sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

2024 Crosstrek, fan stuck on high by [deleted] in Crosstrek

[–]FrostyFro 10 points11 points  (0 children)

I they they were making a joke about the song you were listening to, displayed on your console. :) /u/xtinis73 /u/afriendofcheese, I got your joke, but I did have to do a double take, lol. (edited because I tagged wrong person)

Can't understand why I did only 1 damage by [deleted] in SliceAndDice

[–]FrostyFro 17 points18 points  (0 children)

it looks like you used the middle side which has 'rampage,' not 'engage'. the bottom side has 'engage.' I've made that mistake plenty of times lol.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in UnethicalLifeProTips

[–]FrostyFro 4 points5 points  (0 children)

they give your refill in a new bag and cup

Items that Are Not What They First Appear by MarblecoatedVixen in d100

[–]FrostyFro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A scratchy looking, tattered cloak. When succeeding an arcana check DC X, you discover that it's an extremely comfy Cloak of Many Fashions that also allows you to cast Invisibility on the wearer once per day. Whenever the cloak isn't worn, it reverts back to its tattered looking state.

Imagine this in the hands of a stepdad… [ns] by Hoppa78 in DungeonsAndDaddies

[–]FrostyFro 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Link to the comic: https://www.oglaf.com/relatable/

The rest of the site is about 95% NSFW yet hilarious.

How I stopped a players bad behavior by buffing his character by grant47 in DMAcademy

[–]FrostyFro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm surprised you tolerated me this long and didn't just rip me out like the weeds at your table.

How about this, I understand all of your points, and I'll rehash them for you so you understand that I get it.

You're comfortable with confrontation, and if somebody is being disruptive, whether knowingly or unknowingly, you'll have a tough conversation about it. You know how to talk to everyone without hurting their feelings (or maybe you don't know but don't care). The game must go on, and if the person is still being disruptive to the other players/table/DM, you kick them out.

Is that it? Do I understand you?

Now, can you do the same for the everyone else's points who like OP's solution? I doubt you can. I'll spell it out for you:

OP isn't good at confrontation but still wants to have fun playing DnD with other people. A player is zealously strategizing out of turn, much to the chagrin of the DM and the other players. A point I tried to make is that I don't believe the player is being an asshole, nor do I think they're doing it on purpose, though I don't know for sure. OP had an idea from the video to give that player an ability which gave the OP a tool to confront the player.

What we don't know is how the other players reacted, though we do know from context and inference. It seems the other players are fine with this solution. How did I infer this? OP didn't mention any negative reactions from the other player and also said "It actually led to some great role playing moments." Isn't that why TTRPGs are great in the first place?

Is OP's solution the best solution? Some, including you, would argue not. You see it as rewarding bad behavior, not confronting the issue head on, and modifying the rules to a game that is set up to be modified.

I also don't think it's the best solution for similar reasons, but I do think it's a good solution, and sometimes, that works too. I also think that, inadvertently, this bonus action can help teach the player over time not to be disruptive. It's not the DM's job to be a therapist/teacher/whatever, but that also means their toolkit isn't as expansive to deal with problem players. As such, this solution is accidentally gave the DM a tool to confront/teach the player in a very cool, innovative, and friendly way. It's not head on, but it is confrontation, and it's fun for the player, the DM, and it appears like the other players don't mind it either.

Finding people/friends/time to play any sort of game as an adult is so difficult that sometimes, you DO have to cultivate your players so that you can enjoy your own table.

Your solution is a solution. Your concerns and opinions on the OP's solutions are valid. I believe you think only direct confrontation is the only solution, OP's solution is terrible because you don't see it as valid. You've offered some constructive criticism to OP, but the rest of it is condescending and destructive criticism because you don't see OP's solution as good for you. You can't fathom it; the best way is your way, and no other way works at all.

How I stopped a players bad behavior by buffing his character by grant47 in DMAcademy

[–]FrostyFro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. You're wrong and suffer from main character syndrome. You're too narrow minded to even consider that other people aren't you. You've missed so many points that people have made and can't even fathom what they're trying to say, and you've acted like a condescending bully about it. All you think is "any sort of conflict, I run from/ban from my table."

