Datasets:

webis

/

tldr-17

like 40

Follow

Webis Group 32

Falunel

If you range the knight, then the only attack you have to ever worry about is the pull, which is extremely easy to avoid. The attack always activates one second after the giant circle disappears, so if you count to one and then dodge, that should do it. (I also play on a laptop with a terrible graphics card and do just fine- just turn your settings to lowest and maybe disable nameplates as well. It helps a lot.) Now, if you melee, it's a different story. The AoE stomp is okay imo with practice, but harder to dodge than the pull and requires you to watch the knight closely (which can be a pain if there's people stacked on top with a ton of particle effects). It's the knight's autoattack that's the worst- even though it's big, telegraphed, and slower than most autoattacks, more often than not it gets covered in particle effects. Not to mention that it's performed a lot and hits hard. tl;dr you should be perfectly fine at range once you get used to the pull's timing, unless you run an utterly awful machine. In which case, you have my complete sympathy.

If you range the knight, then the only attack you have to ever worry about is the pull, which is extremely easy to avoid. The attack always activates one second after the giant circle disappears, so if you count to one and then dodge, that should do it. (I also play on a laptop with a terrible graphics card and do just fine- just turn your settings to lowest and maybe disable nameplates as well. It helps a lot.) Now, if you melee, it's a different story. The AoE stomp is okay imo with practice, but harder to dodge than the pull and requires you to watch the knight closely (which can be a pain if there's people stacked on top with a ton of particle effects). It's the knight's autoattack that's the worst- even though it's big, telegraphed, and slower than most autoattacks, more often than not it gets covered in particle effects. Not to mention that it's performed a lot and hits hard. tl;dr you should be perfectly fine at range once you get used to the pull's timing, unless you run an utterly awful machine. In which case, you have my complete sympathy.

Guildwars2

t5_2r9po

cfxtm35

If you range the knight, then the only attack you have to ever worry about is the pull, which is extremely easy to avoid. The attack always activates one second after the giant circle disappears, so if you count to one and then dodge, that should do it. (I also play on a laptop with a terrible graphics card and do just fine- just turn your settings to lowest and maybe disable nameplates as well. It helps a lot.) Now, if you melee, it's a different story. The AoE stomp is okay imo with practice, but harder to dodge than the pull and requires you to watch the knight closely (which can be a pain if there's people stacked on top with a ton of particle effects). It's the knight's autoattack that's the worst- even though it's big, telegraphed, and slower than most autoattacks, more often than not it gets covered in particle effects. Not to mention that it's performed a lot and hits hard.

you should be perfectly fine at range once you get used to the pull's timing, unless you run an utterly awful machine. In which case, you have my complete sympathy.

DejaBoo

Oh I believe you comprehended the HER part alright... How is it I don't have empathy? There are several levels for this to play out for all parties. Have you considered them all. I bet not. I bet you are only considering the OP and defending the OP like so often society quickly rallies behind women in broken relationships. This actually could be a break through for their therapy. It actually COULD HAVE BEEN a break through for their therapy when he opened up, but then she ruined by cheating. You and others on here don't hold her accountable, why? (not saying you should ream the OP, just saying the overly pandering to her position like vote counts in this segment) Where it is not uncommon for therapists to stop therapy for adultry under what they call reaching an "impasse". Is not trust the highest regard for a relationship, and yet somehow he opeining up under alcohol finally is far worse. Which then validates not only her actions, but her hatred. How do you reconcile I'm the one without empathy here? The truth is she invested tons of time to learn he's not attracted ot her and she is **HURT**. The rest is bullshit you guys swallowed so she can justify **HURTING HIM BACK**. *fucking highschool I swear!* What we don't know and yet we do know in this forum is men do suffer from dead bedrooms too, right. That it's not unreasonable to suggest he didn't get angry, he didn't get violent from seeing them, and yet no one here says a word about how he must be suffering without immediately getting confronted about her being a victim (WTF? when it's her OP and only her side -- what a joke). How it's reasonble he must be on some level she is suffering or worse, and on some level is giving her permission to be free because of empathy (or love). **Where is your compassion and empathy?** It could be (and likely is) a blessing that now they can go on their separate ways as you indicated for **both** of them. There's tons of possibilities here that require deep *empathy*. What's worse, you assume I don't have empathy *ONLY* because I challenged you for a one sided view? That's just shallow and frankly demonstrates **your lack empathy** and likely sexism to be frank. tl;dr High level of alcohol abuse and no one got hurt this is chalked up as a big win in my book considering what went down for woman hell bent on revenge.

Oh I believe you comprehended the HER part alright... How is it I don't have empathy? There are several levels for this to play out for all parties. Have you considered them all. I bet not. I bet you are only considering the OP and defending the OP like so often society quickly rallies behind women in broken relationships. This actually could be a break through for their therapy. It actually COULD HAVE BEEN a break through for their therapy when he opened up, but then she ruined by cheating. You and others on here don't hold her accountable, why? (not saying you should ream the OP, just saying the overly pandering to her position like vote counts in this segment) Where it is not uncommon for therapists to stop therapy for adultry under what they call reaching an "impasse". Is not trust the highest regard for a relationship, and yet somehow he opeining up under alcohol finally is far worse. Which then validates not only her actions, but her hatred. How do you reconcile I'm the one without empathy here? The truth is she invested tons of time to learn he's not attracted ot her and she is HURT . The rest is bullshit you guys swallowed so she can justify HURTING HIM BACK . fucking highschool I swear! What we don't know and yet we do know in this forum is men do suffer from dead bedrooms too, right. That it's not unreasonable to suggest he didn't get angry, he didn't get violent from seeing them, and yet no one here says a word about how he must be suffering without immediately getting confronted about her being a victim (WTF? when it's her OP and only her side -- what a joke). How it's reasonble he must be on some level she is suffering or worse, and on some level is giving her permission to be free because of empathy (or love). Where is your compassion and empathy? It could be (and likely is) a blessing that now they can go on their separate ways as you indicated for both of them. There's tons of possibilities here that require deep empathy . What's worse, you assume I don't have empathy ONLY because I challenged you for a one sided view? That's just shallow and frankly demonstrates your lack empathy and likely sexism to be frank. tl;dr High level of alcohol abuse and no one got hurt this is chalked up as a big win in my book considering what went down for woman hell bent on revenge.

DeadBedrooms

t5_2t25p

cfylvdr

Oh I believe you comprehended the HER part alright... How is it I don't have empathy? There are several levels for this to play out for all parties. Have you considered them all. I bet not. I bet you are only considering the OP and defending the OP like so often society quickly rallies behind women in broken relationships. This actually could be a break through for their therapy. It actually COULD HAVE BEEN a break through for their therapy when he opened up, but then she ruined by cheating. You and others on here don't hold her accountable, why? (not saying you should ream the OP, just saying the overly pandering to her position like vote counts in this segment) Where it is not uncommon for therapists to stop therapy for adultry under what they call reaching an "impasse". Is not trust the highest regard for a relationship, and yet somehow he opeining up under alcohol finally is far worse. Which then validates not only her actions, but her hatred. How do you reconcile I'm the one without empathy here? The truth is she invested tons of time to learn he's not attracted ot her and she is HURT . The rest is bullshit you guys swallowed so she can justify HURTING HIM BACK . fucking highschool I swear! What we don't know and yet we do know in this forum is men do suffer from dead bedrooms too, right. That it's not unreasonable to suggest he didn't get angry, he didn't get violent from seeing them, and yet no one here says a word about how he must be suffering without immediately getting confronted about her being a victim (WTF? when it's her OP and only her side -- what a joke). How it's reasonble he must be on some level she is suffering or worse, and on some level is giving her permission to be free because of empathy (or love). Where is your compassion and empathy? It could be (and likely is) a blessing that now they can go on their separate ways as you indicated for both of them. There's tons of possibilities here that require deep empathy . What's worse, you assume I don't have empathy ONLY because I challenged you for a one sided view? That's just shallow and frankly demonstrates your lack empathy and likely sexism to be frank.

High level of alcohol abuse and no one got hurt this is chalked up as a big win in my book considering what went down for woman hell bent on revenge.

DejaBoo

Are you so sure she's beating herself up over what happened? > I'm numb today. I don't care anymore. My boyfriend actually walked in on us having sex and then went back to bed. I don't care. I hate him right now. I hate him for making me feel like I don't meet his standards. Nobody who loves you should ever make you feel that way. and the cause: > **we all had way too much to drink**.... My boyfriend **drunkenly said**, "Yeah, I love her but in my past I dated a ton of girls that looked like Playboy models so I guess **my standards are too high**." At the time I was drunk and **it made me livid**, but I didn't say anything because our friend was over. Sounds like overt aggressive revenge fuck and her quasi needs she spouted if you ask me. ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯ tl;dr Blind mrstrey, you are so blind :)

Are you so sure she's beating herself up over what happened? > I'm numb today. I don't care anymore. My boyfriend actually walked in on us having sex and then went back to bed. I don't care. I hate him right now. I hate him for making me feel like I don't meet his standards. Nobody who loves you should ever make you feel that way. and the cause: > we all had way too much to drink .... My boyfriend drunkenly said , "Yeah, I love her but in my past I dated a ton of girls that looked like Playboy models so I guess my standards are too high ." At the time I was drunk and it made me livid , but I didn't say anything because our friend was over. Sounds like overt aggressive revenge fuck and her quasi needs she spouted if you ask me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ tl;dr Blind mrstrey, you are so blind :)

DeadBedrooms

t5_2t25p

cfy2z8t

Are you so sure she's beating herself up over what happened? > I'm numb today. I don't care anymore. My boyfriend actually walked in on us having sex and then went back to bed. I don't care. I hate him right now. I hate him for making me feel like I don't meet his standards. Nobody who loves you should ever make you feel that way. and the cause: > we all had way too much to drink .... My boyfriend drunkenly said , "Yeah, I love her but in my past I dated a ton of girls that looked like Playboy models so I guess my standards are too high ." At the time I was drunk and it made me livid , but I didn't say anything because our friend was over. Sounds like overt aggressive revenge fuck and her quasi needs she spouted if you ask me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Blind mrstrey, you are so blind :)

Type-21

Some information on why Google stopped streetview in Germany: - [Germany’s Complicated Relationship With Google Street View]( - [Google fined by German regulator over Street View privacy breach]( - [Google Abandons Street View in Germany]( - - **tl;dr**: People told Google to get off their lawn.

Some information on why Google stopped streetview in Germany: [Germany’s Complicated Relationship With Google Street View]( [Google fined by German regulator over Street View privacy breach]( [Google Abandons Street View in Germany]( tl;dr : People told Google to get off their lawn.

Maps

t5_2qiwh

cfxssy2

Some information on why Google stopped streetview in Germany: [Germany’s Complicated Relationship With Google Street View]( [Google fined by German regulator over Street View privacy breach]( [Google Abandons Street View in Germany](

People told Google to get off their lawn.

aimeetea88

I've done this before. A guy was going crazy. In free roam, on his own against the cops. All the other players were up in Blaine County, so I was wandering near him in passive trying to get some action shots and noticed I kept picking up money from the dead cops. Got around $1.5k in a few minutes, all while watching the action and getting some great shots. Tl;dr - I guess cops drop money too.

I've done this before. A guy was going crazy. In free roam, on his own against the cops. All the other players were up in Blaine County, so I was wandering near him in passive trying to get some action shots and noticed I kept picking up money from the dead cops. Got around $1.5k in a few minutes, all while watching the action and getting some great shots. Tl;dr - I guess cops drop money too.

gtaonline

t5_2xrd1

cfy71hl

I've done this before. A guy was going crazy. In free roam, on his own against the cops. All the other players were up in Blaine County, so I was wandering near him in passive trying to get some action shots and noticed I kept picking up money from the dead cops. Got around $1.5k in a few minutes, all while watching the action and getting some great shots.

I guess cops drop money too.

belindamshort

Don't assume that a college degree will get you where you want to be. I know a lot of unemployed and under employed people who have college degrees, and in some cases, Masters. Look for happiness in other ways. Worrying about money comes no matter how much of it you have, its just a different set of worries. I grew up very poor, and busted my ass to go to school, thinking that was how I would be successful. No one else in my family had gone to college and they were all poor or had very very hard jobs that didn't pay all that well. There were a lot of things I didn't understand back then, like the fact that my father used to have a good paying job and was laid off and there was no call for his type of work any more. He went to school and tried to get a better job but couldn't afford to keep up with (networking) the classes he had to continue to upkeep to make money doing that. My mother was on disability and we had food stamps. We lived comfortably for a while when she was married, but most of my life, I spent very poor. Too poor for school lunch, much less cable/xbox. As many others have said similar things, I will just share this- My current job is very good, and I make _very_ good money, but has nothing to do with my college degree or schooling and everything to do with networking and contacts, and my coworkers have various levels of schooling. ** TL;DR Don't pin your happiness to money, trust me you'll never find it.** Go to college because you want to learn. That's the best reason, and in the end, the reason I went.

Don't assume that a college degree will get you where you want to be. I know a lot of unemployed and under employed people who have college degrees, and in some cases, Masters. Look for happiness in other ways. Worrying about money comes no matter how much of it you have, its just a different set of worries. I grew up very poor, and busted my ass to go to school, thinking that was how I would be successful. No one else in my family had gone to college and they were all poor or had very very hard jobs that didn't pay all that well. There were a lot of things I didn't understand back then, like the fact that my father used to have a good paying job and was laid off and there was no call for his type of work any more. He went to school and tried to get a better job but couldn't afford to keep up with (networking) the classes he had to continue to upkeep to make money doing that. My mother was on disability and we had food stamps. We lived comfortably for a while when she was married, but most of my life, I spent very poor. Too poor for school lunch, much less cable/xbox. As many others have said similar things, I will just share this- My current job is very good, and I make very good money, but has nothing to do with my college degree or schooling and everything to do with networking and contacts, and my coworkers have various levels of schooling. TL;DR Don't pin your happiness to money, trust me you'll never find it. Go to college because you want to learn. That's the best reason, and in the end, the reason I went.

confession

t5_2qo2a

cfy3ov8

Don't assume that a college degree will get you where you want to be. I know a lot of unemployed and under employed people who have college degrees, and in some cases, Masters. Look for happiness in other ways. Worrying about money comes no matter how much of it you have, its just a different set of worries. I grew up very poor, and busted my ass to go to school, thinking that was how I would be successful. No one else in my family had gone to college and they were all poor or had very very hard jobs that didn't pay all that well. There were a lot of things I didn't understand back then, like the fact that my father used to have a good paying job and was laid off and there was no call for his type of work any more. He went to school and tried to get a better job but couldn't afford to keep up with (networking) the classes he had to continue to upkeep to make money doing that. My mother was on disability and we had food stamps. We lived comfortably for a while when she was married, but most of my life, I spent very poor. Too poor for school lunch, much less cable/xbox. As many others have said similar things, I will just share this- My current job is very good, and I make very good money, but has nothing to do with my college degree or schooling and everything to do with networking and contacts, and my coworkers have various levels of schooling.

Don't pin your happiness to money, trust me you'll never find it. Go to college because you want to learn. That's the best reason, and in the end, the reason I went.

Withgrapesoda

I dreamed my mom sold my sister and best friend into a prostitution ring. She woke me up and I started screaming at her. TLDR Nyquil and reading Memoirs of a Geisha don't mix

I dreamed my mom sold my sister and best friend into a prostitution ring. She woke me up and I started screaming at her. TLDR Nyquil and reading Memoirs of a Geisha don't mix

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cfy0exg

I dreamed my mom sold my sister and best friend into a prostitution ring. She woke me up and I started screaming at her.

Nyquil and reading Memoirs of a Geisha don't mix

BrianBoyko

> So after losing two bullets, two sessions in a row, I'm starting to think maybe it's not variance. 1) Losing two buy-ins two sessions in a row is certainly within the realm of variance. 2) That doesn't rule out that you may not be ready to handle live $1-3. Don't get me wrong, people say that $1/2 and $1/3 is an "easy game, just play ABC poker" but the truth is that ABC poker is tough to get down and play *constantly.* So, let's take a look here: > I play lots of small pots, taking them down with c-bets, and floats to bluff turn. Then I manage to hit a big hand, and get stacked. It's getting a bit annoying. C-bets are fine, floats to bluff turn are a little... rough. Remember, you don't have to win every small pot. Your goal is not to win hands, it's to win *money.* And floating the turn is more expensive than C-betting, because you are really risking a lot of money to win a little. *By the time you get to the turn* it may be that betting 1/2 the pot only has to work 1/3rd of the time to be profitable. But when you *plan* to float turn, then you have to understand the "cost" of your plan includes the preflop and flop calls. So, if you plan to float turn at 1/3, you'd be risking maybe $10 pre, $15 on the flop, and then you bet $25 as a float on the turn into a pot of $50 before your bet. So, yeah, the *immediate* bet only needs to be profitable 1 in every 3 times ($25/$75), but the *plan* will cost $50 total, to win a pot of $75, which means your float "plan" needs to work 66% of the time. Here's the thing - if you're constantly seen as pulling off float bluffs, if you're constantly in small pots and c-betting frequently, it becomes more and more likely that you will be looked up by a player who is paying attention. If I decide to float, I tend to do it very rarely, and that gives it more "credibility." I use my table image as a tight player who tends to bet for value in rare situations. And if I am caught at my float - which sometimes happens, I go back to playing tight, getting value from the inadvertent "advertising" I did. > 4 players limp to the cutoff, who pops it to $8. Huge raise. Maybe for the table, but at $1/3 Live? A standard opening raise would be to $10-15, in this case, I'd have bet $25-30 in villian's shoes, simply because if I've got good cards, I don't want someone to get the right price to call and set-mine for two pair, or for button to flat-call behind me. Maybe villain just isn't thinking that way, but it could also mean that he has a marginal hand and *wants* multiway action - but he also wants position. That to me seems like it's suited connectors or a small pocket pair. > On the button I make it $30 with 87s and everyone calls. I don't like this play. No - in fact, I *hate* this play. What do you intend to accomplish by raising? You only get calls from better! (and yes, I include 22+ as "better"). 87s is a *speculative hand* - and speculative hands don't have value preflop, so why are you putting in your money preflop when you can easily get your money in on a later street when you're a favorite - or fold on a later street having only lost a tiny amount $8!? That's the value of suited connectors - played right, they frequently lose small pots and occasionally win big ones. If the game was *really* deep - like, everyone had $500 or more behind, I'd say go for it - add some "bluff outs" to your play. But I doubt the effective stacks are that deep. That said, this is a *PERFECT* spot for you to call with 87s! By calling, you give the limpers a good price to call, so you play 87s six ways WITH POSITION, pot odds of 16%, and tons and tons of money behind for *massive* implied odds! (There's more than 225x your initial risk potentially in play!) I *dream* of scenarios like this. My god. Against 5 other random hands, your 87s wins 19% of the time so you even get good direct odds to call. Call! But when you 3-bet, you're reducing the implied odds, and you're getting hands that beat you greatly to call. Your 87s is too weak *right now* to bet for value, and with a loose-passive crowd like you've described, it's unlikely to succeed either as a bluff *now* or as a multi-street bluff. After all, with 4-6 players in the hand, the flop is bound to hit *somebody* hard... and now you have a hand that is going to be tough to lay down if you hit a second-best type hand, like flush-over-flush or two pair vs. a set/straight. So now you're looking at lower implied odds (only 60x your initial risk) and bigger reverse implied odds. (You only have a single pot-sized bet behind.) In fact, on the flop, you've left yourself in an all-in-or-fold situation, with a hand that ONLY RARELY hits the flop hard enough to go all-in. You're burning $30 here. > Flop is Q88, two clubs. Two players check, the next player bets $25. That player just made a mistake of *some* form or another. If he's trapping with Q8, he could extract more by betting 1/3rd pot (or about $60.) If he's betting as a blocking-bet with a flush draw, he's just asking to get re-raised. If he has A8 or something, then he is giving the flush draw odds to call. > The action is folded to me, and I make it $100 to go. I have around $200 behind at this point. You just made the same mistake he did. You have $300 behind in a pot that's $205. You have a monster (trips) but the board is wet, and you have only 4 outs to redraw with. Your move is a big bet, and I would probably end up shoving here. It is the only move that is getting the hand that you currently beat - a flush draw - to call. It will also be called off by hands like AQ, which you get value from. You will also get called by Q8 and 89+, but that's the price of poker. If you had called preflop, of course, you would have a little more "play" and can get away from the hand more easily - or at least, control the size of the pot - if a club or a queen comes on the turn, but because the pot is so big relative to your stack, you have to go with your hand now. Even if you get worse to fold here (KQ?) that would otherwise call a smaller bet, so what? You are still winning a HUGE pot! Re-raising to $100 in a pot that's now $305, you are giving the "$25 raiser" good odds to call to see the turn if he's got a flush draw. You're giving other players on flush draw good implied odds considering that your $100 bet has nearly pot-committed you, (can you fold the turn or river if a third club or a queen comes?) AND you've got other players who could overcall and give good direct odds for ANY player on a flush draw. Keep in mind, these hands currently beat you: QQ, Q8, A8, K8, Q8, J8, T8, and 98. There are three combinations of QQ, 2 combinations of Q8, and 3 combinations of the rest of 98+ hands. So there are 20 possible hands out of 1,326 combinations. You are beat here by any *specific* player 1.5% of the time. There are three players remaining in the hand, which means the chances you are good here are [(1306)^3 / (1326)^3] are 95%. So you're *very likely* good but you can't be too surprised if someone shows up with better here. Don't worry about doing the math in your head at the table, but do understand that you have a strong hand, but not the nuts. > the first player who checks now goes all in for $160 If it's $160 on top, then you have a decision. It's $160 to win a pot of $725 total. If the villain is likely to over play AQ or to semi-bluff check-raise with a flush draw, then you can call, but otherwise, a straightforward "level 1" player has *at least* trips here. You need to be good at least 22% of the time to make the call, though. Could villain *possibly* be calling off $30 preflop with 86, 85, 84, 83, or 82 though? Is villian savvy enough to know what a semi-bluff *is*? I think I fold here. If it's just $60 on top of your $100 raise then it's an insta-call. $60 to win a pot of $525. Even if you are beat, you have pot odds of 11% and 3 outs twice (6%), so villian only has to be semi-bluffing or bluffing 5% of the time. **TL;DR** This is a textbook case of how to play a good hand very poorly.

> So after losing two bullets, two sessions in a row, I'm starting to think maybe it's not variance. 1) Losing two buy-ins two sessions in a row is certainly within the realm of variance. 2) That doesn't rule out that you may not be ready to handle live $1-3. Don't get me wrong, people say that $1/2 and $1/3 is an "easy game, just play ABC poker" but the truth is that ABC poker is tough to get down and play constantly. So, let's take a look here: > I play lots of small pots, taking them down with c-bets, and floats to bluff turn. Then I manage to hit a big hand, and get stacked. It's getting a bit annoying. C-bets are fine, floats to bluff turn are a little... rough. Remember, you don't have to win every small pot. Your goal is not to win hands, it's to win money. And floating the turn is more expensive than C-betting, because you are really risking a lot of money to win a little. By the time you get to the turn it may be that betting 1/2 the pot only has to work 1/3rd of the time to be profitable. But when you plan to float turn, then you have to understand the "cost" of your plan includes the preflop and flop calls. So, if you plan to float turn at 1/3, you'd be risking maybe $10 pre, $15 on the flop, and then you bet $25 as a float on the turn into a pot of $50 before your bet. So, yeah, the immediate bet only needs to be profitable 1 in every 3 times ($25/$75), but the plan will cost $50 total, to win a pot of $75, which means your float "plan" needs to work 66% of the time. Here's the thing - if you're constantly seen as pulling off float bluffs, if you're constantly in small pots and c-betting frequently, it becomes more and more likely that you will be looked up by a player who is paying attention. If I decide to float, I tend to do it very rarely, and that gives it more "credibility." I use my table image as a tight player who tends to bet for value in rare situations. And if I am caught at my float - which sometimes happens, I go back to playing tight, getting value from the inadvertent "advertising" I did. > 4 players limp to the cutoff, who pops it to $8. Huge raise. Maybe for the table, but at $1/3 Live? A standard opening raise would be to $10-15, in this case, I'd have bet $25-30 in villian's shoes, simply because if I've got good cards, I don't want someone to get the right price to call and set-mine for two pair, or for button to flat-call behind me. Maybe villain just isn't thinking that way, but it could also mean that he has a marginal hand and wants multiway action - but he also wants position. That to me seems like it's suited connectors or a small pocket pair. > On the button I make it $30 with 87s and everyone calls. I don't like this play. No - in fact, I hate this play. What do you intend to accomplish by raising? You only get calls from better! (and yes, I include 22+ as "better"). 87s is a speculative hand - and speculative hands don't have value preflop, so why are you putting in your money preflop when you can easily get your money in on a later street when you're a favorite - or fold on a later street having only lost a tiny amount $8!? That's the value of suited connectors - played right, they frequently lose small pots and occasionally win big ones. If the game was really deep - like, everyone had $500 or more behind, I'd say go for it - add some "bluff outs" to your play. But I doubt the effective stacks are that deep. That said, this is a PERFECT spot for you to call with 87s! By calling, you give the limpers a good price to call, so you play 87s six ways WITH POSITION, pot odds of 16%, and tons and tons of money behind for massive implied odds! (There's more than 225x your initial risk potentially in play!) I dream of scenarios like this. My god. Against 5 other random hands, your 87s wins 19% of the time so you even get good direct odds to call. Call! But when you 3-bet, you're reducing the implied odds, and you're getting hands that beat you greatly to call. Your 87s is too weak right now to bet for value, and with a loose-passive crowd like you've described, it's unlikely to succeed either as a bluff now or as a multi-street bluff. After all, with 4-6 players in the hand, the flop is bound to hit somebody hard... and now you have a hand that is going to be tough to lay down if you hit a second-best type hand, like flush-over-flush or two pair vs. a set/straight. So now you're looking at lower implied odds (only 60x your initial risk) and bigger reverse implied odds. (You only have a single pot-sized bet behind.) In fact, on the flop, you've left yourself in an all-in-or-fold situation, with a hand that ONLY RARELY hits the flop hard enough to go all-in. You're burning $30 here. > Flop is Q88, two clubs. Two players check, the next player bets $25. That player just made a mistake of some form or another. If he's trapping with Q8, he could extract more by betting 1/3rd pot (or about $60.) If he's betting as a blocking-bet with a flush draw, he's just asking to get re-raised. If he has A8 or something, then he is giving the flush draw odds to call. > The action is folded to me, and I make it $100 to go. I have around $200 behind at this point. You just made the same mistake he did. You have $300 behind in a pot that's $205. You have a monster (trips) but the board is wet, and you have only 4 outs to redraw with. Your move is a big bet, and I would probably end up shoving here. It is the only move that is getting the hand that you currently beat - a flush draw - to call. It will also be called off by hands like AQ, which you get value from. You will also get called by Q8 and 89+, but that's the price of poker. If you had called preflop, of course, you would have a little more "play" and can get away from the hand more easily - or at least, control the size of the pot - if a club or a queen comes on the turn, but because the pot is so big relative to your stack, you have to go with your hand now. Even if you get worse to fold here (KQ?) that would otherwise call a smaller bet, so what? You are still winning a HUGE pot! Re-raising to $100 in a pot that's now $305, you are giving the "$25 raiser" good odds to call to see the turn if he's got a flush draw. You're giving other players on flush draw good implied odds considering that your $100 bet has nearly pot-committed you, (can you fold the turn or river if a third club or a queen comes?) AND you've got other players who could overcall and give good direct odds for ANY player on a flush draw. Keep in mind, these hands currently beat you: QQ, Q8, A8, K8, Q8, J8, T8, and 98. There are three combinations of QQ, 2 combinations of Q8, and 3 combinations of the rest of 98+ hands. So there are 20 possible hands out of 1,326 combinations. You are beat here by any specific player 1.5% of the time. There are three players remaining in the hand, which means the chances you are good here are [(1306)^3 / (1326)^3] are 95%. So you're very likely good but you can't be too surprised if someone shows up with better here. Don't worry about doing the math in your head at the table, but do understand that you have a strong hand, but not the nuts. > the first player who checks now goes all in for $160 If it's $160 on top, then you have a decision. It's $160 to win a pot of $725 total. If the villain is likely to over play AQ or to semi-bluff check-raise with a flush draw, then you can call, but otherwise, a straightforward "level 1" player has at least trips here. You need to be good at least 22% of the time to make the call, though. Could villain possibly be calling off $30 preflop with 86, 85, 84, 83, or 82 though? Is villian savvy enough to know what a semi-bluff is ? I think I fold here. If it's just $60 on top of your $100 raise then it's an insta-call. $60 to win a pot of $525. Even if you are beat, you have pot odds of 11% and 3 outs twice (6%), so villian only has to be semi-bluffing or bluffing 5% of the time. TL;DR This is a textbook case of how to play a good hand very poorly.

poker

t5_2qhix

cfy9cf2

So after losing two bullets, two sessions in a row, I'm starting to think maybe it's not variance. 1) Losing two buy-ins two sessions in a row is certainly within the realm of variance. 2) That doesn't rule out that you may not be ready to handle live $1-3. Don't get me wrong, people say that $1/2 and $1/3 is an "easy game, just play ABC poker" but the truth is that ABC poker is tough to get down and play constantly. So, let's take a look here: > I play lots of small pots, taking them down with c-bets, and floats to bluff turn. Then I manage to hit a big hand, and get stacked. It's getting a bit annoying. C-bets are fine, floats to bluff turn are a little... rough. Remember, you don't have to win every small pot. Your goal is not to win hands, it's to win money. And floating the turn is more expensive than C-betting, because you are really risking a lot of money to win a little. By the time you get to the turn it may be that betting 1/2 the pot only has to work 1/3rd of the time to be profitable. But when you plan to float turn, then you have to understand the "cost" of your plan includes the preflop and flop calls. So, if you plan to float turn at 1/3, you'd be risking maybe $10 pre, $15 on the flop, and then you bet $25 as a float on the turn into a pot of $50 before your bet. So, yeah, the immediate bet only needs to be profitable 1 in every 3 times ($25/$75), but the plan will cost $50 total, to win a pot of $75, which means your float "plan" needs to work 66% of the time. Here's the thing - if you're constantly seen as pulling off float bluffs, if you're constantly in small pots and c-betting frequently, it becomes more and more likely that you will be looked up by a player who is paying attention. If I decide to float, I tend to do it very rarely, and that gives it more "credibility." I use my table image as a tight player who tends to bet for value in rare situations. And if I am caught at my float - which sometimes happens, I go back to playing tight, getting value from the inadvertent "advertising" I did. > 4 players limp to the cutoff, who pops it to $8. Huge raise. Maybe for the table, but at $1/3 Live? A standard opening raise would be to $10-15, in this case, I'd have bet $25-30 in villian's shoes, simply because if I've got good cards, I don't want someone to get the right price to call and set-mine for two pair, or for button to flat-call behind me. Maybe villain just isn't thinking that way, but it could also mean that he has a marginal hand and wants multiway action - but he also wants position. That to me seems like it's suited connectors or a small pocket pair. > On the button I make it $30 with 87s and everyone calls. I don't like this play. No - in fact, I hate this play. What do you intend to accomplish by raising? You only get calls from better! (and yes, I include 22+ as "better"). 87s is a speculative hand - and speculative hands don't have value preflop, so why are you putting in your money preflop when you can easily get your money in on a later street when you're a favorite - or fold on a later street having only lost a tiny amount $8!? That's the value of suited connectors - played right, they frequently lose small pots and occasionally win big ones. If the game was really deep - like, everyone had $500 or more behind, I'd say go for it - add some "bluff outs" to your play. But I doubt the effective stacks are that deep. That said, this is a PERFECT spot for you to call with 87s! By calling, you give the limpers a good price to call, so you play 87s six ways WITH POSITION, pot odds of 16%, and tons and tons of money behind for massive implied odds! (There's more than 225x your initial risk potentially in play!) I dream of scenarios like this. My god. Against 5 other random hands, your 87s wins 19% of the time so you even get good direct odds to call. Call! But when you 3-bet, you're reducing the implied odds, and you're getting hands that beat you greatly to call. Your 87s is too weak right now to bet for value, and with a loose-passive crowd like you've described, it's unlikely to succeed either as a bluff now or as a multi-street bluff. After all, with 4-6 players in the hand, the flop is bound to hit somebody hard... and now you have a hand that is going to be tough to lay down if you hit a second-best type hand, like flush-over-flush or two pair vs. a set/straight. So now you're looking at lower implied odds (only 60x your initial risk) and bigger reverse implied odds. (You only have a single pot-sized bet behind.) In fact, on the flop, you've left yourself in an all-in-or-fold situation, with a hand that ONLY RARELY hits the flop hard enough to go all-in. You're burning $30 here. > Flop is Q88, two clubs. Two players check, the next player bets $25. That player just made a mistake of some form or another. If he's trapping with Q8, he could extract more by betting 1/3rd pot (or about $60.) If he's betting as a blocking-bet with a flush draw, he's just asking to get re-raised. If he has A8 or something, then he is giving the flush draw odds to call. > The action is folded to me, and I make it $100 to go. I have around $200 behind at this point. You just made the same mistake he did. You have $300 behind in a pot that's $205. You have a monster (trips) but the board is wet, and you have only 4 outs to redraw with. Your move is a big bet, and I would probably end up shoving here. It is the only move that is getting the hand that you currently beat - a flush draw - to call. It will also be called off by hands like AQ, which you get value from. You will also get called by Q8 and 89+, but that's the price of poker. If you had called preflop, of course, you would have a little more "play" and can get away from the hand more easily - or at least, control the size of the pot - if a club or a queen comes on the turn, but because the pot is so big relative to your stack, you have to go with your hand now. Even if you get worse to fold here (KQ?) that would otherwise call a smaller bet, so what? You are still winning a HUGE pot! Re-raising to $100 in a pot that's now $305, you are giving the "$25 raiser" good odds to call to see the turn if he's got a flush draw. You're giving other players on flush draw good implied odds considering that your $100 bet has nearly pot-committed you, (can you fold the turn or river if a third club or a queen comes?) AND you've got other players who could overcall and give good direct odds for ANY player on a flush draw. Keep in mind, these hands currently beat you: QQ, Q8, A8, K8, Q8, J8, T8, and 98. There are three combinations of QQ, 2 combinations of Q8, and 3 combinations of the rest of 98+ hands. So there are 20 possible hands out of 1,326 combinations. You are beat here by any specific player 1.5% of the time. There are three players remaining in the hand, which means the chances you are good here are [(1306)^3 / (1326)^3] are 95%. So you're very likely good but you can't be too surprised if someone shows up with better here. Don't worry about doing the math in your head at the table, but do understand that you have a strong hand, but not the nuts. > the first player who checks now goes all in for $160 If it's $160 on top, then you have a decision. It's $160 to win a pot of $725 total. If the villain is likely to over play AQ or to semi-bluff check-raise with a flush draw, then you can call, but otherwise, a straightforward "level 1" player has at least trips here. You need to be good at least 22% of the time to make the call, though. Could villain possibly be calling off $30 preflop with 86, 85, 84, 83, or 82 though? Is villian savvy enough to know what a semi-bluff is ? I think I fold here. If it's just $60 on top of your $100 raise then it's an insta-call. $60 to win a pot of $525. Even if you are beat, you have pot odds of 11% and 3 outs twice (6%), so villian only has to be semi-bluffing or bluffing 5% of the time.

This is a textbook case of how to play a good hand very poorly.

lucasjkr

How does proving solvency work , exactly? The site shows off addresses with X account of coins in them. Take me for example - "lucas exchange" wants to prove its solvency, so I post links to the public key if my wallets, and move those coins to new predefined wallets so that every one can be satisfied that I have control over 1,200,000 bitcoins. Have I proved solvency? No. You don't know what my customer balances Are. If I owe my customers 900,000 bitcoins, then yes I have demonstrated solvency. But if I owe my customers 1,300,000 bitcoins I've just demonstrated that I'm insolvent. How would you know what my customers bitcoin balances actually are? Even if I report that I owe my customers 900,000 BTC, how would you know that that's what i owe, or if I gave you that number just to make myself look solvent? TLDR: proving solvency can't be done just by showing how many bitcoins one has. Not even if I tell you how much I owe my customers. The only way to prove solvency is by having an independent auditor review the exchanges books and records. And you better be sure the audit is done by someone competent and experienced. Any one can say "I audited it and it looks fine to me" while simultaneously taking a bribe to underreport the exchanges debts. In short ; proof of solvency means absolutetly nothing v

How does proving solvency work , exactly? The site shows off addresses with X account of coins in them. Take me for example - "lucas exchange" wants to prove its solvency, so I post links to the public key if my wallets, and move those coins to new predefined wallets so that every one can be satisfied that I have control over 1,200,000 bitcoins. Have I proved solvency? No. You don't know what my customer balances Are. If I owe my customers 900,000 bitcoins, then yes I have demonstrated solvency. But if I owe my customers 1,300,000 bitcoins I've just demonstrated that I'm insolvent. How would you know what my customers bitcoin balances actually are? Even if I report that I owe my customers 900,000 BTC, how would you know that that's what i owe, or if I gave you that number just to make myself look solvent? TLDR: proving solvency can't be done just by showing how many bitcoins one has. Not even if I tell you how much I owe my customers. The only way to prove solvency is by having an independent auditor review the exchanges books and records. And you better be sure the audit is done by someone competent and experienced. Any one can say "I audited it and it looks fine to me" while simultaneously taking a bribe to underreport the exchanges debts. In short ; proof of solvency means absolutetly nothing v

Bitcoin

t5_2s3qj

cfymy7t

How does proving solvency work , exactly? The site shows off addresses with X account of coins in them. Take me for example - "lucas exchange" wants to prove its solvency, so I post links to the public key if my wallets, and move those coins to new predefined wallets so that every one can be satisfied that I have control over 1,200,000 bitcoins. Have I proved solvency? No. You don't know what my customer balances Are. If I owe my customers 900,000 bitcoins, then yes I have demonstrated solvency. But if I owe my customers 1,300,000 bitcoins I've just demonstrated that I'm insolvent. How would you know what my customers bitcoin balances actually are? Even if I report that I owe my customers 900,000 BTC, how would you know that that's what i owe, or if I gave you that number just to make myself look solvent?

proving solvency can't be done just by showing how many bitcoins one has. Not even if I tell you how much I owe my customers. The only way to prove solvency is by having an independent auditor review the exchanges books and records. And you better be sure the audit is done by someone competent and experienced. Any one can say "I audited it and it looks fine to me" while simultaneously taking a bribe to underreport the exchanges debts. In short ; proof of solvency means absolutetly nothing v

MCneill27

First off, I'm not an academic. Second, my undergraduate education was focused on analytic philosophy. Familiarize yourself with that term, and then edit your post appropriately. Third, I don't agree with Zizek in the ways I am familiar with him, but that doesn't mean I can't respect the work he does. At the very least, it means I don't have the gall to reduce the problems he spends his life working on to ignorant irrelevancies like Slovenian history and North Korea, China, and the USSR's forays into communism. Fourth, you know absolutely nothing about me and my life. Your assumptions give you up; they reveal a lot of hate and anger that I don't know the backstory of nor will I pretend to know of. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder, which is why you were so quick earlier to boast that you were a professional writer, as if that gives you some sort of heightened legitimacy to dismiss things you don't understand. I don't care if you're fucking Stephen Hawking, you're still wrong to dismiss. Just to list the completely wrong assumptions you've listed off: **(1)** Like I said earlier, I'm not an academic, but I do have a university education. You got that tiny detail right! Congrats. **(2)** I've never taken Philosophy 101, and I'm not in my second semester. **(3)** >your (brain cells) are currently running at full capacity to crank out as much cognitive dissonance as it takes to maintain the facade that your life's passion is something more than a world-wide circlejerk. You assume philosophy is my life's passion. It is not. Regardless, this passage requires a lot of background justification. Pray tell me what you've learned that reveals all philosophy to be nothing more than a world-wide circlejerk, so I can pass on the word to them and they can learn what they're doing is wrong. **(4)** >Certainly it takes a supreme intellect to regurgitate Marxism and communist ideals. Ideals which have never worked throughout history, and will never work outside of computer simulations with perfect virtual individuals. Here you make laughable assumptions about Zizek's work, most likely without ever reading more than that paragraph quoted earlier. I challenge you to engage with philosophy, not Zizek right away as it will mean next to nothing, but just any academic philosophy in order to get a glimpse of your own ignorance. **(5)** >People like you are the most useless waste of societal resources. What type of person is that? All you know about me thus far is that I am critical of those who speak about things they know nothing about. I believe in being charitable towards anyone's work I am not an expert in, and to assume they have good reasons for holding their beliefs until proven otherwise (you really quickly proved otherwise, by the way - thank you for that). **(6)** >But quite another to buy into it to fulfill a desperate need to feel holier-than-thou. You weren't born in the bible-belt of yuppie pseudo-intellectualism, you actively went out and looked for it. I've not once indicated a subscription to Zizek's philosophy. How the ***fuck*** do you know what I believe in? The only thing you've witnessed that I've "bought into" is not reducing other's work as meaningless based on my own limited worldview. Being reasonable and charitable to things I probably don't fully understand. That's it. I've not once made a positive argument with you about anything. I've solely been defensive towards the way you ignorantly dismiss entire fields of work. **(7)** This is my favourite part. >And now you will probably reply with yet another completely empty non-response, making shaky off-base attacks in a poorly devised **ad-hominem strategy**. Because normally people hear your rambling, circular bullshit and don't have the time or interest to play your petty games. So you feel justified day after day in thinking you've successfully proven your worth as an 'intellectual.' **When in reality, for all your thinly veiled self-masturbation over your 101 IQ, all anyone really reads is "Look at me mommy! I'm doing it!"** The irony here is too much. I've engaged you on every paragraph you've written. But the fact that you'd have the gall to finish up your comment, which consists *purely* of ad-hominem attacks, with a prediction that I will probably respond ad-hominem is just sad. You couldn't even separate the paragraph that warns of ad-hominem from having its own ad-hominem attack? Come on, man. **TL;DR:** I actually in no way am a follower of Zizek or even particularly a fan, but /u/honda27 infers my life story from a defense of being reasonable and charitable towards other's work. Armed with entirely false assumptions about my life and beliefs, as well as a particularly nasty attitude towards academic philosophy, academics in general, and Zizek in particular, he gets every detail wrong and then has the audacity to pre-criticize me of ad-hominem attacks without even taking a breath from his own ad-hominem attacks.

