#Party Programme

[grumpzone]

does anyone know if it’s possible to download the nsp concert? I know some people did that with the acoustic concert by poking around the source code, but I can’t seem to find anything like that for this one? I found a link that I assume would work but the control list has “no download” attached to it so?? I assume it’s not possible to download unless there’s a way around that

I know I can screen record it but I’d like to download it if I can. Does anyone know if it’s possible?? help

[medusa1597]

i completely forgot i had queued up a podcast episode earlier omg i went from brat summer to unionized boss sequestration in two secs

[en8y]

hackpartygordoic + prograpartygordoic

[IMAGE ID: two horizontal flags with nine stripes; each flag has the party gordo in the center. the party gordo is a very large hot pink slime, wearing cool green, star-shaped sunglasses, and a yellow party hat with blue polkadots on it. it is smiling and has a dull green and bright yellow radiating background. the middle stripe is twice as large as the rest of them, which are equally sized. the first flag has these top three colors: black, dark grey, and bright green. the second flag has these top three colors: dark blue, medium blue, and bright mint green. each flag has these bottom six stripes: warm pink, off-white, warm pink, light yellow, mint green, and cool blue. END ID.]

hackpartygordoic: a teknine gender connected to being a party gordo hacker; this gender is connected to party gordos, party gordo aesthetics, hacker/hacking aesthetics, technology aesthetics, and teknithood/exenhood!

prograpartygordoic: a teknine gender connected to being a party gordo programmer; this gender is connected to party gordos, party gordo aesthetics, programming aesthetics, technology aesthetics, and nonbinary teknithood/exenhood!

@radiomogai @liom-archive @epikulupu @electrosaccharine

[kaurwreck]

may i suggest you IEUqLL8J4gI on youtube? spoiler: it's not actually about killing gods in jrpgs

I don't love video essays because of how they tend to conflate, oversimplify, and often misstate or misrepresent information. They also tend to be poorly organized/structured. I think this video falls into similar issues, and its framing of Japan is infantilizing and orientalist at times.

Your summary is a good example of why it's not well constructed— the essay should, actually, be about killing gods in jrpgs. Context isn't supposed to distract from the thesis; it's supposed to support and provide an analytical lens. Nothing exists in a vacuum (not even American video game tropes, despite what the intro implied, or even the outro with its overextension of classical theology). But I think the creator misses background context relevant to the point, overattributes to the West (and in doing so, strips substantial autonomy, sovereignty, and culpability from Japan), and conflates Eastern philosophies and religions (and attempts to compare both to the West without considering comparably influential Western philosophy at all). The essay also suffers from a common issue in media analyses online in that the essay contains very little actual analysis (the analysis doesn't begin until after 1 hour into a 1.5 hour video— and is very rushed with only thin connections made to only some of the background information).

But, I do appreciate the recommendation, and it was definitely interesting. I can only be critical because of the sheer amount of background I've inhaled and because I don't think I'm necessarily the target audience. I also struggle to critique anything unless there's something substantial enough to latch onto, and so, as far as I'm concerned, the fact I have specific criticisms at all speaks well of the recommendation.

[hearty-an0n]

GUYSSSS 333: OUR SHOW IS DONE!!!!! IM SO SAD!!! WE DROPPED SO MANY THINGS TODAY BUT WE SMOOTHED PAST THEM!!!! and so many people cried and i almost cried anddd 3:

[williamalex75]

[bellassoblr]

what

[homonyat]

Tangentially related to my passion for communism themed degeneracy but my ancom homegirl has invited me over for dinner. Ma'am last time I came for a party someone ended up on a leash with a mouthful of jackboot plzzz (I ended up with a hangover X3)

[alexanderwales]

I'm a big fan of wizards-as-programmers, but I think it's so much better when you lean into programming tropes.

A spell the wizard uses to light the group's campfire has an error somewhere in its depths, and sometimes it doesn't work at all. The wizard spends a lot of his time trying to track down the exact conditions that cause the failure.

The wizard is attempting to create a new spell that marries two older spells together, but while they were both written within the context of Zephyrus the Starweaver's foundational work, they each used a slightly different version, and untangling the collisions make a short project take months of work.

The wizard has grown too comfortable reusing old spells, and in particular, his teleportation spell keeps finding its components rearranged and remixed, its parts copied into a dozen different places in the spellbook. This is overall not actually a problem per se, but the party's rogue grows a bit concerned when the wizard's "drying spell" seems to just be a special case of teleportation where you teleport five feet to the left and leave the wetness behind.

