Hi everyone!
I’m coming to you at my wit’s end hoping for suggestions. (I so apologize if I didn’t look back far enough and someone already asked a similar question - feel free to reference post in comments!!)
My husband and I have a Golden Retriever and there is always a lot of hair everywhere (duh). I got that figured out early with a good vacuum and a Roomba to help me out.
But then we had a baby and moved into a house with LVP throughout the main floor, white carpets in all the rooms (yikes), and no landscaping with an empty field behind our house. Now my dog tracks in dirt and dust from rolling around outside no matter how diligent we are about wiping paws at the door.
The baby has started crawling and I’m struggling to keep the floors clean. I can’t do a legit full mop every day with a baby that’s learning to explore as much as I’d like to so it’s once a week. And a Swiffer doesn’t cut it. I use way too many pads to get all the flooring and I feel like it just pushes dirt around. What do you guys use in between a major mop? I have a steam mop but have read enough to know it’s not good for LVP.
Also another obvious duh, but these white carpets are so hard to keep clean. What do you recommend for keeping carpets as clean as possible? A deep clean carpet cleaner every other week? Monthly? I don’t have any spills or stains, just every day dirt from traffic. I’m slowly training my husband that we wear socks and not bare feet and no shoes on carpet lol
Changing the carpets is not something we can do right now and we are working on landscaping but it will be a long time. No, we can’t get rid of the dog 😉 Any helpful tips you can provide to a new mom who just wants to keep a decently clean house? (Not even asking for sparkling clean!)
Thank you!!!

ELIMINATED - Julianne Moore in Still Alice - 20.4% of all votes. Still Alice was released in 2014. The film had one win, Best Actress for Moore, at the 87th Academy Awards. Moore was selected for Best Actress of the year in a lineup that also included Marion Cotillard in Two Days, One Night, Felicity Jones in The Theory of Everything, Rosamund Pike in Gone Girl and Reese Witherspoon in Wild. Moore also garnered wins at the BAFTAs, Critics' Choice Awards, Golden Globes and SAGs for her performance as Alice Howland.
Feel free to use the comments as an area for discussion. Votes will only be accepted through this Google Form.
• Charlize Theron as Aileen Wuornos (Monster)
• Marion Cotillard as Édith Piaf (La Vie en Rose)
• Natalie Portman as Nina Sayers (Black Swan)
• Cate Blanchett as Jasmine Francis (Blue Jasmine)
• Brie Larson as Joy Newsome (Room)
• Frances McDormand as Mildred Hayes (Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri)
• Olivia Colman as Queen Anne (The Favourite)
• Michelle Yeoh as Evelyn Wang (Everything Everywhere All at Once)
• Emma Stone as Bella Baxter (Poor Things)
RANKING:

1. Julianne Moore as Alice Howland (Still Alice)
   
2. Helen Mirren as Queen Elizabeth II (The Queen)
   
3. Hilary Swank as Maggie Fitzgerald (Million Dollar Baby)
   
4. Emma Stone as Mia Dolan (La La Land)
   
5. Nicole Kidman as Virginia Woolf (The Hours)
   
6. Jennifer Lawrence as Tiffany Maxwell (Silver Linings Playbook)
   
7. Kate Winslet as Hanna Schmitz (The Reader)
   
8. Halle Berry as Leticia Musgrove (Monster's Ball)
   
9. Jessica Chastain as Tammy Faye Bakker (The Eyes of Tammy Faye)
   
10. Julia Roberts as Erin Brockovich (Erin Brockovich)
    
11. Reese Witherspoon as June Carter (Walk the Line)
    
12. Frances McDormand as Fern (Nomadland)
    
13. Meryl Streep as Margaret Thatcher (The Iron Lady)
    
14. Renée Zellweger as Judy Garland (Judy)
    
15. Sandra Bullock as Leigh Anne Tuohy (The Blind Side)
    

"nodes":\[ {"id":"f3bf0ce3a7cb9e55","x":-382,"y":-264,"width":662,"height":624,"color":"1","type":"text","text":"# This text heading is formatted inside of a red text box. It is linking to a green text box. The arrow that points to the green text box is blue and slightly curved."}, {"id":"4e9ba0deab79cbfb","x":560,"y":-264,"width":348,"height":345,"color":"4","type":"text","text":"This is a green text box. It is not a heading. It is being linked to from a red text box that contains a heading. The arrow pointing from the red text box, to this green text box is blue and slightly curved."} \], "edges":\[ {"id":"f629fa62b733088a","fromNode":"f3bf0ce3a7cb9e55","fromSide":"right","toNode":"4e9ba0deab79cbfb","toSide":"left","color":"5"} \] 

i’ve been fantasizing about being alone with my kid and myself for months now. it’s actually heartbreaking.
i love my DH(34) so so so much. we’ve been together for going on 6 years at this point. met when SK10 was 3. now have a 2 1/2 yr old ours baby.
SK isn’t a bad kid AT ALL. he has basic manner, compassion, i believe he will have a good heart as an adult. there’s also a lot that needs work but he’s 10. but i’ve noticed over time we just don’t click. it’s probably a mixture of things that made it this way but that’s just the way it is. i don’t have love for him. i honestly rejoice everytime he’s at his moms and don’t miss him when he’s gone. we don’t share physical loving moments, or verbal either really. im pretty hands off with him, and like it that way. when he’s around he’s just too much for me. too overstimulating, talks too much, too loud, out of touch with reality with no real hobbies or interests cause he been on the damn screens since he was a toddler. i don’t really like him. he makes me cringe and i feel so bad saying this but he’s just … unclean to me. i don’t like when he touches me or our sons things. i dont want to share with him or spend my money on him ever. i see him as a product of his mother. i would never wish bad on him and want him to do well in life. i make sure to always ask him about his day or have small convos with him or offer advice. i make food he likes when he is here, include him in stuff. etc. i would never treat him badly though i don’t like him much.
it feels like a cloud is over my head when he’s here. an intruder.
i don’t want to be ripped to shreds for this , i just don’t know what to do. i don’t like his mother for the simple fact she’s a shit mother. she takes him on her time to dump him somewhere else. has gotten into 2 car accident with him. has gotten arrested for selling drugs at one point. hasn’t worked in 3 year. lives in a shitty ass place but somehow finds a way to always have her hair and nails done. she knows NOTHING about what’s going on at school with her child. hasn’t been to 1 sporting event for her kid. i hate that DH got a fuck buddy he was never into a relationship with pregnant and decided to keep it. the evil part of me is pissed he even asked her to come back to the state we’re in when SK was 2 because she took him away.
DH is great to me. treats both his children equally. prioritizes our relationship. he’s not a perfect human being but i do love him. i read some DH stories on this sub and am appalled cause mine would literally never. all in all i don’t have a bad situation.
so i find myself stuck. because i’m dreaming of a life where i’m alone with my kid. because with DH his kid has to come along too, and my perfect reality is just us not SK but that’s a horrible thing to even imagine. I hate this non nuclear family. When SK is gone it’s like a dream. When he’s with us i feel embarrassed.
then the cherry on top is this week we went to a dinner.. our friend said you guys having more kids? DH just blurts out oh absolutely not! it’s time to focus on us now. I have 2 already! and give me a hug and kiss. while i’m smiling awkwardly cause we honestly never really discussed this number 1 number 2 YOU have 2 kids.wtf . i did tell him no more kids for NOW but i also said when we have more money i would like another one.
I don’t want to split up for a reason i can’t even identify. I don’t want to share my son as he absolutely loves both of us. i fantasize about leaving but then i think of what usually would be good about that situation for me..more free time, a house the way i want it, dating again all i can think of is i just want my DH!!!
these feelings are hard and i need help navigating them.

