Yeah I'm honestly suprrised. Is Lol really good at keeping toxicity down? I play Dota and used to play league, I would still agree that Dota may be toxic than league, but I wouldn't say its a huge difference. Lot more Smurfs in Dota if feels though.
There was a senator that literally asked someone trying to be confirmed, if Trump was a Russian plant, what would he do differently? They kept trying to deflect.
Idk. I now recommend getting cheap tools first until they either break( from usage) or their bad quality is a noticeable and active hindrance. From there buy better quality.
I also suggest buying ALL the tools you need. Sometimes, you think you can make it work with some alternatives and don't want to get the specialized tool. I feel that I usually end up spending more time dealing with the problem and getting more stressed out.
Example of the latter: dealing with my drum breaks with just pliers. Uninstalling was a breeze, but installing was a huge pain. The cheapest specialty tools made my life so much better, and used them several times. I notice their janky, but they still work good enough to get the job done.
Yeah that's what I'm thinking. I can also get a point off of djocovic, just give me a lot of chances.
If we're talking about a point in one game, nah to either. A point in a 3 set match? I think so.
It is honestly a difficult game to get into. But of a steel learning curve, and the point system doesn't help. Very fun game and ive seen there's a huge community of people that play it, which is great for networking
I think you say that because you don't understand the actual point structure.
So first point is actually 15. But some people like to just say 5 instead. Now if you both have a point, then you would say 15 all or 5 all. After that, the next point is 30. If you're tied it's 30 all. Now the next point is, you got it, 40. If you're tied, you would obviously say, duece. Now if you score a point, after having 3 points, which is called 40, and you would have more than 2 points than your opponent, then you have won the game, which is the name of a set of points and does not mean you won the whole game. But if you would have 1 more point than your opponent after scoring a point after your 3rd point, then instead of getting a game, you get advantage. You need to score 1 more point to win the game, which is just a set of points and not the whole game. If you have advantage, and your opponent scores a point then you lose your advantage, and it's right back to duece, which is what you say when both players have 40, which is actually 3 points.
Have you confirmed that no website you provide ad revenue or membership fees to used AWS? If you haven't checked, then you probably have supported Amazon.
Amazon makes most of their money through AWS.
Regardless, good on you for not buying from Amazon directly. I too haven't purchased from them for years
Honestly, I've been hearing this a lot of reddit and it feels like Russian disinformation to get liberals/Democrats to throw their own stupid Jan 6.
Post some reliable evidence, and an actual reason why Democrats aren't talking about this reliable information and I may be convinced.
Democrats and Kamala would be the people to champion this information if it were valid since they lost power due to the "cheating". The fact that they haven't said anything tells me it's probably not real.
Impeachment doesn't require the DOJ. We would Just need the house to send the articles of impeachment to the Senate.
Regardless the house is mainly controlled by Rs so I doubt they would impeach, and the Senate is also Republican controlled meaning Trump wouldn't even be removed if he was impeached
Idk, that would make sense except that desantis had been talking them down as well. If desantis were more neutral about the situation I would be more inclined to believe your theory.
For real. The issues occurring in the US are various, but the vast spreading of disinformation in the US is crippling. Don't let unchecked lobbying (aka bribing of politicians) occur in your country, don't let "news organizations" spread false realities.
I've not been diagnosed, but I experience this all the time. I've made a habit of saying past me is so smart, if I remembered.
I've written notes that I have forgotten about, and found afterwards and thought, wow if I had remembered this note, it would have been very helpful.
Also examples like your said, "where's [blank]?" Search for it find it after way too long* " oh wow that was an extremely logical place to have put it, if only I remembered. GJ past me"
I'm legitimately confused as to what will happen here.
Seemingly, Trump is the one that got them out of Romania, yet Trump's allies are attacking them. You would expect Trump to ensure his team is consistent with whether this are "bad people" or not.
I'm hoping they still get tried for any crimes they committed.
I feel your conflating things with your first point. Yeah a person living in NY is going to make more money than the average american (as you point out with that data you posted), but that doesn't mean you can't be poor as in struggling to pay bills, to save for retirement, or to pay for living expenses. By your definition, there's no poor people in the US, because compared the to world our poor people are very wealthy. My point is, the financially struggling people in New York are more likely to take public transit than the people that are wealthy in New York. Emphasis on more likely because you assumed i meant all lower income people only take public transit (the confusion maybe stemming from my private jet analogy).
You're right about large cities will have large populations, but that doesn't mean that cities want everybody concentrating in certain areas. Providing incentives or disincentives so manage movement is helpful, especially when you have solid alternatives in the form of public transit. The fees aren't crazy high, and it encourage cost efficient decision making (in terms of better for the city as vehicles are extremely detrimental).
I would definitely support higher corporate tax rates. A big issue is that congestion pricing is already something a majority of voters are liking and is being implemented. Increased taxes can still be done later.
Congestion pricing is a tax levied against the poor? The poor are less likely to be driving wtf. That's like saying extra taxes on private jets is a tax for preventing the poor from getting private jets: that wasn't not an issue and is in fact a way of redistributing wealth to lower classes. You don't need to drive to Manhattan to experience Manhattan in the same way that you don't need to own a private jet to travel.
If you have a better way to reduce congestion in Manhattan AND provide additional funds to public transit, feel free to suggest that idea.
You should plug it in your comment.