A wizard is constantly fiddling with his spells, making minor tweaks and changes, getting them easier to cast, with better effects, adding bells and whistles. The "shelter for the night" spell includes a tea kettle that brings itself to a boil at dawn, which the wizard is inordinately pleased with. He reports on efficiency improvements to the indifference of anyone listening.

A different wizard immediately forgets all details of his spells after he's written them. He could not begin to tell you how any of it works, at least not without sitting down for a few hours or days to figure out how he set things up. The point is that it works, and once it does, the wizard can safely stop thinking about it.

Wizards enjoy each other's company, but you must be circumspect about spellwork. Having another wizard look through your spellbook makes you aware of every minor flaw, and you might not be able to answer questions about why a spell was written in a certain way, if you remember at all.

Wizards all have their own preferences as far as which scripts they write in, the formatting of their spellbook, its dimensions and material quality, and of course which famous wizards they've taken the most foundational knowledge from. The enlightened view is that all approaches have their strengths and weaknesses, but this has never stopped anyone from getting into a protracted argument.

Sometimes a wizard will sit down with an ancient tome attempting to find answers to a complicated problem, and finally find someone from across time who was trying to do the same thing, only for the final note to be "nevermind, fixed it".

[ayyponine]

The knowledge that my sister is currently on her way due to arrive here in under 12 hrs... yucky

[hjohn3]

Labour Pains

Will The Real Keir Starmer Please Stand Up?

Source: The New Statesman

By Honest John

IT IS a truism to say that Labour have had a torrid first 100 days in office. The headlines have been filled with pearl-clutching horror at the extent of Keir Starmer’s carefree acceptance of £100,000 worth of declared gifts (along with a number of senior members of the shadow cabinet, including Rachel Reeves); ructions and hostile briefings within the Number Ten operation that has effectively hounded former Chief of Staff, the previously much sought-after Sue Gray, out of office and the extraordinarily unsubtle tone set by both Reeves and Starmer that the Tory inheritance is so dire, that there is little the new government can do to address the country’s economic woes or the dire state of its public services in the immediate term. This was on top of far right race riots over the summer and the announcement of the cessation of winter fuel payments to pensioners cutting through to the public causing Labour’s (and Starmer’s) poll ratings to collapse. This appears to have created a paralysis at the heart of the operation and the impression of a directionless administration buffetted from pillar to post with no counter-narrative being presented to make the case for the first Labour government in fourteen years, elected with a 174 seat majority just three months ago.

The truth is that, with the exception of the riots, just about all of Labour’s woes are self-inflicted. The extraordinary lack of sensitivity, insight and curiosity that has led senior government figures to happily accept gifts of clothing, spectacles and football and concert tickets from Labour donors and others while asking the country to tighten its belt, at times beggars belief. And yes, of course, this is small beer indeed when compared to the serial corruption of the Tory years, but Labour is held to a higher standard, and in fact has asked to be held to a higher standard. The doomed attempt to separate political roles from administrative ones within Number Ten led to unseemly and destructive internal feuding, betraying a nasty and back-biting culture at the heart of Starmer’s operation, which bodes ill for the prospects of united and efficient government. Added to these unforced errors is the deadening messages of economic misery and broken public services put out by the PM and his cabinet, having the effect of simultaneously depressing the population while deterring the private sector and inward investment the government craves. This litany of woe has been a result of choice and political ineptitude, all utterly avoidable. Equally, the strange decision of the new administration not to have a mini-budget or financial statement in the summer, has prevented Labour from making any policy announcements to counteract the negative publicity swirling around the serial cock-ups, because everything must wait for Reeves’ full Budget later this month. This flat-footedness has led sage voices to claim that Labour's problem is drift and, worse, a lack of governing purpose.

