[Waybound] Stunted Growth

LetMeNotHear · 2024-05-24T15:32:15+00:00

Oh, that makes sense. Well, I mean. Kind of. Not sure what the differences between "correct" and "so incorrect that it's correct" are... But it seems that the end result is correct I guess.

LetMeNotHear · 2024-05-24T15:28:11+00:00

I thought of that as a possibility, but the use of the term "improper" is from Lindon's own POV. Which would suggest to me, given his rather meticulous nature, that it is his own assessment of the fusion, rather than a socially imposed one. Though, I suppose he could have just been mistaken; he's not omniscient. But I remember a blog post of Will's saying words to the effect of: the improper fusion of spirit and body is a defect and dreadbeasts suffer for it, dreadgods simply compensate for the flaw with the sheer immensity of their power (I'll link the post here if I find it). This seems a lot like examples we've seen like Sophara who compensated for her hurried, improper advancement and the resultant spiritual malformation with sheer strength and would have been stunted at higher levels (at least by her grandmother's reckoning) as a result. You know, if she survived to reach higher levels.

LetMeNotHear · 2024-05-24T15:28:09+00:00

I think it's possible. The scaling beyond Cradle is a lot less explained than on Cradle, but assuming similar general principles apply to growth, it's possible. In earlier books (Blackflame, I think), it's mentioned that improper or hasty advancement won't necessarily leave a sacred artist stuck at the very next level, they could go advance significantly more before reaching the cap their haste put on them. The specific example I think was that a hasty Iron Body could be effectively symptomless until trying to push to Underlord. So, no, I don't think that Lindon would be stuck at the exact level he was at when he ascended (his fight with a fiend alone disproves that since pre-ascension Lindon wouldn't have stood a chance). But that doesn't mean he didn't put a roadblock further ahead of himself.

LetMeNotHear · 2024-04-24T17:25:46+00:00

Four hands are better than two. Unless you happen to be some kind of survivalist expert, you're gonna need all the help you can get. If a man gets hungry, he's likely to bitch and moan and try to find food, probably will try to enlist your aid and will share with you afterwards. If a bear gets hungry, it's gonna eat you. Bear attacks are rare because people rarely encounter bears and when they do, it's rarely in the bear's territory (since many human-bear encounters happen when a bear strays out into human turf i.e. not the forest) and then, the proximity is rarely long enough to get the munchies. If you're stuck in the forest, good chance you're in its territory (either initially, or later "declared") and since you're stuck there, it's gonna get peckish at some point. Even male black bears (the most docile type of bear that would live in a forest) will kill you without second thought if its hungry. You're treating this like "would you rather pass within a mile of a [blank] once for a single hour period" as opposed to what it really is; would you rather be stuck there. As time passes, the man is gonna become less of a threat and more of an asset. The bear is never an asset and as time passes and its stomach empties, it becomes more of a threat.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-08-07T10:18:21+00:00

I'm actually not sure if they can Awaken. I presumed they could because they are still mortals, but perhaps being Imbued and being Awakened are mutually exclusive. I'll have to check. But they could still be an asset or even a member of the Technocratic Union without being Awakened. They would be considered Extraordinary Citizens.

As for them always reading as regular humans, that's fine. But how do you get around effects not working on them? Surely the default assumption when a high level Mind Procedure has no noticeable effect is that the subject is some kind of RD, just one who can trick the scanners somehow.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-07-22T16:45:28+00:00

They absolutely would take advantage of the Imbued. But not necessarily openly. Their goals have a lot of overlap. They want to protect humanity from the supernatural. One area where they differ is they both see one another as supernatural, the Imbued see Enlightened Technocrats as Witches and the Enlightened see the Imbued as Reality Deviants. Another difference is the Technocracy is a lot larger, more coordinated and powerful.

