What if you’re a farmer and are addressing a sow?

Yeah, I have to fight the temptation not to fix typos sometimes!

The biggest thing preventing me from doing something like this is that I like having my players do a recap of the previous session, as a way to help me know what caught their attention the most/what mattered to them.

I guess you could still do this, especially if you really lean into the idea that the reporter is presenting an extremely biased/limited recap.

I’m not sure what “piece linked” you’re talking about, since none of the parent comments of this comment actually have a link in them.

This is the first time I’ve ever heard of FUTO, but I did read their statement about open source and it sounds pretty good to me. I actually think they’re capitulating a little bit too much by deciding not to call it open source anymore. As far as I’m concerned, if the source is available and anyone can contribute, that’s open source. I don’t particularly care whether or not it’s free for Google to incorporate it into their increasingly-enshitified products or not.

Creative Commons (an org to which FUTO says they have donated) doesn’t like their licences being used for software, presumably for finicky technical legal reasons. But if you imagine the broad spirit of their licences applying to software, all the main CC licences would be open source in my opinion. All combinations of Attribution, Non-Commercial, Share Alike, and No Derivatives, as well as CC0 respect the important elements of open source.

Fuck yeah Juice Media

Sure, but that’s because, as said, the Korean War was fought by the United Nations. A huge number of countries were involved in a small way. It was certainly not “for the French”.

Not sure the downvotes are fair. You’re certainly not wrong about the underlying reason that the US supported it.

But I do think it’s a bit off base because it ignores the fact that this wasn’t an attempt to ideologically spread communism, it was an attempt by one communist country (backed by two other much more powerful communist countries) to invade and force their style of authoritarian communism onto their neighbour.

Korea had nothing to do with France.

You’re probably thinking of Vietnam. Although even that, to say it was “for the French” would be a massive exaggeration. French Indochina ended before the start of the Vietnam War (known locally as the American War) proper, and France regaining its former colonies was never on the table, no matter the outcome. American foreign policy at the time was staunchly anti-imperial. Or at least anti the form of explicit imperialism Europe had engaged in over the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries.

Korea? You mean that war fought by the United Nations to defend against an aggressive invasion from their much more powerful (and foreign-backed) neighbours? That Korea?

😭

Yeah, I’m not going to disagree with you about how she became Oracle being highly problematic. But that, to me, is an entirely separate conversation from whether Oracle herself is good disabled representation, which is what I thought this conversation was about.

Because of the way the story exploits both the “damsel in distress” trope of Barbara Gordon

I’ll admit, I don’t read actual comics, so I’m only familiar with it from some of the times it’s been adapted for screen. But apart from the fridging-esque nature of how she becomes disabled, but I’m not sure how she’s used as a damsel in distress once she becomes Oracle.

and the weird “disability gives you superpowers[”] angle

Does it? I thought Oracle was just very competent and intelligent, what you’d expect of a Bat-family member who can’t be physically involved.

No, I don’t accept Oracle as a redeeming character

Umm, why not?

Looks like the followup ancestry feat is more applicable to this image. I do like the idea of it costing an ancestry feat to get though. Implies it’s a feature some nephilim have, but not the majority.

Oh that’s good, because I was gonna say, tieflings don’t have prehensile tails in the Realms.

So for example, “an ewt” became “a newt” or “a eke-name” became “a nickname”.

I think you might be right about what agglutination is in your description, but not in this example. Examples I’m seeing are more like “-s” to make something plural, or “anti-” to say that something is against something else.

Some Wikipedia:

Analytic languages contain very little inflection, instead relying on features like word order and auxiliary words to convey meaning. Synthetic languages, ones that are not analytic, are divided into two categories: agglutinative and fusional languages.

So unlike what I thought previously, agglutination vs fusion is not what we care about here, synthetic vs analytic languages is. English’s practice of creating compound words like “cellar door” is analytic. A more purely analytic language would probably not say “two cellar doors” but merely “two cellar door”. And an antihistamine would be a “histamine opposer”. And German’s famous “words created by shunting other words together” is not really agglutination, but morphologically the same as what English does (seemingly called “inflection”, if I’m reading this right), just with different orthographic rules.

Which I guess brings us back to the question: what does Sending count as a word? My instinct is to say that the way English puts spaces is a good baseline to follow, not least because the creators of D&D are anglophones. What, then, would Donau­dampfschifffahrts­gesellschafts­kapitän be? Probably 5. But if you asked the average German speaker (non-linguist) “how many words is Donau­dampfschifffahrts­gesellschafts­kapitän?” what would they say?

I’m not a linguist so I could be wrong, but I think that they would tell you that there is a difference between agglutination (what German does) and adding adjectives as separate words (what English does), even in spoken language. But I also know that even defining “word” in a strict linguistic sense is difficult, so 🤷‍♂️