#highlights n shit

[absoluteminimum]

may I have this dance?

[quirkle2]

[zombie au] the image is too big for tumblr i had to cut it in half GVEAUYGV (please for the love of god zoom in)

[satirn]

wroking out his Ngod! design again im pretty happy w it

[solradguy]

Survived visiting transphobic grandma and acquired one (1) pumpkin roll. Extremely tired. As my Social Interaction Threshold™️ maxed out and I got progressively worse at conversation, I'm grateful no one called me out for my responses reducing to "that's wild" (reaction to a positive statement) and "that's heavy" (reaction to a negative statement)

[hivepixels]

.

[helielune]

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaauauuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhhgggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[fruityumbrella]

ao3 comments that make you explode into five million rainbow sunbursts foreverrrrr

[dorims]

hc that roman liked to play with caroline’s makeup when he was very little until he got caught and then he never dared touch makeup again

[pop-roxs]

ALRIGHT FINE THIS IS THE *TRUE* ULTIMATE CHALLENGE (IMPOSSIBLE 😱)

ok fuck wait. wait um um uh um

first one looks like its from the puppet arc? when they were running up the stairs of the tower?

second one is also s1 and also looks like its from the church arc. not exactly sure when during the church arc it is thoooo

third one is 100% from the s1 puppet arc. its during when they had to fight lizzie as a puppet

fourth one looks like its from the s1 church arc.... maybe near when they first got there? OMG I JUST FINISHED TYPING OUT EVERYTHING I WAS WRONG ABOUT THIS. I TURNED UP MY BRIGHTNESS AND SAW THE BG, THIS IS FROM THE VERY BEGINNING OF THE PUPPET ARC WHEN GRELLE FINDS CIEL N PLUTO OUTSIDE OF THE DOLL SHOP.

fifth one, after MUCH close inspeciton, looks to be from bota. maybe when lizzie tried to stab her, judging from her facial expression.

this was actually pretty hard. you almost got me. some of these may be wrong tho

[tylerhourman-remaking]

comics also beat you over the head with the themes nowadays. you dont get subtlety or ambiguity. batman comics used to be somber and noir-like. now theyre funny and feel-good and nothing about the stories stick to you and live in your head like long halloween/dark victory or murderer/fugitive-type stories do

[dragoncarrion]

ok i just finished some urgent drawing so i can do fuck all now. firs the requests then i want to draw a new pfp. shed away the old me

[ashenberry]

i have no idea how sam and cat part 2 is gonna b over 10 hours by the way without feeling a little bit bloated as hell

[unfortunately-i-love-it]

long hair Yusuke because i said so

[hopefullydreaming]

Reading over my outline rlly reminds me just how unhinged I got in the run up to the end of the semester because I do not know why my Brian thought any of this was a good idea or why I’ve phrased things the way I did? I seem to just stop thinking in the middle of a sentence

[drunk-poets-society]

I am SO tired jeez

[monsterfactoryfanfic]

if I've learned anything from grad school it's to check your sources, and this has proven invaluable in the dozens of instances when I've had an MBA-type try to tell me something about finances or leadership. Case in point:

Firefox serves me clickbaity articles through Pocket, which is fine because I like Firefox. But sometimes an article makes me curious. I'm pretty anal about my finances, and I wondered if this article was, as I suspected, total horseshit, or could potentially benefit me and help me get my spending under control. So let's check the article in question.

It mostly seems like common sense. "...track expenses and income for at least a month before setting a budget...How much money do I have or earn? How much do I want to save?" Basic shit like that. But then I get to this section:

This sounds fucking made up to me. And thankfully, they've provided a source to their claim that "research has repeatedly shown" that writing things down changes behavior. First mistake. What research is this?

Forbes, naturally, my #1 source for absolute dogshit fart-sniffing financial schlock. Forbes is the type of website that guy from high school who constantly posts on linkedin trawls daily for little articles like this that make him feel better about refusing to pay for a decent package for his employees' healthcare (I'm from the United States, a barbaric, conflict-ridden country in the throes of civil unrest, so obsessed with violence that its warlords prioritize weapons over universal medical coverage. I digress). Forbes constantly posts shit like this, and I constantly spend my time at leadership seminars debunking poor consultants who get paid to read these claims credulously. Look at this highlighted text. Does it make sense to you that simply writing your financial goals down would result in a 10x increase in your income? Because if it does, let me make you an offer on this sick ass bridge.

Thankfully, Forbes also makes the mistake of citing their sources. Let's check to see where this hyperlink goes:

SidSavara. I've never heard of this site, but the About section tells me that Sid is "a technology leader who empowers teams to grow into their best selves. He is a life-long learner enjoys developing software, leading teams in delivering mission critical projects, playing guitar and watching football and basketball."

That doesn't mean anything. What are his LinkedIn credentials? With the caveat that anyone can lie on Linkedin, Mr. Savara appears to be a Software Engineer. Which is fine! I'm glad software engineers exist! But Sid's got nothing in his professional history which suggests he knows shit about finance. So I'm already pretty skeptical of his website, which is increasingly looking like a personal fart-huffing blog.

The article itself repeats the credulous claim made in the Forbes story earlier, but this time, provides no link for the 3% story. Mr. Savara is smarter than his colleages at Forbes, it's much wiser to just make shit up.

HOWEVER. I am not the first person to have followed this rabbit hole. Because at the very top of this article, there is a disclaimer.

Uh oh!

Sid's been called out before, and in the follow up to this article, he reveals the truth.

You can guess where this is going.

So to go back to the VERY beginning of this post, both Pocket/Good Housekeeping and Forbes failed to do even the most basic of research, taking the wild claim that writing down your budget may increase your income by 10x on good faith and the word of a(n admittedly honest about his shortcomings) software engineer.

Why did I spend 30 minutes to make a tumblr post about this? Mostly to show off how smart I am, but also to remind folks of just how flimsy any claim on the internet can be. Click those links, follow those sources, and when the sources stop linking, ask why.