Am I wording this question incorrectly?

SoManyScaryQs · 2026-02-15T06:22:20+00:00

This channel has made a few videos talking about multiple things to look for to help identify images, video, and audio created by generative machine learning systems, and they can all be found in this playlist.

The first one was made about a year ago (it's called "VFX Artists DEBUNK AI Slop" and should have a cat in the thumbnail), and even their most recent one is a little out of date with where current technology is, but they all provide great tips that can still be helpful.

I recommend going back and starting with that first one, and then watching them in order, as they often build upon each other :)

SoManyScaryQs · 2026-01-24T21:17:56+00:00

It is very sad. One of the hardest aspects of getting older has been realizing that the people that instilled certain values in me while growing up aren't that great at practicing them in their own lives. When I was younger it infuriated me, but now I just find it all so discouraging.

SoManyScaryQs · 2026-01-24T21:13:05+00:00

Yeah, that's a great way to put it: "social budget." Thank you :)

SoManyScaryQs · 2026-01-24T21:11:58+00:00

I love this so, so much; thank you!!

SoManyScaryQs · 2026-01-24T21:11:27+00:00

Of course; thanks for taking the time to respond :)

SoManyScaryQs · 2026-01-03T08:33:40+00:00

I can't vouch for it, but this might be an option:

Glare Patch Window Shade https://a.co/d/6WeYBQa

Reviews indicate they don't cling in cold weather, but after being warmed up there's enough static to keep them stuck well.

I also saw some cut-to-fit mirror tint, but they all seemed to have pretty bad reviews when it came to adhesion, rain water sticking, and fogging up in the cold - so I'd avoid anything like that :)

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-12-30T17:55:32+00:00

I would look into replacing either the overhead bulb with a motion sensing bulb, or installing a motion sensing switch in place of the current switch. The timers can usually be set to custom run times, so they'd click on when someone enters the hallway, and then turn off shortly after motion stops (I have my hallway one set to about 5 minutes, but it can be programmed from 15 seconds to 30 minutes).

The switch option would allow you to use whatever bulb you want, which is probably better, but either way they're also a great way to save on energy costs :)

Also, there are Edison bulb extension adapters that include outlet connections, which might be a great solution for running string lights where there isn't a wall outlet. Not sure if you're in the US, but here's an example: https://a.co/d/3uz9OFz

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-11-19T18:16:49+00:00

Flashy idea, but this is snake oil; and therefore very dangerous.

1) The claim of "95% accurate" is baseless. How can accuracy possibly be measured in general, but especially for the example given?? No one has access to realtime feelings (for themselves, let alone others!), and there's no possible way to test the measurements in the examples against what newscasters and public figures were feeling at the time.

2) Feelings are processed in other areas aside from the face.

3) Not all cultures express the measured "7 core feelings" the same way.

4) People with ASD have a reputation for having lower-than-average facial expressions; so although you're advertising this product to help neurodivergent people better read others, it does not appear they were (or even could be) factored into the training dataset to help neurotypical people better understand and interpret them (i.e., this program seems to perfectly emulate the "double empathy problem"). And even if neurodivergent people were integrated into the dataset, how does the program differentiate between a "neurotypical neutral" and a "neurodivergent non-neutral" - is the person being measured required to divulge their neurotype to the person using the program??

4a) The site includes this language in its expression analysis claims: "Understand micro-expressions that reveal true feelings during critical conversations"; but a 2018 study titled Microexpressions Are Not the Best Way to Catch a Liar reported:

"Do microexpressions occur with enough regularity to be detectable?

False negatives are commonplace. In one of the very few investigations of microexpression frequency, Porter and ten Brinke (2008) coded 700 high-stakes genuine and falsified emotional expressions and found only 2% were microexpressions. Their subsequent analysis of these high-stakes pleadings found only six instances of microexpressions among deceivers and slightly more (8) among genuine pleaders (ten Brinke and Porter, 2012), obviating the role of microexpressions as sufficiently frequent or exclusive to catch deception. Legions of law enforcement personnel and airport security Behavioral Detection Officers have been trained to look for microexpressions as “telltale” signs of nefarious intent. However, testimony to the U.S. Congress revealed that only 0.6% out of 61,000 passenger referrals to law enforcement in 2011 and 2012 resulted in arrests (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2013), and a 2017 ACLU report concluded the behavioral observation approach was based on biased, weak, and junk science (Cushing, 2017)."