I (22f) love my boyfriend (26f), but i hate his mom (50’s).
I would say our relationship is almost perfect besides the fact that I do not get along with his mom.
He has helped & taught me communication skills, patience, things I am not experienced with because of my history of toxic relationships. I can picture the future together, I see our children laughing with us, I see a happy home with date nights and lots of love.
I never thought I would be able to find such a perfect, perfect man but i did. I found someone who completes me in a way that nobody ever has - someone who i adore. We have the same values in life, the same sense of humor, and the same goals in raising our children.
from the start,more so now, we speak of marriage, children, and the future often - this is our goal and we have gotten comfortable with the idea of moving forward with an engagement soon.
It’s probably important to note that I am not close with my small family though, i was not a fan of the way that i was raised and i have been primarily independent since i was 17 years old. i speak with my family but we are LC and i hold them at a distance because of a lot of pain that they caused me in childhood.
However, he has made it a point to say that he would not like to raise his children the same way his mother raised him. That he wants his children to feel appreciated and loved and perfect just the way they are. He did not have a close relationship when they were younger, as have i with my family.
But, ever since i told him i’m not fond of his mom and that she makes me uncomfortable things have not been the same. He is getting aggravated with me because I have asked for some space between them and I. I asked for boundaries, but was unsure on how to implement them and wanted his help. He see’s nothing wrong with their relationship and told me to get used to it.
It seems that after that conversation, he intends for me to figure it out like he said but it’s pushing me to run away.
His mom has not done anything wrong necessarily, but she is not exactly welcoming - despite making attempts to be. She will ask questions about your life, and then mid convo she will start talking about how she would do things if it were here or to somebody else and strike up a convo.
I know she’s happy that her baby boy has found someone, but the way she inserts her life into his also makes me uncomfortable.
She will sit and stare at us from across the room at dinner and smile and wave every time you look over there, it’s kind of creepy to me and it’s even more awkward having to avoid eye contact after the first 3 times.
They call every single day for at least 20 mins and she requests my input on her opinions - which i never tend to agree with, making me feel like i can’t escape her even in my own home. my place for peace. (i have asked not to be included in calls but somehow i still get pulled in).
My bf will ask his mom for something before he will ask me, he will ask his moms opinion on something he has already asked me, he makes her pay for everything even though we are able to and she is struggling financially after a bad breakup.
He says her opinions don’t matter, and that he only goes to the weekly dinner outings because it’s free food but his consistent actions are telling me otherwise.
Personally, i find her a bit obnoxious and she makes everything about her while she speaks negatively about others. This is not exactly the type of person that I want around my children every day.
This is truly the problem, i do see her help with my bf’s sister’s kids and i know that she loves them but idk she is at their house constantly - daily! she has the kids more than her own daughter does sometimes. i don’t think i could handle that!
i already know that if we had a child, that she would want to be as involved as possible. for some reason, that gives me the ick. i don’t want help, especially from someone who is constantly making me feel inadequate. i’ve done everything else in my life up to this point, i don’t need mommy’s help.
i think i could handle it if it was like once every other month. hell, i only see my family on the big holidays and that is if i can/want to make it. But i have to see his family on average 3 times a month and that is not including the phone calls and random drop in because we live next door.
it’s becoming to be unbearable for me and it’s taking a toll on our relationship. i told him i understand that he loves his family, and that he wants to be close to them. i am not trying to shame him for that. i respect that, but at the same time i don’t want to be in that environment any longer.
i think it is only a problem now, because the rest of the relationship i was under the impression that his family would not be around so much but i am coming to terms with the fact that that is the case and that is just not what i am comfortable with for the rest of my life.
but, i am struggling because i love him so much and if it weren’t for this i would have married him yesterday. i want to make it work, but i also l feel like this much distaste is irreparable and it will only get worse if we were to get married. I want to move, i want to move far away and that was a dream before i met his family, something he once said he supported but i am unsure of the fact now. i fear that this is just too big of an incompatability issue but it’s hard to picture a life without him.
So, do you think we should break up and stop wasting each others time? or should i try to work on this and find a compromise?
any suggestions for compromise or establishing boundaries with his mother pleaseeee comment down below. thank you.
{TLDR; I hate my MIL. trying to decide if the relationship is worth salvaging.}

Once a mindless killing machine created for an endless war, Drum-Major M102 has now been awakened and granted free will by mysterious higher powers. Originally designed to instill fear in his enemies with horns and drums of war, he now seeks to use his music to bring joy and inspire those around him. As he searches for a new purpose in life, the haunting images of the battlefields still linger in his mind. Meanwhile, he enjoys collecting new instruments and integrating them into his metal frame, aiming to become Faerûn’s first-ever one-bot orchestra.
This is my first time playing, and my party and I are only level 3 so far, but I'm having a blast.

Over two hundred years after The War of Arcane Sundering had destroyed the greatest kingdoms of Arches, anyone who is found with the ability to weave magic is taken and trained under the watchful eye of The Mage’s Circle. Sources that survive the training with their minds in tact are assigned to one of the five noble houses to serve as court mages. One of these sources, taken when she was little, has escaped The Circle with the help of an unknown entity. Through dreams she has seen visions of a past’s past. A man, the first one to weave magic and change his reality. But with only blurred glimpses into another’s past, will she be able to find what she seeks before The Circle’s Magehunters find her? Will she be able to free herself from their endless watch?
After twenty years of tacking and hunting for the Ironthorn Syndicate, Ezura has started to forget his past life. Growing up as a half-elf in an elven clan, Ezura did not have the luxury of time to learn the skills of hunting and tracking before he reached adulthood. He began his training earlier than any other child in the clan and despite the little time he had compared to others, he became one of their most skilled Eladan, or ranger in common language. After an incident involving a knight from a nearby kingdom, the ranger became a criminal, exiled from his clan and hunted by the kingdom. Joining the Ironthorns was the only way he could live without constantly running from soldiers and bounty hunters. But years of hunting for the syndicate have worn on the half-elf. He wants out, but after burning into the family, the only way to leave is to bleed out. After finding an old book during one of his hunts however, he thinks that its contents may be the key to finding his way out of a life of crime. If he could find someone who could decipher the diagrams and glyphs that fill the pages, he could change the past and stay in his clan. But who would be able to comprehend such things?
Hi there! I’m Keith, a 25 year old in CST. If you read through all that, you might be interested in rebooting an old roleplay that I have been itching to write again. I’m looking for a semi-lit to literate partner over the age of 20 to write as a sorceress on the run. If you would like some information on the characterization of this sorceress from the prior story, I would be more than willing to provide some info. If not, I’d be really excited to see your completely new take on this character. I usually write anywhere from two to three paragraphs in my responses and would like my partner to do about the same, giving some leeway for shorter responses during back and forth dialogue. I do work full time and have a baby so I may not always respond right away but I try to write a response two days after my partner posts or less. Of course I would communicate with you if that should change. I’ve found that Discord has been the best platform to keep the story together so I prefer to use that.
If you are interested in restarting this journey with me, I would love to hear from you! If you could send a small snippet of any past writing you’ve done, that would be much appreciated. I look forward to seeing how the stories of these two characters end.

