View Poll Results: What is your pet peeve?

Voters
65. You may not vote on this poll
  • Using the elevator to go one floor

    7 10.77%
  • Not using the car's blinker

    21 32.31%
  • Not replacing the toilet paper

    5 7.69%
  • Getting lame email forwarded to you

    23 35.38%
  • Not putting the phone/remote back

    1 1.54%
  • Using "loose" insted of "lose"

    3 4.62%
  • Other

    5 7.69%
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 61
  1. #41  
    have you ever seen those donation things in malls where you place a coin on a little parabolic ramp and once you let it go it begins to roll in a large circle. as gravity takes its course, the coin continues to spiral into smaller circles until it eventually (and ALWAYS) ends up falling into the small hole at the bottom centre?

    I often feel that people can manipulate things this way no matter what the topic. No matter how wide the initial circle of the coin, it always ends up in that tiny hole.

    i guess that's my pet peeve: 'gravity' (but not the literal meaning of the word )

    to quote one of my favourite lines on the subject of gravity (which ironically fits in with alternate meanings)

    "it's not so much that it's pulling us down, but rather pushing us down" (Paraphrased, obviously)
    wow, it's been awhile.....things have REALLY changed...why is my Visor Edge still in my hand? Will a Treo fit better?
  2. #42  
    The thing that really bugs me the most is that you spend all this money on a Prism, and fatal exceptions are still in black and white! What were they thinking of...
  3. #43  
    Ex neighbor named his dog "peeve"

    ...bugged the heck outta me.

    others: People who can't (read:won't) appreciate corny jokes, puns, etc. Bureaucracy. The choice of ignorance.
  4. #44  
    Originally posted by lennonhead
    I do not like to be long winded and I don't think anyone wants to read another long post , but this is important...
    And as a music major and soon to be music instructor I feel that everyone should have exposure to musical training. It was a main part of scholarly curriculum, but is now being slowly phased out. The problem is that unless we add hours to the school day (not a bad idea, actually) the kids that don't want to learn are being forced to stay until at least Junior High (and in some cases higher), which makes teachers have to pander to the lowest common denominator. As a result the current school day is spent learning stuff that's already been covered in elementary school. It's becoming a real acid test as the students who really want to learn are forced to do it on their own (as I was). We've lost the students with a capacity to learn but no desire to learn on their own, because they're just going with the flow – which is being set by the students who actively fight against what's being taught. I'm in a second level college chemistry class and we had to spend the first 2 weeks "learning" about protons, neutrons, and electrons. In my second level college comp class we started off "learning" about subjects and predicates. This is a private institution. What a load of crap! Of course I don't make a lot of friends telling the professor during class that if the students were too stupid to pay attention and learn something in high school they should go back and learn it on their own before they're allowed in an institution of "higher learning."

    Anyway, my point is that school should be voluntary, or at the very least have differing levels of educational intensity. That way the stupid kids can spend their days drooling on themselves and chewing crayons until after Junior High and then drop out and get jobs cleaning up after the elephants in the circus. The ones that want to learn can be taught Latin, music, what would today be considered advanced English, Science, Math, etc. and can do something with themselves.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  5. #45  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson

    Anyway, my point is that school should be voluntary, or at the very least have differing levels of educational intensity. That way the stupid kids can spend their days drooling on themselves and chewing crayons until after Junior High and then drop out and get jobs cleaning up after the elephants in the circus. The ones that want to learn can be taught Latin, music, what would today be considered advanced English, Science, Math, etc. and can do something with themselves.
    I disagree, at least at this point in our society's evolution. The divide in education between have's and have-not's, and especially between white and non-white, is so great that a program like this would have predictable, and unfortunate, results: minorities dropping out and becoming Elephant Dung Sweepers.

    There's something to be said for pushing every person a far as they can be pushed, sometimes against their will. There's no good way of separate out the smart from the dumb w/out stigmatizing the "dumb." And the "dumb" usually turn out to be mostly "the different."
  6. #46  
    Sorry there's so many points to respond to, hence I may forget a few. (Is it me, or weren't we prev. able to scroll through the prev. posts to refer to them as we composed new ones? I know I can open up another window; but this brings a sligtly greater chance of crashing -- and then you lose all the text in your post!)

