Gromnir

curious is a large % of recipes we got which call for canola "or other neutral oil." the thing is, Gromnir ain't a fan o' canola, but all too often we use anyway... just 'cause? well, real reason is canola has a longish shelf life and am usual using tablespoons or teaspoon quantities so a decent sized bottle will last us a bit less than eight months, which is a few months short o' when canola goes rancid. still, we don't like canola and am considering experimenting to broaden our horizons. we have, infrequent, tried a few other options, but nothing seemed like a particular improvement over canola. folks got input on their alternative "neutral oil"? if you got multiple options (e.g. one for cooking a steak v. a vegetable dish) do not hesitate to share options. thanks in advance. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking data mining revealed to obsidian how infrequent sidekicks were being used. one suspects players who used companions wanted real companions, and the people unconcerned 'bout companion v sidekick differences were just as likely to create custom party members as to use sidekicks. were also a way to give players more new content which would feel genuine new. a couple extra lines from eder or aloth might go unnoticed, whereas sidekick additions would be more obvious. is nothing more than a guess, but am thinking obsidians made an effort to give players a reason to use sidekicks. ... furthermore, gotta suck as a developer to add something to a game you think is kewl and then have nobody recognize your effort. why not, given an opportunity to make post release changes, improve chances for under explored content to be getting recognition. personal pov and in the spirit o' full disclosure, is no way in hell Gromnir bothers with ydwin in party if not for fact we were told by developers the sidekick would have considerable input during dialogues/cutscenes o' BoW. HA! Good Fun!

wanted to like new blade runner. didn't. weren't as if first installment were free o' angst laden introspection, but 2049 were like a tom stoppard play, but bloated, w/o any humor and absent any likeable characters. by the middle o' the movie, we wanted the movie to end, soon rather than later. HA! Good Fun!

so weird. possible the first time we referenced neville chamberlain in 15 years on the board and very next day chill sees need to confront us with, o' all things, a wiki entry for chamberlain. but chill is correct, in late 1980s, during a cpl playoff game, we did repeated stay back in our two-deep assignment rather than sneaking up to stop the run. team got torched multiple times for big ground gains late in a close game. we were so concerned 'bout giving up the big play that we got burned for multiple ten and fifteen yard runs... enough to set up game winning field goal for opponents as it turns out. *insert shame-faced emoji here* if chill sees parallel elsewhere, am baffled... regardless, we do recommend folks clicking on the links we provided to see chill were not only wrong 'bout Gromnir frequency o' indulgence, but evidencing his own obvious hypocrisy. momentary amusing, if tedious exercise. serious though, neville chamberlain? HA! Good Fun!

spent abnormal amounts o' time at our pc... looking for potential replacement parts to be building a new pc. we were gonna wait 'til black friday, but with the trade war looming, am suspecting is better to get some o' our tech purchases in before new pricing kicks into effect. last year, when looked like rockport were going under, we bought multiple pairs o' hiking and walking shoes, so at least we got casual/athletic footwear covered. HA! Good Fun!

no doubt. nevertheless, is possible some sensitive folks were, what is word, triggered by the fox news snippet and the "adversity score" language. 'could see how a few folks connected dots which didn't actual exist. even so, adversity scores is gonna identify groups w/o needing in indulge in legal ambiguous exploration o' backgrounds. state universities stymied by Court efforts to make certain aspects o' a applicant's background more relevant in the admissions process will be able to use adversity score as an alternative route to achieve similar end purposes. HA! Good Fun!

am risking the dreaded double-post, but is kinda worth it... is nevertheless on us as we forgot to mention an important detail. 'least the detail appeared important to gifted. in any event, underlined status from gifted post is not one o' the 15 factors in the sat's new adversity score. HA! Good Fun!

am also pleased with gorsuch. is already the third best writer on the Court. unfortunate, am embarrassed by the kavanaugh circus. the thing is, we woulda' also been satisfied (if less pleased) with merrick garland even if we don't share his legal philosophy. moderate. competent. character? am not certain what senate woulda' uncovered, but considerable time passed after obama tabbed garland for the scalia vacancy and the worst thing anybody discovered 'bout him is that he had an extensive comic book collection, which he sold to help pay for law school. tutored elementary school kids in spite o' his busy schedule. oh well. as for chill... anybody may click the links. check list o' Gromnir posts. check yours. let'em decide. compare us to neville chamberlain? ... okie dokie. HA! Good Fun!

