Lurker > Zanzenburger

emblem-man posted...

Some people just want to be mad though

But for real though, I've sent it to some people, hoping it helps them out

RuneterranSnap posted...

Definitely passing this on to my wife, thanks :)

Glad to help!

Bumping again, since I know a lot of people were upset about the student loan forgiveness being struck down. This is a decent alternative for those who can utilize it.

Bump

Depends how you contextualize "this world". It's easy to be discouraged when looking at things on a global scale, or even a national scale.

I've found that looking at things on a more local scale provides a better view of my world, including those around me. Personally, I volunteer a lot at community events, food pantries, schools, churches, etc. So I spend a lot of time seeing the kindness of others and generally happy people improving the lives of those around them. Overall, that gives me a positive view of our world, knowing that there are people who still have hope and care enough to make a difference.

In reality, most people's lives would improve to some extent if they disconnect from the negativity in the internet and try to focus on what's happening in their local communities. There's usually a lot to celebrate when you look for it.

I fondly remember the DCOM "Pixel Perfect".

For a kid's movie, it has surprisingly mature themes about the humanity of AI and what it means to be human. It was like a child-focused "Bicentennial Man" but with a holographic girl instead of a robotic man.

One of my favorite lines in the movie is when the protag's female friend (who has a crush on him) finds out he made a holographic girl using body part references from the girls he knows, including her. She forces him to tell her what part of her he used for the hologram and he tells her it was her ears. She's like "So I guess that was the only part of me you thought was worth keeping". That hit me hard back in the day.

Another powerful scene was the guy trying to explain the feeling of "touch" to the hologram girl using music notes, and failing since the feeling can't be replicated.

emblem-man posted...

Interesting. A brief look up shows that the amount you pay on the income repayment plan is based on discretionary income (AGI - 150% of poverty level). With the current plans, if your income rises significantly, your payments would then be higher correct?

In what situations would someone actually be making payments for 20 years? If their income stays low and if their loan is so big that the income based payment increase from higher salary still doesn't pay off the loan?

Yes, this plan raises it to 225% of the poverty level, and then your monthly payment goes up from there, but by much less than the previous plan. Starting July 1, 2024, there will be even more cuts, with your monthly payment being 5% 9fnyour discretionary income instead of 10%.

Essentially yes. It's possible that your monthly payment is so low that it only pays for your interest without touching the balance. While the balance should never go up, it might stay the same if all you are paying is accrued interest (and remember that any unpaid interest is erased each month). That would mean that a $30k loan may not be paid off in 20 years if the min monthly payment is only $30 and only covers interest. But the whole $30k remaining will be forgiven after 20 years.

Bump for afternoon crowd.

IfGodCouldDie posted...

If those bullet points are accurate thats pretty good. Not sure who or how many will be affected, hopefully it is a significant amount of people.

This should affect pretty much everyone that has federal loans, regardless of your income level. The main change is that they are cutting the "discretionary income" threshold for the monthly payment from 1% to 0.5%, which will lower everyone's monthly payment. That plus interest cancellation makes this a pretty big reform, that's unfortunately overshadowed by the forgiveness drama.

Had this been the only thing announced, this would have made a lot more headlines as a HUGE overhaul of the student loan process, as it's more than just a one-time bandaid fix. This will help borrowers for the life of their loan.

Anarchy_Juiblex posted...

Whether that's a good idea depends on whether you think Republicans will take power in the next 20 years and if they'll keep this.

Mathematically, min payments and waiting is the smart move. But in reality . . . get as much ahead as possible imo.

I've read about this as well, as I'm on track for PSLF forgiveness (only 4 more years to go) and wonder if this is something that could be taken away.

What I've learned from my research is that, even if it's removed, people already on the program are grandfathered in. They would just stop enrolling new people into it. So my understanding is once you are on the SAVE Plan, you should be fine even if it gets taken away, as long as you don't ever unenroll from it and try to reenroll.

