hkmaly

The first one matches the scenario most, as Dan noted. The spell would make her pink to highlight the lowering of intelligence.
The second is the "keep the palette" option. Is the second most obvious choice, and matches Nanase Craft when ignoring the lowering the intelligence.
The third one ... well ... I think the work spend on color coordination is lost on me. I don't think it's better than either of the first two options, and see no reason why should the spell transform her this way.
... speaking about it, I think the spell would be supposed to make the swimsuit more sexy and/or less practical as well, but likely failed to find better option
 

The first one matches the scenario most, as Dan noted. The spell would make her pink to highlight the lowering of intelligence.
The second is the "keep the palette" option. Is the second most obvious choice, and matches Nanase Craft when ignoring the lowering the intelligence.
The third one ... well ... I think the work spend on color coordination is lost on me. I don't think it's better than either of the first two options, and see no reason why should the spell transform her this way.
... speaking about it, I think the spell would be supposed to make the swimsuit more sexy and/or less practical as well, but likely failed to find better option
 

The remarkable thing is that less than a year ago, comic time, Grace was a controlled substance.
Completely unavailable Over-The-Counter or Non-Prescription.
 

Red and green are very close in spectrum. Humans are optimized to distinguish between them because blood is red and leaves are green, but for Geckos the UV is apparently more important.
So yes, I would conclude that the pattern on walls is red-green and likely deliberately use shades which make it invisible for people under Gecko transformation.
Question is: does she still see Sarah's blue clothes as being blue?
I suppose the fact that I consider logical correctness of lizards not having mammalian glands to be more important than how sexy Nanase looks as lizard likely also puts me in minority.
(Also, yes, she still looks sexy to me.)
 
 

http://egscomics.com/comic/tsos-04
Even good movie could still leave lot to be discussed. At least some kind of movies. The "ok" movies might be worst in this regard ... if there are basically no obvious problems, but there is also nothing really interesting ... meanwhile, StarWars prequels are exact opposite. They have lot of problems, but it could've been great movies otherwise.
(Meanwhile, Abrams Star Trek movies could be good movies, but they are not Star Trek. They are barely sci-fi, due to lack of the "sci" part. And Justin loves them for all sort of wrong reasons.)
And yes, Sarah, you dated Grace and don't think readers will forget that.

http://egscomics.com/comic/tsos-04
Even good movie could still leave lot to be discussed. At least some kind of movies. The "ok" movies might be worst in this regard ... if there are basically no obvious problems, but there is also nothing really interesting ... meanwhile, StarWars prequels are exact opposite. They have lot of problems, but it could've been great movies otherwise.
(Meanwhile, Abrams Star Trek movies could be good movies, but they are not Star Trek. They are barely sci-fi, due to lack of the "sci" part. And Justin loves them for all sort of wrong reasons.)
And yes, Sarah, you dated Grace and don't think readers will forget that.

Hmmm ... I think it's better than wizard Sarah ...
... now we need Ashley to complete the set. Ashley, hurry, you need to learn how to fly or at least hover and get into costume.

http://egscomics.com/egsnp/nanasecraft-07
Not sure which game protagonists guide was eaten by wolves, but it reminds me several RPG campaigns, including all I ever tried to DM. Thinking a proper way how to pack all the monsters into dungeon is hard and doesn't feel necessary if you are just eager to play and don't have any experience ... so yeah, wolves behind locked doors with nothing to eat except the bear in next room which they didn't and neither he tried to eat them. Also, the bear totally ignored the adventurers killing the wolves and waited until they came in his room. Yeah. There must've been powerful magic in play.
 

Dan wouldn't like to reveal how NEW Pandora would look like, but maybe he can show OLD Pandora? He can do anything he wants with non-canon timeline ...

If Dan wasn't avoiding doing non-canon things with Pandora until she shows up again in the story, the climax of this arc would be a great time for her to make a cameo!

Nanase and Ellen,
Diane and Lucy,
Catalina and Rhoda,
Grace and Tedd Tess,
Ashley and Elliot (mall female Elliot)

While true, the term of author using his power to resolve situation in his writing is called "deus ex machina" and is generally considered bad writing. Author is SUPPOSED to make story hold even without himself.
Yes, such simplified case makes possible to show what can happen in clear way. I also saw it somewhere ... oh, right, it's on wikipedia explaining casual loop.
You can model cases like this even with the billiard ball. Also remember that quantum physics is principally statistically based and when multiple outcomes are possible, which one happen is random, so it doesn't need to be ONLY possible scenario, just likely enough - and the fact that time travel happens isn't, by itself, something which would lower the likehood of scenario happening.
I believe it does justify existence of such loops, although it's harder to explain why exactly was everything in superposition in advance ... it's because existence of time travel itself makes the scenario when time travel WONT happen LESS stable than the scenario with stable time loop, because someone would try to interfere. In the Gargoyle case (note that I didn't saw that episode), someone ELSE would try to travel into past but failed to form a stable loop, while the character itself going into past does result in stable loop, so it can happen. In terminator case, later episodes (which allowed past to change, but anyway) established that sky.NET is something which can happen even without time travel ; presumably, it would then invent time travel and try to change the past, failing to form a stable loop. Similarly, the resistance would try to change the past. It is possible that the stable loop that happened, which DID bring sky.NET faster BUT also gave resistance their leader, is the most likely stable scenario from all which could happen - and it actually makes sense, because both sides trying to utilize time travel gained something. It's even possible that it solves the major problem with the movie, specifically the fact that it would be easier to send into past something which would wipe out whole city: it's possible it didn't happened BECAUSE it didn't resulted in stable time loop. (Although the explanation that authors didn't think it though is easier.)
... also, it's not MY quantum-physic based explanation. I would like to take credit but I suspect that I didn't formed it independently but only based on story which explained parts of Novikov self-consistency principle ... and, in fact, had I remembered how it's called, I might just refer to it instead of trying to explain it myself.