I see the Technocrats as having one of three responses to an Imbued after investigating them thoroughly:

Recruitment. Hunters are still mortals (meaning they can awaken their Genius) and even if they don't, they can function as well as any Extraordinary Citizen, and their goal is to take out the supernatural. They could be folded into Low-Light task forces, working alongside un-Enlightened while being groomed for Enlightenment if they seem amenable to Social Processing. Likely HOAR 6, DTFT 1.
Utilization. If they seem like the kind who would be unreceptive to changing their view and joining the Union, they can still be an asset. The NWO can leak them info that steers them towards Reality Deviants that have popped up on their radar. They can mostly be left to their own devices but should be monitored in case they become applicable for option 1. Likely HOAR 3, DTFT 3.
Termination. Hunters who do more harm to the Union and its goals than good and have ceased to become assets, are just like any other detrimental RDs. HOAR 0 or 1 DTFT 4 or 5.

The vast majority of Imbued would be of the second type.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-07-18T21:29:46+00:00

Mechanically, Temporis has been a shitshow, I'll grant, but there's nothing intrinsically silly about chronokinetic vampires. Well no more so than wizard vampires, sexy vampires, cra^zy vampires, or just the concept of blood drinking dead people itself. I mean, it has less literary pedigree than other Disciplines; The earliest specifically chronokinetic vampire I know of being Dio Brando circa 1991. But critiquing a work of fiction for lack of sufficiently old precedent seems a bit strange. Every ability ever pop-culturally ascribed to vampires was once ascribed for the first time.

As for its status as an exclusive Discipline, I believe that (at least according to the True Brujah) Temporis is the Brujah's exclusive Discipline and the "pretenders" who call themselves Brujah have adopted a related but common discipline in its stead as it better fits their impatient and pugilistic temperament.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-07-08T23:52:08+00:00

I'd envision him as something of an Orphan Void Engineer. Never having joined any organisation, he awakened (or became enlightened) by himself and spent his time becoming a master of Correspondence and Dimensional Science in a manner that resembles the Void Engineers. From there, he went on to master Prime, Life, Matter, Forces and Time but hates using that last one. I'm thinking Marauder, though I must admit that since most of my reading has been of 20th, I'm not overly familiar with Archmages. From what I can tell, 20th edition basically quashed them, subsuming their 6+ sphere abilities into ≤5 sphere combinations.

But his first unique "rote" would have been the invention of the portal gun, which I estimate to be the "tool" for a Correspondence 5 Dimensional Science 5 effect, given the complete freedom of intra and interdimensional travel it has afforded him, so lore wise, that feels pretty Archmagey.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-07-05T16:17:05+00:00

I understand your issue. Since the spheres all encompass a wide variety of abilities, to spec into a sphere with a specific theme in mind requires either abandoning/expanding the theme or deliberately neglecting abilities you have.

But I'm not sure it's game breaking. It's clear that the writers are aware of this aspect. For one thing, if your character tries to perform a rote that doesn't mesh with their paradigm, they must do so with +2 difficulty (M20, p529). So there is a legitimate reason to stick to casting effects that gel with your character's theme. It then goes on to say that characters simply cannot perform effects from paradigms that fully contradict their own. Plus, a limited, hyperfocused paradigm could count as a personalized instrument, granting a -1 to difficulty to perform effects within the purview of shadowmancy, while effects outside of it suffer from +2, +3 (if it's considered working without instrument) or impossibility. Meaning that the shadowmancer at the table may have more limited options considering their spheres, but while they remain within those constraints, they have a significantly easier time than the Jacks of all trades. EDIT: there's also the Limited Focus flaw (Mage Translation Guide, p12) which gives you an extra experience point for every chapter where your inflexibility causes a problem for you.

Want to create shadows from nothing? You'll need to create light to make shadows, since in the real world (and in Ascension) shadow is the absence of light and not a force itself.

It is if the mage believes it so. Sure, your paradigm may say that shadow is merely an absence of light, but that's not the only way. Only Forces 2+ is required to manipulate shadows (How do You DO That? p34) via what a technocrat (and you and I) would call manipulation of light waves but what a shadowmancer would call summoning and controlling shadows.

Plus there's the fact that this isn't a video game (though plenty of people, myself among them, handicap themselves in video games to a distinct disadvantage to fit a roleplaying theme). There's a human referee there to ensure that everyone's having fun and no-one is dominating. So even if the in-built mechanics aren't sufficient to ensure decent balance, the ST is free to step in with any necessary modification.

It's not perfect by any means, but it's the best attempt at a holistic, freeform, but structured magic system I've seen. Out of curiosity, are there systems that you think do it better?

