janonymous

That might be true, but doesn't seem very relevant at the moment

There are quite a few movies called Home on imdb, a link or release year would be helpful

People worried about Mozilla surely won't migrate to chrome, will they?

No way to find out

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect

I'm pretty excited to see the brackets! I think there are a lot of unrealistic expectations going around about how effective they will be, leading to a lot of unnecessary negativity. But I guess that's just a normal reaction to changes in hobby spaces. Most people that get upset probably didn't read the article and just looked at the brackets and Game Changers list to find things to complain about. Also it's just a beta! Anyway, in my eyes it just has to be better than what we currently have and that's not too hard. Also it won't replace the pre-game talk. It's supposed to complement it.

I quite like the 5 brackets. They represent the different deck types, that I see most often, well enough. Of course there is still the possibility for vastly varying power levels within these, if you only consider what you're not allowed to play instead of adhering to the bracket's "spirit". There will still be people that consider their weird but high-synergy deck to be bracket 1 or 2, because it adheres to the rules, but at least I don't have to worry about facing cards from the Game Changers list. There will always be a way for bad actors to spoil everyone's fun if they really try, but that's another issue I think. We'll see if the brackets communicate their power level well enough for more balanced games.

I really like the idea of the Game Changers list. Way better than having a list for each bracket. It's also great to have a half-way step before bans, which will allow for unbans of various cards that are fine in higher power games. I like that I can look at that list and get a feel what I can expect to see and what not in the different brackets. It's a really elegant solution! It does look a little short, though. I expected to see Burgeoning, Necropotence, Farewell and more on that list.

All in all I'm excited to adjust my decks to fit into the different brackets to see if it actually works out. Commander is such a great game if everybody is roughly playing on the same level and you have some idea of what you can expect to see. Over the last years this most often happened when my pod brought their cEDH adjacent, high power decks. Anything less than that had way more power level inconsistencies. Which felt especially worse, because the games took way longer. Hopefully this is a step to fix this!

You don't have to play 3 Game Changers for your deck to be in bracket 3. I think the "rules" are more like guard rails. It may be more helpful to consider the bracket descriptions to gauge where your decks fall. Just because your high power optimized deck adheres to the "rules" in bracket 1, doesn't mean it is a bracket 1 deck. As they wrote, this will not protect you from bad actors.

Edit: This is also answered in the FAQ part of the article:

My best deck has no Game Changers and is technically a Bracket 2 deck. Should I play it there?

You should play where you think you belong based on the descriptions. For example, if your deck has no-holds-barred power despite playing zero Game Changers, then you should play in Bracket 4!

Love it! One of the best shows I've seen in years. Have recommended to basically anyone I know.

I get the love for 3, but I've come to like 5 best. It's easier on the eye and has way better use interface.

But if we're talking Might and Magic, don't forget Dark Messiah!

I have this as well, although maybe not as badly. It comes in goes in waves and depends a lot on my current self perception. But there is also this general anxiety thinking, that clings on to every possible way something could turn out wrong. It's exhausting, but it did get better over the years. I have also learned to live with it, when it's bad.

The first thing I want to recommend is therapy. That helped me a lot. Hearing a professionals perspective on my negative inner dialog, helped me view it with a little more distance. I see now that it's my brain trying to help me, trying to protect me from bad experiences, based on past traumas. Unfortunately this self protection mechanism often goes wild and hurts me in the process.

To get a grip on it all, I like to imagine my brain as a sand hill and my thoughts as marbles that are dropped on the top and then roll downwards, leaving channels in the sand. The more marbles run along a similar path the more likely the next marbles will follow them. That makes it so hard to change your thoughts, because you have to actively fight against your neuronal pathways that have been established by years and and years of this thinking. In the beginning this thinking was probably very useful. That's why the channel grew so deep, but now it is too deep channeling too many thoughts that way. So, when I realize my thoughts keep running down the same track, I stop them and force them towards a different outcome: What if all went well? What if it's all a misunderstanding? What if it happens, but it's actually not bad at all? I consciously think of various ways that contradict my negative thought patterns. It is a lot of effort, but honestly, thinking of all the worst outcomes is as well.

I have a couple of mantras, I like to remind myself of ideally every day, to program them into my mind:

• The best thing I can do is just be myself (I noticed the more I overthink something, the worse it gets. Often the best thing is just to be my honest self instead of playing 4D-chess with myself to play around every possible way something could go wrong)
• Be Authentic - Surrender the Outcome - Do the Work (You can only control yourself, you have no control over the outcome. So do your best and then let go)
• Nothing lasts, nothing is finished, nothing is perfect

I also feel like meditating and reading or listening to Alan Watts and Ram Dass helped me get a different perspective on life. Instead of holding myself to my own impossible standards and then be disappointed with myself, I realized that we're actually not that important and there is no ideal or right way to live. Life isn't there to be perfected. It's to be lived and enjoyed! In Ram Dass' words: "You can do it like it's a great weight on you, or you can do it like a dance."

Regarding mistakes: It's alright to make mistakes. They are actually an essential part of life! There is no getting around them! It's kind of a framing issue. A mistake is just something you learned how to do better after doing it. But we got told to feel bad about them often enough that we took it to heart. We are often way too hard on ourselves! Way harder than we would be with anyone else. Sometimes it helps to step back and talk to yourself as if you were your friend. And why wouldn't you want to be a good friend to yourself? In the end we're all just kids in the inside that want to be valued and loved. A part of my therapy was to talk to my inner child, tell him that he is loved and safe.

I've also heard it helps to give your negative inner voice a name, like Steve. Steve wants to do everything right and is afraid of everything. He can be a real drag, but he just wants to help. Tell your Steve to shut the fuck up and relax a little.

Yeah, I don't think that's very helpful, but then again neither is blaming all men 🤷‍♂️

When I hear someone complain about men I always assume it's about the way men are socialized in our society not about literally all men. It's a way to air out frustrations, not an actual statement. Of course there are exceptions, some do mean it literally, but they are definitely a minority.

I mean I agree, it's silly to phrase it like that, but I find reactions like this even more silly. Someone is venting their frustration about a specific experience, that fuels a general frustration with the way a significant portion of men behave (which includes heinous crimes that are systemically perpetrated by men against women). And the reaction they get is "Well, actually, it's not all men, you know?". Like, come on. Is that really what's being said here? Isn't that reaction a kind of whataboutism? Instead of talking about what caused this or showing some empathy, you really want to make fun of it and point out the semantics?