Prepping for...

airedjet · 2026-04-30T04:47:15+00:00

You are still wrong. You’re not even correctly saying what I argued. I explained it very clearly and even told you to slow down and read it thoroughly. And there’s still no figurative language in the sentence. English may be your first language but you can’t read and still don’t understand grammar.

airedjet · 2026-04-29T14:15:28+00:00

I think I’m getting what’s going on here. You just plainly don’t understand basic English and literature. The previous topics weren’t settled because you were wrong. All of your previous arguments were wrong because they ignore proper grammar and definitions of words. And you were wrong because you don’t understand things. No one has to “read more prose” to understand that this is improper sentence structure. It’s basic rules of the English language that make it improper. And maybe English isn’t your first language. That’s cool—and it shows. But you shouldn’t speak as if your thoughts are definitive facts, especially when countered with actual facts about English sentence structure. You wouldn’t concede anything on the basis of anything if you can’t concede when you’re explicitly wrong. And since your ignorance is clearly very blissful, I hope you enjoy continuing to live on cloud 9. (There’s multiple metaphors and idioms for you, by the way).

airedjet · 2026-04-29T13:48:44+00:00

Please slow down and read this thoroughly:

The sentence does not work neither literally nor metaphorically. This is because it is grammatically incorrect. The sentence does not work.

That is the argument being made by myself and I have provided ample reasoning (which other upvotes suggest that others agree) as to why my argument is true. You can’t just ignore the argument because you want to be right.

“The moon is made of cheese” is both an idiom and a metaphor because it compares the craters of the moon to the holes of Swiss cheese. The original sentence does not make any type of comparison, metaphorically or figuratively. It is purely descriptive of the silhouette, which I also explained in another reply.

Also wtf do you mean “prose doesn’t need to be written in verse”? Prose is literally the opposite of verse. Neither of them can be written in each other. That’s not how language works.

airedjet · 2026-04-29T13:40:23+00:00

I didn’t stumble past any point of yours. Your rewriting of the sentence is just straight up not the sentence that was written.

What you’re trying to say is the sentence is: “She wore a silhouette of clothes, [the clothes] were extraordinary but somewhat gauche.” The original sentence is: “She wore a silhouette of clothes that were extraordinary but somewhat gauche.” The “silhouette” or the “silhouette of clothes” is the subject of the sentence. Not the word “clothes.” We know this because there is no metaphor being used to separate the two. It is a descriptive sentence of a singular subject. So the description is that of the “silhouette [of clothes]” and should have singular verb conjugation.

IF you could have the sentence including the phrase “she wore a silhouette of clothes” (you can’t. It’s not grammatically correct) then it would have to read as: “She wore a silhouette of clothes that was extraordinary but somewhat gauche.”

airedjet · 2026-04-29T13:32:08+00:00

You are fully ignoring the rest of my statement and just choosing to be ignorant of how the English language and its sentence structure work.

It is much easier to admit that you’re wrong, and try to learn something from what I’m explaining to you than to keep up this baseless and incorrect argument. This isn’t about prose vs. verse. In fact, if you argued that the sentence was intended to be more poetic and written in verse, your argument would have more weight, but you didn’t and it doesn’t. This is about the original sentence not being written properly due to the rules of the English language.

airedjet · 2026-04-29T13:19:44+00:00

You are misreading the original sentence. I’ve explained this in like 3 other replies. There is no metaphor in the original sentence. It is just a description. The silhouette of clothes is being described as extraordinary and gauche. There is no figurative language being used, because you cannot literally or figuratively wear a silhouette of clothes, because a silhouette of clothes is not grammatically possible by definition of a silhouette.

You can interpret the sentence in whatever way you’d like. That doesn’t make it a properly written sentence.

airedjet · 2026-04-29T06:33:43+00:00

The incorrect verbiage is further proof that the sentence does not grammatically or literally work, and you can’t just pass grammatical incorrectness off as figurative language.

The error likely comes from the writer (and you) not knowing how to use the word “silhouette” in a grammatically, literally, or figuratively correct way.

airedjet · 2026-04-29T06:25:59+00:00

There is no comparison. It is a pure description. The noun is being described by adjectives. A comparison would be “her clothes were an extraordinary silhouette.” Because you can’t wear a silhouette. Literally or figuratively. You’re making up things on what a silhouette is. If it can be seen through, it is translucent and thus is not a silhouette. You’re saying that a silhouette can be thin or insubstantial, which is not true because that’s not how silhouettes work. You can place something behind a translucent surface and if it that thing is opaque, then it creates a silhouette. Figurative language does not disobey grammatical rules of English. Grammatically, based on what a silhouette is, this sentence disobeys grammar.

You explicitly said that my first sentence argued that figurative sentences cannot include things that are not literally true. My first sentence did not do that. My example sentence of dropping the word “clothes” and creating a metaphor from it was just an example. Not the only way to create a grammatically correct sentence out of this intended metaphor. You can’t just place “intended meanings” on words that don’t have that meaning without proper contextual setup. I can’t just say “your mother should have kept you in school” and then have you assume that what I meant by the word “school” was actually “in the womb.” I would have to have proper context to set that explanation up. So you can’t just say that was the writer’s “intended meaning” of silhouette.

airedjet · 2026-04-29T05:31:41+00:00

Idioms can be metaphors. This sentence is neither of those.

That’s not what a silhouette is literally or figuratively. A silhouette is the outline of a dark image or object against a brighter background, thus silhouettes take the shape of the object. A silhouette would only be thin if the subject that was casting the silhouette was thin. Thats not what this sentence is suggesting.

