Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[Webbo]

It is interesting. If you think that the American and Australian accents both evolved from English, Welsh, Scottish, Irish accents but both sound quite different. 

[The Bear]

Coincidentally I saw this video on the evolution of a London accent since the 1400s. Back then it sounded like a mixture of Scandinavian and Irish/Scottish. 

 

It's quite interesting to hear it change through the centuries. 

 

 

 

Edited 10 January 2021 by The Bear

[Fox92]

2 hours ago, BenTheFox said:

The scouse accent isn't that bad. Certainly nowhere near as bad as brummy, black country or Essex. 

I like scouse accents. Always have done.

 

I find Geordie/Mackem hardest to understand (obviously not celebrities like Sting or Alan Shearer, because they're not as bad, but at work for example I have to listen more closely than I normally would if it's someone from Newcastle/Sunderland and even parts of Middlesbrough).

[SouthStandUpperTier]

Probably best not comment on the Leicester accent.  

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

24 minutes ago, Fox92 said:

I find Geordie/Mackem hardest to understand (obviously not celebrities like Sting or Alan Shearer, because they're not as bad.)

 

[Fox92]

 I knew it.

[BenTheFox]

13 hours ago, Haydos said:

It's not 'better' but it can be more authentic sounding. It's not as crisp and perfect than digital recordings.

 

10 hours ago, ozleicester said:

Having recently returned using an 80s sound system with record player. I think there is a very different sound through vinyl...BUT, the reason i think it seems better is the entire system is better than what i played my digital/cd's on.

Better speakers, better amp and better EQ's....means better sound

It's funny, someone I know carried out a blind test where subjects were played the same recordings both on and vinyl and .wav files. Every single person thought the .wav files sounded better and then he showed the recordings being played on what appears to vinyl but is essentially a serato/scratch live disk so a .wav file and he had comments like 'warm' and 'textured'. I do fully accept that there is an undeniable romance associated with vinyl and it allows you to properly appreciate the record as a piece of art.

[bovril]

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

I was watching an American programme yesterday, one of the presenters was from Boston MA. Now that's an annoying accent. Gaaarden, caaardboard. 

 

1 hour ago, BenTheFox said:

The weirdest one is how similar West Country and East Anglian accents are. 

 

1 hour ago, Webbo said:

It is interesting. If you think that the American and Australian accents both evolved from English, Welsh, Scottish, Irish accents but both sound quite different. 

Bostonian is closer to E. Anglian rather than W. Country because it's non-rhotic. The way people with a strong Boston accent say "park the car" is very similar to how somebody with a broad Norfolk accent would say it. 

 

I think it's generally believed that most British English accents were rhotic in the past which is why the Americans retained it while most of us lost it. Boston and some other towns on the coast (N. Orleans) partially picked up the non-rhoticity perhaps because they had more contact with the British in subsequent years. 

 

There are still some communities in the US that have accents heavily influenced by the British immigrants.

 

 

Edited 10 January 2021 by bovril

[Guest SO1]

My 10 cents.

[Nalis]

Harry Maguire is a decent player.

 

His cumbersome nature makes his errors look worse than they actually are.

[Unabomber]

3 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Harry Maguire is a decent player.

 

His cumbersome nature makes his errors look worse than they actually are.

I think most people would say he is decent or at worst average. Just no where near the price tag paid for him which isn’t his fault. 

[Nalis]

2 minutes ago, Unabomber said:

I think most people would say he is decent or at worst average. Just no where near the price tag paid for him which isn’t his fault. 

This is probably another unpopular opinion from me but I think part of the fee is probably on his leadership qualities too. At the time, Man U had none and we had loads.

 

I do agree we got an excellent fee for him though.

[bovril]

Maguire has a bit of a twattish air. I'm happy to see Kante and Mahrez doing well but I quite enjoy a Maguire **** up. 

[Scotch]

An unpopular opinion that I've been sitting on for a while now.....

 

I'm all for letting the Panda's die out!

They can't say we've not tried but the fat, lazy b@stards arent putting in their share of the graft. 

 

Fuch them!

[Facecloth]

19 minutes ago, Foxy_Bear said:

An unpopular opinion that I've been sitting on for a while now.....

