Lanthanite

Employers liked offering this structure because then they didn't have to like, try to guess how long the invasion of spain will take and then carry 800 coins per soldier around the battlefield where it could be captured. It also gives them the chance to budget around the assumption that they take an enemy city and *find* vast sums of treasure even if they don't have the full value at the beginning of the war.

The main flaw of this system is that it's very easy to end up in a scenario where if you have, say, 50,000 guys that have been fighting for 800 days, you now owe 40 million silver to your army, and if the budget has not worked out to a 40 million surplus, you literally can't afford to end the war, but you can probably afford to pay them for a couple more weeks. So then you have to start thinking creatively.

At the start of my employment, my boss showed me videos of people stealing, and we both had a chuckle about it. How silly they were! There was a camera overhead, and it’s not to watch the shoppers. See, we can’t actually stop shoplifters. They get away with it maybe nine out of ten times. But we, who are watched and tallied and witnessed? We are always caught.

At first it was hard to hold one hundred dollars bills. An amount I had never seen before. An amount that didn’t exist in my household. It’s normal now. Here is something that is not for me.

“What the hell, I’ll take another,” says the man, pondering our 200 dollar watches. What the hell. Total comes to 580 and not even a flinch in his face. I have been working for 11 hours today and made only 110 dollars. It will go to my rent. Today I work for free, it feels. When I get my check, I will have 35 dollars left for food and saving.

The six hundreds he hands me go into the cash register. For a moment, I imagine having money. Then I put it away, counting out his change.

I know for a fact we sell our products for double what they are worth. That I could be making commission. That they could hand me those 580 dollars and change my life and not even mark the difference in their checkbooks. He’s not the only sale they make today, but I am the reason they made it. He’s not the only one spending 600 dollars, but if I hadn’t spent two hours with him telling me about his life, he wouldn’t have spent any. I go home. I don’t own a watch.

I have watched and rewatched a video on how to make salmon four ways. My shopping list is always the same. Pasta. Rice. Tuna. If I can afford butter it was a good week. I dream of the world I will never walk in, where I can throw the best fish fillet in the cart with a shrug. I hold hundreds in my hand and look up at the camera. I put them under the cash drawer.

I go to work. I scrap together my savings. I eat my bowl of rice slowly. My manager takes a paid week off from work just for his birthday. He owns a yacht. 

i was part of their college program. i moved to the state for it. they legally owned the building i was living in and still charged me rent. i ostensibly was being charged to work for them. it was a 2 bedroom apartment and they placed 6 adult women in it in forced triples.

as many as one in ten disney employees have experienced homelessness while working for the company. despite huge efforts to unionize, strike, or otherwise demand fair treatment; disney has refused to increase employee quality of life.

disney admits publicly that a good portion of their success is because the employees (“cast members”) are dedicated, passionate, and selfless. this is never reflected in pay. even “face” characters (ie those that are princesses etc) make barely above a minimum wage.

at the time that i worked there, i made $8.50 an hour. at one point i was asked to create a human shield around a bag because a bomb dog had alerted to it. for eight fucking dollars an hour.

i now work a very cushy office job. i have bought the salmon and cooked it all four ways.

i go to the store. i am nice to the person behind the counter. she looks up at the camera while she counts out my change. there is nothing fundamentally different about her and i.

The existence of the Catholic Church in Lancer is evidenced by this passage from page 121 of No Room For A Wallflower Act 1:

Catholicism is such a prevalent world religion that it would almost certainly have had many adherents on all of the Ten, which meant that everywhere the Ten went, so too did Catholicism. The Ten left starting around 6000bu, and instantaneous FTL communication didn't appear until around 3200u, which means that for over 9000 years - longer than the current human historical record! - Catholic dioceses on old Earth colonies could not have maintained full communion.

There was also no contact between Earth and any of its colonies by any means (FTL or not) from 6000bu to at least 1400u, and realistically several centuries after that. 1400u is when Union on Cradle first turned its long-range communication systems back on and experienced the Third Trauma; they didn't start to send regular messages to surviving colonies until significantly after that - first contact with the Karrakin Trade Baronies didn't happen until 2800u, more than 800 years into the First Expansion Period.

This puts the earliest that the Catholic church on Cradle could possibly have had any contact with orphaned dioceses at around 8000 years. This exceeds the current lifespan of the Catholic church by more than four times.

