z7kn2 biyh9 d3ydt 58sff hak57 inti5 772hh kky8z yaied 68bke hyeyn b74yf tsbf4 kyb8s 3ss9z z6y2f 3857t e8r8t zs932 4ah68 3tnet Got a full package of toys for all of the kids |

Got a full package of toys for all of the kids

2021.12.08 16:22 XxjackxX6829 Got a full package of toys for all of the kids

Got a full package of toys for all of the kids submitted by XxjackxX6829 to Astroneer [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 WOOFAIYAZ Rust Looks blurry and low quality on a good pc

Rust Looks blurry and low quality on a good pc submitted by WOOFAIYAZ to playrust [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 GreenJesus4President F1 Stewarding - A Discussion of this year's inconsistencies

Regardless of your preferred driver and team, I think by the end of Jeddah, almost any F1 fan would be a little confused about some of the stewarding decisions that were made throughout the race. I'm hoping this post can serve as a discussion point for past stewarding decisions throughout the season, how the standards have changed, and how we hope to see the title fight stewarded (or not stewarded) this weekend!!
Track Limits - Restarts
After the first Red Flag and restart this weekend in Jeddah, Max, from pole, got a very poor start on his hard tires. In Jeddah, pole position is on the outside, and ultimately Lewis gains a sizable advantage on Max going into Turn 1, with the inside line. Lewis forces Max off the track, refusing to turn in until his own right wheels are well onto the curb. Max keeps it stuck in over the curbs and rejoins the track, holding P1. The race was promptly restarted and Max was effectively instructed to yield the positions gained, and started from P3 for the next restart.
Question presented: Hamilton has a definite advantage into turn 1, and entering the braking zone, Hamilton's rear wheels are parallel with Verstappen's fronts. Was Verstappen properly punished for leaving the track to attempt to defend on a restart?
Track limits on restarts have been, at times, a very hot topic this season. In Austria, Ricciardo yeeted it around the outside runoff of Turn 1 and gained about 4 positions, much to Fernando's dismay. In Fernando's opinion, across the two weekends in Austria, he made 4 overtakes on-track into turn 1, and in all 4 situations, the overtaken driver simply drove it around the outside through the corner and rejoined back in front of him. None of these instances were investigated or punished.
In response, going into Russia and in an effort to draw attention to the restart shenanigans, Fernando blatantly practiced his line through the runoff in turn 2 during free practice, taking the line on multiple laps. On the restart, he makes absolutely no effort to try to drive the track and immediately sends it through the runoff. This incident was not investigated or penalized. Fernando ignores track limits - Russia
Going into Mexico, Masi was apparently thinking about enforcing Turn 1 track limits, and FIA's race-specific rules provided that on standing starts in Mexico, "any driver who leaves the track at turn one or two will be required to ensure that they rejoin he track safely and do not gain a lasting advantage. In practical terms this will mean giving up any positions that were gained."
Yet... once again, the race begins and we see MULTIPLE off-track overtakes in Mexico, none of which are investigated or penalized. Checo skips turn 2 entirely and rejoins in 3rd. Lando skips turn 2 entirely and overtakes 3 cars. A blue car (can't tell which, I am pretty sure a Williams) also entirely skips Turn 2, gaining 5 positions. Alonso skips Turn 2 and overtakes a Haas. No stewarding occurred whatsoever here.
Track limits do not seem to have been enforced on a single restart, on a single driver, at any point this season. Even in Mexico where the FIA published an official document specifically addressing off-track action on restarts, FIA simply does not enforce track limits on restarts.
So why was Max punished? Arguably, Lewis had such a significant advantage entering the braking zone over Max that it was simply Lewis' corner. However, Lewis didn't leave Max any room to even attempt to stay on track. In light of the very firm precedent set throughout literally every race of the season, I'm not sure how Max or Red Bull could have anticipated a penalty. He was significantly alongside Lewis, Lewis didn't leave him any room, it is a restart and track limits simply are not enforced on restarts.
Driving Standards and "leaving space" in wheel to wheel battles.
The controversy about "leaving space" began at the first race of the season in Bahrain. This Chainbear video addresses the events of the weekend and the specific rules in much more detail than I can. However, to summarize it briefly: FIA published a pre-race rule stating that track limits would not be enforced through Turn 4, but "reminding" drivers to keep article 27.3 of the sporting regs in mind, i.e., that you cannot gain a lasting advantage from leaving the track. Hamilton ran extremely wide through Turn 4 all weekend. Max apparently didn't get the memo until his engineers informed him mid-race that Lewis was running wide and making massive gains and telling him to take the same line. Ultimately, Max attempts an overtake around the outside, Lewis runs him off the track, and Max is instructed to return the position. The FIA then instructed Lewis to stop running wide on Turn 4, apparently feeling he was abusing their leniency a little too thoroughly, but issued no punishment.