There is difference between "safer" and "safe".
For example, receiving death threats is generally safer than receiving death sentences.
... hmmm ... true, I might be underestimating number of this kind of activists due to them not being so public.
That's not the part I'm arguing with. If only political correctness was really just about this ...
... uuuhhhh ... we got pretty far from the etymology of word "bimbo" ... maybe we should try to stop.
(Maybe I should try to stop as you seem to be trying already.)

That's true, but my point was that he's ok with that - like, he doesn't seem to regret it.

Batman wouldn't be possible without Bruce's money.
Didn't read those stories, but based just on movies, I would think real Kal El is somewhere in middle between Clark and Superman. However, definitely agree with him not being satisfied with being just superman. (Hmmm ... nice quote about it on DC wikia ...)
Tony Stark, meanwhile, might live just well without secret identity.

... is the elephant still there?
How much of the class she was supposed to be in already passed?
And Diane, unfortunately, learning about your mistakes is necessary step to fix them. Yes, I know, I would also prefer some other way.

... is the elephant still there?
How much of the class she was supposed to be in already passed?
And Diane, unfortunately, learning about your mistakes is necessary step to fix them. Yes, I know, I would also prefer some other way.

... is the elephant still there?
How much of the class she was supposed to be in already passed?
And Diane, unfortunately, learning about your mistakes is necessary step to fix them. Yes, I know, I would also prefer some other way.

... is the elephant still there?
How much of the class she was supposed to be in already passed?
And Diane, unfortunately, learning about your mistakes is necessary step to fix them. Yes, I know, I would also prefer some other way.

Grace COULD put on other clothes, but she's more likely to "support" Sarah.

I've replaced the power supply too. But it took much more work than my grandfather's axe.

His name was Solan. She gave him to a group of centaurs after the death of his father, Borias, who was killed in combat against a warrior in Xena's employ.

First off I feel like I am often bad at explaining my own arguments so I often quote others. This was clearly a mistake. I am trying to start over.
Second I want to preface this by saying something that while I feel should be obvious, but too often isn’t. No I don’t know how you feel. And this is only natural because I’m not you. The best I can try to do is try to imagine how I would feel in your place, or draw from the closest experience I have but even then no two people are exactly the same and no one will ever be able to know exactly how another feels. The best we can do is try to empathize.
Second what do you suggest as an alternative? I am not saying that we cannot try to be respectful to the cultures we borrow from. People should ALWAYS try to be respectful to the cultures they borrow from, But what happens when people become to afraid of mesing things up that they don’t even bother to interact with other cultures? 
Speaking off drawing from our own experiences let me talk about a VERY personal experience. Because I can relate to that fear metaphorically through my fear of romantic interactions and the various rules involved with them.
 
There is nothing I desire more in the world then to have a satisfing and emotionally fulfilling romantic relationship with someone. But at the same time my idea of dating someone who isn’t a friend is word for word the same as what Eliot and Susan have said. Now add to this the rule that you don’t want to pester someone who doesn’t have an interest in you, which is something that I can respect. I wouldn’t want to be hounded merciless by someone else either. Well with all of these complex rules I have all but resigned myself to the fact that I am likely to remain single. Why? Because of all the obstacles to a relationship. I’d have to make a friend who happens to be a girl. And yes I do mean happens. It won’t work if I go looking for it too deliberately. I don’t even make REGULAR friends easily enough. I feel like people toss around that word to casually. I would then have to fall in love. And here’s the real kicker for me. BECAUSE I can appreciate the desire of people not to be pestered I can only ask her out once. After that, (assuming we could remain friends) I would say that if she changes her mind to let me know about it but don’t expect me to ask again, no matter how much time has past because I don’t want to be a pest. All of this time I would be dealing with the fact that it is ENTIRELY POSSIBLE SHE FORGOT that I said she would have to be the one to tell me if her feelings change, as I am ill equiped to notice what she is feelings unless she comes out and tells me. And I know this firgering it thing is something that can happen because I will often preface a conversation with “tell me if x” only for my folks to forget it mid conversation. Combine it with the fact that I’d be so concerned about  pestering het that I’d never bring it up again because I have now been told this is something not to do. And I only have one chance.  This is because my deafult and really only way of dealing with conversations is tell me if something I do or say bugs you and I will stop it.  I will treat you the same way. At the same time no topic is off of conversation for ever. Because some topics that bug people on one day may not bug them when their in another mood. But that means that a topic like this that I am not allowed to approach multiple times is impossible for me to deal with besides the one shot approach.
 