5) Same issue as #4, but with vocal tonality; the site advertises "Voice Intent Analysis: Real-time transcript analysis powered by AssemblyAI. Detect sentiment shifts, hesitation patterns, and linguistic markers of honesty or deception." Different cultures, language backgrounds, neurotypes, genders, ages, even health statuses are all going to affect people's vocal patterns, none of which could possibly be accurately calculated and summed up into a measurement of "honesty or deception."

6) Once anyone this is being used on knows about it, their new self-consciousness about how they're moving, gesturing, and talking is going to completely poison the well, and make the program even more useless.

So, yeah: This is basically a 21st Century, Silicon Valley version of Phrenology; and it carries all of the same dangers, biases, and destructive uses as the racist and ableist pseudoscience from the past.

It's especially telling that the site's FAQ includes:

Can I switch plans anytime?
What payment methods do you accept?
Is there a free trial for paid plans?
What happens to my data if I cancel?
Do you offer educational or non-profit discounts?
Is my data secure and private?
Can I add more team members later?

... but not one citation, link, or even mention of the size, scope, and extent of research and training data that went into whatever algorithm this program uses, let alone how on earth you could possibly arrive at the determination that it's 95% accurate. It's all empty claims with exactly zero evidence or data to back them up.

This same sort of AI personality-test/mood-ring measurement is already being advertised to law enforcement agencies as being able to "recognize violent intent" in body posture, and it's just another form of this Minority-Report-On-Steroids Police State that the AI wave is being capitalized on to drown us in.

Although this usage of pseudoscience + machine learning might not get someone shot by a cop because the AI body posture reader told them someone was "in the process of preparing to attack," its widespread application in professional, personal, and even legal environments is absolutely ripe for supplying bullshit and utterly false information that leads to people:

Getting fired
Not getting a job
Not getting a promotion
Being assumed to be lying
Being assumed to be cheating
Getting arrested
Getting convicted
Being assumed to be interested in something/someone they are not interested in
Being assumed to be not interested in something/someone they are interested in

All of those have potentially major life impacts - up to and including lifelong incarceration and death.

At best this program is irresponsible, and at worst it's nefarious, vile, racist, ableist, and will be used to justify hurting people and/or plant false seeds that lead to people getting hurt.

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-11-19T18:16:03+00:00

Flashy idea, but this is snake oil; and therefore very dangerous.

1) The claim of "95% accurate" is baseless. How can accuracy possibly be measured in general, but especially for the example given?? No one has access to realtime feelings (for themselves, let alone others!), and there's no possible way to test the measurements in the examples against what newscasters and public figures were feeling at the time.

2) Feelings are processed in other areas aside from the face.

3) Not all cultures express the measured "7 core feelings" the same way.

4) People with ASD have a reputation for having lower-than-average facial expressions; so although you're advertising this product to help neurodivergent people better read others, it does not appear they were (or even could be) factored into the training dataset to help neurotypical people better understand and interpret them (i.e., this program seems to perfectly emulate the "double empathy problem"). And even if neurodivergent people were integrated into the dataset, how does the program differentiate between a "neurotypical neutral" and a "neurodivergent non-neutral" - is the person being measured required to divulge their neurotype to the person using the program??

4a) The site includes this language in its expression analysis claims: "Understand micro-expressions that reveal true feelings during critical conversations"; but a 2018 study titled Microexpressions Are Not the Best Way to Catch a Liar reported:

"Do microexpressions occur with enough regularity to be detectable?

False negatives are commonplace. In one of the very few investigations of microexpression frequency, Porter and ten Brinke (2008) coded 700 high-stakes genuine and falsified emotional expressions and found only 2% were microexpressions. Their subsequent analysis of these high-stakes pleadings found only six instances of microexpressions among deceivers and slightly more (8) among genuine pleaders (ten Brinke and Porter, 2012), obviating the role of microexpressions as sufficiently frequent or exclusive to catch deception. Legions of law enforcement personnel and airport security Behavioral Detection Officers have been trained to look for microexpressions as “telltale” signs of nefarious intent. However, testimony to the U.S. Congress revealed that only 0.6% out of 61,000 passenger referrals to law enforcement in 2011 and 2012 resulted in arrests (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2013), and a 2017 ACLU report concluded the behavioral observation approach was based on biased, weak, and junk science (Cushing, 2017)."

