Magic School Days

by Dogger807

Book Two Has Been Posted

Hello everyone, I would like to announce the posting of the first chapter of book two.

https://www.fimfiction.net/story/477026/hazy-days-and-magical-ways

Comments

[Stardust-pony]

...

I luv iou

[TDR]

koo

[Teraunce]

Wee!

[Mister Morden]

Excellent!

[blisterbeetle01]

Woo HOOOOO!!!!!!

[maskedmustelid]

Thanks for the notice - I always hate it when I don't realise that a sequel to a story has been written, because it's not been linked to directly from the previous one!

[EdBecerra]

10406334
I *think* the point is, get the stallions - even gay stallions - into the herd, and there's no other problem, really. They aren't *required* to make whoopie with the mares, only remember once in a while to submit a *cough* "sample" in a container for the mares to use to make foals.

*shrug* I knew of a gay man who made good money donating to sperm banks. He told me the money was good and all the bank cared about was that he was clean, healthy, and had no known genetic flaws.

Same applies to gay humans in stallion form. The mares won't give a damn who the stallions want to cuddle at night, so long as they remember to submit samples regularly.

[Dreadnought]

I've been waiting for Book 2 ever since the last great story finished.!

[Arcanum -Phantasy]

I liked the last story, but please tell me the sequel will be easier to follow. As much as I like zany stories, I like them more when they have a plot that isn't running in fifty different directions at once with sixty different characters to keep track of. Don't get me wrong, I do like this story, I just think it would be easier to follow it if it didn't seem like the plot had ADHD. That being said, I look forward to seeing what you put out there and hope you are doing well in these ( insert colorful language....*FULL CAPITALS*) times.

[Greenhorn]

The wait is finally over.

[SWEETOLEBOB18]

10440168
To be fair, I doubt any of the guys looked at her head. (Sort of like why Sarah Bellum's face is never shown.)

[EonAon]

So as I've read through this twice I have to say please for the sake of all our sanity stop writing people to self identify 2/3rds down a paragraph or longer. The stranger on the island is fine since he is a ongoing plot point. The sections with the spirt of Volddemort REALLY need to have more identity attached to them since they come off as disjointed ramblings of who knows what really.

Another thing that I've seen is that you really need to pare back some of the POV segments back to the crusaders. Not to say some of the rabbit holes you go down are not delightful, but its becoming a spreadsheet issue. I.E. I need a spreadsheet to keep track of the plot points as a reader not as the story teller.

Overall the equestrian perspective on males is a bit misandry in many ways and I severely doubt the ministry would be as blasé about sexual predators' even with the remorse shown.

Otherwise great story and you really need to get a editor and spellcheck on it more often.

[Adenbadens]

10452974
When Clouded first got her owl and asked for one capable of handling large deliveries, I at first thought because she’d ship love back home, but I understand now that it’s because she wanted to bring the changelings over. And she did.

[link4]

10456951
im realizing a lot in my reread as well. it wasn't until OB was in albus office that i realized what cadence meant by 'my turn'...the queen 'chryssi' is not in charge at the moment as per the punishment. cady is, so cady is referred to as queen until chryssi punishment is over. i didn't realize cady was responsible till now. course, it's obvious in the end albus was replaced...

[peter]

10459773
Put this is Equestria, and Ponyville. I suppose you could call it a cultural thing where their is a bias on adopting children who are not blood related, or of the same genus.

Taking in the cultural situation laid out in this story's universe, I have to wonder if the issue was not her age, but her sex. I bet colts have no issue at all being adopted, they likely never even make it into the system.

[Fennekin11506]

I can not express how much I love this book and I'm only on chapter 34 but if I can rate it 5 stars it would be Google out of 5 (search up Google buck and you will know) will recommend to any one.

For thows who cant it is 1 followed by 1 million 0's

[Alaborn]

10460636
A googol is 1 followed by 100 zeroes. And starting in 1998, everyone started misspelling that as google.

[TheLocalCannon]

10463574
Y’know, I completely forgot the context of that xD, it sounds like I misread what was stated or something. The way I stated it sounds like you’d expect the paragraph to be talking about how it being a bad thing the privilege was taken away, but it isn’t saying that’s a bad thing, which is good.

