Taken from: https://www.theringer.com/movies/2024/5/21/24161120/greatest-movie-car-chase-scenes-ranked-furiosa-mad-max-saga
In honor of the imminent ‘Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga,’ we’re shifting into high gear to determine the best chase scene in cinema history
By Miles Surrey May 21, 2024, 6:30am EDTGetty Images/Ringer illustration
After wowing audiences with Mad Max: Fury Road, director George Miller returns to the franchise’s post-apocalyptic wastelands for Furiosa, the epic origin story of the eponymous heroine (now played by Anya Taylor-Joy), premiering on Friday. As the follow-up to one of the greatest action films ever made, it’s hard to overstate the hype for Furiosa, and that was before word got out about a showstopping 15-minute sequence that required nearly 200 stuntpeople and took 78 days to shoot. While Furiosa will have its own distinct flavor, as is true of every Mad Max movie, there’s one thing that unites these projects: intense, jaw-dropping scenes of vehicular mayhem. And what better way to honor the franchise than by celebrating what it does best?
Ahead of Furiosa’s release, we’ve put together our definitive ranking of the best car chases in cinema. There weren’t any strict rules in place, other than capping the list at 20—mostly for my own sanity—and limiting every franchise to one entry. (Apologies to Fury Road’s kickass predecessor The Road Warrior.) We also won’t discriminate against scenes that feature motorbikes, so long as cars (and/or trucks) remain part of the equation. As for what, exactly, constitutes a good car chase? Like list making, it’s bound to be subjective, but I tend to gravitate toward two key elements: the skill of the stuntwork on display and the ways in which a filmmaker conveys the action in relation to the story. (Also, the less CGI, the better.) Buckle up, ’cause we’re not wasting any time shifting into high gear.

20. Quantum of Solace (2008)

There have been some memorable car chases in the James Bond franchise: the first sequence featuring the iconic Aston Martin DB5 in Goldfinger, the corkscrew jump in The Man With the Golden Gun, the Lotus Esprit submarine in The Spy Who Loved Me. But I’m going with a somewhat controversial pick here: Quantum of Solace. There are many issues with Quantum of Solace—namely, it was one of the most high-profile blockbusters affected by the 2007-08 writers strike—but its opening scene isn’t one of them. Picking up right where Casino Royale left off, we find Bond (Daniel Craig) evading henchmen through the narrow roads around Italy’s Lake Garda. The frenetic, furious chase mirrors Bond’s sense of anguish after losing Vesper Lynd (Eva Green), the woman he opened his heart to, and his relentless quest for answers. It’s a thrilling tone-setter for Quantum of Solace and one that doesn’t overstay its welcome, capped off by Bond sending his final pursuers flying off a cliff:
If we’re being honest, though, it feels like James Bond has yet to create a franchise-defining car chase. Perhaps that’s a mission the newest 007, whoever it ends up being, can undertake.

19. Mission: Impossible—Rogue Nation (2015)

The Mission: Impossible franchise is no stranger to electrifying chase scenes, the best of which find Tom Cruise’s Ethan Hunt working up his heart rate. When it comes to action behind the wheel, though, Fallout tends to dominate the discussion—even on this very website. But I think the vehicular chase in Rogue Nation is being slept on. What we have is effectively two sequences for the price of one: The first finds Hunt pursuing Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson) by car through the narrow streets of Casablanca alongside some nefarious henchmen; the second sees him continue the chase outside the city on motorbike. (Adding to the chaos: Hunt had only just been resuscitated, and he’s clearly not all there.) In terms of death-defying stunts for the audience’s entertainment, a helmetless Cruise taking corners like a MotoGP racer is child’s play compared to his other exploits, but the actor’s authentic reaction to scraping his knee on the road underlines that there’s no one else in Hollywood doing it like him:
We’ll be sure to update this ranking if and when Cruise does something even more dangerous down the road, pun unintended.

18. Vanishing Point (1971)

A movie that counts the likes of Steven Spielberg and Quentin Tarantino among its biggest fans, Vanishing Point is the first of a few entries on this ranking that’s essentially one extended car chase. The film stars Barry Newman as Kowalski, a man tasked with delivering a Dodge Challenger T 440 Magnum from Colorado to California while eluding police across four states. One of Kowalski’s most memorable run-ins comes when a guy driving a Jaguar E-Type convertible challenges him to an impromptu race. Incredibly, we’re expected to believe the man in the Jag comes out of this crash in one piece:
Vanishing Point might not boast the impressive production values of other movies on this list, but considering Tarantino would go on to feature a white Challenger in Death Proof, its influence in the car cinema canon is undeniable.

17. Fast Five (2011)

Let’s face it, Fast & Furious has seen better days. Some believe the franchise’s dip in quality coincided with the death of Paul Walker; others are dismayed by the pivot from street racing to absurd feats of superherodom—emphasis on the Dom. Perhaps it’s a bit of both, but the very best movie in the series, Fast Five, manages to strike the perfect balance: It’s a relatively grounded heist thriller that nevertheless takes the franchise to ridiculous new heights. After Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel) and his crew steal $100 million from a Brazilian kingpin, they drag the entire bank vault holding the money through the streets of Rio de Janeiro, all while being pursued by authorities. It’s a delightfully destructive sequence that does untold damage to Rio’s infrastructure and features some of the most bone-crunching crashes committed to film:
If the Fast franchise is going to break out of its recent slump, it would do well to remember that there’s nothing better than letting its heroes live their lives a quarter mile at a time—no detours to outer space required.

16. The Blues Brothers (1980)

A good car chase isn’t reserved just for action flicks: Comedies can get in on the act, too. In The Blues Brothers, starring the recurring Saturday Night Live characters played by John Belushi and Dan Aykroyd, the beloved bandmates must prevent the foreclosure of the orphanage where they were raised by scrounging together $5,000. Naturally, that’s easier said than done: Along the way, the Blues Brothers draw the attention of neo-Nazis, a country-and-western band, and local police. While The Blues Brothers has amusing gags and musical numbers, its chase sequences with the Brothers behind the wheel of a 1974 Dodge Monaco are what really steal the show—and none are better than a climactic pursuit across Chicago. More than 60 old police cars were used in the film, some of which are wrecked in a comically over-the-top pileup:
The sheer scale of The Blues Brothers’ final set piece is commendable in and of itself—as is the movie’s commitment to treating real-life cars like a bunch of Hot Wheels.

15. Baby Driver (2017)

For good and for ill, Edgar Wright’s movies exude an abundance of style, and Baby Driver is no exception. Baby Driver is centered on a clever gimmick: The action works in tandem with its soundtrack because the film’s protagonist, Baby (Ansel Elgort), suffers from tinnitus and constantly plays music to drown out the ringing. When everything’s clicking into place, Baby Driver feels like a supersized series of music videos, and nothing hits quite like its opening sequence. Baby acts as the getaway driver for a bank robbery while listening to the Jon Spencer Blues Explosion’s “Bellbottoms.” The ensuing chase works around rhythms of the song, as if Baby’s Subaru WRX were the star of its own dance number. Take nothing away from the actual driving, either, which puts the rally car to good use:
Baby Driver’s gimmick stretches a little thin by the end, but it’s hard to deny the crowd-pleasing power of Wright’s film when it’s firing on all cylinders.

14. The Raid 2 (2014)

With a trio of kickass Indonesian martial arts films under his belt, Gareth Evans has established himself as one of the most exciting action directors on the planet—someone who seems most in his element staging positively brutal hand-to-hand combat. In The Raid 2, however, Evans also brought his signature brand of carnage to the road. While there’s some cleverly executed close-quarters fighting within the confines of an SUV, courtesy of Iko Uwais’s hard-hitting protagonist, what really cements this sequence’s greatness are the moments when Evans turns the cars into an extension of the characters’ fists:
This belongs in an entirely new category of combat: car fights. There are so many action scenes in The Raid 2 worth writing home about—the kitchen showdown is an all-timer—but the fact that Evans casually tossed in an unforgettable car chase shows why he’s one of one.

13. The Driver (1978)

I’ll say this for Walter Hill’s The Driver: It sure lives up to its title. In this stripped-down thriller—one where none of the characters have a name—we follow the Driver (Ryan O’Neal), a getaway driver who has become a thorn in the side of the LAPD. In the film’s best scene, we see its taciturn protagonist living up to his reputation. With the Driver behind the wheel of a 1974 Ford Galaxie, a cat-and-mouse game unfolds when a handful of police cars are hot on his tail. What I love about this sequence is the pared-down nature of it all: The Driver outwits the cops as much as he outraces them. (Though, ironically, that wasn’t entirely by design: As Hill later explained, an accident on the last night of shooting meant they had to cobble together what had already been filmed.) Frankly, you’d never know the difference from the finished article:
If the general vibes of The Driver seem familiar, that’s because it was a major inspiration for Nicolas Winding Refn’s Drive, which just so happened to feature an unnamed protagonist (Ryan Gosling) evading police through the streets of Los Angeles.

12. The Bourne Supremacy (2004)

The shaky-cam style of the Bourne franchise isn’t for everyone—just ask John Woo—but credit where it’s due: These movies know how to deliver a good chase scene. (A friendly reminder that The Bourne Legacy is an underrated gem with an awesome motorbike sequence to boot.) But there’s one Bourne chase that stands above the rest: the Moscow getaway in The Bourne Supremacy. After being wounded by the Russian assassin Kirill (Karl Urban), Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) hijacks a taxi, with both the police and Kirill in hot pursuit. This isn’t the kind of sequence that lingers on any one shot; instead, what makes it work is the frenetic nature of the editing, which allows the viewer to feel like they’re in Bourne’s fight-or-flight headspace:
If I’m being honest, I’m usually one of those people who doesn’t like the Bourne movies’ shaky-cam style, but when it’s executed with such craftsmanship, you can’t help but get caught up in its adrenaline-pumping power.

11. The Seven-Ups (1973)

Philip D’Antoni was the producer of two movies featuring Hall of Fame car chases, Bullitt and The French Connection, the latter of which won him an Oscar for Best Picture. And with his lone directorial feature, The Seven-Ups, D’Antoni sought to craft an iconic sequence of his own. The film stars Roy Scheider as NYPD detective Buddy Mannuci (elite Italian American name; I can practically smell the gabagool), who commands a unit handling major felony cases that lead to seven-plus-year prison sentences; that’s why they’re known as the Seven-Ups. Midway through the movie, when one of the team members is killed by two shooters who flee the scene, Buddy chases after them. The 10-minute sequence, which starts in the Upper West Side before moving out of the city, is thrillingly immersive, alternating between close-ups of the characters and wider shots of all the damage they’ve caused. But the chase’s defining moment comes right at the end, when Buddy narrowly avoids a grisly death:
The sequence isn’t quite at the level of Bullitt or The French Connection—very few are—but D’Antoni still manages to leave an unmistakable imprint on the car chase canon.

10. Death Proof (2007)

If you ask Quentin Tarantino, Death Proof, his knowingly trashy tribute to exploitation cinema, is the worst movie he’s ever made. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t a lot to admire about the film, which honors the unsung heroes of Hollywood: stunt performers. The first half of Death Proof follows three female friends who cross paths with Stuntman Mike (Kurt Russell), a misogynistic serial killer who takes them out in his “death-proof” Chevy Nova. Fourteen months later, a group that includes stuntwoman Zoë Bell, playing herself, also lands on Mike’s radar. As Bell and her friends test out a ’70s Challenger, she performs a “ship’s mast” stunt, clinging onto the hood of the car with fastening belts. Unfortunately, when Mike pursues the women, it puts Bell in a precarious situation. Most of the entries on this list celebrate some next-level driving skills, but Death Proof’s inclusion is all about Bell pulling off one of the wildest stunts you’ll ever see. She’s quite literally hanging on for dear life:
If the Academy handed out Oscars to stunt performers—and let’s hope it does happen one day—Bell would’ve won in a landslide.

9. To Live and Die in L.A. (1985)

William Friedkin was already responsible for an all-time great car chase in The French Connection (more on that later), but the filmmaker made a commendable bid to outdo himself with To Live and Die in L.A. In this neo-noir thriller, Secret Service agent Richard Chance (William L. Petersen) is hell-bent on arresting an expert counterfeiter, Rick Masters (Willem Dafoe), who kills Chance’s partner days before his retirement. To capture Masters, Chance and his new partner, John Vukovich (John Pankow), attempt to steal $50,000 from a jewelry buyer for an undercover operation. The sting goes bad when the buyer, who is later revealed to be an undercover FBI agent, is killed and a group of gunmen goes after Chance and Vukovich. It’s a clever inversion of the usual car chase formula—this time, it’s the lawmen running away from the criminals. The outside-the-box thinking extends to the film’s most astonishing stretch, in which Chance evades the gunmen by driving into oncoming traffic:
The fact that Friedkin shot the chase at the end of filming—in case anything disastrous happened to the actors—underscores just how risky the endeavor was. The pulse-pounding results speak for themselves.

8. The Matrix Reloaded (2003)

The Matrix sequels have never been held in high esteem, but I’m ready to live my truth: The Matrix Reloaded fucking rules. (If anyone’s got a problem with this take, file your complaints with the Architect.) What’s more, the film happens to boast the finest action set piece of the franchise: the highway chase. After Morpheus (Laurence Fishburne) and Trinity (Carrie-Anne Moss) free the Keymaker (Randall Duk Kim), a program capable of creating shortcuts within the Matrix, they’re pursued by the Twins (Neil and Adrian Rayment). Morpheus once warned that going on the freeway was “suicide,” and it doesn’t take long to see why: The chase draws the attention of several Agents, who repeatedly take over the bodies of other drivers on the road. The scene is the best of both worlds: There’s some incredible stuntwork on display, including when Moss weaves around on a Ducati, and CGI augments some feats of superhuman strength. But the most jaw-dropping aspect of the sequence is how it came together, as the production spent $2.5 million to construct its own highway (!) on California’s Alameda Island. If that weren’t unique enough, I’m pretty sure Reloaded is also the only movie in existence in which a katana takes out an SUV:
The Matrix remains the Wachowskis’ masterpiece, but don’t get it twisted: The filmmakers were still cooking with gas in the sequel.

7. Gone in 60 Seconds (1974)

Size isn’t everything, but for H. B. Halicki, who produced, wrote, directed, and starred in Gone in 60 Seconds, it’s certainly part of the package. The indie action flick follows Maindrian Pace (Halicki), a Los Angeles insurance investigator who has a lucrative side hustle jacking high-end cars. The plot kicks into motion when a South American drug lord enlists Pace to nab 48 cars within five days in exchange for $400,000. Of course, Gone in 60 Seconds is best known for what happens after Pace is caught stealing a 1973 Ford Mustang Mach 1, when he leads police on a chase that lasts a whopping 40 minutes. (More than 90 cars were destroyed in the process.) Halicki, for his part, did all the driving himself, including a spectacular jump off a makeshift ramp of crashed cars:
While Halicki wound up making a few more indies after Gone in 60 Seconds, he died in an accident on the set of its sequel. His legacy as a do-it-all daredevil, however, lives on.

6. Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)

Long before James Cameron immersed himself in the world of Pandora, he was a pioneer of state-of-the-art visual effects. Case in point: Terminator 2: Judgment Day is credited for having the first CGI character in a blockbuster, the T-1000 (Robert Patrick), a killing machine composed of a futuristic liquid metal. But Cameron also understood that the CGI of that era shouldn’t be the main attraction: It worked best as a complement to the practical effects, as seen in Judgment Day’s epic viaduct chase. When the T-1000 tracks down a young John Connor (Edward Furlong) in a shopping mall, he’s saved at the last minute by the Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger), giving John a chance to escape on his dirt bike. As the T-1000 gives chase, the David and Goliath vibes between man and machine are further epitomized by the T-1000’s commandeering of a truck. The sequence already has a terrifying sense of urgency, but it hits another level when the T-1000 crashes through the viaduct like the Kool-Aid Man:
Big Jim is still revolutionizing what can be achieved with visual effects in the Avatar franchise, and while I cherish those movies, nothing beats his old-school showmanship.

5. Duel (1971)

The feature-length debut of Steven Spielberg—perhaps you’ve heard of him—the TV movie Duel is essentially one extended chase sequence between salesman David Mann (Dennis Weaver) and a sinister trucker determined to drive him off the road. I’ve attached a clip from the ending of the film, but that doesn’t do Duel justice. What cements this movie’s greatness is how it sustains an unbearable level of tension across its 90-minute running time—with a budget under $500,000, no less. Spielberg’s masterstroke is never once showing us the other driver, anthropomorphizing the truck itself as a monster. (You can see a lot of similarities with how he would build suspense in Jaws.) When Mann finally gets the upper hand, tricking his adversary into driving off a cliff, it feels like you can breathe again:
Spielberg would move on to bigger and better things after Duel, but considering how much the director accomplished with so little, you can’t help but wonder what else he could conjure up with limited resources.

4. Mad Max: Fury Road (2015)

Like Duel, Fury Road is basically one long car chase—the difference is Miller got to work with a blockbuster budget, and made every cent of it count. It’s hard to pick a single standout sequence in Fury Road, but if I had to choose, I’d go with the first attack on the War Rig after Furiosa (Charlize Theron) flees with the wives of Immortan Joe (Hugh Keays-Byrne). Here’s why: Think back to when you saw Fury Road for the first time, before you fully grasped the vehicular carnage that was in store. And then stuff like this kept happening:
To quote Steven Soderbergh’s thoughts on Fury Road: “I don’t understand how they’re not still shooting that film and I don’t understand how hundreds of people aren’t dead.” Whether or not Miller manages to one-up the action in Furiosa, the director is already in the pantheon.

3. The French Connection (1971)

We return to the Friedkin-verse for what may be his best film, The French Connection, the crime thriller based on Robin Moore’s 1969 nonfiction book of the same name. The story concerns two NYPD detectives, Jimmy “Popeye” Doyle (Gene Hackman) and Buddy “Cloudy” Russo (Roy Scheider), and their tireless pursuit of a French heroin smuggler. But while there’s plenty to admire about how The French Connection illustrates the thin line between police and criminals, its greatest claim to fame is its car chase. After Popeye narrowly survives a sniper attack, he goes after the shooter, who escapes on an elevated train. The ensuing sequence is true daredevil filmmaking that Friedkin shot without permits, leading to real crashes with New Yorkers that made the final cut. But Friedkin’s finest touch was mounting a camera to the front of the car, making the audience feel like they’re part of the action:
My Ringer colleague Justin Sayles believes The French Connection’s chase should’ve landed at no. 1, and I’m sure many folks will agree with him. Being the only film on this list to win Best Picture, however, is a solid consolation prize.

2. Bullitt (1968)

When it comes to modern car chases, all roads lead back to Bullitt. A Dad Cinema classic, the film stars Steve McQueen as Frank Bullitt, a San Francisco detective who pursues a group of mobsters after a key witness is killed in protective custody. In his search for answers, Bullitt realizes he’s being tailed by a couple of hitmen, and then turns the tables on them. From there, the chase is on. Aside from McQueen doing most of his own stunts behind the wheel of a Ford Mustang GT 390 Fastback, what’s so impressive about the sequence is how timeless it is. Even the little imperfections, like hubcaps repeatedly coming off the wheels, work to the film’s advantage, stressing just how much these drivers are living on a razor’s edge. It’s been more than 50 years since Bullitt revolutionized the car chase, and yet few movies since have felt like they’re pushing the envelope to such an exhilarating degree:
That the car driven by McQueen was recently sold at auction for $3.74 million, a then-record price for a Mustang, underlines Bullitt’s enduring legacy.

