author
stringlengths 3
20
| body
stringlengths 12
18.4k
| normalizedBody
stringlengths 13
17.9k
| subreddit
stringlengths 2
24
| subreddit_id
stringlengths 4
8
| id
stringlengths 3
7
| content
stringlengths 3
17.9k
| summary
stringlengths 1
7.54k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TheShandyMan | Provided the current pricing model isn't modified. I would think that since the "goal" beta was to test things and not give a realistic progression, that things have been progressed. For example, I went from the first ship to a Lakon 6 in less than 2 days and I've only had the game for a week or so. Admittedly I found out about the Coelrind mining spot fairly early which accelerated my income a great deal.
TL;DR I would wager that parts & ships will cost more very shortly. | Provided the current pricing model isn't modified. I would think that since the "goal" beta was to test things and not give a realistic progression, that things have been progressed. For example, I went from the first ship to a Lakon 6 in less than 2 days and I've only had the game for a week or so. Admittedly I found out about the Coelrind mining spot fairly early which accelerated my income a great deal.
TL;DR I would wager that parts & ships will cost more very shortly.
| EliteDangerous | t5_2vi60 | cm7i6db | Provided the current pricing model isn't modified. I would think that since the "goal" beta was to test things and not give a realistic progression, that things have been progressed. For example, I went from the first ship to a Lakon 6 in less than 2 days and I've only had the game for a week or so. Admittedly I found out about the Coelrind mining spot fairly early which accelerated my income a great deal. | I would wager that parts & ships will cost more very shortly. |
Celes_the_lost | I have these thoughts from time to time as well. These thoughts have been less bothersome since I took some advice from my therapist to live in the present and not worry about the future. I'm 26, and will turn 27 in april. I have not started HRT yet, but I am going through therapy now. Honestly theres women who realized who they were at double or maybe almost triple our age, and most look great after working hard to acheive their goals. The best thing to do is to stop worrying about the future as you cannot predict it. Just live in the now and work hard to become yourself. All of us have it hard, but I know with patience and effort we will all find our true selves.
TLDR: You will get there, don't let doubts about the future control you.
| I have these thoughts from time to time as well. These thoughts have been less bothersome since I took some advice from my therapist to live in the present and not worry about the future. I'm 26, and will turn 27 in april. I have not started HRT yet, but I am going through therapy now. Honestly theres women who realized who they were at double or maybe almost triple our age, and most look great after working hard to acheive their goals. The best thing to do is to stop worrying about the future as you cannot predict it. Just live in the now and work hard to become yourself. All of us have it hard, but I know with patience and effort we will all find our true selves.
TLDR: You will get there, don't let doubts about the future control you.
| MtF | t5_2ub9j | cm79vz7 | I have these thoughts from time to time as well. These thoughts have been less bothersome since I took some advice from my therapist to live in the present and not worry about the future. I'm 26, and will turn 27 in april. I have not started HRT yet, but I am going through therapy now. Honestly theres women who realized who they were at double or maybe almost triple our age, and most look great after working hard to acheive their goals. The best thing to do is to stop worrying about the future as you cannot predict it. Just live in the now and work hard to become yourself. All of us have it hard, but I know with patience and effort we will all find our true selves. | You will get there, don't let doubts about the future control you. |
deadkennedy | Well, maybe with any luck, the definition for "Boston" will used as loosely as most out-of-staters...
(eg - cross the boarder into MA, and tell everyone you were in Boston)
tl;dr - do it in western mass | Well, maybe with any luck, the definition for "Boston" will used as loosely as most out-of-staters...
(eg - cross the boarder into MA, and tell everyone you were in Boston)
tl;dr - do it in western mass
| boston | t5_2qh3r | cm7incz | Well, maybe with any luck, the definition for "Boston" will used as loosely as most out-of-staters...
(eg - cross the boarder into MA, and tell everyone you were in Boston) | do it in western mass |
SawJong | My ex girlfriend's uncle and his partner had their civil union celebration in a gay bar. We went there and the whole experience was quite weird. So I was like 16 at the time. When we entered the bar, the first thing I saw was this huge poster of a guy giving someone a blowjob, reminding of the importance of condoms. I've never seen posters like that anywhere else, not gay versions, not straight versions, nothing. Of course that's a great idea but the 16 year old me was quite surprised.
Now at some point we are just talking with people and my girlfriend goes to talk with someone and I'm left standing alone. A gay guy, in his 40s, walks up to me and starts asking pretty normal questions - what do I do, where am I from and so on. He asks whether I would like to go to a cruise with him. I politely decline and I guess he saw from my facial expression that I'm straight. He asked again but said that he could dress up as a woman.
As I was declining, my ex walked up to me and asked what we were talking about. I saw that my moment of freedom had come, took her hand and started walking away.
TL;DR : Some gay guy wanted me to go on a cruise with him, offered to dress up as a woman when I declined. | My ex girlfriend's uncle and his partner had their civil union celebration in a gay bar. We went there and the whole experience was quite weird. So I was like 16 at the time. When we entered the bar, the first thing I saw was this huge poster of a guy giving someone a blowjob, reminding of the importance of condoms. I've never seen posters like that anywhere else, not gay versions, not straight versions, nothing. Of course that's a great idea but the 16 year old me was quite surprised.
Now at some point we are just talking with people and my girlfriend goes to talk with someone and I'm left standing alone. A gay guy, in his 40s, walks up to me and starts asking pretty normal questions - what do I do, where am I from and so on. He asks whether I would like to go to a cruise with him. I politely decline and I guess he saw from my facial expression that I'm straight. He asked again but said that he could dress up as a woman.
As I was declining, my ex walked up to me and asked what we were talking about. I saw that my moment of freedom had come, took her hand and started walking away.
TL;DR : Some gay guy wanted me to go on a cruise with him, offered to dress up as a woman when I declined.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cm7g5gq | My ex girlfriend's uncle and his partner had their civil union celebration in a gay bar. We went there and the whole experience was quite weird. So I was like 16 at the time. When we entered the bar, the first thing I saw was this huge poster of a guy giving someone a blowjob, reminding of the importance of condoms. I've never seen posters like that anywhere else, not gay versions, not straight versions, nothing. Of course that's a great idea but the 16 year old me was quite surprised.
Now at some point we are just talking with people and my girlfriend goes to talk with someone and I'm left standing alone. A gay guy, in his 40s, walks up to me and starts asking pretty normal questions - what do I do, where am I from and so on. He asks whether I would like to go to a cruise with him. I politely decline and I guess he saw from my facial expression that I'm straight. He asked again but said that he could dress up as a woman.
As I was declining, my ex walked up to me and asked what we were talking about. I saw that my moment of freedom had come, took her hand and started walking away. | Some gay guy wanted me to go on a cruise with him, offered to dress up as a woman when I declined. |
pickles541 | To expand on this, elephants can understand human language to an extent. i.e. Elephants know that humans who speak, let's say, Spanish are poachers and kill on sight while those that speak Cantonese are neutral and will ignore you if you ignore them. But those that speak Swahili are friendlies who will help you take care of your children. Now I chose very different languages for the effect but they are able to understand the difference between African dialects of the same language like within English. Yankee accents are different from Dixie accents which are different from English accents. They all use the same words but are different.
tldr; Elephants are smart motherfuckers and I want to meet one. | To expand on this, elephants can understand human language to an extent. i.e. Elephants know that humans who speak, let's say, Spanish are poachers and kill on sight while those that speak Cantonese are neutral and will ignore you if you ignore them. But those that speak Swahili are friendlies who will help you take care of your children. Now I chose very different languages for the effect but they are able to understand the difference between African dialects of the same language like within English. Yankee accents are different from Dixie accents which are different from English accents. They all use the same words but are different.
tldr; Elephants are smart motherfuckers and I want to meet one.
| babyelephantgifs | t5_30vm5 | cm8o1st | To expand on this, elephants can understand human language to an extent. i.e. Elephants know that humans who speak, let's say, Spanish are poachers and kill on sight while those that speak Cantonese are neutral and will ignore you if you ignore them. But those that speak Swahili are friendlies who will help you take care of your children. Now I chose very different languages for the effect but they are able to understand the difference between African dialects of the same language like within English. Yankee accents are different from Dixie accents which are different from English accents. They all use the same words but are different. | Elephants are smart motherfuckers and I want to meet one. |
Anon-sama | > WHY would you want people who thought like that playing alongside you, knowing that whilst they play, they're judging you.
You took what I said out of context. They're hesitant to join because they're afraid they might end up that way, that this community and it's activites (Tabletop, RP etc) is not something you can easily balance with other life activites and as a result you will gain weight and become unhealthy and as a result unhappy.
For example if I were a competitive swimmer and I was interested in joining this community and I wandered down to my local store and saw overweight people everywhere, I would be having second thoughts. These people can't afford to excercise and eat well? How will I know the same thing won't happen to me? It may be naive to think that way but it does happen.
I'm sure we would have a lot more people flocking to this group if everyone were some sort of pro athlete for example. The way the majority of the group DOES matter.
Tl;dr: They aren't judgemental, they're just afraid of losing their current lifestyle.
| > WHY would you want people who thought like that playing alongside you, knowing that whilst they play, they're judging you.
You took what I said out of context. They're hesitant to join because they're afraid they might end up that way, that this community and it's activites (Tabletop, RP etc) is not something you can easily balance with other life activites and as a result you will gain weight and become unhealthy and as a result unhappy.
For example if I were a competitive swimmer and I was interested in joining this community and I wandered down to my local store and saw overweight people everywhere, I would be having second thoughts. These people can't afford to excercise and eat well? How will I know the same thing won't happen to me? It may be naive to think that way but it does happen.
I'm sure we would have a lot more people flocking to this group if everyone were some sort of pro athlete for example. The way the majority of the group DOES matter.
Tl;dr: They aren't judgemental, they're just afraid of losing their current lifestyle.
| Warhammer40k | t5_2rr81 | cm807qm | WHY would you want people who thought like that playing alongside you, knowing that whilst they play, they're judging you.
You took what I said out of context. They're hesitant to join because they're afraid they might end up that way, that this community and it's activites (Tabletop, RP etc) is not something you can easily balance with other life activites and as a result you will gain weight and become unhealthy and as a result unhappy.
For example if I were a competitive swimmer and I was interested in joining this community and I wandered down to my local store and saw overweight people everywhere, I would be having second thoughts. These people can't afford to excercise and eat well? How will I know the same thing won't happen to me? It may be naive to think that way but it does happen.
I'm sure we would have a lot more people flocking to this group if everyone were some sort of pro athlete for example. The way the majority of the group DOES matter. | They aren't judgemental, they're just afraid of losing their current lifestyle. |
blindcolumn | 1. 120 mph is indeed "that fast".
2. Any piece of airplane debris that has enough air resistance to slow your fall is going to be far above you because, surprise surprise, it's falling a lot slower than you.
3. The advice on where to land would be somewhat helpful if it weren't for the fact that you have almost no control over your trajectory when you're falling.
4. 120 mph is fast enough that you're going to sustain about the same amount of damage no matter how you orient yourself when you land.
tl;dr: If you fall out of an airplane without a parachute, your survival is pretty much purely up to chance (and very bad chances at that.) |
120 mph is indeed "that fast".
Any piece of airplane debris that has enough air resistance to slow your fall is going to be far above you because, surprise surprise, it's falling a lot slower than you.
The advice on where to land would be somewhat helpful if it weren't for the fact that you have almost no control over your trajectory when you're falling.
120 mph is fast enough that you're going to sustain about the same amount of damage no matter how you orient yourself when you land.
tl;dr: If you fall out of an airplane without a parachute, your survival is pretty much purely up to chance (and very bad chances at that.)
| NoStupidQuestions | t5_2w844 | cm8j6up | 120 mph is indeed "that fast".
Any piece of airplane debris that has enough air resistance to slow your fall is going to be far above you because, surprise surprise, it's falling a lot slower than you.
The advice on where to land would be somewhat helpful if it weren't for the fact that you have almost no control over your trajectory when you're falling.
120 mph is fast enough that you're going to sustain about the same amount of damage no matter how you orient yourself when you land. | If you fall out of an airplane without a parachute, your survival is pretty much purely up to chance (and very bad chances at that.) |
17th_knight | >Going totally fucking mental every time says "god bless you" in public is neither normal nor healthy.
Who says I do? In fact, I [already commented on that](
And no, saying "God saved me" is not at all like those others. Bless you is automatic, like saying "OH GOD!" in the heat of the moment. Deliberately saying and thinking that a deity reached down frome the heavens and plucked you out of harm is not something you just blurt out, and it *is not harmless*, because that kind of thinking then shoves the notion into people's heads that their loved ones weren't worth saving.
> Your fundamentalism is not better than their fundamentalism
You do realize that my criticism only matters to a religious person, right? Because an atheist wouldn't care if you said "God saved me". You'd chuckle and move on.
But if you say that and a religious person hears it (a religious person with a family member shot in a school shooting, let's say) then they take away "WOW, god saved him.....*but not my loved one*". My criticism of him is in defense of the religious who hear such nonsense from someone.
TL;DR Congrats on not understanding any of my points. | >Going totally fucking mental every time says "god bless you" in public is neither normal nor healthy.
Who says I do? In fact, I [already commented on that](
And no, saying "God saved me" is not at all like those others. Bless you is automatic, like saying "OH GOD!" in the heat of the moment. Deliberately saying and thinking that a deity reached down frome the heavens and plucked you out of harm is not something you just blurt out, and it is not harmless , because that kind of thinking then shoves the notion into people's heads that their loved ones weren't worth saving.
> Your fundamentalism is not better than their fundamentalism
You do realize that my criticism only matters to a religious person, right? Because an atheist wouldn't care if you said "God saved me". You'd chuckle and move on.
But if you say that and a religious person hears it (a religious person with a family member shot in a school shooting, let's say) then they take away "WOW, god saved him..... but not my loved one ". My criticism of him is in defense of the religious who hear such nonsense from someone.
TL;DR Congrats on not understanding any of my points.
| pics | t5_2qh0u | cm8gw9v | Going totally fucking mental every time says "god bless you" in public is neither normal nor healthy.
Who says I do? In fact, I [already commented on that](
And no, saying "God saved me" is not at all like those others. Bless you is automatic, like saying "OH GOD!" in the heat of the moment. Deliberately saying and thinking that a deity reached down frome the heavens and plucked you out of harm is not something you just blurt out, and it is not harmless , because that kind of thinking then shoves the notion into people's heads that their loved ones weren't worth saving.
> Your fundamentalism is not better than their fundamentalism
You do realize that my criticism only matters to a religious person, right? Because an atheist wouldn't care if you said "God saved me". You'd chuckle and move on.
But if you say that and a religious person hears it (a religious person with a family member shot in a school shooting, let's say) then they take away "WOW, god saved him..... but not my loved one ". My criticism of him is in defense of the religious who hear such nonsense from someone. | Congrats on not understanding any of my points. |
GrijzePilion | > Hurr Americans are dumb and own guns. I live in Norway and sit on my ass all day. Crime doesn't exist in utopian European society because communism
You just pulled a massive TL;DR. But you made it sound like any of that is bad or impairs your "infinite" freedom. | > Hurr Americans are dumb and own guns. I live in Norway and sit on my ass all day. Crime doesn't exist in utopian European society because communism
You just pulled a massive TL;DR. But you made it sound like any of that is bad or impairs your "infinite" freedom.
| pics | t5_2qh0u | cm8eiro | Hurr Americans are dumb and own guns. I live in Norway and sit on my ass all day. Crime doesn't exist in utopian European society because communism
You just pulled a massive | But you made it sound like any of that is bad or impairs your "infinite" freedom. |
ImAGhostOooooo | The fact that both coordinators brought in very complicated systems, and the defense is out-performing the offense (by A LOT) causes me to think the defense is executing better due to their line.
There's a classic saying that games are won and lost in the trenches, and in the past year or two I've really come to see how the "trenches" affect the outcome of the game. If you have a D-line getting ridiculous amounts of penetration, the other team's RB won't be able to find a hole (or maybe even get the handoff like the Van Noy play from last sunday <3) and the QB won't have the time to get the ball off to any WR; let alone an open one.
On the other side of the ball, if you can have an average QB, average WRs, and average RBs, and the line gives the QB allllll day to find an open man, the WRs allll day to get open, and holes big enough for a semi truck to drive through (let alone the RB) then you'll likely have huge success.
Our D-line is giving our secondary and linebackers the penetration they need to execute. The pressure allows the DBs to have to cover WRs for less time every play and force more intercept-able throws, and frees up LBs to blitz and clog running lanes, since Suh and company require some double teams to keep them at bay.
**SO** maybe Lombardi's plays are much more genius than we think and just aren't being given either enough time to develop, or enough execution to work. I change my mind from earlier in the week and blame the O-line, and maybe or maybe not Lombardi's system, for the offense's ineffectiveness. That being said, Lombardi has to adjust his schemes to account for this bad O-line. I think this recent move by him is a step in the right direction.
**Tl;Dr:** Same stuff everyone's been saying. D-line is playing so well that they make the LBs and secondary better and allow them to execute better. The O-line is crippling the offense and Lombardi needs to adjust for that. Hopefully this shrinking of the playbook is the first step in the right direction. | The fact that both coordinators brought in very complicated systems, and the defense is out-performing the offense (by A LOT) causes me to think the defense is executing better due to their line.
There's a classic saying that games are won and lost in the trenches, and in the past year or two I've really come to see how the "trenches" affect the outcome of the game. If you have a D-line getting ridiculous amounts of penetration, the other team's RB won't be able to find a hole (or maybe even get the handoff like the Van Noy play from last sunday <3) and the QB won't have the time to get the ball off to any WR; let alone an open one.
On the other side of the ball, if you can have an average QB, average WRs, and average RBs, and the line gives the QB allllll day to find an open man, the WRs allll day to get open, and holes big enough for a semi truck to drive through (let alone the RB) then you'll likely have huge success.
Our D-line is giving our secondary and linebackers the penetration they need to execute. The pressure allows the DBs to have to cover WRs for less time every play and force more intercept-able throws, and frees up LBs to blitz and clog running lanes, since Suh and company require some double teams to keep them at bay.
SO maybe Lombardi's plays are much more genius than we think and just aren't being given either enough time to develop, or enough execution to work. I change my mind from earlier in the week and blame the O-line, and maybe or maybe not Lombardi's system, for the offense's ineffectiveness. That being said, Lombardi has to adjust his schemes to account for this bad O-line. I think this recent move by him is a step in the right direction.
Tl;Dr: Same stuff everyone's been saying. D-line is playing so well that they make the LBs and secondary better and allow them to execute better. The O-line is crippling the offense and Lombardi needs to adjust for that. Hopefully this shrinking of the playbook is the first step in the right direction.
| detroitlions | t5_2rynx | cm8cp54 | The fact that both coordinators brought in very complicated systems, and the defense is out-performing the offense (by A LOT) causes me to think the defense is executing better due to their line.
There's a classic saying that games are won and lost in the trenches, and in the past year or two I've really come to see how the "trenches" affect the outcome of the game. If you have a D-line getting ridiculous amounts of penetration, the other team's RB won't be able to find a hole (or maybe even get the handoff like the Van Noy play from last sunday <3) and the QB won't have the time to get the ball off to any WR; let alone an open one.
On the other side of the ball, if you can have an average QB, average WRs, and average RBs, and the line gives the QB allllll day to find an open man, the WRs allll day to get open, and holes big enough for a semi truck to drive through (let alone the RB) then you'll likely have huge success.
Our D-line is giving our secondary and linebackers the penetration they need to execute. The pressure allows the DBs to have to cover WRs for less time every play and force more intercept-able throws, and frees up LBs to blitz and clog running lanes, since Suh and company require some double teams to keep them at bay.
SO maybe Lombardi's plays are much more genius than we think and just aren't being given either enough time to develop, or enough execution to work. I change my mind from earlier in the week and blame the O-line, and maybe or maybe not Lombardi's system, for the offense's ineffectiveness. That being said, Lombardi has to adjust his schemes to account for this bad O-line. I think this recent move by him is a step in the right direction. | Same stuff everyone's been saying. D-line is playing so well that they make the LBs and secondary better and allow them to execute better. The O-line is crippling the offense and Lombardi needs to adjust for that. Hopefully this shrinking of the playbook is the first step in the right direction. |
vanguard199 | Overall, I am satisfied with the update. I have found that my battery life has extended by roughly 20-25%.
There are a few times where I had to restart the phone. I'm guessing it has something to do with one of the apps. The problem was that my home screen would turn black. However, the 3 buttons below and notification bar was still active. I'll keep an eye on it and continue my investigation.
TL:DR - lollipop is awesome. Some apps are causing my phone to glitch out and force a restart. Still investigating. | Overall, I am satisfied with the update. I have found that my battery life has extended by roughly 20-25%.
There are a few times where I had to restart the phone. I'm guessing it has something to do with one of the apps. The problem was that my home screen would turn black. However, the 3 buttons below and notification bar was still active. I'll keep an eye on it and continue my investigation.
TL:DR - lollipop is awesome. Some apps are causing my phone to glitch out and force a restart. Still investigating.
| Nexus5 | t5_2v4cu | cm8d3y9 | Overall, I am satisfied with the update. I have found that my battery life has extended by roughly 20-25%.
There are a few times where I had to restart the phone. I'm guessing it has something to do with one of the apps. The problem was that my home screen would turn black. However, the 3 buttons below and notification bar was still active. I'll keep an eye on it and continue my investigation. | lollipop is awesome. Some apps are causing my phone to glitch out and force a restart. Still investigating. |
insidesin | Don't worry, same boat here. Just turned 21 and I'd have to say I haven't had a real "best friend" since I was about 12... I feel like all my friends are the kind of people you invite to important things and then just assume half won't come and half will (always random half). I just want there to be that one person I know I can say "Hey, let's hang out this week sometime!" and they'll enjoy it like me. It's a weird as fuck thing to hold to yourself and I've kind of taken it on myself as a fault in my personality because I feel like I'm a really good person until I realise how little people want to get close.
If you wanna start a PM stream just hit me up, I'll try follow this thread in case though... sorry I can't offer any solutions, just a lonely same experience :(
tl;dr, exact same boat, it sucks not having someone, anyone showing interest in you in the slightest. | Don't worry, same boat here. Just turned 21 and I'd have to say I haven't had a real "best friend" since I was about 12... I feel like all my friends are the kind of people you invite to important things and then just assume half won't come and half will (always random half). I just want there to be that one person I know I can say "Hey, let's hang out this week sometime!" and they'll enjoy it like me. It's a weird as fuck thing to hold to yourself and I've kind of taken it on myself as a fault in my personality because I feel like I'm a really good person until I realise how little people want to get close.
If you wanna start a PM stream just hit me up, I'll try follow this thread in case though... sorry I can't offer any solutions, just a lonely same experience :(
tl;dr, exact same boat, it sucks not having someone, anyone showing interest in you in the slightest.
| socialskills | t5_2r275 | cm90hmp | Don't worry, same boat here. Just turned 21 and I'd have to say I haven't had a real "best friend" since I was about 12... I feel like all my friends are the kind of people you invite to important things and then just assume half won't come and half will (always random half). I just want there to be that one person I know I can say "Hey, let's hang out this week sometime!" and they'll enjoy it like me. It's a weird as fuck thing to hold to yourself and I've kind of taken it on myself as a fault in my personality because I feel like I'm a really good person until I realise how little people want to get close.
If you wanna start a PM stream just hit me up, I'll try follow this thread in case though... sorry I can't offer any solutions, just a lonely same experience :( | exact same boat, it sucks not having someone, anyone showing interest in you in the slightest. |
stefanhc1 | I started reading this with an English accent after you said UK so that helped me get through this monster! Anyway, welcome to r/ADHD. I am by no means a doctor but your symptoms are pretty much my own and sound like what most people experience with ADHD. You should know that you are not alone in your struggle and we all have these thoughts all the time. As far as advice goes, I am also at Uni and the few things that help me get by are: Finding a space to separate myself from the world (a cubicle in the library) where the only things there are me and my study materials, listening to instrumental music (helps drown out my thoughts), finding a subject I really enjoy and obsessing about it. Other than that, the usual things like regular exercise, diet, sleep, routine and of course medication.
Tl;dr: Get diagnosed, find something you love to do, fight every day. | I started reading this with an English accent after you said UK so that helped me get through this monster! Anyway, welcome to r/ADHD. I am by no means a doctor but your symptoms are pretty much my own and sound like what most people experience with ADHD. You should know that you are not alone in your struggle and we all have these thoughts all the time. As far as advice goes, I am also at Uni and the few things that help me get by are: Finding a space to separate myself from the world (a cubicle in the library) where the only things there are me and my study materials, listening to instrumental music (helps drown out my thoughts), finding a subject I really enjoy and obsessing about it. Other than that, the usual things like regular exercise, diet, sleep, routine and of course medication.
Tl;dr: Get diagnosed, find something you love to do, fight every day.
| ADHD | t5_2qnwb | cm8pjn1 | I started reading this with an English accent after you said UK so that helped me get through this monster! Anyway, welcome to r/ADHD. I am by no means a doctor but your symptoms are pretty much my own and sound like what most people experience with ADHD. You should know that you are not alone in your struggle and we all have these thoughts all the time. As far as advice goes, I am also at Uni and the few things that help me get by are: Finding a space to separate myself from the world (a cubicle in the library) where the only things there are me and my study materials, listening to instrumental music (helps drown out my thoughts), finding a subject I really enjoy and obsessing about it. Other than that, the usual things like regular exercise, diet, sleep, routine and of course medication. | Get diagnosed, find something you love to do, fight every day. |
insanity-insight | Just want to note that I'm not the guy you were arguing with above, and I never argued one way or the other on Dawn.
What I object to is this idea that every single Survivor fan should agree on whether every single player is likeable or unlikeable.
Survivor is a show that puts real-life people (flawed people with good and bad traits) on an island for viewers to watch. Inevitably, different viewers will have different reactions to each Survivor, in just the same way that some people in real life meet each other and just "click," while others have instant personality conflicts. No matter how much the editing skews one way or another on a player, fans will still have differing reactions to characters because every fan has his/her own personality and values different things in the characters they root for.
TL;DR: Assuming that everyone in the world should react to a castaway in the exact same way you did is short-sighted and incredibly ignorant of the basic fact that every person is different, and will react to different characters in different ways. | Just want to note that I'm not the guy you were arguing with above, and I never argued one way or the other on Dawn.
What I object to is this idea that every single Survivor fan should agree on whether every single player is likeable or unlikeable.
Survivor is a show that puts real-life people (flawed people with good and bad traits) on an island for viewers to watch. Inevitably, different viewers will have different reactions to each Survivor, in just the same way that some people in real life meet each other and just "click," while others have instant personality conflicts. No matter how much the editing skews one way or another on a player, fans will still have differing reactions to characters because every fan has his/her own personality and values different things in the characters they root for.
TL;DR: Assuming that everyone in the world should react to a castaway in the exact same way you did is short-sighted and incredibly ignorant of the basic fact that every person is different, and will react to different characters in different ways.
| survivor | t5_2qhu3 | cm9a9uk | Just want to note that I'm not the guy you were arguing with above, and I never argued one way or the other on Dawn.
What I object to is this idea that every single Survivor fan should agree on whether every single player is likeable or unlikeable.
Survivor is a show that puts real-life people (flawed people with good and bad traits) on an island for viewers to watch. Inevitably, different viewers will have different reactions to each Survivor, in just the same way that some people in real life meet each other and just "click," while others have instant personality conflicts. No matter how much the editing skews one way or another on a player, fans will still have differing reactions to characters because every fan has his/her own personality and values different things in the characters they root for. | Assuming that everyone in the world should react to a castaway in the exact same way you did is short-sighted and incredibly ignorant of the basic fact that every person is different, and will react to different characters in different ways. |
insanity-insight | You're telling me. It's a really weird tic and I don't understand it either.
My best theory: Russell played two very visible and aggressive strategic games, then lost by wide margins at Final Tribal. This caused a large portion of the fan-base to believe that Russell was "robbed" by weaker players.
The problem with that theory is that really the core challenge of Survivor is that you have to vote people out while somehow getting them to vote for you at the end. Russell was unarguably an arrogant, meanspirited bully to almost everyone in the game. So while he was a flashy player, he didn't really deserve to win because his jury management was atrocious.
Nearly all Survivor fans understand this. But internet neckbeards feel that understanding why Russell lost makes them light-years smarter than the "casual fan." Liking the self-satisfied feeling of pretending they are geniuses among a sea of "casual" morons, internet neckbeards have taken the Russell explanation to ludicrous extremes, trumpeting that Russell was "the worst player ever to play Survivor" while claiming that anyone with a nuanced opinion on Russell is infinitely stupider than the genius neckbeard. As this false feeling of intellectual superiority causes the neckbeard's head to swell, he will get even more vehement in his exaggerated and unrealistic argument, using the downvote arrow to drown the moronic "casual" and bury his/her opinion. The powerful feeling of asserting one's (completely made-up) intellectual prowess over a (supposedly) uninformed ignoramus has even been known to bring neckbeards to completion right there at the desk in their parents basement.
TL;DR: Self-proclaimed "superfans" get off on asserting their brilliance by downvoting people they see as stupid, and Russell is basically their go-to porno to achieve said stimulation. | You're telling me. It's a really weird tic and I don't understand it either.
My best theory: Russell played two very visible and aggressive strategic games, then lost by wide margins at Final Tribal. This caused a large portion of the fan-base to believe that Russell was "robbed" by weaker players.
The problem with that theory is that really the core challenge of Survivor is that you have to vote people out while somehow getting them to vote for you at the end. Russell was unarguably an arrogant, meanspirited bully to almost everyone in the game. So while he was a flashy player, he didn't really deserve to win because his jury management was atrocious.
Nearly all Survivor fans understand this. But internet neckbeards feel that understanding why Russell lost makes them light-years smarter than the "casual fan." Liking the self-satisfied feeling of pretending they are geniuses among a sea of "casual" morons, internet neckbeards have taken the Russell explanation to ludicrous extremes, trumpeting that Russell was "the worst player ever to play Survivor" while claiming that anyone with a nuanced opinion on Russell is infinitely stupider than the genius neckbeard. As this false feeling of intellectual superiority causes the neckbeard's head to swell, he will get even more vehement in his exaggerated and unrealistic argument, using the downvote arrow to drown the moronic "casual" and bury his/her opinion. The powerful feeling of asserting one's (completely made-up) intellectual prowess over a (supposedly) uninformed ignoramus has even been known to bring neckbeards to completion right there at the desk in their parents basement.
TL;DR: Self-proclaimed "superfans" get off on asserting their brilliance by downvoting people they see as stupid, and Russell is basically their go-to porno to achieve said stimulation.
| survivor | t5_2qhu3 | cm9b6dr | You're telling me. It's a really weird tic and I don't understand it either.
My best theory: Russell played two very visible and aggressive strategic games, then lost by wide margins at Final Tribal. This caused a large portion of the fan-base to believe that Russell was "robbed" by weaker players.
The problem with that theory is that really the core challenge of Survivor is that you have to vote people out while somehow getting them to vote for you at the end. Russell was unarguably an arrogant, meanspirited bully to almost everyone in the game. So while he was a flashy player, he didn't really deserve to win because his jury management was atrocious.
Nearly all Survivor fans understand this. But internet neckbeards feel that understanding why Russell lost makes them light-years smarter than the "casual fan." Liking the self-satisfied feeling of pretending they are geniuses among a sea of "casual" morons, internet neckbeards have taken the Russell explanation to ludicrous extremes, trumpeting that Russell was "the worst player ever to play Survivor" while claiming that anyone with a nuanced opinion on Russell is infinitely stupider than the genius neckbeard. As this false feeling of intellectual superiority causes the neckbeard's head to swell, he will get even more vehement in his exaggerated and unrealistic argument, using the downvote arrow to drown the moronic "casual" and bury his/her opinion. The powerful feeling of asserting one's (completely made-up) intellectual prowess over a (supposedly) uninformed ignoramus has even been known to bring neckbeards to completion right there at the desk in their parents basement. | Self-proclaimed "superfans" get off on asserting their brilliance by downvoting people they see as stupid, and Russell is basically their go-to porno to achieve said stimulation. |
Landohh | I bought both but I know your dilemma. It's why I bought both haha. Haven't touched GTA yet as I just picked up the games last night but dove into DA for about 3 hours. Playing on Nightmare and being my first forray into the series, I had quite a hard time with the first demon boss, but I could not go to bed until I defeated him. Being able to play with the action-rpg elements of player controlled, switching between characters quickly, then at the click of the track pad being able to pause and tactically maneuver your party is incredibly fun.
Game is gorgeous. Frame rate stutters during cinematics that I have watched so far but honestly doesn't bother me. Story is already sucking me in while I only have a vague understanding of the Dragon Age universe and the rifts between races/factions/political side of things.
With GTA...you know what it is. You've played it before as have I (but I didn't get very far cause it caused my PS3 to obtain the YLOD), but I see this as the "definitive" version of the game. Like Diablo 3: UEE, it's the version of the game that is going to be there to pick up and play whenever you want a taste of that genre. First person is definitely something I am looking forward to checking out.
TLDR; If I had to pick for you...I'd go Dragon Age. You've seen GTA before | I bought both but I know your dilemma. It's why I bought both haha. Haven't touched GTA yet as I just picked up the games last night but dove into DA for about 3 hours. Playing on Nightmare and being my first forray into the series, I had quite a hard time with the first demon boss, but I could not go to bed until I defeated him. Being able to play with the action-rpg elements of player controlled, switching between characters quickly, then at the click of the track pad being able to pause and tactically maneuver your party is incredibly fun.
Game is gorgeous. Frame rate stutters during cinematics that I have watched so far but honestly doesn't bother me. Story is already sucking me in while I only have a vague understanding of the Dragon Age universe and the rifts between races/factions/political side of things.
With GTA...you know what it is. You've played it before as have I (but I didn't get very far cause it caused my PS3 to obtain the YLOD), but I see this as the "definitive" version of the game. Like Diablo 3: UEE, it's the version of the game that is going to be there to pick up and play whenever you want a taste of that genre. First person is definitely something I am looking forward to checking out.
TLDR; If I had to pick for you...I'd go Dragon Age. You've seen GTA before
| PS4 | t5_2rrlp | cm902va | I bought both but I know your dilemma. It's why I bought both haha. Haven't touched GTA yet as I just picked up the games last night but dove into DA for about 3 hours. Playing on Nightmare and being my first forray into the series, I had quite a hard time with the first demon boss, but I could not go to bed until I defeated him. Being able to play with the action-rpg elements of player controlled, switching between characters quickly, then at the click of the track pad being able to pause and tactically maneuver your party is incredibly fun.
Game is gorgeous. Frame rate stutters during cinematics that I have watched so far but honestly doesn't bother me. Story is already sucking me in while I only have a vague understanding of the Dragon Age universe and the rifts between races/factions/political side of things.
With GTA...you know what it is. You've played it before as have I (but I didn't get very far cause it caused my PS3 to obtain the YLOD), but I see this as the "definitive" version of the game. Like Diablo 3: UEE, it's the version of the game that is going to be there to pick up and play whenever you want a taste of that genre. First person is definitely something I am looking forward to checking out. | If I had to pick for you...I'd go Dragon Age. You've seen GTA before |
BelgianDutchman | I want to be able to see as much as possible while staying in that price range. I don't know if I'm being reasonable but besides planets and the moon I want to be able to look at nebulae etc.
Portability is nice I guess but not a determining factor, I doubt it's gonna leave my room/garden.
I don't know, is the 8" dobsonian the right thing? I thought that tl;dr in the sticky was a meant to be cynical and meant "you should just read the whole thing". | I want to be able to see as much as possible while staying in that price range. I don't know if I'm being reasonable but besides planets and the moon I want to be able to look at nebulae etc.
Portability is nice I guess but not a determining factor, I doubt it's gonna leave my room/garden.
I don't know, is the 8" dobsonian the right thing? I thought that tl;dr in the sticky was a meant to be cynical and meant "you should just read the whole thing".
| telescopes | t5_2qnl1 | cma1cbs | I want to be able to see as much as possible while staying in that price range. I don't know if I'm being reasonable but besides planets and the moon I want to be able to look at nebulae etc.
Portability is nice I guess but not a determining factor, I doubt it's gonna leave my room/garden.
I don't know, is the 8" dobsonian the right thing? I thought that | in the sticky was a meant to be cynical and meant "you should just read the whole thing". |
Sidetrackedent | They actually didn't survive the Halos firing in the forerunner war. What happened was that the ring you found in Halo 1 had flood on it. The flood got released because the covenant was fucking about and accidently released them. The flood actually still existed on some rings as research by the forerunners (like the rings in 1 and 2). So the flood certainly could still exsist on other constructs, and with the new games having an intense focus on the forerunners and discovering their old tech, i think it is likely the flood could come back. For all we know there could be another ring with more flood, just waiting to be released.
Tldr: the forerunners preserved the flood on some rings for research, meaning there could be more out there. So it all depends if 343 wants to bring them back or not. | They actually didn't survive the Halos firing in the forerunner war. What happened was that the ring you found in Halo 1 had flood on it. The flood got released because the covenant was fucking about and accidently released them. The flood actually still existed on some rings as research by the forerunners (like the rings in 1 and 2). So the flood certainly could still exsist on other constructs, and with the new games having an intense focus on the forerunners and discovering their old tech, i think it is likely the flood could come back. For all we know there could be another ring with more flood, just waiting to be released.
Tldr: the forerunners preserved the flood on some rings for research, meaning there could be more out there. So it all depends if 343 wants to bring them back or not.
| halo | t5_2qixk | cma7n7x | They actually didn't survive the Halos firing in the forerunner war. What happened was that the ring you found in Halo 1 had flood on it. The flood got released because the covenant was fucking about and accidently released them. The flood actually still existed on some rings as research by the forerunners (like the rings in 1 and 2). So the flood certainly could still exsist on other constructs, and with the new games having an intense focus on the forerunners and discovering their old tech, i think it is likely the flood could come back. For all we know there could be another ring with more flood, just waiting to be released. | the forerunners preserved the flood on some rings for research, meaning there could be more out there. So it all depends if 343 wants to bring them back or not. |
Were-Shrrg | just to clarify: you can absolutely copy someone's picture - if you ask them first. if its not quite a copy, just used as a referance, you should still give credit to the origional artist. Most people won't really care one way or the other, although some explicitly say " don't use my art".
tl;dr Using other's art as a reference is fine, don't be scared, credit them when you post it | just to clarify: you can absolutely copy someone's picture - if you ask them first. if its not quite a copy, just used as a referance, you should still give credit to the origional artist. Most people won't really care one way or the other, although some explicitly say " don't use my art".
tl;dr Using other's art as a reference is fine, don't be scared, credit them when you post it
| wolves | t5_2rwxn | cmagdbd | just to clarify: you can absolutely copy someone's picture - if you ask them first. if its not quite a copy, just used as a referance, you should still give credit to the origional artist. Most people won't really care one way or the other, although some explicitly say " don't use my art". | Using other's art as a reference is fine, don't be scared, credit them when you post it |
CrimsonPheasant | I've been an advocate for more sets for a while.My reasoning being that since D3 does not have a skill tree, the loot items have to fulfil the role that higher nodes on a skill tree fulfil, namely skill modification or damage buff on existing skills. Examples of this are Raekor set which gives Furious charge all runes (modifying it from just high damage Battering Ram to also include fury regen, crowd control etc) and Tasker and Theo which buffs pet damage. Since items are the skill tree, we need more items for build diversity and more branches on the skill tree.
Some points:
* as mentioned by other posters on this thread, 5 sets per class will clog up loot tables making getting 1 particular item difficult. Possible solution: increase blood shard limit so that after a session of farming shards if you blow it all on one slot, you have a reasonable chance of getting all sets for that slot.
* Alternatively, have 2 FUNCTIONAL 6-piece sets per class (Helltooth and to a lesser extent Roland, we're looking at you). And buff the 4 piece sets. I recently levelled up another wizard to play Tal Rashas and take a break from FB. Abandonned the TR set after an hour due to it being so underwhelming. 4-piece sets need to be more like the Sunwuko set, an alternative to 6-pieces at least up to T6 (though in the case of Sunwuko, the 6-piece isn't even competition...that needs to be fixed before we think about adding more sets).
* Add more standalone items. In terms of diversity, Crusader and WD are in the best places. Yes, you have to have Akkhan for Crusader, but change your weapon and shield combo and you could be playing holy shotgun/Stampede/Condemn which are very different playstyles. Similarly with pet doctors, depending on your mask and weapon you could be playing Tik/carnevil/standard MoJ dps. More build defining items will help.
TL;DR -> rework existing sets instead of adding more may be the answer. Add more unique stand alone items that define a build. | I've been an advocate for more sets for a while.My reasoning being that since D3 does not have a skill tree, the loot items have to fulfil the role that higher nodes on a skill tree fulfil, namely skill modification or damage buff on existing skills. Examples of this are Raekor set which gives Furious charge all runes (modifying it from just high damage Battering Ram to also include fury regen, crowd control etc) and Tasker and Theo which buffs pet damage. Since items are the skill tree, we need more items for build diversity and more branches on the skill tree.
Some points:
as mentioned by other posters on this thread, 5 sets per class will clog up loot tables making getting 1 particular item difficult. Possible solution: increase blood shard limit so that after a session of farming shards if you blow it all on one slot, you have a reasonable chance of getting all sets for that slot.
Alternatively, have 2 FUNCTIONAL 6-piece sets per class (Helltooth and to a lesser extent Roland, we're looking at you). And buff the 4 piece sets. I recently levelled up another wizard to play Tal Rashas and take a break from FB. Abandonned the TR set after an hour due to it being so underwhelming. 4-piece sets need to be more like the Sunwuko set, an alternative to 6-pieces at least up to T6 (though in the case of Sunwuko, the 6-piece isn't even competition...that needs to be fixed before we think about adding more sets).
Add more standalone items. In terms of diversity, Crusader and WD are in the best places. Yes, you have to have Akkhan for Crusader, but change your weapon and shield combo and you could be playing holy shotgun/Stampede/Condemn which are very different playstyles. Similarly with pet doctors, depending on your mask and weapon you could be playing Tik/carnevil/standard MoJ dps. More build defining items will help.
TL;DR -> rework existing sets instead of adding more may be the answer. Add more unique stand alone items that define a build.
| Diablo | t5_2qore | cmainvu | I've been an advocate for more sets for a while.My reasoning being that since D3 does not have a skill tree, the loot items have to fulfil the role that higher nodes on a skill tree fulfil, namely skill modification or damage buff on existing skills. Examples of this are Raekor set which gives Furious charge all runes (modifying it from just high damage Battering Ram to also include fury regen, crowd control etc) and Tasker and Theo which buffs pet damage. Since items are the skill tree, we need more items for build diversity and more branches on the skill tree.
Some points:
as mentioned by other posters on this thread, 5 sets per class will clog up loot tables making getting 1 particular item difficult. Possible solution: increase blood shard limit so that after a session of farming shards if you blow it all on one slot, you have a reasonable chance of getting all sets for that slot.
Alternatively, have 2 FUNCTIONAL 6-piece sets per class (Helltooth and to a lesser extent Roland, we're looking at you). And buff the 4 piece sets. I recently levelled up another wizard to play Tal Rashas and take a break from FB. Abandonned the TR set after an hour due to it being so underwhelming. 4-piece sets need to be more like the Sunwuko set, an alternative to 6-pieces at least up to T6 (though in the case of Sunwuko, the 6-piece isn't even competition...that needs to be fixed before we think about adding more sets).
