u/JuanFran21

Battle of Ruspina? I think

Those Julius Caesar numbers look off - iirc he lost 3 battles (once to Vercingetorix, once to Labienus, once to Pompey). Maybe you could count one of those as a draw but idk if any would count as a win.

They won't. I'm almost certain all the major parties would much rather just rerun the election.

Sure! Tainted Keeper is probably my favourite character to play in the game, but he does have a bit of a learning curve. My advice:

Prioritise any coin-based items/trinkets you come across. Breaking pots in cellar 1/2 is always a good bet if you have extra bombs, since both swallowed penny and counterfeit penny can drop (drops coin on hit/double coins on pickup), which are incredibly strong for obvious reasons. Other items that are very strong include keepers head, wooden nickel, steam sale, member card and deep pockets.

Don't be risky when picking up coins (unless it's a dime/nickel). If it's too close to an enemy, leave it. Most coins will be fairly easy to pick up, but you can leave 15/30/45 coins across a run, that's only 1/2/3 items less. If you're going all the way to The Chest this simply isn't a big deal.

Health is an issue: the keeper is basically the lost in this regard. I advise to leave a few regular coin pickups throughout the level so you can replenish yourself to 2 hearts if needed. Check secret rooms (and finish the Pong challenge); if you get greed's gullet, you've pretty much won the run due to the extra health.

Check all your shops! These are so broken with tainted Keeper, since treasure room items can appear in them. They should be prioritised over treasure rooms imo. With the amount of items on sale in Tainted Keeper shops, it tends to be a matter of when (not if) you get a strong item. With a restock machine or rerolls, Tainted Keeper can see more treasure room items per floor than any other character.

Yes but the question says with certainty. It's entirely possible 3 is blind given the parameters of the question.

2 is white, 3 is black, 4 is black. 1 is certainly blind, 2 isn't, 3 and 4 you cannot tell I believe?

Explanation:

1 should be able to see all hats in front of them and deduce their own colour. Given they say nothing, they must be blind.

2 says their colour. This is only possible if the two hats they can see are the same colour (3 and 4), allowing them to deduce their own hat - given 1 eventually says their hat is white, the two hats in front of them must be black, so 2's hat is white.

Given 3 and 4 are perfect logicians, they would immediately deduce they both have black hats once 2 answers. As such, it's impossible to tell which is blind and which can see.

They should really push for STV imo. I feel like if you did polling on which party is a voter's second choice, the Lib Dems would top that list.

Just an FYI, there are 2 bell puzzles in the game. You gave the solution to the 1st one: the OP was asking for a solution to the 2nd one.

On the subject, I wonder if the Traitors/Raven has any staff members in common? The production design feels very similar in places.

I think it's an impossible question to ask tbh. Many who say they would fight might balk if actually faced with doing it, while others who say they wouldn't may change their mind if the country is under actual threat.

Brit here, some context:

Palestine Action (PA) is a medium-sized Pro-Palestinian protest group here in the UK. They are notable due to a couple of high profile incidents their members were involved in. Namely, they broke into a military base a caused damage to a jet, costing the government 10s of millions. They also broke into a factory belonging to an Israeli firm, smashing up the place until the police arrived; during the confrontation, a female police officer was thrown to the floor and a member of PA hit her on the back with a sledgehammer, causing permanent damage.

Because of the above incidents, the government took the controversial decision to proscribe this group, making it illegal to support them financially or otherwise. Many criticised this as being overreach (which I agree with), though it should be noted that dozens of other pro-Palestinian groups continue to function completely unimpeded. This is NOT about suppressing support for Gaza, rather an action taken to disincentivise further acts of domestic terrorism, which the UK has a complicated history with.

Sally Rooney has continued to vocally support PA, as well as pledge her royalties to the group. This has lead to her publisher refusing to publish her books, as pledging money to this group is currently illegal and could lead to legal action against the publisher. Note she could pledge this money to literally any other pro-Palestine group and she would face no issues, but is deliberately choosing not to do so.

In my opinion, even though I disagree with the government proscribing PA, this all comes off as incredibly performative. Rooney and others are essentially redirecting energy from protesting on behalf of Palestinians to protesting on behalf of a protest group, which just seems like the actual issue is being ignored. Though it is her money and books to do with as she chooses.

Not really. It's just her publisher not wanting to publish due to her pledging all the royalties to and group that is proscribed in the UK. Whether you agree with the proscription decision or not (I don't), she A) could send these royalties to any number of other Palestine charities and be absolutely fine or B) self publish. The UK government is doing absolutely nothing here, it's just Sally Rooney dying on a hill for no reason.

Such a stupid hill to die on. Supporting Palestine is absolutely allowed in the UK, there are plenty of larger pro-Palestinian groups she could donate her royalties to and she'd have no issues. There are probably Palestine protests and fundraisers happening every single day unimpeded by the government.

But no, she's specifically choosing Palestine Action, knowing it's considered a terrorist group by the government. She knows exactly what the potential ramifications are by doing this, exactly the same as the elderly protesters who went out with PA signs knowing they'd be arrested for it.

For the record, I actually do think the government went too far by prescribing PA as a terrorist group, rather than just bringing criminal cases against individuals within the organisation. But Rooney and others like her are proving that their activism are entirely performative, since they are now redirecting energy away from protesting the situation in Palestine to protesting for PA.

Imo boss rush and greedier should be moved down, mother and beast should be top.

Mother because alt floors are incredibly difficult, it's easy to mess up the knife pieces and die, plus mother herself is a difficult boss.

Beast because you really dont get many items on these runs - just whatever you get up to depths 2, at which point you start the ascent (compare that to delirium which you tend to fight after The Chest). Ascent has some difficult enemies, after which you have to fight 6 of the tankiest bosses in the game, back to back.

It's a difficult issue.

On one hand, the popular orthodoxy in the UK is that housing is a great investment since the value always goes up. This is great for existing homeowners and investors, plus increasing house prices keeps the market moving (meaning the government gets more from stamp duty and the like).

On the other hand, house prices falling is better for first time buyers, since housing is becoming increasingly unaffordable for many in the UK. The best way to do this is to increase the amount of housing stock available by building more. But then you screw over existing homeowners; the more housing prices drop, the bigger the risk that they may go into arrears, which means they can't sell until prices rise again, stagnating the market.

The thing is, Miranda realises Hannah is smart and that murdering her in hide and seek would be too obvious. Choosing Miranda and not murdering her will just confirm to Miranda that Hannah is a traitor, since it's the sort of clever play she expects. Miranda would just spend the whole day going full in on Hannah.

Not even choosing Miranda might throw her off the scent a bit; she might not be as vocal about Hannah the next day and the heat might die down a bit. But then again Miranda might recognise the bluff so who knows.

I mean, she likely wasn't dark skinned but certainly wasn't as pale as the image makes it out. Probably eastern Mediterranean with a strong tan.

I guess it's not as... black and white as people are making it out to be.

I think that was her only choice - if she had refused, she would be high up on the traitor's kill list and also be high up on the faithful suspicions list. She would have gone early anyways, may as well try and play it as a traitor.

Hannah posted a YouTube video where she goes through this crazy mathematical strategy she developed to find the traitors. It is genuinely super impressive and most likely would have worked - is such a shame she got made a traitor!

This is so dumb lol.

1. Obviously it's easier to deposit 10k of cash than it is to withdraw it. Scammers will often ask people to withdraw large amounts of cash, since it's untraceable - the bank is right to make checks, especially since he's old.

2. Business accounts commonly have cash go in, but it's very odd to withdraw cash. Why would someone want to withdraw cash from their business? The extra checks are there to ensure the guy isn't screwing a business partner or using the cash for non-business uses.

3. Banks don't have infinite cash, they need to ensure they actually have enough to give out to this guy.

But what if parents aren't moderating it? Which they are not, currently. The issue is that social media is incredibly damaging to developing minds, my generation was the first to really grow up with it and stats show a significant increase in anxiety, self image issues, warped views of relationships and so on. Plenty of my generation have voluntarily dropped social media in adulthood because we recognise how damaging it can be.

According to the BBC, the motion specifically defined Zionism as an "ideology supporting an ethnonationalist Jewish state". They are instead supporting "a single democratic Palestinian state in all of historic Palestine".

I think it's a valid argument to say Zionism as a concept has multiple meanings to different people nowadays, however with the above definitions it's pretty clear the stance of the motion is that Israel as a state should no longer exist.

It's hard to say, but I believe the original person who broke the story fired him from the university radio station due to what he did, which she clarified was him having sex with his gf while she was unconscious. But obviously this isn't hard proof.

The university guidelines were also published and showed the charge doesn't include stuff like groping, it was one of 3 things (rape, statutory rape, incest) so was one of those. Again am just repeating what I've seen, so please verify if you want further info.

It's also like, I get people can change and be rehabilitated, maybe he has. But it's everyone else's personal choice whether they want to continue associating with him or not. A lot of the comments I've seen seem to almost be trying to convince people that they should keep watching him because of some moral argument about rehabilitation and forgiveness. But it really should just be a personal choice.

I think people can absolutely change, and quite possibly Jacob has. But you have to consider that his job is one that is almost exclusively driven by having an active fan base, at that something like sexual assault can completely put someone off watching his content (even if they think he's changed).

At the end of the day people are well within their right to choose watch they watch and for whatever reason, in this case that means his youtube career is dead.