i got the Worldbox Humble version will i be able to get the steam version for free ? or pay again on the 2nd

2021.12.01 12:33 Smart-Mess4860 i got the Worldbox Humble version will i be able to get the steam version for free ? or pay again on the 2nd

submitted by Smart-Mess4860 to Worldbox [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 -Venser- [uThermal] Winning TvP FAST With Hellions - Terran School #42

[uThermal] Winning TvP FAST With Hellions - Terran School #42 submitted by -Venser- to AllThingsTerran [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 richie2raw Duct Tape (GG4xDosidos) by Kings and Queens

submitted by richie2raw to MDEnts [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 carlyeah ex iOS user that jumped to android + galaxy watch: is there a way to improve a couple of notifications behavior?

submitted by carlyeah to WearOS [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 Kenny_K-Man Guys, how do I add text to photo?

Guys, how do I add text to photo? submitted by Kenny_K-Man to okbuddyreiner [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 Brraed Who/What do you love to hate?

submitted by Brraed to AskReddit [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 awecasper THIS GONNA BE HUGE!

THIS GONNA BE HUGE! submitted by awecasper to AllCryptoBets [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 Logical_Garlic_4548 I pulled 80 times in the week 1 pipe. These are all the new items I got. I’m so happy

I pulled 80 times in the week 1 pipe. These are all the new items I got. I’m so happy submitted by Logical_Garlic_4548 to MarioKartTour [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 craterface12 Anyone experiencing the Pop Shop using at least 1 GB of RAM when only the process is running in the background?

The process appears to open and remain open when the system sends a notification of application updates, and it gobbles up resources for no reason. Any way to stop it from starting up on its own and staying on?
submitted by craterface12 to pop_os [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 click411 where to check if snapshot of your solo was successful

where to check if snapshot of your solo was successful
submitted by click411 to Sologenic [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 here4thememes420 [USA-FL] [H] Paypal, Local Cash [W] New RTX 3070

I help operate a media company in South Florida and were looking to update some hardware for our editing PC. Looking to get a new 3070 at MSRP, any brand. Help a small business out!
submitted by here4thememes420 to hardwareswap [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 ogneoa What game do you think is the best of all time?

submitted by ogneoa to AskReddit [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 5igorsk Ажиотаж из-за билетов на нового «Человека-паука» переходит всевозможные границы мультивселенной и адекватности.

Стартовавшие вчера американские продажи билетов на «Нет пути домой» вызвали немалый интерес не только среди фанатов, но и перекупов. В интернете можно найти заветные квитки на премьерные сеансы, превышающие номинальную цену в разы. Кто-то готов отдать билет за $900 или $1500. Есть даже объявление о продаже нескольких билетов (точное количество не раскрывается) за $25 000, или же в количестве пяти штук за $14 200.
Ну ребят, приезжайте в Россию. У нас тут есть свободные места.😁
submitted by 5igorsk to Tay_5 [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 Kleon_ Please vote

We introduced a weekly thread to better give users the opportunity to add links and for Any $BBIG information to be easier to access. However I am seeing some users are not happy with the weekly thread, this poll now gives the community option to decide.
View Poll
submitted by Kleon_ to BBIG [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 Celany After 60 Years, property retailer is claiming they own the mineral rights and will be exercising them.

I am not the original poster. This is a repost.
This is reposted with permission from u/00_Joe_Snow with update his messaged me at the bottom. Originally posted 4 years ago in legaladvice.
Thank you again, u/00_Joe_Snow, for granting permission and giving a final update!
After 60 Years, property retailer is claiming they own the mineral rights and will be exercising them.
https://www.reddit.com/legaladvice/comments/78gc4z/tn_after_60_years_property_retailer_is_claiming/
Ok guys, here’s a good one for you. Hits a little bit of everything. Tree law, rock…..law, property sales, legal conflict of interest, ethics complaints. Might even do a shitty MS Paint drawing!
Located in small town Tennessee. Sixty years ago, my grandmother bought a piece of undeveloped wooded area about 50 acres in size. Nothing fancy, something to be left to the family when she passes. Fast forward to this year. Douchebag Properties (DBP) is claiming that they own the mineral rights on that piece of dirt and that they are going to be exercising those rights to remove rock off the property for sale. They want us to sign a hold harmless agreement and a bunch of paperwork essentially saying that if anything goes wrong it’s not their fault, not their problem, and the property owner takes full liability. And they need this contract signed ASAP because they want to get started before the weather turns cold. Basically, trying to pull a fast one on a 90 year old grandmother.
We did some digging. Apparently they do own the mineral rights (future lawsuit incoming; original seller claimed was selling mineral estate and surface estate. Title search came back clean. Not sure about statute of limitations or how the hell these assholes got the rights to begin with.) So, we know we can’t stop them from getting the rocks. Sucks but lesson learned. Honestly it’s not about the mineral rights. It’s more about them coming onto our property, taking what they want and leaving a mess behind for us to deal with.
After talking it over with my Grandmother, this is what we want to happen before any work is done.

