Varyk

I used sink plungers in toilets pretty much my whole life until i scrolled across a similar diagram one day and discovered the truth.

What happened in the vegan community?

I hadn't heard about any of this until seeing that ToS post.

i like watching "making-of" or "behind-the-scenes" featurettes and documentaries about the behind the scenes machinations of movie making, but in terms of literature, I'm not sure what to look for if i want to learn about the process Martha wells went through to conceive the murderbot diaries, for example.

i can search for making-of The Matrix and find documentaries, but not making-of project hail Mary and find similar literary results.

is there a section of literature like this?

should i be reading annotated editions?

thanks

the car models can be whatever, I'm just curious if anyone is dressing up their cheap cars as expensive ones or if this is an industry yet?

is there a legal hurdle?

is there a limit to car decision in general?

is this sort of car case business already a thing?

Also, thank you for posting and commenting and making such an exciting community thrive!

I keep seeing him but can't figure out his role in the memes. Is it random like the orb thing?

Update: thank you everyone! user @Today has provided a great link of a discussion that suggests the correct answer is where being an abbreviation of, whereas as a replacement of since, hypothesized in these comments.

As I love archaic definitions, I'm more convinced to now that this is the answer!

Especially since the question originates from one weirdo using "where" instead of since.
https://english.stackexchange.com/questions/338694/is-it-ever-appropriate-to-use-where-instead-of-because-or-since

Like "Where we knew he was heading to Chicago tomorrow, we got on the first plane heading east to intercept."

"Where we knew where the safe was, we began to cut through the wall in the corner behind her desk."

Thanks

This is the first I've heard of it, but here's one of his infamous quotes:

"There is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity, maybe it’s a kind of lack of generosity towards non-Jews.

I mean, there’s always a reason why anti-anything crops up anywhere; even a stinker like Hitler didn’t just pick on them for no reason.”

His other quotes tend to be condemnation about specifically Israeli zionism and barbaric murder, but i don't have context as to whether he's referring to palestine or not. Some people might have more sympathy for these statements these days, but a lot of his other quotes have to do with Jews controlling money and media, less defensible prejudice.

I haven't met anyone yet who does and I haven't read any good endorsements about foldable phones but I keep seeing advertisement for foldable phones.

Thanks

TLDR: I loved Borderlands two and I'm going to start a replay with a different character, which i almost never do.

I had fun with Borderlands 1, but was basically pushing through by the end trying not to fall asleep.

B2, on the other hand, I was very engaged in the entire ride through, although it seemed well balanced and the game ended when it should, even including the side quests.

Improvements -

The writing! I think I heard a reference to Anthony Burch writing in Borderlands 2 from hey ass. Whatcha playing episode, and he got some award?

Experience tiers, which I didn't initially like because it wasn't explained, but basically the quests are more important than farming enemies for experience, so you get much more engaged with the stories because you're following quests instead of trying to kill enough boring enemies in the same way to get high enough of a level to destroy future enemies.

In any case, the writing that I did like in Borderlands 1, was perfect in 2. Not too long, always funny, always engaging, every character very well defined, which brings me to my next point:

The voice acting was hilarious and perfect, again, very well defined and idiosyncratic for every character, just so much fun to listen to. Every time handsome Jack pops up. It's fun to listen to him be an a******.

The quests were so much more satisfying. At the end of the first game, I was basically just following marker to marker without caring what anybody said or what was written down just tapping through to the next wavepoint until the quest was finished.

In Borderlands 2, Even if I accidentally clicked through the introduction to the quest, I would go back and make sure to read because I know that the paragraph introducing and explaining the quest is funny and that the quest is going to be rescuing lab experiments and I have to find a particular valve or putting together a treasure map with a weird lure, rather than just find the bigger bad guy punch him to death.

Driving was huge - I was not into driving in Borderlands 1 and got really bored and irritated every time I had to drive. I felt like the aiming system was complete dog s***, and it was just not very fun to drive around in general, like the handling was terrible.

I loved driving around the Borderlands too and was actively bummed out whenever. I didn't get a car, but it made perfect sense and they used the car just enough so that the game wasn't too easy. But you could still boost and race around however you wanted, or chase down a beer van. So much fun driving, such a huge improvement from the first game.

Larger levels with more interesting landscapes in them, each level felt much more unique than the entire The first game to me, like each area had its own style to a degree I hadn't seen before.

I can't remember a single place from the first game, but I'm going to remember the different style of the underground bug. Bunker and the dust and all these other places that had an impact on the personality of the game.

Lastly, art is more efficient, not as many bold lines emphasizing the comic book quality, which is carried through more by the personality of the game instead of by the specific art.

TLDR: there are no qualifying limitations on presidential immunity

Not only does any US president now have complete immunity from "official" actions(with zero qualifying restrictions or definitions), but if those actions are deemed "unofiicial", no jury is legally allowed to witness the evidence in any way since that would interfere with the now infinitely broad "official" presidential prerogatives.

Furthermore, if an unofficial atrocity is decided on during an official act, like the president during the daily presidential briefing ordering the army to execute the US transexual population, the subsequent ordered executions will be considered legally official presidential acts since the recorded decision occurred during a presidential duty.

There are probably other horrors I haven't considered yet.

Then again, absolute immunity is absolute immunity, so I don't know how much threat recognition matters here.

If the US president can order an action, that action can be legally and officially carried out.

Not constitutionally, since the Constitution specifically holds any elected politician subject to the law, but legally and officially according to the supreme court, who has assumed higher power then the US Constitution to unconstitutionally allege that the US President is absolutely immune from all legal restrictions and consequences.