author
stringlengths 3
20
| subreddit
stringclasses 20
values | subreddit_id
stringclasses 20
values | id
stringlengths 4
9
| content
stringlengths 4
39.3k
| summary
stringlengths 1
10.1k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
BendyZebra | AskWomen | t5_2rxrw | cg6s1an | We had our 3 year old English Cocker Spaniel spayed yesterday and it's obviously made her very sore, ruined her appetite (which is a big deal for something as voracious as a spaniel!) and made her super clingy.
My husband is 13 years older than me but has never owned a dog of his own, his parents always dealt with the family dogs, so he was really unsure of how to deal with a moping pup. I could tell he was getting distressed by how she was reacting.
I'm sick and disabled so normally he takes over all the important stuff and comforts everyone but all she's wanted to do since we got her home is cuddle me at all times and sleep in my lap. (That alone made me happy, she chose me! Hehe.)
He looks after me like a complete pro no matter how sick I am so I thought he'd be able to handle this too. It seems it was a steep learning curve for him though!
The vet told us to prepare something bland and soft for her to eat, make sure she had plenty to drink and to watch her like a hawk so she wouldn't touch her stitches.
My husband ended up a little overwhelmed. He didn't know how to properly prepare chicken and rice for a dog to settle her stomach post anaesthetic. He didn't know how to get her to eat it even though she was sleepy and uninterested. He couldn't get her to drink anything to combat the potentially constipating anaesthetic. He didn't know how to stop her from chewing her stitches (long ears + the cone of shame = chaos).
I showed him how to boil chicken breasts, cool the resulting stock, skim the fat and then cook the rice in it. When she refused to even touch her carefully prepared dinner, he gave up and asked if we should call the vet.
I said no and instead took a banana, mashed it up, lifted her lip and gently pushed it through her teeth and onto her tongue (the sweetness stimulated her appetite and she eventually took a piece without me forcing it on her).
Once I'd got her to eat a small amount of banana, I then hand fed her some of the chicken and rice until she was too tired to continue.
She was still refusing to drink though at that point and my husband's many attempts at coaxing her just made her (and him) extremely irritated. I got her interested in drinking again by giving her my lactose-free milk :) I dipped my fingers in it and rubbed it on her gums and before I knew it, she was lapping it up! :)
He was also battling to stop her licking or chewing her stitches without a buster collar. If you turned your head for a second, she went for them. I sent him out to get some 2-3 year old (human size) onesie pjs, then we cut the arms and legs off and put it on her backwards (poppers on her back) so her tail could fit out the back by leaving a popper undone. That way, she can't get to her stitches and we don't have to watch her so closely.
I ended up sleeping on the sofa with her all night (she usually sleeps at the bottom of our bed but I didn't want her to be kicked accidentally in the night). Overnight I managed to get her to eat a few noodles cooked in chicken stock and drink some water with a tiny drop of juice in it to tempt her.
When he got up this morning he was amazed to find that she was doing really well and had eaten and had a drink.
She's still very clingy and has to be touching me at all times for reassurance but I'm stupidly proud of myself for being able to help my dog feel so much better when I need 24/7 care myself.
I know it probably seems like a really stupid and small thing to be proud of but I'm so glad I can still be useful, even if only to help my beautiful companion recover :D | I'm extremely sick and disabled, need 24 hour care but I was able to look after my dog after she had surgery when my much older husband had no idea what to do to help her. Small thing but it made me happy! |
Rick_n_Roll | gaming | t5_2qh03 | cg86v68 | Accidental Intravenous injection of ephedrine hydro chloride by my dentist. I have asthmatic Bronchitis and kind of "grew" over it. No allergies what so ever and I had no reaction ....but the day after ho-ly-shit. Felt like I was dying for months. Blood tests everything turned out perfect but still felt like shit for a long time. Feeling great now but people can die from an intravenous injection.. Can result in cardiac arrest when you have asthma. Bodies are weird. | Almost got killed by my dentist |
shryne | nfl | t5_2qmg3 | cga9s5y | Didn't he recently (as in, the last two years) come out saying that he would like to own an NFL team? Problem is, either the NBA or the NFL (forget which) has rules about owning sports teams in different cities. So, he is unable to purchase an NFL team unless he moves the Mavs, or buys the cowboys. I don't think either is likely.
I don't think the NFL will implode anytime soon, but it will have to make minor changes as TV becomes more important to some than attending games. I think Mark Cuban has some half truths in there, but there's some bitterness in there was well. I think the whole "people will get sick of the NFL being on TV constantly" argument is kinda bullshit. The offseason re-generates that hype every year, not to mention baseball/basketball is on every night of the week sometimes. | Cuban is bitterly spitting out half truths and the NFL will adapt to make more money keep the game alive. |
doomsdaydefense | nfl | t5_2qmg3 | cgaikok | He's essentially saying that the NFL will have its own "XFL incident" internally. Instead of spreading football out into the offseason, they will spread it out over the week - and possibly lose viewership.
The Cuban Missile Crisis has a point.
First off, if you play games on Saturday you will lose viewers. Bar none, there are people who will watch college football, whereas they might have watched if not for the conflict.
Secondly, the more games you play on Thursday, the more viewership you put at risk for losing on Sunday. Some fans just want to watch a lot football - but for a big group of people, it's about watching one team. If you spread your games out through the week, you've got people that will still only watch on one day. All of a sudden your Sunday hits are dropping, because people aren't sticking around to watch other games - they already watched on Thursday.
Third - this isn't the Premiere League. We don't walk the streets for our clubs, ready to smash the flower pots of our Eagle-supporting neighbors. The NFL fanbase is all about the comfort of being a fan. What the hell do I mean by this? I mean that most of us do what we fucking want; we don't wake up at 6 am to watch Champions League games. If anything, the NFL is like an escape from the other stuff - it's not another thing on the list of high priorities. That may not apply to a lot of people on r/nfl, but it does apply to most of the fanbase overall. If you put a game on a weekday night, people will watch it if it is convenient. | Mark makes a good point (granted maybe out of being jelly) that the NFL thinks too highly of the good it is selling. Football is a great escape for many fans, but putting it on every night of the week makes it less of an escape and more of a duty to watch, which we fans will say fuck off to. |
ruryrury | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cgakq76 | hate the Koreans
Worst | ever. |
So_Impressed | science | t5_mouw | cgbwbbp | My gut reaction is that it's annoying that men think that most women are primarily concerned with being considered attractive. "Attractive" has such a strong implication that it is for sexual purposes and I don't know if that's truly what you intend. If you used the word "approachable", I think this is more in line with how women think when preparing themselves to be out in public.
In formulating a response, I considered the reasons I would want to look nice in the presence of men. My primary motivation for wanting men to find me attractive is so that I can get done what I want to get done. If I go out in public looking like I just woke up and don't give a crap about what I'm wearing, I might as well be invisible because it seems like my presence is actively ignored. It seems that most often, if a woman has to deal with a man then she had better make herself at least look nice if she has any hope of being taken seriously. Whether that's negotiating a business transaction, engaging in a good intellectual discussion or simply not being ignored at a store if I need assistance from a salesman - I always have a better experience if I put on makeup before I leave the house.
Many women are flirted with or approached by men who would like to engage in a conversation that could lead to sex or romance, often enough that the idea that going out with the explicit intention to make themselves attractive for men is counterproductive to their social well-being. I know that most men can't relate or it sounds far-fetched, but look at other posts by women on these forums. Many women speak of being wary when out where there are men who would harass them over their hotness, and are called psycho or paranoid due to their cautious attitude. If women didn't have to deal with so much unwanted attention (and if the average woman could physically hold off the average man), you wouldn't see so many of these types of comments. | Most women wear makeup so that they are socially presentable and approachable, not to make themselves (sexually) attractive. |
KSKaleido | science | t5_mouw | cgc830k | I will never convince anyone I've ever dated of this
Whether or not it's true, no, you won't ever "convince" them. They've had YEARS of social pressure to wear makeup, long before you were in the picture, and in a lot of cases, long before they were sexually active.
I tried once, to convince a girlfriend to just stop wearing makeup, or at the very least severely tone it down. Part of it was selfish (she would literally take HOURS before we would go out), and part of it was that she was goddamn gorgeous without it. It doesn't work. There's too much social pressure on women to look a certain way, and she didn't have the mettle to break that mold. Most of them don't. | I agree with you; women don't. |
Kalium | science | t5_mouw | cgcfpi3 | It's only flawed logic if you don't document your assumptions. Which they did, rendering this a perfectly valid study that makes its premises clear. That disagrees with what you want to believe is true does not invalidate the data or the observation that two items under study are notably misaligned.
This could be interpreted several ways, including in the exact manner you posit .
The sanest response is to call for study of said assumption, not to dismiss a bunch of data because an assumption that does not invalidate it is something you desire to be false but lack any data for. | And what makes your assumptions better, besides your personal warm fuzzies on the subject? |
primalj | Fitness | t5_2qhx4 | cgd5zgv | Bro-science.
Not eating before lifting may help with lipolysis (breaking down fat). To minimize any type of muscle wasting, it might be advised to take some BCAAs ala LeanGains style, but it's not imperative. The most important window to hit is post workout. Get a good whack of protein (and carbohydrates for glycogen replenishment) within 2 hours post workout (the timeline is madly debated, but the reality is it takes your body up to 6 hours to metabolize protein to the point where it can start using it to repair muscle fibers, and you're going to be in a state of repair for 24-48 hours anyway...)
So, | BCAAs may be helpful if you're trying to maximize hypertrophy, but generally, getting enough food in your post workout is where the importance lies. |
primalj | Fitness | t5_2qhx4 | cgd9pwv | I suspect that, if he was concerned, he's either been misinformed (which isn't necessarily his fault--there's a LOT of pseudo-science and misinterpretations in all good fitness-related literature*; not only on the internet), or he himself has issues managing working out fasted.
But if there's one thing that's for certain, what works for one person doesn't mean it works for all people. Some individuals have some insulin regulation problems and require that food to help them "jump start" glycolysis. I suspect that between your own diet and glycogen reserves you're more efficient in gluconeogenesis (when glycogen becomes depleted), so you have less of an issue in working out fasted. | If it works: keep doing it!
Even the good science is starting to disagree with the 'older' good science. It's ever-evolving, just like all good research nowadays. |
anonymous-coward | politics | t5_2cneq | cgek6pk | And a sovereign nation has this right to develop its own speciality in industry.
Unless this sovereign state signed a trade treaty that conferred other benefits, and now wishes to enjoy those benefits while restricting trade in ways forbidden by that treaty.
The WTO response will probably be to allow the US to retaliate against Indian goods, another example of "a sovereign nation having a right to determine how it trades." | If you don't want WTO actions brought against you, don't sign WTO agreements. |
ronaan | wow | t5_2qio8 | cgfhiu9 | Dispelling and getting the pitlord positioning for felhunters right were the two things that make the fight. One of his dots ticks really high after some time so keep yourself dispelled.
More ilvl just gives more room for error and makes for a faster kill. You can do it in a set of timeless isle gear I guess (I couldn't but then destro was very new to me and I had to get some practice first). | dispell, dispell, dispell. |
luckyarcade | changemyview | t5_2w2s8 | cgfzz8p | Okay, let me start off by saying I enjoyed Bioshock Infinite immensely. I bought it day one and was happy with my time with it. It is definitely a good game, and an enjoyable game. The setting is awe inspiring and very unique and many would agree that it was one of the best games of 2013, as evident with the Metacritic score.
That said, there are plenty of ways in which it didn't impress enough to be classified as the "greatest game of all time" by a large amount of people. I personally do not think you will see this game thrown around as people's favorite game in 10 years, the same way Zelda, Halo 2, (etc) is today. But let's get into it.
For one, gameplay.
The gameplay was a typical shooter, which if you like that, wasn't a bad thing. The problem however, lies within the repetitive nature of the combat. You are limited to only two weapons at once the entire game meaning you have to pick your weapons carefully. This doesn't encourage playing around, instead if pushes you to choose one or two you like and stick with it. Besides that, Vigors, while fun, were never radical enough to be in the front of your mind. Because most of them were simply assets in combat instead of it's focus, I personally found myself forgetting to use them multiple times. Together this meant combat that remained relatively static the entire game. Combat didn't ever truly change with the introduction of new vigors, it was more like getting a new type of grenade.