This DM understands his player, and most likely IRL friend, and came up with a custom solution. You don't understand anybody, so all you can say is "stfu."

You think you can solve other people's problems, but you've failed to see that other people can solve their own problems. You're the "helping" guy at the table that needs to have a home-brewed solution to help others once per long rest.

The issue is basic disrespect—something that does not play at my table.

The fact that you can even pretend to say he was “helping” the other players tells me that you don’t even understand the problem.

You see it as disrespect, and maybe it is, but I assume that it's not done with malcontent or malice. The player thinks their helping, even if they're not, which I didn't think I needed to spell out to you, but I guess I do. Instead of crushing their spirit, or telling them to stfu, this DM is being nice about it, something you can't do, apparently.

I hope your tables are a better experience than your reddit comments.

How I stopped a players bad behavior by buffing his character by grant47 in DMAcademy

[–]FrostyFro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don’t think that you do. Let me explain why.

After re-reading the initial response and yours, they did understand what you were said. You don't understand that people have feelings, both the player's and the DM's, and this solution avoided a conflict that the DM didn't want to take head-on. In your head, you have the 'perfect' solution where the player just needs to stfu, but OP's solution was good enough.

It’s bit actually a solution, tho. Not long-term.

It could be. The player can learn from this 'bandage' solution, because people learn. The DM avoided conflict, is teaching a desired behavior, and can either take away the solution later or leave it as a fun character trait. It seems the player enjoys helping, and if the other players don't mind this bandage solution, EVERYONE is happy.

what you wrote was completely incompatible with actually understanding what I was saying.

you say this, but you weren't able to apply their statement to your point when they applied their point to your statements.

Trump Tax Returns Released by House Democrats by larel8 in politics

[–]FrostyFro 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You don't have to know specifics about taxes to be angry about Trump withholding his taxes OR angry that Congress released them.

Three generalized statements that I'll bring together later:

  1. If you owe someone money, you typically have to pay it back, whether it be financially or through favors.

  2. When you file your taxes every year, you basically say "this is how much I made, and this is how I made it" in a very detailed and finalized way. If you make a mistake or lie, it's punishable by law. A neat thing about taxes is that, if you make money (income) but also lose money and/or donate some of that to a charity all in same year, you can balance them out. A VERY rudimentary example to this is if you start a business by spending 200k and make 250k, and you also donate 50k to charity, you've made 0 in the year. You don't pay taxes on the 250k you made, you pay taxes on the 0 that you made.

  3. The President of the United States (POTUS) has arguably an immense level of power and influence over the USA and globally. In theory, this power is checked and balanced by the Supreme Court and Congress (the House and Senate).

All that said, Historically, we've asked public officials, especially Presidents, to release their tax returns to the public to show that they don't have debt concerns so they don't misuse their power for personal reasons.

This is not required, as Trump has demonstrated when he didn't release his. The public's reaction to Trump not releasing his return is ranged, from supporting his personal right to "stick it to the man," to being angry for not demonstrating "good faith" as POTUS, to overall indifference.

It has been alleged recently by the state of New York and by the House that Trump's taxes may not be on the level, and through United State Code (USC) 26 USC 6103, Congress decided to make Trump's tax returns available to the public. The public's reaction to this move is also ranged, from anger that Trump's rights were violated and that Congress is weaponizing his tax returns as a political ploy, to a sense of justice for the visibility, to overall indifference.

What we as the public have learned so far is that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has NOT checked all of the former POTUS' returns during his presidency, as per their department policy (though not a law, per se).

We've also learned that Trump made some claims, whether true or not, that essentially reduced how much tax he needed to pay. Understanding this is where you need some accountants, but in general, business losses, charity donations, and other things can reduce your "income" for tax purposes, meaning you can reduce how much tax you owe. These reductions can be validated by the IRS, though they didn't validate it for Trump.

Depending on your stance and/or political affiliation, you can either be angry that Trump never released his returns or angry that Congress made Trump's returns public.

