swim

Would you say what you’re seeking is “more intimacy,” up to, potentially, the most possible intimacy?

I would suggest looking at his different interests and getting curious. If you’re interested in the guy, it should be pretty easy to find reasons why this film or that game are endearingly-this-or-that in a way that makes you like and respect him even more.

Then, you bond over it; by trusting his taste (intimacy) enough to check out that show or whatever interest, you now have an opportunity to get deep (intimacy) into what you each individually felt (intimacy) about it, and maybe you felt something in common. That’s some foundation for intimacy.

I use tagging in Boost

Oh yeah well im bigly better at gulf than you

What? What? Fat chance, jack

etc.

Lol bad take

Reference

But I’ve read they have since mitigated the traceability of their pizza eating through various means.

Yes, and I feel like the Republicans as you describe them would aptly be called “creepy.”

And I think “cringe” is often a feeling of second-hand embarrassment.

“Weird” and “strange” are more general and synonymous with “unusual” and “peculiar.”

None of that is in disagreement with your take, though

Shamming

This is a christian server

Just because you’re not wrong doesn’t mean you’re right. “Spray and pray” is the lowest form of divine intervention. - Laws of Murphy, 69:420

How a gun “works” is that a thick-walled chamber houses the cartridge, so that as the powder ignited within rapidly expands (deflagration) there is nowhere for it to go besides violently propelling the projectile into the barrel. If there is no chamber, the thin walls of the cartidge are the path of least resistence, and the bullet likely stays put as the gases escape from cracks in the casing.

So no, while this wouldn’t be “safe” (eye damage comes to mind), there would not be enough energy to significantly wound a human by striking a round’s primer without a chamber.

No barrel makes the whole round detonate. The bullet is ineffective, the “gun” explode :(

I think it could very well be dissolving at least a coating. I would use more dilute IPA. 👍

Believe it or not, there have been well-reasoned, aptly articulated arguments against capitalism delivered by earnest, enlightened people (and members of every class), delivered chiefly out of compassion for their fellow man, for over 200 years.

Anti-capitalism sentiment is in no way a transient sensation. It’s clear from your comments you aren’t well-read on the subject, and I don’t mean that as an insult; with some even-keeled reading of relevant works rather than knee-jerk dismissal of all criticism of capitalism as people looking for something to “blame for their woes,” you will undoubtedly have a better grasp on the world and your own position in it.

This is it, folks

Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?

Prosecution, but yeah. Persecute this shithead

So true

That’s the mistake you’ve been making that I pointed out: they were never challenging the fact that knowing employment law will protect your job when protesting. They were challenging a conflation of the law with company policy.

No one in this discussion thinks the Constitution will protect them from termination when the company has employment law on their side, they’re insisting against (what seemed to be your) assertions that acting against company policy was a matter of criminal law.

E: They said “It is […] legal to voice political opinions, even on company time, even on company platforms, and it is also legal for the company to fire the people doing so.” And you replied "That’s the misinformation that caused these people their jobs. Stop spreading it. You’re wrong, and dangerously misinforming others about US laws. You cannot voice political opinions at work if the company has a policy against the practice." They weren’t spreading misinformation, man. You, however, are using words like “you cannot” about company policy, like a bootlicker.

Trespassing is against the law, yep. Doesn’t look like anybody was disputing that or ignorant of anything you’re talking about. The person above was correctly making a needed distinction; “the law” has been conflated with “company policy.”

A small amount of education on the law as it relates to murder and homicide will disabuse you of this naiveté.