How we could save Star Trek: Lower Decks and create Star Trek: Legacy

Mike O'Sullivan • May 2024 • mike@cerritosenterprises.com
Executive summary
We can save Lower Decks and create Legacy, but it will take more than appeals to Paramount. It will take money. These series can be fostered by a group of business savvy Star Trek fans. It would be a profit making venture that could also give Star Trek fans more of what they want.
Key takeaways:

• I'm not being a downer, but we need to face reality.
• Letter writing campaigns and petitions will not save Lower Decks or create Legacy.
• Doing so would take money.
• Investors could make a good profit from those shows.
• I propose here a plan that is a long shot but could work.

Historical background
Star Trek TOS was the first show ever extended because of a letter writing campaign. NBC and Desilu executives were impressed enough by the campaign to extend the show one more season.
At the time, determining television ratings was a young science. Shows were only rated by percent of total viewers. Demographics were not taken into account. Only a few years later, NBC executives realized that Star Trek was actually a big hit. It attracted young, middle class Americans… one of the most sought after markets in the world. Ever since then, Star Trek has had a symbiotic but complicated relationship with fans and networks.
Recent background
Unlike TV ratings in the 1960s, streaming services know quite a bit about viewership. They know which shows are popular and the demographics of those viewers. They know exactly how much money each show is bringing in. Apparently, Star Trek isn't doing well enough to attract their investment dollars.
Paramount is in the midst of serious financial difficulties. Their stock has declined by 50% in the last year. Their streaming service, Paramount+, lost $490 million last year, which was an improvement over the previous year when they lost about $575 million. All of Paramount's revenue streams are down, they're over leveraged, and they have a cash flow problem. [https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/business/business-news/paramount-streaming-loss-subs-1235838684/] Paramount is struggling to make ends meet, so they're making cuts. We wish they weren't cutting back on Star Trek, but tough decisions have to be made.
Executives presumably already knew that there would be campaigns to save Lower Decks and create Legacy. They've already taken that into account. Unless a campaign is overwhelming, it's unlikely to change their minds.
The plan
It's important to understand that this plan is based on profit, not fandom. While there is certainly a place in the world of commerce for doing something because it's cool, profit is the engine that drives business.
I propose here a plan in which a group of investors form a company devoted to investing in Star Trek. This plan would reduce Paramount's risk while leveraging the popularity of Star Trek. As business ventures go, the plan would be relatively low risk because it only moves forward if certain contracts could be arranged. However, even with contracts signed, it would take a significant investment to get the cameras rolling.
First, let's look at some numbers. I'm working from memory here, but I think these numbers are close enough for an overview of the situation.
It costs about $3 million to produce an episode of Lower Decks. It costs about $8 million for an episode of Discovery, so Legacy would probably cost around the same amount. For the purposes of this discussion, we'll only look at Lower Decks. The same principles would apply to Legacy on a larger scale. A ten episode season of Lower Decks would therefore cost around $30 million. Hollywood accounting can get tricky… an expense item can get allocated among multiple projects that might not seem related. Therefore, a per-episode estimate is fuzzy and doesn't necessarily extrapolate into a season-long budget. We'll go with a season budget of $30 million here. Reality will adjust those numbers as necessary.
In terms of corporate structure, there are two Paramount divisions involved in producing Lower Decks: Paramount Studios and Paramount+. This plan drops Paramount+ out of the equation, instead relying on other streaming services like Netflix.
So let's get to the actual plan.
A group of investors would form a company called Cerritos Enterprises. Those investors would probably be Star Trek fans… the tech world is filled with Trekkies. However, remember that this is a profit making endeavor, so fanship isn't a requirement.
Cerritos Enterprises wouldn't initially need to raise a huge amount of money (as startups go). $1 million would probably be a good start, enough to show that the company is a real, established startup that's ready to do business. They would need to provide evidence that they can raise more funds if the deal goes forward. That makes it relatively low risk because more money isn't invested until there are signed contracts. (I'm going to stop saying "relatively" every time I say "low risk". Just assume the risk is always relative to the general risk of any business startup.)
Having established credibility, Cerritos Enterprises makes proposals to two companies: Paramount and a streaming service, say Netflix.
To Paramount, they propose hiring Paramount Studios to produce Lower Decks. That would appeal to Paramount because it would be low risk: they don't have to proceed until they have at least some cash in hand.
To Netflix they propose that Netflix would carry the show. Netflix would be the biggest risk taker: they can't know for sure how popular the show would be on their platform. However, Netflix is in a good position to take risks. They made $5.4 billion profit last year, up from the previous year. In fact, they have been consistently profitable every year since 2011. [https://www.businessofapps.com/data/netflix-statistics/] They're a good candidate for a risky entertainment venture.
The proposals involve sharing expenses. Each player would contribute money. For example, Cerritos Enterprises would kick in $10 million, as would Paramount and Netflix. Paramount's investment would be in-kind… they produce the show with the knowledge that Netflix is already ready to buy. Netflix would need to kick in some money before delivery to get production going.
Allocating profits would get complicated. Paramount might want more than just payment for producing the show; they would want revenue based on the popularity of the show. Netflix might not be satisfied with just adding a great show to their platform: they might want a share of merchandising or of future expansion of the franchise. All of that would have to be worked out.
If we go with these numbers, Cerritos Enterprises would need to pony up about $10 million. To give some perspective, $25 million is considered the sweet spot for first round investment in a tech startup. Most startups fail, so an investment of $10 million in a low risk venture wouldn't phase the world of investors. It has a better promise of profit at a lower investment than most startups.
In terms of who would put up the money, we can generally divide investors into two categories: macroinvestors and microinvestors.
Macroinvestors are the peoplecompanies that put up millions of dollars for a venture. They're often called "angel investors'' because they put money into projects that most people wouldn't view as promising. Angel investors would form the bulk of investment.
I would love to see the project include Star Trek fans (like me) as microinvestors. However, that might be difficult or impossible. Securities and Exchange Commission regulations make it difficult for small investors to get in on startups. (Personal note: this is a situation that I think should change. Little guys like me should be able to get in on the action.) You can't just crowdfund a project by selling equity. That being said, fans could be a promising source of money. Trekkies probably skew towards higher incomes, and they're passionate about the franchise they love. I'm sure quite a few fans (like me) would make small investments just for the sheer excitement of getting involved in Star Trek. If for no other reason, I would like to see Cerritos Enterprises include microinvestors so the fan base could have more say in the future of our franchise. A company like MicroVentures (https://microventures.com/) might be able to help implement microinvestment.
Cerritos Enterprises would benefit from having a Star Trek star on the board of directors. Jonathan Frakes would be a good choice. Not only is he beloved by the Star Trek community, he's an experienced director and producer. He knows the business. He could attract Trekkie investors, then he could talk business with them. George Takei is also an experienced entertainment producer. There are probably other business savvy stars who could get involved.
Conclusion
Entertainment industry professionals will undoubtedly find flaws in this plan. That's a good thing: it helps make the plan better. However, Hollywood is like any other industry: money talks. A pile of cash on the table will get their attention.
This is an ambitious plan, but Trekkies are an innovative group. Making things happen is what we do.
Let's make this happen.
Mike O'Sullivan [mike@cerritosenterprises.com](mailto:mike@cerritosenterprises.com) Star Trek fan

The last 7 years of my life has felt like falling down stairs in slow motion. It’s pretty much been constant loss; divorce, having to move back to the hometown I hate, the deaths of multiple loved ones, loss of transportation, employment, belongings, all this with the pandemic in the background. It’s been a tough time. Throughout all this a dear friend had been encouraging me to move to the city/state she lives. Citing the opportunities and culture there and how she knew that I’d love it. I didn’t doubt her at all, I was sure I would. I never took the leap because I didn’t completely trust my motives. See, I’ve been in love with her (silently) for 20+ years at this point. A couple months ago she confessed to feeling the same for just as long. It was a revelation. After that were daily, hours long phone calls about all the things. We’d decided to take the leap and make a go of it. I’ve learned many times over recently that life is fleeting. And though a fairytale ending was not guaranteed, she was without a doubt worth the risk. We told our families and mutual friends all about it. I began preparing for the move; selling what I could, throwing away or donating what I couldn’t. Most of my belongings are packed up. In mid March I went to see her, I had a lovely time. It’s a profound experience to kiss someone you’ve thought about kissing for decades. I loved every minute of that all too brief trip. A week to the day after I returned she said she thought that maybe I shouldn’t move in right away per the original plan. She has children and never had a boyfriend living in the house with all of them. I understood, completely. It would just mean delaying my arrival until I could secure enough funds to secure an apartment once I got there. I could deal with that, I thanked her for being honest and told her that I wasn’t interested in complicating her life and that I would do what it took for us to be successful. After that conversation I didn’t hear from her for over a week. Which was different than what had become normal for us. I finally talked to her and we agreed (I thought) on my new plan of action. Since that time she’s essentially ghosted me. She hasn’t called or responded to a text in over a month. Frankly, I’m devastated. I stopped texting her because not getting a response started to make me feel like a real loser. I still lover her and I still stand behind my desire to not complicate her life or cause her any strife. That’s the main reason I haven’t called and asked for an explanation. But at this point, after everything that’s happened in my life this feels like the final blow that’s broken me completely. I’m so incredibly sad, to the point of nausea most days. Sitting here amongst my half packed belongings wondering what the hell happened. It’s been so bad I called a helpline the other week. I’m not okay, I’m doing everything I can to hold on and ride it out. I’ve tried reaching out to friends to explain how bad I’m doing, but I can’t tell if I’m not being clear enough or if no one has the bandwidth to be there for me cause it feels like they aren’t. I don’t know what to do at this point. I just feel more broken than I ever have. This hurts more than my divorce and the infidelity that caused it. I feel like I’ve lost a friend and a lover in one fell swoop making all the times and things we shared painful to reflect on. And I don’t know why.

