Jump to content

unpopular opinions


Joel
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 2/29/2016 at 1:41 PM, Sarcastic Coffeecup said:

I think that stammering online on text based chats looks pretty dumb. I can understand if you do that IRL or on voice chats, but if you jam that on text to try to appear cute or whyever, it feels like a desperate attempt to appear special.

I mean stuff like "t-thanks. o-oh, s-sorry"

Maybe that's just me.

Really? I dont see it as being cute as much as I see it as a way to emphasize a meaning that wouldnt otherwise be shown just writing out the word

For example 

'Thanks', it doesnt say much, maybe for some people it says enough

'Thanks o///o' i.e, people using emoticons to emphasize feeling and meaning, in this case, flustered

'T-thanks' is a way to emphasize meaning sans the silly emoticons, if you want something somewhat more serious.

 

I dont know how other people use the stutter, but if I use it its because I want to get some meaning across, which would likely be lost otherwise seeing as written word doesnt have volume, tone, and inflection.

Context helps, and "Thanks" can be read in many ways. With other cues it helps to understand what someone means when they write 'thanks'

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

- The WiiU is a neat game system.

-People who say they don't need alcohol to have fun annoy me. Like, anybody could, sure. But why try to start a fire with flint or rubbing sticks when you have a lighter?

- People who criticize others for trying to look "special" grate on my nerves, mostly if their reasoning for whatever trying to look special is turns out too be really inane.

-Ears/Tails as an outfit accessory are kinda dumb.  

-BrutalDoom is better than vanilla Doom (even if SergeantMark4 is a cunt.)

-Porn is just as legitimate a genre as action is. Or rather, definitely COULD be.

-Weird fetishes don't bug me that much even if I'm not into them. 

-If somebody is a pedophile, that does't make them automatic scum/evil.

-I like PC and consoles and think neither suck. Stick to whatever you prefer. Fuck.

-A Serbian Film is a good movie, like, REALLY good.

- The best 3D Zelda game is Windwaker (not dissin' on the others, tho, strong competition.)

-SNES is the best console of all time.

-I don't like cringe videos.

 

Edited by Rabbit Head
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Rabbit Head said:

- The WiiU is a neat game system.

It's great!! Especially for retro gamers. D-Pad sux tho.

13 minutes ago, Rabbit Head said:

- The best 3D Zelda game is Windwaker (not dissin' on the others, tho, strong competition.)

Hmmmmmmmm... I can respect that. I'd say 3rd best but really that's like comparing apples to more apples. 

16 minutes ago, Rabbit Head said:

-SNES is the best console of all time.

FUCK YEAH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Endless/Nameless said:

It's great!! Especially for retro gamers. D-Pad sux tho.

Hmmmmmmmm... I can respect that. I'd say 3rd best but really that's like comparing apples to more apples. 

FUCK YEAH

1. Yeah, it's got some pretty unique and fun games on it whether or not you include virtual console. D-pad is bad especially is you want to play retro games with it.

2. Like I said, STRONG competition, Windwaker is the one I just happen to have enjoyed the most. 

3. MY BROTHER!

938896151091346759.jpg.d077c520f3851ac6a

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Rabbit Head said:

-A Serbian Film is a good movie, like, REALLY good.

Here's my unpopular opinion.

I didn't think A Serbian Film was that disturbing at all. And I feel worried about myself like I should have been far more disturbed by it than I was, or that people will think that of me because of that.

I watched it because I love disturbing movies. I love to be shocked, horrified, terrified, disturbed, etc. The movie is at the top of every "most disturbing movies" list, so I expected big things from it. I reckon that's part of it, it's hyped so much in that regard, you really expect it to be more disturbing than it is.

And all the stuff I was meant to find disturbing, everyone already knows what's gonna happen before they watch the movie, so you already have been introduced to the idea, had time to be shocked by it, move on, etc. And it's not graphic in the movie, you don't see anything, so it's the idea alone that is left to horrify you, and that's lost its power when you already know what's coming up.

And then the main thing I think is I'm disturbed by different ideas than A Serbian Film was showing. I'm disturbed by body horror and space/time manipulation and the idea of being trapped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Saxon said:

Even toys and movies?

Yes. It is an all-or-nothing sort of manipulation. Children rarely have the self-discipline to not jump at every new thing they see. I find the worst outcome to this form of marketing is apparent in young adults in the present, as the entire "over-hype" phenomenon. It is as though it stunts a human's ability to skeptically-evaluate products, and isn't that the point? 

I feel that turning children into consumers has little difference to indoctrinating them into a religion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Saxon said:

So you'll actually need to quote at least 1 reputable study to demonstrate that people, exposed to targeted adverts when they are children,  grow up to be less able to critically evaluate adverts as adults. 

This claim isn't necessarily true; the reverse could may even be true; that children who are never targeted by adverts are not 'immunised' against the tricks of the trades.

