And for the unaware, he likely resigned so he couldn’t be forced to aid in his own prosecution. Basically, a police department can force an officer to testify against themselves as long as they want to remain a cop. The department basically goes “we’re making your testimony a condition of your ongoing employment. So testify or be fired.” As long as he remains a cop, he doesn’t have a 5th amendment right to remain silent.
By quitting, he’s able to clam up and not aid in any investigation. And since he was given the option to resign instead of being fired, he can simply wait for it to blow over then get the same job in the next city over.
The fact that there’s an investigation to be done is why I fucking hate cops. What investigation? He was literally caught on his own camera trying to murder an innocent person. An acorn hit the car? Fuck kind of excuse is that? I would get the death penalty if I killed someone with that pitiful excuse. People who are given a position of authority over others should be held to a higher standard, not a lower one. I’ll never trust a cop for as long as I live because of this shit.
That’s why there’s an “investigation.” Because The SCOTUS was lied to, unintentionally by anyone alive at the time, in 1982 during Harlow V Fitzgerald.
Holy fucking shit, I hadn’t actually seen the video until now. I’d put a bullet in my brain if I had to live with that embarrassment. At least Taylor Swift is richer than God and she can just pay someone else to feel bad about flying everywhere.
I still can’t believe that there are not just a few, but many cops that such bad trigger discipline and common sense. This guy shouldn’t be allowed near any guns, let alone as a police officer.
His dick got leaked, that’s the news… Reminds me of
Sexual intercourse. That’s the answer for all of these. Every single one of you that uh “oh if you had 24 hours with me what would you…” Sexual intercourse. Every single time. We don’t need to do any more. All done. You’re so hot. Hubba hubba. Wanna have sex. That’s it. No more. The dude that’s like “Oh if I brought you Domino’s and I worked at Domino’s what would you do?” I’d take the pizza and I’d have sex with you. Cause you’re so attractive. The girl “If I worked at Starbucks and I gave you your drink that you paid for but I looked at you, what would you do?” Intercourse. I would take you to the back and have intercourse, because I can’t resist you. Okay? We’re all done. There’s no more. What more do we n- I need to fucking delete this app dude.
Ever talk to someone about politics only for them to come to a dead stop? They reached the end if their script. I’ve had so many unwilling conversations with right wingers regurgitating what they just heard without actually thinking about what they’re saying.
I don’t think it’s just right wingers, I’ve seen people that just regurgitate information in most social groups I’ve been in, including lefty communities.
I’m just speaking from personal experience and using right wingers as the ironic example as the Manospere is what popularized the term. I’ve also had this experience with tankies as well. The Lazerpig vs Lira debate where Lira was absolutely running off a dialog tree he made is another example.
Information is fine. A lot of people just regurgitate talking points and clearly have no idea what they mean. I call it bumper sticker politics, and both sides are guilty of it (“Go woke go broke!” “Corporations aren’t people!”). If your entire belief structure can be boiled down to one sentence that you don’t even understand, you are not helping.
Sure but the difference is NPCs do not have the capacity for thought. These people have the biological capacity yet choose not to use it. That’s a huge difference. Most of these idiots if they had been raised properly would be just as varied and dynamic as you or me.
They’re not fundamentally different than us, they’re just mentally stunted by their upbringing. We shouldn’t think of them as a lesser class of human beings, because we all know where that train of thought takes us.
You may be overthinking the idea. Referring to someone as an NPC is just a shorthand to describe people who fit into the crowds, who don’t make real impressions on you, who really don’t have anything to contribute to your life, but who likely contribute a whole lot to the people in their lives.
You’re an NPC to almost everyone, just as everyone is an NPC to almost everyone else.
You can’t always drill down into people’s personalities to give them real unique identities in your mind.
It’s like walking into a crowd during a concert. Everyone else is an NPC to you except the couple people you went with.
Yeah and I’m saying that’s a dangerous mental habit to fall into. Keep in mind that all people are people, and at least have the capacity for rich, varied, interesting lives and thoughts and emotions. You don’t have to care about them, but keep it in mind.
Oh man, that’s nothing. Did you know that during her song Style she takes a random man from the crowd, assigns them new pronouns, and transitions them into a femboy?
The phone number is 4 digits. I realize we added area codes. I didn’t realize we had already done it once before that wet the other 3 digits.i wonder if they still have a xxx-xxx-3577 phone number floating around the company somewhere
I guess it worked in that it’s an orange frog, but the style is completely different and it’s not a realistic drawing of a real species the way the OP was.
