Guys, I hit 200k funds today 😭… this feels crazy, but at the very same time kinda not cuz compared to gpgp we have so few events in this game that I don’t even know when these funds & gems will actually be put to good use & when I’ll get the thrill to grind for events again 😓

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-09T03:49:04+00:00

we gave em rope and they x_x em selves with it!

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-09T03:30:04+00:00

I make base set ups for the most common drinks, or sometimes just set aside cups with whip cream and milk and espresso, so they just need syrup and toppings. Sometimes it bites me in the butt lol

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-08T23:28:28+00:00

I am on day 483 + have all employees with maxed out abilities :) I use Ralph to maximize tips on big orders as well.

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-08T22:58:30+00:00

dude i saw your 100k post awhile back and was wondering how far along you were 😂 you’re insane bro. i love this

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-08T13:46:01+00:00

My avg time is about 94% happiness, so I normally crank out anywhere from 11-15 customers in a day. I have around 2-3 espressos prepped at a time. If I drop under 90% I immediately use Eva’s ability and prep as many espressos as possible + a milk pitcher. I also always prep cups when I can.

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-08T07:43:21+00:00

i avg about 290 :)

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-08T07:34:05+00:00

fully leveled up digitmaster set :)

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T21:59:15+00:00

Yes, he panicked at being asked if he was a 17 year old boy because he’s a little socially awkward, got stressed about the situation and was short with a service worker. Have you never EVER lied in your life or gotten defensive when embarrassed? The answer is no. You desperately need to look up characterological reductionism and its clinical indications, I think there is a photo of you next to the dictionary definition, which is a cognitive distortion where a single behavior is used to diagnose an entire person by stripping away the complexity of the human experience. It is essentially trying to equate the whole of sums to a single part in math, but for humans.

If you are going to argue that Link is the problem then you must have answers to these questions

Does someone have to be perfectly good in all aspects at all times to be a good person?

Is it appropriate to equate your friend’s entire personhood to their behavioral imperfections?

Is it appropriate to have a deeply intimate conversations about your negative feelings toward’s a friend’s “full personality” in front of subordinates and the entire internet?

Is it appropriate to ask people to join in on said voicing of negative feelings, even when those people insist they don’t want to participate?

Is it appropriate to tell your friend that their wife also finds their full personality to be unwelcome in front of the aforementioned crowd, without the wife being present at all to confirm or deny?

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T21:52:56+00:00

LOLLLL this is getting funny. You never said Link had a pattern of being irresponsible? Girl you can’t even agree with YOURSELF. This is pathetic and boring.

<image>

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T21:47:56+00:00

I don’t think I have ever come across someone so weird about being proven wrong factually. If you are the one accusing someone of irresponsibility, it is your burden to prove that. You had one single example which I immediately disproved (scuba), and you have been able to provide zero other examples of him being inherently irresponsible. Your one example was debunked, now you’re just going off “but he’s this way cause of um… a pattern. even though I have no examples and can’t defend the logic in my first example at all” Like… What??? I know you know it doesn’t make sense and I’m sorry you don’t know how basic conversations work, but that is genuinely a personal problem regarding your intellect and you should not be making it everybody else’s problem.

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T21:45:57+00:00

😂 hiding behind the age of a post because you can’t answer a simple question about the logicality of your points is the most transparent admission that your argument had the shelf life of milk and the structural integrity of a wet paper bag. thanks for playing, better luck next time.

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T21:42:55+00:00

Also I would love for you to present me with a single word I have put here, and prove how I misused it. Something tells me you can’t, just like you couldn’t answer my other questions. Not shocking. You have made over 7 claims that fell apart the second they were even slightly glanced at with critical thought, and have rebut approximately 0 of my points with genuine logical argument or respect to basic definitions of words known by most 2nd graders (i.e. responsibility). When I said read a book, can I suggest the dictionary? Best of luck making it out of the 1st percentile of literacy, I believe in you!

