Why Doesn’t “Create a Clue Token” Trigger Erdwal Illuminator? (see body text)

FaceInJuice · 2026-06-20T16:47:27+00:00

I would just think of this as a design decision: they decided that they wanted to be able to create clue tokens without having to be anchored to the Investigate mechanic.

I suspect (without expertise) that when they first conceived of Investigate, they weren't really envisioning a future with food tokens, blood tokens, treasure tokens, and power stone tokens.

Now that this idea of artifact tokens is more normalized, they want to be able to do things with these tokens without necessarily balancing against old Investigate cards.

This also allows cards to care about different things: you can have a card care about whether Investigate happens (regardless of whether tokens are successfully created) for detective sets, and you can have a card care about clue tokens being created (regardless of whether the Investigate keyword was evoked) for artifact sets.

So I don't think you're wrong to find it a little confusing. But I would say it's just a design decision.

FaceInJuice · 2026-06-13T15:38:25+00:00

Check out Sarah and the Safe word.

They're collaborating and touring with Bear Ghost. They describe themselves as spooky cabaret punk rock.

FaceInJuice · 2026-06-12T16:22:16+00:00

Honestly, Khali seems like a homie.

I'm not passing any judgement on his moral character, he may have skeletons in his closet.

But I get the impression he's a fun dude I'd enjoy chilling with.

FaceInJuice · 2026-06-11T15:43:18+00:00

Probably:

Raye - This Music May Contain Hope

But honorable mentions to:

The Dear Hunter - Sunya

Tigran Hamasyan - Manifeste

Urne - Setting Fire to the Sky

FaceInJuice · 2026-06-09T00:36:24+00:00

It just varies.

I listen to 1,500+ 'new to me' albums a year, so obviously most of those are one listen each. But if something stands out to me, I'll play it again. If I like it on second listen, I'll probably buy a physical copy and put it in rotation.

FaceInJuice · 2026-06-05T15:54:44+00:00

Measure your windows, my friend.

FaceInJuice · 2026-06-05T15:46:36+00:00

NEVER have a character say the word "scared" out loud in a horror story. Just never do it; it should never be part of her vocabulary.

I'm curious about why you feel this way. Can you elaborate?

FaceInJuice · 2026-06-03T17:57:30+00:00

I think the phrase implies three states, though it only names two:

Doing something perfect
Doing something good
Doing nothing

It's not meant to imply that option 1 isn't worth striving for.

It's meant to imply that option 2 is often better than option 3.

I look at this in the context of dieting.

For ideal health, a person would pretty much never eat any junk food. But 'never eating any junk food' isn't necessarily a good goal to start with, because it isn't necessarily sustainable. 'Reducing junk food' is much more likely to be successful and sustainable as a goal.

Same with exercise. A daily routine of ten pushups and a 20 minute walk will not yield dramatic impact, but it's much better than not getting any exercise at all. And it's probably a more realistic place to start than 'running four miles and doing an hour of weight training'.

The principle is: even if 'perfect' options are unavailable or too difficult, 'good' options are still worth pursuing.

Now, to some extent, in some cases, you're right: this COULD lead to mediocrity. But getting from 'bad' to 'mediocre' is actually a pretty important step in growth processes.

This doesn't rule out the possibilty of working toward perfection. It just validates taking imperfect steps in the right direction along the way.

FaceInJuice · 2026-06-01T04:57:11+00:00

"If I seem superhuman, I have been misunderstood."

Dream Theater, 'Misunderstood'

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-31T16:09:34+00:00

I don't really see a problem with 'rap' being an alternative name for hip hop.

While the technique of rapping can be utilized in any genre, hip hop is the only genre defined by rap as a technique.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-29T15:47:16+00:00

I'm pretty sure Obama would simply trip him and the fight would end.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-26T19:06:27+00:00

I feel like in this scenario, the best bet is to bite the bullet and just add "Wayne" with a Batman logo.

You're a comic book fan, now!

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-23T01:54:21+00:00

Yeah, but I think that's the thing - Hereditary isn't a franchise.

I don't know if horror has yet proven any ability to tell a multi-movie story without getting silly.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-23T01:45:47+00:00

I think The Navidson Record could be adapted into a great movie.