Add more standalone items. In terms of diversity, Crusader and WD are in the best places. Yes, you have to have Akkhan for Crusader, but change your weapon and shield combo and you could be playing holy shotgun/Stampede/Condemn which are very different playstyles. Similarly with pet doctors, depending on your mask and weapon you could be playing Tik/carnevil/standard MoJ dps. More build defining items will help. | rework existing sets instead of adding more may be the answer. Add more unique stand alone items that define a build. |
MilhouseVanDeadpool | Because as humans we're obsessed with stories. Underdog scenarios and fairytale successes in sports and stuff is a pretty classic trope for any story. Often, people remember how amazing the achievement was years later, and forget the way it was achieved, which is why we end up with Wimbledon's FA Cup win being a fairytale, despite the fact that everyone hated them at the time for various reasons (overly negative, defensive football that was often violent is one).
tl;dr people like an endearing story and David vs Goliath comparisons and stuff. | Because as humans we're obsessed with stories. Underdog scenarios and fairytale successes in sports and stuff is a pretty classic trope for any story. Often, people remember how amazing the achievement was years later, and forget the way it was achieved, which is why we end up with Wimbledon's FA Cup win being a fairytale, despite the fact that everyone hated them at the time for various reasons (overly negative, defensive football that was often violent is one).
tl;dr people like an endearing story and David vs Goliath comparisons and stuff.
| explainlikeimfive | t5_2sokd | cmadpqw | Because as humans we're obsessed with stories. Underdog scenarios and fairytale successes in sports and stuff is a pretty classic trope for any story. Often, people remember how amazing the achievement was years later, and forget the way it was achieved, which is why we end up with Wimbledon's FA Cup win being a fairytale, despite the fact that everyone hated them at the time for various reasons (overly negative, defensive football that was often violent is one). | people like an endearing story and David vs Goliath comparisons and stuff. |
CrackChowder | That is like saying *"should gadgetzan auctioneer be rogue exclusive"* and obviously no. Class cards tend to be better cards than neutral cards because only one class are allowed to use them, however not too strong because then you would fill your deck with class cards only.
The problem with having Bloodfen Raptor a class card for Hunter is that it's simply too weak. If there was a 3/2 demon for 2 mana for warlock then it wouldn't be run in zoo.
However if it had some kind of ability like "the next beast you play this turn gains +2 health" so it has some viability if you draw it later on in the game it could be a pretty cool class card.
**TL;DR:** Class cards are supposed to be powerful, not just there because it's one of the only classes that can make use of it. | That is like saying "should gadgetzan auctioneer be rogue exclusive" and obviously no. Class cards tend to be better cards than neutral cards because only one class are allowed to use them, however not too strong because then you would fill your deck with class cards only.
The problem with having Bloodfen Raptor a class card for Hunter is that it's simply too weak. If there was a 3/2 demon for 2 mana for warlock then it wouldn't be run in zoo.
However if it had some kind of ability like "the next beast you play this turn gains +2 health" so it has some viability if you draw it later on in the game it could be a pretty cool class card.
TL;DR: Class cards are supposed to be powerful, not just there because it's one of the only classes that can make use of it.
| hearthstone | t5_2w31t | cmagb54 | That is like saying "should gadgetzan auctioneer be rogue exclusive" and obviously no. Class cards tend to be better cards than neutral cards because only one class are allowed to use them, however not too strong because then you would fill your deck with class cards only.
The problem with having Bloodfen Raptor a class card for Hunter is that it's simply too weak. If there was a 3/2 demon for 2 mana for warlock then it wouldn't be run in zoo.
However if it had some kind of ability like "the next beast you play this turn gains +2 health" so it has some viability if you draw it later on in the game it could be a pretty cool class card. | Class cards are supposed to be powerful, not just there because it's one of the only classes that can make use of it. |
Ryan5493 | Before I get down voted, let me just preface this by saying Idc where FSU is ranked, as long as its in the top 4. I honestly think that you could make a legitimate argument for FSU to be #1 by simply applying the same argument to Bama and Oregon that is applied to us.
As of right now, Bamas best win is against Mississippi State. They have had close games with Arkansas, LSU , and West Virginia. Their loss came at the hands of a bad Ole Miss team who got shut out this week by a 5 loss Arkansas team and lost to a bad Auburn team. Their best win, Mississippi State, has close wins over LSU, Auburn, and UAB. LSU and Auburn are their best wins. Neither team is very good. We sit here and fault FSU for close wins against poor competition, but can't do the same for Alabama?
Oregon had a close game with WSU and lost to Arizona. Both games are regarded as mulligans because of either injuries or weather. FSU has a dealt with injuries at many key postions all year. There was a point in time that we were at our 4th and 5th string line backers, some of which were walk ons, due to injuries. We were without Jameis for one of the most important games of the year. We dealt with torrential downpour this weekend. We've been injured all along the o line, d line, and at RB. Granted, Oregon has had some great wins, but why is it they get the benefit of the doubt when we've dealt with very similar circumstances for a longer period of time?
The final point I'll make, is that we are the defending champs and currently hold the nation's longest winning streak. I recognize that last year holds no bearing on this year, but you're crazy if you don't think that we get everyone's best shot week in and week out. Everyone wants to dethrone the champ. This also plays into the close games. I think it's ludicrous that people honestly believe that we would get shredded in the playoffs when there has not been a single flat out dominant team in college football this year.
**TL;DR: You could make a case for FSU to be #1, but it doesn't really matter as long as they're at least #4** | Before I get down voted, let me just preface this by saying Idc where FSU is ranked, as long as its in the top 4. I honestly think that you could make a legitimate argument for FSU to be #1 by simply applying the same argument to Bama and Oregon that is applied to us.
As of right now, Bamas best win is against Mississippi State. They have had close games with Arkansas, LSU , and West Virginia. Their loss came at the hands of a bad Ole Miss team who got shut out this week by a 5 loss Arkansas team and lost to a bad Auburn team. Their best win, Mississippi State, has close wins over LSU, Auburn, and UAB. LSU and Auburn are their best wins. Neither team is very good. We sit here and fault FSU for close wins against poor competition, but can't do the same for Alabama?
Oregon had a close game with WSU and lost to Arizona. Both games are regarded as mulligans because of either injuries or weather. FSU has a dealt with injuries at many key postions all year. There was a point in time that we were at our 4th and 5th string line backers, some of which were walk ons, due to injuries. We were without Jameis for one of the most important games of the year. We dealt with torrential downpour this weekend. We've been injured all along the o line, d line, and at RB. Granted, Oregon has had some great wins, but why is it they get the benefit of the doubt when we've dealt with very similar circumstances for a longer period of time?
The final point I'll make, is that we are the defending champs and currently hold the nation's longest winning streak. I recognize that last year holds no bearing on this year, but you're crazy if you don't think that we get everyone's best shot week in and week out. Everyone wants to dethrone the champ. This also plays into the close games. I think it's ludicrous that people honestly believe that we would get shredded in the playoffs when there has not been a single flat out dominant team in college football this year.
TL;DR: You could make a case for FSU to be #1, but it doesn't really matter as long as they're at least #4
| CFB | t5_2qm9d | cmb2j00 | Before I get down voted, let me just preface this by saying Idc where FSU is ranked, as long as its in the top 4. I honestly think that you could make a legitimate argument for FSU to be #1 by simply applying the same argument to Bama and Oregon that is applied to us.
As of right now, Bamas best win is against Mississippi State. They have had close games with Arkansas, LSU , and West Virginia. Their loss came at the hands of a bad Ole Miss team who got shut out this week by a 5 loss Arkansas team and lost to a bad Auburn team. Their best win, Mississippi State, has close wins over LSU, Auburn, and UAB. LSU and Auburn are their best wins. Neither team is very good. We sit here and fault FSU for close wins against poor competition, but can't do the same for Alabama?
Oregon had a close game with WSU and lost to Arizona. Both games are regarded as mulligans because of either injuries or weather. FSU has a dealt with injuries at many key postions all year. There was a point in time that we were at our 4th and 5th string line backers, some of which were walk ons, due to injuries. We were without Jameis for one of the most important games of the year. We dealt with torrential downpour this weekend. We've been injured all along the o line, d line, and at RB. Granted, Oregon has had some great wins, but why is it they get the benefit of the doubt when we've dealt with very similar circumstances for a longer period of time?
The final point I'll make, is that we are the defending champs and currently hold the nation's longest winning streak. I recognize that last year holds no bearing on this year, but you're crazy if you don't think that we get everyone's best shot week in and week out. Everyone wants to dethrone the champ. This also plays into the close games. I think it's ludicrous that people honestly believe that we would get shredded in the playoffs when there has not been a single flat out dominant team in college football this year. | You could make a case for FSU to be #1, but it doesn't really matter as long as they're at least #4 |
s1500 | I've been suffering from a rash of date cancellations. Wed night date(real good looking) canceled on me since she met another guy(also been passed over way too often in the span of a month). Another woman I've been emailing/texting quite a bit canceled our date for today out of the blue. Lots of time wasted.
Been however doing lots of emailing with someone who lives a bit further, but we're getting along real well.
But all the bad stuff that happened during the week went away with a party I went to Friday. Had lots of wild fun. Total duckduck_goose territory. Got my mojo back. If no new relationships, new notches on the bedpost is 2nd best.
tl;dr; canceled out/passed over, didn't matter: had sex. | I've been suffering from a rash of date cancellations. Wed night date(real good looking) canceled on me since she met another guy(also been passed over way too often in the span of a month). Another woman I've been emailing/texting quite a bit canceled our date for today out of the blue. Lots of time wasted.
Been however doing lots of emailing with someone who lives a bit further, but we're getting along real well.
But all the bad stuff that happened during the week went away with a party I went to Friday. Had lots of wild fun. Total duckduck_goose territory. Got my mojo back. If no new relationships, new notches on the bedpost is 2nd best.
tl;dr; canceled out/passed over, didn't matter: had sex.
| OkCupid | t5_2rct2 | cmb1dw5 | I've been suffering from a rash of date cancellations. Wed night date(real good looking) canceled on me since she met another guy(also been passed over way too often in the span of a month). Another woman I've been emailing/texting quite a bit canceled our date for today out of the blue. Lots of time wasted.
Been however doing lots of emailing with someone who lives a bit further, but we're getting along real well.
But all the bad stuff that happened during the week went away with a party I went to Friday. Had lots of wild fun. Total duckduck_goose territory. Got my mojo back. If no new relationships, new notches on the bedpost is 2nd best. | canceled out/passed over, didn't matter: had sex. |
smacksaw | smacksaw story time:
I am...basically a professional shopper. When you have 6 kids, you learn to shop economically. Additionally, living up north it's often too hot to speedwalk outside without getting sweaty or it's far too cold. Thus, I go to malls regularly and I walk. Usually 2 laps of an entire mall, plus anchor stores is what I shoot for, then I get what I gotta get and go.
Ask me about deals. I know deals.
Lane Bryant is a plus-sized store. So is Torrid. Of course Macy's, JCPenney etc have plus-sized sections. Let me break these stores down for you from all of the many malls over many states I have lived in/worked in and go regularly. The average person goes to the mall at Christmastime. I go more in a year than they go in an entire lifetime.
Lane Bryant: I do not know how this store stays in business. Or Motherhood Maternity or Laura Petites and a lot of other specialty stores. Lane Bryant, no matter where I go or how fat the local populace is? Dead, dead, dead, dead. Here is a store full of 14+ fashion, some of it pretty cute IMO. Why is no one shopping there? Charlotte Russe, Wet Seal, etc are all always busy. She can claim fatties are bursting with money to spend on clothing, but I don't see it. You know where I see the fat people at the mall? The food court.
Torrid: Hot Topic is not doing well. Most places I go, Hot Topic is rather dead from it's heyday. Young "cool" kids are buying their crap by thrifting, not paying full retail at HT. Still they do have some specific things. Torrid is basically Fat Topic and I have no idea how this store is in business. There is literally never anyone in that store whenever I go by there. If Hot Topic is hurting, Torrid is terminally ill.
The next stores you judge by their clearance.
Marshalls/TJMaxx: The way these stores work is that they get regular shipments and clearance out stuff to make room. A lot get new stuff on Tuesday, the one in Bellingham, WA gets new items *daily* because it's so hot. Plus sizes make up a fraction of the store. Let's say plus makes up 4 out of 80 racks of clothing. The clearance is where old items get moved. The plus clearance is as big is the new arrivals. Meaning no one is buying it. The TJMaxx nearest me has more rounders of plus clearance than plus new arrivals. My wife wears S/M/L depending on the garment and cut and is a 7/9 and her sizes are always gone. They have gobs of 00, 0, 1, 11, 13 and 15+
Macys: This is the same story. The Womens section always has the most clearance. It's generally segregated into brands/mini stores. Macys has a lot of clearance, some stores more than others. When I'm looking for my wife, I only ever look in Juniors for her. Looking in the other departments is a constant waste because only the largest sizes are left. And the "old lady clothes" are already larger sizes to begin with.
JCP: Yet another store that is aggressive in clearancing things out. The one closest to me doesn't even have a Juniors clearance. Dresses and suits are always 11+, 1X, etc. Like TJMaxx, they never have a 36D/34DD for my wife on clearance, but they have plenty of 38A, 40D, 42B, etc. The clearance racks are always huge. Size S or M panties? Never.
Kohls: They discount in stages, 60%, 80% and final clearance which is 80% and sometimes more. The Juniors at the one nearest me is huge, but again all of the sizes are huge. Anything in cute, like Abbey Dawn or Candies is sold out in everything except 0, 00 and 11. Same goes with the bras. Their largest clearance section is the plus-sized old lady stuff and then the contemporary stuff.
I frankly don't think these people buy clothes, I think they like the idea they *could* buy clothes and/or are looking for something to complain about. I shop for my wife and daughter. I've worked retail. I can understand inventory pretty quickly and remember it from trip to trip.
I don't see fat people shopping, I don't see them buying/trying clothes for them, I don't see their garments being sold. Instead I see the most common sizes on display with the majority frequency and I see them being sold though quickly and easily.
I wear a 2XL or 3XL shirt, depending on cut. I always find them. I need 34" pants. I never find them. It's the same for men. Plenty of fat sizes and super skinny sizes, like 28x30 or 40x30.
tl;dr - if fat people bought clothes, someone would make money selling to them. | smacksaw story time:
I am...basically a professional shopper. When you have 6 kids, you learn to shop economically. Additionally, living up north it's often too hot to speedwalk outside without getting sweaty or it's far too cold. Thus, I go to malls regularly and I walk. Usually 2 laps of an entire mall, plus anchor stores is what I shoot for, then I get what I gotta get and go.
Ask me about deals. I know deals.
Lane Bryant is a plus-sized store. So is Torrid. Of course Macy's, JCPenney etc have plus-sized sections. Let me break these stores down for you from all of the many malls over many states I have lived in/worked in and go regularly. The average person goes to the mall at Christmastime. I go more in a year than they go in an entire lifetime.
Lane Bryant: I do not know how this store stays in business. Or Motherhood Maternity or Laura Petites and a lot of other specialty stores. Lane Bryant, no matter where I go or how fat the local populace is? Dead, dead, dead, dead. Here is a store full of 14+ fashion, some of it pretty cute IMO. Why is no one shopping there? Charlotte Russe, Wet Seal, etc are all always busy. She can claim fatties are bursting with money to spend on clothing, but I don't see it. You know where I see the fat people at the mall? The food court.
Torrid: Hot Topic is not doing well. Most places I go, Hot Topic is rather dead from it's heyday. Young "cool" kids are buying their crap by thrifting, not paying full retail at HT. Still they do have some specific things. Torrid is basically Fat Topic and I have no idea how this store is in business. There is literally never anyone in that store whenever I go by there. If Hot Topic is hurting, Torrid is terminally ill.
The next stores you judge by their clearance.
Marshalls/TJMaxx: The way these stores work is that they get regular shipments and clearance out stuff to make room. A lot get new stuff on Tuesday, the one in Bellingham, WA gets new items daily because it's so hot. Plus sizes make up a fraction of the store. Let's say plus makes up 4 out of 80 racks of clothing. The clearance is where old items get moved. The plus clearance is as big is the new arrivals. Meaning no one is buying it. The TJMaxx nearest me has more rounders of plus clearance than plus new arrivals. My wife wears S/M/L depending on the garment and cut and is a 7/9 and her sizes are always gone. They have gobs of 00, 0, 1, 11, 13 and 15+
Macys: This is the same story. The Womens section always has the most clearance. It's generally segregated into brands/mini stores. Macys has a lot of clearance, some stores more than others. When I'm looking for my wife, I only ever look in Juniors for her. Looking in the other departments is a constant waste because only the largest sizes are left. And the "old lady clothes" are already larger sizes to begin with.
JCP: Yet another store that is aggressive in clearancing things out. The one closest to me doesn't even have a Juniors clearance. Dresses and suits are always 11+, 1X, etc. Like TJMaxx, they never have a 36D/34DD for my wife on clearance, but they have plenty of 38A, 40D, 42B, etc. The clearance racks are always huge. Size S or M panties? Never.
Kohls: They discount in stages, 60%, 80% and final clearance which is 80% and sometimes more. The Juniors at the one nearest me is huge, but again all of the sizes are huge. Anything in cute, like Abbey Dawn or Candies is sold out in everything except 0, 00 and 11. Same goes with the bras. Their largest clearance section is the plus-sized old lady stuff and then the contemporary stuff.
I frankly don't think these people buy clothes, I think they like the idea they could buy clothes and/or are looking for something to complain about. I shop for my wife and daughter. I've worked retail. I can understand inventory pretty quickly and remember it from trip to trip.
I don't see fat people shopping, I don't see them buying/trying clothes for them, I don't see their garments being sold. Instead I see the most common sizes on display with the majority frequency and I see them being sold though quickly and easily.
I wear a 2XL or 3XL shirt, depending on cut. I always find them. I need 34" pants. I never find them. It's the same for men. Plenty of fat sizes and super skinny sizes, like 28x30 or 40x30.
tl;dr - if fat people bought clothes, someone would make money selling to them.
| fatlogic | t5_2wyxm | cmbdeqx | smacksaw story time:
I am...basically a professional shopper. When you have 6 kids, you learn to shop economically. Additionally, living up north it's often too hot to speedwalk outside without getting sweaty or it's far too cold. Thus, I go to malls regularly and I walk. Usually 2 laps of an entire mall, plus anchor stores is what I shoot for, then I get what I gotta get and go.
Ask me about deals. I know deals.
Lane Bryant is a plus-sized store. So is Torrid. Of course Macy's, JCPenney etc have plus-sized sections. Let me break these stores down for you from all of the many malls over many states I have lived in/worked in and go regularly. The average person goes to the mall at Christmastime. I go more in a year than they go in an entire lifetime.
Lane Bryant: I do not know how this store stays in business. Or Motherhood Maternity or Laura Petites and a lot of other specialty stores. Lane Bryant, no matter where I go or how fat the local populace is? Dead, dead, dead, dead. Here is a store full of 14+ fashion, some of it pretty cute IMO. Why is no one shopping there? Charlotte Russe, Wet Seal, etc are all always busy. She can claim fatties are bursting with money to spend on clothing, but I don't see it. You know where I see the fat people at the mall? The food court.
Torrid: Hot Topic is not doing well. Most places I go, Hot Topic is rather dead from it's heyday. Young "cool" kids are buying their crap by thrifting, not paying full retail at HT. Still they do have some specific things. Torrid is basically Fat Topic and I have no idea how this store is in business. There is literally never anyone in that store whenever I go by there. If Hot Topic is hurting, Torrid is terminally ill.
The next stores you judge by their clearance.
Marshalls/TJMaxx: The way these stores work is that they get regular shipments and clearance out stuff to make room. A lot get new stuff on Tuesday, the one in Bellingham, WA gets new items daily because it's so hot. Plus sizes make up a fraction of the store. Let's say plus makes up 4 out of 80 racks of clothing. The clearance is where old items get moved. The plus clearance is as big is the new arrivals. Meaning no one is buying it. The TJMaxx nearest me has more rounders of plus clearance than plus new arrivals. My wife wears S/M/L depending on the garment and cut and is a 7/9 and her sizes are always gone. They have gobs of 00, 0, 1, 11, 13 and 15+
Macys: This is the same story. The Womens section always has the most clearance. It's generally segregated into brands/mini stores. Macys has a lot of clearance, some stores more than others. When I'm looking for my wife, I only ever look in Juniors for her. Looking in the other departments is a constant waste because only the largest sizes are left. And the "old lady clothes" are already larger sizes to begin with.
JCP: Yet another store that is aggressive in clearancing things out. The one closest to me doesn't even have a Juniors clearance. Dresses and suits are always 11+, 1X, etc. Like TJMaxx, they never have a 36D/34DD for my wife on clearance, but they have plenty of 38A, 40D, 42B, etc. The clearance racks are always huge. Size S or M panties? Never.
Kohls: They discount in stages, 60%, 80% and final clearance which is 80% and sometimes more. The Juniors at the one nearest me is huge, but again all of the sizes are huge. Anything in cute, like Abbey Dawn or Candies is sold out in everything except 0, 00 and 11. Same goes with the bras. Their largest clearance section is the plus-sized old lady stuff and then the contemporary stuff.
I frankly don't think these people buy clothes, I think they like the idea they could buy clothes and/or are looking for something to complain about. I shop for my wife and daughter. I've worked retail. I can understand inventory pretty quickly and remember it from trip to trip.
I don't see fat people shopping, I don't see them buying/trying clothes for them, I don't see their garments being sold. Instead I see the most common sizes on display with the majority frequency and I see them being sold though quickly and easily.
I wear a 2XL or 3XL shirt, depending on cut. I always find them. I need 34" pants. I never find them. It's the same for men. Plenty of fat sizes and super skinny sizes, like 28x30 or 40x30. | if fat people bought clothes, someone would make money selling to them. |
d1rt_squirrel | I've been using mine for destiny and CoD and have zero regrets. I have 4 paddles, trigger stops, domed mid length domed sticks, emr remap function and no rumbles. I also got the scuf pro grip.
Getting used to paddle placement is crucial, but the emr function makes it easy to do. With it you can change your button configuration based on preference or by game. This makes getting used to the side the paddle is on a non-issue.
The triggers stops work well, but you may need to adjust them. They come ready for CoD, but i tightened them up a bit and they are straight baller now lol. It makes burst and semi-auto weapons more of a viable option in any setting. Believe it or not, the knuckles in my index fingers don't cramp or ache after long play sessions.
The domed and taller sticks are more popular on the competitive scene because your thumb sits on top of the stick rather than the out edge. It gives you more control for movements and lessens the stress on the stem for the analog stick(s). The short and tall sticks just depend on the height that some prefer, I would assume due to hand size.
No rumbles I'm still not sure about. I don't care much for fps as the rumble tanks your precision when aiming. I will say that the lighter controller is awesome tho.
Wired controllers are good if there is no risk of someone coming through and mangling your set up, so I opted for the Turtle Beach 500x. I figured I dropped $250 on a controller, might as well go balls deep. I find I only lose an hour of charge with a normal headset plugged in, but no rumbles will help with battery life.
If you're serious about getting better, pro or otherwise, scuf makes awesome stuff. I can play all night without discomfort, and that was my main focus. The grip isn't necessary but makes a big difference because my hands don't sweat. You grip the controller harder with sweaty hands, so it's just an added bonus.
Sorry to be long-winded, but it's not something that can be explained in a few sentences.
TL;DR Scuf is worth the money, just make sure you have tested one out first. They have a return policy, but as much as any other online purchase returns can be a pain in the ass. I hope i helped you, one way or the other.
Add me up if you wanna play sometime. GT is d1rt squirrel, same as my flair.
Cheers!
*Edit* My piss poor spelling, and I realized you said it's hard to get your hands on one to test. | I've been using mine for destiny and CoD and have zero regrets. I have 4 paddles, trigger stops, domed mid length domed sticks, emr remap function and no rumbles. I also got the scuf pro grip.
Getting used to paddle placement is crucial, but the emr function makes it easy to do. With it you can change your button configuration based on preference or by game. This makes getting used to the side the paddle is on a non-issue.
The triggers stops work well, but you may need to adjust them. They come ready for CoD, but i tightened them up a bit and they are straight baller now lol. It makes burst and semi-auto weapons more of a viable option in any setting. Believe it or not, the knuckles in my index fingers don't cramp or ache after long play sessions.
The domed and taller sticks are more popular on the competitive scene because your thumb sits on top of the stick rather than the out edge. It gives you more control for movements and lessens the stress on the stem for the analog stick(s). The short and tall sticks just depend on the height that some prefer, I would assume due to hand size.
No rumbles I'm still not sure about. I don't care much for fps as the rumble tanks your precision when aiming. I will say that the lighter controller is awesome tho.
Wired controllers are good if there is no risk of someone coming through and mangling your set up, so I opted for the Turtle Beach 500x. I figured I dropped $250 on a controller, might as well go balls deep. I find I only lose an hour of charge with a normal headset plugged in, but no rumbles will help with battery life.
If you're serious about getting better, pro or otherwise, scuf makes awesome stuff. I can play all night without discomfort, and that was my main focus. The grip isn't necessary but makes a big difference because my hands don't sweat. You grip the controller harder with sweaty hands, so it's just an added bonus.
Sorry to be long-winded, but it's not something that can be explained in a few sentences.
TL;DR Scuf is worth the money, just make sure you have tested one out first. They have a return policy, but as much as any other online purchase returns can be a pain in the ass. I hope i helped you, one way or the other.
Add me up if you wanna play sometime. GT is d1rt squirrel, same as my flair.
Cheers!
Edit My piss poor spelling, and I realized you said it's hard to get your hands on one to test.
| xboxone | t5_2xbci | cmb4urh | I've been using mine for destiny and CoD and have zero regrets. I have 4 paddles, trigger stops, domed mid length domed sticks, emr remap function and no rumbles. I also got the scuf pro grip.
Getting used to paddle placement is crucial, but the emr function makes it easy to do. With it you can change your button configuration based on preference or by game. This makes getting used to the side the paddle is on a non-issue.
The triggers stops work well, but you may need to adjust them. They come ready for CoD, but i tightened them up a bit and they are straight baller now lol. It makes burst and semi-auto weapons more of a viable option in any setting. Believe it or not, the knuckles in my index fingers don't cramp or ache after long play sessions.
The domed and taller sticks are more popular on the competitive scene because your thumb sits on top of the stick rather than the out edge. It gives you more control for movements and lessens the stress on the stem for the analog stick(s). The short and tall sticks just depend on the height that some prefer, I would assume due to hand size.
No rumbles I'm still not sure about. I don't care much for fps as the rumble tanks your precision when aiming. I will say that the lighter controller is awesome tho.
Wired controllers are good if there is no risk of someone coming through and mangling your set up, so I opted for the Turtle Beach 500x. I figured I dropped $250 on a controller, might as well go balls deep. I find I only lose an hour of charge with a normal headset plugged in, but no rumbles will help with battery life.
If you're serious about getting better, pro or otherwise, scuf makes awesome stuff. I can play all night without discomfort, and that was my main focus. The grip isn't necessary but makes a big difference because my hands don't sweat. You grip the controller harder with sweaty hands, so it's just an added bonus.
Sorry to be long-winded, but it's not something that can be explained in a few sentences. | Scuf is worth the money, just make sure you have tested one out first. They have a return policy, but as much as any other online purchase returns can be a pain in the ass. I hope i helped you, one way or the other.
Add me up if you wanna play sometime. GT is d1rt squirrel, same as my flair.
Cheers!
Edit My piss poor spelling, and I realized you said it's hard to get your hands on one to test. |
Death_Star_ | Using "they" as a gender-neutral personal pronoun is still technically incorrect and improper.
"He or she" is the correct way to address a person of yet-undisclosed gender.
Perpetuating "they" as a singular personal pronoun is like people using "literally" so much that it's starting to ironically become the opposite meaning ("figuratively," in a hyperbolic way).
I think Oxford's Dictionary has been considering adding a definition to "literally" to mean something along the lines of "an exaggeration of the term 'figuratively.'" Obviously, we don't want that to happen. I can't think of a synonym for "literally," so if that word gets redefined into "figuratively," then I wouldn't know how to substitute any words for "literally."
**Edit/TL;DR** -- Using "they" as a singular personal pronoun is no better than using "literally" when you mean "figuratively" -- so let's avoid both usages, especially since there really isn't a synonym/substitute for "literally." | Using "they" as a gender-neutral personal pronoun is still technically incorrect and improper.
"He or she" is the correct way to address a person of yet-undisclosed gender.
Perpetuating "they" as a singular personal pronoun is like people using "literally" so much that it's starting to ironically become the opposite meaning ("figuratively," in a hyperbolic way).
I think Oxford's Dictionary has been considering adding a definition to "literally" to mean something along the lines of "an exaggeration of the term 'figuratively.'" Obviously, we don't want that to happen. I can't think of a synonym for "literally," so if that word gets redefined into "figuratively," then I wouldn't know how to substitute any words for "literally."
Edit/TL;DR -- Using "they" as a singular personal pronoun is no better than using "literally" when you mean "figuratively" -- so let's avoid both usages, especially since there really isn't a synonym/substitute for "literally."
| bestof | t5_2qh3v | cmbgwyk | Using "they" as a gender-neutral personal pronoun is still technically incorrect and improper.
"He or she" is the correct way to address a person of yet-undisclosed gender.
Perpetuating "they" as a singular personal pronoun is like people using "literally" so much that it's starting to ironically become the opposite meaning ("figuratively," in a hyperbolic way).
I think Oxford's Dictionary has been considering adding a definition to "literally" to mean something along the lines of "an exaggeration of the term 'figuratively.'" Obviously, we don't want that to happen. I can't think of a synonym for "literally," so if that word gets redefined into "figuratively," then I wouldn't know how to substitute any words for "literally."
Edit/ | Using "they" as a singular personal pronoun is no better than using "literally" when you mean "figuratively" -- so let's avoid both usages, especially since there really isn't a synonym/substitute for "literally." |
KoalaExpress | Plus one of the TDs was complete garbage time and would not have happened if our retard D-lineman didn't commit a rather flagrant helmet to helmet on the FG try.
Detroit was doing fuck all out there to stop NE after the first two drives. Vereen actually looked a bit better at times.
In the end, this guy has it. The TL;DR for NE RBs is usually 'play at your own risk at all times'. | Plus one of the TDs was complete garbage time and would not have happened if our retard D-lineman didn't commit a rather flagrant helmet to helmet on the FG try.
Detroit was doing fuck all out there to stop NE after the first two drives. Vereen actually looked a bit better at times.
In the end, this guy has it. The TL;DR for NE RBs is usually 'play at your own risk at all times'.
| fantasyfootball | t5_2qlqq | cmbodh5 | Plus one of the TDs was complete garbage time and would not have happened if our retard D-lineman didn't commit a rather flagrant helmet to helmet on the FG try.
Detroit was doing fuck all out there to stop NE after the first two drives. Vereen actually looked a bit better at times.
In the end, this guy has it. The | for NE RBs is usually 'play at your own risk at all times'. |
buzzr309 | > But Belicheck doesn't forget. He feeds whoever is winning games and if Blount keeps in his good graces like he did last year Belicheck will use him.
You clearly aren't a Patriots fan, or don't watch a lot of Pats games. This couldn't be further from the truth. BB couldn't care less about a "hot hand" approach. He gameplans every week for the opponent. If he thinks a defense has a good front and a weak secondary, he'll have Brady throw 50+ times (See: denver). If it's a good secondary and a weak front, he'll run 40+ times (See: Indianapolis).
tl/dr: don't trust Pats players in fantasy. They are all high variance plays. Always. | > But Belicheck doesn't forget. He feeds whoever is winning games and if Blount keeps in his good graces like he did last year Belicheck will use him.
You clearly aren't a Patriots fan, or don't watch a lot of Pats games. This couldn't be further from the truth. BB couldn't care less about a "hot hand" approach. He gameplans every week for the opponent. If he thinks a defense has a good front and a weak secondary, he'll have Brady throw 50+ times (See: denver). If it's a good secondary and a weak front, he'll run 40+ times (See: Indianapolis).
tl/dr: don't trust Pats players in fantasy. They are all high variance plays. Always.
| fantasyfootball | t5_2qlqq | cmbolhs | But Belicheck doesn't forget. He feeds whoever is winning games and if Blount keeps in his good graces like he did last year Belicheck will use him.
You clearly aren't a Patriots fan, or don't watch a lot of Pats games. This couldn't be further from the truth. BB couldn't care less about a "hot hand" approach. He gameplans every week for the opponent. If he thinks a defense has a good front and a weak secondary, he'll have Brady throw 50+ times (See: denver). If it's a good secondary and a weak front, he'll run 40+ times (See: Indianapolis). | don't trust Pats players in fantasy. They are all high variance plays. Always. |
AK4Real | Ill try to answer your questions since I went to AX in 2013 and i followed all the events that were going on this past years AX.
* Day 0 is pretty important. AX lines for any event is long as fuck. Im not even exaggerating. Get your badge on Day 0 and get there as early as possible. For next year apparently, [they released a statement about the line problem.]( They stated that they want to reduced lines to 90mins long or less and registration will be open longer. This past year they had trouble with there machines and had to keep registration open as late as 12am.
* These badges go out REALLY quick. I personally think they're worth it because as i said before, lines are a bitch in general for all events. The perks are pretty nice with the addition next year! I hope they have a ball pit! If you can get your hands on one, you're lucky.
* the studio panels arnt so bad but they kinda sorta fill up. The Production IG panel is underrated in my opinion. I went to Johnny Young Bosch's panel it filled up REALLY QUICK and not everyone got in because of this. So to really answer your question, depends on the popularity of the panel.
* The people i met that did purchase the Premier pass were happy. They only thing people are sour about this year is getting their discount for next years badge.
TL;DR Answer: yup.
Questions, comments, or concerns are welcome! :D | Ill try to answer your questions since I went to AX in 2013 and i followed all the events that were going on this past years AX.
Day 0 is pretty important. AX lines for any event is long as fuck. Im not even exaggerating. Get your badge on Day 0 and get there as early as possible. For next year apparently, [they released a statement about the line problem.]( They stated that they want to reduced lines to 90mins long or less and registration will be open longer. This past year they had trouble with there machines and had to keep registration open as late as 12am.
These badges go out REALLY quick. I personally think they're worth it because as i said before, lines are a bitch in general for all events. The perks are pretty nice with the addition next year! I hope they have a ball pit! If you can get your hands on one, you're lucky.
the studio panels arnt so bad but they kinda sorta fill up. The Production IG panel is underrated in my opinion. I went to Johnny Young Bosch's panel it filled up REALLY QUICK and not everyone got in because of this. So to really answer your question, depends on the popularity of the panel.
The people i met that did purchase the Premier pass were happy. They only thing people are sour about this year is getting their discount for next years badge.
TL;DR Answer: yup.
Questions, comments, or concerns are welcome! :D
| anime | t5_2qh22 | cmbg1kb | Ill try to answer your questions since I went to AX in 2013 and i followed all the events that were going on this past years AX.
Day 0 is pretty important. AX lines for any event is long as fuck. Im not even exaggerating. Get your badge on Day 0 and get there as early as possible. For next year apparently, [they released a statement about the line problem.]( They stated that they want to reduced lines to 90mins long or less and registration will be open longer. This past year they had trouble with there machines and had to keep registration open as late as 12am.
These badges go out REALLY quick. I personally think they're worth it because as i said before, lines are a bitch in general for all events. The perks are pretty nice with the addition next year! I hope they have a ball pit! If you can get your hands on one, you're lucky.
the studio panels arnt so bad but they kinda sorta fill up. The Production IG panel is underrated in my opinion. I went to Johnny Young Bosch's panel it filled up REALLY QUICK and not everyone got in because of this. So to really answer your question, depends on the popularity of the panel.
The people i met that did purchase the Premier pass were happy. They only thing people are sour about this year is getting their discount for next years badge. | Answer: yup.
Questions, comments, or concerns are welcome! :D |
BlueDo | *Armor, armor, and armor*.
I see Aui_2000 as a high authority on itemization on heroes. Both he and EternalEnvy are very serious about item efficiency. I know that EE has a tendency to build wrong items and being unable to change up his item builds to the situation, but he definitely knows what he's doing when thinking outside the game.
With that said, a very common theme among efficiency theory-crafting nerds, or at least among these two, is that they rate armor very highly. **Armor is one very important aspect of the game that is often ignored by most players.**
When most people hear the term "tanking up," they automatically think about building Heart of Tarrasque. This is a huge mistake. Heart costs 5500, and has a very awkward buildup. People fail to think of alternative tank items such as Assault Cuirass, Shiva's Guard, Butterfly, Satanic, and other cheaper items. All of the above have easier transitioning components, except for Butterfly.
It may not be intuitive, but resistance is a lot better than it initially seems. While armor does not reduce magic damage, there are other aspects that synergize with it. For example, your teammate's Mekansm, Urn of Shadows, Salves, and Tangoes are much more effective. The most practical benefit is that it allows you to tower-dive without being so easily return-killed. Also you don't waste as much regen after an engagement.
Often overlooked armor builds that EE and Aui incorporate include:
* [**The EE Doom**]( - Doom already has a huge STR gain, and has good regen in the form of Scorched Earth. Armor is the only thing he's missing. Frost Ogre is an often overlooked creep that Doom can use. 8 armor, especially in the early game, is no joke.
* Double **Ring of Protection** - With the recent buff, this is a very good starting item. It transitions well into the early game until you run out of slots.
* **Tranquil Boots** - Some of you might be thinking, "well of course, it's good on supports." It's Aui's go to item on Death Prophet. I'm of the same mind in favoring it over Phase Boots. Unless you go for Mekansm or a casual Platemail, Tranquil is the easiest way to incorporate armor into your build. It's honestly an underrated item on non-supports as well. Don't be afraid to build it on an offlaner such as Undying or Bristleback.
* **Vladimir's Offering** - Just because you're a ranged support, don't be afraid to get it. 5 armor for your whole team is great, and it costs less than half of Assault Cuirass.
Anyways, I hope this post helps you self-reflect on the little intricacies of your build. Change up your starting item builds and see how much of a difference it makes for you.
**TL;DR - Get Armor** | Armor, armor, and armor .
I see Aui_2000 as a high authority on itemization on heroes. Both he and EternalEnvy are very serious about item efficiency. I know that EE has a tendency to build wrong items and being unable to change up his item builds to the situation, but he definitely knows what he's doing when thinking outside the game.
With that said, a very common theme among efficiency theory-crafting nerds, or at least among these two, is that they rate armor very highly. Armor is one very important aspect of the game that is often ignored by most players.
When most people hear the term "tanking up," they automatically think about building Heart of Tarrasque. This is a huge mistake. Heart costs 5500, and has a very awkward buildup. People fail to think of alternative tank items such as Assault Cuirass, Shiva's Guard, Butterfly, Satanic, and other cheaper items. All of the above have easier transitioning components, except for Butterfly.
It may not be intuitive, but resistance is a lot better than it initially seems. While armor does not reduce magic damage, there are other aspects that synergize with it. For example, your teammate's Mekansm, Urn of Shadows, Salves, and Tangoes are much more effective. The most practical benefit is that it allows you to tower-dive without being so easily return-killed. Also you don't waste as much regen after an engagement.
Often overlooked armor builds that EE and Aui incorporate include:
[ The EE Doom ]( - Doom already has a huge STR gain, and has good regen in the form of Scorched Earth. Armor is the only thing he's missing. Frost Ogre is an often overlooked creep that Doom can use. 8 armor, especially in the early game, is no joke.
Double Ring of Protection - With the recent buff, this is a very good starting item. It transitions well into the early game until you run out of slots.
Tranquil Boots - Some of you might be thinking, "well of course, it's good on supports." It's Aui's go to item on Death Prophet. I'm of the same mind in favoring it over Phase Boots. Unless you go for Mekansm or a casual Platemail, Tranquil is the easiest way to incorporate armor into your build. It's honestly an underrated item on non-supports as well. Don't be afraid to build it on an offlaner such as Undying or Bristleback.
Vladimir's Offering - Just because you're a ranged support, don't be afraid to get it. 5 armor for your whole team is great, and it costs less than half of Assault Cuirass.
Anyways, I hope this post helps you self-reflect on the little intricacies of your build. Change up your starting item builds and see how much of a difference it makes for you.
TL;DR - Get Armor
| learndota2 | t5_2tta4 | cmbqg54 | Armor, armor, and armor .
I see Aui_2000 as a high authority on itemization on heroes. Both he and EternalEnvy are very serious about item efficiency. I know that EE has a tendency to build wrong items and being unable to change up his item builds to the situation, but he definitely knows what he's doing when thinking outside the game.
With that said, a very common theme among efficiency theory-crafting nerds, or at least among these two, is that they rate armor very highly. Armor is one very important aspect of the game that is often ignored by most players.
When most people hear the term "tanking up," they automatically think about building Heart of Tarrasque. This is a huge mistake. Heart costs 5500, and has a very awkward buildup. People fail to think of alternative tank items such as Assault Cuirass, Shiva's Guard, Butterfly, Satanic, and other cheaper items. All of the above have easier transitioning components, except for Butterfly.
It may not be intuitive, but resistance is a lot better than it initially seems. While armor does not reduce magic damage, there are other aspects that synergize with it. For example, your teammate's Mekansm, Urn of Shadows, Salves, and Tangoes are much more effective. The most practical benefit is that it allows you to tower-dive without being so easily return-killed. Also you don't waste as much regen after an engagement.
Often overlooked armor builds that EE and Aui incorporate include:
[ The EE Doom ]( - Doom already has a huge STR gain, and has good regen in the form of Scorched Earth. Armor is the only thing he's missing. Frost Ogre is an often overlooked creep that Doom can use. 8 armor, especially in the early game, is no joke.
Double Ring of Protection - With the recent buff, this is a very good starting item. It transitions well into the early game until you run out of slots.
Tranquil Boots - Some of you might be thinking, "well of course, it's good on supports." It's Aui's go to item on Death Prophet. I'm of the same mind in favoring it over Phase Boots. Unless you go for Mekansm or a casual Platemail, Tranquil is the easiest way to incorporate armor into your build. It's honestly an underrated item on non-supports as well. Don't be afraid to build it on an offlaner such as Undying or Bristleback.
Vladimir's Offering - Just because you're a ranged support, don't be afraid to get it. 5 armor for your whole team is great, and it costs less than half of Assault Cuirass.
Anyways, I hope this post helps you self-reflect on the little intricacies of your build. Change up your starting item builds and see how much of a difference it makes for you. | Get Armor |
ElContador67 | Can't say I agree, profitability is important.
With the power structure in this country, our best chance for sustainable growth is to get private capital interested. To do that we need green energy investments to have a positive return- not just to society or the economy as a whole, but also to the financial source.
Our country's massive, government-influencing private sector only has so much interest in good deeds; to get it to do real work on environmental issues we need to prove (through lucrative government projects, sustainable business tax cuts, etc.) that doing so is good for its wallet.
Edit: TLDR- Return ratio is important for proof-of-concept reasons | Can't say I agree, profitability is important.
With the power structure in this country, our best chance for sustainable growth is to get private capital interested. To do that we need green energy investments to have a positive return- not just to society or the economy as a whole, but also to the financial source.
Our country's massive, government-influencing private sector only has so much interest in good deeds; to get it to do real work on environmental issues we need to prove (through lucrative government projects, sustainable business tax cuts, etc.) that doing so is good for its wallet.
