Eddie Clark
banner
dreddieclark.bsky.social
Eddie Clark
@dreddieclark.bsky.social
Personal account so expect eclecticism. Law, politics, SFF books, anime, gaming, music. Queer stuff.

Day job = Administrative law and public law theory.
I really don't get why no other markets have picked them up! so good!
November 28, 2025 at 3:53 AM
Yes I did note the regulations functionally lie: there is a link in the regulations to a page which... doesn't have the reg impact statement.
November 27, 2025 at 11:58 PM
Stuff
www.stuff.co.nz
November 27, 2025 at 11:53 PM
I asked Henry Cooke to ask Rob salmond whether he'd apologise. Henry asked. Rob said, effectively "I'm sorry the right misused my completely non racist work to be racist".

(so; no)
November 27, 2025 at 11:52 PM
Oh boy do I feel this.
November 27, 2025 at 8:23 PM
(they send you the 10 dollar credit within 3 days. Don't freak out if you you don't get it immediately)
November 27, 2025 at 7:45 PM
also enjoyed monster train 2 and battle suit aces as two card battlers that are both very different but also both very different from the slay the spire clone median in the subgenre.
November 27, 2025 at 6:23 PM
I think outer worlds 2 is very good if not quite excellent - most of the criticism wants it to be a game it's not trying to be. And as per usual with my falcom fandom (I know you find the amount of cut scenes irritating, heh) the trails in the sky remake is excellent.
November 27, 2025 at 6:23 PM
yes! Very pleasant surprise. and a fair bit though not all of the jank ironed out post release.
November 27, 2025 at 6:20 PM
Been an odd year for me in games. Not played that many 2025 releases that really grabbed me (does Hades 2 count? Given I've been playing it for 2 years already) & in the end I disliked a lot I'd been looking forward to (Silksong (which I admire but don't enjoy); Demonschool).
November 27, 2025 at 6:15 PM
I didn't realise you were a clair obscur dissenter! Not my favourite game of the year but I did think it was very good.
November 27, 2025 at 5:44 PM
it does, I think, leave the decision slightly vulnerable. Out and out error of fact is difficult to argue, but you can have quite some success if there's no plausible evidentiary basis for the decision.
November 27, 2025 at 7:17 AM
Reposted by Eddie Clark
Page 27, a half-sentence reads "In addition, personnel expenses incurred by Health New Zealand were $0.5 billion lower than forecast..." It doesn't even rate its own sentence! 😠
www.treasury.govt.nz/publications...
Financial Statements of the Government of New Zealand for the Year Ended 30 June 2025
Accessible version Only the Financial Statements Summary has been prepared in HTML.
www.treasury.govt.nz
November 27, 2025 at 2:40 AM
Is there a linkable source available for this? Feels like a genuine scandal.
November 27, 2025 at 1:15 AM
if you're not constantly worrying about home invasion, are you really rich?
November 27, 2025 at 12:31 AM
It is so stupid (complimentary).
November 27, 2025 at 12:18 AM