Leaving Bahrain, it seemed that if you attempted to send an overtake around the outside, the inside driver was entitled to shove you off the track.
In Austria, three penalties were handed out to inside drivers for running a driver attempting an overtake off the track. This Chainbear video does an excellent job of directly addressing the rules and why these penalties were doled out. After Bahrain, the stewards seemed to be demanding that if two cars enter a corner "significantly alongside" one another, even a high-speed corner, the inside driver must leave sufficient space for the overtaking driver to keep it within the white lines or face a penalty.
Leaving Austria, apparently if you force an overtaking driver around the outside off the track, you will be penalized; but simultaneously, per Bahrain, if you ARE forced off the track you cannot overtake.
In Great Britain, the very next race, Lewis attempts to overtake Max on the inside of an extremely high speed corner. Lewis makes no effort to stick to the driving line, attempting to run Max off the track, but Max refuses to yield. Lewis oversteers into Max, yeeting Max off the track and ending his race. Lewis is handed a 10 second penalty, with the Stewards published reasoning, "Cars 33 and 44 entered turn 9 with Car 33 in the lead and Car 44 slightly behind and on the inside. Car 44 was on a line that did not reach the apex of the corner, with room available to the inside. When Car 33 turned into the corner, Car 44 did not avoid contact and the left front of Car 44 contacted the right rear of Car 33. Car 44 is judged predominantly at fault."
In Great Britain, it seems the Stewards found that Hamilton was entitled to racing room along the inside, and that Max appropriately gave the space. Hamilton failed to make the turn causing a collision. After Silverstone, it seems that if two cars enter the turn significantly alongside each other: (1) the outside driver must leave room for the inside driver. (2) the inside driver must leave room for the outside driver. (3) If the outside driver accomplishes an overtake by leaving the track, they will be penalized. (4) If a driver is found "predominantly at fault" for causing a collision, they will be penalized with a 10 second time penalty.
Then, in Monza, Lewis attempts an overtake on Max into a high-speed chicane. Max is at a decided disadvantage entering the corner. Lewis leaves no space and Max goes over the curbs and attempts to rejoin in front of Hamilton but his car takes off and he lands on him. The stewards penalize Max, reasoning, interestingly, "Car 44 was driving an avoiding line, although his position caused Car 33 to go onto the kerb. But further, the Stewards observed that Car 33 was not at all alongside Car 44 until significantly into the entry into Turn 1. In the opinion of the Stewards, this manoeuvre was attempted too late for the driver of Car 33 to have "the right to racing room." The stewards mimicked the language from the Silverstone decision, finding Verstappen "predominantly at fault", but awarding him a 3 place grid drop for the following race.
The Monza decision is difficult to square with the prior decisions. The most notable differing factor is the specific finding in Monza that Max was "not entitled to racing room" as, prior to the braking zone, Max had only gotten his front wheels to overlap with Lewis' rear wheels. The primary take-away from Monza probably should have been, "Max was too far away to be entitled to racing room. If he was closer before entering the braking zone, Lewis would have been obligated to leave him space on the track, but as Max's front wheels only barely overlapped with Lewis' rear before braking began, Max was not entitled to that space.
Brazil. Lewis has a big DRS run on Max and gets alongside him on the outside entering a relatively high speed corner. Max holds the inside line and brakes late attempting to make the corner. He oversteers a little bit and ultimately runs wide, arguably running Lewis off the track. Lewis also leaves the track. Max is decidedly ahead of Lewis when both cars leave the track. No investigation deemed necessary.
Brazil seems to be, perhaps, either a reversion to the Bahrain standards or an expansion of Monza. As in Bahrain, they effectively rule that it is OK to muscle other drivers off the track and off-track overtakes are not permitted. So if we are returning to the Bahrain standard, they were thinking that if Max hit his line, Lewis wouldn't have had any space outside anyways, and if he had overtaken Max around the outside would have been ordered to return it.
In Monza they found that Lewis had no obligation to leave any space since Max was "not entitled to racing room." Here Lewis and Max are alongside each other, and even if he stuck his line Verstappen was going to run Lewis off the track, but there was no collision. If this is an extension of Monza, I suppose it stands for the idea that anything goes between the white lines until there is contact.
Either way, it is pretty much impossible to square the non-investigation of Brazil with Silverstone and Austria. The "difference" between this and Silverstone seems to be solely that there was contact and a shunt in Silverstone. Nonetheless I think it is abundantly clear that coming into Jeddah a precedent had been set that it is AOK to muscle drivers off the track, and if you do so you are guaranteed to keep your position, because if they try to overtake off-track, they will be penalized.
Bringing it all together in Jeddah
Now lets take a look at the stewarding of Jeddah in light of these precedents!

