
u/Next-Geno_N

Hollow Knight: Silksong - Sea of Sorrow | An Extended Look Coming Exclusively To Netflix on August 27
First look at The Hollow Knight Silksong Movie - only in cinemas December 3rd, 2027
Hollow Knight: Silksong has been permanently discounted by $1 on all storefronts. (Was $19.99)
Team Cherry announces they have formed a polycule relationship
Full cast announcement for Hollow Knight Silksong: The Odyssea of Sorrow, releasing 4th September 2026.
How is the Holy Ghost a credible means of discerning true religion?
I'm asking this in good faith.
Scholarship, archeology, history, etc, are not very effective ways of verifying the church's truthfulness.
Instead, we're taught to take it to the Lord, and seek a confirmation through the Holy Spirit.
But the problem is: many religions have such mechanisms and experiences that to them confirm the truthfulness of their religion. If the method produces confident positive results across mutually exclusive claims, then the method itself can't be used to discriminate between true and false.
So when it happens to us church members, why should we have confidence that this does indeed mean the church is true?
We might be tempted to suggest additional mechanisms- study, faithful living, etc, but these don't self-evidently favour the lds church either, particularly given that people of other religions also use such mechanisms to strengthen their own convictions.
Often we might try to explain away other church's spiritual experiences by saying that they have "fragments of truth" and so on, and that this is what the Holy Ghost was testifying of.
But the thing is, that's not how the other-religion people receiving those experiences tend to interpret them. So the aforementioned explanation would mean that spiritual confirmations can seem to mean one thing but actually mean another. It would set a precedent, for example, that our lds religion only gets spiritual confirmations because it contains fragments of "the one true religion, Islam" or so on.
And so I'm looking for an intellectually honest reason to stay in the church, that wouldn't also be experienced by members of a false church.
I'm happy to "hang in there and have faith until a confirmation comes," but it's not like there's only one religion that this would apply to. There are thousands of religions out there; why should I prioritise investigating the lds religion over any other? And why should I value lds spiritual confirmations over the spiritual confirmations of the truthfulness of any other religion?
And besides, I'm supposed to be booking my endowment- which is a bit more of a commitment than just "hanging in there and having faith."
Frankly, it already worries me that this matter hardly gets raised in the church. It's pretty foundational to establishing the credibility of spiritual witnesses, and so you'd think that almost all critical-thinking members and investigators would have to confront this issue at some point.
Would appreciate your insight on this. Thanks.
Do I really need to clock in at my home store before training at another store?
Edit: many thanks to all. I ended up clocking in at my home store and will look to reimburse petrol costs.
Original: I've got a first aid coyrse tomorrow from 8:45am-4pm at another store. The notice apparently says I have to go to my normal store and clock in there first, even though my normal store is in the opposite direction from the training location. They're not super far apart (25 min between them on a bike) but it would still require me to get up at 5am.
My section leader said that previously clocking in at the other store would have been fine, as it would have shown as an alternative location, but they’re unsure how it works with the new exceptions report.
Has anyone done training at another store recently? Do you genuinely have to travel to your home store purely to clock in first, or can you clock in at the training store and have any exception corrected afterwards?
Do you think Big Finish will give us the regeneration for Eric Roberts' Master?
It's a bit weird, because obviously (I think) we know that Alex MacQueen's Master, which is exclusive to Big Finish, comes inbetween the Roberts master and the War master.
So that could make things a bit awkward if- for example- the BBC wasn't too keen on them legitimising MacQueen to the point of making Roberts regenerate into him.
The fact that every Master! box set ends with >!the Roberts Master being returned to the Eye of Harmony!<doesn't exactly fill me with confidence that Big Finish is being allowed to take big swings with the character.
It's a shame, because I *would* like to see the Master's timeline be bridged in the same way that Big Finish has given us The Eighth Doctor Time War/War Doctor content.
So what was Mario's character arc in The Super Mario Bros Movie?
I see wildly different takes on this, from "Yes, Mario has an arc and it's ____" to "No, Mario has no character arc and that is/isn't okay."
