I think it is showing what you are saved as in the other persons phone. There are ones where the guy presumably saved a girls number but she didn’t bother to save his and another where the girl saved him as do not answer. I think the point is so you can see how the other person views you. These are mostly joke features and the feature you mentioned is pretty standard now.

I keep trying to find ways to evangelize Going Medieval. The devs have been so communicative and consistent with updates. It’s not everyones kind of game, but I’ve definitely spent more time than I should have playing it.

I’m seeing some hostility towards you as a hiring manager which is rough, because hiring manager is not necessarily HR. It often means the manager of the person being hired. So the person on a specific team responsible for filling positions on that team. I’m not sure if you directly hire for your team or it’s an HR term in your case, but just adding this here in case it helps someone not be rude to a random person on the internet.

Also, as a person who hires people on my team (I don’t use the hiring manager title, but yea) it’s ridiculous how awful some resumes are. We don’t use hiring software, and I personally review all the resumes, but we are a small team so I totally understand why that would be used. The overlap of people who don’t like filling out the forms but who also want to be evaluated on who they are rather than what’s on their resume is a circle. I don’t want to dismiss anyone who doesn’t have a degree, but just because a degree isn’t on the resume doesn’t mean they don’t have one. Plenty of people leave off the years they worked at a specific job. I can assume months or years, but the form would help clarify that without wasting anyone’s time. Decisions have to be made somewhere and if people want to be judged by people in their field, then their full time job will likely not be hiring, so sometimes they use these forms for standardization purposes. I don’t like them either, but they are not this evil thing they are made out to be.

Good Omens on Amazon

Yea, understandable in both of those scenarios, but neither was the case at the time.

FB has been terrible in my experience. Craigslist is still ok if you can filter through the spam. I once contacted a seller on FB for an item that was 300 cash. We had set a time for pickup later that day and I went to the bank to get the cash. I messaged them when I was 10 minutes out and they told me not to come because they had already sold it. I totally understand selling it if I had not been communicating or had been ignoring their messages, but the last thing we had messaged each other was just a few hours prior while agreeing on a time. They didn’t even bother letting me know they had sold it. I would have just arrived at the place and they never would have shown. That, among a lot of other issues, and I won’t buy or sell on FB anymore.

Seems like you have a lot of good suggestions already, but more couldn’t hurt.

I bought the following chairs (also from Staples coincidently) in 2022, and both have been great, but it looks like they’ve gone up in price.

TempurPedic 6400 Fabric Computer and Desk Chair Black TP6400BLK - $279.99 at time of purchase

TempurPedic Mesh Back Fabric Computer and Desk Chair Black TP6450BLKMB - 299.99 at time of purchase

Regardless of what chair you end up deciding on, the put it in your cart and wait a few days a trick is always helpful, and I would definitely recommend googling coupons for wherever you purchase it from.

Good luck!

I have never had a bad experience with an early access game. I generally only buy early access games from indie studios I am already familiar with, and have never purchased an early access AAA game. I genuinely enjoyed the early access aspect of several games, playing them through different stages in development extends the playtime in my opinion. Every new update feels like free DLC, but the game I purchased felt complete already. In my opinion, early access is far better than kickstarter for games, since at least there is a game you are purchasing and gameplay footage is publicly available, but sometimes these are legitimately the only ways to fund a game.

The issue is that the criticism is generally not valid. If you’re criticizing a colleague for poor time management because they legitimately have poor time management, fine, whatever. It’s not something I would do, but there may be cases in which that is done. In the context of this meme, it is likely not the individuals fault that they are overworked. It is likely a systemic failure that foists too many tasks on each individual worker. Generally, the people “bragging” about working additional hours are not poor performing employees, but people that are dedicated to their job or the company, and believe that the additional hours will help them advance their careers. Approaching it from a place of “if you are a good worker, they should treat you better, not worse” rather than shaming the individual is most likely to help them see the issue with that sentiment. Also, I’m pretty sure it was just a spelling error, but just to be clear I believe this is anti-worker, not anti-work.

Shame is not as effective as offering support, especially since the root cause of the behavior is not necessarily in the persons control. Working additional hours might be seen as a requirement in some fields, so you might be shaming them into not talking about the issue, but the best way to actually solve the problem would likely be to empathize with them and change their perspective.

If someone is in an abusive relationship and they mention the abuse to someone, shaming them for being in that relationship and subjecting themselves to that behavior is unlikely to fix anything. Offering them compassion and support and safe alternatives is demonstrably more effective. Shame is likely to make them more defensive about their choices or stop talking about the abuse they suffer entirely, especially if the issue is not entirely in their control. I think similar behavior and responses would be elicited in the case of working relationships as well. 

Appreciate you adding that last sentence, but ideally no one would work more even for additional pay. People need time to recuperate and enjoy life and in the current system often just getting by requires overtime pay. I’ve worked in both types of positions, and though I’m glad overtime and holiday pay exist in our current system, often the people working more or over the holidays are the most desperate or marginalized.

I think the OP sentiment was directed towards salaried workers because I’ve basically never heard hourly workers talk about it in this way or context. I think the reason salaried employees brag about long hours is largely due to the fact that they might not be getting additional compensation so are at least trying to get social capital in exchange for their time.

