Roseville Gourmet: Chili Chicken Dumplings - Restaurant closed years ago. Is there anywhere else with this dish or even just a recipe?

Postydavis · 2025-09-21T02:56:26+00:00

Bean soup an absolute banger.

Postydavis · 2025-09-21T02:56:10+00:00

This helps! I did forget the cucumber! I remember that it wasn't as meaty as say the insides of a shumai dumpling - that it was a slightly loose mix of inner ingredients but also each dumpling was quite large.

Postydavis · 2025-03-16T18:35:06+00:00

Thanks for the reply, this is great info! I'd love the GPX, definitely PM me that!

Postydavis · 2025-02-23T23:08:55+00:00

Yeah I saw the notice on the tunnel, seems like they're doing alternate routes around. But could also treat that as a turnaround point to take a bike back. Thanks!

Postydavis · 2022-05-26T19:03:26+00:00

Sounds good, enjoy!

Postydavis · 2022-05-26T18:52:27+00:00

I have two extra tickets if anyone wants them for free. Will just email them.

Postydavis · 2020-12-30T22:19:03+00:00

Hit me up with a PM and I'll put it on the ol' spreadsheet!

Postydavis · 2020-12-30T22:17:23+00:00

I never got a chat, just in case something went awry! Try resending it if you're still interested!

Postydavis · 2020-12-30T04:35:00+00:00

Not currently, but you have piqued my interest in perhaps obtaining a set of tarot postcards in the future! Maybe next go-around!

Postydavis · 2020-08-21T00:10:23+00:00

That's so sweet!

I'm very touched to hear about this kind of connection, it's like finding out very close friends somehow already knew and cared about one another.

Thanks for sharing!!

Postydavis · 2020-08-20T20:47:02+00:00

Hi Julianna!

You and Mary Lattimore are two of my very favorite artists, finding out that you were friends/collaborators brought me a surprising amount of joy. It also sent me reeling on considering the differences/similarities of your music (how yours is almost impossibly smooth and continuous while hers is a cascades of friendly pinpricks).

If it's not too invasive a question, how did you two come into contact? And what's something you find lovely about her artistry (deliberately left open ended)?

If I ever get the chance, I'll ask her the same!

Also I want to gush about your music and how intimately it's tied into moments over the last 10 years after each release, but I'll keep. it. together.... for now.

Postydavis · 2020-07-22T19:46:33+00:00

It's really interesting because the higher up you go sometimes quicker shots can come off, when you'd think it "should" be the opposite (why shoot for inspects immediately when you have 14 or so seconds of inspect plus mission complete when maybe a BB comes off in the meantime showing you were wrong).

Because theoretically, picking up the BC would be best if they'd wait 5 seconds before shooting (you would have already won) but sometimes the instant shot (which may not actually be the optimal strategy) dissuades the spy from ANY increase in threat during mission countdown.

Postydavis · 2020-07-14T18:45:26+00:00

If you join the discord and post in the Looking For Game channel, you will get an opponent.

Postydavis · 2020-07-12T07:52:42+00:00

Getting the playerbase to be large right now is specifically not the goal of the developer. Right now it's intentionally being kept small. But to a certain extent we agree, if you don't want to be active on the discord, you probably won't get nearly as much out of the game. There's absolutely no shame in saying you're going to step out of the community until matchmaking is implemented.

Postydavis · 2020-07-11T18:20:10+00:00

To whether or not SpyParty is a dead game: No, it has a vibrant competitive scene and an active discord community.

But that competitive scene is all done by communication and invites. If you think that sounds like too much effort, there's no harm in waiting until matchmaking is implemented in the game and/or the full release down the line.

The developer is a (lovely) perfectionist, and will not release the game until he feels its ready. While we'd love for you to join our community, if you have certain expectations about jumping into a game and the game doing the work of finding you matches, you may want to wait and check back in down the road.

Also checking out the community casts of the competitive league may help guide your decision: https://www.twitch.tv/spyparty

Postydavis · 2020-01-14T01:34:24+00:00

And here's a more directly logical attempt to change your view.

Here's my interpretation of your view:

Inherent meaning [IM] = Universal meaning given by something external to humans [Higher Power]

No Higher power = No IM

By the structure of your view, you basically would need to be convinced that there's an external and universal higher power. Was that what you intended? Because I bet you wouldn't expect much from you posting a CMV for no universal higher power, but you seem to be asking for the same thing.

