Stackbabbin' Bumscags

Ugh. After numerous hours of Trial and Many Errors, I have finally managed to get a stable Half Persian 3-in-1 chain made.
This weave is particularly tricky because you cannot safely set it down or hold it in whatever way you want, as the weave isn't stable until the point I'm at now.
Moving it the wrong way, dropping it, or setting it down wrong will result in the entire thing falling apart and you'll have to start over.
It involves putting 2 closed rings into 1 open ring, closing that ring, then weaving another open ring into rings 1 and 3, but not 2, the ring you're weaving in will rest against ring 2, then you'll add 1 closed ring, and then close the open ring. You'll repeat this again until the chain is of the desired length.
The biggest issue I was having was that the rings I'm using are of a larger diameter than my other rings, so the weave is overall loose and floppy so far, but this is to accommodate the rings I will be adding to it once I've completed my chain.

This is the beginnings of a different weave I'm attempting called the Cylon weave, which starts out as a Half Persian 3-in-1 and adds other rings.

Ugh. After numerous hours of Trial and Many Errors, I have finally managed to get a stable Half Persian 3-in-1 chain made.
This weave is particularly tricky because you cannot safely set it down or hold it in whatever way you want, as the weave isn't stable until the point I'm at now.
Moving it the wrong way, dropping it, or setting it down wrong will result in the entire thing falling apart and you'll have to start over.
It involves putting 2 closed rings into 1 open ring, closing that ring, then weaving another open ring into rings 1 and 3, but not 2, the ring you're weaving in will rest against ring 2, then you'll add 1 closed ring, and then close the open ring. You'll repeat this again until the chain is of the desired length.
The biggest issue I was having was that the rings I'm using are of a larger diameter than my other rings, so the weave is overall loose and floppy so far, but this is to accommodate the rings I will be adding to it once I've completed my chain.

This is the beginnings of a different weave I'm attempting called the Cylon weave, which starts out as a Half Persian 3-in-1 and adds other rings.

I've lengthened my Helm Chain today, I've decided to make it a necklace instead of a bracelet.
I'm now beginning my attempt at a Byzantine weave.
Nope, can't do Byz, I don't have the right rings to really do that with right now.
Instead I'm trying out a specific pattern that requires I start with a Half Persian 3-in-1 chain, and I'm cursing everything just trying to get this fucking chain started.

I've lengthened my Helm Chain today, I've decided to make it a necklace instead of a bracelet.
I'm now beginning my attempt at a Byzantine weave.
Nope, can't do Byz, I don't have the right rings to really do that with right now.
Instead I'm trying out a specific pattern that requires I start with a Half Persian 3-in-1 chain, and I'm cursing everything just trying to get this fucking chain started.

Here's what I mean about "closed" and "open" rings.
The rings on the top left are closed, while the rings on the top right are open.
The 3 at the bottom are what's called "raw", they aren't closed nor open, they are as-is out of the bag.
This was my first chain, a very basic 2-in-2.
Some weaves go by "(Name) X in Y" where X and Y are numbers of rings, in this case, it's that 2 rings are inside 2 rings.
I have another pattern I'm going to attempt which'll start off as part of a Half-Persian 3-in-1, so there'll be 3 rings inside 1 ring.
And this is my Helm Chain.
It's a variation of a standard 2-in-2, but you can see it's got that extra ring in the middle.
I couldn't attempt a Helm Chain with my first 2-in-2 chain because I didn't have the right aspect ratio of the two rings I was using.
It was fine for that chain, but I couldn't get the black rings to fit over the silver rings in the first chain, so I started this new one.
This is my first practice at weaving rings into a chain.

My color selection is very limited, I have another set of rings that are light blue, but my color selection will be expanding later.
So far the only troubles I've had is starting a new chain, once the chain has been started, it's a rather easy affair, but starting them is a pain in the ass.

About a week or so ago I mentioned that I would be starting my journey into making chainmail jewelry.
A few of you guys (2) expressed interest in seeing my journey, and I got my materials today.

Materials required:
Pliers x2
Rings, size depends on your pattern, or "weave"
Patience, lots of it.
Weave instructions

The whole thing is mostly just learning technique, and your very basics is learning how to properly open and close your rings.
So I spent my first half hour opening and closing some rings to get the feel of the movement of the pliers, and how much force I need to put on them to close the rings properly.
When opening rings, you push inward so that the ends of your rings overlap, then when you pull it back to close the ring and line the ends up so they meet.
Overlapping the ends when opening them causes the ring to keep that shape, so when you close the ring, it keeps a nice and neat seam when closed.

