ulyssessword
No bio...
User ID: 308
ulyssessword
4d ago
Do a pure mage, no economy run. No items, no selling, no looting (except spell books), no buying. Maybe cheat in some spell books for yourself.
Just cast spells, kill things, and move on to the next quest. You'll never be interrupted by checking for the last couple gold pieces in a ruin, or have to run back to town to sell things since the rules ban you from picking it up anyways. It felt a lot smoother when I tried it, even if I did end up as a stealth archer (Conjure Bow, Muffle, and sometimes Invisibility).
ulyssessword
4d ago
This is so remarkably and verifiably wrong.
Yup. Doesn't stop people from making that argument, either explicitly or by omission.
ulyssessword
4d ago
is she expecting the school to take action against this boy because it's who she and her friends "suspect" created the images without any hard evidence?
Based on other things I've seen elsewhere, probably.
The First Amendment protects free speech from infringement by the Federal Government, the Fifth guarantees due process in the courts, and so on. The principal is not a Fed and their office is not a court, so obviously the constitution does not apply. Do one little rhetorical slip, and suddenly the entire idea of due process is not a valid counterargument to your preferred methods of meting out punishments (anywhere short of a genuine Court of Law, at least).
ulyssessword
5d ago
You do know that these are the same side, right?
You'd think that, and it would be completely logical, but the "replace" side of the UBI issue is less prominent than the "add" side around here. One of the primary drivers of cancelling the trials has been the direct cost of the transfers (as opposed to administration costs, etc.), and the cited benefits boil down to more money.
There's not much point in trying to (retroactively) change a grading rubric and the paper's score so that the actual outcome, your preferred outcome, and the procedurally-fair outcome all match. As a result, practically nobody had that broad of a conversation.
There is a point to setting scientific research standards and Harvard's employees, so that the actual/preferred/fair outcomes all match (in the future, at least).
Also, getting a zero for a substandard paper is wrong, and getting fired for academic fraud is right. We should be keeping different halves of the double standards from those examples.
More options
Context Copy link