Match types don’t apply after moving to “Create Ads” step” in Google Ads

I’m trying to set up a Google Ads campaign. On step 2 "Set up ad groups" I add keywords to Ad groups with match types:

+ipad +apps
"ipad apps"
[ipad apps]

Then I click "Save and Continue" and on Step 3 my keywords appear changed to:

ipad apps, +ipad +apps

Then I click back to Step 2 and I see the following:

ipad apps
ipad apps
+ipad +apps

For some reason, my keywords are changed to "broad match". How to prevent this behavior? What do I need to do to turn on Matching Types?

Match two distinct values from a single column in a joined table

I have three tables:

class: class_id class_name  student: student_id student_name  class_schedule: class_id student_id 

I want to select all the classes where studentA and studentB are in the same class using the student names. I can use a subquery to pull all the classes studentA is in, and then from that subset the classes that studentB is in and that works. That being said, it is terribly inefficient. I have tried a number of solutions including joining the same table twice, once for each value I want to find, but always get an empty result set.

For testing and prototyping purposes I am using sqlite, but will reside on DB2 long term.

When you cast Flock of Familiars, is your regular familiar’s telepathy improved to match the others?

My problem is with the D&D 5e paradigm ‘spells do only as they say they do’ which if I am reading flock of familiars correct means that already possessing a familiar weakens this spell to the point where you’d have been better off not having that original familiar.

The spell description of the flock of familiars spell states (emphasis mine):

If you already have a familiar conjured by the Find Familiar spell or similar means, then one fewer familiars are conjured by this spell.

Familiars summoned by this spell can telepathically communicate with you and share their visual or auditory senses while they are within 1 mile of you.

Whereas the spell description of the spell find familiar states (emphasis mine):

While your familiar is within 100 feet of you, you can communicate with it telepathically. Additionally, as an action, you can see through your familiar’s eyes and hear what it hears until the start of your next turn, gaining the benefits of any special senses that the familiar has. During this time, you are deaf and blind with regard to your own senses.

This makes it seem as if the familiars summoned by flock of familiars are much, much stronger than those summoned by the regular find familiar because (1) their range is increased from 100 foot to 1 mile and (2) the flock of familiars does not state that one would be deaf and blind to their own senses. However, possessing a regular familiar does cause the Flock of Familiars spell to summon one familiar less effectively turning three strong familiars into two strong familiars and one weak familiar.

I very strongly doubt that this is the RAI and if this comes up on my table – which it might since I plan to take this spell when my wizard levels to lvl 3 – I, for one, will be arguing to give the regular familiar the same benefits for as long as flock of familiars lasts, but is this correct RAW or is it just wishful thinking of a player planning to use the spell? And is the not deaf and blind part supposed to be a benefit of flock of familiars (allowing you to see through all three’s senses at once) or is it an ommision on Wizard of the Coast’s part?

EDIT: Before anyone makes any wrong assumptions, I am not trying to rules lawyer my DM. If she says I cannot, I will not. However, we are on very good footing and I dare believe that if I ask her for those benefits that she will instantly say yes. I just don’t want to ask for those benefits unless they are actually RAI and if they are even RAW, all the better.

Use WPQuery to match to specific repeater row in post

So i have a repeater inside post-type ‘properties’ that stores Lot No and Auction Date for all the Auctions a property is in.

When going into an event page, say for 12th August it needs to list all of the properties in this auction in Lot No order.

When i use WP Query i’m doing it as so:

function my_posts_where( $  where ) {    $  where = str_replace("meta_key = 'auctions_$  ", "meta_key LIKE 'auctions_%", $  where);    return $  where; }  add_filter('posts_where', 'my_posts_where');          $  args = array (             'post_type'=>'properties',             'post_status'=>'publish',             'posts_per_page'=> 40,             'paged'=> $  paged,             'suppress_filters' => false,             'meta_query' => array(              'proparray' => array(                'key' => 'auctions_$  _auction_date',                'value' => $  today2,                'compare' => 'LIKE',              ),              'lot-nos' => array(                'key' => 'auctions_$  _lot_no',                'type' => 'NUMERIC',              ),         ),        'orderby' => array(           //  'auction-dates' => 'ASC',             'lot-nos' => 'ASC',         ),           );         $  wpb_all_query = new WP_Query($  args); 

My problem is that it’s picking up Lot Nos from other rows. So if a property has the following date:

Auction Date : 7th June 2020 Lot No: 2 Auction Date: 12th August 2020 Lot No: 14

It is picking up the auction date 12th August 2020, but ordering it as Lot No 2, NOT 14. I need it to match to the specific row of the date in question, then get the Lot No from that row. is this possible?

Is there a regex way to match generally all possible subdomains in robots.txt?

Given a website with the fictional domain example.com.
The owner of this website added a subdomain : x.example.com.

  • After one year, the owner changed x to y so to have y.example.com
  • After two years, the owner changed y to z so to have z.example.com

Each of the three scenarios did not involve a change of all example.com structures at robots.txt so the owner got a serious long term SEO problem because crawling software were requested to scan non existing webpages (x, and y ones respectively).