  1. Restart #1. Max gets a terrible start from pole on the outside. Lewis gets a great run on VER and actually fully clears him just before getting on the brakes, but Hamilton is earlier on the brakes because he needs to make the inside line. VER is completely alongside Hamilton just as they enter the turn. Just as in Monza, Hamilton runs Max completely off the track.
    1. Most importantly this is literally the very first restart overtake of the season that has ever been penalized or even investigated that I am aware of; although if someone can find any prior such penalties doled out this season I'm VERY interested.
    2. Especially in light of Alonso overtaking literally 4 cars by just ignoring a corner in Russia on a line he had been openly practicing. Unlike Mexico, FIA did not publish any race-start specific standards here in Jeddah.
    3. Arguably, as in Monza, Max was not entitled to racing room as Lewis did definitely completely clear Max's front wing for a split second before he began braking. However I also think it is apparent that by the time the cars are actually in "turn 1" Max is completely alongside, and it is turn 2 that Lewis is ultimately squeezing Max off.
    4. Literally all night, the stewards allowed the inside driver to simply not turn in to defend the position. Sainz and Leclerc were dead even entering turn 1 with Sainz on the inside and Sainz simply refused to turn the car until Leclerc was off track. Leclerc held the position off track (pretty much the exact same line Max took.) Leclerc did ultimately give the position back, but I do not believe the stewards actually gave that instruction, nor was this incident investigated. Was it because it was an inter-team incident and the stewards let them sort it out? Did they reason that Sainz didn't have to give space because of the Vettel/Tsunoda incident going on just in front of them? We'll never know! But more on-point, Ocon probably made this same move on Bottas 10 times throughout the race without any warning or incident.
  2. Lap 36. Lewis tries to send it around the outside into Turn 1. Lewis gets full overlap with Max, but Max holds the inside line. Lewis turns into Max causing both cars to oversteer. (No idea why this isn't talked about more, but both Lewis' onboard and the aerial make it very clear that both cars had plenty of grip until Lewis attempted his usual shunt maneuver of stuffing his front wheel into the rear wheel of the Bull). Both cars over steer off the track with Verstappen still clearly in the lead (see second photo). Max is instructed to give the position back (we won't go into the attempts to return the position).
    1. Why is Max instructed to give the position back? Literally none of the prior stewarding decisions support that instruction. He made the same move as Lewis did to him on the first restart, as Sainz did to Leclerc, and as Ocon did to Bottas for 20 laps.
    2. The official ruling from FIA was "VER left the track at turn 1 and rejoined gaining a lasting advantage." There is no discussion of forcing Lewis off the track (Austria decisions.) There is no discussion of appropriate room being given (Monza/Silverstone decision.) There is no discussion of
    3. Unlike the restart, he conclusively held the lead throughout the entire corner. By the time he left the track his car was entirely in front of Lewis'. Lewis' car also left the track. What advantage does he gain? How is this incident any different than Brazil? Just as in Brazil, there is no way Lewis is getting around the outside without leaving the track himself, which presumably remains illegal per Bahrain/Monza/Brazil.
  3. Lap 43. On lap 42 Max was instructed to hand back the position, which he attempts to do through Turn 27 again, but in a particularly bit of underappreciated tricky driving, Lewis just absolutely sandbags it through the corner giving Max back the lead. As Lewis must hold the position for 3 turns, Max had not fulfilled the request to return the position. On lap 43 just as they are approaching Turn 27 again Max is informed he has been assessed a 5 second time penalty and hands the position back to Lewis, either from confusion or frustration. Lewis overtakes on the inside, slows to match Max's speed, goes super deep into the corner and runs Max entirely off the road. Masi phoned Mercedes and said "hey now, that incident at turn 27 was awfully close to an unsportsmanlike conduct black and white flag", but no flag is waved. No investigation is conducted. No summons is issued, and no penalty is served.
    1. Completely baffling decision from FIA. Unlike every other instance of a driver being forced off the track, this isn't even a real racing incident. Max has deliberately yielded the position. Lewis goes WAY off the racing line and compromises his own corner speed and exit speed for the sole purpose of shoving Max off the track to ensure he can't get a good run. Lewis didn't understeer all the way out there and his ideal racing line sure as hell had nothing to do with going that deep into the corner. This was not shoving off the track in an attempt to attack or defend (Brazil would be the only prior decision to support a no penalty here) but a very deliberate move to put the other driver at a disadvantage.

