It might sound weird, but a lot of the time I'd rather roll up a new character than play a character that got permanently changed without a heads up. Like, my cyrrent Hackmaster character is (specific flaw) frail and scarred up, and if my GM was like "oh, by the way a wandering Cleric fixed that for you when they were healing your wounds" I'd be pissed. Just undercuts the character I'm playing
Indeed, and each time you've convinced nobody.
What good will answering this question do? You won't accept any answers that focus on actual responses, because you don't believe any of them work. What's the point?
Yeah, there's a 50/50 chance they didn't say "chewed"
I would be questioning their understanding of 'flipped out' because there was hardly any reaction to the change but that's called 'flipped out'.
Yeah, I mean in that sense yes, if it's a character trait you like to RP that if fixed is something you couldn't really justify changing back, but something that is effectively a curse that changes gender...not really that permanent in a DnD game is it? And GM determining things about your character off screen is a bit different to walking into a trap a having a magical effect applied during gameplay.
On the one hand, [holds up sign that says collaborative storytelling]
Oh my god. You have to be insane to think lockdowns had no benefits.
No, I didn't give you shit studies. You said they were shit because you either misread or wilfully misinterpreted them. And you are also scientifically illiterate (do you not remember that you even had to have the meaning of a p value explained to you?) so you can't even tell whether a study is shit, hence why you keep posting them. What's even funnier about this claim is that the one you complained most about was one you first introduced, albeit indirectly.
No, I think the US (and to a lesser extent UK) governments presented a load of superficial evidence supplemented by fabricated evidence that plenty of people found convincing enough to persuade them into supporting the war. You don't seem to understand what evidence is: it's not the same thing as true, objective proof. Evidence is simply information in support of a conclusion. It can be of varying strength, and it can also be wrong.
They've been pointed out to you multiple times. Seriously, do you have a memory problem?
And thus you promptly tell everyone that you are not aware of the science of how masks work, even despite all the many times it's been mentioned. Great job there.
The human race is not going to underbreed itself to extinction. The notion is really just scaremongering bollocks.
Ah yes, because the world population HASN'T reached 8 billion or anything. It's not as if we're breaching numerous ecological boundaries.
That's true, but the poorest countries in the world tend to have the highest fertility rates. Are they more "secure" than wealthier ones?
"Hurry up and grow up, spud. We need fresh meat for the grinder."
No, but they tend to lack access to birth control and other sexual health services (abortion, vasectomy, tubal ligation) to rein it in. An old dude I worked with also suggested that in poor countries, lacking Netflix and the like, meant there's not much else to do but fuck, but that's a statement I'm gonna take with just all the salt.
Given the anecdote, I'd say 50/50 is incredibly generous. "Chewed" does not make contextual sense for the original sentence or the reaction, whereas "Jewed" (as in "Jewed you down", see the word's "verb" meaning in the dictionary) makes everything fall into place, as it's a highly offensive way of describing someone as an aggressive bargainer (closer to a conman, really), by directly invoking the quintessential antisemitic stereotype.
No, but you partly answer that yourself in the last comment of the post: "Hurry up and grow up, spud. We need fresh meat for the grinder."
No-one's really tried to get the birth rate up in the West. Arguably, there's been little need when immigration is available and cheaper: why invest $$$ developing an adult when someone else can do it for you, and the finished article just turns up on the border? But it's also an issue of policy.
I don't care if they are white or not, I want the human species to not go extinct. If we ever hit below 2.1 children per couple in terms of Earth's population, we are screwed. As Hawki mentioned.
Humanity isn't gonna sit around and just Not Have Kids until we go extinct. That just doesn't make sense, like, psychologically. It's like worrying that humanity is gonna collectively starve to death if people, like, got on a diet kick
Having a few million, and even hundreds of millions of people would suck too.