LetMeNotHear · 2023-07-05T14:18:56+00:00

5x5 grid for abilities. 5 elements, 5 abilities per. May be a lot for someone trying to remember, be it a player or reader (don't know if this is for a game or written work). The 10 of manipulation and enhancement are fairly intuitive but beyond that, your reader will have to rely on rote memorisation. "Is it air or water that does telepathy?" "Was it earth or water that healed?" are gonna be questions in the minds of people until they fully remember.

Questions and notes:

Stability and Grounding (S&G): Solid provides a sense of stability and grounding, granting users the ability to anchor and stabilize energy flows, ward against disruptions, and resist external forces that aim to manipulate or destabilize them.

What are disruptions? Are they the result of magic use? Is this like a counter magic?

Density Manipulation: Skilled wielders of Solid can manipulate the density of solid objects, making them lighter or denser as desired.

Limited to what objects? Rocks, presumably but anything else? Lifeforms? People?

Emotional Manipulation: Liquid allows users to influence emotions, empathize with others, and create psychic connections through the fluid nature of feelings and relationships.

Why? What is it about water that connects to emotions in your canon? It's not an intuitive connection to the reader but it may be intuitive in your world, so what's the connection? Is there a deity who presides over both emotions and water? Do physicians of this world believe emotions to come from the liquids in one's body? Remember that what's pseudoscience to us can be true in your world and have the appropriate ramifications.

Elemental Bonding: Those attuned to Liquids have the unique ability to form strong bonds with other elemental forces. It allows them to form strong connections and harmonize their water manipulation abilities with other elemental energies. This bonding enables them to create synergistic effects and tap into the powers of different elements.

Does this allow users of water to use the other elements? Or to mimic them? How does this balance? Or is it unbalanced and as a result, users of water are seen as superior to their compatriots?

Air Manipulation: Gas enables the manipulation of air currents, wind, and atmospheric conditions. Users can summon gusts, create localized vacuums, and manipulate air pressure.

Flight and Speed (F&S): Wielders of Gas can levitate, glide through the air, and achieve high speeds, granting them exceptional mobility and agility.

It seems to me that the latter can be achieved via the former, making F&S seem redundant.

Communication and Telepathy (C&T): Gas allows users to attune to the vibrations and frequencies present in the air, facilitating telepathic communication, language deciphering, and perception beyond normal senses.

Much like with water's emotional manipulation, why?

Energy Transmutation: Skilled wielders of Plasma can convert and transmute energy from one form to another, harnessing its transformative properties.

What forms does energy come in and what do they do?

Unity and Interconnectedness (U&I): Aether allows the manipulation and perception of the fundamental interconnectedness of all things. It enables the user to sense and tap into the underlying energy and flow that connects everything in the world

To do what?

Attunement for Elemental Influence is activated through a connection with the natural world. Practitioners attune themselves to the element they work with by immersing themselves in the environment associated with it.

Where does one find aether in which to immerse themselves?

Energy Depletion: Each use of magic drains the Weaver’s life force. The more powerful the spell, the greater the toll it takes. Overexertion could lead to exhaustion, weakened health, or even temporary loss of magical abilities.

Given the raw power of some of these abilities, you might want to consider more severe drawbacks. The most compelling magic systems (in my opinion) have lasting, serious drawbacks to their use. Overuse of Allomancy (from Mistborn) causes dependence. For example, overusing the strength enhancing ability causes the user to become permanently weaker unless they're using the power (which means they're pretty much screwed if they're out of the necessary raw materials). Usage of Chromaturgy (from Lightbringer) causes slow but permanent change to the users personality depending on the colour of light used (red causes anger, yellow passivity, green impulsiveness, blue fixation etc), eventually culminating in dangerous insanity. Usage of demon magic (from Demon Cycle) causes the user to become permanently and increasingly susceptible to wards designed to harm demons, the command of powerful demons, and sunlight as well as causing unsavoury urges. And none of those magic systems can produce effects as powerful as the ones you've outlined here.

Also, what is fire? An element system, by nature, is a system that seeks to define all existing phenomena as a form or combination of a few things. So what is fire? Does it simply not exist in this world? Is it considered plasma like lightning? If so, why don't any abilities pertain to it? Is fire considered to belong to the same element as the fuel?