COVxy posted...

Yeah, if I'm being honest, the 10-20k debt forgiveness is a bit of a red herring. Will be ready to label this a genius move if this goes through while republicans are doing their best to block debt forgiveness. Paying the 5% of your disposable income for 20 years followed by full forgiveness is pretty damn close to making university universally (close to) free.

Agreed. I've been following the proposal since its announcement. Even from the beginning, the SAVE Plan in its entirety was not in question from the Supreme Court, just the "forgiveness" part of it which was arguably the main focus. However, there is no question about the authority for the President to enact these other measures, so this is pretty much a sure thing. From what I've read, there is no way for the Supreme Court nor Congress to block this as it falls within the powers of the Department of Education.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

This is fair. Fortunately, you have the option to either pay off quickly and get rid of the loan on your credit, or hang on at the lower payment and wait for forgiveness at a later time.

emblem-man posted...

I'm curious if the person have to be under the SAVE plan for the whole 20 years. As in, if they ever make more than that 67k, are they essentially kicked off the program? I hope it's not a cliff style dropoff.

If it works like the previous REPAYE plan, it's 20 years in any IDR plan, so if you've already built some years in REPAYE, those should count towards the 20 year forgiveness plan. That's just an assumption, though, we'll have to get more guidance when this goes into effect.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

This will replace the existing REPAYE IDR plan. If you are already on a REPAYE plan, you will automatically get transferred over to it. If you are on any other plan, you will have to apply. The application will come out later this summer and you should be notified by your loan provider.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

No, as mentioned earlier, any interest you didn't pay gets "forgiven" on a month-to-month basis as long as you make your minimum monthly payment. Then, after 20 years, whatever you have leftover is forgiven for good.

The only question I have about this is, if you have a $0 monthly payment because you are under the exemption guidelines, do you get 100% of your loans forgiven after 20 years?

My initial guess is yes, because that's how PSLF works, where paying $0 for 10 years still qualifies you for the forgiveness at the end, as long as you continue to qualify for the $0 payments.

So this would be a big win for the lower class, who essentially get their loans forgiven (albeit after 20 years). But this is also a win for the middle class, who will get their monthly payments lowered with basically no downside.

While the headlines this weekend focused on the Supreme Court striking down Biden's student loan forgiveness proposal, other elements of Biden's student loan proposal introduced one year ago were not affected and will continue as planned. On the same day as the ruling, the Biden administration announced the SAVE plan (Saving on a Valuable Education).

Here are the main details:

• The SAVE Plan increases the income exemption from 150% to 225% of the poverty line.
• Single borrowers who make less than $15 an hour and families making less than $67.5k will have no monthly payments to make
• All other borrowers will see their monthly payments cut in half for savings of at least $1000 a year
• The plan eliminates 100% of remaining interest for both subsidized and unsubsidized loans after a scheduled payment is made under the SAVE Plan. This means that as long as you are making monthly payments, your balance will never go up, even if you are paying less than the interest accrual. For example, if you accrued $50 in interest in July, and you make a minimum payment of $30, the $20 is erased and not added onto your balance.
• The SAVE Plan excludes spousal income for borrowers who are married and file separately. Spouses no longer have to cosign the IDR application
• Student loan balances not paid off will continue to be forgiven after 20 years under this new plan

More details about the plan can be found here:
https://studentaid.gov/announcements-events/save-plan
https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2021/idrfactsheetfinal.pdf

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/9/1/4/AAHdjXAAEoXa.jpg

Frolex posted...

Take a look to see if you can find an email or text chat position at a call center

I have family that has worked in call centers before and it's not a bad gig. Pay and hours are decent.

Also, in case you are scared of customer interactions, all call center jobs now have built in scripts for every situation. You basically read through the script and adjust based in the customer's specific needs. There are also chat reps who don't ever talk on the phone but just text the customer.

