It's legit. It's not "just a fan-theory".
From as far back as 2013 and as recent as 2022 the author has talked about it. I speed-ran through all of the author's Narou Blog Posts, used the advanced search feature on X, and noted down the links containing useful information that I found. I hope you find this informative.

1. THE AUTHOR REFERS TO IT MOSTLY IN THREE DIFFERENT WAYS

In this tweet from 2022, he talked about the title of this future story itself being still undecided. Here he casually termed it as "the story of 80 years since Mushoku Tensei", he also called it "the last story in Six-Faced World", but the most often way the author referred to it—and the way the Japanese fanbase mostly called%22%20%E7%84%A1%E8%81%B7&src=typed_query&f=top) it—is "the main story (temporary title)" [本編(仮)] or just "the main story".

2. DESPITE BEING CALLED THE MAIN STORY, MUSHOKU TENSEI IS NOT "THE PREQUEL" OF "A MAIN STORY", AND THE SO-CALLED MAIN STORY IS NOT "THE SEQUEL" OF MUSHOKU TENSEI

This reddit post has excellently talked about Mushoku Tensei being the main story of its own. Even the author himself has tweeted, "The main story of Mushoku Tensei is Mushoku Tensei."
Rifujin-sensei has an aversion of calling it a sequel. Here he elaborated that the story will not be a sequel of Mushoku Tensei. In this tweet he talked about the story not being a continuation of Rudeus' story, although certain characters from Mushoku Tensei will appear since they're directly related to Hitogami's defeat but he insisted it's not the continuation of it. Here he even said he will not write a Mushoku Tensei's sequel.
A fan here compared it to how Fate isn't the sequel of Tsukihime despite being in the same universe, and the author concurred . It's just like how Old Dragon's Tale, Kingdragon King's Subjugation, and Mushoku Tensei are all set in the same universe but aren't prequel/sequel of each other.

3. CHARACTERS FROM MUSHOKU TENSEI THAT WILL APPEAR IN "THE MAIN STORY (TEMPORARY TITLE)"

I think we can infer about which characters would most likely appear based on the chapter The Final Dream in Mushoku Tensei's final volume (since they're directly related to Hitogami's defeat as the author said). However, he kept it vague about how important they would be to the plot itself.
Here he confirmed that Lara Greyrat will appear, but he doesn't even know the story yet since he hasn't began writing it.
In this blog post from 2015, he talked about how he thought Luicellia might appear again in the story set 80 years into the future. He said as a character she was already created even before Norn and Ruijerd. She was described as a beautiful demon girl who is taciturn and straightforward, quick to kill her opponents, but also hardworking, earnest, and single-minded. Considering it's still a concept, her character traits might change (not to mention the traits themselves included being the last Superd).
How about Nanahoshi then? Is she perhaps the main character of the last story?

4. NANAHOSHI SHIZUKA IS NOT THE PROTAGONIST OF "THE MAIN STORY (TEMPORARY TITLE)"

I know certain section of fanbase are believers of this theory, but the author has debunked that idea in this blog post from as far back as May 2013. Someone said they heard it from somewhere that Nanahoshi will be the protagonist of "the main story", and Rifujin-sensei answered that it's a hoax—Nanahoshi is not the protagonist.
What about the Akihito guy then? Good-looking sporty teenage, a summoned hero, managed to charm the unique Blessed Child in his short isekai life the first time, and will possibly have his own harem considering he's perhaps also Nanahoshi's love interest. The planned story of him literally screams "I'm the main character of power trip shonen fantasy", but is he? Well...

5. SHINOHARA AKIHITO IS NOT THE PROTAGONIST OF "THE MAIN STORY (TEMPORARY TITLE)"

You read that right. I don't know if a lot of you believe he is, because I most definitely did. I even (guiltily) spread misinformation that I believe he's the protagonist because I genuinely thought he was.
Then... I discovered this blog post.
Someone asked Rifujin-sensei in early 2015, "Could it be that 'Shinohara Akihito' is actually the main protagonist of Mushoku Tensei? I thought Rudeus was the protagonist who changes the future, but if it turns out that Shinohara Akihito is the true protagonist and Rudeus is merely a pawn, then I feel really sorry for Rudeus." To which, the author replied, "The protagonist of the main story (temporary title) is a different person."
The author added that he also had a story concept where Akihito is the protagonist, but he felt that the story ultimately wouldn't differ much from Rudeus' own so he scrapped it.
Now for the million dollar questionL who is the protagonist? Probably an entirely new guy, but I have a theory.
Kuroki Seiji couldn't get over what happened to him ten years ago. On that fateful day, he would have been died if not for a savior pushing him out of the road when a Truck that lost control almost hit him. His savior was tragically died in his stead, but the stranger thing was the fact that his friends, Shinohara Akihito and Nanahoshi Shizuka, vanished out of thin air. That experience led to him being approached by a secretive magical society he didn't know exist wanting to hear about the "unnatural situation". Ten years later having joined the society and gained various magical knowledge, he stared down at the magic circle he drew after countless research, believing it would deliver him to wherever his best friends have been disappearing to. Closing his eyes and taking a deep breath, he activated the magic circle.
Alright, sorry please ignore my baseless fanfiction idea.
What I know is that in The Final Dream, there are two "Asian-looking" guys among the party that defeated Hitogami. There is a teenage guy who looked to be good at sport, and there is an older guy in his twenties or thirty who noticed Rudeus first and bowed to him. Is the teenage guy Akihito? Probably, but who is the older guy? Is he perhaps the protagonist? Maybe my fanfiction idea isn't so baseless after all (I'm joking).

6. WHEN WILL THE AUTHOR WRITE "THE MAIN STORY (TEMPORARY TITLE)"?

It's not like it's definitive that he will definitely write it, but lucky for us at least he confirms the plan to write it is genuine, he just needs to prioritize other things first.
Like in this blog post from 2021, he give a blueprint of his main priorities for the foreseeable future.

1. Work hard on anime-related projects.
2. Also work hard on publishing books since they need to be released around the same time.
3. Progress the Orc story bit by bit in between.
4. Once 1 and 2 are settled, continue the Orc story to its conclusion.
5. Heal my shoulders, neck, and eyes.
6. Write the final story of the Six-Faced World.

However, there could be a change of plan in between. Back in 2016, his preference was said to write "the main story" last, and there are also multiple other posts where he said there are more Mushoku Tensei-related stories he also planned to write.
For instance, in an April 2015 blog post this is the list of the stories he planned to tell each as a standalone:

• The story of Shinohara Akihito and Kuroki Seiji
• Young Perugius-sama's wild days (the Laplace War story)
• The old tales of Kishirika and Badigadi (the Second Human-Demon War)
• The life of Ancient God
• Mysteries related to Hitogami and the Dragon Tribe
• The story of Fangs of the Black Wolf
• How Lara and Leo become legendary saviors
• What ultimately happened to Nanahoshi
• Norn-chan's heartwarming school days

Both the Ancient God one and the Mysteries of Hitogami x Dragon Tribe have since been told in Old Dragon's Tale. In this one post there seems to be a planned 11 chaps story outline about Kishirika with Badigadi but was probably scrapped, however a Badigadi's POV from that era has been told as extra chapter in LN Vol. 23. As for the Akihito x Seiji one, I don't know why the author wants to write specifically about the duo. Akihito is understandable since he will definitely be a in the story, but Seiji is supposedly the unimportant one left behind. Hmm, maybe my fanfic—Sorry!
In different posts he talked about wanting to write the reason why Hitogami became so rotten, or about the rewrite version of the notorious Aisha x Arus arc (the relationship is canon, sorry denials), or about Orsted's POV in his previous loops.
Back to the point.
I can only trace the mention of this future story as far back as May 2013 (the Nanahoshi answer one), but it's obvious he already talked about it even before that (considering that post shows someone was already informed about this "main story"). Maybe he first mentioned it in a domestic socmed he used before migrating to Twitter, or there's information from older posts that I missed.
Rifujin-sensei tweeted this as recently as September 2022, here he confirmed he still sticks to his plan of writing "the story about 80 years after Mushoku Tensei" when the Mushoku Tensei anime and Orc's Hero Story both conclude, with rough time estimation being between 2025-2030.
https://preview.redd.it/m6yrmk46gl0d1.png?width=311&format=png&auto=webp&s=82af552ceec8e0aab8014134001fc5b0ea1d598a
Finger crossed, let's look forward to this in a few years.

Hi all,
I am renting a build-to-rent flat directly from its developer, my contract is May 2024- May 2025. I have pre-settled status (BNO) so I don't need to worry about visa expiry etc.
However, my partner is on a student visa set to expire in Jan 2025. He will either apply for a PSW visa or partner visa depending on our future circumstances, but he will be moving in with me shortly in August 2024. I need to add him to my lease as per the developeLL's requirement.
My question is: will his visa status affect his right to rent check? Will the LL refuse to add him to the lease, since his current visa will expire before the lease does?
Thank you!