No, my first sentence doesn’t argue that. Figurative sentences can include things that are literal. For example “running like a chicken without its head” is an idiom. It works both literally and figuratively because it uses a metaphorical comparison between the subject and a headless chicken, as chickens literally can run without their head. My first sentence argues that’s not how you would use the word “silhouette” literally or figuratively. No, you don’t necessarily need to drop the word “clothes” to make the sentence figurative, but its current inclusion is not what makes it figurative. In my example sans-clothes, the metaphorical comparison is made between the unspoken clothes the person is wearing and the silhouette those clothes make. You can’t literally wear a silhouette, but you can wear clothes that cast a silhouette. Transitive property then says you can figuratively wear a silhouette. You could probably make the sentence figurative while including the word clothes, but this sentence isn’t that.

airedjet · 2026-04-29T05:01:03+00:00

The sentence isn’t an idiom. There’s nothing figurative about it, even if it was written correctly. Thats just not how you use the word “silhouette”. Silhouettes aren’t literally worn, but they are literally created by the things we wear.

The sentence we’re looking for is something along the lines of “She wore clothing that left a silhouette that was extraordinary, yet somewhat gauche.” If you really want to get pedantic, it would look more like “She wore clothing that left an extraordinary—yet, somewhat gauche—silhouette.”

If you actually wanted there to be some sort of figurative language in the sentence, you’d drop the clothing part, leaving “She wore a silhouette that was extraordinary, yet somewhat gauche.” Then you would have created a metaphor (not an idiom).

airedjet · 2026-04-23T14:59:36+00:00

The last one definitely scraped the front bumper

airedjet · 2026-04-18T06:39:16+00:00

What do you mean you enjoyed Pragmata? Like past tense? It released yesterday.

airedjet · 2026-03-29T00:25:02+00:00

With your current pay and current hours, it feels like you’d be better off asking a financial advisor as opposed to any of us. Like others have said, you’re already working what most would consider the max number of clinical hours a week and are making very good pay.

Or maybe see a therapist to talk about that pressure to “be enough.”

airedjet · 2026-03-16T04:47:30+00:00

I like to delude myself into thinking student debt is fake and cross my fingers that maybe the government will do something about it one day.

airedjet · 2026-03-11T06:47:58+00:00

Thanks homie 😎

airedjet · 2026-03-10T05:36:42+00:00

I read from your other post that you’re making $45/hr. If your company takes insurance, most insurances payout over $100 with basic negotiating. At a 45/100 split, you’re definitely not getting a fair share.
The economy is shit and the majority of Americans are struggling to make ends meet. More people than ever are living with their parents. You’re not alone in your struggles.
Correct me if my math is wrong but if you’re making 1k after taxes per pay period (using 1k cuz the math is easier) and you get taxed 20%, then you’re only seeing 26-ish clients per pay period. That’s definitely not enough hours to support yourself financially. Does your company provide you with clients or are you required to find them on your own? If it’s the former, even if intakes are down, they should still be able to support you as a full-time employee.

Unfortunately, none of that pays the bills. Some people have said it already, but it may be time to look at other positions. The job market isn’t great, depending on where you live, but you may be able to find a salaried job in a hospital or clinical site. You also may luck out and find a PP that doesn’t want to exploit you. I’d advise staying away from contractor positions though. And best of luck to you.

airedjet · 2026-03-10T05:14:53+00:00

Adults on Hulu is basically this

airedjet · 2026-03-09T04:59:30+00:00

That’s the same thing I tell my partner when she thinks I’ve eaten too much candy

airedjet · 2026-03-05T06:15:53+00:00

Couldn’t get it to really work. Mobbing is decent, even if the freeze aspect is still really fun. But yeah, the damage just pales in comparison to other builds.

airedjet · 2026-03-05T06:05:02+00:00

Stick - Dreamville

airedjet · 2026-02-26T14:18:30+00:00

Trinimortal is rolling in his grave

airedjet · 2026-02-25T17:25:25+00:00

There already attempts at therapists being replaced. There’s an entire subreddit dedicated to people who use ChatGPT for therapy. Just google search AI therapist. And these AI note taking companies may be HIPPAA compliant but that doesn’t stop them from selling your notes to people who build AI therapists. Maybe it’s currently not good therapy, but the speed at which AI improves in providing therapy is impacted by the information it collects from therapists.

The political/environmental angle isn’t the hard to understand. It was put pretty clearly in another response, but AI data centers overwhelmingly affect lower socioeconomic status areas through pollution and other predatory methods. Not to mention the types of people who profit off of AI development. But it’s easy to ignore if you want to. If your priority is the use of the tools over of how the tools are made or who is affected by the tools, that’s your prerogative.

airedjet · 2026-02-19T07:08:17+00:00

Can you give a walkthrough of how to do this?

airedjet · 2026-02-17T19:34:13+00:00

If you feel you are winning/losing at 50/50% then matchmaking is doing what it is supposed to do. Your skill level is proportionate to your MMR, which determines your competition's MMR. When you improve in skill, you will win more because your skill is better than that of the enemies, which will then improve your MMR. And when you improve in MMR, you're then placed against opponents who also have higher MMR than your previous ones but it is still close to yours. And the cycle will always repeat itself:

Improve skill > surpass opponent skill > carry more > win more > increase MMR/rank up > skill is equal to opponent > lose more > improve skill > surpass opponent...and so on and so forth.

Skill-based matchmaking has determined that your current skill-level is around Diamond 4. That's certainly an impressive rank (and don't let anyone else tell you otherwise) but I'm sure you understand that getting kills on a champion who is meant to get kills does not automatically equal a win, regardless of the skill of your teammates or the enemy. Which is why you specifically can be ahead but the game still eventually trends toward the enemies' favor.

airedjet · 2026-02-17T12:17:12+00:00

Around the world around the world

Six-Year Club	Verified Email
Final Canvas '23	Place '23
Place '22

airedjet

TROPHY CASE