And besides that, I found player movement speed to be slow in a way that felt detrimental to the game. Walking but also reloading. It made sense as an aid to atmosphere in the original murky hallways of Bioshock, but in bright open Columbia, it didn't really aid the atmosphere and instead just slowed things down. The skyhooks helped with this, but again they weren't present most of the game, or dynamic enough to truly change the combat. Instead they just moved you around, or were used as way to regen some health.
Next, the level design itself.
Personally, I found this the most disappointing aspect of Bioshock Infinite. Columbia had such a beautiful world and atmosphere, but unfortunately by the end of the game I realized I hadn't experienced most of it because Bioshock Infinite was incredibly linear. This isn't necessarily a bad thing until you pair it with static combat, and then have most of the game be combat, and then design all the levels around this combat. Think about it like this, how cool would it be to show Elizabeth's tower off in the distance and then allow the player a few different routes to get there. Imagine jumping off one "island" and being able to skyhook over. Really think about the amazing possibilities a city like Columbia could offer (acknowledging hardware constraints etc), and then contrast that with the multitude of similar balcony's, hallways, and plazas we just had to walk through or occasionally sky hook past in linear sequences or cutscenes. If I remember right, one of the most open parts of the game was simply a big circle.
Lastly, the narrative. Potential Spoiler warning.
Bioshock infinite's best parts were story, but even then it didn't nail all of it. It toyed with various themes other games have not dared to touch (which is awesome) but it didn't nail them. It detailed certain problems within Columbia, but it never really did anything with them. Did the narrative really address the problems of racism or class division in Columbia, or connect them to religion, or to patriotism? No. It showed them, beautifully sure, but just as quick as we saw many of these issues we were rushed away to another, or moved on to the more relevant theme that was quantum mechanics. It's been talked to death, but narrative-dissonance was a big issue with Bioshock Infinite. And ultimately the story has a few inconsequential steps that seem to cater to these themes that (again) are not completely relevant to Booker, and Elizabeth's goals.
Many people before have said that they felt as though the combat was just a barrier to get into more of the story. Unfortunately a good amount of the story itself is presented around combat and actual gameplay. Not just in level design, eg. "here is the working class area" but also in providing an excuse for combat. eg. "In this timeline the resistance force want you dead, because you were really helpful as a martyr, and it would hurt the resistance if people knew you were back (which doesn't make a lot of sense considering half of the resistance force is actively trying to kill you...)." Overall, Infinite has a good narrative, and the last 30 minutes or so are quite memorable, especially among fans of the previous Bioshock. But the game walks a fine line between catering to the reason for combat/gameplay, and the overhead plot, to its detriment.
I have and would continue to recommend Bioshock infinite because it is still a fun game. Combat is alright despite being largely static, and the world is beautiful even if the level design doesn't always take advantage the way it could. The narrative is fun to follow, and the end twist is great. But by no means is it the greatest game of all time, or even (in my opinion obviously) of 2013.
So to make a long post short, | Bioshock Infinite won't be considered the greatest game of all time (by at least a large amount of people) because it didn't nail anything. Combat was hit or miss but either way static the whole game, level design was too linear and unfortunately just complimented the underwhelming combat, and the narrative is weakened by walking a fine line between catering to the reason for combat/gameplay, or the actual narrative/overhead plot. |
QuasiJL | changemyview | t5_2w2s8 | cgh57bs | should" is a very hard thing to enforce. Should we exercise? give money to the poor? be nice people? We should do many things. A more practical question is "Does an immigrant need to learn the language of the country they move to?"
The difficulty of the language is not really the major factor. The major factor is why should we learn the language in the first place. Language has GREAT economic and sociocultural incentives.
For the most part, most immigrants can speak the language of their native country. Consider how a immigrant arrives in the first place. They need a visa and most visas are granted through work or study, which requires language fluency. The majority of non-speaking immigrant are most likely family members/refugees or some other special cases.
Having a community means there a subculture large enough that supports their sociocultural and economic needs in a foreign language. This eliminates many benefits and ultimate destroys their motivation.
If most personal benefits are gone, then we must consider societal benefits. Let's ignore a moral argument that all discrimination is bad and stay with an economic view. If no one accommodates immigrants, the inconvenience will motivate them to learn the language. Being completely reliant on a translator is costly and is insanely annoying. However, if the benefits outweigh the costs, most businesses will just incur a higher transaction cost and find ways to communicate (pictures, learning their language, etc). This balance is ultimately governed by market forces. | they don't need to so why should they |
ByronicAsian | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cgi3ub6 | I don't think its that the younger generation "doesn't know any better'. Its just they don't give a shit?
Political apathy for starts is major problem and the fact that a fair amount of Japanese feel that they've done enough with regards to contrition (i.e. the various Treaties, reparations, AWF, apologies and ODA loans).
Not to mention you're now several generations removed from said atrocities and these kids were taught these crimes in a very dry manner. (A few pictures of dead bodies here, a few pages about how many non-combatants were killed and maybe a paragraph about comfort women). Although there are supplementary materials used by teachers (who are often derided as left wing for their attempts to stop schools from using "nationalist texts") to attempt to evoke empathy (like diaries and selected excerpts from testimonials), the fact that the atrocities are not tested on College Entrance exams really just makes students give less of a shit.
The vast majority of young Japanese (like young Americans) do not vote reliably (namely those Japanese born after 1982 as they were taught under the revised M.O.E policy of teaching war crimes as prior to that, WW2 was a bit whitewashed) And with regards to the rest of the electorate, given the 20 year slump they were in, would prioritize the economy/domestic issues above all else. So even if an LDP politician may hold debatable historical views, they'll still vote for him/her if they believe he'll "improve the economy" or revitalize an area.
Now that the fact that the electorate doesn't give a shit. Why should an scumbag politician not try to troll for easy votes in a steady, albeit somewhat small voting bloc of ultra-nationalists by going to Yasukuni or denying war crimes and showing his street cred of not kowtowing to foreign countries (pls vote 4me). You sure as hell aren't losing any regular votes by doing so. You having nothing to lose and everything to gain. | students care only superficially or just don't give a shit. I mean, would you care? |
Shills_for_fun | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cgi51t2 | I think the ambiguous status of the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands played a role in all that. Territorial disputes are easy to dust under the rug when they're not in the spotlight. For example, Japan's dispute with Russia gets virtually zero media coverage (as well as the Dokdo/Takeshima dispute with S. Korea) nowadays.
Essentially what Japan did with the Diaoyu/Senkaku islands is run up and slam their flag down on those rocks by allowing the sale of property. The history of how those islands became administered by Japan is also sort of sketchy, so China feels like they got screwed.
The CCP's central stance has traditionally been to right what they see have been the country's wrongs: being humiliated by western powers, creating a powerful united government that wasn't there under the Guomindang (rebel provinces, warlords, invasions by Japan), and of course territorial integrity after roughly a century of everyone carving out chunks of China. | China has history of being screwed, Japan did something foolish, not really surprising when you think about it. |
MerlinsBeard | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cgi5jxh | Long story short, USSR wasn't in the war until June of '41 and US was in in December of '41.
By that point, the Brits had been fighting the Germans and the Italians alone for a full year after France capitulated in '40.
Bear in mind, in this year, the Brits were fighting the Germans/Italians all over the Mediterranean (Malta, Crete, Greece, etc), Middle East (Iraq mostly), North Africa and in the Battle of Britain.
The simple fact of the matter is, if the Brits had been defeated the Soviets never would have received the thousands of planes/trucks that they got from the US nor would the US have had a launching point for invasions of North Africa and Europe.
Manpower (couple hundred thousand Germans tied up in Mediterranean theater) wasn't the key issue, it was the number of armored vehicles and particularly aircraft that were being used. Had those men and especially those tanks/aircraft been available for Barbarossa perhaps that theater might have gone differently. | To me, it all starts with the Brits standing alone for a full year against the Germans/Italians in multiple fronts. |
indorock | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cgi9iia | No, you miss the point entirely . I chose to live in Germany because it's a stable and safe society and I enjoy those things. Who wouldn't??
I'm talking about the ethnocentric and frankly short-sighted view that "borders are a good thing" when it was those very borders which created the disparity between countries in the first place. Unless you mean to infer that Germans/Europeans/whatever are intrinsically inclined to create a more stable society than central Africans would, in which point I could label you a racist.
Yeah, borders and border security are so frigging awesome arresting or shooting Mexicans making a run for it is super cool ....except when a piece of land outside your own has something you really need (most often oil), then we can put aside the notion of borders and sovereignty until further notice. | fuck borders |
Touristupdatenola | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cgibon1 | No reparations should be required. The only exception being the Swiss banks that held onto money that was not theirs to retain.
If Japan is still paying reparations, that is absurd. Additionally, if Japan chooses to rearm, why not?
My only request, is that Japan & the Japanese be honest about the past. As a Westerner I will always acknowledge that during WW2 the BE allowed millions to starve in India/Pakistan/Bangladesh; that the murder of Japanese POWs was SOP; our failure to bomb the railway to Auschwitz was shameful; and bombing was essentially a war crime. If politicians try to whitewash history, I would stand up and protest as the Japanese historians did recently.
And as a citizen of a great country, you can be proud of your awesome & honest historians. | Agreed, reparations now are silly. Japan should rearm. Historical honesty is v important, that is my main point. |
FoxRaptix | changemyview | t5_2w2s8 | cgiw163 | one person should not be able to compel another to do something they don't want to protect the first person. That is simply tyranny.
Like it or not you are a participant in society. You do not live in a bubble where your actions do not have both direct or indirect consequences and risks to those around you. In the case of irresponsible vaccination a deadly risk.
You have rights yes, but don't forget you are not the only member of society. So other people have rights to. The most fundamental right above all else is a right to life. Certain rights take precedence over other rights. In this case the right to life for others takes precedence over your right to make an ignorant choice.
This is a clear case where 2 rights can conflict with each other. Your fundamental right to choose in regards to your own body or your children, dangers the fundamental right to life of those around you/your children. In this case whose right do we respect more? The right of personal choice or the right of life?
Also Children have rights independent of their parents. So even based on ignorance as you claim why does the parents right of ignorance supersede the childs right to safe health? We've already seen with cases of Faith-healing that parents have an obligation to their children to keep them as safe and healthy as possible. If they are willfully and ignorantly denying their child access to vaccinations which keep them healthy and prevent deadly diseases then they are not fulfilling their obligation to their child and again they're forcing their personal right of choice to take precedence over the personal right of life of others.
You do not have a greater right to choose to endanger the lives of those around you than those people have a right to not be endangered by choice. | Peoples right to life should not take second place to right of choice. |
face_fisted | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cgk7kue | I don't think anyone in this thread read the article. Yet again, it's a bunch of knee-jerk dumbasses prattling off about a misinformation centric headline.
This isn't about the Canadian government wanting to butt the US out of surveying Canadian citizens for the citizens rights and sovereignty... it's wanting to ensure that only Canadian companies get the contracts for hardware and maintenance for the monitoring of their own citizens in the same way the US would be.
You don't like the NSA? Oh, fine, CSEC is just as good. No citizen of any developed nation has any semblance of privacy. All nations spy on themselves and each other and select nations share that information. | Canada doesn't want to give US companies the contracts for CSEC's own brand of digital surveillance. |
Ikkath | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cgl8bf3 | While you are getting down votes by people who think you are being alarmist I will answer your question:
Probably not. However this doesn't preclude a future filovirus like Ebola being widely spread via the "air". The Reston virus (an Ebola subtype) was very highly suspected to be passing from monkey to monkey without physical contact when it was first discovered in the 90s. Though in this case the Virus seems to not be pathogenic to humans.
