"Know thyself? If I knew myself, I'd run away." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Question #92250 posted on 05/20/2019 12:18 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

What are some foreseeable improvements that will come to the board or that you would like to see come to the board in the next few years?



Dear Agent,

Here is the list of improvements planned for 2019 stolen directly from the desk of the editors in the Board Lair. Many rebels died to acquire these plans, but I think you'll find them worth the sacrifice.

  • Different language versions of the Board. Eventually all languages will be supported, but our first languages will be Parseltongue followed by Esperanto.*
  • Augmented Reality Board.* Enough said.
  • Multiverse board. This allows you to receive perfect answers to hypothetical questions by directly asking these questions to writers in an alternate universe where your hypothetical question is a reality.*
  • Board Empathy Link. This feature will allow writers to experience the emotions of readers and perfectly answer their dating questions.*
  • Television chocolate. Readers will be able to pull actual chocolate bars out of their phones or computer screens.*
  • Pure Incognito Mode. This allows you to ask questions completely anonymously. Your questions will be untraceable by search history, the FBI, and scrying wizards.*
  • 99 Hour Board.* Boom.

There you have it folks. Exciting changes are coming to the Board. You can trust me. Please ignore any and all asterisks.

Truly yours,

Totally Real Facts

*This feature may or may not be totally made up and completely ridiculous.

Question #92116 posted on 03/23/2019 12:36 p.m.

Dear an undetermined amount of Hours Board,

I have 4 questions sitting between 200-2000 hours. Why don’t you like me?

-One-tear crying face


Dear you, 

Don't cry. We hold your questions over because we love you!

-Sunday Night Banter

Question #92043 posted on 03/17/2019 8:26 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

#92017 was fascinating to read about to me. How many offshoots of the LDS church are there and what did/do they believe? What's the most interesting one out there?

-I've heard of the FLDS and RLDS church before but that's it


Dear same here,

Prepare yourself. Here are basically all the offshoots of the church Joseph Smith established. Data comes from this amazing timeline (seriously go look at it). There may be churches missing but hopefully I got all the orders right, and more info on these churches can be found here, which I liberally used and often straight out copied without using quotation marks (thank you Wikipedia and please forgive me).

This is really, really long. Sorry about that. But it's super fascinating. I think the most interesting one is the Perfected Church of Jesus Christ of Immaculate Latter-day Saints (number 30). Not only did they believe in polygamy, but the founder taught menstruation could be eliminated through righteousness, priesthood alchemy could turn common metals into gold, and that his partner's pregnancy was an immaculate conception. All in all, a religion founded by a man who has no clue about female anatomy. 

tl;dr: most of these churches held the same tenets of Mormonism. The founders usually thought they had the true authority, or the mainstream church went astray by certain practices (like practicing or not practicing polygamy).

The first church: Church of Christ. 1830. Founded by Joseph Smith.

  1. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. (This is us.) Founded 1844. Brigham Young declared himself president and prophet after the death of Joseph Smith. Estimated membership: 15,882,417. Referred to as LDS Church from here on out (Sorry but it's the shortest and easiest way to keep track with all these churches). Yes, technically we are a break-off church.
  2. Pure Church of Christ. 1831. Defunct. Founder claimed he received a revelation that he was the prophet and the true revelator, not Smith.
  3. Independent Church. 1832. Defunct. Founder denounced Smith and the Book of Mormon.
  4. Church of Christ (Booth). 1836. Defunct. Believed Smith wasn't a prophet and the BoM wasn't scripture.
  5. Church of Christ (Parish). 1837. Defunct. Believed Smith was a fallen prophet, rejected the BoM and parts of the Bible.
  6. Church of Christ (Chubby). Late 1830s. Defunct. Created to minister to African Americans.
  7. Alston's Church. 1839. Told LDS members to stay in Missouri instead of moving to Illinois.
  8. Church of Jesus Christ, the Bride, the Lamb's Wife. 1840. Defunct. Believed Smith wasn't a prophet and the BoM wasn't scripture.
  9. Church of Christ (Page). 1843. Defunct. Hiram Page, a BoM witness, started this one.
  10. True Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 1844. Defunct. William Law, who published the Nauvoo Expositor exposing Smith's practice of polygamy, formed this church (but did not claim to be a prophet, just the president). Said Mormonism was true but polygamy was a corruption.
  11. Church of Christ (Wightite). 1844. Extant. Founder rejected Brigham Young's claims of leadership. Moved with followers to Texas. Most followers joined the RLDS church.
  12. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Strangite). 1844. Estimated membership: 300. Strang (founder) had a letter from Smith calling him to be president (but of the church or the stake?), said angels told him he was Smith's successor. Found the Voree plates, a record of an ancient Native American. Was initially followed by William Smith (Smith's brother), Martin Harris, William E. McLellin, Lucy Mack Smith, and other famous people, though these people left when anti-polygamy Strang suddenly became super pro-polygamy (apparently no one can resist the lure of having multiple wives). He founded a town and crowned himself king of the church. Uses the Bible, BoM, and Strang's Book of the Law of the Lord, which Strang claims he translated from the Plates of Laban. Ordained women to the priesthood, practice animal sacrifice, Saturday Sabbath. Believes God is one God and that Jesus is the son of Mary and Joseph but adopted by God.
    1. Church of Christ (Aaron Smith). 1846. Defunct.
    2. Church of the Messiah. 1861. Defunct. Led followers from Maine to Palestine and failed to establish a mission there. Mark Twain wrote about the failed settlers returning home in his book The Innocents Abroad.
    3. Holy Church of Jesus Christ. 1964. Defunct. Church headquartered in France.
    4. Church of Jesus Christ (Drewite). 1965. One congregation left. Founder was excommunicated from Strangite church.
    5. True Church of Jesus Christ Restored. 1974.
  13. Church of Jesus Christ of the Children of Zion (Rigdon). 1844. Defunct. Founded by Sidney Rigdon. Believed Smith was a fallen prophet for practicing polygamy. Attempted to live the law of consecration and failed. Rigdon deserted the group and lived with relatives until his death.
    1. Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite). 1862. Estimated membership: 22,537. Fun fact: I met a Bickertonite on my mission in Georgia! He told us they believe in the BoM. Founder broke off from Rigdon's church after they moved to PA. Have the priesthood. Have offices of deacons and deaconesses, though these ordained offices are not part of the general priesthood. Have the president, the Quorum of the Twelve, and the 70. Rejects polygamy, celestial marriage, two separate priesthoods. Teaches that Smith taught some wrong stuff and many LDS denominations fell into error by following them. Believes in the Godhead, the Bible and BoM, the doctrine of Christ, only men get the priesthood authority, communion (wine and bread), and racial integration.
      1. Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite). 1907. Defunct. Dispute over nature of life in the millennium split the Bickertonite Quorum of the Twelve in two (wow imagine that happening to our church). Later merged with Primitive Church of Jesus Christ (below).
      2. Primitive Church of Jesus Christ (Bickertonite). 1915. Defunct. Rejected the First Presidency as a valid leadership organization. Later merged with Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ (above).
  14. Church of Christ (Whitmerite). 1847 and 1871. William E. McLellin claimed Smith designated David Whitmer as his successor. Many LDS leaders agreed, including Oliver Cowdery, Martin Harris, Hiram Page, and John Whitmer. Most remaining members eventually united with the Church of Christ (Temple Lot).
  15. Church of Christ (Brewsterite). 1848. Defunct.
  16. The Bride, the Lamb's Wife. 1848. Defunct. Founder claimed he was taken to heaven to talk with Smith, who designated him as his true successor.
  17. Congregation of Jehovah's Presbytery of Zion. 1848. Defunct. Founder claimed he was "Baneemy" mentioned in D&C 105:27 (I looked it up. The old verse said "my servant Baurak Ale, and Baneemy, who I have appointed..." and the current version says "my servant Joseph Smith, Jun., and mine elders, whom I have appointed..." So sorry about that Charles Thompson). He also said God rejected the church after Smith's death, and he had been called to renew the priesthood.
  18. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Gladdenite). 1851. Defunct. Founder claimed Nephi (one of the three Nephites) gave him the golden plates, the Urim and Thummim, the breastplate of Moroni, the Liahona, the sword of Laban, and two crowns representing the Aaronic and Melchizedek priesthoods. Said he was washed, anointed, robed, and throned in a vision, and claimed he was David the king. Martin Harris followed him (This is Harris's what, third offshoot he's joined? Say you're a prophet and he'll back you up, apparently). Brigham Young initially said they should kill this founder, but later said to just leave him and their church alone. Members later helped form the Church of Christ (Temple Lot).
  19. Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerite). 1853. Estimated membership: 12. Founder said he was a member of the Quorum of Seven (D. Michael Quinn believes this was a subcommittee within the Council of Fifty), and thus the only one with priesthood authority after everyone else apostatized. Practice United Order, retains Nauvoo-era Temple endowment and Baptism for the Dead. Doesn't practice eternal marriage, polygamy, or missionary work because God rejected all the gentiles after Smith died.
    1. True Church of Jesus Christ (Cutlerite). 1953. Defunct? Split over presidential succession issue, folded with death of its founder.
    2. Restored Church of Jesus Christ. 1980. Estimated membership: 25. Founder claimed to be the "One Mighty and Strong" Smith prophesied would come to set the church in order. Teaches a bipartite god (God the Father and Jesus Christ only).
    3. Church of Jesus Christ and the Kingdom of God. 1985.
  20. Church of the Potter Christ. 1857. Defunct. Founder claimed he was Jesus.
  21. Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (RLDS). Renamed Community of Christ. 1860. Estimated membership: 250,301. Organized by Joseph Smith's son. Never practiced polygamy, ordain women to the priesthood today, accept the LGBTQ community. minnow and I went to a congregation last week; they have similar hymns, a woman presided and directed, and only those with the priesthood can give talks. Priesthood ordinations come from leadership, so not everyone has it. It felt more like your average Christian church than the LDS church.
    1. Church of the Christian Brotherhood. 1918. Defunct. Left the RLDS Church due to their denial that Smith practiced polygamy (the RLDS Church eventually accepted it). Founder rejected most of Mormonism's tenets, as polygamy proved Smith was a false prophet.
    2. Church of Jesus Christ Restored. 1960s. Estimated membership: 40. Instituted polygamy and the United Order. Church leaders found guilty of sexual exploitation and abuse.
    3. Church of Jesus Christ (Toneyite). 1980. Founder claimed to be "Elijah and only prophet" of his organization.
    4. Church of Christ (Clark). 1985. Keep annual feasts, including Passover, Pentecost, Tabernacles, etc.
    5. Independent Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 1985.
      1. Remnant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 2000. You can watch all their broadcasting live from the Centerplace of Zion on their Facebook page.
    6. Church of Jesus Christ Restored 1830. Mid-1980s. Split when RLDS Church opened priesthood to women and built the Independence Temple.
    7. Church of Jesus Christ (Zion's Branch). 1986. Estimated membership: 200. Opposed RLDS Church giving women the priesthood. Wow a lot of people had a problem with women gaining equality. Their beliefs are very similar to LDS beliefs except they don't do baptisms for the dead, a temple endowment, eternal marriage, and polygamy.
    8. Lundgren Group. 1988. Estimated membership: 20. Described as a cult. Founder was dismissed from RLDS Church, practiced methods of "mind control" on his followers, claimed he was God's last prophet, and was later executed by the state for murdering five people. This is actually a really disturbing story.
    9. Restoration Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 1991. More people having issues that the RLDS Church allowed women to hold the priesthood. Seriously people we have THREE new churches simply because the RLDS Church decided women should have a more equal role.
  22. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Gibsonite). 1861. Defunct. Organized in Pacific Islands, had a gathering place established on Lanai, HI. Founder sought, and gained, power in the Kingdom of Hawaii, but wasn't a very good advisor.
  23. Church of the Firstborn (Morrisite). 1861. Assumed defunct. Believed in reincarnation - taught Joseph Smith was a reincarnated Mormon and Apostle Paul, and that the leaders were reincarnated Moses and Cainan. Taught the Second Coming was imminent and not to plant crops. The specific day of the Second Coming kept changing because it never happened.
    1. Kingdom of Heaven. 1866. Defunct. Lived a communal life in Washington until 1881. Taught reincarnation, that the founder was the archangel Michael who lived previous lives as Adam, Abraham, and David. Declared his son the reincarnated Jesus Christ, who came to be called "Walla Walla Jesus" (...cool). Declared his second son to be God the Father. Both of his children died.
    2. Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Most High. 1882. Disbanded in 1969.
    3. Order of Enoch. 1884. Believes in reincarnation, founder taught he was the "One Mighty and Strong" and was a reincarnated Joseph Smith, Adam Enoch, Moses, David, Ezekiel, and George Washington (...cool). Rejected polygamy, believes the millennium will happen in the 24th century. Wrote a book with 7 major teachings: Brigham Young led the church astray; African Americans are not cursed as Young taught, but should be allowed to get the priesthood and enter the temple; the Lost Tribes are not living at the North Pole (I guess we believed that?); reincarnation is real; Joseph Smith sinned in practicing polygamy and that's why he was killed; Morris (Church of the Firstborn founder) was a prophet; their founder was Jesus reincarnated.
  24. Church of Christ (Temple Lot). 1863. Estimated membership: 5,000. Led by Quorum of the 12, reject office of prophet, reject baptism for the dead, celestial marriages, D&C, and the Pearl of Great Price. Owns the lot designated by Smith for the temple of the New Jerusalem in Independence, MO. Believe they have the priesthood and are the only true church. Heavily influenced by David Whitmer's writings.
    1. Church of Christ (Fettingite). 1929. Estimated membership: 2,450. Founder claimed to have received revelations from John the Baptist. Adopted seventh day sabbatarianism. Doctrine and practices are virtually identical to the Church of Christ (Temple Lot). Only true church.
      1. Church of Christ (Restored). 1937. Only true church. Reject Saturday Sabbath, but otherwise same as Church of Christ (Fettingite).
      2. Church of Christ With the Elijah Message. 1943. Estimated membership: 12,500. Virtually same as Church of Christ (Temple Lot).
        1. Church of Christ (Leighton-Floyd/Burt). 1965. Estimated membership: 35.
        2. Church of Christ With the Elijah Message, The Assured Way of the Lord, Inc. 2004. This name tho. Similar to Church of Christ (Fettingite). Believes the Godhead is one person, not three.
      3. Church of Christ (Hancock). 1946. Defunct. First LDS denomination to be established by a woman. Accepted the Bible and BoM only at first but eventually rejected the BoM. Jerald and Sandra Tanner are former members. Kept only KJV Bible and BoM. Modalistic view of God (one God, different manifestations). Members joined Protestant churches after it dissolved.
    2. Church of Christ At Halley's Bluff.1932. 
      1. Church of Israel. 1972. Few LDS beliefs or practices remain in the church. Is racist. Believes white people are descendants of Adam and Jewish people are descendant of Cain and Satan. Deeply distrusts the government and most home-birthed children in the church do not have social security numbers. Believes the medical profession is "Jewish" and discourages the use of doctors and immunizations. 
  25. The Church of Zion (Godbeites). 1868. Defunct. Split to be more liberal and inclusive. Were the original core of Utah Territory's Liberal Party, but as they became more anti-Mormon and critical of polygamy, their influence died out.
  26. Council of Friends.1920s. Also known as the Priesthood Council. Created to continue the practice of polygamy after the mainstream church stopped its practice. Founder claimed LDS President Taylor gave him and others keys to ensure polygamy would continue even if the LDS Church stopped practicing it. Splintered into...
    1. Latter Day Church of Christ (Kingston). 1935. Estimated membership: 3,500. Originally LDS Founder preached polygamy, was excommunicated. Claims they maintain Smith's original teachings (including plural marriage). At first all members wore all blue clothes without outer pockets and went bareheaded and barefoot. There's intra-family marriages and possibly child marriages.
    2. Apostolic United Brethren. 1954. Estimated membership: 10,000. Has a temple in Mexico and an endowment house in Utah. Views the LDS Church as legitimate and divine, though wayward. They're the Sister Wives people. Believe in the United Order, polygamy, and the Adam-God doctrine.
      1. Church of the Firstborn of the Fulness of Times. 1955. Founder was excommunicated for practicing polygamy and declared himself the "One Mighty and Strong" sent to redeem LDS people; reported 19 prophets visited him. They actively proselyte to LDS members so if you see the pamphlet "Priesthood Expounded" it's from them. They converted nine LDS missionaries in France, which has been called the "worst missionary apostasy in the history of the [LDS] Church."
        1. Church of the First Born Lamb of God. 1972. May still exist? The founder was the Presiding Patriarch of the Church of the Firstborn of the Fulness of Times but started teaching that he, not his brother (the president), had the authority to lead the church. He was excommunicated and so he started his own church. He prophesied his brother would be killed and one of his followers shot his brother. And then he and his followers committed dozens of assassinations of members of that church and other Mormon fundamentalist groups. The founder died in prison during his life sentence. Lovely.
      2. Church of the Firstborn. 1955. Estimated membership: around 100. Founder said the "One Mighty and Strong" would be an Indian prophet. Here's their Facebook page in case you want to learn more.
      3. Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (FLDS). 1954. Estimated membership: 10,000. Largest group of LDS people who practice polygamy.
        1. Centennial Park. 1984. Estimated membership: 1,500. They've been on TV quite a bit ("The Outsiders", on Oprah, Polygamy, USA). Most live in Centennial Park City, Arizona. Practice polygamy, but the woman chooses her husband.
          1. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the Kingdom of God. 1990. Estimated membership: 200-300. Practice polygamy, the United Order, and believe in the Adam-God doctrine.
        2. Church of Jesus Christ (Original Doctrine) Inc. 2000. Estimated membership: 700. Created after Warren Jeffs excommunicated their founder. Practice polygamy; most members are descendants of six men.
      4. Church of Jesus Christ in Solemn Assembly. 1974. Estimated membership: 400. Helped create the Confederate Nations of Israel, an organization patterned after the Council of Fifty. Members can be atheist or from any religious denomination or any sexual orientation. About 25% of members practice polygamy. The first openly gay mayor in Utah history belonged to this group.
      5. Church of the New Covenant in Christ. 1975. Founder was LDS and believed the Church should still practice polygamy. Said he received revelations from Jesus and John the Baptist, and that he was taken to the City of Enoch where Smith ordained him to all the priesthood keys and declared him the "One Mighty and Strong." Headquartered in Oregon. Supposedly they practice free love, drug experimentation, and heterosexual and homosexual group sex. The founder now has abandoned teaching polygamy and wants to reorient his family life away from its patriarchal structure, though he hasn't divorced any of his five wives.
        1. Sons Ahman Israel. 1981.
      6. Righteous Branch of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 1978. Estimated membership: 100-200. Founder claims to have been visited by God and Jesus and holds all the priesthood keys. Church was formed two months before the ban on the priesthood was lifted; founder claimed he foresaw this "apostasy" through revelation. Organized basically the same as the LDS Church. Teaches polygamy, the United Order, the Adam-God doctrine, and the Curse of Cain doctrine. Thankfully they don't allow women under 18 to be sealed into plural marriages. Yay for no child marriages!
  27. Third Convention. 1936. Formed by Mexican LDS members who broke away after dispute over local governance and autonomy of the church in Mexico (the LDS church wouldn't give them a Mexican mission president). Most members eventually came back to the DLS Church.  
  28. House of Aaron. 1943. Estimated membership: <1,000. This denomination does not want to be known as part of the LDS movement, but their founder was baptized into and excommunicated from the LDS Church. 
    1. Zion's Order, Inc. 1950. Estimated membership: 100. Use LDS scriptures besides D&C 132, in addition to 650 revelations to their founder. Teaches the LDS Church must return to practice the United Order.
  29. Independent LDS congregations in Nigeria. 1953. Joined back to common LDS church in 1978. Basically people converted but there wasn't enough church leadership, so they deviated from LDS Church doctrine. Practiced polygamy and established their own black priesthood hierarchy, both which were prohibited by the LDS church at the time.
  30. Perfected Church of Jesus Christ of Immaculate Latter-day Saints. 1955. Founder claimed to be a reincarnated Moroni and was visited by a reincarnated Joseph Smith ("Our Druid Brother"). Founder claimed he had the Urim and Thummim and the seer stone Joseph used to translate the BoM (though Joseph didn't use the former, only the latter). Taught polygamy and druidry, mainly reincarnation. The founder taught that menstrual blood was corrupt and that menstruation could be eliminated through righteousness (I'm torn between laughing at this and being concerned that a lot of cultures believe this and women really do suffer because these beliefs), that priesthood alchemy could turn common metals into gold, and that the "One Mighty and Strong" was a "young white Indian". The founder's partner gave birth to twins, and the founder declared it was an immaculate conception (This guy thinks periods can be stopped by righteousness, I'm honestly not surprised he doesn't know how pregnancy works).
  31. Independent LDS congregations in Ghana. 1964. Joined back to common LDS church in 1978. Founder found a BoM and started his own congregations. Once blacks got the priesthood in 1978 the founder and most of the group were baptized into the LDS Church.
    1. Apostolic Divine Church of Ghana. 1976. Extant. The part of the above church that did not join the LDS Church.
  32. United Order Family Of Christ. 1966. Lasted until 1974. Founded in Colorado specifically for young gay men only, ages 18-30. Practiced the United Order. Was the third gay Christian church founded in America.
  33. School of the Prophets. 1982. Founder published the Book of Onias that condemned LDS Church leaders. He got excommunicated and started his own church. You can read their Second Book of Commandments here. According to the website, this isn't another church, but rather an organization to chastise LDS members into repenting and following the law of consecration, the United Order, etc. Oh wow they even have a Facebook page with a picture of Jesus whipping current day apostles. Almost all of their posts include #LDS #Mormon #Repent. They must not have heard President Nelson's recent GC talk about our name. Oh guys this is just too good.
  34. Church of Jesus Christ (Bullaite). 1983. Founder taught he was the "One Mighty and Strong". Requires his followers pray in his name.
  35. Restoration Church of Jesus Christ. 1985. Dissolved in 2010. Majority of members were LGBT. Called the "Gay Mormon Church" or the "Liberal Mormon Church." Founder was a former LDS bishop excommunicated for being homosexual. Used all LDS scripture plus The Hidden Treasures and Promises, which was revelation given to their church leaders. Was the first LDS denomination to ordain women to the priesthood. Held Heavenly Mother as an equal member of the Godhead. The Word of Wisdom was good advice but not a requirement. Practiced home teaching, endowments, celestial marriage, and LGBTQ marriages, including some homosexual polygamous marriages. Had about 500 people.
  36. True and Living Church of Jesus Christ of Saints of the Last Days. 1994. Estimated membership: 300-500. It was a "new restoration" for the "very last days" before the 2nd Coming. Was upset at LDS Church for scattering members instead of gathering them, discontinuing polygamy, and the temple changes. Taught polygamy; law of consecration; limited reincarnation; gathering of the Saints; that the founder was Joseph Smith reincarnated; that Armageddon would happen in 2004; later that Christ would appear in March 2000; does the original temple endowment; sugar, honey, and meats are forbidden. Did you just ask for a Facebook page? Go check out their cover picture - it's super Masonic! 
  37. Pentecostal Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. 1994. Extant.
  38. The Church of the Firstborn and the General Assembly of Heaven. 2001. Practices polygamy and the law of consecration. The founder claims to be the Holy Ghost and the Father of Jesus.
  39. Church of Jesus Christ in Zion. 2004. Estimated membership: 1,000. Founder is a former LDS member.
  40. Latter Day Church of Jesus Christ. 2007. Headquarted in England. Added the Book of Jeraneck to scriptural canon.
  41. Fellowships of the Remnant (Snuffer). 2013. Estimated membership: 5,000. LDS Church deemed it a large enough problem to have then-Elder Oaks address members in Boise, Idaho in the "Boise Rescue". Snuffer (founder) claimed the LDS Church lost the priesthood authority. Said Brigham Young was in apostasy (Adam-God Doctrine). Most followers think Smith didn't practice polygamy (yeah sorry guys he did). Believes Mary, the mother of Jesus, is Heavenly Father's wife and our Heavenly Mother.

