Things that annoy the HELL out of you.

[champion]

I pretty much always at least skim all the new posts in OT, I just don't contribute that much anymore.

 

While I'm here, my roommate annoys the hell out of me. He has the most bizarre sleep schedule in the world that essentially revolves around him sleeping all day and staying up all night. As you can imagine, sharing a room with someone like this gets annoying since he likes to talk on the phone and have the light on when he's awake aka when I'm asleep.

 

Luckily I'll be switching rooms soon if everything goes according to plan, so yeah.

[Estonian dude]

RPG, I check the forums pretty much bihourly or so.

 

 

I hate how my current flatmates treat the flat...

All sinks are congested, hair everywhere in the bathroom floor, nobody but me takes out the trash (seen it twice for anyone else to take out trash than me since September), nobody gives a [bleep] that sinks are congested, I have played the plumber now twice already, stove is pretty nasty, sinks are pretty nasty. My roommate uses my pan and doesn't wash it after, uses my knives and doesn't wash them after, so on. Luckily noone is stealing anything. And I can't see flatmates almost ever. Seen one dude three times since September, haven't talked with him once, he actively avoids us.

 

For background, I live in a dorm flat, so that we have 2 rooms per flat and 2 people in each room.

[Low Levelled]

If these things have been happening for 6 months like you say, don't expect them to change soon. You should have said something immediately. If I were you at this point I'd just stay over at a friend's place often.

[Estonian dude]

I do stay at a friend's place often.

And today, the plumber came around and I talked with flatmates a bit. Promised to be more serious about it.

[jasignhagj]

My computer likes to freeze up for a second or so every hour, it's incredibly annoying when I'm playing LoL or listening to music.

[Alg]

You need a solid DM and friends that don't suck

Funny how not 12 hours after this, one of the players in the Pathfinder game I'm in played not one, but TWO characters that actively played against the party for the entire session: the first almost getting us killed in a boss fight (Purely on the grounds of "If he died, he's going to take us with him"), the second completely and irrevocably trashed a major part of the setting.

 

I can understand that: he's playing characters with their own goals and never once broke character. But he pretty much built those characters solely to screw over the short- and long- term goals of the rest of the party, he only got away with it because of a number of lucky rolls and fairly exploitative interpretation of the rules (which the GM okayed in other situations - and was clearly not happy about upholding in this one), and he taunted us pretty much the entire time.

[Ginger_Warrior]

The way I'm so agreeable that I can't seem to stay angry at people, even when it's a good anger and I know I should be angry with them. I tried the cold shoulder. Worked for about three sentences. [bleep]'s sake, try again tomorrow... >_>

 

On the other hand, I tend to clean when I'm upset / frustrated about something. My kitchen is sparkling and it reeks of lemon. :)

[Star.]

I asked my group member to send me our finished report so I could improve her crappy spelling/grammar. She takes about half of what I've improved so now we just submitted a report which has bits that seem like they were written by a ten year old. I also changed the font from Times New Roman to Calibri but she didn't realise that they were different and our first sentence of the report is literally half Calibri, half Times New Roman. Hopefully we still get a 2:1, I'll take a low 2:1.

[Riku3220]

My friends have recently taken to putting ranch dressing on literally everything and I'm pretty sure that's some kind of crime against food and flavor.I don't even use ranch on my salad so I don't know how they're able to have it with anything else.

[Blake]

Pizza, nuggets, fries, salad, basically anything fried... Mmmm

[champion]

I've tried ranch with fries and it was pretty gross. I think it only really pairs well with vegetables.

[muggiwhplar]

I use ranch in my wraps... cook a chicken tender and put in a wrap with ranch, cheddar/jack cheese, shredded lettuce, and sliced tomatoes :thumbup:

[muggiwhplar]

I get annoyed when I see people share videos from "Upworthy"-- mostly because the videos tend to be extremely irrational, over-simplified, and idealistic misrepresentations of how the world actually works. I think stuff like that is generally a step in the wrong direction; I prefer uncomfortable truths over feel-good lies. Self-delusion inhibits personal growth and happiness.