It is reasonable to assume that in the absence of any possible contact with the Holy See on Earth, Catholic dioceses on the colony worlds would have to establish their own central authority - essentially, a series of definitionally non-competing antipopes. The realities of time, distance and differing environments would cause dogma in each separate diocese to drift.

We've already seen this happen on Earth: Irish Catholicism is notably different in character to American Catholicism, and both of those groups can pick up a phone and talk to the Pope! Meanwhile, some of the Ten went to planets hundreds of light-years away - even if you could send a question to the Holy See, by the time you got a response back, assuming your civilization endured, the cultural conditions that provoked your question would most likely be historical curiosities discussed by your distant descendants.

So imagine the nightmarish complications around 3200u onwards, during the Second Expansion Period, which is when FTL communication and travel became commonplace in the Lancer universe. This is a reasonable point to posit that the "Catholic Union" mentioned in Wallflower came into being.

Let me set the scene: the Cradle Papacy proposes, now that FTL communication is possible, to reunify the Catholic Church and return the faithful across every human world to full communion with the Holy See (SecComm was ascendant back then; this feels like the sort of One Humanity shit they'd pull). With Union's newly-built OmniNet, the Cradle Pope reaches out to the archdioceses of Karrakis, Carina, Tau Ceti, Rigel Kentaurus, Spinward Ultima…

Cradle Pope: "Blessings upon you all, from the Church of Peter the Apostle, First Bishop of Rome, in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit."

Karrakis Pope: "Oh, hey! Which one of the Passions are you Bonded to?"

Sparri Pope: "Blessings upon you in the name of Saint Anaru, who vanquished the Beasts of God and ate their eggs."

Constellar Pope: "I have a brain implant that constantly updates the Liturgy for me!"

Bishop-Regent of Ras Shamra: "Blessings upon you in the name of Malcolm XVII, Prophet and Final Pope, who harrowed the Nightlands."

Cradle Pope: "…"

Cradle Pope: "Guys what the fuck"

The Catholic Union in 5016u must be an absolutely batshit compromise between a multitude of utterly incompatible regional dogmas that exists broadly so that these separate churches can exercise collective political authority.

The de-emphasis of Jesus Christ.

As humanity becomes a galactic society and the Crucifixion gets further and further away from us in both time and space, the idea that One Time, One Dude on One Planet died for our eternal salvation becomes increasingly unsustainable as a belief system. What would the Virgin Birth mean to someone 500 light years from Bethlehem? What would the Betrayal in Gethsemane or the Passion at Golgotha mean to a person who could never see Jerusalem? Why did the Saviour manifest only once, on one planet, millennia before we mastered space travel?

Yeah, but if my default mental image was Alvin and the Chipmunks (2007) rather than Alvin and the Chipmunks (1983) I wouldn't have this problem. I can absolutely picture these guys getting into German Eurotrance:

The story is told primarily through the liner notes that come with the CDs of each act, and we’ve been waiting for Act III for literally over sixteen years, since 2009. They released each song digitally on Bandcamp every week for a few months during the last quarter of 2025, and we hadn’t gotten any of the liner notes until MAGfest, where they were selling the CD physically with the libretto.

I won’t get into the actual ending details because there’s still a bit of an embargo, but some people thought it was really abrupt and sudden. It was abrupt. It was fucking scary! You should listen to the whole album on Bandcamp! I kind of loved it, but there were some plot threads that went unresolved. On top of that, years ago, there was a song called The Fight (which is a much more uplifting song than the ending we got) that they outright said was part of Act III— but it never showed up on the album. They said during a Twitch stream a few weeks ago that there was almost nothing left on the cutting room floor, so why was The Fight excluded?

So people started to do the classic thing that usually never ever works— theorize that there was another secret part they weren’t showing us.

Then, MAGfest people were buying the MAGfest Power magazine (which is a really cool magazine about all the stuff to see at the con) and noticed in an interview with Panther and Commander that they were dropping literal actual ARG hints. Along with that, they were selling bracelets with a cipher on them. Most of being in the Protomen Discord during MAGfest was watching people run around the Gaylord hotel trying to figure out what the fuck was going on before the Act III performance— there was a scavenger hunt that ended with one guy finding a jar of Ovaltine?— and you can read the whole thing about the ARG here. Spoilers for the libretto part of the ARG. It’s so fucked up.

I literally met the band at the meet & greet with my friend Veg, we asked Reanimator, “hey, what’s going on with Act III? Is that it?”

He tells us to “look at the disc”. Veg pulls it out, looks at the back without the design. Reanimator goes “no, no, the other side”.

