Lurker > adjl

Isn't the "no" option on this referendum actually the pro-gay marriage one? I seem to remember getting that impression, based mostly on stuff that has ended up in my newsfeed thanks to an Australian friend.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SmokeMassTree posted...

Mead posted...

Remember how much shit conservatives gave California when they needed help during their drought after some folks talked about seceding?

I'm guessing most of them aren't gonna put two and two together and realize how fucked up that was given the current situation

Using more water than you can produce and then crying about it isn't the same thing.

3/10

It's basically the same thing. California operated for years on the assumption that there'd be enough water, so when climate change reared its ugly head and took away their rainfall, they ended up with a crisis situation. Texas operated for years on the assumption that the levees would keep them above water, so when climate change reared its ugly head and gave them a particularly nasty rain storm, they ended up in a crisis situation.

The moral of the story: the world's changing, and everyone needs to change with it.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Pus_N_Pecans posted...

Anything you can live on and still indulge every now and then is a good wage in my book.

Pretty much. There's no single value for "enough money," because everyone's wants and needs are going to be different. Figure out how much the life you want will cost, then make a bit more than that so you can save some of it to cover unexpected expenses.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

RCtheWSBC posted...

What an odd thing to lie about

Paired with the whole Tinder success story gimmick, I could see it as a way to troll people who are less successfuly at the sexytimes, by way of "I'm 400 pounds and I'm still getting laid on a regular basis, what's your excuse?". That's about the only reason I could think of to lie about it, though, and given that he could just as easily be accused of lying about Tinder, that seems kinda flimsy.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Snuggletoof posted...

But lets be real, 90 percent of the backlash was people crying at the word "paid". Screaming that it would be the end of free mods, and completely ignoring all of the benefits having a compensated supply of quality content creators would bring. Consider what happened with Youtube when people started making money for their videos. We got hours of high quality content, and thousands of people got to make careers out of doing something they love.

The biggest difference between this and Youtube is that users don't have to pay for Youtube. Additionally, many modders are already supported to some extent by ad revenue and/or voluntary donations. Charging for mods would provide them with more support, but at considerable cost to the consumers. On top of that, only giving the modder 25% of the fee is just insulting, given how little Valve or Bethesda did for the mod.

I think there's probably a good way to improve modders' compensation, but having the game's studio selling mods for it isn't a great way to do it.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

You kiss your mother with that ampersand?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

That really depends on what you consider to be "very little work."
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SmokeMassTree posted...

Did you just compare the number of work place deaths to the number of military deaths?

SmokeMassTree posted...

Hey you guys that risk your lives, you're gonna need to take a pay cut and have less than ideal equipment

SmokeMassTree posted...

The military budget isn't high enough until each and every soldier on the ground is in a full suit of batman armor.

I mean, you yourself said the government should be allocating more money to ensure that people whose jobs threaten their lives don't end up dying. Unless, of course, that was just hollow, overly-emotional rhetoric, and you weren't actually interested in following your point to its logical conclusion.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

GreenTreeClub posted...

Fake news...

The regulations were only there for NEW structures. It did not affect the Harvey victims one way or another, this is just political posturing in order to attack Trump on the backs of the victims.

Anyways, those regulation are dumb because they had to do with climate change, meaning, because of climate change fiction, new infrastructure is harder to be built. In order to build it, the regulations were removed. But Trump said the infrastructure would be built to the highest standards.

Obviously Trump's order didn't have any actual effect on Harvey's impact, given that that would be impossible, but the timing is rather fitting for demonstrating why it's a bad idea. The regulations he's repealed forced developers to consider how conditions would change in designing new infrastructure moving forward. If developers had better considered how conditions would change in designing Houston's infrastructure, there's a good chance a lot less of it would be underwater right now. There's a lesson to be learned from Houston, and Trump's order ignores that lesson entirely.