The people involved (names are changed):
Jake – me
Tom – my flatmate
Kath – Tom’s girlfriend
Emily – Kath’s flatmate
TLDR (but context is very important for how the situation develops):
· Me and Emily get with each other at a party.
· It turns out Kath had forbidden Emily from getting with me. Since Emily went and did it anyway, Kath falls out with her.
· Kath ends her friendship with Emily. Me and Emily continue seeing each other.
· When I plan to go to see Emily at their apartment, Tom tells me that Kath is in a really dark place mentally, and the thought of me and Emily being there together while Kath’s there is triggering her anxiety, so he asks me not to go over.
· Me and Emily follow these instructions for months, while Tom and Kath continue coming and going to either of our apartments as they please.
· Emily eventually gets in touch with Kath to try and understand exactly why me coming over is an issue, since Kath has no problem coming to my place. Kath has a meltdown due to this and it makes her suicidal.
· Tom falls out with me because I knew about the messages that caused his girlfriend to feel suicidal.
(Skip to 'Late April' if you want to go straight to the crux of this post, but I do think it's quite an entertaining read).
Background Context
Me and Tom (both mid-twenties) have lived together in our apartment since I moved to the city last year. I’ve known him for several years and would put him in my inner circle of closest friends, so living with him was all just good chill vibes as expected - or at least it was for the first six months.
I met Tom’s girlfriend of several months, Kath, for the first time pretty soon after moving in. Although she was kind of shy, I thought she seemed nice enough. I noticed that Kath would seem to lean on Tom a fair amount when it came to support for her mental health (she had been diagnosed with anxiety), which of course is normal as her boyfriend. On one occasion, she had a particularly bad anxious episode during a group hangout, with Tom consoling her about it afterwards. Following this, Tom seemed exhausted, saying to me “I’m not a professional, I’m not equipped to deal with all this mental health stuff. She needs help from someone who can adequately help her deal with these thoughts. When she blows things out of proportion and she stresses out to me about her anxiety, it just ends up making my own anxiety worse”. He also said that he had even offered to pay for therapy for Kath, but she didn’t want to accept it.
I just felt bad for Tom, especially since I had some understanding of what he was going through. I had previously had a girlfriend who had anxiety/depression/BPD and put all her mental health issues on me. That girlfriend was also very manipulative and would mention suicidal thoughts any time she started feeling like she was losing control over me (just to be clear, there was no indication that Kath was acting in a manipulative way towards Tom at that point). In my experience, when you end up in a situation where you’re essentially acting as someone’s full-time personal mental health counsellor, it hardly ever ends well.
At some point in January, I met Kath’s “bestie” flatmate, Emily. I remember thinking she was cute, seemed nice and easy to talk to. We all hung out as a group a few times that month and I thought there may have been a little bit of a vibe between me and Emily.
So as you do, I slid into Emily’s DMs and basically let her know I was interested. I messaged her a week or two before our party that her and Kath were coming to, but her response was lukewarm so I just thought she probably wasn’t interested.
For context, I had recently broken up with my girlfriend in January, who had just got back from travelling for the last 6 months. Things in that relationship weren’t great before she even went travelling, and during the months she was away I had come to terms with the fact that it was best to end it. I waited until she was back to say it in person, as I didn’t want to drop that on her while she was travelling and ruin that once in a lifetime experience. However, deep down I knew I had wanted talk to other girls and explore new connections for the last few months, but obviously I didn’t want talk to anyone until it was cleanly over. Me messaging Emily was only a few days after breaking up with her, which I guess isn’t great, but in my head I had been ready to move on for a while, I saw no point in putting an arbitrary time limit on myself. I made sure to explain this context when I messaged Emily so that she was aware of my recent circumstances.
The Party (End of January)
So me and Emily end up getting with each other at the party. Initially, when I brought up me messaging her, she said “I think you’re cute, but I think it’s best we just be friends for the next couple months, since you just recently got out of a relationship, and we can see what happens afterwards”. But as the night went on, I guess Emily changed her mind, because as we kept talking it got increasingly flirty and we ended up getting together. Perfect end to the night, right? Not exactly.
At one point when Emily goes to the bathroom, she comes back into my bedroom saying “Kath is furious at me”. I ask why, and she says that Kath had basically forbidden her from getting with me.
Back when I first messaged Emily, she had of course shown Kath the messages straight away. It turns out Kath for some reason had a really intense reaction to this and was like “I can’t believe he has the audacity to hit on my best friend right after breaking up with his girlfriend! It’s so disrespectful using you as a rebound, it’s disrespectful to his ex and it’s disrespectful to me for hitting on my best friend like this! He was the only one of Tom’s friends that I actually liked but he’s ruined that too now!”.
Apparently, Kath had been used as a rebound before and this was triggering for her, so she didn’t want her best friend to be used as a rebound. She said “you can’t get with him, Emily, that’s my boundary.” Emily was a bit taken aback by the intensity of this reaction and was just a bit like “umm okay…?”. She tried a few times before the party to understand a bit more about why Kath had such a problem with it but didn’t get much further explanation than that.
Now, I agree that Emily was in the wrong for saying to Kath that she wouldn’t get with me and then went and did it anyway, and Emily also acknowledges this. Emily should have said from the start she wasn’t okay with this weird “boundary” Kath had set. It was a bit cowardly. Although given how intensely Kath overreacts to things, I can understand why Emily initially just agreed to whatever she was saying to calm her down. I can also understand how when you’re at a party having fun, drinking and realise that you do actually have a good vibe with the person, in the moment you might change your mind and be like “actually fuck that, who the fuck is she to tell me who I can and can’t get with?”.
Kath saw this as Emily having no respect for their friendship, by choosing some guy she’d just met over her. From Emily’s perspective she was choosing herself, choosing not to follow these nonsensical rules that had been imposed on her, and she was just tired of Kath overreacting to everything and trying to control her.
In my opinion, being this controlling for no good reason is pretty disrespectful in itself. Given that Kath’s reason for telling Emily not to get with me was because she didn’t want her to be used as a rebound…well that’s Emily’s risk to take, isn’t it? I can see how from Emily’s perspective, she knew Kath might not be happy about it, but it’s also not some deep betrayal, since based on the reason Kath gave, the consequence would only be on Emily herself. Emily had the exact same knowledge about my recent relationship status as Kath did, so why did Kath think she can tell her what to do?
As we get to further into this post and the real reason why Kath set this “boundary” is revealed, you will see why I actually think any argument Kath has against Emily for getting with me at the party is automatically void, but we will learn these details as they come.
Start of February
After the events of the party, Kath didn’t want to talk to Emily the next day when she tried to initiate communication via message (Kath tends to avoid in-person confrontation). Fair enough, Emily gave her space. Me and Emily spend the next day together just talking and getting to know each other more, and it’s clear that we vibe together and both feel very comfortable with each other, which is pretty rare for both of us.
I don’t see Tom for the first few days after the party, as he had been staying at Kath’s. When I do, I’m a bit surprised that he didn’t think much of Kath’s reaction at the party. He says “yeah I probably should have warned you about this beforehand”. We both agree that Emily was in the wrong for going back on what she said, but also that Kath shouldn’t have tried to control her like that. He did say “sorry I know this put you in an awkward position”.
A few days after the party, Emily again tries to get in touch with Kath via message.
Emily’s message essentially apologised for her actions, saying she was in the wrong for going back on what she said, and that she should have said from the start that she wasn’t happy with this “boundary”. She also said that Kath shouldn’t have tried to dictate her life and tell her what to do, especially when it’s something that’s none of her business, and that she is going to continue seeing me, taking the risk of being a “rebound”.
Kath’s response essentially said the whole incident at the party was only a small part of why she exploded so intensely, this was just the last in a long line of things Emily had done in the past which she had not forgiven her for. This was just the last straw for Kath because “it hit so close to home, so close to the love of my life”. She wanted things to be civil between them until the end of their tenancy, but this was essentially the end of their friendship.
Okay good, Kath flipping out so badly now finally made a bit more sense to me. Obviously, I wanted to know what Emily had done that was so bad to cause this, as any indicators of bad character would inform whether I choose to keep talking to her.
Emily went through these, explaining that these were incidents from their past that they had discussed at the time, dealt with and moved on from. I have cut these out for the word limit as they don’t add much to this post, but it was the most minor, nonsensical things (I can explain in the comments if anyone wants details).
In any case, I wasn’t particularly interested in what mistakes Emily might have made months or years ago, I was more interested in what her character was like now and going forward.
Early/Mid February
So here’s where the main situation we’re in now starts. For context, Kath and Emily’s apartment is in the city center, close to where both mine and Tom’s offices are, so it would make sense to go over in the evening and go into work from theirs the next morning, as Tom has been doing once or twice a week for the last few months.
It's worth noting that ever since the party right up to the present moment, Emily and Kath have not been interacting at all, avoiding each other in their apartment, only messaging for things like bill payments.
The first time I planned to go stay round Emily’s place was early/mid-February. When I mention this to Tom, he tells me that Kath has been having a really bad time mentally since the party, and the thought of me and Emily being there together triggers her anxiety. He asks me not to go over to their apartment for the next couple of weeks or so while she’s in this particularly bad phase. I don’t really understand what me going over and seeing Emily has to do with Kath’s anxiety (and Tom says he doesn't really understand it either himself), but I say okay fine it’s not that big of deal, I won’t go over for the time being.
Now, a valid question for myself is why I decided to keep seeing Emily, despite knowing that Kath had fallen out with her and therefore knowing it could potentially cause fiction between me and Tom. I don’t think I did anything wrong for several reasons:
· I suppose there’s the general visceral reaction against being told what to do. Like mind your own business, it’s not my fault Kath decided to get involved in my business. Why should she get what she wants when she’s the one being unreasonable? Why should we deny ourselves the opportunity of getting to know someone we seem to vibe with just because Tom’s girlfriend doesn’t like it?
· Before I even knew there was any issue at all, it was already too late; I had already gotten with Emily, they had already fallen out, and Kath already thought I was a dickhead. So what good would it do now to not see each other? Kath already didn’t like me (and she had also previously told me that once she doesn’t like someone, there’s no going back, they’re finished in her mind).
· In the initial first few days after the party, both me and Tom were kind of expecting that Kath’s reaction would blow over in a few days after she had cooled down. How could I have predicted that her reaction would instead continue getting increasingly intense as the situation went on?
· Frankly, I was annoyed at Tom at this point. He knew how Kath had reacted to me messaging Emily, so why did he just bend over and enable his girlfriends’ controlling, unreasonable behavior without question? If it was my girlfriend acting like this generally, I’d be like “why are you getting involved in their business, just let them do what they want?”, and especially so if it was directly affecting one of my close friends.
· Fundamentally, there’s no inherent reason why there had to be any issue at all? Okay Kath has ended her friendship with Emily and might not like that we’re seeing each other, but there’s no need for there to be any continued drama. Obviously we won’t all be hanging out as a four having fun like I had initially hoped, but that doesn’t mean we can’t just exist as adults and be civil? The only reason this continues to be an issue in the first place is because Kath is making it an issue for everyone else involved.
· Finally, I actually like Emily – from the first few days it was clear it wasn’t just going to be a FWB situation. If it felt like more of a superficial FWB situation, then yeah I probably would have just thought it’s not worth the drama, even though I thought Kath was the one in the wrong.
Late February
Over the month of February, me and Emily keep hanging out and getting closer. Whilst I was keeping a very close eye on her for any sign of character flaws (it was still possible that Kath could be in the right, even though her side of it didn’t make much sense to me), the more I got to know her, the more it seemed my initial judgment of her was accurate. I saw how she acted with her other friends, they all seemed to really value and appreciate her. I saw her helping out her friend in need of a fairly large amount of money without a second thought, I saw her going to accompany her friend for a medical scan they had, and generally she was really nice and thoughtful with me. Not exactly the behavior of an inconsiderate person.
Sometime in late February, Emily messages me completely baffled. She couldn’t believe that Kath had invited over a girl from their social circle, Dianne. The reason why this is a bit scandalous is because Kath is always talking shit about Dianne behind her back. And it’s not just “she can be a bit annoying sometimes”, it’s an explicit sentiment of how much she dislikes her, how much of a bad person she is and how much she wants her removed from her life. And she does this frequently, I barely speak to Kath and even I’ve heard her rant about how much she doesn’t like Dianne. So, she’s constantly saying this kind of stuff behind her back, and here she is now inviting her round for tea acting all friendly. I just found that so two-faced and this inevitably shaped my perception of Kath being deceptive.
Not long after I heard about this, Kath was round our place over the weekend. Me, Tom and Kath were heading off to our friend’s housewarming party later that day, with me driving us. At one point when the three of us are all in the kitchen, Kath speaks to me properly for the first time since the party, basically to clear the air. She says she doesn’t want there to be any bad blood between us and that her problem wasn’t with me, it was with Emily. I just say that I was cool with her, I don’t want her to feel uncomfortable with me or when coming over to our apartment, and that the situation between her and Emily was between them and not my business.
I wasn’t entirely convinced with her “clearing the air”, given that I had seen she apparently has no issue with being two-faced, but at the time I thought it was best to stay cool with her for the sake of me and Tom’s friendship and also I didn’t particularly fancy spending the rest of the day and a long car ride with awkward vibes.
End of February
At the end of February, Tom asks me how things are going with Emily and basically advises caution with her. He says that from what he’s seen she’s basically not a good person and she’s generally inconsiderate. I tell him I find that surprising from what I’ve seen of Emily, but I know it’s possible she could have just been putting on a front for the last month. I openly accept this, saying “I want to hear what you have to say, obviously you’re my friend and I respect your opinion”.
Essentially, he doesn’t bring up anything that I hadn’t already been told.
When I question Tom on why Kath thought she was a mind reader and assuming what my intentions were with Emily at the very start of this whole thing, Tom reveals he had since found out that the real reason Kath had forbidden Emily from getting with me in the first place actually wasn’t really to do with me recently breaking up with my girlfriend/using Emily as a rebound (Tom said this was a minor part of the reason, more of an excuse to base it on). It was more that Kath already knew beforehand that she wanted to end her friendship with Emily and was essentially trying to prevent her still being part of her life (i.e. by getting close to her boyfriend’s friend/flatmate).
Now it all made sense why Kath tried to “ban” her from getting with me in the first place. I’m not sure if Tom thought telling me this would make me more sympathetic to Kath’s side of it, but if anything, this deceptive behavior was even more of a red flag to me. As far as everyone (except for Kath) was concerned, her and Emily were best friends. Kath had even said to Emily a couple of weeks before the party that “she was like a sister to her”.
Tom didn’t seem to have much issue with this, saying something along the lines of “yeah I know she shouldn’t have kept all this stuff bottled up, but she doesn’t like confrontation, it makes her really anxious”.
After learning this, I think any argument for Emily being in the wrong for disobeying Kath’s instructions at the party is automatically void: Imagine having the audacity to be like “yeah I know I tried to control you by framing it as me being a protective friend looking out for you, but actually it was really because I wanted to end my friendship with you anyway teehee 😊”. In my view that is just so manipulative. No wonder the reason given to Emily for not getting with me made no sense to her.
When I revealed this to Emily, she said that she had been suspecting that was the case anyway, but it still really hurt to hear it confirmed.
Form her perspective it was like: “So was Kath holding all these grudges all the times I was consoling her for whatever mental health issue she was having at any given time?” (I wonder if Tom was thinking what a bad person Emily was when it was him and Emily staying up till stupid o’clock trying to console Kath who was crying about job applications a few weeks before all this kicked off). There are many other examples of things she had done for Kath in both the recent and more distant past.
Kath also knew that Emily’s best friend had killed herself a few years prior, and after going through the loss of her best friend, Emily had always said she was super hesitant to call anyone her “best friend”. Kath knew about this and still let Emily believe they were best friends, whilst she clearly didn’t really mean it, which I think is quite cruel of her.
Despite what I had seen of Emily so far, I still took what Tom said into account, and continued to watch her carefully.
Mid March
Another couple of weeks pass and given that my last interaction with Kath was her clearing the air with me, I thought everything was now cool between us. I mention to Tom at the start of the week that I’m planning to stay at their apartment later that week and he says “okay cool”. However, later that same evening, he once again asks me not to go over to their apartment. Apparently when he told Kath that I was going over, she started having a panic attack at the thought of me going there.
At this point I’m really started to get frustrated at this situation and again I try to understand exactly what the problem is, because this entire time Kath and Tom have been coming and going to either apartment as they please, so Kath clearly doesn’t have a problem coming to my apartment while I’m there. Tom again says that he doesn’t fully understand it himself, and that Kath doesn’t want to feel this way either, but she’s in a really bad place at the moment and me being there with Emily is really triggering her anxiety.
This makes no sense to me or Emily, because we obviously wouldn’t do anything to make Kath uncomfortable, and from our perspective this is just enabling her dysfunctional way of dealing with this situation.
Even though I still don’t understand what the fuck me seeing Emily has got to do with Kath’s mental health, I’m obviously not going to barge my way into someone’s home when I’m not welcome. So once again, I do as I’m told and say I won’t go over. But I do tell Tom that this situation isn’t going to continue going on like this indefinitely, and to me it feels to me like I’m being walked all over, in the sense of “oh yeah no worries, you two carry on going to either apartment as you please, I’ll just sit here like a dickhead and follow my instructions, don’t worry about it 😊”. He does say sorry and that he knows it’s inconvenient for us, but it's an even bigger inconvenience for Kath.
It’s worth bearing in mind that at this point, I could have responded to this situation by saying that if I’m not welcome at her apartment, Kath is not welcome here (or equally Emily could say to Kath “you can’t bring Tom round”). Whilst yes, it’s a bit petty, I think this would be a completely justified response to prevent a situation where we are being walked all over. Because what would be the alternative? They just carry on doing as they please indefinitely whilst Emily is told she isn’t allowed to have equal use of her own apartment? Now obviously telling your friend that his girlfriend isn’t allowed to come over is really a last resort and would definitely put a big dent in our friendship, and generally I have no desire to control what anyone else does, so of course I didn’t respond in this way.
Despite my frustration at this entire situation, I do feel bad for Tom because I can see how uncomfortable he seems during these conversations with me, he obviously doesn’t want to give me these unreasonable instructions. I can only assume he’s just trying to do whatever he can to keep his girlfriend afloat and prevent her next meltdown. I’ve been there myself dealing with a girlfriend with mental health issues, so I don’t want to actively make things worse for my friend either. However, I’m also worried that it’s likely to get worse for him the more he feeds into it and gets sucked into it.
At this point, the cynical side of me couldn’t help but wonder if Kath was being a bit manipulative and leaning into all the mental health stuff to maintain control of the situation.
· She seemingly is unable to give a reason for exactly why me and Emily being in her apartment makes her so uncomfortable. To me, this was completely indistinguishable from her just hating the fact that we’re together.
· All this reminds me of exactly the same kind of manipulative behavior I saw with that ex-girlfriend.
· She’s shown she has no problem with being intentionally deceptive – maybe if the entire basis of this situation hadn’t started off with Kath being manipulative she would have a bit more credibility in my eyes.
I know this kind of behavior is often not even intentional, and that it can be subconscious where the person doesn’t even realise they’re being manipulative.
(Still Mid March)
Now we get to the part that pisses me off the most in this whole situation. Only a few days after that conversation with Tom, for some reason Kath comes to stay in our apartment for the weekend while Tom was away at a house party. As in, it’s just me and Kath in my apartment.
Personally, I couldn’t imagine having the nerve to say to someone they aren’t welcome in my home because their presence triggers me, and then only a mere few days later actively choosing to go stay the weekend at their place while it’s just us two in the apartment. Like either my presence triggers you or it doesn’t?
Now to be fair, Tom had asked me a week or two beforehand if Kath could come to our apartment to hang out with someone from our friend group while he was away, and I said that was cool. Anyway, those plans fell through, but Kath still came over by herself.
But the main thing that pissed me off about this is that Tom, after knowing that I was already feeling like I was being taken for a mug in this situation, apparently didn’t even think it was worth bothering to check with me if it was still cool with me that Kath came round, given our conversation a few days prior.
If he’d at least checked in like, “I know it’s a bit weird that she’s coming to stay round by herself after having just said that your presence triggers her anxiety”, I still would’ve said okay, because I have no desire to control what anyone does. But it was just the fact he didn’t seem to care, saying “btw Kath is gonna stay here tonight” moments before leaving to his party.
To me it felt like he had spent the last month or so basically giving me instructions to make sure everyone caters to his girlfriend’s feelings, and yet didn’t give the slightest consideration to how this would make me feel. Part of me was thinking does he even see me as a friend or just as an inconvenience to his relationship at this point?
I spoke to Tom in the week following this, expressing how I had felt about Kath staying round. He did apologise and acknowledged he could’ve checked in with me, but he didn’t really seem to understand why her coming over like that was such a kick in the teeth for me. He said Kath doesn’t have a problem with me, it’s only a very specific situation that triggers her (i.e. me and Emily being in her apartment together).
Again I try to understand exactly why it’s a problem. Ever since the party, Emily’s presence in their apartment has consisted of her quietly staying in her room, quickly cooking her food and going straight back to her room. She doesn’t spend 2 hours in the kitchen making food like Kath and Tom sometimes do when he’s there.
Tom again says he doesn’t fully understand it himself. From what he understands, it’s triggering because her home is her safe space and if we’re both there it’s like there’s two hostile presences in that safe space. He reiterated that she is in a very dark place at the moment, and that she’s been having frequent panic attacks and suicidal thoughts.
Tom then says that Kath would be prepared to leave the apartment if me and Emily wanted to meet there, and Kath would basically get out of the way and come to me and Tom’s apartment instead. This did give me a bit more confidence that Kath wasn’t just purposefully making things difficult.
If Kath genuinely meant this, then of course that’s really appreciated, but I’m obviously not going to make her leave her own home and come all the way to ours to then have a 2 hour commute to her work. It’s so over the top and needless. I think that this clearly isn’t a functional solution going forward. What if one day when we want to meet up, Kath has had a long day at work and doesn’t feel like leaving her apartment (obviously, fair enough!), what if she’s got plans with friends in her apartment that evening? In any case, it’s still a situation where rules are being imposed on us, I can never just spontaneously decide to go see Emily one day after work or something. We still can’t come and go freely in the same way they have been doing for the past two months. It would be much better to understand why exactly it’s such a problem and see how we’re going to find a long-term solution, instead of Kath just running away from it.
The cynical side of me was wondering if Kath was just saying this knowing that neither me or Emily are realistically going to make her leave her own home, and if we do agree to it, then she can say “oh look how inconsiderate they are, making me leave my own home just so that they can be in the apartment”, ensuring that she keeps Tom firmly on her side.
Logically, I would’ve thought as time goes on, Kath would eventually get used to the situation and just accept it. Conversely, is it not quite understandable that the longer we have rules imposed on us, the more frustrated we become?
Once again say that I won’t go over and tell him that I won’t press this issue for the time being.
Late April
So now we get to the latest development in the situation, which is the crux of this post.
For the next month or so after that conversation with Tom, me and Emily have just been following our instructions and not pressed anything, whilst they continue coming and going as they please. One weekend we’re talking about the whole ‘Kath situation’ and we say “okay we’ve left it for a while now, it’s probably time to see how we’re going to move forward with this”.
In that next week, Emily sends Kath the following message:
“Hey, I appreciate this message might be uncomfortable but we need to discuss the fact that Jake can’t come here while you’re at home because I know that him and Tom have spoken about this but we’ve never addressed it with each other and I think it’s unfair that they’ve been largely absorbing this conflict this whole time. Can you please tell me what the exact problem would be and how we could make it work? At the end of the day we both pay equal rent here and I should be allowed to bring someone over, especially considering that Tom comes here whenever you want. We’re nothing more than just 2 housemates now and if you were living with a stranger from Spareroom such restrictions couldn’t have existed. I think I’ve let it slide and should have addressed it earlier, but it’s time we come up with a fair solution and I’d like to know if there’s anything reasonable we can do. I don’t want to go into other conversations about our fallout cause that’s done and dusted now, I want to strictly address this issue. Would you like some notice before he comes? I can’t always guarantee how far in advance I can let you know but I will do my best to give you enough time.”
Kath’s response:
“hey, I do not really appreciate this conversation being brought up 2 days before my birthday and I wish we can settle it today and not drag it on. And I do not appreciate you using Tom as a weapon to guilt trip me either. Please let me know if he is coming over tonight so that I can go somewhere else. As u probably already know I am in a really bad place at the moment and being in the apartment with both of you makes me feel very uncomfortable and unsafe. I’m already struggling to be there and I have been discussing with the agency about terminating the contract early, the terms have only been made clear to me today so I was going to message you about it. By paying a fee of £660 (£330 each) we can terminate the contract 12^th of June and I wish u will consider this. I will be gone from the apartment for 2 weeks. I would really appreciate it if you do not bring him over in the next few days as I said it will be my birthday and I will be gone for 2 weeks after if you decide to do so after this, please let me know at least 2 days in advance so that I can leave (pack clothes and everything), but do not take advantage of this as it is extremely difficult for me to commute to work – it takes me 2 hours on the bus”
Emily’s response to this:
“I don’t appreciate you using your birthday as a “weapon” to paint me as an inconsiderate person once again as you’re saying you were going to message me anyway about terminating the contract. You always have Tom round without any notice, without ever considering if it was ever uncomfortable for me given what’s happened - but now you expect me to organise our schedule around you? We can’t ever do something spontaneous or simply make plans the day before? Jake won’t be coming tonight or in the next few days until you’re away. I was hoping we could talk about why exactly this makes you uncomfortable and unsafe as it’s quite clear we wouldn’t interact with you or do anything to purposely upset/annoy you. You also had no problem being in his apartment with him without Tom there, so clearly his presence must not be that big of a problem. I am going to get back to you about terminating the contract as I have to figure out where I would go, but I’d love nothing more than to leave this apartment as early as possible too.”
There was no response after Emily’s second message.
Tom comes back to our apartment the next day and ignores me all day until the evening when he asks “Did you know that Emily was going to send those messages?”.
I say “Yes, obviously?”. He responds with “Right, okay” and starts walking back towards his room.
I ask him what was wrong with the messages, and he comes back and says “what the fuck is Emily doing sending messages like that to my suicidal girlfriend?”. He essentially thought the tone of the messages, the proximity to Kath’s birthday and the fact that we’re once again bringing up this issue of me coming round was out of order. He also said that Emily’s 2^nd message was implying that she was just going to bring me round without any notice anyway (looking at the message, no it wasn’t? It was just highlighting the unfairness of Kath expecting us to organise our schedule around her? None of the messages say that I’m going to come over, they are essentially just trying to understand exactly why it makes Kath uncomfortable).
We also did note that it was Kath’s birthday on the Friday (messages were sent on Tuesday). Maybe that wasn’t ideal, but we thought what real difference does it make? This is nothing new, it’s the same situation that’s been ongoing for the last 3 months anyway (and personally, I thought that up until the moment Kath says “okay sorry, I shouldn’t have imposed rules on you” then she shouldn’t expect that this won’t be brought up to her?).
I was a bit shocked at how angry he was and explained that we’re just trying to understand exactly what her issue is, because it still doesn’t make any sense to us. I bring up the general point about Kath imposing rules on people and expects everyone to cater to her feelings, whilst zero consideration has been given to how Emily has felt over the last 3 months, when not only does it make her uncomfortable as well that there are two “hostile presences” in her home, but especially given that those hostile presences have told her she’s not allowed to have equal use of her apartment she also pays rent for.
Tom responds with “but it’s not making Emily feel suicidal is it? Kath was having convulsions on the fucking bed last night after those messages. Why do you keep focusing on this tiny issue of coming to the apartment when my girlfriend is literally suicidal? She’s already said she’d make arrangements to leave the apartment for when you want to come over, and yet you keep pressing the issue and triggering her further”.
In that moment I was a bit taken aback and didn’t have much of a response. I kind of just sat and processed that for a few minutes, thinking “fuck, have I actually been in the wrong this whole time?”. Tom looked exhausted and stressed out, he must have been dealing with Kath’s meltdown the whole of the night before.
I say to Tom “tell Kath not to worry about me coming over while she’s there, I’m not going to, I’ll just leave it for good and won’t press this issue anymore”. Tom doesn’t give much of a response, but I think he says “I appreciate it”. He leaves for his two-week holiday shortly after.
I felt really bad that evening, thinking I had caused Tom to have to deal with whatever horrible meltdown because of me pressing this issue. Maybe I had been overly cynical of Kath, and she genuinely was just trying her best and not meaning to be manipulative.
When Tom got back from his holiday, he basically confirmed our friendship is over because I had known about those messages that caused his girlfriend to feel suicidal.
I’ve thought about the situation a lot since he left for his holiday:
· Looking back at the messages Emily sent, I think the tone is completely fine? Every single person I’ve shown the messages to has said they are actually quite kind and empathetic, and way nicer than they need to be given Kath’s behavior over the last 3 months.
· Tom’s reaction was essentially “how dare Emily have the audacity to ask for a reason why she hasn’t been allowed to have equal use of her own apartment for the last 3 months!”
· It’s true that Tom had mentioned that Kath had been having some suicidal thoughts a month prior, but I didn’t know that this would directly impact that, especially since I thought the message was quite nice and sensitive. Just the weekend before this Tom and Kath were out clubbing, having fun and they were going on holiday later that week. So obviously I didn’t realise she was still feeling so bad. How could anyone expect that simply asking the question of “why does this make you so uncomfortable” would result in this reaction.
· As soon as I did realise how intensely Kath had reacted, and what Tom had had to deal with as a result, I backed off straight away, saying that she doesn’t have to worry, I’m not going to press it anymore.
· Realistically, if this is how Kath reacts to being asked for basic fairness, then I think really she needs to be in a mental health crisis centre or hospital, not just carrying on with everyday life as if everything is fine, and certainly not in a situation where she’s imposing rules on people.
· At the end of the day, Kath’s mental health is not my responsibility, nor is it Tom’s responsibility. I think it’s unfair of Kath to have made it his problem to such a large degree.
Logically, I don’t think I’m in the wrong, and yet Tom’s reaction to this makes me feel like I’m going crazy. That’s why I wrote out everything’s that’s happened from start to finish to “audit” myself and evaluate each of my actions throughout the entire situation. I’ve looked back and don’t think I’m in the wrong for anything I’ve done. The only explanation I can think of is that Tom has been so deep in all of Kath’s mental health stuff 24/7 that he’s just not thinking clearly about this situation.

