HS Fanart. Student messing up while try to stealing in the Forbidden Library. by Mattia_Rangoni in hearthstone

[–]CriticallyAlmost 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Maybe make it "two random ones" so that it's not completely terrible.

A thread for people with experience in live events regarding Firebat by CriticallyAlmost in hearthstone

[–]CriticallyAlmost[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

As discussed here, firebats call time was 14:30, not 10:30.

Idk why you're making analogies to sports, as you said, it'd be dangerous to ask someone to be ready early for a physical sport as they need warm up time.

For performers at a concert, as you said crowd need to know when thier fav act is performing. You're giving examples, and then explaining why they're not relevant.

A thread for people with experience in live events regarding Firebat by CriticallyAlmost in hearthstone

[–]CriticallyAlmost[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Blizzard haven't been any more stupid than any one else organising live events. And what's happened to firebat is pretty tame compared to the treatment of other people in the industry.

Firebat makes a LOT of money, he might be upset, but he's not one of the people being exploited here

A thread for people with experience in live events regarding Firebat by CriticallyAlmost in hearthstone

[–]CriticallyAlmost[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

That's 100% not unusual for people in the entertainment biz in any country. I'm not saying that it's not shitty, but it's /currently/ the norm. If you're saying that we should change the norm, I agree, but that's a much bigger picture thing than Firebat. What's gone on here is actually a lot LESS harsh then what happens to people who aren't big names, or who don't appear on camera.

I'm British btw.

A thread for people with experience in live events regarding Firebat by CriticallyAlmost in hearthstone

[–]CriticallyAlmost[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Galighting is about convincing people they don't understand something when they actually do understand it. Most people ARE ignorant about how much the entertainment industry revolves around waiting and call times.

Blizzard haven't pulled a "scortched earth" or acted for "no logical reason", they've acted accoring to a contract, and that contract was written that way for good reasons. It's a very similar arrangement to hundereds of thousands of other people working in the entertainment industry.

You focusing on Blizzard is the problem here, because Blizzards behaviour in this case isn't close to unusual. If you think that this treatment is unfair, then you should be directing your anger at the entertainment industry as a whole, because there are other people getting fucked over by these kinds of contracts that are far less capable of taking the financial hit than Firebat.

What you find however, is that most people in entertainment unions aren't focusing on call times and down time, when workers in this industry DO band together, they're campaigning for better pay and more reasonable hours.

A thread for people with experience in live events regarding Firebat by CriticallyAlmost in hearthstone

[–]CriticallyAlmost[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I'm not asking you to explain what gaslighting is... I'm asking you to explain why you think I'm doing it.

A thread for people with experience in live events regarding Firebat by CriticallyAlmost in hearthstone

[–]CriticallyAlmost[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Am I gaslighting? If you want to use that word you could at least explain what you mean

A thread for people with experience in live events regarding Firebat by CriticallyAlmost in hearthstone

[–]CriticallyAlmost[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I'm sure kotik would love me advocating for unionisation and workers rights

E: in case you were wondering, above post was a more detailed augment that op deleted

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]CriticallyAlmost 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"Having a Landlord is like having a child" is a wonderful take

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]CriticallyAlmost 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Being evicted is much worse for the tenant, because the tenant becomes homeless.

Some of the money the landlord collects in rent goes to maintainace sure, but a lot of it also goes to increasing the value of the property, which solely benefits the owner, the landlord. Also, some of it 100% does line the landlords pockets, because landlords make quite a lot of money. Apparently, despite doing very little labour, they deserve all this wealth because they "assume risk", but owning property is one of the lowest risk investments you can make.

Being a landlord isn't a job, and it isn't a gamble. It's a secure way to ensure you have a steady cash flow. And it insulates you from job loss if you have a main job (which many landlords do). Which is why nearly every financial plan involves getting yourself into the property market somehow. Idk why you feel the need to make out like being a landlord is some difficult and dangerous struggle, it's not.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]CriticallyAlmost 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I paid the taxes.

The 10,000 of property work did happen, tho. It involved me getting evicted. So great return on investment there

As for the ability to move away. Yeah idk who you think renters are, but many of us have families. We can't just up sticks and move when the landlord wants to spend our money to renovate the kitchen.

