I love you.

I agree with you, but for less deep and introspective reasons. The original ending was had better pacing, even if it made no sense. The new ending is clunky and info-dumping and caters to the vocal fans who are morons.

No, I didn't like the ending of BG, and Lost lost my interest after the second season.

Agree, I fall asleep in summer blockbusters.

I get a lot more of a "fuck off" from the new ending than the old, to be honest. It's just a lot more subtle. It's kind of, "fuck off, you dumbasses who couldn't understand our narrative genius*, let us spell it all out for you in letters eighteen meters tall on the side of this planet."

I didn't play the DLC actually, and yes, this is why. Watched one you tube video and realized I preferred the old endings, flawed and plot-holed as they are. I'm happy that so many people like the new endings and that's great—I don't. (I watched them all on youtube. I thought the synthesis one was kind of tragically…

You're saying that like it's a bad thing? No, I think one of the points of Shepard's journey is that her actions made her a hero. And when one hero falls, another can come and save the day.

I think the original endings, flawed as they were, had narrative tension. The new endings are more like an expository slide show—they may satisfy some viewers who like things tidy, but they lack the punch of the original. There are no consequences. The relays aren't destroyed, the Normandy doesn't almost blow up,…

You're wrong. Check the original. The Normandy escape scene is changed.

I think the endings did what they were supposed to do: placate the masses. As such, they were tailored to about that level—everything that wasn't nailed down, was also spelled out. And then repeated with a slideshow. (Krogan babies! Asari and flowers! Look! Everyone's okay!)

I'm with you.

Smile sweetly at them and tell them that you're so glad Obamacare will be overthrown, because that way you won't have to pay for their old-person healthcare needs.

I'm pretty sure in some places out west you can still shoot Native Americans—or even Canadians—if they are on your property.

I suppose it is possible that you live in a stepfordian wonderland, where all women left their hedge funds and biglaw firms to stay home and bake cookies, all the while fending off calls from head hunters. However, for most of the rest of us, things are not that simple.

In my experience, Vagabondella is correct. Spacing goes something like, 2 shots at 2 months, another 2 at four months, etc, etc. Come in twice as often, get half the shots. There are some, as have already been mentioned by others in other threads, that don't "need" to be done immediately. Hep A and B for example.…

You know plenty of women who are removing themselves from the workforce NOW. Because, presumably, you know plenty of women who have just had kids. Get back to those same women in ten years and then see how many are still out of the work force.

I delayed shots, and I am about the farthest thing from an anti-vax person you will ever meet. I did it so if my kid had a reaction, we'd know what she was reacting to. My child was allergic to egg whites, for one, so getting the MMR was a little fraught. We did that one by itself. Pertussis, of course, we did first.…

I think you'll find very few women "take a lifetime off," and I'm not sure why outsourcing housework and child care is in some way more respectable than doing them.

Heh, I always do that too. A priest and I had quite a spirited discussion about it. I commended him for his work, running an orphanage, he admitted that he did not run an orphanage, I commended him for his work with foster and disadvantaged children, he admitted that wasn't his "calling." I commended him for following…

The RIght has no economic plan for those states, so they're serving up bread and circuses. I mean, it's babies! How can you vote to kill the babies?