all for staying impartial in most cases but if you're not on the damn jury it's fine to have feelings about the case and see the evidence and make your own judgements. Again, in the case of my coworker, we knew all the evidence very early on and everyone knew he'd done it. If it had been successfully proven that he HADN'T my feelings would've changed but the case proved the evidence gathered was accurate and he definitely did it. Besides, I wasn't on the jury (and couldn't be because I knew her) so it doesn't MATTER what my feelings were and if I made assumptions based on the evidence.

However, that is a real life thing (though you needed to hear someone else's views on it) and this is a FICTIONAL thing. So, again, chill. If you're uncomfortable with people getting upset about it I could not care less.

Also, yep, I get what Muerte meant. It was just an unnecessary comment that was off-topic and, being that it "pointed out" hypocrisy, had an implied, "Ugh, THOSE people" tone to it that, again, was unnecessary.

Lol, I'm sort of amused that my views are seen as contentious. The promotion of holding an unbiased opinion and seeking to become informed before reaching a conclusion...the very notion of "innocent until proven guilty"...is apparently now controversial. Huh, wow. And I need to chill, even though I'm not the one getting all worked up over an unrelated personal anecdote, ok. (I mean, for real though, that really sucks and I'm truly sorry about your coworker. That's terrible. But it actually has nothing to do with this or any other unrelated case, fiction or not. You can't just say every defendant is absolutely guilty and that all circumstances are equal. Letting one case color your views on another is bias, plain and simple. Sorry, but I'm pretty sure you'd be rightfully disqualified from placement on a jury for a murder trial, all things considered.)

Anyway, you see, this is why people's lives get ruined through trial by social media. Everyone is so quick to judge, so quick to feel...facts be damned - who needs 'em, right? But once the mob forms and someone is condemned in the court of popular opinion, it's nigh impossible to undo, no matter what evidence is brought to light.

But since this particular case is fiction, I'm not that invested here, so I'm out. Have fun with this little story, everybody!

This thread is a goshdiddlydarn mess.

It's relevant to this, whether or not you like it being pointed it. I'm not saying liking villains is bad. I'm also not saying people aren't allowed to be biased. Everyone is. But at least be critical of it and maybe a little less hypocritical.

Character 1: Speaks of genocide, murdered ten people, suggests they rule over everyone because people like to be owned. Character 2: Did something terrible, but we don't fully know if it was a crime of passion or premeditated. Or really know them much. If someone can look at two characters like this and go "character 1 is my precious innocent baby who has done nothing wrong ever and anyone that speaks poorly of them is the worst. Character 2 needs to be thrown out, they are HORRIBLE and I cannot believe we haven't already locked them away 5eva." They... kinda need to ask themselves why. And maybe take a breath.

Also, seeing as I need to be Extra Clear: I am not saying everyone is acting like this, or to this extreme. I know some are, though. I've seen more than one user getting a bit... Extra Upset... any time he's brought up. Or not, some like to steer the ship that way for no reason I honestly haven't read much of this board, so I don't know how much of that is going on here. My comment was small and not pointed at anyone specific.

Starting to wonder if Subeta can have literally anything without drama anymore.

At this point I just want this Nuegarten/murder mess wrapped up so we can forget about it and move on.

I got on a tangent trying to reply here so I'm just gonna throw this out there, but people can like a thing just because they like it. I don't think it's necessary to be hyper-critical or on the defensive to make sure other people know that you don't support whatever your Problematic Fave™ did in real life. It's fiction, you know?

"Yeah, this character is a serial killer, but I like their sense of humor." "They're trying to rule the universe, but they have a great aesthetic." "I like their outfit even though they lied to their team to get their support." These are all valid reasons to like a character, and I don't think every mention of them needs to come with a disclaimer that you don't support murder, lying, or ruling the universe. You can be critical of a character or piece of media quietly (or frankly, not at all, if you don't feel like dissecting everything Problematic™ about something, because it's fiction).

The important point, in my opinion, is separating fiction from reality (which I guess involves being critical of things to a degree, but)

I'd just like to say that I'm passionate about this and yelling from the rafters BECAUSE it's fiction. I'm just having fun lmao.

JUSTICE FOR ANNE! ANNE DESERVES THE TRUTH! PROTECT MY SMALL, DISGRUNTLED GIRL! DOUBLE MEAT IS DOUBLE SWEET.

I understand you actually, I have it with GOT, when something bad happens to one of the bad guys and their faith is uncertain, even though they killed many people, I'm still feeling this "omg please don't die", so I find myself love-hating a character..

And I like some Disney villains more than the heroes, like I prefer Scar over the "charmings" lion family..

Anyway, I hope they will continue this mini story soon, I can't wait anymore :P

Yeah I'm another "typically pro-villian" people but it really depends on how likeable/interesting the character is?

It's been my opinion (and nothing but an opinion, obv) that the villain character is typically more interesting. Like, Hannibal is far more interesting than Will (but puppies, so he got a lot of points for that), but I couldn't pick who I like more between Hannibal and Clarice. Typically, though, the good guy is a stagnant handsome good guy who is perfect at everything and saves the day and gets the girl. Why is he so perfect, is he dead on the inside? Is he preoccupying himself with tasks to avoid his mind? Does he get the girl because others judge him for really wanting the boy? Or is he just boring.

All that said, is Bubbles more interesting than Gunter? Not really. Is Gunter more likeable? I mean he's got a great beard & a goat, but otherwise not really. All we know at face value is Gunter drowned Bubbles at the brewery, and Gunter is now haunted by it. As a curious being, I want to know the story. Was it pure greed? Was it a drunken accident? Was Bubbles a horrible person in a way law enforcement is typically less than effective (stalking, various types of abuse, killed his wife and got away with it, a cannibal)? Hell, was he turning into a zombie?

Idk I won't lose sleep at night if Gunter gets away with it and nobody ever knows what he did. But I want some interesting backstory and something that'd leave me sympathetic towards him, rooting for him to not face justice. Even if we get nothing I wouldn't lose sleep, but I'd judge him everytime he popped up. ESPECIALLY SINCE HE'S GOT ALL THIS VEGAN FOOD AND WHERE'S MY ACAI BOWL SUBETA, WHERE IS IT D|?!