author
stringlengths 3
20
| body
stringlengths 12
18.4k
| normalizedBody
stringlengths 13
17.9k
| subreddit
stringlengths 2
24
| subreddit_id
stringlengths 4
8
| id
stringlengths 3
7
| content
stringlengths 3
17.9k
| summary
stringlengths 1
7.54k
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
ohmyemma | As someone who was a DD in High School, I usually covered myself up enough (being a tom boy) that it tended not to be too much of an issue. I didn't really get much sexual attention, guys checking me out (unless they were and I was obvious to their stares, of course) etc. No one ever sexually harassed me, though.
I remember that there was one teacher I had who would openly perv at girls who showed their cleavage etc, it made me feel incredibly uncomfortable and very self conscious. This guy was like 35-40 years old. I tried looking him up like a year ago, he still teaches: not at the same school but one in the same town. I feel for the girls who are now being educated by him.
Back on topic: it really wasn't until after High School where I finally gained a bit of confidence where I would wear singlet tops, dress a little feminine and embraced my 'curves'. Nowadays, I find them more annoying as tops don't fit properly - I have to go a size up. Only ever caught one guy staring at my boobs in the street one time, it was kind of amusing as Asian guys really do enjoy women with larger breasts.
I've never gotten into situations where I could be raped, or sexually harassed or anything along those lines luckily.
**tl;dr** Yes, I have big boobs. No, never received much extra attention unless you counted a creepy 11th/12th grade Psychology teacher who would openly perv on fellow classmates. Never caused any trouble either. Hope this helps. | As someone who was a DD in High School, I usually covered myself up enough (being a tom boy) that it tended not to be too much of an issue. I didn't really get much sexual attention, guys checking me out (unless they were and I was obvious to their stares, of course) etc. No one ever sexually harassed me, though.
I remember that there was one teacher I had who would openly perv at girls who showed their cleavage etc, it made me feel incredibly uncomfortable and very self conscious. This guy was like 35-40 years old. I tried looking him up like a year ago, he still teaches: not at the same school but one in the same town. I feel for the girls who are now being educated by him.
Back on topic: it really wasn't until after High School where I finally gained a bit of confidence where I would wear singlet tops, dress a little feminine and embraced my 'curves'. Nowadays, I find them more annoying as tops don't fit properly - I have to go a size up. Only ever caught one guy staring at my boobs in the street one time, it was kind of amusing as Asian guys really do enjoy women with larger breasts.
I've never gotten into situations where I could be raped, or sexually harassed or anything along those lines luckily.
tl;dr Yes, I have big boobs. No, never received much extra attention unless you counted a creepy 11th/12th grade Psychology teacher who would openly perv on fellow classmates. Never caused any trouble either. Hope this helps.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccs1fom | As someone who was a DD in High School, I usually covered myself up enough (being a tom boy) that it tended not to be too much of an issue. I didn't really get much sexual attention, guys checking me out (unless they were and I was obvious to their stares, of course) etc. No one ever sexually harassed me, though.
I remember that there was one teacher I had who would openly perv at girls who showed their cleavage etc, it made me feel incredibly uncomfortable and very self conscious. This guy was like 35-40 years old. I tried looking him up like a year ago, he still teaches: not at the same school but one in the same town. I feel for the girls who are now being educated by him.
Back on topic: it really wasn't until after High School where I finally gained a bit of confidence where I would wear singlet tops, dress a little feminine and embraced my 'curves'. Nowadays, I find them more annoying as tops don't fit properly - I have to go a size up. Only ever caught one guy staring at my boobs in the street one time, it was kind of amusing as Asian guys really do enjoy women with larger breasts.
I've never gotten into situations where I could be raped, or sexually harassed or anything along those lines luckily. | Yes, I have big boobs. No, never received much extra attention unless you counted a creepy 11th/12th grade Psychology teacher who would openly perv on fellow classmates. Never caused any trouble either. Hope this helps. |
idefix_the_dog | To be honest, we're not. Most women I've talked to (incl SO who is busty - I hope that's not a negative word?) often see how men look at their breasts. I'm guessing they choose to ignore it. Women, and young women/girls, should have the right to dress sexy/beautiful if they want to, without being harassed. Looking in a subtle way is no problem to me, otherwise you (both men and women) should cover up more, but staring/harassing/... is just plain wrong.
This goes both ways for me. I think women also have the right to check out men. But maybe because they're less visually-minded, they do it less? I don't know.
TL;DR: men do check out women, women know and see it, don't kid yourself | To be honest, we're not. Most women I've talked to (incl SO who is busty - I hope that's not a negative word?) often see how men look at their breasts. I'm guessing they choose to ignore it. Women, and young women/girls, should have the right to dress sexy/beautiful if they want to, without being harassed. Looking in a subtle way is no problem to me, otherwise you (both men and women) should cover up more, but staring/harassing/... is just plain wrong.
This goes both ways for me. I think women also have the right to check out men. But maybe because they're less visually-minded, they do it less? I don't know.
TL;DR: men do check out women, women know and see it, don't kid yourself
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccs20i1 | To be honest, we're not. Most women I've talked to (incl SO who is busty - I hope that's not a negative word?) often see how men look at their breasts. I'm guessing they choose to ignore it. Women, and young women/girls, should have the right to dress sexy/beautiful if they want to, without being harassed. Looking in a subtle way is no problem to me, otherwise you (both men and women) should cover up more, but staring/harassing/... is just plain wrong.
This goes both ways for me. I think women also have the right to check out men. But maybe because they're less visually-minded, they do it less? I don't know. | men do check out women, women know and see it, don't kid yourself |
zetterbeauty | Negative. Gym class left you vulnerable to jokes and/or stares (even with a largely self-deprecating sense of humor, it gets old after a while), not to mention the physical pain associated with it. As a freshman, I was always the "heavy-chested" friend to some senior's little brother or sister. Guys always teased about their size, tried to touch them on occasion or would pressure you otherwise (not that I ever gave in). Got the up-down glance on a minute-by-minute basis from staff, classmates, boys and girls alike. Even at prom, someone told me the only thing they remembered was that my boobs looked better than usual because it was a strapless dress. Then, a year after we all graduated, I went back to a party with some of my classmates. I was the only sober one (I got there late and they ran out of booze) and was eventually cornered by 5 people all grabbing at my shirt demanding they see/touch them. Never talked to them again and still resent them for it 3 years later. Got a breast reduction in May and it was, hands down, the best decision I've ever made.
TL;DR Negative. So fucking negative.
EDIT: Forgot to mention, I was always presumed to be a whore if someone didn't know me. That shit got annoying too. | Negative. Gym class left you vulnerable to jokes and/or stares (even with a largely self-deprecating sense of humor, it gets old after a while), not to mention the physical pain associated with it. As a freshman, I was always the "heavy-chested" friend to some senior's little brother or sister. Guys always teased about their size, tried to touch them on occasion or would pressure you otherwise (not that I ever gave in). Got the up-down glance on a minute-by-minute basis from staff, classmates, boys and girls alike. Even at prom, someone told me the only thing they remembered was that my boobs looked better than usual because it was a strapless dress. Then, a year after we all graduated, I went back to a party with some of my classmates. I was the only sober one (I got there late and they ran out of booze) and was eventually cornered by 5 people all grabbing at my shirt demanding they see/touch them. Never talked to them again and still resent them for it 3 years later. Got a breast reduction in May and it was, hands down, the best decision I've ever made.
TL;DR Negative. So fucking negative.
EDIT: Forgot to mention, I was always presumed to be a whore if someone didn't know me. That shit got annoying too.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccsbfza | Negative. Gym class left you vulnerable to jokes and/or stares (even with a largely self-deprecating sense of humor, it gets old after a while), not to mention the physical pain associated with it. As a freshman, I was always the "heavy-chested" friend to some senior's little brother or sister. Guys always teased about their size, tried to touch them on occasion or would pressure you otherwise (not that I ever gave in). Got the up-down glance on a minute-by-minute basis from staff, classmates, boys and girls alike. Even at prom, someone told me the only thing they remembered was that my boobs looked better than usual because it was a strapless dress. Then, a year after we all graduated, I went back to a party with some of my classmates. I was the only sober one (I got there late and they ran out of booze) and was eventually cornered by 5 people all grabbing at my shirt demanding they see/touch them. Never talked to them again and still resent them for it 3 years later. Got a breast reduction in May and it was, hands down, the best decision I've ever made. | Negative. So fucking negative.
EDIT: Forgot to mention, I was always presumed to be a whore if someone didn't know me. That shit got annoying too. |
bananakarate | When I was 14 my dad came to talk to me about all these weird and crazy subjects that he'd never discussed before. It was unexpected and caught me off guard. We were super close and I'd never seen him like that before. My family was always loving and close but he got extremely hateful to my brother and then two days later while my brother was in school and I was sleeping (had to miss school; long story) he just shot himself in front of my mom. I've always felt guilt because of the "talks" he had with me over those two days. But I truly don't think I could have changed a thing about what happened. I was still a child at the time. It's ruined our whole family because of the trauma
of it all. I still have "flashbacks" when it comes to being awoken unexpectedly and the smell of blood but for the most part I've been able to live as normal of a life as I possibly could under the circumstances. Things are always hard growing up a young man without a father but the one thing I've learned is every situation gets better. Even if it's just a little bit it'll get better.
tl;dr dad committed suicide 8 years ago, never get over it, just learn to always look to the inevitable bright side. | When I was 14 my dad came to talk to me about all these weird and crazy subjects that he'd never discussed before. It was unexpected and caught me off guard. We were super close and I'd never seen him like that before. My family was always loving and close but he got extremely hateful to my brother and then two days later while my brother was in school and I was sleeping (had to miss school; long story) he just shot himself in front of my mom. I've always felt guilt because of the "talks" he had with me over those two days. But I truly don't think I could have changed a thing about what happened. I was still a child at the time. It's ruined our whole family because of the trauma
of it all. I still have "flashbacks" when it comes to being awoken unexpectedly and the smell of blood but for the most part I've been able to live as normal of a life as I possibly could under the circumstances. Things are always hard growing up a young man without a father but the one thing I've learned is every situation gets better. Even if it's just a little bit it'll get better.
tl;dr dad committed suicide 8 years ago, never get over it, just learn to always look to the inevitable bright side.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccs7vnj | When I was 14 my dad came to talk to me about all these weird and crazy subjects that he'd never discussed before. It was unexpected and caught me off guard. We were super close and I'd never seen him like that before. My family was always loving and close but he got extremely hateful to my brother and then two days later while my brother was in school and I was sleeping (had to miss school; long story) he just shot himself in front of my mom. I've always felt guilt because of the "talks" he had with me over those two days. But I truly don't think I could have changed a thing about what happened. I was still a child at the time. It's ruined our whole family because of the trauma
of it all. I still have "flashbacks" when it comes to being awoken unexpectedly and the smell of blood but for the most part I've been able to live as normal of a life as I possibly could under the circumstances. Things are always hard growing up a young man without a father but the one thing I've learned is every situation gets better. Even if it's just a little bit it'll get better. | dad committed suicide 8 years ago, never get over it, just learn to always look to the inevitable bright side. |
need_my_amphetamines | I got kicked out of high school for messing around with a Freshman when I was a Senior (we attempted to have sex), on school property, during school hours... Her step-dad was the biggest asshole, and I know from witnesses that he was the one who reported what happened (she got kicked out too). I had to get my class ring back from him after he confiscated it a few months before and mumble apologies and promises (with fingers crossed behind my back) that I would stay away from her at school.
A month or so later, I sneak out of the house and go to WalMart at 2am and buy a huge package of toilet paper, a jar of peanut butter, a container of honey, a bag of flour, a few packages of generic cream-filled cookies, and a box of plastic forks. See where this is going yet?
I go over to her neighborhood and park down the street from her house. Smartly, I am dressed in all black. I get some good exercise tossing toilet paper up into the trees. Next up, I take the time to stick hundreds of plastic forks down into the lawn individually (with gloves on so I don't leave fingerprints). The honey was dumped all over the front door mat and porch around it. The peanut butter went under the door handles of their vehicles. The generic cream-filled cookies? I twisted them apart and stuck the cream side onto all the windows of the vehicles, tossing non-cream sides onto the grass. Then flour... flour everywhere!
And my coup de gras? I lit a package of firecrackers, threw them at the front porch, and ran for my car. Oh the thrill of it, the adrenaline pumping through my veins!
The kicker was, I found out months later that they thought that it was band/color guard members who did it (she and her sister were both in band and color guard), and *they* got in trouble for it! (A friend from school brought it up in conversation; I didn't confess to it. They still don't know that I was the one that did it.)
TL;DR: I go all out for anonymous revenge. | I got kicked out of high school for messing around with a Freshman when I was a Senior (we attempted to have sex), on school property, during school hours... Her step-dad was the biggest asshole, and I know from witnesses that he was the one who reported what happened (she got kicked out too). I had to get my class ring back from him after he confiscated it a few months before and mumble apologies and promises (with fingers crossed behind my back) that I would stay away from her at school.
A month or so later, I sneak out of the house and go to WalMart at 2am and buy a huge package of toilet paper, a jar of peanut butter, a container of honey, a bag of flour, a few packages of generic cream-filled cookies, and a box of plastic forks. See where this is going yet?
I go over to her neighborhood and park down the street from her house. Smartly, I am dressed in all black. I get some good exercise tossing toilet paper up into the trees. Next up, I take the time to stick hundreds of plastic forks down into the lawn individually (with gloves on so I don't leave fingerprints). The honey was dumped all over the front door mat and porch around it. The peanut butter went under the door handles of their vehicles. The generic cream-filled cookies? I twisted them apart and stuck the cream side onto all the windows of the vehicles, tossing non-cream sides onto the grass. Then flour... flour everywhere!
And my coup de gras? I lit a package of firecrackers, threw them at the front porch, and ran for my car. Oh the thrill of it, the adrenaline pumping through my veins!
The kicker was, I found out months later that they thought that it was band/color guard members who did it (she and her sister were both in band and color guard), and they got in trouble for it! (A friend from school brought it up in conversation; I didn't confess to it. They still don't know that I was the one that did it.)
TL;DR: I go all out for anonymous revenge.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccs8txg | I got kicked out of high school for messing around with a Freshman when I was a Senior (we attempted to have sex), on school property, during school hours... Her step-dad was the biggest asshole, and I know from witnesses that he was the one who reported what happened (she got kicked out too). I had to get my class ring back from him after he confiscated it a few months before and mumble apologies and promises (with fingers crossed behind my back) that I would stay away from her at school.
A month or so later, I sneak out of the house and go to WalMart at 2am and buy a huge package of toilet paper, a jar of peanut butter, a container of honey, a bag of flour, a few packages of generic cream-filled cookies, and a box of plastic forks. See where this is going yet?
I go over to her neighborhood and park down the street from her house. Smartly, I am dressed in all black. I get some good exercise tossing toilet paper up into the trees. Next up, I take the time to stick hundreds of plastic forks down into the lawn individually (with gloves on so I don't leave fingerprints). The honey was dumped all over the front door mat and porch around it. The peanut butter went under the door handles of their vehicles. The generic cream-filled cookies? I twisted them apart and stuck the cream side onto all the windows of the vehicles, tossing non-cream sides onto the grass. Then flour... flour everywhere!
And my coup de gras? I lit a package of firecrackers, threw them at the front porch, and ran for my car. Oh the thrill of it, the adrenaline pumping through my veins!
The kicker was, I found out months later that they thought that it was band/color guard members who did it (she and her sister were both in band and color guard), and they got in trouble for it! (A friend from school brought it up in conversation; I didn't confess to it. They still don't know that I was the one that did it.) | I go all out for anonymous revenge. |
Runnerbrax | I have had two. Post surgery is gonna suck for the first week. Anything requiring ab flexion (proper word?) Will feel like knives stabbing you.
It goes away little by little the first week. As /u/TheBrahdigy put it. You will eventually get back into it.
Tl;dr Don't watch any funny movies the first week post surgery. Trust me... | I have had two. Post surgery is gonna suck for the first week. Anything requiring ab flexion (proper word?) Will feel like knives stabbing you.
It goes away little by little the first week. As /u/TheBrahdigy put it. You will eventually get back into it.
Tl;dr Don't watch any funny movies the first week post surgery. Trust me...
| bodybuilding | t5_2ql8s | ccswhtq | I have had two. Post surgery is gonna suck for the first week. Anything requiring ab flexion (proper word?) Will feel like knives stabbing you.
It goes away little by little the first week. As /u/TheBrahdigy put it. You will eventually get back into it. | Don't watch any funny movies the first week post surgery. Trust me... |
bobbito | Subject? possibly. That can be pretty broad. Is "it's just a joke?" an excuse for a shitty joke? No.
Essentially, good comedy requires empathy and I"m shocked at how many "comics" completely lack it. Remember you're an entertainer and know who your audience is. "Fuck 'em if they're offended/upset" is not a real good way to look at it since your job is to make them laugh, not be pissed.
If you write offensive, off color jokes, make sure they are funny first, offensive second. The audience should go go "hahahahahahawwwww" as they feel a bit guilty for laughing.
There are a handful of touchy topics that every basement dwelling narcissist that grabs a mic thinks he has a fresh take on (racism, misogyny, rape, etc) and 99% of the time it is tasteless, uncreative garbage. This open micer attitude of "HEY IF SOMEONE LAUGHED IT IS OKAY" it ridiculous. If you had to alienate half the audience to get that laugh, maybe shelf it. Comedy and laughter are about being inclusive, not excluding people.
This opinion is always downvoted and always unpopular here, but I'm okay with that. I go to enough open mics to know who the dipshits who are narcissistic enough to not give a shit about the audience and I am happy to collect their downvotes.
tldr; No. Not everything. Have some empathy. | Subject? possibly. That can be pretty broad. Is "it's just a joke?" an excuse for a shitty joke? No.
Essentially, good comedy requires empathy and I"m shocked at how many "comics" completely lack it. Remember you're an entertainer and know who your audience is. "Fuck 'em if they're offended/upset" is not a real good way to look at it since your job is to make them laugh, not be pissed.
If you write offensive, off color jokes, make sure they are funny first, offensive second. The audience should go go "hahahahahahawwwww" as they feel a bit guilty for laughing.
There are a handful of touchy topics that every basement dwelling narcissist that grabs a mic thinks he has a fresh take on (racism, misogyny, rape, etc) and 99% of the time it is tasteless, uncreative garbage. This open micer attitude of "HEY IF SOMEONE LAUGHED IT IS OKAY" it ridiculous. If you had to alienate half the audience to get that laugh, maybe shelf it. Comedy and laughter are about being inclusive, not excluding people.
This opinion is always downvoted and always unpopular here, but I'm okay with that. I go to enough open mics to know who the dipshits who are narcissistic enough to not give a shit about the audience and I am happy to collect their downvotes.
tldr; No. Not everything. Have some empathy.
| Standup | t5_2r18f | ccsu60x | Subject? possibly. That can be pretty broad. Is "it's just a joke?" an excuse for a shitty joke? No.
Essentially, good comedy requires empathy and I"m shocked at how many "comics" completely lack it. Remember you're an entertainer and know who your audience is. "Fuck 'em if they're offended/upset" is not a real good way to look at it since your job is to make them laugh, not be pissed.
If you write offensive, off color jokes, make sure they are funny first, offensive second. The audience should go go "hahahahahahawwwww" as they feel a bit guilty for laughing.
There are a handful of touchy topics that every basement dwelling narcissist that grabs a mic thinks he has a fresh take on (racism, misogyny, rape, etc) and 99% of the time it is tasteless, uncreative garbage. This open micer attitude of "HEY IF SOMEONE LAUGHED IT IS OKAY" it ridiculous. If you had to alienate half the audience to get that laugh, maybe shelf it. Comedy and laughter are about being inclusive, not excluding people.
This opinion is always downvoted and always unpopular here, but I'm okay with that. I go to enough open mics to know who the dipshits who are narcissistic enough to not give a shit about the audience and I am happy to collect their downvotes. | No. Not everything. Have some empathy. |
Blackoutorgetout | Not me but a female friend of mine took one of her professors home from the bar. Had sex with him, stole 20 bucks from his wallet, then took a picture of his ID with him naked in her bed in the background. When he woke up she showed him the picture and informed him that she wasn't going to be in class again and thanks for the A. Needless to say I both admired her and was appalled.
TLDR: Doesn't matter got an A | Not me but a female friend of mine took one of her professors home from the bar. Had sex with him, stole 20 bucks from his wallet, then took a picture of his ID with him naked in her bed in the background. When he woke up she showed him the picture and informed him that she wasn't going to be in class again and thanks for the A. Needless to say I both admired her and was appalled.
TLDR: Doesn't matter got an A
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccsnpec | Not me but a female friend of mine took one of her professors home from the bar. Had sex with him, stole 20 bucks from his wallet, then took a picture of his ID with him naked in her bed in the background. When he woke up she showed him the picture and informed him that she wasn't going to be in class again and thanks for the A. Needless to say I both admired her and was appalled. | Doesn't matter got an A |
cmrh | I hooked up with the TA of my anthropology class in college. We still sleep together pretty often. Maybe because we're now married? Who knows.
TLDR banged the TA, got an A | I hooked up with the TA of my anthropology class in college. We still sleep together pretty often. Maybe because we're now married? Who knows.
TLDR banged the TA, got an A
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccsnxhm | I hooked up with the TA of my anthropology class in college. We still sleep together pretty often. Maybe because we're now married? Who knows. | banged the TA, got an A |
satisfyinghump | This can be hard to deal with, since you may feel like you are "under her" in terms of seniority or whatever hierarchy is in your school. But the truth is, you're getting this hostility because this woman probably her whole life devoted herself to one subject, and one subject only, and is threatened by ANYTHING that she does not understand.
You chose to learn as things came out. These things came out at the same time as she was alive, and one would argue that she should know as much as you or more, considering you were a sperm while she was still in school getting her doctorate.
So remember, you are better then her. By the simple fact that you kept your cool and don't look for other people to blame when you are in the wrong.
Now as far as how you want to handle this, there are two ways, continue taking the abuse and possibly losing your job/role or take initiative. You can do that via email, or in person.
I am speaking from experience here (7 years in IT, situations like yours every day, not bragging about who has had worst experiences here, just letting you know what's what so you can take my advice with some knowledge that I've used it and lived it)
I would choose to do in person. (email is forever and doesn't convey emotion) Reply all to the email and say "I agree this matter should be dealt with. If it wouldn't be a problem, can we please have a meeting between my dept. head, yourself and me at the earliest time possible".
Then when you have your meeting, ask the nut job what was wrong about what you said. If you want to be extra bold, ask her to logon to a computer in your dept. heads office (I did this method, as the person was complaining about a similar issue, though it had to do with the blue 'Fn' key on the laptop keyboard), and see what happens.
Now if she can logon correctly, or she tells the story from her point of view, just wait till shes finished, don't interrupt. Then PHYSICALLY turn your body to your dept. head if not already, if already, try to visualize your dept. head as the most important person in the world. She will feel this. Then ask her if she herself has ever had problems understanding your instructions. Hopefully she will say no. Then tell the story as it happened from your point of view. Then mention the email message that the nut job sent, and point out that there is only one thing that juts out in this entire situation. The only person out of everyone, who has had a problem with your instructions, is the nut job. Not your boss, and not the other professors. Try to remain helpful and open about whos fault it is, but don't be afraid to point out the obvious, that this woman made a mistake. Stand your ground and exclaim that you will NOT receive the blame for someone elses mistake. Offer that next time you can write down the instructions in an email, and cc your dept. head, as you had wanted to do before you were cut off by the nut job.
Hope this is helpful, I always feel bad when I see/hear these sorts of situations. it's not fair that people in IT get stepped on and shitted on, regardless of what happens. if a mistake is made, our fault, if the computer stops working 6 months after we last looked at it, our fault, if apple's new phone doesn't work with the current email system, our fault. etc.
Goodluck!
tl;dr. stand your ground, don't take the blame for someone else's mistake. | This can be hard to deal with, since you may feel like you are "under her" in terms of seniority or whatever hierarchy is in your school. But the truth is, you're getting this hostility because this woman probably her whole life devoted herself to one subject, and one subject only, and is threatened by ANYTHING that she does not understand.
You chose to learn as things came out. These things came out at the same time as she was alive, and one would argue that she should know as much as you or more, considering you were a sperm while she was still in school getting her doctorate.
So remember, you are better then her. By the simple fact that you kept your cool and don't look for other people to blame when you are in the wrong.
Now as far as how you want to handle this, there are two ways, continue taking the abuse and possibly losing your job/role or take initiative. You can do that via email, or in person.
I am speaking from experience here (7 years in IT, situations like yours every day, not bragging about who has had worst experiences here, just letting you know what's what so you can take my advice with some knowledge that I've used it and lived it)
I would choose to do in person. (email is forever and doesn't convey emotion) Reply all to the email and say "I agree this matter should be dealt with. If it wouldn't be a problem, can we please have a meeting between my dept. head, yourself and me at the earliest time possible".
Then when you have your meeting, ask the nut job what was wrong about what you said. If you want to be extra bold, ask her to logon to a computer in your dept. heads office (I did this method, as the person was complaining about a similar issue, though it had to do with the blue 'Fn' key on the laptop keyboard), and see what happens.
Now if she can logon correctly, or she tells the story from her point of view, just wait till shes finished, don't interrupt. Then PHYSICALLY turn your body to your dept. head if not already, if already, try to visualize your dept. head as the most important person in the world. She will feel this. Then ask her if she herself has ever had problems understanding your instructions. Hopefully she will say no. Then tell the story as it happened from your point of view. Then mention the email message that the nut job sent, and point out that there is only one thing that juts out in this entire situation. The only person out of everyone, who has had a problem with your instructions, is the nut job. Not your boss, and not the other professors. Try to remain helpful and open about whos fault it is, but don't be afraid to point out the obvious, that this woman made a mistake. Stand your ground and exclaim that you will NOT receive the blame for someone elses mistake. Offer that next time you can write down the instructions in an email, and cc your dept. head, as you had wanted to do before you were cut off by the nut job.
Hope this is helpful, I always feel bad when I see/hear these sorts of situations. it's not fair that people in IT get stepped on and shitted on, regardless of what happens. if a mistake is made, our fault, if the computer stops working 6 months after we last looked at it, our fault, if apple's new phone doesn't work with the current email system, our fault. etc.
Goodluck!
tl;dr. stand your ground, don't take the blame for someone else's mistake.
| iiiiiiitttttttttttt | t5_2tfln | cct0ukm | This can be hard to deal with, since you may feel like you are "under her" in terms of seniority or whatever hierarchy is in your school. But the truth is, you're getting this hostility because this woman probably her whole life devoted herself to one subject, and one subject only, and is threatened by ANYTHING that she does not understand.
You chose to learn as things came out. These things came out at the same time as she was alive, and one would argue that she should know as much as you or more, considering you were a sperm while she was still in school getting her doctorate.
So remember, you are better then her. By the simple fact that you kept your cool and don't look for other people to blame when you are in the wrong.
Now as far as how you want to handle this, there are two ways, continue taking the abuse and possibly losing your job/role or take initiative. You can do that via email, or in person.
I am speaking from experience here (7 years in IT, situations like yours every day, not bragging about who has had worst experiences here, just letting you know what's what so you can take my advice with some knowledge that I've used it and lived it)
I would choose to do in person. (email is forever and doesn't convey emotion) Reply all to the email and say "I agree this matter should be dealt with. If it wouldn't be a problem, can we please have a meeting between my dept. head, yourself and me at the earliest time possible".
Then when you have your meeting, ask the nut job what was wrong about what you said. If you want to be extra bold, ask her to logon to a computer in your dept. heads office (I did this method, as the person was complaining about a similar issue, though it had to do with the blue 'Fn' key on the laptop keyboard), and see what happens.
Now if she can logon correctly, or she tells the story from her point of view, just wait till shes finished, don't interrupt. Then PHYSICALLY turn your body to your dept. head if not already, if already, try to visualize your dept. head as the most important person in the world. She will feel this. Then ask her if she herself has ever had problems understanding your instructions. Hopefully she will say no. Then tell the story as it happened from your point of view. Then mention the email message that the nut job sent, and point out that there is only one thing that juts out in this entire situation. The only person out of everyone, who has had a problem with your instructions, is the nut job. Not your boss, and not the other professors. Try to remain helpful and open about whos fault it is, but don't be afraid to point out the obvious, that this woman made a mistake. Stand your ground and exclaim that you will NOT receive the blame for someone elses mistake. Offer that next time you can write down the instructions in an email, and cc your dept. head, as you had wanted to do before you were cut off by the nut job.
Hope this is helpful, I always feel bad when I see/hear these sorts of situations. it's not fair that people in IT get stepped on and shitted on, regardless of what happens. if a mistake is made, our fault, if the computer stops working 6 months after we last looked at it, our fault, if apple's new phone doesn't work with the current email system, our fault. etc.
Goodluck! | stand your ground, don't take the blame for someone else's mistake. |
thedjotaku | Pretty well. My wife was my gf/fiance throughout college. At the time it was amazing. With hindsight, it sucked. But I'm still with my wife and it's somewhere between 100 and 1000 times better on average. Everyone has off days when their head isn't in it, but most days it's awesome. Especially because it's constantly improving, I've never really wondered what it've been like with others.
The more I read about sex online (including reddit), the more I realize how personal everyone's sex preferences are. So while statistics dictates that some percentage of people will have mindblowing sex on the first try, I think you really only get the best sex possible with someone after a few times together. For those who don't have experience or haven't read as much - basically here's what I've experienced both with pre-sex messing around and what I've read online. Some girls LOVE if you play with their nipples - others absolutely HATE IT and will lose all ability to come if you do anything to them. Some love (giving/receieving) oral and some hate it - even if you're the best and every other girl or guy has told you that you're the best.
tl;dr: It was great for me, and I think random hookup sex can be overrated | Pretty well. My wife was my gf/fiance throughout college. At the time it was amazing. With hindsight, it sucked. But I'm still with my wife and it's somewhere between 100 and 1000 times better on average. Everyone has off days when their head isn't in it, but most days it's awesome. Especially because it's constantly improving, I've never really wondered what it've been like with others.
The more I read about sex online (including reddit), the more I realize how personal everyone's sex preferences are. So while statistics dictates that some percentage of people will have mindblowing sex on the first try, I think you really only get the best sex possible with someone after a few times together. For those who don't have experience or haven't read as much - basically here's what I've experienced both with pre-sex messing around and what I've read online. Some girls LOVE if you play with their nipples - others absolutely HATE IT and will lose all ability to come if you do anything to them. Some love (giving/receieving) oral and some hate it - even if you're the best and every other girl or guy has told you that you're the best.
tl;dr: It was great for me, and I think random hookup sex can be overrated
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccswjml | Pretty well. My wife was my gf/fiance throughout college. At the time it was amazing. With hindsight, it sucked. But I'm still with my wife and it's somewhere between 100 and 1000 times better on average. Everyone has off days when their head isn't in it, but most days it's awesome. Especially because it's constantly improving, I've never really wondered what it've been like with others.
The more I read about sex online (including reddit), the more I realize how personal everyone's sex preferences are. So while statistics dictates that some percentage of people will have mindblowing sex on the first try, I think you really only get the best sex possible with someone after a few times together. For those who don't have experience or haven't read as much - basically here's what I've experienced both with pre-sex messing around and what I've read online. Some girls LOVE if you play with their nipples - others absolutely HATE IT and will lose all ability to come if you do anything to them. Some love (giving/receieving) oral and some hate it - even if you're the best and every other girl or guy has told you that you're the best. | It was great for me, and I think random hookup sex can be overrated |
G-Man33 | It was early but still a dumb one.
~level 30 just rolling along killing things, with my barb and my speakers crackle and eventually cut out when my dog runs out from under my desk. I guess he tripped on a wire. the area looked clear so I go under to fix it. when the sound comes back on I hear one or two hits and then dead.
TL;DR - my dog killed me | It was early but still a dumb one.
~level 30 just rolling along killing things, with my barb and my speakers crackle and eventually cut out when my dog runs out from under my desk. I guess he tripped on a wire. the area looked clear so I go under to fix it. when the sound comes back on I hear one or two hits and then dead.
TL;DR - my dog killed me
| Diablo | t5_2qore | ccsxfvd | It was early but still a dumb one.
~level 30 just rolling along killing things, with my barb and my speakers crackle and eventually cut out when my dog runs out from under my desk. I guess he tripped on a wire. the area looked clear so I go under to fix it. when the sound comes back on I hear one or two hits and then dead. | my dog killed me |
Takashi3 | I was powerleveling a friend on normal mp10, act 3 keep depths. He just straight ran into the fire like you OP, and boom dead. I felt bad for the guy, but I was laughing my ass off.