The “lack of purpose” claim sounds superficially credible, given Labour’s gaffe-strewn first three months in power, but actually does not stand up to close examination. The July 2024 King’s Speech included forty bills, several of which have already been drafted and all of which are intended to be passed into legislation this Parliament. Highlights include:-

The establishment of a National Wealth Fund, a depository for government, private sector and inward investment funds to provide the financial vehicle through which to grow the exconomy;

An Employment Rights bill, arguably the first steps towards creating a higher wage economy and arresting the ongoing decline into low wage non-unionised workforces that benefit no one but corporate interests;

The renationalisation of the rail industry, over 20 years after the Tories privatised it, turning our rail networks into a disaggregated, outdated and expensive mess. This sits alongside legislation to make it easier to bring bus transport back under the control of local authorities, forty years after Thatcher needlessly broke up municipal bus services;

The establishment of Great British Energy, the first publicly owned energy provider in four decades, designed at the very least to foster green research and new models of green energy provision but possibly ultimately to become the vehicle by which gas and electricity can finally be brought back into public ownership where they have always belonged;

A Renters’ Rights bill to address the scandalous treatment of renters by private landlords. This should also been seen in the context of the commitment to build a million new affordable homes over the next five years, an ambition not matched since the days of Harold Macmillan;

The English Devolution bill and the Planning and Infrastructure bill, which taken together, could result in the first attempt to plan the British economy since the 1970s and to devolve real tax raising and spending decisions to the English regions - potentially a transformative rebalancing of wealth and power within the geography of England; and

The intention to abolish the last of the Hereditary Peerships in the House of Lords.

Taken together this is the most social democratic set of policy proposals put forward by any government since 1974 and unlike the Wilson/Callaghan government, which was quickly blown off course, much of the above already exists as draft legislation. If Labour’s programme has more than a hint of Wilsonian and Keynesian socialism about it, that is probably no accident. The King’s Speech could be criticised for omissions and in some areas limited ambition, but Labour’s programme does not suggest a government devoid of ideas, purpose, or indeed radicalism. Whatever Starmerism is, it is certainly not continuity Thatcherism.

But if this is the case, how has a narrative been set so quickly and devastatingly that the new government is naive, tin-eared, bent and with no principles to its name? Part of the answer lies in the unremitting hostility of the right wing media to any and all Labour governments - particularly one threatening the tax privileges of the rich. But the stories have been given prominence by friendly journals and platforms too, so the barrage of bad publicity cannot be blamed solely on malign players. The reasons for the perception of lack of direction and integrity are, I think, the huge contradiction at the heart of Labour’s fiscal policy and a darkness at the centre of the national party’s way of doing business.

In terms of fiscal policy, for all the ambition of Labour’s published programme and its stated promise to invest in health and social care and in education, Rachel Reeves, backed until now all the way by Starmer, has consistently confirmed her intention to abide by her fiscal rules. Inherited from the Conservatives, the rule states that public sector debt should be falling as a proportion of GDP by the fifth year of the current Parliament. Jeremy Hunt had already pencilled in significant public spending cuts to help the Tories meet the “rule” although this was exacerbated by both promised tax cuts and cuts to National Insurance. This partly explains Labour’s constant reference to the point of absurdity to the “£22bn black hole” in the public finances. The fact of the matter is that the “black hole” is as much of a construct as was David Cameron’s equally spurious “maxed out credit card”. This false analogising of national to household finances suits a neoliberal orthodoxy that holds that taxes must never rise, borrowing must always be reduced and public services must always live within their means even if the resultant budgets bear no relationship to the reality of service need. The “rules” themselves are essentially made up, but made even harder to deliver by Labour’s self-inflicted trap of promising not to raise income tax, VAT or NI when in opposition. The terms of the rule also effectively reduce the scope for increased government borrowing. It is the fiscal rule which was behind so much of the dropping of Labour policy commitments in the run up to the election, particularly and notoriously, the Green New Deal, until then viewed as the means to secure the growth Labour claims is essential to repairing public services (itself another very challengeable neoliberal nostrum).

Belatedly, Reeves is looking at means to ease the rule’s restrictions on the use of capital spend (essential if the National Wealth Fund is to have any chance of success) and some Treasury jiggery-pokery to allow public debt to be accounted for differently which would enable more borrowing to fund infrastructure projects to help reinflate the economy and generate that longed-for growth. Whereas these tweaks are welcome, they do not get away from the fact that while the government adheres to neoliberal fiscal orthodoxies, Labour’s transformational vision simply won’t be achieved. At some point the real Keir Starmer will need to stand up: does he wish to simply preside over a post-Brexit “broken” country whose public realm was all but destroyed by the Tories, whose industrial base is shrunken, whose productivity deficit is large and growing and whose trade with its closest partners is crippled by the useless Brexit “deal” allegedly negotiated by the equally useless Boris Johnson? Or does he genuinely wish to rebuild public services, actively manage the economy, secure higher workers’ pay, reduce the need for low wage immigration and rebalance power and wealth in the U.K. in a way that both works, but also lasts?