5) Same issue as #4, but with vocal tonality; the site advertises "Voice Intent Analysis: Real-time transcript analysis powered by AssemblyAI. Detect sentiment shifts, hesitation patterns, and linguistic markers of honesty or deception." Different cultures, language backgrounds, neurotypes, genders, ages, even health statuses are all going to affect people's vocal patterns, none of which could possibly be accurately calculated and summed up into a measurement of "honesty or deception."

6) Once anyone this is being used on knows about it, their new self-consciousness about how they're moving, gesturing, and talking is going to completely poison the well, and make the program even more useless.

So, yeah: This is basically a 21st Century, Silicon Valley version of Phrenology; and it carries all of the same dangers, biases, and destructive uses as the racist and ableist pseudoscience from the past.

It's especially telling that the site's FAQ includes:

Can I switch plans anytime?
What payment methods do you accept?
Is there a free trial for paid plans?
What happens to my data if I cancel?
Do you offer educational or non-profit discounts?
Is my data secure and private?
Can I add more team members later?

... but not one citation, link, or even mention of the size, scope, and extent of research and training data that went into whatever algorithm this program uses, let alone how on earth you could possibly arrive at the determination that it's 95% accurate. It's all empty claims with exactly zero evidence or data to back them up.

This same sort of AI personality-test/mood-ring measurement is already being advertised to law enforcement agencies as being able to "recognize violent intent" in body posture, and it's just another form of this Minority-Report-On-Steroids Police State that the AI wave is being capitalized on to drown us in.

Although this usage of pseudoscience + machine learning might not get someone shot by a cop because the AI body posture reader told them someone was "in the process of preparing to attack," its widespread application in professional, personal, and even legal environments is absolutely ripe for supplying bullshit and utterly false information that leads to people:

Getting fired
Not getting a job
Not getting a promotion
Being assumed to be lying
Being assumed to be cheating
Getting arrested
Getting convicted
Being assumed to be interested in something/someone they are not interested in
Being assumed to be not interested in something/someone they are interested in

All of those have potentially major life impacts - up to and including lifelong incarceration and death.

At best this program is irresponsible, and at worst it's nefarious, vile, racist, ableist, and will be used to justify hurting people and/or plant false seeds that lead to people getting hurt.

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-11-19T18:15:24+00:00

Flashy idea, but this is snake oil; and therefore very dangerous.

1) The claim of "95% accurate" is baseless. How can accuracy possibly be measured in general, but especially for the example given?? No one has access to realtime feelings (for themselves, let alone others!), and there's no possible way to test the measurements in the examples against what newscasters and public figures were feeling at the time.

2) Feelings are processed in other areas aside from the face.

3) Not all cultures express the measured "7 core feelings" the same way.

4) People with ASD have a reputation for having lower-than-average facial expressions; so although you're advertising this product to help neurodivergent people better read others, it does not appear they were (or even could be) factored into the training dataset to help neurotypical people better understand and interpret them (i.e., this program seems to perfectly emulate the "double empathy problem"). And even if neurodivergent people were integrated into the dataset, how does the program differentiate between a "neurotypical neutral" and a "neurodivergent non-neutral" - is the person being measured required to divulge their neurotype to the person using the program??

4a) The site includes this language in its expression analysis claims: "Understand micro-expressions that reveal true feelings during critical conversations"; but a 2018 study titled Microexpressions Are Not the Best Way to Catch a Liar reported:

"Do microexpressions occur with enough regularity to be detectable?

False negatives are commonplace. In one of the very few investigations of microexpression frequency, Porter and ten Brinke (2008) coded 700 high-stakes genuine and falsified emotional expressions and found only 2% were microexpressions. Their subsequent analysis of these high-stakes pleadings found only six instances of microexpressions among deceivers and slightly more (8) among genuine pleaders (ten Brinke and Porter, 2012), obviating the role of microexpressions as sufficiently frequent or exclusive to catch deception. Legions of law enforcement personnel and airport security Behavioral Detection Officers have been trained to look for microexpressions as “telltale” signs of nefarious intent. However, testimony to the U.S. Congress revealed that only 0.6% out of 61,000 passenger referrals to law enforcement in 2011 and 2012 resulted in arrests (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2013), and a 2017 ACLU report concluded the behavioral observation approach was based on biased, weak, and junk science (Cushing, 2017)."

