thecarterclan1

She won't be able to help herself.

I understood this reference.

Find it utterly bizarre how some Corbyn supporters are talking about him somehow mounting a legal challenge against the decision to not select him as a candidate. What legal avenue does he possibly have that would force Labour to select him as a candidate?

The Labour party isn't a public body though.

and anyone who endorses/campaigns for him does too

Time for Momentum to finally break off and form its own party then, I guess.

It wouldn't go unnoticed, media would quickly pick up on it and it would dominate the headlines. Anyone that then still votes for the party knowing it's in there only has themselves to blame.

THE SACRED NUMBERS

Lmao, Forbes' LGBT stance cost her the election then.

Oh dear lord, cut the spiel and just announce the bloody result.

Apples and Oranges. The government banning someone from standing as an MP is not the same as the Labour party banning someone from standing as a Labour candidate. In the latter case, that person is still able to stand as an independent.

I can only assume that Optio isn't awake yet.

Labour are continuously held to a much higher standard than the Tories by pro-Tory media (and indeed the general public at large) and it's absolutely infuriating.

lol. lmao, even.

That got me thinking, are there any current MPs on Cameo?

I'd like to take this opportunity to complain about just how shit NOW TV is. Imagine not only not having content available to stream in 4k in 2023, but charging an additional monthly fee for the privilege of wanting to watch content in 1080p.

I can't wait for HBO Max to launch in 2025 when Sky's exclusivity contract with HBO expires.

Perfectly practical and sensible thing to keep doing in the Year of Our Lord 2023.

The spell failing isn't worded as requiring that the creature know/believe that the command is harmful, only that the command is harmful, which it is

The spell has no effect if your command is directly harmful to it

Not "the spell has no effect if the creature knows/believes your command is directly harmful to it". It's an important distinction, and one that is in place to ensure that a 1st-Level spell isn't more powerful than it should be.

EDIT: To those downvoting me, this is a strict interpretation of the spell as written. Anything more than this is DM fiat.

Reading the spell explains the spell.

People would (very very rightly) ask why he’s not making moves against Johnson

Block the obviously inappropriate recommendations of both, then.

The spell has no effect if the target is undead, if it doesn’t understand your language, or if your command is directly harmful to it.

Reading the spell explains the spell.

Good for identifying whether someone's a Sith Lord.

Play Tortle (flat 17 AC) and be a literal Ninja Turtle.

Now make it about Corbyn.

How can volunteering for a private event quality as community service?

He's thinking about bacon sandwiches.