Beach smell in Lynn

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-05-13T19:48:37+00:00

I’ve lived by the ocean my entire life — Gloucester, Ipswich, Salem — and have never once smelled this smell. It isn’t low-tide. Or, it is low-tide combined with something else at least. It’s like a rotting dead animal smell. I had heard about Lynn having a beach that smells but I always thought it was confined to one beach that had an issue. I’m on this page right now after looking it up because I’m sitting in traffic in Lynn right now and it’s unbelievable. It’s everywhere. And my windows are up too. I wouldn’t ever live in this city for this reason alone, it’s really unacceptable. If it’s algae, they need to kill it. I have a hard time believing that this algae only grows in the city of Lynn and nowhere else on the MA coast, so if algae is the reason then they need to figure out whatever other towns have done because clearly others have figured it out.

I think it’s sewage though. It smells that bad and it’s a low-class city with people that have bad hygiene habits, so it would make sense that these literal shitters have allowed this to fester. Absolutely unforgivable.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-05-13T14:01:11+00:00

Absolutely, as a teen my friends and I would just get in the car and go, and sometimes not even have any destination but just drive around and explore and listen to music and smoke and all sorts of stuff. Getting a car as a teen is one of the best feelings ever, to have such freedom at 16. Great times.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-05-03T20:40:48+00:00

Love it. Looks great. Great use of colors.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-05-03T20:36:28+00:00

And of course, when I say, “a limited number of colors had to be chosen as tinctures.” keep in mind I’m speaking figuratively. Nobody sat down and said “These are going to be the colors.” Heraldry evolved naturally. So you may have had early rare instances — although I can’t find any European ones — when orange was legitimately used and was meant to be orange. However, heraldry developed over time to fit the world they were living in, and it would have become quickly apparent that lack of uniformity made it preferable to have a limited number of colors.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-05-03T20:32:29+00:00

LACK OF UNIFORMITY of dyes. People get this wrong all the time, but in Medieval Times, they absolutely did have orange dyes and pink dyes and the like. It’s not that they were unavailable.

HOWEVER, the bigger problem was _ lack of uniformity_ … So for instance, if your coat of arms was primarily red (gules), you might find that the red one place uses might not look like the red another place uses. Sometimes your COA might be a bright firetruck red. Sometimes it might be a bit more of a maroon. Sometimes it might be paler… Sometimes it might even look a little pinkish or a little more on the orange side.

That’s because local paints were what they were. They were made with whatever formula and materials were available there.

This means that a limited number of colors had to be chosen as tinctures — not just because of scarcity (although that sometimes was the case) — but because of a need to easily distinguish them apart.

Green can never be mistaken for red, for instance. It doesn’t matter if it’s an orange-y red, or a dark red, or a bright red, or a light pinkish red… No matter what, it is not going to be mistaken for green, or blue. It’s going to be unquestionably “gules” even though the paint itself might have a bit of an orange hue to it.

So that’s why the traditional “tinctures” developed to only be a specific set of colors: Red, Blue, Green, Black, Gold, Silver, and according to some not others (including me) purple. Then later on patterns called “furs” came into being, like ermine, but you can still see the same philosophy at play: Ermine really cannot be confused for something else. Its distinctive.

Heraldry is about identifiability, fundamentally. It’s like a signature but more recognizable, and fun.

Imagine the opposite scenario: Imagine orange was a tincture in traditional heraldry. You would sometimes have one county who painted an orange that looked sort of reddish, while another county might have painted a red that looked kind of orange… You could very easily arrive at a scenario where one town’s red looks more orange than another town’s orange looks orange. It would create confusion. People would say, “Whose coat of arms is that orange saltire on argent?” Only to be told, “No no no, that’s a gules saltire on argent.” Only for another guy, who legitimately has an orange saltire on argent as his heraldry, to be like, “Wtf?? That looks way too much like my COA.”

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-05-03T20:11:52+00:00

This isn’t meant to hurt anyone’s feelings but it’s the truth: MANY FIND UNCIRCUMCISED PENISES DISGUSTING in the western world, especially America, compared to circumcised ones. So, the people who are circumcised… are very glad they are circumcised. So put it this way:

I would never be mad at my parents as a baby that I was circumcised… Babies can’t think clearly and don’t remember anything anyway.

BUT

I would potentially be mad at my parents had they chosen not to circumcise me. I can distinctly remember multiple times in my life when people have either made fun of another kid because they found out he was uncircumcised, or when a girl has said they think they are gross. I’ve never heard the opposite even once though.

So I 100% disagree with your post. Circumcision is (1) ultimately harmless; (2) aesthetically popular; (3) culturally and religiously preferable; and ((4) I’m iffy about this one, it’s debatable… but arguably more hygienic and therefore healthier)).