[Fennekin11506]

10463484
sorry my bad

[Sherlock Hooves]

10464506
No absolutely NO! Look I work in the criminal justice system. Specifically in the courts. And parole isn't meant to force you to do something because of the whims of a ruling class. Its meant to help a former criminal become a functioning member of society through therapy, learning empathy, and paying one's debt to society. Not conforming to standards that would have nothing to do with his rehabilitation! You can't demand a former criminal to change their religion as part of their probation. That's not only unethical but dictatorial. Demanding the man take more wives when he's happily married with two kids, with the threat of prison and possible death looming over him is fucked up. I don't care how you try and spin it!

[EdBecerra]

10464831
Uh, I believe that going by the original quote (that he's doing things by torchlight *Brit English for a flashlight), it's implied that the power for the entire building is *off*. Plug in a cheap spaceheater, and it wouldn't *run* without any power.

[ShadwSonic]

10464809
Of course, God doesn't need to follow science to do things... So proving it can't exist or be made to within those conditions only helps the case for God!

[Chrome Masquerade]

10469010
Am I wrong?

[TheLocalCannon]

10509623
Yeah, since then I’ve come to better understand what was intended there. I was seeing something that wasn’t there.

[NecromanCREEEEEE]

10514238
The goblet is more like a computer sorting through numbers than a destiny machine. Explained several times, it just goes through the criteria given to it for personality and competence, then picks the most suited person who's been thrown into the goblet. Plus, it did sound like anyone could throw a vote, not just the chosen few, considering Discord walked up and threw his vote, he didn't just poof it in. Since the Goblet doesn't rely on telling the future, rather reviewing the past of all who's names have been thrown in, it would still work despite the hands of fate being thrown around and off the world as a whole.

it's why the prophesies were destroyed, since they no longer held credence on the newly changed world and potential futures.

But yes, this is why Dumbledore wins in the books and canon, because the prophesies aren't broken and the Boy Who Lived stays under his command. But because another dimension's god decided to play ball with his dimension, the power vacuum was never in question. Discord seems fairly omniscient in this canon, or at the very least sees far more than humans can, which is why he can control the events so well. Plus, even in normal canon, the only reason some of these people are still in power is because of severe corruption, and with the safeguards in place that just haven't been known to the general public, the corruption was easily rooted out by a commoner. Alice could've found this information elsewhere, even just coming across the laws would've gotten the Malfoys out of the office, as well as anyone else she already knew the sins of. Discord just provided further information about their deeds.

All of these events could have happened, but with Discord in play he made them go off to his liking rather than what reality should've dictated.

[everydaygamer]

10514477

But yes, this is why Dumbledore wins in the books and canon, because the prophesies aren't broken and the Boy Who Lived stays under his command.

I'd point out that in the books even Dumbledore admits that the prophecies don't actually mean much. They are just as likely to come true as they aren't. Heck, the prophecy involving Harry was only gonna come true because Voldemort was intent on killing Harry in order to avoid it, never realizing that his actions were actually the reason the prophecy was being fulfilled to begin with.

Basically, the only reason the prophecy involving Harry was important was that it was the whole reason Voldemort was trying to kill Harry in the first place. It held no greater meaning beyond that.

[Mollie White]

And I think the story is still very good)

[Mollie White]

And I think the story is still very good.

[everydaygamer]

10591973
A truth serum can be resisted so anything obtained from using it can't be used as evidence during a trial. Similar issue with imperious curse plus it's illegal.

I'm speaking purely in terms of proving guilt in a trial, so in that regard, it makes no sense for the rite to not have been used on the death eaters.

[DJSkywalker]

10598666
That may not have been the intention, but that is how it reads. And I don't agree that it's not an attempt to excuse them. That's why I am fully against any kind of fan theory that the Dursely's were messed with to make them hate Harry. There are bad people out there like them, they don't need spells or magic to make them that hateful. Saying that it was magic that made them bad completely ruins that. Now, if the author was attempting for the redemption of the Durselys, that would be a different story, but instead, this story is trying to excuse that they were bad by going "oh a wizard did it". It shifts all of the weight off of them which can easily backfire now on to Harry. It would save a lot more headaches if that part was never added in the first place.
10586314
While I can understand where the belief comes from, it was a bad theory from the start. The Durselys were bad people, just plain and simple as that, probably the only simple thing in Harry's life. But I still cannot follow the train of logic that suddenly says that Dumbledore of all people would put someone through that kind of torture on purpose. The guy's still human and makes mistakes. And like I said, some bashing has been earned, but to make one up to try and add drama is super lazy, imo.

