On the one hand, you don’t really want to give people the power to decide what books are available. Assholes would use that to remove queer books, for example.
On the other hand, that power is already implicitly in place. There’s finite space in a library, so they must choose a subset of all possible books. I’d want to know how the existing processes work before suggesting changes.
Reminds me of a long road trip I took in my youth. After a couple days we were basically speaking in in-jokes
This joke is why I will say to DMs getting railroad-y, “are you sure you wouldn’t rather write a book?”
Well, we were literally walking in Manhattan when it came up, and couldn’t take the euclidean straight path. We could only walk on the grid of streets.
(This is setting aside factors like waiting to cross, or a busier street)
Interesting. The inability to pan and walk around makes it very different. I liked “walking” around in geoguesser until I found a landmark or something, but I never played competitively or obsessively.
I worked in a grocery store that had a little pizza making section. End of the day they’d throw out a lot of pizza. Management absolutely did not want employees to grab some at the end of the day.
Well, I was friends with the guy who worked there so he’d “throw it out” into my possession. I had a lot of free pizza back then.
Nowadays there’s an app “too good to go” where you can get cheap food at the end of the day from places. Not as good as free, but like four slices of pizza for $5 isn’t bad.
On the one hand, fuck the police and all that.
On the other, I want people who park in the bike lane to suffer
I’m the kind of guy who will look stuff up. I think it’s really important to admit when you’re wrong and the other person was right. Don’t move goal posts or claim you misunderstood. Just own it.
Like I was having a debate with my partner about if it was faster to go all the way up and over, or make a lot of turn-right then turn-left. I thought the ladder was faster because it approximates a straight line. She was like no that’s crazy. Eventually I found that’s called Manhattan distance and she was right, and I fully admitted defeat.
I’m ready for that style of language to be passé. But probably the next slang will also be unpleasant.
As others have said, working from home has many benefits
The commute alone is pretty big. If your commute is like an hour, that’s changing your salary from like $x / 10 hours to $x / 8 hours. That’s a big bump. If your daily pay was $1000, that’s like going from $100/hour to $125/hour.
No disagreement here.
I realized when reading one of the other comments that my similarly sized complaint is it creates a lot of potential for problems at the game level as well as narrative when people make their characters in isolation. I kind of assumed that comes packaged with “and you all meet in a tavern”.
Like, everyone makes a fighter and shows up to session 1. The dm’s going to have a head scratcher thinking about balance, and some players might be annoyed they don’t really have a niche of their own. A weird party like that can work, but it’ll be a happier experience if folks talk about it ahead of time.
It can work, as clearly shown by your rather wholesome example and many people’s games. But it’s also leaving a very large surface area for problems. Unlike real life, you can just avoid that by making your characters together.
Maybe I should have said in my previous thread that while the “you all meet for the first time” is kind of cliché, there are more serious problems at the game level. And like it can work if everyone makes a fighter, but you can also make everyone’s lives easier if you discuss up front.
They don’t care about the snow. They care about getting people mad at their enemy. The post, and conservatives more generally, are bad,. dishonest, people.
Conservatism is exclusively about in-group. Everything else is a post-hoc justification. They’re just less, I don’t know, morally developed. Like children.
So as a senior, you could abstain. But then your junior colleagues will eventually code circles around you, because they’re wearing bazooka-powered jetpacks and you’re still riding around on a fixie bike
Lol this works in a way the author probably didn’t intend. They are wearing extremely dangerous tools that were never really a great idea. They’ll code some circles, set their legs on fire, and crash into a wall.
I think the best game I’ve done started as “it’s a DND world and you’re a band on tour”.
It started with a simple “the bridge is out on the way to your next show”, then there was a battle of the bands, a sketchy record label, and then the players organized a recall of the mayor that was in bed with the capitalists. That game went great places.
Yeah I don’t think I would happily play another “and then you all meet for the first time and work together” game unless it was like intentionally subverting the trope. It adds so many problems and suspension of disbelief problems.
Snapshot tests are an anti-pattern. Easy to use, lead to problems.
They do not encode intent. Everything in the snapshot is equally weighted. Your test will fail the same way if your copy changes or your HTML structure, but one of those is probably way more important. Assert on what’s important.
They discourage thinking about what you’re doing. Suppose you have an API that returns information about a user and their pets. Your first integration test adds a user to the database, makes a request, and looks at the response. You could just brainlessly snapshot the response, but the user PK in the response might not always be the same. People are going to try to snapshot the response anyway.
Humans are lazy, and they won’t read the diff carefully. This is especially true if the diff is large or complex. Doubly so if you have a great number of these. They’ll go “oh yeah I changed this component so it should have changed. Accept changes” and move on. No one wants to look at 40 large dozen line diffs.
If you have your code set up to arrange and then act, you’re like 80% of the way there to writing a normal set of asserts.
I would never recommend snapshot testing.
Not good.
They could be ignorant and not understand how politics affects pretty much everything.
They could be foolishly cynical and think that “none of it matters”, so they just don’t pay attention.
They could be like pathologically avoidant and don’t want to talk about a potentially disharmonious topic.
They could have shitty views they don’t want to talk about.
Not good. Not good people.
So far as I know it’s available in a bunch of regions: https://www.toogoodtogo.com/en-us