What started as a panicked attempt to get her over-intoxicated friend to a hospital ended up in a disastrous car crash that claimed the lives of her friends... and a careless God crossing the street. But Sammi's adventure wasn't about to end there. In her dying breath, the God curses Sammi to take up her mantel. Now with her three friends resurrected as ghosts, Sammi has to navigate the tricky world of godhood.
Previous Chapter Next chapter coming soon!
Start here! Patreon (up to chapter 9)
I love houses. House flipping, house hunting, crazy properties in town, gorgeous exotic vacation destinations. I think in a past life I was a real estate agent. Or a carpenter. Interior designer, actually, probably. Maybe just rich?
Doesn’t matter. I love houses, and I was gonna get myself the best digs in town.
“Best digs in town might be a liiiiittle suspicious?” Joni said as I began adjusting the filters of my favorite search: Lottery houses.
“So do you… we’re looking for a house?” Cara was leaning over my shoulder, watching as I pushed the Rooms, Cost, Square Footage, and Bathrooms options as high as I could. “Cause if you don’t even own a place, I feel like saying you’d answer my questions when we got to New Olympia is kinda a blow off.”
“Not a blow off,” I said. “This probably won’t take too too long. I just don’t want to kick anyone out of their house that, like, is a regular person living their life.”
“Kick them out?”
I paused and looked up at Cara, eyes serious. “Please. The parroting. It’s making me nervous.” Then I looked back down and began sifting through various mansions, penthouses, lake houses, villas. “For sale or for rent?”
“For rent,” Blair said immediately. She propped her head up on her chin as she watched me scroll. “Then you don’t gotta kick anyone out.”
“She’s got a point,” Christopher said. “Both from a, like, humanitarian point of view but also from a logistical point of view. Whoever’s moving needs the money pronto to buy a new house and they’re gonna constantly be dealing with banks and shit. You’d need a new lie a day just to keep them off you. But with rentals and all, first off, landlords renting out ten grand a month properties are already making bank off other units. Yeah you’re screwing them over, but not as bad. They got a buncha others. Second, you pay monthly, so you really only gotta fend them off once a month.”
My thumb jammed the “For Rent/For Sale” switch, and I cranked up the rental price. “What else are we thinking for criteria?”
“Middle of town’s a bad idea,” Joni said. “Too easy to find us.”
“We don’t have to, like, hide though,” Christopher said. “Just say you’re both out on bail. I mean, the point is to find Miller and bring him to justice, right? That’s gonna take time. There’s no place far enough out of town that we could hide in for long.”
I squinted at him, tearing my eyes away from a sexy seven bedroom manor with two pools. “What?”
He sighed, as if convinced that I was in the wrong for not understanding what fuck he just said. “Like, think about it Sammi. We’re not actually gonna be able to hide. Or if we are, it’s gonna be in an alley or some shit.” He wrinkled his nose at the same time I did. “They’re cops with detectives and shit, and they think we shot someone and broke someone else out of jail. They’re gonna find us. We’ll have to lie, not hide, to avoid being put back. So may as well be local to all the action.” With this, he pointed directly at a lofty unit in the center of town.
Hmm. He brought up a valid point, so I checked it out.
A five bedroom penthouse with three terraces giving outdoor views of the entire city. Bathrooms that put the hotel to shame. Closets the size of my old bedroom. A pool deck. Appliances with fancy brand names I only ever heard on episodes of “Dream House” and hadn’t actually realized existed in the real world. Enough bedrooms for me, Cara, and the ghosts to each sleep separately.
For a moment, the enormity of it washed over me. Not just the enormity of the house, though it was enormous, but the reality of what I could accomplish. This apartment was twenty five thousand dollars a month. I’m not entirely sure I’ve made that much money in my life. Or, okay, probably around that, but that’s my point. This was the kind of unit rich people showed off in out-of-touch blogs or escapist shows about the lifestyles of famous people. And it could literally be mine if I could play my cards right. Or not even right. Just not catastrophically wrong.
Cause I was a God. And for the first time since becoming a God, I was using my abilities, my status, my familiars and shit to do something cool. Not rob a TechShack of some earpods or break in or out of a hospital.
This was a big yield.
As I had my little epiphany, Cara had taken over scrolling my phone, much to the relief of my ghosts, who’d started grumbling about the static screen while I zoned out.
“Okay.” Cara looked at me. “I’m not gonna ask any of the questions you know I want to ask, cause that’ll just piss you off.” Thank God she was learning. “So we’ll skip that for now and ask the really important question. How are you gonna get your hands on this place?”
–
Step 1 was to get to the place, which kinda sucked, given we were still at Pizza Dogs. It just wasn’t a very cool start to the coolest scheme I’d ever pulled off. Luckily Pizza Dogs closed at 9, so a solid number of people were leaving the restaurant. I was able to wave down a waitress who’d just checked off of her shift and convince her she was a taxi driver.
“You’re really loving this whole taxiing thing, huh?” Christopher said.
“At least she’s not talking like a robot trying to use slang.” I grit my teeth at the memory of Cops Cop and Taxi Service.
“No, you just told her she was mute.” Blair stuck her lip out. “That’s mean, Sammi.”
“I told her she couldn’t talk. That’s different.” I gave Cara a weak smile, but she hadn’t even commented on my ghost talking. She just buried her face in her hands. See? Learning.
Step 2 was gonna be actually getting in the unit. The listing on HouzeHunting didn’t exactly have the name of the landlord on it, so I was gonna have to get creative getting in touch with them. What it did have was ‘24 hour doorman service,’ which meant getting in would be easy peasy.
Finally we pulled up to the address I’d given our driver. 1732 East Windham Street. She leaned out the window, looking up the seventy story building.
“It’s totally appropriate for you to talk now,” I said as I scrambled out, towing Cara with me. No sense in actually making her mute for life.
The woman nodded. “You, uh, live here or visiting? If you don’t mind me asking.”
I flipped my wad of black hair over my shoulder, wincing at how singularly it moved. I shoulda combed it after my bath yesterday.
“Live here, obviously.” I gave a rich person kinda snort, nose in the air and all.
“Huh.” She looked back at me, rubbing the back of her neck as if it was sore from craning up so high. “But you needed a taxi to get here?”
“Uh.” Rich people used taxis, right? On the ladder from Sammi to Bill Gates, someone had to use them, and if I couldn’t afford a taxi normally, then the typical passenger must exist somewhere above me. “My fancy personal car got towed cause I was parking it in a fire lane.”
The woman didn’t look convinced. Not that she thought I was lying, but she still looked at me like I was dumb as dirt. “You don’t have, like, a personal driver?”
I cocked my head at her, trying to mirror Joni’s sassy tilt but probably just looking confused. “Are you offering?”
Her lips parted, and I could see her brain chewing on this question. “What do you… wait, are you being serious?”
Was I? Suddenly I wasn’t sure. Having a personal chauffeur could be kinda great. Someone always available to text or call when I needed a ride so I wouldn’t have to keep remembering where I left my car. Besides, driving made me nervous. I’d never been a particularly bad driver, no prior accidents, never really hit anything in the past, unless we’re counting bumper cars. Which we’re not, cause I’m a menace in bumper cars. But that’s like the point.
Or, no, the point was, I wanted to minimize driving, and this woman could be key. Of course, I knew nothing about her. What if she had a family at home and I told a too strong lie and she never saw them again?
But then, she wouldn’t be offering if she wasn’t serious, right? Sure I’d lied and told her she was a taxi driver, but the average every day taxi driver didn’t just ditch their families to be rich people’s chauffeur’s.
“Uh. Yeah.” I looked at the ghosts. Two thumbs up from Christopher, one from Blair, and two thumbs down from Joni. That was a total of one thumbs up, if my math was right. “Yeah, I pay ten thousand a month.” We could figure that out later.
The woman’s eyes shot open. “Okay, you’re actually fucking with me. You’re actually offering to hire me for ten thousand a month.”
I nodded. “Yeah. And you can… I mean, if you got your own place, you can stay there obviously but you could also stay in one of my bedrooms. I got some extra ones I was gonna give to the gho–uh, dogs. But I don’t have dogs, so you were next on the list. Well, a chauffeur was next on the list. But also if you’ve got–do you have a family?”
Each of my statements plunked out of my mouth like gumballs out of a broken candy machine. But she just kept nodding like this was a normal proposal.
“I mean, I had a boyfriend.” Her face flushed crimson. “Kinda embarrassing to say at my age. Thought we were–” She took a deep breath. “Thought he was the one. I’m not gonna say I was looking to have kids or anything, so I suppose age doesn’t matter, but that doesn’t mean I really want to start over. Five years wasted is all, and at my age, the well starts to dry up a bit. People look at you a bit…” She blinked. “I’m sorry, that’s not really what you asked, was it.”
It wasn’t entirely, but I was kinda hooked on the story now. “Yeah it was,” I said. “It was the first question in the interview, and you’re nailing it. Uh, you actually already passed the first round. Let’s take the rest inside.”
The woman let out a shaky breath and smoothed her frizzled hair. “Right, of course. Thank you so much!”
Cara had, thank God, kept her mouth shut this whole interview process, so I just towed my newly formed posse towards the doorman.
“My key got lost,” I said confidently and too quickly, noticing way late that there weren’t any visible keyholes anywhere on the door. “Uh…” I looked nervously at the ghosts.
“Just tell him someone said he should let you in,” Joni said.
“Yeah.” Blair smiled. “Carl from management.”
“No–”
“Carl from management said you should let me in,” I said, bowling over Joni’s protests. “I own that top penthouse suite. Suite 72. The one for rent. Or, not for rent cause I’m renting it now. And I called earlier because my key is broken and Carl your manager said–”
I stopped finally because the doorman had long since stopped frowning perplexedly at me and had just tapped his card against the door.
“Haha,” I said, verbalizing the laugh a little too hard. “Look at me, talking too much as always.”
He frowned again, but nodded nonetheless, before holding the door open for me. “Here you are.”
“Thank you so much,” I said, stepping in like a real fancy lady. “I’ve got it from here.”
And, because I was stupid and always spoke without thinking, he nodded and shut the door behind me.
So technically Step 2 ‘get in’ was done, but it was like, barely done. Like when your mom says ‘go to your room’ so you sit in the doorway. Cause I wasn’t really close to my new apartment yet, which meant a new step on the list. Step 3? Get into New Olympia.
Somehow a little sneaky ‘Step 3b, interview your new chauffeur’ had snuck on the list too, but that would be easy to finish once I got to the actual unit.
It was literally impossible to keep my jaw in its socket as we walked through the lobby. I was actually straight up speechless at how fancy it all was. There was a bar in the lobby, like this was some hotel! Given my experience with rich people things, it was either totally free or thirty bucks a glass. Still, it was pricey enough that I should probably have been charged just for looking at it. Even Cara and the driver had their mouths gaping open as they looked around, taking in the mirror shiny marbely floors and columns.
I closed my eyes, taking in a deep breath, and really tried to capture this moment of peace and quiet inside the lobby of my new home.
“Blair stop humming, they’ll be able to hear you.”
“I’m using my regular humming, not my banshee humming.”
“My bad, shoulda clarified. I’m able to hear you, and you’re annoying me.”
“Joni, why are you always so mean.”
“She’s, like, kinda got a point. You need to get that stick out of your ass.”
“I’ll get the stick out of my ass when Blair stops humming.”
“Bro, it’s totally more than the humming, and you know it.”
“Is singing okay?”
“No.”
“What about–”
“Why don’t you just whistle, Blair?”
“That’s not nice. You know I can’t whistle.”
“Kinda my point.”
“Hey, be nice to Blair, Joni.”
Peace and quiet were overrated anyway. We were here for schemes.
My eyelids snapped open. In front of me was a big old reddish wood desk. The sign on it said “Main desk, open 7AM to 9 PM.” Next to it was another, more temporary sign, “Partial Service After Hours. Ring Bell For Assisance.”
My eyes drifted hungrily to the shiny golden bell. It was the kind you see in movies and shows, you press down a few times to summon the waiter or whoever sits behind the desk.
“Just once, Sammi,” Joni said, already reading my mind. “You ring it once.”
“But Joni,” I whispered, hand hovering over it, “I’m a God.”
DING DING DING DING DING DING DING
Seven was overkill. The man was there after the first two rings. But I couldn’t stop. It was too satisfying.
He regarded me with pained eyes. “Ma’am, you didn’t have to ring it that many times.”
“I didn’t,” I said confidently. And just like that, the pained look vanished. He didn’t look comfortable though, probably because I didn’t look like I should be there. Time to fix that.
I jutted my chin out. “Is there, like, a master key to all the elevators and units you can give me.”
The guy blinked rapidly. “I’m… sorry, you want what?”
“Lies, Sammi. That was a request!”
This is why we needed Joni and the stick up her ass.
“Uh.”
“Tell him that… I don’t know, someone from management said you could borrow a skeleton key.”
I smiled. “Carl from management told me I could have a skeleton key. A, you know, a key that opens all the doors.” I gave Joni a panicked glance.
She motioned her finger in a repeating loop and mouthed ‘go on.’
“And.” I swallowed. “You said you would give us one.”
The concierge sighed. “I know. I know. I just.” He ran a hand through his hair. “Carl doesn’t manage my department, so if this isn’t the right call, Sandy’s gonna have my head.”
I eyed the ghosts nervously. The lie had worked but it didn’t seem to fully convince him. “Sandy said…”
“Keep it simple,” Joni hissed.
“...that you would give me a key to let me in?”
“Right, please hold a moment, it’s almost done transferring.” The concierge paused and looked at a key card on his desk. He squinted before picking it up and beeping it against a little card pad. It flashed red. “I’m sorry,” he said. “The transfer didn’t go through right. One moment please.” Then he typed on his computer for a few very long minutes while Cara, the driver, and I all stood frozen by the elevator. After several breath-holding moments of silence (yeah, now the ghosts decide to shut up) he tapped the card again and it flashed green. “There we go.”
I let out a long breath before scuttling over to pick up my card. “Thank you!” I said, a cheery forced grin on my face. “Thank you so much! Remember, this came from, uh, Sandy’s boss, and she told you not to tell Sandy, so keep it zipped!”
He mimed zipping his lips as I waved again before rushing to the elevator.
Soon we were zooming up dozens and dozens of levels as my breathing came more and more naturally. Even the elevator was fancy. All golden mirrors, which Blair was staring at, disappointed that she couldn’t see her reflection in them.
There was no one on the seventy second story and ther was only one door, at the end of a gleaming hardwood hallway. My black boots clomped awkwardly as I escorted the driver–still in a bright orange shirt with a barking dog and a slice of pizza on it–and Cara–still in an orange jumpsuit–towards the door at the end.
Once I got there, I tapped my card, and we were in.
I don’t really have good words to describe the place. Huge, for one. Empty for another. Those were the two big ones. I could have gawked at it all, but I was a little tired of gawking, so I filed away ‘tour my house and get it fitted out’ for later. Besides, I had all my gear and shit still in my car… somewhere. I’d get it up here eventually and then the real decorating could start.
But there was a first step. Well two first steps. Okay, technically only one could be the first step, so we’ll do that first.
I waved Cara to join me in one of the bedrooms.
“I’ll finish your interview in like, fifteen minutes,” I said to the driver. She nodded.
“Okay,” I said, closing the door behind me and plopping down on the ground.
Cara stood awkwardly, eyeing the big ass empty room with a big ass empty bathroom off to the side. “Okay,” she said, still standing. “Do I need to–”
“No no, I said I would…” I trailed off, lips pursed and confused. “You wanted… Or… I was gonna tell you–”
“Oh shit yeah.” Now suddenly Cara was on the floor across from me, leaning in. “You’re telling me what the fuck is going on.”
My breath rushed out in a long woosh as I contemplated how to start this. Joni had made a snarky comment at one point like ‘pushing this off won’t make it easier’ and I’d responded with a ‘I’ll come up with a plan while I delay’ which of course I hadn’t, and now I was angry cause Joni was right.
“So the problem is,” I said, starting slowly. “Everything I tell you, you’ll believe.”
“Obviously,” Cara said, believing me instantly.
“But no one else but me knows what’s going on. So I can’t help but…” I trailed off again, noticing Cara nodding animatedly. This wasn’t working. I wanted her to believe me cause she fully understood and accepted my story, not cause of magic. But to get that, I couldn’t be the one to tell her, and the only other people who knew about my godliness were the ghosts and–
I smacked myself on the face. Sammi, you’re a genius. An actual, mensa accredited whiz kid.
“Blair,” I said, smiling. “I think I’ll offload this to you.”
Blair frowned, scrunching her nose up for a moment, before pointing at herself. “Me?”
I nodded confidently. Blair knew everything but lacked the Verity Tongue. This would be a sinch.
“Cara, how do you feel about a little ghost story?” I shivered a bit, getting goosebumps at my own words. Now that lead-in was brilliant. ‘A little ghost story’, who came up with that? I was getting smarter by the minute.
“Oooooooooooooh.” Blair zoomed around the room, and Cara leapt to her feet.
“What the fuck?”
“Bewaaaaare moooooortal,” Blair droned, pitching her voice low. “For the story you’re about to hear is both dreadful and awwwwwful. Fear for your soul for those who hear this story are cursed and will find themselves in an early–”
“Blair!” I shouted. “Stop that. What the fuck? Literally not like that. Like literally anything but that. You need to start with–”
“Yo, Sammi, dawg, chill.” Christopher patted my back. “We’ll help her out.”
“Yeah, you don’t want to taint the story with your god powers,” Joni said. “We’ll sort Blair. You interview the pizza waitress.”
Suddenly my genius felt like the opposite of genius. Yeah, delegation was important, but I did want to hear what the ghosts were telling Cara. Didn’t I need to know? What if they told her something totally wrong and stupid? Or what if they said something mean? Like what if they really played up the part about my reckless speeding? What if they lied about something? Made me look incompetent.
I opened my mouth to protest, but Christopher just gave me an icy pat again.
“Look, you’re gonna jump in to correct something we say, and it’s just gonna fuck up Cara.” He gave me a serious look, one of the most serious looks he’d given me since this whole ordeal. Which was honestly kinda stupid cause of all the times to pull out there ‘seriously, Sammi’ face, he was picking now? Was this really the right time for this? “Seriously, Sammi. We got this.”
I didn’t believe him at all, but they were absolutely right about me likely fucking this up with my motor mouth. No way was I sitting still while Joni made snarky comments about me, like, eating gross bagels or telling cops to steal poop.
“All right,” I said. “Come out when you’re done. Or if you need hands at all. Like if she passes out and you need to check for a pulse.”
“Are you talking to me?” Cara said.
“No. I’m talking to the ghosts.” And with that I closed the door.
Looks like Sammi's got a house! And maybe a minion or two on top of her familiars. Let's see how Cara takes all of this...

