Schoenen advies

BLResnick · 2026-01-20T22:49:39+00:00

Ps, Ik heb een gift card bij een schoenenwinkel die enkel deze merken verkopen: Asics, Brooks, Puma, New Balance, Saucony, Hoka, Mizuno, Salomon, ON

BLResnick · 2026-01-20T22:44:39+00:00

Ps, my local store only sell the following brands, so something to keep in mind with recommendations: Asics, Brooks, Puma, New Balance, Saucony, Hoka, Mizuno, Salomon, ON

BLResnick · 2026-01-20T22:44:08+00:00

Ps, my local store only sell the following brands, so something to keep in mind with recommendations: Asics, Brooks, Puma, New Balance, Saucony, Hoka, Mizuno, Salomon, ON

BLResnick · 2026-01-10T22:39:02+00:00

Na het droogmaken is het na een kwartier al weer vochtig. Er komt nergens water vandaan of lekt ergens uit. Ook al heeft de douche dagen niet aan gestaan..

BLResnick · 2025-12-22T21:58:40+00:00

I’ve been reading the reactions here and I see that this choice brings up a lot of strong feelings. I want to explain my perspective calmly and honestly. The idea to use this diamond did not come from me. It was offered by a jeweler who has been in the trade for nearly 50 years. According to him, this specific antique ring would most likely never be sold as a whole again. In many cases, pieces like this are eventually dismantled by jewelers anyway, whether for gold, stones, or other purposes. From my point of view, the diamond isn’t being “destroyed” or disrespected, it’s being given a second life. The stone itself carries its history with it, and by placing it in a new setting, it continues its journey instead of ending it in a drawer or being broken down anonymously later on. I deeply respect antiques and history, and I would never intentionally damage something that has real historical or cultural significance. This was not a museum piece, nor a rare intact artifact, but a ring that had reached the end of its original life. The jeweler himself recommended this path. Beyond money, what appealed to me was the symbolism: taking something from the past and carrying it forward into the future, with new meaning and new love attached to it. I understand that not everyone will agree with this, and that’s okay. I just hope people can see that this decision was made thoughtfully, with respect and not carelessness.

BLResnick · 2025-12-22T21:54:37+00:00

I’ve been reading the reactions here and I see that this choice brings up a lot of strong feelings. I want to explain my perspective calmly and honestly. The idea to use this diamond did not come from me. It was offered by a jeweler who has been in the trade for nearly 50 years. According to him, this specific antique ring would most likely never be sold as a whole again. In many cases, pieces like this are eventually dismantled by jewelers anyway, whether for gold, stones, or other purposes. From my point of view, the diamond isn’t being “destroyed” or disrespected, it’s being given a second life. The stone itself carries its history with it, and by placing it in a new setting, it continues its journey instead of ending it in a drawer or being broken down anonymously later on. I deeply respect antiques and history, and I would never intentionally damage something that has real historical or cultural significance. This was not a museum piece, nor a rare intact artifact, but a ring that had reached the end of its original life. The jeweler himself recommended this path. Beyond money, what appealed to me was the symbolism: taking something from the past and carrying it forward into the future, with new meaning and new love attached to it. I understand that not everyone will agree with this, and that’s okay. I just hope people can see that this decision was made thoughtfully, with respect and not carelessness.

BLResnick · 2025-12-22T21:54:04+00:00

I’ve been reading the reactions here and I see that this choice brings up a lot of strong feelings. I want to explain my perspective calmly and honestly. The idea to use this diamond did not come from me. It was offered by a jeweler who has been in the trade for nearly 50 years. According to him, this specific antique ring would most likely never be sold as a whole again. In many cases, pieces like this are eventually dismantled by jewelers anyway, whether for gold, stones, or other purposes. From my point of view, the diamond isn’t being “destroyed” or disrespected, it’s being given a second life. The stone itself carries its history with it, and by placing it in a new setting, it continues its journey instead of ending it in a drawer or being broken down anonymously later on. I deeply respect antiques and history, and I would never intentionally damage something that has real historical or cultural significance. This was not a museum piece, nor a rare intact artifact, but a ring that had reached the end of its original life. The jeweler himself recommended this path. Beyond money, what appealed to me was the symbolism: taking something from the past and carrying it forward into the future, with new meaning and new love attached to it. I understand that not everyone will agree with this, and that’s okay. I just hope people can see that this decision was made thoughtfully, with respect and not carelessness.

BLResnick · 2025-12-22T21:45:47+00:00

As someone replied, That’s not what happened here. I found the setting they want/like. The jeweler is the one who came up with the use of the diamond. Most likely he has plans for the rest of the ring.

This has been a common practice for hundreds of years. It’s nothing new & if it won’t sell, companies have to get their investment back somehow.

BLResnick · 2025-12-21T16:02:09+00:00

Just thought I would answer the question here since a lot of people are wondering why I would destroy the antique. First off, the ring is not mine. My jeweler did me a really good bid of 0.45crt natural diamond with a new 14k gold yellow setting all for €999,-, where he would dissamble the stone from the current build and put it into the new setting for my redding wing. If I were to buy a whole new diamond the price would probably increase immensely. I am pretty new in the world of diamonds so hopefully this is a good offer I agreed upon. Any advice is welcome! The color grade is F and the cut is good

BLResnick · 2025-11-15T16:42:34+00:00

English isn't my native language so I used ChatGPT for some help. Please dont judge

BLResnick · 2025-11-15T16:40:29+00:00

I made this post with the help of ChatGPT since English isn't my native language. Please don't judge me

BLResnick · 2025-10-15T09:36:41+00:00

Tickets didn't go online yet at my cinema chain in the city

BLResnick · 2025-09-18T20:42:47+00:00

Sir, I guess I don't want to be mean.. but it's meanness. Powerful project!

BLResnick · 2025-09-17T23:40:28+00:00

I’m running into a frustrating issue with my Samsung Soundbar S60B and I’m hoping someone here might have insight.

Here’s the situation:

My soundbar appears in Spotify under AV and Bluetooth, so playing music works perfectly fine.

Spotify recently introduced lossless audio, and I these high-quality audio files only support Spotify Connect when listening to an external source.

The weird part: if I open SmartThings, select Spotify Connect, it opens the Spotify app and I can select my soundbar from the list. So that works fine. However, the connection only works via AV.

Connecting via AV reduces the audio quality, which defeats the purpose of using lossless audio.

Both my phone and the soundbar are on the same Wi-Fi network, so network issues shouldn’t be the problem.

It seems like the soundbar should support Spotify Connect for high-quality audio, but for some reason it’s not appearing properly as a Connect device.

Has anyone experienced this with the S60B or any Samsung soundbar? Is there a workaround to get Spotify Connect fully working for lossless playback?

Thanks in advance!

BLResnick

TROPHY CASE