Quite simply, ignoring climate change in designing new infrastructure will only create more Houstons. Repealing regulations that demand that climate change be taken into account is an awful idea, as Harvey was kind enough to demonstrate mere days after Trump did so.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Smarkil posted...

adjl posted...

Given what's at stake, I'd go for legislating it. Nursing home patients are a particularly vulnerable population, such that adding an extra level of deterrent to abusive behaviour is reasonable to protect them. A little redundancy isn't going to hurt when you consider what's going to happen if it's under-enforced.

Well good news. Those laws already exist.

http://elder.findlaw.com/elder-abuse/types-of-elder-abuse.html

Emotional and/or psychological abuse typically is defined as an act that causes emotional pain, distress or anguish. Common forms of emotional/psychological abuse include verbal assaults, intimidation, humiliation, threats, insults, harassment and treating senior citizens like children.

This type of elder abuse usually is verbal, but not always. For example, giving an elderly person the silent treatment or isolating an older person from family and friends are non-verbal forms of emotional/psychological abuse.Emotional and/or psychological abuse sometimes is a byproduct of physical abuse, such as when an elderly person fears his or her abuser.

We really don't need more laws to cover something that's already covered.

You do, however, sometimes need new laws to clarify things that some people might not think of as being covered by the existing ones. This would fall under that, where a great many people think (insist, even) that misgendering is not abusive behaviour, and would therefore not think to avoid it in their efforts to not abuse patients.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Brother_Gilbert posted...

Krazy_Kirby posted...

zero medical benefit to doing it

You are afraid of little pain. Keep telling that to yourself.

So why haven't you cut off your earlobes?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Smarkil posted...

Yeah, but shouldn't this be covered under different rules or be dealt with through the business rather than being legislated?

Imagine if you went into your patient's room every morning and said, "Morning f***face. Let's get your fat ass up."

Should you be charged with breaking a law? Or should you be reported to the business and fired/blacklisted for being a s***head instead?

Given what's at stake, I'd go for legislating it. Nursing home patients are a particularly vulnerable population, such that adding an extra level of deterrent to abusive behaviour is reasonable to protect them. A little redundancy isn't going to hurt when you consider what's going to happen if it's under-enforced.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

I'm definitely keeping an eye on this one. When the Mario-Rabbids crossover was first announced, I figured it just sounded overwhelmingly stupid, but the E3 information on it really piqued my interest. I'm cautiously very optimistic about it.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

That sounds pretty hot.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

EightySeven posted...

I wonder if Ted Cruz is going to vote for emergency Federal aid to the area.

I'd say that anyone that doesn't vote for emergency federal aid to the area doesn't understand what emergency federal aid is for.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

Topic title is misleading. If this only applies to caregivers and is intended to prevent harassment in that environment I see no problem with it

Pretty much. It applies very narrowly, and is clearly intended specifically to improve quality of life for nursing home patients. That's not really a bad thing. More broadly? Misgendering people makes you an ass, but it shouldn't be illegal. Fortunately, that's not actually what the topic is about.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

SmokeMassTree posted...

Is this actually $250m worth or is this like when they bust 10 pounds of weed and call it $2m worth

The article says 1062 kg of 97% pure stuff. That's rather a lot.

Sahuagin posted...

why at a secret location?

Presumably for security's sake. $250 million is an awful lot of money; a whole lot of people would literally kill to intercept that destruction shipment.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Veedrock- posted...

I live in a world where people think police are the bad guys.

Literally letting the media play you. And proud of it no doubt.

Oh, most police are good guys. The problem is that giving this kind of power to the bad ones is dangerous, and the good ones don't stand to benefit enough to offset that danger.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zikten posted...

Jiggy101011 posted...

I'm not sure why Americans went the circumcised way

in the 1800's a rumor was spread that circumcision would reduce masturbation. you were also supposed to eat a healthy diet of corn flakes too. and then the sin would just wash away

Pretty much. It started as a puritanical thing, and it's been perpetuated purely for the purpose of tradition, which is a pretty stupid reason to mutilate baby's genitals.