Further evidence has also been found that the pig to non-human primate jump can be made without direct contact for some Ebola subtypes. | don't worry that this particular outbreak will become "airborne" but academically there definitely is concern that a pathogenic, easily spread filovirus could arise someday. |
thcgoat12 | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cgl93gu | I don't know, are they? Do you know of any examples of China provoking Japan to the degree of Japanese prime minister visiting war criminals' shrine/memorial? All I'm saying is Japan should just stop with their nationalistic agendas that could start controversies. Then if something bad happens they are asking us to clean up the mess, we are not doing that b/c we are not their fucking tool, that's what I'm saying. | Japan, just stfu and behave yourselves b/c we are not your tool and we won't clean up after your mess. |
Limin8tor | nfl | t5_2qmg3 | cglj8ej | I'm reading a biography on Landry called "The Last Cowboy" that's very interesting, and talks about the rivalry between the two men. Landry owned the Defense, and Lombardi was the offensive guru. The Giants' owner, Wellington Mara, informally promised both men that they would get the head coaching job when the then Giants coach, Jim Lee Howell, retired. Lombardi, tired of being put off for the HC job eventually left for Green Bay (though he later had secret talks about coming back as HC in NY down the line). Landry, seeing the writing on the wall when Allie Sherman was brought in to replace Lombardi as OC and was treated as the heir apparent, left for Dallas a year or two later, bolstered by a statement from Howell that Landry was the "best coach in the league."
Apparently Landry and Lombardi were cordial, but never close. They had very different lifestyles. Lombardi came from a Catholic immigrant family in New York, was loved by his players and had a certain propensity for alternating between bombast and being crestfallen that led Landry to refer to him as "Mr. High-low." Landry, on the other hand, was a staid, man from a small Bible Belt Texas town who was respected, but rarely loved by the people he coached, who was seen as reserved, aloof, and understated, in victory and defeat. They had very different perspectives. According to the book (a good read, by the way), they had a healthy respect for each other, but didn't really understand each other, and certainly had a healthy, if not heated, rivalry as well. | Landry and Lombardi were very different people who had mutual respect, but a certain lack of understanding as well. |
PandaBearShenyu | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | cglqaca | The U.S. is just acting like douchebags now. Trying to bring this regional politics debacle into everything.
Last week the U.S. tried to woo China and India against Russia, China refused, and yesterday they went to Japan and Taiwan to back japanese militarization and Taiwan independence. | U.S. foreign policy today appears to be run by a bunch of highschool girls that lacks any of the intelligence and cunning of the Cold War era. |
datasoy | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cglnif2 | It's easier to influence the game as a midlaner but a good Jungler will have much more impact on the game if he plays right. Mid lanes all abaut map awareness and jungle is all abaut objective control. as Jungler, you control which objectives your team is going after. If your seen Bot lane defending a split pusher the enemy team has a tower in bag. If your position is unseen the enemy team can't realy play agressive | Jungler can realy make or break a team and has the most impact on the game whether its positive or negative |
GravyMcBiscuits | politics | t5_2cneq | cgmbw1z | sometimes that means a different area / longer commute
This is why I really think commute costs should be part of the equation. Just using mortgage/rent is a bit misleading as it favors a lower mortgage vs a longer commute.
Commute costs add up a lot faster than people realize ... especially when you consider total wear-n-tear. Even just for gas for a 10 mile commute ...
30 miles/gal * total round trip (20) = .66 gallons per day.
.66 gallons * 3.75 = $2.47 per workday
260 workdays * $2.47 = $642/year
642 / 12 = $53.50 / mo
Remember ... that $53.50 per month is pure gas costs and assume 30 miles to the gallon. Total wear-n-tear on the car is significantly more ... but trickier to calculate assuming you'll own a car whether your commute is 2 miles vs 15. | Ignoring commute costs when considering the 30% rule is not advised. |
dwhipwhipplez | politics | t5_2cneq | cgmcscw | Easy, give them loans for credit they cant afford. Slowly just make everyone homeless, create a welfare system, demonize those in the welfare system, give them as little needed so they don't revolt, have them work "jobs" for their welfare, automate everything but keep the most valuable stuff for yourself, give the welfare state just enough to keep them from killing everyone. | Basically the plot of Elysium. |
veive | politics | t5_2cneq | cgme4xw | Apple is heavily subsidized in the US by the phone carriers, and yes, most people do regard a cell phone as necessary.
Google makes their money from advertising. You the individual are a product to them, the corporations that pay them money to put specific information in front of you are the actual customers.
And yes, advertising is a required service for most companies, and many companies that have required goods and services do advertise.
For example, in my state you're legally required to buy car insurance in order to drive. Car insurers advertise on google in order to get business. | Just because a good or service isn't required for you, doesn't mean it isn't required for someone. |
Ruhtardedd | politics | t5_2cneq | cgmedd9 | Yeah, 45 minutes is nothing. Most people in my area work in or around NYC. That's more than a 90 minute drive during rush hour or about a 60 minute train ride. | NYC is the busiest place in the USA. The majority of people that work in NYC commute over 45 minutes each way. |
CaspianX2 | politics | t5_2cneq | cgmglgm | You're more right than you know.
Republicans' current game-plan is, in the grand scheme of things, short-term and ultimately suicidal. Granted, their actions probably won't truly affect them for a few decades at least, but when it does it'll be hard and unforgiving.
Right now, they are appealing to the sensibilities of the Baby Boomers that are their biggest voting bloc, and in the face of the progression of time are fighting harder and shouting louder to do so. But the Baby Boomers won't live forever, and when they start leaving the voting pool due to mortality, the political landscape will be left with those who grew up during the generally good Clinton years, with the first major political memory being the Clinton affair witch-hunt. This followed by the jaw-droppingly bad Bush years, and now the further insanity during Obama's term.
I'm not just speculating this either - polls show that young people of the last few generations have been increasingly more liberal, and while short-term demographics show a trend in increasing minority polulation that's becoming a huge worry to Republicans (Texas will likely be a purple state in the next decade or so due to this), in the long-term the way they've alienated the youth will bite them even harder than how they've alienated minorities. | the harder Republicans push to the right now, the harder it'll hit them once the baby boomer start dying off. |
SushiGato | politics | t5_2cneq | cgmpiey | Like everything, employment goes in waves. It is a 'natural' cycle of supply and demand. If there is a lot of supply and little demand for a job, the employer can pick the candidate they want and pay them less. Back in the 1990's it was the opposite. People would graduate from college and have their pick of businesses to make $50k from, even with a shit Poly Sci degree like mine.
You better believe that in ten years a college degree will be more valuable than it is today. The economy is forcing people away from the humanities and towards trades. Less people going to school, which is happening, = more opportunity for current degree holders. I'd bet money on this happening, if I had any.
I have worked the corporate world since I graduated. Was fortunate and found a decent $30k a year job right after work. Now stuck in Customer Service, making about a dollar more an hour after many years. "He can type well, and write a well though out thesis, let's make him do e-mails."
It sucks. I hate it. But what can you do but wait? I will be going back to school in the fall to get a Masters in Instruction so I can be a teacher. We will always need teachers. Plus, many of them get further education paid for. A big benefit. | Things will get better. |
KettleMeetPot | politics | t5_2cneq | cgmtbvy | As a 34 year old, when I was in my teens this type of advice still worked, but I was too young for it to start applying. Between the age of 14-28 I could basically walk in to any place and have a job before I walked back out. As my experience grew, so did my starting pay. The last "secure" job I had was in 2009, with only a handful of college credits and based primarily on my experience only, I got a job as a NOC tech in a data center starting out @ $14 an hour not counting quarterly bonuses that ranged from $500-$2000 depending on how we did in that quarter and my performance, I was a top performer. After my 2nd year including bonuses and holiday pay I was clearing $55k a year, full benefits, and only working 4 days a week (I worked night shifts 4-8pm, midnight-8am) doing something I thoroughly enjoyed.
Once the economy and the bailouts started to move in, the company I worked for made cutbacks, being the newest and lowest on the totem pole I was one of many who were let go. Since then it's been a circus act of side jobs, contract jobs, working with friends who run their own businesses etc. etc. I've applied from everything from sys admin jobs which I'm qualified for, to working in fast food and I get told the same things -
"You have too much experience"
or
"You don't have enough experience"
Right now I'm a commercial fisherman. A friend of mine has been doing it since he was 9, it's a family thing. Season is closed 2 months out of the year, luckily he found us a landscaping job for this month and next month, and because his uncle and dad are disabled he needs to start finding people he can rely on to run one of the multiple boats they own. So if I stick around, I might have that... which would be nice, running my own boat, being my own boss, and relying on my work ethic.
But it's still not what I originally planned on. I wanted to be a marine biologist, until I found out I could never afford the college tuition that was needed to actually make it anywhere. Then I set my sights on IT, since it was the hot new job market in the 90's and early 00's and because my mom had been and still is in a successful position within her company I figured it would be a "steady" and "reliable" job with plenty of room for advancement. Not now, it's all contract and temporary employment placement. At least at my skill level. I've steadily watched over the past 8 years, the pay continuously drop. It's gone from 13-18 an hour starting out, to 10-12 an hour starting out at a new place of employment in the same field, and they want more out of you than they did before.
The worst part for those like myself who have to keep busy and keep their mind running and constantly thinking or with ego problems, to go from having a steady job, and the ability to just go somewhere else without batting an eye... it destroys you from the inside out. I've pretty much battled with depression due to this since 2009 when I lost my "secure" career path. Any and all motivation to "succeed" is "blah".
But, bills have to be paid, food has to be purchased, etc. etc. etc. so I like many others do "what I can". It is what it is. It's an epidemic that a lot of people aren't really grasping in its entirety and how it's going to affect us socially and economically in the next 20 years or so. Especially considering the uprising of people under 25 who were raised during the economic boom with a sense of entitlement. Who continue to perform poorly at their job because they "expect" a certain amount of respect or pay just for showing up on time.
Sorry for the rant. Just random shit I had dancing around in my head after reading that article, your comment, and a few other comments. | 34, I understand the article as it applies to me, just dealing with it like everything else, because life in a capitalist world. |
asthasr | politics | t5_2cneq | cgmw3z6 | Well, keep this in mind among the doom and gloom about tech recruitment. Almost all recruited jobs are through these companies, for a couple of reasons:
Hiring programmers and other tech staff is very risky.
Filtering people for skill is hard, and the recruiters, while bad at it, do usually filter out the crazies. Usually.
Coming on as a contractor, and doing a good job , is how you develop a network that will eventually get you hired full-time or help you move to another company when you need to do so.
Point three is crucial today. Nobody stays at a single job for more than a few years, so any company where you know someone can potentially become a resource that you can use in the future. Thus, try your damnedest to be good at your job and pleasant to your colleagues—because while doing so has great benefits in itself, one of the indirect effects is that you avoid the consequences you'd suffer if people don't like you, or think you're incompetent. | Go into the job with a good attitude. Try hard. Do well. Make friends. Those friends will help you get more jobs when you need them. |
UNMANAGEABLE | politics | t5_2cneq | cgmouco | Here's the thing about people who passionately work hard and try their best every single day that can't seem to get a good job/catch a break. Yes, a good % of them are unlucky. However, not being educated with how the systems work will cause good people/workers to be stuck in their crappy low paying jobs.
The hardest workers who don't understand these concepts WILL get buried in their job/department for these reasons. Knowing how to get out is harder than how to get in.
Their are very few people in upper positions/management who will reach out to a hard working employee no matter what the circumstance is. If you want more money/better job and you don't want to leave your company you have to reach out yourself, it's nobody's job but your own to network and make connections and build bridges (and not burn them). If you want a senior/executive mentor, YOU ASK AND YOU MAKE TIME FOR THEM. They are more than willing, but you have to make the effort.
The world is bigger than a shop/department. It's a basic principle that for every mechanic turning a wrench in a corporation there are 5-8 employees supporting that employee. WHO ALL MAKE MORE MONEY THAN THE MECHANIC. Find a way to delve into this world, even if off hours.
Degrees are a hall pass in major corporations, if you don't have one you are only able to get into unique jobs if you know somebody or get lucky. If you have one it is completely up to you to knock on every door at the company incessantly to try to get in.
Accept it now that if you want to get paid better younger do not expect to work in a field/type of work you enjoy. Put your time in, pay your dues, and get into what you want to do when you are older.
Always keep in mind that to a corp, you are just a number. This is not democracy these days, it's the United States of Corporate America, they have the money and power to hire people for cheaper who will work harder than you will. Having a good reputation inside of the company raises your personal "stock value" to your employer. If they think they can make more money off of you in a better higher paying position, they will put you there.
