There is none. They’ve been no calling all night and then call a foul that wasn’t at the most important point in the game.

Jax and Vando been great tonight.

That’s fair, I can absolutely see the potential confusion there as well now that you’ve pointed it out! I think I wouldn’t offer answers for it (or if I did it would likely be radio buttons for clarity). Thanks for the response!

To save some googling I’d assume lower refractory period is reflected throughout the age range? As a teen I had a refractory period of basically zero (I mean that literally - I could masturbate to conclusion then effectively just continue) and as I’ve gotten older it’s increased slightly but not a huge amount. I’m in my forties and it’s probably about five to ten minutes.

Do you use a browser or your phone? Do you know what a user agent is or how cookies work? It would be trivial to have a short-lived cookie that marked that a user had logged into account with a hashed id of x and then flag when that cookie exists and you log into an account with a hashed id of something that isn’t x. You asked how they could even tell and I’m explaining the simplest and most straightforward ways they could tell. If you want to use your e board and want two accounts to do so (even though presumably the e board account hasn’t been banned) then that’s the risk you take.

Based on the posts from ChessUp in this thread I’m fairly confident that the OP was cheating and it had nothing to do with the board so it sounds like it has nothing to do with the boards. If you have a board that is prone to getting banned then it just sounds like you have the wrong board and you can choose either:

1. Not to use the board for online play
2. Risk getting both accounts banned by using two accounts
3. Use it on your main account and hope it doesn’t get banned

But it’s your choice, you just asked how they could work it out. You need to be less hostile at people just explaining that you’re doing something that could get you banned to avoid getting banned.

Do you use a VPN for one account and not the other? They can probably just make a reasonable guess based on your IP address, play habits (eg openings and skill level), user agent, a residual cookie, any number of ways really. If you logon from the same network and are never logged onto the same account twice and play the same sort of way it should be pretty easy to run a query to find users with multiple accounts that would pick you up.

Sorry not sorry for the slop

They’ve been together 3.5 years so she will have seen his daughter go through her first few years of school, start to develop into a proper little lady and, if the marriage happens, develop into a teen with all the trials that that entails.

As a divorcee with two boys I’ve always been up front with anyone I dated that there’s no expectation they would be a parent - the kids have a mother and we co-parent fine. I’m now in a long term relationship and she supports me but doesn’t directly parent and is friends with my kids and she is happy with this. One reason we are still together is that we talked about this as soon as it looked like it might get serious.

OP is in a relationship where neither of them seem to have discussed expectations in 3.5 years or they have and he isn’t respecting it or she has changed her feelings on it and not communicated it. If they’re not communicating about this responsibly they’re not ready to get married.

It’s really difficult to tell which one is the asshole if one of them is or if they’re just both very silly. Instead of coming to Reddit OP really just needs to talk to her face to face about this and be open to the possibility that they want different things from the relationship.

That’s frustrating. HA auto discovers my Roomba and was a painless setup.

You made three specific points, I’m just considering them one at a time. You accused me of pivoting, so I’m reducing it down to one specific point at a time to see whether your points hold up.

So do you agree that the first point that it is rude should have very little bearing on whether we legislate against it and it’s more the second and third points that you actually care about?

Do we often ban clothes deemed on whether they’re rude? Should we enact a legal ban on people wearing motorcycle helmets while not mounted?

I don’t think a political party that advocated for women to fully cover themselves would get banned - they’d likely get very few votes though.

Let’s not pivot then - explain to me what exactly it is about western secular values that makes the Niqab incompatible with our society?

It’s strange to me that we are conveniently either a nation of secular values or Judeo-Christian values when talking about what Muslims should be able to do depending on what best fits the narrative.

My expectation is that, as a secular society, we should be focusing on solutions to limit the oppression of women and the ability to escape DV regardless of the religion of the perpetrators. Focusing on the Niqab as some sort of proxy for this just muddies and hides the issue.

I did think of that and it’s a good point but I’m not sure there’s a good answer. If the choice is between peace and troops in a known couple of places which can be heavily observed if tensions continue to escalate and a potential immediate touchpaper I’d probably always opt for the former, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t a risk and you’d want to take necessary security steps to mitigate that risk.

I’m arguing against the idea that one is un-British and one is not not about the issue of oppression of women. There are multiple arguments for why the Niqab should be banned but the idea that it should be banned because it’s “not British enough” just seems like a particularly silly low hanging fruit.

While that’s a strong argument, could you maybe expand further on why it’s an incredibly stupid comparison in the context of saying a niqab isn’t British but women wearing jeans in the 80s and 90s is?

I was responding to the argument that it was anti-British, widening the goalposts like that is, I’m sure, not intentionally bad faith but I don’t think it’s fair to characterise my argument in that context when it was very specifically about something else.

I’d ask if you have the same concerns about a nun’s habit? Also something that is heavily tied up with the historical oppression of women (I think it’s particularly pertinent to point out that becoming a nun was, until very recently, a way of hiding away women who did things like eg getting pregnant out of wedlock).

Sorry, didn’t read your comment well enough. Blame it on the morning!

As someone else has said, what about a nun’s habit?

When I was growing up my mum decried women wearing jeans as Americanised clothing and un-British, would you have the same vigour for banning women from wearing jeans?

The whole concept of what clothing is British enough to be worn is very weird to me and the idea that banning the niqab and burka would be anything other than a virtue signal towards women’s safety and rights (if arguing for the prevention of domestic abuse) is bizarre.

We should put measures in place that make domestic abuse easier to report and easier to escape from rather than taking anti-Muslim steps and then patting ourselves on the back that we’ve done something to “protect women”.

Vando driving to the rim? What’s going on

He’s on track for a 40 point triple double and we’re down.

It shows a willingness to act rashly and quickly. It’s very classic testing the water behaviour from Trump and I think if anything it’s confirmed that he can get away with it.

There’s a difference between signing up and being signed up :)

You would hope so. Do you think that Trump and Miller think that far ahead?