Thank goodness for the red circle, I'd have been sure the focus was the 2 guys in the water.
TheFogan
joined 2 years ago
Also could just be a general concept of investments... IE we lose 10 million here for canceling this show, we make 100 million in the merger we want to do next year.
Yeah, I think scottsman are the ones that are actually immune to marketing.
With regards to taletells implimentation of it, I found it pretty badly done. IE namely they used it for choice based story games... but I felt them pretty damn weak in that area. (in the sense that 99.9% of the story is pretty set in stone, and usually based on the most common choice, you go back and do the opposite, and everything plays out pretty much identically except maybe one or 2 one liners will change).
IE I remember the walking dead... Kenny was a mostly cool guy, who was always in conflict with a hot head old man, obviously the natural way most people play is to take kenny's side in the conflicts. In the end the hothead leaves you for dead and kenny saves you.
then replaying it... basically with constantly taking hotheads side, being a jerk to kenny at every juncture along the way. so you get the alternate ending, where hothead punches you out, and kenny saves you... but adds in the comment "even if you are an asshole". while rescuing you.
and honestly the episodes just branch that further in story, largely they clearly didn't have the resources to make a wide ever branching story that you think it is... so you just get little bits that all merge back into the same path overall.
Trying to figure out if you are joking, or you are from a nicer country that getting paid sick leave is something everyone gets. Good chunk of the american work force, has to negotiate with their boss, go to a doctor that's going to charge them between $50-$200 so they can tell you "yep you have a cold, here's a note so you can prove it to your boss", so you can give that note to your boss and hopefully not get fired for taking some UNPAID days off. (of course as most states are "at will" if you do that too often you still run the risk of getting fired for "no reason" later).
Yeah I think the real thing is just not understanding how bad a cold without an immune system would be. IE only real way to put it in context is, read up on what an immune-comprimised individual goes through when they get a cold.
It's a bit like saying
"why is my countries missile defense so crappy, whenever we're attacked there's chunks of metal all over the ground, so much smoke and noise it makes it hard to sleep, why are we so bad at defending from missiles".
Hate speach won't only speech that might incite someone to commit violence.
Expected result
"Mexicans are all rapists, and murderers and are harming the fabric of our society" -- Protected free speach
"that's really hateful to say about a whole class of people that have all walks of life in them just like us" -- Potentially inciting violence
In particular when they've already announced over 1000 victims.
How the hell did Epstein have time to rape 1000 victims... and still have so much time to party with and manage money for so many powerful people.
Also yeah, the trafficking itself is such a crazy concept. You don't solo traffic so many people by yourself.
nope nope, you already see it in the conservative sites, the spin that this trans person is the cause of his "left leaning" views, and is a corrupted person that's family has blocked out because they consider her dangerous and mentally ill).
So, while she didn't take part in, assist in or have any part in the shooting, and is assisting the police in convicting him, the narrative is already spinning that this evil trans person radicalized him... and all by herself she turned this perfect Mormon boy into the cold blooded killer.
Fully agree that, well the actions are blatently evil. Would be evil even if Catherine were actually an animal. I'd say inflicting suffering on any being with no end goal other than to inflict suffering, is kind of 100% the definition of evil.
Where I disagree is the law/chaos axis being based on local laws. IE a paladin doesn't suddenly become chaotic if he enters an evil nation that demands everyone to take part in sacrificing babies. To me that axis is always on whether you are more rigid in following your own rules, you care about the way you get the results, rather than just the end result.
To me I would say, there's not enough details in the story to gather long term opinions on Natasha, as IMO it's more of an overarching concept of consistency. So with the information given, I'd rule
NE.
Very hard to judge with that context. Not minding sounds just like non-sex repulsed asexual. (going off the fact that you don't seem to be implying wanting to do so, and haven't said anything along the lines of "wanting to".
IE the real question is would you enjoy having sex with someone, and/or do you even have romantic feelings.
ace is a huge crazy spectrum, but what I generally hear about is
aromantic - IE do not feel romantic attraction
asexual - does not feel a desire to have sex.
sex repulsed - (this does not appear to apply to you, that's when you are actually sickened when confronted with sex).
So without full more detailed view on you, unless your tone of "I don't mind" is different than what I think of when I hear that. (IE I don't mind emptying the dishwasher, or taking out the trash).
Ah damn, my arguement must have completely come apart, because that's absolutely a scottsman, and he is falling for the marketing. I don't think there's any comeback for that.