If you feel hurt when you are on the bottom of the scoreboard or feel sorry when someone calls you out for being bad at an online competitive game where you kill people, then here's an idea that is gonna blow your mind, I know it's really hard to come up with this so I don't blame you.
Give us a goddamn toggle option.
If someone is too sensitive let them have the option to turn the Chat and Scoreboard to the 2042 one. For the rest of us who actually feel motivated by seeing where we rank with the rest of the server instead, let us chose a "legacy" option since you have a hard on for inventing dumb quotes.
"Pride and accomplishment" Never forget this goldie.
I dare you to show me one single study you made about making this decision. First Youtube removing dislike bars, now this. I wonder how these people survive real life arguments.
Edit: Apparently me demanding features that were in the game since the beginning of the franchise is more toxic than a game company selling a game at full price that shipped completely broken, missing features, unbalanced with bugs and glitches, following misleading marketing, lies and in general condescending comments from the devs about how the community was way too quick to judge the game before seeing the final product, as if that changed anything. Comments like "trust us bro" and "we care about the game more than any one of you". Or the "June Boom" and "Sep-tem-ber" tweets. Or lies from EA about the game being the earliest to go alpha and year ahead of schedule. ALL of that is completely fine and not toxic but this post is.
I grew up in Breckenridge, have skied Vail Resorts for 20+ years, and am currently a data scientist at a major tech firm (you’ll see in a second how this is relevant). I want to share my perspective on the longer term lack of incentives Vail has to effectively operate its resorts.
Growing up in Breckenridge (early 2000s) I often heard Vail referred to as “the Evil Empire” by locals. The small mountain town culture was already eroding, but a few things placated us as locals: new investments into lift infrastructure and rising property values (horrible for seasonal workers but enough to stop property owners/voters from throwing a fit). While we still experience significant crowding, as one of Vail’s flagship resorts, Breckenridge and its ops team receive greater priority than many of Vail Resorts’ recent acquisitions, especially on the East Coast. This is due to the company’s financial incentives.
The Vail business model is simple: get as many people on the Epic pass as possible, track everything they do, and then effectively market CO/UT vacations using that data.
-
Get as many people on the Epic pass as possible: This was one of Vail’s first big innovations. The original justification was that skiing depends on highly variable weather conditions, and season passes were a way to hedge against this uncertainty to guarantee revenue ahead of the season. While this is true, it has enabled the core of Vail’s recent financial success: data-science powered marketing.
-
Tracking pass holders: In order to do data-enabled marketing, you need customer data. Vail has the largest customer database in the entire ski industry. This isn’t just a list of customers, however. Since Vail put up RFID gates on the mountain, they can track where pass holders are and what they do. This is combined with an increasing ability to track you off-mountain. Growing up in Breck, my family remembers Vail’s vertical integration—purchasing lodging, ski shops in town, shuttle services. For most of these services, you receive a discount for booking with your epic pass (although usually services are marked up, so this discount merely restores market prices). This is to ensure that your behavior is associated with your pass number and stored for later analysis.
-
Data-Science Driven Marketing: There is a reason Vail’s new CEO is the former Chief Marketing Officer. Here is a talk she gave at Yale on the company’s data science strategy: [Kirsten Lynch — Data-Driven Marketing at Vail
Your stories will likely all trump mine, but I have a sweet little Easter egger who lays her beautiful blue egg every(ish)day and then runs over to scream her egg song at my office window to make sure I know about it. Even if I’m already outside.
She’s a rescue and absolutely terrified of everyone, but I think it’s kind of like punching the clock for her. Just letting me know that she did her work for the day while I’m doing mine.
I was talking to someone about addiction and basically saying the following
>I personally don’t have any addictive qualities, but I absolutely sympathize with addicts who often got introduced to drugs (opioids) under nefarious conditions.