I also had a paragon 8 WD who died as well. I sometimes have Internet connection problems, so the game will close spontaneously once in a while. I was just doing mp0 to find some monsters for the achievements to kill said monsters, when I stumble upon one of the champion pack. Just as I was about to kill it (I had 65k life, and enough dps to kill the pack within 10 seconds), I got dc'd. Needless to say, it was stupid because I would never have died to the monsters if I had not dc'd.
TL;DR Stupid death from getting disconnected from game | I was powerleveling a friend on normal mp10, act 3 keep depths. He just straight ran into the fire like you OP, and boom dead. I felt bad for the guy, but I was laughing my ass off.
I also had a paragon 8 WD who died as well. I sometimes have Internet connection problems, so the game will close spontaneously once in a while. I was just doing mp0 to find some monsters for the achievements to kill said monsters, when I stumble upon one of the champion pack. Just as I was about to kill it (I had 65k life, and enough dps to kill the pack within 10 seconds), I got dc'd. Needless to say, it was stupid because I would never have died to the monsters if I had not dc'd.
TL;DR Stupid death from getting disconnected from game
| Diablo | t5_2qore | ccsz2zy | I was powerleveling a friend on normal mp10, act 3 keep depths. He just straight ran into the fire like you OP, and boom dead. I felt bad for the guy, but I was laughing my ass off.
I also had a paragon 8 WD who died as well. I sometimes have Internet connection problems, so the game will close spontaneously once in a while. I was just doing mp0 to find some monsters for the achievements to kill said monsters, when I stumble upon one of the champion pack. Just as I was about to kill it (I had 65k life, and enough dps to kill the pack within 10 seconds), I got dc'd. Needless to say, it was stupid because I would never have died to the monsters if I had not dc'd. | Stupid death from getting disconnected from game |
Digimule | I did very well in the subjects I was interested in, and barely scraped by in the ones I wasn't.
I learned quite young that grades were constructed by your teacher, and that having a high grade didn't mean you understood the information, or that low grades didn't mean you were struggling.
Math and science especially frustrated me. I easily understood everything they threw at me, and I didn't need to do countless exercises to drive it home. I rarely did any homework, and scored low on assignments/homework, but high on tests/exams.
My reasoning was that I understood the work. Why would I waste my time doing the same thing over and over and over again?
It really fed into my underachieving, and led to me being very jaded to the education system. I only ever got high grades because I was smart, not because I worked hard.
**tl;dr** I never cared about grades. I cared about learning, not what some teacher *thought* I had learned. | I did very well in the subjects I was interested in, and barely scraped by in the ones I wasn't.
I learned quite young that grades were constructed by your teacher, and that having a high grade didn't mean you understood the information, or that low grades didn't mean you were struggling.
Math and science especially frustrated me. I easily understood everything they threw at me, and I didn't need to do countless exercises to drive it home. I rarely did any homework, and scored low on assignments/homework, but high on tests/exams.
My reasoning was that I understood the work. Why would I waste my time doing the same thing over and over and over again?
It really fed into my underachieving, and led to me being very jaded to the education system. I only ever got high grades because I was smart, not because I worked hard.
tl;dr I never cared about grades. I cared about learning, not what some teacher thought I had learned.
| intj | t5_2qowo | cct0cem | I did very well in the subjects I was interested in, and barely scraped by in the ones I wasn't.
I learned quite young that grades were constructed by your teacher, and that having a high grade didn't mean you understood the information, or that low grades didn't mean you were struggling.
Math and science especially frustrated me. I easily understood everything they threw at me, and I didn't need to do countless exercises to drive it home. I rarely did any homework, and scored low on assignments/homework, but high on tests/exams.
My reasoning was that I understood the work. Why would I waste my time doing the same thing over and over and over again?
It really fed into my underachieving, and led to me being very jaded to the education system. I only ever got high grades because I was smart, not because I worked hard. | I never cared about grades. I cared about learning, not what some teacher thought I had learned. |
TheMusicalIntrovert | Currently in high school (sophomore). I do fairly well in school and never study. I see homework as unneeded and a waste of time because I have already learned the material. Of course it's different when you are expected to learn from the countless packets of fill in the blank answers you regurgitate from the textbook. I never study because I take thorough notes that are comprised of all the information on the slide. Nothing is shortened and there are no pictures. Just straight paragraphs of information. I hate when teachers ask for artwork in notes because "it helps you learn even more". I hate having to learn from pictures. It seems pointless to me. Teachers have always told me that notes should be short and sweet when I can't learn anything from a sentence fragment. Countless people in my math classes have called me a nerd simply because I memorize formulas and steps and I am able to put them to use very quickly. Ironically, the same people who call me a nerd like to argue that my answer is incorrect when I'm acing tests and you are getting Cs.
TLDR: Doing fairly well in high school. I see no real need for studying or homework. | Currently in high school (sophomore). I do fairly well in school and never study. I see homework as unneeded and a waste of time because I have already learned the material. Of course it's different when you are expected to learn from the countless packets of fill in the blank answers you regurgitate from the textbook. I never study because I take thorough notes that are comprised of all the information on the slide. Nothing is shortened and there are no pictures. Just straight paragraphs of information. I hate when teachers ask for artwork in notes because "it helps you learn even more". I hate having to learn from pictures. It seems pointless to me. Teachers have always told me that notes should be short and sweet when I can't learn anything from a sentence fragment. Countless people in my math classes have called me a nerd simply because I memorize formulas and steps and I am able to put them to use very quickly. Ironically, the same people who call me a nerd like to argue that my answer is incorrect when I'm acing tests and you are getting Cs.
TLDR: Doing fairly well in high school. I see no real need for studying or homework.
| intj | t5_2qowo | cctexri | Currently in high school (sophomore). I do fairly well in school and never study. I see homework as unneeded and a waste of time because I have already learned the material. Of course it's different when you are expected to learn from the countless packets of fill in the blank answers you regurgitate from the textbook. I never study because I take thorough notes that are comprised of all the information on the slide. Nothing is shortened and there are no pictures. Just straight paragraphs of information. I hate when teachers ask for artwork in notes because "it helps you learn even more". I hate having to learn from pictures. It seems pointless to me. Teachers have always told me that notes should be short and sweet when I can't learn anything from a sentence fragment. Countless people in my math classes have called me a nerd simply because I memorize formulas and steps and I am able to put them to use very quickly. Ironically, the same people who call me a nerd like to argue that my answer is incorrect when I'm acing tests and you are getting Cs. | Doing fairly well in high school. I see no real need for studying or homework. |
SpiderVeloce | You have a small window of a couple years where you can disappear and do nothing and the business world won't hold it against you. After that, gaps in your resume become a negative. You can't do it forever though; eventually you will have to settle into the usual routine of working.
TL/DR: You can go out and play for a while but you have to be back in time for work.
| You have a small window of a couple years where you can disappear and do nothing and the business world won't hold it against you. After that, gaps in your resume become a negative. You can't do it forever though; eventually you will have to settle into the usual routine of working.
TL/DR: You can go out and play for a while but you have to be back in time for work.
| self | t5_2qh96 | cctdbgf | You have a small window of a couple years where you can disappear and do nothing and the business world won't hold it against you. After that, gaps in your resume become a negative. You can't do it forever though; eventually you will have to settle into the usual routine of working. | You can go out and play for a while but you have to be back in time for work. |
Peregrine21591 | > Your average tomcat can fuck up a friendly dog.
Similar story - my aunt had an Alsatian many years ago (long gone now) and he was a big fucker, going by the name of Sultan
My aunt came to visit my parents, bringing Sultan with her. At this time, my parents had recently acquired 2 female kittens (Harry and George, also long gone now, which makes me sad) upon arrival, Sultan immediately started chasing the kittens, who both retreated to the chairs under the dining table, which was covered with a nice dangly table cloth.
Long story short, Sultan stuck his head under the table cloth to try to find them, and pulled back a bleeding nose and proceeds to run out the back door, out of the garden and got half way up the street before someone managed to stop him.
Harry emerged triumphant (because she was a bad ass mother fucker) and George just hid for the rest of the visit.
For the rest of her life, one of Harry's favourite past times was luring small children to the table, and then scratching them when they tried to stroke her
TL;DR, if you follow a cat into a bush or a small hiding place, they will likely rip your face off | > Your average tomcat can fuck up a friendly dog.
Similar story - my aunt had an Alsatian many years ago (long gone now) and he was a big fucker, going by the name of Sultan
My aunt came to visit my parents, bringing Sultan with her. At this time, my parents had recently acquired 2 female kittens (Harry and George, also long gone now, which makes me sad) upon arrival, Sultan immediately started chasing the kittens, who both retreated to the chairs under the dining table, which was covered with a nice dangly table cloth.
Long story short, Sultan stuck his head under the table cloth to try to find them, and pulled back a bleeding nose and proceeds to run out the back door, out of the garden and got half way up the street before someone managed to stop him.
Harry emerged triumphant (because she was a bad ass mother fucker) and George just hid for the rest of the visit.
For the rest of her life, one of Harry's favourite past times was luring small children to the table, and then scratching them when they tried to stroke her
TL;DR, if you follow a cat into a bush or a small hiding place, they will likely rip your face off
| pics | t5_2qh0u | ccti7fn | Your average tomcat can fuck up a friendly dog.
Similar story - my aunt had an Alsatian many years ago (long gone now) and he was a big fucker, going by the name of Sultan
My aunt came to visit my parents, bringing Sultan with her. At this time, my parents had recently acquired 2 female kittens (Harry and George, also long gone now, which makes me sad) upon arrival, Sultan immediately started chasing the kittens, who both retreated to the chairs under the dining table, which was covered with a nice dangly table cloth.
Long story short, Sultan stuck his head under the table cloth to try to find them, and pulled back a bleeding nose and proceeds to run out the back door, out of the garden and got half way up the street before someone managed to stop him.
Harry emerged triumphant (because she was a bad ass mother fucker) and George just hid for the rest of the visit.
For the rest of her life, one of Harry's favourite past times was luring small children to the table, and then scratching them when they tried to stroke her | if you follow a cat into a bush or a small hiding place, they will likely rip your face off |
bluefyre73 | I think GTAVO is very different from reality. I understand the point you are trying to make, and have thought similar things myself, but in the end, GTA is a game, while real life has very real consequences. In real life, people would be far less willing to kill others or run wild in an anarchy situation, where there are no rules. In GTA, you simply respawn if anything bad happens: there are no real consequences, or at least consequences that have a serious effect as in reality.
tl, dr; No b/c YOLO | I think GTAVO is very different from reality. I understand the point you are trying to make, and have thought similar things myself, but in the end, GTA is a game, while real life has very real consequences. In real life, people would be far less willing to kill others or run wild in an anarchy situation, where there are no rules. In GTA, you simply respawn if anything bad happens: there are no real consequences, or at least consequences that have a serious effect as in reality.
tl, dr; No b/c YOLO
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | cctboqw | I think GTAVO is very different from reality. I understand the point you are trying to make, and have thought similar things myself, but in the end, GTA is a game, while real life has very real consequences. In real life, people would be far less willing to kill others or run wild in an anarchy situation, where there are no rules. In GTA, you simply respawn if anything bad happens: there are no real consequences, or at least consequences that have a serious effect as in reality. | No b/c YOLO |
narwhal_tamer | Well let me preface this with saying I was on anti-malarials and so I was having some crazy dreams regardless, but this one took the cake.
My vantage point is from the ceiling of a theater stage, upon which three king sized beds lay. There were twenty people on it, naked. All of them Americans who also lived in the tropical country I was in. They're all having a massive orgy. Just a massive writhing knot of legs and arms and penises, breasts, the works, I can see so much detail that I notice the sweat dripping down their backs. As my vantage point changes, moving along the ceiling but towards where an audience would sit, parts start changing, men are taking off their dicks and dawning vaginas, women affixing a dick and balls to themselves. And then going back at it. Then, I hear a voice from a friend of mine coming to the audience, where my viewpoint looks and sees my friend and I sitting as the only two people in a theater, both fully dressed, with clipboards, critiquing the performance of the people on stage.
Weird shit, man. Waking up after that took a few minutes to process what my brain had really just invented.
TL;DR: Had a crazy sex dream where I end up critiquing a massive orgy that involved interchangeable sex parts. | Well let me preface this with saying I was on anti-malarials and so I was having some crazy dreams regardless, but this one took the cake.
My vantage point is from the ceiling of a theater stage, upon which three king sized beds lay. There were twenty people on it, naked. All of them Americans who also lived in the tropical country I was in. They're all having a massive orgy. Just a massive writhing knot of legs and arms and penises, breasts, the works, I can see so much detail that I notice the sweat dripping down their backs. As my vantage point changes, moving along the ceiling but towards where an audience would sit, parts start changing, men are taking off their dicks and dawning vaginas, women affixing a dick and balls to themselves. And then going back at it. Then, I hear a voice from a friend of mine coming to the audience, where my viewpoint looks and sees my friend and I sitting as the only two people in a theater, both fully dressed, with clipboards, critiquing the performance of the people on stage.
Weird shit, man. Waking up after that took a few minutes to process what my brain had really just invented.
TL;DR: Had a crazy sex dream where I end up critiquing a massive orgy that involved interchangeable sex parts.
| AskWomen | t5_2rxrw | cctoefh | Well let me preface this with saying I was on anti-malarials and so I was having some crazy dreams regardless, but this one took the cake.
My vantage point is from the ceiling of a theater stage, upon which three king sized beds lay. There were twenty people on it, naked. All of them Americans who also lived in the tropical country I was in. They're all having a massive orgy. Just a massive writhing knot of legs and arms and penises, breasts, the works, I can see so much detail that I notice the sweat dripping down their backs. As my vantage point changes, moving along the ceiling but towards where an audience would sit, parts start changing, men are taking off their dicks and dawning vaginas, women affixing a dick and balls to themselves. And then going back at it. Then, I hear a voice from a friend of mine coming to the audience, where my viewpoint looks and sees my friend and I sitting as the only two people in a theater, both fully dressed, with clipboards, critiquing the performance of the people on stage.
Weird shit, man. Waking up after that took a few minutes to process what my brain had really just invented. | Had a crazy sex dream where I end up critiquing a massive orgy that involved interchangeable sex parts. |
stuxxnet42 | The motors seem to draw 1.6A max each. At 6V this means 2\*(6\*1.6) = 19.2 Watts. Your booster chips max input is 2A. With the 3.7V of your battery the best case (no loss) would mean (3.7\*2) = 7.4 Watts. So less than half of what your motors will draw at max. If your robot is light enough and there is little friction it might work. But I don't know much about robots so don't take this as an advise, it's just a guess. I would **definitely** measure the current of your motors during operation before using this kind of setup.
TLDR: Your booster chip might be too weak | The motors seem to draw 1.6A max each. At 6V this means 2*(6*1.6) = 19.2 Watts. Your booster chips max input is 2A. With the 3.7V of your battery the best case (no loss) would mean (3.7*2) = 7.4 Watts. So less than half of what your motors will draw at max. If your robot is light enough and there is little friction it might work. But I don't know much about robots so don't take this as an advise, it's just a guess. I would definitely measure the current of your motors during operation before using this kind of setup.
TLDR: Your booster chip might be too weak
| AskElectronics | t5_2se13 | cctt45e | The motors seem to draw 1.6A max each. At 6V this means 2*(6*1.6) = 19.2 Watts. Your booster chips max input is 2A. With the 3.7V of your battery the best case (no loss) would mean (3.7*2) = 7.4 Watts. So less than half of what your motors will draw at max. If your robot is light enough and there is little friction it might work. But I don't know much about robots so don't take this as an advise, it's just a guess. I would definitely measure the current of your motors during operation before using this kind of setup. | Your booster chip might be too weak |
ChiBullsKmK | Just wrote this to someone with a similar question about Baltimore defense before the packers game last week. "In regards to Baltimore defense. They only looked ok versus peyton for a half do I'll attribute that to first game reps with Peyton's new toys.
Then they beat the offensive juggernaut known as the browns. Trent got near 60 yards on 18 carries in a defensive struggle THE BROWNS.
Now this Texans game without rice. If it wasn't for Schaub wonderful pick six and special teams TD by Doss it was actually a close game. Foster and Tate combined for 90 yards on 21 carries.
Loss @ buffalo. Proved that offense is bad four or five picks. Defense gives up 164 yds and 1 td to banged up rbs spiller and Jackson.
Now the Miami game. That offensive line is horrible. You and I could get a half sack on them. Not to mention Wallace had more than a handful of drops.
So basically I don't attribute there best games defensively to the defense. More attributed to bad qb play. Which won't happen with Rodgers.
Notable trends haven't played any good qbs besides Peyton and they got blown out(more carries for lacy), lots of catches for TEs indicating weak LB coverage. Which could be Rodgers dumping off to lacy. The defense and team in general plays better at home. But packers are the better team.
I'm a lacy owner but I've been following the ravens closely for gambling purposes.
Hopefully you get what I'm saying that the numbers are skewed.
TL:DR
Ravens are unproven based on offensive woes, previous matchups with lesser qbs. "
UPDATE: with two of three starting wrs going down. The one wr Nelson hits a bomb and lacy runs all over Baltimore in Baltimore.Baltimore defense looks meh and not scary as #1 fantasy defense against run.
| Just wrote this to someone with a similar question about Baltimore defense before the packers game last week. "In regards to Baltimore defense. They only looked ok versus peyton for a half do I'll attribute that to first game reps with Peyton's new toys.
Then they beat the offensive juggernaut known as the browns. Trent got near 60 yards on 18 carries in a defensive struggle THE BROWNS.
Now this Texans game without rice. If it wasn't for Schaub wonderful pick six and special teams TD by Doss it was actually a close game. Foster and Tate combined for 90 yards on 21 carries.
Loss @ buffalo. Proved that offense is bad four or five picks. Defense gives up 164 yds and 1 td to banged up rbs spiller and Jackson.
Now the Miami game. That offensive line is horrible. You and I could get a half sack on them. Not to mention Wallace had more than a handful of drops.
So basically I don't attribute there best games defensively to the defense. More attributed to bad qb play. Which won't happen with Rodgers.
Notable trends haven't played any good qbs besides Peyton and they got blown out(more carries for lacy), lots of catches for TEs indicating weak LB coverage. Which could be Rodgers dumping off to lacy. The defense and team in general plays better at home. But packers are the better team.
I'm a lacy owner but I've been following the ravens closely for gambling purposes.
Hopefully you get what I'm saying that the numbers are skewed.
TL:DR
Ravens are unproven based on offensive woes, previous matchups with lesser qbs. "
UPDATE: with two of three starting wrs going down. The one wr Nelson hits a bomb and lacy runs all over Baltimore in Baltimore.Baltimore defense looks meh and not scary as #1 fantasy defense against run.
| fantasyfootball | t5_2qlqq | cctqnuc | Just wrote this to someone with a similar question about Baltimore defense before the packers game last week. "In regards to Baltimore defense. They only looked ok versus peyton for a half do I'll attribute that to first game reps with Peyton's new toys.
Then they beat the offensive juggernaut known as the browns. Trent got near 60 yards on 18 carries in a defensive struggle THE BROWNS.
Now this Texans game without rice. If it wasn't for Schaub wonderful pick six and special teams TD by Doss it was actually a close game. Foster and Tate combined for 90 yards on 21 carries.
Loss @ buffalo. Proved that offense is bad four or five picks. Defense gives up 164 yds and 1 td to banged up rbs spiller and Jackson.
Now the Miami game. That offensive line is horrible. You and I could get a half sack on them. Not to mention Wallace had more than a handful of drops.
So basically I don't attribute there best games defensively to the defense. More attributed to bad qb play. Which won't happen with Rodgers.
Notable trends haven't played any good qbs besides Peyton and they got blown out(more carries for lacy), lots of catches for TEs indicating weak LB coverage. Which could be Rodgers dumping off to lacy. The defense and team in general plays better at home. But packers are the better team.
I'm a lacy owner but I've been following the ravens closely for gambling purposes.
Hopefully you get what I'm saying that the numbers are skewed. | Ravens are unproven based on offensive woes, previous matchups with lesser qbs. "
UPDATE: with two of three starting wrs going down. The one wr Nelson hits a bomb and lacy runs all over Baltimore in Baltimore.Baltimore defense looks meh and not scary as #1 fantasy defense against run. |
Typhlosi0n | Because the more casual, lesser skilled players would hardly advance in rank, so they would feel no sense of achievement and nothing to work towards. They might get fed up with not getting anywhere and stop playing the game.
Systems based on how long you play, such as those in Reach and Halo 4, are made to retain players. This is because said casual players, who might lack skill, will be able to rank up easily, no matter how good they are, they just have to play a lot, therefore, they will aim to rank up and therefore play more. The problem with this system is, as you say, it doesn't mean much, you could have someone at max rank who just plays a lot.
Even though Halo 4 does have the second type of ranking system, it still didn't manage to retain players, (with regards to ranking up) because there was only 130 levels and it takes no time to hit max rank, so when these types of people do, they have nothing to work for, so just might not play any more.
tl;dr: retains players | Because the more casual, lesser skilled players would hardly advance in rank, so they would feel no sense of achievement and nothing to work towards. They might get fed up with not getting anywhere and stop playing the game.
Systems based on how long you play, such as those in Reach and Halo 4, are made to retain players. This is because said casual players, who might lack skill, will be able to rank up easily, no matter how good they are, they just have to play a lot, therefore, they will aim to rank up and therefore play more. The problem with this system is, as you say, it doesn't mean much, you could have someone at max rank who just plays a lot.
Even though Halo 4 does have the second type of ranking system, it still didn't manage to retain players, (with regards to ranking up) because there was only 130 levels and it takes no time to hit max rank, so when these types of people do, they have nothing to work for, so just might not play any more.
tl;dr: retains players
| halo | t5_2qixk | cctnuc3 | Because the more casual, lesser skilled players would hardly advance in rank, so they would feel no sense of achievement and nothing to work towards. They might get fed up with not getting anywhere and stop playing the game.
Systems based on how long you play, such as those in Reach and Halo 4, are made to retain players. This is because said casual players, who might lack skill, will be able to rank up easily, no matter how good they are, they just have to play a lot, therefore, they will aim to rank up and therefore play more. The problem with this system is, as you say, it doesn't mean much, you could have someone at max rank who just plays a lot.
Even though Halo 4 does have the second type of ranking system, it still didn't manage to retain players, (with regards to ranking up) because there was only 130 levels and it takes no time to hit max rank, so when these types of people do, they have nothing to work for, so just might not play any more. | retains players |
Portadaddy | Cop was/is/and never will be anything but a mediocre ADC.
People say "he is consistent, he sits back and cs's, he plays conservative." What people fail to realize is that each season the teams get better and better. More professional players enter League every season, and more and more remarkable players like Faker will continue to show up going into season 4 and beyond.
Before long you will have top teams in which each of the players is worlds better than in past years. The level of skill and play will rise, and ADC's like Cop who are "capable and conservative" will be left behind by the new highly talented players. High skill, extreme talent, and among the best in the world will be a requirement for all players on a world best team. Cop will never be at that level, and therefore Curse will always be a second rate team when compared to or competing against the best teams in the world.
TLDR: Prepare for Curse to always be a second rate team as the worlds best teams get better and better players, and COP is never going to be among them or able to compete with them. | Cop was/is/and never will be anything but a mediocre ADC.
People say "he is consistent, he sits back and cs's, he plays conservative." What people fail to realize is that each season the teams get better and better. More professional players enter League every season, and more and more remarkable players like Faker will continue to show up going into season 4 and beyond.
Before long you will have top teams in which each of the players is worlds better than in past years. The level of skill and play will rise, and ADC's like Cop who are "capable and conservative" will be left behind by the new highly talented players. High skill, extreme talent, and among the best in the world will be a requirement for all players on a world best team. Cop will never be at that level, and therefore Curse will always be a second rate team when compared to or competing against the best teams in the world.
TLDR: Prepare for Curse to always be a second rate team as the worlds best teams get better and better players, and COP is never going to be among them or able to compete with them.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ccu0409 | Cop was/is/and never will be anything but a mediocre ADC.
People say "he is consistent, he sits back and cs's, he plays conservative." What people fail to realize is that each season the teams get better and better. More professional players enter League every season, and more and more remarkable players like Faker will continue to show up going into season 4 and beyond.
Before long you will have top teams in which each of the players is worlds better than in past years. The level of skill and play will rise, and ADC's like Cop who are "capable and conservative" will be left behind by the new highly talented players. High skill, extreme talent, and among the best in the world will be a requirement for all players on a world best team. Cop will never be at that level, and therefore Curse will always be a second rate team when compared to or competing against the best teams in the world. | Prepare for Curse to always be a second rate team as the worlds best teams get better and better players, and COP is never going to be among them or able to compete with them. |
futureslave | Thank you for qualifying it as irrational. We sure haven't done anything to anyone for the last 30 years to justify anyone's enmity. I always liked Houston, though, and I'd hate for them to become a heated rival. Like I couldn't get behind hating the Nuggets or the Spurs in the playoffs last year. Both are damn fine clubs.
tl;dr - fuck the Lakers. | Thank you for qualifying it as irrational. We sure haven't done anything to anyone for the last 30 years to justify anyone's enmity. I always liked Houston, though, and I'd hate for them to become a heated rival. Like I couldn't get behind hating the Nuggets or the Spurs in the playoffs last year. Both are damn fine clubs.
tl;dr - fuck the Lakers.
| nba | t5_2qo4s | ccu3tz8 | Thank you for qualifying it as irrational. We sure haven't done anything to anyone for the last 30 years to justify anyone's enmity. I always liked Houston, though, and I'd hate for them to become a heated rival. Like I couldn't get behind hating the Nuggets or the Spurs in the playoffs last year. Both are damn fine clubs. | fuck the Lakers. |
FugitiveDribbling | The short answer is that the framers of the US constitution wanted divided sovereignty. They wanted a separation of powers in which some powers of governance went to the executive branch, some to the legislative branch, and some to the judicial branch. This would prevent any one branch from having unchecked ability to exercise its will. The framers also, incidentally, wanted powers divided between the federal and state governments. All of this resulted in part from the framers having a sort of dismal view of human nature. They did not trust in benevolent monarchy or even the benevolence of the majority. They wanted a huge number of formal checks in place to prevent tyranny.
As login228822 also suggests, the [Federalist Papers]( are a good source for arguments in favor of divided powers. Federalist 51 is really the best document for this in my opinion. You might also check out the [Anti-Federalist Papers](
In contrast to the US system, both monarchies and modern parliamentary systems do not apportion sovereignty between branches. Parliamentary systems do not have a separate executive. Rather, executive powers rest with leaders drawn from the parliament (the prime minister and his/her cabinet). This means that there is no separate executive branch to counterbalance a potential tyranny of the majority'in the legislative branch (or vice versa). `Ambition is not made to counteract ambition,' to borrow a phrase from Federalist 51.
TL;DR: Because the founders wanted a separation of powers, the US has a presidential system of government with checks and balances.
Edit: Removed a claim about parliamentary sovereignty in the 18th century. | The short answer is that the framers of the US constitution wanted divided sovereignty. They wanted a separation of powers in which some powers of governance went to the executive branch, some to the legislative branch, and some to the judicial branch. This would prevent any one branch from having unchecked ability to exercise its will. The framers also, incidentally, wanted powers divided between the federal and state governments. All of this resulted in part from the framers having a sort of dismal view of human nature. They did not trust in benevolent monarchy or even the benevolence of the majority. They wanted a huge number of formal checks in place to prevent tyranny.
As login228822 also suggests, the [Federalist Papers]( are a good source for arguments in favor of divided powers. Federalist 51 is really the best document for this in my opinion. You might also check out the [Anti-Federalist Papers](
In contrast to the US system, both monarchies and modern parliamentary systems do not apportion sovereignty between branches. Parliamentary systems do not have a separate executive. Rather, executive powers rest with leaders drawn from the parliament (the prime minister and his/her cabinet). This means that there is no separate executive branch to counterbalance a potential tyranny of the majority'in the legislative branch (or vice versa). `Ambition is not made to counteract ambition,' to borrow a phrase from Federalist 51.
TL;DR: Because the founders wanted a separation of powers, the US has a presidential system of government with checks and balances.
Edit: Removed a claim about parliamentary sovereignty in the 18th century.
| AskHistorians | t5_2ssp3 | cctx15g | The short answer is that the framers of the US constitution wanted divided sovereignty. They wanted a separation of powers in which some powers of governance went to the executive branch, some to the legislative branch, and some to the judicial branch. This would prevent any one branch from having unchecked ability to exercise its will. The framers also, incidentally, wanted powers divided between the federal and state governments. All of this resulted in part from the framers having a sort of dismal view of human nature. They did not trust in benevolent monarchy or even the benevolence of the majority. They wanted a huge number of formal checks in place to prevent tyranny.
As login228822 also suggests, the [Federalist Papers]( are a good source for arguments in favor of divided powers. Federalist 51 is really the best document for this in my opinion. You might also check out the [Anti-Federalist Papers](
In contrast to the US system, both monarchies and modern parliamentary systems do not apportion sovereignty between branches. Parliamentary systems do not have a separate executive. Rather, executive powers rest with leaders drawn from the parliament (the prime minister and his/her cabinet). This means that there is no separate executive branch to counterbalance a potential tyranny of the majority'in the legislative branch (or vice versa). `Ambition is not made to counteract ambition,' to borrow a phrase from Federalist 51. | Because the founders wanted a separation of powers, the US has a presidential system of government with checks and balances.
Edit: Removed a claim about parliamentary sovereignty in the 18th century. |
snickers23 | Well basically I read it on the Internet where you keep your body completely still, clear your mind but stay awake. And after a whole you'll start hearing things and eventually (didnt know this till after the fact) your chest will feel like someone is siting on it. And open your eyes and there's some girl on ur chest. Honestly if you google how to do it you'll read all the stories and everyone is the same. It's creepy shit man. Some people have this happen naturally and after a while they say that they realize it's going on and can control it and wake up. Go figure I try and do it for fun, it's not fun.
Tl;dr google how to lucid dream and read the horror stories about the girl on your chest. | Well basically I read it on the Internet where you keep your body completely still, clear your mind but stay awake. And after a whole you'll start hearing things and eventually (didnt know this till after the fact) your chest will feel like someone is siting on it. And open your eyes and there's some girl on ur chest. Honestly if you google how to do it you'll read all the stories and everyone is the same. It's creepy shit man. Some people have this happen naturally and after a while they say that they realize it's going on and can control it and wake up. Go figure I try and do it for fun, it's not fun.
Tl;dr google how to lucid dream and read the horror stories about the girl on your chest.
| WTF | t5_2qh61 | ccu1nq5 | Well basically I read it on the Internet where you keep your body completely still, clear your mind but stay awake. And after a whole you'll start hearing things and eventually (didnt know this till after the fact) your chest will feel like someone is siting on it. And open your eyes and there's some girl on ur chest. Honestly if you google how to do it you'll read all the stories and everyone is the same. It's creepy shit man. Some people have this happen naturally and after a while they say that they realize it's going on and can control it and wake up. Go figure I try and do it for fun, it's not fun. | google how to lucid dream and read the horror stories about the girl on your chest. |
EnglishNuclear | We've recently had a big media frenzy over Roy Hodgson's joke to the players in the changing rooms during England's match against Poland this week. He cracked an old Nasa joke about a monkey and a human in space together and this was apparently a racist event as some of the players, including the player he was referring to. This player took absolutely no offence as, due to his intelligence, he knew that it was a joke where a monkey was integral to the punchline and not in any way racist.
All of a sudden, Roy's had to apologise to the media, despite both white and black players backing him and lending support to the fact that no offence was taken or intended. An anti-racism group has called for an FA investigation and all sorts, which is just ludicrous and not the sort of thing we need in the changing room leading up to the World Cup.
It sort of feels that people (usually white) are trying too hard to denounce ANY alleged racism by making a massive fuss. "No, don't say that, these black people might be upset!" Almost feels, in a way, MORE racist as minorities are being treated with kid gloves and as though they're either incapable of intelligent analysis of language, irony & sarcasm or defending themselves when something IS intended to be derogatory...
TL;DR
Yes. Stop treating people like Fabergé eggs. Minorities aren't stupid. | We've recently had a big media frenzy over Roy Hodgson's joke to the players in the changing rooms during England's match against Poland this week. He cracked an old Nasa joke about a monkey and a human in space together and this was apparently a racist event as some of the players, including the player he was referring to. This player took absolutely no offence as, due to his intelligence, he knew that it was a joke where a monkey was integral to the punchline and not in any way racist.
