Thanks.
That pulls a bit of the rug out from under that unsteady pile of pattern-matching.
This got downvoted to −2. If anyone would like to see fewer postings like the above, they can improve the odds that they’ll see the change they’d like by explaining what it is about the above post that was disliked.
Thank you, in advance for your help with this.
11 year olds if I have that right
By this point in the year most if not all of them are probably 12.
The difference between 11 and 12 might only matter to an 11- or 12-year-old, but you probably didn’t have that right, for whatever that’s worth.
Thanks.
That pulls a bit of the rug out from under that unsteady pile of pattern-matching.
Is Theodore Nott wearing his scary face because he learned it was a good idea to do so in Chaos, or because there is also a conspiracy of Green Slytherin: those who can cast Avada Kedavra, the green spell?
Harry courted the company of both Draco and Hermione. He adjusted his presentation to meet their expectations, as he understood them. Draco could be doing the same because why have one secret power base when you could have two?
I don’t consider this terribly likely. It came up in that pattern-matching way, but feels like it’s needlessly complicated.
Hopefully someone else can undermine it more decisively or support it better.
ye shall also know that any events occurring there were also of my own impulse and not a halfhearted sop to feminists
Why would we think that? We would think that if he unfridged Hermione.
That is pretty strong evidence that Hermione will be resurrected sooner, rather than later. So I guess the ending where Harry resurrects everyone ever maybe won’t seem more likely when this arc is complete.
Unless this is the end.
So we know, for egotistical example, that he did not add “Dumbledore had looked down over the side of the terrace and made a gesture before returning” in response to my post that included risking transfiguration sickness on the list of things for which Harry could get in trouble.
Or, at least, we know that is what the author wishes us to believe. dun dun daaaaaaaah
As someone suggested earlier, it’s possible that Sirius Black is hiding out as the Weasley owl (the “measured and courteous hoot”). That would fit with Peter Pettigrew being the unfortunate in Azkaban chanting, “I’m not serious.”
It’s also possible that Pettigrew is hiding out somewhere, I suppose, but that doesn’t seem smart.
This also raises the possibility that someone or multiple someones who weren’t ever Marauders using small animagus forms to get around the castle, which could show up funny on the map.
I’m pretty sure that what he said was that nothing was intended as an allegory—or maybe a metaphor or something of the sort—to an artificial super-intelligence.
Somebody has the link, I expect.
That post was about deleting people who refuse to engage in rational argument, not deleting posts that use rational argument in ways that are “unmarketable” as you put it.
Let’s put it this way, would you also suggest we delete all the posts critical of religion because it also puts of a lot of people?
the utility of censorship is not exclusive to the situations described in that post.
But in the end, no. This conversation didn’t start when I issued a call to action, but when I expressed a difficult decision I had made for myself. I didn’t know that people were reading it as a directive until someone pointed that out.
Anyway, it’s far too late to change: that rape article is over two years old. “Better late than never” doesn’t mean that late is always good enough. In this case, it’s definitely not.
In a world with wishes—but where I didn’t immediately wish for a world without wishes—maybe I’d wish that Less Wrong would be image conscious enough to distance itself from people who unapologetically marginalize the suffering of rape victims, maybe not. But the call I get to make is whether or not to facilitate the process by which my friends and the people with whom I would like to be friends forget that I have any contact with Less Wrong. It is not whether or not to facilitate the process by which Less Wrong rehabilitates its status as a haven for creeps, creep enablers, or creep apologists.
Maybe it really was his father’s rock.
Maybe James Potter carried around that specific huge rock, transfigured into something portable, for all the right reasons.
Maybe James even told Dumbledore that if anything every happened to him, Dumbledore should give Harry his cloak, his snitch, and his rock. Dumbles knows that Harry hates Quiddich and the Snitch most of all, so he’s holding that one back until he thinks he can present it without it being rejected. The cloak was easy. And he’s managed to make Harry carry the rock, so that’s got to me making Dead James happy.
I’d suggest that Potters have carried that rock for generations—for all the right reasons of course—except that Dumbledore wouldn’t ignore heritage like that. He’d call it The Potter Rock or something.
Harry doesn’t trust Quirrell anymore, hasn’t trusted him since the Azkaban arc. That was made pretty clear inthe conversation in the dark warehouse immediately after the raid.
I don’t want to get them to self-flagellate, but to look for what leverage they have and not worry as much about what it totally outside of their control.
Someone please tell Shinji Ikari about this radical notion.
Vg jnf arprffnel sbe gur Puvyqera gb or qlfshapgvbany. Gur yrff gurl jrer noyr gb pbaarpg jvgu bgure crbcyr gur zber gurl jrer qevira gb pbaarpg jvgu gurve Rinf. Hagvy gur raq, nyzbfg rirelguvat sbyybjrq gur Fpranevb.
When feasible, do the things that relieve your stress.
Thanks!
So 1, 2, and 5 are the only chapters where the phrase doesn’t appear in the chapter itself. Do those numbers mean anything recognizable?
EDIT: Yeah. 4. 1, 2, 4, and 5. Upvoting for correcting me.
Good point. I’m sticking to B, Quirrell was telling Harry he’d pass it to him on the downlow. Note that he didn’t say that the book would be labeled “Memory Charms,” just that it would be filed under M.
Frigideiro was mentioned, though—when he tests his “dark side,” his dark side isn’t any more powerful with magic.
Yeah, but not precision. That’s why it’s just feel like a bit of an ass pull—a “butt snag”? -- and why is the way it’s so specific is kind of what sets the alarm off for me.
Harry can ask anyone else what the status of memory charms is in the Hogwarts curriculum.
I would guess that either
A) They will be evasive in answering any precocious questions because Quirrell asked them to be evasive about some precocious questions or
B) Quirrell wasn’t telling Harry that wizards are stupid and keep dangerous things in plain sight. He was telling Harry that he’d “pass it to [him] beneath a disguised cover.” in the guise of telling him how to learn more about memory charms.
That… sort of makes sense except that the loop seems overly complex and Harry would try to prevent more misery or something?
I don’t know what “just complex enough” would look like, so I’m not sure what you mean by overly complex. But I promise I will listen.
It has been established that the past cannot be changed because the universe steps through time once, with all time travel included. Harry cannot change the misery that occurred.
On the other hand, the author has said something to the effect that even if there is an afterlife in HP&tMoR, there is no evidence of one so someone like Harry would not believe in one. Without evidence of an afterlife, Harry can create one that has always existed and contains the minds of many or all people.
“Of course,” the witch snarked amiably. “I have a dozen of them in my trunk.”
(This revision is meant more as a suggested direction than a suggested destination.)
Less worried about downvotes I’ve received, more interested in the things that lead to me getting them.
Thanks, though.