Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)AB
Posts
0
Comments
96
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I don't think breakfast needs to be that immediate? The dish prepared here almost certainly took a minimum of 30, if not 45+ minutes to make, and there's no indication it was immediately after waking. Breakfast can be a bit later.

  • I did a quick Google search, and I'm guessing miso is the ulcer treatment misoprostol that you shouldn't take during pregnancy. A d and c is a dilation and cutterage, an invasive surgical procedure that removes something from the uterus. In this instance the something was a nonviable pregnancy that went awry from possibly the medication (or other factors).

    Admittedly i was also confused about miso, and immediately thought soup? I was extremely incorrect

  • I appreciate your reply and question. I think it comes across rude because the correction wasn't really necessary to understand the context of what was said, and it's even less of a correction and more of a personal preference. It doesn't add much to the conversation, which makes it seem more like grammatical pedantry. The fact that it wasn't entirely correct made it seem even more out of place.

    For the record, I'm not accusing you of being rude, just identifying how the comment came across. I'm not assuming intent with your original comment and apologize if it seemed like I had.

  • I actually don't think this is correct. Whom is used when the unknown person is the object being impacted (to whom did you sell your car). In this sentence, "who" is actually referring to a person performing the action (the sentences "who questioned him?" And "where are those who questioned him?" Would use who, not whom. You wouldn't say "whom questioned him," but whom could be used to replace "him," such as "he questioned whom?").

    As I alluded to above, you can usually see if it's who or whom by changing it to he/she (who) or him/her (whom). You may need to adjust the sentence slightly, but it will normally work. Above you need to remove the "where are those" portion to find the answer.

    So I believe that your correction came across a bit rude, and I'm fairly certain it is also wrong.

  • To be fair, about that women's world cup team, if i recall correctly it was a PR move to play an exhibition match with those kids and they were not trying very hard to win. I don't think they would truly lose to U-15 if it was, for example, a tournament.

    Your overall point has merit but i think that specific example gets overused a bit.

  • One of the finer points of something new is getting in at the right time. I have to imagine if you're a streamer and you force yourself to stay on your old game "for the fans," you could miss out on the shiny new thing that people care about. This could literally cost them money that they need for rent. I am confident that many streamers are not highly paid and depend on this income.

    Don't forget, fans are fickle, corporations are fickle, everyone is fickle. I don't think any employee of a company should be loyal to that company if it is to their own detriment as that company will let their employees go if it needs to (better companies try harder, worse companies make worse decisions).

    I don't see why a streamer should treat their career differently. Do what you think is best for you. Streamers don't owe me, the fan, and it doesn't do me any good for them to force themselves to play a game they're less interested in just to appease me.

  • Half of all marriages, which include people who have been married multiple times. For example, if you have 5 married couples, 4 are on their first marriage and the last couple is on their 6th marriage, then on average 50% of the marriages in this scenario failed. But it doesn't apply to everyone in the same way. Some people even remarry the same person.

    The median is much lower.

  • They're saying that allegedly, Christians are not big on voting, and this statement is meant to encourage those non voters to come vote just this once and everything will get better. Then you can go back to being a non voter.

    I think.

    Horrible wording no matter how you slice it, though.

  • I feel like the wealthy people you see are the ones who either get excitement from flaunting it or from lying about it (for example, mtv cribs was all fake). There are plenty of stories (yes i know they're just stories) about multi millionaires who drive the same old truck, wear regular blue jeans, and have a nice quiet (albeit larger than average) home.

    It's not crazy at all. I just think we see the outliers more frequently than not because they want us to see them.

  • I think they're referencing the manga/anime death note. So they're just writing in the names of countries hoping they will die.

    Did a light google search, looks like the individual is the former prime minister of poland (between ww1 and ww2), and a fairly prominent statesman, who I'm guessing hated those other countries.

  • Living in the USA, my experience looking into this was similar. However, there are some doctoral programs in europe that are free even for international students, which is actually quite tempting.

  • This is a really weird and unnecessarily aggressive take. I think that the other person is saying is that the communication about the games has been pretty poor, and it really isn't clear what the right move is. Other games make a lot more sense in both continuity and playing order. I'm not sure why that's such a difficult concept to grasp.

    For example , FF7 remake isn't actually a remake. It's only the first act of ff7. Rebirth is somehow act 2? I don't understand why. Some people seem to think rebirth is DLC instead of part 2 and a standalone game at that.

    I'm personally an og ff7 purist, and I'm rather annoyed that they split this up into multiple games. I'll just wait until all 3 are released and then... admittedly probably not play them unless they go on sale

  • Good call, i forgot about that one! Also i just looked up stills of walking tall and the rundown, and he had hair in the rundown, and a buzzcut in walking tall, so add another movie that could be just like the ones pictured.

  • I don't think it's fair to assume, at best, an accident is negligence. There are numerous things that can lead to an accident that wouldn't be negligence, such as normal wear and tear causing problems with something such as brakes or steering (perhaps not caught during routine maintenance as they weren't issues at the time), something falling into the road (weather related, wildlife, erosion), a glitch of some kind (two green lights, not negligence necessarily) , or visibility issues (even cautious and solid drivers can be at risk during poor conditions). These are just some examples, but in the cases nobody involved would be at fault.

    I believe the comparison to a gun is woefully inaccurate and invalid. Both are machines with the capacity to cause harm, but the similarities end there.

  • I can totally understand, and that makes a lot of sense. I think the sheer volume of accidents in the post are what's so shocking. I've only been in a vehicle with an obviously reckless driver two times (so far. And to clarify, two people, once each), and from my perspective, some people really shouldn't drive. Heck, one of those two times was supposed to be a casual date (she was picking me up, we were in college), and i asked her to drop me off immediately. Big nope.