Thought I’d try and start something here. This is a thread for you to post your opinions that may be - well - unpopular with most folks. A caveat to this - let’s try and keep politics and religion out of this thread, as there are threads for those elsewhere.
I’ll start. As a GTA resident, I don’t give a damn about the Toronto Raptors. I don’t care that they made it to the finals, and I would really, really like to go more than five minutes without hearing someone either on the radio or in my office talking about them.
I’m a vet who works with rescues and I also work with and support breeders.
If you post a picture of something and your house looks like an episode of Hoarders and/or I cannot see a clear pathway for people to escape in a fire I will judge you. I realize most people won’t spend all of their free time tidying up and keeping their house free of clutter and unnecessary things, but there are few (but yes, some) reasons to keep a dirty unsafe house.
Homeless people are often homeless for reasons. This isn’t to say that they don’t need help, but I’m not willing to rent my house to the homeless charity so they can fill it with people who are likely to trash it.
My unpopular opinion is that I think Tom Brady is probably the greatest of all time and he has done an incredible job over an incredible period of time. The Patriots are my second favourite team after the Steelers.
Tom Brady is the example of why it’s better to be pretty good and totally reliable than to be awesome but spotty. Also see burn out vs. fade away.
That being said, I can’t stand Tom Brady as a part of my Colts fandom. I am warming up to him a bit as he ages, and him not liking Bill Bellicheat also helps.
I’m not sure if this applies, but I’ve been thinking of this for a while.
I subbed the preschool class for a week after spring break, and for an afternoon a couple weeks ago. This is a special needs class that mostly has edge cases. There are a couple typical peers in each class, otherwise known as “normal” kids, as examples and the goal is to get these kids up to the level where they can enter a standard kindergarten class next year. This is an awesome idea and a program I support fully. Seems like about half of them are foster children with behavioral issues as well and this helps them learn how to follow instructions and socializes them.
There ratio they hit is about one TA per 3 or 4 kids and a teacher. This seems pretty reasonable.
However, since we share some of the space as the older special needs kids I saw a couple things that made me think. The students in these classes will always be special needs, due to severe mental or physical, or both, developmental issues. Their ratio seems more like one to two, or maybe three. And in a couple cases it’s 1/1.
There are several children in this category who are in mobile beds or wheelchairs that are non-verbal and non responsive to most stimulus.
I struggle thinking that this is a good use of local money. I’m sure there are state and federal grants as well, but with each of these students requiring a at least half a person each that’s tens of thousands just in pay per student. To a purpose I’m not sure I understand. These are non-verbal non interacting kids. I’m sure these aides are getting hand squeezes and such, but they can’t be learning all that much, if anything.
Why is this a school responsibility? What is the reasoning behind this, and what do they expect to get in return for the investment?
After a couple of decades of sci-fi, I’m simply starting to detest time travel as this is now everybody’s dea ex machina to get out of a corner they may have written themselves in.
Avengers endgame is taking the piss with time travel as it now leaves more questions than answers.
Also the constant rebooting of Terminator is starting to wear a bit thin now (although we will be watching the latest instalment as we’re big Arnie fans).
There’s exceptions for mid-renovations and such, hopefully. Then again my place is kind of cluttered, too. So maybe I’d need to work on some stuff, too.
My mother-in-law is borderline hoarder and it really does worry me. We have a long-term project to reinforce good behavior of getting rid of stuff, which she seems to be aware is a good thing. But the catalyst in her case is her husband dying, so we don’t want to be too hard about it.
Yes those would fall under exceptions. My master closet is the staging area for my renovations upstairs, so it’s got paint cans and tools and the like in it. When I finish a project and know I won’t be starting a new one, I clean it up. Nothing lives there indefinitely. Moving is an exception. But I don’t understand how people can’t unpack within 6mo either. But that’s me. If it can live in a box for that.long then you didn’t need it anyway.
I’ve heard this a lot, and it seems to make sense on the surface, but there are a lot of things that I go years between needing, like plumbing tools or floppy drives. Or months, like spare monitor or multi-meter.
Then again, there is untold crap that I may never need in boxes in my garage, attic, or closets.
There are at least 6 boxes that never got fully unpacked when my wife moved to my house… mostly her stuff but not all - I used a desk over there when we were engaged. Between something else being a more pressing task, and not knowing where it would get stored otherwise, we don’t ever seem to get around to dealing with them.
I think I’ll make that my June project - go through boxes and either throw stuff out or sort & store it.
I’ve spent the last couple of weeks going through old roommate’s stuff. I got rid of a bunch of his stuff and a bunch of mine to make room for the stuff of his that I wanted to keep (books, CDs, DVDs, mostly). It’s good that I’m getting a reason to go through stuff that I haven’t touched in many years. I took the attitude of "I haven’t touched this in almost 10 years. I obviously don’t need it. A few things may be treasures, but a lot of it is old hardware and now gradually making it to the e-waste pile at work.
I’m trying to get rid of stuff if I don’t actively use it, but I consider rules like “If you haven’t looked at it in a year…” more guidelines than hard rules.
I did just go through my ‘office’ Bins of Miscellaneous Cables over the weekends. Only threw out a couple things, but it felt good to reasses and repack everything.
I love the original. It’s an awesome song and very well done.
But Disturbed’s version just adds an extra layer to it. The lead singer has an incredible voice and he uses it to its full effect.
I’m going to be the unpopular opinion here. Simon and Garfunkle’s version of The Sound of Silence is way better than Disturbed’s. They seem to miss the point of the song, in my opinion.