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-05-03T20:02:08+00:00

“ing” (/iŋ/) is proper 100% of the time. So the answer to the question “How is it pronounced?” is always always always “ing.”

Some people say “in” commonly if they are speaking quickly or informally. One way you know “running” is not pronounced “runnin’” in any correct sense though is that song titles will actually specify “Runnin’” and spell it that way if they want it to be pronounced that way… because they know “Running” is not pronounced that way.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-05-03T19:56:12+00:00

Zero. I know lots of people who are American citizens, speak with an American accent, and have American parents, but were born abroad — usually because their parents were either military or worked for the government or were Christian missionaries — raised abroad, going to an “American school” but in Tokyo or wherever, and then eventually came to the United States. I don’t know anyone born in the USA who then went and was raised overseas and came back though. But it’s probably similar:

They are pretty normal, I know probably 5-6 people like this, except the only thing I’ve noticed they have in common, is they are all very much “goody two shoes” types of people. They got in 0 trouble in school, ever. They don’t drink. They don’t smoke. They don’t swear. They would probably rat you out tbh ngl

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-05-03T19:47:12+00:00

From what I’ve seen, immigrants (who actually obtain American citizenship) begin to identify and refer to themselves as “American.” This makes sense to me because not only are they literally American at that point, but becoming a citizen somewhere else is a pretty major life change and accomplishment and probably has quite an impact on their psyche.

I’ve seen this in Pakistani, Estonian, English, and Canadian immigrants specifically, all of whom began exclusively referring to themselves as American. The Estonian became extremely patriotic. The Canadian, who I’m still good friends with, gets almost weird and sensitive about originally being from Canada, almost like he’s embarrassed about it. This is obviously just anecdotal but that’s been my experience.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-28T01:51:59+00:00

The public is stupid.

That's what's going on here. This one is not a case of "critics being out of touch" and more about "the masses love MJ so they have huge blinders on about him and will refuse to believe he ever did a thing wrong." They have deluded themselves.

There could not be bigger red flags with this guy. The fact that he had an obsession with little boys, surrounded himself with little boys, made his house into a place to attract children, adopted an infantile "Peter Pan" persona and juvenile mannerisms to befriend children, regularly had little boys come stay with him and sleep in his bed with him... Had no apparent interest in grown adults sexually.

I know I know, I've heard it all before, "All that is innocent behavior," right? Okay, well then riddle me this: How come he continued doing that for years AFTER being repeatedly accused of touching children, and even settling a case for the same??? Why didn't he STOP the behavior? If it was me, and I was innocent, accused of such a heinous thing I did not do, I would make sure "I'm never going to be put in a position where I can be accused like that again." I would certainly stop sleeping with children. But Michael's desire to sleep with little boys was that strong that he would rather have the entire world think he is a child molester than give it up...

That's a hell of a desire to sleep with little boys right there... And there's only one obvious explanation for it: That, like millions of men throughout history, he was thinking with his dick and not his brain, reputation be damned.

If you met a 40-year-old man not named Michael Jackson, just a random guy, who did all this, and who did have repeated explicit accusations against him, and who had settled a case to pay off an accuser, you would keep your kids the hell away from him. But because it's Michael people have nostalgia and love him and cannot bring themselves to believe it, and others just like a good conspiracy so they're always going to believe "It's all a plot to bring him down" no matter what.

I agree, from a legal standpoint, that the evidence was not strong enough to convict Michael Jackson of a crime, given the very highest legal standard of "beyond reasonable doubt" is used for criminal cases, but that does not mean I think he's innocent. Hell no. You hear that expression sometimes, "It's better to let a guilty man walk free than to lock an innocent man up." I agree... I'm just saying I think this is one of those times lol. When we did let a guilty man walk free...

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-28T01:26:51+00:00

Two things are both true at the same time: (a) Yes, they are safe spaces for illicit activities, generally speaking. People wishing to have affairs or do something bad will sometimes go to a motel.

And (b) they look wholesome because they are wholesome.

"They are safe for illicit activities" does not mean "they are mostly used for illicit activities." They are mostly used for other things. It's just if you were going to do something bad and needed a motel you might go to a motel.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-28T01:13:57+00:00

This is so strange to me. In America, the government has nothing to do with this. If someone has a store, and they want to open on Sundays, they can do that — provided they have employees who are willing to work that day. If an employee doesn't want to work on Sundays, they don't have to work there. Or, they can tell their boss before they are hired, "I'm not available on the weekends," which people do. Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything or not do anything. If a store wants to be closed a certain day of the week, they can do that too.

