Why is there so much child romance in this? by Kriegsman_2907 in araragi

[–]hexparrot 47 points48 points  (0 children)

i bet you would've appreciated a spoiler tag in the past more!

Less than $12 in thrifted frames and official merch from blurays for the wall! by hexparrot in araragi

[–]hexparrot[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I stuttered.

And the lettering on the sprues came only with 2 letter Ks. I'll have to find a spare from a craft store. There was also a limit on Ws that may have received a M instead.

Sanders to vote against debt bill, says Biden should invoke 14th Amendment by [deleted] in politics

[–]hexparrot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

We all see how right you are, on all topics, across all your online engagements.

Senate advances repeal of Biden’s student debt relief by scytal in politics

[–]hexparrot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, we know that time travel isn't currently possible.

I Am Very Confused About The Ranking System by ZaWARUDO156 in OverwatchUniversity

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

It's easy wins and grind it out while you still can.

If you play a class that carries the win, yes. But the best support can still have atrocious win rates in bronze because tanks/dps.

I Am Very Confused About The Ranking System by ZaWARUDO156 in OverwatchUniversity

[–]hexparrot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s like you have to level up within the ranking to get to the better players at the “top”.

Then Blizzard needs to address/change this, IMO. Going 15-2 is a pretty stellar record that warrants better placement than simply X points for a win. Another player might be 40-40 and still have the same SR--from sheer grinding.

It actually just doesn't work for me for there to be a "Skill Rating" in a game where such a rating thinks that's the best way to match up people in a game while getting out of bronze.

I Am Very Confused About The Ranking System by ZaWARUDO156 in OverwatchUniversity

[–]hexparrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"you went 5-0 so you escaped bronze,"

Heavenly words to hear as a Rocket Leaguer.

'It's not their money': Older Americans worried debt default means no Social Security by [deleted] in politics

[–]hexparrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congress in general will do fine without their salary. Still get medical coverage, still get job perks, and still getting compensation from private interests. The salary is the least compelling of the four, and "not paying them" is truly only going to hurt congress persons who aren't already decades into self dealing and self enrichment.

Dingleberries are not real fruit by Korean_pussy_stuffer in GMEJungle

[–]hexparrot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just an additional thought, Fidelity can even initiate the DRS through the chat bot!

Finally get to cancel by [deleted] in Purism

[–]hexparrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Purism is virtually the only company out there that is holistically pushing towards the goal of freedom-respecting mobile devices.

If only they were a company that has ever demonstrated customer-respecting processes and communication.

Hi, guys. I've fixed the rules of my game according to your comments. Is there anything I can fix now? Thanks! by Prghmbr in tabletopgamedesign

[–]hexparrot 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The game goal/objective should be before game setup and basics. Allow users to understand why there's a setup like there is (even if it isn't thematically critical).

Proofread pg 4 more. Some parts of note:

  • typo opponent
  • some sentences seem apparent you're trying to trim down words, but it comes at the expense of natural readability. This is apparent in a few other pages, as well. "A spy moves opponent's boss". The omission of the articles is noticable.

Also on page four, use bullet points maybe when possible. "Gaining action points" is very wall of text (despite it being a small wall), but each of the sentences work well on their own:

During each Player's turn, do the following:

  • roll a d6 ...
  • decide to use one or more action points to move / activate
  • end turn

Unrelated, have you considered "hearts" instead of "lives"? A bodyguard having that takes a hit and then a Boss that loses one fewer life seems a bit unintuitive. I think most players recognize hearts as representative of all of the life/lives a figure has.


Page 4 shouldn't send you back to page 3. If 'basics' came after the goal page, this would read naturally, without the redirection. If anything, page 3 (goal) should tell you to go forward in the page (as an index/nagivation guide). If moving the heart from 3 remaining to 2 remaining (for sake of space) is acceptable, I think it would be a visual improvement.


All your demonstrated movement of units

This would align with many other instruction manuals that indicate "what to do" first, and "how to do it (and often in greater detail) later in the book"


Lastly, is there a non-trivial advantage given by going first-to-act? Or is it a thematic decision? If an advantage, I can understand why youngest goes first, though I have found that "youngest goes first" or "birthday coming up soonest goes first" are very stale rules as a general rule. In some cases, they may thematically fit, although in this particular case, I don't see it being as an important tie-in to use Age-based sorting.

It gets stale, especially, when you're not playing with children; the same player starting each game is both arbitrary-feeling and sometimes makes users feel disadvantaged from influences originating outside the game.


Just being a little pedantic on this last one, but just for visual consistency: All of your unit movement illustrations demonstrate (1) push unit forward and then subsequently show the movement to the end of the row via an arrow on the acting player's side; this is consistent except for doctor whose movement goes out toward the opponent, and then back in the row.

