u/TUD-13BarryAllen

I've met an overwhelming amount of people who want to read books but really can't, and one of the worst roadblocks is the fact that most people imagine reading as a starting a 200-400 book, and then finishing that same book, front to back. Or there are so many books to choose from and they get overwhelmed.

If you can't stick with it or don't know where to start, try just reading many at once.

Pick a few books that make you excited to read. Read 20 pages of one book, or read many chapters of one book, then put it aside and start something else that interests you. Do this with as many books as you can handle. For me personally it actually improves my memory keeping track of many things, and keeps me interested when I'm in a reading slump. I find that a lot of books I've read are actually 10x better when they air out and I can take time to process what's going on over time instead of going front to back in one go. The ability to drop a book on a whim helps me dnf things without guilt or lack of achievement or gives me a chance to take breaks for when I'm in the right mood.

What is an obscure book that would be a hit in a parallel universe?

Something obscure that you stumbled upon and started just for the hell of it that you actually regret almost not reading or knowing about? It can be good for any reason, maybe some things aren't good at all hence why it's not known but maybe the prose was amazing, or there was a unique plot twist, or it did something that other horror has failed to do.

This is a very loaded post but I am looking for true answers, or at least explanation for why it's so easy for many Christians to write off their struggles. I've seen Christians respond to others' struggles by saying "God will never give you more than you can handle." When it comes to the person's struggling themselves, it can vary from the person using that idea to encourage their own selves to keep pushing, the person rationalizing things that are objectively not alright in their life, or the person even being hypocritical and applying it only to situations where they expect someone else to bear a burden or consequence while having severe flaws themselves.

I am fully aware that this verse or advice is not actually true to The Bible. It is a saying that is a miscontrusion of multiple verses, notably 1 Corinthians 10:13. But I feel that it deserves a genuine argument against it because it has become so Incorporated into many Christians' lives to the point where it affects their decision making, interactions, expectations, treatment of others vs self, it goes on. It should be accounted for as part of Christianity if many people are going to make such promises of God, and it deserves an explanation.

If this is supposedly true or is substantial advice to provide, where is the limit?

If God apparently never gives us more than we can handle, why do so many people resort to ending their lives or other tragedies? Why do we have so many real world problems and medical problems that we still have not developed ourselves to handle and may never will? In general this idea also opens the door to hypocrisy and unfair treatment.

How does it explain the millions of people who have ended their own lives because they'd gotten more than they can handle, in some cases things that are technically in man's control such as bullying or assault that are objectively bad rather than things beyond control such as illness, poverty, disaster that can be debated as "part of God's plan"? That also begs the question, if it was part of God's plan all along regardless of the problem being in the control of us or being unnecessary suffering, how can God play out his "plan" while also going against His own principle? In Christianity, humans are flawed, but they are not flawed to this degree, the flaws are for the purpose of personal development, reparation, balanced free will. How do, or would, Christians who believe in this principle also explain the various diseases and social issues and structural issues that we are not equipped to handle that we will most likely not be equipped to handle for decades or centuries, if at all before the end of humanity? These issues far too often are too much for individuals to bear, and regularly too much for society to bear regardless of how many people come together come up to the point where these issues cause severe adversity, disability, cases of people ending their lives or otherwise not reaching their potential whether within Christianity or not.

I would also like an answer on how so many genuine Christians are alright with saying that a person won't be given more than they can bear and then leaving the person alone to struggle. Even modifications such as "God helps us handle what we are given" cannot apply without action. Principle is commonly seen when a person's life is completely spiraled out of control, total losses, divorces, illness and substance abuse, the list goes on. How is this an acceptable response, despite everything else that Christianity preaches? I feel like that is technically taking the Lord into vain, or for granted, by dismissing the problem or the person being at risk and saying "God has this under control." Wouldn't the correct response be to be selfless, love and help your neighbor, lean on a blend of personal values, God given strength, and the medicine/society that we've developed to see to the safety and well being of the person? Having this be the go-to response or even a common response destroys a community because it hinders family, parents, friends, teachers and authority figures' needs to actually learn about personal issues, contemporary issues that affect others. It blocks the need to develop solutions or at least develop an understanding, and keeps people distanced from the reality of issues that they might indirectly be causing or be struggling from themselves and refuse to face. Things that cannot be explained, for example cases where a person "gives up" and ends their life, end up being exceptional cases where the victim is alienated or otherwise the situation is swept under the rug.