The way myself and my party does it is we play every other week on Saturday from 6pm to 10pm. This way everyone knows the schedule and can plan around it. If people can’t clear their schedule to play then we replace them. It’s harsh but it’s the only way I found to play D&D consistently.
And I myself have excused myself from a game because my life schedule changed and couldn’t keep the commitment I had previously and it would be too much work for the rest of the party to change their schedules.
Harsh but fair. It ensures that everyone can work their schedule out in advance, while also presenting clear expectations for participating in a voluntary hobby. Is there a consecutive number of missing sessions before being replaced? If not, how does the DM work it out in the campaign?
You have to be harsh, otherwise nobody gets to play. When we started our new group we made sure to inform everyone that playing DnD is not to be treated as a secondary hobby that can just be canceled for other stuff all the time. Make it your priority, plan other things around the sessions if you want to play with that group. Of course, any emergencies excluded but otherwise treat it as if it is your sport club training. If you miss too many sessions, you’re out.
I know this sounds super arrogant and mean, but it’s the only thing that works consistently. Also filters out friends who are not ready or able to commit that much time for playing.
I only run west marches style games now. The pcs need to be back in town by end of session or miss out on carousing or possibly worse depending on where they are. Each game is self contained so people can drop or join as they want.
Yeah this convo is either saying they’re going to a bar which can be fun. Or they’re 18-22 and drinking is as much about buying the alcohol as it is imbibing it.
I have two small friend groups of four and in both is someone who often works weekend, so that’s always fun trying to plan something, let alone if I want to have both groups somewhere. It was honestly a miracle I could get all 6 of them in one place at the same time somewhat close to my birthday.
Plan the activity with a smaller group than you would want initially. Then invite others to an already organized event and rely on fomo to get people to go. Works great.
I wouldn’t pretend it’s not something terrorists would do. I think what people are upset about is more like: let’s assume that there is a terrorist HQ being run in a school. Let’s also assume their are innocent people of any and all ages in that same school. Finally, let’s assume there are only two options to deal with the terrorist HQ (there could be others in reality but for this exercise there are only two options).
Option a) bomb the school, injuring and killing everyone inside. Option b) a specialized operation that will only target the terrorists but may result in casualties to your army.
People, and myself, are upset that the option being chosen seems to overwhelmingly be option a, the indiscriminate injury and death of everyone in the building whether innocent or terrorist. No judge and no jury for anyone involved, only death.
For me at least, this cartoon is not pointing out that terrorists would run an HQ in a school. It’s pointing out that currently the IDF cannot, or will not, see past the fact that this is still a picture of a school. It may contain a terrorist HQ, but it’s not a building labeled “terrorist HQ” with the sole function of being a terrorist HQ. This is a picture of a school that may also house a terrorist HQ. And that is a very very important distinction that seems to be wildly ignored.
Hamas wants to lure them into a ground war where they can also ensure the maximum amount of martyred. Hamas is causing these deaths. No one is safe either way. It’s a war zone. Hamas is shooting people that are fleeing.
For option b) you have to get your army to the target. Through terrorists hiding among civilians, through ide’s that are hidden along the way, through civilians that do not like you. And if you miraculously survive this march without heavy casualties the Hamas is already gone and hide somewhere else…not to forget the civilian casualties that would happen on the way…
The problem with this: Option b is not realistically an option. The whole point of Hamas hiding in civilian infrastructure and mingling with civilians is disguise. Or to put it another way: to make option b completely unfeasible. How would you identify Hamas members? Do they wear their bright orange terrorist uniform? Can you spot them by their mean facial expressions? And there is another problem with option b. Civilians in the building naturally do not see the IDF as their saviors from Hamas oppression, so there is a high chance that some of them will suddenly turn into non-civilians. Which leads to an out of control scenario and resulting bloodbath.
Disclaimer: This is not meant as a justification of option a. I’m just pointing out that option b is not a realistic option.
What tells you that option b wouldn’t bring even more death and destruction? Special operations like black hawk down and the storm on faluja were some of the bloodiest parts of the respective wars.
War crimes don’t cancel each other out or something. You don’t add up the war crimes each side has committed and then if they’re equal everyone calls it fair game.
You don’t get to measure one against the other and then, if the other side turns out to have done “more war crimes” then you’re exonerated. That’s not how that works.
International law seems to disagree with this. If you use a civilian building to perform military actions, you make it a military building. Not saying that the situation is not messed up, I also think Isreals response is is disproportionate. But how crazy does one have to be to use their own women and children as meat shields?
Equally, are we going to pretend that bombing a school which is not a Hamas HQ and then, after the news comes out that they killed 10s of children, telling us it was a Hamas HQ is not something the IDF would do?