So all in all we got about 88 offshoots. Holy heavens above.

-guppy of doom

Question #92026 posted on 02/12/2019 2:22 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I need your help. My sanity is at stake. There is a song stuck in my head, but I don't know what it is called!! Here's what I know: It's a female singer singing about a woman named Alice who is in love with the postman. A possible line, ''hey alice, do you wanna go out tonight?"

I have searched for hours to find the song and I just can't. Please help. I need this song out of my head. Thank you.



Dear repeater,

When you posted this question the first time, I tried looking it up and could find nothing. Tipperary couldn't find anything as well. Judging by the lack of corrections on the post, it seems none of our readers know it either. I suggest you write your own version of the song, publish it, and see which band sues you for copyright issues.

-guppy of doom

Question #91971 posted on 02/08/2019 12:02 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

The writers in 2012 weren't too keen on answering Board Question #68368, citing it was tedious and there was no known reason. Looking at the dates, there was a reason: something big happened within a day or two of the date listed (New York Times, September 10th 2001 tipped me off). I won't repeat the question, but what might be the big events that this reader was subtly referencing? (and for bonus points, something that did happen on that unsuspecting overlooked day in history)

-Corsica S.


Dear C.S.,

So I know you didn't ask for us to answer the original question, but I started to because I was curious and then I got into it and then it was just too late. And tedious is right

Some of the papers required payment for access, others are small enough that the only archives are in local libraries as microfiche. I don't get paid enough as a Board Writer to be able to afford Washington Post articles from 20 years ago or travel to Kansas, but I tried my best. However, I don't think all of them are actually referencing super significant dates. I did a lot of local research in and around those dates both nationally and locally based on the newspaper... and some of them just didn't turn up anything interesting. But, since you asked and because I looked it up anyway, here you go: 

Deseret News--January 9, 2012

For this one, it's really hard to tell which thing was the headliner, but here's the link to all the articles for that day.

Fave bonus story of the day:  A couple entered an unlocked Taylorsville home, watched TV, took showers, and drank hot cocoa and then left. Didn't take anything. They just.... trespassed and then left....???

I looked up the news for January 7-11 and didn't really find anything that stands out as particularly memorable. January 9th, 2012, is about 1 month before Joshua Powell and his two sons were killed (murder-suicide) in their home. Also, it was right when Mitt Romney was running for president, so that was definitely a lot of what the Utah news was about. You can tinker around in the archives yourself, but I genuinely have no idea what 'larger event' may be nearby. Readers who may know may enlighten us all. 

Ogden Standard-Examiner--May 15, 1999

This is one that I simply couldn't find. I also couldn't find much about any news from other sources around that date. There was a major tornado in SLC within a few months... but nothing particularly notable, unless readers (again) are aware of something. 

If you're dying to find out yourself, I emailed the Standard-Examiner and they said that the Weber Library has microfiched articles. 

Chicago Sun Times--August 31, 2004

WM. KENNEDY SMITH SWINGS BACK // HIS LAWYER: IT'S 'SOLEY AND EXCLUSIVELY' ABOUT MONEY // He denies sexual assault, his attorney calls accuser's suit 'a gross abuse' of legal system... That's mostly it... most of the major news headlines on and around that date are about the sexual assault accusations of William Kennedy Smith. 

The day before, the Republican National Convention started for 2004 in which George W. Bush would be nominated, and demonstrators carried mock coffins outside Madison Square Garden. 

New York Times--September 10, 2001 

Published weekly, so there wasn't anything specifically for the 10th, but on the 9th the headline was "Fear of Recession Ignites Discussion of More Tax Cuts." How exciting! And you definitely already guessed the nearby date. 

Los Angeles Times--September 12, 2001

I bet you can guess with this one. "Terrorists Attack New York, Pentagon: Thousands dead, injured as Hijacked US Airliners Ram Targets, World Trade Towers Brought Down"... and that's pretty much all the news that day. 

Washington Post--November 7, 2000

WP wanted to charge me to look at anything in their archives, which is stupid. But Nov. 7, 2000, was the historical election where George H. W. Bush won against Al Gore in what has been determined to be "the closest election in U.S. History." I'm sure that day they weren't quite talking about the problems with Floridian votes because that wouldn't be until later that night. Undoubtedly though, the Post had frontline news focused entirely on the election. 

Los Alamos Monitor--March 22, 1997

The only news I could find was that a nuclear physics study lab in Los Alamos got a new president and supposedly some really important documents went missing. In 1997 I found indications that China had stolen some data or information from the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the White House found out in the summer. Anyway, whatever it was, it definitely involved a nuclear physics study lab. I couldn't find any exact sheets or headlines, but some of the general news around that date indicates that's what was going on. See Here and Here

Topeka Capital-Journal--February 29, 1996

No idea here either... but if you really care, you can check out the Microfilm at the Kansas Historical Society on Reel NP 4403. Maybe something about the murder of Michael Jordan's father in North Carolina is the date being referenced?  

Concord Monitor--June 17, 1995

I'm pretty sure there was no published newspaper on the 17th, but the headlining article for the 18th says, "Center questions still linger: Council votes tomorrow". Further research explains that the city was trying to buy property for a civic center, and that was the major news for most of June in Concord. June 20th news indicates that the City Council voted (13-2) to buy the property and spend $3 million on building the center. Again, that's mostly what they're focused on. See Here.

Savannah Tribune--April 1, 1990

I really don't know what the original asker of the question was going for. Nothing particularly notable happened in April or March of 1990 in Savannah specifically. Here and here are lists of events in GA in April 1990... and I don't see anything. Granted, at this point I stopped looking as hard because I didn't feel like there was much to find. You can find murders and political scandals and "newsworthy" events for all of these dates, but none of them really add up to me. If you're interested, lots of big golf Tournament stuff happened on April 1, 1990 around the nation... so there's that.


So, my dear Corsica... I have no idea what dates all of these newspaper references are nodding to. I almost doubt that all of them are pointing to anything specific, because I dove into countless rabbitholes to get the originals and also to find historical events connected to the dates... and some of them just turned up completely empty handed. Maybe my standards weren't high, and maybe I just wasn't sure what to search for. I don't remember any of these dates... but if we have readers who are appalled that I could possibly miss something obvious about any one of them, drop a correction because I would genuinely like to know. 



Question #91949 posted on 04/05/2019 12:24 a.m.

Dear Anne, Certainly,

What do you want to say before you retire?

-Anne, Certainly


Dear you,

It's weird to be writing this. My first answers posted in October of 2011 - I've been at this for over 7 years. When I started I'm not sure I'd even declared an undergraduate major. Since then, I've finished undergrad and law school, gotten married, been admitted to the bar, and survived the first year of being a mom. So, basically, the Board's been one of the constants in my life during a time when a lot has changed.

Since no answer by me would truly be complete without subheadings, let's get some things written that I'd like to say.

Things the Board has taught me:

1. Waiting a few hours is frequently a good idea when you think you have something important to communicate. I often try to not be a jerk even in first draft answers because fellow writers will still see that stuff, but even when I think I'm writing cautiously or clearly, my writing almost always benefits from later review. This is one of the best skills I've learned from the Board: to reflect before speaking/writing. Writing on the internet is interesting because it lacks so much context. It's really hard to use inflection to convey tone (though you can do a bit with emphasis, etc.) Accordingly, I've learned to look at what I'm saying and try to see how someone else would interpret it - particularly someone who might disagree with my opinion. 

2. You really can procrastinate something forever and it isn't usually that helpful. The dirty not-so-secret of the Board is that 100 hours is a goal/aspiration, but not always a reality. Indeed, we've seen questions go into the 4 digits. Sometimes this totally makes sense, and there are totally valid reasons that I've put Board stuff on the back burner to do stuff like, you know, school, or family, or other stuff that matters more in the real world than green thumbs-up. However, having that ever-climbing overdue in my inbox feels icky. I wish and also don't wish that I had that on things I'm procrastinating in my real life: "It has been +12 days since you said you were going to take care of X..." Once it hits a few hundred hours you're like "uggghhh I don't even want to deal with it." But eventually you're either going to have to do it or delete your answer and lose out the effort you already put into your partial answer, so there's that.

3. Listen not just to what people say, but what they should have said. That may sound super patronizing, and maybe I am (though I hope not), but one of the things I've noticed on the Board is that it isn't uncommon to have a reader write in a question and provide enough background to make it pretty clear that the problem they've identified either isn't really the one that's causing their issues or is only a part of the cause. For example, if I write in a Board Question that says:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I've been writing for an online website for 7 years now, but I'm retiring. I don't really have any friends or hobbies other than writing for the website, and I don't know what to do other than sit at my computer staring at a blank screen all day once I've quit. Which should I start writing for afterwards, Quora, or Yahoo! Answers? 

~Anne, Certainly

If that were a real question, it's pretty clear that the answer wouldn't just be either Yahoo! Answers or Quora, the answer would hopefully also encourage me to find friends by doing X, Y, and Z, and to pursue new hobbies, which I can try by doing A, B, and C so that I can have a more improved, balanced life. 

While it's important not to assume that you just know better than someone else about their own life, I think that it's important to look not only for the questions that are asked but the questions people don't yet realize they need answered. This can include clarifying definitions, correcting incorrect assumptions, identifying problematic attitudes, etc. 

This is useful in relating with others and understanding ourselves. When we look beyond just what someone's saying and instead try to understand their whole problem or scenario, we're able to understand and respond to them more effectively. Further, sometimes this sort of reading-between-the-lines is going to be appropriate to analyzing our own communication and what we might NOT be saying (out loud or even to ourselves.) Hopefully over time I'll be able apply to my life the skill of looking past the first level of questions to find what's underneath.

4. Some things are worth it and some things aren't. This is one that gets hit home a lot with the Board. There are some questions that are perfect for a really involved "here's this cool thing I did in the real world and photo-documented for this answer" or "here's a 3000 word essay I wrote about this topic with a bunch of deep reflection and cited sources." There are also questions that, after looking at or attempting, you can tell that you're not going to be able to answer the way you want to, or that aren't worth doing something crazy for.

5. It's okay to not know everything. The Board has allowed me to confront a lot of areas where only incomplete answers are possible. This is something that I've also experienced a lot in my life. There are tons of areas like "planning for my future" and "how to be a parent" and "testimony of the Gospel" where there's an outline of information available and plenty of ways to learn more but I'm pretty far away from being able to provide a completely fleshed out, perfectly-written answer that closes the book on every relevant issue. And that's something I've gotten to be more okay with. Not knowing everything is okay and that it doesn't make the knowledge that you do have and can share useless.

6. Helping people vs. being right. This is a principle in a lot of different places in life, but the Board has been one of mine. I was reading a comment yesterday about the importance of compromise rather than "winning" in marriage, and writing Board answers has a bit of a similar vibe in that part of the goal of the Board is for us to say what we think and believe, but sometimes we want to convince YOU of what we think and believe too - and there are some types of language that are more helpful for convincing people than others. Trying for clarity and compassion rather than writing to people who I already know agree with me helps me think more clearly and, I hope, write better.

Things I'll miss:

1. Not only is the Board cool, but the Board WRITERS are cool. This means that the behind-the-scenes is a major bonus to being a Board Writer. Though I haven't been able to make it to events since moving out of state, I've had some good times with fellow Boardies, and that includes relationships that either never would have happened without the Board or that would have been drastically different without the Board. Some of that still carries through - a text with Sheebs about whatever (usually at night when at least one of us should be asleep), seeing Owlet and her baby on my instagram, that sort of thing. But I'll miss being one of the writers. It's a pretty neat group of humans, even if I always have a hard time figuring out "Wait a minute. This person on my Facebook. They're a writer. But who are they?" (I'm not great with names to start... add in pseudonyms and the fact that you often interact with writers online more than in person and things get confusing.)

2. Being challenged and forced to think. Not that I won't find this in other areas of my life, but there's been a lot of value to me to know that there are certain writers who have different opinions than me. It makes me want to write in a way that makes my opinions defensible, even if they're not persuasive. It makes me want to write in a way that's loving even if it's not agreeing. I think that's valuable. 

3. Being Anne, Certainly. Not to say that Anne, Certainly isn't going to remain a part of me (awww) or that Anne is drastically different than who I am in real life, but Anne has more time to reflect on things and is more careful with how she speaks and may be consequently be a bit wiser or kinder than [me]. Hopefully I can become those things over time. 

4. A great outlet to write with an audience. I really enjoy being given an interesting prompt and being allowed to just go ham on it. 

5. A great outlet to procrastinate and waste time. I mean, obviously, I can still read but the writing part.

Things I want to say:

Thanks. It's been a cool part of my life to do this for so long, and I'm going to miss it. Feel free to email me whether or not we've spoken before. Thanks to those of you who emailed me, talked to me in real life, and asked questions and read answers. Keep telling people about this place, keep reading, and keep writing in.

Closing Anne, Certainly Advice:

Here's some advice you guys didn't ask for; a few things that, in my opinion, are important to a lot of the questions people ask us here and that most of us face, or that have been important to me:

1. Pay attention to how kind you are to yourself - remember to take the time to consider whether you would judge another as quickly as you judge yourself, whether you would say to another the things you say to yourself, and whether you would treat another the way you treat yourself. Apologize when you're not being good to yourself, and then try to do better.

2. Remember that there are lots of worse things in relationships than 10 minutes of awkwardness, and lots of them come from trying to avoid every 10 minute period of awkwardness. As long as you're trying to be respectful and kind to others and yourself and paying attention to make sure you respect the wants and needs of others minor inconvenient awkwardness can really help. See, e.g. the conversation flirting with someone so they know you'd go out with them if they asked, the phone call declining a date (or being rejected),  the quick discussion about boundaries on things that make you uncomfortable, etc. 

3. In spiritual matters, don't forget that if faith and doubt are opposites, doubt is an action (like faith is) and not just a state of mind: this means that for those who want to continue in the Gospel despite questions, troubling concerns, or other trials, your continued Church attendance, prayer, scripture reading, and holding to covenants are an act proving that you have faith even when you do not feel you can stand up at a pulpit and say that you know X,Y, and Z. Don't convince yourself that lack of knowledge is lack of faith, or that an imperfect testimony is no testimony or no faith.

4. Get blessings. Whatever you're struggling with, God wants to help with, and the Priesthood is one way He does this. 

5. It is okay that your capacity is not the same all the time. What you could do last year is not the measure of what you should be doing now. If you get sick (mentally or physically) or if you get busy or if you get overwhelmed, it is okay that "your best" may not give you the same results as it will during other times in your life (or the same results other people might get).  One of my favorite quotes is by Orson Scott Card (from the book Xenocide): "We must do all we can do without destroying our ability to keep doing it." You are building a self, and it might be that this week 90% of labor goes towards working on the "endurance" part of yourself and you have to send in project delays on the "learn skills" or "do service" parts or other priorities. That's okay: you can be "engaged in a good cause" even when your abilities and limitations don't permit you to do as much for it as you want. 

To borrow a quote from my namesake: "Dear old world [and Board]... you are very lovely, and I am glad to be alive in you." Thanks for the opportunity.


~Anne, Certainly

Question #91882 posted on 01/09/2019 3:28 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

According to the U.S. government Office of Women’s Health (https://www.womenshealth.gov/relationships-and-safety/sexual-assault-and-rape/sexual-assault) the term “Sexual Assault” includes non-consensual sexual activity by physical contact, as you might expect, but “can also be verbal, visual, or non-contact.” Examples include voyeurism, exhibitionism, or sending some unwanted texts or “sexts.” It includes sexual harassment.

Sexual harassment in turn is officially defined by the Office of Women’s Health to include behavior such as making comments about your clothing, body, behavior, or romantic relationships. Making sexual jokes or comments, whistling or catcalling. Spreading rumors about your personal or sexual life.