You don't need a degree for the job and there are openings everywhere. As long as you can navigate the occasional irate customer (which you are provided scripts for or can escalate to a manager), then it's an option.

The idea of co-ed anything is typically more alluring than actually doing anything co-ed.

I used to do theater in college and due to facility limitations our dressing rooms and showers were co-ed. So you had people in all states of undress up to and including fully nude as we did quick changes for scenes and such. In the moment, no one really cares, except for the newbies who you can tell are uncomfortable, but even that goes away pretty quickly. Practical nudity in those situations quickly turns into just business and no one seems to care or pay any attention to it.

Have_A_Cigar posted...

Personally disagree with this. Luck alone won't do it. One's grit though often leads to the creation of one's own luck, in my opinion. Countless stories of people with humble backgrounds (myself included) who refused to become another statistic. Waiting around for government handouts is no way to go through life.

I work with at-risk families who are struggling. Very few of these families are in the position they are in due to lack of grit or general laziness.

In one family, their breadwinner father had an accident and became permanently disabled, so the mom had to drop out of college to work to feed the kids and take care of her husband. She took out student loans that she had to start paying back with no degree to show for it. Without help, she is unable to go back to college.

I worked with another student who just got hit with problem after problem while in school. First, their parent died, and they were responsible for the funeral arrangements. Within three months, their other parent died. That same year, their house caught fire and they lost everything. They had to essentially start from scratch. Then mental health issues hit and they were hospitalized from an anxiety attack. Once again, all these student loans and had to drop out of school to deal with these problems.

There are tons if these examples. A mom who lost her son in a car accident. A 20yo diagnosed with cancer. Countless sudden job layoffs that forced college part timers to either take out loans or quit school.

Luck is absolutely a part of what can pave the way to success for some people. I started with nothing and built my way from poverty class to upper middle class. But in addition to my grit, I was lucky enough to not be hospitalized during my most tight financial years, never lost my job through layoffs, never had a family member die, and never had to lose my home to a fire or other costly weather issue. Hell, the six figure job I have now is only because it opened up at the perfect time and the hiring manager just happened to go to my alma mater. Any of these things could gone slightly differently and completely ruined all my planning and efforts.

I think most people that are successful don't realize just how much luck plays a part into that success, if only by having life-altering things not happen during those critical moments. Sure, there are people who squander their opportunities due to lack of grit, but more often I meet people who just could not overcome all the crap life had thrown at them in a short time.

My earliest memory of where babies came from was when my closest sibling was born through a C-section. My parents took the opportunity to let me believe that all babies came from C-sections. It did always make me wonder how people in older times had babies when they didn't have access to reliable cutting equipment until I learned the truth.

As far as how the baby was conceived, I never really thought about it. I guess I just assumed it started forming in the women's uterus at a predetermined age.

Pokemon Gold and Silver has you investigating a robbery right at the beginning of the game, then it jumps you directly into the gym badges adventure. Not too much downtime there.

I thought the show was great. Everything with Madysinn was hilarious and I wish she was in more episodes.

The only thing the show could have really done better is do more with the court cases. My favorite scene was the actual back-and-forth legal battle between She hulk and Matt Murdock, applying case law to ridiculous superhero shenanigans to argue their case. It was funny, but also cool to see how superhero antics can have serious legal consequences and set precedents for the future. The cases of the week were usually very basic or interrupted halfway so there was very little opportunity to appreciate their legal complexity.

DarkBuster22904 posted...

You mean a movie about a hero comparatively few people care about, played by an actor nobody likes, with a story about how none of the movies in the series matter anymore, as the climax of a series of mid-to-bad movies, sandwiched between Spiderman and fucking Indiana Jones, failed to be successful?

Gasp.

I think a lot of people care about The Flash, if at least because of the Justice League cartoon and the 9 seasons of the show on CW has gained him a following among the mainstream.

Agreed on all other points though.

Mazey Day was an interesting concept but I thought was executed poorly.