    I wanted to start out w/the best comedy "pet peeve" I ever heard in my prev. post, but I got too wrapped up in the other stuff, but here goes; it's a little-known (I believe) gem from Jim Carrey (prob. a little "too risque" for his current aud.):
    "I really have a pet peeve when you're in bed w/three women, right? And ... isn't it always the UGLIEST one who whispers in your ear: 'Save it for ME!'"

    =============
    Then someone seemed to take it as an article of faith that just because someone makes a long post (God forbid anyone has a lot of data on subjects!) they're "self-impressed." (I believe that was the phrase used.)
    Ask yourself, then, how one who is NOT "self-impressed" supposed to get out all the relevant data for those reading that he can?
    As I've covered on this site before (in the erroneously-named "Cameras & Lawsuits Everywhere One Day" thread -- I explained why in there):
    "Brevity is the Soul of Wit."
    And, largely, the CONVERSE.
    (The subject is much deeper, and much more grave than I really want to get into here -- does it come across that I'm *trying,* I swear, to keep it light? -- so please give those pages a read when you get a chance.)

    Here's a good spot to make note of my pet peeve of those who like to "correct" mis-attributions (I'm a human being, not a quotation thesaurus -- is it pretty clear to everyone that I make these posts off the top of my head, to save time, and w/no research?):
    Try to concentrate on the SUBSTANCE of the quotation, which is 99.9% of the time MUCH more important than WHO "said it." (And please note that if the "who" is Shakespeare, the "marquee value" of his name is going to push the quote farther and wider than whomever 1st uttered it -- "that's just the way it is" as Mr. Hruce Bornsby, I believe, said. And please have the courage to note, however baleful, that "Great Minds Think Alike" [and, oh no; I've SO FORGOTTEN who said this, I have NO ONE to attribute it to] ... so the people who "string this together" across time are probably unlikely slouches. And, yes, you can include me in that group, if you must!)

    ==========
    And speaking of "relevance, "here's a good spot to make note of the "Latin" polemic I brought up -- please DON'T confuse it for a plethora of languages, which the Tower of Babel story militates AGAINST.

    Originally posted by lennonhead
    I do not like to be long winded and I don't think anyone wants to read another long post , but this is important:
    <snip>
    He didn't understand why the community was so blind to the importance of Latin. <snip>
    Either the community doesn't understand or they are more concerned about money then the education of their children.
    <snip>
    Man, you call that long-winded? I'll show you long winded .... (jk)

    (I swear, everyone, I really am trying to be brief!)

    LIKE LATIN, teaching a "plethora of languages" (or even just ONE) must be PROVEN to have (hopefully great) educ. value. (Grrrr, I should have saved more of your text -- because I realize now I've forgotten some I meant to quote.) Please note in all of your text you never say WHY and/or give PROOF (hopefully incontrovertible) that the teaching of Latin is worthwhile. Hard evidence would be best. You mention at least twice that others did not understand -- but it is incumbent on those who DO understand to ENSURE those who DON'T do in fact SEE it.

    This is actually a great prob. in educ. -- and may only be solved once computers are sophisticated enough to teach in multivarious ways (and/or w/the "Internet Colleges" now springing up):
    I believe it's fairly been PROVEN (ooooops; I have no real evidence to present!) that there are a number of WAYS to teach any given thing -- but most teachers only know ONE WAY! (For ex. a student may be "more attuned auditorily than kinesthetically" -- so teach them THAT way.)
    It's apparently frighteningly EASY TO ALIENATE peop. who learn one way by teaching some OTHER way.

    This brings to mind a best-seller (!; hard to believe; "best-seller," BTW is only 50,000 copies; this is NOTHING out of 6 billion people, obviously -- and is quite diff. from a #1 of all-time best-seller [10,000,000 copies, currently]) some of you may have read:
    "Innumeracy" (by John Dos Paulos?)
    The guy is a math PROFESSOR! But it's CLEAR after reading only, say, 30pp. or so HE HAS NO CLUE AS TO RELEVANCE!!! He actually makes a stellar case that math should NOT be taught, rather than the converse.
    One ex., for ex., he gives is that people gen. have no idea of the Earth's distance to the moon -- and they SHOULD know! And should NOT est. this incorrectly!
    Sorry, folks, but the gen. pop. of non-geeks is going to read this and say:
    Here's a guy w/no [expletive] clue!
    And quickly put the book down.