All of a sudden, Roy's had to apologise to the media, despite both white and black players backing him and lending support to the fact that no offence was taken or intended. An anti-racism group has called for an FA investigation and all sorts, which is just ludicrous and not the sort of thing we need in the changing room leading up to the World Cup.
It sort of feels that people (usually white) are trying too hard to denounce ANY alleged racism by making a massive fuss. "No, don't say that, these black people might be upset!" Almost feels, in a way, MORE racist as minorities are being treated with kid gloves and as though they're either incapable of intelligent analysis of language, irony & sarcasm or defending themselves when something IS intended to be derogatory...
TL;DR
Yes. Stop treating people like Fabergé eggs. Minorities aren't stupid.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccu8x4g | We've recently had a big media frenzy over Roy Hodgson's joke to the players in the changing rooms during England's match against Poland this week. He cracked an old Nasa joke about a monkey and a human in space together and this was apparently a racist event as some of the players, including the player he was referring to. This player took absolutely no offence as, due to his intelligence, he knew that it was a joke where a monkey was integral to the punchline and not in any way racist.
All of a sudden, Roy's had to apologise to the media, despite both white and black players backing him and lending support to the fact that no offence was taken or intended. An anti-racism group has called for an FA investigation and all sorts, which is just ludicrous and not the sort of thing we need in the changing room leading up to the World Cup.
It sort of feels that people (usually white) are trying too hard to denounce ANY alleged racism by making a massive fuss. "No, don't say that, these black people might be upset!" Almost feels, in a way, MORE racist as minorities are being treated with kid gloves and as though they're either incapable of intelligent analysis of language, irony & sarcasm or defending themselves when something IS intended to be derogatory... | Yes. Stop treating people like Fabergé eggs. Minorities aren't stupid. |
fuck_trey | One day when I was working in a cubicle I had the hiccups. It was annoying so they came in my cube and said "the boss wants to see you". I had just started and was only an intern so I was pretty scared. After a little silence and some panic she said "just kidding, but you don't have the hiccups any more". It worked.
Tl;dr get scared | One day when I was working in a cubicle I had the hiccups. It was annoying so they came in my cube and said "the boss wants to see you". I had just started and was only an intern so I was pretty scared. After a little silence and some panic she said "just kidding, but you don't have the hiccups any more". It worked.
Tl;dr get scared
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccuaeiq | One day when I was working in a cubicle I had the hiccups. It was annoying so they came in my cube and said "the boss wants to see you". I had just started and was only an intern so I was pretty scared. After a little silence and some panic she said "just kidding, but you don't have the hiccups any more". It worked. | get scared |
TitusVandronicus | For the record, the "Seven Gods" are one deity with seven aspects.
On the topic of "active" gods in ASOIAF, the Drowned God is definitely something to be reckoned with. Each time a character has a traumatic near-drowning experience, they come back greatly affected and changed.
After nearly drowning in Blackwater Bay, Davos hears a voice in his head (that he attributes to The Mother) telling him to take vengeance upon Melisandre. Now admittedly, Davos' lack of food and water, along with the grief he felt for his lost sons, could have brought on this auditory hallucination.
Aeron Greyjoy was a heavy drinking, heavy partying, heavy pissing playboy until his "Golden Storm" sank during Balon's rebellion. Aeron survives and is changed immensely, having a spiritual awakening beneath the waves.
Patchface was a clever, quick-witted fool capable of acrobatics, juggling, singing and so on. When Steffon Baratheon's ship sunk within sight of Storm's End, Patchface was the only survivor, and was certainly not the quick-witted fool Lord Steffon Baratheon had written of in a letter to Storm's End. After his time in the sea, Patchface is an odd fool singing prophetic little diddies, one who Melisandre fears greatly.
TL;DR: I think the Drowned God is a "voice" people hear after a near-drowning experience. Whatever this "voice" is, it seems to have an agenda, one that is certainly anti-R'hllor/Melisandre. | For the record, the "Seven Gods" are one deity with seven aspects.
On the topic of "active" gods in ASOIAF, the Drowned God is definitely something to be reckoned with. Each time a character has a traumatic near-drowning experience, they come back greatly affected and changed.
After nearly drowning in Blackwater Bay, Davos hears a voice in his head (that he attributes to The Mother) telling him to take vengeance upon Melisandre. Now admittedly, Davos' lack of food and water, along with the grief he felt for his lost sons, could have brought on this auditory hallucination.
Aeron Greyjoy was a heavy drinking, heavy partying, heavy pissing playboy until his "Golden Storm" sank during Balon's rebellion. Aeron survives and is changed immensely, having a spiritual awakening beneath the waves.
Patchface was a clever, quick-witted fool capable of acrobatics, juggling, singing and so on. When Steffon Baratheon's ship sunk within sight of Storm's End, Patchface was the only survivor, and was certainly not the quick-witted fool Lord Steffon Baratheon had written of in a letter to Storm's End. After his time in the sea, Patchface is an odd fool singing prophetic little diddies, one who Melisandre fears greatly.
TL;DR: I think the Drowned God is a "voice" people hear after a near-drowning experience. Whatever this "voice" is, it seems to have an agenda, one that is certainly anti-R'hllor/Melisandre.
| asoiaf | t5_2r2o9 | cculklq | For the record, the "Seven Gods" are one deity with seven aspects.
On the topic of "active" gods in ASOIAF, the Drowned God is definitely something to be reckoned with. Each time a character has a traumatic near-drowning experience, they come back greatly affected and changed.
After nearly drowning in Blackwater Bay, Davos hears a voice in his head (that he attributes to The Mother) telling him to take vengeance upon Melisandre. Now admittedly, Davos' lack of food and water, along with the grief he felt for his lost sons, could have brought on this auditory hallucination.
Aeron Greyjoy was a heavy drinking, heavy partying, heavy pissing playboy until his "Golden Storm" sank during Balon's rebellion. Aeron survives and is changed immensely, having a spiritual awakening beneath the waves.
Patchface was a clever, quick-witted fool capable of acrobatics, juggling, singing and so on. When Steffon Baratheon's ship sunk within sight of Storm's End, Patchface was the only survivor, and was certainly not the quick-witted fool Lord Steffon Baratheon had written of in a letter to Storm's End. After his time in the sea, Patchface is an odd fool singing prophetic little diddies, one who Melisandre fears greatly. | I think the Drowned God is a "voice" people hear after a near-drowning experience. Whatever this "voice" is, it seems to have an agenda, one that is certainly anti-R'hllor/Melisandre. |
SaintJackDaniels | SPOILERS:
I always assumed there were either no gods or just one. I believe that, based on what has been revealed and the stories about the past such as the Grey King, the pantheons in game of thrones should be treated similarly to Greek Mythology.
As far as I can tell the seven are idols, since they have done absolutely nothing in the whole series. They supposedly walked on Earth a long time ago but no one was around for that. They have done exactly zero things. In addition, they don't even have magic power that could be attributed to them like the northern and the red god.
The northern gods are Bloodraven / Bloodravens predeccesors / Bloodravens successor.
This leaves R'hllor either being the only real god, or, the result of magic being attributed to him. I go with the second since so far all of the other sets of gods either haven't existed or aren't actually gods.I don't think game of thrones are the type of books to have almighty gods running around, so I think R'hllor will eventually be revealed to be something involving Valyria and magic.
The drowned god has so far not been revealed to do anything, similar to the 7. I think that the many different gods are going to all be proven to be either some sort of magic (The old gods), absolutely nothing (new gods), or remain mysterious but most likely be magic.
With all of that said, I don't think Martin is going to reveal R'hllor (and possibly the drowned god) to be one or the other as explicitly as he has with the old gods.
Also, throughout the series, every single use of magic has been attributed to a god. Since some of these have been proven not to be from gods (northern magic), then all of it might be. I think gods are the character's way of explaining where magic comes from since they have no idea how it works.
IF there is a god, we won't ever meet him or her, we won't ever see him or her, and he or she won't affect the plot at all. So effectively, it doesn't matter.
TL;DR There are no gods as far as we know, only magic.
EDIT: I forgot about the faceless god. I would have to guess that the faceless men are all aspects of it. Or in other words, magic explanation. | SPOILERS:
I always assumed there were either no gods or just one. I believe that, based on what has been revealed and the stories about the past such as the Grey King, the pantheons in game of thrones should be treated similarly to Greek Mythology.
As far as I can tell the seven are idols, since they have done absolutely nothing in the whole series. They supposedly walked on Earth a long time ago but no one was around for that. They have done exactly zero things. In addition, they don't even have magic power that could be attributed to them like the northern and the red god.
The northern gods are Bloodraven / Bloodravens predeccesors / Bloodravens successor.
This leaves R'hllor either being the only real god, or, the result of magic being attributed to him. I go with the second since so far all of the other sets of gods either haven't existed or aren't actually gods.I don't think game of thrones are the type of books to have almighty gods running around, so I think R'hllor will eventually be revealed to be something involving Valyria and magic.
The drowned god has so far not been revealed to do anything, similar to the 7. I think that the many different gods are going to all be proven to be either some sort of magic (The old gods), absolutely nothing (new gods), or remain mysterious but most likely be magic.
With all of that said, I don't think Martin is going to reveal R'hllor (and possibly the drowned god) to be one or the other as explicitly as he has with the old gods.
Also, throughout the series, every single use of magic has been attributed to a god. Since some of these have been proven not to be from gods (northern magic), then all of it might be. I think gods are the character's way of explaining where magic comes from since they have no idea how it works.
IF there is a god, we won't ever meet him or her, we won't ever see him or her, and he or she won't affect the plot at all. So effectively, it doesn't matter.
TL;DR There are no gods as far as we know, only magic.
EDIT: I forgot about the faceless god. I would have to guess that the faceless men are all aspects of it. Or in other words, magic explanation.
| asoiaf | t5_2r2o9 | cculyb2 | SPOILERS:
I always assumed there were either no gods or just one. I believe that, based on what has been revealed and the stories about the past such as the Grey King, the pantheons in game of thrones should be treated similarly to Greek Mythology.
As far as I can tell the seven are idols, since they have done absolutely nothing in the whole series. They supposedly walked on Earth a long time ago but no one was around for that. They have done exactly zero things. In addition, they don't even have magic power that could be attributed to them like the northern and the red god.
The northern gods are Bloodraven / Bloodravens predeccesors / Bloodravens successor.
This leaves R'hllor either being the only real god, or, the result of magic being attributed to him. I go with the second since so far all of the other sets of gods either haven't existed or aren't actually gods.I don't think game of thrones are the type of books to have almighty gods running around, so I think R'hllor will eventually be revealed to be something involving Valyria and magic.
The drowned god has so far not been revealed to do anything, similar to the 7. I think that the many different gods are going to all be proven to be either some sort of magic (The old gods), absolutely nothing (new gods), or remain mysterious but most likely be magic.
With all of that said, I don't think Martin is going to reveal R'hllor (and possibly the drowned god) to be one or the other as explicitly as he has with the old gods.
Also, throughout the series, every single use of magic has been attributed to a god. Since some of these have been proven not to be from gods (northern magic), then all of it might be. I think gods are the character's way of explaining where magic comes from since they have no idea how it works.
IF there is a god, we won't ever meet him or her, we won't ever see him or her, and he or she won't affect the plot at all. So effectively, it doesn't matter. | There are no gods as far as we know, only magic.
EDIT: I forgot about the faceless god. I would have to guess that the faceless men are all aspects of it. Or in other words, magic explanation. |
csjam | porteur racks with only three points of contact tend to be wiggly and not too stable for your load. there are not any good porteur racks out there that are a reasonable price. if you want utility, check out cetma cargo, would link but on mobile. the best way to get the most for your money is to braze your own. just started making a huge 28x16 porteur rack. (will upload when finished).
tldr this rack is probably just as good as its higher priced competitors. but still not the greatest due to mounting mechanism | porteur racks with only three points of contact tend to be wiggly and not too stable for your load. there are not any good porteur racks out there that are a reasonable price. if you want utility, check out cetma cargo, would link but on mobile. the best way to get the most for your money is to braze your own. just started making a huge 28x16 porteur rack. (will upload when finished).
tldr this rack is probably just as good as its higher priced competitors. but still not the greatest due to mounting mechanism
| FixedGearBicycle | t5_2qo7a | ccueumx | porteur racks with only three points of contact tend to be wiggly and not too stable for your load. there are not any good porteur racks out there that are a reasonable price. if you want utility, check out cetma cargo, would link but on mobile. the best way to get the most for your money is to braze your own. just started making a huge 28x16 porteur rack. (will upload when finished). | this rack is probably just as good as its higher priced competitors. but still not the greatest due to mounting mechanism |
CallerNumber4 | I honestly haven't looked into it enough to give an honest full impression, I just want to address one point that has been a talking point for a those outspoken against the church's budget priorities. That is City Creek.
In case you somehow don't know City Creek is the multi-complex 2 story mall with retractable roof, housing and etc. functions. There aren't any official documents released on the cost but estimates pin it at 1.5 billion.
That would put the cost of the entire complex at 100$ for every member at a flat contribution rate, active or not. And fair to say maybe 300-1,000$ for the upper-middle class Utahn population that will use the facility 95% of the time. That is a good piece of pie although it has 2 caveats: the return and urban decay.
Needless to say City Creek has been successful. [With 2,000 additional jobs, 36% of downtown retail or 209million]( Many would say the church isn't intended to be a business although when it comes to safe investments with positive returns I myself am more than comfortable with it operating with more than just tithing contributions.
As for urban decay though the move can be seen as more understandable. The basic idea is a major city reaching such a level of decay it becomes unsustainable. For one reason or another an area gets more dangerous/less appealing/less job opportunities so people so who pay higher taxes, those with more physical mobility, move out of the area into the county. With less city income police upkeep is harder and when cuts are made crime goes up and the cycle self-perpetuates. The most vivid example would obviously be Detroit who's been in a worsening state of urban decay since race violence in the 50s and 60s climaxing to the point where the city declares bankruptcy this year. I encourage all to look up the phenomenon as well as it's inverse; Gentrification. Point is City creek is obviously helping to prevent urban decay from taking root in SLC. With bringing not only more sales revenue but more income and property tax too. Just a side of the argument most don't consider. In my eyes the church has an interest and a right ensuring that the immediate area around it's key religious center is welcoming to members and investigators alike.
As for the whole topic I feel like any debate lies in whether the church has a right to use church funds for it's own interest rather than if it should. Because the *majority* of examples(still not approving of Prop 8) it's can be seen as good all around. **TL;DR: City creek rant.** | I honestly haven't looked into it enough to give an honest full impression, I just want to address one point that has been a talking point for a those outspoken against the church's budget priorities. That is City Creek.
In case you somehow don't know City Creek is the multi-complex 2 story mall with retractable roof, housing and etc. functions. There aren't any official documents released on the cost but estimates pin it at 1.5 billion.
That would put the cost of the entire complex at 100$ for every member at a flat contribution rate, active or not. And fair to say maybe 300-1,000$ for the upper-middle class Utahn population that will use the facility 95% of the time. That is a good piece of pie although it has 2 caveats: the return and urban decay.
Needless to say City Creek has been successful. [With 2,000 additional jobs, 36% of downtown retail or 209million]( Many would say the church isn't intended to be a business although when it comes to safe investments with positive returns I myself am more than comfortable with it operating with more than just tithing contributions.
As for urban decay though the move can be seen as more understandable. The basic idea is a major city reaching such a level of decay it becomes unsustainable. For one reason or another an area gets more dangerous/less appealing/less job opportunities so people so who pay higher taxes, those with more physical mobility, move out of the area into the county. With less city income police upkeep is harder and when cuts are made crime goes up and the cycle self-perpetuates. The most vivid example would obviously be Detroit who's been in a worsening state of urban decay since race violence in the 50s and 60s climaxing to the point where the city declares bankruptcy this year. I encourage all to look up the phenomenon as well as it's inverse; Gentrification. Point is City creek is obviously helping to prevent urban decay from taking root in SLC. With bringing not only more sales revenue but more income and property tax too. Just a side of the argument most don't consider. In my eyes the church has an interest and a right ensuring that the immediate area around it's key religious center is welcoming to members and investigators alike.
As for the whole topic I feel like any debate lies in whether the church has a right to use church funds for it's own interest rather than if it should. Because the majority of examples(still not approving of Prop 8) it's can be seen as good all around. TL;DR: City creek rant.
| latterdaysaints | t5_2uas2 | ccunvve | I honestly haven't looked into it enough to give an honest full impression, I just want to address one point that has been a talking point for a those outspoken against the church's budget priorities. That is City Creek.
In case you somehow don't know City Creek is the multi-complex 2 story mall with retractable roof, housing and etc. functions. There aren't any official documents released on the cost but estimates pin it at 1.5 billion.
That would put the cost of the entire complex at 100$ for every member at a flat contribution rate, active or not. And fair to say maybe 300-1,000$ for the upper-middle class Utahn population that will use the facility 95% of the time. That is a good piece of pie although it has 2 caveats: the return and urban decay.
Needless to say City Creek has been successful. [With 2,000 additional jobs, 36% of downtown retail or 209million]( Many would say the church isn't intended to be a business although when it comes to safe investments with positive returns I myself am more than comfortable with it operating with more than just tithing contributions.
As for urban decay though the move can be seen as more understandable. The basic idea is a major city reaching such a level of decay it becomes unsustainable. For one reason or another an area gets more dangerous/less appealing/less job opportunities so people so who pay higher taxes, those with more physical mobility, move out of the area into the county. With less city income police upkeep is harder and when cuts are made crime goes up and the cycle self-perpetuates. The most vivid example would obviously be Detroit who's been in a worsening state of urban decay since race violence in the 50s and 60s climaxing to the point where the city declares bankruptcy this year. I encourage all to look up the phenomenon as well as it's inverse; Gentrification. Point is City creek is obviously helping to prevent urban decay from taking root in SLC. With bringing not only more sales revenue but more income and property tax too. Just a side of the argument most don't consider. In my eyes the church has an interest and a right ensuring that the immediate area around it's key religious center is welcoming to members and investigators alike.
As for the whole topic I feel like any debate lies in whether the church has a right to use church funds for it's own interest rather than if it should. Because the majority of examples(still not approving of Prop 8) it's can be seen as good all around. | City creek rant. |
jgardner | You're not doing your accounting right.
If I use a million dollars to develop property, I don't spend a million dollars and get nothing in return. That million dollars is there in property value, and usually, multiplied by a very large factor. So it doesn't "cost" the members anything to develop the property, even if it did come from tithing funds (which it didn't.)
Also, if I'm sitting on a pile of cash, I don't leave it sitting in a corner somewhere. That money *must* be put somewhere, or else it will be squandered. If you give it to the banks, they put that money somewhere in your behalf. If you buy shares of a company, the shareholders who sold you their shares put that money somewhere else. If you buy a bond, that money is put somewhere else. At what point do you arbitrarily draw the line and say the money is no longer the church's? Or are you imposing an unrealistic and arbitrary line that makes no sense for anyone else but yourself?
TL;DR: Don't be ignorant about how money really works. | You're not doing your accounting right.
If I use a million dollars to develop property, I don't spend a million dollars and get nothing in return. That million dollars is there in property value, and usually, multiplied by a very large factor. So it doesn't "cost" the members anything to develop the property, even if it did come from tithing funds (which it didn't.)
Also, if I'm sitting on a pile of cash, I don't leave it sitting in a corner somewhere. That money must be put somewhere, or else it will be squandered. If you give it to the banks, they put that money somewhere in your behalf. If you buy shares of a company, the shareholders who sold you their shares put that money somewhere else. If you buy a bond, that money is put somewhere else. At what point do you arbitrarily draw the line and say the money is no longer the church's? Or are you imposing an unrealistic and arbitrary line that makes no sense for anyone else but yourself?
TL;DR: Don't be ignorant about how money really works.
| latterdaysaints | t5_2uas2 | ccwm7tm | You're not doing your accounting right.
If I use a million dollars to develop property, I don't spend a million dollars and get nothing in return. That million dollars is there in property value, and usually, multiplied by a very large factor. So it doesn't "cost" the members anything to develop the property, even if it did come from tithing funds (which it didn't.)
Also, if I'm sitting on a pile of cash, I don't leave it sitting in a corner somewhere. That money must be put somewhere, or else it will be squandered. If you give it to the banks, they put that money somewhere in your behalf. If you buy shares of a company, the shareholders who sold you their shares put that money somewhere else. If you buy a bond, that money is put somewhere else. At what point do you arbitrarily draw the line and say the money is no longer the church's? Or are you imposing an unrealistic and arbitrary line that makes no sense for anyone else but yourself? | Don't be ignorant about how money really works. |
calignantchaos | Can we let it go? He already said he wasn't going to open the damn thing, I think we should just leave him alone. I know a lot of people feel 'cheated' that they never got to see what was inside, but a huge amount of assholes on reddit started hounding him over it, and even bitched about him not wanting to do it after his grandma died. TL;DR leave the safe guy alone already | Can we let it go? He already said he wasn't going to open the damn thing, I think we should just leave him alone. I know a lot of people feel 'cheated' that they never got to see what was inside, but a huge amount of assholes on reddit started hounding him over it, and even bitched about him not wanting to do it after his grandma died. TL;DR leave the safe guy alone already
| AdviceAnimals | t5_2s7tt | ccutnvy | Can we let it go? He already said he wasn't going to open the damn thing, I think we should just leave him alone. I know a lot of people feel 'cheated' that they never got to see what was inside, but a huge amount of assholes on reddit started hounding him over it, and even bitched about him not wanting to do it after his grandma died. | leave the safe guy alone already |
WTF_is_an_Acronym | While I am finding similar results with PE vs UF, optimum dps for enhance really comes down to individual fights in SoO, and also switching out your 4th tier talent. For example, Galakras is a heavy cleave fight so spec'ing into Echo of Elements is huge with a possible double proc from fire nova, and the cleave damage from both Primal elementals will heavily outweigh the damage from UF. Malkorok on the other hand is a good candidate for AS/UF considering its likely the most "Patchwerk" comparable fight in SoO. The melee haste from AS tends to outweigh trying to lineup Elemental Mastery with certain cd's and EoE isn't really viable for a single target fight. As far as you mentioning UF rotation and not quite mastering it, its really nothing you shouldn't already be doing, there's just more emphasis on prioritizing LB5 with UF's 30% increased LB damage.
As far as the majority of the fights in SoO go, you can't go wrong with AS/PE or AS/UF from my experience. I rarely dip into EM nowadays but I could be wrong on that part. I only mention it because your armory says you're spec'd into it but for all I know you rotate it out situationally. A lot of fights in Siege have cleave worthy moments but even the fights with multiple targets, there's usually an emphasis on focusing down certain targets. I think in the long run, especially with better gear, UF will outweigh PE, but not by much and it really will depend on individual encounters.
I hope this helps.
TL;DR AS/UF for single target non bursty fights, EoE/PE heavy cleave fights(really just Galakras, Spoils, and trash), and AS/PE or AS/UF for everything between. | While I am finding similar results with PE vs UF, optimum dps for enhance really comes down to individual fights in SoO, and also switching out your 4th tier talent. For example, Galakras is a heavy cleave fight so spec'ing into Echo of Elements is huge with a possible double proc from fire nova, and the cleave damage from both Primal elementals will heavily outweigh the damage from UF. Malkorok on the other hand is a good candidate for AS/UF considering its likely the most "Patchwerk" comparable fight in SoO. The melee haste from AS tends to outweigh trying to lineup Elemental Mastery with certain cd's and EoE isn't really viable for a single target fight. As far as you mentioning UF rotation and not quite mastering it, its really nothing you shouldn't already be doing, there's just more emphasis on prioritizing LB5 with UF's 30% increased LB damage.
As far as the majority of the fights in SoO go, you can't go wrong with AS/PE or AS/UF from my experience. I rarely dip into EM nowadays but I could be wrong on that part. I only mention it because your armory says you're spec'd into it but for all I know you rotate it out situationally. A lot of fights in Siege have cleave worthy moments but even the fights with multiple targets, there's usually an emphasis on focusing down certain targets. I think in the long run, especially with better gear, UF will outweigh PE, but not by much and it really will depend on individual encounters.
I hope this helps.
TL;DR AS/UF for single target non bursty fights, EoE/PE heavy cleave fights(really just Galakras, Spoils, and trash), and AS/PE or AS/UF for everything between.
| wow | t5_2qio8 | ccuyy9p | While I am finding similar results with PE vs UF, optimum dps for enhance really comes down to individual fights in SoO, and also switching out your 4th tier talent. For example, Galakras is a heavy cleave fight so spec'ing into Echo of Elements is huge with a possible double proc from fire nova, and the cleave damage from both Primal elementals will heavily outweigh the damage from UF. Malkorok on the other hand is a good candidate for AS/UF considering its likely the most "Patchwerk" comparable fight in SoO. The melee haste from AS tends to outweigh trying to lineup Elemental Mastery with certain cd's and EoE isn't really viable for a single target fight. As far as you mentioning UF rotation and not quite mastering it, its really nothing you shouldn't already be doing, there's just more emphasis on prioritizing LB5 with UF's 30% increased LB damage.
As far as the majority of the fights in SoO go, you can't go wrong with AS/PE or AS/UF from my experience. I rarely dip into EM nowadays but I could be wrong on that part. I only mention it because your armory says you're spec'd into it but for all I know you rotate it out situationally. A lot of fights in Siege have cleave worthy moments but even the fights with multiple targets, there's usually an emphasis on focusing down certain targets. I think in the long run, especially with better gear, UF will outweigh PE, but not by much and it really will depend on individual encounters.
I hope this helps. | AS/UF for single target non bursty fights, EoE/PE heavy cleave fights(really just Galakras, Spoils, and trash), and AS/PE or AS/UF for everything between. |
Brandon_Storm | What you're looking for is the [Spawn Origins Hardcover]( collections. And McFarlane has been pretty good about releasing them on a regular basis. We're already up to book 9 I believe, getting us all the way up to issue 112 (about halfway through the entirety of the series).
For about $20 (less than the cover cost of individual issues) you'll be getting around 12 issues per book. They're all still in print (as far as I know) so they're easy to find or at least easy to have ordered in.
There is a [TPB version]( however these collect half the issues AND DO NOT CONTAIN SOME ISSUES AT ALL (e.g. 9 and 10 are not in TPB 2), and aren't always half the price. But if mobility and super casual reading are your thing, these are right up your alley.
In regards to massive compendiums, there are these [Deluxe Editions]( at triple to quadruple the price of the other hardcovers, but only collect double the issues. Also, they're quite large and unwieldy for reading, in my opinion. Good collector's item though.
**tl;dr The Spawn Origins Hardcover collections are what you're looking for.** | What you're looking for is the Spawn Origins Hardcover .
For about $20 (less than the cover cost of individual issues) you'll be getting around 12 issues per book. They're all still in print (as far as I know) so they're easy to find or at least easy to have ordered in.
There is a TPB version , and aren't always half the price. But if mobility and super casual reading are your thing, these are right up your alley.
In regards to massive compendiums, there are these [Deluxe Editions]( at triple to quadruple the price of the other hardcovers, but only collect double the issues. Also, they're quite large and unwieldy for reading, in my opinion. Good collector's item though.
tl;dr The Spawn Origins Hardcover collections are what you're looking for.
| Spawn | t5_2ru8b | ccv763y | What you're looking for is the Spawn Origins Hardcover .
For about $20 (less than the cover cost of individual issues) you'll be getting around 12 issues per book. They're all still in print (as far as I know) so they're easy to find or at least easy to have ordered in.
There is a TPB version , and aren't always half the price. But if mobility and super casual reading are your thing, these are right up your alley.
In regards to massive compendiums, there are these [Deluxe Editions]( at triple to quadruple the price of the other hardcovers, but only collect double the issues. Also, they're quite large and unwieldy for reading, in my opinion. Good collector's item though. | The Spawn Origins Hardcover collections are what you're looking for. |
Phase83 | I work as an engineering technician, still going to school, for a small dental manufacturing company in the R&D Engineering Lab. We just went through hiring 2 new Mech Engineers and while we were reviewing resumes and interviews, my boss and the other Mech Engineers seemed to frown upon those that had taken a "break" after graduating. I didn't quite understand it but, that seemed to be a negative thing with them. Their experience ranges from 5-25 yrs in the field if that means anything to you. I think they want applicants that want to jump right into the field as opposed to ones that needed a breather.
tldr: In my experience, yes, it hurts your chances but, life isn't all about work. | I work as an engineering technician, still going to school, for a small dental manufacturing company in the R&D Engineering Lab. We just went through hiring 2 new Mech Engineers and while we were reviewing resumes and interviews, my boss and the other Mech Engineers seemed to frown upon those that had taken a "break" after graduating. I didn't quite understand it but, that seemed to be a negative thing with them. Their experience ranges from 5-25 yrs in the field if that means anything to you. I think they want applicants that want to jump right into the field as opposed to ones that needed a breather.
tldr: In my experience, yes, it hurts your chances but, life isn't all about work.
| AskEngineers | t5_2sebk | ccv37q9 | I work as an engineering technician, still going to school, for a small dental manufacturing company in the R&D Engineering Lab. We just went through hiring 2 new Mech Engineers and while we were reviewing resumes and interviews, my boss and the other Mech Engineers seemed to frown upon those that had taken a "break" after graduating. I didn't quite understand it but, that seemed to be a negative thing with them. Their experience ranges from 5-25 yrs in the field if that means anything to you. I think they want applicants that want to jump right into the field as opposed to ones that needed a breather. | In my experience, yes, it hurts your chances but, life isn't all about work. |
CodeBridge | Your center of mass should always be as low as possible on your craft. I could explain it using the principles of inertia, but I'd rather you just take my word for it. ([Edit: See lower post for explanation](
Wings add drag on the X and Y axis if they are pointed towards the nose of the craft, like on your design. When placed on the top, it makes the tip of the craft harder to move against its velocity vector. When placed at the bottom, the back of the craft becomes harder to move. In essence, you turn starting with your nose, so you want your rear to spin more slowly. Kind of how cars turn with the front wheels, but forklifts turn using their back wheels. The front allows cars to turn more safely (less risk of rolling) and the back allows forklifts to turn with the least amount of distance.
TL;DR CoM towards the rear. Wings towards the rear.
You also might consider canards or other control surfaces towards the nose if it is too difficult to turn a craft.
Edit: What other people have mentioned about placing the wings behind the CoM is also correct.
Double Edit: I need to learn more about physics | Your center of mass should always be as low as possible on your craft. I could explain it using the principles of inertia, but I'd rather you just take my word for it. ([Edit: See lower post for explanation](
Wings add drag on the X and Y axis if they are pointed towards the nose of the craft, like on your design. When placed on the top, it makes the tip of the craft harder to move against its velocity vector. When placed at the bottom, the back of the craft becomes harder to move. In essence, you turn starting with your nose, so you want your rear to spin more slowly. Kind of how cars turn with the front wheels, but forklifts turn using their back wheels. The front allows cars to turn more safely (less risk of rolling) and the back allows forklifts to turn with the least amount of distance.
TL;DR CoM towards the rear. Wings towards the rear.
You also might consider canards or other control surfaces towards the nose if it is too difficult to turn a craft.
Edit: What other people have mentioned about placing the wings behind the CoM is also correct.
Double Edit: I need to learn more about physics
| KerbalAcademy | t5_2wrxb | ccvbgnm | Your center of mass should always be as low as possible on your craft. I could explain it using the principles of inertia, but I'd rather you just take my word for it. ([Edit: See lower post for explanation](
Wings add drag on the X and Y axis if they are pointed towards the nose of the craft, like on your design. When placed on the top, it makes the tip of the craft harder to move against its velocity vector. When placed at the bottom, the back of the craft becomes harder to move. In essence, you turn starting with your nose, so you want your rear to spin more slowly. Kind of how cars turn with the front wheels, but forklifts turn using their back wheels. The front allows cars to turn more safely (less risk of rolling) and the back allows forklifts to turn with the least amount of distance. | CoM towards the rear. Wings towards the rear.
You also might consider canards or other control surfaces towards the nose if it is too difficult to turn a craft.
Edit: What other people have mentioned about placing the wings behind the CoM is also correct.
Double Edit: I need to learn more about physics |
CostlyIndecision | Take martial arts classes of your own, maybe get a friend or two to join the same club if you can. I did the same and it skyrocketed my self confidence.
Interestingly, that 17 year old you describe sounds like me minus the bullying; and I say 'fight me' sarcastically. I think that in particular started as a joke that is essentially used between friends when you don't have a counter-argument. (doubt that's applicable here though)
For the short-term... well. Just stand up to them. Its terrifying, I know. I've been there myself once. Assuming these bullies are worth a damn, they'll knock you around a lot; but whats important is that you took a stand. That might stop it for a while, it might not. If it doesn't, you have to do it again, and again, and again. You've probably heard all about bully psychology, but its true, they don't like targets that appear strong. Fighting back, even if you lose, gets you some shred of strength in their eyes. That and if you're learning martial arts during all this, maybe you'll end up knocking one of them around in return.