So, because we are dealing with small town Southerners where everyone knows everyone else and the concept of “Outsiders” are very much a thing, we found a law firm in a different city / county that hopefully had no relation to DBP or the contractor they hired to dig the rocks. We bring up our concerns, he says that he has never worked for or done business with either DBP or the contractor, pay his fee, and expect him to represent us fairly. But I’m starting to get the feeling that this guy is not on the up and up.
He tours the property with DBP and the contractor (without their lawyers and without telling us) changes nothing about the contract that they want us to sign, and is also now really pushing us to get it taken care of ASAP. As in calling and texting multiple times a day saying that it’s a good deal and that we need to move fast. First, we did not give permission for anyone to be out there without us being notified and on site. (I don’t know if it’s normal for lawyers to do location visits without notifying the owners, so maybe that’s just on me. It pissed me off. Stay off my lawn!) Second, it’s been 60 years since we came into this land. What’s the rush? I’m not going to take the chance on signing something that’s not in our best interest without going over it with a fucking magnifying glass.
After losing faith in this lawyer we reach out to my Aunt who is a non-practicing property lawyer (in another state.) She takes our demands, legalesed them up, and then forwarded it to our council stating that we expect him to work in our best interest, not DBP’s. That’s where we are now.
So this was part vent / rant and part question.
Am I missing something obvious? And, am I expecting too much? I know that we most likely will not get everything and if they do own the mineral rights, they are going to get the minerals. But, I don’t want some fast-talker taking advantage of my grandmother because she is old and an “outsider.” I also don’t want this piece of property to be strip mined out from under us.
Just because I know it's not complete without one.
Editors Note: The comments are VERY interesting if you're the kind of person who nerds out over legal rights to minerals/mining vs quarrying/land ownership/etc. If not...not so much. : )