    This goes for music, too (which all people seem to naturally love, BTW, even w/out educ. -- just diff. kinds, paradoxically often giving rise to fights, rather than brotherhood): If you can submit a good paragraph, say, out of something like Douglas R. Hofstader's Nobel Prize-winning "Godel, Escher, Bach" that would prob. make a better case than just saying: it's important that it should be taught.

    You have to be careful of proselytizing a subject that "is close to your heart" w/out rigorously discerning whether virtually all people in the gen. pop. will derive (great, hopefully) benefit from the subj. (Esp. if they may not "love" it as much as you do -- and it will kind of have to be crammed down their throats.) Such that huge amounts of resources will be committed to it.

    THERE MUST BE REASON.
    EVEN A SMALL CHILD IS BRIGHT ENOUGH TO ASK "WHY" -- the most crucial question in the universe (for all things, not just science).
    EACH INDIV. HAS A "RIGHT TO KNOW" (and, in fact, the indiv. personality will UNLIKELY ACQUIESCE under ANY other conditions other than having a GOOD REASON WHY; this is "not only" for the indiv. involved -- but to BOLSTER the case "for others," who will inevitably also want to know WHY that subj. in partic. is being studied; each of us, like it or not, kind of has to "answer to" those around us in this way -- esp. friends & family, etc.) -- AND W/OUT KNOWING ***WHY*** (and I have not studied a lot of educ. theory -- but looking back on my school career, I'd have to say the shoe fits) REBELLION IS LIKELY GUARANTEED.

    An educ. joke I like to make is: "They tried to teach me Spanish in High School ... but I showed them!"
    Truly, though -- I was never given a REASON.
    I WAS EXPECTED TO DO SOMETHING NO INTELLIGENT ADULT WOULD EVER DO: WASTE MY TIME ON SOMETHING I HAD NO PROOF WOULD EVER IMPROVE MY LIFE IN ANY WAY WHATEVER.
    INDEED, I HAD EVERY REASON TO FEAR THAT IT MIGHT "DILUTE" THE "CLARITY" OF MY THINKING IN MY NATIVE TONGUE (and, sorry to report to the rest of the world, but reports of how life in the U.S. is so much better than living elsewhere -- despite the massive problems we are continually engaged in trying to improve -- I can't take the CHANCE this "might not" be right).
    WHEN YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT RE-STRUCTURING SOMEONE'S BRAIN, THAT'S SOME SERIOUS TALK, AND IT SHOULD REQUIRE SERIOUS, SERIOUS ANSWERS TO WHAT ARE ONLY NORMAL OBJECTIONS, FEARS, CONCERNS, ETC.

    Hey, last thing about computers, BTW.
    BION, I saw Newt Gingrich, of all people, promote this idea (way back when):
    We should give all people in the U.S. (sorry non-U.S.'ers, but lobby your gov't. for this!) a free laptop!
    (He actually said "tax-credit," but I'd rather ENSURE NO people in the U.S., REGARDLESS of who they are, color of skin, etc. could ever even TRY to say they were denied this "digital divide" opportunity -- by actually putting one in their HANDS. NOW, however, they CAN say it -- and it CAN'T be disproven.)
    Even if it cost us 47 trillion (and it wouldn't) ... wouldn't this be *the very best* reason EVER to "go into debt" -- to ensure (at least somewhat) prac. all of our citizens won't be left behind in the "digital divide"?