This is all if you don't want to tell someone btw; that's still the best option you have. I still recommend learning martial arts anyway, its a nice confidence boost and you know, typical 'meet new people', 'exercise is gud' etc etc.
tl;dr, tell someone, but if you really don't want to, learn martial arts, and in the meantime fight back, even if it means getting the shit kicked out of you. Most importantly, don't let bullying affect who you are; confidence is key. Believe me, I know. | Take martial arts classes of your own, maybe get a friend or two to join the same club if you can. I did the same and it skyrocketed my self confidence.
Interestingly, that 17 year old you describe sounds like me minus the bullying; and I say 'fight me' sarcastically. I think that in particular started as a joke that is essentially used between friends when you don't have a counter-argument. (doubt that's applicable here though)
For the short-term... well. Just stand up to them. Its terrifying, I know. I've been there myself once. Assuming these bullies are worth a damn, they'll knock you around a lot; but whats important is that you took a stand. That might stop it for a while, it might not. If it doesn't, you have to do it again, and again, and again. You've probably heard all about bully psychology, but its true, they don't like targets that appear strong. Fighting back, even if you lose, gets you some shred of strength in their eyes. That and if you're learning martial arts during all this, maybe you'll end up knocking one of them around in return.
This is all if you don't want to tell someone btw; that's still the best option you have. I still recommend learning martial arts anyway, its a nice confidence boost and you know, typical 'meet new people', 'exercise is gud' etc etc.
tl;dr, tell someone, but if you really don't want to, learn martial arts, and in the meantime fight back, even if it means getting the shit kicked out of you. Most importantly, don't let bullying affect who you are; confidence is key. Believe me, I know.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ccv70a1 | Take martial arts classes of your own, maybe get a friend or two to join the same club if you can. I did the same and it skyrocketed my self confidence.
Interestingly, that 17 year old you describe sounds like me minus the bullying; and I say 'fight me' sarcastically. I think that in particular started as a joke that is essentially used between friends when you don't have a counter-argument. (doubt that's applicable here though)
For the short-term... well. Just stand up to them. Its terrifying, I know. I've been there myself once. Assuming these bullies are worth a damn, they'll knock you around a lot; but whats important is that you took a stand. That might stop it for a while, it might not. If it doesn't, you have to do it again, and again, and again. You've probably heard all about bully psychology, but its true, they don't like targets that appear strong. Fighting back, even if you lose, gets you some shred of strength in their eyes. That and if you're learning martial arts during all this, maybe you'll end up knocking one of them around in return.
This is all if you don't want to tell someone btw; that's still the best option you have. I still recommend learning martial arts anyway, its a nice confidence boost and you know, typical 'meet new people', 'exercise is gud' etc etc. | tell someone, but if you really don't want to, learn martial arts, and in the meantime fight back, even if it means getting the shit kicked out of you. Most importantly, don't let bullying affect who you are; confidence is key. Believe me, I know. |
Punkbob | There is a few passages on this in Bob Woodward's book "Obama's Wars"
The gist of it is that he was all happy go lucky until a few generals came in when it looked like he was about to be president and started briefing him on National Security matters. As this was happening the general that had been previously been advising him started to freak out because he knew that these new guys were gonna present things in a very dark and skewed point of view that justified all the extensions of government power.
Basically he tried to get into the meetings but Obama sort of shut him out and Obama's campaign staff that were supposed to be his advisers on Defense and Security were either shut out or awestruck, and deferred to the generals in the room. This shift also manifested itself as advisers that were more in tune with the expanded power of the executive branch were brought in so that Obama was not seen as weak on terrorists. The general who saw all this was basically realized that his fears had come true and the military/national security apparatus had been able to convince Obama towards their outlook on the world, which was skewed towards force as a solution towards every problem, and a requirement to continue or expand executive branch's bush era programs.
There is an important caveat to all this, he had made so many pledges against war that he feared alienating his base too much so any overt giant uses of force had to be curtailed, so there was a push towards more Special Ops raids, drone strikes, and intelligence gathering. All of these could be somewhat buried under the rug, while also trotted out when they succeeded as political coups.
Tl;Dr Candidate Obama was taken into a room and scared by the military into becoming President Obama. | There is a few passages on this in Bob Woodward's book "Obama's Wars"
The gist of it is that he was all happy go lucky until a few generals came in when it looked like he was about to be president and started briefing him on National Security matters. As this was happening the general that had been previously been advising him started to freak out because he knew that these new guys were gonna present things in a very dark and skewed point of view that justified all the extensions of government power.
Basically he tried to get into the meetings but Obama sort of shut him out and Obama's campaign staff that were supposed to be his advisers on Defense and Security were either shut out or awestruck, and deferred to the generals in the room. This shift also manifested itself as advisers that were more in tune with the expanded power of the executive branch were brought in so that Obama was not seen as weak on terrorists. The general who saw all this was basically realized that his fears had come true and the military/national security apparatus had been able to convince Obama towards their outlook on the world, which was skewed towards force as a solution towards every problem, and a requirement to continue or expand executive branch's bush era programs.
There is an important caveat to all this, he had made so many pledges against war that he feared alienating his base too much so any overt giant uses of force had to be curtailed, so there was a push towards more Special Ops raids, drone strikes, and intelligence gathering. All of these could be somewhat buried under the rug, while also trotted out when they succeeded as political coups.
Tl;Dr Candidate Obama was taken into a room and scared by the military into becoming President Obama.
| worldnews | t5_2qh13 | ccvo730 | There is a few passages on this in Bob Woodward's book "Obama's Wars"
The gist of it is that he was all happy go lucky until a few generals came in when it looked like he was about to be president and started briefing him on National Security matters. As this was happening the general that had been previously been advising him started to freak out because he knew that these new guys were gonna present things in a very dark and skewed point of view that justified all the extensions of government power.
Basically he tried to get into the meetings but Obama sort of shut him out and Obama's campaign staff that were supposed to be his advisers on Defense and Security were either shut out or awestruck, and deferred to the generals in the room. This shift also manifested itself as advisers that were more in tune with the expanded power of the executive branch were brought in so that Obama was not seen as weak on terrorists. The general who saw all this was basically realized that his fears had come true and the military/national security apparatus had been able to convince Obama towards their outlook on the world, which was skewed towards force as a solution towards every problem, and a requirement to continue or expand executive branch's bush era programs.
There is an important caveat to all this, he had made so many pledges against war that he feared alienating his base too much so any overt giant uses of force had to be curtailed, so there was a push towards more Special Ops raids, drone strikes, and intelligence gathering. All of these could be somewhat buried under the rug, while also trotted out when they succeeded as political coups. | Candidate Obama was taken into a room and scared by the military into becoming President Obama. |
rolandgilead | I hated it at first until I used it to my advantage.
I have a lot of depth. But no real stand outs this year. I was 1-5 and needed a change. I targeted another 1-5 team and a 2-4 team. Both of which have a high caliber player or two, but no depth, even among their starters.
Traded MJD, Doug Martin and Andre Johnson for Adrian Peterson. The evaluate trade showed that I would be +28 and he would be +34 on the season. This was because he would be starting MJD practically every week, and the other two every week.
I then traded Ashlon Jeffery and Fred Jackson for Dez Bryant. Again it showed +21 me, +24 him because the two guys I gave him would be in the starting lineup every week for him.
Now my team is:
QB: Rivers, RG3
RB: Peterson, Gore, Stacy
WR: AJ Green, Dez Bryant, Keenan Allen, James Jones
K: Crosby
DEF: Seattle.
10 team, non ppr, 6pt passing TDs. Hoping to make a run to get me back in the running for playoffs. I currently have 3 empty spots on my bench but some waiver wire additions should help with that next week.
**TL;DR** Use the trade evaluation to your advantage if you can. Learn how to evaluate those numbers yourself and explain if needed, or simply game it and point to it if not. | I hated it at first until I used it to my advantage.
I have a lot of depth. But no real stand outs this year. I was 1-5 and needed a change. I targeted another 1-5 team and a 2-4 team. Both of which have a high caliber player or two, but no depth, even among their starters.
Traded MJD, Doug Martin and Andre Johnson for Adrian Peterson. The evaluate trade showed that I would be +28 and he would be +34 on the season. This was because he would be starting MJD practically every week, and the other two every week.
I then traded Ashlon Jeffery and Fred Jackson for Dez Bryant. Again it showed +21 me, +24 him because the two guys I gave him would be in the starting lineup every week for him.
Now my team is:
QB: Rivers, RG3
RB: Peterson, Gore, Stacy
WR: AJ Green, Dez Bryant, Keenan Allen, James Jones
K: Crosby
DEF: Seattle.
10 team, non ppr, 6pt passing TDs. Hoping to make a run to get me back in the running for playoffs. I currently have 3 empty spots on my bench but some waiver wire additions should help with that next week.
TL;DR Use the trade evaluation to your advantage if you can. Learn how to evaluate those numbers yourself and explain if needed, or simply game it and point to it if not.
| fantasyfootball | t5_2qlqq | ccve65n | I hated it at first until I used it to my advantage.
I have a lot of depth. But no real stand outs this year. I was 1-5 and needed a change. I targeted another 1-5 team and a 2-4 team. Both of which have a high caliber player or two, but no depth, even among their starters.
Traded MJD, Doug Martin and Andre Johnson for Adrian Peterson. The evaluate trade showed that I would be +28 and he would be +34 on the season. This was because he would be starting MJD practically every week, and the other two every week.
I then traded Ashlon Jeffery and Fred Jackson for Dez Bryant. Again it showed +21 me, +24 him because the two guys I gave him would be in the starting lineup every week for him.
Now my team is:
QB: Rivers, RG3
RB: Peterson, Gore, Stacy
WR: AJ Green, Dez Bryant, Keenan Allen, James Jones
K: Crosby
DEF: Seattle.
10 team, non ppr, 6pt passing TDs. Hoping to make a run to get me back in the running for playoffs. I currently have 3 empty spots on my bench but some waiver wire additions should help with that next week. | Use the trade evaluation to your advantage if you can. Learn how to evaluate those numbers yourself and explain if needed, or simply game it and point to it if not. |
r00x | There are people of ages, sensibilities and senses of humour very different to yours, that's why.
I've seen Reddit upvote things I find downright boring or confusing, and downvote things I've thought were excellent. Happens all the time. Just realise that not everyone has the same opinion as you, and then it seems obvious that this would happen.
Technically the system should provide an "average" of everyone's opinion on something. Only this isn't strictly true because people don't necessarily provide feedback equally (i.e. the percentage of people who dislike something and the percentage who don't aren't both likely to vote or comment in equal measure) and people are influenced and manipulated by the reactions of their peers.
tl;dr: You could be here just for the interesting social science alone. | There are people of ages, sensibilities and senses of humour very different to yours, that's why.
I've seen Reddit upvote things I find downright boring or confusing, and downvote things I've thought were excellent. Happens all the time. Just realise that not everyone has the same opinion as you, and then it seems obvious that this would happen.
Technically the system should provide an "average" of everyone's opinion on something. Only this isn't strictly true because people don't necessarily provide feedback equally (i.e. the percentage of people who dislike something and the percentage who don't aren't both likely to vote or comment in equal measure) and people are influenced and manipulated by the reactions of their peers.
tl;dr: You could be here just for the interesting social science alone.
| funny | t5_2qh33 | ccvl1de | There are people of ages, sensibilities and senses of humour very different to yours, that's why.
I've seen Reddit upvote things I find downright boring or confusing, and downvote things I've thought were excellent. Happens all the time. Just realise that not everyone has the same opinion as you, and then it seems obvious that this would happen.
Technically the system should provide an "average" of everyone's opinion on something. Only this isn't strictly true because people don't necessarily provide feedback equally (i.e. the percentage of people who dislike something and the percentage who don't aren't both likely to vote or comment in equal measure) and people are influenced and manipulated by the reactions of their peers. | You could be here just for the interesting social science alone. |
SlothCatter | I liked the most recent chapter, and I skimmed through the earlier parts. Personally, I'm not sure you even need that much background prior to the most recent chapter. The information could probably be revealed later in the narrative without it feeling a little like a history lesson.
I liked the main character, and would be interested to see how her story unfolds. The overall concept is pretty cool, too.
For self promotion: [this thread]( has some good thoughts in it. Tl;dr: people like it when you engage with a community more so than when you just promote your work. | I liked the most recent chapter, and I skimmed through the earlier parts. Personally, I'm not sure you even need that much background prior to the most recent chapter. The information could probably be revealed later in the narrative without it feeling a little like a history lesson.
I liked the main character, and would be interested to see how her story unfolds. The overall concept is pretty cool, too.
For self promotion: [this thread]( has some good thoughts in it. Tl;dr: people like it when you engage with a community more so than when you just promote your work.
| fantasywriters | t5_2t4ad | ccvoqld | I liked the most recent chapter, and I skimmed through the earlier parts. Personally, I'm not sure you even need that much background prior to the most recent chapter. The information could probably be revealed later in the narrative without it feeling a little like a history lesson.
I liked the main character, and would be interested to see how her story unfolds. The overall concept is pretty cool, too.
For self promotion: [this thread]( has some good thoughts in it. | people like it when you engage with a community more so than when you just promote your work. |
brorack_brobama | Man, we should have a dozen parties with 3 core party blocs. Congress more and more resembles a parliament with both sides showing staunch party loyalty, unfortunately this kind of democracy isn't a 2-player game. It's like playing Monopoly with 2 people. The Republicans have half of the board stacked with hotels and the Democrats have the other half stacked with hotels. Roll the dice, hope you land on chance or free parking.
It isn't fun or productive, and the status quo changes more by happenstance than any real sense of trying.
TL;DR You're right, democracy isn't a two-player game. | Man, we should have a dozen parties with 3 core party blocs. Congress more and more resembles a parliament with both sides showing staunch party loyalty, unfortunately this kind of democracy isn't a 2-player game. It's like playing Monopoly with 2 people. The Republicans have half of the board stacked with hotels and the Democrats have the other half stacked with hotels. Roll the dice, hope you land on chance or free parking.
It isn't fun or productive, and the status quo changes more by happenstance than any real sense of trying.
TL;DR You're right, democracy isn't a two-player game.
| Libertarian | t5_2qh63 | ccwaqm8 | Man, we should have a dozen parties with 3 core party blocs. Congress more and more resembles a parliament with both sides showing staunch party loyalty, unfortunately this kind of democracy isn't a 2-player game. It's like playing Monopoly with 2 people. The Republicans have half of the board stacked with hotels and the Democrats have the other half stacked with hotels. Roll the dice, hope you land on chance or free parking.
It isn't fun or productive, and the status quo changes more by happenstance than any real sense of trying. | You're right, democracy isn't a two-player game. |
Intrexa | Nothing I see in that surprises or impresses me from an engine perspective. In a lot of areas it's 2 steps back. The *only* reason this looks good is because of amazing modelers and background designers, but the tech to render it is lacking. The one thing this does extremely well is rounded surfaces, but everything is 100% flat textures on every surface. Things like the rivets, and cracks in the wall are clearly not [bumped]( at all. [Look at this]( whatever that strip is, it's very flat. If you had control of the camera, and strafed around an object, it would look a lot, lot worse.
They also get a huge boost from having such tiny, tiny areas of action. In the highway where the trees 'grow', it's maybe 20 yards of trees, with like 3 in the background. If you pay attention to the background, you can see really aliased lighting (top right of screen at [this point]( and from a lot of shadows it makes it look like the sun is way too close or different sources. There's no reflection from the light, at all. The only movement in the entire demo (the robot's hand) was extremely jerky and unrealistic.
For comparison, [this is a 2011 tech demo]( from unreal 3 running in real time on consumer grade hardware (albeit like a $2,000 computer). Both OP's video and the linked video are really just tech demos of what the engine can render. This game won't be noted for pushing any graphical boundaries in 5 years.
Tl;dr: Creators knew their engines strengths and abused those while very carefully hiding out any spot it would be weak at. | Nothing I see in that surprises or impresses me from an engine perspective. In a lot of areas it's 2 steps back. The only reason this looks good is because of amazing modelers and background designers, but the tech to render it is lacking. The one thing this does extremely well is rounded surfaces, but everything is 100% flat textures on every surface. Things like the rivets, and cracks in the wall are clearly not [bumped]( at all. [Look at this]( whatever that strip is, it's very flat. If you had control of the camera, and strafed around an object, it would look a lot, lot worse.
They also get a huge boost from having such tiny, tiny areas of action. In the highway where the trees 'grow', it's maybe 20 yards of trees, with like 3 in the background. If you pay attention to the background, you can see really aliased lighting (top right of screen at this point was extremely jerky and unrealistic.
For comparison, this is a 2011 tech demo . Both OP's video and the linked video are really just tech demos of what the engine can render. This game won't be noted for pushing any graphical boundaries in 5 years.
Tl;dr: Creators knew their engines strengths and abused those while very carefully hiding out any spot it would be weak at.
| videos | t5_2qh1e | ccvxokk | Nothing I see in that surprises or impresses me from an engine perspective. In a lot of areas it's 2 steps back. The only reason this looks good is because of amazing modelers and background designers, but the tech to render it is lacking. The one thing this does extremely well is rounded surfaces, but everything is 100% flat textures on every surface. Things like the rivets, and cracks in the wall are clearly not [bumped]( at all. [Look at this]( whatever that strip is, it's very flat. If you had control of the camera, and strafed around an object, it would look a lot, lot worse.
They also get a huge boost from having such tiny, tiny areas of action. In the highway where the trees 'grow', it's maybe 20 yards of trees, with like 3 in the background. If you pay attention to the background, you can see really aliased lighting (top right of screen at this point was extremely jerky and unrealistic.
For comparison, this is a 2011 tech demo . Both OP's video and the linked video are really just tech demos of what the engine can render. This game won't be noted for pushing any graphical boundaries in 5 years. | Creators knew their engines strengths and abused those while very carefully hiding out any spot it would be weak at. |
captaino | Happened a while ago, but my daily run along a river path in Chicago was once interrupted by a bike race running along the same path that morning. During my run up and down the path (which was paved and about 6 feet wide), I was probably passed by roughly 500 bikers. Most passed as close to me (I was running as far to the right as possible) as 6 inches, going 20-30 mph.
As if that wasn't enough, guess how many of them said anything to warn me before they passed? One guy. One guy said, "On your left," literally as he was passing me on my left, which defeats the purpose, but still I thanked him loudly.
I was in disbelief by the end of my run. I am also a biker, and one my big rules is to never pass anyone without letting them know, well beforehand, that you will be passing and on what side. I have learned since then not to expect that in Chicago. I've seen runners and walkers get hit frequently because they moved a few inches to either side at the wrong moment and a biker clipped them.
I love biking, but bikers in this city are awful.
TL;DR Bikers in Chicago never tell you before they pass you. | Happened a while ago, but my daily run along a river path in Chicago was once interrupted by a bike race running along the same path that morning. During my run up and down the path (which was paved and about 6 feet wide), I was probably passed by roughly 500 bikers. Most passed as close to me (I was running as far to the right as possible) as 6 inches, going 20-30 mph.
As if that wasn't enough, guess how many of them said anything to warn me before they passed? One guy. One guy said, "On your left," literally as he was passing me on my left, which defeats the purpose, but still I thanked him loudly.
I was in disbelief by the end of my run. I am also a biker, and one my big rules is to never pass anyone without letting them know, well beforehand, that you will be passing and on what side. I have learned since then not to expect that in Chicago. I've seen runners and walkers get hit frequently because they moved a few inches to either side at the wrong moment and a biker clipped them.
I love biking, but bikers in this city are awful.
TL;DR Bikers in Chicago never tell you before they pass you.
| running | t5_2qlit | ccvwq3y | Happened a while ago, but my daily run along a river path in Chicago was once interrupted by a bike race running along the same path that morning. During my run up and down the path (which was paved and about 6 feet wide), I was probably passed by roughly 500 bikers. Most passed as close to me (I was running as far to the right as possible) as 6 inches, going 20-30 mph.
As if that wasn't enough, guess how many of them said anything to warn me before they passed? One guy. One guy said, "On your left," literally as he was passing me on my left, which defeats the purpose, but still I thanked him loudly.
I was in disbelief by the end of my run. I am also a biker, and one my big rules is to never pass anyone without letting them know, well beforehand, that you will be passing and on what side. I have learned since then not to expect that in Chicago. I've seen runners and walkers get hit frequently because they moved a few inches to either side at the wrong moment and a biker clipped them.
I love biking, but bikers in this city are awful. | Bikers in Chicago never tell you before they pass you. |
caveman_chubs | Well the Metropolitans had 74 wins let's look
#Management#
Sandy Alderson and co have said they have a plan and it begins now. They've navigated through the silly contracts of the Omar Minaya era and the financial restraints of the Madoff scandal. Both, for the most part, are resolved. They have added a ton of youth to the farm system and acquired a few draft picks. Alderson and staff have bolstered the pitching staff for the future, a staple of all great mets teams of the past. Now they must find talent to field on the actual fielding positions. Over all they must stay the course and make their plan show dividends
#The Team#
As mentioned above the team has a lot of young Starting Rotation talent. But with Matt Harvey gone to Tommy John Surgery some one must come in and step up, Rapheal Monetro or Noah Syndergaard, or go out and get a free agent. Rumors have linked the Mets to Tim Linscecomb. Around a 1-2 year deal at about 2.5 mil per. A value signing that has potential great upside.
The outfield is a mess. As the season unfolded one thing became clear. Its awful and all options, except Juan Lagares, are awful. With Mike "from Whitestone" Baxter, who's only claim to fame is he saved the hitter by seperating his shoulder, is gone to LA. Lucas Duda can't field, Eric Young Jr. Can't hit, Andrew Brown maybe to young, Marlon Byrd was traded, Kirk Neiweheis can't hit or field well , and Jordanny Valdespin called the manager a cocksucker and mouthed his way essentially out of the organization. The Mets need help here quickly. With 1 outfielder on the roster something needs to be done and I'm unsure how they play this out.
The infield has David Wright. He's simply the best. Hell lock down 3rd forever. But SS is a need as is first. Second is roamed by Dan Murphy who is solid trade bait but I believe the mets should keep him as a #2 hitter. Less pressing matter than the outfield but the Mets need to beef up production from the 1B and Ss positions
#Bullpen#
Oh the Lolpen. Blew a ton of games. Overall was horrid. Bobby Parnell looks to have put it all together but got hurt and missed a ton of games so I'm not sure if it was a fluke or he is the closer. All I do know is old guys like Lately Hawkins, Scott Attichson, and David Aardsma aren't going to cut it. The young guys were just ineffective. This is another pressing matter that must be addressed
Sorry for wall of text
TL;DR- Outfielders and bullpen are major needs. A starter to replace Harvey and some infield help. Trade ike Davis his days in NY are done | Well the Metropolitans had 74 wins let's look
Management
Sandy Alderson and co have said they have a plan and it begins now. They've navigated through the silly contracts of the Omar Minaya era and the financial restraints of the Madoff scandal. Both, for the most part, are resolved. They have added a ton of youth to the farm system and acquired a few draft picks. Alderson and staff have bolstered the pitching staff for the future, a staple of all great mets teams of the past. Now they must find talent to field on the actual fielding positions. Over all they must stay the course and make their plan show dividends
The Team
As mentioned above the team has a lot of young Starting Rotation talent. But with Matt Harvey gone to Tommy John Surgery some one must come in and step up, Rapheal Monetro or Noah Syndergaard, or go out and get a free agent. Rumors have linked the Mets to Tim Linscecomb. Around a 1-2 year deal at about 2.5 mil per. A value signing that has potential great upside.
The outfield is a mess. As the season unfolded one thing became clear. Its awful and all options, except Juan Lagares, are awful. With Mike "from Whitestone" Baxter, who's only claim to fame is he saved the hitter by seperating his shoulder, is gone to LA. Lucas Duda can't field, Eric Young Jr. Can't hit, Andrew Brown maybe to young, Marlon Byrd was traded, Kirk Neiweheis can't hit or field well , and Jordanny Valdespin called the manager a cocksucker and mouthed his way essentially out of the organization. The Mets need help here quickly. With 1 outfielder on the roster something needs to be done and I'm unsure how they play this out.
The infield has David Wright. He's simply the best. Hell lock down 3rd forever. But SS is a need as is first. Second is roamed by Dan Murphy who is solid trade bait but I believe the mets should keep him as a #2 hitter. Less pressing matter than the outfield but the Mets need to beef up production from the 1B and Ss positions
Bullpen
Oh the Lolpen. Blew a ton of games. Overall was horrid. Bobby Parnell looks to have put it all together but got hurt and missed a ton of games so I'm not sure if it was a fluke or he is the closer. All I do know is old guys like Lately Hawkins, Scott Attichson, and David Aardsma aren't going to cut it. The young guys were just ineffective. This is another pressing matter that must be addressed
Sorry for wall of text
TL;DR- Outfielders and bullpen are major needs. A starter to replace Harvey and some infield help. Trade ike Davis his days in NY are done
| baseball | t5_2qm7u | ccwcndc | Well the Metropolitans had 74 wins let's look
Management
Sandy Alderson and co have said they have a plan and it begins now. They've navigated through the silly contracts of the Omar Minaya era and the financial restraints of the Madoff scandal. Both, for the most part, are resolved. They have added a ton of youth to the farm system and acquired a few draft picks. Alderson and staff have bolstered the pitching staff for the future, a staple of all great mets teams of the past. Now they must find talent to field on the actual fielding positions. Over all they must stay the course and make their plan show dividends
The Team
As mentioned above the team has a lot of young Starting Rotation talent. But with Matt Harvey gone to Tommy John Surgery some one must come in and step up, Rapheal Monetro or Noah Syndergaard, or go out and get a free agent. Rumors have linked the Mets to Tim Linscecomb. Around a 1-2 year deal at about 2.5 mil per. A value signing that has potential great upside.
The outfield is a mess. As the season unfolded one thing became clear. Its awful and all options, except Juan Lagares, are awful. With Mike "from Whitestone" Baxter, who's only claim to fame is he saved the hitter by seperating his shoulder, is gone to LA. Lucas Duda can't field, Eric Young Jr. Can't hit, Andrew Brown maybe to young, Marlon Byrd was traded, Kirk Neiweheis can't hit or field well , and Jordanny Valdespin called the manager a cocksucker and mouthed his way essentially out of the organization. The Mets need help here quickly. With 1 outfielder on the roster something needs to be done and I'm unsure how they play this out.
The infield has David Wright. He's simply the best. Hell lock down 3rd forever. But SS is a need as is first. Second is roamed by Dan Murphy who is solid trade bait but I believe the mets should keep him as a #2 hitter. Less pressing matter than the outfield but the Mets need to beef up production from the 1B and Ss positions
Bullpen
Oh the Lolpen. Blew a ton of games. Overall was horrid. Bobby Parnell looks to have put it all together but got hurt and missed a ton of games so I'm not sure if it was a fluke or he is the closer. All I do know is old guys like Lately Hawkins, Scott Attichson, and David Aardsma aren't going to cut it. The young guys were just ineffective. This is another pressing matter that must be addressed
Sorry for wall of text | Outfielders and bullpen are major needs. A starter to replace Harvey and some infield help. Trade ike Davis his days in NY are done |
teawreckshero | Think of it like TVtropes or wikipedia. It's not intended to be linear, but most articles have dependencies.
As far as finding a beginning goes, I know what you mean. This is what I read first:
and though it's not actually on the LessWrong site, it is written by the Yudkowsky guy, and is linked to on one of the intro pages on the LessWrong site.
Edit: This is kind of the TL;DR version of Baysian Reasoning: | Think of it like TVtropes or wikipedia. It's not intended to be linear, but most articles have dependencies.
As far as finding a beginning goes, I know what you mean. This is what I read first:
and though it's not actually on the LessWrong site, it is written by the Yudkowsky guy, and is linked to on one of the intro pages on the LessWrong site.
Edit: This is kind of the TL;DR version of Baysian Reasoning:
| YouShouldKnow | t5_2r94o | ccvx9tg | Think of it like TVtropes or wikipedia. It's not intended to be linear, but most articles have dependencies.
As far as finding a beginning goes, I know what you mean. This is what I read first:
and though it's not actually on the LessWrong site, it is written by the Yudkowsky guy, and is linked to on one of the intro pages on the LessWrong site.
Edit: This is kind of the | version of Baysian Reasoning: |
cowbellthunder | For his efficiency and minutes played, he is working CHEAP. 3-and-D guys are in vogue, as teams are emphasizing defense on every possession and 3 point shooting. In the amnesty clause era, where teams are paying 10s of millions for a player to go away, finding players like Jimmy Butler who can swing a few wins and basically play for free (drafted 30th overall on a rookie deal) is an essential edge good teams will need to have. And this doesn't include the value the Bulls will continue to reap through the end of Jimmy's rookie deal (and the Bulls' leverage in future contract negotiations).
TL;DR: He's a GM's wet dream and has earned Thib's trust. Jimmy Buckets is our guy. | For his efficiency and minutes played, he is working CHEAP. 3-and-D guys are in vogue, as teams are emphasizing defense on every possession and 3 point shooting. In the amnesty clause era, where teams are paying 10s of millions for a player to go away, finding players like Jimmy Butler who can swing a few wins and basically play for free (drafted 30th overall on a rookie deal) is an essential edge good teams will need to have. And this doesn't include the value the Bulls will continue to reap through the end of Jimmy's rookie deal (and the Bulls' leverage in future contract negotiations).
TL;DR: He's a GM's wet dream and has earned Thib's trust. Jimmy Buckets is our guy.
| nba | t5_2qo4s | ccwbzh5 | For his efficiency and minutes played, he is working CHEAP. 3-and-D guys are in vogue, as teams are emphasizing defense on every possession and 3 point shooting. In the amnesty clause era, where teams are paying 10s of millions for a player to go away, finding players like Jimmy Butler who can swing a few wins and basically play for free (drafted 30th overall on a rookie deal) is an essential edge good teams will need to have. And this doesn't include the value the Bulls will continue to reap through the end of Jimmy's rookie deal (and the Bulls' leverage in future contract negotiations). | He's a GM's wet dream and has earned Thib's trust. Jimmy Buckets is our guy. |
stevejavson | If we look at a definition and brief description of a disease, we get:
>A disease is an abnormal condition that affects the body of an organism. It is often construed as a medical condition associated with specific symptoms and signs.[1] It may be caused by factors originally from an external source, such as infectious disease, or it may be caused by internal dysfunctions, such as autoimmune diseases. In humans, "disease" is often used more broadly to refer to any condition that causes pain, dysfunction, distress, social problems, or death to the person afflicted, or similar problems for those in contact with the person. In this broader sense, it sometimes includes injuries, disabilities, disorders, syndromes, infections, isolated symptoms, deviant behaviors, and atypical variations of structure and function, while in other contexts and for other purposes these may be considered distinguishable categories. Diseases usually affect people not only physically, but also emotionally, as contracting and living with many diseases can alter one's perspective on life, and one's personality.
So to paraphrase, a disease typically needs to meet 2 conditions, with another one that is *usually* taken into consideration as well.
1. A disease needs to be abnormal
2. A disease needs to be associated with specific symptoms and signs
3. A disease usually causes some kind of distress/disability/dysfunction
Now, if we compare that to mental illness:
>A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a mental or behavioral pattern or anomaly that causes distress or disability, and which is not developmentally or socially normative
For something to be considered a mental disorder, it generally needs to satisfy 3 conditions.
1. It needs to be abnormal
2. It can't be the result of normal culture/social environment
3. It needs to cause distress/disability/dysfunction
At first glance, the two definitions may seem a little different but they're not really.
For disease:
>A disease needs to be associated with specific symptoms and signs
Mental illnesses do too. They're just not currently as stringent as we would like due to our limited understanding of the brain.
For mental illness:
>It can't be the result of normal culture/social environment
This is here to make sure we don't put things out of context. People in different places and in different time periods may have different manifestations of certain types of mental illness. If we had a much better understanding of the physiology behind mental illnesses and the tools to measure them, we could probably scrap this rule.