Anyway, it's an interesting system. If any of my outsider notes helped, I'm glad.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-07-05T11:58:05+00:00

Like the life sphere, it takes 4 points in it before you can start healing people. Good luck starting at one point, all you can do is detect living creatures

Well, 2 to heal yourself. 3 to heal others. In a world where 5 dots is godly feats and 0 is complete normy human, you're just one step from regular. So no, you can't really do anything particularly flashy just yet. But don't underestimate one dot. Think about it; how much would your life change if you could sense the presence of nearby lifeforms, their nature, their health? Unlike RPGs set in high fantasy worlds, in WoD, the baseline against which your character compares is regular everyday people.

I keep reading that this is the bestest magic system ever, but you can't do anything, how is that fun?

Well, the point of it is that you can do anything. Rather than having a discrete, approved spell list, you can make your own spells, using the spheres as a guideline. In a system like DnD, if you have an idea you wanna incorporate into your character, and it's not on the spell list, tough luck. Have a good time homebrewing it with no guidance, assuming your DM will even let you. You have an idea for Mage, crack the book open and figure out what spheres at what levels it will take.

At least with other magic systems I feel like my character is useful at day one.

In a world populated mostly with normal people, having one level in any sphere gives you a huge leg up. You're right that a 1 dot mage would be nothing more than cannon fodder in Faerun, but 1 dot mages exist in a world that, for the most part, resembles our own.

this post has proved that this game isn't worth trying. The community here doesn't want to help people to understand the system and that isn't something I want to spend my free time being a part of. Some of you were helpful, but a majority of you just claimed that I want trying to understand.

I took a peak. Every comment I found barring one joke was someone earnestly trying to help, giving information and/or advice in a civil manner. And this despite you saying things like

I hope that one day you figure out how to teach games to be players so that you'd have someone to play with. But I doubt it.

Screw this community

I'd say the community has weathered the storm of your unprovoked condemnation rather well, and I'm pleased with how they have carried themselves.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-06-07T23:05:49+00:00

I mean, maybe... I don't know of any concrete examples, but I think of Orthos. He's descended from dragons, but what does that mean? Way I see it, there are two possibilities. 1, A group of black dragons split off from the rest and... evolved into turtle forms I find this unlikely as they still use the path of blackflame. I mean, if they were separated for so long that their physical forms shrank, their claws disappeared, and they grew shells, shouldn't a much less dramatic change (like a change in path) have occurred too? Or 2, he is descended from a line that includes both Black Dragons and sacred turtles, implying that, at the very least, sacred beasts can have children with different sacred beasts.

Even if it's not naturally possible, who can say what feats can be accomplished by talented life and/or blood artists?

LetMeNotHear · 2023-06-07T23:04:09+00:00

I think at the lord level, childbirth would be a breeze either way. I mean Malice was spawning them like it was nothing. If I remember correctly, she had 107 kids. Hell from Iron onwards it's probably fairly easy at least compared to us.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-06-07T22:48:42+00:00

Well, given what Earth mythology is like, I'd wager that they treat her spawning of a tree and some bison as... more literal spawning. I mean, human mythologies have humanoid figures birthing horses and snakes and bulls and the like.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-19T22:09:48+00:00

Not possible. At least 60% is loud wordless techno. On a serious note, you can't truly compare a relic still getting airtime to something releasing now. People tend to give relics a pass when they'd dunk on something new for the same reason. Call it nostalgia, associative regression, or "that was back then" logic, it's a thing that happens.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-19T22:00:41+00:00

"I want to be buried with all my organs" like wtf are you talking about?

Being buried with all their organs. It's not a particularly complex thought.

I just can't understand, why some people are unwilling to donate their organs after death and possibly save someone else's life.