 

I'm all for letting the Panda's die out!

They can't say we've not tried but the fat, lazy b@stards arent putting in their share of the graft. 

 

Fuch them!

 

[Scotch]

12 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

 

I knew this was to funny a thought to be original. I'm subconsciously plagiarizing folk. Sad times. 

[Ian Nacho]

Parents of children who require food vouchers are disgusting. Of course there will be the odd case where the parent is just in a unfortunate circumstance but on the whole, I think it is wrong. So, many parents who’s children require food vouchers will be on some form of welfare I would assume. Basically, the purpose of food vouchers is for parents who cannot budget properly and who are wasting their benefits on other things. The term food voucher itself suggests that parents can’t be trusted to be given money to feed their children, as they are just going to spend it on other things if it was straight cash. Of course, it’s not the child’s fault so the vouchers should still be issued, but surely parents should be able to afford to give their kids something at least half decent to eat based upon their benefits. Surely feeding your kids should be your number one priority as a parent, and they should be able to budget towards this?

[Guest Fktf]

4 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

Parents of children who require food vouchers are disgusting. Of course there will be the odd case where the parent is just in a unfortunate circumstance but on the whole, I think it is wrong. So, many parents who’s children require food vouchers will be on some form of welfare I would assume. Basically, the purpose of food vouchers is for parents who cannot budget properly and who are wasting their benefits on other things. The term food voucher itself suggests that parents can’t be trusted to be given money to feed their children, as they are just going to spend it on other things if it was straight cash. Of course, it’s not the child’s fault so the vouchers should still be issued, but surely parents should be able to afford to give their kids something at least half decent to eat based upon their benefits. Surely feeding your kids should be your number one priority as a parent, and they should be able to budget towards this?

 

*Insert popcorn eating gif here*

[ozleicester]

20 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said:

Parents of children who require food vouchers are disgusting. Of course there will be the odd case where the parent is just in a unfortunate circumstance but on the whole, I think it is wrong. So, many parents who’s children require food vouchers will be on some form of welfare I would assume. Basically, the purpose of food vouchers is for parents who cannot budget properly and who are wasting their benefits on other things. The term food voucher itself suggests that parents can’t be trusted to be given money to feed their children, as they are just going to spend it on other things if it was straight cash. Of course, it’s not the child’s fault so the vouchers should still be issued, but surely parents should be able to afford to give their kids something at least half decent to eat based upon their benefits. Surely feeding your kids should be your number one priority as a parent, and they should be able to budget towards this?

I rest my case

[UpTheLeagueFox]

2 hours ago, Ian Nacho said:

Parents of children who require food vouchers are disgusting. Of course there will be the odd case where the parent is just in a unfortunate circumstance but on the whole, I think it is wrong. So, many parents who’s children require food vouchers will be on some form of welfare I would assume. Basically, the purpose of food vouchers is for parents who cannot budget properly and who are wasting their benefits on other things. The term food voucher itself suggests that parents can’t be trusted to be given money to feed their children, as they are just going to spend it on other things if it was straight cash. Of course, it’s not the child’s fault so the vouchers should still be issued, but surely parents should be able to afford to give their kids something at least half decent to eat based upon their benefits. Surely feeding your kids should be your number one priority as a parent, and they should be able to budget towards this?

I didn't grow up in poverty but we were cash poor.

Never got any flash presents, we had a black and white telly, no foreign holidays, often had second hand clothes etc.

I didn't like it, seeing other kids have and do better things.

My parents budgeted for everything and saved what little they could.

But we never ever went without food.

 

I now realise my childhood was rich in love and kindness and it taught me so much.

In fact the older I got, the more I realised how lucky I was and I appreciate those life lessons.

[Dahnsouff]

On 10/01/2021 at 15:55, SouthStandUpperTier said:

Probably best not comment on the Leicester accent.  

cop-E. - copy

mon-E- money

 

As always, you don’t have an accent until you go somewhere with a different accent, then it becomes apparent 

Used to get ragged on about the heavy E sound. 