The conversation went back and forth and eventually they asked if I felt the same about people addicted to porn. They made the point that most people know drugs are addictive and can ruin lives, but most people don’t know or understand that about porn.
Spent the rest of the day thinking about it. Our, and my anger needs to be more targeted and directed at the producers. It’s the people who traffic, abuse, rape, and profit off women that are the problem, not the addicted end user who probably doesn’t know much better or understand the damage they are doing by being a part of the system.
You don’t get mad that a heroin addict is living under a bridge and offering handjobs for a bag. You get mad at the dealers who tricked them into starting and got them addicted.
I know for me moving forward, I will be directing all my wrath at producers not users
The Suffragettes are almost universally considered to have been a force of good, having acquired basic human rights for women, it seems insane, or at least, immoral and/or unethical that anyone would be critical of the suffragettes. So imagine my surprise when I discovered that Emma Goldman, my favorite historical anarchist was quite critical of the suffragettes and declined to support them despite considering herself to be a feminist.
Apparently, Suffragettes argued that women voters would ''purify the nation'' due to their natural inclination towards morality, domesticity, and maternal responsibility.
In Goldman's 1906 Essay, “The Tragedy of Woman’s Emancipation,” Goldman criticized the realism and implications of this, citing that the states which had allowed women to vote at the time did not experience any improvement as a result of women's voting. Specifically, she wrote:
''Has that purified our political life, as many well-meaning advocates predicted? Certainly not. […] Corruption of politics has nothing to do with the morals, or the laxity of morals, of various political personalities. Its cause is altogether a material one. Politics is the reflex of the business and industrial world''.
Goldman believed that while the right to vote and other civil rights could be good demands, she stated that, for herself, true emancipation began neither at the polls nor in the courts, but in liberating women from routine stereotypes, biases, and prejudices.
In Goldman's 1910 Essay ''Women's suffrage'', Goldman famously called universal suffrage “our modern fetish.”
Also, while not related to Goldman, the book ''The Case against Adolescence'' by Dr. Robert Epstein argues that many of the restrictions placed upon the youth can be traced back to the suffragette movement which, in the process of ending child labor, also advocated for laws that heightened ''the supremacy of elders'' as a means of protecting young people from exploitation, only to have them be exploited further. Unlike Goldman, Epstein is not an Anarchist and proclaims himself to be a Capitalist although he expresses very left-wing ideals in most of his books whether or not he realizes it. Like Emma however, Robert is a youth rights activist.
So my question is: were Goldman's views on the Suffragette's misguided? Or were her criticisms justified? From the perspective of Anarchists, was the Suffragette movement a force of indisputable good or did they have some problematic traits to
... keep reading on reddit ➡Yo Jungle. I know most of us are pro-DRS here and really I had intended to post this on ss, but realized comment is different than post requirement... lol, whoops. Anyway, I hope you jungle monkeys enjoy:
What's up Apes and Apettes. I'm not going to spend a lot of time with flowery language, twitter screenshot reposts, and profound theses. Instead I'll assume most APEs here frequent the sub and are familiar (at least casually) with all of our Chair-man 😍's tweets.
If not, have a visit.
I want to start with his recent messaging. Particularly:
- It takes money to buy whiskey
- Only interested in speaking with candidates who want to actually work
- His memoriam tweet to his father on the anniversary of his passing. Respectfully, 'I miss you'. ----- I feel this one deserves interpretation. His father, as Ryan has said in multiple prior interviews, was the first to open the office and the last to leave. He could be found getting his hands dirty at every level of the company to assist whomever was in need of his help. I won't continue to take liberties, but Ryan's tweet fits in the context of the other two. He wants people who work hard and misses his Dad who embodied hard work for him growing up and in adulthood.