Good morning sisters and brothers, fellow Saints of our aspirational Zion. I was asked to speak and allowed to decide what the topic would be. After a lot of consideration I felt inspired to speak about being Actively Engaged in a Good Cause and how that relates to the full name of the church.
I was glad when President Nelson decided to put more emphasis on the full name of the church. Not that I mind using the term Mormon, but because I do find the full name of the church to be significant. When the church was organized in 1830 it was called the Church of Christ. In 1834 the members voted to change the name of the church to the Church of the Latter-day Saints. Then in 1838 Joseph had a revelation for the name to be The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. While this effectively combined the two previous names, it also highlights something that I think most people overlook. Namely that the church is not only Jesus’s church, but that the church also belongs to us, the Latter-day Saints. We too have ownership of the church. While this may sound strange at first, it actually also fits very well with another concept that Joseph Smith taught: Theodemocracy.
Joseph spoke of this most actively the year before his death when running for President of the United States and when the Council of Fifty was created. The idea also holds in it that while God is in charge, we also have ownership and must have a say, actively vote, propose new ideas, and generally be actively engaged in moving things forward. It is not a theocracy with a fake voting system attached like that of North Korea. However, we have largely seen our own tradition move from one in which we do things by common consent including adding to our canon or as in 1834 voting to change the name of the church, towards something much more akin to voting in North Korea. This has coincided with other shifts in which we have taken less and less ownership of our church and as a result failed to properly sustain and support our leaders.
It is unfair to our leaders for us to sit back and wait for them to do frankly most of the heavy lifting when it comes to the running and functioning of our church, stake, and ward. In the past when I’ve been in callings that required me to be overseeing the assignments of home teaching or really any other church assignments, my experience has been that occasionally some inspiration will strike for some of the assignments, but that for the majority, I felt like I was left to figure out myself what assignments seemed to make the most sense. I know that many leaders that I have spoken to on this topic have also had such experiences. When we as members speak with our leaders, share information with them, it makes it much easier to make the best decisions. Without that feedback much more is left to guesswork.
We need to support and sustain our leaders, but this becomes difficult or challenging if we bring some assumptions to the table when considering how we do this. A major one as I see it is when we put too much trust in the arm of the flesh and grant our leaders infallibility or the lesser but largely equivalent functional infallibility.
As the saying goes: “Catholics say that the Pope is infallible, but none of them believe it. Mormons say that the Prophet is fallible, but none of them believe it.” Brigham Young recognized the potential for harm in this setting and said:
"I am fearful [the Saints will] settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken the influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way.” – Brigham Young 1862 General Conference (quoted in General Conference of the church in 1963 and in 1989)
And this one is also important:
"And none are required to tamely and blindly submit to a man because he has a portion of the priesthood. We have heard men who hold the priesthood remark, that they would do anything they were told to do by those who presided over them, if they knew it was wrong; but such obedience as this is worse than folly to us; it is slavery in the extreme; and the man who would thus willingly degrade himself should not claim a rank among intelligent beings, until he turns from his folly. A man of God… would despise the idea. Others, in the extreme exercise of their almighty authority have taught that such obedience was necessary, and that no matter what the saints were told to do by their presidents, they should do it without asking any questions. When Elders of Israel will so far indulge in these extreme notions of obedience as to teach them to the people, it is generally because they have it in their minds to do wrong themselves.” – Millennial Star, vol.14 #38, pp. 593-95
Yet does this functionally happen in the church? Do we follow this council to find out for ourselves instead of simply assuming everything from our leaders is divine? Apostle Charles W. Penrose, who would later serve as counselor to President Smith, declared:
"President Wilford Woodruff is a man of wisdom and experience, and we respect him, but we do not believe his personal views or utterances are revelations from God; and when ‘Thus saith the Lord’, comes from him, the saints investigate it: they do not shut their eyes and take it down like a pill.” – Millennial Star 54:191
Do we do this? When the prophet says “Thus saith the Lord” do we take the time to investigate it? Do we remember President Kimball’s reaction to Elder Benson’s talk on the “14 fundamentals of following the prophet”?
"Spencer felt concern about the talk, wanting to protect the Church against being misunderstood as espousing ultraconservative politics or an unthinking “follow the leader” mentality. The First Presidency again called Elder Benson in to discuss what he had said and asked him to make explanation to the full Quorum of the Twelve and other General Authorities… A First Presidency spokesman Don LeFevre reiterated to the press the day after the speech that it is “simply not true” that the Church President’s “word is law on all issues—including politics.” – Lengthen Your Stride – Working Draft, by Edward Kimball
I’ve had the opportunity to know some great Mormons who do take this approach, but I’ve also known many who treat quotes from church leaders like downloaded messages from God (no human filters involved).
If we can believe that God is capable of inspiring our leaders, surely we can believe God is capable of letting us know when they’re wrong. If instead we assume that their judgment is always superior to our own, perhaps we’re helping to put up a massive iron gate.
"How often has the Holy Spirit tried to tell us something we needed to know but couldn’t get past the massive iron gate of what we thought we already knew?" – Dieter Uchtdorf 2012 Worldwide Leadership Training
Moses once opined “Would that all the Lord's people were prophets, that the Lord would put his Spirit on them!” We have all been confirmed members of the church and in that confirmation told to receive the Holy Ghost. It is easy to forget that when the spirit tells us something, that is a member of the Godhead speaking to us. If we can believe that God can give guidance to our leaders surely we can also believe God can give us guidance.
Another important and often overlooked point is the context to this oft quoted verse:
"We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion." -D&C 121:39
This statement wasn’t given in a vacuum. It is in the middle of a long discussion of priesthood and priesthood authority. This is talking specifically about priesthood leaders. When we read that “many are called but few are chosen,” we’re reading that many priesthood leaders abuse their power and only few truly honor it. The saints in Joseph’s day understood this. I think we’ve sanitized it over the years to make it seem like an aside, an intermission on the discussion of priesthood. This statement is as true now as ever. This verse, with its proper context, needs to be a lesson for us as members. We need to sustain and support our leaders. This doesn’t mean following them blindly. This doesn’t mean we must become “yes-men” to them. This does mean pray for them to be chosen instead of just called. This does mean to influence our leaders to do God’s will. Remember, one of Brigham’s concerns about us acting as if all our leaders decisions were divine is that it will “weaken the influence [we] could give to [our] leaders.”
What questions our church leaders will take to the Lord are impacted by our own openness to those things. In 1977 President Kimball expressed concern that if the Race-ban on priesthood was removed that there would be pushback from members in the American South and from some in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. When President Hinckley was asked in an interview about the Gender-ban on priesthood his response was that “there’s no agitation for it.” Until we better engage in our own history and understand how we got to where we are now it will be very difficult if not impossible for us as members to be prepared for the removal of the current gender-ban on priesthood.
Sometimes we might justify our own spiritual laziness by saying that while our leaders are fallible that God will never let them lead us astray, granting them a sort of functional infallibility. Nevermind that this was first said when my 3rd-great-grandpa President Woodruff was trying to convince members not to leave over the Manifesto. Nevermind that it means that we’re denying our leaders their agency by assuming that God removes their ability to make mistakes in their callings. Maybe some make such a statement more nuanced. Maybe they think that our leaders can make mistakes, but they won’t be majosignificant mistakes. Well, what is and isn’t significant depends a lot on who you are and how you’re being affected by it. I’m thinking that the women and children who were slaughtered in prophet-sanctioned genocide in the Bible considered that a significant mistake. I’m thinking that the thousands denied temple blessings their entire lives because of the color of their skin might consider that significant.
Let’s just recognize that few are chosen and that we need to give our leaders constructive/interactive support. We place a lot of responsibility on our leaders and they are very likely to make mistakes. Because they are human and doing their best, but as humans we all err from time to time. Recognizing the mistakes of our leaders is essential to giving them true support; it is vital to sustaining them. I would hope that we would avoid enabling or cheerleading bad decisions that friends or family are about to make. Pointing out why a decision will be or was problematic is what we expect of people who we truly love and support us, because it helps us to avoid pain and pitfalls and enables us to be our best.
Here’s a story from our little section of Salt Lake City in which members recognized the potential for mistakes and took ownership of our church. On August 23rd, 1896 Stake President Angus M. Cannon proposed a man to be the bishop of a new ward which was to be divided from the Sugar House Ward. The congregation voted against the proposed new bishop. President Angus M. Cannon then purportedly shouted "Sit down! and shut your mouths, you have no right to speak!" When Cannon engaged in a shouting match with the dissenting congregation, a ward member and policeman threatened to arrest the stake president for disturbing the peace. President Cannon more calmly repeated his attempt but was voted down "again several times." The Secretary of the First Council of the Seventy was in attendance and wrote in his journal: "I have been taught that the appointing power comes from the priesthood and the sustaining power from the people and that they have the right of sustaining or not sustaining appointees.
When it comes to being actively engaged in church endeavors our neighborhood and the general Sugar House area has done a lot. The "stake missionary program" began in the Granite Stake under President Frank Taylor in the early 1900s. It was an idea presented to President Taylor who then prayerfully considered trying it out as a stake. It proved successful and was later picked up by the General Authorities who made it a church-wide program.
The seminary program was also started in our stake after Joseph Merrill (a newly called member of the Granite Stake Presidency) felt inspired to start it and worked out agreements with the school board and got it going at the very new (at the time) Granite High School.
Also, in 1909 the Granite Stake started a monthly family home evening program. After counseling with many sisters and brothers in the stake, the Stake Presidency asked each family to spend Tuesday evening home together. All of these were local things which were eventually picked up and run at the church-wide level. We have a history in our area of being anxiously engaged and pioneering with new ideas.
While those are all instances of members, wards, and stakes starting programs for good causes in our area of Salt Lake City, they are just a few examples of Saints starting inspired efforts which were eventually accepted and promoted by the top church leaders. The relief society started when women in Nauvoo came together to do some good. The Primary program, Sunday school, Mutual Improvement Association, welfare/farming, organized genealogy efforts, and Young Adult programs all also started as members and local leaders were anxiously engaged and thereby gave influence to the top church leaders.
So as we consider how we can more actively engage in the church and look at what we can do now that would help to further the kingdom of God, I’d like to share a few things that have been on my mind which I feel would be steps which we can do now and which doesn’t require any new doctrines, revelations, or organizational adjustments from our leadership.

