Just an ordinary myopic internet enjoyer.
Can also be found at lemmy.dbzer0, lemmy.world and Kbin.social.
I’d be worried about not really being able to make my own decisions and not having someone there to help me out.
I don’t know about you, but I sure hope I’d be able to check out before that time comes for me. Before my mind and body becomes too feeble, I’d like to be able to just nope out.
Even if it were possible, I still would not prefer to have any kids.
First off, I haven’t even been a “proper adult”, and probably would never be. How can I be expected to raise a child with the care and love they deserve when I don’t even have my life sorted out? Even if you argue that I’d have to change once having a child, I’ve also seen people fail to change even after having children they swore they loved even more than their own life.
Secondly, we’ve already got enough people that are unwanted and abandoned. Why not take better care of people we already have now?
Lastly, parenting is a huge commitment. It’s not just about you and your “legacy”, but another life that will suffer for your mistakes. For those who are up to the task and willingly take on the responsibility, thank you and best of luck!
Because why not? I’m alive by default, and I’m too lazy to change that.
First OS: Windows 3.1 running on top of MS-DOS 6.2
First Linux distro: Ubuntu (forgot the version, but it was circa 2018).
If I’d count an OS/Linux distro that I’ve used even if not in a machine I own, it’d be Linux Mint of circa 2006.
NO
Neither do I self-identify as a tankie, I don’t think anyone who’d identify themselves as tankies would think of me as one.
This isn’t about content, but upcycling is a thing. You can have somewhat fashionable and stylish products made from what would otherwise be waste.
Nope, you’re not alone. I sometimes write a lengthy reply, read it, reread it, and before I get sucked into that overthinking loop, press “post” and go do something else.
I then find myself returning to my reply and re-reading it, often catching mistakes in spelling, grammar, or worse, in how I stated or presented my idea. That’s why a lot of my replies end up being edited after the fact, with a note saying why I felt I had to edit my response.
I’ve tried to discern the context in which you’re asking this question, but based on the OP and their replies, I think it’s not so much about outlining than it is organizing details and thoughts before writing the initial rough draft. I might be wrong and that the OP already knows about what I’d laid down below, but I hope even if it doesn’t help the OP, it might be of help to someone.
Outlining is basically trying to organize your thoughts and all the details mapped out before writing. I assume that all the details are already laid out in one form or the other, and now it’s time to put them into order. What order things would be put into depends on what is being described or being explained.
If I were to describe a house’s interior, I might go from the main door, then proceeding as if I’m physically walking through the house, and then describing objects I encounter as if I’m panning the camera.
If I’m describing a person, I might go with the basic biographical details first, then an overview of their achievements, then personal life. Within each heading, for example, their personal life, I might go chronologically.
If I’m describing a process, I might go with an overview of what the process is for, what are its inputs, steps needed to prepare the inputs for the process, and then the process itself in chronological order. Within each step, I might go into the reasoning behind having to do this step, or why this step must go before (or after) some other step.
If I’m describing an idea, I might go for a general definition first, then go more specific, discussing what makes each specific definition different from the others. I might then go for a quick historical overview of how this idea came into being, what ideas have led to this idea, and the thinkers that have contributed to building up this idea.
That is, there’s a lot of approaches you can use to organize your ideas. You can organize your ideas or details based on location. That is, organizing details spatially, like describing a house’s interior. You can organize your ideas based on time, which came first, which comes next, like describing a process. You can also organize your ideas from most general to the most specific (or vice versa, though starting with the most detailed first might require more concentration on part of the reader). One can use these and any other methods of organization you can think of so long as it makes sense given the context.
How you might organize your ideas or details would depend on what you’re trying to achieve in the first place, and some methods are more suited than others depending on the topic. Lengthier works might even require a mix of these techniques. For example, if I were to describe a city for a D&D campaign, I might describe its layout first, laying out the details as if I were walking through the city. Then, I might describe its government structure from the widest in scope to the narrowest. Is it part of a kingdom? How is the city itself governed? Are there any districts, if so, how are they governed?. I would then give an overview of its history—in chronological order, of course. Any other detail that might be of use (for the DM or the players) can then be listed in order of most prominent or well-known to the least.
Now as a demonstration, I’ll attempt to outline this response:
A source close to the Pope told CNN that the phrase could also be understood as there is a “gay climate” in the seminaries.