First off, I'm not an academic. Second, my undergraduate education was focused on analytic philosophy. Familiarize yourself with that term, and then edit your post appropriately. Third, I don't agree with Zizek in the ways I am familiar with him, but that doesn't mean I can't respect the work he does. At the very least, it means I don't have the gall to reduce the problems he spends his life working on to ignorant irrelevancies like Slovenian history and North Korea, China, and the USSR's forays into communism. Fourth, you know absolutely nothing about me and my life. Your assumptions give you up; they reveal a lot of hate and anger that I don't know the backstory of nor will I pretend to know of. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder, which is why you were so quick earlier to boast that you were a professional writer, as if that gives you some sort of heightened legitimacy to dismiss things you don't understand. I don't care if you're fucking Stephen Hawking, you're still wrong to dismiss. Just to list the completely wrong assumptions you've listed off: (1) Like I said earlier, I'm not an academic, but I do have a university education. You got that tiny detail right! Congrats. (2) I've never taken Philosophy 101, and I'm not in my second semester. (3) >your (brain cells) are currently running at full capacity to crank out as much cognitive dissonance as it takes to maintain the facade that your life's passion is something more than a world-wide circlejerk. You assume philosophy is my life's passion. It is not. Regardless, this passage requires a lot of background justification. Pray tell me what you've learned that reveals all philosophy to be nothing more than a world-wide circlejerk, so I can pass on the word to them and they can learn what they're doing is wrong. (4) >Certainly it takes a supreme intellect to regurgitate Marxism and communist ideals. Ideals which have never worked throughout history, and will never work outside of computer simulations with perfect virtual individuals. Here you make laughable assumptions about Zizek's work, most likely without ever reading more than that paragraph quoted earlier. I challenge you to engage with philosophy, not Zizek right away as it will mean next to nothing, but just any academic philosophy in order to get a glimpse of your own ignorance. (5) >People like you are the most useless waste of societal resources. What type of person is that? All you know about me thus far is that I am critical of those who speak about things they know nothing about. I believe in being charitable towards anyone's work I am not an expert in, and to assume they have good reasons for holding their beliefs until proven otherwise (you really quickly proved otherwise, by the way - thank you for that). (6) >But quite another to buy into it to fulfill a desperate need to feel holier-than-thou. You weren't born in the bible-belt of yuppie pseudo-intellectualism, you actively went out and looked for it. I've not once indicated a subscription to Zizek's philosophy. How the fuck do you know what I believe in? The only thing you've witnessed that I've "bought into" is not reducing other's work as meaningless based on my own limited worldview. Being reasonable and charitable to things I probably don't fully understand. That's it. I've not once made a positive argument with you about anything. I've solely been defensive towards the way you ignorantly dismiss entire fields of work. (7) This is my favourite part. >And now you will probably reply with yet another completely empty non-response, making shaky off-base attacks in a poorly devised ad-hominem strategy . Because normally people hear your rambling, circular bullshit and don't have the time or interest to play your petty games. So you feel justified day after day in thinking you've successfully proven your worth as an 'intellectual.' When in reality, for all your thinly veiled self-masturbation over your 101 IQ, all anyone really reads is "Look at me mommy! I'm doing it!" The irony here is too much. I've engaged you on every paragraph you've written. But the fact that you'd have the gall to finish up your comment, which consists purely of ad-hominem attacks, with a prediction that I will probably respond ad-hominem is just sad. You couldn't even separate the paragraph that warns of ad-hominem from having its own ad-hominem attack? Come on, man. TL;DR: I actually in no way am a follower of Zizek or even particularly a fan, but /u/honda27 infers my life story from a defense of being reasonable and charitable towards other's work. Armed with entirely false assumptions about my life and beliefs, as well as a particularly nasty attitude towards academic philosophy, academics in general, and Zizek in particular, he gets every detail wrong and then has the audacity to pre-criticize me of ad-hominem attacks without even taking a breath from his own ad-hominem attacks.

todayilearned

t5_2qqjc

cfz6x1g

First off, I'm not an academic. Second, my undergraduate education was focused on analytic philosophy. Familiarize yourself with that term, and then edit your post appropriately. Third, I don't agree with Zizek in the ways I am familiar with him, but that doesn't mean I can't respect the work he does. At the very least, it means I don't have the gall to reduce the problems he spends his life working on to ignorant irrelevancies like Slovenian history and North Korea, China, and the USSR's forays into communism. Fourth, you know absolutely nothing about me and my life. Your assumptions give you up; they reveal a lot of hate and anger that I don't know the backstory of nor will I pretend to know of. You seem to have a chip on your shoulder, which is why you were so quick earlier to boast that you were a professional writer, as if that gives you some sort of heightened legitimacy to dismiss things you don't understand. I don't care if you're fucking Stephen Hawking, you're still wrong to dismiss. Just to list the completely wrong assumptions you've listed off: (1) Like I said earlier, I'm not an academic, but I do have a university education. You got that tiny detail right! Congrats. (2) I've never taken Philosophy 101, and I'm not in my second semester. (3) >your (brain cells) are currently running at full capacity to crank out as much cognitive dissonance as it takes to maintain the facade that your life's passion is something more than a world-wide circlejerk. You assume philosophy is my life's passion. It is not. Regardless, this passage requires a lot of background justification. Pray tell me what you've learned that reveals all philosophy to be nothing more than a world-wide circlejerk, so I can pass on the word to them and they can learn what they're doing is wrong. (4) >Certainly it takes a supreme intellect to regurgitate Marxism and communist ideals. Ideals which have never worked throughout history, and will never work outside of computer simulations with perfect virtual individuals. Here you make laughable assumptions about Zizek's work, most likely without ever reading more than that paragraph quoted earlier. I challenge you to engage with philosophy, not Zizek right away as it will mean next to nothing, but just any academic philosophy in order to get a glimpse of your own ignorance. (5) >People like you are the most useless waste of societal resources. What type of person is that? All you know about me thus far is that I am critical of those who speak about things they know nothing about. I believe in being charitable towards anyone's work I am not an expert in, and to assume they have good reasons for holding their beliefs until proven otherwise (you really quickly proved otherwise, by the way - thank you for that). (6) >But quite another to buy into it to fulfill a desperate need to feel holier-than-thou. You weren't born in the bible-belt of yuppie pseudo-intellectualism, you actively went out and looked for it. I've not once indicated a subscription to Zizek's philosophy. How the fuck do you know what I believe in? The only thing you've witnessed that I've "bought into" is not reducing other's work as meaningless based on my own limited worldview. Being reasonable and charitable to things I probably don't fully understand. That's it. I've not once made a positive argument with you about anything. I've solely been defensive towards the way you ignorantly dismiss entire fields of work. (7) This is my favourite part. >And now you will probably reply with yet another completely empty non-response, making shaky off-base attacks in a poorly devised ad-hominem strategy . Because normally people hear your rambling, circular bullshit and don't have the time or interest to play your petty games. So you feel justified day after day in thinking you've successfully proven your worth as an 'intellectual.' When in reality, for all your thinly veiled self-masturbation over your 101 IQ, all anyone really reads is "Look at me mommy! I'm doing it!" The irony here is too much. I've engaged you on every paragraph you've written. But the fact that you'd have the gall to finish up your comment, which consists purely of ad-hominem attacks, with a prediction that I will probably respond ad-hominem is just sad. You couldn't even separate the paragraph that warns of ad-hominem from having its own ad-hominem attack? Come on, man.

I actually in no way am a follower of Zizek or even particularly a fan, but /u/honda27 infers my life story from a defense of being reasonable and charitable towards other's work. Armed with entirely false assumptions about my life and beliefs, as well as a particularly nasty attitude towards academic philosophy, academics in general, and Zizek in particular, he gets every detail wrong and then has the audacity to pre-criticize me of ad-hominem attacks without even taking a breath from his own ad-hominem attacks.

merelymoe

The R41 is probably the closest you can get to a straight razor shave with a double edge. It's reputation speaks for itself, but once you get the right blade and right technique, you'll have a great shave every time. I recently acquired a 39C and I really like it a lot. More forgiving then my R41 but the shave isn't as close (please note that the shave with the 39c is still very good, just not as close as I get with my R41 with the same number of passes). TL/DR: R41 is aggressive but, with proper handling, is very effective.

The R41 is probably the closest you can get to a straight razor shave with a double edge. It's reputation speaks for itself, but once you get the right blade and right technique, you'll have a great shave every time. I recently acquired a 39C and I really like it a lot. More forgiving then my R41 but the shave isn't as close (please note that the shave with the 39c is still very good, just not as close as I get with my R41 with the same number of passes). TL/DR: R41 is aggressive but, with proper handling, is very effective.

wicked_edge

t5_2s46m

cgy3zhq

The R41 is probably the closest you can get to a straight razor shave with a double edge. It's reputation speaks for itself, but once you get the right blade and right technique, you'll have a great shave every time. I recently acquired a 39C and I really like it a lot. More forgiving then my R41 but the shave isn't as close (please note that the shave with the 39c is still very good, just not as close as I get with my R41 with the same number of passes).

R41 is aggressive but, with proper handling, is very effective.

PenguinOfPwnage

What I do on Prince is (I always play prince): First few turns: If necessary, use your Warrior to scout out an area for your settler to settle. You *do not* have to settle on your first turn. My limit for turns not settling is 4. After all, it is a lot better to have your first city on the hill (production + defense) next to that Cotton (smilers and gold) rather than on that Tundra (1 food. No mas.) NOTE: YOU WILL BE BEHIND IN SCORE AT THIS POINT. DO NOT WORRY. **The next few turns** Policies: Tradition > Free Monument Thing > Aristocracy > Whatever seems to be the best (Oligarchy if there are a ton of barbarians around you, Liberty for your next city if you're too lazy to build a settler) Science queue: Beeline to Writing, then Archery, then the next techs are situational (If you are on a tiny island, get Sailing; if you are surrounded by Dyes or Gold or whatnot, get Calendar or Mining) Take phillosophy with the Great Library, then it's up to you. Production queue: Scout > Worker > Great Library > Archers > College > Settlers (if you want) Manually navigate your scout. The navigation AI is stupid. Remember to keep a small army, but the most important thing in any Civ game is: **ALWAYS. STAY. AHEAD. IN. TECH.** Rome and Greece WILL BACKSTAB YOU. THEY WILL SEND THEIR LEGIONS AND SHIT TO YOUR CAPITAL. If you have more advanced units, you will quickly dismantle them. Once you have non-resource demanding units availiable to you (Musketmen and Cannon) or a ton of Iron, start Zerging the original attacker. Once you take their capital and a lot of their good cities, make a peace deal with them. They should give you a lot of their stuff for peace. Remember, if you conquer a city nowhere near a strat or lux resource, BURN IT TO THE GROUND. The AI settles badly and you do not need to put up with it. Once you nearly wipe out a whole empire, you should have a huge military remaining from the conquest. This will threaten all other civs and they will not want to attack you. Make sure you stay ahead in tech, still, as you don't want to fight Mechanized Infantry with Cavalry. Oh, and your unhappiness issue? If you have or are about to have duplicate luxury resources or are playing as Arabia, trade it off with another civ. They will be happy, you will be happy, and everyone is happy. (Then invade them a few hundred turns later with your modern advanced army if you please) By now, you will have the highest score, all other civs will wonder at your glory, and you can proceed to a Science victory with your cap and major cities scoring high production and having such a technological lead. TL;DR: Raze bad cities. Be technologically advanced. Peace out.

What I do on Prince is (I always play prince): First few turns: If necessary, use your Warrior to scout out an area for your settler to settle. You do not have to settle on your first turn. My limit for turns not settling is 4. After all, it is a lot better to have your first city on the hill (production + defense) next to that Cotton (smilers and gold) rather than on that Tundra (1 food. No mas.) NOTE: YOU WILL BE BEHIND IN SCORE AT THIS POINT. DO NOT WORRY. The next few turns Policies: Tradition > Free Monument Thing > Aristocracy > Whatever seems to be the best (Oligarchy if there are a ton of barbarians around you, Liberty for your next city if you're too lazy to build a settler) Science queue: Beeline to Writing, then Archery, then the next techs are situational (If you are on a tiny island, get Sailing; if you are surrounded by Dyes or Gold or whatnot, get Calendar or Mining) Take phillosophy with the Great Library, then it's up to you. Production queue: Scout > Worker > Great Library > Archers > College > Settlers (if you want) Manually navigate your scout. The navigation AI is stupid. Remember to keep a small army, but the most important thing in any Civ game is: ALWAYS. STAY. AHEAD. IN. TECH. Rome and Greece WILL BACKSTAB YOU. THEY WILL SEND THEIR LEGIONS AND SHIT TO YOUR CAPITAL. If you have more advanced units, you will quickly dismantle them. Once you have non-resource demanding units availiable to you (Musketmen and Cannon) or a ton of Iron, start Zerging the original attacker. Once you take their capital and a lot of their good cities, make a peace deal with them. They should give you a lot of their stuff for peace. Remember, if you conquer a city nowhere near a strat or lux resource, BURN IT TO THE GROUND. The AI settles badly and you do not need to put up with it. Once you nearly wipe out a whole empire, you should have a huge military remaining from the conquest. This will threaten all other civs and they will not want to attack you. Make sure you stay ahead in tech, still, as you don't want to fight Mechanized Infantry with Cavalry. Oh, and your unhappiness issue? If you have or are about to have duplicate luxury resources or are playing as Arabia, trade it off with another civ. They will be happy, you will be happy, and everyone is happy. (Then invade them a few hundred turns later with your modern advanced army if you please) By now, you will have the highest score, all other civs will wonder at your glory, and you can proceed to a Science victory with your cap and major cities scoring high production and having such a technological lead. TL;DR: Raze bad cities. Be technologically advanced. Peace out.

civ

t5_2rk3b

cfytdho

What I do on Prince is (I always play prince): First few turns: If necessary, use your Warrior to scout out an area for your settler to settle. You do not have to settle on your first turn. My limit for turns not settling is 4. After all, it is a lot better to have your first city on the hill (production + defense) next to that Cotton (smilers and gold) rather than on that Tundra (1 food. No mas.) NOTE: YOU WILL BE BEHIND IN SCORE AT THIS POINT. DO NOT WORRY. The next few turns Policies: Tradition > Free Monument Thing > Aristocracy > Whatever seems to be the best (Oligarchy if there are a ton of barbarians around you, Liberty for your next city if you're too lazy to build a settler) Science queue: Beeline to Writing, then Archery, then the next techs are situational (If you are on a tiny island, get Sailing; if you are surrounded by Dyes or Gold or whatnot, get Calendar or Mining) Take phillosophy with the Great Library, then it's up to you. Production queue: Scout > Worker > Great Library > Archers > College > Settlers (if you want) Manually navigate your scout. The navigation AI is stupid. Remember to keep a small army, but the most important thing in any Civ game is: ALWAYS. STAY. AHEAD. IN. TECH. Rome and Greece WILL BACKSTAB YOU. THEY WILL SEND THEIR LEGIONS AND SHIT TO YOUR CAPITAL. If you have more advanced units, you will quickly dismantle them. Once you have non-resource demanding units availiable to you (Musketmen and Cannon) or a ton of Iron, start Zerging the original attacker. Once you take their capital and a lot of their good cities, make a peace deal with them. They should give you a lot of their stuff for peace. Remember, if you conquer a city nowhere near a strat or lux resource, BURN IT TO THE GROUND. The AI settles badly and you do not need to put up with it. Once you nearly wipe out a whole empire, you should have a huge military remaining from the conquest. This will threaten all other civs and they will not want to attack you. Make sure you stay ahead in tech, still, as you don't want to fight Mechanized Infantry with Cavalry. Oh, and your unhappiness issue? If you have or are about to have duplicate luxury resources or are playing as Arabia, trade it off with another civ. They will be happy, you will be happy, and everyone is happy. (Then invade them a few hundred turns later with your modern advanced army if you please) By now, you will have the highest score, all other civs will wonder at your glory, and you can proceed to a Science victory with your cap and major cities scoring high production and having such a technological lead.

Raze bad cities. Be technologically advanced. Peace out.

eqweni

Always avoid settling on top of a resource you can improve it and get more out of it. The choice comes down to 1. Next to the tile 2. 2 or 3 tiles away Both of those can be very useful, you always want to settle down next to have a resources 1 tile away from the city and the resources 2 and 3 tiles away can be lesser. You almost always want to settle your city near a unique luxury resource if its your 1st to 4th. There are exceptions to this rule though. If there is a lake victoria for grabs but no unique luxury, i would still settle that. For example you have cattle next to your city gems 3 tiles away and maybe stone 2 tiles and something else. That city would be good. Always look at your opportunities. There might be a city that could get 2 gems stone and cattle. Then you realise you can move it so that you lose 1 gem but get marble. TL:DR Settle cities where they get the best of the resources. Edit: You can bribe the other civs to go to war with each other to keep someone down. Try to help your buddies so that the uncathcable guy doesn't get away even more.

Always avoid settling on top of a resource you can improve it and get more out of it. The choice comes down to Next to the tile 2 or 3 tiles away Both of those can be very useful, you always want to settle down next to have a resources 1 tile away from the city and the resources 2 and 3 tiles away can be lesser. You almost always want to settle your city near a unique luxury resource if its your 1st to 4th. There are exceptions to this rule though. If there is a lake victoria for grabs but no unique luxury, i would still settle that. For example you have cattle next to your city gems 3 tiles away and maybe stone 2 tiles and something else. That city would be good. Always look at your opportunities. There might be a city that could get 2 gems stone and cattle. Then you realise you can move it so that you lose 1 gem but get marble. TL:DR Settle cities where they get the best of the resources. Edit: You can bribe the other civs to go to war with each other to keep someone down. Try to help your buddies so that the uncathcable guy doesn't get away even more.

civ

t5_2rk3b

cfylerl

Always avoid settling on top of a resource you can improve it and get more out of it. The choice comes down to Next to the tile 2 or 3 tiles away Both of those can be very useful, you always want to settle down next to have a resources 1 tile away from the city and the resources 2 and 3 tiles away can be lesser. You almost always want to settle your city near a unique luxury resource if its your 1st to 4th. There are exceptions to this rule though. If there is a lake victoria for grabs but no unique luxury, i would still settle that. For example you have cattle next to your city gems 3 tiles away and maybe stone 2 tiles and something else. That city would be good. Always look at your opportunities. There might be a city that could get 2 gems stone and cattle. Then you realise you can move it so that you lose 1 gem but get marble.

Settle cities where they get the best of the resources. Edit: You can bribe the other civs to go to war with each other to keep someone down. Try to help your buddies so that the uncathcable guy doesn't get away even more.

mikeditka23

UPDATE: sticking to my code of always accepting the start position and always being a random civ... I actually did get Egypt...cranking wonders, leading in science, culture good...however Montezuma is on my continent...he is a proper cunt. I have finally said screw it and gone to WAR. I don't care if I win or not...I must burn him to ash. Greek was just to my east...I easily took them out. Persia to my south, I took a two cities, burned one and then made peace. Actually VERY interesting map though...lots of mountains and there is a "mountain pass" between my capital and two other cities and my now booming Persian conquest area to the south (Aztecs just eat of that with a LOT of land/military/and somehoe 5000 gold)...with all this gold, Montezuma has allied EVERY city state on the continent...there are two CS which straddle the strategic "mountain pass" another as soon as you go through the bottleneck...this makes my empire fractured and moving troops from north to south impossible. I have taken one and I need at least 2/3...the issue is...I now know that you can NOT raze a city-state. This is now a problem as my unhappiness is now at 20 despite my trade and numerous perks/wonders/buildings...but I simply had to take them...I'm hoping one these courthouses are complete I'll conquer Montezuma (who is this games "uncatchable"...also, just for good measure I sent 3 lux to Bismarck so that the #3 Germans would declare war on Aztecs as well...best case: I'll smite him, worse case: I get so bogged down I miss a tech victory TLDR: going very well with Egypt, Montezuma is a fukker, can't help getting drawn into war, love this game

UPDATE: sticking to my code of always accepting the start position and always being a random civ... I actually did get Egypt...cranking wonders, leading in science, culture good...however Montezuma is on my continent...he is a proper cunt. I have finally said screw it and gone to WAR. I don't care if I win or not...I must burn him to ash. Greek was just to my east...I easily took them out. Persia to my south, I took a two cities, burned one and then made peace. Actually VERY interesting map though...lots of mountains and there is a "mountain pass" between my capital and two other cities and my now booming Persian conquest area to the south (Aztecs just eat of that with a LOT of land/military/and somehoe 5000 gold)...with all this gold, Montezuma has allied EVERY city state on the continent...there are two CS which straddle the strategic "mountain pass" another as soon as you go through the bottleneck...this makes my empire fractured and moving troops from north to south impossible. I have taken one and I need at least 2/3...the issue is...I now know that you can NOT raze a city-state. This is now a problem as my unhappiness is now at 20 despite my trade and numerous perks/wonders/buildings...but I simply had to take them...I'm hoping one these courthouses are complete I'll conquer Montezuma (who is this games "uncatchable"...also, just for good measure I sent 3 lux to Bismarck so that the #3 Germans would declare war on Aztecs as well...best case: I'll smite him, worse case: I get so bogged down I miss a tech victory TLDR: going very well with Egypt, Montezuma is a fukker, can't help getting drawn into war, love this game

civ

t5_2rk3b

cg0s6j0

UPDATE: sticking to my code of always accepting the start position and always being a random civ... I actually did get Egypt...cranking wonders, leading in science, culture good...however Montezuma is on my continent...he is a proper cunt. I have finally said screw it and gone to WAR. I don't care if I win or not...I must burn him to ash. Greek was just to my east...I easily took them out. Persia to my south, I took a two cities, burned one and then made peace. Actually VERY interesting map though...lots of mountains and there is a "mountain pass" between my capital and two other cities and my now booming Persian conquest area to the south (Aztecs just eat of that with a LOT of land/military/and somehoe 5000 gold)...with all this gold, Montezuma has allied EVERY city state on the continent...there are two CS which straddle the strategic "mountain pass" another as soon as you go through the bottleneck...this makes my empire fractured and moving troops from north to south impossible. I have taken one and I need at least 2/3...the issue is...I now know that you can NOT raze a city-state. This is now a problem as my unhappiness is now at 20 despite my trade and numerous perks/wonders/buildings...but I simply had to take them...I'm hoping one these courthouses are complete I'll conquer Montezuma (who is this games "uncatchable"...also, just for good measure I sent 3 lux to Bismarck so that the #3 Germans would declare war on Aztecs as well...best case: I'll smite him, worse case: I get so bogged down I miss a tech victory

going very well with Egypt, Montezuma is a fukker, can't help getting drawn into war, love this game

sapoia

Overhyped is probably a better word. In short, you have so many people, particularly on Reddit, that keep espousing the myth that you can just toss up a bunch of short stories for $2.99 in the erotica market and make tons of money. While some certainly do, the vast majority don't. This is the case for virtually all other markets on Amazon. You are correct. Short fiction does not sell as well in other categories as it does in erotica, but there's still plenty of money to be made. From my past experience, it's not difficult to make a livable income, but it takes more time than erotica might. There's a move in many markets toward novellas. A novella still takes longer to develop than a short story, obviously, but it's still short form fiction and generates sales in similar fashion to the short story method used by so many in erotica. TL;DR - Overhyped is a better word. Sorry if I offended you. I really didn't mean anything derogatory toward erotica or it's writers.

Overhyped is probably a better word. In short, you have so many people, particularly on Reddit, that keep espousing the myth that you can just toss up a bunch of short stories for $2.99 in the erotica market and make tons of money. While some certainly do, the vast majority don't. This is the case for virtually all other markets on Amazon. You are correct. Short fiction does not sell as well in other categories as it does in erotica, but there's still plenty of money to be made. From my past experience, it's not difficult to make a livable income, but it takes more time than erotica might. There's a move in many markets toward novellas. A novella still takes longer to develop than a short story, obviously, but it's still short form fiction and generates sales in similar fashion to the short story method used by so many in erotica. TL;DR - Overhyped is a better word. Sorry if I offended you. I really didn't mean anything derogatory toward erotica or it's writers.

selfpublish

t5_2sew3

cfz0jb6

Overhyped is probably a better word. In short, you have so many people, particularly on Reddit, that keep espousing the myth that you can just toss up a bunch of short stories for $2.99 in the erotica market and make tons of money. While some certainly do, the vast majority don't. This is the case for virtually all other markets on Amazon. You are correct. Short fiction does not sell as well in other categories as it does in erotica, but there's still plenty of money to be made. From my past experience, it's not difficult to make a livable income, but it takes more time than erotica might. There's a move in many markets toward novellas. A novella still takes longer to develop than a short story, obviously, but it's still short form fiction and generates sales in similar fashion to the short story method used by so many in erotica.

Overhyped is a better word. Sorry if I offended you. I really didn't mean anything derogatory toward erotica or it's writers.

WireSnoopIsMyBitch

I take propranolol and citalopram for anxiety and then Xanax if I get a panic attack. The propranolol is mainly used as a blood pressure med, but it also helps with anxiety. Definitely talk to your doctor to ensure it doesn't interfere with the amisulpride. But from what my pharmacist has told me, propranolol has been around for a long time, has minimal side effects, and treats various ailments (even migraines). Tl;dr ask the doctor first

I take propranolol and citalopram for anxiety and then Xanax if I get a panic attack. The propranolol is mainly used as a blood pressure med, but it also helps with anxiety. Definitely talk to your doctor to ensure it doesn't interfere with the amisulpride. But from what my pharmacist has told me, propranolol has been around for a long time, has minimal side effects, and treats various ailments (even migraines). Tl;dr ask the doctor first

Anxiety

t5_2qmij

cfyreyb

I take propranolol and citalopram for anxiety and then Xanax if I get a panic attack. The propranolol is mainly used as a blood pressure med, but it also helps with anxiety. Definitely talk to your doctor to ensure it doesn't interfere with the amisulpride. But from what my pharmacist has told me, propranolol has been around for a long time, has minimal side effects, and treats various ailments (even migraines).

ask the doctor first

destraht

Well it was their first time and one of the guys Craig was terrible at management and he is long gone now. They used a Chinese company that totally dicked them around numerous times. Now they have a German board producer that is solid and very close to where their location. In addition they already have the PND packager for static linked games (in addition to the debs for the new Debian system). They can also use the original case as a starting point for ideas and a Greek company is already making a test mold for a dummy board. He already has private funding up to the mass production stage and he was quitely getting the initial ideas together before he announced it so the Pyra is starting out several months ahead of where the Pandora started at. I think that he will get it all ready and then crowdfund it for the production money. tl;dr The disasterous Pandora situation will not be happening with the Pyra.

Well it was their first time and one of the guys Craig was terrible at management and he is long gone now. They used a Chinese company that totally dicked them around numerous times. Now they have a German board producer that is solid and very close to where their location. In addition they already have the PND packager for static linked games (in addition to the debs for the new Debian system). They can also use the original case as a starting point for ideas and a Greek company is already making a test mold for a dummy board. He already has private funding up to the mass production stage and he was quitely getting the initial ideas together before he announced it so the Pyra is starting out several months ahead of where the Pandora started at. I think that he will get it all ready and then crowdfund it for the production money. tl;dr The disasterous Pandora situation will not be happening with the Pyra.

linux

t5_2qh1a

cfyywjw

Well it was their first time and one of the guys Craig was terrible at management and he is long gone now. They used a Chinese company that totally dicked them around numerous times. Now they have a German board producer that is solid and very close to where their location. In addition they already have the PND packager for static linked games (in addition to the debs for the new Debian system). They can also use the original case as a starting point for ideas and a Greek company is already making a test mold for a dummy board. He already has private funding up to the mass production stage and he was quitely getting the initial ideas together before he announced it so the Pyra is starting out several months ahead of where the Pandora started at. I think that he will get it all ready and then crowdfund it for the production money.

The disasterous Pandora situation will not be happening with the Pyra.

lochnessie15

<3 I'm completely with you - my first SO, who I was with for about 4 years, passed about two years after we broke up. We were still on okay terms and talked occasionally, and even though I feel like I can't really wear the jewelry and other things I have from him, I'm still really glad I have them. Especially with the context, other SOs haven't minded, but I also don't bring the things out; they just stay tucked away (or remain as AIM logs on my old computer). I still have a few mementos from my other serious relationship (before my hubby :), and they're nice to have around, too - the relationship was a significant part of my life and shaped who I am today and how I approach relationships. They represent memories both good and bad, and those help me realize how much better off I am now. And useful things can totally remain useful! tl;dr: Mementos are acceptable when tucked away, useful things are good if they're disassociated from the relationship.

<3 I'm completely with you - my first SO, who I was with for about 4 years, passed about two years after we broke up. We were still on okay terms and talked occasionally, and even though I feel like I can't really wear the jewelry and other things I have from him, I'm still really glad I have them. Especially with the context, other SOs haven't minded, but I also don't bring the things out; they just stay tucked away (or remain as AIM logs on my old computer). I still have a few mementos from my other serious relationship (before my hubby :), and they're nice to have around, too - the relationship was a significant part of my life and shaped who I am today and how I approach relationships. They represent memories both good and bad, and those help me realize how much better off I am now. And useful things can totally remain useful! tl;dr: Mementos are acceptable when tucked away, useful things are good if they're disassociated from the relationship.

PolishGauntlet

t5_2wdjx

cfzfvyr

3 I'm completely with you - my first SO, who I was with for about 4 years, passed about two years after we broke up. We were still on okay terms and talked occasionally, and even though I feel like I can't really wear the jewelry and other things I have from him, I'm still really glad I have them. Especially with the context, other SOs haven't minded, but I also don't bring the things out; they just stay tucked away (or remain as AIM logs on my old computer). I still have a few mementos from my other serious relationship (before my hubby :), and they're nice to have around, too - the relationship was a significant part of my life and shaped who I am today and how I approach relationships. They represent memories both good and bad, and those help me realize how much better off I am now. And useful things can totally remain useful!

Mementos are acceptable when tucked away, useful things are good if they're disassociated from the relationship.

breedlovehoops

ineedhelp What kind of content would you like to see on a (mostly) nail blog aside from color reviews? I have some stamped manis coming up and a few giveaways prepared, but that's about it. I've considered a write-up about how to paint your nails with little to no clean up, a wear test of Elmer's glue as a peel off base coat, and a stash post. I just don't know if those would be interesting to anyone else, or if they are only interesting for a few people. **TL;DR** What content do you like to see on nail blogs aside from reviews?

ineedhelp What kind of content would you like to see on a (mostly) nail blog aside from color reviews? I have some stamped manis coming up and a few giveaways prepared, but that's about it. I've considered a write-up about how to paint your nails with little to no clean up, a wear test of Elmer's glue as a peel off base coat, and a stash post. I just don't know if those would be interesting to anyone else, or if they are only interesting for a few people. TL;DR What content do you like to see on nail blogs aside from reviews?

PolishGauntlet

t5_2wdjx

cgdaibh

ineedhelp What kind of content would you like to see on a (mostly) nail blog aside from color reviews? I have some stamped manis coming up and a few giveaways prepared, but that's about it. I've considered a write-up about how to paint your nails with little to no clean up, a wear test of Elmer's glue as a peel off base coat, and a stash post. I just don't know if those would be interesting to anyone else, or if they are only interesting for a few people.

