#scottadam

[motherdanger]

the scam = rigged traps

the men = lawrence and scott

[classfelidae]

And they were roommates…

Scott and Adam have a pretty complex relationship in my au, with Scott having extreme internalised homophobia which ends up destroying their relationship (if you could call it that)

I included the sketch for a new comic I’m working on with Adam kind of venting to Lawrence about it.

This artwork was such a challenge, from the complex poses to the backgrounds, and obviously the band posters. I really wanted to make Scott’s grimy room seem believable.

I’m really happy with how the lighting turned out, my idea was they *were* watching the tv but got a little distracted… so the blue glow is kinda lighting them. I’d imagine Scott’s room would be one of those with a small, awkwardly placed window that barely allows light in.

I’ve not drawn suggestive art in a long time, I thank my close friends for being so supportive of me and hyping me up!

❗️Disclaimer. Both characters in the artwork are consenting, and are adults ❗️

[hvcklebury]

redraw.... yeah

[guyfa1lure]

I love my little rustynailshipping papa's louie sushiria ❤️

[helloitsbees]

Chapters: 1/1 Fandom: Saw (Movies) Rating: Explicit Warnings: Creator Chose Not To Use Archive Warnings, No Archive Warnings Apply Relationships: Adam Faulkner-Stanheight/Scott Tibbs, Adam Faulkner-Stanheight/Lawrence Gordon (Implied) Characters: Scott Tibbs, Adam Faulkner-Stanheight Additional Tags: Unhealthy Relationships, Trans Adam Faulkner-Stanheight, Adam Faulkner-Stanheight Lives, Strap-Ons, Breeding Kink, Additional Warnings In Author's Note, Break Up, Friends With Benefits Summary:

Adam was the best thing he’d never earned, Scott knew. It was only a matter of time before they fell apart, before Scott ruined it like he ruined everything.

He’d read once about unexploded bombs being left behind after wars– land mines, dormant, hidden under sand and soil, waiting for just the right amount of pressure to detonate, to turn whatever poor bastard who stepped on it into hamburger meat. He hadn’t finished the article, but sometimes he wondered if there was a way to tell if you’d stepped on one before you got blown to smithereens. If you could feel the click. If you had a few seconds to realize what you’d done before your brain matter turned into a fine red mist.

Scott had always been a reckless man, never minding his step. With Adam, he was still waiting for the click. ---- four times Scott almost ended things, and the one time he did.

[deadmans-corpse]

just noticed that jaylex and scottadam is like same ship different font

[actualyves]

I wrote some fluffy, smutty ScottAdam because I love being queer and I love them being queer.

[everybody-scream-fxck]

Adam: You think you're smarter than everyone else. Scott: I don't think I'm smarter than everyone else. I know I am.

[sagenotparsley]

OKAY FINE I GET IT I NEED SCOTT TIBBS

[epicforwards]

"Every skill you acquire doubles your odds of success."

-- Scott Adams

[pyxisbr-blog-blog]

O Otimista, da Série "Entre sem bater".

Os pessimistas e os otimistas são, acima de tudo, uns fracos.

Não aguentam um segundo de realismo.

#Otimista #Entresembater #Dilbert #ScottAdams #Realista #Pessimista #Tolo #Humor #Satira

[minyboy]

Leadership is the art of trading imaginary things in the future for real things today.

[classfelidae]

We were mean and 17,

Make it like a dream, she said

“We were clean, like kerosine, candy and porno maaaaaagazines”

Afterlife - Alex G

[unfoldingmoments]

Goals Vs Systems

I was seated next to a businessman who was probably in his early sixties. I suppose I looked like an odd duck with my serious demeanor, bad haircut, and cheap suit, clearly out of my element. He asked what my story was and I filled him in. I asked what he did for a living and he told me he was CEO of a company that made screws. Then he offered me some career advice. He said that every time he got a new job, he immediately started looking for a better one. For him, job seeking was not something one did when necessary. It was an ongoing process. This makes perfect sense if you do the math. Chances are the best job for you won’t become available at precisely the time you declare yourself ready. Your best bet, he explained, was to always be looking for the better deal. The better deal has its own schedule. I believe the way he explained it is that your job is not your job; your job is to find a better job.

This was my first exposure to the idea that one should have a system instead of a goal. The system was to continually look for better options. And it worked for this businessman, as he had job-hopped from company to company, gaining experience along the way, until he became a CEO. Had he approached his career with a specific goal in mind, or perhaps specific job objectives (e.g., his boss’s job), it would have severely limited his options. But for him, the entire world was his next potential job. The new job simply had to be better than the last one and allow him to learn something useful for the next hop.

Did the businessman owe his current employer loyalty? Not in his view. The businessman didn’t invent capitalism, and he didn’t create its rules. He simply played within the rules. His employers wouldn’t have hesitated to fire him at the drop of a hat for any reason that fit their business needs. He simply followed their example. The second thing I learned on that flight—or confirmed, really—is that appearance matters. By the end of the flight, the CEO had handed me his card and almost guaranteed me a job at his company if I wanted it. Had I boarded the flight wearing my ratty jeans, threadbare T-shirt, and worn-out sneakers, things would have gone differently. Throughout my career I’ve had my antennae up, looking for examples of people who use systems as opposed to goals. In most cases, as far as I can tell, the people who use systems do better. The systems-driven people have found a way to look at the familiar in new and more useful ways. To put it bluntly, goals are for losers. That’s literally true most of the time. For example, if your goal is to lose ten pounds, you will spend every moment until you reach the goal—if you reach it at all—feeling as if you were short of your goal. In other words, goal-oriented people exist in a state of nearly continuous failure that they hope will be temporary. That feeling wears on you. In time, it becomes heavy and uncomfortable. It might even drive you out of the game.