Edit: TLDR- Return ratio is important for proof-of-concept reasons
| environment | t5_2qh1n | cmbrn7g | Can't say I agree, profitability is important.
With the power structure in this country, our best chance for sustainable growth is to get private capital interested. To do that we need green energy investments to have a positive return- not just to society or the economy as a whole, but also to the financial source.
Our country's massive, government-influencing private sector only has so much interest in good deeds; to get it to do real work on environmental issues we need to prove (through lucrative government projects, sustainable business tax cuts, etc.) that doing so is good for its wallet.
Edit: | Return ratio is important for proof-of-concept reasons |
Titicaca23 | So I checked some dictionary definitions of “terrorism” and they are not bad but still too open to interpretation IMO.
I think the Ottawa shooting was 100% an act of terrorism because I’ve been using my own more specific (yet probably still imperfect) definition for some time since this debate has actually arisen many times in the last decade.
Let me know what you think. An act of terrorism is one that meets the following 3 criteria:
(1) An act intended to cause physical harm,
(2) An act outside of a military operation,
(3) An act whose primary objective is to communicate a message.
These criteria are all met by the Ottawa shooting. Importantly, note that the mental health of the individual has no bearing. This fact is only important to the defense of the perpetrator and not on the acknowledgement of the act itself.
And now about the mental illness talking point.... I have much to say about this but I will try and be as brief as I can.
(1) Both the Ottawa shooter and the Quebec driver where actually deemed to be mentally fit for release into society by trained professionals (judges, police officers, social workers, etc.). These individuals were 100% functional taxpaying citizens. Their past drug use and voluntary social withdrawal are not enough to brush off their actions. They demonstrated excessive planning, patience, anticipation of events and other people’s behaviors and many other highly sophisticated cognitive faculties. In fact, leading to their actions, they probably had to overcome an unusual amount of anxiety to follow through with their first act of murder. This demonstrates, if anything, an above average command of one’s affect and emotions.
(2) As seen in the definition I proposed, mental illness and acts of terrorism are not mutually exclusive. Are we to be surprised that the most vulnerable segments of our population (low income, under educated, marginalized, mentally ill, etc.) will be overrepresented in any exploitative recruiting cause (gangs, cults, terrorists, etc.)? Yet if these more vulnerable Canadian citizens were to be swept up by drug cartels and we would see an increase in gang violence, would we not have a gang problem? If more and more families were loosing their kids to an obscure religion that encourages severing past social ties, would we not have a cult problem? Then doesn’t it follow that if these vulnerable Canadians are today killing in the name of jihad that we now have a terrorist problem? It is the recruiting force that is the issue, not the recruitee. Today, Canada has enemy groups overseas that are actively recruiting and/or instructing their supporters to commit lone wolf acts of terrorism to show their support for jihad. Both the Ottawa shooter and the Quebec driver are demonstratively direct responses to that calling.
(3) I suspect that the mental illness defense really stems from people’s fear of how our government will react. Canadians are rightfully aware that increasing police powers and introducing questionable legislation will fray at our rights and freedoms and may lead to abuses of power. I think this is a legitimate concern. However, denying that these were acts of terrorism is not the answer. Discussing what should be done (or if anything should be done) is where the conversation needs to be. I am encouraged by the topmost upvoted comment (by u/vegiimite) that many of you see it this way. In a way, isn’t the fact that terrorist attacks have been reduced to lone wolf attacks with no guidance/planning/financial support mean that our existing laws are working to prevent terrorist plots? If all they can do is the occasional lone wolf attacks, have we not reduced their capabilities significantly?
Tl;dr: According to my own made-up definition, this was an act of terrorism and besides, mental illness and acts of terror are not mutually exclusive. We have been and should continue to address both these issues independently and not let their occasional overlap prevent meaningful discussions and progress.
| So I checked some dictionary definitions of “terrorism” and they are not bad but still too open to interpretation IMO.
I think the Ottawa shooting was 100% an act of terrorism because I’ve been using my own more specific (yet probably still imperfect) definition for some time since this debate has actually arisen many times in the last decade.
Let me know what you think. An act of terrorism is one that meets the following 3 criteria:
(1) An act intended to cause physical harm,
(2) An act outside of a military operation,
(3) An act whose primary objective is to communicate a message.
These criteria are all met by the Ottawa shooting. Importantly, note that the mental health of the individual has no bearing. This fact is only important to the defense of the perpetrator and not on the acknowledgement of the act itself.
And now about the mental illness talking point.... I have much to say about this but I will try and be as brief as I can.
(1) Both the Ottawa shooter and the Quebec driver where actually deemed to be mentally fit for release into society by trained professionals (judges, police officers, social workers, etc.). These individuals were 100% functional taxpaying citizens. Their past drug use and voluntary social withdrawal are not enough to brush off their actions. They demonstrated excessive planning, patience, anticipation of events and other people’s behaviors and many other highly sophisticated cognitive faculties. In fact, leading to their actions, they probably had to overcome an unusual amount of anxiety to follow through with their first act of murder. This demonstrates, if anything, an above average command of one’s affect and emotions.
(2) As seen in the definition I proposed, mental illness and acts of terrorism are not mutually exclusive. Are we to be surprised that the most vulnerable segments of our population (low income, under educated, marginalized, mentally ill, etc.) will be overrepresented in any exploitative recruiting cause (gangs, cults, terrorists, etc.)? Yet if these more vulnerable Canadian citizens were to be swept up by drug cartels and we would see an increase in gang violence, would we not have a gang problem? If more and more families were loosing their kids to an obscure religion that encourages severing past social ties, would we not have a cult problem? Then doesn’t it follow that if these vulnerable Canadians are today killing in the name of jihad that we now have a terrorist problem? It is the recruiting force that is the issue, not the recruitee. Today, Canada has enemy groups overseas that are actively recruiting and/or instructing their supporters to commit lone wolf acts of terrorism to show their support for jihad. Both the Ottawa shooter and the Quebec driver are demonstratively direct responses to that calling.
(3) I suspect that the mental illness defense really stems from people’s fear of how our government will react. Canadians are rightfully aware that increasing police powers and introducing questionable legislation will fray at our rights and freedoms and may lead to abuses of power. I think this is a legitimate concern. However, denying that these were acts of terrorism is not the answer. Discussing what should be done (or if anything should be done) is where the conversation needs to be. I am encouraged by the topmost upvoted comment (by u/vegiimite) that many of you see it this way. In a way, isn’t the fact that terrorist attacks have been reduced to lone wolf attacks with no guidance/planning/financial support mean that our existing laws are working to prevent terrorist plots? If all they can do is the occasional lone wolf attacks, have we not reduced their capabilities significantly?
Tl;dr: According to my own made-up definition, this was an act of terrorism and besides, mental illness and acts of terror are not mutually exclusive. We have been and should continue to address both these issues independently and not let their occasional overlap prevent meaningful discussions and progress.
| canada | t5_2qh68 | cmcxfrm | So I checked some dictionary definitions of “terrorism” and they are not bad but still too open to interpretation IMO.
I think the Ottawa shooting was 100% an act of terrorism because I’ve been using my own more specific (yet probably still imperfect) definition for some time since this debate has actually arisen many times in the last decade.
Let me know what you think. An act of terrorism is one that meets the following 3 criteria:
(1) An act intended to cause physical harm,
(2) An act outside of a military operation,
(3) An act whose primary objective is to communicate a message.
These criteria are all met by the Ottawa shooting. Importantly, note that the mental health of the individual has no bearing. This fact is only important to the defense of the perpetrator and not on the acknowledgement of the act itself.
And now about the mental illness talking point.... I have much to say about this but I will try and be as brief as I can.
(1) Both the Ottawa shooter and the Quebec driver where actually deemed to be mentally fit for release into society by trained professionals (judges, police officers, social workers, etc.). These individuals were 100% functional taxpaying citizens. Their past drug use and voluntary social withdrawal are not enough to brush off their actions. They demonstrated excessive planning, patience, anticipation of events and other people’s behaviors and many other highly sophisticated cognitive faculties. In fact, leading to their actions, they probably had to overcome an unusual amount of anxiety to follow through with their first act of murder. This demonstrates, if anything, an above average command of one’s affect and emotions.
(2) As seen in the definition I proposed, mental illness and acts of terrorism are not mutually exclusive. Are we to be surprised that the most vulnerable segments of our population (low income, under educated, marginalized, mentally ill, etc.) will be overrepresented in any exploitative recruiting cause (gangs, cults, terrorists, etc.)? Yet if these more vulnerable Canadian citizens were to be swept up by drug cartels and we would see an increase in gang violence, would we not have a gang problem? If more and more families were loosing their kids to an obscure religion that encourages severing past social ties, would we not have a cult problem? Then doesn’t it follow that if these vulnerable Canadians are today killing in the name of jihad that we now have a terrorist problem? It is the recruiting force that is the issue, not the recruitee. Today, Canada has enemy groups overseas that are actively recruiting and/or instructing their supporters to commit lone wolf acts of terrorism to show their support for jihad. Both the Ottawa shooter and the Quebec driver are demonstratively direct responses to that calling.
(3) I suspect that the mental illness defense really stems from people’s fear of how our government will react. Canadians are rightfully aware that increasing police powers and introducing questionable legislation will fray at our rights and freedoms and may lead to abuses of power. I think this is a legitimate concern. However, denying that these were acts of terrorism is not the answer. Discussing what should be done (or if anything should be done) is where the conversation needs to be. I am encouraged by the topmost upvoted comment (by u/vegiimite) that many of you see it this way. In a way, isn’t the fact that terrorist attacks have been reduced to lone wolf attacks with no guidance/planning/financial support mean that our existing laws are working to prevent terrorist plots? If all they can do is the occasional lone wolf attacks, have we not reduced their capabilities significantly? | According to my own made-up definition, this was an act of terrorism and besides, mental illness and acts of terror are not mutually exclusive. We have been and should continue to address both these issues independently and not let their occasional overlap prevent meaningful discussions and progress. |
kobe21224 | It all started when I called my best friend(Joey) and she(Sharon) was on the phone. She told me that her boyfriend(the fourth guy in our friendship square: Steve) wasnt fulfilling her sexual desires. Me being the friend that i was told her that she should have sex with me and then go back with Steve to keep our group from breaking apart. Next day, they break up anyway and she still wants the sex. The whole day consisted of the most stealth flirting I've ever participated in. The four of us go to Joey's friend's house to play Call of duty. She says that shes tired and wants to sleep in the living room. I stay cause im a really good friend. The next 30 minutes was the most stressful time of my life. My friends are basically right outside the room playing video games.
TL;DR Lost virginty with my friends-ex while he was playing video games 10 feet away | It all started when I called my best friend(Joey) and she(Sharon) was on the phone. She told me that her boyfriend(the fourth guy in our friendship square: Steve) wasnt fulfilling her sexual desires. Me being the friend that i was told her that she should have sex with me and then go back with Steve to keep our group from breaking apart. Next day, they break up anyway and she still wants the sex. The whole day consisted of the most stealth flirting I've ever participated in. The four of us go to Joey's friend's house to play Call of duty. She says that shes tired and wants to sleep in the living room. I stay cause im a really good friend. The next 30 minutes was the most stressful time of my life. My friends are basically right outside the room playing video games.
TL;DR Lost virginty with my friends-ex while he was playing video games 10 feet away
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cmbth7i | It all started when I called my best friend(Joey) and she(Sharon) was on the phone. She told me that her boyfriend(the fourth guy in our friendship square: Steve) wasnt fulfilling her sexual desires. Me being the friend that i was told her that she should have sex with me and then go back with Steve to keep our group from breaking apart. Next day, they break up anyway and she still wants the sex. The whole day consisted of the most stealth flirting I've ever participated in. The four of us go to Joey's friend's house to play Call of duty. She says that shes tired and wants to sleep in the living room. I stay cause im a really good friend. The next 30 minutes was the most stressful time of my life. My friends are basically right outside the room playing video games. | Lost virginty with my friends-ex while he was playing video games 10 feet away |
jacarandaspoon | The chances of you being pregnant are pretty low. You had sex about 8 weeks ago. You then had one normal period and one light one. Your body only produces an egg once a month (and it should at all if you are on the pill) if the egg was fertilised you can have some implantation bleeding which can appear as a light period. However, given that you had a regular period then a light one it would be pretty hard to explain that by a pregnancy. There are a LOT of different factors than can cause lighter or heavier than normal periods and being stressed or worried is definitely one of them. As I understand it people that don't know that they are pregnant are generally overweight (as this can hide a bump) and/or people that don't get regular periods. If your periods are normally regular and the only thing that's different is that one was lighter than usual, I really don't think you have any reason to be concerned at all.
Seeing as you seem to be quite anxious about this I would recommend taking another pregnancy test (assuming that it's been a couple of days since the last one) and go see a doctor. They will probably give you a regular pregnancy test and then if for some reason you are still concerned they can do a blood test as well. tl:dr it seems highly unlikely that you are pregnant but go see a doctor if you can't stop worrying about it. | The chances of you being pregnant are pretty low. You had sex about 8 weeks ago. You then had one normal period and one light one. Your body only produces an egg once a month (and it should at all if you are on the pill) if the egg was fertilised you can have some implantation bleeding which can appear as a light period. However, given that you had a regular period then a light one it would be pretty hard to explain that by a pregnancy. There are a LOT of different factors than can cause lighter or heavier than normal periods and being stressed or worried is definitely one of them. As I understand it people that don't know that they are pregnant are generally overweight (as this can hide a bump) and/or people that don't get regular periods. If your periods are normally regular and the only thing that's different is that one was lighter than usual, I really don't think you have any reason to be concerned at all.
Seeing as you seem to be quite anxious about this I would recommend taking another pregnancy test (assuming that it's been a couple of days since the last one) and go see a doctor. They will probably give you a regular pregnancy test and then if for some reason you are still concerned they can do a blood test as well. tl:dr it seems highly unlikely that you are pregnant but go see a doctor if you can't stop worrying about it.
| TheGirlSurvivalGuide | t5_2vfzu | cmc2dms | The chances of you being pregnant are pretty low. You had sex about 8 weeks ago. You then had one normal period and one light one. Your body only produces an egg once a month (and it should at all if you are on the pill) if the egg was fertilised you can have some implantation bleeding which can appear as a light period. However, given that you had a regular period then a light one it would be pretty hard to explain that by a pregnancy. There are a LOT of different factors than can cause lighter or heavier than normal periods and being stressed or worried is definitely one of them. As I understand it people that don't know that they are pregnant are generally overweight (as this can hide a bump) and/or people that don't get regular periods. If your periods are normally regular and the only thing that's different is that one was lighter than usual, I really don't think you have any reason to be concerned at all.
Seeing as you seem to be quite anxious about this I would recommend taking another pregnancy test (assuming that it's been a couple of days since the last one) and go see a doctor. They will probably give you a regular pregnancy test and then if for some reason you are still concerned they can do a blood test as well. | it seems highly unlikely that you are pregnant but go see a doctor if you can't stop worrying about it. |
Poop_But | Not really about TWD story wise but related. Mad Men is a better show than the Walking Dead in every way you can compare. If you dont agree, you probably haven't paid attention to Mad Men. When you include Breaking Bad, that only makes The Walking Dead AMC's 3rd best show of recent history and a 3rd that struggles to keep up with AMC's better shows. At least until season 5 that is and that's pushing it.
Furthermore, AMC will have a HUGE branding problem in the coming years if they don't find a hit show that doesn't have fucking zombies in it. They are going to overexpose TWD because everything else they have is shit or has failed and it will be the downfall of the show.
TL/DR: Mad Men is better. | Not really about TWD story wise but related. Mad Men is a better show than the Walking Dead in every way you can compare. If you dont agree, you probably haven't paid attention to Mad Men. When you include Breaking Bad, that only makes The Walking Dead AMC's 3rd best show of recent history and a 3rd that struggles to keep up with AMC's better shows. At least until season 5 that is and that's pushing it.
Furthermore, AMC will have a HUGE branding problem in the coming years if they don't find a hit show that doesn't have fucking zombies in it. They are going to overexpose TWD because everything else they have is shit or has failed and it will be the downfall of the show.
TL/DR: Mad Men is better.
| thewalkingdead | t5_2rygv | cmcie12 | Not really about TWD story wise but related. Mad Men is a better show than the Walking Dead in every way you can compare. If you dont agree, you probably haven't paid attention to Mad Men. When you include Breaking Bad, that only makes The Walking Dead AMC's 3rd best show of recent history and a 3rd that struggles to keep up with AMC's better shows. At least until season 5 that is and that's pushing it.
Furthermore, AMC will have a HUGE branding problem in the coming years if they don't find a hit show that doesn't have fucking zombies in it. They are going to overexpose TWD because everything else they have is shit or has failed and it will be the downfall of the show. | Mad Men is better. |
dukeslver | The pacing is the biggest issue to me. What I love about other great dramas is that they fit so much into 50 minute episodes and are able to move the story along and develop characters at a rapid and consistent pace. The Walking Dead *sometimes* gets this right, but will then usually go a few weeks where they get distracted by other garbage and then tread water.
Just as a juxtaposition, if Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones had the Walking Dead's pacing, the plots and stories those shows have told would take 15 seasons to tell.
The Walking Dead is 4.5 seasons deep and if they simply wrote the story in a more rapid and condensed manner everything could *easily* fit into 3 seasons. For instance Seasons 1 and season 2 could have easily been condensed into 1 season.
**TL;DR**: PACING, this show stagnates... a lot. About 3 seasons worth of content has been dragged out into 4.5 seasons. | The pacing is the biggest issue to me. What I love about other great dramas is that they fit so much into 50 minute episodes and are able to move the story along and develop characters at a rapid and consistent pace. The Walking Dead sometimes gets this right, but will then usually go a few weeks where they get distracted by other garbage and then tread water.
Just as a juxtaposition, if Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones had the Walking Dead's pacing, the plots and stories those shows have told would take 15 seasons to tell.
The Walking Dead is 4.5 seasons deep and if they simply wrote the story in a more rapid and condensed manner everything could easily fit into 3 seasons. For instance Seasons 1 and season 2 could have easily been condensed into 1 season.
TL;DR : PACING, this show stagnates... a lot. About 3 seasons worth of content has been dragged out into 4.5 seasons.
| thewalkingdead | t5_2rygv | cmcptpq | The pacing is the biggest issue to me. What I love about other great dramas is that they fit so much into 50 minute episodes and are able to move the story along and develop characters at a rapid and consistent pace. The Walking Dead sometimes gets this right, but will then usually go a few weeks where they get distracted by other garbage and then tread water.
Just as a juxtaposition, if Breaking Bad or Game of Thrones had the Walking Dead's pacing, the plots and stories those shows have told would take 15 seasons to tell.
The Walking Dead is 4.5 seasons deep and if they simply wrote the story in a more rapid and condensed manner everything could easily fit into 3 seasons. For instance Seasons 1 and season 2 could have easily been condensed into 1 season. | PACING, this show stagnates... a lot. About 3 seasons worth of content has been dragged out into 4.5 seasons. |
Xenosphobatic | I enjoy my Ice Ferrets, although the prime does wear on me. Two C-ERLL (one per arm) and one ERML in the CT for one variant lets me engage from afar, and a three ERML, one C-LPL is a little closer engagement mech. The prime I fitted with a SRM6 in the LT, 2ML in the left arm, and I think a SRM4 in the right arm. Overall, the mech does not have the tonnage for mounting any significant amount of ballistic weaponry, but I do alright with the energy weapons, I think.
The Mist Lynx however....ugh. I really want to like it, but it just doesn't have the tonnage to do...anything. The JJ's are fun, but after someone shoots you twice, your arms fall off and you've nothing to shoot back. I've really yet to find a build I like, and the ECM arm is a fucking joke. No weapon mounts at all.
TL;DR: Ice Ferret - not so bad, Mist Lynx - Bleh. | I enjoy my Ice Ferrets, although the prime does wear on me. Two C-ERLL (one per arm) and one ERML in the CT for one variant lets me engage from afar, and a three ERML, one C-LPL is a little closer engagement mech. The prime I fitted with a SRM6 in the LT, 2ML in the left arm, and I think a SRM4 in the right arm. Overall, the mech does not have the tonnage for mounting any significant amount of ballistic weaponry, but I do alright with the energy weapons, I think.
The Mist Lynx however....ugh. I really want to like it, but it just doesn't have the tonnage to do...anything. The JJ's are fun, but after someone shoots you twice, your arms fall off and you've nothing to shoot back. I've really yet to find a build I like, and the ECM arm is a fucking joke. No weapon mounts at all.
TL;DR: Ice Ferret - not so bad, Mist Lynx - Bleh.
| OutreachHPG | t5_2zm77 | cmcv13f | I enjoy my Ice Ferrets, although the prime does wear on me. Two C-ERLL (one per arm) and one ERML in the CT for one variant lets me engage from afar, and a three ERML, one C-LPL is a little closer engagement mech. The prime I fitted with a SRM6 in the LT, 2ML in the left arm, and I think a SRM4 in the right arm. Overall, the mech does not have the tonnage for mounting any significant amount of ballistic weaponry, but I do alright with the energy weapons, I think.
The Mist Lynx however....ugh. I really want to like it, but it just doesn't have the tonnage to do...anything. The JJ's are fun, but after someone shoots you twice, your arms fall off and you've nothing to shoot back. I've really yet to find a build I like, and the ECM arm is a fucking joke. No weapon mounts at all. | Ice Ferret - not so bad, Mist Lynx - Bleh. |
darkdragon841 | Learn how to deal with the matchups in your lane. Utilize cost benifit analysis. Each champion has a certain damage output which can avoided with positioning. Learn it. In a lane, learn or feel out the trade outcomes. Has the enemy jayce used his shock blast? Is he in range of my Barrel? Will my damage be greater than my opponents? This knowledge comes with practice and learning all the champions. TL;DR learn the champions and have good situational cost benefit analysis. | Learn how to deal with the matchups in your lane. Utilize cost benifit analysis. Each champion has a certain damage output which can avoided with positioning. Learn it. In a lane, learn or feel out the trade outcomes. Has the enemy jayce used his shock blast? Is he in range of my Barrel? Will my damage be greater than my opponents? This knowledge comes with practice and learning all the champions. TL;DR learn the champions and have good situational cost benefit analysis.
| summonerschool | t5_2t9x3 | cmcx5lm | Learn how to deal with the matchups in your lane. Utilize cost benifit analysis. Each champion has a certain damage output which can avoided with positioning. Learn it. In a lane, learn or feel out the trade outcomes. Has the enemy jayce used his shock blast? Is he in range of my Barrel? Will my damage be greater than my opponents? This knowledge comes with practice and learning all the champions. | learn the champions and have good situational cost benefit analysis. |
sadsturbator | Driving from Montreal to LA. Had been going about 24 hours non stop and needed sleep badly. I couldn't think straight. I was starting to see things out of the corner of my eyes. Right as I end up in St. Louis around 3:30am, I miss a sign on the freeway I thought I might have needed to see. My overly tired sleep deprived self pulls over and walks back towards the sign to read it. I don't know what made me walk between two lanes in the middle of the road, but I did. I seemingly unnoticed two 18 wheelers entering the highway. As they entered they got into separate lanes and drove parallel to one another. They passed me on both sides, my hat flew off, and I lost my balance and had a major panic attack. Don't be so god damn stupid to walk out in the middle of any road, even a dark mostly empty freeway at night. Make sure to be plenty rested when driving.
Tl;dr 2 18-wheelers passed me on both sides while I stood in the middle of an interstate. | Driving from Montreal to LA. Had been going about 24 hours non stop and needed sleep badly. I couldn't think straight. I was starting to see things out of the corner of my eyes. Right as I end up in St. Louis around 3:30am, I miss a sign on the freeway I thought I might have needed to see. My overly tired sleep deprived self pulls over and walks back towards the sign to read it. I don't know what made me walk between two lanes in the middle of the road, but I did. I seemingly unnoticed two 18 wheelers entering the highway. As they entered they got into separate lanes and drove parallel to one another. They passed me on both sides, my hat flew off, and I lost my balance and had a major panic attack. Don't be so god damn stupid to walk out in the middle of any road, even a dark mostly empty freeway at night. Make sure to be plenty rested when driving.
Tl;dr 2 18-wheelers passed me on both sides while I stood in the middle of an interstate.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cmdf73g | Driving from Montreal to LA. Had been going about 24 hours non stop and needed sleep badly. I couldn't think straight. I was starting to see things out of the corner of my eyes. Right as I end up in St. Louis around 3:30am, I miss a sign on the freeway I thought I might have needed to see. My overly tired sleep deprived self pulls over and walks back towards the sign to read it. I don't know what made me walk between two lanes in the middle of the road, but I did. I seemingly unnoticed two 18 wheelers entering the highway. As they entered they got into separate lanes and drove parallel to one another. They passed me on both sides, my hat flew off, and I lost my balance and had a major panic attack. Don't be so god damn stupid to walk out in the middle of any road, even a dark mostly empty freeway at night. Make sure to be plenty rested when driving. | 2 18-wheelers passed me on both sides while I stood in the middle of an interstate. |
PokerTuna | Playing since beta and i think the only time I spent money on Hearthstone is to get 3 expert packs, 1-2 arena entries and Nax expansion (which btw you can buy with gold ). Although it's more than your 10$ it's still nothing compared to what others spend on it ( especially streamers ).
That being said - I'm having a lot of fun and win 50-60% of my games. I main mage and play other classes only when my quest line up perfectly ( like 3x warrior dailies, so it's less of a chore for me ). Mage hasn't been FotM, OP or anything like that for a long while now but I'm doing good.
tl;dr - try to do every possible daily and get achievements ( - few of them give gold ) and you will do just fine, trust me. Planty of good cheap decks to find if ur not feeling creative ;)
BTW. seriously play what you like. screw this handlock or whatever fotm meta there is. it is possible to win with any class, just takes time and practice. Cards will come your way, just don't play it 100% and you will enjoy it. | Playing since beta and i think the only time I spent money on Hearthstone is to get 3 expert packs, 1-2 arena entries and Nax expansion (which btw you can buy with gold ). Although it's more than your 10$ it's still nothing compared to what others spend on it ( especially streamers ).
That being said - I'm having a lot of fun and win 50-60% of my games. I main mage and play other classes only when my quest line up perfectly ( like 3x warrior dailies, so it's less of a chore for me ). Mage hasn't been FotM, OP or anything like that for a long while now but I'm doing good.
tl;dr - try to do every possible daily and get achievements ( - few of them give gold ) and you will do just fine, trust me. Planty of good cheap decks to find if ur not feeling creative ;)
BTW. seriously play what you like. screw this handlock or whatever fotm meta there is. it is possible to win with any class, just takes time and practice. Cards will come your way, just don't play it 100% and you will enjoy it.
| hearthstone | t5_2w31t | cmdhieo | Playing since beta and i think the only time I spent money on Hearthstone is to get 3 expert packs, 1-2 arena entries and Nax expansion (which btw you can buy with gold ). Although it's more than your 10$ it's still nothing compared to what others spend on it ( especially streamers ).
That being said - I'm having a lot of fun and win 50-60% of my games. I main mage and play other classes only when my quest line up perfectly ( like 3x warrior dailies, so it's less of a chore for me ). Mage hasn't been FotM, OP or anything like that for a long while now but I'm doing good. | try to do every possible daily and get achievements ( - few of them give gold ) and you will do just fine, trust me. Planty of good cheap decks to find if ur not feeling creative ;)
BTW. seriously play what you like. screw this handlock or whatever fotm meta there is. it is possible to win with any class, just takes time and practice. Cards will come your way, just don't play it 100% and you will enjoy it. |
Craptard | Copying this from earlier.
/u/Dragovic summed it up pretty greatly in an /r/OutOfTheLoop question:
> I've been waiting so long for another chance to answer why people hate Nickleback. Every time I get ignored everyone just accepts the vague answers. Hating Nickleback is basically a meme that's about 15 years old now and many people forgot where it came from or are too young to remember it and just joined the bandwagon so they think it's serious.
It started from Nickleback signing onto roadrunner records in the late 90s which used to be known only for death and thrash metal. Some metalheads bought their CD's because they trusted the label that seemed to consistently sign on great metal bands and they were pissed that compared to all the other bands from the label, this one really sucked. The other bands that sucked were at least somewhat metal but not this one. Eventually it became a meme in the metal community that Nickleback sucks.
A comic named Brian Posehn who is a well known metalhead, made a Nickleback sucks joke which I can't remember. It has something to do with music being violent because listening to Nickleback made him want to kill someone. That joke became part of a promo for some show on Comedy Central in the early 2000s and it was shown a lot. Eventually a lot of people heard the joke, it was repeated, and simplified back to Nickleback sucks. After that everyone, not just metalheads kept repeating that Nickleback sucks and now there are kids that repeat a meme older than them. It's sort of a look into what will happen to the current popular memes in the future.
TL;DR: It's a meme.
| Copying this from earlier.
/u/Dragovic summed it up pretty greatly in an /r/OutOfTheLoop question:
> I've been waiting so long for another chance to answer why people hate Nickleback. Every time I get ignored everyone just accepts the vague answers. Hating Nickleback is basically a meme that's about 15 years old now and many people forgot where it came from or are too young to remember it and just joined the bandwagon so they think it's serious.
It started from Nickleback signing onto roadrunner records in the late 90s which used to be known only for death and thrash metal. Some metalheads bought their CD's because they trusted the label that seemed to consistently sign on great metal bands and they were pissed that compared to all the other bands from the label, this one really sucked. The other bands that sucked were at least somewhat metal but not this one. Eventually it became a meme in the metal community that Nickleback sucks.
A comic named Brian Posehn who is a well known metalhead, made a Nickleback sucks joke which I can't remember. It has something to do with music being violent because listening to Nickleback made him want to kill someone. That joke became part of a promo for some show on Comedy Central in the early 2000s and it was shown a lot. Eventually a lot of people heard the joke, it was repeated, and simplified back to Nickleback sucks. After that everyone, not just metalheads kept repeating that Nickleback sucks and now there are kids that repeat a meme older than them. It's sort of a look into what will happen to the current popular memes in the future.
TL;DR: It's a meme.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cmdxag5 | Copying this from earlier.
/u/Dragovic summed it up pretty greatly in an /r/OutOfTheLoop question:
> I've been waiting so long for another chance to answer why people hate Nickleback. Every time I get ignored everyone just accepts the vague answers. Hating Nickleback is basically a meme that's about 15 years old now and many people forgot where it came from or are too young to remember it and just joined the bandwagon so they think it's serious.
It started from Nickleback signing onto roadrunner records in the late 90s which used to be known only for death and thrash metal. Some metalheads bought their CD's because they trusted the label that seemed to consistently sign on great metal bands and they were pissed that compared to all the other bands from the label, this one really sucked. The other bands that sucked were at least somewhat metal but not this one. Eventually it became a meme in the metal community that Nickleback sucks.
A comic named Brian Posehn who is a well known metalhead, made a Nickleback sucks joke which I can't remember. It has something to do with music being violent because listening to Nickleback made him want to kill someone. That joke became part of a promo for some show on Comedy Central in the early 2000s and it was shown a lot. Eventually a lot of people heard the joke, it was repeated, and simplified back to Nickleback sucks. After that everyone, not just metalheads kept repeating that Nickleback sucks and now there are kids that repeat a meme older than them. It's sort of a look into what will happen to the current popular memes in the future. | It's a meme. |
Fealiks | He's interested in Eastern philosophy. Eastern philosophy tends to be less prosaic than western philosophy (aka philosophy), and a recurring motif of Eastern pedagogy is either phrasing insights in an inaccessible way or as questions, in order to force the reader to think about the conclusion for themselves.
So when Jaden Smith tweets a quote from some well-respected Eastern philosopher and people think that it's an original thought of his, the context of Eastern philosophy (wherein the reader knows that some further thought will be required) isn't there; people aren't accustomed to reading tweets they have to think about, so they judge them prosaically rather than poetically (usually rendering them nonsensical).
**tl;dr** basically a lot of people point to his philosophical musings and quotes and use them as easy opportunities to feel good about themselves, because if you call a 16 year old stupid, who's going to argue. | He's interested in Eastern philosophy. Eastern philosophy tends to be less prosaic than western philosophy (aka philosophy), and a recurring motif of Eastern pedagogy is either phrasing insights in an inaccessible way or as questions, in order to force the reader to think about the conclusion for themselves.
So when Jaden Smith tweets a quote from some well-respected Eastern philosopher and people think that it's an original thought of his, the context of Eastern philosophy (wherein the reader knows that some further thought will be required) isn't there; people aren't accustomed to reading tweets they have to think about, so they judge them prosaically rather than poetically (usually rendering them nonsensical).
tl;dr basically a lot of people point to his philosophical musings and quotes and use them as easy opportunities to feel good about themselves, because if you call a 16 year old stupid, who's going to argue.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cme463w | He's interested in Eastern philosophy. Eastern philosophy tends to be less prosaic than western philosophy (aka philosophy), and a recurring motif of Eastern pedagogy is either phrasing insights in an inaccessible way or as questions, in order to force the reader to think about the conclusion for themselves.
So when Jaden Smith tweets a quote from some well-respected Eastern philosopher and people think that it's an original thought of his, the context of Eastern philosophy (wherein the reader knows that some further thought will be required) isn't there; people aren't accustomed to reading tweets they have to think about, so they judge them prosaically rather than poetically (usually rendering them nonsensical). | basically a lot of people point to his philosophical musings and quotes and use them as easy opportunities to feel good about themselves, because if you call a 16 year old stupid, who's going to argue. |
dullun | First off, congratulations on going vegan. I know from experience how difficult it is with a non-vegan family, since I went veg around your age.
It seems to me you're doing everything you can with the situation you're in. If right now you aren't able to get your own vegan detergent and your family can't make the switch, that's okay. You're still doing the best you can.
It's great that your family is being as supportive as you are, and that you appreciate their help. I think that unless they turn vegan there might always be those differences where you'll have to agree to disagree. In my case those things got easier over time - when I had more money I switched to vegan shampoo and now the whole family uses it.
Tl;dr I think we all go through this, just do what you can and you're still doing a good thing. Maybe they'll.come around, maybe they won't. | First off, congratulations on going vegan. I know from experience how difficult it is with a non-vegan family, since I went veg around your age.
It seems to me you're doing everything you can with the situation you're in. If right now you aren't able to get your own vegan detergent and your family can't make the switch, that's okay. You're still doing the best you can.
It's great that your family is being as supportive as you are, and that you appreciate their help. I think that unless they turn vegan there might always be those differences where you'll have to agree to disagree. In my case those things got easier over time - when I had more money I switched to vegan shampoo and now the whole family uses it.
Tl;dr I think we all go through this, just do what you can and you're still doing a good thing. Maybe they'll.come around, maybe they won't.
| vegan | t5_2qhpm | cmdzlvu | First off, congratulations on going vegan. I know from experience how difficult it is with a non-vegan family, since I went veg around your age.
It seems to me you're doing everything you can with the situation you're in. If right now you aren't able to get your own vegan detergent and your family can't make the switch, that's okay. You're still doing the best you can.
It's great that your family is being as supportive as you are, and that you appreciate their help. I think that unless they turn vegan there might always be those differences where you'll have to agree to disagree. In my case those things got easier over time - when I had more money I switched to vegan shampoo and now the whole family uses it. | I think we all go through this, just do what you can and you're still doing a good thing. Maybe they'll.come around, maybe they won't. |
brandoss77 | Rick, Daryl, Michonne and Carol are very far from 2 dimensional and have all gone through drastic evolutions, but their evolution has felt real. Its had time to build. The change in them is slow burning and you barely notice it happening until you rewatch a few seasons back and realise they are totally different characters now. Tyreese on the other hand started off pretty badass, then went to bed one night and woke up with a totally opposite moral compass. It hasnt felt real, its like they just threw him in there because one moral compass was put out and they had to fill the role with someone so they just threw him in.
Tldr; I think the problem that I and possibly others have with Tyreese isnt the fact that he's 'taking the high ground', its that they just havent portrayed or written it very well. It feels forced. | Rick, Daryl, Michonne and Carol are very far from 2 dimensional and have all gone through drastic evolutions, but their evolution has felt real. Its had time to build. The change in them is slow burning and you barely notice it happening until you rewatch a few seasons back and realise they are totally different characters now. Tyreese on the other hand started off pretty badass, then went to bed one night and woke up with a totally opposite moral compass. It hasnt felt real, its like they just threw him in there because one moral compass was put out and they had to fill the role with someone so they just threw him in.
Tldr; I think the problem that I and possibly others have with Tyreese isnt the fact that he's 'taking the high ground', its that they just havent portrayed or written it very well. It feels forced.
| thewalkingdead | t5_2rygv | cmecmxa | Rick, Daryl, Michonne and Carol are very far from 2 dimensional and have all gone through drastic evolutions, but their evolution has felt real. Its had time to build. The change in them is slow burning and you barely notice it happening until you rewatch a few seasons back and realise they are totally different characters now. Tyreese on the other hand started off pretty badass, then went to bed one night and woke up with a totally opposite moral compass. It hasnt felt real, its like they just threw him in there because one moral compass was put out and they had to fill the role with someone so they just threw him in. | I think the problem that I and possibly others have with Tyreese isnt the fact that he's 'taking the high ground', its that they just havent portrayed or written it very well. It feels forced. |
SJ0 | humm i think they're just saving it. only recently did they build young Bruce as a character. they'll take their time to explore bruce as time goes by. remember this show doesn't revolve around bruce. a lot of characters are written really well in this show so bruce's screentime is limited.
they've got a lot of ICONIC comic book characters. bruce wayne, alfred, gordon, penguin, riddler, selina, harvey dent, are all very well recognized characters from comic world all together. they also have (or will have) Victor Zsasz, Joker, Poison Ivy, Strange, Freeze, Scarecrow, etc
If they can get all of this then i seriously doubt getting rights to bats is as issue.
this isn't arrow where they they're lucky to get somewhat recognizable comic book character once in a while. in gotham, everything is big.
TL;DR in time it'll happen and it'll be GLORIOUS. | humm i think they're just saving it. only recently did they build young Bruce as a character. they'll take their time to explore bruce as time goes by. remember this show doesn't revolve around bruce. a lot of characters are written really well in this show so bruce's screentime is limited.
they've got a lot of ICONIC comic book characters. bruce wayne, alfred, gordon, penguin, riddler, selina, harvey dent, are all very well recognized characters from comic world all together. they also have (or will have) Victor Zsasz, Joker, Poison Ivy, Strange, Freeze, Scarecrow, etc
If they can get all of this then i seriously doubt getting rights to bats is as issue.
this isn't arrow where they they're lucky to get somewhat recognizable comic book character once in a while. in gotham, everything is big.
TL;DR in time it'll happen and it'll be GLORIOUS.
| Gotham | t5_2tbsa | cme62jh | humm i think they're just saving it. only recently did they build young Bruce as a character. they'll take their time to explore bruce as time goes by. remember this show doesn't revolve around bruce. a lot of characters are written really well in this show so bruce's screentime is limited.
they've got a lot of ICONIC comic book characters. bruce wayne, alfred, gordon, penguin, riddler, selina, harvey dent, are all very well recognized characters from comic world all together. they also have (or will have) Victor Zsasz, Joker, Poison Ivy, Strange, Freeze, Scarecrow, etc
If they can get all of this then i seriously doubt getting rights to bats is as issue.
this isn't arrow where they they're lucky to get somewhat recognizable comic book character once in a while. in gotham, everything is big. | in time it'll happen and it'll be GLORIOUS. |
pabben2 | Cause even if someone is afk theyre still registered to the game i.e theyre still playing. When they disconnect you are getting a 2:1 vote.
So youre just dumb and dont understand how its coded. If youre afk ingame youre still ingame i.e coded as not afk. If you alt-f4 youre coded as not being in game
tldr players are coded as minions wat | Cause even if someone is afk theyre still registered to the game i.e theyre still playing. When they disconnect you are getting a 2:1 vote.
So youre just dumb and dont understand how its coded. If youre afk ingame youre still ingame i.e coded as not afk. If you alt-f4 youre coded as not being in game
tldr players are coded as minions wat
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cmeilfe | Cause even if someone is afk theyre still registered to the game i.e theyre still playing. When they disconnect you are getting a 2:1 vote.
So youre just dumb and dont understand how its coded. If youre afk ingame youre still ingame i.e coded as not afk. If you alt-f4 youre coded as not being in game | players are coded as minions wat |
zanotam | I'm a fucking mathematics grad student irl and nobody would give me shit about saying 66% for 2/3. I mean, mother of god, even in my comment I am 100% (or 99.9, repeating of course,% right) right in saying that 66% is below the minimum value as can be seen by the fact that 2/3 is not enough and 2/3 >= 0.66.....
TL;DR If you're gonna math nazi, you best be right. | I'm a fucking mathematics grad student irl and nobody would give me shit about saying 66% for 2/3. I mean, mother of god, even in my comment I am 100% (or 99.9, repeating of course,% right) right in saying that 66% is below the minimum value as can be seen by the fact that 2/3 is not enough and 2/3 >= 0.66.....
TL;DR If you're gonna math nazi, you best be right.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cme7u99 | I'm a fucking mathematics grad student irl and nobody would give me shit about saying 66% for 2/3. I mean, mother of god, even in my comment I am 100% (or 99.9, repeating of course,% right) right in saying that 66% is below the minimum value as can be seen by the fact that 2/3 is not enough and 2/3 >= 0.66..... | If you're gonna math nazi, you best be right. |
person1234man | My first mission was simple, land on the mun. I was excited when my 3 kerbins got there. I had done it all on my own, no videos no tutorials. Then I realised I had no way back to kerbin. That's when I knew my next mission save the first kerbins on the mun.
Unfortunately this mission I couldn't do on my own. My first Lander barley made it there and didn't even have enough fuel to escape gravity. I looked up how to make a better Lander and went from there. I made it to the specs but added extra batteries, solar panels and a prob core so I could fly it unmanned.
I launched the mun lander mk2 and I was on my way. It had plenty of fuel to get into mun orbit menuevar to a landing spot less than a kilometer away. Landing was easy enough and after touch down each kerbin EVA'd to the mk2 Lander.
With all kerbins onboard and Jebediah at the helm they took off. There was plenty of fuel to escape orbit, but I eventually had to ditch the engine and empty file tank. But I had plenty of RCS fuel to make the rest of the trip. After a few minutes of retrograde burn with the RCS thrusters they had an unstable orbit that put them in the atmosphere of Kerbal.
They touched down in the ocean and where soon recovered. After a few weeks on the mun they where glad to be back home with breathable air.
TLDR: landed 3 kerbins on the mun with no way back. Next mission was a rescue mission and everyone made it back safe | My first mission was simple, land on the mun. I was excited when my 3 kerbins got there. I had done it all on my own, no videos no tutorials. Then I realised I had no way back to kerbin. That's when I knew my next mission save the first kerbins on the mun.
Unfortunately this mission I couldn't do on my own. My first Lander barley made it there and didn't even have enough fuel to escape gravity. I looked up how to make a better Lander and went from there. I made it to the specs but added extra batteries, solar panels and a prob core so I could fly it unmanned.
I launched the mun lander mk2 and I was on my way. It had plenty of fuel to get into mun orbit menuevar to a landing spot less than a kilometer away. Landing was easy enough and after touch down each kerbin EVA'd to the mk2 Lander.
With all kerbins onboard and Jebediah at the helm they took off. There was plenty of fuel to escape orbit, but I eventually had to ditch the engine and empty file tank. But I had plenty of RCS fuel to make the rest of the trip. After a few minutes of retrograde burn with the RCS thrusters they had an unstable orbit that put them in the atmosphere of Kerbal.