What content do you like to see on nail blogs aside from reviews?

elyndar

If you're bronze you most likely have mistakes everywhere. However this being said the advice I give every bronze friend I have ever talked to on how to carry themselves out of bronze, is to learn how to cs. No one at bronze can even do a remotely decent job of csing. Frankly even up in platinum its still not that great. Most bronze players in my experience miss roughly 1/2 the cs they could have gotten extremely easily and many get even less. If you learn to cs better and say get 3/4 cs, than by 3 waves you'll be 5 cs up easily. 12 waves in you'll be up 20 cs which is about equal to one kill. 12 minion waves in is 7 minutes into the game. In a 28 minute game which is extremely frequent in bronze you will at least gain 4 kills worth of gold up on your lane opponent. Even in a game where you get 10 kills this means that your gold generation has increased 40% and you have 40% more power to work with if you ignore gold coming from objectives and assists. After objectives and assists factor in you'll usually at least have 10% more gold to work with. You can have this additional power for only getting 2 more cs a wave than what you did previously. You can see how just a simple change like that can increase the gold you gain significantly during the course of a game. Now that I've gone over some reasoning for why to learn to cs, lets go over how to get better at it. First step to get better at csing is to go and practice the basics, which is getting nearly every cs while under no pressure at all with your full runes and masteries on. To know what perfect cs is though you have to understand the numbers. Lets talk about minion waves a little shall we? Each wave consists of 3 caster minions and 3 melee minions. Every third wave has a cannon minion added in. This means that every three waves you can get 19 cs. Minions spawn at 1:30 into the game and start fighting the enemy minion line at 2:00 minutes in. Minion waves spawn every 30 seconds from the 1:30 mark till the end of the game meaning that by 5:00 minutes 38 cs have reached lane and by 5:30 you would get all 38 of them in a perfect world. Note that your position in lane can slightly change when creeps arrive so its best to keep track of what minion wave it is. Now that we've talked about the theory, lets get down to the nitty gritty of actually getting better. To get better go create a custom game on summoners rift and go try to get max cs. Why 5 minutes? Because its most difficult to cs in the early game, and because its only 5 minutes its very easy to fit around other things. Just slip one in every now and then while waiting for friends or whatever. Most people I tell this say, "its boring I don't want to" or something along those lines. If you're really trying to get better and do outside reading or watch lcs games or whatever, then you can surely spend 5 minutes every once in awhile improving your basics. There is no excuse to not do it if you want to get better. All top level players get about 10 cs/min regularly (note this is only possible after 11 minutes in unless you farm jungle or other lanes). If they can do it in pro games with their jobs on the line, and you can't even manage to do that without any pressure on you, then how can you expect yourself to carry yourself very high up the ladder? Your learning will progress through a series of steps as you get better and better. The steps are as follows (idea originated from the unsc lol society videos but with my own twists on it): 1: Get at least 80% of max cs with full runes and masteries, no lane opponents, and normal items. This will let you cs perfectly when no one is bothering you and makes it a huge problem for the enemy team to leave you alone in lane for long periods of time as you will get farmed very quickly relative to other players. 2: Get at least 80% of max cs with full runes, masteries, no lane opponents, normal items, but this time you must keep moving between each auto attack. Stay out of auto attack range of the minions before you last hit, and go in only when you will get the cs in one hit. The reason for this is it naturally increases your mechanics and ability to remain mobile even when csing and allowing you to remain safe most of the time, thus allowing you to dodge skill shots, respond to harass, etc. better. 3: Get at least 80% of max cs with full runes, masteries, no lane opponents, normal items, you must keep moving inbetween each cs, and this time you must alternate on each wave between autoing as much as possible and autoing as little as possible. This teaches you mechanically how to both push and freeze a lane when alone thus giving you the option whether to go for turret pushing or freezing. 4: Do step 3 again, but this time with 1 bot as your opponent to simulate an enemy laner's harass. You can ensure 1 bot in your lane by adding 3 bots to the enemy team. 1 will go to each lane. Remember your goal is not to kill the bot, but to perfectly cs even while the bot is in your face. This will help you not only focus on the minion wave, but also on your laner as well. 5: Do step 4, but instead of 1 bot have 2 bots for even more harass. You do this by adding a full 5 bots to the enemy team. I'm not one hundred percent sure you can have 2 bots in mid lane as I have never really tried. 6: Step 5, but you drop your runes, masteries, and items. This makes it a little harder on you and makes it a little more similar to a real game in the sense that the pressure for making mistakes is higher. It also teaches you how to cs by a smaller margin getting you out of the habit of autoing whenever the cs is just below 1 shot. It'll teach you better how to walk the razors edge between a minion having 10 hp when your auto hits and a minion having 0 hp when your auto hits. 7: Do step 6, but whenever you start an auto attack press tab and examine the enemy team, your team, what items everyone has, who is doing well, who is feeding, team comp, summoners and what cooldowns they have, etc, or look at the minimap and determine where everything is, or actually examine other lanes temporarily to check hp values and such. Which of these to do depends on how much time you have between when one minions dies and the next will die. This reduces your tunnel vision and promotes an understanding of the game as a whole even before grouping up, as well as teaching you to plan when to get cs and not get cs. 8: Do step 7, but keep track of both their minion wave and your minion wave. Later on this will help you to plan harass better on the enemy, so its best to get in the habit now. Writing down your cs per game before and after you finish the practice can really show you how much you improved over the whole regimen. If you finish the whole thing I guarantee you will be much better at csing than when you started. After you finish you will consistently have a gold advantage in lane. The gold accrued by csing will become the foundation that you can use to improve on all the other aspects of your game. No matter what happens in game whether it be a 4v5, or whatever there will always be cs to be gotten. If you play jungle or support you should still know how to cs, but junglers can do a similar exercise more relevant to them by trying to clear the jungle as fast as they can. **TL;DR: Learn to cs and you will be able to carry yourself out of bronze.**

If you're bronze you most likely have mistakes everywhere. However this being said the advice I give every bronze friend I have ever talked to on how to carry themselves out of bronze, is to learn how to cs. No one at bronze can even do a remotely decent job of csing. Frankly even up in platinum its still not that great. Most bronze players in my experience miss roughly 1/2 the cs they could have gotten extremely easily and many get even less. If you learn to cs better and say get 3/4 cs, than by 3 waves you'll be 5 cs up easily. 12 waves in you'll be up 20 cs which is about equal to one kill. 12 minion waves in is 7 minutes into the game. In a 28 minute game which is extremely frequent in bronze you will at least gain 4 kills worth of gold up on your lane opponent. Even in a game where you get 10 kills this means that your gold generation has increased 40% and you have 40% more power to work with if you ignore gold coming from objectives and assists. After objectives and assists factor in you'll usually at least have 10% more gold to work with. You can have this additional power for only getting 2 more cs a wave than what you did previously. You can see how just a simple change like that can increase the gold you gain significantly during the course of a game. Now that I've gone over some reasoning for why to learn to cs, lets go over how to get better at it. First step to get better at csing is to go and practice the basics, which is getting nearly every cs while under no pressure at all with your full runes and masteries on. To know what perfect cs is though you have to understand the numbers. Lets talk about minion waves a little shall we? Each wave consists of 3 caster minions and 3 melee minions. Every third wave has a cannon minion added in. This means that every three waves you can get 19 cs. Minions spawn at 1:30 into the game and start fighting the enemy minion line at 2:00 minutes in. Minion waves spawn every 30 seconds from the 1:30 mark till the end of the game meaning that by 5:00 minutes 38 cs have reached lane and by 5:30 you would get all 38 of them in a perfect world. Note that your position in lane can slightly change when creeps arrive so its best to keep track of what minion wave it is. Now that we've talked about the theory, lets get down to the nitty gritty of actually getting better. To get better go create a custom game on summoners rift and go try to get max cs. Why 5 minutes? Because its most difficult to cs in the early game, and because its only 5 minutes its very easy to fit around other things. Just slip one in every now and then while waiting for friends or whatever. Most people I tell this say, "its boring I don't want to" or something along those lines. If you're really trying to get better and do outside reading or watch lcs games or whatever, then you can surely spend 5 minutes every once in awhile improving your basics. There is no excuse to not do it if you want to get better. All top level players get about 10 cs/min regularly (note this is only possible after 11 minutes in unless you farm jungle or other lanes). If they can do it in pro games with their jobs on the line, and you can't even manage to do that without any pressure on you, then how can you expect yourself to carry yourself very high up the ladder? Your learning will progress through a series of steps as you get better and better. The steps are as follows (idea originated from the unsc lol society videos but with my own twists on it): 1: Get at least 80% of max cs with full runes and masteries, no lane opponents, and normal items. This will let you cs perfectly when no one is bothering you and makes it a huge problem for the enemy team to leave you alone in lane for long periods of time as you will get farmed very quickly relative to other players. 2: Get at least 80% of max cs with full runes, masteries, no lane opponents, normal items, but this time you must keep moving between each auto attack. Stay out of auto attack range of the minions before you last hit, and go in only when you will get the cs in one hit. The reason for this is it naturally increases your mechanics and ability to remain mobile even when csing and allowing you to remain safe most of the time, thus allowing you to dodge skill shots, respond to harass, etc. better. 3: Get at least 80% of max cs with full runes, masteries, no lane opponents, normal items, you must keep moving inbetween each cs, and this time you must alternate on each wave between autoing as much as possible and autoing as little as possible. This teaches you mechanically how to both push and freeze a lane when alone thus giving you the option whether to go for turret pushing or freezing. 4: Do step 3 again, but this time with 1 bot as your opponent to simulate an enemy laner's harass. You can ensure 1 bot in your lane by adding 3 bots to the enemy team. 1 will go to each lane. Remember your goal is not to kill the bot, but to perfectly cs even while the bot is in your face. This will help you not only focus on the minion wave, but also on your laner as well. 5: Do step 4, but instead of 1 bot have 2 bots for even more harass. You do this by adding a full 5 bots to the enemy team. I'm not one hundred percent sure you can have 2 bots in mid lane as I have never really tried. 6: Step 5, but you drop your runes, masteries, and items. This makes it a little harder on you and makes it a little more similar to a real game in the sense that the pressure for making mistakes is higher. It also teaches you how to cs by a smaller margin getting you out of the habit of autoing whenever the cs is just below 1 shot. It'll teach you better how to walk the razors edge between a minion having 10 hp when your auto hits and a minion having 0 hp when your auto hits. 7: Do step 6, but whenever you start an auto attack press tab and examine the enemy team, your team, what items everyone has, who is doing well, who is feeding, team comp, summoners and what cooldowns they have, etc, or look at the minimap and determine where everything is, or actually examine other lanes temporarily to check hp values and such. Which of these to do depends on how much time you have between when one minions dies and the next will die. This reduces your tunnel vision and promotes an understanding of the game as a whole even before grouping up, as well as teaching you to plan when to get cs and not get cs. 8: Do step 7, but keep track of both their minion wave and your minion wave. Later on this will help you to plan harass better on the enemy, so its best to get in the habit now. Writing down your cs per game before and after you finish the practice can really show you how much you improved over the whole regimen. If you finish the whole thing I guarantee you will be much better at csing than when you started. After you finish you will consistently have a gold advantage in lane. The gold accrued by csing will become the foundation that you can use to improve on all the other aspects of your game. No matter what happens in game whether it be a 4v5, or whatever there will always be cs to be gotten. If you play jungle or support you should still know how to cs, but junglers can do a similar exercise more relevant to them by trying to clear the jungle as fast as they can. TL;DR: Learn to cs and you will be able to carry yourself out of bronze.

leagueoflegends

t5_2rfxx

cfywk4o

If you're bronze you most likely have mistakes everywhere. However this being said the advice I give every bronze friend I have ever talked to on how to carry themselves out of bronze, is to learn how to cs. No one at bronze can even do a remotely decent job of csing. Frankly even up in platinum its still not that great. Most bronze players in my experience miss roughly 1/2 the cs they could have gotten extremely easily and many get even less. If you learn to cs better and say get 3/4 cs, than by 3 waves you'll be 5 cs up easily. 12 waves in you'll be up 20 cs which is about equal to one kill. 12 minion waves in is 7 minutes into the game. In a 28 minute game which is extremely frequent in bronze you will at least gain 4 kills worth of gold up on your lane opponent. Even in a game where you get 10 kills this means that your gold generation has increased 40% and you have 40% more power to work with if you ignore gold coming from objectives and assists. After objectives and assists factor in you'll usually at least have 10% more gold to work with. You can have this additional power for only getting 2 more cs a wave than what you did previously. You can see how just a simple change like that can increase the gold you gain significantly during the course of a game. Now that I've gone over some reasoning for why to learn to cs, lets go over how to get better at it. First step to get better at csing is to go and practice the basics, which is getting nearly every cs while under no pressure at all with your full runes and masteries on. To know what perfect cs is though you have to understand the numbers. Lets talk about minion waves a little shall we? Each wave consists of 3 caster minions and 3 melee minions. Every third wave has a cannon minion added in. This means that every three waves you can get 19 cs. Minions spawn at 1:30 into the game and start fighting the enemy minion line at 2:00 minutes in. Minion waves spawn every 30 seconds from the 1:30 mark till the end of the game meaning that by 5:00 minutes 38 cs have reached lane and by 5:30 you would get all 38 of them in a perfect world. Note that your position in lane can slightly change when creeps arrive so its best to keep track of what minion wave it is. Now that we've talked about the theory, lets get down to the nitty gritty of actually getting better. To get better go create a custom game on summoners rift and go try to get max cs. Why 5 minutes? Because its most difficult to cs in the early game, and because its only 5 minutes its very easy to fit around other things. Just slip one in every now and then while waiting for friends or whatever. Most people I tell this say, "its boring I don't want to" or something along those lines. If you're really trying to get better and do outside reading or watch lcs games or whatever, then you can surely spend 5 minutes every once in awhile improving your basics. There is no excuse to not do it if you want to get better. All top level players get about 10 cs/min regularly (note this is only possible after 11 minutes in unless you farm jungle or other lanes). If they can do it in pro games with their jobs on the line, and you can't even manage to do that without any pressure on you, then how can you expect yourself to carry yourself very high up the ladder? Your learning will progress through a series of steps as you get better and better. The steps are as follows (idea originated from the unsc lol society videos but with my own twists on it): 1: Get at least 80% of max cs with full runes and masteries, no lane opponents, and normal items. This will let you cs perfectly when no one is bothering you and makes it a huge problem for the enemy team to leave you alone in lane for long periods of time as you will get farmed very quickly relative to other players. 2: Get at least 80% of max cs with full runes, masteries, no lane opponents, normal items, but this time you must keep moving between each auto attack. Stay out of auto attack range of the minions before you last hit, and go in only when you will get the cs in one hit. The reason for this is it naturally increases your mechanics and ability to remain mobile even when csing and allowing you to remain safe most of the time, thus allowing you to dodge skill shots, respond to harass, etc. better. 3: Get at least 80% of max cs with full runes, masteries, no lane opponents, normal items, you must keep moving inbetween each cs, and this time you must alternate on each wave between autoing as much as possible and autoing as little as possible. This teaches you mechanically how to both push and freeze a lane when alone thus giving you the option whether to go for turret pushing or freezing. 4: Do step 3 again, but this time with 1 bot as your opponent to simulate an enemy laner's harass. You can ensure 1 bot in your lane by adding 3 bots to the enemy team. 1 will go to each lane. Remember your goal is not to kill the bot, but to perfectly cs even while the bot is in your face. This will help you not only focus on the minion wave, but also on your laner as well. 5: Do step 4, but instead of 1 bot have 2 bots for even more harass. You do this by adding a full 5 bots to the enemy team. I'm not one hundred percent sure you can have 2 bots in mid lane as I have never really tried. 6: Step 5, but you drop your runes, masteries, and items. This makes it a little harder on you and makes it a little more similar to a real game in the sense that the pressure for making mistakes is higher. It also teaches you how to cs by a smaller margin getting you out of the habit of autoing whenever the cs is just below 1 shot. It'll teach you better how to walk the razors edge between a minion having 10 hp when your auto hits and a minion having 0 hp when your auto hits. 7: Do step 6, but whenever you start an auto attack press tab and examine the enemy team, your team, what items everyone has, who is doing well, who is feeding, team comp, summoners and what cooldowns they have, etc, or look at the minimap and determine where everything is, or actually examine other lanes temporarily to check hp values and such. Which of these to do depends on how much time you have between when one minions dies and the next will die. This reduces your tunnel vision and promotes an understanding of the game as a whole even before grouping up, as well as teaching you to plan when to get cs and not get cs. 8: Do step 7, but keep track of both their minion wave and your minion wave. Later on this will help you to plan harass better on the enemy, so its best to get in the habit now. Writing down your cs per game before and after you finish the practice can really show you how much you improved over the whole regimen. If you finish the whole thing I guarantee you will be much better at csing than when you started. After you finish you will consistently have a gold advantage in lane. The gold accrued by csing will become the foundation that you can use to improve on all the other aspects of your game. No matter what happens in game whether it be a 4v5, or whatever there will always be cs to be gotten. If you play jungle or support you should still know how to cs, but junglers can do a similar exercise more relevant to them by trying to clear the jungle as fast as they can.

Learn to cs and you will be able to carry yourself out of bronze.

TheMentallord

I disagree. If I'm playing bottom lane, I usually win (not in kills, but I push way more, I'm more agressive than most people with whom I play and usually get better CS from pushing a lot). When I get the tower on bot, I try to push to tier 2, to have the enemy pushed back and pull 1 or 2 people to bot. Then, I have 2 choices : Call the jungler and go for dragon or go mid and get another turret. Don't pay attention to the "stop stealing farm", just push the wave and try to take the tower. Then, the map is open for you. I've found myself winning way more games since I started doing this. Tl;dr- play super agressive, push all the time, create situations instead of react to situations and you should win more.

I disagree. If I'm playing bottom lane, I usually win (not in kills, but I push way more, I'm more agressive than most people with whom I play and usually get better CS from pushing a lot). When I get the tower on bot, I try to push to tier 2, to have the enemy pushed back and pull 1 or 2 people to bot. Then, I have 2 choices : Call the jungler and go for dragon or go mid and get another turret. Don't pay attention to the "stop stealing farm", just push the wave and try to take the tower. Then, the map is open for you. I've found myself winning way more games since I started doing this. Tl;dr- play super agressive, push all the time, create situations instead of react to situations and you should win more.

leagueoflegends

t5_2rfxx

cfz2dhv

I disagree. If I'm playing bottom lane, I usually win (not in kills, but I push way more, I'm more agressive than most people with whom I play and usually get better CS from pushing a lot). When I get the tower on bot, I try to push to tier 2, to have the enemy pushed back and pull 1 or 2 people to bot. Then, I have 2 choices : Call the jungler and go for dragon or go mid and get another turret. Don't pay attention to the "stop stealing farm", just push the wave and try to take the tower. Then, the map is open for you. I've found myself winning way more games since I started doing this.

play super agressive, push all the time, create situations instead of react to situations and you should win more.

hinkraka

What I think is the major point here, as a bronze III (I play way too little to climb consistently even if I have enough skill) is that the logic of "if you're good enough you can carry games like shit" only works if you are that much better! Purely fictive numbers here: I am a diamond player (no I am not, just making an example) and thus when playing against golds I am 200% of their skill! Saying that 100% is the average number of skill of the level I am playing at. And my guess is that the average disparity in skill is +/- 10%. So basically even if the other team consists of 5 people slightly more skilled than the average and my team is in the lower percentile, my team will still win out statistically almost every game. We end up on 4*90 plus 200=560% of our ability while the other team has 550% So techichally this means that you should win almost every game within the variation since you will win when facing the most menacing opponents, and most of the games you won't. And since you are way much better and most of the game isn't a full 5v5 you will get even more of an advantage. But most of us aren't 2 divisions above in skill where we are in status. Which means that even if I am 120% in skill I will not be able to hard carry since if I meet that 100-110% opponent I am not that much better than them so I can't carry superhard. Tl;dr: basically the "truth" about being good enough and carry your team only applies when you are significantly better and the "less" better you are the more you have to trust on your teammates. People with 2 accounts in challenger are that much better at any lvl of play, I am not that much better in most games. So I have to rely on doing my best AND luck, not just my best since it won't be good enough against bad luck...

What I think is the major point here, as a bronze III (I play way too little to climb consistently even if I have enough skill) is that the logic of "if you're good enough you can carry games like shit" only works if you are that much better! Purely fictive numbers here: I am a diamond player (no I am not, just making an example) and thus when playing against golds I am 200% of their skill! Saying that 100% is the average number of skill of the level I am playing at. And my guess is that the average disparity in skill is +/- 10%. So basically even if the other team consists of 5 people slightly more skilled than the average and my team is in the lower percentile, my team will still win out statistically almost every game. We end up on 4*90 plus 200=560% of our ability while the other team has 550% So techichally this means that you should win almost every game within the variation since you will win when facing the most menacing opponents, and most of the games you won't. And since you are way much better and most of the game isn't a full 5v5 you will get even more of an advantage. But most of us aren't 2 divisions above in skill where we are in status. Which means that even if I am 120% in skill I will not be able to hard carry since if I meet that 100-110% opponent I am not that much better than them so I can't carry superhard. Tl;dr: basically the "truth" about being good enough and carry your team only applies when you are significantly better and the "less" better you are the more you have to trust on your teammates. People with 2 accounts in challenger are that much better at any lvl of play, I am not that much better in most games. So I have to rely on doing my best AND luck, not just my best since it won't be good enough against bad luck...

leagueoflegends

t5_2rfxx

cfz2gdd

What I think is the major point here, as a bronze III (I play way too little to climb consistently even if I have enough skill) is that the logic of "if you're good enough you can carry games like shit" only works if you are that much better! Purely fictive numbers here: I am a diamond player (no I am not, just making an example) and thus when playing against golds I am 200% of their skill! Saying that 100% is the average number of skill of the level I am playing at. And my guess is that the average disparity in skill is +/- 10%. So basically even if the other team consists of 5 people slightly more skilled than the average and my team is in the lower percentile, my team will still win out statistically almost every game. We end up on 4*90 plus 200=560% of our ability while the other team has 550% So techichally this means that you should win almost every game within the variation since you will win when facing the most menacing opponents, and most of the games you won't. And since you are way much better and most of the game isn't a full 5v5 you will get even more of an advantage. But most of us aren't 2 divisions above in skill where we are in status. Which means that even if I am 120% in skill I will not be able to hard carry since if I meet that 100-110% opponent I am not that much better than them so I can't carry superhard.

basically the "truth" about being good enough and carry your team only applies when you are significantly better and the "less" better you are the more you have to trust on your teammates. People with 2 accounts in challenger are that much better at any lvl of play, I am not that much better in most games. So I have to rely on doing my best AND luck, not just my best since it won't be good enough against bad luck...

rube

It sounds like you might just be burnt out on the series. I couldn't get into AC1, but loved AC2. It fixed many of the problems. Loved AC:B even more. But AC:R felt bland to me. The setting was boring and the bomb making didn't add anything to the game. But then AC3 came along and was just terrible. It just felt like a complete mess of a game with all of these random things thrown in. The story and characters were boring, the setting wasn't very interesting. Even the ship sailing wasn't to my liking, as it felt tacked on. But I recently got AC4 and I'm enjoying it. I'm not sure if I'm enjoying it as much as AC2/B, but it's quite good. The world feels massive with the various places you can travel to, and the ship sailing and combat are fun. And yeah, the on land gameplay is pretty much the same as past games: stab this guy, open this treasure chest, find these items. But those are the things I love about the AC series. If they were missing, it just wouldn't feel right. So yeah, it's nothing new overall, but they added just enough to make the game fresh for me. I do wish they'd redo the combat system, although I don't know if fans of the series would agree. It's always been the weakest point of the series in my opinion. It just feels far too rigid and boring. There seems to be no real skill. It's just hack-hack-hack, counter, hack-hack-hack, counter, repeat. I'd love to see a more fleshed out system similar to the Ninja Gaiden, Devil May Cry and God of War games use. **TLDR:** You're probably burnt out on the series, as I was getting. But AC4 breathed just enough new life into it for me.

It sounds like you might just be burnt out on the series. I couldn't get into AC1, but loved AC2. It fixed many of the problems. Loved AC:B even more. But AC:R felt bland to me. The setting was boring and the bomb making didn't add anything to the game. But then AC3 came along and was just terrible. It just felt like a complete mess of a game with all of these random things thrown in. The story and characters were boring, the setting wasn't very interesting. Even the ship sailing wasn't to my liking, as it felt tacked on. But I recently got AC4 and I'm enjoying it. I'm not sure if I'm enjoying it as much as AC2/B, but it's quite good. The world feels massive with the various places you can travel to, and the ship sailing and combat are fun. And yeah, the on land gameplay is pretty much the same as past games: stab this guy, open this treasure chest, find these items. But those are the things I love about the AC series. If they were missing, it just wouldn't feel right. So yeah, it's nothing new overall, but they added just enough to make the game fresh for me. I do wish they'd redo the combat system, although I don't know if fans of the series would agree. It's always been the weakest point of the series in my opinion. It just feels far too rigid and boring. There seems to be no real skill. It's just hack-hack-hack, counter, hack-hack-hack, counter, repeat. I'd love to see a more fleshed out system similar to the Ninja Gaiden, Devil May Cry and God of War games use. TLDR: You're probably burnt out on the series, as I was getting. But AC4 breathed just enough new life into it for me.

Games

t5_2qhwp

cfz0wdf

It sounds like you might just be burnt out on the series. I couldn't get into AC1, but loved AC2. It fixed many of the problems. Loved AC:B even more. But AC:R felt bland to me. The setting was boring and the bomb making didn't add anything to the game. But then AC3 came along and was just terrible. It just felt like a complete mess of a game with all of these random things thrown in. The story and characters were boring, the setting wasn't very interesting. Even the ship sailing wasn't to my liking, as it felt tacked on. But I recently got AC4 and I'm enjoying it. I'm not sure if I'm enjoying it as much as AC2/B, but it's quite good. The world feels massive with the various places you can travel to, and the ship sailing and combat are fun. And yeah, the on land gameplay is pretty much the same as past games: stab this guy, open this treasure chest, find these items. But those are the things I love about the AC series. If they were missing, it just wouldn't feel right. So yeah, it's nothing new overall, but they added just enough to make the game fresh for me. I do wish they'd redo the combat system, although I don't know if fans of the series would agree. It's always been the weakest point of the series in my opinion. It just feels far too rigid and boring. There seems to be no real skill. It's just hack-hack-hack, counter, hack-hack-hack, counter, repeat. I'd love to see a more fleshed out system similar to the Ninja Gaiden, Devil May Cry and God of War games use.

You're probably burnt out on the series, as I was getting. But AC4 breathed just enough new life into it for me.

abominare

Depends a little if you're modding. Dawnguard is going to cause cities to get attacked randomly by vampires. This can get annoying if you just ignore it because after a while townies gonna get eaten. This gets even worse if you're running mods that improve the upper end of monster leveling or increase spawns. Especially if you're like me and halfway through playing you just say fuck it and start mass producing craft items to get through all that jazz. Dragonborn isn't an issue because I believe the instigating attack only happens once. In terms of the questline in DG you'll end up having to do some of the midline of the main quest but it seamless how you do it and doesn't mean you have to actually do the main quest to get it, just coincides with some quest items. Theres a few moments in both where the expansions will check some variables on Alduin to see if they need to address it, but it really doesn't matter. Tl; dr you'll most likely do dawnguard first because you'll get annoyed and you might as well grab dragon rend before doing DB cause uh dragons be annoying as fuck anyways.

Depends a little if you're modding. Dawnguard is going to cause cities to get attacked randomly by vampires. This can get annoying if you just ignore it because after a while townies gonna get eaten. This gets even worse if you're running mods that improve the upper end of monster leveling or increase spawns. Especially if you're like me and halfway through playing you just say fuck it and start mass producing craft items to get through all that jazz. Dragonborn isn't an issue because I believe the instigating attack only happens once. In terms of the questline in DG you'll end up having to do some of the midline of the main quest but it seamless how you do it and doesn't mean you have to actually do the main quest to get it, just coincides with some quest items. Theres a few moments in both where the expansions will check some variables on Alduin to see if they need to address it, but it really doesn't matter. Tl; dr you'll most likely do dawnguard first because you'll get annoyed and you might as well grab dragon rend before doing DB cause uh dragons be annoying as fuck anyways.

skyrim

t5_2s837

cfz9nrl

Depends a little if you're modding. Dawnguard is going to cause cities to get attacked randomly by vampires. This can get annoying if you just ignore it because after a while townies gonna get eaten. This gets even worse if you're running mods that improve the upper end of monster leveling or increase spawns. Especially if you're like me and halfway through playing you just say fuck it and start mass producing craft items to get through all that jazz. Dragonborn isn't an issue because I believe the instigating attack only happens once. In terms of the questline in DG you'll end up having to do some of the midline of the main quest but it seamless how you do it and doesn't mean you have to actually do the main quest to get it, just coincides with some quest items. Theres a few moments in both where the expansions will check some variables on Alduin to see if they need to address it, but it really doesn't matter.

you'll most likely do dawnguard first because you'll get annoyed and you might as well grab dragon rend before doing DB cause uh dragons be annoying as fuck anyways.

turrtlesoup

If you vote yes for dragon defender you are probably upper 70s attack with like 85 strength and a 5-10m total bank. You just want a free piece of loot. Dragon defender would significantly devalue the dfs. What's the point of that? So you casuals can get, essentially, a top tier piece of equipment for free. Lol nah. Just play the game and save your gp until you can afford the stuff that's out now. Runescape is an easy game, but it's all about the grind. If you aren't willing to work, you don't deserve the loot. It's that simple. Tl; dr- don't make rs easy for the casuals

If you vote yes for dragon defender you are probably upper 70s attack with like 85 strength and a 5-10m total bank. You just want a free piece of loot. Dragon defender would significantly devalue the dfs. What's the point of that? So you casuals can get, essentially, a top tier piece of equipment for free. Lol nah. Just play the game and save your gp until you can afford the stuff that's out now. Runescape is an easy game, but it's all about the grind. If you aren't willing to work, you don't deserve the loot. It's that simple. Tl; dr- don't make rs easy for the casuals

2007scape

t5_2wbww

cfz2pxj

If you vote yes for dragon defender you are probably upper 70s attack with like 85 strength and a 5-10m total bank. You just want a free piece of loot. Dragon defender would significantly devalue the dfs. What's the point of that? So you casuals can get, essentially, a top tier piece of equipment for free. Lol nah. Just play the game and save your gp until you can afford the stuff that's out now. Runescape is an easy game, but it's all about the grind. If you aren't willing to work, you don't deserve the loot. It's that simple.

don't make rs easy for the casuals

Dankleton

I'm sure. In IPv6 (or, to be completely accurate, in the 2001::/3 range of IPv6 - which is the only range which is used today) a LAN will always have a /64 network mask. In IPv6 you don't think about how many hosts you can support, you think about how many networks you can support - so a /44 will give you 1048576 /64 networks. I think that each IPv4 address you have will give you a /56 range (enough for 256 networks) - this is based on the fact that there are 12 host bits in the /20 (the number of bits in an IPv4 address minus the number of network bits: 32-20) and that 44+12=56. You will need to confirm this with your ISP and check how you convert from your IPv4 address to your 6rd address. The standard way for 6rd to work is that you have an IPv4 network (e.g. 192.0.2.0/24) mapped to an IPv6 network (e.g. 2001:DB8:40::/48.) If my IPv4 address was 192.0.2.15/32, then the ISP would tell me to convert the address by taking the last digit, multiplying by 256 and converting it into hex and then putting that on the end of the 6rd prefix to give me a /56 range. So my 6rd range might be 2001:DB8:40:0f00::/56. This would give me 2001:DB8:40:0f00::/64 as my first network and 2001:DB8:40:0fff::/64 as my last. Someone who's address was 192.0.2.1 would get 2001:DB8:40:0100::/64 to 2001:DB8:40:01ff::/64. The person with 192.0.2.2 would get 2001:DB8:40:0200::/64 to 2001:DB8:40:02ff::/64. I'm aware that I've not explained this very well, and I apologise for that. **tl;dr** No, those ranges don't overlap.

I'm sure. In IPv6 (or, to be completely accurate, in the 2001::/3 range of IPv6 - which is the only range which is used today) a LAN will always have a /64 network mask. In IPv6 you don't think about how many hosts you can support, you think about how many networks you can support - so a /44 will give you 1048576 /64 networks. I think that each IPv4 address you have will give you a /56 range (enough for 256 networks) - this is based on the fact that there are 12 host bits in the /20 (the number of bits in an IPv4 address minus the number of network bits: 32-20) and that 44+12=56. You will need to confirm this with your ISP and check how you convert from your IPv4 address to your 6rd address. The standard way for 6rd to work is that you have an IPv4 network (e.g. 192.0.2.0/24) mapped to an IPv6 network (e.g. 2001:DB8:40::/48.) If my IPv4 address was 192.0.2.15/32, then the ISP would tell me to convert the address by taking the last digit, multiplying by 256 and converting it into hex and then putting that on the end of the 6rd prefix to give me a /56 range. So my 6rd range might be 2001:DB8:40:0f00::/56. This would give me 2001:DB8:40:0f00::/64 as my first network and 2001:DB8:40:0fff::/64 as my last. Someone who's address was 192.0.2.1 would get 2001:DB8:40:0100::/64 to 2001:DB8:40:01ff::/64. The person with 192.0.2.2 would get 2001:DB8:40:0200::/64 to 2001:DB8:40:02ff::/64. I'm aware that I've not explained this very well, and I apologise for that. tl;dr No, those ranges don't overlap.

networking

t5_2qkaf

cfzb9au

I'm sure. In IPv6 (or, to be completely accurate, in the 2001::/3 range of IPv6 - which is the only range which is used today) a LAN will always have a /64 network mask. In IPv6 you don't think about how many hosts you can support, you think about how many networks you can support - so a /44 will give you 1048576 /64 networks. I think that each IPv4 address you have will give you a /56 range (enough for 256 networks) - this is based on the fact that there are 12 host bits in the /20 (the number of bits in an IPv4 address minus the number of network bits: 32-20) and that 44+12=56. You will need to confirm this with your ISP and check how you convert from your IPv4 address to your 6rd address. The standard way for 6rd to work is that you have an IPv4 network (e.g. 192.0.2.0/24) mapped to an IPv6 network (e.g. 2001:DB8:40::/48.) If my IPv4 address was 192.0.2.15/32, then the ISP would tell me to convert the address by taking the last digit, multiplying by 256 and converting it into hex and then putting that on the end of the 6rd prefix to give me a /56 range. So my 6rd range might be 2001:DB8:40:0f00::/56. This would give me 2001:DB8:40:0f00::/64 as my first network and 2001:DB8:40:0fff::/64 as my last. Someone who's address was 192.0.2.1 would get 2001:DB8:40:0100::/64 to 2001:DB8:40:01ff::/64. The person with 192.0.2.2 would get 2001:DB8:40:0200::/64 to 2001:DB8:40:02ff::/64. I'm aware that I've not explained this very well, and I apologise for that.

No, those ranges don't overlap.

truckingsoftware

So the first and biggest issue is this, We do not have an original copy of any portion of scripture, the oldest sections of NT are still 2nd century some very late 1st century. The oldest copies of the OT are 3-4 century BC. If we believe that the OT was first organized under Solomon or Josiah, we are still 200+ years offset from our oldest copies. If we believe that Moses wrote the first 5 books then we are maybe as much as 1000 years removed from our oldest texts. So I find it possible that an individual can believe that the Bible in the original text is infallible and yet understand that the copy we have today might not be the original wording and as a result has human error/translational error. This means that the truth behind a statement may be true while the words used to express it might not be. Let's split this up by section in the Bible. Parts of the Bible are clearly literary in nature. The Psalms are very clearly poems, and songs. They describe the nature of God and that is true. God's love endures forever, that isn't metahpor even though the psalms use figurative language to describe it. Proverbs, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, the Parables are all similar in this. People don't read "The Raven" and argue whether it is literal or figurative because it isn't attempting to be literal, it is attempting to be literature. Next we have the prohpets. These are tough, obviously the writers use figurative language and metaphor to describe a prohpetic end for whomever the target audience is. Some of the prophecy we can see has happened for instanc Isaiah prophecies about to coming of Christ (to the point that Christ quotes the prophecies in the temple). Daniel spoke of the fall of Babylon. Habbakkuk doesn't really make a ton of definitive prohpecies but rather discusses the nature of divine justice. Revelation is also a tricky issue. The question is, when the prohpets speak, can we see the language as figurative and metaphor while still viewing the result as being truth. I don't know. I'm not a huge fan of eschatology as a whole. The epistles: These are letters, metaphor may be used and figurative language may be used to convey truth throughout. For isntance the Armor of God, using that imagery doesn't diminish the value of that truth behind the image. They are pretty straight forward, and, according to Paul, the message was recieved directly from God. The bigger issue is attempting to distinguish which parts are meant to be understood across the board as truth and which parts are meant to address specific issues facing the specific church to whom the letter was addressed. A huge portion of epistle scholarship is focused on this. The Gospels/ Acts: Understanding that the parables are very clearly stories and should be literally understood as stories. I think this is literal truth. I think the description of Christ and his time on earth is literal. It seems absurd to me to say that certain miracles or descriptions are metaphor BUT Christ died as the Son of God, went to hell, came back to life and rose again. There is literally nothing more fantastical than that in the NT and nothing seems to contradict the nature of God and as a result I believe the Gospels to be as it happened. Are the exact words of Christ there? no He didn't speak english, do we have exact or optimal translations? I don't know. As far as the OT, We have the histories, Joshua-Esther. Most of these are pretty straight forward histories of the Jewish people. Some of it has found reference with other sources, others haven't. I believe these to be truth. I put the same standard as belief in Christ. Nothing about them seems to directly contradicts concrete fact and nothing about them is more fantastical than the resurection of Christ so yes I believe them as literal. Figurative language may be used throughout but I do believe that the events described happened. The books of the Law (Leviticus-Duet) are also pretty straight forward. They are the descriptions of the law which was given to the Israelites. The biggest issue in this is fidning which parts of the law are still aplicable. Some argue that since Paul claims the law is dead none of it matters, some base the law on reasonability and fail to remember how unreasonable Christ actually was (take up your cross daily). Few who argue that we aren't bound by the law would also argue that the 10 Commandments aren't law anymore, even though they are the original law. Some scholarship (the one I adhere to) argues that parts of the law are moral imperatives (not murdering) and are about right and wrong and others are cultural imperative (foods and different fabrics) which are about purity and atonement. I believe that there are clear moral imperatives in the OT law which should be adhered to today, but I don't believe attonement law (sacrificing doves and such) or ritual purification applies to the gentile or the modern day because that part of the law was fulfilled by Christ. Genesis and even into Exodus is a bit hazy. How much of Genesis is literal vs. allegorical I don't know. It seems bold to "limit the power of God" by saying that because we, in our limited human perspective, can't reconcile our current understanding of science with Genesis then it must be metaphor. Our understanding of science could be incomplete, our understanding of Genesis could be incomplete. are metahors and figurative language used in Genesis? It seems so. Does that make it any less true? Not necessarily. Job is the outlier, Job may or may not have been a real dude, i don't know, it seems to be one of the oldest stories in the Bible and it might very well be an allegory. TL:DR: Figurative/Metaphor =/= False, and that seems to be a major sticking point for a lot of people. Methapors can be true, figurative language can convey truth.

So the first and biggest issue is this, We do not have an original copy of any portion of scripture, the oldest sections of NT are still 2nd century some very late 1st century. The oldest copies of the OT are 3-4 century BC. If we believe that the OT was first organized under Solomon or Josiah, we are still 200+ years offset from our oldest copies. If we believe that Moses wrote the first 5 books then we are maybe as much as 1000 years removed from our oldest texts. So I find it possible that an individual can believe that the Bible in the original text is infallible and yet understand that the copy we have today might not be the original wording and as a result has human error/translational error. This means that the truth behind a statement may be true while the words used to express it might not be. Let's split this up by section in the Bible. Parts of the Bible are clearly literary in nature. The Psalms are very clearly poems, and songs. They describe the nature of God and that is true. God's love endures forever, that isn't metahpor even though the psalms use figurative language to describe it. Proverbs, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, the Parables are all similar in this. People don't read "The Raven" and argue whether it is literal or figurative because it isn't attempting to be literal, it is attempting to be literature. Next we have the prohpets. These are tough, obviously the writers use figurative language and metaphor to describe a prohpetic end for whomever the target audience is. Some of the prophecy we can see has happened for instanc Isaiah prophecies about to coming of Christ (to the point that Christ quotes the prophecies in the temple). Daniel spoke of the fall of Babylon. Habbakkuk doesn't really make a ton of definitive prohpecies but rather discusses the nature of divine justice. Revelation is also a tricky issue. The question is, when the prohpets speak, can we see the language as figurative and metaphor while still viewing the result as being truth. I don't know. I'm not a huge fan of eschatology as a whole. The epistles: These are letters, metaphor may be used and figurative language may be used to convey truth throughout. For isntance the Armor of God, using that imagery doesn't diminish the value of that truth behind the image. They are pretty straight forward, and, according to Paul, the message was recieved directly from God. The bigger issue is attempting to distinguish which parts are meant to be understood across the board as truth and which parts are meant to address specific issues facing the specific church to whom the letter was addressed. A huge portion of epistle scholarship is focused on this. The Gospels/ Acts: Understanding that the parables are very clearly stories and should be literally understood as stories. I think this is literal truth. I think the description of Christ and his time on earth is literal. It seems absurd to me to say that certain miracles or descriptions are metaphor BUT Christ died as the Son of God, went to hell, came back to life and rose again. There is literally nothing more fantastical than that in the NT and nothing seems to contradict the nature of God and as a result I believe the Gospels to be as it happened. Are the exact words of Christ there? no He didn't speak english, do we have exact or optimal translations? I don't know. As far as the OT, We have the histories, Joshua-Esther. Most of these are pretty straight forward histories of the Jewish people. Some of it has found reference with other sources, others haven't. I believe these to be truth. I put the same standard as belief in Christ. Nothing about them seems to directly contradicts concrete fact and nothing about them is more fantastical than the resurection of Christ so yes I believe them as literal. Figurative language may be used throughout but I do believe that the events described happened. The books of the Law (Leviticus-Duet) are also pretty straight forward. They are the descriptions of the law which was given to the Israelites. The biggest issue in this is fidning which parts of the law are still aplicable. Some argue that since Paul claims the law is dead none of it matters, some base the law on reasonability and fail to remember how unreasonable Christ actually was (take up your cross daily). Few who argue that we aren't bound by the law would also argue that the 10 Commandments aren't law anymore, even though they are the original law. Some scholarship (the one I adhere to) argues that parts of the law are moral imperatives (not murdering) and are about right and wrong and others are cultural imperative (foods and different fabrics) which are about purity and atonement. I believe that there are clear moral imperatives in the OT law which should be adhered to today, but I don't believe attonement law (sacrificing doves and such) or ritual purification applies to the gentile or the modern day because that part of the law was fulfilled by Christ. Genesis and even into Exodus is a bit hazy. How much of Genesis is literal vs. allegorical I don't know. It seems bold to "limit the power of God" by saying that because we, in our limited human perspective, can't reconcile our current understanding of science with Genesis then it must be metaphor. Our understanding of science could be incomplete, our understanding of Genesis could be incomplete. are metahors and figurative language used in Genesis? It seems so. Does that make it any less true? Not necessarily. Job is the outlier, Job may or may not have been a real dude, i don't know, it seems to be one of the oldest stories in the Bible and it might very well be an allegory. TL:DR: Figurative/Metaphor =/= False, and that seems to be a major sticking point for a lot of people. Methapors can be true, figurative language can convey truth.

