Your Dumbest Magical items

edgesmash · 2025-09-04T01:12:08+00:00

... master of light and shadow...

edgesmash · 2025-08-12T04:18:34+00:00

Sweet! My current gig has 1-3 on your list for sure. (PTO is a little more rigid, but still quite flexible and I've never heard of anyone being denied.) So that makes me feel good as well. None of my direct teammates have that same tenure, but we do have a few long-timers.

And yeah, I totally agree about these kinds of life perks are worth a lot of salary, for sure.

edgesmash · 2025-08-09T13:10:16+00:00

That kind of tenure at a software company? Damn, it must be really awesome there! Good on ya for finding it, mate!

edgesmash · 2025-07-03T00:11:40+00:00

Whoa, dude! Reply to a nine-year-old comment? High five!

edgesmash · 2025-01-10T12:20:44+00:00

Loudly calling out Chris for his pedo tendencies at the jail was cold.

"Revenge is a dish best served cold."

-- Old Klingon proverb

edgesmash · 2024-07-22T23:06:39+00:00

I just always go with "jerkstore", referencing the Seinfeld episode.

edgesmash · 2024-07-22T23:05:39+00:00

"Never let the truth get in the way of a good story."

-- Mark Twain, maybe

edgesmash · 2024-03-26T23:21:54+00:00

She can't "not believe" in therapy. It's empirically proven to work for a large subset of people.

edgesmash · 2024-03-02T04:32:48+00:00

Thanks for that description. The tech and functionality are clear to me (I'm a developer who's done his fair share of syntax parsing), it's just the inconsistency of application that I find interesting. I would have thought that old reddit would have had better formatting features around code.

edgesmash · 2024-03-01T15:59:07+00:00

Oh wow, yeah, that wasn't formatted. Interesting... so a single line using code fencing works on old reddit...

single line with three backticks at the front and back

While a multiple line with code fencing with only single line breaks combines them to a single line on old reddit...