Once you've gotten the hang of opening and closing your rings, it's time to take up a basic weave, I decided to start with a simple 2-in-2, extremely simple, and can be used to make earrings, bracelets/anklets, or necklaces. This 2-in-2 chain is going to be a bracelet, and I have started on what's called a Helm Chain as my first lesson in weaving rings through a chain.

Will get some images up soon, there aren't that many formatting buttons for creating a new thread.

About a week or so ago I mentioned that I would be starting my journey into making chainmail jewelry.
A few of you guys (2) expressed interest in seeing my journey, and I got my materials today.

Materials required:
Pliers x2
Rings, size depends on your pattern, or "weave"
Patience, lots of it.
Weave instructions

The whole thing is mostly just learning technique, and your very basics is learning how to properly open and close your rings.
So I spent my first half hour opening and closing some rings to get the feel of the movement of the pliers, and how much force I need to put on them to close the rings properly.
When opening rings, you push inward so that the ends of your rings overlap, then when you pull it back to close the ring and line the ends up so they meet.
Overlapping the ends when opening them causes the ring to keep that shape, so when you close the ring, it keeps a nice and neat seam when closed.

Once you've gotten the hang of opening and closing your rings, it's time to take up a basic weave, I decided to start with a simple 2-in-2, extremely simple, and can be used to make earrings, bracelets/anklets, or necklaces. This 2-in-2 chain is going to be a bracelet, and I have started on what's called a Helm Chain as my first lesson in weaving rings through a chain.

Will get some images up soon, there aren't that many formatting buttons for creating a new thread.

I kinda wish we'd gotten a bit more character development and story on all of them before going "Oh yeah by the way this person is gay, now back to this awesome story I was telling..." I like how ME3 handled Cortez, even though he didn't get any major amounts of development, it wasn't really hammered in that he's gay when you find out about it, if you even got to that reveal anyway. But this just feels like "LESBIAN SURPRISE! -Rainbows-".

I'd have rather them focused more on building up these characters more before any reveals on romantic relationships. Either that or just have it mildly introduced when we were learning about each character in the beginning. Let the shippers and artists have their own headcanon (which they'll continue to do anyway) and keep with the world-building.

Don't just have 'em be gay for the sake of inclusivity, or just leave out the romantic relationships altogether, let people (keep) form(ing) their own stuff on them.

This also reeks of being a safe choice, with Tracer being the face of the game (she's the only character on the front cover of physical copies), despite the diverse cast of characters, and being the cute lesbian is pretty much the safest way to introduce an LGBT character. I'm not against it, but either fully commit to the deal or just don't do it.

I kinda wish we'd gotten a bit more character development and story on all of them before going "Oh yeah by the way this person is gay, now back to this awesome story I was telling..." I like how ME3 handled Cortez, even though he didn't get any major amounts of development, it wasn't really hammered in that he's gay when you find out about it, if you even got to that reveal anyway. But this just feels like "LESBIAN SURPRISE! -Rainbows-".

I'd have rather them focused more on building up these characters more before any reveals on romantic relationships. Either that or just have it mildly introduced when we were learning about each character in the beginning. Let the shippers and artists have their own headcanon (which they'll continue to do anyway) and keep with the world-building.

Don't just have 'em be gay for the sake of inclusivity, or just leave out the romantic relationships altogether, let people (keep) form(ing) their own stuff on them.

This also reeks of being a safe choice, with Tracer being the face of the game (she's the only character on the front cover of physical copies), despite the diverse cast of characters, and being the cute lesbian is pretty much the safest way to introduce an LGBT character. I'm not against it, but either fully commit to the deal or just don't do it.

I kinda wish we'd gotten a bit more character development and story on all of them before going "Oh yeah by the way this person is gay, now back to this awesome story I was telling..." I like how ME3 handled Cortez, even though he didn't get any major amounts of development, it wasn't really hammered in that he's gay when you find out about it, if you even got to that reveal anyway. But this just feels like "LESBIAN SURPRISE! -Rainbows-".

I'd have rather them focused more on building up these characters more before any reveals on romantic relationships. Either that or just have it mildly introduced when we were learning about each character in the beginning. Let the shippers and artists have their own headcanon (which they'll continue to do anyway) and keep with the world-building.