    Prob. best done back when Newt was still around -- but, even today, prob. very useful. Still only 1/2 of the U.S. is on the Internet.
    "Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition From Mediocre Minds." -- Albert Einstein
  7. #47  
    Originally posted by bkbk

    As I've covered on this site before (in the erroneously-named "Cameras & Lawsuits Everywhere One Day" thread -- I explained why in there):
    "Brevity is the Soul of Wit."
    And, largely, the CONVERSE.
    (The subject is much deeper, and much more grave than I really want to get into here -- does it come across that I'm *trying,* I swear, to keep it light? -- so please give those pages a read when you get a chance.)

    I did.

    Originally posted by bkbk

    Here's a good spot to make note of my pet peeve of those who like to "correct" mis-attributions...
    Try to concentrate on the SUBSTANCE of the quotation, which is 99.9% of the time MUCH more important than WHO "said it."

    Actually, all I did was cite the actual quotation and provide the original source. You have no idea from my post whether this was done to "correct" you or to provide the original to back your point up.


    But either way, I do disagree that the SUBSTANCE of a quote is 99.9% percent more important than WHO "said it."

    "Of course, you know, this means war." said by Bugs Bunny is very different than the same words uttered by the President of the U.S.
  8. #48  
    Originally posted by dietrichbohn


    I disagree, at least at this point in our society's evolution. The divide in education between have's and have-not's, and especially between white and non-white, is so great that a program like this would have predictable, and unfortunate, results: minorities dropping out and becoming Elephant Dung Sweepers.

    There's something to be said for pushing every person a far as they can be pushed, sometimes against their will. There's no good way of separate out the smart from the dumb w/out stigmatizing the "dumb." And the "dumb" usually turn out to be mostly "the different."
    You're right. It would be hell to limit the criteria to just potential intelligence (and agreeing on what standard should be used to measure potential intelligence). The rich would buy their way in and then complain about the common "ilk" and with their financial backing the administrators woud listen. If only there were a way to make it strictly intelligence based, but that's not going to happen, esp. with such a capitalist state such as America (which I think works out pretty good for the most part, except in the areas where money shouldn't matter, e.g. education). I agree with pushing people against their will up to a point. There comes a point when they need the will to push themselves. If they don't have it they might as well be stupid. Worth (whether religious, societal, personal) is measured by productivity (although it takes differnent things to be productive in different areas e.g. personal productivity may be nothing more than a daily affirmation, religious productivity may be a moment of prayerful contemplation, etc.).
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  9. #49  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson

    It was my post that brought them. I'm responsible for their irrepressable behavior.
    Not to worry--they seem to have left us.
  10. #50  
    Originally posted by bkbk
    ...This goes for music, too (which all people seem to naturally love, BTW, even w/out educ. -- just diff. kinds, paradoxically often giving rise to fights, rather than brotherhood): If you can submit a good paragraph, say, out of something like Douglas R. Hofstader's Nobel Prize-winning "Godel, Escher, Bach" that would prob. make a better case than just saying: it's important that it should be taught...
    Except that turns off the audience. People are bombarded with the statistics on the correlation between music and math, math and science so spouting them again would be pointless. But you do bring out a point I tried to make (ineffectively, apparently) which is getting people to agree on a curriculum is hell. Historians and lawyers (they exist so you might as well reconcile yourself with that fact) would argue for history and politics. Scientists, Mathematicians, and Health Care professionals would argue for science and math. Writers, poets and song writers would argue for English (and prob. other foreign languages as well). Businessmen and accountants would definitely argue for foreign language, along with statistics (the ******* child of mathematics), and other business courses. Musicians would argue for each one of the others, plus music theory, performance, history, etc.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  11. #51  
    Originally posted by ****-richardson

    I agree with pushing people against their will up to a point. There comes a point when they need the will to push themselves. If they don't have it they might as well be stupid. Worth (whether religious, societal, personal) is measured by productivity (although it takes differnent things to be productive in different areas e.g. personal productivity may be nothing more than a daily affirmation, religious productivity may be a moment of prayerful contemplation, etc.).
    The main question is when a reasonable point is. I think High School is reasonable. As for measuring worth by productivity, that's pretty shaky. There's productivity and potential, and the worth is mixed up in both. A person with potention but no production (yet), is still worth an investment.


    hmmm.. maybe we could graph it, worth by potential by productivity....

    ...suddenly I recall a scene from Dead Poet's Society.