- SugarDaddy candy image
- Com-pooter-chair (Jul 23)
- Dr. Ruth Sex
TL;DR/Summary: The above in combination, to me, paint the message of "hey shareholders, you keep whining about wen MOASS, well I don't mind being your SugarDaddy, but it takes money to buy whiskey and I'm only interested in candidates who actually want to work... I told y'all before in July to register DRS with Com-pooter-chair. I EVEN included it for the first time EVER IN HISTORY on our Q3 financial statements. So lemme remind y'all; y'all keep saying hedgie fk and fk SHF, etc. etc. Well lemme show you how to fk. Here is the manual. Dr. Ruth Sex.
So if you think all you have to do "is HODL" because it's the "easiest job in the world because it costs nothing to HODL"....*ahem* I beg to differ. Listen to your 🪑-man. Please.
TRUE TL;DR: 1 Buy. 2 D. R. S. 3 HODL [in Book, not Plan holdings]
Thank you for coming to my TED talk. And all of the awards, gracious APEs!!
Edit: Clarity of TRUE TL;DR:, gratitude. :D
It seems like everyone on AITA thinks they're an expert in mental health.
This means that a lot of harmful misinformation and bad advice gets thrown around in the comments section under the guise of, "I'm saying this because I want to help you and I know what I'm talking about." Since I'm mentally disabled myself, it really hurts to read all these comments demonizing my conditions and saying things about my disabilities that are straight-up wrong.
One of the main things that really bothers me on AITA is that the commenters are quick to turn against any mentally ill/disabled person and call them an asshole. Usually, they justify it by saying that a person's mental illness is their responsibility. On the surface, I agree with that, since everyone is responsible for themselves and it's wrong to take your problems out on other people, however, that's not how AITA commenters see it. According to them, if you're mentally ill and you dare show any symptoms -- even the most harmless, standard symptoms -- you're a terrible person.
Before I continue, I want to make it really clear that I'm not talking about AITA commenters who criticize people for using mental illness as an excuse to do horrible things. I'm talking about those AITA comments that have the same vibes as parents who tell their kids, "stop being depressed. You're ruining the holidays by having depression. Just be happy."
I also want to note this -- I am not an expert in mental health. Nor am I claiming to be. And while everything I am going to say here comes from my own experiences as a mentally disabled person, I do not speak on behalf of all mentally ill/disabled people. No one does.
AITA's treatment of people with PTSD is unhelpful and hostile.
I once read an AITA story where someone with PTSD asked their partner not to say certain things around them because it was triggering. When I read the post, I didn't think it was an unreasonable request; it wasn't like any of the phrases mentioned were unavoidable in everyday conversation. If my partner made that request of me, I'd agree in an instant. After all, it'd be such a small thing for me to remember, yet it would mean the world to my partner.
But of course, the AITA commenters agreed that the person with PTSD was an asshole. Many commenters said they were an asshole because they should be getting help and going to therapy, as if therapy is an instant fix and is accessible to everyone. I also remember someone saying that the person s
... keep reading on reddit ➡I think they are well intentioned but very foolish. I don't think the hard line will work and curbing tats and insignias is actually a way for police to use the bikies vanity to their own advantage. You can clearly see who's who and who's involved because bikies like to show it off. I think this is well intentioned but a foolish way to go about it.
I saw the last episode of Talking Sopranos with David Chase, and he said something like “I don’t understand why people don’t like AJ”. Not long after I saw a post on this sub trying to contrive an argument for AJ actually being a better kid than Meadow. Some of you need to be taken to slip and fall school.
To recap AJ’s story leading up to his suicide attempt: he pours acid on a kid’s toes, then shamelessly laughs about it on the steps of his dorm. When the African exchange student hits Jason’s car, AJ joins in the beating without hesitation.
Crucially, the second beating is what AJ describes as triggering his depression when he talks to his counselor in the next episode, right before his suicide attempt. HOWEVER, in the former episode, there is another therapy scene where AJ professes to feeling very good, immediately following the second beating. The counselor says something like “maybe the medication is working”. Following THAT, we see AJ in an English class listening to his teacher read Yeats’s “The Second Coming”.