1. Give leaders their agency and remove the false idol of functional infallibility

I’ve already said a lot about this. The only thing I’ll add is to encourage everyone to read and learn about our history. The church history department has been putting out a lot of new, well-researched material, and there is a very high chance that it will be different than how you learned about things over the last several decades. Interestingly, most historically thorny topics become vastly easier to deal with when we stop denying leaders agency and ability to get things wrong.

1. Stop turning into a time capsule of the 1950s

This is really a small thing, but sometimes small things can have an outsized impact. Assuming someone comes into church for the first time, they will likely be a little weirded out because in dress and culture they walked into a time capsule of the 1950s. The Amish did this with mid-1800s, some Mennonites have as well. FLDS have with when they split in the 1930s/40s. These groups that have followed this pattern of freezing time and culture because they have been integrated into their religious practice are generally ones that are not really growing and have little-to-no impact or relevance in society. If we want to do the most good and build the most bridges, it is easier to do if we don’t continue falling into this pattern. Any efforts on our part to make our meetings look like a place that people in the public could come into and not feel out of place are steps in this direction. Dresses, suits and ties aren’t part of Christ’s gospel. Missionary clothing is changing for similar reasons. New guidelines for missionaries include allowing sisters to wear pants and Elders to go without jackets, so surely we can extend the same to our church attendance.

1. Always speak at church as though the audience is the general public

I have many times felt like I didn’t fit in or belong at church, and many times this has been because people speaking at church have done so with the assumption that everyone in the building must share their views on a given topic. Simply imagining that a gay couple, an ex-mormon, an investigator, some in the midst of a faith crisis, and others who live in our neighborhood are in the audience will help us to make sure that as we teach our lessons, give our talks, etc. that we will do so in the most open and welcoming way possible, which frankly is how i believe Jesus would have spoken. I truly believe that if we try to do this it will drastically improve our lessons and dialogue and help to make church a place that more people want to be. It is a change that (to borrow imagery from Jesus’s parable of the sower) will be akin to tilling and prepping the soil to improve the likelihood of allowing seeds to take root.
There are near infinite ways that we can innovate and get engaged in good causes. Awake and arise, join in the cause of Zion. The aspiration of Zion is to be of one heart and one mind and have no poor among us. I think it is worth noting that being of one mind doesn’t mean agreeing on everything. It means that we are united in love; love for God and for all persons. When this is our top priority, when we worry about how our actions impact others and whether our words and actions are conveying love, we become united. I’ve been a long-time fan of Eugene England’s essay “The church is as true as the gospel.” In it he makes the case that the church is true because it is a vehicle in which we are able to actually try to put the gospel into practice. In doing so we encounter difficulties as we interact with other fallible mortals and try to navigate our interactions in a Christ-like way. We all try and this mix of imperfect people who unite in love and service can help to bring each other and others to Christ. It is my prayer that we can find ways to engage with love, and humble ourselves like little children, to change our ways as needed to come closer to Christ. I leave this with you in the name of Jesus Christ, Amen.

I've only seen a few stills from this film. It's Asian cinema and I'm not sure which country. It's just two guys in the rain that seem to be crying and the quote is something along the lines of
"Don't give me your love, I can't return it"
It's not much to go on but would hopefully this rings a bell. Appreciate any help.

Most of the posts I see about insulation/radiant barrier say the radiant barrier is not worth the $. I have a house in Texas where my electric bill is $90 during the winter, and $600 during the summer from the house not cooling off and the AC running all day. Love the constant 100 degree weather. Built in 1972 and 3000 sq feet with 6" of insulation and we bought 3 years ago.
The 3 quotes were between 7k for just a radiant barrier and a solar whirly bird, to 10k for radiant barrier and new insulation. All of them were adamant about radiant barrier. For my situation - what has been everyones experience who have houses in the south? Should I keep hunting down someone who will just do the insulation?

Martlet and Papyrus are two names that are rather famous throughout the Undertale and Undertale yellow communities. Of course, there are many things that come to mind when you here both names. Papyrus for example is the loud. arrogant, but kind skeleton that is the brother to the funny Skeleton Man (Sans). Martlet on the other hand you might remember as kind of a mother figure to clover if you support the idea of momlet or maybe just the puzzle loving bird friend of clover. Each of these characters have unique fates for each Fanfiction a member of our beloved community writes. Whether its romance, tragedy, or a simple slice of life fanfic. So where do these two falls in my little world of a second human monster war. Well, it might be a bit more complex than one might think.
​
Opening UN Archives.