[Update][TN] Property retailer is claiming they own the mineral rights and will be exercising them.
This is a bit of a two-parter.
First Part: On the subject of rocks.
So, after a few evenings of Google and I getting to know each other over some very large glasses of scotch, I found more than a few cases that says that this company pushing to "mine" the rocks as "minerals" are full of shit.
First, what they want to mine is called "Dimension Stone" It looks like this.
Second, this rock, is not a mineral that falls under minerals rights laws. As discussed in Heineman v. Terra Enterprises, LLC, 817 F.Supp. 2d 1049 (E.D. Tenn. 2011) The United States District Court in Chattanooga ruled that rock does not constitute a mineral.
“Substances such as sand, gravel, sandstone, and limestone are not minerals within the ordinary meaning of the word unless they are rare and exceptional in character...blablabla.”
While they might own the minerals rights (we are still determining if this is true) those include oil / gas / coal / etc.
Not rocks.
Now the asshole who wants to do the mining texted us that it was his intent to quarry stone out of the property. Note, that he did not say mine stone out of the property. Mining and quarrying are two very different things in legal circles. Even if "rocks" were considered a mineral, State of Tennessee v. Lahaire-Hille, LLC, stated that
“if the extraction of the substance in question is necessarily so destructive of the mined surface area as to essentially “destroy the conveyance” of surface rights to that area, then the company does not have the right to perform the proposed extraction at all, regardless of whether the substance is a “mineral,” and regardless of whether the extraction method is the “usual, necessary and convenient means” of removing said mineral.” “general mineral reservation in a deed will not be construed so broadly as to include extraction methods that destroy the surface rights conveyed in the same deed. If a grantor wishes to retain the right to obtain minerals through destructive surface extraction he must explicitly reserve that right within the deed; a general mineral reservation will not suffice.”
So, TLDR; Rocks aren't minerals. And even if they were, minerals rights don't count because if you dig them up you destroy the surface and therefore the surface owners rights.
Second Part: On the subject of the shyster lawyer.
Now this gets interesting. After a few weeks of total non-communication from the lawyer and more than a few texts from the asshole trying to quarry the stone about not needing lawyers involved, it was time to step up our game. One of Grandma Snow's daughters is a non-practicing lawyer in another state. So a call her up, tell her about this...lunacy....and give her the rundown on the cases that I found during my scotch-fueled-Google-rage. She tells me that it's hit or miss and that she would not be able to represent us anyway because she is no longer a part of the bar in TN. But she is willing to look over the cases and get back to me.
Two days later she calles me up, tells me that I should have been a lawyer, and then sends me a copy of the Cease and Desist she wrote and overnighted to all the involved parties......
......Holy. Shit. I would not want to be on her bad side in a courtroom. Trial by Combat might be safer.
So anyway, Aunt Lawyer sends a copy of the C&D to Shyster and said that she has reviewed the time sheet for what we paid him and had some very serious questions in regards to his billing. Specifically, his little field trip to the property to meet the miners without prior authorization, his failure to provide all correspondence with the opposition for her records, and why he seemed to be on a first name basis with all the other parties on what official correspondence we do have.
Shysty responds back with a threat to report her to the other State Bar for interfering with his client. Now just so we are clear, Aunt Lawyer is Grandma Snow's daughter. I'm not quite sure where he was trying to go with this threat because it's not like she went and started filling things or appearing in court. Aunt Lawyer responds with
I think I can speak to her and speak on her behalf without having to ask you.
More drama ensues, lots of legal threats, threats of ethics reports and then......nothing. It has been radio silence for the past month. No word from the property retailer, no word from the miner, and no word from Shysty.
As it is right now we are assuming that the value of the rocks are just not worth the effort or the legal fight to get them. That might change in the future, but as of right now, there is nothing.
I finally convinced Grandma Snow to get a trail camera to watch over the entrance of the property. Any trespassers will get reported to the police and hopefully that will be the end of this mess.
Thanks for everyone who commented on the previous post. I will continue to update if there are any changes.