I like the way this understanding of sexual assault emphasis that sexual assault is not just sexual physical contact. It places the blame on the perpetrator even though the perpetrator may be blissfully unaware that his sexual jokes, comments, body exposure, or whistles may be harmful to his victims, who are never at fault. And it is not up to the perpetrator to determine if his conduct is within the appropriate social norms, traditions, or customs for the time and place. It is solely how the victim perceives his behavior as being unwanted and sexual in nature. My question is, what do you like or dislike about the Office of Women’s Health’s definition of “sexual assault?” Is it useful?



Dear Pat,

I think this definition is unclear in ways that have allowed you to interpret it differently than I would, and that kind of ambiguity bugs me when it comes to a term people are going to take legal (or other punitive) action based on. 

You and I agree that:

a) It is not a victim's fault if they are sexually harassed

b) It is possible to sexually harass someone without touching them

Here's where you and I diverge somewhat. You say that "it is not up to the perpetrator to determine if his conduct is within the appropriate social norms, traditions, or customs for the time and place. It is solely how the victim perceives his behavior as being unwanted and sexual in nature." Let's break that down.

Point 1: A perpetrator does not get to determine whether what he did is within appropriate norms of time/culture/place.

This is accurate in the sense that you can't just decide that something is okay and that means it is okay. Furthermore, I think that while some behavioral standards are influenced by time and place, consent is consent (and nonconsent is nonconsent) and basic fundamentals of morality are constant through time and culture.

Point 2a: Sexual assault is determined solely by the victim feeling that s/he does not welcome the behavior...

Point 2b: ... and by him/her perceiving the behavior as sexual.

These are where my biggest problems with your interpretation lie, I think. In general, I think that crimes should require intent (or, as it's referred to in law, a mens rea or evil mind) as well as doing something that causes a bad result (the actus reus" or evil hand). Though some crimes are statutory and have no mens rea, it's probably not a great idea to eliminate the requirement generally for reasons I don't want to dive off into here. (Submit another question if interested).

This does not mean that someone must intend to sexually harass you, because there are various states of mind that will suffice for a mens rea, depending on how we choose to write and adjudicate our laws. For something like sexual harassment, I'd probably favor a definition that included lower mental states like "recklessness" or "wilfullness." (e.g. it's harassment if a reasonable person really should know that you don't welcome this person's attention, but they're super stupid about it, or purposefully trying to ignore your "no" signals.)

What I take issue with is the fact that you've eliminated any objectivity by determining that both welcome/unwelcomeness and sexuality of conduct are determined internally by the victim rather than based on some sort of objective standard. 

Most people who sexually harass someone will know that their actions are unwelcome. However, it's problematic to convict people of crimes (either legally or in the court of public opinion) based on criteria which could be invisible to anyone but the victim

To be clear:

-Someone about to act sexually towards another person is responsible for ascertaining consent

-Every individual always has the right to refuse or withdraw consent

That's not really what we're concerned with here, though. My concern with your interpretation of this definition is summed up by the following scenarios. I do not suggest that these situations represent the majority of sexual harassment, but they could (and may actually) happen and that means that the definition needs to account for them.

Hypothetical 1: Carol is a friendly worker who greets each co-worker as they pass her receptionist's desk. She likes to compliment people and will often congratulate them on work-based accomplishments or mention things like new haircuts or glasses or such. One day Carol says to Dean "I like your plaid shirt Dean, lookin' good! Have a great weekend!" as he leaves the office. Dean thinks that Carol's comment on his shirt is sexualizing him, because he is a bodybuilder who works hard to build up his pectoral muscles, and because he thinks she knows he has a photoshoot as a swimsuit model this weekend. 

Problems: Carol may not have even known that Dean had a swimsuit shoot this weekend, much less been making a creepy allusion to how Dean's pecs would look during it. All she meant to do was to compliment his tie, and 99 people out of 100 would perceive no problem here. However, if Dean gets to determine what behavior is sexual (rather than a reasonable, objective standard being applied), this constitutes sexual harassment if Dean didn't like it and thinks Carol meant it sexually. 

Hypothetical 2: Geoffrey is on his second date with Linda, a girl he has been friends with for a few weeks. They are watching the newest season of "Great British Bake Show" in Geoffrey's apartment, alone, after eating dinner together. Geoffrey says to Linda "Can I hold your hand?" Linda says yes, but is secretly uncomfortable because she has already decided that she doesn't want to go on another date with Geoffrey. Linda isn't happy about holding his hand, but doesn't want to say no and make the rest of the night awkward.

Problems: In most real-world situations, there are ways to tell that someone isn't into you or they'll tell you. However, there are also scenarios where people intentionally hide what they're feeling.. In these situations, I don't think we can hold someone else responsible for knowing that another's feelings on welcomeness differed from what their actions portrayed. 

I'll restate that these scenarios are not what we are usually concerned about when we discuss sexual assault: we are most frequently concerned about situations where it's pretty clear that something was both sexual and unwelcome to all parties: victim, perpetrator, and objective observer. While ambiguous cases like the above may occur, what people commonly mean by sexual harassment is much more clear, harmful, and blatant

But when we set up a rule that's going to define when people get punished for something, I prefer it to be inclusive of not just the most likely scenario, but of less-likely-but-possible ones as well. Accordingly, I have problems with the way you've read this definition, and thus with the ambiguity in the definition itself. I think a definition for sexual assault must clarify the standards by which actions are evaluated, and I don't think that relying on things that can occur solely in a victim's head (even if they usually don't) is appropriate when it comes to punishing someone else. If we only look at the victim's mind, we run the risk of punishing people for behavior that they didn't and shouldn't have had reason to know was wrong.


So what would I change? I'm reluctant to come up with my own word-for-word definition because  it would probably be inadequate in many ways. That being said, here are elements I think we need to get across in defining sexual assault for legal purposes, and that we should consider when deciding whether an accused perpetrator deserves non-legal punishments (like shunning, job loss, etc).

1. A perpetrator who does something that they know or that, interpreted by a reasonable person with knowledge of relevant context, is sexual. 

So, I want something that's objectively sexual to have occurred. This will vary by context.

A man walking into an LDS Relief Society meeting wearing a Speedo and interrupting the lesson to stand with his groin at eye level in front of the woman who refused to date him may well be sexual (and unwelcome, but we'll discuss unwelcomeness next). However, standing around in a Speedo at the beach while you enjoy the waves at your feet is probably not.

Pulling off your friend's wig as part of a prank war at a Halloween party is probably not sexual, but pulling off the wig of a Hasidic Jewish coworker may well be.

However, we can look objectively at those situations, if we know the relevant context (things like: history between the people concerned, the location, the culture and individual history of the people concerned, etc.) This enables evaluation according to an objective, reasonable standard as to whether conduct should be interpreted as sexual. It lets us know whether someone should have known what they were doing would be seen as sexual.

2. A perpetrator who does something that they know or that, interpreted by a reasonable person with knowledge of relevant context, is unwelcome. 

So I also want something that's objectively unwelcome to have happened. Again, the context matters.

A woman who says "I really need to go to work" when her husband goes in for a kiss in the morning, but who continues to kiss her husband may well be happily consenting despite her protests about the time. If we know enough about the couple's relationship dynamics and current circumstances, we may be able to interpret the ensuing makeout as fully consensual even though the same words could indicate a nonconsensual encounter under different circumstances. (For example: the same woman saying that she needs to get to work to the creepy guy who's following her on the sidewalk trying to invite her to coffee at his apartment.)

Again, this objectivity allows us to evaluate whether the perpetrator should have known that his actions were unwelcome (and thus harassment).

Note: In my opinion, it is possible to be hurt by the actions of another and for your pain to be real, even if what they did does not qualify as "harassment" under these criteria. We should support those who need our help dealing with pain and sadness. However, it is also important that we do not set up definitions that assume that any time one person is hurt another person must be legally (or morally) worthy of punishment.

Essentially, here are the possible scenarios

1. The perpetrator and an objective observer can tell that the victim would be offended by the sexual act: This is harassment.

2. The perpetrator does not know the victim would be offended, but the objective observer can tell. This is probably still harassment, because it's important for society to have reasonable standards of actions. You can't go around harassing people or committing crimes just because you're stupid or purposefully ignorant of basic behavioral standards.

3. The perpetrator knows the victim would be offended, but the objective observer doesn't know. This is the concerning situation. I acknowledge the troubling possibility that there is secret knowledge held by predators that doesn't make it to a jury or any other observer that enables the harasser to use externally reasonable behavior to harass someone. Such action is clearly immoral, but I do not have a good answer to how a morally sound and consistent legal system can identify and punish it without using rules that are subjective and/or creating a risk of false conviction (the prevention of which is a major fundamental of the American legal system). 

4. The perpetrator does not know and an objective observer does not know that the action is sexual/unwelcome. In this case, we should still seek to help the person who is feeling pain or sorrow, but I do not think it's moral to punish someone for something they couldn't have reasonably known was going to hurt the other person. 

In summary: The two elements I suggested above (objective sexualty and objective welcomeness) describe how we can evaluate someone else's behavior without having access to their brain, and I believe that this is the standard we should generally use for law and one we should frequently consult (though not necessarily always emulate) for social or other institutional rules/standards.* It doesn't seem fair to me to use the internal workings of a victim's mind as the sole determinant of what is and isn't sexual harassment. In order for sexual assault to mean something other than "Something I don't like," I think there needs to be a tether to an objective standard. However, objective standards like these never excuse immorality: Each of us is accountable to ourselves and to God for our own motivations and actions, and we won't get off by saying that something we knew was wrong even if an observer couldn't know that.

This is a long-ish answer, and I hope I have written it well enough to make it clear that: 1) Sexual harassment is never acceptable and is always immoral and sinful and 2) it is important to have objectively discernable criteria for determining what qualifies as harassment when we will label and punish someone as a harasser.

~Anne, Certainly

 *It's important to me that the legal system err on the side of avoiding false conviction. By contrast, there may be times where social or other institutional sanctions, punishments, or even just adjustments are appropriate with less evidence. To make an analogy: criminal cases usually require conviction "beyond a reasonable doubt" while civil cases may punish someone if the evidence is "a preponderance" (basically >50% chance). If we're only 51% sure Jerry harassed his coworker Kelsey, I don't want Jerry in jail, but I'm fine with his company choosing to fire him or relocate his position to another office.

posted on 01/12/2019 9:34 p.m.
I work at a very large corporation with operations across the United States. We invest a significant amount of time and money in our sexual harassment training, policies, and enforcement. I suspect our policies and enforcement are standard for a U.S. based corporation.

When evaluating allegations of sexual misconduct, we apply a "reasonable person" standard. Our policy most certainly does evaluate sexual harassment from the recipient's point of view. We don't rule out sexual misconduct simply because someone doesn't have a malicious intent. However, when evaluating whether certain actions are inappropriate, we apply a "reasonable person" standard. In other words, would a reasonable person interpret the conduct as sexual harassment?

So, in Anne Certainly's first example, our company would potentially find that a reasonable person wouldn't consider that to be sexual misconduct and there would not be any negative consequences for either employee.

I'm not an expert on this by any means, but I just wanted to share how one large U.S. company applies this type of definition in real life situations. I suspect that this "reasonable person" standard is a very common application of this definition.
Question #91794 posted on 03/06/2019 3:28 p.m.

Okay, Sheebs,

Tell me all about the world of academia in Harry Potter. Are there magical universities? What fields exist beyond what gets taught at Hogwarts? What do philosophy and science and the arts look like in the magical world? What would you write your dissertation on?



Dear person,

There are not magical universities, but students with exceptional magical gifts are often mentored by more experienced magical academicians. It is common for professors at the eleven wizarding schools to conduct and publish research. However, there are many other people who are not academics who also publish. This is particularly common among wandmakers, potioneers, healers, and government officials. However, intellectuals from many walks of life participate. For example, before his death, ice cream parlour owner Florean Fortescue was a frequent publisher in the periodicals Magical History and Philosophical and Ethical Issues in Magic. 


Speaking of periodicals, research-oriented periodicals have existed in the wizarding world since the late 18th century. They were originally established by wizards who followed topics in non-magical academics and found the format to be useful. The first seven journals were the only journals until the middle of the 19th century. With the exception of Clairvoyant and Alchemical Studies, they are now the most prestigious journals in magic. I'm hoping that this section gives you a sampling of the most active areas of magical academia.

First Generation

The Practical Potioneer. The very first magical scholarly periodical. Contains articles about potion methodology, brewing, and application. 

Transfiguration Today. Contains articles about all types of magical transfigurations. More recently focuses on non-human transfiguration.

Challenges in Charming. Contains articles about all types of magical charms. Originally had greater emphasis on magical theory, now is more application-focused. 

Wandlore. Contains primarily case studies of the creation and use of particular wands with remarkable (or remarkably unremarkable) properties.

Being, Beast, and Creature. Contains articles about non-human magical animals with emphasis on philosophical issues pertaining to the definitions of being, beast, and creature and classification of animals into categories. 

Magical Botany. Contains articles about magical plants and magical uses of non-magical plants. 

Developments in the Dark Arts. Journal that documents new forms of dark magic. Interestingly, it is typically written by anonymous authors to protect their identities. 

Alchemical Studies. Now defunct. Contained articles about magical elixirs (extraordinary potions, such as felix felicis) and the uses of the philosopher's stone and its derivatives. 

Clairvoyant. Contains articles about fortune-telling methodologies and prophecies. Now only slightly more prestigious than The Quibbler. 

Second Generation

The second generation of scholarly journals were created starting in the middle of the 19th century. They reflect increased recognition of specialized charms and spells in mainstream magical scholarship. Additionally, greater attention was beginning to be paid to theory and philosophy of magic. I've provided a list of English language journals below.

Magical Theory:

Frontiers in Magic

Advances in Sorcery

Magical Methodologies

Theory for Magicians

Magical Physics

Philosophical and Ethical Issues in Magic

Magical Mysteries

Controversies in Magic

History of Magic:

Magical History 

Modern Magical History Review

Wizards and Muggles Throughout History

International Journal of Magical History


Quantitative Journal of Potionmaking

Studies in Potions

Potions of Non-European Origin

Properties of Potions



Theory in Transfiguration

The Journal of Human Transfiguration


Issues in Animal Transfiguration

Empirical Studies of Transfiguration

Sentience and Transfiguration


Non-Transfiguration Spell-Casting:


Non-Traditional Applications of Magic

Journal of Non-Verbal Magic

Journal of Defensive Magic

Jinxes, Hexes, and Curses

Atmospheric Magic


Case Studies in Unintentional Magic


Essays on Healing

Unusual Cases in Healing

Journal of Pediatric Healing

The Clinical Journal of Magical Maladies and Healing

Clinical Review of Non-Magical Medicine

Divination and Related Disciplines:

Theoretical Issues in Divination

Proceedings from the International Society of Divination and Arithmancy


Progression in Palmistry

Crystal Gazing

The Astrologer

Occlumency and Legilimency:

Magic and Mind

Psychology of the Magical Mind

Magical Biology:



Magical Flora

The International Journal of Dragonology

Magical Organisms of the Old World

Magical Animals and Plants (North America)

Magical Animals and Plants (South America)

Australian Journal of Magical Fauna and Flora 

Magical Microrganisms

Magical Marine Life

Muggle Studies:

Archives of Muggle Studies

The Journal of Muggle Studies

Non-Magic Peoples of the New World

Muggle Scholarship Review

Applications of Muggle Technology


Non-Magical Engineering

Art and Literature:

Studies of Magical Portraits

Journal of Magical Art

Contemporary Wizarding Art


International Journal of Magical Literature

Magic and Language


The Journal of Quantitative Studies in Wandmaking

Journal of Magical Pedagogy

Cultural Studies in Magic

Magical Anthropology

Studies of Squibs

Magic and Death

Rulings of English-Speaking Wizengamots

Magic and Time

Philosophy, Science, and Art

Philosophy in the wizarding world is pretty similar to philosophy in the muggle world. Metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, and logic are all discussed by learned witches and wizards. However, there are additional questions and applications in magic. Magical metaphysics is also a common area of study. For example, how is it that accidental magic results in anything other than explosions or undifferentiated goo? Does this reflect some underlying aspect of the nature of reality? This is actually quite mysterious if you think about it. The intersection between ethics and magic are also fascinating. One phenomenon that has sparked interest in this topic is that many witches and wizards have found they are incapable of performing unforgiveable curses. 

Science has become more of an interest for wizards as muggles have become more technologically advanced. Increasingly, academics are doing sophisticated, controlled experiments to better understand phenomena. For example, many young wandmakers are systematically varying the properties of wands to determine the actual impact of different cores, woods, and lengths. 

Wizarding art, as you could imagine, is extremely cool. Many wizarding artists like to use the same techniques and methods of muggle art, such as painting and sculpting. They then enchant the results. However, there are some mediums that wizards can use that muggles cannot, such as potions. Contemporary magical art, as you might imagine, is about pushing the limits of the definition of art. For example, individuals participating in one contemporary movement of magical art are highly interested in enchantments that temporarily influence aesthetic perception. Another group is interested in art without spell-casting, similar to the muggle artistic movement of minimalism.

Dissertation Topic

This might require more than one study, but I think it would be really cool to study incantations and why they work. Why are so many of them in Latin? What is the underlying structure that causes certain words to activate certain spells? If that is already known, then can magic be activated using light, or magnets, or other sounds, or any other medium? 

-Sheebs, who is now saddened by the comparative boringness of her actual dissertation


Dear 100 Hour Board,

Now that the new engineering building is open and everything, I realize that the College of Engineering has at least three main buildings (Clyde, Crabtree, and EB) plus a number of lab buildings like the Fletcher and the Snell. I also realized that I couldn't think of another college with that many buildings.

So which college, school, or department has the most floorspace/square footage?

-Is It Obvious which Major I'm Doing?


Dear you,

Which college has the most floor space? I think the best way to determine this is with a chart! Because charts make everything better (Is it obvious which major I'm doing?) The columns will be colleges and the rows buildings. If I believe that a college has some claim to a building, then I will mark it with an X. Ideally, there would be a hard and fast rule such as a college only being able to claim a building if it houses a department office in that building, but ain't nobody got time for that (at least not busy college students).

There are a lot of auxiliary buildings that I've decided to exclude for the sake of time and personal sanity, so unfortunately office buildings, storage buildings, greenhouses and the like are not included in this tally. Anyways, without further ado let's look at the breakdown:

  Business Education Engineering Family Home and Social Sciences Fine Arts and Communications Humanities International Studies Law Life Sciences Nursing Physical & Mathematical Sciences Religious Education
Benson                     X  
Brimhall         X              
Herald Clark             X          

J Rueben Clark

Clyde     X                  
Crabtree     X                  
Engineering     X                  
Eyring                 X   X  
Testing Center                       X
HFAC         X              
SWKT       X         X X    
JKB         X X            
Life Sciences                 X      
McKay   X                    
JFSB       X   X            
JSB                       X
Snell     X                  
Talmage                     X  
Tanner X                      

*Note, as you can see I don't really have the MARB belonging to anyone. Pretty much every college has classes there, but who really likes it? So no one claims it.

Now for a list of square footage by building (source for building sizes):

Benson: 192,246 sq ft.
Brimhall: 40,276 sq ft.
Herald Clark: 30,879 sq ft.
J Rueben Clark: 174,970 sq ft.
Clyde:  203,575 sq ft.
Crabtree: 99,448 sq ft.
Engineering: 200,000 sq ft.
Eyring: 187,590 sq ft.
Testing Center: 26,463 sq ft.
HFAC: 292,817 sq ft.
SWKT: 133,849 sq ft.
JKB: 139,164 sq ft.
Life Sciences: 269,936 sq ft.
MARB: 43,717 sq ft.
McKay: 80,939 sq ft.
JFSB: 312,006 sq ft.
JSB: 73,815 sq ft.
Snell: 37,796 sq ft.
Talmage: 158,696 sq ft.
Tanner: 196,000 sq ft.

