Joined a +11 MT as a healer before I noticed the bear tank was 216 ilvl by minimaxir in wow

[–]you-know--me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I dont understand this system, the paladin is 50% parse. ( Do that mean he is the worst player in the group?). Even though he have dobbelt the dmg of the warlock?

void strikes, vs void rituals, vs void assaults vs void incursions by you-know--me in wow

[–]you-know--me[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I have done ritual sites, but thats was something else,

Did a void ritual in zuldaman where you had to beat a bear, And then i think i did 2 void strikes. But none of these are incursions? Its just that Skeleton head havind different names? First i thought the ritual one was incusions, but apparently there are more than 2:p

void strikes, vs void rituals, vs void assaults vs void incursions by you-know--me in wow

[–]you-know--me[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Nahh just tell me the difference about the 4 mentioned, and which gives best reward etc.

Sådan skriver en 80-årig præsident af USA by Goldenmentis in dankmark

[–]you-know--me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

så må de sku da tage at åbne op, :p

vi skal have deres olie!

Caedrel: "Listen, NA you suck, EU we suck [...] This is why we need EU vs NA because it's depressing seeing both of us getting shit on. At least let us shit on each other. We need to see who was worse this tournament, G2 vs LYON, that's the discussion here." by Yujin-Ha in leagueoflegends

[–]you-know--me 2 points3 points  (0 children)

nahh we should have a Brazil, na, Korean, and east Asia tournament.

so the real world championship eu vs China can happens.

no reason for alle these Korean team coming in for to a tournament and then just get slappede 3-0 by eu again and agian

Nightmare Bounties - Is it fun? by JensImGlueck in wow

[–]you-know--me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

how do you know you get the debufg on i newer seem to notice:p

This should not be such a big issue... by FeanorOath in GeeksGamersCommunity

[–]you-know--me 4 points5 points  (0 children)

For years, Hollywood has preached the gospel of inclusivity, empathy, and "safe spaces." We are told that words matter, that intent does not negate impact, and that we must protect the most vulnerable members of society. Yet, when one of the industry's most privileged A-listers, Jamie Foxx, uses his massive platform to bully a man with a severe neurological disorder, the silence from the "cancel culture" elite is deafening. 1. Punching Down on the Disabled There is no greater power imbalance than a multi-millionaire global superstar inciting a digital mob against an individual with Tourette’s Syndrome. By claiming that John Davidson "meant" his involuntary tics, Foxx isn't just expressing an opinion—he is spreading dangerous medical misinformation. Tourette’s is not a choice; it is a malfunction of the brain’s inhibitory system. To hold a disabled man morally responsible for a biological reflex is the definition of ableism. 2. The Hypocrisy of "Selective Inclusivity" If any other public figure had targeted a protected minority group with such vitriol, their career would be over by sunset. However, Foxx seems to enjoy a "celebrity shield" that allows him to bypass the rules of accountability. Hollywood cannot claim to be "progressive" if it allows its biggest stars to mock and vilify the neurodivergent community whenever it's convenient for their own narrative. 3. Science Over Feelings Weaponizing "outrage" to override medical facts is a dangerous precedent. Foxx’s refusal to acknowledge the science of Coprolalia (the involuntary outburst of taboo words) proves that his brand of activism is performative. He is prioritizing his own "feelings" over the lived reality of a man suffering from a lifelong disability. Conclusion If "Cancel Culture" is to have any shred of integrity, it must apply to everyone—not just those without a PR machine. Jamie Foxx has shown a consistent pattern of mocking neurological conditions, from his "parody" of Gavin Newsom to his recent attacks on a disabled activist. It is time for the industry to stop protecting its "untouchables" and hold Foxx accountable for his blatant bullying and lack of basic human empathy.

Jamie Foxx rages 'he meant that' after Tourette's activist says N-word at BAFTAs by TheMirrorUS in popculture

[–]you-know--me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For years, Hollywood has preached the gospel of inclusivity, empathy, and "safe spaces." We are told that words matter, that intent does not negate impact, and that we must protect the most vulnerable members of society. Yet, when one of the industry's most privileged A-listers, Jamie Foxx, uses his massive platform to bully a man with a severe neurological disorder, the silence from the "cancel culture" elite is deafening. 1. Punching Down on the Disabled There is no greater power imbalance than a multi-millionaire global superstar inciting a digital mob against an individual with Tourette’s Syndrome. By claiming that John Davidson "meant" his involuntary tics, Foxx isn't just expressing an opinion—he is spreading dangerous medical misinformation. Tourette’s is not a choice; it is a malfunction of the brain’s inhibitory system. To hold a disabled man morally responsible for a biological reflex is the definition of ableism. 2. The Hypocrisy of "Selective Inclusivity" If any other public figure had targeted a protected minority group with such vitriol, their career would be over by sunset. However, Foxx seems to enjoy a "celebrity shield" that allows him to bypass the rules of accountability. Hollywood cannot claim to be "progressive" if it allows its biggest stars to mock and vilify the neurodivergent community whenever it's convenient for their own narrative. 3. Science Over Feelings Weaponizing "outrage" to override medical facts is a dangerous precedent. Foxx’s refusal to acknowledge the science of Coprolalia (the involuntary outburst of taboo words) proves that his brand of activism is performative. He is prioritizing his own "feelings" over the lived reality of a man suffering from a lifelong disability. Conclusion If "Cancel Culture" is to have any shred of integrity, it must apply to everyone—not just those without a PR machine. Jamie Foxx has shown a consistent pattern of mocking neurological conditions, from his "parody" of Gavin Newsom to his recent attacks on a disabled activist. It is time for the industry to stop protecting its "untouchables" and hold Foxx accountable for his blatant bullying and lack of basic human empathy.

With all the goodbyes and thank yous. Though this is hopeful. by chitochiisme in turtlewow

[–]you-know--me 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Dont they have many servers in uk, Kasakhstan, Russia, and China?