1. Ronin (1998)

“If I’m going to do a car chase,” filmmaker John Frankenheimer said in an interview with the American Society of Cinematographers, “I’m going to do a car chase that’s going to make somebody think about whether or not they want to do another one!” Boy, did he ever. In Frankenheimer’s late-career masterpiece, Ronin, the director actually incorporated several chases, but it’s the climactic sequence that stands alone as the greatest ever filmed. The movie concerns an international group of mercenaries who are hired to steal a mysterious briefcase; a series of double-crosses and double-bluffs ensue. But for the final chase, all you need to know is that Sam (Robert De Niro), a mercenary with ties to the CIA, is in pursuit of Deirdre (Natascha McElhone), an IRA operative in possession of the case. Winding through the streets and tunnels of Paris, what’s most striking is just how fluid it all feels. You’re completely engrossed in the chase’s forward momentum, captured from every conceivable angle; a symphony of controlled chaos. The driving styles even reflect the characters: Deirdre is reckless and impulsive, while Sam remains calm and controlled.
There are many worthy car chases in this ranking, but in my view, Ronin takes pole position. And while I can’t imagine a movie ever topping what Frankenheimer achieved, I’d love nothing more than to be proved wrong.

To make a long backstory short, I've been in an off again on again situationship with a BPD (29F, severe cocaine and other stimulants addiction) person since November of '22. It was mostly off again, with a few on times, until August of '23 when it become mostly on. During the "off" time, she was in a relationship with a man who turned very abusive and she ultimately got a restraining order against
Basically, she is textbook BPD with a severe substance abuse problem and many narcissistic tendencies. Chaotic interpersonal relationships, heavy splitting, etc. We were recently going through a 2.5-3 week really good patch where she was treating me with respect, responding to my needs, being available, etc. Then came her female best friends birthday last Monday. I was supposed to go out with them but she ignored my text message telling me when to meet them at the bar. Now, I've known her best friend as a close platonic friend of mine about 4x as long as I've known her and her best friend is the one who initially invited me. So I showed up to the bar I was invited to at the time I was invited to be there. When she saw me, she freaked out and had a panic attack. Eventually she calmed down and said she was overwhelmed because so many people were hitting her up and her best friend was rushing her to get ready and she just shut down. Typical bullshit but I let myself buy it. Come to find out, she had been initiating conversation with her abusive ex that weekend and she was afraid I'd find out. Her best friend knew and was pissed at her, but covered for her.
Come the next Wednesday, we have plans at 5pm. I'm to go from work directly to her house and we get ready together to go out. The whole day goes by and I don't hear from her. So I contact her best friend to see if she had pulled a typical disappearing act or what and her best friend had not heard from her since the day before too. To make a long story short, we both find out together that she is currently and has been with the abusive ex all Tuesday night into that day. She finally responded to best friend and asked her to lie to me. I got pissed at her and she finally responded the next morning with no apology or anything, but asking me to do something for her. Which I initially declined but foolishly carried out anyway. I let her spin her stupid bullshit story and allowed myself to believe it, even though I knew it was trash. In the meantime, her best friend has been LIVID at her for seeing her abusive ex and lying to me and is in the midst of ending their friendship, saying tons of hurtful shit and just freaking out on her but that's another story.
Move to Thursday, I again am not hearing from her and around 8pm her best friend texts me "something happened. You need to call me ASAP". My situationship had texted her best friend a video of herself with a bloody nose and a black eye saying "he hit me. if you ever cared about me you'd let me hear your voice." Her best friend failed to fall for the bullshit and never replied to her. But around 9:30pm, I foolishly answered the facetime and heard her bullshit apology again and let her come over because she was so distraught. We then hung out Friday evening and Saturday most of the day and things seemed really good, she was regretful and sorry and acting very normal and loving. She had called the police and they were looking for the abusive ex. Her best friend also called the police to report that he was in violation of the injunction she has against him!
Well, come Monday, I again have heard nothing from her all day. I had therapy after work and talked at length about the situation and had gotten prepared to try to break things off for like the 5th time. I let it get to 8pm with no response to my 2 messages from earlier and I go to send something to her and I'm blocked! I knew immediately she had to be with the abusive ex once again. I sent her the "breakup" message I had crafted anyway on several social medias along with 4-5 other messages just sharing how flabbergasted I was about the whole situation. Then in the middle of the night, I had a moment of weakness being unable to sleep and I tried to No Caller ID call her (which is a favorite tactic of hers that she does to me every time I've tried to block her). And he answers, "who is this?". I just hung-up immediately.
It feels good that it finally happened in such an absurd and hurtful way. Typically, I've been the one trying to end things due to her bullshit then I let her come crying back to me with her hoover attempts. In the past, she's not been able to go more than 2-3 hours without a hoover but we're going on 36 hours no contact already. But I am still am cycling through periods of wanting to hear back from her vs being fully pissed off and done with it.
I apologize if the story is a little disjuncted, I have left out a huge number of details for the sake of brevity. The "anything is on the table" quote was an enjoyable one from a friend of mine when I told him about the recent antics. Sure enough, he was right! Even returning to your abusive ex 2 days after he hit you in the face and you called the cops on him was on the table.

Okay, the new system isn't even out yet, but I already made my verdict. As you can tell from the title, I don't have much nice stuff to say about it.
1. Let's start with the fact that you can only have four safes.
That's... okay, cool, but...
2. You can only open one of them at a time(?).
Yes, that's trash, but it's tolerable, but...
3. Not only do you have to open them manually every time, but you also cannot have more than four safes. Any additional safe you get while your slots are full simply won't count.
Damn, it just keeps getting worse. But wait, the despair isn't over yet—there's more! In fact;
4. You can't discard the boxes you have(?), either. So, if you have only 3-hour bunny safes, you absolutely must open them first before getting anything else like a better one.
And to rub salt in the wound for that matter, the boxes have levels. Levels that you acquire through upgrading, apparently(?). The higher the level of the box, the better the rewards, right? Yes, correct! That's great, for sure! What could I possibly say against that, other than... the fact that if you have a level 2+ box, you absolutely must open it if you still want to keep getting level 9+ boxes in the future. So, that could take many hours, and you will get a smaller reward. Why? Because you cannot discard it, and you must live with the lower-level boxes. Now, I don't know if you have to open low level ones only once, or if the levels you receive are RNG. Kindly and hopefully it isn't RNG, so that you always get's the highest levels, without having to wait the same time for potentially 50% of the rewards you could get.
5. The safes feel "unbalanced".
Why do I say that? Well, on one side, we have the "normal" safes, which take hours to open, correct? And on the other side, we have the practice bunny safe, arguably the best one by a long shot. Why? Because this safe can be opened instantly. For free. In fact, if there were a way to only get this safe, I would definitely accept that.
If you could only get practice bunny safes, in three hours of actively playing the game, you would get way more than what the normal 3-hour safe offers in rewards, which is insane to me, even though the practice safe gives less. You would also actively play the game which is nice for literally everyone in the current state of the game.
6. But wait, there's more! So, listen, here in the patch notes, the developers said, and I quote:

"There are three main goals of this update. Firstly, to create a means for growth through gameplay, thus providing motivation to keep playing."

Yeah, see that above? It's nonsense and doesn't reflect what will actually happen "completely". So, look, I have four safes currently, each taking three hours or more to open, correct? So... I can't win any more safes, right? So... why would I keep playing at some point, may I kindly ask you? I mean, in such a situation, why wouldn't I just play once every 3/8 hours instead? Also, will everybody keep coming back every 3/8 hours to get one more safe and then close the game every time? How long will it take to max out? I honestly believe that by then, any hype you might feel about the game in the context of getting strong would have already drowned out.
7. No way to skip timer besides paying gems(?).
What’s even weirder is that there isn't even a mechanic to skip five minutes or more of the safe opening if I genuinely... play the game. Like, really, I can't do anything but wait? Dude, most matches in this game are against bots, and I feel like this may have increased the odds slightly. Before, I would play many matches because I wanted to play and nothing else, and now I will likely only play once every 3/8 hours, and I feel like many people will do the same. Doesn't that mean there will be more bots and fewer matches overall? I honestly don't know. I just feel like the game's player base isn't big enough for such a mechanic.
Anyway, I'm not a "professional" on mobile games industry, so I have no idea how common this is. At best I have read that Clash Royale has it too, so, who knows? I don't think it will work here but we must wait and see, I suppose...
That all said, If anybody has any way to cheat or skip waiting times, or only get practice bunny safes while deleting the rest that you don't want, I would really like to hear it below in the comments! Please, do share your methods! 👍

so for context me and my ex started dating in january 2023. it was a really good and healthy long distance relationship (NY to FL) and i took many trips to see her and i even went on vacation with her family. we ended in october 2023 in a pretty bad way, but we’ve decided to stay friends. i’ll be honest i never really lost feelings for her, just kind of forgot about them. we started to get close as of recently like facetiming and snapping and stuff but two days ago she got back together w this guy that had ghosted her in april. she still texts me all the time and still wants to facetime me all the time, like for example, she told me that she wants to call today but her bf is coming over so she will call me once he leaves. i have a feeling she still finds me attractive because i catch her staring at me on facetime and also when i send her a snap i look good in she responds with a “🫢” face (not the emoji). anyways we talked yesterday and i asked her if the guy knows about our friendship, she said no. for context he’s a co worker of hers and he knew that we were together for 8 months so if he sees my name in her phone he will know who i am. i told her that if he finds out we’re talking even if it’s completely platonic he will probably break up with her as it is always a red flag if you are still friends with exes if your in a relationship. she said and i quote “im not gonna tell him and if he finds out im just gonna say it’s a different (my name).” i told her that it makes me feel weird and she said “listen it’s not a big deal stop worrying about it.” more context, before i knew about her and this kid, while they were still talking she texted me stuff saying “if you lived here in FL things would be different” (aka if i lived there we’d still be tg) and she also wrote a poem on her spam insta that she stated i was the good path for her yet she always takes the bad paths etc etc (she sent me a screenshot of it and said “you are the good path that i wrote about”) this was all while they were first talking. i know she actually likes this kid because of the way she talks about him but i also don’t know if she still likes me.

(Only Europe, Please) - short note - If you're not into reading or receiving long messages,don't read any further + Please If you don't want to read everything because of my post being too long for you & instead of reading It all - ..skip some parts - find another person to talk to.Let's respect each other and our free time. All people criticizing/making fun of me & other people - will be blocked.Pretty much as people questioning my post and giving me unsolicited advice.I'm not here for any conflicts and I know I can't please everyone - I know I never will.. However It's me who should feel comfortable in my new potential friendship & obviously someone who wants to be my friend - not the whole world.. which is why I don't need any advice from people who don't even want to be a part of my life. The amount of rude people on Reddit always criticizing others and making fun of them is unbelievably high but let me tell you something - NEVER let anyone make choices for you and criticize you only because you're different! Always fight for your dreams and never let anyone make you think you're worthless! It's your life and you're the one deciding what's best for you - If you want to judge me despite not even wanting to talk to me or give me advice better block me! I'm an adult woman and I make all decisions on my own.I'm not trying to "fit in" and be like everyone else - just to get more attention.Accept me for who I am or let go - is my motto.
★
🤍
Hello guys! 🙂 (read everything before you decide to send me a message) Please send me a message ONLY If you're in the same situation and If your expectations are the same as mine.I want to find like minded people from Europe (Why Europe? Read my post to find out) I'm looking for something permanent (remember - you can feel lonely even If you're surrounded by others - If there's no emotional bond) I'm fed up of meeting people who never make time for me & only text me once or twice a week to ask me "what are you up to?" Out of boredom.I don't want to meet people asking others a million of questions like "what's your favorite movie?" Just to give them one word answer and ask them another question "and music? Your favorite song?" I'm looking for something "deeper" & different 🙂
★
🤍
What kind of friend would I like to find? Someone to talk to on a daily basis - Someone who needs It & wants It just as much as me
🤍
What are my expectations? I would like to meet someone in a similar situation – why? Because I honestly feel like only a person with the same expectations and a similar outlook on life would get along with me & because I feel more comfortable talking to people like me..Friendless people who need a strong bond - people without friends and partners.. Don't get me wrong…Most people deserve to be happy and It's good to have friends but people who have friends or families in real life are usually more focused on them (which is completely understandable) & have less time for others + I simply don't want to be replaced by anyone..I kind of envy people who can call others , true friends given I don't have an emotional bond with any of my acquaintances. Please send me a message only If you're not In a relationship and don't have friends for the same reasons I've already mentioned before
★
🤍
Whenever I hear that others have friends I simply get sad because (believe it or not) If I had to choose between 20 people to talk to (acquaintances) and one special person - I'd choose that one special person without any hesitation .
★
🤍
I also want to talk to others every day because..I want to see someone’s effort & be someone's first choice - not another person to have random conversations with..some people ask me "Why do you want to talk to people from Europe?" Well..Because I would like to see someone I'd get along with - In the far future - face to face :) + I don't want to wait any longer than 6 hours to receive a message - waiting 6 hours to receive a message is more than enough
★
🤍
I'm by no means criticizing people who don't want to talk to others often / People who really are super busy & People who want to find someone to have unimportant conversations with - I'm aware that not everyone has the same expectations which is why everything you're reading now - is here for a reason :) All I'm suggesting is - I don't want anything temporary and I don't want to be the one always giving more than receiving.Listen people - I used to ignore being..ignored by others..always being just an option to talk to during tough times or moments of boredom.I was too young to realize that I was never important enough for most people that were a part of my life. I don't know who needs to hear this but..No one is too busy to make time for you! People make excuses to avoid others because they prioritize everything and (maybe) everyone..over them. It's true that most people are busy - but It takes only a few seconds to start a conversation (If you're into short messages) and a few minutes (1-10/15) to type a long message . Don't let anyone lie to you.
★
🤍
Truth is that most people either don't like you enough to make time for you or just simply - feel no need to talk to others often but are they too busy? No..You don't need to send me a message just to ask me and tell me "Do you really want to talk every day? I like long messages but I can't promise to contact you often" If you really are unsure please don't send me a message.I don't need more acquaintances aka people to talk to - occasionally.
🤍
I'm not trying to sound rude but conversations once or twice a week wouldn't be enough for me and I don't need them... Let me tell you one thing – A true friend would never just give up on you for no reason :) It’s always possible to find someone to have a random conversation with – someone willing to send you one message once or twice a week..but..It’s almost impossible to find people willing to make more time for you.
★
🤍
I’m not asking a busy person to make time for me by changing some plans! Absolutely not! I’m here to find someone who wants to talk daily (throughout the day or maybe even night) of one’s own will.Someone looking for the same kind of connection.Strong friendships are based on mutual support. One of the best things you can do for a friend in need, is just to be there for them when they want to talk.I often see posts from people who always say how friendless they are because they don't feel loved or appreciated by their "friends" remember! A true friend - someone who truly likes you or someone who wants to get to know you - will always find time for you.
★
🤍
I'm not interested in small talk/short messages - I love long and meaningful conversations. It's so easy to find someone who loves abbreviations and questions like "How are you?" How was your day? Or what are you interested in? But so hard/almost impossible to find a person who knows how to keep a conversation going & show others some effort.Building and maintaining friendships takes time and effort.Never allow pursuits or possessions to become bigger priorities than your relations with other people.Close friendships are so important to us because they are so difficult to form + Having friends can help you feel as if you belong to something that brings purpose and connection to your life
🤍
• I do NOT respond to any „Hey,hmu” or „u want to talk?” type of messages (super short messages or messages full of abbreviations – I literally can’t stand abbreviations and acronyms in text messages) ALL messages full of abbreviations will immediately be ignored.I also don't like it when people ignore everything I say in private messages just to focus on a random question or? When they start talking only about themselves and don't ever ask me anything. I love conversations with people referring to everything I say...I want everything I say and do - to be reciprocated
🤍
• No NSFW profiles (checking mental health subreddits NOT included as I'm a huge empath and always try to understand others) - Please! I'm not looking for anyone to flirt with and I'm not looking for a partner either. I always check people's profiles (even comment history) - To avoid guys, trying to get inappropriate pictures from adult women or? flirt with them + I don't want to see you with no clothes on so If you're on Reddit only because you want others to see what's underneath your clothes - I'm not for you! I just simply don't want to see any s e x related activity on your profile If you want to talk to me.
🤍
• If both of us (you and I) are from the same country (I live in a non-English speaking country) - I want to communicate with you in our first language! No - Not because I don't understand English - because as you see - I do. Why then? English is simply overrated and people don't appreciate other languages as much as they should. So.. If we're from the same country and you want to talk only in English (which is quite common on reddit) - Talk to someone else. I just don't want to talk to a person from the same country as mine - in a foreign language as It's just something I don't understand even If all you want is to improve your language skills
🤍
• Please only adult people 18-36 (age range) It doesn't matter to me If you're younger or older than me (as long as you're not underage) So.. don't worry! I just want to have discussions with emotionally mature people :)
🤍
• I don’t respond to messages I don’t find interesting even If they're long - If after receiving and reading your message I don't feel comfortable or think "I wouldn't get along with him/her" I simply do not respond (what I’m suggesting is that I don’t always respond to someone’s first or second message because..sometimes you just know If you’d get along with someone or not- I’d never ignore anyone after days or weeks of daily conversations though) just because I don’t want to do anything forcefully & because I don’t want to lead anyone on. I read all messages but I definitely don't respond to all of them! I want to make it clear because I don't want to be accused of not responding and not reading people's messages! - Some people don't message me back as well and even If It's a bit disappointing I'm ok with that! - as long as there's no emotional bond - Not responding to someone's first or second message Is completely OK! If people think they wouldn't get along with a stranger - is there a reason to start a conversation? I don't think so. I can't stand being ignored after days or weeks of daily conversations and seeing people changing priorities over time.. but that's something different - something I don't want to go through ever again for real. If I'm really interested in someone's message it's impossible to hear from me "I'm too busy" because I know myself and If I had no time for others - I wouldn't be here. I don't want to pretend someone I'm not and always try to find some cheap excuses to avoid others. (unlike most people who don't want to talk to others)
🤍
• Don’t ask me “Can you tell me something about yourself?” If you really want to get to know me - you can ask me questions :) I'm an open book.
🤍
• It would be better If you guys were into emojis - like me - to describe your emotions In text messages. Two emojis - 🙂 and 🙁 are completely enough! I just don't like emotionless conversations.I also don't like it when people say "yeah" or yea"as it sounds dismissively. First impression Is everything to me! I want to see your kindness even in a text message - Emojis are very helpful to express your emotions.I don't want to meet people who say "crying Is a weakness" - It's OK to cry even If you're a guy!
🤍
• I want to talk on reddit first (just to make sure If I'd get along with you) before moving to Discord or some other app
🤍
• I would rather talk to a homebody - not another person who always has something to do as people who are very busy don't even have time for daily conversations
🤍
• If you're another person interested only in "childish conversations" such as "HEYOOO! I'M BORED! Ya like Pizza or cheese? xDDDD 🤣" I'm begging you! Don't send me a message.I'm not a child anymore and such messages don't make me smile or laugh.I'm looking for someone interested In serious discussions - not another person just seeking some entertainment out of boredom . Conversations with sarcastic undertones (even when It comes to some emojis such as 🤣😂) are not for me. Your typing style matters to me! Why? when It comes to online conversations with someone new - It's not always possible to know If someone Is laughing at you.. or with you. Let me tell you something else! Jokes about cancer, disabilities and death are UNACCEPTABLE to me. If you find joy In someone else's misfortune you are not a person I want to know.
🤍
• Time response matters to me a lot! I would never ask anyone to be online all day long and I'm NOT asking any of you for any instant messaging as I'm someone who would rather wait an hour or two to receive a proper response instead of some short and pointless messages but I'm interested only in daily conversations and I don't want to wait any longer than 6 hours to get a message from you.I don't need unbelievably long messages either! Messages as long as the second paragraph of my post - are completely enough. If you like longer messages? you can send me a longer message, but If you want to send me one word or one sentence as a response to my post - don't expect a reaction from me. I don't want to come across as rude - I just don't want to waste your time
🤍
• I'm strongly AGAINST picking on people you don't even want to chat with - and making fun of them! I can't stand people who criticize others publicly or make fun of them! (only because they disagree with someone they don't even know) There's no place In my life for someone using Reddit, to hurt other people
🤍
• I'm not into foul language and I definitely don't want to talk to people who swear a lot...
🤍
• I want to meet assertive people who know what they want and always stand up for their friends
🤍
• I want to meet someone willing to call me In the future, someone spontaneously sending me pictures of animals or food, et cetera. I want more than just text conversations.. 🌻
🤍
Why can’t you see any of my hobbies listed down below? Because what really matters to me is..who you are (If you’re honest, talkative ,understanding, caring and trustworthy – for example) just simply – It matters to me what you’re like! not what you like.Don’t get me wrong – you can tell me what your hobbies are but from my point of view - people's hobbies are important - If you want to find a gaming buddy or If you want to meet someone to hang out with in real life and..go bowling for example.What most people seem to care about are other people's passions – I don’t. I get along with other people despite having completely different hobbies but I absolutely don’t get along with people way different than me (different expectations and outlook on life – way different sense of humor or personality traits – It’s just an example) It doesn't make ANY DIFFERENCE to me If you're a gamer or? Someone interested in photography! It doesn't make any difference - > as long as you're talkative and kind and If you also want to find someone willing to stay in your life..for good - But If you're into small talk and all you want is to...type and receive super short messages or If you're here only because you're bored and don't know what to do + If you're a very sarcastic person - I'm definitely not for you! I don't get along with overly sarcastic people turning everything into a joke. Friendships should be natural – not forced. I wouldn't get along with people who laugh at everything.. In my opinion most people are way too sarcastic.. It's quite sad... Sarcasm can also be another form of passive-aggressive behavior.
★
🤍
People who want to be to friends should feel comfortable and have something in common. No - not necessarily a similar taste in music or movies but something else..Most friendships don't fizzle out because of people not having the same hobbies but..because they just simply have different expectations when It comes to something important.I'm not here out of boredom and trust me - I'm not here to meet as many people as possible.I choose quality over quantity.I highly value myself and my time & Sometimes one person but a person who makes you feel comfortable and understood - is more than enough :) We ALL can choose what kind of people we’d like to talk to and maybe even become really good friends with and I? I don’t want anyone to be disappointed.We all have some expectations after all.I know that people don't have to talk as often as possible in order to become friends but I'm interested only in daily conversations. If you really need someone to talk to due to loneliness and If you have time to talk to me daily (throughout the day and maybe even night) I always make time for others.I'm literally always available.I could even stay up all night long only to talk to someone important to me. I’m ready to commit but only If there’s some chemistry between me and someone else.I don’t do anything forcefully.
★
🤍
If you want to talk to me tell me your story - tell me why you're here, what kind of friend would you like to meet :) Et cetera.Such messages are way more interesting to me than...someone's long list of hobbies. I know! It's unusual on reddit but I don't make friends based on hobbies..I want to meet someone with the same mindset as mine to finally feel understood and get close to someone new. You can share your problems with me - I absolutely don't mind "complaining" as I've been through a lot in my life.What do people usually tell you when you tell them that something's wrong? "Don't complain" or "Life's not over yet - one day you'll be happy" or "There are worse situations than yours" and..obviously "Find a therapist" Life's not a fairytale and sometimes things don't go as planned.Emotions shouldn't be bottled up.I'm sick of people always telling others "everything's gonna be ok" move on " & more..Trust me people - not everyone wants to hear "Just believe in yourself and everything's gonna be ok" Some people take it as reassurance - but others? They would rather hear something different 🙁Imagine being told that things will be okay, only for them to get worse..Do you guys know why telling someone "everything's gonna be ok" Is wrong? Because you can't see the future.
★
🤍
You can't guarantee others that one day they'll finally be happy + when It comes to social interactions - We're responsible only for ourselves - not others & as you guys know people let us down quite often (sometimes even when there's no reason) so instead of telling people how they should move on, forget everything and be happy or asking them to find a therapist - be there for them! Always be willing to listen to them If you really like them or want to get to know them & don't suggest everyone in a tough situation to find a therapist because even the best therapist won't ever replace a true friend + It's quite normal to be disappointed If people always do something to hurt you. Sharing your hardships with other people in a very similar situation or exactly the same one - is VERY helpful If the other person understands you & wants to start all over by just letting it all out! Feeling emotional support instead of always hearing some "positive quotes" or someone saying "Stop complaining let's talk about something else - Is very important! "Everyone needs a shoulder to cry on. I appreciate sensitive people who always try to understand others. If after hearing a sad story all you want to say is "forget the past and move on" you're not for me. It's important to be a good listener and provide emotional support to others
★
🤍
Please - If you're a completely different person than the described type of person I'm looking for (If you love abbreviations,If you don't need a stable friendship, If you're sarcastic and quiet) or If you simply disagree with my post - don't force yourself to send me a message.I want my new potential friendship to be natural which is why I want you to contact me only If your needs are the same - I don't want you to pretend someone you're not - only to please me - Pretending to be someone you're not - is the worst.I want to finally be happy again & find someone "always" wanting to talk - sending me random pictures throughout the day - food pictures or pictures of some animals. What is the most important to me? I want to find people who value online friendships as much as they would value real life ones as there's another human being on the other side
★
🤍
No comments please.Only Private messages and chat requests 🌺
I know It's possible to meet people with exactly the same expectations as mine but It's just not easy because most people are Interested In temporary and entertaining conversations. People like me are just "different" I really want to finally find someone who loves emojis as much as I do.. someone who loves sweet, warm and serious discussions at the same time. Emojis really do - change conversations 😊

(Only Europe, Please) - short note - If you're not into reading or receiving long messages,don't read any further + Please If you don't want to read everything because of my post being too long for you & instead of reading It all - ..skip some parts - find another person to talk to.Let's respect each other and our free time. All people criticizing/making fun of me & other people - will be blocked.Pretty much as people questioning my post and giving me unsolicited advice.I'm not here for any conflicts and I know I can't please everyone - I know I never will.. However It's me who should feel comfortable in my new potential friendship & obviously someone who wants to be my friend - not the whole world.. which is why I don't need any advice from people who don't even want to be a part of my life. The amount of rude people on Reddit always criticizing others and making fun of them is unbelievably high but let me tell you something - NEVER let anyone make choices for you and criticize you only because you're different! Always fight for your dreams and never let anyone make you think you're worthless! It's your life and you're the one deciding what's best for you - If you want to judge me despite not even wanting to talk to me or give me advice better block me! I'm an adult woman and I make all decisions on my own.I'm not trying to "fit in" and be like everyone else - just to get more attention.Accept me for who I am or let go - is my motto.
★
🤍
Hello guys! 🙂 (read everything before you decide to send me a message) Please send me a message ONLY If you're in the same situation and If your expectations are the same as mine.I want to find like minded people from Europe (Why Europe? Read my post to find out) I'm looking for something permanent (remember - you can feel lonely even If you're surrounded by others - If there's no emotional bond) I'm fed up of meeting people who never make time for me & only text me once or twice a week to ask me "what are you up to?" Out of boredom.I don't want to meet people asking others a million of questions like "what's your favorite movie?" Just to give them one word answer and ask them another question "and music? Your favorite song?" I'm looking for something "deeper" & different 🙂
★
🤍
What kind of friend would I like to find? Someone to talk to on a daily basis - Someone who needs It & wants It just as much as me
🤍
What are my expectations? I would like to meet someone in a similar situation – why? Because I honestly feel like only a person with the same expectations and a similar outlook on life would get along with me & because I feel more comfortable talking to people like me..Friendless people who need a strong bond - people without friends and partners.. Don't get me wrong…Most people deserve to be happy and It's good to have friends but people who have friends or families in real life are usually more focused on them (which is completely understandable) & have less time for others + I simply don't want to be replaced by anyone..I kind of envy people who can call others , true friends given I don't have an emotional bond with any of my acquaintances. Please send me a message only If you're not In a relationship and don't have friends for the same reasons I've already mentioned before
★
🤍
Whenever I hear that others have friends I simply get sad because (believe it or not) If I had to choose between 20 people to talk to (acquaintances) and one special person - I'd choose that one special person without any hesitation .
★
🤍
I also want to talk to others every day because..I want to see someone’s effort & be someone's first choice - not another person to have random conversations with..some people ask me "Why do you want to talk to people from Europe?" Well..Because I would like to see someone I'd get along with - In the far future - face to face :) + I don't want to wait any longer than 6 hours to receive a message - waiting 6 hours to receive a message is more than enough
★
🤍
I'm by no means criticizing people who don't want to talk to others often / People who really are super busy & People who want to find someone to have unimportant conversations with - I'm aware that not everyone has the same expectations which is why everything you're reading now - is here for a reason :) All I'm suggesting is - I don't want anything temporary and I don't want to be the one always giving more than receiving.Listen people - I used to ignore being..ignored by others..always being just an option to talk to during tough times or moments of boredom.I was too young to realize that I was never important enough for most people that were a part of my life. I don't know who needs to hear this but..No one is too busy to make time for you! People make excuses to avoid others because they prioritize everything and (maybe) everyone..over them. It's true that most people are busy - but It takes only a few seconds to start a conversation (If you're into short messages) and a few minutes (1-10/15) to type a long message . Don't let anyone lie to you.
★
🤍
Truth is that most people either don't like you enough to make time for you or just simply - feel no need to talk to others often but are they too busy? No..You don't need to send me a message just to ask me and tell me "Do you really want to talk every day? I like long messages but I can't promise to contact you often" If you really are unsure please don't send me a message.I don't need more acquaintances aka people to talk to - occasionally.
🤍
I'm not trying to sound rude but conversations once or twice a week wouldn't be enough for me and I don't need them... Let me tell you one thing – A true friend would never just give up on you for no reason :) It’s always possible to find someone to have a random conversation with – someone willing to send you one message once or twice a week..but..It’s almost impossible to find people willing to make more time for you.
★
🤍
I’m not asking a busy person to make time for me by changing some plans! Absolutely not! I’m here to find someone who wants to talk daily (throughout the day or maybe even night) of one’s own will.Someone looking for the same kind of connection.Strong friendships are based on mutual support. One of the best things you can do for a friend in need, is just to be there for them when they want to talk.I often see posts from people who always say how friendless they are because they don't feel loved or appreciated by their "friends" remember! A true friend - someone who truly likes you or someone who wants to get to know you - will always find time for you.
★
🤍
I'm not interested in small talk/short messages - I love long and meaningful conversations. It's so easy to find someone who loves abbreviations and questions like "How are you?" How was your day? Or what are you interested in? But so hard/almost impossible to find a person who knows how to keep a conversation going & show others some effort.Building and maintaining friendships takes time and effort.Never allow pursuits or possessions to become bigger priorities than your relations with other people.Close friendships are so important to us because they are so difficult to form + Having friends can help you feel as if you belong to something that brings purpose and connection to your life
🤍
• I do NOT respond to any „Hey,hmu” or „u want to talk?” type of messages (super short messages or messages full of abbreviations – I literally can’t stand abbreviations and acronyms in text messages) ALL messages full of abbreviations will immediately be ignored.I also don't like it when people ignore everything I say in private messages just to focus on a random question or? When they start talking only about themselves and don't ever ask me anything. I love conversations with people referring to everything I say...I want everything I say and do - to be reciprocated
🤍
• No NSFW profiles (checking mental health subreddits NOT included as I'm a huge empath and always try to understand others) - Please! I'm not looking for anyone to flirt with and I'm not looking for a partner either. I always check people's profiles (even comment history) - To avoid guys, trying to get inappropriate pictures from adult women or? flirt with them + I don't want to see you with no clothes on so If you're on Reddit only because you want others to see what's underneath your clothes - I'm not for you! I just simply don't want to see any s e x related activity on your profile If you want to talk to me.
🤍
• If both of us (you and I) are from the same country (I live in a non-English speaking country) - I want to communicate with you in our first language! No - Not because I don't understand English - because as you see - I do. Why then? English is simply overrated and people don't appreciate other languages as much as they should. So.. If we're from the same country and you want to talk only in English (which is quite common on reddit) - Talk to someone else. I just don't want to talk to a person from the same country as mine - in a foreign language as It's just something I don't understand even If all you want is to improve your language skills
🤍
• Please only adult people 18-36 (age range) It doesn't matter to me If you're younger or older than me (as long as you're not underage) So.. don't worry! I just want to have discussions with emotionally mature people :)
🤍
• I don’t respond to messages I don’t find interesting even If they're long - If after receiving and reading your message I don't feel comfortable or think "I wouldn't get along with him/her" I simply do not respond (what I’m suggesting is that I don’t always respond to someone’s first or second message because..sometimes you just know If you’d get along with someone or not- I’d never ignore anyone after days or weeks of daily conversations though) just because I don’t want to do anything forcefully & because I don’t want to lead anyone on. I read all messages but I definitely don't respond to all of them! I want to make it clear because I don't want to be accused of not responding and not reading people's messages! - Some people don't message me back as well and even If It's a bit disappointing I'm ok with that! - as long as there's no emotional bond - Not responding to someone's first or second message Is completely OK! If people think they wouldn't get along with a stranger - is there a reason to start a conversation? I don't think so. I can't stand being ignored after days or weeks of daily conversations and seeing people changing priorities over time.. but that's something different - something I don't want to go through ever again for real. If I'm really interested in someone's message it's impossible to hear from me "I'm too busy" because I know myself and If I had no time for others - I wouldn't be here. I don't want to pretend someone I'm not and always try to find some cheap excuses to avoid others. (unlike most people who don't want to talk to others)
🤍
• Don’t ask me “Can you tell me something about yourself?” If you really want to get to know me - you can ask me questions :) I'm an open book.
🤍
• It would be better If you guys were into emojis - like me - to describe your emotions In text messages. Two emojis - 🙂 and 🙁 are completely enough! I just don't like emotionless conversations.I also don't like it when people say "yeah" or yea"as it sounds dismissively. First impression Is everything to me! I want to see your kindness even in a text message - Emojis are very helpful to express your emotions.I don't want to meet people who say "crying Is a weakness" - It's OK to cry even If you're a guy!
🤍
• I want to talk on reddit first (just to make sure If I'd get along with you) before moving to Discord or some other app
🤍
• I would rather talk to a homebody - not another person who always has something to do as people who are very busy don't even have time for daily conversations
🤍
• If you're another person interested only in "childish conversations" such as "HEYOOO! I'M BORED! Ya like Pizza or cheese? xDDDD 🤣" I'm begging you! Don't send me a message.I'm not a child anymore and such messages don't make me smile or laugh.I'm looking for someone interested In serious discussions - not another person just seeking some entertainment out of boredom . Conversations with sarcastic undertones (even when It comes to some emojis such as 🤣😂) are not for me. Your typing style matters to me! Why? when It comes to online conversations with someone new - It's not always possible to know If someone Is laughing at you.. or with you. Let me tell you something else! Jokes about cancer, disabilities and death are UNACCEPTABLE to me. If you find joy In someone else's misfortune you are not a person I want to know.
🤍
• Time response matters to me a lot! I would never ask anyone to be online all day long and I'm NOT asking any of you for any instant messaging as I'm someone who would rather wait an hour or two to receive a proper response instead of some short and pointless messages but I'm interested only in daily conversations and I don't want to wait any longer than 6 hours to get a message from you.I don't need unbelievably long messages either! Messages as long as the second paragraph of my post - are completely enough. If you like longer messages? you can send me a longer message, but If you want to send me one word or one sentence as a response to my post - don't expect a reaction from me. I don't want to come across as rude - I just don't want to waste your time
🤍
• I'm strongly AGAINST picking on people you don't even want to chat with - and making fun of them! I can't stand people who criticize others publicly or make fun of them! (only because they disagree with someone they don't even know) There's no place In my life for someone using Reddit, to hurt other people
🤍
• I'm not into foul language and I definitely don't want to talk to people who swear a lot...
🤍
• I want to meet assertive people who know what they want and always stand up for their friends
🤍
• I want to meet someone willing to call me In the future, someone spontaneously sending me pictures of animals or food, et cetera. I want more than just text conversations.. 🌻
🤍
Why can’t you see any of my hobbies listed down below? Because what really matters to me is..who you are (If you’re honest, talkative ,understanding, caring and trustworthy – for example) just simply – It matters to me what you’re like! not what you like.Don’t get me wrong – you can tell me what your hobbies are but from my point of view - people's hobbies are important - If you want to find a gaming buddy or If you want to meet someone to hang out with in real life and..go bowling for example.What most people seem to care about are other people's passions – I don’t. I get along with other people despite having completely different hobbies but I absolutely don’t get along with people way different than me (different expectations and outlook on life – way different sense of humor or personality traits – It’s just an example) It doesn't make ANY DIFFERENCE to me If you're a gamer or? Someone interested in photography! It doesn't make any difference - > as long as you're talkative and kind and If you also want to find someone willing to stay in your life..for good - But If you're into small talk and all you want is to...type and receive super short messages or If you're here only because you're bored and don't know what to do + If you're a very sarcastic person - I'm definitely not for you! I don't get along with overly sarcastic people turning everything into a joke. Friendships should be natural – not forced. I wouldn't get along with people who laugh at everything.. In my opinion most people are way too sarcastic.. It's quite sad... Sarcasm can also be another form of passive-aggressive behavior.
★
🤍
People who want to be to friends should feel comfortable and have something in common. No - not necessarily a similar taste in music or movies but something else..Most friendships don't fizzle out because of people not having the same hobbies but..because they just simply have different expectations when It comes to something important.I'm not here out of boredom and trust me - I'm not here to meet as many people as possible.I choose quality over quantity.I highly value myself and my time & Sometimes one person but a person who makes you feel comfortable and understood - is more than enough :) We ALL can choose what kind of people we’d like to talk to and maybe even become really good friends with and I? I don’t want anyone to be disappointed.We all have some expectations after all.I know that people don't have to talk as often as possible in order to become friends but I'm interested only in daily conversations. If you really need someone to talk to due to loneliness and If you have time to talk to me daily (throughout the day and maybe even night) I always make time for others.I'm literally always available.I could even stay up all night long only to talk to someone important to me. I’m ready to commit but only If there’s some chemistry between me and someone else.I don’t do anything forcefully.
★
🤍
If you want to talk to me tell me your story - tell me why you're here, what kind of friend would you like to meet :) Et cetera.Such messages are way more interesting to me than...someone's long list of hobbies. I know! It's unusual on reddit but I don't make friends based on hobbies..I want to meet someone with the same mindset as mine to finally feel understood and get close to someone new. You can share your problems with me - I absolutely don't mind "complaining" as I've been through a lot in my life.What do people usually tell you when you tell them that something's wrong? "Don't complain" or "Life's not over yet - one day you'll be happy" or "There are worse situations than yours" and..obviously "Find a therapist" Life's not a fairytale and sometimes things don't go as planned.Emotions shouldn't be bottled up.I'm sick of people always telling others "everything's gonna be ok" move on " & more..Trust me people - not everyone wants to hear "Just believe in yourself and everything's gonna be ok" Some people take it as reassurance - but others? They would rather hear something different 🙁Imagine being told that things will be okay, only for them to get worse..Do you guys know why telling someone "everything's gonna be ok" Is wrong? Because you can't see the future.
★
🤍
You can't guarantee others that one day they'll finally be happy + when It comes to social interactions - We're responsible only for ourselves - not others & as you guys know people let us down quite often (sometimes even when there's no reason) so instead of telling people how they should move on, forget everything and be happy or asking them to find a therapist - be there for them! Always be willing to listen to them If you really like them or want to get to know them & don't suggest everyone in a tough situation to find a therapist because even the best therapist won't ever replace a true friend + It's quite normal to be disappointed If people always do something to hurt you. Sharing your hardships with other people in a very similar situation or exactly the same one - is VERY helpful If the other person understands you & wants to start all over by just letting it all out! Feeling emotional support instead of always hearing some "positive quotes" or someone saying "Stop complaining let's talk about something else - Is very important! "Everyone needs a shoulder to cry on. I appreciate sensitive people who always try to understand others. If after hearing a sad story all you want to say is "forget the past and move on" you're not for me. It's important to be a good listener and provide emotional support to others
★
🤍
Please - If you're a completely different person than the described type of person I'm looking for (If you love abbreviations,If you don't need a stable friendship, If you're sarcastic and quiet) or If you simply disagree with my post - don't force yourself to send me a message.I want my new potential friendship to be natural which is why I want you to contact me only If your needs are the same - I don't want you to pretend someone you're not - only to please me - Pretending to be someone you're not - is the worst.I want to finally be happy again & find someone "always" wanting to talk - sending me random pictures throughout the day - food pictures or pictures of some animals. What is the most important to me? I want to find people who value online friendships as much as they would value real life ones as there's another human being on the other side
★
🤍
No comments please.Only Private messages and chat requests 🌺
I know It's possible to meet people with exactly the same expectations as mine but It's just not easy because most people are Interested In temporary and entertaining conversations. People like me are just "different" I really want to finally find someone who loves emojis as much as I do.. someone who loves sweet, warm and serious discussions at the same time. Emojis really do - change conversations 😊