Krazy_Kirby posted...

zero medical benefit to doing it

There is a very slight reduction in the risk of penile cancer, which makes sense, because there's a very slight reduction in the amount of penis tissue available to become cancerous. Obviously, that's pretty dumb reasoning, because if that's a significant issue for you, the logical extension of it is to cut the penis off entirely to reduce your risk of penile cancer by 100%.

supergamer19 posted...

Not this again. Who cares? If you're seeing a dude naked with his penis out, it's usually because someone is getting banged. That means they should be erect, which means the foreskin can usually be pulled back behind the head and it stays there, which means most erect shlongs look similar anyway. so, again, who cares?

I don't particularly care about existing wangs, but lopping off bits of baby dicks isn't cool at all. Adults can do whatever they want to their dongs, but cosmetic surgery on babies is absolutely not okay.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

Not to be contrarian, but might you provide a source so I can appropriately reply?

First and second paragraphs of TC's link. 100 antifa members, disappearing into a crowd of 2000 right-wing protestors.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

Neither agreed nor disagreed. Explain.

TC said something demonstrably wrong, topic turned into demonstrating how he's wrong, and now he's run away. The solution: Don't say things that are demonstrably wrong, especially when you're just trying to evoke an emotional reaction and they don't actually contribute to reporting.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

Yeah? And that's obvious. This is also the time to stand up to them. What's less obvious is that this is the time to also stand up to extremists who oppose them. Again, both are bad. Reject the dumbass nazis, and also reject the extremists who oppose them but would be disastrous as well. Refuse both.

Indeed. Again, this is just the discussion of whether or not they're cowardly. The fact that they can be defended as not being cowardly is exactly why one shouldn't try to paint them as cowards. Calling one's enemies cowards is an ancient and hopelessly transparent propaganda technique, which is not remotely necessary when one can just condemn the fact that they're being violent assholes. This is why I gave the extreme example of suicide bombers, whom everyone agrees are awful and indefensible, but which clearly cannot be called cowardly. Just call them (and only them, not everyone who has similar views or beliefs) violent assholes and leave it at that.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Give Nazi hug while using sharpie to turn swastika tattoo into windows logo
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

XlaxJynx007 posted...

The President is allowed to pardon anybody they want

And this president pardoned an unambiguous scumbag who has no business being back on the streets. This is a problem, because now an unambiguous scumbag who has no business being back on the streets is back on the streets. That Trump is allowed to do this doesn't make it any less of a problem.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

That sounds like islamophobe talk...Islam commits most suicide bombings after all (according to islamophobes like you). Why do you hate Islam? The radicals don't speak for most after all.

Most suicide bombings in today's world are indeed conducted by Islamic radicals. Why should acknowledging that constitute Islamophobia? Using that to justify distrust of all Islamic people, or to inform sweeping immigration (or worse, registration) policies would, but simply acknowledging that fact does not in any way suggest that the vast majority of Muslims aren't innocent, peaceful people.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

I'm not sure how you are trying to demonstrate this. Mind spelling it out?

See how the topic's been derailed? That's why you don't add extra points that are demonstrably wrong.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Troll_Police_ posted...

right, im afraid of the power of your words, so i will react with physical violence

Yes, that is indeed the point. Welcome to understanding the issue! It's great, isn't it?

Tropic_Sunset posted...

Hell, i can't think of a scenario that would make me unwilling to run people over who were willing to drag me from my car other than being physically unable to move it.

Most people hesitate when presented with the option to kill people. Specifically, though, I can see somebody not wanting to start driving if there were innocent people in the path of the car. Again, though, if you were already just trying to mow down the crowd, there's no such thing as people you don't want to kill in the crowd.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

So...the driver in this case, using his car to attack, was using basic strategy? By they were not only using basic strategy, but also minimizing risk?