our choice in no way made gary johnson a better candidate, and investing libertarian dollars in a hopeless national campaign when money and effort woulda' been far better spent on winnable local and state offices don't make your defense any better. that said, if in 2016 we were in a battleground state and we voted gary johnson 'stead o' clinton, chances are we woulda felt sick. clinton were almost equal on the skeevy scale compared to trump, but of those choices available, she were the most competent. a clinton Presidency mighta' been an ideal situation for the Court as well. with a republican senate, only genuine qualified and moderate appointees by clinton woulda' won approval. sure, the appointees woulda' been a bit more activist than we prefer, but again, competence and character, eh? instead, a few o' the fed judges being lightning approved by the senate is having dubious qualifications and/or character. clinton, from day 1, woulda' been a virtual lame duck, which would be gd's ideal President as far as we can tell. republican senate and house woulda' prevented any meaningful changes domestic. so with clinton we would necessarily get competent and unimpeachable (figurative) appointees as well as functional greater state influence as fed influence dwindled while exec and legislature worked at cross purposes... or found limited room for bipartisan common ground. our dislike o' clinton could be described as approaching loathing, but am forced to consider the possibility a kodos win woulda' been better for america. HA! Good Fun!

dear lord. anybody who clicks on the link will see how often you get yourself embroiled in the topics we identified. select the exceptions helps with none save those who don't bother to clicky and perhaps those who share your preoccupations. not a particular good try... mate. HA! Good Fun!

funny. am not certain we can identify another recent politics thread post where we added skin color into the discussion. most recent Gromnir + race post related to politics we found were the following from 2016: not exact the kinda example you are looking for, but there you go. welcome to look for the trend. we did join the maga catholic school boys and black isrealites discussion in january o' this year (*gasp*) but is hardly Gromnir who raised race issue, and again we demurred, suggesting the confrontation were blown way outta proportion. am thinking your own preconceptions is coloring your memory or perspective. kinda fixated. and no, trump doesn't get to be Gromnir's benchmark just because he were elected. were the question o' Gromnir's standards for requisite competence and character for candidates for prez. fact trump got elected do not mean we need stoop to levels seeming acceptable to chill. HA! Good Fun!

why do people keep trying to use trump as the benchmark? when did trump become the minimum standard for competence and/or morality? lord knows we has often criticized trump for his ignorance and mendacity, so pointing out what a maroon is trump makes little sense in the present context. and no, poor and white males is not 51% of voters much less population. not even close. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/ https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2012/08/22/chapter-2-middle-class-demographics/ nevertheless, it is a significant enough percentage, particularly as so many such folks voted obama previous. HA! Good Fun!

am knowing why you say you have voted for hopeless candidates. is why we brought up the actual popular vote and perot as well as aleppo. am understanding why aleppo is a sore spot. aleppo severe undercuts your argument... and is embarrassing. if the national recognition you is getting for libertarians is the kinda ridicule resulting from aleppo comments, then it ain't helping expand future opportunities for libertarians. is why we has suggested the alternative o' starting local and developing qualified candidates rather than wasting votes and money on hopeless candidates. gd dogged defense o' libertarian alternative in spite o' lack o' candidate or platform is so profound bass ackwards we have trouble contemplating a more flawed approach. similar, but less bootless, were the folks who voted trump. same reasoning as exhibited in your silly license plate image and list. trump were a viable option for all those poor and white rural americans who voted obama and felt abandoned. can't trust democrats and they didn't genuine trust any traditional republican candidate... so pick the outsider with no experience and a penchant for saying stoopid stuff when a microphone is pointed his way 'cause at least he ain't like all the other politicians. but yeah, am seeing cause for your confusion. our insistence on voting for most qualified and admirable candidate must be difficult to accept if you are so invested in subverting the dominant paradigm that abilities and character is secondary issues. HA! Good Fun!

so, asking us to prove a negative? regardless, is nothing in those paragraphs which suggests the use o' such numbers is mandatory. by what mechanic would the sat folks be able to compel schools to utilize their new number? full article is available via msn if you are interested, but lord knows how you will get any closer to enlightenment. HA! Good Fun!

agreed on this point. point o' the adversity score wasn't least unclear. were a knee-jerk reaction to ascribe some kinda import and value to sat's new number beyond which were readily apparent. am nevertheless relieved the ambiguity were dispelled even if the cause o' confusion remains elusive. HA! Good Fun!

