When Pokémon Go launched I thought the design concept from a lore perspective works better for MMBN as AR game. I am curious would you play AR MN game with AR virus busting and Navi battles?
I just need to get this off my chest. I used to work with this arrogance entitled white boy. Everyone used to talk about his ambition and how he really wanted a senior role but was a bit too impatient. They talked about how smart he was but he just needed to wait. Meanwhile I was younger than him but carried myself with humility and a senior position openned up. The white Executive who lead our department rejected my promotion without any reason. The rumors circulating was that people found out about the promotion and were talking about it like it was a done deal and that offended the Executive. I was blacklisted from raises, bonuses and promotions despite no one denying my talent, hard work and drive. I found out recently after I left he got his senior position. Funny right how white ambition is treated like passion meanwhile the reckless rumors can stop a BM's career in its tracks.
I have a mixed family and friend group and we openly talk about everything. It has honestly been hilarious to see my more conservative relationships slowly realize that systemic bias actually does exist.
I am just curious what are some blatant double standards that you faced as BM that would make most people's head spin?
Long story short from my personal experience a credit background opens doors. Currently my role allows for me to get involved more in lending and I wanted to know some of the best courses or certifications for anyone leaning into that direction.
I had to double check and found an article!
I remember in old Master Rules field spells felt like literal domain expansion. There could only be one active on either side of the field. Those extra boost made such a difference on the playground. It feels kinda weird that Umi basically became an Archtype/Sub-archtype meanwhile the others are non irrelevant. Should spells like Yami get the Umi treatment?
Anyone else refuse to engage in obvious naked politicizing grifting surrounding this issue? My question is why is this issue of all issues on your radar?
Edit: My frustration is that I may not always agree with Destiny but I can see a genuine univerisal application of values to all situations. When I see content creators cover issues like this because it is "popular." They use a selective application. For those of you who don't know Daniel Perry also committed his crime in TX. His coveraged included his full military uniform, but conveniently ignored his subpoenaed phone messages to underage girls or his fantasies of committing political and racial violence. After being convicted the Governor of TX pardoned him and reinstated his guns rights. If you actually cared about this issue and turning down the temperature you have to cover both. You can't say one was more popular than the other.
I noticed a theme through out my personal and professional journey. Whenever I stop being accommodating and copy everyone else's standards for setting boundaries I am told I am going to far. I literally show them one to one parallels and they keep insisting I am wrong. Somehow it is different. I work hard to maintain my emotions but it feels so draining and almost gaslighting when I check a person's bad behavior I am told I crossed some line.
Apparently this is a common issue for people with ADHD and I would love to understand why? Why are we further ostracized for setting boundaries or defending ourselves in reasonable situations?
I started a new role and everyone seems very friendly. One person was just recently promoted and I am filling their old position. They were assigned to show me around but they seem cold and distance. I am going to be direct I was told by management I was strongest candidate with zero competition coming anywhere close multiple times. I like to stay humble but I have the feeling they said that to people around the office and it is rubbing this person the wrong way.
We need to get along for my career to have a chance but they decide from the jump I am threatening. So what is the play? I am thinking unfortunately going around him and learning everything on my own because I am not really in the mood to make nice.
Here is just some background about Dignity at Work linked.
The current framework of the law is rigged to avoid accountability for discrimination. If BM mobilized around this we would be knocked down immediately. However Dignity at Work laws make a case for why we all benefit and even shows that dignity is profitable (proving neoliberalism never cared about capitalist or efficiency but rebranding neo-colonialism and racial hierarchy)
This should be the next big political push
Let me round this out in an example:
Scenario A: On team of 5 there is only one BM, let's call him Daniel. He has the lowest pay, the most hours worked, the most responsibilities and his boss singles him out for demeaning tasks. The rationale is that the manager personally does not like Daniel and refuses to elaborate further.
Scenario B: The situation is identical but the manager says he doesn't understand how people like Daniel got into the firm. Daniel in particular needs to prove himself so he knows he is not a DEI hire.
I am not a legal expert but from my extensive research most if not all states criminalize intentions not the actions. So scenario B is a clear example of something like an EEOC or Title VII violation but Scenario A is technically not the *legal* standard of harassment because there is no explicit intention to discriminate against a protected class (e.g. race, religion, gender, etc.)
Should this be the next big fight, is it a waste of time or do I need to touch grass?
We are in election season and I am curious if there are any new iconic figures leading the charge for modern civil rights who deserve some attention
I accidentally stumbled across the concept of Dignity to Work Acts (DAWA). For those who may not know a lot of the laws meant to protect workers focus more on intentions than the actual harm. So a manager's abusive behavior has to be for example because of race instead of personal bias. DAWAs aim at removing that distinction. Naturally the biggest advocates are Democrats/the Leftist.
I am curious about other similar policies ideas floating around.
My parents got to where they were in life by working twice as hard as everyone else. My mistake is that this doesn't translate in a corporate environment 😅
I just left a toxic work environment and my mental health got better and unironically my wisedom maxed out like someone took off the xp cap on my brain.
I finally understood my mistake was walking into" the pit." I needed to avoid "the pit" and if whenever safe and possible convince everyone filling in "the pit" in their best interest.
The pit is any unfavorable position that serves two purposes. A warning for interfering with system but also a reward for everyone else for compliance with the system.
An example, let's say you work in fast food. You take the initiative to always take out the trash before it overwhelms the kitchen. No one else chips in. One day you decide you're done and now your manager writes you up. You have a day off and come into a morning shift to a mountain of trash and your manager makes it your responsibility despite the fact the night shift should be written up. Your complaints further digs the hole you're in as you alienate the rest of the team further and enrage your manager.
The status quo benefits your team where now you do more work than them and your manager get trash dealt with. Everyone benefits at your expense and your only option becomes leaving.
It sounds ridiculous but the best course of action is to let things implode. If you fell into the pit by yourself no one is inclined to help you even if your intentions was to fill the pit. If multiple people fall in or everyone at once. There is a mutual benefit to address the issue and fill in the pit.