I am sitting in one of the disused but quite beautiful parts of the neighborhood, waiting for it to rain.
The rain has already come and gone, a light rain that left traces of dampness on the pavement – the shade of the spring day darkens, becomes real, which is a comfort because that realness, that feeling of extra substance, comes from the water cycle working the way it's supposed to.
I feel it around my nostrils, on the cheeks of my face near the eyes, like I'm a frog looking up from its pond water, which is a pleasant feeling to sashay around town with. This is the spring we all know, the moisture appearing on my skin after driving miles above the earth ten minutes earlier –
an epic plunge is what we are walking through, but it's already rising again, and let's face it – we live in a cook pot set on media, I mean medium – medium is the setting on the cook pot, which notice is more than a crock. From the frog’s point of view, it is ideal.
From our point of view, standing in the chop of the water cycle, we are soaring in the air – then minutes from now, we might be walking in the clouds, and who knows after that, but this is the context for comings and goings this mid-afternoon – this potential for levitation.
I find a broad and elegant tree stump to sit on and record the concrete. Someday we'll all have concrete recorders but today, we just have me.
The stumps are not indigenous to the property, at least I don't think so, but I'm not exactly sure why I don't think that, given that the facility that occupies the block was once probably a forest with abundant marshy places. The forest went, then some infrastructural evolution played out that upcycled into a world-class performing arts center.
Given that my art, before it is anything, is performative – watch the monkey paint words with a stick – I'm hand-in-glove with the performance of the plaza.
I am sitting in a grove of tree stumps, which automatically brings to mind entropy – we all will die someday, become handsome all-weather furniture that slowly disintegrates – but then the overwhelming pleasantness of the day causes the thought to move on, and the stumps become a moment in time that is also a cross-section of full biography, which is quite a thing to be sitting on, waiting for the rain.
The forecast, which I predict would be one of the more impressive modern achievements to the humans who lived through the ice age – just an opinion. The forecast –
I picture their faces in stunned wonder as weather prediction after weather prediction comes true. The forecast
says there is a one-hundred percent chance of rain later this afternoon, time precise to the quarter hour, but with Doppler weather radar, one can make one's own data-driven prediction about when the rain will start to the nearest few minutes.
Someday we'll wear watches that are nothing but countdown clocks ’til the next time the forecast calls for rain – when the clock reaches the nearest minute, it switches to seconds.
This broad, elegant stump I'm sitting on sets on a bed of gravel which, when it rains, can convince me it is river gravel – pick up a few of the rounded stones, give them a close look for evidence of the past. I briefly imagine
finding the remains of a sauropod, each piece of gravel containing a tiny piece of a single sauropod, which together add up to the most complete sauropod skeleton yet discovered.
The stump is all take and no give, and yet I think I prefer it to popping open a lawn chair – the imperviousness of the stump being conducive to recording the concrete.
My backside is about eighty-years wide, which is older than my age, which inspires thoughts about backing into predestination, at least where just sitting around on a fine spring day is concerned. Like a bump on a log in a way, and let's face it – the concrete doesn't get much more concrete than that. A splashing sound
comes from the page. I scan the paper like it’s the sky, and I'm waiting for an aerial firework to open, then I find the spot of rain splashed across the phrase think so – think so, is the phrase – which is followed by a second raindrop, this one hitting the word water, causing the ink to run a little.
A one-hundred percent chance – does that even make sense? I picture a barrel of rain, rolling across the plains. Perhaps we should feel lucky for being visited by such a probability – possibly years before it rolls around again.
Rain will undoubtedly fall at this time, we say to our ice-age guests, and they will hold up the one hand like it's rain, hold up the other like it's time, weigh the two sides side-by-side maybe, maybe invent that gesture where the dancer holds both palms above their heads, lifts them up and down like they're raising the roof.
Still, I'm not sure they'll really understand all those computer models, wrapping themselves around big-data projects involving sensors and rain gauges deployed across the land, starting centuries ago. Science raised the roof, we might say, at least as far as weather prediction is concerned.
I sense the rain not exactly letting up, retreat to the interior of the performing arts center after taking a few notes.
Along part of the gravel is a long puddle of water from the overnight rain, and I would need but a few fish bones or raccoon tracks to believe the whole thing was situated beside a river, the sort of gravel bed surging with snow melt earlier in the season.
This being the Midwest, higher elevations are usually metaphorical, metaphorical before they are anything else, and I think about the campus surging with graduates this past weekend, the landscape of human potential, in all directions, inundated by them.
Inside now, I see a balloon bouquet along one wall of the concourse, with gold Mylar affirmation – The Best Is Yet to Come! – floating on the end of a ribbon.
A one-hundred percent chance of rain – imagine telling all those graduates, you have a one-hundred percent chance of finding love within a fortnight. Call it a graduation gift, then imagine all those rain gauges quivering in their brackets at the thought of measurements certain to be made, collated, used to improve the algorithms that animate the global gods of rain.
At the far end of the concourse, a lady is teaching a gentleman how to dance – they aren’t touching, aren’t even facing each other – side-by-side – and I hear her call out the moves, move-by-move.
Maybe he’s an actor and she’s going over a certain bit of choreography for an upcoming production. Maybe he’s a restless spirit, and she’s teaching him the art of haunting.
That ghost forest in the gravel outside is adjacent to one of the busiest intersections on campus, and yet, turn your back to it, and it becomes just another element in the stopping and starting of the cosmos.
I could see to either end of the block from that broad, elegant tree stump I was sitting on without really being seen from the street which, along with a lush stand of grass in a nearby raised garden bed, brings to mind the wide-open prairie from centuries past.
I picture deer bounding over golden rod. I picture foxes negotiating cone flowers.
The interior of the performing arts center is designed around the premise of potential – four theaters in league with the cardinal directions, plus a blindingly white amphitheater and a low stage in the concourse itself, where they hand out complimentary spliffs and pass around community bongs during free upbeat life-affirming musical programs, attended by folks after the workday is over, plus a helping of retirees.
Okay, not grass but alcohol, but you get the point – people enjoy shindigs now and then. The lady and gentleman are out of sight, but she’s still giving direction – I can hear their back and forth somewhere around the curve in the wall,
which might stand for the passing of time. I imagine myself performing the pasodoble – no, I take it back. I imagine myself performing the pasodoble – no, I take it back! For real this time! I imagine myself destroying the pasodoble – no, god, my boot heels! The planks on the floor! I take it back!
The sun returns, so I pick up my things, head back out to that secluded space, spend a few minutes admiring the resoundingly designed program of the building.
Preformed white concrete panels are suspended twelve feet off the ground to establish the roof of the entrance. Ninety-degree angles abundantly in evidence. Brick pixelates the angled outer walls with the stuff of the earth. Ultra-high resolution, they call it around the masonic lodge.
Someone in the amphitheater is having their photo taken by a professional – everyone loves to do photo shoots there. She is wearing dark knee socks, a navy jumper and a blue bowl haircut, or maybe it’s a wig – I can’t tell from here. I picture anime or promotional material for this fine spring day.
A squirrel bounds through the grass – then poses in front of me, paws together, as though summoning oration.
A robin alights on the stone cladding of the raised beds, begins to stand exclusively on its left leg. The leg is angled under the center of mass – it’s a practiced move.
No one knows why the American robin does this – maybe it’s like bird meditation, though the memory of the American robin is so specifically extraordinary when it comes to navigation and geospecific locations that effectively, at the sensual level on up, it is living in a reality separate from our own, so who knows what meditation might mean.
They can see the magnetic fields of the earth in their eyes using a protein called cryptochrome, which reacts to magnetism. Cryptochrome – like something from the Marvel universe.
Maybe when the American robin stands on its left leg, it’s spacing out to the daytime reality of solar storms, the whole environment all aflutter with a phenomenology of waves passing around the material world.
The robin and the squirrel go their separate ways, and I feel the temperature drop – ah, me! the pasodoble! – as the next part of the front crosses campus.
A peel of thunder indicates the breaking of the sound barrier by means of electromagnetism and the displacement of gasses. Electromagnetic properties experience disequilibrium as a kind of earthquake in the sky that causes the air to vibrate in an awe-inspiring way – the sound magnetic fields make when they rearrange themselves in a gaseous atmosphere.
We are fluid dwellers, through and through, we humans and mammals and reptiles and amphibians and lichen gnawing on patches of the plaza’s concrete. Maybe from the standpoint of the atmosphere, land is just one big coral reef.
When that perfect destiny began to drop rain, the sound at first was curious, expectant – an all-squinty-eyed-and-kissy-faced sort of rain began to fall that grew into a snowy hum that seemed to have a simple song playing inside it, like someone playing a ukulele in the room next door, singing along.
The gig carries on for twenty minutes or so – an opening act – before the rain begins to march double time through the streets – barely soldiers even when they were soldiers.
Less tactic and more matador, this rain storm, and its boot heel crashes down on the planking of the still-lovely spring day. These magnetic storms are not
for war making, nor fighting bulls, nor even for entertaining that cosmic bird called the American robin. What are they for then?
American robins also configure their flight by the stars, by remembering features on the land, by creating mental maps of it all.
And they swim with both grace and endurance, as they navigate this liquid world, this concrete way of life.
In the moment, they are roosting in a tree, observing the silver magnetic waves marching through the streets. Made of what? The pasodoble! Concrete.

There is more to it than the title. I was engaged to be married to a woman I was with for almost four years. In our last year together, she pretty much treated me like a ghost, ignoring messages, not wanting to go on dates, and the last straw was blocking me on social media. I did everything to keep the relationship alive, working long hours, going to visit her in her city every month, trying to talk to her, but she kept pushing me away. Eventually our last conversation was over the phone, at night, and her last words to me were "I don't love you now," "I am seeing someone else," and "I need you to back off." This was after Valentine’s Day, after a hard day of work, after I sent her a valentine gift. I was devastated and pretty much cursed out God, blamed the world, blamed myself for the relationship ending after I did everything I could to keep it. To this day I have doubt I am worthy to be a child of God, that I failed my family, I failed myself, and I failed at life. I was severely depressed for a long time. I am still depressed, but I have a better handle on it now.
A few months after the relationship ended, I have mixed feelings of love and hate towards my ex. I cannot forgive her, no matter how hard I tried. I have tried deeply and daily to forgive her, but I do not believe I can. I have not spoken to her since Feb 2023. I have blocked her on all social media. The only way she can contact me is by email, letter, or by going to my parents’ home. I have already told myself, if she ever wants to talk to me, it must be in person, no other way. I will not talk to people solely through social media anymore, it must be face to face or on an actual voice call (no voice messages) if we live in the same city.
In June 2023, I move to China and am working as an English teacher. I wanted to get far away from the past and I did. My family are supportive of my decision.
In July 2023, I met this sweet and intelligent woman through a language exchange app. We simply wanted to help each other practice English, Spanish, and Chinese. After a week or so she asked to have dinner with me as friends and I thought nothing of it. I was still recovering from the last relationship and wanted nothing to do with a new one. She chose a cool restaurant, had a bar, Mexican food, and great drinks. I expected the meetup to be about 30 minutes. It ended up being 3 hours. We had no idea that time flew quickly. The conversation we had was fun. The day we had dinner was the last day I was staying in her city, I had to move to another Chinese city in China for work. I never stopped thinking about her.
Few months pass by and its December 2023. I told myself “Screw it." I went online and ordered a bouquet of flowers to be delivered to her home. Once the order was made, I thought nothing of it and continued my routines for the next few days. The flowers were going to be delivered on Christmas. Christmas is not a big holiday in China. I got anxious as the day got closer. I thought “what am I doing? I only met her once in person, we are language partners, I live in a different city, she and I are full time workers… blah blah blah.” At this point there was nothing I could do; I could not cancel the order. Christmas day comes, its dinner time, I am chilling with other foreigners, and I got a notification from the woman saying, “thank you for the flowers, they are beautiful.” I asked if we could chat, and she said of course. I do not know what came over me, I was scared but I wanted to be honest with her.
She told me “This is not a gift for a friend.” I responded in honesty “I have been thinking about you since the night we had dinner and I want to know if you could give me the chance to impress you and become your partner.” She said, “I had been waiting for you to do that, I do not know if it is romantic, but I do like you and would like to know you more.” This was a great feeling. I was happy and thankful. I thanked God and myself for doing it.
We met up a few weeks ago in her city and we had a wonderful dinner, we spent the entire day together, talking, walking, exchanging ideas, enjoying each other’s company. We even challenged each other to be healthier. Next time I see her, I must do 30 pushups and she has to do 1 pushup (not fair, but if I win, she has to ride a bike with me around a park). We have given each other cute nicknames; she calls me “Winnie the Pooh” and I call her “Honey.” She asked me why I call her “Honey” and I told her because, “Winnie the Pooh likes Honey.”
We kept our language exchange schedule, and we understand that we are both busy with work and taking this relationship slow is good for us. She has told me multiple times that she wants me in her city. Whether she wants me or not, I have always planned to go back to that city. The weather is nice, there are more things to do, it’s closer to other major cities.
There are so many times I want to talk to her, but the fear and past experiences shake me to the core. I TRULY want to talk to her, about anything. Hearing and listening to her speak about her passions and hobbies is joyous to me. We always exchange ideas in our weekly exchanges. I do not want to say, “I love her,” I am too scared to say that. However, I want her as my girlfriend. I just do not know what to do to overcome this fear and progress our relationship further.
Note: If anyone is wondering, yes, she is Chinese. I am American but my appearance is Hispanic.

TLDR: Their spam filtering is blocking everything I do, even asking for help, for no apparent reasons.
I don't know if I am experiencing some twilight-zone-level circumstances or what, but I just cannot get anywhere trying to register an account on Wordpress.org. Going through the registration form just leads to a screen saying my account needs approval which never seems to come. Days passed after my first attempt, so I reached out to the only contact point shown (forum-password-resets@wordpress.org). I got a canned response about how they're inundated with spam and moderating account creation, and a whole bunch of explanation about whether or not I actually need to use Wordpress. I have been developing websites with Wordpress for many years now and am well aware I don't need an account to use the software. However, I do need an account to participate in the Wordpress.org support forums where I can communicate with plugin developers (specifically one which currently has a couple apparently unreported bugs). The canned email response indicated I should reply to that message with an explanation about why I think I need an account. Specifically:

What you plan to use the account for
What question (if any) you intend to post on the forums/trac/github
What plugin/theme (if any) you intend to create

I wrote up the same explanation as above in this post plus mention of my desire to release some plugins I have written over the years and tried to send the email, only to have their email server bounce me a message saying it wasn't delivered due to high likelihood of spam. I tried to compose a new message to the same contact point, since at least that worked once, but got another server rejection message (spam). The email account I was trying to register with and composing the messages from is a company email, and the company doesn't engage in any bulk/subscription mailing whatsoever. The mail server domain is 100% used for very basic business use (purchasing from vendors, responding to customer inquiries, internal communication, etc.) so I cannot possibly imagine how it would be blacklisted for spam. I cannot even understand how anything about the content of the messages I composed would be triggering to spam filters. Nonetheless, I tried all the process described thus far again from my personal email on a totally different domain (and even without the VPN connection I typically use running to avoid any IP flagging issues) and the result is all the same.
So, what to do? I have even tried to compose another email, again from yet another domain and while on yet another IP, asking about the previous two registration attempts. I received a message saying those accounts can only be discussed via messages from those accounts. To which I tried to reply, "How can I do so when your filters keep rejecting anything I try to send?". I didn't receive any server rejection message thus far, but it's already been more than a day and I am afraid as soon as I try to send another message to inquire it's gonna get shot dead immediately like all those before.
I'm so frustrated. I can understand taking measures to reduce spam, but this almost feels like an extreme level of gatekeeping under the guise of spam prevention. I was even a bit taken aback at the requirement to report "What plugin/theme (if any) you intend to create" when simply needing to enroll to contribute in the forums. Why is account registration the place to also moderate plugin submissions? How are users who need support for Wordpress core or third-party plugin developers supposed to register? If they cannot, what's the use of forums which only have the devs themselves as users? I'm lucky in all these years I never needed to access the forums in anything more than a reading capacity, but now that I have a rather urgent need to do so it seems impossible. And this, as someone who could definitely make positive contributions to threads from users who do need help given my many years of experience working with WP core and countless 3p plugins.
I so very much hope someone from Wordpress.org might actually take notice of this and lend a hand, but if not thanks for reading my grievances to provide at least a little release therapy as I wrote this off my chest.

We've been dating for 4 months online. She confessed first and fell in love really quickly. We've never argued, i've never insulted her, but she has insulted me to "get me to hate her"
Not long ago, me and my girlfriend broke up. She tried to push me away by insulting me, but still talked to me. Not long ago, she basically admitted that the reason it was because she didn't feel good enough for me, and that she felt as if she lost all meaning in life and is living in the moment. Now, this isn't surprising since she has struggled with depression already, has self harmed and has attempted to take her life before.
She has also heard voices before, can't remember her own face/others face and has a chance of being schizophrenic, but it's not really confirmed.
What hurts is, she says it's too late (despite the fact it has only been a few days and we still talk albeit less) and that she has left me, yet it's because of the fact that she is "insecure" about everything. It hurts a lot, since I love her a lot. She's insecure about so many aspects of her looks which I've never noticed. She didn't want to talk about her personality, but I can understand why.
I don't know what to do, since she doesn't want to block me. I don't want to leave her either, but it hurts so bad. She did say that she loves me, but she just doesn't feel good enough. How can I even convince her? School and lack of sleep is damaging her mental health and it doesn't help when others insult her sometimes as well.
Now, whenever I try to talk to her about it, her last reply was just: " i can't read allat, nothings gonna change, i read most of it, sorry no" and when I kept talking, she just said aaaaaaa with a crying emoji. Then later on, she just messaged me that she is fixing up her messy room..? I guess that's an improvement for depression, but I don't know. I don't even know if she cares about me and it's just the depression that is talking, yet she still sent me a meme on instagram, still talks to me (but way less) so I don't know.
Even when I try to talk to her, she just says I aint reading allat or its too late, sorry no.. or stuff like that. On the bright side, she said she was cleaning up her room and didn't say no to sending it when I asked (but it will take a while for it to be cleaned fully)
It hurts so bad. I don't know why she doesn't think it won't work out, its a sudden 180. None of my friends see her stories on IG anymore, probably removed. Last time I got removed, she said she wanted to post her suicide note on there and didn't want me to see, probably why a friend was removed. But now more were removed, but not unfollowed/blocked.
And she doesn't even hate me, she just thinks I don't know any better. Calls me clingy, yet asked to hang out/had more messages than me for a long time. Even wanted to match profile pictures on every platform, but unlike during her suicide attempt, she didn't do ir everywhere.
She says she can't be romantical, but what does that even mean? She is asexual, yeah, but if anything, she was the more romantical one.. she still said she loved me, but that was when we broke up, now she insults me but way less after I vented to her.
Even her last message was night. I guess. Which is way different from her usual typing pattern. Maybe I just make her feel guilty..? I dont know anymore. It sucks when I see her listening to some love songs, I dont know if its shuffle or if she actually feels hurt.
Tl;dr: Depressed GF broke up with me due to her not feeling good enough for me, thinking I can do better and feeling as if she has lost the meaning of life. Acts cold to push me away, yet still talks to me albeit coldly, but doesn't want to block. She doesn't think it will work out. How I convince her I really do love her?

26 female, I feel like I wind up with guys that basically lie to me and gaslight the shitnout of me when I call them out about how I have feelings and don’t feel that’s the same on their end and they’ll say they do “but” etc. Because my gut is screaming when something is wrong and I’m very forthcoming about it. And when their actions don’t match I almost try harder as if that will impress them and when I reach my breaking point I give up and I’m completely crushed.
I keep seeing my most recent ex out every single time I leave my house (who is the person I’m basically referencing but I’ve been crushed about two times like this in my life and I say” they” because I’ve felt this same feeling and it went on for years like their is something wrong with me). I’ve never had to deal with this and it’s making me crazy. I’m crying everytime after and it hurts because he’ll stare at me everywhere I am and doesn’t say a word. Last time he waved and I have ignored him for nearly two months, we got into a fight when I found out he was sleeping with another girl and I blocked him on everything and just ignored him I never looked in his direction and I don’t know how to not feel bad. I’m even casually talking to a new guy and I can feel myself obsessing over future possibilities and having to stop myself so I don’t repeat this same shit. We go to the same places a lot and I just feel like shit sitting home like I’m bored out of my mind. Any advice and please be honest but I am alittle fragile about this situation lol
And side bar I’m a very strong person and very hardworking , I barely date let alone fine myself ever in a situationship (this was my first) t’s just with this specific department I fall apart when it doesn’t work out. And it’s not every guy it’s specific ones I really see a future with and when they start to treat me like shit I almost try harder to gain them, not sure how to explain this

I wrote the following as a sort of journal entry and thought this might be a good place to share it. I know it’s a bit over the top, but this is the only way these words come out of me. Not trying to be pretentious lol. Hope someone out there can relate or enjoy. Felt good to write it.
How can I align my thoughts at once? Or weave them into a single thread? Things don’t move that way in my head, really, and it can be hard, then, to truly capture them. What would I look like if I were a book, I wonder? Pages ripped, and torn, and taped back in. Some pages black and smudged and burned to soot. Some crinkled and crunchy, stuck in an awkward permanence to their neighbor, having had tea or coffee spilled on them - once soggy moments, now rigid in time. Some pages would overflow with words like a waterfall, cascading down into rivers and streams of thought, eternally winding back to the vast open sea of paper before them. Some would be marred by the oily fingerprints of a late-night bad decision - a snack I didn’t need, or a love I didn’t crave. Some would be beautiful and intimate. Some so subtle that a reader might unknowingly skip past them when rifling through; soft, tender, and pure. Some pages would find you with faded Polaroids of a kind stranger’s smile wedged into the binding. Snips of hair, cut and glued in the shape of a promise to a long-forgotten friend. The sweat-soaked setlist to every face-melting, heart-wrenching, and whispered empty bedroom concert I’ve ever held, complete with scribbled titles scratched through in harsh black ink, and a few more added hastily to the end of the already cramped page. Speeches I’ve given to the gods, tacked down with old chewing gum and dried saline. My book would creak and crunch beneath its own weight. Inside, you’d find slots for age-old mixtapes, once used to barter and commiserate with similarly hollowed childhood friends. Each to be removed and played in their own time, a patch-work soundtrack to my life. You’d find dust and dirt and a spider or two, with flecks and specks of god knows what. And some pages would make you fear me. Some would bring you joy. Some would make you ache, or yearn, or gasp, or cry. And many would leave you with more questions, and fewer answers.
Some pages would be dark even for me to read.
Pages that suck and pull at your core. Pages that eat your soul. Pages that aren’t pages at all, always changing in location, always hoping to blend and sneak past the conscious reader’s gaze. And on the very next page, as if nothing had changed, you’d find snippets of life I’ve kept precious. A stack of “get well soon” cards from my first-grade class, carefully threaded into the binding. Art drawn and painted and weaved into the fabric of the pages themselves, labors of love. Secrets and prayers alike, whispered and kissed and sent and tucked with care - all etched like scars into the pale canvas beneath them, invaluable and unquantifiable.
And when you’d finish the book, dear reader, what would you feel, then, seeing me displayed like that? Would you love or hate me more? Would the sum total of my existence be greater or lesser in your eyes? If you weighed and judged me in the balance, what would you discover? Would my life hold any value? Which fragments of this collection would hold any worth at all? If one were to be subtracted or added, would your perception shift? If I strung together the perfect sentence, would you love me then? Is that where my worth would lie?
And what of my own perspective? To see myself laid out in full, aching, and oozing, and radiant all at once—could it be enough? Would it offer anything new? Could I see it - really see it - and call it complete? Would my book, in the end, have meant anything at all?

[INT. APARTMENT - DAY]
(Sheldon and Leonard walk into the apartment, each holding bags with clothes. The bags read "Playdoe's Closet".)
Sheldon: I am very disappointed.
Leonard: Why? Sheldon, we got you new shirts. Look, this one has Flash on it...
(Sheldon sits down in his spot, setting the bag down.)
Sheldon: There was absolutely no Playdoe at Playdoe's Closet.
(Leonard giggles to himself.)
Leonard: You didn't actually think there was Playdoe at Pla—
(He cuts himself off.)
Leonard: Who am I kidding? Of course you did.
Laugh track
Sheldon: A comic book store is called a comic book store because it has comic books. A mattress store is titled a mattress store because it has mattresses. Therefore, Playdoe's Closet should be full of closets with Playdoe...
Leonard: Ugh... Sheldon, why would you even want a store full of Playdoe? That doesn't even make sense.
Sheldon: It makes perfect sense, Leonard. Playdoe is fun.
Leonard: No, it's not. It's... Playdoe.
Sheldon: gasp Leonard?! How can you not find the idea of endless possibilities and the probability of creation from the tiny plastic tube of wonder?
(Howard, sitting in the corner, speaks up.)
Howard: Sheldon, why would anyone over the age of 10 want to play with Playdoe?
Sheldon: Well, there are lots of people, like people who find solace in the vast, nearly infinite possibilities of all the colors and shapes you can make... and single mothers who want to keep their kids entertained.
Howard: mothers, you say? Maybe I can get—
Leonard: Howard, no. You're not gonna use Playdoe to drive your sex life with single moms.
Howard: I wasn't... anymore.

Mavs fans are picking trivial plays and post it there making a big deal of it or even plays that should be us but they control the narrative with misleading titles while we have crimes committed against us and I see zero videos on it.
I have zero experience of how to do this especially during the game and I understand it's a free work but if I can help someone who can do this in any way I would. Just tell me how.

I live in California. I paid cash for a 2021 Nissan Versa on December 8, 2022. My car was stolen on June 6, 2023. I was devastated. My insurance company tried to lowball me. I refused offers until they told me ,"This claim has gone on for too long, we are closing it out" This happened on July 8, 2023. I agreed to take $1948,000 on a vehicle I had paid $23,000 with only 12 thousand miles on it. They demanded my Certificate of Title and my Fob Keys, which I mailed, overnite. No money was ever received because within 3 hours after I mailed keys and Pink Slip (Certificate of Title), the police called me to tell me car recovered, looks fine, come pick it up. I was so happy. I did not want the money. I had put so much money into my car in 4 months, and I owned it outright, and had worked 2 jobs for years. So I called insurance company, so happy, let them know My car had been recovered. It took two weeks before they mailed the keys back, but car was in mint condition, had been driven only 9 miles (joyride?) parked in a huge, Walmart, parking lot. I asked for the title to please be mailed back as well. They kept ignoring me. I went to register my car this past December. Only to be denied due to DMV looking at me like a criminal and telling me I had already been paid $19000.00 and vehicle is now owned by my insurance company . I tried explaining , asked for help...they told me Esurance must fix this, you cannot do anything as they legally own the vehicle. I call my claims adjustor, hysterical, and asked him why is my vehicle registered to my insurance company and why does the DMV believe I have been paid $19000,00. He literally told me, "Oh now your just making this up." I tried to ask him to investigate please, he told me, "since you have raised your voice I am hanging up now.' Im downplaying just how rude he was. He basically called me a liar and hung up on me. I was crying but I was not mean, I was almost pleading. He refused to answer my calls and no one else at the office would speak to me, they just forwarded my calls to him. I was in perfect health up until this point. But as each day passed, I begaan to shake from stress, burst into tears, became incredibly depressed, became unable to sleep, spent all my non working hours trying to find a solution. I was unable to concentrate at work. This finally went from beginning to have panic attacks but ended with me waking up after being in a coma, on a ventilator, for 14 days/ I had no idea where I was, was unable to remember how I got to the hosptal or why. I had two Myocardial infarctions, the Doctor explained that I went into full cardiac arrest and a co-worker gave me CPR for 16 minutes until the ambulance arrived. i had a second Cardiac arrest The Doctor told me, shortly after they had settled my into ICU. That one, He told me, they almost were unable to bring me back from. Thank God for The Doctors refusal to stop working on me, my wonderful coworker and The inventor of the Defribulator! Before my release, The Cardiologist told me they could find absolutely no reason for my Heart attack, i have low blood pressure, have no heart or health problems, no family history. They were dumbfounded. i gave him a brief synopsis of my car insurance situation, He told me, ;Stress, it was the stress" "That stress will kill you, you must work on your stress". They referred me to a social worker and a psychologist. When I finally began to regain stress and began to try and demand that my insurance company fix this because they were literally killing me, I felt. I sent a letter, pointing out every single thing that happened, all correspondence, how rudely I was being treated and I sent over my final Diagnosis from the hospital. They never acknowledged my letter. It is now May 13, 2024. have seen attorneys I cannot afford. I was told by DMV Investigations that I definitely need an attorney. Ive been put on Temporary Disability and since I am unable to register my car, I cannot drive it. I am unable to survive on what disability pays. I am losing all hope. I will probably lose my apartment, and may have to live in my car, but my greatest fear now is that my kitty and myself will be on the street, because if they take my car (its illegal to even park an unregistered car on a public street ( is what I was told by the Van Nuys supervisor of the DMV. ) Yet I have asked the Dmv to tell me if there is anyway we can resolve this. I just want them to know i was paid nothing and was finally sent a letter admitting that I wasnt paid anything and it was not my insurance company who made the mistake, it was Copart, and I should take it up with Copart. Okay, this is so beyond absurd. Copart who? Why do I pay full coverage insurance/ when I should pay almost nothing, as this is totally "Do it yourself-Figure it out yourself" insurance. The Claims adjuster told me last week, that they were not going to help me due to my 'Refusal to Communicate with us in January". I got so angry and told him, "So now , You say that I refused to communicate with you?" He said, "Yes, we do." I said," I know for a fact, you never made a single attempt to contact me, while I was in the hospital , after having a heart attack, because phones and emails keep records, and you know, there is no record of anything coming from you or my insurance company . The records I am looking forward to hearing will be all the calls between you and myself. my insurance company claims that every phone call will be taped, and I look forward to the day your employers listen to just how unprofessional, rude and outright sadistic you have treated me. Because you forgot who you work for, sir, and if you did not have policyholders, you would not have a job. You seemed to really enjoy mocking my illness, calling me a liar, hanging up on me. in fact I think we will hear that you threatened to hang up, not look into my claim, and said you were done with my problems and would no longer take my calls.. I have never been treated so cruelly, so rudely, and all I wanted was for my vehicle, which your company never paid a cent to me for, would be transferred back into my name, because I did not make this mistake and I cannot fix this mistake. All I ever wanted from you to fix the mistake that was made by your company You lost nothing in this claim, I only ask that you right a wrong. I have a car that cannot be registered or driven. I oay for your company to ;make me whole' but i would have been better off if i had no insurance at all. My car was found, my car would still be in my name and I could have registered it. Obviously, your never going to help me or make things right' he said, 'i have done all I needed to do, i mailed you the Certificate of Title, so your claim is Closed.' So I have an unsigned Certificate of Title in the name of my insurance company . Which does nothing to help me. Any ideas? So far beyond hopeless, i have lost faith, have lost all joy, no longer leave my apartment. I will do anything, but i just have no clue and no hope. Thank you so much.

As the title suggests, I have been in a relationship with a girl I really liked and had a crush on for a bit before we started dating. She's my first girlfriend ever and all my firsts have been with her. We had a rocky start where she said that she didn't want to be in a serious relationship initially and went on a few dates with other guys before we decided to make things serious.
We've been dating for 10 months and things have been good - ofcourse your usual relationship differences but we try hard to overcome them and continue loving each other.
This is not her first relationship and she has had a couple of relationships before and has made out with a few guys/girls too in the past. Those stories often come up and while she is open about everything and supportive, I often feel like I haven't had anything exciting in life. It's almost a recurring theme.
I love her a lot and so does she, and she knows about this insecurity of mine and has been supportive and has said that maybe in the distant future we can see what can be done about this.
This feeling of inadequacy, comparison with her and seeing that something similar happened on opposite ends at the beginning has been growing.
How do I overcome this feeling or is the only way to move away and try things myself to overcome this?
Tldr - insecure that my gf is my first while she has had multiple guys in the past

I live in California. I paid cash for a 2021 Nissan Versa on December 8, 2022. My car was stolen on June 6, 2023. I was devastated. My insurance company tried to lowball me. I refused offers until they told me ,"This claim has gone on for too long, we are closing it out" This happened on July 8, 2023. I agreed to take $1948,000 on a vehicle I had paid $23,000 with only 12 thousand miles on it. They demanded my Certificate of Title and my Fob Keys, which I mailed, overnite. No money was ever received because within 3 hours after I mailed keys and Pink Slip (Certificate of Title), the police called me to tell me car recovered, looks fine, come pick it up. I was so happy. I did not want the money. I had put so much money into my car in 4 months, and I owned it outright, and had worked 2 jobs for years. So I called insurance company, so happy, let them know My car had been recovered. It took two weeks before they mailed the keys back, but car was in mint condition, had been driven only 9 miles (joyride?) parked in a huge, Walmart, parking lot. I asked for the title to please be mailed back as well. They kept ignoring me. I went to register my car this past December. Only to be denied due to DMV looking at me like a criminal and telling me I had already been paid $19000.00 and vehicle is now owned by my insurance company . I tried explaining , asked for help...they told me Esurance must fix this, you cannot do anything as they legally own the vehicle. I call my claims adjustor, hysterical, and asked him why is my vehicle registered to my insurance company and why does the DMV believe I have been paid $19000,00. He literally told me, "Oh now your just making this up." I tried to ask him to investigate please, he told me, "since you have raised your voice I am hanging up now.' Im downplaying just how rude he was. He basically called me a liar and hung up on me. I was crying but I was not mean, I was almost pleading. He refused to answer my calls and no one else at the office would speak to me, they just forwarded my calls to him. I was in perfect health up until this point. But as each day passed, I begaan to shake from stress, burst into tears, became incredibly depressed, became unable to sleep, spent all my non working hours trying to find a solution. I was unable to concentrate at work. This finally went from beginning to have panic attacks but ended with me waking up after being in a coma, on a ventilator, for 14 days/ I had no idea where I was, was unable to remember how I got to the hosptal or why. I had two Myocardial infarctions, the Doctor explained that I went into full cardiac arrest and a co-worker gave me CPR for 16 minutes until the ambulance arrived. i had a second Cardiac arrest The Doctor told me, shortly after they had settled my into ICU. That one, He told me, they almost were unable to bring me back from. Thank God for The Doctors refusal to stop working on me, my wonderful coworker and The inventor of the Defribulator! Before my release, The Cardiologist told me they could find absolutely no reason for my Heart attack, i have low blood pressure, have no heart or health problems, no family history. They were dumbfounded. i gave him a brief synopsis of my car insurance situation, He told me, ;Stress, it was the stress" "That stress will kill you, you must work on your stress". They referred me to a social worker and a psychologist. When I finally began to regain stress and began to try and demand that my insurance company fix this because they were literally killing me, I felt. I sent a letter, pointing out every single thing that happened, all correspondence, how rudely I was being treated and I sent over my final Diagnosis from the hospital. They never acknowledged my letter. It is now May 13, 2024. have seen attorneys I cannot afford. I was told by DMV Investigations that I definitely need an attorney. Ive been put on Temporary Disability and since I am unable to register my car, I cannot drive it. I am unable to survive on what disability pays. I am losing all hope. I will probably lose my apartment, and may have to live in my car, but my greatest fear now is that my kitty and myself will be on the street, because if they take my car (its illegal to even park an unregistered car on a public street ( is what I was told by the Van Nuys supervisor of the DMV. ) Yet I have asked the Dmv to tell me if there is anyway we can resolve this. I just want them to know i was paid nothing and was finally sent a letter admitting that I wasnt paid anything and it was not my insurance company who made the mistake, it was Copart, and I should take it up with Copart. Okay, this is so beyond absurd. Copart who? Why do I pay full coverage insurance/ when I should pay almost nothing, as this is totally "Do it yourself-Figure it out yourself" insurance. The Claims adjuster told me last week, that they were not going to help me due to my 'Refusal to Communicate with us in January". I got so angry and told him, "So now , You say that I refused to communicate with you?" He said, "Yes, we do." I said," I know for a fact, you never made a single attempt to contact me, while I was in the hospital , after having a heart attack, because phones and emails keep records, and you know, there is no record of anything coming from you or my insurance company . The records I am looking forward to hearing will be all the calls between you and myself. my insurance company claims that every phone call will be taped, and I look forward to the day your employers listen to just how unprofessional, rude and outright sadistic you have treated me. Because you forgot who you work for, sir, and if you did not have policyholders, you would not have a job. You seemed to really enjoy mocking my illness, calling me a liar, hanging up on me. in fact I think we will hear that you threatened to hang up, not look into my claim, and said you were done with my problems and would no longer take my calls.. I have never been treated so cruelly, so rudely, and all I wanted was for my vehicle, which your company never paid a cent to me for, would be transferred back into my name, because I did not make this mistake and I cannot fix this mistake. All I ever wanted from you to fix the mistake that was made by your company You lost nothing in this claim, I only ask that you right a wrong. I have a car that cannot be registered or driven. I oay for your company to ;make me whole' but i would have been better off if i had no insurance at all. My car was found, my car would still be in my name and I could have registered it. Obviously, your never going to help me or make things right' he said, 'i have done all I needed to do, i mailed you the Certificate of Title, so your claim is Closed.' So I have an unsigned Certificate of Title in the name of my insurance company . Which does nothing to help me. Any ideas? So far beyond hopeless, i have lost faith, have lost all joy, no longer leave my apartment. I will do anything, but i just have no clue and no hope. Thank you so much.

I need your opinion. If you and a family member were arguing over messenger to the point where it was annoying and the person you were arguing with is one of those "I'm always right and you don't know anything" type of person, is it wrong to just block them. Once they're blocked, how do we feel if their fiance (who you never met in person) starts messaging you in their defense? What are we arguing about? This family member trying to make money off another family member going to jail for something really stupid by "making a documentary" and "telling the truth".

Hi Baristas:
Title kinda says it all. I wanted to have some facts straight before I go in and talk with my manager (who is leaving, so I want to make sure I am setting myself up for good things in the future). I want to work. I want to get the hours. When I am not able to get the full hours I'm looking for at my home store (call it SiteA), I want to be able to pick up shifts that work with what I am already scheduled. I am already a "borrowed partner" at another store (SiteB) and have been called a couple of times to cover, but I was already on the clock at SiteA. I am also on SiteC's "call list" for when they need someone. However, I've not heard a peep from them in over a month.
(1) Should I ask my SM to submit (or do it on my own) borrowed partner request for area stores (SiteC, SiteD, etc etc)?
-OR-
(2) Should I visit all those stores and ask to talk to the SMs/SSVs and let them know that, while SiteA owns me for 30 hours, I am able and willing to work outside of when I'm scheduled there?
-OR-
(3) Both 1 and 2 would be best. Plus a convo with outgoing SM about what I need/want.
Any advice/guidance would be helpful. I want to work, but I also don't want to seem greedy and/or be seen as "THAT" barista; I'm trying to make sure I'm taken care of the best way I know how--working.

As the title suggests, I have been in a relationship with a girl I really liked and had a crush on for a bit before we started dating. She's my first girlfriend ever and all my firsts have been with her. We had a rocky start where she said that she didn't want to be in a serious relationship initially and went on a few dates with other guys before we decided to make things serious.
We've been dating for 11 months and things have been good - ofcourse your usual relationship differences but we try hard to overcome them and continue loving each other.
This is not her first relationship and she has had a couple of relationships before and has made out with a few guys/girls too in the past. Those stories often come up and while she is open about everything and supportive, I often feel like I haven't had anything exciting in life. It's almost a recurring theme.
I love her a lot and so does she, and she knows about this insecurity of mine and has been supportive and has said that maybe in the distant future we can see what can be done about this.
This feeling of inadequacy, comparison with her and seeing that something similar happened on opposite ends at the beginning has been growing.
How do I overcome this feeling or is the only way to move away and try things myself to overcome this?

Hi Reddit,
I'm in need of some advice regarding my current marital situation and the potential sale of our home. To give you the full picture, I'll start from the beginning. Apologies for the length, but I feel all the details are necessary to understand the context.
I (29F) met my husband (40M) on Tinder four years ago. We dated for about eight months when my family had an opportunity to purchase a property. My then-boyfriend was also looking to be involved in a business deal of that sort, and he was interested in having his name on the property as well. My father supported this, seeing as how my boyfriend was a physician with a good income, and saw this as a way to bring him closer to our family. The opportunity came quickly, and we all signed the contract to purchase the house.
Trouble began shortly after this. My boyfriend requested that only he and I be on the title of the house, removing the rest of my family, as he saw a future with us and envisioned it as our potential family home. My father was very pleased to hear this and supported it, so we obliged. During this time, the property had increased in value, and I requested the other family members be paid off so we could buy out their shares. My boyfriend declined, feeling it was unfair.
To skim over some details, here are the highlights of the construction: My boyfriend paid more for the down payment than we initially realized would be required. Because of this, he paid no further construction costs. The construction proceeded with debt from my family until the construction loans came through. My family paid for the construction, and my father built the house for us without charging for his management services. My father was displeased with my boyfriend’s behavior and required him to pay more money for the construction due to inflation and the COVID shutdown. My boyfriend declined, and my mother and I secretly took out a line of credit to front the construction costs to my father, pretending it was from my boyfriend. Eventually, as we got the construction loans on a rolling basis after meeting construction milestones, my mother’s line of credit was paid off.
During this time, my family and I wondered why my boyfriend had not proposed. I decided that if he hadn't proposed by a certain time, I would leave him. Fortunately, he did propose on Valentine’s Day 2022. By spring of 2022, construction was coming to an end, and it was time for us to settle into the house. My fiancé felt uncomfortable with how much money he had put into the house and was worried I could leave him and make a profit. I promised him I wouldn’t leave him, but it wasn’t enough. He said he would believe me if I had a child with him, otherwise women would leave men if there were no ties. I told him I would have a child with him right when we got married. He suggested I come off birth control, as it takes months for a woman’s cycle to normalize after being on birth control for many years. I promised him I would come off birth control.
Coming off birth control was more stressful than I realized. I was very hormonal, breaking out, and felt unlike myself. This contributed to my fiancé and I fighting more than usual. In one particularly heated fight, I told him I would go back on birth control and even purchased the pills, but he told me he would break up with me if I did because he wanted to get to know the real me. I conceded, and then something switched in me and I became excited at the possibility of having a baby. I started tracking my cycle and figuring out my ovulation days. I shared this with my fiancé, and on one of those days, we got pregnant. I didn’t find out until the end of summer 2022. When I did find out, I told my fiancé and suggested we should probably get married.
My fiancé's first response was that we should wait to see if the baby sticks, and if it does, then we can plan a marriage but he wanted to wait until February 2023. I was very disappointed and angry and yelled at him. I felt alone and overwhelmed by the thought of having an illegitimate child. After discussing potentially getting an abortion, potentially breaking up, and potentially selling the house, I talked my fiancé into keeping the baby and getting married. He also wanted to keep the baby but was afraid of our situation. After many fights about when to have the wedding, we finally decided on December 2022. At that point, I was four months pregnant. During this time, my fiancé and I had major arguments that therapy couldn’t even remedy. We would yell at each other, slam doors, I would cry, and he would hold himself up in a room for hours. We had nice moments too, but they were heavily clouded over by the bad.
Finally, we got married, and things were good for a while. But then we faced some marital problems. My husband kept separate accounts and managed the finances himself. We had a joint credit card where I could pay for expenses without being questioned. He made all of the major investment decisions and major purchases. If I tried to disagree or speak up, he would get upset because this was not the submissive wife I had promised him I would be. I made significantly less money than him but lived a good lifestyle, buying almost anything I wanted within reason. Coming from a traditional family, I was upset that finances were kept separate. And so it continued that my husband would invest tens of thousands of dollars into our house so that his family from out of town would visit. We live in Vancouver, Canada, but his family is from Ottawa. In hopes of luring his youngest sister (of four) to Vancouver, my husband would make any modification to the house that his youngest sister showed the slightest interest in. This included a hot tub on the rooftop, a media system in the basement, a movie projector, and much more. After said sister got married, she made it clear that she would not move to Vancouver. Then a switch happened in my husband, and he suddenly wanted to sell the house.
Meanwhile, during all this time, I had my baby, and my husband and I were still fighting more than ever. I felt no support from him, and he felt drained by his work, our fights, and being away from his family. Recently, for the past three months, he has been consistently pushing for the sale of our house. This is where my dilemma lies. I am afraid to sell this house because my husband has kept finances separate, and the mortgage on this house has been serving as a way for me to feel secure. My husband contributes a monthly amount on a regular basis. He could have forced a sale in the past but didn’t, instead paying into the monthly mortgage on top of other bills. Now, he is considering forcing the sale of our house, but I am upset that he is citing financing as the issue when I have been begging him to save money instead of spending (his response is that $200,000 does not affect a $2M mortgage, and that he now feels burnt out and wants to retire sooner and live passively). If I don’t agree to sell, I feel unstable about moving from our home given that my husband and I fight so frequently, and I am left alone to take care of the child. It is also worth noting that my parents live right across the street and come over frequently to help with the child, or I would go over to seek their help. My husband says that he feels abandoned and uncomfortable frequently because of our proximity to my parents, but I am because there have been times when I felt truly alone, and my parents were my only solace and support. My husband would ignore me for days, especially when I was postpartum and vulnerable. My parents now see my husband as someone who doesn’t put his wife and child first. My husband says that the massive mortgage we have is too stressful for him, and he can’t take that burden. I am sad that my husband will not consider keeping this house for another three years so that I can get comfortable with the idea of selling the house and that potentially I and my family can all move to Ottawa so that we can allow my husband to be closer to his family.
I don’t know what to do at this point, Reddit. I’m currently on extended maternity leave, but it ends in six months. My husband and I will have to come to an agreement about the house, otherwise, it is likely that he will force the sale of the house even if I’m not ready to move. I’ve consistently felt rushed and overlooked in this relationship. I am tired of being the small voice that does not impact decision-making. My husband is now being nice to me and trying to show me a good time, but I see it as him turning on his charming mode so that I can say yes to the sale of this house. I’m not sure what to do. Our fights and disagreements are so bad and the marriage feels like doom sometimes (never any physical violence). I sometimes questions even staying with him, but I worry for my daughter. He is a good father to her, when he is present and off his phone.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks for reading.

I realized after the Christopher Alvarez article that the more you dwell in this shit, trying to make connections off of bread crumbs, the more you get lost in the sauce. That being said, I just saw someone post a TikTok of Christopher Alvarez happy and bouncing on a bed after hitting 50k followers, and they titled it "Weird Post From CA"... What the fuck is weird about that??? That is probably the only action he can really do, and he's excited about 50k followers, and you're calling it weird??? I don't know if OP was trying to make fun of him, or was trying to tie this to a conspiracy theory, but either way- that's fucked up.
That leads me to say this. EbonyPrince2k24 is a scammer. He wanted to auction off Drake's items and in order to do that, he needed to create hype for them to increase the value. What better way to do that than taking a picture of footage of OVO surrounding a disabled man, and alluding to the fact they hurt him? From the very start he was advertising this auction, and he just wanted money. That's it. He even admitted that there were other moles that told Kendrick the information about the daughter and pedophilia shit. So basically, this nigga knows nothing. If he really had incriminating shit on that footage of OVO doing something to CA, and really wanted it out there, he would've posted that shit on Twitter the first day he hopped on that bitch.
I get y'all have unanswered questions. Why was CA following minors? What was that dog audio in Ak's stream? Did Ak and CA get paid off? I get it. There's some weird holes. However, the reason the main sub keeps calling you schizo, is because IF YOU TRY TO MAKE CONNECTIONS BASED OFF CRUMBS OF INFORMATION, YOU LOOK SCHIZO. The truth is, if the authorities can't find out this shit, most likely there's no fucking way you're gonna find out this shit on the internet.
Most of the people y'all used as sources are fucking frauds. Lakers faked dms, Ebony is a scammer, and I'm pretty sure Kendrick's best friend or something said he don't know Coolee, and he crashed out, went on a blocking rampage and deactivated his account. You shouldn't be trusting twitter accounts for proof of serious accusations anyways. Also, blind items are based off rumors, so you can't 100% lean on them as a credible source.
Drake is a fucking weirdo, and if Kendrick is telling the truth, I want that mf exposed. But when it gets to the point y'all are stalking a disabled man's tiktok posts and posting them on the subreddit acting like you found something, you need to take a step back and realize that you're going full fucking schizo.

I’m currently writing a fanfic in a completely different section of the world unexplored by the games. That would be Nova Scotia in formerly annexed Canada. I am wondering how I may handle the Brotherhood of Steel or if they would even exist out there. I did make a post earlier talking about something similar.
I tried to do some research into how the Brotherhood of Steel are portrayed in the various games including the classic titles. Yet for some reason while their ideology is easy to understand, information about the organization as a whole is confusing to me.
I’m curious about what Brotherhood of Steel chapters we as fans know about and whether a chapter could exist in my location chosen.
So far I know of a few. Lost Hills chapter within former NCR territory. Mojave chapter which appeared in New Vegas. There’s also some Chicago chapter that integrated with the East Coast chapter. Then there’s the East Coast one which primarily exists in the Capital Wasteland but were able to project power into the Commonwealth and later Farharbor at presumably great cost.
Are there any more chapters we as fans may know about? Would these chapters be everywhere? Can they expect support from each other or are they largely alone and isolated?

So I figured I'd get on her and speak about what I have learned from testing people and there reactions to the things you do and says,so all my life well since the first time I noticed the reaction of someone from my actions,I have been testing people and seeing how they react to all different things and when they are in different moods,I've set back and stayed quiet and watched the and I have learned how to read everyone, and having this skill is a double edged sword, because there are a lot of people who can't be themselves around me regardless if I tell them I don't care,it's because of the psychological mind block it creates in their minds, when they are trying to play they're made up character they've made themselves out to look like,but when someone knows what they are about, it keeps going through there mind of the fact someone is watching them act and pretend to be this character, so they feel out of place and there could do a lot of different things,but they just need me out of the group,but they have a issue with just asking me to leave, this is their pride and ego narcissist kicking in and they have to do things in ways that make no sense to me and confuse me and make me look like the bad person or anything to cause their fans to dislike me and get me to leave, and this is the ways of a narcissist as most of them are call karans,but not every karan narcissist are the same in there psychological mindset,some karans are created by the effects of the sober mind of a person who are mentally and physically drained in there life and have no patience to anything,but they're stubborn and you can't help them with anything, especially mental strength by meds, you can watch them and see how miserable they are making themselves and everyone in their life,this is because they have a control issue and their way and their minds are so drained and exhausted and they can't think alike with anyone besides those like-minded people,but anyone who suggest meds or anything to help ease there issues of frustration they live with by living with a stubborn mind will be rejected and they will always remain miserable and ridiculous about the way others live there life and what they put in their bodies,lol I'm actually losing my track on this on how best to make people understand this better than I'm doing,lol,but anyway a lot of people need meds and which meds is all based on their actions and feelings with sober mind, everyones brain is created just a little different than the next and some are created way different by undeveloped areas of the brain,while the fetus is growing into the full human,this is a very important time for the mother to be careful and pick and choose how she lives, because of how sensitive the effects of everything may cause issues with the full development of the child's brain and the way there life will become,it's all based on the brain,but nobody will ever be exactly the same in how they think and there personality, so we have all different types of personalities,in the brain your moods you feel are all created by the brain creating different chemicals as we call drugs, so everyone does all different types of drugs everyday created by our brains and those are all the different moods and feels me have,but if your brain doesn't get fully developed to function properly to be able to handle the stress we deal with,as why we have all different medications to help boost that part of the brain and help level the chemicals being created,as Im ADHD and manic bipolar and suffering from bad depression,but it's all up and down and everywhere at times especially without any form of meds and I need strong meds to help level me, but my brain was underdeveloped in a few areas and I just have to help with boosting the dopamine level in my brain and I've been testing all different types of things trying to find a good level of my brains actively so I can function and relax, without any medication I lose all abilities,I can't think or function for weeks and sleep none stop,I lose all control of self control and my brain craves dopamine as it can't create the right amount to my me function normally,that is a effect when I was a fetus and something stopped the development of that area of my brain and few other areas that cause my depression and mood swings,my mother smoked marijuana and cigarettes while pregnant with me,so was this the thing that caused me to have these issues,idk but very possible by the way thc and nicotine effect the brain when in the system, the dopamine slows down and you because lost in confusion while getting hungry and giggly and I feel that way when I'm sober,but with a addition of feeling drunk and not giving a fuck and real social, but it never level and longer I am without the medications,my brain speeds up and I get more and more anxious and need to go go and do something or anything but I have zero interest in anything and I just pace the floor and call everybody and i never get any relief,even when I sleep I don't sleep and I wake up exhausted with my mind racing,I feel like I'm trapped in my misery and can't get out,the medications help relive it all and I feel alive relaxed and comfortable with good motivation to get things done, this is just my example of how the brain needs drugs and why people need meds and truth is everyone has the ability to understand why people do the things they do and why they feel the way they feel,but it's all based on brain development before birth, you can cause the issue with your brain by hitting your head and over dosing yourself with basically anything and hurt the function of your brain. There's people who's will be a totally different person with certain medications,but overall the personality is all based on the brains development before birth. So I've just confused myself from the point of understanding for you by what I am saying,lol I just know I was all over the place writing this, but it is all good to know about regardless and I will be back to write a lot more.🫣😊

https://mises.org/mises-daily/society-without-state
In attempting to outline how a “society without a state” — that is, an anarchist society — might function successfully, I would first like to defuse two common but mistaken criticisms of this approach. First, is the argument that in providing for such defense or protection services as courts, police, or even law itself, I am simply smuggling the state back into society in another form, and that therefore the system I am both analyzing and advocating is not “really” anarchism. This sort of criticism can only involve us in an endless and arid dispute over semantics. Let me say from the beginning that I define the state as that institution which possesses one or both (almost always both) of the following properties: (1) it acquires its income by the physical coercion known as “taxation”; and (2) it asserts and usually obtains a coerced monopoly of the provision of defense service (police and courts) over a given territorial area. An institution not possessing either of these properties is not and cannot be, in accordance with my definition, a state. On the other hand, I define anarchist society as one where there is no legal possibility for coercive aggression against the person or property of an individual. Anarchists oppose the state because it has its very being in such aggression, namely, the expropriation of private property through taxation, the coercive exclusion of other providers of defense service from its territory, and all of the other depredations and coercions that are built upon these twin foci of invasions of individual rights.
Nor is our definition of the state arbitrary, for these two characteristics have been possessed by what is generally acknowledged to be states throughout recorded history. The state, by its use of physical coercion, has arrogated to itself a compulsory monopoly of defense services over its territorial jurisdiction. But it is certainly conceptually possible for such services to be supplied by private, non-state institutions, and indeed such services have historically been supplied by other organizations than the state. To be opposed to the state is then not necessarily to be opposed to services that have often been linked with it; to be opposed to the state does not necessarily imply that we must be opposed to police protection, courts, arbitration, the minting of money, postal service, or roads and highways. Some anarchists have indeed been opposed to police and to all physical coercion in defense of person and property, but this is not inherent in and is fundamentally irrelevant to the anarchist position, which is precisely marked by opposition to all physical coercion invasive of, or aggressing against, person and property.
The crucial role of taxation may be seen in the fact that the state is the only institution or organization in society which regularly and systematically acquires its income through the use of physical coercion. All other individuals or organizations acquire their income voluntarily, either (1) through the voluntary sale of goods and services to consumers on the market, or (2) through voluntary gifts or donations by members or other donors. If I cease or refrain from purchasing Wheaties on the market, the Wheaties producers do not come after me with a gun or the threat of imprisonment to force me to purchase; if I fail to join the American Philosophical Association, the association may not force me to join or prevent me from giving up my membership. Only the state can do so; only the state can confiscate my property or put me in jail if I do not pay its tax tribute. Therefore, only the state regularly exists and has its very being by means of coercive depredations on private property.
Neither is it legitimate to challenge this sort of analysis by claiming that in some other sense, the purchase of Wheaties or membership in the APA is in some way “coercive.” Anyone who is still unhappy with this use of the term “coercion” can simply eliminate the word from this discussion and substitute for it “physical violence or the threat thereof,” with the only loss being in literary style rather than in the substance of the argument. What anarchism proposes to do, then, is to abolish the state, that is, to abolish the regularized institution of aggressive coercion.
It need hardly be added that the state habitually builds upon its coercive source of income by adding a host of other aggressions upon society, ranging from economic controls to the prohibition of pornography to the compelling of religious observance to the mass murder of civilians in organized warfare. In short, the state, in the words of Albert Jay Nock, “claims and exercises a monopoly of crime” over its territorial area.
The second criticism I would like to defuse before beginning the main body of the paper is the common charge that anarchists “assume that all people are good” and that without the state no crime would be committed. In short, that anarchism assumes that with the abolition of the state a New Anarchist Man will emerge, cooperative, humane, and benevolent, so that no problem of crime will then plague the society. I confess that I do not understand the basis for this charge. Whatever other schools of anarchism profess — and I do not believe that they are open to the charge — I certainly do not adopt this view. I assume with most observers that mankind is a mixture of good and evil, of cooperative and criminal tendencies. In my view, the anarchist society is one which maximizes the tendencies for the good and the cooperative, while it minimizes both the opportunity and the moral legitimacy of the evil and the criminal. If the anarchist view is correct and the state is indeed the great legalized and socially legitimated channel for all manner of antisocial crime — theft, oppression, mass murder — on a massive scale, then surely the abolition of such an engine of crime can do nothing but favor the good in man and discourage the bad.
A further point: in a profound sense, no social system, whether anarchist or statist, can work at all unless most people are “good” in the sense that they are not all hell-bent upon assaulting and robbing their neighbors. If everyone were so disposed, no amount of protection, whether state or private, could succeed in staving off chaos. Furthermore, the more that people are disposed to be peaceful and not aggress against their neighbors, the more successfully any social system will work, and the fewer resources will need to be devoted to police protection. The anarchist view holds that, given the “nature of man,” given the degree of goodness or badness at any point in time, anarchism will maximize the opportunities for the good and minimize the channels for the bad. The rest depends on the values held by the individual members of society. The only further point that need be made is that by eliminating the living example and the social legitimacy of the massive legalized crime of the state, anarchism will to a large extent promote peaceful values in the minds of the public.
We cannot of course deal here with the numerous arguments in favor of anarchism or against the state, moral, political, and economic. Nor can we take up the various goods and services now provided by the state and show how private individuals and groups will be able to supply them far more efficiently on the free market. Here we can only deal with perhaps the most difficult area, the area where it is almost universally assumed that the state must exist and act, even if it is only a “necessary evil” instead of a positive good: the vital realm of defense or protection of person and property against aggression. Surely, it is universally asserted, the state is at least vitally necessary to provide police protection, the judicial resolution of disputes and enforcement of contracts, and the creation of the law itself that is to be enforced. My contention is that all of these admittedly necessary services of protection can be satisfactorily and efficiently supplied by private persons and institutions on the free market.
One important caveat before we begin the body of this paper: new proposals such as anarchism are almost always gauged against the implicit assumption that the present, or statist system works to perfection. Any lacunae or difficulties with the picture of the anarchist society are considered net liabilities, and enough to dismiss anarchism out of hand. It is, in short, implicitly assumed that the state is doing its self-assumed job of protecting person and property to perfection. We cannot here go into the reasons why the state is bound to suffer inherently from grave flaws and inefficiencies in such a task. All we need do now is to point to the black and unprecedented record of the state through history: no combination of private marauders can possibly begin to match the state’s unremitting record of theft, confiscation, oppression, and mass murder. No collection of Mafia or private bank robbers can begin to compare with all the Hiroshimas, Dresdens, and Lidices and their analogues through the history of mankind.
This point can be made more philosophically: it is illegitimate to compare the merits of anarchism and statism by starting with the present system as the implicit given and then critically examining only the anarchist alternative. What we must do is to begin at the zero point and then critically examine both suggested alternatives. Suppose, for example, that we were all suddenly dropped down on the earth de novo and that we were all then confronted with the question of what societal arrangements to adopt. And suppose then that someone suggested: “We are all bound to suffer from those of us who wish to aggress against their fellow men. Let us then solve this problem of crime by handing all of our weapons to the Jones family, over there, by giving all of our ultimate power to settle disputes to that family. In that way, with their monopoly of coercion and of ultimate decision making, the Jones family will be able to protect each of us from each other.” I submit that this proposal would get very short shrift, except perhaps from the Jones family themselves. And yet this is precisely the common argument for the existence of the state. When we start from the zero point, as in the case of the Jones family, the question of “who will guard the guardians?” becomes not simply an abiding lacuna in the theory of the state but an overwhelming barrier to its existence.
A final caveat: the anarchist is always at a disadvantage in attempting to forecast the shape of the future anarchist society. For it is impossible for observers to predict voluntary social arrangements, including the provision of goods and services, on the free market. Suppose, for example, that this were the year 1874 and that someone predicted that eventually there would be a radio-manufacturing industry. To be able to make such a forecast successfully, does he have to be challenged to state immediately how many radio manufacturers there would be a century hence, how big they would be, where they would be located, what technology and marketing techniques they would use, and so on? Obviously, such a challenge would make no sense, and in a profound sense the same is true of those who demand a precise portrayal of the pattern of protection activities on the market. Anarchism advocates the dissolution of the state into social and market arrangements, and these arrangements are far more flexible and less predictable than political institutions. The most that we can do, then, is to offer broad guidelines and perspectives on the shape of a projected anarchist society.
One important point to make here is that the advance of modern technology makes anarchistic arrangements increasingly feasible. Take, for example, the case of lighthouses, where it is often charged that it is unfeasible for private lighthouse operators to row out to each ship to charge it for use of the light. Apart from the fact that this argument ignores the successful existence of private lighthouses in earlier days, as in England in the eighteenth century, another vital consideration is that modern electronic technology makes charging each ship for the light far more feasible. Thus, the ship would have to have paid for an electronically controlled beam which could then be automatically turned on for those ships which had paid for the service.
Let us turn now to the problem of how disputes — in particular disputes over alleged violations of person and property — would be resolved in an anarchist society. First, it should be noted that all disputes involve two parties: the plaintiff, the alleged victim of the crime or tort and the defendant, the alleged aggressor. In many cases of broken contract, of course, each of the two parties alleging that the other is the culprit is at the same time a plaintiff and a defendant.
An important point to remember is that any society, be it statist or anarchist, has to have some way of resolving disputes that will gain a majority consensus in society. There would be no need for courts or arbitrators if everyone were omniscient and knew instantaneously which persons were guilty of any given crime or violation of contract. Since none of us is omniscient, there has to be some method of deciding who is the criminal or lawbreaker which will gain legitimacy; in short, whose decision will be accepted by the great majority of the public.
In the first place, a dispute may be resolved voluntarily between the two parties themselves, either unaided or with the help of a third mediator. This poses no problem, and will automatically be accepted by society at large. It is so accepted even now, much less in a society imbued with the anarchistic values of peaceful cooperation and agreement. Secondly and similarly, the two parties, unable to reach agreement, may decide to submit voluntarily to the decision of an arbitrator. This agreement may arise either after a dispute has arisen, or be provided for in advance in the original contract. Again, there is no problem in such an arrangement gaining legitimacy. Even in the present statist era, the notorious inefficiency and coercive and cumbersome procedures of the politically run government courts has led increasing numbers of citizens to turn to voluntary and expert arbitration for a speedy and harmonious settling of disputes.
Thus, William C. Wooldridge has written that

Wooldridge adds the important point that, in addition to the speed of arbitration procedures vis-à-vis the courts, the arbitrators can proceed as experts in disregard of the official government law; in a profound sense, then, they serve to create a voluntary body of private law. “In other words,” states Wooldridge, “the system of extralegal, voluntary courts has progressed hand in hand with a body of private law; the rules of the state are circumvented by the same process that circumvents the forums established for the settlement of disputes over those rules…. In short, a private agreement between two people, a bilateral “law,” has supplanted the official law. The writ of the sovereign has cease to run, and for it is substituted a rule tacitly or explicitly agreed to by the parties. Wooldridge concludes that “if an arbitrator can choose to ignore a penal damage rule or the statute of limitations applicable to the claim before him (and it is generally conceded that he has that power), arbitration can be viewed as a practically revolutionary instrument for self-liberation from the law….”2
It may be objected that arbitration only works successfully because the courts enforce the award of the arbitrator. Wooldridge points out, however, that arbitration was unenforceable in the American courts before 1920, but that this did not prevent voluntary arbitration from being successful and expanding in the United States and in England. He points, furthermore, to the successful operations of merchant courts since the Middle Ages, those courts which successfully developed the entire body of the law merchant. None of those courts possessed the power of enforcement. He might have added the private courts of shippers which developed the body of admiralty law in a similar way.
How then did these private, “anarchistic,” and voluntary courts ensure the acceptance of their decisions? By the method of social ostracism, and by the refusal to deal any further with the offending merchant. This method of voluntary “enforcement,” indeed proved highly successful. Wooldridge writes that “the merchants’ courts were voluntary, and if a man ignored their judgment, he could not be sent to jail…. Nevertheless, it is apparent that … [their] decisions were generally respected even by the losers; otherwise people would never have used them in the first place…. Merchants made their courts work simply by agreeing to abide by the results. The merchant who broke the understanding would not be sent to jail, to be sure, but neither would he long continue to be a merchant, for the compliance exacted by his fellows … proved if anything more effective than physical coercion.”3 Nor did this voluntary method fail to work in modern times. Wooldridge writes that it was precisely in the years before 1920, when arbitration awards could not be enforced in the courts,

It should also be pointed out that modern technology makes even more feasible the collection and dissemination of information about people’s credit ratings and records of keeping or violating their contracts or arbitration agreements. Presumably, an anarchist society would see the expansion of this sort of dissemination of data and thereby facilitate the ostracism or boycotting of contract and arbitration violators.
How would arbitrators be selected in an anarchist society? In the same way as they are chosen now, and as they were chosen in the days of strictly voluntary arbitration: the arbitrators with the best reputation for efficiency and probity would be chosen by the various parties on the market. As in other processes of the market, the arbitrators with the best record in settling disputes will come to gain an increasing amount of business, and those with poor records will no longer enjoy clients and will have to shift to another line of endeavor. Here it must be emphasized that parties in dispute will seek out those arbitrators with the best reputation for both expertise and impartiality and that inefficient or biased arbitrators will rapidly have to find another occupation.
Thus, the Tannehills emphasize:

If desired, furthermore, the contracting parties could provide in advance for a series of arbitrators:

Arbitration, then, poses little difficulty for a portrayal of the free society. But what of torts or crimes of aggression where there has been no contract? Or suppose that the breaker of a contract defies the arbitration award? Is ostracism enough? In short, how can courts develop in the free-market anarchist society which will have the power to enforce judgments against criminals or contract breakers?
In the wide sense, defense service consists of guards or police who use force in defending person and property against attack, and judges or courts whose role is to use socially accepted procedures to determine who the criminals or tortfeasors are, as well as to enforce judicial awards, such as damages or the keeping of contracts. On the free market, many scenarios are possible on the relationship between the private courts and the police; they may be “vertically integrated,” for example, or their services may be supplied by separate firms. Furthermore, it seems likely that police service will be supplied by insurance companies who will provide crime insurance to their clients. In that case, insurance companies will pay off the victims of crime or the breaking of contracts or arbitration awards and then pursue the aggressors in court to recoup their losses. There is a natural market connection between insurance companies and defense service, since they need pay out less benefits in proportion as they are able to keep down the rate of crime.
Courts might either charge fees for their services, with the losers of cases obliged to pay court costs, or else they may subsist on monthly or yearly premiums by their clients, who may be either individuals or the police or insurance agencies. Suppose, for example, that Smith is an aggrieved party, either because he has been assaulted or robbed, or because an arbitration award in his favor has not been honored. Smith believes that Jones is the party guilty of the crime. Smith then goes to a court, Court A, of which he is a client, and brings charges against Jones as a defendant. In my view, the hallmark of an anarchist society is one where no man may legally compel someone who is not a convicted criminal to do anything, since that would be aggression against an innocent man’s person or property. Therefore, Court A can only invite rather than subpoena Jones to attend his trial. Of course, if Jones refused to appear or send a representative, his side of the case will not be heard. The trial of Jones proceeds. Suppose that Court A finds Jones innocent. In my view, part of the generally accepted law code of the anarchist society (on which see further below) is that this must end the matter unless Smith can prove charges of gross incompetence or bias on the part of the court.
Suppose, next, that Court A finds Jones guilty. Jones might accept the verdict, because he too is a client of the same court, because he knows he is guilty, or for some other reason. In that case, Court A proceeds to exercise judgment against Jones. Neither of these instances poses very difficult problems for our picture of the anarchist society. But suppose, instead, that Jones contests the decision; he then goes to his court, Court B, and the case is retried there. Suppose that Court B, too, finds Jones guilty. Again, it seems to me that the accepted law code of the anarchist society will assert that this ends the matter; both parties have had their say in courts which each has selected, and the decision for guilt is unanimous.
Suppose, however, the most difficult case: that Court B finds Jones innocent. The two courts, each subscribed to by one of the two parties, have split their verdicts. In that case, the two courts will submit the case to an appeals court, or arbitrator, which the two courts agree upon. There seems to be no real difficulty about the concept of an appeals court. As in the case of arbitration contracts, it seems very likely that the various private courts in the society will have prior agreements to submit their disputes to a particular appeals court. How will the appeals judges be chosen? Again, as in the case of arbitrators or of the first judges on the free market, they will be chosen for their expertise and their reputation for efficiency, honesty, and integrity. Obviously, appeals judges who are inefficient or biased will scarcely be chosen by courts who will have a dispute. The point here is that there is no need for a legally established or institutionalized single, monopoly appeals court system, as states now provide. There is no reason why there cannot arise a multitude of efficient and honest appeals judges who will be selected by the disputant courts, just as there are numerous private arbitrators on the market today. The appeals court renders its decision, and the courts proceed to enforce it if, in our example, Jones is considered guilty — unless, of course, Jones can prove bias in some other court proceedings.
No society can have unlimited judicial appeals, for in that case there would be no point to having judges or courts at all. Therefore, every society, whether statist or anarchist, will have to have some socially accepted cutoff point for trials and appeals. My suggestion is the rule that the agreement of any two courts, be decisive. “Two” is not an arbitrary figure, for it reflects the fact that there are two parties, the plaintiff and the defendant, to any alleged crime or contract dispute.
If the courts are to be empowered to enforce decision against guilty parties, does this not bring back the state in another form and thereby negate anarchism? No, for at the beginning of this paper I explicitly defined anarchism in such a way as not to rule out the use of defensive force — force in defense of person and property — by privately supported agencies. In the same way, it is not bringing back the state to allow persons to use force to defend themselves against aggression, or to hire guards or police agencies to defend them.
It should be noted, however, that in the anarchist society there will be no “district attorney” to press charges on behalf of “society.” Only the victims will press charges as the plaintiffs. If, then, these victims should happen to be absolute pacifists who are opposed even to defensive force, then they will simply not press charges in the courts or otherwise retaliate against those who have aggressed against them. In a free society that would be their right. If the victim should suffer from murder, then his heir would have the right to press the charges.
What of the Hatfield-and-McCoy problem? Suppose that a Hatfield kills a McCoy, and that McCoy’s heir does not belong to a private insurance, police agency, or court, and decides to retaliate himself? Since under anarchism there can be no coercion of the noncriminal, McCoy would have the perfect right to do so. No one may be compelled to bring his case to a court. Indeed, since the right to hire police or courts flows from the right of self-defense against aggression, it would be inconsistent and in contradiction to the very basis of the free society to institute such compulsion.
Suppose, then, that the surviving McCoy finds what he believes to be the guilty Hatfield and kills him in turn? What then? This is fine, except that McCoy may have to worry about charges being brought against him by a surviving Hatfield. Here it must be emphasized that in the law of the anarchist society based on defense against aggression, the courts would not be able to proceed against McCoy if in fact he killed the right Hatfield. His problem would arise if the courts should find that he made a grievous mistake and killed the wrong man; in that case, he in turn would be found guilty of murder. Surely, in most instances, individuals will wish to obviate such problems by taking their case to a court and thereby gain social acceptability for their defensive retaliation — not for the act of retaliation but for the correctness of deciding who the criminal in any given case might be. The purpose of the judicial process, indeed, is to find a way of general agreement on who might be the criminal or contract breaker in any given case. The judicial process is not a good in itself; thus, in the case of an assassination, such as Jack Ruby’s murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, on public television, there is no need for a complex judicial process, since the name of the murderer is evident to all.
Will not the possibility exist of a private court that may turn venal and dishonest, or of a private police force that turns criminal and extorts money by coercion? Of course such an event may occur, given the propensities of human nature. Anarchism is not a moral cure-all. But the important point is that market forces exist to place severe checks on such possibilities, especially in contrast to a society where a state exists. For, in the first place, judges, like arbitrators, will prosper on the market in proportion to their reputation for efficiency and impartiality. Secondly, on the free market important checks and balances exist against venal courts or criminal police forces. Namely, that there are competing courts and police agencies to whom victims may turn for redress. If the “Prudential Police Agency” should turn outlaw and extract revenue from victims by coercion, the latter would have the option of turning to the “Mutual” or “Equitable” Police Agency for defense and for pressing charges against Prudential. These are the genuine “checks and balances” of the free market, genuine in contrast to the phony check and balances of a state system, where all the alleged “balancing” agencies are in the hands of one monopoly government. Indeed, given the monopoly “protection service” of a state, what is there to prevent a state from using its monopoly channels of coercion to extort money from the public? What are the checks and limits of the state? None, except for the extremely difficult course of revolution against a power with all of the guns in its hands. In fact, the state provides an easy, legitimated channel for crime and aggression, since it has its very being in the crime of tax theft, and the coerced monopoly of “protection.” It is the state, indeed, that functions as a mighty “protection racket” on a giant and massive scale. It is the state that says: “Pay us for your ‘protection’ or else.” In the light of the massive and inherent activities of the state, the danger of a “protection racket” emerging from one or more private police agencies is relatively small indeed.
Moreover, it must be emphasized that a crucial element in the power of the state is its legitimacy in the eyes of the majority of the public, the fact that after centuries of propaganda, the depredations of the state are looked upon rather as benevolent services. Taxation is generally not seen as theft, nor war as mass murder, nor conscription as slavery. Should a private police agency turn outlaw, should “Prudential” become a protection racket, it would then lack the social legitimacy which the state has managed to accrue to itself over the centuries. “Prudential” would be seen by all as bandits, rather than as legitimate or divinely appointed “sovereigns” bent on promoting the “common good” or the “general welfare.” And lacking such legitimacy, “Prudential” would have to face the wrath of the public and the defense and retaliation of the other private defense agencies, the police and courts, on the free market. Given these inherent checks and limits, a successful transformation from a free society to bandit rule becomes most unlikely. Indeed, historically, it has been very difficult for a state to arise to supplant a stateless society; usually, it has come about through external conquest rather than by evolution from within a society.
Within the anarchist camp, there has been much dispute on whether the private courts would have to be bound by a basic, common law code. Ingenious attempts have been made to work out a system where the laws or standards of decision-making by the courts would differ completely from one to another.7 But in my view all would have to abide by the basic law code, in particular, prohibition of aggression against person and property, in order to fulfill our definition of anarchism as a system which provides no legal sanction for such aggression. Suppose, for example, that one group of people in society holds that all redheads are demons who deserve to be shot on sight. Suppose that Jones, one of this group, shoots Smith, a redhead. Suppose that Smith or his heir presses charges in a court, but that Jones’s court, in philosophic agreement with Jones, finds him innocent therefore. It seems to me that in order to be considered legitimate, any court would have to follow the basic libertarian law code of the inviolate right of person and property. For otherwise, courts might legally subscribe to a code which sanctions such aggression in various cases, and which to that extent would violate the definition of anarchism and introduce, if not the state, then a strong element of statishness or legalized aggression into the society.
But again I see no insuperable difficulties here. For in that case, anarchists, in agitating for their creed, will simply include in their agitation the idea of a general libertarian law code as part and parcel of the anarchist creed of abolition of legalized aggression against person or property in the society.
In contrast to the general law code, other aspects of court decisions could legitimately vary in accordance with the market or the wishes of the clients; for example, the language the cases will be conducted in, the number of judges to be involved, and so on.
There are other problems of the basic law code which there is no time to go into here: for example, the definition of just property titles or the question of legitimate punishment of convicted offenders — though the latter problem of course exists in statist legal systems as well.8 The basic point, however, is that the state is not needed to arrive at legal principles or their elaboration: indeed, much of the common law, the law merchant, admiralty law, and private law in general, grew up apart from the state, by judges not making the law but finding it on the basis of agreed-upon principles derived either from custom or reason.9 The idea that the state is needed to make law is as much a myth as that the state is needed to supply postal or police services.
Enough has been said here, I believe, to indicate that an anarchist system for settling disputes would be both viable and self-subsistent: that once adopted, it could work and continue indefinitely. How to arrive at that system is of course a very different problem, but certainly at the very least it will not likely come about unless people are convinced of its workability, are convinced, in short, that the state is not a necessary evil.

[Murray Rothbard delivered this talk 32 years ago today at the American Society for Political and Legal Philosophy (ASPLP), Washington, DC: December 28, 1974. It was first published in The Libertarian Forum, volume 7.1, January 1975, available in PDF and ePub.]

title says it all, really.
I got the legendary edition in the steam sale & fell in love with ME1, while some of the dialogue could be a bit cringe worthy I had an absolute blast with the combat, looting and exploration granted by the end I barely even bothered looking at the equipment menu.
I cannot place it exactly but 2 just is not landing with me for some reason, I am not a huge fan of how the combat feels especially since a lot of the abilities seem to have been nerfed to the point of being next to useless, thought I'd switch from soldier to infiltrator and oh boy was that a mistake, stuck using weapons I do not really enjoy apart from the sniper, my abilities don't seem to do much and I feel kinda squishy, lesson learned.
I'm also not very big on what I feel is a pretty heavy dead space influence on ME2, something about how it all couples together with the mass effect style of exploration just turns me off of the game rather quickly, however I do enjoy scanning planets & the revamped upgrade system but it all starts falling away from me as soon as the combat starts, I don't find the game particularly difficult per-se at least not like DS/souls-like difficulty however pretty much every combat encounter seems to consist of a mish-mash of really light but surprisingly high dps enemies with a couple of super sponges thrown in to prolong the combat as much as possible.
I'll definitely finish the game, at some point, however after the excitement I had to play ME2 after finishing 1 I'm now a bit apprehensive about playing 3 once I'm finished. if the combat and story are just a direct continuation of what is going on in ME2 I'll be kinda disappointed honestly.
I should mention I skipped these games entirely at release, I was not huge on dialogue/narrative focused games as a kid/young teenager and especially not space exploration games but I have always heard good things about the original trilogy, especially 2 and I guess I'm a bit sad that I don't (yet?) see or understand what it is that makes this game so many people's favorite of the series. sorry for the rambling.