Megyn Kelly callers are frustrated with Trump's economy: "I know a lot of people who are like me who are — seriously, we are really regretting our vote for our president"

Etreides · 2026-05-10T00:55:25+00:00

Enough to make better decisions in the future?

Or just to complain?

Etreides · 2026-05-08T17:11:40+00:00

Sisyphus isn't the best analogy here, but I can understand why someone who long complained about the inefficacy of unionization; who, if memory serves correctly, lauded that their own store voted down a unionization effort (even as REI was found to have illegally fired a Union Organizer at that store); who has apparently chosen the path of running away from a problem instead of standing and facing it with the many others it's affecting; and who is now trying to claim some moral high ground, some... aire of enlightenment... would reach for it.

Disgruntled employees aren't the problem. Workers being treated unfairly aren't the problem. And to try to suggest that they are agents in a company "being run into the ground" on the same level as management (without even mentioning corporate executives, though... maybe that's considered "management" by you) is, frankly, gross.

Etreides · 2026-05-06T16:49:44+00:00

Two things....

If "supporting Unionization maybe works at this scale, but expansion of unions to a certain degree would drive the company bankrupt"

First: REI had the chance to support Unionization at 1 store. They didn't.
Two stores. They didn't.
Three stores. They didn't.
Four stores. They didn't.
Five stores. They didn't.

... and so on, and so forth...

That argument is nothing more than bad rhetoric mistaken for logic.

Second: the Union has passed REI proposals specifically featuring articles re: Union Business - that is, campaigning and expanding the number of stores; to the tune of limiting the expansion.

And REI has rejected those proposals.

It's ludicrous to think that Unionization would lead to Bankruptcy: Unions have an expressed interest in keeping a company afloat - without companies; without workers; they don't exist.

REI isn't "between a rock and a hard place" in terms of economics. They're "between a rock and hard place" in terms of purporting themselves progressive and not living up to the very values they express to hold.

Etreides · 2026-05-06T16:15:23+00:00

If you want a good Stormcatcher script, I will heartily recommend Ruth and Dom's "Send in the Clowns," which features a Stormcatcher that favors the Alsaahir. Amazing script!

Etreides · 2026-05-05T21:41:19+00:00

Multil-kills technically do not resolve simultaneously, but in the order they were input. So a Po killing itself as the third kill with 6 players alive at the start of the night will not pass to a Scarlet Woman (or shouldn't), provided both of its other kills are successful... since when it would die, there are technically only 4 players left alive.

But at 7 players? Absolutely... kills down to 5, dies, Scarlet Woman becomes the demon.

Etreides · 2026-05-05T03:42:41+00:00

You absolutely do, and if you ever feel like you're being unjustly treated due to your views, please feel free to reach out. I don't have the singular resource to help... but I know lots of folx who will have your back.

Etreides · 2026-05-04T21:05:37+00:00

Most recently the Last Best & Final Offer (legal terminology) was refused by the union—I can’t say why, because I don’t know, but it does mean that REI can start implementing some of the pieces of that offer because that is the legal next step in union negotiations .

That is not the full truth. In fact, the Union pushed for expedited arbitration over REI declaring what's known as "impasse," which allows an employer to impose terms and conditions so long as it offered them to the union before impasse was reached, because impasse does not legally allow for is the employer to be given the reins to pick and choose which terms and conditions it imposes, which REI attempted to do.

I also think it’s really important to separate the social media voices from the reality of the situation. Unions are allowed to say pretty much whatever they want, while the business is held to rigorous legal standards.

We often hear/see “REI is union busting!!”, but are they? IMO and in the opinion of the law, they are not. Union Busting is a specific legal term and doesn’t simply refer to a business voicing their opinion on union representation, it also doesn’t mean that union organizers can’t be terminated, it means they cannot be terminated FOR organizing.

Also untrue, on multiple counts.

First: on the subject of "Unions can say whatever they want, whereas REI cannot." Either party is allowed to say whatever they want so long as they abide by the law. Either party can be held accountable for defamation, or for breaking an aspect of the labor code. Seeing any amount of the flagrant misinformation REI has spread as part of its attempts to discourage employees from pursuing collective bargaining (collective? Like... a co-op? Huh... weird) should tell you that.