The ending wasn't earned, I feel like. If the point they were trying to make is how paparazzi dehumanizes people for profit by having the girl give the actress the gun to shoot herself so she can get that shot, then they could have done to build it up more. The episode felt so short, and therefore the lead didn't get much development to get her to that point. She was basically an uncaring photographer at the beginning, then quits after indirectly causing the death of a celebrity, gets convinced to do one last job to make money for rent, and then seems to show empathy and remorse for the actress when they see her condition in the room. The flip flopping back and forth is too drastic and uneven, for the heel turn at the end to make sense. The episode could have used more scenes of her grappling with her conscience, only for her to basically say "screw it" at the end and just give into her greedy ways (similar to the movie "Nightcrawler" if anyone saw that one; I feel that movie did the plot of this episode better).

And of course, the werewolf angle came out of nowhere and made me go wtf, but honestly, I think it could've worked if it was retooled slightly. I'd believe it if the change was supposed to be an allegory about how we dehumanize celebrities to the point where paparazzi reap what they sow. But that whole sequence happened so quickly and became a generic chase scene that the allegory was lost if that's what they were going for. It would have been really cool at the end if they revealed that the actress wasn't actually a werewolf but that's just how the lead had envisioned her, replaying the scenes with the actress being human and going crazy, making the lead shooting her that much more disturbing and the final scene that much darker.

Also, somewhat related, but does anyone remember this little jingle:

Woo News, Hey Strange, Wild Skeeter, Hey Strange, Wild Skeeter, 'Blam Animorphs!

Everyone once in a while it pops into my brain, lives rent-free for a few days, then disappears into the depths where it belongs.

Turbam posted...

Wild Thornberrys was ok, but it's issue was that every episode was the same:
"Eliza, make sure that you don't do that"
"Darwin, I'm going to do that"
"I should not have done that"

For what it's worth, I feel like you can pretty much sum up every Nicktoon in such a way. Rugrats is basically "babies get into pretend grand adventures that cause havok due to Angelica lying to them". Fairly Odd Parents is "Timmy makes a wish that goes hilariously wrong". Spongebob is "Spongebob or his friends do something stupid that triggers a series of hilarious events".

To me, Wild Thornberries was a mix of a Nicktoon and those nature shows you'd find on PBS kids. There was usually some kind of lesson about wildlife in then. Also, "There's a nipper in the dunny" is a phrase that is embedded into my brain forever.

Quora used to be great for getting thoughtful answers from people about experiences that are too hard to Google. For example, I always wondered what firefighters did throughout the day when they weren't putting out fires. It's not like they patrol the streets like police do. I learned a lot from several firefighters who shared their experiences. In another note, it was cool to read accounts from strippers about the industry (both the good and the bad). They're things I wouldn't go out of the way to research on my own, but they were both suggested questions on Quora.

Now the questions get too specific and trollish, or are just there to provoke a specific kind of response (i.e. what are some sexy pictures of <insert actress name>). And instead of reading all the answers to a question, they show you one answer, then a bunch of related answers to related questions as the default, instead of letting you see other answers to the one specific question you asked.

And then there's the "online cooking recipe" answers that the site is plagued with, with users responding with an autobiographical story before actually getting to your answer.

lol I actually loved Rocket Power and Wild Thornberries. I learned early on that the Internet hated Rocket Power but didn't realize they also hated Wild Thornberries.

I always loved animals and nature so I enjoyed all the nature-themed plots and things you'd learn about the animal of the day. I also thought it was cool for the family to just live in an RV and travel the world. I also had a thing for Eliza's older sister whose name escapes me.

Rocket Power was just good fun. The kids were just such a-holes to each other and others. The show kinda reminded me of Always Sunny for kids. They kept getting themselves in ridiculous situations due to their selfishness and greed. Also Tito was amazing.

I've grown to love pickleball in recent years. There's a court down the street from my house.

emblem-man posted...