Yep, pretty much. It just wasn't a particularly brave assault to mount, given the very minimal risk to the attacker.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

Keep in mind that my specific example (which as clarification I do not assume is representative for all antifa, but would condemn them as such for the cowardice I think we agree on that the white supremacist displayed)was certainly not surrounded by multiple dissenters, but was in the midst of people who agreed with him when he attacked with potentially deadly force.

As I mentioned earlier, the antifa folks were outnumbered 20 to 1 (2000 to 100). An individual attacker may have had a few allies nearby, but he would definitely have been surrounded by dissenters.

Smarkil posted...

The message they're attempting to spread will not affect politics and will not affect social change. They're a******s. And virtually everyone in this country knows that. These so-called neo-nazi's have been around since WW2 and they've accomplished exactly jack and s***.

White nationalist ideals are certainly having an impact on how immigration and trade policies are shaping up in the US, and racists across the country have been emboldened by Trump's election. If Nazis were ever going to influence anything in the US, now's the time.

Smarkil posted...

How about we just go ahead and say, "You can hit someone if they hit you" and leave it at that? Maybe let's not forgive the violence of Antifa or Neo-Nazi's or PETA or whoever the f*** just because they're fighting so-called 'bad guys'.

Oh, I quite agree. Violence is bad. I just understand the rationale behind the violence, and that it's not something that can really be considered cowardly, because Schmen's oversimplification of "just words" misses the point to a degree that would be comical if not for the realization that a good many people actually believe that.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Duck-I-Says posted...

Questionable. I believe that this is the end and after death you're gone forever. Many suicide bombers believe they'll be sent to an eternal paradise where all their dreams come true. If I believed that I'd be far less worried about dying.

A valid consideration, certainly, but that's introducing additional variables. There's no reason somebody ramming a car into a crowd or bashing somebody's head in with a lock-sock can't also believe that death will send them to an eternal paradise, nor that a suicide bomber can't commit their attack without such beliefs. Based on where most suicide bombings are happening in the current world, most of them do indeed have that religious component, but if you strip that away and say all other things are equal, suicide bombing is braver than any other offensive because the attacker knows for certain that they won't survive.

Duck-I-Says posted...

You're right about attacking people in public not being cowardly, though, but it's pretty amusing this political s***post has turned into a semantic debate about an aspect that doesn't really matter that much.

I'm trying to teach a lesson about sensationalism, and the importance of reporting things neutrally instead of trying to emotionally manipulate your audience. Namely that, if you're going to try to emotionally manipulate your audience, at least keep the facts straight so you don't look like an overemotional idiot.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Troll_Police_ posted...

adjl posted...

Wait... how is literally fighting against a cause they disagree with considered cowardly? Detrimental and gratuitously antagonistic, sure (violence is bad and all), but cowardly?

"I fear your words so much, i am willing to physically assault you to silence them"

THAT is cowardly

Come now, you're more intelligent than that. Or do you actually think that systematic protests are "just words," and not part of an organized effort to effect political and social change?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

That said, people have absolutely been dragged from their cars and beaten.

Usually not when the car in question is being used as a weapon. Most people who get dragged from cars either can't move their car, or choose not to because they don't like the idea of running people over to escape. If somebody's just driven a car into a crowd with the intent of running people over, neither of those issues are particularly relevant.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

They both tried to ensure their escape. They are both cowards. The attack wasn't important.

Ensuring you can escape safely after mounting an offensive is basic strategy, not cowardice. The attack is important in assessing how bold the attack is, because the level of risk faced by the attacker is massively different.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

Trying to excuse one and condemn the other based on only their methods of attack is ridiculous.

I'm not particularly trying to excuse either of them. Both are bad, and neither should have happened. I'm just pointing out that it's not particularly cowardly to start a fight while surrounded by thousands of people that you know aren't going to take your side, and that calling such people cowards in a fit of thinly-veiled pathos is just silly. How brave or cowardly it is irrelevant to the discussion of whether it's right or wrong.

