Mckinley25

That bothered me about the first chapter as well. A digression like that should either provide a future utility or an opportunity for exposition, but not only did it avoid both, the conditional setup was abandoned too! I don’t even remember, did he ride the dinosaur out as well?

Is this to replace Pickard at the AHL level?

It is definitely unnecessary unless your safety would be compromised, but I am unaware of any European nation where that would be a genuine concern. This is obviously anecdotal but my wife was born in Europe and we frequently visit her family. Every experience I’ve had in sharing my United States citizenry has been notably positive. If there are any substantial number of travelers engaging in that deception (has anyone tracked that?) then unless their experiences are wildly different it’s empty posturing.

This template might be the most effective way to get to know everyone here haha.

I am comfortable stating with a high level of certainty that if the sexual identity movement of the last few decades could retroactively be erased, the gender identity movement would be non existent. It’s a cumulative linear progression. Even the legitimate aspects of gender identity are inescapably joined with its predecessor precisely because societal perceptions of gender were rigidly associated with sexuality. The nuances of gender fluidity couldn’t be explored until a separation occurred, and that was reliant on the historical contingency of overturning sexual suppression. The meaningless distinctions you mentioned are also contingent on the expansion of gender understanding, thus cumulative. They are easily dismantled however, if gender is fluid, then there is an infinite number of possible descriptors between two points of distinctions, which renders the entire exercise no more sufficiently applicable to identity assignments as your given name. This leaves us closer to where we began this journey, with a binary but practical and enlightened form of biological distinction. I mostly agree with everything else you wrote, but I’ll add more later, I’ll have time while the Wings underwhelm tonight.

Yeah, because they are the effect of progress, when observed they qualify as predictive of that result. The identity politics you referred to, the hyper specificity of gender and racial definitions, followed the social shift of sexual identity acceptance. Social movements carry momentum and after the designed outcomes are achieved, a vestigial impulse outlives the movement. It is an outgrowth of moral tinkering, and manifests as a weak imitation of the original movement, absent its teleology. Bluntly stated, people want to feel like they are part of a positive social change, but not everyone is in a position to participate. Incidents contrary to sexual and racial equality still occur, but the facile nature of identity politics demonstrates progress occurred because they could not manufacture that momentum and social saturation by their own feeble means. I said they will be quickly exhausted (relative to social trends) because of the surplus of historical precedence, and as you clearly stated, they can’t survive empirical scrutiny. Some artifacts of social movements linger longer than others, most notably, PETA, but the basis of their mission is still tenable. This has allowed them to simultaneously occupy separate positions on the timeline and exist as an interesting exception to the above rule. I am going to meander about this topic indefinitely if I don’t force myself to stop, so if it seems like I’m too dismissive of identity politics as a problem it’s only because we can be extremely satisfied with their causation.

If Zadina was playing against the Wings he may have gotten two points as well.

I genuinely appreciate the feedback. I sincerely am not trying to “sound smart,” if my comments are perceived that way, then I accept the criticism. All I am attempting is to construct a coherent argument, and avoid the trappings of a lazy dialectic. If my arguments lack clarity or substance then I admittedly need to reimagine them. Your measurement of severity is narrowly defined to nomenclature and anecdote. The metric most commonly used is suffering. That’s a broad term but it is categorically divided to specifically parallel standard of living metrics. We have consensus regarding nonsensical nature of identity politics, but they are again, predictive of progress. This is not the first nor last time they will be present in our lives, but their current iteration will be fleeting.

I agree that false claims of discrimination or racial injustice hamper efforts towards equality and racial harmony, but in no way are the plights of legitimate victims being suffocated by those who seek attention over justice. The proportional disparity overwhelms, even with the increasing presence of platforms designed to facilitate substance starved expression. I also am immediately suspect of any assertion that race relations are “getting worse”, imprecise language, and standard fluctuations of events aside, every generation has and continues to improve on their predecessors. Your inclusion of a perception conditional is appropriate but I disagree with your conclusions. One of the many metrics in measuring sociological incident trends is false accusations, as they are dependent on progress. If the reported offense doesn’t breach the current degree of ethical expectations, the desired response will not generate. I agree that the blame placed on President Trump is vastly inflated. There may be some truth to the far too commonly parroted claim that he normalizes sentiments of prejudice but finding concrete data in support of that is as likely as finding offense from the Wings third line. I may be further securing an idealistic stronghold but my complaint would be that the news media allows social media movements to dictate reported information. This practice is self evidently beneficial financially, but favors sensationalism over accuracy. This is clearly an oversimplification of the issues, so I’ll take refuge in the restrictions of the format for the many pertinent exclusions.

He is definitely better when the puck is moving, on the defensive side; positionally, breaking up plays, his skating ability helps in that regard. When the puck slows down or stops along the boards, he’s much weaker. Hopefully some summers in the gym and some game play seasoning will work to correct those issues.

I would normally avoid treading on covered ground, but Cholowski often appeared as the most skilled player last night, even when considering Mantha’s efforts. It’s promising to see he almost never looks at the puck, on both sides of the rink. Incidentally, it was enjoying to watch them play at the Colosseum, which was where I learned to skate and play hockey. I still fondly remember my first goal, I scored with an unmarked, un-curved red stick given to those players green enough to be unsure of our handedness. The keeper laid across the goal-line but his four year old stature left uncovered ice. I wasn’t even skilled enough shoot the puck, or stop, but my forward momentum carried us both into the net. I think at least two years passed before I scored again, but I was able to unceremoniously upgrade my stick.

I hope the practice of displaying power play graphics over the entire screen after the power play has started carries over into the regular season.

I like your repurposing of Lucas’ lazy prequel defense.

But see, I also was certainly no fighter in the NHL, so that just resets the balance to insanely jacked guy vs gets winded after one lap around ice guy. I’d proceed with measured caution.

This was the best possible scenario, the oldest couples team wins, what a game.