I simply don't like the taste of many things. I've never been officially tested, but I suspect I may have extra sensitivity to certain compounds, such that no matter how many other things are in a dish, I can still taste that one thing that I don't like. I also suspect that I am more sensitive to all tastes in general, as there are many foods that have been described to me as "mild" that I find are quite strong.
Now, I'll still try most things once. There are limits, mostly involving spiciness,, but I wouldn't want to be thought of as ungrateful or close-minded. It's just that I've disliked far more things than I've liked when trying new foods.
I also resent the common refrain of, "You just haven't had good [food in question] yet!" Actually, I probably have, and I still didn't like it. It has nothing to do with how it is prepared or what other ingredients are in the dish, that food still has its fundamental taste that I don't like.
It's not food, but I like using wine as an example. It doesn't matter whether it's the cheap boxed stuff from the supermarket or some expensive vintage at a fancy restaurant, because both taste like overripe grapes in addition to whatever other flavours present, and I don't like the taste of overripe grapes.
Right, I'm mostly familiar with Canada (my own country) and the USA (by cultural osmosis).
Still, the legal burden on the grandparents to get access to their grandkids seems sufficiently high. It's far cry from the idea many people seem to have of grandparents' rights, i.e. the right of the grandparenta to see their grandkids supercedes that of the parents to control whom the kids interact with.
If you read the article, it's mostly about visitation to maintain an existing relationship after a divorce, rather than mandating visits between toxic grandparents and their grandkids above the objections of the parents.
Grandparents' rights are not what many people seem think they are. It's not a court ordering a couple to let estranged/toxic grandparents have access to their grandkids above the objections of the parents.
Rather, it is adjusting custody arrangements during separation/divorce so that grandparents can maintain an existing relationship wth their grandkids. For example, if a couple is separating and the mother gains primary custody, the father's parents can apply to get visitation rights with the kids. It's not automatic, as they would have to meet the burden of, "in the best interest of the children," to the satisfaction of the judge.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, but this is my understanding of the issue from reading discussions and papers (including the one linked in another post in this thread).
Yes, I know some of those are technically pronounced differently, but the average English speaker can't tell.
But honestly, as someone who learned French as an adult, the biggest hurdle is knowing which combinations of letters make which sounds. Many are completely illogical - the 3rd person plural verb conjugations are particularly weird - but there is less inconsistentcy than English. The harder part is actually trying to get your English tongue to say words like "aéroport" or "heureux" or "accueillir" properly.
There are always some outliers, like "oeuf" (egg) being pronounced "uhf" while the plural "oeufs" being pronounced "oo", but you get used to those.
I think it's the case with most Slavic languages. My wife's native tongue is Serbian, and knowinf when and how to use articles was one the hardest parts of learning English for her.
I seem to remember reading about how he once torpedoed his own bill when he found out the Democrats were going to support it, because he valued denying the Democrats a bipartisan win more than he valued the effects of the bill itself.
I also remember reading about the time he blamed Obama for the unintended consequences of a piece of legislation. Obama had vetoed the initial passage, and Congress re-passed it with a veto-proof majority. But somehow, Obama was at fault because I guess he didn't warn the Congress-critters hard enough or something.
If true, neither of these would be the worst things he ever did, not even close. But they are emblematic of his desire to score purely partisan wins above most anything else.
Most is Slay the Spire, and I don't even think it's close. And I say that having bought it twice, once on Steam and once on mobile.
Least, I'm tempted to day League of Legends or Overwatch, both of which I bought extra cosmetic stuff for and neither of which I play anymore - and I'm not sure I even liked either of them much when I was playing.
But not knowing (and not wanting to know) how much money I've spent on either, I'll instead say either Imperator: Rome or Victoria III. I preordered both with extras, and ended up only putting around 40 hours into both before giving up. Compare that to other Paradox grand strategy games, where I can easily have 500+ hours played, and I really feel like I didn't get my money's worth.
Most of that is a mismatch of the series to my tastes in games. It just takes a lot for me to like open-world games, and GTA has never hit the mark.
The other small part is just my preteen self being resentful that GTA3 was the game that brought all my classmates into the hobby, instead of a game that I actually liked.
He got one way of doing Bond: the superhero in a tuxedo. I like that version when it really works (Live and Let Die), and I at least find it entertaining when it becomes too undignified (Octopussy). The worst I'll say about Moore is that he probably should have exited the series one movie earlier, if only for the ick factor of his age vs the female leads.
I think the other way of doing Bond properly is to make him a suave, devil-may-care sociopath, like Craig in Casino Royale. This is closer to the way he is in the books. But there's always the danger of losing all levity and veering into grimdark, and then you end up with something like the wounded dog Bond from No Time to Die.
My favourite Bond is actually Brosnan, whom I think had the best of both worlds: absolutely ludicrous plots and villains, but also a dangerous edge. He was the first Bond to actually look like he had been given more than cursory training with firearms.
I'm really hoping that legislation will be in place to curb this sort of thing by the time my kids are old enough to want to watch sports. I'm not thrilled at the prospect of those ads marinating in their young brains, and I don't relish the thought of trying to explain to a credulous 8-year-old that we can't win millions of dollars betting on hockey games.
Hoping is different than expecting, unfortunately.
Except the demon is also an idiot because she doesn't have a tail and is way less agile than she thinks she is.
I simply don't like the taste of many things. I've never been officially tested, but I suspect I may have extra sensitivity to certain compounds, such that no matter how many other things are in a dish, I can still taste that one thing that I don't like. I also suspect that I am more sensitive to all tastes in general, as there are many foods that have been described to me as "mild" that I find are quite strong.
