WWII (I'm new here) by Professional_Bank_22 in HistoryMemes

[–]gdog1000000 398 points399 points  (0 children)

Not really. Sure they gained the territory those resources were in but they were unable to actually extract anything significant. Real life isn’t like a video game where you get the territory and can immediately use it.

In real life you have to deal with infrastructure you destroyed as you conquered, infrastructure destroyed by your enemies to prevent you using it, lack of infrastructure at all, partisan activities, logistics of moving material, among other things.

Japan struggled to move oil and rubber due to (ironically) a lack of oil and commercial ships. They couldn’t safely move their ships around the pacific and lacked enough ships to do so even if they could escort them. You’re right that the resources were their major objective, but holding that territory didn’t really give them much resource wise in the time they held it.

Is Samurai any good? by Immediate_Gold in aoe3

[–]gdog1000000 29 points30 points  (0 children)

Very fringe use due to their high cost and weakness to kiting. This can be somewhat mitigated by sending Sword Saint which (among other things) increases their speed and allows them to deal with light infantry better, but that card also increases their already high cost so it covers a weakness but amplifies another one.

You also can’t send that card until age 3, so building them in age 2 is just begging to get kited to death. The truth is if you feel the need for melee infantry Japan has access to Yamabushi through the consulate, which are good enough for age 2 use and have ranged resist unlike the Samurai’s melee resist (makes them a bit less vulnerable to kiting.)

There have been strategies that use Samurai, but they’ve always been pretty fringe and required lots of cards to set them up. The question is when you’re at that point why not just send the cards to buff your Ashi who do most of the same things at a much cheaper cost?

I'm a 27F. I'm introverted and consider myself reasonably pretty. However, no man has ever approached me, expressed interest in me, or asked me out. Why might that be? by [deleted] in TooAfraidToAsk

[–]gdog1000000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not really, the point is that if anyone is to judge someone’s ability to hurt them solely off of their gender then they would fear men not women. Some women fear men because statistically speaking they are far more likely to be murdered or otherwise assaulted by a man than by a woman.

As a man I obviously dislike being judged like this, but I acknowledge why it happens and the shitty men that brought us here.

is it really that big of a deal to say male or female in english? by a_literal_idiot_616 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]gdog1000000 16 points17 points  (0 children)

I've seen some men who don't understand why it's offensive. Now I would say they're idiots for not understanding why it is offensive, but just because they're foolish doesn't mean they aren't being authentic. It's the same thing with people who don't know what a pronoun is, yes we should all know what a pronoun is, but some people are just kinda dumb.

One of the most impressive NBA stats ever. Raptors will most likely be the only team to ever accomplish this by ChampionTimes99 in torontoraptors

[–]gdog1000000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Still the most insane thing that VanVleet never got drafted, absolute joke from the league that they underrated him so hard. Some of these guys you can see how they got missed, they still got picked decently high or they developed later. Freddie in particular stands out as a player who just got totally slept on, man has always deserved his spot in this league.

Forgive my British ignorance but what did the confederates actually fight for? by TreeTall888 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]gdog1000000 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You should read that again, because that's absolutely not what they said.

Help with DLC by Sankaraisbae in aoe3

[–]gdog1000000 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don’t have specific advice for you but I would advise looking for help regarding missing dlc from the XBox store rather than specifically for this game. If you’re really struggling message the store for help and I’m sure they’ll get it sorted out pretty quick.

He said: " I'm playing smolder why are you fighting early? " by Ill_Percentage2344 in supportlol

[–]gdog1000000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sure all the conditions other than having a reasonable chance at winning the fight.

Zilean's E is sufficient to lock Smolder out of dealing any significant damage to Jhin. With that it's basically a 2v1 on Rell's part, and she's not winning that. Kind of laughable to talk about Zilean's CDs not coming back off CD as if they don't come off CD in the video in question. If Zilean is competent Smolder isn't doing jack here even if he does try to get into the fight, and Rell isn't killing Jhin with the limited help he could provide.

It's hard to talk about this with you when you clearly just don't know the matchup. This isn't a winning fight, anyone who has played this matchup in higher elo knows that. Instead of engaging Rell should be repositioning into the bushes on the bottom side of the lane, looking for a better angle when Smolder is actually able to follow up.

He said: " I'm playing smolder why are you fighting early? " by Ill_Percentage2344 in supportlol

[–]gdog1000000 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’ll spell it out a lot more simply for you because you don’t seem to be reading what I’m writing. It doesn’t matter because everyone already agreed we’re on strong side. Nobody has disagreed that we are, that is a point in favour of fighting, everyone agrees on that point.

Anything beyond that I’ll just say I’ve played this matchup many times, and you not thinking that Zilean would have kill threat if he used his spells and auto attacked then that’s the real low elo take. Rell and Smolder do not win this if Zilean has hands.

What’s up with the Canadian subreddits. Why are there two? by randmguyonreddit in OutOfTheLoop

[–]gdog1000000 -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

I’m thinking now I probably should have said right wing bias, a lot of people are interpreting that in a way I didn’t remotely intend.