They touched down in the ocean and where soon recovered. After a few weeks on the mun they where glad to be back home with breathable air.
TLDR: landed 3 kerbins on the mun with no way back. Next mission was a rescue mission and everyone made it back safe
| pcmasterrace | t5_2sgp1 | cme9vm9 | My first mission was simple, land on the mun. I was excited when my 3 kerbins got there. I had done it all on my own, no videos no tutorials. Then I realised I had no way back to kerbin. That's when I knew my next mission save the first kerbins on the mun.
Unfortunately this mission I couldn't do on my own. My first Lander barley made it there and didn't even have enough fuel to escape gravity. I looked up how to make a better Lander and went from there. I made it to the specs but added extra batteries, solar panels and a prob core so I could fly it unmanned.
I launched the mun lander mk2 and I was on my way. It had plenty of fuel to get into mun orbit menuevar to a landing spot less than a kilometer away. Landing was easy enough and after touch down each kerbin EVA'd to the mk2 Lander.
With all kerbins onboard and Jebediah at the helm they took off. There was plenty of fuel to escape orbit, but I eventually had to ditch the engine and empty file tank. But I had plenty of RCS fuel to make the rest of the trip. After a few minutes of retrograde burn with the RCS thrusters they had an unstable orbit that put them in the atmosphere of Kerbal.
They touched down in the ocean and where soon recovered. After a few weeks on the mun they where glad to be back home with breathable air. | landed 3 kerbins on the mun with no way back. Next mission was a rescue mission and everyone made it back safe |
morgonjuce | Let us put KSP like this:
KSP is fundamentally working, unlike many other early access titles, and they are right now just adding more stuff to the game like minecraft. There are no gamebreaking bugs or mechanics in KSP and already has a strong modding community.
TL;DR: early access done right. | Let us put KSP like this:
KSP is fundamentally working, unlike many other early access titles, and they are right now just adding more stuff to the game like minecraft. There are no gamebreaking bugs or mechanics in KSP and already has a strong modding community.
TL;DR: early access done right.
| pcmasterrace | t5_2sgp1 | cmerslv | Let us put KSP like this:
KSP is fundamentally working, unlike many other early access titles, and they are right now just adding more stuff to the game like minecraft. There are no gamebreaking bugs or mechanics in KSP and already has a strong modding community. | early access done right. |
somethingaboutfifa | Keylor Navas' card is a iMOTM, a special card. Usually IF's and other special cards recieve stats that will give them a higher rating than what their card says. When you then add up all the IF's and special cards he had last year, it accounts for a great amount of upgrades. If you look further down, in the comments, you will find this comment: , where it says his real IG rating when you put in his IG stats to the player creator.
TL;DR: IF's=Bigger upgrades than normal rating upgrades, therefore a higher IG rating than what the card suggests. | Keylor Navas' card is a iMOTM, a special card. Usually IF's and other special cards recieve stats that will give them a higher rating than what their card says. When you then add up all the IF's and special cards he had last year, it accounts for a great amount of upgrades. If you look further down, in the comments, you will find this comment: , where it says his real IG rating when you put in his IG stats to the player creator.
TL;DR: IF's=Bigger upgrades than normal rating upgrades, therefore a higher IG rating than what the card suggests.
| FIFA | t5_2qxh7 | cmepsav | Keylor Navas' card is a iMOTM, a special card. Usually IF's and other special cards recieve stats that will give them a higher rating than what their card says. When you then add up all the IF's and special cards he had last year, it accounts for a great amount of upgrades. If you look further down, in the comments, you will find this comment: , where it says his real IG rating when you put in his IG stats to the player creator. | IF's=Bigger upgrades than normal rating upgrades, therefore a higher IG rating than what the card suggests. |
stabsterino | DotA always requires at least 1 "true support," if you try to split up the farm 5 ways you're just going to have everyone fall behind. Even 4 is really greedy and typically not that great. Keep in mind though that in low brackets you'll very often find people randomly doing whatever they feel like doing with little regard to that.
"Tanks" aren't an actual thing in DotA, as I'm sure you can tell from some of the other replies; but you do typically have tanky heroes. Most often you'll have carries themselves tank up while also building damage, so they're decently balanced out, and some of them can and do become incredibly hard to kill as it should be.
Some carries are more commonly played as glass cannons though, maybe because getting them to become decently tanky would make them hit like kittens, maybe because they don't need to become tanky to have a high impact, given the right support. Probably the best example that comes to mind is Sniper, which you'll find A LOT in your games as a newbie. In these cases, you WANT a front line. You want 1 or more heroes who can go in and who are also decently scary to draw focus from the enemy and eat a couple of abilities so the glass cannon(s) is(are) safer. Then it's a bit of a game of positioning and effect: you need your "DPS" positioned well enough that he doesn't instantly get jumped to and blown up, and you need your front line to pose enough of a threat that reaching him once he starts killing is hard, or you just can't do it until you've gotten rid of the front line. Often you'll want decent AoE disables too, like a tidehunter, and you'll always want just disables in general. No-stun lineups have a pretty huge tendency to do horribly.
I only played like 3 games of league before getting my ass straight back to dota, so I have no idea of what place you're really coming from, but I hope what I've said is in the general ballpark.
Most importantly and concisely: in dota you will usually need a balance of everything, i.e. mobility, damage, tankiness, utility, and whatever else you want to categorise, divided in one way or another among the heroes of a team. But if the enemy team follows a strat that is weaker or stronger in a certain group of categories, you can have a higher impact and outdraft/outbuild them by doing a strat yourself that counters it. For example, if they're idiots and pick 5 heroes who do no damage, you might want to have a nice amount of squishy high-DPS'ers since you can't be punished for it.
**tl;dr: you'll nearly always need "actual tanks" and you'll always need "true supports," but there are plenty of niche strats, the effectiveness of which depends on what the other team is going for. You'll never have "5 dps vs 5 dps" though** | DotA always requires at least 1 "true support," if you try to split up the farm 5 ways you're just going to have everyone fall behind. Even 4 is really greedy and typically not that great. Keep in mind though that in low brackets you'll very often find people randomly doing whatever they feel like doing with little regard to that.
"Tanks" aren't an actual thing in DotA, as I'm sure you can tell from some of the other replies; but you do typically have tanky heroes. Most often you'll have carries themselves tank up while also building damage, so they're decently balanced out, and some of them can and do become incredibly hard to kill as it should be.
Some carries are more commonly played as glass cannons though, maybe because getting them to become decently tanky would make them hit like kittens, maybe because they don't need to become tanky to have a high impact, given the right support. Probably the best example that comes to mind is Sniper, which you'll find A LOT in your games as a newbie. In these cases, you WANT a front line. You want 1 or more heroes who can go in and who are also decently scary to draw focus from the enemy and eat a couple of abilities so the glass cannon(s) is(are) safer. Then it's a bit of a game of positioning and effect: you need your "DPS" positioned well enough that he doesn't instantly get jumped to and blown up, and you need your front line to pose enough of a threat that reaching him once he starts killing is hard, or you just can't do it until you've gotten rid of the front line. Often you'll want decent AoE disables too, like a tidehunter, and you'll always want just disables in general. No-stun lineups have a pretty huge tendency to do horribly.
I only played like 3 games of league before getting my ass straight back to dota, so I have no idea of what place you're really coming from, but I hope what I've said is in the general ballpark.
Most importantly and concisely: in dota you will usually need a balance of everything, i.e. mobility, damage, tankiness, utility, and whatever else you want to categorise, divided in one way or another among the heroes of a team. But if the enemy team follows a strat that is weaker or stronger in a certain group of categories, you can have a higher impact and outdraft/outbuild them by doing a strat yourself that counters it. For example, if they're idiots and pick 5 heroes who do no damage, you might want to have a nice amount of squishy high-DPS'ers since you can't be punished for it.
tl;dr: you'll nearly always need "actual tanks" and you'll always need "true supports," but there are plenty of niche strats, the effectiveness of which depends on what the other team is going for. You'll never have "5 dps vs 5 dps" though
| DotA2 | t5_2s580 | cmev7p6 | DotA always requires at least 1 "true support," if you try to split up the farm 5 ways you're just going to have everyone fall behind. Even 4 is really greedy and typically not that great. Keep in mind though that in low brackets you'll very often find people randomly doing whatever they feel like doing with little regard to that.
"Tanks" aren't an actual thing in DotA, as I'm sure you can tell from some of the other replies; but you do typically have tanky heroes. Most often you'll have carries themselves tank up while also building damage, so they're decently balanced out, and some of them can and do become incredibly hard to kill as it should be.
Some carries are more commonly played as glass cannons though, maybe because getting them to become decently tanky would make them hit like kittens, maybe because they don't need to become tanky to have a high impact, given the right support. Probably the best example that comes to mind is Sniper, which you'll find A LOT in your games as a newbie. In these cases, you WANT a front line. You want 1 or more heroes who can go in and who are also decently scary to draw focus from the enemy and eat a couple of abilities so the glass cannon(s) is(are) safer. Then it's a bit of a game of positioning and effect: you need your "DPS" positioned well enough that he doesn't instantly get jumped to and blown up, and you need your front line to pose enough of a threat that reaching him once he starts killing is hard, or you just can't do it until you've gotten rid of the front line. Often you'll want decent AoE disables too, like a tidehunter, and you'll always want just disables in general. No-stun lineups have a pretty huge tendency to do horribly.
I only played like 3 games of league before getting my ass straight back to dota, so I have no idea of what place you're really coming from, but I hope what I've said is in the general ballpark.
Most importantly and concisely: in dota you will usually need a balance of everything, i.e. mobility, damage, tankiness, utility, and whatever else you want to categorise, divided in one way or another among the heroes of a team. But if the enemy team follows a strat that is weaker or stronger in a certain group of categories, you can have a higher impact and outdraft/outbuild them by doing a strat yourself that counters it. For example, if they're idiots and pick 5 heroes who do no damage, you might want to have a nice amount of squishy high-DPS'ers since you can't be punished for it. | you'll nearly always need "actual tanks" and you'll always need "true supports," but there are plenty of niche strats, the effectiveness of which depends on what the other team is going for. You'll never have "5 dps vs 5 dps" though |
nighoblivion | > Contrary to what most people say, tanks are in DotA, especially pro matches.
There's a difference between "a tank" and "being tanky". Dota utilizes the latter, having no heroes you build just so they can absorb damage for the team doing nothing else. Tankiness is secondary, thus no "tanks". Strength heroes also become more tanky than other heroes, but that's due to natural stat gain and itemization.
Bristleback is naturally tanky thanks to his passive, but you still build him mainly for doing damage.
Tidehunter need not be tanky, depending on itemization, though his passive and his anchor smash that debuffs damage does have the secondary effect of making you be cc'd less and making people do less damage. He's not played as a 'tank', he's utility thanks to ravage.
Centaur isn't a tank either, though he can become very tanky late game (as can Bristle, thanks to his passive), and is mainly burst damage and utility, in particular initiation thanks to blink dagger and his ultimate which is king for positioning.
TL;DR: None of the heroes you mentioned are tanks, they're just naturally tanky, especially with tanky itemization.
| > Contrary to what most people say, tanks are in DotA, especially pro matches.
There's a difference between "a tank" and "being tanky". Dota utilizes the latter, having no heroes you build just so they can absorb damage for the team doing nothing else. Tankiness is secondary, thus no "tanks". Strength heroes also become more tanky than other heroes, but that's due to natural stat gain and itemization.
Bristleback is naturally tanky thanks to his passive, but you still build him mainly for doing damage.
Tidehunter need not be tanky, depending on itemization, though his passive and his anchor smash that debuffs damage does have the secondary effect of making you be cc'd less and making people do less damage. He's not played as a 'tank', he's utility thanks to ravage.
Centaur isn't a tank either, though he can become very tanky late game (as can Bristle, thanks to his passive), and is mainly burst damage and utility, in particular initiation thanks to blink dagger and his ultimate which is king for positioning.
TL;DR: None of the heroes you mentioned are tanks, they're just naturally tanky, especially with tanky itemization.
| DotA2 | t5_2s580 | cmewbh7 | Contrary to what most people say, tanks are in DotA, especially pro matches.
There's a difference between "a tank" and "being tanky". Dota utilizes the latter, having no heroes you build just so they can absorb damage for the team doing nothing else. Tankiness is secondary, thus no "tanks". Strength heroes also become more tanky than other heroes, but that's due to natural stat gain and itemization.
Bristleback is naturally tanky thanks to his passive, but you still build him mainly for doing damage.
Tidehunter need not be tanky, depending on itemization, though his passive and his anchor smash that debuffs damage does have the secondary effect of making you be cc'd less and making people do less damage. He's not played as a 'tank', he's utility thanks to ravage.
Centaur isn't a tank either, though he can become very tanky late game (as can Bristle, thanks to his passive), and is mainly burst damage and utility, in particular initiation thanks to blink dagger and his ultimate which is king for positioning. | None of the heroes you mentioned are tanks, they're just naturally tanky, especially with tanky itemization. |
NOTShutup868 | I just really dislike Flash Sentry, most people say they just need to develop his character but I say he just needs to fade into obscurity. The ONLY direction they can go with Flash Sentry is into romance. I don't know about others but I sure don't want romance in MLP, **ESPECIALLY** not when it involves one of the Mane 6. I enjoy my favorite ship so much because its just so subtle, and the episodes between Rarity and AJ are always so amazing because their characters play off each other so well, but I wouldn't want it to actually happen because, besides that it's a gay relationship in a kid's show and parents probably wouldn't approve, but also because it would just fuck up the Mane 6. [](/sp)
tl;dr: Leave shipping to fanfics and fanart, leave it out of the show. The only time they made romance work in MLP was when it was a complete joke (Hearts and Hooves day) | I just really dislike Flash Sentry, most people say they just need to develop his character but I say he just needs to fade into obscurity. The ONLY direction they can go with Flash Sentry is into romance. I don't know about others but I sure don't want romance in MLP, ESPECIALLY not when it involves one of the Mane 6. I enjoy my favorite ship so much because its just so subtle, and the episodes between Rarity and AJ are always so amazing because their characters play off each other so well, but I wouldn't want it to actually happen because, besides that it's a gay relationship in a kid's show and parents probably wouldn't approve, but also because it would just fuck up the Mane 6.
tl;dr: Leave shipping to fanfics and fanart, leave it out of the show. The only time they made romance work in MLP was when it was a complete joke (Hearts and Hooves day)
| mylittlepony | t5_2s8bl | cmf1abe | I just really dislike Flash Sentry, most people say they just need to develop his character but I say he just needs to fade into obscurity. The ONLY direction they can go with Flash Sentry is into romance. I don't know about others but I sure don't want romance in MLP, ESPECIALLY not when it involves one of the Mane 6. I enjoy my favorite ship so much because its just so subtle, and the episodes between Rarity and AJ are always so amazing because their characters play off each other so well, but I wouldn't want it to actually happen because, besides that it's a gay relationship in a kid's show and parents probably wouldn't approve, but also because it would just fuck up the Mane 6. | Leave shipping to fanfics and fanart, leave it out of the show. The only time they made romance work in MLP was when it was a complete joke (Hearts and Hooves day) |
royalsalmon | I always really was a pc gamer I remember being really young and booting up doom on my uncles old pc, I remember being blown away by the graphics in need for speed hot pursuit 3 I believe it was back in like circa 1997 - 1999 I had it on a console shorty I put the keyboard and mouse down for a ps2 I was a console gamer till 2012 lol I had a lot of spare time after high school before college so I got hooked on dayz streamers and I bought my pc for the sole purpose of dayz I got banned within a month of owning the the Arma 2 mod (cd theft maybe idk didn't cheat) .... so now I have 1.5k machine for streaming
Tldr- I own a very expensive twitch machine
Edit- need to add world of warcraft has been part of life since 2007 lol.fth! | I always really was a pc gamer I remember being really young and booting up doom on my uncles old pc, I remember being blown away by the graphics in need for speed hot pursuit 3 I believe it was back in like circa 1997 - 1999 I had it on a console shorty I put the keyboard and mouse down for a ps2 I was a console gamer till 2012 lol I had a lot of spare time after high school before college so I got hooked on dayz streamers and I bought my pc for the sole purpose of dayz I got banned within a month of owning the the Arma 2 mod (cd theft maybe idk didn't cheat) .... so now I have 1.5k machine for streaming
Tldr- I own a very expensive twitch machine
Edit- need to add world of warcraft has been part of life since 2007 lol.fth!
| pcmasterrace | t5_2sgp1 | cmf6tr1 | I always really was a pc gamer I remember being really young and booting up doom on my uncles old pc, I remember being blown away by the graphics in need for speed hot pursuit 3 I believe it was back in like circa 1997 - 1999 I had it on a console shorty I put the keyboard and mouse down for a ps2 I was a console gamer till 2012 lol I had a lot of spare time after high school before college so I got hooked on dayz streamers and I bought my pc for the sole purpose of dayz I got banned within a month of owning the the Arma 2 mod (cd theft maybe idk didn't cheat) .... so now I have 1.5k machine for streaming | I own a very expensive twitch machine
Edit- need to add world of warcraft has been part of life since 2007 lol.fth! |
jimjoebob | the unfortunate reality about donating leftover food to homeless shelters is related to the reason that some grocery stores, especially in NYC, lock their dumpsters so no one can "dumpster dive".
as with most precedents set in the US, it only took one homeless person to sue a grocery store, and that possibility of kindness dried right up.
tl:dr; most restaurants/grocery stores are afraid of lawsuits, so they don't give away their food at the end of the day. | the unfortunate reality about donating leftover food to homeless shelters is related to the reason that some grocery stores, especially in NYC, lock their dumpsters so no one can "dumpster dive".
as with most precedents set in the US, it only took one homeless person to sue a grocery store, and that possibility of kindness dried right up.
tl:dr; most restaurants/grocery stores are afraid of lawsuits, so they don't give away their food at the end of the day.
| atheism | t5_2qh2p | cmfgs8w | the unfortunate reality about donating leftover food to homeless shelters is related to the reason that some grocery stores, especially in NYC, lock their dumpsters so no one can "dumpster dive".
as with most precedents set in the US, it only took one homeless person to sue a grocery store, and that possibility of kindness dried right up. | most restaurants/grocery stores are afraid of lawsuits, so they don't give away their food at the end of the day. |
BrineOfEmeralds | I enjoy the tense pace of battle, the adrenaline rush that comes with combat. I enjoy the fine art of swordsplay, cutting down a hoard before they can blink in surprise. I enjoy losing my self in my shooting. Down my bowshaft, nothing is an impossible shot. Everything is a target. I enjoy the quickening of the blood that comes with a proc, the boost of rage that enables me to become a one man army with only my shovel, Fossor.
The joy that comes from the solitude building walls and proc halls, repairing and creating. I enjoy the taste of ale, which brings me warmth and confidence in even the darkest nights. I enjoy cake, which is nice. Because it is cake. I enjoy being the dwarf that brings light to darkened walls, enlightening the horizons of many dwarves. I enjoy filling the cracks of broken walls with old man's glue, keeping our defenses strong and secure. I enjoy being part of a unit, looking out for each other, charging along side them.
I enjoy the role of leading as Bruce Willakers, playing my horn, piercing Undead skulls with Vindera, and slicing golems with my golden instrument of warfare, Excaliju. I enjoy playing as nisovin, casting spells to protect my fellow teammates. Using my mad inventions to defeat key enemies. Blasting monsters away with my Tinderflame. I enjoy playing Romain, purifying monsters and thinning the tide, even turning it. All monsters shall feel my burning anger.
The simple joys of life. Well, at least what remains of it. Shrines to the cake God. A proc with Fossor. Those many great things, that make DvZ a wonderful game to play.
**TL;DR: I enjoy playing DvZ** | I enjoy the tense pace of battle, the adrenaline rush that comes with combat. I enjoy the fine art of swordsplay, cutting down a hoard before they can blink in surprise. I enjoy losing my self in my shooting. Down my bowshaft, nothing is an impossible shot. Everything is a target. I enjoy the quickening of the blood that comes with a proc, the boost of rage that enables me to become a one man army with only my shovel, Fossor.
The joy that comes from the solitude building walls and proc halls, repairing and creating. I enjoy the taste of ale, which brings me warmth and confidence in even the darkest nights. I enjoy cake, which is nice. Because it is cake. I enjoy being the dwarf that brings light to darkened walls, enlightening the horizons of many dwarves. I enjoy filling the cracks of broken walls with old man's glue, keeping our defenses strong and secure. I enjoy being part of a unit, looking out for each other, charging along side them.
I enjoy the role of leading as Bruce Willakers, playing my horn, piercing Undead skulls with Vindera, and slicing golems with my golden instrument of warfare, Excaliju. I enjoy playing as nisovin, casting spells to protect my fellow teammates. Using my mad inventions to defeat key enemies. Blasting monsters away with my Tinderflame. I enjoy playing Romain, purifying monsters and thinning the tide, even turning it. All monsters shall feel my burning anger.
The simple joys of life. Well, at least what remains of it. Shrines to the cake God. A proc with Fossor. Those many great things, that make DvZ a wonderful game to play.
TL;DR: I enjoy playing DvZ
| DvZ | t5_2u01h | cmfibja | I enjoy the tense pace of battle, the adrenaline rush that comes with combat. I enjoy the fine art of swordsplay, cutting down a hoard before they can blink in surprise. I enjoy losing my self in my shooting. Down my bowshaft, nothing is an impossible shot. Everything is a target. I enjoy the quickening of the blood that comes with a proc, the boost of rage that enables me to become a one man army with only my shovel, Fossor.
The joy that comes from the solitude building walls and proc halls, repairing and creating. I enjoy the taste of ale, which brings me warmth and confidence in even the darkest nights. I enjoy cake, which is nice. Because it is cake. I enjoy being the dwarf that brings light to darkened walls, enlightening the horizons of many dwarves. I enjoy filling the cracks of broken walls with old man's glue, keeping our defenses strong and secure. I enjoy being part of a unit, looking out for each other, charging along side them.
I enjoy the role of leading as Bruce Willakers, playing my horn, piercing Undead skulls with Vindera, and slicing golems with my golden instrument of warfare, Excaliju. I enjoy playing as nisovin, casting spells to protect my fellow teammates. Using my mad inventions to defeat key enemies. Blasting monsters away with my Tinderflame. I enjoy playing Romain, purifying monsters and thinning the tide, even turning it. All monsters shall feel my burning anger.
The simple joys of life. Well, at least what remains of it. Shrines to the cake God. A proc with Fossor. Those many great things, that make DvZ a wonderful game to play. | I enjoy playing DvZ |
Whober | All adcs have different strengths and weaknesses, as well as situations when you want to pick them. I'll list their strengths and create a mini tier list at the end.
* **Ashe** is an adc that has decent engage potential but has weaker damage than most.
* **Caitlyn** is a very safe adc with a weak midgame, but a very strong early game and an average lategame. She is great for sieging.
* **Corki** is a very strong adc in general, he has a good early game,great midgame, and average lategame. He also has siege potential with his rockets and Q.
* **Draven** is a risky pick, and takes a bit of practice. He can Snowball leads very easily and can become a monster with 2 items.
* **Ezreal** is a very safe champion with a very strong early game and a great midgame. His lategame is very dependent on how good you are at landing mystic shots.
* **Graves** is a great lane bully and is amazing for new players because of his passive. His midgame is average and his lategame suffers because of a lack of range, but other than this, he is a great champion and if you can position properly he can become a monster.
* **Jinx** is a very strong champion who Just needs a kill or two to snowball. She becomes stronger as the game goes on, without really having a weak point in the game.She's like kog maw with a different passive.
* **Kalista** is very hard to place at the moment because she hasn't been out for long enough. From my experiences, she is underwhelming if she doesn't go at least average in lanephase, and she needs a couple items to get going. Her objective control with E makes her very strong,since the stacks have no cap.
* **Kog'Maw** is a very strong champion who does much better in competitive play than soloque because he has no mobility and requires peel from the team. He gets stronger as the game goes on, much like Jinx. His siege is very strong and he can Shred through tanks with his w.
* **Lucian** is a very strong champion who has no weak point in the game. This being said, he also never has a very strong point. He is very consistent and only needs 2 items to be able to keep up with any adc in damage.
* **Miss fortune** lacks an escape, and has an ultimate that makes her immobile. She can be very strong with the proper setup but she feels like a weaker version of graves, who can deal more aoe damage while being more mobile. This being said, If you build trinity into shiv, you can be fairly mobile as long as you position properly.
* **Quinn** can be an interesting champion, and can bring out a lot of unexpected damage. Most people will max q first, but in my opinion maxing w first into e will give you better mobility and damage. She can be a lot stronger than people expect, but she is lacking a strong ultimate. It's better to use it after you disengage with your vault for extra distance.
* **Sivir** is a very strong champion who hasn't seen much popularity but is definitely one of the stronger adcs on this list. She can stay relevant all game and really only requires an IE and a stattik to get going.Excellent poke and waveclear helps her stay relevant all game and her ultimate is a great ability for teamfights.
* **Tristana** is a strong champion with a weak early game, but she makes up for it with a very strong lategame. She is weaker than kogmaw as far as scaling is concerned, but she is still a great pick.
* **Twitch** is great in all phases of the game but suffers from a strong escape, he has amazing damage potential, but requires a strong frontline to be able to utilize it.
* **Varus** is a decent poke champion who is strong all game but is far too immobile to take advantage of it. He can destroy teams with his poke and engage with his ultimate, but more often than not he's going to be using it to snare whoever jumps on top of him.
* **Vayne** Requires a lot of practice, but if you put in the time to learn her, she can become a beast. Inexperienced players will have difficulty with her early game, but players with a lot of practice on her can win most lanes with ease.
**Top Tier-**champions who can be picked in any situation
* Corki
* Ezreal
* Lucian
* Sivir
Tier 1- champs who Are strong but not strong enough to be picked in any situation
* Cait
* Jinx
* Kog
* Twitch
* Trist
* Graves
**Tier 2-** champions who need a buff to be placed higher
* MF
* Varus
* Ashe
* Quinn
**Skill dependant champions**-champions who require a lot of time put into them to be played well. These champs have top tier potential but only if you work to put them there.
* Draven
* Vayne
**NOT PLACING KALISTA IN ANY TIER UNTIL I GET MORE TIME TO TEST HER**
TLDR; Read tier list. | All adcs have different strengths and weaknesses, as well as situations when you want to pick them. I'll list their strengths and create a mini tier list at the end.
Ashe is an adc that has decent engage potential but has weaker damage than most.
Caitlyn is a very safe adc with a weak midgame, but a very strong early game and an average lategame. She is great for sieging.
Corki is a very strong adc in general, he has a good early game,great midgame, and average lategame. He also has siege potential with his rockets and Q.
Draven is a risky pick, and takes a bit of practice. He can Snowball leads very easily and can become a monster with 2 items.
Ezreal is a very safe champion with a very strong early game and a great midgame. His lategame is very dependent on how good you are at landing mystic shots.
Graves is a great lane bully and is amazing for new players because of his passive. His midgame is average and his lategame suffers because of a lack of range, but other than this, he is a great champion and if you can position properly he can become a monster.
Jinx is a very strong champion who Just needs a kill or two to snowball. She becomes stronger as the game goes on, without really having a weak point in the game.She's like kog maw with a different passive.
Kalista is very hard to place at the moment because she hasn't been out for long enough. From my experiences, she is underwhelming if she doesn't go at least average in lanephase, and she needs a couple items to get going. Her objective control with E makes her very strong,since the stacks have no cap.
Kog'Maw is a very strong champion who does much better in competitive play than soloque because he has no mobility and requires peel from the team. He gets stronger as the game goes on, much like Jinx. His siege is very strong and he can Shred through tanks with his w.
Lucian is a very strong champion who has no weak point in the game. This being said, he also never has a very strong point. He is very consistent and only needs 2 items to be able to keep up with any adc in damage.
Miss fortune lacks an escape, and has an ultimate that makes her immobile. She can be very strong with the proper setup but she feels like a weaker version of graves, who can deal more aoe damage while being more mobile. This being said, If you build trinity into shiv, you can be fairly mobile as long as you position properly.
Quinn can be an interesting champion, and can bring out a lot of unexpected damage. Most people will max q first, but in my opinion maxing w first into e will give you better mobility and damage. She can be a lot stronger than people expect, but she is lacking a strong ultimate. It's better to use it after you disengage with your vault for extra distance.
Sivir is a very strong champion who hasn't seen much popularity but is definitely one of the stronger adcs on this list. She can stay relevant all game and really only requires an IE and a stattik to get going.Excellent poke and waveclear helps her stay relevant all game and her ultimate is a great ability for teamfights.
Tristana is a strong champion with a weak early game, but she makes up for it with a very strong lategame. She is weaker than kogmaw as far as scaling is concerned, but she is still a great pick.
Twitch is great in all phases of the game but suffers from a strong escape, he has amazing damage potential, but requires a strong frontline to be able to utilize it.
Varus is a decent poke champion who is strong all game but is far too immobile to take advantage of it. He can destroy teams with his poke and engage with his ultimate, but more often than not he's going to be using it to snare whoever jumps on top of him.
Vayne Requires a lot of practice, but if you put in the time to learn her, she can become a beast. Inexperienced players will have difficulty with her early game, but players with a lot of practice on her can win most lanes with ease.
Top Tier- champions who can be picked in any situation
Corki
Ezreal
Lucian
Sivir
Tier 1- champs who Are strong but not strong enough to be picked in any situation
Cait
Jinx
Kog
Twitch
Trist
Graves
Tier 2- champions who need a buff to be placed higher
MF
Varus
Ashe
Quinn
Skill dependant champions -champions who require a lot of time put into them to be played well. These champs have top tier potential but only if you work to put them there.
Draven
Vayne
NOT PLACING KALISTA IN ANY TIER UNTIL I GET MORE TIME TO TEST HER
TLDR; Read tier list.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cmfxahb | All adcs have different strengths and weaknesses, as well as situations when you want to pick them. I'll list their strengths and create a mini tier list at the end.
Ashe is an adc that has decent engage potential but has weaker damage than most.
Caitlyn is a very safe adc with a weak midgame, but a very strong early game and an average lategame. She is great for sieging.
Corki is a very strong adc in general, he has a good early game,great midgame, and average lategame. He also has siege potential with his rockets and Q.
Draven is a risky pick, and takes a bit of practice. He can Snowball leads very easily and can become a monster with 2 items.
Ezreal is a very safe champion with a very strong early game and a great midgame. His lategame is very dependent on how good you are at landing mystic shots.
Graves is a great lane bully and is amazing for new players because of his passive. His midgame is average and his lategame suffers because of a lack of range, but other than this, he is a great champion and if you can position properly he can become a monster.
Jinx is a very strong champion who Just needs a kill or two to snowball. She becomes stronger as the game goes on, without really having a weak point in the game.She's like kog maw with a different passive.
Kalista is very hard to place at the moment because she hasn't been out for long enough. From my experiences, she is underwhelming if she doesn't go at least average in lanephase, and she needs a couple items to get going. Her objective control with E makes her very strong,since the stacks have no cap.
Kog'Maw is a very strong champion who does much better in competitive play than soloque because he has no mobility and requires peel from the team. He gets stronger as the game goes on, much like Jinx. His siege is very strong and he can Shred through tanks with his w.
Lucian is a very strong champion who has no weak point in the game. This being said, he also never has a very strong point. He is very consistent and only needs 2 items to be able to keep up with any adc in damage.
Miss fortune lacks an escape, and has an ultimate that makes her immobile. She can be very strong with the proper setup but she feels like a weaker version of graves, who can deal more aoe damage while being more mobile. This being said, If you build trinity into shiv, you can be fairly mobile as long as you position properly.
Quinn can be an interesting champion, and can bring out a lot of unexpected damage. Most people will max q first, but in my opinion maxing w first into e will give you better mobility and damage. She can be a lot stronger than people expect, but she is lacking a strong ultimate. It's better to use it after you disengage with your vault for extra distance.
Sivir is a very strong champion who hasn't seen much popularity but is definitely one of the stronger adcs on this list. She can stay relevant all game and really only requires an IE and a stattik to get going.Excellent poke and waveclear helps her stay relevant all game and her ultimate is a great ability for teamfights.
Tristana is a strong champion with a weak early game, but she makes up for it with a very strong lategame. She is weaker than kogmaw as far as scaling is concerned, but she is still a great pick.
Twitch is great in all phases of the game but suffers from a strong escape, he has amazing damage potential, but requires a strong frontline to be able to utilize it.
Varus is a decent poke champion who is strong all game but is far too immobile to take advantage of it. He can destroy teams with his poke and engage with his ultimate, but more often than not he's going to be using it to snare whoever jumps on top of him.
Vayne Requires a lot of practice, but if you put in the time to learn her, she can become a beast. Inexperienced players will have difficulty with her early game, but players with a lot of practice on her can win most lanes with ease.
Top Tier- champions who can be picked in any situation
Corki
Ezreal
Lucian
Sivir
Tier 1- champs who Are strong but not strong enough to be picked in any situation
Cait
Jinx
Kog
Twitch
Trist
Graves
Tier 2- champions who need a buff to be placed higher
MF
Varus
Ashe
Quinn
Skill dependant champions -champions who require a lot of time put into them to be played well. These champs have top tier potential but only if you work to put them there.
Draven
Vayne
NOT PLACING KALISTA IN ANY TIER UNTIL I GET MORE TIME TO TEST HER | Read tier list. |
Muratsvr | Yeah, buff early game champions then ppl play and crush top lane with them. After that buff late game top laners, ppl crush early game too with them. Then buff late game junglers to compete with top laners. Back where we are the only difference is mid and bot is a lot weaker. So you need to buff adcs and mids. Top mains cries cuz adcs are too stronk. Final desicion. NERF EVERYTHING.
TL;DR If something is broken, fix this. Don't break others too. (Like blizzard) | Yeah, buff early game champions then ppl play and crush top lane with them. After that buff late game top laners, ppl crush early game too with them. Then buff late game junglers to compete with top laners. Back where we are the only difference is mid and bot is a lot weaker. So you need to buff adcs and mids. Top mains cries cuz adcs are too stronk. Final desicion. NERF EVERYTHING.
TL;DR If something is broken, fix this. Don't break others too. (Like blizzard)
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | cmftoaq | Yeah, buff early game champions then ppl play and crush top lane with them. After that buff late game top laners, ppl crush early game too with them. Then buff late game junglers to compete with top laners. Back where we are the only difference is mid and bot is a lot weaker. So you need to buff adcs and mids. Top mains cries cuz adcs are too stronk. Final desicion. NERF EVERYTHING. | If something is broken, fix this. Don't break others too. (Like blizzard) |
WranglerOfSkittles | The answers today are pretty thin. I would've expected something more detailed from Daystrom.
In any case, I agree to a point.
>The Ferengi...
The Ferengi opening trade negotiations isn't an act of aggression. The Kareema were on the edge of Dominion space, which at the time the wormhole appeared did not include the wormhole.
> Jem'Hadar soldier Talak'talan beams aboard DS9...
This is true, but the Jem'hadar also destroyed those colonies. Further, the colonies are not in Dominion space, which lies a significant distance from the wormhole -- the Dominion is claiming that essentially the entire Gamma Quadrant is theirs, most especially the wormhole. It would be like the Cardassians warning the Dominion to stay out of the wormhole because it violates their space.
>Starship Down
This is where things are becoming interesting, and the Federation starts to look like the aggressor, but by this time the Jem'hadar had already massacred the Federation (well, Bajoran) colonies. The Dominion first contact was essentially "You invaded our space unknowingly and we killed you all," and during the rescue mission to extract their people from Dominion space, the Dominion destroyed a Federation capital ship while it was retreating. I disagree that these actions are "within the rights of the Dominion" -- a comparable and equally inflammatory claim would be that the Rape of Nanking was within the rights of the Japanese because they controlled the territory at the time.
>Like Senator Vreenak pointed out accurately in In the Pale Moonlight, Sisko is very literally "the man that started the war with the Dominion".
You don't really demonstrate this point.
On the Federation side, Sisko mining the wormhole was the act most precipitous of the Dominion War, but Starfleet at this time were aware of something: The Dominion is much, much more powerful than all of the Alpha Quadrant powers combined. Keep in mind, the forces the Alpha Quadrant prevails over were the Dominion's forces that were trapped within the Alpha Quadrant by a combination of the mining and the actions of the Prophets/wormhole aliens. At some point after the colonies were destroyed (and, more likely, Odo made first contact with the Founders, giving them untold information about the Alpha Quadrant powers they could use against it via the Link), the Founders began to infiltrate the Alpha Quadrant.
The act that irreparably set the two quadrants on the path to war, though, was definitely the Obsidian Order/Tal Shiar joint strike on the Founder homeworld. The Founders are motivated by fear of self-annihilation and, roughly, the idea that the best defense is a good offense. Attacking their homeworld ensured that would eventually attack the Alpha Quadrant. Sisko, to this end, had little to do with it (and was part of the effort to prevent the strike).
> And yet, history will remember him as a hero and the Dominion as the aggressor when in truth, Sisko and the hawks on the Federation Council are war criminals and the Dominion was just a victim, defending its borders from a foreign power that refused to stop violating their territory.
Border violations don't excuse a war of this magnitude, and as I've detailed above, there are plenty of other precipitating factors to the war that don't pin it solely on the Federation or Sisko. At most, he accelerated the war and involved the Romulans, but the die were already cast by that point: the Dominion was going to invade the Alpha Quadrant from the moment they were attacked. If they hadn't been, it's possible war would have evolved from the border disputes, but more likely the Founders would've played a long game, working to destabilize the main powers in the Alpha Quadrant. The paranoia they inspired by doing so, though, lead to the more aggressive Federation stance...etc.
TL;DR: It's cyclical, and both sides escalated to the eventual conflict. It's incorrect to say "Sisko did this."
| The answers today are pretty thin. I would've expected something more detailed from Daystrom.
In any case, I agree to a point.
>The Ferengi...
The Ferengi opening trade negotiations isn't an act of aggression. The Kareema were on the edge of Dominion space, which at the time the wormhole appeared did not include the wormhole.
> Jem'Hadar soldier Talak'talan beams aboard DS9...
This is true, but the Jem'hadar also destroyed those colonies. Further, the colonies are not in Dominion space, which lies a significant distance from the wormhole -- the Dominion is claiming that essentially the entire Gamma Quadrant is theirs, most especially the wormhole. It would be like the Cardassians warning the Dominion to stay out of the wormhole because it violates their space.
>Starship Down
This is where things are becoming interesting, and the Federation starts to look like the aggressor, but by this time the Jem'hadar had already massacred the Federation (well, Bajoran) colonies. The Dominion first contact was essentially "You invaded our space unknowingly and we killed you all," and during the rescue mission to extract their people from Dominion space, the Dominion destroyed a Federation capital ship while it was retreating. I disagree that these actions are "within the rights of the Dominion" -- a comparable and equally inflammatory claim would be that the Rape of Nanking was within the rights of the Japanese because they controlled the territory at the time.
>Like Senator Vreenak pointed out accurately in In the Pale Moonlight, Sisko is very literally "the man that started the war with the Dominion".
You don't really demonstrate this point.
On the Federation side, Sisko mining the wormhole was the act most precipitous of the Dominion War, but Starfleet at this time were aware of something: The Dominion is much, much more powerful than all of the Alpha Quadrant powers combined. Keep in mind, the forces the Alpha Quadrant prevails over were the Dominion's forces that were trapped within the Alpha Quadrant by a combination of the mining and the actions of the Prophets/wormhole aliens. At some point after the colonies were destroyed (and, more likely, Odo made first contact with the Founders, giving them untold information about the Alpha Quadrant powers they could use against it via the Link), the Founders began to infiltrate the Alpha Quadrant.
The act that irreparably set the two quadrants on the path to war, though, was definitely the Obsidian Order/Tal Shiar joint strike on the Founder homeworld. The Founders are motivated by fear of self-annihilation and, roughly, the idea that the best defense is a good offense. Attacking their homeworld ensured that would eventually attack the Alpha Quadrant. Sisko, to this end, had little to do with it (and was part of the effort to prevent the strike).
> And yet, history will remember him as a hero and the Dominion as the aggressor when in truth, Sisko and the hawks on the Federation Council are war criminals and the Dominion was just a victim, defending its borders from a foreign power that refused to stop violating their territory.
Border violations don't excuse a war of this magnitude, and as I've detailed above, there are plenty of other precipitating factors to the war that don't pin it solely on the Federation or Sisko. At most, he accelerated the war and involved the Romulans, but the die were already cast by that point: the Dominion was going to invade the Alpha Quadrant from the moment they were attacked. If they hadn't been, it's possible war would have evolved from the border disputes, but more likely the Founders would've played a long game, working to destabilize the main powers in the Alpha Quadrant. The paranoia they inspired by doing so, though, lead to the more aggressive Federation stance...etc.
TL;DR: It's cyclical, and both sides escalated to the eventual conflict. It's incorrect to say "Sisko did this."
| DaystromInstitute | t5_2whek | cmg6rlk | The answers today are pretty thin. I would've expected something more detailed from Daystrom.
In any case, I agree to a point.
>The Ferengi...
The Ferengi opening trade negotiations isn't an act of aggression. The Kareema were on the edge of Dominion space, which at the time the wormhole appeared did not include the wormhole.
> Jem'Hadar soldier Talak'talan beams aboard DS9...
This is true, but the Jem'hadar also destroyed those colonies. Further, the colonies are not in Dominion space, which lies a significant distance from the wormhole -- the Dominion is claiming that essentially the entire Gamma Quadrant is theirs, most especially the wormhole. It would be like the Cardassians warning the Dominion to stay out of the wormhole because it violates their space.
>Starship Down
This is where things are becoming interesting, and the Federation starts to look like the aggressor, but by this time the Jem'hadar had already massacred the Federation (well, Bajoran) colonies. The Dominion first contact was essentially "You invaded our space unknowingly and we killed you all," and during the rescue mission to extract their people from Dominion space, the Dominion destroyed a Federation capital ship while it was retreating. I disagree that these actions are "within the rights of the Dominion" -- a comparable and equally inflammatory claim would be that the Rape of Nanking was within the rights of the Japanese because they controlled the territory at the time.
>Like Senator Vreenak pointed out accurately in In the Pale Moonlight, Sisko is very literally "the man that started the war with the Dominion".
You don't really demonstrate this point.
On the Federation side, Sisko mining the wormhole was the act most precipitous of the Dominion War, but Starfleet at this time were aware of something: The Dominion is much, much more powerful than all of the Alpha Quadrant powers combined. Keep in mind, the forces the Alpha Quadrant prevails over were the Dominion's forces that were trapped within the Alpha Quadrant by a combination of the mining and the actions of the Prophets/wormhole aliens. At some point after the colonies were destroyed (and, more likely, Odo made first contact with the Founders, giving them untold information about the Alpha Quadrant powers they could use against it via the Link), the Founders began to infiltrate the Alpha Quadrant.
The act that irreparably set the two quadrants on the path to war, though, was definitely the Obsidian Order/Tal Shiar joint strike on the Founder homeworld. The Founders are motivated by fear of self-annihilation and, roughly, the idea that the best defense is a good offense. Attacking their homeworld ensured that would eventually attack the Alpha Quadrant. Sisko, to this end, had little to do with it (and was part of the effort to prevent the strike).
> And yet, history will remember him as a hero and the Dominion as the aggressor when in truth, Sisko and the hawks on the Federation Council are war criminals and the Dominion was just a victim, defending its borders from a foreign power that refused to stop violating their territory.
