u/Tebwolf359

Gineas is a great example of how I want it to work.

- in wow:0 it’s closed
- in retail it opens during cataclysm
- in Forever: it has the freedom to open or not.

Cool. The diversion point is in the future, that works for me.

On the other hand, if the retcon/diversion point was in the past, that’s a hard no for me.

For examples:

- the Dracthyr are currently sealed away
- the jailer exists
- eredar are corrupted draneai

All of those are retcons made in wow, but they take place in the deep past.

I don’t want to ever see the shadowlands or the jailer, to be clear. But I also don’t want anything contradicting it, because then that means WoWF is no longer a branch that splits off at WoW:0, but at a much older time, and now that’s a different game entirely.

As someone who has been against discord as being something that was harming the open web for years now, it doesn’t surprise me.

When I search for discussions on Magic or Warhammer or obscure game X, having that in a discord is annoying at best and harmful at worst.

And it’s not private if it was a public discord.

The privacy objection here feels like “yes, I published my name in the yellow pages. What do you mean that people can look it up?”

They owned it from the beginning. Touchstone was a division of Disney, and it was distributed by Buena Vista (Disney).

It was made as part of Tim Burtons development deal with Walt Disney Studios.

Crazy-parent groups boycotted Disney at the time over releasing such a blasphemous thing.

I’ve seen it. I love it. It perfectly marries the macabre and whimsy.

Just like WoW did from vanilla on.

Ahhhh. I hate the flavor text on this.

Yes, Kirk plays poker and bluffs. But Kirk is also one of the only humans we see beat Vulcans at chess as well.

Kirk is both chess and poker, not one over the other. #kirkDrift

The way I’ve heard it is a bit different perspective.

That god gives the rules, but enjoys the loopholes because it shows they are thinking about it. If he didn’t want you to find the loopholes, then in his wisdom he would have made it with more loopholes or at least given a law to not look for loopholes.

This looks more Disney then most of retail, BTW.

As in, if you put him on a shirt with Jack Skellington, I wouldn’t blink.

And that’s fine.

Warcraft’s art since AT LEAST Warcraft 3 is Warhammer by way of Disney.

This is part of where Mon Mothma and her long time persona is important.

She built a public image of stability and trust ability for decades.

A radical firebrand making her same speech in the Senate doesn’t mean as much. But someone who has long been a calm, steady voice of reason saying ALERT! FIRE! Gets attention.

It’s why you need both her and Luthien, Bail and Saw.

Any of them alone is not enough but you need the public servants who spend their life being visible to the public to be trusted.

Yes, with a caveat.

I want to see other types of force users, just like I want to see other forms of government beyond the Republic and empire.

BUT, I don’t want the like blurred over Dark=bad or Fascism=bad.

Mainly thinking about all the grey Jedi fantasies.

The Jedi are not the only was to use the force “right”, but the Sith are not the only ways to use it wrong, and the dark side being corruptive evil shouldn’t be overlooked or papered over.

That where I was both excited and disappointed by Acolyte.

What I thought we might get: force witches that were good. Non-Sith bad guys.

What we got:

- force witches that still used the darkside (mind dominance)
- a Sith

(On the positive side, we got a very clean example of why force Suggestion isn’t dark by comparison to domination, and Qimir is at least seemingly a hedonistic Sith instead of a control the world Sith.

I think of it like this:

There’s lots of things I can say about myself that will give people a default impression on my positions.

If I run for office, and I say I am a Democrat, that does not mean I agree with the party platform on every detail, but it’s fair to assume so unless I say otherwise.

I would say the default expectation of a Democratic candidate is that they would be prochoice, pro-gun regulations, etc.

This does not mean you are a fake Democrat if you don’t hold those positions. But it’s fair to assume you do unless you state otherwise.

Religion gets trickier since there often isn’t an official platform as much.

But if I am running, and say I’m Catholic, I think it’s fair to assume the default is I am Pro-life and Anti-death penalty.

So if I am running as a Democratic candidate and I am openly Catholic, asking if I would vote pro-life or pro-choice is beyond fair.

Where the bigotry comes in is assuming things that are not part of a religion, but part of (at best) a cultural mis-image of a religion.

The risk/reward analysis here intrigues me:

- I know the speed limit for some curves is very accurate
- I believe that others have a higher tolerance
- the risk of I overshoot is horrible, up to and including death.
- the reward is 10/mph for let’s be generous, 2 minutes. So possible time savings of 10-15 seconds. At most.

Why would people take that risk for that reward?

> instead of turning his back on the one man he knows has a gun, River sits down and disarms him

I will pick on Rivers bad decisions all day, but this one made sense and the camera showed us him looking at the gun before accepting the offer.

Because Star Trek is a single entity, where each FF is its own multiverse.

Sure, but all of Star Trek is still the same multiverse.

The Kelvin and Mirror universes you can travel to from the prime timeline.

Everything else is the same timeline, just may be overwritten by time travel.

I wouldn’t be against the idea, but it would be closer to all the Ravnica cards (even the mono color) saying what guild they are from.

Yeah, reading the post looks like a pure win:

- because when you think “write contact” means let this app add a contact to my contacts and the app gets permission to delete contacts in the background, that’s very different
- if all an app needs to to write a contact, the existing api will bring up a form to do that.
- if it actually needs to manage the contacts, apps can do that via a new API, but users will be more clear on what they are allowing the app to do

What’s the OP issue?

Fair enough.

I think part of the point of robots in SF, going at least as far back as Asimov, or Frankenstein are to make us question what the line is, why we draw it, etc.

Because once their plan was exposed, that money theoretically becomes open to the people makes ordered to pay.

So they wouldn’t be getting either way.

Yes. So if we found out that humans were genetically engineered as servants, would that change how you feel about them?

The origin of the species doesn’t change if they are alive and sentient today.

The question comes to what we define as life.

Ina. SciFi world, where we’ve met and formed relationships with aliens, what makes the Kalon less alive then Bortus? Or a human?

To be fair, that’s not clear from your story.

From your text it sounds like he heard you reached out, thought it was friendly, not someone wanting something from him, and had lunch with an old, coldly remembered former employee.

You didn’t do anything wrong on the front end, but depending on how you handled the end, spends on if he fits you in a role he may or may not have, or it he calls friends.

Edit: yeah, your edit makes it a bit different. He knew you were looking, and had your resume. This was an interview for some kind.

If you had burned bridges in the past you wouldn’t have got this far.

The key isn’t the behavior itself.

Kaladin is judging the lighteyes for doing it when he wouldn’t if they were dark eyes. Or if he did, it’d be a silent judgement.

Kaladin allows the light>dark racism to let him become (understandably) racist against the light-eyed. And down that path leads to Moash.

That’s kind of the point. What is a correct spelling of a name, especially one that comes from a different language.

They are all made up on some level.

If the parents wanted “Rachel” but spelled “Rachael” because of Michael, then is it correct or incorrect?

Neither and both at the same time, because it’s closer to the original but different than common?

Where I had an unusual name (enough I won’t give it because I’ve never seen anyone else with it), and my wife’s name is a portmanteau of her father’s first and middle names. Neither of us were bullied in school
Or life for our name once.

Bullies don’t need material. They will find whatever they want to.

I assume we are talking about clayface here?

Ok. Let’s go over what the basic assumptions are, and why they are.

- Hollywood accounting is notoriously opaque and dodgy. Ember how Stan Lee had to sue because Spider-man didn’t make a profit, and Peter Jackson had to sue because neither did LOTR?
- in part because of that, the accepted formula to judge a box office is 2.5x budget
- 2x because, taken as a whole worldwide, with exchange rates, different chains, different weekends, over the life of a film, studios get back about half of a movie ticket.
- .5 for things like marketing
- this is only looking at theatrical, not merchandising (Star wars), theme parks (Disney), tie ins (Batman vs Superman Doritos), etc. not looking at home video sales or streaming. Those are all too individual movie specific.

This means the 2.5 metric is useful for telling if a movie was a hit or not ONLY by box office.

It does not reflect quality. Some of the best movies of all time (Wizards of Oz, It’s a wonderful life, The Shawshank Redemption) didn’t do well at the box office.

So, if Clayface has a budget of $30 million (current report), then it has bring in more then that budget ($45 mil) on opening weekend, but is still $35 million away from what would be considered breaking even, because of the $45m it brought in, the companies that spent the $30milliom will only see about $23 million.

This does not mean it’s a failure.

It doesn’t mean it’s a success.

It means it’s doing decent.

That is all.

Makes sense on some level. Everyone can make mistakes. But if you review and say it looks good, now you’re lying.

Fine. Enjoyable. Workers my time.

If I’m ranking in in the Star Wars movies, it’s probably in the upper half, around the middle.

I can think of 4 it was easily better then (2, 7, 8, 9) and 1 is was probably better then. (solo).

So that’s a fine place to be.

Yes, but both are different types of failure.

Lucas is a writer with some defects, but pair him with a good director and you get Empire Strikes Back.