I would think that the only real way to bring back the sight is to have the surgery, but I read somewhere that the drops reduce inflammation? Does that help with bringing sight back or stopping/slowing progression? I didn’t think cataracts causes pain for inflammation to be a problem but I have no idea.
Species: dog
Age: 11
Sex/neuter status: male and neutered
Breed: mutt. Dachshund terrier most likely.
Weight: ~15 lbs
History/Clinical signs: I’ve never had a vet talk to me about his eye sight. Eyes are blue tinted/cloudy. Probably noticed it more in the last year. Kind of dawned on me this morning that it’s significantly affecting him. I feed him Fresh Pet. He’s very particular about how he eats. Everything has to be cut up small because his teeth aren’t great. He is also particular about eating out of bowls. So I had previously been just putting it on the floor in the kitchen which is hard floor. More recently I put it on a plate on the dog food mat with his water, which sits on carpeted area. He won’t start eating it until I take a piece off the plate and put it on the floor to eat. It hit me this morning that he probably can’t see that the food is cut up. More that it’s just a giant blob.
Duration: probably longer than a year but more noticeable lately.
Location: Houston, TX

I am not sure what my rights are My elderly father, who is 89 has been friended by a younger woman in her 50s who cleans his apartment and has slowly pushed away all of his family in order to financially abuse him I am the owner of the condo. I am his daughter. I rent out the condo to him. He gave a key to this woman and the entire family told told him she was scamming him, but he chooses not to believe us He has switched bank accounts, and we have no clue as to his financial situation situation now Before he did this, we were able to monitor his bank account He is very sick right now and has a fair bit of money or at least had we don’t know the status of it now He believes that this woman and her family loves him and that our family is out to hurt him we have told him numerous times over the last couple of years. Do not give the key to anyone he refuses to let us know his ongoing and has been lying to us What are my rights to prevent him or prevent the scammer from going near him again? We cannot deem my father incompetent because he’s not. He’s just very messed up in the head right now. No one in my family can get through everything about this woman We are afraid that she will clean them out. She slowly has been doing for the last couple years. We’ve already talked to Elder abuse and a few other places, but nothing seems to be happening This housekeeper has tried to get him married off to her sister and my father thinks it’s just great Her family lives in a different country and we live in Canada She has also taken my father to this other country at Christmas without our permission and requested my father give her $40,000 for the marriage Of course, my father did not have the cash on him so the marriage did not go through I am stuck as to how to deal with this and prevent her from having a key to access his apartment He has been told not to give a key to anyone. It is our condo we rented to him as a landlord. What are my rights to prevent this woman from entering the apartment and having a key?

TLDR: recommendations to invest a legal settlement of $90k for a late 50's person with no current retirement savings, and salary of under $20k annually.
good morning all, thank you. this really is for a friend, im a full time worker in a union, have the pension roth ira, have filed taxes for over 25 yrs now, etc... so im in a different situation than my friend.
hes late 50's, side hustle type of worker, thus no real income to speak of, messenger services type of income. he has no retirement savings curently, no pension, no annuity, no savings to speak of. he was recently involved in a car accident last year, and is about to receive his portion of a settlement, about $90k, asked me what he should do with it. i recommended this: to talk to a tex service settlement copamny to get caught up on his current tax status (as he hasnt filed in years...he claims because he makes so little he didnt have to file...) im not a tax expert, thus i recommened that he talk to a tax settlement company just to get 'straight' going forward.. for the money, hes gonna spend a little bit on a new bicycle (his as destroyed by the car), a guitar (he loves his guitar & music) . but for the bulk: i receommend he open a roth ira, deposit the $, and buy a simple low-expense, steady interest annually vanguard mutual fund, tax free interest for the next 10 years or so, as he later 50's now age-wise... as well he can add to it annuallly whatever he can afford to.. the payment is 'as per him' tax free, no taxes paid on ot since its pain & suffereing settlement $? (is this true?)
anywho, am i correct in this? hes not someone thats gonna buy 'crypto', or jump into stocks like msft or nvda... etc.. thanks everyone!

"Hey do you know that mute bum, a strange worn-off Black Mask with Gold Accents and numerous horns, tattered clothes, gray hair, and scars all over his body who always smells like something that just burned?"
"Oh, what about him?"
"I know the Tavern is full of misfits, and I've been touring my theatrics away from here, but what's so special about that hotshot that everyone moves out of his way?"
"Well if you're so curious why not just go at it?"
"And what about you?"
"Can't spoil it now, eh?"
"Now, now Giovanni, there can't be anyone madder than me"
"How presumptuous of you Sparkle" (maybe she'll finally kick the bucket now, hopefully)
Kalpas Path - Physical Preservation
"The Mute Grumpy Bum, A Masked Fool(?), perhaps a Mourning Actor rather, but the insignia behind his tattered jacket were that of a, Moth? Yet his heavy steps always leave behind a literal burning trail... How ominous. But most of the time, he just does menial tasks carrying absurdly larger objects than himself, what a scene."
Basic Attack - "Get Lost" (Cold & Deep tone) : Kalpas reappears In front of a Single Target Enemy and throws/kicks them back based on how humane the Target was (if humanoid throw, kick if huge) dealing 100% Atk as Physical DMG.
Skill - "Pillars of Oblivion" : Kalpas cannot gain a Shield from foreign sources, he stomps the Ground around him, consuming 40% hp of all Allies including himself to erect 4 Molten Pillars of Oblivion for 2 turns.
While each Pillar exists, Allies cannot be inflicted with foreign Debuffs, & gain a Shield excluding him that can block 1000 DMG + 25% of Kalpas max Def, but cannot heal beyond 60% of their Max H.P threshold, and takes 1 DMG when hit despite having a Shield.
For each Pillar that depleted its Shield value(especially when their Turns expire), the DMG accumulated would be redirected to Kalpas, and he would perform "Meet Your Tombstone" (Blast Counter Attack) to the recent enemy that attacked an ally or depleted it, also hitting adjacent targets.
Enhanced Attack - "Meet Your Tombstone": Consumes 15% Grit and deals Physical DMG equal to the sum of 20%-44% of his ATK and 50%–110% of his Max Def% to a single enemy. In addition deals Physical DMG equal to the sum of 8%–17.6% of Kalpas' ATK and 20%-44% of his Max Def to adjacent targets.
Ultimate - "Your Last Words?" : "Would you save it?" Activation Cost - Kalpas Having 1 hp.
Kalpas reappears In front of the enemies yet still consumes 60% H.P of all Allies including himself from the shockwave left behind his departure as he emits a Nuclear Meltdown and Transforms into his fiendish ICHOR for 2 turns (Activation of this Ultimate doesn't consume a Turn) dealing AoE Physical DMG based on his Total Break Effect, Def%, & Missing Health, then fixing his Turn in the Action Order to be the Slowest Ally but he would cinematically intercept (mock enemies head on) and absorb all DMG taken by previous turns of Allies as he inflicts 10% lost of max h.p to the Enemy he'll block just for being in contact, while 50% of the DMG mitigated would sustain the Shield value of his Infernal Grit until his finisher.
Voicelines when he intercepts Attacks during his ULT:
"Where are you aiming at?!" "Is this supposed to be a joke?!" "Futile!"
In his Second Turn in the Action Order being his Finisher, he can Summon 4 Pillars of Oblivion, grabbing (also by summoning Infernal chains to latch unto) and breaking each as he can consume them to Attack 6 times, the fifth personally being his right stomp, and the 6th being his left fist.
(Void Archives: "To the Sky People, the Right Hand is deemed as unclean, and only slaves would show it uncover in public.")
Finisher line: "What a waste of breath."
Talent - "Asura of Decimation" : Kalpas cannot be healed during combat except when he attacks an Enemy without Toughness based on 10% of his Total Break Effect.
His Attacks will ignore Weakness Types & Reduces Toughness while delaying the speed of Enemies hit by 20%.
If the Enemies' Toughness is already Broken, he would additionally deal Super Break DMG, and preferably retrigger Bleed or Burn D.o.T based on his Total Break Effect.
When Kalpas HP reaches 1 from any Pillar of Oblivion that depleted, further DMG absorbed would grant him an "Infernal Grit" as bonus Break Effect based on 6% of his Max Def & Shield based on 40% Max H.P lost, 99% healing received instead fortifies his Infernal Grit's Shield value.
Technique - "Kneel Imbeciles" : After using this Technique, it creates a fiery pressure (dimension) around Kalpas that lasts for 20 seconds, and all enemies in this dimension will have their movement speed reduced by 50%, if they are non Elite Enemies, they would be struck by Fear status.
For 3s that open world enemies stayed within, they would enter a Weakness Broken State without engaging Combat(stunned). After entering combat, enemies in the dimension will have their Toughness reduced by 50% and their speed delayed by 20%. Only 1 dimension created by Allies can exist at the same time.
Passives:
"Fallen's Vengeful Hope" - While Grit is Active, Kalpas would gain 50% Bonus Effect Resistance. When Kalpas is alone or an Ally is taken down, he'll gain 160 bonus Speed throughout the Combat/4 Turns.
"Grit of Fervour" - Kalpas converts every 100 Atk & H.P beyond 1600 into bonus Defense. Ally Shields or Enemy Toughness that are reduced also grants him Shield by 10% of his Break Effect before consuming Pillars to build Infernal Grit (be undying at 1hp as excess DMG became Shields)
"Oath of Disputed Regrets" - When there's no Pillars of Oblivion, he'll absorb the next DMG taken of Allies to build up Infernal Grit. This effect will refresh at the start of each of his Turns.
10 Sub Traces: Break Effect%, Def%, Effect Resistance%
Eidolons:
1 "Indifferent Facade of the Guilty" - 2 "In... Humane?" - 3 "Wit's End; Withheld" - 4 "I among, shall Predate Portions of Finality... thus I fell from the Sky?" - 5 "Heartsbane of the Lost Sundered Moth" - 6 "Asura of Decimation" -
Q1: Why is he Physical instead of Fire? A1: The Pressure of the Heat he emits numbs entities that they barely noticed themselves already deforming, unless he's being careful about who are those he doesn't mean to hurt while sane.
Q2: Why Preservation? A2: He does it with the best of his Ability.
Q3: What's the deal with him? A3: My head-canon is that he got thrown into a Portal from Hi3 PrevEra Hershey of Finality Boss Fight leaving an impression that he got bubble-popped after going ZORO(Y.O.L.O) and then contributed the Attrition of Glamoth against the Remnants of the Swarm, from there he became a Self Annihilator but Aha kidnapped him before he lost his shit unlike Nanook's Ascension (Praise Aha, THEY can proudly claim "I can fix it, surely"). He resembles Nanook but is more scarred, he is oddly invisible to him, Aha promised him to be sane, before he can work his way up to heal his scars, he doesn't remember much but would act on impulse based on regrets and habits die hard. He was 6th of Hi3rd's 13 Moths.
Q4: Are you ok? A4: Absolutely n- yes.
Idle Emote 1: Smoke would envelop as he lowered his mask revealing a disfigured monsterficated right side of his face without lips, while the left stayed humane nor some scarlet horns are protruding, and were just as badly scarred, he'll stare at the mask blankly not realising his tears dripping down and evaporating, he'll sighs then wear up his mask again as the smoke enveloping him dissipates.
Idle Emote 2: He'll Earth bend a simple kitchen set up especially a grill, 3 other Team Members would show up and enjoy his grill as he'll just look at them, with mask on, satisfied as he keeps cooking. If we consumed Food from our inventory, and he's in the team, he'll start this idle Emote commenting, "You lot ain't eating properly enough."
His phone alternates between either a NaKYA 3310 or a Parchment appearing like a Small Rune Scripture whose symbols were that of an Elation Cup pouring down on the drawn design of his Mask.

CEO and Creative Director of Moon Studios; Thomas Mahler, tweeted to Game Designer and Consultant; Alexander Brazie, calling him out for talking in favor for DEI practices. Alexander got fired too.
(I am well aware that Reddit isn't much better than ResetEra when talking about this sort of subject, but I'm giving it a go anyway.)
My question is thus, to you the Ori fans: What are your thoughts and opinions on what transpired over the CEO of your game's company? Was Thomas Mahler reasonable and had a point? Or was he full of crap?
https://twitter.com/thomasmahlestatus/1790189410014667064?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1790189410014667064%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=