Border violations don't excuse a war of this magnitude, and as I've detailed above, there are plenty of other precipitating factors to the war that don't pin it solely on the Federation or Sisko. At most, he accelerated the war and involved the Romulans, but the die were already cast by that point: the Dominion was going to invade the Alpha Quadrant from the moment they were attacked. If they hadn't been, it's possible war would have evolved from the border disputes, but more likely the Founders would've played a long game, working to destabilize the main powers in the Alpha Quadrant. The paranoia they inspired by doing so, though, lead to the more aggressive Federation stance...etc. | It's cyclical, and both sides escalated to the eventual conflict. It's incorrect to say "Sisko did this." |
rextraverse | Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Haven't changed my view but I'd like to respond to a few points
> The Ferengi opening trade negotiations isn't an act of aggression.
I would agree. I used the initial point about the Ferengi trade negotiations as a setup for later Federation violations.
> Further, the colonies are not in Dominion space, which lies a significant distance from the wormhole
This is an assumption. We the viewers don't know the borders of Dominion space. We have Talak'talan saying "Here's a list of the vessels we have destroyed for violating *our territory*" and "the Dominion will no longer stand by and allow ships from your side to violate *our territory*".
Could this just be posturing on their side, claiming territory that they didn't claim before? Yes. However, could there also be a legitimate, long standing claim to this space by the Dominion that we as viewers don't know about? Also yes. And if there is a longstanding claim, doesn't the concept of Ignorantia juris non excusat come into play here?
Moreover, after the events of *The Jem'Hadar*, the Dominion has made their claim to this territory abundantly clear. I don't understand how the Federation can just dismiss the Dominion's claims, especially when the Federation has barely two years of history exploring this part of space.
> a comparable and equally inflammatory claim would be that the Rape of Nanking was within the rights of the Japanese because they controlled the territory at the time.
Here I disagree with you... not on the claim itself (obviously), but on the precedent of previous Federation behavior. I'm going to get away from the Nanking example and go back to the Bajoran example as a fictional equivalent because I think if we use real world genocide like Nanking or the Holocaust, it makes it difficult to discuss this topic within the confines and values of the entities in the fictional universe.
It would be fair to say that the Occupation of Bajor would fall under this definition as well. However, the Federation very much was able to justify their policy of non-interference because the Occupation of Bajor occurred within the sovereign borders of Cardassian space. By "within their rights", I mean it in the context that the Federation does not believe they have to right to interfere. The viewpoint that Cardassians have the right to Occupy and enslave the Bajoran race without Federation interference.
> TL;DR: It's cyclical, and both sides escalated to the eventual conflict. It's incorrect to say "Sisko did this."
Does the blame fall solely on Sisko and the Federation? No, of course not. However, I still think there's a legitimate argument to be made that they are the instigators of the conflict. | Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Haven't changed my view but I'd like to respond to a few points
> The Ferengi opening trade negotiations isn't an act of aggression.
I would agree. I used the initial point about the Ferengi trade negotiations as a setup for later Federation violations.
> Further, the colonies are not in Dominion space, which lies a significant distance from the wormhole
This is an assumption. We the viewers don't know the borders of Dominion space. We have Talak'talan saying "Here's a list of the vessels we have destroyed for violating our territory " and "the Dominion will no longer stand by and allow ships from your side to violate our territory ".
Could this just be posturing on their side, claiming territory that they didn't claim before? Yes. However, could there also be a legitimate, long standing claim to this space by the Dominion that we as viewers don't know about? Also yes. And if there is a longstanding claim, doesn't the concept of Ignorantia juris non excusat come into play here?
Moreover, after the events of The Jem'Hadar , the Dominion has made their claim to this territory abundantly clear. I don't understand how the Federation can just dismiss the Dominion's claims, especially when the Federation has barely two years of history exploring this part of space.
> a comparable and equally inflammatory claim would be that the Rape of Nanking was within the rights of the Japanese because they controlled the territory at the time.
Here I disagree with you... not on the claim itself (obviously), but on the precedent of previous Federation behavior. I'm going to get away from the Nanking example and go back to the Bajoran example as a fictional equivalent because I think if we use real world genocide like Nanking or the Holocaust, it makes it difficult to discuss this topic within the confines and values of the entities in the fictional universe.
It would be fair to say that the Occupation of Bajor would fall under this definition as well. However, the Federation very much was able to justify their policy of non-interference because the Occupation of Bajor occurred within the sovereign borders of Cardassian space. By "within their rights", I mean it in the context that the Federation does not believe they have to right to interfere. The viewpoint that Cardassians have the right to Occupy and enslave the Bajoran race without Federation interference.
> TL;DR: It's cyclical, and both sides escalated to the eventual conflict. It's incorrect to say "Sisko did this."
Does the blame fall solely on Sisko and the Federation? No, of course not. However, I still think there's a legitimate argument to be made that they are the instigators of the conflict.
| DaystromInstitute | t5_2whek | cmgav2b | Thanks for your thoughtful responses. Haven't changed my view but I'd like to respond to a few points
> The Ferengi opening trade negotiations isn't an act of aggression.
I would agree. I used the initial point about the Ferengi trade negotiations as a setup for later Federation violations.
> Further, the colonies are not in Dominion space, which lies a significant distance from the wormhole
This is an assumption. We the viewers don't know the borders of Dominion space. We have Talak'talan saying "Here's a list of the vessels we have destroyed for violating our territory " and "the Dominion will no longer stand by and allow ships from your side to violate our territory ".
Could this just be posturing on their side, claiming territory that they didn't claim before? Yes. However, could there also be a legitimate, long standing claim to this space by the Dominion that we as viewers don't know about? Also yes. And if there is a longstanding claim, doesn't the concept of Ignorantia juris non excusat come into play here?
Moreover, after the events of The Jem'Hadar , the Dominion has made their claim to this territory abundantly clear. I don't understand how the Federation can just dismiss the Dominion's claims, especially when the Federation has barely two years of history exploring this part of space.
> a comparable and equally inflammatory claim would be that the Rape of Nanking was within the rights of the Japanese because they controlled the territory at the time.
Here I disagree with you... not on the claim itself (obviously), but on the precedent of previous Federation behavior. I'm going to get away from the Nanking example and go back to the Bajoran example as a fictional equivalent because I think if we use real world genocide like Nanking or the Holocaust, it makes it difficult to discuss this topic within the confines and values of the entities in the fictional universe.
It would be fair to say that the Occupation of Bajor would fall under this definition as well. However, the Federation very much was able to justify their policy of non-interference because the Occupation of Bajor occurred within the sovereign borders of Cardassian space. By "within their rights", I mean it in the context that the Federation does not believe they have to right to interfere. The viewpoint that Cardassians have the right to Occupy and enslave the Bajoran race without Federation interference.
> | It's cyclical, and both sides escalated to the eventual conflict. It's incorrect to say "Sisko did this."
Does the blame fall solely on Sisko and the Federation? No, of course not. However, I still think there's a legitimate argument to be made that they are the instigators of the conflict. |
bobnoski | Right, a couple of things. While I agree that 4K is not that viable yet. Your arguments and stats are not actually that accurate.
while you didn't claim this, it's important to be clear with this. Blu-ray is not fully uncompressed.
The current compression type of Blu-ray is H.264(most of the time).
Now. If we ignore the audio The bit-rate of a Blu-ray video is usually around 20-30 Mbps when using H.264.
the maximum an A/V disk is capable of is 48 Mbps so the audio is not actually that big of a problem as you claim it to be due to the technical limitations of Blu-ray
Recently two new codecs have arisen. VP9 and H.265. Both are about equally efficient and I won't go into detail about them. Though they are the reason I think 4k is a while off. Not all hardware supports them and some only supports one or the other(so until this is fixed, no mass 4k content)
The interesting thing about the codecs is that they are much more efficient. Roughly twice as much.
Companies claim to stream visually lossless 4K at around 20-30Mbps, some even at 8 Mbps but that's only in blind consumer world. So the same speed at 1080p Blu-ray now(which again, is also not actually uncompressed at all). So 4K on Blu-ray is perfectly viable and will look pretty damn good thanks to these new compression types.
Now for the internet part.
Wireless streaming at 4K is more of a receiver support problem. You can get a 5GH router with 802.11ac capabilities and run at an advertised speed of up to 733Mbps over LAN realistically closer to 500Mbps
About the actual internet part. sorry but in places other than the USA 100Mbps is not only avalible now but has been for a couple of years. My current provider(Ziggo) had 120Mbps availible back in 2009 in an all in one pack for €65 [since then they threw the speed up to 180Mbps]( Yes that is my current actual internet speed and I can also download games from steam at ~22 MBps(*8 = 176Mbps) with it.
While these speeds are premium and reasonably expensive.([it's actually not that much more than slower choices](
So basically with a little increase in monthly internet costs(€10 more a month if you are at the cheapest pack on Ziggo for example to get to 90/9)
A decent router starting at ~€35 [here](
you can watch 4k on a [pretty decent tv for a grand](
and [you might even see the difference]( i know it's not a very good test please don't hate me even more...)
So basically the only thing in the way of 4K is companies actually streaming it and Comcast finally giving people decent internet.(no 4K in the USA probably ends up meaning no 4K anywhere)
TL;DR The technology is there and pretty cheap. Screw companies(Mainly Comcast..) | Right, a couple of things. While I agree that 4K is not that viable yet. Your arguments and stats are not actually that accurate.
while you didn't claim this, it's important to be clear with this. Blu-ray is not fully uncompressed.
The current compression type of Blu-ray is H.264(most of the time).
Now. If we ignore the audio The bit-rate of a Blu-ray video is usually around 20-30 Mbps when using H.264.
the maximum an A/V disk is capable of is 48 Mbps so the audio is not actually that big of a problem as you claim it to be due to the technical limitations of Blu-ray
Recently two new codecs have arisen. VP9 and H.265. Both are about equally efficient and I won't go into detail about them. Though they are the reason I think 4k is a while off. Not all hardware supports them and some only supports one or the other(so until this is fixed, no mass 4k content)
The interesting thing about the codecs is that they are much more efficient. Roughly twice as much.
Companies claim to stream visually lossless 4K at around 20-30Mbps, some even at 8 Mbps but that's only in blind consumer world. So the same speed at 1080p Blu-ray now(which again, is also not actually uncompressed at all). So 4K on Blu-ray is perfectly viable and will look pretty damn good thanks to these new compression types.
Now for the internet part.
Wireless streaming at 4K is more of a receiver support problem. You can get a 5GH router with 802.11ac capabilities and run at an advertised speed of up to 733Mbps over LAN realistically closer to 500Mbps
About the actual internet part. sorry but in places other than the USA 100Mbps is not only avalible now but has been for a couple of years. My current provider(Ziggo) had 120Mbps availible back in 2009 in an all in one pack for €65 since then they threw the speed up to 180Mbps with it.
While these speeds are premium and reasonably expensive.([it's actually not that much more than slower choices](
So basically with a little increase in monthly internet costs(€10 more a month if you are at the cheapest pack on Ziggo for example to get to 90/9)
A decent router starting at ~€35 here
So basically the only thing in the way of 4K is companies actually streaming it and Comcast finally giving people decent internet.(no 4K in the USA probably ends up meaning no 4K anywhere)
TL;DR The technology is there and pretty cheap. Screw companies(Mainly Comcast..)
| gadgets | t5_2qgzt | cmhzpo5 | Right, a couple of things. While I agree that 4K is not that viable yet. Your arguments and stats are not actually that accurate.
while you didn't claim this, it's important to be clear with this. Blu-ray is not fully uncompressed.
The current compression type of Blu-ray is H.264(most of the time).
Now. If we ignore the audio The bit-rate of a Blu-ray video is usually around 20-30 Mbps when using H.264.
the maximum an A/V disk is capable of is 48 Mbps so the audio is not actually that big of a problem as you claim it to be due to the technical limitations of Blu-ray
Recently two new codecs have arisen. VP9 and H.265. Both are about equally efficient and I won't go into detail about them. Though they are the reason I think 4k is a while off. Not all hardware supports them and some only supports one or the other(so until this is fixed, no mass 4k content)
The interesting thing about the codecs is that they are much more efficient. Roughly twice as much.
Companies claim to stream visually lossless 4K at around 20-30Mbps, some even at 8 Mbps but that's only in blind consumer world. So the same speed at 1080p Blu-ray now(which again, is also not actually uncompressed at all). So 4K on Blu-ray is perfectly viable and will look pretty damn good thanks to these new compression types.
Now for the internet part.
Wireless streaming at 4K is more of a receiver support problem. You can get a 5GH router with 802.11ac capabilities and run at an advertised speed of up to 733Mbps over LAN realistically closer to 500Mbps
About the actual internet part. sorry but in places other than the USA 100Mbps is not only avalible now but has been for a couple of years. My current provider(Ziggo) had 120Mbps availible back in 2009 in an all in one pack for €65 since then they threw the speed up to 180Mbps with it.
While these speeds are premium and reasonably expensive.([it's actually not that much more than slower choices](
So basically with a little increase in monthly internet costs(€10 more a month if you are at the cheapest pack on Ziggo for example to get to 90/9)
A decent router starting at ~€35 here
So basically the only thing in the way of 4K is companies actually streaming it and Comcast finally giving people decent internet.(no 4K in the USA probably ends up meaning no 4K anywhere) | The technology is there and pretty cheap. Screw companies(Mainly Comcast..) |
ShitArchonXPR | I'm gonna regret making this post...
* Not all genetic population clusters have the same intelligence. Case in point: Ashkenazi Jews. Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews go to the same schools as the Ashkenazim, and they aren't the top scientists in Israel. Genes fucking matter. By extension, they also matter with Gentile populations.
* I hate Romani culture. I believe they need to stop being degenerate and teaching their kids to fail at life if they don't want to be subject to antizigianism from even the most progressive, tolerant people. If the gadje treated them like they treated the gadje, they would call that racism. For anyone from /r/romani reading this, sure, your music is beautiful but we don't live in the 19th century, so the tinker skill isn't used, your blood feud suck, your tackiness with large houses sucks, damn near everything about your culture fucking sucks and you make African-Americans and even Native Americans look like a model minority. I say this more in reference the Finnish Kale than Romani-Americans. You want to live free and not stay in one place? Fine. But don't come crying because you can't have your cake and eat it too. There are certain things to do if you want to be wealthy and successful. Getting pregnant as a teen and having your kids be uneducated isn't one of them. P.S. I have yet to hear a single pleasant word about your prostitutes.
* I think Icelanders, by nature of their height, skull shape, blondism, etc., are genetically superior to all the billions of wide-nosed, prognathid peoples from Filipinos to Bantus to Australian Aborigines. I want Nordic genes to be propagated. I'd be happy for the gene for Jonas Savimbi's nose to die out. That's just my aesthetic preference as an autistic weirdo. I am very glad that I am mostly on of Northwest European ancestry and only 1/16th Cherokee (my Nana's grandfather--she has the classic "mestizo" appearance which made it hard for her to fit in with her fellow Anglo white girls at school). I say this because I don't like shortness or being diabetic, and Scottish genes are much better in both regards. Even though the Cherokee were awesome before Jackson fucked with them.
* I think most Australoid women are hideous. That protruding brow is apelike and archaic, not sexy. Obesity and degeneracy, and lack of boobs and curves, round out the package. The only good part is their blond hair.
**TL;DR** My political views are libertarian but my racial preferences are kind of Nazi.
As a disclaimer, just because humans aren't equal in outcome doesn't mean individuals shouldn't be treated with equal rights. But these are some of the thoughts I've had recently.
| I'm gonna regret making this post...
Not all genetic population clusters have the same intelligence. Case in point: Ashkenazi Jews. Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews go to the same schools as the Ashkenazim, and they aren't the top scientists in Israel. Genes fucking matter. By extension, they also matter with Gentile populations.
I hate Romani culture. I believe they need to stop being degenerate and teaching their kids to fail at life if they don't want to be subject to antizigianism from even the most progressive, tolerant people. If the gadje treated them like they treated the gadje, they would call that racism. For anyone from /r/romani reading this, sure, your music is beautiful but we don't live in the 19th century, so the tinker skill isn't used, your blood feud suck, your tackiness with large houses sucks, damn near everything about your culture fucking sucks and you make African-Americans and even Native Americans look like a model minority. I say this more in reference the Finnish Kale than Romani-Americans. You want to live free and not stay in one place? Fine. But don't come crying because you can't have your cake and eat it too. There are certain things to do if you want to be wealthy and successful. Getting pregnant as a teen and having your kids be uneducated isn't one of them. P.S. I have yet to hear a single pleasant word about your prostitutes.
I think Icelanders, by nature of their height, skull shape, blondism, etc., are genetically superior to all the billions of wide-nosed, prognathid peoples from Filipinos to Bantus to Australian Aborigines. I want Nordic genes to be propagated. I'd be happy for the gene for Jonas Savimbi's nose to die out. That's just my aesthetic preference as an autistic weirdo. I am very glad that I am mostly on of Northwest European ancestry and only 1/16th Cherokee (my Nana's grandfather--she has the classic "mestizo" appearance which made it hard for her to fit in with her fellow Anglo white girls at school). I say this because I don't like shortness or being diabetic, and Scottish genes are much better in both regards. Even though the Cherokee were awesome before Jackson fucked with them.
I think most Australoid women are hideous. That protruding brow is apelike and archaic, not sexy. Obesity and degeneracy, and lack of boobs and curves, round out the package. The only good part is their blond hair.
TL;DR My political views are libertarian but my racial preferences are kind of Nazi.
As a disclaimer, just because humans aren't equal in outcome doesn't mean individuals shouldn't be treated with equal rights. But these are some of the thoughts I've had recently.
| PurplePillDebate | t5_2ya42 | cmi53a9 | I'm gonna regret making this post...
Not all genetic population clusters have the same intelligence. Case in point: Ashkenazi Jews. Mizrahi and Sephardic Jews go to the same schools as the Ashkenazim, and they aren't the top scientists in Israel. Genes fucking matter. By extension, they also matter with Gentile populations.
I hate Romani culture. I believe they need to stop being degenerate and teaching their kids to fail at life if they don't want to be subject to antizigianism from even the most progressive, tolerant people. If the gadje treated them like they treated the gadje, they would call that racism. For anyone from /r/romani reading this, sure, your music is beautiful but we don't live in the 19th century, so the tinker skill isn't used, your blood feud suck, your tackiness with large houses sucks, damn near everything about your culture fucking sucks and you make African-Americans and even Native Americans look like a model minority. I say this more in reference the Finnish Kale than Romani-Americans. You want to live free and not stay in one place? Fine. But don't come crying because you can't have your cake and eat it too. There are certain things to do if you want to be wealthy and successful. Getting pregnant as a teen and having your kids be uneducated isn't one of them. P.S. I have yet to hear a single pleasant word about your prostitutes.
I think Icelanders, by nature of their height, skull shape, blondism, etc., are genetically superior to all the billions of wide-nosed, prognathid peoples from Filipinos to Bantus to Australian Aborigines. I want Nordic genes to be propagated. I'd be happy for the gene for Jonas Savimbi's nose to die out. That's just my aesthetic preference as an autistic weirdo. I am very glad that I am mostly on of Northwest European ancestry and only 1/16th Cherokee (my Nana's grandfather--she has the classic "mestizo" appearance which made it hard for her to fit in with her fellow Anglo white girls at school). I say this because I don't like shortness or being diabetic, and Scottish genes are much better in both regards. Even though the Cherokee were awesome before Jackson fucked with them.
I think most Australoid women are hideous. That protruding brow is apelike and archaic, not sexy. Obesity and degeneracy, and lack of boobs and curves, round out the package. The only good part is their blond hair. | My political views are libertarian but my racial preferences are kind of Nazi.
As a disclaimer, just because humans aren't equal in outcome doesn't mean individuals shouldn't be treated with equal rights. But these are some of the thoughts I've had recently. |
ghostmeatloaf | I haven't seen Foxcatcher or Boyhood yet but in my opinion Birdman was much, much stronger than Gone Girl. I didn't find any of the characters in Gone Girl likeable, or relatable, in the slightest. It was a well made movie but the main character was such an unbearable doofus that I didn't care about his ultimate fate.
The only people I cared about were the sister and the Ben's cat.
I didn't find the ending really enjoyable at all, either. Not in the sense that it wasn't the sort of tidy ending that movies usually give us, it's just that I found the whole [spoilers](#s "Surprise! I was a sociopath this whole time! I was just pretending, for years! My only motivation for doing all of this is that I was really bored and sort of frustrated!") feel really flat.
Many of the more dramatic scenes in the movie also felt really forced, as if they were the result of some cosmically perfect, very convenient timing. [spoilers](#s "Emily Ratajkowski doing her big "I'm the mistress!" reveal minutes before Ben's character was going to do it himself, followed *immediately* by Ben winning his way out of the jam by being charismatic and charming on camera, despite being quite the opposite up until that point, indeed, just minutes prior, with Tyler Perry throwing gummy bears at him for being a dumbass.")
Or how about the scene where [spoilers](#s "The one lady detective was the only competent person in the room during the hospital scene (I understand that it was supposed to be an example of how successful Wife's manipulation of the masses was, but it was a room full of goddamn crime detectives, they're not fucking stupid, remember the bit about the blunt object weapon?), and her entire post-kidnapping-crisis interview was done in a crowded room on live TV, and the hospital staff couldn't be fucking bothered to wash all the goddamn blood off of her.")
The entire movie was wrought with this super heavy dramatic weight that felt totally unearned because, for me personally anyway, I didn't care who lived or died, besides the cat.
tl;dr: got a glimpse of Batman's dong, 10/10 | I haven't seen Foxcatcher or Boyhood yet but in my opinion Birdman was much, much stronger than Gone Girl. I didn't find any of the characters in Gone Girl likeable, or relatable, in the slightest. It was a well made movie but the main character was such an unbearable doofus that I didn't care about his ultimate fate.
The only people I cared about were the sister and the Ben's cat.
I didn't find the ending really enjoyable at all, either. Not in the sense that it wasn't the sort of tidy ending that movies usually give us, it's just that I found the whole spoilers feel really flat.
Many of the more dramatic scenes in the movie also felt really forced, as if they were the result of some cosmically perfect, very convenient timing. spoilers
Or how about the scene where spoilers
The entire movie was wrought with this super heavy dramatic weight that felt totally unearned because, for me personally anyway, I didn't care who lived or died, besides the cat.
tl;dr: got a glimpse of Batman's dong, 10/10
| movies | t5_2qh3s | cmi2ij4 | I haven't seen Foxcatcher or Boyhood yet but in my opinion Birdman was much, much stronger than Gone Girl. I didn't find any of the characters in Gone Girl likeable, or relatable, in the slightest. It was a well made movie but the main character was such an unbearable doofus that I didn't care about his ultimate fate.
The only people I cared about were the sister and the Ben's cat.
I didn't find the ending really enjoyable at all, either. Not in the sense that it wasn't the sort of tidy ending that movies usually give us, it's just that I found the whole spoilers feel really flat.
Many of the more dramatic scenes in the movie also felt really forced, as if they were the result of some cosmically perfect, very convenient timing. spoilers
Or how about the scene where spoilers
The entire movie was wrought with this super heavy dramatic weight that felt totally unearned because, for me personally anyway, I didn't care who lived or died, besides the cat. | got a glimpse of Batman's dong, 10/10 |
ghostmeatloaf | I haven't seen Foxcatcher or Boyhood yet but in my opinion Birdman was much, much stronger than Gone Girl. I didn't find any of the characters in Gone Girl likeable, or relatable, in the slightest. It was a well made movie but the main character was such an unbearable doofus that I didn't care about his ultimate fate.
The only people I cared about were the sister and the Ben's cat.
I didn't find the ending really enjoyable at all, either. Not in the sense that it wasn't the sort of tidy ending that movies usually give us, it's just that I found the whole [spoilers](#s "Surprise! I was a sociopath this whole time! I was just pretending, for years! My only motivation for doing all of this is that I was really bored and sort of frustrated!") feel really flat.
Many of the more dramatic scenes in the movie also felt really forced, as if they were the result of some cosmically perfect, very convenient timing. [spoilers](#s "Emily Ratajkowski doing her big "I'm the mistress!" reveal minutes before Ben's character was going to do it himself, followed *immediately* by Ben winning his way out of the jam by being charismatic and charming on camera, despite being quite the opposite up until that point, indeed, just minutes prior, with Tyler Perry throwing gummy bears at him for being a dumbass.")
Or how about the scene where [spoilers](#s "The one lady detective was the only competent person in the room during the hospital scene (I understand that it was supposed to be an example of how successful Wife's manipulation of the masses was, but it was a room full of goddamn crime detectives, they're not fucking stupid, remember the bit about the blunt object weapon?), and her entire post-kidnapping-crisis interview was done in a crowded room on live TV, and the hospital staff couldn't be fucking bothered to wash all the goddamn blood off of her.")
The entire movie was wrought with this super heavy dramatic weight that felt totally unearned because, for me personally anyway, I didn't care who lived or died, besides the cat.
tl;dr: got a glimpse of Batman's dong, 10/10 | I haven't seen Foxcatcher or Boyhood yet but in my opinion Birdman was much, much stronger than Gone Girl. I didn't find any of the characters in Gone Girl likeable, or relatable, in the slightest. It was a well made movie but the main character was such an unbearable doofus that I didn't care about his ultimate fate.
The only people I cared about were the sister and the Ben's cat.
I didn't find the ending really enjoyable at all, either. Not in the sense that it wasn't the sort of tidy ending that movies usually give us, it's just that I found the whole spoilers feel really flat.
Many of the more dramatic scenes in the movie also felt really forced, as if they were the result of some cosmically perfect, very convenient timing. spoilers
Or how about the scene where spoilers
The entire movie was wrought with this super heavy dramatic weight that felt totally unearned because, for me personally anyway, I didn't care who lived or died, besides the cat.
tl;dr: got a glimpse of Batman's dong, 10/10
| movies | t5_2qh3s | cmi2v05 | I haven't seen Foxcatcher or Boyhood yet but in my opinion Birdman was much, much stronger than Gone Girl. I didn't find any of the characters in Gone Girl likeable, or relatable, in the slightest. It was a well made movie but the main character was such an unbearable doofus that I didn't care about his ultimate fate.
The only people I cared about were the sister and the Ben's cat.
I didn't find the ending really enjoyable at all, either. Not in the sense that it wasn't the sort of tidy ending that movies usually give us, it's just that I found the whole spoilers feel really flat.
Many of the more dramatic scenes in the movie also felt really forced, as if they were the result of some cosmically perfect, very convenient timing. spoilers
Or how about the scene where spoilers
The entire movie was wrought with this super heavy dramatic weight that felt totally unearned because, for me personally anyway, I didn't care who lived or died, besides the cat. | got a glimpse of Batman's dong, 10/10 |
perestroika12 | It honestly looks like they did some post production stuff when they were editing the video. It looks like they may have upped the saturation and maybe added a tad of HDR/bloom.
tl;dr: aftereffects | It honestly looks like they did some post production stuff when they were editing the video. It looks like they may have upped the saturation and maybe added a tad of HDR/bloom.
tl;dr: aftereffects
| spaceengine | t5_2sit9 | cmhop8m | It honestly looks like they did some post production stuff when they were editing the video. It looks like they may have upped the saturation and maybe added a tad of HDR/bloom. | aftereffects |
_armen | I'd like to especially emphasize this point. My interest in GamerGate looked something like this:
1) Allegations of sleeping with reviewers in exchange for coverage
Game reviewers have had a long history of biased coverage due to various financial incentives, and knowing how tightly knit these groups were, it wouldn't surprise me at all if this sort of thing was going on.
That said, all they would have needed to do to appease me was issue a public apology stating they'd be more careful about disclosing possible conflicts of interest and I'd have been satisfied.
2) A dozen "Gamers are dead" articles are simultaneously released, ignoring the issue of corruption
Again, I was pissed but not surprised. I'm *very* familiar with corrupt journalism, and I know that there's a lot of content repackaging and self interest driven reporting among lower tier news outlets. The sexism claims were annoying but expected, and I've taken issue with female representation in games for a while now, so I didn't even mind it being brought up as a discussion topic.
That said, the fact that these all happened simultaneously pretty much confirmed my suspicions of collusion, and I fully expected the sites involved to receive some serious flack for their blatant display of collusion.
At this point, I would have needed to see a handful of serious apologies and talks of the people responsible being fired before I would have felt satisfied. This was a serious issue, but still not one that was unmanageable.
3) Near universal silencing of discussion related to corruption
This is where GamerGate went from a scandal to a legitimate existential threat.
Public discussion has always been the equalizing force on the internet, and it's the reason I'm so attracted to sites like Reddit. I know that no matter how shitty the article is, there will usually be someone who's informed about the issue to call them out on their bullshit in the comments section.
When discussions about corruption started being removed en masse, I realized that games journalists were beyond the point of redemption, and when the censorship spread to sites like Reddit and 4chan, I began to start legitimately panicking. Public discussion was the single trump card that online reporting had over the rest of the mainstream media, and it's the reason I've chosen to get my news through sites like Reddit for years now. The fact that this could be taken away so easily was an amazingly eye opening experience.
At this point, I don't even know how the sites responsible for this mess could fix the situation, and I'm not even sure they're the source of the problem. The issues we're facing extend far beyond poor journalism.
GamerGate's intensity and devotion to these issues has been downright amazing given the incredible amount amount of vile it's been forced to endure, and I hope to see it continue to grow. It's done an amazing job of addressing issues of journalistic integrity, and a culture of skepticism is beginning to form that I hope will extend far beyond the games industry.
**TL;DR:** The issue of silencing voices extends far beyond games journalism and would be reason enough alone to keep this movement alive. | I'd like to especially emphasize this point. My interest in GamerGate looked something like this:
1) Allegations of sleeping with reviewers in exchange for coverage
Game reviewers have had a long history of biased coverage due to various financial incentives, and knowing how tightly knit these groups were, it wouldn't surprise me at all if this sort of thing was going on.
That said, all they would have needed to do to appease me was issue a public apology stating they'd be more careful about disclosing possible conflicts of interest and I'd have been satisfied.
2) A dozen "Gamers are dead" articles are simultaneously released, ignoring the issue of corruption
Again, I was pissed but not surprised. I'm very familiar with corrupt journalism, and I know that there's a lot of content repackaging and self interest driven reporting among lower tier news outlets. The sexism claims were annoying but expected, and I've taken issue with female representation in games for a while now, so I didn't even mind it being brought up as a discussion topic.
That said, the fact that these all happened simultaneously pretty much confirmed my suspicions of collusion, and I fully expected the sites involved to receive some serious flack for their blatant display of collusion.
At this point, I would have needed to see a handful of serious apologies and talks of the people responsible being fired before I would have felt satisfied. This was a serious issue, but still not one that was unmanageable.
3) Near universal silencing of discussion related to corruption
This is where GamerGate went from a scandal to a legitimate existential threat.
Public discussion has always been the equalizing force on the internet, and it's the reason I'm so attracted to sites like Reddit. I know that no matter how shitty the article is, there will usually be someone who's informed about the issue to call them out on their bullshit in the comments section.
When discussions about corruption started being removed en masse, I realized that games journalists were beyond the point of redemption, and when the censorship spread to sites like Reddit and 4chan, I began to start legitimately panicking. Public discussion was the single trump card that online reporting had over the rest of the mainstream media, and it's the reason I've chosen to get my news through sites like Reddit for years now. The fact that this could be taken away so easily was an amazingly eye opening experience.
At this point, I don't even know how the sites responsible for this mess could fix the situation, and I'm not even sure they're the source of the problem. The issues we're facing extend far beyond poor journalism.
GamerGate's intensity and devotion to these issues has been downright amazing given the incredible amount amount of vile it's been forced to endure, and I hope to see it continue to grow. It's done an amazing job of addressing issues of journalistic integrity, and a culture of skepticism is beginning to form that I hope will extend far beyond the games industry.
TL;DR: The issue of silencing voices extends far beyond games journalism and would be reason enough alone to keep this movement alive.
| KotakuInAction | t5_33726 | cmidnd2 | I'd like to especially emphasize this point. My interest in GamerGate looked something like this:
1) Allegations of sleeping with reviewers in exchange for coverage
Game reviewers have had a long history of biased coverage due to various financial incentives, and knowing how tightly knit these groups were, it wouldn't surprise me at all if this sort of thing was going on.
That said, all they would have needed to do to appease me was issue a public apology stating they'd be more careful about disclosing possible conflicts of interest and I'd have been satisfied.
2) A dozen "Gamers are dead" articles are simultaneously released, ignoring the issue of corruption
Again, I was pissed but not surprised. I'm very familiar with corrupt journalism, and I know that there's a lot of content repackaging and self interest driven reporting among lower tier news outlets. The sexism claims were annoying but expected, and I've taken issue with female representation in games for a while now, so I didn't even mind it being brought up as a discussion topic.
That said, the fact that these all happened simultaneously pretty much confirmed my suspicions of collusion, and I fully expected the sites involved to receive some serious flack for their blatant display of collusion.
At this point, I would have needed to see a handful of serious apologies and talks of the people responsible being fired before I would have felt satisfied. This was a serious issue, but still not one that was unmanageable.
3) Near universal silencing of discussion related to corruption
This is where GamerGate went from a scandal to a legitimate existential threat.
Public discussion has always been the equalizing force on the internet, and it's the reason I'm so attracted to sites like Reddit. I know that no matter how shitty the article is, there will usually be someone who's informed about the issue to call them out on their bullshit in the comments section.
When discussions about corruption started being removed en masse, I realized that games journalists were beyond the point of redemption, and when the censorship spread to sites like Reddit and 4chan, I began to start legitimately panicking. Public discussion was the single trump card that online reporting had over the rest of the mainstream media, and it's the reason I've chosen to get my news through sites like Reddit for years now. The fact that this could be taken away so easily was an amazingly eye opening experience.
At this point, I don't even know how the sites responsible for this mess could fix the situation, and I'm not even sure they're the source of the problem. The issues we're facing extend far beyond poor journalism.
GamerGate's intensity and devotion to these issues has been downright amazing given the incredible amount amount of vile it's been forced to endure, and I hope to see it continue to grow. It's done an amazing job of addressing issues of journalistic integrity, and a culture of skepticism is beginning to form that I hope will extend far beyond the games industry. | The issue of silencing voices extends far beyond games journalism and would be reason enough alone to keep this movement alive. |
Cuckoorabbit | Okay, I have **SUCH** strong feelings about Dawn.
Everything she did was out of a feeling of necessity, due to her fixation on keeping everything 'the way it was before' because she believed rescue was coming. And I believe this was a result of her OCD.
OCD creates a desire for control and a discomfort with change in a lot of people - so the end of the world was a double-edged sword for Dawn, because *there was a chance for her to gain power* but **everything has changed**.
The only way for Dawn to be comfortable with the way things were was to take charge and allow certain things to happen for the "greater good" i.e. allowing her men to violate the female wards kept them happy, therefore they were *unlikely to revolt against her and bring down the Status Quo that she'd built and enforced.*
Because of her delusions that the world could return to how it was - she felt she *had* to keep people happy, therefore took the burden of allowing that, but still maintaining boundaries (they only get *their* ward) to seem in charge and powerful - which is the same reason she had Noah beaten, and the same reason she doesn't show weakness or emotion in front of her subordinates.
In her mind, if she was able to keep the hospital running and keep a hierarchy (and to a lesser extent - keep everyone in uniform, doctors and coppers), then when the world eventually returned to normal and she would feel accomplished *because the hospital routine had become a part of her obsessive fixation*!
Think about in - in the week we see Grady Memorial, Dawn doesn't leave the hospital once. Not when two of her wards escape, not when one of her officers is killed. She had to be ever-present to remain on top of things and I honestly think she would've felt like a Captain abandoning a sinking ship if she'd left. Which she could've done by the way - she had weapons, people loyal to her and a way out, but her goal wasn't *just* self-preservation as she led everyone (including Beth) to believe, it was genuinely preservation of the greater good.
**TL;DR**: Dawn's actions are all the result of an incredibly intrusive and controlling mental illness, as well as the desire to save face and appear strong. I don't believe she was bad, just bound by a duty she'd assigned herself (hold the world on her shoulders) and it was ultimately too much for her, which she couldn't admit.
P.S. apologies for rambling I just REALLY WANTED DAWN TO LIVE | Okay, I have SUCH strong feelings about Dawn.
Everything she did was out of a feeling of necessity, due to her fixation on keeping everything 'the way it was before' because she believed rescue was coming. And I believe this was a result of her OCD.
OCD creates a desire for control and a discomfort with change in a lot of people - so the end of the world was a double-edged sword for Dawn, because there was a chance for her to gain power but everything has changed .
The only way for Dawn to be comfortable with the way things were was to take charge and allow certain things to happen for the "greater good" i.e. allowing her men to violate the female wards kept them happy, therefore they were unlikely to revolt against her and bring down the Status Quo that she'd built and enforced.
Because of her delusions that the world could return to how it was - she felt she had to keep people happy, therefore took the burden of allowing that, but still maintaining boundaries (they only get their ward) to seem in charge and powerful - which is the same reason she had Noah beaten, and the same reason she doesn't show weakness or emotion in front of her subordinates.
In her mind, if she was able to keep the hospital running and keep a hierarchy (and to a lesser extent - keep everyone in uniform, doctors and coppers), then when the world eventually returned to normal and she would feel accomplished because the hospital routine had become a part of her obsessive fixation !
Think about in - in the week we see Grady Memorial, Dawn doesn't leave the hospital once. Not when two of her wards escape, not when one of her officers is killed. She had to be ever-present to remain on top of things and I honestly think she would've felt like a Captain abandoning a sinking ship if she'd left. Which she could've done by the way - she had weapons, people loyal to her and a way out, but her goal wasn't just self-preservation as she led everyone (including Beth) to believe, it was genuinely preservation of the greater good.
TL;DR : Dawn's actions are all the result of an incredibly intrusive and controlling mental illness, as well as the desire to save face and appear strong. I don't believe she was bad, just bound by a duty she'd assigned herself (hold the world on her shoulders) and it was ultimately too much for her, which she couldn't admit.
P.S. apologies for rambling I just REALLY WANTED DAWN TO LIVE
| thewalkingdead | t5_2rygv | cmhz4ko | Okay, I have SUCH strong feelings about Dawn.
Everything she did was out of a feeling of necessity, due to her fixation on keeping everything 'the way it was before' because she believed rescue was coming. And I believe this was a result of her OCD.
OCD creates a desire for control and a discomfort with change in a lot of people - so the end of the world was a double-edged sword for Dawn, because there was a chance for her to gain power but everything has changed .
The only way for Dawn to be comfortable with the way things were was to take charge and allow certain things to happen for the "greater good" i.e. allowing her men to violate the female wards kept them happy, therefore they were unlikely to revolt against her and bring down the Status Quo that she'd built and enforced.
Because of her delusions that the world could return to how it was - she felt she had to keep people happy, therefore took the burden of allowing that, but still maintaining boundaries (they only get their ward) to seem in charge and powerful - which is the same reason she had Noah beaten, and the same reason she doesn't show weakness or emotion in front of her subordinates.
In her mind, if she was able to keep the hospital running and keep a hierarchy (and to a lesser extent - keep everyone in uniform, doctors and coppers), then when the world eventually returned to normal and she would feel accomplished because the hospital routine had become a part of her obsessive fixation !
Think about in - in the week we see Grady Memorial, Dawn doesn't leave the hospital once. Not when two of her wards escape, not when one of her officers is killed. She had to be ever-present to remain on top of things and I honestly think she would've felt like a Captain abandoning a sinking ship if she'd left. Which she could've done by the way - she had weapons, people loyal to her and a way out, but her goal wasn't just self-preservation as she led everyone (including Beth) to believe, it was genuinely preservation of the greater good. | Dawn's actions are all the result of an incredibly intrusive and controlling mental illness, as well as the desire to save face and appear strong. I don't believe she was bad, just bound by a duty she'd assigned herself (hold the world on her shoulders) and it was ultimately too much for her, which she couldn't admit.
P.S. apologies for rambling I just REALLY WANTED DAWN TO LIVE |
Kainsin | This is my list, others' may vary:
Priority 1: Kupon I-Seal and +2 update items for Empy +2 gear. I already have everything I want from here, but I may trick out one more job on this login campaign.
Priority 2: Salvage armor. This round is Morrigan gear and since I play mages I'll be picking it up. Never really did Salvage before I left.
Priority 3: Seals on main, shanks on mules. Or KS seals on mules to do KS99... depends on how much time I have and if I'll be able to solo it with my dual-box char.
tl;dr: Empyrean upgrade items & Salvage gear > Seals/Shanks | This is my list, others' may vary:
Priority 1: Kupon I-Seal and +2 update items for Empy +2 gear. I already have everything I want from here, but I may trick out one more job on this login campaign.
Priority 2: Salvage armor. This round is Morrigan gear and since I play mages I'll be picking it up. Never really did Salvage before I left.
Priority 3: Seals on main, shanks on mules. Or KS seals on mules to do KS99... depends on how much time I have and if I'll be able to solo it with my dual-box char.
tl;dr: Empyrean upgrade items & Salvage gear > Seals/Shanks
| ffxi | t5_2qn97 | cmi4ee6 | This is my list, others' may vary:
Priority 1: Kupon I-Seal and +2 update items for Empy +2 gear. I already have everything I want from here, but I may trick out one more job on this login campaign.
Priority 2: Salvage armor. This round is Morrigan gear and since I play mages I'll be picking it up. Never really did Salvage before I left.
Priority 3: Seals on main, shanks on mules. Or KS seals on mules to do KS99... depends on how much time I have and if I'll be able to solo it with my dual-box char. | Empyrean upgrade items & Salvage gear > Seals/Shanks |
SCMP_Panda | Thats not what I'm saying at all, if you want me to state it in the shortest way possible i would have to say: Both sides are flinging shit at each other and its not very productive.
And when I said that I find both positions silly i probably should have added some more context in there, well here goes. I find modern/third wave feminism to be redundant, as to me it seems that people at this point are arguing and fighting over something that can be solved with a live and let live policy. As in, if two people want to do X than its none of my business and as long as they are consenting adults then go ahead. I'm not trying to dismiss your experiences or the experiences of people here I am just trying to find some common ground. I want to learn and to be able to hopefully find points to agree on, however small those can be. As I have said what's important to me is equality of opportunity, the outcome wont always be equal and thats perfectly ok as long as people succeed and advance based on merit. If a man can do Y job better than a woman then he deserves to work there, just as if a woman can do X job better she deserves to do that. We are a sexually dimorphic species, there are going to be differences and inequalities no matter what we do, so as long as everyone has the ability to do what they want and how they want then thats good in my books.
People treating other people poorly is not a good thing at all. I don't really care what gender they are.
And I completely understand why you would be bitter, when I was labeled as a terrorist for playing video games that made me pretty bitter for sure. And let me make this absolutely clear, feminism in a historical context has brought equality and improved everyones lives, studies show that a society gets exponentially healthier when everyone is treated equally. I am in no way saying that women deserve less rights or need to be knocked down at all.
I think that with there being such a small gap left, and with each gender being above or below the other in differing aspects of society that if everyone banded together for the sake of equality and put their own movements doctrines aside it would be a lot more productive. For example if a man is abusing his wife that is obviously wrong, and it is highly condemned in society and the punishments are severe. But if a wife is abusing her husband the situation is usually laughed at and passed off as the man being weak. While there are logical reasons for this behaviour it does not make it right. And at the same time a provocative woman is called a slut, while that quality is praised in guys. Again I see logical reasons about why people think that but it doesn't make it right.
