top of page


Public·30 members

That What Exactly Your Mind Is Doing рџрџрџ Sad... EXCLUSIVE

They simply used more words to communicate but the outcome is the same. WotC can just keep doing as it does, while naivity gets to thrive in the community. This is nothing else but legalization of corporate greed that is ultimately detrimental to the game.

That what exactly your mind is doing 😓😓😓 sad...

This was your one chance to take a stance against the direction WotC is taking the game. Now it is obvious that you are condoning if not outright supporting the corporate agenda that will in the long run prove destructive for the game. Not that it was unexpected, but it is still very, very disappointing.

Like it or not, the RC is that voice. As the governing body for this format, it is 100% your responsibility to make the format fun and accessible to everyone. But you also have to represent the wishes of the community to the company that makes the cards we play with. The outcry cannot just be heard, it must be felt. I think a banning is an important step at not just asking Wizards nicely to be more consumer thinking.

Naked greed will not be solved by conversations with people beholden to the corporation. I assume your reach does not extend to the Chairpersons of Hasbro, so the only option that remains to express dissent is to answer in a way that will impact sales.

The reaction at that time was much more widespread since that change was visible to way more players. I think the RC is doing a good job serving the vast majority of commander players who would never have even considered the possibility that these cards would be disallowed, and I think this article was well written and well reasoned.

Whilst I have read your response and reasoning behind your decision to not ban these cards at day 0, I feel you have completely missed one of the major concerns that has been raised. In your words, you feel there was 3 areas of concern:

I finally would like to express that I appreciate the difficulty of the situation you have found yourself in. It is likely that if you did the right thing, the RC would likely be disbanded by WotC and Commander would be fully under the rule of the company. But by not doing the right thing, you are serving EDH up to WotC on a platter anyway. You have potentially alienated the community you purport to represent, and some of us genuinely feel betrayed. The ramifications of this in the future could be huge, and personally, I am massively disappointed in your overall decision.

3) Negan. The level of false equivalence is nuts. Clearly fantasy creatures doing stuff that is typical fantasy bad guy things as featured in comics and fantasy books for decades, is so very very very different to a human being in a fictional world intended to reflect the real world after a disaster doing extremely graphic and frankly evil things to other humans. Including acts that have happened to people who have played this game, and quite likely use this game to escape that. Worse still, the fact that said character could well be the figurehead of your deck which in turn forces other players to confront the things he did. and there a huge swathes of the magic player base who would understandably find that extremely unpleasant.

The commander community was wrong to reach out to content creators and individuals in a toxic way, and although it shows how passionately commander is loved, it is never okay to attack people. However at the same time, many of us feel that the rules committee is the protector of the format, from threats within the community as well as threats from outside. WOTC is obviously testing a new business model where they will test how price elastic the market is, and by focusing design on cards specifically for the commander format, they will begin to change the format from the outside. I have nothing against WOTC they are a business, but I always loved that Commander was a format that stood apart from WOTC. The RC banning these secret lair cards based on this business model will most definitely pit the RC against WOTC, but by not banning these cards, WOTC will feel that they have to go ahead to keep doing what they are doing, even though much of the community has issues with this product.

Psychology Today does not read or retain your email. However, a copy will be sent to you for your records. Please beaware that email is not a secure means of communication and spam filters may prevent your email from reaching thetherapist. The therapist should respond to you by email, although we recommend that you follow up with a phone call.If you prefer corresponding via phone, leave your contact number.

Psychotherapy, or meeting with a therapist or counselor, is an effective form of treatment for anxiety. Since the root of anxiety stems from the mind, talking to a mental health professional will help you understand why your mind might process certain things a certain way and why you might be experiencing anxiety the way that you are. By meeting with a psychologist or counselor, you can learn specific skills and coping strategies that help you manage your anxiety. Since anxiety is closely related to other mental disorders like depression and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), receiving counseling will help you understand the different ways anxiety contributes to these conditions.