 

I'd rather see people sharing "hope for humanity" types of videos instead. Makes people feel good and it's realistic.

 

Edit: someone beat me to it and stated my qualm much more eloquently: http://flavorwire.com/447533/you-dont-have-to-be-cynical-to-worry-about-upworthy/

 

So why does Upworthy rub people the wrong way? As Abebe writes, “The things they collect can get fluffy, smarmy, or manipulative, but… [they lead] millions of Americans to spend a few extra moments pondering meaningful societal issues. I mean, are you against millions of Americans pondering meaningful societal issues?” And the answer to this is, of course, no. As with anything about Upworthy, it feels almost, well, unworthy to quibble — as Abebe acknowledges, “It’s the sort of thing that’s hard to hate without feeling like a churl, villain, or snob.”

[Ginger_Warrior]

I've not watched any of the videos, so I did a quick search and I found this:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXGNns6Zejw

 

I'd be insulting this site's members if I was to pick this video apart here. It's a gross misrepresentation and over-simplification of both sides of the argument; I puffed on a cigarette twice before, does this make me a smoker in the same way six Presidents smoke pot? The trouble with presenting things like this on YouTube is that 13-year old kids can't critically analyze the difference between crappy BS strawman arguments like this, and a well-substantiated discussion.

 

There's nothing wrong with having ideals or being idealistic. The way society moves forward is by people saying 'This could be better'. Rosa Parks wasn't wrong for being idealistic. The problem comes when people are presented an argument that says 'Do X; achieve Y' (for example: their video about child slavery in India) without them being told 'Well, actually, it's all a bit more complicated than that, so we need to do A, B and C first'.

[muggiwhplar]

This was the article that popped up on my newsfeed http://www.upworthy.com/watch-a-hilarious-actress-shut-down-peoples-body-shaming-comments-about-her-outfits?c=mrp1

 

It's very difficult for some people to understand that "beauty" and "sexual attractiveness" are two completely different things.

[Ginger_Warrior]

I couldn't quite really understand the point that Mindy was making there. I certainly don't think she's courageous for choosing not to be skinny. That's just day-to-day reality for the vast majority of people. There was a wider context being drawn on there, namely that the mass media have grossly unrealistic ideals of both male and female bodies, which I agree with. There's a few other articles on that website which essentially tap into the same thing, via different angles.

 

That's maybe half the problem with the website. It makes a point, it gives a half-arsed example... and then, frustratingly, it stops. It gets you thinking, sure, but it's not critical. It's not analytical. It's not discursive. It doesn't really make any attempt to understand why things are the way they are. It's the kind of approach that would barely pass at degree level because it's only describing things, not explaining things or providing any of its own thoughts and ideas.

 

If you're going to campaign for change (for instance as in this case, a campaign for media portrayals of beauty) or make some general observation about how society works, I'm all for it, and I get that sometimes we can be a bit silly and not everything has to be perfectly referenced, but let's make it at least a little bit informed.

 

At the moment it's like, 'This is what Mindy said, she's so right!!!' and it leaves you wanting to say, 'So what? People (i.e. academics) have really been saying this stuff for decades in far, far more detail, only you didn't care because they're a) not famous; and b) not charismatic or presentable'.

[Blake]

I've not watched any of the videos, so I did a quick search and I found this:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXGNns6Zejw

 

I'd be insulting this site's members if I was to pick this video apart here. It's a gross misrepresentation and over-simplification of both sides of the argument; I puffed on a cigarette twice before, does this make me a smoker in the same way six Presidents smoke pot? The trouble with presenting things like this on YouTube is that 13-year old kids can't critically analyze the difference between crappy BS strawman arguments like this, and a well-substantiated discussion.

 

There's nothing wrong with having ideals or being idealistic. The way society moves forward is by people saying 'This could be better'. Rosa Parks wasn't wrong for being idealistic. The problem comes when people are presented an argument that says 'Do X; achieve Y' (for example: their video about child slavery in India) without them being told 'Well, actually, it's all a bit more complicated than that, so we need to do A, B and C first'.