[Dreadnought]

You know, Ministry of Image publishes MLP fanfiction stories. I do hope you would consider publishing this wonderful story. I'd be the first one in line to buy!

Dreadnought

[Cobalt Comet]

Something I can't believe I didn't think of earlier. Since Amelia bones had sex with Discord does that mean she is his first wife?

[HurricaneFox]

10697036
Yes but the law in here is you can't have only one mare per stallion. Its three mares to one stallion at the least, so no one can be monogamous

[SamuelK28]

10697213
Was probably scamming the lot of them.

[Mad Maudlin]

In Dumbledore's defense, he was an adult in a kid's book. His hands were tied by tropes, such as "Adults are useless".

[link4]

10723608
just like the ministry.

need to know if death eaters are loyal to voldy or under an unforgivable curse? no wya to know.

except ther eis- truth serum and oaths on ones own magic

[Forestor]

10723794
Original comments are still up. The rewrite was posted before the original Prologue and didn't overwrite it.

[TheLocalCannon]

10728831
but.. I'm not a thiieef ;-;

[Cobalt Comet]

10739221
Actually based on this story it is before the Canterlot wedding. Chrystalis hadn't been caught yet.

[Dreadnought]

10739735
Yes. But shouldn't she be thinking of him as her brother in law?

[Dogger807]

10767724
By the way you started with an implied slight against my cognitive capacities I can already state that your post is based on emotion, not logic. First of all, I have, in previous posts, implicitly stated that JKR started with Dumbledore as a plot device and it went horribly wrong from there. So, acknowledging that there is a dissonance, I choose to work from the execution not the intention.

Majority of people don't nitpick story to death about this stuff, because it literally destruction without any creation. Also it is done to the ground.

Ignoring the self-hypocrisy of these two sentences back to back, this is the second time you have claimed to speak for the majority in one paragraph. Just as an exercise, go to any archive of HP fiction. All offer listings of their works. On any given page, I think you will find the opposites of your assertions are true. In fact, if you list by favorites or kudos, the first few pages will have an almost unanimous opposition.

The accusation of flanderization might be appropriate if I didn’t have seven books of actions and dialog to back my portrayal. Just because my analysis does not agree with yours does not mean I have a lesser understanding of him or his actions. Let me be candid, unless you can claim to have talked to three forensic psychologists, on the subject, then my understanding exceeds your own. To continue to be blunt, my representation of Dumbledore is much more flattering than theirs. I say this not to lord over you, rather as a point of fact that your insulting implication that I do no understand the character is unfounded and erroneous.

Also, having contradictory goals is par for the course for Dumbledore; it is embedded in his character. And yes, this was probably JKR overcorrecting as people reviewed her works.

Ok. Fine. We have conflicting views of Dumbledore’s cannon character. Please tell me why I should discard a, complex grey character just because you and others are focusing on the abuse he suffers.

Look, your long posts have shown that you can put thought to paper. It is past time that you stop telling me how the story should be written and start showing me. I’m sure I will enjoy your efforts even if I don’t agree with your rendition of any one character.

[Ecuos Oinocernos]

10768115

By the way you started with an implied slight against my cognitive capacities I can already state that your post is based on emotion, not logic.

Not your capacities, but rather your extreme bias in usage of said capacities. I really liked your story, but by chapter 63 I was worn off by many toxic recurrent themes.

"Majority of people don't nitpick story to death about this stuff, because it literally destruction without any creation. Also it is done to the ground."
Ignoring the self-hypocrisy of these two sentences back to back, this is the second time you have claimed to speak for the majority in one paragraph. Just as an exercise, go to any archive of HP fiction. All offer listings of their works. On any given page, I think you will find the opposites of your assertions are true. In fact, if you list by favorites or kudos, the first few pages will have an almost unanimous opposition.

There is no contradiction in my sentence. The fact that you had to add this disclaimer shows audience opposition. Subversion of the sake of subversion was popular in early days of fandom, I don't deny it. I surprised you didn't go with full fandom bingo and added evil manipulative Weasleys.