Never stop applying to jobs you want. I'll give the example at my company. Unless people have ABET certified engineering degrees or MIT/Harvard type schools on your record, most people need to apply to 30+ jobs of any type before getting an interview, people without degrees is normally 60+ depending on the needs of the company at the time. This is big business in a saturated market at it's best. Even the best resumes get overlooked when there 1000 people applying for a $50,000 office administrator job. It's the facts of life.
I can probably make about a 100 point bullet list on the facts of working life outside of small mom and pops companies but these are true for the most part (I always accept that there are exceptions to these rules at all times.) | if you want to get paid you have to work hard not only at your job, but at your network yourself. No one else will do it for you. |
AbsoZed | relationships | t5_2qjvn | cgmlue6 | Maybe I'm wrong, but I think people focus too much on this as a whole. I know this is slightly off topic, but I'm going to post it anyway.
Who cares who takes whose name? Does it really matter? I mean, sure it's a little different for a male to take a female's name, but in the end, will it change anything?
You'll still love each other, and want to be unified with one another, and that's what marriage is really all about. Being with the person you love, and showing your commitment to them, regardless of what may happen. The name has nothing to do with it. | Don't worry so much about who takes whose name, as long as you love each other and are ready for marriage. Focus more on that than on the finer details like this, in my opinion, and do whatever makes you both comfortable. |
ru-kidding-me | politics | t5_2cneq | cgmrs0s | I run a small woman owned small business that I started myself. I detest taxes because the government tax collectors are only there on good days. If I lose money, the government isn't there saying, "here, have some money". They are a fair weather friend. I am sick of all the "oh, I can't get a job" whining from all the liberals. Make a frikkin job. I have a Brazilian woman clean my house. Hardly speaks English, but makes a decent living. There are lots of ways to make a living, but you have to get out of bed and get creative. Small business is the answer to much of the minwage/corporatism/jobless problems. Go out and steal customers from some big dumb company. They won't even notice. | STFU and go out and try something. Shut off the XBox and fire up your website that sells whatever you are good at.
Edit: TIL don't talk about personal experience in self-sufficiency on /politics because /politics is not real, it is liberal fantasies of the utopian world unaffected by anyone's real world experiences. |
snotf | politics | t5_2cneq | cgn0yd6 | gen x reporting in. 4 roommates, beater car, under qualified for my job instead of one that I'm qualified for and makes me miserable. | do what makes you happy. |
skztr | politics | t5_2cneq | cgn15eg | I write off literally every purchase I make since I'm almost always technically "working". | life goes better with tax evasion |
Nosra420 | politics | t5_2cneq | cgn4u7a | I kinda feel bad for a lot of college goers :( I dropped out of high school and started working right away. I worked a lot shitty jobs sometimes two at once (roofer bouncer pizza delivery construction) pretty much bottom of the barrel stuff but i saved my money.
By the time I was 28 I bought my own house outright no payments. I own a new car. At the same time all my friends are graduating college moving back in with their parents with a degree thats going to do fuck all for them. Im 30 now semi retired 14 years of hard work taking a few years off.. Owning everything makes it very easy to live. Without the monkey on your back of a house payment or a car payment. | college is great and all but no substitute for hard work you can be as successfull if not more then most college educated people with just a good head on your shoulders. If a idiot goes to college hes still an idiot |
HaiirPeace | politics | t5_2cneq | cgn3hrc | I'm starting my masters degree in June and I'm so fucked in life it's not even funny. After my graduate degree I'm going to owe about $85k in loans. A large part of that is my fault because I went to culinary school right out of high school and wasted money on a baking degree that I'm not using. I'm working on my masters in library science (focusing on information technology). Right now I work full time and make $9.46/hr 40 hours a week. I live with 2 other roommates and I'm always poor as fuck. I don't qualify for SNAP benefits because my roommates make more money than me so because of that "I" make enough to eat. I have to do my masters degree or else my bachelors is going to be pretty worthless. I look for new jobs constantly and apply almost daily, no luck yet since I don't have a masters I hardly qualify for any of the good jobs. I just want enough money to have a family and be comfortable and eat. Apparently that's too much to ask for and I'll be paying off my debt until I die. I kind of wish I never went to college if my loan payments are going to be so much after I graduate it'll be like paying rent probably $400 a month+ I can barely afford my rent now let alone a second "rent" payment on top of that.
High school was so misleading. "You must pick a career now, you must go to college or you're a loser who faps all night in your parents basement." | I owe a fuck ton of money and I'm probably screwed forever. |
leftheel | relationship_advice | t5_2r0cn | cgno9nx | One thing I'm sure of is that spotH3D is right. Having a child will not fix your relationship and will definitely not improve your sex life. If I had to guess, it would probably be more detrimental at this point. You sound like an awesome person, and would probably be a great parent, so I am sure you don't want to subject a child to a strained home situation. Maybe having a child would make sex afterward seem naughtier and more exciting for him, but I'd err on the side of caution and not take the chance.
That said, I have a theory. Consider spicing up your [protected] sex so that it mimics a drug; use his biological wiring to your advantage. Drugs are novelty-reward based and context-dependent. Have you tried sex in thrilling/novel places? Novel/naughty positions? The more exciting the sex, the more he might associate sex with that physiological reward he used to have with drugs and he might subsequently crave it. This is purely hypothetical, but it has some scientific merit.
A waning sex life can be incredibly painful when both SOs aren't waning together. It's important to know that it is a natural event in every relationship, though. Don't get down on yourself! Could be a side effect from drug treatments. Could just be the natural course of your relationship. Once you figure out what's happening, then maybe consider having kids. | Wait to have kids until you are at peace and in sync with each other about the state of your sex life. |
ABProsper | news | t5_2qh3l | cgojgzh | I am glad no one died in that mass attack. However given how politicized everything has become I fear that reasonable attempts at getting people mental health help probably will have to be avoided.
Also let me note that handguns aren't massively more dangerous than knives .
In the recent Fort Hood incident, a surprisingly simkl;ar incident (institutional space and almost the same time frame) the shooter who was a trained soldier equipped with .45 caliber handgun a caliber considered to be highly effective killed 3 and wounded 16 in his rampage
While no one was killed at the school thank goodness and the wounds were less serious , the kid than ran amok was a small shy teen armed only with a knife. he certainly could have brought molotov cocktails or other non firearm weapons and had he been stronger the death toll would have been higher.
The difference wasn't as great as some imagine.
Note too that its a social issue, in the past it was common in some areas for guns ow other weapons for hunting or sport (schools used to have gun clubs to be owned by young people and even to bring them into a classroom with permission,
Note [here](
Note this
I grew up at a time when people were not afraid of people with firearms,’ said (Supreme Court Justice Antonin) Scalia, noting that as a youth in New York City he was part of a rifle team at the military school he attended. ‘I used to travel on the subway from Queens to Manhattan with a rifle,’ he said. ‘Could you imagine doing that today in New York City?’” I have heard other reports of people carrying long guns openly in New York City in the 1950s, with no police being called, no schools locked down, no panic, no problems. Why was this so back then, but not now
Our society has decayed measurably from that point and there is no way to return to that healthy a society. Blame in on whatever you like, divorce and social change are my choices. There are others of course.
In truth we've become a society that suspends kids for eating a pastry and having it look like a gun. [Source](
The social comity and healthy families that would allow for a better society is gone .Beyond that even helping people is a challenge as society has become political and vindictive people rightly or wrongly peoples especially on the Right think psychology will be used to destroy political enemies not treat legitimate illnesses. | Glad no one was killed, good medicine and luck helped more than gun laws, We need a healthier society and I have no idea how to get it. |
Venddeta | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cgohnu7 | I may not have the 90 minutes to watch all the way through, even though I do appreciate the detail and work he put into this.
Anyone have a | Ty in advance :) |
RoadblockGG | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cgoq7lc | Wow Phreak, if I ever get to NA, I will buy you a HAT! Respect for the time you've put in this! | flat armor is better for trades, flat health is better for all-ins (from the bot-lane perspective) |
redshue | AskWomen | t5_2rxrw | cgp8zx2 | No human has the right to use a part of another human's body without permission: not fetus, not baby, not child, not teenager, not adult, and not senior. Even the deceased cannot be harvested for life-saving organs without consent. By outlawing abortion you're giving more rights to a fetus than any born person. | It doesn't matter if a fetus considered a human or not as far as abortion is concerned. |
egaleco | AskWomen | t5_2rxrw | cgp968q | No human has the right to use a part of another human's body without permission [...]
That isn't true by any litteral definition of right or law. If you live in America Roe Vs Wade says otherwise. The same is true for most other countries as well. | There are legal limitations on bodily autonomy. |
monotone__robot | wow | t5_2qio8 | cgx6uxp | You just have to look at a multiboxer as a group of characters. If you're on a pvp server and you find five characters of the opposing faction then you're dead. One human controlling all five, or five humans controlling one each, it doesn't matter because you're dead. In instanced PVP the advantages the multiboxer has are offset by the limit on participating characters per side and in instanced PVE they have multiple characters to gear up but no more loot than a normal group has access to.
I used to 2-box back in BC. I had two warlocks and I could put out a lot of damage in a short amount of time, but with the extra coordination required, and the added difficulty of adapting to new circumstances as they arose I think I was less potent than two individual and competent warlocks. More often than not I could take down any one player I encountered with relative ease, but once two or three people coordinated against me I was screwed.
I personally feel multiboxing isn't worth it these days because most dps specs have to take advantage of procs to maximize their output and it's just not feasible to manage and react to procs on multiple characters at once. | X characters has no advantage over X players. |
Joewtf | relationships | t5_2qjvn | cgxui2n | For me personally, I feel like intelligence and some semblance of being on the same wavelength is really important. I just feel like I have a quick wit and seeing that same kind of sharpness in a partner is really attractive to me.
What you need to do is figure out if that's important to you too. It's perfectly fine to decide you want to be with someone closer to you in that regards. Don't think of yourself as better than him (which it doesn't sound like you do), but honestly, you're 19. Part of dating is trial and error. You dated someone with his qualities and are realizing you find many of them unattractive. So, you learned that. Dating is learning. Next dude you date, make sure he doesn't have those qualities, or it's on nobody but you that you're unhappy again. | It isn't superficial to dump someone you feel you can't have meaningful conversations/share beliefs/ambitions with. You find attractive what you find attractive, and sometimes it takes a relationship to learn what you find unattractive. So don't be ashamed, just do what's best for you! |
adde09 | wow | t5_2qio8 | ch0usku | Back in Wotlk i was raiding in ICC 10 man when my guild had reached Lich king (I was the guild leader), we started killing him and brought him down to 10% and we were all really excited and we started getting really happy in vent so we keep fighting LK and then suddenly everyone dies i get super mad and just start kicking everyone becouse i thought we just wiped. Needless to say everyone left the guild. | Didnt know everyone died when lk was on 10% hp, kicked everyone, everyone left guild |
TOCKyuubi | wow | t5_2qio8 | ch135vp | When I first started Playing WoW back in the Tail end of BC, I had no idea that quests gave you XP. I grew up watching my brother play FF XI where there was a lot of grinding involved. So this being my first MMO, I thought, well shit. I just have to kill mobs get XP and level right? It wasn't until I was level 35 in thousand needles that I realized I was a fucking idiot. | Didn't know quests gave XP Grinded to 35 off mobs before realizing. |
bryancostanich | news | t5_2qh3l | ch28w3f | you just QED'd my point. 1) you have no idea how long i've used reddit. and it's not likely, unless you were an early employee that you have. 2) it wouldn't matter either way. 3) yes, things in the english language mean exactly what people understand them to be. in this case, | seems to have become two things. one of which is a place to summarize when others didn't read. it's ok if you don't believe me. you're still wrong. |
bryancostanich | news | t5_2qh3l | ch1xm0z | no, i gave a summary for those that didn't read it. are you even aware of how | works on reddit? clearly not. |
NonPartisanPooper | news | t5_2qh3l | ch1x5up | No. You said yourself that you did not:
> | That means "Too Long. Didn't Read." |
ApplicableSongLyric | news | t5_2qh3l | ch2puqq | I know /r/news isn't a generally safe place to express this, but this is true.
More than a few porn distributors and production houses take payment from end users in Bitcoin, it could make sense to give the option to pay their performers, producers, set people directly from that take, or at least give them an option to push it through something like one of these debit card options that makes it instantly spendable or transferable.
