I’d be worried about not really being able to make my own decisions and not having someone there to help me out.

I don’t know about you, but I sure hope I’d be able to check out before that time comes for me. Before my mind and body becomes too feeble, I’d like to be able to just nope out.

Even if it were possible, I still would not prefer to have any kids.

First off, I haven’t even been a “proper adult”, and probably would never be. How can I be expected to raise a child with the care and love they deserve when I don’t even have my life sorted out? Even if you argue that I’d have to change once having a child, I’ve also seen people fail to change even after having children they swore they loved even more than their own life.

Secondly, we’ve already got enough people that are unwanted and abandoned. Why not take better care of people we already have now?

Lastly, parenting is a huge commitment. It’s not just about you and your “legacy”, but another life that will suffer for your mistakes. For those who are up to the task and willingly take on the responsibility, thank you and best of luck!

Because why not? I’m alive by default, and I’m too lazy to change that.

Thanks! About the translation, yeah, my primary concern is putting across the wording of the original, that’s why it became too literal. You know, that basic Japanese newbie learner tendency to be too literal.

I am also a bit stumped about the grammar used for the last sentence, but I’m guessing it’s some polite construction which wouldn’t affect the English translation too much.

I agree about being able to grasp the gist of the message with some basic Japanese, but IDK about being able to actually read the message.

お願い

この先は危険ですので、これ以上前へ行かないようお願い致します。

There are some parts of the message that I don’t think is included in basic Japanese lessons:

• 危険 → dangerous
• 以上 → exceeding, beyond
• 行かないよう → probably related to the V+ようだ construction, which with the following bit, might be a polite way of making a request.
• お願い致します → probably some polite way of saying ‘please’

If I were to translate the message with my meager self-taught Japanese, I’d probably render it as something like

Request

Because of the danger ahead, not going beyond here is humbly requested.

Though I don’t think that fully captures the nuance of the message itself.

Oh! That’s probably enough for one day’s work (kahit na may konting overtime o mejo heavy workload)! Pwede na palang pang-remote work ito! Of course, it’d depend on what exactly you’re doing, but a work day doesn’t impose a huge demand on a computer all the time.

So pwedeng na ata talaga syang pang-work computer!

That looks like a sweet portable PC set-up. Obviously you can’t use it on the go as laptops would allow you to, but if you’ve got the space, you can set it up rather quickly.

Just one question though, how long do you think it’d run when on powerbank alone (assuming your average usage)?

First OS: Windows 3.1 running on top of MS-DOS 6.2

First Linux distro: Ubuntu (forgot the version, but it was circa 2018).

If I’d count an OS/Linux distro that I’ve used even if not in a machine I own, it’d be Linux Mint of circa 2006.

The alien impersonator was me all along!‌ HAHAHA!!!

I mean, seriously, I am not a native English speaker, but even with my weird English accent, it only became weirder if I try to speak fast while keeping the emphasis on that ‘t’ at the end of “hot”. My native accent also probably lends to that glottal stop taking over the ‘t’ and merging it with the upcoming ‘p’ sound. It also helps that the two sounds (glottal stop and the bilabial ‘p’) are on opposite sides of my mouth, so I‌ can quickly sound them in succession. The end result sounded to me like an exaggerated “posh British” rendition, as if the alien watched way too much‌ BBC before invading Earth.

It just sounded way weirder than I otherwise would be. I can’t really describe it.

NO

Neither do I self-identify as a tankie, I don’t think anyone who’d identify themselves as tankies would think of me as one.

I didn’t get it until I started trying to say “hot potato” in the middle of a sentence, like “Look out! Hot potato incoming!”

The ‘t’ in “hot” became more and more like a glottal stop as my tongue started to touch the gums of my top front teeth less and less.

This isn’t about content, but upcycling is a thing. You can have somewhat fashionable and stylish products made from what would otherwise be waste.

Nope, you’re not alone. I sometimes write a lengthy reply, read it, reread it, and before I get sucked into that overthinking loop, press “post” and go do something else.

I then find myself returning to my reply and re-reading it, often catching mistakes in spelling, grammar, or worse, in how I stated or presented my idea. That’s why a lot of my replies end up being edited after the fact, with a note saying why I felt I had to edit my response.