Now, I'll still try most things once. There are limits, mostly involving spiciness,, but I wouldn't want to be thought of as ungrateful or close-minded. It's just that I've disliked far more things than I've liked when trying new foods.
I also resent the common refrain of, "You just haven't had good [food in question] yet!" Actually, I probably have, and I still didn't like it. It has nothing to do with how it is prepared or what other ingredients are in the dish, that food still has its fundamental taste that I don't like.
It's not food, but I like using wine as an example. It doesn't matter whether it's the cheap boxed stuff from the supermarket or some expensive vintage at a fancy restaurant, because both taste like overripe grapes in addition to whatever other flavours present, and I don't like the taste of overripe grapes.
Right, I'm mostly familiar with Canada (my own country) and the USA (by cultural osmosis).
Still, the legal burden on the grandparents to get access to their grandkids seems sufficiently high. It's far cry from the idea many people seem to have of grandparents' rights, i.e. the right of the grandparenta to see their grandkids supercedes that of the parents to control whom the kids interact with.
If you read the article, it's mostly about visitation to maintain an existing relationship after a divorce, rather than mandating visits between toxic grandparents and their grandkids above the objections of the parents.
Grandparents' rights are not what many people seem think they are. It's not a court ordering a couple to let estranged/toxic grandparents have access to their grandkids above the objections of the parents.
Rather, it is adjusting custody arrangements during separation/divorce so that grandparents can maintain an existing relationship wth their grandkids. For example, if a couple is separating and the mother gains primary custody, the father's parents can apply to get visitation rights with the kids. It's not automatic, as they would have to meet the burden of, "in the best interest of the children," to the satisfaction of the judge.
Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, but this is my understanding of the issue from reading discussions and papers (including the one linked in another post in this thread).
Yes, I know some of those are technically pronounced differently, but the average English speaker can't tell.
But honestly, as someone who learned French as an adult, the biggest hurdle is knowing which combinations of letters make which sounds. Many are completely illogical - the 3rd person plural verb conjugations are particularly weird - but there is less inconsistentcy than English. The harder part is actually trying to get your English tongue to say words like "aéroport" or "heureux" or "accueillir" properly.
There are always some outliers, like "oeuf" (egg) being pronounced "uhf" while the plural "oeufs" being pronounced "oo", but you get used to those.
I think it's the case with most Slavic languages. My wife's native tongue is Serbian, and knowinf when and how to use articles was one the hardest parts of learning English for her.
In at least one other place in the script his serial number is R-66Y instead.
"Donald Duck-ing it."
I'm already never buying another Samsung phone - or any other Samsung device, for that matter. You don't need to keep convincing me.
Any other Canadian kids remember this book series?
I seem to remember reading about how he once torpedoed his own bill when he found out the Democrats were going to support it, because he valued denying the Democrats a bipartisan win more than he valued the effects of the bill itself.
I also remember reading about the time he blamed Obama for the unintended consequences of a piece of legislation. Obama had vetoed the initial passage, and Congress re-passed it with a veto-proof majority. But somehow, Obama was at fault because I guess he didn't warn the Congress-critters hard enough or something.
If true, neither of these would be the worst things he ever did, not even close. But they are emblematic of his desire to score purely partisan wins above most anything else.
Most is Slay the Spire, and I don't even think it's close. And I say that having bought it twice, once on Steam and once on mobile.
Least, I'm tempted to day League of Legends or Overwatch, both of which I bought extra cosmetic stuff for and neither of which I play anymore - and I'm not sure I even liked either of them much when I was playing.
But not knowing (and not wanting to know) how much money I've spent on either, I'll instead say either Imperator: Rome or Victoria III. I preordered both with extras, and ended up only putting around 40 hours into both before giving up. Compare that to other Paradox grand strategy games, where I can easily have 500+ hours played, and I really feel like I didn't get my money's worth.
Also this
The Ogre Battle series calls to you.
I'll go one further: I've never liked GTA.
Most of that is a mismatch of the series to my tastes in games. It just takes a lot for me to like open-world games, and GTA has never hit the mark.
The other small part is just my preteen self being resentful that GTA3 was the game that brought all my classmates into the hobby, instead of a game that I actually liked.
He got one way of doing Bond: the superhero in a tuxedo. I like that version when it really works (Live and Let Die), and I at least find it entertaining when it becomes too undignified (Octopussy). The worst I'll say about Moore is that he probably should have exited the series one movie earlier, if only for the ick factor of his age vs the female leads.
I think the other way of doing Bond properly is to make him a suave, devil-may-care sociopath, like Craig in Casino Royale. This is closer to the way he is in the books. But there's always the danger of losing all levity and veering into grimdark, and then you end up with something like the wounded dog Bond from No Time to Die.
My favourite Bond is actually Brosnan, whom I think had the best of both worlds: absolutely ludicrous plots and villains, but also a dangerous edge. He was the first Bond to actually look like he had been given more than cursory training with firearms.
I'll generally prefer silly James Bond over boring or depressing James Bond.
"The card says Moops"
I'm really hoping that legislation will be in place to curb this sort of thing by the time my kids are old enough to want to watch sports. I'm not thrilled at the prospect of those ads marinating in their young brains, and I don't relish the thought of trying to explain to a credulous 8-year-old that we can't win millions of dollars betting on hockey games.
Hoping is different than expecting, unfortunately.