PeriodicallyPedantic

joined 2 years ago

That entirely depended on how 1337 you were ๐Ÿ˜ฌ

Yeah, it should be slangopodes.

[โ€“] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

This is absolutely not the reason, because even back then when we started doing it, we did it on ICQ, MSN, etc. those chats didn't have length restrictions, and typing was easy on a keyboard.

[โ€“] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 16 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Armed with my screwdriver
Life is never a bore
I study and research
Data galore
Nothing can stop me
Accolades and more
Now let me prop open
The Demon Core

[โ€“] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 67 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

This is a red, beige, and green checkered flag.

  • wants to chase down people
  • is whimsical
  • can't make up his mind
  • is controlling
  • cares about fitness
  • not a gym bro

I'm kinda surprised that people are so offended by a homescreen that they're downvoting.

Do you not like my arrangement? Or is there something about live tiles themselves (what? They're just like widgets)? What is it that has you downvoting over something so benign?

[โ€“] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Windows phone for life

There is more when I scroll down, but I figured this was enough. Rather show the live tiles working than the last few rows

[โ€“] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think you missed my point.
Also idk how serious you're being.

It's about expectation management. If you're taught to expect that you can turn struggle into strength and obstacles into opportunity, then when you're unable to then you'll feel like something is wrong with you, and when society expects it of others then it becomes a moral failing.
But the times where it's feasible to transform those negatives into positives are rare and fleeting, so we're setting ourselves and others up for failure with messages like this.
And equally important, this effectively absolves responsibility from those with the power to help.

So I don't believe it's healthy to take that "positive" perspective, because I don't really believe it's positive, any more than the belief you can fly is.

[โ€“] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 0 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Lol I'm not sure which of the perspectives that'd fall under, but I'm not sure that's a great long term strategy either in the current job market.

Reality and ideality (is that a word?) are unfortunately pretty divergent

Share Your Crayons, Bestie Susie

[โ€“] PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You're placing the onus on the wrong party. If you tell someone that they just need to take control of a situation in which they have no control, what psychological impact do you think that'll have on them when they're inevitably unable to?

This advice is dangerously naive at best, and victim blaming to support existing power structures at worst.

I should have known

 

She is so proud of me, she tells everyone

 

I cum in the shower, instead.

 

Imagine living in a universe where, without even trying, you can run so fast that if you trip, you will die and splatter your body over a couple hundred meters of ground. And if you trip into someone, it'll kill them and possibly an entire pile of people.

Like, in motor racing, the cars get wrecked but the drivers are fine. In the movie Cars, they all die. The race spectators are watching a blood sport.

 

What is a bread roll if not all crust?
What is toasting, if not making the whole piece of bread more crust-like?

 

When toilets try to save money by reducing the amount of water they use per flush, but you end up having to flush like 3 times ๐Ÿคฌ

 

What would you put in your second aid kit?

 

Be me.
I've started sitting down to pee because it's cleaner.
Stand up after I've finished peeing.
Pull up pants.
Turn around to flush.
There is poop in the toilet.
I forgot that this time I had sat down to poop.

 

In old plays and stories, such as Romeo and Juliet, poisons are depicted as being fairly fast acting.

Would they really have had access to such poison, or was it simply creative license? What would a realistic depiction of a poison of that era be?

 

I'm trying to figure out a ruling for something one of my players wants to do. They're invisible, but they took a couple of seemingly non-attack actions that my gut says should break inviz.

Specifically, they dumped out a flask of oil, and then used a tinderbox to light it on fire. Using a tinderbox isn't an attack, nor is emptying a flask, although they are actions , and the result of lighting something on fire both seems like an attack and something that would dispell inviz.

I know that as DM I can rule it however I want, but I'm fairly inexperienced and I don't wanna go nerfing one of my players tools just because it feels yucky to me personally without understanding the implications.

Is this an attack or is there another justification for breaking inviz that is there some RAW clause I didn't see? Or should this be allowed?

 
 
view more: next โ€บ