We're talking about racing, so obviously no two incidents are precisely identical. However I do think that regardless of the driver you support, we can all agree that the stewarding standards have been almost impossible to anticipate.
Moving into Jeddah I just hope that Masi and the teams and the stewards can all get on the same page so we don't see the results being affected by stewarding yet again.
As it stands there is some serious tension in the rules for outside drivers. As it stands it seems they simply are not entitled to space unless there is a collision, nor are they permitted to keep racing when they are inevitably shoved off. The racing line for these F1 cars is simply too tight for "cutback" moves to be effective; as such you just can't overtake on the outside right now.
Taking ALL prior decisions into consideration, the following seems to be the present standard of wheel-to-wheel racing:
  1. There are NO circumstances under which a driver with the inside line must leave space for an outside driver; but per Silverstone, an outside driver must ensure that they leave space for the inside driver.
  2. Following Jeddah, to hold your position you must keep it within the white lines; unless maybe it is TREMENDOUSLY clear that the other driver was not going to be able to overtake you without leaving the track themselves(perhaps only basis for Brazil)
  3. If there is a collision, whoever gained an advantage from the collision with the least damage will be awarded a 10 second time penalty
For Abu Dhabi I just hope that the stewards will give CLEAR direction to the drivers and ideally revert to how they were stewarding earlier in the season, whereby wheel-to-wheel racing incidents are assessed as follows:
  1. Was the attacking car significantly alongside? (apparently more than front wheel to rear wheel per Monza)
  2. Did the defending car leave space?
  3. Was there contact?
It seems FIA has just forgotten about the concept of racing room since Monza and I hope that they either clearly say, "yeah, racing room doesn't exist anymore, just shove each other off to hold positions", or clearly say, "if there is significant overlap between the cars, you MUST ALWAYS leave space or you will be punished."
Thanks for reading! Heres to an excellent finale!!
submitted by GreenJesus4President to formula1 [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 Fenrir_The_Wolf430 Got me my big iron finally!!

submitted by Fenrir_The_Wolf430 to airsoft [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 FrontpageWatch2020 [#374|+3113|212] This isn't photshopped, Basketball painted with Vantablack [r/interestingasfuck]

submitted by FrontpageWatch2020 to longtail [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 andresrodriguezv vague 1920x2400

vague 1920x2400 submitted by andresrodriguezv to NumaVerse [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 NoOrganization6488 Finals Week Car?

Anyone know what happened to that junk car they used to bring out during finals week so we can smash it and destress? That would be good right now
submitted by NoOrganization6488 to utdallas [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 AutoNewspaperAdmin [World] - Investigators in Alabama find car, bones in 1976 cold case | Toronto Star

[World] - Investigators in Alabama find car, bones in 1976 cold case | Toronto Star submitted by AutoNewspaperAdmin to AutoNewspaper [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 Mz_Greene Personality test

Personality test submitted by Mz_Greene to h3h3productions [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 AssistIll ich🤷🏻iel

ich🤷🏻iel submitted by AssistIll to ich_iel [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 businessyndicate Buying a specific phone number

submitted by businessyndicate to businesstalkdaily [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 ShortAlgo $AMZN Looks overbought Register for 7-Day Trial Access at https://t.co/4iPw4wGRcw https://t.co/wIDhR0jiNy

submitted by ShortAlgo to UltraAlgo [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 SwallowmaWhatDude Co worker who sexually harassed me got paid more than me