For context, I'm a 16-year-old living in "socialist" Vietnam. For the uninitiated, you must think that we're a bunch of commies who're still singing praise about Mr. Ho Chi Minh whilst fighting off Agent Orange in guerilla warfare. If that's the case, then, oh boy, you couldn't be any further from the truth.
Last summer break, my dad offered me a position at a traditional Vietnamese food restaurant in the local AEON Mall branch for a month. He said that it would give me good work experience and color my CV, which I agreed with at the time. And so, like the 'pride of the family' that I was (yes, adults call all of their eldest/most academically adept children this in Vietnam), I decided to take him up on his offer. And, despite everything I've read about 9-5s on Reddit, nothing could've prepared me for actually experiencing it myself.
Firstly, the hours are actually 8:30-17:00, so that's 30 extra minutes compared to the average. Secondly, you're supposed to work 7 days a week. Yep, you heard that right. SEVEN. Their rationale was that since we worked in the service sector, we needed to work even on break days to maximize our output as that's when traffic is at its peak. And the best part? We weren't supposed to get ANY days off even on public holidays, because, guess what, that's when everybody goes out to eat. And, for as much as I hated it, I couldn't deny what they were saying. After all, I myself have been guilty of going to restaurants before on holidays with my family, so I am painfully aware of the fact that somebody still had to work their asses off to give us a good time. In this case, I got to place myself into one of these people's shoes for once.
And that's just the time factor. The people there were... well, let's just say that I had a better time just not interacting with any of them in the first place. Like, I get it, you're very worn down just like I am and I'm a rookie making mistakes and messing stuff up, but you don't have to be such a cunt about it. Even I manage to keep a poker face about me almost every day, and yet I'M supposed to be part of the demographic that was known for their erratic mood swings! I swear, only, like, 3 of the employees there had a shred of sympathy in their entire bodies, which didn't make it any easier for me to contort my face into a grin every time I served a customer. Honestly, it's one of the rare cases where the manager had a more likable and understanding personality than his subordinates, which, uh, isn't saying a whole lot, to be frank.
Not to mention the work itself. Somehow, serving there managed to require a lot of finesse to not topple over the tray stacked to the brim with wine glasses and constant physical labor while being mind-numbingly boring. The health and safety regulations there were practically non-existent, and it really showed when I got a nasty cut on my fingertip while skinning some of the hardest-to-peel fruits I'd ever encountered in my entire life. Normally, I'd expect to get at least a break to recover, but NOOO... they just told me to slap on a bandage and get on with it DESPITE the injury I had. Needless to say, I quickly excused myself and found better luck sweeping the floor instead, but that one experience really set in stone for me just how little people cared about each other when push came to shove.
Now, you must be thinking, "Well, at least you're getting paid for it." Yeah, at 24000 VND per hour, no less. For context, that is equivalent to just under a dollar an hour, which goes to show just how fantastic the economic circumstances are in Vietnam. The last saving grace is gone. Whoops.
And the worst part about all of this is... I am still extremely PRIVILEGED compared to the average person in Vietnam. My parents are both start-up owners, so I get to live quite comfortably without having to worry about food or electricity bills, unlike many others less fortunate than I. But knowing that I'm better off compared to so many people doesn't inspire gratitude or confidence in me. It only makes me feel ashamed to be living in such a world, where the only true winner is inevitable decay and the rest of us are playing the part of the fool. Even the ones at the top.
What I went through was like a bucket of ice water in my face, making me realize just how inconsequential my childhood joys truly are. "Remember the good times", huh? Kiss my ass. Good luck following your own advice while dealing with a seemingly endless horde of customers while trying to steady your shaking arms carrying a tray to the other fucking side of the restaurant. So many people keep telling me that I'm too cynical and negative, but you know what? I bet a majority of them have never actually worked a full-time job before. Seeing them get proven wrong only further reinforces my beliefs that adulthood is not an age of freedom for most like it is advertised in Vietnam, but rather one of monotony and frustration, watching as any semblance of a spark or flair in you gets slowly and methodically washed away until everything around you becomes white noise. And that's me just after ONE MONTH of that shit. I can't even imagine how much pain I'd be in if I had to do that for the rest of my life.
If this is the kind of stuff I had to go through just to get by, then I really don't see the appeal in the state of living over the state of being dead. Like, if I'm such a burden to society and this world to the point where I have to inflict torture upon myself daily just to repay my debts and earn the right to exist, then what reason do I have for sticking around in a world that clearly doesn't want me? What's so good about living when "treading water" is the best the average person like me can hope for? The fact that people have to convince themselves that life is worth living with motivational quotes and thought-ending cliches really rubs me the wrong way, and now I'm not even sure whether they're trying to help others or trying to convince themselves. Sorry if I'm being too "edgy" or whatever for you, by the way. You can always just NOT read this if it bothers you that much.
Anyway, that's enough rambling from me for now. This summer holiday, my dad wants me to do it all over again. And you know what? I will. Because it's the best shot I have at increasing my chances of making it in this twisted place we call reality. Maybe, if I'm lucky enough, I'll find a different place to work in with less bullshit hours and more acceptable working conditions. I'll take anything at this point. Oh, and before I go... sorry for wasting your time, but you brought this upon yourself.

How can we stop going around in circles with these corrupted nihilists? (basically an extreme religious-nut but in reverse; no meaning, no value, no good/bad, nothing matters) I've compiled some of my thoughts/comments.

But first If you are not caught up yet:
1 Re: Vegan Gains ...The Militant Vegan Raffaela Interview - (May 12, 2024)
2 Vegan Gains is a sub-Jerkivest [5/11/24]
3 Moral Realism Debate w/ Inmendham - (May 16, 2024)
4 WTF #899: The vegan gains debate ... Value realism - (May 19, 2024)
5 Vegan Gains ...Denialism is the only nihilism [5/19/24]
also saw this Controversial Topics with Vegan Gains (Horse Riding, Bivalves, Depression, and much more!) - (May 11, 2024) ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ (he thinks in terms of some dogmatic religious brain-rot morality source of right/wrong, but a kind of reversed/opposite conclusion of it's absence, nihilism)
the very reason religion was invented in the first place was because humans by nature had a value-engine driving them & NEED for meaning, that's the irony. value gave rise to religion, religion never needed to grant value. The fact people can't grasp this. 🤦 ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎ ‎

Now onto the various arguments, sorry how long and out of order it is But the idea is to provoke you coming up with better ideas/arguments, and if you can critic and strenghen my and ultimately inmendham's arguments. The GOAL should be to Create a formal argument AKA a syllogism, modus ponens. Something clear and concise that can't be taken out of context or misinterpreted, as happened with the debate...