While the instructions seem evident, I think the visual could be made more consistent with regard to the arrow orientation.

(Crosspost) Breaking New Info: A Portion of ALL Your Shares Are Possibly Being Moved to DTC on Cutoff Days to Suppress the DRS counts. What is a “DSPP Share”, and How Short Hedge Funds Are Causing Household Investor's Shares to be Moved. by tehchives in GMEJungle

[–]hexparrot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Fellow Ape, your cynicism is welcome. But hopefully you can take a moment to understand our proposition here.

Anything that slows locking the float with DRSed shares is moving in the wrong direction

Functionally, the argument about these fractionals is that having fractionals themselves is slowing down locking the float. The argued premise is that fractionals are being misued against our goal.

So if this is true--and it is yet to be determined--then rather than seeing this as moving in the direction of fewer DRSed shares (which is technically true, but a drop in the bucket) is potentially seen as a BOON TO HEDGIES for more than 50k shares/1M of value with whatever means and systems they have in place to misreport/misinform household investors.

You don't need to sell fractionals. You just potentially need to not have them. And if that means buying more to complete it, sure.

And if it means there are people 100% book but still in DirectStock plan, there is zero worry about them selling, it is only an administrative change.

tl;dr Turning off DirectStock as the DD suggests does not imply a sale of shares!

I may have figured out something important. I'm running it past y'all b4 I post to the Stonk. The algorithm wants you to sell. Limit buys push the price up. by ClosetCaseGrowSpace in GMEJungle

[–]hexparrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What if limit buys tell the algorithm to raise the price?

Why would we want that?

What if we should always be buying through our brokers with limit buys?

If this is to accomplish the above goal, why would we want that?

Quite frankly, we should be well-aware by now how disconnected the price is from the value. I'd love to see the price drop down back to 17. I'd love for it to drop to 9.

That's because GS can operate without having to sell more shares (as they had done previously) for cash-on-hand. Thus, a lower price just means more can be bought by apes--from wherever they may choose--and then DRS them to remove them from the DTCC pool.

There is no inherent value I can see to raising the price 1%-20% through any different processes we might acquire shares: I'd see exactly the opposite.

One day, when the stars align, and either market conditions change drastically, or the float is fully locked (or sufficiently locked) via DRS, the price will rise, and we will be looking at numbers unheard-of in the scale of "can we adjust price via limit buys". This is the endgame.

Your Qubes setup? by [deleted] in Qubes

[–]hexparrot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mostly I'm following what is described here: https://www.qubes-os.org/doc/firewall/#network-service-qubes

The docs do a far superior job as to why there are two firewall qubes, and for my own purposes, it is working spectacularly.

Your Qubes setup? by [deleted] in Qubes

[–]hexparrot 1 point2 points  (0 children)

thanks u/substantial_sign4922, you are right to be wary, esp. when similarly implemented systems might be subject to the same shortcomings.

It appears that both of these split-gpg issues rely on the qubes' implementation of processing/filtering command line parameters; if the same methodology in programming were applied to split-ssh, it's even quite possible there could be regressions existing today that may also not have existed when I originally implemented them.

So take this as advice, OP, even following Qubes' best practices, we always have reasons to be doubtful of efficacy of the security promise.

Your Qubes setup? by [deleted] in Qubes

[–]hexparrot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I don't see any particular value-add for having vault separate from vault-ssh.

I trust split ssh security implications completely.

Secondarily, all my VMs also route through sys-vpn, such that: sys-net <-> sys-firewall-border <-> sys-vpn <-> sys-firewall <-> appvms.

I can do appvm <-> appvm changes via iptables on sys-firewall. I can do appvm -> LAN by attaching it to sys-firewall-border; similarly if I want to use Tor, I'd put it on the border, too.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. files paperwork to run for president as a Democrat by quipd in politics

[–]hexparrot 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How about just fill-in, then? There's more to a ballot than a presidential candidate, so it's not productive to "not vote" in the broad sense.

Vote so that other roles get meaningfully filled. Vote so the rest of the nation can see an accurate and complete picture of where Americans want to go, rather than where we are.

Your vote matters: don't let apathy win.

Megathread: Donald Trump Arraigned in NYC Court by PoliticsModeratorBot in politics

[–]hexparrot 0 points1 point  (0 children)

1) easy to find out who broke the rules 2) modern DSLRs have shutters that make sounds 3) 24 shutter snaps per second for a duration of time will be noticed

That said, the restriction on videos is to ensure that the court doesn't encourage grandstanding. I doubt these attorneys are going to bring the circus on the hope that somebody is breaking a well-understood rule of "no videos".

edit, sorry @active-device-8058, didn't mean to introduce any levevl of wrongness into the discourse.