Hello Apes.
Back with another review of all the tweets sent from memelord and cat inspiration, Roaring Kitty.
If you missed my first review for 13th May, you can find it here.
To reiterate, the description of each tweet is to the best of my knowledge the references made and the speculation is pure speculation on my part, this is just for fun and shouldn't be taken as any financial advice, make your own decisions, I just like the stock. If you have anything to add feel free to in the comments and I'll do my best to update the post.
11am - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790396654971224430
Description: The infamous scene from the movie Troy where Achilles rather reluctantly at first, comes forward to fight the mighty Boagrius. Achilles runs at him, defending against a few spear throws then with one epic jump and slide, stabs Boagrius with this blade killing him in one clean strike. The music dubbed on this clip is Counting Bodies Like Sheep To The Rhythm of the War Drums by A Perfect Circle.
Speculation: Chosen warrior blessed by the gods comes forward in front of the masses and takes out the big baddie. You could make the speculation that the song could reference something to do with DRS (A Perfect Circle) and SHFs bleeding out (counting bodies like sheep).
11.30am - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790404203715887238
Description: First of all we have a cat talking to itself in the mirror stating the words, "Don't be the bigger person today, be the person that helps them understand that sometimes when you f**k around, we find out...". We then cut to arrested development where Buster who is portrayed as a bear has something to say, "i wanna shoot down everything you say, so i feel good about myself. cause i'm an uptight [insert copious amounts of swearing].
Speculation: First part DFV knows they (Shorts) have messed around again and have been doing it dirty. The gig is up again, time to close and pay up. The second part is a funny scene from arrested development where Buster, a character who just cannot fit in properly goes AWAL to try and show he has a nasty side, it just comes across as way too far. DFV just poking fun at bears here no doubt.
12:00pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790411757120561628
Description: First we have a scene from The Town where Doug says to James, "I need your help. I can't tell you what it is, you can never ask me about it later, and we're gonna hurt some people." and James replies, "Who's car are we going to take?" Then it cuts to Mad Max where there are a load of sand buggy cars going nuts with flame throwers and all sorts of chaos with the song Du Hast by Rammstein playing in the background.
Speculation: I haven't seen the Town but from reading online this scene showed the amazing friendship between Doug and James when James simply replies, who's car are we going to take? in response to what sounds like a risky ask for help from Doug. Then with Mad Max: Fury Road we have a film about a post apocalyptic survivor in Max Rockatansky who eventually brings down a warlords Citadel (hmmm).
12:30pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790419301976903884
Description: First we have the whistling of Omar from The Wire, then we have a scene from the Kingsmen where they are locked in a pub with Galahad and the quote "Manners maketh man" and finally we have a scene from Oldboy with a big fight scene cut alongside some anime which is from demon slayer
Speculation: The whistling is synonymous with Omar and is to the tune of a nursery rhyme, "the farmer in the dell", anyone that watched The Wire would know instantly that this means Omar is coming and this means you best get out the way as he is coming with his double-barreled shotgun and he certainly won't hesitate to use it. The Kingsmen scene where they are locked in the pub is a particularly violent scene and it's an interesting film to reference, the plot *Film spoiler here* is essentially about a boy named Eggsy from a lower-class neighbourhood who's father dies and he finds out that his father was part of an elite inner circle of upper class. After trying to be part of this group, Eggsy discovers their secret plot to take over the world and takes it into his own hands to save the day. u/ ThePhenomNoku talks about the last 2 referenced films; "So the anime is demon slayer. It’s about a kid who has everything taken from him and trains to learn how to fight demons. Though as a sidenote he kind of carries one around with him. It’s complicated.The other movie with the guy holding the person, & the fight scene is the original Oldboy, and without giving too much of the plot away it’s about a dude who is falsely imprisoned for a couple of years or so, and then enacts his revenge."
Edit\* As u/ omegs points out: whistle is "The farmer in the dell, Hi-ho, the derry-o" reference to the circle. The movie Kingsmens: The Golden Circle as well
1:00pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790426851409817615
Description: Firstly we have the scene from Oceans 11 where Danny Ocean is chatting to Rusty Ryan right in the initial stage of their plan to heist the casino. He talks about how it's never been done before, will need planning and a large crew and Ryan asks if they are going to use guns, he replies "not exactly, there's lots of security" and finally Ryan asks "what's the target?". We then cut to a film i'm not aware (anyone help here?) of where an older gentleman shows a calculator to a young woman and the calculator says "Just up" on it then the woman says "yes that looks correct"
Speculation: In Oceans 11 there was a lot of planning and variables that had to happen for everything to work. It was a high risk high reward plan with a lot set up to go against but it's possible. The target has always been "just up", DFV just reiterating what he said in the first place.
1:30pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790434400494116873
Description: First we have a scene from Old School where he states, "A loophole?" "Yes. Well, it's interesting, sir. As stupid as they appear, they're actually very good at paperwork. It's quite an anomaly." then it cuts to a scene from the same film with the C&C factory everybody dance now song and a cheerleading dance attempt
Speculation: Of course with the loophole stuff it could be about all of the DD that has been done on what has gone on over the years but it could equally be about SHFs finding loopholes to get out of the mess they are in with the stock. The second part the judges clearly don't feel the attempt of the cheerleading or gymnastics piece they are portraying is any good but they are giving it a go and it's suppose to a comedy. Note the school is the cougars, cat links again of course.
Edit\* As u/ omegs points out: Loophole is reference to circle. Notice how the mascot is similar to a cat that does backflips into the center of the circle
2:00pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790441953659687421
Description: The first part is taken from The Batman and has Batman's monologue running and when the Batman signal is fired into the sky, a kitty shadow is shown instead of the Batman logo. It ends with an emphasis on "Fear is a Tool".
Speculation: Batman was of course a good hero who would rid the streets of criminals, they would scare just at the sight of the batman signal being fired knowing that they were about to get wrecked. In this clip, two years has been replaced with three years in the monologue and the kitty signal is of course a nice touch.
2:30pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790449499506192405
Description: This clip is taken from Mr Robot and is where Elliot plays eXit, a text based computer game that requires him to answer a series of questions in a text based game.
Speculation: I think it's best just to give the description of what happens in this scene taken from the fandom page. Elliot chooses to sit down with the friend in the dungeon. He lights a match and reads the note "Don't leave me here." Elliot chooses to stay. The alarm shuts off. An explosion happens nearby. Robot opens the door to find a fire raging outside. He concludes it's too late. Both of them sit down. They each say "I love you." Explosions rage around the room. "It's an exciting time in the world," Elliot says. Fade to red. Take from that what you will.
3:00pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790457051115847720
Description: This scene is taken from the movie Scream (2022), a direct sequel to Scream 4. A lot of the text has been changed but to summarize, one person states "he is making a requel" then there is some talk about the squeeze movie that came out last year and how most people in the actual know hated it and how "squeeze mid" pissed on their "covidhood", how the main character is a mary sue? Then a few cuts of Scream and how real squeeze movies have meta slasher whodunnits and that to some people the original is their favorite thing in the world
Speculation: A requel is A movie which revisits the subject matter of an earlier film but is not a remake or a linear continuation of its plot (i.e. a sequel or prequel). So essentially what is happening right now with the stock is not exactly the same of what has happened before but it is essentially a revisit of the same subject regarding squeezes. A mid squeeze implies that it wasn't as high as the squeeze could have gone and the theme of slashers and murdered people really suggests heads will roll (SHFs hopefully).
3:30pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790464599575167004
Description: This is a scene from Candyman where he has come for the woman. There is some cat flashes and images going on and the Woman in this is tagged as a bear (that is someone who is down on a stock or market, usually would short). Candyman talks about how there is no need for the bear to leave yet and that he was obliged to come then he says "be my victim" and a bumble bee comes out of the word be.
Speculation: Time is running out for the bear, they can hang around for a while longer but they will be the victim. This is more of the DFV is coming for you as he dresses himself up as a rampaging murderer targeting the bear in this case. Not sure on the bee, whether that is DFV just having some fun or if it's that a sting is coming in some sense.
4:00pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790472153470759217
Description: Taken from No Country for Old Men, Carson states he is a day trader and that Anton doesn't have to do this (Anton is going to kill him) tell him he could just go home. Carson continues that Anton could have 14 grand out of an ATM and just walk away before finally stating "do you have any idea how crazy you are?". Anton replies, "you mean the nature of these memes?" to which Carson says "I mean the nature of you!" The scene ends with the phone ringing.
Speculation: DFV putting himself into the mode of Anton from No Country for Old Men is quite the statement. For those who haven't seen this movie, Anton is a wrecking ball of a killer and adheres by his rulebook to seek out different people through the movie to take out. Carson being the desperate short seller here who is not understanding why DFV isn't just playing by the usual financial rules and taking his gains and going. The phone ringing at end could be an implication of margin calls ringing for the desperate short seller.
Edit\* As u/ omegs points out: I think the ATM might be a double meaning "At The Money"
8:00pm - https://x.com/TheRoaringKitty/status/1790532552828289526
Description: This is taken from Braveheart and the prisoner (William Wallace) is asked to say a word in a famous scene where WW shouts "FREEEEDOM" only in this clip its "GAMESTOOOOOOOP".
Speculation: This is the first direct reference to Gamestop word for word and it should be noted that this is the scene where William Wallace is about to be executed. Could mean that DFV is willing to risk it all for Gamestop like William Wallace martyring himself for the freedom of Scotland.
Hope you enjoyed.
Love ya DFV

You all must know very well about GBWhatsApp. If you have used it well then you will know what features you get in this WhatsApp and how you can use all those features. Otherwise, if you have not used it and want to know more information about it. So you have to stay with our article till the end. So that you can know well about every good and bad feature of it. Actually, there is no such bad feature in this WhatsApp due to which you have to face any kind of problem. But still, let us tell you that this is a third-party app, so you have to use it very carefully.
Although GBWhatsApp promises that no user’s data or any other information will ever be leaked, but still you have to run it very carefully so that you do not face any problems related to it in the future. In further information, we are going to tell you about some special features of GBWhatsapp and its excellent privacy. You have to read it very carefully, only then you will be able to know the real importance of WhatsApp and how to use it. Making it popular among millions of users around the world. If you want more privacy, more control over your chatting experience, or want a way to add some fun and excitement to your conversations then GB WhatsApp is a great solution for you.

Download GBWhatsApp (112 MB)

Through which you can do everything which you cannot do in normal WhatsApp. GB WhatsApp is your preferred medium for your chats with more privacy, control and convenience. Enjoy the innovative features and customization of GBWhatsApp that attracts millions of people globally. Experience the best messaging with GB WhatsApp and take your chats to the next level. This is the only application which is used all over the world. And the best thing about it is that whoever uses this application once never thinks of using normal WhatsApp again. This WhatsApp has made a good place among the people in a very short time.What is GB WhatsApp & Its Other Detail
GB WhatsApp is actually one of the many versions of WhatsApp with rich features and is a very great application. It has many more features than WhatsApp, like secret, automatic reply, selecting to send message to more people simultaneously. It also has many other amazing features like sending text messages and even large video files. GB WhatsApp is the second version of WhatsApp. That said, there isn’t much difference in terms of look and structure between the original WhatsApp, GB WhatsApp, or GB WhatsApp Pro, or even FM WhatsApp. As you know the main difference between GB WhatsApp and WhatsApp is that GB WhatsApp has more features. That’s why people like to use GB WhatsApp. The latest version of GBWhatsApp is easily available on Android smartphones and anyone interested in using it can do so.
What is GB WhatsApp & Its Other Detail

GBWhatsApp APK History & Why Should I Download It?

The Facebook company made all the basic files for WhatsApp Messenger available as open-source software in late 2016. Now anyone can use those codes to develop a messaging service that competes with WhatsApp. An Android developer from the Arab world named Atnfas_hoak, better known as Omar. Uses those codes to create a chat application that connects directly to WhatsApp’s native database. Although he created this mobile application for entertainment. But the interesting thing is that it provides more features than the initially released WhatsApp and that is why the number of people using this WhatsApp is increasing day by day.
After one year of use it has more than 100k users which indicates a substantial increase in popularity. Also if you are satisfied with the normal WhatsApp application and its built-in capabilities then you can skip the need of getting the GB WhatsApp APK. However if you also want to be persistent then you should download the latest GBWhatsApp APK version. So that you always get to see something new with every update.

• Even WhatsApp doesn’t currently enable you to send large files to just anyone. But GB WhatsApp allows you to do so. The maximum file transmission capacity on GBWhatsApp can reportedly increase to 2GB.
• The ability to completely alter the app’s design and theme.
• Integrated function to reduce the length of the WhatsApp document to save up memory
• There are no flaws or mistakes.
• Along with this, there are many reasons which force you to download this WhatsApp at any cost.

The Special Feature of GBWhatsApp

• Auto Reply:-First of all you can use this auto-reply feature in gbwhatsapp when you want to reply to any of your friends at any time. You can use it to promote your business by sending unlimited bulk messages to a chat or group. Through this feature you will not be able to forget any of your friend’s birthday or any other event.
  
• Filter messages:- GB WhatsApp Pro APK is designed with Filter Messages feature that provides the user with the option to clear chats which can also filter your messages. You will benefit from this that if you want to view any of your chats separately then you can use this feature. Which is a very amazing feature and is also very useful for the people.
  
• Download Status:- Another great feature of this app is that you can download status photos and videos uploaded by other contacts which is great. Now you don’t need to use any third party application, you can easily save any type of status from your contact list, that too in its original quality. If we talk about normal WhatsApp then no such feature is included in it.
  
• Send High Quality Image:- Sometimes we have to send Images in Original Quality, and for that, we use the Document Option. Now GBWhatsApp Pro Allows you to end Images in the Highest Quality.
  
• Bulk Sender:- GB WhatsApp This tool lets you send bulk messages. This means you can send unlimited messages to contact and prank your friends with this amazing tool. This tool helps you send personalized WhatsApp messages to multiple people, even if you haven’t added them to your phonebook. It works with WhatsApp and WhatsApp Business on your mobile phones and laptops and is 100% secure and free to use.
  

The Special Feature of GBWhatsApp

• Pop-up notifications:- Similar to messaging app WhatsApp, GB WhatsApp also offers pop-up notifications with response opportunities. You can hide these notifications from view by opening the app’s notification options and turning off pop-up notifications. So that no one can bother you by sending messages again and again and you can do your work without any interruption.
  
• Amazing Fonts:- If you have used normal WhatsApp till now, then you would know that only one font is given for use in it, after seeing which the person gets bored. But you do not need to worry, after downloading GB WhatsApp, you get many more fonts in it which you can use as per your convenience. You can change the huge amount of fonts available every day.
  
• Infinite Themes:- The main advantage of GBWhatsApp APK with stunning fonts is its imaginative appearance as it offers an unlimited number of themes that can be used to help make WhatsApp look great. By simply browsing GB WhatsApp Themes you will be able to download the themes using any web browser. Not only this, if you do not like your WhatsApp theme then you can download the theme separately and apply it on your WhatsApp.
  

Change Colors

• Universal Color:- Changes Color everywhere, including UI
• Universal ActionBar Text Color:- Changes the color of the Actionbar on all screens
• Background:-Change Color of Background. Default is White
• List Background:- Change Background of list Chats in One UI.
• Status Bar:- Change Color of StatusBar on Every Screen
• Navigation Bar:- Change Color of NavigationBar on
• Tabs background color:- Change the background color for the Tabs in home screen
• Page Title Text Color:- Change color of ‘CHATS’, ‘STATUS’, ‘CALLS’
• Page Selected Title Text Color:- Change Selected color of ‘CHATS’, ‘STATUS’, ‘CALLS’
• Unread message counter color:- Change the background color for the unread message

GBWhatsApp Other Features and Advance Privacy

• Anti-revoke:- GBWhatsapp comes with an anti-revoke message feature, which means that even if someone sends any kind of message and then deletes everything on your behalf, you can still see those deleted messages by default.
  
• App Lock:- App Lock allows you to require a pattern, PIN, password or fingerprint to enter apps and access your messages. This adds a layer of security, and makes your WhatsApp chats even more secure so that no stranger can access your personal chats. And also keeps your messages hidden from people who have access to your phone. If you want, you can show the PIN and password while typing.
  
• DND Mode:- It has an inbuilt Do Not Disturb mode. If you are using any other app on your Android phone and do not want to be disturbed by WhatsApp messages then you can use the DND feature to disable the internet connection only for GB WhatsApp Pro. can do. Through this feature you can pause your WhatsApp for some time. And you can use other apps without any problem.
  
• People Nearby:- Developers added People Nearby to WhatsApp to exchange contact information face-to-face. With this update, people nearby can help you meet new friends. This allows you to automatically connect with everyone around you without any contact.
  
• Anti-Ban:- Some users may have trouble using third-party WhatsApp mods GB WhatsApp developers have integrated anti-ban features to reduce the risk. This assurance means you can enjoy additional features without the constant fear of losing access to the account. Now you can use this WhatsApp for a long time, this time the developers have given anti-ban form to this WhatsApp.
  
• Hide Last Seen:- With GB WhatsApp you can hide your last seen status. This allows you to appear offline to others and also see their last seen status. Unlike the original WhatsApp where hiding your last seen prevents you from seeing the last seen of others. GB WhatsApp offers the ability to hide your own Last Seen while retaining the ability to view the Last Seen of others.
  
• Block and Restrict Calls:- Now restrict callers without blocking them with GBWhatsApp Apk download. This is an amazing feature of this app because you don’t need to block the person or turn off the internet if you don’t want to talk to them. Go to the calls section of the app and block the caller from calling you. He will be able to text you and share his voice notes with you, which you can listen to at your convenience.
  
• Show Double Ticks after Reply:- This is an exciting feature of this app that you can use to take your privacy to the next level. The messages will be delivered to you. But the sender will see a tick on his message. Double and blue ticks will be visible to him only when you reply otherwise he will think that you are offline or for some reason his message has not been delivered yet.
  
• No In-App Ads:- Despite being a free application, it is an ad-free app. Advertisements are the main reason to distract users from using any app. GBWhatsApp comes with an ad-free interface and just like the original WhatsApp, you will never see a single ad while using this app.
  
• Change Chat Names:- GBWhatsApp app will allow you to have maximum control over the chat. You can easily change the name of a chat without changing the name of the contact in the contact list. Set nicknames for your chat with this beautiful app and talk to them with more passion and love.
  

Other Features

• Forward messages to anyone without forwarding the tag.
• You can select all chats at once from the home screen of this app.
• Add new fonts and icons.
• Anti-ban feature, you will not be banned from using WhatsApp.
• Stickers from other apps can be added.
• You can select all chats at once from the home screen.
• Enable drag to reply in group call.
• Hide the last seen.
• You can send a private reply to groups.
• The ability to send a group message supported by photos and videos.
• One-time photo and video viewing.
• Feature hide visiting cases to your friends.
• Hide the two check marks (correct) when receiving the message.
• Get notified of deleted messages.
• You can now read the description of the group in the title as the normal case.
• Airplane mode has been added so that the internet can be locked off from the WhatsApp application only.
• The possibility of sending 100 documents at once instead of 30.
• The feature of uploading your friends’ statuses.
• Video Now you can send a file size of up to 50 MB.
• You can send a group message to up to 600 people at once.
• With the theme option you can easily change the appearance.
• Make a list of who can contact you.
• Send up to 90 photos at once.
• The possibility of making a lock for Watts GP against blocking.
• You can download gbwhatsapp for free with a direct link

Conclusion

In today’s article we have told you about some special features of GBWhatsapp. We hope that you have understood all this information well. As we have mentioned earlier that WhatsApp is a third party app which cannot be trusted blindly. Most of the people around the world are using it but some people also say that all the data of this app has been leaked. Actually GB WhatsApp promises its users that no WhatsApp user’s data will be leaked. But you have to use it very carefully so that you never face any problem due to which you have to worry. Apart from this, there are many other flaws in it due to which people have to get a little worried.
Therefore you will have to be very careful while using it. Although we have given you all the information about this WhatsApp, but if you have any doubt about this article then you can tell us by commenting. We will definitely solve all your problems. Apart from this, we write many useful articles on our website which are very useful for people. If you want to know more things related to this, then you will have to visit our website as much as possible. So that you can read our every post first. GBWhatsApp Pro is a great app for those who want a more personalized and feature-rich WhatsApp experience.