I wonder why… Surely it isn’t because a seminary is a good place for a confused, self-hating homosexual to be in, right? Surely it isn’t because being gay was seen as so anathema in Catholic-dominant societies that the seminary seems to be a sanctuary, right?
There’s this saying “a fish is caught through its mouth,” and this is an illustration of what it means. This pope might present this ‘cool’, ‘modern’ image to the public, but his words spoken in private amongst his peers reveals his real stance about these things.
Edit: proofreading.
Target is one creature the caster can touch (can be self). The target can make a wisdom saving throw against the caster’s spell save DC. If successful, the spell ends without having any effect on the target. Otherwise (or if the target chose not to make the wisdom saving throw), the target will immediately taste some really well-made lemonade gin mojito that will linger for as long as the spell is in effect.
For every turn the target takes after this, the target will have to make a constitution saving throw against the caster’s spell save DC. A successful constitution saving throw will restore one first level spell slot. A natural 20 will increase the spell slot level this spell will restore. A failure will end the spell. A critical failure will cause the target to deplete all of their spell slots and the spell ends. Every turn increases the save DC by one.
This might pale in comparison with all the other replies here, but one incident really made me uneasy.
I was seated inside a train minding my own business. I was wearing a loose shirt and an even looser pair of walking shorts. The shorts were made of thin and glossy material. It wasn’t thin enough to expose my underwear but it readily shows any bumps or whatnot.
The train wasn’t that full, and there were lots of empty seats. The train had longitudinal seating (two rows of seats facing each other, with some standing space in between. There’s also an area where the train can “bend”. This area has no seats of course. I was seated next to this “bendy area”.
I remember having difficulty staying awake and was seated in an increasingly loose way. I caught a glimpse of a guy standing in front of me. He was leaning against the train walls and was on his phone.
Now, the train isn’t the most quiet, but I distinctly heard an unmistakeable camera sound which jolted me awake. Selfie cameras on phones wasn’t yet a thing back then and the way his phone is oriented, I can see the phone’s camera lens pointed at me. The guy, noticing that I noticed the sound, quickly put the phone back in his pocket.
I might be wrong, I hope I was wrong, but I thought a stranger took a photo of me just a meter or two away from me.
That’s it. Kinda underwhelming, I suppose but I was kept wondering why that guy, if it’s indeed the case, took a picture of me.
Ah, my bad. I didn’t mean to imply that it being done in a religious context invalidates it, just that the religious context would inform us more about the man’s intent and whether or not they’d continue on doing so regardless of the result.
I used the term “pledge” earlier, but maybe it’s better to use the word “vow” to refer this. The term in Filipino is “panata” (which wiktionary translates to “vow”). It usually isn’t as dramatic as this, however. And as far as I’ve observed, a lot would do these vows after they deem their prayers to have been heard (usually recovery from illness or accidents, or recovery from financial ruin), and thereafter, no matter what, they’d try to fulfill their vows, whether that’d be a crucifixion reenactment, or attending processions, or even just as simple as foregoing alcohol or vices or letting their hair grow.
edit:
I must clarify my position here, I guess. I am neither in favor nor against the practice. But having grown up in the country where these practices occur, I just felt I have to clarify some things. Personally? I don’t mind. They’re doing these things with good intentions, and they’re hurting no one. As far as I know, they don’t force anyone to join them, but rather, make sure that those who are following their footsteps are sure they want to.
I agree with your sentiment, but I felt compelled to comment on one crucial element here: what he has been doing isn’t a protest, but some form of a religious pledge. It just so happened that this year, he’s praying for world peace. This is akin to some traditions in India and other parts where self-flagellation is part of religious ritual, but only for those who pledge themselves to it. It’s touched upon in the article, but he’s been doing it since the 1980’s as thanksgiving for his survival in an accident. Some people just do it once, but some devote their lives to it, and it seems to me that he’s one of the latter.
Whether or not his actions will lead to results doesn’t matter, as far as I see it. He’s already devoted to the bit, and only old age (and poor health) will likely stop him.
Seems like some follow-up work is in order. I’ve seen at least one person not see the point (that it’s on Lemmy). They failed their knowledge check (arcana, or history? IDK)! Maybe someone can lend them some bardic inspiration?
I don’t use a shower, rather, I have a bucket (or two) of water and a dipper. I can ruminate and think about things while giving myself a thorough scrubbing, and not consume any water.
I can take as much time as I need (much to the irritation of people I live with) without consuming any more water.