Seems we’ve run into the “want to be != are” fallacy.
Seems we’ve run into the “want to be != are” fallacy.
Guessing they still have no idea why people liked Battlefield around the Bad Company to BF3/4 days. It’s a complete mystery.
Modern audiences want unique looking heroes with purple tazers and quips about food delivery apps not servicing warzones.
Krill is so small that instead of looking like a plate of shrimp, they end up looking like a plate of tartare. Like fishy ground chicken. Some people eat krill. Most don’t.
Idk any more details about human krill consumption.
You’re allowed to use the word normal. It means something quite understandable for most, and only very sensitive people object to its use.
The Tenacious D Devil in which he sings “I’m the Devil, I can do what I want!” about wanting to have nonconsensual sex with a very fat, bald man.
Also he’s had a few smaller roles here and there.
War Within
I agree.
I’ll add there’s apparently no point to a degree in it because it seems even the ones who have one learned nothing.
It means I open the site, and I can’t read the article because it had some obligatory signup.
Granted, this was on mobile. On desktop it seems I can read it.
I don’t care.
The site doesn’t want readers, I’m gonna go back to reading memes.
It’s not what you wanted to say, but it is what the words you wrote effectively meant.
Nature doesn’t lend you credibility. You and your colleagues read Nature because it’s how you filter out the trash.
Researchers agree to have it that way. I will not yield on that argument. You do, you agree to it by majority to this day.
So they are the source of your credibility. And you continue to agree to have it that way.
Why publish through a journal at all? What do they do that WordPress doesn’t? Are they the source of your credibility? Do they pay the peer reviewers. Or are you all just whipped?
If you’re looking at publishing it for free, I’d think it should be fine to put a PDF download in an ordinary blog post with the title and abstract?
Or are there people who won’t allow that?
Yeah, I’m also guessing the Tweeter is just a masterbator, not a real doctorbator with a PhD in D.
Then do the same test but you put it in front of Catharina, and see what happens.
That’s why the shoulder has to be relocated.
Nursing/Kindergarten or something? Isn’t that about that high?
I also thought of that one.
For anyone curious it’s Counter Strike in VR, basically.
Puking on the carpet, dropping dead things at your feet, licking at you, drawing your blood with sharp claws. Imagine a long slimy toad-lizard with those sharp claws, behaving like that.
They’re usually just liars acting as a filter between the game and the interested customers.
Instead of just showing the have, they cut what doesn’t look good and make it appear as something more than it is. That’s their job.
It’s not adding value. Peak marketing executed perfectly is just misleading enough to increase sales beyond what just seeing the game would do, without making the customers mad enough to have a negative impact.
I make a rare exception for actual artistry, like some of the WoW expansion cinematics. It’s still pretty misleading, but they’re pretty.
As for the next Elder Scrolls, I don’t think Bethesda has the devs to make it fun or interesting. From what I’ve seen from them, they are not particularly competent.