u/DGBD

I’ve noticed a split in the busking community and I’d love to know where people here fall on this.

I have always found that having more money in the hat/case means more people give. I seed my case, and I rarely take anything out while I’m busking (exceptions for particularly large bills or particularly dodgy areas). I’ve also never used a sign that appeals to “pity” or a sense of need, like “everything helps” or “need money for _____.” Personally, I think that people are more willing to engage with buskers if they see us as performers and not as panhandlers, given the stigma surrounding panhandling, and so I try to avoid anything that would make them make that connection. I don’t care as much about my looks, but I do try not to look too scrubby when I’m out and about.

But I know others who like to clear out their hat/case frequently, to appear like they “need it more.” I’ve also seen a lot of buskers with signs that emphasize need or how little money they have. A recent post here came from someone who clearly thought it would be a bad thing for people to think that buskers aren’t poor or needy.

So, what is your strategy? Do you want to look like you need the money? Do you try to hide just how much you’re making? Do you put a “help me”/“need money” sign up? Or are you hoping that your case fills up to entice even more giving, and trying to distance yourself from that “needy” look?

I don’t think there’s a wrong answer necessarily, although again I’ve got my own opinion on the matter. What’s yours?

Seems like so many churches are gray stone Neo-Gothic/Gothic Revival buildings. It’s especially true of Church of Ireland (Anglican) churches in my experience, but plenty of Catholic ones as well like St. Colman’s in Cobh.

Was it just a function of so many being built in the 19th century when this style was popular? And if so, why is it that so many were built then?

“Hector the Hero” is a popular lament with Scottish fiddle players and bagpipers. Supposedly, Hector MacDonald was set to be court-martialed and decided instead to shoot himself. Depending on who you read, he was persecuted due to homophobia (he was allegedly homosexual), class snobbery (he came from a decidedly non-aristocratic background), or possibly actual sexual misconduct.

I’ve asked this here before, but am wondering if anything new has come to light about what his crimes were, whether the charges were legitimate, and what sorts of evidence we have for the theories above.

Nowadays spray paint is ubiquitous with graffiti, and I can’t imagine the huge tags and large-scale murals made by popular graffiti artists being possible without spray paint. Was spray paint taken on quickly by graffiti artists, and did it open up new ways of expression or did the same concepts just become easier? Were large-scale graffiti works particularly common before spray paint, and how long after spray paint did they become a well-known type of graffiti?

Bello has been seen as a player with great potential over the past few years, and last year he had a promising season overall (29 games/28 starts, 166.2 IP, 3.35 ERA, 1.236 WHIP). He figured to be a good middle-to-end of the rotation starter with the potential to make a leap and be a solid starter for years to come.

Instead, this year has gotten off to a disastrous start. He’s sporting a 5.65 ERA, 1.643 WHIP, and often looking lost on the mound. The Sox decided on a solution: pitch him in the 2nd inning. They put a bullpen “starter” out for the 1st as an opener, then put Bello in.

This has worked incredibly well for Bello. Per Tyler Miliken, in 4 2nd inning “relief appearances”/late starts, he has a 0.71 ERA in 25.1 innings and great numbers by pretty much every metric (7.1 K/9, .215 BAA, 0 HRs).

Problem solved? Nope!

Because in those 4 games, the openers have given up a combined 9 runs. The Sox are basically spotting the opposing team 2+ runs before their actual starter even takes the mound!

A while ago they tried starting Bello again, but he only lasted 5 innings and gave up 7 runs on 8 hits (including 2 HR) and 3 walks with only 1 K. So, they went back to the opener situation, where in 2 “relief appearances” he went 6.1 and 7 innings with only 1 ER in each game.

Some people have pointed to his pitch mix as a possible culprit; specifically, he uses his cutter way more as a start than as a “reliever.” Some people attribute his better numbers to not having to see the top of the lineup the first time, which certainly helps. Others think it’s a mental issue that he needs to resolve, or maybe a different way of preparation that ends up benefitting him on 2nd inning “starts.”

But overall, the Sox are in a weird bind. Either they have to find a reliever who can reliably “start,” which they have not yet found, or they have to hope that Bello figures things out. If they get “reliever Bello” as a starter he could potentially be a huge weapon. But right now, they’re getting an absolutely awful first followed by 7 innings of ‘00 Pedro incarnate (which, TBF, the first inning was often Pedro’s problem as well). You can’t win games by giving your opponent early runs, and whether Bello is a starter or a “reliever,” that’s what’s happening.

They seemed like a thing in my parents’ era of graduations (70s), and my grandfather was very proud of his “brass rat” (MIT ring), but by the time I was graduating high school and college in the late 00s/early 10s no one I knew cared about them at all.

Why did they become a thing, and then why did they lose popularity?

I’ve read a decent bit on the issue around monotheism/henotheism/monolatry in Second Temple Judaism. A lot of what I’ve read approaches it from the perspective of Jewish understandings of their god and his relationship with other (potential) gods.

Can anyone recommend a good article/book that looks at things the other way around, the pagan understanding of the Jewish god as a god within their religious framework? Most of what I’ve found seems to be focused on pagan views of Jews and their practices, without as much on what pagans understood their god to be. Would non-Jewish visitors or transplants offer sacrifices at the Temple, or otherwise do devotional practices? Do we know of “Yahweh” as a more minor god in other pantheons contemporary to Second Temple Judaism? Would the sorts of gentiles that Paul was talking to have already known the god of Israel and understood him to have particular power?