If you want an extreme example: Suicide bombers are braver than any of us will ever be.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

Even if you blindside someone who is ostensibly unarmed with a lock in a sock and try to disappear into the crowd?

A crowd that saw what happened and can tear your arms off if they're so inclined? It's a cheap shot, certainly, but it's far from being a safe way to attack somebody.

Tropic_Sunset posted...

Or are you saying that the dips*** who drove his car into non-violent protesters was brave?

In that case, he has the option of just reversing out of there, which means he's not actually going into combat. Just causing a bunch of damage that nobody can readily retaliate against or prevent. I'd call that cowardly.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

How is it not?

Because going into any sort of battle is typically considered to be the opposite of cowardly, regardless of what measures the attackers have taken to protect themselves.

OhhhJa posted...

It's a bunch of masked idiots going around beating unarmed people.

By the sound of things, the protestors were about as well-armed as the attackers. Most of the attacks sound like standard kicks and punches, and I think it's fairly safe to assume the protestors have arms and legs, as well as outnumbering the attackers 20 to 1.

OhhhJa posted...

You gotta do better than that if you wanna defend a bunch of violent degenerates

adjl posted...

Detrimental and gratuitously antagonistic, sure (violence is bad and all)

Second half of the post, dude. Violence is bad and these guys are assholes, but that doesn't make calling them cowards any more accurate. Given that the former part of that point is kind of a given, I'm more interested in pointing out your flawed, sensationalist word choice.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Rogue One is the best Star Wars movie period.

****ing come at me.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

Malia is ugly and if you're a celeb you need to learn how to deal with that s***.

Or, you know, we could start holding people to higher standards as far as unwanted attention goes. "She had it coming because her parents are famous" really isn't a cool attitude to take. At all.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Wait... how is literally fighting against a cause they disagree with considered cowardly? Detrimental and gratuitously antagonistic, sure (violence is bad and all), but cowardly?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Option A: Become aware of how bad it is and make it better
Option B: Become aware of how bad it is a ****ing embrace it for all it's worth

Option A might have been preferable, but given how thoroughly Sega's failed at that already with Sonic, this might actually be the more sensible route.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Doctor Foxx posted...

They inventory situation is atrocious and feels very outdated unless they've really fixed it.

What, how quickly the inventory fills up? It does very much fall prey to the problem of emphasizing loot quantity over quality, where the vast majority of what drops is utterly useless and you can't hope to ever start to pick it all up if you want to spend your time efficiently (or even entertainingly). You can make or download a loot filter that will hide or emphasize certain loot based on varying criteria, which works around that problem quite nicely, even if it would be nice to have less garbage dropping.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

helIy posted...

adjl posted...

Unless that several hours is really only for the first time you pick up the game, and subsequently gets streamlined by knowing what you're doing, allowing for hundreds upon hundreds of hours of enjoyable game. A few hours of sluggish start is definitely worthwhile for a thousand hours of full fun.

no.

Aren't you a little old to count yourself part of the instant gratification generation?

I mean, really, what made you look at this:
https://www.pathofexile.com/fullscreen-passive-skill-tree/3.0.1/AAAABAMAAQ==

And think you'd actually experienced the game by the time you did this:
https://www.pathofexile.com/fullscreen-passive-skill-tree/3.0.1/AAAABAEAAXZ_e4x-4ITEnlfkUQ==
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Bonus points because the first reply to that stream of damning stories is somebody saying "stick to hockey and don't make political commentary." Some people seem to rather enjoy remaining in denial about awful things Trump's doing.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Veedrock- posted...

2003 > Brotherhood.

It's better to watch first, but having watched it first, I think I prefer Brotherhood. Brotherhood blows through the shared material too quickly to appreciate the character development it offered in 2003, but as a recap that just reminded me of the content and how it made me feel, it worked quite well. Without watching it first, though, the shared material would just be too brief of a review.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Kana posted...

The extreme majority of burglaries are ones of opportunity, and burglars will not generally stick around if they see someone is home.