we have heard your specious reasoning regarding the vote for 2016 many times. you dragging out the libertarian presidential candidates to get beaten over and over again ain't ironic? have gary johnson's and similar embarrass themselves and libertarian cause on national stage were not a win, no matter how gd tries to reimagine. aleppo didn't matter to you? that is exact the problem. arguable most important area o' knowledge for a President is beside the point for gd. johnson garnered 3.27% o' the popular vote. perot, as an independent, got better than 19%... and he were smart enough to realize 19% weren't anywhere near enough. perot gave up as independent. libertarians... well, you are beating the same freaking horse with same freaking clubs overandov erandoverandoverandoverandover. we would happily vote libertarian if there were a decent libertarian candidate. however, actual competence o' candidates is a uniquely Gromnir requirement in our debates on this matter. drag out same dead horse again, and you are gonna once again get aleppo'd and perot'd and 3.27%. pretend as if obvious incompetent candidates will improve voter wellbeing or libertarian cause is gonna get same reply from us as your act o' equine necroviolence is similar unchanged. HA! Good Fun!

ah, once again with the predictable qq shiboleth. predictable if disappointing. am seeing serious discussion is once again at it terminus. nevertheless, the adversity score is generated by SAT and not a school. score is on a scale o' 1-100. college boards sends adversity score, along with sat test results, to schools designated by the student. sat doesn't have control over how individual schools or state school systems utilize their data as part o' the admissions process. again, what exactly did you think were gonna happen? your confusion is actual more curious than the sat adversity score issue which is pretty straight-forward. as to getting somebody to pay for your kid's college, am suspecting you is gonna need vote bernie sanders. relevance to sat numbers is elusive. HA! Good Fun!

... am not certain what you thought were the point o' the adversity score. is a standardized numerical score sent to schools. not as if the sat people could force schools to adopt the score as part o' a universal admissions process. private schools and state school systems is gonna need decide what to do with the numbers sat provides, if anything. HA! Good Fun!

am not certain how gifted read this as affirmative action. sat is gonna provide a number which the student never sees. the number will be sent to schools and the schools may then decide what, if anything, to do with the number. the number, in and of itself, benefits the student not at all. 'ccording to the article, yale, and other schools, is already applying an adversity score. yale is a private institution and decided they value a more diverse student body. if a vast majority o' your students is coming from same small group o' eastern prep schools, there is no doubt a tendency to develop a kinda echo chamber environment. same backgrounds. same teachers. same curriculum. am understanding why folks in charge at yale might value greater diversity o' pov 'mongst their student body... and yale has the resources to develop their own adversity score as they see fit. schools not yale, schools with an endowment less than $25 billion (or whatever it is 2019) might see value in having an adversity score available w/o having the resources to develop such. sat is doing no more than standardizing readily available info into an easy to understand (and no doubt oversimplified) number, which is their business after all. college boards thus offers a service to schools, no doubt to fill a perceived demand. gifted is 'gainst capitalism? knee-jerk HA! Good Fun!

lord knows we ain't using trump as a baseline. preach to the choir. not sure how trump incompetence relates to gary johnson. am also thinking the linked johnson comment were extreme telling. is not as if gary were being asked 'bout some obscure hotspot in sub saharan africa or se asia which only folks with security clearances were aware. nightly news fodder were aleppo. regardless, as foreign policy actions is where President is most significant, a fundamental ignorance o' foreign relations should be enough to remove such a candidate from serious Presidential contention in the minds o' most voters. you make it sound as if gary johnson were dismissed outta hand when is our contention comments such as aleppo shoulda' resulted in hurl dismissing him as a viable candidate. if hurl genuine had no idea how gary johnson would perform on world stage, that alone shoulda' made you cringe at the thought o' voting for him. and gd kinda missed our point on voting for gary johnson 2020. am knowing he ain't running, but fact he ain't running makes no difference whatsoever. is just as likely to get him elected 2020 as you were 2016. thank goodness. elect a candidate bumbling ignorant regarding the single most important aspect o' the Presidency? americans get themselves torqued 'bout Presidential opinions on economy and abortion and other issues. past few years should make obvious that a President has limited power to make unilateral changes to domestic policy, particular as US fed is far less significant in the day-to-day lives o' most americans than many realize. foreign policy is arguable most important when selecting a President, but somehow it gets relegated to secondary status in the minds o' far too many voters. HA! Good Fun! ps as for flogging a dead horse... am genuine uncertain whether or not gd is gong for self-effacing irony with this.