The second monster human war was the most destructive war in history and resulted in the destruction of several Undertale AUs and monster race losing 90% of their population all because they followed a racist and mentally Ill scientist name Chujin. As tragic of this sounds it doesn't mean people tried to improve the aftermath and make life easier. Papyrus and Martlet are a good example of this.
Martlet was born in the human year 1959 at an unknown date. Accounts of her early life and parents have been lost to history to due Asgor and the monsters general poor record keeping with Alphy's and Chujin being the only ones who kept some records of sorts. It's possible this poor record keeping is why Chujin thought the monster population was bigger than it actually was. What we do know is Martlets part the events of what the United Nations Elimination of Monsters Coalition calls Undertale Yellow are and some of her life just before the events. It's suggested by Human historians that Martlet got into puzzles when she was possibly 12 in human years but that's just a rough idea. Interviews with her few surviving friends state that she made her first puzzle at 6 years old in monster years which is roughly 14 years old in human years. To further complicate things is the fact that different monsters age differently than others with Martlets species having the closest correlation to human years out of all monsters.
Payrpus birth and exact age are harder to track down. All we know is that he and his brother Sans (Currently living in New Ebot in Colorado. Mt Ebot is in Colorado) appeared in the underground out of nowhere in 1980 on the [Redacted] of [Redacted]. Papyrus took a job as a royal guard somewhere between 1980-1981 and met Martlet possibly around that time. We both know based on William Henderson's interview with Papyrus and a mention by Flowey that they exchanged blueprints for their respective puzzles on occasions and while Papyrus describes her as his closest friend Sans stated that "She was simply my brothers pen pal" whether this was Sans simply messing with Willaim Henderson or him saying the true we'll never know.
EVENTS OF UNDERTALE YELLOW
The turning point in Martlets life came on May 12th when a certain kid named Clover fell into the underground. Clover was born on the 4th of July 1969 though his family moved to the to the town of Ebot Colorado in 1978. He never got to meet his father until 1975 due to his father's enlistment into the Unified states of the Americas army during the Vietnam war. (1962-74. This is an Alternate Vietnam the US still loses however) When his father came back, he was a drunken and PTSD ridden mess. Clover's mother was little better as she was rather neglectful and lazy. Clovers Unhealthy Family life would play a role into going ahead with his plan to find the forgotten 6 children who had gone missing throughout the 60s and 70s. He developed a fascination with cowboys when watching western movies (Particularly the old ones) along with a cowboy attire. He wore this attire proudly. Due to his family life, he matured rapidly. When his friend Integra (The soul integrity) went missing when she was dared to climb MT Ebot it was the final nail in the coffin for him and he began to prepare himself for an expedition into the mountain. He bought a Coll-Wesson revolver and rope by stealing money from his father. (He was beaten for this) on May the 12th he climbed Mt Ebot and jumped into the underground and died.... Oh, wait no Flowey brought him back to life without him knowing. Clover then met Flowey around 30 minutes later starting his journey.
Martlet in the meantime was lazily relaxing in one of the many checkpoints in the Snowdin area. The exact time she met clover is unknown, but it was most likely 1 hour after she had sent a list of suggestions to how Payprus could improve his puzzles. Martlet originally tried to follow protocol and capture clover however after seeing how peaceful clover was, she gave up on it. Then after their failed attempt to get to the hot lands, the fiasco in the wild east, and meeting Ceroba and Chujin, Ceroba (Chujin is alive in my story, but Kanko is not and was killed by integrity according to Chujin) was revealed to want clovers soul to bring back Kanako. Chujin was horrified at the thought of killing an innocent kid and went against his wife's wishes (Unknown to the others this was a ploy to gain trust) Martlet and clover spoke briefly on a hotel rooftop before going with Starlo and Chujin to face Ceroba. Ceroba knocked Martlet, Starlo, and Chujin (Who was only pretending) out. Clover battled it out with Ceroba on the 13ths of May. Clover came close to winning until Chujin drove a knife through his back killing him. Chujin then asked Ceroba to not use clovers soul to bring back monster kind but to instead to give it to Asgor so monster kind can be free. (Chujin is still the royal scientist in my AU) Ceroba after some arguing agrees with Chujin as Martlet and Starlo begin to wake up. Chujin calls the royal guard who apprehend Starlo but Martlet Barely escapes by flying away.
Knowing her time was now limited she sent the last Blueprints to Papyrus before the royal Guard burst into her home at around midnight and captured her. Martlet and Starlo were executed by undying on the 14th of May early morning. While Martlets story came to an end her legacy and puzzles did not as Papyrus received her blueprints on the 14th and would hide them from the royal guard.
EVENTS OF THE SECOND HUMAN MONSTER WAR AND PAPYRUSES RISE TO FAME.
Papyrus would with the help of Sans create more puzzle's and preserve Martlets puzzles. Then on September 4th, 1984, Frisk fell into the underground and was killed by Undying. After this Papyrus was ordered to destroy his puzzle's as they now had no use to monster kind as the invasion of the surface was inevitable. Papyrus as a sign of things to come suggested instead of destroying the puzzles they should be used to entertain monster kind's children. Undying would allow it and Papyrus who still wanted to hunt the humans though his loyalty was shaken by martlets execution agreed to be in the first wave out of the underground. On the 10th of September the monster climbed up to the surface for the first time.
The sight was so breathtaking many simply forget that they were invading. Chujin fear that the humans would be waiting for them up on the surface ready to exterminate monster kind was proven false within the first day as no human was spotted on the first day. Chujin still refused to believe reports and still ordered the invasion forward. Papyrus spent the first day trying to make more puzzles. On the 11th the town of Ebot was spotted and attacked by Asgors army and Chujins boss monsters and axis models. Papyrus was in the attack but quickly simply broken down as he watched the monsters slaughter humans indiscriminately. What made Papyrus ultimately desert the Royal Guard was the Human police's along with the 9th National Guards battalions last stand as they bought time for the civilians to evacuate the time. Papyrus stated in his interview with William Henderson decades later "IT WAS THEN ON THAT DAY I KNEW WE HAD LOST THE WAR. THE HUMANS PROVED BOTH BRAVER AND FAR KINDER THAN THE GREAT PAPYRUS AND MONSTER KIND!! IF THE GREAT PAPYRUS COULD GO BACK IN TIME HE WOULD HAVE GLADLY FOUGHT WITH THOSE BRAVE HUMANS!!"
Papyrus and later his brother Sans would go into hiding for most of the war until 1996 when they switched sides and joined the Commonwealth of Britannia's army. They would serve in the Commonwealths army until 1998 when they both retired. It was around this time when Papyrus began his journey to help the entertainment industry and carry on Martlets puzzle making legacy. The second human monster war by the time he had retired had gone on for 14 brutal years and large amounts of homes and cities had been destroyed. Papyrus would turn his attention to entertaining the many children who had lost their fathers and mothers during the ongoing conflict by hosting's puzzle solving challenges. Many of these puzzles' Martlets puzzles, and these proved to be a favorite among human children. Sans also helped and had stopped being lazily for once in his life.
When interviewed by William Henderson and asked what inspired him to do this he stated. "THE GREAT PAPYRUS SIMPLY DOESNT WATCH AS CHILDREN CRY IN THEIR SLEEPY AND REMAIN SAD. ITS NOT WHAT THE GREAT PAPYRUS DOES." The entertainment industry caught onto what Papyrus was doing in 2000 and offered to not only to fund his puzzle challenges but to make them into a game show of sorts. The show "Papyruses puzzles" was born as a result of this and has remained popular ever since. Sans found his calling in the fast-food industry and opened up his own fast-food chain to honor Grillbies who had died during the war. Papyrus would give a lot of credit to Martlet for helping him discover puzzles and funded the building of a statue in her honor.
WHAT PAPYRUS IS DOING NOW.
Papyrus is currently these days is donating much of his money to the protection of the underground charity and has recently created the Blue Bird Puzzle Corporation (Refence to Martlet). Martlet was dug up by UNEMC soldiers (United Nations Eliminations of Monsters Coalition) and was buried under a second statue made in her honor in Snowdin next to the Statue of Clover and the 6 other souls. Papyrus pays a visit to her grave once very 6 months. An inscription on her statue reads "The one that inspired THE GREAT PAPYRUS to make puzzles."

TLDR: I'm expecting MPs any moment because I hit my democracy officer.
Do you guys know the old movie The Incredibles? I know, I know it's old and looks terrible in SEHD, but my daughter loves that movie.
As I was heading out she asked me about my cape and if I had to wear it, and ya'know, I never thought about it... But there's a thing in the movie where it shows superheroes dying because of their cape, so she asked me if I could just not wear the cape. She actually yelled at me
"NO CAPES!"
I think that's a direct quote from the movie, she seemed to be emulating someone, it was actually kinda adorable.
So I reached out to my democracy officer to inquire about the cape regulations, and I dunno what's going on in his life, but the meeting did not go well.
All I asked him was if I could not wear the cape. At first he pulled up the SEAF Publishing Directorate (I'll admit I never knew this existed) to look at the regulations and they do clearly state that all Helldivers must wear their full uniform at all times and the cape is listed in the description of the uniform.
He took this as the final word and dismissed me, and I know, I should have just accepted that and left but all I wanted to know was if there was any appeal process, or maybe a special dispensation one could use to avoid wearing the cape.
Well he stood up and started screaming at me that I needed to leave his office immediately. I couldn't believe how upset he got with a simple question so I tried to explain about the movie and my daughter....
Well... and then.... sigh... well, he said if he saw me out of uniform he would bring a treason charge against me. That really pissed me of, but then, ah geeze, then he said he would also have my daughter brought up on a civilian treason charge.
So I hit him.
I didn't think, I actually don't know what happened it was so fast. I was upset and getting more upset but when he threatened my daughter I just kinda blanked out.
So I called the paramedics, they came within 5 minutes, and I went home.
Now that I've had some time to cool off I'm pretty sure this has gone as badly as it could have, well he's not dead, there is that. But he'll be taking meals through a straw for the foreseeable future.
Anyway, if anyone knows a good SEAF Attorney I need one asap.
thanks.

TL;DR: I think I may need 2 U-Boxes, but I only want to pay for 1. What can I realistically fit into 1 box for my cross-country move?
Hi all, I'm a few weeks away from a cross-country move, & I would love some insight on what I might be able to realistically fit into 1 U-Haul U-Box.
I'm in a fairly small junior 1 bedroom at the moment, so I don't have a huge amount of stuff, but I'm worried this ultimately won't be able to fit into 1 box. I'm opting to have U-Haul's 3rd party movers load the box for me, if that makes a difference! I have:

• Couch
• Coffee table
• 2 bar stools
• TV stand
• 2 TVs
• Full length mirror
• Queen bed w/ drawers
• Queen mattress
• 3 full length lamps
• A small entryway cabinet thing
• 2 desks (one is a standing desk that can be raised, in case I might be able to load things in under it, lol)
• Small-ish Christmas tree box
• Miscellaneous boxes & items

As I'm typing this out, I'm realizing it's probably a little bit crazy to expect all of this to fit into one box lol, but when I got a quote it was ~another $1,000 for a 2nd box, & I'm hoping to avoid that extra expense if possible.
I don't think most of my stuff would be worth the extra $1,000 to keep, so I'm happy to hear that I'm being totally unrealistic here & should sell some stuff to ensure I can get everything into one box haha
Thoughts?
ETA: I just watched this video & it made me feel a little better about this, but please lmk what you think!

Hey guys! I don’t know what to name this post but it’s a complicated story I guess.. I’m also not great at English😅
Sooo me (F~25) and my ex (M~30) broke up cause we were fighting, we didn’t communicated, he was hurting me and I was hurting him. We were not in a happy place together and we both didn’t feel good and had depression. I wanted to fight for us but he is the “leave me alone in my own bubble” kind of guy. Of course i was hurt and sad about this, he is still my dream man and I love him with all my heart. I’m just not in love with this guy, he is my person. I just feel like he is such a good person, he inspires me and makes me want to be a better person. It’s weird to say but he is really my best friend and we have so much fun together, even when we are a couple or not.. I felt sad when we broke up, I just lost my soulmat. I wanted comfort and attention and also wanted to move on. So I started dating. I met a few guys, went on dates and had s3x. During we were no longer a couple we would hang out, watch movies ect like friends. We had a really good friendship for a while and then started to “date” again. It was confusing because we didn’t say anything about our break and friendship and started fighting again since I kept meeting some guys. I felt like it was just a “friends with benefits” since he told me he didn’t like me when we broke up and never said then he started to again. I also thought he was meeting other. One night we were out partying, we got drunk and started arguing again. He asked me how many guys I have been with, told me that my “bc list” is growing, in what town the guys lived and what there names were. I gave fake answers cause 1, I thought the fight would end there 2, he has nothing to do with it 3, I might felt I little ashamed since he slutshamed me and 4, I was also drunk and wanted some payback I guess.. After that he told me a bunch of things he had done with other girls, not on our break tho but prior we met. I just brushed it away cause I knew he was drunk and gets really mean when he drinks since his depression. After that night we didn’t have any contact for some weeks and by this time I really got a reality check. I then realized that I’m a toxic parter and felt so bad for everything bad I’ve done to him, both before the breakup, after and during the party. Therefore I started really working on myself and I fought myself and my instincts to be a good person. Eventually we started seeing each other AGAIN and this time I felt like I was really good. I asked for forgiveness so many times and told him that I understand that he can’t trust me or forgive me right away but that I will keep on working and proving for him that he is the one. We had some really good months and I was not seeing anyone else and I really wasn’t interested in anything else that proving myself to him. But yet again he closed me out and was angry at me again.. He told me that he couldn’t let go of the past. Since I’ve worked so much on myself I felt that this was unfair. He was the one that asked me about stuff, I told him this and that the answer were fake. He didn’t believe me, told me that he would never asked me those questions and questioned why I lied and assumed that the number was higher than what I told him. I also felt that it was unfair because I didn’t see how much I have changed and how much better I have became since he was so trapped in the past. Of course I yet again told him that I understand if he can’t trust me but it is unfair to only see my bad/old side and not who I am now. Now I don’t know what to do. I know that he is toxic and I shouldn’t want to get back to him. But I miss my best friend..
This was a fkn long ass post so I hope someone had patience with my bad writing and English.

