@stavvers

Kinda touchy, aren't we...

No, I'm not feeling it.

@stavvers

Diogenes on the Internet: "Touching story, bro. I bet you're a real looker."

@stavvers

And yet, we do use "unsightly" for a negative adjective, so perhaps "sightly" is just out of fashion.

The image mentions "intangible" again in the negative. We do still say "tangible" for "solid to the touch".

English is always a tricky thing.

@cstross

@stavvers

I'd argue that 'handsome' satisfies the touch case

@stavvers Well there’s “touchy,” which means irritable. And “looky looky” is an exclamation indicating intrigue or attraction.

So the default is also for things to be grumpy but alluring.

@stavvers see, I disagree.

We do say that something is "a sight" meaning it looks impressive, and we do say something is "touchy" meaning they're ill-tempered.

The conclusion is that the default object is impressive to look at, ill-tempered, produces a cacophony, smells bad and tastes delicious, which is to say, it's an apex predator, which all tracks.

@stavvers

We have "sighted," but that would mean the object can see you. And we have "touched," which means the object is...well, not quite right.

So the default object is loud, stinky, delicious, slightly insane, _and it can see you_

@stavvers the default object varies by language then.
In Portuguese, "Smell" is "Cheiro"
"Cheiroso" is something that smells good. ("-oso" being a suffix similar in usage to "-y")

So the default smell in Portuguese is good, by the logic of those tumblers