Talk:Rose-colored glasses

From TheKolWiki

I just noticed that several members of Jicken Wings have 2 pairs of rose-colored glasses. how? I don't know. link SuperDude 08:11, 10 October 2006 (CDT)

• Presumably, they got duplicated as a result of White Wednesday. --Quietust 10:10, 10 October 2006 (CDT)
  • They wouldn't have been duped in WW because they weren't obtainable when the backup was made back in August. --Veistran 14:02, 10 October 2006 (CDT)
    • Ascending while they were still available (and you were infected) enabled you to get two pairs.--DerekNJ 10:51, 10 October 2006 (CDT)
      • Under that circumstance, it presumably would be possible to determine the plural form, though it would require a very great sacrifice by one of the 4 people who actually have more than one (namely, pulverizing both of them at once). In all likelihood, this isn't going to happen. --Quietust 12:51, 12 October 2006 (CDT)

So why is the item's plural form marked as "unknown, currently impossible to determine", when it is quite possible to determine?--SuperDude 11:39, 12 October 2006 (CDT)

• Because it isn't possible to determine. It is not possible under normal circumstances to obtain more than one. Even in the abnormal circumstances that enabled some players to acquire a duplicate, the plural text is still impossible to determine; the item is not tradeable, and gives no message when removed from your closet or display case. (You may recieve acquire text from Hangk's, but I doubt it. I'm not really sure since I'm an HC'er and don't really mess with Hangk's, however.) --Aardvark (Talk | Contribs) 11:54, 12 October 2006 (CDT)

You don't get the plural form if you withdraw two or more from Hagnk's, just "You aquire [item] (2)".--Jubbers 18:38, 12 October 2006 (CDT)

Thanks to the marvelous /count command, I've determines the plural is "pairs of rose-colored glasses." --EEpiccolo 20:36, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

References

Is this an reference to overly optimistic people? "seeing the world with rose tinted glasses"?? Atriarch 14:17, 23 January 2007 (CST)

• Almost definitely - it'd be hard for it not to be one. --Quietust (t|c) 15:24, 23 January 2007 (CST)