Christianity

t5_2qh6c

cfz6tw5

So the first and biggest issue is this, We do not have an original copy of any portion of scripture, the oldest sections of NT are still 2nd century some very late 1st century. The oldest copies of the OT are 3-4 century BC. If we believe that the OT was first organized under Solomon or Josiah, we are still 200+ years offset from our oldest copies. If we believe that Moses wrote the first 5 books then we are maybe as much as 1000 years removed from our oldest texts. So I find it possible that an individual can believe that the Bible in the original text is infallible and yet understand that the copy we have today might not be the original wording and as a result has human error/translational error. This means that the truth behind a statement may be true while the words used to express it might not be. Let's split this up by section in the Bible. Parts of the Bible are clearly literary in nature. The Psalms are very clearly poems, and songs. They describe the nature of God and that is true. God's love endures forever, that isn't metahpor even though the psalms use figurative language to describe it. Proverbs, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, the Parables are all similar in this. People don't read "The Raven" and argue whether it is literal or figurative because it isn't attempting to be literal, it is attempting to be literature. Next we have the prohpets. These are tough, obviously the writers use figurative language and metaphor to describe a prohpetic end for whomever the target audience is. Some of the prophecy we can see has happened for instanc Isaiah prophecies about to coming of Christ (to the point that Christ quotes the prophecies in the temple). Daniel spoke of the fall of Babylon. Habbakkuk doesn't really make a ton of definitive prohpecies but rather discusses the nature of divine justice. Revelation is also a tricky issue. The question is, when the prohpets speak, can we see the language as figurative and metaphor while still viewing the result as being truth. I don't know. I'm not a huge fan of eschatology as a whole. The epistles: These are letters, metaphor may be used and figurative language may be used to convey truth throughout. For isntance the Armor of God, using that imagery doesn't diminish the value of that truth behind the image. They are pretty straight forward, and, according to Paul, the message was recieved directly from God. The bigger issue is attempting to distinguish which parts are meant to be understood across the board as truth and which parts are meant to address specific issues facing the specific church to whom the letter was addressed. A huge portion of epistle scholarship is focused on this. The Gospels/ Acts: Understanding that the parables are very clearly stories and should be literally understood as stories. I think this is literal truth. I think the description of Christ and his time on earth is literal. It seems absurd to me to say that certain miracles or descriptions are metaphor BUT Christ died as the Son of God, went to hell, came back to life and rose again. There is literally nothing more fantastical than that in the NT and nothing seems to contradict the nature of God and as a result I believe the Gospels to be as it happened. Are the exact words of Christ there? no He didn't speak english, do we have exact or optimal translations? I don't know. As far as the OT, We have the histories, Joshua-Esther. Most of these are pretty straight forward histories of the Jewish people. Some of it has found reference with other sources, others haven't. I believe these to be truth. I put the same standard as belief in Christ. Nothing about them seems to directly contradicts concrete fact and nothing about them is more fantastical than the resurection of Christ so yes I believe them as literal. Figurative language may be used throughout but I do believe that the events described happened. The books of the Law (Leviticus-Duet) are also pretty straight forward. They are the descriptions of the law which was given to the Israelites. The biggest issue in this is fidning which parts of the law are still aplicable. Some argue that since Paul claims the law is dead none of it matters, some base the law on reasonability and fail to remember how unreasonable Christ actually was (take up your cross daily). Few who argue that we aren't bound by the law would also argue that the 10 Commandments aren't law anymore, even though they are the original law. Some scholarship (the one I adhere to) argues that parts of the law are moral imperatives (not murdering) and are about right and wrong and others are cultural imperative (foods and different fabrics) which are about purity and atonement. I believe that there are clear moral imperatives in the OT law which should be adhered to today, but I don't believe attonement law (sacrificing doves and such) or ritual purification applies to the gentile or the modern day because that part of the law was fulfilled by Christ. Genesis and even into Exodus is a bit hazy. How much of Genesis is literal vs. allegorical I don't know. It seems bold to "limit the power of God" by saying that because we, in our limited human perspective, can't reconcile our current understanding of science with Genesis then it must be metaphor. Our understanding of science could be incomplete, our understanding of Genesis could be incomplete. are metahors and figurative language used in Genesis? It seems so. Does that make it any less true? Not necessarily. Job is the outlier, Job may or may not have been a real dude, i don't know, it seems to be one of the oldest stories in the Bible and it might very well be an allegory.

Figurative/Metaphor =/= False, and that seems to be a major sticking point for a lot of people. Methapors can be true, figurative language can convey truth.

Mysterius

The [Railgun]( series is a spin-off of the [Index]( series. [Railgun S]( is the direct sequel. (There is also [one notable OVA]( that takes place between the two seasons, though it is not essential.) On the Index side, you also have [Index II]( (which, as the name suggests, is the sequel to the first season of Index) and [the movie]( That's all the main parts, with the other small OVAs and specials being largely fluff/comedy. (Speaking only of the anime, not associated manga or LNs.) You can, as the other commenters suggested, simply watch all 36+ hours of episodes in the order they aired... *or* watch the first episode or two of each series and decide how you'd like to watch them. You don't *really* have to watch Index to understand Railgun, and vice versa. Note that the two series each focus on a different protagonist and have somewhat different pacing/flavor, so they may attract different audiences; i.e. if you don't enjoy one, you may still enjoy the other. Currently, [YouTube]( has the first season of Railgun. [Hulu]( and [Funimation]( have both seasons. Similarly, [YouTube]( has most of the first season of Index (but not the last two episodes, for some reason?), [Hulu]( has the first season and half of the second season, and [Funimation]( isn't complete either but has 4 more episodes than Hulu... except those Funimation videos are paywalled... yeah, not sure why Index's legal streaming options are so messed up at the moment, especially compared to Railgun's. **TL;DR:** You can watch all of Railgun on Hulu starting from the first episode [here](

The Railgun On the Index side, you also have Index II and [the movie]( That's all the main parts, with the other small OVAs and specials being largely fluff/comedy. (Speaking only of the anime, not associated manga or LNs.) You can, as the other commenters suggested, simply watch all 36+ hours of episodes in the order they aired... or watch the first episode or two of each series and decide how you'd like to watch them. You don't really have to watch Index to understand Railgun, and vice versa. Note that the two series each focus on a different protagonist and have somewhat different pacing/flavor, so they may attract different audiences; i.e. if you don't enjoy one, you may still enjoy the other. Currently, [YouTube]( has the first season of Railgun. [Hulu]( and [Funimation]( have both seasons. Similarly, YouTube , [Hulu]( has the first season and half of the second season, and [Funimation]( isn't complete either but has 4 more episodes than Hulu... except those Funimation videos are paywalled... yeah, not sure why Index's legal streaming options are so messed up at the moment, especially compared to Railgun's. TL;DR: You can watch all of Railgun on Hulu starting from the first episode [here](

anime

t5_2qh22

cfzqcv9

The Railgun On the Index side, you also have Index II and [the movie]( That's all the main parts, with the other small OVAs and specials being largely fluff/comedy. (Speaking only of the anime, not associated manga or LNs.) You can, as the other commenters suggested, simply watch all 36+ hours of episodes in the order they aired... or watch the first episode or two of each series and decide how you'd like to watch them. You don't really have to watch Index to understand Railgun, and vice versa. Note that the two series each focus on a different protagonist and have somewhat different pacing/flavor, so they may attract different audiences; i.e. if you don't enjoy one, you may still enjoy the other. Currently, [YouTube]( has the first season of Railgun. [Hulu]( and [Funimation]( have both seasons. Similarly, YouTube , [Hulu]( has the first season and half of the second season, and [Funimation]( isn't complete either but has 4 more episodes than Hulu... except those Funimation videos are paywalled... yeah, not sure why Index's legal streaming options are so messed up at the moment, especially compared to Railgun's.

You can watch all of Railgun on Hulu starting from the first episode [here](

countmontecristo

Here's my experiance with a situation that might be very similar to yours. -Rooted my phone- Check -Used Titanium Backup and backed up everything-Check -Tried using Flashify with the appropriate AT&amp;T recovery.img file, then hit reboot, problem. (so I tried the next part) -Used Rom Manager and selected TWRP as boot-check, Went to reboot my device and that where I had the problem (using both Rom Manager and Flashify). The LG logo popped up, and at the top right corner it said, as OP stated, "error boot certification verify" along with some other stuff (screen dies before I can read it fully, sorry). then the screen dies. I am able to hold down the power button for about 10-15 seconds and turn the phone on normally, only when I try to reboot do I have a problem. I am thankful that I have not bricked my device (I thought I had when this first happened). No longer having a warrenty and being on a tight budget are a bad combination. Any help for me, the OP, or anyone else who has this probelm would be much appreciated. TL;DR: The LG logo popped up, and at the top right corner it said, as OP stated, "error boot certification verify" along with some other stuff (screen dies before I can read it fully, sorry). then the screen dies.

Here's my experiance with a situation that might be very similar to yours. -Rooted my phone- Check -Used Titanium Backup and backed up everything-Check -Tried using Flashify with the appropriate AT&T recovery.img file, then hit reboot, problem. (so I tried the next part) -Used Rom Manager and selected TWRP as boot-check, Went to reboot my device and that where I had the problem (using both Rom Manager and Flashify). The LG logo popped up, and at the top right corner it said, as OP stated, "error boot certification verify" along with some other stuff (screen dies before I can read it fully, sorry). then the screen dies. I am able to hold down the power button for about 10-15 seconds and turn the phone on normally, only when I try to reboot do I have a problem. I am thankful that I have not bricked my device (I thought I had when this first happened). No longer having a warrenty and being on a tight budget are a bad combination. Any help for me, the OP, or anyone else who has this probelm would be much appreciated. TL;DR: The LG logo popped up, and at the top right corner it said, as OP stated, "error boot certification verify" along with some other stuff (screen dies before I can read it fully, sorry). then the screen dies.

lgg2

t5_2y2tt

chqbok0

Here's my experiance with a situation that might be very similar to yours. -Rooted my phone- Check -Used Titanium Backup and backed up everything-Check -Tried using Flashify with the appropriate AT&T recovery.img file, then hit reboot, problem. (so I tried the next part) -Used Rom Manager and selected TWRP as boot-check, Went to reboot my device and that where I had the problem (using both Rom Manager and Flashify). The LG logo popped up, and at the top right corner it said, as OP stated, "error boot certification verify" along with some other stuff (screen dies before I can read it fully, sorry). then the screen dies. I am able to hold down the power button for about 10-15 seconds and turn the phone on normally, only when I try to reboot do I have a problem. I am thankful that I have not bricked my device (I thought I had when this first happened). No longer having a warrenty and being on a tight budget are a bad combination. Any help for me, the OP, or anyone else who has this probelm would be much appreciated.

The LG logo popped up, and at the top right corner it said, as OP stated, "error boot certification verify" along with some other stuff (screen dies before I can read it fully, sorry). then the screen dies.

Samuraiking

I can run T4 with it. I'm not gonna lie, learning to play without an escape has a learning curve and I used to die a lot, but I feel confident in it now and with better gear, it's easier. I haven't actually even tried anything above T4 because it's not worth the effort for farming. It's a build made to smash through T1 and gear up. I prefer kill speed over drop rate, but I think with my new gear I can do T5. Need to try when the servers come up. But I probably need more eHP to survive most of the packs in T5. I use... like... zero defensive skills or runes. It's all about burst dmg and killing before they can do anything. Reflect dmg/projectiles can really hurt. Walls aren't that bad if you are smart enough to pull them into the open. [Build explained here]( [TL;DR Profile Page](

I can run T4 with it. I'm not gonna lie, learning to play without an escape has a learning curve and I used to die a lot, but I feel confident in it now and with better gear, it's easier. I haven't actually even tried anything above T4 because it's not worth the effort for farming. It's a build made to smash through T1 and gear up. I prefer kill speed over drop rate, but I think with my new gear I can do T5. Need to try when the servers come up. But I probably need more eHP to survive most of the packs in T5. I use... like... zero defensive skills or runes. It's all about burst dmg and killing before they can do anything. Reflect dmg/projectiles can really hurt. Walls aren't that bad if you are smart enough to pull them into the open. [Build explained here]( [TL;DR Profile Page](

Diablo

t5_2qore

cfzsiwj

I can run T4 with it. I'm not gonna lie, learning to play without an escape has a learning curve and I used to die a lot, but I feel confident in it now and with better gear, it's easier. I haven't actually even tried anything above T4 because it's not worth the effort for farming. It's a build made to smash through T1 and gear up. I prefer kill speed over drop rate, but I think with my new gear I can do T5. Need to try when the servers come up. But I probably need more eHP to survive most of the packs in T5. I use... like... zero defensive skills or runes. It's all about burst dmg and killing before they can do anything. Reflect dmg/projectiles can really hurt. Walls aren't that bad if you are smart enough to pull them into the open. [Build explained here]( [

Profile Page](

KyfhoMyoba

Dread. Game. Works. There are plenty of posts on this sub that are examples of dread game. Search them out and study them. OP, are you in good physical condition? Get in the BEST physical condition. Flirt shamelessly with ALL (even the unattracive ones, it's good practice) in wifeys presence. Deny you were flirting. Only reinforce (with your attention and affection) HER attention and affection. She MUST work for it. Continue to go out on the weekend. Get a small bottle of women's perfume (hide it at work or something where wife can't find it) and before you come in the door after the night out, put a very, very small amount on yourself. I disagree with real-boethius below. Confessing to an affair is ultra hard dread game, and often times works with the proper frame. You (clearly) don't have proper frame. When you told her about your (barely an) "affair" it should've been along the lines of "I'm sorry you feel that way" or "Why do you care? You don't want me." not "I'm sorry I did it". I also disagree with the "stop playing her aloof games". One of the things you're doing with dread is operant conditioning, and you are starting from zero - re-establishing the relationship basis. The other part about we're having sex at 9:30 is good though, but there's got to be a carrot AND a stick. For instance, it's a little later in the evening, you walk over to where she's standing, turn her around and give her a really good kiss. If she doesn't respond, go out for the rest of the night. Above all, don't explicate, demonstrate, and if she calls you out on it explicitly, deny, deny, deny. If she "woke up" a little bit this past weekend, reinforce that. Reciprocate her attention and affection. If hers stops, yours not only stops completely - don't speak to her unless spoken to, and grunt your responses, ignore most of what she says, avoid being in the same room as her unless she wants to physically touch you - but you leave the house more to work out, go out, what ever. Give her hamster the opportunity to spin. Talk to a female friend on the phone. A lot. Lock your cell phone. Wife will worry more about an emotional affair than a physical one, but emotional has more plausible deniability. Tl;dr The more and better options in the SMV that she perceives you have, the faster the panties drop.

Dread. Game. Works. There are plenty of posts on this sub that are examples of dread game. Search them out and study them. OP, are you in good physical condition? Get in the BEST physical condition. Flirt shamelessly with ALL (even the unattracive ones, it's good practice) in wifeys presence. Deny you were flirting. Only reinforce (with your attention and affection) HER attention and affection. She MUST work for it. Continue to go out on the weekend. Get a small bottle of women's perfume (hide it at work or something where wife can't find it) and before you come in the door after the night out, put a very, very small amount on yourself. I disagree with real-boethius below. Confessing to an affair is ultra hard dread game, and often times works with the proper frame. You (clearly) don't have proper frame. When you told her about your (barely an) "affair" it should've been along the lines of "I'm sorry you feel that way" or "Why do you care? You don't want me." not "I'm sorry I did it". I also disagree with the "stop playing her aloof games". One of the things you're doing with dread is operant conditioning, and you are starting from zero - re-establishing the relationship basis. The other part about we're having sex at 9:30 is good though, but there's got to be a carrot AND a stick. For instance, it's a little later in the evening, you walk over to where she's standing, turn her around and give her a really good kiss. If she doesn't respond, go out for the rest of the night. Above all, don't explicate, demonstrate, and if she calls you out on it explicitly, deny, deny, deny. If she "woke up" a little bit this past weekend, reinforce that. Reciprocate her attention and affection. If hers stops, yours not only stops completely - don't speak to her unless spoken to, and grunt your responses, ignore most of what she says, avoid being in the same room as her unless she wants to physically touch you - but you leave the house more to work out, go out, what ever. Give her hamster the opportunity to spin. Talk to a female friend on the phone. A lot. Lock your cell phone. Wife will worry more about an emotional affair than a physical one, but emotional has more plausible deniability. Tl;dr The more and better options in the SMV that she perceives you have, the faster the panties drop.

asktrp

t5_2y2sm

cg1xrpy

Dread. Game. Works. There are plenty of posts on this sub that are examples of dread game. Search them out and study them. OP, are you in good physical condition? Get in the BEST physical condition. Flirt shamelessly with ALL (even the unattracive ones, it's good practice) in wifeys presence. Deny you were flirting. Only reinforce (with your attention and affection) HER attention and affection. She MUST work for it. Continue to go out on the weekend. Get a small bottle of women's perfume (hide it at work or something where wife can't find it) and before you come in the door after the night out, put a very, very small amount on yourself. I disagree with real-boethius below. Confessing to an affair is ultra hard dread game, and often times works with the proper frame. You (clearly) don't have proper frame. When you told her about your (barely an) "affair" it should've been along the lines of "I'm sorry you feel that way" or "Why do you care? You don't want me." not "I'm sorry I did it". I also disagree with the "stop playing her aloof games". One of the things you're doing with dread is operant conditioning, and you are starting from zero - re-establishing the relationship basis. The other part about we're having sex at 9:30 is good though, but there's got to be a carrot AND a stick. For instance, it's a little later in the evening, you walk over to where she's standing, turn her around and give her a really good kiss. If she doesn't respond, go out for the rest of the night. Above all, don't explicate, demonstrate, and if she calls you out on it explicitly, deny, deny, deny. If she "woke up" a little bit this past weekend, reinforce that. Reciprocate her attention and affection. If hers stops, yours not only stops completely - don't speak to her unless spoken to, and grunt your responses, ignore most of what she says, avoid being in the same room as her unless she wants to physically touch you - but you leave the house more to work out, go out, what ever. Give her hamster the opportunity to spin. Talk to a female friend on the phone. A lot. Lock your cell phone. Wife will worry more about an emotional affair than a physical one, but emotional has more plausible deniability.

The more and better options in the SMV that she perceives you have, the faster the panties drop.

PerpetualJordan

I've not played much of Dark Souls, let alone Dark Souls 2, and I have played Thief, but I'd probably still recommend Dark Souls 2. You'd definitely get more value for your money, a lot more hours spent and overall a lot more fun (with some slight rage ;p). From what I've played so far of Thief, it's not bad, but it's not great, my main complaint is that it's too easy, and that's playing on Master with no kills, no alerts. TL;DR Buy Dark Souls 2 and get Thief when it's on sale.

I've not played much of Dark Souls, let alone Dark Souls 2, and I have played Thief, but I'd probably still recommend Dark Souls 2. You'd definitely get more value for your money, a lot more hours spent and overall a lot more fun (with some slight rage ;p). From what I've played so far of Thief, it's not bad, but it's not great, my main complaint is that it's too easy, and that's playing on Master with no kills, no alerts. TL;DR Buy Dark Souls 2 and get Thief when it's on sale.

gaming

t5_2qh03

cfzyygn

I've not played much of Dark Souls, let alone Dark Souls 2, and I have played Thief, but I'd probably still recommend Dark Souls 2. You'd definitely get more value for your money, a lot more hours spent and overall a lot more fun (with some slight rage ;p). From what I've played so far of Thief, it's not bad, but it's not great, my main complaint is that it's too easy, and that's playing on Master with no kills, no alerts.

Buy Dark Souls 2 and get Thief when it's on sale.

Sideburnt

Rule of 3's, I expect you know this as a hiker. 3 minutes without air, 3 hours without shelter 3 days without water 3 weeks without food Food isn't your priority really, and neither would insulin be. So long as you're waiting for rescue. Now then, if you're doing the opposite and trying to hike out of danger you'd need to put way more thought into survival. T1's don't have a liver response to speak of to stop hypoglycemia so you'd need to replace the glycogen release with something high in glucose. I'm afraid this is really difficult in the wild, as glucose was a seasonal treat. Berries, some ripened fruit, honey if you can get and find it. Complex starches would give you the slow release but you'll be lucky to find enough starchy roots and wild tubers to cover this body requirement. Finally you'd need enough calories to keep your body going, you could trap for small game, but you need the fat. So you'd either have to fish for the oil, or catch large game which without a rifle is really hard. Either way in deficit of food, you're going to put your body through hell to get out of dodge. If you're very serious about this, rather than just pondering I'd recommend you research setting small game traps and how to make fish cages, Packing something easy to set and practical to recover and re-use like rat trap to catch rodents would be a good idea too, you can tape them to trees and use a dob of something to catch squirrels as they come down to forrage. Given enough time you can leech the tannin from acorns, they're available 3/4 of the year and can be very calorific, the process is time consuming and relies on a running water source and staying in the area or repeated boiling. TLDR: It's not easy, dump all excess weight. Ignore food, but be opportunistic. Don't take your insulin unless you're in danger of DKA. Other things will kill you before the beetus.

Rule of 3's, I expect you know this as a hiker. 3 minutes without air, 3 hours without shelter 3 days without water 3 weeks without food Food isn't your priority really, and neither would insulin be. So long as you're waiting for rescue. Now then, if you're doing the opposite and trying to hike out of danger you'd need to put way more thought into survival. T1's don't have a liver response to speak of to stop hypoglycemia so you'd need to replace the glycogen release with something high in glucose. I'm afraid this is really difficult in the wild, as glucose was a seasonal treat. Berries, some ripened fruit, honey if you can get and find it. Complex starches would give you the slow release but you'll be lucky to find enough starchy roots and wild tubers to cover this body requirement. Finally you'd need enough calories to keep your body going, you could trap for small game, but you need the fat. So you'd either have to fish for the oil, or catch large game which without a rifle is really hard. Either way in deficit of food, you're going to put your body through hell to get out of dodge. If you're very serious about this, rather than just pondering I'd recommend you research setting small game traps and how to make fish cages, Packing something easy to set and practical to recover and re-use like rat trap to catch rodents would be a good idea too, you can tape them to trees and use a dob of something to catch squirrels as they come down to forrage. Given enough time you can leech the tannin from acorns, they're available 3/4 of the year and can be very calorific, the process is time consuming and relies on a running water source and staying in the area or repeated boiling. TLDR: It's not easy, dump all excess weight. Ignore food, but be opportunistic. Don't take your insulin unless you're in danger of DKA. Other things will kill you before the beetus.

diabetes

t5_2qhsj

cg0l1u6

Rule of 3's, I expect you know this as a hiker. 3 minutes without air, 3 hours without shelter 3 days without water 3 weeks without food Food isn't your priority really, and neither would insulin be. So long as you're waiting for rescue. Now then, if you're doing the opposite and trying to hike out of danger you'd need to put way more thought into survival. T1's don't have a liver response to speak of to stop hypoglycemia so you'd need to replace the glycogen release with something high in glucose. I'm afraid this is really difficult in the wild, as glucose was a seasonal treat. Berries, some ripened fruit, honey if you can get and find it. Complex starches would give you the slow release but you'll be lucky to find enough starchy roots and wild tubers to cover this body requirement. Finally you'd need enough calories to keep your body going, you could trap for small game, but you need the fat. So you'd either have to fish for the oil, or catch large game which without a rifle is really hard. Either way in deficit of food, you're going to put your body through hell to get out of dodge. If you're very serious about this, rather than just pondering I'd recommend you research setting small game traps and how to make fish cages, Packing something easy to set and practical to recover and re-use like rat trap to catch rodents would be a good idea too, you can tape them to trees and use a dob of something to catch squirrels as they come down to forrage. Given enough time you can leech the tannin from acorns, they're available 3/4 of the year and can be very calorific, the process is time consuming and relies on a running water source and staying in the area or repeated boiling.

It's not easy, dump all excess weight. Ignore food, but be opportunistic. Don't take your insulin unless you're in danger of DKA. Other things will kill you before the beetus.

Rystic

I understand completely. Dark Souls 1 wasn't a game, it was a research project by FromSoftware to determine what comforts we took in a world that was a bleak and terrible place. Now they know, and they've made a game entirely around taking away those comforts, for maximum oppression. Estus Flask? Oh it starts with one charge now. Also it heals over time. Invasions? Oh we decided to swap the mechanics, so now you get invaded in the default state. Don't worry, you won't be -- oh wait, Cracked Red Eye Orb drops off mobs in the starting area. *GOOD LUCK!* Dying a lot? Well we thought you were getting friendly with death, like it was all some big joke. Like a bunch of friends sitting around playing Dark Souls, and the one playing goes "LOL GUYS I DIED AGAIN", and everyone laughs. Well now *we take away your maximum health, because we don't feel you deserve it.* Soft humanities? What is this, Baby's First Vagina Adventures? Feeling a bit like the game railroads you? Well now we've tucked away the place you're suppose to go, and made a giant fucking door leading to an area with a massive fire tower and *gigantic armor golems* to help rekindle that desire to explore. You'll aggro no less then ten of these walking abominations before you can say *"Is this even the right way?"* Want to check if a chest is a mimic? Well, we've removed all visual hints that a chest might be fake, and we changed it so *attacking chests destroys the contents*. We wanted to bring back the thrill of opening chests! Cleared an area out? Well some of those corpses might *just be waiting to get up!* We figured, "hey, why didn't the hollowed ever play possum? It's brilliant!". I have a theory that the coven of Firekeepers we see in the beginning actually represent the dev team, laughing at our helplessness. They know veteran Dark Souls players are coming in, and they know exactly *what makes us weak.* **TL; DR: I fucking love this game.**

I understand completely. Dark Souls 1 wasn't a game, it was a research project by FromSoftware to determine what comforts we took in a world that was a bleak and terrible place. Now they know, and they've made a game entirely around taking away those comforts, for maximum oppression. Estus Flask? Oh it starts with one charge now. Also it heals over time. Invasions? Oh we decided to swap the mechanics, so now you get invaded in the default state. Don't worry, you won't be -- oh wait, Cracked Red Eye Orb drops off mobs in the starting area. GOOD LUCK! Dying a lot? Well we thought you were getting friendly with death, like it was all some big joke. Like a bunch of friends sitting around playing Dark Souls, and the one playing goes "LOL GUYS I DIED AGAIN", and everyone laughs. Well now we take away your maximum health, because we don't feel you deserve it. Soft humanities? What is this, Baby's First Vagina Adventures? Feeling a bit like the game railroads you? Well now we've tucked away the place you're suppose to go, and made a giant fucking door leading to an area with a massive fire tower and gigantic armor golems to help rekindle that desire to explore. You'll aggro no less then ten of these walking abominations before you can say "Is this even the right way?" Want to check if a chest is a mimic? Well, we've removed all visual hints that a chest might be fake, and we changed it so attacking chests destroys the contents . We wanted to bring back the thrill of opening chests! Cleared an area out? Well some of those corpses might just be waiting to get up! We figured, "hey, why didn't the hollowed ever play possum? It's brilliant!". I have a theory that the coven of Firekeepers we see in the beginning actually represent the dev team, laughing at our helplessness. They know veteran Dark Souls players are coming in, and they know exactly what makes us weak. TL; DR: I fucking love this game.

DarkSouls2

t5_2vqni

cg0onbl

I understand completely. Dark Souls 1 wasn't a game, it was a research project by FromSoftware to determine what comforts we took in a world that was a bleak and terrible place. Now they know, and they've made a game entirely around taking away those comforts, for maximum oppression. Estus Flask? Oh it starts with one charge now. Also it heals over time. Invasions? Oh we decided to swap the mechanics, so now you get invaded in the default state. Don't worry, you won't be -- oh wait, Cracked Red Eye Orb drops off mobs in the starting area. GOOD LUCK! Dying a lot? Well we thought you were getting friendly with death, like it was all some big joke. Like a bunch of friends sitting around playing Dark Souls, and the one playing goes "LOL GUYS I DIED AGAIN", and everyone laughs. Well now we take away your maximum health, because we don't feel you deserve it. Soft humanities? What is this, Baby's First Vagina Adventures? Feeling a bit like the game railroads you? Well now we've tucked away the place you're suppose to go, and made a giant fucking door leading to an area with a massive fire tower and gigantic armor golems to help rekindle that desire to explore. You'll aggro no less then ten of these walking abominations before you can say "Is this even the right way?" Want to check if a chest is a mimic? Well, we've removed all visual hints that a chest might be fake, and we changed it so attacking chests destroys the contents . We wanted to bring back the thrill of opening chests! Cleared an area out? Well some of those corpses might just be waiting to get up! We figured, "hey, why didn't the hollowed ever play possum? It's brilliant!". I have a theory that the coven of Firekeepers we see in the beginning actually represent the dev team, laughing at our helplessness. They know veteran Dark Souls players are coming in, and they know exactly what makes us weak.

I fucking love this game.

FAPTROCITY

When i started at 265 ish i lost the first 70pounds in 6 months. When you get smaller so are the losses at that point, read the faq on the body recomp protocol that would probably be your best bet. It is slow but given 4 month time frame you have quite a bit of time to accomplish what you want. Its mostly following a few quidelines and toying with what works for you. Im doing skd for a total of 6 weeks as i used to ckd all the time, after this 6 weeks i may do the tkd protocol to give it a shot. Tldr.....stick to basic principles and when it stops working experiment with yourself.

When i started at 265 ish i lost the first 70pounds in 6 months. When you get smaller so are the losses at that point, read the faq on the body recomp protocol that would probably be your best bet. It is slow but given 4 month time frame you have quite a bit of time to accomplish what you want. Its mostly following a few quidelines and toying with what works for you. Im doing skd for a total of 6 weeks as i used to ckd all the time, after this 6 weeks i may do the tkd protocol to give it a shot. Tldr.....stick to basic principles and when it stops working experiment with yourself.

ketogains

t5_2v5mu

cg0mlt8

When i started at 265 ish i lost the first 70pounds in 6 months. When you get smaller so are the losses at that point, read the faq on the body recomp protocol that would probably be your best bet. It is slow but given 4 month time frame you have quite a bit of time to accomplish what you want. Its mostly following a few quidelines and toying with what works for you. Im doing skd for a total of 6 weeks as i used to ckd all the time, after this 6 weeks i may do the tkd protocol to give it a shot.

stick to basic principles and when it stops working experiment with yourself.

Misiok

Here's a thought: In free to play games, that are not pay to win or pay to get advantage, every player counts. The ones that spend money on useless and pretty cosmetics, and especially the ones that do not spend a dime. I mean, if the paying players are important, then non-payings are even more important, because by just playing, you are letting the paying players play the game by just being here. It is, after all, a multiplayer game, and what point is there of it being multiplayer if there is no one playing it? Those that pay are always in the minority in such games, so it's up to those that don't pay to just play and increase the population. Just by playing you provide others with enjoyment and grief, sadness and anger as well as happiness. Truly you are a god of their destinies. tl;dr - everyone is important, whether they pay or not, because multiplayer game needs players of all kinds.

Here's a thought: In free to play games, that are not pay to win or pay to get advantage, every player counts. The ones that spend money on useless and pretty cosmetics, and especially the ones that do not spend a dime. I mean, if the paying players are important, then non-payings are even more important, because by just playing, you are letting the paying players play the game by just being here. It is, after all, a multiplayer game, and what point is there of it being multiplayer if there is no one playing it? Those that pay are always in the minority in such games, so it's up to those that don't pay to just play and increase the population. Just by playing you provide others with enjoyment and grief, sadness and anger as well as happiness. Truly you are a god of their destinies. tl;dr - everyone is important, whether they pay or not, because multiplayer game needs players of all kinds.

DotA2

t5_2s580

cg0kr4a

Here's a thought: In free to play games, that are not pay to win or pay to get advantage, every player counts. The ones that spend money on useless and pretty cosmetics, and especially the ones that do not spend a dime. I mean, if the paying players are important, then non-payings are even more important, because by just playing, you are letting the paying players play the game by just being here. It is, after all, a multiplayer game, and what point is there of it being multiplayer if there is no one playing it? Those that pay are always in the minority in such games, so it's up to those that don't pay to just play and increase the population. Just by playing you provide others with enjoyment and grief, sadness and anger as well as happiness. Truly you are a god of their destinies.

everyone is important, whether they pay or not, because multiplayer game needs players of all kinds.

tzenrick

A brushed, alternating current electric motor will make small sparks while it runs. These motors are very common. A small volume of natural gas [\(6% ish\)]( is all it takes to explode. In a 5 story building, that would be about 2 feet of concentrated gas stirred throughout the building. If the leak was on the top floor, gravity would have pulled the gas down throughout the building. If the leak was in the bottom, an opening door could have been enough to stir it in the right place. Once you get the gas lit in one place the turbulence is enough to keep stirring the gas in front of the flame front. tl;dr: A [video]( then.

A brushed, alternating current electric motor will make small sparks while it runs. These motors are very common. A small volume of natural gas [(6% ish)]( is all it takes to explode. In a 5 story building, that would be about 2 feet of concentrated gas stirred throughout the building. If the leak was on the top floor, gravity would have pulled the gas down throughout the building. If the leak was in the bottom, an opening door could have been enough to stir it in the right place. Once you get the gas lit in one place the turbulence is enough to keep stirring the gas in front of the flame front. tl;dr: A [video]( then.

news

t5_2qh3l

cg1ecsf

A brushed, alternating current electric motor will make small sparks while it runs. These motors are very common. A small volume of natural gas [(6% ish)]( is all it takes to explode. In a 5 story building, that would be about 2 feet of concentrated gas stirred throughout the building. If the leak was on the top floor, gravity would have pulled the gas down throughout the building. If the leak was in the bottom, an opening door could have been enough to stir it in the right place. Once you get the gas lit in one place the turbulence is enough to keep stirring the gas in front of the flame front.

A [video]( then.

teeejaaaaaay

Honda car salesman here. I'm relatively new to the business and I honestly never thought I would do it because dealerships can be shady and interest rates can be a scam. I feel as though I need to make a counter argument here. Dealerships do serve a purpose. The dealership I work at sells customers cars at invoice a lot more than you would think. As a salesman my main job is to find a car that suits their financial and real world needs. I do not make more money off of more expensive cars, sometimes it is the opposite. I spend a lot of time with my customers teaching them about their car and I am always a resource for them no matter how long ago they purchased a vehicle. Working at a more "modern" dealership, we see value in customers quite differently than the old "take me for all they got" style. If we gouge someone on price, they will not trust us, nor will they ever come back. It is more beneficial for us as a car dealership to treat customers with respect and earn their business no matter how little we make off of a car. Also, if they have a good experience at the dealership, they will come back for oil changes, recalls and warranties repairs. You could take the car dealership out of the picture and dealerships are starting to recognize that. That's why my dealership is sharply customer focused and not as profit driven. But I still think that the need for dealerships is there. It would be very hard to be competitive as a car manufacturer if you had no one to sell your cars other than advertising. In my case, Michael Bolton would bankrupt Honda rather quickly. Tl;dr - Dealerships are changing as is necessary and consumers are being put first as the free market would require.

Honda car salesman here. I'm relatively new to the business and I honestly never thought I would do it because dealerships can be shady and interest rates can be a scam. I feel as though I need to make a counter argument here. Dealerships do serve a purpose. The dealership I work at sells customers cars at invoice a lot more than you would think. As a salesman my main job is to find a car that suits their financial and real world needs. I do not make more money off of more expensive cars, sometimes it is the opposite. I spend a lot of time with my customers teaching them about their car and I am always a resource for them no matter how long ago they purchased a vehicle. Working at a more "modern" dealership, we see value in customers quite differently than the old "take me for all they got" style. If we gouge someone on price, they will not trust us, nor will they ever come back. It is more beneficial for us as a car dealership to treat customers with respect and earn their business no matter how little we make off of a car. Also, if they have a good experience at the dealership, they will come back for oil changes, recalls and warranties repairs. You could take the car dealership out of the picture and dealerships are starting to recognize that. That's why my dealership is sharply customer focused and not as profit driven. But I still think that the need for dealerships is there. It would be very hard to be competitive as a car manufacturer if you had no one to sell your cars other than advertising. In my case, Michael Bolton would bankrupt Honda rather quickly. Tl;dr - Dealerships are changing as is necessary and consumers are being put first as the free market would require.

todayilearned

t5_2qqjc

cg0uot0

Honda car salesman here. I'm relatively new to the business and I honestly never thought I would do it because dealerships can be shady and interest rates can be a scam. I feel as though I need to make a counter argument here. Dealerships do serve a purpose. The dealership I work at sells customers cars at invoice a lot more than you would think. As a salesman my main job is to find a car that suits their financial and real world needs. I do not make more money off of more expensive cars, sometimes it is the opposite. I spend a lot of time with my customers teaching them about their car and I am always a resource for them no matter how long ago they purchased a vehicle. Working at a more "modern" dealership, we see value in customers quite differently than the old "take me for all they got" style. If we gouge someone on price, they will not trust us, nor will they ever come back. It is more beneficial for us as a car dealership to treat customers with respect and earn their business no matter how little we make off of a car. Also, if they have a good experience at the dealership, they will come back for oil changes, recalls and warranties repairs. You could take the car dealership out of the picture and dealerships are starting to recognize that. That's why my dealership is sharply customer focused and not as profit driven. But I still think that the need for dealerships is there. It would be very hard to be competitive as a car manufacturer if you had no one to sell your cars other than advertising. In my case, Michael Bolton would bankrupt Honda rather quickly.

Dealerships are changing as is necessary and consumers are being put first as the free market would require.

Drewskeet

I work for a reseller of technology. This is differnet, but the same rules apply. I would hate it if the companies I sell for entered the market as a competitor to me. We built our company and the customer base up for the specific manufacturer, why should they be able to come in and reap the benefits of us helping create the market? I agree with Telsa's aregument, but I fear this argument isn't only for automanufacturing and could have bad affacts on the rest of the economy. Also, these dealerships create a ton of jobs across the country. Taking away their protections would hurt the country as a whole IMO. TL;DR I think this issue goes further than just Tesla and could be a slippery slope for other industry's.

I work for a reseller of technology. This is differnet, but the same rules apply. I would hate it if the companies I sell for entered the market as a competitor to me. We built our company and the customer base up for the specific manufacturer, why should they be able to come in and reap the benefits of us helping create the market? I agree with Telsa's aregument, but I fear this argument isn't only for automanufacturing and could have bad affacts on the rest of the economy. Also, these dealerships create a ton of jobs across the country. Taking away their protections would hurt the country as a whole IMO. TL;DR I think this issue goes further than just Tesla and could be a slippery slope for other industry's.

todayilearned

t5_2qqjc

cg0vfa6

I work for a reseller of technology. This is differnet, but the same rules apply. I would hate it if the companies I sell for entered the market as a competitor to me. We built our company and the customer base up for the specific manufacturer, why should they be able to come in and reap the benefits of us helping create the market? I agree with Telsa's aregument, but I fear this argument isn't only for automanufacturing and could have bad affacts on the rest of the economy. Also, these dealerships create a ton of jobs across the country. Taking away their protections would hurt the country as a whole IMO.