TL;DR: The minor differences between the definitions is the result of practical reasons.
| If we look at a definition and brief description of a disease, we get:
>A disease is an abnormal condition that affects the body of an organism. It is often construed as a medical condition associated with specific symptoms and signs.[1] It may be caused by factors originally from an external source, such as infectious disease, or it may be caused by internal dysfunctions, such as autoimmune diseases. In humans, "disease" is often used more broadly to refer to any condition that causes pain, dysfunction, distress, social problems, or death to the person afflicted, or similar problems for those in contact with the person. In this broader sense, it sometimes includes injuries, disabilities, disorders, syndromes, infections, isolated symptoms, deviant behaviors, and atypical variations of structure and function, while in other contexts and for other purposes these may be considered distinguishable categories. Diseases usually affect people not only physically, but also emotionally, as contracting and living with many diseases can alter one's perspective on life, and one's personality.
So to paraphrase, a disease typically needs to meet 2 conditions, with another one that is usually taken into consideration as well.
A disease needs to be abnormal
A disease needs to be associated with specific symptoms and signs
A disease usually causes some kind of distress/disability/dysfunction
Now, if we compare that to mental illness:
>A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a mental or behavioral pattern or anomaly that causes distress or disability, and which is not developmentally or socially normative
For something to be considered a mental disorder, it generally needs to satisfy 3 conditions.
It needs to be abnormal
It can't be the result of normal culture/social environment
It needs to cause distress/disability/dysfunction
At first glance, the two definitions may seem a little different but they're not really.
For disease:
>A disease needs to be associated with specific symptoms and signs
Mental illnesses do too. They're just not currently as stringent as we would like due to our limited understanding of the brain.
For mental illness:
>It can't be the result of normal culture/social environment
This is here to make sure we don't put things out of context. People in different places and in different time periods may have different manifestations of certain types of mental illness. If we had a much better understanding of the physiology behind mental illnesses and the tools to measure them, we could probably scrap this rule.
TL;DR: The minor differences between the definitions is the result of practical reasons.
| changemyview | t5_2w2s8 | ccvyg54 | If we look at a definition and brief description of a disease, we get:
>A disease is an abnormal condition that affects the body of an organism. It is often construed as a medical condition associated with specific symptoms and signs.[1] It may be caused by factors originally from an external source, such as infectious disease, or it may be caused by internal dysfunctions, such as autoimmune diseases. In humans, "disease" is often used more broadly to refer to any condition that causes pain, dysfunction, distress, social problems, or death to the person afflicted, or similar problems for those in contact with the person. In this broader sense, it sometimes includes injuries, disabilities, disorders, syndromes, infections, isolated symptoms, deviant behaviors, and atypical variations of structure and function, while in other contexts and for other purposes these may be considered distinguishable categories. Diseases usually affect people not only physically, but also emotionally, as contracting and living with many diseases can alter one's perspective on life, and one's personality.
So to paraphrase, a disease typically needs to meet 2 conditions, with another one that is usually taken into consideration as well.
A disease needs to be abnormal
A disease needs to be associated with specific symptoms and signs
A disease usually causes some kind of distress/disability/dysfunction
Now, if we compare that to mental illness:
>A mental disorder or psychiatric disorder is a mental or behavioral pattern or anomaly that causes distress or disability, and which is not developmentally or socially normative
For something to be considered a mental disorder, it generally needs to satisfy 3 conditions.
It needs to be abnormal
It can't be the result of normal culture/social environment
It needs to cause distress/disability/dysfunction
At first glance, the two definitions may seem a little different but they're not really.
For disease:
>A disease needs to be associated with specific symptoms and signs
Mental illnesses do too. They're just not currently as stringent as we would like due to our limited understanding of the brain.
For mental illness:
>It can't be the result of normal culture/social environment
This is here to make sure we don't put things out of context. People in different places and in different time periods may have different manifestations of certain types of mental illness. If we had a much better understanding of the physiology behind mental illnesses and the tools to measure them, we could probably scrap this rule. | The minor differences between the definitions is the result of practical reasons. |
m0r05 | You'd think it would be similar but it isn't. You do train for firefighting the majority of your carreer, but shipboard firefighting, what DC's train for, and structural firefighting, what Fire Departments train for, are compeletly different beasts.
Most of DC's work is on preventive maintenance (They are part of the enginerring department), most of Fire Departments work is actually EMS
Edit to add:
Source: Former DC, tried to go FD when I got out, learned that being a DC counted for essentialy nothing
TLDR; DC wont help you join a Fire Department any more than any other military job will | You'd think it would be similar but it isn't. You do train for firefighting the majority of your carreer, but shipboard firefighting, what DC's train for, and structural firefighting, what Fire Departments train for, are compeletly different beasts.
Most of DC's work is on preventive maintenance (They are part of the enginerring department), most of Fire Departments work is actually EMS
Edit to add:
Source: Former DC, tried to go FD when I got out, learned that being a DC counted for essentialy nothing
TLDR; DC wont help you join a Fire Department any more than any other military job will
| navy | t5_2rg06 | ccwho23 | You'd think it would be similar but it isn't. You do train for firefighting the majority of your carreer, but shipboard firefighting, what DC's train for, and structural firefighting, what Fire Departments train for, are compeletly different beasts.
Most of DC's work is on preventive maintenance (They are part of the enginerring department), most of Fire Departments work is actually EMS
Edit to add:
Source: Former DC, tried to go FD when I got out, learned that being a DC counted for essentialy nothing | DC wont help you join a Fire Department any more than any other military job will |
Steelcanine | If they bring dodge back in, I better get a refund for the refund that I got for them removing the runes.
tl;dr
WHO WANTS PIECE OF THE CHAMP | If they bring dodge back in, I better get a refund for the refund that I got for them removing the runes.
tl;dr
WHO WANTS PIECE OF THE CHAMP
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ccwg2w1 | If they bring dodge back in, I better get a refund for the refund that I got for them removing the runes. | WHO WANTS PIECE OF THE CHAMP |
jedazar | i am by no means a high elo player, but there are some situations where it could be ok to buy more than one of the same item.
the first is if its a small item, for example a dorans item, or something else like cloth armor or a longsword. you can buy more than one to fill a specific need in laning phase.
in regards to multiple higher-priced items, it could be ok on some champs, as long as the item doesnt have a unique passive that makes up a large portion of the cost. for example, buying two bloodthirsters might not be too bad if you needed the extra ad, but it might be better to buy a last whisper for armor pen. builds like two phantom dancers on an ADC used to be common in s2 as well, but its maybe not as good an idea now due to items like bork etc.
**tldr if its a cheap item (dorans, cloth armor etc) and/or doesnt have an expensive unique passive (like guardian angel), then it can be ok if you dont need other stats.** | i am by no means a high elo player, but there are some situations where it could be ok to buy more than one of the same item.
the first is if its a small item, for example a dorans item, or something else like cloth armor or a longsword. you can buy more than one to fill a specific need in laning phase.
in regards to multiple higher-priced items, it could be ok on some champs, as long as the item doesnt have a unique passive that makes up a large portion of the cost. for example, buying two bloodthirsters might not be too bad if you needed the extra ad, but it might be better to buy a last whisper for armor pen. builds like two phantom dancers on an ADC used to be common in s2 as well, but its maybe not as good an idea now due to items like bork etc.
tldr if its a cheap item (dorans, cloth armor etc) and/or doesnt have an expensive unique passive (like guardian angel), then it can be ok if you dont need other stats.
| summonerschool | t5_2t9x3 | ccw6ehq | i am by no means a high elo player, but there are some situations where it could be ok to buy more than one of the same item.
the first is if its a small item, for example a dorans item, or something else like cloth armor or a longsword. you can buy more than one to fill a specific need in laning phase.
in regards to multiple higher-priced items, it could be ok on some champs, as long as the item doesnt have a unique passive that makes up a large portion of the cost. for example, buying two bloodthirsters might not be too bad if you needed the extra ad, but it might be better to buy a last whisper for armor pen. builds like two phantom dancers on an ADC used to be common in s2 as well, but its maybe not as good an idea now due to items like bork etc. | if its a cheap item (dorans, cloth armor etc) and/or doesnt have an expensive unique passive (like guardian angel), then it can be ok if you dont need other stats. |
vn2090 | I got my bsce in civil and did an internship in structures during grad school in structures. I thought I wanted to do structures but never really had a chance to work in it due to the job market during my undergrad. I ended up not liking it at all. Probably just the firm I was at, but it didn't really involve problem solving like I thought there would be. All it is is modeling in revit and then running it in ram elements. There was also a severe lack of science. Everything is already codified. They also didn't seem to be investing in me as an engineer. They would just give me data entry tasks and they would never take the time to educate me on what they were doing, even though I was immensely capable. I had friends in other disciplines talking about how they were given projects and interesting challenges to solve. I was being told I would need to wait until I got my PE license before I could start handling projects. So now I am desparetly trying to get out of the field. I grabbed a research job where I am baisically a mechanical engineer and I am being handed real problem solving tasks. They are paying way more and they highly value my work. I'm taking a graduate mechanical engineering course just get exposure to it and jump over. I'm probably going to try to get into robotics.
TLDR- my impression with structural engineering is that it is a dying profession with a flooded job market and software that strips all engineering judgment from the profession. I partially regret majoring in civil engineering because it has caused so much stress for my job search and satisfaction of profession founded on solving problems. | I got my bsce in civil and did an internship in structures during grad school in structures. I thought I wanted to do structures but never really had a chance to work in it due to the job market during my undergrad. I ended up not liking it at all. Probably just the firm I was at, but it didn't really involve problem solving like I thought there would be. All it is is modeling in revit and then running it in ram elements. There was also a severe lack of science. Everything is already codified. They also didn't seem to be investing in me as an engineer. They would just give me data entry tasks and they would never take the time to educate me on what they were doing, even though I was immensely capable. I had friends in other disciplines talking about how they were given projects and interesting challenges to solve. I was being told I would need to wait until I got my PE license before I could start handling projects. So now I am desparetly trying to get out of the field. I grabbed a research job where I am baisically a mechanical engineer and I am being handed real problem solving tasks. They are paying way more and they highly value my work. I'm taking a graduate mechanical engineering course just get exposure to it and jump over. I'm probably going to try to get into robotics.
TLDR- my impression with structural engineering is that it is a dying profession with a flooded job market and software that strips all engineering judgment from the profession. I partially regret majoring in civil engineering because it has caused so much stress for my job search and satisfaction of profession founded on solving problems.
| civilengineering | t5_2qo8j | ccwp6vy | I got my bsce in civil and did an internship in structures during grad school in structures. I thought I wanted to do structures but never really had a chance to work in it due to the job market during my undergrad. I ended up not liking it at all. Probably just the firm I was at, but it didn't really involve problem solving like I thought there would be. All it is is modeling in revit and then running it in ram elements. There was also a severe lack of science. Everything is already codified. They also didn't seem to be investing in me as an engineer. They would just give me data entry tasks and they would never take the time to educate me on what they were doing, even though I was immensely capable. I had friends in other disciplines talking about how they were given projects and interesting challenges to solve. I was being told I would need to wait until I got my PE license before I could start handling projects. So now I am desparetly trying to get out of the field. I grabbed a research job where I am baisically a mechanical engineer and I am being handed real problem solving tasks. They are paying way more and they highly value my work. I'm taking a graduate mechanical engineering course just get exposure to it and jump over. I'm probably going to try to get into robotics. | my impression with structural engineering is that it is a dying profession with a flooded job market and software that strips all engineering judgment from the profession. I partially regret majoring in civil engineering because it has caused so much stress for my job search and satisfaction of profession founded on solving problems. |
pandabearak | A pastrami sandwich, fries, chips, and an ice cream sunday. With a beer. Sex after.
TL;DR its lunch time right now. | A pastrami sandwich, fries, chips, and an ice cream sunday. With a beer. Sex after.
TL;DR its lunch time right now.
| AskMen | t5_2s30g | ccwgmg0 | A pastrami sandwich, fries, chips, and an ice cream sunday. With a beer. Sex after. | its lunch time right now. |
jevmorgan | This reminds me of a game of musical chairs I saw a couple of months ago at my niece's 6th birthday party. After any kid failed to get a chair, the adults all cheered and high fives the kid. It was an attempt to keep the kids from having meltdowns, but it still rewarded failure in a weird way.
TL;DR: musical chairs is basically the "let's watch a bunch of kids crying" game. | This reminds me of a game of musical chairs I saw a couple of months ago at my niece's 6th birthday party. After any kid failed to get a chair, the adults all cheered and high fives the kid. It was an attempt to keep the kids from having meltdowns, but it still rewarded failure in a weird way.
TL;DR: musical chairs is basically the "let's watch a bunch of kids crying" game.
| casualnintendo | t5_2uz4o | ccwgpjt | This reminds me of a game of musical chairs I saw a couple of months ago at my niece's 6th birthday party. After any kid failed to get a chair, the adults all cheered and high fives the kid. It was an attempt to keep the kids from having meltdowns, but it still rewarded failure in a weird way. | musical chairs is basically the "let's watch a bunch of kids crying" game. |
lDangerouzl | i just got a razer taipan and im very happy with it, but it would be best if u can test which mouse is best for you. as headset i recommend the g35 from logitech kinda one of the comfort sort and good sound (phreak use it 2 :)) as keyboard i would say to get a mechanical one but you need to see what would be best for you TL DR: Logitech G35, Razer Taipan, any mechanical keyboard | i just got a razer taipan and im very happy with it, but it would be best if u can test which mouse is best for you. as headset i recommend the g35 from logitech kinda one of the comfort sort and good sound (phreak use it 2 :)) as keyboard i would say to get a mechanical one but you need to see what would be best for you TL DR: Logitech G35, Razer Taipan, any mechanical keyboard
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ccwfy9b | i just got a razer taipan and im very happy with it, but it would be best if u can test which mouse is best for you. as headset i recommend the g35 from logitech kinda one of the comfort sort and good sound (phreak use it 2 :)) as keyboard i would say to get a mechanical one but you need to see what would be best for you | Logitech G35, Razer Taipan, any mechanical keyboard |
DrizzyBoi | Headset: I usually just use my beats but I figure you're gonna want a gaming headset
Keyboard: Razer Blackwidow Ultimate
I've had two of these and the first only broke cuz I spilled coke in it. But I absolutely love this keyboard and the blue switches are my shit.
Mouse: I've had two different mice, a steelseries and my current one is the Razer deathadder. The steelseries stopped working 10 minutes into use...returned it got another and boom. Gone after a week. After returning that I switched to the Razer and have not regretted it at all. Really good mouse imo.
TLDR: Black widow ultimate keyboard and Razer deathadder mouse
| Headset: I usually just use my beats but I figure you're gonna want a gaming headset
Keyboard: Razer Blackwidow Ultimate
I've had two of these and the first only broke cuz I spilled coke in it. But I absolutely love this keyboard and the blue switches are my shit.
Mouse: I've had two different mice, a steelseries and my current one is the Razer deathadder. The steelseries stopped working 10 minutes into use...returned it got another and boom. Gone after a week. After returning that I switched to the Razer and have not regretted it at all. Really good mouse imo.
TLDR: Black widow ultimate keyboard and Razer deathadder mouse
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ccwicju | Headset: I usually just use my beats but I figure you're gonna want a gaming headset
Keyboard: Razer Blackwidow Ultimate
I've had two of these and the first only broke cuz I spilled coke in it. But I absolutely love this keyboard and the blue switches are my shit.
Mouse: I've had two different mice, a steelseries and my current one is the Razer deathadder. The steelseries stopped working 10 minutes into use...returned it got another and boom. Gone after a week. After returning that I switched to the Razer and have not regretted it at all. Really good mouse imo. | Black widow ultimate keyboard and Razer deathadder mouse |
LavenderGumes | Peanut butter surrounded by chocolate, at its core, is a brilliant idea. The two flavors absolutely complement each other, providing a sweet, salty, and nutty finish. Peanut butter's creamy texture is great with the melting chocolate. It's a fairly soft combination that also offers a degree of moisture, literally melting in your mouth. I love me a buckeye or the flavorful peanut butter chocolate smoothie.
With that said, Reese's peanut butter cups are a sub par candy. That peanut butter is nothing like what peanut butter should be. It doesn't taste like peanuts! And instead of creamy butter, I get a disk of chalk which crumbles in my mouth. The chocolate encasing isn't as poor as the peanut butter, but it's certainly not anything special. Overall I have always been disappointed with the texture, taste, and mouth-meltiness. It's just not a candy that can be mass produced. Small candy shops can make dope peanut butter cups.
Tl;dr: Reese's Peanut Butter Cups are better in theory than in practice. | Peanut butter surrounded by chocolate, at its core, is a brilliant idea. The two flavors absolutely complement each other, providing a sweet, salty, and nutty finish. Peanut butter's creamy texture is great with the melting chocolate. It's a fairly soft combination that also offers a degree of moisture, literally melting in your mouth. I love me a buckeye or the flavorful peanut butter chocolate smoothie.
With that said, Reese's peanut butter cups are a sub par candy. That peanut butter is nothing like what peanut butter should be. It doesn't taste like peanuts! And instead of creamy butter, I get a disk of chalk which crumbles in my mouth. The chocolate encasing isn't as poor as the peanut butter, but it's certainly not anything special. Overall I have always been disappointed with the texture, taste, and mouth-meltiness. It's just not a candy that can be mass produced. Small candy shops can make dope peanut butter cups.
Tl;dr: Reese's Peanut Butter Cups are better in theory than in practice.
| AskMen | t5_2s30g | ccwwp6o | Peanut butter surrounded by chocolate, at its core, is a brilliant idea. The two flavors absolutely complement each other, providing a sweet, salty, and nutty finish. Peanut butter's creamy texture is great with the melting chocolate. It's a fairly soft combination that also offers a degree of moisture, literally melting in your mouth. I love me a buckeye or the flavorful peanut butter chocolate smoothie.
With that said, Reese's peanut butter cups are a sub par candy. That peanut butter is nothing like what peanut butter should be. It doesn't taste like peanuts! And instead of creamy butter, I get a disk of chalk which crumbles in my mouth. The chocolate encasing isn't as poor as the peanut butter, but it's certainly not anything special. Overall I have always been disappointed with the texture, taste, and mouth-meltiness. It's just not a candy that can be mass produced. Small candy shops can make dope peanut butter cups. | Reese's Peanut Butter Cups are better in theory than in practice. |
CaptCrappyJack | You're going to hear all kinds of different opinions. Some from people who've had bad experiences, and some from those with good ones. Don't listen to any of them. Instead, listen to what feels most right. If you're already considering it, then its probably not a terrible idea. I have been enlisted for 10 years (Air Force), and although it is not my dream job or anything, it IS stable. Depending on your job, you may (and probably will) have a lot of spare time to pursue your true passions. If you're interested in art, editorial and conceptual design, consider going into Public Affairs in the Air Force. The AFN and AF Newspapers are always looking for good candidates.
If you are tossed between enlisted or officer, the difference for you is this: Officers lead and do a lot of paperwork. Enlisted do the actual hands-on work, and don't get paid as much as officers.
Talk to a recruiter and get some info. They will generally give you straight facts until you start talking jobs and reasons you may not. Their job is to sell you on the military, so they may not always tell you everything. Most will not blatantly lie to you, but there are a few assholes out there muddying up our military.
TL;DR Listen to yourself and stick with your choice. Its the best option. | You're going to hear all kinds of different opinions. Some from people who've had bad experiences, and some from those with good ones. Don't listen to any of them. Instead, listen to what feels most right. If you're already considering it, then its probably not a terrible idea. I have been enlisted for 10 years (Air Force), and although it is not my dream job or anything, it IS stable. Depending on your job, you may (and probably will) have a lot of spare time to pursue your true passions. If you're interested in art, editorial and conceptual design, consider going into Public Affairs in the Air Force. The AFN and AF Newspapers are always looking for good candidates.
If you are tossed between enlisted or officer, the difference for you is this: Officers lead and do a lot of paperwork. Enlisted do the actual hands-on work, and don't get paid as much as officers.
Talk to a recruiter and get some info. They will generally give you straight facts until you start talking jobs and reasons you may not. Their job is to sell you on the military, so they may not always tell you everything. Most will not blatantly lie to you, but there are a few assholes out there muddying up our military.
TL;DR Listen to yourself and stick with your choice. Its the best option.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccwzy1h | You're going to hear all kinds of different opinions. Some from people who've had bad experiences, and some from those with good ones. Don't listen to any of them. Instead, listen to what feels most right. If you're already considering it, then its probably not a terrible idea. I have been enlisted for 10 years (Air Force), and although it is not my dream job or anything, it IS stable. Depending on your job, you may (and probably will) have a lot of spare time to pursue your true passions. If you're interested in art, editorial and conceptual design, consider going into Public Affairs in the Air Force. The AFN and AF Newspapers are always looking for good candidates.
If you are tossed between enlisted or officer, the difference for you is this: Officers lead and do a lot of paperwork. Enlisted do the actual hands-on work, and don't get paid as much as officers.
Talk to a recruiter and get some info. They will generally give you straight facts until you start talking jobs and reasons you may not. Their job is to sell you on the military, so they may not always tell you everything. Most will not blatantly lie to you, but there are a few assholes out there muddying up our military. | Listen to yourself and stick with your choice. Its the best option. |
savs83 | I've been playing on and off for almost 15 years. Just by myself, never in a band or anything. I had a Fender Jap Strat for almost 12 years. Then when I finally got a job and had enough money, I got a Gibson LP Studio, it was $1300 and I love it. I loved Slash and always loved that Gibson sound.
Come this past year, I really started getting back into guitar and decided I wanted a new one. I always had my eye on a PRS, but never thought I was "good enough" to own one. Like I said, I don't play in a band, or gig. So why have something so nice just for myself. Well, I looked at the SE line and I liked them alot, but as soon as I picked up the USA Custom 24, that was it, I knew I had to have one. Ended up with a 2013 custom color (Eriza Verde Green Burst) for $3k. Was it expensive, yes. Would I buy it again? Yes. I love it. It plays perfectly, the tone is incredible, its sexy as hell, etc.
It's all about what important to you and what makes you happy. It's made me play EVERY day and I just love playing it. I would never buy an expensive guitar and not play it or stick it on a wall. They're meant to be played and enjoyed.
I'm not knocking cheaper guitars by any means. You can make music on any guitar. My Fender was like, $400 when I got it back in the day and I still love playing it.
TL:DR - If you can afford a guitar that makes you happy, then buy it. It's all personal preference and we all have different ideas of what we want and can afford. | I've been playing on and off for almost 15 years. Just by myself, never in a band or anything. I had a Fender Jap Strat for almost 12 years. Then when I finally got a job and had enough money, I got a Gibson LP Studio, it was $1300 and I love it. I loved Slash and always loved that Gibson sound.
Come this past year, I really started getting back into guitar and decided I wanted a new one. I always had my eye on a PRS, but never thought I was "good enough" to own one. Like I said, I don't play in a band, or gig. So why have something so nice just for myself. Well, I looked at the SE line and I liked them alot, but as soon as I picked up the USA Custom 24, that was it, I knew I had to have one. Ended up with a 2013 custom color (Eriza Verde Green Burst) for $3k. Was it expensive, yes. Would I buy it again? Yes. I love it. It plays perfectly, the tone is incredible, its sexy as hell, etc.
It's all about what important to you and what makes you happy. It's made me play EVERY day and I just love playing it. I would never buy an expensive guitar and not play it or stick it on a wall. They're meant to be played and enjoyed.
I'm not knocking cheaper guitars by any means. You can make music on any guitar. My Fender was like, $400 when I got it back in the day and I still love playing it.
TL:DR - If you can afford a guitar that makes you happy, then buy it. It's all personal preference and we all have different ideas of what we want and can afford.
| Guitar | t5_2qi79 | ccxcrpb | I've been playing on and off for almost 15 years. Just by myself, never in a band or anything. I had a Fender Jap Strat for almost 12 years. Then when I finally got a job and had enough money, I got a Gibson LP Studio, it was $1300 and I love it. I loved Slash and always loved that Gibson sound.
Come this past year, I really started getting back into guitar and decided I wanted a new one. I always had my eye on a PRS, but never thought I was "good enough" to own one. Like I said, I don't play in a band, or gig. So why have something so nice just for myself. Well, I looked at the SE line and I liked them alot, but as soon as I picked up the USA Custom 24, that was it, I knew I had to have one. Ended up with a 2013 custom color (Eriza Verde Green Burst) for $3k. Was it expensive, yes. Would I buy it again? Yes. I love it. It plays perfectly, the tone is incredible, its sexy as hell, etc.
It's all about what important to you and what makes you happy. It's made me play EVERY day and I just love playing it. I would never buy an expensive guitar and not play it or stick it on a wall. They're meant to be played and enjoyed.
I'm not knocking cheaper guitars by any means. You can make music on any guitar. My Fender was like, $400 when I got it back in the day and I still love playing it. | If you can afford a guitar that makes you happy, then buy it. It's all personal preference and we all have different ideas of what we want and can afford. |
JudgeJBS | You (maybe not you, but others) would be amazed at how well simply not feeding uncontrollably works to win games. Maybe you got first blood at top, had a 5 cs lead, got a few items. so you decided next opportunity (maybe when you hit lvl 6) you will all in a fight. Unfortunately, you missed your q, misflashed, and dove well beyond the minion line, underestimating the dmg you would take, and lost the fight in overall embarrassing form. Then you got ganked by the enemy Rengar because your ward had died and you forgot to buy a new one.
So now you're 1-2-0 with a 10-20cs dissadvantage.
This is the point of no return for most players- good players will simply freeze lane just outside of tower and slowly catch up in cs, allowing for the jungler to make plays in your lane or other lanes, and 'stopping the bleeding'. Bad players will simply go back to lane and all in - probably losing. Then go back to lane and all in, probably losing. Then go back to lane and all in, probably losing - all the while screaming at your jungler that he doesn't gank enough despite the fact the enemy has the river constantly warded, you won't buy a pink ward, and are dead half the time anyway.
So now instead of being lets say 2-3-0 (Lets assume you got a gank from your jungler and got ganked by their jungler again) with a 20 cs advantage (from freezing lane/not fighting, just farming) at 15 minutes, you are now 2-6-0 with a 40 cs dissadvantage, making you useless in most formats.
TL;DR: Play boring if you are behind. Don't be a hero (play on tilt). Let your team (who hopefully aren't as behind as you) carry you and make the plays needed to win the game. | You (maybe not you, but others) would be amazed at how well simply not feeding uncontrollably works to win games. Maybe you got first blood at top, had a 5 cs lead, got a few items. so you decided next opportunity (maybe when you hit lvl 6) you will all in a fight. Unfortunately, you missed your q, misflashed, and dove well beyond the minion line, underestimating the dmg you would take, and lost the fight in overall embarrassing form. Then you got ganked by the enemy Rengar because your ward had died and you forgot to buy a new one.
So now you're 1-2-0 with a 10-20cs dissadvantage.
This is the point of no return for most players- good players will simply freeze lane just outside of tower and slowly catch up in cs, allowing for the jungler to make plays in your lane or other lanes, and 'stopping the bleeding'. Bad players will simply go back to lane and all in - probably losing. Then go back to lane and all in, probably losing. Then go back to lane and all in, probably losing - all the while screaming at your jungler that he doesn't gank enough despite the fact the enemy has the river constantly warded, you won't buy a pink ward, and are dead half the time anyway.
So now instead of being lets say 2-3-0 (Lets assume you got a gank from your jungler and got ganked by their jungler again) with a 20 cs advantage (from freezing lane/not fighting, just farming) at 15 minutes, you are now 2-6-0 with a 40 cs dissadvantage, making you useless in most formats.
TL;DR: Play boring if you are behind. Don't be a hero (play on tilt). Let your team (who hopefully aren't as behind as you) carry you and make the plays needed to win the game.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ccx63zp | You (maybe not you, but others) would be amazed at how well simply not feeding uncontrollably works to win games. Maybe you got first blood at top, had a 5 cs lead, got a few items. so you decided next opportunity (maybe when you hit lvl 6) you will all in a fight. Unfortunately, you missed your q, misflashed, and dove well beyond the minion line, underestimating the dmg you would take, and lost the fight in overall embarrassing form. Then you got ganked by the enemy Rengar because your ward had died and you forgot to buy a new one.
So now you're 1-2-0 with a 10-20cs dissadvantage.
This is the point of no return for most players- good players will simply freeze lane just outside of tower and slowly catch up in cs, allowing for the jungler to make plays in your lane or other lanes, and 'stopping the bleeding'. Bad players will simply go back to lane and all in - probably losing. Then go back to lane and all in, probably losing. Then go back to lane and all in, probably losing - all the while screaming at your jungler that he doesn't gank enough despite the fact the enemy has the river constantly warded, you won't buy a pink ward, and are dead half the time anyway.
So now instead of being lets say 2-3-0 (Lets assume you got a gank from your jungler and got ganked by their jungler again) with a 20 cs advantage (from freezing lane/not fighting, just farming) at 15 minutes, you are now 2-6-0 with a 40 cs dissadvantage, making you useless in most formats. | Play boring if you are behind. Don't be a hero (play on tilt). Let your team (who hopefully aren't as behind as you) carry you and make the plays needed to win the game. |
dridrione | This should take more space and time than a single comment. And it is a good idea. Maybe I'll do a post about it tomorow.
To make it short : if you win toplane. Stay toplane and drag their jungler. make sur your team makes usefull things while jungler is top
if you are botlane : transition to midlane after tower is dead. Kill tower. transition to next tower. and keep on staying grouped.
if you are mid : Roam with your jungler to force teamfights and get towers.
if you are jungler : gank a lot, keep farming your jungle. force dives (but dont die) and get towers asap.
TLDR : when you are ahead get objectives. | This should take more space and time than a single comment. And it is a good idea. Maybe I'll do a post about it tomorow.
To make it short : if you win toplane. Stay toplane and drag their jungler. make sur your team makes usefull things while jungler is top
if you are botlane : transition to midlane after tower is dead. Kill tower. transition to next tower. and keep on staying grouped.
if you are mid : Roam with your jungler to force teamfights and get towers.
if you are jungler : gank a lot, keep farming your jungle. force dives (but dont die) and get towers asap.
TLDR : when you are ahead get objectives.
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ccxfn2r | This should take more space and time than a single comment. And it is a good idea. Maybe I'll do a post about it tomorow.
To make it short : if you win toplane. Stay toplane and drag their jungler. make sur your team makes usefull things while jungler is top
if you are botlane : transition to midlane after tower is dead. Kill tower. transition to next tower. and keep on staying grouped.
if you are mid : Roam with your jungler to force teamfights and get towers.
if you are jungler : gank a lot, keep farming your jungle. force dives (but dont die) and get towers asap. | when you are ahead get objectives. |
dridrione | Happy you red all the way to my TLDR :D | Happy you red all the way to my TLDR :D
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ccx3jkj | Happy you red all the way to my | D |
LordSmooze9 | Iron them out, as in smooth out the wrinkles. TL;DR iron out = correct | Iron them out, as in smooth out the wrinkles. TL;DR iron out = correct
| leagueoflegends | t5_2rfxx | ccxqnqq | Iron them out, as in smooth out the wrinkles. | iron out = correct |
tyronelamisters | Did some quick stats: take away the rushing attempts and yards in the fourth quarter against the Giants defense when they are playing with a 9 point (2 score) deficit: 3.52 yards per carry. Remove the same type of attempts and yards during the entirety of the second half: 3.17 yards per carry.
Tl;Dr - The Giants defense isn't padding their rush defense stats because teams are trying to run the clock on them in the fourth quarter or second half. | Did some quick stats: take away the rushing attempts and yards in the fourth quarter against the Giants defense when they are playing with a 9 point (2 score) deficit: 3.52 yards per carry. Remove the same type of attempts and yards during the entirety of the second half: 3.17 yards per carry.
Tl;Dr - The Giants defense isn't padding their rush defense stats because teams are trying to run the clock on them in the fourth quarter or second half.
| nfl | t5_2qmg3 | ccx8wxq | Did some quick stats: take away the rushing attempts and yards in the fourth quarter against the Giants defense when they are playing with a 9 point (2 score) deficit: 3.52 yards per carry. Remove the same type of attempts and yards during the entirety of the second half: 3.17 yards per carry. | The Giants defense isn't padding their rush defense stats because teams are trying to run the clock on them in the fourth quarter or second half. |
MackaBizzle | Yeah I'd say I've had a similar sort of thing to this, I was on and off for a couple of weeks to a month for my first manic episode, which then ended in crashing down into depression
>my mind might still race, I might still have insomnia and I'll still fixate on things like I do when manic
Definitely this for the bits where I wasn't quite as manic. Still having large amounts of unrealistic thoughts etc.
TL;DR: Yes
Edit:taking the last two lines out of the quote | Yeah I'd say I've had a similar sort of thing to this, I was on and off for a couple of weeks to a month for my first manic episode, which then ended in crashing down into depression
>my mind might still race, I might still have insomnia and I'll still fixate on things like I do when manic
Definitely this for the bits where I wasn't quite as manic. Still having large amounts of unrealistic thoughts etc.