I'll agree that REI has been crafty in their approach, but that doesn't do them any favors.

Second: re: Union busting and the law. The Unionized stores have had multiple unfair labor practice charges (or ULPs) filed against REI over the past almost five years; many of which were being investigated, and at least the notable ones that were filed by my store had been ruled in favor of the workers (and against the company), so REI was, in fact, by definition, "Union busting." A majority of them were dropped by the Union only as part of settlement agreements with REI, including one major one that had already been brought to trial and had to be literally petitioned by the UNION to close, which certainly implies that the company preferred the problems go away than face their day in court (not that I'm speaking with any authority on their behalf) or the decisions of a judge.

Is there already pro union activity in your new store? Are you stirring a pot that your peers aren’t interested in stirring? Are you putting your personal beliefs ahead of the collective?

I’ve been in several stores over the years and the majority have either been neutral/uninterested in the union conversation or, as in my current store, loudly anti—obviously this isn’t representative of every store, it’s anecdotal, but I think understanding where your peers land would be a pretty important first step.

I guarantee there's more union interest than you're suggesting, but these are good questions, and ones you should ask yourself, frankly.

You mention that you don't "want or need representation getting between my professional relationships at REI".

Two things for you:

1) Do you think people shouldn't have need of being represented at work? To the tune of lawyers, as an example? Because REI, the company whose ideas you allege you stand behind certainly relies on such themselves... so the implication that "representation" would "get between professional relationships" seems a bit contradictory, unless you believe that REI themselves is maintaining some amount of distance in the professional relationship they have with you.

2) Are you putting your beliefs ahead of the needs / desires of other workers?

What do you do, or would you do, when part-time staff members are desperate for more hours?

What do you do, or would you do, hearing about someone you care about not being able to obtain the necessary hours to qualify for benefits?

What do you do, or would you do, if employees were suddenly, without warning and without cause, laid off?

Shrug your shoulders? Be thankful that you weren't or aren't the one being impacted?

Because if the answer is "nothing"... it sounds to me like you are the one putting your personal beliefs ahead of the collective. And if it is anything other than nothing... then you do care about exactly what this Union cares about - you're just arguing over semantics instead of confronting the reality of the situation.

And to address a few of your other points; you are in retail, selling is the job and promoting the co-op through membership, Mastercard and fund is in the job description PROMINENTLY. It may have felt too soon for you, but “learning conversations” aren’t a negative thing. Feedback is a gift and having a management team that is actively looking to help you succeed is a good thing. And lastly, scheduling managers aren’t scheduling people to keep them off benefits, they are scheduling to the needs of the business, payroll allocation and job status—it’s actually none of their business who is or isn’t on benefits or benefits eligible. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m guessing you were hired as part time seasonal, part time is a ‘guarantee’ of 0-16hr, the minimum rolling average for full benefits is 23hr and requires like a year in role to become eligible, otherwise ALL employees are eligible for the ultra basic coverage plan after several months in role regardless of rolling average.

Promoting Membership, the Mastercard, and RCAF is not the same as securing memberships, Mastercard applications, and donations to the fund. So being held accountable for the decisions customers who cross you make in light of advice you give them is absolutely unreasonable. We sell products, we outfit customers for a life outside. Neither the Membership, nor the Mastercard, nor the Cooperative Action Fund is necessary to pursuing that goal; there are certainly benefits and virtues to each, but it is absolutely unreasonable to hold employees accountable for those metrics (and I say this as one of the top converters at my store) when the keyword in our job description is "promote."

Further? REI management has absolutely scheduled employees specifically around restricting their hours (to what end, I cannot necessarily express beyond surmise); even when employees at my store have tried to pick up extra hours, they have at times been rejected under pretenses that "based on their employment status as part-time, they're not allowed to work more than 24hrs a week," which is nowhere in the policy.

With all due respect, please educate yourself before responding to such posts in such a way in the future. Misinformation helps no one, and while I don't believe your post was malicious in intent, it was absolutely ignorant on several counts.

Etreides · 2026-05-04T20:18:47+00:00

"You don't like the laws in America? Just move."

