Flaired Users Only When I mention on Reddit that if you actually valued humans, you would create them and raise them with their other parent.
I’m honestly worried about her. I’m sure this is “unpopular” here but let’s get real—
Yeah, she (and Ned) did a shitty super shitty thing. Presumably repeatedly. Granted, I’ve always had a neutral/indifferent option of her. I don’t have any investment in her but I am worried. She’s a youngish woman in the public eye with literal world wide media bearing down on her. Ned was (is?) an internet celebrity but she was only occasionally featured. I’m sure she wasn’t recognized too often.
That said, Ned is actively working on rehabbing his image ex: the (in my opinion) self reported TMZ photos and Ariel’s and his coordinated statements.
Infidelity is not ok in my book. That said, I’m worried Alex is going to be Lewinsky’d. This situation isn’t the same but it is similar.
He has way more money and power. He has a wife supporting him (presumably). Alex is alone. It doesn’t sound like a she’s fired but she clearly can’t go back to work there. Would you? Absolutely not. The shame and scrutiny would be unbearable. If they fire her she could sue for wrongful termination or receive a hefty severance which I’m sure 2nd Try does not want.
What are her options? For real. She and Ned should have never done what they did. But where will she work now? She won’t work in media since she’ll be a lightning rod for criticism. What will she do?
I worry that Alexandria is in a dark place. Ned could bounce back (maybe) but it seems grim for her. She deserves so scrutiny but not to have her entire life ruined forever.
(Note: I’m not a cheater but I have been cheated on in a marriage bound relationship. I just worry that she’ll be branded as unemployable forever. I think cheating is fucked but I’m sure there are people calling her a “home-wrecker” who are far from innocent. The only difference is you’re not a semi public figure).
EU CENTRAL deserves extra compensation and shouldnt be on all regions.
I think this whole situation is an opportunity to remind people why boss and employee romantic relationships are problematic, or any relationship wherein one person has authority over the other for that matter.
At the heart of the issue is the ability to consent. The idea of consent revolves around the idea of being able to say no without the fear of repercussions. Obviously problems start arising very quickly when the dynamic of a romantic relationship is boss and employee. The employee will always be in a position to have repercussion brought on to them if they refuse to continue the relationship. Even if they are verbally consenting and are enthusiastic they are not in position to fully consent.
I want to be very clear I do not think Ned is some sort of Weinstein workplace abuser, im sure they both enjoyed themselves very much in their mid life crisis affair. However, I wanted to point out that there is no such thing as a consensual romantic relationship between a boss and employee.
This is off my chest. I want this off my chest. A lot of posts here are just annoying and seeking to justify shitty human behavior/feed an inflated female ego.
We men need to stop marrying/dating women with promiscuous pasts. Women will always look at where we are going in life as a man - we have the right to be concerned with her past. If you dont believe me, go to PHInvest and you will notice women complaining about their male partners earning less BUT you rarely see men do this.
Hate me, idc Im speaking truth. Sex is effortless for Women, so if you're willingly giving it away for 5 shots of tequila and some flirty comments no man should put in the effort to date you or give you the life you want. Period.
TO men that will hate this - remember this, she let 5 other guys hit easily, while shes making you work. Who is the clown here? Never forget you can date down, as long as your ages are legal, a 5-10 year age gap is not unheard off (just make it reasonable, no 28M and 18F), by default we men also date down economically. THERE ARE THOUSANDS of women out there for you. Have an abundance mindset, not a scarcity mindset.
And to everyone that gets triggered - You think Im an incel, but I have a pretty good and happy life.
Maybe the reason you're attracting low quality women is because you're a low quality man yourself.
Yall women will turn on each other JUST LIKE THAT.
Discussion Why do we pretend Ubers are something everyone should do or the game is bad and not the extra high tier stretch-goal content they were designed to be?
Seriously its so common to see that as a talking point here, can't we just have the megahard bosses be megahard? Is there any reason we should aim for Casuals to be killing Ubers? Wouldn't making ubers no longer a big goal just kill late game progression for a lot of people by removing the concrete purpose to it all?
OC [OC] Trump states are responsible for 56% of CO2 emissions despite having only 43% of the population and 37% of the GDP in the United States
Vaush the content creator should debate destiny. But Ian the person won’t.
Independent of the personal beef, destiny has gotten over 100,000 new YouTube subscribers since he and vaush were close to each other near 400,000. Most of these new people probably have little awareness of vaush and whatever history destiny has with him. Vaush can absolutely siphon off from his new audience and he has weirdly pretended he can’t? As if the dgg community is categorically different from the far right people he converses with.
Vaush also has clear disagreements with destiny that are worth hashing out. He represents a further left critique of the danger the right poses. The lgbt g*nocide argument hinges on the extent of policies and behaviors emerging that make healthcare/bathroom/general participation in society unsafe/ a challenge for them. The damage going to be caused by climate change and how we can’t politically disarm a party who refuses to take it seriously.
Destiny has both empirical disagreements, over the extent of these harmful policies, as well as ideological disagreements over the process changes (electoral college changes, filibuster changes, etc.). Among left leaning video consumers, this more status quo fixing the system versus the more aggro shaking it up to protect against the far right is going to be a vital debate.
If there was a new content creator who was open to conversations and had 500k+ subscribers, proving him wrong and convincing his audience would make sense to capture more potential audience.
This next part requires some inferences because vaush hasn’t really addressed the benefits above and his reasons for not debating destiny have felt lackluster. He’s mentioned that destiny’s just a wacky guy and obsessed with him and cares only about making himself appear smarter than everyone else.
This again feels strange because (1) many people vaush debates can fall into this category (2) destiny has conversations with people where they can have constructive discussions (3) even if it goes off the rails, if you’re right it makes you look good
In the recent interview he simultaneously says he doesn’t remember all the details from the multi year falling out they had but retains this version of destiny in his head that isn’t worth engaging.
It just feels like he doesn’t like destiny and that he won’t enjoy the conversation. If Ian the person is uncomfortable with it. Ok. But also own that. He is leaving destiny’s growing audience on the table. Vaush the content creator would improve the interleft discourse by engaging, even if it’s just video reacts, with destiny’s more status quo establishment center left position.
Also destiny has many real flaws worth pointing out and saying him reviewing your videos when you’re a large creator is obsessive feels like hollow criticism.
Tl;dr vaush should debate destiny. They have meaningful differences. Vaush is right. He’s ceding destiny’s audience for what feels like personal discomfort.
I am sick and tired of seeing all this misinformation spewing about, and I'm not mad at the people, this should have been done by the OW team but their communication skills seems to be crap.
Edit: This information is for people who already own OW1. People coming to OW for the first time after OW2 is released has a much different experience which I am not addressing here! I'm also focusing on the information that people usually gotten wrong. Stuff like people being locked out because of their choice of cellphone provider is an issue that's pretty clear.
Edit: So apparently I've come off as more positive then I intended. So I'll add my own concerns and doubts as some commentary as italicized text.
What are we getting with OW2?
Over the next 2 years and at the release of OW2 we will be getting 9 new heroes and 9 new maps. These have a delayed release because its a lot healthier for the game to try and balance new heroes one at a time then trying to sort out a mess of them. The OW team is simultaneously brilliant and terrible at balancing the game, so they need time and player feedback for each one.
What do you mean heroes are locked?
Yes, they are "locked" inside the battle pass. But they're not really "locked" completely. When a hero is locked you can't play them in quick play, unranked, and competitive modes. Any locked hero is still available to you in arcade or practice modes. Meaning if you only play mystery heroes, you'll have access to every hero without ever unlocking them. You can also pull them out in practice to see if its a hero you want to spend coins/cash on in the first place. Take them for a test drive before you purchase! That's nice.
New heroes come out every even season (2,4,6,8...). Every odd season (3,5,7,9...) we will be getting a new map that does not have to be unlocked. Season 1 doesn't follow this since its the launch of the game and we're getting 3 new heroes and 3 new maps.
How do I unlock new heroes?
There are several ways to unlock them.
- Pay $10 to instantly be able to play them, but you'll still have to wait two weeks to play them in comp. This is to make sure they don't pull a Brig again.
- Play the game until they're unlocked for you in the free battle pass.
- You can earn up to 540 coins per season and buying a battle pass is 1,000 coins, so if you save up enough coins just by playing the game, you can unlock heroes instantly every other season. And Heroes come out every other season so it lines up perfectly!
- You can unlock old heroes by doing challenges
- You can unlock old heroes by buying them in the shop with coins.
The potential for all this to be predatory bullshit is high. If the free path to unlock heroes requires more time than a full time job, then its predatory. If streams haven't finished the BP in like the first two weeks, there's a huge problem and its just corporate greed veiled as options. They haven't released how much exp is needed and how much you gain from doing things so that's a big worry.
Can I play Competitive with heroes still locked?
Yes you can! Having heroes locked does not stop you from playing competitive.
The Devs came out and explained their reasoning. People only play a small number of heroes in competitive play. And the higher rank you go, the smaller that pool is. So it doesn't change the game play at all if you have a hero locked that you wouldn't play anyways. They showed the data that on average people play around 5-6 heroes in competitive and the higher ranks have the smallest pools. They have the data that people just don't switch.
And this makes sense, with a growing roster trying be good at all the heroes is just stupid. Not even OWL players are that good on the fly. OW coaches have always said to play what you're best at and not what's meta for the 90% of the player base. So having a hero that you're not good at locked in comp doesn't really change anything. Hell, DPS arn't getting a new hero for like 6-8 months? Why would they be locked out of comp because of a locked hero in a different role? Are DPS just suppose to wait around with LONGER queue times while the tanks and support finally unlock everything? It makes zero sense. So if they do that, scream at them.