 

 

I thought it was funny that he said the "Last 6 presidential election winners", but then said "Obama-Obama-Bush-Bush-Clinton-Clinton", which is only three people, just to try to make the number look bigger.

[Dizzle229]

Troubleshoot. Check for solution online. Two things which have never helped anyone ever.

[jasignhagj]

"How did you learn to fix computers?"

 

Google

[Kirschen]

Someone at work thought I was bisexual and then proceeded to induulgen in some gossip about ten thousand random things about other workers. I cannot tell what irritated me more: being unable to focus on my job because of her motor mouth or because she made a very bold assumption about me.

 

[jasignhagj]

Someone's sending spam and forging the sender as my Uni email address, so I'm getting hundreds of failure to deliver messages into my inbox

[muggiwhplar]

 

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook. I usually just roll my eyes and ignore these things but she's a close friend of mine and she's used to me busting her balls :P

 

If you're going to model yourself after a sex symbol, it'd probably make more sense to model yourself after a modern one; not one from over half a century ago. How many men do you know who have posters of Marilyn Monroe on their walls?

 

 

I kind of want to make a parody of that picture now.

 

Option 1: "This is Queen Elizabeth. Her skin is very pale and she's very fat. She was considered the MOST BEAUTIFUL woman of her time because her skin tone and body type indicated that she was wealthy and didn't have to work. Remember, girls with pale skin and excess body fat, you are HOT, you are SEXY, you are a Queen Elizabeth"

 

Option 2: "This is Pamela Anderson. The worlds biggest sex icon. Her tummy has minimal bodyfat, her thighs don't touch, her arms are skinny, she doesn't have stretch marks, and her boobs are massive and perky. She is known as one of the MOST BEAUTIFUL women in history. Eat healthy and exercise consistently, wear makeup, and get breast implants. You are HOT, you are SEXY, you are a Pamela."

[Kalphite]

 

A friend of mine posted this on Facebook. I usually just roll my eyes and ignore these things but she's a close friend of mine and she's used to me busting her balls :P

 

If you're going to model yourself after a sex symbol, it'd probably make more sense to model yourself after a modern one; not one from over half a century ago. How many men do you know who have posters of Marilyn Monroe on their walls?

 

 

I kind of want to make a parody of that picture now.

 

Option 1: "This is Queen Elizabeth. Her skin is very pale and she's very fat. She was considered the MOST BEAUTIFUL woman of her time because her skin tone and body type indicated that she was wealthy and didn't have to work. Remember, girls with pale skin and excess body fat, you are HOT, you are SEXY, you are a Queen Elizabeth"

 

Option 2: "This is Pamela Anderson. The worlds biggest sex icon. Her tummy has minimal bodyfat, her thighs don't touch, her arms are skinny, she doesn't have stretch marks, and her boobs are massive and perky. She is known as one of the MOST BEAUTIFUL women in history. Eat healthy and exercise consistently, wear makeup, and get breast implants. You are HOT, you are SEXY, you are a Pamela."

 

wow way 2 support tha patriarchy how dare u insist that all women arent beautiful the way they are swine like u give girls eating disorders enjoy ur RAPE CULTURE

[Tesset]

It's not about telling all women that they're beautiful. It's about telling the women that the "skinny white model with big boobs" is not the only level of beauty, and not even the only ideal of beauty.

[nine naked men]

yeah, it's an obnoxious shitty facebook meme, but it has a decent point, albeit one that could be easily misconstrued

 

your responses wouldn't work because the context is all different. queen elizabeth doesnt have an enduring legacy of being a sex symbol or w/ever, neither does pamela anderson, but you ask some random dude on the street about marilyn monroe they'll 99% be like "oh yeah she was that good looking lady that had the scene in that movie w/the subway vent and everyone posts those awful "if you can't handle me at my worst etc" memes".

 

it's just shorthand to hopefully make people realise that there are different standards of beauty, and they change, and what applies to some people doesn't necessarily apply to others.

 

well namaste