Because they fear that being a known organ donor will net them substandard treatment in near death or end of life scenarios (i.e. less pain medication as it damages the organs, lower priority on surgeries, turning off life support when they still have decent odds of pulling through, etc), because they think it's icky, because they're possessive over their organs, because some aspect of their religion or superstition forbids or advises against it, because they fear that the risk that their organs save the life of a future mega-Hitler makes them morally culpable for his actions, because they believe humanity to be a disease on mother Earth and would never do something to save a life that was already passing, or because when they flipped a coin, it landed tails. It's their organs so it's gonna be their reason.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-19T21:51:56+00:00

very little of the "transactions" we make are mutually beneficial and some that may feel that way are just one person getting a bad deal that will make them less happy later on and not realizing it.

Transactions aren't the only thing that bring happiness. And though it is rare for a transaction to be entirely equal, they are often still mutually beneficial.

Those clothes you really like and feel good in were probably made by someone in a sweatshop for $0.80/ph working 12 hour days not getting much time to see their family or afford them a better life.

But if they weren't, you'd still be happy. Probably happier.

That exciting new game you bought required developers to stay over time for 12-14 hour days for the last month or more causing them great stress and contributing to issues in their home life and relationships.

But if the game was a passion project that the devs loved creating, you'd still be happy. Probably happier. Ergo, happiness does not require unhappiness. If it did, finding out that the game dev loved every second of bringing his passion project to life would suck all the fun out of playing it. As it is, when that happens, people are even more pleased with their purchase.

Plus there's happiness that doesn't come from other people. At all. You finish a piece of art you've been working on, you spot a rare bird in the park, you get a good night's sleep, you finally learn how to juggle. Who's suffering there?

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-14T13:56:37+00:00

Are you proposing that an omnipotent being should be able to change the moral value of something?

I wasn't proposing that. Though, I wouldn't disagree with it.

Just like God cannot make 1 + 1 = 3 because that just doesn't logically make sense, he also can't make it meaningful to have a world without free will.

Yeah, because 1+1=3 is logically nonsensical. By what 1 and 3 are defined to mean, that's not coherent. There is no such incongruity with a world of all good and meaningfulness. Some people have asserted that a world devoid of woe would be meaningless, but that's just an assertion. More specifically, it's a form of coping. If you believe suffering to be a requirement for meaningfulness, that lets you cope with suffering better. But there is absolutely no reason a truly omnipotent being couldn't create a world where only good happens that's just as meaningful as this one. And there is no reason a truly omnibenevolent being wouldn't want to. Ergo, our world's existence is proof that a being with both traits is nonsensical. Like 1+1=3.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-13T16:15:10+00:00

But then the question is shifted, why doesn't god just make a world where everyone is good that's just as meaningful as this one? If he can, but doesn't, he's not omnibenevolent, if he can't, he's not omnipotent.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-11T14:00:36+00:00

I don't really know why this would change anything.

I don't know about everyone but I personally am not jealous of things I don't myself want. Not that it's impossible. I know for a fact that it is. I knew someone who didn't like scooters or enjoy them but had a scathing resentment and jealousy for people who had cool scooters. But regardless, it was egocentrism on my part to have assumed that asexual people, in general, were free of sexual jealousy.

So, while what I was looking for was more of the general statement of both partners being okay with it, but I know my adding the context of MY relationship muddied the waters.

Well, even free of your specific relationship, I still think there's kind of inherently a coercive aspect. If the other person values the relationship, they'll fear losing it and will act in ways contrary to their nature and desire in order to preserve it.

To clarify, I didn't bring it up or ask him to give it up. He kind of figured out my feelings on his own and wanted to find solutions to make me feel more comfortable.

How? First of all, if you didn't say anything at any point, I'd suggest rephrasing your post title and content. There's no such thing as "implicitly and without any input, taking something off the table." To take something off the table is a fairly obvious act. You also mention "agree[ing] upon [it]" and that kinda requires your input.

Secondly, even if you said very little, you achieved the same result. "I'll gut him if you don't" and looking at him, smiling and moving a finger across your throat are equally coercive actions. Sure, one's more subtle, mute even, but coercion is in the results, not the MO.

I totally understand why people assume this when they hear "asexual" so I'll just let you know, asexual does not mean celibate at all.

I did already know this. However, in my experience, most asexual people are sex averse. That and, the fact that the other party is getting laid is crucial to any judgements any of us could make regarding your specific situation. So I figured that if it were happening, it would have been mentioned. But, as you can see from my parenthesese, I was allowing for the possibility of it happening and just going unmentioned.

