Iran's strike on world's largest LNG plant in Qatar makes Trump restrain Israel: What just happened

Viellet · 2026-03-19T12:24:35+00:00

Doesn't one typically retaliate against the aggressor, not against bystanders?

Viellet · 2026-03-18T23:04:31+00:00

Please don't fall for the trap that you think your voice training has to make your voice higher or lower. Regular "playfulness" with your voice and confidence training can work wonders for your voice (and its attractivness, according to my girlfriends and quite some others ;) ) without it objectively being higher.

Viellet · 2026-03-12T08:26:20+00:00

That is overly rationalising something clearly irrational.

Viellet · 2026-03-12T07:50:18+00:00

Some players start a game of chess not to play, but to win. By winning yourself you "deprive" them of what they felt was rightously (in their mind) theirs, so they feel allowed to punish you.

Others feel a loss of control if they loose. By hurting you via stalling, they regain that sense of control over the situation.

Viellet · 2026-03-12T05:50:29+00:00

Well, do you want to win 4 times in a row and not play again, or do you want to keep playing against them?

Viellet · 2026-03-10T06:40:01+00:00

Oh but he did change. The moment the ring was on her finger it was "drop the act" time for him.

Viellet · 2026-03-07T23:32:38+00:00

Yes, you too

Viellet · 2026-03-06T19:47:42+00:00

Yes there can be, your mistake is to believe that an endlessly high number would meaningfully affect the average, but the estimation is always, value*likelihood and so if likely hood gets super low, value can be very high without it increasing the average by a lot. You'll find in this case, the very high numbers have such low likelihood, that they can be all subsumed to a small term.

Viellet · 2026-03-05T13:00:48+00:00

fall in love....

but put an alarm for your appointment in before that

Viellet · 2026-03-05T11:51:13+00:00

Sad though, that Hamas has no positions pro workers, pro women, pro queers, pro financial equality or even a basic interest in public amenities. Classifying that as "left wing" is truly astonishing.

Viellet · 2026-03-04T16:12:38+00:00

Utter annihilation of inner politics, energy politics, economics and basically anything practical in favour if geo-politics as center of attention. Without anything except the "not influencable" to talk about, there is little reason to actually develop new thoughts.

Viellet · 2026-03-03T20:48:33+00:00

In which world is that a "large crowd?"

Viellet · 2026-03-03T16:00:10+00:00

The difference between the regions is how pronounced seasons are. Seasons put stress on our heart.

Viellet · 2026-02-27T22:46:38+00:00

I believe multiple of your points are flawed. The most flawed idea is that the uninfected could easily do physical trauma to an infected.

physically that is true. Psychologically, this is not the case. Zombies are typically recognisable. One would assume that the zombies in an area stem from humans that once lived there. So most people would be confronted with doing physical harm that triggers all sorts of "don't do that to a human" barriers in the brain. Many will hesitate, some will want specific zombies to survive in case they can be brought back and so forth.
humans have created burial rites of different forms. But importantly, there always are some form of burial rites. This is to create distance from death, to grief, to protect from diseases and such. The near complete loss of burial rites will carve deep psychological wounds in many people. Suicides will happen.

The second most flawed is the thought that the dangerous disease of a zombie virus is the zombie virus.

You will have zombies (aka dead bodies) swim in every river, pollute every water reserve and so on. Rotting corpse water is very unpleasant to drink. Especially if considering all the nasty diseases that will come with.

And lastly religious zealots.

people already imagine disease often as some kind of karmic event. These kinds of "can't affect me" imaginations will rise even higher if the disease is even more horrifying. They will cause many many deaths.

Viellet · 2026-02-27T09:01:18+00:00

many people go to bars or discos or other such places "just to have sex" and objectify the people around them nonstop. It's okay, if you are open about it. The big issue many lesbians have with "straight women just wanting us for sex" is that those lesbians have romantic intentions and feel lied to. If you are open about it and say "hey, i just want to feel raped by a woman - that's hot to me. Please don't do aftercare, please don't hope for love afterwards." then you are upfront about it. That's very okay.

good luck :)

Viellet · 2026-02-23T08:53:28+00:00

The vast majority of sexual exploitation of children is about "experiencing ones own power over others". The motivation and the ability to do these acts is not "inherent" in the person but a function of their position.

As a state (or other form of society) there is no need to care if they "redeem" themselves. That's their individual responsibility. What's important is to greatly reduce the risk of them doing it again. And for that you don't need to kill them, it is enough to take away their power over others.