I don't need to do anything. I am voicing an opinion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Saxon said:

Let me rephrase that then. 

You would need to be aware of at least 1 reputable study showing your opinion has a good justification in order to persuade me. 

I honestly don't know the answer about this question, which I think is interesting, and I'm looking through papers now in order to see if I can find an answer.

It would have simply been helpful if you could save me some time by pointing me in the right direction. 

 

I typically don't care to persuade anyone of anything. If you find something I saw intriguing, that is your prerogative. Do not confuse me with someone interested in what you think or feel. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Saxon said:

...Not even yourself? ...if I come up with an idea I want to find out if it's right or not. 

Do people really not care about checking their ideas? 

As an aside, it's not exactly consistent to lament that children may grow up unable to critically evaluate ideas that have been planted in their heads, if you're unwilling to critically evaluate your own ideas. 

Haha, you are so cute when people don't satisfy your academic urges~

Just because I declined to elaborate doesn't mean that I have not looked into the matter on my own. Assumptions sure are funny!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 6tails said:

You went into it already knowing what to expect - that kills most of the shock factor in the first place. You should not feel bad for not having the extreme reaction many others did.

I feel like even if I went into it blind I still wouldn't have found it very disturbing. I didn't find Salò that disturbing either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have such little respect for the schooling system that think that cheating on tests is generally okay. I have taken entire courses for people Online while posing as them in exchange for large amounts of currency.

On 3/4/2016 at 9:00 AM, Brazen said:

People who look at child/cub porn are pedophiles


The definition of pedophile is someone who looks at child pornography is a pedophile. That is literally what it means. I don't think this opinion should be unpopular because it is immediately apparent!

"Cub" is just a nice way of saying "sexual children," in the way that "feral" is a nice way of saying "sexual actual animals."

Edited by jcstinks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, jcstinks said:

I have such little respect for the schooling system that think that cheating on tests is generally okay. I have taken entire courses for people Online while posing as them in exchange for large amounts of currency.

 

I unironically believe that cheating and lying are important skills to cultivate (especially in school where nothing important is at stake) both because they give you an edge over people who can't and also because it is integral to being able to identify other liars and cheats.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Zaraphayx said:

I unironically believe that cheating and lying are important skills to cultivate (especially in school where nothing important is at stake) both because they give you an edge over people who can't and also because it is integral to being able to identify other liars and cheats.

Theft gives you an edge over people who dont as does murder.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Saxon I tried arguing over research papers with 6tails before and trust me when I say you aren't going to accomplish much of anything by bashing your head against that wall.  He is quite good at posting research that contradicts the very points he is making and then ignoring everything from said research that disagrees with the point he is trying to make.  When it does look like he is starting to be proven wrong he just resorts to personal anecdotes, ad hominem attacks,  and/or claiming that you need to look outside of the paper for something to prove it right.  So if want to continue I wish you the best of luck, but I wouldn't hold out hope for convincing him of anything.

 

As for the topic I hate Cards Against Humanity.  Its a shit game made up of lego block jokes that you just plug together without any real thought except none of the jokes are funny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 6tails said:

How the hell does this work when the CONCLUSION of every paper I post states exactly my point?

Sorry, you failed that argument long ago.

hm...

16 minutes ago, Derin Darkpaw said:

When it does look like he is starting to be proven wrong he just resorts to personal anecdotes, ad hominem attacks,  and/or claiming that you need to look outside of the paper for something to prove it right.

HHMMMMM...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure you two are arguing about different things - Saxon is interpreting harmful as "long-term cognitive decline" or "preventing the development of resistance to advertising," while 6tails is interpreting harmful more broadly (i.e., the study mentions that advertising to children leads to purchasing things that aren't needed, increased parent-child conflict, and increased materialistic attitudes). In a way, you're both kind of right. At least that's what I can gather from the above arguments.

The linked studies comment that children develop skepticism, which leads to more critical evaluation of advertising. This suggests that the cognitive decline due to advertising - if present - does not necessarily overtake the defenses generated during childhood development. However, I haven't seen any data attempting to explicitly quantify said cognitive decline, and with the age of some of the cited studies, I would be interested to see a comparison of cognitive decline between previous advertising tactics and modern ones. There might be data in Saxon's study, but it is behind a paywall so I can't see it.

Edited by Zop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Through my years of schooling, I learned that you aren't going to convince certain people of anything, especially people who rely on name-calling and generalized insults when you disagree with them. Anyone that has to assume that you don't know what you're talking about right off the bat reeks of contempt. They already feel like they are superior to you, so you are fighting an uphill battle.