I have a 2007 EX-L with only 107k miles on it. I love the car, but over the last year, I have spent $7200 on needed repairs/maintenence. Some of that was new tires, a new battery, and a new alternator (Jan 2024). The rest was parts breaking and things like spark plug replacements and such.
The car is back in the shop today having the power steering high pressure hose replaced after it ruptured and leaked out all the PS fluid onto my garage floor. Looking at a $900 bill for that. During the initial inspection of the vehicle, a leaking rear strut was also discovered. Quote to change the pair of rear struts and perform wheel alignment is another $1400.
I am SO frustrated at this point. I know the car is 17 years old, but I feel like I got a lemon almost. I have spent SO much money on this car since about 2015 on repairs of random things that I don't feel should have failed at such low mileage.
So, I told them not to fix the struts today. I need time to think about what I am going to do. I don't drive much, only about 5k miles a year. Theoretically, this car SHOULD last me another 15 years, but it's become a money pit. It also only gets like 17 MPG at this point and gas is $5.50/gal where I live.
I'm considering just trading it in and getting a new CR-V Hybrid.
WWYD? Repair and keep driving it (and gamble that it won't need any more pricey repairs) or get rid of it?

im 34M with adult ADHD ive been single since i was 23, in high school i hooked up with alot of girls was in popular social circles and at 15 i was sleeping with women in there 30s and 40s and going to bars and nightclubs, in my early 20s i was a chef and slept with waitresses.
i hit a bad patch in my life around 23/24 and began to have mental health issues because of working all the time and something wasnt being met in my life adult ADHD played into it. but after highschool i always struggled to form lasting relationships i had good friends and colleagues but I struggled to form something meaningful besides work.
at 30 i discovered i liked trans porn and at 34 became infatuated with a 19 year old transfemme cam girl.
i realised i am fucked up in the head .. i don't consider myself gay but im not exactly straight either i always loved being with women i have been in love with women and girlfriends in high school but there was always something holding me back i put it down to having ADHD
at 34 i realise now i am infatuated with this transfemme girl which basically doesn't exist in my reality.
its a tough bite of a reality sandwich because i am a kind of black and white thinker ..but probably because there basically isnt anyone that exists that im like wow thats what i like .. its literally this one person that signals this
the unfortunate reality is this is nothing more than a fantasy
i think at this stage i need to realise i am going to die alone and just get on with it.
i get girls smiling at me or showing interest from a far but all i can think about is this transfemme girl.
its an unhealthy infatuation
people think i am just gay but i don't believe i am i dont feel that way about males or men and honestly if i did i would imagine it woud not be something i would be comfortable with , im not homophobic i just dont have that kind of interest.
when its with some transfemme girls i dont know it just triggers me more emotionally than just sexually.
at the end of the day there are virtually no girls like this in my country or area and chances are its only a fantasy that i cant unlock because reality is always much more complicated.
suffice to say i think im fucking screwed shit out of luck . i was happier when i didn't have this attraction i was basically not attracted to anyone and was care free free as bird i was always stressed but didnt feel the misery of knowing and nothing
now i got to bottle it down until the day i die.
lifes a trip
i think there must come a stage when you just have to fight yourself on this compartmentalise and detach and just getnon with the fact that life is fucking shit but try and find some joy meaning whatever in work, family, nature, exercise, video games and movies ,
its pisses me off that i have this attraction now, when you sit in the house in the evening alone until you finally KO , im better on days when i dont give in and think about this person im bored and completely unfulfilled jist waiting ro sleep to exercise the next day and run the whole cycle over again. but when i do give in its even worse it just creates a self loathing and the fact that yeah im probably going to spend the next 30 years alone and then die
im trying to be healthy and look after myself getting leaner by rhe week but honestly shit would make you just want to turn to alcohol weed and food
i was suicidal in my 20s sometimes i wish i had have just gone through with it then , because i imagine life is just going to get much worse as i get older
to realise at 40 then 50 maybe 60 if im still alive that yeah i have been in a longterm stare of emotional depravation for 30-40-50 years .
id rather just burry all this and forget about and move on but looking forward there is nothing, nothing but work, home, alone alcohol food exercise. virtually void of all meaning with long stretches of isolation and boredom in the end it leads nowhere .
hopefully at 40 ill have a nervous breakdown and hamg myself that would be nice

Idea

Since I've heard about the abilities and the goals of the mangod I've been thinking about a game where one person plays as the mangod.
It might make sense to use the world of MT, but it's not neccessary for this game.

Thoughts

I wasn't sure how it would work. I thought it would have to be a narrative game. Every character and their stories would have to be set up manually. That's a lot of effort, and it the end you would just finish the game once. Or maybe reach all endings once, and that's it. In the end you would just click all paths. It wouldn't really be strategic.
I thought it would be nice if it was more strategic. Similar to Sudoku, or even more like Minesweeper. You have limited knowledge of the world. There are simple rules. Sometimes you might have to guess. And if you make a mistake it's over.
While reading I always thought of it as huge decision trees. Multiple lines going out from each character, depending on their decisions. And most of them lead to the mangod dying. The mangod would always look at all the paths and try to find one which doesn't lead to his death.
So I thought, it would make sense if for each (important) character a huge decision tree will be generated. And all the decision trees will be connected (so a decision of person A might influence the decisions of person B later).
Depending on the setting it might be possible to see the future of all charactres. But I guess being able to track the future of multiple hundreds of characters would be overkill.
It's was never clear to me why the mangod wasn't able to switch desciples all the time. Maybe I missed it somehow. But if it's possible to look at the future of somebody, he would know his future, and so he wouldn't even have to switch back. So in the end he could just see the future of all characters. And that might be overpowerd. So if his restriction is explained somewhere, I would like to know.
However, I think in a game it would make sense if the mangod never sees all possible paths of the furture of some person. And besides that, it's only possible to switch desciples once per step. An step could be a day, month, year...
I have these basic ideas: - see all possible paths of the person, but only the paths which don't require any interference by other persons - see all paths of the person, but only the paths which can be reached by influencing - only see a few steps in advance, and the likelyhood of important outcomes (especially the death of the mangod, maybe also the death of other characters)
So these huge decision trees for each character might be generated in advance. But they might also be only generated partially.
Generating a decision tree for a single character, who only has two options every year, which would lead to more than one quadrillion (1,000,000,000,000,000) paths. That might be difficult to program, and even more difficult to keep track of when playing as the mangod. So it would be more reasonable if there are only around 10 important events a character might take part in, which also influence the lives of other characters. Most other things are likely rather unimportant.
But there might be different paths to reach one of these important points. For example you want to avoid some characters to get children, there are different paths they could end up together. So you would just have to avoid these if most of your deaths rely in this event. So these unimportant decisions usually add up to become important. But in the end, many decisions don't change a lot and just lead to the same or the same few paths (strong fate).
It would be nice if these trees could be generated automatically. It would still be neccessary to fill them with story I guess. It wouldn't need to be complicated story. Just simple events like "Person A dies", "Person A impregnates person B", "Person A becomes king", "Person A moves from place X to Y", etc. So maybe generating these automatically should work, too. Maybe somehow generating mini stories, which could be used to generate huge stories. I guess using modern AI wouldn't make much sense, though.

Gameplay

The basic game loop might look like this: - you play as the mangod - each step (day, month, year) you select your three deciples - you can look through their possible futures (trees containing around 10 important possible events, and maybe hundreds of unimportant events; not everything might be visible from the beginning) - you can tell each charactre some information you know - then the next step begins - the game ends when the mangod dies - the goal of the mangod might be one of these: - survive for a fixed time - kill some enemy (like Orsted) - ensure there are only paths which don't lead to death (maybe by killing Orsted)
It's probably easier as a single player game where all the characters are NPCs. The NPCs might just always go the same path if the mangod doesn't interfere. But there might also be some randomness instead. Maybe the only "randoness" might come from special characters, which cannot be seen (basically Orsted).
But it might also make sense as a multiplayer game. Either online, or if possible even some kind of table top. But since the mangod would always have three deciples, there should be way more other players (but the rules could also be tweaked so the mangod can only have one desciple at a time). So as a realtime online game it would probably make more sense.
If it's a multiplayer game, the main problem is, that the players already know that the mangod doesn't care about them. So it might be difficult to make them trust the mangod. There would have to be some gameplay mechanic, which makes it reasonable for the mangod to tell the truth. Building trust doesn't work. In the end, the players already know that the mangod would only build trust to betray them one day. Maybe the mangod could explain to somebody that they have the same goals, and the other player might believe it, so they would gladly work together.