The accusation of flanderization might be appropriate if I didn’t have seven books of actions and dialog to back my portrayal. Just because my analysis does not agree with yours does not mean I have a lesser understanding of him or his actions. Let me be candid, unless you can claim to have talked to three forensic psychologists, on the subject, then my understanding exceeds your own. To continue to be blunt, my representation of Dumbledore is much more flattering than theirs. I say this not to lord over you, rather as a point of fact that your insulting implication that I do no understand the character is unfounded and erroneous.

I spoke to Santa, and he said that appeal to authority is fallacy, experts have to provide reasoning just like everyone else. Dumbledore never organized torture of anyone in canon. In order to make him worse you made Dursleys worse, which another staple of edgy sector of fandom.

Please tell me why I should discard a, complex grey character just because you and others are focusing on the abuse he suffers.

Except your Dumbledore is not complex and grey. He is lame 2d villain that is basically magical old man version of Prince Hans from Frozen. Because abuse he suffers serve no purpose except sating self-righteous sadism. You don't torture him to make him change his ways, you don't eliminate him even though portrait him virtually as sinister as Voldemort. Story does not progress in those direction. You just torture him for entertainment as part of recurring physical joke.

Look, your long posts have shown that you can put thought to paper. It is past time that you stop telling me how the story should be written and start showing me. I’m sure I will enjoy your efforts even if I don’t agree with your rendition of any one character.

1. If you publish work of fiction you should expect criticism, including harsh one. And I concentrated on Dumbledore, and didn't even touch many other issues with this story.
2. I don't have to be bird to be ornithologist. Appeal to accomplishment is fallacy.
3. For matter of fact, I have few well received fanfics stories written in Russian, including HP-D&D crossover, but I fail to see how they would prove anything, as such you free to assume I wrote nothing.

[Dogger807]

10768512
An appeal to authority is only a fallacy if it falls outside their expertise. That is an appeal of authority for authority sake. What I did was reference an expert on the subject. If I had sited a priest from the down the street, then your dismissal would have been valid.

Furthermore, Dumbledore did organize the torture of Harry in cannon, leaving a child in a hostile environment and restricting his communication after the death of a schoolmate and the following year the death of his godfather is nothing short of torture. No, I did not make the Dursleys worse, JKR's editors nerfed them to appeal to a younger audience. I personally think she had a pamphlet on how to detect child abuse handy when she wrote them.

I do expect criticism, but your repetitive complaining about my treatment of Dumbledore has crossed into the realm of whining and your post was heavy with implications against my intelligence.

Finally, I made no appeal toward accomplishment, I stated that you should show me how you thought the story should be wrote. I did this in spirit of offering up an olive branch, because as much as you annoyed me, I am willing to read what you might have produced for this site. I had no way of knowing that you had works published in Russian; so, link your writings and I'll punch them through google translate.

[Ecuos Oinocernos]

10768827

An appeal to authority is only a fallacy if it falls outside their expertise.

My point was that I have no way of confirming your authority ("three forensic psychologists") nor the reasoning behind their verdict. Especially considering quality of psychology as science. This is why literally said "I spoke to Santa, and he said that appeal to authority is fallacy, experts have to provide reasoning just like everyone else."

Furthermore, Dumbledore did organize the torture of Harry in cannon, leaving a child in a hostile environment and restricting his communication after the death of a schoolmate and the following year the death of his godfather is nothing short of torture. No, I did not make the Dursleys worse, JKR's editors nerfed them to appeal to a younger audience. I personally think she had a pamphlet on how to detect child abuse handy when she wrote them.

• Leaving child in hostile environment Environment was shitty, Dursley definitely would have been persecuted for child abuse if they stood a fair trial. Nonetheless, things that shown and implied, that abuse was 90% psychological, with physical violence coming mostly from Duddley. As books progressed, Dursley just kept distance from Harry, leaving him alone. As shitty as Harry treatment is, this contrivance is result of JKR creating whole "Harry's Mother Protection" thing, just to have an excuse of escapism fantasy. It was never clarified how exactly that worked aside from Voldemort not being able to touch Harry and shoot spells onto him, but the literally not single moment in the series where it is implied that those were not necessary security measures.
• No, I did not make the Dursleys worse, JKR's editors nerfed them to appeal to a younger audience. - post ago you claimed "So, acknowledging that there is a dissonance, I choose to work from the execution not the intention." Now, suddenly, you roll with author's intention. All most as if you swing between "authorial intent" and "death of author" whenever it helps to promote particular narrative about particular character.
• "restricting his communication after the death of a schoolmate and the following year the death of his godfather is nothing short of torture" In both cases - security measure, in 5th year is was particularly done because Dumbledore suspected that Voldemort can spy on them through soul fragment within Harry. In 6th year it was done because wizarding war entered active phase.