I don't know, should acceptance into college be similar to getting hired for a job?

My main point is, similar to how more methods are being used to show acceptance eligibility, it seems like "good at standardized testing" is a method that should stay, to help those people out also. Like I said, I'm all for having more pathways, not necessarily for removing them. Which is why I asked if it would still count towards their overall application if they did well on it

Yes, they will still accept them if taken.

Sansoldier posted...

It shouldn't be a requirement, but a good extra data point for assessing the student's academic performance.

I agree with this.

CedarPointcp posted...

iirc i read yrs ago that the sat was a greater predictor of college success than good grades. that was one study or article i read. The studies or results are supposedly all over the place

This is a personal area of interest for me, so I've researched this a long time. While individual studies may show results all over the place based on methodology and sampling, the trend of research (which means the plurality of results) has a general consensus that grades are a stronger predictor than the tests. There's no easy way to prove that without posting the dozens of articles I've read on the subject (something I'm not about to do on my day off from research lol), but I figured I'd share that nugget, so take it as you will.

emblem-man posted...

Not a requirement but you can still take it and it will count?

I'm all for adding more pathways to get people into college that might not be good at standardized testing, but I wouldn't want to remove standardized testing from being an option.

Also, holistic methods can be easily gamed by people, more so than standardized testing

How is it any different than employers hiring people? Most jobs don't have a standardized test you can take. It's based on subjective reviews of resumes and interviews. Rubrics are used to keep the process as standardized as possible.

College admissions are no different than hiring for a job position. Many colleges even have interviews for the same purpose.

DragonClaw01 posted...

Plus if you suck at taking tests now, then good luck in college. College is like 85% tests & maybe like 15% some lame group project or something. If anything, college is more centered around standardized testing than highschool is. So, hiding kids from standardized tests is only setting them up for failure

I graduated college with a 4.0 in my bachelor's, two masters, and a PhD. I now teach statistics and research courses with heavy math and heavy writing and reading components. I struggled with the SAT no matter how much I studied. If SAT was the primary determinant of my college options, I would have been screwed.

Research shows that grades are better predictors of college success than standardized tests, despite popular belief.

Here is a news article for it. I have some research papers in my home computer I can pull up later, but this news story gives the basics of it:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-12-22/grades-vs-sat-scores-which-is-a-better-predictor-of-college-success

Grade inflation is very overblown through the media. When you look at actual studies, you will see that grades are still the golden standard for predicting college success.

I have a question about Episode 1 this season. Will mark with spoilers below.

Once the show acknowledges that there are multiple levels of reality, we find out that real Joan initiates the behavior of the digital Joan's under her. Meaning that when Joan Joan went to the church, Annie Joan went to the church, Selma Joan went to the church, Kate Joan went to the church, etc. This works fine in every scene except the Michael Cera scene. In every scene up until that one, we only ever reference the current level, or the level below. But Cera changes things by mentioning the level "above them", referencing "real Joan". This conversation could only work at Annie Joan's level. Any evel below and that would no longer be true (unless Selma Joan's Cera character believed that "Annie Joan" was "real Joan"). But even accepting that, how did that conversation play out in Joan Joan's level? Whoever was the Cera character obviously wasn't telling her about the level above her, since she was the top level. So what conversation were they having in place of it? Is that where the levels of reality broke and Joan Joan's life briefly split from those of her digital doppelgangers, since they could not possibly have had the same conversation?

opopopza posted...

My cousin goes on Facebook bragging about her daughter's high school grades. Her GPA is something ridiculous like 4.5, something that wasn't even possible when I was in high school.

This happens when students take Dual Enrollment or AP courses for college credit in high school. College courses are often weighted on a 5.0 or even 6.0 scale.

g980 posted...

Terrible idea

Grade inflation is real in some places and kids who go to rigorous high schools will be fucked

Why remove basically the only objective measure in college apps?

