Soo.. Need some help with ideas for puns that can work into a costume for the 21st amendment (the repeal of prohibition, the 18th amendment). My girlfriend insists on a couples costume and I'm going as the 2nd amendment. The only other doable thing I can think of is the 21st.
I was thinking maybe she could dress as some bottle of alcohol and peal multiple layers off a printed 18th amendment ..or something.. rePEEL the 18th amendment.?
Help me guys, girls and nonbinaries!
I understand Apoc 1 is certainly beyond an easy fix.
I understand AR2 is Gus and Co's MAIN goal (And I understand that), I understand that they are going to care far more about that game than they do about Apoc 1.
But, Apoc 1 still has a lot of players, I personally have met quite a few people who hate AR2. Not because it's "broken" or whatever, but because it's just not Apoc. They liked Apoc for one very big reason: it was simple.
They loved the cartoony, arcade-style game. They loved the smooth-block-model designs, they loved the simple architecture, they loved how SIMPLE this game was.
Sure, there are dozens of people who will disagree. But there are also a dozen that WILL agree.
Apoc 1 has more people than AR2 for a few reasons: Can't afford AR2 and it's simple and easy.
No matter what they do to AR2, the simplicity of everything is gone.
u/Mr_NekoTentacles made a post going into more detail but.
That is a great segway into my main point.
Gusmanak should hire a team dedicated to fixing AR1.
I understand most of his funds are going to AR2. I don't blame him. I fully understand that. But there are dozens of devoted, hardcore Apoc fans that would work for a very small price, hell - some may even work for FREE out of pure love for the game (I know I would.)
Hire some scripters to (try) and fix and amend (pun intended) what errors there are in Apoc's code. There's been quite a few mods out there that HAVE reduced exploits. It's not IMPOSSIBLE. It's just highly IMPROBABLE. There's a difference.
Hire some devoted designers who can perfectly replicate AR1's simple and cartoony-arcade style designs. Hire some people to do their best to fix this game for others. There are a dozen people who prefer OLD Apoc vs AR2.
If Gus hired a team to work on Apoc 1, the stress would be reduced a bit on Gus' part as he's not constantly bombarded with Apoc 1 bugs and issues and shit. It'd be on the new team.
I'm just saying Gus - if you're reading this. PLEASE THINK ABOUT IT.
Don't say no right off on the bat.
Please, spend some time and reflect on is this would be beneficial.
Sure, I'm not on your team, I don't know what issues there are. But from an OUTSIDER perspective, hiring a third party team to work on Apoc 1 is a great idea. Then maybe we'd get that updated Trinity HQ, that updated Military Outpost. New towns. New locations.
It'd
... keep reading on reddit ➡My original motion:
>**Amend Section 13 (“Motions”) of the Standing Orders of the House as follows:**At the end of (2) insert “During the reading of a motion, any Peer may submit amendments under the same procedures as those for amendments to Bills;After (2) insert: “(3) When the reading ends all amendments, if any, proposed shall, if necessary, be put to a vote of the same length as that of divisions for amendments to Bills, unless they were withdrawn before the end of that reading;And renumber accordingly.
And original opening speech (as I'm feeling lazy re-writing it):
My Lords, under the current Standing Orders of the House, we may amend documents coming from the Other Place, i.e. Bills, yet we cannot amend items that are solely a matter for this Noble House. By prohibiting amendments to motions, we leave those who draft them to make use of unofficial channels to discuss, debate and agree on a text that can pass the House. This is even more important as no government, regardless of its majority in the Other Place, ever commands a majority in Your Lordships' House. To me, the use of official channels where possible and appropriate is much preferred over unofficial ones.
By amending the Standing Orders to allow amendable motions, we shall ensure that any Peer can provide input to the text of motions on the floor of the House, and allow the House itself, not the drafter of the motion, to find the most agreeable text. My Lords, I hope you will accept this non-controversial amendment to our Standing Orders.
TLDR: Motions are Lords business only. Allow us to amend our own motions in order to debate them publicly, and not having to agree on a wording with a majority through private channels.
This Q is particularly relevant to communities where officials are trying to push out homeless camping in parks, on sidewalks, and other areas officials deem unsuitable for camping.
Two homeless issues that arise here:
-
Homeless aversion to typical barracks/communal-type shelters, for the justifiable reasons that such environments often have a) a predatory criminal element and b) onerous rules, including wake up times and a ban on pets such as dogs; and
-
A preference by most homeless, it seems, for encampments in or near city centers, i.e. siting within walking distance (1/2 mile) of food stores, libraries, other amenities. City camping also allows homeless who are so inclined to engage in city street scenes, which can involve everything from easy procurement of illegal drugs to panhandling to hustling.
The city environment is also:
a) Generally much supported by homeless advocates and outreach workers on grounds that it allows easy providing to homeless of everything from free food to medical support to, if needed, needle exchange.
b) Much opposed by homeless critics on grounds that homeless quality of life offenses (many of which do inevitably come from the unfortunate state of being homeless) are much more impactful to the non-homeless in dense cities than they would in a rural area.