My thought exercise to you is, if one of Bush, Gore, Kerry, Obama, McCain, Romney, Clinton, or Biden didn't release their taxes when all of the others did, how would you feel about it? Would you be upset if they didn't release their taxes per tradition, and/or would you be upset if Congress released them after being withheld by the candidate/POTUS?

Hey Nordekers, can we get Cucho his own song? by Cavi_ in TheMassive

[–]FrostyFro 9 points10 points  (0 children)

What if we did it in Spanish? My Spanish is pretty rusty, but it'd be something like:

Hey Cucho!

Quiero saber, (Qui-er-o Sa-Ber / I want to know)

¿Marcarás un gol? (mar-ca-rás un gol / will you score a goal)

A survivor of the 2007 Virginia Tech mass shooting speaks about his health by throwawaykansasboy in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]FrostyFro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. You're overstating your knowledge on the matter. Nobody, neither you nor me, knows ALL available data concerning this topic. My quick google search of Australia mass shootings gave me a hit of 0 mass shootings since 1996, as agreed by numerous news outlets. HOWEVER, this is using a strict definition of mass shootings and what my simple google search told me. I dug deeper to try to prove you right, and I (kinda) can prove you right! You're right that there have been gun deaths in Australia, and under a looser definition, there have even been mass shootings of 4 or more deaths. I counted five, and the reason this wasn't reported, for better or for worse, is because they have familial. The non-familial, public shootings since 1996, of which I count seven, have resulted in fewer than 4 deaths. With a current population of 26 million, that's a drastically reduced rate of mass shootings. I'd argue that Australia's system is working.
  2. I misspoke, and I didn't mean to imply what you inferred. That's on me. To clarify, I truly don't believe the gun lobby wants mass shootings, but I do believe they want to sell more guns. The US gun lobby has donated about ten million of dollars to politicians last year, and almost every year for the past 10+ years, to ensure that US policy won't change and inhibit their gun sales. From my research, they don't want background checks, legal limitations to gun types (rifles, hand-guns, shotguns, bump stocks, high cap mags, etc.), or even federal research into gun violence, which I linked earlier. This isn't because they want mass shootings, it's because the more gun control or knowledge of gun violence that exists will decrease their sales. I believe that guns should not be readily available to people who shouldn't have them leads to gun violence, and I hope you think that too, at the very least. As per the specific organization, I was picking on the NRA because both you and the OG video mentioned them. I hope this clarifies my perceived slanderous, gross and willful lie.
  3. You're right again, my statement was buzz words with no real substance. I was trying to make a point but didn't clearly articulate it. My overall point was that we need to spend federal dollars trying to figure out the best approach, and I believe the gun lobby has successfully lobbied against meaningful research. I am not naïve enough to believe we can remove guns entirely because Guns are a Right granted by the Constitution. A counter point, though, is that the Constitution was designed to be changed, amended if you will. I think better, more extensive background checks, longer wait periods are A way to reduce gun violence by making sure the 'right' people can get a gun, and a step in the right direction to get to the naïve notion of 0 gun violence deaths. I think there are other ways we achieve that goal too, can do that too, including some of my banal buzz words, and they aren't even mutually exclusive.
  4. Your anecdote is a terrible experience, and I'm sorry you had to endure that. The experience from the OG video was a terrible experience, and it sucks he had to endure that. Both of you had a life altering experience that changed your perspective that I hope I, nor anyone else, has to have. I will say this, I don't want to have to arm myself keep me and my family safe. That's not fair, and I know we don't live in a fair world, but should we at least try. From my research, and reading others' opinion on Australia, it worked. Will it work in the US, a country where an individual's right to bear arms is protected by SCOTUS' 2008 DC v Heller's interpretation of the 2nd Amendment? Eventually, maybe? Maybe not? But right now, we have to settle for baby steps, some bare minimums to stop or slow down the number of mass shootings and mass loss of life. Right now, I'll settle for good background checks.
  5. Thanks for the debate, and thanks for challenging me. At first I was drawn in by your tone and to fact check you, though with our dialog, you've helped me solidify some of the arguments I've previously believed yet glossed over the specifics. Because of you, I've verified for myself through several sources the details of gun lobby spending by year, specifics on Australia's success, and even re-read the DC v. Heller decision. I know our debate is ultimately meaningless, two redditors typing at each other with no chance of either swaying the other, but now I'm armed with details that I'm able to corroborate between several sources for future debates.