I do expect criticism, but your repetitive complaining about my treatment of Dumbledore has crossed into the realm of whining and your post was heavy with implications against my intelligence.

I think you don't get what I am even trying to say. Jeez. My point is, that even if you chose to make Dumbledore that way, your treatment of him doesn't lead anywhere narrative wise. I don't want Umbridge from canon being randomly beaten to pulp once a week, I want here to be sent to jail, removing her threat from society. I don't want Voldemort being beaten to pulp once a week, I want him killed, removing his threat from society. Just be honest and admit that you love to hate this character. I don't think you are dumb, nor I think that you are bad writer, nor a bad person. I just want you to own up to your bias. Or just kill Dumbledore, because you actively portray him worse then Voldemort and Umbridge.

[Dogger807]

10768886

Granted, I can not verify my claims on talking to an expert on the subject. But that is a different level than talking to someone who is imaginary. Though I do tend to seek out those with expertise in subjects I am interested in, it is not something easily proven over the internet.

No, I did not make the Dursleys worse, JKR's editors nerfed them to appeal to a younger audience. - post ago you claimed "So, acknowledging that there is a dissonance, I choose to work from the execution not the intention." Now, suddenly, you roll with author's intention. All most as if you swing between "authorial intent" and "death of author" whenever it helps to promote particular narrative about particular character.

Okay, I approached this the wrong way and I did so because you seemingly dismissed expert testimony in your previous post. For anyone with experience in the field, there is more than ample evidence, in the first chapter of the first book, that Harry was physically abused, even though it was not explicitly stated. Just because you did not witness the maltreatment does not mean it did not happen. Sadly this is true in real life as well, a neighbor will swear up and down that a child must be lying because they have not seen the beatings first hand and they will continue to deny reality despite being shown pictures of bruising and multiply broken bones. You may not see physical abuse, but I see a very high probability with more than enough evidence to remove the child from that household. Again, that is just the first chapter. There are several other warning signs throughout the books, such as Harry's reactions to painful situations. He was not close enough to his uncle to adopt a "manly" facade to mask his suffering, yet he always minimized or hid his injuries. This is not the behavior of someone who has only been psychologically abused, the opposite would be expected in that case.

Leaving child in hostile environment

Harry's whole experience at Hogwarts is proof that they were unnecessary. The shear number of times he was in mortal danger without any assistance from Dumbledore or the staff illustrate that if he had ultimate protection available then it would be better to have him tutored at home at the most extreme. No, Harry's safety was never a concern of Dumbledore's, he only paid lip service to it. You are smart, I'm sure you can think of dozens of better ways to protect Harry during the summers. Or, if the blood wards were really that powerful, then something more forceful should have been done to ensure his treatment was within reason. There are too many, "There was no other choice" being thrown around for that to be valid.

"restricting his communication after the death of a schoolmate and the following year the death of his godfather is nothing short of torture"

They had a Fideliusly charmed house with friends and his godfather available by that time. The Bloodwards would have been moot.

Love to hate? Maybe. Though I do despise both Umbridge and Snape by a much greater degree. There is just too much potential in the Dumbledore angle to just kill him off .

[Ecuos Oinocernos]

10768972

Again, that is just the first chapter. There are several other warning signs throughout the books, such as Harry's reactions to painful situations. He was not close enough to his uncle to adopt a "manly" façade to mask his suffering, yet he always minimized or hid his injuries. This is not the behavior of someone who has only been psychologically abused, the opposite would be expected in that case.

I don't know. I don't claim an expertise in this field, nonetheless this behavior can be explained by Dursley constantly gaslighting Harry into self-deprecation. They constantly talk that he is burden, bother, freak and son of freaks. Pre-Hogwarts Harry simply obsessed with minimizing his presence in order to not bother anyone. Not to be nuisance to anyone. Also Harry perspective rather explicit about bullying from Dudley and he doesn't see older Dursley as respectable authority figure, so there is no reason for him to ignore physical violence from them. Don't get me wrong, he was disgustingly abused: episodically hit when performing chores too slow, constantly verbally berated, underfed, forced to live in dehumanizing space, Dursleys ignored more explicit violent attacks from others, such as Dudley bullying him, or Marge siccing dog on him. I even believe there is reason for that: Dursley feared him. From their perspective, Harry was a ticking bomb. They feared to use more violent methods of "discipline", because they feared his magic outbursts.