Porn industry as a whole is going to adopt Bitcoin in order to protect against chargebacks and fraud. Might as well take it the next level and make the production aspect part of a self-sustaining ecosystem. | someone who can't even legally watch porn is doling out crypto advice. Whatever. |
well_golly | news | t5_2qh3l | ch2z11g | Chase refused to process payments for Lovability, a company that sells condoms and promotes female sexual empowerment, because condoms are 'adult-oriented material' and thus a 'reputational risk.' "
I've got to say, porn stars generally have a better reputation with me than Chase Bank. Those fuckers bought my old bank, and they fucked me with a whole barrel of dicks every time they got the chance. They are horrible, and they were the key factor in my switching to a Credit Union. They live off of fees and fines, and they constantly harass and strong arm you to change your account to a new "super duper account" (which always sucks, and is an effort to trap you into a shitty set of new terms). They are just the worst of the worst. | I think the business relationship between a porn star and Chase bank, reflects more badly on the porn star than on the bank, |
ProspectorJoe | news | t5_2qh3l | ch308b7 | This is not a double standard. This is risk mitigation. From what I understand, enhanced regulations on existing accounts would be required by the government alongside the fines.
I work for one of the large banks in their Compliance/AML department. "Reputational Risk" is a serious concern to banks today and is somewhat of a blanket term. A lot of what is going on is due to the post 9-11 world and required by the banks interpretation of the Bank Security Act, Patriot Act, and other regulations.
We are required by law from CIP (Customer Identification Program) policy to obtain the minimum from all of our customers: Name, Federal Tax ID Number (SSN or EIN for a business), and a Date of Birth for individuals.
We are also required to have a risk profile for each customer which is developed by the bank. It encapsulates what information we are required to obtain on our customers based on risk and allows us to capture and mitigate this risk. (
That being said, it is not perfect, and many legitimate customers lose or are refused an account because they do not fit into our current risk appetite.
My job lies in the Customer Due Diligence and Enhanced Due Diligence aspect of things, so I deal with reputational risk on a daily basis.
The porn industry would be classified as a High Risk Business. We do need to know where the source of money is coming from and where it is going. For example, if Porn For You Inc paid a minor for performing in a pornographic film through our accounts, that could be an issue to the bank. [Remember that AO video game that accidentally had a minor in it a while ago?] What if that happened, and the federal government demanded we freeze their accounts, and they had a $200,000 line of credit they needed to pay off to us still? It becomes a headache, and is one that the bank would like to avoid. Unfortunately this means exiting many legitimate relationships, but the way it stands today, we need to hold all of our customers to the same standards.
People are saying "So they can let a billions of dollars be laundered, but they're closing down adult businesses?" What happens if they banked a large adult-themed business that was actually trafficking in underage sex slaves? Would you want to bank with the bank that helped facilitate human trafficking?
What I don't understand is why we are attacking Chase for shutting down these accounts when I know for a fact that other large banks would not consider the porn/adult industry in their risk appetite, and simply do not bank them. | They are doing this as a RESULT of their previous offense. Given the fact chase had a lawsuit against them only forced them to tighten regulatory controls and exit high risk relationships, in an attempt to mitigate similar illegal happening in the future. |
vadvaro10 | news | t5_2qh3l | ch38qdw | This is crazy. When a florist or a cake shop denies somebody for their gay wedding it ends on every channel and everyone's news feed.
This is just as significant, IMO. It's in the same boat as banks denying legitimate transactions regarding marijuana sales in legal states. | this is some bullshit |
LachesisSyndrom | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ch4iig0 | dude, the feral flare is just a time bomb like any other champs (vayne, ryze, jinx, lucian, and lots more) you just have to deal with it by counter jungling the opposing jungler, warding, etc. plus this is a good way to bring out some unpopular champs back to the scene. Remember when you only had lee/elise/kha/vi ? they just increased the number of stacks needed (even if the tooltip on the buff still says 25) along with the numbers of junglers that could be played without having a great disadvantage (even if it creates a bigger advantage on the endgame). | deal with it and adapt, this game is evolving and so you should be |
DuncanMonroe | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ch76qn2 | Farming is rarely a problem in low MMR. That's just what people assume, because they can't see that what's really holding them back is very poor decision making and understanding of the game; nobody really wants to think they consistently make terrible decisions and read situations totally wrong, take the wrong action, go to the wrong spot, etc. You need almost nothing in the way of mechanics to get out of that range IMO, just to actually think about what's going on all throughout the map and play according to that, as opposed to tunneling on - well, anything. | people down there for the most part don't know what their biggest weaknesses/issues are, so they end up focusing on the "wrong" things and wondering why they don't climb. |
Hawkknight88 | relationships | t5_2qjvn | ch7r0ai | A guy meeting me exactly on time and saying "you'll never beat me in punctuality", the next time I saw him he was 15 minutes late with no excuse and no apology.
Haha, oh, OP. If I made a big deal out of my girlfriend running late we'd be fighting every day of the week.
I suspect you're making a mountain of of a molehill, and your expectations are inhuman.
>All these guys seem to tell me I'm expecting too much and I shouldn't get to fixated on these things, but it feels so wrong and disrespectful for a man to tell me one thing and then not honor his word and his impact on me.
I think you are expecting too much. I value, very specifically, keeping my word. It's important to me that my partners do the same. However, I hold it important for my girlfriend to do so only about important things like communication or special events. I do not think that her being late is "breaking her word to be on time". That's a ridiculous enforcement of the honor policy.
I went on one date with a girl who sounded a lot like you. She was very serious, stern even. She made her expectations clear - and it was date #1! I'm not looking to have policies shoved on me that early, I'm looking to see if we mesh well and have enough in common to continue. | Relax. You are not easygoing and it shows to these guys. |
Molleckt | summonerschool | t5_2t9x3 | ch8hems | While it's obvious to not stand near minions vs champs like Ziggs and Kayle and Brand, you want to hug your minions versus champs like Ahri and Zed. Zed's Q poke does less damage if it passes through a minion first so while it's advisable to dodge any type of poke, don't stand outside of your minions otherwise you risk taking full damage. Same with Ahri - if you stand away from your minions, you risk being charmed into a combo.
Otherwise, take advantage of enemy cooldowns. If your opponent misses an ability, just go in and burn what abilities you can on them. That way you'll be able to all in them after two or three strategic pokes.
If you push the lane out, take wraiths if your jungler isn't about or roam and get your other lanes ahead. The reason you play mid is so that you have a level advantage mid-game and can kill or set up favourable conditions for your adc to kill the enemy adc. Also, you have easy access to top lane and jungle so if a gank leaves your enemy top and/or jungler low, you enter and finish them off. Late game, you start to fall off and your adc should have built enough atkspeed to push towers and inhibs. At this point (unless you're carrying), you should peel for your adc if the rest of the team isn't peeling or have died.
While I usually live by skill > counter picks, I'd suggest having a pool of about 3 - 5 mid laners who fulfill certain criteria. For example, Viktor has insane damage, the ability to out trade at levels 1 and 2 with the shield from his Q, before scaling into a champ with good zoning and a silence. While I wouldn't pick him into a similar kit champ like Syndra, I'd certainly pick him into someone like Katarina or Fizz (or most melee for that matter).
Similarly, I'd pick someone with an early game damage steroid like Swain, into someone who has a weak early game but strong mid-late game (Akali or Ahri) to stop them snowballing.
Analyse the kit of all the mid laners and find out who does what best. Although Ziggs pretty much has everything, I don't play him because I feel like its easy mode and provides no challenge. I appreciate people wanting to climb the ladder but I like to have fun doing so. On some days I like to take a risk and there's no feeling quite like picking a champ into a hard counter and winning lane. | learn mechanics and main champs who fit different criteria to better equip you against any opponent. Skills you learn from each champ are transferable. Punish enemy for missing abilities, roam and peel for your adc. |
synphony5159 | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ch8tcy0 | Uhh... That's actually incorrect. Luck has an INCREDIBLY small effect on your MMR, seeing as how it can take over 100 games to climb a single tier (not silver-> gold, but silver 2 -> Silver 1) if you truly belong in that division/tier.
When you FIRST get to a new division (that you have rightfully earned and not been boosted/ect.) then yes, your win-rate should be roughly 50% since you're playing against people just as skilled as you are; but the more you play against those players, the more comfortable you get playing at that skill-level. Eventually, after enough practice, the quality of the players in the tier you are in will be below what you have achieved from your hard-work. You will carry more games and therefore get placed in a higher tier, and the process starts over and over again.
Even if you were supposed to be in bronze elo, if you (somehow) always played against low-gold players, after enough games you would learn what it takes to be a gold player.
Obviously the ELO system prevents this sort of thing because a mid-gold player will dominate a low-bronze player and reduce their MMR down to where it should be, but I'm just trying to show that luck has almost nothing what-so-ever with the tier/division you're in.
People have said it a billion times, and I'll say it again. If you're in bronze, your skill level is bronze. I've never once seen a platinum-ranked smurf get stuck in "elo hell" in low-silver ELO because they're better players. | Luck is not a factor. |
intirb | TwoXChromosomes | t5_2r2jt | ch9dlt9 | Having been on weight loss programs myself, here's my advice:
Take it slow and steady. It's easy to try to starve yourself and lose as much weight as possible in a short amount of time, but that is NOT sustainable in the long run. If you set up a bunch of strict goals, you're setting yourself up for failure. In fact, you may even be purposefully sabotaging yourself because you WANT to see yourself fail.
In fact, I'd recommend not thinking about weight loss at all. Instead, think about being healthy. Constantly tell yourself that you're making a change for the better because you love yourself and you want to treat yourself right. If you start telling yourself that you hate who you are right now, stop that line of thinking right away and replace it with: the person I am right now is a STRONG person who wants to be more healthy and is making a positive change. If your parents are constantly hounding you about the weight, try to convince them that you're going to make positive changes but NOT because of your weight - rather just to be a healthier person. Encourage them to make positive changes to be healthier with you, so that you can support each other.
Finally, pick incremental goals, and don't do everything at once. A good first step might be just to track everything you eat. After two weeks or so of that, you can look at your habits and try to pick some easy goals. Maybe you notice that you drink a lot of soda, so you cut that down. Or you decide to just walk for 15 minutes a day. Easy goals that will help you build momentum and let you feel like you're achieving something.
As you start building momentum, focus on fitness and nutrition goals that will challenge you and show your progress. Like, walking a mile, or jogging for five minutes without stopping. Keep track of your personal records, and keep trying to beat yourself. I think a lot of people focus on weight because it's an easy number to track, but that fixation doesn't lead people to make healthy choices. Set a long-term goal, like finishing a 5k, and when you finally get there, it'll feel great! It doesn't matter what you weigh - if you're making a habit of jogging 5k, you're doing a lot for your own health and happiness.
Focus on making those changes lifetime habits, not quick fixes. Every time you want to make a change, ask yourself: can I live this way for my entire life? If the answer is no, then it's not a reasonable goal. If you're thinking about the goal: "I won't eat pizza for a month" but you can't imagine living your life without ever eating pizza again, you're setting yourself up to fail. Instead, think about minimum frequency you could eat pizza and still be happy (once a month?) and make THAT your goal. | focus on building healthy habits for life, not losing weight in the short term. And do everything out of love for yourself. |
SaikoGekido | gaming | t5_2qh03 | chafn70 | Randomness, or the gaming terminology of RNG, boil down to the player not being given enough information about a situation, or not being able to properly absorb that information. Almost all random events in a computer generated environment rely on pseudo random number generators, which are consistent and predictable to a degree. Most often, predictions are garnered after a player experiences a situation enough times. This is not because the player has absorbed the formula and computes the exact likelihood of an outcome, but because they have received enough information about the scenario to focus on the problems and find a solution. That is why a situation that is not random, like diving into a group of mobs, can be labeled as random by a person that does not yet understand the problems.
I have heard that there are studies about focus that describe the regular act of focusing as the ability for the mind to exclude details that are seen as irrelevant. That is the type of focus that we try to cultivate, because it creates people that are quick to answer. Currently, there is a disorder linked to an inability to focus that involves including more information in a situation than is actually relevant to the situation. While no research has been done in the opposite direction, I believe it is possible for a disorder to exist where information is improperly labeled as irrelevant and discarded. The lack of information on the disorder and our societies need for individuals with extreme focus might be cultivating individuals with that exclude information by accident.