This past summer I worked as a cashier. About half way through the summer we got a new employee who worked the cashiers with me.
From day one she kept hinting at trying to be with me. First I took it as standard flirting but once I made it obvious I wasn't interested, she just kept going.
Leaving weird notes for me, constantly not doing her job just so she could come up and make me as uncomfortable as possible, and even saying she'd be willing to cheat on her boyfriend to get with me (directly in front of customers)
Now, the worst part is that the only other person up there with us was the 'head cashier' who had nothing going on in her life other than that job title, and she absolutely hated me. It was obvious I was better at talking with the customers than anyone else in the store, and her jealously took over about a week I was there.
She hated that I was "lazy" despite the fact I did most of the work and she would skip work about half the week. When she was there, I realized anything that came out of my mouth was gonna be used against me so I literally stopped talking other than the usual "find everything alright?" To the customers.
One week of silence and she makes up that I'm rude to customers and I need to "calm down." It became constant lies from her end from that point on.
She also had a million mental issues and threw them all on me. Her exact words for justifying her behavior were "I went to therapy once but I didn't like my therapist and I'm not doing it again"
Due to her pure hatred for me, she looked at our new employee trying to grind on me everyday as us having a weird work relationship (which I wouldn't be surprised if someone thought of us like that if it wasn't for the fact I told this woman to stay away from be every single day)
This head cashier of mine was buddy buddy with the boss since she worked there forever, so her lies immediately put me at a losing position with the boss who assumed I was a lazy asshole.
Not to mention I was one of the few men in this store snd telling anyone I was being harassed by women wasn't gonna go my way.
Anyways, I quit this hellhole a while ago but I've just now been made aware that the new employee who couldn't do her job to save her life who kept trying to fuck me under the desk was getting paid more than me simply because she asked the boss for more money????
Look, I was never told this was an option and our boss kept complaining about low sales due to covid, so it's not like I had any hints this was possible.
But to go through all the garbage those two women put me through, just to figure out the new employee who did less work and went through far less shit got paid more than me because she asked?! Every single request I made (only two different times when I mentioned I don't think we should listen to the same 8 hour pandora playlist EVERY DAY) got shot down with a "maybe, we'll see"
It's over now, but it's a good example of how much work can suck absolute ass.
submitted by SwallowmaWhatDude to antiwork [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 SoriaChan Gold or silver? What looks better on me and which one should i opt for normally?

Gold or silver? What looks better on me and which one should i opt for normally? submitted by SoriaChan to coloranalysis [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 AutoNewspaperAdmin [CA] - Santa Claus ready to parade a street near you | Toronto Star

[CA] - Santa Claus ready to parade a street near you | Toronto Star submitted by AutoNewspaperAdmin to AutoNewspaper [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 2globalnomads Uusi kirja seksiturismista: Kuuma loma - Web & SEO Designers Forum

Uusi kirja seksiturismista: Kuuma loma - Web & SEO Designers Forum submitted by 2globalnomads to 2globalnomads [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 niuz-bot Canada anunță un boicot diplomatic al Jocurilor Olimpice de iarnă de la Beijing, urmând exemplul Statelor Unite, Marii Britanii și Australiei - [Articole]

Premierul canadian Justin Trudeau a anunţat miercuri un boicot diplomatic al Jocurilor Olimpice de iarnă de la Beijing, după ce Statele Unite, Regatul Unit şi… Mai departe »
Citeste in continuare: https://www.g4media.ro/canada-anunta-un-boicot-diplomatic-al-jocurilor-olimpice-de-iarna-de-la-beijing-urmand-exemplul-statelor-unite-marii-britanii-si-australiei.html
submitted by niuz-bot to niuz [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 Eaglezzz State of Yeagerbomb [Modpost]