Harry's whole experience at Hogwarts is proof that they were unnecessary. The shear number of times he was in mortal danger without any assistance from Dumbledore or the staff illustrate that if he had ultimate protection available then it would be better to have him tutored at home at the most extreme. No, Harry's safety was never a concern of Dumbledore's, he only paid lip service to it. You are smart, I'm sure you can think of dozens of better ways to protect Harry during the summers. Or, if the blood wards were really that powerful, then something more forceful should have been done to ensure his treatment was within reason. There are too many, "There was no other choice" being thrown around for that to be valid.

"The shear number of times he was in mortal danger without any assistance from Dumbledore or the staff illustrate that if he had ultimate protection available then it would be better to have him tutored at home at the most extreme"
Dude, you just called out plot contrivance that is present in 99% of stories starring teens and kids. Without otherwise competent stuff doing stupid sh*t, there wouldn't be a story. When it comes to calling out and punishing characters, your treatment of Snape, for example, is incomparable to Dumbledore. You went out of your way to make Narcissa Malfoy and Bella "f*cking torturous mudred" Lestrange into innocent people in this AU. And blood protection didn't just work during the summer. It was working as long as Harry doesn't reach the maturity and considers house of his blood relative his home he is invincible in case of Voldemort's magical attack.

They had a Fideliusly charmed house with friends and his godfather available by that time. The Bloodwards would have been moot.

It was probably stupid on JKR's part to keep Harry in Dursleys house during the sixth summer, but during GoB and OoP it was a necessity.. It is heavily implied that Lily's charms are better. Unfortunately Fidelius and Sacrificial Protection are both very vaguely defined, and Fidelius (just like Time Turner and Unbreakable Vow) provides for way too powerful loopholes. JKR is no Talkien, Le Guin or Sanderson, her worldbuilding is vivid, but deeply thought-out consistency is not her forte. When I see things like this, in my fanon, I try too fill the crack so building looks like it is intended in blueprints, even if those blue prints are drawn by Maurits Escher, while you disassemble it into building material and put it together in the way you see as constructively sound. Example of my reasoning: Voldemort is extremely paranoid and power obsessed, yet he is never forced his followers to give Unbreakable oath, thus there must be more requirements to it than explicitly mentioned, rather than Voldemort just being dumb. Same goes for Dumbledore, I see his actions as motivated by the fact that he is overconfident and not trustful enough and thus overloads himself with too many plans that he can't perfectly execute, and he knows more about Fidelius and Blood Protection than reader.

Dumbledore orchestrated his own death (euthanasia) the way that Snape killed him, so Draco doesn't have to commit this crime, even though in great scheme nothing would change if it was Draco who cast the killing curse. Do you really think that person who bothered with such thing while on verge of death, can simultaneously torture child with no reason? I remind you at early books, when Dursleys abused Harry the most, Dumbledore had no reason to believe that Harry is have to die. Dumbledore was skeptical of prophesy, but he knew for fact that Tom believes in it and won't leave Harry alone, but no reason to believe that boy had to die. His character flows stem from overconfidence, inability to share his burden with anyone else while juggling several responsible offices of authority. Not from explicit malice. Or vain-glory. He is very self-conscious about the later because of traumatic youth and consciously suppresses it.

[SWEETOLEBOB18]

10770042
Thank you

[SWEETOLEBOB18]

10862567
Quite correct. Lyra & Bon Bon are Harry's guardians, Sweetie would be their daughter in law.

[SWEETOLEBOB18]

10872586
The computer must be running to access the records. I'd get a plug outlet extender & plug into that.

If it plugged in somewhere I couldn't reach, well they do have battery powered heaters for camping.

[peter]

10872602
This was the eighties? I imagine even with power they did little work on computers. They even mentioned him using alternative light sources instead of the usual. This is a landscaping business. I assume. It would resemble the outbuildings and yard of a farm more than a regular business.