What regex prophylaxis could have been used by the owner, beforehand to prevent the SEO problem;
Is there a regex way to match generally all possible subdomains in robots.txt?

X.509 – How Is Certificate Chain of Trust “Subject Name”-“Issuer Name” Match Comparison Made?

I keep reading that in an X.509 certificate chain of trust that the "Issuer Name" in a certificate that has been signed by the Issuer must "match" the "Subject Name" of the Issuer’s certificate. Exactly how is this match determined? Do all of the RDNs (Relative Distinguished Names) have to match between both the Subject Name and Issuer Name or is the match determined solely by the RDNs that are present in the Issuer certificate’s Subject Name, or is some other match algorithm at work?

Can I cast hold person, and have my Hound of Ill Omen attack, on the turn I summon the hound if our initiatives match?

If my Shadow Sorcerer survives to level 6, I will have a Hound of Ill Omen.

As a Bonus Action, you can spend 3 Sorcery Points to magically summon a hound of ill omen to target one creature you can see within 120 feet of you.
{snip stats and moving through objects and creatures}
The hound appears in an unoccupied space of your choice within 30 feet of the target.

I will summon it next to the target for the purposes of this question. (within 5′)

Roll Initiative for the hound.

For this question, the Hound’s initiative roll ends up being the same as mine.

Additionally, while the hound is within 5 feet of the target, the target has disadvantage on Saving Throws against any spell you cast.

Here is where the order of operation concern comes in.

  1. I have used a bonus action to summon the Hound

  2. I can use an Action to cast a spell: I specifically want to cast Hold Person.

  3. The Hound can attack on its turn (when I summon it)

    It is my understanding that the target will have disadvantage on the saving throw versus Hold Person. If the target fails its save, the Hound will be able to attack the held target with advantage, and will have an automatic critical on any hit.

Is there a problem with this order of operations? The bonus action should be usable by me before I cast that spell, and summoning the Hound does not appear to be a ‘cast a spell’ action.

On the rare occasion that our initiative aligns, I’d like to take full advantage of it.

Will this work?

How do I get a new player to stop rewriting my game to match his favorite fiction?

I have a D&D 5e game that I’ve been running for a year that is on pause because some players don’t want to play online or go outside (stupid plague ruining my tabletop). So I offered my son and the player who still does small gatherings a filler game. My son picked Star Wars, I agreed. He told his adult sister, who wanted to come over with her boyfriend to join. During session zero I warned that Star Wars canon, for me, is the original trilogy and the original rulebooks from West End Games (1987).

In no time the boyfriend was saying his character is the cousin of Dash Rendar (who?) because that’s his favorite character. He defends his expectation because he bought himself a Dash Rendar miniature. Then, 4 sessions in, he wanted me to replace his ship, despite my effort to give him stats, background, drawings and floorplan, with Dash Rendar’s ship, because he bought a miniature for it (after having the other ship for a couple sessions). There is also the expectation that I make Dash a major NPC in my game, and give him Dash’s guns and equipment, and something about a planet; I stopped listening. I’ve never had a player like this (in 35 years). He’s not belligerent when I point the lines of ‘few’, ‘minor’ or ‘cosmetic’, or session zero. He just repeats the requests endlessly. And argues that they are still few, minor and cosmetic. And that’s just the character he wants to play. And he doesn’t see how making the game “enjoyable for him” should be such a hassle for me. It’s completely poisoning the game for me, I don’t even want to judge it anymore.

So to resolve it (dodge it entirely), I asked them if they would like to join my D&D game when social distancing stops or pauses or lightens or whatever. I thought it would help because they don’t have history with Forgotten Realms, so there wouldn’t be the crossed expectations. Since my son and his uncle are in both games, we could do some side adventures to level them up to toward the existing party, learn the rules and explain their characters’ relationships with the existing party. They said yes, and made D&D Beyond accounts to join my campaign. The boyfreind made a Warlock Hexblade. I was stoked to have eliminated the problem.

But now he doesn’t want to have anything to do with the Raven Queen, he wants me to replace her with some guy named Leoric from Diablo 2 because that’s his favorite console game. And I need to modify Shadowfell to be more like Diablo 2. And ALL of his spells and features and feats need a necromantic effect that mimic his favorite spells from the video game. I don’t want to hardline him, because I made concessions for every player, they just stopped demanding additional changes somewhere around ‘totally reasonable.’ And like my experience in the Star Wars game, a few concessions have already resulted in the expectation of more, more, MORE!

I pushed back, and he said that he wants to replace him with a Necromancer like Raistlin from DragonLance. Head:0, Brick Wall: Infinity

I am teetering on the edge of just telling him that I don’t try to play his PC, so he shouldn’t try to rewrite my game, and he’s welcome to go find another table where he can play Dash Leoric or whatever. Am I actually wrong, does this fall under the umbrella of ‘the judge’s first job is making the game fun for the players’ or is this guy hijacking my agency as creator and judge? If I am right, and discussing it does not work, what’s the next thing to try?

It does NOT help that it was my own dumb ass that invited my daughter’s boyfriend into my game in the first place. 🙂