[Facecloth]

6 hours ago, Ian Nacho said:

Parents of children who require food vouchers are disgusting. Of course there will be the odd case where the parent is just in a unfortunate circumstance but on the whole, I think it is wrong. So, many parents who’s children require food vouchers will be on some form of welfare I would assume. Basically, the purpose of food vouchers is for parents who cannot budget properly and who are wasting their benefits on other things. The term food voucher itself suggests that parents can’t be trusted to be given money to feed their children, as they are just going to spend it on other things if it was straight cash. Of course, it’s not the child’s fault so the vouchers should still be issued, but surely parents should be able to afford to give their kids something at least half decent to eat based upon their benefits. Surely feeding your kids should be your number one priority as a parent, and they should be able to budget towards this?

Actually, these vouchers are replacing school meals. This isn't about parents continually not budgeting, this is about an extra cost for them during a time the children are at home instead of at school. I'm sure there are some parents who spend their money on things they shouldn't be spending it on, like a mum I saw on the news with fake nails, but let's not vilify all these parents from the actions of a few. People talk about their own childhood as though that's proof, but then don't seem to accept people like Marcus Rashfords story of his childhood, which if you've heard it depicts exactly the type of scenario these vouchers are meant for. Its the same attitude that gets people riled up about benefits as s whole. There's a small proportion of benefit cheats, a small proportion who refuse to work, or fake disability, and suddenly people want that very legitimate safety net that's there for us all to be taken away. Its very easy to criticise when you haven't walked in someone shoes, and when you're always looking for the bad in people.

[Dahnsouff]

55 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Actually, these vouchers are replacing school meals. This isn't about parents continually not budgeting, this is about an extra cost for them during a time the children are at home instead of at school. I'm sure there are some parents who spend their money on things they shouldn't be spending it on, like a mum I saw on the news with fake nails, but let's not vilify all these parents from the actions of a few. People talk about their own childhood as though that's proof, but then don't seem to accept people like Marcus Rashfords story of his childhood, which if you've heard it depicts exactly the type of scenario these vouchers are meant for. Its the same attitude that gets people riled up about benefits as s whole. There's a small proportion of benefit cheats, a small proportion who refuse to work, or fake disability, and suddenly people want that very legitimate safety net that's there for us all to be taken away. Its very easy to criticise when you haven't walked in someone shoes, and when you're always looking for the bad in people.

Its a good point, and its very easy to view people, articles and draw conclusions based on the little (of questionable bias) information we are provided with. I find myself guilty of this, I try to catch myself, as we must remember that when we view these events, like a mother having her nails done, people seeming to break guidelines, we are looking through a key hole.

We see a moment in time, and it likely does not represent normality, and this key hole can often presented with agenda, to invite clicks, invoke outrage, etc.in the case of stories online, etc.

[David Guiza]

9 hours ago, Ian Nacho said:

Parents of children who require food vouchers are disgusting. Of course there will be the odd case where the parent is just in a unfortunate circumstance but on the whole, I think it is wrong. So, many parents who’s children require food vouchers will be on some form of welfare I would assume. Basically, the purpose of food vouchers is for parents who cannot budget properly and who are wasting their benefits on other things. The term food voucher itself suggests that parents can’t be trusted to be given money to feed their children, as they are just going to spend it on other things if it was straight cash. Of course, it’s not the child’s fault so the vouchers should still be issued, but surely parents should be able to afford to give their kids something at least half decent to eat based upon their benefits. Surely feeding your kids should be your number one priority as a parent, and they should be able to budget towards this?

Just say you hate poor people and save yourself the rest of the paragraph. 

[Finnegan]

10 hours ago, Ian Nacho said:

Parents of children who require food vouchers are disgusting. Of course there will be the odd case where the parent is just in a unfortunate circumstance but on the whole, I think it is wrong. So, many parents who’s children require food vouchers will be on some form of welfare I would assume. Basically, the purpose of food vouchers is for parents who cannot budget properly and who are wasting their benefits on other things. The term food voucher itself suggests that parents can’t be trusted to be given money to feed their children, as they are just going to spend it on other things if it was straight cash. Of course, it’s not the child’s fault so the vouchers should still be issued, but surely parents should be able to afford to give their kids something at least half decent to eat based upon their benefits. Surely feeding your kids should be your number one priority as a parent, and they should be able to budget towards this?

 

Jesus ****ing christ