If that is the macro choice ahead of Starmer, he has a micro one to tackle too. The unedifying sight of Sue Gray, respected senior civil servant and surprise addition to Starmer’s team earlier this year, being chased out of her Chief of Staff role by relentless and nasty briefings emanating from the political advisers headed by her replacement, Morgan McSweeney, goes to the heart of the current culture of the Labour Party, and potentially to Labour in government. McSweeney has been hailed as a sound political strategist who will bring much needed discipline to communications and policy formulation which has been so palpably lacking in recent weeks. Perhaps he will, but at heart McSweeny is a malign and sectarian figure. His Labour Together grouping seemed to have no clear positions on anything other than a hatred of the Labour left that supported Jeremy Corbyn. The argument for his ceaseless campaign, once Starmer was safely elected leader, to evict left wing figures from any and all positions of influence in the party, was that Corbyn’s Labour could never get elected. This argument was given sustenance by Labour’s demolition at the 2019 election, but more recently McSweeney’s factionalism has had its own negative impact on Labour’s electoral prospects. The de-selection during the General Election campaign itself of even the most mildly “left” candidates, together with the atrocious treatment of Diane Abbott, arguably cost Labour seats lost to the so-called “Gaza Independents” and Corbyn himself and also opened space on the left for the Greens. The fact that these ill-conceived actions spoke more to sectarian animus, rather than a clear political strategy, was as worrying as it was unjust.

McSweeney’s constant search for enemies has continued in government. With no more leftist dragons to slay, McSweeney turned his fire on Gray and the administrative function Starmer had hoped would help Labour govern competently. Now all power lies in the hands of a permanent campaigner and fight-picker whose political views and principles remain opaque, but whose modus operandi is that of intolerance and the playground politics of my gang versus your gang. Although McSweeney may successfully professionalise Labour’s operation and assume a level of Alistair Campbell-like significance, he may also turn out to be wholly divisive and destructive and perpetuate the dysfunction in Number Ten that had been so publicly on display this autumn.

One thing however is clear. This remains Keir Starmer’s government. It is to be hoped it quickly rediscovers its moral purpose, clarity and urgency. If necessary, the time may come for Starmer to deploy his much-vaunted ruthlessness against both neoliberal fiscal restraint and continued political wrecking by his new Chief of Staff. Reeves and McSweeney are probably the closest political figures to Starmer, but if their current positioning and behaviour cannot or will not alter, then they too must be viewed as dispensable by the PM. The success of the Starmer project and arguably that of Labour in government, will depend on it.

15th October 2024

[enbycrip]

I will genuinely never forgive anyone involved in making The Imitation Game for their absolute travesty of Alan Turing’s story.

He was intensely autistic, and gay, and *kind*.

He mentored people below him in the programme - including women, who pretty much everyone else was crappy to.

He had terrible allergies and went cycling in a gas mask in the country to avoid then, and when he got overstimulated at parties he pulled incredibly daft elaborate “walking into a cupboard” leaving gags to handle them that left everyone screaming on the floor despite the silliness.

He got on really well with kids and never talked down to them. He gave his neighbours his sugar rations on their kids’ birthdays so she could always make them birthday cakes - even when he was being persecuted after the war, even when he was suffering horrible side effects from the tortures they put him through.

He was such an utterly, genuinely lovely human being, and he deserved so much damn better, and at the very *least* he deserved to be portrayed as who he was in the 21st fucking century instead of falling into a whole slew of horrifically harmful stereotypes that erased the fucking gift he was to us all over again.

[postmodernart]

What could be done by the President and Ruling Party in the United States - potential Program of the Neurocratic Party

1. We could gradually change the number of working days a week from 5 to 4, then 3 days, then to 2 and 1 day. When everything is automated human control is just needed from time to time. 2. We could support the creation of remote-controlled infantry for the US Military instead of conventional infantry. Robot operators will control the Armed Forces 100 miles away. 3. We could support the transformation of NATO into an Interpol-like organization that no longer be aligned against Russia and China. 4.