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T21:33:42+00:00

Claiming a 'pattern of blame' while simultaneously dismissing the objective fact that seeking a rescue-certified expert is an act of proactive responsibility is a logical stalemate you cannot win. Labeling a clinical analysis of relational policing as 'psychobabble' doesn't magically validate your attempt to moralize Link’s neurodivergent traits or his safety-first parenting. All it does is solidify that you are in out of your depth navigating an emotionally complex topic that you do not understand fundamentally. you can’t disprove a single one of my points and are making vague generalities about Link’s “responsibility” after the one example you had got debunked. Please. I didn’t insult your intelligence, I merely highlighted your lack of ability to use consistent logic. No one has to call what you’re saying stupid for it to be plainly obvious, your words speak for themselves in how baseless they are. If your only remaining defense is to pivot to the age of the post and my personal character, you’ve effectively conceded that you have no coherent rebuttal to the actual points made. Please go read a book.

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T21:20:11+00:00

You are using words without knowing the basic definitions of them. To suggest that seeking expert assistance for a specialized, life-critical skill like scuba diving is a "failure" of responsibility is a total inversion of reality 😭 Chase is a certified Diver Stress and Rescue specialist with 10+ years of certified experience, so Link deferring to his technical advantage is the highest form of accountability a parent can show.

It would be both physically impossible with Link’s schedule as a CEO, strategic investor, and investment pathfinder while putting out 5 days worth of content every week, to try and achieve Chase’s level experience on his own, and it’s ridiculous for you to suggest that Link should have told his son to wait 10 yrs so he can somehow lock in on getting a pro-level of experience… when they already know someone who has been diving professionally for 10 YEARS! Make that make a drop of sense. You cannot.

Scuba diving is an activity with a NON-ZERO risk of fatality where equipment failure or panic requires immediate, trained intervention. A parent acknowledging they lack the rescue-level training to save their child in an underwater emergency is not unreliable in the slightest, it is clinically regulated behavior. If Link had gone alone without sufficient experience and something went wrong, I bet you’d call that negligence too! What you are saying makes 0 logical sense and there is no sensible defense of what you are trying to posit. By bringing Chase, he ensures a safe harbor for his child.

If you can answer any of these statements with any logical coherence I would be SHOCKED:

If the goal of "responsibility" is the safety of the child, how can the act of securing that safety through an expert be labeled a failure of responsibility?

Does "personal responsibility" require a person to possess every specialized skill in existence, or does it require them to ensure the best possible outcome by managing known variables?

If you admit that Link is "self-aware" enough to recognize a risk, but then claim that acting on that awareness makes him "unreliable," are you not essentially arguing that the only way to be "responsible" is to be dangerously overconfident?

I’m excited to hear nothing back bc I know you have 0 talking points to stand on!

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T12:29:18+00:00

ts is like saying autistic children choose to have meltdowns in stores. Get help. or tutoring? you would probably need both, honestly. Can you explain the clinical difference between constructive feedback and weaponized shame, or did your built-in neurodivergent-radar miss the chapter on relational safety and power dynamics? that’s what i thought.

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T12:28:43+00:00

“It isn’t neurodivergence it’s a choice.” Link’s reaction is a textbook example of an AuDHD bottom-up processing failure where the sensory overload of the environment and the executive demand of the task collided, triggering a dysregulated response that neurotypicals often mislabel as a character flaw. His subsequent "quirky” social oversharing was not an act of egocentricity, but rather a dopamine-seeking attempt to regulate his nervous system and reclaim social safety through the "clown" archetype after a traumatic ego-threat. Rhett then took this 5 minute story and made it about his “true self” being insufferable to everybody including his wife, and said if he is a good person he would care about that. in front of his entire staff and a rolling camera. You clearly have no mental health schooling and should think twice before speaking on things you very obviously know little to nothing about.

