#jaeyong AU โ ๐ช๐ถ๐ด๐ท๐ณ๐ฌ๐ป๐ฌ เผ
โ
โ โฅ า ๐ถ๐๐๐๐๐๐ก๐ โ ๐๐๐
0:45 โโโโโโโโโ 3:45
โป โ II โท โบ
โ
this story belongs to me. the characters used obviously are not, and any occurrence in this story that could relate to any real life event is purely coincidental. I also DO NOT own ANY of the photos used in this AU.
๐. do not comment, just quote.
๐. do not copy or steal.
๐. ignore the timestamps.
๐. ignore any typos I make.
๐. I am from Australia so I may use some Aussie slang in my writing.
๐. ๐๐๐๐๐ฆ!
there will be angst. if the story triggers you in any negative way, do NOT continue. this is not a horror nor thriller, but inside may contain certain elements that may be triggering for some.
- loner
- best friends with jennie
- gets bullied at school
- tries to stay positive
- loves drawing and doodling
- extremely soft
- moves here to start fresh
- new boy at school
- model
- has a private so he can rant
- hates confrontation
- sungchan is his little brother
- taeyong's best friend
- gets bullied at school
- calls taeyong and her the "hate duo"
- sassy and doesn't take shit from anyone
- is taeyong's voice of reason
- loves to gush about boys with taeyong
- jaehyun's younger brother
- is the real reason why they moved
- extremely quiet and awkward
- is a bit of a loner unlike his brother
- best friends with Shotaro
- jaehyun's new best friend
- loves sports
- bi
- lowkey has a crush on jaehyun
- loves gossip
๊ฐ ๐ก๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๊ฑ
- goes to a different school
- used to go to this school but moved because of bullying
- is gay
- is the moodmaker of the group
- is taeyong's only other friend
- nags but it's out of love
- loves music
- makes self hating jokes 24/7
๊ฐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ก๐ ๐ฆ๐ข๐ก๐ ๊ฑ
- shotaro's half older bro
- loves dyeing his hair
- loves anime
- a flirt
- yuta's younger half brother
- loves to dance
- struggles with Korean
- but is always positive and happy
- sungchan's new best friend
This will include bullying. That's a main focus of this au. And there will be h*mophobia as well, from the bully. The bully won't have a platform, and is not based on an idol. This will be a comedy-angst so if the angst isn't your cup of tea well.
More from Culture
One of the authors of the Policy Exchange report on academic free speech thinks it is "ridiculous" to expect him to accurately portray an incident at Cardiff University in his study, both in the reporting and in a question put to a student sample.
Here is the incident Kaufmann incorporated into his study, as told by a Cardiff professor who was there. As you can see, the incident involved the university intervening to *uphold* free speech principles:
Here is the first mention of the Greer at Cardiff incident in Kaufmann's report. It refers to the "concrete case" of the "no-platforming of Germaine Greer". Any reasonable reader would assume that refers to an incident of no-platforming instead of its opposite.
Here is the next mention of Greer in the report. The text asks whether the University "should have overruled protestors" and "stepped in...and guaranteed Greer the right to speak". Again the strong implication is that this did not happen and Greer was "no platformed".
The authors could easily have added a footnote at this point explaining what actually happened in Cardiff. They did not.
This is ridiculous. Students were asked for their views on this example and several others. The study findings and conclusions were about student responses not the substance of each case. Could\u2019ve used hypotheticals. The responses not the cases were the basis of the conclusions.
— Eric Kaufmann (@epkaufm) February 17, 2021
Here is the incident Kaufmann incorporated into his study, as told by a Cardiff professor who was there. As you can see, the incident involved the university intervening to *uphold* free speech principles:
The UK govt\u2019s paper on free speech in Unis (with implications for Wales) is getting a lot of attention.
— Richard Wyn Jones (@RWynJones) February 16, 2021
Worth noting then that an important part of the evidence-base on which it rests relates to (demonstrably false) claims about my own institution
1/https://t.co/buoGE7ocG7
Here is the first mention of the Greer at Cardiff incident in Kaufmann's report. It refers to the "concrete case" of the "no-platforming of Germaine Greer". Any reasonable reader would assume that refers to an incident of no-platforming instead of its opposite.
Here is the next mention of Greer in the report. The text asks whether the University "should have overruled protestors" and "stepped in...and guaranteed Greer the right to speak". Again the strong implication is that this did not happen and Greer was "no platformed".
The authors could easily have added a footnote at this point explaining what actually happened in Cardiff. They did not.
You May Also Like
1/โWhat would need to be true for you toโฆ.Xโ
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, โXโ could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- โFeel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- โFeel that weโre in a good place as a companyโ
- โFeel that weโre on the same pageโ
- โFeel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we arenโt that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders donโt know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is โwhat would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?โ
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, โXโ could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- โFeel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- โFeel that weโre in a good place as a companyโ
- โFeel that weโre on the same pageโ
- โFeel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we arenโt that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders donโt know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is โwhat would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?โ
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