On the subject of Efilism, tread lightly, the philosophy and argument extends beyond merely focusing on suffering; it also includes the critical issue of consent violation. Its proponent and creator, Inmendham, argues for value realism, which contrasts starkly with the notion of subjective morality which I find illogical. While objective morality is full of baggage... often linked to outdated religious doctrine so on face value it's not fun or easy subject to broach... many contemporary non-religious ethicists ground it in realism. Personally me, inmendham and others see no use for the term "morality" as it's tainted. value-realism is the subject. Is it a value-laden universe or not?
it is not necessary to call TRUE/REAL right or wrong Objective, because if objective is defined as mind-independent than without minds there's nothing right/wrong to happen to, therefore THE discussion should be just regarding what is TRUE or NOT, subjective doesn't necessarily mean mere contrived opinion or preference but can be logical conclusion, e.g. you can conclude 2 + 2 = 4 as we understand these concepts of numbers to model reality but can you call it objective or mind-independent 2 + 2 = 4, or that math exists? Not really. As you require a modeler to model reality, an observer to make the observation, a mind to come to such accurate conclusions. To me, claiming there is no real right or wrong is akin to asserting that moral standards and ultimately the subject of Ethics is as fictitious as religion or Santa Claus, you just believe it cause you want to or have preference to. Why maintain this pretense if it's all a mere fabrication / contrivance?
Regarding subjective judgments such as determining "What's the tastiest potato chip or the most beautiful painting?", these are not factual assessments about the things themselves, The question itself is misleading, because the thing itself has none of those qualities objectively, Instead, such qualities are OUTPUTs generated by the interaction of our bodies and minds with these INPUT items, the input is quite arbitrary/irrelevant, unlike the highly meaningful & distinct output generated of positive or negative experiences. You might get off more on certain female body part than another, it doesn't matter, the output positives & negatives is more or less same among individuals and that's what's relevant... not what specific fun or hobby gets you or them off or pushes their buttons.
It can be TRUE that a certain food item is the tastiest to that personal individual, or gross to another, and we can talk about intersubjective truths with averages overall. But one's experience of what is tastiest for them doesn't contradict another's, they can both be true for them individually, as you are likely not even sharing the same exact experiences to judge differently. And one's very perception or framing of the experience changes the experience itself, no way around this truth. Some people find bricks tasty or edible, just how their brain is wired.
It's important to recognize that differing opinions of personal taste do not inherently conflict in the way ethical contradictions do. With ethical matters, asserting that two diametrically opposed views are equally valid is problematic, either one is right and the other wrong, or both might be based on flawed reasoning. Pretending 2 opposing ethical views can be both equally right/true/correct is utter contradictory mush, either one of them must be right / wrong, or both are contrived meaningless nothing opinions, just made up. you wouldn't say whether one believes in god or not IS mere personal opinion/preference and such 2 opposing views can be equally right at same time, that's utter contradictory nonsense, by saying 2 opinions that gRAPE is both good & bad at same time are equally right opinons, right loses all meaning and you might as well say neither is right and both are wrong, they each have their own contrived fairytale delusion.
Now with Ethics of right / wrong, it does not depend on one single individual's preference or opinion, but taken as the whole, if you violate one without consent you still have to account for that since you are seemingly putting the weight on the preference otherwise preferences are utterly meaningless and irrelevant.
ALSO, Do you call whatever you prefer what's right, or do you prefer to try to do what is right?
Do you prefer to seek out what is the right most accurate conclusion given all the facts of reality, or contrive right to be what's in your preference/interest or personal gain?
I don't think VG or most these talking heads understand value-realism (problematic events within subjectivity/a non-physical but REAL reality of the mind). Obviously there's no objective divine or otherwise prime-directive moral-rules we must follow. Unfortunately Religion has poisened the conversation so much with archaic ideas and mushy terms like 'Morality'. Understand there is no 'moral truth', let alone an objective one, ofc if you pigeon-hole me or all realists into defending such nonsense it's easy to refute them. What I'm interested in is subject of Ethics, and to start whether or not value/problematic events exist or do not exist.
Here's a silly question by nihilists: "why is suffering bad?"
Response: How do you identify suffering? Based on the fact that it feels bad. (Yes subjectively) Just as we can subjectively understand 2+2 = 4
Or this: "prove suffering bad, objectively"
Also question-begging, obviously it is subjective. If such badness cannot exist mind-independently by definition.
"Prove suffering is bad, objectively"
is begging the question, because...
It strawmans / assumes the badness must be bad mind-independently, it isn't therefore, it isn't bad.
Answer this, evolutionarily do animals PERCEIVE being tortured skinned alive nail in the eye as BAD, or does it impose torture which we RECOGNIZE and define as Bad by definition?
If true PAIN/torture isn't bad then why does it exist evolutionarily? Answer: (problem -> solution) mechanism which functions as ability to learn & improved survival, this mechanism was reinforced over time as it worked.
inmendham & realists like myself argue: it is the case Descriptively, Objectively evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-value-judgements onto animals which function as a learning/problem solving mechanism. Fact is, the invention of 'PROBLEM' is something I/we/animals had nothing to do with... (no-free-will-choice) but are simply byproduct in observation of this fact.
If real PROBLEM(s) didn't truly exist then Arguably the word and conceptual understanding it points 👉 to wouldn't exist either. As if beings could be truly blind never seeing colors/vision yet pulling the idea out of thin air and conceiving of such a thing, how preposterous, that'd be giving human creativity/imagination way too much credit. The only nihilist argument then is that by evolution we & all feeling organisms are somehow ultimately deluded or have illusion of problem where there is none, which I find deeply implausible. Run the torture study/experiment a million times putting people's arm in the fire "yep still bad". Filtering out people who lack ability to feel pain of course.
As evolutionary biologists even states pain is a message to the animal "don't do that again". Can't get descriptively prescriptive more than that.
Are You Getting It?
The Ought is literally baked in as an IS. The is-ought gap to be bridged is a complete Red-Herring, yes you can't derive an Ought from an IS, because if you oughtn't do something, then it can never be BAD... problematic/BAD/torture can't mean anything if it doesn't scream OUGHT-not.
All you have to agree to is due to evolution it created torture which is decidedly negative/ inherently BAD, by definition. Otherwise it wouldn't feel bad or be torturous at all... THEN ask yourself, how can something be BAD yet it's not BAD to create that BAD?
This is Checkmate. These are irrefutable Facts & Logical deductions.
So much for it all being false-perception, the very fact placebo patients perceive an otherwise harmless laser as BAD/painful makes it so. It's the TRUE reality in their mind and you can't deny that fact. It's also a fact believing a pain isn't really all that bad can make it so, but this doesn't make these value-laden experiences NOT real/true.
As per evolution, your body/brain's mechanisms must generate & impose a prescriptive-value-judgement / problematic event within your mind,
It's nagging, complaining, telling you keeping your hand on the hot stove is a mistake/problematic/bad. (not in itself but as a consequence)
I believe this brain making me write all this... is making an accurate assessment when it observe certain events to be problematic/bad where it's happening which is within subjectivity, where's your evidence my perceptions are fooling me or I'm somehow deluded? I witnessed the crime take place and you were nowhere near the crime scene yet you have the authority to claim otherwise as fact? (You are not simply agnostic to my problem suffering but a De-nihilist)
Once one accepts this evolutionary fact we can move on to more complicated questions regarding ethics, like how do weigh the good & the bad, conflicting preferences, etc. Otherwise, it's all pointless & futile, like arguing bivalves or wild-suffering with a non-vegan. They're just not on that level yet and it's a waste of time.
revised version of my other comment: I believe that many discussions around morality miss a crucial point about value-realism, which acknowledges problematic events within subjectivity, a non-physical but real reality of the mind. It is evident that there are no objective, divine, or prime-directive moral rules we must follow. Unfortunately, religion has muddied the conversation with archaic ideas and terms like 'morality'.
There is no 'moral truth,' especially not an objective one. If critics pigeonhole realists into defending such notions, it becomes easy to refute them. My interest lies in ethics and whether value/problematic events exist.
Consider this question by nihilists: "Why is suffering bad?"
Response: Suffering is identified because it feels bad, subjectively. Just as we subjectively understand 2+2=4, we can recognize suffering through its unpleasant experience.
When asked to "prove suffering is bad, objectively," this is question-begging, as the question assumes that the badness must exist independently of minds, which it does not by definition. This question straw-mans the issue by requiring mind-independent badness, ignoring the subjective nature of suffering. As if the quality of it being BAD must be granted by something outside the experience itself.
Evolutionary Perspective: Animals perceive and react to torture (e.g., being skinned alive) as bad because evolution has imposed mechanisms that signal harm. Pain serves as a problem-solving mechanism, reinforcing behaviors that enhance survival. If pain and suffering weren't inherently problematic, they wouldn’t exist in the form they do.
Realists like myself argue that evolution has objectively imposed prescriptive-value judgments on animals. The concept of 'problem' or 'bad' arises from these evolutionary mechanisms, not from free will. The existence of these concepts indicates the reality of these problematic experiences.
If real problems didn’t exist, neither would the concepts describing them. This is akin to how beings blind from birth wouldn’t conceive of color. Suggesting that evolutionary processes have universally deluded all feeling organisms into perceiving problems where there are none is implausible.
As evolutionary biologists state, pain signals to the animal, "don't do that again," which is descriptively prescriptive. The 'ought' is embedded within the 'is.' Thus, the is-ought gap is a red herring because prescriptive judgments are evolutionarily ingrained.
Again, How do you identify suffering? Based on the fact that it feels bad. (Yes subjectively) Just as we can subjectively understand 2+2 = 4
All you have to agree to is due to evolution it created torture which is decidedly negative/ inherently BAD, by definition. Otherwise it wouldn't feel bad or be torturous at all... THEN ask yourself, how can something be BAD yet it's not BAD to create that BAD?
Conclusion: By acknowledging that evolution created inherently negative experiences like torture, we accept that these experiences are bad by definition. Denying the badness of creating bad experiences is contradictory. Therefore, once recognizing the true reality of subjective experiences, only then we can move on to complex ethical questions about weighing good and bad and addressing conflicting preferences.
playing devil's advocate let's try Steelman their position and then arrive at the logical conclusions of it and then perhaps refute it. If they say: "veganism = right" realize there is no contradiction IF by 'right' they just mean it's literally nothing but their preference...
There's no goal to prefer to know/do what's right, RATHER what's right is whatever matches our personal preferences, so unlike flat earther vs round earth beliefs/CLAIMs which can contradict/conflict with each other since either 1 is right or both are wrong. Individual tastes don't.
Whereas if VG says 9 people gRAPE the 1 kid for fun is WRONG because he's a threshold-deontologist but Also RIGHT to a hedonistic utilitarian, Those views only contradict/conflict if they are making VALUE-claims or recognizing a problematic event take place. However, with VG apparently he would have to say he's not claiming or labelling anything as TRULY problematic at all but merely describing his preferences like flavor of ice cream...
Now, of course, as the realist, I find such a view more deplorable/worse than if they were merely agnostic on right/wrong. Cause it's one thing to say there's a right answer to questions of Ethics but we have no objective scientific basis to determine it yet or lack knowledge VS saying they have knowledge there is absolutely no right or wrong.
Under Anti-realism nihilism, what they mean by wrong/right, is just their preference, if I understand correctly (which I'm quite sure) Anti-realism nihilism reduces the Subject of Ethics down to nothing but you or someone else pontificating/opining (i.e "me no like torture") . It defends some sort of expressivism, emotivism, normative, prescriptive reduction of Ethics. Which I find lubricious and has to be a mistake,
I don't see anyone playing any different game even the nihilists invest their money and plan ahead for self-interest, no one truly signs up for torture for fun like it's no problem, and runs away from pleasure happiness as bad. Further, it stands to reason... since we can recognize objectively evolution created a punishment mechanism to enforce learning and survival, BAD/PROBLEM as a concept is something I/WE/Animals had nothing to do with. We didn't invent it, we recognize it and respond accordingly. Even evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins stated that pain is a message to the organism 'don't do that again!'
We must address further the flawed logic of VG and other nihilists reducing Ethics down to mere arbitrary preferences like potato chip flavor, or how much salt you prefer in the soup. As it is completely disanalogous & dishonest upon reflection. QUOTE: "There's no arguing against Efilism, it's just personal opinion. Like arguing what tastes better... ice-cream or potato chips?"
Say if you believe that the mona-lisa is beautiful, and I personally find it ugly, this conflicts/contradicts nothing because it claims nothing in terms about that object or reality outside of our own minds.
such qualities are OUTPUTs generated by body/mind from these INPUTs, the input is quite arbitrary/irrelevant, unlike the highly meaningful & distinct output generated of positive or negative experiences.
it doesn't matter what specific fun or hobby gets them off or pushes their buttons in order for it MATTER, those differences don't make it any less real OR all mere subjective opinion. the output positives & negatives is more or less same among individuals and that's what's relevant...
It can be TRUE that a certain food item is the tastiest to some personal individual, or gross to another, one's experience of what is tastiest for them doesn't contradict another's, they can both be true for them individually because it is the reality in their mind, Some people find bricks tasty or edible, just how their brain is wired.
while one person may find a certain food delicious, another may find it repulsive, without invalidating each other's experiences because they are true for them individually. both experiences are valid/correct.
However, actions that disregard another's negative experience invalidate their reality. if you find being boiled alive problematic and I do it anyway believing it's ok, I am invalidating your experience as either not real, relevant, doesn't matter, or my preferences are more important (carry more weight) than yours. Or simply believe it's ALL equal or arbitrary and I just prefer to exploit you so I do that.
Positive or negative experiences are largely consistent among people, making them relevant, regardless of the specific stimuli. Individual truths about taste or preference coexist without contradiction, reflecting each person's value-generated reality.
This cannot honestly be applied to one's mere opinion it's fine to boil kids alive, as you are invalidating the fact that it matters to those victims. You saying it doesn't matter or your gain of pleasure outweighs their loss of pain, is a claim about the reality of events going on in their mind, so there is room for conflict/contradiction. They can't both be right/wrong at the exact same time.
A strong non-intuition argument/claim & facts presented render value-nihilism implausible:
It is Descriptively the case, that Evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-ought statements... of 'PROBLEMATIC sensation/event' on organisms which functioned as a learning mechanism and improved survival.
Therefore, BAD/PROBLEM isn't mere subjective opinion but something I/we/animals had nothing to do with and are mere by-product reacting to an observation.
This is pretty much the only base-axiom needed to ground my own torture as mattering as the original actual value-currency at stake. That paired with the fact I sampled consciousness and know it matters to me whether or not I am tortured, the fact that I personally observe it as problematic makes it the true reality for my own mind...
...AND it's not mere opinion/proclamation / or idea humans creatively invented out of thin air... as if like everyone could be truly blind yet conceptualizing colovision, makes no sense. plus that's giving humanity way too much credit of imagination.
Can't really have thoughts about information that you don't have. The concept of bad/problem arguably wouldn't even exist if it never was so.
Yes, I agree very semantics. I am attempting to shed clarity on this topic. Looking at the word "BAD" purely in a descriptive sense (e.g., that which can be categorically applied to extreme suffering) it loses all meaning if it's not truly consequential (i.e., it matters whether one experiences bad or not). If it doesn't actually matter ("no problemo") then it can't be bad, only an illusion/delusion of it, yet it's an effective one evolution imposed on organisms as a learning/problem-solving mechanism. The value-realists like myself have every reason to believe evolution created the real thing, not some contrived pseudo-problem organisms feel compelled/obligated to solve.
One only requires the axiom of a Descriptive Bad to ground Ethics. Why? Because it can be argued that a descriptive statement of BAD/problem is prescriptive by it's very nature in the meaning the of word/language.(otherwise its psuedo-bad/fake langauge, redefines bad as aversion/mere preference against) Otherwise, it can't mean anything to be bad, torturously obnoxious, unwanted experiential events couldn't mean anything. Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins even state pain is a punishment signal/message to the animal: "Don't do that again!" If those aren't prescriptions imposed, then I don't know what is. The animal doesn't simply decide/prefer to avoid the event and finds it bad, it's told/finds it bad and so prefers to avoid the event/problem. If god or there were some logically or physically possible way it were to be invented how else would it exist?, or what you think evolution's reward & punishment mechanism accomplished? If it didn't synthesize problematic sensations to force organisms to solve?
Evolution prescribes Needs/wants, at the same time imposes a PAIN/PROBLEM of starvation/hunger which by it's very nature is a prescription for solution (i.e. sustenance/relief/comfort.)
By the very nature of "PROBLEM" it prescribes -> "SOLUTION" not merely a contrived or trivial-like on paper math problem, but the origin of why the word even exists: the problem of pain, a true whip/punishment mechanism, real currency to play with, real loss. Idk how you can describe something categorically as a PROBLEM in the true sense of the word if it doesn't come with it a necessary prescription for its solution. Because if there is no NEED for a solution, then it turns into no longer a problem again...
I don't see how it could be any other way because if there's no real game to be playing with value baked into it, then money would be worthless/not even exist, animals wouldn't bother evade standing in the fire, etc.
Saying It is Descriptively the case, that Evolution IMPOSED Prescriptive-ought statements... of 'PROBLEMATIC sensation/event' on organisms which functioned as a learning mechanism and improved survival.
Is the same as saying Evolution IMPOSED torture/BAD, as that's what torture/bad is... a prescribed need for solution to a problem which is some form of relief/comfort.
The prescription arises as a result of accepting step 1. (which nihilists reject/deny) problem solution. The latter does not follow/exist without the former. basic 2+2 = 4 logic. There's no point figuring out the answer to the math equation, if we don't agree first and foremost a problem exists. Nor how to solve a disease, if we don't first and foremost recognize a disease exists. And so, Any debate with nihilists on step 2: of determining what is the most likely solution / right answer becomes irrelevent and a waste of time. Arguing about whether x or y IS the right answer to fixing/preventing diabetes is pointless when they don't even agree the really disease exists. They don't believe an actual real BAD / Problem exists.
VG reduces it down to mere preferences, his reasonings that even if universally sentience prefers not suffebe tortured... Well, just because it is the case descriptively we prefer to avoid suffering doesn't mean we ought/should prevent suffering. He hasn't bridged the IS-OUGHT gap. But he got it backwards,
the claim/argument... ISN'T that because descriptively, sentience universally has a preference to avoid suffering, it is therefore bad,
the claim/argument... IS that it's descriptively bad/problematic, therefore universally there's a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it,
Again you can't classify/label something as a problem if it's inconsequential whether it is solved or not. The word loses all meaning. If something NEEDs solving/fixing it means there's a problem, if there's a problem it means there's something NEED solving/fixing. Evolution manufactures these needy problems in organisms to manipulate and control them.
Merely what our preferences are IS NOT relevant, preference "frustration" arguably IS. (if preferences couldn't be frustrated "i.e., no value" than it wouldn't matter which way things turned out)
You can have a preference for some art style over another, if we were just programmed non-feeling robots that preferred to avoid standing in the fire, but there was no real kernel of value/bad, then it wouldn't matter.
Let's imagine something was Objectively PROBLEMATIC, an IS statement. What would a real problem look like? something in NEED of a solution. Again, why? because If it doesn't matter whether or not it exists or is Solved or not, it could never be a problem in the first place. So either this problem exists or it doesn't. (NOTE: it doesn't need to be an objective problem to be REAL, "i.e mind-independent")
Next, if ASI or sentient beings were to sample this "problem", would it not be the case they would logically deduce it's in need of a solution? And assign their preferences accordingly to solving it? Cause again otherwise then you just see it as "no-problemo" again.
"If Inmendham's argument is that sentient beings create value, and that the universe has no value without the presence of a sentient being generating it, would it not follow that the ought is inherently built into sensation?" yes but the way VG unfairly reframes it is that we subjectively place value on it, THAT it's entirely subjective, like you prefer salty or sweet, or certain ice cream flavor. emphasizing that it's entirely subjective opinion. Take a look at his unfair silly example: "we can't say pineapple on pizza is objectively tasty or not..." this shows a complete ineptitude in grasping the subject and misrepresenting the argument like crazy, no one is arguing whether Mona Lisa is objectively beautiful or some such thing.
What is being argued: the positive or negative mind-dependent event produced in response to the sensual or perceptual stimuli, the input (object) is irrelevant, only the output (experience) matters and what the value-engine (BRAIN) produced. What pushes your buttons so to speak, blue jelly beans or green jelly beans, could differ between 2 individuals but the shared experience is the same more or less. Whether you wired to find pineapple on pizza tasty or gross is irrelevant, some people find bricks edible.
Main issue is they talking past each other: what inmendham is arguing for was either not expressed as best it could be, and/or VG does not quite comprehend what is being argued... inmendham claims/argues evolution created the real bad/PROBLEM and we respond in recognition of this fact/truth with preferences that follow accordingly, Logic cannot be escaped, once you know 2+2 = 4, you can't will or believe it to be 79. If you know the right answer "torture be Bad M'kay?" obviously you won't act or behave otherwise and say you love it. What could it mean to have a preference against experiencing torture... does such a statement even make any sense? All that is required is a real BAD to exist... and then the preference to avoid it logically follows, an inescapable truth. Unless he thinks I also choose or prefer to believe 2+2 = 4 ?
Essentially VG keeps counter-arguing that: "yes we want to avoid torture, but that's just your preference... just cause universally sentience has a preference against torture (a Descriptive / IS statement) doesn't logically follow some Normative/Prescriptive claim/statement. That just because something IS the case it doesn't follow that we OUGHT / should do X, like help others, prevent suffering, etc. That's a non-sequitur he says. Ultimately it's just a preference." sure but...
His argument only applies/counters a strawman position in his head: Because of this I and other realists can account for / side-step it completely, we aren't attempting to derive an OUGHT from an IS. e.g strawman: "we ALL have preference against torture, Therefore it's BAD." Or "we ALL have preference against torture, Therefore we OUGHT prevent it"
The actual argument is that it's Truly Bad/Problematic by the very nature of the word, Therefore first-hand observation follows universally a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it. Not the other way around.
"If the only thing that can have meaning in the universe is the experience of a sentient being, ought we not maximize its value just by nature of its experience being the only thing that can matter?" yes the ought is a further logical extension of recognizing it to be a problem, which denotes/demands a solution, otherwise if it doesn't matter to solve it or not then you've turned it into a non-problem again. So it can only be categorically one or the other.
Issue of semantics, different terminology and definitions: as long as VG defines objective as "mind-independent" and sets the goal-post to the realist to find a mind-independent "wrong/bad" as if somehow we need some divine-command or absolute rule in the universe that declares it so... then there is no fruit to the discussion. suffering/bad takes place in the mind/experience, so of course it's unfair to ask one to present a mind-independent suffering/bad in the universe, it is begging the question. To be fair inmendham uses the term objective and could have done better job with defining/pushing his terms "e.g. objective as truth/real/fact" and not let VG impose in his own. However, I don't ascribe a requirement to demonstrate an Objective BAD to ground a BAD as real, valid, and true; it can be entirely based on Subjectivist grounds/axiomatic foundations.
Just because the BAD takes place within subjectivity doesn't make it any less real (non-physical/immaterial sure... but not unreal). VG and nihilists can't understand this. 2+2 = 4 is subjective as is all science ultimately as a root axiomatic-fact... as an observation requires an observer. This doesn't mean realism can't be proven/grounded, it can just like we can know 2+2=4 and the moon exists. If anti-realism is gonna deny subjective truths because it's subjective, then one can't know much of anything and reduces to solipsism. I am more certain I exist and the reality of "perceived" BAD I experience is actually a real BAD... THAN that the moon even exists or any other scientific empirical claim.
PROBLEM is something I/we/animals had Nothing to do with, we didn't invent it.
If Anti-realism nihilism was True and Real "PROBLEMS" didn't exist the word wouldn't exist. It is like being born never knowing or seeing or experiencing vision & color, it's impossible to contrive or imagine it. Some knowledge & information is only accessible through experience.
Even Richard Dawkins stated, "pain is a message to the animal Don't do that again!"
If the ought exists within subjectivity, as preferences, why would them being Subjective vs Objective determine whether or not their violation matters? If one experiences disgust looking at something AND another finds beauty... both are true realities for them, they don't conflict or contradict like empirical or fact claims, but instead both are correct and relevant, not one or the other, BECAUSE when someone says the mona Lisa is beautiful they are just saying it arises in them a sense of beauty, the thing/input is irrelevant whereas the output in mind is what is relevant and true for their reality.
Subjective =/= not true, I don't understand the dichotomy between objective vs subjective ethics, as if there isn't facts to glean about subjectivity.
There's also definition or semantic problems:
objective (mind-independent) vs subjective (mind-dependent)
Under such definition does it make sense to say Objectively evolution created feeling experiencing organisms having sense of taste, smell, sound, hunger, pain, to survive. So can we apply word objective to mind-dependent experiences or not?
And of course under such definition there is no objective mind-independent ethics as without minds there is no feeling subject of concern to even talk about in first place. So how silly...
Yet they take objective to mean True & Subjective made up or mere contrived opinion.
For me these are semantic word games that distract, I just care about what's fact/true. What many don't get is Even science, math is subjective invention, byproduct of subjective tool of language, doesn't mean we can't create an accurate model and picture of reality.
I believe the Is-Ought gap is a red-herring, sure it's true you can't contrive an Ought from just what IS, but with evolution the OUGHT statement is built-in, it's descriptively a prescriptive value statement imposed on me, I/we/animals literally have nothing to do with it, I'm just by-product an observer. This is key understanding.
There exists no objective or divine commandment "you OUGHT do X" written into the fabric of reality, and therefore if you don't that's Bad, No. That's nonsense/impossible logically.
Rather an Descriptive IS statement of X is a real bad/PROBLEM, denotes/demands a solution by it's very nature of the word, otherwise if it doesn't need solving then it becomes into a non-problem again, so either x categorically IS a PROBLEM or it's not.
The claim/argument... Is that it's Descriptively BAD/Problematic, therefore universally there's a deductively logically assigned preference to avoid it. Not the other way around. Our personal preference against torture forever doesn't make it therefore bad. The prescription is built in, forced onto us.
It's like "STOP!" & "GO" What do you say to a dog? "BAD dog!" This is saying it should or shouldn't do something. basically = "No!" "Stop!" That's a prescriptive statement/signal/conveyed message.
Or simply, alls required is Descriptively diagnose Torture as Problematic. Which implies Problem Solution Without necessity of solution there is no problem at all, likewise without problem solution means nothing.
​So you essentially boiled my position down to: "Evolution programmed preference to avoid torture." or "we evolved preference to avoid torture" Does that sound incoherent or what... as if I would make such a silly claim. Keep straw-manning.
Do you think animals have PREFERENCE by default to avoid being tortured burned alive and have sex, or logically preferences are born out of observing problematic negative / positive assigned accordingly through punishment & reward mechanisms aka prescriptions, think long and hard about this one...
This is why value or ethical nihilism is incoherent to me. IF torture be bad, how can it be NOT-bad/neutral to create BAD?
It either is truly BAD or it isn't. It's either real or it's an illusion/delusion and false perception.
Their position must reduce to there is no MEANINGFUL difference between Torture & Bliss. And evolution didn't create any problematic sensation or true punishment whatsoever. Instead, were somehow deluded to view being boiling alive as problematic sensation/BAD, and relief as good, we can't tell the difference or label which is which...
Vegan Gains or any anti-realist needs to substantiate these anti-realist nihilist claims & concede if he agrees with the statements below:
"The value-laden problematic BAD experience of being tortured boiled alive in a vat of acid indefinitely... isn't really bad, evolution didn't successfully impose a real negative punishment mechanism on animals, torture isn't something I/we/animals had nothing to do with and are just byproduct observing the imposition, NO! Instead our opinion has everything to do with it... what's problematic torture, one is merely subjectively interpreting/inventing/proclaiming it to be so! Evolution failed!"
"Animals run from fire cause they irrationally unreasonably subjectively interpret it to be bad/problematic sensation or experience, not cause DNA molecule made it so objectively for evolutionary reasons"
"It is all subjective preference like flavor of potato chips, problematic torturous experience isn't bad you just think it's bad or have preference against it."
"You don't logically recognize intrinsic problematic torturous experience then logically assign solution to problem which is preference to avoid that experience, No, you merely have subjective delusional preference against a nail in your eye and there is no logic to it"
"Good is Bad, and Bad is Good depending on opinion, no right or wrong, all subjective tho"
value anti-realism nihilism. INSANE! WORSE than a flat-earth theory!

Okay, I know this is gonna attract some hate, but bear with me.
First off, I want to say: Hades 1 is one of my favourite games ever. I have just under 1000 hours on it, I've done everything, and while I'm not as good as some players, I'm running 30 heat consistently without losing.
I'm also a professional games designer, and while that doesn't make my opinions valid, I think I have an okay idea of general design principles.
So I've been playing Hades 2, and so far I'm not really loving it. Obviously this is still the Alpha, and theres a lot of stuff that needs to be changed before the proper release - some stuff is minor, like boon balancing, some stuff I just find baffling as a design decision (Eris "blessing"), and some stuff I appreciate might just mean the game isn't aimed at me - and thats fine.
But the major issue I have is this - the game is slow. Painfully. It seems like one of the aims of the design team was to make the game a bit less "twitchy", which is fine if thats what you want. But theres a mechanic which is compounding this and making combat honestly tedious for me.
Magick regen.
Okay, for me to explain this properly, you need to understand a big issue that hades has - that is, that melee combat kinda sucks. I want to quote Dacookieman from this subreddit, discussing Polyphemus: "Yeah it's just impossible to capitalize on openings as melee because of how all of his attacks work. If you try to play slow then mobs build up and because the hitboxes from cyclops are often overlapping the enemies they also have the same issue of not being able to capatalize on openings without taking damage. It's not quite as bad w the mobs but together it makes melee builds very brutal."
Dacookieman hits the nail on the head precisely here. Last night, I ran a build where I fought Polyphemus with the axe and zero magick regen 5 times, and consistently got wrecked. On the 6th time I was lucky enough to actually get a magick regen boon, and I destroyed him without taking a single hit.
This is obviously a HUGE difference. So why is the magick regen so important here? Because I can just stay the hell away from him.
Polyphemus , as mentioned above, is absolutely horrible against melee because of his attack pattern and wonky hitboxes. On the other hand, if you stay away from him? He can't do squat. He's like a tortoise with a chainsaw strapped to the back - dangerous yes, but easily defeatable by just moving away.
Polyphemus is far from the only boss with this issue. Almost all bosses have this problem to some degree (except Eris and Charybdis, possibly). Chronos 1st phase is especially bad. For these bosses, the consistent theme is "if you stay far enough away we cant actually hit you".
So this means that the best strategy is - time and time again - stay at range. And that means, ideally, you want to get some magick regen and a decent ranged cast. Then you just sit back, launch your omega casts over and over, and slowly destroy your opponents. And they can't really do anything to stop you.
Of course, the omega casts will cost magick, so the answer to this is to get some sortof magick regen - ideally Demeter, Apollo, Zeus or Hestia. And magick regen takes time, so this means your gameplay pattern looks like: Cast - run away - wait/regen magick - approach - repeat.
Its a horrible gameplay mechanic. It reminds me of FPS games in the 2000s where regenerating health was a thing and the "best" tactic was, after clearing a room, to just afk for 5 minutes while you got your health back.
And, because I know theres a bunch of people who insist on posting this, no, I do not need to "git gud". Being good or bad is irrelevant to negative design patterns.
There's also a ton of grind in this game (which, seperately, I'm not a massive fan of), but I want to add in here that I shouldnt be required to grind unlocks to be allowed to have fun. I genuinely enjoy doing Hades 1 fresh file runs - theyre hard, but I never feel like I'm unfairly punished. Hades 2 seem to have this attitude of "well, you're only allowed to have fun once you've put in ~20 hours and started unlocking the necessary upgrades".
When you design, you need to reward players for the patterns you want to see in the game. Doom "fixed" the health problem by allowing "Glory kills", ENCOURAGING the player to get knee deep in demons - the best gameplay choice was to play the game in the way the developers intended. At the moment, in Hades 2, the best gameplay choice is avoiding combat as much as possible and only jumping in briefly to throw out a spell.
This is also not helped by many of the areas being considerably larger, meaning that you have much more space to run away to.
Hades 1 didnt have magick, but it did have a god gauge. The god gauge powers up by damaging enemies - the gameplay loop you want to encourage. (also taking damage, but thats still promoting engaging enemies)
As the quote goes, "given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game". The optimal way to play Hades 2 is also the least fun way. Maybe you dont want to play optimally, thats fine. And maybe you think the game is fine the way it is - if you enjoy it, power to you. But for me, coming from the high intensity action of Hades 1 into this feels like I've been wading through honey. Sure its sweet, but its slow - and ultimately exhausting.