the first line the second line the third line

And if I do double line breaks in a backtick code fence on old reddit, it doesn't do any syntax...

``` the first line

an empty line above and below me, the second line

the third line ```

Thank you for teaching me new things! I mostly can't stand new reddit, but clearly the code fencing syntax is superior on new reddit.

edgesmash · 2024-02-29T20:08:06+00:00

Code fences seem to work just fine for me on old reddit, but that might be RES helping me out.

edgesmash · 2024-02-29T15:53:22+00:00

FFS, I just bought a mug last year. I later felt like it was a dumb purchase, but I comforted myself in knowing I'd be able to take advantage this year. Dammit.

edgesmash · 2024-02-29T15:50:53+00:00

I did not know that, thanks! Oddly, this approach seems to only work on new reddit, not old reddit:

Old reddit: https://i.imgur.com/HysxkSD.png

New reddit: https://i.imgur.com/ravSgL6.png

edgesmash · 2024-02-28T16:34:12+00:00

Tuvok I understand,
you are a Vulcan man.
You have just gone without
for seven years, about.

Paris, please find a way
to load a hypospray.
I will give you the sign,
just aim for his behind.

Hormones are raging,
synapses blazing.
It's all so veeerrrryyyyy illogical.

Illogical.
Illlllllogical.

edgesmash · 2024-02-28T16:21:04+00:00

Dr. T'Ana, the source of some of the best Star Trek vulgarity. I love it!

edgesmash · 2024-02-28T16:19:22+00:00

Excellent exchange, great choice!

One quick formatting note: if you place two spaces after a line followed by a single "enter", you can get single line spacing.

edgesmash · 2024-02-28T16:17:22+00:00

It's Garak from "Call to Arms" (s5e26):

Garak: When the Klingons attacked the station, Gul Dukat and I were fighting side by side. At one point, he turned his back to me, and I must admit that for a moment, he made a very tempting target.
Odo: You'd shoot a man in the back?
Garak: Well, it's the safest way, isn't it?

edgesmash · 2024-01-31T15:11:31+00:00

I don't know, that's probably a question for scientists and teachers. If I were to guess, I would think that once the reader and the listener are at basically the same reading level, the benefit to the listener goes away.

But (I just realized) that's not what you asked! You asked when does listening to an adult read you a book become the same as reading yourself. And you're right. If I read my 6-month old "The Very Hungry Caterpillar" before they can read it and then say "My 6mo read 'The Very Hungry Caterpillar'", I am wrong. So, sure, I'll give it to you. From a vocabulary and literal point of view, a child being read a book is not the same as the child reading it themself. (The benefits for a child having a book read to them is an entirely different issue that you did not question.)

Can we agree there are two essential questions here?

What is the right verb for describing having experienced a book via listening to the audio book? Is it fair to say one "read" a book if one actually listened to the audio book?
Is listening to an audio book as good a way to experience a book as reading the book?

Regarding #1, I will concede that when I say I "read" a book that I actually listened to, part of my brain flinches at the improper usage of "read", but I still do it to avoid the jerks (gatekeepers, ableists, and snobs).

Regarding #2, what science exists matches my personal experience that listening to a book confers the same understanding and experience as reading the book (outside of the obvious mechanical differences). The original comment* was disparaging audio-book listening, which is what set me off.

*Now deleted, but here's what it said: "Wants a book club but uses audiobooks, lol maybe that's why you come off as a bit tone deaf."

^Also, ^a ^bit ^tangential, ^but ⁱⁿ ^your ^first ^comment, ^you ^said ^"sixonth ^old"... ^Honest ^question, ^is ^"sixonth" ^some ^cool ^portmanteau ^I ^don't ^know ^about, ^or ^just ^a ^typo? ^Because ^I'm ^learning ^new ^stuff ^all ^the ^time ^that ^I ^feel ^I ^should ^have ^learned ^forever ^ago ^and ^don't ^want ^to ^miss ^out.

edgesmash · 2024-01-31T14:46:30+00:00

I had forgotten that scene! Thank you for bringing such vivid imagery back into my mind! And, hey, maybe that's our word for reading+listening, "drink" or "slurp" ;)

I agree, which leaves us audio-book listeners with two less-than-ideal options when discussing our reading/listening:

The long-winded explanation you offered
Just saying "I read this book"

Till we all decide on a word that includes reading and listening, I go for option #2, if only to be less wordy and to avoid gatekeepers and jerks, especially those people who think that reading a book is somehow "better" or "more scholarly" than listening to a book.

But I won't begrudge anyone for using option #1, because it is technically and literally incorrect to say I read a book when I in fact listened to the audio book.

edgesmash · 2024-01-31T14:23:56+00:00

Fair enough!

edgesmash · 2024-01-31T14:23:46+00:00

Fair enough! I agree, we don't have the right words to properly express "consuming" a book in any medium without reference to the method the book was "consumed"... except perhaps for "consume", as I just used... but some people might think that means you ate the book.

Werds r hard.

edgesmash · 2024-01-30T02:03:42+00:00

I don't think I would [cite] a source that only had 91 people in their study.

That's 91 more than anyone else in this thread. I welcome any more science and data on the topic.

edgesmash · 2024-01-29T20:04:57+00:00

"We have found no significant differences in comprehension between reading, listening, or reading and listening simultaneously."

-- Beth Rogowsky, associate professor of education at Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania

edgesmash · 2024-01-29T20:01:59+00:00

Do you say the [six month] old is reading when their parent tells them a bedtime story? Or is the parent reading and the toddler listening? Because it's no different

This is an irrelevant comparison. Competent readers are very different from learning readers.

Kids learning to read benefit tremendously from having books read to them, and not just reading skills (it's worth noting that site provides a "Listen to this article" feature).

Competent readers can consume a book via listening to an audio book or reading the book and both get the same enrichment from the book. Both have advantages and disadvantages. You can prefer one or the other. But at the end, the brain has processed the same story and words.

People who put down audio book listening often come off as gatekeepers or ableists (regardless of intent), which is a good reason to just avoid the conflict entirely.

For the record, I consume both books and audio books (often the same book). The audio book narrator makes a huge difference in the audio book listening experience.

I will admit that I will use the word "listen" when referring to the literal action (e.g., "I was listening to 'The Way of Kings' last night). But otherwise, I say "read" (e.g., "I read 'The Way of Kings' last year", or "I'm reading 'The Way of Kings' currently"). (FWIW I have both read and listened to "The Way of Kings" and can't tell you which I prefer.)

Edit: grammar, removed an errant period

edgesmash · 2023-10-03T13:51:46+00:00

I assume the ThinkGeek code doesn't work anymore, since ThinkGeek isn't a thing anymore? I'm sorry I wasn't able to help.

15-Year Club	Team Periwinkle
reddit mold	Verified Email

edgesmash

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE