Problem description & analysis

There is an EMPLOYEE table in the database. The data is as follows:

EID	NAME	SURNAME	GENDER	STATE	BIRTHDAY	HIREDATE	DEPT
1	Rebecca	Moore	F	California	1974-11-20	2005-03-11	R&D
2	Ashley	Wilson	F	New York	1980-07-19	2008-03-16	Finance
3	Rachel	Johnson	F	New Mexico	1970-12-17	2010-12-01	Sales
4	Emily	Smith	F	Texas	1985-03-07	2006-08-15	HR
5	Ashley	Smith	F	Texas	1975-05-13	2004-07-30	R&D
6	Matthew	Johnson	M	California	1984-07-07	2005-07-07	Sales
7	Alexis	Smith	F	Illinois	1972-08-16	2002-08-16	Sales
8	Megan	Wilson	F	California	1979-04-19	1984-04-19	Marketing
9	Victoria	Davis	F	Texas	1983-12-07	2009-12-07	HR
10	Ryan	Johnson	M	Pennsylvania	1976-03-12	2006-03-12	R&D

We are trying to find records where EID is less than 5 according to the dynamic condition (dynamically composed SQL). Below is the desired result:

EID	NAME	SURNAME	GENDER	STATE	BIRTHDAY	HIREDATE	DEPT
1	Rebecca	Moore	F	California	1974-11-20	2005-03-11	R&D
2	Ashley	Wilson	F	New York	1980-07-19	2008-03-16	Finance
3	Rachel	Johnson	F	New Mexico	1970-12-17	2010-12-01	Sales
4	Emily	Smith	F	Texas	1985-03-07	2006-08-15	HR

Solution

We write the following script p1.dfx in esProc:

	A
1	=connect("demo")
2	=A1.query@x("SELECT * FROM EMPLOYEE WHERE "+where)

Explanation:
Set a script parameter where, whose value is EID<5.
A1 Connect to the database named demo.
A2 Return query result as a table sequence and auto-close database connection when the query is finished.
Refer to How to Call an SPL Script in BIRT to learn about the method of integrating the SPL script into BIRT.

https://www.academia.edu/119041827
​
Grimm’s Law with Verner’s Law explain many consonant shifts in Germanic regularly, but some exceptions exist. Thurneysen’s Law concerns, in part, voicing dissimilation of nearby fricatives and has been interpreted as either irregular or due to unknown changes in Gothic, not of PGmc. date. In this framework I will attempt to add another type of dissimilation of fricatives, also at a distance and irregular, and necessarily of PGmc. date. Many, not all, PIE *kVs appear as Gmc. *kVs, likely due to regular *k > *x then optional *xVs > *kVs in PGmc. Also, *kVz might also be included, depending on the timing of *d > *t, *zd > *st, etc. (*kizdno-, below). This would be dissimilation of [+continuant] in fricatives, or similar changes in whatever system is accepted. Examples:
​
*kus-ne/ye- ‘kiss’ > H. kuwas-, G. kunéō, Ps. kṣulawul, Gmc. *kusja- > E. kiss, ON kyssa
​
*H2ak^- ‘sharp’ (in many names of bladed objects, etc.)
*H2ak^si-() ‘axe’ > G. axī́nē , L. ascia
*H2ak^si-wo-? > *H2ak^wisyo- > Go. aqizi, ON øx, OHG acchus, E. ax(e)
​
*kwa(H2)t(h)o- > Skt. kvath- ‘boil’, Go. hvaþō ‘foam’
*kwa(H2)so- > OBg kvasŭ ‘leaven / fermented drink’
*kwa(H2)s(e/i)yo- > L. cāseus ‘cheese’, *kwasja-z > ON Kvasir ‘a wise Van formed from the spit of gods, killed by dwarves who mixed his blood with honey to ferment into Mead of Poetry’
​
*kizd- ‘pine (sap) / turpentine pine’ >>
*kizdaH2- > Skt. cīḍā- ‘turpentine pine’
*kizdimo- > *kīḷima- > Skt. kilima-m ‘kind of pine’, A. kíilum ‘turpentine’ (*zd > ḷ after RUKI, as Vedic)
*kizdno- > Gmc. *kizna- > OE cén ‘fipine/spruce’, OHG kén
​
*H2ag^sulo- > ON öxull, OHG ahsala ‘shoulder’, NHG Achsel ‘armpit’, OE eaxl, E. axle
*H2ag^su- > *H2ak^su- > *aH2k^us-?, OHG uochisa \ uochsana , OE ócusta \ óxta \ óxn ‘armpit’
​
These are likely related to ‘axle’ < *H2ag^- ‘drive’, but the optional metathesis seems likely limited to Gmc., well after *gs > *ks, etc., *k > x, especially since the same type of metathesis produces *H2ak^wisyo- in a word certainly < *H2ak^- ‘sharp’. When several nearly identical roots vary only in having *k > k in Gmc., a specific change there is preferable to looking for several new roots with only evidence from one branch. Removing ‘axe’ from ‘sharp’ also seems misguided, and attempts to explain this in a reasonable manner would surely have found the common *kVs before now, if tried at all. Manaster Ramer’s idea that Go. aqizi comes from a compound with *-k^g- seems less likely due to the other cases with irregular *k > k all occurring before s, which shows that a sound change is responsible, not an individual explanation for each. Previous attempts to separate all these sets of words since *k > k is not regular do not seem needed if the specific environment *k-s is considered for all these. For example, Kloekhorst said, “The formal as well as semantic similarity to Gr. kunéō ‘to kiss’ (*ku-ne-s-) and OHG kussan ‘to kiss’ is striking. Nevertheless, the Hittite verb cannot be cognate to both, since Gr. k- does not regularly correspond to OHG k-.” Once might be coincidence, but with 5 good examples, the support for this change (or lack of change) seems sufficient. Separating nearly identical words because *k seems to become k shows that a search for only what is clearly regular and a dependence on what is already known as regular has hindered the growth of historical linguistics.
​
Several other words, less clear, might show that *k-k > k-k could be included:
Li. kaĩras \ kaĩrias \ kairỹs ‘left’, kairė̃ ‘left hand’, Gmc. *kaika- > ON keikr ‘bent backwards’, Dan. kei ‘left hand’
​
An even less certain case of *x-x > *k-x might be:
*xux- > *kux- > OE cohhetan ‘blusteriot/cough’, Dutch kuch, E. cough
​
Though this seems to be onomatopoeia within Gmc., thus *xux- has no outside evidence, languages with [x] often have words for ‘cough’ start with this, like:
Khw. xaf-, NP xaf-, Os. xuf-
​
Though uncertain, such speculation is only possible due to good evidence for *kVs > kVs. The sporadic nature of Thurneysen’s Law seems matched by, at least, this change in all of Gmc., making its nature and scope as PGmc. in age more likely. That these changes were optional need not be evidence they did not exist at all. Any attempt can only lead to absurdities and chaos, all unneeded.
​
​
Buck, Carl Darling (1949) A Dictionary of Selected Synonyms in the Principal Indo-European Languages, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago
​
Kloekhorst, Alwin (2008) Etymological Dictionary of the Hittite Inherited Lexicon
https://www.academia.edu/345121
​
Manaster Ramer, Alexis (2024, draft?) If Not a Perfect Etymology of the Germanic 'Axe', At least A Dead Ringer for One v
https://www.academia.edu/118943826
​
Whalen, Sean (2023) Pashto k- entries by Georg Morgenstierne
https://www.reddit.com/Pashtun/comments/128y1hh/pashto_k_entries_by_georg_morgenstierne/
​
Whalen, Sean (2024a) Cretan Elements in Linear B, Part Two: *y > z, *o > u, LB *129, LAB *65, Minoan Names (Draft)
https://www.academia.edu/114878588
​
Whalen, Sean (2024b) Proto-Indo-European Options for *g^hdh(iy)es ‘yesterday’, Greek i- / e- (Draft)
https://www.academia.edu/115010109
​
Whalen, Sean (?) Indo-European Alternation of *H / *s as Widespread and Optional (Draft)
​
Woodhouse, Robert (2000) The origin of Thurneysen's law: a detailed analysis of the evidence
https://www.academia.edu/9232685
​

Problem description & analysis

There is an EMPLOYEE table in the database. The data is as follows:

EID	NAME	SURNAME	GENDER	STATE	BIRTHDAY	HIREDATE	DEPT
1	Rebecca	Moore	F	California	1974-11-20	2005-03-11	R&D
2	Ashley	Wilson	F	New York	1980-07-19	2008-03-16	Finance
3	Rachel	Johnson	F	New Mexico	1970-12-17	2010-12-01	Sales
4	Emily	Smith	F	Texas	1985-03-07	2006-08-15	HR
5	Ashley	Smith	F	Texas	1975-05-13	2004-07-30	R&D
6	Matthew	Johnson	M	California	1984-07-07	2005-07-07	Sales
7	Alexis	Smith	F	Illinois	1972-08-16	2002-08-16	Sales
8	Megan	Wilson	F	California	1979-04-19	1984-04-19	Marketing
9	Victoria	Davis	F	Texas	1983-12-07	2009-12-07	HR
10	Ryan	Johnson	M	Pennsylvania	1976-03-12	2006-03-12	R&D

We are trying to sort records in the table by EID in a specific order, which is [9,7,5,3, descending order for the rest]. The first four records corresponding to 9,7,5,3 will be passed in as parameters. Below is the desired result:

EID	NAME	SURNAME	GENDER	STATE	BIRTHDAY	HIREDATE	DEPT
9	Victoria	Davis	F	Texas	1983-12-07	2009-12-07	HR
7	Alexis	Smith	F	Illinois	1972-08-16	2002-08-16	Sales
5	Ashley	Smith	F	Texas	1975-05-13	2004-07-30	R&D
3	Rachel	Johnson	F	New Mexico	1970-12-17	2010-12-01	Sales
1	Rebecca	Moore	F	California	1974-11-20	2005-03-11	R&D
2	Ashley	Wilson	F	New York	1980-07-19	2008-03-16	Finance
4	Emily	Smith	F	Texas	1985-03-07	2006-08-15	HR
6	Matthew	Johnson	M	California	1984-07-07	2005-07-07	Sales
8	Megan	Wilson	F	California	1979-04-19	1984-04-19	Marketing
10	Ryan	Johnson	M	Pennsylvania	1976-03-12	2006-03-12	R&D

Solution

We write the following script p1.dfx in esProc:

	A
1	=connect("demo")
2	=A1.query@x("SELECT * FROM EMPLOYEE").sort(EID).align@as(eid.split@pc(),EID)

Explanation:
Set a script parameter eid, whose value is 9,7,5,3.
A1 Connect to the database named demo.
A2 Return query result as a table sequence and auto-close database connection when the query is finished. Sort the table sequence fist by EID then by the comma-separated sequence of numbers defined through parameter eid. Put the non-matching members at the end during the second sort.
Refer to How to Call an SPL Script in BIRT to learn about the method of integrating the SPL script with BIRT.

Disclaimer: This post is merely to provide knowledge, and not to instruct you to do anything. Your choice whether to choose the Science One program at UBC or not is completely up to you. I hope this helps in making an informed decision.
I just thought I would contribute to the existing public knowledge of the Science One program already on Reddit here: https://www.reddit.com/UBC/comments/ec95t4/for_anyone_interested_in_science_one/ My post assumes you already did basic research on the program and aims to contribute more knowledge that isn’t publicly available yet (here is the Science One website: https://scienceone.ubc.ca)
I am an alumni in the 2023-2024 cohort, but just a disclaimer that a few things will change in the program in the years to come (see below):
Just a few small updates to the previous Reddit post:

• BIOL 140 is no longer a mandatory component of Science One so there will be no associated biology labs.
• There are three STT’s, where you can find here for the updated schedules for your year: https://scienceone.ubc.ca/resources

Note about grades: While Science One is promoted as a program where the students care more about knowledge than grades, while this is very true in my personal experience, I still think that grades played a large impact on our mental health, confidence, and our overall enjoyability of the first year experience. The reason I am including grades here is to allow you to have reasonable expectations about your grades and know that if you want to go into a very competitive specialization in second year, Science One may not be the right program for you. Note that the grades published on UBC grades (https://ubcgrades.com) is not representative of the actual class average. There is a policy where if a student failed two or more subjects in Science One, the credit for Science One will be broken down into its individual course components and the student will not appear to have been in Science One (it doesn’t show Science One on their transcript, rather the rough course equivalents). This raises the apparent class average reported. In my year, 3 people were removed, which changed the class average from 75% to 77%.
Alright, with that out of the way, I will be filling in the gaps of public knowledge specifically with the workload of Science One. Below is a (hopefully) unbiased perspective on Science One. My personal opinion will be stated later in this post.
Biology
Note: both of our biology professors (Pam Kalas and George Haughn) are no longer teaching in the program, so this subject may look very different

• Weekly 10 minute quizzes (quiz average 15% of biology grade), consisting normally of two to three written questions (be sure to learn to type very fast and think fast, especially since these quizzes are normally at 8:30am in the morning)
  • However, we get one quiz drop per term where our lowest quiz mark is discarded
  • Generally the quiz average is around 74%
• Biology Midterm “superquiz” once a term (20% of biology grade, can replace quiz average if the mark is higher so can be worth up to 35%) which is around 55 minutes and consists of around 10 long written questions (however, this is very little time for the amount of thinking and typing necessary to succeed so learn to type fast!)
  • Average was around 74% and 60% respectively for terms 1 and 2
• Biology assignments for completion/participation (10%) around once every 1-2 weeks ~ somewhat simple compared to the complexity of the quizzes and midterm, takes around 15-20 minutes per assignment
• Pre-readings per week around 2 hours, critical to understanding the class material
  • Pre-readings are found in study guides provided to us or on public webpages, there is no textbook for biology
• One tree project in term 1 where you are tasked with finding and identifying five different tree species around campus
• 2.5 hour final exam (50%), however, if you do better on your final exam than midterm average, it can replace the midterm average (so can be worth up to 85% of your grade)
  • Consists of written answers with explanations (I found this final to always be very rushed, finishing writing my answers with around 1 minute to spare)
  • Typically, since the final exams are so difficult, very few people will be able to get a higher mark on the final exam than the midterm
  • Average was 65% in term 1, term 2 grades not available

Overall: 3-10 hours of work per week depending on your thinking speed and how busy that week’s schedule is
Class average over the year: 71%
Term 1 Units: Great Bear Rainforest, Metabolism, DNA, Gene Expression, Genetics
Term 2 Units: Genetics (Continued); Phylogenies, Speciation, Population and Community Dynamics; Macromolecular Self Assembly; Regulation of Gene Expression; Biological Energy Transformation
Biology Tutorials

• Salmon project ~ year long project where we test the DNA of salmon through learning gel electrophoresis strategies
  • Very minimal prep work, maximum 30 min per tutorial

Chemistry
Note: One professor is no longer teaching in Science One (John Sherman), but the other is staying (Guillaume Bussiere), so this may be different in your year

• Around biweekly unit quizzes (40%), five per term, each quiz around 30 minutes, double sided with around 15-25 questions, with both multiple choice and written answer questions
  • Around 74% averages
  • One quiz drop per term
• Assignments (10%) consisting of worksheets provided in class (takes around 30 minutes-1 hour per assignment) and questions submitted on a paid ($70 if I remember correctly) homework submission website called Achieve
• 2.5 hour final exam (50%) consisting of theory based questions, organic chemistry, multiple choice, and calculation
  • 69% average in term 1, term 2 grades not available

Overall: 2-5 hours of work per week depending if there’s quizzes or assignments that week
Class average over the year: 75%
Term 1 Units: Chemical Bonding and Basics, Conformations, Stereochemistry, Thermodynamics, Electrochemistry
Term 2 Units: Kinetics, Quantum Chemistry, Intermolecular Forces (not really a whole unit, more like a supplementary lecture), Valence Bond Theory and Molecular Orbital Theory, Acid Base Chemistry, SN1 and SN2 Reactions
Chemistry Tutorials

• some coding based tutorials for quantum chemistry, little to no prep work, but knowledge of python coding is needed (but you will learn in Science One), submission of a worksheet for marks
• Organic chemistry worksheets, guided by the professors, but no submission necessary

Chemistry Labs (Chem 121, Chem 123 equivalents for term 1 and 2 respectively)

• Biweekly 3 hour lab sessions, where we are performing experiments and recording notes in our EDF
• Prep work: normally on our “off weeks”, we need to fill in our EDF and do the prep work (around 3-5 hours)
• In term 2, we also need to submit lab reports for each lab session (takes around 1-2 hours to write)

Overall class average (I forgot): around 85%
Physics

• Two long form assignments per term (20%, so 10% each assignment), each assignment generally consists of collecting data related to something learned in class, and analyzing it
  • Data collecting and analysis can take around 2-6 hours spread over the week (generally how long it takes to complete the assignment)
  • Around 80% averages
• Biweekly quizzes (30%), total 5 per term, one hour long open book online quizzes, consisting of 12 multiple choice or calculation questions
  • Around 75% averages
  • one quiz drop per term
• Prereadings assignments (4%) on WebWork (around once every two weeks, but very inconsistent schedule), consisting around 3-4 multiple choice/calculation based questions
  • Most often, there is no prereading assignment, but there are around 6-7 sections of prereading assigned per week of lecture of online OpenStax textbooks
    • Personally, I did not do them, but still survived, as the prereadings can take up to 3 hours depending on your reading speed and intended depth of read
• Homework assignments (6%) around once every two weeks consisting of 8-11 multiple choice and calculation based questions, requires a lot of knowledge of theory rather than plugging in numbers into equations
• 2.5 hour open book final (40%) consisting of both multiple choice (submitted on Canvas) and long written answer questions (paper copy, but submitted on Canvas)
  • 60% average in term 1, term 2 grades not available

Overall: around 2-5 hours of work per week depending on if there’s quizzes, long assignments, or assignments
Class average over the year: 76%
Term 1 Units: Measuring and Modelling Motion, Motion and Conservation Laws, Thermodynamics, Rotational Motion, Special Relativity
Term 2 Units: Waves, Quantum Mechanics, Electrostatics, Circuits, Magnetism and Magnetic Fields, Stellar Nucleosynthesis
Physics Tutorials

• Generally working on worksheets with the guidance of professors, very helpful for understanding the content better, but worksheets are not submitted

Physics Labs (Phys 119, Phys 129)

• 3 hour sessions per week, consisting of data collection and data analysis, learn plenty of Python and basic statistical tests (however, most labs in term 1 are very rushed, but in term 2 there is much more spare time)
• Prep work in term 1 takes around 1-2 hours per lab, consisting of submitting a Jupyter notebook with code so we understand the code we need to use in the lab
• Prep work in term 2 takes around 15 minutes - 2 hours, mostly doesn’t have as much prep work as term 1
  • Rarely Jupyter lab notebooks for submission, most weeks we just preread what we are doing in the lab and that is sufficient

Class average (I forgot): around 85%
Mathematics

• Midterms “tests” (25%) three per term, around 50 minutes, and consisting of 3-4 written questions (average is usually around 60%, but we have had two instances of failed average midterms resulting in scale [but don’t rely on a scale, it is very rare!]), however, we get one midterm drop per term, where it is not counted in our average
• Assignments (16%) consisting of three long assignments with written answers that take around 2-4 hours to complete, and weekly two WebWork assignments that are around 6-12 questions, calculation and theory based
• Weekly quizzes (9%), with one quiz drop per term
  • 15 minute quizzes with 3 questions, generally a little rushed but doable
• 2.5 hour final (50%)
  • Average 67% in term 1, term 2 grades not available
• Pre-reading assignments not for marks, takes around 2 hours per week (personally I didn’t do any and I was ok)

Overall workload: around 3-6 hours per week depending if there’s assignments, and midterms that week
Class average over the year: 72%
Term 1 Focus: Derivatives and ODE’s
Term 2 Focus: Integration
Term 1 Project (partnered)

• consists of a presentation and mind map of a topic that we research in depth using primary literature
• Around biweekly meetings with our mentor, and mini check in assignments

Overall workload: around 1 hour per week, but can be up to 4 hours when preparing for the presentation
Class average: around 85%
Term 2 Project (partnered)

• consists of a project designed personally by you and a partner to measure something and report on it in a 3000 word paper (90%) and a presentation to our peers (10%)
• Weekly check ins with mentor, or round table discussion with updates

Overall workload: anywhere from 0-8 hours a week depending on the complexity of the project
Class average: 75%
Summary
With that in mind, I want to provide some pros and cons of Science One:
Pros

• Unique connections to professors
• Community with fellow students, and can form a very close knit group of people who are like-minded
• Blended grade at the end of the school year, so if you do bad in one subject but good at the rest, you can “hide” the bad mark
• Networking with professionals at guest speakers
• Having all your classes in one classroom, to avoid rushing across campus between classes
• Allows you to see how all science subjects interconnect
• Provides a deeper knowledge of all topics, basically an honours version of first year Science
• No stress about designing your own timetable
• Research experience in term 2 project can help with research applications in the future
• Study spaces for only Science One students, very helpful especially during finals season

Cons

• grading is a little harsh (very harsh in biology in my opinion) and there is no scaling at the end of the school year, so you may not get into your desired major if it is very competitive to get into
• You also are not prioritized for major selection compared to mainstream (ie if you get a 70% and a mainstream student gets a 71%, they will be prioritized)
• Workload is very intense, sometimes it felt like there was no break for ourselves
• Mental health and stress levels
• Blended grade at the end of the school year, so if you do really good in one subject it may be hidden
• Busy workload means less free time, so some relationships outside of Science One may dwindle
• Very hard to take elective courses on top of Science One, because of the busy schedule and demanding workload (might make it harder to get into Computer Science because of its prerequisites)
• Science One only offers 28 credits (6 for two terms of, biology, physics, math, and chem each, with 2 for two terms of chemistry labs and physics labs each), meaning that our term 1 and term 2 work do not provide us any credit
  • Science One disqualifies students from taking SCIE 113 (a communication requirement), but does not give any credits for it

Personal Opinion
While I did enjoy Science One at the start of the school year because of the pros mentioned above, over the school year, I started taking an interest in a competitive major, which put a lot of stress on myself to achieve high marks. It almost felt like no matter how hard I tried and how well I thought I knew the topic, my mark was going to be low anyways because the way the content is tested. I feel like I shot myself in the foot when it comes to getting into my major as the application process is completely based on grades.
While I don’t know if I would have done better in mainstream (I probably wouldn’t have had as many friends, and therefore my mental health would be worse, and possibly it means that I don’t have as much motivation), I definitely think that I could have done better in mainstream if I had the same motivation I do now as their way of testing and marking may be a lot more lenient. However, I am almost certainly sure that if my cohort were placed into mainstream classes in first year, we would have achieved much higher grades than we did in Science One. However, I don’t know if being in Science One could have an effect on my performance in the years to come. I do acknowledge that over the year, I was able to develop really good study habits to manage the workload and also learned to prioritize my health, which will be beneficial in the future.
However, I have also noticed that there are some “hell weeks”, where we absolutely feel like dropping out. In both terms, after term 1 and 2 conferences, where we were away at camp for the weekend (we didn’t have the weekend to do schoolwork), there was a week where there were many overlapping assessments, such as math midterms, chemistry quizzes, math assignments, and chemistry assignments, etc. These are the assessments that ended up having class averages which were below expectations, which I feel wasn’t our fault at all.
In fact, we were burnt out, but because of our wonderful Student Council, we were able to have some assignments pushed back to alleviate some of our workload and reduce burnout. Special thanks to our chemistry professors, as they were always open to planning the chemistry quizzes on days that weren’t as bad for us, and even asked us which day we wanted the quizzes. I can tell they really care about our wellbeing and our performance.
In addition, even though Science One is marketed as being prestigious, most of the people I talk to don’t even know what Science One is, and the few who do know it, know it for its intensive nature and harsh marking scheme. There is no special treatment for Science One graduates that I know of except for the occasional “wow how did you survive?”.
Generally, I don’t regret doing Science One, but if I had the chance to restart first year, I would have chosen to go the mainstream route. I feel I would have been a lot less stressed and have gotten much better grades. However, I did meet so many motivated and amazing people this year, and have generally enjoyed some aspects such as camp. Unfortunately, because of my desired major, I have seen Science One as something that may have limited my options in the future.
Do I think Science One is for you?
These are my personal opinions and please don’t take this section as the final decider for you. Be sure to do more research!
To succeed in Science One, talent can only go so far. At some point you will be challenged academically, and you will doubt yourself. But what follow is what really determines if you are a good fit for Science One. If you want to give up and do something easier, go to mainstream. If you want to persevere and to learn more, Science One may be the right choice for you. If just you want the prestige of Science One, don’t do Science One, it is not as well known as their website may make it seem. If you want to go into Computer Science, Science One may not be for you since it has little connection to Computer Science and really lowers your mark.
If you really are hard set on a competitive major which requires high marks, consider mainstream, since it is very rare and very very difficult to do well in Science One. If you really love to learn more difficult concepts, have a tight community to be by your side, to have good connections to your professors, to get some research experience, AND grades aren’t a huge concern for you, Science One is for you.
Again, take my opinion with a grain of salt. You are ultimately the right person who can make the right choice for yourself. You know yourself the best. I hope this helped and I wish you all the very best in your studies, whether you decide to go Science One or not. Feel free to DM me or reply below if you have any further questions :)

Problem description & analysis

Below is text file separators.txt:
EID;NAME;SURNAME;GENDER;STATE;BIRTHDAY;HIREDATE;DEPT 9;Victoria;Davis;F;Texas;1983-12-07;2009-12-07;HR 7;Alexis;Smith;F;Illinois;1972-08-16;2002-08-16;Sales 5;Ashley;Smith;F;Texas;1975-05-13;2004-07-30;R&D 3;Rachel;Johnson;F;New Mexico;1970-12-17;2010-12-01;Sales 1;Rebecca;Moore;F;California;1974-11-20;2005-03-11;R&D 2;Ashley;Wilson;F;New York;1980-07-19;2008-03-16;Finance 4;Emily;Smith;F;Texas;1985-03-07;2006-08-15;HR 6;Matthew;Johnson;M;California;1984-07-07;2005-07-07;Sales 8;Megan;Wilson;F;California;1979-04-19;1984-04-19;Marketing 10;Ryan;Johnson;M;Pennsylvania;1976-03-12;2006-03-12;R&D
The column separator is the semicolon (";"). We are trying to use the file as the data source in BIRT, use the semicolon as the separator, and extract a data set from the text file as follows:

EID	NAME	SURNAME	GENDER	STATE	BIRTHDAY	HIREDATE	DEPT
9	Victoria	Davis	F	Texas	1983-12-07	2009-12-07	HR
7	Alexis	Smith	F	Illinois	1972-08-16	2002-08-16	Sales
5	Ashley	Smith	F	Texas	1975-05-13	2004-07-30	R&D
3	Rachel	Johnson	F	New Mexico	1970-12-17	2010-12-01	Sales
1	Rebecca	Moore	F	California	1974-11-20	2005-03-11	R&D
2	Ashley	Wilson	F	New York	1980-07-19	2008-03-16	Finance
4	Emily	Smith	F	Texas	1985-03-07	2006-08-15	HR
6	Matthew	Johnson	M	California	1984-07-07	2005-07-07	Sales
8	Megan	Wilson	F	California	1979-04-19	1984-04-19	Marketing
10	Ryan	Johnson	M	Pennsylvania	1976-03-12	2006-03-12	R&D

Solution

Write the following script p1.dfx in esProc:

	A
1	=file("separators.txt").import@t(;,";")

Explanation:
A1 Use semicolon as the separator, import data from the file, and return it as table sequence. Take the first record as column headers.
Refer to How to Call an SPL Script in BIRT to learn about the method of integrating the SPL script with BIRT.

Appraisal patterns of envy and related emotions

Crossposting audience: The bad news is there does not seem to be a cure for envy. This is congruent with the recidivism statistics of maladapted/antisocial behavior in narcissists, without which narcissism and those with NPD would not be so socially undesirable. However, there are clear signs that the circuitry of envy is noticeably different than the circuitry of admiration, and that jealousy pathways are similar to addiction and expectation of reward pathways. A neuroeconomic analysis of "I won't win this one without illegal/unethical leveling" may be occurring in the envious, showing there may be insight that could resolve what has been until this point and unresolvable emotion full of frustration and pain at the perceived inferiority these individuals suffer. It is important to study and resolve this to help protect their victims from violence, psychological, and economic abuse, theft, hostage-taking of what is critical to the envied person, and unreasonable dislike that turns into hate crime on a whim. Victims deserve protection (the envious say the opposite) and so we research. Follow this subreddit for the first research-backed subreddit on envy.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3356518/#:~:text=The%20more%20a%20situation%20was,as%20both%20deserved%20and%20controllable.
Deservingness predicts whether someone will engage in benign or malicious envy. When someone feels low control over something, deservingness tends to be perceived as lower. For instance, there are people that believe that young Angelina Jolie had lip fillers because they themselves have small lips. Due to the fact their bodies may not produce that kind of estrogen, they feel malicious envy. Interestingly, that creates a circular loop where they feel it isn’t deserved because they can’t also have it, and because it isn’t deserved according to them subjectively (for instance, this is a case where subjective deservingness is completely incorrect…she was born that way, it’s not about deserving or not) then they feel malicious envy. (Interestingly this particular example may explain the malicious envy economic abuse levelling properties of misogyny…people without estrogen may feel malicious envy towards those with it as empathy is valued and factoring in all the moving pieces like a more high empathy mind can may be a coveted trait). Higher entitlement is more likely to lead to malicious envy; narcissists and narcissistic people are proven to over-appraise their own features and create cases of social inflation (zeronarcissists) meaning they are more likely to believe they will be given things, deserve things, or have things they will not be given, do not objectively deserve by truly just criteria, or do not have. Therefore narcissists are more likely to feel people have things they don't deserve because they believe they are the only people that deserve them and therefore they are more likely to experience malicious envy and engage in illegal “bring them down to my level” behaviors. Misogynists who believe everything women have is given to them by men show this same narcissistic trait as a group; interestingly this may be an attempt to feel in control of having low estrogen by making delusions of control about women that do not withstand evidence when rigorously examined (thinking they program women in the same way infants think they control their mothers before they develop a sense of the external world when successfully psychologically developed, but when examined no such control exists).
Similarly, research on how resentment means objective criteria of undeservingness is not fulfilled and how that differs from envy which is a subjective evaluation that something is not deserved based often on entitlement and narcissistic self over-appraisal (narcissistic areas show severe social inflation, such as a low quality prison community mathematics program issued by Edmonds College where they give everyone A's, but their comprehensjon would all collapse if their comprehension was put into action, showing the importance of accurate feedback against the flattery of the masses who did not earn it and did not work to improve themselves…the poor are just as able to actually study and get real A’s in math if given enough stability, food, and safety from harassment and aggressors) shows how the idea that looks are something to embody or that you are, rather than something you possess, again reflects the narcissist’s cognition in pride towards their being a nationality, vs. possessing a nationality. (This is of course different from ethnicity). Thus, if someone feels looks aren't deserved and shows envy, it suggests that they think people are their looks and so everything they gain is through their looks, this shows dehumanization of people whose looks they are jealous of, completely discrediting all other parts of their personality where looks are something they merely have and they also have other skills specific to them as well that are a direct consequence of those skills and nothing to do with their looks. This dehumanization shows therefore incel logic, a narcissistic cognition pattern, and reveals the entitlement that caused the malicious envy insofar as after examining this it becomes clear they feel entitled to BE someone else’s looks as their social self-inflation has awarded them as more deserving. This may cause them to try to control and make a possession (commodify) the person they feel they deserve to be in order to feel like they actually have become what they deserve to be, and then weaponize it for their own use instead of realizing that person is an agent, not a commodity, with skills that create results external to their looks…they are unable to comprehend that, showing true hate crime characteristic of the incel (male and female and nonbinary can all engage in commodification and blanket statements of those with looks they are jealous of as hate crime; I have recently dealt with who I believe to be an incel woman who completely dehumanized me and just because men found me to be prettier she tried to chalk up all my accomplishments to that…even though my grades and accomplishments in the field we both shared are publicly viewable, all As, and just as good or even better than hers…that is the sign that a lot of deservingness is rationalized, not objective). Depending on the weakness of the targeted proxy, this will work with enough money, power and control. If the proxy is strong, it will not work, and the narcissist will be triggered and really attack them on what they perceive is “undeservingness” even deliberately sinking their appraisal. This is the danger of incels, and we can learn how this broken logic may have also collapse our housing market just like any group that resorts to terrorism and malicious envy will, such as invasive, aggressive communists entitled to the "glory of America" (targetting LA and Hollywood in particular) while not even remotely showing the foundational comprehension of it.
Malicious envy is predicted by subjective, not objective, appraisals of undeservingness.
The more a situation was appraised as undeserved, the more participants experienced malicious envy.
Envy is always malicious according to some theories
Scholars have argued that only a malicious form of envy aimed at derogating the envied person should be considered “envy proper” (Miceli and Castelfranchi 2007; Schoeck 1969; Smith 2004; Smith and Kim 2007).
Appraisals have a strong socialemotional component, just like sentiment analysis has an intractable projection problem even in collecting databases based on subjective analysis of what people perceive to be certain emotions on average
The core idea in appraisal theory is that each emotion can be related to a specific pattern of appraisals, which are cognitions about the perceived antecedents of emotional experiences.
Low control over the situation leads to more malicious envy
Smith and colleagues (Smith 2000; Smith et al. 1994) clarified that someone should also perceive to have low control over the situation (making it difficult to change the situation), and feel that it is unfair that the other has the superior position.
Envy is differentiation with non-maladapted emotions by lack of social comparison. When social comparison is initiated, the initiator is in at least benign envy, potentially malicious envy
Where these studies did not differentiate benign and malicious envy, Van de Ven et al. (2009) content analyzed written personal experiences of malicious envy, benign envy, admiration, and resentment. That analysis confirmed that both benign and malicious envy contained explicit social comparisons (“she got a good grade while I did not”), whereas these were hardly ever present for episodes of admiration and resentment.
Low control and perceived unfairness cause malicious envy
low control potential and perceived unfairness, appeared to be mainly present in stories about malicious envy, not in those of benign envy.
Appraisal-emotion relationships are a critical component to any competent analysis of an appraisal system, especially if it is broken
“Unless the subject is instructed to specify the appraisals that are relevant to the primary emotion under investigation, appraisals relevant to other emotions may be reported, obscuring true appraisal-emotion relationships.”
When subjective feelings that someone doesn’t deserve something are high, malicious envy tends to be the result. This malicious envy can then motivate them to break the appraisal system, showing appraisal is inherently social-emotional.
We expected that envy-eliciting situations in which another is undeservedly better off will elicit malicious envy, while situations in which another is deservedly better off are more likely to elicit benign envy.
Calling age instead of skill can, for example, lead to feelings that deservingness criteria has not been met
For example, a colleague might not deserve a promotion, but might be entitled to it based on the number of years he works for the company. The deservingness of the situation provides information as to which emotion will be elicited and thus seems important to add as one of the important appraisal dimensions (Feather 2006; Feather and McKee 2009). For example, a deserved positive outcome can lead to feelings of pride, while a similar but undeserved outcome can lead to feelings of guilt.
Subjective injustice is not objective injustice. Envious people become less cooperative and have more ideas of subjective injustice for it. They can or cannot be based in factual injustices (such as someone doing all the work and another getting the pay–calorically and energetically corrupt, broken and unsustainable; human trafficking is a good example of a true and actual factual injustice…it will collapse everything if unchecked).
Consistent with this are findings that subjective injustice is indeed related to typical envy experiences, such as depressive and hostile feelings (Smith et al. 1994). Envious people also became less cooperative towards someone who was undeservedly better off, but not when the advantage of the other was deserved (Parks et al. 2002).
Alternative theories have suggested that the more something is deserved, the more the lack of control creeps in and the more intense the envy is because they have no way to prop up their own delusion that they are the more deserving due to evidence about the sheer gravity of the facts about deservingness. These theories deserve more attention.
In contrast to this, Miceli and Castelfranchi (2007) theorize that the more deserved it is perceived to be that the other has something one lacks, the more intense the envy will be. After all, an envious person who is outperformed by someone who really is much better might feel especially frustrated. We, however, predict that the intensity of the emotional experience of envy will not be affected by the perceived deservingness of the situation, but that appraisals of deservingness determine whether malicious or benign envy is felt.
Envy was hypothesized as strongest for those who feel they cannot improve their situation
As early as 1597, Bacon already reasoned that envy would be strongest for those who feel they cannot improve their situation. Similarly, Rawls (1971) argued that envy would become hostile when people have no opportunity to act constructively. Others go even further and argue that low perceived control is a necessary condition for envy to occur (Ortony et al. 1988; Smith 1991).
Low control created more malicious envy while high control created more benign envy
We predicted that appraisals of low control potential would elicit malicious envy, while appraisals of high control potential would elicit benign envy.
Benign envy resembles admiration, and malicious envy resembles resentment
One could argue that benign envy resembles admiration, and that malicious envy resembles resentment. If we were to find clear differences between these emotions, it would be testimony to both the importance of studying envy and distinguishing benign from malicious envy.
Admiration differs from benign envy because it feels frustrating. Benign envy was almost always seen before people began taking action to relieve the feelings of inferiority, often doing the same thing. That was not present in mere admiration, showing that with just a little more hate people doing this are at risk of malicious envy.
Admiration has been defined as the emotional response to non-moral excellence (Algoe and Haidt 2009). Although both benign envy and admiration are felt when people are confronted with a superior other, there is a strong indication that they are different experiences (Van de Ven et al. 2009). First, benign envy feels frustrating, while admiration is a pleasant feeling. Second, benign envy was found to lead to action tendencies aimed at improving one’s own situation, while admiration was not.
Benign envy, but not admiration, was related to explicit social comparisons. If it is without social comparisons, it is not envy. This shows that there is a codependent element at the heart of envy, which suggests broken codependent appraisal systems.
This would be consistent with our earlier content analysis (Van de Ven et al. 2009). In it, we found that benign envy, but not admiration, was related to explicit social comparisons (e.g., “I did not pass the exam, while the other person did”).
If the upward comparison reflects badly, frustration occurs.
if the upward comparison reflects badly on oneself frustration is more likely to occur. Because of this, we also expected the situation to have worsened somewhat for benign envy but not for admiration (predicting a difference for benign envy and admiration on the situational state appraisal).
Resentment is indignant displeasure or persistent ill will at something regarded as wrong. This is usually based on more factual, independent appraisal systems not easily infiltrated and affected by codependent factors.
Merriam Webster’s dictionary defines resentment as the indignant displeasure or persistent ill will at something regarded as wrong.
For example, people who feel that their situation is superior to that of people in a communist system, might still resent communists if they perceive the communist belief system to be morally wrong. In the current research, we asked participants to recall experiencing resentment for one specific person, as that is the resentment that is relatively close to malicious envy.
Objective unfairness causes resentment while subjective feelings and perceptions of undeservingness leads to malicious envy. These subjective feelings and perceptions may not have any basis at all, showing much of aesthetics is perceptual and is more about an inability to process intuitions, feelings and processes analytically to break them down into an actionable, processable form. (With the exception of art for its own sake; but art for a moral or judgmental sake suggests this analytical inability)
Others have theorized that resentment is more likely if the situation is perceived to be objectively unfair (D’Arms 2009; Rawls 1971), while (malicious) envy is more likely if there is more of a subjective feeling of undeservingness (Feather and Sherman 2002; Smith et al. 1994). However, appraisal theory suggests that appraisals that lead to certain emotions are by definition subjective perceptions of the situation (Scherer et al. 2001). Furthermore, perceptions of fairness and deservingness are likely to be strongly related, making these unlikely candidates for differentiating envy from resentment.
If someone actually caused you to be worse off, resentment is more likely, such as for a bad manager who was factually incompetent and endangered your life repeatedly due to extreme covert rages (for example). Malicious envy would instead be that somebody made you feel bad about yourself, which is not an actual flaw of them as a manager, but would be experienced as malicious envy.
Thus, if the other person actually caused you to be worse off resentment is more likely, while malicious envy is more likely if situational factors are responsible. For example, a football player could be maliciously envious of another player who undeservedly made the first team if it was the decision of the coach to choose the other, but the football player would resent the other player if the other player had cheated with his playing record to get into the first team.
Deservingness was clearly related to the type of envy elicited. Appraisal of control was a huge core feature of appraisal of deservingness. If people felt something was not in their control, it was more likely to be found undeserving, showing saying someone doesn’t deserve something may be at root an attempt to establish power and control to relieve feelings of inferiority.
First, and as expected, the perceived deservingness of the situation clearly mattered: For malicious envy, the situation was strongly perceived to be undeserved, while for benign envy this was not the case. Deservingness was thus clearly related to the type of envy elicited. Second, we also found a difference with respect to the appraisal of control potential. Those in the benign envy condition indicated that they had more control over the situation than those in the malicious envy condition.
Admiration is more likely if being outperformed is not appraised to reflect badly on oneself (low personalization). If it is appraised to reflect badly, benign envy is more likely (those with high personalization are more likely to begin the process of envy, linking narcissism to higher likelihood to feel envy as they process information through the ego instead of through its found environment).
Study 1 thus suggests that admiration is more likely if being outperformed does not reflect badly on oneself. If it does reflect badly upon oneself, but the situation is deserved, benign envy is likely to result.
A key difference between malicious envy is whether the other is blamed for the situation. High blame of the envied one shows malicious envy.
A key difference between malicious envy and resentment is whether the other is blamed for the situation (which leads to resentment) or whether the circumstances are blamed (leading to malicious envy).
Benign envy makes people take similar action (not seem in admiration) to relieve feelings of inferiority, malicious envy shows leveling and destructive behaviors to try to bring the person down where they don’t make them feel inferior anymore. It is seriously not ok and very dangerous.
Benign envy was assessed by asking whether they “would be inspired” and “would start to work harder,” r(124) = .46, p < .001. Malicious envy was assessed by asking whether they “would secretly wish that their coworker would lose clients” and “would gossip about the coworker to others”, r(124) = .40, p < .001.
Malicious envy seeks to pull down the envied person, ironically creating the very injustice they subjectively perceived to be the case, which may or may not actually have a foundation depending on the case (perception does not mean reality)
The results are important because they provide insight into when benign envy exists that leads to constructive behavior aimed at moving up to the superior position, and when malicious envy exists that leads to destructive behavior aimed at pulling down the envied person.
If the other is to blame, resentment is more likely. If the circumstances are to blame, malicious envy is more likely.
if the other is to blame resentment will be elicited, if the circumstances are to blame than malicious envy is more likely.
A feedback loop exists where someone who makes someone feel inferior makes them disliked, and making them disliked makes what they have seem to be more undeserved. This shows that many people have broken, rationalizing appraisal systems.
For example, it seems likely that a person more easily becomes maliciously envious towards a disliked person. We predict this to be the case because an advantage of a disliked person could easily be perceived as undeserved.
Confounding of undeservingness and low control seems to be in all situations considered as undeserved
This could reflect an issue with our scenario, but we do wish to note that this confounding of undeservingness and control potential seems to be present in all undeserved situations: undeserved situations by definition constitute of a discrepancy between what someone put into a situation and what they got out of it (Feather 1999)
People who are entitled feel injustice when literally anyone has an advantage over them. This is definitely not a correct injustice appraisal and shows a rationalization, not a logical, process at the root of greed.
People who tend to feel entitled to many things (Campbell et al. 2004) may also find it undeserved when others have an advantage over them.
Internal locus of control shows that people with an internal locus of control tend to experience only benign envy certain they can control it back to favor them. Finding they cannot, it will slowly turn into malicious envy.
Furthermore, people with an internal locus of control (Duttweiler 1984) tend to feel that they can easily influence situations themselves, and might thus be especially likely to experience benign envy.
Why different brains are more likely to become hostile when seeing someone’s success as opposed to inspired again remains a very fruitful place of investigation that is not receiving the push and attention required (envy is behind so much destruction)
Investigating which persons are likely to become hostile or who become inspired after being confronted with others who outperform them seems an interesting line of study.
A possible healing force for envy would be to encourage logic that broke down knee jerk envy and move that logic to show it was deserved, and to assign this deservingness in a coolheaded, non-core attribution (aka, it is things they possess like gifts, not things they are at the core like a genius, that leads to narcissism in feeling pride for being (genius) instead of happiness with a state one is currently in (giftedness))
Evaluating the positive outcomes of someone else as deserved prevents possible negative behavior following envy, and is actually likely to inspire people to work harder and attain more for oneself.
Apparently this paper above just threw someone at Reddit into a narcissistic rage and I have multiple screenshots of about 10 minutes later being unable to post this new post, so I'm putting it here until it works.
Strange case of narcissistic and victim blaming research, has the tell-tale sign of relying on psychoanalysis, not quantitative fact based evidence and qualitative report, which would reveal the victim blaming. Bob Ferguson shows similar signs of this kind of incompetence so could be good to analyze
Analysis of this paper; victim blaming in young victims by the very men who normalize this culture under a Satanist "male desire to enjoy the period of the flesh".
How this author fails to have global comprehension of the variables at play while still so certainly stating them is a strong case of narcissism in itself. This would be interesting to analyze on its own sake. It also shows a high reliance on psychoanalysis, which is a common theme I have been seeing when things collapse without evidence.
https://intapi.sciendo.com/pdf/10.2478/pcssr-2022-0005

Lifetime - Staked: 876.65u, Profit/Loss: +27.79u, ROI: 3.17%, Parlay Suggestions: 168-64 Dog of the Week: 13-15
2024 - Staked: 229.55u, Profit/Loss: -5.57u
As always, scroll down for UFC St. Louis Breakdowns. The following is just a recap of last event’s results.
~UFC 301 (PREVIOUS CARD)~
Staked: 10.75u
Profit/Loss: -0.29u
Parlay Suggestions: 4-1
It may be chalked up as the slightest loss, but the Pereira/Rebecki parlay rolling on means this one could end up in the green in hindsight, so I’m happy with how things went really. Shoutout to Joanderson Brito for a great gameplan, he never let Shore into that fight and I don’t think it really mattered that it ended under strange circumstances. Borralho dominated as expected. Lucindo could have been more live for a submission if she’d had more time in round 1, but her striking was too superior. Drakkar Klose did what he does best. On to the next one.
✅ 5u Caio Borralho to Win at -275 (won +1.8u)
✅ 2u Michel Pereira + Mateusz Rebecki to Win at -105 (rolls on to upcoming event)
✅ 2u Drakkar Klose to Win at -137 (won +1.46u)
❌ 2u Jack Shore to Win at +140
❌ 1u Iasmin Lucindo to Win by Submission at +350
✅ Arb on Martinez/Aldo (won +0.2u)
❌ 0.25u Parlay Pieces
❌ 0.5u Trixie

~UFC St. Louis~
From a fan perspective this card is a bit dry, but from a betting perspective I think it’s got a lot of opportunities and it’s one I’m really looking forward to. At the time of writing, the event is in nine days and I’ve already placed five moneyline bets! It’s nice that there will be a crowd too, the Apex is boring.
Lots to say, so let’s get into it!

~Derrick Lewis vs Rodrigo Nascimento~
Very surprised by the betting line here. Derrick Lewis cannot be trusted to defend a takedown at this stage in his career, and that really isn’t a secret at all.
In my opinion, unless Derrick Lewis is facing a pure striker with equally low output, or a massively inferior level of competition, he shouldn’t be the betting favourite against anyone in the UFC. Of course he’s the most prolific knockout artist the UFC has ever seen so he cannot be too much of a dog either, but he’s literally KO or bust in every single fight. Betting is a game of probabilities, and I think it’s difficult to really argue that Lewis should be favoured to find the KO 50% of the time in a five-round fight. Especially when he faces an opponent that has the capabilities to put him on his back. look how easily Serghei Spivac justified a -225 pricetag against Derrick Lewis! No significant strikes absorbed, and a submission win inside three minutes. How Jailton Almeida didn’t manage to do the same, I’ll never know…but it still was very dominant.
Rodrigo Nascimento may not come to the Octagon with a singlet on, but he’s quite reliable to shoot takedowns when necessary – Such as against Tanner Boser, another heavyweight with notoriously bad takedown defence. Another important facet to his style is his BJJ. It’s been some time since we’ve seen him win by submission, but a heavyweight that looks to finish the fight on the mat will always be better than one who just lays and prays once they set up a dominant position (such as a Curtis Blaydes or a Carl Williams). Lewis is surprisingly durable on the mat, which gives him the opportunity to have another crack at the KO when the next round starts, but a submission threat like a Spivac or perhaps a Nascimento can look to get the fight stopped before that happens.
Nascimento isn’t a bad striker either, and whilst I certainly don’t recommend it, I don’t think it’s super crazy to imagine him possibly winning a striking battle here by playing the range game and out-voluming Lewis – at the very least he will keep it competitive whilst he’s conscious. This isn’t going even going to be as binary as the Spivac fight, where extended periods on the feet are so clearly in favour of Lewis.
Lewis has faced a lot of grapplers recently. He was +370 against Jailton, +180 against De Lima, +190 against Spivac, +300 against Blaydes…so why is he a favourite against an opponent that can also land takedowns against him? And also one who is probably the second best striker amongst those aforementioned names!? I know that Nascimento isn’t a pure grappler like some of them…but surely it would take about 30 seconds of gameplanning to realise that grappling is definitely the route to take here? We’ve seen him go 15 minutes and have control time for more than half a fight before. I also know that Nascimento hasn’t fought a level of opposition anywhere near this experienced or ‘high level’, but given the gap in skills I think there are regional
I’m not saying Nascimento is a vastly superior UFC fighter or someone destined for great things, but he’s well-rounded and capable of executing a very obvious gameplan. I will therefore be playing him for 2u at +140 or better. This is purely a bet based on number I’m getting on Nascimento, and I think everyone should be on it. Perhaps I am putting too much stock into the intelligence of a fighter (something I never like to do), but this really is a must bet. I do not believe you can mathematically justify Derrick Lewis being expected to win more than 50% of the time against an opponent that is better than him at everything except pure power.
I decided to pull the trigger as the more I think about this, the more I think this betting angle is obvious. There’s a risk in going early as Lewis is obviously a popular name, but I think the +137 is clear value, so I took it for 2u.
How I line this fight: Derrick Lewis +125 (45%), Rodrigo Nascimento -125 (55%)
Bet or pass: 2u Rodrigo Nascimento to Win (+137)
Prop leans: None, though Nascimento Submission is the very obvious lean

~Joaquin Buckley v Nursulton Ruziboev~
Late notice fight announcement but glad to see Buckley got himself a co-main spot on a home card. Buckley’s slowly growing into a decent fighter, and has proven to be much more than just the hard-hitting muscle-man that he was originally thought to be. Seeing him get a win over Vicente Luque is pretty mad, I even thought he’d struggle with Alex Morono.
Nursulton Ruziboev’s brief UFC career has seen him win by KO early in round one both times. Yeah, he hits hard. What else? I don’t really know. Buckley can live and die by the sword if you want to go full rabies with him (plenty of KO wins but also KO losses to Di Chirico, Holland and Curtis).
I’m sure this one will be fireworks, but I don’t really know how you could approach betting this one, other than targeting the clearly juiced FDGTD. We got Guskov/Spann at -20000 a few weeks ago, so I wouldn’t hold your breath. Onto the next one. Excited to see the fireworks though.
How I line this fight: No idea
Bet or pass: Pass
Prop leans: None

~Terrance McKinney vs Esteban Ribovics~
Terrance McKinney is always an interesting fighter to look at from a betting perspective, because he’s got that unique 5 minutes of danger before falling off a cliff. It’s kind of funny to me how the UFC had to clearly cut back on the level of competition they’d been feeding McKinney, because he hit his ceiling pretty hard in the Sadykhov and Bonfim fights.
The front-runner style therefore makes his fights easy to get creative with, props wise. Basically, you go McKinney R1, or Ribovics R2/3. So which one do you go for? Well, that’s unfortunately where the confident opinions start to run out. McKinney should definitely be live for that R1 finish though, because I think Ribovics will struggle to contend with his power and physicality whilst they’re both fresh. His takedown defence against Radzhabov was not up to par either, and the scrambles could see him get caught in a submission against the opportunistic McKinney all the same.
However, if the fight does make it past that opening round, Ribovics certainly looks spirited and gritty enough to turn up the heat and force McKinney to capitulate like he usually does. It’s one of those weird capitulations where he doesn’t seem gassed or mentally checked out – it feels like he swaps places with his twin brother that’s not a fighter whilst on the stool. Kind of like Alex Hernandez.
So yeah, I’ll do what I usually do in these spots and see what kind of price I can get by building a McKinney R1 or Ribovics R2/3 prop for myself…but other than that I don’t think we’ll be finding any sort of value anywhere here. The McKinney prop narrative is pretty well documented at this stage. Though the live-betting angle will always exist because the 3^rd party people have no idea what they’re watching.
In terms of a moneyline, Esteban obviously has to be favoured due to the higher finishing potential across the available 15 minutes (he could win in R1,2, or 3). Definitely not interested in playing anything than that McKinney 1 or Ribovics 2/3 combination.
How I line this fight: Terrance McKinney +175 (36%), Esteban Ribovics -175 (64%)
Bet or pass: Potential single bet on McKinney R1 or Ribovics R2/3
Prop leans: See above

~Alonzo Menifield vs Carlos Ulberg~
Zo Menifield is a better fighter than many give him credit for, but I think this might be a terrible stylistic fight for him. He’s going up against the much more technical and quick striker, who can also hit pretty hard. For Zo to do the work he wants to do on the feet, he’s going to need to get inside, and for every moment he’s not there he’s going to be on the end of Ulberg’s superior straight shots. He’s basically going to have to get hit twice, to land one himself.
Before I started looking into this fight I was intrigued by Menifield’s potential path to victory via wrestling, but the stats he’s currently averaging 0.67 takedowns per 15 minutes, and just beat a kickboxer across 15 minutes in Dustin Jacoby without landing one. Not sure why I had it in my head that he looks to grapple.
That Jacoby fight does give some credit to Alonzo and indicate that he’s not as outmatched as you’d expect a less technical tank to be. The same logic I used in the opening paragraph really should also have applied to Dustin Jacoby, but DJ’s not a particularly reliable striker and is prone to some moments of stupidity.
So yeah…I think Zo’s got a chance, but it’s going to be an uphill battle that he loses more often than not. The line’s a bit too wide for my liking as Ulberg is flavour of the month at LHW, but either way I see no value to bet either guy here.
How I line this fight: Alonzo Menifield +200 (33%), Carlos Ulberg -200 (67%)
Bet or pass: Pass
Prop leans: None

~Tabatha Ricci v Tecia Torres-Pennington~
Another fight where I am very confused by the betting line. Yes, Tecia Torres has been out of competition whilst having a baby with Raquel Pennington, but it looks like she’s already back in ridiculous shape and I think the narrative of doubting/fading mothers is pretty overblown. Enough WMMA fighters have come back having given birth and looked fine. I asked a few mothers I know who work out and they didn’t think they suffered much of a set back once they shifted the initial weight. I take my research very seriously, you see, and if this bet loses it’s all their fault.
So I’m going to (perhaps foolishly) assume that the Tecia Torres we get for this fight is the same as the one from tape…and that woman absolutely should not be the underdog to Tabatha Ricci. She’s got a great mixture of speed and volume on the feet, and is more than capable of keeping herself safe in the grappling department. There are very few fighters outside the top five that I’d think should be a favourite against Tecia. And that’s even before considering that this fight is a decent matchup for her.
Comparatively, Tabatha Ricci has struggled whenever she’s faced an opponent that she can’t out-grapple. She put together a great run against Gillian Robertson, Jessica Penne, Polyana Viana and Maria Oliveira, but landed between 3-5 takedowns in all of those fights and either had a significant amount of subsequent top control time, or was the superior striker anyway. After that run, she faced Loopy Godinez in her most recent fight, where her takedowns were shut down and she was forced to strike against an okay-ish striker. It went to a split, but the majority of media scorecards were were in favour of Godinez for her superior striking. Not being able to differentiate yourself in the striking department against Godinez isn’t a very good sign really.
When it comes to decision heavy WMMA fighters, I think the statistics are at their most reliable (and I’m not much of a statistics guy usually). The stats here clearly paint the picture that Tecia Torres is the superior martial artist on the feet. She lands more, she gets hit way less. She has much better accuracy, and she defends more. And she got all of those superior stats from going 15 minutes against Marina, Namajunas (x2) Andrade, Joanna and Weili, whereas Ricci has padded hers by teeing off on Gillian Robertson and Jessica Penne.
If Torres-Pennington is able to get back to anywhere near the same level as she was before the pregnancy, I think the betting line is massively wrong here. God bless Alayah Torres-Pennington for this betting line! 2u on Torres-Pennington. I moved in when it was +137, but the line has shifted since. It’s always a good idea to consider playing WMMA underdogs, so this one was a no brainer to me.
How I line this fight: Tecia Torres-Pennington -150 (60%), Tabatha Ricci +150 (40%)
Bet or pass: 2u Tecia Torres-Pennington to Win (+137), perhaps an extra 0.5u on Torres Decision
Prop leans: Torres by Decision is a very reliable MoV

~Sean Woodson vs Alex Caceres~
Alex Caceres is a really tricky one. He has improved so, so much in the last few years, and I’d never have believed he’d make it this far. He was a contestant on TUF 12, the show most recent to when I started watching MMA (which also brought us Michael Johnson). Those who have been watching prelims for many years will remember when Alex was nothing more than a veteran that couldn’t wrestle for shit, and was constantly being used to further the careers of submission based fighters (Kron Gracie, for example). Somehow, during the lockdown break, he managed to sharpen the takedown defence and completely re-invented himself as a fighter. He’s 7-2 in his last nine, and the losses have come against Sodiq Yusuff and Giga Chikadze. A very respectable body of work.
Sean Woodson’s career has also had its ups and downs. He was touted as a prospect to look out for back in the day of Glory MMA & Fitness and everyone’s favourite UFC gambler, James Krause. Unfortunately for the gangly and unorthodox Woodson, he couldn’t handle the pressure and ended up having all of his hype destroyed by Julian Erosa. He won a few more fights, but then drew with Luis Saldana, and by that point everyone thought he was a busted prospect that couldn’t be trusted to win against anyone. Then he pulled off an upset against Charles Jourdain recently, and now we don’t know what to think.
So this is basically a bout between two guys who have blown hot and cold in different stages of their career, and they’re therefore guys I often look to gloss over when I see that they’re fighting because I know they can easily oveunder perform in relation to expectations. Woodson should be the more diverse and unorthodox fighter of the two to be able to win minutes against Bruce Leroy, but the power that Caceres has on the return very much could turn the tide in an instant. Woodson isn’t defensively sound and relies on his length too much, and we have seen him fumble winnable fights before.
I don’t have much confidence in this one at all, but I understand why Woodson’s the slight favourite, given his tricky style and frame, and the fact he’s a bit younger. The books have lined this one correctly though, using their vig to price either side out of being an appealing price. I’m not really sure how someone has a strong opinion on this one really.
How I line this fight: Sean Woodson -137 (58%), Alex Caceres +137 (42%)
Bet or pass: Pass
Prop leans: None

~Jake Hadley vs Charles Johnson~
Another Charles Johnson fight, another anti-grappling gameplan. I’m getting a bit bored of seeing the exact same fight really, it would be cool to see Johnson stand and trade with someone for 15 minutes.
In fairness to Hadley he’s hardly one-dimensional, but he’s definitely best as a grappler that uses striking as a means to an end. We have seen what he looks like when he can’t have significant top control time, or when he goes up against a guy that can put him on his back. And it shows him to be a great hammer but a bad nail.
Charles Johnson’s resurgence has been a very interesting turn of events! If you’re a regular UFC bettor, you’ll know Johnson as one of the most untrustworthy guys on the roster, who fails to put his stamp on rounds and only seems to be able to produce a maximum of 55% of superiority per round. That was, until he fought Azat Maksum last time, where his tenacity was enough for him to turn the fight on its head in the latter half, finally providing a Charles Johnson fight where we had confidence on what the judges’ scorecards were going to look like!
Johnson is a very hard guy to finish though, because he doesn’t have any actual major weaknesses that aren’t based on self-sabotage. That is going to turn into his biggest strength here against Hadley, whose 2-2 decision record paints a clear picture. In a fight where a finish is going to be hard to come by, I think this one is going to run very close, in typical Charles Johnson fashion. In short, Johnson’s skills nullify Hadley’s greatest skill, so this one should run closer than it might look on the wikicap.
Therefore, your only options are probably to hold your breath and bet Johnson as the +130 underdog for a bit of value, or pass completely. A bet on Hadley is definitely not adviseable at – money.
I was lining up to play the overs/FGTD, but I’ve seen that the Over 2.5 Rounds sits at -250…which is far too steep for me to entertain. Those bookies are sharp!
How I line this fight: Jake Hadley +100 (50%), Charles Johnson +100 (50%)
Bet or pass: Pass
Prop leans: Either man’s decision prop could be an interesting way to bet this one.

~Jared Gooden vs Kevin Jousset~
Kevin Jousset makes his third appearance for the UFC, having impressed in two victories against Kiefer Crosbie (can) and Song Kenan (decent enough fighter). His output and diversity in the latter fight was really what caught my attention, as I was personally unsure he would be able to hang with UFC calibre opposition. I did bet him in his debut against Crosbie because his opponent that day has no business being in the UFC, but even the way he looked in that one had me questioning if he was up to the challenge.
On the subject of having ‘no business being in the UFC’, Jousset faces Jared Gooden. I know Gooden is a long time friend and associate of Dan Levy (HalfTheBattle) so I’m always hoping he does well, but honestly he’s proven countless times that he’s not good enough to be here. Of course, he’s a powerful guy, and in a cagefight that attribute is going to result in a couple of upsets…but Gooden has been competently outgrappled and outstruck on too many occasions for me to believe in him. Plus, he finally hit that KO path to victory against Wellington Turman, who is notoriously untrustworthy and shocking on the feet. If I remember correctly I was very adamant that people shouldn’t bet him there.
Jousset is a well-rounded guy as well. He’s not the most devastating striker but he does good defensive work (which is key here). He’s also more than happy to mix in takedowns and grappling when he deems it necessary, which is another advantageous asset here.
In short, whilst I’m still kind of suspicious of Jousset’s overally capabilities and whether or not he’s going to make anything of himself in the UFC, I can definitely see this one being an advantageous stylistic fight for him as the more well-rounded man. If Jousset can stay safe from Gooden’s power, he should have an easy enough victory on his hands.
In terms of the betting line, I would have put Jousset anywhere from the -200 to -250 range, which is pretty much where he’s landed. Makes sense to me. I’m glad I don’t have to consider betting this fight, because trusting either man with my money doesn’t feel good.
How I line this fight: Jared Gooden +225 (31%), Kevin Jousset -225 (69%)
Bet or pass: Pass
Prop leans: None

~Chase Hooper vs Viacheslav Borshchev~
Probably the most binary and therefore divisive fight on the card, which makes it possibly the most exciting one. Hooper’s a great grappler that can’t strike. Borshchev is a great striker that can’t defend takedowns.
I always land on the same conclusion when it comes to this kind of conundrum, and it’s because of our good friend Mackenzie Dern. Your BJJ doesn’t really mean shit if you have no wrestling (aside from pulling guard or catching submissions whilst standing, both of which don’t really happen often at all), and Chase Hooper doesn’t really have much wrestling. Of course, Slava Claus has bad wrestling defence…but I’d rate Hooper’s wrestling as clearly inferior to that of Mike Davis, Marc Diakiese or Nazim Sadykhov, so there aren’t actually strong guarantees that Chase can even consistently land takedowns here.
Obviously I think you have to make Borshchev the favourite here, as all fights start standing and his grappling defence seems solid enough that he shouldn’t get instantly submitted if he does get forced to the floor anyway. If that’s the case, I think he can clearly do damage and win fights off the scoring criteria. Hooper’s a tough kid, but when he eats shots they all look like fight enders with the amount his head snaps back. I genuinely think cutting his hair was a good strategic move for him. Also, this fight will have a live audience, and that plays ever so slightly into the metrics of the KO threat, not the grappler (because people still boo takedowns sometimes).
The books have it lined pretty where I would expect, with a small to moderate lean in Slava’s favour, so I don’t really think there’s any point in forcing a bet here. Both men have legitimate paths, it’s just that the Russian’s is slightly easier to land and will be more definitive. A win for Hooper likely sees him outgrapple his opponent for 15, whereas Borshchev can do it with one punch. Betting Slava KO would probably be the smartest play available, because that’s most of his win condition, whereas Hooper could win by all three methods.
I have noticed since writing that Slava may be moving down to -150, which is where I grade him without vig. If that price does solidify market wide, I may be interested in playing him to win by KO, or perhaps KO/DEC Double Chance. It would only be a 1u thing, but watch this space.
How I line this fight: Chase Hooper +150 (40%), Viacheslav Borshchev -150 (60%)
Bet or pass: 1u Slava KO or Slava KO/Dec…we will see.
Prop leans: None

~Trey Waters vs Billy Goff~
I honestly can’t remember a thing about either guy, I was surprised to see this wasn’t a double debut. From looking at Tapology I vaguely remember their last fights, with Goff steamrolling that Japanese guy on the South Korea card and Waters styling on Josh Quinlan.
I need a lot more info than that to be able to decipher this one. Info I honestly cannot be bothered to go and find, considering the most I could get would be a low-confidence opinion. I’mma pass on this one and admit I just couldn’t be arsed. I’m quite confident I wouldn’t have felt comfortable betting it anyway, so that’s probably some time saved. Check out Slayer’s breakdown on Wednesday/Thursday, he’ll have the goods.
How I line this fight: Didn’t do tape
Bet or pass: Pass
Prop leans: None

~Waldo Cortes-Acosta vs Robelis Despaigne~
I’ve been a consistent Waldo hater since he came to the UFC. He’s a fat guy who strikes, but his power actually looks to be severely lacking. In fact, the only thing he actually does well is a leg kick. Seriously, how can you be that size, that young, and still not KO 2024 Andrei Arlovski? Don’Tale Mayes did it. Waldo also lost a round to Chase Sherman and Jared Vanderaa ffs. I have every reason not to understand why he’s looked at favorably.
Robelis Despaigne’s UFC debut was short lived but impressive all the same. That stuff doesn’t tell us much at all, but he’s a very credentialed combat sports athlete (Lonon 2012 Olympic Bronze Medalist). I can’t really say it with super confidence, but this does feel like it should be a very winnable fight for him.
A lot of people are immediately quoting Despaigne’s MMA record and highlighting his inexperience, but my counter to that would be to consider what experience and tools he is actually going to need here?
I don’t think Cortes-Acosta will have any interest in grappling or attempting takedowns, and I also think he’s the inferior fighter from a power perspective. In a fight like this, what more do you really need?
I’m surprised Despaigne is only around -170 here. I get that he’s inexperienced in MMA but he’s far more experienced than Waldo in professional competition. Maybe I’m being too basic with my analysis here and Waldo actually has something for him, but I was expecting -250 at least. I did initially hesitate on whether or not I wanted to play Despaigne here, given I’ve not got a whole lot to offer in my analysis other than Olympian vs fat boi….but I don’t think Waldo brings anything uniquely MMA to the table that Despaigne is going to struggle with?
I scoffed at that Jhonata Diniz guy making his debut -250 to Austen Lane few weeks ago because I saw a clear angle for an MMA based opponent to capitalise on a skillset that the vastly more credentialed striker wouldn’t be well versed in dealing with. Given what we saw there, I’d say I was absolutely right. Diniz still got the job done, but Lane was able to weaponise MMA experience. Waldo probably won’t. Honestly it wouldn’t even surprise me to see Robelis try and show off some of his MMA improvements and shoot a takedown on fat boi.
2u Robelis Despaigne to win at -163. This could age terribly because I know I’m going against my principles here…but this betting line could look like an absolute gift in hindsight.
How I line this fight: Waldo Cortes-Acosta +250 (29%), Robelis Despaigne -250 (71%)
Bet or pass: 2u Robelis Despaigne to Win (-163)
Prop leans: None

~Carlos Diego Ferreira vs Mateusz Rebecki~
Very simple fight to break down, I think. Rebecki’s a very dominant wrestler with the topside grappling ability to keep you there once he grounds you. We haven’t seen him fight a super high level of competition yet, but I think we’ve seen enough to be excited by him as a prospect.
The above description of Rebecki’s style sounds a lot like a fella called Gregor Gillespie. We saw him face Carlos Diego Ferreira back in 2021 and ultimately force a stoppage by using his style to overwhelm CDF until the ref showed mercy. Mateusz Gamrot, an equally impressive grappler (but with worse top control time than Rebecki and Gillespie) also managed to get CDF to tap to strikes (which is a big, big red flag). Beneil Dariush, though not a pressure wrestler or big ground striker, was able to ground CDF and ride out top position to win comfortably against the Brazilian on two separate occasions. In short, CDF is a prime victim for Rebecki’s style.
And to make matters worse, all of those three aforementioned fights of CDFs happened three years ago. The Brazilian is now 39 years old, and we’ve only seen him compete once since the trio of losses. That was against Michael Johnson, in a fight he was quite clearly losing and was looking terrible in before his power and Johnson’s A+ capitulation managed to gift him a win. Sad for me as I was on the underdog there and felt it was a great bet, but really anyone who bets on a flake like Michael Johnson gets what they pay for.
I felt that -250 was just not a steep enough price tag for Rebecki here, so I bet him heavy a week ago. I fully believe in the guy’s abilities as a grappler, and CDF is ripe for the picking when looking to execute that kind of style. That’s not to mention CDF looks fucking old and clearly on his way out, and is being fed to a 19-1, 31-year-old beast that can get another dominant win on his record against a veteran with a recognisable name (if you don’t recognise CDF’s name, you a casual). I played Rebecki for 3u at -250, then parlay’d him for 2u more with Michel Pereira against Ihor Poteiria last week. That’s 5u in total riding on Rebecki.
I’ve noticed that the betting line has now moved into the -300s since then. I’m a bit sick of harping on about how much of an edge you get by working ahead, but there’s yet another example.
How I line this fight: Carlos Diego Ferreira +400 (20%), Mateusz Rebecki -400 (80%)
Bet or pass: 3u Mateusz Rebecki to Win (-250), 2u Mateusz Rebecki to Win (-105, parlay’d with Michel Pereira last week)
Prop leans: None, but CDF’s ability to wilt on bottom would make me believe Rebecki can finish him here, most likely via KO

~JJ Aldrich vs Veronica Hardy~
JJ Aldrich has historically been a bit of a money train for me, because she doesn’t get the respect she deserves for her skillset. I arb’d out of a bet on Aldrich when I confidently bet her at the opener against Montana De La Rosa (admittedly I got spooked by the line movement and the face I was on an island with that one). I also bet her against Na Liang (she underperformed there, in fairness), Gillian Robertson and Vanessa Demopoulos too.
Her style ain’t pretty, and it doesn’t blow your hair back…but Aldrich is a very competent striker that also has very good takedown defence. If you aren’t an above average striker, you’re therefore likely to struggle against her. Look what she did against Erin Blanchfield – she competently won most of the minutes in that fight and could have easily gone on to beat Erin were it not for that very lucky guillotine (not to discredit a good win from Erin, but it was fortuitous). Yes it’s easy to say that in hindsight, but it’s a testament to the skills Aldrich has, and the fact she’s not really faced too many steps up in competition over the years actually makes her quite underrated.
Veronica Hardy has been a bit of a strange one since she came back to competition. Everyone faded her (myself included) against Juliana Miller, which was possibly the squarest bet I have ever placed in my life. She looked good there, but I think her performance that day was flattered by how awful her opponent was and how much she overcame the betting odds and the lay-off. It felt like the perfect storm for Veronica, so the fact she overcame it kind of bolsters that win when in reality she beat a non-UFC calibre fighter. Miller is also purely a grappler and couldn’t get her takedowns going, so there isn’t really a whole lot of comparison to make for that fight anyway because that’s not JJ’s style.
Hardy’s last appearance came against Jamey-Lyn Horth, a then 6-0 Canadian fighter who hadn’t done anything remarkable in her career, other than beat the equally average and non-UFC calibre Hailey Cowan. The fight was razor close, with both women incidentally landing the exact same number of significant strikes and takedowns. A split decision was understandable there, it was a hard one to score. Wasn’t impressive.
Back to this fight, and I am once again very confused by the betting line, because I think the market is massively underrating JJ Aldrich, as always. She’s faced the much better level of competition in recent years, and the only fighter that’s gotten the better of her in the striking is Ariane Lipski.
Even if you’re just wiki-capping this fight, you should conclude that Aldrich deserves to be favoured. So what does Veronica Hardy have that bridges that gap and pushes her to be the slight favourite? Is it popularity? The fact that she’s hot? Her affiliations to Dan Hardy? The fact she’s a personality outside of MMA? I don’t know but I genuinely think it’s more likely to be any of those things than anything we see on tape! Because I didn’t see anything.
Honestly I think it’s quite likely that those are the factors. A fight like this isn’t going to get a lot of action, and any casual making a 12-fold parlay is more likely to recognise Hardy’s name? Idk, it’s a weird one but either way I’m betting Aldrich for 2u here at +125. I think she should be -150 at least.
How I line this fight: JJ Aldrich -150 (60%), Veronica Hardy +150 (36%)
Bet or pass: 2u JJ Aldrich to Win (+125), 0.5u JJ Aldrich to Win by Decision (+175 or better)
Prop leans: Likely an Aldrich decision

Bets (Bold = been placed)
1u Rodrigo Nascimento to Win (+137) (cashed out of a unit as Nascimento didn't take his Tshirt off at scale and that a huge red flag for me lol)
2u Tecia Torres to Win (+137)
0.25u Tecia Torres to Win by Decision (+170)
1u Terrance McKinney to Win in Round 1 or Esteban Ribovics to Win in Round 2 or 3 (+130)
2u Viacheslav Borshchev to Win (-137)
3u Mateusz Rebecki to Win (-250)
2u Mateusz Rebecki to Win (-105) (parlay with Michel Pereira from last week)
2u JJ Aldrich to Win (+125)
0.25u JJ Aldrich to Win by Decision (+170)
2u Robelis Despaigne to Win (-163)
0.25u Parlay Pieces (+420)
Parlay Pieces: McKinney/Ribovics Under 2.5 Rounds, Ricci/Pennington Over 2.5 Rounds, Aldrich/Hardy Over 2.5 Rounds, Viacheslav Borshchev, Mateusz Rebecki, Robelis Despaigne
Dog of the Week: JJ Aldrich
FUTURE BETS
2u Edson Barboza to Win (+125 or better)
2u Angela Hill to Win (-137)
2u Piera Rodriguez to Win (-120)
2u Kleydson Rodrigues to Win (-175 or better)
1u Abus Magomedov to Win & Under 1.5 Rounds (+100 or better)

"The Bonfire of the Vanities" by Tom Wolfe is a satirical novel that delivers a harsh analysis of 1980s New York City society. The story follows Sherman McCoy, a successful bond trader, as his life unravels when a fateful wrong turn in the Bronx leads to a horrific catastrophe.
Set against the backdrop of Wall Street excess, racial tensions, and socioeconomic inequity, the story tackles themes of greed, ambition, and the corrosive repercussions of power. As Sherman's world crumbles around him, he becomes engaged in a controversy that threatens to destroy everything he holds dear, including his marriage, his profession, and his reputation.
Wolfe's writing is quick, incisive, and packed with caustic social critique. He provides a vivid vision of New York City in the 1980s, capturing the glamour and decadence of the era, as well as the underlying tensions and injustices that boil under the surface. Through a colorful ensemble of characters, including ambitious lawyers, opportunistic journalists, and disillusioned socialites, Wolfe delivers a wide and uncompromising portrait of a society driven by money and moral degradation.
What sets "The Bonfire of the Vanities" unique is its ambitious scale and brilliant narrative. Wolfe brilliantly ties together various story threads, shifting perspectives, and convoluted plotlines to offer a panoramic image of current American life. At the same time, he goes deep into the mind of his characters, probing their motivations, fears, and insecurities with empathy and understanding.
Overall, "The Bonfire of the Vanities" is a riveting and thought-provoking read that presents a stinging critique of the excesses of the 1980s and the moral bankruptcy of the American Dream. Wolfe's razor-sharp wit, incisive sociological observations, and engrossing narrative make this work a timeless masterpiece that continues to resonate with readers today.
Free Audiobook with a free trial of Audible

My mom passed along this booklet that belonged to my grandmother when we were expecting. Figured I would share it here before discarding it. The Girl Name list is already posted 😊 Enjoy!
WHAT'S IN A NAME
Don't let the meanings concern you. Think instead of how the name will fit the child, when the child is grown, or known. Choose the name with care. It's very important to your baby-all through life. Here are some guides: - Say each name aloud, along with your own family name, to check rhythm and sound. - Use soft first names with sharp-sounding family names. - Use multi-syllable first names with short family names. - Avoid using a first name that ends with the same sound that starts the last name, such as "Jane Nevins." - Avoid "famous combinations" such as "Abraham" and "Lincoln." - Watch out for initials that spell out familiar letters, like “S. O. S”
if it's a BOY
A AARON.. Exalted ABBOTT.. Fatherly ABEL.. Proud ABELARD. . Noble ABNER. . Full of light ABRAHAM.. Great Father ABSALOM.. Peaceful ACHILLES.. Brave ADAM.. Man, manly ADDISON.. Son of Adam ADELBERT.. Bright ADLAI.. Just ADOLF.. Noble animal ADONIS.. Lord, lordly ADRIAN.. Courageous AENEAS.. Praiseworthy ALAN, ALLEN.. Swift, cheerful ALARIC.. Ruler over all ALASTAIR.. Worthy defender ALBERT.. Illustrious ALBIN.. Fair ALBION.. Name for England ALDEN.. Friend ALDO.. Experienced, skilled ALDRED.. Wise counselor ALDRIC. Wise ruler ALDRICH.. See Aldric ALDWIN.. Wise friend ALEXANDER.. Aid to men ALEXIS.. Helper ALFRED.. Good counselor ALGERNON.. Wise ALLISON.. Holy fame ALLISTER.. See Alastair ALOYSIUS.. Famous ALONSO, ALONZO, ALPHONSE, ALPHONSO Good Warrior ALVIN.. Friendly AMBROSE.. Immortal AMIEL.. God's helper AMORY.. Loving AMOS.. Reliable ANATOLE. . Sunrise ANDERS.. Strong ANDERSON.. Manly son ANDRE.. See Andrew ANDREW.. Manly, strong ANGELO.. Saintly messenger ANGUS.. Virtuous ANSELM.. Warrior of God ANSON.. Born of God ANTHONY, ANTON, ANTONIO.. Thriving ARCHER.. Bowman ARCHIBALD.. Valiant ARDEN. . Fervent ARGUS.. Watchful ARIEL.. Lion of God ARISTIDE.. The best ARMAND.. Brave ARNO.. Eagle-eyed ARNOLD.. Eagle-strong ARTHUR.. High, noble ASA.. Healer ASHER.. Fortunate ASHLEY.. Ash meadow ATWATER.. Near the water ATWELL.. Near the spring ATWOOD.. Near the forest AUBREY .. Fair-haired ruler AUBURN.. Red-haired AUGUST, AUGUSTINE, AUGUSTUS.. Imperial AUSTIN.. See August AVERIL.. Courageous AVERY.. See Averil AXEL.. Heaven blessed AYLMER.. Famous
B BAILEY.. Officer of the law BAINBRIDGE.. Short bridge BALDWIN.. Bold friend BALFOUR.. Pasture BANCROFT.. Bean field BANNING.. Newsworthy BANNISTER.. Fruitful BARCLAY. . Birch meadow BARD, BAIRD.. Minstrel BARLOW.. Brave BARNABAS, BARNABY, BARNEY.. Consoler BARNARD.. See Bernard BARNETT.. Commands BARRETT. Mighty BARRY.. Diligent BARTH.. Sacred BARTHOLOMEW.. Guardian of the plough BARTON.. Homestead BARUCH.. Blessed BASIL.. Kingly BAXTER.. Baker BAYARD.. Wise BEAUFORD.. Good crossing BEAUFORT.. Good fort BEAUMONT.. Good hill BELLAMY.. Good friend BELMONT.. Good hill BEN.. Son BENEDICT.. Blessed BENITO.. See Benedict BENJAMIN.. Favorite son BENNETT.. See Benedict BENSON.. Son of Ben BENTLEY.. Meadow BENVENUTO.. Welcome BERKELEY ..See Barclay BERN. Strong as a bear BERNARD.. Bold as a bear BERTHOLD.. Bright ruler BERTRAM.. Bright as a raven BERTRAND.. See Bertram BERWYN.. Famous friend BEVERLY.. Beaver meadow BEVIS.. Bow BION.. Energetic BJORN.. Bear BLAINE.. Slim BLAIR.. Plain dweller BLAKE.. Dark complexioned BLAKELY.. Dark meadow BLYTHE.. Light-hearted BOAZ.. Agile BONIFACE.. Fortunate BOOTH.. Sheltered place BORIS. . Spirited BOWEN.. Son BOWMAN.. Archer BOYCE.. Woodland BOYD.. Blond BRADEN.. Broad minded BRADFIELD.. Broad field BRADFORD.. Broad crossing BRADLEY.. Broad meadow BRADSHAW.. Broad forest BRADSTREET.. Broad street BRADY.. Spirited BRAND, BRANT.. Fiery BRENDEN.. Fiery BRENT.. Hill dweller BRET, BRETT.. A Breton BREWSTER.. A brewer BRIAN, BRYAN.. Strong BRIGHAM.. Home near a bridge BRISBANE. Horseman BROOK, BROOKS.. Stream BRUCE.. Ruler BRUNO.. Dark complexioned BRYCE.. Swift BURGESS.. Freeman BURKE.. Stronghold BURL.. Castle BURLEIGH.. Castle meadow BURTON.. Fine BYRNE.. Armor-protection BYRON.. Clear vision
C CADMAR.. Valiant. CADMUS.. Adornment CADWALLADER.. Strategist CAESAR.. Emperor CALDWELL.. Cold spring CALEB. . Faithful CALVERT.. Head man CALVIN.. Bold CAMERON. . Scottish nobility CAMPBELL. . Scottish nobility CANUTE.. See Knut CAREW.. Castle moat CAREY, CARY.. Beloved CARL.. Manly CARLETON.. Country town CARLYLE.. Country tower CARMICHAEL.. Stronghold CAROLL.. See Carl CARSON.. Beloved son CARTER.. Driver CARVEL.. Song CARVER.. Sculptor CASEY.. Valorous CASIMIR.. High prince CASPAR.. Horseman CASSIDY.. Inventive CASTOR.. Purity CAVANAUGH.. Cavalier CECIL.. Misty-eyed CEDRIC.. General CHAD.. See Chadwick CHADWICK.. Country home CHANDLER.. Candle-maker CHANNING.. Cannon-like CHARLES.. Strong CHAUNCEY.. Chancellor CHENEY.. Forest dweller CHESTER.. Camp CHEYNEY .. Strong as an oak CHRISTIAN.. Follow the Lord CHRISTOPHER.. Christ-bearer CICERO. . Farmer CLARE, CLARENCE.. Illustrious CLARK.. Scholar CLAUDE.. Delicate CLAUS.. Victory CLAY.. Mortal CLAYTON.. English CLEMENT.. Merciful CLIFFORD.. Cliff crossing CLINTON.. Hill town CLIVE.. Cliff CLYDE.. Strong COLBY. . Coal town COLIN.. Triumph COLVIN.. Dark-haired friend CONAN, CONANT.. Wisdom CONRAD.. Wise counselor CONROY.. Wise ruler CONSTANTINE.. Steadfast CONWAY.. Wise COOPER.. Barrel maker CORBET, CORBIN, CORBY.. Little raven CORDELL.. Binding cord COREY.. Chosen CORNELIUS.. Crowned CORNELL.. Sturdy CORRIE.. Glen dweller CORT.. Courageous orator CORWYN.. Gentle friend COSMO.. Orderly COURTNEY.. Farm dweller COWAN.. Mason CRAIG.. Steadfast rock CRISPIN.. Curly-haired CULVER.. Peaceful CURRAN.. Romantic hero CURTIS.. Courteous CUTHBERT.. Famous, bright CYRIL.. Lordly CYRUS.. The sun
D DAGOBERT.. Sword bearer DALE.. Valley DAMON.. Conquering DAN.. A judge DANA, DANE.. Arbiter DANIEL.. God is my judge DARIUS.. Ruler DARRELL, DARRYL, DARYL.. Dear little one DARWIN.. Brave friend DAVID. Beloved DEAN.. Churchman DEEMS.. Judge of men DELAND.. Dark-eyed DEMETRIUS.. Of the earth DENIS, DENNIS.. Joyous DERRICK.. Ruler DESMOND.. World power DEWEY.. Like the dew DEXTER.. Fortunate DIETRICH.. Ruler DION. See Denis DICKSON, DIXON. Strong DMITRI. See Demetrius DOMINIC, DOMINICK.. Belonging to the Lord DONALD.. Proud chief DORAN.. A gift DOREMUS.. We shall give DORIAN.. Conquering hero DOUGLAS.. Dark-haired DOYLE.. Dark stranger DREW .. Adept, gifted DRUMMOND.. Lover DUANE.. Hill dweller DUDLEY .. Fair meadow DUFF.. Dark-haired DUKE.. Leader DUNCAN.. Dark-haired DUNSTAN. . Dark stone DURAND.. Enduring DURWIN .. Dear friend DUVAL.. From the valley DWIGHT.. Wise fellow
E EARL.. Noble EBEN, EBENEZER.. Strong EDAN.. Bright as flame EDBERT.. Blessed EDELBERT.. Illustrious EDGAR.. Fair protector EDISON.. Blessed son EDMUND.. Blessed peace EDRED.. Blessed counselor EDSEL.. Profound EDWALD.. Powerful EDWARD.. Blessed guardian EDWIN.. Blessed friend EGBERT.. Bright as a sword EGMONT.. Protector EINAR.. Battle chiet ELBERT.. Illustrious ELDEN, ELDON.. Old friend ELDRED, ELDRID.. Wise ELDWIN.. Wise friend ELEAZER.. God has helped ELI, ELIAS, ELLIS.. High ELIHU.. God is He ELIJAH..The Lord is God ELIOT, ELLIOTT.. Hunter ELISHA.. God is salvation ELLERY.. Strong as a tree ELLSWORTH.. Nobility ELMAR, ELMER.. Famous ELMO.. Congenial ELROY.. Royal blood ELTON.. Town dweller ELY.. See Eli EMANUEL.. God is with us EMERSON.. Nobly born EMERY, EMORY.. Leader EMIL.. Follows the good EMMETT.. Industrious ENNIS. Praiseworthy ENOCH.. Dedicated ENOS.. Man ENRICO.. See Henry EPHRAIM.. Productive ERASMUS.. Lovely ERASTUS.. Beloved ERIC.. Heroic ERNEST.. Zealous ERNST.. See Ernest ERROL.. Adventurer ERWIN.. Triumphant ESME.. Esteemed ESMOND.. Protector ETHAN.. Strength ETHELBERT.. Illustrious EUCLID.. Famous EUGENE.. Well born EUSTACE.. Sturdy EVAN.. Young fighter EVELYN.. Youth EVERARD.. Strong as a boar EVEREST, EVERETT.. Bold EWART.. Strong EZEKIEL.. God makes strong EZRA.. Help
F FABIAN.. Farmer FAIRFAX.. Fair-haired FARLEY.. Sturdy FEDERICO.. See Frederick FELIX.. Happy FENTON. Marsh town FEODOR.. Gift of God FERDINAND.. Bold in peace FERGUS.. Fierce chief FIELDING.. Lad of the fields FINDLAY.. Competent FIORELLO.. Little flower FISK. . Faith FLETCHER.. Arrow maker FLORIAN.. Flourishing FLOYD.. Brown-haired FORREST.. Woodland FOSTER. . Forester FRANCHOT.. Free FRANCIS.. See Franchot FRANK.. See Francis FRANKLIN.. Freeholder FRASER, FRASIER FRAZER.. Curly-haired FREDERICK,.. Peaceful ruler FREEMONT.. Peaceful guard FRITZ.. See Fred FULTON.. Big town
G GABRIEL.. Man of God GAILLARD.. Lively one GAMALIEL.. Reward of God GARDELL.. Protector GARDNER.. Garden keeper GARETH, GARTH.. Garden GARRET.. Honored GARRICK.. Fighter king GARRISON, GARRY.. Protector GARVEY.. Soldier GARY.. See Garvey GASTON.. From Gascony GAVIN, GAWAIN.. Battle hawk GAYLORD.. Lively master GAYNOR.. Lively head GEOFFREY.. Peace-loving GEORGE.. Farmer GERALD.. Spear wielder GERARD, GERHART.. Strong with spear GERVAIS.. Warlike GIDEON.. Hewer GIFFORD.. Merciful GILBERT.. Bright servant GILES.. Shield GILFORD.. Wide crossing GILROY.. King's servant GIORDANO.. See Jordan GLENN.. Valley GODFREY.. God's peace GODWIN.. God's friend GORDON.. Strong, upright GRAHAM.. Serious GRANT.. Great GRANTLAND. . Deeded land GRANVILLE.. Great city GRATTAN. . Fenced land GRAYSON.. Gray's son GREGG.. Flourishing GREGORY.. Vigilant GRENVILLE.. See Granville GRIFFITH.. Faithful GRISWOLD. Gray woods GROSVENOR.. Great hunter GROVER.. Grove dweller GUS, GUSTAVE.. Good staff GUTHRIE.. Military sage GUY, GUIDO.. Leader GUYON .. Soldier
H HAAKON..Spearsman HALBERT.. Bright stone HALDANE, HALDEN.. Valley home HAMILTON.. Hill town HAMLET.. Village HAMLIN, HAMLYN.. Home HANK.. See Henry HANLEY.. Wide meadow HANS.. See John HARDY.. Enduring HARLAN.. Warrior-born HARLEY.. Of the meadow HAROLD.. Army leader HARRISON.. Son of Harry HARRY .. See Harold, Henry HARTLEY.. Stag meadow HARVEY.. Noble warrior HARWOOD.. Wood dweller HAVEN.. Refuge HAYWOOD.. Hedged wood HEATH.. Open land HECTOR.. Dependable HEINRICH.. See Henry HENRY.. Home ruler HERBERT.. Bright soldier HERCULES.. Chosen one HERMAN.. Army man HERSCHEL.. See Henry HEYWOOD. See Haywood HEZEKIAH.. Might of God HILARY.. Happy, merry HILDEBRAND.. War sword HIRAM.. Noble HOBART.. See Hubert HOLDEN.. Good HOLMES.. Meadow HOMER.. Promise HORACE, HORATIO.. Keen HOSEA.. Salvation HOWARD.. Castle guard HOWELL.. Lordly HOYT.. Joyous HUBERT.. Bright in spirit HUCK.. See Henry HUGH, HUGO.. Lofty HUMBERT.. High and bright HUMPHREY.. Peaceful HUNTER.. One who hunts HYMAN. . Long life
I IAN.. See John IGNATIUS.. Fiery IMMANUEL.. See Emanuel IRA.. Watchful IRVING.. Leader IRWIN.. See Erwin ISAAC.. Laughter ISIDORE.. Gift of Isis ISAIAH.. Salvation of Lord ISRAEL.. Soldier of God IVAN.. See John IVAR, IVER, IVOR.. Archer
J JACINTO.. Born to the purple JACK.. See Jacob, John JACOB.. One who replaces JACQUES.. See Jacob JAMES.. See Jacob JAN.. See John JARED.. Descent JARVIS, JERVIS.. Challenger JASON.. Healer JASPER.. Treasurer JAY.. Lively JEAN.. See John JEFFREY. . See Geoffrey JEREMIAH, JEREMY, JERRY.. Exalted of the Lord JEROME.. Holy JESSE.. Wealthy JESUS.. Saviour JETHRO.. Excellence JOAB.. The Lord is my father JOACHIM, JOAQUIM.. The Lord will judge JOB.. Patient JOCK.. See Jack JOEL.. The Lord is God JOHN.. God is gracious JONAH, JONAS.. Peace dove JONATHAN.. Gift of God JORDAN.. Garden JOSEPH.. Prosperous JOSHUA.. God is salvation JOSIAH.. God supports JOYCE.. Merry JUAN.. See John JUDAH, JUDE.. Praised JUDSON.. Son of praise JULES, JULIAN, JULIUS.. Soft-haired JUNIUS.. Roman JUSTIN, JUSTUS..Just
K KANE.. Exacting KARL. . See Carl KASPER.. Precious KEANE, KEENAN.. Sharp KEITH.. Windy place KELLY. Fighter KELVIN ..Army friend KEMP.. Champion KENDALL.. Valley chief KENNARD.. Great lover KENNETH.. Handsome KENT.. Chief KENTON. . Chief town KENYON.. White-haired KERBY, KIRBY.. Church town KERMIT.. Great warrior KERRY.. Mysterious KERWIN.. Good friend KEVIN.. Handsome, kind KIM.. Leader, chief KING.. Ruler KIT.. See Christopher KNUT, KNUTE.. Weapon KONRAD.. See Conrad KURT.. Concise
L LACHLAN.. Courageous LAIRD.. Lord LAMBERT.. Bright land LANCE, LANCELOT.. Warrior LANDERS, LANDIS.. Son of the plains LARRY.. See Laurence LARS.. Lord LATHAM.. Low village LAUREN, LOREN, LORIN.. Sign of victory LAWRENCE.. Victor LAWTON.. Praiseworthy LAZARUS.. See Eleazer LEANDER.. Reknowned LEE, LEIGH.. Meadow LELAND. Meadow land LEMUEL.. Dedicated to God LENNOX.. Quiet stream LEO, LEON.. Lion LEONARD.. Bold as a lion LEONIDAS.. Lion-like LEOPOLD.. Lion of the people LEROY.. The king LESLIE.. Low meadow LESTER.. Meadow camp LEVI.. United LEWIS.. Bold warrior LINCOLN.. Deep stream LINDLEY.. Linden meadow LINDSAY, LINDSEY.. Gentle LINUS.. Flaxen-haired LIONEL.. Young lion LISLE, LYLE.. The islander LLEWELLYN.. Lightning LLOYD.. Brown-haired LOCKWOOD.. Enclosed forest LORENZO.. See Lawrence LORING.. Famed warrior LOTHAIR, LOTHARIO, LOWTHER.. Fighter LOUIS.. See Lewis LOWELL. Low spring LOYALL. . Faithful LUCIAN, LUCIUS.. Light LUDLOW.. Humble man LUDOVIC, LUDOWICK, LUDWIG.. See Lewis LUKE.. See Lucian LUTHER.. Famed warrior LYMAN.. Manly LYNN.. Lake LYSANDER.. Emancipator
M MACAULAY.. Stalwart son MACE.. Sceptre MADDOX.. Power MAGNUS.. Great MAHON.. Chief MALACHI.. God's messenger MALCOLM.. Servant of (St.) Columba MANFRED.. Great peace MANLEY, MANLY.. Strong MANUEL.. See Emanuel MARC, MARK.. See Marcus MARCELLUS.. From Mars MARCUS.. War-like MARMADUKE. . See Duke MARSHALL.. Groom MARTIN.. War-like MARVIN.. High hills MATTHEW, MATTHIAS.. Gift of God MAURICE.. Dark-haired MAURY.. Twilight MAXIM, MAXIMILIAN, MAX.. Of the greatest MAXWELL.. Fair son MAYNARD.. Mighty MEAD.. Meadow MELVILLE, MILVIN.. Chief MEREDITH.. Sea guardian MERLIN. Hill by the sea MERRILL.. Fragrant MERRIT.. Worthy MERTON.. See Martin MERVIN.. Raven of the sea MEYER.. Steward MICHAEL, MICAH.. God-like MILES, MYLES.. Soldier MILLARD.. Grinder MILO.. Warrior MILTON.. Mill town MITCHELL.. See Michael MONROE.. Mt. on River Roe MONTAGUE.. Of the mount MONTE.. From the mountain MONTGOMERY.. Hunter MORGAN.. Coastal dweller MORRIS.. See Maurice MORTIMER.. Place by sea MORTON.. Big hill MOSES.. Blessed leader MOSS.. See Moses MURDOCH.. Sailor MURRAY.. Great water MYRON.. Incense bearer
N NAPOLEON.. Strong ruler NAT, NATHAN, NATHANIEL.. Gift of God NEAL, NEIL.. Champion NED.. See Edmund, Edward, Edwin NEHEMIAH.. Comfort of God NELSON.. Son of Neal, Neil NERO.. Powerful NESTOR.. A rememberer NEVILLE.. New city NEWCOMB.. Newcomer NEWELL.. New spring NEWTON..New town NICHOLAS.. Conqueror NIGEL. . Dark-haired NILS.. Victorious NIMROD.. Great hunter NOAH.. Rest NOEL, NOWELL.. Christmas NOLAN.. Well-known NORMAN.. Man from North
O OAKLEY.. Oak meadow OCTAVIUS.. Eighth (born) OGDEN.. Dell of oaks OLAF.. Champion OLIVER.. Bearer of peace OMAR, OMER.. Better ORAN, ORIN.. White-haired ORLANDO.. See Roland ORRICK.. Golden king ORSINO, ORSON.. Little bear ORTON.. Golden town ORVILLE.. Golden city OSBERT.. Divine brightness OSBORN.. Divine bear OSCAR.. Leaping warrior OSGOOD.. Godly OSMOND.. Protection of God OSRIC.. Divine power OSWALD.. Divine ruler OTIS.. Keen of hearing OTTO.. Mountain OWEN.. High-born
P PABLO.. See Paul PADDY.. See Patrick PADRAIC.. See Patrick PAOLO.. See Paul PARKER.. Park keeper PASCAL.. Easter PATRICK.. Noble, a patrician PAUL.. Little one PAYTON, PEYTON.. Noble PEARCE, PIERCE. See Peter PERCY, PERCIVAL.. Keen-eyed PERRIN, PERRY.. See Peter PETER..Firm as a rock PHELAN.. Wolf PHILANDER.. Lover of people PHILBERT.. Outstanding PHILEMON.. Loving PHILIP.. Lover of horses PHINEAS.. Frank, candid PIERRE.. See Peter PIP.. See Philip PIUS.. Pious, filial PRENTICE, PRENTISS.. Learner PRESCOTT.. Church PRESTON.. Of the church PRIMUS.. First (born) PROCTOR.. Officer PUTNAM.. Watering town
Q QUENTIN, QUINN, QUINTIN, QUINTUS.. Fifth (born) QUILLER.. Fledgling QUINCY.. Fifth son Worshipper of God
R RADCLIFF.. Red cliff RADFORD.. Red ford RALPH.. See Randolph RAMSAY, RAMSEY.. Island RANDALL, RANDOLPH.. Protected by the wolf RANGER.. Forest guard RAOUL.. See Ralph, Rudolph RAPHAEL.. Healed by God RASTUS.. See Erastus RAY.. See Raymond RAYMOND.. Quiet protector RAYNARD.. Sound judge REDMOND.. Adviser REED.. Red-haired REGAN.. Noble man REGINALD.. Strong ruler RENARD.. See Raynard RENE, RENATO.. Reborn REUBEN.. Behold, a son! REUEL.. God is his friend REX.. King REXFORD.. King's crossing REYNOLD.. See Reginald RHYS.. Chieftain RICHARD.. Bold fighter RIDGELEY.. Ridge meadow RIORDAN.. Royal singer RITCHIE.. Stern leader ROBERT, ROBIN.. Illustrious RODERICK. . Famous king RODMAN.. Surveyor RODNEY.. Famous in counsel ROGER.. Famous with spear ROLAND.. Glory of the land ROLF, ROLFE.. See Randolph ROLLO.. See Randolph ROMEO.. Man of Rome RONALD.. See Reginald RORY.. See Roderick ROSCOE.. Swift as a steed ROSS.. Gallant as a steed ROY.. King ROYAL, ROYCE.. Kingly RUDOLPH.. Famous RUFUS.. Red-haired RUPERT.. See Robert RUSSELL.. Red-haired RUTHERFORD.. Meadow
S SALVADOR.. Saviour SAMSON.. Like the sun SAMUEL.. Asked of God SANDER(S), SANDOR, SAUNDERS.. See Alexander SANFORD.. Sand crossing SAUL.. Asked of God SAWYER.. Woodcutter SAXON.. Swordsman SCHUYLER.. Learned SCOT, SCOTT.. Northman SEABROOK.. Sea spring SEAN.. See John SEARL, SERLE.. Armed SEBASTIAN.. Majestic SEBOLD.. Bold conqueror SEDGWICK.. Victorious SELIG.. Blessed SELWYN.. Royal friend SETH. . Appointed SETON.. Countryman SEWARD.. Sea warden SEWELL.. Sea spring SEXTUR.. Sixth (born) SEYMOUR.. Like St. Maur SHAUN, SHAWN.. See John SHELBY.. Shell city SHELDON.. Shield bearer SHELLEY.. Of the meadow SHERMAN.. A cutter SHERWIN.. Bright friend SHERWOOD.. Bright wood SHIRLEY.. County meadow SIDNEY, SYDNEY.. Joyous SIEGFRIED.. Conqueror SIGMUND.. Victor SIGURD.. Ruler SILAS.. Woodsman SILVAN.. Of the forest SILVESTER.. Forester SIMEON, SIMON.. Hearkening SINCLAIR.. Ilustrious SOLOMON.. Peaceable SPENCER.. Steward STACEY, STACY.. Steady STAFFORD.. Staff crossing STANISLAUS.. Praiseworthy STANLEY. Stone meadow STANTON. Stone town STEPHEN, STEVEN.. Crown STERLING.. Little star STEWART.. One in charge STROTHER, STRUTHER, STRUTHERS.. Stream(s) SUMNER.. Summoner STUART.. See Stewart SVEN.. Youth, swain SYLVESTER.. See Silvester
T TAD.. See Theodore TALBOT.. Hunter TAYLOR.. Tailor TED, TEDDY.. See Theodore TERENCE, TERRY.. Tender THADDEUS.. Praise THANE.. Aid THATCHER.. Roof maker THAYER.. Strong THEOBALD.. For the people THEODORE.. Gift of God THEODORIC.. Ruler of people THEOPHILUS.. Dear THOMAS.. Twin THORNE.. Thorn tree THORPE.. Village THURSTON.. Stone of Thor TIMOTHY.. Honoring God TITUS.. Protected TOBIAH, TOBIAS.. The Lord is good TOD, TODD.. Thick foliage TOM, TOMMY.. See Thomas TONY.. See Anthony TRACEY, TRACY.. Leader TRAVERS, TRAVIS.. Traveller TREMONT.. Three-hilled TRENT.. Thirty (French) TREVOR.. Prudent TRISTAN.. Romantic TURNER.. Acrobat TYBALT.. See Theobald TYLER.. Tile maker
U UDOLPH.. Fortunate noble ULRIE, ULRICH.. Noble lord ULYSSES.. Greek God UPTON.. Hill dweller URBAN.. Of the city URIAH.. Light of God
V VALENTINE.. Valiant VALERY.. Strong, worthy VAN.. Advance VARDEN.. Hill dweller VAUGHAN, VAUGHN. . Small VERGIL, VIRGIL.. Flourishing VERN, VERNON.. Green country VICTOR.. Conqueror VINCENT.. Conquering VIVIAN .. Full of life VLADIMIR.. Glory of princes
W WADE.. Wanderer WADSWORTH.. Traveler WALCOTT.. Stone cottage WALDEMAR.. Famed power WALDEN.. Powerful WALDFORD.. Mighty ford WALDO.. See Waldemar WALLACE.. Scottish hero WALT, WALTER.. Leader WARD.. Guardian WARE.. Keen-witted WARING.. Watchful WARNER, WERNER.. Protector WARREN.. Park WARRICK, WARWICK.. Fighting king WASHINGTON.. Town on The Wash (Thames estuary) WAYLAND.. Traveler WAYNE.. Wagon-maker WEBSTER.. Weaver WENDELL.. Wanderer WESLEY.. West meadow WHITELAW.. White hill WHITNEY.. White island WILBUR.. Forest dweller WILFRED.. Lover of peace WILL, WILLY.. See William WILLARD.. Strong of will WILLIAM.. Protector WILLIS.. Shield WILLOUGHBY.. Willow town WILMAR, WILMER.. Resolute WINFRED.. Peace maker WINSTON.. Friendly town WINTHROP.. Friendly Village WOLVERTON.. Town of good peace WOODROW.. Officer of the forest WRIGHT.. Worker WYNDHAM.. Windy village WYNNE.. Gain
X XAVIER.. Glorious XERXES.. King
Y YARDLEY.. Meadow yard YATES.. Gate dweller YVAIN, YWAIN.. Young warrior
Z ZACHARIAH, ZACHARY.. Whom God remembers ZEBEDIAH.. The gift of God ZEKE.. See Ezekiel ZENO, ZENOS.. Gift of Zeus ZIGMOND.. Winning

We are 3 years out from the 2021 draft which is an eternity in the NFL. Time to see how we did.
Our Picks
Rd1 Pick 15 Mac Jones - QB - Alabama
Rd2 Pick 6 (38) Christian Barmore - DT - Alabama
Rd 3 Pick 33 (96) Ronnie Perkins- Edge - Oklahoma
Rd 4 Pick 15 (120) Rhamondre Stevenson - RB - Oklahoma
Rd 5 Pick 33 (177) Cameron McGrone - LB - Michigan
Rd 6 Pick 4 (188) Joshuah Bledsoe - Safety - Missouri
Rd 6 Pick 13 (197) Will Sherman - OT - Colorado
Rd 7 Pick 15 (242) Tre Nixon - WR - UCF
Here are some posts from the sub back then
Patriots/comments/n38j7g/bugner_2021_nfl_draft_team_grades_i_combined_18/
/Patriots/comments/n2vtl6/my_analysis_of_the_patriots_2021_draft/
/Patriots/comments/n2y4bx/how_the_media_is_grading_the_patriots_draft/
Official Draft Threads
/Patriots/comments/n1flxj/official_draft_day_thread_kickoff_800_pm_et_april/
/Patriots/comments/n266t8/official_draft_day_thread_day_2_kickoff_700_pm_et/
/Patriots/comments/n2l4gt/official_draft_day_thread_day_3_kickoff_1200_pm/
/Patriots/comments/n3cajb/official_draft_day_thread_postdraft_discussion
Official /NFL Mac Jones Thread
/nfl/comments/n1k4qround_1_pick_15_mac_jones_qb_alabama_new_england/

Join us on Discord!

Reds (14-12) @ Rangers (14-13)

First Pitch: 4:05 PM at Globe Life Field

Team	Starter	TV	Radio
Reds	Hunter Greene (0-2, 4.55 ERA)	FOX	WLW
Rangers	Michael Lorenzen (2-0, 2.45 ERA)	FOX	105.3, KFLC (ES)

MLB	Fangraphs	Reddit Stream	IRC Chat
Gameday	Game Graph	Live Comments	Libera: ##baseball

Line Score - Game Over

	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	R	H	E	LOB
CIN	0	2	0	1	0	0	4	1	0	8	10	0	4
TEX	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	4	4	7	1	4

Box Score

TEX		AB	R	H	RBI	BB	SO	BA
2B	Semien	2	0	0	0	1	0	.261
2B	Wendzel	1	1	1	2	0	0	.154
SS	Seager	4	1	1	1	0	0	.247
1B	Lowe, N	4	1	1	0	0	2	.280
LF	Carter	4	0	0	0	0	1	.213
3B	Smith	4	0	2	1	0	1	.304
DH	Langford	4	0	1	0	0	1	.245
C	Heim	2	0	0	0	0	1	.259
C	Knizner	2	0	0	0	0	0	.125
RF	Jankowski	2	0	0	0	0	0	.190
RF	Duran, E	2	0	0	0	0	1	.200
CF	Taveras	3	1	1	0	0	1	.221

TEX	IP	H	R	ER	BB	SO	P-S	ERA
Lorenzen	6.0	6	5	5	1	3	100-68	4.24
Ureña	3.0	4	3	2	1	3	55-34	3.60

CIN		AB	R	H	RBI	BB	SO	BA
LF	Benson	5	1	2	2	0	2	.198
SS	De La Cruz, E	5	0	0	0	0	3	.283
1B	Steer	4	0	0	0	1	1	.253
1B	Encarnacion-Strand	3	2	1	0	0	0	.196
RF	Fairchild	0	0	0	0	0	0	.204
RF	Fraley	3	1	0	0	1	0	.340
CF	Thompson, B	0	0	0	0	0	0	.111
C	Stephenson, T	2	1	1	0	0	0	.231
C	Maile	1	1	1	0	0	0	.172
2B	India	4	1	4	4	0	0	.222
DH	Martini	2	1	1	2	0	0	.210
3B	Espinal	4	0	0	0	0	0	.190

CIN	IP	H	R	ER	BB	SO	P-S	ERA
Greene, H	7.0	1	0	0	1	6	98-63	3.63
Suter	1.1	6	4	4	0	2	38-27	4.00
Díaz, A	0.2	0	0	0	0	0	7-5	3.27

Scoring Plays

Inning	Event	Score
T2	Jonathan India singles on a line drive to right fielder Travis Jankowski. Christian Encarnacion-Strand scores. Jake Fraley to 3rd. Tyler Stephenson to 2nd.	0-1
T2	Nick Martini out on a sacrifice fly to center fielder Leody Taveras. Jake Fraley scores.	0-2
T4	Jonathan India singles on a line drive to left fielder Evan Carter. Christian Encarnacion-Strand scores. Jonathan India to 2nd.	0-3
T7	Jonathan India homers (1) on a fly ball to right field. Tyler Stephenson scores.	0-5
T7	Will Benson homers (4) on a fly ball to right field. Nick Martini scores.	0-7
T8	Nick Martini out on a sacrifice fly to left fielder Evan Carter. Luke Maile scores.	0-8
B9	Davis Wendzel homers (1) on a fly ball to left center field. Leody Taveras scores.	2-8
B9	Corey Seager homers (2) on a fly ball to right field.	3-8
B9	Josh Smith doubles (9) on a line drive to right fielder Stuart Fairchild. Nathaniel Lowe scores.	4-8

Highlights

Description	Length
Bullpen availability for Texas, April 27 vs Reds	0:07
Bullpen availability for Cincinnati, April 27 vs Rangers	0:07
Bench availability for Cincinnati, April 27 vs Rangers	0:07
Fielding alignment for Cincinnati, April 27 vs Rangers	0:11
Bench availability for Texas, April 27 vs Reds	0:07
Fielding alignment for Texas, April 27 vs Reds	0:11
Starting lineups for Reds at Rangers - April 27, 2024	0:09
Corey Seager: Home Run Statcast Analysis	0:12
Davis Wendzel: Home Run Statcast Analysis	0:12
Breaking down Hunter Greene's pitches	0:04
Hunter Greene's outing against the Rangers	0:20
Michael Lorenzen's outing against the Reds	0:23
The distance behind Jonathan India's home run	0:13
Breaking down Will Benson's home run	0:13
Breaking down Michael Lorenzen's pitches	0:04
Jonathan India's RBI single	0:14
Nick Martini's sac fly	0:17
Jonathan India's second RBI single	0:19
Nick Lodolo joins broadcast, talks returning to Texas	6:14
Max Scherzer joins broadcast, talks rehab, more	3:34
Sencillo remolcador de India y pone la pizarra 2-0	0:23
Elly De La Cruz makes strong throw, saves run	0:20
Jonathan India's two-run homer (1)	0:30
De La Cruz salva una carrera gracias a gran tiro	0:15
Will Benson's two-run homer (4)	0:33
Hunter Greene allows one hit through seven innings	0:53
Davis Wendzel's first career homer	0:32
Corey Seager's birthday homer (2)	0:30
Alexis Díaz earns save	0:10
Josh Smith's RBI double	0:24
Nick Martini's sac fly	0:18
Josh Smith breaks up no-hitter	0:16
Michael Lorenzen K's Will Benson	0:08

Decisions

Winning Pitcher	Losing Pitcher	Save
Greene, H (1-2, 3.63 ERA)	Lorenzen (2-1, 4.24 ERA)	Díaz, A (6 SV, 3.27 ERA)

Attendance	Weather	Wind
	74°F, Roof Closed	0 mph, None

HP	1B	2B	3B
Brian O'Nora	Paul Clemons	D.J. Reyburn	Brennan Miller

Game ended at 6:46 PM.
Remember to sort by new to keep up!

Just after dawn Trazek, a visitor from a distant planet that is friendly with Earth, entered the Musée de la Machine. As an off-world researcher, he had secured rare access to study human combat technologies from their Great Wars.
Stepping through the vaulted archway, he activated his translation microbes and scanned the echoing halls. At the reception desk sat a woman, absorbed in documents on her monitor. Trazek greeted her in French, introducing himself as the expected visitor from Rigel 4.
"Enchantée Monsieur Trazek. I am Curator Julia Pierre. Please, follow me and we'll begin your orientation." Julia led him through the collections, pausing at restored vehicles from ages past. Trazek scanned each with curiosity, absorbing technical details through his enhanced optics.
As they walked, Julia explained her role advising governments on the care and use of these artifacts from turbulent eras. Our goal is accurate preservation alongside thoughtful education. Coming to a hangar marked '1939 to 1945', Julia turned to him.
"This was humanity's most destructive period. What elements intrigue your research?" Trazek considered the question carefully. "All wars hold difficult lessons. I aim to understand challenges faced by engineers and soldiers, and how ingenuity flourished even under immense pressure."
Julia nodded, opening the doors. "Wise insights. Let us begin." Inside warmed the scent of old machinery and filtered sunlight. Neat rows of machines sat quietly, polished and carefully marked. Trazek first approached a Panzer III, scanning the riveted armor with interest.
"Rugged construction, optimized for rapid production. Tell me of its role in early battles." As Julia recounted tactical deployments, Trazek noted power ratios, munition capacities, and crew arrangements and compared them to later models' advances.
Eager to learn more, Trazek followed her deeper into the vast chamber, pausing before each vehicle to delve into minutiae with insatiable curiosity. After absorbing terabytes of technical specifications from British Cromwells and American Shermans, Trazek turned to Julia.
"Your archival databases would illuminate production priorities and strategic considerations. May we access them to deepen comparative analyses?" She smiled. "The library is at your disposal, sir. Please, follow me there and I'll activate your security clearance."
As they walked the quiet halls, Trazek glimpsed historical photographs depicting grim realities of warfare. Grateful for keen curiosity untainted by direct experience, he pondered humanity's will to persevere through crisis and create ever evolving means of self defense.
In the library's vaulted study, Julia activated terminals granting him unfettered access. "All resources are networked for your convenience. Please, don't hesitate to ask if you require further details on collection specifics." Settling in with enthusiasm, Trazek commenced rigorous parsing of military correspondence, production orders, damage reports, and technical journals detailing evolving threat assessments and engineering solutions.
Graphing penetration values against sloped equivalents illuminated armor design tradeoffs across combatants. He noted how mass production priorities complicated mechanical reliability for some while standardized parts facilitated maintenance for others.
Simulations modeling battlefield engagements with various armament strategies against reconstructed opposing vehicles allowed actionable insights into tactical adaptations over time. Hours passed as Trazek immersed himself in the voluminous archives, pausing only briefly to replenish electrolytes.
His earlier scans processed at the cellular level, integrating fragmented details into a cohesive historical compendium. Gradually, a richer understanding took shape of the immense pressures faced by all combatants to advance their tools of war under mortal circumstances.
Though saddened by loss of life, Trazek felt privilege in intimately experiencing humanity's will to survive and triumph through ingenuity even in their darkest hours. By sunrise, a profound respect had formed for the species' fortitude and inventiveness against overwhelming odds. This was only the beginning.
As the morning sun rose over the archive building, Trazek emerged from the library, brimming with new insights. His studies illuminated volumes, yet gaps remained to fully contextualize humanity's ingenuity under duress. Though archives held untold knowledge, firsthand examination proved invaluable for his research aims.
Trazek found Curator Julia in her office, finalizing restoration plans for rescued artillery pieces. Greetings exchanged, he inquired if restored vehicles may be examined close up. "An opportunity to non invasively analyze material composition and systems integration could yield invaluable data."
Julia smiled warmly. "The Hangar is yours to explore, Monsieur Trazek. Might I accompany with technical details?" Graciously accepting, they departed for the vast chamber housing humanity's mechanized legacy.
Within echoed machinery past and present. Work crews meticulously tended restored tanks while fabricated components filled orders to preserve global memory. Trazek scanned rows of familiar silhouettes, selecting a late model Sherman to commence further analysis.
Peering within armored confines as Julia recounted production volumes, Trazek noted efficient utilization of materials. Mass production facilitated standardization and expedient repairs, critical advantages. Through enhanced vision, he studied rivet placements and weld qualities, comparing assembly methods between adversaries.
T 34 captured Trazek's attention. Julia related its role penetrating German lines as he examined layered composite armor sandwiching sparse metals. Though crude, innovative sloping maximized protection.
Next, a late model Soviet T 34 caught his optic, sloped armor angles analyzing readily apparent. "Innovative protection with minimal resources. The metallurgical analysis would be enlightening." Julia nodded. "Our foundry has meticulous records from the period. Shall we proceed?"
He noted minimal crew provisions, reflecting the USSR's desperate circumstances. Comparative production rates across combatants illuminated strategic resource management. Towards midday, Julia received a call, stepping aside.
Trazek took the opportunity to analyze a hulking Tiger One, armor thickness dwarfing earlier designs. Scans detected precise construction, yet seams revealed months elapsed between prototypes and deployment, a calculated risk.
Assessing mechanical systems through microscopic lenses, he comprehended Field modifications aimed at addressing early unreliable complications. Despite vulnerabilities, such as petrol engines, Tiger One's dominated when operational, altering tactical doctrines.
Breaking from enrapturement, Trazek observed restoration crews, fixing the track on a Churchill tank. Though low speed with short range, thick armor proved a critical advantage on the defensive.
Considering production strains, durability proved as vital as firepower against a numerically superior enemy. As Trazek inspected a German Stug 3's assault gun, Julia rejoined, bemused.
"Find your research enlightening, Monsieur?" He chirped affirmatively. "Each vehicle yields unforeseen insights. Might remaining storage facilities be accessed?" She smiled. "Of course. This way, the more hangars await exploration."
Under sheltering arched roofs lay more machines, quietly enduring the present as sentinels of history. Trazek enthusiastically examined examples from all participants. Studying opportunistic variants such as the SU 100, resembling post war designs foreshadowed future doctrines.
Comparative qualities between former adversaries now yielded to compassionate regard, a testament to humanity's capacity for reconciliation. Sun sinking towards the western tree line found Trazek absorbed in a late war Panther, meticulously analyzing how rushed deployment sacrificed quality.
Julia's stories brought designs to life, as sunlight through high windows lit lingering restoration crews. Exchanging thanks, Trazek departed feeling enriched, yet seeking confirmation from operational simulations utilizing quantitative data accrued.
Though archives edified, his research required experiential application. Another dawn would herald new insights into humanity's visceral will to overcome through ingenuity, resilience, and fraternity amid violence.
As dawn's light filtered into the museum hangars, Trazek rose from rest mode on the floor, systems reenergized. His studies yielded unforeseen insights, yet gaps remained.
While archives aided contextual understanding, first hand experiences proved invaluable. As curator Julia had promised further access, he continued investigations with renewed vigor.
Trazek found Julia assisting engineers reconstructing a half track from archival schematics. Greetings exchanged, he requested simulator access to analyze engagements incorporating accrued data.
"A prudent next step. The lab awaits, sir." Gratitude voiced, they departed for the high tech analysis wing. Within gleamed monitors projecting lush simulations.
Operators calibrated complex scenarios modeling tactical doctrines against restored vehicles. Trazek absorbed it all, computational abilities enhancing comprehension. At a terminal, Julia gestured.
"All resources are open to you, Monsieur. How may I assist your studies?" Optics scanning capabilities, he responded. "Access to damage reports correlating findings. Comparative analyses of engagement strategies."
As Julia compiled requested files, Trazek initiated simulations integrating detailed scans and material compositions and assembly methods of armored vehicles from various combatants.
Recreating the climactic battle of Kursk through extrapolated tactical routines and upgraded systems based on production strains illuminated strategic imperatives.
Studying resource prioritization optimizing mechanized capabilities against industrially advantaged enemies offered enlightenment. Absorbing terabytes of runtime data, Trazek noted how mass producing reliable lightweight tanks facilitated numerical advantages despite qualitative disadvantages.
Comparatively, concentrating production on specialized mechanized assets amplified individual impact potential yet proved strategically riskier reliant on fewer vehicles. No singular solution ensured victory rather, adapting to fluctuating conditions through cooperative effort and constant betterment prevailed.
Hours passed as Trazek immersed in simulating replays incorporating field modifications and engineering workarounds resolving initial complications.
Emerging from engrossment, Trazek encountered Julia observing engineers restoring a halftrack. Exchanging thanks for unlimited access, he inquired further perspectives on perseverance under duress. She replied “While war tests our best and worst, through shared hardship arises camaraderie and innovation lifting all. Your insights illuminate our capacity for both.”
Trazek’s research neared conclusion. Though darkness exists, so too does light in fraternity, in ingenuity, in relentless hope. Humanity’s trials bred understanding among former adversaries. And in understanding, a shared future might be shaped. Trazek departed enriched, perspectives broadened on the indomitable human spirit prevailing even against greatest odds through compassion and cooperation. Though violence awoke, from its ashes bloomed reconciliation. There lay humanity's greatest invention.

Hey guys! Anchorage Deadbeat here, figured I'd try something new (always throwing things at the wall to see what sticks) and create a sort of map/overview of last night's Assembly Meeting. All of the links are to specific parts of my twitter thread from last night, which if you click them should lead you to the start of the discussion on that topic. If you don't have a twitter, all of my meeting notes are available completely for free (without requiring a sign in) on my Patreon page.
Let me know what you think about this format!
Meeting Highlights

• Mayor and Chair Reports:
  • Mayor attended Arctic infrastructure conference
  • Acknowledgment of longest-serving Muni employee
  • Mayor speaks on second Mayoral Job Fair
  • Chair emphasized need to “right the wrong” on Eklutna River project
  • Chair stressed the need for shelter funding, support for SB77 to address abandoned properties
• Committee Reports:
  • May 4 marks the Clean Up Day Project
  • Updates on the Anchored Homes project
  • Port of Alaska modernization progress (Pier 1 complete Summer 2027)
  • Think tank formation regarding rollout of allowed camping ordinances
  • Transportation Committee met, considered downtown right on red restrictions, “Minnesota Cheese Grater”
  • Legislative Committee heard updates on state bills
• Consent Agenda:
  • Specific items pulled for individual discussion

Consent Agenda Actions

• Election Certification: April 2nd results certified, new Assembly member welcomed
• Resolutions:
  • Recognition of Paul D. Rotkis for 16 years of service
  • Recognition of Nancy Clark for 31 years of service
  • May declared Bike Month in Anchorage
  • April 28th designated Workers' Memorial Day
  • Recognition of Great Alaska Council, Boy Scouts of America, Eagle Scout class of 2023
  • May 2nd declared National Day of Prayer
  • Recognition of Chief of Police Michael Kerle
  • Recognition of Ross Noffsinger for 27 years of service
• Appointments:
  • Samantha Simpson appointed to Watershed and Natural Resources Advisory Commission
  • Richard Whitney's appointment to Public Naming Commission failed (vote 6-5)

Assembly Action on Remaining Items

• Resolution Appropriating NTE $370k for Sullivan Arena Repairs:
  • Postponed indefinitely (vote 10-1) due to concerns regarding lack of breakdown of repairs and questioning whether this is the best use of capital funds.
• Ordinance Amending Zoning Map to Rezone Old Federal Archives Site:
  • Amendment that creates requirement for Fish Creek easement
  • Amendment allows for greater flexibility in development by considering the easement language.
  • Passes, as amended, 11-0.
• Ordinance Amending Title 21 (part 1):
  • Testimony that this will delay building this season, if not changed.
  • Amendment delaying the effective date of standards impacting development (passed unanimously).
  • Rationale behind the amendment is to allow time to address concerns raised by builders and to form a working group to develop a more comprehensive solution.
  • Planning Department drafts an amendment, which is taken up near end of meeting.
• Resolution Revising and Appropriating Funds for General Government Operating Budget:
  • Mike Edgington has concerns about Convention Center rules.
  • Second hearing set for April 30th to allow for public comment on changes made since the initial proposal.
• Ordinance Setting Tax Levy Rates:
  • Public hearing opened and closed.
  • Second hearing set for April 30th.
• Ordinance Setting Tax Levy, etc for ASD
  • Publice hearing opened and closed
  • Second hearing set for April 30th
• Resolution Revising and Appropriating Funds for Utilities and Enterprise Activities Budgets:
  • Public hearing opened and closed.
  • Motion to postpone to April 30th passed unanimously.
• Ordinance Authorizing Issuing $150 Million in Tax Anticipation Notes:
  • Passed unanimously.
  • This is a tool to allow the Municipality to borrow money in anticipation of tax revenue collection.
• Ordinance Amending AMC 9.06.115 to Adjust Police Service Rates:
  • Amendment allows for automatic adjustments to police service rates every five years based on an index.
  • Passed unanimously.
• Resolution Approving Heritage Land Bank Work Program and Management Plan:
  • Postponed unanimously due to the absence of a sponsor and the need for amendments.
• Ordinance Amending Title 7 to Allow Electronic Bids:
  • Discussion focused on concerns regarding cost to applicants and the need for a more thorough cost analysis.
  • Amendment proposed to ensure no cost to end user for submitting an application (passes 8-3).
  • Passes unanimously, as amended.
• Ordinance Amending AMC to Modify Building Permit Fees
  
  • Volland says that they intended to reduce cost for permitting fourplexes, but it actually increased over the original square footage system. He wants to see costs align more with other types of dwellings.
  • Passes unanimously.
• Property Tax Exemption for Volunteer Firefighters/EMS
  
  • Public testimony
    • Bree Witzke
    • Brianna Sullivan, co-chair of Girdwood Board of Firefighters
    • Michelle Weston, Girdwood Fire Chief
    • Scott Fisher, Chugiak Fire and Rescue Fire Chief
  • Discussion focused on providing a property tax exemption for volunteer firefighters and EMS workers, as a retention incentive and show of appreciation
  • Johnson moves amendment to clarify language for legal, passes unanimously.
  • Zaletel and Constant concerned about shift of tax burden, support regardless.
  • Martinez notes disparity in tone between discussion of $1.2mil burden for this, versus $35k burden for digital submissions of Electronic Bids from earlier.
  • Passes unanimously.
• Ordinance Amending Title 21: Further Discussion and Vote
  
  • Brawley/Volland Introduce Amendment: An amendment is introduced to allow the Planning Director to approve administrative relief during the Table 3 pause transition period.
  • Planning representative explains this is intended to provide relief for developments planned under previous standards and is only in effect until November 1, 2025.
  • Volland expresses concern about fairness, defining "undue burden", and the potential need to pause Table 3 entirely.
  • Planning Manager Yell acknowledges the subjectivity of "undue burden" and emphasizes a case-by-case approach. He suggests other code sections allow for flexibility, including variances. A written response would be required from developers seeking relief.
  • Brawley favors the amendment but opposes pausing Table 3, seeing it as a data collection tool.
  • Constant supports the limited time/scope and hopes this lessens the need for petitioners to issue Appearance Requests.
  • Zaletel proposes an amendment to the amendment requiring a denial decision to include "the most appropriate alternative for the applicant to pursue” to streamline processes for developers.
  • The amendment to clarify denial decisions passes unanimously (11-0). The main amendment also passes unanimously (11-0).
  • The main motion passes unanimously (11-0).
• SWS Budget Transfer
  
  • Passes unanimously.
• Initial Audience Participation Restoration Ordinance
  
  • Sulte is out of the Chambers, has an S-version.
  • Postponed unanimously to the meeting of May 21.
  • Rules Committee will discuss on May 16.
• Beverage License Transfer (IHOH) Conditional Protest
  
  • Passes unanimously.
• Special Alcohol Land Use Permit (Divots Golf)
  
  • Passes unanimously.
• Allocation of $568k from ERA to AHD for Grant Agreement with ACEH for decompression of ECWS
  
  • Bree Witzke testifies, thanks them for the program and for her home.
  • Passes unanimously.
• Transfer of Anchored Home, Next Step Initiative grant from Real Estate to Health Department
  
  • Alexis Johnson explains rationale for transfer
  • Brawley asks for swift timeframe, ideally before next week’s special meeting.
  • Passes 9-1, Myers opposed.

Final Audience Participation

• Irene Quednow: Supports tax exemption for volunteer firefighters, supports paid electronic grant applications/free paper applications, and condemns attacks on municipal employees.
• Bree Witzke: Calls for civility during the election season, advocates for open-mindedness and audience participation, and asks for alternative solutions to summer camp abatements.
• Alexis Johnson: Pleads for an end to the bullying of municipal workers, shares examples of the negative impacts, and describes efforts to reassure new hires.
• Unnamed Testifier: Alleges sexual assault and harassment by a police officer and demands justice.
• Roger Branson: Appeals to the Mayor to collaborate with the Assembly on homelessness solutions and criticizes divisive rhetoric.

Member Comments

• Brawley: Remembers past meeting tensions
• Rivera: Welcomes Littlefield
• Littlefield: Describes his first meeting experience as illuminating
• Martinez: Highlights the frequency of unanimous votes indicating a collaborative spirit.
• Myers: Welcomes Littlefield and inquires about addressing Assembly bullying of municipal workers.
• Constant: Suggests involvement of the Superior Court may be appropriate for addressing bullying concerns.

https://www.academia.edu/117903694/Scythian_mp_Draft_
The river called Exampaîos was translated as ‘sacred roads’ in Scythian (or one of the languages/dialects spoken by the group called Scythians, since not all words seem to have the same sound changes) by Herodotus. This would show *pathya- ‘path (adj.?)’ > *pa(h)ya- (3). The cognates of Greek póntos ‘sea’, pátos ‘trodden/beaten way / path’ all mean ‘path / crossing / ford’, etc. (Skt. pánthās ‘path / way / road’, OCS pǫtĭ ‘way / road’, OPr pintis ‘road’, L. pōns ‘bridge’, Arm. hun ‘ford / way’). This implies G. póntos got its meaning from a shift ‘path > ford / river / sea’ or similar. The same shift in Scythian would imply that Exampaîos was ‘sacred river’ and a good but imperfect understanding of Scythian led to a small mistranslation. The first part would be cognate with *yaks- > Kho. gyaṣ- ‘sacrifice / make offering’, Skt. yakṣá-m ‘a kind of supernatural being’, *ya(H2)g^- > Skt. yájate ‘sacrifice / make offering’, Av. yaz-, OP yad- ‘worship’. Compounds in IE sometimes change u- & i-stems to o-stems, and o- to i- or yo-, so *yaxša- + *path(a(:))- > *yaxšapathya- makes sense. Where would -mp- come from?
​
Keeping the languages/dialects termed Scythian separate seems best. Trying to analyze each group of words, sometimes with similar semantics, in accounts/stories one at a time allows more certainty in which sound changes existed in each group. The Bactrian Ardokϸo, a goddess equivalent to Fortuna (7), seems to be
​
*arti-xši- > Bactrian Ardokϸo [ardxǝš(ǝ)]
​
cognate with Av. arti- \ aṣ̌i- ‘reward?’ and *xšay- / *xša:- ‘rule’ (Middle Persian pādi-xšāy ‘rule(r)’), making her ‘lady of fortune’. This allows the same analysis for Scythian Argímpasa (a goddess equated with Aphrodite) :
​
*arti-patni: > *arḍi-paθna: > *aRgi-pasna > *argi-pasa > Argímpasa
​
We can be fairly sure that *rt > rg was regular, since a god mentioned in the same list is put in Greek as Thagimasádas (a god equated with Poseidon). Since the 2nd part must be Iranian *maza(n)t- ‘great’, Thagi- would only match
​
*twrk^tor- > *twǝrs^tar- > Skt. tváṣṭar- ‘carpenter’, Av. θwōrǝštar- / etc. ‘fashioner’
​
making *θwaRšta:-maza(n)t- > *θwaRta:-maza(n)d- ‘great creator / god of sky/rain/ocean’, which would then be “Lord Creator” or similar (reasonably = Ahuramazda = Varuna ); later with the same *-rt- > -rg-. But again, where would -mp- come from?
​
Having 2 examples with relatively certain *-p- but attested -mp- suggests some kind of sound change. This would match data in Scythian: the Scythians gave the Persian king Darius, who was chasing the the Scythians but unable to catch them (never fighting them, running out of supplies, etc.) the gift of a bird, a mouse, a frog, and five arrows. They’re message that he could understand their meaning “if he was clever” makes it likely that it was a pun (see full evidence below) for
​
*vi-m mūš-ǝm magandra-m panča išū-nam
​
which was meant to sound like:
​
*vi-mōš-ǝm maga-n drampanči šūna-m
​
I gave a gift, they run in vain.
​
Here, it is *-v- that would become -mp- (or *-m-, since Skt. drámati ‘runs’ & drávati both exist). With evidence that Indo-Iranian had many nasal sonorants (5), including many *ṽ > v / m and even *-p- > *-v- > *-ṽ- > v / m :
​
Skt. náva- ‘young / new’, A. náaw, Ti. nam, Dm. nõwã, Ks. *nõra > nõ.a, Kh. nóγ ‘new’
​
Skt. náva ‘9’, Dm. noo, A. núu, Ti. nom, D. no, Sa. no, Kv. nu, Kt. nu, Ni. nu, Kh. nyòf
​
Skt. lopāśá-s > *lovāśá- \ *lovāyá- > Kh. ḷòw, Dk. láač \ ló(o)i ‘fox’, fem. *lovāyī > *lomhāyī > A. luuméei, Pl. lhooméi
​
Skt. śubha- ‘bright/beautiful/splendid/good’, *śumhâ > A. šúwo ‘good’, šišówo ‘pretty’, Dm. šumaa ‘beautiful’
​
IE? *kswiP-to- > Av. xšvipta-, *xšvufta- > Ps. šaudǝ ‘milk’, šómle ‘buttermilk’
​
PIE *g^hew- ‘pour’ > G. khéō ‘pour’, Skt. juhóti ‘pour a libation / sacrifice’, *goü- > B. goi- / gom- ‘sacrifice’
​
I say that Scythian evidence supports that they were similar in this way to modern Dardic languages. Thus, any labial P became v > ṽ between vowels. Later, this ṽ > mv in Scythian, > mb > mp (prenasalized?). No other reasonable explanation would produce so many “coincidental” cases of -mp- for likely -p-. Since these groups show even more clear evidence that -t- > -d- and -nt- > -nd- existed, how would *-p- or *-mp- in all these cases not become **-mb-?
​
Scythian Puns
Herodotus has been accused of being inaccurate, but some odd incidents involving the Persian king Darius might show the reality of weird actions brought about by completely unexpected causes. The Scythian king Idánthursos had an odd response to Darius’ challenge, that seems to make little sense without context. Darius told him to either stand and fight or else acknowledge him as his master. Idánthursos said, “In return for saying that you are my master, I say to weep”. In the Greek account of this is added “this is Scythian speech.’ Manaster Ramer & Schwartz (1) took this to mean it was only understandable when spoken in Scythian, a dead Iranian language. If so, it would be a simple pun based on two roots with the same form, *xšay- ‘weep’ (Sogdian xšēwan ‘weeping’) and *xšay- / *xša:- ‘rule’ (Middle Persian pādi-xšāy ‘rule(r)’, English Padishah, Sogdian pāt(i)xšāwan). It is possible that the cognates of xšēwan and -xšāwan were pronounced the same in Scythian, which would make the most sense here.
​
Though this pun is simple, basic, short, and easily seen (when you know Iranian), it establishes an important principle. Manaster Ramer believes other seemingly inexplicable words and actions taken by Scythians in other histories have a similar reason based on words and pronunciations in the Scythian language. In another later incident, Darius runs out of supplies while chasing the Scythians, who still refuse to engage in battle. The Scythians send an envoy carrying a bird, a mouse, a frog, and five arrows. When asked the meaning, the envoy said it was up to the Persians to figure out the meaning of the gifts “if they are clever”. Since there is no, I repeat, NO reason for this based on any rational strategy, it must be a joke. I do not insist it was an actual historic event where a Scythian rider somehow transported several small animals across the empty land, but even if it was a later tall tale (such as tend to cluster around famous people and events, making them more clever or amusing than they actually were), it was certainly the Scythians who told the tale, since this again forms a pun in Iranian. Herodotus and others must have accurately passed on the stories, whether they were true or not. There was no real way to know more in the ancient world.
​
Manaster Ramer (2) saw that since ‘5 arrows’ would be *panča išūnam (with standard grammar, noun in genitive after ‘5’) it provided a source for moving the word boundaries, needed for any long pun, to produce *ūnam ‘(in) lack / in want’ (both Skt. ūná- ‘insufficient / lacking’ and Latin vānus ‘empty / void’, English vain are cognates < PIE *w(a)H2no-) or my šūna-m ‘in vain’ (Skt. śūnyá- ‘hollow / empy / vacant’ < *k^uH2- ‘swell / become inflated’). In the same way, since ‘bird’ was simply *vi- in Iranian, it would sound the same as the prefix vi- ‘away’ found in many, many verbs. With no other possible purpose, these gifts (real or apocryphal) provided a way to put together another phrase made up of these simple parts. That their languages had sound changes (both within Scythain and with standard sandhi) added would be required for any such interpretation, not restricted to my analysis or different just because this was a pun.
​
Even with this taken as fact, I can not agree with many of Manaster Ramer’s ideas on how to interpret the pun. He posited *makata- ‘frog’ when evidence for *mantraka- exists in IIr. instead (*mantruko- ‘frog / toad’ > Dk. maṇúuko, Kt. maṇúk, Ni. âv-maṭrakog, D. maṭéeq, A. maṭróok; many IIr. words add diminutive suffixes -ika- / -aka- / -uka- with no distinction). This would obviously completely change the meaning. Since these words for ‘frog’ often show metathesis and other unexplained changes (6), I would think that *mantraka- > *makantra- would fit here best (or else it woud produce no recognizable words at the ‘frog' . Instead of his elaborate sound changes that remove Scythian and Ossetic from a close relation, I support this traditional view and only use a few sound changes common to many Middle Iranian languages (k > g between vowels or sonorants, etc.), sandhi (m deleted before m, V deleted before V) and the particularly Ossetic *p > f (then, like Kassite, > *x; likely *Cx > *C). This produces:
​
bird mouse frog (acc.) five arrows (gen.)
​
*vi-m mūš-m makantra-m panča išū-nam
​
*vi-m mūš-ǝm magandra-m panča išū-nam sound changes > Scythian
​
*vi mūšǝm magandram panč išūnam sandhi
​
which was meant to sound like:
​
*vi-mauš-m magha-m dramanti śūna-m
​
*vi-mōš-ǝm maga-n drampanči šūna-m sandhi, sound changes > Scythian
​
I gave a gift, they run in vain.
​
Since this describes the situation at the time, when Darius keeps moving in search of a fight but never fulfills his purpose, it seems to fit the context. Since the root *mauš- ‘take’ (Skt. moṣ- ‘steal / take away’), *vi-mauš- ‘give’, is fairly rare it’s possible that it was *mausH- / *muHs- and would give *vi-mūš-ǝm to match *vi-m mūš-ǝm (or, if *ū became *ō under certain conditons, such as when followed by C and a non-high V), so they might be even closer in sound or identical. Other parts:
​
*dram- ‘run’
​
*-anti ‘3rd pl.’
​
*magha- ‘gift’, Skt. maghá- ‘gift / reward / wealth’
​
1
Manaster Ramer, Alexis & Schwartz, Martin (2019) Some Interlinguistic Iranian Conundrums
https://www.academia.edu/38499565
​
2
Manaster Ramer, Alexis (draft?) Scythian Rebus
https://www.academia.edu/117487565
​
3
Manaster Ramer, Alexis (draft?) Wörter und Schla(n)gen, or Marquart and Manaster Ramer in Scythia: Greek μάραγνα, Syriac maragnā
https://www.academia.edu/117824786
​
4
Whalen, Sean (2024) Greek Pottery, Pkpuphs & Khukhospi (Draft)
https://www.academia.edu/117645949
​
5
Whalen, Sean (2023) Indo-Iranian Nasal Sonorants (r > n, y > ñ, w > m)
https://www.academia.edu/106688624
​
6
Turner, R. L. (Ralph Lilley), Sir (1962-1966) A comparative dictionary of Indo-Aryan languages. London: Oxford University Press. Includes three supplements, published 1969-1985.
https://dsal.uchicago.edu/dictionaries/soas/
https://dsal.uchicago.edu/cgi-bin/app/soas_query.py?qs=ma%E1%B9%87%E1%B8%8Du%CC%84%CC%81ka&searchhws=yes&matchtype=exact
​
7
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ardoksho
​

(NOTE: Only feature film categories are listed. Certain nominations omit teams of nominees and only list the film and/or certain individuals. Winners highlighted)

Producers Guild of America

Darryl F. Zanuck Award for Outstanding Producer of Theatrical Motion Pictures

• American Fiction (MGM)
• Anatomy of a Fall (Neon)
• Barbie (Warner Bros.)
• The Holdovers (Focus Features)
• Killers of the Flower Moon (Apple Original Films/Paramount Pictures)
• Maestro (Netflix)
• Oppenheimer (Universal Pictures)
• Past Lives (A24)
• Poor Things (Searchlight Pictures)
• The Zone of Interest (A24)

Award for Outstanding Producer of Animated Theatrical Motion Pictures

• The Boy and the Heron (GKids)
• Elemental (Pixar)
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (Sony Pictures)
• The Super Mario Bros. Movie (Illumination/Universal Pictures)
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem (Paramount Pictures)**

Outstanding Producer of Documentary Theatrical Motion Pictures

• 20 Days in Mariupol
• American Symphony
• Beyond Utopia
• The Disappearance of Shere Hite
• The Mother of All Lies
• Smoke Sauna Sisterhood Squaring the Circle (The Story of Hipgnosis)

Directors Guild of America

Feature Film

• Greta Gerwig – Barbie
• Yorgos Lanthimos – Poor Things
• Christopher Nolan – Oppenheimer
• Alexander Payne – The Holdovers
• Martin Scorsese – Killers of the Flower Moon

Documentaries

• Moses Bwayo and Christopher Sharp – Bobi Wine: The People's President
• Mstyslav Chernov – 20 Days in Mariupol
• Madeleine Gavin – Beyond Utopia
• Davis Guggenheim – Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie
• D. Smith – Kokomo City

First-Time Feature Film

• Cord Jefferson – American Fiction
• Manuela Martelli – Chile '76
• Noora Niasari – Shayda
• A. V. Rockwell – A Thousand and One
• Celine Song – Past Lives

Screen Actors Guild

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Leading Role

• Bradley Cooper – Maestro as Leonard Bernstein
• Colman Domingo – Rustin as Bayard Rustin
• Paul Giamatti – The Holdovers as Paul Hunham
• Cillian Murphy – Oppenheimer as J. Robert Oppenheimer
• Jeffrey Wright – American Fiction as Thelonious "Monk" Ellison

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Leading Role

• Annette Bening – Nyad as Diana Nyad
• Lily Gladstone – Killers of the Flower Moon as Mollie Burkhart
• Carey Mulligan – Maestro as Felicia Montealegre
• Margot Robbie – Barbie as Barbie
• Emma Stone – Poor Things as Bella Baxter

Outstanding Performance by a Male Actor in a Supporting Role

• Sterling K. Brown – American Fiction as Clifford "Cliff" Ellison
• Willem Dafoe – Poor Things as Dr. Godwin Baxter
• Robert De Niro – Killers of the Flower Moon as William King Hale
• Robert Downey Jr. – Oppenheimer as Lewis Strauss
• Ryan Gosling – Barbie as Ken

Outstanding Performance by a Female Actor in a Supporting Role

• Emily Blunt – Oppenheimer as Katherine "Kitty" Oppenheimer
• Danielle Brooks – The Color Purple as Sofia
• Penélope Cruz – Ferrari as Laura Ferrari
• Jodie Foster – Nyad as Bonnie Stoll
• Da'Vine Joy Randolph – The Holdovers as Mary Lamb

Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture

• American Fiction – Erika Alexander, Adam Brody, Sterling K. Brown, Keith David, John Ortiz, Issa Rae, Tracee Ellis Ross, Leslie Uggams, and Jeffrey Wright
• Barbie – Michael Cera, Will Ferrell, America Ferrera, Ryan Gosling, Ariana Greenblatt, Kate McKinnon, Helen Mirren, Rhea Perlman, Issa Rae, and Margot Robbie
• The Color Purple – Halle Bailey, Fantasia Barrino, Jon Batiste, Danielle Brooks, Ciara, Colman Domingo, Aunjanue Ellis-Taylor, Louis Gossett Jr., Corey Hawkins, Taraji P. Henson, Phylicia Pearl Mpasi, and Gabriella Wilson "H.E.R."
• Killers of the Flower Moon – Tantoo Cardinal, Robert De Niro, Leonardo DiCaprio, Brendan Fraser, Lily Gladstone, John Lithgow, and Jesse Plemons
• Oppenheimer – Casey Affleck, Emily Blunt, Kenneth Branagh, Matt Damon, Robert Downey Jr., Josh Hartnett, Rami Malek, Cillian Murphy, and Florence Pugh

Outstanding Performance by a Stunt Ensemble in a Motion Picture

• Barbie
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3
• Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny
• John Wick: Chapter 4
• Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One

Writers Guild of America

Best Original Screenplay

• Air – Alex Convery
• Barbie – Greta Gerwig & Noah Baumbach
• The Holdovers - David Hemingson
• May December – Samy Burch; story by Samy Burch & Alex Mechanik
• Past Lives – Celine Song

Best Adapted Screenplay

• American Fiction – Cord Jefferson; based on the novel Erasure by Percival Everett
• Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret. – Kelly Fremon Craig; based on the book by Judy Blume
• Killers of the Flower Moon – Eric Roth and Martin Scorsese; based on the book by David Grann
• Nyad – Julia Cox; based on the book Find a Way by Diana Nyad
• Oppenheimer – Christopher Nolan; based on the book American Prometheus by Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin

Best Documentary Screenplay

• Bella! – Jeff L. Lieberman
• It Ain't Over – Sean Mullin
• The Pigeon Tunnel – Errol Morris
• Stamped from the Beginning – David Teague; based on the book Stamped from the Beginning by Ibram X. Kendi
• What the Hell Happened to Blood, Sweat & Tears? – John Scheinfeld

American Society of Cinematographers

Winners Announced March 5

Theatrical Feature Film Nominees

• Edward Lachman, ASC for El Conde
• Matthew Libatique, ASC, LPS for Maestro
• Rodrigo Prieto, ASC, AMC for Killers of the Flower Moon
• Robbie Ryan, ISC for Poor Things
• Hoyte van Hoytema, ASC, FSF, NSC for Oppenheimer

Spotlight Award

• Eric Branco for Story Ave.
• Krum Rodriguez for Citizen Saint
• Warwick Thornton for The New Boy

Documentary Award

• Jeff Hutchens for Murder in Big Horn "Episode 1"
• Curren Sheldon for King Coal
• D. Smith for Kokomo City

American Cinema Editors

Best Edited Feature Film (Drama, Theatrical)

• Anatomy of a Fall – Laurent Sénéchal
• Killers of the Flower Moon – Thelma Schoonmaker
• Maestro – Michelle Tesoro
• Oppenheimer – Jennifer Lame
• Past Lives – Keith Fraase

Best Edited Feature Film (Comedy, Theatrical)

• Air – William Goldenberg
• American Fiction – Hilda Rasula
• Barbie – Nick Houy
• The Holdovers – Kevin Tent
• Poor Things – Yorgos Mavropsaridis

Best Edited Documentary (Theatrical)

• 20 Days in Mariupol – Michelle Mizner
• American Symphony – Sammy Dane, Matthew Heineman, Jim Hession, and Fernando Villegas
• Joan Baez: I Am a Noise – Maeve O'Boyle
• Little Richard: I Am Everything – Nyneve Minnear and Jake Hostetter
• Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie – Michael Harte

Best Edited Animated Feature Film (Theatrical or Non-Theatrical)

• Elemental – Stephen Schaffer
• Nimona – Randy Trager and Erin Crackel
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse – Michael Andrews
• The Super Mario Bros. Movie – Eric Osmond
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem – Greg Levitan

Visual Effects Society

Outstanding Visual Effects in a Photoreal Feature

• Dungeons & Dragons: Honor Among Thieves: Ben Snow, Diana Giorgiutti, Khalid Almeerani, Scott Benza, and Sam Conway
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3: Stephane Ceretti, Susan Pickett, Alexis Wajsbrot, Guy Williams, and Dan Sudick
• Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny: Andrew Whitehurst, Kathy Siegel, Robert Weaver, Julian Hutchens, and Alistair Williams
• Oppenheimer: Andrew Jackson, Mike Chambers (VES), Giacomo Mineo, Dave Drzewiecki, and Scot Fisher
• The Creator: Jay Cooper, Julian Levi, Ian Comley, Charmaine Chan, Neil Corbould (VES)

Outstanding Supporting Visual Effects in a Photoreal Feature

• John Wick: Chapter 4: Janelle Croshaw Ralla, Reina Sparks, Jonathan Rothbart, Javier Roca, and Gerd Nefzer
• Killers of the Flower Moon: Pablo Helman, Brian Barlettani, Sam Bassett , and Brandon Keys McLaughlin
• Napoleon: Charley Henley, Sarah Tulloch, Luc-Ewen Martin-Fenouillet, Simone Coco, and Neil Corbould (VES)
• Nyad: Jake Braver, Fiona Campbell Westgate, R. Christopher White, and Mohsen Mousavi
• Society of the Snow: Félix Bergés, Micaela Gagliano, Laura Pedro, Ezequiel Larrú, and Pau Costa

Outstanding Visual Effects in an Animated Feature

• Chicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget: Jon Biggins, Jim Lewis, Charles Copping, and Matthew Perry
• Elemental: Peter Sohn, Denise Ream, Sanjay Bakshi, and Stephen Marshall
• Nimona: Archie Donato, Yancy Lindquist, Theodore Ty, and Anthony Kemp
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse: Alan Hawkins, Christian Hejnal, Michael Lasker, and Matt Hausman
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem: Matthieu Rouxel, Marie Balland, Jacques Daigle, and Vincent Leroy

Outstanding Animated Character in a Photoreal Feature

• Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom (Topo the Octopus): Thomas Ward, Andrew Butler, Felix Slinger-Thompson, and Jacob Burstein
• Godzilla Minus One (Godzilla): Kosuke Taguchi and Takashi Yamazaki
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (Rocket): Nathan McConnel, Andrea De Martis, Antony Magdalinidis,and Rachel Williams
• Wonka (Oompa Loompa), Dale Newton, Kunal Ayer, Valentina Ercolani, and Gabor Foner

Outstanding Character Animation in an Animated Feature

• Elemental (Ember): Gwendelyn Enderoglu, Jared Fong, Jonathan Hoffman, and Patrick Witting
• Elemental (Wade): Max Gilbert, Jacob Kuenzel, Dave Strick, and Benjamin Su
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (Spot): Christopher Mangnall, Craig Feifarek, Humberto Rosa, and Nideep Varghese
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem (Superfly): Gregory Coelho, Anne-Claire Leroux, Simon Cuisinier, and Olivier Pierre

Outstanding Created Environment in a Photoreal Feature

• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (Knowhere): Omar Alejandro Lavrador Ibanez, Fabien Julvecourt, Klaudio Ladavac, and Benjamin Patterson
• Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny (Underwater Wreck Environment): Johan Gabrielsson, Adrian Tsang, Stefan Andersson, and Martin Eneroth
• John Wick: Chapter 4 (Place de L’Étoile): Manuel Gaudreau, Fabrice Vienne, Vignesh Ravi, and Laurent Makowski
• The Creator (Floating Village): John Seru, Guy Williams, Vincent Techer, and Timothée Maron

Outstanding Created Environment in an Animated Feature

• Chicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget (Chicken Island): Charles Copping, Matthew Perry, Jim Lewis, and Jon Biggins
• Elemental (Element City): Chris Bernardi, Brandon Montell, David Shavers, and Ting Zhang
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (Mumbattan City): Taehyun Park, YJ Lee, Pepe Orozco, and Kelly Han
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem (Midtown Manhattan): Olivier Mitonneau, Eddy Frechou, Guillaume Chevet, and Arnaud Philippe-Giraux

Outstanding Virtual Cinematography in a CG Project

• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3: Joanna Davison, Cheyana Wilkinson, Michael Cozens, and Jason Desjarlais
• Migration: Guylo Homsy, Damien Bapst, Antoine Collet, and David Dangin
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse: Rich Turner, Randolph Lizarda, Daniela Campos Little, and Thomas Campos
• The Creator: Roel Coucke, Christopher Potter, Amanda Johnstone-Batt, and Jeremy Bloch

Outstanding Model in a Photoreal or Animated Project

• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 (The Arête): Kenneth Johansson, Jason Galeon, Tim Civil, and Artur Vil
• Peter Pan & Wendy (Jolly Roger): Patrick Comtois, Thomas Gallardo, Harrison Stark, and David Thibodeau
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (Spider HQ): Dongick David Sheen, Mark JeongWoong Lee, Mikaela Bantog, and René Völker
• The Creator (Nomad): Oliver Kane, Mat Monro, Florence Green, and Serban Ungureanu

Outstanding Effects Simulations in a Photoreal Feature

• Napoleon: Koen Hofmeester, Gianmichele Mariani, Clair Bellens, and Hernan Llano Duque
• Nyad (Stormy Waters) Korbinian Meier, Sindy Saalfeld, David Michielsen, and Andreas Vrhovsek
• The Creator: Ludovic Ramisandraina, Raul Essig, Mathieu Chardonnet, and Lewis Taylor
• The Nun 2: Laurent Creusot, Sebastien Podsiadlo, Michael Moercant, and Benjamin Saurine

Outstanding Effects Simulations in an Animated Feature

• Elemental: Kristopher Campbell, Greg Gladstone, Jon Reisch, and Kylie Wijsmuller
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse: Pav Grochola, Filippo Maccari, Naoki Kato, and Nicola Finizio
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem: Louis Marsaud, Paul-Etienne Bourde, Serge Martin, and Marine Pommereul
• The Super Mario Bros. Movie: Simon Pate, Christophe Vazquez, and Milo Riccarand

Outstanding Composition and Lighting in a Feature

• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3: Indah Maretha, Beck Veitch, Nathan Abbot, and Steve McGillen
• John Wick: Chapter 4 (Apartment Massacre Videogame Style): Javier Roca, Julien Forest, Thomas Bourdis, and Dominik Kirouac
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse: Bret St.Clair, Kieron Cheuk-Chi Lo, Kelly Christophers, and Rowan Young
• The Creator (Bar): Phil Prates, Min Kim, Nisarg Suthar, and Toshiko Miura
• The Creator (Spaceships): Ben O-Brien, Juan Espigares Enriquez, Wesley Roberts, and Hayes Brien

Outstanding Special (Practical) Effects in a Photoreal Project

• I’m a Virgo: John McLeod, Scott Kirvan, Alec Gillis, and Carl Miller
• Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One: Neil Corbould (VES), Ray Ferguson, Keith Dawson, and Chris Motjuoadi
• Oppenheimer: Scott Fisher, James Rollins, and Mario Vanillo
• Society of the Snow: Pau Costa, Carlos Laguna, Guillermo F. Aldunate, and Eloy Cervera

Emerging Technology Award

• Blue Beetle (Machine Learning Cloth): JohnMark Gibbons, Allen Ruilova, Momme Carl, and David Minor
• Elemental (Volumetric Neural Style Transfer): Vinicius C. Azevedo, Byungsoo Kim, Raphael Ortiz, and Paul Kanyuk
• The Flash (Volumetric Capture): Stephan Trojansky, Thomas Ganshorn, Oliver Pilarski, and Lukas Lepicovsky
• Wish (Dynamic Screen Space Textures for Coherent Stylization): Brent Burley, Daniel Teece, and Brian J. Green

Motion Pictures Sound Editors

Outstanding Achievement in Sound Editing - Feature Animation

• Elemental
• Migration
• Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse
• The Super Mario Bros. Movie

Outstanding Achievement in Sound Editing - Feature Documentary

• 32 Sounds
• American Symphony
• Mourning in Lod
• Still: A Michael J Fox Movie
• Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour

Outstanding Achievement in Sound Editing - Foreign Language Feature

• Anatomy of a Fall
• The Zone of Interest
• Godzilla Minus One
• Society of the Snow

Outstanding Achievement in Sound Editing - Feature Dialogue ADR

• Barbie
• Killers of the Flower Moon
• Maestro
• Napoleon
• Oppenheimer
• Poor Things

Outstanding Achievement in Sound Editing - Feature Effects/Foley

• Gran Turismo
• Ferarri
• John Wick Chapter Four
• Napoleon
• Oppenheimer
• The Killer

Outstanding Achievement in Music Editing - Documentary

• American Symphony
• Pianoforte
• Still: A Michael J Fox Story
• WHAM!

Outstanding Achievement in Music Editing - Feature Motion Picture

• Barbie
• Creed III
• Maestro
• Oppenheimer
• Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse
• Wonka

Cinema Audio Society

Motion Picture: Live Action

• Barbie - Nina Rice (Production Mixer), Kevin O’Connell (Re-Recording Mixer), Ai-Ling Lee (Re-Recording Mixer), Peter Cobbin (Scoring Mixer), Kirsty Whalley (Scoring Mixer), Bobby Johanson (ADR Mixer), Kevin Schultz (Foley Mixer)
  
• Ferrari - Lee Orloff (Production Mixer), Andy Nelson (Production Mixer), Tony Lamberti (Re-Recording Mixer), Luke Schwarzweller (Re-Recording Mixer), Andrew Dudman (Scoring Mixer), Matthew Wood (ADR Mixer), Giorgi Lekishvili (Foley Mixer)
  
• Killers of the Flower Moon - Mark Ulano (Production Mixer), Tom Fleischman (Re-Recording Mixer), Eugene Gearty (Re-Recording Mixer), George A. Lara (Foley Mixer)
  
• Maestro - Steven A. Morrow (Production Mixer), Tom Ozanich (Re-Recording Mixer), Dean A. Zupancic (Re-Recording Mixer), Nick Baxter (Scoring Mixer), Bobby Johanson (ADR Mixer), Walter Spencer (Foley Mixer)
  
• Oppenheimer Willie D. Burton (Production Mixer), Gary A. Rizzo (Re-Recording Mixer), Kevin O’Connell (Re-Recording Mixer), Chris Fogel (Scoring Mixer), Tavish Grade (Foley Mixer), Jack Cucci (Foley Mixer), Mikel Parraga-Wills (Foley Mixer)
  

Motion Picture: Animated

• Elemental - Vince Caro (Original Dialogue Mixer), Paul McGrath (Original Dialogue Mixer), Stephen Urata (Re-Recording Mixer), Ren Klyce (Re-Recording Mixer), Thomas Vicari (Scoring Mixer), Scott Curtis (Foley Mixer)
  
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse - Brian Smith (Original Dialogue Mixer), Aaron Hasson (Original Dialogue Mixer), Howard London (Original Dialogue Mixer), Michael Semanick (Re-Recording Mixer), Juan Peralta (Re-Recording Mixer), Sam Okell (Scoring Mixer), Randy K. Singer (Foley Mixer)
  
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem - Doc Kane (Original Dialogue Mixer), Michael Semanick (Re-Recording Mixer), Mark Mangini (Re-Recording Mixer), Trent Reznor (Scoring Mixer), Atticus Ross (Scoring Mixer), Chris Cirino (ADR Mixer), Chelsea Body(Foley Mixer)
  
• The Boy and the Heron – Kôji Kasamatsu (Original Dialogue & Re-Recording Mixer)
  
• The Super Mario Brothers Movie - Carlos Sotolongo (Original Dialogue Mixer), Pete Horner (Re-Recording Mixer), Juan Peralta (Re-Recording Mixer), Casey Stone (Scoring Mixer), Doc Kane (ADR Mixer), Richard Durante (Foley Mixer)
  

Motion Picture: Documentary

• 32 Sounds - Laura Cunningham (Production Mixer), Mark Mangini (Re-Recording Mixer), Ben Greenberg (Scoring Mixer), Bobby Johanson (ADR Mixer), Blake Collins (Foley Mixer)
  
• American Symphony - Tom Paul (Re-Recording Mixer), Tristan Baylis (Re-Recording Mixer), Ryan Collison (Foley Mixer),
  
• Little Richard: I Am Everything - Tom Paul (Re-Recording Mixer)
  
• Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie - Skip Lievsay (Re-Recording Mixer), Paul Urmson (Re-Recording Mixer), Joel Dougherty (Re-Recording Mixer), John Michael Caldwell (Scoring Mixer), Micah Blaichman (Foley Mixer
  
• Taylor Swift: The Eras Tour - Jacob Farron Smith (Production Mixer), John Ross (Re-Recording Mixer), David Payne (Re-Recording Mixer), Christopher Rowe (Re-Recording Mixer)
  

Casting Society of America

Feature Animation

• Elemental (Disney): Natalie Lyon, Kevin Reher, Kate Hansen-Birnbaum (Associate Casting Director)
• Leo (Netflix): Danielle Aufiero, Amber Horn
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse (Sony): Mary Hidalgo
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem (Paramount): Rich Delia, Adam Richards (Associate Casting Director)
• Wish (Disney): Grace C. Kim

Feature Big Budget - Comedy

• Air (Amazon Studios): Mary Vernieu, Lindsay Graham Ahanonu, Sydney Shircliff (Associate Casting Director)
• Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret (Searchlight): Francine Maisler, Melissa Kostenbauder, Betsy Fippinger (Location Casting), Tara Feldstein (Location Casting), Chase Paris (Location Casting), Molly Rose (Associate Casting Director)
• Asteroid City (Focus Features): Douglas Aibel, Jina Jay (Location Casting), Matthew Glasner (Associate Casting Director)
• Cocaine Bear (Paramount): Debra Zane, Dylan Jury, Alli Coffey (Location Casting)
• Wonka (Warner Bros.): Nina Gold

Feature Big Budget - Drama

• The Color Purple (Warner Bros.): Bernard Telsey, Tiffany Little Canfield, Destiny Lilly
• Maestro (Netflix): Shayna Markowitz, Dayna Katz (Associate Casting Director)
• Killers of the Flower Moon (Apple): Ellen Lewis, Rene Haynes, Kate Sprance (Associate Casting Director)
• Oppenheimer (Universal): John Papsidera
• Saltburn (Amazon Studios): Kharmel Cochrane

Feature Studio or Independent - Comedy

• American Fiction (Amazon Studios): Jennifer Euston, Lisa Lobel (Location Casting), Angela Peri (Location Casting), Melissa Morris (Associate Casting Director)
• Bottoms (Amazon Studios): Laura Rosenthal, Maribeth Fox, Meagan Lewis (Location Casting), Kimberly Ostroy (Associate Casting Director)
• The Holdovers (Focus Features): Susan Shopmaker, Lisa Lobel (Location Casting), Angela Peri (Location Casting), Melissa Morris (Associate Casting Director)
• Joy Ride (Lionsgate): Rich Delia, Kara Eide (Location Casting), Kris Woznesensky (Location Casting), Adam Richards (Associate Casting Director)
• Theater Camp (Searchlight): Kristian Charbonier, Bernard Telsey

Feature Studio or Independent - Drama

• The Iron Claw (A24): Susan Shopmaker, Brent Caballero (Location Casting)
• May December (Netflix): Laura Rosenthal, Meagan Lewis (Location Casting), Rebecca Carfagna (Location Casting), Kimberly Ostroy (Associate Casting Director)
• Past Lives (A24): Ellen Chenoweth, Susanne Scheel
• Priscilla (A24): Nicole Daniels, Courtney Bright, John Buchan, Jason Knight
• Rustin (Netflix): Avy Kaufman, Donna Belajac (Location Casting), Missy Finnell (Location Casting), Scotty Anderson (Associate Casting Director)

Feature Low Budget - Comedy or Drama

• Birth/Rebirth (IFC Films): Allison Twardziak, Danielle Pretsfelder Demchick
• Emily (Warner Bros.): Fiona Weir
• Jules (Bleecker Street): Avy Kaufman
• Memory (Ketchup Entertainment): Susan Shopmaker
• Monica (IFC Films): Emily Schweber, D. Lynn Meyers (Location Casting)

Feature Micro Budget - Comedy or Drama

• The Donor Party (Vertical): Anthony J. Kraus
• How I Learned to Fly (Film Movement): Jessica Sherman
• Summoning Sylvia (The Horror Collective): Steven Tylor O’Connor
• What Comes Around (IFC Films): Eyde Belasco, Jeff Johnson (Location Casting)
• Your Lucky Day (Well Go USA Entertainment): Jessica Sherman

The Zeitgeist Award

• Barbie (Warner Bros.): Lucy Bevan, Olivia Grant (Associate Casting Director)
• The Flash (Warner Bros.): Rich Delia, Kate Ringsell, Adam Richards (Associate Casting Director)
• The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes (Lionsgate): Debra Zane, Dylan Jury, Simone Bär (Location Casting)
• Rebel Moon: Part One – A Child of Fire (Netflix): Kristy Carlson, Jeanette Benzie (Associate Casting Director)
• Transformers: Rise of the Beasts (Paramount Pictures): Wittney Horton, additional voice casting by Ruth Lambert and Robert McGee, Eve Streger (Associate Casting Director)

Art Directors Guild

Excellence in Production Design for a Contemporary Film

• Beau Is Afraid – Fiona Crombie
• John Wick: Chapter 4 – Kevin Kavanaugh
• The Killer – Donald Graham Burt
• Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One – Gary Freeman
• Saltburn – Suzie Davies

Excellence in Production Design for a Period Film

• Asteroid City – Adam Stockhausen
• Killers of the Flower Moon – Jack Fisk
• Maestro – Kevin Thompson
• Napoleon – Arthur Max
• Oppenheimer – Ruth De Jong

Excellence in Production Design for a Fantasy Film

• Barbie – Sarah Greenwood
• The Creator – James Clyne
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 – Beth Mickle
• Poor Things – James Price and Shona Heath
• Wonka – Nathan Crowley

Excellence in Production Design for an Animated Film

• The Boy and the Heron – Yôji Takeshige
• Elemental – Don Shank
• Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse – Patrick O'Keefe
• The Super Mario Bros. Movie – Guillaume Aretos
• Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem – Yashar Kassai

Guild of Music Supervisors

Best Music Supervision for Film Budgeted Over $25 Million

• The Holdovers
• My Big Fat Greek Wedding 3
• They Cloned Tyrone
• Barbie
• Maestro
• Saltburn
• Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse
• Are You There God? Its Me, Margaret
• Wonka
• Air

Best Music Supervision for Film Budgeted $25 Million And Under

• The Iron Claw
• Jesus Revolution
• All of Us Strangers
• Polite Society
• Flamin' Hot
• Joy Ride

Best Music Supervision for Film Budgeted $10 Million And Under

• Aristotle and Dante Discover the Secrets of the Universe
• Brother
• Past Lives
• Somewhere in Queens
• Eileen
• War Pony
• Paint
• Theater Camp

Best Music Supervision for a Non-Theatrically Released Film

• Change Can Dunk (TIE)
• Please Don’t Destroy: The Treasure of Foggy Mountain
• Rye Lane
• Sitting in Bars With Cake
• Family Switch
• Totally Killer (TIE)
• A Million Miles Away
• Heist 88
• Praise This

Best Song Written and/or Recorded for a Film

• Spiderman: Across the Spiderverse (Am I Dreaming) - Mike Dean, Peter Lee Johnson, Rakim Mayers, Roisee, Leland Wayne, and Landon Wayne
• Theater Camp (Camp Isn't Home) - Noah Galvin, Molly Gordon, Nick Lieberman, Ben Platt, and Mark Sonnenblick
• The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes (Can't Catch Me Now) - Dan Nigro and Olivia Rodrigo
• Barbie (I'm Just Ken) - Mark Ronson and Andrew Wyatt
• American Symphony (It Never Went Away) - Jon Batiste and Dan Wilson
• Joy Ride (Juicy) - Isak Alvedahl, Kirubel Swedin, and Sandra Wikstrom
• Totally Killer (Little Bit 'O Soul) - John Carter and Kenneth Hawker
• Past Lives (Quiet Eyes) - Zachary Dawes and Sharon Van Etten
• Rustin (Road to Freedom) - Lenny Kravitz
• Barbie (What I Was Made For) - Billie Eilish O’Connell, Finneas O’Connell*

Costume Designers Guild

Excellence in Contemporary Film

• American Fiction – Rudy Mance
• May December – April Napier
• Nyad – Kelli Jones
• Renfield – Lisa Lovaas
• Saltburn – Sophie Canale

Excellence in Period Film

• Killers of the Flower Moon – Jacqueline West
• Maestro – Mark Bridges
• Napoleon – Janty Yates & Dave Crossman
• Oppenheimer – Ellen Mirojnick
• Poor Things – Holly Waddington

Excellence in Sci-Fi/Fantasy Film

• Barbie – Jacqueline Durran
• Haunted Mansion – Jeffrey Kurland
• The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes – Trish Summerville
• The Little Mermaid – Colleen Atwood & Christine Cantella
• Rebel Moon – Part One: A Child of Fire – Stephanie Porter

Excellence in Costume Illustration

• 1923: War and the Turquoise Tide – Maggie S. Chan
• Haunted Mansion – Barbra Araujo
• The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Song Songbirds & Snakes – Oksana Nedavniaya
• Loki: 1893 – Felipe Sanchez
• Rebel Moon – Part One: A Child of Fire – Jason Pastrana

Make-Up Artists and Hair Stylists Guild

Best Contemporary Make-up

• Candy Cane Lane - Tym Shutchai Buacharern, Michele Lewis, Jennifer Zide-Essex, Yvettra Grantham
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 - Jane Galli, Personal
• The Haunted Mansion - Kimberly Jones, Dionne Wynn, Bridgit Crider, Carla VanNessa Wallace
• NYAD - Felicity Bowring, Ann Maree Hurley, Julie Hewett, Mahar Lessner
• Saltburn - Siân Miller, Laura Allen

Best Period and/or Character Makeup

• Barbie - Ivana Primorac, Victoria Down, Maha Mimo
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 3 - Alexei Dmitriew, Nicole Sortillon, Amos Samantha Ward, LuAndra Whitehurs
• Maestro - Siann Grigg, Jackie Risotto, Elisa Tallerico, Nicky Pattison-Illum
• Oppenheimer - Luisa Abel, Jason Hamer, Kerrin Jackson, Jamie Loree Hess
• Poor Things - Nadia Stacey

Best Special Makeup Effects

• Golda - Karen Thomas, Eva Susanna Johnson Theodosiou
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 - Alexei Dmitriew, Lindsay MacGowen, Shane Mahan, Scott Stoddard
• Maestro - Kazu Hiro, Sian Grigg, Duncan Jarman, Mike Mekash
• Poor Things - Nadia Stacey, Mark Coulier
• Rebel Moon: Part One – A Child of Fire - Ozzy Alvarez, Justin Raleigh, Kelsey Berk, Jonathan Shroyer

Best Contemporary Hair Styling

• Candy Cane Lane - Yvette Shelton, Shian Banks, Stacey Morris, Maisha Oliver
• Joyride - Jeannie Chow, Kim Lee
• NYAD - Daniel Curet, Vanessa Columbo, Enzo Angileri, Darlene Brumfeld
• Pain Hustlers - Michelle Johnson, Dennis Bailey
• Saltburn - Siân Miller, Laura Allen

Best Period Hair Styling and/or Character Hair Styling

• Barbie - Ivana Primorac, Marie Larkin, Clare Corsick
• Chevalier - Roo Maurice, Francesco Pegoretti
• The Color Purple - Lawrence Davis, Andrea Mona Bowman, Tym Wallace
• Guardians of The Galaxy Vol. 3 - Cassandra Lyn Russek, Stephanie Fenner, Peter Tothpal, Connie Criswell
• Maestro - Kay Georgiou, Lori McCoy-Bell, Jameson Eaton, Amanda Duffy-Evans

Society of Composers and Lyricists

Outstanding Original Score For a Studio Film

• Anthony Willis - Saltburn
• Joe Hisaishi - The Boy and the Heron
• Ludwig Göransson - Oppenheimer
• Laura Karpman - American Fiction
• Robbie Robertson - Killers of the Flower Moon

Outstanding Original Score For an Independent Film

• Jon Batiste - American Symphony
• John Powell - Still: A Michael J. Fox Movie
• Daniel Pemberton - Ferrari
• Mica Levi - The Zone of Interest
• Fabrizio Mancinelli and Richard M. Sherman - Mushka

Outstanding Original Song For a Drama or Documentary

• Olivia Rodrigo and Dan Nigro - Can’t Catch Me Now (Hunger Games: Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes)
• Jon Batiste and Dan Wilson - It Never Went Away(American Symphony)
• Lenny Kravitz - Road to Freedom (Rustin)
• Nicholas Britell and Taura Stinson - Slip Away (Carmen)
• Sharon Farber and Noah Benshea - Better Times (Jacob the Baker)

Outstanding Original Song For a Comedy or Musical

• Billie Eilish O’Connell and Finneas O’Connell - What Was I Made For? (Barbie)
• Mark Ronson and Andrew Wyatt - I’m Just Ken (Barbie)
• Diane Warren - The Fire Inside (Flamin' Hot)
• Heather McIntosh, Allyson Newman and Taura Stinson - All About Me (The L-Word)
• Jack Black, John Spiker, Eric Osmond, Michael Jelenic, and Aaron Horvath - Peaches (Super Mario Bros. Movie)

David Raksin Award for Emerging Talent

• Kenny Wood - The Naughty Nine
• Hannah Parrott - After Death
• Fabrizio Mancinelli - The Land of Dreams
• Catherine Joy - Home Is A Hotel
• Allyson Newman - Commitment to Life

Set Decorators Society of America

Best Achievement in DécoDesign of a Contemporary Feature Film

• The Killer – Brandi Kalish (Set Decoration); Donald Graham Burt (Production Design)
• Leave the World Behind – David Schlesinger (Set Decoration); Anastasia White (Production Design)
• May December – Jess Royal (Set Decoration); Sam Lisenco (Production Design)
• Mission: Impossible – Dead Reckoning Part One – Raffaella Giovannetti (Set Decoration); Gary Freeman (Production Design)
• Saltburn – Charlotte Dirickx (Set Decoration); Suzie Davies (Production Design)

Best Achievement in DécoDesign of a Period Feature Film

• Killers of the Flower Moon – Adam Willis (Set Decoration); Jack Fisk (Production Design)
• Maestro – Rena DeAngelo (Set Decoration); Kevin Thompson (Production Design)
• Napoleon – Elli Griff (Set Decoration); Arthur Max (Production Design)
• Oppenheimer – Claire Kaufman (Set Decoration); Ruth De Jong (Production Design)
• Poor Things – Zsuzsa Mihalek (Set Decoration); Shona Heath & James Price (Production Design)

Best Achievement in DécoDesign of a Science Fiction or Fantasy Feature Film

• Barbie – Katie Spencer (Set Decoration); Sarah Greenwood (Production Design)
• Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 3 – Rosemary Brandenburg (Set Decoration); Beth Mickle (Production Design)
• The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes – Sabine Schaaf (Set Decoration); Uli Hanisch (Production Design)
• Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny – Anna Pinnock (Set Decoration); Adam Stockhausen (Production Design)
• Wonka – Lee Sandales (Set Decoration); Nathan Crowley (Production Design)

Best Achievement in DécoDesign of a Comedy or Musical Feature Film

• American Fiction – Kyra Friedman Curcio (Set Decoration); Jonathan Guggenheim (Production Design)
• Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret. – Selina M. Van den Brink (Set Decoration); Steve Saklad (Production Design)
• Asteroid City – Kris Moran (Set Decoration); Adam Stockhausen (Production Design)
• Candy Cane Lane – Jan Pascale (Set Decoration); Aaron Osborne (Production Design)
• The Little Mermaid – Gordon Sim (Set Decoration); John Myhre (Production Design)