TL;DR: Yes
Edit:taking the last two lines out of the quote
| bipolar | t5_2qnv4 | ccxiyst | Yeah I'd say I've had a similar sort of thing to this, I was on and off for a couple of weeks to a month for my first manic episode, which then ended in crashing down into depression
>my mind might still race, I might still have insomnia and I'll still fixate on things like I do when manic
Definitely this for the bits where I wasn't quite as manic. Still having large amounts of unrealistic thoughts etc. | Yes
Edit:taking the last two lines out of the quote |
bkay17 | Man there's a lot of hate in this thread.
Yeah so Laney left, she might regret it later but whatever, it was her decision and I assume she's been a bit upset ever since Alana left.
As for Miranda, yeah she did a shit job this week, but they already have a set schedule for TV. They're not going to kick her off after Laney had already left. I'm amazed how many people in here are using this as a way to prove that the judges have some huge sense of favoritism towards her. They might seem to be impressed by her work a lot, but that's probably because a lot of it has been REALLY REALLY GOOD. I don't think the judges would've had any problem booting Miranda had Laney stayed and put out something better. I just don't see the supposed 'bias' from the judges, or at least not when it comes to kicking people off for shitty makeups.
That being said, I think I'm in the same boat as most everybody else on here in that the final I want is Laura, Tate, and Roy, but I also think Roy might have a hard time beating Miranda next week if she puts out one of her good makeups.
TL;DR - Stop hating on everybody and just enjoy the show, guys. | Man there's a lot of hate in this thread.
Yeah so Laney left, she might regret it later but whatever, it was her decision and I assume she's been a bit upset ever since Alana left.
As for Miranda, yeah she did a shit job this week, but they already have a set schedule for TV. They're not going to kick her off after Laney had already left. I'm amazed how many people in here are using this as a way to prove that the judges have some huge sense of favoritism towards her. They might seem to be impressed by her work a lot, but that's probably because a lot of it has been REALLY REALLY GOOD. I don't think the judges would've had any problem booting Miranda had Laney stayed and put out something better. I just don't see the supposed 'bias' from the judges, or at least not when it comes to kicking people off for shitty makeups.
That being said, I think I'm in the same boat as most everybody else on here in that the final I want is Laura, Tate, and Roy, but I also think Roy might have a hard time beating Miranda next week if she puts out one of her good makeups.
TL;DR - Stop hating on everybody and just enjoy the show, guys.
| faceoff | t5_2qymq | ccyae0u | Man there's a lot of hate in this thread.
Yeah so Laney left, she might regret it later but whatever, it was her decision and I assume she's been a bit upset ever since Alana left.
As for Miranda, yeah she did a shit job this week, but they already have a set schedule for TV. They're not going to kick her off after Laney had already left. I'm amazed how many people in here are using this as a way to prove that the judges have some huge sense of favoritism towards her. They might seem to be impressed by her work a lot, but that's probably because a lot of it has been REALLY REALLY GOOD. I don't think the judges would've had any problem booting Miranda had Laney stayed and put out something better. I just don't see the supposed 'bias' from the judges, or at least not when it comes to kicking people off for shitty makeups.
That being said, I think I'm in the same boat as most everybody else on here in that the final I want is Laura, Tate, and Roy, but I also think Roy might have a hard time beating Miranda next week if she puts out one of her good makeups. | Stop hating on everybody and just enjoy the show, guys. |
IntoTheLeaf | *Sorry about the long response.* [0]
The fact that your room was ~73 degrees surprises me, but this has happened to me before. I was very cold for some reason, and looking around at my frients in the circle, no one else was cold, seemingly at all. The shivers got me pretty bad and it was constant. Like you, I could focus on it and make it disappear momentarily, but whenever I laughed I would feel almost a jolt and start shivering again. I would also *congest* my body so to speak to make it stop. (shoulders and legs together) With this occurrence, I would just point out that senses are heightened when we get high, and that maybe my body's temperature was low at the time. (To me, this is what I really think happened to you.)
*Buuut,* there have also been times when I've found myself shaking just in the hands, almost like I'd just had a bunch of soda or energy shots. I would feel overly-excited, but it would be kind of nerve-wracking around others that don't know I'm high, because my heart would be pounding like the cops at my door every weekend. (wut) And my hands would shake a lot. But this fits the description of being overly-anxious. No particular reason, but if I was anxious prior to smoking, then smoking just enhanced it. (Just want to point out that anxiety attacks are different, and *much* less serious, than panic attacks, and anxiety is natural. I honestly don't think you had a panic attack or seizure whatsoever.)
**TL;DR** - From my own experiences, my best guess would either be: 1-Low body temperature; 2-Small anxiety attack. | Sorry about the long response. [0]
The fact that your room was ~73 degrees surprises me, but this has happened to me before. I was very cold for some reason, and looking around at my frients in the circle, no one else was cold, seemingly at all. The shivers got me pretty bad and it was constant. Like you, I could focus on it and make it disappear momentarily, but whenever I laughed I would feel almost a jolt and start shivering again. I would also congest my body so to speak to make it stop. (shoulders and legs together) With this occurrence, I would just point out that senses are heightened when we get high, and that maybe my body's temperature was low at the time. (To me, this is what I really think happened to you.)
Buuut, there have also been times when I've found myself shaking just in the hands, almost like I'd just had a bunch of soda or energy shots. I would feel overly-excited, but it would be kind of nerve-wracking around others that don't know I'm high, because my heart would be pounding like the cops at my door every weekend. (wut) And my hands would shake a lot. But this fits the description of being overly-anxious. No particular reason, but if I was anxious prior to smoking, then smoking just enhanced it. (Just want to point out that anxiety attacks are different, and much less serious, than panic attacks, and anxiety is natural. I honestly don't think you had a panic attack or seizure whatsoever.)
TL;DR - From my own experiences, my best guess would either be: 1-Low body temperature; 2-Small anxiety attack.
| trees | t5_2r9vp | ccxngur | Sorry about the long response. [0]
The fact that your room was ~73 degrees surprises me, but this has happened to me before. I was very cold for some reason, and looking around at my frients in the circle, no one else was cold, seemingly at all. The shivers got me pretty bad and it was constant. Like you, I could focus on it and make it disappear momentarily, but whenever I laughed I would feel almost a jolt and start shivering again. I would also congest my body so to speak to make it stop. (shoulders and legs together) With this occurrence, I would just point out that senses are heightened when we get high, and that maybe my body's temperature was low at the time. (To me, this is what I really think happened to you.)
Buuut, there have also been times when I've found myself shaking just in the hands, almost like I'd just had a bunch of soda or energy shots. I would feel overly-excited, but it would be kind of nerve-wracking around others that don't know I'm high, because my heart would be pounding like the cops at my door every weekend. (wut) And my hands would shake a lot. But this fits the description of being overly-anxious. No particular reason, but if I was anxious prior to smoking, then smoking just enhanced it. (Just want to point out that anxiety attacks are different, and much less serious, than panic attacks, and anxiety is natural. I honestly don't think you had a panic attack or seizure whatsoever.) | From my own experiences, my best guess would either be: 1-Low body temperature; 2-Small anxiety attack. |
Falterfire | I'm not sure this is a question that can be reasonably answered by anybody since it requires you to make a number of huge assumptions:
* What qualifies as 'good'?
* What qualifies as 'harm'?
* How do you determine if it was done *by* a religion? Does it count if Religion is being used as an excuse to accomplish goals which aren't necessarily religious?
* How do you balance harm against religion?
It would be exceedingly difficult to figure out so much as a list of what was *done* by religion. Sorting it into harm and good and then comparing the two are equally difficult tasks which would also need to be undertaken.
The better question is: Does it *matter*? Most Christians aren't Christian because they think a Christian community produces 3.6% more charitable donations than a secular one, they're Christian because they hold as true some variation on the statement "There is a God who had a son named Jesus Christ who sacrificed himself for the sake of humanity."
The total amount of good done by any person or group is totally irrelevant to whether that key statement is true. If good is done, but God and Jesus aren't real, you may as well strip away those unnecessary bits and just reduce Christianity to a Charity-and-Social-Wellbeing organization and stop wasting money on buying Bibles and maintaining fancy crosses and the like.
**tl;dr**: Why does it matter? | I'm not sure this is a question that can be reasonably answered by anybody since it requires you to make a number of huge assumptions:
What qualifies as 'good'?
What qualifies as 'harm'?
How do you determine if it was done by a religion? Does it count if Religion is being used as an excuse to accomplish goals which aren't necessarily religious?
How do you balance harm against religion?
It would be exceedingly difficult to figure out so much as a list of what was done by religion. Sorting it into harm and good and then comparing the two are equally difficult tasks which would also need to be undertaken.
The better question is: Does it matter ? Most Christians aren't Christian because they think a Christian community produces 3.6% more charitable donations than a secular one, they're Christian because they hold as true some variation on the statement "There is a God who had a son named Jesus Christ who sacrificed himself for the sake of humanity."
The total amount of good done by any person or group is totally irrelevant to whether that key statement is true. If good is done, but God and Jesus aren't real, you may as well strip away those unnecessary bits and just reduce Christianity to a Charity-and-Social-Wellbeing organization and stop wasting money on buying Bibles and maintaining fancy crosses and the like.
tl;dr : Why does it matter?
| TrueAtheism | t5_2soy6 | ccxx3p4 | I'm not sure this is a question that can be reasonably answered by anybody since it requires you to make a number of huge assumptions:
What qualifies as 'good'?
What qualifies as 'harm'?
How do you determine if it was done by a religion? Does it count if Religion is being used as an excuse to accomplish goals which aren't necessarily religious?
How do you balance harm against religion?
It would be exceedingly difficult to figure out so much as a list of what was done by religion. Sorting it into harm and good and then comparing the two are equally difficult tasks which would also need to be undertaken.
The better question is: Does it matter ? Most Christians aren't Christian because they think a Christian community produces 3.6% more charitable donations than a secular one, they're Christian because they hold as true some variation on the statement "There is a God who had a son named Jesus Christ who sacrificed himself for the sake of humanity."
The total amount of good done by any person or group is totally irrelevant to whether that key statement is true. If good is done, but God and Jesus aren't real, you may as well strip away those unnecessary bits and just reduce Christianity to a Charity-and-Social-Wellbeing organization and stop wasting money on buying Bibles and maintaining fancy crosses and the like. | Why does it matter? |
ratatatar | Questions like these never seem to have an objective way to answer them. When that happens, I re-evaluate the structure of the question. To me, religion isn't an external uncaused entity, it's a result. It's not the cause of evil, it's the result of human development. Religion fit a very important spot in the development of societies and culture and a sense of both individualism and community. That's been vital in our survival as a species and thus has been preserved. Sadly, like most adaptations or mutations, it comes with consequences.
Maybe I'm starting to sound kooky at this point, but I personally believe we need to start engineering our beliefs with goals in mind where it's pretty clear the development of religions up to this point have been divergent (on a global level, convergent for a given environment), and reactive. Not the sign of omnipotent foresight... but maybe of something else...
**TL;DR natural selection may also apply to ideas and beliefs.** | Questions like these never seem to have an objective way to answer them. When that happens, I re-evaluate the structure of the question. To me, religion isn't an external uncaused entity, it's a result. It's not the cause of evil, it's the result of human development. Religion fit a very important spot in the development of societies and culture and a sense of both individualism and community. That's been vital in our survival as a species and thus has been preserved. Sadly, like most adaptations or mutations, it comes with consequences.
Maybe I'm starting to sound kooky at this point, but I personally believe we need to start engineering our beliefs with goals in mind where it's pretty clear the development of religions up to this point have been divergent (on a global level, convergent for a given environment), and reactive. Not the sign of omnipotent foresight... but maybe of something else...
TL;DR natural selection may also apply to ideas and beliefs.
| TrueAtheism | t5_2soy6 | ccy7s0u | Questions like these never seem to have an objective way to answer them. When that happens, I re-evaluate the structure of the question. To me, religion isn't an external uncaused entity, it's a result. It's not the cause of evil, it's the result of human development. Religion fit a very important spot in the development of societies and culture and a sense of both individualism and community. That's been vital in our survival as a species and thus has been preserved. Sadly, like most adaptations or mutations, it comes with consequences.
Maybe I'm starting to sound kooky at this point, but I personally believe we need to start engineering our beliefs with goals in mind where it's pretty clear the development of religions up to this point have been divergent (on a global level, convergent for a given environment), and reactive. Not the sign of omnipotent foresight... but maybe of something else... | natural selection may also apply to ideas and beliefs. |
JustinRaeGu | its complicated you see. this dawgie dog, my good frined, that is to say, 'terran it up' is just trying to contribute to the community in the best way he knows how and thats to make lots of reddit posts to prove the new populariest game is SC2. netizens will walk bye our reddit and see hundreds if not thousands of posts. then they will be like deyum son i want a reddit with that many posts and stuff lewlzerrolf then they will start to go on sc2 reddit even though they dont play the game!!! finally they will make enough posts about ladder anxiety and then they will get blizzard to open 'search for match no homo' option.
tl;dr this guys double post saved SCII. gg no re | its complicated you see. this dawgie dog, my good frined, that is to say, 'terran it up' is just trying to contribute to the community in the best way he knows how and thats to make lots of reddit posts to prove the new populariest game is SC2. netizens will walk bye our reddit and see hundreds if not thousands of posts. then they will be like deyum son i want a reddit with that many posts and stuff lewlzerrolf then they will start to go on sc2 reddit even though they dont play the game!!! finally they will make enough posts about ladder anxiety and then they will get blizzard to open 'search for match no homo' option.
tl;dr this guys double post saved SCII. gg no re
| starcraft | t5_2qpp6 | ccyf2u4 | its complicated you see. this dawgie dog, my good frined, that is to say, 'terran it up' is just trying to contribute to the community in the best way he knows how and thats to make lots of reddit posts to prove the new populariest game is SC2. netizens will walk bye our reddit and see hundreds if not thousands of posts. then they will be like deyum son i want a reddit with that many posts and stuff lewlzerrolf then they will start to go on sc2 reddit even though they dont play the game!!! finally they will make enough posts about ladder anxiety and then they will get blizzard to open 'search for match no homo' option. | this guys double post saved SCII. gg no re |
TheAsianNation | Perfect way of putting it. While playing, I had the idea that the ending would be predictable but still good. However, during the last few moments of the game (parking lot and onward) I was sort of confused and anxious, thinking: "Wait... what? What's going on?" I *really* wanted to know what was happening. Then, when that last line was said, I fully understood what had just happened and my emotions were so conflicted. I didn't know what to think of "the character" anymore. (Tried my best not to spoil the game)
TL;DR: The game took my emotions and stepped all over them. | Perfect way of putting it. While playing, I had the idea that the ending would be predictable but still good. However, during the last few moments of the game (parking lot and onward) I was sort of confused and anxious, thinking: "Wait... what? What's going on?" I really wanted to know what was happening. Then, when that last line was said, I fully understood what had just happened and my emotions were so conflicted. I didn't know what to think of "the character" anymore. (Tried my best not to spoil the game)
TL;DR: The game took my emotions and stepped all over them.
| AskReddit | t5_2qh1i | ccyfc55 | Perfect way of putting it. While playing, I had the idea that the ending would be predictable but still good. However, during the last few moments of the game (parking lot and onward) I was sort of confused and anxious, thinking: "Wait... what? What's going on?" I really wanted to know what was happening. Then, when that last line was said, I fully understood what had just happened and my emotions were so conflicted. I didn't know what to think of "the character" anymore. (Tried my best not to spoil the game) | The game took my emotions and stepped all over them. |
USCswimmer | I went to a race in Vegas once when I lived there, worst experience of my life... partially my fault, and partially the tracks fault, let me tell you about it:
First off, it was a noon race which is absolutely terrible, and I went with 3 first timers (my buddy and two smokin hot girls that were strippers and I happened to know). ANYWAYS, I want to get some tailgating in, so I say we need to get a move on about 6am. Of course nobody is ready, and we hit race traffic around 9am... we sit in this race traffic for no joke around 4 hours, and miss the first portion of the race.
So finally after parking and going to the track lugging along our coolers, we get to the gate and there is the evil sign "NO COOLERS OR OUTSIDE FOOD/BEVERAGE ALLOWED". Fuck that, I go into panic mode because we have two coolers with 24 beers each and we didn't tailgate and I didn't have much money to spend inside (and I know these girls would like to be 'treated').
So my buddy takes the coolers back to the car and we get inside and go to our seats which actually are not bad. The race was green flag the entire remainder (about 1 hour), which I enjoy but obviously first timers hated. The girls enjoyed themselves because you know, they had on their daisy dukes and big fake boobs and blonde hair and got attention from all the fans. Race ends with a whimper and we are all sober and all they want to do is leave.
Now I'm the kind of guy that won't fight traffic, but these girls were ready to fucking leave instantly. I kept trying to say we wouldn't go anywhere due to traffic if we left now, but they insisted... so Into the car they piled and I decided fuck this I'm going to tailgate (because I have tons of booze and food due to no pre race tailgate AND no coolers inside).
So the three of them get in the car that is moving about 5 feet every 20 minutes, and I'm outside the car chillin in a lawn chair watching their misery while drinking a cold beer (or 20) and munching down on my snack trays.
tldr; worst track experience ever. | I went to a race in Vegas once when I lived there, worst experience of my life... partially my fault, and partially the tracks fault, let me tell you about it:
First off, it was a noon race which is absolutely terrible, and I went with 3 first timers (my buddy and two smokin hot girls that were strippers and I happened to know). ANYWAYS, I want to get some tailgating in, so I say we need to get a move on about 6am. Of course nobody is ready, and we hit race traffic around 9am... we sit in this race traffic for no joke around 4 hours, and miss the first portion of the race.
So finally after parking and going to the track lugging along our coolers, we get to the gate and there is the evil sign "NO COOLERS OR OUTSIDE FOOD/BEVERAGE ALLOWED". Fuck that, I go into panic mode because we have two coolers with 24 beers each and we didn't tailgate and I didn't have much money to spend inside (and I know these girls would like to be 'treated').
So my buddy takes the coolers back to the car and we get inside and go to our seats which actually are not bad. The race was green flag the entire remainder (about 1 hour), which I enjoy but obviously first timers hated. The girls enjoyed themselves because you know, they had on their daisy dukes and big fake boobs and blonde hair and got attention from all the fans. Race ends with a whimper and we are all sober and all they want to do is leave.
Now I'm the kind of guy that won't fight traffic, but these girls were ready to fucking leave instantly. I kept trying to say we wouldn't go anywhere due to traffic if we left now, but they insisted... so Into the car they piled and I decided fuck this I'm going to tailgate (because I have tons of booze and food due to no pre race tailgate AND no coolers inside).
So the three of them get in the car that is moving about 5 feet every 20 minutes, and I'm outside the car chillin in a lawn chair watching their misery while drinking a cold beer (or 20) and munching down on my snack trays.
tldr; worst track experience ever.
| NASCAR | t5_2qs08 | ccylc9q | I went to a race in Vegas once when I lived there, worst experience of my life... partially my fault, and partially the tracks fault, let me tell you about it:
First off, it was a noon race which is absolutely terrible, and I went with 3 first timers (my buddy and two smokin hot girls that were strippers and I happened to know). ANYWAYS, I want to get some tailgating in, so I say we need to get a move on about 6am. Of course nobody is ready, and we hit race traffic around 9am... we sit in this race traffic for no joke around 4 hours, and miss the first portion of the race.
So finally after parking and going to the track lugging along our coolers, we get to the gate and there is the evil sign "NO COOLERS OR OUTSIDE FOOD/BEVERAGE ALLOWED". Fuck that, I go into panic mode because we have two coolers with 24 beers each and we didn't tailgate and I didn't have much money to spend inside (and I know these girls would like to be 'treated').
So my buddy takes the coolers back to the car and we get inside and go to our seats which actually are not bad. The race was green flag the entire remainder (about 1 hour), which I enjoy but obviously first timers hated. The girls enjoyed themselves because you know, they had on their daisy dukes and big fake boobs and blonde hair and got attention from all the fans. Race ends with a whimper and we are all sober and all they want to do is leave.
Now I'm the kind of guy that won't fight traffic, but these girls were ready to fucking leave instantly. I kept trying to say we wouldn't go anywhere due to traffic if we left now, but they insisted... so Into the car they piled and I decided fuck this I'm going to tailgate (because I have tons of booze and food due to no pre race tailgate AND no coolers inside).
So the three of them get in the car that is moving about 5 feet every 20 minutes, and I'm outside the car chillin in a lawn chair watching their misery while drinking a cold beer (or 20) and munching down on my snack trays. | worst track experience ever. |
CatLord8 | In all fairness, to me this destroys the point of a heterogeneous group. No matter how many (or few sometimes) fighters there are, combat is usually played out to the bitter end. Why? Because it really only takes time and not a lot of work. However, when you have people who want to play diplomats, and their shining glorious moment is "Roll diplomacy. Okay do it again. It's done, next scene." is extremely disappointing because they have to sit through the rest of the game, especially the hour long fight scene that they can't contribute to. That said, having played the infiltrator in many a game, I've learned that the only real time I got to do it was dungeon crawling because I could describe what I did to look for traps. Otherwise it's the same "Stealth v Perception, now off to what's happening with everyone else while you were sneaking". All those points and playing your desired roll is a total of five minutes in a four hour session.
TL;DR So it's a good method for unimportant stuff but it can't just fall to the wayside for a concept. | In all fairness, to me this destroys the point of a heterogeneous group. No matter how many (or few sometimes) fighters there are, combat is usually played out to the bitter end. Why? Because it really only takes time and not a lot of work. However, when you have people who want to play diplomats, and their shining glorious moment is "Roll diplomacy. Okay do it again. It's done, next scene." is extremely disappointing because they have to sit through the rest of the game, especially the hour long fight scene that they can't contribute to. That said, having played the infiltrator in many a game, I've learned that the only real time I got to do it was dungeon crawling because I could describe what I did to look for traps. Otherwise it's the same "Stealth v Perception, now off to what's happening with everyone else while you were sneaking". All those points and playing your desired roll is a total of five minutes in a four hour session.
TL;DR So it's a good method for unimportant stuff but it can't just fall to the wayside for a concept.
| rpg | t5_2qh2s | cczg6iz | In all fairness, to me this destroys the point of a heterogeneous group. No matter how many (or few sometimes) fighters there are, combat is usually played out to the bitter end. Why? Because it really only takes time and not a lot of work. However, when you have people who want to play diplomats, and their shining glorious moment is "Roll diplomacy. Okay do it again. It's done, next scene." is extremely disappointing because they have to sit through the rest of the game, especially the hour long fight scene that they can't contribute to. That said, having played the infiltrator in many a game, I've learned that the only real time I got to do it was dungeon crawling because I could describe what I did to look for traps. Otherwise it's the same "Stealth v Perception, now off to what's happening with everyone else while you were sneaking". All those points and playing your desired roll is a total of five minutes in a four hour session. | So it's a good method for unimportant stuff but it can't just fall to the wayside for a concept. |
thedinnerman | Also, if you liked Freddie Hubbard, you may like Lee Morgan. I would highly recommend his album The Cooker as well as all of his recordings with Art Blakey and the Messengers (especially A Night In Tunisia and Moanin').
Freddie Hubbard falls in line with a few trumpet players that follow in sequential order of how people were influenced. For example, Dizzy Gillespie was really checking out Louis Armstrong when he created the bop trumpet sound, Clifford Brown was listening to Dizzy Gillespie when he became one of the most admired trumpet tones/vocabulary wizards of Jazz, Lee Morgan knew Clifford's style and tone inside and out and created his own voice, and Freddie Hubbard developed Lee's vocabulary, utilizing his ridiculously fantastic chops. Everyone was listening to their peers that were just a bit older than them and absorbing their ideas.
**TL;DR - Trumpet players are awesome. Listen to all of them.** | Also, if you liked Freddie Hubbard, you may like Lee Morgan. I would highly recommend his album The Cooker as well as all of his recordings with Art Blakey and the Messengers (especially A Night In Tunisia and Moanin').
Freddie Hubbard falls in line with a few trumpet players that follow in sequential order of how people were influenced. For example, Dizzy Gillespie was really checking out Louis Armstrong when he created the bop trumpet sound, Clifford Brown was listening to Dizzy Gillespie when he became one of the most admired trumpet tones/vocabulary wizards of Jazz, Lee Morgan knew Clifford's style and tone inside and out and created his own voice, and Freddie Hubbard developed Lee's vocabulary, utilizing his ridiculously fantastic chops. Everyone was listening to their peers that were just a bit older than them and absorbing their ideas.
TL;DR - Trumpet players are awesome. Listen to all of them.
| LetsTalkMusic | t5_2t4it | ccz0vsg | Also, if you liked Freddie Hubbard, you may like Lee Morgan. I would highly recommend his album The Cooker as well as all of his recordings with Art Blakey and the Messengers (especially A Night In Tunisia and Moanin').
Freddie Hubbard falls in line with a few trumpet players that follow in sequential order of how people were influenced. For example, Dizzy Gillespie was really checking out Louis Armstrong when he created the bop trumpet sound, Clifford Brown was listening to Dizzy Gillespie when he became one of the most admired trumpet tones/vocabulary wizards of Jazz, Lee Morgan knew Clifford's style and tone inside and out and created his own voice, and Freddie Hubbard developed Lee's vocabulary, utilizing his ridiculously fantastic chops. Everyone was listening to their peers that were just a bit older than them and absorbing their ideas. | Trumpet players are awesome. Listen to all of them. |
dadeho618 | One night, my brother, cousin, a couple friends and I (all around 12 years old) were out walking around the block. We were just strolling along and shooting the shit as we walked passed a set of apartments. We heard some banging and looked behind us, to see my cousin had dragged back, and started banging on someone's door.
We all hauled ass. We were about halfway around the block, when we stopped. All of a sudden, out of the dark, came a tall skinny black guy, running like Usain Bolt, and he had a pistol in his hand. After we shit ourselves, we quickly put full blame on my cousin.
The guy said someone had recently broken into his car, and when he heard all the commotion outside, he grabbed his gun and came looking.
Could have gone down much worse, I guess.
Did't stop us though. A year or two later we got creative. After christmas, we scoured the neighborhood curbs for thrownout "live" christmas trees. We would drag the tree on someone's porch, put it against the front door, and ring the bell. When the homeowner opened the door, the tree fell in on them.
Alternately, we would tie a tree to the pizza delivery guy's bumper with a good 50-60 foot of yarn/string. Something to get enough distance, that he didn't realize he was dragging it right away.
TLDR: Shit we did in the 80's. | One night, my brother, cousin, a couple friends and I (all around 12 years old) were out walking around the block. We were just strolling along and shooting the shit as we walked passed a set of apartments. We heard some banging and looked behind us, to see my cousin had dragged back, and started banging on someone's door.
We all hauled ass. We were about halfway around the block, when we stopped. All of a sudden, out of the dark, came a tall skinny black guy, running like Usain Bolt, and he had a pistol in his hand. After we shit ourselves, we quickly put full blame on my cousin.
The guy said someone had recently broken into his car, and when he heard all the commotion outside, he grabbed his gun and came looking.
Could have gone down much worse, I guess.
Did't stop us though. A year or two later we got creative. After christmas, we scoured the neighborhood curbs for thrownout "live" christmas trees. We would drag the tree on someone's porch, put it against the front door, and ring the bell. When the homeowner opened the door, the tree fell in on them.
Alternately, we would tie a tree to the pizza delivery guy's bumper with a good 50-60 foot of yarn/string. Something to get enough distance, that he didn't realize he was dragging it right away.
TLDR: Shit we did in the 80's.
| funny | t5_2qh33 | ccz32ov | One night, my brother, cousin, a couple friends and I (all around 12 years old) were out walking around the block. We were just strolling along and shooting the shit as we walked passed a set of apartments. We heard some banging and looked behind us, to see my cousin had dragged back, and started banging on someone's door.
We all hauled ass. We were about halfway around the block, when we stopped. All of a sudden, out of the dark, came a tall skinny black guy, running like Usain Bolt, and he had a pistol in his hand. After we shit ourselves, we quickly put full blame on my cousin.
The guy said someone had recently broken into his car, and when he heard all the commotion outside, he grabbed his gun and came looking.
Could have gone down much worse, I guess.
Did't stop us though. A year or two later we got creative. After christmas, we scoured the neighborhood curbs for thrownout "live" christmas trees. We would drag the tree on someone's porch, put it against the front door, and ring the bell. When the homeowner opened the door, the tree fell in on them.
Alternately, we would tie a tree to the pizza delivery guy's bumper with a good 50-60 foot of yarn/string. Something to get enough distance, that he didn't realize he was dragging it right away. | Shit we did in the 80's. |
Syncs | Alright...as an Aikido practitioner myself I feel like I should weigh in on this. My school gets lots of people from various martial arts who feel the same way you do, that the attacks required are useless and unrealistic, and they are right. I do Tae Kwon Do as well, and there is no way in hell I would ever throw an Aikido "attack" at someone in any kind of real fight. BUT that is kind of the point. Aikido, at least for beginners, is kind of esoteric. Nothing makes sense, attacks are weak and contrived, but we do this so that we don't actually hurt one another when doing the attack over and over. There has been more than one occasion where I have attacked and chopped my partner in the neck because they were not ready or screwed up the technique. Because it was slow, and contrived, the only thing that I hurt was their pride. If you just jump in, lots of people (especially trained fighters) will act or react in a way that hurts other members. There are no pads that I know of that keep wrist locks and joint attacks from working, and any extra force on the part of the thrower can easily break an arm. So too much all at once, and people don't ever have a chance to learn.
But then, you have people at the upper end of Aikido. Those tiny little men who look about as much a martial artist as my local grocer. And they can take anything. Even the most balanced punch has some form of momentum, and they can capitalize on that. But, if they got injured their first week, they never get a chance to learn. It is kind of like using Shinai rather than Bokken or a real sword in beginning sword classes, you have to start low before you can go anywhere (and Aikido has been dubbed "the 30 year martial art" by a lot of people, so there is a lot of climbing involved).
Until you reach the peak, it is mostly clumsy, contrived, and useless attacks only good against drunk people or untrained fighters, or those who flat do not expect it. So yeah, unless you want to work for a long time on something that won't be useful for years, don't do Aikido.
TL;DR: Weak attacks are like Shinai, good ones are Katanas. | Alright...as an Aikido practitioner myself I feel like I should weigh in on this. My school gets lots of people from various martial arts who feel the same way you do, that the attacks required are useless and unrealistic, and they are right. I do Tae Kwon Do as well, and there is no way in hell I would ever throw an Aikido "attack" at someone in any kind of real fight. BUT that is kind of the point. Aikido, at least for beginners, is kind of esoteric. Nothing makes sense, attacks are weak and contrived, but we do this so that we don't actually hurt one another when doing the attack over and over. There has been more than one occasion where I have attacked and chopped my partner in the neck because they were not ready or screwed up the technique. Because it was slow, and contrived, the only thing that I hurt was their pride. If you just jump in, lots of people (especially trained fighters) will act or react in a way that hurts other members. There are no pads that I know of that keep wrist locks and joint attacks from working, and any extra force on the part of the thrower can easily break an arm. So too much all at once, and people don't ever have a chance to learn.
But then, you have people at the upper end of Aikido. Those tiny little men who look about as much a martial artist as my local grocer. And they can take anything. Even the most balanced punch has some form of momentum, and they can capitalize on that. But, if they got injured their first week, they never get a chance to learn. It is kind of like using Shinai rather than Bokken or a real sword in beginning sword classes, you have to start low before you can go anywhere (and Aikido has been dubbed "the 30 year martial art" by a lot of people, so there is a lot of climbing involved).
Until you reach the peak, it is mostly clumsy, contrived, and useless attacks only good against drunk people or untrained fighters, or those who flat do not expect it. So yeah, unless you want to work for a long time on something that won't be useful for years, don't do Aikido.
TL;DR: Weak attacks are like Shinai, good ones are Katanas.
| aikido | t5_2qhwn | cczdysg | Alright...as an Aikido practitioner myself I feel like I should weigh in on this. My school gets lots of people from various martial arts who feel the same way you do, that the attacks required are useless and unrealistic, and they are right. I do Tae Kwon Do as well, and there is no way in hell I would ever throw an Aikido "attack" at someone in any kind of real fight. BUT that is kind of the point. Aikido, at least for beginners, is kind of esoteric. Nothing makes sense, attacks are weak and contrived, but we do this so that we don't actually hurt one another when doing the attack over and over. There has been more than one occasion where I have attacked and chopped my partner in the neck because they were not ready or screwed up the technique. Because it was slow, and contrived, the only thing that I hurt was their pride. If you just jump in, lots of people (especially trained fighters) will act or react in a way that hurts other members. There are no pads that I know of that keep wrist locks and joint attacks from working, and any extra force on the part of the thrower can easily break an arm. So too much all at once, and people don't ever have a chance to learn.
