Aurix

About the story I doubt they could course correct in time after the botched Dawntrail writing and therefore I am not excited about in the least. The dungeons were great, judging by casual mode mechanics I hope they cook with the Alliance Raid as well and they have my faith, and the real star of the show will be the Chaotic Alliance raid. Artwork 100% faith, battle design 90% faith and story 0% faith for me.

The described issues are very different from each other. One was a fire warning and the other a stall. Not an argument against the airline or manufacturer. Just a coincidence.

I am out of the loop. What Dax?

Even then I am not sure, if it can keep up the wonder and horror. It will work only so many times.

I would love to experience the sequel like I did the original, but not sure if it is repeatable.

Artikel erwähnt keine Statistiken und Belege für die Behauptung.

The entire gambling lootboxes were massively popularized by Valve, turning Team Fortress 2 from pay2play to predatory gambling.

I once called out quite specific misandrist statements, you could assume they might have disagreed with the evaluation. Instead, they straight up jumped to calling me a dangerous misogynist when my entire political and social stance is openly opposite. In the aftermath I read on their social media increasingly unhinged rants how only single rare exceptions of men are not perpetrators. Not surprised the left alienates large demographics, even their own allies.

You absolutely need to as early as possible for a massive advantage. Pick 3 for white and 3 for black. Look for books, speak ideally to your local chess club.

I did that because the answer didn't make sense as it is an issue I just acknowledged.

You imply I think Wikipedia is per default unbiased and all truthful which it isn't and I stated clearly otherwise with "quite difficult to be neutral". So I am not sure where the misunderstanding comes from.

Bad rep for going down the personal route in a discussion.

Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence or persuade an audience to further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented.

From Wikipedia. They didn't send the message war is bad for your health like some insurance disclaimer. The selective content tries to induce fear through the incursion into Kursk and for obvious reasons would have never shown the tense situation after the fall of Avdiivka with regular territorial losses in that area. Presentation of dead soldiers is aimed at inducing an emotional response. The intent is and was foremost to demoralize the enemy. I don't think it's reprehensible in any way. Declaring a few cuts as the truth, when you could have shown the opposite with Avdiivka, should tell you that's naive. Call it what is, a Ukrainian military high jacking of Russian TV.

Your example tries to put science into this and the issue we talk about is a war between two countries. Selectively showing information is scientifically inaccurate for history and social science. Science is a way of course to find the truth in a way, but a process of better descriptions of reality.