Jump to content

Pet Peeves


Sarcasm

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, Zathoth said:

No that's just a modification of Sturgeons law.

"90% of everything is crud."

Usually that is just the baseline, in general a higher percentage is crud, if you are lucky the remaining percent are amazing.

I know that; can't a rephrasing of his law still be internet's golden rule?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Zathoth said:

It is the golden rule of the universe in general, why simplify it when it already covers everything?

It's not simplified - somethin being crem is not equivalent to being carcinogenic ;)

Spoiler

I learned a new word! I was sure it's 'cancerogenous'.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who behave like elitist snobs toward librarians.

First off, I wasn't trying to deny you your lawful right. I was trying to follow our study room policy, which is in place so that groups of three or more, like yours, take precedence over groups of two. You're getting huffy over a room that you are renting for free. Calm down. 

Second, you had three people in your group. You could have just said that when I asked, instead of making it sound as though you only had two before haughtily pointing me toward the note on your account reminding the whole staff how that you get special treatment. 

Third, don't assume that because I am here offering you a free service I am somehow beneath you. I have a Master's degree. I worked my chull off to get it. 

Finally, dude. You're getting a free study room in a public library. You didn't get that note on your account by being an important member of the community or a frequent donator to the library. You got it by bullying the staff. That's not something to take pride in. 

Additional peeve: Backhanded apologies. "I don't like being rude, but if you had been more observant then I wouldn't have had to have been" is not an apology and you know it. 

Edited by Ookla the Pug-whisperer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ookla the Pug-whisperer said:

People who behave like elitist snobs toward librarians.

First off, I wasn't trying to deny you your lawful right. I was trying to follow our study room policy, which is in place so that groups of three or more, like yours, take precedence over groups of two. You're getting huffy over a room that you are renting for free. Calm down. 

Second, you had three people in your group. You could have just said that when I asked, instead of making it sound as though you only had two before haughtily pointing me toward the note on your account reminding the whole staff how that you get special treatment. 

Third, don't assume that because I am here offering you a free service I am somehow beneath you. I have a Master's degree. I worked my chull off to get it. 

Finally, dude. You're getting a free study room in a public library. You didn't get that note on your account by being an important member of the community or a frequent donator to the library. You got it by bullying the staff. That's not something to take pride in. 

Additional peeve: Backhanded apologies. "I don't like being rude, but if you had been more observant then I wouldn't have had to have been" is not an apology and you know it. 

Wait, he gets priority treatment because he bullied the staff? Something very very wrong there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Ookla the Chibi said:

Wait, he gets priority treatment because he bullied the staff? Something very very wrong there.

Happens a lot in customer service. A customer will make an unreasonable demand ("Return this item and give me a cash refund even though I bought it five years ago and don't have the receipt!"), staff will refuse, customer will demand to speak with a supervisor, supervisor will hear a completely different story ("They wouldn't return my item even though I had the receipt, and they called me names and made me wait for hours!") and will demand the staff do what the customer wants. 

Its different at this library--management is generally more inclined to trust the staff--but they probably gave him a room to keep him from going to the director with a fake sob story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ookla the Pug-whisperer said:

Happens a lot in customer service. A customer will make an unreasonable demand ("Return this item and give me a cash refund even though I bought it five years ago and don't have the receipt!"), staff will refuse, customer will demand to speak with a supervisor, supervisor will hear a completely different story ("They wouldn't return my item even though I had the receipt, and they called me names and made me wait for hours!") and will demand the staff do what the customer wants. 

Its different at this library--management is generally more inclined to trust the staff--but they probably gave him a room to keep him from going to the director with a fake sob story. 

Thats just obnoxious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Drivers who think that being in a parking lot gives them license to drive wherever the storms they want.

Last night I was attempting to exit a parking lot and another car turned onto the aisle I was in so that he was directly facing me, on the left (in other words, WRONG) side of the aisle. I waited briefly for him to get on the correct side of the road, thinking that he'd just taken a too-wide turn, but he kept creeping down the aisle on a collision course toward me. So I gave him a little honk, but he just honked back at me as if were the one being stupid and reckless and driving on the wrong side of the road! >:/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who know crem and speak authoritatively (had to check the spelling, to be honest). Like this commenter on the article about African elephants being born tuskless due to poachers:

Quote

Miss Scientist, you say " a ellephant with out tusks is a crippled ellephant" I say a ellephant with out tusks is a live ellephant. sure the ellephants that cross dry lanes will have harder times digging water up and tuberculs but harder does not mean imposible. If any thing this obstacle of tusklessness will only trigger othet mutations in the species to overcome it thus another step in their evolution. 

That's... that's not how evolution works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Ookla the Sunrise Watcher said:

People who know crem and speak authoritatively (had to check the spelling, to be honest). Like this commenter on the article about African elephants being born tuskless due to poachers:

That's... that's not how evolution works.

It's not how spelling works, either, Anonymous Internet Commenter. *eye twitch* 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Ookla the Flighty said:

@Ookla the Sunrise Watcher Oh boy. Someone who still thinks Lamarckian evolution is a real thing. *eyeroll*

I think he just really, really misunderstood how evolution works. Nobody teaches Lamarckian, right?

This is supported by his talking of mutations, he seems to understand that evolution is about mutations; but then he doesn't understand that you can't "trigger" a mutation (radioactivity and similar cases aside) and the change of environment does not make things evolve, it just kills off (or decreases offspring of) those without some mutation helpful in that situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ookla the Sunrise Watcher said:

I think he just really, really misunderstood how evolution works. Nobody teaches Lamarckian, right?

This is supported by his talking of mutations, he seems to understand that evolution is about mutations; but then he doesn't understand that you can't "trigger" a mutation (radioactivity and similar cases aside) and the change of environment does not make things evolve, it just kills off (or decreases offspring of) those without some mutation helpful in that situation.

My biology teachers taught us about how Lamarck thought evolution worked and then explained that he was wrong. Lamarck would have said that cutting off the elephants' tusks will make them bear offspring that are born without tusks, or that clipping a bird's wings to keep it from flying will make its future eggs hatch flightless chicks. We know that's not how it works because those changes don't affect the underlying genetics--and it's only a "mutation" if the genes change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ookla the Flighty said:

My biology teachers taught us about how Lamarck thought evolution worked and then explained that he was wrong. Lamarck would have said that cutting off the elephants' tusks will make them bear offspring that are born without tusks, or that clipping a bird's wings to keep it from flying will make its future eggs hatch flightless chicks. We know that's not how it works because those changes don't affect the underlying genetics--and it's only a "mutation" if the genes change.

Yeah, I meant it's 'not taught' as it's always said to be wrong: Lamarck's model assumes that changes to phenotype cause changes to genotype.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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