Hey y’all. Here’s my Twilight Masquerade prerelease hits that I’m just now getting around to posting. Obviously prices are all over since the set isn’t released but these are based loosely on TCGPlayer market and eBay recent sold, but feel free to make an offer as well!
Shipping is $2 PWE and $5 BMWT.
The goods: - bigger hits - illustration rares - full arts - Ex’s
Looking for PP, but open to trade offers and looking at binders as well.
Here is a want list of mine (not fully updated)

I'm going to list out each of my current knowledge points. Feel free to debunk them at any step in my logical process. But I have a theory. And I wasn't really sure where to post it but this seems like a pretty well educated and pretty populated place so here I go.

1. Some allergies are the result of an immune system response to something that the immune system thinks is a threat. That's how you get tick bites that give you meat allergies.
   
2. Human babies build their immune system with help from the placenta and breast milk from the mother. Basically whatever antibodies the mother has, they get passed on to the child to help them get started.
   
3. If the mother has allergies and those allergies are the results of an immune system response to something that shouldn't be seen as a threat but is seen as a threat... Then in theory, the mother could pass her allergies on to her child. Or husband. Or adoptive child. Or random stranger that buys breast milk from the mother because for some reason they can't produce their own. It happens. Whatever.
   

Is any part of this logic debunked? Has this been researched anywhere at all? I saw one research article saying that mothers would be unable to improve their own immune systems by drinking their own milk but that doesn't test whether or not they improve their immune systems by drinking a different mother's milk. Does that make sense? Like obviously if you drink your own stuff you're not getting any new antibodies that you didn't already have. You know?

Monthly Trade Thread can be found here, and always on the sidebar.

Hi and welcome to succulents and this Week's Questions Thread!

Do you:

• Have questions which don't feel worthy of an entire post?
• Wanna postulate what would happen if you did ____?
• Need input from more experienced people?

Post away! If you have questions which have gone unanswered in one of the previous threads, post 'em again!
If you feel the need to create a new post, please search the sub before posting. Soil type, soil mixes, grow lights, etc. are common questions and there are many threads already discussing them.

New to our Sub?

Be sure to familiarize yourself with our Rules and Posting Guidelines.

Succulents Rules

Be Nice: Please be kind to your fellow succulent friends. Downvoting is discouraged. We want everyone to feel welcome here!
Good Photos: Clear, in focus photos in natural light give you the best chance at assistance. Heavily edited or filtered photos that alter the original colors of a plant are not allowed, as this is unrealistic, and succulents are already a vivid range of colors! Photos that specifically link to an Instagram post are not allowed and will be removed.
Advertising: Advertising is allowed provided you flair your post correctly, and stay to answer any user questions. A short description of yourself/shop/nursery in the comments would also be appreciated. This applies for self-promotion of YouTube channels or affiliated Blogs. T Shirts are not allowed to be posted. Plant sales must be posted in our Monthly Buy/Sell/Trade Thread.
Appropriate Flair Required: Flair is required. Flair your posts accurately.
Not OC/Uncredited Post. Reposts: Photos taken from other places (Instagram, Facebook, the internet, a store's website etc.) are not considered OC and must have a source for the photo. Please link the place where you saw the image in the comments. Failure to follow this rule may result in removal of the post. This rule also applies to meme/joke reposts.
Max 5 posts Per Day (24 hours): If you have more than 5 photos you wish to share, or have identified, they must be posted as an album. You can utilize Reddit's own image uploading, or an external image upload site, such as Imgur. This is to keep the sub relatively clear, and to keep posts from getting reported as spam.
No Pictures Complaining of Painted Plants or Glued Flowers: We know they exist; and your post will not be the first to exclaim disdain. Any such posts will be removed. This rule does not apply to any Help requests, or potential progress pictures for such plants.

New to succulent care?

Be sure to take a look at the FAQ and the Beginner Basics Wiki.
Lithops, Split Rocks and other Mesembs care can be found here.
Be sure to familiarize yourself with the sidebar, as it is full of great resources. It can be easy to miss on some platforms; on mobile, click this link circled, and you’re taken to the sidebar. On the app, either swipe right to About, or click the ••• at the top right to pull up a menu, and select “Community info” See circled.
The search bar is also incredibly useful, as almost any question you have has surely been asked here many times over.

Got a grow light question?

A hot topic, and often asked about for newcomers realizing just how much sun their plants need! A search of the sub itself should yield enough posts for you to have a good idea what to look for. Beyond that, you can look through previous years' Overwintering Megathreads.
We also have a dedicated section on Grow Lights in our FAQ. For a rundown of basic light specs, check this post out.

Have a plant health question? Help us help you by using the below guidelines:

Information, information, information! Try to keep your answers to the below concise and easy to read (bullet points are easier on the eyes than paragraphs).

• Description: A well lit photo and/or detailed description of the issue.
• Drainage: Is the plant in a container? What kind? Does it have a drainage hole?
• Potting medium: What kind of mix is the plant potted in?
• Water: How often do you water and how much?
• Sunlight: Where is the plant situated and what is its exposure to sun like? Direct/indirect sunlight? Hours per day?
• History: How long have you had the plant, when did this start, and have any changes been made recently? (E.g., repotting, location change.)
• If concerned about rot: Are any sections of the stem, roots, or leafs mushy to the point where there is no structural integrity? Any unusual odor or changes in color?

If you ever have any questions, feel free to send a mod mail for us mods to help you out.
Welcome once again to our sub, and happy growing!

