|
Post by Moni on Jan 21, 2018 1:35:52 GMT -5
ReiquaThe sentence as you have it now is kind of iffy, yeah. I honestly wouldn't use "while" as a conjunction here at all (punctuation-ly, you use a comma before "while" if you mean "although," which I'm assuming is the case here, and you don't use a comma if you're using "while" to mean "at the same time," so you SHOULD use a comma here), since Jax scowling angrily at the officer vs. Shay's look of complete defiance aren't exactly opposites. is probably the easiest fix in that it's technically grammatically correct. For flow reasons I'd probably change ", but" to a semicolon, for the simple reason that Maz kicking at the gutter isn't really deserving of a "but" because... it's not really in opposition to the idea of him not answering the cop. Additionally it helps separate "none of the miscreants answered him" and "Max... complete defiance" as separate ideas more cleanly. ... but since we're using semicolons at that point, it's probably okay to go a step further and sequester "none of the miscreants answered him" in its own separate sentence. Separating them into separate sentences probably allows you the most freedom here since it opens up new syntactic possibilities when it comes to describing Maz's, Shay's, and Jax's actions. If you want to go beyond punctuation I'd probably do something to make it clearer who's directing verbs at what without the bit of redundancy you have. (This is precisely why I don't like editing. :crymoji:)
|
|
|
Post by Reiqua on Jan 21, 2018 4:21:36 GMT -5
Thanks Twillie and Moni! I know it was a very simple question and very simply resolved but I don't regret asking it! Also Moni, you are a wealth of editing knowledge when it comes to all things punctuation. (Which might be why I so often seem to find myself asking you to beta read for me!)
|
|
|
Post by Allison on Mar 3, 2018 13:36:48 GMT -5
I don't know if I feel "silly" asking this, but since this is for any questions, I guess I'll go ahead and ask. Let's say I came up with an idea for a forum game, then found out it's already on here, but if I posted it, I'd be bumping a thread where the last post is over 2 years ago. Should I go ahead an bump the old one, or make a new one?
|
|
|
Post by Coaster on Mar 3, 2018 14:06:17 GMT -5
I don't know if I feel "silly" asking this, but since this is for any questions, I guess I'll go ahead and ask. Let's say I came up with an idea for a forum game, then found out it's already on here, but if I posted it, I'd be bumping a thread where the last post is over 2 years ago. Should I go ahead an bump the old one, or make a new one? I have done that with entire pages of forum games in the past, so even if thread necromancy is generally frowned upon, there is precedent for it. xD;
|
|
|
Post by Gelquie on Mar 3, 2018 15:21:40 GMT -5
Allison - If you're talking about the Games and Interactive Board, and you're talking 2 years and not something from say, 2003, then you're probably good bumping it. While the general rule is to avoid thread necromancy, there is exception for things like games or others that aren't really time-dependent.
|
|
|
Post by Allison on Apr 27, 2018 18:22:16 GMT -5
I feel like this should be obvious, but how do I get a custom title underneath my stars, like some of you have? Do I have to have a certain number of posts first, or something? I don't see where to enter it, if it's an option for me.
|
|
|
Post by Gelquie on Apr 27, 2018 18:33:19 GMT -5
I feel like this should be obvious, but how do I get a custom title underneath my stars, like some of you have? Do I have to have a certain number of posts first, or something? I don't see where to enter it, if it's an option for me. Custom titles can only be entered by mods, but anyone can have one if they want! If you'd like a custom title or would like it changed, make a post requesting one here. Posts are generally deleted after the requests are fulfilled.
|
|
|
Post by Twillie on Apr 27, 2018 18:35:31 GMT -5
I feel like this should be obvious, but how do I get a custom title underneath my stars, like some of you have? Do I have to have a certain number of posts first, or something? I don't see where to enter it, if it's an option for me. That's something you can request over here! And no requirements or anything to have a custom title, just if you want one :3 But yeah, only mods are able to put in custom titles, hence why there's no place to enter it. EDIT: Ninja'd xD
|
|
|
Post by Ryanruff13 on Jul 17, 2018 10:48:28 GMT -5
What are some good outlets for reading up on current events, as close to the original source(s) as possible?
I ask this because (my apologies if this is shameless self-promotion) I have had the idea to start my own social commentary website, and my goal for it is to get more involved in becoming informed about the latest news. The problem is that I have been suffering severe writer's block for some time, and I found that my writer's block extends to my ability to start writing content concerning current events. Plus, I admit with embarrassment that I used to be out of touch with politics for the longest time, so it's difficult for me to know where to do my research beyond hearing about it secondhand.
