Unpopular Opinions You Hold

[Strokes]

12 minutes ago, Finnegan said:

 

I mean, I suppose so. 

 

I've always thought I'm better than all of you. 

 

Especially you. 

I wouldn’t disagree, you are the best cùnt of them all. 

[Parafox]

2 hours ago, Corky said:

This plus infinity.

 

The song is crap and is seemingly at every sporting event you watch.

In it's original format/performance, it's a decent song. However it's been has been hijacked and thereby soiled by it's constant use as a celebratory chant.

[leicsmac]

7 hours ago, Buce said:

 

No pedantry.

 

It was the wrong word. Period.

Never had you as one to use Americanisms, Buce!

 

But yes, it's true.

[leicsmac]

The use and advancement of tech (both mechanical and biological) has obvious risks, but it's the only way that humanity survives for anything approaching a geologically long term.

 

Those who suggest we fight climate change by abandoning it or the advancement thereof on favour of a more "sustainable" society are shooting themselves in the foot at best, flat out misanthropic at worst.

[leicsmac]

Oh, and there is nothing worse than death and when the "good guys" go on about death not being the worst thing in works of fiction it's almost always because there are ghosts or some other way for the dead to interact with the living. Which rather marginalises the true finality of it.

[Carl the Llama]

16 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Oh, and there is nothing worse than death and when the "good guys" go on about death not being the worst thing in works of fiction it's almost always because there are ghosts or some other way for the dead to interact with the living. Which rather marginalises the true finality of it.

This is the unpopular opinions thread, Mac.  Most would agree that death is final and living is preferable. I assume so anyway...

 

Personally I do actually disagree but I wouldn't want to be responsible for changing a person's perspective on the matter if they aren't already in a similar headspace to me.

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

This is the unpopular opinions thread, Mac.  Most would agree that death is final and living is preferable. I assume so anyway...

 

Personally I do actually disagree but I wouldn't want to be responsible for changing a person's perspective on the matter if they aren't already in a similar headspace to me.

You're probably right, but I see so many morality tales about it that I do wonder. (Star Wars and Harry Potter being the two most popular that come to mind.)

 

To say nothing of the nihilism I see more and more of these days. That's probably just social media acting as a force multiplier, though.

Edited 25 August 2021 by leicsmac

[Buce]

6 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Never had you as one to use Americanisms, Buce!

 

But yes, it's true.

 

 

Touché!

[Nalis]

Wanting to leave a legacy that lives beyond your lifespan is the big pile of self indulgent wa nk.

 

Rarely it is done through selfless means.

[SpacedX]

2 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Rarely it is done through selfless means.

You've been reading the deathlist thread?

 

3 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Wanting to leave a legacy that lives beyond your lifespan is the big pile of self indulgent wa nk.

 

Disagree. That legacy need not be associated with vanity or conceit, rather it may be an altruistic movement or charitable cause virtue - or such deeds as love, wisdom and creativity...or simply a fine body of work which may be passed down the generations. 

 

[Nalis]

11 minutes ago, Line-X said:

You've been reading the deathlist thread?

 

Disagree. That legacy need not be associated with vanity or conceit, rather it may be an altruistic movement or charitable cause virtue - or such deeds as love, wisdom and creativity...or simply a fine body of work which may be passed down the generations. 

 

Vanity and perceived altruism arent exclusive most of the time though 

 

And yes, I am a fickle bastard.

[leicsmac]

27 minutes ago, Nalis said:

Wanting to leave a legacy that lives beyond your lifespan is the big pile of self indulgent wa nk.

 

Rarely it is done through selfless means.

Agreed, but nor is it always selfish.

 

Thinking and acting beyond the end of one's lifespan is also (sometimes) necessary, depending on the value one places on the future.

 

NB. It's also possible to do a selfish act that also helps other people.

Edited 25 August 2021 by leicsmac

[Alf Bentley]

2 hours ago, Nalis said:

Wanting to leave a legacy that lives beyond your lifespan is the big pile of self indulgent wa nk.

 

1 hour ago, Line-X said:

 

Disagree. That legacy need not be associated with vanity or conceit, rather it may be an altruistic movement or charitable cause virtue - or such deeds as love, wisdom and creativity...or simply a fine body of work which may be passed down the generations. 

 

Isn't there a big difference between "wanting to leave a legacy" and happening to leave a legacy?

 

Some people leave a legacy of importance to many because they have a great idea, do something creative or expressive or whatever. Some other people leave a legacy of importance to a few because they do deeds of love, wisdom, altruism etc.

But they often do those things because they feel that it's a valuable use of their time or simply the right thing to do - with no thought to legacy or posterity.