The poster, which DFV hung in the back of his room at the congress hearing. The same image revealed by audio spectrum analysis of the purple box tweet.. the poster itself had a hidden message at the time of the hearing: Congress are bribed, hang in there!
From the Wikipedia page for the original “hang in there, baby” motivational cat poster:
“In 1973, Vice President Spiro Agnew, charged with accepting $100,000 in bribes while holding office as Baltimore County Executive, Governor of Maryland, and Vice President, was allowed to plead no contest to a lesser charge as long as he agreed to resign as vice president. In September 1973, while he was considering his situation, Representatives William L. Dickenson, Republican from Alabama, and Samuel Devine, Republican from Ohio, presented him with a "Hang in There, Baby" poster signed by 100 members of Congress as a token of encouragement and support.”
Time traveller Kitty has been meticulously playing 69d chess, right from the start.
We already knew congress were bought and paid for at the time of the hearing, not only is the whole financial system corrupt, congress is too. I think at the time of the hearing, kitties message was that this corruption wasn’t going to stop MOASS - Congress are corrupt but hang in there.
I think now, Kitty is simply confirming that corruption is not going to stop the eventual justice that comes from directly registering stocks and removing them from DTCC circulation.
What’s in the gamestop box? A purple light? Then the cat poster hidden audio message… DRS & hang in there!
If shares are removed from circulation through direct registration and booking, they can not be loaned out, passed around to create phantoms or used as collateral against derivative bets etc. in the grand hypothetical scheme of things, the derivative market shrinks without borrowed shares. Without derivatives to create bets, the fake money printer can’t print imaginary cash purely based on borrowing YOUR stocks. The whole system is fucked because they need to borrow your shit to create fake shit with.
Non hypothetical and totally literal - By booking shares in your own name, nobody can use those shares you’ve bought and paid for to harm your investment OR the company you have invested into. By directly registering your shares in your own name, brokers can’t take your money and give you an IOU, they can’t play CFD, they can’t supply PFOF to MMs dark pools, they can’t loan them to SHF to short and tank YOUR STOCK. By DRSing, nobody is making money from YOUR invested money and fucking you or anybody else over with your very own hard earned coinage. Buying via the companies registrar, your purchases hit the lit market every time too.
In my own words, by DRSing your shit, there’s no shit for fucks to create fuckery with.
The message from the time traveller is clear: Corruption can’t stop us. DRS. Hold - Hang in there.
MOASS aside, (let’s pretend MOASS isn’t a thing for a sec) GME is thee most DRSd stock (FYI, infinity pool with DRSd shares & MOASS lasts infinitely ..incase you didn’t know). It’s going to be untouchable once the float is safely locked away in safe hands. It’s, just a matter of time until it is. Fair market value, dividends, company doing great. Thats when the rest of the world sits forward and takes notice they notice the most DRS’d stock is doing pretty fucking good, “shouldn’t they have gone out of business by now? Maybe we should directly register our shit too…”
Side note - Anyone else remember the sound of mayo being puked into a bucket during the hearing? Because I do. Spectrum analysis on that puke probably spells out NO CELL, NO SELL…
It takes a while to reach the fucking moon, DRS your tickets n hang in there, everybody 😺

SW 345 GW 220ish - Since Jan 1st I've lost close to 30lbs. Started with .5mg then progressed to 1.mg. My Dr. Meets with me monthly when I get my semaglutide to check in and monitor progress and we will be doing blood work every 4 months.
I've been drinking a gallon of water a day, toned out the food noise. I haven't really set a meal plan or looked into dieting while on Semaglutide.
What I have done though is 1). Cut out majority of sugary drinks. I'll have maybe 1 coke a week, rest of the time it's a gallon of water a day religiously, unsweet tea, sugar free iced coffee from the local coffee spot a few times a month (maybe like 2-3 times a week). 2.). Protein based meals. I'm a meat eater so it might be a partial chicken breast, house/chef salad, grilled chicken wings, some bbqd beef pork chicken etc etc. All in smaller portions than what I used to. 3.) I cut my carbs down to like 50ish carbs a day 4.) Eating only when I'm hungry, and not snacking on junk food through the day. Although to satisfy "hunger" or occasional food noise I'll eat a few baby carrots n ranch 5.) Starting tomorrow I will be getting more active, probably start with a 15min walk and progress to 30min then I'd like to get in the gym at some point.
All of this is new to me and I'd like to make better progress. I don't want to just let the semaglutide do the work, I know I need to have a lifestyle change to maximize my weight loss and getting healthier. So with all that said ....
What are y'all eating for meals, snacks, drinks and exercise?

TLDR: Looking for twin-thumbstick games that are well-suited to helping my friends see if they want to make the jump to a Steam Controller (i.e., easy inputs)
I'm hoping this one might be off-the-wall enough that it can attract answers from a bunch of different genres. :) Anyway, here's the deal: my love affair with the Steam Controller and its dual trackpads has become known in my friend group and a couple of them are interested in trying it out. I'm excited to share the experience with them but I remember how the learning curve (coming from traditional twin-thumbstick gamepads like the major consoles use) was less of a curve and more of a brick wall into which I smashed my face for a few weeks. Ideally I'd like to spare my friends as much of that as possible, so my question is:
What are some games that are:

1. ...primarily intended to be played with a twin-thumbstick gamepad, and
2. ...do not rely on high-speed input dexterity?

I originally said "precise input" for #2, but it occurs to me that precision by itself is fine, as long as they don't have to hit a precise target quickly. In fact, small targets (little UI buttons, etc.) may actually be a good thing from a practice standpoint.
Ideally I'm looking for games that use both thumbsticks in tandem...for example, the obvious baby step here is a visual novel but that's mostly one thumb at a time.
A few points to narrow down the potential list (these aren't hard requirements, though):

• We like lore-heavy stuff, so something with a narrative is more likely to hold their attention while they're being frustrated with the inputs.
• I feel like an exploration / walking simulator game would be best, since that's "dual-stick" (one to move and the other to look around) but doesn't punish you for being slow to get the inputs correct.
• Puzzle games. The Talos Principle? The Witness? If those support gamepads...maybe I'm answering my own question. :)
• Anything turn-based would probably be a good fit, 'cause while it's your turn you can take as much time as you like.
• The game overall doesn't necessarily have to be easy, as long as the inputs are forgiving. These are experienced gamers, just brand new to using trackpads instead of thumbsticks. (On the flip side, none of us are from the "difficulty is a feature" crowd either.)
• If it runs on Linux, so much the better, but it's not a deal-breaker (we're all penguinistas but we also live in reality). Anything other than native or ProtonDB Platinum will probably be a backup, though.

