Asking this is like when people debate what is and isn't a sandwich. Everyone knows that a sub and a club are sandwiches right? Bread and filling, straightforward. But it's a big world with many foods. Is a hot dog a sandwich? A pizza? What about a taco? A falafel wrap? It's not exactly clear.

People spend tons of effort trying to come up with simple definitions that conclusively define sandwiches. But these inevitably lead to consequences that just intuitively don't make sense to people. Now a deep dish pizza is a quiche, pop tart is a toast, a burrito is a calzone until you take a bite at which point it becomes a quiche. Your simple definition is just not useful in the real messy world of bready foods.

At the end of the day, you have to accept that sandwich is a loose, vague term that cannot accurately categorize all food ever, and mostly it's whatever people say it is.

The point is, gender and sex are like sandwiches.

Is there any reliable source for this information? Or is it rumours only.

It gave your horse extra health actually, so not purely cosmetic. But I think in a single player game that also has extremely good modding tools, it doesn't really matter. If you want to pay to win your single player game, you do you.

Horse armour was mostly a landmark for showing companies that consumers were willing to pay for micro stuff like that. The potential return vs effort invested was crazy. Todd himself said that they try doing nice DLC that gives you good value for your money, but it's hard to justify business-wise when the horse armour is so cheap to make and sells so well.

We have geodesics for that.

It was the beginning of the end, because they saw how much money they made on the horse armour vs how much effort it took to make it. It was actually generally criticized at the time, but it also sold really well.

WoW was like the iPhone of MMOs. Didn't invent anything, just put it all together in a coherent, accessible, user friendly package.

But on a fundamental level, in the least instance admins have to be able to know who votes for our version of the system to even work compared to the competition.

Could you elaborate on this claim? Because I don't really see why that would be true.

It's a highway lane that you're only allowed to drive on if you have multiple people driving in the car. So you could avoid traffic, for example. It's supposed to reduce the number of cars on the road.

There is one in Norway it seems, in Trondheim.

In this case, it redirects to Google's general privacy policy that covers all their services. Anyway Google's calculator stores a history of all the calculations you did in your account somewhere. So I guess it needs to have a policy stating what they do with that data.

It's really sad to me that one of the most powerful tools in the republican campaign's arsenal is juvenile nicknames for their opponents. An actual Trump campaigning innovation: Lying Ted, crooked Hillary, sleepy Joe, etc. And it works. Like really, really well.

Turns out many voters are swayed by elementary school level debate tactics.

The bigotry is on the same level, but I think JK Rowling is actively militant on a far different level compared to Orson Scott Card. Just looking at their twitter for example, OSC tweets maybe once a month and 9/10 times it's about a book signing or other such promotion. JK Rowling's feed is a constant flow of hatred on trans people. She tries very hard to make sure you are reminded of her bigotry every single time you hear anything about her.

The reach is different too. OSC has some 16k followers. Rowling has 15 million. It's natural for her to attract a much higher degree of disdain.

If you eject downward you may hit the ground before your chute has opened. Helicopters tend to stay pretty low.