“Not normalizing” comes in many forms and this one seems hostile to fellow workers. Approaching it from a place of empathy is far more likely to help than a place of blame. It’s not the workers fault. It’s a systemic problem and the first step to helping someone realize that is to open their eyes to the fact that they are struggling for no reason other than that the institution demands it, not that they are the problem.

The fact that you suggest it’s a cultural issue and then state it can be rectified by organizing is exactly my point. This person is essentially shaming the individual worker for falling prey to a cultural and systemic problem.

I never said we need a socialist revolution. In this context I left system open ended, but you can’t effectively organize anything with people you’re hostile to and unwilling to build solidarity with. I don’t think a socialist revolution is likely or even necessary, but more empathy is. The OP sentiment is not foreplay, it’s outright rejection. It seems like we are actually in agreement.

Is the slave comment supposed to imply that I might be working more than I should? I’m literally saying it’s a bad thing that it happens but we should be sympathetic to people who don’t yet realize that and show them that they are being exploited. I don’t see how this is funny, as there is no punchline or set up or anything. I don’t think everyone needs to agree about comedy but I was sharing my opinion on this sentiment.

What is this anti worker propaganda on .ml? Your fellow worker is brainwashed by the capitalist state and instead of seeking to build solidarity with them you mock them? How about sympathizing with their excessive workload and likely lacking compensation and eventually introducing that a different system would not require that from them?

I definitely second don’t start together as being the best way to play. I also heavily edit the settings so that it’s not as punishing as the default. It makes the game experience feel a little more open world and less full-time grind.

Frostpunk is made by my favorite game studio and I love the genre and all their other games, but I really did not enjoy it. Some reviews mention that the scenarios have such small margins that unless you do things in a specific way, it’s very unlikely you will beat them. I agree with that to a certain extent, but it feels like there’s something else to it too. It’s been years since I played, but the tech tree felt interesting but like it wasn’t properly enmeshed with the gameplay and struggles with an obvious winning strategy that limits your feasible options.

It seems like we just have a difference of opinions, so I’m happy to agree to disagree, but just so that you don’t think I ghosted, I’ll at least reply.

The word hate in this context was meant more in the sense of “haters”, like unnecessary disparagement for the sake of disparagement, which seems in line with your use of the word ridicule.

I’m not sure what you personally would have preferred, but I do not think that this is particularly vague, given the context and the market. If someone’s parent or grandparent walks into an Apple store and is confronted with the base model, and then a pro, a pro max, and a mini, I feel like they will get an overall sense of how those differ. You’ll likely get people saying, well, I don’t need anything too fancy, I just use it to take calls and maybe look some stuff up, so I probably don’t need a pro, but I definitely don’t want the mini version, so maybe I’ll check out the base model, and if that is still too small, I’ll check out the pro max, even though I might not need the Pro aspect, I might like the Max aspect. Mini and Max makes sense in this context as part of an overall spectrum that a layperson could understand. I guess the argument could be that they could give the screen size specifically, but then it would need a different name depending on local usage of the metric system or not. Also, a lot of people don’t understand that some electronics are measured on the diagonal, so that might also be confusing. S/SE Is probably The worst bit of their naming conventions, and they worked on that.

I think it’s pretty evident that the reason they did not choose pretzel rectangle was because those words are not very information dense, or relevant to the product. I feel like this is kind of proving my point?

Considering the market, I don’t think that most people need the general name of the device to have every single specification included. So long as each iteration is distinct, and understandable, people who actually care about what chip is in it can find the information readily. I don’t think most consumers care about a17 or M2, or bionic, or whatever else, and if anything that kind of technical jargon would be more obfuscating.

I get that this is mostly just a meme at this point, but it’s really not a bad naming system. The switch from plus to max was a little weird but it kept things from being iPhone pro plus. It goes

1. Item
2. Iteration
3. Tech specs
4. size

Which is more informative than a lot of other options. Not a diehard fan or anything, but the hate for this particular issue seems overblown.

Always happy to talk about it with people in good faith!

You are partially correct in that I like it because it makes it clear I’m not het without getting into specifics, but I choose it over other similar descriptors for a few additional reasons. I know some people who identify as pansexual and though it’s completely valid to identify with that, I like that queer does not solely refer to sexuality. There are plenty of aromantic pansexuals and asexual people looking for relationships. Because queer doesn’t end in “sexual” I feel like it’s a more wholistic view of the relationship I’m seeking and allows me to discuss it without implying any explicitly sexual feelings. I’m not aro/ace but I feel like it gives people more room in that regard. Similarly, I like that it’s not as restrictive as bisexual, though bisexuals don’t necessarily endorse a gender binary. I like that’s it’s super inclusive, but still leaves me space I feel like pansexual does not reserve for me to find gender identities or expressions that I have a preference for or against. I also like that it gives me an immediate gauge on how people feel about the community as a whole. No true ally will go “well what does that even mean?! You’re all coming up with things just to confuse us” and some trans exclusive or nonbinary exclusive people will push back on it because “bisexual” should be sufficient or some nonsense like that. It allows people to ask questions if it’s relevant to them or they are interested, while still giving people that don’t care as much or might not be interested the general idea that I’m a member of the LGBT community and I’m open about that. I am in a long term monogamous relationship at the moment but this was all relevant when I was dating.

In a more practical sense, to me it means I’m interested in a variety of sexual and gender expressions and though I cannot definitively say I would like any and all combinations of them, I’m more than likely happy to engage if I like the person.