Having never used OF, I assumed it was a pay to access content model, I guess they additionally allow tipping, which isn’t a surprise, I assume there’s also a pay for specific content creation model. But what I don’t know is if the tipping, while linked to a creator, is linked to a specific piece of content. If it isn’t, wouldn’t a creator with any amount of mixed content be hard to evaluate? You couldn’t prove the tipping was related to an excluded category in that case.

The point of games is to have fun, “cheats” are essentially just difficulty options.

Honestly, he’d probably better than like 80+% of the field we’ve had in the last 3 elections or will have if there is another one.

Once Upon a Galaxy has been my default game since I first played it.

It’s an asynchronous alternating activation autobattler (like Arcane Rush, or Storybook Brawl/Hearthstone Battlegrounds but you play against ghosts). Games take about 10-15 minutes.

It’s largely public domain fantasy themed, but has been expanding into the “legally distinct” cultural references as they add content, basically every captain/unit/treasure is a reference.

The shop mechanic is simplified, there’s no currency, you just get a set of choices, and can pick 1. You get two shops per round by default, lots of ways to get extra.

Asynchronous play means that you face challenging opponents that naturally evolve with the meta game but you can also take time to make thoughtful decisions.

The draft pool for the shop has a large base pool that you add to by selecting a custom sebset from a second large pool as your captain’s deck. The progression is through unlocking cards for each captain’s secondary pool, and unlocking new captains. You can naturally earn all cards through play, most captains are free, new captains are paywalled for a limited time.

Monetization is through 3 paths: cosmetics, acceleration of card unlocks, access to paywalled captains. I haven’t found it to be particularly exploitative or negative feeling.

My only gripe is minor, that it doesn’t have mid-run save/resume, but that is on their road map.

There is essentially no story, if that matters to you.

If it’s not obvious, I’m really enthusiastic about this game. I’m not affiliated/sponsored in any way. Happy to answer any questions.

It sounds very infrastructure/trade based than politics, so I’d stay away from nation/country terms. Regional Planning would be a generic term for the infrastructure piece, could use Commerce if trade is important. >

I’ve come to view tolerance not as a default position, but rather as a contract which people are defaulted into, if you’re breaking it by refusing to be bound by it, you’re no longer protected by it either.

I’ll leave guilt up to the jury, but people really need to read the article, though it could really use more details. There’s a possibility of this actually being a nothing burger. Their family business received a COVID relief payment from FEMA, article says it was for $5M too much (doesn’t say if it was more than they requested or just more than FEMA meant to send), portions of that money were paid to family members (unclear if they worked at the family business) and those family members also donated to her campaign (timeline is unclear, obviously faster movement would be more suspicious, but if these are well separated, not as much).

I’m going to steal this from my favorite author, the power to arrive late to things, and it frequently happens even if you aren’t trying to.

Bonus power: the power to get an excessive amount of water on the floor when washing dishes.

There are many more, it’s a fun series.

Does the length of the bill matter?

Maybe the elected representatives should read an entire bill before they vote on passing it…

It depends on what you mean by viewpoint.

If they’re disagreeing about objective reality, 0/10. If we can’t agree on an objective level, there’s no point.

If they’re disagreeing about following the social contract of tolerance, -10/10. They break the contract, they aren’t covered by it, they should be removed with prejudice.

If they’re disagreeing about the value of certain concepts, solutions or programs, 3/10? I’d talk to someone about something for a little while, I might give them a reference, but it’s not my job to educate them.

Of course just talking to people, I’m like a 5/10 in general…

You could get away with a Starship Troopers Star Trek Terran Empire series literally forever, The Colbert Report ran 11 seasons and people still think it existed to balance out the liberal bias of The Daily Show.

An Open World is only too big if it requires loading screens at transition points that aren’t natural. An Open World can have an insufficient density of relevant content, where exploring it has too little marginal utility to the player, and therefore it is ultimately not useful to exist.

Not to take any rightful criticism off of DOGE, but ATCs just have never properly recovered from Reagan getting pissy, and are still just not properly equipped.

I would truly love it if federal courts started declaring the DOJ a vexatious litigant.

Jar Jar Binks in The Phantom Menace was originally planned to be a covert Sith Master. He force jumps, he uses mind control, and he “accidentally” sabotages them. But the negative reaction to him was so strong, Lucas reworked the last 2 scripts of the prequels and is why Count Dooku basically comes out of nowhere.

• Do you use youtube mainly? Daily, but secondary to Twitch
• Do you care about clickbait? Nope
• Did clickbait make you stop seeing some creator? Clickbait that are lies damage my opinion of a creator, clickbait that’s honest is irrelevant
• Did you use youtube but clickbait (among other things) made you to stop using it’s platform? Still use YT
• Do you think clickbait is the major of the YouTube’s problems? Nope, discoverability, live streaming, and comments are all bigger imo
• Do you see something good in clickbait among the bad things? Like, which ones? Only negative is when it is intentionally deceptive.
• Could we see clickbait as a necessary evil? It is as necessary as all advertising is, if it’s honest, fine, if not, then no.

I normally would say, keep it down until they give tangible concessions, but there’s basically nothing I believe they could agree to that they wouldn’t immediately backtrack on. So, just leave it all shuttered, GDP means shit to me.

Bringing back Kimmel wasn’t enough for me to resub, that doesn’t change that they’re willing to capitulate, just shows they do a cost/benefit on it. If they’d gone “Fuck you, make me” I’d have still had respect for them, but they don’t earn back respect just by undoing the bad thing they did, they’d need to do more.

Is it time for another Bonus Army?