Does it really makes sense to trust the guys who chose to blow up a building full of children when they give us an unverifiable self-serving justification for their action?!
Even if you are partisan and in your heart of hearts feel deeply that Israel are the good guys, how can you be sure they’ve investigate enough and know with enough certainty that that’s a Hamas HQ to take a decision that they know is highly likely to result in dead children as collateral damage (assuming you are unable to question the morality of those who think dead children as collateral is acceptable)?
The Death Penalty in the the US has a huge system in place not just to judge a possible perpetrator but also of appeals to try and make sure a single person is not executed if he or she turns out to be innocent and even then death is a highly exceptional and rare penalty, so how would it be fine to kill a bunch of innocent children on a non-existent standard of proof (the killers are judge, jury and executioner) that their school contains a Hamas HQ, with no appeals, no independent verification, no nothing but the word of the very people who think dead children is morally accepetable as collateral.
The point being the implied extraordinary difference in the value of innocent human life under even the American system in States that have the Death Penalty (who value it less that most of the Western World which does not have the Death Penalty in great part because even in the best system with such penaly innocents die) and that of the IDF which will blow up Palestinian children and then state it was a Hamas target, the system for determining that being opaque and without independent oversight (i.e. they care very little with avoiding taking innocent lives).
And my argument is even assuming the claims of those places being high value Hamas targets are believed genuine by those making them rather than the claims being just “easy excuses” used quite independent of reality: I’m merely just pointing that if you genuinelly want to avoid kill innocents whilst trying to get the guilty you have quite a complex process to avoid as much as possible that errors happen, and external oversight to avoid that bad people bypass or abuse the power to kill innocents.
You’re right, trust the Islamic jihadists who have stolen so much aid from their own people that the UN had to step in and stop providing.
The leadership of Hamas was on Lebanese TV the other day saying they know civilians will die because of their actions, they intend on attacking again and again regardless of that. I’m paraphrasing but it was pretty wild to see.
I dont trust either of them. Honestly if there werent us citizens their we should probably just stay out of it. On one side you have the oppressive idf and on the other you have people who are not just trying to liberate Palestinians but are also killing people regardless of their copability in their oppression. Why cant we just agree that both are bad?
You generally (it depends by country) don’t get paid anymore between 6 and 12 months. But you still have a job. So when they get tired of using her womb like clown car, they could back to work. Also is usually (again varies by country) shared parental leave. So between both parents up to the maximum allowance.
That’s a good point, but for Sweden, it is indeed 480 paid days. It’s a government calculation related to your income and there is a point (after 390 days) where it drops to the minimum payout, but it is still paid leave.
There are also government-mandated options in Sweden to receive a slightly lower pay in exchange for working fewer hours. I don’t have the exact details here, but it’s something like 75% pay for 75% hours.
Pretty incredible coverage for new parents in that specific country.
This article has a great summary for a lot of European countries’ parental leave laws. And yeah, quite a few are less than a year of paid leave:
Canadian here. I signed a contract with 4weeks of vacation that was changed to ‘unlimited’ this year. So far I’ve taken 5 weeks and have a 6th week approved in November.
I haven’t used any sick days but they’re unlimited. If you take more than 3 in a row, you need a doctors note.
15 weeks parental leave that can be split between partners (father can use none/some/all to look after child while mother goes back to work)
My state now has mandatory parental leave, about a year after me and my wife had decided that we didn’t want more kids. Oh well. At least people in the future will benefit.
Even if I were it wouldn’t apply in this case. Having a society with programs like this in place helps everyone even indirectly. I am fine with greed as long as it goes beyond basic right in front of you.
We all benefit from a better world. Sure some more than others but all at least some.
Yeah, this kinda shit is fucking hilarious but people don’t realize it. There’s this corporate training BS called Kaizen where they take a lot of normal Japanese words like 無理 (muri) and associate weird Eastern mystic significance to them.
Literally just means “impossible” and is frequently used in slang to be like “no no no I couldn’t possibly [talk to that hot guy]”. Having it put up on a slide and presented by some white dudes in suits who were nodding solely and talking about the secret Japanese knowledge was just too much to bear.
I fucking hate Kaizen. I had to go through it as part of a job placement program and was convinced it was a cult. Like no, I am not going to call “Leaving a reminder for myself” a Gemba. I’m calling it a note because the japanese didn’t fucking invent the idea of writing things down for later.
Manga are a kind of comic, they’re just pretty specific about their format and choices. Anime is a kind of animated cartoon, it’s just specific about its choices. Even “coming from Japan” isn’t a requirement as long as it follows those traditionally(-ish) Japanese choices.