I’ve tried to discern the context in which you’re asking this question, but based on the OP and their replies, I think it’s not so much about outlining than it is organizing details and thoughts before writing the initial rough draft. I might be wrong and that the OP‌ already knows about what I’d laid down below, but I hope even if it doesn’t help the OP, it might be of help to someone.

Outlining is basically trying to organize your thoughts and all the details mapped out before writing. I assume that all the details are already laid out in one form or the other, and now it’s time to put them into order. What order things would be put into depends on what is being described or being explained.

If I were to describe a house’s interior, I might go from the main door, then proceeding as if I’m physically walking through the house, and then describing objects I encounter as if I’m panning the camera.

If I’m describing a person, I might go with the basic biographical details first, then an overview of their achievements, then personal life. Within each heading, for example, their personal life, I might go chronologically.

If I’m describing a process, I might go with an overview of what the process is for, what are its inputs, steps needed to prepare the inputs for the process, and then the process itself in chronological order. Within each step, I‌ might go into the reasoning behind having to do this step, or why this step must go before (or after) some other step.

If I’m describing an idea, I might go for a general definition first, then go more specific, discussing what makes each specific definition different from the others. I might then go for a quick historical overview of how this idea came into being, what ideas have led to this idea, and the thinkers that have contributed to building up this idea.

That is, there’s a lot of approaches you can use to organize your ideas. You can organize your ideas or details based on location. That is, organizing details spatially, like describing a house’s interior. You can organize your ideas based on time, which came first, which comes next, like describing a process. You can also organize your ideas from most general to the most specific (or vice versa, though starting with the most detailed first might require more concentration on part of the reader). One can use these and any other methods of organization you can think of so long as it makes sense given the context.

How you might organize your ideas or details would depend on what you’re trying to achieve in the first place, and some methods are more suited than others depending on the topic. Lengthier works might even require a mix of these techniques. For example, if I were to describe a city for a D&D campaign, I might describe its layout first, laying out the details as if I were walking through the city. Then, I might describe its government structure from the widest in scope to the narrowest. Is it part of a kingdom? How is the city itself governed? Are there any districts, if so, how are they governed?. I would then give an overview of its history—in chronological order, of course. Any other detail that might be of use (for the DM or the players) can then be listed in order of most prominent or well-known to the least.

Now as a demonstration, I’ll attempt to outline this response:

• Foreword and disclaimer
• Basic overview of outlining
• Examples
  • Describing a house
  • Describing a person
  • Describing a process
  • Describing an idea
• Organizing detail
  • Based on space/location
  • Based on time/chronology
  • Based on generality/specificity
  • Combination of approaches and others
• Demonstration

Tagalog, my native language, has one that I’ve always wondered about: ‘umay.’ I would translate it as “too delicious, it’s almost sickening.”

Imagine a cake that’s too delicious, overwhelms your senses with sweetness, tartness, bitterness and all the good things that in moderation, would have made for a perfectly delicious cake. For example, “Masarap naman yung cake ni Maria, kaso nakaka-umay” (“Maria’s cake is delicious, really, but it’s a bit too much for me”). I guess one can put it as ‘too much,’ or ‘overwhelming,’ but there’s this additional element of “it’s actually kinda good, you know, but it went a bit too far.”

Now, I’ve been wondering if it’s related to the Japanese 美味い (うまい), and the wiktionary entry I linked earlier has it as a possible origin. I find it kinda (morbidly) funny wondering if it got its present meaning during the second world war, when the Japanese invaded the Philippines. I’d imagine Filipinos would just keep saying “it’s delicious, it’s delicious,” just to placate the Japanese, even if they’re already too sick and tired of it.

A source close to the Pope told CNN that the phrase could also be understood as there is a “gay climate” in the seminaries.

I wonder why… Surely it isn’t because a seminary is a good place for a confused, self-hating homosexual to be in, right? Surely it isn’t because being gay was seen as so anathema in Catholic-dominant societies that the seminary seems to be a sanctuary, right?

There’s this saying “a fish is caught through its mouth,” and this is an illustration of what it means. This pope might present this ‘cool’, ‘modern’ image to the public, but his words spoken in private amongst his peers reveals his real stance about these things.

Edit:‌ proofreading.

Target is one creature the caster can touch (can be self). The target can make a wisdom saving throw against the caster’s spell save DC. If successful, the spell ends without having any effect on the target. Otherwise (or if the target chose not to make the wisdom saving throw), the target will immediately taste some really well-made lemonade gin mojito that will linger for as long as the spell is in effect.