 If it isn’t clear what this has to do with being so afraid of messing things up they stop bother to interact interact with other cultures, I will make things clear.
 
Here I go. Trying to navigate the complex rules of what we are and we are not allowed to borrow from other cultures and why the frustration of dealing with such a thing might lead people to give up reminds me of my own frustrations with the various romantic rules have disusded me from even trying. And here is what happens when people are discouraged from even trying to reach out across other cultures. When people discouraged from trying to reach out across cultures, people will end up not understanding other cultures. Which leads to even more ignorance and isolation. 
 
 
 

Yes, and I was not saying dictionaries are useless. They are not. They are in fact very useful tools. But tools is all they are and too many people treat them as books of law.
She used an entirely irrelevant and deliberately absurd point to ridicule the very idea of the concept of what she was attacking. This is a common method used to discredit the opposition.
Let me give you an example. A noted TERF used a similar method in an attempt to discredit trans people. She said, "A man cannot just decide he is a woman. It would be like if I said I was Australia. If I did, would I be Australia?"
Does this strike you as a fair and reasonable equivalent? And yet, Shriver did the same thing when she equated being a murderer to being of a foreign culture. For that alone I could despise her, and I do.
You are. But that is not what Shriver did. She was all but yelling at us of 'lesser' cultures that we have NO right to get mad when someone takes our cultures and treats them with utter contempt just because they think they have a funny idea. Here's what I think of that. When someone takes my nation's myths and legends and decides to take a dump on them, I will damn well protest and Shriver can take her thin skinned whining and insert it rectally, hard. There are actual Nazis trying to use the Norse gods and their symbolism because they think it looks cool. They tried that during WW2, too. BUGGER THAT.
There are other and less extreme cases. Many I might not even be bothered to object to. For example, Jack Kirby took Thor and made him into a superhero. But he did it as a modern retelling of a legend and made a lasting cultural contribution of it, and yes, I consider comics to be part of our culture. While that was technically cultural appropriation, it was a different time and age and he did it with a good deal of respect for the material, so he gets a pass.
Then there is the Japanese anime Ah! my Goddess. There they took Verdandi, one of the three Norns -- or Morrigu, or the Kindly Ones, or whatever flavour of Indo-European you like -- and turned her into Belldandy. A freaking housewife. They also took Ash Yggdrasil and made it into a supercomputer. And so one of the three Fates, She who Is, got turned into a waifu in a harem anime. Do I find that offensive? Hell yeah. But whatever. If anyone is dumb enough to ask me for my opinion, I will give it to them. And I refuse to invest as much as a penny in their garbage. But will Shriver let me do that? No. She says I should get over myself.
Then back to Thor. The recent movie Thor: Ragnarok, to be exact. They grabbed the most sombre and serious part of Norse mythology, the Twilight of the Gods, the End of all Things, and turned it into a sodding PRATFALL COMEDY. Again, do I find that offensive? YOU BET YOUR ARSE. This one I really had to fight hard to not go on the 'net and complain about. Shriver is saying that is not an option I should be allowed to have. I didn't take it, admittedly, but there is a difference between choosing not to complain and being told you can't do it.
And that's just Denmark. Denmark actually has a huge advantage a lot of other cultures don't. We retain our sovereignty, we are part of the wealthiest nations on Earth and we can hit back when someone pisses on us culturally. A lot of people from poorer countries or just plain without a home nation to call their own don't have even that. They might for good reason feel offended. For example, let's go back to the swastika. For thousands of years it was an important symbol for many cultures; a variant of it even exists in Norse mythology where it is known as the Sun Cross. Then the Nazis grabbed it, shat on it and now it is one of the most hated symbols on Earth. A Hindu family went to the West and sent their innocent daughter to school wearing her swastika. They came from a part of the world where WW2 as it played out in Europe is not very well understood and they were aghast when their daughter was sent home and told she could not wear it anymore. This, according to Shriver, is JUST FINE.
There are people still fighting similar appropriation in many places. And some of them are being seriously hurt. They have every right to object as far as I am concerned. And yes, of COURSE there are idiots abusing this for fun and profit. There are idiots abusing everything they can for fun and profit. That does not mean that the cause they are abusing is invalidated. And I will not shut up because idiots like Shriver feel butthurt by that. Period.

I could not find (at least with a very quick search) a definition of "social agenda", but "agenda" itself specifically refers to a plan or list (at least according to wiktionary). This is why I feel a person should have the intention to promote a cause for it to properly be said they have a social agenda. I will admit though that from how I've heard it used many other people do not seem to have such a strict definition of the term.
At any rate, as I said to begin with this is just a semantics argument. Even if a writer does not consciously have an "agenda", they can't help but insert their own point of view and opinions into the story, so the end result for the audience is the same.