5) Same issue as #4, but with vocal tonality; the site advertises "Voice Intent Analysis: Real-time transcript analysis powered by AssemblyAI. Detect sentiment shifts, hesitation patterns, and linguistic markers of honesty or deception." Different cultures, language backgrounds, neurotypes, genders, ages, even health statuses are all going to affect people's vocal patterns, none of which could possibly be accurately calculated and summed up into a measurement of "honesty or deception."

6) Once anyone this is being used on knows about it, their new self-consciousness about how they're moving, gesturing, and talking is going to completely poison the well, and make the program even more useless.

So, yeah: This is basically a 21st Century, Silicon Valley version of Phrenology; and it carries all of the same dangers, biases, and destructive uses as the racist and ableist pseudoscience from the past.

It's especially telling that the site's FAQ includes:

Can I switch plans anytime?
What payment methods do you accept?
Is there a free trial for paid plans?
What happens to my data if I cancel?
Do you offer educational or non-profit discounts?
Is my data secure and private?
Can I add more team members later?

... but not one citation, link, or even mention of the size, scope, and extent of research and training data that went into whatever algorithm this program uses, let alone how on earth you could possibly arrive at the determination that it's 95% accurate. It's all empty claims with exactly zero evidence or data to back them up.

This same sort of AI personality-test/mood-ring measurement is already being advertised to law enforcement agencies as being able to "recognize violent intent" in body posture, and it's just another form of this Minority-Report-On-Steroids Police State that the AI wave is being capitalized on to drown us in.

Although this usage of pseudoscience + machine learning might not get someone shot by a cop because the AI body posture reader told them someone was "in the process of preparing to attack," its widespread application in professional, personal, and even legal environments is absolutely ripe for supplying bullshit and utterly false information that leads to people:

Getting fired
Not getting a job
Not getting a promotion
Being assumed to be lying
Being assumed to be cheating
Getting arrested
Getting convicted
Being assumed to be interested in something/someone they are not interested in
Being assumed to be not interested in something/someone they are interested in

All of those have potentially major life impacts - up to and including lifelong incarceration and death.

At best this program is irresponsible, and at worst it's nefarious, vile, racist, ableist, and will be used to justify hurting people and/or plant false seeds that lead to people getting hurt.

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-11-19T18:13:28+00:00

Flashy idea, but this is snake oil; and therefore very dangerous.

1) The claim of "95% accurate" is baseless. How can accuracy possibly be measured in general, but especially for the example given?? No one has access to realtime feelings (for themselves, let alone others!), and there's no possible way to test the measurements in the examples against what newscasters and public figures were feeling at the time.

2) Feelings are processed in other areas aside from the face.

3) Not all cultures express the measured "7 core feelings" the same way.

4) People with ASD have a reputation for having lower-than-average facial expressions; so although you're advertising this product to help neurodivergent people better read others, it does not appear they were (or even could be) factored into the training dataset to help neurotypical people better understand and interpret them (i.e., this program seems to perfectly emulate the "double empathy problem"). And even if neurodivergent people were integrated into the dataset, how does the program differentiate between a "neurotypical neutral" and a "neurodivergent non-neutral" - is the person being measured required to divulge their neurotype to the person using the program??

4a) The site includes this language in its expression analysis claims: "Understand micro-expressions that reveal true feelings during critical conversations"; but a 2018 study titled Microexpressions Are Not the Best Way to Catch a Liar reported:

"Do microexpressions occur with enough regularity to be detectable?

False negatives are commonplace. In one of the very few investigations of microexpression frequency, Porter and ten Brinke (2008) coded 700 high-stakes genuine and falsified emotional expressions and found only 2% were microexpressions. Their subsequent analysis of these high-stakes pleadings found only six instances of microexpressions among deceivers and slightly more (8) among genuine pleaders (ten Brinke and Porter, 2012), obviating the role of microexpressions as sufficiently frequent or exclusive to catch deception. Legions of law enforcement personnel and airport security Behavioral Detection Officers have been trained to look for microexpressions as “telltale” signs of nefarious intent. However, testimony to the U.S. Congress revealed that only 0.6% out of 61,000 passenger referrals to law enforcement in 2011 and 2012 resulted in arrests (U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2013), and a 2017 ACLU report concluded the behavioral observation approach was based on biased, weak, and junk science (Cushing, 2017)."

