Same reason so many white people aren’t interested in minority rights, or rich people aren’t interested in poor people’s rights: it doesn’t directly benefit them and at some level they understand many of their privileges require an underclass to support them. Giving women the tools, voices, and rights to contribute equally takes away men’s control of women and access to free labour.
I watched it, but honestly it’s still far, far too much for just the Hobbit. 4 hours, I think? I’m pretty sure I could just read the book in that time.
I don’t know about best but I sure as hell remember it: When I was 13 I was at a wedding and an very drunk old man gave me some sage advice completely unprompted - “when you have sex don’t fuck her in the ass, you’ll get poop everywhere”.
So if I say I have a pet gamer does that mean gamers are normally pets? If I say I have pet giraffe does that mean giraffes are normally pets? No, obviously not, because that’s not how language works.
Ah, you’re a world of imagination type. Sorry, I operate in real world effects, not in theoretical constructs that are totally different except for in what they actually do.
I think it would be completely fine to block manosphere influencers, antivaxers, holocaust deniers and white supremacists from entering like that so I have to agree that stopping pro-Palestinian activists is also fine.
One of these is not like the others - grow some fucking morals.
Because it’s not particularly encouraged by the game. Like you can, they give you the tools, but theres a bunch of stuff you can get earlier with perfect parrying, or is gated behind it entirely, so you feel like you should be doing it.
Personally I found a mod to make the parry and dodge windows a little longer so I could reliably hit them, after which it became much less frustrating.
How dare you, middle mouse is the only acceptable keybind for grenades. Side is for melee.
PF2e relies a lot more on tactical decisions than 5e, so I’m not certain how well the mod works depending on the other systems it has to lean on - missing mechanics can wildly unbalance the maths due to the assumptions it’s built on.
Assuming it is fully implemented though, flanking, feinting, or another way of applying off-guard to an enemy would increase that 65% chance to 75%. Intimidating the enemy can push it up to 80 or 85%. Maybe have an ally aid the attack and get up to 95%. Crits also change gameplay quite a bit due to the 10 over/under conditions. A 65% chance to hit contains a 15% chance to crit, 75% a 25% chance, 85% a 35% chance, so the additional misses get balanced out by the additional crits beyond 5e’s static 5% chance. A single character generally doesn’t have enough actions to apply everything themselves though, so you have to coordinate actions across the whole team to be effective rather than each member being an individual powerhouse.
You don’t see how changes like that, extending the minimum time to be considered for parole (I.e released), would in practice extend a sentence?
Sorry, rereading I was completely unclear about which case I was refering to, and got my conflicts of interest mixed up - I meant the proscription judgement (https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2026/721?query=AMMORI&court=ewca%2Fciv) and Johnson wasn’t on this panel, his judgement is just based on it. The Suffragettes actions are specifically brought up as “civil disobedience” rather than “direct action”, which is a distinction the proscription kinda hinges on.
I find these comments really weird. “Look, I totally understand, but here’s a big list of things that show I don’t understand it at all. Like even a little bit. No, I won’t do any introspection and wonder if I might not actually understand”.
You might want to read the judgement then, because Johnson has a very different understanding - he very specifically names the Suffragettes as not being terrorists, despite their use of public and personal bombings and arson attacks to intimidate and influence policy. The law is not being applied equally, it is being used as a bludgeon against those who oppose genocide.
If the aggravating factor is added it will have an impact on the conditions of their parole, not the sentence itself
Where did you get this idea from? Aggravating and mitigating factors specifically apply to the length of the sentence in UK law.
The Gamers is a D&D movie made for $1000, and I honestly like it more than honour among thieves. It’s a movie about playing TTRPGs rather than a D&D themed action-fantasy, and I’d love to see the same thing done with a much bigger budget.
Started dating one of the other leaders while working on an international youth camp, but kept it on the down low so the kids wouldn’t realise. The kids didn’t actually realise we were dating but were still convinced we’d make a cute couple, so would try and convince us to ask each other out while we’d brush them off with excuses about just being coworkers and not thinking the other person liked us that way.
On the final day as we were leaving we said our goodbyes, got our respective kids onto their buses heading in opposite directions, and then kissed in full view of all our kids before getting on ourselves. I jumped on my bus and one of my kids angrily hissed “YOU LIED TO US” at me before I got the barrage of questions about how long and what happened.
The international element turned out to be too much for us, but it was a nice relationship while it lasted.
Worked in a restaurant as a teen, in a kitchen that opened onto the bar area, so the head chef was working directly next to where customers entered. The head chef specifically requested this set up because he liked to talk and customers gave him more people to talk to, but it also gave the rest of us a front row view of complainers getting ripped apart. I watched him spend 10 minutes in the middle of service picking every scrap out meat out of a pasta dish and pile it into a roughly steak shape to prove to a whiny customer there was plenty of beef in her dish.
Anyway, the really good ones where when people responded that they knew/would complain to the owner, as he’d call “the owner” then dramatically overact answering his own phone and having a conversation with himself about if he knew them. I’ve heard he’s started doing a stupid double act with his daughter now she works there, but only sporadically visit now so I haven’t been able to see it.
Kirk lived in vast wealth and luxury, and then died quickly, and his story is over. I don’t believe in Hell, so as far as I’m concerned, he escaped justice, scot-free.
Don’t try to bring me into this, you’re the one focusing on Kirk, I focused on the victims. There is no “we”, it’s all you.
It’s weird how every time a company does something they’re known for doing and it’s badly received they claim it was an unintentional rollout.