So I wanted to gather your thoughts, to see if there was anything I had overlooked. I'm open to slightly or completely changing my mind on this.
I'd argue that even if Mario was *supposed* to have an arc, he doesn’t actually have a successful one in practice.
- His arc isn't that he learns perseverance is good- because although lots of people clown on him for his perseverance in Brooklyn, the film never dramatises that Mario himself holds this negative opinion- outside of a throwaway line he says to Peach more than halfway through the film (“never thought of that as a good thing”.) Hence, there is no discernible shift in his behavior before vs after.
- His arc isn’t that he becomes skilled, because A) The plumbing job showed that skill wasn’t the issue, seeing as he didn't seem to make any mistakes, but everything still went wrong. B) Virtually none of the skills he acquired on the training course were actually used in the final battle; the fact that Luigi uses the super star as equally well Mario shows that skill was a total non-factor in saving the day.
- The arc isn't him learning to stop being so reckless, seeing as the solution to any problem in the film is always just to repeatedly rush into danger until you succeed.
Ultimately, Mario leaves Brooklyn wanting respect and then gets exactly that when he returns, despite Mario himself not approaching life any differently to before.
That could work if the Mushroom Kingdom journey had meaningfully explored what his desire for respect was made of- you know, a sort of “static character arc”- where Mario doesn’t change, and the film simply tests the depth of his existing resilience.
But even this wasn’t well-executed in practice, because the film’s later challenges don’t introduce new emotional costs, pressures/or trade-offs. So when Mario repeats the same behaviour throughout the film, it doesn’t carry escalating emotional significance. Mario emerging from the pizzeria at the end is less of a revelation about the depths of his perseverance and more just a "well obvs" moment, seeing as nothing in the finale is heightened on emotional level to make perseverance during that more emotionally significant than- say- persevering through the full-night-long training montage.
So the ending is just Mario getting what he always deserved, without the journey along the way feeding into it. If Peach, Bowser & co were somehow sucked into Brooklyn in Act 1 instead of Act 3, it’s hard to see what would have been meaningfully different. Mario would have rushed in, beaten him with the super star, and gotten everyone’s praise, without having to go on any kind of journey. And as a result, the film starts to feel more of a flat chain of action setpieces, rather than a cohesive journey where every step matters.
TL-DR: I don't think Mario has an arc in the first film, but I honestly want to hear what other people's thoughts are on this. Do you agree/disagree?
UK government announces plans to ban Hollow Knight Silksong for under-16s
Where do you see Big Finish in 20 years?
Someone asked the question a few years ago, but a lot has changed since then:
- The Disney era has flopped, with future TV spinoffs seeming unlikely for now
- In an unprecedented move, the 11th & 12th Doctor Adventures range are being started without their original actors, despite Smith & Capaldi still being alive and kicking
- Every Doctor (besides 14 and 15) now has an ongoing range. The First Doctor’s hiatus will end in 2028, and even Tennant has 15 stories releasing from 2027 to 2029.
- Billie Piper has joined The Ninth Doctor Adventures
- Tom Baker has stopped recording new audios, but he has an unreleased back catalogue of roughly five years.
- McCoy has recorded his final adventure (in terms of chronological timeline placement).
- Subscriptions were discontinued in 2025
- Big Finish’s license has been renewed until 2035.
________________________
Some of the challenges that Big Finish might have to confront are:
- The increasing age of the classic Doctors
- The increasing age of the classic companions (it’s one thing to recast a Doctor, but are they going to recast every single companion too? So far, large-scale recasts have only been for Doctors that Big Finish has hardly touched, like the early 1st Doctor era).
- The increasing number of Doctors overall; assuming the TV series continues, would Big Finish be able to sustain ongoing series for 20 different Doctors?
- The ever-decreasing demand for physical CDs, and how this will affect the size, timing, and purchase structures of future audio dramas.
What are your thoughts?
This will put the debate to rest... Right? Right?
Credit to @Avesvery (who appears to have made this version)