I'm not trying to speak for anyone else but when I see people say that both sides should be able to work together, then when I make an effort to reach out and possible help bridge the divide and I get slapped down and feel attacked by one side or another it just seems futile. If a small amount of people from both sides of the argument sat down and had a good conversation, where ideas were stated and debated I really think that it would benefit everyone. I think that that would be able to create progress not in the name of feminism or mens right, but for the purpose of actual equality.
Oh and about the shirt the reason that example comes to mind is because when people tell women to wear they are labeled as misogynists and bigots. But reducing a man to tears on national television i apparently ok and justifiable over the shirt that he was wearing, that was made for him by a female friend of his. To me that seems like a double standard, where telling a woman what to wear is wrong, but its ok to shame a man for his shirt. And putting that aside its a shirt, maybe i just don't understand why its such a big deal and I'm more than happy to admit that that might be the case.
If I could say a bit about my experience about how masculinity has harmed me, I suffer with some mental illnesses, and when I have been open about it to women I have gotten laughed at and mocked for having feelings. So when I was at group therapy once I asked if there was a space for just men, since in my mind that is where I feel the most secure sharing my feelings and I know men who have the same view. When I asked that the person running the course couldn't take my question seriously... which is discouraging to say the least. Then when I get told that its my fault that women don't feel safe you can probably imagine why that confuses and upsets me, I cannot find a space where I feel safe sharing my thoughts, feelings, and problems among peers because that kind of group would be socially unacceptable and offends people who aren't involved.
TLDR: People flinging shit doesn't help anyone, lets put down our labels and ideologies and make progress for equality. | Thats not what I'm saying at all, if you want me to state it in the shortest way possible i would have to say: Both sides are flinging shit at each other and its not very productive.
And when I said that I find both positions silly i probably should have added some more context in there, well here goes. I find modern/third wave feminism to be redundant, as to me it seems that people at this point are arguing and fighting over something that can be solved with a live and let live policy. As in, if two people want to do X than its none of my business and as long as they are consenting adults then go ahead. I'm not trying to dismiss your experiences or the experiences of people here I am just trying to find some common ground. I want to learn and to be able to hopefully find points to agree on, however small those can be. As I have said what's important to me is equality of opportunity, the outcome wont always be equal and thats perfectly ok as long as people succeed and advance based on merit. If a man can do Y job better than a woman then he deserves to work there, just as if a woman can do X job better she deserves to do that. We are a sexually dimorphic species, there are going to be differences and inequalities no matter what we do, so as long as everyone has the ability to do what they want and how they want then thats good in my books.
People treating other people poorly is not a good thing at all. I don't really care what gender they are.
And I completely understand why you would be bitter, when I was labeled as a terrorist for playing video games that made me pretty bitter for sure. And let me make this absolutely clear, feminism in a historical context has brought equality and improved everyones lives, studies show that a society gets exponentially healthier when everyone is treated equally. I am in no way saying that women deserve less rights or need to be knocked down at all.
I think that with there being such a small gap left, and with each gender being above or below the other in differing aspects of society that if everyone banded together for the sake of equality and put their own movements doctrines aside it would be a lot more productive. For example if a man is abusing his wife that is obviously wrong, and it is highly condemned in society and the punishments are severe. But if a wife is abusing her husband the situation is usually laughed at and passed off as the man being weak. While there are logical reasons for this behaviour it does not make it right. And at the same time a provocative woman is called a slut, while that quality is praised in guys. Again I see logical reasons about why people think that but it doesn't make it right.
I'm not trying to speak for anyone else but when I see people say that both sides should be able to work together, then when I make an effort to reach out and possible help bridge the divide and I get slapped down and feel attacked by one side or another it just seems futile. If a small amount of people from both sides of the argument sat down and had a good conversation, where ideas were stated and debated I really think that it would benefit everyone. I think that that would be able to create progress not in the name of feminism or mens right, but for the purpose of actual equality.
Oh and about the shirt the reason that example comes to mind is because when people tell women to wear they are labeled as misogynists and bigots. But reducing a man to tears on national television i apparently ok and justifiable over the shirt that he was wearing, that was made for him by a female friend of his. To me that seems like a double standard, where telling a woman what to wear is wrong, but its ok to shame a man for his shirt. And putting that aside its a shirt, maybe i just don't understand why its such a big deal and I'm more than happy to admit that that might be the case.
If I could say a bit about my experience about how masculinity has harmed me, I suffer with some mental illnesses, and when I have been open about it to women I have gotten laughed at and mocked for having feelings. So when I was at group therapy once I asked if there was a space for just men, since in my mind that is where I feel the most secure sharing my feelings and I know men who have the same view. When I asked that the person running the course couldn't take my question seriously... which is discouraging to say the least. Then when I get told that its my fault that women don't feel safe you can probably imagine why that confuses and upsets me, I cannot find a space where I feel safe sharing my thoughts, feelings, and problems among peers because that kind of group would be socially unacceptable and offends people who aren't involved.
TLDR: People flinging shit doesn't help anyone, lets put down our labels and ideologies and make progress for equality.
| TrollXChromosomes | t5_2sekm | cmiseg7 | Thats not what I'm saying at all, if you want me to state it in the shortest way possible i would have to say: Both sides are flinging shit at each other and its not very productive.
And when I said that I find both positions silly i probably should have added some more context in there, well here goes. I find modern/third wave feminism to be redundant, as to me it seems that people at this point are arguing and fighting over something that can be solved with a live and let live policy. As in, if two people want to do X than its none of my business and as long as they are consenting adults then go ahead. I'm not trying to dismiss your experiences or the experiences of people here I am just trying to find some common ground. I want to learn and to be able to hopefully find points to agree on, however small those can be. As I have said what's important to me is equality of opportunity, the outcome wont always be equal and thats perfectly ok as long as people succeed and advance based on merit. If a man can do Y job better than a woman then he deserves to work there, just as if a woman can do X job better she deserves to do that. We are a sexually dimorphic species, there are going to be differences and inequalities no matter what we do, so as long as everyone has the ability to do what they want and how they want then thats good in my books.
People treating other people poorly is not a good thing at all. I don't really care what gender they are.
And I completely understand why you would be bitter, when I was labeled as a terrorist for playing video games that made me pretty bitter for sure. And let me make this absolutely clear, feminism in a historical context has brought equality and improved everyones lives, studies show that a society gets exponentially healthier when everyone is treated equally. I am in no way saying that women deserve less rights or need to be knocked down at all.
I think that with there being such a small gap left, and with each gender being above or below the other in differing aspects of society that if everyone banded together for the sake of equality and put their own movements doctrines aside it would be a lot more productive. For example if a man is abusing his wife that is obviously wrong, and it is highly condemned in society and the punishments are severe. But if a wife is abusing her husband the situation is usually laughed at and passed off as the man being weak. While there are logical reasons for this behaviour it does not make it right. And at the same time a provocative woman is called a slut, while that quality is praised in guys. Again I see logical reasons about why people think that but it doesn't make it right.
I'm not trying to speak for anyone else but when I see people say that both sides should be able to work together, then when I make an effort to reach out and possible help bridge the divide and I get slapped down and feel attacked by one side or another it just seems futile. If a small amount of people from both sides of the argument sat down and had a good conversation, where ideas were stated and debated I really think that it would benefit everyone. I think that that would be able to create progress not in the name of feminism or mens right, but for the purpose of actual equality.
Oh and about the shirt the reason that example comes to mind is because when people tell women to wear they are labeled as misogynists and bigots. But reducing a man to tears on national television i apparently ok and justifiable over the shirt that he was wearing, that was made for him by a female friend of his. To me that seems like a double standard, where telling a woman what to wear is wrong, but its ok to shame a man for his shirt. And putting that aside its a shirt, maybe i just don't understand why its such a big deal and I'm more than happy to admit that that might be the case.
If I could say a bit about my experience about how masculinity has harmed me, I suffer with some mental illnesses, and when I have been open about it to women I have gotten laughed at and mocked for having feelings. So when I was at group therapy once I asked if there was a space for just men, since in my mind that is where I feel the most secure sharing my feelings and I know men who have the same view. When I asked that the person running the course couldn't take my question seriously... which is discouraging to say the least. Then when I get told that its my fault that women don't feel safe you can probably imagine why that confuses and upsets me, I cannot find a space where I feel safe sharing my thoughts, feelings, and problems among peers because that kind of group would be socially unacceptable and offends people who aren't involved. | People flinging shit doesn't help anyone, lets put down our labels and ideologies and make progress for equality. |
Lethalfresa | Hi :)
After graduating high school I was in high pursuit of a career in the medical field. I have 100s and 100s aof hours worth of patient care experience (from age 16 to 24), and all of the other typical things people seem to be concerned with in the pursuit of becoming a P.A. or M.D.
I still love trying to understand as much as possible about the human body and medicine overall but I am not exactly sure that I want to be a health care provider. I guess it's genuine interest, curiosity, respect, fun, relaxing, to read and learn as much as possible about all of this since it is relevant to us all.
I am still working on an undergraduate degree and still have NO idea what I want to do afterwards though I really love the current curriculum I am following B.S. Environmental Biology and minor in Organic Chemistry. I guess I'll just see what happens.
It's as if I know what I like and want to do BUT it just seems like a huge mess of different areas and I'm not sure there is one program to satisfy my interests. I will stop here because I can go on and on about this.
If only you saw everything that I am subscribed to. *Is that information public, o.h. m.y.*
tl;dr - Genuine interest in the field.
| Hi :)
After graduating high school I was in high pursuit of a career in the medical field. I have 100s and 100s aof hours worth of patient care experience (from age 16 to 24), and all of the other typical things people seem to be concerned with in the pursuit of becoming a P.A. or M.D.
I still love trying to understand as much as possible about the human body and medicine overall but I am not exactly sure that I want to be a health care provider. I guess it's genuine interest, curiosity, respect, fun, relaxing, to read and learn as much as possible about all of this since it is relevant to us all.
I am still working on an undergraduate degree and still have NO idea what I want to do afterwards though I really love the current curriculum I am following B.S. Environmental Biology and minor in Organic Chemistry. I guess I'll just see what happens.
It's as if I know what I like and want to do BUT it just seems like a huge mess of different areas and I'm not sure there is one program to satisfy my interests. I will stop here because I can go on and on about this.
If only you saw everything that I am subscribed to. Is that information public, o.h. m.y.
tl;dr - Genuine interest in the field.
| medicalschool | t5_2re2p | cmimqno | Hi :)
After graduating high school I was in high pursuit of a career in the medical field. I have 100s and 100s aof hours worth of patient care experience (from age 16 to 24), and all of the other typical things people seem to be concerned with in the pursuit of becoming a P.A. or M.D.
I still love trying to understand as much as possible about the human body and medicine overall but I am not exactly sure that I want to be a health care provider. I guess it's genuine interest, curiosity, respect, fun, relaxing, to read and learn as much as possible about all of this since it is relevant to us all.
I am still working on an undergraduate degree and still have NO idea what I want to do afterwards though I really love the current curriculum I am following B.S. Environmental Biology and minor in Organic Chemistry. I guess I'll just see what happens.
It's as if I know what I like and want to do BUT it just seems like a huge mess of different areas and I'm not sure there is one program to satisfy my interests. I will stop here because I can go on and on about this.
If only you saw everything that I am subscribed to. Is that information public, o.h. m.y. | Genuine interest in the field. |
swovy5 | I have the Stealth 500P and also have this problem. I'm anxious to find a good headset with mic monitoring. I feel like there aren't many options out there.
Also, thank you for putting the tl;dr at the top. | I have the Stealth 500P and also have this problem. I'm anxious to find a good headset with mic monitoring. I feel like there aren't many options out there.
Also, thank you for putting the tl;dr at the top.
| gaming | t5_2qh03 | cmiturd | I have the Stealth 500P and also have this problem. I'm anxious to find a good headset with mic monitoring. I feel like there aren't many options out there.
Also, thank you for putting the | at the top. |
ReverendSaintJay | The unregulated nature of mechanical mods means that any battery on the planet will run any build you put on it, right up until the point that it fails (violently) in your hand. This, in my opinion, is a dangerous thing.
The "safe" assumption to make is that any non-VTC4/5 battery will have a Maximum Continuous Discharge rating of 20A. There are some out there with "pulse" ratings that are higher, but unless you have a spec sheet indicating exactly what duration "pulse" those batteries can support, you have to assume 20A is the max safe limit.
20A at 4.2V needs a build with a resistance of 0.21 ohms and will generate 84w of power. Now, this is a "theoretical" maximum, in practice you have to deal with issues like voltage drop (the loss of electrical potential due to the materials used in the mod), battery sag (where the internal resistance of the battery increases under load), and the fact that the LiPo can only maintain 4.2v for the first 2-5% of the discharge curve. In reality your vape on that build is going to be around 62w until the batteries drain too much to be usable.
25A at 4.2V needs a 0.168 build, and has a theoretical output of 105w. But again, over the broadest distribution of discharge rates you will realistically only get around 77w. This means that you will be exceeding the maximum safe rating for the battery and still not getting the performance you are looking for.
tl;dr to get 100w consistently you need authentic 30w batteries or the IPV3 that you have on the way. | The unregulated nature of mechanical mods means that any battery on the planet will run any build you put on it, right up until the point that it fails (violently) in your hand. This, in my opinion, is a dangerous thing.
The "safe" assumption to make is that any non-VTC4/5 battery will have a Maximum Continuous Discharge rating of 20A. There are some out there with "pulse" ratings that are higher, but unless you have a spec sheet indicating exactly what duration "pulse" those batteries can support, you have to assume 20A is the max safe limit.
20A at 4.2V needs a build with a resistance of 0.21 ohms and will generate 84w of power. Now, this is a "theoretical" maximum, in practice you have to deal with issues like voltage drop (the loss of electrical potential due to the materials used in the mod), battery sag (where the internal resistance of the battery increases under load), and the fact that the LiPo can only maintain 4.2v for the first 2-5% of the discharge curve. In reality your vape on that build is going to be around 62w until the batteries drain too much to be usable.
25A at 4.2V needs a 0.168 build, and has a theoretical output of 105w. But again, over the broadest distribution of discharge rates you will realistically only get around 77w. This means that you will be exceeding the maximum safe rating for the battery and still not getting the performance you are looking for.
tl;dr to get 100w consistently you need authentic 30w batteries or the IPV3 that you have on the way.
| electronic_cigarette | t5_2qmlu | cmiznsk | The unregulated nature of mechanical mods means that any battery on the planet will run any build you put on it, right up until the point that it fails (violently) in your hand. This, in my opinion, is a dangerous thing.
The "safe" assumption to make is that any non-VTC4/5 battery will have a Maximum Continuous Discharge rating of 20A. There are some out there with "pulse" ratings that are higher, but unless you have a spec sheet indicating exactly what duration "pulse" those batteries can support, you have to assume 20A is the max safe limit.
20A at 4.2V needs a build with a resistance of 0.21 ohms and will generate 84w of power. Now, this is a "theoretical" maximum, in practice you have to deal with issues like voltage drop (the loss of electrical potential due to the materials used in the mod), battery sag (where the internal resistance of the battery increases under load), and the fact that the LiPo can only maintain 4.2v for the first 2-5% of the discharge curve. In reality your vape on that build is going to be around 62w until the batteries drain too much to be usable.
25A at 4.2V needs a 0.168 build, and has a theoretical output of 105w. But again, over the broadest distribution of discharge rates you will realistically only get around 77w. This means that you will be exceeding the maximum safe rating for the battery and still not getting the performance you are looking for. | to get 100w consistently you need authentic 30w batteries or the IPV3 that you have on the way. |
Amadan | > Howver the standard rotation does not use bow heavily ^
Rotation, no. But it is situationally awesome, since it *destroys* anything large (buildings, dragons, huge-ass wurms, you name it, it's going down in a hail of ice).
There's lots and lots in Ele set that is not in rotation, but is situationally awesome. For a trivial example, Staff Air 4, Air 5 + Arcane Wave, Arcane Brilliance is permaswiftness, completely stupidly awesome when you need to haul ass, but completely stupid in a rotation.
You pull out the bow when you need it, and it is awesome. Then you stash it away, and be awesome in other ways.
Additional advice to OP: learn to stancedance. It is a very, very important skill to have. When you learn where you can camp, start camping in an element; but if you *start out* by learning how to camp in an element, you will turn out to be a very sucky Ele. People who get too used to being in one element usually think Ele to be a hard, unrewarding and boring profession; it is anything but.
**tl;dr:** Stance dance is core to Ele play, and deciding when not to is an advanced skill; **not** vice versa. | > Howver the standard rotation does not use bow heavily ^
Rotation, no. But it is situationally awesome, since it destroys anything large (buildings, dragons, huge-ass wurms, you name it, it's going down in a hail of ice).
There's lots and lots in Ele set that is not in rotation, but is situationally awesome. For a trivial example, Staff Air 4, Air 5 + Arcane Wave, Arcane Brilliance is permaswiftness, completely stupidly awesome when you need to haul ass, but completely stupid in a rotation.
You pull out the bow when you need it, and it is awesome. Then you stash it away, and be awesome in other ways.
Additional advice to OP: learn to stancedance. It is a very, very important skill to have. When you learn where you can camp, start camping in an element; but if you start out by learning how to camp in an element, you will turn out to be a very sucky Ele. People who get too used to being in one element usually think Ele to be a hard, unrewarding and boring profession; it is anything but.
tl;dr: Stance dance is core to Ele play, and deciding when not to is an advanced skill; not vice versa.
| Guildwars2 | t5_2r9po | cmkrus0 | Howver the standard rotation does not use bow heavily ^
Rotation, no. But it is situationally awesome, since it destroys anything large (buildings, dragons, huge-ass wurms, you name it, it's going down in a hail of ice).
There's lots and lots in Ele set that is not in rotation, but is situationally awesome. For a trivial example, Staff Air 4, Air 5 + Arcane Wave, Arcane Brilliance is permaswiftness, completely stupidly awesome when you need to haul ass, but completely stupid in a rotation.
You pull out the bow when you need it, and it is awesome. Then you stash it away, and be awesome in other ways.
Additional advice to OP: learn to stancedance. It is a very, very important skill to have. When you learn where you can camp, start camping in an element; but if you start out by learning how to camp in an element, you will turn out to be a very sucky Ele. People who get too used to being in one element usually think Ele to be a hard, unrewarding and boring profession; it is anything but. | Stance dance is core to Ele play, and deciding when not to is an advanced skill; not vice versa. |
blahprath | Going out on a limb here, but just in case you believe in a higher power and want a theological perspective, this is a classic argument between Calvinists (predestination/fate), and Arminianism (free will).
*Very* long story short, it is very difficult to make a case to be one or the other. The most rational and logical conclusion IMHO, is both occur simultaneously. Not even necessarily a combination which results in a 100% sum of will, but 100% of both. If you're open to the idea of an omnipotent higher power, this is the only way in which sovereignty can exist both for God and man.
EDIT: **tl;dr:** All of both. | Going out on a limb here, but just in case you believe in a higher power and want a theological perspective, this is a classic argument between Calvinists (predestination/fate), and Arminianism (free will).
Very long story short, it is very difficult to make a case to be one or the other. The most rational and logical conclusion IMHO, is both occur simultaneously. Not even necessarily a combination which results in a 100% sum of will, but 100% of both. If you're open to the idea of an omnipotent higher power, this is the only way in which sovereignty can exist both for God and man.
EDIT: tl;dr: All of both.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cmj0xop | Going out on a limb here, but just in case you believe in a higher power and want a theological perspective, this is a classic argument between Calvinists (predestination/fate), and Arminianism (free will).
Very long story short, it is very difficult to make a case to be one or the other. The most rational and logical conclusion IMHO, is both occur simultaneously. Not even necessarily a combination which results in a 100% sum of will, but 100% of both. If you're open to the idea of an omnipotent higher power, this is the only way in which sovereignty can exist both for God and man.
EDIT: | All of both. |
VerticallyImpaired | There is a very delicate catch 22 here. If she plays Destiny I will be required to coach and guide her. This removes the possibility of higher level strikes, raids, nightfall, and competitive PvP.
tl;dr - Destiny is mine and mine alone. | There is a very delicate catch 22 here. If she plays Destiny I will be required to coach and guide her. This removes the possibility of higher level strikes, raids, nightfall, and competitive PvP.
tl;dr - Destiny is mine and mine alone.
| DestinyTheGame | t5_2vq0w | cmj5mxx | There is a very delicate catch 22 here. If she plays Destiny I will be required to coach and guide her. This removes the possibility of higher level strikes, raids, nightfall, and competitive PvP. | Destiny is mine and mine alone. |
smao | Överskott i handels/-bytesbalans säger bara att vi exporterar (nominellt i egen valuta) mer än vi importerar, säger ingenting om vår valutas korskurs-påverkan (svag alt. stark krona).
Nollsummespel i rikedom map kronans korskurs, ett räkneexempel:
| *Korskurs* | *Upp/Ned* | [Import] *(Standard)enhet* | [Import] *Kostnad (egen valuta)* | [Export] *(Standard)enhet* | [Export] *Säljpris (utländsk valuta)* | [Export] *Säljpris (egen valuta)* | [Nominell Vinst] *egen valuta* | [Reell Vinst] *justerad för korskurs*
:-|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|:-:|
Stark | 1.2 | 20 % | *100* | 83 | *100* | 200 | 167 | 84 | 100
Paritet | 1 | 0 % | *100* | 100 | *100* | 200 | 200 | 100 | 100
Svag | 0.8 | -20 % | *100* | 125 | *100* | 200 | 250 | 125\* | 100
Alltså. Det enda som händer om vi försvagar vår kronkurs är att vi importerar inflation\*. Företagen blir nominellt rikare (=*fler* pengar) men pengarna är inte lika mycket värda längre (=inte *mer* pengar).
Alltså ett **nollsummespel i (reell) rikedom** med enda följd att vi nu **importerat inflation** och tagit ett steg närmare bananrepublik och på så sätt skrämt iväg utländska investerare.
TL;DR
Att bli "rikare" nominellt (men inte realt) är detsamma som **importerad inflation**. | Överskott i handels/-bytesbalans säger bara att vi exporterar (nominellt i egen valuta) mer än vi importerar, säger ingenting om vår valutas korskurs-påverkan (svag alt. stark krona).
Nollsummespel i rikedom map kronans korskurs, ett räkneexempel:
Korskurs
Upp/Ned
[Import] (Standard)enhet
[Import] Kostnad (egen valuta)
[Export] (Standard)enhet
[Export] Säljpris (utländsk valuta)
[Export] Säljpris (egen valuta)
[Nominell Vinst] egen valuta
[Reell Vinst] justerad för korskurs
Stark
1.2
20 %
100
83
100
200
167
84
100
Paritet
1
0 %
100
100
100
200
200
100
100
Svag
0.8
-20 %
100
125
100
200
250
125*
100
Alltså. Det enda som händer om vi försvagar vår kronkurs är att vi importerar inflation*. Företagen blir nominellt rikare (= fler pengar) men pengarna är inte lika mycket värda längre (=inte mer pengar).
Alltså ett nollsummespel i (reell) rikedom med enda följd att vi nu importerat inflation och tagit ett steg närmare bananrepublik och på så sätt skrämt iväg utländska investerare.
TL;DR
Att bli "rikare" nominellt (men inte realt) är detsamma som importerad inflation .
| sweden | t5_2qofe | cmjb7gu | Överskott i handels/-bytesbalans säger bara att vi exporterar (nominellt i egen valuta) mer än vi importerar, säger ingenting om vår valutas korskurs-påverkan (svag alt. stark krona).
Nollsummespel i rikedom map kronans korskurs, ett räkneexempel:
Korskurs
Upp/Ned
[Import] (Standard)enhet
[Import] Kostnad (egen valuta)
[Export] (Standard)enhet
[Export] Säljpris (utländsk valuta)
[Export] Säljpris (egen valuta)
[Nominell Vinst] egen valuta
[Reell Vinst] justerad för korskurs
Stark
1.2
20 %
100
83
100
200
167
84
100
Paritet
1
0 %
100
100
100
200
200
100
100
Svag
0.8
-20 %
100
125
100
200
250
125*
100
Alltså. Det enda som händer om vi försvagar vår kronkurs är att vi importerar inflation*. Företagen blir nominellt rikare (= fler pengar) men pengarna är inte lika mycket värda längre (=inte mer pengar).
Alltså ett nollsummespel i (reell) rikedom med enda följd att vi nu importerat inflation och tagit ett steg närmare bananrepublik och på så sätt skrämt iväg utländska investerare. | Att bli "rikare" nominellt (men inte realt) är detsamma som importerad inflation . |
wote89 | That goes back to the whole environment in which these terms are common. Usually, "cisgendered" only comes up when the conversation involves *non*-cisgendered individuals (usually--but not always--transgendered people) and their gender identity. Since there's no neutral state with regard to gender in that context, the term "cisgender" serves to avoid normalizing one type of gender identity over another.
While this is usually characterized as "special treatment" or "special snowflakism", the main reason this is done is to avoid pigeonholing discussion. There are certain questions you either can't ask or won't think to ask if you frame gender as "normal" and "trans" (for instance)--not out of malice, necessarily, but because there are certain assumptions that you have to make in order to use those terms.
tl;dr, It's so we can discuss issues of gender without prejudicing discussion by assuming one state is "normal" and another is not. | That goes back to the whole environment in which these terms are common. Usually, "cisgendered" only comes up when the conversation involves non -cisgendered individuals (usually--but not always--transgendered people) and their gender identity. Since there's no neutral state with regard to gender in that context, the term "cisgender" serves to avoid normalizing one type of gender identity over another.
While this is usually characterized as "special treatment" or "special snowflakism", the main reason this is done is to avoid pigeonholing discussion. There are certain questions you either can't ask or won't think to ask if you frame gender as "normal" and "trans" (for instance)--not out of malice, necessarily, but because there are certain assumptions that you have to make in order to use those terms.
tl;dr, It's so we can discuss issues of gender without prejudicing discussion by assuming one state is "normal" and another is not.
| CFB | t5_2qm9d | cmk2tvy | That goes back to the whole environment in which these terms are common. Usually, "cisgendered" only comes up when the conversation involves non -cisgendered individuals (usually--but not always--transgendered people) and their gender identity. Since there's no neutral state with regard to gender in that context, the term "cisgender" serves to avoid normalizing one type of gender identity over another.
While this is usually characterized as "special treatment" or "special snowflakism", the main reason this is done is to avoid pigeonholing discussion. There are certain questions you either can't ask or won't think to ask if you frame gender as "normal" and "trans" (for instance)--not out of malice, necessarily, but because there are certain assumptions that you have to make in order to use those terms. | It's so we can discuss issues of gender without prejudicing discussion by assuming one state is "normal" and another is not. |
somekindofsalad | i blew myself up on an 'invisible' piece of lvl 50 environment the first time down there, got sniped by those two hobbies the next time (guess they're solar lololol instadeath), next time i went to my regular spot on the second 'level' of the nexus area and let my gjallarhorn tear apart sekrion before the hobbies had a chance to spawn.
tl;dr: GJALLARHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORN. | i blew myself up on an 'invisible' piece of lvl 50 environment the first time down there, got sniped by those two hobbies the next time (guess they're solar lololol instadeath), next time i went to my regular spot on the second 'level' of the nexus area and let my gjallarhorn tear apart sekrion before the hobbies had a chance to spawn.
tl;dr: GJALLARHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORN.
| DestinyTheGame | t5_2vq0w | cmk2jk8 | i blew myself up on an 'invisible' piece of lvl 50 environment the first time down there, got sniped by those two hobbies the next time (guess they're solar lololol instadeath), next time i went to my regular spot on the second 'level' of the nexus area and let my gjallarhorn tear apart sekrion before the hobbies had a chance to spawn. | GJALLARHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORN. |
ochogiltrow | Anyone who posts anything about themselves in response to the OP is an idiot and should get off the internet.
"oh man I can do it faster u newb.." blah blah blah Nobody cares about you, we came here for the fun and the stories not how much better than some turd is in comparison to the OP.
TL;DR OP is cool and I like his story, but pissed that he has to edit in things bc stupid people are being stupid. | Anyone who posts anything about themselves in response to the OP is an idiot and should get off the internet.
"oh man I can do it faster u newb.." blah blah blah Nobody cares about you, we came here for the fun and the stories not how much better than some turd is in comparison to the OP.
TL;DR OP is cool and I like his story, but pissed that he has to edit in things bc stupid people are being stupid.
| DestinyTheGame | t5_2vq0w | cmk5938 | Anyone who posts anything about themselves in response to the OP is an idiot and should get off the internet.
"oh man I can do it faster u newb.." blah blah blah Nobody cares about you, we came here for the fun and the stories not how much better than some turd is in comparison to the OP. | OP is cool and I like his story, but pissed that he has to edit in things bc stupid people are being stupid. |
gillberg1111 | As someone who plays Heroclix, HCRealms.com is the site to go to for information. They have forums, but also a units section. While they can post all the stats, I know you guys cannot. Additionally they offer a community submitted 5 Star rating system for every figure like the guy below mentioned. I can lookup the piece and immediately get feedback if it's worth It.
When I was first starting out, it was extremely helpful for buying pieces. I find myself looking for that in Warmachine since I am still learning. Over Black Friday I bought stuff that people had talked about on here and some stuff that looked cool.
Just yesterday I noticed there was a discussion section on BattleCollege when I was looking to pickup Behemoth, Deathjack, or Bronzeback. I was looking for someone to recommend which were worth buying or not. Instead one had no comments, one had a comment about an issue with the article, and the last was a question about an errata. Nothing wrong with those comments, just that there was nothing else. These are 30$+ models, I was hoping to see someone with some feedback from using them or saying it looks great but not very playable. I'm not sure how you could encourage community participation though.
TL;DR Another vote for community submitted 5 Star rating system. | As someone who plays Heroclix, HCRealms.com is the site to go to for information. They have forums, but also a units section. While they can post all the stats, I know you guys cannot. Additionally they offer a community submitted 5 Star rating system for every figure like the guy below mentioned. I can lookup the piece and immediately get feedback if it's worth It.
When I was first starting out, it was extremely helpful for buying pieces. I find myself looking for that in Warmachine since I am still learning. Over Black Friday I bought stuff that people had talked about on here and some stuff that looked cool.
Just yesterday I noticed there was a discussion section on BattleCollege when I was looking to pickup Behemoth, Deathjack, or Bronzeback. I was looking for someone to recommend which were worth buying or not. Instead one had no comments, one had a comment about an issue with the article, and the last was a question about an errata. Nothing wrong with those comments, just that there was nothing else. These are 30$+ models, I was hoping to see someone with some feedback from using them or saying it looks great but not very playable. I'm not sure how you could encourage community participation though.
TL;DR Another vote for community submitted 5 Star rating system.
| Warmachine | t5_2s3ta | cmjvl3k | As someone who plays Heroclix, HCRealms.com is the site to go to for information. They have forums, but also a units section. While they can post all the stats, I know you guys cannot. Additionally they offer a community submitted 5 Star rating system for every figure like the guy below mentioned. I can lookup the piece and immediately get feedback if it's worth It.
When I was first starting out, it was extremely helpful for buying pieces. I find myself looking for that in Warmachine since I am still learning. Over Black Friday I bought stuff that people had talked about on here and some stuff that looked cool.
Just yesterday I noticed there was a discussion section on BattleCollege when I was looking to pickup Behemoth, Deathjack, or Bronzeback. I was looking for someone to recommend which were worth buying or not. Instead one had no comments, one had a comment about an issue with the article, and the last was a question about an errata. Nothing wrong with those comments, just that there was nothing else. These are 30$+ models, I was hoping to see someone with some feedback from using them or saying it looks great but not very playable. I'm not sure how you could encourage community participation though. | Another vote for community submitted 5 Star rating system. |
become_taintless | Since the barcode is easily readable and duplicable, it falls under the category of "something you know" and not "something you have" and is thus in the same category as passwords.
TL;DR this still isn't 2FA. | Since the barcode is easily readable and duplicable, it falls under the category of "something you know" and not "something you have" and is thus in the same category as passwords.
TL;DR this still isn't 2FA.
| sysadmin | t5_2qnp7 | cmkyq7s | Since the barcode is easily readable and duplicable, it falls under the category of "something you know" and not "something you have" and is thus in the same category as passwords. | this still isn't 2FA. |
iamadogforreal | Half assed solution to get the boss off your back:
Write an ahk script that launches at startup. It makes itself focus and disables the keyboard. The mouse is the only thing working (you can also disable/freeze explorer.exe, task manager, startmenu, etc). Make a GUI window with a bunch of buttons, say 20, each with 6 random numbers in the button. Write "Click on 2nd factor access code to continue." Put in some basic logic like 'if not pressed button 5 then reboot' Make each button different on each computer. So Joe's computer will need to press button 9 which is labeled, "458-442." Give him a little card with this written on it and have him put it in his pocket.
Blammo, poor man's 2nd factor auth. I'd rather do that than mess with 3rd party toys like barcode readers.
tldr; roll your own security is just as a bad idea as expecting to do this with a zero budget
| Half assed solution to get the boss off your back:
Write an ahk script that launches at startup. It makes itself focus and disables the keyboard. The mouse is the only thing working (you can also disable/freeze explorer.exe, task manager, startmenu, etc). Make a GUI window with a bunch of buttons, say 20, each with 6 random numbers in the button. Write "Click on 2nd factor access code to continue." Put in some basic logic like 'if not pressed button 5 then reboot' Make each button different on each computer. So Joe's computer will need to press button 9 which is labeled, "458-442." Give him a little card with this written on it and have him put it in his pocket.
Blammo, poor man's 2nd factor auth. I'd rather do that than mess with 3rd party toys like barcode readers.
tldr; roll your own security is just as a bad idea as expecting to do this with a zero budget
| sysadmin | t5_2qnp7 | cmk4vao | Half assed solution to get the boss off your back:
Write an ahk script that launches at startup. It makes itself focus and disables the keyboard. The mouse is the only thing working (you can also disable/freeze explorer.exe, task manager, startmenu, etc). Make a GUI window with a bunch of buttons, say 20, each with 6 random numbers in the button. Write "Click on 2nd factor access code to continue." Put in some basic logic like 'if not pressed button 5 then reboot' Make each button different on each computer. So Joe's computer will need to press button 9 which is labeled, "458-442." Give him a little card with this written on it and have him put it in his pocket.
Blammo, poor man's 2nd factor auth. I'd rather do that than mess with 3rd party toys like barcode readers. | roll your own security is just as a bad idea as expecting to do this with a zero budget |
JaxSingleton | If you're asking about party affiliations and political representation, then you only need to count up the number of MLAs and MPs, as others have done already.
I have a different theory, however, based on more literal definitions of liberal and conservative.
If *left-leaning* or liberal is defined as being "open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values" (i.e., risk accepting) and *right-leaning* or conservative is defined as "holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation" (i.e., risk averse) then on this continuum, Calgary is far more liberal and Edmonton is far more conservative.
There are many reasons for this, including economics, labour force characteristics and recent interprovincial immigration patterns. Edmonton is almost 100 years older than Calgary. As its elder and government capital, Edmonton family roots run deeper, generational family finances are more well-established and governance, or rather a respect for traditional due-process, are deep-seeded values as one would expect from a capital city. While more recently a magnet for hard-working, blue-collar labourers, Edmonton was established by judges, lawyers, doctors, politicians - all of whom respected tradition, rule of law and the comfort that comes with slow and steady development.
Calgary radiates a younger vibrancy. It has come to embrace a maverick characteristic of cowboy independence - which is ironic, given the historic necessity of cooperation and collaboration that was required in order to settle the west and turn oil into a national energy driver. But this is the also the narcissistic quality that gives Calgary its youthful confidence. However, eventually, these cowboys became land owners and those land owners became oil investors and they traded their blue collars for white ones, especially after Lougheed granted huge tax breaks for oil companies to relocate and establish head offices around the Bow River.
Older money is more conservative money. It is risk-averse money, preferring government bonds over get-rich-quick schemes. It values reasonable returns over long terms. It is also stingy with the purse strings - willing to put up with repairs over replacements. Old money has been through the booms and the busts. Old money prefers a low-profile - neither losses nor profits are grieved or celebrated in public. When investments are made they are done so after all of the evidence is in. These values embody the character of Edmonton, for good and bad.
Newer money is more liberal money. It looks for unconventional, but lucrative, investment. It resents rules that curb its potential. It doesn't want to be told of the dangers and risks. Newer money is bold, like Calgary. It wants to enjoy the benefits of these riches today; it wants to be current and modern. Nouveau riche celebrates the highs and celebrates the survival through the lows (and the dead or broke tell no tales, at all). Newer money values intuition over evidence. These values embody the character of Calgary, for good and bad.
Edmonton has created a reputation for world-class medical research and clinical treatment; Calgary is creating a powerhouse market for naturopaths, homeopaths and alternative medical practices. Edmonton is a natural base for labour movements and union offices; Calgary celebrates the entrepreneur who walks the tightrope without a net. Edmonton fluoridates its public water supply based on decades of research and evidence on the public health benefits for such a low investment; Calgary does not "believe" in the benefits, opting out of socialized treatment. The oil industry has attracted an international immigration of upper-class to Calgary; the same industry has attracted an interprovincial relocation of middle-class Canadians to Edmonton. Thus, Calgary is a much more metropolitan and diverse city; whereas, Edmonton is more homogenous and traditionally "Canadian" because of its residents.
Calgary is also much more a city people move to; Edmonton is still home to many who were born there. Such characteristics force Calgary to be far more liberal and willing to change due to outside influencers, while Edmonton remains more conservative and less-willing to change. Edmontonians are more willing to pay taxes for services; wealthier Calgarians would rather pay no taxes, in favour of purchasing services when required.
So, while on the surface, Calgary appears politically to be more "Conservative," it is only the economic influences that drive policies of energy exploitation and low taxation. Calgarians, also due to the growing diversity and immigration, vote for their own individual interests. The vast majority of Calgarians earn their living thanks to oil and gas. Voting against the government that has guaranteed this monopoly would be foolhardy. All of these factors support the notion that Calgary, as a city and society, is far more liberal than Edmonton.
While Edmonton looks more politically liberal, it is more a respect for due process, which includes debate amongst differing political actors to inform a better outcome. Debate also slows down change, and Edmonton likes neither haste nor waste. Edmontonians tend to vote for shared interests and the spreading of risk that minimizes the individual impact of failure. The fact the the government sits there connects policy to practice more tangibly than down south. Edmonton also has to manage a more diverse portfolio of industry, which makes it more cautious and risk-averse when it comes to economic development.
**tl;dr** Politically, Calgary appears more "Conservative" but, culturally, is far more liberal than Edmonton.
Edit: spelling | If you're asking about party affiliations and political representation, then you only need to count up the number of MLAs and MPs, as others have done already.
I have a different theory, however, based on more literal definitions of liberal and conservative.
If left-leaning or liberal is defined as being "open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values" (i.e., risk accepting) and right-leaning or conservative is defined as "holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation" (i.e., risk averse) then on this continuum, Calgary is far more liberal and Edmonton is far more conservative.
There are many reasons for this, including economics, labour force characteristics and recent interprovincial immigration patterns. Edmonton is almost 100 years older than Calgary. As its elder and government capital, Edmonton family roots run deeper, generational family finances are more well-established and governance, or rather a respect for traditional due-process, are deep-seeded values as one would expect from a capital city. While more recently a magnet for hard-working, blue-collar labourers, Edmonton was established by judges, lawyers, doctors, politicians - all of whom respected tradition, rule of law and the comfort that comes with slow and steady development.
Calgary radiates a younger vibrancy. It has come to embrace a maverick characteristic of cowboy independence - which is ironic, given the historic necessity of cooperation and collaboration that was required in order to settle the west and turn oil into a national energy driver. But this is the also the narcissistic quality that gives Calgary its youthful confidence. However, eventually, these cowboys became land owners and those land owners became oil investors and they traded their blue collars for white ones, especially after Lougheed granted huge tax breaks for oil companies to relocate and establish head offices around the Bow River.
Older money is more conservative money. It is risk-averse money, preferring government bonds over get-rich-quick schemes. It values reasonable returns over long terms. It is also stingy with the purse strings - willing to put up with repairs over replacements. Old money has been through the booms and the busts. Old money prefers a low-profile - neither losses nor profits are grieved or celebrated in public. When investments are made they are done so after all of the evidence is in. These values embody the character of Edmonton, for good and bad.
Newer money is more liberal money. It looks for unconventional, but lucrative, investment. It resents rules that curb its potential. It doesn't want to be told of the dangers and risks. Newer money is bold, like Calgary. It wants to enjoy the benefits of these riches today; it wants to be current and modern. Nouveau riche celebrates the highs and celebrates the survival through the lows (and the dead or broke tell no tales, at all). Newer money values intuition over evidence. These values embody the character of Calgary, for good and bad.
Edmonton has created a reputation for world-class medical research and clinical treatment; Calgary is creating a powerhouse market for naturopaths, homeopaths and alternative medical practices. Edmonton is a natural base for labour movements and union offices; Calgary celebrates the entrepreneur who walks the tightrope without a net. Edmonton fluoridates its public water supply based on decades of research and evidence on the public health benefits for such a low investment; Calgary does not "believe" in the benefits, opting out of socialized treatment. The oil industry has attracted an international immigration of upper-class to Calgary; the same industry has attracted an interprovincial relocation of middle-class Canadians to Edmonton. Thus, Calgary is a much more metropolitan and diverse city; whereas, Edmonton is more homogenous and traditionally "Canadian" because of its residents.
Calgary is also much more a city people move to; Edmonton is still home to many who were born there. Such characteristics force Calgary to be far more liberal and willing to change due to outside influencers, while Edmonton remains more conservative and less-willing to change. Edmontonians are more willing to pay taxes for services; wealthier Calgarians would rather pay no taxes, in favour of purchasing services when required.
So, while on the surface, Calgary appears politically to be more "Conservative," it is only the economic influences that drive policies of energy exploitation and low taxation. Calgarians, also due to the growing diversity and immigration, vote for their own individual interests. The vast majority of Calgarians earn their living thanks to oil and gas. Voting against the government that has guaranteed this monopoly would be foolhardy. All of these factors support the notion that Calgary, as a city and society, is far more liberal than Edmonton.
While Edmonton looks more politically liberal, it is more a respect for due process, which includes debate amongst differing political actors to inform a better outcome. Debate also slows down change, and Edmonton likes neither haste nor waste. Edmontonians tend to vote for shared interests and the spreading of risk that minimizes the individual impact of failure. The fact the the government sits there connects policy to practice more tangibly than down south. Edmonton also has to manage a more diverse portfolio of industry, which makes it more cautious and risk-averse when it comes to economic development.
tl;dr Politically, Calgary appears more "Conservative" but, culturally, is far more liberal than Edmonton.
Edit: spelling
| Edmonton | t5_2raht | cmkayz4 | If you're asking about party affiliations and political representation, then you only need to count up the number of MLAs and MPs, as others have done already.
I have a different theory, however, based on more literal definitions of liberal and conservative.
If left-leaning or liberal is defined as being "open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard traditional values" (i.e., risk accepting) and right-leaning or conservative is defined as "holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation" (i.e., risk averse) then on this continuum, Calgary is far more liberal and Edmonton is far more conservative.
There are many reasons for this, including economics, labour force characteristics and recent interprovincial immigration patterns. Edmonton is almost 100 years older than Calgary. As its elder and government capital, Edmonton family roots run deeper, generational family finances are more well-established and governance, or rather a respect for traditional due-process, are deep-seeded values as one would expect from a capital city. While more recently a magnet for hard-working, blue-collar labourers, Edmonton was established by judges, lawyers, doctors, politicians - all of whom respected tradition, rule of law and the comfort that comes with slow and steady development.
Calgary radiates a younger vibrancy. It has come to embrace a maverick characteristic of cowboy independence - which is ironic, given the historic necessity of cooperation and collaboration that was required in order to settle the west and turn oil into a national energy driver. But this is the also the narcissistic quality that gives Calgary its youthful confidence. However, eventually, these cowboys became land owners and those land owners became oil investors and they traded their blue collars for white ones, especially after Lougheed granted huge tax breaks for oil companies to relocate and establish head offices around the Bow River.
Older money is more conservative money. It is risk-averse money, preferring government bonds over get-rich-quick schemes. It values reasonable returns over long terms. It is also stingy with the purse strings - willing to put up with repairs over replacements. Old money has been through the booms and the busts. Old money prefers a low-profile - neither losses nor profits are grieved or celebrated in public. When investments are made they are done so after all of the evidence is in. These values embody the character of Edmonton, for good and bad.
Newer money is more liberal money. It looks for unconventional, but lucrative, investment. It resents rules that curb its potential. It doesn't want to be told of the dangers and risks. Newer money is bold, like Calgary. It wants to enjoy the benefits of these riches today; it wants to be current and modern. Nouveau riche celebrates the highs and celebrates the survival through the lows (and the dead or broke tell no tales, at all). Newer money values intuition over evidence. These values embody the character of Calgary, for good and bad.
Edmonton has created a reputation for world-class medical research and clinical treatment; Calgary is creating a powerhouse market for naturopaths, homeopaths and alternative medical practices. Edmonton is a natural base for labour movements and union offices; Calgary celebrates the entrepreneur who walks the tightrope without a net. Edmonton fluoridates its public water supply based on decades of research and evidence on the public health benefits for such a low investment; Calgary does not "believe" in the benefits, opting out of socialized treatment. The oil industry has attracted an international immigration of upper-class to Calgary; the same industry has attracted an interprovincial relocation of middle-class Canadians to Edmonton. Thus, Calgary is a much more metropolitan and diverse city; whereas, Edmonton is more homogenous and traditionally "Canadian" because of its residents.
Calgary is also much more a city people move to; Edmonton is still home to many who were born there. Such characteristics force Calgary to be far more liberal and willing to change due to outside influencers, while Edmonton remains more conservative and less-willing to change. Edmontonians are more willing to pay taxes for services; wealthier Calgarians would rather pay no taxes, in favour of purchasing services when required.
So, while on the surface, Calgary appears politically to be more "Conservative," it is only the economic influences that drive policies of energy exploitation and low taxation. Calgarians, also due to the growing diversity and immigration, vote for their own individual interests. The vast majority of Calgarians earn their living thanks to oil and gas. Voting against the government that has guaranteed this monopoly would be foolhardy. All of these factors support the notion that Calgary, as a city and society, is far more liberal than Edmonton.
While Edmonton looks more politically liberal, it is more a respect for due process, which includes debate amongst differing political actors to inform a better outcome. Debate also slows down change, and Edmonton likes neither haste nor waste. Edmontonians tend to vote for shared interests and the spreading of risk that minimizes the individual impact of failure. The fact the the government sits there connects policy to practice more tangibly than down south. Edmonton also has to manage a more diverse portfolio of industry, which makes it more cautious and risk-averse when it comes to economic development. | Politically, Calgary appears more "Conservative" but, culturally, is far more liberal than Edmonton.
Edit: spelling |
stormageddondog | I have a biology question related to genetics, skin and hair, and a home remedy that I don't understand. This is a long post, I apologize and hope it's okay. The question is at the bottom.
I have a dog tested and confirmed to have color dilution alopecia, a condition that I've read is a result of a genetic mutation. CDA happens to dogs that are "rare" color variations in particular breeds - blue chihuahuas, blue dobermans, silver labs, for example. These are gray dogs in breeds where gray doesn't usually exist, they are basically diluted black. CDA causes most (but frequently all) of their gray hair to fall out while they are still young (usually by around 2), leaving them permanently bald in those areas. And only the gray hair- if they have other standard colors on them (like white or brown or fawn in chihuahuas) then it's usually normal. The skin in those "blue" or "silver" areas is usually gray as well, and the skin is thin and soft and the pores are clogged and prone to irritation. Very few will grow some hair back but most won't. It is a condition that is mostly aesthetic except for of course the protection fur provides to a dog.
My dog was mostly bald, almost all his fur fell out in the course of a year. He's two years old and healthy otherwise. I did a lot of research online and through my vet and I found only three instances where people treated their dog's CDA with melatonin. One was a very sciencey type study by a vet that didn't result in any regrowth. The other was a guy who thoroughly documented his routine but didn't say if it worked out not. One was a Facebook group for a woman who was able to regrow her dog's fur using a combination of melatonin, vitamins A/D/E, and apple cider vinegar. She's the only person I found whose dog had regrowth.
I'm a skeptical person but I decided to try it because it didn't seem to hurt the dogs. I didn't expect it to work but I'll be damned if my dog didn't regrow a TON of fur in just two months! He started growing fur within a week of giving him melatonin. He has more fur now than he's ever had and it is still growing, coming back in where he was totally hairless and smooth even for a long time. I have no science background but I know enough to know that there are too many variables to prove the melatonin worked, but I'm wondering if there is a small possibility that it did make his fur grow back (this is not my question). The hair quality is totally different too; previously if he had any fur, you could gently pull it and it would come out with zero resistance. The hair would break easily and be all clumpy and gross near the roots. This new hair doesn't come out even if I give it a good tug. It doesn't break as easily either. It's still much softer than normal long-haired chihuahua fur but it's better than what he used to have. My vet was really shocked and said he'd never seen anything like it.
Sorry for the long long backstory but I didn't think CDA was something a lot of people knew about. Obviously there's no way to prove from my one non-scientific-method test that the melatonin worked, but here is my question based off an idea I had if I went with the idea that the melatonin worked:
I read that melatonin aids in the production of melanin, which is what controls skin pigment I think. Since "blue" color variations in this breed of dog are rare, could it be that he is gray because he doesn't have enough melanin to be fully black? If so, could that translate to skin and his fur conditions being poor, causing the breakage and clogging that made his fur fall out? Could giving him melatonin in some way help improve his skin quality in the areas where he has that gray skin as a result?
I'm not claiming the melatonin worked because I know there are other things that could have caused this. I'm just curious IF it worked, could this be part of the reason? Again I have no science or medical background so I'm sorry if everything I wrote sounds stupid. Thank you for reading :)
tl;dr Can melatonin supplements have an effect on skin and hair? | I have a biology question related to genetics, skin and hair, and a home remedy that I don't understand. This is a long post, I apologize and hope it's okay. The question is at the bottom.
I have a dog tested and confirmed to have color dilution alopecia, a condition that I've read is a result of a genetic mutation. CDA happens to dogs that are "rare" color variations in particular breeds - blue chihuahuas, blue dobermans, silver labs, for example. These are gray dogs in breeds where gray doesn't usually exist, they are basically diluted black. CDA causes most (but frequently all) of their gray hair to fall out while they are still young (usually by around 2), leaving them permanently bald in those areas. And only the gray hair- if they have other standard colors on them (like white or brown or fawn in chihuahuas) then it's usually normal. The skin in those "blue" or "silver" areas is usually gray as well, and the skin is thin and soft and the pores are clogged and prone to irritation. Very few will grow some hair back but most won't. It is a condition that is mostly aesthetic except for of course the protection fur provides to a dog.
My dog was mostly bald, almost all his fur fell out in the course of a year. He's two years old and healthy otherwise. I did a lot of research online and through my vet and I found only three instances where people treated their dog's CDA with melatonin. One was a very sciencey type study by a vet that didn't result in any regrowth. The other was a guy who thoroughly documented his routine but didn't say if it worked out not. One was a Facebook group for a woman who was able to regrow her dog's fur using a combination of melatonin, vitamins A/D/E, and apple cider vinegar. She's the only person I found whose dog had regrowth.
I'm a skeptical person but I decided to try it because it didn't seem to hurt the dogs. I didn't expect it to work but I'll be damned if my dog didn't regrow a TON of fur in just two months! He started growing fur within a week of giving him melatonin. He has more fur now than he's ever had and it is still growing, coming back in where he was totally hairless and smooth even for a long time. I have no science background but I know enough to know that there are too many variables to prove the melatonin worked, but I'm wondering if there is a small possibility that it did make his fur grow back (this is not my question). The hair quality is totally different too; previously if he had any fur, you could gently pull it and it would come out with zero resistance. The hair would break easily and be all clumpy and gross near the roots. This new hair doesn't come out even if I give it a good tug. It doesn't break as easily either. It's still much softer than normal long-haired chihuahua fur but it's better than what he used to have. My vet was really shocked and said he'd never seen anything like it.
Sorry for the long long backstory but I didn't think CDA was something a lot of people knew about. Obviously there's no way to prove from my one non-scientific-method test that the melatonin worked, but here is my question based off an idea I had if I went with the idea that the melatonin worked:
I read that melatonin aids in the production of melanin, which is what controls skin pigment I think. Since "blue" color variations in this breed of dog are rare, could it be that he is gray because he doesn't have enough melanin to be fully black? If so, could that translate to skin and his fur conditions being poor, causing the breakage and clogging that made his fur fall out? Could giving him melatonin in some way help improve his skin quality in the areas where he has that gray skin as a result?
I'm not claiming the melatonin worked because I know there are other things that could have caused this. I'm just curious IF it worked, could this be part of the reason? Again I have no science or medical background so I'm sorry if everything I wrote sounds stupid. Thank you for reading :)
tl;dr Can melatonin supplements have an effect on skin and hair?
| askscience | t5_2qm4e | cmk2dgq | I have a biology question related to genetics, skin and hair, and a home remedy that I don't understand. This is a long post, I apologize and hope it's okay. The question is at the bottom.
I have a dog tested and confirmed to have color dilution alopecia, a condition that I've read is a result of a genetic mutation. CDA happens to dogs that are "rare" color variations in particular breeds - blue chihuahuas, blue dobermans, silver labs, for example. These are gray dogs in breeds where gray doesn't usually exist, they are basically diluted black. CDA causes most (but frequently all) of their gray hair to fall out while they are still young (usually by around 2), leaving them permanently bald in those areas. And only the gray hair- if they have other standard colors on them (like white or brown or fawn in chihuahuas) then it's usually normal. The skin in those "blue" or "silver" areas is usually gray as well, and the skin is thin and soft and the pores are clogged and prone to irritation. Very few will grow some hair back but most won't. It is a condition that is mostly aesthetic except for of course the protection fur provides to a dog.
My dog was mostly bald, almost all his fur fell out in the course of a year. He's two years old and healthy otherwise. I did a lot of research online and through my vet and I found only three instances where people treated their dog's CDA with melatonin. One was a very sciencey type study by a vet that didn't result in any regrowth. The other was a guy who thoroughly documented his routine but didn't say if it worked out not. One was a Facebook group for a woman who was able to regrow her dog's fur using a combination of melatonin, vitamins A/D/E, and apple cider vinegar. She's the only person I found whose dog had regrowth.
I'm a skeptical person but I decided to try it because it didn't seem to hurt the dogs. I didn't expect it to work but I'll be damned if my dog didn't regrow a TON of fur in just two months! He started growing fur within a week of giving him melatonin. He has more fur now than he's ever had and it is still growing, coming back in where he was totally hairless and smooth even for a long time. I have no science background but I know enough to know that there are too many variables to prove the melatonin worked, but I'm wondering if there is a small possibility that it did make his fur grow back (this is not my question). The hair quality is totally different too; previously if he had any fur, you could gently pull it and it would come out with zero resistance. The hair would break easily and be all clumpy and gross near the roots. This new hair doesn't come out even if I give it a good tug. It doesn't break as easily either. It's still much softer than normal long-haired chihuahua fur but it's better than what he used to have. My vet was really shocked and said he'd never seen anything like it.
Sorry for the long long backstory but I didn't think CDA was something a lot of people knew about. Obviously there's no way to prove from my one non-scientific-method test that the melatonin worked, but here is my question based off an idea I had if I went with the idea that the melatonin worked:
I read that melatonin aids in the production of melanin, which is what controls skin pigment I think. Since "blue" color variations in this breed of dog are rare, could it be that he is gray because he doesn't have enough melanin to be fully black? If so, could that translate to skin and his fur conditions being poor, causing the breakage and clogging that made his fur fall out? Could giving him melatonin in some way help improve his skin quality in the areas where he has that gray skin as a result?
I'm not claiming the melatonin worked because I know there are other things that could have caused this. I'm just curious IF it worked, could this be part of the reason? Again I have no science or medical background so I'm sorry if everything I wrote sounds stupid. Thank you for reading :) | Can melatonin supplements have an effect on skin and hair? |
brutalkitten | The number of electrons doesn't make a massive difference to dispersion forces in a molecule per se, only if the number of electrons affects the size of the atom (down a period = more electron "shells"). Where the number of electrons does matter, however, is in the number of pairs of electrons shared in a covalent bond. Remember that atoms closer to the Noble Gases are more stable when they are isoelectronic with the Noble Gas closest to them, i.e. Fluorine is more stable when it has an extra electron, or ten total, like Neon. This is why halogens are often found as negative ions, and why these elements are found commonly in diatomic form. By bonding covalently, they form a sort of symbiotic relationship where they stabilize each other by sharing a pair of electrons. F2 shares one pair of electrons between each F atom, while O2 shares two pairs between each O, already intrinsically increasing the dispersion forces in O2, and thus increasing the energy required to break the IMFs (BP).
Both of these molecules form covalent bonds in their diatomic form, and both have London dispersion intermolecular forces. These are relatively weak IMFs. What dictates which of the two has the stronger IMF, and therefore the higher boiling point, is the size of the atoms in the molecule. Oxygen is in the same period as Fluorine, so it has the same number of electron "shells", but it has a slightly lower Z effective and thus a slightly weaker nuclear pull on its valence electrons, which means the electrons are not held as tightly into the nucleus. This difference in Zeff is significant enough that despite having one fewer valence electron, Oxygen is a slightly larger atom in terms of atomic diameter. This means the electrons it shares covalently in an O2 molecule spend more time around one or the other Oxygen atom, creating a slightly stronger dispersion force. Stronger IMFs require more energy to break, thus a higher boiling point for O2 than F2. I would look up intermolecular forces for diatomic molecules if you are interested.
TL;DR: larger atoms = stronger dispersion forces = higher boiling point / more electrons shared covalently = stronger dispersion forces = higher boiling point | The number of electrons doesn't make a massive difference to dispersion forces in a molecule per se, only if the number of electrons affects the size of the atom (down a period = more electron "shells"). Where the number of electrons does matter, however, is in the number of pairs of electrons shared in a covalent bond. Remember that atoms closer to the Noble Gases are more stable when they are isoelectronic with the Noble Gas closest to them, i.e. Fluorine is more stable when it has an extra electron, or ten total, like Neon. This is why halogens are often found as negative ions, and why these elements are found commonly in diatomic form. By bonding covalently, they form a sort of symbiotic relationship where they stabilize each other by sharing a pair of electrons. F2 shares one pair of electrons between each F atom, while O2 shares two pairs between each O, already intrinsically increasing the dispersion forces in O2, and thus increasing the energy required to break the IMFs (BP).
Both of these molecules form covalent bonds in their diatomic form, and both have London dispersion intermolecular forces. These are relatively weak IMFs. What dictates which of the two has the stronger IMF, and therefore the higher boiling point, is the size of the atoms in the molecule. Oxygen is in the same period as Fluorine, so it has the same number of electron "shells", but it has a slightly lower Z effective and thus a slightly weaker nuclear pull on its valence electrons, which means the electrons are not held as tightly into the nucleus. This difference in Zeff is significant enough that despite having one fewer valence electron, Oxygen is a slightly larger atom in terms of atomic diameter. This means the electrons it shares covalently in an O2 molecule spend more time around one or the other Oxygen atom, creating a slightly stronger dispersion force. Stronger IMFs require more energy to break, thus a higher boiling point for O2 than F2. I would look up intermolecular forces for diatomic molecules if you are interested.
TL;DR: larger atoms = stronger dispersion forces = higher boiling point / more electrons shared covalently = stronger dispersion forces = higher boiling point
| askscience | t5_2qm4e | cmkkti9 | The number of electrons doesn't make a massive difference to dispersion forces in a molecule per se, only if the number of electrons affects the size of the atom (down a period = more electron "shells"). Where the number of electrons does matter, however, is in the number of pairs of electrons shared in a covalent bond. Remember that atoms closer to the Noble Gases are more stable when they are isoelectronic with the Noble Gas closest to them, i.e. Fluorine is more stable when it has an extra electron, or ten total, like Neon. This is why halogens are often found as negative ions, and why these elements are found commonly in diatomic form. By bonding covalently, they form a sort of symbiotic relationship where they stabilize each other by sharing a pair of electrons. F2 shares one pair of electrons between each F atom, while O2 shares two pairs between each O, already intrinsically increasing the dispersion forces in O2, and thus increasing the energy required to break the IMFs (BP).
Both of these molecules form covalent bonds in their diatomic form, and both have London dispersion intermolecular forces. These are relatively weak IMFs. What dictates which of the two has the stronger IMF, and therefore the higher boiling point, is the size of the atoms in the molecule. Oxygen is in the same period as Fluorine, so it has the same number of electron "shells", but it has a slightly lower Z effective and thus a slightly weaker nuclear pull on its valence electrons, which means the electrons are not held as tightly into the nucleus. This difference in Zeff is significant enough that despite having one fewer valence electron, Oxygen is a slightly larger atom in terms of atomic diameter. This means the electrons it shares covalently in an O2 molecule spend more time around one or the other Oxygen atom, creating a slightly stronger dispersion force. Stronger IMFs require more energy to break, thus a higher boiling point for O2 than F2. I would look up intermolecular forces for diatomic molecules if you are interested. | larger atoms = stronger dispersion forces = higher boiling point / more electrons shared covalently = stronger dispersion forces = higher boiling point |
znode | The short answer is that water (near side), Earth, and water (far side) are like a loose stack of pancakes, and in a gravitational gradient, everything is being pulled apart from everything else based upon its distance. That is the very nature of tidal forces.
To build the intuition further, imagine you have a slinky. You put a handle on one end of the slinky, so you can hold on to that end. That's the near side to the Sun, and you are the Sun.
Now imagine that the slinky is painted so that the middle 80% is green, and represents the Earth. The 10% at either end are painted blue for the oceans. Now you grab that handle on the near side and swing the slinky around. What would you expect?
* The slinky stretches only on the handle / near side, and at the far end, doesn't stretch at all,
* The entire slinky comes apart, and everything is stretched.
If you've played with slinkys a lot, you'd see that the answer is 2, everything gets stretched, all along the entire slinky. The near side is pulled apart from the middle, the middle is pulled apart from the far side.
This is exactly what happens with the Earth. The water on the near side is experiencing slightly more gravity than the Earth, so it bulges; the Earth is experiencing slightly more gravity than the water on the far side, so the far side also bulges. Of course, the rocky part of the earth is a bit more rigid than the ocean, and so the solid parts of Earth doesn't bulge as much (though it still does a little, which is measurable).
[See source from NOAA](
[Incidentally, this is a very easily mistaken mechanism as well, and is often misrepresented in many textbooks as "inertial effects", debunked here.](
tl;dr: near side water is pulled away from the Earth; the Earth is pulled away from the far side water. Ends up looking like all the water is coming apart. | The short answer is that water (near side), Earth, and water (far side) are like a loose stack of pancakes, and in a gravitational gradient, everything is being pulled apart from everything else based upon its distance. That is the very nature of tidal forces.
To build the intuition further, imagine you have a slinky. You put a handle on one end of the slinky, so you can hold on to that end. That's the near side to the Sun, and you are the Sun.
Now imagine that the slinky is painted so that the middle 80% is green, and represents the Earth. The 10% at either end are painted blue for the oceans. Now you grab that handle on the near side and swing the slinky around. What would you expect?
The slinky stretches only on the handle / near side, and at the far end, doesn't stretch at all,
The entire slinky comes apart, and everything is stretched.
If you've played with slinkys a lot, you'd see that the answer is 2, everything gets stretched, all along the entire slinky. The near side is pulled apart from the middle, the middle is pulled apart from the far side.
This is exactly what happens with the Earth. The water on the near side is experiencing slightly more gravity than the Earth, so it bulges; the Earth is experiencing slightly more gravity than the water on the far side, so the far side also bulges. Of course, the rocky part of the earth is a bit more rigid than the ocean, and so the solid parts of Earth doesn't bulge as much (though it still does a little, which is measurable).
[See source from NOAA](
[Incidentally, this is a very easily mistaken mechanism as well, and is often misrepresented in many textbooks as "inertial effects", debunked here.](
tl;dr: near side water is pulled away from the Earth; the Earth is pulled away from the far side water. Ends up looking like all the water is coming apart.
| askscience | t5_2qm4e | cmkrwg6 | The short answer is that water (near side), Earth, and water (far side) are like a loose stack of pancakes, and in a gravitational gradient, everything is being pulled apart from everything else based upon its distance. That is the very nature of tidal forces.
To build the intuition further, imagine you have a slinky. You put a handle on one end of the slinky, so you can hold on to that end. That's the near side to the Sun, and you are the Sun.
Now imagine that the slinky is painted so that the middle 80% is green, and represents the Earth. The 10% at either end are painted blue for the oceans. Now you grab that handle on the near side and swing the slinky around. What would you expect?
The slinky stretches only on the handle / near side, and at the far end, doesn't stretch at all,
The entire slinky comes apart, and everything is stretched.
If you've played with slinkys a lot, you'd see that the answer is 2, everything gets stretched, all along the entire slinky. The near side is pulled apart from the middle, the middle is pulled apart from the far side.
This is exactly what happens with the Earth. The water on the near side is experiencing slightly more gravity than the Earth, so it bulges; the Earth is experiencing slightly more gravity than the water on the far side, so the far side also bulges. Of course, the rocky part of the earth is a bit more rigid than the ocean, and so the solid parts of Earth doesn't bulge as much (though it still does a little, which is measurable).
[See source from NOAA](
[Incidentally, this is a very easily mistaken mechanism as well, and is often misrepresented in many textbooks as "inertial effects", debunked here.]( | near side water is pulled away from the Earth; the Earth is pulled away from the far side water. Ends up looking like all the water is coming apart. |
Cookiesand | I think the most generally accepted reason is that allergies are an over active immune system.
So we didn't evolve allergies. We evolved a good immune system to keep us from getting sick when we lived in the wild or what not. However now we live in much more sanitary conditions so our immune system doesn't have as much "harmful" things to react to but it has evolved over time to be very reactive and so it reacts to things that are harmless. So when someone is allergic to pollen their immune system things pollen is a pathogen even though it's completely harmless.
TL:DR; our immune system is bored. | I think the most generally accepted reason is that allergies are an over active immune system.
So we didn't evolve allergies. We evolved a good immune system to keep us from getting sick when we lived in the wild or what not. However now we live in much more sanitary conditions so our immune system doesn't have as much "harmful" things to react to but it has evolved over time to be very reactive and so it reacts to things that are harmless. So when someone is allergic to pollen their immune system things pollen is a pathogen even though it's completely harmless.
TL:DR; our immune system is bored.
| askscience | t5_2qm4e | cmk6hw2 | I think the most generally accepted reason is that allergies are an over active immune system.
So we didn't evolve allergies. We evolved a good immune system to keep us from getting sick when we lived in the wild or what not. However now we live in much more sanitary conditions so our immune system doesn't have as much "harmful" things to react to but it has evolved over time to be very reactive and so it reacts to things that are harmless. So when someone is allergic to pollen their immune system things pollen is a pathogen even though it's completely harmless. | our immune system is bored. |
GinGimlet | Helper T cells are like the gateway, they serve as an extra layer of regulation. You have to remember that your immune response is *very* dangerous when uncontrolled. Even in a controlled immune response there is a significant amount of tissue damage, which then has to be repaired after the pathogen is cleared. Requiring these cells to have help from helper cells before being activated is a way to ensure appropriate levels of responses. They don't slow down the response because although they do also need to be specific for the pathogen, there is a huuuuge range of specificities and they get activated with the same efficiency as the corresponding B cell or CD8 T cells. Remember that if you see that organism again in, say, 10 years-- you have long-lived B, CD4 and CD8 T cells so they can all get fired up again very quickly and eliminate the pathogen rapidly.
The other huge benefit to helper T cells is that they come in many different flavors. There are Th1, Th2, Th17, T regulatory cells, etc. These cells have a strong influence on the subsequent immune response such that a Th1 helper cell induces very different B cell responses than a Th2 helper cell. For example, a Th2 response is required for getting rid of helminth (worm) infections. The type of antibodies that B cells make after interacting with Th2 helper cells are very good at activating other immune cells that are great at dealing with worms. If your B cells made the inappropriate type of antibodies in response to a worm infection, you wouldn't clear it as easily (or maybe at all).
This may all seem complicated but the entire immune system is essentially organized in this way. It's partially evolutionary—keep in mind that as beautiful and functional as our immune systems are they are still constructed by trial and error over time. This type of organization isn’t uncommon in the immune system—there are checks and balances and redundancies all over the place. I have a PhD in the field and it’s baffling how things are organized sometimes, but in the end it works!
TL;DR: Two big answers to your question: 1) Helper T cells add a layer of regulation to prevent unchecked inflammation and 2) they determine the 'flavor' of the subsequent immune response which is very important depending on the type of infection you have.
Sorry for the long response, but I get fired up about this stuff.
| Helper T cells are like the gateway, they serve as an extra layer of regulation. You have to remember that your immune response is very dangerous when uncontrolled. Even in a controlled immune response there is a significant amount of tissue damage, which then has to be repaired after the pathogen is cleared. Requiring these cells to have help from helper cells before being activated is a way to ensure appropriate levels of responses. They don't slow down the response because although they do also need to be specific for the pathogen, there is a huuuuge range of specificities and they get activated with the same efficiency as the corresponding B cell or CD8 T cells. Remember that if you see that organism again in, say, 10 years-- you have long-lived B, CD4 and CD8 T cells so they can all get fired up again very quickly and eliminate the pathogen rapidly.
The other huge benefit to helper T cells is that they come in many different flavors. There are Th1, Th2, Th17, T regulatory cells, etc. These cells have a strong influence on the subsequent immune response such that a Th1 helper cell induces very different B cell responses than a Th2 helper cell. For example, a Th2 response is required for getting rid of helminth (worm) infections. The type of antibodies that B cells make after interacting with Th2 helper cells are very good at activating other immune cells that are great at dealing with worms. If your B cells made the inappropriate type of antibodies in response to a worm infection, you wouldn't clear it as easily (or maybe at all).
This may all seem complicated but the entire immune system is essentially organized in this way. It's partially evolutionary—keep in mind that as beautiful and functional as our immune systems are they are still constructed by trial and error over time. This type of organization isn’t uncommon in the immune system—there are checks and balances and redundancies all over the place. I have a PhD in the field and it’s baffling how things are organized sometimes, but in the end it works!
TL;DR: Two big answers to your question: 1) Helper T cells add a layer of regulation to prevent unchecked inflammation and 2) they determine the 'flavor' of the subsequent immune response which is very important depending on the type of infection you have.
Sorry for the long response, but I get fired up about this stuff.
| askscience | t5_2qm4e | cmk91ow | Helper T cells are like the gateway, they serve as an extra layer of regulation. You have to remember that your immune response is very dangerous when uncontrolled. Even in a controlled immune response there is a significant amount of tissue damage, which then has to be repaired after the pathogen is cleared. Requiring these cells to have help from helper cells before being activated is a way to ensure appropriate levels of responses. They don't slow down the response because although they do also need to be specific for the pathogen, there is a huuuuge range of specificities and they get activated with the same efficiency as the corresponding B cell or CD8 T cells. Remember that if you see that organism again in, say, 10 years-- you have long-lived B, CD4 and CD8 T cells so they can all get fired up again very quickly and eliminate the pathogen rapidly.
The other huge benefit to helper T cells is that they come in many different flavors. There are Th1, Th2, Th17, T regulatory cells, etc. These cells have a strong influence on the subsequent immune response such that a Th1 helper cell induces very different B cell responses than a Th2 helper cell. For example, a Th2 response is required for getting rid of helminth (worm) infections. The type of antibodies that B cells make after interacting with Th2 helper cells are very good at activating other immune cells that are great at dealing with worms. If your B cells made the inappropriate type of antibodies in response to a worm infection, you wouldn't clear it as easily (or maybe at all).
This may all seem complicated but the entire immune system is essentially organized in this way. It's partially evolutionary—keep in mind that as beautiful and functional as our immune systems are they are still constructed by trial and error over time. This type of organization isn’t uncommon in the immune system—there are checks and balances and redundancies all over the place. I have a PhD in the field and it’s baffling how things are organized sometimes, but in the end it works! | Two big answers to your question: 1) Helper T cells add a layer of regulation to prevent unchecked inflammation and 2) they determine the 'flavor' of the subsequent immune response which is very important depending on the type of infection you have.
Sorry for the long response, but I get fired up about this stuff. |
Sidethepatella | I can help- so when a snake is "opaque" or "in the blue" their outer skin is preparing to shed. This includes the scales over their eyes, which when they prepare to be shed off, turn an opaque white or grey color.
But you knew that. From a survival perspective this is a very dangerous time for a snake. They cannot see predators coming, and if touched don't have one of their main senses for telling predator from prey from innocuous thing. This is why they tell you not to pick up/transport snakes during this time, the stress can literally kill them.
Now on to your question- doesn't your snake need water every day? Short answer is no. King snakes are very resilient snakes. And Cali's do come from deserts. If she needs to drink, I'm sure she will. If she needs to soak (it helps the process of shedding) I'm sure she will. Other than that, she probably feels a bit vulnerable and wants to be left alone.
TL;DR She's probably staying where she feels safe until she sheds. She doesn't necessarily need to drink every day.
Edit 1: to all you herpetology fans out there, please make sure they have water all the time, no matter where they are from, snakes need to be allowed to make the choice for themselves
Edit 2: I just reread your question and I'm not sure I answered it- what is going on in the snakes body if they can go without drinking for days? The ELI5 version is snakes are really good at retaining moisture. Water isn't released through their skin like us (no sebaceous glands) and their respiration is usually slower than ours. | I can help- so when a snake is "opaque" or "in the blue" their outer skin is preparing to shed. This includes the scales over their eyes, which when they prepare to be shed off, turn an opaque white or grey color.
But you knew that. From a survival perspective this is a very dangerous time for a snake. They cannot see predators coming, and if touched don't have one of their main senses for telling predator from prey from innocuous thing. This is why they tell you not to pick up/transport snakes during this time, the stress can literally kill them.
Now on to your question- doesn't your snake need water every day? Short answer is no. King snakes are very resilient snakes. And Cali's do come from deserts. If she needs to drink, I'm sure she will. If she needs to soak (it helps the process of shedding) I'm sure she will. Other than that, she probably feels a bit vulnerable and wants to be left alone.
TL;DR She's probably staying where she feels safe until she sheds. She doesn't necessarily need to drink every day.
Edit 1: to all you herpetology fans out there, please make sure they have water all the time, no matter where they are from, snakes need to be allowed to make the choice for themselves
Edit 2: I just reread your question and I'm not sure I answered it- what is going on in the snakes body if they can go without drinking for days? The ELI5 version is snakes are really good at retaining moisture. Water isn't released through their skin like us (no sebaceous glands) and their respiration is usually slower than ours.
| askscience | t5_2qm4e | cmkbvs7 | I can help- so when a snake is "opaque" or "in the blue" their outer skin is preparing to shed. This includes the scales over their eyes, which when they prepare to be shed off, turn an opaque white or grey color.
But you knew that. From a survival perspective this is a very dangerous time for a snake. They cannot see predators coming, and if touched don't have one of their main senses for telling predator from prey from innocuous thing. This is why they tell you not to pick up/transport snakes during this time, the stress can literally kill them.
Now on to your question- doesn't your snake need water every day? Short answer is no. King snakes are very resilient snakes. And Cali's do come from deserts. If she needs to drink, I'm sure she will. If she needs to soak (it helps the process of shedding) I'm sure she will. Other than that, she probably feels a bit vulnerable and wants to be left alone. | She's probably staying where she feels safe until she sheds. She doesn't necessarily need to drink every day.
Edit 1: to all you herpetology fans out there, please make sure they have water all the time, no matter where they are from, snakes need to be allowed to make the choice for themselves
Edit 2: I just reread your question and I'm not sure I answered it- what is going on in the snakes body if they can go without drinking for days? The ELI5 version is snakes are really good at retaining moisture. Water isn't released through their skin like us (no sebaceous glands) and their respiration is usually slower than ours. |
Lung_doc | As a lung and critical care doc - I won't try to answer your question directly as I don't know. But I will say that very few go peacefully unaided. There are only a few common final terminal pathways.
A few involve the brain - massive bleed inside a closed space and the brainstem herniates. I don't see this very often, but the passing, though often unexpected, is fairly peaceful because they are already unconscious well before they pass.
Everyone else dies (more or less) when there is a failure to deliver oxygen to the heart and / or brain. Practically speaking, this can go in only a few ways
1. fatal arrhythmia: unconsciousness often occurs super fast because blood pressure drops almost instantly. Definitely not a bad way to go
2. Severely low blood pressure (from infection etc) - also not a bad way to go. Usually preceded by moderately low BP where you may feel dizzy when upright, but as it gets worse you lose consciousness (pass out) and then don't wake up. It doesn't hurt.
3. Everything else - meaning lung failure from copd or pneumonia or heart failure (with the commonly associated lungs full of fluid problem) or most everything else - all of this will make you short of breath - like you are drowning. You are gonna want some morphine. Not always to the point of knocking you out, but usually big doses.
There are a few other ways where folks are naturally drowsy - particularly if the kidneys or liver failed first - and you may not feel so short of breath.
Tl;dr While yes, some patients go peacefully while holding their children's hands and saying a lovely prayer and without the aid of morphine - they are the exception in my world. | As a lung and critical care doc - I won't try to answer your question directly as I don't know. But I will say that very few go peacefully unaided. There are only a few common final terminal pathways.
A few involve the brain - massive bleed inside a closed space and the brainstem herniates. I don't see this very often, but the passing, though often unexpected, is fairly peaceful because they are already unconscious well before they pass.
Everyone else dies (more or less) when there is a failure to deliver oxygen to the heart and / or brain. Practically speaking, this can go in only a few ways
fatal arrhythmia: unconsciousness often occurs super fast because blood pressure drops almost instantly. Definitely not a bad way to go
Severely low blood pressure (from infection etc) - also not a bad way to go. Usually preceded by moderately low BP where you may feel dizzy when upright, but as it gets worse you lose consciousness (pass out) and then don't wake up. It doesn't hurt.
Everything else - meaning lung failure from copd or pneumonia or heart failure (with the commonly associated lungs full of fluid problem) or most everything else - all of this will make you short of breath - like you are drowning. You are gonna want some morphine. Not always to the point of knocking you out, but usually big doses.
There are a few other ways where folks are naturally drowsy - particularly if the kidneys or liver failed first - and you may not feel so short of breath.
Tl;dr While yes, some patients go peacefully while holding their children's hands and saying a lovely prayer and without the aid of morphine - they are the exception in my world.
| askscience | t5_2qm4e | cmkf13b | As a lung and critical care doc - I won't try to answer your question directly as I don't know. But I will say that very few go peacefully unaided. There are only a few common final terminal pathways.
A few involve the brain - massive bleed inside a closed space and the brainstem herniates. I don't see this very often, but the passing, though often unexpected, is fairly peaceful because they are already unconscious well before they pass.
Everyone else dies (more or less) when there is a failure to deliver oxygen to the heart and / or brain. Practically speaking, this can go in only a few ways
fatal arrhythmia: unconsciousness often occurs super fast because blood pressure drops almost instantly. Definitely not a bad way to go
Severely low blood pressure (from infection etc) - also not a bad way to go. Usually preceded by moderately low BP where you may feel dizzy when upright, but as it gets worse you lose consciousness (pass out) and then don't wake up. It doesn't hurt.
Everything else - meaning lung failure from copd or pneumonia or heart failure (with the commonly associated lungs full of fluid problem) or most everything else - all of this will make you short of breath - like you are drowning. You are gonna want some morphine. Not always to the point of knocking you out, but usually big doses.
There are a few other ways where folks are naturally drowsy - particularly if the kidneys or liver failed first - and you may not feel so short of breath. | While yes, some patients go peacefully while holding their children's hands and saying a lovely prayer and without the aid of morphine - they are the exception in my world. |
brohr | Hey man, I had a very similar experience happen to me about a month ago. Dated this girl the summer after senior year, went to the same college for 3 years and she broke up with me randomly one weekend about jealousy that had been going on for about a year. My advice is coming from someone who is still trying to figure this out. Just focus on improving your life the best you but make it clear to her that you would still be interested in getting back together if she ever wanted but that you are not going to actively pursue it. People will tell you to forget about her but you and I both know that's impossible so take the love you have for her and make sure that the next time you and her see each other you are the best possible version of yourself and since you and her were together for so long there is no doubt she still has feelings for you. Getting back together is ultimately a decision she will have to make on her own. Enjoy being single. Hang out with friends, focus on a hobby, get closer with your family. Keeping being your best self and if she truly loves you she will see that. That's what I'm trying to do anyway and I guess time will tell if it is meant to be. If you love someone, let them go. If it was meant to be they will come back. If they don't it never was.
tl;dr Just focus on doing your own thing and improving yourself for you. She isn't going to completely forget about you and if you both had real mutual love, she will see that in you again if you are the best version of yourself. | Hey man, I had a very similar experience happen to me about a month ago. Dated this girl the summer after senior year, went to the same college for 3 years and she broke up with me randomly one weekend about jealousy that had been going on for about a year. My advice is coming from someone who is still trying to figure this out. Just focus on improving your life the best you but make it clear to her that you would still be interested in getting back together if she ever wanted but that you are not going to actively pursue it. People will tell you to forget about her but you and I both know that's impossible so take the love you have for her and make sure that the next time you and her see each other you are the best possible version of yourself and since you and her were together for so long there is no doubt she still has feelings for you. Getting back together is ultimately a decision she will have to make on her own. Enjoy being single. Hang out with friends, focus on a hobby, get closer with your family. Keeping being your best self and if she truly loves you she will see that. That's what I'm trying to do anyway and I guess time will tell if it is meant to be. If you love someone, let them go. If it was meant to be they will come back. If they don't it never was.
tl;dr Just focus on doing your own thing and improving yourself for you. She isn't going to completely forget about you and if you both had real mutual love, she will see that in you again if you are the best version of yourself.
| relationship_advice | t5_2r0cn | cmkgjmz | Hey man, I had a very similar experience happen to me about a month ago. Dated this girl the summer after senior year, went to the same college for 3 years and she broke up with me randomly one weekend about jealousy that had been going on for about a year. My advice is coming from someone who is still trying to figure this out. Just focus on improving your life the best you but make it clear to her that you would still be interested in getting back together if she ever wanted but that you are not going to actively pursue it. People will tell you to forget about her but you and I both know that's impossible so take the love you have for her and make sure that the next time you and her see each other you are the best possible version of yourself and since you and her were together for so long there is no doubt she still has feelings for you. Getting back together is ultimately a decision she will have to make on her own. Enjoy being single. Hang out with friends, focus on a hobby, get closer with your family. Keeping being your best self and if she truly loves you she will see that. That's what I'm trying to do anyway and I guess time will tell if it is meant to be. If you love someone, let them go. If it was meant to be they will come back. If they don't it never was. | Just focus on doing your own thing and improving yourself for you. She isn't going to completely forget about you and if you both had real mutual love, she will see that in you again if you are the best version of yourself. |
Tanner4dude2man0 | If thats litterally all you can afford, that still isnt as good a value as even a cheap pc like this
[PCPartPicker part list]( / [Price breakdown by merchant](
Type|Item|Price
:----|:----|:----
**CPU** | [AMD Athlon X2 340 3.2GHz Dual-Core Processor]( | $39.20 @ Mwave
**Motherboard** | [ECS A55F2-M3(1.0) Micro ATX FM2 Motherboard]( | $38.99 @ Newegg
**Memory** | [Team Elite 4GB (1 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory]( | $32.99 @ Newegg
**Storage** | [Western Digital Caviar Blue 250GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive]( | $29.50 @ Amazon
**Video Card** | [Zotac GeForce GTX 650 1GB Video Card]( | $59.99 @ Amazon
**Case** | [Rosewill FBM-02 MicroATX Mini Tower Case]( | $24.99 @ Newegg
**Power Supply** | [EVGA 500W 80+ Certified ATX Power Supply]( | $34.98 @ NCIX US
| | **Total**
| Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available | $260.64
| Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-12-03 14:01 EST-0500 |
If you spent $80 on a ps3 (which does not give a playable experience imo), you still have to buy games for at least $20, which will add up. And you can mainly only play old games since very few games are being made for it anymore.
With the pc shown above, you can play most games on medium at 1080p with AA at 50-60fps, and all valve games maxed (I know because I recently built a slightly lower powered pc with very similar specs for a friend). And with a pc, there are tons of free to play games, the under $5 section during steam sales, and then there is the added value of having a general use pc.
If you but a ps3 for $80, then buy 5 games for $40 each (which is a normal price for ps3 games), you spent $280. More than you would spend building this pc, which would give you a better experience. If you build the pc, you dont even have to pay for any games, just download TF2, Firefall, Warframe, BR,ect. and you will never run out of anything to play. And you dont even have to justify building the pc, just build as your general use computer and use it to game. A similar powered laptop would run at least $400.
Every one needs a computer, and if you built the one above, you would be saving $100-200 vs a prebuilt or laptop, so you just saved money, and if you went crazy on a steam sale and spent $200 on games or better parts, you would be breaking even on the COST of the paming machine. And even if we were speaking in terms of how much was SPENT, the initial ammount spent on the ps3 may be lower, but for a gaming machine to be a viable source of entertainment, you would need at least 5 games which, after you buy the games, you would have spent more than you would have building the pc.
* PC initially spent= $260.
* PC total spent after 1 month (having at least 5 quality games)= $260.
* PC cost= negative $100-200.
* PC total cost after 1 month (with 5 quality games)= negative $100-200.
* PS3 initially spent= $80.
* PS3 total spent after 1 month (having at least 5 quality games)= $280.
* PS3 cost= $80.
* PS3 total cost after 1 month (with 5 quality games)= $280.
TL;DR: Everyone needs a PC. Build one that can run games for $260 to spend less for something you need instead of buying a prebuilt, while litterally spending no money on gaming. | If thats litterally all you can afford, that still isnt as good a value as even a cheap pc like this
[PCPartPicker part list]( / [Price breakdown by merchant](
Type
Item
Price
CPU
[AMD Athlon X2 340 3.2GHz Dual-Core Processor](
$39.20 @ Mwave
Motherboard
[ECS A55F2-M3(1.0) Micro ATX FM2 Motherboard](
$38.99 @ Newegg
Memory
[Team Elite 4GB (1 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory](
$32.99 @ Newegg
Storage
[Western Digital Caviar Blue 250GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive](
$29.50 @ Amazon
Video Card
[Zotac GeForce GTX 650 1GB Video Card](
$59.99 @ Amazon
Case
[Rosewill FBM-02 MicroATX Mini Tower Case](
$24.99 @ Newegg
Power Supply
[EVGA 500W 80+ Certified ATX Power Supply](
$34.98 @ NCIX US
Total
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
$260.64
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-12-03 14:01 EST-0500
If you spent $80 on a ps3 (which does not give a playable experience imo), you still have to buy games for at least $20, which will add up. And you can mainly only play old games since very few games are being made for it anymore.
