most pussy games can be recreated as home versions without buying the experience.
Tell that to my local sex worker, amirite.
(I'm guessing typo?)
crapwittyname
joined 1 year ago
I googled your comment and found the game Monikers which I'd never heard of. I honestly think the DIY version must be better, since there's always someone who's responsible for the name. That makes it so much better as a bonding experience! It's also good across cultures because the people from culture a will know the answers from culture a and the same for culture b, c etc. and it then becomes a natural exchange
Times up!
Needs at least 4 people, a pen and paper and a bowl/hat. And a stopwatch.
Tear the paper so you have about 25-35 pieces of similar size, then give these out to the players.
Everyone writes down a famou name on each of their pieces of paper. Shuffle them up in the bowl. Divide into teams. Set stopwatch for 1 minute.
Round 1: one member of the first team describes the name on the paper without using any of the words written on the paper. The team gets to keep the paper if it's correctly guessed. After a minute, play passes to the next team with a reduced number of papers in the bowl. This continues until all names have been guessed. Count the number of pieces of paper kept by each team and make a note. Return the papers to the bowl.
Round 2: same as round one, but the describer can now only use one word. No miming, no eye signals, one. Word.
Round 3: same as the previous rounds but the describer must stay absolutely silent and can only mime.
The team that scored the most over 3 rounds wins.
I've played this with strangers and with friends and family alike and it's always fun.
Anglesey is doing something right
Yeah, same old. You?
Yes. I should imagine I would be quite happy that you were gone by then.
I think your last sentence answers the OP in a nutshell. There's nothing more to it than that, and there needn't be.
A clockwise rotation turns a car to the right (in forward gear) and tightens a nut (right hand threaded). But this is not a rotation to the right. It's a clockwise rotation. You can't rotate "to the right". That's the point.
Yes, and I would be devastated to see you go.
If you're gripping the bottom of the wheel you move your hands left to make the car turn right. Which is kind of the whole problem here. Rotation around a centre doesn't happen right or left. That's the whole reason why the words "clockwise" and "anticlockwise" exist. Translation = right, left, up, down, forward, back. Rotation = clockwise, anticlockwise.
You're the problem. You get that, right?
Your comment doesn't stand up. It seems you've got something against fusion energy for some reason.
On cost: it's a best guess, since we don't yet have a working fusion reactor. The error bars on the cost estimates are huge, so while it is possible fusion will be more expensive, with current data you absolutely cannot guarantee it. Add to that the decreasing costs as the technology matures, like we've seen in wind and especially solar over recent decades.
On nuclear physics PhDs: that's no different to any energy generation, you need dozens of experts to build and run any installation.
On waste: where are you getting this info on the blanket? The old beryllium blanket design has been replaced with tungsten and no longer needs to be replaced. The next step is to test a lithium blanket which will actually generate nuclear fuel as the reaction processes.
This is the important fact that you have omitted, for some reason.
And that is why it's so important this technology is developed. It's incredibly clean and, yes, limitless.
As for your advice, there was a time not long ago when we didn't understand how to build fission plants either, and it cost a lot of time and money to learn how. I wonder if people back then were saying we should just stick to burning coal because we know how that works.