Yeah alright man. Just cut off half of your logo like it’s only part one of two. Just cut your logo in half for your “final” album. Sure

See, it's not just that he writes mediocre, churned-out thrillers; there are many, many authors of mediocre, churned-out thrillers out there, he ain't special.

It's also not that he "writes" them with "coauthors" and slaps his name on them - again, this is not unique.

It's not even - though this is starting to get there- that he chases every publishing trend and creates His Version of everything from Diary of a Wimpy Kid to Nicholas Sparks, which nobody likes as well as they like his thrillers but still buy because they have His Name on them like a summoning charm.

No, what makes James Patterson uniquely loathed is the combination of the frequency of publication and his popularity. Because, to be honest, I'm not sure that anyone even likes his books anymore, but it doesn't matter, because if they have the James Patterson name on them then readers will be queuing up like zombies desperate for a fix of decaying cerebral matter. Which would be tolerable if he had the decency to only write one book a year like most other bestselling authors, but "James Patterson" (quotes VERY intentional) puts out roughly two books per month. So as a librarian, not only do you have to buy every new book James Patterson puts out, you have to buy multiple copies in order to fulfill demand. Somewhere around 5% of my fiction budget is spent ENTIRELY ON JAMES PATTERSON. Every new James Patterson that comes out means a dozen or more queer romances, inventive sci-fi novellas, unique cultural viewpoints, etc, etc that you can't buy because YOU HAVE TO BUY JAMES PATTERSON INSTEAD. (See also, you just weeded and shifted the Ps in fiction to make room and now it's full again oh god why.)

And the clincher - the absolute clincher - is the knowledge that the publishers will be "finding" "unfinished manuscripts" by "James Patterson" for a minimum of fifty years after his death, so even if some right-minded bibliophile with a claymore takes one for the team, we will never, ever be free.

STARTING OFF. BAD.

Why is that you might ask. Well you see. There are many Rules and Laws and Regulations about the use and exchange of personal healthcare data.

Which is why of course this guy, seeing a well-thought-out and tested technical position, decided "what if i get all of them at once and also the 2FA codes and stored them ALL in the same place with no encryption whatsoever"

This is genuinely one of the most infuriating things I've read about recently. This girl just straight up DIDN'T DO THE ASSIGNMENT. Then complained about discrimination because the person grading it was trans.

She got a ZERO because she didn't do the assignment. She didn't even properly CITE her source, which was the bible. There is absolutely a proper way to cite the bible, btw. And she didn't do it.

This was the assignment, btw:

She did not do almost ANYTHING this assignment required. She deserved that zero.

this was the TA's reaction, btw:

"Please note that I am not deducting points because you have certain beliefs, but instead I am deducting point for you posting a reaction paper that does not answer the questions for this assignment, contradicts itself, heavily uses personal ideology over empirical evidence in a scientific class, and is at times offensive. "While you are entitled to your own personal beliefs, there is an appropriate time or place to implement them in your reflections. I encourage all students to question or challenge the course material with other empirical findings or testable hypotheses, but using your own personal beliefs to argue against the findings of not only this article, but the findings of countless articles across psychology, biology, sociology, etc. is not best practice. "You argue that abiding by normative gender roles is beneficial (it is perfectly fine to believe this), but to then say that everyone should act the same, while also saying that people aren't pressured into gendered expectations is contradictory, especially since your arguments reflect a religious pressure to act in gender-stereotypical ways. You can say that strict gender norms don't create gender stereotypes, but that isn't true by definition of what a stereotype is. Please not that acknowledging gender stereotypes does not immediately denote a negative connotation, a nuance this article discusses. "Additionally, to call an entire group of people "demonic" is highly offensive, especially a minoritized population. You are entitled to your own beliefs, but this isn't a vague narrative of "society pushes lies," but instead the result of countless years developing psychological and scientific evidence for these claims and directly interacting with the communities involved. You may personally disagree with this, but that doesn't change the fact that every major psychological, medical, pediatric, and psychiatric association in the United States acknowledges that, biologically and psychologically, sex and gender is neither binary nor fixed. "I implore you apply some more perspective and empathy in your work. If you personally disagree with the findings, then by all means share your criticisms, but make sure to do so in a way that is appropriate and using the methodology of empirical psychology, as aligned with the learning goals in this class. If you have any additional questions or concerns about this or would like some additional educational resources, I would be happy to discuss this further and provide you with them."

