That actually made me think about what the dragon pendant represents to the dragon wearing it, and if it’s very different from the cameo pendants we have. Also, I’m not sure if this is your work, but I don’t mean to disparage it. It just made me think of all the different icons we wear, and icons of people are so uncommon.
As for what I’d wear, after I’ve gotten past my initial thought, probably one representing my wife or kids.
This makes me want to get a necklace with a human pendant on it.
If someone is behaving poorly, there are two broad reasons. They know and are choosing to (for some value of choosing) and they don’t know and are doing it anyway. If someone is being a dick and doesn’t realize why they’re being a dick, pointing it out can cause them to realize they’re being a dick, at which point they can choose to stop (again, for some value of choosing) or they can not, which puts them in category of knowing and choosing to. All that assumes that they accept your assessment of the situation is correct.
Now, as for your specific alternative? Having been in this type of situation, I would go with something along the lines of, “Aww, honey that sucks. Let’s stop arguing about how your feelings about the state of the kitchen aren’t my problem. Now, do you want cuddles before or after I tidy the kitchen, and where does chocolate and/or ice cream fit into this process?” Now, granted, my wife has learned to accept that my stupid, overly-specific ass is just that and is willing to say things like that on occasion since subtle is only a theoretical concept around here.
Because is not an answer. Because can be the first word in an answer, but if nothing is provided afterwards than the answer is essentially, “I believe it to be so, and I choose to provide no evidence whatsoever to support that belief.” And how do you move forward from that? In fact, your specific statement I responded to was
“Because youre doing it”
What kind of response can be made to that? There is no example, merely an assertion. There is nothing specific, merely a general response. What kind of resolution besides complete capitulation or parting ways can be made based on this statement? In fact, if I was given that response in a conversation and was feeling combative, I would be inclined to respond with, “Who’s stonewalling now?” And, given how I put because in quotes, implying a complete statement, I could argue your response to my previous comment was gaslighting.
Now you’ve determined that your partner is a poor communicator, because “because” is never a useful answer. Now your question is whether to try to work with your partner to improve communication, or give up on an adult whose communication skills haven’t advanced beyond those of a child in first grade.
Here’s a link to an article talking about it, including a small list of materials and if they will lose or gain electrons. I found that with a quick search, more or better ones can be found, I’m sure. I chose this one because it has the split between gain and loss, which others don’t.
Edit: working link
Yeah, it really depends on the location. Both heating and cooling batteries are a problem where I live, and these batteries would need a lot more protection where I live.
And it is an option. It’s just completely orthogonal to what is being discussed here.
The point of going low density is to reduce cooling requirements. Cramming them into a shipping container is the exact opposite of that.
And since IQ is a statistical measurement, about 65% of people are within 1 standard deviation of average, and hence are identical under casual observation. So, for all practical purposes, most of the people you meet are average, and the rest are split between above and below.
Which is why most comedians aren’t known for being mathematically inclined.
There is Fossify Messages. A caveat. Fossify is a fork of some apps that were abandoned or had the license changed. After that happened, they were unmaintained for a while. That appears to have changed somewhat, but it has been 2 months since the last update on F-Droid.
First entertainment purposes only is corporate language for gives the wrong answers and don’t want to lose the lawsuit if we tell people to trust it. Just like Fox News.
This is intentional behavior on the part of Sxan, and he’s fairly consistent about it. I don’t agree with his reasons, but he has the right to believe what he does and write how he does. I don’t begrudge him making people spend additional mental effort reading it, and most days it doesn’t bother me. I don’t have the energy today, so stopped reading after the first thorn.
I realize there are benefits to attacking Iran, but it’s still wrong.
Ive always thought of it as more of a shot against the man than the woman. In your example, the man slept with someone he normally wouldn’t, for whatever reason, and only recognized that fact once his desire for sex was satisfied. The woman didn’t change in the entire situation.
Likewise, I’d say my choices in this area were poor, but had nothing to do with looks.
State-run prisons where labor can be required would also qualify as slavery by any definition.
The notwithstanding clause can’t negate any part of the constitution, but that is a distinction without a difference. That said, it does make it easy to call any politician who uses it a slimy piece of shit and have something to refer to for why you believe that. Not that I would ever call a politician a slimy piece of shit - our slander laws in Canada do not have a clause to use the truth as a defense.
Jokes are funny, which he is not.
AR without cameras is kind of pointless, imo. The creep factor is huge, though. It would be reasonable (not easy, but reasonable) if people could curate what information about themselves was available to whom, but that would preclude the corporations having access to whatever information they could glean about everyone. And if they have it, why couldn’t they provide it to whoever is willing to pay them a small monthly fee for it?
Until that problem is solved, AR is going to be a very tough sell.
I find people who say this don’t properly account for their time waiting at lights. Sure, you may be going faster when you aren’t stopped, but you will catch those reds more often and will be stopped longer, reducing those average speeds. Which is the entire point of the article.