Hello fellow yeagerists and white eldian supremacy believers. I've pondered if I should make this post for a good bit. But since no one on the mod team is talking about it, or in general seems to even give a shit, I've decided to just say what's going on.
If any of you have been on reddit for any amount of time, you would know places like this aren't well liked by the admins. Lack of modposts and the fact this is a fairly small sub would probably lead you to believe we're under the radar from reddit... Well... we're not, not at all. In fact, we've been contacted 4 times by the admins and we've pretty much done nothing about it. Because the truth about the mod team is that half of us are gone and the other half don't give a shit and just want to shitpost in discord... or if you're TalentedCrown, larp as a white male. So organizing any kind of mod meeting is nearly impossible and would probably give me cancer, so fuck it. I'm doing it.
In short, the admins have asked us to remove "harassment" and to add more mods since most are inactive. What does this mean for the sub? It does not mean that dark and edgy humor are no longer allowed. That's what Yeagerbomb is and that will never change. All I'm asking of you is to please not remove "humor" from "dark and edgy humor". In other words, no more full "mask-off" comments. Please keep a lid on that. The admins crack down on that shit hard and it's either we remove it, or they do. And if they remove it, it pushes this sub further up shit's creek.
And that's about it. I'm not asking for mod applications yet as I need to talk with ryan and see what he wants to do, but I figured this sub should know what's going on behind the scenes. Transparency and all that crap.
submitted by Eaglezzz to yeagerbomb [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 Strong9018 Why is it so difficult for people on Reddit to acknowledge when they may be wrong about something?

I am truly trying to ask this question in good faith and this is not intended to be inflammatory, I apologize if the wording of my title comes off that way at all
I just find myself frustrated sometimes when browsing Reddit because it seem like the comment sections are full of disagreements where neither party is willing to budge on their views even when very reasonable evidence is presented to the contrary. What further adds to this problem is that the arguments will also devolve into semantical arguments
In person I feel like a lot of the topics and arguments that happen on here tend to be more nuanced and not as polarized. As a relatively new user in their early 30s, can someone please explain to me if this is normal on Reddit?
submitted by Strong9018 to TooAfraidToAsk [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 ShortAlgo $ANAB Looks oversold Register for 7-Day Trial Access at https://t.co/4iPw4wGRcw https://t.co/gwEFJILtWA

$ANAB Looks oversold Register for 7-Day Trial Access at https://t.co/4iPw4wGRcw https://t.co/gwEFJILtWA submitted by ShortAlgo to UltraAlgo [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 A_Blue_Apple_Pie Does anybody know any good funko pop shop locations in Liverpool uk? And if you do please tell me as I’m collecting them. If you’d like to see my collection too then upvote or comment and I will show it. Thanks

submitted by A_Blue_Apple_Pie to funkopop [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 OkEmpress Is the Pokéradar broken or am I just super unlucky?

I heard that getting a chain of 20 guarantees at least 2 perfect IV's, a chain of 30 guarantees at least 3 perfect IV's, and so on. I've been chaining for ditto so I can start breeding for competitive pokemon. My chain broke at 35 and I only have four ditto with any perfect IV's. Two of which I got before a chain of 10 and the other two with only two perfect IV's each. Am I doing something wrong? Is there anything specific I can do to increase my odds?
submitted by OkEmpress to pokemon [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 AltairMUP96 I’m sure that’s Sandman and the other one is female. Perhaps Black Cat or Silk?

I’m sure that’s Sandman and the other one is female. Perhaps Black Cat or Silk? submitted by AltairMUP96 to ContestOfChampions [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 turtleycool38 Are Sagittarians actually pretty emotional?

View Poll
submitted by turtleycool38 to Zodiac [link] [comments]

2021.12.08 16:22 Padcolt The Triflers - Why did Dawn do this?

Why did Dawn have Chao and Tao killed? I understand her motivation for killing Donovan. She made Truman kill him because she wouldn't be able to control her. That part is clear. However, what reason did she have for killing Chao and Tao? With Chao, it is stated that he only cares about something if it leads to his own entertainment. And Tao especially doesn't make sense because it's clear he enjoys human experimentation just iike Dawn. I believe he even looks up to her, perhaps her intelligence, as when he fucks up during the first experimentation scene, he apologizes and seems very regretful that he dissapointed Dawn. Keeping that in mind, why did Dawn want the two dead? The only reason I can think of is that she thought they wouldn't be loyal to her like Truman would. Well, what do you guys think? Do you have any ideas?
submitted by Padcolt to MumkeysAnimeReviews [link] [comments]