(all typos are mine, I had to type it out from screenshots in this article, which ALSO CONTAINS THE WHOLE ESSAY SHE WROTE)

Can we talk about how PERFECT this response is? This TA did their due diligence when grading this paper. The essay? It was hot garbage. I read the whole thing.

The other instructor for this course AGREED WITH THE TA!

"Samantha, I am the other instructor for this course, and I have also take the time to read your paper. I concur with [redacted] on the grade you received. This paper should not be considered as a completion of the assignment. "Everyone has different ways in which they see the world, but in an academic course such as this you are being asked to support your ideas with empirical evidence and higher-level reasoning. "I find it concerning that you state at the beginning of your paper that you do not think bullying ("teasing") is a bad thing. In addition, your paper directly and harshly criticizes your peers and their opinions, which are just as valuable as yours. Disagreeing with others is fine, but there is a respectful way to go about it. That goes for discussion posts as well as reaction papers. "Please employ more thoughtfulness in your future assignment."

There is genuinely no reason, at all, for this TA to be placed on leave. The TA was just doing their goddamned job.

As someone who had to write all kinds of essays about all kinds of things in high school (and in college, but that's somehow less relevant to this). I was able to write about being pro-gay marriage (before it was legalized in the US), being pro-abortion and being LGBTQIA+ AT A CATHOLIC SCHOOL. And I still managed to get As. Do you want to know how? I used real sources and cited them. I actually followed the assignment while still getting my point across.

It is absolutely possible to write essays disagreeing with the premise without completely flouting the assignment. I promise you it's possible.

I could vent about this for HOURS. That's how much it pisses me off.

The essay is intentionally bad. You cannot write an essay that bad unintentionally, and even if you could, you would not then cry discriminating for being part of the biggest religious group in the US.

This woman saw that she had a trans woman in front of her and decided to try and ruin that trans woman's life to kickstart her own career in the reactionary talk show and podcast circuit. She already had an appearance on Fox, iirc.

It failed to cite sources, which should be an instant academic dishonesty fail

It didn’t extensively refer to the article it was responding to, only the broad strokes view that you could get from the title.

THEN it was based on personal belief instead of academic rigor, insulted and dehumanized an entire population, and advocated for bullying (this last should be an academic REMOVAL from the school by most policy sets).

As a fandom grandma, I've had years to figure out how to respond and I can tell you the two most important ways to deal with these situations. I wish someone had told them to this poor TA (which means they are students themselves and very early in their teaching career) but it appears their department left them out to dry on this situation.

First ... GRADE ON THE OBJECTIVE RUBRIC ELEMENTS.

Never comment on the topic or the outrageous statements. You keep everything within the rubric and objective guidelines of the assignment. The paper didn't meet the word count, didn't use the required sources, didn't refer to the reading, didn't use correct citation style, didn't have a clear thesis statement, etc. Yes, I can and have taken points off for only using the Bible as a source because I clearly stated they had to use scholarly, peer-reviewed support (or have that support cleared by me before the paper). Usually when they go on a diatribe, they don't support it with facts or information and that's part of the rubric. They didn't do the assignment, pure and simple. And you don't have to give them a zero; I reserve zeros for those who don't turn anything in. A twenty out of a 100 is harder to argue with later on.

Second ... DO NOT ENGAGE ON THE SUBJECT

You can't win and you don't want to win. By divorcing the topic from the writing, you don't give them the response they're looking for. Instead, you are the calm voice explaining how to write a stronger argument and better read/understand college level articles (which will help them in other classes). Yeah, it hurts like hell when a student writes about how women shouldn't be allowed to teach men because of their inherent intellectual weakness (yep, had that this last semester actually), but I took great joy in showing them how their writing needed to improve and why sentence fragments mattered. By not engaging, I'm protecting myself and, maybe, just maybe, teaching them a little something.

This paper was bait, and the TA did kinda fall for it. She doesn't deserve to have her life ruined for that (obviously!), and her response is heartfelt and empathetic. Getting the other instructor to look at it was also a smart move (and something we were advised to do in the Ideologically Offensive Paper training).

That said, it's possible--even likely--that the student would have used this as the launching pad for her Fascist Barbie Audition Tour no matter how carefully the TA had explained why she was getting a zero. (Or even if she'd thrown the student a few points, which I probably would have done. Like maybe 5 out of 25. 2 points for being mostly coherent at the sentence level, 2 for it not being a summary, and 1 for demonstrating that she at least glanced at the abstract.)