If you achieve your goal, you celebrate and feel terrific, but only until you realize you just lost the thing that gave you purpose and direction. Your options are to feel empty and useless, perhaps enjoying the spoils of your success until they bore you, or set new goals and reenter the cycle of permanent presuccess failure.

The systems-versus-goals point of view is burdened by semantics, of course. You might say every system has a goal, however vague. And that would be true to some extent. And you could say that everyone who pursues a goal has some sort of system to get there, whether it is expressed or not. You could word-glue goals and systems together if you chose. All I’m suggesting is that thinking of goals and systems as very different concepts has power. Goal-oriented people exist in a state of continuous presuccess failure at best, and permanent failure at worst if things never work out. Systems people succeed every time they apply their systems, in the sense that they did what they intended to do. The goals people are fighting the feeling of discouragement at each turn. The systems people are feeling good every time they apply their system. That’s a big difference in terms of maintaining your personal energy in the right direction. The system-versus-goals model can be applied to most human endeavors. In the world of dieting, losing twenty pounds is a goal, but eating right is a system. In the exercise realm, running a marathon in under four hours is a goal, but exercising daily is a system. In business, making a million dollars is a goal, but being a serial entrepreneur is a system. For our purposes, let’s say a goal is a specific objective that you either achieve or don’t sometime in the future. A system is something you do on a regular basis that increases your odds of happiness in the long run. If you do something every day, it’s a system. If you’re waiting to achieve it someday in the future, it’s a goal. Language is messy, and I know some of you are thinking that exercising every day sounds like a goal. The common definition of goals would certainly allow that interpretation. For our purposes, let’s agree that goals are a reach-it-and-be-done situation, whereas a system is something you do on a regular basis with a reasonable expectation that doing so will get you to a better place in your life. Systems have no deadlines, and on any given day you probably can’t tell if they’re moving you in the right direction. My proposition is that if you study people who succeed, you will see that most of them follow systems, not goals. When goal-oriented people succeed in big ways, it makes news, and it makes an interesting story. That gives you a distorted view of how often goal-driven people succeed. When you apply your own truth filter to the idea that systems are better than goals, consider only the people you know personally. If you know some extra successful people, ask some probing questions about how they got where they did. I think you’ll find a system at the bottom of it all, and usually some extraordinary luck. (Later in this book I’ll tell you how to improve your odds of getting lucky.)

“Consider Olympic athletes. When one Olympian wins a gold medal, or multiple gold medals, it’s a headline story. But for every medalist there are thousands who had the goal of being on that podium and failed. Those people had goals and not systems. I don’t consider daily practices and professional coaching a system because everyone knows in advance that the odds of any specific individual winning a medal through those activities are miniscule. The minimum requirement of a system is that a reasonable person expects it to work more often than not. Buying lottery tickets is not a system no matter how regularly you do it.”

On the system side, consider Mark Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook. It’s apparent that his system for success involved studying hard, getting extraordinary grades, going to a top college—in his case Harvard—and developing a skill set with technology that virtually guaranteed riches in today’s world. As it turns out, his riches came quickly through the explosive growth of Facebook. But had that not worked out, he would likely be a millionaire through some other start-up or just by being a highly paid technical genius for an existing corporation. Zuckerberg’s system (or what I infer was his system) was almost guaranteed to work, but no one could have imagined at the time how well. Warren Buffett’s system for investing involves buying undervalued companies and holding them forever, or at least until something major changes. That system (which I have grossly oversimplified) has been a winner for decades. Compare that with individual investors who buy a stock because they expect it to go up 20 percent in the coming year; that’s a goal, not a system. And not surprisingly, individual investors generally experience worse returns than the market average.

I have a friend who is a gifted salesman. He could have sold anything, from houses to toasters. The field he chose (which I won’t reveal because he wouldn’t appreciate the sudden flood of competition) allows him to sell a service that almost always auto-renews. In other words, he can sell his service once and enjoy ongoing commissions until the customer dies or goes out of business. His biggest problem in life is that he keeps trading his boat for a larger one, and that’s a lot of work. Observers call him lucky. What I see is a man who accurately identified his skill set and chose a system that vastly increased his odds of getting “lucky.” In fact, his system is so solid that it could withstand quite a bit of bad luck without buckling. How much passion does this fellow have for his chosen field? Answer: zero. What he has is a spectacular system, and that beats passion every time.

Excerpt From: Scott Adams. “How to Fail at Almost Everything and Still Win Big: Kind of the Story of My Life.” , Chapter 6: Goals Vs Systems

[boredtechnologist]

Scott Adam's "Strange Odyssey" for the TRS-80 computer

[helloitsbees]

Chapters: 1/1 Fandom: Saw (Movies) Rating: Explicit Warnings: Creator Chose Not To Use Archive Warnings, No Archive Warnings Apply Relationships: Adam Faulkner-Stanheight/Scott Tibbs Characters: Adam Faulkner-Stanheight, Scott Tibbs Additional Tags: Angst, Making Out, Flashbacks, Masturbation, Grinding, scott tibbs is an asshole but my GOD is he interesting to write, boy let me peel you like an onion Series: Part 9 of The Price of Saw Summary:

Adam had always been soft in a way that Scott wanted to dig his hands into– it was just as easy to make him smile as it was to get under his skin, and Scott had craved both ever since they were tiny. There was something so fucking addictive about knowing that he could make those huge eyes narrow in anger or fill with tears of laughter. It felt sometimes like he had something breakable in the palm of his hand, carrying it gently while the worst impulses in his brain whispered in his ear about how easy it’d be to drop it, to crush it.

Scott tossed back another gulp of beer, and closed his fist.

----- A flashback to Adam's second kiss with a guy. Takes place within the same universe as Till the Road and Sky Align, but can be read on its own.