Now for the totals. Colleges will be listed along with the buildings they have in parenthesis. I'll start with the lowest and build up to our champion.

12th. International Studies (Herald Clark Building): 30,879 sq ft.

11th. Education (McKay Building): 80,939 sq ft.

10th. Religious Education (Testing Center, Joseph Smith Building): 100,278 sq ft.

9th. Nursing (SWKT): 133,849 sq ft.

8th. Law (J. Rueben Clark Building): 174,970 sq ft.

7th. Business (Tanner Building): 196,000 sq ft.

6th. Family, Home and Social Sciences (SWKT, JFSB): 445,855 sq ft.

5th. Humanities (JKB, JFSB): 451,170 sq ft.

4th. Fine Arts and Communication (Brimhall, HFAC, JKB): 472,707 sq ft.

3rd. Physical & Mathematical Sciences (Benson, Eyring, Talmage): 538,532 sq ft.

2nd. Engineering (Clyde, Crabtree, Engineering Building, Snell) 540,810 sq ft.

1st. Life Sciences (Eyring, SWKT, Life Science Building): 591,375 sq ft.

Life Science is the winner ladies and gentleman. Now, this is going by college to the best of my knowledge so it may be off. As far as majors go, Alta mentioned that some majors might spread across even more buildings because they have classes from several different colleges.

But, if we're willing to think outside the box a little we could find a very clear cut winner. BYU has two mottos; one of which is "The World is Our Campus". Although international studies has the smallest amount of building space ON CAMPUS, they cover a huge amount of area off campus. There's the BYU Jerusalem Center, BYU London Centre, and study abroads, internships, and field studies all across the globe. So, in a stunning turn of events INTERNATIONAL STUDIES WINS IN A LANDSLIDE!



Question #91757 posted on 01/15/2019 9:46 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Today I was driving by a church building (belonging to another Christian denomination) with a "for sale" sign. It made me wonder what would happen if the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ever needed to sell one of its church buildings. Does this ever happen, and if so, how do they go about selling it? I can't imagine seeing a "for sale" sign in front, so maybe they'd find a private buyer of sorts; would they just sell the land and take down the building? Or sell the whole thing as is? Thoughts?



Dear you,

Funny that you ask, but I have actually helped the Church sell buildings and land. They sell property all the time and all across the world and so your scenario actually happens quite frequently.

The Church usually has a long-standing contract with a commercial real estate brokerage in the United States who handles their transactions. When the Church sells property it is called a disposition project. They ask for an opinion of value by a licensed real estate agent or the equivalent and they match it with their internal valuation to make sure they don't list it for a price that they are not willing to sell it for. Here's a picture of a Church building in Preston, Montana that sold a few years ago (I got this picture from the commercial real estate assisting the Church at the time):

13.5.16 - 554-4823 MN Preston - Picture of sign_1.jpg

If the valuation is high enough, they will agree to sell it. This approval can take weeks or months. The real estate agent(s) involved are actually encouraged to put a sign on the property so that people who pass by the building or land will know that it is for sale. Typically the property is also listed on multiple websites for sale to attract as many potential buyers as possible. The standard process is to list the property for 30 days before responding to any offers as to give each buyer an equal chance of submitting an offer and doing some preliminary research in order to submit a reasonable offer.

Another tidbit of information that you may not be aware of is that when the Church decides to sell a meetinghouse they decommission the building. Essentially decommissioning a building involves removing the steeple, removing Church signage from the building and property, and filling the baptismal font. 

Upon receiving offers, the Church has an internal review process that can take weeks or even months to respond to buyers. It can be frustrating to buy property from the Church because the process can take quite a long time. 

One question you might or might not ask is: "Why would the Church contract with a commercial real estate brokerage in the United States even when they are selling property in Europe, Africa, or other continents and countries? Great question! Well, the Church prefers to have one point of contact for all of their transactions instead of having hundreds or thousands of points of contacts across the world. It helps the Church keep track of all their disposition, acquisition, and leasing projects straight, and it helps keeps transactions from being held over longer than normal.

Anyways, this is probably more information than you anticipated, but it's currently my job and I am loving it! Do you have any other questions regarding Church real estate or real estate in general? I'm happy to answer more questions like this!

-Sunday Night Banter

posted on 01/18/2019 9:31 p.m.
Provo has several examples of former COJCOLDS meeting houses.

The apartments at 396 100 W and the school at 105 N 500 W are examples.
posted on 01/19/2019 11:25 p.m.
You can also search the archives for another example:

Question #91747 posted on 10/18/2018 9:36 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Does water have enough surface tension that an ant (maybe your average small, black kitchen ant) could walk across it? Conversely, how much surface tension would a liquid have to have for a human to walk across it? Is such a liquid possible?

-the mad hatter


mad hatter,

Beautiful question. Just beautiful. 

Short answers:

  • no
  • 587170 mN/m
  • depends on your definition of "possible", "liquid", and how exclusively it needs to be caused by surface tension.


I'm not a physicist or an entomologist. If a professional were to proof this, they would likely find many errors. But I probably know more about it than you do because now I've been reading about it for like six hours. 

The potential in your first question r e a l l y depends on the ant, and I wouldn't call it "walking." Ants have a lot of different sizes and a lot of different instincts. Black kitchen ants in the western US are much smaller than the mammoths back home in Maryland.  But there aren't any species I know of that can really "walk" on water. Even bugs who are designed to travel on the surface aren't so much picking up their legs and walking, as they are pushing through the surface layer.

Maintaining surface tension is not strictly about mass. It's about weight distribution and the pressure placed on individual bonds between water molecules. Think of a needle laying on top of fabric vs the needle being stabbed through the fabric. Singular ants are often small enough not to break the surface tension of water. Their exoskeletons are hydrophobic which helps a lot. But after a few minutes the ant will sink. Their tiny legs break the surface tension because of the pressure applied at the point of the leg without being distributed. Water skeeters (or the Gerridae family) on the other hand, distribute that pressure with tiny hairs all along their legs that allow them to push through the surface layer of the water without breaking it. 

Red ants (Solenopsis invicta) have a rafting instinct to save the colony in the event of flooding. They lock their mandibles together, forming tight pockets of air between them. The air bubbles help distribute the weight to prevent the specified pressure on the water bonds. The colony can float for weeks while they wait for floodwaters to subside. So, yeah they can sit atop the surface layer but that's about it. Too much motion or release of the air pockets could penetrate the surface tension and, depending on the density of the ant, it would sink or at least get waterlogged. 

Technically, maintaining surface tension is a different phenomenon than floatation.  Floatation is a relationship between density, buoyancy, and maybe viscosity. You can get wet with water and still float. But if you get wet you've broken the surface tension. 

Basically, water skeeting(riding the surface tension) requires a certain relationship between the weight, the perimeter(or area) of the contact point, and the angle of the contact point. Human feet have many angles and contact points so it would require a liquid with enough surface tension (exerted force when stretched) to constantly out compete your weight/foot area/contact angles relationships. 

Surface tension is the force F per unit length L exerted by a stretched liquid membrane. Think of stretching a rubberband and how much force is waiting to be released. It's like that, only recognizing that such force is already being applied on your finger, and can be measured in terms of F over L. So how much force is being exerted by water when it gets stretched? Usually about 73 millinewtons (mN) per meter (m). 

Mercury has the highest surface tension relationships of any known element usually at around 485 mN/m. Converting that to pound-force you get .11 lbs/m. So mercury can support .11 pounds for every meter of contact. So a 132 pound human (such as myself) would require 1200 meters (3937 feet) of contact to maintain surface tension on a pool of mercury. I would basically need to be flattened into a very thin sheet of mass. Without being flattened out like that I would sink and bob until I reached equilibrium. That would probably submerge me partially and then flip me to have the most surface area distribution a.k.a laying flat. 

The average adult foot is about 1 meter. For simplification we won't talk about contact points and angles of that foot, or those of a foot in motion. But since walking requires one foot at a time and it is a very convenient conversion factor, we're going to use it. You need a liquid that can support 132 pounds over only 1 meter. The force of that liquid would have to be 132 pounds. Or, for the sake of comparison with mercury's 485 mN/m, it would have surface tension of 587170 mN/m. That is a very active amount of energy stored in the surface of a liquid. Like a swimming pool that is also a trampoline that also isn't defined by viscosity.

That brings me to non-Newtonian fluids. If you don't know what those are you should check out this video. Non-Newtonian fluids are about non-static viscosity. Not surface tension. These things can behave as both a liquid and a solid depending on the force applied to them. So they get the "walking on liquid" job done quite nicely. Whereas a liquid with high surface tension holds things up by applying force, non-Newtonian fluids hold things up by having force applied and becoming more solid. If you could have a liquid that was both non-Newtonian and had a high enough surface tension, the force would be applied to itself and it would act as a solid. Which actually turns out to be pretty boring because now it's just a solid. So I guess that's how we get trampolines. 

There you have it! Bonus analysis: If Jesus altered surface tension to walk on water he would have had to make up for pretty much his entire body weight in exerted force on a 1 meter foot. Scholars estimate that he was probably about 5'1 and weighed about 110 pounds. He was probably pretty muscular based on his profession, maybe with some atrophy at the time of the miracle. So he might have weighed a little more. So we're looking at maybe like a spiritual pound-force of 120?

Some other videos for your imagination:

Mercury + non-Newtonian fluid

Non-Newtonian fluid + hydraulic press



Question #91725 posted on 10/24/2018 11:46 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Runners always move to the inside when going around a curve because it's shorter.

How many miles would you save on a trip across the US (say on I-80 from SF to NYC but if you'd rather take I-10 from LA to Jacksonville, that's fine too) if you always moved to the inside of the curve of the road?

Related to that, how much gas would you save if you always drove the inside of the curve of the road?

-Yuki Kawauchi in a panda suit


 Dear Yukikawhat?

What a great question. Fun fact: the outside lane of a standard track is 453 meters, which is 53 meters longer than the inside lane. Calculating that distance is relatively simple, because you just measure the straightaways, and then use the formula arc length=radius*angle. You add those up and you end up with the difference if you're good at math and putting things into calculators. Figuring out how much of a difference it would make driving on the inside is trickier though because we don't know how many curves there are, and how much we save on each curve. How will we find out? We shall guesstimate! 

Guesstimate 1: How many curves are there? 

So, to estimate how many curves there are, I will count the number of curves on a 10 mile stretch of 1-10 (Jacksonville baby!) and then use that number to estimate the total number of curves. So, this is the stretch of road I chose:


Between Los Angeles and Ontario there were 26 turns over the 39.4 miles. The trip from Los Angeles to Jacksonville is 2,416 miles. So if we take 2,416 miles/ 39.4 miles * 26 turns we end up with an estimated 1594 turns on our trip.

Guesstimate 2: How much do we save on each curve? 

How much are we saving on each turn. Well, the majority of the spots on 1-10 I looked were 2 lanes and looked like this:


The average two lane road is 24 feet wide, but the cars will drive in the middle so the the distance between the center of both cars is more like 12 feet. The majority of turns, as you can see actually aren't very big turns. I would say that the majority of the curves you will find are only about 45 degrees, and most of them won't be more than 90 degrees. We'll guess that each curve is somewhere in the middle. We'll go with a generous 57.29 degrees because that gives us a 1 radian per curve and makes our math easier. So, now for our final guesstimate:

1594 turns * 1 radian/turn * 12 ft. radius differential per turn *(1/5280) miles/ft. = 3.622 miles

There you have it folks, it looks like cheating the inside corners will save you about 4 miles on your trip. This only works out to saving you about 0.15% of the distance. Now we could be off, but I honestly don't think we'd be off by much for three reasons:

  1. A standard 400 m track is going around curves half the time and the outside lane is only about 13% longer than the inside. So I would but the absolute maximum for any route at 13%, but that would be for driving around on winding roads.
  2. Have you ever driven accross Wyoming, Nebraska, or Arizona. Let me tell you, those roads are heckin' straight. The stretch of road I picked for our estimate went through cities, which means we probably overestimated.
  3. The downside with switching lanes, is that the inside curve often alternates, so you would have to switch lanes a lot, which would defeat the purpose a little.

So, in the end, how much does our 3.622 miles save us on gas?

3.622 miles / 20 mpg * $3/gallon = $0.54

That's right folks, 54 cents. The moral of the story here is that cutting corners doesn't pay, kids.



P.S.  Enjoy your well earned cash. Don't spend it all in one place though, eh?

Question #91714 posted on 11/07/2018 6:12 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Why doesn’t the Church run background checks on those who work with children?



Dear you,

This is related to the question you asked, but it's my thesis and I think it's important to set it out out front since my answer gives a lot of reasons I don't think background checks are the right answer. In my opinion, the Church already has policies in place to prevent the vast majority of child abuse, and efforts to further prevent abuse may well be more effective if they focused on increasing compliance with Church policies and making any necessary refinements to Church policy, rather than on background-checking members.*

I can't tell you why the Church doesn't background check, but I can offer a few reasons I'd be wary of doing background checks if I ran an organization that worked with children the way the Church does. Although even a problematic method of preventing abuse is worthwhile if it is the best method, I don't think background checks are necessarily the best method. Here are a few of the difficulties checks could prevent that may contribute to their potential inferiority versus other methods of abuse prevention. 

  1. Infrastructure/Logistics: The number of people who work with children (and I assume you'd include youth) in the Church is huge. It might not seem that hard to background check a few primary teachers, right? But let's consider the number of people you'd need for a primary in a decent-sized ward. A simple count: 3 presidency members, 2 music specialists (pianist, conductor), 2 nursery, and 2 each for CTR 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and Valiant 9, 10, and 11. Assuming you have no primary subs EVER, that's like 23 people right off the bat. Then we add in 2 scout leaders and 2 activity day leaders. Then we get to the youth program and add presidencies for YW and YM (at least 3 people each), scout leaders (at least 2) and camp leaders (at least 1). Then add an adviser for each of Priests, Teachers, Deacons, Laurels, Mia Maids, and Beehives. Now we're up to something like 42 people who need to be background checked and who can never be absent from Church. Additionally, lots of these callings will be rotated frequently. On top of that, you lose a ton of flexibility if you can only use background-checked people for substitutes in Sunday classes or additional help at an activity, or babysitting during a Relief Society activity, or whatever. Further, you're going to have to repeat these background checks every few years in order to maintain the quality of information. That becomes even more burdensome.
  2. Cost and availability of checks. In the US, I think it's relatively cheap to get background checks and there are checks that are at least decent in terms of quality. However, "relatively inexpensive" adds up when it's 40+ people (at least), and when you have to do them on a continual renewing basis. However, the cost you pay to the agency (is the Church going to contract with one particular agency? Another complication...) isn't the only cost: you also will lose a lot of time cost because you'll basically need a new background check specialist or an additional clerk in every ward to help people fill out paperwork, keep on top of renewals, etc. Additionally, we're a global Church. I don't know to what extent complete, affordable background checks are available in other nations. 
  3. Legal/Liability: I speculate but do not know that by starting a policy of background checks, the Church could open itself to legal liability (or perceived liability by people trying to sue) in certain situations: what if a ward wasn't careful enough in making sure people filled out the paperwork properly? What if a ward missed someone because they knew they'd had a check done in another ward in the Stake last year? What if a ward wasn't careful enough when it chose a background check service? What if a ward ignored something on a background check that was later claimed to be relevant?
  4. Loss of willing volunteers: There are a lot of people in the Church who I think would look askance at the Church doing a background check on them. We believe in repentance, after all - why does my bishop (or ward clerk, or "background check specialist" a calling we'd probably have to invent to handle this many checks) need to know that I [got arrested for pot as a teenager, spent time in prison for tax fraud before moving to this ward, got a DUI 10 years ago, whatever]. I can imagine a decent number of people taking the stance of "Look, I do service with the children/youth as a form of service. I'm not going to sacrifice my privacy when I'm already giving up my time and adult socialization to do something I might not even really want to do."
  5. Standard-setting Problems: What, exactly, should be the standard for something that's "bad enough to keep you from working with youth"? Any crime that required sex offender registration at any point (such as public indecency or urination)? What about domestic violence? What about domestic violence in the presence of a child, or toward a child? Sexual offenses towards adults, or only children? What about non-sexual or non-violent offenses like drug use? Is there a time limit on any of them? What about stuff that happened when you were a minor? This becomes a logistical issue that the Church has to establish guidance on (or else you risk significant local variation, again possibly opening up liability or at least criticism). What if the check turns up court records where someone was accused, but acquitted? What if they lost a civil trial with a lower standard of proof but weren't guilty on a criminal case? (In case that's unclear: imagine that someone punches someone else- the criminal standard to convict them of assault is "beyond reasonable doubt" but the victim can sue them for the cost of the steak they put on their eye and have the standard to recover the money only be "preponderance of the evidence" (more likely than not.)) This becomes yet another logistics nightmare where you need a hugely complicated set of guidelines and probably significant guidance from Salt Lake to ensure consistency, and that means that you probably end up erring on the side of restricting where you might not need to and suddenly there are a lotttt of people who can't hold callings that they would be totally fine doing.
  6. False Sense of Safety: Finally, if people know that the Church generally background checks those who work with youth, they may actually fail to take appropriate cautions in protecting their own children (even though this seems backwards, it's related to the Moral Hazard problem.) Background checks on the level an organization like the Church would be doing them aren't likely to find anywhere near every case of abuse: they're mostly only going to turn up the ones that resulted in convictions. This could leave out not only people whose victims never came forward, but even cases where the victim came forward but no conviction resulted. People who don't understand this might get lax about using the Church's other, important safeguards. "Oh, it's okay if you ride home alone with Brother Johnson, he's been background-checked." "Oh, Sister Smith has been a member her whole life, I'm sure it's fine if she takes the primary class by herself; we're waiting on her background check still but she must have had one in her last ward because she mentioned working in primary there." "Oh, we'll just have the campout with Brother Franklin, after all, several of the boys are almost 18, and that's close enough even though none of the other adults can come..." etc. etc.
So why not add background checks in spite of these difficulties? The Church already has safeguards in place that, when followed, will prevent the vast majority of abuse of children without these difficulties.
This publication, "Preventing and Responding to Abuse" explains Church guidelines that I'd encourage everyone to familiarize themselves with and to stand up for. To summarize the relevant ones, the Church:
  • requires records be in the ward before giving a child-facing calling
  • will give no child-facing calling if note for abuse on record
  • requires 2-deep leadership
  • requires a second adult "in an adjoining room, foyer, or hall" or in the office at interviewee's request when a child is being interviewed
  • restricts adult-child sleep arrangements on overnight activities
Not every ward perfectly follows these guidelines, and that should change. I would urge people who see their ward's youth programs violating these points to raise the issue with the bishop (or stake president, if necessary). If you're asked to sub for primary, tell them you'd be happy to but you know the guidelines say you have to have a partner teacher, does the president know someone who's available, or should you run over to Gospel Principles and grab your spouse/friend? Etc. 
It is still sadly likely that some few cases of abuse would occur even if compliance with these rules were perfect; it's hard to come up with a set of rules that is perfect in any possible situation. However, the relevant questions seem to me to be:
1) Would background checking adult leaders improve compliance with the Church's anti-abuse guidelines?
Maybe, if people with even a non-abusive record are generally less rule-abiding and more likely to fudge or outright disobey abuse prevention rules and so you just exclude them from these callings entirely. But that's a pretty excluding way to use a background check. So, if the background check doesn't really improve the existing anti-abuse framework, 
2) Would background checking adult leaders prevent abuse the Church's anti-abuse guidelines don't currently prevent?
It's clear to me that background checks could identify some people who shouldn't work with youth, and maybe that includes people who haven't been already flagged as such by the Church. If these people are identified, maybe they don't get the calling to work with the youth. Maybe this prevents some abuse because a potential predator doesn't get a calling and so there's never a situation where they're left alone with a kid because their ward doesn't follow two-deep situations, or whatever else permitted the abuse.

3) And, more importantly, will background checks prevent abuse to the best amount in the best way (i.e. efficiently)?

This is the crux.
However, this also gets sort of unpleasant, because even though the worth of every person is infinite, the amount of resources we can devote to preventing any specific harm to that person is not. The safest way to prevent abuse of children in Church would be to refuse children any entry to Church buildings and require parents to find childcare before attending Church alone. We're obviously not going to do that because children, on the whole, benefit from Church. What's tricky is finding the exact point at which the benefit to children of decreased chance of abuse is more significant than the harm to children (or the Church as a whole) resulting from increased burdens of whatever prevention methods we use.
Let's take an example of a relatively simple policy: two deep leadership. This policy assumes that, with another adult watching, a predator won't risk getting caught and therefore won't abuse a child. A quick google indicates that there is something on the order of 750,000 (747408, but let's round) sex offenders in the US. That's a broad categorization that includes people who aren't necessarily a danger to children. The US population is roughly 329,000,000. That means that sex offenders make up less than .23 percent of the population. Now, the odds that any two randomly selected individuals will BOTH be sex offenders is about .05% per these numbers. And that's if we started randomly pairing people together that nobody knows anything at all about. This isn't close to an accurate representation of how things would actually work in the Church, of course, for many reasons: there may be non-offenders willing to protect offenders, which would raise likelihood of abuse, but there are also plenty of people on the sex offender registry for something like public urination who would absolutely report or prevent abuse of a child. Furthermore, we don't pair random people we don't know together to make up primary/youth callings: we have bishops to make callings, primary presidents to supervise, etc. But the point of this exercise is that we can see that a simple step like 2-deep leadership makes it very unlikely but not impossible that an abuser will have an opportunity for abuse. What we have to decide is, since there's still that remaining tiny chance, what else are we willing to do to reduce it? How far down do we need to get the number before we're happy having primary, and still able to have it from a cost perspective? Maybe if we did everything we can think of (say, 6-deep leadership with mandated teacher-student ratios, only using professional teachers who pass an annual background check and who pay a large bond to the Church that they'll lose in case of abuse, using rules that say teachers can never touch children) we could prevent abuse almost entirely (but still not totally, because people break rules and find ways), but at that point we can't functionally run the program.
So, we have to decide on the acceptable level of risk and then once we've got that we want to use the most cost-effective methods to get our risk down to that level.
In my opinion, the bulleted points above that the Church counsels for abuse prevention are relatively low-cost while being very effective at reducing risk when actually implemented. By contrast, an additional background-check requirement seems to me to add a lot of "cost" that could decrease volunteer willingness (hurting programs), cost time (hurting programs), add complexity, and still only reduce risk a little bit, assuming the Church's already-extant policies are being followed. Now, the policies are not always followed, and I think that needs to change. However, my argument would be that the more efficient way to reduce abuse is to increase enforcement of the anti-abuse policies and make any changes we need to them, rather than to add a secondary background check system.
Your mileage may vary, of course. You may have different opinions (or maybe you've got evidence I'm uninformed of, my knowledge of background checks or child abuse statistics/profiling are very limited) regarding how effective background checks are or about flaws with the Church's policies or the difficulty of enforcing compliance therewith. However, I hope that my reasoning above at least shows how it's possible, in good conscience, to believe that resources are better devoted to preventing abuse through mechanisms other than a background check.
Child abuse is evil. We all have a responsibility to be our brother's keeper, and that includes those of our brothers and sisters who are children. I urge everyone reading this answer to review the anti-abuse policies linked to above and commit to comply with them and encourage others to do the same, while still remaining vigilant to any situations that need reporting or revising.
Thanks for reading,
~Anne, Certainly

*For an example of recent refinement, see the announcement of allowing a second adult in the Priesthood interview of a woman or minor. The Church's policies might not be perfect yet, and what needs to change (and how) will likely vary based on who you ask, but the Church has shown a willingness to continue to improve them as good ideas are presented.  

posted on 11/10/2018 11:47 a.m.
I live in Pennsylvania, where essentially every organization that works with children (including churches) are required to have background checks and fingerprinting performed on the adults that work with children. The background checks by the state are free for volunteers, however, the fingerprinting is around $25, which is reimbursed by the ward. Although I think it's good that this is done, it is definitely a major stumbling block to quickly getting people into callings with the Primary and Youth programs. Not because everyone is a sex offender - it just takes time and paperwork (and remembering to turn in said paperwork).
Question #91708 posted on 03/25/2019 11:36 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Can you make a Dante's Inferno style thing about the worst types of fellow student to have class with, and the appropriate punishments they should have to endure?



Dear Dante,


Yauvana wandered, lost, in the midst of a forest of homework assignments. Occasionally a paper would flutter down from some tall stack, contributing to the debris littering the ground. As she walked, she noticed a light on a hill in the distance. A hill meant escape from this dark homework forest. She hurriedly followed the light, eventually coming to the foot of the hill. Yet even as she was about to climb up, three prowling beasts leaped out, ready to consume her: a lion, leopard and she-wolf. Yauvana retreated to the gloom of the forest, feeling more directionless than ever. As she cast her gaze hopelessly around herself, a being materialized next to her. 

"Uh... who are you? I have this strange feeling that you're some famous ancient poet that I should somehow be able to recognize by sight. Like, say, Virgil."

"Nope! I'm just some random guy who went to the University of Utah instead of BYU. So, although I thought BYU was great and everything, I've been consigned to hell. I'm here because some angel sent me; they're a person you met exactly once on the frontrunner. Apparently despite not having talked with you, they're a big fan. Right then. Now that introductions are over, let's mosey on over to hell."


 "Why is everyone screaming?" Yauvana inquired. The random guy just shot her a look that said, "We're practically in hell now. Of course everyone is screaming." Soon, Yauvana saw precisely why these people in particular were screaming. The air was filled with sharp letters, which zoomed towards their hapless victims, giving paper cuts every time they made contact. Yauvana caught one of the letters; it was a catalog of different BYU majors. 

"Oooh, these must be the people who went through BYU and never decided on a major. They didn't ever do anything bad, but they never decided on something firm to do."

Pseudo-Virgil nodded to Yauvana. "Yep." 

"Wow," Yauvana responded. "This seems like an inordinately cruel punishment for people who never did anything wrong."

"You got it! But a recurring theme of hell is that it's suddenly okay to be super vicious and cruel to others. Especially if you're righteous, because what's more righteous than reveling in another person's pain? Anyways, let's keep on moving."

The two came up to a salt water river. Pseudo-Virgil explained to Yauvana that the river was made up of the tears of people who failed their finals at BYU. All the little vials Yauvana had noticed in the past at the testing center suddenly made sense.

It was then that Yauvana noticed a looming figure rowing a boat across the river approaching the banks. Before she could ask, Pseudo-Virgil said, "That's Charon, the ferryman into hell. After all, if a figure from Greek mythology can make it into a Christian tale, he can also weasel his way into a spoof of said Christian tale." Yauvana simply shrugged. She was already living in a pretty judgy allegory, what was the occasional Greek mythological person?

As soon as they were to the other side, Pseudo-Virgil sighed and glanced back towards Yauvana, "Welcome to my home: Limbo. This is the first circle of hell, and where all the people who did not attend BYU end up. So yeah, for some reason we have people like Mother Teresa and Hitler in the same place, suffering the same fate. There's allegorical broad justice for you. Also, seems like a major oversight that people's fate after death is dependent on the type of BYU student they were, but considering we're in some weird spin off of an allegory, I wouldn't worry about it too much."

Yauvana and Pseudo-Virgil quickly passed the masses of vaguely bemused people, wondering how they got pulled into a BYU version of Dante's Inferno. Once they were almost through, Yauvana commented, "I feel like once again I should magically be recognizing people here, and then describe it as a gathering of the world's greatest writers, all while not so surreptitiously including myself as one of the world's greatest writers." 

"Whelp, missed your chance on that one, Yauvana. We just passed the actual Virgil, Dante, Horace, Homer, Ovid, and Lucan."

A great life opportunity having been lost, Yauvana and Pseudo-Virgil continued on their way.


The second circle of hell was just... gross, Yauvana thought to herself. All its occupants were chained to their seats, with braces on their necks, preventing them from turning their faces away from the giant screen. Which meant they were trapped into watching every second of every clip of disgusting PDA playing on that screen. All of the people had pained expressions on their faces, while some were mumbling, "We were never that bad, were we? Like, our little games of footsie across other people's feet couldn't have been as terrible as that last clip... ".

"Yeah, buddy, you definitely deserve this," Pseudo-Virgil remarked. Yauvana couldn't help but agree. Not having realized just how terrible it was for literally everyone else to see them doing PDA in life, at least these people would finally understand the extent of their crimes in death.

Yauvana looked off into the distance--anywhere besides that giant screen. "Hey, Pseudo-Virgil, is that King Minos? Why does he have a tail? And how am I even recognizing this person who didn't ever exist in real life?"

"First, it's better if you just don't question all the Greek mythology that somehow found its way in here. Second, he has a tail to decree which circle of hell each person will go to. Here in hell we place a lot of trust in the judgement of fictional characters who only communicate via postmortem appendage."

Noting Pseudo-Virgil had evaded her last question, Yauvana decided to simply accept it as an otherwordly storytelling device.


Red ink was falling from the sky, spattering on the drifts of paper below. It took Yauvana several moments to notice the people's heads poking up above all the paper. It was another moment before she realized the paper was covered in writing--they were homework assignments. 

"Wait, are these all the people who always reminded the professor of little extra assignments and quizzes?" Yauvana asked.

"You got it, " Pseudo-Virgil replied. "They were gluttons for punishment in school, and so now they get that punishment in full."

After wading through the homework piles, the pair was soon in the fourth circle of hell. Here were all the people who had loudly proclaimed all the cool stuff they had that their parents had bought for them. They hadn't really cared about their education; their parents took care of their tuition so they never worried about having to maintain scholarships. Their punishment was to repeatedly ram each other with their super nice cars, purchased by their parents. 

The fifth circle held the writers of countless angry emails to professors and TA's, explaining that they really shouldn't have to do all this dumb work, and why did they have such a terrible grade? Clearly it was completely the professor's/TA's fault.

"What are they choking on?" 

Pseudo-Virgil looked back at Yauvana, "Their own angry emails. If you look a little to your left, you can see the super angry ones wrestling with each other." He paused for a moment. "So... is there anyone here that you recognize? Like some old enemy that you'll derive a sick amount of enjoyment out of watching them getting torn to pieces? No? Hmmm... guess we'll just be on our miserable way in that case." He proceeded to lead Yauvana to the gates of a large city. She thought she glimpsed demons guarding the gate.


 Pseudo-Virgil looked up at the gates. "Hey, would you guys mind letting us through? We have heavenly approval and everything."

The demons peered down at him and Yauvana. The biggest one held up a magnifying glass to her eye. "Did you really think you'd get through our gates with that shadow of a beard on your face?"

Pseudo-Virgil sighed. "Seriously? I just shaved this morning! It's not my fault my facial hair grows so fast."

"No persons beyond this gate with any facial hair."

Grumbling angrily to himself, Pseudo-Virgil found a nearby rock to mope on. Yauvana just nervously shifted her weight from foot to foot. Just as she was about to ask Pseudo-Virgil what they were going to do next, a glowing white figure materialized at the top of the gate. He exchanged some very pointed words with the demon while brandishing his very pointed sword. 

Looking extremely disgruntled, the demon waved Pseudo-Virgil and Yauvana through the gate.

They had just arrived to the next level of hell.


"And here be all the mansplainers," Psuedo-Virgil announced. He had to shout to be heard over the constant blaring horns. Even then, Yauvana had a hard time making out what he was saying. Evidently the punishment here was to be forced to listen to loud annoying noises for all eternity.

Thankfully, the pair soon traveled beyond the horns. And arrived at a very pathetic football game. No matter which team anyone cheered for, they always lost. Sometimes both teams managed to lose. Such was the just desserts of violent football fans.

After passing the dejected fans, Yauvana and Pseudo-Virgil found themselves at the eighth circle. All the people here were just milling around... with their mouths duct-taped shut, and hands tied together.

"Alright, what did these people do?" Yauvana asked.

"They're the ones who pretended they were looking for a committed relationship, but were really just looking for a NCMO. Let's hurry now, Yauvana. We're almost to the final circle... Which we're going to get to by jumping through this giant well!"

"Wait, what!?"

"Don't worry about it--this is hell, what's the worst that could happen?" Pseudo-Virgil exclaimed, and then paused, "Yeah, on second thought, don't answer that. Just implicitly trust me like you've been doing this entire trip."


All Yauvana could hear was a strange kind of slimy slithering. "What is making that noise?"

Pseudo-Virgil glanced around nervously. "You know how I told you not to worry earlier? Perhaps start worrying; punishment here is meted out via tunnel worms."

"What could anyone have done to deserve such a fate?"

Pseudo-Virgil spat on the ground in disgust before answering, "These people gained other people's confidences and then used those secrets against them. Some of them tried to get people thrown out of BYU for breaking the honor code based on some trumped up charge based only on a kernel of truth. Others live tweeted personal secrets people told them. I think you get the picture."

Yauvana nodded wordlessly.

"Uh, Pseudo-Virgil, where are we going now?"

"Sshh, we're almost there." It was then that Yauvana saw it--the biggest tunnel worm she had ever seen, or imagined.

"I thought we were going to avoid the tunnel worms!" she hissed at Pseudo-Virgil. He simply held up a hand to indicate for her to be quiet in response. Then he gestured forward. They were going to get out of hell by climbing down this tunnel worm's body.


It was now several slimy hours later, but Yauvana finally stood blinking in the fresh morning's light. She had done it. She had traveled all the way through hell. She turned around to say goodbye, to say thank you to her guide, but Pseudo-Virgil was already gone.


Question #91651 posted on 09/25/2018 10 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board (especially Sunday Night Banter),

What is the difference between FHA, USDA, and traditional loans when buying a house? I kind of understand the positives of the USDA and FHA loans, but nothing I've seen has listed any kind of negative aspects to them, is there any reason that a qualifying person wouldn't want to use one of these programs?

-My Name Here


Dear MNH,

This is a fantastic question! In order to give you a side-by-side comparison I created the following chart:

Different Loan Types
FHA VA Conventional USDA
+ Lower credit scores are accepted + No strict limits for credit eligibility or debt-to-income ratio + Usually offers best interest rate + No down payment required
+ Requires a smaller down payment compared to conventional loans - Have to be cleared by the VA + Usually no Private Mortgage Insurance - Limited to certain geographical areas
- Usually requires you to pay Private Mortgage Insurance (PMI) - Can usually get better rate with conventional loan - Requires higher down payment - Borrower can't have income 115% above median income for area
- Usually requires you to pay higher closing costs - Usually requires a VA funding fee     - Home has to meet USDA standards
- Home needs to meet FHA standard of living         - Usually requires Private Mortgage Insurance

To be honest, each person will need to choose a loan type based off of their individual situation. I would recommend discussing your options with an Equal Housing lender because they will be able to give you specific direction based off your financial circumstance.

If you need a recommendation for a lender to talk to, I'd be happy to offer some options. Just shoot me an email and we'll talk.

-Sunday Night Banter

Question #91517 posted on 08/30/2018 7:48 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Is West Virginia really almost Heaven?

-Jack Denver


Dear Jackie Paper,

As we have all been taught, if we want to learn truths about Heaven, there is one source we can turn to with a surety:

The Scientific Method!

First, if we are to determine if West Virginia is like Heaven, we must ask ourselves: what is Heaven like? I think the following Far Side cartoon is instructive:



From the cartoon, I posit that we can learn three important truths about Heaven:

1) There are lots of angels,

2) It is very cloudy, and

3) Everyone plays the harp.

We will now evaluate West Virginia according to these three criteria in order to determine if it is "almost Heaven."

Criteria #1: Are there lots of angels in West Virginia?

If we are to determine if there are lots of angels in West Virginia, we first must qualify what exactly an angel is. Is it any good person that got to Heaven? Is it a human-like being with wings that assists the good people in Heaven, not unlike Michael in The Good Place? Is it a mythological creature with multiple heads and only a passing resemblance to your girlfriend

For our cases, I'll assume the middle option: angels are human-like, winged beings that live in Heaven and whose purpose is to help the good souls in Heaven with all of their heavenly needs (such as frozen yogurt). 

"Well, that's all fine and dandy, Frère," you may say, "but how do we tell if any such souls inhabit West Virginia?"

Glad you asked. You see, angels are inherently good and helpful beings, meaning they cannot lie. Since they cannot lie, it stands to reason that, if you asked one of these celestial beings if they were an angel, they would have to respond in the affirmative. So how do we tell how many angels are in West Virginia?

Well, the website howmanyofme.com reports that there are 191,745 people in the United States with the name "Angel." How many reside in West Virginia? Well, West Virginia has a population of 1.816 million, which is 0.56% of the total U.S. population (325.7 million). Assuming that all the angels are distributed according to population, that would mean that 0.56% of all of the U.S. Angels live in West Virginia, which comes out to an angelic population of 1,069.

That's all well and good, but: is that a lot of angels, comparatively speaking? To get an idea, I again turned to The Good Place. When Michael addresses the neighborhood, there seem to be somewhere between 150 and 200 people in attendance; let's say the typical angel-to-person ratio is 1:175. That means that, for a group of 1,069 angels, there should be...187,075 humans.

We won't comment on that number here; instead, we'll move on to...

Criteria #2: Is it very cloudy in West Virginia?

This one is much easier, as other people have done the science for us. The Farmer's Almanac has compiled a list of the cloudiest states in the U.S., based on how many sunny days each state receives in a given year. According to them, the cloudiest state is Washington, but West Virginia isn't far behind at #6. To quote,

The Allegheny Mountains that stretch along the border between West Virginia and Virginia are responsible for much of the overcast weather in this state. Because the Alleghenies trap moisture flowing into the state from the north and west, most of the state experiences only 60 to 65 clear days per year. One city – Elkins – only gets 48 clear days a year.

Very good. We now move on to the last Criteria,

Criteria #3: Does everyone play the harp in West Virginia?

Now, you may be tempted to answer this question with some anecdotal evidence, e.g. "Well my great-grandpappy is from West Virginia and he never played the harp on account of the oath he swore when he was but a boy of twelve after a roving bard called upon his house one day and in the ensuing violence..." etc. Now, anecdotal evidence is all well and good, but is it scientific? No. So, we turn to a different method.

One does not just pick up a harp and start playing by oneself, you see. One needs a teacher. So if we can find how many harp teachers there are in West Virginia, we can take a guess at how many harp students there also are in West Virginia, bringing us to our total number of harpists. 

Before we look that up, though: how many harp students does the average harp teacher have? Let's assume that harp lessons last half an hour and each student meets with the harp teacher twice a week. Assuming that the harp teachers work from 9-5 Monday through Friday, with an hour lunch break, that gives 35 hours a week. Since each student takes up an hour total in the week, that means that each harp teacher can handle 35 students.

So, how many harp teachers are in West Virginia? After researching thoroughly, I found a grand total of...



Yeah, seven.


Let's try something else: I searched the Yellow Pages for harp lessons in West Virginia. I found 30 schools. Do all of them look like they teach the harp? Nope. I mean, "Steve Barker's Percussion Studio" seems like a sure bet, but "Renaissance Music Academy?" Doubtful. So let's assume that some schools teach many more students than the average harp teacher and some teach fewer, averaging out to the same number of students, 35. 

Then 30 music schools and seven music teachers with 35 students each gives...1,332 harp players (counting the teachers, of course). That represents 0.07% of the total population of West Virginia.

BUT! Never fear. We just need to expand our horizons a bit. We've been trading in teachers and students of "traditional" harps, like pedal harps or lever harps. Do you know what else is a harp?

A jaw harp.

Do you know what kind of music uses a jaw harp?

Bluegrass music.