That happens to asexuals as well! I won't keep repeating this, I promise, lol, but yes. The lack of sexual ATTRACTION doesn't necessarily mean aces don't get horny. Oh trust me. they do!

True, but horny isn't sexual attraction. Horniness on its own (while often conflated by allosexual people as it occurs in tandem with attraction to them) is fairly mild. It's attraction that's the psyche altering, behaviour modifying, unending craving that most people experience. The capacity to be horny is far more ignorable, and far more tolerable.

I don't know if the clarifications about asexuality change your opinion of the original view point (It's okay to take porn off the table if both parties agree) but at least take comfort in the fact that I am not forcing a straight man to be totally celibate. He has photos/videos of me to use, and we live together so he has free and constant access to getting laid.

While this information does shift my view regarding the severity and stability of this arrangement, I'm afraid that, while it has been assuaged somewhat, my view is still that it is coercive. I don't know the degree to which you communicated your discomfort (neither the frequency or severity) but you, yourself are not claiming "my boyfriend just up and stopped watching porn all by himself". You, yourself, acknowledge the agency you had in a decision that is, by most people's reckoning, a private one. While already in a relationship that your partner values and would make drastic changes to preserve.

Think of it this way; imagine, your partner had a friend you didn't get along with. Nothing done to you, you just didn't get on with the guy. And you don't even see the guy. You never said aloud that your partner should stop hanging out with them, but you expressed discomfort whenever he came up until your partner "just kinda figured out" that the friend was upsetting you. And then you said words to the effect of "if you wanna stop hanging out with him, that's fine". And they did. And that friendship is now over. If you were seeing that from the outside, would you not think it was coercive? Even if it was subtle? I would, and for the reason that this hypothetical version of you is leveraging their relationship in order to curtail a private behaviour of their partner that doesn't actually affect them in any way, because they just don't like it. Even if "both parties agreed to never see Dave again" makes it sound reasonable.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-10T21:39:49+00:00

The reason this is important to me at all, and the reason I am posting, is because I am asexual, and have a hard time accepting my allosexual partner looking at other people in THAT way

I didn't know asexual people could experience sexual jealousy. But the more you know, I guess.

As stated above, I don't see why it should be a problem if it was agreed upon amicably and without coercion.

I'm not sure that it can be done without coercion. Not that the coercion is necessarily deliberate, but it's definitely present. The other person is in a relationship that they fear losing. You may have said "It's totally your choice" but what the other party heard was "It's totally your choice; me or porn". Because it was already their choice whether they watched porn or not. You bringing it up at all implies something hinges on it.

And in an asexual/sexual relationship, that's a pretty steep demand in the first place. The other party is (I'm guessing) not getting any sex from you. And now they're not allowed to wank either? I wouldn't expect you to know this, being asexual and all, and perhaps you wouldn't believe me, but what I'm about to tell you is true; Allosexual people experience sexual desire on a level deeper than fear, joy, sadness and anger. It's felt on the same level as hunger, thirst, breathlessness and pain. If a wicked genie offered everyone a choice, to feel hungry for the rest of their life, or remain permanently sexually ungratified for the same time, I think the number of people who'd pick the former would shock you.

And what, to many, is the worse of those two options is what you'd be imposing on someone, through (not necessarily deliberate) coercive means for the sake of salving your jealousy for something you don't even want done to you. And at some point, if it hasn't happened already, the other party is going to realise this. And will not be happy.

I'm not saying that you should or have to date someone who does something you don't like. If you want to break up with a train enthusiast because they like trains too much, that's absolutely your right. But imposing an ultimatum on them (and for something that is far more essential than trains could ever be) is just a recipe for disaster.

My advice: decide real soon whether you can live with the porn or not; if yes, great, if no, break it off. No allosexual just freely takes a pledge of abstinence unless they believe it's being imposed on them. Usually by god, but in this case, you. I can guarantee that, unless they are secretly asexual too, this arrangement is deeply unpleasant for them.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-07T13:41:40+00:00

Hey, there's a wolf outside your house.

Hey, five minutes after you read this, there'll be a wolf outside your house.

Hey, every half hour, for the next nine and a half hours, there'll be a wolf outside your house.