For every turn the target takes after this, the target will have to make a constitution saving throw against the caster’s spell save DC. A successful constitution saving throw will restore one first level spell slot. A natural 20 will increase the spell slot level this spell will restore. A failure will end the spell. A critical failure will cause the target to deplete all of their spell slots and the spell ends. Every turn increases the save DC‌ by one.

This might pale in comparison with all the other replies here, but one incident really made me uneasy.

I was seated inside a train minding my own business. I was wearing a loose shirt and an even looser pair of walking shorts. The shorts were made of thin and glossy material. It wasn’t thin enough to expose my underwear but it readily shows any bumps or whatnot.

The train wasn’t that full, and there were lots of empty seats. The train had longitudinal seating (two rows of seats facing each other, with some standing space in between. There’s also an area where the train can “bend”. This area has no seats of course. I was seated next to this “bendy area”.

I remember having difficulty staying awake and was seated in an increasingly loose way. I caught a glimpse of a guy standing in front of me. He was leaning against the train walls and was on his phone.

Now, the train isn’t the most quiet, but I distinctly heard an unmistakeable camera sound which jolted me awake. Selfie cameras on phones wasn’t yet a thing back then and the way his phone is oriented, I can see the phone’s camera lens pointed at me. The guy, noticing that I noticed the sound, quickly put the phone back in his pocket.

I might be wrong, I hope I was wrong, but I thought a stranger took a photo of me just a meter or two away from me.

That’s it. Kinda underwhelming, I suppose but I was kept wondering why that guy, if it’s indeed the case, took a picture of me.

Investigators also spoke to the priest, who said the woman had been told at an earlier Mass on Sunday that she had not fulfilled all the requirements for receiving communion and could not participate, officials said.

When she returned for a later service, the priest says she “attacked” him and “grabbed” a tray of communion wafers from his hands, the affidavit says.

“She informed the priest she did in fact do the steps necessary and is now accepted by God, thus, granting her the ability to participate,” an affidavit reports.

That’s when the priest “became upset and tried to ram the ‘cookie’ in her mouth,” she told police.

“In response … she attempted to grab another communion bread which (the priest) was holding. However, (he) grabbed her and bit her arm,” the affidavit says.

AFAIK, the priest does have the power to refuse communion to someone. But then again, a quick online search to confirm this gave me the following:

Can. 912 Any baptized person not prohibited by law can and must be admitted to holy communion.

Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.

Can. 916 A person who is conscious of grave sin is not to celebrate Mass or receive the body of the Lord without previous sacramental confession unless there is a grave reason and there is no opportunity to confess; in this case the person is to remember the obligation to make an act of perfect contrition which includes the resolution of confessing as soon as possible.

(Taken from https://www.vatican.va/archive/cod-iuris-canonici/eng/documents/cic_lib4-cann879-958_en.html#TITLE_III)

Not a Roman Catholic priest, let alone a Roman Catholic canon lawyer, but I think any baptized Catholic can take communion unless:

1. They are excommunicated.
2. Explicitly declared to be barred from participating in the sacrament of communion.
3. Obviously manifesting grave sin.

And then, Catholics are enjoined to refrain from participating from mass or receiving communion if they’re aware of committing a grave sin and haven’t yet done the sacrament of confession.

The only way I can justify the priest’s prior actions given all this is if the woman has been explicitly (visible to all the people in the church) committing grave sin. Or is known by the congregation that the woman is committing grave sin.

However, from the other places, it seems that the advice is to privately convince the person to refrain from participating in communion. Assuming the priest has done this in that previous mass, and the woman escalated the situation by reaching for the communion wafers, I could understand the priest going wild. Afterall, the priest has a duty to ensure the sanctity of the communion wafers.

That the priest’s first impulse in this situation is to bite the woman still is funny to me though. Was his hands and arms already otherwise occupied?

Of course, all I’ve said above (TL;DR: the priest can possibly bar someone from participating in the holy communion, that the priest has a duty of keeping the sanctity of the consecrated hosts) still doesn’t excuse the priest from being charged with assault and battery. I feel this part needs to be said out loud.

And since I’m already quoting the Roman Catholic Canon law, I think this one’s most apropos:

Can. 909 A priest is not to neglect to prepare himself properly through prayer for the celebration of the eucharistic sacrifice and to offer thanks to God at its completion.