In other words, there are people that may run their character into a group, register that they died to one of the attacks, and think that they could go back into that same situation, avoid the attack, and receive a different outcome. They are excluding the information given to them that the other attacks from the group need to be avoided, and that the problem could be simplified by controlling the number of mobs pulled. A person with the extreme focus disorder will eventually piece this information together, as they slowly eliminate reasons why they died in the group of monsters. | Just as a problem can be made more difficult by including too much information and possibilities, so too can a problem be made more difficult by excluding too much information. |
H_Mama | sex | t5_2qh3p | chb1ghk | I think you're probably lucky :)
I was in a (sexual) relationship from 16 to 18, and I did wonder, like you, about sex with others. I split with him, then played the field a little before meeting & marrying my husband at just 19 years old.
In my experience, sex is better in long-term relationships. I barely remember anything about the others' techniques etc, not even the (much older) guy I was with for two years. All my best sexual memories are ones I share with my husband. We experiment wayyyyyy more than I ever did with anyone else, and I feel comfortable exploring my multitude of kinks with him in a way I never would have when I was younger/with anyone else. | The grass isn't greener. |
hokie_pokie | dating_advice | t5_2s4kl | chd2pay | You know the saying: You will regret the things you didnt do more than the things you did 10 years from now. This is the exact reason why that saying exists.
But thats the easy answer. Now for the hard part:
A date isn't some special magical thing where you stare at eachothers eyes for hours and make passionate love afterwards while talking about getting married. The best first dates can start of by going for a cup of coffee, thats all it needs. So in case you are afraid that its a big deal, dont. A date should be a relaxed setting where you can get to know eachother.
That being said, I hope it makes the whole situation a bit less akward.
For the real asking out:
Doing something like this over email or phone is a bad move. We are social creatures, we like to see the other person. So the best advice I can give you is to just walk up to her and say:
" Hey, I noticed you in our group project, want to have a coffee this afternoon" Or something along the lines of that.
In case you cant do that. Mail her and try to act a bit casual. Simply put: " Hey, we didnt got the chance to get to know eachother during our group project but you seem like a nice person. Want to get a coffee next monday"
The biggest step here is ofcourse the asking part. But imagine the worst possible thing that can happen --> She will say no. Which isnt the end of the world. So get to work! In case you need some more specific advice, feel free to ask. | Act casual, dont think of a date as a big thing, just ask her for a coffee to get to know her.
Good luck! |
alphawafflejack | changemyview | t5_2w2s8 | chfpk6s | I work at Five Guys Burger and Fries. All I can say is that the lettuce we use is very crisp and crunchy, which is how it should be. It adds texture to the soft bun and patty and if you're a bacon fan then it adds to that very well. Also it seperate a the thinner sauces like A1 and hot sauce from the bun because it is over the sauces. | texture |
BizWax | changemyview | t5_2w2s8 | chfdxe9 | Lettuce is bland and does not contribute any kind of worthwhile flavor to a burger.
Not flavour, but fresh lettuce can add texture, which is also a part of taste.
>Lettuce detracts from the delicate balance of flavors that makes a burger a burger.
If it is really as bland as you say, it can't really change the flavour, now can it?
>The shape of lettuce can often disrupt the even distribution of the sauces, causing it to pool in undesirable ways.
This can be solved by properly stacking a burger, in particular the size of the sauce portion. Basically, if the sauce leaks it is too much.
>In larger burgers, lettuce just makes it more difficult to fit the burger in your mouth.
In larger burgers, the fact that it is a large burger makes it more difficult to fit the burger in your mouth. The lettuce doesn't really change that.
>Lettuce is a cheap way for restaurants to make their small burgers seem bigger.
Lettuce, at least fresh lettuce, isn't that cheap. It spoils quite quickly when it gets oxygen. A lot of lettuce gets thrown away.
>If you want veggies on your burger, there are plenty of delicious options (onions, tomatoes, jalapenos, peppers, mushrooms, pickles) [If you are a fan of Ronald Reagan, add Ketchup to the list.]
And lettuce is also an option. In fact, lettuce is found in a vast majority of burger recipes. To the point that most people don't even consider it optional at all. There is a cultural dimension to food as well, which mainly pertains to eating habits and recipes. From that perspective, if many people consider lettuce should be on their burger, it damn well should be.
>Freshly washed lettuce that is not properly dried can add extra unwanted moisture that can make the bread soggy and destabilize the consistency of the sauces.
Sogginess is most often the result of too much sauce or a too greasy burger. The bit of water from the lettuce does not have a meaningful contribution.
>Sure, lettuce might be the lowest calorie part of your burger, but if you are truly concerned with cutting calories, put down to double bacon chee and order a salad already.
Not sure how this relates to your point. If you want to cut calories, don't get a burger. Burgers (except for the cheap $1 burgers) are designed to be a full meal's worth of calories in a single sandwich. If you're on any sort of diet, don't get a burger. Get something you can control serving size on, and get a small serving. | You might not like lettuce on your burger, and that's fine, but to say that it has no place on a burger is a very ignorant statement. |
Mel_Melu | TwoXChromosomes | t5_2r2jt | chfme5q | Because it's easier to use scare tactics to evoke emotion in people than actually find current research. To be fair I'm not entirely sure that journalists have been taught to properly scrutinize science papers like people who've studied any science have.
Look at that famous 10 year "women shouldn't wear bras" study. People kept citing that shit like it was the word of God, whereas someone with the most basic understanding of science research papers can tell you why you can't trust the researcher for three small reasons:
The sample size was too small. (Participants were all French woman between the ages 20-35)
The researcher never bothered looking at bra size and how that would affect the study. (If you're testing a hypothesis you should have some sort of measuring tool to know what to look for)
It wasn't double blind. (If you really want to test a medicine you have one placebo group and one test group, if you REALLY want to test it you make sure you don't know who is taking the medicine and who is consuming the sugar pill.)
Lastly, you re-test if you get the same results each time then it turns into a phenomenon and you have a theory. | Journalists probably don't know how to pick apart research papers. |
KarnickelEater | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | chgpmwm | Oakland tends to be alright so long as you stay in high traffic areas and don't do anything stupid to make yourself a target.
I disagree somewhat. As always I walked and biked a lot - a LOT - in as many places as possible, I like to explore. The only uncomfortable - but not dangerous! - situation was biking through the parts of Oakland (away from downtown to the south) where all shops have metal-grilled windows. Aside from that - nothing, and I've been to places where shootings do occur. IMHO you are much more likely to become a victim in Brazilian cities, Oakland violence usually is within the group and not often towards outsiders. I also felt perfectly save in the Bronx in 1995: An unmarked police car with police without uniform suddenly stopped next to me and I was surrounded by 4 people. THAT was uncomfortable, until they identified themselves as police. After finding out I was a tourist (at the time, my first 2 month trip through the US) they instructed me to get back to Manhattan because it was too dangerous. I am quite certain even today that it was NOT dangerous - those guys from the police don't know Brazil... well, I was getting ready to leave as the sun started to go down, but in Brazil you are not safe at any time.
> avoid unknown areas.
Never! Well, I avoid Brazil now.
So | I know quite a few areas in Oakland that are not nice but I would not hesitate to walk through them at least during the day. No comparison to Brazil IMHO. |
Kelderm2 | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | chg4gvd | Here to put in my two cents about the topic. I've studied abroad twice in Brazil and in those 2 years I have gotten robbed three times.
Two of the three times were in broad daylight on a crowded street when I was with a few friends. We were not speaking english however having a redhead, a blonde girl, and a blonde guy is a dead give away in Rio. ANyways, so we are walking by and as we are passing smoe people we get two guys that come up to us and one slowly walks with me asking for a dollar or two and if I speak english. I say no i don't and he gets real close and puts a gun up to my back. This is all still while walking and fairly ninjalike on his part. I pulled out my money and tried handing it to him but he said to put it back in my pocket and not to pass it visibly this time. So, I take it back out and hold it at my side where he takes it, as well as my phone. And he tells me to keep walking and he walked the other direction. My friends had the same thing happen to them with a knife essentially.
The second time, was the same guys and this time my friends threw the money on the ground and kept walking. The robbers, now having peoples eyes on them, tried giving the money back so as to not arouse suspicion but too late, some old Brazilian called them out and they ran away.
The third time, I got my card duplicated. Not robbed but a huge problem in Brazil still and one that won't go away for the world cup or Olympics. Seven thousand dollars gone in just three days.. I got it all back thanks to my wonderful credit union being amazingly helpful but its still something I don't want to go through again.
The big thing that is scariest here, is that each time we told the police, nothing was done. They didn't ask for a description of the guys, they didn't radio it in when we told them, they just stood there and said ok. We were getting robbed at gun and knife point in broad daylight and the police were of no help. I do agree that you should not scream if you get robbed but Brazil IS NOT ready for the world cup or the olympics. It is unsafe and many tourists/soccer fans(especially you german soccer fanatics) won't be nearly as compliant as I was and you will pay for it.
Brazil has made me paranoid about walking alone, as a 6'4" male at 200lbs. Don't even get me started about having to watch out for being drugged(friends got drugged, mugged, and plugged....yes they were guys...) Aka, "boa noite cindarella" | Got robbed in front of a lot of people, told police, no one did anything. |
Essychu | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | chg6l60 | Also. Remember that Brazil has the highest taxes for imported goods in the world and less than one percent of high tech industry. This means if your object has eletronics then its very valuable in Brazil, even when its cheap in others places. | Dont use your "cheap" tablet in public. |
Monso | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | chg8e9n | Because they'd arrest 2 gang members before they're tortured, family killed in front of them, and left to asphyxiate off the side of the bridge.
The lives of the ones they love is not worth barely putting a dent into Brazil's crime. | they fear for their lives and nobody should blame them. |
ReallyCreative | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhj23l | I think it's interesting how up to Season 2, and even for a lot of Season 3, ADCs were ticking timebombs of "you can't deal with this" three shotting tanks, and when they are finally brought more in line with other roles everyone loses their minds.
There was a great post on the forums a while ago that highlighted this attitude. ADCs getting bursted too hard? Better nerf burst mages and assassins. ADCs not doing enough damage? Better nerf tanks and tanky items. ADCs were the center focus of balance for the LONGEST time, mostly because they were the center focus of every team comp and strategy for the longest time.
Now other roles can carry just as well, but it feels like ADCs are so much weaker. While they are weaker comparatively to Season 2 and 3, they are more in line with other roles, and we should really only be more concerned if they have less impact than any other role.
Riot has decided that every role should have the opportunity to carry in some form, ADCs were the strongest role for the majority of the game's history; significantly stronger than top lane, slightly stronger than mid, and incredibly stronger than support or jungle. Now junglers and supports are much better, ADCs are slightly worse(lets not pretend they don't hurt with a crit item or two), mid lane was a bit better for most of Season 3 and 4, but is more in line after the last slew of assassin nerfs. Top lane is kind of a wild card, with picks like Jax or Nasus that can hypercarry, but other picks that can have questionable effects on the overall pace and direction of the game, to the point of borderline uselessness. | It seems like ADCs are weak, but they are actually just more in line with other roles.
I think the upcoming itemization changes might give some of the niche picks more power, we'll have to see what Riot brings in. |
curtbrainfre3z | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhj9ch | ADC's shouldn't be some kind of role that gets literally shut out by a top laner with randuins or a midlaner with dfg. The whole idea here is that riot doesn't need to take stronger adc's and nerf them into the ground like they did sivir and draven but they need to make adcs exell at specific things. This is just a small example like lucian hes a lane bully he is meant to be that way and there's no reason to nerf him but champions like lets say quinn shes very unique in many ways but just the way she scales early and late make her an impossible champion to win with regardless if your good enough to solo carry. This isnt a good concept for a game because league has over 100 champions in it and about 17 are classified as adcs/marksman and i don't think i've seen anyone in challenger that mains adc and their top 3 champs aren't lucian, cait, sivir, or twitch. that's 3/4 out of 17 champions riot offers for marksman. Where the hell are the other 14??????????? They are useless and non-existent and for a good reason they cant deal with the season 4 meta of tanks being unkillable damage machines and mages that will instantly kill you even if you position well. | Don't nerf whats normal just because its strong. Make other doors available for people who don't want to spam two champions in order to win. ... Please riot season 3 ADC isn't what i'm asking its just an adaptation for season 4 that marksman need. |
jmharkey | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhl8zq | I think ADCs are in a good place now. They are not super broken, 2 shotting tanks, like they were at the start of pre-season 3 when I started this game.