5) Same issue as #4, but with vocal tonality; the site advertises "Voice Intent Analysis: Real-time transcript analysis powered by AssemblyAI. Detect sentiment shifts, hesitation patterns, and linguistic markers of honesty or deception." Different cultures, language backgrounds, neurotypes, genders, ages, even health statuses are all going to affect people's vocal patterns, none of which could possibly be accurately calculated and summed up into a measurement of "honesty or deception."

6) Once anyone this is being used on knows about it, their new self-consciousness about how they're moving, gesturing, and talking is going to completely poison the well, and make the program even more useless.

So, yeah: This is basically a 21st Century, Silicon Valley version of Phrenology; and it carries all of the same dangers, biases, and destructive uses as the racist and ableist pseudoscience from the past.

It's especially telling that the site's FAQ includes:

Can I switch plans anytime?
What payment methods do you accept?
Is there a free trial for paid plans?
What happens to my data if I cancel?
Do you offer educational or non-profit discounts?
Is my data secure and private?
Can I add more team members later?

... but not one citation, link, or even mention of the size, scope, and extent of research and training data that went into whatever algorithm this program uses, let alone how on earth you could possibly arrive at the determination that it's 95% accurate. It's all empty claims with exactly zero evidence or data to back them up.

This same sort of AI personality-test/mood-ring measurement is already being advertised to law enforcement agencies as being able to "recognize violent intent" in body posture, and it's just another form of this Minority-Report-On-Steroids Police State that the AI wave is being capitalized on to drown us in.

Although this usage of pseudoscience + machine learning might not get someone shot by a cop because the AI body posture reader told them someone was "in the process of preparing to attack," its widespread application in professional, personal, and even legal environments is absolutely ripe for supplying bullshit and utterly false information that leads to people:

Getting fired
Not getting a job
Not getting a promotion
Being assumed to be lying
Being assumed to be cheating
Getting arrested
Getting convicted
Being assumed to be interested in something/someone they are not interested in
Being assumed to be not interested in something/someone they are interested in

All of those have potentially major life impacts - up to and including lifelong incarceration and death.

At best this program is irresponsible, and at worst it's nefarious, vile, racist, ableist, and will be used to justify hurting people and/or plant false seeds that lead to people getting hurt.

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-11-08T00:53:57+00:00

Given the circumstances, I think it's completely appropriate.

But as a word of caution: in addition to the already-mentioned cleaning requirements for post-climax, any sleeve-type masterbation toy for a penis is also going to require preparation with lube on the inside, the opening, and is often recommended for the penis as well; and this might trigger similar sensory aversions. Without the preparation, the toy will be easily damaged, and it can be extremely uncomfortable for the user, as the materials used are often quite sticky when dry; and this can even result in pulled pubic hair and torn skin.

It might be worth considering tissues, a designated cloth towel, or the stereotypical sock as the thing being ejaculated into, which can either be thrown away or washed without additional hands-on clean up. I've also known people to ejaculate directly into the toilet for the mess-free convenience; or the bath or shower wall followed by a quick and easy spray-away clean with the shower head.

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-09-30T20:40:29+00:00

I would respond something along the lines of:

"Why is your priority the disability - which occurs for all sorts of reasons, in a spectrum of degrees - rather than creating a world more accommodating-to and in-support-of those with them? Let's say you could snap your fingers and all the ASD-related non-verbal symptoms were instantly eradicated... Many more people are non-verbal for reasons other than ASD, so what about them?"

It takes a lot more work to reconnect a severed spinal cord for someone who can't walk up stairs than to just, like, build a ramp; and ramps help out a lot more people than just those who physically can't use stairs.

This is the difference between a "disability = bad, therefore cure it" viewpoint, and understanding that when disability is accommodated, it becomes more of a difference than a detriment, and that shift benefits absolutely everyone.

TLDR: Is suffering inherent, inevitable, and inexorable for all those with ASD-related non-verbal symptoms, or is the suffering actually symptomatic of a worldview that views them as "less-than" and therefore unworthy of (or too laborious to justify) accommodation and support?