[Update 2][TN]: Rocks are not minerals. Here's a C&D that says so.
Some people here are sick in the head and get their jollies from reading dry legal mumbo jumbo in their down time. I won't name any names (you know who you are), but they asked for a copy of the C&D.
Presented for pure entertainment!
Re: Rocks! And just how much they are not yours!
CEASE AND DESIST ALL ACTION THEREFORE
Gentlemen:
Please be advised that I represent Grandma Snow and her interest in the above referenced property. Grandma Snow and her daughter, Mama Snow have asked me to review the documents provided to them regarding the mineral rights for Rockland (the “Premises”).
Specifically, I have reviewed the Surface Owner Agreement provided to Grandma Snow, the letter dated October 27, 2017 from CONTRACTOR, the October 20, 2017 letter from Douchebag to CONTRACTOR and the TMSP Notice of Intent application, the Stone Lease Agreement between Douchebag Properties (DBP) and Contractor and the conveyance deeds (the Deed).
Even with a cursory review the Surface Owner Agreement is wholly unacceptable. Basically DBP is asking Grandma Snow to hold herself out as the insurer for DBP in exchange for a pittance. There is no obligation in the Deed for the surface owner to take on this type of obligation. Clearly, that document is off the table.
Next, CONTRACTOR, in a letter dated October 27, 2017, has informed Grandma Snow that he has signed a lease with DBP for stone removal (Stone Lease Agreement “The Lease”). The Lease states that there is a separate surface owner with surface rights overlying the Premises and that additional rights must be addressed and resolved with the surface owner of the property. While we appreciate that you have acknowledged that there is a separate surface owner, please be advised that any access to the Premises at this time by DBP, CONTRACTOR or any of their agents will be considered TRESPASS and will be prosecuted. There is NO AGREEMENT with the surface owner that any person may access the Premises at this time.
CONTRACTOR indicated to Mama Snow in a text his intent to “quarry” stone from the Premises. The owner of the mineral rights, nor their predecessor in title were ever conveyed the legal right to “quarry” stone on the Premises. Please See Doochin v. Rackley, 610 S. W.2d 715, 719 (Tenn. 1981). The Deed merely states that Missouri Coal and Land Company reserves the right to go upon said tract or parcel of land for the purpose of mining and removing therefrom the said minerals, gas or oil. (emphasis added) Grandma Snow has not agreed that the owner of the mineral rights may “quarry” and according to the findings in Campbell v. Campbell, 29 Tenn. App 651, 199 S.W.2d 931, 93 (1946) “the owner of the surface is entitled to subjacent support… unless the right to such support has been waived or relinquished by the surface owner.” Grandma Snow has not waived or relinquished any right to subjacent support of her property, nor will she agree to do so. The Campbell court further states that “such a waiver should not be implied unless the language of the instrument of conveyance … clearly indicates such to be the intention of the parties.” The Deed conveying mineral rights contains no such language.
In addition, the court in State of Tennessee v. Lahaire-Hille, LLC, Tenn. Ct. App. R. 11 ( 2008) in citing Campbell v. Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. Co. 150 Tenn. 265 S.W. 676 (1924) stated that “if the extraction of the substance in question is necessarily so destructive of the mined surface area as to essentially “destroy the conveyance” of surface rights to that area, then the company does not have the right to perform the proposed extraction at all, regardless of whether the substance is a “mineral,” and regardless of whether the extraction method is the “usual, necessary and convenient means” of removing said mineral.”
Case law is clear, “general mineral reservation in a deed will not be construed so broadly as to include extraction methods that destroy the surface rights conveyed in the same deed. If a grantor wishes to retain the right to obtain minerals through destructive surface extraction he must explicitly reserve that right within the deed; a general mineral reservation will not suffice.” See State v. Lahaire-Hill, LLC, 278 S.W.3d 745, 752 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2008). Basically, the mineral owner does not have the right under the language of the Deed to quarry any substance or harm the surface of the property in a manner that would prevent the surface owner from enjoying the normal use of the Premises, which we can all agree stone quarrying will do.
Regardless, there does not exist any rights to remove stone from the Premises anyway. The Deed which conveys the “mineral rights” See Deed Book, Page ### reads in pertinent part, “Coal and Land Company for itself and its successors or assigns reserve all the Coal, gas, Air or Other Minerals underneath the Surface of the [illegible] or parcel of land.” As discussed in Heineman v. Terra Enterprises, LLC, 817 F.Supp. 2d 1049 (E.D. Tenn. 2011) The United States District Court in Chattanooga ruled that rock does not constitute a mineral. “Substances such as sand, gravel, sandstone, and limestone are not minerals within the ordinary meaning of the word…” See also Hart v. Craig 352 Mont. 209 (2009), 216 P.3d 197, 198 (2009) (quoting Heinatz v. Allen, 147 Tex. 512, 217 S.W. 2d 994, 997 (1949)).
So, to be clear, DBP, as the owner of the mineral rights does not have any right to remove rock, which, according to the State of Tennessee courts, is not a mineral, from the Premises. CONTRACTOR through its questionable Lease with DBP has no right to trespass upon the Premises, nor to remove rock from the Premises. Therefore, should DBP, CONTRACTOR, OTHER CONTRACTOR or any of your agents or assigns persist in accessing the property to remove rock we will pursue further action for trespass, any damage to the property, and compensation for conversion of property of any stone that has been removed. You are hereby advised to CEASE AND DESIST any and all action regarding this property and any perceived claim to the stone, rock or subsurface support of the Premises.
PLEASE GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY.
Sincerely yours,
Aunt Lawyer


Final Update from Joe Snow when he granted me permission to post:
Small update, nothing too extravagant: They slunk off into the dark when they realized that they were not going to be able to illegally sand mine off this property without it being a bigger hassle than it was worth. Communication with Shiesty dropped off pretty quickly when he realized that he was dealing with a family connected lawyer not working for billable hours.
Grandma Snow sadly passed away a few years ago and that little piece of dirt was sold and made someone else's problem.
I am not the original poster. This is a repost.
This is reposted with permission from u/00_Joe_Snow.
submitted by Celany to BestofRedditorUpdates [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 homesteadlife1 Advent Calendar and Countdown for Christmas Idea for Adults