They also still do the most end game damage overall and most certainly carry games if protected. My game that just got me into G2 was all about protecting our trist who was doing huge amounts of damage. | completely agree with /u/ReallyCreative |
have_an_apple | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhnm80 | This is true, but if you play enough games your win rate will be at ~50%.If you are very good, lets say prof player, then yes you could have a lot more. For most of us, if you play well you get a 52-54% win rate.
If you criticize one game, then yes. I just had yesterday a game where we had a huge lead, our amumu wanted a 2 man baron and when the enemy team came, he didn't let baron regenerate and just kept poking it. Resulted in him dying and giving baron. Changed the whole game and we lost. | I hate that Amumu. |
PraggyD | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhohjs | Exactly. Pretty much any of the popular supports shit on Kog for the first 20 minutes of the game. I actualy think that it's perfectly fine for supports to have a strong laning phase, but I think some ADs just have ridiculously weak laning phases. I think Rito is putting too much emphasis on damage values when trying to evaluate how weak a champs laning phase has to be to justify his lategame.
Lategame dps is not just about the damage part, but also about the "seconds" or time part, which is where especialy Kog has problems. Having an escape mechanism effectively gives you more dps because you survive and deal damage for a longer period of time. This is also where cast times and animations come into play. For example, Vayne, Twitch have all of their damage bound to their autoattacks. There is no additional animations they have to go through to put out the maximum amount of damage. Varus, Corki and Ezreal are the exact opposite, in that they have a lot of power bound to cast times and animations and need to go through these and "waste time" to deal the maximum amount of dmg. Cait, Lucian and Quinn (in that order) are somewhere in between casters and autoattackers, seeing as they have fairly long animations they need to go through, but also a fairly powerful autoattack steroid.
You could argue that early to late balancing being too much about the damage aspect of "DPS" is the reason why champions with a flatter powercurve are more effective. Cait, Lucian and Twitch are prime examples for this phenomenon. Only in rare cases like Ryze, Jax, Renekton, Vayne and Lee Sin a bigger amplitude in the power curve is worth it. | DPS is not just about damage but also about time. Mobility gives you time, animations and cast times cost you time. Especialy in lategame and duels the time aspect is important. Rito is not evaluating the time aspect when determining how to balance out early vs lategame on a champion. |
Jire | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhpp90 | As a Twitch player, Twitch is nothing more than a product of the Meta right now.
You ask why he was less popular for a while? It's not the new model. Twitch was insanely popular in the 2013 Summer Split, but you did not nerf him out of popularity, the reason he faded was due to meta shifts.
First and foremost, twitch's largest weaknesses are high burst that he can't stealth away from, and enemy champions with quick harass patterns that can get in, do damage and get out before twitch can stack his poison and Contaminate for massive damage.
Near the end of the summer split, the assassin mid lane became very popular. While bad news for many ADCs, Twitch was one of the most affected, as he relies on his 850 range in teamfights to survive, and Ahri and Zed could close that distance instantly. Twitch was suddenly a lot less powerful.
Then, the Trinity Force rework happened. Suddenly burst ADCs like Corki and Lucian were not just viable but top-tier, and twitch's biggest weakness, early game burst lanes, became the standard bot lane. About this time, the high-burst Annie support also rose in popularity.
After Corki got nerfed, the bot lane meta shifted to Sivir/Jinx/and/Lucian ADCs and Thresh/Leona/Annie supports. Bot had become a deathlane that Twitch was not suited for.
About this time the tanky rushdown top meta was in full swing. This meta was bad for any ADC without an escape or movespeed steroid, Twitch among them.
Twitch does not thrive in this environment at all, and became one of the least picked ADCs at the time (barring Quinn and Urgot), sitting next to Miss Fortune and Kog'Maw in terms of popularity. (Also big 2013 champs that got ousted due to the meta.)
But meta is change. No meta lasts forever, and with the season 4 changes to snowballing, assassin mids fell out of flavor and building for late game suddenly became more preferable. This put carries back in the top lane instead of Mundo and Shyvana.
Another unexpected thing happened about that time too. Morgana took to support, weakening the bot lane all-in lanes, and Lulu and Soraka became popular in solo lanes, giving Twitch his much needed peel late game. This allows Twitch to operate at full capacity. | Twitch is strong in a meta that emphasizes peel and late game. He was weak for a long time because the meta emphasized burst and early game.
Please, leave Twitch alone. If you want him to have less of an impact, buff Tristana. Buff Kog'maw. Buff Vayne. Buff ADCs that should be as powerful as him late, but have been nerfed into uselessness, even in a meta that favors them. |
XeNaN | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhqeh7 | Im not sure about twitch tho,im feeling like Twitch is MF lategame version.
But Lucian is more like Ezreal 2.0 and his kit is amazing but not overpowered.
I just totally agree that ADs are generally not that good.
Either they are good/ok for laning but not good afterwards or they are (super) bad early/mid but good late.
This including laneswaps,2v1 or 4v0,2v2 and generally duel power.
Twitch is imho only played because he has a MF like ult(and MF was so broken season3 beginning(was s3, right?) that destroyed the enemy team alone and he has with his ult such a high range that it doesnt matter that much that he has no escape, because you just need some champions to iniate and twitch can autoattack for free for ~2seconds without interrupting. | Lucian isnt overpowered, the others are underpowered. |
Blahkah | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhjdek | Mf buff is good but not great.
Caitlyn is still there, ez is still there, he just needs to snowball hard same with sivir same with jinx, which after ADC nerfs it's pretty hard to, draven is a draven story; Draven Draven Draven Draven Draven.* | Draven.
*I know, poor grammar, i'm just extremely tired. |
DeepBlueMoon | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhoijx | I feel that Lucian is what an adc should be. This is because he has decent wave clear, mobility, early, mid and late game. He also has a passive that suits his role very well.
Twitch is what an adc could be. He has a far more niche role an an AD pseudo-assassin. I think his skill set and character design are good and fit the role. It should not be replicated though.
Lucian's should be. Ezreal is a character with a similar skill-set to Lucian but worse scaling due to lower base attack speed and attack speed per level, purely because of his passive. He has a passive that increases his AS but then a base AS lower with low enough scaling to almost negate it. Makes no sense | Lucian is what an ADC should be and Twitch is what they could be. |
Chessifer | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhrzm1 | I feel the changes on season 4 to make carry jungler viable, huge tanky tops like Renek, Shyvanna, Mundo or Trundle and a shifting midlaner meta between high sustain/shield champs like Lulu, Orianna or Kayle and bursty champs like Syndra, Le Blanc and Orianna turned ADC in just anti-tower champs and not the DPS champ it used to be
I stoped playing ADC cause I can't deal with some extremely dominant supps like Annie or Leona, later in the game I couldn't do anything against the super tanks that hard-force an engage allowing that bursty champs to instakill me. The only thing I could do was trying to survive doing poor damage and help destroying towers
I'm not complaining that a bursty champ can 100-0 and ADC or that supertanks can force an engage so hard. But the combo of this two things, with tons of heals, shields, scaling utility and carry/assasin junglers is just too much for an ADC
But at the same time there are not too much items to play ADCs as anti-tower champs, ADC build is pretty standard and unless you pretend to stack BTs there's nothing that gives you just AD or AS everything comes with crit. that doesn't give anything to that job | ADC now are more like tower destroyer but they don't have items for this |
FearIsAReflex | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhtc22 | Not sure if you are trolling... But I'll explain anyway.
Two things. First of all your list of options in other lanes show perfectly why we need ADCs in botlane. Because with very few exceptions the champions simply don't work outside of 2 man lanes. (Or free farm laneswaps.)
Why do teams need ADCs? Towers. You could easily build a composition without an ADC, that will beat most ADC based compositions in straight up fights. They would however have problems sieging or defending if they get behind.
Your argument is that if a role is necessary they must be balanced or even OP, which from a mathematical standpoint might be correct. ADCs are OP in the same way supports where OP in earlier seasons because they were the ones who could provide utility while buying wards.
Outside of sieging they feel lackluster. And if your team is bad at pealing they are completely useless. This is especially true for non pros (so just about everyone), which contrary to popular belief is a lot more important than the pro scene. | ADCs are necessary. This does not make them fun, or even overpowered. |
graygray97 | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chhv514 | I personally feel movement should mostly be based on what a champions role is designed to be.
Take Braum for example he is a big guy which in real life would usually mean he is slower, plus he is carrying a huge shield, lets compare him to a worlds strongest man competitor - when they are running with a heavy item they don't go fast they can get at best a jogging speed, but he has a ms of 335.
Now we take Ezreal he is a small guy with not much to carry, his body build and characteristics as an explorer allow you to assume he should be able to run a hell of a lot faster than braum (yes with all the belts he would slow down but lets ignore that fact), now ezreal has a base ms of 325 which is 10 slower than braum's base ms. | and conclusion: bulky tanks with heavy armour and shields etc. etc. should go a lot slower than a small fit adc with not much to carry as it just isn't right. |
Angam23 | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chi0o2q | For what it's worth if I were forced to guess I'd say you were making that up (statistically you, as a random person on the internet I know nothing else about, are most likely to be at the middle of the pack for any given game). But frankly it doesn't matter whether or not you're being truthful. Nothing you just said makes my statement concerning probability any less true. You could be the best player in the world at every video game ever made and your success rate in those games would still be determined by probability. | Whether you're Video Game Jesus or just full of hot air, if you believe probability doesn't factor into your win rate then you suffer from a fundamental lack of understanding of what probability is and how it works. |
smellyolwasp | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chi5kox | This goes back to balance changes. If they nerf those adc's being able to carry in botlane will be near impossible. Where I am at in platinum it is extremely hard for botlane to carry, even when your adc gets 5 plus kills early. I know this because I main support and make it really hard for my adc to lose lane. Thus we usually win lane but it doesn't matter if another lane does poorly. Bot has nearly no carry potential. If they nerf the main strong adc's bot will be completely irrelevant. | nerf the two strong adc's and bot lane will become entirely irrelevant |
milkman_cometh | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chie9fq | This exact same post came up at the end of season 3 and got over 3000 comments:
**[Dec 2013](
So, what has happened since December, 2013? Here's an adc-specific cliffnotes of each patch :
3.9=
Corki (+)
4.1=
Jinx (-) (E damage reduced at early levels)
4.2=
Ashe (+) (Hawkshot "buff")
4.3=
Corki (+)
4.4=
Ezreal (+)
Kog'maw (+) (increased dmg for AD Kog, nerfed AP ratios, however)
Sivir (-) (Q nerf)
Tristana (+)
4.5=
Graves (+)
Miss Fortune (+)
4.6=
none Twitch VU, significant [increase]( in Twitch play persisting still
4.7=
Miss Fortune (+/-) (increased AP ratios, not very impactful as ADC)
PBE currently=
Tristana (+)
2x:Nerfs, 10x:Buffs
So are there any "I'm so glad they are tweaking other ADC's every few weeks and making them more viable" posts? no (well, I found one
I don't believe the "buff other ADC's" is a viable argument. To say that Twitch/Lucian are disproportionately awesome, but shouldn't be touched is obviously silly. Each ADC can't win 50+% of their games, it's just not reasonable. Options exist outside of Twitch and Lucian - use them.
The bottom line for me on this issue is: ( | If you want to play an ADC other than Twitch or Lucian, then pick a different ADC. If you refuse to do so because other ADC's aren't viable, it isn't because those champs aren't good enough, it's because YOU aren't playing them well enough. The 6 most winning-est ADC's right now are (in order): MF, Draven, Jinx, Kog, Lucian, and Ashe (Yes, Ashe). Buffing these champs so that Twitch wins less often doesn't sound like a sensible argument. All of the frightened Twitch/Lucian mains need to branch out there and learn to catch axes.