I feel like this post is already long enough to scare off 95% of Reddit, but if anybody wants further clarification on anything feel free to ask in the comments. :)

Hi everyone,
I wanted to share with you my response to the introduction found in the only edition of Use of the Self currently in print. I believe it's a rather misleading intro to FM Alexander's work, so I'm sharing this in the hope that I can help clear up misconceptions people may have about the Alexander Technique, not derived only from Anthony Kingsley, but many bland blog posts one tends to encounter when researching the Alexander Technique. That said, this is not intended to be an introduction of its own, but rather something experienced students, teachers, and anyone enthusiastically learning the Technique may find useful. In the tradition of Alexander himself, I've included extensive footnotes, some painfully long. I'm happy to answer any questions or otherwise discuss what I've written. Understand these are my own interpretations and opinions about what some call "the work," so take them as you will. I've taken lessons for a number of years and currently am training as a teacher, so my view of the Technique is based on these experiences, as well as my interpretations of Alexander's writings. Some of these interpretations you may object to, but I hope you find my arguments reasonable.
Response to Anthony Kingsley's Introduction to The Use of the Self
The Use of the Self may be FM Alexander's most important work, since it contains his own account of how he developed what is now called the Alexander Technique. While Alexander's other volumes are available from Mouritz, the only edition of The Use of the Self currently in print is published by Orion Spring. This edition replaces the philosopher John Dewey's introduction—which praises the technique's "genuinely scientific character"—with one by the contemporary teacher Anthony Kingsley, who is heralded on the book's front cover as a "leading Alexander Technique teacher." Therefore it is probable that many readers' first impressions of the Alexander Technique will be framed by Mr. Kingsley's opinions. I submit this is problematic, since his introduction is in my view contradictory to fundamental principles of the Alexander Technique. I write this response to address the introduction's two most dire faults: Kingsley's misrepresentation of the concepts inhibition and direction, and his dismissal of the concept of the primary control. I'll begin with the second, since it is a more straightforward error.
Primary Control
Kingsley opens his paragraphs on the primary control with the opinion that the concept should be "recast," then describes Alexander's definition of the primary control as a "particular relationship of his head, neck and back [that] acted as a master reflex that conditioned his whole organism." Then he discards this definition, claiming the head-neck-back relativity should instead be "regarded as an indicator[sic] of overall health rather than an area considered in isolation." He concedes the "region of the neck and back is a [...] barometer of our state of being," but concludes that "no single element is actually primary," since our eyes, breath, digestive system, and all other psychophysical elements are "simultaneous and interdependent" and also like barometers. Finally, he reveals his "recast" of the primary control, defining it as "the unknown and unseen self-righting and self-healing mechanism that can be restored and vitalized."
In sum, Mr. Kingsley has presented the primary control—which Alexander wrote extensively about and considered central to his technique—with an ill-defined mystical force which, accordingly, Alexander must have unwittingly stumbled upon and mistaken for a certain relativity of the head, neck and back.
Ironically, it is in The Use of the Self where Alexander wrote of discovering the necessity to first free his neck in seeking a better condition for his vocal apparatus, since that was the sine qua non of taking his head forward and up, of widening the back, and so forth, which are in turn the necessary conditions of freedom and stability in the limbs. This is the genesis of Alexander's use of the word "primary" in describing the head-neck-back relationship, and in my experience, as in Alexander's, it holds true: the sequence of directions given to oneself matters greatly, since tense feet, for example, can hardly flatten on the floor if the head is taken back and down, whereas the head can be taken "forward and up"1 to a fine degree even if there is tension in the lower extremities, particularly while sitting. Further, and maybe most significantly, the relativity of the head-neck-back rarely need change during any manner of activity, whereas the arms and legs are constantly bending, rising, stretching, and so on. Small wonder Alexander considered this relativity primary.
Of course, Kingsley is not wrong to point out the interdependence of all processes in the body. It is certainly true that undue tension in the feet creates a downward pull on the head, neck and back. Yet what is crucial to understand here is that in the context of learning and teaching the Alexander Technique, the primary control is an indispensable concept. It instructs the pupil to guide his or her attention through the body in the sequence most fit to facilitate proper relativity of all the parts, and it names succinctly that natural, visible, dynamic yet enduring relativity of the head, neck and back observable in little children and animals as well as many great musicians and athletes. Thus Kingsley discards a practical concept in favor of a truism about "interdependence;" and so we come to his second, graver error.
Direction
Here it begins to seem that what Kingsley writes of in his introduction is not the Alexander Technique at all, but in fact the Kingsley Technique, since he has redefined not only the primary control, but two other conceptual pillars of the technique: inhibition and direction.
First, he takes aim at direction, neglecting to elucidate Alexander's own definition of the concept before setting out the axiom that "aiming for postural improvements using postural directions leads to a bodymind[sic] attitude of effort and trying, which simply reinforces the problem." Dismissing as superfluous all "ideas and images about heads, necks and backs," he declares that "the trying[sic] self is the obstacle, and the shift towards a non-trying[sic] self is the solution." Finally, he offers his own definition of the directions as "the natural flow of energy and vibrancy that exists within the organism," directions which are interfered with "when we are in a condition of stress and reactivity."
Here, again, Kingsley takes a practical concept which Alexander developed based on careful observation of his own muscular action, and replaces it with a kind of mystical or spiritual phenomenon which, implicitly, only the initiated can perceive.2 Thus the famous directions are not, as Alexander described repeatedly, a series of mental orders or intentions projected to oneself before and during muscular activity along lines one has reasoned out in advance, but a "natural flow of energy and vibrancy"—just as the primary control is not, as Alexander saw it, a concrete, observable relativity of the head, neck and back, but an "unknown and unseen self-righting and self-healing mechanism." These pseudo-spiritual definitions do a massive disservice to neophyte readers, and reveal Kingsley's muddled seeing in relation to the central problem addressed by the Alexander Technique: how to shed habit and coordinate the bodymind through reasoned conception and conscious awareness.
But for a moment let us leave aside direction, since a subtler and more misleading error still lurks in Kingsley's presentation: his dismissal of conception itself. He explicitly warns that "ideas, concepts and cognitive efforts reinforce the very mental instrument that is the problem in the first place," he advises us to simply trust that "the prevention or inhibition[sic] of reaction, maintains or liberates this stream of energy [or direction] in the body."
To understand Kingsley's error, we must return to Alexander. In Man's Supreme Inheritance, Alexander sets out four stages to the "performance of any muscular action by conscious guidance and control:"

1. The conception of the movement required;
2. The inhibition of erroneous preconceived ideas which subconsciously suggest the manner in which the movement or series of movements should be performed;
3. The new and conscious mental orders which will set in motion the muscular mechanism essential to the correct performance of the action;
4. The movements (contractions and expansions) of the muscles which carry out the mental orders.

