First I read Rickiest click of my career. I think it was a visionary mistake.

But at least I do not see it morally as a very big problem that a person explicitly says that something is acceptable and then that thing is done to him

This is why one of my wild theories is that the timing of the shot isn’t coincidental, and since there’s so little time between his answer and the shot, there’s a (negligible, too low, ridiculously small) chance that the shooter was waiting for this particular question (and the answer that follows), suggesting some connection between the person asking and the killer. I am aware of how tinfoil hat it sounds, and I don’t think that’s actually the case, but it makes some sense.

While I’ve been playing with variously wild theories myself, as well, I don’t see why a sniper would keep their crosshair right on the person they are trying to protect. However, I’m also not overly educated in snipology to be 100% sure about it.

Weirdly, after a certain percentage of useless meetings (that should have been an email) it does become more productive to make the AI “do the job”: not because it’s actually efficient, but an AI is never interrupted for a pointless meeting for hours.

Indeed.

“Had to be me. Someone else might’ve gotten it wrong”

Shit, it was even hard to simply copy-paste this.

While I never heard that saying before, I can totally get behind it. I truly appreciate it, thanks.

Wow. Do you know the feeling when someone brings your attention to something that you had been ignoring pretty much all your life, and from that point it drives you mad every single time? Yeah, you have just done that with the meant to/supposed to thing. You’re SO totally right! Aaaand you cursed me.

Oh no (yes?), I totally get what you’re saying, and I’m able to process these situations (I think I’ve seen enough during that 15-20 years of playing with/against kids), that part doesn’t bother me; what I was really curious about is how you, personally, would interpret that brief response, without any prior context.

Oh yeah, I don’t have a problem dealing with the nastier version, I was just wondering how you would interpret the exchange, provided it was the first and only 4 characters you see from a random person.

While I was thinking of something similar, it’s important that in this particular case we’re talking about a conversation with a stranger, and not about breaking news. Now, I get that it all depends - what I’m curious about is your assumption of the situation’s vibe.

While I might use them interchangeably, as a non-native I would think “need to” is supposed to mean that the situation came out of necessity, such as feeling the need to pee or resorting to selling your car because of an empty wallet, while “have to” is more like the result of some rules or discipline, such as showing up to work in time - but I understand that the line between the two can be rather blurry.

As for my thing: there are a few shortened words in my language (similarly to the English “hubby”, “preggo”, etc.) that got shortened according to pronunciation, and not the original (longer) word, having a different spelling at the start (as if “circle” got shortened to “circ”, but spelled as “cirk”). It feels like a kid came up with the spelling, and now it’s the official form. It’s bugging my inner spelling nazi every time I see it.

I had the feeling - but, considering the above, which one would you think of when setting this from someone as the first reaction?

Does adding fuck really change anything?

Yeah, it makes it even worse : ). I was thinking just the same first - however, I’m not in my early twenties / late teens anymore, and I’ve been wondering if that was the case with the younger generation.

shut up is also a rude phrase in english

I was thinking the same! But I started seeing videos lately where a conversational partner (typically a young girl, but that could be some bias) responded with ‘shut up’ in a cheerful manner, seemingly meaning some pleasant surprise mixed with disbelief. And this feels rather recent to me - hence my doubt. But I’m relieved if I’m not the only one, thanks. I wonder if it’s a generational (or a non-existent?) thing.

Ah okay, thanks for clearing it up! I had no idea that double-original-op was actually a thing, and made me question myself about the meaning of the acronym.

Original OP

Wait, what does OP stand for?

Ctrl+Shift+Reset returns your document to the last saved state.

Oh, if anything, unless it’s in the last element, it’s easier to see paired items in the list ( ‘,’ -> next element; ’ and ’ -> still the same element, with ‘and’ inside). When it’s the last element, it’s indeed ambiguous. And then there’s /u/hakase 's comment:

“They went to Oregon with Betty, a maid, and a cook”, where Betty is the maid mentioned.

I see where you’re coming from. In school we were also taught to NOT put a comma before ‘and’ if it’s a list. I also didn’t quite get it, and found it weird. However, if you consider ‘and’ and a comma serving the same purpose (linking the elements in a list), then putting a comma before ‘and’ would just make either of them redundant. I’m not saying I prefer either of the two, but at least there is a reason to it.