This would be an issue if grades were the only factor. Any college worth their weight only looks at grades as part of the picture. In addition to grades, colleges look at:

• Personal essays
• Volunteer hours
• Leadership experience
• Work experience or internships
• Career goals
• Socio-economic background
• Class Ranking
• School performance

The thing of it is, colleges take into account grade inflation in their application processes. They look at what school you attend. Schools with a higher average GPA for students are held to higher standard per student since they are more likely to have a high GPA. So they may rank a student with a 3.0 GPA higher in a tougher school than a 4.0 GPA student at an easier school.

Likewise, a 4.0 student will not get into the top schools if they don't have leadership experience or well-defined or well-aligned career goals. College applications use rubrics that include all or most of the above criteria and GPA is only a fraction of it.

I have sat on college application review committees and scholarship application review committees and ACT/SAT scores rarely make or break a student's chances when taken in combination with the other criteria. If anything, they may downgrade an otherwise well-rounded student who just doesn't test well with those kids of tests. They could be removed with little impact.

g980 posted...

Also every "i'm bad at standardized tests but i get good grades person" ive met is just good at sucking up to teachers and is not as smart as they think

There's no secret to filling in the right bubble besides just knowing the answer

My issue with standardized tests was the vocabulary/analogy sections. I aced the Math and Writing sections, and most of the reading sections, but because English is my second language I did not understand the questions having you define the synonyms or antonyms of certain words. The section is supposed to test your critical thinking of the relationships between meanings of words, but if you've never heard of the word before, then that part doesn't work. Even taking tons of time studying flashcards, I did not have enough exposure to those words growing up to learn them all for the test.

Your assertion that poor test-takers only suck up to teachers is very limited and doesn't grasp the challenges that students from poorer backgrounds face. I work at a university and my job is increasing college access. We offer free ACT/SAT training for our communities and are able to provide these students help with test-taking strategies. Had I had access to these trainings as a teen, it would have helped immensely. But those trainings were expensive and only the well-off kids could afford them.

CedarPointcp posted...

Yeah I also didn't score that well on standardized tests, never did like act tutoring and stuff, do those really help a lot more than like an act guide book you check out from the library?

There are actual tricks to taking standardized tests. Content mastery is only a part of it. Another part is having the ability to answer questions in a fast fashion to get through the time limits. There are entire industries full of test-taking coaches that can raise your ACT/SAT scores simply by teaching you how to take the test, without having to teach you any actual content.

I work at a university and real with these coaches all the time. My problem with standardized tests is that they focus more on HOW you take the test than what you actually know. Research has also shown that standardized tests are biased against minorities and people from low socio-economic backgrounds.

I think this episode had potential, but I feel like the ideas didn't come together in a meaningful way.

Like you said, there were too many unanswered questions about the mother's motives. She seemed so torn up about her husband's death, which appears really was just a random death unrelated to anything. She keeps all the videos as a trophy, then when the gf finds one, she tries to talk to her. I have no idea if her "I'm not gonna hurt you" line was genuine or not. What was her intention if she found her?

But what bothers me the most is the gf's death. It came out of nowhere and I feel added nothing to the plot. I guess you can say that the male lead (whose name I forget) learned a valuable lesson that success comes with personal sacrifices, having lost everyone he cares about in the process. But that doesn't make sense because he didn't want to do the documentary in the first place. He was pressured into it by his girlfriend and buddy.

I think the plot would have hit home harder if either A) he was the one insisting on making the documentary and roping his girlfriend into it, making him indirectly responsible for her death, or B) it was actually him who died and his gf getting all of the success, having her wondering at the end if her success was worth destroying an entire family over it. Would have been even creepier if she did think it was worth it.

As it stands, the episode just feels like a bunch of random things happened with no real central narrative or point.

Edit: And don't get me started on John Hannah's character. What purpose did he serve other than being the stereotypically small town creepy guy and a potential red herring? His character just moped around, told the MC the "truth" (which he would have discovered anyway once he got home), and then disappeared forever.