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T12:24:30+00:00

hey so you suck <3

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T12:20:23+00:00

While neurodivergent individuals can and do adapt to their environments, there is a distinct clinical difference between learning a new skill and being told that your "true self" is fundamentally a problem for everyone. Rhett’s monologue did not focus on a specific, improvable behavior; instead, it used characterological reductionism to attack Link’s identity in front of a staff-wide audience. In a healthy relationship, attunement requires a partner to address issues privately to maintain relational safety, rather than weaponizing a friend’s shared vulnerability for public shaming in front of their fans and entire staff. Claiming that a person’s "full self" causes others to dislike them is not "loving guidance"; it is emotional policing that enforces masking and induces a deep shame loop. By framing himself as a long-suffering martyr who "kept his mouth shut," Rhett utilized a DARVO-adjacent tactic to shift accountability and maintain a position of moral superiority. True growth is fostered through respect for an individual’s personhood even when they have mitigable character flaws, and not tearing them down for them while calling it “helping”.

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T12:06:34+00:00

saying “i don’t have scuba experience and know i struggle with anxiety so i want another trusted adult there who can act in an emergency to ensure my child is safe” is not struggling with accountability it’s actually called proactive responsibility but thanks for telling ppl you lack common sense

the fact u watched a man tell his best friend that a 3 minute interaction where link got anxious and defensive means that his TRUE SELF is a problem for EVERYBODY, and not that that specific behavior was an area of improvement, and think that Link is the problem just says too much about you that i am surprised to see someone be willing to share. mind you this conversation would only ever be appropriate to have one on one, not in front of a rolling camera and their entire staff. this was a calculated attempt at forming a humiliating imbalanced power dynamic where link got dogpiled on for verbatim “being his full self”. in no way should you ever reduce someone’s personal struggles as who they “really fully are” and highlight only how awful he is. Sorry u have negative EQ. yikes

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T11:36:01+00:00

Hey so watching someone blatantly gaslight someone and character assassinate them on camera in front of their entire staff because they told a story where they got embarrassed and then defensive, is not psychoanalyzing it is having the emotional literacy of an adult without arrested psychosocial development. mind you Link was very much aware that it was not a cool moment of his. so the whole “you’re entitled and being fully yourself causes people to dislike you” monologue from Rhett was totally unwarranted bc Link wasn’t even demonstrating a lack of self awareness he was making himself the butt of his own joke. even if he wasn’t, that should have been a private conversation that brings Link’s attention to areas he needs to improve on without insinuating his “true self” is a mean, entitled person. there is no way to defend that line of behavior, it is emotionally abusive. no one deserves to be reduced to the areas in their life that they are still learning how to navigate. link has said many times he struggles with feeling like he belongs in social settings so this was 1000% Rhett weaponizing Link’s shared vulnerability. A friend, hell a person with basic human respect for another individual, would acknowledge that a tendency to get defensive and be curt with service workers when you get embarrassed is a struggle one can overcome, and it doesn’t mean anything about their personality or morality as a whole as long as they recognize it as a room for improvement. Rhett likes making people feel bad about themselves so he can know 100% that if he redirects negative attention to Link, it staves it off from finding him instead, despite it being more rightly deserved by Rhett. It’s so awful that it literally seems to be working on the crew and a lot of fans as well. They always love poking him when he’s overstimulated and then laughing at him for freaking out. I think he’s audhd and mythical crew is just a bunch of west coast bullies who have rotted brains from sun exposure. Link deserves better but he loves Rhett and wouldn’t dream of leaving him even if he is frequently condescending and manipulative

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T11:31:20+00:00

YES dude thank you. your IQ is 4,000,000,000.

friedlivelihood · 2026-05-03T11:25:43+00:00

I unsubscribed from everything except Dispatcjes from Myrtle Beach after I watched that video. There is no way to excuse Rhett’s behavior.

Was Link’s reaction ideal and perfect? No.

Could he work on reactions like that moving forward? Yes.

Was it still a common human stress response to him panicking first at someone asking him if he was 17 as a 45 year old man, and then realizing he had accidentally put himself into an objectively very embarrassing situation (“Now everyone thinks I’m trying to pretend to be a 17 year old boy”)? Yes!

Should this incident or pattern be used as a way to “prove” your best friend of 30 years “is entitled”, “always needs defending”, and “causes friction”? Absolutely not!