Slightly off topic, but spreading advice and wisdoms like this also leaves so many uneducated or innocent Christians with a community where it is harder to truly understand God's word. The more mistruths that gets piled up the harder it is to maintain the religion, and having these kinds of messages drives away new or returning members. Not only do the new members get confused by inconsistencies, they actively see such promises being made that clearly are not true and they no longer trust family members or the community or the religion as a whole. I know this is a separate topic, but this principle is a good example of false promises.

This is a very loaded post but I am looking for true answers, or at least explanation for why it's so easy for many Christians to write off their struggles. I've seen Christians respond to others' struggles by saying "God will never give you more than you can handle." When it comes to the person's struggling themselves, it can vary from the person using that idea to encourage their own selves to keep pushing, the person rationalizing things that are objectively not alright in their life, or the person even being hypocritical and applying it only to situations where they expect someone else to bear a burden or consequence while having severe flaws themselves.

I am fully aware that this verse or advice is not actually true to The Bible. It is a saying that is a miscontrusion of multiple verses, notably 1 Corinthians 10:13. But I feel that it deserves a genuine argument against it because it has become so Incorporated into many Christians' lives to the point where it affects their decision making, interactions, expectations, treatment of others vs self, it goes on. It should be accounted for as part of Christianity if many people are going to make such promises of God, and it deserves an explanation.

If this is supposedly true or is substantial advice to provide, where is the limit?

If God apparently never gives us more than we can handle, why do so many people resort to ending their lives or other tragedies? Why do we have so many real world problems and medical problems that we still have not developed ourselves to handle and may never will? In general this idea also opens the door to hypocrisy and unfair treatment.

How does it explain the millions of people who have ended their own lives because they'd gotten more than they can handle, in some cases things that are technically in man's control such as bullying or assault that are objectively bad rather than things beyond control such as illness, poverty, disaster that can be debated as "part of God's plan"? That also begs the question, if it was part of God's plan all along regardless of the problem being in the control of us or being unnecessary suffering, how can God play out his "plan" while also going against His own principle? In Christianity, humans are flawed, but they are not flawed to this degree, the flaws are for the purpose of personal development, reparation, balanced free will. How do, or would, Christians who believe in this principle also explain the various diseases and social issues and structural issues that we are not equipped to handle that we will most likely not be equipped to handle for decades or centuries, if at all before the end of humanity? These issues far too often are too much for individuals to bear, and regularly too much for society to bear regardless of how many people come together come up to the point where these issues cause severe adversity, disability, cases of people ending their lives or otherwise not reaching their potential whether within Christianity or not.

I would also like an answer on how so many genuine Christians are alright with saying that a person won't be given more than they can bear and then leaving the person alone to struggle. Even modifications such as "God helps us handle what we are given" cannot apply without action. Principle is commonly seen when a person's life is completely spiraled out of control, total losses, divorces, illness and substance abuse, the list goes on. How is this an acceptable response, despite everything else that Christianity preaches? I feel like that is technically taking the Lord into vain, or for granted, by dismissing the problem or the person being at risk and saying "God has this under control." Wouldn't the correct response be to be selfless, love and help your neighbor, lean on a blend of personal values, God given strength, and the medicine/society that we've developed to see to the safety and well being of the person? Having this be the go-to response or even a common response destroys a community because it hinders family, parents, friends, teachers and authority figures' needs to actually learn about personal issues, contemporary issues that affect others. It blocks the need to develop solutions or at least develop an understanding, and keeps people distanced from the reality of issues that they might indirectly be causing or be struggling from themselves and refuse to face. Things that cannot be explained, for example cases where a person "gives up" and ends their life, end up being exceptional cases where the victim is alienated or otherwise the situation is swept under the rug.

