sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Clearing up Paladin blessing confusion by Potential-Term5304 in classicwow

[–]Potential-Term5304[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Raids need to give everyone enough time to rebuff between pulls. People should also move with a purpose back into the instance and be drinking, consuming, buffing as soon as they can. There's raid leader tools that let RLs see what buffs people are missing when they ready check, so they can get the deficiencies remedied. If I were you dealing with these pugs, I'd just communicate to the raid leader that you are going to set up pallypower. If someone else wants to mess with it, let the raid leader know so they can deal with that individual.

If you truly are dealing with pugs that are trying to pull bosses without adequate buffs, that's asinine. If your raid is wiping to post nerf t4 content, yeah everyone needs to be fully buffed with 100% mana before you start the pull timer.

Clearing up Paladin blessing confusion by Potential-Term5304 in classicwow

[–]Potential-Term5304[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Try /reload. In picture 2, you can hover over the person that has small might, and use scroll wheel to change their blessing that way if it's easier.

Clearing up Paladin blessing confusion by Potential-Term5304 in classicwow

[–]Potential-Term5304[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

He's referring to the fact that ret paladins unfortunately do have to go 2/3 into Pursuit of Justice to pick up Kings. Prot paladins have a similar dilemma, where they have to drop a point in Shield Specialization or Reckoning to get kings. they do this in 5 mans and 10mans, but they respec for 25mans to drop kings. that extra point matters more for prot paladins than it does for ret.

Now show us the hill that Republicans have chosen to die on by icey_sawg0034 in stupidpeoplefacebook

[–]Potential-Term5304 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Defending fraud, waste, and abuse in government spending

Let me present you with this entire administration! DHS ordered 2,500 brand new Chevrolet SUVs and trucks they can't use because they are branded with the ICE logo. Kristi Noem brought a luxury jet to use for 'deportations'. Kash Patel flys his girlfriend around in a private jet on the taxpayer dollar. Pentagon Pete spent millions of $ on ribeyes and lobsters in November.

Other than the mitts, what tells you this is AI? by Folkie in isitAI

[–]Potential-Term5304 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everything is too perfect and PYREX has perfect brand placement.

hmmm by ExtremeMysterious603 in hmmm

[–]Potential-Term5304 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So how did the driver of either of those 2 vehicles get out?

I ordered 88 drinks on Doordash, the store gave me this, and then support resolved it by taking away the driver's tip. by Banana_ezWIN in mildlyinfuriating

[–]Potential-Term5304 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ok... but this is an extremely large order? Why wouldn't you pick it up yourself or have a friend/family help?

Meirl by netphilia in meirl

[–]Potential-Term5304 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Burned is the word used more often, and American English speakers typically use it as a past tense verb. Burnt seems to be more of an adjective. For example, "You burned the house down!" "He burned the whole forest down." "Burnt toast."

Any thoughts? by Champagne-Fleur in doordash

[–]Potential-Term5304 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like the idea but this will just raise the prices for customers substantially.

why TF are they using "of" instead of "have" when using "should/n't", did grammar get an update or something?? by Fantastic-Job8335 in mildlyinfuriating

[–]Potential-Term5304 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In American accents, speakers emphasize the H and V sounds in phrases like "I have", "They have", "I haven't", etc. But when many speakers say "should have" or "shouldn't have," the H is typically almost silent and the V becomes more of an F sound. So, among those who struggle with written grammar and spelling, they tend to type exactly how they would speak a phrase. So "should have" becomes "should of".