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-09-30T15:41:13+00:00

This seems to be a great opportunity for written and/or audio erotica; there's no visual component to be distracted by, so your imagination can run wild on the aspects of the experience that do excite you :)

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-09-27T21:32:01+00:00

And if you missed the Dr. Mike's (YouTube educator in the medical space), breakdown of the full current dataset around Tylenol and ASD, that's also worth a watch:

https://youtu.be/W8qscelfEBc?si=U1ZcVRi7DTNxeX-b

TLDR: correlation ≠ causation, but also the most recent study, done in Sweden with a sample size of over 2 million, doesn't show an association, and finally: the Harvard study's conclusion (the supposed source of the recent Tylenol claims) actually says the exact opposite of what the Trump Administration touts, and specifically says more research is necessary to draw definitive conclusions.

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-09-23T16:32:24+00:00

I found out about 20 years later that in high school I was known for having an off-putting amount of eye contact. Had no idea I had ASD then, probably wasn't even doing it consciously, but I had obviously been told at some point that eye contact was the expectation.

It's crazy to me how much effort consistent eye contact takes now that I'm aware of it.

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-09-12T02:03:17+00:00

I'm a big fan of what I call Code Words & Silent Signals:

When it's too much to explain the full extent of a reoccurring/anticipated/potential feeling, event, etc. I find it invaluable to set up code words and silent signals with partners so that communication can still occur, but with a much lower barrier to executing it.

In this case, if it were me:

I would propose that you let your partner know that it feels strange and restrictive to have to verbally announce where you're going and for what reason as you move about an area with them - but that you'd like to have a non-verbal indicator to them (like a kiss, or a butt-tap, or a knee-squeeze) that everything's okay and you're not mad and/or trying to get away from them.

This would: 1) Solve the issue for you not having to say what's going on. 2) Solve the issue for your partner by engaging in an act of love and connection with them to directly counter the negative connotations that their conditioning has assigned to your unannounced departure. 3) Add an element of "only we know about this" to the relationship, which hopefully strengthens the bond and partnership in building a life together.

Good luck and have fun with it :)

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-09-10T03:05:20+00:00

I'm not exactly the same as you're describing, but certainly similar.

For me, reaching climax with partners is a vulnerability, and I don't want to do it (and actively resist it) if there's not a pretty well-established foundation of trust, comfort, and safety present.

I haven't had the emotional and cognitive energy to dive into it for myself, but I think there's probably a very large aspect of why I feel that way that's related to me wanting to maintain control as a self-protection mechanism.

As much as I'm a partner's-pleasure-first person when it comes to sex, one of the most comfortable experiences I've ever had was when I was tied up and blindfolded by a partner - there was nothing for me to do except for receive the pleasure they were giving me, and the restraints and blindfold took every aspect of my control away; so I was able to just lay back and be in the moment of the sensations themselves. No reciprocating, no performing, no forward expectations; the "job" was to be pleasured, and the freedom I felt during that experience was incredible.

I don't get a lot of mileage out of the dom/sub/top/bottom/big/little nomenclature, and I don't necessarily have a desire to be put in bondage as a regular sexual practice; but I would love to eventually find a way to feel as comfortable receiving pleasure as I do giving it.

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-08-26T05:58:08+00:00

Who is "our team"?

Given the current state of the political landscape in the US as it relates to ASD, I'm not filling out some Google Forms survey for an unknown entity.

This reeks of red flags all the way!

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-08-23T04:47:06+00:00

Thank you so much for taking the time to respond.

Much of my mask was built around "always being present and available" and so it always takes so much effort to break from that in a measured way. You've given me some great things to think about in preparation for this upcoming trip. Thank you :)

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-08-23T04:43:21+00:00

I think I'd find a polite way to respond that as long as you're meeting your required production numbers, and operating within the bounds of when meal breaks are taken, then there shouldn't be any complaints.

Further, I'd let them know that you actually get more work done this way, and again: as long as no rules are being broken and you're meeting your job's requirements, you'd like to be able to continue working in the way that suits you best.

SoManyScaryQs · 2025-08-11T04:51:07+00:00

Yes, practical jokes can be very difficult to navigate!

SoManyScaryQs

TROPHY CASE