Similar game ideas

I already had ideas for similar games before. A game about the mangod would be a mix between the two.

Strategy game

A strategy game, where you follow the stories of multiple charactres (similar to Samurai Warriors 3). Each character has their own story, but depending on which battles you win and lose with each character, or which paths you choose, you might have different paths for other characters.

Demon possesion

You are a demon and always posses one character. You can just live inside them and do nothing, but you can also influence them in various ways. You can communicate to them directly, or you can just give them ideas and feelings. You can be honest or you can lie. You can control their bodies by force or you can make them consent to controlling their bodies.
There might be three ways to switch the person you posses: - you are locked into a magic artifact, like a ring, so the possessed person have to give the ring to the other person - just be close enough - be close and the other person needs to be in a vulnerable state of mind (maybe sad, maybe in love, maybe while being intimate)
It would likely be an episodic game. You would probably start on a small island with only 5 people and have to leave this island at first. And in the end you might get your body back or kill the person who banned you.

Implementation

I doubt I'll actually try to program it for real, but it might be helpful that I've already written a performant perti net simulator in C. Perti nets can be used to represent connected decision trees.

End

So now I've written it down somewhere. Any thoughts?

Hi ITSJ’s - female ENFJ here.
Regarding the story below:

1. how do you interpret his text and intentions, what his fears and goals may be? Would you rule me out as a prospective partner as an ISTJ or would you want to just wait?
   
2. any advice on how to fix this?
   

I like an ISTJ. I could tell he liked me a lot because he kept showing up to things and physically kept leaning into me, would act like a gentleman and send me memes. We became friends by attending church together.
Here’s where it gets complicated: We met while I was dating someone, but I could tell he’d grown to like me over time as we hung out innocently as friends.
Friday, I asked a couple of friends if they’d like to join me for dinner with another couple, and he was the only one to say yes. Then the couple left after dinner and we went to a bar to hang. After talking and making intense eye contact, he leaned in and held my hands and kissed me (while I was still dating someone). Then he apologized a ton. He said he felt terrible because my bf is a really good guy, and this made him “such an asshole”. I told him I liked him, and he immediately said “I like you too”. I said I couldn’t tell fully if that was true, and he said “I love your personality and you’re attractive, of course I like you. But I can’t pursue someone in a relationship”. I felt like there was pain in his eyes, and assumed it was because he’d liked me for awhile and felt he messed up (mostly because he kept saying sorry and touching me). Then he kept holding my hand and rubbing his fingers across me out of nervousness. I told him it was okay, not to feel guilty, I was the one in the relationship and that I was going to break up with my bf soon (which was true). He said that did make him feel better that I was ending things with him. But also proceeded to grill me on why I chose to live with him if I wasn’t sure. I told him I was 22 when it happened (we dated for 6 years).
Then I kissed him back and we went to another bar and kept kissing.
Then Sunday, a friend invited us both to brunch, many of whom knew my bf. he didn’t sit near me and seemed distant, but I did catch him looking at me (tho I could be overanalyzing).
I broke up with my bf that night Sunday, and told him the next day: “Hey, I wanted to let you know that I broke up with [name here] last night. He doesn’t want to make it very public and out of respect for him, not many folks know but I wanted to be fair to you. I’d been planning to do it within the next month and didn’t want you to feel guilty. We’re all invited to this MDW party but if I’m not there, didn’t want you to worry that it was you.”
He responded 6 hours later with: “Hey thanks for letting me know and definitely not going to mention this to anyone. Don’t worry about being fair to me, you don’t owe me anything. Sorry about all of this, I know it has got to be a really hard time for you and I probably contributed to that, so I am sorry. I would totally get it if you didn’t want to run into me (I’m out of town Memorial Day anyway). Happy to catch up if you want to sometime, but please don’t feel obligated at all.”
I do feel terrible and am focusing on caring for my ex through the transition of us parting. That being said, I still like this guy. I’m afraid how he acted at brunch was an indication he doesn’t like me anymore. His vague text feels bad. I value honesty and trust and this is the first time I’ve let something like this happen. I’m afraid we messed things up, but hoping to reconcile. Wondering if i should try to be friends first and still pursue something. I can’t tell if his text means he’s being cautious or that he’s polite and we’re done for.