It is only after finding out about Romantic poetry that he tells his counselor about the beating and claims a resurgence of his depression.
TL;DR: AJ is not a victim of circumstance who would do better things if he had better role models, or whatever. He only shows remorse once he gets the idea that inner turmoil is interesting, and even then avoids taking direct responsibility.
The list is too long, many were in various forms of backwardness, a few had Marxist-Leninist type regimes. Of course they are not 'capitalist' now, just like they were not 'socialist' before. But definitely they adopted more free market approaches and enabled private businesses ('liberalization').
Were all these countries misguided? Were they all brainwashed by capitalist/corporate propaganda? Is US foreign policy to blame in each and every case?
From reading socialist posts this is what the general socialist view seems to imply, and in fact be centered around.
Or could it be that the flawed socialism was not working in almost cases and because of this, one by one they gave up on it and moved to flawed capitalism?
The show has mentioned - both in scenes and out by the showrunner Rafe - that they are treating the prophecies as untrustworthy due to the amount of time past. I think they are also taking it a bit further and also allowing for the possiblity that the Dark One's minions are also actively trying to fill this information void with misinformation.
Let's face it. This is inline with RJ's intentions for the story. It would also make these minions, dark friends and forsaken alike, be frankly a bit more competant. And finnally it would hit on current real world issues. These are all good things for a show to grab an audience's attention.
This idea, that lost information is latter filled with nonsense/ misunderstandings/straight out lies I think might be the root cause of events for epsisode 8.
For example, Rand and Moiraine obviously think they just fought the dark one. This is simply silly if moiraine has any good history lessons regarding the topic. So - therefore - these lessons don't exist. This gap of knowledge is what season 2 will be about for Moiraine. Finding out what happened really. Both to her personally, way back 3000 years ago, and what happened at the eye. This will help Moiraine figure out who/what she is in the upcoming conflict.
Second, I don't think the EYE = BORE is correct now. I think it was the EYE is the location of the conference of AS in the Hall of Servants. It was at that moment Ishy declared to the world what they faced, how Ishy believed they were doomed to eventually fail, and that he would join the DO's side. After all, in the show we see a quick glimse of Ishy and LT face off as if apporaching each other in a show down like way.... but it looks like they are about to talk, not fight. Also the surrounding room looks more like the White towers council chamber for the sitters. And finnally, Rand says he "fought him" in this room. This doesn't NEED to mean a combat of power. It could start as a combat of words and ideas. A plea to keep people on his side.
Anyway, the Bore might be another piece of lost information.
I mean, if Moiraine really does think they they just fought the DO. Then really anything is now possible.
Is not how we are born, or where we are born, or who we are supposed to be when we are born, is about who you chose to be.
When you see the world, when you study it, when you study yourself, who are you? Who do you want to be?
If a child is born out of a priest and spends his childhood being good, but grows up and decides to become a murderer, is he still that good kid?
Meruem was a monster who’s purpose at birth was to be the strongest there is, his only crime in existence, was this predetermined purpose that was unwillingly placed upon him.
As strong as matured as he looked, he was a baby when he committed most of his atrocities, but what did he decide to become??
After studying life he learnt a few things:
-
He learned mercy, compassion, and even love
-
He learned that value is not correlated to strength, and that a weak, defenseless blind little girl, could hold all the value in the world to him
-
He learned that to rule you can’t be constantly looking down on others as if they were trash, and that you should be wise and resort to diplomacy before giving in to violence, like when he tried to talk with netero.
-
And most importantly, at the last minute of his life, he learned what he most wanted, not revenge, not hatred, but to hold the hand of the person he loved the most before passing away.
Out of netero, Gon, and Meruem, I am not afraid to say that, Meruem ended up being the most human
And a monster who overcomes his evil nature to become human, is more of a hero in my eyes than the humans who gave up part of their humanity to defeat the monsters.
