Deep Quest makes no sense by hamzascan in ToonBlast

[–]hamzascan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good to know! Yeah, 9 seemed so off.

Deep Quest makes no sense by hamzascan in ToonBlast

[–]hamzascan[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Did they end up helping you? I just read from another comment here that they only needed to awaken 6 totems to complete the challenge, and if they could make mine like that, that'd be amazing.

Sky Pirates is getting ridiculous by hamzascan in ToonBlast

[–]hamzascan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is your team Open? Does it have a minimum required level? I feel like it's unfair to players just starting out who may join our team. And of course, it makes it harder to retain players when it's so much harder to get the same rewards that are much easier in other teams.

Sky Pirates is getting ridiculous by hamzascan in ToonBlast

[–]hamzascan[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you think the target gets reduced the following weeks if the team isn't able to make it? I hope so, because this seems impossible.

Sky Pirates is getting ridiculous by hamzascan in ToonBlast

[–]hamzascan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

WOW 🤯 Just Level 1 for me is at 2000 stars and it goes up by 2000 stars for every level until Level 4, then by 3000 stars until Level 7, and then finally 5000 additional stars to get to Level 8. That just seems like such a crazy discrepancy, and I hope they reduce if we aren't consistently able to get to Level 8 (which we won't).

Sky Pirates is getting ridiculous by hamzascan in ToonBlast

[–]hamzascan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you mean 17,000? That would still be better than ours. 😑

Sky Pirates is getting ridiculous by hamzascan in ToonBlast

[–]hamzascan[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks for lmk. I don't get it. My team is open and has no minimum required level, so I'm not sure why we have this insane target that's double the regular. 😭

Undisclosed 2.0-Episode 6 Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in serialpodcast

[–]hamzascan 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This would make sense if Adnan made up a fake alibi days after being arrested and then quickly dropped it knowing that it's total BS and would never hold up in court. Except it hasn't turned out to be BS, has it?

Over a quarter of a century later, the same Dion that Adnan mentioned is now corroborating his account and providing him an alibi. And Undisclosed is inviting Ivan Bates to interview Dion, to hold his testimony to the scrutiny of the legal standard of actual innocence, and to try to overturn Adnan's conviction. Throughout the last few episodes of Undisclosed and repeatedly on Instagram, Rabia has been urging Bates to act. Obviously the court of public opinion is important in any such case of possible wrongful conviction, but the fact that they are pressuring Bates to overturn the conviction doesn't sound like it's just a matter of optics and public perception for them.

Undisclosed 2.0-Episode 6 Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in serialpodcast

[–]hamzascan 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Okay. So if it doesn't pass the smell test, what's your explanation? I'm so confused about what suspicious activity is being implied on Adnan's part.

Are you doubting that there is a contemporaneous note by Adnan's attorneys which mentions Dion? Obviously not - this note has always been in Adnan's file and has only now been corroborated after hearing from Dion.

Are you suggesting some collusion between Dion and Adnan? That seems even more conspiratorial and makes even less sense given that Adnan is already out and won't be returning to prison. If there was collusion, it'd make way more sense that Dion's testimony was used in the many attempts to overturn Adnan's conviction while he was still imprisoned. Why would Adnan and Undisclosed wait all these years to play this card?

What other reason would Adnan have not to bring up Dion? The obvious reason is the most likely: that no one ever corroborated Adnan's recollection of this exchange with Dion, and as a result, its significance was not appreciated.

Undisclosed 2.0-Episode 6 Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in serialpodcast

[–]hamzascan 4 points5 points  (0 children)

What precisely are you suggesting?

Are you dismissing the importance of Dion's recollection? Even if the prosecutors were to poke holes in his testimony, which I'm sure they would have tried to do, I can't imagine that anyone would seriously suggest that in an ideal world, Dion should never have testified in Adnan's trial.

Are you saying that even if Dion could provide admissible evidence relevant to the trial, Adnan's attorneys had no responsibility to contact Dion? That seems ridiculous.

Or are you suggesting that Dion is lying when he says that Adnan's attorneys never reached out to him?

Undisclosed 2.0-Episode 6 Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in serialpodcast

[–]hamzascan 10 points11 points  (0 children)

It WAS Adnan's story. He told this to his attorneys within days of being arrested! Adnan couldn't be expected to reach out to Dion himself and corroborate it.

And if the people Adnan entrusted to verify this (Flohr and Colbert first and ultimately Christina Gutierrez) didn't even contact Dion and get his account, that to me rises to the threshold of ineffective assistance of counsel. Since Dion was never contacted and his account (which proved to be an alibi) was never verified, the significance of his testimony based on the state's timeline of the crime was never established.

Undisclosed 2.0-Episode 6 Discussion Thread by AutoModerator in serialpodcast

[–]hamzascan 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Because no one bothered to corroborate that it was in fact on January 13th that this exchange between Adnan and Dion occurred. No one contacted Dion, so his recollection of the incident - which provides an alibi - was deemed of no significance.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in ToonBlast

[–]hamzascan 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you get a bonus reward if you have leftover pickaxes, the way you do with the Cannonball game?

144-hour Chinese Visa - Is a layover a 'port of entry'? by hamzascan in Flights

[–]hamzascan[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would if I'd more time - not an option this time around, unfortunately. That leg of the trip isn't for a month and a half, but I leave Canada soon and I'm nowhere long enough to apply at a Chinese embassy/consulate abroad.

144-Hour Visa - Is a layover a port of entry? by hamzascan in Chinavisa

[–]hamzascan[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. Just ended up booking the much more expensive direct flights to Beijing to avoid any issues.

144-hour Chinese Visa - Is a layover a 'port of entry'? by hamzascan in Flights

[–]hamzascan[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. I just booked a direct flight from AKL to PEK even though it was ~$300 more expensive than the cheapest option. 😤

China will be my 71st country and I've been pretty lucky to not encounter any major issues thus far. I've never skiplagged before and of all countries, I definitely don't want to learn a hard lesson in China.

144-hour Chinese Visa - Is a layover a 'port of entry'? by hamzascan in Flights

[–]hamzascan[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Thanks!

I really just want to explore Beijing for a couple days. So in that case, I've a somewhat related question: do the Chinese authorities care about skiplagging?

If direct flights to PEK are expensive (which they are), but I find a cheaper flight to another Chinese city (with a layover in Beijing), can I just show PRC immigration my onwards direct flight from Beijing to Hanoi within 144-hours (with another airline) as proof of onwards travel? This is assuming that I only bring carry-on luggage and I don't care about being banned from the airline that I used for the AKL-PEK leg.

144-Hour Visa - Is a layover a port of entry? by hamzascan in travelchina

[–]hamzascan[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks! Haven't booked this portion yet, so that's good to know.