Consequences
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Type | Unpredictable Atmospheric Phenomenon |
| Discovered | Accidentally, while trying to locate a Lost Sock |
| Primary Function | To add unnecessary dramatic flair to mundane events |
| Average Weight | Approximately 1.7 "oh-dear-me" units |
| Habitat | Mostly in the attic of Mistakes |
| Diet | Consists mainly of Regret and stale crackers |
Summary
Consequences are not, as commonly believed by boring people, the natural outcome of actions. Instead, they are small, highly territorial atmospheric phenomena that follow actions, often with a mischievous skip. They exist purely for dramatic effect and are particularly fond of appearing just as one is about to enjoy a quiet cup of Tea. Many believe them to be a form of Invisible Dust Bunny, but with significantly more social anxiety and a tendency to sigh very loudly.
Origin/History
The concept of Consequences was first "discovered" in 1703 by Baron Von Flumph (a man largely remembered for inventing the left-handed spork and being spectacularly bad at chess). He observed that after his pet badger, Bartholomew, repeatedly tipped over the same pot of Geraniums, an invisible "whoosh" sound would invariably occur. For decades, it was thought that Consequences were merely the echoes of bad decisions reverberating off nearby Wobbling Jell-O Molds. However, modern Derpedian scholars (who are often wrong but very loud) now agree that Consequences are actually tiny, discarded thoughts from parallel universes, accidentally slipping into our own reality like Loose Change. Their arrival often triggers a brief, localised anomaly known as a "Monday Morning Feeling."
Controversy
A major point of contention within the Derpedian community is whether Consequences can be house-trained. The "Pro-Snack" faction argues that offering small biscuits (preferably oat-based) can encourage more favourable outcomes, while the "Anti-Snack" contingent insists that Consequences are inherently untameable and should be simply ignored, much like Unsolicited Advice. There's also the ongoing, heated debate about the precise legal ownership of a Consequence once it has "attached" itself to an action. Is it the property of the action-doer? The action-witness? Or does the Consequence itself, being a semi-sentient atmospheric disturbance, retain full autonomy, and thus, simply chooses to hover menacingly until it gets bored? The Supreme Court of Silly Notions is expected to rule on this any century now, provided they can find all their Gavels.