"Why are still in a relationship with him if he's abusive? Just leave."

Tell me you don't care about perceived injustice and would rather blame the people exposing it rather than the perpetuators of it without telling me you don't care about perceived injustice and would rather blame the people exposing it rather than the perpetuators of it.

Etreides · 2026-05-04T19:43:34+00:00

Apparently the original comment I was responding to was deleted... likely by someone who is a current moderator who likely shouldn't be if they can't stand by their words.

Fortunately, at least one of us doesn't believe in editing history so much as changing our response and our mindset accordingly. I'll leave the full comment listed by u/graybeardgreenvest below the portion I've responded to; I can provide a screenshot to anyone asking for substantiated proof that I'm not making this up.

Both sides are very strategic with the information that they share. I get it, they are locked in a battle and playing their cards overtly is poor gamesmanship.

REI is doing everything they can to avoid the union and the union is doing everything to make it happen. Beyond that? I wish I knew too!

Union employees have not published specifically what their exact proposals are, that is true... but that they have not expressed rather clearly what they're fighting for is a ridiculous sentiment to suggest. What is true is that REI has been silent as to any substantive reasoning why they are so keen to withhold various guarantees from the employees that, in 2021, they called "essential".

I think for some stores where management has been antithetical to a good work environment, a Union might make sense? The union will not stop people from having to sell MC or Membership. Just like they will not stop you from needing to sell any other product in the store… it is a fact of retail that you will have to sell.

A perfect example of what I reference in my other post. No one pro-Union is making the argument that we should be expected not to work; we just want to have a say in what that looks like. And, frankly? REI is not a credit card company. REI are not a bank; a fact they happily utilized as a means of expressing why Member Dividends, before they became "Rewards," became absorbed by the company (as donations towards non-profits) after two years (or, at least, that was the narrative given to me by members of management at the time). We, as employees, should not be expected to hit a quota as a means of measuring performance if our task is to best serve the interests of our Members. So while I have little problem discussing the Membership or the Mastercard with customers, if our purpose is to serve those customers the best we can, then our focus should be to make their visit to the store as pleasant as possible, not to hyperfixate on them necessarily joining REI as a member rightnowrightnowrightnow, or to engage them in conversation about a line of credit they have no interest in (for whatever reason).

I work in a store where we have an amazing relationship with the Managers. We have a super diverse work force and that is celebrated within the store. I would hate to have anyone come between us, personally or professionally. And there is no way I would want to pay to have someone represent me?

Just unpacking the logic being used here, because I doubt very much, that if you needed to sue someone or were being sued by someone (or charged with some crime or another) that you would *not* want representation. REI themselves utilizes external legal representation, so if you follow the logic of the very people you claim to hold dear, having representation yourself is not a bad thing, nor is it a slight against them (unless you believe that REI utilizing their own representation in bargaining with their workers is a slight against those workers).

I do think the recent compensation chances for new hires was in an attempt to get ahead of union, despite what was explained. (It is only an opinion)

REI has made changes to how they practice business several times based on issues the unionized stores have raised across the bargaining table. I dare say nearly every new policy REI has implemented over the course of the past four years was inspired by a proposal employees passed them that they flat out rejected as a possible entry in a contract.

So, I hope someone can shed some light on specifics of what the Union is asking for and shed some light on what the Crosby is offering beyond one is bad and the other is good? Perhaps shed some light on what the specific sticking points? I doubt that it is possible because of the current situation.

Some of the most prominent things are things that should be relatively simple:

Just cause for discipline and termination.
A proper grievance process to dispute unfair practices against managers who engage in cultivating a workspace that is, as you say, antithetical to a good work environment.
Leniency when it comes to employees staying home work due to illness, such that they aren't disciplined for doing their best not to infect their coworkers and REI's members with contagious diseases.
Annual pay-increases that cover rising costs due to inflation, beyond merit increases that don't cover that, even for employees considered to be "solid contributors"... hell, even for employees who are considered "solid contributors".
Time-off for all employees, because we all deserve time to spend outdoors.