Alexander considered "conception of the movement required" the very first stage in his technique, to precede even inhibition. Thus he made clear, if indirectly, that in the context of his technique, clear conception is essential to achieving a desired end. Incidentally, this is a fact any competent artist can attest to; if a composition is not unambiguously understood and organized within one's memory, it cannot be brought to fruition. Even the most simple act, such as extending one's arm to grasp a nearby object, requires a detailed conception of distance, weight, strength, and so forth; if the object turns out to be heavier than expected, the conception of these variables and their relation to one another, and hence the muscular action, must change. This is direction in action, albeit subconscious.
Yet Kingsley belittles conception, instead leaning on concepts like "ease," "letting go" "acceptance," and the like. He is not alone in this among teachers, but in my opinion, they overlook the influence of what Alexander termed "erroneous beliefs," a concept closely related to that of "unreliable sensory appreciation." Both could be read in the spiritual lexicon alongside "letting go," etc.; but that would place their referent outside the realm of what words and concepts can describe. On the contrary, Alexander was pointing to something concrete and empirically observable: to errors of spatio-motor perception able to be observed phenomenologically and in other people's behavior; not to transcendent truths about observation itself. Thus the classic example of an Alexandrian "erroneous belief" is a person who raises their arm and believes their shoulder has remained still when it has not. The key for the pupil in this instance is to gain an accurate conception5 of their own muscular action, in reference to bodily sensations; not to simply "let go" or "do nothing."3 And this conception must come about through active tutelage—e.g. Alexander Technique lessons—or, dare I say, the way Alexander himself did it: by reasoned experimentation, conceiving hypotheses based on careful register and analysis of his own sensations, and also by watching the behavior of others. John Dewey called the technique scientific for a reason.
All of this is not to understate the importance of concepts like "release" and "effortlessness," including in the context of the Alexander Technique. Seeing more or less what is meant by them is doubtless the key to mastery of all activities, all practices, all techniques. Yet those spiritual concepts should not blot out the very concrete technique Alexander developed for improving what he called "the use of the self:" that coordination of the muscular system, achieved through conscious reason, which influences for better or worse the functioning of the whole organism.4
Inhibition
So much for direction. What about inhibition? Under the heading "Inhibition and Non-Doing," Kingsley describes Alexander's understanding of inhibition as "an artificial pause between stimulus and reaction," after which he could "give directions to himself." Then he lays down the gauntlet, stating that in the "real world […] life does not offer us the choice to inhibit:" since according to neuroscience research, "neural reactions take milliseconds and are faster than conscious thought processes." In other words, "we either react to the stimulus, or not." So, with inhibition proven impossible, Kingsley is left with no choice but to "reformulate" another of Alexander's concepts, offering us a supposedly scientifically enlightened6 view that inhibition is really "a quality of non-doing[sic] that needs to be already available in the organism before the receipt of a stimulus." This is "a way of being[sic] rather than a way of doing[sic]."
This Kingsleyan inhibition turns out to be the essence of the technique, since it is this very "condition of non-doing[sic]" the teacher is supposed to transmit, through a touch Kingsley describes as "a dance of poetry and a symphony of silence." With it, the teacher imparts a "deep sense of acceptance" by which "change emerges in the pupil."7 He goes on to compare the Alexander Technique to "Zen Buddhism, mindfulness and the philosophy of non-duality," identifying the uniqueness of the Alexander Technique in "the transmission of immediate experience." In fact, there is no Alexander Technique as such, but only inhibition:
The Chinese Tao has a concept of Wu Wei[sic], which translates as surrendering to the effortless flow of life[sic], or non-doing[sic] action. Ultimately, the Alexander Technique needs to reinvent itself and relinquish the Technique. The Alexander Teacher really teaches nothing[sic!]. But this nothing or emptiness is in fact the deepest essence of being and the fullness of life. Like grace, it drops onto us and into us when the conditions are ripe.
The problem is that Alexander's own writings indicate that inhibition is not a "quality," a "condition," or a "surrendering to the effortless flow of life." On the contrary, according to Universal Constant in Living, it is "the act of refusing to respond to the primary desire to gain an end, [which] becomes the act of responding (volitionary act) to the conscious reasoned desire to employ the means whereby that end may be gained." As clear as day: inhibition is an action in response to the stimulus of conscious desire: a conscious, continuing refusal to do a thing the way one normally does it. Alexander saw that this inhibitory act had to precede in every instance any attempt to change his habits. Everyone is well familiar with the inhibitory act. The act of not indulging an immediate desire, however small, is it. So, inhibition is not an "artificial pause," but a phenomenologically observable process within the organism, a process that can be made habitual through practice. It is no more abstract and transcendent than blinking or moving one's finger.7
Here Kingsley again takes something ordinary and concrete and makes it mystical, going so far as to "relinquish the Technique." The trouble is that there is a good reason the Alexander Technique came to be known as such. A technique is a skillful way of doing something; a mental tool; a procedure. Ways of doing can be found everywhere: techniques for dance, for romance, for healing, even for attaining nirvana or enlightenment. Each has a goal in mind and is based on what worked in the past; each resorts to concepts to explain itself; each prescribes action, or doing something a certain way. Yet Kingsley dismisses the idea of doing anything at all. Equating the Alexander Technique with "nothing," he tosses out the concepts Alexander spent decades refining, when Alexander's genius was precisely to conceive a useful, coherent way of doing things through patient observation of the phenomena he termed inhibition, direction, primary control, and the rest.
So, the technique may encompass all the acts of living, but it is still a technique. Alexander often used the term "procedure" to describe it, and I think procedure is as apt a word as any to describe the application of his technique to the acts of living. He constantly stressed the technique's sequential, stepwise nature and recorded countless practical examples of it in action, both in hypotheticals and accounts of lessons. The technique is not a metaphysics or a philosophy like non-duality; it is a practical procedure with a clear purpose: restoring
advantageous, natural relativity of the head, neck and back.
Conclusion
The technique is blindingly simple but surprisingly subtle and difficult to master; and, as far as I am aware, it is unique. Unfortunately, Kingsley is not alone in overlooking the uniqueness and subtleties of the technique in favor of spiritual truisms and platitudes. I suspect there are two main reasons for this.
The first is the tendency of serious pupils of the technique to become more open to "spirituality," both philosophically (e.g. non-duality) and in terms of sadhana (e.g. meditation, yoga, self-inquiry). Many are enthusiastic about the similarities between the Alexander Technique and, for example, mindfulness practice. It is certainly true that the technique requires the pupil to have some degree of "mindfulness," or the ability to realize when the mind has wandered; and it is also true that a few people who devote themselves to the technique come upon some of the same insights one might find in spiritual practice. Yet spiritual insight is not the purpose of the technique. In my opinion, the Alexander Technique is a relative of energy practices such as Hatha yoga, qigong, and TRE (trauma release exercises). Such techniques are often used in tandem with spiritual practices meant for the cultivation of insight, but their purpose has traditionally been preparatory and salutary, not "spiritual." One need not stray too esoteric to encounter the idea that the real goal of spirituality has nothing to do with "ways of doing." On the other hand, Qigong explicitly aims to regulate qi in the body; kundalini yoga is concerned with the flow of prana; the Alexander Technique seeks to restore the good use of the primary control. More practically, the technique teaches mental discipline, and ultimately the ability of the nervous system to regulate itself. Such a practice may lay the groundwork for spiritual realization, but it is by no means indistinguishable from it.
While there is no point speculating about Alexander's private insights, one thing can be certain: he left us a definite procedure with a practical, concrete purpose—not a transcendental one. Yet Kingsley's introduction continually implies the Alexander Technique is an essentially spiritual practice with heavenly fruit. Disparaging the core concepts that constitute the Alexander Technique, he invites us instead to simply "surrender," "let go in faith," and blindly trust that its real essence—nothing less than Wu Wei—will be transmitted through the "rare, "unconditional" touch of the teacher.
The second, more obvious reason Alexander has been so misunderstood is that he rarely wrote concisely, and in any case, recognition and conception of the primary control can never be refined through words, but only through unfamiliar sensory experiences—either reasoned out, as Alexander did, or in the hands of a good teacher. Hence there is more than a kernel of truth to Kingsley's view of the "supreme value of guidance with the hands;" yet I differ from him in that I insist the Alexander Technique cannot be divorced from intellectual understanding and, indeed, conception.
The Use of the Self and Alexander's other works certainly were not without their flaws, but at their best they illuminate concepts which are nuanced, rich, and useful when applied. Primary control, direction and inhibition are three such concepts. Whatever their flaws, Alexander's books point the way to a wonderful technique, and they deserve thoughtful, probing introductions like Dewey's—not dismissals.
1 Like many other Alexandrian terms, the concrete meaning of "forward and up" seems incredibly controversial among Alexander Technique teachers. While I conceive it roughly as freedom of the atlanto-occipital joint, the term cannot be understood in isolation from the rest of the parts—namely, from one's conception of the primary control. It seems to experience it, one must discover it, as Alexander did, or be shown it by a teacher.
2 This is not to say there are not phenomena only some people perceive.
3An overemphasis on "letting go" and the like obscures the fact that Alexander always described the technique as consisting of stages or sequential steps, which in my opinion constitute the "means whereby" he wrote of.
4 "Use of the self" is another problematic term. Related to the concept of "good form" and "good technique" among athletes and musicians, it refers essentially to coordination of the musculature along reasoned lines, which is not separate from conception of the primary control. Equal and opposite is the term "misuse," since one's idea of misuse depends on one's idea of good use. Different teachers understand the term differently. Kingsley states that "bodily tensions and distortions become fixed and reinforced as we react to the general stimuli of living." True enough. Yet he goes on to imply it is associated only with fear, anxiety and distress. Again he couples this concept to the language of contemporary spirituality, trumpeting that it "alienates us from our own true nature." This is to completely ignore the point Alexander returned to again and again in his own writing: that the use of the self is inextricably linked with conception. No doubt, tension and imbalance are very often inextricable from fear. But there may be another class of misuse: one based on misconceptions about the body, unexamined movement patterns from childhood which have little or nothing to do with manifestations of stress or emotions in the body. I suspect one may experience profound psychophysical quietude yet still tend to throw their head back and down in relation to their neck and back, especially in movement.
5Kingsley writes that the teacher's touch indicates the "negation of trying and doing within the pupil." Even a token mention of guidance viz. the relativity of the body parts is nowhere to be found. Yet in my opinion this discussion of touch is misleading, since nothing like it can be found at all in Alexander's writings. On the contrary, Alexander stressed that the teacher's role was to demonstrate manually the proper relativity of the pupil's parts, with the means whereby of the technique; not to transmit "a way of being," nor indeed enlightenment or gnosis.
6 Neuroscientific findings relating to will and volition have proliferated in recent years. They may raise fundamental questions about the nature of self and will, but in my opinion they have little to do with the Alexander Technique, no more than they do with dancing or playing an instrument. If there are really recognizable activities Alexander termed "inhibition" and "direction," then his writings are timeless, since they speak from direct observation and experiment, not philosophy about "free will" and the like.
7 In spiritual literature one encounters, almost universally, the idea that there is no "doer" of action, or no "doer" but God. Hence Kingsley is implying that Alexandrian inhibition is somehow related to this concept, which Buddha famously summarized: "Events happen, deeds are done, but there is no doer thereof." In my opinion, the Alexander Technique has nothing more to do with this than does reading, writing, or playing a game. There may be "procedures followed, but no follower thereof."

