The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
I doubt even Sava can be bothered to hate Friends because it'd go against his contrarian nature.
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
Again, what does it matter that he knew it was going to be short-term? They were not in a relationship. You can't not be in a relationship and demand the other person does not have sex with someone else.
It actually matters a lot.
If you know it's temporary, you know your action will affect your partner and relationship in the future. So it clearly shows what regard you hold for your partner and the future of the relationship. In that hypothetical, Ross would have been saying that random sex was more important to him than Rachel's happiness and his chance to be with her.
And did you type all that in the one minute after my reply.
No, I have a team of Filipinos write out responses for every possible permutation a conversation will take, and then have an assistant just copy paste them in as needed.
If you know it's temporary, you know your action will affect your partner and relationship in the future. So it clearly shows what regard you hold for your partner and the future of the relationship. In that hypothetical, Ross would have been saying that random sex was more important to him than Rachel's happiness and his chance to be with her.
BS. They were not a in a relationship, period. Rachel didn't blame Ross for not being considerate enough or whatever (which is true enough), she blamed him for cheating.
Karen in Californication is far more mature about this. She accepts that if they're not officially together, then Hank is going to be screwing other women. She may get angry over his lack of thoughtfulness, but she doesn't claim he's cheating.
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
I didn't say I hated it, I 'm just saying you watch it. I watched it at one time.
ACK!
It's not because I've started a thread about the issue that I'm watching it.
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
BS. They were not a in a relationship, period. Rachel didn't blame Ross for not being considerate enough or whatever (which is true enough), she blamed him for cheating.
Obviously she didn't blame him for something that only happened in our hypothetical!
I haven't used the term "cheating" because it's a nebulous term that can mean just about anything. A relationship is an agreement between two or more people who are free to set their requirements for fidelity wherever they want. What is necessary for a healthy relationship is for everyone to know what constitutes fidelity in their partners eyes, and to live up to it. In the hypothetical where Ross knew that the break wasn't permanent, he clearly would have been in breach of what he knew Rachel's requirements for fidelity were.
That's why there's a big difference between knowing the break is temporary or not.
Karen in Californication is far more mature about this. She accepts that if they're not officially together, then Hank is going to be screwing other women. She may get angry over his lack of thoughtfulness, but she doesn't claim he's cheating.
Everyone is right about their own requirements for fidelity from their partner.
Thank you for demonstrating the kind of ****ty reasoning Rachel would use.
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
Sure she would, because you can't use anything other than loopy logic to call it cheating. There can be no requirements for fidelity if you're not together.
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
Please don't start discussing what exactly constitutes a relationship.
DISCLAIMER: the author of the above written texts does not warrant or assume any legal liability or responsibility for any offence and insult; disrespect, arrogance and related forms of demeaning behaviour; discrimination based on race, gender, age, income class, body mass, living area, political voting-record, football fan-ship and musical preference; insensitivity towards material, emotional or spiritual distress; and attempted emotional or financial black-mailing, skirt-chasing or death-threats perceived by the reader of the said written texts.
Comment