    My bottom line: Education is by necessity a discipline that is subjective, because it's object, people, are subjective. Whether or not we spend our resources on people to prevent them from being pet peeves of ours (SEE! SEE! I'm still on topic!!!) is going to have to be decided on a case by case basis. As I said, Bureaucracy is a pet peeve!
  12. #52  
    And I thought my posts usually run a bit longer than they should.. (thanks BkBk , I don't have any guilt about it now..)
    "One of the most important things you learn from the internet is that there is no ‘them’ out there. It’s just an awful lot of ‘us’." -- Douglas Adams
  13. #53  
    Originally posted by dietrichbohn


    The main question is when a reasonable point is. I think High School is reasonable. As for measuring worth by productivity, that's pretty shaky. There's productivity and potential, and the worth is mixed up in both. A person with potention but no production (yet), is still worth an investment.
    This is true, but not nearly the investment of someone who has shown willingness to realize potential.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  14. #54  
    I think I'm gonna be ill, folks.
    I was halfway through one of my patented mammoth posts, and I bumped a key and now it's all gone.
    They've got to design either these forms or the Web better than this.
    I'm seriously going to be ill over this one....
    "Great Spirits Have Always Encountered Violent Opposition From Mediocre Minds." -- Albert Einstein
  15. #55  
    There's a lot here to respond to, but I think I'll add something to the original thread topic...

    My personal pet peeve? People who chew with their mouths open, especially when chewing gum. ARGH!!!

    Perhaps "All of the above" should have been an choice on the poll.

    Helen
  16. #56  
    Originally posted by bkbk
    Here's a good spot to make note of my pet peeve of those who like to "correct" mis-attributions (I'm a human being, not a quotation thesaurus -- is it pretty clear to everyone that I make these posts off the top of my head, to save time, and w/no research?):
    This brings up a pet peeve of mine...people who get upset or offended when someone helpfully points out an error that they've made in a good faith manner.

    Try to concentrate on the SUBSTANCE of the quotation, which is 99.9% of the time MUCH more important than WHO "said it."
    This is true, however correct attribution must not be ignored out of simple laziness. "You're only human. You're supposed to make mistakes." - Billy Joel. However, the corrolary to this is that you're supposed to use them as learning experiences. Let's say, for example, that I quote the following..."A little learning is a dangerous thing." and attribute it to Mark Twain. What does the phrase mean? Not a whole lot. However, if one knows that the real attribution should be Alexander Pope, then one would likely also know the rest..."A little learning is a dang'rous thing. Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring. There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again." - Alexander Pope This would be a case where knowing the correct attribution greatly clarifies the meaning of what is being said. Now, that being said, I generally don't consider the author of a quotation important to its meaning. I do, however, consider it important to give credit where credit is due. Try not to take it so personally when someone "corrects" you as such.
    Last edited by Toby; 03/22/2001 at 09:16 AM.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  17. #57  
    Oh, and here's another Einstein quote for bkbk:
    "Reading, after a certain age, diverts the mind too much from its creative pursuits. Any man who reads too much and uses his own brain too little falls into lazy habits of thinking."
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  18. #58  
    Originally posted by Toby
    Oh, and here's another Einstein quote for bkbk:
    "Reading, after a certain age, diverts the mind too much from its creative pursuits. Any man who reads too much and uses his own brain too little falls into lazy habits of thinking."
    Very similar to what's mentioned in Arthur Schopenhauer's "On Thinking for Oneself." I mentioned the book before, but I thought I'd bump it again. I found it to be a good read.
    -Joshua
    I've decided to become enigmatic.
  19. #59  
    Originally posted by Toby

    "You're only human. You're supposed to make mistakes." - Billy Joel
    Actually the Billy Joel lyric is: "You're only human, you're allowed to make your share of mistakes."
    Eschew obfuscation!
  20. #60  
    Originally posted by linguas
    Actually the Billy Joel lyric is: "You're only human, you're allowed to make your share of mistakes."
    Actually, the lyric I was thinking of is "We're only human. We're supposed to make mistakes." It's almost at the end of the song.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions