Left 4 dead mercy hospital
Left 4 Dead 2
2009.06.03 14:27 weiran Left 4 Dead 2
Left 4 Dead series related. Please refer to the sidebar for communities/rules.
2008.10.01 09:59 Left 4 Dead
2013.06.22 03:40 Left 4 Dead
A subreddit dedicated to the Left 4 Dead game series!
2023.06.08 00:12 Brand-berry98 I seriously hate the Starbucks right next door to my office
 | There’s a Starbucks next to my vet office and my coworkers and I usually order from it a lot. Lately especially after becoming a partner part time I’ve noticed the drink quality here is so bad and have avoided ordering from here as much as I can. My manager treated everyone to a drink today and half of our drinks looked like this. Especially the matchas. We had 4 drinks in our mobile, ordered 15 minutes ahead and she even tipped. This is how 3/4 of the drinks looked, 3/4 of them being matchas and one caramel macchiato. I hadn’t even taken a sip yet and it was missing so much liquid in the drink. It was a standard matcha with brown sugar. Brown sugars shaken espressos are made as lattes there, refreshers aren’t shaken, dead shots in drinks, ingredients missing in drinks. Today was the final straw and I wanted to go in there and demand our drinks remade but my manager at my other job said no since she’s the one that placed the mobile order. I just felt bad bc everyone’s drinks were messed up and she deserves to get what she paid for for all of us. submitted by Brand-berry98 to starbucks [link] [comments] |
2023.06.08 00:11 sulvester10 Dish spotted on the ohio River around cincinnati
 | submitted by sulvester10 to Dish5G [link] [comments] |
2023.06.08 00:10 clientjb7 Does HOSAS or HOTAS work better than kbm in dogfights? (And other questions)
This is an opinion question, so i appreciate any feedback. Im considering getting some high end sticks (virpil) because the idea of having a flight sim sounds really cool and i think my kids would love it, but i question whether this would provide better performance for me in dog fight situations since im in my 40s and have been using kbm my whole life.
1) is the transition fairly easy to go from keyboard mouse to using sticks? (Especially wanting to know if people who have used keyboard mouse for 25 years can make this transition easily)
2) do people find that HOSAS setups work better (accuracy on aiming and orbiting a target) than KBM?
3) For HOSAS users, what is the right and left sticks controlling?
4) For HOSAS users, are petals in your armament and what does that control?
Thanks for any feedback. Im not a great player, and i dont think a couple sticks will make me a great player, but with practice, im wondering if i can get better, and whether HOSAS will give me more accuracy or not. I would hate to get them and then choose to use keyboard mouse over dual sticks because im better at it. Just wanted to hear others thoughts. Thanks
submitted by clientjb7 to starcitizen [link] [comments]
1) is the transition fairly easy to go from keyboard mouse to using sticks? (Especially wanting to know if people who have used keyboard mouse for 25 years can make this transition easily)
2) do people find that HOSAS setups work better (accuracy on aiming and orbiting a target) than KBM?
3) For HOSAS users, what is the right and left sticks controlling?
4) For HOSAS users, are petals in your armament and what does that control?
Thanks for any feedback. Im not a great player, and i dont think a couple sticks will make me a great player, but with practice, im wondering if i can get better, and whether HOSAS will give me more accuracy or not. I would hate to get them and then choose to use keyboard mouse over dual sticks because im better at it. Just wanted to hear others thoughts. Thanks
2023.06.08 00:10 ConfusedCrohnie2 Is my new gastroenterologist pushing for unnecessary gastroscopy and colonoscopy?
Background: F27. Diagnosed with TI Crohn’s disease in March this year. 5'9", 200lb.
Currently on 30mg Prednisolone, 150mg Azathioprine, Resprim Forte 1/day (sulfamethoxazole 800mg, trimethoprim 160mg), and various antibiotics for an infection.
I was diagnosed with TI Crohn’s in March of this year after a colonoscopy and gastroscopy. The question I have is more about the possibility of coeliac disease, though, so I didn’t add too many details about my Crohn’s treatment. Apologies for the long post, it’s been a confusing few months and I don’t know which details you need.
In summary: I had a colonoscopy and gastroscopy done by a GI who diagnosed me with Crohn’s and also mentioned possible coeliac. I got a new GI who says the quality of the original scopes wasn’t good enough and she needs to repeat them to get a clear answer on the Coeliac and also to better assess the Crohn’s. I’m wondering if this makes sense.
More details:
I had the colonoscopy and gastroscopy done on February 23rd this year.
In my follow up consultation after the scopes I was diagnosed with Crohn’s and my GI mentioned they also found signs of possible coeliac and sent me to get a coeliac serology test. In the email to my GP he wrote: “Duodenal biopsies were suggestive of possible coeliac disease with moderate villous irregularity and intraepithelial lymphocytosis. Gastric biopsies were normal without any evidence of coeliac disease.”. I’d previously had a coeliac serology done back in December which was negative (AGA IgG = 4.1, TTG IgA = 6).
The next coeliac serology was done on the 15th of March, and it also came back negative (AGA IgG = 1.7, TTG IgA = 5). Coeliac genotyping was positive so that couldn't be used to rule it out.
It may be important to note that from Feb 6th to Feb 23rd I was eating very little gluten (was on a strict low FODMAP diet).
I decided to switch to another GI for my Crohn’s treatment because I didn’t feel like the original one was communicating with me well. I saw the new GI on May 18th and she made some changes to my Crohn’s medications and told me she would need to redo the scopes at some point (but didn’t say why) and asked me to get some blood tests.
Last week I ended up in the ED for an infection. While I was there a GI from the hospital came and saw me and he read my previous scopes histology reports and he told me “you probably have coeliac”. They put me on a gluten free diet for the rest of my short stay.
I had a second appointment with my new GI yesterday and she told me she’s not sure whether I have coeliac or not because the quality of the scopes I got was not good enough, so she needs to redo them. She is pretty sure I do have Crohn’s but also wants to check that out for herself too.
So these are my questions: what could have been wrong with the scopes/biopsies for them to be invalid somehow, is it just bad luck or did my original GI potentially mess up? Or is my new GI possibly pushing for unnecessary scopes? Also, would the fact that I was on a very low gluten diet for a few weeks prior to the scope affect anything or make the duodenal and gastric biopsies invalid or something? Why might the doctors at the hospital have been fairly confident that I have coeliac but the other GIs aren’t?
I would obviously much rather not have coeliac but my Crohn’s inflammation is minimal at the moment according to a CT scan last week so I’m wondering whether my continued symptoms could be due to something else.
submitted by ConfusedCrohnie2 to AskDocs [link] [comments]
Currently on 30mg Prednisolone, 150mg Azathioprine, Resprim Forte 1/day (sulfamethoxazole 800mg, trimethoprim 160mg), and various antibiotics for an infection.
I was diagnosed with TI Crohn’s in March of this year after a colonoscopy and gastroscopy. The question I have is more about the possibility of coeliac disease, though, so I didn’t add too many details about my Crohn’s treatment. Apologies for the long post, it’s been a confusing few months and I don’t know which details you need.
In summary: I had a colonoscopy and gastroscopy done by a GI who diagnosed me with Crohn’s and also mentioned possible coeliac. I got a new GI who says the quality of the original scopes wasn’t good enough and she needs to repeat them to get a clear answer on the Coeliac and also to better assess the Crohn’s. I’m wondering if this makes sense.
More details:
I had the colonoscopy and gastroscopy done on February 23rd this year.
In my follow up consultation after the scopes I was diagnosed with Crohn’s and my GI mentioned they also found signs of possible coeliac and sent me to get a coeliac serology test. In the email to my GP he wrote: “Duodenal biopsies were suggestive of possible coeliac disease with moderate villous irregularity and intraepithelial lymphocytosis. Gastric biopsies were normal without any evidence of coeliac disease.”. I’d previously had a coeliac serology done back in December which was negative (AGA IgG = 4.1, TTG IgA = 6).
The next coeliac serology was done on the 15th of March, and it also came back negative (AGA IgG = 1.7, TTG IgA = 5). Coeliac genotyping was positive so that couldn't be used to rule it out.
It may be important to note that from Feb 6th to Feb 23rd I was eating very little gluten (was on a strict low FODMAP diet).
I decided to switch to another GI for my Crohn’s treatment because I didn’t feel like the original one was communicating with me well. I saw the new GI on May 18th and she made some changes to my Crohn’s medications and told me she would need to redo the scopes at some point (but didn’t say why) and asked me to get some blood tests.
Last week I ended up in the ED for an infection. While I was there a GI from the hospital came and saw me and he read my previous scopes histology reports and he told me “you probably have coeliac”. They put me on a gluten free diet for the rest of my short stay.
I had a second appointment with my new GI yesterday and she told me she’s not sure whether I have coeliac or not because the quality of the scopes I got was not good enough, so she needs to redo them. She is pretty sure I do have Crohn’s but also wants to check that out for herself too.
So these are my questions: what could have been wrong with the scopes/biopsies for them to be invalid somehow, is it just bad luck or did my original GI potentially mess up? Or is my new GI possibly pushing for unnecessary scopes? Also, would the fact that I was on a very low gluten diet for a few weeks prior to the scope affect anything or make the duodenal and gastric biopsies invalid or something? Why might the doctors at the hospital have been fairly confident that I have coeliac but the other GIs aren’t?
I would obviously much rather not have coeliac but my Crohn’s inflammation is minimal at the moment according to a CT scan last week so I’m wondering whether my continued symptoms could be due to something else.
2023.06.08 00:09 niad_04 4
4.1. Digital Signals and Gates
In a circuit, logic gates will make decisions based on a combination of digital signals coming from its inputs. Most logic gates have two inputs and one output. Logic gates are based on Boolean algebra. At any given moment, every terminal is either false or true (0 or 1).
The basic logic gates are AND, OR, XOR, NOT, NAND, NOR and XNOR.
4.2. The NOT Gate The logic symbol and the truth table look like this:
The NOT gate is a single input output gate. This gate is also known as Inverter because it applies an inversion of the applied binary signals. That means that a zero goes to one, and one goes to zero.
4.2. The ‘’Buffer’’ Gate The logic symbol and the truth table look like this: The ‘’Bufffer’’ Gate is a logic block that takes the input and compares it to zero. If the given input is equal to zero, the output will be 0. If the input is not equal to zero, the output will be 1.
4.3. Multiple-input Gates In the multiple-input gate there are multiple input terminals, which increases the number of input state possibilities. A two-input gate for example has 2 to the second degree of possibilities (00, 01, 10 and 11). A three-input gate has 2 to the third degree of possibilities (000, 001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, 111). This increase in the number of possible input states obviously allows for more complex gate behaviour, thus we have different types of multiple-input gates
4.4. TTL NAND and AND gates The logic symbol and the truth table look like this: The AND gate is a basic digital logic gate that implements logical conjunction from mathematical logic. A 1 output results only if all the inputs to the AND gate are also 1. When one of the inputs is 0, the output will always be 0. The NAND gate is a digital logic gate that has the opposite outputs compared with AND, hence the name NAND. A 0 output results only if all the inputs to the NAND gate are 1. When one of the inputs is 0, the output will always be 1. The logic symbol and the truth table look like this:
A Two-Input Inverter Circuit can work both as a NAND and AND logical gates, because of the outputs that it creates at the end:
3.6. TTL NOR and OR gates
The logic symbol and the truth table look like this: The OR gate is a basic digital logic gate that implements logical disjunction from mathematical logic. A 1 output results when one of the inputs to the OR gate is also 1. When both inputs are 0, the output will also be 0.
The NOR gate is a digital logic gate that has the opposite outputs compared with OR, hence the name NOR. A 0 output results when one of the inputs to the OR gate is 1. When both inputs are 0, the output will be 1. The logic symbol and the truth table look like this: A logical OR and NOR gates can also be made by the following TTL circuit. If input A is left floating (or connected to Vcc), the current will go through the base of transistor Q3, saturating it. If input A is grounded, that current is diverted away from Q3‘s base through the left steering diode of “Q1,” thus forcing Q3 into cutoff. The same can be said for input B and transistor Q4: the logic level of input B determines Q4‘s conduction: either saturated or cutoff. Notice how transistors Q3 and Q4 are paralleled at their collector and emitter terminals. In essence, these two transistors are acting as paralleled switches,
allowing current through resistors R3 and R4 according to the logic levels of inputs A and B. If any input is at a “high” (1) level, then at least one of the two transistors (Q3 and/or Q4) will be saturated, allowing current through resistors R3 and R4, and turning on the final output transistor Q5 for a “low” (0) logic level output. The only way the output of this circuit can ever assume a “high” (1) state is if both Q3 and Q4 are cut off, which means both inputs would have to be grounded, or “low” (0). This circuit’s truth table, then, is equivalent to that of the NOR gate: In order to turn this NOR gate circuit into an OR circuit, we would have to invert the output logic level with another transistor stage, just like we did with the NAND-to-AND gate example: 3.7. CMOS Gate Circuitry Combinations of n- and p-channel transistors allow the construction of logic building blocks. The inverter, NAND, and NOR logic building blocks are the backbone of most digital logic families. Two primary connections are the two- input NAND gate and the two-input NOR gate. CMOS circuits aren’t plagued by the inherent nonlinearities of the field-effect transistors, because as digital circuits their transistors always operate in either the saturated or cutoff modes and never in the active mode. Their inputs are, however, sensitive to high voltages generated by electrostatic (static electricity)
sources, and may even be activated into “high” (1) or “low” (0) states by spurious voltage sources if left floating.
submitted by niad_04 to u/niad_04 [link] [comments]
In a circuit, logic gates will make decisions based on a combination of digital signals coming from its inputs. Most logic gates have two inputs and one output. Logic gates are based on Boolean algebra. At any given moment, every terminal is either false or true (0 or 1).
The basic logic gates are AND, OR, XOR, NOT, NAND, NOR and XNOR.
4.2. The NOT Gate The logic symbol and the truth table look like this:
The NOT gate is a single input output gate. This gate is also known as Inverter because it applies an inversion of the applied binary signals. That means that a zero goes to one, and one goes to zero.
4.2. The ‘’Buffer’’ Gate The logic symbol and the truth table look like this: The ‘’Bufffer’’ Gate is a logic block that takes the input and compares it to zero. If the given input is equal to zero, the output will be 0. If the input is not equal to zero, the output will be 1.
4.3. Multiple-input Gates In the multiple-input gate there are multiple input terminals, which increases the number of input state possibilities. A two-input gate for example has 2 to the second degree of possibilities (00, 01, 10 and 11). A three-input gate has 2 to the third degree of possibilities (000, 001, 010, 011, 100, 101, 110, 111). This increase in the number of possible input states obviously allows for more complex gate behaviour, thus we have different types of multiple-input gates
4.4. TTL NAND and AND gates The logic symbol and the truth table look like this: The AND gate is a basic digital logic gate that implements logical conjunction from mathematical logic. A 1 output results only if all the inputs to the AND gate are also 1. When one of the inputs is 0, the output will always be 0. The NAND gate is a digital logic gate that has the opposite outputs compared with AND, hence the name NAND. A 0 output results only if all the inputs to the NAND gate are 1. When one of the inputs is 0, the output will always be 1. The logic symbol and the truth table look like this:
A Two-Input Inverter Circuit can work both as a NAND and AND logical gates, because of the outputs that it creates at the end:
3.6. TTL NOR and OR gates
The logic symbol and the truth table look like this: The OR gate is a basic digital logic gate that implements logical disjunction from mathematical logic. A 1 output results when one of the inputs to the OR gate is also 1. When both inputs are 0, the output will also be 0.
The NOR gate is a digital logic gate that has the opposite outputs compared with OR, hence the name NOR. A 0 output results when one of the inputs to the OR gate is 1. When both inputs are 0, the output will be 1. The logic symbol and the truth table look like this: A logical OR and NOR gates can also be made by the following TTL circuit. If input A is left floating (or connected to Vcc), the current will go through the base of transistor Q3, saturating it. If input A is grounded, that current is diverted away from Q3‘s base through the left steering diode of “Q1,” thus forcing Q3 into cutoff. The same can be said for input B and transistor Q4: the logic level of input B determines Q4‘s conduction: either saturated or cutoff. Notice how transistors Q3 and Q4 are paralleled at their collector and emitter terminals. In essence, these two transistors are acting as paralleled switches,
allowing current through resistors R3 and R4 according to the logic levels of inputs A and B. If any input is at a “high” (1) level, then at least one of the two transistors (Q3 and/or Q4) will be saturated, allowing current through resistors R3 and R4, and turning on the final output transistor Q5 for a “low” (0) logic level output. The only way the output of this circuit can ever assume a “high” (1) state is if both Q3 and Q4 are cut off, which means both inputs would have to be grounded, or “low” (0). This circuit’s truth table, then, is equivalent to that of the NOR gate: In order to turn this NOR gate circuit into an OR circuit, we would have to invert the output logic level with another transistor stage, just like we did with the NAND-to-AND gate example: 3.7. CMOS Gate Circuitry Combinations of n- and p-channel transistors allow the construction of logic building blocks. The inverter, NAND, and NOR logic building blocks are the backbone of most digital logic families. Two primary connections are the two- input NAND gate and the two-input NOR gate. CMOS circuits aren’t plagued by the inherent nonlinearities of the field-effect transistors, because as digital circuits their transistors always operate in either the saturated or cutoff modes and never in the active mode. Their inputs are, however, sensitive to high voltages generated by electrostatic (static electricity)
sources, and may even be activated into “high” (1) or “low” (0) states by spurious voltage sources if left floating.
2023.06.08 00:09 c5ly Is the game too easy?
I see a lot of discussion about things that need buffs, but IMO the things that need the most buffs are the mobs. The game is just way too easy. We already have a ton of maxed out characters after just a few days of playing... Is that not a concern in terms of design?
Maybe this game is just not for me. I don't want the experience to be just to put my brain on auto pilot while I crush everything and see big numbers, those numbers shouldn't mean anything in an ARPG. What I mean is that if the game is designed a bit differently, a level 1 monster should still pose a significant threat. What matters is what it feels like to interact with the monsters. You want to feel like you're progressing in power in terms of your gear and stats don't get me wrong, but what should matter so much more is that you should feel progression of your skill at playing the game. This is just my opinion, but I think it's a lot more fun when the monsters pose a big threat, and they need to continue to even after you're totally maxed out. It's Diablo... you should feel the dread of your next encounter, especially in the endgame even after you're "maxed out." Take Dead Cells for example, which I know is a super different game, but there are a ton of similarities. In that game you can get extremely powerful, but if you misstep at any point in the endgame you are punished hard, even by basic enemies, which really keeps you engaged and on your toes at all times. Diablo 4 doesn't punish you enough for playing badly. I've been watching a ton of players complain about how underpowered they feel, when it seems like they're just expecting things to play out like D3 and just crush everything. This might be an unpopular take, but I really feel like the concept of "blasting" is a super degenerate state of gameplay experience, and should be designed against. When you take on a Nightmare Dungeon, you should be in it for an hour or more, regardless of how maxed out you are, but where we're at is people are doing 10 Nightmare Dungeons per hour. I just think that the "nightmare" should really mean something.
I think the ways in which many different monsters interact with the player aren't super well thought out. The game needs telegraphing, but it's too easy. Most of the threat of the endgame scenarios has to do with CC chains, which is challenging at times, but possibly in the wrong way, as it just takes away your interaction, which isn't that fun. It's an action RPG, emphasis on action. The monsters need more dynamic and powerful actions other than freezing you, trapping you, stunning you, etc.. Maybe one of the scaling attributes they need to add to the mobs is the speed of their abilities, or a modifier to reduce the timing on their telegraphs. I think just giving the mobs more health is also a poor design direction, which instead should be more focused on your skill and understanding with how to out-skill the mob's move sets.
I think monsters should do way more damage than they do in the endgame and their spawn densities need to be adjusted to spawn less but those mobs should be very scary. When there is too much on screen it becomes much harder to parse, which means the design inevitably goes in a direction that doesn't require you to actually be able to see or understand everything going on, rather you just need to withstand it with stats and gear... It's just my opinion, but I don't find that very engaging or challenging in the right way.
submitted by c5ly to diablo4 [link] [comments]
Maybe this game is just not for me. I don't want the experience to be just to put my brain on auto pilot while I crush everything and see big numbers, those numbers shouldn't mean anything in an ARPG. What I mean is that if the game is designed a bit differently, a level 1 monster should still pose a significant threat. What matters is what it feels like to interact with the monsters. You want to feel like you're progressing in power in terms of your gear and stats don't get me wrong, but what should matter so much more is that you should feel progression of your skill at playing the game. This is just my opinion, but I think it's a lot more fun when the monsters pose a big threat, and they need to continue to even after you're totally maxed out. It's Diablo... you should feel the dread of your next encounter, especially in the endgame even after you're "maxed out." Take Dead Cells for example, which I know is a super different game, but there are a ton of similarities. In that game you can get extremely powerful, but if you misstep at any point in the endgame you are punished hard, even by basic enemies, which really keeps you engaged and on your toes at all times. Diablo 4 doesn't punish you enough for playing badly. I've been watching a ton of players complain about how underpowered they feel, when it seems like they're just expecting things to play out like D3 and just crush everything. This might be an unpopular take, but I really feel like the concept of "blasting" is a super degenerate state of gameplay experience, and should be designed against. When you take on a Nightmare Dungeon, you should be in it for an hour or more, regardless of how maxed out you are, but where we're at is people are doing 10 Nightmare Dungeons per hour. I just think that the "nightmare" should really mean something.
I think the ways in which many different monsters interact with the player aren't super well thought out. The game needs telegraphing, but it's too easy. Most of the threat of the endgame scenarios has to do with CC chains, which is challenging at times, but possibly in the wrong way, as it just takes away your interaction, which isn't that fun. It's an action RPG, emphasis on action. The monsters need more dynamic and powerful actions other than freezing you, trapping you, stunning you, etc.. Maybe one of the scaling attributes they need to add to the mobs is the speed of their abilities, or a modifier to reduce the timing on their telegraphs. I think just giving the mobs more health is also a poor design direction, which instead should be more focused on your skill and understanding with how to out-skill the mob's move sets.
I think monsters should do way more damage than they do in the endgame and their spawn densities need to be adjusted to spawn less but those mobs should be very scary. When there is too much on screen it becomes much harder to parse, which means the design inevitably goes in a direction that doesn't require you to actually be able to see or understand everything going on, rather you just need to withstand it with stats and gear... It's just my opinion, but I don't find that very engaging or challenging in the right way.
2023.06.08 00:09 bbgunbb Hemlock in raised beds--is it still safe to plant?
My partner and I moved into a new house with some raised beds left by the previous people who lived here. This spring we noticed what we thought initially was some kind of carrot growing in one of the beds--after it grew 4 feet tall we realized it was actually poison hemlock. I tore it out and am pretty sure I got the full taproot out, and then we planted a bunch of things in the bed. I didn't really think about it until I started reading more about hemlock and now I'm stressed that there are still some root offshoots left in the soil.
I'm wondering if it's still safe to eat the other plants in the bed. It's mostly greens and brassica veggies so nothing that resembles a carrot or parsley so I doubt we would misidentify if it grew back... thoughts?
submitted by bbgunbb to gardening [link] [comments]
I'm wondering if it's still safe to eat the other plants in the bed. It's mostly greens and brassica veggies so nothing that resembles a carrot or parsley so I doubt we would misidentify if it grew back... thoughts?
2023.06.08 00:09 IngenuityImaginary71 When a MH1 remake would drop.
1 Velocidrome
2 Iodrome (Poison)
3 Gendrome (Paralyze)
4 Cephadrome (Paralyze/Water)
5&6 Yian Kut-Ku (Fire) + Blue Yian Kut-Ku (Blast instead of Fire)
7 Yian Garuga (Fire/Poison)
8&9 Gypceros (Poison) + Purple Gypceros (Deadly Poison)
10&11 Basarios (Fire/Poison/Sleep) + Ruby Basarios (Blast/Deadly Poison/Sleep)
12&13 Gravios (Fire/Sleep) + Black Gravios (Fire/Blast/Sleep)
14&15 Khezu (Thunder) + Red Khezu (ThundeParalyze)
16&17 Monoblos + White Monoblos (Ice)
18&19 Diablos + Black Diablos
20&21 Plesioth (Water) + Green Plesioth (WateSleep)
22&23 Rathalos + Azure Rathalos (Both Fire/Poison)
24&25 Rathian (Fire/Poison) + Pink Rathian (Fire/Deadly Poison)
26&27 Kirin (Thunder) + Oroshi Kirin (Ice)
28&29 Lao-Shan Lung + Ashen Lao-Shan Lung (Both Dragon)
30 Fatalis (Dragon)
31 Crimson Fatalis (Blast)
(Ruby Basarios and Oroshi Kirin are 4th Gen)
Newer Monsters.
32&33 Espinas (Fire/Poison/Paralyze) + Flame Espinas (Fire/Blast/Sleep)
34 Nergigante (Dragon)
35&36 Odogaron + Ebony Odogaron (Dragon)
37&38 Quropeco (Fire) + Crimson Quropeco (Thunder)
39 Deviljho (Dragon)
40 new Flagship Monsters (Ice/Water)
41 new Endboss
5 Rare Subspecies
I want a slightly more basic but hard hitting MH again, which puts the focus on individual monsters that are not otherwise in the spotlight.
The endgame would use the subspecies as a sort of qurio/tempered mechanic.
Monsters like Elders or somekind like Brachydios could be a Title Update or something.
submitted by IngenuityImaginary71 to MonsterHunter [link] [comments]
2 Iodrome (Poison)
3 Gendrome (Paralyze)
4 Cephadrome (Paralyze/Water)
5&6 Yian Kut-Ku (Fire) + Blue Yian Kut-Ku (Blast instead of Fire)
7 Yian Garuga (Fire/Poison)
8&9 Gypceros (Poison) + Purple Gypceros (Deadly Poison)
10&11 Basarios (Fire/Poison/Sleep) + Ruby Basarios (Blast/Deadly Poison/Sleep)
12&13 Gravios (Fire/Sleep) + Black Gravios (Fire/Blast/Sleep)
14&15 Khezu (Thunder) + Red Khezu (ThundeParalyze)
16&17 Monoblos + White Monoblos (Ice)
18&19 Diablos + Black Diablos
20&21 Plesioth (Water) + Green Plesioth (WateSleep)
22&23 Rathalos + Azure Rathalos (Both Fire/Poison)
24&25 Rathian (Fire/Poison) + Pink Rathian (Fire/Deadly Poison)
26&27 Kirin (Thunder) + Oroshi Kirin (Ice)
28&29 Lao-Shan Lung + Ashen Lao-Shan Lung (Both Dragon)
30 Fatalis (Dragon)
31 Crimson Fatalis (Blast)
(Ruby Basarios and Oroshi Kirin are 4th Gen)
Newer Monsters.
32&33 Espinas (Fire/Poison/Paralyze) + Flame Espinas (Fire/Blast/Sleep)
34 Nergigante (Dragon)
35&36 Odogaron + Ebony Odogaron (Dragon)
37&38 Quropeco (Fire) + Crimson Quropeco (Thunder)
39 Deviljho (Dragon)
40 new Flagship Monsters (Ice/Water)
41 new Endboss
5 Rare Subspecies
- Molten Tigrex (Old Volcano)
- Moonlight Nargacuga (Old Jungle)
- Silver Rathalos (Verdant Hills)
- Golden Rathian (Old Swamp)
- White Espinas (Dunes)
I want a slightly more basic but hard hitting MH again, which puts the focus on individual monsters that are not otherwise in the spotlight.
The endgame would use the subspecies as a sort of qurio/tempered mechanic.
Monsters like Elders or somekind like Brachydios could be a Title Update or something.
2023.06.08 00:07 _Triple_ [STORE] 900+ KNIVES/GLOVES/SKINS, 50.000$+ INVENTORY. M9 Fade, M4 Poseidon, BFK Freehand, Crimson Kimono, Nomad Fade, Skeleton, Kara Lore, Bayo Autotronic, AWP Fade, Kara Damas, BFK Ultra, Kara Freehand, Kara Bright, M9 Damas, Omega, Tiger Strike, Flip MF, Bayo Tiger, Deagle Blaze, Talon & More
Everything in my inventory is up for trade. The most valuable items are listed here, the rest you can find in My Inventory
Feel free to Add Me or even better send a Trade Offer. Open for any suggestions: upgrades, downgrades / knives, gloves, skins / stickers, patterns, floats.
All Buyouts are listed in cash value.
KNIVES
★ Butterfly Knife Freehand FN #1, B/O: $2500
★ Butterfly Knife Ultraviolet FT, B/O: $822
★ Butterfly Knife Scorched FT, B/O: $616
⎯★ Bayonet Tiger Tooth MW #1, B/O: $1300
★ Bayonet Autotronic FN, B/O: $1050
★ Bayonet Tiger Tooth MW, B/O: $629
★ Bayonet Bright Water FT, B/O: $326
★ Bayonet Safari Mesh BS, B/O: $233
⎯★ Karambit Lore FT, B/O: $1110
★ Karambit Damascus Steel FT, B/O: $840
★ Karambit Freehand MW, B/O: $784
★ Karambit Bright Water MW, B/O: $759
⎯★ M9 Bayonet Fade FN, B/O: $1801
★ M9 Bayonet Fade FN, B/O: $1801
★ M9 Bayonet Damascus Steel FN, B/O: $751
⎯★ Nomad Knife Fade FN, B/O: $1156
★ Nomad Knife Slaughter MW, B/O: $544
★ Nomad Knife Blue Steel WW, B/O: $318
⎯★ Flip Knife Marble Fade FN, B/O: $646
★ Flip Knife Doppler (Phase 4) FN, B/O: $574
★ Flip Knife Gamma Doppler (Phase 1) MW, B/O: $552
★ Flip Knife Case Hardened FT, B/O: $257
★ Flip Knife Freehand FT, B/O: $255
★ StatTrak™ Flip Knife Bright Water FN, B/O: $287
⎯★ Huntsman Knife Lore FN, B/O: $461
★ Huntsman Knife Gamma Doppler (Phase 4) FN, B/O: $436
★ Huntsman Knife Doppler (Phase 3) FN, B/O: $353
★ Huntsman Knife Autotronic FT, B/O: $212
★ Huntsman Knife Bright Water FT, B/O: $129
★ Huntsman Knife Forest DDPAT MW, B/O: $129
★ Huntsman Knife Forest DDPAT BS, B/O: $123
★ StatTrak™ Huntsman Knife Rust Coat BS, B/O: $127
⎯★ Bowie Knife Gamma Doppler (Phase 2) FN, B/O: $375
★ Bowie Knife Gamma Doppler (Phase 1) FN, B/O: $363
★ Bowie Knife Tiger Tooth FN, B/O: $269
★ Bowie Knife Crimson Web WW, B/O: $192
★ Bowie Knife Bright Water FN, B/O: $159
★ Bowie Knife Ultraviolet FT, B/O: $126
⎯★ Stiletto Knife Slaughter FN, B/O: $616
★ Stiletto Knife Crimson Web FT, B/O: $412
★ StatTrak™ Stiletto Knife Night Stripe FT, B/O: $227
⎯★ Falchion Knife Lore FT, B/O: $214
★ Falchion Knife Autotronic FT, B/O: $192
★ Falchion Knife Scorched WW, B/O: $105
⎯★ Survival Knife Crimson Web BS, B/O: $216
★ Survival Knife Case Hardened FT, B/O: $198
★ Survival Knife Scorched FT, B/O: $111
⎯★ Shadow Daggers Fade FN, B/O: $368
★ Shadow Daggers Doppler (Phase 3) FN, B/O: $228
★ Shadow Daggers, B/O: $201
★ Shadow Daggers Damascus Steel FT, B/O: $108
★ Shadow Daggers Ultraviolet FT, B/O: $105
★ Shadow Daggers Black Laminate FT, B/O: $99
★ Shadow Daggers Forest DDPAT FT, B/O: $85
⎯★ Gut Knife Doppler (Sapphire) MW #1, B/O: $1700
★ Gut Knife Gamma Doppler (Phase 1) FN, B/O: $223
★ Gut Knife Marble Fade FN, B/O: $203
★ Gut Knife Doppler (Phase 2) FN, B/O: $191
★ Gut Knife Case Hardened BS, B/O: $127
⎯★ Navaja Knife Doppler (Phase 4) FN, B/O: $199
★ Navaja Knife Doppler (Phase 4) FN, B/O: $199
★ Navaja Knife, B/O: $138
★ Navaja Knife Damascus Steel FN, B/O: $111
⎯★ Classic Knife Urban Masked FT, B/O: $146
★ StatTrak™ Classic Knife Stained BS, B/O: $168
⎯★ Ursus Knife Doppler (Phase 3) FN, B/O: $476
★ Ursus Knife, B/O: $375
⎯★ Skeleton Knife, B/O: $1137
★ Talon Knife, B/O: $608
★ Paracord Knife, B/O: $305
★ Survival Knife Forest DDPAT FT, B/O: $97
GLOVES
★ Moto Gloves Transport MW, B/O: $204
★ Moto Gloves Polygon BS, B/O: $142
★ Moto Gloves Blood Pressure BS, B/O: $84
★ Moto Gloves Blood Pressure BS, B/O: $84
★ Moto Gloves 3rd Commando Company BS, B/O: $63
★ Moto Gloves 3rd Commando Company BS, B/O: $63
⎯★ Specialist Gloves Crimson Kimono WW, B/O: $1215
★ Specialist Gloves Tiger Strike FT, B/O: $672
★ Specialist Gloves Lt. Commander FT, B/O: $305
★ Specialist Gloves Lt. Commander BS, B/O: $140
★ Specialist Gloves Crimson Web BS, B/O: $137
★ Specialist Gloves Buckshot FT, B/O: $75
⎯★ Driver Gloves Crimson Weave FT, B/O: $359
★ Driver Gloves Imperial Plaid BS, B/O: $229
★ Driver Gloves Overtake BS, B/O: $77
★ Driver Gloves Racing Green FT, B/O: $48
⎯★ Sport Gloves Omega FT, B/O: $739
★ Sport Gloves Amphibious BS #2, B/O: $733
★ Sport Gloves Arid BS, B/O: $292
⎯★ Hand Wraps Giraffe MW, B/O: $212
★ Hand Wraps Leather FT, B/O: $160
★ Hand Wraps Desert Shamagh MW, B/O: $101
⎯★ Broken Fang Gloves Yellow-banded MW, B/O: $185
★ Broken Fang Gloves Needle Point FT, B/O: $67
★ Broken Fang Gloves Needle Point WW, B/O: $59
⎯★ Hydra Gloves Case Hardened BS, B/O: $65
★ Hydra Gloves Emerald FT, B/O: $65
★ Hydra Gloves Emerald BS, B/O: $62
WEAPONS
AK-47 Case Hardened BS, B/O: $130
AK-47 Bloodsport MW, B/O: $79
AK-47 Fuel Injector BS, B/O: $76
AK-47 Fuel Injector BS, B/O: $76
AK-47 Bloodsport FT, B/O: $70
AK-47 Neon Rider MW, B/O: $60
StatTrak™ AK-47 Aquamarine Revenge FT, B/O: $72
⎯AWP Fade FN, B/O: $1039
AWP Asiimov FT, B/O: $139
AWP Asiimov FT, B/O: $139
AWP Wildfire MW, B/O: $95
AWP BOOM MW, B/O: $93
AWP BOOM MW, B/O: $93
AWP Duality FN, B/O: $81
AWP Asiimov BS, B/O: $79
AWP Asiimov BS, B/O: $79
AWP Chromatic Aberration FN, B/O: $60
StatTrak™ AWP Hyper Beast FT, B/O: $68
StatTrak™ AWP Hyper Beast FT, B/O: $68
StatTrak™ AWP Electric Hive FT, B/O: $55
⎯Desert Eagle Blaze FN, B/O: $623
Desert Eagle Emerald Jörmungandr FN, B/O: $241
Desert Eagle Cobalt Disruption FN, B/O: $81
Desert Eagle Cobalt Disruption FN, B/O: $81
Desert Eagle Cobalt Disruption FN, B/O: $81
Desert Eagle Printstream FT, B/O: $54
⎯M4A1-S Blue Phosphor FN, B/O: $434
StatTrak™ M4A1-S Bright Water MW, B/O: $55
⎯M4A4 Poseidon FN, B/O: $1465
M4A4 Asiimov BS, B/O: $55
M4A4 Hellfire MW, B/O: $50
⎯USP-S Kill Confirmed MW, B/O: $72
USP-S Printstream FT, B/O: $69
StatTrak™ USP-S Kill Confirmed FT, B/O: $139
⎯AUG Flame Jörmungandr FN, B/O: $234
P90 Run and Hide FT, B/O: $147
Five-SeveN Candy Apple FN, B/O: $61
Trade Offer Link - Steam Profile Link - My Inventory
Some items on the list may no longer be available or are still locked, visit My Inventory for more details.
Send a Trade Offer for fastest response. I consider all offers.
Add me for discuss if there is a serious offer that needs to be discussed.
2023.06.08 00:07 habbalah_babbalah Tenant Association Board sides with Landlord on major issues - what can I do?
I live in a large apartment building with about 520 units, in a U.S. city with rent controls. The property is managed by a well-known PM company, with a history of reducing services and evicting tenants unjustly. We have a tenant association, a 501(c)(4), with membership standing at 8% of the tenants. I am a member and also serve as a tenant rep on the board. I got invited to the board after reporting issues on Nextdoor and being involved in tenants' rights previously.
During my first board meeting, we discussed a plan proposed by the PM about packages left in the mailroom for more than two days -- they would be returned to sender on the third day. The plan provided arrangements for holding packages when tenants are on vacation. The board was about to vote in favor of recommending to the PM that they implement the plan when I intervened to discuss the issues. One major concern was that the tenant board was giving permission to the landlord to take possession of tenant property without consent. The meeting ended without a vote, and I investigated further- called a USPS cop, a PD detective, the city's tenant union organizers, and a tenant lawyer. It became clear that the plan's actions would be illegal, including federal crimes for USPS packages. What happens when irreplaceable items are "lost in the mail" after being returned to sender? Grandmas ashes, artwork, etc. Many older folks in this building, people who aren't quick to pick up packages, but it shouldn't be treated as a crime.
At the next board meeting, I presented ten points with law and case citations, pointing up the severe legal hazards of implementing the plan. Throughout, other board members interrupted me, shouted at me, basically taking the landlord's side! Eventually, the truth prevailed, and they voted against recommending the plan. I was even invited to present my findings to the PM's general manager, which led to the plan being canceled, and instead they expanded the mailroom.
That pattern with the board has repeated itself on several major issues:
Lease renewal: The property management company is sending spurious 12-month "renewal agreement" letters to tenants, even though local law dictates that leases automatically renew on a month-to-month basis after the initial period. The letters are deceptively worded, potentially misleading tenants into believing they must move out if they don't sign. Despite raising my concerns, the board president dismissed the issue, instead personally attacking me for asking if she had spoken with the PM about it (she then admitted to "working on it with them.") I am seeking advice from tenant organizations and tenant attorneys. I emailed the board, recommending we oppose the letters and request the landlord to stop sending them, but received no response.
Intercom system: The board president announced that only leaseholders' names would be entered into the new video intercom system. I pointed out obvious flaws with this approach, situations where leaseholders are not present but their guests or roommates require access. The president dismissed these concerns by referring to roommates as "illegals." WTF?! I argued against this stance, mentioning tenants who follow the law by adding legally-allowed roommates, or partners who are not required to be on the lease. However, the issue remains unresolved, with the PM's general manager also telling me that unnamed occupants are "illegals" and vaguely hinted at evictions.
Removal of deck furniture: The property management company removed all deck furniture from the roof decks after an act of vandalism. I told the board that this was a reduction in services and proposed requesting a rent reduction. No response.
Reduction of door attendant hours: at one time there were three shifts, 24/7. Now there's one 7 hour shift. Major reduction in service with no corresponding rent reduction. No response from the board.
It seems that I am the only board member paying attention to tenant issues. The rest of the board focuses on organizing monthly parties for tenants, with some parties exclusively for the board members. I researched and discovered that the landlord had won a major, precedent-setting court case against the association about 15 years ago, which has led the current board into placating the landlord. This has created a situation akin to Stockholm Syndrome, where they are more concerned about the landlord's well-being than tenant needs. The president often praises the PM's manager, despite the many problems they create. The board passively and actively resist requests to the landlord for changes. I am probably viewed by them as a Karen.
Current tenant members seem to view the association as a social organization. Former members have expressed disappointment, saying that the association doesn't help them with landlord issues, so they quit.
I am not well-versed in the laws governing 501(c)(4) organizations, or the actions I can take to force a change in the board. Logic doesn't land well on them, and as a group they just aren't gonna change.
I'd appreciate any helpful hints and ideas.
submitted by habbalah_babbalah to TenantUnion [link] [comments]
During my first board meeting, we discussed a plan proposed by the PM about packages left in the mailroom for more than two days -- they would be returned to sender on the third day. The plan provided arrangements for holding packages when tenants are on vacation. The board was about to vote in favor of recommending to the PM that they implement the plan when I intervened to discuss the issues. One major concern was that the tenant board was giving permission to the landlord to take possession of tenant property without consent. The meeting ended without a vote, and I investigated further- called a USPS cop, a PD detective, the city's tenant union organizers, and a tenant lawyer. It became clear that the plan's actions would be illegal, including federal crimes for USPS packages. What happens when irreplaceable items are "lost in the mail" after being returned to sender? Grandmas ashes, artwork, etc. Many older folks in this building, people who aren't quick to pick up packages, but it shouldn't be treated as a crime.
At the next board meeting, I presented ten points with law and case citations, pointing up the severe legal hazards of implementing the plan. Throughout, other board members interrupted me, shouted at me, basically taking the landlord's side! Eventually, the truth prevailed, and they voted against recommending the plan. I was even invited to present my findings to the PM's general manager, which led to the plan being canceled, and instead they expanded the mailroom.
That pattern with the board has repeated itself on several major issues:
Lease renewal: The property management company is sending spurious 12-month "renewal agreement" letters to tenants, even though local law dictates that leases automatically renew on a month-to-month basis after the initial period. The letters are deceptively worded, potentially misleading tenants into believing they must move out if they don't sign. Despite raising my concerns, the board president dismissed the issue, instead personally attacking me for asking if she had spoken with the PM about it (she then admitted to "working on it with them.") I am seeking advice from tenant organizations and tenant attorneys. I emailed the board, recommending we oppose the letters and request the landlord to stop sending them, but received no response.
Intercom system: The board president announced that only leaseholders' names would be entered into the new video intercom system. I pointed out obvious flaws with this approach, situations where leaseholders are not present but their guests or roommates require access. The president dismissed these concerns by referring to roommates as "illegals." WTF?! I argued against this stance, mentioning tenants who follow the law by adding legally-allowed roommates, or partners who are not required to be on the lease. However, the issue remains unresolved, with the PM's general manager also telling me that unnamed occupants are "illegals" and vaguely hinted at evictions.
Removal of deck furniture: The property management company removed all deck furniture from the roof decks after an act of vandalism. I told the board that this was a reduction in services and proposed requesting a rent reduction. No response.
Reduction of door attendant hours: at one time there were three shifts, 24/7. Now there's one 7 hour shift. Major reduction in service with no corresponding rent reduction. No response from the board.
It seems that I am the only board member paying attention to tenant issues. The rest of the board focuses on organizing monthly parties for tenants, with some parties exclusively for the board members. I researched and discovered that the landlord had won a major, precedent-setting court case against the association about 15 years ago, which has led the current board into placating the landlord. This has created a situation akin to Stockholm Syndrome, where they are more concerned about the landlord's well-being than tenant needs. The president often praises the PM's manager, despite the many problems they create. The board passively and actively resist requests to the landlord for changes. I am probably viewed by them as a Karen.
Current tenant members seem to view the association as a social organization. Former members have expressed disappointment, saying that the association doesn't help them with landlord issues, so they quit.
I am not well-versed in the laws governing 501(c)(4) organizations, or the actions I can take to force a change in the board. Logic doesn't land well on them, and as a group they just aren't gonna change.
I'd appreciate any helpful hints and ideas.
2023.06.08 00:07 Upper_Beef Employer haven't asked for their equipment back?
Hey. Anonymous obviously.
So I worked in Finance for a well known company. Long story short, my 4 yr old daughter was diagnosed with a life limiting condition last year, is severely disabled (needs 24 hr care) and her health worsened during the beginning of this year. I had to take roughly 2-3 months off - lots of hospital visits etc. She's more stable now, but obviously we don't know how many years we have with her.
My manager phoned me and suggested he was going to put me on a zero hour contract, and they would find a full time replacement. As it happens, I wasn't fond of the job anyway, and they weren't particularly understanding of my situation in the first place. We have insurance money to fall back on, so in my sleep deprived mind I said 'fine' - my wife and I needed a break, and I knew working full time wasn't an option going forward.
4 months on, that zero hour job has basically turned into no hours whatsoever. They haven't bothered calling, even to ask how things are,, so safe to assume they're not wanting me back - fine - but I haven't officially resigned. I still have my laptop with VPN key fob etc and they haven't asked for any of it back (which actually sums up the incompetent nature of said company). I've accepted another PT time job which will give me greater flexibility and less stress.
Any advice on how to handle this tactfully without burning bridges?
submitted by Upper_Beef to AskUK [link] [comments]
So I worked in Finance for a well known company. Long story short, my 4 yr old daughter was diagnosed with a life limiting condition last year, is severely disabled (needs 24 hr care) and her health worsened during the beginning of this year. I had to take roughly 2-3 months off - lots of hospital visits etc. She's more stable now, but obviously we don't know how many years we have with her.
My manager phoned me and suggested he was going to put me on a zero hour contract, and they would find a full time replacement. As it happens, I wasn't fond of the job anyway, and they weren't particularly understanding of my situation in the first place. We have insurance money to fall back on, so in my sleep deprived mind I said 'fine' - my wife and I needed a break, and I knew working full time wasn't an option going forward.
4 months on, that zero hour job has basically turned into no hours whatsoever. They haven't bothered calling, even to ask how things are,, so safe to assume they're not wanting me back - fine - but I haven't officially resigned. I still have my laptop with VPN key fob etc and they haven't asked for any of it back (which actually sums up the incompetent nature of said company). I've accepted another PT time job which will give me greater flexibility and less stress.
Any advice on how to handle this tactfully without burning bridges?
2023.06.08 00:07 Lost-Mad-Hatter Losing Friends, and Family; a rant.
Hi there everyone, I (~20) am having a hard time keeping close friendships for long periods of time (none last over 4 years) and feeling valued in them.
For the longest time, I thought it had been because I have horrible self-esteem, insecurities and etc, that led to me not feeling valued. I thought it must be my lack of self-love that has me not feeling loved. Somehow that logic added up for the past 20ish years.
I'm realizing now that, in addition to having ADHD, I might have autism? But that's for another post, hehe. If you have ADHD, autism, or are the older sibling rebel trope, any advice is much appreciated! And anyone else too, I'm just looking for comfort, in the form of an essay-like rant. Perhaps the toxic relationships sub is where this post belongs, but I'd just like to feel seen by a community that gets me better.
____
Anyways, the rant.
I seem to always leave friends, they rarely leave me. I am the one who decides "NOpe. This feels uncomfy, I give up." and part ways, rarely ever checking up on those drifted friendships. I always leave when I feel disrespected. For some reason, that is one thing that I've been able to hold true to myself about. The moment I realize that I am not respected, I leave (and trust me, I was better at this when I was a kid than now).
Anyways, it's happening again.
My closest friend, who I've always been proud of and inspired by for many reasons, is someone my heart has been drifting away from for a long while now (let's say, less than a year).
The last straw was when they lost my trust, utterly and completely.
______
I was leaving home. An emotionally abusive environment, where nobody and I mean nobody understood my struggles (oldest sibling, strict parents, no support for ADHD).
On rare occasions, I've felt violated in this home, I've felt vulnerable and weak, as though I was an object of ridicule. Rare occasions that my close friend knew about, and felt for me, comforted me through, and at some point, it was too much so I stopped sharing how I truly felt each day;
how are you? I'm good!
They're someone who's communicated that they are no longer interested in supporting my well-being, even to the level of knowing how I actually am doing each day (which is ok if that's how distant you wanna be from now on).
The day comes and I decide that one more weekend at home and I'll lose my sanity. I, for safety purposes, tell my friends that I plan to leave home (following all protocols for my situation). My close friend called this decision stupid.
The reason?
I was leaving "all of a sudden," it doesn't seem that "serious," I could wait a few years, get into grad school or get a job; leave when it's societally "right" to, so as not to rock the boat.
I don't know whose boat everyone seems to care about.
My method of leaving right now was too easy, too impulsive, and foolish, not with my own money, nor with my parent's agreeance and understanding.
I would rather have my parents "hate" me right now, and eventually explain things over a long period of time, rather than endure another few years of toxicity, get money and proper ghost them.
My friend's method meant that I would continue to be misunderstood, leave on "fake" good terms basis, and continue to play a game of leading a double life. I wanted to cut the bullshit, and have them know me for me. I cared about this more, rather than having the social and monetary connection with people I didn't feel truly safe with.
____
Fast forward to me finally leaving home. I left a letter, I gave my folks a call that night, it was a very emotional night. During my call, I had to set boundaries, I couldn't tell them where I was, I just tried my best to reassure them that I'm safe; I care that they were not worried sick.
A day or two later, I get a call from my friend. They tell me that my parents know that I'm with my partner and the city that I've gone to (strict parents, dating isn't allowed, curfew is before sunset, etc).
They say this calmly, with a straight, almost pissed but also trying to keep sane, face. My partner and I start asking why, why after all that you know about how toxic, how judgemental they can be, why tell them something I wasn't going to share until I had collected myself, until I was ready?
My friend robbed me of the opportunity of protecting myself from my parents' thoughts. As I mentioned earlier, my parents have made me feel vulnerable, fragile, and totally powerless, (physically and emotionally). All my life I lived up to "good kid" standards, and when they went through my phone a year ago, all of that trust I thought they had on me, diminished. They saw through chats, the outfits I tried in private, the makeup I tried, etc. Slutshamed me, told me not to text so much on the phone past 12AM, and ultimately, made me feel not only transparent, but ridiculed. I wanted to disappear at that moment.
Now having my parents know that I have a partner, I have no idea what horrific words they'd say. It doesn't cross my mind as much anymore (it's been a few months since the whole fiasco), but it still hurts just as much.
It hurts that my friend looked apathetic toward my pleas for an explanation.
Their response was more or less;
"I did not agree with your method of dealing with this, that's why I decided for you."
_________
Fast forward to now: I had stopped talking to this friend, I didn't want any more explanations.
They messaged me and I didn't want to hear it. They said, for what it's worth, their actions were out of care for my parent's wellbeing, and that they're sorry for any of the hurt I'd felt as a result.
I wish I could tell them that they can't even scratch the surface of knowing how it feels and that they had no business deciding my life's actions for me. Though they've been through rough times in life, they're the type of person to lack empathy and compassion for their past self - the self that had gone through emotional turmoil.
In short, they're emotionally unavailable and inconsiderate, to themselves and therefore to others.
________
I started talking to this friend again recently, I was missing social connection, and thought, perhaps my unsure feelings would be confirmed if I talk to them again.
I am almost certain now that it isn't worth working through this one, and that they'd never really have enough respect to have my back even if they didn't understand me.
I guess my rant here wondered if it's worth working through or worth slowly cutting off.
I also wanted some advice and comfort in knowing if it's ok to lose friends all at once. I feel misunderstood by anyone who even slightly agrees or empathizes with my close friend, and that number consists of the entire little group that knows of this situation.
I feel like a child in a group of adults, but the adults are childish.
I really like spending time with this outer circle, but as I mentioned in the beginning, most of these friendships feel emotionally distant. It's weird, because they all really want me to be my happy humourous self, but want nothing to do with me.
____
Don't know if this is just city friendships, where fast pace is a contributing factor to shuffling friends every handful of years, but I ultimately feel like an alien in the city. I vibe better with small-town kids.
____
If you read this far, thank you so much for your time :)) I really appreciate it. Any comments or anecdotes are welcome, and please no judgment! Thank you!
submitted by Lost-Mad-Hatter to neurodiversity [link] [comments]
For the longest time, I thought it had been because I have horrible self-esteem, insecurities and etc, that led to me not feeling valued. I thought it must be my lack of self-love that has me not feeling loved. Somehow that logic added up for the past 20ish years.
I'm realizing now that, in addition to having ADHD, I might have autism? But that's for another post, hehe. If you have ADHD, autism, or are the older sibling rebel trope, any advice is much appreciated! And anyone else too, I'm just looking for comfort, in the form of an essay-like rant. Perhaps the toxic relationships sub is where this post belongs, but I'd just like to feel seen by a community that gets me better.
____
Anyways, the rant.
I seem to always leave friends, they rarely leave me. I am the one who decides "NOpe. This feels uncomfy, I give up." and part ways, rarely ever checking up on those drifted friendships. I always leave when I feel disrespected. For some reason, that is one thing that I've been able to hold true to myself about. The moment I realize that I am not respected, I leave (and trust me, I was better at this when I was a kid than now).
Anyways, it's happening again.
My closest friend, who I've always been proud of and inspired by for many reasons, is someone my heart has been drifting away from for a long while now (let's say, less than a year).
The last straw was when they lost my trust, utterly and completely.
______
I was leaving home. An emotionally abusive environment, where nobody and I mean nobody understood my struggles (oldest sibling, strict parents, no support for ADHD).
On rare occasions, I've felt violated in this home, I've felt vulnerable and weak, as though I was an object of ridicule. Rare occasions that my close friend knew about, and felt for me, comforted me through, and at some point, it was too much so I stopped sharing how I truly felt each day;
how are you? I'm good!
They're someone who's communicated that they are no longer interested in supporting my well-being, even to the level of knowing how I actually am doing each day (which is ok if that's how distant you wanna be from now on).
The day comes and I decide that one more weekend at home and I'll lose my sanity. I, for safety purposes, tell my friends that I plan to leave home (following all protocols for my situation). My close friend called this decision stupid.
The reason?
I was leaving "all of a sudden," it doesn't seem that "serious," I could wait a few years, get into grad school or get a job; leave when it's societally "right" to, so as not to rock the boat.
I don't know whose boat everyone seems to care about.
My method of leaving right now was too easy, too impulsive, and foolish, not with my own money, nor with my parent's agreeance and understanding.
I would rather have my parents "hate" me right now, and eventually explain things over a long period of time, rather than endure another few years of toxicity, get money and proper ghost them.
My friend's method meant that I would continue to be misunderstood, leave on "fake" good terms basis, and continue to play a game of leading a double life. I wanted to cut the bullshit, and have them know me for me. I cared about this more, rather than having the social and monetary connection with people I didn't feel truly safe with.
____
Fast forward to me finally leaving home. I left a letter, I gave my folks a call that night, it was a very emotional night. During my call, I had to set boundaries, I couldn't tell them where I was, I just tried my best to reassure them that I'm safe; I care that they were not worried sick.
A day or two later, I get a call from my friend. They tell me that my parents know that I'm with my partner and the city that I've gone to (strict parents, dating isn't allowed, curfew is before sunset, etc).
They say this calmly, with a straight, almost pissed but also trying to keep sane, face. My partner and I start asking why, why after all that you know about how toxic, how judgemental they can be, why tell them something I wasn't going to share until I had collected myself, until I was ready?
My friend robbed me of the opportunity of protecting myself from my parents' thoughts. As I mentioned earlier, my parents have made me feel vulnerable, fragile, and totally powerless, (physically and emotionally). All my life I lived up to "good kid" standards, and when they went through my phone a year ago, all of that trust I thought they had on me, diminished. They saw through chats, the outfits I tried in private, the makeup I tried, etc. Slutshamed me, told me not to text so much on the phone past 12AM, and ultimately, made me feel not only transparent, but ridiculed. I wanted to disappear at that moment.
Now having my parents know that I have a partner, I have no idea what horrific words they'd say. It doesn't cross my mind as much anymore (it's been a few months since the whole fiasco), but it still hurts just as much.
It hurts that my friend looked apathetic toward my pleas for an explanation.
Their response was more or less;
"I did not agree with your method of dealing with this, that's why I decided for you."
_________
Fast forward to now: I had stopped talking to this friend, I didn't want any more explanations.
They messaged me and I didn't want to hear it. They said, for what it's worth, their actions were out of care for my parent's wellbeing, and that they're sorry for any of the hurt I'd felt as a result.
I wish I could tell them that they can't even scratch the surface of knowing how it feels and that they had no business deciding my life's actions for me. Though they've been through rough times in life, they're the type of person to lack empathy and compassion for their past self - the self that had gone through emotional turmoil.
In short, they're emotionally unavailable and inconsiderate, to themselves and therefore to others.
________
I started talking to this friend again recently, I was missing social connection, and thought, perhaps my unsure feelings would be confirmed if I talk to them again.
I am almost certain now that it isn't worth working through this one, and that they'd never really have enough respect to have my back even if they didn't understand me.
I guess my rant here wondered if it's worth working through or worth slowly cutting off.
I also wanted some advice and comfort in knowing if it's ok to lose friends all at once. I feel misunderstood by anyone who even slightly agrees or empathizes with my close friend, and that number consists of the entire little group that knows of this situation.
I feel like a child in a group of adults, but the adults are childish.
I really like spending time with this outer circle, but as I mentioned in the beginning, most of these friendships feel emotionally distant. It's weird, because they all really want me to be my happy humourous self, but want nothing to do with me.
____
Don't know if this is just city friendships, where fast pace is a contributing factor to shuffling friends every handful of years, but I ultimately feel like an alien in the city. I vibe better with small-town kids.
____
If you read this far, thank you so much for your time :)) I really appreciate it. Any comments or anecdotes are welcome, and please no judgment! Thank you!
2023.06.08 00:06 Altruistic-Carry-669 Not Ibd?
(21f) Long story short i don’t have IBD but instead i just have ibs.
When I was 12 i started to have a lot of gi symptoms. Painful gas, diarrhea, mucus in stool, frequent urgent bm, sharp pains in upper left side of tummy, occasional blood in stool, blood when i wipe, loose stool, occasional constipation, etc.
I had a colonoscopy and upper endoscopy. At the time they diagnosed GERD, lactose intolerance, and gastritis. They treated the gastritis put me on some type of medication i don’t remember what it was.
At age 14 symptoms worsened. I went to the hospital. They did a ct scan, found colitis and suspected possible crohns or UC. I got another colonoscopy. They said i had UC. They removed polyps. They did not medicate me. (At least I do not recall being put on anything other than more medication for gastritis, but i could be wrong because there was a lot going on in my life at the time and my memory is pretty shit.) I moved right after this across the country. I didn’t have insurance for awhile so we never got to follow up with another GI.
Now at age 20 I finally got myself a primary care doc and she gave me a referral for GI. I haven’t had a bad flare in while. I’ve cut out majority of my trigger foods. I cut caffeine out completely and dairy. I try to eat a bland diet most of the time. I got promoted at work and having less stress/anxiety. I still have occasional symptoms. Worse being frequent/ urgent bm, fatigue and painful bloating. With those i still don’t feel like I’m in an active flare up.
New GI wanted to do a colonoscopy. I had my follow up today. The results were completely normal. No evidence of UC or Crohns. Biopsies were also clear. He says i don’t have UC and there is no evidence i ever did and that the previous diagnosis was wrong/misunderstood and just caused extra worry. I should feel relieved. “It’s just Ibs” he says. He prescribed something to take 3 times daily. I haven’t picked it up yet and i will have another follow up in about 2 months to see if it has helped.
I just feel a bit defeated. I know i should be relieved because now there is no increased risk of colon cancer. But when you think you have been living with a serious incurable disease for over 5 years it feels like a slap in the face to be told its just ibs. And i know ibs can be awful and it is but still.
So i guess my question is do any of you relate to this? Have you been told one thing by a previous doctor and then your current not take it seriously or just say they were wrong? Is that possible? Have you ever had colonoscopy come back normal after previously been diagnosed? Is my current doctor correct? What does remission look like with IBD in biopsies/ scopes? Can colonoscopy look normal after years without a major flare up?
submitted by Altruistic-Carry-669 to IBD [link] [comments]
When I was 12 i started to have a lot of gi symptoms. Painful gas, diarrhea, mucus in stool, frequent urgent bm, sharp pains in upper left side of tummy, occasional blood in stool, blood when i wipe, loose stool, occasional constipation, etc.
I had a colonoscopy and upper endoscopy. At the time they diagnosed GERD, lactose intolerance, and gastritis. They treated the gastritis put me on some type of medication i don’t remember what it was.
At age 14 symptoms worsened. I went to the hospital. They did a ct scan, found colitis and suspected possible crohns or UC. I got another colonoscopy. They said i had UC. They removed polyps. They did not medicate me. (At least I do not recall being put on anything other than more medication for gastritis, but i could be wrong because there was a lot going on in my life at the time and my memory is pretty shit.) I moved right after this across the country. I didn’t have insurance for awhile so we never got to follow up with another GI.
Now at age 20 I finally got myself a primary care doc and she gave me a referral for GI. I haven’t had a bad flare in while. I’ve cut out majority of my trigger foods. I cut caffeine out completely and dairy. I try to eat a bland diet most of the time. I got promoted at work and having less stress/anxiety. I still have occasional symptoms. Worse being frequent/ urgent bm, fatigue and painful bloating. With those i still don’t feel like I’m in an active flare up.
New GI wanted to do a colonoscopy. I had my follow up today. The results were completely normal. No evidence of UC or Crohns. Biopsies were also clear. He says i don’t have UC and there is no evidence i ever did and that the previous diagnosis was wrong/misunderstood and just caused extra worry. I should feel relieved. “It’s just Ibs” he says. He prescribed something to take 3 times daily. I haven’t picked it up yet and i will have another follow up in about 2 months to see if it has helped.
I just feel a bit defeated. I know i should be relieved because now there is no increased risk of colon cancer. But when you think you have been living with a serious incurable disease for over 5 years it feels like a slap in the face to be told its just ibs. And i know ibs can be awful and it is but still.
So i guess my question is do any of you relate to this? Have you been told one thing by a previous doctor and then your current not take it seriously or just say they were wrong? Is that possible? Have you ever had colonoscopy come back normal after previously been diagnosed? Is my current doctor correct? What does remission look like with IBD in biopsies/ scopes? Can colonoscopy look normal after years without a major flare up?
2023.06.08 00:06 Various_Dark_3291 Mukaku's master plan was an inch close of failure on this one
 | submitted by Various_Dark_3291 to Kengan_Ashura [link] [comments] |
2023.06.08 00:05 bikingfencer Galatians - chapter four - Paul wrestles with election
Chapter Four
Paul … includes in ‘the elements of the universe’ all sub-Christian ideas and observances, both Jewish and Gentile. He regards these ‘elements’ as slave drivers who frighten men with curses for not propitiating them by observance of special days and seasons, food taboos, dietary fads, and circumcision. In Christ he declared his independence of Fate, Fortune, Luck, and Chance, and from astrology, the counterfeit religion and bastard sister of astronomy, whose practitioners exploited the superstition that the stars controlled men’s lives from birth to death.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 521 & 522)
“The elements of the world] A mere Jewish phrase, יסודי עולם הזה yasudey ‘olam hazzeh, ‘the principles of this world;’ that is, the rudiments or principles of the Jewish religion. The apostle intimates that the law was not the science of salvation; it was only the elements or alphabet of it.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 387)
At this juncture, says Paul, when the appointed period of history was ‘full,’ god sent his Son γενομενον εκ γυναικος, γενομενον υπο νομον [genomenon ek gunaikos, genomenon upο nomon], ‘born of woman, bοrn under law.’ … Jesus was not only born under law, but was subject to it all his life. ...The ‘yoke’ of the Torah demanded that he observe the customs of his forefathers, such as wearing phylactery and prayer fringes, ceremonial washing of hands before eating, giving thanks at mealtime, praying at stated times, bringing tithes and sacrifices, and obeying the Ten Commandments.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 522 & 523)
Not to mention circumcision, kashrut, and the prohibition of associating with gentiles.
“Sent forth refers to God’s sending of his Son from his pre-existent state in heaven (I Cor. [Corinthians] 8:6; Phil. [Philippians] 2:6-8; Col. [Colossians] 1:15-17). Yet this Son was born of woman. There is nothing in these words, or elsewhere in Paul’s letters, to prove or disprove that he knew the story of the miraculous conception. His point here is that the Christ, although he was the pre-existent Son of God, did not come into this world with a body composed of celestial substance, but was woman-born like all other human beings. … It was very different from the conception of royal sonship in Ps. 2, where the king is called God’s ‘Son; because he has been chosen to be the Messiah. In Paul, Jesus is God’s Son by nature, and his Christhood follows by virtue of this sonship. This belief was the fundamental cause of the split between the Jews and the Christians. The lowly birth, the obscurity of Nazareth, and the fact that Jesus was a common laborer, constituted a grievous scandal in the eyes of all who were expecting their Deliverer to come riding on a chariot of clouds wielding the lightning of judgment. Paul’s gospel contradicts every form of hyperspirituality that fixes a gulf between God and his material world. On the other hand, his conception of the coming of Jesus was poles removed from the pagan stories of the births of heroes, savior-gods, and kings, whose legends were freighted with illicit relationships and lawless conduct like the lives of the devotees who had created them in their own image.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 523-524)
“Nothing is said explicitly about the Son’s preexistence, which is at most implied … born of a woman: … The phrase is derived from the OT [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] (Job 14:1 …). So born, Jesus submitted to the law by being circumcised and thus became capable of falling under its curse. But lest the Galatians draw a wrong conclusion, Paul [and The Interpreters’ Bible] does not mention Jesus’ circumcision. Instead of genomenon, ‘born,’ some patristic writers read gennomenon, and understood this ptc. [participle] as referring to Mary’s virginal conception; but this is anachronistic interpretation.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 787)
………………………………………… Worry of Shah’OoL to Galatians [verses 8–20]
Paul did not deny the existence of these beings whose ignorant worshipers called them gods, but he declared that they did not partake of the nature of God (I Cor. 8:4-6). God permitted them to plague mankind to punish sin, especially the sin of participating in the sacraments of the Gentile cults (I Cor. 10:19-22; 11:28-31). But Christ had conquered them and no Christian needed to fear them.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 529)
…
…………………………………………
Two the covenants [verses 21-26]
It is very likely, therefore, that the allegory produced here; St. Paul had borrowed from the Jewish writings; and he brings it in to convict the Judaizing Galatians on their own principles: and neither he, nor we, have any thing farther to do with this allegory, than as it applies to the subject for which it is quoted; nor does it give any license to those men of vain and superficial minds, who endeavour to find out allegories in every portion of the Sacred Writings; and by what they term spiritualizing, which is more properly carnalizing, have brought the testimonies of God into disgrace. May the spirit of silence be poured out upon all such corrupters of the word of God!” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 390)
“Allegorical interpretation rests upon the belief that every word, figure of speech, and grammatical form in scripture has a special ‘spiritual’ significance besides its literal meaning. The theory is that the God who dictated it meant more than rests on the surface and that while he said one thing, he also meant something else in addition to the literal sense… The Greeks had long since applied the method to explain away the immoral things which the gods said and did in Homer… Then Greek-speaking Jews, like Philo Judaeus, employed it apologetically to read Greek philosophy into the O.T. [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible], proclaiming that Moses had said all these good things long before and better than Homer and Plato.
The wonder is that Paul has so little allegory. His restraint is explained partly by his training as a Pharisee. The rabbis were suspicious of any interpretation of scripture that tended to make Jews lax in their observance of the law. Jews with Gnostic leanings, and those who considered some of their ancestral customs outmoded, could resort to allegory to justify their philosophy and conduct, while maintaining that they were the spiritual superiors of the conservatives who held to the letter of the law … His argument, however, is never strengthened by allegorical symbolism and typology, for these are convincing only to those who by imagination can find them so. Rather, as in Rom. 9-11, he introduces unnecessary complications such as the moral difficulties involved in predestination. His gospel does not rest on the quicksands of allegory, a specious method of interpreting scripture. Its interpretations are of interest to the historian not as correct representations of what the writers and first readers of the Bible had in mind, but only as source materials for understanding the life and thought of the allegorists themselves.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 540)
Paul speaks of Jerusalem above, because this new city of freedom already exists in heaven where Christ is, where dwell the souls of those who have died in Christ. But it also exists on earth as the church, the body of Christ, whose members are colonists from heaven sent to prepare men for the full establishment of God’s kingdom at Christ’s second coming (Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:1-3).
The biblical root of this conception of an ideal future and heavenly Jerusalem is Isa. [Isaiah] 54. Other descriptions appear in Ezek. [Ezekiel] 40-48; Zech. [Zechariah] 2:1-13; Hag. [Haggai] 2:6-9; Tob. [Tobias] 13:9-18 Ecclus. [Ecclesiasticus] 36; Pss. Sol. [Psalms of Solomon] 17:33. Historically the expectation assumed three forms. According to the earliest hope, God would build the new Jerusalem in Palestine and make it the capital of his theocratic world government. The plan of this glorious city was graven upon the palms of his hands (Isa. 49:16). From this idea it was but a step, especially for those influenced by Greek ideas, to think of this ideal Jerusalem as already existing in heaven. According to the Apocalypse of Baruch, God had shown it to Adam in Paradise before he sinned; to Abraham on the night mentioned in Gen. 15:12-21; and to Moses on Sinai, when he gave him the heavenly pattern for an earthly tabernacle (II Baruch 4:1-6; cf. [compare with] Heb. [Hebrews]12:22). The third conception combined these two ideas. The Jerusalem which was ‘above’ would come down to earth to be established in Palestine in place of the city that ‘now is’ (cf. Rev. [Revelation] 3:12, 21:2; II Esdras 7:26; 13:36; 10:54).
So the new Jerusalem belonged to both worlds and to both ages, to heaven and earth, to the present and the future. Its constitution was the new covenant, and its citizens were the men of faith in Christ, a new kind of freemen who traced their spiritual ancestry through the line of Isaac and his mother Sarah as heirs of God’s promise to Abraham. As for Ishmael and his tribe, they were the men of law, predestined to be slaves forever. Needless to say, the Judaizers found Paul’s allegorical exclusion of themselves utterly unacceptable. They believed that the Torah was God’s blueprint for all creation, and that it would be observed forever in the new Jerusalem. That, they said, was why God was going to purge the old city – to establish an order of life in which perfect obedience to his law would be possible.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 541-542)
“…it was a maxim among the rabbins, that, ‘Whatsoever was in the earth, the same was also found in heaven; for there is no matter, howsoever small, in this world, that has not something similar to it in the spiritual world.’ On this maxim, the Jews imagine that every earthly thing has its representative in heaven: and especially whatever concerns Jerusalem, the law, and its ordinances. Rab. Kimchi, speaking of Melchisedec, king of Salem, says, זו ירושלים של מעלה Zu Yerushalem shel me’alah – ‘This is the Jerusalem that is from above.’…
There is a spiritual Jerusalem, of which this is the type; and this Jerusalem, in which the souls of all the righteous are, is free from all bondage and sin: or by this, probably the kingdom of the Messiah was intended; and this certainly answers best to the apostle’s meaning, as the subsequent verse shows.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 391)
“A telling item in the counterpropaganda of the legalists was the argument that even among the Christians only a radical fringe consisting mainly of foreign Jews, of whom Paul was one, were proposing to abandon the law of Moses. …
In one respect his quotation of Isa. 54:1 does not fit Paul’s allegory. It was Sarah, the mother of freemen, who possessed the husband, and Hagar, the slave, who was the deserted woman. As usual with Paul’s illustrations (cf. Rom. 7:1-4; 11:17-24), the details cannot be pressed without making them go lame …
The Isaian figure to describe the plight of Jerusalem during the Babylonian exile grew out of a common experience in Hebrew family life. Childlessness, particularly the failure to bear sons, was great grief and disgrace. Such was the sorrow of Jerusalem; but the prophet bade her look forward with courage to the time when all her scattered children would come back to her (Isa. 54:3). God was her ‘husband,’ and he would treat his faithful remnant with everlasting lovingkindness, making them more numerous than the former population and giving them a heritage of great peace and prosperity (Isa. 54:13-17).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 542)
“The prophet’s words are addressed to deserted Zion, bidding it rejoice at the return of the exiles.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)
“A rabbinical tradition of the second century A.S. interprets the Hebrew participle מצחק [MeeTsHahQ, “play”] (LXX παιζοντα [paizonta] in Gen. 21:9 to mean that Ishmael’s ‘playing’ became so rough that Isaac’s life was in danger. This son of a slave is said to have shot arrows at Isaac to kill him, and Paul’s statement shows that some such tradition was current in his day. He applied it to the Judaizers who were trying to force the Christians to observe the whole law of Moses, and to the unbelieving Jews who were excommunicating the Christians and their families and getting them into trouble with the civil authorities (1:5; 4:17; 5:10; I Thess. [Thessalonians] 2:14-16).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 543)
“The quotation is from Gen. 21:10 … The speaker of these words is Sarah, who is filled with rage against Hagar and Ishmael. Abraham is represented as greatly grieved, but God is said to have sanctioned the demand of the cruel and jealous wife….
This story was one of the effects and one of the causes of the perpetual feud between the Israelites and the tribes that descended from Ishmael. The Hebrews were so sure that God wanted them to have Palestine that they found no moral difficulty in saying that it was God himself who had overruled Abraham’s conscience (Gen. 17:18-21). They affirmed that Ishmael’s character and destiny had been predetermined (Gen. 16:12). Consequently, even his circumcision at the age of thirteen could not make him a member of God’s chosen people. However great this innocent victim of a family feud might become by virtue of the halfhearted blessing conceded by an uneasy conscience (Gen. 17:20-21), he and his descendants were barred forever from the higher blessing. Theirs was to submit to the religious imperialism of the most favored nation or die. Moreover, all Abraham’s other sons except Isaac were barred from the promise and sent away ‘unto the east country’ (Gen. 25:5-6). And yet while all this was said to be the Lord’s doing, it was in the same breath declared to be the doing of the human actors in this drama of the nations. Sarah herself was said to have suggested that Abraham become a father by her Egyptian slave girl. Then, too, it was explained that Hagar’s flight from the cruelty of her mistress was voluntary, making her, rather than the callous compliance of Abraham, responsible for her plight ‘in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur’ (Gen. 16:7).
Paul’s use of Abraham’s expulsion of Hagar and her child has its parallel in the equally heartless treatment of Esau which he employs in Rom. 9-11 in his longer discussion of the divine process of selection. Here too it was assumed that the hatred generated by centuries of war for the possession of Palestine lay in the heart of God. “I hate Esau,” said Malachi (1:3), making God the speaker; and Rom. 9:6-13 presses it to the utmost limit of predestination. But the love of God in Christ Jesus made Paul’s heart better than his inherited doctrine … When the history of the struggle for the possession of “the Holy land” is allegorized to justify a doctrine of “election” which foredooms countless souls to an eternity of torment in a future hell, it becomes as morally atrocious as it is irreconcilable with Paul’s gospel.
Nevertheless Paul’s allegory gives the historian an insight into Paul’s mind as he wrestled with the insoluble problem of God’s sovereignty and human freedom.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 543-544)
“Paul bids the Galatians rid themselves of the Judaizers – and, ironically enough, obey the Torah itself.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)
submitted by bikingfencer to bikingfencer [link] [comments]
- … we were enslaved [משעבדים, MeShoo`eBahDeeYM] to fundamentals [ליסודות, LeeYÇODOTh] [of] the world.
Paul … includes in ‘the elements of the universe’ all sub-Christian ideas and observances, both Jewish and Gentile. He regards these ‘elements’ as slave drivers who frighten men with curses for not propitiating them by observance of special days and seasons, food taboos, dietary fads, and circumcision. In Christ he declared his independence of Fate, Fortune, Luck, and Chance, and from astrology, the counterfeit religion and bastard sister of astronomy, whose practitioners exploited the superstition that the stars controlled men’s lives from birth to death.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 521 & 522)
“The elements of the world] A mere Jewish phrase, יסודי עולם הזה yasudey ‘olam hazzeh, ‘the principles of this world;’ that is, the rudiments or principles of the Jewish religion. The apostle intimates that the law was not the science of salvation; it was only the elements or alphabet of it.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 387)
- But [אבל, ’ahBahL] as that was filled the time, sent forth, Gods, [את, ’ehTh] His son, born [of] woman, and subject [וכפוף, VeKhahPhOoPh] to instruction.
At this juncture, says Paul, when the appointed period of history was ‘full,’ god sent his Son γενομενον εκ γυναικος, γενομενον υπο νομον [genomenon ek gunaikos, genomenon upο nomon], ‘born of woman, bοrn under law.’ … Jesus was not only born under law, but was subject to it all his life. ...The ‘yoke’ of the Torah demanded that he observe the customs of his forefathers, such as wearing phylactery and prayer fringes, ceremonial washing of hands before eating, giving thanks at mealtime, praying at stated times, bringing tithes and sacrifices, and obeying the Ten Commandments.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 522 & 523)
Not to mention circumcision, kashrut, and the prohibition of associating with gentiles.
“Sent forth refers to God’s sending of his Son from his pre-existent state in heaven (I Cor. [Corinthians] 8:6; Phil. [Philippians] 2:6-8; Col. [Colossians] 1:15-17). Yet this Son was born of woman. There is nothing in these words, or elsewhere in Paul’s letters, to prove or disprove that he knew the story of the miraculous conception. His point here is that the Christ, although he was the pre-existent Son of God, did not come into this world with a body composed of celestial substance, but was woman-born like all other human beings. … It was very different from the conception of royal sonship in Ps. 2, where the king is called God’s ‘Son; because he has been chosen to be the Messiah. In Paul, Jesus is God’s Son by nature, and his Christhood follows by virtue of this sonship. This belief was the fundamental cause of the split between the Jews and the Christians. The lowly birth, the obscurity of Nazareth, and the fact that Jesus was a common laborer, constituted a grievous scandal in the eyes of all who were expecting their Deliverer to come riding on a chariot of clouds wielding the lightning of judgment. Paul’s gospel contradicts every form of hyperspirituality that fixes a gulf between God and his material world. On the other hand, his conception of the coming of Jesus was poles removed from the pagan stories of the births of heroes, savior-gods, and kings, whose legends were freighted with illicit relationships and lawless conduct like the lives of the devotees who had created them in their own image.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 523-524)
“Nothing is said explicitly about the Son’s preexistence, which is at most implied … born of a woman: … The phrase is derived from the OT [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible] (Job 14:1 …). So born, Jesus submitted to the law by being circumcised and thus became capable of falling under its curse. But lest the Galatians draw a wrong conclusion, Paul [and The Interpreters’ Bible] does not mention Jesus’ circumcision. Instead of genomenon, ‘born,’ some patristic writers read gennomenon, and understood this ptc. [participle] as referring to Mary’s virginal conception; but this is anachronistic interpretation.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 787)
- Accordingly [לפיכך, LePheeYKhahKh], you are not [אינך, ’aYNKhah] a slave anymore [אוד, ’OD], for if [כי אם, KeeY ’eeM] a son, and, if a son, then [אזי, ’ahZahY] also heir from favor [מטעם, MeeTah`ahM] [of] Gods.
………………………………………… Worry of Shah’OoL to Galatians [verses 8–20]
- In [the] past, in a time that you did not know [את, ’ehTh] Gods, you slaved [את, ’ehTh] who that in their nature [שבמנהותם, ShehBeMahHOoThahM] were not Gods.
Paul did not deny the existence of these beings whose ignorant worshipers called them gods, but he declared that they did not partake of the nature of God (I Cor. 8:4-6). God permitted them to plague mankind to punish sin, especially the sin of participating in the sacraments of the Gentile cults (I Cor. 10:19-22; 11:28-31). But Christ had conquered them and no Christian needed to fear them.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 529)
- Behold, you are honoring days and new-[moons], seasons [מועדים, MO`ahDeeYM] and years.
…
…………………………………………
Two the covenants [verses 21-26]
- Say to me, you, the wanters to be subject to Instruction, have you not heard [את, ’ehTh] the Instruction?
- Is it not written that to ’ahBRahHahM there were two sons, the one from the maid [האמה, Hah’ahMaH] and the second from the woman the free [החפשיה, HahHahPhSheeYah]?
- But [אך, ’ahKh] [the] son [of] the maid was born according to [לפי, LePheeY] the flesh, and however [ואילו, Ve’eeYLOo] [the] son [of] the free upon mouth of the promise.
- The words the these, they are a parable to two the covenants: the one from Mount ÇeeNah-eeY [Sinai], the birther to slavery, and she is HahGahR [“The Sojourner”, Hagar].
It is very likely, therefore, that the allegory produced here; St. Paul had borrowed from the Jewish writings; and he brings it in to convict the Judaizing Galatians on their own principles: and neither he, nor we, have any thing farther to do with this allegory, than as it applies to the subject for which it is quoted; nor does it give any license to those men of vain and superficial minds, who endeavour to find out allegories in every portion of the Sacred Writings; and by what they term spiritualizing, which is more properly carnalizing, have brought the testimonies of God into disgrace. May the spirit of silence be poured out upon all such corrupters of the word of God!” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 390)
“Allegorical interpretation rests upon the belief that every word, figure of speech, and grammatical form in scripture has a special ‘spiritual’ significance besides its literal meaning. The theory is that the God who dictated it meant more than rests on the surface and that while he said one thing, he also meant something else in addition to the literal sense… The Greeks had long since applied the method to explain away the immoral things which the gods said and did in Homer… Then Greek-speaking Jews, like Philo Judaeus, employed it apologetically to read Greek philosophy into the O.T. [Old Testament, the Hebrew Bible], proclaiming that Moses had said all these good things long before and better than Homer and Plato.
The wonder is that Paul has so little allegory. His restraint is explained partly by his training as a Pharisee. The rabbis were suspicious of any interpretation of scripture that tended to make Jews lax in their observance of the law. Jews with Gnostic leanings, and those who considered some of their ancestral customs outmoded, could resort to allegory to justify their philosophy and conduct, while maintaining that they were the spiritual superiors of the conservatives who held to the letter of the law … His argument, however, is never strengthened by allegorical symbolism and typology, for these are convincing only to those who by imagination can find them so. Rather, as in Rom. 9-11, he introduces unnecessary complications such as the moral difficulties involved in predestination. His gospel does not rest on the quicksands of allegory, a specious method of interpreting scripture. Its interpretations are of interest to the historian not as correct representations of what the writers and first readers of the Bible had in mind, but only as source materials for understanding the life and thought of the allegorists themselves.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 540)
- Hagar signifies [מסמלת, MeÇahMehLeTh] [את, ’ehTh] Mount ÇeeNah-eeY, that is in Arabia, and parallels [ומקבילה, OoMahQBeeYLaH] to Jerusalem of our day, for she is in slavery with her sons.
- But [אבל, ’ahBahL] Jerusalem from ascended [מעלה, Mah`eLaH], [the] daughter [of] freedom [חורין, HOReeYN] is she, and she is mother to us.
Paul speaks of Jerusalem above, because this new city of freedom already exists in heaven where Christ is, where dwell the souls of those who have died in Christ. But it also exists on earth as the church, the body of Christ, whose members are colonists from heaven sent to prepare men for the full establishment of God’s kingdom at Christ’s second coming (Phil. 3:20; Col. 3:1-3).
The biblical root of this conception of an ideal future and heavenly Jerusalem is Isa. [Isaiah] 54. Other descriptions appear in Ezek. [Ezekiel] 40-48; Zech. [Zechariah] 2:1-13; Hag. [Haggai] 2:6-9; Tob. [Tobias] 13:9-18 Ecclus. [Ecclesiasticus] 36; Pss. Sol. [Psalms of Solomon] 17:33. Historically the expectation assumed three forms. According to the earliest hope, God would build the new Jerusalem in Palestine and make it the capital of his theocratic world government. The plan of this glorious city was graven upon the palms of his hands (Isa. 49:16). From this idea it was but a step, especially for those influenced by Greek ideas, to think of this ideal Jerusalem as already existing in heaven. According to the Apocalypse of Baruch, God had shown it to Adam in Paradise before he sinned; to Abraham on the night mentioned in Gen. 15:12-21; and to Moses on Sinai, when he gave him the heavenly pattern for an earthly tabernacle (II Baruch 4:1-6; cf. [compare with] Heb. [Hebrews]12:22). The third conception combined these two ideas. The Jerusalem which was ‘above’ would come down to earth to be established in Palestine in place of the city that ‘now is’ (cf. Rev. [Revelation] 3:12, 21:2; II Esdras 7:26; 13:36; 10:54).
So the new Jerusalem belonged to both worlds and to both ages, to heaven and earth, to the present and the future. Its constitution was the new covenant, and its citizens were the men of faith in Christ, a new kind of freemen who traced their spiritual ancestry through the line of Isaac and his mother Sarah as heirs of God’s promise to Abraham. As for Ishmael and his tribe, they were the men of law, predestined to be slaves forever. Needless to say, the Judaizers found Paul’s allegorical exclusion of themselves utterly unacceptable. They believed that the Torah was God’s blueprint for all creation, and that it would be observed forever in the new Jerusalem. That, they said, was why God was going to purge the old city – to establish an order of life in which perfect obedience to his law would be possible.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 541-542)
“…it was a maxim among the rabbins, that, ‘Whatsoever was in the earth, the same was also found in heaven; for there is no matter, howsoever small, in this world, that has not something similar to it in the spiritual world.’ On this maxim, the Jews imagine that every earthly thing has its representative in heaven: and especially whatever concerns Jerusalem, the law, and its ordinances. Rab. Kimchi, speaking of Melchisedec, king of Salem, says, זו ירושלים של מעלה Zu Yerushalem shel me’alah – ‘This is the Jerusalem that is from above.’…
There is a spiritual Jerusalem, of which this is the type; and this Jerusalem, in which the souls of all the righteous are, is free from all bondage and sin: or by this, probably the kingdom of the Messiah was intended; and this certainly answers best to the apostle’s meaning, as the subsequent verse shows.” (Clarke, 1831, vol. II p. 391)
- That see, is written:
“A telling item in the counterpropaganda of the legalists was the argument that even among the Christians only a radical fringe consisting mainly of foreign Jews, of whom Paul was one, were proposing to abandon the law of Moses. …
In one respect his quotation of Isa. 54:1 does not fit Paul’s allegory. It was Sarah, the mother of freemen, who possessed the husband, and Hagar, the slave, who was the deserted woman. As usual with Paul’s illustrations (cf. Rom. 7:1-4; 11:17-24), the details cannot be pressed without making them go lame …
The Isaian figure to describe the plight of Jerusalem during the Babylonian exile grew out of a common experience in Hebrew family life. Childlessness, particularly the failure to bear sons, was great grief and disgrace. Such was the sorrow of Jerusalem; but the prophet bade her look forward with courage to the time when all her scattered children would come back to her (Isa. 54:3). God was her ‘husband,’ and he would treat his faithful remnant with everlasting lovingkindness, making them more numerous than the former population and giving them a heritage of great peace and prosperity (Isa. 54:13-17).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 542)
“The prophet’s words are addressed to deserted Zion, bidding it rejoice at the return of the exiles.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)
- But you, my brethren [τεχνα, tekhna, “children”], you are the sons of the promise, as was YeeTsHahQ [“He Laughed”, Isaac].
- And just as [וכשם, OoKhShayM] that then pursued, [רדף, RahDahPh] the son that was born according to [לפי, LePheeY] flesh, [את, ’ehTh] the son that was born according to the spirit, yes, also now.
“A rabbinical tradition of the second century A.S. interprets the Hebrew participle מצחק [MeeTsHahQ, “play”] (LXX παιζοντα [paizonta] in Gen. 21:9 to mean that Ishmael’s ‘playing’ became so rough that Isaac’s life was in danger. This son of a slave is said to have shot arrows at Isaac to kill him, and Paul’s statement shows that some such tradition was current in his day. He applied it to the Judaizers who were trying to force the Christians to observe the whole law of Moses, and to the unbelieving Jews who were excommunicating the Christians and their families and getting them into trouble with the civil authorities (1:5; 4:17; 5:10; I Thess. [Thessalonians] 2:14-16).” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X p. 543)
- But what says the Written [Scripture]?
“The quotation is from Gen. 21:10 … The speaker of these words is Sarah, who is filled with rage against Hagar and Ishmael. Abraham is represented as greatly grieved, but God is said to have sanctioned the demand of the cruel and jealous wife….
This story was one of the effects and one of the causes of the perpetual feud between the Israelites and the tribes that descended from Ishmael. The Hebrews were so sure that God wanted them to have Palestine that they found no moral difficulty in saying that it was God himself who had overruled Abraham’s conscience (Gen. 17:18-21). They affirmed that Ishmael’s character and destiny had been predetermined (Gen. 16:12). Consequently, even his circumcision at the age of thirteen could not make him a member of God’s chosen people. However great this innocent victim of a family feud might become by virtue of the halfhearted blessing conceded by an uneasy conscience (Gen. 17:20-21), he and his descendants were barred forever from the higher blessing. Theirs was to submit to the religious imperialism of the most favored nation or die. Moreover, all Abraham’s other sons except Isaac were barred from the promise and sent away ‘unto the east country’ (Gen. 25:5-6). And yet while all this was said to be the Lord’s doing, it was in the same breath declared to be the doing of the human actors in this drama of the nations. Sarah herself was said to have suggested that Abraham become a father by her Egyptian slave girl. Then, too, it was explained that Hagar’s flight from the cruelty of her mistress was voluntary, making her, rather than the callous compliance of Abraham, responsible for her plight ‘in the wilderness, by the fountain in the way to Shur’ (Gen. 16:7).
Paul’s use of Abraham’s expulsion of Hagar and her child has its parallel in the equally heartless treatment of Esau which he employs in Rom. 9-11 in his longer discussion of the divine process of selection. Here too it was assumed that the hatred generated by centuries of war for the possession of Palestine lay in the heart of God. “I hate Esau,” said Malachi (1:3), making God the speaker; and Rom. 9:6-13 presses it to the utmost limit of predestination. But the love of God in Christ Jesus made Paul’s heart better than his inherited doctrine … When the history of the struggle for the possession of “the Holy land” is allegorized to justify a doctrine of “election” which foredooms countless souls to an eternity of torment in a future hell, it becomes as morally atrocious as it is irreconcilable with Paul’s gospel.
Nevertheless Paul’s allegory gives the historian an insight into Paul’s mind as he wrestled with the insoluble problem of God’s sovereignty and human freedom.” (Stamm, 1953, TIB vol. X pp. 543-544)
“Paul bids the Galatians rid themselves of the Judaizers – and, ironically enough, obey the Torah itself.” (Joseph A. Fitzmyer, 1990, TNJBC p. 788)
2023.06.08 00:05 DViLL- Mike Rockenfeller - 11th July 2011 - LeMans
Eurosport coverage: https://youtu.be/YAu3pMgmvpU
This crash is often forgotten due to Allan McNish's accident in the same race, yet in the day time. This crash was in the complete darkness at 01:25. and there are two shots of it happening. One from the cockpit of Rockenfeller, and one from directly in front on the crash. Where you see two lights chasing forwards, one pair pull to the side and suddenly swerve to the left in a cloud of dust. And before you know it. A cloud of debris.
Entering the kink just after the mulsanne straight, the #1 Audi of Mike Rockenfeller went to overtake the #71 AF corsa Ferrari of Robert Kaufmann, Kaufmann tightened the line and Rockenfeller touched the grass on the inside and lost traction, this flung him into the side of the Ferrari, spinning him head on into the barrier in a shower of debris. At over 320km/h. The Ferrari also hit the barriers but to much less extremity than the Audi.
After the crash, Rockenfeller exited the car alone before the engine of the Audi burst into flames, and he walked away and climbed over the metal barrier and sat down between the two barriers, and he passed out there. So when the marshals arrived, they saw a monocoque and debris and tires, but there was no driver. And as it was pitch black here, and Mike had basically hid himself, they believed the driver was ejected from the car, and were concerned for his life. But it was only when a marshal stood on Mike, they realised he left the car on his own and then succumbed to the crash.
Both drivers were taken to hospital, and both recovered fully from minor injuries. There was a safety car for one hour and the race was soon resumed.
submitted by DViLL- to MotorsportsCrashes [link] [comments]
This crash is often forgotten due to Allan McNish's accident in the same race, yet in the day time. This crash was in the complete darkness at 01:25. and there are two shots of it happening. One from the cockpit of Rockenfeller, and one from directly in front on the crash. Where you see two lights chasing forwards, one pair pull to the side and suddenly swerve to the left in a cloud of dust. And before you know it. A cloud of debris.
Entering the kink just after the mulsanne straight, the #1 Audi of Mike Rockenfeller went to overtake the #71 AF corsa Ferrari of Robert Kaufmann, Kaufmann tightened the line and Rockenfeller touched the grass on the inside and lost traction, this flung him into the side of the Ferrari, spinning him head on into the barrier in a shower of debris. At over 320km/h. The Ferrari also hit the barriers but to much less extremity than the Audi.
After the crash, Rockenfeller exited the car alone before the engine of the Audi burst into flames, and he walked away and climbed over the metal barrier and sat down between the two barriers, and he passed out there. So when the marshals arrived, they saw a monocoque and debris and tires, but there was no driver. And as it was pitch black here, and Mike had basically hid himself, they believed the driver was ejected from the car, and were concerned for his life. But it was only when a marshal stood on Mike, they realised he left the car on his own and then succumbed to the crash.
Both drivers were taken to hospital, and both recovered fully from minor injuries. There was a safety car for one hour and the race was soon resumed.
2023.06.08 00:05 YourHighlordVyrana Stain Their World Red: 1/???
Really enjoyed writing Ashe, but didn't like the title or how short it was and wanted to expand upon it. So I C/Ped the extremely short chapter here, made a lot changes, and resumed where I left off. So this is the new and official Chapter 1. Changed the title too! Once this goes up, I might just delete Ashe altogether we'll see. Until then, here's another for you guys. A proper chapter. Longer too. Back on the computer, so that's fun. Enjoy.
Title subject to change!
Read Ashe here (unless it's gone lol): https://www.reddit.com/HFY/comments/13mkfre/comment/jkvjcro/?context=3
///
The dead stare of a long-disintegrated child looked up at them. Remnants frozen in time as a monument of ruin to the wasteland before her. A lifeless, shattered. Echos of what used to be. It used to beautiful. Maybe in memory, it stays there. Isolated, but perfect. Perhaps, in another lifetime, they could have considered such a sight tragic.
But now? Now, it was simply a byproduct. One of many at that.
Oblivion wondered if it was a form of hypocrisy. To care for their own children, the ones they were responsible for feeding and caring for. The very same children who required the life-filling nutritional energy only essence, only Souls, could provide in sufficient quantity and quality. At least, until they found a long-term alternative. How then, was it fair, that they could stare into the monuments of ash and brimstone without remorse? To sleep well in the void of space as the killed world after world? To render galaxies extinct and universes as little more than drifting debris of dead space?
As it turned out, Oblivion didn't care to find the answer.
In truth, they didn't actually care to answer a question they'd already established an answer for. The thought experiment was simply that. An experiment. Something to do, at best. The attention upkeep for a Living Extinction class such as themself rarely warranted such self-scrutiny, but times could be dull, seeing as the bare minimum of effort that it took to kill planet after plantet after planet bore no grief to their heart not any guilt over the lives violently ripped away.
"Yo." A voice cried out. In response, the bored decimator tilted their head up to see their one and only partner hovering above them, floating in the shattered sky just a few feet above. They wondered if it was weird to take note that their friend's feet were remarkably clean. "You okay?"
Oblivion nodded. Their eyes glazed back down at the ashen remains of the child. It's face frozen in fear, their dreams, hopes and ideas dashed away. All so that their own children could have dreams, hopes and ideas on their own. Cataclysm, their partner, drifted down next to the standing red-skinned killer. Both Soul Rippers stood side-by-side amidst a lifeless chunk of what used to be Callus II, a world once renowned for its natural beauty. Destroying it hadn't actual yielded much Soulfood, or essence, as it was already halfway evacuated before their arrival. But once they did arrive, escape was impossible, not that it stopped the local resistance from, well, resisting. No, the planet's destruction was intended to damage moral moreso than it was to yield any form of "economic" bounty. Not that it didn't of course, food was food afterall, but it was an already sparsely populated planet. Since it was strongly suggested that the destruction of Callus II would cause significant unrest, maybe even rebellion in the remaining population centers, Oblivion figured it only fair they do their duty.
Hence, another byproduct of a looong list that kept expanding, unlikely to end anytime soon.
"We got new orders from the ladies up top. Wanna guess what?" Oblivion's head tilted up; eyes gleaming with a current of curiosity. She gestured with her hand towards the broken debris scattered about. Of a long-dead world around them.
Cataclysm smirked as she shook her head. "Nah, nothin' too crazy. Got something new this time." She paused. 'Word is... we got allies now. Real, honest folks that wanna, and get this, work with us this time around."
A frown creased the white-haired woman's features. She turned to look at her partner's increasingly grinning expression.
Oblivion asked the obvious question without words. Mute as she was, it'd taken some time for Cataclysm to get a proper read on her partner's flow with any accuracy. Maybe it was because she was one of the not-quite-insignificant few that carried whatever gene caused the highbreds to be amquadsinistrous instead of the standard amquaddextrious. Which, naturally, caused her childhood to be filled with more than a few hiccups when you're a part of a species that heralds 4 arms to 1 torso. But the challenge was welcomed. It allowed her to be the Soul Ripper she is today. Her upper-hand twirled its index finger into a speedy frenzy, purple Vydent energy streaming from the tip into a swirling tight ball barely half the size of her thumb. The casual level of control over her Vydent flow made Cataclysm's partner wonder if it was weird that they noticed that, in addition to her feet, their friend's nails were also very clean.
Oblivion, for her part, remained focused on the current revelation. Confused at her friend's wording more than anything. Vassals that chose submission, to forgo their freedom and independence and live as official dependence of the Highbred Collective was the standard play-by-play. The trade-off, of course, being that in exchange for willingly allowing oneself to live as, essentially, glorified cattle for food and breeding purposes for denizens the Highbred Collective, the said cattle, referred to as thralls, would be legally protected under relatively well-regulated supervision and oversight in order to protect both their privacy and livelihood. The Gyfolten Principle in particular ensured, under extremely strict law and application, that humane treatment be provided in abundance for all enthralled vassals, unless otherwise specified by the vassals themselves. It was one of the very few choices offered to any and all opposition, excluding special exceptions naturally. A choice often typically preferred over those whose territories were soon to be conquered, destroyed or both. That was the only form 'allies' her people took. For a species to be able enter an honest partnership with the highbred race was... nearly unheard of.
Only one race had ever managed such a feat, and they were long extinct. The white-haired decimator pointed as her own head in a clawing motion, its question clear.
"Nope, not enthrallment." Cataclysm responded, still grinning even when she popped the 'P'. "Like I said. Full on allyship. Partners even!" The excitement in her voice was evident. Almost infectious.
Oblivion's frown only deepened, confusion warring with contemplation before her eyes suddenly widened as the realization hit her. Cataclysm took the moment to mentally pat herself on the back for being able to translate the powerful mute's particular form of communication.
"Yep. There it is. It's aaaallll over your face BeeBee. No thralls, no vassals, no crazy shit. We got ourselves real volunteers this time around. People who wanna actually negotiate and even talk with us. Heh, three guesses as to who just got sattled to provide 'security' for the upcoming 'diplomatic mission'." She used air-quotes. "And the first two don't count."
Oblivion blinked.
Somehow, her partner's smile split her face even wider, a dance of mischievousness flashed through her glowing purple beacons. She slowly started to rise higher into the ruined sky moments later.
"Well! Guess you'll just have to fiiiind out when we get there. Planet we're going to is called 'Earth' by rest of the galaxy. So... ready for a lil' road trip?"
///
The journey to Earth was a rather uneventful.
Surrounding her was a comfortable dome of dark red vydent energy, solidified into a comfortable hardlight seat that was easy on the eyes. It surrounded her like those capsules she'd seen on TV, forming both a protective barrier between herself and the vacuum of space as they traveled through FTL. Spacious too. She even had a nice comfy pillow and the 'chair' reclined as high or low as she pleased.
So, while uneventful, it most certainly was pleasant.
Pinelock was their assigned Solar Soother, an Energizer whose sole job was to provide speedy and smooth transportation for Decimators like Oblivion and herself. Cataclysm remembered being in her role eons ago, using her own vydent energy to ferry bigger and better Decimators from star system to star system. It paid decently, but she wasn't in it for the essence. The job was, at best, a luxury afforded for the powerful. Like being a limousine driver for an excessively wealthy businessman. It helped her connect with those powerful killers back then, helped her understand their motivations beyond the barebone necessity of "kill or be killed".
With that thought in mind, the blonde Soul Ripper made a mental reminder to tip their chauffeur when they arrived at Earth as she leaned back into the provided pillow. Just as her eyes closed, she began thinking about her partner.
She remembered feeling incredibly nervous when upon first meeting her. The stories surrounding the then average Soul Ripper, wondering which ones were true and which ones were just hearsay from her various obsessors. Oblivion was a living legend, both inside and out. A genius and warrior both in fact. Back then, Cataclysm admired their tenacity. She read their info-profile. How Oblivion heralded many obsessors in her early days, rising to prominence primarily through utilizing some seriously impressive enthrallment tactics, drowning her would-be killers in a sea of bodies by utilizing some prolific insect race to force them to expend their vydent energy reserves. After that, it was a simple matter of killing off whatever opposition remained, though mercifully chose to personally spare or adopt many of the children of the deceased. All-in-all, it was a typical power story, up until the moment the Red Bastion, the main governing body of Highbred at the time, attempted to recruit her to their cause once she'd grown beyond their means of subjugation. And when their efforts ended in futility, Oblivion remained standing, the Red Bastion did not. Without leadership, the remaining populace moved on, formed their own groups, established a new primary Obelisk of Dominion, and the events were eventually relegated to the history logs. Whatever obsessors didn't try to outright kill the white-haired Soul Ripper decided to become dedicated housewives, pledging their hearts and mind to Oblivion and only her. Which was standard Obsessor behavior. What got her popular was the sheer volume of subsequent Supplicants that followed, asking to join her harem. Oblivion declined, of course, but the aftermath of so many offers are ultimately what rocketed her to the position she has today.
"A relatively bloodless rise to power really." Cataclysm though to herself. "Thought I wonder how she felt back then. What made her want to be a Soul Ripper? And why?" Even today, Cataclysm still didn't know. It was one of the few things she decided she'd have to be okay with never knowing. Over the years, as their bond grew, she thought she had a pretty good grasp on why her partner did what she did back then. But in truth? She still had no clue. And likely never would.
What she figured she should know, however, is a little information on the race they were visiting. The humans of planet Earth.
"May I ask you a question, Cataclysm?" Oblivion's voice gently echoed in the blonde Soul Ripper's mindscape, her voice somehow a whisper carried with all the authority of a command. But it was a genuine question, and Cataclysm was happy to answer honestly. "Well, you just did you did, but shoot. What's on that mind o' yours?"
It was always an exceptionally rare moment with an even short timeframe that Oblivion spoke, and even when she did it was always through their telepathic connection. So, whenever she did offer to speak, Cataclysm vowed to always make time to listen.
As she listened in on such a rarity, the blonde Soul Ripper also found her wondering about the new world they would be arriving at. And most importantly, what it's denizens so different from the rest.
///
Thank you so much for reading, Chapter will be far longer as they progress, haven't quite settled on a word count just yet. When Chapter 2 is up, it will be posted either at the top or the bottom, here. This is really my first real time posting here and, unlike previous unposted projects, I really want to improve my consistency in writing and craft a fun story while doing so. Until then, thank you for reading, please feel free to leave constructive criticism or feedback at your leisure, and I hope you have a great day!
-Highlord V.
submitted by YourHighlordVyrana to HFY [link] [comments]
Title subject to change!
Read Ashe here (unless it's gone lol): https://www.reddit.com/HFY/comments/13mkfre/comment/jkvjcro/?context=3
///
The dead stare of a long-disintegrated child looked up at them. Remnants frozen in time as a monument of ruin to the wasteland before her. A lifeless, shattered. Echos of what used to be. It used to beautiful. Maybe in memory, it stays there. Isolated, but perfect. Perhaps, in another lifetime, they could have considered such a sight tragic.
But now? Now, it was simply a byproduct. One of many at that.
Oblivion wondered if it was a form of hypocrisy. To care for their own children, the ones they were responsible for feeding and caring for. The very same children who required the life-filling nutritional energy only essence, only Souls, could provide in sufficient quantity and quality. At least, until they found a long-term alternative. How then, was it fair, that they could stare into the monuments of ash and brimstone without remorse? To sleep well in the void of space as the killed world after world? To render galaxies extinct and universes as little more than drifting debris of dead space?
As it turned out, Oblivion didn't care to find the answer.
In truth, they didn't actually care to answer a question they'd already established an answer for. The thought experiment was simply that. An experiment. Something to do, at best. The attention upkeep for a Living Extinction class such as themself rarely warranted such self-scrutiny, but times could be dull, seeing as the bare minimum of effort that it took to kill planet after plantet after planet bore no grief to their heart not any guilt over the lives violently ripped away.
"Yo." A voice cried out. In response, the bored decimator tilted their head up to see their one and only partner hovering above them, floating in the shattered sky just a few feet above. They wondered if it was weird to take note that their friend's feet were remarkably clean. "You okay?"
Oblivion nodded. Their eyes glazed back down at the ashen remains of the child. It's face frozen in fear, their dreams, hopes and ideas dashed away. All so that their own children could have dreams, hopes and ideas on their own. Cataclysm, their partner, drifted down next to the standing red-skinned killer. Both Soul Rippers stood side-by-side amidst a lifeless chunk of what used to be Callus II, a world once renowned for its natural beauty. Destroying it hadn't actual yielded much Soulfood, or essence, as it was already halfway evacuated before their arrival. But once they did arrive, escape was impossible, not that it stopped the local resistance from, well, resisting. No, the planet's destruction was intended to damage moral moreso than it was to yield any form of "economic" bounty. Not that it didn't of course, food was food afterall, but it was an already sparsely populated planet. Since it was strongly suggested that the destruction of Callus II would cause significant unrest, maybe even rebellion in the remaining population centers, Oblivion figured it only fair they do their duty.
Hence, another byproduct of a looong list that kept expanding, unlikely to end anytime soon.
"We got new orders from the ladies up top. Wanna guess what?" Oblivion's head tilted up; eyes gleaming with a current of curiosity. She gestured with her hand towards the broken debris scattered about. Of a long-dead world around them.
Cataclysm smirked as she shook her head. "Nah, nothin' too crazy. Got something new this time." She paused. 'Word is... we got allies now. Real, honest folks that wanna, and get this, work with us this time around."
A frown creased the white-haired woman's features. She turned to look at her partner's increasingly grinning expression.
Oblivion asked the obvious question without words. Mute as she was, it'd taken some time for Cataclysm to get a proper read on her partner's flow with any accuracy. Maybe it was because she was one of the not-quite-insignificant few that carried whatever gene caused the highbreds to be amquadsinistrous instead of the standard amquaddextrious. Which, naturally, caused her childhood to be filled with more than a few hiccups when you're a part of a species that heralds 4 arms to 1 torso. But the challenge was welcomed. It allowed her to be the Soul Ripper she is today. Her upper-hand twirled its index finger into a speedy frenzy, purple Vydent energy streaming from the tip into a swirling tight ball barely half the size of her thumb. The casual level of control over her Vydent flow made Cataclysm's partner wonder if it was weird that they noticed that, in addition to her feet, their friend's nails were also very clean.
Oblivion, for her part, remained focused on the current revelation. Confused at her friend's wording more than anything. Vassals that chose submission, to forgo their freedom and independence and live as official dependence of the Highbred Collective was the standard play-by-play. The trade-off, of course, being that in exchange for willingly allowing oneself to live as, essentially, glorified cattle for food and breeding purposes for denizens the Highbred Collective, the said cattle, referred to as thralls, would be legally protected under relatively well-regulated supervision and oversight in order to protect both their privacy and livelihood. The Gyfolten Principle in particular ensured, under extremely strict law and application, that humane treatment be provided in abundance for all enthralled vassals, unless otherwise specified by the vassals themselves. It was one of the very few choices offered to any and all opposition, excluding special exceptions naturally. A choice often typically preferred over those whose territories were soon to be conquered, destroyed or both. That was the only form 'allies' her people took. For a species to be able enter an honest partnership with the highbred race was... nearly unheard of.
Only one race had ever managed such a feat, and they were long extinct. The white-haired decimator pointed as her own head in a clawing motion, its question clear.
"Nope, not enthrallment." Cataclysm responded, still grinning even when she popped the 'P'. "Like I said. Full on allyship. Partners even!" The excitement in her voice was evident. Almost infectious.
Oblivion's frown only deepened, confusion warring with contemplation before her eyes suddenly widened as the realization hit her. Cataclysm took the moment to mentally pat herself on the back for being able to translate the powerful mute's particular form of communication.
"Yep. There it is. It's aaaallll over your face BeeBee. No thralls, no vassals, no crazy shit. We got ourselves real volunteers this time around. People who wanna actually negotiate and even talk with us. Heh, three guesses as to who just got sattled to provide 'security' for the upcoming 'diplomatic mission'." She used air-quotes. "And the first two don't count."
Oblivion blinked.
Somehow, her partner's smile split her face even wider, a dance of mischievousness flashed through her glowing purple beacons. She slowly started to rise higher into the ruined sky moments later.
"Well! Guess you'll just have to fiiiind out when we get there. Planet we're going to is called 'Earth' by rest of the galaxy. So... ready for a lil' road trip?"
///
The journey to Earth was a rather uneventful.
Surrounding her was a comfortable dome of dark red vydent energy, solidified into a comfortable hardlight seat that was easy on the eyes. It surrounded her like those capsules she'd seen on TV, forming both a protective barrier between herself and the vacuum of space as they traveled through FTL. Spacious too. She even had a nice comfy pillow and the 'chair' reclined as high or low as she pleased.
So, while uneventful, it most certainly was pleasant.
Pinelock was their assigned Solar Soother, an Energizer whose sole job was to provide speedy and smooth transportation for Decimators like Oblivion and herself. Cataclysm remembered being in her role eons ago, using her own vydent energy to ferry bigger and better Decimators from star system to star system. It paid decently, but she wasn't in it for the essence. The job was, at best, a luxury afforded for the powerful. Like being a limousine driver for an excessively wealthy businessman. It helped her connect with those powerful killers back then, helped her understand their motivations beyond the barebone necessity of "kill or be killed".
With that thought in mind, the blonde Soul Ripper made a mental reminder to tip their chauffeur when they arrived at Earth as she leaned back into the provided pillow. Just as her eyes closed, she began thinking about her partner.
She remembered feeling incredibly nervous when upon first meeting her. The stories surrounding the then average Soul Ripper, wondering which ones were true and which ones were just hearsay from her various obsessors. Oblivion was a living legend, both inside and out. A genius and warrior both in fact. Back then, Cataclysm admired their tenacity. She read their info-profile. How Oblivion heralded many obsessors in her early days, rising to prominence primarily through utilizing some seriously impressive enthrallment tactics, drowning her would-be killers in a sea of bodies by utilizing some prolific insect race to force them to expend their vydent energy reserves. After that, it was a simple matter of killing off whatever opposition remained, though mercifully chose to personally spare or adopt many of the children of the deceased. All-in-all, it was a typical power story, up until the moment the Red Bastion, the main governing body of Highbred at the time, attempted to recruit her to their cause once she'd grown beyond their means of subjugation. And when their efforts ended in futility, Oblivion remained standing, the Red Bastion did not. Without leadership, the remaining populace moved on, formed their own groups, established a new primary Obelisk of Dominion, and the events were eventually relegated to the history logs. Whatever obsessors didn't try to outright kill the white-haired Soul Ripper decided to become dedicated housewives, pledging their hearts and mind to Oblivion and only her. Which was standard Obsessor behavior. What got her popular was the sheer volume of subsequent Supplicants that followed, asking to join her harem. Oblivion declined, of course, but the aftermath of so many offers are ultimately what rocketed her to the position she has today.
"A relatively bloodless rise to power really." Cataclysm though to herself. "Thought I wonder how she felt back then. What made her want to be a Soul Ripper? And why?" Even today, Cataclysm still didn't know. It was one of the few things she decided she'd have to be okay with never knowing. Over the years, as their bond grew, she thought she had a pretty good grasp on why her partner did what she did back then. But in truth? She still had no clue. And likely never would.