Advent Calendar and Countdown for Christmas Idea for Adults submitted by homesteadlife1 to creative [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 mytastingkitchen Make your healthy Quinoa Salad

Make your healthy Quinoa Salad submitted by mytastingkitchen to mytastingkitchen [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 AlphaDoom [FOR SALE] Starker & YL - Smoke (Clear/Smoke Variant /100)

I have a copy of Starker and YL’s Smoke that I’m looking to let go of, pictures here. My copy has only been played once, with the only flaw being a small seam split on top which is hardly noticeable. This is a solid play copy with sharp corners.
I’m asking $110USD shipped within North America.
Note that the above price includes the $20USD it will cost to ship from Canada. Also open to offers if this is too high, the sales history for this record is somewhat limited so I wasn’t sure what is a fair price.
Thanks!
submitted by AlphaDoom to VinylCollectors [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 cbvv1992 🔥60% Off Code – $13.20 Back Brace Lumbar Support Belt Lumbar Support Straps!!

🔥60% Off Code – $13.20 Back Brace Lumbar Support Belt Lumbar Support Straps!! submitted by cbvv1992 to DealAndSale [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 ConnorXChloe I am the most anti-theist at this moment than I ever have been, and it is entirely because of every interaction with every religion I have, every day. [...] What I am not tolerant of is intolerance.

submitted by ConnorXChloe to Shitthatratheismsays [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 marijuAnna4e20 Bom dia, hj sai na esperança de encontrar cogumelos alucinógenos. Encontramos esses daqui mas não consigo identificar qual desses pode ser o certo..todos foram pegos em esterco de vaca, alguns parece ter a coloração azul quando se é esmagado já outros não. Me ajudem a identificar quais desses..?

submitted by marijuAnna4e20 to DrogasBrazil [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 radarbot $BLZE Backblaze storage company earnings on Dec13 after IPO on Nov10

Backblaze is a small company of 228 employees that focuses on providing low cost storage solutions.
Their investor presentation: https://ir.backblaze.com/static-files/c3bddf59-1708-4a3b-abb9-269e781090fa
Their S1 filing prior to IPO: https://ir.backblaze.com/node/6576/html
They are primarily targeting the audience of individual users and SMB. Their price is the most competitive in the industry, yet they are still able to maintain 50% gross margins.
They IPO'd at $19, with 29M shares outstanding, which gave them a mktcap of $551M. Their revenue in 2021 is targeted at being $61M, with H1'2021 already hitting $31M (as per the S1).
With a revenue of $61M and a P/S multiplier of 10, with 50% gross margins, and 30% YoY revenue growth (all priced in due to being included in S-1), we can expect the stock price to become about the $21-22 range. But if they continue with 30% YoY revenue growth with 100% customer retention, it is very easy to see BLZE being priced at $27 by end of 2022.
The above projections are all based on a P/S ratio of 10, but if they have a strong growth quarter with potential for more revenue, then we could easily see the P/S jump to 10 or 20.
The biggest risks against BLZE is that they are mostly competitive on price. Which makes their market a race to the bottom. Margins can get squeezed, there's no loyalty in customers, and its easy to migrate storage solutions.
If BLZE drops below $21 prior to December 13, It is a good price to get in. If BLZE jumps above $25, it is higher risk given that there's still a lockup period and unknown revenue results for Q3. But as a long term hold, if BLZE can deliver 30% YoY revenue through 2025 as the investor presentation projects, BLZE could become a company worth investing.
Compared to high revenue multiplier IPOs that we're currently seeing (ie. SNOW, RIVN, etc), BLZE seems more in line with an appropriate risk/reward ratio.
submitted by radarbot to stocks [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 backtonormal1993 Powerbi help

Hi,
I need help with displaying only the top 10 values is a measure.
I already have a measures which displays a count of the values from a table for a particular country. But I'm unable to figure how to show only the top 10 countries with highest counts.
Please help.
submitted by backtonormal1993 to PowerBI [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 RandomGuyWithName This guy may be spying on us, be careful

This guy may be spying on us, be careful submitted by RandomGuyWithName to BONKpatrol [link] [comments]


2021.12.01 12:33 Lo_Innombrable Eduardo Miño, 20 años

Eduardo Miño, 20 años submitted by Lo_Innombrable to chile [link] [comments]


http://surgutphoto.ru