I think this issue goes further than just Tesla and could be a slippery slope for other industry's.

Ridiculousgoodlookn

I personally think we need a large dealer network. Over the long run, it might actually save money. I refuse to buy something that will affect my financial situation for the next 5 years without knowing what I am buying. I test drive up to 5 cars before I settle on one car, which I keep for the entire term at least. Also the maintenance and warranty work are an integral part of the car market. My neighbor owns an Aston Martin and has had to ship his car on a car carrier 300 miles to get it serviced if something goes bad. When my truck broke, the Ford dealership sent a tow truck and fixed my truck by the next morning. Whenever I bring a car part to the dealer, they know just what to buy and give me instructions on how to replace the part. Tldr : car dealers play an integral and irreplaceable part of the car market that cannot just be replaced with the Internet.

I personally think we need a large dealer network. Over the long run, it might actually save money. I refuse to buy something that will affect my financial situation for the next 5 years without knowing what I am buying. I test drive up to 5 cars before I settle on one car, which I keep for the entire term at least. Also the maintenance and warranty work are an integral part of the car market. My neighbor owns an Aston Martin and has had to ship his car on a car carrier 300 miles to get it serviced if something goes bad. When my truck broke, the Ford dealership sent a tow truck and fixed my truck by the next morning. Whenever I bring a car part to the dealer, they know just what to buy and give me instructions on how to replace the part. Tldr : car dealers play an integral and irreplaceable part of the car market that cannot just be replaced with the Internet.

todayilearned

t5_2qqjc

cg0wzk6

I personally think we need a large dealer network. Over the long run, it might actually save money. I refuse to buy something that will affect my financial situation for the next 5 years without knowing what I am buying. I test drive up to 5 cars before I settle on one car, which I keep for the entire term at least. Also the maintenance and warranty work are an integral part of the car market. My neighbor owns an Aston Martin and has had to ship his car on a car carrier 300 miles to get it serviced if something goes bad. When my truck broke, the Ford dealership sent a tow truck and fixed my truck by the next morning. Whenever I bring a car part to the dealer, they know just what to buy and give me instructions on how to replace the part.

car dealers play an integral and irreplaceable part of the car market that cannot just be replaced with the Internet.

burnshimself

The only reason I think dealerships themselves are probably a good idea is because somebody has to sell the car. I'm not going to buy a car online, I just won't do it. You don't get a proper feel for the way the car rides, the seating and layout, trunk space, appearance, how high/low it is, etc. There are a lot of details you miss without seeing a car in person or driving it. Now, that being said, I think you should allow auto manufacturers to have their own direct to consumer dealerships where a independent dealer is not required. Manufacturer-employed salesmen, manufacturer-run dealerships. However, I don't know that this would alleviate the problems of dealers and you certainly would not realize the cost benefits the article seems to propose. For one, it's unlikely manufacturers would want to get into that game and compete against dealers selling their cars. Secondly, you would in no way be able to remove all of the overhead related to the sale of cars. You need a physical presence, you need to keep the lights on, and you need salespeople. Cars are such a varying thing, you have to be there and test it in order to make an informed decision as a consumer. There is value in that and you can't get around it, so there's going to be overhead costs relating to the sale of cars in general. Additionally, people seem to ignore the repeated value of dealerships. They buy back vehicles from you if you don't want to keep them, which saves people the cost of selling their car online or elsewhere if they don't have the time, will, or knowhow to do so. They service vehicles regularly and with fairly reliable mechanics, at least where I'm from. I don't know that I've ever had my car serviced outside of the dealership I bought it from (it came with a service package, but they've done a good job). They also lease cars, which is not an easy game for manufacturers to get into and would majorly alter the business model of an auto manufacturer in a way they might not want. TL;DR: We could make dealerships better, but to suggest getting rid of them all together is crazy. They're a necessary value add. They let you test drive cars, perform service, buy back vehicles, organize leases, etc. People here are pretending as if dealers just sit there and sleaze you out of a car and thats it. If you have a bad dealer experience, buy a car somewhere else! The good ones are out there

The only reason I think dealerships themselves are probably a good idea is because somebody has to sell the car. I'm not going to buy a car online, I just won't do it. You don't get a proper feel for the way the car rides, the seating and layout, trunk space, appearance, how high/low it is, etc. There are a lot of details you miss without seeing a car in person or driving it. Now, that being said, I think you should allow auto manufacturers to have their own direct to consumer dealerships where a independent dealer is not required. Manufacturer-employed salesmen, manufacturer-run dealerships. However, I don't know that this would alleviate the problems of dealers and you certainly would not realize the cost benefits the article seems to propose. For one, it's unlikely manufacturers would want to get into that game and compete against dealers selling their cars. Secondly, you would in no way be able to remove all of the overhead related to the sale of cars. You need a physical presence, you need to keep the lights on, and you need salespeople. Cars are such a varying thing, you have to be there and test it in order to make an informed decision as a consumer. There is value in that and you can't get around it, so there's going to be overhead costs relating to the sale of cars in general. Additionally, people seem to ignore the repeated value of dealerships. They buy back vehicles from you if you don't want to keep them, which saves people the cost of selling their car online or elsewhere if they don't have the time, will, or knowhow to do so. They service vehicles regularly and with fairly reliable mechanics, at least where I'm from. I don't know that I've ever had my car serviced outside of the dealership I bought it from (it came with a service package, but they've done a good job). They also lease cars, which is not an easy game for manufacturers to get into and would majorly alter the business model of an auto manufacturer in a way they might not want. TL;DR: We could make dealerships better, but to suggest getting rid of them all together is crazy. They're a necessary value add. They let you test drive cars, perform service, buy back vehicles, organize leases, etc. People here are pretending as if dealers just sit there and sleaze you out of a car and thats it. If you have a bad dealer experience, buy a car somewhere else! The good ones are out there

todayilearned

t5_2qqjc

cg0x04h

The only reason I think dealerships themselves are probably a good idea is because somebody has to sell the car. I'm not going to buy a car online, I just won't do it. You don't get a proper feel for the way the car rides, the seating and layout, trunk space, appearance, how high/low it is, etc. There are a lot of details you miss without seeing a car in person or driving it. Now, that being said, I think you should allow auto manufacturers to have their own direct to consumer dealerships where a independent dealer is not required. Manufacturer-employed salesmen, manufacturer-run dealerships. However, I don't know that this would alleviate the problems of dealers and you certainly would not realize the cost benefits the article seems to propose. For one, it's unlikely manufacturers would want to get into that game and compete against dealers selling their cars. Secondly, you would in no way be able to remove all of the overhead related to the sale of cars. You need a physical presence, you need to keep the lights on, and you need salespeople. Cars are such a varying thing, you have to be there and test it in order to make an informed decision as a consumer. There is value in that and you can't get around it, so there's going to be overhead costs relating to the sale of cars in general. Additionally, people seem to ignore the repeated value of dealerships. They buy back vehicles from you if you don't want to keep them, which saves people the cost of selling their car online or elsewhere if they don't have the time, will, or knowhow to do so. They service vehicles regularly and with fairly reliable mechanics, at least where I'm from. I don't know that I've ever had my car serviced outside of the dealership I bought it from (it came with a service package, but they've done a good job). They also lease cars, which is not an easy game for manufacturers to get into and would majorly alter the business model of an auto manufacturer in a way they might not want.

We could make dealerships better, but to suggest getting rid of them all together is crazy. They're a necessary value add. They let you test drive cars, perform service, buy back vehicles, organize leases, etc. People here are pretending as if dealers just sit there and sleaze you out of a car and thats it. If you have a bad dealer experience, buy a car somewhere else! The good ones are out there

AxMDelicious

My only issue with Mega-Evolutions is many of them were not Pokemon in trouble, so to speak. Folks like Scizor, T-tar, Garchomp, Blaziken, Gengar and Lucario were by no means in trouble. Many of them top threats and in some cases, for 2+ generations. So why buff the already powerful? Making Khangaskhan bigger, great (maybe too big), same with Manetric, Houndoom, Medicham, Ampharous and Mawhile. Before, they had their problems, and of course they still do, but they have been (to my eyes), reasonably bumped up a peg or too. As for Bannett or Abamasnow, I'm sure on the right team they could be devastating, just not as for free or effortlessly. Of course EVERYONE has their 'Q-Pokemon should have gotten a Mega!' so I won't name names, but I think other less viable / devastating Pokemon could have used a helping hand more than who actually did. TLDR: I support Mega's but question the initial recipients.

My only issue with Mega-Evolutions is many of them were not Pokemon in trouble, so to speak. Folks like Scizor, T-tar, Garchomp, Blaziken, Gengar and Lucario were by no means in trouble. Many of them top threats and in some cases, for 2+ generations. So why buff the already powerful? Making Khangaskhan bigger, great (maybe too big), same with Manetric, Houndoom, Medicham, Ampharous and Mawhile. Before, they had their problems, and of course they still do, but they have been (to my eyes), reasonably bumped up a peg or too. As for Bannett or Abamasnow, I'm sure on the right team they could be devastating, just not as for free or effortlessly. Of course EVERYONE has their 'Q-Pokemon should have gotten a Mega!' so I won't name names, but I think other less viable / devastating Pokemon could have used a helping hand more than who actually did. TLDR: I support Mega's but question the initial recipients.

stunfisk

t5_2sn6d

cg24e53

My only issue with Mega-Evolutions is many of them were not Pokemon in trouble, so to speak. Folks like Scizor, T-tar, Garchomp, Blaziken, Gengar and Lucario were by no means in trouble. Many of them top threats and in some cases, for 2+ generations. So why buff the already powerful? Making Khangaskhan bigger, great (maybe too big), same with Manetric, Houndoom, Medicham, Ampharous and Mawhile. Before, they had their problems, and of course they still do, but they have been (to my eyes), reasonably bumped up a peg or too. As for Bannett or Abamasnow, I'm sure on the right team they could be devastating, just not as for free or effortlessly. Of course EVERYONE has their 'Q-Pokemon should have gotten a Mega!' so I won't name names, but I think other less viable / devastating Pokemon could have used a helping hand more than who actually did.

I support Mega's but question the initial recipients.

wingmant

I've had the idea for a lego "Knights" comic for a while, but couldn't really get myself up to do it. Finally, I had a burst of creativity and got it rolling back in February. Now, I'm up to 5 pages and am already feeling drained from doing it - not because I don't want to though; moreso because I feel like it's not living up to what I had idealized it as in my head. I'm not necessarily looking for any kind of motivation or "you can do it" comments, but what I am hoping (even though it's only 5 pages for now) is that I could get some really honest feedback and critique so I can improve it as I push myself to continue. I'm at the point where I know what I want to do, but it's not turning out the way I've hoped - I fear I have a bit of tunnel vision with the direction I want to take it. Another thought - Is Blogger a feasible way to present a comic or is making my own site (web dev by trade) a better option even now? That being said, I graciously ask to hear what you think so I can continue and make it even better, even this early on. If it is too early, then I shall just have to make more anyway and come back later. Many thanks for even reading this! :) *[edit] XPOSTED from r/webcomics* **tl;dr** how can I improve this for lego and webcomic fans?

I've had the idea for a lego "Knights" comic for a while, but couldn't really get myself up to do it. Finally, I had a burst of creativity and got it rolling back in February. Now, I'm up to 5 pages and am already feeling drained from doing it - not because I don't want to though; moreso because I feel like it's not living up to what I had idealized it as in my head. I'm not necessarily looking for any kind of motivation or "you can do it" comments, but what I am hoping (even though it's only 5 pages for now) is that I could get some really honest feedback and critique so I can improve it as I push myself to continue. I'm at the point where I know what I want to do, but it's not turning out the way I've hoped - I fear I have a bit of tunnel vision with the direction I want to take it. Another thought - Is Blogger a feasible way to present a comic or is making my own site (web dev by trade) a better option even now? That being said, I graciously ask to hear what you think so I can continue and make it even better, even this early on. If it is too early, then I shall just have to make more anyway and come back later. Many thanks for even reading this! :) [edit] XPOSTED from r/webcomics tl;dr how can I improve this for lego and webcomic fans?

lego

t5_2qhm7

cg1ylt3

I've had the idea for a lego "Knights" comic for a while, but couldn't really get myself up to do it. Finally, I had a burst of creativity and got it rolling back in February. Now, I'm up to 5 pages and am already feeling drained from doing it - not because I don't want to though; moreso because I feel like it's not living up to what I had idealized it as in my head. I'm not necessarily looking for any kind of motivation or "you can do it" comments, but what I am hoping (even though it's only 5 pages for now) is that I could get some really honest feedback and critique so I can improve it as I push myself to continue. I'm at the point where I know what I want to do, but it's not turning out the way I've hoped - I fear I have a bit of tunnel vision with the direction I want to take it. Another thought - Is Blogger a feasible way to present a comic or is making my own site (web dev by trade) a better option even now? That being said, I graciously ask to hear what you think so I can continue and make it even better, even this early on. If it is too early, then I shall just have to make more anyway and come back later. Many thanks for even reading this! :) [edit] XPOSTED from r/webcomics

how can I improve this for lego and webcomic fans?

uberdud

As an Uber driver I would like to insist that there is no tip included. Many people believe there is no need to tip simply because Uber says so. Uber does this in order to differentiate from other taxi services. My argument as to why no tip is included is as follows. We get paid directly as a percentage of our fares. The fare is based on this equation: small starting fee + time cost + distance cost. It's very difficult for me to comprehend where the tip is hiding in this formula. In addition, I have received ~$3 from a fare for multiple rides. Sometimes when I get a small fare like this I get a tip to compensate for me because the rider recognizes there's no way I'm making money on the ride after gas expense from picking them up and driving them to their destination. Unfortunately the majority of the time riders still believe that I am somehow covered by $3 for the ride because of Uber's implication. I still receive tips a ~15% of the time. The people who tip are generally great people to drive in addition to being tippers. That being said I have many great riders who don't tip. **TLDR: I drive for Uber and there is no discernible way we are tipped through Uber fares.**

As an Uber driver I would like to insist that there is no tip included. Many people believe there is no need to tip simply because Uber says so. Uber does this in order to differentiate from other taxi services. My argument as to why no tip is included is as follows. We get paid directly as a percentage of our fares. The fare is based on this equation: small starting fee + time cost + distance cost. It's very difficult for me to comprehend where the tip is hiding in this formula. In addition, I have received ~$3 from a fare for multiple rides. Sometimes when I get a small fare like this I get a tip to compensate for me because the rider recognizes there's no way I'm making money on the ride after gas expense from picking them up and driving them to their destination. Unfortunately the majority of the time riders still believe that I am somehow covered by $3 for the ride because of Uber's implication. I still receive tips a ~15% of the time. The people who tip are generally great people to drive in addition to being tippers. That being said I have many great riders who don't tip. TLDR: I drive for Uber and there is no discernible way we are tipped through Uber fares.

chicago

t5_2qh2t

cg2ssyk

As an Uber driver I would like to insist that there is no tip included. Many people believe there is no need to tip simply because Uber says so. Uber does this in order to differentiate from other taxi services. My argument as to why no tip is included is as follows. We get paid directly as a percentage of our fares. The fare is based on this equation: small starting fee + time cost + distance cost. It's very difficult for me to comprehend where the tip is hiding in this formula. In addition, I have received ~$3 from a fare for multiple rides. Sometimes when I get a small fare like this I get a tip to compensate for me because the rider recognizes there's no way I'm making money on the ride after gas expense from picking them up and driving them to their destination. Unfortunately the majority of the time riders still believe that I am somehow covered by $3 for the ride because of Uber's implication. I still receive tips a ~15% of the time. The people who tip are generally great people to drive in addition to being tippers. That being said I have many great riders who don't tip.

I drive for Uber and there is no discernible way we are tipped through Uber fares.

Rugger11

He is and most of us on here know it. Unfortunately to the uninformed, his posts and articles are interesting, exciting, and what seems to be an inside scoop to what is behind the curtain that is the NFL. He takes sensationalism to a completely new level by flat out lying. Manish is doing a terrible job if you consider it to be to report the news surrounding the NFL and Jets. However if you consider his job to get pageviews and any form of social media buzz and interaction, he is doing a fantastic job. Unfortunately, he only cares about the later. The NY Daily News views the matter as more views=more money. Until he stops getting views, they won't do anything about him. TL;DR: Don't give him any pageviews. No clicking, no angry tweeting. Nothing. Flat out ignore him.

He is and most of us on here know it. Unfortunately to the uninformed, his posts and articles are interesting, exciting, and what seems to be an inside scoop to what is behind the curtain that is the NFL. He takes sensationalism to a completely new level by flat out lying. Manish is doing a terrible job if you consider it to be to report the news surrounding the NFL and Jets. However if you consider his job to get pageviews and any form of social media buzz and interaction, he is doing a fantastic job. Unfortunately, he only cares about the later. The NY Daily News views the matter as more views=more money. Until he stops getting views, they won't do anything about him. TL;DR: Don't give him any pageviews. No clicking, no angry tweeting. Nothing. Flat out ignore him.

nyjets

t5_2s2av

cg28qj3

He is and most of us on here know it. Unfortunately to the uninformed, his posts and articles are interesting, exciting, and what seems to be an inside scoop to what is behind the curtain that is the NFL. He takes sensationalism to a completely new level by flat out lying. Manish is doing a terrible job if you consider it to be to report the news surrounding the NFL and Jets. However if you consider his job to get pageviews and any form of social media buzz and interaction, he is doing a fantastic job. Unfortunately, he only cares about the later. The NY Daily News views the matter as more views=more money. Until he stops getting views, they won't do anything about him.

Don't give him any pageviews. No clicking, no angry tweeting. Nothing. Flat out ignore him.

tacocat777

Hi, I have a matching egg, it looks like your reddit account is active but you have been ignoring posts on here recently. I hope for some reason you feel the urge to hatch my smeargle for me. It's going to be my HM bitch and your the only active user with this TSV :/ TL;DR: Hook a hommie up and hatch his egg (I added you) :p

Hi, I have a matching egg, it looks like your reddit account is active but you have been ignoring posts on here recently. I hope for some reason you feel the urge to hatch my smeargle for me. It's going to be my HM bitch and your the only active user with this TSV :/ TL;DR: Hook a hommie up and hatch his egg (I added you) :p

SVExchange

t5_2z47n

ciuatk5

Hi, I have a matching egg, it looks like your reddit account is active but you have been ignoring posts on here recently. I hope for some reason you feel the urge to hatch my smeargle for me. It's going to be my HM bitch and your the only active user with this TSV :/

Hook a hommie up and hatch his egg (I added you) :p

TehRoot

A caste system is arbitrary rules placed on social/hegemony status. Individuals should be focused to work through specific goals into areas that reflect their aptitude. Work for society to benefit one another, not an upper or ruling class. Sexuality is part of the emotion trumping reason that humanity fumbles with. If anything the root point is that intellectualism needs to be promoted, while emotion needs to be pushed down and bred out. tl;dr humanity needs to evolve into a group of finely tuned intellectuals, with a high affinity for reason/rationality, and a low affinity for emotion.

A caste system is arbitrary rules placed on social/hegemony status. Individuals should be focused to work through specific goals into areas that reflect their aptitude. Work for society to benefit one another, not an upper or ruling class. Sexuality is part of the emotion trumping reason that humanity fumbles with. If anything the root point is that intellectualism needs to be promoted, while emotion needs to be pushed down and bred out. tl;dr humanity needs to evolve into a group of finely tuned intellectuals, with a high affinity for reason/rationality, and a low affinity for emotion.

sex

t5_2qh3p

cg2mttq

A caste system is arbitrary rules placed on social/hegemony status. Individuals should be focused to work through specific goals into areas that reflect their aptitude. Work for society to benefit one another, not an upper or ruling class. Sexuality is part of the emotion trumping reason that humanity fumbles with. If anything the root point is that intellectualism needs to be promoted, while emotion needs to be pushed down and bred out.

humanity needs to evolve into a group of finely tuned intellectuals, with a high affinity for reason/rationality, and a low affinity for emotion.

GenevieveLeah

That is exactly how I temped last month, which was my first month temping. My temperature seemed to be extremely low (96.8 F, a lot of days) until I O'd, then it spiked as expected, and was verified by a positive OPK. Temp stayed elevated for 8 days. The day before AF it dropped a whole degree, back down around 97 F. (Four days early, boo). I don't even have a basal thermometer. Just the cheap store-brand one I've had for years. I didn't even test the same time of day, just when I happened to wake up that day, but always did it first thing. I have your exact problem. I wake up before DH and just don't want to bug him. So I get up, walk to the bathroom, shove the thermometer under my tongue, pee while I wait, then record the reading - after I flushed and washed my hands, of course. Am I a model scientist? No. A lot of variables with how my data is collected. I did see the expected trends with my temperatures related to ovulation and the LH surge. Am I pregnant yet? No. Do I plan to take my temperature in bed from now on? No, because I feel the overall data in my chart was informative, even if the method wasn't scientifically advisable. I may buy a basal thermometer, but I don't think it will change anything. TL;DR, I think getting up to the bathroom will be fine. You are looking for changes in the temperature and overall trends, which will still happen if you are standing when the temp is taken vs. laying down. And your SO will appreciate it. Edit: tried to post my chart but I am dumb.

That is exactly how I temped last month, which was my first month temping. My temperature seemed to be extremely low (96.8 F, a lot of days) until I O'd, then it spiked as expected, and was verified by a positive OPK. Temp stayed elevated for 8 days. The day before AF it dropped a whole degree, back down around 97 F. (Four days early, boo). I don't even have a basal thermometer. Just the cheap store-brand one I've had for years. I didn't even test the same time of day, just when I happened to wake up that day, but always did it first thing. I have your exact problem. I wake up before DH and just don't want to bug him. So I get up, walk to the bathroom, shove the thermometer under my tongue, pee while I wait, then record the reading - after I flushed and washed my hands, of course. Am I a model scientist? No. A lot of variables with how my data is collected. I did see the expected trends with my temperatures related to ovulation and the LH surge. Am I pregnant yet? No. Do I plan to take my temperature in bed from now on? No, because I feel the overall data in my chart was informative, even if the method wasn't scientifically advisable. I may buy a basal thermometer, but I don't think it will change anything. TL;DR, I think getting up to the bathroom will be fine. You are looking for changes in the temperature and overall trends, which will still happen if you are standing when the temp is taken vs. laying down. And your SO will appreciate it. Edit: tried to post my chart but I am dumb.

TryingForABaby

t5_2sil5

cg2s1u7

That is exactly how I temped last month, which was my first month temping. My temperature seemed to be extremely low (96.8 F, a lot of days) until I O'd, then it spiked as expected, and was verified by a positive OPK. Temp stayed elevated for 8 days. The day before AF it dropped a whole degree, back down around 97 F. (Four days early, boo). I don't even have a basal thermometer. Just the cheap store-brand one I've had for years. I didn't even test the same time of day, just when I happened to wake up that day, but always did it first thing. I have your exact problem. I wake up before DH and just don't want to bug him. So I get up, walk to the bathroom, shove the thermometer under my tongue, pee while I wait, then record the reading - after I flushed and washed my hands, of course. Am I a model scientist? No. A lot of variables with how my data is collected. I did see the expected trends with my temperatures related to ovulation and the LH surge. Am I pregnant yet? No. Do I plan to take my temperature in bed from now on? No, because I feel the overall data in my chart was informative, even if the method wasn't scientifically advisable. I may buy a basal thermometer, but I don't think it will change anything.

I think getting up to the bathroom will be fine. You are looking for changes in the temperature and overall trends, which will still happen if you are standing when the temp is taken vs. laying down. And your SO will appreciate it. Edit: tried to post my chart but I am dumb.

PM_me_your_lips_

Way better than expected. I was stuck in a small western Texas town, posted up in a hotel for 6-7 weeks for work. I started going to this local bar, originally to catch a college basketball game and grab a beer. Turns out that this place had one helluva burger, so I started eating dinner there every other night. Now this bar was pretty much all locals, mostly your lower class, hard-working variety aged 30-40. I'm relatively younger (mid 20's) working as a geoscientist, so I stuck out for sure, mostly for being obviously out of state. Anyways, the main bartender, who is a chubbier but somewhat attractive girl my age, becomes friendly with me. After a few non-specific conversations, she starts asking more personal questions like if I'm single, recently out of a relationship, looking for dates, etc. She ends up convincing me to go on a date with her younger sister, who she claims is an attractive college student, but extremely shy. Her college is &lt; 2,000 people and she lives with her mom and had been having trouble meeting people. I decide to entertain her, because what the else am I going to do. Up to this point, I've just been hitting the hotel gym, watching movies, and blasphemously rocking out to some early 90's indie music that's not country (this is one of those cities that considers Deliverance a love story). So she gives me her sister's number and we start making awkward texty smalltalk. She seems nice and is eager to tell me about herself, and doesn't seem as shy as I'm led to believe. I indirectly try to get her to send me a picture of herself, just so I know what I'm getting into, but all I'm getting back is various photo shoots of her beloved dog. Oh well, I tried. So she decides she wants to meet me for a drink at a bar in a city about 20 miles away, probably to avoid her sister eavesdropping and whatnot. I arrive at the bar about 20 minutes early, enough time to orally inject some whiskey-based liquid courage, not knowing what to expect. Honestly, not to sound shallow, but I'm fearing the worst at this point and am uncharacteristically nervous at this point. She texts me to meet her outside so she doesn't have to awkwardly search the bar for me. I pay for my drinks, planning to just walk right by as if I'm another bar patron heading for home, just in case it looks like impending disaster. Unexpectedly, I walk out to meet a gorgeous brunette, about 5'1'' and 110 pounds with chestnut eyes and the other goods to boot. She looks like a shorter Mila Kunis with dimples and wavier hair. [Garth is literally screaming "Schwiiiing" in my head] She's admittedly out of my league as far as looks go, but now I'm determined to make this work. So we sit down, and she's incredibly awkward at first. She seems almost ashamed that I bought her a drink, and is mostly responding to my questions with one word answers. I finally get her to start talking about herself (always a good idea) and she warms up to the convo. We end up getting a couple more drinks and close the bar down (it's not that late though, apparently a lot of bars close between midnight and 1 AM in TX). I ask if she's ready to leave and she notifies me that her cousin dropped her off and she needs a ride home. She tells me that she isn't really tired and having a fun night. She then suggests that we return to my hotel to watch a movie. [Uhhh, Yes] I crack some jokes on the drive home, she holds my hand, things are going great. We get back to the Best Western, and start watching 'Moonrise Kingdom' for about the opening credits before we are making out. [Schwing Schwang Schwung] Not going to lie, I ask for sex because why not. She declines since other than a week of texting, this is literally her first time meeting me, which is completely understandable. End up getting one of the better beejers of my life, and we stay up all night talking afterwards. I take her home in the morning, and we continue to date for the next few months. Eventually things got a little serious and I wasn't really willing to commit to something where I'd have to move a couple hours away from my current living situation. Still talk to her every couple weeks, and we hang out when I get the chance to make the drive / have time off work. She's a great person and I wish nothing but happiness for her and her family. That was my only blind date I've ever went on, and it was an unexpected but amazing experience. TLDR: Reluctantly agreed to a blind date in a town where things like that end in Texas Chainsaw Massacres. Ended up getting a BJ from a Mila Kunis lookalike, and met some amazing people.

Way better than expected. I was stuck in a small western Texas town, posted up in a hotel for 6-7 weeks for work. I started going to this local bar, originally to catch a college basketball game and grab a beer. Turns out that this place had one helluva burger, so I started eating dinner there every other night. Now this bar was pretty much all locals, mostly your lower class, hard-working variety aged 30-40. I'm relatively younger (mid 20's) working as a geoscientist, so I stuck out for sure, mostly for being obviously out of state. Anyways, the main bartender, who is a chubbier but somewhat attractive girl my age, becomes friendly with me. After a few non-specific conversations, she starts asking more personal questions like if I'm single, recently out of a relationship, looking for dates, etc. She ends up convincing me to go on a date with her younger sister, who she claims is an attractive college student, but extremely shy. Her college is < 2,000 people and she lives with her mom and had been having trouble meeting people. I decide to entertain her, because what the else am I going to do. Up to this point, I've just been hitting the hotel gym, watching movies, and blasphemously rocking out to some early 90's indie music that's not country (this is one of those cities that considers Deliverance a love story). So she gives me her sister's number and we start making awkward texty smalltalk. She seems nice and is eager to tell me about herself, and doesn't seem as shy as I'm led to believe. I indirectly try to get her to send me a picture of herself, just so I know what I'm getting into, but all I'm getting back is various photo shoots of her beloved dog. Oh well, I tried. So she decides she wants to meet me for a drink at a bar in a city about 20 miles away, probably to avoid her sister eavesdropping and whatnot. I arrive at the bar about 20 minutes early, enough time to orally inject some whiskey-based liquid courage, not knowing what to expect. Honestly, not to sound shallow, but I'm fearing the worst at this point and am uncharacteristically nervous at this point. She texts me to meet her outside so she doesn't have to awkwardly search the bar for me. I pay for my drinks, planning to just walk right by as if I'm another bar patron heading for home, just in case it looks like impending disaster. Unexpectedly, I walk out to meet a gorgeous brunette, about 5'1'' and 110 pounds with chestnut eyes and the other goods to boot. She looks like a shorter Mila Kunis with dimples and wavier hair. [Garth is literally screaming "Schwiiiing" in my head] She's admittedly out of my league as far as looks go, but now I'm determined to make this work. So we sit down, and she's incredibly awkward at first. She seems almost ashamed that I bought her a drink, and is mostly responding to my questions with one word answers. I finally get her to start talking about herself (always a good idea) and she warms up to the convo. We end up getting a couple more drinks and close the bar down (it's not that late though, apparently a lot of bars close between midnight and 1 AM in TX). I ask if she's ready to leave and she notifies me that her cousin dropped her off and she needs a ride home. She tells me that she isn't really tired and having a fun night. She then suggests that we return to my hotel to watch a movie. [Uhhh, Yes] I crack some jokes on the drive home, she holds my hand, things are going great. We get back to the Best Western, and start watching 'Moonrise Kingdom' for about the opening credits before we are making out. [Schwing Schwang Schwung] Not going to lie, I ask for sex because why not. She declines since other than a week of texting, this is literally her first time meeting me, which is completely understandable. End up getting one of the better beejers of my life, and we stay up all night talking afterwards. I take her home in the morning, and we continue to date for the next few months. Eventually things got a little serious and I wasn't really willing to commit to something where I'd have to move a couple hours away from my current living situation. Still talk to her every couple weeks, and we hang out when I get the chance to make the drive / have time off work. She's a great person and I wish nothing but happiness for her and her family. That was my only blind date I've ever went on, and it was an unexpected but amazing experience. TLDR: Reluctantly agreed to a blind date in a town where things like that end in Texas Chainsaw Massacres. Ended up getting a BJ from a Mila Kunis lookalike, and met some amazing people.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cg2r4u5

Way better than expected. I was stuck in a small western Texas town, posted up in a hotel for 6-7 weeks for work. I started going to this local bar, originally to catch a college basketball game and grab a beer. Turns out that this place had one helluva burger, so I started eating dinner there every other night. Now this bar was pretty much all locals, mostly your lower class, hard-working variety aged 30-40. I'm relatively younger (mid 20's) working as a geoscientist, so I stuck out for sure, mostly for being obviously out of state. Anyways, the main bartender, who is a chubbier but somewhat attractive girl my age, becomes friendly with me. After a few non-specific conversations, she starts asking more personal questions like if I'm single, recently out of a relationship, looking for dates, etc. She ends up convincing me to go on a date with her younger sister, who she claims is an attractive college student, but extremely shy. Her college is < 2,000 people and she lives with her mom and had been having trouble meeting people. I decide to entertain her, because what the else am I going to do. Up to this point, I've just been hitting the hotel gym, watching movies, and blasphemously rocking out to some early 90's indie music that's not country (this is one of those cities that considers Deliverance a love story). So she gives me her sister's number and we start making awkward texty smalltalk. She seems nice and is eager to tell me about herself, and doesn't seem as shy as I'm led to believe. I indirectly try to get her to send me a picture of herself, just so I know what I'm getting into, but all I'm getting back is various photo shoots of her beloved dog. Oh well, I tried. So she decides she wants to meet me for a drink at a bar in a city about 20 miles away, probably to avoid her sister eavesdropping and whatnot. I arrive at the bar about 20 minutes early, enough time to orally inject some whiskey-based liquid courage, not knowing what to expect. Honestly, not to sound shallow, but I'm fearing the worst at this point and am uncharacteristically nervous at this point. She texts me to meet her outside so she doesn't have to awkwardly search the bar for me. I pay for my drinks, planning to just walk right by as if I'm another bar patron heading for home, just in case it looks like impending disaster. Unexpectedly, I walk out to meet a gorgeous brunette, about 5'1'' and 110 pounds with chestnut eyes and the other goods to boot. She looks like a shorter Mila Kunis with dimples and wavier hair. [Garth is literally screaming "Schwiiiing" in my head] She's admittedly out of my league as far as looks go, but now I'm determined to make this work. So we sit down, and she's incredibly awkward at first. She seems almost ashamed that I bought her a drink, and is mostly responding to my questions with one word answers. I finally get her to start talking about herself (always a good idea) and she warms up to the convo. We end up getting a couple more drinks and close the bar down (it's not that late though, apparently a lot of bars close between midnight and 1 AM in TX). I ask if she's ready to leave and she notifies me that her cousin dropped her off and she needs a ride home. She tells me that she isn't really tired and having a fun night. She then suggests that we return to my hotel to watch a movie. [Uhhh, Yes] I crack some jokes on the drive home, she holds my hand, things are going great. We get back to the Best Western, and start watching 'Moonrise Kingdom' for about the opening credits before we are making out. [Schwing Schwang Schwung] Not going to lie, I ask for sex because why not. She declines since other than a week of texting, this is literally her first time meeting me, which is completely understandable. End up getting one of the better beejers of my life, and we stay up all night talking afterwards. I take her home in the morning, and we continue to date for the next few months. Eventually things got a little serious and I wasn't really willing to commit to something where I'd have to move a couple hours away from my current living situation. Still talk to her every couple weeks, and we hang out when I get the chance to make the drive / have time off work. She's a great person and I wish nothing but happiness for her and her family. That was my only blind date I've ever went on, and it was an unexpected but amazing experience.

Reluctantly agreed to a blind date in a town where things like that end in Texas Chainsaw Massacres. Ended up getting a BJ from a Mila Kunis lookalike, and met some amazing people.

custerc

Let's not blame the action of one dude on all Chinese teams. All the other iG players shook hands just fine. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PDD BEING CHINESE. So many people in here trying to be culturally sensitive are making Chinese people sound like fucking retards. Does anyone really think that even if shaking hands wasn't the tradition in Asia, PDD (after watching it happen after every game in international tournaments throughout his career and *doing it himself* earlier in the day) somehow just forgot that he's meant to shake hands "because Chinese culture"? Fuck that, what he did was just as rude in Chinese culture as any other, which is why everyone else on the team shook hands. It may or may not be their own custom, but they are ALL aware it happens at tournaments like this, and they know *why* it happens and what it means. They are not idiots. TL;DR PDD is just a sore loser, don't blame it on China or Chinese culture.

Let's not blame the action of one dude on all Chinese teams. All the other iG players shook hands just fine. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PDD BEING CHINESE. So many people in here trying to be culturally sensitive are making Chinese people sound like fucking retards. Does anyone really think that even if shaking hands wasn't the tradition in Asia, PDD (after watching it happen after every game in international tournaments throughout his career and doing it himself earlier in the day) somehow just forgot that he's meant to shake hands "because Chinese culture"? Fuck that, what he did was just as rude in Chinese culture as any other, which is why everyone else on the team shook hands. It may or may not be their own custom, but they are ALL aware it happens at tournaments like this, and they know why it happens and what it means. They are not idiots. TL;DR PDD is just a sore loser, don't blame it on China or Chinese culture.

leagueoflegends

t5_2rfxx

cg2x1d4

Let's not blame the action of one dude on all Chinese teams. All the other iG players shook hands just fine. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PDD BEING CHINESE. So many people in here trying to be culturally sensitive are making Chinese people sound like fucking retards. Does anyone really think that even if shaking hands wasn't the tradition in Asia, PDD (after watching it happen after every game in international tournaments throughout his career and doing it himself earlier in the day) somehow just forgot that he's meant to shake hands "because Chinese culture"? Fuck that, what he did was just as rude in Chinese culture as any other, which is why everyone else on the team shook hands. It may or may not be their own custom, but they are ALL aware it happens at tournaments like this, and they know why it happens and what it means. They are not idiots.

PDD is just a sore loser, don't blame it on China or Chinese culture.

Sephiroth472

Something that I've put together after watching Armada at Apex was that it isn't the character. I saw him do the same thing with Pit in PM as he did with Peach in Melee. Armada just perfects characters to the point where every initialization/punish leads to a kill. Peach is an amazing character, but I think it's definitely Armada that takes the game to another level. TL/DR: Peach is still top tier, but Armada could have done it with anyone.

Something that I've put together after watching Armada at Apex was that it isn't the character. I saw him do the same thing with Pit in PM as he did with Peach in Melee. Armada just perfects characters to the point where every initialization/punish leads to a kill. Peach is an amazing character, but I think it's definitely Armada that takes the game to another level. TL/DR: Peach is still top tier, but Armada could have done it with anyone.

smashbros

t5_2qiep

cg34m6a

Something that I've put together after watching Armada at Apex was that it isn't the character. I saw him do the same thing with Pit in PM as he did with Peach in Melee. Armada just perfects characters to the point where every initialization/punish leads to a kill. Peach is an amazing character, but I think it's definitely Armada that takes the game to another level.

Peach is still top tier, but Armada could have done it with anyone.

chorner

Background: CCS members put forward 4 resolutions a couple months ago to change how the credit union runs elections, compensates directors, discloses pay, and to limit directors to a maximum 12-year term. Now: Ignoring the merits of the resolutions, the board of Coast Capital Savings has put forward 4 doppleganger resolutions to confuse members which may cause the original resolutions to fail. They've put up this bizarre youtube ad: And added this pamplet to sway opinions: If you're a member of Coast Capital Savings Credit Union, you can vote now online (or will get a package in the mail next week). Please read the resolutions carefully and vote. ---- TL;DR: Coast Capital board is being deceptive and trying to nullify upcoming vote. Bring your pitchfork!

Background: CCS members put forward 4 resolutions a couple months ago to change how the credit union runs elections, compensates directors, discloses pay, and to limit directors to a maximum 12-year term. Now: Ignoring the merits of the resolutions, the board of Coast Capital Savings has put forward 4 doppleganger resolutions to confuse members which may cause the original resolutions to fail. They've put up this bizarre youtube ad: And added this pamplet to sway opinions: If you're a member of Coast Capital Savings Credit Union, you can vote now online (or will get a package in the mail next week). Please read the resolutions carefully and vote. TL;DR: Coast Capital board is being deceptive and trying to nullify upcoming vote. Bring your pitchfork!