What she figured she should know, however, is a little information on the race they were visiting. The humans of planet Earth.
"May I ask you a question, Cataclysm?" Oblivion's voice gently echoed in the blonde Soul Ripper's mindscape, her voice somehow a whisper carried with all the authority of a command. But it was a genuine question, and Cataclysm was happy to answer honestly. "Well, you just did you did, but shoot. What's on that mind o' yours?"
It was always an exceptionally rare moment with an even short timeframe that Oblivion spoke, and even when she did it was always through their telepathic connection. So, whenever she did offer to speak, Cataclysm vowed to always make time to listen.
As she listened in on such a rarity, the blonde Soul Ripper also found her wondering about the new world they would be arriving at. And most importantly, what it's denizens so different from the rest.
///
Thank you so much for reading, Chapter will be far longer as they progress, haven't quite settled on a word count just yet. When Chapter 2 is up, it will be posted either at the top or the bottom, here. This is really my first real time posting here and, unlike previous unposted projects, I really want to improve my consistency in writing and craft a fun story while doing so. Until then, thank you for reading, please feel free to leave constructive criticism or feedback at your leisure, and I hope you have a great day!
-Highlord V.
2023.06.08 00:05 CodyCruikshank Jesus vs kratos
 | in the chosen of the dead chapter 2 jesus explains that how he is beaten long ago it took place on planet Tatooine when jesus used to put up a fight with kratos well it didn’t go so well in the end kratos won, and Jesus Christ is completely injured, wounded, and sick, kratos took him to the hospital at coruscant, the only way to cure his sickness and heal his wounds, is to inject him with the revenant flower submitted by CodyCruikshank to GodofWar [link] [comments] |
2023.06.08 00:04 DViLL- Mike Rockenfeller - 11th July 2011 - LeMans
Eurosport coverage: https://youtu.be/YAu3pMgmvpU
This crash is often forgotten due to Allan McNish's accident in the same race, yet in the day time. This crash was in the complete darkness at 01:25. and there are two shots of it happening. One from the cockpit of Rockenfeller, and one from directly in front on the crash. Where you see two lights chasing forwards, one pair pull to the side and suddenly swerve to the left in a cloud of dust. And before you know it. A cloud of debris.
Entering the kink just after the mulsanne straight, the #1 Audi of Mike Rockenfeller went to overtake the #71 AF corsa Ferrari of Robert Kaufmann, Kaufmann tightened the line and Rockenfeller touched the grass on the inside and lost traction, this flung him into the side of the Ferrari, spinning him head on into the barrier in a shower of debris. At over 320km/h. The Ferrari also hit the barriers but to much less extremity than the Audi.
After the crash, Rockenfeller exited the car alone before the engine of the Audi burst into flames, and he walked away and climbed over the metal barrier and sat down between the two barriers, and he passed out there. So when the marshals arrived, they saw a monocoque and debris and tires, but there was no driver. And as it was pitch black here, and Mike had basically hid himself, they believed the driver was ejected from the car, and were concerned for his life. But it was only when a marshal stood on Mike, they realised he left the car on his own and then succumbed to the crash.
Both drivers were taken to hospital, and both recovered fully from minor injuries. There was a safety car for one hour and the race was soon resumed.
submitted by DViLL- to GreatestRacingCrashes [link] [comments]
This crash is often forgotten due to Allan McNish's accident in the same race, yet in the day time. This crash was in the complete darkness at 01:25. and there are two shots of it happening. One from the cockpit of Rockenfeller, and one from directly in front on the crash. Where you see two lights chasing forwards, one pair pull to the side and suddenly swerve to the left in a cloud of dust. And before you know it. A cloud of debris.
Entering the kink just after the mulsanne straight, the #1 Audi of Mike Rockenfeller went to overtake the #71 AF corsa Ferrari of Robert Kaufmann, Kaufmann tightened the line and Rockenfeller touched the grass on the inside and lost traction, this flung him into the side of the Ferrari, spinning him head on into the barrier in a shower of debris. At over 320km/h. The Ferrari also hit the barriers but to much less extremity than the Audi.
After the crash, Rockenfeller exited the car alone before the engine of the Audi burst into flames, and he walked away and climbed over the metal barrier and sat down between the two barriers, and he passed out there. So when the marshals arrived, they saw a monocoque and debris and tires, but there was no driver. And as it was pitch black here, and Mike had basically hid himself, they believed the driver was ejected from the car, and were concerned for his life. But it was only when a marshal stood on Mike, they realised he left the car on his own and then succumbed to the crash.
Both drivers were taken to hospital, and both recovered fully from minor injuries. There was a safety car for one hour and the race was soon resumed.
2023.06.08 00:04 Lets-go-there Am I the asshole AITA #AITA
Hey guys, I need some advice. This is a throw away account and will probably be deleted later. I’m going to give some background context before getting to the main part so bare with me.
I have and at this stage am a swimming teacher and have been for 10 years. I’m also studying in the health industry. I have been working at the company I am employed at for the last 5years. I am also a carer for my parents.
Yesterday I was pulled into the office to have a meeting with 2 managers after being away on placement for a month. I’ve literally been back for 4 shifts. In the past one of the managers and I haven’t seen eye to eye but I’ve been calm on my part. I was pulled in because of a comment I made to my supervisor. The comment I made was for verbatim ‘There’s been a little bit of regression in the class, their kicks haven’t been worked on.’ The teacher who was given my shifts heard this when I was talking to my supervisor. She has been a teacher for two months. She then logged a complaint with the manager over it. For context we had families put their classes on hold, threaten to quit and cancel classes because the teaching given over that month was (and I quote from the supervisors that told me) ‘not up to or near the standard that they want, are used to or you give.’
I was also pulled up about asking the pool deck if they thought that a child had been moved up too early, because I thought they had. For context this child is 2 levels above where they should be. I’m not the only teacher to do this and as instructors we often ask each other their thoughts because we want a second opinion. I’m pretty strict with my move ups, so often ask for a second opinion. I am also one of the teachers that trains a fair few of then new instructors, I have no issue with that. I’m also often asked by the manager whom is not a swimming instructor and other pool decks my thoughts on other teachers and where their weaknesses are. Whenever I’m asked I point out to them on the lesson plans, what is and isn’t going right and what needs to be worked on. It is often followed by me saying that ‘they probably need a bit more training.’ Everyone does because when you feel like there’s nothing left to learn, you shouldn’t be in this industry.
All of this was brought up in a meeting. I said if someone has an issue with what I have said, approach me about it and we can have a conversation and I’ll actively go out of my way to apologise and not do the same thing twice. I was then told I was intimidating to some of the new teachers. This may be the case but I’m confident in what I do and the people whom I’ve been told are intimidated by me are also the ones whom have never had a conversation outside of the pool with me. I stated this to the managers.
I know that one of these managers has had it out for me since I stood up to her after she called me on the phone abusing me after I sent a text telling her that I was underpaid. We had a meeting after that (that I recorded) with her stating that she was out of line, shouldn’t have yelled at me and needs to stop saying to other staff that I’m intimidating and a bit of a bitch. There have also been multiple occasions where the supervisor and managers have agreed that children have been moved up too early and there isn’t much consistency between the teachers and move ups from other supervisors. There have also been multiple occasions where the manager has said to other staff while the teacher is not present that quote ‘they are a bad teacher. They are a sh!t teacher.’ Which other staff have also said on multiple occasions about different teachers, but nothing has ever come from it.
I have been stood down while they get letters from the two people these situations involve on grounds of bullying. I know that they are trying to sack me, I’ve seen them do this kind of thing before. My question is, am I the bully and the asshole?
submitted by Lets-go-there to u/Lets-go-there [link] [comments]
I have and at this stage am a swimming teacher and have been for 10 years. I’m also studying in the health industry. I have been working at the company I am employed at for the last 5years. I am also a carer for my parents.
Yesterday I was pulled into the office to have a meeting with 2 managers after being away on placement for a month. I’ve literally been back for 4 shifts. In the past one of the managers and I haven’t seen eye to eye but I’ve been calm on my part. I was pulled in because of a comment I made to my supervisor. The comment I made was for verbatim ‘There’s been a little bit of regression in the class, their kicks haven’t been worked on.’ The teacher who was given my shifts heard this when I was talking to my supervisor. She has been a teacher for two months. She then logged a complaint with the manager over it. For context we had families put their classes on hold, threaten to quit and cancel classes because the teaching given over that month was (and I quote from the supervisors that told me) ‘not up to or near the standard that they want, are used to or you give.’
I was also pulled up about asking the pool deck if they thought that a child had been moved up too early, because I thought they had. For context this child is 2 levels above where they should be. I’m not the only teacher to do this and as instructors we often ask each other their thoughts because we want a second opinion. I’m pretty strict with my move ups, so often ask for a second opinion. I am also one of the teachers that trains a fair few of then new instructors, I have no issue with that. I’m also often asked by the manager whom is not a swimming instructor and other pool decks my thoughts on other teachers and where their weaknesses are. Whenever I’m asked I point out to them on the lesson plans, what is and isn’t going right and what needs to be worked on. It is often followed by me saying that ‘they probably need a bit more training.’ Everyone does because when you feel like there’s nothing left to learn, you shouldn’t be in this industry.
All of this was brought up in a meeting. I said if someone has an issue with what I have said, approach me about it and we can have a conversation and I’ll actively go out of my way to apologise and not do the same thing twice. I was then told I was intimidating to some of the new teachers. This may be the case but I’m confident in what I do and the people whom I’ve been told are intimidated by me are also the ones whom have never had a conversation outside of the pool with me. I stated this to the managers.
I know that one of these managers has had it out for me since I stood up to her after she called me on the phone abusing me after I sent a text telling her that I was underpaid. We had a meeting after that (that I recorded) with her stating that she was out of line, shouldn’t have yelled at me and needs to stop saying to other staff that I’m intimidating and a bit of a bitch. There have also been multiple occasions where the supervisor and managers have agreed that children have been moved up too early and there isn’t much consistency between the teachers and move ups from other supervisors. There have also been multiple occasions where the manager has said to other staff while the teacher is not present that quote ‘they are a bad teacher. They are a sh!t teacher.’ Which other staff have also said on multiple occasions about different teachers, but nothing has ever come from it.
I have been stood down while they get letters from the two people these situations involve on grounds of bullying. I know that they are trying to sack me, I’ve seen them do this kind of thing before. My question is, am I the bully and the asshole?
2023.06.08 00:03 houdinix23 Me starring my doctor dead in the eyes after being told ive got 2 weeks left to live
 | submitted by houdinix23 to Daniellarson [link] [comments] |
2023.06.08 00:03 leopauldelr My Top 10 Iconic Le Mans Legends
 | This weekend, the 24 Hours of Le Mans race will celebrate its 100th anniversary, and with 62 cars from different classes gathering around in this centennial milestone as well as special guest stars, rest assured that the 100th running of the 24 Hours of Le Mans is going to be historical indeed. submitted by leopauldelr to u/leopauldelr [link] [comments] https://preview.redd.it/pefahi055o4b1.png?width=320&format=png&auto=webp&s=96bc8f6e4d0f78793f315a8d4b2f096639691d58 As the whole world is bracing for the centennial running of the legendary endurance race that pushes carmakers over the limit in the name of speed and survival, it's time for me to jot down my top ten iconic Le Mans legends. 10) GR010 - Following the success of their LMP1-class TS050, which propelled Toyota Gazoo Racing to three straight overall titles at Le Mans, Toyota created this competitor to the new Hypercar class, which replaced the LMP1 class after the 2020 season. Complying with Hypercar regulations, the GR010 is powered by a 3.5L V6 twin-turbo engine mated to an electric motor that powers the front wheels, making it a 4WD machine where the petrol engine powers the rear wheels while the electric motor takes care of the front, a drastic change compared to its LMP1 predecessor. Toyota defended its Le Mans success in the new Hypercar class with the #7 Toyota Gazoo Racing car emerging as the winner of the 24 Hours of Le Mans for two years, making it its fifth win in a row. 9) Toyota TS050 - In the 2018 24 Hours of Le Mans, being the only manufacturer-backed LMP1 racer competing in its class, the #8 Toyota Gazoo Racing TS050, piloted by Formula 1 driver Fernando Alonso, Formula E driver Sebastien Buemi, and Kazuki Nakajima, made a historic victory at Le Mans, marking the second time a Japanese carmaker won Le Mans since the legendary Mazda 787B and the first time a Japanese driver became part of the Le Mans-winning team. In 2019 and 2020, with the latter being the final year for the LMP1 era, Toyota emerged victorious in Le Mans. 8) Jaguar XJR-9 - Built in collaboration between Jaguar and Tom Walkinshaw Racing, Jaguar's Group C competitor is powered by two V12 engines; a 7.0L for the WSPC and a 6.0L for IMSA GTP class. Both produce 760PS of power and 828Nm of torque, while mated to a 5-speed March/TWR manual gearbox, making the XJR-9 capable of hitting a 245mph top speed. A Silk Cut-sponsored Jaguar XJR-9 won the 1988 24 Hours of Leman with Jan Lammers, Johnny Dumfries, and Andy Wallace behind the wheel. 7) Peugeot 905 - The V10-powered Peugeot 905 cemented the French carmaker to the list of Le Mans winners when it won the legendary endurance race twice in 1992 and 1993. 6) Audi R18 TDi - The Audi R18 TDi is known as the only diesel-powered racing machine that conquered Le Mans three times from 2012 to 2014. Not only that, it has dominated two WEC championship titles from 2012 to 2013. Such achievement proves that diesel is king until dieselgate came most carmakers are ditching diesel-powered engines for good. 5) 919 Hybrid - In 2014, Porsche returned to LMP1 endurance racing with their 919 Hybrid and although it didn't fare well in its first run, which led to its 3rd place finish at the constructor's championship at the 2014 WEC season, it came back with a much fighting chance and because of such will power, it managed to win not just Le Mans but also three WEC seasons on the trot from 2015 to 2017. Porsche has left the LMP1 racing program after their three-win streak with the 919, only to make a comeback in the Hypercar class with the 963 racing machine. 4) Sauber-Mercedes C9 - As part of the Sauber-Mercedes partnership, this Group C prototype was introduced in 1987 and its first success can be traced back to the 1989 24 Hours of Le Mans, where the #63 C9 driven by Jochen Mass, Manual Reuter, and Stanley Dickens, achieved a win. During qualifying for Le Mans, the C9, with its Mercedes-Benz M119 HL 90º 5.0L Turbo V8 engine with two KKK turbos, achieved a top speed of 248.0 mph (400 km/h) at the Mulsanne Straight of Le Mans. 3) 917K - The Porsche 917K is known as the short-tail version of the legendary 917, a sports prototype race car, and it gave Porsche their first overall wins at Le Mans for two straight years since 1970. Thanks to such success, it even gained a starring role in the Le Mans movie starring Steve McQueen. 2) 787B - Built as an improved version of the 787, it features the same R26B 4-rotor Wankel engine as its predecessor which produces up to 690HP of power. Aside from that, it features carbon-fiber bodywork which resulted in a light, rigid body structure and other improvements. In the 1991 24 Hours of Le Mans endurance race, Mazda sent two 787B machines with the race-winning #55 car driven by Bertrand Gachot, Johnny Herbert, and Volker Weider. The 787B not only became the first Japanese-manufactured race car to win Le Mans, but it's also the first-and-only rotary-powered race car to win the said endurance race. 1) GT40 Mk. II - Ford's trial-and-error process of creating a racing machine that can crush Ferrari in Le Mans is nothing more of an act of revenge from the Blue Oval following Ferrari's rejection to become part of the Ford empire. Armed with the 7.0L V8 engine producing 485HP of power and mated to a 4-speed gearbox, the GT40 Mk.II from Ford delivered a stunning podium sweep at the 1966 24 Hours of Le Mans race, more than enough to crush Ferrari into it. Such achievement has been profiled in the biopic movie Ford vs. Ferrari. In this centennial running of the 24 Hours of Le Mans, will it be a milestone for Toyota Gazoo as it's seeking a three-peat in the Hypercar class? Will the return of Ferrari in Le Mans crush Toyota's dreams for a three-peat? Find out as this legendary endurance race unfolds this Saturday, June 10th. Don't miss it! |