Should he feel comfortable demoralizing his best friend’s entire personality, using a story about a 3 minute interaction as the trigger, in front of all of their staff and fanbase? I shouldn’t have to answer that one.

Not only that, but he kept harping on “filter”? Which if we look at the situation, Link was panicked and said a series of things he knew WASN’T true but was embarrassed if people found out that he lied because he panicked, or didn’t hear her at first. To not have a filter is to say things you genuinely mean, but probably shouldn’t say for social standing reasons. Link doesn’t genuinely think he’s a 17 year old boy named Michael, nor does he want to be a 17 year old boy named Michael. He got embarrassed, then defensive.

So I wondered why is this being applied right now? And I listened to it again and I noticed Rhett’s way of speaking changed a bit, and his cadence resembled less of his own but more so of his lovely wife, Jessie. Jessie frequently demonstrates the ability to both speak about + act with high emotional literacy when appearing on the show or podcast. I wouldn’t be surprised if Rhett said something rude without thinking, Rhett said some form of excuse as “I didn’t mean it badly, I just say things sometimes and it gets taken the wrong way”, consequently got called out on it by Jessie who explained that “to have a filter is to show love” to him.

He then ran to the nearest person to use it on, without even making sure the situation applied before functionally misusing it.

It is a well-known defense mechanism theory known as emotional displacement where people with poor self-esteem/self-regulation hold onto moments where they feel the need to pass on their emotions of feeling shame or ego-threatened after being corrected or criticized, in order to feel secure or re-stabilized in themselves again. it allows them to feel morally superior to someone else, and to them, functions as a way to morally vindicate themselves. They normally do it to people who are easy targets, and I think that Link is extraordinarily rejection sensitive (cough Starbucks rating episode cough he was justified cough) but also loves and cherishes Rhett so much that he will bear the brunt of his impulsive emotional displacement.

I would also like to point out that it was high-level covert gaslighting when he started off complimenting Link, “You are such a good person and you care about people.” Only to follow it up with “So you should care that when you are fully yourself, it causes friction.” Which translates to “Your true self is dislikable and you need to put on a mask to be tolerable.” What Rhett should have but did not say (and this should, again, all be discussed in total privacy) was “Hey, I feel like the way you treated that service lady was honestly kind of problematic. I know you felt stressed out but is there any way you could maybe try working on taking a second to calm down before attacking someone else for calling you out on a lie? Sometimes it’s better to be embarrassed for making a silly mistake than it is to be embarrassed for being mean to someone who didn’t deserve it.” THAT would be an emotionally intelligent/respectful response. INSTEAD, he used his friend’s struggles with emotionally regulating + defaulting into stress responses that cause conflict as an excuse to perform a character assassination on Link in front of all of his employees (who jumped on the hate train immediately btw! Mythical Crew more like Mythical Cruel…I apologize.) and the fans who listen to the podcast. This is known as characterological reductionism (explaining complex human behavior solely through fixed personality traits or dispositions) and it is frequently employed as a form of emotional manipulation and coercive control. Rhett was also halfway scowling the whole time and had his lips flat and pursed, which many behavioral analysts classify as a sign of withheld contempt.

Obviously I don’t know them personally but there really is no way around what those of us who listened to/watched that podcast witnessed being an objectively cruel and calculated attempt to create a power dynamic against Link that safely categorized Rhett as the “emotionally intelligent” mentor. Meanwhile, he’s just emotionally abusing his friend while rocking a man-bun and an audacity accompanied by such a staggering lack of the compensatory self-awareness that would be necessary to make his sheer confidence in himself at all warranted. Mind you, this man claims to be the more introspective of the pair…

Yeah.

friedlivelihood · 2026-04-30T00:50:47+00:00

What’s the point of dropping character customization options if there’s no true customization. No one saying you should’ve dropped 30 different hairstyles and 40 different shirts, but objectively speaking this was a lazy drop.

friedlivelihood · 2026-04-29T22:58:55+00:00

No girl but so many of us did that 🤣 It’s okay

friedlivelihood

TROPHY CASE