VictoriaBC

t5_2rbsy

cg33td3

Background: CCS members put forward 4 resolutions a couple months ago to change how the credit union runs elections, compensates directors, discloses pay, and to limit directors to a maximum 12-year term. Now: Ignoring the merits of the resolutions, the board of Coast Capital Savings has put forward 4 doppleganger resolutions to confuse members which may cause the original resolutions to fail. They've put up this bizarre youtube ad: And added this pamplet to sway opinions: If you're a member of Coast Capital Savings Credit Union, you can vote now online (or will get a package in the mail next week). Please read the resolutions carefully and vote.

Coast Capital board is being deceptive and trying to nullify upcoming vote. Bring your pitchfork!

shillagepeople

As a redditor who has spent time on psych wards, I can assure you conspiracy theories are a big deal to many patients. Of course, there's no way of knowing if any given given post on conspiracy is trolling or a genuine belief of the OP. I think /r/conspiracy is a mix of trolling and genuine belief, and some of that belief is borne from mental illness. Same for the David Icke forums. I want it to be trolling, because this is some funny shit. You just never really know, though. Tl;dr Some people will REALLY believe it's Shakira's fault.

As a redditor who has spent time on psych wards, I can assure you conspiracy theories are a big deal to many patients. Of course, there's no way of knowing if any given given post on conspiracy is trolling or a genuine belief of the OP. I think /r/conspiracy is a mix of trolling and genuine belief, and some of that belief is borne from mental illness. Same for the David Icke forums. I want it to be trolling, because this is some funny shit. You just never really know, though. Tl;dr Some people will REALLY believe it's Shakira's fault.

conspiratard

t5_2r2dd

cg3eow6

As a redditor who has spent time on psych wards, I can assure you conspiracy theories are a big deal to many patients. Of course, there's no way of knowing if any given given post on conspiracy is trolling or a genuine belief of the OP. I think /r/conspiracy is a mix of trolling and genuine belief, and some of that belief is borne from mental illness. Same for the David Icke forums. I want it to be trolling, because this is some funny shit. You just never really know, though.

Some people will REALLY believe it's Shakira's fault.

Zxv975

Well, Reindeer spawn every minute and give 2 minute's worth of production. This means they effectively count as 1 * CpS. My current CpS is 3,864,301,241,460,905.5 (3.86 Qa) at 730k HCs. Unlocking all 7 Halloween cookies would take ~ 30-60 minutes. My CpS for unlocking 1 cookie is: 3,864,354,101,244,181.5 (0.0014% increase) Unlocking all 7 would give me a **0.0096%** increase in CpS. Considering I gave up at least 30 minutes worth of Reindeer, that's at minimum **6.948 Quntillion** cookies (60 * 30 * 3.86 Qa). This means I would have to play for a further **5208 hours** at my new CpS to make up for all those cookies I lost. Also worth noting that this whole thing goes out the window if you consider Reindeer + Frenzy/Elder Frenzy. Frenzies on average make Reindeer worth about 3-4x as much, further increasing the time to 15,600 - 20,800 hours. Popping wrinklers is another reason why it's bad. Sitting on 9 wrinklers is 5.005x multiplier, compared to the 6x multiplier of 10 wrinklers. The CpS you gain from just keeping wrinklers active is very similar to the above calculation, doubling the amount of potential cookies you'd lose. If you pop all 10, that's even worse. TL;DR: it's not worthwhile to get Halloween cookies at larger HC values. Even at 1/10th of my HCs (~70k), it'd still take you 500-1000 hours (not counting Frenzies/Elder Frenzies) to break even with the cookies you'd lose from popping wrinklers/reindeer.

Well, Reindeer spawn every minute and give 2 minute's worth of production. This means they effectively count as 1 * CpS. My current CpS is 3,864,301,241,460,905.5 (3.86 Qa) at 730k HCs. Unlocking all 7 Halloween cookies would take ~ 30-60 minutes. My CpS for unlocking 1 cookie is: 3,864,354,101,244,181.5 (0.0014% increase) Unlocking all 7 would give me a 0.0096% increase in CpS. Considering I gave up at least 30 minutes worth of Reindeer, that's at minimum 6.948 Quntillion cookies (60 30 3.86 Qa). This means I would have to play for a further 5208 hours at my new CpS to make up for all those cookies I lost. Also worth noting that this whole thing goes out the window if you consider Reindeer + Frenzy/Elder Frenzy. Frenzies on average make Reindeer worth about 3-4x as much, further increasing the time to 15,600 - 20,800 hours. Popping wrinklers is another reason why it's bad. Sitting on 9 wrinklers is 5.005x multiplier, compared to the 6x multiplier of 10 wrinklers. The CpS you gain from just keeping wrinklers active is very similar to the above calculation, doubling the amount of potential cookies you'd lose. If you pop all 10, that's even worse. TL;DR: it's not worthwhile to get Halloween cookies at larger HC values. Even at 1/10th of my HCs (~70k), it'd still take you 500-1000 hours (not counting Frenzies/Elder Frenzies) to break even with the cookies you'd lose from popping wrinklers/reindeer.

CookieClicker

t5_2y620

cg3l66g

Well, Reindeer spawn every minute and give 2 minute's worth of production. This means they effectively count as 1 * CpS. My current CpS is 3,864,301,241,460,905.5 (3.86 Qa) at 730k HCs. Unlocking all 7 Halloween cookies would take ~ 30-60 minutes. My CpS for unlocking 1 cookie is: 3,864,354,101,244,181.5 (0.0014% increase) Unlocking all 7 would give me a 0.0096% increase in CpS. Considering I gave up at least 30 minutes worth of Reindeer, that's at minimum 6.948 Quntillion cookies (60 30 3.86 Qa). This means I would have to play for a further 5208 hours at my new CpS to make up for all those cookies I lost. Also worth noting that this whole thing goes out the window if you consider Reindeer + Frenzy/Elder Frenzy. Frenzies on average make Reindeer worth about 3-4x as much, further increasing the time to 15,600 - 20,800 hours. Popping wrinklers is another reason why it's bad. Sitting on 9 wrinklers is 5.005x multiplier, compared to the 6x multiplier of 10 wrinklers. The CpS you gain from just keeping wrinklers active is very similar to the above calculation, doubling the amount of potential cookies you'd lose. If you pop all 10, that's even worse.

it's not worthwhile to get Halloween cookies at larger HC values. Even at 1/10th of my HCs (~70k), it'd still take you 500-1000 hours (not counting Frenzies/Elder Frenzies) to break even with the cookies you'd lose from popping wrinklers/reindeer.

jman2477

I started maybe a month or so ago with episode 97 "Long Brown Blood". Holy shit that episode got me hooked. But it puts you into a podcast with a cast of characters that aren't necessarily the original cast. I since went through and listened to the entire anthology on iTunes. It's a damn good podcast. Start at episode 1, start whenever, doesn't matter. I have listened to every episode but I would suggest *maybe* skipping a few episodes (definitely skip the Kansas City episode of the HarmonCountry tour. Episode 30 something I think. Maybe 40 something. TLDR; Great podcast. Start anywhere. Skip Kansas City episode.

I started maybe a month or so ago with episode 97 "Long Brown Blood". Holy shit that episode got me hooked. But it puts you into a podcast with a cast of characters that aren't necessarily the original cast. I since went through and listened to the entire anthology on iTunes. It's a damn good podcast. Start at episode 1, start whenever, doesn't matter. I have listened to every episode but I would suggest maybe skipping a few episodes (definitely skip the Kansas City episode of the HarmonCountry tour. Episode 30 something I think. Maybe 40 something. TLDR; Great podcast. Start anywhere. Skip Kansas City episode.

Harmontown

t5_2vo38

cj49mgh

I started maybe a month or so ago with episode 97 "Long Brown Blood". Holy shit that episode got me hooked. But it puts you into a podcast with a cast of characters that aren't necessarily the original cast. I since went through and listened to the entire anthology on iTunes. It's a damn good podcast. Start at episode 1, start whenever, doesn't matter. I have listened to every episode but I would suggest maybe skipping a few episodes (definitely skip the Kansas City episode of the HarmonCountry tour. Episode 30 something I think. Maybe 40 something.

Great podcast. Start anywhere. Skip Kansas City episode.

Alvklez

If you make the money, it's yours to spend freely. Your mother has no right to take that away. Though I can see where she comes from when she wants you to stop spending money on cards. Assuming that you are young, (seeing as how your parents still have supreme authority) your mom probably wants to teach you that you can't just spend money whenever you want when you're on your own. There's bills/rent and all of your basic needs (food, shelter, clothing etc.) plus gas money or transportation fees, and if you want to go to college; tuition and student loans. If you don't want her to take away your money, prove to her that you can practice restraint when spending your own money. Try to work with the cards that you have, sell or trade what you don't want or use instead of buying cards. If that doesn't work, set aside a fraction of your weekly paycheck for an MTG fund and only spend *that* money, rather than your entire paycheck. **TL;DR:** MTG is fun, just don't blow all of your money on the game for a temporary fix.

If you make the money, it's yours to spend freely. Your mother has no right to take that away. Though I can see where she comes from when she wants you to stop spending money on cards. Assuming that you are young, (seeing as how your parents still have supreme authority) your mom probably wants to teach you that you can't just spend money whenever you want when you're on your own. There's bills/rent and all of your basic needs (food, shelter, clothing etc.) plus gas money or transportation fees, and if you want to go to college; tuition and student loans. If you don't want her to take away your money, prove to her that you can practice restraint when spending your own money. Try to work with the cards that you have, sell or trade what you don't want or use instead of buying cards. If that doesn't work, set aside a fraction of your weekly paycheck for an MTG fund and only spend that money, rather than your entire paycheck. TL;DR: MTG is fun, just don't blow all of your money on the game for a temporary fix.

magicTCG

t5_2qn5f

cg3p5e8

If you make the money, it's yours to spend freely. Your mother has no right to take that away. Though I can see where she comes from when she wants you to stop spending money on cards. Assuming that you are young, (seeing as how your parents still have supreme authority) your mom probably wants to teach you that you can't just spend money whenever you want when you're on your own. There's bills/rent and all of your basic needs (food, shelter, clothing etc.) plus gas money or transportation fees, and if you want to go to college; tuition and student loans. If you don't want her to take away your money, prove to her that you can practice restraint when spending your own money. Try to work with the cards that you have, sell or trade what you don't want or use instead of buying cards. If that doesn't work, set aside a fraction of your weekly paycheck for an MTG fund and only spend that money, rather than your entire paycheck.

MTG is fun, just don't blow all of your money on the game for a temporary fix.

Trematode

Longtime PC fps player here: 6v6 is refreshing and a great design decision considering the nature of the combat. With the current map sizes and player count, the dynamics of pilot vs pilot, pilot vs titan, and titan vs titan are all brilliantly balanced. Coming from the Battlefield series, and knowing full well the kind of clusterfuck you can get with overpopulated game servers -- or perhaps more specifically, a scale of game design that is at odds with itself -- I am SOOO glad titanfall does not fall into this trap. tl;dr: More players != more fun

Longtime PC fps player here: 6v6 is refreshing and a great design decision considering the nature of the combat. With the current map sizes and player count, the dynamics of pilot vs pilot, pilot vs titan, and titan vs titan are all brilliantly balanced. Coming from the Battlefield series, and knowing full well the kind of clusterfuck you can get with overpopulated game servers -- or perhaps more specifically, a scale of game design that is at odds with itself -- I am SOOO glad titanfall does not fall into this trap. tl;dr: More players != more fun

Games

t5_2qhwp

cg41iud

Longtime PC fps player here: 6v6 is refreshing and a great design decision considering the nature of the combat. With the current map sizes and player count, the dynamics of pilot vs pilot, pilot vs titan, and titan vs titan are all brilliantly balanced. Coming from the Battlefield series, and knowing full well the kind of clusterfuck you can get with overpopulated game servers -- or perhaps more specifically, a scale of game design that is at odds with itself -- I am SOOO glad titanfall does not fall into this trap.

More players != more fun

lavafilledpoptart

For some reason this picture makes me think of this BoC music video. BoC - The Children's Prison: Maybe just the idea of children being creative, full of pure unadulterated ideas, etc, etc. Tl;dr growing up sucks if you don't have art and parents who support it.

For some reason this picture makes me think of this BoC music video. BoC - The Children's Prison: Maybe just the idea of children being creative, full of pure unadulterated ideas, etc, etc. Tl;dr growing up sucks if you don't have art and parents who support it.

pics

t5_2qh0u

cg43idb

For some reason this picture makes me think of this BoC music video. BoC - The Children's Prison: Maybe just the idea of children being creative, full of pure unadulterated ideas, etc, etc.

growing up sucks if you don't have art and parents who support it.

PseudoPsychosis

The hoa of my dad's neighborhood hated him because when I lived with him we were reckless loud teenagers. We had loud cars and made messes in the driveway. The neighbors were always calling the cops on us and the hoa was giving us shit. We even got a letter from the hoa's attorney. The president of the hoa was offered a new job and left the neighborhood. They didn't have anyone competent or willing to take the position except for my dad. They begged him to take the roll.. Now my dad is the president of the hoa and gives the other neighbors shit. TL;DR Neighbors hate our family, hoa gave us shit. President of hoa resigned and had no replacement. They gave the roll to my dad. Dad now gives neighbors shit.

The hoa of my dad's neighborhood hated him because when I lived with him we were reckless loud teenagers. We had loud cars and made messes in the driveway. The neighbors were always calling the cops on us and the hoa was giving us shit. We even got a letter from the hoa's attorney. The president of the hoa was offered a new job and left the neighborhood. They didn't have anyone competent or willing to take the position except for my dad. They begged him to take the roll.. Now my dad is the president of the hoa and gives the other neighbors shit. TL;DR Neighbors hate our family, hoa gave us shit. President of hoa resigned and had no replacement. They gave the roll to my dad. Dad now gives neighbors shit.

pics

t5_2qh0u

cg48oj3

The hoa of my dad's neighborhood hated him because when I lived with him we were reckless loud teenagers. We had loud cars and made messes in the driveway. The neighbors were always calling the cops on us and the hoa was giving us shit. We even got a letter from the hoa's attorney. The president of the hoa was offered a new job and left the neighborhood. They didn't have anyone competent or willing to take the position except for my dad. They begged him to take the roll.. Now my dad is the president of the hoa and gives the other neighbors shit.

Neighbors hate our family, hoa gave us shit. President of hoa resigned and had no replacement. They gave the roll to my dad. Dad now gives neighbors shit.

croutonicus

Epidemiological data on patients is the best kind of evidence there is for the efficacy of a drug. Essentially you look at thousands of people taking a drug and look for increases in certain diseases. This is extremely beneficial for the NHS, as not only can they charge for selling the records but they get data on which drugs might not be as good as they thought. All in all this is an excellent idea for everybody. The NHS has always had a price on patient records. Age and postal area are required as it allows companies to monitor the efficacy of their drug in different populations or see if environmental factors in geographical areas are affecting the data. Other than that they can't ask for any specific information on who the people actually are so there is no way to trace it back to a particular person. The people describing this as a betrayal of trust have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. TL;DR NHS makes money from selling non-specific information to companies so they can sell better treatments to the NHS.

Epidemiological data on patients is the best kind of evidence there is for the efficacy of a drug. Essentially you look at thousands of people taking a drug and look for increases in certain diseases. This is extremely beneficial for the NHS, as not only can they charge for selling the records but they get data on which drugs might not be as good as they thought. All in all this is an excellent idea for everybody. The NHS has always had a price on patient records. Age and postal area are required as it allows companies to monitor the efficacy of their drug in different populations or see if environmental factors in geographical areas are affecting the data. Other than that they can't ask for any specific information on who the people actually are so there is no way to trace it back to a particular person. The people describing this as a betrayal of trust have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. TL;DR NHS makes money from selling non-specific information to companies so they can sell better treatments to the NHS.

unitedkingdom

t5_2qhqb

cg42m9n

Epidemiological data on patients is the best kind of evidence there is for the efficacy of a drug. Essentially you look at thousands of people taking a drug and look for increases in certain diseases. This is extremely beneficial for the NHS, as not only can they charge for selling the records but they get data on which drugs might not be as good as they thought. All in all this is an excellent idea for everybody. The NHS has always had a price on patient records. Age and postal area are required as it allows companies to monitor the efficacy of their drug in different populations or see if environmental factors in geographical areas are affecting the data. Other than that they can't ask for any specific information on who the people actually are so there is no way to trace it back to a particular person. The people describing this as a betrayal of trust have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

NHS makes money from selling non-specific information to companies so they can sell better treatments to the NHS.

senatorskeletor

Not really. But he eventually worked for a guy my cousin married. The guy asked me if I knew the bully, since he knew we went to school together. I was like, "uh... I don't really have anything to say." (I didn't want to look petty or bitter in front of someone who was about to become family.) I found out much later that the bully was on his last legs at the company, and his boss (i.e. my new cousin-in-law) wanted to see if I had anything god to say about him. When I obviously didn't, he decided to fire him. tl;dr: Never did, but I did get my childhood bully fired.

Not really. But he eventually worked for a guy my cousin married. The guy asked me if I knew the bully, since he knew we went to school together. I was like, "uh... I don't really have anything to say." (I didn't want to look petty or bitter in front of someone who was about to become family.) I found out much later that the bully was on his last legs at the company, and his boss (i.e. my new cousin-in-law) wanted to see if I had anything god to say about him. When I obviously didn't, he decided to fire him. tl;dr: Never did, but I did get my childhood bully fired.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cg42u37

Not really. But he eventually worked for a guy my cousin married. The guy asked me if I knew the bully, since he knew we went to school together. I was like, "uh... I don't really have anything to say." (I didn't want to look petty or bitter in front of someone who was about to become family.) I found out much later that the bully was on his last legs at the company, and his boss (i.e. my new cousin-in-law) wanted to see if I had anything god to say about him. When I obviously didn't, he decided to fire him.

Never did, but I did get my childhood bully fired.

savitrius

I was bullied severely in middle school/early high school. Turning them in never did a damn thing, and my school is one of those stupid "zero tolerance" schools. I was physically bullied, told I would never amount to anything, but what hurt the most was being ignored. The bullying slowed after sophomore year, but the effects were still felt. I never fought back, not in the traditional sense anyway. I just decided I wasn't going to let them hold me down anymore, and I showed them all what I can do. I started drawing and doing photography more and got some of my stuff put up in the local gallery/coffee shop (the big hangout place for everyone). Once I started letting myself shine I was happier. I stopped letting them bother me (easier said than done, though) and they stopped bothering me. Actually, after graduation one of the bullies hugged me and apologized for what he did. While we aren't friends per-say, we see each other around campus quite a bit. Now I'm well known among our class as the artist, and am always asked for updates on my current projects. I'm happier than I've ever been, and am actually optimistic about my future. TL;DR: "The best revenge is to live well"

I was bullied severely in middle school/early high school. Turning them in never did a damn thing, and my school is one of those stupid "zero tolerance" schools. I was physically bullied, told I would never amount to anything, but what hurt the most was being ignored. The bullying slowed after sophomore year, but the effects were still felt. I never fought back, not in the traditional sense anyway. I just decided I wasn't going to let them hold me down anymore, and I showed them all what I can do. I started drawing and doing photography more and got some of my stuff put up in the local gallery/coffee shop (the big hangout place for everyone). Once I started letting myself shine I was happier. I stopped letting them bother me (easier said than done, though) and they stopped bothering me. Actually, after graduation one of the bullies hugged me and apologized for what he did. While we aren't friends per-say, we see each other around campus quite a bit. Now I'm well known among our class as the artist, and am always asked for updates on my current projects. I'm happier than I've ever been, and am actually optimistic about my future. TL;DR: "The best revenge is to live well"

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cg44qt0

I was bullied severely in middle school/early high school. Turning them in never did a damn thing, and my school is one of those stupid "zero tolerance" schools. I was physically bullied, told I would never amount to anything, but what hurt the most was being ignored. The bullying slowed after sophomore year, but the effects were still felt. I never fought back, not in the traditional sense anyway. I just decided I wasn't going to let them hold me down anymore, and I showed them all what I can do. I started drawing and doing photography more and got some of my stuff put up in the local gallery/coffee shop (the big hangout place for everyone). Once I started letting myself shine I was happier. I stopped letting them bother me (easier said than done, though) and they stopped bothering me. Actually, after graduation one of the bullies hugged me and apologized for what he did. While we aren't friends per-say, we see each other around campus quite a bit. Now I'm well known among our class as the artist, and am always asked for updates on my current projects. I'm happier than I've ever been, and am actually optimistic about my future.

The best revenge is to live well"

FireFoxG

From what I read...having a weaker currency results in exports going up because it costs less to produce stuff here because wages are artificially low. Not only that, it means domestic demand goes down as well due to a drop in REAL nominal purchasing power per dollar. Keep in mind, commodities don't change in nominal real terms, only in purchasing power. From what the experts are saying about china... they want china to raise its currency so that the people there can switch over to a consumer based economy which effectively lowers the trade surplus because of increased domestic demand and high production wage related costs. Saying that currency debasement is good for the average person is crazy. Judging by the comparisons of REAL purchasing power in both china and America... I think it's insane to say china is debasing its currency because real median household purchase power is rising at double digit growth in china, whereas American REAL median household purchasing power in America is falling at a scary rate. It's classic Orwellian doublespeak crazyness I've come to expect from the US government to say china is debasing and America has too strong a dollar. US inflation adjusted income China(which I'm not sure if this is inflation adjusted) TLDR; debasement of currency is why America working class is failing and if the situation with Russia result in further losses... its going to get even worse and fast.

From what I read...having a weaker currency results in exports going up because it costs less to produce stuff here because wages are artificially low. Not only that, it means domestic demand goes down as well due to a drop in REAL nominal purchasing power per dollar. Keep in mind, commodities don't change in nominal real terms, only in purchasing power. From what the experts are saying about china... they want china to raise its currency so that the people there can switch over to a consumer based economy which effectively lowers the trade surplus because of increased domestic demand and high production wage related costs. Saying that currency debasement is good for the average person is crazy. Judging by the comparisons of REAL purchasing power in both china and America... I think it's insane to say china is debasing its currency because real median household purchase power is rising at double digit growth in china, whereas American REAL median household purchasing power in America is falling at a scary rate. It's classic Orwellian doublespeak crazyness I've come to expect from the US government to say china is debasing and America has too strong a dollar. US inflation adjusted income China(which I'm not sure if this is inflation adjusted) TLDR; debasement of currency is why America working class is failing and if the situation with Russia result in further losses... its going to get even worse and fast.

economy

t5_2qhpn

cg4wk41

From what I read...having a weaker currency results in exports going up because it costs less to produce stuff here because wages are artificially low. Not only that, it means domestic demand goes down as well due to a drop in REAL nominal purchasing power per dollar. Keep in mind, commodities don't change in nominal real terms, only in purchasing power. From what the experts are saying about china... they want china to raise its currency so that the people there can switch over to a consumer based economy which effectively lowers the trade surplus because of increased domestic demand and high production wage related costs. Saying that currency debasement is good for the average person is crazy. Judging by the comparisons of REAL purchasing power in both china and America... I think it's insane to say china is debasing its currency because real median household purchase power is rising at double digit growth in china, whereas American REAL median household purchasing power in America is falling at a scary rate. It's classic Orwellian doublespeak crazyness I've come to expect from the US government to say china is debasing and America has too strong a dollar. US inflation adjusted income China(which I'm not sure if this is inflation adjusted)

debasement of currency is why America working class is failing and if the situation with Russia result in further losses... its going to get even worse and fast.

Yosarian2

&gt;From what I read...having a weaker currency results in exports going up because it costs less to produce stuff here because wages are artificially low. In a sense, but "low" only in comparison to a foreign currency. Basically, if the US goes down against the Euro, $100 US will still buy you just as much American made stuff as ever, but it will buy you less European made stuff. The problem is that the fact that the US dollar has been kept artifically high by it's "world reserve currency" status, which drives jobs out of the US by making wages seem higher internationally, without the workers getting much of the benefit of those higher wages (after all, your basic expenses, rent, food, electricity, ect, are all domestic, so they aren't affected). The only real positive effect it has on the US consumer is making imported things somewhat cheaper, which is nice, but at the same time it undermines American industry. We do have to decrease the wealth inequality gap between the rich and the poor in the US, probably by changing our tax policy and perhaps by raising the minimum wage, improving the safety net, improving education, and some other similar measures, but that's totally unrelated to how strong or weak the dollar is compared to foreign currencies. &gt;Judging by the comparisons of REAL purchasing power in both china and America... I think it's insane to say china is debasing its currency That's just it. When China debases it's currency, which of course it has been doing for a long time now, it doesn't cost the average Chinese worker anything, *so long as he buys things made in China and eats things grown in China*. It does cost the Chinese worker more to import stuff from the US, so he does that less. That's part of reason there's such a big trade gap between the US and China. &gt;TLDR; debasement of currency is why America working class is failing ...what? The American currency hasn't been "debased" at all; it's actually overly strong compared to most other international currencies, when looking at relative GDP growth and all that. Inflation is a mostly unrelated issues to the issue of exchange rates, but for the record, inflation has also been at historically low levels, staying under 3% every year since 2008.

>From what I read...having a weaker currency results in exports going up because it costs less to produce stuff here because wages are artificially low. In a sense, but "low" only in comparison to a foreign currency. Basically, if the US goes down against the Euro, $100 US will still buy you just as much American made stuff as ever, but it will buy you less European made stuff. The problem is that the fact that the US dollar has been kept artifically high by it's "world reserve currency" status, which drives jobs out of the US by making wages seem higher internationally, without the workers getting much of the benefit of those higher wages (after all, your basic expenses, rent, food, electricity, ect, are all domestic, so they aren't affected). The only real positive effect it has on the US consumer is making imported things somewhat cheaper, which is nice, but at the same time it undermines American industry. We do have to decrease the wealth inequality gap between the rich and the poor in the US, probably by changing our tax policy and perhaps by raising the minimum wage, improving the safety net, improving education, and some other similar measures, but that's totally unrelated to how strong or weak the dollar is compared to foreign currencies. >Judging by the comparisons of REAL purchasing power in both china and America... I think it's insane to say china is debasing its currency That's just it. When China debases it's currency, which of course it has been doing for a long time now, it doesn't cost the average Chinese worker anything, so long as he buys things made in China and eats things grown in China . It does cost the Chinese worker more to import stuff from the US, so he does that less. That's part of reason there's such a big trade gap between the US and China. >TLDR; debasement of currency is why America working class is failing ...what? The American currency hasn't been "debased" at all; it's actually overly strong compared to most other international currencies, when looking at relative GDP growth and all that. Inflation is a mostly unrelated issues to the issue of exchange rates, but for the record, inflation has also been at historically low levels, staying under 3% every year since 2008.

economy

t5_2qhpn

cg4wxte

From what I read...having a weaker currency results in exports going up because it costs less to produce stuff here because wages are artificially low. In a sense, but "low" only in comparison to a foreign currency. Basically, if the US goes down against the Euro, $100 US will still buy you just as much American made stuff as ever, but it will buy you less European made stuff. The problem is that the fact that the US dollar has been kept artifically high by it's "world reserve currency" status, which drives jobs out of the US by making wages seem higher internationally, without the workers getting much of the benefit of those higher wages (after all, your basic expenses, rent, food, electricity, ect, are all domestic, so they aren't affected). The only real positive effect it has on the US consumer is making imported things somewhat cheaper, which is nice, but at the same time it undermines American industry. We do have to decrease the wealth inequality gap between the rich and the poor in the US, probably by changing our tax policy and perhaps by raising the minimum wage, improving the safety net, improving education, and some other similar measures, but that's totally unrelated to how strong or weak the dollar is compared to foreign currencies. >Judging by the comparisons of REAL purchasing power in both china and America... I think it's insane to say china is debasing its currency That's just it. When China debases it's currency, which of course it has been doing for a long time now, it doesn't cost the average Chinese worker anything, so long as he buys things made in China and eats things grown in China . It does cost the Chinese worker more to import stuff from the US, so he does that less. That's part of reason there's such a big trade gap between the US and China. >

debasement of currency is why America working class is failing ...what? The American currency hasn't been "debased" at all; it's actually overly strong compared to most other international currencies, when looking at relative GDP growth and all that. Inflation is a mostly unrelated issues to the issue of exchange rates, but for the record, inflation has also been at historically low levels, staying under 3% every year since 2008.

newsettler

Don't know about the founding generation but the current ones are in stress and paranoid I mean 94% of non adults and 24% of Adults in sderot show symptoms of PTSD [source]( I mean 70% of the cases in Israel of PTSD had been severe situation and Israeli citizens exainty was second after Japan [source]( (warning links are from offical mental health institutions) TL;DR Israeli current generation is crazy

Don't know about the founding generation but the current ones are in stress and paranoid I mean 94% of non adults and 24% of Adults in sderot show symptoms of PTSD [source]( I mean 70% of the cases in Israel of PTSD had been severe situation and Israeli citizens exainty was second after Japan source TL;DR Israeli current generation is crazy

worldnews

t5_2qh13

cg501lq

Don't know about the founding generation but the current ones are in stress and paranoid I mean 94% of non adults and 24% of Adults in sderot show symptoms of PTSD [source]( I mean 70% of the cases in Israel of PTSD had been severe situation and Israeli citizens exainty was second after Japan source

Israeli current generation is crazy

sciencequiche

^This. One does not consider total viewers, when advertisers only pay for 18-49. TvBytheNumbers creates a Renew/Cancel index that is pegged to the 18-49 rating. "The Renew/Cancel Index is the ratio of a scripted show's new episode adults 18-49 ratings relative to the new episode ratings of the other scripted shows on its own network. It's calculated by dividing a show's new episode Live+Same Day adults 18-49 average rating by the Live+Same Day new episode average of all the new scripted show episodes on the show's own network. The network's average ratings in the calculation are not time weighted (ex. hour long shows are not weighted twice what 30 minute shows are)." For ease, let's compare Cosmos to what else was in the 9 PM slot on Sunday night (Family Guy). FG pulls down a 1.9-2.4 in 18-49 without a football bump. Holding close to the top demo shows of the night - not bad. Most importantly, Cosmos lost less viewers than Resurrection or Believe - two shows that also premiered that week. Resurrection went 3.6-&gt;3.0 (17% loss) and Believe got crushed 2.7-&gt;1.4 (40% loss), compared to 10% loss for Cosmos (2.1-&gt;1.9). If Cosmos stays near the 2.0 line, it will be considered a success. tl;dr - Cosmos is doing well. Math.

^This. One does not consider total viewers, when advertisers only pay for 18-49. TvBytheNumbers creates a Renew/Cancel index that is pegged to the 18-49 rating. "The Renew/Cancel Index is the ratio of a scripted show's new episode adults 18-49 ratings relative to the new episode ratings of the other scripted shows on its own network. It's calculated by dividing a show's new episode Live+Same Day adults 18-49 average rating by the Live+Same Day new episode average of all the new scripted show episodes on the show's own network. The network's average ratings in the calculation are not time weighted (ex. hour long shows are not weighted twice what 30 minute shows are)." For ease, let's compare Cosmos to what else was in the 9 PM slot on Sunday night (Family Guy). FG pulls down a 1.9-2.4 in 18-49 without a football bump. Holding close to the top demo shows of the night - not bad. Most importantly, Cosmos lost less viewers than Resurrection or Believe - two shows that also premiered that week. Resurrection went 3.6->3.0 (17% loss) and Believe got crushed 2.7->1.4 (40% loss), compared to 10% loss for Cosmos (2.1->1.9). If Cosmos stays near the 2.0 line, it will be considered a success. tl;dr - Cosmos is doing well. Math.

Cosmos

t5_2s0xk

cg5524l

This. One does not consider total viewers, when advertisers only pay for 18-49. TvBytheNumbers creates a Renew/Cancel index that is pegged to the 18-49 rating. "The Renew/Cancel Index is the ratio of a scripted show's new episode adults 18-49 ratings relative to the new episode ratings of the other scripted shows on its own network. It's calculated by dividing a show's new episode Live+Same Day adults 18-49 average rating by the Live+Same Day new episode average of all the new scripted show episodes on the show's own network. The network's average ratings in the calculation are not time weighted (ex. hour long shows are not weighted twice what 30 minute shows are)." For ease, let's compare Cosmos to what else was in the 9 PM slot on Sunday night (Family Guy). FG pulls down a 1.9-2.4 in 18-49 without a football bump. Holding close to the top demo shows of the night - not bad. Most importantly, Cosmos lost less viewers than Resurrection or Believe - two shows that also premiered that week. Resurrection went 3.6->3.0 (17% loss) and Believe got crushed 2.7->1.4 (40% loss), compared to 10% loss for Cosmos (2.1->1.9). If Cosmos stays near the 2.0 line, it will be considered a success.

Cosmos is doing well. Math.

MrTra1tor

Worms Ultimate Mayhem (or Worms 4 Mayhem) is different from the rest of the games. It is as turn based as all the other, but it's completly in 3D rather than 2D. The world is not exactly as destructable, but there are a hell of a lot of things you can blow up just like the 2D worms. **TL;DR:** Worms in a 3D world

Worms Ultimate Mayhem (or Worms 4 Mayhem) is different from the rest of the games. It is as turn based as all the other, but it's completly in 3D rather than 2D. The world is not exactly as destructable, but there are a hell of a lot of things you can blow up just like the 2D worms. TL;DR: Worms in a 3D world

Steam

t5_2qwis

cg5g15x

Worms Ultimate Mayhem (or Worms 4 Mayhem) is different from the rest of the games. It is as turn based as all the other, but it's completly in 3D rather than 2D. The world is not exactly as destructable, but there are a hell of a lot of things you can blow up just like the 2D worms.

Worms in a 3D world

afreudtolove

Cargo is AMAZING. If you have a chance, try out their essential lip colours! They are the bomb.com, super pigmented and creamy, and stay on *forever*. I have this palette and it's super blendable and highly pigmented. I JUST hit the pan after using it everyday (sometimes twice) for the past six months. I'm quite pale, and the contour looks super natural or a bit more intense if I layer it accordingly. The highlight in the palette is *okay* (like a 6/10, I'd say, for me) but that's probably because highlighters don't show up on my skin all the time. The blush is really nice, I use it every day. If you're in Western Canada, most London Drugs sell it and have really good deals on occasion! TL;DR: cargo is the bomb.com and I like it.

Cargo is AMAZING. If you have a chance, try out their essential lip colours! They are the bomb.com, super pigmented and creamy, and stay on forever . I have this palette and it's super blendable and highly pigmented. I JUST hit the pan after using it everyday (sometimes twice) for the past six months. I'm quite pale, and the contour looks super natural or a bit more intense if I layer it accordingly. The highlight in the palette is okay (like a 6/10, I'd say, for me) but that's probably because highlighters don't show up on my skin all the time. The blush is really nice, I use it every day. If you're in Western Canada, most London Drugs sell it and have really good deals on occasion! TL;DR: cargo is the bomb.com and I like it.

MakeupAddiction

t5_2rww2

cg5bdla

Cargo is AMAZING. If you have a chance, try out their essential lip colours! They are the bomb.com, super pigmented and creamy, and stay on forever . I have this palette and it's super blendable and highly pigmented. I JUST hit the pan after using it everyday (sometimes twice) for the past six months. I'm quite pale, and the contour looks super natural or a bit more intense if I layer it accordingly. The highlight in the palette is okay (like a 6/10, I'd say, for me) but that's probably because highlighters don't show up on my skin all the time. The blush is really nice, I use it every day. If you're in Western Canada, most London Drugs sell it and have really good deals on occasion!

cargo is the bomb.com and I like it.

Frankie__Spankie

When I was like 14 or 15, I was hanging out with a friend of mine during the summer break. His parents were at work and we were just playing video games most of the time. We got hungry and he decided to grill some burgers. Myself, I had no idea how grills really worked at that age and I suspected he didn't either. He turned the propane tank on and put all the burners on high. He hit the igniter switch and nothing happened. He tried a few more times and still nothing. He decided to go get a lighter. He closed the lid, still left the burners on high with the propane valve open. He actually took a minute or two to find a lighter and came back downstairs. He opens the grill and I took a step back, not because I necessarily saw it coming, but because I knew he wasn't the brightest bulb and would probably screw it up. Meanwhile, he looks in to make sure the lighter is close to the burner, whole hand in the grill, click, boom, big fireball. Nothing caught on fire, all the hair on his arm burnt off completely and so did his eyebrows as well as some hair on his head. No serious injuries, he even laughed about it immediately after. TL:DR - Friend tried starting a grill, left the fuel valve open while he went to find a lighter, started grill with lighter, fireball, lots of lost hair.

When I was like 14 or 15, I was hanging out with a friend of mine during the summer break. His parents were at work and we were just playing video games most of the time. We got hungry and he decided to grill some burgers. Myself, I had no idea how grills really worked at that age and I suspected he didn't either. He turned the propane tank on and put all the burners on high. He hit the igniter switch and nothing happened. He tried a few more times and still nothing. He decided to go get a lighter. He closed the lid, still left the burners on high with the propane valve open. He actually took a minute or two to find a lighter and came back downstairs. He opens the grill and I took a step back, not because I necessarily saw it coming, but because I knew he wasn't the brightest bulb and would probably screw it up. Meanwhile, he looks in to make sure the lighter is close to the burner, whole hand in the grill, click, boom, big fireball. Nothing caught on fire, all the hair on his arm burnt off completely and so did his eyebrows as well as some hair on his head. No serious injuries, he even laughed about it immediately after. TL:DR - Friend tried starting a grill, left the fuel valve open while he went to find a lighter, started grill with lighter, fireball, lots of lost hair.

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cg58fjo

When I was like 14 or 15, I was hanging out with a friend of mine during the summer break. His parents were at work and we were just playing video games most of the time. We got hungry and he decided to grill some burgers. Myself, I had no idea how grills really worked at that age and I suspected he didn't either. He turned the propane tank on and put all the burners on high. He hit the igniter switch and nothing happened. He tried a few more times and still nothing. He decided to go get a lighter. He closed the lid, still left the burners on high with the propane valve open. He actually took a minute or two to find a lighter and came back downstairs. He opens the grill and I took a step back, not because I necessarily saw it coming, but because I knew he wasn't the brightest bulb and would probably screw it up. Meanwhile, he looks in to make sure the lighter is close to the burner, whole hand in the grill, click, boom, big fireball. Nothing caught on fire, all the hair on his arm burnt off completely and so did his eyebrows as well as some hair on his head. No serious injuries, he even laughed about it immediately after.

Friend tried starting a grill, left the fuel valve open while he went to find a lighter, started grill with lighter, fireball, lots of lost hair.

Jasonberg

I think you've hit it on the head. The boys attempt similar greatness with In The Evening but it doesn't live up to the power songs on earlier albums. Dazed, Kashmir, Achilles, etc all go big without a massive reliance on keyboards as the lead instrument. TL;DR heroin (Page) and alcohol (Bonham) is a hell of a drug.