[madamepestilence]

Just as a reminder as I've just noticed myself - arab.org has more pages to support on

In case you're unfamiliar with how this site works, it confirms ad revenue via your clicks, which allows them to donate money to various funds

These go to:

Children -> UNICEF (United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund)

Fight Poverty -> UNDP (United Nations Development Programme)

Environment -> Greenpeace MENA (Middle East and North Africa)

Palestine -> UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency [for Palestine Refugees in the Near East])

Refugees -> UNHCR (United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees)

Women -> UN Women

Do more with your daily clicks! You can help each one once per individual (perhaps per IP address?) per day, letting you help out with six things at once?

US-specific advice for helping Palestine below cut.

Side note I'm keeping beneath the cut since it's relevant to US folks only: if you're really determined to help Palestine, vote for Dr. Cornel West, Ph.D. for President of the United States.

He's the most openly vocal about a free Palestine and is the only candidate who has demonstrably shown he is the most committed and prepared to immediately cease US support to Israel.

Joe Biden isn't going to cave if he gets re-elected. We all know that. Voting third party is a lot less risky than you've been taught - the two party system can replace one or both parties with new parties if they lose public favour.

We have both the people and the ability to unseat the Democratic party and install Socialism, and between Socialism and Republicans, Socialism is going to lock in place immediately and become the dominant political force in America.

Cornel West's Platform

Cornel West's Volunteer Events

Cornel West's Ballot Access Tracker and Ballot Access Plans

Tumblr thread I have of Primary/Caucus polling dates in the US (includes US territories)

Not on your Primary/Caucus ballot? Write-in, "Cornel West," on your ballot, or urge your Caucus representatives to do the same.

In a state where it's difficult for Independent candidates to get ballot access? Dr. Cornel West, Ph.D. thought ahead and has created a new party for those states called the Justice for All Party.

(Addendum: Claudia de la Cruz is not a viable alternative. The Party for Socialism and Liberation has a Conservative 5th Column and has frequent issues with discrimination.)

Free Palestine. Vote for Cornel West.

[finelinevogue]

under wraps

summary - you and andrew are on a talk show together & you are also in a secret relationship

word count - +1k

pairing - andrew garfield x actress!reader

🍿• 🍿• 🍿• 🍿• 🍿• 🍿• 🍿• 🍿• 🍿• 🍿• 🍿

“Andrew, have you ever met Y/N?”

“I-um - yes! Briefly.”

“Where?”

Well that was a long question that would have to be answered with a lot of lies.

Going on chat shows where you and Andrew were both on at the same time were rare, but when it did happen it was very difficult to keep your relationship a kept secret.

You and Andrew had been dating for 7 months now and were doing well to keep it under wraps - which you both wanted to keep that way for as long as possible - but going on live chat shows was always a risk.

You’d both set up all your fake stories ages ago so that when you got asked questions like he’d just been asked, it would be okay.

“I believe - this is going to sound so douchey to say - but I believe it was at Paul McCartney’s birthday party last year?” Andrew looked to you for confirmation.

It was even harder to keep everything under-wraps on this chat show as you’d been placed next to each other on the chat sofa.

It was nice to be sat next to your boyfriend.

He smelt great and he was an immense comfort to you - as he is clearly a huge, global, mega-star whereas you are best-known for your role as a main character on a well-known British TV show.

It’s always a little nervy being sat next to the big names in the leagues, but Andrew always had a way of being the bridge and bringing everyone together.

“Oooh la-di-daaa!” Graham Norton - the host - teased. “Paul McCartney! You have gone up in the world.”

The audience and the rest of the celebrity guests laughed - including Florence Pugh, who was here to promote her new movie that also starred Andrew, Paul Mescal and Pedro Pascal, who were here to promote their new movie.

“Paul was also there.” Andrew pointed out, to which Paul nodded along.

“And Pedro?” Graham prompted.

“Oh, Paul McCartney doesn’t know who I am.” He said, which got a laugh from the audience. Once the audience had died down he spoke again, “But, Madonna however….”

After people had quietened down, Graham returned to asking questions.

“Y/N. You’ve got your new series of ‘The Lovely Life’ coming out.” Graham said.

Andrew started clapping immediately, prompting other people to start clapping with him and giving you a cheer or two.

You blushed slightly as you took note of the celebrities clapping for you, inching ever so closer to Andrew to try and hide the endearment.

“Brilliant show.” Andrew commented - as if he doesn’t tell you that every day you go to work and every other day of your life.