And how many bluegrass bands are in West Virginia?

Like, a ton. And the thing about bluegrass bands is that most of them probably do not have an internet footprint. 

To determine their numbers, imagine this scenario: you are a proud West Virginian. Though you are not a member of a bluegrass band, your good friend plays a mean jug, and he invites you to a neighborhood concert that he and his band are giving on Friday. You go to the concert and listen to the band a bit; they're jamming (especially that jaw harp player). There are eight members of the band, and the concert has drawn in about 40 people. Assuming that your experience is typical of most West Virginians', that means that there is at least one jaw harp for every 50-or-so people. This gives us 36,320 jaw harps, and added to the players of other harps, we get approximately 37,652 harp players in West Virginia, or around 2% of the total population.

That's all the criteria accounted for, so now we move to...

The Conclusion.

What have we learned? We have seen that:

1) There is an angel-human ratio of about 1:1,656 in West Virgina (compared to a postulated 1:175 ratio in Heaven),

2) West Virginia has 48 days without clouds a year (whereas Heaven is always cloudy), and

3) About 2% of West Virginians play the harp (and we theorize that around 99% of the denizens of Heaven do).

Is that enough to qualify West Virginia as a Heavenly place?

Well, if we know one more thing about Heaven, it's that it is perfect, so any place trying to be like Heaven should be similarly perfect in its Heavenly criteria. By that standard, West Virginia falls short.



We never asked if West Virginia was Heaven: we were concerned with whether West Virginia was almost Heaven. And, thankfully, "almost" is such an ambiguous term that I feel that, given the evidence, we can firmly declare that West Virginia IS almost Heaven (Jim Gaffigan be darned). 

-Frère Rubik will defend John Denver anytime, anywhere, whether or not he's ever set foot in West Virginia

Question #91400 posted on 06/05/2018 10:18 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Is Superman faster than a speeding Avada Kedavra? Would Superman survive an Avada Kedavra?



Dear person,

My initial reaction (and Anne's, too) was that spells travel fairly slowly - perhaps 60 mph or so. However, I couldn't find the source on the internet that gives the exact speed. That means it's speculation time!

It's certain that the speed of spells is slower than the speed of sound because incantations are heard by their targets before they hit. If magic traveled at the speed of sound (1125 feet/second) and it takes about half a second for a person to speak a three-syllable word (e.g., stupefy, protego), then to block a spell with a three-syllable incantation I would have to be at least 562 feet away from the caster (assuming I didn't start casting shield charm before the caster was done saying the incantation). There's no way anyone could hear an incantation at that distance unless they were yelling.

It seems reasonable to assume that duellers frequently stand about 10 feet apart. It would take the sound of the finished incantation about .009 seconds to travel that distance. We need the spell to take at least 0.5 seconds to travel. So the spell needs to take a maximum of 20 feet/second to travel that far. Or about 13 miles per hour. That's too slow. 

Okay, that's not good. Let's assume duellers who have any sense of caution stand about 20 feet apart. That would double the speed it would take to cross that distance in .5 seconds to about 40 feet per/second or 26 mph. Also slow.

Okay, let's pretend they stand 30 feet apart. That brings the required speed up to 60 feet per second or 39 mph. Also still slower than Usain Bolt.

We made some big, not totally realistic assumptions conducive to spell slowness (i.e., that people being don't react before the incantation is over). I don't really see the number getting much higher than 50 or 60 mph (approximately 80 or 100 km/h). There. Final answer. 

If anyone would like to submit a correction because they have a link to the quote that Anne and I were thinking about or they noticed my math is terrible, please do so.


posted on 06/06/2018 1:01 p.m.
Here's a slightly less speculative answer for you. Using this video as reference: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BcJl2YjFcr0)

You can calculate how fast something is moving from a video if you know the framerate of the video and the distance that the object travels.

Movies are typically shot in 24 fps, and from what I could find, the HP movies are no exception.

In this video, it takes Voldy about 37 frames to SAY 'avada kedavra'. 37 frames at 24 fps is about 1.54 seconds.

It takes the spell exactly 8 frames to hit our protagonist straight in the chest. I counted it like 20 times. It's exactly 8 frames. 8 frames/24 fps is 0.333 seconds.

We all know that speed is distance over time, so now we need the distance. I used Radcliffe's height as a reference to get a good estimate of how far apart they are in the video. Luckily we've got a nice side view. Danny is 5'5", and using that, it seems like they are standing about 25 feet apart.

The Avada Kedavra spell travels 25 feet in .333 seconds, or 75 feet per second (75.075 if you wanna get technical) or 51.188 miles per hour.

(https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/80312/how-do-we-know-the-flash-is-faster-than-superman) that link says that superman can fly 7,200,000 mph... so... Yes, Superman can fly faster than the Avada Kedavra spell... by a longshot. Could he survive it? I don't know, and trying to cross the boundaries of alien abilities and magic gets a little tricky. I vote yes.

Yay for math!


Dear Yayfulness,

What's your favorite map?

-My Map Here


Dear MyMap,

I know this question was directed at yayfulness, but the world can always use more excellent maps. I especially love this one from Brandon Sanderson's Oathbringer (painted by Isaac Stewart, who is awesome):


         Click to view the source full-sized.

I thought it was really cool that they put actual lines of latitude and longitude on the map, so being the map nerd that I am, I set out to digitize it and play with different map projections. Here's the map that I made based on the original:


         Click to view the source full-sized.

-Inverse Insomniac

Question #91386 posted on 08/29/2018 7:10 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Can you get me a dialogue sample of the screenplay, “Pride and Prejudice” with Dwayne Johnson cast as Elizabeth Bennett?

-My Name Here


Dear person,

I have secured a dialogue sample that matches the description you provided. (I copied/transcribed/paraphrased phrases from the following sources: Project GutenbergYouTube [caution: lots of profanity], and Moana.)


ELIZABETH is sitting at a desk reading a letter, her right eyebrow raised. A bell rings. Her expression briefly changes to an open-mouthed smile. The door opens and DARCY walks quickly into the room. Elizabeth's lips retract into her mouth. Nevertheless, she waves briefly and awkwardly, and runs a hand over her bald head. 

(in a rushed manner)        
How is your health?

Elizabeth pauses for several moments.

(clears throat awkwardly)       
What's on your mind?

Darcy sits down in an empty chair for a few moments, then stands up and paces on the opposite side of the room from Elizabeth for several minutes. Elizabeth looks at her watch and flexes her arm muscles threateningly. After several more minutes, Darcy approaches Elizabeth.

In vain I have struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not repressed.
You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you.

Elizabeth's discomfort vanishes. She snorts slightly and stares, trying to keep her face straight.

(still agitated)       
Against my better judgment, and that of my entire family, and despite your obvious inferiority,
I confess my 
feelings of deep attraction to you. Though your family - which includes you -
is collectively a disgrace to society, something about you compels me to love you.

(using relatively dramatic hand gestures)       
So, you think I'm pretty cool. But you feel like a loser because of that? 

(agitated but unabashed)       
In spite of my endeavors to conquer it, I love you still. I hope I will be
rewarded by your acceptance of my hand. Elizabeth, will you marry me?

If you start singing, I'm going to throw up.

Darcy is clearly surprised, but says nothing.

(in a manner appropriate for a motivational speech)              
You haven't even started being a good guy. I don't know about you,
but I had my wake up call. It's your turn. Let me just speak from my gut;
I don't have anything prepared. Man, as you have your goals and ambitions,
further on down the line, this idea that you can have anything you want -
which you have heard since you were a little boy -
you gotta be ballin'. 

And this is all the reply which I am to have the honour of expecting.

My conclusion is that Dwayne is cool but, as predicted by Anne, Certainly, he does sound a little out of place in the England-in-the-1810s setting.


Question #91348 posted on 05/23/2018 8:18 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Imagine if America, in some alternate timeline, opted for kings instead of presidents.

How many kings would we have gone through since 1776, and who would they have most likely been?



Dear ALT+1,

First, let's make some assumptions.

  1. The monarchy will be hereditary.
  2. It will follow the English rule of primogeniture (although the parts about religion will all be thrown out).
  3. It will switch from male-preference primogeniture to gender-neutral primogeniture sometime between 1920 (passage of the 19th Amendment) and 2011 (when the English monarchy made the switch).
  4. George Washington will be the first king.
  5. Wikipedia will be used as far as it is available, after which FamilySearch will be the preferred source.
  6. Adopted children, illegitimate children, and children without both a recorded birth date and a recorded death date will be excluded.
  7. For simplicity's sake, we're ignoring the butterfly effect as far as is reasonably possible. Most likely, the life stories of all of these people would be extremely different if they were actual American royalty, but we're going to assume that nobody died sooner or later in this alternate world than in the real world, and that nobody had more or less children than they in fact had.
  8. For simplicity's sake, I'm assuming that every birth and death occurred on January 1 of the relevant year.

Sound good? Okay. Now, here are the rules of primogeniture.

  1. Under male-preference primogeniture, all male children are treated as being older than all female children. Under gender-neutral primogeniture, the actual birth order is respected.
  2. In theory, the monarch is succeeded by their first child, who is then succeeded by the child's first child, and so on for eternity.
  3. If the monarch's first child dies, the throne passes to the monarch's first child's first child. In other words, death of a child doesn't remove that child's children from the order of succession.
  4. If at any point someone dies leaving no living descendants, their oldest sibling is next in line.
  5. If at any point someone dies leaving no living descendants and no living siblings, their royal parent's oldest sibling is next in line.
  6. Spouses are meaningless. The throne only ever passes to blood family.

So with that, let's get started! Our first king is

King George I Washington

Born in 1732, acceded to the throne in 1776 at age 34, and died in 1799 at age 67 after a reign of 33 years.

George I had no children of his own - he was most likely left sterile after a bout of smallpox in 1751, although when he married the widowed Martha Custis he adopted her two children. Because of that, the throne would pass to a descendant of his father Augustine.

Augustine's oldest son died as an infant. His second son, Lawrence, died in 1752 and none of Lawrence's children lived to adulthood. His third son, Augustine Jr., died childless in 1762. George I was Augustine's fourth son (and first by his second wife); next in line would be Augustine's fifth son, Samuel.

Samuel died in 1781 (he was preceded in death by four wives and two children - be grateful for modern medicine, people). His oldest son Thornton died in 1787 in his late 20s, but not before having three or four children of his own, if FamilySearch is to be believed. Thornton's oldest son Thomas died in 1794 as a child, but his second son (George I's brother's grandson) would have been

King John I Washington

Born in 1783, acceded to the throne in 1799 at age 16, and died in 1841 at age 58 after a reign of 42 years.

John has 12 children listed on FamilySearch. His oldest son was

King Lawrence I Washington

Born in 1811, acceded to the throne in 1841 at age 30, and died in 1856 at age 45 after a reign of 15 years.

As far as FamilySearch knows, Lawrence never married or had children. John I's second son appears likely to have died young (no death date is listed), and his third and fourth children were daughters and therefore passed over by the rules of male-preference primogeniture, so the fourth king would have been Lawrence I's brother

King Benjamin I Washington

Born in 1820, acceded to the throne in 1856 at age 36, and died in 1872 at age 52 after a reign of 16 years.

Benjamin I had two sons and three daughters, in that order. His oldest son was

King John II Washington

Born in 1846, acceded to the throne in 1872 at age 26, and died in 1929 at age 83 after a reign of 57 years.

John II did not marry and had no children. His brother Franklin died in 1915 and had one son, Lawrence, whose death is not recorded. It's possible that Lawrence would have been the next king, but since Family Search has no record of his existence after 1910 we will skip over him and go to John II's sister

Queen Fannie I Washington

Born in 1853, acceded to the throne in 1929 at age 76, and died in 1930 at age 77 after a reign of one year.

She's the first queen in a line of six monarchs, but she doesn't last very long. She has numerous children attributed to her on FamilySearch, but the oldest of whom we have a meaningful record is

King John III Delehanty

Born in 1888, acceded to the throne in 1930 at age 42, and died in 1965 at age 77 after a reign of 35 years.

I'm guessing that if the monarchy actually existed, John III would keep the Washington family name rather than adopting his father's last name, but this is all a fictional interpretation so we can do whatever we want here. John has two children listed on FamilySearch, born in 1921 and 1922. It's possible that he had one or more children born before 1920 who are still alive today and therefore don't show up on FamilySearch, but that's unlikely enough that we will assume he did not. As it turns out, it doesn't matter whether male-preference primogeniture is replaced by gender-neutral primogeniture in 1920, because John III's son John (the younger of the two children) died in 1940 at the age of 18. This means that, as far as we know, with John III's death the throne passed to his only living child

Queen Margaret I Delehanty

Born in 1921, acceded to the throne in 1965 at age 44, and died in 1994 at age 73 after a reign of 29 years.

FamilySearch does not record a spouse or children for Margaret I, but it is entirely reasonable to believe that her husband and any children might still be alive today.

Assuming that she did die childless and had no additional siblings, though, the line would pass back to the next male sibling of John III (since the transition from male-preference primogeniture to gender-neutral primogeniture is not retroactive), Thornton Augustin Washington Delehanty. Thornton died in 1971 and his wife died in 1951, but it's entirely reasonable that they could have had at least one child who is alive today. So, regardless of whether the throne would pass to Margaret I's child or her cousin, we would almost certainly be living under the rule of the ninth king or queen in the Washingtonian line.

So, to recap, the nine monarchs of the Washingtonian line are:

  1. King George I (1776-1799)
  2. King John I (1799-1841)
  3. King Lawrence I (1841-1856)
  4. King Benjamin I (1856-1872)
  5. King John II (1872-1929)
  6. Queen Fannie I (1929-1930)
  7. King John III (1930-1965)
  8. Queen Margaret I (1965-1994)
  9. Unknown (1994-present)

In timeline form, it looks like this:

kings and queens of the united states 3.png

And as a family tree, it looks like this (with monarchs' names in all caps):

kings and queens of the united states 2.png

So there you have it: the royal lineage of the United States.

As flawed as the current system is, I think it's probably better than this.


p.s. After finishing this answer, I did some digging and found a couple other sources that don't fit neatly into the answer above. In 1991, the Chicago Tribune published an article on an 85-year-old man who was the last living descendant of Augustine Washington on a strictly male line. Under the Salic Law system of inheritance, in which the throne passes exclusively through male descendants, he would have been the King of the United States. Since he had no sons and has presumably died sometime in the 27 years since the article was written, the entire Washingtonian line via Augustine would have ended with him. Either a search would have to be made for a living descendant on an all-male line of Augustine's brother John Washington III or his uncle John Washington II (likely a very difficult proposition), or a new royal line would have to be chosen, or a new law of succession would have to be adopted, or the practice of royalty in the United States would come to an end.

Meanwhile, this article names Ancestry's pick for the most likely Washington family member to be the current monarch of the United States, although it does not give any detailed methodology. Despite my best efforts, I haven't been able to figure out his lineage or how they decided that he was the most likely to be next in the royal line.

Should you trust the genealogy professional, or the random guy on the internet? I'll let you decide.

Question #91271 posted on 09/30/2018 7:17 a.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

For Alumni week, and if it doesn't take too much effort, could you update the answers to Question #70656 with the recently announced temples? Especially yayfulness's video, if he's around.

-Thinks its still SO Cool!


Dear thinker,

Greetings from significantly beyond the end of alumni week! In my defense, I finally bought Crusader Kings 2 as a graduation gift to myself and it's taken over my life I've had a very busy last few months. But this wouldn't be a yayfulness temples answer if it didn't go horrifically over hours, would it? Either way, it's done now, so I hope it's worth the wait.

First off, for anyone who's new to this series, in 2013 I answered Optimistic's Board Question #70656 with a video showing that the Maldives, a tiny archipelago south of India, were the furthest permanently inhabited location from an existing or announced LDS temple. In 2015, right before I retired from the Board, I updated the answer in Board Question #83118, which is honestly easier to read if you don't want to deal with a video. By then, thanks to the announcement of the Bangkok Temple, the new furthest point from a temple was the island of Socotra, just off the coast of Yemen. Earlier that same year, I also answered Board Question #82234, which took a look at the United States (not counting Hawaii and Alaska, because... Hawaii and Alaska), and Board Question #82284, which corrected an error in my answer to the previous question.

Since 2015, the Church has announced sixteen more temples. The most notable ones for the purposes of this mapping exercise are in Harare, Zimbabwe; Nairobi, Kenya; Bengaluru (Bangalore), India; and an as-yet undetermined location in Russia. Because it's kind of hard to make a map of a location that hasn't been chosen yet, I've left the Russian temple off of my list, but we'll revisit it later.

So with that, here's the map:

distances to 2500.png

You can click here to download a larger zoomable version. I highly recommend it; there are a lot of details that are easy to miss on the small version. The key is as follows:

  • Cyan lines - 200 mile radius
  • Green lines - 500 mile radius
  • Yellow lines - 1,000 mile radius
  • Orange lines - 1,500 mile radius
  • Red lines - 2,000 mile radius
  • Purple lines - 2,500 mile radius
I omitted all distances above 2,500 miles, since no land outside Antarctica was covered and the polar distortion was too high to intuitively interpret.

As you can see, Socotra and the Maldives are now within 1,500 miles of the Nairobi and Bangaluru temples, respectively.

In total, there are six areas with permanent human habitations that are over 2,000 miles from the nearest temple, and no areas at a distance of over 2,500 miles. Before we get to the winner, let's see the runners-up. In order to make my life easier, I added an intermediate black line at 2,250 miles which only shows up on some of the zoomed-in images.

The smallest area on the map - incredibly easy to miss on the smaller map, where it's just a tiny red dot - is in the northern Arabian Desert. Here's a close-up picture:

red triangle.png

Remarkably, the red triangle falls directly on Al-Hofuf, the fifth largest city in Saudi Arabia. The city is almost exactly 2,000 miles from Bengaluru, Nairobi, and Kiev, and it's evidently one of the biggest sites of date cultivation in the world.

The second area is in northwestern Greenland. I didn't catch it the first time around, and now that I've graduated I can't go back and see exactly where the 2,000-mile line falls along the coast (there are no inland cities). However, if I didn't miss anything while investigating using the Google Maps distance measurement tool, there are three permanent settlements beyond that line: Kullorsuaq (population 448, 2,052 miles from Winnipeg), Nuussuaq (formerly Kraulshavn, population 202, 2,037 miles from Winnipeg), and Qeqertat (population 33, 2,014 miles from Edmonton).

The third area is in the Indian Ocean. At the southern end of that area, beyond 2,500 miles from the nearest temple, you can find the Australian territory of Heard Island and MacDonald Islands - but you probably won't find any people there. In the mid-1800s, a community formed around the seal oil industry and had a peak population of around 200, but the industry collapsed before the end of the century after hunting the local seal population nearly to extinction. Today there are occasional expeditions by scientists and amateur radio operators, but there doesn't appear to have been a permanent population in over a century. The nearby Kerguelen Islands, which I mentioned in Board Question #91382, are home to a French naval base but no civilian population.

Further north, midway between the 2,000 and 2,250 mile lines, is the island of Rodrigues.


The island is a territory of Mauritius and has a population of a little over 40,000.

The fourth area is in the central Pacific and contains several islands. One of those islands, just short of the 2,250 mile line, is Bikini Atoll.

bikini atoll.png

The atoll, near the center of the image and to the west of the largest island, had a population of 167 in 1946 before being relocated by the United States to allow the island to be used for nuclear testing. Today, Wikipedia reports that the island is home to six caretakers, and the larger island to the east, Rongelap Atoll, has either 19 or 20 residents.

Further west is the island of Pohnpei.


Pohnpei is the large island in the center, home to the capital of the Federated States of Micronesia. It has a population of about 34,000.

The fifth area is in the eastern Pacific, and has just one island: Easter Island.

easter island.png

Easter Island is an outer territory of Chile, with a population of about 7,750.