Slightly off topic, but spreading advice and wisdoms like this also leaves so many uneducated or innocent Christians with a community where it is harder to truly understand God's word. The more mistruths that gets piled up the harder it is to maintain the religion, and having these kinds of messages drives away new or returning members. Not only do the new members get confused by inconsistencies, they actively see such promises being made that clearly are not true and they no longer trust family members or the community or the religion as a whole. I know this is a separate topic, but this principle is a good example of false promises.

I loved the playground scene so much, it actually took me by surprise and I've been itching for that ever since. I also really enjoyed the suspense in the scene where the mom is on the bed talking, the whole time I was dreading the moment where the mom would say something about going into her heart and even when it didn't happen, I was still satisfied by the scene and how things played out.

This is very subjective and I know it's probably not going to get much better than the YouTube classic Lights Out but I'm taking recommendations. Are there any short films that actually made you regret getting bored and searching YouTube? Anything that sticks with you like a scene in a movie? Anything that has a very large amount of development and takes full advantage of every second, or otherwise takes full advantage of such a short time and small space?

I've heard so many say that they enjoyed books like the The Deep (Cutter), Last Days or most Adam Nevill​, but the ending really didn't do it for them. Last Days seems to be a notorious example. I have never heard any positive opinions about the ending, but it's odd that something can start out as everyone's favorite ​and then drastically decline in quality​. I still have yet to read it because I've heard so many bad reviews so I don't know where it fell off at, same for a lot of books that are mentioned or reviewed as having bad endings.

What are your general, or specific, opinions about horror endings? Where do you feel like a lot of things fall flat or decline in quality? I have a feeling that, for a lot of very divisive endings, such as I'm Thinking of Ending Things, the author gets too ambitious. Completely changes the tone, changes the rules of the universe or story, shoehorns too much mystery, too much abstract. or the author oth​erwise really drops the ball confusing resolution for problems going away, people ending, etc.

Everyone on the other side complains about how Obama had a basketball court in the White House as a defense for criticism against Trump. That's the proof that Obama corrupt and doesn't care about the country.

I just want to point out that there's nothing wrong with this. I would expect a father to be putting up some basketball hoops for his family inside his family's residence while serving almost a decade, especially when his wife was very fitness oriented. It's not some mutinous, even deranged act. The country was taken care of to the best of his ability, he remained For The People regardless of what he had. There were problems and there were things I don't agree with even as a supporter, but the money that goes into that wouldn't even scratch the surface of those problems.

I don't get how it's perfectly fine for Trump to tear up an entire wing to make a 600M ballroom, while a high population of children are living with their parents absent working all the time, low quality education or absence of education, food desperation, lack of healthcare and women's healthcare. Way too many adults are living like this too, scraping by for food, watching women's healthcare and basic healthcare fall apart, probably about to lose their homes and everything they have at any random point. The disabled people and minorities are pretty much just existing when but being oppressed. We have the worst economy in a long time, same for justice system, same for education, and it's predicted to only get worse, on top of all the other perks that he is actively doing or signing off on.

And the ballroom isn't enough, there's this basement that's for some reason "intertwined". All we really know about it is that it's going to be for military purposes, far far more stable than our schools and average neighborhoods. It's not even limited to a ballroom and basement, he's done so much destruction to the sanctity and history of the property under our money. There are other concerns with this that are related to child safety, with the way that things played out, I don't have to explain.

I just recently learned about the special light you can get to prevent nightmares. There are other things I learn about just by accident despite playing 4 for a few years now. Unrelated but I didn't know about certain traits either like the grilled cheese one, which adds character to the game.

I want to take my next gameplay very seriously. I'm holding weddings, baby showers, birthdays, very committed to the immersion. I'm seeking other ways to improve the gameplay and make the most of it even if it's subtle. I'm on console so no mods, only gallery. thank you in advance.

I see all these things online about reality shifting nowadays and now what I used to do back in high school finally has a name.