So the Q: How amendable would homeless be to government designated campground where each homeless person is given a private, lockable cabin or mobile home, say at least 200 square feet? Family groups get bigger units. The sites could be the size of a Walmart parking lot, maybe 100 to 200 homeless per site.
Understand this is a best case scenario. Some communities might not have much in the way of cabins or mobile homes--might just provide tents. Is that a deal breaker for the homeless? All sites would have proper communal bathrooms and showers and daily visits by a maintenance workers to ensure they remain in order.
Siting would have to be on outskirts of cities, or could even be completely rural. NIMBY opposition would probably arise under any circumstance; for this reason siting should strive to be distant from any hon-homeless housing, say at least 1/2 mile. On the outskirts of a city, an industrial area would probably be ideal to minimize NIMBYism.
Hi something that has always bothered me are my deep expression lines on my forehead as seen here : https://imgur.com/a/pvQCu3X
A lot has to do with it raising my eyebrows as I have a very overhanging brow and to open my eyes better. Either way, it bothers me slightly and I was wondering if botox would be the only fixable solution? They're quite distinct so I doubt any anti-aging product would solve it however I am also quite hesitant to even think about going for a botox injection.
Would love to hear any thoughts/solutions. Also, do you like chicken pox scars, too young to remember when I had it but it must have been bad haha
https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/procedure-committee/news-parliament-2017/eu-withdrawal-agreement-meaningful-vote-report-published-17-19/
What is the big deal that Bercow did here?
I’m new to reddit, so apologies for the length and any mistakes!
Some quick background: I (22f) met this close friend (22f) (we’ll call her Dee) around a decade ago, when in middle school. Most of the time we spent together consisted of group hangouts, as we had two other close friends. This carried on into high school and thereafter.
———————
I will not pretend to know what obstacles Dee has faced in her life, nor what she deals with on the daily. I know her parents had a turbulent relationship and that she was raised primarily by her grandparents. Her mom would periodically come back into her life, but was, in her words, “very flaky”. (This might not be relevant, but I’m including it in the event it might be.)
Dee has so many great qualities. She’s generous, she will defend you with fiery rage when you’re wronged, she boosts confidence, etc. However, a common theme that has always been present is her tendency to sabotage relationships (both romantic and platonic).
When she achieved the “stable and secure romantic relationship” she desired, she cheated and ghosted her partner for being “too boring and too clingy”.
When she got into the casual dating scene, she disliked the lack of loyalty present. “Why can’t he just settle down? Am I not enough?”
Both of the former situations cycled over and over throughout our friendship.
At random times, she would become furious with the entire friend group for one member’s transgression. This happened OFTEN. E.g: “liking” a post on social media from someone she disliked, NOT liking a post she made on social media, not being available on a day she was free, not having ample funds to attend an event, etc.
After “disassociating” with the group, yet again, for a transgression, I decided to let her go.
Usually, after time had passed, she would slowly begin resuming casual conversation to make amends with the group. Sometimes, she would contact members individually and try to get them on “her side” or she would lash out.
After I purged social media (due to personal circumstances), I was berated for “blocking her like a b****.” I lost it. I told her the truth: I’m too old for this. This is immature. This isn’t entertaining, it is draining. We can’t have these conversations into our late 20’s-30’s. She did not respond, and we have not spoken since.
And I miss her. I miss the good moments, when she was happy and unproblematic. I miss the trips we took and the kind convos we had. I miss calling her up to g
... keep reading on reddit ➡
One argument I hear repeatedly when it comes to gun control is "It's our fundamental right" or "It's in the constitution, it can't be changed". One of my US friends has tried to explain this to me before, but I just didn't understand, something about government being divided into two houses and it taking a number of years. Why is it that, even if they wanted to, the US government couldn't amend the amendments? For sake of argument, if the government wanted to implement strict gun control, why would they be unable to do so?
EDIT: I don't know a thing about US politics, please explain the meaning of any words longer than 8 letters :3
I've mained both Mistweaver and Restoration Druid in the past - my druid is presently a side character, but I can catch her up, as I can catch up my Windwalker as well. I don't have good logs from this tier as my guild raids during nights I'm no longer available, so I have my io. I play on Proudmoore, and if you're a Proudmoore guild I'm working on gearing a priest - if you're not, I'm willing to transfer her. Thank you for your time!
https://raider.io/characters/us/proudmoore/Passeriforme
I know, and am excited for the tie in eclyopedia-esk book "The World of Ice and Fire" is (or should) be out sometime this year. For those who do not know "The World of Ice and Fire" is a compendium tie-in book for "A Song of Ice and Fire" gathering histories/lore/families/characters...etc in a enclyopedic or wiki fashion(or so I think). It is being put together by ASOIAF writer George RR Martin, and Elio and Linda of Westeros.org
This has been know for a while now, and from last I've heard on track for release sometime this year... Which leads me to my question...
As TWOIAF is to be out this year can we assume that this will be just the first edition of this book? As we have two novels, and a handful of D&E novellas yet to come out, can we assume that as more books come out that there will be future editions to go along with new canon?