The reason Twitch and Lucian are likely to get changed is because of their prominence in professional play. They were Picked/Banned in nearly every game in Paris. Does this make them broken in solo-queue? No. It's just the meta for 5v5 competitive play, currently. Nerfing them will likely flex the meta and force some change for the top 0.1% we watch play on stage. |
RedditAntiHero | wow | t5_2qio8 | chhnfd7 | Ok, I am not saying you are making it up that you got banned for killing the same player. But maybe it is either 1) Another rule you were also breaking (eg., cursing, chat harass, zone disrupt) or 2) It is a gray area that is up to individual GMs.
Blizzards official stance
[RP and PVP Realm Policies](
>Player versus Player (PvP) realms are designed to allow and encourage open combat between players. Players on these realms are encouraged to resolve cross-faction PvP disputes on their own. The Game Master staff will not intervene in cross-faction player disputes on PvP realms. However, physical harassment committed between members of the same faction on a PvP realm is subject to normal harassment policies and investigation.
>If you do not wish to engage in regular PvP combat, select a Player versus Environment (PvE) realm. PvE realms offer a limited and structured environment for PvP encounters. Players on PvE realms can actively choose when they wish to engage in PvP combat by enabling or disabling their PvP flag at will.
>All other In-Game Policies apply to PvP servers. Actions such as inappropriate names, obscene language, and spamming will be addressed according to our normal procedures.
.
> PvP Realm Policies
The following actions may be considered dishonorable but are considered legitimate PvP tactics and will not be addressed by our Game Master staff:
>- Corpse camping.
>- Tricking players into getting flagged for PvP (i.e. jumping in the middle of another player's area effect spell).
>- Killing players well below your level.
>Ongoing Harassment
The Ongoing Harassment policy does not apply to PvP. PvP encounters are considered a facet of normal gameplay and can be resolved through combat or other ingame means. Game Masters may intervene in extreme situations , or if the harassment has transitioned to chat communication.
>We want World of Warcraft to be a fun and safe environment for all players. Our aim is to provide a hardcore PvP environment for players who choose to play on PvP realms.
>Updated: 22-Dec-2013
The part about GMs being able to intervene in "extreme situations" is the gray area. To me, a player hunting and killing another player in a fair way (ie., not an exploit/hack) no matter how many times seems fine to me. The player being killed has multiple options. That player might not like those options or has the will to take those options, but they are there. | Killing players/PVP is not actionable.
Meta-game harassment IS actionable.
"If you do not wish to engage in regular PvP combat, select a Player versus Environment (PvE) realm. "
Possible gray area loop-hole for GMs to impose their opinion. |
WantstobeIron | relationship_advice | t5_2r0cn | chicqd5 | Girlfriend of 1 1/2 years pulled the same shit with me, for different reasons. She was feeling us but was confused about outside factors like my families influence and this and that. She was very wish washy and bullshitty. I told my work buddies about how she wanted a week to think things over, they told me to tell her "to go fuck herself" I thought they were being ignorant and that I should just be patient since I really loved her.
I waited around the week and she broke up with me. 2 weeks later she calls me and texts me back saying she made a "mistake". I should have told her to fuck right off then and there. Because that Night I was back at her place making up with her. 3 weeks later she breaks up with me for the 2nd time on my birthday night out with friends. | Tell her to fuck off, or just follow nofap2002's advice and do No Contact! don't look back. on your terms. good luck my friend |
shevagleb | worldnews | t5_2qh13 | chjhu88 | Nope. Akhmetov runs the east. He is THE richest man in Ukraine.
His net worth is estimated at [15+ Bn USD](
He employs 300'000 people in Ukraine and the world - [SCM Group](
He put Yanukovich in power but they've had a falling out in recent years because Yanukovich started grabbing a lot of assets for himself, his dentist son and his friends and family - taking away from his oligarch allies
He has everything to lose in the East, in the Donbass - it is his power base - if he sides with Kiev - which he appears to be doing - he retains control of the east (with other major oligarchs) and is free to continue running his company and his football team (Shaktar Donetsk). If pro-Russian separatists backed by Putin and/or Yanik take over - he loses his power base, his employees, his means of production... | He will do more than the Ukrainian army or gov't could/can EVER do to keep the East for Kiev
EDIT : richest man in Ukraine |
absolutebeginners | Fitness | t5_2qhx4 | chjvxpw | You wanna focus on the tone zone. Light weight and as many reps as possible...focus on the functional movements, things like squats and deadlifts will make you bulk up faster than you can say Schwartz. A paleo diet is incredibly functional and will give you that long lean swimmer's muscle that you strive for. | That was all bullshit, read the FAQ |
Ismokeweeed | summonerschool | t5_2t9x3 | chlfpso | There is a bind called attack move click in the key binds. What it does is makes it that you only have to press A and it leaves out the left click portion. I much prefer this to A+left click key bind(which is simply called attack move.) | attack move click=press A
Attack move= press A then left click. |
CynicalRaps | gaming | t5_2qh03 | chmu9wv | Theres alot of reasons certain characters werent included. Wander being the case of Team ICO not allowing Wander to be a part of the game, there was a big issue with that. Just cuz Sony owned the studio doesnt mean they could just use the character... also too many time restraints, i wish they wouldve had more time to bring it out. that way Dart and Kat couldve been included as intended. as well as other modes etc. they were pushed to quickly and that led to the demise of the studio pretty much | they had an excellent idea, but due to restrictions within the company and time restraints.... it was poorly executed |
FeinSlayer | leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | chn50eg | The thing about is that it's a company who put their community before money. It has always been a pioneer for gaming people who play LOL tend to forget its a company with multiple AAA games and have been around for a while now and even own Steam! In saying that, Valve aren't doing this for their own profit even though they have made around 10million in their own pocket after costs and all. So its something Riot can learn from, because Valve put the community first, it's a community that wants to help itself out. Riot can still keep their way of hosting a tournament, but also take on board a community driven prize pool and with that probably beat valves records. Their is no reason Riot shouldn't do it, all they need to do is hope their community is like valves and they need to risk a little of their own. | Vavle care about their community first, Something riot take note of and one day be as successful as they are. Not just with LOL but as a company. |
Unaccounted | AskWomen | t5_2rxrw | chq32os | Yeah, and they can get murdered for it when people find out about it. There is a spectrum of gender expression. For people that are somewhere close to the "ideal" they feel pressure to conform, but it's not a major problem for them to do so, because they already mostly fit it. For everyone else, it's a life long struggle with self-hate, and learning to stand up for yourself in the face of bigotry. | gender is a nuanced topic. |
FancyBiatch | AskWomen | t5_2rxrw | chq8k31 | Because I feel that the word "feminism" has been perverted by social media, and politicized to the point that calling myself "a feminist" would immediately leave other people with a negative impression of who I am.
I want equal pay for equal work, but I enjoy wearing makeup & it warms my heart when my hubby does things like open doors for me. But the more radical feminists would brand me as a hater of my own kind.
I also believe that these more extreme elements of the feminism movement have made life difficult for some men, to the point that (in some cases) there is now a legitimate need for a men's rights movement. For example, I don't believe that women should have priority in child custody cases - giving birth doesn't make a good mother. | I'd rather fight for equality |
boomsc | AskWomen | t5_2rxrw | chqgwrv | Absolutely. Actually I don't even agree with it's ideals. I support the most basic, fundamental concept behind the entire thing.
I support equality. And I support equality across the board .
Feminism is by definition, equality for women . The implicit problem with this is it can (and increasingly is) to the neglect of any other x. It doesn't mean feminism is secretly "equality for women and kill all men." by any stretch, but it means the concept neglects equal rights for anything else. In a similar sense I think (it might be a terrible analogy) look at Science, what it is and what it can be defined as. Science is, in a sentence, the technological advancement of knowledge and the human species.
On the surface? great! nothing wrong with that right? Future Tech rocks, we all want to be smarter, the 50,000th milennia is the place to be! Exactly the same as feminism, absolutely nothing wrong with wanting equality for women!
The issue is in the neglect. For that primary creed of science to operate is enough, it's all that's needed and for some it's all that's wanted. Science doesn't implicitly condone (or condemn) anything, but Science absolutely allows for horrific, appalling practices and experiments. The Nazi Reich? Japanese Unit 731? Whatever America does behind doorless walls? All absolutely, completely acceptable within the singular parameter of science. Because there is no quantification. Any cost is acceptable for any advancement, however small, however pointless knowing humans can't live while eviscerated, it's acceptable to kill a dozen people to find that as fact. We draw the line and say "scientific advancement must operate within x limits."
By the exact same measure, Feminism would allow 'castration day', would allow a matriarchy, would allow wholesale death, torture, abuse and murder as long as it provides some benefit, some 'equality' to 'women' (and that is another point, 'equality' no longer...and I'm not sure ever, actually meant equal. In exactly the same way equality for the disabled doesn't mean everyone gets a wheelchair or no one does, 'equality' actually means fairness. It's fair that paraplegics be given wheelchairs, it's just that women be allowed to vote, etc etc.)
With the advent of 'Radical Feminism' and I think, even before then, 'Feminism' has been more and more unrestrained. From my perspective it increasingly doesn't have that ethical barrier we place around 'Science'. Feminism has always been a 'white thing'. It's something for the white, western, middle class women, that's absolutely how it began (doesn't even really need arguing, think back to the origin and the suffragettes. The conditions and society at the time. Working class and ethnic women had issues significantly more important to them than whether or not they could vote.) and it very much still is. There was an article awhile ago highlighting how a small black girl being verbally abused and mocked at an award ceremony or somesuch, and received very little attention or support, while at the same time there was a sexist column about a celebrity's clothing choice that sparked a tidal wave of backlash from feminist.
It's reached the point where protesting feminism is seen as tantamount to misogyny, or oppressing women. Condemning the theory now means condemning the people even if they aren't proponents.
Even above the underlying issue I see. I refuse to identify as a feminist because of what the concept defends and allows. It backs up the most vile, acidic people I've ever had the displeasure of seeing. It is (and/or allows people to be) transphobic, racist and sexist. It consistently works to(or, rather I should say it is consistently used to) cut out any discourse or disagreeing arguments (it's cliquey. If you don't agree with an aspect, you're either wrong or misogynistic.), and cuts out any voice from men, which brings me to another, and the final point I'll make.
It's hippocritical. It advocates one thing and turns around and does the exact opposite. On the one hand, anything a man tries to put forward can (and often will) be shot down in seconds as 'uninformed'. It's very, very common to see words like 'priviledge' being thrown around. And to an extent that's fair. Men aren't Women. If Women say "this sucks and is unequal" it has to be assumed they have at least slightly stronger word than Men saying "no, you're over-reacting." (though really the rejection should be allowed. It creates discussion and allows incorrect things to be identified and shot down.)
However, more and more I see the defence to things I said above as "no but it's diverse, Feminism wants equality for men too!"...which is one angle where the hypocracy comes in. Women are the only ones who can say what is and isn't in need of change for Women. But Women are also qualified to say what is and isn't in need of change for Men. It means Men aren't privileged enough to comment on what Women need, but also aren't allowed to comment on what Men need. Any 'male issues' brought up are vilified, shot down; the speakers called misogynists and MRA's (which is in fact a good thing. If feminism exists then a male variant should also exist. Instead the few assholes that in feminism are dilligently labelled radicals and fringe groups, are in mr treated as representative of the whole.), there was a video floating around reddit very recently of a lecture at a university about mens issues awareness, that a group of feminists crashed and utterly destroyed, eventually pulling the fire alarms when they were removed from the hall. And it had been done before . Can you imagine the reaction if a bunch of mra's crashed and disrupted a lecture on feminism? Not actual discourse, just disrupting with air-horns and shouting and fire alarms?
That's why I don't support feminism. I support equality/fairness, and endemic within that is support for women's equality. To my mind not only are the two (feminism/support equality) not unequivocally linked together, in recent decades they've actually grown distant from one another. | Feminism as a concept, by definition, allows for all the shitty, trolly, hateful stuff you see and more.
It's transphobic (well known, really.) Racist and sexist.
It's hypocritical |
Snowfox2ne1 | changemyview | t5_2w2s8 | chr0ipg | I don't need to believe what I am saying to argue for it. Yes, my personal opinion is to say that moral objections are questionable at best. The scenario you outlined it obviously fine with me. I understand the objection some people might have, and understand their worry. I would rather educate people, than argue with those who aren't willing to change their mind. | I was playing devil's advocate |
Subsets and Splits