Alg

Okay, but the argument you linked happened because people with your mentality don't listen when something challenges your preconceptions :v

Yeah, I'm not really seeing how that requirement relates to quests at all.

I would point my brother at this thread if he still had any interest in Tip.It. He's on XBone but I think he's got a pretty permanent group set up. meanwhile I'm learning everything about the game's meta through osmosis, somehow. Thorn bad, Gjallahorn good, something like that

Details!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cg0J4QSf8ac&feature=youtu.be Because apparently it's a soft, melancholy piano/string ensemble that heralds my metamorphosis into weeb trash.

What, you didn't know that Blizzard invented every single MMO trope?

Yes

Their goal may or may not be "spend a few hours here to justify eating that double cheeseburger last night"

Because DG was built with it in mind and never changed significantly, while Runescape was built with it for the equivalent of half a game and then lazily expanded in the other direction over the course of ten years.

Please tell me In the Heart of the Sea isn't trying to be blue/orange. Because that's actual green right there. That is actually green and yellow-orange. Some of it's yellow-green to red-orange. They have gone too far both literally and figuratively.

7.5/10That's a bit more than just the tip, isn't it?

So I saw a Transformers movie a few weeks back and I'm going to have to recant that orange/blue contrast post I made a few months back. The color harmony needs to die, for the greater good.

What about this: tip if that's the norm where you're eating, don't tip if it isn't? Because the server is not being paid enough to put up with cultural posturing :twss:

It'd be completely fine if skills fed into combat, as long as the products are actually useful. In fact, that's probably the way they should do it, considering how well it worked for herblore. The biggest issue right now is that combats are pretty much universally better at being gathering/production skills than the dedicated gathering and production skills; when they could instead have unique (and potentially untradeable/semi-tradeable) rewards that you will pretty much always need a healthy stockpile of.

They're not really comparable to the overload combo potions, are they? I mean, not saying they aren't useful, but it's such a small part of the update and Herblore's combat options are just so much stronger. Chance of extra harmony moss versus not dying instantly when the QBD uses a fire attack.

i am whichever the objectively best sexual orientation is That would be pansexual, solely because it allows you to give zero [bleep]s about giving [bleep]s. The ace/aro combination is a very close second since you can give zero [bleep]s about the whole [bleep]ing thing, and focus on more important things.

Okay, long-term goal: getting an answer that isn't this hyperevasive bullshit :3 Why does it keep going back to my long-term goals? My long-term goals are my own, they're not relevant to the topic at hand. This isn't me caring about a topic because I feel I shouldn't have to change, this is me caring about a topic because it directly affects people I care about (also I actually enjoy learning about it, and it's generally more acceptable to nerd out about gender than, say, the language of flowers or color theory). I'm not trying to incite change on some global level, and my plans don't revolve around those changes happening. I can, however, use it to teach people on an individual level, when they're already at least partially open to the idea because it affects people they care deeply about. In doing so, I've found people I care about. And honestly the biggest obstacle I've had to face is that people are convinced that they already know everything about LGBTQ+ issues and, as such, feel obligated to tell those individuals who they are and what they should be doing, especially if what they're doing does not fit their preconceptions... Which is exactly what's happening here. Clinging to outdated preconceptions, and ignoring anything that might shake them, is part of why I don't trust the individual. (appropriately enough, that sort of mindset is why people tend to be blindsighted when they find out I'm more into women than men, and, being a lifelong troll, I take endless joy in baiting them)

It's not his point as much as the utterly clueless way he's going about it :v I'm not going to deny that people have control over their lives, but likening it to life with a couple of added difficulties is disgustingly ignorant to the point of being insulting. If you're going to pull that, learn the details so you'll know exactly what hardships there are and maybe offer real solutions. Honestly, I wish I knew how awful that sort of thing was ten years ago. God knows I was guilty of it back then.

...What do my plans have to do with the topic at hand? I'm actually pretty alright with my situation at the moment, I don't see why I should ignore the fact that a lot of people I associate with are definitely not in as good a position. Deflecting the argument on to me isn't going to make the problem go away, and if you don't want to bother to understand it, that's on you. If happiness is that sort of head-in-the-sand blissful ignorance, I'll keep doing my own thing :p

Okay, but are you facing pretty constant discrimination or being denied basic rights? It's less "I can't be happy because statistics say I should be unhappy" and more "I'm unhappy because I actually have a pretty high chance of being harmed physically, emotionally, or financially for being who I am"

I'm not really sure why that would be a bad thing, though? Especially if it comes as a consequence of having a very specific and, believe it or not, practical, starting point for that sort of thing. I mean, what with the way people absolutely have been made outcasts because of their orientation. If you like the same sex in any capacity you've got an entire political party saying discrimination against you should be encouraged, if you're asexual then people will flat out deny you exist (for example... by saying their relationships aren't valid, or that they.re virgins that needed an excuse, or that they need to grow up, or so on). And that's just your four mainstream ones, everything else might as well not exist, usually because people hear about it and assume it's made up, instead of digging deeper. Sexuality (or lack thereof) has a big impact on people's lives, after all. Why wouldn't you want to find solidarity in it? The alternative is pretty awful to live through.

(perhaps this could do with its own thread?) You're gonna have to elaborate on that then I did mention that it's all on a spectrum, yes? It's this huge, broad (even a little bit fluid) thing and there's a lot of territory where just the big four labels would paint a picture so incomplete that it may as well not be a label at all (see: asexuality's enormous gray area). And even that falls apart with trans*/nonbinary people. Where would you place someone who's exclusively into females but identifies and presents as neither gender? Also, romantic orientation. There are asexual people who are still very much interested in being in a romantic relationship, which might or might not include sex. Close friend was dating a girl a while back, both are asexual and they were that kind of sickeningly sweet couple. Or someone who calls herself a lesbian because, while she's sexually attracted to males and females, she only has any interest in being in a relationship with females.

It's far more nuanced than that

But that's what sexual orientation *is*. It's who you're attracted to, nothing more. You're pretty much arguing that a gay guy who's married to, and sleeps with, a woman because of social pressure is actually bi. :v

That's because you're mixing sexual attraction/orientation with sexual activities. You can definitely sleep exclusively with men and still be heterosexual if you're attracted exclusively to women, because the definition covers attraction (Not to say that people wouldn't wonder why, but hey, it's your business). You can have sex with your partner and still call yourself asexual because you're not sexually attracted to anyone. You can be celibate and still call yourself bisexual because you're attracted to men and women. Hell, you could call yourself bisexual when you've only had relationships with one of the sexes, or even just one person. The list goes on. I mean, sexuality is a spectrum (that goes back to the Kinsey scale). Of course things are going to get messy when you try to apply labels to each individual part of it.