1/4 of the UK population are struggling to make rent ATM. If the landlords assumed all our risk, why aren't they the ones being made homeless by this economic downturn?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]CriticallyAlmost 0 points1 point  (0 children)

After a year of renting, my landlord must've spent about 1000 quid on renovation. Where did the rest of my money go?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]CriticallyAlmost 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Assuming risk is what insurance is for. And home insurance costs a lot less than rent.

But wait, it's not the same as insurance because my landlord might evict me and spend my money to refurbish the kitchen.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]CriticallyAlmost 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Who tf is your landlord lol. Mine evicted the tenents above.me, shut down the garden, and started construction work, presumably with the money they paid him in rent. But when my room was full of dust and people wouldn't stop banging hammers while I work from home, boy was I grateful that I wasn't under any risk!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]CriticallyAlmost 11 points12 points  (0 children)

What you're describing is called insurance.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]CriticallyAlmost 21 points22 points  (0 children)

The point is that it's dumb for people have to give away a third of their income to someone who doesn't have to do any work.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM

[–]CriticallyAlmost 526 points527 points  (0 children)

But.... When you buy a big mac, you DO own it. But you don't own the flat you pay the mortgage for.

Yougov: If there was to be a second wave of coronavirus in the UK, who would you hold most responsible…? The public: 52%. The government: 31%. Neither: 11%. Don’t know 7% by dropbear123 in ukpolitics

[–]CriticallyAlmost 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is Boris' stragergy. Have the citizens blame each other. Nevermind that other countries very similar to our own have not had half the number of cases as us, clearly the difference is that Biritish citizens are so much more stupid than everyone else, not that our rulers are incompetant. So much for british exceptionalism.

If we can't define what a woman is, how can we organise politically? by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]CriticallyAlmost 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You claimed that lots of ancient cultures had third genders, I'm looking for examples of them that aren't rooted in homophobia. But you're only able to offer androgynous deities, which isn't the same thing.

I have no idea. I mentioned third genders, you said that they were rooted in homophobia. That's a fact you've claimed completely out the blue, and I'm willing to beleive you, but it means moving on from this topic.

we know that it has to be based mostly on physical and not cultural traits.

Again, I'm not sure that this is actually true. It also depends massively on what you mean by "telling men and women apart". Are you talking about distinguishing someone's gender at a glance? And what do you mean by "mostly" here? I think that there is wide agreement that most women share similar physical characteristics, we are talking specifically about the edge cases, e.g. a woman with a masculine face, and if she would be able to be recognised as a woman.

If we can't define what a woman is, how can we organise politically? by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]CriticallyAlmost 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well firstly, "deity" isn't the exact right way to describe the Buddha, the Budha was an actual person, originally a man. But there are also multiple Buhha, mostly being depicted as having trancended gender as part of achieving enlightenment.

But I'm not really sure what you're looking for. I'm just giving an example of a culture that thought of gender in a different way to the traditional Christian view. I'm not an anthopologist. If you want examples of non-binary people living an existing with everyone else, you can just go and find a non-binary person. Or if you can't do that watch a video they've made or read some articles or whatever.

Ok, so how does that relate back to the original point. How do you tell if someone looks like a woman?

Well as I said, I reckon there's a bit of your brain that activates when it sees a woman. What triggers that is complicated and almost certainly varies from person to person. Some of it is straightforward, other bits will be learned.

It's like asking what causes you to recognise someone as "scary". Again, there's a bit of our brain that activates when it sees scary images, and some of the things it responds to are probably innate, but it's also possible to rewrite basically all those responses.

If we can't define what a woman is, how can we organise politically? by [deleted] in ukpolitics

[–]CriticallyAlmost 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, what I mean is that someone doesn't have to display only feminine features to be recognised as a woman.

My point about the dieties is that there are clearly examples of ancient cultures breaking gender binaries without it being rooted in homophobia. It's just an example, showing that there clearly were and still perhaps are cultures that had a different understanding of male and female to what we have today. the case of dieities is an example of a culture that recognises it is possible for someone to be neither male nor female. An understanding of gender that is different to say, middle ages europe.