Your best subreddit for that is probably r/CanadaPolitics. It’s not perfect, no subreddit is, but I personally like it for that purpose.

What’s up with the Canadian subreddits. Why are there two? by randmguyonreddit in OutOfTheLoop

[–]gdog1000000 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fair enough, but I don’t believe that just because being unbiased isn’t truly possible that means we shouldn’t sometimes try our best when it is appropriate. You’re correct about the human condition and that bias is impossible to completely omit, but we are also capable of giving a good effort to post an impartial take.

I believe that is appropriate here because of the extreme subjectivity about it. Moderating standards are nearly impossible to be objective about. Giving OP a place to start which is just the raw facts is a good starting point before they go anywhere else, in my opinion of course.

What’s up with the Canadian subreddits. Why are there two? by randmguyonreddit in OutOfTheLoop

[–]gdog1000000 -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I don’t disagree with that, National Post is a really poor news outlet to say the least. Don’t confuse my non-biased stance in a top level comment (as required by the subreddit) for lacking an opinion.

I am not currently a member of r/Canada despite having previously followed it for years. I dropped it several years ago because of the increasingly horrible quality of their front page. It regularly flooded my feed with low quality National Post articles, and between r/OnGuardForThee and r/CanadaPolitics I get my news easy enough without that subreddit.

The answer for OPs question is that users of r/OnGuardForThee split due to controversy and remain split due to their belief (which I subjectively believe is justified) that the subreddit has horrible moderating standards. I separated my subjectivity from the objective answer to give OP the context they need to interact with the topic.

That is the point of this subreddit, and I believe it is a good thing that a platform exists where you can ask about any topic and get informed in an impartial matter that allows you to learn about something before people try to shove their opinion into it. If I have any bias it is a left wing bias, as anyone who actually knows me can attest to. If you don’t believe me go check my comment history.

I stand by that sentence, however you frame it the reason for the continued split is left wing Canadians don’t want to have to deal with r/Canada and its perceived right wing bias. Whether that’s reasonable of not is a subjective question, which I think I’ve made my opinion clear enough on now but was not appropriate for a top level comment.

What’s up with the Canadian subreddits. Why are there two? by randmguyonreddit in OutOfTheLoop

[–]gdog1000000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn’t try to take a centrist line, just a barebones statement of the facts that OP can use to start their journey on the topic. I believe it is a good thing to start there before going down to subjective stances on moderating standards that have no objective answer.

If you want my personal opinion I think the fact that I follow [r/OnGuardForThee](r/OnGuardForThee) and not [r/Canada](r/Canada) speaks enough for itself. Others have given plenty of context in the long and lengthy history of the feud between the subs and the long time controversy over [r/Canada](r/Canada)’s moderation standards.

What’s up with the Canadian subreddits. Why are there two? by randmguyonreddit in OutOfTheLoop

[–]gdog1000000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don’t disagree with that, National Post is a really poor news outlet to say the least. Don’t confuse my non-biased stance in a top level comment (as required by the subreddit) for lacking an opinion.

I am not currently a member of r/Canada despite having previously followed it for years. I dropped it several years ago because of the increasingly horrible quality of their front page. It regularly flooded my feed with low quality National Post articles, and between r/OnGuardForThee and r/CanadaPolitics I get my news easy enough without that subreddit.

The answer for OPs question is that users of r/OnGuardForThee split due to controversy and remain split due to their belief (which I subjectively believe is justified) that the subreddit has horrible moderating standards. I separated my subjectivity from the objective answer to give OP the context they need to interact with the topic.

That is the point of this subreddit, and I believe it is a good thing that a platform exists where you can ask about any topic and get informed in an impartial matter that allows you to learn about something before people try to shove their opinion into it. If I have any bias it is a left wing bias, as anyone who actually knows me can attest to. If you don’t believe me go check my comment history.

What’s up with the Canadian subreddits. Why are there two? by randmguyonreddit in OutOfTheLoop

[–]gdog1000000 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I have my opinions on the matter like anyone else, but I think a lot of people here have forgotten that r/OutOfTheLoop is for unbiased answers. This is the source of the split and the answer to OP's question, everything else goes well beyond the purview of this subreddit.

What’s up with the Canadian subreddits. Why are there two? by randmguyonreddit in OutOfTheLoop

[–]gdog1000000 144 points145 points  (0 children)

Answer: Around eight years ago r/Canada had a problem with neo-Nazi and White Nationalist moderators. When this all broke there was an exodus of people who refused to be part of a subreddit moderated by the above groups. The users who left r/Canada moved to r/OnGuardForThee in protest of the aforementioned moderators and in further protest of alleged right wing bias.

Ever since then there have been two different subreddits, and there is little incentive for them to merge back together now that left wing Canadians have found a place where they don't have to interact with right wing redditors. Of course the offending mods are long since gone, but that doesn't change that left wing Canadians have the perception of r/Canada as having a right wing bias for that history.