|
|
|
Post by Ian Wolf-Park on Jul 17, 2018 12:35:56 GMT -5
What are some good outlets for reading up on current events, as close to the original source(s) as possible? I ask this because (my apologies if this is shameless self-promotion) I have had the idea to start my own social commentary website, and my goal for it is to get more involved in becoming informed about the latest news. The problem is that I have been suffering severe writer's block for some time, and I found that my writer's block extends to my ability to start writing content concerning current events. Plus, I admit with embarrassment that I used to be out of touch with politics for the longest time, so it's difficult for me to know where to do my research beyond hearing about it secondhand. Newspapers, magazines and news channels like CNN are probably the best sources for current events as most do have a presence on the Internet, but may charge a subscription fee. Alternatively, you can use sources such as MSN (Mind you, the one that I linked to is the Canadian version), Google News, or the like as they show news from various sources, including the aforementioned newspapers and magazines. I'm a little hesitant to mention Wikipedia for reasons, but I'll mention it anyways as it also has a news page, and the articles have links at the bottom, with some of the links from various newspapers and magazines. In this Internet age, you readily have access to current events.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2018 14:12:16 GMT -5
What are some good outlets for reading up on current events, as close to the original source(s) as possible? I ask this because (my apologies if this is shameless self-promotion) I have had the idea to start my own social commentary website, and my goal for it is to get more involved in becoming informed about the latest news. The problem is that I have been suffering severe writer's block for some time, and I found that my writer's block extends to my ability to start writing content concerning current events. Plus, I admit with embarrassment that I used to be out of touch with politics for the longest time, so it's difficult for me to know where to do my research beyond hearing about it secondhand. Reuters and the Associated Press are newswires, which means that they gather a good number of the stories you see on CNN, MSNBC, BBC, The New York Times, and other news sources. They're good. Apart from that, there's BBC, The Hill, and NPR. There's also The New York Times, Financial Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal--note that unless you have a subscription, many of these newspapers' articles will be behind a paywall. Try to avoid the "big three" of American cable news (CNN, MSNBC, FOX), as they tend to be more sensationalist and gloss over international stories.
|
|
|
Post by Twillie on Oct 13, 2018 17:19:40 GMT -5
Has the 1931 Dracula film aged well? I've been kinda curious to watch it, but I'm skeptical on whether it'll still hold up as a good mystery/horror movie, or if it's like Frankenstein and it's just a huge dated mess now x3;
And I mean, Frankenstein was a delight to watch, so either way I wouldn't complain, but I'm just curious, especially since the same people made both those films.
|
|
|
Post by Moni on Oct 13, 2018 18:18:32 GMT -5
Has the 1931 Dracula film aged well? I've been kinda curious to watch it, but I'm skeptical on whether it'll still hold up as a good mystery/horror movie, or if it's like Frankenstein and it's just a huge dated mess now x3; And I mean, Frankenstein was a delight to watch, so either way I wouldn't complain, but I'm just curious, especially since the same people made both those films. it's aged better than the book ayyyyy (lowkey frankenstein by mary shelly is one of my faves; dracula by bram stoker is... interesting.) but seriously, kind of cheesy, wouldn't expect to be *scared* with it... but a fun watch.
|
|
|
Post by Twillie on Jan 6, 2019 0:29:24 GMT -5
When one starts therapy, what's the first session like? How do you introduce yourself to the therapist, what do they talk about to start things, how in depth do things go, etc.? Like, is the first session more of a "get to know you thing", or is it more on the end of jumping right into what you're there to talk about? And how is that subject of mental health introduced? Do they just simply ask why you're there, what's been on your mind, etc.? Do you need a specific purpose or subject in mind to talk about, or can you go just to talk?
|
|
|
Post by Gelquie on Jan 6, 2019 1:08:17 GMT -5
Twillie - It sort of depends on what kind of session it is. If it's a one-time sort of session without expected follow-up, it'll probably be diving into the issue. If it takes more than that, then the first session is generally down to you talking about yourself so that they have a frame of reference for who they're talking to. The goal there is to help them figure out who you are, what problems you're struggling with, and what you seek to gain from therapy. (It's okay if you don't know; if the therapist is any good, they'll help you figure it out over subsequent sessions. At the very least, you talking about what you're struggling with and your perspective should help them out.) The subject of mental health, in my experience, is kind of assumed in therapy-like situations, so I feel it should be expected to come up. You could possibly start out by talking about what you're there to talk about, whether it's a general sense or an acute sense. If they think that it's more than just an acute issue, they may ask more about you. Oftentimes, they already have questions prepared. You'll just need to be ready to talk about yourself in detail/depth, as much or little as you're comfortable with. (Not saying everything in the first few sessions is to be expected; trust takes time to build and a good therapist should understand that.) I don't generally worry too much about not having a specific purpose in mind to talk about when I come in, though that can help. In my case, there's always something to talk about, so I don't think about the specifics too much. Basically, I feel the first session comes down to getting to know you, and in the next one they start going into it. Though it may be different for more acute cases where you just need to talk about something in particular. They might still try to get to know you a little so they know how to talk to you, but... I dunno; I can't speak for short visits. I feel therapists are also used to those who don't know those answers themselves, so they may be able to answer a lot of these for you. You should feel free and safe to ask these things directly. (If you don't after a reasonable amount of time, that could be a sign you need a different therapist.) Hopefully this answer makes sense. Feel free to poke me if it doesn't, or talk to me on the side.
|
|