When I was in high school I had these extremely vivid experiences when I was tired and laid down a certain way or relaxed for a long time. I learned how to trigger them intentionally, but they weren't really in my control outside of some of my own actions within them. Sometimes they were just quick scenes, where I was for example sitting at a park and watching life go by, and sometimes they were actual realities that were just as vivid as real life or even more realistic than real life, where I would be sitting in a class or watching a game or just chilling out somewhere, very mundane things.

They didn't feel like dreams. I've had lucid dreams multiple times and these were nothing like it. I looked into hypnagogic hallucinations and thought that was it for a long time until I actually started having hypnagogic and hypnapompic hallucinations and it was much different. In these worlds, I could feel seconds and minutes go by, hear people moving or breathing, read clocks, watch music videos in real time. In the real world, I'd be gone for maybe five minutes and would wake up so well rested it was unbelievable.

It's cool to know it has a name. Back then people just thought I was crazy or maybe having really weird dreams. I can't do it as an adult, at least the way I used to over a decade ago but I'm looking into other methods used in the community to see where that takes me.

I don't like to put Disney shows on a pedestal because of the nature of the industry, however Good Luck Charlie had such amazing casting. Charlie ended up looking like Bob and Amy's real child as she grew up and the others were believable as siblings! As a kid I thought Gabe stood out but as I got older I started realizing that he simply took after other relatives or had a recessive gene of some sorts, just like a few people that I know in real life, and it's so interesting.

Miracle at Midnight, which I believe was made for TV, is one of the exceptions where the family looks close enough for me to suspend disbelief. Plot and studios aside, the fact that Sam and Mia had already been in multiple films together made them a really good call due to the chemistry they had, working off of each other, being believably in this situation together as parents and a couple outside of the world affairs.

There are cases where movies or shows about adopted children are either hit or miss, and what makes the casting realistic is when the adopted child has a quirk or demeanor from the adoptive parents, or they show signs of being raised in their environment that do technically make them genetically closer to the adoptive parents than to the biological ones. I can see it happening, and the immersion works. There was an episode of a medical show where a couple brought their daughter in for a severe medical problem, with no family history or compatibility, and it turned out that they had abducted her as a baby and raised her as their own child up to that point. Before the twist, I had no reason to question her being the daughter, the acting and direction and casting was already good in general, but I thought it was going to turn into a drama where the mother cheated or one of the parents was a secret step parent. The twist was so memorable and I was completely immersed because I could also see that happening too because of the acting and good direction.

I don't enjoy TV or movies that often because of the lack of immersion. I know it's just fiction, but if I have to try or if I have to suspend my disbelief that much, I could just read a book and create my own visuals.

The worst case for me personally was the movie adaptation of the book We Need to Talk About Kevin. John C Reilly was amazing and in general is good for a dumb dad role, but he was horribly miscast for WNTTAB. Kevin is supposed to be a projection of the mom for many reasons so he's expected to take after her, but Franklin is so disbelievable as a father or any kind of blood relative to him to the point where it looks like the mom cheated, and it takes away from the story. His dumb dad portrayal also does not fit here because in the book and with the overarching theme of the story in general, he's not exactly supposed to be unaware of what's going on, it's more so a mix of arrogance and ignorance on Franklin's end and manipulation by Kevin. I think the sister is miscast as well, looking like no one in the family or even a believable mix of recessive traits. It feels like she's cute to be cute and the opposite of Kevin (blonde, soft, poster child) just to look pure. But I do know that finding child actors is extremely difficult and it's not a reflection of her performance, she did an amazing job.

Drake and Josh is another example. I do not see Miranda Cosgrove as Drake Bell's sister no matter how hard I try. Even when I was young, she looked nothing like Drake or the mom and Drake didn't really look like the mom either. There are many layers to this because of Nickelodeon and child actors, however there are fan theories out there or rather headcanons that say they were adopted or neighborhood kids and I totally entertain them. On the same scale, Jake from Two and a Half Men looks like neither Alan or Judith and it bothers me every single time. This is not a reflection of the actor, Angus is absolutely iconic and he looks the role so well that I forget he isn't a real kid and I would but replace him with anyone else, but he's not Alan's kid.