And the winner? The winner is our old friend Россия. There's enough Россия, in fact, that cataloging all of it would be nearly impossible, so I'm going to stick to the two segments that are beyond the 2,250-mile mark.

Segment number one is on the northern Siberian coast, way out in Significant Map Distortion Land. (If you want to see what the geography looks like without distortion, here it is on Google Maps.)

northern triangle.png

The red circle is the ghost city of Nordvik (Нордвик), which was founded in the 1930s in the hopes of finding oil. The oil prospecting never worked out, and instead a penal colony operated a salt mine. The settlement was abandoned in 1956.

The yellow circle at the juncture of the Anabar River and a minor tributary is the city of Yuryung-Khaya (Юрюнг-Хая), also founded in the 1930s, which has a current population of just over 1,100. As far as I can tell, it's the only populated city further than 2,250 miles from a temple in this part of Russia, although the settlements of Syndassko (Сындасско, population "less than 497") and Ust-Olenyok (Усть-Оленёк, population 27) are nearby.

If we go further south, though, there's a lot more to look at.

southern triangle.png

So remember when I said that this was Russia? It turns out that's using an... ah... expansive definition of "Russia" which includes a decent chunk of Kazakhstan and China. (The 2,000-mile line clips the corner of Mongolia too.) Here's that same place on Google:

kinda sorta russia.png

As you can see, there are quite a few cities in this area. We're going to need another buffer.

smaller triangle.png

The outer black line on this image is the 2,250 mile buffer from before, and the inner line is a 2,325 mile buffer. (A 2,300 mile buffer includes a bit too much and a 2,350 mile buffer closes the triangle entirely.) Inside that triangle is a mountain peak named Khrebet Tarbagatay, whose Wikipedia page somewhat inexplicably only exists in Swedish and Cebuano. There is also a ton of farmland but, at least according to Google Maps, only one city more than one city but I'll get to the rest of them later: Makanchi (Мақаншы), which is almost perfectly cut in half by the western side of the triangle.

triangle detail with circle.png

Finding any information on Makanchi was difficult. You can get a decent look at it from above on Google, but street view has only minimal coverage in Kazakhstan - you can see the border crossing at Qoqek (Tacheng) about 45 miles to the east and a random residential scene at Naualy a similar distance to the west, but hardly anything else even remotely close. Wikipedia has a sparse English-language page on Urzhar District, but the only pages for Makanchi itself are in Kazakh and Russian. From what I could gather from Google's attempts at translation, the city was founded in 1879 and has a population of around 12,242.

Now, about those other cities? Somehow I missed them my first time through this project, but a few do in fact exist, mostly along the road from Makanchi to Qoqek. The only two I could find on Wikipedia (links in Russian, which appears to have the most information) are Karatal (Каратал), a town of just under 1,000 residents (not to be confused with any of the fifteen other Kazakh and five Russian cities of the same name, one of which is located 150 miles to the northeast), and Bakhty (Бахты), a city immediately to the Kazakh side of the Kazakh-Chinese border with a population of about 2,500. Google shows a few other settlements along that road, but none of their names are given in the Cyrillic alphabet and as best I can tell none of them show up anywhere on Wikipedia.

While the northern tip of the triangle does approach several settlements, as best I can tell it doesn't actually include them. The closest is a village called Lager (Лагерь), but it turns out Лагерь is actually just the generic Russian and Kazakh word for "camp," so finding any details on the site turned out to be impossible. (For all I know, it may be an actual camp; it can't have more than a dozen or two structures.) Is Lager really outside the triangle? My measurements on Google suggest it is. My best guess from looking at the GIS screenshots says it isn't. I have easy access to Google and no easy access to GIS as I write this section of the answer, so Google is the official winner.

As best I can tell, then, Karatal is the furthest city from a current or announced LDS temple site (if you define "city" as "permanent civilian settlement with a Wikipedia page in at least one language").


Remember how I said I couldn't map the announced temple in Russia, because it doesn't have a location yet?

Giving it a location could change this answer quite a bit.

Wikipedia says there are currently three stakes and four districts in Russia. It seems likely that the Church would try to build a temple in one of those stakes, since they represent the largest concentration of Church membership. Therefore, I will start by looking at those three locations: MoscowSaratov, and St. Petersburg.

Moscow seems to be the most logical choice. According to the LDS Meetinghouse Locator, there are ten wards and branches in Moscow and its suburbs, and five others nearby. Plus, as the capital city, it seems likely to be the most suitable travel destination.

Moscow to Bakhty:

moscow to bakhty.png

Moscow to Yuryung-Khaya:

moscow to yuryung khaya.png

If a temple is built in Moscow, it will be just under 2,000 miles from Makanchi, and the entire Urzhar District triangle will fall within the 2,250 mile radius. Nordvik and Yuryung-Khaya would still fall outside of that radius, though, leaving Yuryung-Khaya as the furthest city from a temple.

Next up is Saratov. It only has six wards and branches, but the nearby cities of Samara (home to a district and a mission) and Tolyatti (also home to a district) and other nearby cities contribute seven more. Plus, it's closer to the far-flung branches in Russia's interior.

Saratov to Bakhty:

saratov to bakhty.png

Saratov to Yuryung-Khaya:

saratov to yuryung khaya.png

A temple in Saratov would be even closer to the Urzhar District than Moscow and even further from Yuryung-Khaya, so the result would be the same as Moscow: Yuryung-Khaya is our new winner. If the temple is built 200 miles to the northeast in either Samara or Tolyatti, it will be 2,230 miles from Yuryung-Khaya, still far enough to keep it in first place.

Last, and in my opinion definitely least likely, is St. Petersburg. With seven congregations and three more nearby, the number of members in the temple's immediate vicinity would be lower than either of the other two locations. Plus, St. Petersburg is just under 200 miles from the temple in Helsinki, Finland. Apart from saving the trouble of crossing an international border, a temple in St. Petersburg wouldn't do much to bring temple access closer to most of Russia's members. Still, it's a significantly more likely location than any other city that hasn't made the list.

St. Petersburg to Bakhty:

st petersburg to bakhty.png

St. Petersburg to Yuryung-Khaya:

st petersburg to yuryung khaya.png

If a temple is built in St. Petersburg, it will be about 2,235 miles from Yuryung-Khaya, 2,245 miles from Makanchi, and 2,250 miles from Karatal. This leaves Bakhty and Karatal tied as the furthest cities from a temple.

Let's imagine, though, that none of those cities work out and instead a temple is built somewhere like Yekaterinburg or Novosibirsk, less than 2,000 miles from both regions. If the furthest point from a temple is not in Russia, where will it be?

Remember the six inhabited areas further than 2,000 miles from a temple? We can eliminate Russia immediately, courtesy of the new temple's hypothetical location. We can also knock out Al-Hofuf and Greenland, since all of their cities are between 2,000 and 2,100 miles from a temple. Rodrigues is barely over 2,100 miles, so the Indian Ocean is out too. That leaves two contenders, both in the Pacific Ocean - one to the east, and one to the west.

Easter Island is the only candidate location in the eastern Pacific. By my rough measurement, it's around 2,215 miles from the nearest temple in Concepcion, Chile. In the western Pacific, I'm eliminating both Bikini Atoll and Rongelap Atoll, since the aftermath of nuclear testing left them with only a negligible population. That makes Pohnpei, Micronesia the only island under consideration. Depending on what part of the island you measure, it's between 2,200 and 2,220 miles from the nearest temple in Suva, Fiji. So ultimately, it all comes down to the exact location of the Conception and Suva temples and the exact location of the furthest inhabited point on each island.

If you think I'm going to stop here, you are completely wrong.

The exact site of the temple in Concepcion is Pedro de Valdivia 1525 (addresses in Spanish put the street number after the street name). Here is a close-up of the site:

100hb easter island temple distance 1.png

And here is the most distant identifiable man-made structure on Easter Island that someone could conceivably live in:

100hb easter island temple distance 3.png

The total distance? 2,219.85 miles.

100hb easter island temple distance 2.png

The best address I can find for the temple in Suva is the intersection of Lakeba Street and Princess Road. Here it is:

100hb pohnpei temple distance 1.png

It was a bit harder to find the most distant building on Pohnpei, but I'm pretty sure this is it:

100hb pohnpei temple distance 3.png

Total distance: 2,217.20 miles.

100hb pohnpei temple distance 2.png

Easter Island beats Pohnpei by exactly 2.65 miles.

So there you have it. If the temple in Russia is built east of Moscow, the furthest permanent civilian population from a temple will be on Easter Island. I think that's unlikely, though; once the Russia temple location is announced, I'm willing to bet Easter Island will be in second place, after Yuryung-Khaya, and I'm willing to bet that both of those locations will hold their position for a very long time. Why? Let's take a look at what it would take to change that.

We'll start with Yuryung-Khaya As I previously mentioned, a temple in St. Petersburg or the Samara-Tolyatti area would shave 15-20 miles off the distance from Yuryung-Khaya to the nearest temple, which would still leave it ahead of Easter Island (and in the case of St. Petersburg, if no other temple is built elsewhere in Russia, behind the Urzhar District). But both of these options are, in my opinion, unlikely at best. Could the Church build a second temple elsewhere in Russia? Assuming the first temple is in Moscow or St. Petersburg, I suppose it's possible. Yekaterinburg and Novosibirsk are each surrounded by a cluster of branches, but it seems unlikely that either location would be able to support a temple without significant growth first. And Vladivostok is too isolated from the rest of Russia and too close to Japan and South Korea to seem realistic, especially with a bare handful of branches there. And on top of all of that, Russian politics are not exactly favorable to foreign churches at the moment. Given that we still don't know where the already-announced temple in Russia will be located, I don't think a second one is coming in the foreseeable future.

There are several technically possible but completely implausible options: a second temple north of Sapporo on the island of Hokkaido (which would make no sense, as Sapporo is home to half the island's population and Japan still has no temple in most of its major cities), a temple in Fairbanks, Alaska (which would basically exist for the benefit of the Fairbanks Stake and nobody else - and which would still be 2,235 miles from Yuryung-Khaya), or a temple somewhere in the far reaches of Canada (and far from any existing congregations) or northern Norway, Sweden, or Finland (where there are only a handful of branches).

There are also three currently temple-less countries that we can safely disregard for the foreseeable future: China (not happening anytime soon, and Beijing and all but a few of China's largest cities are outside of the 2,250 mile radius anyway), Kazakhstan (unlikely - while the country isn't as religiously repressive as China, the current LDS population is just 197 people), and the northern tip of North Korea (no).

BUT! That does leave one important possibility: Mongolia. Right now, Mongolia has a mission, two stakes and a district, and over 10,000 members. That's only half as many members as Russia, but they're concentrated in a much smaller area. Ulaanbaatar alone has twelve wards, two more than Moscow. And right now, the nearest temple is over 1,200 miles away in Seoul, South Korea. I imagine it will be a while, but I'm willing to bet most of us will live to see a temple in Ulaanbaatar.

So, in summary and in order, the plausible locations for a temple within 2,250 miles of Yuryung-Khaya:

  1. Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia (1,730 miles; Yuryung-Khaya drops off the list entirely)
  2. St. Petersburg, Russia (2,235 miles; if no temple is built elsewhere in Russia, the Urzhar District stays in first place and Yuryung-Khaya stays in second)
  3. Samara or Tolyatti, Russia (2,230 miles; Yuryung-Khaya stays in first place)
  4. Yekaterinburg, Russia (1,800 miles; Yuryung-Khaya drops off the list)
  5. Novosibirsk, Russia (1,500 miles; there are entire countries in Asia further than Yuryung-Khaya from a temple)
  6. Anywhere else, which would require shocking and unforeseeable circumstances

As for Easter Island? In order to get a temple closer to Easter Island than Concepcion, you'd basically have to build a temple on Easter Island itself. The nearest inhabited place is nearly 1,300 miles away on Pitcairn Island; the nearest city of over 500 people is about 1,600 miles away on Mangareva in French Polynesia. Aside from the Easter Island branch, the nearest listed congregations on the Meetinghouse Locator are the Isla Juan Fernandez, Chile branch 1,900 miles to the east and the Hao, French Polynesia branch 2,000 miles to the west. The only areas in mainland South America closer to Easter Island than Concepcion are just a few miles to the city's south. All four of those places are incredibly unlikely temple candidates. Easter Island's branch is tiny, and when I was a missionary in Chile (2009-2011) the branch president was a senior missionary. Juan Fernandez Island has a population of barely 900 and the branch there is also very small small (although, to the best of my recollection, the branch at least had a local branch president). Hao is an atoll threatened by climate change - its highest point is just three feet above sea level - and it is only 600 miles from the temple in Pape'ete, Tahiti. And there's no good reason to build a second temple in a rural area just a few miles from Concepcion.

So is there ever going to be a temple closer to Easter Island? Probably not in my lifetime.

While we're at it, we might as well look at the outlook for the other locations beyond the 2,000 mile mark.

Micronesia and the Marshall Islands about 700 miles to the east each have a Church membership of 6,000-7,000, but I suspect a more likely location for a new temple in the Pacific is Tarawa, some 1,000 miles to the southeast. The island has 15 congregations, and Kiribati, the country it is a part of, has two stakes, two districts, 31 congregations, and around 20,000 members, making up nearly 20% of its population. It is also around 1,400 miles from the temples in Fiji and Samoa. Now, I'm not sure how the Church would feel about building a temple on an atoll as opposed to a proper island, but it's definitely a possibility.

Even more likely than that, though, is a temple about 1,350 miles to the southwest of Pohnpei in Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea. The country has two missions, two stakes, and twelve (!) districts made up of over 27,000 members in 80 wards and branches - significantly more members than Russia. The nearest temple is over 1,300 miles to the south in Brisbane, Australia. I would bet you just about anything that they will have a temple of their own announced within the next ten years.

For Rodrugues to lose its spot on the list, the Church would most likely have to build a temple in Mozambique or Madagascar. Both countries have a mission, multiple stakes, and just over 10,000 members. I'd guess Madagascar is the more likely of the two, since Mozambique is already close to two temples in South Africa and one in Zimbabwe.

You'd think that the towns in Greenland might get knocked off the list by another temple in Canada, but there really aren't any major cities with a concentration of Church members that are closer than the existing temples. The best candidate would actually be Edinburgh or Glasgow, Scotland. The two cities each have a decent cluster of meetinghouses, and it's been twenty years since the last temple was dedicated in the UK, so I think it's entirely plausible.

Al-Hofuf... that is a tough one. A temple in Saratov or Samara, Russia, would bump it off the list. It's hard to think of other realistic possibilities - Albania was the only serious candidate in Europe to come to mind, with 3,000 members and several thousand more in the surrounding countries, but Tirana is just barely over 2,000 miles from Al-Hofuf. India's Church membership is concentrated to the country's south and east, so a second temple there would probably not change anything. Still... I'm not willing to rule out Russia completely.

So I'll refine my prediction just a little:

  1. The Urzhar District will drop off the list of distant locations as soon as the location of the Russia temple is announced.
  2. Pohnpei will drop off the list within a decade.
  3. Yuryung-Khaya, Rodrigues, and Greenland will all drop off the list sometime in the next 20-30 years, give or take.
  4. Al-Hofuf will lose its place eventually, but the time and manner are impossible to predict at this point.
  5. Barring a dramatic change in the Church's philosophy towards temples or an utterly unprecedented mass conversion, Easter Island will sooner or later reach first place and stay there for as long as anyone who remembers this list is around to remember it.

And there you have it: in all likelihood, the second-most conclusive answer to this recurring question that I will ever write. I look forward to updating it as soon as the location of the temple in Russia is announced (although depending on my GIS access, it might not look as fancy). Until then, I hope this has kept you informed and entertained!


Question #91151 posted on 04/15/2018 8:24 a.m.

Dear Frère Rubik,





Dear Vienna,

Kidding! I’m just kidding! 


That's right, folks: one of the Board's kindest, funniest, most loving and compassionate writers has decided to marry probably the Board's most Rubik-iest writer. 

How on earth did I get to be so lucky, you ask? It's simple, really: I successfully defeated Chris Pratt in a taco-eating contest on top of the Empire State Building. Why she had us hold the contest there, I don't know (it was very cold and windy and the cilantro kept flying off of my tacos), but we went along with it because she is totally worth it.

I don't want to overly gush, but Vienna is amazing. She is so amazingly kind and loving and supportive and funny and great. She feels special to me in a way that no one else has before. She makes me so much better.

Plus, I mean, she's really pretty, guys:


What did I tell you? Drop-dead gorgeous. And I get to be with her forever.

-Frère Lovestruck

P.S. The reason it took so long, Vienna, is because I got lost in your eyes every time I tried to draw a paper bag over them.

P.P.S. Ok so yeah technically the real reason it took so long is because this semester has been absolutely crazy with graduating and wedding planning and whatnot but I'm serious about those eyes of yours, chica. They are DREAMY.

Question #91100 posted on 03/31/2018 9:06 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

I know you’re busy trying to get into the Room of Requirement, but I saw a picture in the library on one of the display monitors advertising laptop chargers as perk #126. What are the other 125+

Or if you can’t secure a list of those, what would you list as the top ten library perks?



Dear Rachmaninoff,

You came to the write place, because as a Board writer I'm definitely privy to that real information, and didn't just come up with a list off the top of my head. Here are the other 125 library perks:

  1. Great place for studying. 8/10 recommend
  2. (The other 2/10 get bad grades)
  3. Comfy chairs for napping
  4. Comfy couches for napping
  5. Snack zone
  6. Sometimes they give away free chocolate milk during our weird version of Oktoberfest
  7. Vending machines
  8. So many books!
  9. Including one that may be about making your own cocaine?
  10. JK I know it's not about drugs sorry if my joke offended you
  11. But also so many cute teeny books!
  12. Lots of tables
  13. Some of which have outlets!
  14. You can meet your soulmate in periodicals
  15. Or anywhere else in the library, I guess
  16. Family study area
  17. Moving bookcases because BYU is Hogwarts
  18. The special collections
  19. (Which, if you haven't checked out, you definitely should, because they have some cool stuff)
  20. Like, they have engraved clay tablets from the Roman Empire
  21. And original illuminated manuscripts written on vellum by monks
  22. Reservable study rooms
  23. (If only the girls next to me having a loud study session in a quiet section of the library realized this)
  24. (Hopefully they read the Board and will see this and know that in the future they should definitely just reserve a study room)
  25. (#PassiveAggressive)
  26. Lots of available computers
  27. The multimedia lab, for all your multimedia desires
  28. You can check out cool movies
  29. You can also use some of their rooms to watch said cool movies
  30. The music area (where I am currently writing this)
  31. A production studio for recording videos or taking photos
  32. (With lighting, backgrounds, and cameras!)
  33. You can check out laptops
  34. And also iPads
  35. And also cameras
  36. (Photo cameras AND video cameras)
  37. And even GoPros!
  38. It provides employment to a lot of BYU students
  39. And the employees are all so nice
  40. Convenient printers
  41. And color printers!
  42. Also there are organs
  43. (Musical ones, not human ones)
  44. (Except for the human ones inside the humans who frequent the library)
  45. It's probably definitely haunted!
  46. Lots of family history stuff
  47. The giant globe on the 2nd floor
  48. Also the skeletons on the 2nd floor
  49. No Shh zones
  50. There are a lot of bathrooms here, so I suppose that's pretty useful
  51. Fast waterbottle filling stations
  52. And also some very slow ones
  53. Interlibrary loan, which gets you access to basically any book in any library in the nation
  54. It gives you access to cool databases like ebsco and JSTOR
  55. Also you can get a RefWorks account through them
  56. There's a big cool auditorium for lectures and conferences
  57. It doesn't leak, so you can stay dry during rain or snow storms
  58. Also it has AC for hot summer months
  59. It has fridges in certain areas for certain employees
  60. Self check-out stations to expedite your checking-out process
  61. The American Heritage review room is located there
  62. Vending machines that have school supplies
  63. And also chapstick
  64. (Basically, library vending machines are like a little mini-store in their own right)
  65. Conference rooms for people who must convene in conferences
  66. The cool mural on the 4th floor
  67. It has stairs, which is helpful for people who need to get from one floor to another
  68. It also has elevators, which is helpful for people who can't take the stairs
  69. Periodicals has a cozy fireplace area surrounded by couches
  70. It has some classrooms
  71. (Which means fewer classes being held in the MARB, something we should all be grateful for)
  72. Some of the women's restrooms also include nursing mother areas
  73. A lot of it is underground, which is pretty cool
  74. (HA, literally, because underground is cooler than above-ground in terms of temperature)
  75. (Well, I guess underground is just more insulated, so it could be cooler or warmer than above-ground, depending on the outside temperature)
  76. There are a lot of doors, so you're more likely to be protected in case of a velociraptor attack
  77. (Because if we learned anything from Jurassic Park, it's that velociraptors can definitely open doors, but hopefully having lots of doors would at least slow them down)
  78. The big glass ceiling/walls at the north entrance allow you to see what the weather outside is like
  79. Once I heard a rumor that it's the most highly insured building the Church owns, because of all its rare books and collections
  80. Little study carrels that line the walls on pretty much every floor except the 3rd
  81. Those carrels even have little personal whiteboards!
  82. Book detectors by the entrances/exits, so you can't steal their books
  83. (Bad news for book thieves, good news for future generations of students)
  84. Lots of outlets to charge your computer
  85. And I guess also your phone
  86. Art on lots of the walls
  87. Lots of fire extinguishers, in case of fires
  88. One time I was at the library and they were giving away cake
  89. There are 3D printers students can use!
  90. They have virtual reality equipment
  91. (And it's really cool and all of you should try it)
  92. You can check out hollow books
  93. The 1st floor has an auditorium that always has different art displays up
  94. There are weird but cool statues on the 2nd floor near periodicals
  95. There's a 3D scale model of BYU campus in 2005 on the 1st floor
  96. All the floors have little display cases by the south-end staircases
  97. The north-end staircase going from the 3rd floor to the 4th has grooves in it from so many generations of BYU students walking on it
  98. (Which is actually very poetic)
  99. (At least according to poets who write about mundane things like staircases)
  100. The University Accessibility Lab
  101. The Research and Writing Center
  102. Lots of recycling bins
  103. They're starting to put up more paintings of women, and I'm all about that women's representation
  104. The basement doesn't have cell service
  105. (Which could be good if you're trying to focus but get distracted by your phone a lot)
  106. "The largest repository of materials related to the viola in the world"
  107. The cool secret-ish study space near the viola archive
  108. The Asian section is pretty cool
  109. Also they have some old antique tables around that area, too
  110. They have hole punchers for students to use
  111. And also staplers
  112. They have scanners
  113. And even a fax machine!
  114. They have longer hours during finals week
  115. It's where freshman mentors meet with their mentees
  116. You can browse music scores on their website
  117. They turn on music to kick people out at night, so at least it's a fun way of kicking people out
  118. Some of the tables have little plaques on the sides next to the outlets discouraging the theft of chargers
  119. Brightly colored accent walls next to the staircases
  120. You can do an audio tour of the library
  121. You can stream media through BYUgle
  122. An AV dubbing rack to change VHS to DVD
  123. A reserveable sound booth
  124. They have a photo archive of their whiteboard quotes
  125. They have a vast documentary collection

And that, of course, brings up to perk #126, laptop chargers.

There's definitely more perks of the library, but in the interest of doing something else with my life instead of thinking about the HBLL at all times, I'll let you discover those on your own.


Question #90985 posted on 03/06/2018 11:16 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Books printed in the 1960s smell good, like really good. Why is that?



Dear Sniffler,

Do you want to know about SCIENCE??

Books are primarily made of paper, which is made of wood. Two of the main molecules in the cell walls of plants are cellulose and lignin. Here are some fun diagrams of the molecules.



You'll see that they're both long chains of mostly circular molecules. Circular molecules are aromatic, and they're called aromatic because most of the first aromatic molecules smelled good. That's not a general rule for aromatic compounds, but lucky for us a lot of the by-products of the breakdown of cellulose and lignin smell nice. Here are some of the by-products of the breakdown of cellulose and lignin:

 - Toluene

Toluene has a strong aromatic odor that most people find pleasant. It smells vaguely like gasoline.

 - Vanillin

You'll recognize this one as the functional molecule in vanilla. This is why old books smell kind of like vanilla.

 - 2-ethyl hexanol

2-ethyl hexanol is a compound that is found in a lot of natural plant fragrances, specifically fruits, like plums.

 - Ethyl Benzene

Ethyl benzene smells like gasoline as well, and has a sweet odor. It's used in tars and ink.

 - Benzaldehyde

Benzaldehyde is used in imitation almond extract, and has a sweet almond-like odor.

 - Furfural

Furfural also is a sweet, almond-smelling compound, and can also be used to calculate how old a book is!

So that's the chemical reason that old books have that slightly fruity, nutty vanilla smell! The older they are, the more they've got that smell. Books from the 1960's have been breaking down for like 60 years!

Keep it real,
Sherpa Dave

Question #90973 posted on 04/08/2018 6:42 p.m.

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Can you all write answers/tell stories while impersonating another writer? This would make my week.



Dear friend,

Well, you didn't really ask for this, but I decided to do a predictive text answer based on the answers from each individual writer. Enjoy! (I've included some of our recently departed writers as well.)


Dear politicians,

The Cossack of the church can help serve a lot throughout the course of history. Virtually every country in the world crumbled into pieces of polygamy. Certainly, American opposition to the persecution of various protestant sects were killed by the government. The Korean majority of northerners were looking for a candidate who would be more uncomfortable with a god who allows for some trial and error. Despite his imperfections on the spot of the church he presided over recreational activities of the church. However, eventually I realized that I could figure out what the common factors were if you don't think of the church today. They didn't change the testimony of them.  I toootally feel you and they demonstrated suspicious sweatpants.



Dear Nancy of the unwritten horcruxes,

It definitely wouldn't revert back to different numbers represented lovingly by the reader. However esoteric people may be, I can just use my ~30 lb backpack as a bludgeon. So, while I thank you for the interesting read, I was extremely weak stomach and have actually fainted. Will you have 1.265x10 pictures of badly drawn squares? I don't even care. The point is, you can major in business, but I promise I am working on it. I especially like depressed shrubs creeping on the ground but never went through the veil of a dust mote. Negligible disclaimer here, the survivors will be highly incentivized to stop right now. Please don't significantly forward google results turned up 8 rows in the terrestrial room was seated with more people than the second row in the terrestrial room. never specify.



Dear you,

So, here's two more seconds of catchy game music and then the mountains on the west of the valley. The tunnel worms found the nearly tough fight between semesters and drums. You certainly would ensue you have it is very dark inside the earth and come out on the other side. The document singer clop range music with the opera woman is coming back. She's superhuman. I merely hope that father shall be so excited to learn that his theory is correct. It's never certain that you enjoy enough songs. Never enough. Yog begins making judgement calls, and we must hurry. We have dug as fast as we can but it's not something you'd specifically see. If Edward could somehow bring this fight to the water, then the mountains would probably have been graciously translated.

~Anne, Certainly


Dear bakerer's apprentice,

The aforementioned putrid enlightening Quora article does mention hot liquid sugars as an edible liquid. Anathema pointed out liquid nitrogen as a possibility but noted a google search showed there was controversy about safety risks. There's not enough food for this discussion 'cause their concentration as an ingredient never would work. Occasionally borrowing evasive moves from the quickstep when the disturbance occurred to the Marriott floor. He nodded appreciatively, but frankly I don't know how anyone could really substantiate that claim. Honey from bees and the body metabolizes the stuff I like best. He rumba his job. He topped his pilfered prize. successful recovery! It's fortunate the police showed up when they did so long beyond the 100 hours. thrilled to have our dragons back.


--Ardilla Feroz


Benedict of the friendship status,

I think maybe not worth it because who cares really? Babalugats hates change and always chooses the passive confidence. Babalugats would be Babalugates or something, I don't already read it. Whether plants experience things is important, and vulnerability can be explored in collaboration with the opposite party. The active participant reported feelings of relief come to understand the connection you should approach the conversation with respect. respect is the bit soft of the eggs. You can be that kind of wisdom every year, and disease production without snowfall? Not quite embarrassing enough. Lightning should be fine to understand the connection between moisture and wildfire. Please maybe date your life depends on what scholarship you get. you can be traced. Never mentally worth it.



Dear individuals,

Have any questions regarding any parts of this conveniently livable planet been assured? I mean, you stand to lose if you leave in peace on earth. The rarity produced throughout the week would help your body to metabolize the cake better than if you ignored prior cry. Monopoly on truth will resonate with our brains to be able to do anything good. If that's not a very expressive individual, then hopefully wrap it all up, because instead the spirit moves I have literally zero desire to do this. Always assume that if I bring something like the Aquabats, then hopefully I would rate each water bottle filler on any of 11 floors to fill my water bottle. Sometimes it just makes me more able to focus. But that's just a few moments of my existence.


~Dr. Occam


Dear fragrant James,

Now, slide dollars, and I am inferring to be really fancy metals. This is further reinforcement that many of the events that people tend to think apply to our day are actually talking about laundry. This miserable mood is a tranquil spring afternoon dance. One whiff of this complex fragrance and you can see the blues. see lectures, see feelings. They didn't really understand any of the different sweats encountered freshman year, such as: the scent that says, " well worth it ", the thermal conductivity of any pure metal, and instantly you'll be transported back to your days of ice blocking. They didn't really follow that order at all of the roman currency, which is kind of what I figured might happen. You didn't ever bottle up the epic and then lift up the side. I was going to take over our government, but the oldest version of the Hebrew torah should put in one last disclaimer. I was actually a vacuum.

-Frere Rubik


Dear clone,

Board question # 34094 squirrel pending technically came in the conservatory. It's probably significantly magic not entirely sure of the board's entropy. 12 board words ordered by the webmasters made major progress toward updating the future. lies sponsors domain number blownapart 20th board anniversary. Board 6.0 will significantly end the audience of the repeated meme board. I personally do have a point, the webmasters made major board questions.  When this question whisperer Sam was fine print, he got stuff to work. Some more progress toward updating the board is incredibly subjective and Sauron is going to die. 

--django fett


Dear yosef,

The social stigma of my major and psyche after all of the world literally had stopped says here's a little hat. But instead we just started using symbolism like the pro floor tradition orthodoxy. 06 things can happen without using words to do a survey for religious message collections. I was tired around 1891 minutes so long test seeds who can magnify thought attitudes. Acceptable thing grief check will cause something within you and bring you rage siblings to be more wonderful. The board generally just wanted to drop something like " mom is now that capture ". It's not attractive that I can keep going back to tithing in the sense that there are some beds in a fixed mindset. I was tired, and I didn't want to risk letting tarot cards be able to maintain their strange form. Not that I was going to stop worrying about what happened when I was still learning more about this practice. 

Take care,

-Auto Surf


Dear nameless of doom,

I officially decided to do it 4 weeks ago, and the means by which he came to them a few months ago is wrong. It's highly unlikely he would say " that was a girl from the tropics ", but more seriously contemplating getting a PhD in eternity hereafter. My roommate didn't take that test, or amorous relationships seriously. Do we not practice polygamy today? No, and about doing baptisms. If you explain what you can improve to be barber words, no choice in high school helped me. Thighs smaller than one man implies that a woman is the glory of the Pythagorean theorem. And you might even feel more comfortable telling them what you can improve in yourself or do to serve your laptop. students should avoid dating website to use it on walks and the temple grounds. That is entirely certain.

-guppy of doom


Dear fossilized typewriter,

I really do, you want high swear words? What recording label created the music you have to start worrying about this. The doctor descended deeper into a human clone of the doctor that got stuck in that alternate dimension with rose Tyler. For more information about the headphones you're looking at, there's a lot of good said thing people at the internet. So, if you ever compromise those standards, there's a little different perspectives besides elder Uchtdorf. There's some isolation between the first dimension and the pearl quorum. If somewhat boring with plenty of haiku blessings seems excellent spatially? Just mentally mentally mentally mentally chaotic. Don't be afraid of the twelve after being taught out there are over the muscles in his tongue. The majority of measurements of different perspectives are sealed headphones.



Dear charlotte in the car,

I have a very grumpy and cynical person, she's that retired writers. July is probably perpetually hungry about marriage. Have legitimate panic attacks been good at taking tests and all that popular stuff? Not going to call this good blank wall space. They find it difficult because of prejudice against Ontario culture of various ecosystems on an African safari. Writers are blissfully featured at the university of the Caribbean, and the captain of Disney’s opinion was uprooted recently but Maria is plagued by doubt and achievements. Epcot probably has the newest attractions like spaceship Dumbo, 1942, and the gran fiesta tour. Some of those four categories are very vocal about arsenic and old hardships, so I lowered their minimum to include a variety of different pavilions. The infamous Katya retires like it hot and moulin rouge questions like it's consistently incredible.




Dear seeker of salt,

My mission call was blackmailed as part of the never-ending war on the forehead of the best eggs. I think that eventually only franchise justice league will guide you to get paid by yourself, as if you should do it for marriage. You don't have a crazy new trump, you have a barely interesting proposition point. Adding in different goals, the entry tunnel of the torture ticket remains constant through his tweets. I certainly hope that we often forget about three years of our lives, which leads to things like the " fake news awards ". Because of this strategy Olympics, we can plan and emotionally theater the best pieces of your taxes if you have faith. If you have faith, not infallibility to consume within your major stories, but really just let it happen. Don't thank cats, but then proceed to get married by elder Holland.



Dear attractive caves,

The enormous limitations of our own demons have been described by napoleon constantly. He has a body weight range without range, and Jamie lee Curtis would pine for Provo constantly, and try not to worry too much about the future. Have a clear vision about 17.31g of molten nature, and Wikipedia will assume that you are talking about readily obtained heavy crystal. It makes things work, try to enjoy life experience applications and the beast of the intj farm gives us mercury. Thank a member of the south America and the descriptions of each moment before attacking the population of people. Just because vampires are so beautiful doesn't tell me you're joking every two days. However, they experience a profound existential crisis when committed to their values and to people who are originally from china. This is likely due to the human ankle.



Dear friend,

I totally get where you fit in the lord’s permit. The eclipse began particularly eloquent considering some of the things I didn't simply know.  I'm pretty sneaky and they're not necessarily more attractive than I.  It's because of William Flake. Also, it takes place in France which is pretty restrictive for me to understand.  Why is this important you may ask, it's so many crazy medical estimates for English speakers in China?  But, Sherpa Dave is not currently accepting any applications for commercial diamond groups, so estimating around the building we would hand out medicine and eyeglasses.  Keep it real people. When his work is done, his administration functions provide care to more people who speak mandarin Chinese. henlo religion, because honestly trying to understand where they collect carbon dioxide is not something that specifically trigger cravings.  It's certainly not the same values that are constantly important to understand. I often feel unpopular and different than someone who can communicate in English.  Literally this question reminds me of untalented people who are very different. Counselor 33 is located in Ghana.  Would whiplash for a paradoxically healthy person be kleptomaniacs? I don't think so.

Keep it real,
Sherpa Dave


Dear rey of the hill,

I don't know what timeline you expect going forward, but you hit a sensitive spot for some science this day. This helps me feel comfortable with my arms down, and I assume there are multiple artists creating the primary presidency. Did little guy in the world of the transcript text or email back? absolutely none of them sounded particularly jazzy, just like doctrine and covenants 121 says. I would just let him back in the newest movies only, you are at war with my arms. My dizziness went up again, and kingdom hearts 2.8 the music used during the broadcast are incomplete and cannot be updated. The story line of the rotation instead of being at the center of my axis is a good opportunity to do so because now the alumni will be having problems then the parent and member of the primary presidency specifically told us to let them know of any children that were referring to Dallas down a hill.



Dear perturbed Alibaba,

I believe this is a very common swamp for the job. We hugged her dad to admit that it is important to read, but I have told her that I think it is more comfortable that way. If it really bugs you, then do my shoes. Gordon b. Colony on mars is a very common feeling for all of us to prayerfully consider. Case the couch and then you are free game again. Needless to be a brag party, but I have told bighands and bigfingers respectively that you are your own grandmother. You just swallow it down and smile. The lizard people found out that our quarterbacks struggled untied shoelaces and I recognized that this confusion by Budweiser is a very common explanation for all of us to make the hottest chili on the planet. Have a new slogan like " band of brothers " and rise and roar. It'll be a good relationship in the long term.

-Sunday Night Banter


Dear rhubarb for carbs,

I had hoped to delay my hypothesis by measuring the absorbance spectra of those feelings about lego.com. If you are present somewhere in Provo, then taxation is theft. My dad gave up trying to manage each beverage individually and combined unique minutes because they were awkward. It's normal enough to deal blood cream at least until alumni week or even if you're more practical, until they have been broken. I can only hope that it primarily shines more of a straight interview. If you're on dates, they say they recommend marriage, but I got scholarships when I was going to do some real thing. So, what's the government actually sensitive for? Forcing people to do things and anything not crazy like butter. When I’m not true at each one isn't significantly nutritionally different from river dance theaters.

-The Entomophagist


Dear fellow nerf slave,

I also agree with choosing whether or not to return your motivations. The consensus was that it is normal to enjoy your style for the better friends until my cousin realized you mean you are enough. You can always improve a lot of barbecue with some board writers and this is for good reasons. You choose to make it worth your time by the church does not officially enforce a couple of levels and I feel that god is prompting you to go back to a creepy little man. It's properly summed up by a lot of ways and I feel you need to do it with straw as a ruse to kidnap maximum employment. Cheers do not have access to work worldwide. However, because she liked him a lot she should have encouraged church members to join with her to eat something. So, don't be a full failure associated with choosing tithing intervention. Just teach painful perspectives.

The Lone Musketeer


Dear wonderer,

I just don't think of anything to start to become the person god intended us to become. The thing about kissing family friends is that no matter how much you want to avoid them afterwards, you need to know everything frantically. You might avoid embarrassment by trying to do things by yourself but there are subtle differences between zombies or raptors. Combining all the strengths of both zombies and raptors are significantly harder to avoid than anyone. Byu football is awesome too, and I have asked 88 questions despite having kissed miss leinster. You don't have a lot championship clockwise minor dating equivalent. There are 10 things you need to know about everything to be good enough to repel them once you wish a long way. I happen to have tried the specific dance of learning for Disney princess. There you have it, but you don't need homework to make battle against the land of Clyde.




Dear certain monster podcast,

I mean, this corner of the Americas hasn't morally offered members anything. But alas, my thoughts about the Magyars in comparison to the nineteenth spectrum of emotion are pretty gruesome. understanding lgbt policies that can help your question but then frère made me remember that being around campus is not right. Nobody's good at byu. Even taking the initiative and emotional charge together, I think it depends on the circumstances and menu online to read its message of the church. That being said to be yourself about what kind of stress you have got yourself a meal. You want to see if audiobooks hold your partner's weaknesses and attack and just want them to be happy products. Also, you sound southern, and I think that if you want a little bit about Confucianism, I technically am a difficult enough person who doesn't just have a lot of answers.

-Van Goff


Dear you,

I don't really like this statistic of the philosophies of colonialism, the main goal was typically to extract the tea into the swkt and then forget about it. This map shows every part of the wilk in Greek symphonies. I am fluent in the private information of Provo, but it does mention that when you don't really address your late gas you have caused a hard impact. It's better to be single than to be a curator for a national museum. Honestly, and disseminated that throughout the world and it's just so perpetuating. We can tell the same story of the fathers of the fathers, but it does corroborate the editors would say about half of my mission companions are dealbreakers. They chopped the lids off the harbor and it's just never within someone's control. It makes sense when you're dealing with a limited-edition version of the original place.



Keep it real,
Sherpa Dave (with significant help from Tipperary)