I think you've hit it on the head. The boys attempt similar greatness with In The Evening but it doesn't live up to the power songs on earlier albums. Dazed, Kashmir, Achilles, etc all go big without a massive reliance on keyboards as the lead instrument. TL;DR heroin (Page) and alcohol (Bonham) is a hell of a drug.

led_zeppelin

t5_2shnv

cg7cmmv

I think you've hit it on the head. The boys attempt similar greatness with In The Evening but it doesn't live up to the power songs on earlier albums. Dazed, Kashmir, Achilles, etc all go big without a massive reliance on keyboards as the lead instrument.

heroin (Page) and alcohol (Bonham) is a hell of a drug.

alphahatter

Kills dont matter much if you dont take objectives. More than anything, taking down inhibs will win you games. Let's say you're doing well in bot. The enemy outer turret is destroyed. Depending on the situation, you can either push bot to get that inner turret then help mid, or immediately go mid and help take down their tower. If you think that you're team is doing bad, it's probably not a bad idea to split push. There are some situations where one of my team mates would engage when they dont need to, resulting in unnecessary team fights. In situations like these, run top or bot and try to take down a tower. Most of the time, they will send one or two people to gank you so always check the map when you do this. I personally like to roam a lot as an ADC because it pressures the enemy team. In my recent games as adc, i'd average about 9-12 kills per game but we still won, even if my team mates were kind of not good. I like to think that I carried these games because I prioritize **objectives** , but that doesn't mean I don't help out in team fights. Ask yourself, is it worth pushing this lane first, or should I join the teamfight? If you make the right decision, your team could score an ace or lose a team fight BUT created more pressure on the enemy team. Aside from inhibs, you can get dragon, or baron if the situation calls it. This is why pro players have lower kill rates compared to people in lower elo who would get 30/7 and still lose. Besides kills, they focus on other important ***objectives***, that if taken, would give them a **higher** chance of winning the game. Tl;dr **Objectives.** edit: grammar

Kills dont matter much if you dont take objectives. More than anything, taking down inhibs will win you games. Let's say you're doing well in bot. The enemy outer turret is destroyed. Depending on the situation, you can either push bot to get that inner turret then help mid, or immediately go mid and help take down their tower. If you think that you're team is doing bad, it's probably not a bad idea to split push. There are some situations where one of my team mates would engage when they dont need to, resulting in unnecessary team fights. In situations like these, run top or bot and try to take down a tower. Most of the time, they will send one or two people to gank you so always check the map when you do this. I personally like to roam a lot as an ADC because it pressures the enemy team. In my recent games as adc, i'd average about 9-12 kills per game but we still won, even if my team mates were kind of not good. I like to think that I carried these games because I prioritize objectives , but that doesn't mean I don't help out in team fights. Ask yourself, is it worth pushing this lane first, or should I join the teamfight? If you make the right decision, your team could score an ace or lose a team fight BUT created more pressure on the enemy team. Aside from inhibs, you can get dragon, or baron if the situation calls it. This is why pro players have lower kill rates compared to people in lower elo who would get 30/7 and still lose. Besides kills, they focus on other important objectives , that if taken, would give them a higher chance of winning the game. Tl;dr Objectives. edit: grammar

summonerschool

t5_2t9x3

cg676uw

Kills dont matter much if you dont take objectives. More than anything, taking down inhibs will win you games. Let's say you're doing well in bot. The enemy outer turret is destroyed. Depending on the situation, you can either push bot to get that inner turret then help mid, or immediately go mid and help take down their tower. If you think that you're team is doing bad, it's probably not a bad idea to split push. There are some situations where one of my team mates would engage when they dont need to, resulting in unnecessary team fights. In situations like these, run top or bot and try to take down a tower. Most of the time, they will send one or two people to gank you so always check the map when you do this. I personally like to roam a lot as an ADC because it pressures the enemy team. In my recent games as adc, i'd average about 9-12 kills per game but we still won, even if my team mates were kind of not good. I like to think that I carried these games because I prioritize objectives , but that doesn't mean I don't help out in team fights. Ask yourself, is it worth pushing this lane first, or should I join the teamfight? If you make the right decision, your team could score an ace or lose a team fight BUT created more pressure on the enemy team. Aside from inhibs, you can get dragon, or baron if the situation calls it. This is why pro players have lower kill rates compared to people in lower elo who would get 30/7 and still lose. Besides kills, they focus on other important objectives , that if taken, would give them a higher chance of winning the game.

Objectives. edit: grammar

wadewils0n

To be honest if im ADC and I start strong 5+ kills 0 or 1 deaths and the rest of my team is doing bad, I'll push my turret and then go help mid but I won't take kills, I feed him just so that in team fights we have burst damage from ADC and APC, usually this results in enemy jungle and bot lane coming mid so we play safe and that takes some pressure off top with ganks to compose himself. tl;dr If I'm fed I force mid game early to try and get advantage in team fights.

To be honest if im ADC and I start strong 5+ kills 0 or 1 deaths and the rest of my team is doing bad, I'll push my turret and then go help mid but I won't take kills, I feed him just so that in team fights we have burst damage from ADC and APC, usually this results in enemy jungle and bot lane coming mid so we play safe and that takes some pressure off top with ganks to compose himself. tl;dr If I'm fed I force mid game early to try and get advantage in team fights.

summonerschool

t5_2t9x3

cg61fmh

To be honest if im ADC and I start strong 5+ kills 0 or 1 deaths and the rest of my team is doing bad, I'll push my turret and then go help mid but I won't take kills, I feed him just so that in team fights we have burst damage from ADC and APC, usually this results in enemy jungle and bot lane coming mid so we play safe and that takes some pressure off top with ganks to compose himself.

If I'm fed I force mid game early to try and get advantage in team fights.

Greenitthe

I would approve of an area in C&amp;D to be the quiet meeting place. Like a heavily wooded forest-y area or something, probably with birds chirping in the background. But I think it does need tasks, otherwise it seems like a waste of space on the map. That said, I'm interested in seeing where they add their new playground for the classic toons. Perhaps another section gets opened for expansion or something. If so, I would be fine if C&amp;D acted as a kind of buffer zone between the low-level content (Central-Dreamland) and the new high-level content (likely Old School Playground-Unreleased Playground). Additionally, those who want TTR to be as close to the original as possible don't have to ever cross from OldTown to NewTown, and as much new content is hidden from those who want it hidden, as possible. Also great since that would make plenty of room for expansion, and it would become like a hub-world, if you will, which would get more toons there (making it more of a social playground), since often when I go it is empty: no guilds, no soloers, nothing. tl;dr I want a forest zone and AA should separate the high and low content.

I would approve of an area in C&D to be the quiet meeting place. Like a heavily wooded forest-y area or something, probably with birds chirping in the background. But I think it does need tasks, otherwise it seems like a waste of space on the map. That said, I'm interested in seeing where they add their new playground for the classic toons. Perhaps another section gets opened for expansion or something. If so, I would be fine if C&D acted as a kind of buffer zone between the low-level content (Central-Dreamland) and the new high-level content (likely Old School Playground-Unreleased Playground). Additionally, those who want TTR to be as close to the original as possible don't have to ever cross from OldTown to NewTown, and as much new content is hidden from those who want it hidden, as possible. Also great since that would make plenty of room for expansion, and it would become like a hub-world, if you will, which would get more toons there (making it more of a social playground), since often when I go it is empty: no guilds, no soloers, nothing. tl;dr I want a forest zone and AA should separate the high and low content.

Toontown

t5_2sgii

cg6wv9c

I would approve of an area in C&D to be the quiet meeting place. Like a heavily wooded forest-y area or something, probably with birds chirping in the background. But I think it does need tasks, otherwise it seems like a waste of space on the map. That said, I'm interested in seeing where they add their new playground for the classic toons. Perhaps another section gets opened for expansion or something. If so, I would be fine if C&D acted as a kind of buffer zone between the low-level content (Central-Dreamland) and the new high-level content (likely Old School Playground-Unreleased Playground). Additionally, those who want TTR to be as close to the original as possible don't have to ever cross from OldTown to NewTown, and as much new content is hidden from those who want it hidden, as possible. Also great since that would make plenty of room for expansion, and it would become like a hub-world, if you will, which would get more toons there (making it more of a social playground), since often when I go it is empty: no guilds, no soloers, nothing.

I want a forest zone and AA should separate the high and low content.

ButterflyGraveyard

Yay! Recognition in the reddit community!!! I'm going to be skipping all day today. Thunder not stolen :D If anything thunder granted! I feel like Bronte :D Thank you! The first time I realized that stupid little things made me cry. Nana: Anytime I interact with my father (I've always wanted to cry but now I can express those feelings.) Overwhelming dysphoria and being asked the same question to elicit a different response. Never again going to get my eyebrows threaded at the Montclair Plaza (the shop by GAME STOP) S.HA.P.E.? Never again, ugh! Every time I come out to someone I'm afraid of loosing, every time I shave and I feel like there's more hair there not than last week, the fact that I haven't had a partner in almost 6 years, every time I hug my body pillow and remember the warmth of holding someone, seeing a pretty girl at the bar and knowing that I'll never be *that* pretty, looking at some random bloke and remembering how hard it was to hold in all the feelings and wished I had come out at 19 instead of denying who I was, being scared... I didn't know fear as a boy, remembering a particular dream I had 3 years ago where I think I felt love for the first and only time, writing this post because I feel so, so vulnerable... But it feels good to cry. I cry when no one is around but it feels good :') TL;DR: Everything. Particularly loneliness but it's okay.

Yay! Recognition in the reddit community!!! I'm going to be skipping all day today. Thunder not stolen :D If anything thunder granted! I feel like Bronte :D Thank you! The first time I realized that stupid little things made me cry. Nana: Anytime I interact with my father (I've always wanted to cry but now I can express those feelings.) Overwhelming dysphoria and being asked the same question to elicit a different response. Never again going to get my eyebrows threaded at the Montclair Plaza (the shop by GAME STOP) S.HA.P.E.? Never again, ugh! Every time I come out to someone I'm afraid of loosing, every time I shave and I feel like there's more hair there not than last week, the fact that I haven't had a partner in almost 6 years, every time I hug my body pillow and remember the warmth of holding someone, seeing a pretty girl at the bar and knowing that I'll never be that pretty, looking at some random bloke and remembering how hard it was to hold in all the feelings and wished I had come out at 19 instead of denying who I was, being scared... I didn't know fear as a boy, remembering a particular dream I had 3 years ago where I think I felt love for the first and only time, writing this post because I feel so, so vulnerable... But it feels good to cry. I cry when no one is around but it feels good :') TL;DR: Everything. Particularly loneliness but it's okay.

asktransgender

t5_2r4b9

cg6fgu6

Yay! Recognition in the reddit community!!! I'm going to be skipping all day today. Thunder not stolen :D If anything thunder granted! I feel like Bronte :D Thank you! The first time I realized that stupid little things made me cry. Nana: Anytime I interact with my father (I've always wanted to cry but now I can express those feelings.) Overwhelming dysphoria and being asked the same question to elicit a different response. Never again going to get my eyebrows threaded at the Montclair Plaza (the shop by GAME STOP) S.HA.P.E.? Never again, ugh! Every time I come out to someone I'm afraid of loosing, every time I shave and I feel like there's more hair there not than last week, the fact that I haven't had a partner in almost 6 years, every time I hug my body pillow and remember the warmth of holding someone, seeing a pretty girl at the bar and knowing that I'll never be that pretty, looking at some random bloke and remembering how hard it was to hold in all the feelings and wished I had come out at 19 instead of denying who I was, being scared... I didn't know fear as a boy, remembering a particular dream I had 3 years ago where I think I felt love for the first and only time, writing this post because I feel so, so vulnerable... But it feels good to cry. I cry when no one is around but it feels good :')

Everything. Particularly loneliness but it's okay.

jrlizardking

Definitely play dark souls 1 if you liked this game. I'm only about 20 hours in on this one but the core mechanics of the game are very similar. I think what you will really miss is the teleporting between bonfires which you don't get until way later in the game. Also, if you are a ps3 owner, I'd recommend giving demons souls a shots its technically the predecessor of dark souls. All three games are very similar , and if you enjoyed this one as much as most of us do, then I wouldn't hesitate to get them. Demons souls is one of my all time favourite games. Tl;Dr if you liked dark souls 2, definitely play demons souls and dark souls 1 as the core games are all very similar.

Definitely play dark souls 1 if you liked this game. I'm only about 20 hours in on this one but the core mechanics of the game are very similar. I think what you will really miss is the teleporting between bonfires which you don't get until way later in the game. Also, if you are a ps3 owner, I'd recommend giving demons souls a shots its technically the predecessor of dark souls. All three games are very similar , and if you enjoyed this one as much as most of us do, then I wouldn't hesitate to get them. Demons souls is one of my all time favourite games. Tl;Dr if you liked dark souls 2, definitely play demons souls and dark souls 1 as the core games are all very similar.

DarkSouls2

t5_2vqni

cg6dj2k

Definitely play dark souls 1 if you liked this game. I'm only about 20 hours in on this one but the core mechanics of the game are very similar. I think what you will really miss is the teleporting between bonfires which you don't get until way later in the game. Also, if you are a ps3 owner, I'd recommend giving demons souls a shots its technically the predecessor of dark souls. All three games are very similar , and if you enjoyed this one as much as most of us do, then I wouldn't hesitate to get them. Demons souls is one of my all time favourite games.

if you liked dark souls 2, definitely play demons souls and dark souls 1 as the core games are all very similar.

StavromulaDelta

I played this at a local board game night and whilst it was a great idea we all found it a bit fiddley. Nb. The box I was playing with had "beta" written on it. I don't have big man hands by any means, but there's a lot of small tokens and positioning the 3d structures on the small park board that had me (and the others) on edge trying not to screw up, especially when you're scrambling to re-roll and grab the initiative first. Tldr: great concept but could do with being more sturdy.

I played this at a local board game night and whilst it was a great idea we all found it a bit fiddley. Nb. The box I was playing with had "beta" written on it. I don't have big man hands by any means, but there's a lot of small tokens and positioning the 3d structures on the small park board that had me (and the others) on edge trying not to screw up, especially when you're scrambling to re-roll and grab the initiative first. Tldr: great concept but could do with being more sturdy.

boardgames

t5_2qmjp

cg73wy2

I played this at a local board game night and whilst it was a great idea we all found it a bit fiddley. Nb. The box I was playing with had "beta" written on it. I don't have big man hands by any means, but there's a lot of small tokens and positioning the 3d structures on the small park board that had me (and the others) on edge trying not to screw up, especially when you're scrambling to re-roll and grab the initiative first.

great concept but could do with being more sturdy.

pumpkinrum

No, you're not alone. As /u/Acheros stated, it can be attributed to the fact that no one writes about women feeling perfectly safe, happy.. 'normal'. If there'd be an article like that, I think a lot of people might react with a ".. yeah, okay, so?" attitude, since it's normal to not be afraid of everything. I've been raped, and I've seen my fair share of abuse my men (not towards me, mind, but I've been a witness). I'm not afraid of men. Someone wants to chat me up? Okay. Cool. Whatever. I had a lovely conversation with a homeless guy (big, bulky, could overpower me if he wished) about books, and it was no big deal. I've socked guys who've overstepped the line and refused to accept firm no's. I've told guys no when they've wanted more than I wanted to give, and they've walked away without a fuss. I've also done the same to women. Crazy, crazy women thinking everyone wants to get laid just cause you go to a LGBT-bar. No, thank you, keep your fingers away from my hoo-hah and my kabooz.. Should I be afraid of women, cause they do that? ..Anyway, **TL:DR: No, you're not alone, thank god. Us women who're not afraid just don't scream as loud as the ones who are afraid of everything**

No, you're not alone. As /u/Acheros stated, it can be attributed to the fact that no one writes about women feeling perfectly safe, happy.. 'normal'. If there'd be an article like that, I think a lot of people might react with a ".. yeah, okay, so?" attitude, since it's normal to not be afraid of everything. I've been raped, and I've seen my fair share of abuse my men (not towards me, mind, but I've been a witness). I'm not afraid of men. Someone wants to chat me up? Okay. Cool. Whatever. I had a lovely conversation with a homeless guy (big, bulky, could overpower me if he wished) about books, and it was no big deal. I've socked guys who've overstepped the line and refused to accept firm no's. I've told guys no when they've wanted more than I wanted to give, and they've walked away without a fuss. I've also done the same to women. Crazy, crazy women thinking everyone wants to get laid just cause you go to a LGBT-bar. No, thank you, keep your fingers away from my hoo-hah and my kabooz.. Should I be afraid of women, cause they do that? ..Anyway, TL:DR: No, you're not alone, thank god. Us women who're not afraid just don't scream as loud as the ones who are afraid of everything

TumblrInAction

t5_2vizz

cg6tooj

No, you're not alone. As /u/Acheros stated, it can be attributed to the fact that no one writes about women feeling perfectly safe, happy.. 'normal'. If there'd be an article like that, I think a lot of people might react with a ".. yeah, okay, so?" attitude, since it's normal to not be afraid of everything. I've been raped, and I've seen my fair share of abuse my men (not towards me, mind, but I've been a witness). I'm not afraid of men. Someone wants to chat me up? Okay. Cool. Whatever. I had a lovely conversation with a homeless guy (big, bulky, could overpower me if he wished) about books, and it was no big deal. I've socked guys who've overstepped the line and refused to accept firm no's. I've told guys no when they've wanted more than I wanted to give, and they've walked away without a fuss. I've also done the same to women. Crazy, crazy women thinking everyone wants to get laid just cause you go to a LGBT-bar. No, thank you, keep your fingers away from my hoo-hah and my kabooz.. Should I be afraid of women, cause they do that? ..Anyway,

No, you're not alone, thank god. Us women who're not afraid just don't scream as loud as the ones who are afraid of everything

PretentiousCountess

Regarding creepy Euro men, there's a subset of guys over there in tourism-heavy countries that make a point of going after the pretty young American students because the stereotype is they're easy. These man-children are usually the emotionally stunted fuckwits who have already struck out with the entire female population of their home country, so they go for "vulnerable" foreign visitors who they figure will be all over their accents. It's definitely a thing...however I would think of it as comparable to what I see in the States a lot, which is douchey American guys exclusively chasing the immigrant Asian girls because of the belief that they are all so submissive and worship Western men. TL;DR douchebags gonna douche to foreign girls wherever.

Regarding creepy Euro men, there's a subset of guys over there in tourism-heavy countries that make a point of going after the pretty young American students because the stereotype is they're easy. These man-children are usually the emotionally stunted fuckwits who have already struck out with the entire female population of their home country, so they go for "vulnerable" foreign visitors who they figure will be all over their accents. It's definitely a thing...however I would think of it as comparable to what I see in the States a lot, which is douchey American guys exclusively chasing the immigrant Asian girls because of the belief that they are all so submissive and worship Western men. TL;DR douchebags gonna douche to foreign girls wherever.

TumblrInAction

t5_2vizz

cg721d7

Regarding creepy Euro men, there's a subset of guys over there in tourism-heavy countries that make a point of going after the pretty young American students because the stereotype is they're easy. These man-children are usually the emotionally stunted fuckwits who have already struck out with the entire female population of their home country, so they go for "vulnerable" foreign visitors who they figure will be all over their accents. It's definitely a thing...however I would think of it as comparable to what I see in the States a lot, which is douchey American guys exclusively chasing the immigrant Asian girls because of the belief that they are all so submissive and worship Western men.

douchebags gonna douche to foreign girls wherever.

masterofthecontinuum

My guess as to how to prevent stuff like this in the future, is if you give out free stuff, or loan out items, be sure the recipient gives you something too. even just some shitty weapon, just something so that the trade is 'balanced', and the recipient doesn't fall into bad luck such as this. If OP had given his friend a single weapon during that key trade, he might have been alright. Hindsight is 20/20, but now hopefully our foresight will be too. **TL;DR** When you receive a gift, give a junk item in return so as not to alert the ban police.

My guess as to how to prevent stuff like this in the future, is if you give out free stuff, or loan out items, be sure the recipient gives you something too. even just some shitty weapon, just something so that the trade is 'balanced', and the recipient doesn't fall into bad luck such as this. If OP had given his friend a single weapon during that key trade, he might have been alright. Hindsight is 20/20, but now hopefully our foresight will be too. TL;DR When you receive a gift, give a junk item in return so as not to alert the ban police.

tf2

t5_2qka0

cg6xhlm

My guess as to how to prevent stuff like this in the future, is if you give out free stuff, or loan out items, be sure the recipient gives you something too. even just some shitty weapon, just something so that the trade is 'balanced', and the recipient doesn't fall into bad luck such as this. If OP had given his friend a single weapon during that key trade, he might have been alright. Hindsight is 20/20, but now hopefully our foresight will be too.

When you receive a gift, give a junk item in return so as not to alert the ban police.

abcdthc

I came here looking for someone like you to ask a question. Im new to HS. I understand CCGS (Crazy ccgs like l5r) I get this game sort of (I have really limited cards, so get the this game at the novice level where the 4/5 for 4 is pretty good card and owls and knife jugglers are preemo. WHat im wondering is what is the effective mana cost of life? At what point do I attack hero instead of champ. (If I have 4-4 and you have a 1-1 do I kill the 1-1 or attack you? When does taking life effectivly balance out a trade? Also if I spend 2 cards and 4 mana to kill your 5 mana cost creature, who won the trade? What if i had to discard a card to play a succubus? Do I still have board advantage? IDK if I phrased these right, hpoping you or someone on here can answer. TLDR, Can someone good at the game help me understand trades a little better. I only play casual so far (I have like 3 packs worth of cards, nothing great) I usually do win my games, the one i dont win somtimes I have a very hard time figuring out where I went wrong. Usually im debating trades I made. Thanks in advance!

I came here looking for someone like you to ask a question. Im new to HS. I understand CCGS (Crazy ccgs like l5r) I get this game sort of (I have really limited cards, so get the this game at the novice level where the 4/5 for 4 is pretty good card and owls and knife jugglers are preemo. WHat im wondering is what is the effective mana cost of life? At what point do I attack hero instead of champ. (If I have 4-4 and you have a 1-1 do I kill the 1-1 or attack you? When does taking life effectivly balance out a trade? Also if I spend 2 cards and 4 mana to kill your 5 mana cost creature, who won the trade? What if i had to discard a card to play a succubus? Do I still have board advantage? IDK if I phrased these right, hpoping you or someone on here can answer. TLDR, Can someone good at the game help me understand trades a little better. I only play casual so far (I have like 3 packs worth of cards, nothing great) I usually do win my games, the one i dont win somtimes I have a very hard time figuring out where I went wrong. Usually im debating trades I made. Thanks in advance!

hearthstone

t5_2w31t

cg7h4xn

I came here looking for someone like you to ask a question. Im new to HS. I understand CCGS (Crazy ccgs like l5r) I get this game sort of (I have really limited cards, so get the this game at the novice level where the 4/5 for 4 is pretty good card and owls and knife jugglers are preemo. WHat im wondering is what is the effective mana cost of life? At what point do I attack hero instead of champ. (If I have 4-4 and you have a 1-1 do I kill the 1-1 or attack you? When does taking life effectivly balance out a trade? Also if I spend 2 cards and 4 mana to kill your 5 mana cost creature, who won the trade? What if i had to discard a card to play a succubus? Do I still have board advantage? IDK if I phrased these right, hpoping you or someone on here can answer.

Can someone good at the game help me understand trades a little better. I only play casual so far (I have like 3 packs worth of cards, nothing great) I usually do win my games, the one i dont win somtimes I have a very hard time figuring out where I went wrong. Usually im debating trades I made. Thanks in advance!

Garrison_Creeker

There is huge real estate overinflation. The bubble will pop for sure. Only the really desirable areas for houses will weather it reasonably well. Condos, especially small ones, are going to get creamed. This always builds slowly and picks up momentum. So if you buy now at near peak price you will lose and quite possibly be stuck with it for over ten years unless you're prepared to take a big financial hit. Also be aware that new condos always start out with artificially low fees. That never lasts and WILL go up 50-100 percent within 5-10 years. In short, it's a huge risk with little financial upside. It also anchors you if you need to move. tl/dr: It's a horrible idea

There is huge real estate overinflation. The bubble will pop for sure. Only the really desirable areas for houses will weather it reasonably well. Condos, especially small ones, are going to get creamed. This always builds slowly and picks up momentum. So if you buy now at near peak price you will lose and quite possibly be stuck with it for over ten years unless you're prepared to take a big financial hit. Also be aware that new condos always start out with artificially low fees. That never lasts and WILL go up 50-100 percent within 5-10 years. In short, it's a huge risk with little financial upside. It also anchors you if you need to move. tl/dr: It's a horrible idea

toronto

t5_2qi63

cg6wx8d

There is huge real estate overinflation. The bubble will pop for sure. Only the really desirable areas for houses will weather it reasonably well. Condos, especially small ones, are going to get creamed. This always builds slowly and picks up momentum. So if you buy now at near peak price you will lose and quite possibly be stuck with it for over ten years unless you're prepared to take a big financial hit. Also be aware that new condos always start out with artificially low fees. That never lasts and WILL go up 50-100 percent within 5-10 years. In short, it's a huge risk with little financial upside. It also anchors you if you need to move.

It's a horrible idea

AnimeJ

Watch Ranger a bit more closely. He's watching the puck, turns and looks away, then required it, turning back to make a play. Killorn was head hunting and ignoring the puck completely. On top of that, he brings the elbow up to the back of Rangers neck, rather than hitting him clean on the numbers. Tldr: dirty hit, needs a suspension.

Watch Ranger a bit more closely. He's watching the puck, turns and looks away, then required it, turning back to make a play. Killorn was head hunting and ignoring the puck completely. On top of that, he brings the elbow up to the back of Rangers neck, rather than hitting him clean on the numbers. Tldr: dirty hit, needs a suspension.

nhl

t5_2qrrq

cg72rv7

Watch Ranger a bit more closely. He's watching the puck, turns and looks away, then required it, turning back to make a play. Killorn was head hunting and ignoring the puck completely. On top of that, he brings the elbow up to the back of Rangers neck, rather than hitting him clean on the numbers.

dirty hit, needs a suspension.

Tyler11223344

Personally I started a few weeks ago with a $30 EVOD starter kit (Sorta, a friend bought it but decided he wanted a multi-voltage battery so I bought the battery and charger off him and picked up a $4 clearomizer to go with it, so its *basically* the starter kit) and I've only smoked one cig since (Still regret it, didn't/couldn't take my kit through an airport so at my destination I caved for one :( ) but the setup itself is *fantastic*. In total it was $26 for me and it easily replaces real cigs. My only regret with the whole ecig thing was spending $40 on a Blu kit a week before I got this real one, I decided I wanted to quit that day before I hurt myself with cigs further and bought the most available "ecig" that I could (Blu's barely even count as ecigs imho). Plus, after looking at google maps, I found out there's a local shop near me, which was unexpected because I **really** didn't expect there to be any in the rural deep south. Sorry for the essay: Tl;dr Get a starter kit (EVOD's good) and don't waste money on Blu ecigs, and you'll be set before you know it.

Personally I started a few weeks ago with a $30 EVOD starter kit (Sorta, a friend bought it but decided he wanted a multi-voltage battery so I bought the battery and charger off him and picked up a $4 clearomizer to go with it, so its basically the starter kit) and I've only smoked one cig since (Still regret it, didn't/couldn't take my kit through an airport so at my destination I caved for one :( ) but the setup itself is fantastic . In total it was $26 for me and it easily replaces real cigs. My only regret with the whole ecig thing was spending $40 on a Blu kit a week before I got this real one, I decided I wanted to quit that day before I hurt myself with cigs further and bought the most available "ecig" that I could (Blu's barely even count as ecigs imho). Plus, after looking at google maps, I found out there's a local shop near me, which was unexpected because I really didn't expect there to be any in the rural deep south. Sorry for the essay: Tl;dr Get a starter kit (EVOD's good) and don't waste money on Blu ecigs, and you'll be set before you know it.

electronic_cigarette

t5_2qmlu

cg7mu8k

Personally I started a few weeks ago with a $30 EVOD starter kit (Sorta, a friend bought it but decided he wanted a multi-voltage battery so I bought the battery and charger off him and picked up a $4 clearomizer to go with it, so its basically the starter kit) and I've only smoked one cig since (Still regret it, didn't/couldn't take my kit through an airport so at my destination I caved for one :( ) but the setup itself is fantastic . In total it was $26 for me and it easily replaces real cigs. My only regret with the whole ecig thing was spending $40 on a Blu kit a week before I got this real one, I decided I wanted to quit that day before I hurt myself with cigs further and bought the most available "ecig" that I could (Blu's barely even count as ecigs imho). Plus, after looking at google maps, I found out there's a local shop near me, which was unexpected because I really didn't expect there to be any in the rural deep south. Sorry for the essay:

Get a starter kit (EVOD's good) and don't waste money on Blu ecigs, and you'll be set before you know it.

T3hSource

It just fell flat on its face and was still trying to pull your heart strings, every development just seemed rushed and unnatural. There simply isn't enough time to squeeze in talk no jutsu, we just have to assume things just happened because FEELS. Which is bad storytelling when you aren't given enough time to understand and empathize with Kinoe/Tenzo/Yamato(what's his name again?). I'm much more attached to bad Obito(redemption Obito hasn't been anything of note yet, aside from being ridiculous), because I see a disappointed idealist turned cynical and destructive. I don't see Kinoe being a confused child, aside from survivor's guilt he has nothing else to empathize with. Even Kakashi's guilt is better done, because we knew who Rin was and what she was for both Kakashi and Obito. Another thing is the Hokages and Danzo being the usual plot devices that they are with masks of characters. Who give little explanation and reasoning to their decisions, making them feel dry. tl;dr Kishi: FEEL HIS PAINNNN! Me:Give me a reason to really give a damn.

It just fell flat on its face and was still trying to pull your heart strings, every development just seemed rushed and unnatural. There simply isn't enough time to squeeze in talk no jutsu, we just have to assume things just happened because FEELS. Which is bad storytelling when you aren't given enough time to understand and empathize with Kinoe/Tenzo/Yamato(what's his name again?). I'm much more attached to bad Obito(redemption Obito hasn't been anything of note yet, aside from being ridiculous), because I see a disappointed idealist turned cynical and destructive. I don't see Kinoe being a confused child, aside from survivor's guilt he has nothing else to empathize with. Even Kakashi's guilt is better done, because we knew who Rin was and what she was for both Kakashi and Obito. Another thing is the Hokages and Danzo being the usual plot devices that they are with masks of characters. Who give little explanation and reasoning to their decisions, making them feel dry. tl;dr Kishi: FEEL HIS PAINNNN! Me:Give me a reason to really give a damn.

Naruto

t5_2quts

cg7f6nx

It just fell flat on its face and was still trying to pull your heart strings, every development just seemed rushed and unnatural. There simply isn't enough time to squeeze in talk no jutsu, we just have to assume things just happened because FEELS. Which is bad storytelling when you aren't given enough time to understand and empathize with Kinoe/Tenzo/Yamato(what's his name again?). I'm much more attached to bad Obito(redemption Obito hasn't been anything of note yet, aside from being ridiculous), because I see a disappointed idealist turned cynical and destructive. I don't see Kinoe being a confused child, aside from survivor's guilt he has nothing else to empathize with. Even Kakashi's guilt is better done, because we knew who Rin was and what she was for both Kakashi and Obito. Another thing is the Hokages and Danzo being the usual plot devices that they are with masks of characters. Who give little explanation and reasoning to their decisions, making them feel dry.

Kishi: FEEL HIS PAINNNN! Me:Give me a reason to really give a damn.

RossTheRed

Alright guys not to sound pompous but I'm pretty sure I win this thread this week. I am an LFR Hero who casually gets to Flex with my guild when I don't have anything going on on Mondays (read: Winter and Spring Break). I got lucky with two piece from celestials (never had tokens drop in LFR or Flex), and two warforged pieces in like the two months I've had this Cloak off Ordos. So, here I am, trying my darned hardest to get good when time is an issue, then I suddenly see an LFM for DPS for 25 Man Garrosh in /2 and decide I'll go for it. Long Story short, we blitz every boss but Garrosh over the course of two nights and I make out like a Bandit. Seriously, I got: * Enchanted Shao-Tien Saber (Warforged) * Immersus Crystaline Eye (Warforged) * Spaulders of the Barbed Assassin * Chest of the Barbed Assassin * Unrepentant Heels (Warforged) * Ring of Restless Energy (Warforged) * Nazgrim's Gutripper And those are just what I am using now, I also got the Thok Dagger which I will use for my Assassination off-spec and I got some gloves off a coin that I vendored because they were worse than my tier. TL:DR - 1 Run in a PUG snagged my 7 upgrades 4 of them Warforged and an OS wep off Normal from a former LFR Hero! :)

Alright guys not to sound pompous but I'm pretty sure I win this thread this week. I am an LFR Hero who casually gets to Flex with my guild when I don't have anything going on on Mondays (read: Winter and Spring Break). I got lucky with two piece from celestials (never had tokens drop in LFR or Flex), and two warforged pieces in like the two months I've had this Cloak off Ordos. So, here I am, trying my darned hardest to get good when time is an issue, then I suddenly see an LFM for DPS for 25 Man Garrosh in /2 and decide I'll go for it. Long Story short, we blitz every boss but Garrosh over the course of two nights and I make out like a Bandit. Seriously, I got: Enchanted Shao-Tien Saber (Warforged) Immersus Crystaline Eye (Warforged) Spaulders of the Barbed Assassin Chest of the Barbed Assassin Unrepentant Heels (Warforged) Ring of Restless Energy (Warforged) Nazgrim's Gutripper And those are just what I am using now, I also got the Thok Dagger which I will use for my Assassination off-spec and I got some gloves off a coin that I vendored because they were worse than my tier. TL:DR - 1 Run in a PUG snagged my 7 upgrades 4 of them Warforged and an OS wep off Normal from a former LFR Hero! :)

wow

t5_2qio8

cg7k0r5

Alright guys not to sound pompous but I'm pretty sure I win this thread this week. I am an LFR Hero who casually gets to Flex with my guild when I don't have anything going on on Mondays (read: Winter and Spring Break). I got lucky with two piece from celestials (never had tokens drop in LFR or Flex), and two warforged pieces in like the two months I've had this Cloak off Ordos. So, here I am, trying my darned hardest to get good when time is an issue, then I suddenly see an LFM for DPS for 25 Man Garrosh in /2 and decide I'll go for it. Long Story short, we blitz every boss but Garrosh over the course of two nights and I make out like a Bandit. Seriously, I got: Enchanted Shao-Tien Saber (Warforged) Immersus Crystaline Eye (Warforged) Spaulders of the Barbed Assassin Chest of the Barbed Assassin Unrepentant Heels (Warforged) Ring of Restless Energy (Warforged) Nazgrim's Gutripper And those are just what I am using now, I also got the Thok Dagger which I will use for my Assassination off-spec and I got some gloves off a coin that I vendored because they were worse than my tier.

1 Run in a PUG snagged my 7 upgrades 4 of them Warforged and an OS wep off Normal from a former LFR Hero! :)

iVoteKick

When you get hired by Blizzard, do you have to attend a PR class that teaches you the age old technique of writing incredibly long statements and posts that contain so little information, or no information at all? No other company seems to be capable of producing such vague insight. tl;dr, "Players ladder for different reasons that make them enjoy sc, and that's good"

When you get hired by Blizzard, do you have to attend a PR class that teaches you the age old technique of writing incredibly long statements and posts that contain so little information, or no information at all? No other company seems to be capable of producing such vague insight. tl;dr, "Players ladder for different reasons that make them enjoy sc, and that's good"

starcraft

t5_2qpp6

cg7jktv

When you get hired by Blizzard, do you have to attend a PR class that teaches you the age old technique of writing incredibly long statements and posts that contain so little information, or no information at all? No other company seems to be capable of producing such vague insight.

Players ladder for different reasons that make them enjoy sc, and that's good"

hibscotty

Not my favourite but most memorable. I was flying through the air and looked down to see a smoking cannon so obviously I had just been shot out of a cannon,I saw a tree inside a cave so headed for that,I landed on a branch and there was this boxing glove on stick so I picked it up and started punching these fluorescent octopi in the face with it,then I dove in the water and pulled a big plug. TL:DR Shot out a cannon,landed in a tree,punched a few octopi and pulled a plug

Not my favourite but most memorable. I was flying through the air and looked down to see a smoking cannon so obviously I had just been shot out of a cannon,I saw a tree inside a cave so headed for that,I landed on a branch and there was this boxing glove on stick so I picked it up and started punching these fluorescent octopi in the face with it,then I dove in the water and pulled a big plug. TL:DR Shot out a cannon,landed in a tree,punched a few octopi and pulled a plug

AskReddit

t5_2qh1i

cg7rtjr

Not my favourite but most memorable. I was flying through the air and looked down to see a smoking cannon so obviously I had just been shot out of a cannon,I saw a tree inside a cave so headed for that,I landed on a branch and there was this boxing glove on stick so I picked it up and started punching these fluorescent octopi in the face with it,then I dove in the water and pulled a big plug.

Shot out a cannon,landed in a tree,punched a few octopi and pulled a plug

Xethaios

Your title states that you don't believe that **acting or behaving** like a hipster equals being a dickhead. Your explanation in the OP specifically refers to the way they dress, which is another thing entirely. Since I'm in agreement with your OP's explanation, I'll counter the title's view. Behaving like a hipster, at least where I live, typically includes not only dressing odd, but liking 'obscure' things and shunning them once they become mainstream. It also includes viewing popular culture and most media as shit, including their fanbases, and they treat the fanbases as such. They're condescending, arrogant and generally rude unless you fit their definition of being 'unique', ie liking obscure things because their obscure and shitting on mainstream media because it's mainstream, therefore it must be shit because the world's populated by idiots, and they're the only enlightened ones that have ever existed ever. They'll take their culture and rub it in your face because you've probably never heard of it. Note that the above definition only applies to the hipsters that are like that, which unfortunately in my region is most of them. Of course there are hipsters that like obscure stuff because they actaully like it, and they might try to spread their fanbase. Good on them, I know and am friends with quite a few of these. But the rude, condescending, arrogant hipster is the hipster that most people have encountered and remember, so it's pretty easy to equate the term 'hipster' to 'dickhead'. TL;DR: Next time word your title better. What you actually mean and what your title means are two different things.