This is a critique and discussion regarding casting decisions or cast management rather than performance it or any incidents regarding actors. Would like to know your best and worst.

I don't like to put Disney shows on a pedestal because of the nature of the industry, however Good Luck Charlie had such amazing casting. Charlie ended up looking like Bob and Amy's real child as she grew up and the others were believable as siblings! As a kid I thought Gabe stood out but as I got older I started realizing that he simply took after other relatives or had a recessive gene of some sorts, just like a few people that I know in real life, and it's so interesting.

Miracle at Midnight, which I believe was made for TV, is one of the exceptions where the family looks close enough for me to suspend disbelief. Plot and studios aside, the fact that Sam and Mia had already been in multiple films together made them a really good call due to the chemistry they had, working off of each other, being believably in this situation together as parents and a couple outside of the world affairs.

There are cases where movies or shows about adopted children are either hit or miss, and what makes the casting realistic is when the adopted child has a quirk or demeanor from the adoptive parents, or they show signs of being raised in their environment that do technically make them genetically closer to the adoptive parents than to the biological ones. I can see it happening, and the immersion works. There was an episode of a medical show where a couple brought their daughter in for a severe medical problem, with no family history or compatibility, and it turned out that they had abducted her as a baby and raised her as their own child up to that point. Before the twist, I had no reason to question her being the daughter, the acting and direction and casting was already good in general, but I thought it was going to turn into a drama where the mother cheated or one of the parents was a secret step parent. The twist was so memorable and I was completely immersed because I could also see that happening too because of the acting and good direction.

I don't enjoy TV or movies that often because of the lack of immersion. I know it's just fiction, but if I have to try or if I have to suspend my disbelief that much, I could just read a book and create my own visuals.

The worst case for me personally was the movie adaptation of the book We Need to Talk About Kevin. John C Reilly was amazing and in general is good for a dumb dad role, but he was horribly miscast for WNTTAB. Kevin is supposed to be a projection of the mom for many reasons so he's expected to take after her, but Franklin is so disbelievable as a father or any kind of blood relative to him to the point where it looks like the mom cheated, and it takes away from the story. His dumb dad portrayal also does not fit here because in the book and with the overarching theme of the story in general, he's not exactly supposed to be unaware of what's going on, it's more so a mix of arrogance and ignorance on Franklin's end and manipulation by Kevin. I think the sister is miscast as well, looking like no one in the family or even a believable mix of recessive traits. It feels like she's cute to be cute and the opposite of Kevin (blonde, soft, poster child) just to look pure. But I do know that finding child actors is extremely difficult and it's not a reflection of her performance, she did an amazing job.

Drake and Josh is another example. I do not see Miranda Cosgrove as Drake Bell's sister no matter how hard I try. Even when I was young, she looked nothing like Drake or the mom and Drake didn't really look like the mom either. There are many layers to this because of Nickelodeon and child actors, however there are fan theories out there or rather headcanons that say they were adopted or neighborhood kids and I totally entertain them. On the same scale, Jake from Two and a Half Men looks like neither Alan or Judith and it bothers me every single time. This is not a reflection of the actor, Angus is absolutely iconic and he looks the role so well that I forget he isn't a real kid and I would but replace him with anyone else, but he's not Alan's kid.

This is a critique and discussion regarding casting decisions or cast management rather than performance it or any incidents regarding actors. Would like to know your best and worst.

Cigarettes and alcohol and other substances are extremely addicting, but you are bigger. Cigarettes are a product, alcohol is a liquid, but you are an entire existence. If you weren't an entire person, it wouldn't have been able to consume you so much. The fact you are an entire person means that you have a lot of willpower, so much experience, a lot of needs and interests on your side.

Simply wanting to quit or cut down is the first step and that is the biggest step. Each day that you don't give in or handle your addiction properly is an entire step taken, two steps completed turns into ten steps completed before you know it. Each day sober is more and more important, tomorrow is five times more important than yesterday so you need to buckle down. Things are becoming so much better for you, for your health, for the people and things you love. Keep holding on day by day, hour by hour. You are bigger.