With the Boys season 4 coming up, I wanted to offer a fix for season 3. One common complaint with season 3 is that it ended with the status quo going unchanged. Homelander wins again, Soldier Boy is frozen once again and the Boys are scrambling for a plan once again. So to combat these problems, here is ny fix for the season.
The season would go pretty much the same until the last episode. However, in the final fight, the Boys should have gone through with their plan and Soldier Boy should have depowered Homelander until some shenanigans happen with Ryan and Homelander escapes.
Now we have a much more interesting set up for season 4. You have two options to choose from. Either we change the finale of season 3 a little more so that nobody except Homelander himself knows that he is depowered. Thus, the season would revolve around him pretending to still be a superhero and controlling Vought but also panicking and being scared about others getting to know that he is powerless. Maybe he could start acting nicer towards the Seven and build up a genuine friendship with A-Train or the Deep since he knows that if he accidentally gets in a fight with them, he will get demolished.
The second option is that Homelander just escapes with Ryan and goes into hiding as everyone now knows that he has no powers. The season would revolve around half the Boys trying to bring down Soldier Boy, who becomes the leader of the Seven and Homelander’s replacement (which would be ironic because Homelander was his replacement) while the other half searches for Homelander.
Soldier Boy could either become a tyrant leader and start bullying A-Train and Deep or try to correct his previous mistakes and be a better leader. Both options would offer an interesting dynamic for season 4. Meanwhile Homelander would be trying to not get killed as the Boys as well A-Train, Deep, Maeve, Ashley and others would all be trying to kill him for tormenting them. He could build a genuine bond with Ryan since he does not have to worry about managing Vought or maintaining his image anymore.
By the end of season 4, you could have Homelander getting his powers back after which season 5 would see him truly lose control and go after every supe and human that tried to kill him when he was human. It would make for a far better season 4 premise and a more impactful finale as Homelander goes scorched Earth with Ryan by his side.
That’s my fix for season 3 of the Boys and how it would make the show more impactful and interesting.

I can’t write.
I can’t write at all. I would type words that pop up into my mind, then I’ll feel icky about it. Then it’d be gone in a flash with the power of my delete button. I used to think I’m a good writer, but it’s more like a phase where you feel so good about what you write. But growing out of it, you’ll look back and think, “What the f*ck is the thought process behind this fiasco?” That’s exactly how I feel about what I have written in the past.
I digress. I decided to start writing on this page here, 15th of May 2024 at 5-something PM in a cafe near school (class had just finished) because I feel like sh*t. Long story short, I have a man. My not-so-my-man man. It’s because we’re not really in any relationship to begin with, like, on paper, there are no statuses for us to settle with. It’s also important to mention how he was actually my crush whom I’ve liked since the start of sophomore year (he’s my senior). I don’t know if it’s because of how I’ve known him for roughly 17 years of my life or that he’s just so very smart. Maybe both. 2023 was rough for me because I fell in love with him but he didn’t even look at me. He’s kind, introverted, that polite and good-to-your-ma-and-everybody’s-ma kind of guy, and he’s just totally my type. Or my type is him. But everyone knew about it, my friends knew about it, his friends knew about it, he was the only clueless person during the episode.
2024 happened and we got close. April blessed me with the fact that he likes me back. “What if, I tell you, hypothetically, that I like you too. What would your response be?”
Best believe my heart rate spiked to 140 BPM.
Then we happened. Just like that. He said things me and my friends never really expected to hear him say. Like, are you serious, did Bonnie really say “God, I love you so much.” (Code name Bonnie, by the way. We call him that. Maybe one day I’ll tell you why) or am I on fentanyl right now? He’s sweet. He took me on dates. He was there when I lost the debating competition I truly believed I could win. He told me it’s okay. It’ll be okay. At the end, it’ll all be okay. And truly when he’s around, I am okay.
I don’t know when or why it started but we kind of fell off due to the fact that he stopped saying ‘I love you’ and bawling my eyes out because he left me hanging after making me wait became a weekly thing. He’s busy, I know of it, but it gets a little too painful for me to just continue my daily dilly-dallying after he left me without any ‘bye-bye’s or a kiss on the cheek. It occurred to me that, maybe, JUST maybe, I’ve liked him for so long and he doesn’t like me that much. I mean, whenever he’s around, Bonnie would rather talk to my male friends instead of me. He never really seeks after me. Never have I ever heard “Where’s Kiyo?” coming out of his mouth. True, most of the time we would be on the school ground, but, come on and talk to me. I am here.
Maybe it’s just the fact that he’s leaving for college soon (I am COUNTING my days because he, in fact, is leaving in DAYS) that makes me sad. Questions like “Do you not want to spend time with me before you go?” or “Do you even want to see me?” or “Will you miss me or will you miss me not?” would pop up in my head like, every 3 seconds (Can someone answer these questions for me by the way) and it’s— bothersome. I want to believe that he truly loves me. Again, I can’t help but doubt.
I really need to make up my mind and answer my own questions on what I’m actually worried about. I’ll continue in a bit. Girl’s gotta catch up the walking duration to an extra class at 7 PM (it’s 6:23).
Yours truly, Kiyo

I mean the famous "Bieber Bashing" of the early 2010s. "Hating Justin Bieber" was barely a joke -rather it was a whole lifestyle. You were cool/"normal" for hating him. People mocked his voice relentlessly. Called his music shit, his person shit. Everything shit. It was so casual, you could "hate" Justin Bieber without ever really knowing him. Because hey -a lot of artists are hated/cringe, so...who cares?
Except...He was 15yo. He was just a kid. He never asked to be famous. He made innocent love songs that 13yo girls liked. He was bullied by adults all life long. Not just millions of faceless facebook statuses, but I watched old interviews in which adults -ADULTS - ask him sexually inappropriate questions, or just tug around him. A thing which got worse, when he started to act out: Drinking, drugs, getting into fights, that monkey situation...And somehow, people just doubled down. "Oh look, we always knew he was an asshole. He deserves it."
I know it might be a little petty of me. There are millions of unfairly hated (child) stars. But somehow, Bieber struck a cord with me. As a kid, many kids and, again, even adults bullied me, due to an unspoken notion that it was "okay". I "deserved" it. And when I fought back, everyone just felt validated in their treatment, cause "see, she's a violent POS". My only "luck" was that my case was isolated to my school/home.
Still. Somehow it terrifies me that millions could easily write about wanting a kid dead/down for simply "being annoying". Like. What's wrong with humanity?

I (F55) have had this FWB relationship with a man (M51) for over two years. He told me from day one it's just a "Friends with Benefits", does not want a serious relationship right now. At the same time he meets a woman (from his country) while he is there visiting his sick father. She's a cancer doctor, young, pretty and they hit it off and they become boyfriend/girlfriend. I found out by seeing a post on FB. He made up this ridiculous story and I believed him. As of Nov 2020, they are engaged. She lives in another country and he lives here in the states. I see him about 2-3 times a week, just for sex. Yes, I am aware of his relationship status with this girl, but I keep seeing him. We've gotten to know each other on a personal level, and have great conversations. Over and over again he tells me that he doesn't plan on marrying her until he retires, in about 10 years. I have been back and forth back and forth on how and why I am doing this to myself. The longer I am with him, the more it's going to hurt when he does marry her, to which I told him that will be the end for us. He is getting ready to spend over a week with her...she is coming to the states to be with him. It kills me knowing she gets the relationship and connection I crave - fun, passion, intimacy, his full attention, love, and all that comes with a full blown relationship. Yes, I'm jealous. But once she leaves, it's back to having only sex (FWB) with me and clearly there isn't much of the Friends part. There is a lot of other details that come with this story. One other thing, I have been dealing with female problems since I met him and as of today, I had a scare of possibly having cervical cancer. Thank God that its not cancer, but I am having to go through a stressful time and constantly worrying about my health; which stems from both of us having unprotected sex from the very beginning. That's on both of us. I know I need to break it off with him. But I can't...or don't want to honestly. I'm broken physically and mentally and I don't know how to fix me. Therapy is too expensive. I have exposed my situation to a few friends, they give me advice and at the same time support me. I need help!

Hello, apparently a bunch of people have been asking about the status of AtlasLoot for Cata as the original developer has been out of the game for a while.
Since I'm out of a job right now and have a lot of free time on my hands, I'm doing it. I've never developed WoW addons before, but I'm quickly learning and making good progress.
I'm working on it as much as I can (I've basically given up on Arch solves) but be patient for a fully working version! There is a lot of data to add/fix, manual data manipulation, and some reverse engineering to do. The original author did respond, and I'm waiting on him again for more info, but once it's READY it should be available on Curse and all the other usual places. No timeline for that atm, but I have put in many hours already. There's quite a lot of changes with Cataclysm so, again, please be patient and report any bugs on Github. Also, feel free to contribute if you'd like.
In the long term, I'd like to create a new addon sometime that replaces things like AtlasLoot. However, that would be a huge undertaking and something to think about. Something like the Dungeon Journal extended to be generalized across all areas of the game would be really nice imo.
Finally, the links and how to install it:
If you just download the Repo on Github you'll have a developer version and will get spammed with "X person sends version Y" messages in your chat window. So, I will regularly do new alpha releases here: https://github.com/snowflame0/AtlasLootClassic_Cata/releases
So go there if you want the latest and greatest with the newest changes/fixes.
Latest Direct Download (May 15th):
https://github.com/snowflame0/AtlasLootClassic_Cata/releases/download/v4.0.0-alpha0/AtlasLootClassic-v4.0.0-alpha0.zip
Directions:
Unzip that and open the folder it creates, you will see a bunch of folders named 'AtlasLootClassic' and 'AtlasLootClassic_X' (one for each module), drag all of those folders into your addons folder which should be inside the WoW directory under '_classic_/Inferface/Addons/'
People have suggested to me to set up one of these: So, if you appreciate the work and want to help support my broke ass while I keep working on this, please feel free to buy me a coffee @ https://buymeacoffee.com/snowflame0

frankly, they're both horrid.
both of them are purely based around how much 2 people like a level AND the creator, of which only one of them (robtop) actually can rate your level and give it the rating status (featured, epic, etc), and the other can make your level more visible to him.
this is flawed, oh it's really, really flawed, as this doesn't enforce creativity and originality, but rather, it encourages heavy inspiration off certain styles, hence why so many rated levels today look very much the same (take a look at modern levels, glow levels, etc, you can clearly observe the resemblances and lack of diversity). if you want a rated level, you don’t have to make something which you like, or which 1000 other people will like, or something unique and creative. to get a rated level, what you need is to please someone (a moderator) enough to make your level more visible to robtop, only for then to be a slim chance of him ever seeing your level at all, which even if he does, if he doesn't like it, it doesn’t matter what half the community thinks, he won't rate it. (see Tidal Wave, which took way too long to get rated)
that's one flaw, but not the only one. another flaw would be the clear and obvious bias toward bigger and more well known creators, where the odds of their levels getting rated are much higher when compared to others, meaning they don't need to put as much effort in their levels for them to get rated. is that bad? not at all, i'm a firm believer that all levels with somewhat normal gameplay and some decent visuals should get star rated, at the very least. but that's just me. anyhow, the reason why i bring this up is because of the recent incident of dislike botting (?) and harassment on Split72. they claim they just build levels for fun, and whatever that's true or not, it doesn’t matter whatsoever. what matters, however, is that because of robtop and the mods' bias, Split's levels are more likely to get rated, while other people's levels won't. so because of them, Split is the one that gets targeted, not robtop.
and lastly, the third most important flaw is the rating standards.
tell me please, what does one need to make a level that is legendary or mythic worthy? what about epic and feature worthy? what about rated at all? you know what you need? you need """good""" decoration, some gameplay, and fame. a lot of people forget that we have only had 3 rating statuses, which worked somewhat fine (rated only for levels with decoration that's decent and decent gameplay, featured for good decoration and decent gameplay, and epic for amazing decoration and decent gameplay), but with the addition of Legendary and Mythics, people debate what levels deserve these ratings? many believe they should be amazing levels with breath taking decoration and gameplay, which fair enough that's understandable, but you need to understand that many years of 3 rating statuses fucked us up badly. many featured levels of 2.1 could fit in the mythic status and many epic levels could fit in the legendary status, but people don't understand it because they still need to get used to it.
i propose an idea for rating standards: rate only - levels with some gameplay and some visuals. featured - levels with decent decoration and some gameplay. epic - levels with good decoration and good gameplay mythic - levels with amazing decoration or effects, polished, and with good gameplay. legendary - levels with amazing and polished decoration and effects, well optimised, and with amazing gameplay.
the status is not proposed by robtop or mods, but by players themselves, where mods' count as 10 status points. make there be some sort of moderator rank but higher, able to rate levels, maybe call it admin. admins can rate levels in a similar manner to robtop, but are limited to 5 rates a day, and only robtop should be able to unrate them.
what could my idea do? make the rated level achievement more accessible to everyone. lower the standards for rated and featured levels whilst also increase the standards for mythic and legendary levels. slightly reduce the bias. increase the number of rated levels by a lot, and more levels to play = more fun for all.
this is in fact pretty much excluding gameplay, but a level playing changes more from player to player than whether a level looks decent or ass.
k thx bai

The history of the Panjabi folk song "Jugni" is a captivating blend of storytelling, spiritual yearning, and a touch of mystery. Unlike a single song, "Jugni" represents a narrative style deeply embedded in Panjabi folk music for centuries. The word itself translates to "firefly" and is also used to describe a free-spirited woman. This symbolism reflects the multifaceted nature of Jugni performances.
The most widely accepted view suggests Jugni wasn't a specific song but a storytelling method used by Panjabi folk singers. It's likely that the themes explored in Jugni narratives ranged from everyday life experiences to spiritual reflections.
There's a theory suggesting a specific origin point around 1908, with folk singers Bishna and Manda credited for its creation. Both men hailed from the Majha region. According to a local lore, Manda (real name Mohammad) was a Muslim Mirasi from Hasanpur, Amritsar, while Bishna belonged to a Jatt family from the Kasur-Patti region. Their repertoire consisted mainly of traditional folk songs like Mirza and Tappe.
This theory behind Jugni's birth is interesting. It is said that around 1908, to celebrate the 50th year (golden jubilee) of Queen Victoria on the throne, a ceremonial flame traveled across British-ruled India, reaching every major city and district headquarters. Bishna and Manda, known for their stage performances, followed the flame wherever it went.
There's a discrepancy in how the word "Jugni" came about, but generally it's claimed that illiterate Bishna and Manda mispronounced "Jubilee" as "Jugni." Capitalizing on the festivities, Bishna and Manda incorporated the "Jugni" (or Jubilee) flame into their performances. They sang self-composed verses about the flame, accompanying themselves on traditional instruments like the Dhad and King. These catchy verses, referencing specific cities and villages, quickly gained popularity, inspiring others to create their own Jugni verses.
Their original 'Jugni-verse' was presumably: "Jugni jaa varhi Majithe, koi rann na chakki peethe, Putt gabhru mulak vich maare, rovan akhiyan par bulh si seete, Piir mereya oye Jugni ayi aa, ehnan kehrhi jot jagaee aa"
This 'Jugni's poetic style and versification later became a traditional method and started taking much more in it's clasp but the beginning of 'Jugni' always remained in some city or place:
"Jugni jaa varhi Ludhiane, Uhnun pai ge anne kaane, Maarn mukkian mangan daane, Piir mereya oye! Jugni kehndi aa, Jehrhi naam Ali da laindi aa"
As the "Jugni" flame traveled, Bishna and Manda's fame grew. However, the era was marked by public discontent towards British rule, including famines and oppression. This social unrest found its way into their Jugni verses, which often criticized the British Raj.
The popularity of these anti-colonial verses did not go unnoticed by the authorities. Bishna and Manda's performances were banned, forcing them to move their shows away from official festivities. Despite police intervention and crowd dispersal tactics, their revolutionary Jugni performances continued to inspire anti-British sentiment.
Tragically, their defiance ended with their arrest and torture by police in Gujranwala. They were reportedly buried in an unmarked grave, their voices silenced but their Jugni legacy living on in the hearts of the people. Both Bishna and Manda are said to have been around their 50s and unmarried, so it is said they died without heirs.
However, there are inconsistencies about this theory. Firstly, Queen Victoria's golden jubilee, which would be the most relevant jubilee for a celebration in 1908, actually occurred in 1887. Additionally, there's no historical record of a nationwide jubilee with a "Jugni" or "Jubilee" flame traveling across India for her coronation as Queen or Queen-Empress of the British Raj.
This discrepancy casts doubt on the accuracy of the story. It's possible that the details about the jubilee and the creation of Jugni are misremembered or embellished over time. Alternatively, there might have been a localized event around 1908 that involved some form of light or celebration, but it wouldn't have been the grand jubilee described in the story. It is possible that there was local events celebrating an end to the 1857 mutiny against British rule.
An alternative perspective comes from the acclaimed Panjabi folk singer Alam Lohar. He claimed to have coined the term "Jugni" inspired by Sufi poetry, and is credited with popularizing a specific style of Jugni singing. In his renditions, Jugni became a vehicle for expressing spiritual themes, often referencing God with terms like "saeen".
Lohar's own journey with Jugni began during his early performances in the 1930s, pre-dating the partition of Panjab. As a child prodigy, he sang Jugni extensively during this time. Unfortunately, limited recording facilities in British India prevented many of these early performances from being captured.
However, later in his career, Lohar released an LP record titled "Jugni" which became a huge success, achieving gold disc status in 1965. He recorded numerous variations of Jugni throughout his career, and some of these recordings are still available on LP records, black and white TV footage, and even YouTube.
Lohar's influence extends well beyond himself. Singers worldwide, including his son Arif Lohar, have been deeply inspired by his renditions of Jugni.
The passage also offers some interesting background on the word "Jugni" itself. It mentions a theory that Lohar might have been influenced by encountering the term in Sufi writings. Additionally, "Jugni" is noted to be a traditional Muslim prayer tool (Tasbih) and an ornament worn by Panjabi women. However, the connection between these uses of "Jugni" and the musical genre wasn't explicitly explained by Lohar.
Lohar's claim is contested by other Panjabi artists. They argue that Jugni existed well before him. This viewpoint strengthens the idea of Jugni being a long-standing narrative tradition.
Despite the debate on its exact origin, some aspects of Jugni's history are clear. It's an established Panjabi folk narrative style, likely referring to fireflies or a free spirit. Alam Lohar undeniably popularized a particular style of Jugni focused on spiritual themes. Renditions of Jugni have been made by many artists including Arif Lohar, Saleem Javed, Asa Singh Mastana, Surinder Kaur, Gurmeet Bawa, Kuldip Manak, Gurdas Mann, Harbhajan Mann, Rabbi Shergill, Malkit Singh, Babbu Mann, Diljit Dosanjh, Bilal Saeed, etc.
In conclusion, Jugni's history is a testament to the enduring power of Panjabi folk traditions. While its exact beginnings might be debated, Jugni's ability to capture the essence of a free spirit and the yearning for the divine continues to resonate with audiences.