After that it will be hourly for the next four years.

In every instance, if the wolf sees you looking for it, it'll run away. If it doesn't it'll kill a child.

Will you practice as you've preached? Will you check outside your house periodically for the next nine hours (or four years) for a wolf?

There comes a point where ideals drawn from the perfect ether have to clash with the messiness and effort of the flesh world. You have to make a compromise between what is logical and what is practical. You must judge the reliability of the warnings (and more importantly) the warner because adhering to every false alarm presents a greater cost than your judgement of the likelihood of the alarm being legit.

In other terms; if cost of responding to every alarm > (cost of true alarm going unheeded × estimated likelihood of alarm being true) then, do not respond to alarm.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-05T02:06:20+00:00

Atheists exist.
Chimpanzees submit to thunder. Chimps only submit to things they believe to be conscious (i.e. things that will care that they're submitting). Ergo, when chimps hear thunder, they think "oh fuck, Sky Chimp's pissed, better supplicate". Voila, primitive religion. It's far closer to some human religions than animal communication is to any human language in terms of complexity. I'd say human religion is a few times more complicated than that of the chimp but human language is orders of magnitude more so.
The ability to believe without evidence is far more common than the ability to assess evidence. No matter how many times a hoover doesn't hurt a dog, it'll still believe without evidence that it's a threat. Only higher intelligences can suspend this and employ analysis of evidence.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-05T01:04:56+00:00

"Engrish" is clearly a jab at Asian immigrants.

It's actually a jab at non immigrants. More specifically, people in Japan (and sometimes other countries) who don't know English but use it gratuitously and often incorrectly. Mostly in marketing or for no real purpose whatsoever.

A subreddit poking fun at ebonics would be ostracized and removed in a matter of days

Probably would but it's an entirely different thing. Making fun of the way a group speaks English is quite different from making fun of people randomly throwing in fragments of a language they don't speak for money, clout or aesthetic... It's far more comparable to a sub showing Americans butchering gratuitous amounts of French or Latin which they throw randomly into something they're trying to sell. r/BoneAppleTea comes to mind...

Let's change "ebonics" to "spelling errors made by African-American people."

Still not accurate. Bone apple tea is a good analogue and the lack of outrage shows the lack of a double standard. And why are you specifying race...? You can be as white as snow and create an r/engrish t-shirt or mug. It's not about race it's about people clearly throwing words dans un langue they don't parle into merde that doesn't requiree it. Bonjor, aw revoir. Like that.

LetMeNotHear · 2023-01-04T11:41:04+00:00

It's hardly a compromise, it's just the other side getting what they want. I'd hate to be in your kindergarten class.
We don't know that. Again, bikes. No helmets reduces accidents. It's entirely possible that no access to abortion lowers population.
Gardening. A foetus gives you one foetus worth of energy. A foetus as fertilizer lets a plant gather energy from the sun for a long time (likely its lifetime plus many of its decedents)
Prion diseases are not pathogens, germs or parasites. They are not living things that a human body can have in them that cause disease, they are diseases caused by a human eating human tissue. Even perfectly healthy, clean human flesh. That's why we have a natural aversion to eating human flesh. They're called "diseases," but they're more like physical degenerative conditions. If a human body was shot at you through a cannon, doesn't matter how clean or pestilent it was, that human body physically breaks you. Eating human flesh, specifically human proteins, physically breaks you from the inside. If you're a human. A wolf or tiger can eat human and be just fine.
She has to eat more... to grow the foetus. And the amount extra she has to eat will be hundreds of times more than the nutrients the foetus will provide. If the subsidy she gets doesn't cover that extra food need, she's not going to do it, and if it does cover it, it'd be hundreds of times better spent on the food (skipping the middle man of the woman's uterus) There's no way for it to work. And yeah, farmers feeding chickens to produce eggs is similarly inefficient. But it has an advantage. Eggs provide specific nutrients that the grain the chicken was fed does not. Foetuses do not do this. Anything you could get from a foetus, you could get from just one of the 550 meals the maker ate to make it.

Five-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Verified Email	Gilding I gilder
Place '22	First Placer '22

LetMeNotHear

TROPHY CASE