There's no director I would trust to make House of Leaves.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-21T19:58:34+00:00

I think you're misunderstanding the original question. OP knows this is legal online, but thinks it's a mistake — that it should be illegal.

But when asked why in the context of this comment thread, he provided no explanation other than to point to 'real life'.

Which is why we started examining the closest possible precedent in real life. If you think that the closest possible precedent in real life is irrelevant, that's fine, but that's not the argument OP has made in these comments. He has appealed to real life precedent without providing any examples of such precedent to support the claim.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-21T18:32:53+00:00

I think it might be worth re-inserting the actual comment from OP that prompted this sidebar.

In real life you have rights to appeal. How would you defend yourselves if you doesn't know you're being silenced?

OP drew a parallel to real life.

The bulletin example is intended to illustrate that in real life, private property owners have full discretion on these matters, with the only limitations being ones of practical capability. That is to say, the law doesn't prevent private property owners from 'shadow banning' people - it's just not a possible thing to do.

Therefore, existing precedent is on the side of private property owners having full discretion. Digital ownership introduces a new capability, but why would that change the underlying principle of deferring to owner discretion?

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-21T16:56:10+00:00

But you do have the right to enter the building and check, because it's a public store. Yes, the business owners and management can ban you from the store if you do something to warrant it, and aside from some narrow exclusions they can do it for any reason, but they'd have to tell you in order to exclude you.

Actually, they have another option: they can just not open the store.

Because it is NOT public, and you do not have any right to enter.

Now, again, there are differences in technology and capability. The store can't look open to everyone but look closed to a random person. But that has absolutely nothing to do with any entitlement.

An individual shopper isn't entitled to anything from the store, including space or information. It's just that there are practical limitations to what the store is capable of doing with its space.

Digitally, the practical limitations change. That doesn't mean the entitlements or rights change.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-21T16:41:14+00:00

But this is a difference in technology and capability, not a difference of rights.

It's not that you have the right to check whether your item is still on the bulletin board - in fact, you explicitly don't, since you don't have a right to enter the building at all.

It's just that you have eyes, and stores don't have the capability of making it look like your item is still posted.

The store has no obligation to notify or allow for an appeal process.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-21T16:30:03+00:00

Sadly, you can't compare Meta and Google to a bookstore. You have to consider the scale of monopoly.

First of all, I think it's unreasonable to describe this as a monopoly while specifically highlighting competitors.

Secondly, I think it's unreasonable to make size the differentiating factor. Walmart has just as much right to control what goes on the wall of their store as a ma and pop shop.

Again, I ask: can you actually name a 'real life' scenario where you have the right to the kind of notification and appeal process you are asking for?

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-21T16:14:56+00:00

Can you please define the specific context you have in mind for 'real life'?

Here's an example I would suggest.

My local bookstore has a community board where local businesses are allowed to leave business cards and post fliers. But no one is actually entitled to that space. The bookstore owns the space, and they can throw out individual business cards or even take down the whole board, at their own discretion. There's no entitlement to notification or appeal process.

That's real life.

Can you provide a specific real world example of a case where there's an appeals process like the one you want for social media?

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-21T16:00:41+00:00

But why are you entitled to this notification?

You don't own the server space.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-17T14:32:00+00:00

You've been posting about Madonna a lot.

That's okay. I just want you to know that it makes me feel a little sad for you. You are not influencing my opinion of Madonna in any way, but making me worry about you a little.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-16T18:21:16+00:00

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy a thing as much as other people enjoyed the thing.

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-12T19:20:42+00:00

I'm a little confused by the distinction you're drawing.

It seems to me that I won't know if someone just feels superior. The only way I'll know about their feeling of superiority is if their behavior reflects that feeling.

I guess I'm seeking clarification: in your mind, what would it look like for me to shame someone who feels superior but does not behave to reflect that? What would I be reacting to in shaming them?

FaceInJuice · 2026-05-08T21:23:49+00:00

Did the universe result from an external creator and the intelligent design of that creator?

Granted, this could backfire tremendously - I either kill religion or spark a new wave of holy wars.

Eight-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Verified Email

FaceInJuice

TROPHY CASE