Hopefully this isn’t downvoted instantly, because I know people seem to get strangely very defensive about Beast’s characterization in this run. I think there is a lot of miscommunication whenever a Beast fan complains about how he was depicted here. Often times people will discount those complaints because they think Beast fans just don’t want him to go bad, when that doesn’t really seem to be the whole truth from what I’ve seen. Ultimately, the complaints I raise and I have seen others raise are more about thinking the writing of his spiral in X-Force 2019 was not done well rather than that said spiral shouldn’t have happened at all. With the Krakoa era coming to an end, and “From the Ashes” having the now-rebooted Beast who is pulled all the way from his time on The Defenders, I don’t see any of the flaws here being addressed beyond characters casually referring to how bad he became. So I wanted to take this time in the in-between, where our new Beast is apparently just chilling on Wonder Man’s couch while the rest of the X-Men fight against Orchis and Nimrod, to once and for all lay out the flaws of Beast’s villainous era, and establish not that it shouldn’t have happened, but that it could have been way better.
Problem 1: A Lack of Pathos:
Most X-Men fans who have been reading for awhile will agree that it’s honestly surprising more mutants haven’t gone down a dark path. Their history is one of striving for acceptance, putting their lives on the line for people who would rather see them dead, and being rewarded with not one but multiple genocides on their population. Some of the most interesting stories can actually come from a formally “upstanding” mutant finally deciding enough is enough. When Cyclops went down his “villainous” path, it made a lot of sense. We’d seen him becoming more disenfranchised with the dream for years. We’d seen his trust in Xavier erode time and time again, and so when he decided to stop asking for acceptance and start demanding it, it was hard to blame him. Even as we saw most of his friends turn against him, that didn’t stop people from declaring “Cyclops Was Right,” because his perspective could easily be understood, and he did achieve results. More recently in X-Men ‘97, we saw Rogue go down a dark path in the wake of Genosha being wiped out, including Magneto and Gambit. Again, this was understood, and it was an interesting direction for her character.
This sort of turn would also make a ton of sense for Hank McCoy. Did you know that back towards the start of the original Uncanny X-Men run, Hank was actually the first X-Men we ever saw to leave the team and say that Magneto was right, after he and Bobby were attacked by an angry mob because Hank used his powers to save a young child? Over the years, one of Hank’s most recurring struggles and arcs is self-loathing and eventual acceptance of his condition. Hank has always been at his darkest when he’s trapped in his spiral of self-loathing, but when he comes out the other side, he tends to be one of the most optimistic mutants when it comes to coexistence with humans. He was out making connections and fighting alongside non-mutants before anyone else. Joining the Avengers and Defenders, speaking on behalf of mutant rights before congress, dating human women who were able to accept his appearance, blue fur and all. Until they weren’t… looking at you, Trish Tilby.
So with all of this in mind, it would honestly be an extremely interesting arc to see Hank, this optimistic mutant who has spent his life building bridges and making connections with humanity, to be slowly beaten down and start to believe peace is not an option. As one of the original X-Men, he has been there through every tragedy that struck the mutant population. And as one of the smartest X-Men, he has usually been at the center of these crises. He has seen advancements in science meant to eradicate the mutants. He has fought against viruses that threaten to drive them extinct. He was there in the wreckage of Genosha. He has seen countless friends killed again and again. He has suffered his own mutation evolving and making him less and less human-looking. He saw the development of a mutant “cure” and was tempted to take it. He has seen it all.
And so that brings us to Krakoa. This is the moment where the mutants as a whole decided enough was enough. If they could not be accepted by humanity, they would pack up and form their own nation, and they would force humanity to accept that they exist by developing life-saving drugs that other nations would have to rely on. And what is one of the first things that happens after the establishment of Krakoa? Hank witnesses assassins infiltrate the island and assassinate Charles Xavier. This right here is honestly the perfect setup for Hank to go darker than he has before. Even after literally segregating the mutant population from humanity, like humanity seemed to want, they still decided to come and kill the man at the forefront of the movement. And Hank, recently placed in charge of mutant black-ops, would likely see that all options are on the table.
Unfortunately, Hank’s actual pathos surrounding the decisions he would go on to make is not explored by the book itself. The book has no interest in detailing Hank’s fall from grace as we saw with Cyclops before him. The book just wants us to accept that Hank has already fallen. And in fact, according to the writing, maybe he never had anywhere to fall from. Any time a character in X-Force tries to ask important questions to understand Hank’s thought process, they are cut off. Usually by Wolverine saying “He’s always been like this.” And then on one occasion, when Wolverine asked Hank why he was doing all this dark shit, Hank said, “Didn’t you read the script? I’ve always been like this.” There is no attempt to examine Hank as a character. We don’t need to know why Hank makes the decisions he does, because this book wants Hank to be a black and white villain and so that’s what he will be. Why? Because he’s always been like this.
Problem 2: Rapid Escalation:
One of the major defenses people have when it comes to Krakoan Hank is that he has apparently been on the road to his villainous self for over a decade. The X-Force run itself loved to have characters spout a list of Hank’s previous “crimes” without any context involved, as justification for why he was acting the way he did in the current run. The problem is, that context is very important. Because it shows the disparity in the Hank of previous stories who made mistakes with good intentions vs the Hank of X-Force who did heinous shit because he wanted to. This was less a plane making a slow descent and more a plane that was slowly descending, but then its engines shut off and it plummeted into a fiery explosion.
To make this case, we need to briefly analyze the previous perceived transgressions of Hank McCoy to show what they actually meant for his character and how they differ from the Bond villain X-Force would present us with. Let’s start with Threnody. Somehow, Threnody became a bit of a buzzword for the beginning of the end for Hank. When people talk about the history of Hank and Threnody, they will usually present it as one of Hank’s worst sins, saying something like “Hank callously handed Threnody over to Mr. Sinister so he could experiment on and abuse her!!!” It kind of makes for some whiplash when you actually read the Threnody story people are talking about. Here is a brief rundown of what actually happens:
Threnody is a young woman who cannot control her powers. It causes her no end of grief, and when we are introduced to her, she is homeless and constantly in danger of hurting herself or others. Beast, Rogue, and Iceman come across Threnody who has been found first by Mr. Sinister. Sinister actually has a vested interest in curing the Legacy Virus, and believes he can help Threnody master her powers, at which point she will prove vital in his efforts to study said Virus. Notably, Threnody wants to go with Sinister here. While Rogue disapproves, Hank does believe that Sinister is actually Threnody’s best option, openly stating Sinister can actually help her gain control and the X-Men cannot, because, as Hank directly says, Sinister is willing to damn parts of his soul in pursuit of scientific enlightenment, and the X-Men are not. A few issues later, when breaking into Sinister’s base, Hank encounters Threnody again. She’s happy. Sinister did indeed help her control her powers, and she has been able to use her abilities to help mutants the world over, while also undermining Sinister’s more evil operations from the inside. Hank expresses relief, saying he was kept up at night by his decision to let her go with Sinister, but Threnody actually thanks him for letting her. And that’s it. That’s Hank’s big “crime” here.
Hank’s other “sins” are also of varying levels of severity. There’s the time “Hank worked with his evil self to cure the Legacy Virus!” when the actual story in question is Hank asserting that he won’t stoop to the levels of Dark Beast and compromise his values in the name of science. There’s the time “Hank sided with the Inhumans against the X-Men!” when the actual story is Storm sending Hank to Attilan to find a way to end the conflict between mutants and inhumans before war broke out. Hank runs out of time to find a cure for the terrigen mist cloud, suggests mutants get off-world in the meantime rather than go to war with the inhumans, is thrown into a cell by the other X-Men for his “betrayal”, and then freed at the conclusion of the war by a repentant Storm when it comes to light that the whole conflict was manipulated by Emma Frost. There’s the time “Hank risked the timestream by bringing the original X-Men to the present day!” A decision that was made on his perceived deathbed with the hopes of bringing his old friend Cyclops back to his side. Hank wants to take the young mutants back right away, but they refuse. And instead of others enforcing that they need to return, we actually see Kitty Pride decide to lead them in the present in memory of Charles Xavier. Notably, Kitty would be one of the many mutants in future issues who would yell at Hank about this.
The point of this post isn’t to absolve Hank of all fault. He has made countless mistakes and bad decisions. Regardless of the culpability of others, the pulling of the O5 to the present was his decision. During Secret Empire, Hank would turn a blind eye to Hydra’s activity simply to keep the mutants under his care safe. During all of this, however, Hank’s character was not compromised. He expressed despair and regret over his worse choices, and struggled with thinking he was a good person any longer. Again, going back to his recurring struggle with self-loathing. He had pathos behind his decisions and how they affected him, and would often reunite with Wonder Man as an opportunity to recenter and declare he would “be better tomorrow than he was yesterday.”
You would think, if the aim of X-Force was to turn Hank into a full-on villain, it would take advantage of the long-form storytelling of comics to chronicle that escalation. Like I said, the assassination of Charles Xavier is a great starting point for Hank to start going darker than he ever has before. The problem is, we don’t get an escalation. Hank starts the run by doing some of the most heinous shit imaginable. Regardless of your thoughts on the severity of Hank’s previous mistakes, none of them compare to his opening volley in this run. Hank uses telefloronics to override and genocide an entire country, leaving various people either completely dead or braindead. We later find out that during this time he also established a space station where he ran unethical experiments on prisoners like Krakoa’s very own Dr. Mengele. He then accuses his old ally Colossus of conspiring with Russia against Krakoa, and calls forth the mutant population to witness as he parades a shamed Colossus through its streets. Then he kills Wolverine and resurrects him as a mindless animal who he uses as an attack dog against his perceived enemies. This isn’t an escalation, this is a different character. And the aforementioned lack of pathos means that we don’t get to see him struggle with these choices. We don’t see his thought process as he becomes darker and darker. Why would we? “He’s always been like this.”
Problem 3: No Personality:
One of the most fun aspects of turning a protagonist into an antagonist is seeing how their personality works with a more villainous mindset. When Cyclops became an “antagonist” to the X-Men, he was still Cyclops. He stuck to his convictions, he was a great leader and tactician, and he was able to turn many mutants to his side because of this. We’ve seen an evil Beast before. The creatively-named Dark Beast is from an alternate future where Beast went down a dark path lacking ethics. The fun of this character, besides comparing his ideologies with our Hank McCoy, is seeing how Hank’s penchant for jokes or quotes now become far more sinister and cutting.
There’s a strange narrative that the jokey Hank is reserved for the Avengers while the Hank with the X-Men is all business and science. This isn’t entirely true. Early on when he was a member of the Defenders, Hank talks about this sort of thing. He essentially says that he wears different hats. While working with the X-Men, he used big words essentially to gain respect from both his teammates and humanity. But with other teams, and in his then-new furry form, he dropped all of that. His speech became more naturalistic and he was much more of a goofball. The thing is, it’s the speech patterns that truly change depending on who Hank is hanging with, not his personality. Hank with the X-Men and Hank with the Avengers are both jovial characters who like to tell jokes and quote philosophy. You can see Hank being a bit of a clown among the X-Men in various runs. So it’s not like it’s a given that Hank is some entirely different dry doctor devoid of any sense of humor when among the X-Men.
But this is how Hank is portrayed in X-Force. Part of why this version of Hank is so hard to reconcile with the rest of his history for fans of the character is that he just doesn’t act like himself, even when he isn’t actively committing war crimes. In one early issue of the run, we get a glimpse at Beast’s journal where he accounts a meeting he had with Forge. Now, Beast has been known to be a very physical character. He is often known to sweep others into a hug, or even plant a big kiss on their face in the case of characters like Wonder Man or Iceman. Meanwhile this one page where we read his thoughts on Forge is clearly pretending this is not the case:

I paid Forge a visit in the Armory – and I must say that he can be, like Logan, rather impossible. There is a certain locker room bravado about him I find perplexing, like a language I only half understand. For instance, he refused to shake my hand but instead dragged me into what he called a “bro hug.” Then he challenged me to a “feat of strength,” asking if I would test out this sappy “muck bomb” he had developed that – or so I gather – glues one in place. He wondered if a “big boy” like me might be able to thrash free of the binding. I refused him and said I very much would prefer to get down to business. He then referred to me as a “bookish peckerwood @#$%” but did so with a friendly laugh and clapped me on the shoulder hard enough to make me stagger. I’m not sure how to process this, honestly. Is he being friendly or cruel? Is it possible to be both?

Needless to say, this doesn’t read like Beast. It reads like an android that has never before felt human emotion. I remember before reading this I was theorizing that Hank had been switched with Dark Beast once more to explain his sudden escalation, but after this I realized that couldn’t be the case. Because this sounds like neither Beast nor Dark Beast. Dark Beast understood how to properly write Hank as a villain. He doesn’t suddenly become your typical made scientist devoid of emotion, humor, or basic human understanding. He still makes jokes that are now cruel. He still quotes literature in a way that paints him as a god among men. Hank going bad can be a fun read, but this run was not.
Problem 4: No One Cares:
Another important angle to consider when writing a story of a good person breaking bad is how it affects those around them. Those who are close friends to the person and find themselves disturbed by their current actions. Again, I return to Cyclops. Regardless of where you stand on if he was right or not, he was very much positioned as an antagonist to the mutants at the Jean Grey School for Higher Learning. Yet we see various friends of Cyclops still caring for him and wanting to pull him back from what they perceive as the dark side. Like I previously said, Beast’s whole reason for messing with the timeline was because he felt he was going to die and wanted to try to appeal to his old friend and bring him back around before he passed on. When someone good goes bad, part of the emotional core is seeing former friends try to appeal to their better nature, and even eventually deciding they’ve gone too far to turn back.
Not so with Hank in X-Force. Like I said, this run posits that this is not any kind of heel turn for Hank. This is how he’s always been. “Hank this isn’t you!” “No, he’s always been like this.” “Hank, turn back before it’s too late!” “Turn back where? He’s always been like this.” None of Hank’s friends give a shit. Hank’s best friend amongst the X-Men is Bobby Drake, Iceman, and we never once see any kind of confrontation there. Cyclops and Angel similarly doesn’t care. Now you could argue this is because X-Force is a secretive organization. Bobby and Scott don’t even know what Hank is doing. There are two issues with this. First, things reach a point where they would know. Hank’s actions become public knowledge, and Wolverine goes off to hunt him down while the rest of the X-Men just kinda look the other way. And second, there is someone with a lot of history with Hank that was a part of X-Force and did see everything that was going on. Jean Grey.
But we never get to see Jean wonder what’s happened to her close friend. Jean who was always incredibly close to Hank. Jean who, it was confirmed during the All-New X-Men era, had mutual feelings for Hank and might have started dating him had things been different. But no, Jean, like every character in this run, accepts that Hank has always been like this. That’s the answer to everything. So instead of some kind of emotional confrontation where she tries to appeal to his better nature, we instead have Jean yell at Hank, use her powers to throw him against a wall, and quit X-Force. And then most recently, we see her tell Firestar without hesitation to throw Hank under the bus for any heat that comes her way from her undercover mission. Because everyone will believe Hank is responsible for all the bad shit. Who the hell cares about Hank? According to this run, no one.
Conclusion:
I hope you can see the larger issue here. When Beast fans complain about his Krakoan era, people assume they just don’t want to see their favorite do bad things. But it’s practically accepted at this point in comics that most heroes will have a villain arc. Hell, Iceman is the only one of the original five X-Men who hasn’t gone down a dark path at this point. The problem is that everything about the writing of Hank during this time was just not done well. There is no exploration of Hank’s descent into villainy, and any questioning down that line is immediately shut down by the assertion that this is just who he’s always been. There isn’t any slow escalation because his first move is genocide. Hank is not even written as himself during this era, but rather as a generic bond villain. And none of Hank’s former close friends even show any emotion about his turn to villainy. An evil Hank story could easily work. We saw it with Dark Beast. A story where the former optimistic member of the X-Men has been beaten down so many times that he takes on a “whatever it takes” mentality could be interesting and emotionally resonant as we both understand what drove him here yet hate the man he’s become. But that isn’t what we got. We got a run that wrote him as a complete stranger and then had all the characters tell the reader that they were wrong for ever thinking he was anyone else.