Edit 2: One more thing, I hate that the auto collision was just there to advance the plot. There was no reason for it to happen other than to get Pia alone with MC's mom.

More and more colleges have already removed them as a requirement. It's only a matter of years before they drop them entirely.

Colleges are focusing more on grades, volunteer hours, leadership experience, and personal essays to determine scholarships and such.

As a former strong student with poor standardized test taking skills (and too poor to hire testing coaches like my rich peers did), I support this.

I unironically think that Nintendo is giving Metroid the "Breath of the Wold" treatment, but not in the way you described.

What I mean by that is that they are looking to reinvent Metroid with something that is both new and familiar to provide a fresh experience with the franchise, similar to what they did to Odyssey with Mario, Forgotten Land with Kirby, and BotW with Zelda. It would explain why they restarted development. Whatever was attempted before just wasn't giving it that "grand" feeling and they wanted to get it right. It's not every day a company will just scrap a game entirely and start from scratch, and then announcing it to the whole world.

Whether or not people will like the change will be anyone's guess, but I do expect something of a departure from the first three Metroid Primes.

I'm 35 and I hear the same thing from my 35yo friends and colleagues. No one ever wants to join me for 5ks or even the water park. Meanwhile, I feel great.

With that being said, I'm sure the age has a little to do with it, but lifestyle (and genetics) also play a part. Both of my parents are in their 60s and are fit and healthy with no pains. They also eat healthy, exercise, and don't smoke/drink. My goal is to stay as healthy as possible as long as possible. I'd love to be one of those guys still placing in 5ks in their 70s.

My three cats always have food available. They only eat as much as they want and leave the rest for later.

My dogs are bottomless pits, but with limits. I actually tested it once just out of curiosity. We had finished an event and had tons of food leftover that wouldn't keep till the next day. So we just put it in a huge platter and just gave to our two large dogs to eat. My wife and I were curious if they would naturally stop, or if they would eat the whole thing.

Interestingly enough, they ate like 75% of it, but at almost the same time, they both stopped suddenly, put their tail between their legs, and walked over to their crates to sleep it off. It was really weird. Looked like a car's gas tank filling up when you hear the click. It wasn't even a gradual stop either. They were eating, and then they just stopped. I don't think they knew what if felt like being full and it spooked them.

I live in a nature preserve so wildlife would eat anything unless I build a greenhouse.

Instead I grow bamboo and Mexican Sunflowers. I like growing tall, fast-growing woody plants that can also be used as privacy hedges. I started with a few and now have a whole field of them.

In the house I'm also raising some carnivorous plants (Venus flytraps and Pitcher Plants).

Loved the new episodes. Charlie coming up with his "business idea" and how it was simultaneously stupid and genius in that he was able to profit off of Frank with it was hilarious and just brought the episode back full circle.

The apartment stuff was funny as well, and how everyone kept reacting to it. And everything with Mac just got progressively more absurd. I love how patient Dennis is with Mac lol. He's such an enabler.

HairyQueen posted...

The whole thing is sickening to me. Its not only appalling that he thought he would get away with it, but also that so many people seem perfectly fine that he did it and would 100% do it again. I wouldnt be surprised it there are ZERO consequences for it either because so far, I havent seen any. Youd think that with how far this behavior has gone and for so long, that it wouldve been addressed before now.
Anyway, thats the end of my rant about mods who post #501.

Okay, I loled.

Euripides posted...

Facebook was more interesting when it wasn't 90% ads and "suggested for you" bullshit that you don't want to see

Oh man, I HATE the "Suggested for you" crap. My phones adblockers filter the fb ads, but they don't register the "suggested for you" posts as ads and therefore does not block them. And they show up 3xs as much as regular ads. Still havent found a way to get rid of them on my phone.

As for the topic at hand, when kids are all the parents have going for them, that's all they're gonna post about.