• 0 Posts
  • 237 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 9th, 2023

help-circle








  • You’re literally arguing nothing right now. THEY took the position we should have brackets defining the order in every single equation or otherwise have them as undefined TODAY. It doesn’t matter when they were invented. Obviously it’s never been written like that. They are the one arguing it SHOULD BE. I said that would be stupid vs following the left to right convention already established. You’re getting caught up in the semantics of the wording.

    What you inferred: they’re saying brackets were always around and we chose left to right to avoid bracket mess.

    What I was actually saying: we chose and continue to choose to keep using the left to right convention over brackets everywhere because it would be unnecessary and make things more cluttered.

    And yes, that IS a position mathematicians COULD have chosen once brackets WERE invented. They could have decided we should use them in every equation for absolute clarity of order. Saying we should not do that based on tradition alone is a bad reason.

    The “always been the case” argument could justify any legacy system. We don’t still use Roman numerals for arithmetic just because they were traditional. Things DO change.

    Ancient Greeks and Romans strongly resisted zero as a concept, viewing it as philosophically problematic. Negative numbers were even more controversial with many mathematicians into the Renaissance calling them “fictitious” or “absurd numbers.” It took centuries for these to become accepted as legitimate mathematical objects.

    Before Robert Recorde introduced “=” in 1557, mathematicians wrote out “is equal to” in words. Even after its introduction, many resisted it for decades, preferring verbal descriptions or other symbols.

    I could go on but if you’re going to argue why something shouldn’t be the case, you should argue more than “it’s tradition” or “we’ve done fine without it so far”. Because they did fine with many things in mathematics until they decided they needed to change or expand it.


  • So are you going to nerf every class similarly?

    Bard

    Vicious Mockery: avg 10 / 55 casts

    Cleric

    Word of Radiance: avg 13.5 / 41 casts
    Sacred flame: avg 18 / 31 casts

    Druid

    Produce Flame: avg 11 / 50 casts
    Poison Spray: avg 22.5 / 25 casts

    Sorcerer

    Acid Splash: avg 10.5 / 52 casts

    Warlock

    Chill Touch: avg 11 / 50 casts

    Wizard

    Ray of Frost: avg 11 / 50 casts

    Artificer

    Thunderclap: avg 13.5 / 41 casts







  • Women are human beings that should have autonomy to do as they please.

    This is 100% true, for anyone (obviously excepting it doesn’t infringe on others, such as murder for example), but also its okay for people to have boundaries and for you to compromise within those boundaries, assuming you want to be with the person more than you care about the boundary they have.

    Now whether such a thing should be a boundary is another question, but if it’s normal to, for example, not want your partner to cheat and have that as a boundary, we can at least agree its okay for boundaries to exist at all within a relationship, and that it isn’t necessarily infringing on your autonomy as a person for your partner to have them.

    There are however definitely boundaries that should be considered a red flag, and for many people this may be one of them. That’s fine, and it’s fully your choice to decide whether you accept a boundary, just as some people may only want an open relationship, and so “no ‘cheating’ of any form” would be a boundary they wouldn’t accept, despite being common.

    And they’re not “yours” or anybody else’s but their own selves.

    Fully agree.