Like Gon throwing away his life willingly just to get cold, heartless, retribution or as you might call it, revenge.
Or Netero, who died saying “you have no idea, of the bottomless malice that exists within the human heart”
This one is going to be a bit personal, but i really want to discuss it with the fandom. I love writting stories. I constantly come up with ideas and discuss it with my friends. Have read and watched a lot of stuff, good and bad. Thus, i like to think i know something about quality ideas and storytelling.
But Doctor Who makes me question myself. My opinion tends to... differ from popular takes a lot. I prefer The Timeless Child and The Division arcs above the Impossible Girl (and the Hell Bent Clara) one. I'd rather have show build theories around Doctor's past than having him go out of character for a Mary Sue companion that is Clara. To me, Timeless Child feels like better episodes of late old who, such as Trial of Timelord or 7th Doctor's dark side story moments. Impossible Girl arc feels cheap and undeserved. And the fact Clara got TARDIS, immortality as well as immortal girlfriend to go alongside is just...disrespectful to other companions.
Here's my ranking: RTD era > Chibnell era > Moffat era
I know that different people have different takes. It's just makes me anxious not knowing nor seeing people who agree with this one. I would love to have a discussion about it in the comments. AMA if you need to. I will gladly explain my point. And i'd love to see anybody with the same opinion. Just to not feel like i'm the only one who's actually interested in Chibnell's lore.
P.S.: if you read all of this, hellur :)
One of the worst quotes I've ever heard (was hanging out with friends)
Another one, possibly the worst I've ever heard was "I only have a few pictures of my daughter. don't like hanging up pictures of my worldly family because I often get reminded of the things they do that I don't like. But I have lots of pictures of spiritual family. I have a picture of [witness child's name] up. I can just look at the picture and think, look how cute [witness child's name] is." (The kid was in the room and part of the conversation so it wasn't entirely random)
wtf. i think this lady doesn't have a soul :(
It’s therapy Thursday for me. IC at lunch and Group in the evening.
Since last session I’ve done a lot of introspection and realized a lot of my acting out is because I don’t feel like a man - let me correct that: I don’t feel the way I think a man should feel based on what I have thought a man was.
I’m not a stranger to accomplishment, so why do I feel like this? I was a great student, went to a good university and chose a difficult major where I graduated with honors, got a good job in a down economy and now have the material comforts I dreamed of as a child. So what is wrong with me? I think this has something to do with always wanting, but never getting, the attention of my dad. He died when I was 11. My mom worked alot. I took care of my brother and when we had a step dad he was not a bad guy but also not a role model. He wasn’t someone whose pride in me could replace what I was missing.
Over the holiday a couple weeks ago my mom was in town. I was showing her all the things I’ve been doing to improve my home. I created a workshop for myself and have learned some new woodworking hobbies. She asked where I got this from and I said “I assume dad”.
She popped that bubble real quick. Apparently my dad was totally incompetent when it came to household stuff. My moms dad helped him all the time. I learned all the men on my dads side are relatively poor when it comes to mechanical skills. (I always thought my dads dad was some kind of machinist because he is missing some fingers, came to find out he was some kind of accounting assistant, he lost his fingers in a freak bread slicing incident!)
All these assumptions of “manhood” are disappearing on me. I don’t know what it means that manhood isn’t defined as: can I grill, can I fix shit, do I have a big penis, and do I have lots of sex.
The weird thing is, and I’m so very sorry if this is triggering, the APs who I found were so into that persona. The single ones wanted a protector type figure and the married ones wanted someone who took control of them. Maybe that says more about what they were lacking in themselves but I thought it was revealing some more natural order to things that I had long not known. Like maybe the reason I was unhappy in my life and in my marriage was because I didn’t have as “manly” a role. My wife and I have always been equals and I’ve never felt like a protector or dominant one, nor have I felt protected or submissive. It’s just been like an equal partnership and when I was
... keep reading on reddit ➡