But then, you have people at the upper end of Aikido. Those tiny little men who look about as much a martial artist as my local grocer. And they can take anything. Even the most balanced punch has some form of momentum, and they can capitalize on that. But, if they got injured their first week, they never get a chance to learn. It is kind of like using Shinai rather than Bokken or a real sword in beginning sword classes, you have to start low before you can go anywhere (and Aikido has been dubbed "the 30 year martial art" by a lot of people, so there is a lot of climbing involved).
Until you reach the peak, it is mostly clumsy, contrived, and useless attacks only good against drunk people or untrained fighters, or those who flat do not expect it. So yeah, unless you want to work for a long time on something that won't be useful for years, don't do Aikido. | Weak attacks are like Shinai, good ones are Katanas. |
shenuhcide | I'm exactly 1 month, 1 week, and 2 days into a long distance relationship (I had to move for work), and even though everyone says I live in paradise, I've come to the conclusion that I'm actually experiencing some sort of mild depression.
We lived together up until 1 month, 1 week, and 2 days ago and even though I can see him on skype, facetime, and google hangouts (yes, we're extremely connected), I do not have any desire but to sit here and do nothing but be sad.
I know that this is the worst thing for me to do; that I should go out on adventures, but I have almost no desire to do so and until this week, I have only left the house to go to work, get groceries, and go snorkeling (the latter only because everyone is asking me what I've been doing and I don't want to tell them I've burned through several TV series on Netflix).
It was really bad because I moved to a very isolated place where I have zero friends and I had bronchitis for two weeks and couldn't go out and do things even if I wanted to.
It's a little better now that I'm healthy and have taken up yoga and some cycling (though the hills here are killer). I guess my suggestion is to go out and do things even if you don't want to. I have absolutely no desire to do anything but sulk, but once I invest the activation energy of leaving the house, time flies a little more quickly. Hopefully my physical activities will result in me looking good when we see each other again.
**TL;DR**: Force yourself to go out; even if you don't want to, at least it'll make the time fly by and you'll end up a little healthier. | I'm exactly 1 month, 1 week, and 2 days into a long distance relationship (I had to move for work), and even though everyone says I live in paradise, I've come to the conclusion that I'm actually experiencing some sort of mild depression.
We lived together up until 1 month, 1 week, and 2 days ago and even though I can see him on skype, facetime, and google hangouts (yes, we're extremely connected), I do not have any desire but to sit here and do nothing but be sad.
I know that this is the worst thing for me to do; that I should go out on adventures, but I have almost no desire to do so and until this week, I have only left the house to go to work, get groceries, and go snorkeling (the latter only because everyone is asking me what I've been doing and I don't want to tell them I've burned through several TV series on Netflix).
It was really bad because I moved to a very isolated place where I have zero friends and I had bronchitis for two weeks and couldn't go out and do things even if I wanted to.
It's a little better now that I'm healthy and have taken up yoga and some cycling (though the hills here are killer). I guess my suggestion is to go out and do things even if you don't want to. I have absolutely no desire to do anything but sulk, but once I invest the activation energy of leaving the house, time flies a little more quickly. Hopefully my physical activities will result in me looking good when we see each other again.
TL;DR : Force yourself to go out; even if you don't want to, at least it'll make the time fly by and you'll end up a little healthier.
| LongDistance | t5_2s6ky | ccz97oo | I'm exactly 1 month, 1 week, and 2 days into a long distance relationship (I had to move for work), and even though everyone says I live in paradise, I've come to the conclusion that I'm actually experiencing some sort of mild depression.
We lived together up until 1 month, 1 week, and 2 days ago and even though I can see him on skype, facetime, and google hangouts (yes, we're extremely connected), I do not have any desire but to sit here and do nothing but be sad.
I know that this is the worst thing for me to do; that I should go out on adventures, but I have almost no desire to do so and until this week, I have only left the house to go to work, get groceries, and go snorkeling (the latter only because everyone is asking me what I've been doing and I don't want to tell them I've burned through several TV series on Netflix).
It was really bad because I moved to a very isolated place where I have zero friends and I had bronchitis for two weeks and couldn't go out and do things even if I wanted to.
It's a little better now that I'm healthy and have taken up yoga and some cycling (though the hills here are killer). I guess my suggestion is to go out and do things even if you don't want to. I have absolutely no desire to do anything but sulk, but once I invest the activation energy of leaving the house, time flies a little more quickly. Hopefully my physical activities will result in me looking good when we see each other again. | Force yourself to go out; even if you don't want to, at least it'll make the time fly by and you'll end up a little healthier. |
seriously_nachochees | Ahh! I feel your pain! I had a similar experience at a salon days before my wedding. The woman scolded me when I asked her to use the dabble method to apply glitter to my toes. She insisted I needed a base color because the glitter was too sparse. I figured she was cussing me when she looked at her coworker shaking her head motioning to my toes speaking in a different language. Oh well :/ then told me it would take forever to dry in a snarky tone... Didn't even get a top coat which was probably for the best anyways. Whatever fine. THEN, when I went for the mani the guy said he would apply a small amount of acrylic to my natural nail cause it tore a little, he didn't just glued it down which was fine it worked, but I could of done myself. Then they were short with me about not wanting a gel manicure because that would require me to come back in to have it removed... Being a true lacqueristas, I chose the mani I wanted months in advance to do myself lol. So he legit did a half-ass paint job got polish all over my cuticles all the while questioning my choices in marriage... mind you I was from out of town so I had never been to this place nor knew any of the employees! I still payed and tipped cause hey a job is a job but man was a bummed about the whole experience.
TL;DR: last salon experience was terrible!!!
Sorry you had a crap experience. :( I'm shy too so it took a lot just to mention doing the dabble method and by the reaction I got ill just be avoiding salons all together lol
Edit: punctuation and such | Ahh! I feel your pain! I had a similar experience at a salon days before my wedding. The woman scolded me when I asked her to use the dabble method to apply glitter to my toes. She insisted I needed a base color because the glitter was too sparse. I figured she was cussing me when she looked at her coworker shaking her head motioning to my toes speaking in a different language. Oh well :/ then told me it would take forever to dry in a snarky tone... Didn't even get a top coat which was probably for the best anyways. Whatever fine. THEN, when I went for the mani the guy said he would apply a small amount of acrylic to my natural nail cause it tore a little, he didn't just glued it down which was fine it worked, but I could of done myself. Then they were short with me about not wanting a gel manicure because that would require me to come back in to have it removed... Being a true lacqueristas, I chose the mani I wanted months in advance to do myself lol. So he legit did a half-ass paint job got polish all over my cuticles all the while questioning my choices in marriage... mind you I was from out of town so I had never been to this place nor knew any of the employees! I still payed and tipped cause hey a job is a job but man was a bummed about the whole experience.
TL;DR: last salon experience was terrible!!!
Sorry you had a crap experience. :( I'm shy too so it took a lot just to mention doing the dabble method and by the reaction I got ill just be avoiding salons all together lol
Edit: punctuation and such
| RedditLaqueristas | t5_2se5q | cczf7n0 | Ahh! I feel your pain! I had a similar experience at a salon days before my wedding. The woman scolded me when I asked her to use the dabble method to apply glitter to my toes. She insisted I needed a base color because the glitter was too sparse. I figured she was cussing me when she looked at her coworker shaking her head motioning to my toes speaking in a different language. Oh well :/ then told me it would take forever to dry in a snarky tone... Didn't even get a top coat which was probably for the best anyways. Whatever fine. THEN, when I went for the mani the guy said he would apply a small amount of acrylic to my natural nail cause it tore a little, he didn't just glued it down which was fine it worked, but I could of done myself. Then they were short with me about not wanting a gel manicure because that would require me to come back in to have it removed... Being a true lacqueristas, I chose the mani I wanted months in advance to do myself lol. So he legit did a half-ass paint job got polish all over my cuticles all the while questioning my choices in marriage... mind you I was from out of town so I had never been to this place nor knew any of the employees! I still payed and tipped cause hey a job is a job but man was a bummed about the whole experience. | last salon experience was terrible!!!
Sorry you had a crap experience. :( I'm shy too so it took a lot just to mention doing the dabble method and by the reaction I got ill just be avoiding salons all together lol
Edit: punctuation and such |
Deanomanc | Nope. Not even close. Pointing what Americans on this thread are doing get's nowhere near me "assuming that all Americans are evil"!?!?!??!!!!
So Let me fix it once and for all.
ITT:
People who know what every country's spy programs entail, Americans who presume the United States is bigger and better than everyone (obviously), and one American who stereotypically cannot accept even the slightest criticism towards some of his fellow countrymen. When he does see said criticism; he loses all sense of perspective and blows the whole thing out of proportion - casting inaccurate assertions at people.
Or, TL;DR - you're being a bitch. | Nope. Not even close. Pointing what Americans on this thread are doing get's nowhere near me "assuming that all Americans are evil"!?!?!??!!!!
So Let me fix it once and for all.
ITT:
People who know what every country's spy programs entail, Americans who presume the United States is bigger and better than everyone (obviously), and one American who stereotypically cannot accept even the slightest criticism towards some of his fellow countrymen. When he does see said criticism; he loses all sense of perspective and blows the whole thing out of proportion - casting inaccurate assertions at people.
Or, TL;DR - you're being a bitch.
| explainlikeimfive | t5_2sokd | cd0qsc6 | Nope. Not even close. Pointing what Americans on this thread are doing get's nowhere near me "assuming that all Americans are evil"!?!?!??!!!!
So Let me fix it once and for all.
ITT:
People who know what every country's spy programs entail, Americans who presume the United States is bigger and better than everyone (obviously), and one American who stereotypically cannot accept even the slightest criticism towards some of his fellow countrymen. When he does see said criticism; he loses all sense of perspective and blows the whole thing out of proportion - casting inaccurate assertions at people.
Or, | you're being a bitch. |
Accujack | What makes what the NSA is doing different is the following:
A) They have more resources (money) than most other countries' agencies with similar purposes. More money = wider and more effective surveillance and more recorded information. Most smaller countries' agencies don't have a prayer of collecting information on this scale, much less keeping enough of it long term to draw conclusions.
B) Because the NSA is a US agency, they have a unique position with regards to control of international communications, including the Internet but also telephone cables and multinational corporations over which they have leverage. They can install equipment at overseas military bases across the world. Simply put, they have access that no other country has to potential targets to spy on.
C) They are closely tied to the only remaining superpower's military assets which roam the world under normal conditions, giving them access to everything they don't already have access to at need. No other country's military really does this, but the US is still trying to be "world police".
D) Their surveillance is being done under a questionable legal basis in the US, and is including US citizens in its target list, which is something explicitly illegal historically unless you agree with the questionable legal grounds mentioned above. US Citizens are very sensitive about this because of all the other "changes" made by our government in the wake of 9/11, like overly invasive TSA searches and other money spent and laws made "for our own good".
TL, DR; In short, this is unique because its the US's agency doing this. The US is still unique in the world as the only remaining superpower, and for that fact alone many countries don't trust us. They fear the creation of a de facto world government with the US in charge, and the level of spying the NSA is carrying out feeds their fears, and those of many US citizens.
| What makes what the NSA is doing different is the following:
A) They have more resources (money) than most other countries' agencies with similar purposes. More money = wider and more effective surveillance and more recorded information. Most smaller countries' agencies don't have a prayer of collecting information on this scale, much less keeping enough of it long term to draw conclusions.
B) Because the NSA is a US agency, they have a unique position with regards to control of international communications, including the Internet but also telephone cables and multinational corporations over which they have leverage. They can install equipment at overseas military bases across the world. Simply put, they have access that no other country has to potential targets to spy on.
C) They are closely tied to the only remaining superpower's military assets which roam the world under normal conditions, giving them access to everything they don't already have access to at need. No other country's military really does this, but the US is still trying to be "world police".
D) Their surveillance is being done under a questionable legal basis in the US, and is including US citizens in its target list, which is something explicitly illegal historically unless you agree with the questionable legal grounds mentioned above. US Citizens are very sensitive about this because of all the other "changes" made by our government in the wake of 9/11, like overly invasive TSA searches and other money spent and laws made "for our own good".
TL, DR; In short, this is unique because its the US's agency doing this. The US is still unique in the world as the only remaining superpower, and for that fact alone many countries don't trust us. They fear the creation of a de facto world government with the US in charge, and the level of spying the NSA is carrying out feeds their fears, and those of many US citizens.
| explainlikeimfive | t5_2sokd | cczk8bg | What makes what the NSA is doing different is the following:
A) They have more resources (money) than most other countries' agencies with similar purposes. More money = wider and more effective surveillance and more recorded information. Most smaller countries' agencies don't have a prayer of collecting information on this scale, much less keeping enough of it long term to draw conclusions.
B) Because the NSA is a US agency, they have a unique position with regards to control of international communications, including the Internet but also telephone cables and multinational corporations over which they have leverage. They can install equipment at overseas military bases across the world. Simply put, they have access that no other country has to potential targets to spy on.
C) They are closely tied to the only remaining superpower's military assets which roam the world under normal conditions, giving them access to everything they don't already have access to at need. No other country's military really does this, but the US is still trying to be "world police".
D) Their surveillance is being done under a questionable legal basis in the US, and is including US citizens in its target list, which is something explicitly illegal historically unless you agree with the questionable legal grounds mentioned above. US Citizens are very sensitive about this because of all the other "changes" made by our government in the wake of 9/11, like overly invasive TSA searches and other money spent and laws made "for our own good". | In short, this is unique because its the US's agency doing this. The US is still unique in the world as the only remaining superpower, and for that fact alone many countries don't trust us. They fear the creation of a de facto world government with the US in charge, and the level of spying the NSA is carrying out feeds their fears, and those of many US citizens. |
Victoria7474 | No it's not much different. Regardless of the laws that may be in place, public knowledge of it happening or self-regulation by governing parties, all governments are watching their people. The difference is how it is presented to the public, who is spied on and how the information is used. In many countries the spying is sold to the public as necessary for safety(terrorism), improving public services(traffic) and general economic boost from knowing how to handle the flow and ebb of the population(division of resources). These are actually generally accepted uses for the information and widely openly used. Spying becomes a problem when you blatantly lie about doing it and spy on every single person on the planet. The US put back door access into every electronic communication device it could ever since publicly claiming to have turned down a law that would have allowed this in the 90's. Why? Because they did not respect the wishes of the people and proceeded with self regulation that allowed them to not only collect the information, but use it to their own discretion. Now they use that information against anyone who speaks against them when they see fit- just like Hitler did during WWII. Also like Hitler- we got into the market early enough to have more years to improve our spying technology beyond that of many people of the world, allowing us to follow, store and use more information of more people.
sorry for lack of sources- limited on time, will ad/find links per request
Forgot to mention a huge deal-breaker with other governments- the NSA sells the info it collects. So do other agencies the difference again is who's information is being used and how. When you have everyone's information, well, they don't like it.
TLDR; The government wrote laws allowing itself to collect information about everyone in the world and use the information however it wants- despite this being illegal by both international and US law. | No it's not much different. Regardless of the laws that may be in place, public knowledge of it happening or self-regulation by governing parties, all governments are watching their people. The difference is how it is presented to the public, who is spied on and how the information is used. In many countries the spying is sold to the public as necessary for safety(terrorism), improving public services(traffic) and general economic boost from knowing how to handle the flow and ebb of the population(division of resources). These are actually generally accepted uses for the information and widely openly used. Spying becomes a problem when you blatantly lie about doing it and spy on every single person on the planet. The US put back door access into every electronic communication device it could ever since publicly claiming to have turned down a law that would have allowed this in the 90's. Why? Because they did not respect the wishes of the people and proceeded with self regulation that allowed them to not only collect the information, but use it to their own discretion. Now they use that information against anyone who speaks against them when they see fit- just like Hitler did during WWII. Also like Hitler- we got into the market early enough to have more years to improve our spying technology beyond that of many people of the world, allowing us to follow, store and use more information of more people.
sorry for lack of sources- limited on time, will ad/find links per request
Forgot to mention a huge deal-breaker with other governments- the NSA sells the info it collects. So do other agencies the difference again is who's information is being used and how. When you have everyone's information, well, they don't like it.
TLDR; The government wrote laws allowing itself to collect information about everyone in the world and use the information however it wants- despite this being illegal by both international and US law.
| explainlikeimfive | t5_2sokd | cczsm1b | No it's not much different. Regardless of the laws that may be in place, public knowledge of it happening or self-regulation by governing parties, all governments are watching their people. The difference is how it is presented to the public, who is spied on and how the information is used. In many countries the spying is sold to the public as necessary for safety(terrorism), improving public services(traffic) and general economic boost from knowing how to handle the flow and ebb of the population(division of resources). These are actually generally accepted uses for the information and widely openly used. Spying becomes a problem when you blatantly lie about doing it and spy on every single person on the planet. The US put back door access into every electronic communication device it could ever since publicly claiming to have turned down a law that would have allowed this in the 90's. Why? Because they did not respect the wishes of the people and proceeded with self regulation that allowed them to not only collect the information, but use it to their own discretion. Now they use that information against anyone who speaks against them when they see fit- just like Hitler did during WWII. Also like Hitler- we got into the market early enough to have more years to improve our spying technology beyond that of many people of the world, allowing us to follow, store and use more information of more people.
sorry for lack of sources- limited on time, will ad/find links per request
Forgot to mention a huge deal-breaker with other governments- the NSA sells the info it collects. So do other agencies the difference again is who's information is being used and how. When you have everyone's information, well, they don't like it. | The government wrote laws allowing itself to collect information about everyone in the world and use the information however it wants- despite this being illegal by both international and US law. |
polydorr | Longshot, but how is your hamstring flexibility?
I ended up injuring my SI joint because my hamstrings were terribly inflexible and it caused me to have poor form. It hurt so bad when I lifted that I thought it was a disc issue. My physical therapist was able to get it back in place and I've been working on my hamstring flexibility ever since, and of course using mirrors to make sure my form is picture perfect.
tldr: Tight hamstring can prevent the pelvis from tilting forward, putting undue stress on the lower back.
| Longshot, but how is your hamstring flexibility?
I ended up injuring my SI joint because my hamstrings were terribly inflexible and it caused me to have poor form. It hurt so bad when I lifted that I thought it was a disc issue. My physical therapist was able to get it back in place and I've been working on my hamstring flexibility ever since, and of course using mirrors to make sure my form is picture perfect.
tldr: Tight hamstring can prevent the pelvis from tilting forward, putting undue stress on the lower back.
| Fitness | t5_2qhx4 | cczjux6 | Longshot, but how is your hamstring flexibility?
I ended up injuring my SI joint because my hamstrings were terribly inflexible and it caused me to have poor form. It hurt so bad when I lifted that I thought it was a disc issue. My physical therapist was able to get it back in place and I've been working on my hamstring flexibility ever since, and of course using mirrors to make sure my form is picture perfect. | Tight hamstring can prevent the pelvis from tilting forward, putting undue stress on the lower back. |
Melcoal | There's a story behind this, not just me bragging about my collection. A few weeks back I ordered from me-jerseys.info and finally got the package this week. I have a good 4-5 more jerseys (not pictured) and 4 more that should arrive in a week or so. They're not all mine (free shipping if you order 10 or more things) but yeah.
Tl;dr - $23 for a jersey that's as close to legit as you can buy is okay with me. | There's a story behind this, not just me bragging about my collection. A few weeks back I ordered from me-jerseys.info and finally got the package this week. I have a good 4-5 more jerseys (not pictured) and 4 more that should arrive in a week or so. They're not all mine (free shipping if you order 10 or more things) but yeah.
Tl;dr - $23 for a jersey that's as close to legit as you can buy is okay with me.
| ravens | t5_2s1w8 | cczh6u7 | There's a story behind this, not just me bragging about my collection. A few weeks back I ordered from me-jerseys.info and finally got the package this week. I have a good 4-5 more jerseys (not pictured) and 4 more that should arrive in a week or so. They're not all mine (free shipping if you order 10 or more things) but yeah. | 23 for a jersey that's as close to legit as you can buy is okay with me. |
Tipperz | To be honest, dogs are expensive all around and you need to be prepared for the incidental costs that come up. My fiance and I have a white GSD that we've adopted just about a year ago. If you get a puppy there are a lot of cost in the first 6 months of their life between shots, which generally include vet visits and getting them spayed or neutered. The cost is going to vary on your location and there are some programs out there that will help.
GSD are also prone to a number of health issues, luckily with ours its been skin infections and digestive issues. We buy a special food and split up her food into 3 meals, it costs a little more than $60 a month and the time it takes to make sure we are home to feed her when we need to be. Don't get me wrong we love our dog, but sometimes having to rush home from school or work is not a lot of fun. However, this is better than having to give her medication to ease her digestive system. For her skin we have had to give her medication a few times and just have to be careful if she gets a scratch.
Then there's toys, treats, flea medication, heart worm medication, and anything else we choose to buy for her. Outside of the cost any dog is a serious time commitment and GSD are no exception. It is often very apparent when a dog is breed for working and that is the case with our dog. She enjoys doing things we want her to do and we have to have tasks or games that uses this. Pretty much daily we spend time hiding her toy and having her find it. We also brought her to obedience classes, which was good for all of us.
GSDs are also generally very intelligent dogs, which can be wonderful or drive you crazy, sometimes both. We taught ours to ring a bell on the door when she has to potty. She picked it up really quickly, but then realized that if she rang the bell when she didn't have to potty she still got to go outside. She eventually stopped, but occasionally still rings just for attention.
tl;dr GSDs are great, just make sure that you're prepared for the costs that could come up and the time commitment. | To be honest, dogs are expensive all around and you need to be prepared for the incidental costs that come up. My fiance and I have a white GSD that we've adopted just about a year ago. If you get a puppy there are a lot of cost in the first 6 months of their life between shots, which generally include vet visits and getting them spayed or neutered. The cost is going to vary on your location and there are some programs out there that will help.
GSD are also prone to a number of health issues, luckily with ours its been skin infections and digestive issues. We buy a special food and split up her food into 3 meals, it costs a little more than $60 a month and the time it takes to make sure we are home to feed her when we need to be. Don't get me wrong we love our dog, but sometimes having to rush home from school or work is not a lot of fun. However, this is better than having to give her medication to ease her digestive system. For her skin we have had to give her medication a few times and just have to be careful if she gets a scratch.
Then there's toys, treats, flea medication, heart worm medication, and anything else we choose to buy for her. Outside of the cost any dog is a serious time commitment and GSD are no exception. It is often very apparent when a dog is breed for working and that is the case with our dog. She enjoys doing things we want her to do and we have to have tasks or games that uses this. Pretty much daily we spend time hiding her toy and having her find it. We also brought her to obedience classes, which was good for all of us.
GSDs are also generally very intelligent dogs, which can be wonderful or drive you crazy, sometimes both. We taught ours to ring a bell on the door when she has to potty. She picked it up really quickly, but then realized that if she rang the bell when she didn't have to potty she still got to go outside. She eventually stopped, but occasionally still rings just for attention.
tl;dr GSDs are great, just make sure that you're prepared for the costs that could come up and the time commitment.
| aww | t5_2qh1o | cczzups | To be honest, dogs are expensive all around and you need to be prepared for the incidental costs that come up. My fiance and I have a white GSD that we've adopted just about a year ago. If you get a puppy there are a lot of cost in the first 6 months of their life between shots, which generally include vet visits and getting them spayed or neutered. The cost is going to vary on your location and there are some programs out there that will help.
GSD are also prone to a number of health issues, luckily with ours its been skin infections and digestive issues. We buy a special food and split up her food into 3 meals, it costs a little more than $60 a month and the time it takes to make sure we are home to feed her when we need to be. Don't get me wrong we love our dog, but sometimes having to rush home from school or work is not a lot of fun. However, this is better than having to give her medication to ease her digestive system. For her skin we have had to give her medication a few times and just have to be careful if she gets a scratch.
Then there's toys, treats, flea medication, heart worm medication, and anything else we choose to buy for her. Outside of the cost any dog is a serious time commitment and GSD are no exception. It is often very apparent when a dog is breed for working and that is the case with our dog. She enjoys doing things we want her to do and we have to have tasks or games that uses this. Pretty much daily we spend time hiding her toy and having her find it. We also brought her to obedience classes, which was good for all of us.
GSDs are also generally very intelligent dogs, which can be wonderful or drive you crazy, sometimes both. We taught ours to ring a bell on the door when she has to potty. She picked it up really quickly, but then realized that if she rang the bell when she didn't have to potty she still got to go outside. She eventually stopped, but occasionally still rings just for attention. | GSDs are great, just make sure that you're prepared for the costs that could come up and the time commitment. |
HalfManHalfPotato | Yeah, it's invite only. They have recruitment threads at some other private trackers' power user forums, so that's the standard way to get in.
The quality of HD releases can typically be separated into 4 tiers:
1) Untouched. This applies to remuxes and untouched blu-rays. The video and audio streams are taken directly from the source without being re-encoded. Remuxes strip out the extras and menus and mux the movie tracks into an mkv; untouched blu-rays contain everything exactly as it is on the retail disc.
2) Transparent encodes. Re-encoded while still being indistinguishable from the source material (blu-ray or HD-DVD) when watching, and ideally in screenshots as well. Mainly seen in releases by internal groups from private trackers.
3) Scene. The scene has their own quality standards which basically fall right into the middle. It's nowhere near as good as transparent encodes, but it's watchable.
4) Shitty, bit-starved. These releases prioritize tiny file sizes over quality and really do a disservice to the material. YIFY falls into this category. They're all too happy to tack "HD" and "1080p" on to their releases, but with the complete loss of grain, visual detail in faces and environments, and color depths, you'd actually be better off watching a good SD encode.
If you're never seen anything but YIFY, then they might look pretty good, but once you have seen something else (especially if you've seen a mouseover comparison) the difference is night and day. At least go for scene encodes if you don't want to dedicate the space to fully transparent ones. As far as mp4 etc, comaptibility with that will depend on the device, though scene and p2p releases should be compatible with most players and streaming media devices.
If you really want quality over anything else, then an encode is either transparent or it's not, and anything that isn't can't really be compared with something that is. If you want to balance quality with filesize, then you'll have to make up your own subjective decision on what your standards are and what you're willing to trade off to save some disk space.
tl;dr [yify encodes make people look like they're made out of clay]( | Yeah, it's invite only. They have recruitment threads at some other private trackers' power user forums, so that's the standard way to get in.
The quality of HD releases can typically be separated into 4 tiers:
1) Untouched. This applies to remuxes and untouched blu-rays. The video and audio streams are taken directly from the source without being re-encoded. Remuxes strip out the extras and menus and mux the movie tracks into an mkv; untouched blu-rays contain everything exactly as it is on the retail disc.
2) Transparent encodes. Re-encoded while still being indistinguishable from the source material (blu-ray or HD-DVD) when watching, and ideally in screenshots as well. Mainly seen in releases by internal groups from private trackers.
3) Scene. The scene has their own quality standards which basically fall right into the middle. It's nowhere near as good as transparent encodes, but it's watchable.
4) Shitty, bit-starved. These releases prioritize tiny file sizes over quality and really do a disservice to the material. YIFY falls into this category. They're all too happy to tack "HD" and "1080p" on to their releases, but with the complete loss of grain, visual detail in faces and environments, and color depths, you'd actually be better off watching a good SD encode.
If you're never seen anything but YIFY, then they might look pretty good, but once you have seen something else (especially if you've seen a mouseover comparison) the difference is night and day. At least go for scene encodes if you don't want to dedicate the space to fully transparent ones. As far as mp4 etc, comaptibility with that will depend on the device, though scene and p2p releases should be compatible with most players and streaming media devices.
If you really want quality over anything else, then an encode is either transparent or it's not, and anything that isn't can't really be compared with something that is. If you want to balance quality with filesize, then you'll have to make up your own subjective decision on what your standards are and what you're willing to trade off to save some disk space.
tl;dr [yify encodes make people look like they're made out of clay](
| torrents | t5_2qh0w | cd0ftrh | Yeah, it's invite only. They have recruitment threads at some other private trackers' power user forums, so that's the standard way to get in.
The quality of HD releases can typically be separated into 4 tiers:
1) Untouched. This applies to remuxes and untouched blu-rays. The video and audio streams are taken directly from the source without being re-encoded. Remuxes strip out the extras and menus and mux the movie tracks into an mkv; untouched blu-rays contain everything exactly as it is on the retail disc.
2) Transparent encodes. Re-encoded while still being indistinguishable from the source material (blu-ray or HD-DVD) when watching, and ideally in screenshots as well. Mainly seen in releases by internal groups from private trackers.
3) Scene. The scene has their own quality standards which basically fall right into the middle. It's nowhere near as good as transparent encodes, but it's watchable.
4) Shitty, bit-starved. These releases prioritize tiny file sizes over quality and really do a disservice to the material. YIFY falls into this category. They're all too happy to tack "HD" and "1080p" on to their releases, but with the complete loss of grain, visual detail in faces and environments, and color depths, you'd actually be better off watching a good SD encode.
If you're never seen anything but YIFY, then they might look pretty good, but once you have seen something else (especially if you've seen a mouseover comparison) the difference is night and day. At least go for scene encodes if you don't want to dedicate the space to fully transparent ones. As far as mp4 etc, comaptibility with that will depend on the device, though scene and p2p releases should be compatible with most players and streaming media devices.
If you really want quality over anything else, then an encode is either transparent or it's not, and anything that isn't can't really be compared with something that is. If you want to balance quality with filesize, then you'll have to make up your own subjective decision on what your standards are and what you're willing to trade off to save some disk space. | yify encodes make people look like they're made out of clay]( |
that_70_show_fan | Before I start explaining myself, why don't you be more elaborate in explaining this so that we don't get off on the wrong foot.
> I'm talking about the more esoteric parts which most people don't even associate with the excessively-embellished, dumbed-down polytheism that's known as Hinduism.
Can you just TL;DR the esoteric parts.. or just explain one aspect of those esoteric teachings? | Before I start explaining myself, why don't you be more elaborate in explaining this so that we don't get off on the wrong foot.
> I'm talking about the more esoteric parts which most people don't even associate with the excessively-embellished, dumbed-down polytheism that's known as Hinduism.
Can you just TL;DR the esoteric parts.. or just explain one aspect of those esoteric teachings?
| india | t5_2qh1q | cd0oi23 | Before I start explaining myself, why don't you be more elaborate in explaining this so that we don't get off on the wrong foot.
> I'm talking about the more esoteric parts which most people don't even associate with the excessively-embellished, dumbed-down polytheism that's known as Hinduism.
Can you just | the esoteric parts.. or just explain one aspect of those esoteric teachings? |
Fna1 | > And at this point, Obamacare’s own enrollment troubles would seem to be more of an obstacle to Millennials’ enrollment than any ad-induced second thoughts
Tldr nothing is creepier than ObamaCare in the flesh, so no embelishment is necessary | > And at this point, Obamacare’s own enrollment troubles would seem to be more of an obstacle to Millennials’ enrollment than any ad-induced second thoughts
Tldr nothing is creepier than ObamaCare in the flesh, so no embelishment is necessary
| Libertarian | t5_2qh63 | cd0l4xo | And at this point, Obamacare’s own enrollment troubles would seem to be more of an obstacle to Millennials’ enrollment than any ad-induced second thoughts | nothing is creepier than ObamaCare in the flesh, so no embelishment is necessary |
Miliean | It's about the criminal's perception of right and wrong, it has NOTHING to do with the actions themselves but it's more about the reasons and perceptions of those actions.
So for example, if walk out onto a busy street and cut someone's head off. It might look like I was insane. But if I did it because I REALLY hate that guy and thought this would be a good way to resolve things, I'm not insane. If I did it because I thought he was an alien sent to assassinate the president and only I could see and stop him, then I might be insane.
tl;dr There is a difference between being an asshole and being insane. Dahmer was more asshole than he was insane. | It's about the criminal's perception of right and wrong, it has NOTHING to do with the actions themselves but it's more about the reasons and perceptions of those actions.
So for example, if walk out onto a busy street and cut someone's head off. It might look like I was insane. But if I did it because I REALLY hate that guy and thought this would be a good way to resolve things, I'm not insane. If I did it because I thought he was an alien sent to assassinate the president and only I could see and stop him, then I might be insane.
tl;dr There is a difference between being an asshole and being insane. Dahmer was more asshole than he was insane.
| explainlikeimfive | t5_2sokd | cd0vbpj | It's about the criminal's perception of right and wrong, it has NOTHING to do with the actions themselves but it's more about the reasons and perceptions of those actions.