then go ahead and vote gary johnson for 2020... 'bout as pointless as voting gary johnson 2016. besides which, you clear are taking wrong lesson from your list. should be recognizing the foreign war issue is not related to party affiliation. is not liberal or conservative, democrat or republican. am sure you can find a neville chamberlain 'mongst the current presidential offerings, but such a candidate won't solve your issues seeing as how is 2019 and not 1890. oh, and like it or not, President is most significant in a foreign relations capacity. a President enjoys more deference from Court and fewer entanglements with Congress when acting on world stage, but this is the guy gd supported? once again, gd is coming at this bass ackwards. gd doesn't like foreign entanglements and wars so mistaken choose guy least capable o' keeping us out o' foreign troubles. HA! Good Fun!

is possible trump doesn't care 'bout the outcome. he needs to galvanize his base for 2020. sure, without adequate peacekeeping forces and nation building efforts you end up repeating mistakes bush made in iraq and obama made with arab spring-- the middle east is a rocky place, where the seed o' democracy does not readily find purchase... to paraphrase a line from raising arizona. what is the point o' creating more instability in the mid-east, yes? add a new economic and political crisis to a region where only constant since fall o' ottoman empire is chaos? does trump care? *shrug* trump may believe that americans will rally 'round the flag during time o' war, and he is doing everything possible to make support o' America and support o' his Presidency synonymous. the reasoning goes as follows: trump needs a win in 2020. is too many investigations from too many corners, and the delay tactics he is employing to hold off Congress, sdny and others is gonna eventual run their course. there is already enough grounds for impeachment, but is not political practical at this time with republicans largely having committed themselves to defense o' trump. etc. am hopeful trump ain't so vain he would risk war and the certain bloodshed to follow for no other reason than to protect his own increasing vulnerable kiester, but how many is convinced trump ain't such a narcissist? HA! Good Fun!

peacekeeping and nation building effort success is in large part a matter o' will. the wh, pre-iraq, were getting estimates that 500,000 troops would be needed to maintain peace in iraq for the first years following successful liberation. 500k. US knew how costly it would be in terms o' manpower and dollars to rebuild iraq. japan saw 350k us troops. germany, a bit misleading, had a peak 1.6 million us troops in country. history suggests twenty troops per thousand population is threshold needed for initial post liberation peacekeeping. no doubt skill o' occupier will make adjustments possible, but twenty per thousand appears to be target. during 2007 surge, us had 20k troops in iraq. will. gotta be willing to commit troops and spend money. US did neither in afghanistan nor iraq and results were predictable. iran, by the way, is more than three times more populous than iraq were at start of the invasion . 1.6 million US troops is the anticipated baseline for successful post war peacekeeping efforts. am not seeing how the wh could hope to generate the support for a 1.6 million peacekeeping troop investment. is not terribad, but terricheap. US has recent been unwilling to commit necessary resources to achieve successful nation building. is 'bout will more than skill, and am not seeing how the American people has the will to make such a contribution o' massive capital and literal blood to bring 'bout anything other than another post war disaster. again, 1.6 million US troops would be needed for initial post war peace keeping in iran. communicate such info truthful to the US people and am expecting most support for war with iran would evaporate. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna bump this. at the moment, the obsidians ain't particular active with developing or posting, but is nevertheless annoying when threads is misidentified as having obsidian contribution. new patch for deadfire is released and predictable the offering spawns numerous questions directed at obsidian. if a mod replies in the thread, the thread gets the obs tag, which is resulting in functional clickbait. amentep seems like a swell guy, so am hoping this is fixed 'cause am developing an almost pavlovian disappointment when seeing his posts. HA! Good Fun!

... possible language issue, but deadfire's multiclass is like bg2-- the decision made and fixed at character creation. an ad&d elven fighter/mage doesn't choose to multiclass at level 3 or 6 or whatever. an elven fighter/mage begins career as a multiclass and follows a preset leveling progression. d20 changed d&d multiclass rules. as such, iwd2 and the nwn games would be the d&d games made by black isle/obsidian which would have include a multiclassing option at level-up. however, thanks to the endemic non-intuitive nature o' ad&d, if a human character met specific ability score requirements, it were possible to dual-class a character. existence o' ad&d dual-class and original bard were 'mongst the considerable examples which were leading one to the conclusion the original pnp developers were using drugs while making up their rules. why humans? 'cause. why did original class abilities need be dormant during dual-classing? 'cause. 'ccording to the rulez, humans and half-elves could become bards in 1st edition, but seeing as how one would need dual class twice to become eligible for bard... bg2 were ad&d 2nd edition, so original bard wacky were abandoned, but it nevertheless embraced dual-class stoopid with vigor. regardless, bg2 multiclass and deadfire multiclass is analogous. HA! Good Fun!