Eh, there’s different schools of thought. Artists like Junji Ito or Kabi Nagata make stuff very different from the usual manga, but they’re still called “manga”. In the same way, Radiant isn’t considered a manga by many even though it’s so close to the actual ones it even got an anime.
I mean yeah. Most people define genres or categories using association, and they can become a gooey mess at worst. I’ve been arguing for structured definitions for years, but it’s a lost cause. I still believe I am the only person who has a completely sane definition for “role-playing game”. But I digress, fam. ^^
Personally my first thought hearing “RPG” is the classic game with various characters, skills, level system and tons of enemies, but there’s a lot of games that don’t fit this definition that are still RPGs
I’m not sure if I want to go into the full thing because people tend to get defensive about their preconceived notions and make a big, heated argument about it. But I will say this: game genres are defined by gameplay— not by content, by visuals, by storytelling style, or by similarities with other games people assume to be in that genre.
As simply as I can put it— and hopefully not opening up a huge can of worms— I define a role-playing game as a game in which your character(s) play one of several roles, meaning “classes”— each with their own stats and abilities that play differently and support the character(s) differently. You can have a single-character game where the character can choose one or more classes, or you can have multiple characters that each have their own classes, or you can have multiple characters that can choose between their classes. That makes D&D, Pokémon, Kingdom Hearts, Dark Souls, Final Fantasy XIII, and honestly a bunch of multiplayer shooters, etc., RPGs. That does not make Zelda or the first Dragon Quest/Dragon Warrior RPGs.
So the biggest problem with humans and categorizations is that humans are highly assumptive, seeing surface-level features and defining items by those, and defining items by outward similarities with other items that they already assume to be of that category. Because of this, what a lot of people do is confuse the adventure genre— games that use exploration, puzzle-solving, and key items in order to progress— and role-playing games, which almost always are adventure games as well. D&D? Both RPG and adventure. Final Fantasy XIII? RPG but not adventure. Zelda? Adventure but not RPG. But in most cases, RPGs are also adventures; so a lot of people through association mistakenly think games with common adventure elements are simply RPGs.
I know a lot of what I’m saying is going to fly over many peoples’ heads, and they’ll go crazy in the comments. Let’s see how long I can ignore them for the sake of my own sanity…
I can imagine not considering the first Dragon Quest an RPG would create a lot of discussion, I can’t really speak for that since I haven’t played it but I guess some of the “canons” must’ve been missing since it used a password system.
Would Dark Souls count as an RPG in your definition? There’s no definite classes but you’re definitely shaping up your character to be a Warrior, Mage, and so on.
I added Dark Souls into the list before I saw this comment; because usually when I talk about this subject, I list it. I try to use variety in my examples, but I just forgot for a moment about listing Dark Souls ^^
Wikipedia is written by humans, a.k.a. non-objective people, which is why they call it “duodecimal counting” instead of “dozenal counting” and used to have Talk wars on that page about it. The irrational side won.
If a game has classes like I said before, then it’s a class-playing game, a.k.a. RPG. Something can be a roguelike but not an RPG. Also “roguelike” is a pretty dumb name for a genre and itself causes a lot of problems, but I digress.
It’s just one of many genres/subgenres that has one groundbreaking game/saga as origin and all the games that took inspiration from it, like Metroidvania or Soulslike. Just creating a new term for each of them would make initial discussions much weirder, although it would probably be clearer later on (nowadays most people that know what a Roguelike is don’t even know “Rogue” is an actual game)
This dude has really drank the kool aid. Imagine being tricked into thinking that you need an imaginary black belt to do root cause analysis and participate in a project
You say that probably because many components in it look like common sense.
“Duh, of course the response to a problem should be to rectify it” (simplifying slightly)
Lots of companies don’t though. Or they jump to a conclusion about the best solution. Or some middle manager decides he knows what’s best and then proceeds to break things.
It’s quite useful to have a philosophy that gives authority to non-traditional but logical steps.
I mean, that’s what people do with models and methodologies right? In my language English terms are used when using an English methodology.
Kaizen comes from Japan, was developed in Japan, and it was quite successful there. It’s not that strange to copy it word for word.
The idea behind it is quite different from what tends to happen in traditional Western companies. Since companies want to be better than their competitors and organizational change is hard, it makes sense to look for ready-made tools, rather than try to reinvent the wheel.
Of course, since (organizational) change makes many employees nervous, depending on how the organization goes about it Kaizen could get a bad name.
lemmyshitpost
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.