It's always okay to just ignore them, and find more cool-headed people to have those sorts of debates with. An emotional mind is usually far less capable of reason than a calm mind. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@evan  I don't quite understand what point you are trying to make.  I was not arguing for either Saxon or 6tails point in this debate nor was I attempting to imply that 6tails was in any way wrong in this current debate.  I was merely stating that from my personal experience arguing with 6tails is a fruitless endeavor no matter which side is right or wrong.   I believe the fact that 6tails seems to have immediately taken this as some sort of attack on his argument and is attempting to use it to further his points is indicative of what I was saying right there however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Derin Darkpaw said:

@evan  I don't quite understand what point you are trying to make.  I was not arguing for either Saxon or 6tails point in this debate nor was I attempting to imply that 6tails was in any way wrong in this current debate.  I was merely stating that from my personal experience arguing with 6tails is a fruitless endeavor no matter which side is right or wrong.   I believe the fact that 6tails seems to have immediately taken this as some sort of attack on his argument and is attempting to use it to further his points is indicative of what I was saying right there however.

that's actually why i did that. he tries to distend claims that he has faulty arguments using the same faulty arguments. i have absolutely no opinion on the subject material being argued, just that i completely agree that arguing with that particular person leads to a wave of nonsensical conclusions.

4 minutes ago, Saxon said:

So you've made a lot of passive aggressive comments, but you haven't said what your views on the cited studies are? 

is it really that scary to believe that Ieono does not care about your input?

Edited by evan
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haha, you are just an assumption machine, aren't you Saxon?

The way you argue with people makes your contempt quite clear. I was not insulted by you citing works that were critical of my opinion, but I was turned off by your immediate assertions that I "need to quote" something to prove my *cough* opinion, and that I was a person who doesn't care about "checking their ideas". I will not debate with someone that does things like that. Like a good study though, you sought your own answers, which is good. But do not expect me to care when you do so, as I stated originally. I am just as capable of finding these sources of information, and coming to my own conclusions without discussing them with you. 

For a person who so obviously wishes to have data before claiming things to be true, you sure do make a lot of sweeping assumptions about people without having much data available to you about them. I will not reply to your assumptions again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Saxon said:

I think it's hypocritical that he thinks people have been calling him names and insulting him, given that he believes that someone questioning his idea means that they view themselves as superior to him, are incapable of reason, contemptuous and whatever insult he cares to package in that direction. 

What did I ask of him? 'Do you have a study to back that claim up, because I'm not convinced that it is true?'

So I've clearly touched a nerve, and Ieono does care. I just think that he's interpreted me challenging his idea as if it's a personal attack, rather than because I thought the idea could have a problem with it (I started undecided and had to read 2 papers before I began to form an opinion)

He's lamenting that it's 'impossible to convince some people', which is odd, given that he refused to try; maybe if Ieono were aware of some critical paper I don't know about he would convince me. 

so that's a yes to my original question, isn't it

 

and frankly, cut the "i touched a nerve" bullshit. let's look at who went on unincited to try to argue his opinion down. if he didn't want to have an argumentative discussion on his opinion, it's quite frankly as simple as that

 

also, saxon you fool, i'm almost 97% positive he was talking about 6TAILS in his original post, that you quoted for passive aggressiveness. even if he wasn't (and i'm more than ready to be wrong on that, btw), you should really consider the point he's trying to make.

Edited by evan
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Derin Darkpaw said:

As for the topic I hate Cards Against Humanity.  Its a shit game made up of lego block jokes that you just plug together without any real thought except none of the jokes are funny.

This probably isn't something to go on gloating about, but I'm actually a CAH pro. I win most of the matches that I participate in because I know exactly what sort of dry one-liner or lackluster punch line can trigger the funny reflex of your archetypical internet geek.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can see the appeal of it and maybe if I caught it from the beginning I'd feel differently but Grey's Anatomy isn't as great as people say it is. I like the medical drama aspect but it's a bit too dramatic sometimes. the music is just kind of meh too

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Taikugemu said:

Thank u.

Your welcome, hon U___U. 

Also, unpopular opinion: Ted Cruz in definitely not the Zodiac Killer. It's some really fringe stuff, I know.

Also also, Baby Metal is pretty good music. Not the best thing ever, but I like it.

Edited by Rabbit Head
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LazerMaster5 said:

How is live music the devil's game? And live music being good is hardly an unpopular opinion, as the popularity of music festivals shows.

i think he's referring to the fact that it is fucking difficult as fuck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Zaraphayx said:

Saxon's posts are valuable and are a pleasant contribution to any thread on Phoenix dot Corvidae dot Org.:^)

Is that an unpopular opinion? :V

He's got the brains and the looks. Total package bby. 

So ummm....I think that the term "lgbt community" is a complete joke, seeing as though those 4 groups can hardly even stand each other. It's like "non-hetero community!" So do you mean to tell me that we are somehow unified by our differences to heterosexuals? Not to mention that the "culture" among each group is radically different and even opposed to one another at times. Urgh....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...