So for example, if walk out onto a busy street and cut someone's head off. It might look like I was insane. But if I did it because I REALLY hate that guy and thought this would be a good way to resolve things, I'm not insane. If I did it because I thought he was an alien sent to assassinate the president and only I could see and stop him, then I might be insane. | There is a difference between being an asshole and being insane. Dahmer was more asshole than he was insane. |
jewsNbrews | It was the last day of bow season. My buddies all had to work so i was at it alone. I was driving to my spot when i saw a group of about five deer cross the gravel road in front of me so i stopped and got out. I knew exactly where they would be going. I high tailed it down the mountain making sure that i was as quite as i could be but stayed just over the horizon so that they couldn't see me. I decided i made it far enough down the ridge and decided to go over the top and sit and wait. I was about five hundred yards in front of them now so i hunkered up next to a bush to make my outline disappear. They were heading down a game trail that would have them cross twenty yards in front of me. They got to within 150 yards when they stopped, circled around for a minute and headed straight up the ridge and out of site. i waited about twenty minutes but decided i might as well head to were i was going to go anyway. I started up the hill and about twenty yards from where i was sitting was a nice 6 point elk shed. I thought man that is cool and picked it up and continued my hike back to my rig. I get to about where the deer where when they averted their course and hear this loud hiss! I find my self staring at a cougar no more than twenty yards away. He is behind some brush and i can barely see his tail at one end flickering about and his face at the other end wide mouthed and hissing. Heart rate just sky rocketed! Now i have a tag for a cougar but was in aww and no shot due to thick brush, plus a little scared. I had my bow in one hand and a shed in the other. This guy was pissed! No firearm with me so i decided not to put the shed down in case i needed something in self defense. I walked 250-300 yards up hill backwards to make sure i wasn't followed or get rushed by it. I got to my truck and was shaking for the next thirty minutes. I will never forget the look on that cats face. Not sure if he had a kill there or not. Ended the day by tagging out a doe.
TL;DR Found a cool shed, walked onto a pissed off cougar, changed shorts at truck, filled deer tag | It was the last day of bow season. My buddies all had to work so i was at it alone. I was driving to my spot when i saw a group of about five deer cross the gravel road in front of me so i stopped and got out. I knew exactly where they would be going. I high tailed it down the mountain making sure that i was as quite as i could be but stayed just over the horizon so that they couldn't see me. I decided i made it far enough down the ridge and decided to go over the top and sit and wait. I was about five hundred yards in front of them now so i hunkered up next to a bush to make my outline disappear. They were heading down a game trail that would have them cross twenty yards in front of me. They got to within 150 yards when they stopped, circled around for a minute and headed straight up the ridge and out of site. i waited about twenty minutes but decided i might as well head to were i was going to go anyway. I started up the hill and about twenty yards from where i was sitting was a nice 6 point elk shed. I thought man that is cool and picked it up and continued my hike back to my rig. I get to about where the deer where when they averted their course and hear this loud hiss! I find my self staring at a cougar no more than twenty yards away. He is behind some brush and i can barely see his tail at one end flickering about and his face at the other end wide mouthed and hissing. Heart rate just sky rocketed! Now i have a tag for a cougar but was in aww and no shot due to thick brush, plus a little scared. I had my bow in one hand and a shed in the other. This guy was pissed! No firearm with me so i decided not to put the shed down in case i needed something in self defense. I walked 250-300 yards up hill backwards to make sure i wasn't followed or get rushed by it. I got to my truck and was shaking for the next thirty minutes. I will never forget the look on that cats face. Not sure if he had a kill there or not. Ended the day by tagging out a doe.
TL;DR Found a cool shed, walked onto a pissed off cougar, changed shorts at truck, filled deer tag
| Hunting | t5_2qlkx | cd76isk | It was the last day of bow season. My buddies all had to work so i was at it alone. I was driving to my spot when i saw a group of about five deer cross the gravel road in front of me so i stopped and got out. I knew exactly where they would be going. I high tailed it down the mountain making sure that i was as quite as i could be but stayed just over the horizon so that they couldn't see me. I decided i made it far enough down the ridge and decided to go over the top and sit and wait. I was about five hundred yards in front of them now so i hunkered up next to a bush to make my outline disappear. They were heading down a game trail that would have them cross twenty yards in front of me. They got to within 150 yards when they stopped, circled around for a minute and headed straight up the ridge and out of site. i waited about twenty minutes but decided i might as well head to were i was going to go anyway. I started up the hill and about twenty yards from where i was sitting was a nice 6 point elk shed. I thought man that is cool and picked it up and continued my hike back to my rig. I get to about where the deer where when they averted their course and hear this loud hiss! I find my self staring at a cougar no more than twenty yards away. He is behind some brush and i can barely see his tail at one end flickering about and his face at the other end wide mouthed and hissing. Heart rate just sky rocketed! Now i have a tag for a cougar but was in aww and no shot due to thick brush, plus a little scared. I had my bow in one hand and a shed in the other. This guy was pissed! No firearm with me so i decided not to put the shed down in case i needed something in self defense. I walked 250-300 yards up hill backwards to make sure i wasn't followed or get rushed by it. I got to my truck and was shaking for the next thirty minutes. I will never forget the look on that cats face. Not sure if he had a kill there or not. Ended the day by tagging out a doe. | Found a cool shed, walked onto a pissed off cougar, changed shorts at truck, filled deer tag |
skittixch | 6.55 gb is danger territory. If you're using a fat32 formatted disk, it won't work. This can bite a lot of inexperienced video guys in the butt. You can either
a) Compress it with something like h264
b) split it into 2 parts and try it
c) try running/exporting to an ntfs drive
**tl;dr** Handbrake is probably not the issue, it's most likely the size...
source: video/CG professional 10+yrs
*edit
if you wanna try and troubleshoot, pm me which software you're working with, what platform, and what you need to get out of this (include est. length, program of origin, OS, any working constraints, etc) | 6.55 gb is danger territory. If you're using a fat32 formatted disk, it won't work. This can bite a lot of inexperienced video guys in the butt. You can either
a) Compress it with something like h264
b) split it into 2 parts and try it
c) try running/exporting to an ntfs drive
tl;dr Handbrake is probably not the issue, it's most likely the size...
source: video/CG professional 10+yrs
*edit
if you wanna try and troubleshoot, pm me which software you're working with, what platform, and what you need to get out of this (include est. length, program of origin, OS, any working constraints, etc)
| AskTechnology | t5_2t6b3 | cd1hvdt | 6.55 gb is danger territory. If you're using a fat32 formatted disk, it won't work. This can bite a lot of inexperienced video guys in the butt. You can either
a) Compress it with something like h264
b) split it into 2 parts and try it
c) try running/exporting to an ntfs drive | Handbrake is probably not the issue, it's most likely the size...
source: video/CG professional 10+yrs
*edit
if you wanna try and troubleshoot, pm me which software you're working with, what platform, and what you need to get out of this (include est. length, program of origin, OS, any working constraints, etc) |
MountainMadman | Not OP, but my two cents:
Most of the scenarios in RCT2 are plain boring. Most of them are pretty much the same thing, except this one is around a castle, this one is on a snowy mountain, and this one is in a field. Also, you don't get a sense of progression like in RCT1, since all of the scenarios are unlocked for you already.
The expansions for RCT2 (Wacky Worlds and Time Twisters) are nearly unanimously considered to be little more than glorified 'stuff packs'. Most of the additions are scenery-related, and most of those look horrible -- the art style is completely different from vanilla RCT2. What new rides there are are often only horribly designed re-skins of existing ride types.
TL;DR scenarios are boring, expansions are useless. | Not OP, but my two cents:
Most of the scenarios in RCT2 are plain boring. Most of them are pretty much the same thing, except this one is around a castle, this one is on a snowy mountain, and this one is in a field. Also, you don't get a sense of progression like in RCT1, since all of the scenarios are unlocked for you already.
The expansions for RCT2 (Wacky Worlds and Time Twisters) are nearly unanimously considered to be little more than glorified 'stuff packs'. Most of the additions are scenery-related, and most of those look horrible -- the art style is completely different from vanilla RCT2. What new rides there are are often only horribly designed re-skins of existing ride types.
TL;DR scenarios are boring, expansions are useless.
| rct | t5_2rzsl | cd1bcph | Not OP, but my two cents:
Most of the scenarios in RCT2 are plain boring. Most of them are pretty much the same thing, except this one is around a castle, this one is on a snowy mountain, and this one is in a field. Also, you don't get a sense of progression like in RCT1, since all of the scenarios are unlocked for you already.
The expansions for RCT2 (Wacky Worlds and Time Twisters) are nearly unanimously considered to be little more than glorified 'stuff packs'. Most of the additions are scenery-related, and most of those look horrible -- the art style is completely different from vanilla RCT2. What new rides there are are often only horribly designed re-skins of existing ride types. | scenarios are boring, expansions are useless. |
NatureBoy92 | I think it's complicated. If he was extremely talented than I think that they would. You have to remember that a lot of Benoit's friends have a soft spot for that kid probably still care a lot about him. Dean Malenko for instance has a high up position in WWE now and he was one of Benoit's good friends. Chris Jericho too also has good standing with the company. So many of the top guys in the WWE have respect for Benoit's career and most likely want to see his son succeed. Heck, Daniel Bryan's Yes Lock and Diving Headbutt are clearly a thinly vieled tribute to the late Benoit. How can you not feel bad for him and want him to overcome the tragedy? If this kind of thing happened in a real sport it would be the topic of discussion and he'd be considered a hero for overcoming the odds and the adversity. He's a unique story.
There is no way that WWE would let him use his Benoit names but WWE fans are not stupid. There is a chance for heckling. I think it could potentially be a PR nightmare for them and that is where the main fear is. I think that he could however make a lot of money in Japan and in indie promotions across the world. He certainly has a lot of people that would support him and want him to succeed, as evidenced by the comments in the two pictures I posted this month of him as well as the picture of him that surfaced this morning with David Hart Smith.
That being said he has an uphill battle. From what I can see David inherited his father's small stature. The difference between David and Chris is that Chris started body building at a very young age. He refined his physique and went and trained all over the World. I'm not saying that David has no chance in hell, but he certainly has a lot to overcome outside of the adversity he will face already. Chris Benoit had incredible discipline. There is that classic story of Benoit taking a younger guy in the locker room who was being disrespectful to the elders and having the young man do 500 squats to teach him a lesson. Benoit did them alongside the young man without so much as a grunt.
Also of note, I have a friend in Canada that, until a few weeks ago, lived in the same neighborhood in Sherwood Park, Alberta as David and his sister. He said that David was a nice guy however really quiet. Not so different from his father.
TL;DR it's a long shot, i don't think his odds are any worse than any other young person looking to get into the business. | I think it's complicated. If he was extremely talented than I think that they would. You have to remember that a lot of Benoit's friends have a soft spot for that kid probably still care a lot about him. Dean Malenko for instance has a high up position in WWE now and he was one of Benoit's good friends. Chris Jericho too also has good standing with the company. So many of the top guys in the WWE have respect for Benoit's career and most likely want to see his son succeed. Heck, Daniel Bryan's Yes Lock and Diving Headbutt are clearly a thinly vieled tribute to the late Benoit. How can you not feel bad for him and want him to overcome the tragedy? If this kind of thing happened in a real sport it would be the topic of discussion and he'd be considered a hero for overcoming the odds and the adversity. He's a unique story.
There is no way that WWE would let him use his Benoit names but WWE fans are not stupid. There is a chance for heckling. I think it could potentially be a PR nightmare for them and that is where the main fear is. I think that he could however make a lot of money in Japan and in indie promotions across the world. He certainly has a lot of people that would support him and want him to succeed, as evidenced by the comments in the two pictures I posted this month of him as well as the picture of him that surfaced this morning with David Hart Smith.
That being said he has an uphill battle. From what I can see David inherited his father's small stature. The difference between David and Chris is that Chris started body building at a very young age. He refined his physique and went and trained all over the World. I'm not saying that David has no chance in hell, but he certainly has a lot to overcome outside of the adversity he will face already. Chris Benoit had incredible discipline. There is that classic story of Benoit taking a younger guy in the locker room who was being disrespectful to the elders and having the young man do 500 squats to teach him a lesson. Benoit did them alongside the young man without so much as a grunt.
Also of note, I have a friend in Canada that, until a few weeks ago, lived in the same neighborhood in Sherwood Park, Alberta as David and his sister. He said that David was a nice guy however really quiet. Not so different from his father.
TL;DR it's a long shot, i don't think his odds are any worse than any other young person looking to get into the business.
| SquaredCircle | t5_2sljg | cd1pf9z | I think it's complicated. If he was extremely talented than I think that they would. You have to remember that a lot of Benoit's friends have a soft spot for that kid probably still care a lot about him. Dean Malenko for instance has a high up position in WWE now and he was one of Benoit's good friends. Chris Jericho too also has good standing with the company. So many of the top guys in the WWE have respect for Benoit's career and most likely want to see his son succeed. Heck, Daniel Bryan's Yes Lock and Diving Headbutt are clearly a thinly vieled tribute to the late Benoit. How can you not feel bad for him and want him to overcome the tragedy? If this kind of thing happened in a real sport it would be the topic of discussion and he'd be considered a hero for overcoming the odds and the adversity. He's a unique story.
There is no way that WWE would let him use his Benoit names but WWE fans are not stupid. There is a chance for heckling. I think it could potentially be a PR nightmare for them and that is where the main fear is. I think that he could however make a lot of money in Japan and in indie promotions across the world. He certainly has a lot of people that would support him and want him to succeed, as evidenced by the comments in the two pictures I posted this month of him as well as the picture of him that surfaced this morning with David Hart Smith.
That being said he has an uphill battle. From what I can see David inherited his father's small stature. The difference between David and Chris is that Chris started body building at a very young age. He refined his physique and went and trained all over the World. I'm not saying that David has no chance in hell, but he certainly has a lot to overcome outside of the adversity he will face already. Chris Benoit had incredible discipline. There is that classic story of Benoit taking a younger guy in the locker room who was being disrespectful to the elders and having the young man do 500 squats to teach him a lesson. Benoit did them alongside the young man without so much as a grunt.
Also of note, I have a friend in Canada that, until a few weeks ago, lived in the same neighborhood in Sherwood Park, Alberta as David and his sister. He said that David was a nice guy however really quiet. Not so different from his father. | it's a long shot, i don't think his odds are any worse than any other young person looking to get into the business. |
ambystoma | Except on a radiograph the dark areas (radiotransparency) typically indicates an absence of material, rather than a presence. This ironically means that Jesus is, in fact, precisely absent in this gentleman's heart. It also appears that Jesus is absent in his trachea, aorta and clavicles. I would also want to check with a radiologist (or, at least, a qualified doctor) whether he is showing signs of bilateral hilar lymphadenopathy. If he were, then sarcoidosis should be included on the differential and this could perhaps be related to the Jesus legion (granuloma and then somehow loss of the resulting fibrosis giving you a cavity?). Hm, on that note, tuberculosis could leave a cavitation. Although a huge hole (ha!) in this theory is precisely where his heart, sternum, spine and clavicles have disappeared to (I presume this isn't post mortem as he appears to be breathing in).
TL;DR tuberculosis gave this guy a cavitating lesion that looks like Jesus | Except on a radiograph the dark areas (radiotransparency) typically indicates an absence of material, rather than a presence. This ironically means that Jesus is, in fact, precisely absent in this gentleman's heart. It also appears that Jesus is absent in his trachea, aorta and clavicles. I would also want to check with a radiologist (or, at least, a qualified doctor) whether he is showing signs of bilateral hilar lymphadenopathy. If he were, then sarcoidosis should be included on the differential and this could perhaps be related to the Jesus legion (granuloma and then somehow loss of the resulting fibrosis giving you a cavity?). Hm, on that note, tuberculosis could leave a cavitation. Although a huge hole (ha!) in this theory is precisely where his heart, sternum, spine and clavicles have disappeared to (I presume this isn't post mortem as he appears to be breathing in).
TL;DR tuberculosis gave this guy a cavitating lesion that looks like Jesus
| forwardsfromgrandma | t5_2t776 | cd23t9j | Except on a radiograph the dark areas (radiotransparency) typically indicates an absence of material, rather than a presence. This ironically means that Jesus is, in fact, precisely absent in this gentleman's heart. It also appears that Jesus is absent in his trachea, aorta and clavicles. I would also want to check with a radiologist (or, at least, a qualified doctor) whether he is showing signs of bilateral hilar lymphadenopathy. If he were, then sarcoidosis should be included on the differential and this could perhaps be related to the Jesus legion (granuloma and then somehow loss of the resulting fibrosis giving you a cavity?). Hm, on that note, tuberculosis could leave a cavitation. Although a huge hole (ha!) in this theory is precisely where his heart, sternum, spine and clavicles have disappeared to (I presume this isn't post mortem as he appears to be breathing in). | tuberculosis gave this guy a cavitating lesion that looks like Jesus |
LikeInk | I have quite a few, I have a cartoon boombox on the inside of my arm, with a rainbow spitting out, and with music notes. I have a drawing that my sister drew when she was 4 on the inside of my forearm. The Los Angeles symbol (LA), I was born and raised in LA. ;), that is right under my sister's drawing. I have a bass clef on the inside of my wrist. A heart on my hand, in between my thumb and pointer finger... Lastly, I have lips on my left hip.. Oh, and I'm getting an old school key on my shoulder tomorrow. About 20hrs work so far..
Edit: TL;DR Not that many. | I have quite a few, I have a cartoon boombox on the inside of my arm, with a rainbow spitting out, and with music notes. I have a drawing that my sister drew when she was 4 on the inside of my forearm. The Los Angeles symbol (LA), I was born and raised in LA. ;), that is right under my sister's drawing. I have a bass clef on the inside of my wrist. A heart on my hand, in between my thumb and pointer finger... Lastly, I have lips on my left hip.. Oh, and I'm getting an old school key on my shoulder tomorrow. About 20hrs work so far..
Edit: TL;DR Not that many.
| dykesgonemild | t5_2tpgb | cd1xs4l | I have quite a few, I have a cartoon boombox on the inside of my arm, with a rainbow spitting out, and with music notes. I have a drawing that my sister drew when she was 4 on the inside of my forearm. The Los Angeles symbol (LA), I was born and raised in LA. ;), that is right under my sister's drawing. I have a bass clef on the inside of my wrist. A heart on my hand, in between my thumb and pointer finger... Lastly, I have lips on my left hip.. Oh, and I'm getting an old school key on my shoulder tomorrow. About 20hrs work so far..
Edit: | Not that many. |
cabbagery | So much in philosophy is interconnected, and the issue of morality is no different. It touches on metaphysics, on 'free will,' and obviously on the issue of just what actions are appropriate, much less obligatory (or prohibited).
The question posed here betrays confusion regarding the nature of metaethical theories. Absolute morality versus relative morality are one axis, and objective morality versus subjective morality are another -- the two sets are orthogonal to one another. That is, an absolute morality could also be subjective, and a relative morality could also be objective.
With respect to atheism, there is no specific requirement to endorse one pairing or another; the old stand-by is that atheism is 'merely' a 'lack of belief in gods' -- nothing else is required to be an atheist. Agree or not, it is clear that there is no set of doctrines an atheist must affirm or endorse apart from a possibly nebulous claim generally rejecting (or simply not considering) the existence of deities.
That said, it is often the case that atheists will endorse moral relativism (whether objective or subjective). This presumably has to do with the fact that it is hard to see how moral absolutism might work given that there are no gods. While that easy analysis is at least partially correct, it is also a bit too easy -- it is also [unfortunately] the case that few humans have any meaningful metaethical training. There are many metaethical theories which are seemingly endlessly under discussion in the academic philosophical community, and insofar as most professional philosophers are atheists (agnostic atheists, generally), not all of the metaethical theories they advance are relativistic. In spite of the fact that most professional philosophers endorse moral realism and moral cognitivism, their views nonetheless vary widely regarding normative ethics, and yes, many endorse deontology, which is quite often absolutist.
For my part, I tentatively endorse 'ethical intuitionism'; it is an objective moral system which is also compatible with moral absolutism, in which moral percepts are known intuitively by moral agents, if they are known at all. It is happily compatible with atheism -- no gods are required -- and it may also be the case that the various metaethical theories which are ostensibly competitors are really just different ways of describing the same system. I digress.
---
**tl;dr**: There are many metaethical theories, and some of them are both absolutist and objective, and some of these are perfectly well compatible with atheism. It is not so much a mark against atheists that they are often unfamiliar with these theories, but against the unfortunate state of [American] education: too many people are too poorly educated in terms of philosophical topics -- theists and atheists alike are often ignorant of the nuance involved in metaethics. | So much in philosophy is interconnected, and the issue of morality is no different. It touches on metaphysics, on 'free will,' and obviously on the issue of just what actions are appropriate, much less obligatory (or prohibited).
The question posed here betrays confusion regarding the nature of metaethical theories. Absolute morality versus relative morality are one axis, and objective morality versus subjective morality are another -- the two sets are orthogonal to one another. That is, an absolute morality could also be subjective, and a relative morality could also be objective.
With respect to atheism, there is no specific requirement to endorse one pairing or another; the old stand-by is that atheism is 'merely' a 'lack of belief in gods' -- nothing else is required to be an atheist. Agree or not, it is clear that there is no set of doctrines an atheist must affirm or endorse apart from a possibly nebulous claim generally rejecting (or simply not considering) the existence of deities.
That said, it is often the case that atheists will endorse moral relativism (whether objective or subjective). This presumably has to do with the fact that it is hard to see how moral absolutism might work given that there are no gods. While that easy analysis is at least partially correct, it is also a bit too easy -- it is also [unfortunately] the case that few humans have any meaningful metaethical training. There are many metaethical theories which are seemingly endlessly under discussion in the academic philosophical community, and insofar as most professional philosophers are atheists (agnostic atheists, generally), not all of the metaethical theories they advance are relativistic. In spite of the fact that most professional philosophers endorse moral realism and moral cognitivism, their views nonetheless vary widely regarding normative ethics, and yes, many endorse deontology, which is quite often absolutist.
For my part, I tentatively endorse 'ethical intuitionism'; it is an objective moral system which is also compatible with moral absolutism, in which moral percepts are known intuitively by moral agents, if they are known at all. It is happily compatible with atheism -- no gods are required -- and it may also be the case that the various metaethical theories which are ostensibly competitors are really just different ways of describing the same system. I digress.
tl;dr : There are many metaethical theories, and some of them are both absolutist and objective, and some of these are perfectly well compatible with atheism. It is not so much a mark against atheists that they are often unfamiliar with these theories, but against the unfortunate state of [American] education: too many people are too poorly educated in terms of philosophical topics -- theists and atheists alike are often ignorant of the nuance involved in metaethics.
| DebateAnAtheist | t5_2ryfy | cd29qhq | So much in philosophy is interconnected, and the issue of morality is no different. It touches on metaphysics, on 'free will,' and obviously on the issue of just what actions are appropriate, much less obligatory (or prohibited).
The question posed here betrays confusion regarding the nature of metaethical theories. Absolute morality versus relative morality are one axis, and objective morality versus subjective morality are another -- the two sets are orthogonal to one another. That is, an absolute morality could also be subjective, and a relative morality could also be objective.
With respect to atheism, there is no specific requirement to endorse one pairing or another; the old stand-by is that atheism is 'merely' a 'lack of belief in gods' -- nothing else is required to be an atheist. Agree or not, it is clear that there is no set of doctrines an atheist must affirm or endorse apart from a possibly nebulous claim generally rejecting (or simply not considering) the existence of deities.
That said, it is often the case that atheists will endorse moral relativism (whether objective or subjective). This presumably has to do with the fact that it is hard to see how moral absolutism might work given that there are no gods. While that easy analysis is at least partially correct, it is also a bit too easy -- it is also [unfortunately] the case that few humans have any meaningful metaethical training. There are many metaethical theories which are seemingly endlessly under discussion in the academic philosophical community, and insofar as most professional philosophers are atheists (agnostic atheists, generally), not all of the metaethical theories they advance are relativistic. In spite of the fact that most professional philosophers endorse moral realism and moral cognitivism, their views nonetheless vary widely regarding normative ethics, and yes, many endorse deontology, which is quite often absolutist.
For my part, I tentatively endorse 'ethical intuitionism'; it is an objective moral system which is also compatible with moral absolutism, in which moral percepts are known intuitively by moral agents, if they are known at all. It is happily compatible with atheism -- no gods are required -- and it may also be the case that the various metaethical theories which are ostensibly competitors are really just different ways of describing the same system. I digress. | There are many metaethical theories, and some of them are both absolutist and objective, and some of these are perfectly well compatible with atheism. It is not so much a mark against atheists that they are often unfamiliar with these theories, but against the unfortunate state of [American] education: too many people are too poorly educated in terms of philosophical topics -- theists and atheists alike are often ignorant of the nuance involved in metaethics. |
Jbozzarelli | For me my love of raw denim is deep rooted in cultural expressions of family. My grandfather was a farmer and canvas work wear was his daily norm. My father, having grown up on a tobacco farm, taught me to love and cherish high quality and reliable goods. He taught me how to take care of something that is top of the line so it lasts forever. They wore jeans and they did it the hard way. Raw denim isn't easy; breaking in jeans is a labor of love. Like oiling a baseball mitt every day till it is velvety soft, or simply maintaining the plow...you get out of things what you put into them. Raw denim, work boots, leather goods...these are the garments my grandfather would have worn while working his tobacco fields, they are what my dad wore when he took me all over Virginia teaching me how to fish when I was a kid, they are representative of a time when things were made right. What they aren't is cheap junk manufactured in China. Sounds stupid but I think a lot of people are nostalgic over quality manufactured goods these days. I wear them because it is a simple understated way to say, "I appreciate quality and history," in one fell swoop. Like a lot of people here I got in it for the fadez; I wanted conversation piece pants. Well, in many ways I got them when I quickly realized raw denim was more than fashion, it is part of a strong desire to establish parallels with those who came before me.
TLDR: my dad and grandpa were badass American motherfuckers and I want to be like them too. | For me my love of raw denim is deep rooted in cultural expressions of family. My grandfather was a farmer and canvas work wear was his daily norm. My father, having grown up on a tobacco farm, taught me to love and cherish high quality and reliable goods. He taught me how to take care of something that is top of the line so it lasts forever. They wore jeans and they did it the hard way. Raw denim isn't easy; breaking in jeans is a labor of love. Like oiling a baseball mitt every day till it is velvety soft, or simply maintaining the plow...you get out of things what you put into them. Raw denim, work boots, leather goods...these are the garments my grandfather would have worn while working his tobacco fields, they are what my dad wore when he took me all over Virginia teaching me how to fish when I was a kid, they are representative of a time when things were made right. What they aren't is cheap junk manufactured in China. Sounds stupid but I think a lot of people are nostalgic over quality manufactured goods these days. I wear them because it is a simple understated way to say, "I appreciate quality and history," in one fell swoop. Like a lot of people here I got in it for the fadez; I wanted conversation piece pants. Well, in many ways I got them when I quickly realized raw denim was more than fashion, it is part of a strong desire to establish parallels with those who came before me.
TLDR: my dad and grandpa were badass American motherfuckers and I want to be like them too.
| rawdenim | t5_2scl9 | cd2odec | For me my love of raw denim is deep rooted in cultural expressions of family. My grandfather was a farmer and canvas work wear was his daily norm. My father, having grown up on a tobacco farm, taught me to love and cherish high quality and reliable goods. He taught me how to take care of something that is top of the line so it lasts forever. They wore jeans and they did it the hard way. Raw denim isn't easy; breaking in jeans is a labor of love. Like oiling a baseball mitt every day till it is velvety soft, or simply maintaining the plow...you get out of things what you put into them. Raw denim, work boots, leather goods...these are the garments my grandfather would have worn while working his tobacco fields, they are what my dad wore when he took me all over Virginia teaching me how to fish when I was a kid, they are representative of a time when things were made right. What they aren't is cheap junk manufactured in China. Sounds stupid but I think a lot of people are nostalgic over quality manufactured goods these days. I wear them because it is a simple understated way to say, "I appreciate quality and history," in one fell swoop. Like a lot of people here I got in it for the fadez; I wanted conversation piece pants. Well, in many ways I got them when I quickly realized raw denim was more than fashion, it is part of a strong desire to establish parallels with those who came before me. | my dad and grandpa were badass American motherfuckers and I want to be like them too. |
merrell056 | I got lucky one time in a pub game while just wildly clicking to loot and got the only nice drop I have found in a public game which was tal rasha's chest.
Actually I found some magic find shako the other day and the guy who had been leading the runs for about an hour was angry about it. I gave it to him without even thinking and he took me to a private game and gave me a bunch of stuff.
TLDR it's really hard to loot anything as a range class in SC public games. I don't even look at loot anymore. | I got lucky one time in a pub game while just wildly clicking to loot and got the only nice drop I have found in a public game which was tal rasha's chest.
Actually I found some magic find shako the other day and the guy who had been leading the runs for about an hour was angry about it. I gave it to him without even thinking and he took me to a private game and gave me a bunch of stuff.
TLDR it's really hard to loot anything as a range class in SC public games. I don't even look at loot anymore.
| slashdiablo | t5_2sv1q | cd2knrb | I got lucky one time in a pub game while just wildly clicking to loot and got the only nice drop I have found in a public game which was tal rasha's chest.
Actually I found some magic find shako the other day and the guy who had been leading the runs for about an hour was angry about it. I gave it to him without even thinking and he took me to a private game and gave me a bunch of stuff. | it's really hard to loot anything as a range class in SC public games. I don't even look at loot anymore. |
Paranitis | I've been watching X Factor UK since it first came to YouTube, as well as X Factor US as soon as it started here. I also watch The Voice and American Idol.
Well, the last season of American Idol was my last, just because of all the focus on the judges. I tried so hard to stick through with it, but it just finally got to be too much.
X Factor UK I still watch every time a new performance pops up on my YouTube subscriptions.
Then with The Voice I fast forward through all the stupid practice shit and the backstage nonsense and get to the performances. I've been pretty impressed with The Voice overall each season. The show has some pretty good performances, and while there is a bit of stuff involving the judges, they don't seem artificial like on the other shows.
But X Factor US...man, that show has been terrible since it began. I keep watching, hoping and hoping they are able to pump out performances like I've seen on the UK original, but it just never quite gets there for me.
Then you get judges giving their people songs they have no business singing, and there is SO MUCH focus on shit going on around the singer during the performance that it distracts away from the singing itself (but that's also a gripe I have with the UK version).
TL;DR - Long time watcher of reality singing competitions, X Factor US is awful. | I've been watching X Factor UK since it first came to YouTube, as well as X Factor US as soon as it started here. I also watch The Voice and American Idol.
Well, the last season of American Idol was my last, just because of all the focus on the judges. I tried so hard to stick through with it, but it just finally got to be too much.
X Factor UK I still watch every time a new performance pops up on my YouTube subscriptions.
Then with The Voice I fast forward through all the stupid practice shit and the backstage nonsense and get to the performances. I've been pretty impressed with The Voice overall each season. The show has some pretty good performances, and while there is a bit of stuff involving the judges, they don't seem artificial like on the other shows.
But X Factor US...man, that show has been terrible since it began. I keep watching, hoping and hoping they are able to pump out performances like I've seen on the UK original, but it just never quite gets there for me.
Then you get judges giving their people songs they have no business singing, and there is SO MUCH focus on shit going on around the singer during the performance that it distracts away from the singing itself (but that's also a gripe I have with the UK version).
TL;DR - Long time watcher of reality singing competitions, X Factor US is awful.
| television | t5_2qh6e | cd3h9ch | I've been watching X Factor UK since it first came to YouTube, as well as X Factor US as soon as it started here. I also watch The Voice and American Idol.
Well, the last season of American Idol was my last, just because of all the focus on the judges. I tried so hard to stick through with it, but it just finally got to be too much.
X Factor UK I still watch every time a new performance pops up on my YouTube subscriptions.
Then with The Voice I fast forward through all the stupid practice shit and the backstage nonsense and get to the performances. I've been pretty impressed with The Voice overall each season. The show has some pretty good performances, and while there is a bit of stuff involving the judges, they don't seem artificial like on the other shows.
But X Factor US...man, that show has been terrible since it began. I keep watching, hoping and hoping they are able to pump out performances like I've seen on the UK original, but it just never quite gets there for me.
Then you get judges giving their people songs they have no business singing, and there is SO MUCH focus on shit going on around the singer during the performance that it distracts away from the singing itself (but that's also a gripe I have with the UK version). | Long time watcher of reality singing competitions, X Factor US is awful. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.