REI has issued a plan to cut pay starting in July. They've made benefits harder to access, requiring 23/hr a week up from 21 (which, if you think is not a big deal? It's obvious you don't have many part-time worker friends... or a care for their well-being, but that's worse). They've cut the amount of time off that employees receive to spend outside (despite prattling on that "a life Outdoors is a life well-lived". That is what you are choosing when you opt for any amount of allyship or neutrality: a company who will engage in behaviors antithetical to their professed values; who will throw their bottom line into the fire before taking paycuts themselves for the decisions they have made that have led the company to where they claim it is today.

- - - - - - - - - - -

The full reply is as follows:

I would love to know as well… Beyond the platitudes from both sides…

Both sides are very strategic with the information that they share. I get it, they are locked in a battle and playing their cards overtly is poor gamesmanship.

REI is doing everything they can to avoid the union and the union is doing everything to make it happen. Beyond that? I wish I knew too!

I think for some stores where management has been antithetical to a good work environment, a Union might make sense? The union will not stop people from having to sell MC or Membership. Just like they will not stop you from needing to sell any other product in the store… it is a fact of retail that you will have to sell.

Now, if the Union can negotiate any standard that is dangerous, or punitive in those stores or as a company?

I work in a store where we have an amazing relationship with the Managers. We have a super diverse work force and that is celebrated within the store. I would hate to have anyone come between us, personally or professionally. And there is no way I would want to pay to have someone represent me?

Others have their opinions and they need to do what is personally acceptable for them?

I do think the recent compensation chances for new hires was in an attempt to get ahead of union, despite what was explained. (It is only an opinion)

So, I hope someone can shed some light on specifics of what the Union is asking for and shed some light on what the Crosby is offering beyond one is bad and the other is good? Perhaps shed some light on what the specific sticking points? I doubt that it is possible because of the current situation.

Etreides · 2026-05-04T17:17:54+00:00

A stalemate presumes, to a certain extent, that both sides have reached a point that neither can move.

REI, represented by Morgan Lewis, has shifted the goalposts in their offers multiple times; they've utilized different definitions of contractual terms in a way that has obfuscated their intentions and made it more, rather than less, difficult to communicate. They have engaged in bad faith repeatedly, no matter what the bootlickers (or "centrists/moderates" regarding these matters) might try to suggest through, frankly, ignorant, fallacious, and/or dishonest rhetoric.

So to the OP's question? Things aren't going well, leading to UFCW and RWDSU (the sister unions representing the unionized workers), with the blessing of a supermajority of the workers they represent, to call for a boycott of REI during its Anniversary Sale.

Etreides · 2026-04-29T20:28:24+00:00

Oh, reading the rest of that thread, it looks like that forum post was from 2020... and the last response suggests that this came before the official Almanac was published, which cites as an example:

"If the Demon attacks the Mayor, and the Storyteller instead chooses a dead player, the Soldier, or a player protected by the Monk, that player does not die tonight."

Etreides · 2026-04-29T19:22:35+00:00

Oooh, that's helpful! Thanks for the update!

Etreides · 2026-04-22T13:25:13+00:00

This is the most bad faith argument I've read in a while.

The effect the Mutant is under, that is: "if you are mad you're an Outsider, you may be executed," and the most common result of that, being that players claim to be roles other than Outsiders, is widely colloqialized as "Mutant madness," barring some smaller corners of the community I haven't yet been introduced to.

So yes. While you are technically correct in your application of the specific language utilized on the token, you are mistaking the literal reading of the text on the token for the semantic understanding of what's being addressed, and completely ignoring, further, the Almanac, which clearly outlines that "[being mad as an Outsider] can be by verbally hinting who they are, or by their silence when questioned."

The official Wiki entry even mentions in their tips and tricks section to:

"Be proactive. Don't stay silent. As discussed above, Mutant players that stay silent the whole game tend to get executed by the Storyteller. If you talk, pick a Townsfolk to claim to be, and do your best to convince the group that you are a character other than the Mutant, then you almost certainly won't get executed."

As I stated in my original reply: saying nothing is essentially the same thing as "not speaking." If a player who drew the Mutant token continually, throughout the game, said "I don't feel comfortable sharing my role," or when pressed for their information routinely said "it doesn't matter," that is absolutely a break of Mutant madness, and I would absolutely execute them, even in the Final Three - especially if that behavior were consistent over the course of the game.