My father passed away about 2 years ago and he left me his entire record collection. He always claimed it was about 60k records and I’m inclined to believe him. Thing is I may like a few rock and jazz albums but by no means do I want to start a record store. Would it be better for me to sell the records individually or to sell them as an entire collection. My father collected all sorts of music. Latin jazz, rock, blues, oldies, do wop, 60s, 70s, some 80s, Spanish records, sound tracks, Disney records and just a whole plethora of stuff. He mostly loved jazz and rock. It feels like I’m giving part of him away and he told me that this would be my inheritance. Sad to say i never really payed much attention to what to look for in an album and estimate its worth. Kinda wish as a kid I would have listened to him more.
Any thoughts on how I can liquidate the collection would be very helpful.
I’ve had one record store owner come in already and he went through some boxes, I then took out the records I wanted to keep….but he didn’t seem very happy with what he got…even though he selected them.
Anyway, again any help would be welcome and highly appreciated. Thank you !

Can anyone recommend a summer curriculum for a preschooler going to kindergarten in the fall? My daughter LOVES doing “work” but I pulled her from her daycare end of this month to spend home with us. I’m having a baby in July, and I just want something that is structured to keep her engaged over the summer. I don’t want to fall into overusing screen time, especially after I have this baby. I’d like something already sort of planned out to keep her busy and on track.. bonus points if there are any Spanish elements.. I am also just open to ideas and pointers to help me put my own schedule together.
Thank you!

Our first kid is starting kindergarten in the Fall, and we're having trouble deciding where to send them. We were hoping to get some other folks' thoughts on pros/cons, or what kinds of questions we should be asking ourselves/schools/teachers, to help guide our decision.
We're looking at:

1. A Waldorf-inspired charter school; K-8
2. A two-way immersive Spanish language program; K-8
3. A 'regular' public school kindergarten.

For number 1, we have a grandparent that is a big advocate for the Waldorf system, with a few other grandkids that went to a different, private Waldorf school. We really like a lot of what we've seen with this charter school; a private education experience without the cost, hand-work and practical skills like cooking and sewing, trying to keep some of the magic of being a kid, confidence building and public speaking. The teacher also moves with their class through the grade levels, which strikes me as an incredible opportunity for the teacher to build a very strong and personal relationship with each student, truly getting to know their strengths and weaknesses, 'hitting the ground running' each year.
For downsides, due to the small size of this charter school, they only have 1 class per grade level, so unfortunately, that means that if our kid clashes with this teacher for whatever reason, our only option is to find another school. We've also heard that reading is very much NOT a priority until much later under the Waldorf system, and our kid LOVES to read. Not sure if that's really a problem or not; they'd probably be a few years ahead of normal kindergarten reading anyways, and it's not like we're NOT gonna keep reading at home, but that Waldorf philosophy really struck us as odd (In case it's not obvious, we parents are voracious readers ourselves...).
For number 2, it is a program which starts with 90% of the day done in Spanish, with plenty of contextual clues and gestures, etc. to help kids understand. This balance shifts gradually year by year, until it is roughly 50% Spanish and 50% English by around Grade 5. Being fluent in English and Spanish is a huge advantage here, and learning language that young seems to come waaay easier than later in life. The exposure to different culture would be invaluable as well.
For downsides, it sounds like a pretty intense experience. The teachers warn that the kids often come home exhausted at first, that they might not want to talk about their day due to needing to 'recharge' first. The school itself isn't quite as nice, definitely more crowded. The program is in its 5th year, so the grade 6-8 part is planned at a local Middle School, but hasn't been 'battle-tested'.
Number 3 is the public school we're zoned for. It's a newer facility, backs up to one of our favorite parks, and would be about a 15 minute walk through quiet neighborhoods or a 5 minute drive. Otherwise, just... a regular school.
What are some good ways to work through making this decision with my partner? Any red flags that jump out to anyone based on this limited info?

Let me start off by saying, my parents are a picture perfect couple.
They are high school sweethearts but even after 30 years of marriage their spark never died, they still go on dates very often, leave love notes to one another around the house and are very thoughtful towards one another.
My dad especially is a great father and husband, when I was a kid, my mom got diagnosed with breast cancer, thankfully it was caught early but she still had to go through chemo and it took a massive toll on her body and spirit, she was mostly bedridden. It absolutely shattered me seeing her suffer that much.
it was a tough time for us but I can’t put into words how much of a trooper dad was. This man took over everything, not only was he the sole provider but he was on top of all household chores: we had healthy home cooked meals, the house was always spotless and he made sure me and my siblings never missed a school day or any extra curricular activities and maintained good grades. He was there for my mom for almost every chemotherapy session and never once showed any signs of fatigue or frustration. He was always cheerful and kept telling us we’ll get through this and we had nothing to worry about, it gave me a lot of hope seeing him stay strong throughout the whole ordeal and helped me stay focused on my studies and not spiral into depression.
Eventually, my mom recovered and everything went back to normal. But to tell you I thought the world of my father would be an understatement, Superman had nothing on my dad. I looked up to him and aspired to be half the person he was.
Imagine my horror when I walked into our house one day to find him in bed with another woman, I say woman but she looks no older than 20 yo, basically my age. My mother was in our hometown for a distant relative’s wedding and I was supposed to be at college but I wanted to drop by for a quick visit. I don’t think I’ve ever yelled at anyone the way I did that day, I kicked her out and chastised him for hours after she left.
This pathetic excuse of a human being tried to bribe me to not tell mom, I can’t even begin to explain how pathetic he was begging me to not tell mom promising me he’ll buy me a new car if I keep quiet. I wanted to throw up. It was a far cry from the father I knew loved and respected.
It’s been 2 weeks since this incident I went back to my dorm and my father has been spamming me with calls and messages ever since. He would range from begging me not to destroy our family to threats of cutting me off the will if I tell mom.
I’ve been wanting to tell her but I couldn’t bring myself to do it, the aftermath of this will be brutal, my picture perfect family will be ruined forever, I pondered telling my siblings instead but I couldn’t do that either, it would ruin their image of dad forever.
I feel like I lost my dad forever, I don’t recognize this man but this is not the dad I knew and loved.
I’m an adult I understand relationships are complicated and my parents’ relationship is ultimately none of my business. Cheating is one thing but bribing your kid? Threatening to disown them if they tell anyone? wtf is this shit? How can I ever look him in the eyes again?
I don’t know if I’ll ever forgive him and I can only hope my mother finds it in her to forgive me for keeping it from her this long. I needed to tell someone desperately but I didn’t know who, thanks for reading this anyways.

After rereading the books, and falling down a deep dark hole of theories and musings on this reddit, I'm worried a few conspiracies are sadly going to happen. I just need to get it off my chest.

• Denna is a denner resin addict: It's strange to mention someone's white teeth twice. But it's a bit of cliche story line, the troubled free willed woman becoming a tragic addict, the fact she only imbued it by accident etc. To me it is sad as I like her, but it's also got this inevitable and tedious feel to it.
  
• Kvothe will kill either Auri or Sim. When chronicler says he had to kill an angel to get to his hearts desire it probably means he killed someone to get to the chandrian. I know the theory about the angels (and yes it's great) but I'm not convinced this quote is literal. Either way it seems inevitable from young Kvothes rash actions and how Kote speaks in the present, that his desire for revenge resulted in hurting those closest to him. It's the archetypal revenge plot line, the protagonist either doesn't get revenge but ends up happy or loses everything but succeeds. So far it doesn't seem like it's going to be the former.
  
• I especailly hate on this theory: Devi is "The Woman". She is not very trustworthy and for kvothe to suddenly change when he's clearly loved Denna for so long just seems not right. And she love loves him. It also once again makes me worry Denna will become another tragic fallen woman in a long line of Madam Bovaries and Kathy's.
  

What other theories do you hate?!
(I love the Aurie/Ariel and bredon/master Ash theories)