 

There are others who do think of posterity and legacy (an increasing number, it seems - almost a growth in denial of the finite nature of a human life). Some things they do may indeed be very beneficial, but their motives can still be vain and self-indulgent.

 

So, I'm afraid my opinion is that your two opinions are entirely compatible - and both of them are popular with me. 

[Oxfordfox83]

On 24/08/2021 at 13:12, leicsmac said:

With the larger topic of the Internet and interactions on it, I'm still inclined to think that for all the shit that happens on there it is a net good for the reason that it allows access to information - sometimes critical information - in a way that simply wouldn't be possible otherwise. And the future of humanity will come down to not only how we act upon what we know, but what we know in the first place.

I like the optimism of this post.

My general reaction is that there is so much information online that we generally can’t navigate the fact from the well-meaning misinformation from the malicious lies. This means people tend to read/discover/find things that reinforce their preconceptions, which makes it easier for the likes of Trump to get and stay in power, for antivax conspiracies to spread, and for a general splintering of society into more entrenched groups. 
 

It will be really interesting to see how the generations that grew up with the ubiquitous internet as just a fact of life adapt it and use it. At the moment, I guess I think it is just about a force for good, but don’t think it’s made anyone happier…

[The People's Hero]

Penguins taste best grilled.

[Dunge]

4 minutes ago, The People's Hero said:

Penguins taste best grilled.

Won’t that just melt away all the chocolate?

[The People's Hero]

1 minute ago, Dunge said:

Won’t that just melt away all the chocolate?

Who doesn't love melted chocolate? Other than dogs. Although actually, they do love it, but just shouldn't. Which I suppose is true for us all.

 

Something for us all to reflect upon.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

i love raw tripe, sprinkled with vinegar.

[The Bear]

7 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said:

i love raw tripe, sprinkled with vinegar.

U 4kin wot m8? 

 

 

 

[MattFox]

That bloke in Afghanistan shouldn’t have been able to rescue all his animals. Massive ego trip on his part

 

 

[Nalis]

9 minutes ago, MattFox said:

That bloke in Afghanistan shouldn’t have been able to rescue all his animals. Massive ego trip on his part

 

 

I love animals but I kind of agree with you. Should have prioritised the movement of people instead.

[Jimothy]

At this point in his career, Ronaldo actually makes the team he plays for worse. He still pulls in the numbers, there's no question about that, but the team around him doesn't. If you look at Juventus over his three seasons, they've gradually picked up less points from 95 in his first season, to 78 last season. They gradually scored less as a team too, from 86 the season before he joined, to below 80 for all the seasons he was there. Ronaldo might be getting 20 to 30 goals, but the other players who were getting 20 goals a season for them are now getting between 5 and 10. I think players look to him too much, rely on him too much and he unbalances the team.

 

I know there are other variables, and other teams improve. And we'll see how he does with Man Utd, but I certainly think Juventus declined during his time there.

 

This also leads into another unpopular opinion. People are too reluctant to let aging sports stars go. People still act like Federer, Nadal, Thiago Silva, Tiger Woods etc, and other sports stars in their late 30s and early 40s will perform at the same level they did 10 years ago. There's a reason Silva is being kept out of the Chelsea team by Christensen. Its not because in their primes Christensen is a better player, but as Silva is now 36, Christensen is the better player. I still see people now claiming Silva is world class, he's not. He was, but he's not any more. Federer, Nadal, Williams will almost certainly never win another slam, they'll compete, they'll get to the latter stages, but its not 2014, and people need to accept that. Athletes get old and they can't go on forever. We'll have it soon with Vardy and we need to accept he'll decline.

[Jimothy]

Oh and another football related one. Scoring a goal doesn't automatically mean the player has a had a good game. You can be completely useless for a whole match and get a tap in. That tap in doesn't erase all the poor play the rest of the 90 minutes. I don't think Albrighton played that well today. Got a goal, the winner, and that's great, but he also didn't play very well. Both can happen. 

[Wymsey]

24 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Oh and another football related one. Scoring a goal doesn't automatically mean the player has a had a good game. You can be completely useless for a whole match and get a tap in. That tap in doesn't erase all the poor play the rest of the 90 minutes. I don't think Albrighton played that well today. Got a goal, the winner, and that's great, but he also didn't play very well. Both can happen. 

I agree; although I wouldn't necessarily deem this as an unpopular viewpoint.

Can remember when Perez score a goal in a game and some on this forum felt he was quite poor in certain situations away from the goal.

[Tuna]

28 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Oh and another football related one. Scoring a goal doesn't automatically mean the player has a had a good game. You can be completely useless for a whole match and get a tap in. That tap in doesn't erase all the poor play the rest of the 90 minutes. I don't think Albrighton played that well today. Got a goal, the winner, and that's great, but he also didn't play very well. Both can happen.