Jack McBrayer: American actor and comedian, born May 27, 1973. He became famous through his roles on ‘Late Night with Conan O’Brien’ and as Kenneth Parcell on ’30 Rock’. His ’30 Rock’ role earned him a nomination for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series at the Primetime Emmy Awards. Many people are nosy about Jack McBrayer’s sexual orientation. Let’s answer the question – is Jack McBrayer gay?

Details About Jack McBrayer’s Personal Life

Detail	Information
Full Name	Jack McBrayer
Date of Birth	May 27, 1973
Place of Birth	Macon, Georgia, U.S.
Education	University of Evansville (BFA)
Occupation	Actor, Comedian
Years Active	1995–present
Notable Roles	Kenneth Parcell in 30 Rock, Fix-It Felix Jr. in Wreck-It Ralph
Relationship Status	Private

Is Jack McBrayer Gay?

Jack McBrayer is one of those people who like to maintain their private lives away from the public eye. Some admirers believe that he could be either asexual or gay, but these are mere conjectures.
The actor himself has not commented anything about his sexual orientation. What we need is to respect his privacy and appreciate that his sexual orientation is nothing else but a personal affair belonging to Jack McBrayer alone.
That is why until he chooses to open this part of his life, we cannot make any definite statements as to what his actual sexual orientation might be.

Why Do People Think Jack McBrayer Is Gay?

Various rumors and discussions have led to a lot of speculation about Jack McBrayer’s sexual orientation. Some think that he may be gay on account of his lack of public relationships and the absence of any information about his personal life.
In contrast, others highlight his secretive nature and the enigma surrounding his love life hence creating an element of doubt concerning which way he swings. These interactions with Alexander Skarsgard have fueled speculations about the sexuality of Jack McBrayer.
Even so, whether Jack is straight or not remains unanswered in a relatively private manner, contributing to fans’ ongoing scrutiny of this comedian’s preferences.

How Jack McBrayer Handles These Rumors?

Jack McBrayer has decided to keep his private life secret. He has not publicly talked about talks about his sexual orientation. His representative has said, “I will not discuss his personal life” when questioned about these rumors.
It’s critical to recall that everyone has the freedom of privacy. It’s up to each person to decide how much they want to share about their personal life. As fans and observers, it’s vital to respect this privacy and focus on valuing their professional work.

Jack McBrayer’s Past Relationships

Jack McBrayer has always kept his personal life private as of may 2024. He is not active on social media and has not been seen in public with a romantic mate. Hence, his past relationships remain largely anonymous.
There have been rumors that he dated his “30 Rock” co-star Jane Krakowski in the past, but neither of them proved or refuted these rumors.
It’s crucial to respect McBrayer’s privacy and focus on his professional victories. He is a talented actor and comedian, and his contributions to the entertainment industry are significant.

In the Recent Livestream at 24:00, Devon didn't want to calculate the outcome of a Match between him and Levan at 115kg.
https://www.youtube.com/live/iLvJJmuAmaU?si=zwSdu5DrStMb0Oz9&t=1453
He was asked what he thinks about it and said that SHW Division is the Crown (of the Sport) ?
The SHW Division with no upper weight-Limit basically says you have a freeway ticket to Hell. If you go the furthest beyond anyone else, you become the strongest but risk and damage your body. That means if Athletes set their Goal for the SHW Title doesn't matter what it takes, it will lead to a spiral of doom.
i would like to see Levan come down in Weight to see if he can hold his Title in about even weight class. The Pound for Pound comparison that Devons says we shouldn't do is exactly what i would argue is what we should do in a healthy weight class <=105kg with a healthy BodyFat-% where your Body can naturaly support your Physique without needing Oxygen-Tanks.
If Devon would follow his own belief, he must bulk up to reach Levans weight to be able to pull against him but he doesn't do this.
If Levan is truly the BEST Armwrestler, he should be able to defeat all the other Athletes in their weight-classes and if he can't do this and "cheats" his way beyond a status that can be called humanly-healthy, it doesn't translate into being the best at the sport but being best at cheating.
Who is the best Armwrestler ? i would argue that it is someone who beats any other Top Armwrestlers in a fixed, healthy Weight-Class with even Weight, hence utilizes Technique, Endurance, Power at this Level to win. This Definition does not fit to SHW. And the best of all would be someone who can shift between the weight classes and defeat all Top-Athletes in every division. Open-Weight-Division should be abolished.

Introduction

In this post, we'll be discussing something called "Virtue Ethics." This is a normative theory of ethics that's most associated with Aristotle, though has in recent times experienced a resurgence of sorts from modern philosophers, some of whom have tweaked and modified it, and in doing so have created different branches on this tree of moral theory. We will be comparing these different flavors of Virtue Ethics to that of the New Testament's, pointing out where they're similar, as well as highlighting where the NT differs (and is actually superior) from the heathens' views.
I want to preface all this with a verse and a warning:

"Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ."-Colossians 2:8

The entire Bible, over and over again, warns against syncretism. It's a running theme throughout to condemn the practice, with this verse being one of the more explicit ones to do so.
Mapping the ideas of Pagans (and especially Greek philosophers) onto the Scriptures has always resulted in people severely misinterpreting the Bible, as looking at the Word of God through a Hellenistic lens is and always has been extremely innapropiate to the author's original intent.
Whenever Greek philosophy or ideas are referenced, they're always portrayed in a bad light or otherwise used to make a point. Examples of the latter could be found in the apostle Paul's writings, as he was a fully educated Roman citizen of his day, and so he made use of known Hellenestic philosophy and literature (that he would have been familiar with) by redefining their terms and ideas in a way that would be consistent with the theology of his own religion. The apostle Peter did the same within his own epistles whenever he mentioned "Tartarus," the abyss/prison for certain disobedient angels that rebelled against God, despite the fact that the word has its roots in Greek mythology and not Hebrew religion (though, the belief that there were a group of spiritual beings that rebelled against the highest authority in the heavens was one technically shared between the two ancient cultures; even if the parties involved were vastly different, as well as the contexts of the rebellion itself).
The affect Hellenstic philosophy has had on the way people think (even subconsciously) can still be felt to this day, and can be seen in the confusion modern "Christianity" has brought on through its adoption of Gnostic teachings such as Dualism or the inherently fatalistic views that many unknowingly hold due to the error of Classical Theism.
While yes, I will be commending the heathen (unbeliever) whenever they are right with their ideas as pertaining to this subject, I will also show where they are wrong.
Let's begin.

"What Is Virtue Ethics?"

First, we need to define some terms and point out the differences between this view and others within the larger debate of normative ethics.
There are three major approaches in normative ethics, those being: Consequentalism, Deontology, and Virtue Ethics. The following are definitions of the terms:
Consequentialism – a class of normative, teleological ethical theories that holds that the consequences of one's conduct are the ultimate basis for judgement about the rightness or wrongness of that conduct.
Deontology – theories where an action is considered morally good because of some characteristic of the action itself, not because the product of the action is good. Deontological ethics holds that at least some acts are morally obligatory regardless of their consequences for human welfare.
Virtue Ethics – theories that emphasize the role of character and virtue in moral philosophy rather than either doing one’s duty or acting in order to bring about good consequences. The virtue ethicist would argue that actions themselves, while important, aren't as important as the character behind them. To the virtue ethicist, consequences are also important, but they would say that good consequences ultimately flow from a virtuous character who has made virtuous decisions. Theories of virtue ethics do not aim primarily to identify universal principles that can be applied in any moral situation, instead teaching that the best decisions can vary based on context, and that there are only some actions that would be universally evil, only because those actions could never flow from a virtuous character in the first place (e.g., rape).
Aristotle's idea of ethics is in an important respect different from most people's, especially today. Heirs as we are to Kant’s idea of duty – there is a right thing that one ought to do, as rational beings who respect other persons – and to Mill’s idea of utility – the right thing to do is that which produces the greatest good for the greatest number – most of us see ethics as concerned with actions. "The function of ethics is to help me see what I ought to do in a given situation," the modern says. Aristotle’s approach was different. His ethic is not so much concerned about helping us to see what we ought to do, as about what sort of person we ought to be.
Aristotle was concerned with character, and with the things that go to make up good and bad character; virtues and vices. His sort of ethic does not look at our action to see if it fulfils our duty, or produces a certain outcome, such as the greatest good of the greatest number, and therefore merits approval. Instead, it looks at us; at the character behind the actions, to see whether we merit approval.
Comparing Virtue Ethics with philosophies such as Deontology and Consequentialism, we are able to divide ethical theories into two kinds; act-centered theories and agent-centered theories. Kant’s (Deontological) and Mill’s (Utilitarian) approaches are act-centered, because they concern themselves with our actions, whilst Aristotle’s is agent-centered because it concerns itself with the character of a person, which in his view was ourselves and our own dispositions that prompt our actions.
Both approaches have ardent present-day advocates, and so both are alive and well. Virtue Ethicists are dissatisfied with the answers ‘modern’ act-centered philosophy offers, and look for a more flexible, person-centered approach that takes more account of the subtle varieties of human motivation. Those in this camp see ethics as being about people – moral agents – rather than merely about actions. Of course, your actions matter. But, for Aristotle and his present day advocates alike, they matter as expressions of the kind of person you are. They indicate such qualities as kindness, fairness, compassion, and so on, and it is these qualities and their corresponding vices that it is the business of ethics to approve or disapprove.
All this seems simple and uncontroversial; there are two ways of looking at an action to evaluate it morally. You can take the action in isolation and judge it, or take the agent and judge him or her.
Virtue ethicists argue that act-centered ethics are narrow and bloodless. What is needed is a richer moral vocabulary than just ‘right and wrong’. There are subtle but important differences between actions that are good because they are kind and those that are good because they are generous, and those that are good because they are just. Likewise, there are subtle but important differences between actions that are bad because they are selfish and those that are bad because they are cruel and those that are bad because they are unfair. These, and many other, distinctions are lost when we talk simply about doing one’s duty, or promoting utility. Questions of motive and of character are lost, in these asceptic terms. Modern moral philosophy won’t do: it is cold, technical and insensitive to the many kinds and degrees of value expressed in human actions. Ethics is more than just thought experiments and hypotheticals about what would be the right course of action to take in any given situation we might conjure up from the comfort of our armchair. Ethics is about doing, and about context and character.

The Different Kinds of "Virtue Ethics"

Virtue Ethics has has been developed in two main directions: Eudaimonism, and agent-based theories.
Eudaimonism (Aristotle's view) bases virtues in human flourishing, where flourishing is equated with performing one’s distinctive function well. In the case of humans, Aristotle argued that our distinctive function is reasoning, and so the life “worth living” is one which we reason well. He also believed that only free men in the upper classes of society (i.e., the aristocrats) could excel in virtue and eschew vice, being that such men had greater access to the means in accomplishing this task as they had the wealth and resources to better perform their distinctive function of 'reasoning,' and thus "live well." For the Eudaimonian, inner dispositions are what one ought to focus on in order to cultivate virtuous traits, and thus a virtuous character.
In contrast, an agent-based theory emphasizes that virtues are determined by common-sense intuitions that we as observers judge to be admirable traits in other people. There are a variety of human traits that we find admirable, such as benevolence, kindness, compassion, etc., and we can identify these by looking at the people we admire, our moral exemplars. Agent-based theories also state that the motivations and intentions behind an action are ultimately what determine whether or not said action is actually virtuous. Whereas Eudaimonism understands the moral life in terms of inner dispositions or proclivities to act in certain ways (whether righteous or wicked, just or unjust, kind or cruel, etc.), agent-based theories are more radical in that their evaluation of actions is dependent on ethical judgments about the inner life of the agents who perform those actions, that is, what the motivations and intents are of a person.
[Note: While both Eudaimonism and agent-based theories are both agent-centered, Eudaimonism is not to be confused with an agent-based theory. Both branches concern themselves more with agents rather than acts themselves, but Eudamonism focuses on the self to improve whereas the agent-based theory focuses on others to improve.]

Common Critcisims Toward Secular Forms of Virtue Ethics

Firstly, Eudaimonism provides a self-centered conception of ethics because "human flourishing" (here defined as simply fulfilling our base function as humans, which is "reason" according to this view) is seen as an end in itself and does not sufficiently consider the extent to which our actions affect other people. Morality requires us to consider others for their own sake and not because they may benefit us. There seems to be something wrong with aiming to behave compassionately, kindly, and honestly merely because this will make oneself happier or "reason well."
Secondly, both Eudaimonism and agent-based theories also don't provide guidance on how we should act, as there are no clear principles for guiding action other than “act as a virtuous person would act given the situation.” Who is a virtuous person? Who is the first or universal exemplar?
Lastly, the ability to cultivate the right virtues will be affected by a number of different factors beyond a person’s control due to education, society, friends and family. If moral character is so reliant on luck, what role does this leave for appropriate praise and blame of the person? For the Eudaimonian, one ought to be born into a status of privilege if they wish to excel in being virtuous. For the proponent of an agent-based theory, one ought to be born into a society or family with good role models and preferably be raised by such, else they have no moral exemplars to emulate.

The New Testament's Virtue Ethic

The New Testament authors didn’t sit down and do a self-consciously philosophical exercise, for this was not what they were concerned with. They were concerned with giving practical instruction to disciples of the faith, and merely trying to express the ethical implications of their spiritual experience. That being said, we know the apostle Paul was familiar with the writings of Aristotle. We can actually identify places where Paul displays knowledge of Aristotle and incorporates some of the philosopher's ideas into his own epistles. Before we do this, however, it's important we refute common misnomers about what the Bible teaches concerning ethics in general.
You probably have heard many attack the ethics of the New Testament as being primitive and simplistic. "God dictates universal commands to follow: 'do not lie,' do 'not divorce,' 'do not insult.' And the only motivating factor is escaping hellfire and obtaining the reward of eternal pleasure." But in reality, this is a gross misrepresentation of the ethics laid out in the NT. I will argue the NT advocates for a form of virtue ethics, instead of claiming the NT contains a form of deontic ethics, as it is so often assumed.
Elizabeth Anscombe was one of the most influential virtue ethicists of the 20th century. Her work helped to revive virtue ethics in the modern era, however she also criticized the ethics of the Bible for promoting a form of ethics different than what Aristotle promoted:
"...between aristotle and us came Christianity, with its law conception of ethics. For Christianity derived its ethical notions from the Torah. (One might be inclined to think that a law conception of ethics could arise only among people who accepted an allegedly divine positive law..." (Modern Moral Philosophy, vol. 33, no. 124, 1-19)
We've already dealt with the issue of the Torah in another post. The Torah is not laying down moral laws, but describing justice in the form of ancient Near Eastern wisdom literature. But does the New Testament teach a deontic form of ethics? Anscombe might appear justified in her claim, as some "Christian" theologians have explicitly taught the ethics of the NT is deontic.
However, other theologians have argued the ethics of the NT is best characterized as a form of virtue ethics. In a study of the NT, we'll support this notion. As noted earlier, one of the central features of this approach to ethics is that the aim of ethics should be on living a virtuous life. Other forms of ethics focus on directing actions when confronted with a moral dilemma, but for virtue ethics every action is a moral or immoral action because all of our actions contribute or do not contribute to living a virtuous life. In other words, for a virtue ethicist, everything we do will contribute to living a fulfilled life. Now, the NT promotes a similar idea with a slight modification. The NT changes the distinctictive function and purpose for man in Eudaimonism from "reasoning" to loving God and others instead, and thus "living well" is changed from self-centered 'flourshing' (as defined by Aristotle) to glorifying God instead. The apostles taught everything we do contributes to living a life that glorifies God:

"Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God."-1 Corinthians 10:31
"And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him."-Colossians 3:17

So we see the same idea in Paul, that everything we do can be seen as a moral or immoral action. Everything we do should be seen as contributing to living a life that glorifies god or not. As a believer, the aim is not just doing good actions to avoid punishments, but to see everything we do as glorifying God. On secular virtue ethics, all our actions are either advancing a good life or not: nourishing your body contributes to living a good life. In a Biblical context: taking the time to properly dress contributes to living a good life, and not giving into the sin of sloth. So all our actions can be moral actions in this context, and so likewise for Paul and Jesus, all we do can contribute to living a life that glorifies God.
Since God made our bodies to thrive and enjoy life, we should nourish our bodies so we can thrive as God intended for our bodies to do, thus ultimately glorifying Him. Since we were created to experience and feel enjoyment, laughing and enjoying things throughout life glorifies God as well since we're experiencing emotions that God created to be experienced. Everything we do should be to glorify God, and often all that is is living our lives in the way that they were intended to be lived. Biblical ethics is very much more than merely performing right actions, but living a virtuous life that brings glory to God.
As Jesus said:

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind."-Matthew 22:37b

It is also important to focus on what it means to love, which is an important aspect of what it means to be a believer. Paul makes the radical claim that to love is the entirety of the law of God:

"For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."-Galatians 5:14

Jesus also taught that to love God and love others were the two greatest commandments (Mark 12:28-31, Matt. 22:34-40). He also extends the commandment to love beyond one's brethren, and to love our enemies (Matt. 5:44). Loving those around us is central to what it means to be a believer (John 13:34; 15:12-17, Rom. 12:10; 13:8, 1 Cor. 13:1-8; 16:14, 2 Cor. 8:8, Eph. 4:2; 5:2, Phili. 1:9, Heb. 10:24, Jam. 2:8, 1 Pet. 1:22, 1 John 2:10; 3:23).
One might suggest this is no different than the Golden Rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do to you," or a Kantian rule: "I ought never to act except in such a way that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law." In other words, "to live well is to perform good deeds or actions and nothing more." But an important point about loving someone is it cannot be done through actions alone. For example, one could buy a gift for their spouse to cheer them up. However, one could perform this action merely because they value performing right actions without any love for the person. One could donate to charity because it is the right thing to do, and not because she cares for the people who would benefit. In such scenarios, they can be seen as idolizing moral laws, not necessarily caring about helping others.
But to love someone requires more than merely performing right actions. You cannot love someone and not care about who they are as a person and where they are heading in life. To love is to will the good of the other. Jesus chastised the Pharisees of his day for only performing right actions, but not loving their brethren in their hearts. His criticism follows Matthew chapter 22, where Jesus says the greatest commandments are to love. The implication is the Pharisees perform proper actions, but have the wrong motivations for doing so. James Keenan puts it like this:
"Essential to understanding this command is that we love our neighbors not as objects of our devotion, but rather as subjects; that is, as persons. Thus, we cannot love others only because God wants us to do so, since then we would love them as means or as objects and not as persons. We can only love one another as subjects, just as God loves us." (Jesus and Virtue Ethics: Building Bridges Between New Testament Studies and Moral Theology, pg. 86)
A critic may bring up that verses of the NT are still phrased as commands, and therefore the structure implies duties were the central aspect of Christian ethics. But the importance of duties is not foreign to Virtue Ethics. Instead of being central to the ethical framework, duties flow from a virtuous character. Virtues are active and have certain demands for which a person must fulfill in their active behavior.
According to Aristotle, knowledge of the virtues gives us practical wisdom in how to properly act. Duties flow from the understanding of the demands of virtues. To put it another way, for virtues to manifest in persons, they have certain demands that must be fulfilled. For the believer, the command of love flows from being virtuous and aligning oneself with the character of God. Commitment to the character of Christ, who perfectly carried out the will of the Father, allows us to perform right and proper actions.
The NT also contains lists of virtues the believer ought to emulate, the most famous of these is in Galatians chapter 5:
"But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law." (vss. 22-23)
Now, the connection with Aristotle cannot be more pronounced. The Greek phrase "against such there is no law" is almost identical to what we find in Aristotle's politics (3.13.1284a). It seems clear Paul is teaching a similar ethical framework to what Aristotle advocated for. Paul is teaching that the believing community ought to be persons who display key virtues, and that their conduct would not need to be regulated by a law. Instead, their character should be the standard others can measure themselves by. Romans chapter 2 is also a place we see references to Aristotle, where Paul notes that when Gentiles do what the law requires, they are "a law unto themselves" (vss. 14-15). In other words, they do not need to be told to act a certain way. They have the proper virtuous character that directs their actions, to do the good the law requires. Paul is advocating in Galatians that believers should think in a similar way.
So in Galatians 5, we have affinity with the teachings of Aristotle, and in other lists of virtues throughout the NT we see a similar idea, which is that Christians were meant to display virtues primarily (Rom. 5:3-5, 1 Cor. 13:1-8, Col. 3:12-17, 1 Tim. 3:2-3; 4:7-8, Jam. 3:17-18, 2 Pet. 1:5-8). From that, good deeds will properly manifest in our actions.
Anscombe made a great point on what the focus of ethics should be:
"It would be a great improvement if, instead of 'morally wrong', one always named a genus such as 'untruthful', 'unchaste', 'unjust'. We should no longer ask whether doing something was 'wrong', passing directly from some description of an action to this notion; we should ask whether, e.g., it was unjust; and the answer would sometimes be clear at once." (Modern Moral Philosophy, vol. 33, no. 124, 1-19)
Interestingly enough, Paul lays out a similar idea in explaining Christian ethics:

"Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. Those things, which ye have both learned, and received, and heard, and seen in me, do: and the God of peace shall be with you."-Philippians 4:8-9

In other words, the central aspect on living a Christian life was on what is virtuous, not on what is lawfully right or wrong. Right actions flow from whatever is honorable, true, and pure. Correlating with this is how Paul responds to the Corinthians who claimed that "all was lawful." Paul reminded them the emphasis is not on what is lawful, but on what is good for building a virtuous character:

"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not."-1 Corinthians 10:23

One's main focus ought to be on what is good, not on laws that dictate behavior.
One of the key aspects of Virtue Ethics is the idea we ought to learn from virtuous teachers and imitate them. A virtuous character is obtained by imitating what a virtuous person does. This parallels a key aspect of Christian ethics. Imitating Christ was (and still is) crucial to living a virtuous life:

"For even hereunto were ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps:"-1 Peter 2:21

Paul says in Romans 8:29 that Christians were predestined "to be conformed to the image of his Son." Jesus often taught his followers to do as he does (Matt. 16:24, Mark 8:34, Luke 6:40; 9:23, John 13:15, 34). Paul says in 1st Corinthians 11: Be ye followers [i.e., imitators] of me, even as I also am of Christ" (vs. 1). Hebrews 13:7 says to imitate the faith of the patriarchs. 1st Thessalonians 2:14 says to imitate each other. And jesus taught to imitate the good Samaritan from his parable (Luke 10:37). Imitating virtuous teachers was key for Christian ethics.
Aristotle tended to compare acquiring virtues with that of learning a practical skill, like playing an instrument or learning how to become a builder. Such practical skills are best picked up when trained by a master of that particular skill, because a teacher can always provide more insight through lessons they learn from experience. For example, an expert salesman can provide examples from his experience of what works with specific customers that a sales textbook could never provide. Many professions today require on-the-job training or experience before even hiring an applicant. The reason is: experience is key to learning a profession. Merely acquiring knowledge from a textbook or an instruction manual is often insufficient to master a skill, so why would mastering the skill of virtue be any different?
In the NT, a believer is to see the world through the eyes of Christ and to love as he loved. One cannot learn how to be a virtuous person without knowing what that life would look like. A key component of Christian theology is that the Messiah perfectly represented the Father and His will on earth, to show us how to properly live as God intended for man. This central tenet of the NT aligns well with agent-based theories of Virtue Ethics, and modifies it so that the person of Jesus Christ is the universal exemplar that one is meant to emulate. We are called to imitate him through our actions, thoughts, and desires, and to conform ourselves to the way he lived. As Paul said:

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."-Galatians 2:20

If learning from Christ is key, we should briefly take a look at the Sermon on the Mount, which is said to be one of Jesus' most important series of teachings. Daniel Harrington notes:
"The sermon begins with nine 'beatitudes' (see 5:3–12) in which Jesus declares as 'happy' or 'blessed' those who practice certain virtues, and promises them an eternal reward and the fullness of God's kingdom." (Jesus and Virtue Ethics: Building Bridges Between New Testament Studies and Moral Theology, pg. 62)
Jesus laid out what a life for those that follow him look like in detail. One ought to be merciful, pure in heart, a peacemaker, thirst for righteousness, etcetera (Matt. 5:2-10). The Sermon does not merely include what right actions are, but includes sections on proper desires. Not only is it wrong to murder, but it is wrong to desire to murder or wish ill on someone (Matt. 5:22). Avoiding adultery is good, but one also should not covet after another man's woman in their heart (Matt. 5:28). In other words, merely avoiding immoral actions is not enough. One must also not desire vices. A believer is called to desire what is good.
The Sermon is not necessarily laying down universal moral commands. For example, Matthew 5:9 says, "Blessed are the peacemakers," but this doesn't imply absolute Pacifism, as it would contradict passages in the Old Testament where it explicitly says there is a time for war (Ecc. 3:8). The point of the Sermon is to teach what a virtuous life ought to look like. A follower of Christ ought to use reason to know what is proper to do in various circumstances. For example, in Matthew chapter 6, Jesus offers guidance on how one ought to pray by presenting the Lord's prayer (vss. 9-15). This is a model of how to pray. It's not a command for followers to always pray in this exact way.
In reality, the Sermon on the Mount mixes in exhortations, parables, hyperbole, declarations, commands, etc. It is best understood as displaying what a virtuous life ought to look like. It's not a law code. Building on this, it's important to understand a proper action is context sensitive. Under Virtue Ethics, one should not necessarily apply a universal maxim to every situation. Sometimes the proper action will depend on what is at stake, who is involved, what is the background, etc. Aristotle advocated against the idea there were fixed universal laws that dictate actions, and instead he argued the right action would depend on the circumstances one finds themselves in. Although the ethics of the NT may be a bit more strict, it still places an emphasis on being sensitive to the context of situations.
In 1st Corinthians chapter 8, Paul lays out instructions on how to deal with meat that has been sacrificed to Pagan idols. Instead of stating an absolute prohibition against meat sacrificed to idols, Paul instructed Christians to use reason to come to the proper ethical decision based on context. In other words, the right action is not determined only by a law. Instead, the Christian had to make the proper decision based on the context: if eating caused another to stumble, then you ought to abstain; if not, then there's no harm done. The value of the action depends on the context.
A Deontologist might reply that there's still a universal law given here: that one should always abstain if it's going to cause another to stumble. This objection can be addressed by asking: how are we to know if eating the meat will cause another believer to stumble? To answer such a question, one must be sensitive to the context, which in this case would be knowledge of the fellow believer and your relation to him. It is the context that determines the right action, not a universal law. Moreover, Paul states that the primary goal for the believer should be to love (1 Cor. 13). The first consideration is once again not the rightness of action, but having love for one another. From this, knowledge of the proper action will follow.
Paul often explains that living a proper life as a believer will take work and practice. He reminded Timothy to attend readings, practice what these things mean, and keep a close watch on himself (1 Tim. 4:13-14). Elsewhere, he directs that all believers must work on their faith (Phili. 2:12). Beyond this, he also noted that not all Christians would have the same gifts, and to accept that this was normal (1 Cor. 12). For some, certain things may be a hindrance, whereas for others it is acceptable (Rom. 14:2-4). What matters is that we love and build one another up (1 Thess. 5:11). Right actions flow from love and knowledge of virtue. Rules are not the primary motives that dictate our actions; rules are secondary in this regard.
An interesting case can be studied with regards to divorce in the Gospels. Jesus preaches against divorce (Mark 10:7-9) and it is often interpreted to mean "divorce is always wrong, regardless of circumstances." However, it should be noted the prohibition on divorce is not a universal law. The context can affect whether or not a divorce is permissible. Jesus says that one can divorce over sexual immorality. Paul also has a situation where divorce is permissible, namely if one spouse is an unbeliever and wishes to leave (1 Cor. 7:15). The implication one can derive is divorce is not ideal, but there are circumstances where it may be the proper action to take. Given the other features of Christian Virtue Ethics we already covered, the proper action to take will depend on the circumstances and what the virtuous agent thinks is the most loving thing to do. A universal prohibition on divorce is not a Christian ethic. Instead, one ought to discern the proper action from circumstances. However, it's clear in most cases divorce would not be the virtuous thing to do.
Building on this, it's important to note that within NT ethics, certain acts are always wrong. For example, idolatry and sexual immorality are always wrong (1 Cor. 10:14, Col. 3:15, 1 Pet. 4:13). There are no possible scenarios where it would be okay to rape, because such an act would never flow from a virtuous character. But this concept is not foreign to theories of Virtue Ethics. Aristotle noted that for some actions, no qualifications could make them virtuous. Actions such as rape or murder are always wrong, because they would never flow from a virtuous character. So it's not as if a Virtue Ethicist cannot claim that some actions are always wrong. They simply are qualified as being unable to flow from virtue, whereas actions like lying or waging war could be considered virtuous for the right reason.
Now, despite Christian Virtue Ethics having many similarities with Eudaimonism (Aristotelian ethics), there are also numerous differences beyond what we've already noted. One of the deficiencies of how Aristotle lays out his ethical theory is that it is essentially an all-boys club. Aristotle writes mainly to aristocratic men, excluding women and slaves. In his view, women were inferior to men and slaves lacked the necessary rational faculty. But the Christians rejected this mentality, as the teachings of Christ and the apostles were available to all (Matt. 28:19). Paul said, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:28). Peter wrote that all Christians were part of the priesthood of Christ (1 Pet. 2:5). Jesus had women followers (Luke 8:2-3), and they were entrusted with delivering revelation (Mark 15:40–16:8). What we find throughout the NT is a radical change to how women were viewed in the ancient world. Paul is also likely building on Aristotle's household structure and refining it. David deSilva says the household codes of the NT are "...following the pairs laid out as early as Aristotle to such a degree as to suggest that these were standard topics in ethical instruction" (Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity, pg. 231). But Paul adds an important preface: submitting to one another out of reverence for Christ (Eph. 5:20-21). DeSilva says:
"...husbands, we cannot then ignore the distinctively Christian addition they bring to this arrangement; husbands are to be subject to their wives as well." (Honor, Patronage, Kinship & Purity, pg. 233)
Thus Paul doesn't break down the traditional perspective on the structure of the family, but he does add the idea that we all must submit to each other in reverence, love, unity, and cooperation because all are equal before God. There is no explicit mention in the NT calling for the abolishment of slavery, but it should be noted that Paul taught that slaves should be seen as equals. In the letter to Philemon, Paul is clear that his slave is no longer "as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved" (vs. 16). Thus, within Christian ethics class distinctions were supposed to evaporate. All were brothers and sisters of one family.
An important aspect of Christian ethics is that it wasn't a standalone ethical theory. It's embedded in the larger Christian worldview. The ethical framework is dependent on Christian doctrines. For Aristotle, his ethical theory is for men who were raised well. This is why these specific men desire to be virtuous and perform right actions. As for why the believer does good and desires to be virtuous, it's not because one was raised well, but because they have been activated by the power of God's Spirit (John 3:6, 1 Cor. 12:13). For believers, the reason as to why we desire to be good and virtuous is because the Spirit of God has regenerated us. He loves us so we can love others (1 John 4:19). One is meant to look to the life of Christ and what he has done by dying on the cross, to know that we are loved and forgiven. This in turn is meant to activate a good life, having seen what we have gained and been forgiven of. He calls and activates us to do similar to those around us. This is a more open system for people of all groups and classes. One only has to call upon the name of the Lord to be included. It does not require a specific gender or to be raised a certain way.
The goal of Aristotelian ethics is to achieve 'eudaimonia.' However, within the Bible the goal is as the Westminster Shorter Catechism puts it: "Man's chief end is to glorify God, and enjoy Him forever." Since the central aspect of Biblical Eschatology is that humans will continue on forever in resurrected bodies, the aim of ethics is more than living a good life presently. Living a good life now is important, but it was only one aspect in the Christian worldview. Humans are meant to live beyond this life, so the aim is also about building virtuous souls that will continue on. The importance of this is more crucial than it may seem at first. Paul said that we must all appear before judgment, so that "every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad" (2 Cor. 15:10).
Being a virtuous person requires integrity, because one will still have to answer to God after death. If one can commit an evil act and no one finds out, then from the outside perspective he or she may still appear virtuous. Culturally speaking, the ancient world was very different from our own. All wrongdoings centered around public honor and shame. One did good to receive public honor, and one did not do what was bad to receive public shame. Right and wrong were connected to one's public honor and shame in the ancient Greco-Roman world. Thus good and evil were public ideas, not personal ideas. Ethical demands were grounded in the community in one's public appearance
The Biblical idea of an omniscient God who cared about our ethical status laid a foundation for integrity and personal guilt to emerge. Now one ought to do good because he is beholden to God, not just the community. Believers are to remain focused on God's approval and on the actions that lead them, regardless of the world's response. This lays down fertile ground for integrity to emerge. So the Biblical worldview has another important element built in that encourages ethical behavior, regardless of the honor it brings. One ought to do good because of a commitment to God not, because it might bring honor to one's name publicly.

Implications for Preterists

Paul believed that the Second Coming would happen in his generation, and prescribed certain things in the NT on the basis of that belief. An example of an exhortation that would no longer apppy to us today would be 1st Corinthians 7:24-29, where Paul argues that the times him and his fellow Christians were in called for celibacy, being that the Lord was fast approaching. It wasn't a sin if you did get married, of course; it was just harder to serve the Lord in this context if you had a family to worry about. Thus, Paul encouraged being single.
So, we need to be careful when reading the NT and determining what prohibitions or exhortations are still applicable to us today. Context is key.

I found out through my mother that my oldest half sister is in the mental hospital from jail. I stopped contact with my oldest sister for a reason, years ago. Actually from both of my half sisters. Because, they kept being pushy, are disrespectful and just bottom line too much drama. I could never look up to them and still can't trust them till this day. Because, they would quickly get angry based off their built hurt internal issues and life situations. Last time I had contact with her, she got mad because I wasn't so engaging with communication with her. So she kept sending me real mean texts years ago. I told her this is not how to start a sisterhood. I had just lost a family member and was trying to focus on my own life. Not caught in in their drama. So I blocked her. I ran into her in a financial aid line and see sat next to and yelled at me. Like she wanted to fight me. I was shocked and embarrassed. Everyone was looking at me. A few months after that her and my other sister come to my house at the time wanting to talk to me and apologize. I left them alone. I didn't want to surround myself with unstable people. I come from a huge family on my mom side with too much drama as is. Long story short I have half sisters on my dad side. I am the youngest and my dad never done anything for us. He was a deadbeat. I could never connect with them. I decided to distance myself for my peace and not surround myself with people that's toxic for me. Family or not. You have to be careful who you have around you. I'm trying to set boundaries for myself to protect myself.
So, anyway my mom works at a mental hospital and my oldest sister recognized my mom and came up to her and asked her about me. Sigh. Gave my mom, her number (which I can't call because she is in a mental hospital. The phone is disconnected) and our dads number. Because my sister found him and now has a relationship with him. She wanted me to call her and looked forward to me calling. I told my mom this is alot too take in. It's just too much. So I sat on all this info for a few days before even trying to call. I bite the bullet and prayed before calling her in the mental hospital. I wanted to make sure she is ok and in a better mental space. Sadly, since our first convo from hospital. I don't really call her. She calls me. Due to her not making any sense. Saying everyone is lying on her. Losing custody of her child not once but twice. Because her friend lied on her taking drugs. I looked up her name in the criminal record website. I was shocked she has a long criminal record that goes back years. Now since I found out this information. I do not want to risk being around her. I would be taking a gamble doing so. She does not seem to be telling the whole truth and in denial of her mental status and why she was transferred from jail to there. She claims her aunt lied on her saying she assaulted her and the case is old. Her aunt has a restraining order against her. She is facing multiple criminal charges. But she hopes the case gets closed due to it being a few years old. I asked her why did she just transferred from jail to the mental hospital. She claimed it's because she filled out the form in jail wrong so they sent her there. Makes 0 sense. Because she is in a 60 day hold. She keeps telling me the same thing over and over and wants to take the compency test to pass it so she can go home. This is just too much. Once again. I don't want to hurt her feelings. But I can't offer her anything. But prayer. I know she feels alone. Her mom and I think our dad talks to her. But my our other sister stopped contacting her years ago. Which is telling on both of their parts. I love everyone. Even the ones that done me wrong. I love my sisters even absent father. But, I'm drained and everytime she calls and talk I start to have a headache. What should I do?