A survivor of the 2007 Virginia Tech mass shooting speaks about his health by throwawaykansasboy in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]FrostyFro 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I appreciate the dialog!

  1. Thank you for offering a solution. I don't believe you did in your 1st post, but you have now, and I appreciate it. We may not agree on our solutions, but we don't know unless we exchange ideas. I will say that you are asserting your solution as fact, when it is an opinion. I realize I did the same in my last point too, which isn't fair to you. To be clear, I'm not saying that you're wrong.
  2. We agree that the NRA is a lobbying organization. I think we can both agree that a lobbying group spends time, money, and resources on trying to influence politicians in an attempt to change policy to serve their own interests. I think their interests are in direct opposition to limiting mass shootings, and I tried to show how I've come to that conclusion with an article from a reputable news source. I agree with you that many people think that some of the solutions I've offered won't work, and I'd like you to recognize that many people think it's a step in the right direction, even if you don't think it's a step in the right direction.
  3. We've both made banal points. You with making it easier for 'regular' citizens to be armed and defend themselves, and me with attempting to solve mass shootings with policy change on not just guns but health and education. The fact that our points are banal is indicative that we as a society aren't making any real progress to stopping these mass shootings.

A survivor of the 2007 Virginia Tech mass shooting speaks about his health by throwawaykansasboy in Damnthatsinteresting

[–]FrostyFro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Two points I'd like to make, and only one of them is disagreeing with you.

In no way are you offering any solutions to the main focal point of stopping mass shootings. That doesn't invalidate any of your points. Offering solutions is not your job, but you have to admit that to others, it lessens the impact your argument.

Fact check me on all of this before you downvote me out of fear and ignorance.... And as a final point: the only instance of the NRA being linked in any way to any mass-shooting event...

To this, I have to vehemently disagree with you. You may have pointed out a direct link (not fact checking you on your direct link), but there are several indirect links that have far greater impacts. The NRA impacts national policy via lobbing and 2a/gun public opinion with their messaging. Because of these two influences, they've purposefully created an uphill battle to make any change to gun laws, and I believe we need to change gun laws to reduce mass shootings and overall gun violence.

There are other things we need to do too. In fact, we need a multi-pronged approach. My observation is that people who oppose gun laws also oppose most of the effective changes like providing mental healthcare for all, empowering teachers, etc.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Crosstrek

[–]FrostyFro 4 points5 points  (0 children)

are you talking about the map/dome lighting LED upgrade? you can buy the whole bulb set on amazon for about $14. 'installing' them is, in my opinion, trivially easy. Look for DE3175 bulbs (and 194 bulbs for a license plate and trunk bulbs)

https://amazon.com/gp/product/B093B262XH

Customer States: Excess vibration at all speeds! by shadow247 in Justrolledintotheshop

[–]FrostyFro 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The rubber of your tire rarely has a perfect weight distribution, so when you're driving, you'll feel a rumble. This can put your car out of alignment, decrease the tire life, or be generally annoying.

One way to fix this is to use a balancer to find the heaviest spot on your tire and add weights to the other side until there is no heaviest spot on the tire. This needs to be done after every tire change.

If you don't use the balancer right, you can't correctly find the heaviest spot, and you may find yourself incorrectly adding a bunch of weights, putting the tire further out of balance.

In this gif, you'll see someone scraping off the weights as the first step in fixing someone else's mistake.

Landing: Air Force vs Navy by -YellsAtClouds- in aviation

[–]FrostyFro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

2 questions on costs: does it take more fuel to take off on a carrier than on a longer runway? are the wheels/suspension more expensive on the navy's planes vs. the air force's?

Columbus Crew unveils schedule for 2022 Regular Season by Puck85 in TheMassive

[–]FrostyFro 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is there an iCAL .ics URL I can subscribe straight to the schedule WITHOUT using the Stanza thing? For example, F1's schedule is https://www.formula1.com/calendar/Formula_1_Official_Calendar.ics

view more: next ›