With the pc shown above, you can play most games on medium at 1080p with AA at 50-60fps, and all valve games maxed (I know because I recently built a slightly lower powered pc with very similar specs for a friend). And with a pc, there are tons of free to play games, the under $5 section during steam sales, and then there is the added value of having a general use pc.
If you but a ps3 for $80, then buy 5 games for $40 each (which is a normal price for ps3 games), you spent $280. More than you would spend building this pc, which would give you a better experience. If you build the pc, you dont even have to pay for any games, just download TF2, Firefall, Warframe, BR,ect. and you will never run out of anything to play. And you dont even have to justify building the pc, just build as your general use computer and use it to game. A similar powered laptop would run at least $400.
Every one needs a computer, and if you built the one above, you would be saving $100-200 vs a prebuilt or laptop, so you just saved money, and if you went crazy on a steam sale and spent $200 on games or better parts, you would be breaking even on the COST of the paming machine. And even if we were speaking in terms of how much was SPENT, the initial ammount spent on the ps3 may be lower, but for a gaming machine to be a viable source of entertainment, you would need at least 5 games which, after you buy the games, you would have spent more than you would have building the pc.
PC initially spent= $260.
PC total spent after 1 month (having at least 5 quality games)= $260.
PC cost= negative $100-200.
PC total cost after 1 month (with 5 quality games)= negative $100-200.
PS3 initially spent= $80.
PS3 total spent after 1 month (having at least 5 quality games)= $280.
PS3 cost= $80.
PS3 total cost after 1 month (with 5 quality games)= $280.
TL;DR: Everyone needs a PC. Build one that can run games for $260 to spend less for something you need instead of buying a prebuilt, while litterally spending no money on gaming.
| pcmasterrace | t5_2sgp1 | cmk7350 | If thats litterally all you can afford, that still isnt as good a value as even a cheap pc like this
[PCPartPicker part list]( / [Price breakdown by merchant](
Type
Item
Price
CPU
[AMD Athlon X2 340 3.2GHz Dual-Core Processor](
$39.20 @ Mwave
Motherboard
[ECS A55F2-M3(1.0) Micro ATX FM2 Motherboard](
$38.99 @ Newegg
Memory
[Team Elite 4GB (1 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory](
$32.99 @ Newegg
Storage
[Western Digital Caviar Blue 250GB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive](
$29.50 @ Amazon
Video Card
[Zotac GeForce GTX 650 1GB Video Card](
$59.99 @ Amazon
Case
[Rosewill FBM-02 MicroATX Mini Tower Case](
$24.99 @ Newegg
Power Supply
[EVGA 500W 80+ Certified ATX Power Supply](
$34.98 @ NCIX US
Total
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
$260.64
Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-12-03 14:01 EST-0500
If you spent $80 on a ps3 (which does not give a playable experience imo), you still have to buy games for at least $20, which will add up. And you can mainly only play old games since very few games are being made for it anymore.
With the pc shown above, you can play most games on medium at 1080p with AA at 50-60fps, and all valve games maxed (I know because I recently built a slightly lower powered pc with very similar specs for a friend). And with a pc, there are tons of free to play games, the under $5 section during steam sales, and then there is the added value of having a general use pc.
If you but a ps3 for $80, then buy 5 games for $40 each (which is a normal price for ps3 games), you spent $280. More than you would spend building this pc, which would give you a better experience. If you build the pc, you dont even have to pay for any games, just download TF2, Firefall, Warframe, BR,ect. and you will never run out of anything to play. And you dont even have to justify building the pc, just build as your general use computer and use it to game. A similar powered laptop would run at least $400.
Every one needs a computer, and if you built the one above, you would be saving $100-200 vs a prebuilt or laptop, so you just saved money, and if you went crazy on a steam sale and spent $200 on games or better parts, you would be breaking even on the COST of the paming machine. And even if we were speaking in terms of how much was SPENT, the initial ammount spent on the ps3 may be lower, but for a gaming machine to be a viable source of entertainment, you would need at least 5 games which, after you buy the games, you would have spent more than you would have building the pc.
PC initially spent= $260.
PC total spent after 1 month (having at least 5 quality games)= $260.
PC cost= negative $100-200.
PC total cost after 1 month (with 5 quality games)= negative $100-200.
PS3 initially spent= $80.
PS3 total spent after 1 month (having at least 5 quality games)= $280.
PS3 cost= $80.
PS3 total cost after 1 month (with 5 quality games)= $280. | Everyone needs a PC. Build one that can run games for $260 to spend less for something you need instead of buying a prebuilt, while litterally spending no money on gaming. |
crilen | Thanks and the cool thing now is TL;DR =P
| Thanks and the cool thing now is TL;DR =P
| javascript | t5_2qh30 | cml8a7h | Thanks and the cool thing now is | P |
k-miliisi | - Set up your view controls meticulously and carefully. They will be your most important tool in every combat situation you will encounter! I have a DIY track clip (cheap and easy to construct), but people do perfectly well with joyhat/mouse look setups. Just remember: what you should be aiming for is as fast, fluid and flexible view control scheme, where zooming in and tracking targets is natural. Joyhat with pan view or mouselook are great. When setting up controls try to imagine a situation where a hostile approaches you from lower 2 o'clock, passes right by you, ends up in your high 8 o'clock and starts a split-s or immelmann. You NEED to be able to track him at least somewhat consistently!
- Good starting planes?
Sim battles often deteriorate to turning battles at relatively low altitude; high-altitude and high-speed energy tactics require a good team and communication, which are rare commodities, and 5 km of altitude advantage is not always desirable. As such, you should first and foremost be familiar with classic dogfight manouvers, horizontal combat and energy retention. These include combat manouvers like high yo-yo, barrel/lag displacement roll, wingover and hammerhead. Today I was involved in what was mostly horizontal <1000m dogfight with P-63 and La-5 against F6F, P-39 and P-47. Many of those are not planes that shine in low-level horizontal, but if you have experience with that sort of combat, you can often outmanouver opponents "drawn down to the deck". A simple barrel roll or high yo-yo is often very effective. The reasons for SBs being mostly low-level furballs and low-level 1v1s could be discussed more, but tl;dr: spotting mechanics.
This, of course, puts special emphasis on good turners (and remember, turning is not always horizontal) and learning that sort of combat well. As said so many times, start with a low tier plane. I would recommend trying out at least the first F2A-1 Buffalo, early Spits, Ki-43, He-112 and maybe Chaika and P-36 Hawks. These are well-suited to low-level horizontal combat you will often encounter, and familiarizing yourself with them will teach you many tricks and techniques you can later apply against other sorts of planes. I would also advice you to actively take part in events; today's event makes Zero the master of the skies it rarely is in normal, BR-dictated random battles. You will learn a thing or two there.
But these are all just words; you should try to find a plane you like, fly it until you master it, then move on to another plane. Most often you will find your "next" plane by the virtue of being shot down by so often you start to pay special attention to that plane. For me it was first the 109Fs, then it was F6Fs, then it was 190s...
Remember, it's never just about plane, it's almost always about situational awareness, pilot skill and playing to plane's strengths and enemy's weaknesses. Plane itself matters the most when all other factors are equal or when a plane is clearly superior in given tactical situation and can dominate the flow of combat.
|
Set up your view controls meticulously and carefully. They will be your most important tool in every combat situation you will encounter! I have a DIY track clip (cheap and easy to construct), but people do perfectly well with joyhat/mouse look setups. Just remember: what you should be aiming for is as fast, fluid and flexible view control scheme, where zooming in and tracking targets is natural. Joyhat with pan view or mouselook are great. When setting up controls try to imagine a situation where a hostile approaches you from lower 2 o'clock, passes right by you, ends up in your high 8 o'clock and starts a split-s or immelmann. You NEED to be able to track him at least somewhat consistently!
Good starting planes?
Sim battles often deteriorate to turning battles at relatively low altitude; high-altitude and high-speed energy tactics require a good team and communication, which are rare commodities, and 5 km of altitude advantage is not always desirable. As such, you should first and foremost be familiar with classic dogfight manouvers, horizontal combat and energy retention. These include combat manouvers like high yo-yo, barrel/lag displacement roll, wingover and hammerhead. Today I was involved in what was mostly horizontal <1000m dogfight with P-63 and La-5 against F6F, P-39 and P-47. Many of those are not planes that shine in low-level horizontal, but if you have experience with that sort of combat, you can often outmanouver opponents "drawn down to the deck". A simple barrel roll or high yo-yo is often very effective. The reasons for SBs being mostly low-level furballs and low-level 1v1s could be discussed more, but tl;dr: spotting mechanics.
This, of course, puts special emphasis on good turners (and remember, turning is not always horizontal) and learning that sort of combat well. As said so many times, start with a low tier plane. I would recommend trying out at least the first F2A-1 Buffalo, early Spits, Ki-43, He-112 and maybe Chaika and P-36 Hawks. These are well-suited to low-level horizontal combat you will often encounter, and familiarizing yourself with them will teach you many tricks and techniques you can later apply against other sorts of planes. I would also advice you to actively take part in events; today's event makes Zero the master of the skies it rarely is in normal, BR-dictated random battles. You will learn a thing or two there.
But these are all just words; you should try to find a plane you like, fly it until you master it, then move on to another plane. Most often you will find your "next" plane by the virtue of being shot down by so often you start to pay special attention to that plane. For me it was first the 109Fs, then it was F6Fs, then it was 190s...
Remember, it's never just about plane, it's almost always about situational awareness, pilot skill and playing to plane's strengths and enemy's weaknesses. Plane itself matters the most when all other factors are equal or when a plane is clearly superior in given tactical situation and can dominate the flow of combat.
| Warthunder | t5_2uc6j | cmkw5qf | Set up your view controls meticulously and carefully. They will be your most important tool in every combat situation you will encounter! I have a DIY track clip (cheap and easy to construct), but people do perfectly well with joyhat/mouse look setups. Just remember: what you should be aiming for is as fast, fluid and flexible view control scheme, where zooming in and tracking targets is natural. Joyhat with pan view or mouselook are great. When setting up controls try to imagine a situation where a hostile approaches you from lower 2 o'clock, passes right by you, ends up in your high 8 o'clock and starts a split-s or immelmann. You NEED to be able to track him at least somewhat consistently!
Good starting planes?
Sim battles often deteriorate to turning battles at relatively low altitude; high-altitude and high-speed energy tactics require a good team and communication, which are rare commodities, and 5 km of altitude advantage is not always desirable. As such, you should first and foremost be familiar with classic dogfight manouvers, horizontal combat and energy retention. These include combat manouvers like high yo-yo, barrel/lag displacement roll, wingover and hammerhead. Today I was involved in what was mostly horizontal <1000m dogfight with P-63 and La-5 against F6F, P-39 and P-47. Many of those are not planes that shine in low-level horizontal, but if you have experience with that sort of combat, you can often outmanouver opponents "drawn down to the deck". A simple barrel roll or high yo-yo is often very effective. The reasons for SBs being mostly low-level furballs and low-level 1v1s could be discussed more, but | spotting mechanics.
This, of course, puts special emphasis on good turners (and remember, turning is not always horizontal) and learning that sort of combat well. As said so many times, start with a low tier plane. I would recommend trying out at least the first F2A-1 Buffalo, early Spits, Ki-43, He-112 and maybe Chaika and P-36 Hawks. These are well-suited to low-level horizontal combat you will often encounter, and familiarizing yourself with them will teach you many tricks and techniques you can later apply against other sorts of planes. I would also advice you to actively take part in events; today's event makes Zero the master of the skies it rarely is in normal, BR-dictated random battles. You will learn a thing or two there.
But these are all just words; you should try to find a plane you like, fly it until you master it, then move on to another plane. Most often you will find your "next" plane by the virtue of being shot down by so often you start to pay special attention to that plane. For me it was first the 109Fs, then it was F6Fs, then it was 190s...
Remember, it's never just about plane, it's almost always about situational awareness, pilot skill and playing to plane's strengths and enemy's weaknesses. Plane itself matters the most when all other factors are equal or when a plane is clearly superior in given tactical situation and can dominate the flow of combat. |
Relax_Im_Hilarious | Someone opens up their heart and their deepest pain to the public and idiots like you thrash it around as karma whoring. They're fake points that mean absolutely nothing, it's the basic human need to seek human compassion and socialization.
In other words the tl;dr: I hope you're young, because you might have some time left to grow into a decent human being... If you're not, well, you're going to have a bad time for the rest of your life. | Someone opens up their heart and their deepest pain to the public and idiots like you thrash it around as karma whoring. They're fake points that mean absolutely nothing, it's the basic human need to seek human compassion and socialization.
In other words the tl;dr: I hope you're young, because you might have some time left to grow into a decent human being... If you're not, well, you're going to have a bad time for the rest of your life.
| Minecraft | t5_2r05i | cmkzgdt | Someone opens up their heart and their deepest pain to the public and idiots like you thrash it around as karma whoring. They're fake points that mean absolutely nothing, it's the basic human need to seek human compassion and socialization.
In other words the | I hope you're young, because you might have some time left to grow into a decent human being... If you're not, well, you're going to have a bad time for the rest of your life. |
arkbg1 | I am so thankful for the moment of meaningful silence that Stewart shows here. The internet has become like a kid in a candy store. We are running around and picking candy, while, suddenly, switching to another candy. This is DESTROYING the internet! We must stop this at once.
Here is a better written example of what I mean written 2 weeks before the 01-18-12 internet blackout from OpBlackout-SOPA.
Original source:
Anonymous: A Necessary Change
BY: A GUEST ON JAN 3RD, 2012 | SYNTAX: NONE | SIZE: 5.70 KB | VIEWS: 1,604 | EXPIRES: NEVER
The Steps to Achieve our Goals
A Necessary Change
Attention Brothers and Sisters of Anonymous:
As a participant of Anonymous, I see our movement gaining speed. Let me explain an analogy. Our movement is like unto a train that does not stop. We are gaining speed rapidly. It appears to us that we are moving along with great progress. The Occupy movement is doing well. We are progressing rapidly.
Let me explain how this is not the case. Many of you may not agree with me. I am calling for an absolute change to our objectives and priorities. Please ponder this with an open mind.
Our great train is barreling towards a wall that will destroy us, if not thought out correctly. I fear for our movement. I understand we have no leader, and that is ABSOLUTELY FINE! It occurs to me that we are getting ahead of ourselves. We have begun to create grand ideas and goals to achieve our ultimate goal: Freedom! Some of you may have already created these grand goals. That is okay as well, but our movement CAN'T handle all of these goals.
We have become like a child in a candy store. We are running around and picking candy, while, suddenly, switching to another candy. This is DESTROYING the movement! We must stop this at once. It seems that everyone is picking and choosing a step to help complete.
This is where we must stop altogether. Get our priorities in order or else we WILL FAIL!
Let me ask you a few questions. Who can create a press release? Who can make a video? Who can create targets? Who can cause an action to take place?
The answer to all the above is simple. Anyone. Yes, anyone can make all of those things. We are ANONYMOUS. The truth is, we DON'T KNOW who makes these? It could be any of us. It could be an outsider. Who is an outsider? Also, the answer is anyone. Your neighbor, friend, teacher, leaders, your family, even the government itself.
These "Outsiders" are set on destroying the movement. How can they influence us to make the wrong decision? Like I said above, through videos, press releases, targets, anything that makes us take an action could possibly come from an Outsider. This is a sad truth that we all wish we could deny. Some of you might.
I am telling you we NEED TO FOLLOW A SET PATH OF STEPS! Here is a simple objective list I have made to show you what I mean:
1. Spread the word of Anonymous
a.) PLAN
2. Take Action
a.) PLAN
3. Play the Defense
a.) PLAN
4. Survive
5. Reap the Rewards
Our movement has gained MUCH momentum. We have spread the word. We are ready. The one problem is that we are not PLANNING! Brothers and Sisters, we still have not gotten to Step 2 yet. We need to begin Step 1a. That is to Plan!
Plan our targets carefully. Stalk them, learn them, BE the target. Learn about them. A simple "Dox" is not enough. Plan the action we will take. Some of you may believe in the "NWO" or the "Illuminati". These organizations may work in mysterious ways. To control our thoughts and provoke an action in their favor.
How can they do this? They have DECIDED what we will do! They have planned accordingly. They have DECIDED we will fail! Eldridge Cleaver said,
"They use FORCE to MAKE you do, what the DECIDERS have DECIDED you MUST do!"
They call themselves the DECIDERS! I say they have not decided, but merely hypothesized the outcome. Sadly, it is ruling in their favor.
How can we stop their "DECISIONS"? This is also another common phrase used by modern people. "Fight fire with fire" WE MUST DECIDE! HOW DO WE WANT OUR MOVEMENT TO RESULT? In their favor, or our favor? The people say in OUR favor! Follow the steps. DO NOT GET AHEAD OF OURSELVES WITH LARGE GOALS!
Once we leave our planning stage, there is NO GOING BACK! The DECIDERS will become nervous that we have caught onto their plan. We are taking control and no one will stop us. They will attempt by waging wars. Even silent wars you won't hear about. I am telling you right now, THE GOVERNMENT WANTS US TO KEEP ON THE TRACK WE ARE GOING! Why are we not being hunted down like the Nazis did to Jews in the Holocaust? We are not considered a threat by the governments, because we are on the track they want us to take! GET OFF!
Brake the chains of oppression! Like the great philosopher Karl Marx told the world, spread the word among the rooftops! Fight your OPPRESSORS with words and courage! Tell everyone about the evils the governments create!
SPREAD THIS WORK TO ALL YOU SEE! PRINT THIS OUT AND HANDOUT TO THE MASSES! TEACH THE WORLD OF TRUE FREEDOM!
WE ARE NOT YOUR PUPPETS! WE ARE NOT YOUR SLAVES! WE ARE NOT YOUR CHILDREN! WE ARE NOT YOUR WORKERS!
WE ARE ANONYMOUS!
We hide our identities because we are NOT scared! THIS IS OUR WAR CRY!
WE ARE LEGION!
Our masks unify us in solidarity! ANONYMOUS be our name to signify us as ONE! You CANNOT address thousands of identities as multiples, but as ONE! We are one in purpose! THIS IS OUR STRENGTH!
WE DO NOT FORGIVE!
The atrocities that have been committed by governments is numberless. We learn these evils and combat them! THIS IS OUR CAUSE!
WE DO NOT FORGET!
We do not forget the atrocities committed by the governments! We do not forget the years of OPPRESSION and PAIN! THIS IS OUR KNOWLEDGE!
EXPECT US!
Our OPPRESSORS never thought we could find them and undermine their plans of CONTROL and DESTRUCTION! We will OBLITERATE them and their supporters! They should have known we were coming! You CANNOT stop the power of the people! THIS IS OUR MESSAGE!
Remain Anonymous, Brothers and Sisters! For we can WIN this battle! We can operate as ONE! We can get the people in power!
irc.anonops.li
OpBlackout
OpBlackout-StopSOPA
OpBlackout-Propaganda
While some of the combined styles of language vary wildly, the over arching message is universally accurate. We must plan better or the internet will not last. That's why I did not join the Jan 18th blackout with Wikipedia, Google and Reddit. I was and still am too busy developing the end game answer to this call for planning.
I created the dapp (decentralized or distributed applications like bitcoin, bittorrent, TOR, etc) codenamed BitVote which is the flagship Dapp for Ethereums upcoming release in March 2015. The reason I am so personally grateful for Stewarts silence is that when everyone is screaming like kids in candy stores then no one can hear my plan. In the end it's no different than any other form of censorship if no one even gets a chance to check out our work at BitVote.GitHub.Com
TL;DR - thank you for silence | I am so thankful for the moment of meaningful silence that Stewart shows here. The internet has become like a kid in a candy store. We are running around and picking candy, while, suddenly, switching to another candy. This is DESTROYING the internet! We must stop this at once.
Here is a better written example of what I mean written 2 weeks before the 01-18-12 internet blackout from OpBlackout-SOPA.
Original source:
Anonymous: A Necessary Change
BY: A GUEST ON JAN 3RD, 2012 | SYNTAX: NONE | SIZE: 5.70 KB | VIEWS: 1,604 | EXPIRES: NEVER
The Steps to Achieve our Goals
A Necessary Change
Attention Brothers and Sisters of Anonymous:
As a participant of Anonymous, I see our movement gaining speed. Let me explain an analogy. Our movement is like unto a train that does not stop. We are gaining speed rapidly. It appears to us that we are moving along with great progress. The Occupy movement is doing well. We are progressing rapidly.
Let me explain how this is not the case. Many of you may not agree with me. I am calling for an absolute change to our objectives and priorities. Please ponder this with an open mind.
Our great train is barreling towards a wall that will destroy us, if not thought out correctly. I fear for our movement. I understand we have no leader, and that is ABSOLUTELY FINE! It occurs to me that we are getting ahead of ourselves. We have begun to create grand ideas and goals to achieve our ultimate goal: Freedom! Some of you may have already created these grand goals. That is okay as well, but our movement CAN'T handle all of these goals.
We have become like a child in a candy store. We are running around and picking candy, while, suddenly, switching to another candy. This is DESTROYING the movement! We must stop this at once. It seems that everyone is picking and choosing a step to help complete.
This is where we must stop altogether. Get our priorities in order or else we WILL FAIL!
Let me ask you a few questions. Who can create a press release? Who can make a video? Who can create targets? Who can cause an action to take place?
The answer to all the above is simple. Anyone. Yes, anyone can make all of those things. We are ANONYMOUS. The truth is, we DON'T KNOW who makes these? It could be any of us. It could be an outsider. Who is an outsider? Also, the answer is anyone. Your neighbor, friend, teacher, leaders, your family, even the government itself.
These "Outsiders" are set on destroying the movement. How can they influence us to make the wrong decision? Like I said above, through videos, press releases, targets, anything that makes us take an action could possibly come from an Outsider. This is a sad truth that we all wish we could deny. Some of you might.
I am telling you we NEED TO FOLLOW A SET PATH OF STEPS! Here is a simple objective list I have made to show you what I mean:
Spread the word of Anonymous
a.) PLAN
Take Action
a.) PLAN
Play the Defense
a.) PLAN
Survive
Reap the Rewards
Our movement has gained MUCH momentum. We have spread the word. We are ready. The one problem is that we are not PLANNING! Brothers and Sisters, we still have not gotten to Step 2 yet. We need to begin Step 1a. That is to Plan!
Plan our targets carefully. Stalk them, learn them, BE the target. Learn about them. A simple "Dox" is not enough. Plan the action we will take. Some of you may believe in the "NWO" or the "Illuminati". These organizations may work in mysterious ways. To control our thoughts and provoke an action in their favor.
How can they do this? They have DECIDED what we will do! They have planned accordingly. They have DECIDED we will fail! Eldridge Cleaver said,
"They use FORCE to MAKE you do, what the DECIDERS have DECIDED you MUST do!"
They call themselves the DECIDERS! I say they have not decided, but merely hypothesized the outcome. Sadly, it is ruling in their favor.
How can we stop their "DECISIONS"? This is also another common phrase used by modern people. "Fight fire with fire" WE MUST DECIDE! HOW DO WE WANT OUR MOVEMENT TO RESULT? In their favor, or our favor? The people say in OUR favor! Follow the steps. DO NOT GET AHEAD OF OURSELVES WITH LARGE GOALS!
Once we leave our planning stage, there is NO GOING BACK! The DECIDERS will become nervous that we have caught onto their plan. We are taking control and no one will stop us. They will attempt by waging wars. Even silent wars you won't hear about. I am telling you right now, THE GOVERNMENT WANTS US TO KEEP ON THE TRACK WE ARE GOING! Why are we not being hunted down like the Nazis did to Jews in the Holocaust? We are not considered a threat by the governments, because we are on the track they want us to take! GET OFF!
Brake the chains of oppression! Like the great philosopher Karl Marx told the world, spread the word among the rooftops! Fight your OPPRESSORS with words and courage! Tell everyone about the evils the governments create!
SPREAD THIS WORK TO ALL YOU SEE! PRINT THIS OUT AND HANDOUT TO THE MASSES! TEACH THE WORLD OF TRUE FREEDOM!
WE ARE NOT YOUR PUPPETS! WE ARE NOT YOUR SLAVES! WE ARE NOT YOUR CHILDREN! WE ARE NOT YOUR WORKERS!
WE ARE ANONYMOUS!
We hide our identities because we are NOT scared! THIS IS OUR WAR CRY!
WE ARE LEGION!
Our masks unify us in solidarity! ANONYMOUS be our name to signify us as ONE! You CANNOT address thousands of identities as multiples, but as ONE! We are one in purpose! THIS IS OUR STRENGTH!
WE DO NOT FORGIVE!
The atrocities that have been committed by governments is numberless. We learn these evils and combat them! THIS IS OUR CAUSE!
WE DO NOT FORGET!
We do not forget the atrocities committed by the governments! We do not forget the years of OPPRESSION and PAIN! THIS IS OUR KNOWLEDGE!
EXPECT US!
Our OPPRESSORS never thought we could find them and undermine their plans of CONTROL and DESTRUCTION! We will OBLITERATE them and their supporters! They should have known we were coming! You CANNOT stop the power of the people! THIS IS OUR MESSAGE!
Remain Anonymous, Brothers and Sisters! For we can WIN this battle! We can operate as ONE! We can get the people in power!
irc.anonops.li
OpBlackout
OpBlackout-StopSOPA
OpBlackout-Propaganda
While some of the combined styles of language vary wildly, the over arching message is universally accurate. We must plan better or the internet will not last. That's why I did not join the Jan 18th blackout with Wikipedia, Google and Reddit. I was and still am too busy developing the end game answer to this call for planning.
I created the dapp (decentralized or distributed applications like bitcoin, bittorrent, TOR, etc) codenamed BitVote which is the flagship Dapp for Ethereums upcoming release in March 2015. The reason I am so personally grateful for Stewarts silence is that when everyone is screaming like kids in candy stores then no one can hear my plan. In the end it's no different than any other form of censorship if no one even gets a chance to check out our work at BitVote.GitHub.Com
TL;DR - thank you for silence
| news | t5_2qh3l | cmly5q1 | I am so thankful for the moment of meaningful silence that Stewart shows here. The internet has become like a kid in a candy store. We are running around and picking candy, while, suddenly, switching to another candy. This is DESTROYING the internet! We must stop this at once.
Here is a better written example of what I mean written 2 weeks before the 01-18-12 internet blackout from OpBlackout-SOPA.
Original source:
Anonymous: A Necessary Change
BY: A GUEST ON JAN 3RD, 2012 | SYNTAX: NONE | SIZE: 5.70 KB | VIEWS: 1,604 | EXPIRES: NEVER
The Steps to Achieve our Goals
A Necessary Change
Attention Brothers and Sisters of Anonymous:
As a participant of Anonymous, I see our movement gaining speed. Let me explain an analogy. Our movement is like unto a train that does not stop. We are gaining speed rapidly. It appears to us that we are moving along with great progress. The Occupy movement is doing well. We are progressing rapidly.
Let me explain how this is not the case. Many of you may not agree with me. I am calling for an absolute change to our objectives and priorities. Please ponder this with an open mind.
Our great train is barreling towards a wall that will destroy us, if not thought out correctly. I fear for our movement. I understand we have no leader, and that is ABSOLUTELY FINE! It occurs to me that we are getting ahead of ourselves. We have begun to create grand ideas and goals to achieve our ultimate goal: Freedom! Some of you may have already created these grand goals. That is okay as well, but our movement CAN'T handle all of these goals.
We have become like a child in a candy store. We are running around and picking candy, while, suddenly, switching to another candy. This is DESTROYING the movement! We must stop this at once. It seems that everyone is picking and choosing a step to help complete.
This is where we must stop altogether. Get our priorities in order or else we WILL FAIL!
Let me ask you a few questions. Who can create a press release? Who can make a video? Who can create targets? Who can cause an action to take place?
The answer to all the above is simple. Anyone. Yes, anyone can make all of those things. We are ANONYMOUS. The truth is, we DON'T KNOW who makes these? It could be any of us. It could be an outsider. Who is an outsider? Also, the answer is anyone. Your neighbor, friend, teacher, leaders, your family, even the government itself.
These "Outsiders" are set on destroying the movement. How can they influence us to make the wrong decision? Like I said above, through videos, press releases, targets, anything that makes us take an action could possibly come from an Outsider. This is a sad truth that we all wish we could deny. Some of you might.
I am telling you we NEED TO FOLLOW A SET PATH OF STEPS! Here is a simple objective list I have made to show you what I mean:
Spread the word of Anonymous
a.) PLAN
Take Action
a.) PLAN
Play the Defense
a.) PLAN
Survive
Reap the Rewards
Our movement has gained MUCH momentum. We have spread the word. We are ready. The one problem is that we are not PLANNING! Brothers and Sisters, we still have not gotten to Step 2 yet. We need to begin Step 1a. That is to Plan!
Plan our targets carefully. Stalk them, learn them, BE the target. Learn about them. A simple "Dox" is not enough. Plan the action we will take. Some of you may believe in the "NWO" or the "Illuminati". These organizations may work in mysterious ways. To control our thoughts and provoke an action in their favor.
How can they do this? They have DECIDED what we will do! They have planned accordingly. They have DECIDED we will fail! Eldridge Cleaver said,
"They use FORCE to MAKE you do, what the DECIDERS have DECIDED you MUST do!"
They call themselves the DECIDERS! I say they have not decided, but merely hypothesized the outcome. Sadly, it is ruling in their favor.
How can we stop their "DECISIONS"? This is also another common phrase used by modern people. "Fight fire with fire" WE MUST DECIDE! HOW DO WE WANT OUR MOVEMENT TO RESULT? In their favor, or our favor? The people say in OUR favor! Follow the steps. DO NOT GET AHEAD OF OURSELVES WITH LARGE GOALS!
Once we leave our planning stage, there is NO GOING BACK! The DECIDERS will become nervous that we have caught onto their plan. We are taking control and no one will stop us. They will attempt by waging wars. Even silent wars you won't hear about. I am telling you right now, THE GOVERNMENT WANTS US TO KEEP ON THE TRACK WE ARE GOING! Why are we not being hunted down like the Nazis did to Jews in the Holocaust? We are not considered a threat by the governments, because we are on the track they want us to take! GET OFF!
Brake the chains of oppression! Like the great philosopher Karl Marx told the world, spread the word among the rooftops! Fight your OPPRESSORS with words and courage! Tell everyone about the evils the governments create!
SPREAD THIS WORK TO ALL YOU SEE! PRINT THIS OUT AND HANDOUT TO THE MASSES! TEACH THE WORLD OF TRUE FREEDOM!
WE ARE NOT YOUR PUPPETS! WE ARE NOT YOUR SLAVES! WE ARE NOT YOUR CHILDREN! WE ARE NOT YOUR WORKERS!
WE ARE ANONYMOUS!
We hide our identities because we are NOT scared! THIS IS OUR WAR CRY!
WE ARE LEGION!
Our masks unify us in solidarity! ANONYMOUS be our name to signify us as ONE! You CANNOT address thousands of identities as multiples, but as ONE! We are one in purpose! THIS IS OUR STRENGTH!
WE DO NOT FORGIVE!
The atrocities that have been committed by governments is numberless. We learn these evils and combat them! THIS IS OUR CAUSE!
WE DO NOT FORGET!
We do not forget the atrocities committed by the governments! We do not forget the years of OPPRESSION and PAIN! THIS IS OUR KNOWLEDGE!
EXPECT US!
Our OPPRESSORS never thought we could find them and undermine their plans of CONTROL and DESTRUCTION! We will OBLITERATE them and their supporters! They should have known we were coming! You CANNOT stop the power of the people! THIS IS OUR MESSAGE!
Remain Anonymous, Brothers and Sisters! For we can WIN this battle! We can operate as ONE! We can get the people in power!
irc.anonops.li
OpBlackout
OpBlackout-StopSOPA
OpBlackout-Propaganda
While some of the combined styles of language vary wildly, the over arching message is universally accurate. We must plan better or the internet will not last. That's why I did not join the Jan 18th blackout with Wikipedia, Google and Reddit. I was and still am too busy developing the end game answer to this call for planning.
I created the dapp (decentralized or distributed applications like bitcoin, bittorrent, TOR, etc) codenamed BitVote which is the flagship Dapp for Ethereums upcoming release in March 2015. The reason I am so personally grateful for Stewarts silence is that when everyone is screaming like kids in candy stores then no one can hear my plan. In the end it's no different than any other form of censorship if no one even gets a chance to check out our work at BitVote.GitHub.Com | thank you for silence |
recycled_ideas | The police are no different in Britain, it's the law that is different.
The issue is the definition you're using of public. The police do not serve the public in an individual sense, that's impossible, and a fairly bad idea for all sorts of reasons.
The police serve the public as a whole. For the most part they do this by enforcing the rules which the public has decided should be enforced to serve the public interests those laws are intended to promote.
That is to say, they don't arrest murderers because they serve the victim or the victim's family, they do so because having a murderer on the street and more importantly having people believe they can kill without consequences is bad for society.
The problem with the US is more that they don't sufficiently enforce the law than that they enforce it to much. If you're black or other minority you get the full force of the law, if you're middle class and white you don't. White Americans vote for all sorts of moronic laws because they know they won't be applied to them, when they are applied to them the outrage is instantaneous and extreme.
That said this isn't even one of those cases.
Eric Garner was suspected of involvement in a fight, on this suspicion he was arrested. Because he was an idiot he resisted that arrest, there's reasons why he did this, but none of them make it not a stupid thing to do.
As they will always do, the police responded with force, to arrest him in spite of his resistance. This resulted in his death, which is not illegal. The chokehold was a violation of NYPD policy and as a result of this, the officer involved lost his badge.
The TL;DR of this and most of these scenarios is that if you refuse to comply with a lawful command or arrest from law enforcement they can and usually will use force. That application of force is never safe and you might die, if you do the cop will walk, as they should unless intent to kill can be established. | The police are no different in Britain, it's the law that is different.
The issue is the definition you're using of public. The police do not serve the public in an individual sense, that's impossible, and a fairly bad idea for all sorts of reasons.
The police serve the public as a whole. For the most part they do this by enforcing the rules which the public has decided should be enforced to serve the public interests those laws are intended to promote.
That is to say, they don't arrest murderers because they serve the victim or the victim's family, they do so because having a murderer on the street and more importantly having people believe they can kill without consequences is bad for society.
The problem with the US is more that they don't sufficiently enforce the law than that they enforce it to much. If you're black or other minority you get the full force of the law, if you're middle class and white you don't. White Americans vote for all sorts of moronic laws because they know they won't be applied to them, when they are applied to them the outrage is instantaneous and extreme.
That said this isn't even one of those cases.
Eric Garner was suspected of involvement in a fight, on this suspicion he was arrested. Because he was an idiot he resisted that arrest, there's reasons why he did this, but none of them make it not a stupid thing to do.
As they will always do, the police responded with force, to arrest him in spite of his resistance. This resulted in his death, which is not illegal. The chokehold was a violation of NYPD policy and as a result of this, the officer involved lost his badge.
The TL;DR of this and most of these scenarios is that if you refuse to comply with a lawful command or arrest from law enforcement they can and usually will use force. That application of force is never safe and you might die, if you do the cop will walk, as they should unless intent to kill can be established.
| news | t5_2qh3l | cmlrry2 | The police are no different in Britain, it's the law that is different.
The issue is the definition you're using of public. The police do not serve the public in an individual sense, that's impossible, and a fairly bad idea for all sorts of reasons.
The police serve the public as a whole. For the most part they do this by enforcing the rules which the public has decided should be enforced to serve the public interests those laws are intended to promote.
That is to say, they don't arrest murderers because they serve the victim or the victim's family, they do so because having a murderer on the street and more importantly having people believe they can kill without consequences is bad for society.
The problem with the US is more that they don't sufficiently enforce the law than that they enforce it to much. If you're black or other minority you get the full force of the law, if you're middle class and white you don't. White Americans vote for all sorts of moronic laws because they know they won't be applied to them, when they are applied to them the outrage is instantaneous and extreme.
That said this isn't even one of those cases.
Eric Garner was suspected of involvement in a fight, on this suspicion he was arrested. Because he was an idiot he resisted that arrest, there's reasons why he did this, but none of them make it not a stupid thing to do.
As they will always do, the police responded with force, to arrest him in spite of his resistance. This resulted in his death, which is not illegal. The chokehold was a violation of NYPD policy and as a result of this, the officer involved lost his badge.
The | of this and most of these scenarios is that if you refuse to comply with a lawful command or arrest from law enforcement they can and usually will use force. That application of force is never safe and you might die, if you do the cop will walk, as they should unless intent to kill can be established. |
topcat512 | I wouldn't justify it either but my dad always warned me to never argue with a police officer because if they see an opportunity to screw you and make their arrest/ticket quota, they will take it. Cops love acting like dicks and getting in your face because what the fuck are you going to do? Raise your voice? Back away? Kick their ass? Harold and Kumar has a nice scene about it:
I would never dream of waving my arms around and yelling like Garner was doing. To some steroid abusing cop who's grown up on action movies his whole life, it was a green light to take him down. You can see Garner get excited and yank his arm out of the officers grip as they try cuffing him. That's all the guy behind him, (the murderer), needed. He sees a chance to use that MMA move he was taught so he pounces on him. In the adrenaline rush, they got carried away because it's not their job to show restraint or protect the public. Their job is to catch criminals and maintain order.
Step up to a cop, no matter how justified you may be, and you will get smacked down. I mean a fucking ticket for selling loosies turns into murder just because Garner waves his hand around. Clearly cops are fucking crazy. So no, it wasn't justified but common sense should tell you that the American police officer is a dangerous lunatic who should be treated like a bear when encountered. No sudden movements and a soft tone of voice.
TL;DR - He should not have resisted because cops are fucking insane. Common sense and history should tell you that raising your voice or getting agitated gives inexperienced cops, (already not the sharpest members of society by any means) a license to fucking murder you over a petty offense. You're caught selling loosies? Shut the fuck up and plead the fifth. At least you'll live.
edit: clarity | I wouldn't justify it either but my dad always warned me to never argue with a police officer because if they see an opportunity to screw you and make their arrest/ticket quota, they will take it. Cops love acting like dicks and getting in your face because what the fuck are you going to do? Raise your voice? Back away? Kick their ass? Harold and Kumar has a nice scene about it:
I would never dream of waving my arms around and yelling like Garner was doing. To some steroid abusing cop who's grown up on action movies his whole life, it was a green light to take him down. You can see Garner get excited and yank his arm out of the officers grip as they try cuffing him. That's all the guy behind him, (the murderer), needed. He sees a chance to use that MMA move he was taught so he pounces on him. In the adrenaline rush, they got carried away because it's not their job to show restraint or protect the public. Their job is to catch criminals and maintain order.
Step up to a cop, no matter how justified you may be, and you will get smacked down. I mean a fucking ticket for selling loosies turns into murder just because Garner waves his hand around. Clearly cops are fucking crazy. So no, it wasn't justified but common sense should tell you that the American police officer is a dangerous lunatic who should be treated like a bear when encountered. No sudden movements and a soft tone of voice.
TL;DR - He should not have resisted because cops are fucking insane. Common sense and history should tell you that raising your voice or getting agitated gives inexperienced cops, (already not the sharpest members of society by any means) a license to fucking murder you over a petty offense. You're caught selling loosies? Shut the fuck up and plead the fifth. At least you'll live.
edit: clarity
| news | t5_2qh3l | cmltm7c | I wouldn't justify it either but my dad always warned me to never argue with a police officer because if they see an opportunity to screw you and make their arrest/ticket quota, they will take it. Cops love acting like dicks and getting in your face because what the fuck are you going to do? Raise your voice? Back away? Kick their ass? Harold and Kumar has a nice scene about it:
I would never dream of waving my arms around and yelling like Garner was doing. To some steroid abusing cop who's grown up on action movies his whole life, it was a green light to take him down. You can see Garner get excited and yank his arm out of the officers grip as they try cuffing him. That's all the guy behind him, (the murderer), needed. He sees a chance to use that MMA move he was taught so he pounces on him. In the adrenaline rush, they got carried away because it's not their job to show restraint or protect the public. Their job is to catch criminals and maintain order.
Step up to a cop, no matter how justified you may be, and you will get smacked down. I mean a fucking ticket for selling loosies turns into murder just because Garner waves his hand around. Clearly cops are fucking crazy. So no, it wasn't justified but common sense should tell you that the American police officer is a dangerous lunatic who should be treated like a bear when encountered. No sudden movements and a soft tone of voice. | He should not have resisted because cops are fucking insane. Common sense and history should tell you that raising your voice or getting agitated gives inexperienced cops, (already not the sharpest members of society by any means) a license to fucking murder you over a petty offense. You're caught selling loosies? Shut the fuck up and plead the fifth. At least you'll live.
edit: clarity |
kami232 | So the murder of non-blacks is OK because it happens less often?
Yeah, racial profiling is a problem, but if you're going to focus on some victims and not all, then you're ~~still doing a disservice~~ preventing justice for all (cherry picking who gets justice is wrong). That's what luizn is saying. He's right. *All* citizens, tourists, and even the illegals should be protected from police brutality. It's not sentiment; it's fact. You can do that *and* target racial profiling as well.
TL;DR - stop getting into a bitchy fight of "*this is more important*" when it's not *just* blacks that get ~~killed~~ murdered by cops - justified or otherwise. Or do I need to remind you of Kelly Thomas?
Brutality is brutality; that needs to be addressed regardless of race. You're just as bad as those who *don't* want to address racial problems if you refuse to acknowledge that police brutality goes beyond race. | So the murder of non-blacks is OK because it happens less often?
Yeah, racial profiling is a problem, but if you're going to focus on some victims and not all, then you're still doing a disservice preventing justice for all (cherry picking who gets justice is wrong). That's what luizn is saying. He's right. All citizens, tourists, and even the illegals should be protected from police brutality. It's not sentiment; it's fact. You can do that and target racial profiling as well.
TL;DR - stop getting into a bitchy fight of " this is more important " when it's not just blacks that get killed murdered by cops - justified or otherwise. Or do I need to remind you of Kelly Thomas?
Brutality is brutality; that needs to be addressed regardless of race. You're just as bad as those who don't want to address racial problems if you refuse to acknowledge that police brutality goes beyond race.
| news | t5_2qh3l | cmlued1 | So the murder of non-blacks is OK because it happens less often?
Yeah, racial profiling is a problem, but if you're going to focus on some victims and not all, then you're still doing a disservice preventing justice for all (cherry picking who gets justice is wrong). That's what luizn is saying. He's right. All citizens, tourists, and even the illegals should be protected from police brutality. It's not sentiment; it's fact. You can do that and target racial profiling as well. | stop getting into a bitchy fight of " this is more important " when it's not just blacks that get killed murdered by cops - justified or otherwise. Or do I need to remind you of Kelly Thomas?
Brutality is brutality; that needs to be addressed regardless of race. You're just as bad as those who don't want to address racial problems if you refuse to acknowledge that police brutality goes beyond race. |
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.