There are a lot of different projects going on at RC. Some people do very short, quick projects, and if I were to do another batch of RC I might do more small projects than I did during this batch. However, I did see other people who were hacking at one big project. Seeing other people doing that long-term work or getting one thing to a polished state was very motivating.

More importantly, self-direction is life-affirming. When you pursue things you care about and are genuinely interested in, your work will be meaningful, fulfilling, and sometimes even transformative. And when you do meaningful work that comes from listening to and acting on your inner motivations, you start to expand your sense of possibility: of what choices are available for you to make, of what you can accomplish, and of who you can become. Often, you open up this sense of possibility for others around you too.

Another thing we did over the summer is give ourselves a taste of our own medicine by each doing a retreat week and trying a couple of the recommendations we came up with to see how they impacted our experiences. Every RC faculty working on the retreat at that time participated: Rachel practiced oil painting, James composed electronic music, Dave made programming sketches, and I made a pair of shorts, my first time sewing a real garment.

I was so anxious to finish the shorts during that week that I found myself getting to work early and staying late, even though I kept reminding myself that the point was to learn and I could always complete them after the retreat week was over. This is something I often say to Recursers who are stressing about getting their projects to some final, presentable state. While I stand by the value of not holding yourself to arbitrary deadlines, I felt that I learned something new about the emotional experience of really wanting to do a specific thing and struggling to catch your abilities up to your vision.

We later discovered that the three self-directives align with the three basic psychological needs described by self-determination theory: autonomy (build your volitional muscles), competence (work at the edge of your abilities), and relatedness (learn generously). These principles help us have deeper conversations with Recursers from the very beginning of their time in batch, because we now have a shared vocabulary for the bigger questions and struggles that people confront at RC.

Building your volitional muscles means following your own intrinsic motivations, rather than external pressures or fears. It means doing the work that excites you, rather than the work you must force yourself to do. It means asking yourself what do I really want to do? and then doing that. Making those decisions for yourself is a skill that gets easier with practice.

I wanted to spend my time at RC getting my CS fundamentals down, as well as at the intersection of art and programming. I was interested in audio machine learning, and doing lots of fun things with environmental sound classification, which led me to build a birdsong classifier. I went deep using a computing cluster at RC to do deep learning procedures. I met a crew of sound/music people and even went on a roadtrip to a conference with them. I was pretty heads-down while I was at RC - I had my head in the screen and had strong intentions about doing that, though I regret not socializing as much.

Please keep in mind that all cities have zoning regulations for the number and types of pets allowed per household. Rancho Cucamonga residents are allowed 3 dogs and 3 cats. Limits may differ for properties with a lot size of 10,000 sq. ft. or greater.

Do you have room in your house and heart to help a pet in need? The RC Animal Center is always looking for foster families to temporarily care for orphaned pets, pets recovering from medical procedures and pets that need to learn a few manners before they are placed up for adoption. We provide foster families with all the supplies and assistance needed to help make the fostering experience a success.

Taken together, these results argue against the suggestion that the wide cross-national variation in depression prevalence estimates in the WMH surveys and previous epidemiologic studies is due to the threshold for defining clinically significant depression in standard diagnostic interviews differing across countries. If that were the case, we would expect that the cases of depression detected in countries with the lowest estimated prevalence of depression would be the most severe cases, resulting in high impairment rates among these cases, whereas the opposite would be true in countries with the highest estimated prevalence of depression. Furthermore, we would expect that reports of core depressive symptoms would be more similar across countries than estimates of disorder prevalence. Neither of these expectations was borne out in the WMH data. A question can be raised by our results regarding why the associations between prevalence and impairment were so different from those reported in the earlier WHO study [15]; however, it is important to bear in mind that this earlier study was based on primary-care samples, for which selection bias regarding seeking help on the basis of either distress or impairment might induce a more negative association between these two variables than exists in the population. The WMH surveys, by contrast, are based on general population samples, for which the selection bias issues that occur in treatment samples do not arise. 041b061a72


Welcome to the group! You can connect with other members, ge...
bottom of page