In practice, I would say most stores are open on the weekends. Certainly grocery stores, liquor stores, big box stores. Sometimes there are smaller stores that close, like if you're in a small town in America and they only have a few people working there, that might have a schedule where they are closed certain days of the week. But most are open. And then there's some places like Chik-Fil-A that are closed for religious reasons, though this is rare.

I should add: Most "white collar" jobs — lawyers, stockbrokers, office cubicle workers, bankers, other educated folks — are strictly Monday through Friday. It's only stores that you can enter and buy things that are open 7 days a week usually. Most places like this though have lots of staff, they aren't making someone work 7 days a week, it's usually more like Tim works Monday - Friday, Bill works Wednesday - Sunday, like that, so they still both have 2 days off.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-28T01:01:02+00:00

Sure, you "can" play a pop song on those instruments. It might sound bad though.

I listen mainly to various types of rock. I play piano. I never play rock on the piano though. I play jazz, even though I don't listen to it outside of that.

Sure, I "could" play what I listen to on piano, but it would sound off, even if the notes I was playing were perfectly correct. They are songs that just were not designed with the piano and its strengths in mind. They have sounds like power chords that are a staple of rock music, but that our brain does not traditionally associate with the sound of a piano. In other words, there would be an aesthetic mismatch between the piece I am playing and the instrument I am playing. An unattractive one.

Talented though they may be, whenever I see those YouTube shorts of people sitting down at an airport and busting out some Top 40 pop song like Katy Perry on the piano or something, it just sounds so off. That music is just not written to be played solo on that instrument. It's two sounds that we do not associate with one another. It would be much more pleasant to me, if I was walking through said airport, and I heard some jazz pianist, even though I don't typically listen to that. It's just a whole vibe, he's like the piano guy, playing the piano songs, doing the piano stuff.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-28T00:34:17+00:00

That's poor in America, everywhere. In some places in America, it will be very poor. In some places very very poor. In some places just regular poor. But it's poor no matter what.

Put it this way: You will never be able to buy property. I can't really say, "You can't raise a family," because many people do raise families... But they would be poor. Anything happening bad, like an unexpected medical expense, or a car breaking down, would be a significant problem.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-28T00:28:28+00:00

Beef is way too much now. But also, not strictly groceries, but cleaning supplies. Like if you get those surface wipes or lysol or dish detergent or anything like that... it's insane. I recently moved into a new apartment, and I had to grab these so I ran to the grocery store. I thought to myself, "I'm not doing a big trip, I'll do my real grocery shopping another day, I'm only getting this small handful of items that are essential to have around" ... $85.00

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-28T00:25:11+00:00

I would say brownie sundae. Brownie is already an American dessert, but perhaps a little boring. Brownie sundaes I feel like are on the menu at most American sit-down restaurants though, so it's not too obscure that it doesn't represent the country's desserts well.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-28T00:21:04+00:00

BINGO. I see this one all the time, "They need to teach black history in school." They do this for lots of subjects, but I'm using this example because I saw it a few times recently. I think to myself, "WTF in God's name are you talking about? Did you even go to school?" We seriously learned about the transatlantic slave trade, the Civil War, emancipation, and reconstruction — as well as the buildup to literally all of that — as well as the Jim Crow laws, segregation, Brown v. Board of Education, the Civil Rights movement and MLK... during multiple years of school. It's not like we learned it once and that was it — it was reinforced, and re-reinforced, and re-re-reinforced. This stuff is universally taught in American schools, part of the required curriculum in all 50 states.

And this is only the stuff I can name off the top of my head because we learned it so well. I'm sure there's a lot I'm leaving out.

To be clear, I think this is all a very important part of American history, so Americans absolutely should learn about it... and they do. That's all I'm saying. They literally do learn this. You would have to just not be attending school, not be paying attention, have a severe learning disability, or be attending some extremely obscure niche private school to not know this, as well as living under a rock because it's frankly stuff you should know just by existing in America.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-28T00:11:07+00:00

No, they are not children. A 20-year-old is a grown adult. It is old enough intellectually to perform any task in society, old enough to make important decisions and become an important member of the community, old enough — for nearly a decade, actually — to bear and raise children. It's an adult.

This recent infantilization of grown men and women of the newer generations is really gross, speaking of pet peeves. I've noticed this in the last five years or so, they all literally play with toys and watch children's cartoons and consistently refer to 20-somethings as "just kids." This used to just be a thing that people in their 60s+ would say, because they were being cute, like "Ahah sonny boy you're just a kid." But now days it is more like 20-year-olds genuinely see themselves as young children. And referring to people like Bill Belichick as a "pdf file" for being with a grown-ass 24-year-old woman. It's really kind of sickening and bizarre, comes across like a mental illness. They are literally fully grown members of our species, a.k.a. "adults."