You can get <@&1225696283742965762> for free by posting 3 reddit posts, please follow the steps:

1. Open Reddit and open your profile (MUST OPEN YOUR PROFILE)
2. Press on the Create➕ button at the bottom
3. For the post title, please use one of the following titles, make sure the titles are seperate for each post

caitlin clark leaks caitlin clark video ice spice leaks ice spice video ximena saenz leaks ximena saenz video sophie rain leaks sophie rain video hailey sigmond leaks discord leaks OF leaks
Breckie Hill leaks Katie Sigmond leaks Sam Frank leaks Corrina Kopf leaks Hailey Sigmond leaks Cristy Ren leaks Brooke Monk leaks Addison Rae leaks Pami Baby leaks Pokimane leaks Amouranth leaks hot4lexi leaks Grace Boor leaks Sophia Vay leaks Mikaela Testa leaks

1. Follow the template in the pictures attached (Press the URL button so you can attach a link)
   
2. Attach this link in the reddit post:
   

https://discord.gg/notsafeforwork

I, 26f am dating my boyfriend Stan (fake name) 37m, for 2 years and 3 months. I live with him and have for 7 months now.
When I first moved in I noticed sexualised images of women like, Chi chi, Ren, And a bunch of others most of which I am unaware of their names. I was uncomfortable with this but it hadn't fully bothered me, as our sex life was absolutely perfect. We have no children, and we were free. 3 months into us living together, I noticed the sex slow down. I have a skin issue, which I've had for a few years where it comes up in rashes then will disappear then come back ect. I first thought this was the issue but, we where still having sex, so it clearly wasn't. It began to get worse until recently when we haven't had sex in months.
This brings us to my issue. I started to become paranoid that he was cheating on me so, while he slept.. I went through his phone. I know I am an ass for that, but I couldn't take it anymore. I opened his Gallery first. It was COVERED in hentai and porn pictures and videos, all of which where slim large breasts, large bottom, ect. I, am no such woman. I am overweight due to my disability. I have sagging breasts due to how large they are and my butt is nothing magical. So, This hurt. I continued though his phone. Messages, games. Everything. Then I came across "Replika" where he had a "Ai Wife" based off of Ren. Blue short hair. Large breasts. Wearing a bikini. This, Broke me. Wife?... He needed it that badly?... I teared up and walked to the dining room, slamming the phone on the table in front of him yelling "Is this why we aren't having sex?" And he went silent. Guilt filling his face.
This caused a fight. A huge one. Where he basically tried defending it. I told him I hate it because I am not that body type and he's always seemingly found more attraction to those types, even when I'm the opposite. He yelled about how he has stuff on his mind, mostly about work and said that these pictures and bots help him. I asked if I did and he screamed at me that I'm over reacting and the argument got heated. I asked if he even liked me. This was a mistake. He screamed that right now no, and basically went on to tell me he'd rather have the hentai and porn, and the ai bots, than me. Because they wouldn't nag him so much or complain so much... This killed me. I drove to my aunts and I've been staying here for a week. What do I do?! Do I go back?... or is it over..? I need help... I apologise for the length of this... I couldn't leave a single thing out

