Orlando City @ Chicago Fire
Columbus Crew @ New England Revolution
LA Galaxy @ FC Dallas
Montreal Impact @ Houston Dynamo
Vancouver Whitecaps @ Real Salt Lake
Minnesota United FC @ San Jose Earthquakes
Philadelphia Union @ Sporting Kansas City
Colorado Rapids @ Seattle Sounders
DC United @ New York City FC
FC Cincinnati @ Atlanta United
Portland Timbers @ LAFC

I recently uncovered a seeming inconsistency in my thinking, and I thought I’d air it here for people to discuss.

I support secessionists. If the Catalans want to secede from Spain and form an independent country, good for them. If the New Caledonians want to secede from France and form an independent country, good for them. If the people in Western Australia want to secede from Australia and form an independent country, good for them. I don’t believe anyone should be forced to be governed by a government not of their choosing.

Meanwhile, I don’t support individuals seceding from a country and becoming sovereign citizens (or freemen on the land, as they’re also known). In my mind, this is effectively anarchy: if everyone secedes, then there’s no government and it’s everyone for themselves. I don’t support this at all. I’m definitely pro-government.

However, both these movements share something at their cores:

• Secessionists are people who refuse to be governed by a government they didn’t choose and don’t want.

• Sovereign citizens are people who refuse to be governed by a government they didn’t choose and don’t want.

During a conversation today, I realised the inconsistency in my supporting one form of separatism but not the other. I’m okay with a million people seceding from a country, but not a single person seceding. And I can’t find the dividing line, or the principle, which underlies this inconsistency. I know that I believe in government, so a secessionist group must be just that: a group. However, while a group of two million seceding is reasonable, a group of two seceding is just ridiculous.

What are your thoughts? Are secessionists and sovereign citizens effectively the same at the core (or not)? Do you support either or both of these movements? Why or why not?

I wasn’t able to find a discussion on this, though I’m sure there has been, and for that, I apologize.

Is there any kind of timeframe on the release of a mobile app for tildes?

I would guess that on Reddit most of their traffic comes from people accessing the site on their phones at this point, but I could be wrong. In any case, it certainly is a large portion of the users that access the site in this way.

With that in mind, it would be nice to be able to access tildes from a mobile app to do away with the clunkiness that comes with using the site through a mobile browser. I don’t mean to sound like it’s terrible. The site functions well enough through a mobile browser, but it would certainly have me using tildes a lot more if the convenience of a mobile app was available.

I’m sure the developers are very busy, and I don’t want to sound demanding, I’m just curious.

And once again, I apologize if this has been discussed recently.

After reading a thread on AskReddit requesting songs that made people cry, I thought about my favorite music and realized that most of the songs that made me cry were because they were uplifting in one way or another. So here I am today, asking you this: what songs move you to tears because of positive emotions? Here are a few of mine:

The Beatles - Let It Be. It's almost embarrassing to put this one first, but a simple three word phrase has never been filled with so much meaning. "Let it be" is practically my motto, and it's the philosophy which has most helped to steer me towards sanity. The music accompanying the lyrics just resonates with my heartstrings and it always makes me feel relieved after listening.

Yoko Kanno - Gotta Knock a Little Harder. People often describe music they like as being written for them. To me, this song feels like my very essence was put into sound. Its a song about breaking free of depression and loneliness. The thing I love about it is how honest it is; breaking through that door is brutally difficult. I love how there isn't an extra verse telling you how much better the narrator's life is after breaking through the door (or even that they made it through), instead implying it through choral swells and a little bit of the listener's imagination.

Arto Lindsay - Counting the Roses. This one may be cheating a little, because it's really the context of the song that makes me cry. It was written for a video game called D2, where a tragic character named Kimberly wrote the lyrics after a particularly terrible day. While the song is beautiful by itself, what affects me is the concept that it represents: even in an ugly, poisonous, depressing world, pure and beautiful things can still be found.

It's a simple question, or is it? How would you measure best? Complexity? Realism? Creativity? Detail?

I think it's fairly obvious that Tolkien has set the gold standard of all worldbuilding, but more recent authors like GRRM, Brandon Sanderson and JKR or the late Terry Pratchett have also created beloved worlds.

Some, like GRRM, are apparently more interested in complex worldbuilding itself rather than finishing their novels while others like JKR use the worlds more as a window dressing without keeping it fairly consistent. Is it alright if the Wizarding World is inconsistent if it serves the plot? How complex can Westeros become before it gets in the way of the story?

I think that GRRM and JKR are both extremes on the spectrum. When reading The Song of Ice and Fire, I felt like GRRM needed a proper editor to reign him in while JKR managed to build a fantastical world in 7 books which, upon closer inspection, makes no sense. On the other hand you have Terry Pratchett, who with the Discworld was clearly more interested in creating a parody of the real world, but still managed to make it very interesting and unique.

Thoughts?

So I haven't read any books since my senior year, where the ones I did were for book essays. That was about 3 years ago. I was, however, a fanatical reader in my formative years, all throughout elementary school. I read lots of Fantasy like Harry Potter, the Magyk series, Skullduggery Pleasant, Percy Jackson, stuff in that vein. As of late, my ADD addled brain has decided to let go a tad and I want to get back into reading

This might be very vague but I'll try my best. I'm looking for books similar to (or maybe kinda detached from, if you think a tangential connection is sufficient enough to warrant an outlier) the books I mentioned earlier. I'm also very open to Sci-Fi, but I like world/race exploration the most. Interesting Alien species and odd planets/phenomena. I prefer novels where the author has a good grasp on the English language, with some wit or neat descriptors, but Tolkien-esque long-in-the-tooth verbosity wears me out after a while. I recall greatly enjoying some Halo novels as well.

This is getting a little long in the tooth, but lastly, if there's anything even remotely comparable to the SCP Foundation collection of stories, I'm way into it. I've also been picking up and putting down House Of Leaves for a while, and it has some neat stuff, but it rambles quite often. Not so much that I want to put it down, but it makes me restless trying to get to the meat but having to wade through the writer's extraneous verbose ramblings. I don't know if this will give enough info but I'll greatly appreciate anything thrown at me!