“The past and the future, considered apart from the consequences of their content, are empty as a dream, and the present is only the indivisible and unenduring boundary between them.” ― Arthur Schopenhauer, The World As Will And Representation

In Chapter 3, it's revealed by the medical records disk that Isa's name is shorthand for "Isolde." I wasn't familiar with this name, but I felt it was distinctive enough that there had to be some meaning behind it, so I did some digging.
One use of the name "Isolde" that caught my attention was that it is the name of a facility at CERN- the ISOLDE or Isotope Separator On Line DEvice, used to produce and separate radioactive isotopes of elements for research purposes. Given the game's frequent use of motifs relating to nuclear science and the health risks of radiation, it felt too specific to be incidental. Still, there wasn't much meaning I could derive from it, but I thought it was interesting enough to be worth pointing out.
The most prominent instance of that name is from the story of Tristan and Isolde, a celtic legend and a romantic tragedy often described as a precursor to Romeo and Juliet. There are many versions of the story told across different times and cultures, but given the game's many references to Romantic Era art from the German speaking world such as Schubert's Serenade and Böcklin's Isle of the Dead, I'm inclined to think it's specifically referencing Richard Wagner's opera "Tristan and Isolde". I'll give a quick synopsis here and analyze the parallels that I think may reflect Isa's role in the story. (To avoid confusion, from now on I will only use 'Isolde' to refer to the character from Tristan and Isolde while 'Isa' will refer to the one from Signalis, unless otherwise stated.)
It begins with Isolde on a ship, being escorted by the knight Tristan, from Ireland to Cornwall to marry Tristan's uncle, King Mark of Cornwall. It is an arranged marriage she is not keen on going through. In a fit of rage, she curses the ship, hoping it sinks and takes all of them with it, particularly Tristan. After learning that Tristan killed her original fiancé, she issues him an ultimatum that she will not willingly leave with him until he drinks with her as an atonement. In truth, she is planning to poison the both of them, and he suspects as much, but in an attempt to prevent this, her attendant replaced the poison with a love potion.
Though she ends up marrying King Mark between the first and second act, Tristan and Isolde can't ignore their passionate love. They realize the only time they can safely pursue their relationship is at night, when the King and the court aren't watching. As their patience for the night grows thinner, they realize the only way to realize their love is through the eternal night: Death. But at the same time, they are caught together by the King and his attendant. Without even attempting to explain his betrayal, he asks Isolde to follow him into death and impales himself on a sword.
In the third act, Tristan partially recovers from the suicide attempt but remains delirious. At the sound of a shepard's pipe in the distance, he reflects on the death of his parents, believing the pipe to be death now calling to him. He laments drinking the potion and how it led him to live a life of madness desiring something that can never be. He dies in Isolde's arms and she follows him into death. As the King arrives to the scene, Tristan's servant kills the King's attendant in revenge and then himself. Amidst all the death, the king reveals he had learned about the love potion and had simply come to offer his blessing to Tristan and Isolde, and the story ends with them finally realizing their love in the afterlife.
In writing this adaptation of the classic story, Wagner was reportedly inspired by the work of Arthur Schopenhauer, particularly his work "Die Welt ais Wille und Vorstellung" or "The World as Will and Representation." In "The Tristan Chord: Wagner and Philosophy", author Bryan Magee identifies Wagner's use of day and night as respective metaphors for "phenomenon", the aspects of the world we can perceive and "noumenon", the fundamentally unknowable reality beneath it. Both concepts were first named by Immanuel Kant, but Schopenhauer further argued that the gap between them is the cause of misery and suffering for all sentient beings; our individual pursuits and efforts to move towards a more personally favorable 'phenomenon' cannot be reconciled with a fundamentally uncertain state of the world and its other inhabitants. That to fulfill one desire requires the quashing of ten others. Illustrating this, he writes:

"...he saw an immense field entirely covered with skeletons, and took it to be a battle-field. However, they were nothing but skeletons of large turtles five feet long, three feet broad, and of equal height. These turtles come this way from the sea in order to lay their eggs, and are then seized by wild dogs... with their united strength, these dogs lay them on their backs, tear open their lower armour, the small scales of the belly, and devour them alive. But then a tiger often pounces on the dogs. Now all this misery is repeated thousands and thousands of times, year in year out. For this, then, are these turtles born. For what offence must they suffer this agony? What is the point of this whole scene of horror? The only answer is that the will-to-live thus objectifies itself."

Returning to Signalis, this quote immediately calls to mind the first-person Shores of Oblivion scene, in which skulls are buried and littered across the sand, and a quote from one of the nearby scattered papers:

we should have never left
the primordial soup
only through death can i escape
the call of the one who rules
above all life

Tristan and Isolde, realizing that their personal passions were irreconcilable with the interests of the material world they were in, concluded the only answer was to leave it behind altogether, so they made a death pact. A "promise", if you will. So upon finding Tristan dead, Isolde takes her own life. Much like how our Isa, who upon losing hope of being able to find Erika in the living world, disintegrates.
Another related theme connecting these stories is the lamentation of fate. Just as Isolde prays for the ship carrying her to her destiny to sink with her on it, and as Tristan regrets drinking the potion that led him to a life of desire for something that could never be, two early game quotes from Isa show that she is seeking Erika not just with love and concern but with regret for how they left things:

"Erika, if you find this note, despite everything that's happened. I've come to look for you."
"Have you ever wondered if you're speaking to someone for the last time without knowing? I wish I could go back, so I could say something else."

The details of this regret are deliberately ambiguous. It sounds like they had a fight or falling out, but 'everything that's happened' implies a deeper conflict- a disagreement or choice that they couldn't reconcile. Something important enough that it took Isa away from her sister, yet also something she regrets so greatly that she would take it all back just so she can see her sister one more time.
As Schopenhauer said, "A man can do what he wants, but not want what he wants." The great tragedy at the center of Tristan and Isolde is that even if we have control of our actions, we are at the mercy of the desires we were given by fate. It's a theme that permeates not just Isa's story, but Signalis as a whole.
Elster never chose to love Ariane. Had she not, she might have found the strength to end her suffering before it was too late. So she ran away from the "day" of Ariane's suffering into the "night" of keeping her in cryosleep.
Ariane never chose to love art. Had she not, she could have had a simple and comfortable life fitting in with her peers. So she ran away from the "day" of the Eusan Nation's surveillance and social ridicule into the "night" of Penrose-512.
Falke lost any hope of finding happiness after becoming burdened with emotions and identity that she could do nothing to satiate, and quite literally went from the "day" of life into the "night" of dreaming.
And then there's Adler, all but crushed by helplessness as he tries in vain to hold back the death of reality, as Elster and Isa continue to bring about its apparent decay in pursuit of their own wills. The relationship between Adler and Isa is interesting and I think quite important, as he's the only character besides Elster who gets direct screen time with her. As the game bluntly mentions the first time Adler meets Isa,

NONE OF US ARE HERE BY CHOICE (And No One Will Miss Us)

It's from this and the Schopenhauerian interpretation of Tristan and Isolde that I think Adler represents phenomenon while Isa represents noumenon.
Adler wishes to preserve the light of day. To awaken from the dream and return to shared experience of a common, coherent reality. One where what you see is what you get. Where experiences can be trusted, and results are predictable.
Isa wishes to live in the night. The world of passion and of choice. Valuing the experience of familial love over all else, even the world or truth, she continues to live only in pursuit of another reality amidst the abyss of uncertainties, one where she made amends with her sister before it was too late, or never fell out with her at all. And when she finally accepts that she cannot find it or manifest it, much like her namesake, she concludes the "eternal night" is her last recourse.
There can be no perfect reconciliation between these two wills. It can never be day and night at the same time. And yet they do find themselves together- falling into the bottom of the mine. In the Nowhere, at the end of all things. At the sunset, the liminal space in between the night and day, between dreaming and waking. Because, one means nothing without the other.
To me that is the important take away from her story. That if we don't want to live in regret over the hand life dealt us- hating ourselves for being unable to fulfill the desires we were stuck with, before its too late, we must confront the question of which world we want to live in.
Is it truly better to have loved and lost then never loved at all? Is it truly better to have tried and failed than to never try? I don't want to believe the answer is no, but none of us can be certain for ourselves until we reason with ourselves honestly about why we struggle with the question in the first place- what the true value of each side of the coin is. Perhaps then we can accept what is beyond our control.
To quote Schopenhauer once more:

Every individual, every human apparition and its course of life, is only one more short dream of the endless spirit of nature, of the persistent will-to-live, is only one more fleeting form, playfully sketched by it on its infinite page, space and time; it is allowed to exist for a short while that is infinitesimal compared with these, and is then effaced, to make new room. Yet, and here is to be found the serious side of life, each of these fleeting forms, these empty fancies, must be paid for by the whole will-to-live in all its intensity with many deep sorrows, and finally with a bitter death, long feared and finally made manifest. It is for this reason that the sight of a corpse suddenly makes us serious.

Kadillac Kirk had been a good friend of mine for several years. I had met him through friends from The Spring Stage; and he never had anything to do with The Imp, which is why he didn’t appear in the Married Mary saga. Mary would have totally thrown herself at him, and Kirk would have definitely “thrown it in her.” He loved the ladies and often remarked that there was no such thing as an unappealing woman, nor was there anything sweeter than finding the pearl of passion in an outwardly plain dame. Fortunately for Kirk, he never met Mary. This was probably fortunate for Mary as well, seeing as Kirk was a confirmed bachelor and his rakish nature might have broken her fat heart.
Kirk was an older guy. Not MOE old, though. He was in his early forties, but he easily passed for a carefree dude in his 30s... not that he lied about his age. I only mention this trait to juxtapose Kirk’s genuine youthful air with Moe’s unconvincing youthful farce. Kirk dressed normally, avoided stupid jargon, and never busted out gimmicks like tarot cards or spells. He just existed, behaved affably, and people liked him for it.
He drove a classic 1962 Cadillac El Dorado convertible with red leather interior, and he lived in a charmingly quaint (and ridiculously expensive) neighborhood. How he made his fortune remained a mystery, but he never bloviated about his wealth. He just threw spectacular parties and people showed up. And, to my knowledge, he never tried to lure women into bed with his money (although I’m sure he got his fair share of boom-boom thanks to his digs and his wheels, even if the gold-diggers denied their monetary agendas).
Kirk was legitimately handsome. He was a drummer, he had a full head of black hair, he was clean-shaven, he worked out, and he knew all the hidden gems in Wellsprings. So why hadn’t I tried... or even desired to date him? I don’t know. I just didn’t feel drawn to him like that. He felt like a cool uncle and he had, thus far, never done anything to change my perception. Plus, the age difference weirded me out a little. Kirk didn’t look forty; but knowing that he had so much more life experience than I did created a power imbalance that would have creeped me out if we’d been dating. As buddies, I just felt supremely cool riding in his Cadillac, smoking Fantasia cigarettes, and hitting the speakeasies and jazz clubs I would have never known about if it weren’t for Kirk’s connections.
And he had been a good person to talk to about my romantic woes. He never lecherously suggested that I should date him, and he gave the type of tempered advice that only comes with lived experience. But he often lightly mocked me for my crush on Dennis and he did a hilarious impression of Smegal popping too soon over his “precious.” So when Mary “got me back” by doing whatever she did with to Dennis, I called Kadillac Kirk and told him the drinks were on me if he’d be my designated driver for the night.
Why hadn’t I called Whisky??? Well, A) Kirk was way more fun to hang out with, at least from my past experiences up to that point. And B) I needed to bitch about a boy, something I couldn’t do in good conscience in front of a guy I was dating. So I put on the sexiest plunging halter dress I owned, applied heavy eye makeup and spikey accessories, braved a pair of stilettos, and sashayed out to Kirk’s convertible. I felt like a badass rock star. I probably looked like a try-hard hooker.
Kirk: Daaaaay-um! Somebody really did do a number on you, huh? I know you said you were upset, but the gents are gonna be writing thank you notes to that fat girl and that butt-fucking hobbit.
Me: I just need to feel pretty and numb. And I trust you to keep me from making a fool of myself.
Kirk squeezed my shoulder. “I’ve got you. You do whatever you need to do to get rid of these demons.”
He sparked up a J and offered me the first puff. I gladly accepted. He took one puff of his own, but said that the rest was mine since he didn’t want to drive stoned. See? He was responsible! Weed wasn’t legal in California yet, so I got a little bit baked before I stashed the sativa in the glove box and wrapped a scarf around my hair like a starlet from the Golden Age of Hollywood. Kirk sped out of the parking lot and said he was taking me to a downtown hotel that was hosting a party that night in their lush lobby.
Kadillac Kirk pulled up to the main entrance, paid the valet, and then opened my door. I was wobbly from the weed. And I had stupidly decided to wear heels. You can get high or you can wear high (heels). You can’t have both. Not if you’ve repeatedly injured both ankles (as I have). I had to take Kirk’s arm to keep from keeling over. “Can people tell I’m stoned?” I whispered. Kirk replied, “Nobody’s paying any attention to anyone else’s intoxication. I promise you that much.” I nodded, steadied myself, and strutted alongside my very cool friend, feeling a little more confident.
A live jazz orchestra was playing Cole Porter as we entered the lobby. Everything sparkled. The music was even more intoxicating than the spliff had been. “Just One of Those Things” brought tears to my eyes since the lyrics hit every raw nerve regarding the Dennis debacle. But I smiled. It might sound mental, but being distraught over a trash fire of a one-sided romance was exhilarating. Immature, for sure. But also exhilarating. You see, that kind of sadness doesn’t hurt. Not really. It stings. It leaves little bruises, but it’s very safe to wallow in because you haven’t actually lost anything. Melancholia over that which you never had is as sweet as it is bitter; and that type of twisted splendor is rivaled only by Stendhal.
“Here's hoping we meet now and then. It was great fun, but it was just one of those things.” I sang along with the band, and a fat tear rolled down past my melancholic smile and onto my chin. Kirk brushed it aside. “Too close to home?” I wiped away the remnants of the tear’s journey from eye to chin and smiled a more genuine smile. “The perfect distance from home. Shall we get drinks? Remember, I’m buying.”
Kirk: No, no. This is your time to heal. And I’m here as your pal, not your chauffeur. What would the lady like?”
I pretended to barf. Kirk knew I hated it when he got overly formal and overly attentive. So he did it just to mess with me. “Shot of vodka,” I replied.
Kirk: How many?
I thought briefly. “FIVE.”
Kirk: Five to one, baby. One in five...
Me: No one here gets out alive.
Kirk: Are you able to hold yourself upright, or should you come with?
I took a seat on an ornate, damask-upholstered chaise lounge. “I’ll be okay. And I was kidding about the five shots.”
I sat there lost in the music for a while. I thought very little about Dennis. Even less about Mary. And not at all about Whisky (whom I had shagged less than a week ago). My mind danced through the ornate lighting in the hotel lobby, and I suddenly felt the need to join the hoity-toity guests on the dancefloor!
Kirk returned with four shots of vodka. Two for him, two for me. That was quite reasonable of him. He knew damn well that I couldn’t handle five shots, but he also knew that I was in a... state. One that called for more than a single shot. I raised a both miniature glasses to “No more ninnyhammers or hairy-footed lovers.” Kirk did his hilarious Smegal impression, we double-toasted, and downed the shots. The band launched into “Let’s Misbehave,” and I kicked off my stilettos and made a beeline for the dance floor.
“There’s something wild about you child that’s so contagious. Let’s be outrageous! Let’s misbehave.” Kadillac Kirk swept me up, twirled me around, and dipped me as we both sang along with the lyrics. I wasn’t swooning for him, but I was enthralled by the moment. The music, the dancing, the combination of booze and bud... so I kissed him as he pulled me back to my feet. And he kissed back. In a way that Dennis never had. In a way that Whisky’s beard wouldn’t permit. I didn’t feel the visceral sensations that I’d felt when Dennis had kissed me, but it felt nice to feel desired. And then I noticed that other guests were watching us and applauding. Now, that was a dopamine rush if ever there was one!
I gently broke away from the embrace, high-fived Kirk and returned to the chaise lounge to put my stupid shoes back on. He followed me and smashed his face back onto mine. I pulled away and laughed. “It was a moment,” I told him. “I appreciate the dance, and that kiss was the perfect finale. But it’s not happening again.”
Kirk: Not to worry, Valerie. I know you. I knew all along that we were performing, and I was more than happy to be your scene partner.
Me: And dance partner! Those were some excellent moves! I didn’t know you had ballroom training.
Kirk: You name it, I’ve mastered it. Another drink for the lady?
I pretended to barf again. “Not yet. I’m not sad right now. Do you mind if I just sit here and enjoy the music?”
Kirk: Ah. My kisses do have healing properties...
I flipped my hand up at him. “Knock that shit off, bro. I wanted to hang out with you because I trust you not to get weird. Even if I get weird, I know you have the maturity to balance me out.”
Kirk: Are you calling me old???
Me: No. I’m calling you rational, responsible, and respectful.
Kirk: Well, now. If you can articulate an alliterative statement that fluently, then you clearly aren’t drunk enough!
I dismissed this comment as a joke. And he did indeed knock off the flirtation. We had a perfectly pleasant time chatting and dancing (no more kissing, though). And then I noticed a girl I knew from Into the Woods entering the lobby. She’d played Florinda and I’d played Little Red. I called her name and waved enthusiastically. She waved back. And then her date entered. It was D.E.N.N.I.S. I sank into the chaise. Kirk caught on immediately. “The hobbit???” he asked. I nodded silently. “You wanna make out again?” he enthused. I shook my head. I had to go say hello to Flo. And I had an idea...
I crossed the lobby, smiled, squealed, and hugged her.
Florinda: Lil’ Red! It’s been forever! So glad to see you!!! This is my friend, Denny.
From the corner of my eye. I could see Dennis shifting uncomfortably. I refused to look directly at him, neglected to acknowledge Flo's introduction and continued to converse only with her. "So glad to see you, too! What have you been up to since we left the woods?"
Dennis: C’mon, Val...
Florinda (appearing oblivious to the iciness between me and Dennis): Oh, I had some drama after the show closed. I'll have to tell you about it some other time... Have you seen Prince Big Bad (Scumbanger) lately?
I laughed. “Last time I saw him, he was hitting on some nasty fat chick at The Imp.”
Flo and I both scoffed at the pervy pest. Into the Woods was where I’d initially met Scumbanger. He played The Wolf/Cinderella’s Prince. Again... typecasting. There’s a whole essay in my brain about my first encounter with the pest, during which he quoted the song that he sang to me in the show, “Hello, Little Girl.” But it gets into some pretty uncomfortable territory because he made me feel... excited. Well, excited and scared. Nothing of note happened during Into the Woods, but our odd interactions did kind of set the stage for some extremely regrettable events during that Cats cast party.
I excused myself, saying that I needed to get back to my friend. And then I leaned in and said in a hushed voice to Flo, “Watch your ass with that one. If he’s the Denny I’m thinking of...” I gave her a look that only another female would be able to read. Her eyebrows shot up and she nodded. Dennis continued to shift as though he were trying to hold in a massive dump. “BABE! Uh...”
Flo apparently answered to that moniker as well. “What is it, Denny? Don’t worry. That was just telepathic girl talk. You apparently have a reputation...”
Dennis: Different Denny. I assure you I’m a pious gentleman.
Me: Ah. My mistake. Well, then. You guys have a good time! They’re playing Cole Porter, and the band is delovely. Great to see you, Flo!
I hugged Flo again, gave Dennis a curt nod, ignored the scent of mandarins and mountain air, and returned to Kirk.
I collapsed on the chaise lounge, exhausted from holding back the rage. I had no right to be mad at Florinda. I hadn’t seen her in three years, so how was she supposed to know that I’d had a thing with Dennis? Hell, I couldn’t even be mad at Dennis because the last time he and I had spoken in any meaningful way, I’d told him that I was no longer entertaining my crush on him. So why was I surprised to see him dating??? And why had he never taken ME out on a date like this??? And why wasn’t I smitten with Kadillac Kirk who HAD taken me out on a date like this, was an objectively excellent kisser, and a bona fide BALLER? What was wrong with me???
Kirk suggested going down the street to a quaint little bar and then sobering up at a diner closer to my apartment. I numbly nodded and followed him in silence for a few blocks. He assured me that I had “turned several heads” on the way to the new location, but I neither cared nor believed him. This wasn't the type of numbness I'd been aiming for. Now I needed to get schnockered. “Five shots of vodka, please.” Yes, I was serious.
Kadillac Kirk, my reliable designated driver, ordered only a beer and watched in something across between astonishment, concern, and delight as I slammed all five shots in rapid succession. I half expected to immediately retch all over the bar. But I felt fine. I half expected to immediately lose consciousness and wake up in the hospital. But I remained coherent. How I’d managed to take in that much hard liquor and suffer no direct consequences, I’ll never know.
I think I wanted to suffer. I wanted to either feel nothing at all or to feel a sickness bad enough to distract me from the scorching sting that pulsed through my being when I realized that I had lost the abstract notion I’d been addicted to this entire time. Hope. It wasn’t Dennis himself I couldn’t quit. It was that drug called hope. The hope that maybe, just maybe Dennis would give our romance a fair chance. The hope that maybe, just maybe he would make peace with himself, get his mind out of his crotch, and enjoy some agenda-free togetherness. The hope that maybe, just maybe he would stop bloviating about his admittedly impressive accomplishments for five fucking minutes and ask about my life. I had my own reasonably impressive accomplishments, even if they paled in comparison to his. A proper suitor would have enjoyed hearing about them.
But seeing him out with another woman, a woman who had no reason to parade her Dennis escapades before me as some means of revenge, a woman he was clearly courting of his own volition... My hope had died. It died before I’d had time to wean myself off it. Now I had to mourn the loss of hope, which is a very tricky brand of grief to navigate. Vodka wasn’t the answer, but it was what I had to work with. So it would have to do.
After enough time had passed without vomiting or collapsing, I asked Kirk to bring his car around to the bar so that I didn’t have to walk two and a half blocks drunk and in heels. He nodded and dramatically leaned in for a kiss. I recoiled. “DUDE! I told you. The moment has passed.”
Kirk: I beg your pardon. I misread your eyes. Thought I saw a green light...
Me: It’s fine. I just want to go home while I’m still feeling okay.
Kirk: Of course. Your chariot will be here soon.
He skipped off to fetch his Cadillac and I noticed that the lights in the bar were beginning to dance a bit. This should have been concerning. But then I realized that I was giggling. Wait... What? Oh shit. Sure, I was drunk from those shots. But what I was feeling in that moment wasn’t drunkery. It was stonery. Kirk probably misread my face because my pupils were dilated. Not from desire, but from drug use.
Some of you might be thinking that I was a bad friend for not introducing Lucy, an old dude connoisseur, to Kirk. Well... I did. Several years before the events of this story. He adored her. She, on the other hand, thought he was immature. And she wasn’t wrong. Lucy was astute when it came to sussing out a person’s true nature. Far more astute than I. Her initial assessment that Kirk was immature is about to be vindicated. Stretch those cringe muscles! It’s almost time for pie...
I somehow managed to get to his car. I honestly don’t recall how I got there. Did one of the bartenders carry me? Did some kind patron allow me to lean on him? Had Kadillac Kirk carried me out? I’m not sure. But my memory ceases to be fuzzy about halfway to the 24-hour diner. It might have been the very same 24-hour diner where Mary pulled her... shenanigans. I’ll never know.
Kirk: Would you say that you’re more drunk or more stoned?
Me: STONED. Definitely stoned.
Kirk made some sort of grunty noise and reached for my thigh. I slapped his hand.
Kirk: Stoned but not amorous? That’s rare.
I started laughing rather unkindly. “You’re a fucking horndog! I thought you were my safe straight male friend, dammit.”
Kirk: I solemnly swear that your safety is my primary concern, my stoned beauty.
I pretended to throw up.
Kirk: So... You’re not horny. But are you hungry? The diner I’m heading to makes this Maple Walnut Pie with the most sumptuous... sensual cream and exquisite drizzling of...
Me: Ew! Stop trying to bang the pie. Bro. Are YOU stoned? (Then I remembered the question.) Yes, I’m hungry. But I don’t like nuts. I’ll have banana cream.
Kirk made that repulsive grunty noise again. “Uhhhhh... Mmmmmm. Cream. Yessssss. Yes, we’ll be there in just a minute.” He was squirming in the driver's seat.
Me: GROSS, DUDE! If you’re gonna be like that I’ll just order HASH brows. Get it? Hash??? (I giggled.) You can’t make that sound nasty.
Kirk: Forgive my jokes. I think my blood sugar’s a bit low.
As Kirk parked, I began to wonder how I might get away with walking shoeless into the diner. The stilettos had to get off my feet. At least while I was walking. And Kirk was kind enough to give me his socks and wear his loafers “island style” into the establishment. Okay, that was gallant of him. Maybe he was going to behave himself for the rest of the evening.
I wasn’t terribly talkative as we sat down, and he expressed a bit of concern for my emotional well-being. I wasn’t coherent enough to explain what was happening to my emotions and I wasn’t sure I trusted him with my deep, dark secrets at that point. So I shrugged like a sulky teenager, ran my hands over my messy, windblown hair, and mumbled that I was “just hungry.” And right on cue, a very kind, slightly older waitress with a sweet southern accent stopped by to take our order.
Kirk: Ah, yes. We’ll have two cups of black coffee. And we’ll share a slice of that delectable Maple Walnut Pie.
Waitress: Oh, honey. That pie is scrumptious! I take it you’ve been here before?
Kirk: I have. This will be her first time to taste the splendor.
I hated to be a killjoy, but I interrupted and said to the waitress, “Ma’am? I’m sure the Maple Walnut is excellent, but could I please get a slice of Banana Cream? And a big glass of ice water?
Waitress: Sure, hon! Banana Cream’s just as yummy! I’ll be right back with those coffees and that big water.
Kirk was sucking on the tip of his forefinger and shaking his head a bit. “You’re passing up so many sensational... sensual...”
I put my forehead on the table and growled. “You swore you’d stop being nasty!” I held this #headdesk pose for quite some time before I finally lifted my head... only to see that Kirk was still sucking his fingertip and staring at me like a wild animal. “Pleeeeeease be normal,” I whined. “It’s been a really weird night for me.”
Kirk: Indeed. Many surprises. You know... You’re like titanium. Your flame burns so fast and so bright, if a guy doesn’t get in there while the iron is hot, he’ll never get another chance. I was too slow.
What the...? I was pretty sure he was wrong about titanium burning quickly. I’m no chemistry wiz, but my dad and my oldest brother are both big-brains when it comes to physics and chemistry. So I picked up some things just listening to them talk. Accurate or inaccurate, Kirk was being creepy again. He’d never been creepy towards me before, although I’d seen him act like this with other women. Usually with staggering success. Why????? His money. It had to be his money. Kirk was a nice-looking man, but holy shit... No amount of good looks could save this creep show
And then, our sweet waitress sat down our coffees, my water, and the two slices of pie. After I gulped down a whole bunch of water, I grabbed a fork, prepared to quell my munchies... and then I froze. Kirk was quickly flicking his finger back and forth across the top of his pie. And moaning. He noticed my wide-eyed stare, smirked, sucked the tip of his thumb, picked up the plate with both hands, and began flicking his tongue across the tip of the triangular pie slice. And moaning some more. Well, there went my appetite.
Kirk took his middle finger and jabbed it into the crustless vertex of the pie slice, then he began pumping it in and out like a piston, and flicking his thumb across the increasingly demolished top layer of whipped cream. He gasped this time. People were starting to stare. His pointer finger joined his middle finger in the piston action, and he replaced his thumb with his tongue. Between flicks of the tongue, he groaned, “Oh yeah, baby... Let me taste you,” but it was kind of hard to understand him.
And I was either about to run to the back office, tell them that I was in danger and needed a police escort home... OR I was about to burst out laughing at the spectacle. Kirk continued... He removed his fingers and gregariously licked pie filling off of them. "Ohhhhh," he groaned, "I got you soooo sticky. So sweet. So moist." And then he started sucking his fingertips again, switching from middle to pointer, middle to pointer and emitting a delighted little, “Mmmmmm” with every suck.
Finally, he jabbed his fingers back into the utterly destroyed pie, lowered his face into the mess and lapped loudly and passionately, moaning, grunting, and mumbling “Come on, baby. Come on. Mmmmmm. Come on.” I could see the waitress and some dude in a suit heading over to the table, so I sank down in my seat, partially covered my face, but continued to watch the train wreck. At last, Kirk shuddered violently as he splatted his entire hand onto the plate and rubbed furiously. And then he locked eyes with me. He sucked the tip of his thumb one final time and said, “You...” There was a long pause during which Kirk lovingly stroked the mess he’d made. “You... are the pie.”
I don’t hang out with Kadillac Kirk anymore. But he’s still a bachelor, ladies!