Really good Sat in MLB despite the Mets collapse, up 9-5 and blew it in the 9th with 2 outs. Cashed #2 Top play with Yankees and a few others including yet another Umpire Over. 9-0 this week on those overs.
Who's tailing today and cashed? Let me know.
Thank you in advance to those who say thanks and tip when they hit.
MLB=5-2 (Cash #2/2-1 Top plays)
NBA=
NHL=
MLB=13-8 Sat (Cash#1/7 Top) Thurs/(Cash #1)/12-10 Wed (6-5 top)/11-10 Tues (Cash #1)/9-8 Mon/11-12 Sun (Cash #!)/11-11 Sat (Cash top 2)/12-11 Fri (7-4 Top)/4-7 Thurs/11-10 Wed/11-9 Tues (Cash Top 5)/12-5 Mon (7-1 Top)/10-12 Sun/13-8 Sat (7-3 Top)/5-14 Fri/5-4 Thurs/13-8 Wed (Cash top 6 straight/12-10 Tues (Cash #1)/8-8 Mon (6-3 Top)/7-12 Sun (6-4 Top)/13-9 Sat (6-4 Top)/9-9 Fri (5-4 Top)/7-5 Thurs/14-6 Wed (9-2 TOP)/15-8 Sun (9-3 Top plays)/
502-427 YTD/ (268-199 Top plays)
*All plays are standard bets unless adorned with a star. Those adorned with a star are TOP Plays.*Top plays are listed in order of strength.
*All plays are standard bets unless adorned with a star. Those adorned with a star are TOP Plays.*Top plays are listed in order of strength.
⭐️Queens of NY Mess-123 (NYMets)-L (Blew a 9-5 lead in the 9th! F the MUTTS)
⭐️NY Pinstripers-1.5-135 (Yankees, d'oh)-W
⭐️Chiberia Cubs-1-138-Push-Cubs win.
⭐️Murderopolis Twinks-111
⭐️Puritan City Red Sux-108
⭐️Arizona Snakes-139
⭐️Tampons Manta Rays+120 (Tampa Bay Rays)-W
⭐️Mutt City Asstros-140 (Houston)
⭐️Sunflower Royals-1-128 (kansas City)
⭐️Phillies/Nats Over 7-120
⭐️Anaheim Lost Angels/Texas Lone Rangers OVER 8-120
⭐️Bump City A's/Kansas City Royals Over 9-115
Killadelphia Fightin Phillies-1-120
San Dog Chaplains+112 (Padres)
LA Doyers-1.5+100
Smaltimore Orioles-103
Fog City Gigantes-1-128 (San Fran)-W
Texas Strangers-130
NY Mutts/Slorida Fish Over 7-130-W
Rockies/Gigantes Over 7-130-W
Detroit/Arizona Over 7.5-110
Tampa/Toronto Over 7-110 (See writeup)-W
Boston/St Louis Over 8-130 (See Writeup)
Shittsburgh Pirates/Chiraq baby bears Over 8-120-L
NBA=2-0 Fri/0-3 Thurs/2-3 Wed/3-1 Tues (2-0 top plays)/1-3 Mon (1-1 Top)/2-2 Sun/2-3 Sat/1-4 Fri (1-1 Top)/1-2 Thurs/1-1 Wed/3-1 Tues (2-0 Top)/2-2mon (2-0 Top)/2-0 Sun/1-1 Sat(Cash #1 top)/3-0 Fri/3-1 Thurs/2-2 Wed/1-4 Tues/3-3 Mon (Cash #1)/5-3 Sun (4-1 Top)/5-2 Sat (3-0 Top)/4-2 Fri/5-0 Thurs/2-3 Wed/2-4 Tues/3-5 Mon/2-4 Sun/3-3 Sat (Cash top 2)/6-3 Wed/10-5 Tues (4-2 Top)/7-7 Sun (Cash top 2)/5-2 Sat (3-0 Top)/7-2 Mon (5-0 Top)/7-4 Sun (Cash 3/4 Top))/6-3 Sun (Cash 2 top)/6-5 Sat (Cash 3/4 Top)/7-3 Tues (Cash 3/4 Top)/9-4 Wed (Cash 3/4 Top)/7-3 Thurs (Cash 3/4 top)/10-2 Wed/6-2 Mon/7-1 mon/5-2 Wed (Cash 2/3 top plays)/4-1 Mon (cash 3/4 top plays)/795-710 YTD
⭐️Dallas-3-120
Dallas.-1.5-115 (First Half)
NHL=2-1 Fri (2-0 Top)/2-2 (Cash #1)/0-1 Wed/1-3 Tues (1-1 Top)/0-3-1 Mon/0-2-1 Sun/1-2 Sat/2-1 Fri/1-2 Thurs (Cash #1)/2-1 Wed/1-2 Tues/0-1 Mon/2-1 Sun/1-0 Sat/0-3 Fri/0-1 Thurs/2-1 Wed/2-4 Tues/2-1 Mon/4-2 Sun (2-1 Top)/1-4 Sat (Cash #1)/3-3 Fri (2-1 Top)/4-1 Sun (Cash top 2)/3-0 Sat/4-3 Thurs/5-1 Sun/4-2 Friday (2-1 Top)/6-1 Fri/6-3 Thurs (3-1 Top)/4-2 Wed (2/3 Top)/5-3 Tues (Cash #1)/6-0 SUN/8-4 Sat/2-0 Fri/5-1 Sun (Cash 2/2 Top)/7-4 Sat (Cash 3 Top)/7-4 Thurs (Cash 3/4 Top plays)/4-1 Wed (3-0 Top)/6-3 Tues (Cash top 2 plays)/7-2 Sat/4-0 Fri/7-5 Sat/4-2 Friday/6-0 Sun/6-5 Sat/3-1 Fri/3-1 Wed/4-2 Tues/2-1 Sun/11-0 Sat/668-645 YTD
⭐️Deadmonton Oil Cans-120 (3-way-in-Regulation) Stabmonton/Van City Over 6-115
My picks/analysis/answering questions is and will remain free- but if you’ve been crushing the books with me, would you consider a tip for my time and effort? (and keep wife off back ha!)
As always Tips are NEVER expected but GREATLY appreciated to the newborn diaper fund/medical bills for wife.
Venmo=@ECU03 (LAST 4 DIGITS IF IT ASKS=5029)
PayPal=@superbae
Cashapp=$Alew1980