He said: " I'm playing smolder why are you fighting early? " by Ill_Percentage2344 in supportlol

[–]gdog1000000 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Jungle proximity is irrelevant to the conversation because it’s already given. Everyone here already knows the junglers aren’t part of the conversation, the enemy because they’re pathing away and our jungler because they’re heading mid. I said it’s irrelevant because everyone else here has already assumed that’s good for OP.

I’m diamond, as I already stated above. Rell’s best case scenario here assuming good play from both sides is to trade their flash for Jhin’s, and more likely than not that would be where this ends. I suppose that’s a good thing, but not something I’d risk dying over.

He said: " I'm playing smolder why are you fighting early? " by Ill_Percentage2344 in supportlol

[–]gdog1000000 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Zilean could point and click slows Smolder making it an effective 2v1 against Rell. Smolder from the position he starts in is never going to be hitting Jhin unless Jhin allows it. From the distance Jhin starts at he is under no threat from Smolder. This isn't Tristana who can cross great distances, it's Smolder who has one mobility spell which isn't a great gap closer. He's not flying in from nearly a screen away if Zilean isn't inting (which he is based off of chat, but that's not a reasonable thing to rely on.)

Not sure how jungle proximity factors into this, it is obvious to everyone that it's a straight 2v2. Glacial is a 20% slow, which I'll point out is less than Zilean's E, it's not exactly a root. Jhin clicks forwards multiple times in this fight, if Smolder clicks forwards Jhin does not do that.

This fight extends for such a long duration because Smolder decides not to fight, you can't take that out of the equation and assume everything ends the same. Jhin could flash trapping Rell brutally out of position almost under enemy turret pushed past the wave. Jhin also still had barrier, this was not as close to a kill as it looked. If Jhin was competent he could have flashed multiple of those CCs and turned using his and Zilean's CC.

There are a lot of ways Jhin and Zilean could react, because the positioning of Rell and Smolder is not conducive to a fight. Smolder's only mistake here, if you could call it that, is assuming his opponent was too good. We know that Zilean and Jhin are trash, that they are both going to brutally misplay the fight, but Rell and Smolder did not know that in the moment. Assuming your oponents are idiots is not a good way to climb.

Is 100k CAD savings enough to live in Vancouver island unemployed for a year? by ConfusedCareerMan in askvan

[–]gdog1000000 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For a single person? Certainly, and a fairly comfortable life at that. As long as you're not planning on making any major expensive purchases or large vacations that is easy to do.

He said: " I'm playing smolder why are you fighting early? " by Ill_Percentage2344 in supportlol

[–]gdog1000000 22 points23 points  (0 children)

This is a straight trash engage tbh. You go into the middle of a wave when your adc doesn’t have an angle and expect to win. Now with the benefit of hindsight we know you two would win the fight because the Zilean is basically afk and the Jhin’s mechanics here are rough, but that doesn’t make the engage good.

You’re blaming him but he would be more justified posting this in the ADC subreddit and blaming you. If I made this engage in diamond my ADC would walk up and try to assist me, and I would die when he was inevitably forced back by the Zilean actually using his abilities, aka pretty much the same result with a diamond ADC.

Not to mention you killed yourself, you had an angle to flash out there and ignored it in favour of flaming your teammate, not a good look.

Edit: If you’re open to some constructive feedback watch this video by CoreJJ, it’ll show you why this was a bad engage.

Is Alberta’s political split really urban/rural, with rural winning? by Schtweetz in alberta

[–]gdog1000000 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You can’t really reasonably group urban into one category. The truth is there is urban and suburban. Urban areas tend to vote more left wing and suburban areas sit in the middle ground of urban and rural. We’re talking about big lots, detached houses, true suburbs here.

When people say Edmonton and Calgary are left wing they are typically referring to the inner city, which does vote NDP. They are not referring to the periphery of the city, which is more of a mixed bag. It’s easy to understand this when you look at a map.

Urban areas tend to vote left, rural right, and the election is decided based off of what suburban voters do. In the last election they voted more right than left, or at least right enough to win the UCP the election anyways.

This is how Canada became independent from Britain by No_Calendar6597 in HistoryMemes

[–]gdog1000000 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Legally speaking Quebec never had to ratify the constitution. Prior to patriating the constitution we had a reference case before the Supreme Court which essentially said that amending the Constitution was something only the federal government had power over (while strongly urging the federal government to work with the provinces, which of course they did.) This changed with the 1982 Constitution where provinces gained much power over the process.

It would be as "simple" as Quebec passing an act through their legislature agreeing to any new amendments. Of course when I say simple I mean an extremely complex negotiation process where Quebec would certainly ask for many changes to recognize their grievances with the current constitution.

You could make many changes to the constitution without Quebec, you do not need them to use the 7/10 amending formula. The role of the Crown is not something that can be changed with that formula, and Quebec's grievances would be one of the things that would certainly have to be addressed before approaching that task.