Pretty much. Odds are, I wouldn't really have to decide what to do, because the second we locked eyes they'd run away, unless I was blocking the escape route.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

My dad, and if we're counting pets, my cat.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

https://twitter.com/phoenixnewtimes/status/901263384087334914

What a delightful fellow.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Zeus posted...

adjl posted...

Shenti_Reborn posted...

preeeeeeetty sure 99% of US presidents were white males

44/45=97.8%

You forget that Obama was half-white, so it's 44.5/45 which rounds up to 99%.

Ah, that works. Carry on.

Shenti_Reborn posted...

I didn't know if it would really add up to 99%

The device you're using to post here has a readily-accessible calculator, you know.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

helIy posted...

i haven't

during the beta, i didn't play much past the first 4-5 locations because character data would get wiped for the full release, and now it's fully out, i still haven't played much of it.

i think i got to the 3rd area after the town. my skills are double slash, and magma ball thing.

So... you've barely touched the game, and haven't even begun to explore the flexibility in character building that's the game's greatest strength? I'm not sure you're really qualified to assess how good of a game it is quite yet.

helIy posted...

if i have to play a game for several hours before it "gets good"

then it's not a game worth playing dude.

Unless that several hours is really only for the first time you pick up the game, and subsequently gets streamlined by knowing what you're doing, allowing for hundreds upon hundreds of hours of enjoyable game. A few hours of sluggish start is definitely worthwhile for a thousand hours of full fun.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Shenti_Reborn posted...

the important math--height, weight and maximum bench press capability

Numerical statistics aren't math. You can perform math with them, but they're just numbers.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

Now that's a hilarious understatement.

Coming from the guy who turned "a murderer who deliberately and maliciously turned jails into torture chambers, resulting in a slew of abuses, injuries, and deaths to people who hadn't even been convicted of a crime" into "a sheriff," I think you might want to turn your gaze inward before you criticize other people for understating an issue.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

I'm not the one that screwed up basic division.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

Shenti_Reborn posted...

preeeeeeetty sure 99% of US presidents were white males

44/45=97.8%
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

helIy posted...

adjl posted...

helIy posted...

literally today.

it just came out on consoles yesterday

Have you found an answer for how spells get aimed with a controller yet? I'm quite curious, but last I heard you were just whacking stuff and didn't need to aim.

i still haven't used spells, just sword skills

Plenty of sword skills target a point, have you not used any of them yet?
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

faramir77 posted...

I find it weird how other languages have plural second person terms ("vosotros" and "ustedes" in Spanish for instance) but we shit on people who try to introduce plural second person terms in English (particularly "y'all").

"You" used to be primarily a plural second-person pronoun, with "Thou" being the singular form, but that got phased out and "You" just fills both roles. I'm fine with that, since the nature of second-person speech is such that quantity is usually unambiguous (and when it isn't, "you all" clarifies it immediately). Hating on "y'all" is mostly just because it's a regional thing and it's taught as part of formal English, so it gets the whole uneducated redneck stereotype going.

Judgmenl posted...

Yes they/they is valid.

"They are going to the store" could imply one or many people.

Indeed. It's valid, but I don't like it because it introduces quantitative ambiguity. I'd like to see a third-person singular pronoun, but "it" has been ruined by dehumanizing connotations because people are dicks (plus it's the go-to pronoun for concepts and objects, and therefore gets used very frequently even without using it to describe people), and making up new ones is hard.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

helIy posted...

literally today.

it just came out on consoles yesterday

Have you found an answer for how spells get aimed with a controller yet? I'm quite curious, but last I heard you were just whacking stuff and didn't need to aim.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.

OhhhJa posted...

What's more scummy? Pardoning a sheriff? Or pardoning crack dealers

Now there's a leading question. Could just as easily compare pardoning somebody who committed hundreds of human rights violations with pardoning a father of three beautiful children. Compare the crimes if you want to compare criminals; thinly-veiled pathos does nothing to help you.
---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.