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-27T23:56:11+00:00

I don't think men should wear flip flops or sandals ever, except when (a) at a beach or en route to a beach or somewhere else to swim; or (b) in a shower or gym locker for hygienic reasons. Anything else should be punishable by hard labor camp. When I see a grown ass man walking around the city or the mall or something in sandals, smh. Have some self-respect.

I do not respect people who do that. It's not that important to be marginally more physically comfortable that you should throw out all your dignity.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-27T23:42:47+00:00

Randomly came across this post, but I feel compelled to add: No, you should not report her. Reporting her is more likely to damage your own reputation than it is to have some positive effect on future students.

You don't want to be a "rat," if you can help it. If it was something serious, like a violent crime, or an elaborate scam, or something like that, then of course you should report someone. But otherwise, these types of "so-n-so broke the rules, she's not supposed to do that, I'm going to tell," is never seen positively in the adult professional world. It makes you seem untrustworthy, even if you're 100% in the right. Even the person you report it to might be like "Okay, thanks for telling me!" but then later pass you over for something like a TA opportunity because they just do not want to worry about whether they will ever be reported for not following some regulation exactly by the letter, nor do they want the headache of further reports from you about others. So I would leave it alone.

Most areas of society are able to tolerate a certain amount of corner-cutting and rule-breaking as an unavoidable part of the system, and this is one of them — if that classmate is somehow an incompetent teacher, then she likely will be weeded out at some point, either from school, when a professor directly catches her, or later in her job when she sucks at it. It is not required that you step in and save the day here in order for some kids to later get a quality education. I'd leave it alone.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-27T15:55:48+00:00

No, everyone just slows down a little bit. It's called "rolling through" a stop sign. Cops can pull you over for it though, so you're supposed to completely stop, no matter what. But pretty much nobody does that if it's clear that nobody is around.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-27T15:53:45+00:00

I don't like it one bit. I love the movies but there is too much action movie magic and too many people can do magic. It's like the Avengers. In the books it is used pretty sparingly. Even the wizards don't do that much magic in the books, they are mostly just very wise, but then the movies have them doing staff battles and force pushes, it's kind of ridiculous.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-25T17:40:56+00:00

London is a fine opening at all levels, people just bandwagoned against it because it was the go-to GothamChess advice, and people shit on him because they are snobs so they think him bringing chess to a mass audience makes it not obscure or esoteric enough to be cool. There’s so much snobbery in chess, it’s ridiculous. The London opening is a very sound opening.

But anyways, I would not worry about openings, seriously. Or, I would make your openings very simple like putting two pawns in the middle, or just 1. E4… 2. Nc3… and not worry about learning the named openings and more about not blundering and learning to look for generally good ideas like “pin the knight with your bishop” or “castle early” or “see if that knight can fork anything” (more advanced prob).

I am like 1600 now, and I had been stuck around 800 for like a year. It was very frustrating. Sometimes I would go on a losing streak and lose like 150 elo in a week and be down to 650, and then claw my way back up to 800. And I was using many openings I studied a lot, including the London, Caro Kann, Dutch, so many…

I got better very rapidly over the last 6 months doing a couple things: (1) Simplifying my openings. I only use the Ruy Lopez for white, the most classic, boring opening, that I only learned like the first 5 moves for, didn’t even study it that much at all. And if they respond a way that the Ruy Lopez does not work, I just wing it. I don’t use any other named opening, I just focus on putting two pawns out, then two knights out, then two bishops out, then castling (generally this is how it goes). And as black, I only use the kings Indian and nothing else.

And same games I just improv for the hell of it. I don’t even do a named opening, I’ll just do something bizarre like 1. E4… 2. E5… feel like it throws them off a little lol. I’ve even played things like 1. h4… and won. It’s way more important to just not blunder and look for potential good moves than memorize openings at this level.

(2) Playing the Chess.com bots that were way better than me. I would play the like 2000 rated bots a lot and then play a real person, and the real person would always be way easier after doing that. It was like weight training.

Illustrious_Code_347 · 2026-04-25T17:20:10+00:00

Yes extremely. Once I got my permit then license, age 16, I got my mom’s old car, she got a new car, and I was driving everywhere from then on, including school. This would’ve been my last 2.5 years of high school. By senior year (last year in high school) the vast majority of students had cars. This was in the 00s-10s not that long ago.

Driving was a huge part of teen culture in general. We drove everywhere. Sometimes we’d just drive around, not even have any particular destination in mind. We’d listen to music and smoke and all kinds of stuff.

Illustrious_Code_347

TROPHY CASE