Where is the promised PvE?
Its coming in 2023 at some point.
They're taking their time with it which makes me happy! At least I hope they are.
How much does OW2 cost?
At the low end, nothing, $0.00, you can unlock everything playable just by playing the game. You'll earn enough coins to even instantly unlock heroes when their battle passes come up.
At the high end, $60 a year. $10 every 2 months. This will unlock all heroes instantly and open up new cosmetics that free passes can't access.
The cost to unlock all playable content without waiting would be $10 every other season, so every 4 months. This works out to $2.50 a month or $30 a year. Minus any battle passes you can unlock with coins just by playing the game.
If you compare this to a box release instead of a live service, that $60 over the next 2 years will get you 9 new heroes, 9 new maps, a ton of cosmetics, and everything else that they could release instantly. Events are still a thing too; a new and improved Junkenstein is happening later in October.
Again, this is fair assuming the free path is decent. It could be predatory FOMO corporate BS, but we'll have to see.
Won't free to play mean there's a ton of smurfs?
No, you need a non pre paid cell number in order to play OW2. And then in order to get into comp you have to WIN 50 games in quick play, after you actually unlock quick play as an option as new to OW players will unlock things slowly.
In order to smurf, you'll need to buy a whole new cell phone plan, go through all the tutorial stuff, some how win 50 games in quick play without letting the system know how you good you are, and then if you do all that, then you'll be able to smurf in low ranks in competitive.
I understand that no barrier is inpenetrable, so there still will be dedicated smurfs, but this should make it a lot harder which makes me happy. What doesn't make me happy;
This however is causing a problem with people who just have a prepaid cell. Legit players are being locked out of the game.
Which sucks, big time. I'm assuming that they'll have a work around for this because I doubt the suits will turn away paying customers.
Do I need to buy the Gabralter Pack?
No, that just gives you the season 1 pack, 2,000 coins which you can buy 2 more season packs, and some skins. You do not need to buy this to play the game.
Stop preordering shit. Do not buy this, let them show you that they made a decent product worth your time and money before you open your wallet.
Is this good for the game?
In this day and age of this capitalist hellscape, yes. Battle passes are just the norm for online games, they're easy to understand for non OW players and don't exploit people with gambling problems.
For people who pay money, it help fund development of even more content. For people who grind, it keeps the player base high.
I hate to say it could have been worse, but it could have been a lot worse. This is the same company that just made all the money with Diablo Immortal and the worse thing about it is heroes are in the BP? Like shit man, OW got hit with nuke and only got a sprained ankle. Its not ideal, but I'll take it.
Its been called one of the best battle passes on the market. Not my words.
And looks like the free battle pass is pretty bad and looks like you can't get any skins unless you pay money or earn coins in the shop.
The cost to completely unlock the battle pass can cost hundreds of dollars.
There is where the whaling has kicked in. People probably won't drop that at the start of the season, less their streamers or something, but the predatory aspects kick in near the end because of a sunk cost fallacy wanting to get your BP's worth even if it costs you an extra$100.
Are you Blizzard fan boy?
Absolutely not. This whole battle pass is on thin fucking ice. If a person with a life outside of video games can't reasonably unlock the hero through the season, then this whole thing comes crashing down. Suddenly its demanding you pay for that battle pass or else you're shit out of luck. If a player with a full time job/family is constantly left further and further behind when it comes to hero unlocks as time goes on, then this BP just a wolf in sheep's clothing and I'll be glad to help hand out the torches and pitch forks.
Message to the devs from Barret: Don't fuck up.
I hope that clears up some misconceptions! And if I got something wrong, let me know, and I'll make edits!
I use to be a LGBT affirming and pro-fornication until I read a bible verse that absolutely shattered my belief. I have no idea how I missed it or so many others as well (I guess it’s very conveniently ignored because Paul said it).
“Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband.” I Corinthians 7:2
This is only verse in the New Testament that says when sex is okay and not “sexually immoral” (Or Porneia a Greek word that Jesus and the bible use a lot to mean something that is sexually immoral).
It literally specifies that not to be sexually immoral according to New Testament standards
- one has to be married (wife, husband)
- monogamous (each man his ‘own wife’, each woman her ‘own husband.’)
- that it should be between a ‘man’ and his ‘wife’ and a ‘woman’ and her ‘husband.’
Now unless we change the words and say that when a gay men or lesbian marries, it is not between two ‘husbands’ or two ‘wifes’ then they are not meeting New Testament standards that are set out about how to avoid ‘Porneia.’
I’m saying the only way to get around it is to do some kind of play with words and say ‘oh when two gay men marry then one of them is the wife.’ Although I fear it is being very disingenuous towards God to do something like that.