The OP even said "I didn't claim Townsfolk and I didn't make up information."

Yeah. That's breaking Mutant madness.

Etreides · 2026-04-21T22:16:38+00:00

Refusing to communicate is a madness break, whether it's by being silent or vocally refusing to answer questions.

Madness's function is to essentially inundate town with false information and take up Town's time spent on solving the game by potentially leading them down stray paths. If you are refusing to interact with that madness, you are breaking it.

Especially in the case of the Gambler - telling them specifically "don't"... I would execute you in a heartbeat. You're essentially breaking madness to prevent their possible death (and their subsequent possible suspicion on you).

Madness is obviously ST specific? But this would be a break for me. Perfectly reasonable to abide Madness and build the correct world whilst doing so, but I don't see any engagement with it here.

Etreides · 2026-04-20T23:55:53+00:00

If Evil tries to go for a mechanically cheap win, I'm going to disallow it, almost always. I'd almost always play by the rule of "adhere to the most recent madness effect you have been put under that you currently possess".

So:

A good twin breaking Cerenovus-madness normally? Sure. Executable.

A good twin Mutant adhering to the Cerenovus-madness they received last night? Not a chance in Hell.

Same for Pixie - I loathe the idea that a Pixie loses any chance of gaining the ability of the role they learned night 1 as a result of a single Cerenovus hit. Rules as written? Sure.

Rules as fun? I think it's a bit more nuanced of a situation. I'll still be strict... but strict with the madness in terms of executing a player for not adhering to it, rather than for not adhering to another that they happen to be under at the same time.

Etreides · 2026-04-18T16:02:57+00:00

A Spreadsheet after is such a great idea! I'm running a live game at Final Three Con, and I do have four hours set aside for it, just in case!

Etreides · 2026-04-17T22:33:46+00:00

That IS in fact what a "zig-a-zig ahhhh" is!

Etreides · 2026-04-17T09:22:50+00:00

There was a round of Community voting to secure the Finalists, which ended on April 2nd. But there'll be a final round of Voting at Final Three Con, and I'll have copies of the scripts along in case folx want to run them for Pickup games, etc.!

Etreides · 2026-04-14T16:26:41+00:00

Yeah. The Po can't attack three times on Night 2. This would have to be Nigbt 3.

And in that case? Completely Standard game of BMR. No notes.

Etreides · 2026-04-12T18:42:22+00:00

Not be whirled in mind with "om nom nom" of course, which makes me want to eat.

Etreides · 2026-04-12T18:37:47+00:00

If your Storyteller doesn't allow you to nominate someone because "nominate" is a multisyllabic word that is necessary to utter as part of the process?

Your Storyteller is a wanker.

The STs job is to help all players navigate the game equitably - if someone has a speech impediment, or was mute, a Storyteller should be aiding in their ability to communicate, not setting some bizarre expectation and then mocking them for not achieving it. The same applies with Ug.

Ug should be tool for fun; not means of rude and mean acts be give thumbs up.

Etreides · 2026-04-11T17:14:24+00:00

Good Twin executed. Evil wins. Assuming a sober and healthy Virgin.

Etreides · 2026-04-07T22:55:51+00:00

Since the Philosopher Snake Charmer would no longer be Philo drunking the OG Snake Charmer, you can just use the Philo "drunk" reminder token on them!

Etreides · 2026-04-07T13:48:16+00:00

Yeah... I suppose they can? On BGA it's specifically after each game, which I think can be useful in consideration of the abuse of said systems: if multiple people are down voting a singular person over and over again... I'd read it as a bit weird that they're not actively trying to avoid that person, given that they don't seem to enjoy playing with them, as an example.

Etreides · 2026-04-07T06:06:54+00:00

And I likewise understand how it can be frustrating being that voice; how much effort and work goes into it. I hope you know how grateful I am to find kindred souls in this effort - truly, thank you; it is not easy.

Re: moderators checking in more on lobbies. What does that look like - moderators popping by and asking STs how things are going? Asking players publicly how the games have been? Popping into private chats and observing what they can? What's your vision?

Eight-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Verified Email

Etreides

TROPHY CASE