There are people who make submissions on sites such as the archive, and instead of actual works, they are attempts to find lost fanfiction or make requests. These submissions clog the space, making it harder for readers to find content and writers to get their own submissions out there, and also use up the storage and bandwidth of communities such as AO3. Submissions like this are against TOS of AO3. The people running the site are volunteers and having more submissions to process, more violations to tackle makes moderation difficult and takes attention away from scams, bots, serious offenses. These requests will result in removal, and very likely a ban.

I'm seeing an abundance of these types of submissions as the archive grows quickly at a significant rate. So, here is what to do if you need to find a fanfiction.

Explore with the search features on the archive. The search features are very exhaustive and just clicking on the search button will bring up a page of options. https://www.reddit.com/r/FanFiction/s/dev3V1Jluu has advice on using AO3 search if the archive is hard to navigate.

If search fails and the work is not in your account history, Reddit has many communities for finding lost fanfiction, including archives of deleted ones. I am not sure which is the most popular at the moment, which has a very high success rate due to tools that the members have, but a couple include r/lostfanfiction and r/DeletedFanfiction. I myself have had success in both.

However if it turns out a work has been deleted, I highly recommend respecting the author's privacy, or otherwise trusting any violation of the content policy that required it being removed, and just accepting the fact that it is no longer available.

As for requests, they are not hard to come by. There is no need to offer requests in most cases because if someone enjoys your work or sees that you are open to writing certain content, they will most likely just ask. If you would like to offer, create an Author's Note in a real work or respond to comments by stating you are taking requests. As for seeking requests, a comment on a work is the way to go unless the author has provided an email. Authors also keep track of bookmarks quite often, so it is possible to make a public bookmark with a note of what you would like to see in a work, asking for a sequel, etc.

Good luck. Hope all the new members enjoy the archive.

I am pretty sure it was a movie though it could have been an episode of something. I walked in on a family member watching it in the early 2000s but it looked like it was from the 70s or 80s because of the camera quality, fashion and characters' home. The effects were also choppy, more like stop motion or b film like puppeteering which is why I wasn't scared of it.

I was young child so I barely remember plot details but it's stayed with me my entire life.

There was a porcelain doll with long dark hair and a dress. Blood trickled down it's face but could've been from eyes for the sake of accuracy. One of the characters (either a man out a woman with short hair) had to stand up on a kitchen chair to change a light bulb, and the doll made the chair move to make the person fall. I believe before this the person already had an injury on their hand, or at some point in the movie had a bandage wrapped around their hand.

I know I'm not mixing it up with anything else such as the Chucky sequel where he is brought back with the swirls of blood. I have tried movies that come up on Google when searching evil doll but they all took place in a mansion or had a ventriloquist doll while this movie, the doll was a collector's type doll which I assume was secondhand or was being held onto temporarily by the characters. I loved porcelain dolls at the time (throughout my entire childhood) so I have a very distinct memory of the evil doll and of liking the scary porcelain doll movie.

I am pretty sure it was a movie though it could have been an episode of something. I walked in on a family member watching it in the early 2000s but it looked like it was from the 70s or 80s because of the camera quality, fashion and characters' home. The effects were also choppy, more like stop motion or b film like puppeteering which is why I wasn't scared of it.

I was young child so I barely remember plot details but it's stayed with me my entire life.

There was a porcelain doll with long dark hair and a dress. Blood trickled down it's face but could've been from eyes for the sake of accuracy. One of the characters (either a man out a woman with short hair) had to stand up on a kitchen chair to change a light bulb, and the doll made the chair move to make the person fall. I believe before this the person already had an injury on their hand, or at some point in the movie had a bandage wrapped around their hand.

I know I'm not mixing it up with anything else such as the Chucky sequel where he is brought back with the swirls of blood. I have tried movies that come up on Google when searching evil doll but they all took place in a mansion or had a ventriloquist doll while this movie, the doll was a collector's type doll which I assume was secondhand or was being held onto temporarily by the characters. I loved porcelain dolls at the time (throughout my entire childhood) so I have a very distinct memory of the evil doll and of liking the scary porcelain doll movie.