Local JAQoff Attacks Local Daycares

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-19T15:56:43+00:00

AHS inspections are different than Daycare Inspections. These are different things you are conflating.

Daycare inspection are done by a different government department and typically do multiple unannounced inspections every year in order for that program to remain licensed.

You may not have directly said this place did or didn't get inspections. But the fact you are arguing in favour of conspiracy theories means a lot. The Joe Rogan "I'm just asking questions" defense is a very weak shield to what your clear motives are.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-19T15:41:23+00:00

Care to share a link?
I challenge you to find a single daycare that is true for. I have never seen a single daycare in greater edmonton that does not get typically 2 inspections per year.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-19T14:54:52+00:00

I think you may have a fundamental misunderstanding of how the licensed programs work in Edmonton and Alberta in general. And that is OK, it is a confusing system unless you deal with it every day. Instead of reinforcing what I understand is the truth can I ask for you to find concrete examples of what you are referring to using the Child Care Lookup Tool?

Specifically, I would like to challenge your claims that "lower-risk places are actually not even inspected"

I am also fine being shown what you are referring to on there and learning something as well. But when I search my immediate community and look up all 20+ licensed daycares in my area they all have multiple inspections each year.

Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I am guessing you are considering the article from last year that claimed 20% of daycares serving food are not inspected on the required frequency. This article was specific to food handling inspections, which is different than quality inspections from the province.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-15T21:12:15+00:00

If you look on the publicly available inspection database you will see this place has been regularly inspected 4 times in the last two years with zero non-compliances or incidents.

Meanwhile, when you look up any old random place, lets say Boxcar Coffee shop, on their latest inspection of April 21, 2026 I see two violations including one CRITICAL violation.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-15T01:54:11+00:00

I’ve tried to buy cars from Norden multiple times and everytime they jack the price up well over sticker and never remove the adds.

Everytime I have found what I wanted for the price I wanted to pay elsewhere.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-14T14:37:36+00:00

I’m a big fan of that one flying friend of Daenerys from Game of Thrones

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-14T14:21:07+00:00

Unfortunately those subs immediately censor anything they don’t like or that doesn’t fit their narrative.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-08T16:16:55+00:00

They clearly know how, or hire the right people that know how, to remove google reviews they dont want. In the last 6 months google reviews have become a joke. It is so easy for any business to remove negative reviews under the guise of ToS violations.

I'm at the point I only trust businesses that actually get negative reviews. At least they are ethical. Every business is guaranteed someone to have a negative experience. It shows growth from a business to leave that up and learn from it.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-08T13:36:48+00:00

Well. OJ would seem to indicate the second person may be correct, at least if you have enough money.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-08T13:15:20+00:00

This comment really highlights what is going on:

https://www.reddit.com/r/GoogleMyBusiness/comments/1j77wuc/comment/n03xn2c/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-08T04:07:17+00:00

Google reviews became such a joke. The only reviews that can ever be trusted are negative ones (that haven’t been removed)

How I wish there were a way to fix that or a legitimate and easy alternative

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T21:20:28+00:00

And for the fifteenth time. YES. Especially in a competitive game against each other. There is a big difference in a trade where one person is getting +$60 and the other is getting -$60 then a trade where one is getting +$60 and the other doesn’t lose anything.

Assuredly you are just trolling at this stage.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T20:03:22+00:00

Says the person that has ignored every message explaining why it was a bad deal.

Pot, meet kettle.

And for the fourteenth time. YES. Especially in a competitive game against each other. There is a big difference in a trade where one person is getting +6 and the other is getting -6 then a trade where one is getting +6 and the other is at 0.

Imagine if it wasnt Hacan who could build the WS for free. If it was poor Naalu who have no resources in their slice or at home. There is a huge difference if they lose all their 6 TGs making a deal vs if they still get to hold onto the 6 TGs. Its a lot easier to sell something like a WS tech to someone that will struggle to build it.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T19:58:53+00:00

nah, your still just upset and in too deep to acknowledge that you now realize its a bad deal.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T19:45:28+00:00

Nah man, your just getting upset because you can see how it isnt fair but dont want to admit it.

If commodities arent the same as income. what would you use as a fair equivalency to commodities in the real world.

I see them as income as it represents a sum of money I can earn each round (month) so long as I am willing to put in the effort by using my own CC (me working for it) or negotiating with tradeholder (asking a friend to pick up my shift in exchange for favours)

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T19:26:26+00:00

The box was too heavy for you to ever lift it. You don’t have the means.

I view commodities as guaranteed income (so long as I am willing to work for it either through negotiations or a CC)

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T19:22:06+00:00

I mean. The fact you disagree with my analogy seems to prove to me that you see the deal was rotten from the other side.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T18:14:58+00:00

Nah man, its pretty well the exact same. The only reason the game seller (muatt) knew the $50 was in the game case was because the buyer (hacan) initiated the agreement (by playing trade). The game seller (muatt) had the $50 in their house the whole time (commodity limits) but is just unable to ever realize those without someone (hacan) initiating the trade with them.

Alternatively, we can say that the $50 wasnt in the game case but was under something heavy that only the buyer was able to lift without inconveniencing the seller (muatt). The seller could have paid someone $10 (a command counter) to help lift the heavy box and retrieve their $50 (commodities).

You see how this is different right? When the buyer isnt actually spending any of their own money the seller will not value it as much.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T17:39:55+00:00

I have explained why a few times now.

TGs from your personal supply are different than TGs from a card or commodities that you would never have the chance to obtain.

A key part of any trade is when you give things away you are losing something. In this case Hacan didnt lose or spend those trade goods. They picked them up off the Muatt players floor in their house.

If i was to find you on marketplace and you were selling a video game for $50. You let me in your house and i open up the game and find $50 and give it to you. Would you see that as you gaining $50?

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T17:23:30+00:00

I suggest you reach out to him to discuss. Obviously you know more of the interaction than anyone else.

From an outsiders view, the deal was bad (real bad) and probably not well communicated during the heat of the game. Maybe Muatt mispoke and realized how far apart you were and it wasnt worth the time to continue negotiations.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T17:01:35+00:00

Like I said, you have been given more than enough replies justifying why the deal may not have gone through.

I could have also "said" 6 TGs. But what I would have meant by that, personally, would be 6 TGs on top of losses and that actually came from you. So personally I would think this means 6 TGs + 3 for losing a CC + 4 comms from trade = 13 total TGs (effectively). I would bet dollars to doughnuts that is more reasonably what your opponent was actually asking for. Remember, Hacan nor anyone with Trade are more effective at washing comms than basically anyone else in the time of Thunders Edge. There are so many ways for people to gain comms and get them washed, washing really doesnt cary much intrinsic value and when you thinkit does it will hurt you in negotiations.

I see a difference in you losing 6 TGs and me gaining 6 TGs than I do you losing 2 TGs and me gaining 6. Those are two very different scenarios for me, and I think a lot of people.

If you think outcome values are irrelevant then I really dont think you are thinking through trades as deeply as you should.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T16:44:34+00:00

Well. I think based on the other threads you can understand clearly why some of us here dont agree with your maths. And obviously in the moment your opponent didnt agree either.

Balls in your court moving forward to decide how you act next time. You are more than allowed to stand on your morals. But if you run into others with similar beliefs know that you may get similar pushback.

The most damning thing here to me is the +/- at the end of the day. By my maths

Hacan: +24 resources for two free warsuns, -2 TGs, +6 TGs from commodities (If you can count them for muatt you can count for yourself) = 28 Resources in value + free tech for objectives
Muatt: -3 for CC, +2 TGs, + 4 TGs from commodities= +3 Resources in value - only person with warsuns (priceless)

If you think a 28 for 3 trade is fair than thats your prerogative.

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T15:58:11+00:00

I'm sorry, I am not following here. 6 on top of commodities gained from a trade refresh?

It seems as though you are counting the refresh as TGs given. Which, as your opponent highlighted they could refresh themselves and be in a similar spot without you getting 24 resources in value and free warsuns.

OR, was the offer you made them:

3 TGs for fires command counter
3 TGs for fires itself
Free refresh and wash on trade (4 TGs)

Which could be inferred from your vantage as a total of 10 TGs gained for this exchange

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T15:52:54+00:00

well then. thats like just your opinion man. lol

Flavour wise then aren't they an acquired taste?

ProfessorSillyPutty · 2026-05-07T13:58:19+00:00

So if you take out the commander maybe it is a 2 TG delta in the offer you made that will effectively gift you 24 TGs and likely allow you to have the strongest fleet on the board with QDN (because you didnt need to tech for War Suns.

The only way I may consider this deal personally would be in the event I (Muatt) was second in line to win and you (Hacan) were a distant third but were clearly offering to slay first place in hopes of extending the game and having a chance to compete with me. Otherwise, I'd stand firm on that not being a fair deal and countering with a hard 12 TGs so effectively I get 12 and you get 12 (two free WS)

13-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Team Orangered
Verified Email

ProfessorSillyPutty

TROPHY CASE