

Chaining someone to a job sounds more like indenture than strong labour laws.
Actually strong labour laws let employees choose to work for a different employer, while requiring the employer to have a valid reason to dismiss the employee.
Chaining someone to a job sounds more like indenture than strong labour laws.
Actually strong labour laws let employees choose to work for a different employer, while requiring the employer to have a valid reason to dismiss the employee.
I also lost quite a bit of respect for Penny Wong when she wasn’t willing to condemn this at the outset: Israel’s order to cut food and water from Gaza difficult to judge from afar, says Foreign Minister Penny Wong
Though to be fair, Dutton was never going to be a better option.
This made slightly less sense before I remembered that manga is supposed to be read right to left.
Responding aggressively to a post asking why it appears that American culture has become more aggressive and hateful is not helping as much as you think.
Fulifilling your dreams is all about the power of persistence folks! That, and having a friend willing to invest almost $70M in your dream.
But earlier this month, he said he would move the company’s headquarters to Austin, citing a new Golden State law meant to protect LGBTQ+ children as the “final straw.”
Imagine being so full of hate for a highly vulnerable group of people that you base your business decisions around it.
Why are we quoting each other? I remember the comment before yours. I made it. Idiot.
Because quoting in a response provides structure to the response that improves readability.
Also, you are posting on a publicly accessible forum, not having a one-on-one conversation. In that context, that fact that you may remember what you said doesn’t mean that it’s not beneficial to repeat it for others.
The “idiot” comment was unnecessarily rude where someone was engaging in what appeared to be a good faith response, and only brings down the tone of your entire post.
It’s Australia. Everything tries to kill you.
The article has a paragraph later on that says:
In rejecting the plaintiffs’ claims for damages, the court said, “It cannot be said that discussions at the Diet…regarding provisions not allowing same-sex marriage are clearly in violation of the Constitution.”
I suspect the plaintiffs are only appealing that aspect of the judgment.
Does it want the hose again?
It depends on what the author was actually trying to say. I’ve never pretended to know what their intention was, and they haven’t added any further commentary to let us know.
You asked why the comment was getting downvoted. I responded with how the comment could be interpreted in a way that warrants downvotes.
You seem to have taken that proposed explanation very personally for some reason.
Way too harsh there.
What if someone wants to be a cripple? Wouldn’t healing them ruin their self esteem?
Your earlier comment was not “what if someone wants to role-play a cripple?” If it was meant to mean that, I don’t understand the relevance of healing hurting their self esteem. Whose self-esteem? The player’s, or the character’s?
The response made sense by querying why would a character want to be crippled, not why a player would find it interesting to do so.
I just got here, but I’d guess it’s because their comment reads like they are saying “no, facists aren’t the bad guys, both sides show contempt for the weak sometimes!” It’s a false balance fallacy.
I’m not sure if that was the intention, or it was just unfortunately worded.
Personally, I’ve always been partial to Nikola Tesla’s alternating current.
My current campaign has a character whose parents still live in the town where the adventure is largely based. A lot of effort is spent convincing other townsfolk not to tell his mother what he’s been up to. It’s fantastic.
Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom were both great games, with good story (if a little cutesy, but it’s aimed at being family friendly), not even really any allusion to sex.
A bit yes and no with TOTK I think.
You are right that TOTK doesn’t have any explicit sex or romance. But the way the introductory cut scenes for Purah and Riju deliberately start from their legs and pan up over their bodies doesn’t really have a purpose other than to sexualise them and announce “look how hot we’ve made these characters for you.”
Time to use Lay on Hands.
The barbarian isn’t going to just say “I roll athletics” without explaining what they are trying to achieve. Same for persuasion. “I try to convince the mayor we are experienced enough adventurers to assist” is enough to let the GM know what the intention is and give context for the NPC’s possible reponse.
20 years on my partner and I still quote The End of the World occasionally.