So I've read about the Mandela Effect, about some of the boundaries in quantum physics and mathematics, and some of the quotes from scientists saying that we may be living in a simulation. But I have to say, I'm still not fully convinced.
Firstly, the Mandela Effect can just be placed to memory issues, but even if it was evidence of multiple universes or timelines, it doesn't point directly to simulation theory.
With regards to the speed of light and other mathematic/scientific 'proof', I feel that these could just be the rules of the universe which we are determined to explain in human terms. And there could be numerous explanations including God, there's no reason to favour the simulation over these other theories.
And finally with regards to the logical arguments provided by Nick Bostrom, I feel as though this linear logical argument could be made in favour of almost anything. It's working towards a conclusion rather than following the evidence.
I'm remaining open-minded so hit me with your most robust, convincing arguments in favour of simulation theory!

Why being transgender is not a sin, by MARK WINGFIELD NOVEMBER 9, 2018

Link to original post: https://baptistnews.com/article/why-being-transgender-is-not-a-sin/#.YYk6tE7MK72
I recently met a lovely young family in the northern suburbs of Dallas. They told me they previously attended a large Baptist church there – until their high school son became their daughter.
The mother was committed to her volunteer work in the church, and when she told the pastor who supervised that ministry area that her child was transgender, the pastor said: “That’s fine. We love everybody here. But it’s still a sin.”
“Blah, blah, blah, but….” Whatever comes after the “but” always negates whatever nice things were said in the first part of the sentence. Beware of the “but.”
Some would look kindly on the suburban pastor’s response because, after all, the pastor didn’t kick the family out of the church or condemn the teenager straight to hell. But.
Even among Christians who appear kind or progressive, too often the existence of someone who identifies as transgender gets chalked up to “sin.” No doubt that’s the root reason so many Christians happily pile on against transgender persons and their family members about bathrooms and schools, because in their heart of hearts, they don’t understand transgender identity and simply default to thinking it is a sinful lifestyle choice.

I think we all can agree that a “sin” is something we do that we shouldn’t do, something we have a choice about. If I eat an entire half-gallon of ice cream, I am likely guilty of the sin of gluttony. I didn’t have to eat the ice cream. If I fixate on why other people are more athletic and agile than me in my mid-life body, I probably am guilty of the sin of envy. There is a way for me to redirect my thoughts to avoid envy.
The same is not true of transgender identity. Emphatically and conclusively, this is not a choice. It is who a person is. Did you choose to have red hair? Did you choose to be tall or short? Did you choose to have the genetic markers you have? Of course not. Transgender persons are simply acknowledging that the gender identity assigned to them at birth because of physical anatomy does not match the brain, biochemical and genetic gender identity they know inside.
Since writing a column two years ago about understanding transgender identity – an opinion article that has been read more than 1 million times and led to giving a TED Talk on the same subject – I have conversed with hundreds of transgender persons and family members of transgender persons. That’s not just ministerially speaking. It really has been hundreds. Every one of those transgender persons has told me that they knew from their earliest awareness – from the time they were 4, 5 or 6 years old – that the gender anatomy they showed on the outside did not match who they knew they were on the inside.
There is an increasing body of scientific evidence to back up this assertion. For example, a 2008 study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior found that female fetuses with increased prenatal exposure to androgens are more likely to have gender nonconforming behaviors. Researchers – including some theologically conservative ones – point to environmental factors that may be responsible for what appears to be an increase in transgender identity through endocrine disruption beginning in the 20th century. This is linked to industrialization, development of new chemicals and medicines.
But these environmental factors only explain an increase, not the presence of transgender identity, which has been documented for centuries. The American Academy of Pediatrics (not to be confused with a small association of conservative pediatricians often cited by critics of transgender rights) recently released a new policy statement explaining that variation in gender identity is a normal part of human diversity. For an excellent, lay-friendly description of the emerging science of transgender identity, look to this report from Harvard University.

I could quote chapter and verse for study after study, and that would not change the minds of some people who are determined to label as sinful anything they do not understand, usually because “the Bible says so.” In these cases, I ask people to tell me where in the Bible being transgender is condemned as sinful. The only answer usually offered is Deuteronomy 22:5, which says: “A woman shall not wear a man’s apparel, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment; for whoever does such things is abhorrent to the Lord your God.”
Here’s the problem with even a literal reading of that passage: Transgender persons will tell you they are not “men” putting on “women’s” clothing or “women” putting on “men’s” clothing. Instead, they are declaring an identity much deeper than clothing; they are saying that they are dressing outwardly to match who they know they are on the inside. This is not cross-dressing, which is not the subject of this column. Cross-dressing is about finding pleasure in wearing certain clothes. Being transgender is about finding mental and spiritual peace by aligning outward presentation with inner being.
Occasionally, people will point to Genesis 1:27 as a condemnation of transgender identity: “male and female he created them.” Most transgender persons will tell you they believe God has, in fact, created them as either male or female; the problem is how they have been labeled by others who are not God.
Some people today identify as “gender fluid,” meaning they find in themselves bits of both male and female identity and cannot definitely say they are one or the other. While this may sound unsettling to some of us on first hearing, a return to Genesis might help. There we also learn that God created both “night” and “day” and that God separated “land” from “sea.” Yet we have no problem understanding the existence of dawn and dusk or marshes and everglades. Also, the point of Genesis 1 is inclusion, not exclusion. The ancient text tells us that God created everything: “and,” not “or.”
The other lesson we need to keep learning from Genesis is that all humanity is created “in the image of God.” Everybody. Without exception. When we look at others who are different than us and try to see in them the image of God, we gain new understanding and empathy.
Sometimes well-meaning Christians get this part but still can’t get over the “sin” label. So they will say things like, “All of us are sinners in God’s eyes, and it’s just that my sin is different than your sin.” That’s another way of saying, “I love you, but….”
There’s an easy way to remember why this is wrong: Transgender identity is about who a person is. It is about their fundamental being as humans created by God in God’s image – an image that God has declared to be good.

I bought my Razer Blade 15 Advanced in 2021, after using my Alienware 15 for 7 years (6 solid years of architecture school + 1 year work with zero problems!)
Specs: i7-10875H, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD, RTX 3070
Seemed fine for the first 2 years, until I noticed that my trackpad suddenly stopped working. I didn't think much of it, I use a mouse most of the time anyway, but I later realized that there was a battery bloat. So I contacted Razer, and in Singapore there's no service center that you can walk into, no phone number I can call so it was multiple emails back and forth. Finally I managed to arrange for them to come pick it up, assess the damage and send it back to me. The repair cost about 300 in total, and only 90 days warranty post repair. I had to back up all my files and reinstall all my programs etc post repair because they completely wipe your computer when you send it in, "for privacy".
Fast forward over a week, I get my laptop back. Not sure why it took so long, I had a friend replace the battery on her computer, they sent someone over and it was done on the spot. Anyway I reinstalled all my programs, downloaded my files. I was in a meeting the next day when I noticed that the bottom part of my screen started glitching. I had my laptop plugged into an external monitor and the glitch did not appear on the monitor so I thought it was just because of the hdmi or something, connection problem maybe? Didn't think much of it as it came and went. Next day I was working again and suddenly the whole screen shut off, but my laptop was still on, keyboards lights were also still on. I had unsaved files that I was working on! I tried closing my laptop and open it again to put it to sleep so I wouldn't lose my programs, but that didn't get the screen back. So I had to force restart then the screen came back on. Awhile later it happened again, WHILE I was in discussions with my bosses. Had to restart my computer and waste everyone's time. It kept recurring until I just decided to plug my laptop into a monitor and used it as a screen mirror instead of restarting my computer. It was a frustrating day. I emailed razer and telling them what happened.
The next day it happened 3 times within the span of 4 hours that day, twice while I was in meetings, so naturally I contacted razer again, even sent them videos of when it happened and how the laptop was still on but the screen blacked out. They asked if my laptop was updated or if I my driver was outdated etc but no, I h ad just done a windows update. This kept happening on and off, several times while I was in meetings, lost a lot of work and wasted a lot of my time, not to mention the frustration! I requested if they could send a technician to check it out instead of me having to send my laptop in again (and have my computer wiped again) but they said they couldn't. They told me that they could seek permission for me to send my laptop in without my SSD and sent me videos on how I can remove it MYSELF. But in the videos it warns that 'modifications' will void any warranty. I'm not an expert how am I supposed to open my laptop up myself??? And obviously this will become an issue in the future if I can't install it properly - I have zero computer modification experience or knowledge. I decided to think on this for awhile, but then they emailed me saying if I don't reply within 48 hours they will assume the issue has been resolved and close my case. So reluctantly I agreed to send my laptop in again under standard procedure, meaning everything will have to be reinstalled.
They told me that and I quote "in light of the fact that this issue has arisen subsequent to a recent repair, we will waive any fees associated with this service". They sent me what they call a RMA, and this time they did not charge me the pick up and diagnostic fee ($99). I agreed, accepted the terms and arranged for the pick up.
However, on the morning of the pick up, someone from Razer emails me again, saying "Good day! My humble apologies for any inconvenience caused. I wanted to inform you that we have reviewed your case and consulted with our repair team. It appears that the current issue with your device is not related to the previous battery replacement. Instead, you are experiencing screen flickering. In this case, we will need to proceed with a repair service that will be under chargeable process." What rubbish, good day???
Shocked, I emailed them back saying that it's ridiculous how do they even know its not related without checking? I never had this problem before, it started right after I got my laptop back from the razer repair center... and you're going back on your word for whatever 90 day warranty and this RMA that I already processed... and you're only notifying me of this the morning of my laptop pick up?
"Please let us know if you would like to move forward with the repair" - Honestly, backed into a corner now. How can I trust them? If I argue and refuse to pay, what if they mess my laptop up more or just take it in and not do anything? Or they can just come up with some reason why it's not related to my battery replacement and make me pay anyway? How would I know whether this is the truth or not? This is even more frustrating because I can't call to speak to anyone, they don't reply emails promptly even during office hours, and your case is not managed by just one person. So its multiple help desk people not one person seeing your problem through from start to end.
Just felt the need to share this with anyone considering getting a razer laptop, this is still an ongoing issue that I'm hoping to resolve. Honestly, I only found out about this battery bloat issue after I bought it but I didn't think it'll happen to me. The laptop looks good and runs well until it doesn't... Then you're stuck dealing with horrible service and it's just not worth the trouble and headspace. Also, the laptops run REALLY hot, its hard to use if you're not in an aircon environment or using an external keyboard. Not to mention they are expensive! I'd expect better for paying so much... It's really not worth it and I really regret buying my razer blade.
UPDATE: Tried posting this to the official razer community but they deleted my post...
https://preview.redd.it/nfvuduc5hp1d1.jpg?width=2298&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a09f748ef46a20b5408ee9cc53abf5b911a0fbed