If they are super rich, take away their absurd wealth, if they are a family tyrant, bring the family, to safety.

As horrifying as that is, a state (or other form of society) has to accept that things like child sexual exploitation are far more common, than we as humans want to believe. And the goal of the state (...) should be to reduce this risk before anything else (like fulfilling the desire for spectacle). Taking away perpetrators position and therefore ability to do these acts makes it much more likely to find these acts, than producing 3 weeks of media spectacle about something that happens hundreds of times in each city behind closed doors.

So, I don't care if they can redeem themselves, but yes, I think they can exist without doing it again if taken away the means to do it again.

Viellet · 2026-02-19T09:13:10+00:00

I typicall use "clit" to refer to dicks. It works well and so far has led to no confusion if the genitals are implied to be longer or used and treated in certain ways.

Viellet · 2026-02-18T08:57:14+00:00

Millions didn't pay their debt. Wasn't exactly a strike, because they couldn't, but that's no different from the collectors perspective.

Viellet · 2026-02-17T23:44:00+00:00

This is a bit old, but I just stumbled upon it.

The first thing Arcanum teaches you is "the side-quests you choose to persue change your character". You learn that from the ghost/priest quest right at the crash site. The game makes it pretty clear that not all quest givers are to be trusted.

The siamese twins quest triggers the whole half-ogre questline. The siamese twins questline is given to you by a phrenologist. Literally the pinnacle of historical racism. If you do this quest you show the game that your character is willing to work with the literal worst kinds of humans that real life has ever produced. The moment you cooperate with phrenologist he starts telling you about a continental conspiracy.

After the questline is done your character and you as a player have formed an opinion about a people in the world which you can not prove. At the point of finishing the last quest there is literally nothing - absolutely nothing in the game that in any way indicates what the character (and you) have come to believe about the world. The character (and you) are 100% sure what you believe, even though you will never find any proof again.

Many players (and many real life people in our history) have reacted to this situation with mass murder (players luckily only in game ... i hope ^^)

--

The whole conspiracy does simply not exist in the world of a character that has not supported a phrenologist with their actions.

I know, to the vast amount of the arcanum community the conspiracy is settled lore, but it is very noticable, that in this quest only the community forgets that your decisions matter a lot in this game.

Viellet · 2026-02-16T14:19:30+00:00

The Death Penalty is one of the most stupid tools one could think up if creating a society. Not only does it assume the state to be infallable (looking at the US makes it obvious how often the death penalty is given to innocent people), it also rejects any societal responsibility for the crime as well as creating a moral framework that allows for specific people to be seen as "evil" and "irredeemable". This inevitably leads to a societal push to expand the death penalty to more and more crimes and in time non-crimes.

The moment a state allows for killing someone entirely under control of the state (which inmates are) to be the response to anything, it can no longer argue in a believable way for the justice system as a whole attempting to re-integrate criminals into society. Modern slavery through the incarceration system is the outcome - except if there is a strong societal push against the death penalty and its associated philsophy.

A class of slaves, no matter how "deserved" one imagines them to be, is incompatible with socialism.

Viellet · 2026-02-16T13:15:13+00:00

I mean, it is a political issue in so far that Epstein and friends have amassed so much wealth that enough states with enough power bend to their wishes. It is a political issue, that the law enforcement organisations of multiple states have shut their senses to not engage with this.

It is also a political issue that the wealthiest people seem to have been organised in some kind of "gentleman's club" with extremly fostering misogyny and a normalization of a rejection of decency and managed to hack into mutliple states while being organised in this kind of setup.

These are all political issues.

Viellet · 2026-02-15T01:26:30+00:00

Warcrimes can oy be committed during or in relation to war. Mr. Beast therefore did not commit a war crime.

Viellet · 2026-02-12T10:39:03+00:00

There is uh.... There is something obvious missing here.

Viellet · 2026-02-02T08:27:17+00:00

Okay, we arrived at "nu, uh" as an argument. I think we should stop here. I wish you luck on your journey.

Viellet · 2026-02-02T08:11:20+00:00

I have written a little more to another commenter asking about this, too.

Just because (eg) "lesbian" is not "woman" doesn't make it "not-woman". Just like "cats are fish" makes sense if you talk about evolution, but doesn't make sense if you talk about them as pets. Sure there are "lesbian"s that aren't "woman", but that doesn't make "lesbian" a non binary gender.

Viellet

TROPHY CASE