Your title states that you don't believe that acting or behaving like a hipster equals being a dickhead. Your explanation in the OP specifically refers to the way they dress, which is another thing entirely. Since I'm in agreement with your OP's explanation, I'll counter the title's view. Behaving like a hipster, at least where I live, typically includes not only dressing odd, but liking 'obscure' things and shunning them once they become mainstream. It also includes viewing popular culture and most media as shit, including their fanbases, and they treat the fanbases as such. They're condescending, arrogant and generally rude unless you fit their definition of being 'unique', ie liking obscure things because their obscure and shitting on mainstream media because it's mainstream, therefore it must be shit because the world's populated by idiots, and they're the only enlightened ones that have ever existed ever. They'll take their culture and rub it in your face because you've probably never heard of it. Note that the above definition only applies to the hipsters that are like that, which unfortunately in my region is most of them. Of course there are hipsters that like obscure stuff because they actaully like it, and they might try to spread their fanbase. Good on them, I know and am friends with quite a few of these. But the rude, condescending, arrogant hipster is the hipster that most people have encountered and remember, so it's pretty easy to equate the term 'hipster' to 'dickhead'. TL;DR: Next time word your title better. What you actually mean and what your title means are two different things.

changemyview

t5_2w2s8

cg7y22d

Your title states that you don't believe that acting or behaving like a hipster equals being a dickhead. Your explanation in the OP specifically refers to the way they dress, which is another thing entirely. Since I'm in agreement with your OP's explanation, I'll counter the title's view. Behaving like a hipster, at least where I live, typically includes not only dressing odd, but liking 'obscure' things and shunning them once they become mainstream. It also includes viewing popular culture and most media as shit, including their fanbases, and they treat the fanbases as such. They're condescending, arrogant and generally rude unless you fit their definition of being 'unique', ie liking obscure things because their obscure and shitting on mainstream media because it's mainstream, therefore it must be shit because the world's populated by idiots, and they're the only enlightened ones that have ever existed ever. They'll take their culture and rub it in your face because you've probably never heard of it. Note that the above definition only applies to the hipsters that are like that, which unfortunately in my region is most of them. Of course there are hipsters that like obscure stuff because they actaully like it, and they might try to spread their fanbase. Good on them, I know and am friends with quite a few of these. But the rude, condescending, arrogant hipster is the hipster that most people have encountered and remember, so it's pretty easy to equate the term 'hipster' to 'dickhead'.

Next time word your title better. What you actually mean and what your title means are two different things.

notthatbigbrother

Yeah last night a dced multiple times in a row and it isn't my internet connection. Teled to my house with 3m to use my varrock portal. Instantly DC. Logs me back in and I'm outside. I click on the house portal and as soon as I do rick turpentine appears and I DC again. Log back in I'm in lumbridge? TL;DR Me raging cause I still can't believe it happened.

Yeah last night a dced multiple times in a row and it isn't my internet connection. Teled to my house with 3m to use my varrock portal. Instantly DC. Logs me back in and I'm outside. I click on the house portal and as soon as I do rick turpentine appears and I DC again. Log back in I'm in lumbridge? TL;DR Me raging cause I still can't believe it happened.

2007scape

t5_2wbww

cg8iloy

Yeah last night a dced multiple times in a row and it isn't my internet connection. Teled to my house with 3m to use my varrock portal. Instantly DC. Logs me back in and I'm outside. I click on the house portal and as soon as I do rick turpentine appears and I DC again. Log back in I'm in lumbridge?

Me raging cause I still can't believe it happened.

cack170

I have been having issues streaming netflix. I even went so far as to have a technician out to "assess the problem." He replaced the male ends of the coaxial cables in my apartment. Because...that helps? -- To splice a new cap on the same piece of copper wire? I dont know. Anyway they said I wouldnt be charged for the service call. I haven't been yet. So we will see. (Here comes random $100 charge on my next billing cycle). I'm pretty sure they just increased the bandwidth after he came out here to make it look like what he did worked. Either way, I can stream in HD now. tl;dr -- try calling to complain. a lot.

I have been having issues streaming netflix. I even went so far as to have a technician out to "assess the problem." He replaced the male ends of the coaxial cables in my apartment. Because...that helps? -- To splice a new cap on the same piece of copper wire? I dont know. Anyway they said I wouldnt be charged for the service call. I haven't been yet. So we will see. (Here comes random $100 charge on my next billing cycle). I'm pretty sure they just increased the bandwidth after he came out here to make it look like what he did worked. Either way, I can stream in HD now. tl;dr -- try calling to complain. a lot.

Atlanta

t5_2qiq9

cg7yl7u

I have been having issues streaming netflix. I even went so far as to have a technician out to "assess the problem." He replaced the male ends of the coaxial cables in my apartment. Because...that helps? -- To splice a new cap on the same piece of copper wire? I dont know. Anyway they said I wouldnt be charged for the service call. I haven't been yet. So we will see. (Here comes random $100 charge on my next billing cycle). I'm pretty sure they just increased the bandwidth after he came out here to make it look like what he did worked. Either way, I can stream in HD now.

try calling to complain. a lot.

Brakdor

I think the most interesting aspect of these sorts of situations is alleigances. There could be different factions in your Theives Guild, divided along racial lines (elves vs humans or purebloods vs inclusionists), motivations / alignments (Profit-driven vs acquisition of power), centered around particular people in the Guild (established leader vs up-and-coming NPC [or PC] member with ideas for change), or whatever. Try to fit this in to some other aspect of your campaign, and for bonus points try to put some of your PCs on both sides of the line. Then as you assign missions, have those missions affect how people on various sides of these factions view your PCs. They will gain the respect and trust of their allies, but also the contempt and ire of the people whose goals their actions are opposing. For example, one or more of the PCs is climbing the ladder of the guild, and cozying up to the leader. One of the Guild Lieutennants offers a job of acquiring some tomes from a wealthy local's estate. When the PCs get to the mark's house, it turns out to be the home of the guild leader, and the tomes are diaries of the leader, including ideas for the infiltration and takeover of the hometown of an un-involved PC. Recovering the tomes for the lieutennant makes him trust the PCs and then he lets them in on his coup attempt. Leaving the tomes behind pisses off the lieutennant who fixes his gaze on the PCs who betrayed him. Destroying the tomes pisses off both thieves guild members, put keeps the un-involved PCs hometown crime free. TL; DR - Choices have consequences. Try to make the PCs make a choice.

I think the most interesting aspect of these sorts of situations is alleigances. There could be different factions in your Theives Guild, divided along racial lines (elves vs humans or purebloods vs inclusionists), motivations / alignments (Profit-driven vs acquisition of power), centered around particular people in the Guild (established leader vs up-and-coming NPC [or PC] member with ideas for change), or whatever. Try to fit this in to some other aspect of your campaign, and for bonus points try to put some of your PCs on both sides of the line. Then as you assign missions, have those missions affect how people on various sides of these factions view your PCs. They will gain the respect and trust of their allies, but also the contempt and ire of the people whose goals their actions are opposing. For example, one or more of the PCs is climbing the ladder of the guild, and cozying up to the leader. One of the Guild Lieutennants offers a job of acquiring some tomes from a wealthy local's estate. When the PCs get to the mark's house, it turns out to be the home of the guild leader, and the tomes are diaries of the leader, including ideas for the infiltration and takeover of the hometown of an un-involved PC. Recovering the tomes for the lieutennant makes him trust the PCs and then he lets them in on his coup attempt. Leaving the tomes behind pisses off the lieutennant who fixes his gaze on the PCs who betrayed him. Destroying the tomes pisses off both thieves guild members, put keeps the un-involved PCs hometown crime free. TL; DR - Choices have consequences. Try to make the PCs make a choice.

DnD

t5_2r9ei

cg8a8hh

I think the most interesting aspect of these sorts of situations is alleigances. There could be different factions in your Theives Guild, divided along racial lines (elves vs humans or purebloods vs inclusionists), motivations / alignments (Profit-driven vs acquisition of power), centered around particular people in the Guild (established leader vs up-and-coming NPC [or PC] member with ideas for change), or whatever. Try to fit this in to some other aspect of your campaign, and for bonus points try to put some of your PCs on both sides of the line. Then as you assign missions, have those missions affect how people on various sides of these factions view your PCs. They will gain the respect and trust of their allies, but also the contempt and ire of the people whose goals their actions are opposing. For example, one or more of the PCs is climbing the ladder of the guild, and cozying up to the leader. One of the Guild Lieutennants offers a job of acquiring some tomes from a wealthy local's estate. When the PCs get to the mark's house, it turns out to be the home of the guild leader, and the tomes are diaries of the leader, including ideas for the infiltration and takeover of the hometown of an un-involved PC. Recovering the tomes for the lieutennant makes him trust the PCs and then he lets them in on his coup attempt. Leaving the tomes behind pisses off the lieutennant who fixes his gaze on the PCs who betrayed him. Destroying the tomes pisses off both thieves guild members, put keeps the un-involved PCs hometown crime free.

Choices have consequences. Try to make the PCs make a choice.

j1akey

I'm heading to the Oregon coast with my girlfriend and staying at a bed and breakfast right on the beach. **TL;DR Sex....Lots and lots of sex**

I'm heading to the Oregon coast with my girlfriend and staying at a bed and breakfast right on the beach. TL;DR Sex....Lots and lots of sex

AskMen

t5_2s30g

cg8bl0k

I'm heading to the Oregon coast with my girlfriend and staying at a bed and breakfast right on the beach.

Sex....Lots and lots of sex

PerfectHair

Okay, little bit of background, I've got an ICS SIG 552 and a disability that limits mobility in one of my arms, which means that, even though the 552 is a short gun as it is, it's still awkward for me to hold. So what I wanna do is put an adjustable stock on it. Sadly, no buffer tube adapters exist for this make and model of gun, so I've been grabbing the dimensions of the existing attachment for my folding stock with the intention to make a set of 2D elevations that I can turn into a 3D part and hopefully get CAMed. TL;DR: Buffer tube adapter for an ICS SIG 552.

Okay, little bit of background, I've got an ICS SIG 552 and a disability that limits mobility in one of my arms, which means that, even though the 552 is a short gun as it is, it's still awkward for me to hold. So what I wanna do is put an adjustable stock on it. Sadly, no buffer tube adapters exist for this make and model of gun, so I've been grabbing the dimensions of the existing attachment for my folding stock with the intention to make a set of 2D elevations that I can turn into a 3D part and hopefully get CAMed. TL;DR: Buffer tube adapter for an ICS SIG 552.

AskMen

t5_2s30g

cg8f23q

Okay, little bit of background, I've got an ICS SIG 552 and a disability that limits mobility in one of my arms, which means that, even though the 552 is a short gun as it is, it's still awkward for me to hold. So what I wanna do is put an adjustable stock on it. Sadly, no buffer tube adapters exist for this make and model of gun, so I've been grabbing the dimensions of the existing attachment for my folding stock with the intention to make a set of 2D elevations that I can turn into a 3D part and hopefully get CAMed.

Buffer tube adapter for an ICS SIG 552.

MankeyManksyo

E5 was the go too heavy maybe a year ago for CW, now it's pretty shit. E100 and IS7 do it's job better in every way as a 57 shield. It's armor is usable based only on your opponents incompetence, the gun lacks alpha and uses HEAT rounds, and it can't even utilize the terrain it is built for because of the turret design allowing you to get spotted before you can even return fire. TLDR: E5 is shit, don't be shit and use it in CW.

E5 was the go too heavy maybe a year ago for CW, now it's pretty shit. E100 and IS7 do it's job better in every way as a 57 shield. It's armor is usable based only on your opponents incompetence, the gun lacks alpha and uses HEAT rounds, and it can't even utilize the terrain it is built for because of the turret design allowing you to get spotted before you can even return fire. TLDR: E5 is shit, don't be shit and use it in CW.

WorldofTanks

t5_2s113

cg8m7s8

E5 was the go too heavy maybe a year ago for CW, now it's pretty shit. E100 and IS7 do it's job better in every way as a 57 shield. It's armor is usable based only on your opponents incompetence, the gun lacks alpha and uses HEAT rounds, and it can't even utilize the terrain it is built for because of the turret design allowing you to get spotted before you can even return fire.

E5 is shit, don't be shit and use it in CW.

the_tolerator

Well it seems that this post was not received all that well, giving some merit to the stereotype that this fandom is overly-sensitive. I may as well share the story for complete context: When I was thirteen my mother, who had raised me for my entire life up to that point, suddenly left to live in Asia and left me with my father who I barely knew. As I was relatively young and kind of sheltered I could not bring myself to communicate with her due to shock. A year ago she returned to the Australia (where I live) after three years and wants to see me again. Of course I continued to refuse communication and now a year later she is trying to appeal to my love of ponies by sending these gifts with no understanding about my relationship with the show. This offends me greatly, and to bring this back to the main point: although I am not one for such sentimental symbolism this is my way of letting go of this detrimental relationship. I would share this to /r/mylittlesupportgroup but I am not exactly looking for support from random strangers. TL;DR: This 'ritual' of sorts symbolises my ending a relationship with a recently absent parent.

Well it seems that this post was not received all that well, giving some merit to the stereotype that this fandom is overly-sensitive. I may as well share the story for complete context: When I was thirteen my mother, who had raised me for my entire life up to that point, suddenly left to live in Asia and left me with my father who I barely knew. As I was relatively young and kind of sheltered I could not bring myself to communicate with her due to shock. A year ago she returned to the Australia (where I live) after three years and wants to see me again. Of course I continued to refuse communication and now a year later she is trying to appeal to my love of ponies by sending these gifts with no understanding about my relationship with the show. This offends me greatly, and to bring this back to the main point: although I am not one for such sentimental symbolism this is my way of letting go of this detrimental relationship. I would share this to /r/mylittlesupportgroup but I am not exactly looking for support from random strangers. TL;DR: This 'ritual' of sorts symbolises my ending a relationship with a recently absent parent.

mylittlepony

t5_2s8bl

cg8v6o3

Well it seems that this post was not received all that well, giving some merit to the stereotype that this fandom is overly-sensitive. I may as well share the story for complete context: When I was thirteen my mother, who had raised me for my entire life up to that point, suddenly left to live in Asia and left me with my father who I barely knew. As I was relatively young and kind of sheltered I could not bring myself to communicate with her due to shock. A year ago she returned to the Australia (where I live) after three years and wants to see me again. Of course I continued to refuse communication and now a year later she is trying to appeal to my love of ponies by sending these gifts with no understanding about my relationship with the show. This offends me greatly, and to bring this back to the main point: although I am not one for such sentimental symbolism this is my way of letting go of this detrimental relationship. I would share this to /r/mylittlesupportgroup but I am not exactly looking for support from random strangers.

This 'ritual' of sorts symbolises my ending a relationship with a recently absent parent.

cherryCheeseSticks

&gt; Everybody bitches and whines about dogs being left outside when it's cold. I don't know if you have ever noticed but dogs in the wild do build houses furnished with gas heaters. Some dogs are much more susceptible to cold than others. A greyhound, for instance, has *very* thin fur, thin skin, and thin limbs. It is definitely not safe for them to be outside in even moderate cold for a prolonged period of time. This is because "dogs in the wild" don't really exist -- we've lived with dogs so long, we've literally changed the way many breeds *would* be able to survive (especially as of recently). I used to watch Life After People, a show about the post-apocalyptic world, and one of the things they mentioned in an episode focusing on post-apocalyptic animals was how difficult a time greyhounds would have surviving. This is precisely because we've bred for them to have very thin skin and traits conducive to being very fast (even more so now that actually hunting with them has fallen out of favor and they are racing dogs) instead of traits conducive to survival in the wild. That said -- yes, it is silly when people complain about Siberian Huskies left out in the cold. Our neighbor's would *howl* and scratch the door to bits if he was left *inside* during a snowstorm! They were literally made for that. &gt; And they talk to their animals like the animal understands. Like when the animal does something it shouldn't and they just yell at it. The animal doesn't give a fuck and doesn't know what you're saying. Actually, dogs in particular understand a *hell* of a lot more than is characterized here, and not just because of what you're saying. When you're yelling at a dog, you're raising your voice, leaning forward, leaning toward or over it, possibly waving your arms or standing with your hands on your hips. Your brows are probably wrinkled, your teeth may even be bared. These are all signs of dominance and aggression -- things a dog *definitely* understands. When you don't feel well and you're warm and murmuring to the dog, it understands because you're hot, you're quiet, and your voice may sound different. When you're excited and taking your dog somewhere, you're using a higher pitch of voice, you're probably a little "bouncy" (moving around quickly, waving your arms, etc.), even slapping your knees (the human analog to the dog play-bow, maybe). Your posture, your body language, your [tone]( and many [other non-verbal clues]( help dogs understand a lot of what you communicate, though obviously not to the same degree as a human and not on the same level. If you tell your dog about how whoever in the office makes everything difficult, no, they're not going to understand. They may understand you're stressed, though. I say above and address mostly dogs because we don't really have a comparable relationship with any other animal but dogs. It's been argued we're so entwined with dogs, [we evolved white sclera because it aided communication with them]( But anyway, regardless of whether we have the same longevity/relationship/whatever with cats, I do still think other animals, be they cats or goats or bats, can provide some of the same psychological benefits as dogs. Regardless of whether an animal has understanding on a human level (obviously not), they bring people comfort. [Therapy dogs]( and [cats]( have been used for everything from post-disaster relief to pallatative care to helping people deal with their anxieties (flying etc.). There was the story posted a while back of [Marcus Luttrell]( whose dog obviously meant a *lot* to him (tl;dr -- he chased a pair of guys who shot his dog through four counties and has a [heartbreaking/badass 911 call through it all]( I imagine it's not often that extreme, but there are definitely cases where a pet has *seriously* helped someone and that's important to acknowledge. If these pets make people feel good and it's their money to spend and their life to live, I think that is ultimately their choice. I think you do have a good point about poverty and people who can't afford to spend on their children and people who have trouble affording their food. There, though, I'd argue that the people lavishing money on their pets are symptomatic of a larger problem rather than the root cause of it, and thus shouldn't be something to prioritize. In other words, if you care more about what people can afford for their children and pet-based spending is a priority in the fight against poverty and economic disadvantage, you might consider re-prioritization of your concerns.

> Everybody bitches and whines about dogs being left outside when it's cold. I don't know if you have ever noticed but dogs in the wild do build houses furnished with gas heaters. Some dogs are much more susceptible to cold than others. A greyhound, for instance, has very thin fur, thin skin, and thin limbs. It is definitely not safe for them to be outside in even moderate cold for a prolonged period of time. This is because "dogs in the wild" don't really exist -- we've lived with dogs so long, we've literally changed the way many breeds would be able to survive (especially as of recently). I used to watch Life After People, a show about the post-apocalyptic world, and one of the things they mentioned in an episode focusing on post-apocalyptic animals was how difficult a time greyhounds would have surviving. This is precisely because we've bred for them to have very thin skin and traits conducive to being very fast (even more so now that actually hunting with them has fallen out of favor and they are racing dogs) instead of traits conducive to survival in the wild. That said -- yes, it is silly when people complain about Siberian Huskies left out in the cold. Our neighbor's would howl and scratch the door to bits if he was left inside during a snowstorm! They were literally made for that. > And they talk to their animals like the animal understands. Like when the animal does something it shouldn't and they just yell at it. The animal doesn't give a fuck and doesn't know what you're saying. Actually, dogs in particular understand a hell of a lot more than is characterized here, and not just because of what you're saying. When you're yelling at a dog, you're raising your voice, leaning forward, leaning toward or over it, possibly waving your arms or standing with your hands on your hips. Your brows are probably wrinkled, your teeth may even be bared. These are all signs of dominance and aggression -- things a dog definitely understands. When you don't feel well and you're warm and murmuring to the dog, it understands because you're hot, you're quiet, and your voice may sound different. When you're excited and taking your dog somewhere, you're using a higher pitch of voice, you're probably a little "bouncy" (moving around quickly, waving your arms, etc.), even slapping your knees (the human analog to the dog play-bow, maybe). Your posture, your body language, your [tone]( and many [other non-verbal clues]( help dogs understand a lot of what you communicate, though obviously not to the same degree as a human and not on the same level. If you tell your dog about how whoever in the office makes everything difficult, no, they're not going to understand. They may understand you're stressed, though. I say above and address mostly dogs because we don't really have a comparable relationship with any other animal but dogs. It's been argued we're so entwined with dogs, [we evolved white sclera because it aided communication with them]( But anyway, regardless of whether we have the same longevity/relationship/whatever with cats, I do still think other animals, be they cats or goats or bats, can provide some of the same psychological benefits as dogs. Regardless of whether an animal has understanding on a human level (obviously not), they bring people comfort. Therapy dogs . There was the story posted a while back of [Marcus Luttrell]( whose dog obviously meant a lot to him (tl;dr -- he chased a pair of guys who shot his dog through four counties and has a [heartbreaking/badass 911 call through it all]( I imagine it's not often that extreme, but there are definitely cases where a pet has seriously helped someone and that's important to acknowledge. If these pets make people feel good and it's their money to spend and their life to live, I think that is ultimately their choice. I think you do have a good point about poverty and people who can't afford to spend on their children and people who have trouble affording their food. There, though, I'd argue that the people lavishing money on their pets are symptomatic of a larger problem rather than the root cause of it, and thus shouldn't be something to prioritize. In other words, if you care more about what people can afford for their children and pet-based spending is a priority in the fight against poverty and economic disadvantage, you might consider re-prioritization of your concerns.

changemyview

t5_2w2s8

cg8xjy8

Everybody bitches and whines about dogs being left outside when it's cold. I don't know if you have ever noticed but dogs in the wild do build houses furnished with gas heaters. Some dogs are much more susceptible to cold than others. A greyhound, for instance, has very thin fur, thin skin, and thin limbs. It is definitely not safe for them to be outside in even moderate cold for a prolonged period of time. This is because "dogs in the wild" don't really exist -- we've lived with dogs so long, we've literally changed the way many breeds would be able to survive (especially as of recently). I used to watch Life After People, a show about the post-apocalyptic world, and one of the things they mentioned in an episode focusing on post-apocalyptic animals was how difficult a time greyhounds would have surviving. This is precisely because we've bred for them to have very thin skin and traits conducive to being very fast (even more so now that actually hunting with them has fallen out of favor and they are racing dogs) instead of traits conducive to survival in the wild. That said -- yes, it is silly when people complain about Siberian Huskies left out in the cold. Our neighbor's would howl and scratch the door to bits if he was left inside during a snowstorm! They were literally made for that. > And they talk to their animals like the animal understands. Like when the animal does something it shouldn't and they just yell at it. The animal doesn't give a fuck and doesn't know what you're saying. Actually, dogs in particular understand a hell of a lot more than is characterized here, and not just because of what you're saying. When you're yelling at a dog, you're raising your voice, leaning forward, leaning toward or over it, possibly waving your arms or standing with your hands on your hips. Your brows are probably wrinkled, your teeth may even be bared. These are all signs of dominance and aggression -- things a dog definitely understands. When you don't feel well and you're warm and murmuring to the dog, it understands because you're hot, you're quiet, and your voice may sound different. When you're excited and taking your dog somewhere, you're using a higher pitch of voice, you're probably a little "bouncy" (moving around quickly, waving your arms, etc.), even slapping your knees (the human analog to the dog play-bow, maybe). Your posture, your body language, your [tone]( and many [other non-verbal clues]( help dogs understand a lot of what you communicate, though obviously not to the same degree as a human and not on the same level. If you tell your dog about how whoever in the office makes everything difficult, no, they're not going to understand. They may understand you're stressed, though. I say above and address mostly dogs because we don't really have a comparable relationship with any other animal but dogs. It's been argued we're so entwined with dogs, [we evolved white sclera because it aided communication with them]( But anyway, regardless of whether we have the same longevity/relationship/whatever with cats, I do still think other animals, be they cats or goats or bats, can provide some of the same psychological benefits as dogs. Regardless of whether an animal has understanding on a human level (obviously not), they bring people comfort. Therapy dogs . There was the story posted a while back of [Marcus Luttrell]( whose dog obviously meant a lot to him (

he chased a pair of guys who shot his dog through four counties and has a [heartbreaking/badass 911 call through it all]( I imagine it's not often that extreme, but there are definitely cases where a pet has seriously helped someone and that's important to acknowledge. If these pets make people feel good and it's their money to spend and their life to live, I think that is ultimately their choice. I think you do have a good point about poverty and people who can't afford to spend on their children and people who have trouble affording their food. There, though, I'd argue that the people lavishing money on their pets are symptomatic of a larger problem rather than the root cause of it, and thus shouldn't be something to prioritize. In other words, if you care more about what people can afford for their children and pet-based spending is a priority in the fight against poverty and economic disadvantage, you might consider re-prioritization of your concerns.

stillUnproductive

I read it. If you are a fan of both The Next Generation and DW you will get something out of it. If you know nothing of The Next Generation then the story will probably be a little too confusing as the story is mostly told in the Star Trek universe. Overall the story didn't grab me, because the story had two fit into two very different and well established universes with very different rules it felt like there were too many concessions to fit it into the lore. Those concessions got in the way of the story. TLDR; You need to be a Star Trek: The Next Generation fan and a Doctor Who fan to make this worth reading.

I read it. If you are a fan of both The Next Generation and DW you will get something out of it. If you know nothing of The Next Generation then the story will probably be a little too confusing as the story is mostly told in the Star Trek universe. Overall the story didn't grab me, because the story had two fit into two very different and well established universes with very different rules it felt like there were too many concessions to fit it into the lore. Those concessions got in the way of the story. TLDR; You need to be a Star Trek: The Next Generation fan and a Doctor Who fan to make this worth reading.

doctorwho

t5_2qhek

cg9163g

I read it. If you are a fan of both The Next Generation and DW you will get something out of it. If you know nothing of The Next Generation then the story will probably be a little too confusing as the story is mostly told in the Star Trek universe. Overall the story didn't grab me, because the story had two fit into two very different and well established universes with very different rules it felt like there were too many concessions to fit it into the lore. Those concessions got in the way of the story.

You need to be a Star Trek: The Next Generation fan and a Doctor Who fan to make this worth reading.

arrjayjee

Remember when Game Trailers said this game wasn't very good and despite being pretty it didn't really do anything new and they reviewed it poorly? And then five years later when they reviewed Call of Duty Whatever and said the graphics were so photorealistic you'd think you were really in a Middle Eastern market and the grenade physics would blow your mind? Grenade physics in COD blew their mind. Turning invisible, activating strength, leaping over a defensive wall, picking up a fuel drum and hurling at a shed to explode the shed and send shrapnel flying through the base, that wasn't mind-blowing. But the tink-tink-tink of a grenade that explodes after bouncing twice on a simple Havok physics function? Fucking. Amazing. And *so realistic*. It also had an awesome zero gravity section that really felt fucking alien and pants-shittingly tense and awkward (as it should be and I know some people didn't like it because it was different but whatever) that hadn't been done in a traditional FPS before and was, thematically, a fucking amazing set-piece that really set the tone for the final act of the game. But nope, it was pretty but did nothing special and was pointless. tl;dr, GameTrailers can eat a dick. Crysis is awesome.

Remember when Game Trailers said this game wasn't very good and despite being pretty it didn't really do anything new and they reviewed it poorly? And then five years later when they reviewed Call of Duty Whatever and said the graphics were so photorealistic you'd think you were really in a Middle Eastern market and the grenade physics would blow your mind? Grenade physics in COD blew their mind. Turning invisible, activating strength, leaping over a defensive wall, picking up a fuel drum and hurling at a shed to explode the shed and send shrapnel flying through the base, that wasn't mind-blowing. But the tink-tink-tink of a grenade that explodes after bouncing twice on a simple Havok physics function? Fucking. Amazing. And so realistic . It also had an awesome zero gravity section that really felt fucking alien and pants-shittingly tense and awkward (as it should be and I know some people didn't like it because it was different but whatever) that hadn't been done in a traditional FPS before and was, thematically, a fucking amazing set-piece that really set the tone for the final act of the game. But nope, it was pretty but did nothing special and was pointless. tl;dr, GameTrailers can eat a dick. Crysis is awesome.

gaming

t5_2qh03

cg940kx

Remember when Game Trailers said this game wasn't very good and despite being pretty it didn't really do anything new and they reviewed it poorly? And then five years later when they reviewed Call of Duty Whatever and said the graphics were so photorealistic you'd think you were really in a Middle Eastern market and the grenade physics would blow your mind? Grenade physics in COD blew their mind. Turning invisible, activating strength, leaping over a defensive wall, picking up a fuel drum and hurling at a shed to explode the shed and send shrapnel flying through the base, that wasn't mind-blowing. But the tink-tink-tink of a grenade that explodes after bouncing twice on a simple Havok physics function? Fucking. Amazing. And so realistic . It also had an awesome zero gravity section that really felt fucking alien and pants-shittingly tense and awkward (as it should be and I know some people didn't like it because it was different but whatever) that hadn't been done in a traditional FPS before and was, thematically, a fucking amazing set-piece that really set the tone for the final act of the game. But nope, it was pretty but did nothing special and was pointless.

GameTrailers can eat a dick. Crysis is awesome.

buddythebear

Let's clear a few things up: 1) Though feminism is often defined as the advocacy for women's rights and equality, critics of modern feminism are not always necessarily opposed to women's rights and equality as a concept, but rather the various policies they pursue or the tactics they employ. 2) "Feminism" is an umbrella term for a movement that has a multitude of ideological factions that are diametrically opposed (e.g., sex-positive feminism vs. anti-pornography feminism), which results in a lot of in-fighting and debate over what it means to be a "feminist." 3) There is a tendency in modern feminism to advocate for *positive* rights (i.e., things that are provided to you, like health care, maternity leave, etc.), as they've achieved near total equality in terms of *negative* rights (i.e., things that can be taken away from you such as the right to vote or the right to have an abortion). A recent example of this was the whole debate over whether the government should require insurance companies to cover birth control. Personally, I think insurance companies should cover birth control, but I don't think it's fair to say that those who don't are opposed to "women's rights," which is how many feminists portrayed their opponents. 4) Often times, it's not the message as much as it is the messenger that provokes criticism, and sometimes hatred, toward modern feminism. Sites like Jezebel and xoJane, the Tumblr/SJW community, writers like Amanda Marcotte, etc., can be incredibly snarky, condescending, and immune to real debate or dialogue. They tend to preach to the choir instead of reaching out to change people's minds. They reduce legitimate criticisms of feminism to "mansplaining," they proudly sport this victim mentality that is ultimately damaging, and they've also discovered the CAPS LOCK KEY, which is often used as a STYLISTIC TOOL IN FEMINIST BLOGGING TO EMPHASIZE OBVIOUS POINTS IN A CONVERSATIONAL WAY, because, like, duh, YOU CAN HEAR ME SHOUTING WHEN I TYPE LIKE THIS. I'm being a bit facetious about that last point, but I get really turned off by that common tone in feminist blogging. It's not clever or cute, it's just immature and sophomoric. 5) See /r/mensrights for other various criticisms of feminism. Some of it is vitriolic, some of the points they make are fair. Like feminists, MRAs can't be painted with one broad stroke. 6) Some people just hate the concept of feminism. It's an unjustified, knee-jerk reaction. Whether it's a teenage boy saying something something get back in the kitchen hurr durr, or a curmudgeon septuagenarian who thinks feminism was the undoing of traditional society, these people are just ignorant assholes. tl;dr: people who criticize feminism aren't necessarily opposed to equal rights for women. They might take issue with the policies that feminists pursue which can be more about preferential treatment rather than equality. They might take issue with how the messengers of feminism exist in this echo chamber that prevents any real debate or dialogue. That said, some people just blindly hate feminism.

Let's clear a few things up: 1) Though feminism is often defined as the advocacy for women's rights and equality, critics of modern feminism are not always necessarily opposed to women's rights and equality as a concept, but rather the various policies they pursue or the tactics they employ. 2) "Feminism" is an umbrella term for a movement that has a multitude of ideological factions that are diametrically opposed (e.g., sex-positive feminism vs. anti-pornography feminism), which results in a lot of in-fighting and debate over what it means to be a "feminist." 3) There is a tendency in modern feminism to advocate for positive rights (i.e., things that are provided to you, like health care, maternity leave, etc.), as they've achieved near total equality in terms of negative rights (i.e., things that can be taken away from you such as the right to vote or the right to have an abortion). A recent example of this was the whole debate over whether the government should require insurance companies to cover birth control. Personally, I think insurance companies should cover birth control, but I don't think it's fair to say that those who don't are opposed to "women's rights," which is how many feminists portrayed their opponents. 4) Often times, it's not the message as much as it is the messenger that provokes criticism, and sometimes hatred, toward modern feminism. Sites like Jezebel and xoJane, the Tumblr/SJW community, writers like Amanda Marcotte, etc., can be incredibly snarky, condescending, and immune to real debate or dialogue. They tend to preach to the choir instead of reaching out to change people's minds. They reduce legitimate criticisms of feminism to "mansplaining," they proudly sport this victim mentality that is ultimately damaging, and they've also discovered the CAPS LOCK KEY, which is often used as a STYLISTIC TOOL IN FEMINIST BLOGGING TO EMPHASIZE OBVIOUS POINTS IN A CONVERSATIONAL WAY, because, like, duh, YOU CAN HEAR ME SHOUTING WHEN I TYPE LIKE THIS. I'm being a bit facetious about that last point, but I get really turned off by that common tone in feminist blogging. It's not clever or cute, it's just immature and sophomoric. 5) See /r/mensrights for other various criticisms of feminism. Some of it is vitriolic, some of the points they make are fair. Like feminists, MRAs can't be painted with one broad stroke. 6) Some people just hate the concept of feminism. It's an unjustified, knee-jerk reaction. Whether it's a teenage boy saying something something get back in the kitchen hurr durr, or a curmudgeon septuagenarian who thinks feminism was the undoing of traditional society, these people are just ignorant assholes. tl;dr: people who criticize feminism aren't necessarily opposed to equal rights for women. They might take issue with the policies that feminists pursue which can be more about preferential treatment rather than equality. They might take issue with how the messengers of feminism exist in this echo chamber that prevents any real debate or dialogue. That said, some people just blindly hate feminism.

explainlikeimfive

t5_2sokd

cg966au

Let's clear a few things up: 1) Though feminism is often defined as the advocacy for women's rights and equality, critics of modern feminism are not always necessarily opposed to women's rights and equality as a concept, but rather the various policies they pursue or the tactics they employ. 2) "Feminism" is an umbrella term for a movement that has a multitude of ideological factions that are diametrically opposed (e.g., sex-positive feminism vs. anti-pornography feminism), which results in a lot of in-fighting and debate over what it means to be a "feminist." 3) There is a tendency in modern feminism to advocate for positive rights (i.e., things that are provided to you, like health care, maternity leave, etc.), as they've achieved near total equality in terms of negative rights (i.e., things that can be taken away from you such as the right to vote or the right to have an abortion). A recent example of this was the whole debate over whether the government should require insurance companies to cover birth control. Personally, I think insurance companies should cover birth control, but I don't think it's fair to say that those who don't are opposed to "women's rights," which is how many feminists portrayed their opponents. 4) Often times, it's not the message as much as it is the messenger that provokes criticism, and sometimes hatred, toward modern feminism. Sites like Jezebel and xoJane, the Tumblr/SJW community, writers like Amanda Marcotte, etc., can be incredibly snarky, condescending, and immune to real debate or dialogue. They tend to preach to the choir instead of reaching out to change people's minds. They reduce legitimate criticisms of feminism to "mansplaining," they proudly sport this victim mentality that is ultimately damaging, and they've also discovered the CAPS LOCK KEY, which is often used as a STYLISTIC TOOL IN FEMINIST BLOGGING TO EMPHASIZE OBVIOUS POINTS IN A CONVERSATIONAL WAY, because, like, duh, YOU CAN HEAR ME SHOUTING WHEN I TYPE LIKE THIS. I'm being a bit facetious about that last point, but I get really turned off by that common tone in feminist blogging. It's not clever or cute, it's just immature and sophomoric. 5) See /r/mensrights for other various criticisms of feminism. Some of it is vitriolic, some of the points they make are fair. Like feminists, MRAs can't be painted with one broad stroke. 6) Some people just hate the concept of feminism. It's an unjustified, knee-jerk reaction. Whether it's a teenage boy saying something something get back in the kitchen hurr durr, or a curmudgeon septuagenarian who thinks feminism was the undoing of traditional society, these people are just ignorant assholes.

people who criticize feminism aren't necessarily opposed to equal rights for women. They might take issue with the policies that feminists pursue which can be more about preferential treatment rather than equality. They might take issue with how the messengers of feminism exist in this echo chamber that prevents any real debate or dialogue. That said, some people just blindly hate feminism.

project_apex

&gt;hele gemengde MBO-4 klas Spijt me on te zeggen maar het probleem zit waarschijnlijk in het woordje MBO. Op mijn universiteit en op bijna alle universiteiten worden 60% van de opleidingen volledig in het Engels gegeven. Op het HBO worden Int. Business en andere opleidingen ook in het Engels gegeven en ook in Nederlandstalige opleidingen bestaat er steeds meer aandacht voor Engels. Daarnaast zie je ook steeds met middelbare scholen die tweetalig onderwijs aanbieden op het VWO en HAVO. Inmiddels zijn er ook al basisscholen die gestart zijn met een proef om enkele vakken (aardrijkskunde, geschiedenis) in het Engels te geven. De goede gewoonte van Nederlanders om buitenlandse films te ondertitelen ipv na-syncen + het feit dat vanaf RTL5 naar boven alles uit Amerikaanse series bestaat zorgen er ook nog eens voor dat je onbewust heel veel tijd in het Engels bezig bent. Dat komt dus helemaal goed met de Engels. Wel mogen wij collectief ons Duits en Frans een bijspijkeren... maar dat is een ander verhaal. TL;DR: ja, komt wel goed.

>hele gemengde MBO-4 klas Spijt me on te zeggen maar het probleem zit waarschijnlijk in het woordje MBO. Op mijn universiteit en op bijna alle universiteiten worden 60% van de opleidingen volledig in het Engels gegeven. Op het HBO worden Int. Business en andere opleidingen ook in het Engels gegeven en ook in Nederlandstalige opleidingen bestaat er steeds meer aandacht voor Engels. Daarnaast zie je ook steeds met middelbare scholen die tweetalig onderwijs aanbieden op het VWO en HAVO. Inmiddels zijn er ook al basisscholen die gestart zijn met een proef om enkele vakken (aardrijkskunde, geschiedenis) in het Engels te geven. De goede gewoonte van Nederlanders om buitenlandse films te ondertitelen ipv na-syncen + het feit dat vanaf RTL5 naar boven alles uit Amerikaanse series bestaat zorgen er ook nog eens voor dat je onbewust heel veel tijd in het Engels bezig bent. Dat komt dus helemaal goed met de Engels. Wel mogen wij collectief ons Duits en Frans een bijspijkeren... maar dat is een ander verhaal. TL;DR: ja, komt wel goed.

thenetherlands

t5_30hrx

cg949du

hele gemengde MBO-4 klas Spijt me on te zeggen maar het probleem zit waarschijnlijk in het woordje MBO. Op mijn universiteit en op bijna alle universiteiten worden 60% van de opleidingen volledig in het Engels gegeven. Op het HBO worden Int. Business en andere opleidingen ook in het Engels gegeven en ook in Nederlandstalige opleidingen bestaat er steeds meer aandacht voor Engels. Daarnaast zie je ook steeds met middelbare scholen die tweetalig onderwijs aanbieden op het VWO en HAVO. Inmiddels zijn er ook al basisscholen die gestart zijn met een proef om enkele vakken (aardrijkskunde, geschiedenis) in het Engels te geven. De goede gewoonte van Nederlanders om buitenlandse films te ondertitelen ipv na-syncen + het feit dat vanaf RTL5 naar boven alles uit Amerikaanse series bestaat zorgen er ook nog eens voor dat je onbewust heel veel tijd in het Engels bezig bent. Dat komt dus helemaal goed met de Engels. Wel mogen wij collectief ons Duits en Frans een bijspijkeren... maar dat is een ander verhaal.

ja, komt wel goed.