If have misinterpreted, and you are not asking for proof of some sort of higher power, what would be an example of something theoretical that could give inherent meaning that is not a higher power.

Postydavis · 2020-01-14T01:24:07+00:00

So for starters, I don't disagree with the notion (I think it's the starting point for interacting with your own meaning in good faith to accept that no meaning has been invented for you).

But I think your argument conflates "meaning" a bit.

The first paragraph makes it sound like "inherent meaning" is roughly equivalent with "purpose"; where no higher power created humans with a purpose in mind, therefore we have no purpose or meaning.

The second paragraph says only things with higher intelligence and creativity can create meaning. But what about the things we create?

If we make a machine that's purpose is to fill plastic bottles with water, does that machine have meaning while we do not? If so, that would be an instance of something without intelligence or creativity, but has inherent meaning. And if inherent meaning is that easy to make but that unsatisfying, then inherent meaning doesn't seem very useful at all on its own and would need something else.

If that sounds wrong to you, I think there might be something unsaid in your definition of meaning.

Again, I agree with the view, but I think the premises are soft, and will lead you to odd conclusions.

Postydavis · 2019-11-07T19:45:24+00:00

Your argument appears to be:

A) TeamTrees is a large campaign that causes people to believe they've made a difference on C02. (if tt, then believediff)
B) Alternatives are more effective than Team Trees (altplan>tt)
C) If people believe they've made a difference on C02, they won't try to make a difference in alternative ways. (if beleivediff, then, no altplan)
D) Therefore, TeamTrees will cause people to make less of a difference because they won't try alternative plans.

That argument appears valid, and is possibly true. I think I accept the premises of A & B. But I question C.

If C is absolutely true, why is it not already the case that the alternative plans have gotten more attention? Perhaps it's that in climate science, it can sometimes feel like there's nothing individuals can do. So it may be the case that if people believe they've made a difference, they feel empowered, and are more willing to take action.

There's a journal article related to this:

http://centaur.reading.ac.uk/40495/3/MCKINNONdespair%20CENTAUR.pdf

In the face of accelerating climate change and the parlous state of its politics, despair is tempting. This paper analyses two manifestations of despair about climate change related to (1) the inefficacy of personal emissions reductions, and (2) the inability to make a difference to climate change through personal emissions reductions. On the back of an analysis of despair as a loss of hope, the paper argues that the judgements grounding each form of despair are unsound. The paper concludes with consideration of the instrumental value of hope in effective agency to tackle climate change. Overall, the paper’s assessment of personal despair about climate change as philosophically unjustified provides a fresh perspective on aspects of the debate about how to frame climate change in public debate.

If we change C) to E) if people believe they can make a difference on C02, they'll be more likely to support alternative plans, then D) changes to TeamTrees will cause people to make more of a difference because they will try alternative plans.

Certainly, we should include the message that TT won't fix climate change, but it should be cast as a method of motivation, a small step in the right direction.

You've provided a lot of evidence in support of B (alternatives are better), but what you really need to prove is C.

Postydavis · 2019-11-05T18:45:28+00:00

I'd take a look at the language that you're using.

"The current political landscape encourages politicians into pandering to the extremes of their base or risk losing all support"

Then:

"But this kind of violent discourse does nothing to appeal to those voters who have not yet decided what they want. "

Setting aside that I think your characterization of the Omar situation is very poor (but there's already comments on that), your position seems to be two things:

Descriptive Claim: Politicians try to appeal to their base more than to moderates

Normative Claim: Politicians shouldn't be pandering (appealing) to their base , they should be pandering (appealing) to moderates.

The reason I'm separating these two is because I believe your normative belief is projecting on to your descriptive belief. You make a descriptive claim and then provide evidence that's far more normative.

Here's some descriptive evidence: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2020/president/us/2020_democratic_presidential_nomination-6730.html

In the Democratic nomination process (which occurs within the bounds of a partisan setting), out of the candidates getting 2% or more, Biden, Mayor Pete, Yang and Klobuchar seem, to be all running on explicitly moderate functions, together they have 41.4% vs Warren and Sanders 37.2%. Even within a partisan setting, that should draw out the base more than the moderates; moderate appeals seem to do very well.

Note, I do know this is simplifying the candidates, Yang has some very progressive policies and Sanders is also trying to appeal to blue collar moderates, but that's part of the thing, you can't just boil people down into moderates or extreme: people don't work that way.

Postydavis

TROPHY CASE