“Thanks.” You smile, giving him a few extra words of kindness with your eyes as you look at him lovingly.

“But it’s not really a show about lovely life, is it Y/N?” Graham asked.

“No, no it’s not.” You sighed.

“Have you seen it, Pedro?” Graham asked.

Pedro pushed his glasses up his nose a little and focuses his body to face you as he speaks, “No. I apologise, but no I haven’t.”

“That’s okay.” You smiled at him, feeling no untowards him.

Some of the audience gasp.

“Oh no.” Florence laughed.

“What? What did I just say?” Pedro looked alarmed, sending you into a giggling fit.

“You’ve just burned the hearts of the UK. Cancel culture will be coming for you.” Paul answered for his friend, patting him in the shoulder solemnly, making everyone laugh and you shake your head at how overdramatic it was.

“No, no!” You shook your head, not wanting to upset Pedro or anything even though it was all in jest.

“How dare you!” Andrew bellowed beside you, also sticking up for you and your programme as a joke.

You leaned back on the sofa, covering your face with your hands as you tried to let the couch swallow you whole.

Once everyone had calmed down again Graham returned to asking questions.

“Y/N, do you want to tell us a little bit about this new season?” He asked.

You crossed a leg over the other, making sure your flowy dress didn’t flash anyone as you did.

“I’m not sure how much I can say, but my character - Ruby - does not catch a break this season! She is back with her ex-boyfriend Jake but there’s also, maybe, potentially, someone new too. Obviously she still is in a lot of trouble from last season so we get to see a lot of that story brought over into this season too.”

“Do we find out if Ruby did kill her dad?” Florence asked, on the edge of her seat.

“To that I will say… The answer has already been revealed.”

That caused the audience and the celebrities to gasp. You giggled as you watched their faces - Andrew’s in particular because he’s constantly asking you questions like that but never gets an answer.

Andrew is super passionate about the work that you do and is constantly encouraging you to try new things and different types of acting. You wouldn’t be as confident as you were today had it not been for Andrew showing you how amazing you really are.

“I have no idea whether this show is streamed in America–.” Pedro said.

“It’s not.” Andrew cut in.

“Well then I will just have to stay in England for longer to binge your show, Y/N. I’m hooked already!”

“Thank you.” You smiled kindly.

“Now, Andrew and Florence. Your new movie is coming out in January, am I right?” Graham asked.

“Yes. January the first.” Florence answered.

“I’ve always wanted to know whether as actors you find it difficult to do intimate scenes with one another - ‘cause I imagine they’re quite intense but it’s also not someone you’ve built an intimate connection with let’s say.”

“Well Florence and I were lucky in that we really trusted one another and felt safe with each other in that space, so I don’t think either one of us felt uncomfortable, right?” Andrew answered, prompting Florence for a response.

“Yeah and I think also there’s an element of knowing in the back of your mind that this is a piece of work that we’ve committed to, and we want to do it well. We have to look convincing to do the job well, which then helps make the acting look more convincing as well.” Florence answered.

“Well you’re very good actors because from the trailer alone you look like you’re a fully committed couple.” Graham laughed, causing other people to agree.

“We’re in a platonic relationship in real life.” Andrew grabbed Florence’s hand to gesture their friendship bond.

You smiled as you watched them.

At the beginning of your relationship, it had been a little difficult to adjust to dating someone who is so high profile in comparison to you. Now, you’re feeling more and more confident within yourself and your own worth each day which makes seeing on-screen chemistry with Andrew’s co-stars easier.

Yours and Andrew’s relationship was - just like any other relationship - built on a pillar of trust and you were very fortunate that you had a lot of trust for each other because you respected each other.

“Well your chemistry is very convincing.” Graham said.

“That’s because we’re great actors.” Florence smiled - earning a cheer from the audience.

No amount of Graham’s meddling would cause Andrew’s gaze to shift from yours.

Once people had settled back down you noticed Andrew’s hand sitting on the chair next to his thigh.

You convincingly, pretend to tuck a hand under your own thigh, pretending like it was a comfort thing, and ever so slightly reached out your pinky finger to touch Andrew’s.

He clearly was on the same wavelength as you because you felt his pinky finger stretching too.

The comfort alone when your pinky fingers grazed each other was warm and lovely. You tried your best to not let your reaction visibly show, but it was hard not to slightly smile or blush when Andrew made you feel so much. So so much.