I bought my Razer Blade 15 Advanced in 2021, after using my Alienware 15 for 7 years (6 solid years of architecture school + 1 year work with zero problems!)
Specs: i7-10875H, 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD, RTX 3070
Seemed fine for the first 2 years, until I noticed that my trackpad suddenly stopped working. I didn't think much of it, I use a mouse most of the time anyway, but I later realized that there was a battery bloat. So I contacted Razer, and in Singapore there's no service center that you can walk into, no phone number I can call so it was multiple emails back and forth. Finally I managed to arrange for them to come pick it up, assess the damage and send it back to me. The repair cost about 300 in total, and only 90 days warranty post repair. I had to back up all my files and reinstall all my programs etc post repair because they completely wipe your computer when you send it in, "for privacy".
Fast forward over a week, I get my laptop back. Not sure why it took so long, I had a friend replace the battery on her computer, they sent someone over and it was done on the spot. Anyway I reinstalled all my programs, downloaded my files. I was in a meeting the next day when I noticed that the bottom part of my screen started glitching. I had my laptop plugged into an external monitor and the glitch did not appear on the monitor so I thought it was just because of the hdmi or something, connection problem maybe? Didn't think much of it as it came and went. Next day I was working again and suddenly the whole screen shut off, but my laptop was still on, keyboards lights were also still on. I had unsaved files that I was working on! I tried closing my laptop and open it again to put it to sleep so I wouldn't lose my programs, but that didn't get the screen back. So I had to force restart then the screen came back on. Awhile later it happened again, WHILE I was in discussions with my bosses. Had to restart my computer and waste everyone's time. It kept recurring until I just decided to plug my laptop into a monitor and used it as a screen mirror instead of restarting my computer. It was a frustrating day. I emailed razer and telling them what happened.
The next day it happened 3 times within the span of 4 hours that day, twice while I was in meetings, so naturally I contacted razer again, even sent them videos of when it happened and how the laptop was still on but the screen blacked out. They asked if my laptop was updated or if I my driver was outdated etc but no, I h ad just done a windows update. This kept happening on and off, several times while I was in meetings, lost a lot of work and wasted a lot of my time, not to mention the frustration! I requested if they could send a technician to check it out instead of me having to send my laptop in again (and have my computer wiped again) but they said they couldn't. They told me that they could seek permission for me to send my laptop in without my SSD and sent me videos on how I can remove it MYSELF. But in the videos it warns that 'modifications' will void any warranty. I'm not an expert how am I supposed to open my laptop up myself??? And obviously this will become an issue in the future if I can't install it properly - I have zero computer modification experience or knowledge. I decided to think on this for awhile, but then they emailed me saying if I don't reply within 48 hours they will assume the issue has been resolved and close my case. So reluctantly I agreed to send my laptop in again under standard procedure, meaning everything will have to be reinstalled.
They told me that and I quote "in light of the fact that this issue has arisen subsequent to a recent repair, we will waive any fees associated with this service". They sent me what they call a RMA, and this time they did not charge me the pick up and diagnostic fee ($99). I agreed, accepted the terms and arranged for the pick up.
However, on the morning of the pick up, someone from Razer emails me again, saying "Good day! My humble apologies for any inconvenience caused. I wanted to inform you that we have reviewed your case and consulted with our repair team. It appears that the current issue with your device is not related to the previous battery replacement. Instead, you are experiencing screen flickering. In this case, we will need to proceed with a repair service that will be under chargeable process." What rubbish, good day???
Shocked, I emailed them back saying that it's ridiculous how do they even know its not related without checking? I never had this problem before, it started right after I got my laptop back from the razer repair center... and you're going back on your word for whatever 90 day warranty and this RMA that I already processed... and you're only notifying me of this the morning of my laptop pick up?
"Please let us know if you would like to move forward with the repair" - Honestly, backed into a corner now. How can I trust them? If I argue and refuse to pay, what if they mess my laptop up more or just take it in and not do anything? Or they can just come up with some reason why it's not related to my battery replacement and make me pay anyway? How would I know whether this is the truth or not? This is even more frustrating because I can't call to speak to anyone, they don't reply emails promptly even during office hours, and your case is not managed by just one person. So its multiple help desk people not one person seeing your problem through from start to end.
Just felt the need to share this with anyone considering getting a razer laptop, this is still an ongoing issue that I'm hoping to resolve. Honestly, I only found out about this battery bloat issue after I bought it but I didn't think it'll happen to me. The laptop looks good and runs well until it doesn't... Then you're stuck dealing with horrible service and it's just not worth the trouble and headspace. Also, the laptops run REALLY hot, its hard to use if you're not in an aircon environment or using an external keyboard. Not to mention they are expensive! I'd expect better for paying so much... It's really not worth it and I really regret buying my razer blade.
UPDATE: Tried posting this to the official razer community but they deleted my post...
https://preview.redd.it/nfvuduc5hp1d1.jpg?width=2298&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a09f748ef46a20b5408ee9cc53abf5b911a0fbed

An associate of mine recently committed suicide. He was a Master Sergeant in the United States Air Force. On November 28, 2022, he went onto the Langley AFB in Hampton, Virginia and hung himself. When I heard of the sad news, I was in shock and disbelief and I was devastated! I hadn’t seen or heard from him in about four or five years but we had a history together. I cared for him as a friend.
I was an Air Force wife for about ten years. In 2011, my ex-husband and I had gotten stationed at Langley Air Force Base, in Hampton, Virginia. About four years later, in 2015, we met the Montalvos. We all hung out a few times, whether it was a movie, going out to eat or inviting them to cookouts at our home. I remember how Master Sergeant Octavio Montalvo used to always have me laughing so hard, every time we all hung out together. He had an animated way of describing situations and sharing how he would respond in those situations. He kept us laughing. These are bitter-sweet memories now because he’s gone in one of the worse ways imaginable! I heard of the situation leading up to his suicide and, the way he responded to it is, by no means, a laughing matter (at all)!
Suicide is a pain that never goes away! When we kill ourselves, we may escape our pain but we transfer it to everyone we leave behind, who is connected to us. The pain of loss that he escaped was transferred to his parents, wife, son, younger brother, sister and other close family members, as well as close and distant friends. As I stated earlier, I hadn’t spoken with Octavio in about four or five years and when I heard what happened, I broke down crying and then I wept. I wept for days afterward. I kept thinking to myself, “Not him! I can’t believe it. Not Montalvo!” I could’ve believed it to be anybody BUT…him! I remembered him as the happy, funny jokester. But life — one of the worst parts of life — got ahold of him and wouldn’t let go. So he let go. And he left behind a lot of broken hearts. What he did hurt people that he never thought it would hurt. It affected people that he didn’t believe cared. Over a month later, I shed tears as I wrote this blog about him. It still hurts. I hurt for him. I still keep thinking, “There’s no do-overs. He’s not coming back. It’s over”. And that’s so very, very, very, very sad to me!
We never know who we affect with our permanent absence from this earth. The lies in our head tell us that no one cares about us and that those we care about will be better off without us. I couldn’t tell Montalvo, but I want to take the opportunity to tell any suicidal person who reads this, to give it one more day! ONE MORE DAY! PLEASE! — ONE. MORE. DAY! I can promise you that time makes a difference! I’ve been there myself. I’ve lived the extremely reckless life, not caring and hoping to die. I’ve strongly desired to just fall asleep and not wake up again. I’ve cried myself to sleep many nights. And I’ve woken up crying, many times, with tears streaming down the sides of my face before I could even open my eyes from my sleep. I’ve overdosed. I’ve raced down the road going close to 100 miles per hour, beating the steering wheel and wanting to die. I’ve tried to buy a gun to blow my brains out. And I’ve tried to hang myself too — but the door broke. I wrestled with suicidal ideations and attempts for about twenty years. All I needed was one more day.
Tomorrow came and it didn’t get better. So, I needed one more day! The next day came and things were worse! So, I needed one more day! MY GOD!!!! I needed one more day! I wouldn’t be here, living a better life, had I succeeded in any of my suicidal attempts. I wouldn’t be here as a living testimony to the goodness that one more day brings. Somebody needs me! Somebody needs the hope of my life story. Somebody needs you too and they need the hope of your life story!
Oftentimes, it gets WAY worse, before it gets better. And that’s the truth! But, what’s also true is that, when it gets worse, it means that it’s about to get better! Maybe not today, tomorrow, next week or next year. But, I can guarantee you one thing: with Jesus, it has no choice but to get better! I’m remembering a quote from a prison inmate I used to correspond with. He said, “Tough times don’t last; tough people do”. You’re stronger than you think! You’ve been through worse! Everything you’ve been through has made you stronger … TOUGHER!
The Lord God, Yahweh, is training you for a battle that’s only suited for the best! You’re chosen and destined for a greatness that no one can fulfill like YOU can fulfill it! It’s like the Marines. Not just anyone can join and make it through the Marine Corp (or any other military branch)! You have to have GRIT! You have to be tough. And it starts with training the MIND! You’ve come way too far in life — in the training — to give up now! There is no turning back. So you may as well put another foot forward and take one more step. Rest, if you must, but don’t give up! Because it gets a whole lot better and, when life is at its hardest, that means a rest-break is right around the corner! You’re not as weak as you were when you first started. You have core strength now. Look back over your life and see how far you’ve come. You’ve said that you couldn’t make it before but you did! Your resume says that you’re a survivor. One of the few. One of the proud! Give it one more day because suicide is not the answer. Suicide is actually the pain that never goes away!
— NaTarsha Harris

1. In 2024, Zayn Malik told Nylon, "[Using Tinder has] not been too successful for me, I'll be honest. Everyone accused me of catfishing. They're like, 'What are you using Zayn Malik's pictures for?' I've been kicked off once or twice."
2. During a 2024 appearance on Getting Grilled with Curtis Stone, Teri Hatcher said, "I've tried them all, and I tried my latest one. I tried Hinge...You know, I thought, I'm gonna say to the universe that I am open and vulnerable, and I'm putting myself out there. That's what I thought my gesture of joining that Hinge app would be. And then they kicked me off."
3. In 2021, Leslie Jones tweeted, "Ok why did @hinge banned me I literally just signed up yesterday! And they don’t even tell you why. So fucking lame after taking my money! [sic]"
4. In 2022, Peyton List told Entertainment Tonight, "I went on a dating app, and I got kicked off because they thought I was a fraud. But it was me!"
5. Appearing on Jimmy Kimmel Live in 2019, Billy Eichner said, "I've been on Tinder for, like, seven years, and I'm very nice. I don't do anything naughty or weird, you know, I'm a normal person. They banned me all of a sudden. They didn't give me an explanation. They just said, 'You violated the terms of use.' And I said, 'I've been single for seven years; you violated the terms of use!' I didn't violate anything."
6. After a breakup, Demi Lovato tried to reactivate their Raya account, only to get rejected from the app.
7. In 2022, Lewis Capaldi told the podcast The Diary of a CEO, "I've just been kicked off of Tinder because, I think, people think I'm fake. So I've been kicked off of Bumble, Tinder, Hinge."
8. In a 2021 Instagram post, Paulina Porizkova said, "OK. What's up @hinge? I signed up a while back and was booted off instantly because I had violated guidelines. I didn't even get to post my photo. My name, it seems, is against guidelines? I called, I emailed. No one bothered to reply."
9. Appearing on Watch What Happens Live with Andy Cohen in 2020, Sam Smith said, "I joined this dating site called Hinge in the UK, and they chucked me off of it after one night cause they thought I was a catfish pretending to be me."
10. In 2018, Andy Cohen told The Ellen Show, "I am on Tinder, and there is a gay dating app that I'm on that I keep getting kicked off of because they think I'm impersonating Andy Cohen. And they're like, 'Your photos don't meet our guidelines.' And I keep trying. I'm like, 'No, it is me.'"
11. In a since-deleted tweet from 2019, Sharon Stone said, "I went on the @bumble dating sight and they closed my account. Some users reported that it couldn’t possibly be me! Hey @bumble, is being me exclusionary? Don’t shut me out of the hive."
12. Quote tweeting Sharon Stone's post, singer Conor Maynard added, "This happened to me on both @Tinder and @hinge ... any help guys?"
13. In 2021, Alicia Silverstone told The Drew Barrymore Show, "A few years ago, I tried to get on one of the dating apps, and I put up a fake profile because I wasn't comfortable yet being me. And then I got kicked off; I got banned."
14. In 2018, Stassi Schroeder Clark tweeted, "Raya kicked me off twice over a year and a half ago for 'talking about it.'"
15. And finally, on a 2023 episode of his podcast IMPAULSIVE, Logan Paul said, "I tried that app, Raya, and within 24 hours, I got some matches. And within 24 hours, I was kicked off the app with a, like, put together user interface message that said, 'You have violated community guidelines. Because of this, Raya has decided not to...' And then that's it. That's how this ended."

Link to article

so a little bit of a preface: we've only been together 1 year but he was in a long term relationship from the age of ~13 to ~20 years old. he's told me before he was unsure about us being super committed because he was in SUCH a committed relationship for so long (i.e: they did EVERYTHING together, because her parents weren't in the picture a whole lot due to their professions) so he said he was still trying to figure himself out as an individual (which i was and am 100% okay with, we're still super young and im still figuring myself out too!) BUT this is MY first very serious relationship, i've been in other relationships but i always knew they were temporary and never felt about those people the ways i feel about my current boyfriend.
onto the story: he's been having a really tough few days. he's been very short with me and has sounded completely uninterested in my existence anytime i've talked to him in the past few days but i brushed it off and tried to remain understanding. today though i felt like he was being the mean person he was being to himself in his head, to me. i'm a very understanding and supportive person in general but especially to him because i love him. so by the end of the day we were sitting in the gym parking lot when he said he needed to do a favor for his mom but didn't have his debit card on him in order to do the favor. he asked if he could use apple pay, i said yes and tried to explain it to him but he was in a bad mood and wasn't trying to hear me out and insisted on going home to find his debit card yelling at me "that's the only way it's going to work." i said okay, no problem and held back my tears as he got out of my car and into his own. he softened up a bit and told me to have a good work out, i told him i was just going to go home. i was feeling defeated and not particularly motivated to workout anymore and so i gave him back the energy drink he bought me and we played a game of hot potato before i finally put it back in his car. long story short, i accidentally ran the drink over and he called me and yelled at me about it.
we had a very heated discussion about the way he was treating me today for about 30 mins before calming down and both apologizing for our parts played. then i drove to his house so we could kiss & make up, essentially. when i got to his house we started talking about things again and he said he felt like a disappointment and a fuck up. so, i started trying to help him sort through these feelings because i don't think those things about him and neither does anyone else around him.
we talked for about an 1.5 hrs and the conversation finally ended because he said, and i quote, "MY problems are MY problems, they're not for you to begin picking my brain and trying to solve them. i don't want to open up to you, i don't want to tell you everything that's on my mind. i don't want you or need you solving my problems or giving me advice on how to live my life. i don't want or need a therapist, if i do open up to you it's not because i want advice from you. i don't spend time with you for your advice. i'll live and learn, let me live."
i apologized for overstepping his boundary and told him i would no longer give him advice on his issues.
my issue now is, where do we go from here? how are we supposed to build anything or truly feel anything for each other if he isn't willing to be open and honest? i don't WANT to therapize him, i just want to help him through his issues now and in the future so we can continue to build something together.
am i overreacting and being overbearing? is this normal? i'm a very solution driven person, and it seems to me like he just wants to dwell in his feelings and frankly in his self-pity. he says all of these horrible things about himself to me, and i just don't see those qualities in him that he sees so i try to help him see himself from my point of view and get to the bottom of why he feels this way. is that wrong?

Okay I'm gonna get a few bugbears out of the way, because I have seen some shitty takes and people here so to scare them off: Sakura is gonna be the main character, deal with it. There are gonna be LGBT characters, boo fucking hoo, cry me a river. I have ships and will ship them. And I'm going to change the magic system a bit. If these things bother you, move on. There are a million fics that are to your liking, you just need to do a bit of googling and scrolling.
My fic is my way of practicing writing action and powescaling. I do like the show but there are problems. Let's face it, Kishimoto is not the best writer and overlooked a character that he didn't mean to be central and just the "set of tits the boys can fight over" but having this character be in the same squad as them and thus in the middle of the action. And by the time he realized "oops she's technically a main character" it was too late and Sakura as a character is cursed and everyone who acts as her in anything and everything faces death threats, stalking, and other forms of harassment. The fact he never saw this shit coming shows he isn't the greatest writer. (Though I'm not either.)
Okay now with the bugbears thoroughly pointed out, let's get to the main issues I've noticed and am going to address in this fanfic but please note: I am not saying I'm a better writer than Kishimoto.
I'm in no way saying I'm better than Kishimoto. Kishimoto is a wonderful writer but he's not the best, nor is he the worst. However, I have the benefit of not having to deal with a publishing company breathing down my neck and forcing certain constrains on me. I have complete creative freedom here.
Then why am I coming here?
I want to see if there are issues that I didn't notice in the story of Naruto. Arcs not addressed, things not followed up on etc. I'm not a big brained Naruto nerd that knows everything about everything in Naruto. So I want to others to to point out things that I can avoid and tackle before I end up running head first into those holes.
What I have so far that I know and will be addressing:
1.) Sakura becomes a powerful and main character.
To address this, I'm making the story centric around Sakura, yes Naruto, Sasuke and Kakashi are there and they all are a team but Sakura isn't fully reliant on them. Sakura has her own goals and aims outside of them. For instance, she became a Shinobi because she didn't know what to do with her life. She wanted to find what it is she can do as a person and felt that being a Shinobi would be the best way to find herself and find what she wants to do and benefit her village.
Her family is still a civilian family and fully support her choice. Sakura still has a crush on Sasuke but she is more reserved about it, not constantly crying and pining about him, rather she is more of "how the hell do I even approach him about my feelings? Would he even reciprocate?" Kind of over thinker about it.
Her treatment of Naruto is more reserved to an eyeroll and your occasional Leroy Jethro Gibbs light smack on the back of the head type of girl. There may be times where she will growl at him and actually scream at him but those will be rare and situational.
Sakura will have her own Jutsu crafted on her own and be able to be on par with her peers. She will be on demon timing and will be a menace on the battlefield in the best way possible.
2.) Chakra Scaling
I'm planning on treating this the way Mana is treated in League of Legends instead of the "Chakra amount= Power" that Kishimoto uses.
To quote a certain Celestial Dragon in League, "Imagine what you can do with a bigger canvas" and "Mages are like infants trying to grasp at the machinery behind reality. At least you have a plausible excuse."
Chakra is merely a tool and the more control you have over it, the stronger the Jutsu and the less hand seals you have to use. To better explain it lets look at it using the Sanin and a few Kage.
In my fanfic the power scaling would be like this with these characters.
Tsunade is stronger than Tobirama and Hashirama and has more utility than them.
Tobirama and Hashirama are stronger than Jiraiya, Hiruzen, and Orochimaru.
Jiraiya is stronger than Hiruzen.
Hiruzen, Minato, and Orochimaru are all equal in strength.
This is the scaling. This does not mean that these characters are weak. Far from it. They do not suck at using their chakra efficiently, far from it. But it's not to the same level as Tsunade's chakra control.
To put it simply all Medical Ninja are practically Jonin without the title, but they're not Kage level. For Tsuande, she doesn't even need to think about her control over her chakra, it's not even second nature. It's like breathing to her. If Tsunade is a pro gymnast, then the others are body builders. Some will have good balance and flexibility, but it's not to her degree if that makes sense.
They each have different focuses and specialties. Hiruzen and Orochimaru for instance love to study Jutsu, but that's that. They don't have the level of control over their chakra as Tsunade and thus cannot perform Medical Ninjutsu despite knowing it exists and knowing a lot about it, they could try to brute force it but they'd end up hurting themselves or somebody else.
If they were all to use the same Jutsu, say for instance a Fire Ball Jutsu. Tsunade's fireball would be fairly big but last longer and burn hotter than the others because of her sheer precision alone.
3.) Time with the Konoha 11
The fanfic is gonna be LOOOOOONG like really long. There will be MANY chapters before we even get anywhere near the Chunin Exams. We will be meeting the other characters long before we even get there (except the Sand Siblings, they will be introduced in the Exams)
4.) Byakugan and Sharingan shenanigans
I'm still trying to navigate this. Ideas are welcome. Please. Lend me your big brains.
This what I can think of off the top of my head. If you have anything else I should look out for. Please just tell me. If you want an idea of what's going to happen.... My page is free to look at, just click on my icon. If you want an idea of my writing and how it's gonna be tackled, please look at the concept chapter entitled "Disasterology".
Thank you whomever had the balls to read all of this.
I don't do TLDRs. Suffer.