Don't just have 'em be gay for the sake of inclusivity, or just leave out the romantic relationships altogether, let people (keep) form(ing) their own stuff on them.

This also reeks of being a safe choice, with Tracer being the face of the game (she's the only character on the front cover of physical copies), despite the diverse cast of characters, and being the cute lesbian is pretty much the safest way to introduce an LGBT character. I'm not against it, but either fully commit to the deal or just don't do it.

Tracer and her gf are cute together
 
but the REAL otp is Hanzo x An Entire Cake

The Magicka card game we backed on Kickstarter has finally arrived.
A lot of production delays, but it looks good so far, will try it out soon.

Mom's getting me the rings I'll need for Christmas.
I sent her a bunch of weaves (what they call the patterns in the chainmail craft) and she's going to pick a few and grab the rings for 'em.
IT'S HAPPENING in the near future

Hey, I actually made a game. The showcase day was last friday, wasnt a triple A, or an average indie, or something that looked good, but hey, it was playable and people liked it.
 
Apparently I'm now a certified video game designer.
 
Honestly, its pretty cool to make games. I'm going to work on my drawing, modeling and animation this next year. Probably going to check how to make songs too.

I am totally on board for another Steve Blum vulgarity infused trip down skill kill lane. It's the only other game I've played with a mighty boot button.
 
It's not perfect and the ending sucks, but I'd still play it again.
Maybe this is testing the waters for a full on sequel?

This isn't a game of Civ, life is not a "competition", yet somehow, we've managed to turn it into one.
"Nation-states" aren't going to work. We can see it now, the UK is scrambling to pick itself back up after Brexit, Israel and Pakistan have been in an uneasy state for quite some time, and it's highly obvious that our "nation of states" is starting to come apart at the seams. Quite frankly, it's high time to federalize the entire nation, no more "United States of America", just "America". You say that domestic politics is ugly, but politics between two different nations is far uglier.

"Acting with prudence" is not the promotion of one group over all others, acting with true prudence would be breaking down the barriers we've put between ourselves, stop thinking in terms of "blacks" and "whites", and cooperate as people. Instead, you only want to put up physical, geographical, and legal barriers, but also reinforce cultural ones. 
You still voted for him.

Regardless, you're set in your willful ignorance, and I'd likely be making greater use of my time by bashing my head into a wall repeatedly.
Your ideology has caused immense harm to many people, and will continue to do so until the movement itself dies out.
Be on the wrong side of history if you want, I'm tired of this "debate".

So that's all this is about, keeping white people in power.
At least you finally just came out and said it.

And here we are back to square one. Just because they overlook racism and sexism, and keep company with racists and sexists, and have been praised by other racists and sexists, doesn't make them racist or sexist.
 
He's racist.
 
"You have an individual, Mr Bannon, who’s basically creating the ideological aspects of where we’re going." - The former Imperial Wizard of the KKK.
 
It's really not that hard.

I just won a scholarship from the company I worked for over the summer's charity arm.
 
 
 
HOOOolly ssheeeetttTT

Regardless I don't think anyone who's penned articles like these should be given a fuckin' chance

you know what, you're right. im going to give trump a chance. maybe he is not the racist sexist idiot hes been claiming to be for the entire election. maybe hes a reasonable guy, that would in no way hire a white supremacist as his chief strategist
 
 
oh...

so you say you want whites to remain the minority, but even if we were to completely halt immigration, whites will lose majority status within the next few decades. how do you intend on changing that other than by gassing the melanin-enriched?

Which is racist, because your assumption is somehow only white people can uphold the constitution. As long as people abide by the principles laid out by the founding fathers it shouldn't matter what their skin color is or where they come from, but you seem to think differently. I think what that really comes down to is a fear that if people of color hold power, they'll treat white people who white people treated people of color. "My people have benefited from imperialism and the subjugation of other races for hundreds of years, but now because of all of these Mexicans pouring into my country, my kids might have to learn fucking Spanish! Oh the horror of being white!" Are you people serious?
 
Now, I can understand the idea that immigrants tip the scales in favor of the Democrats which unbalances the two parties, but if the Republicans are unable to adapt or compromise, that's on them. As far as what I see they refuse to do this, by the way. If anything they've become even more extreme and pandered to more radicals over the last decade which is making their situation even worse. Why should the Republicans deserve to have any power when they insist on making themselves more and more socially irrelevant? 

conservatives have some pretty ass-backwards views, so them losing is an objectively good thing