Lorewarn

9 hours ago, desertshox said:

 

Wrong poster. He wasn't the one who sarcastically said he gets pissed at the prices compared to grocery store pricing.

Ah my bad, too many insane and hilarious takes in here to keep track of.

10 hours ago, RichardHangslow said:

So far none of you have been able to explain why lowering the price of food at the game is a bad thing.

Well, I'd say if vendors lower the prices of food at the games to the same level that you buy that food for at a grocery store (per how you insanely claim you base food purchasing decisions on), they would lose money. I think losing money is a bad thing.

A few more curious writing decision questions for me (spoilers below):

• Why do the Hutts walk around with slaves carrying them on a platform when this is a world with floating ships/barges/speeders/anything?

• ...why did the Hutts also wait five years to claim Jabba's territory?

Since when is Nebraska athletics a billion dollar company?

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

How is a corporation exploiting someone by selling them something they don't need at a higher price?

....by taking advantage of ignorance or poor financial education to the tune of more money..?

Nothing to see here. Someone from tropical/coastal places doesn't think the midwest is as good - opinion shared by a very large swath of people. Don't even waste the click.

1 hour ago, RichardHangslow said:

So I am supposed to hope that the team sucks so I can wait outside the stadium in hopes to get a cheaper ticket to go and watch a bad football team so I can later tell my friends that the experience inside the stadium was greatly improved? 

Well you seem completely incapable of recognizing that more money helps the team have a better chance at being good, which gives you something of value, so yeah, if you want to whine and moan about a business doing what's good for the business, you should hope the team sucks. At least that way your high horse will stay strong and high.

5 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Psssst….you don’t need coffee. 
 

Im saying that and I’m a coffee drinker. 

I know that. Just seems a bit off to focus moreso on the "hey poor person you don't need this luxury" personal responsibility angle than the "hey powerful corporation systematically preying on and exploiting people for gain" one.

9 hours ago, runningblind said:

I mean it's pretty straightforward what is happening whether that gets your undies in a bunch or not.

Yes, it is. More than 150 people involved with the team knew, and someone spilled the beans to the wrong person, either on accident or in a, "don't tell anyone" way.

Occam's Razor is your friend. Baseless conspiracies are not.

7 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

Sorry, I don’t really give a s#!t about price gouging on a luxury item like this. 
 

If I’m building yachts and I want to triple my price, why should anyone give a s#!t like this?

I agree with you on principle, but there are a lot of contexts where there's rightfully some blame and condemnation towards SBux. Their business model is to monopolize coffee in neighborhoods leaving no other 'restaurant' coffee options and also strategically picking zones full of people that are less likely or able to easily have and make their own.

BUT, pro tip, regular hot and iced coffees at Starbucks have unlimited free refills if you have the app, and even if you don't a refill is .50c

1 hour ago, funhusker said:

Why do conservatives not quash this “relationship” by admonishing those groups and agree with the left that they are a gross group of people?

 

The conservatives have very valid points. It’s too bad they let it get lost because of a gross group of people.

Conservatives would lose a not-insignificant slice of their base if they vehemently disavowed racists in word and in deed.

15 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Most rational people would prefer to make more valid comparisons 

Most good faith participants in the conversation would know what was meant and engage based on the point being conveyed instead of, "hErP DeRp nO RePuBlIcAn hAs aCtUaLlY LiTeRaLlY SaId tHaT EvErY SiNgLe sOuThErN ImMiGrAnT HaS CoViD AnD UsEs fEnTaNyL"

2 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

Here we have @Scarletwanting to compare an apple to a banana to make a point.    compare similar things when you want to make a point.  

Not sure if you know this, but you can compare things even if they aren't similar. Apples and bananas is a fine example. Both are fruit. Both have sugar. One's round, one's long and curvy. One is mostly red, the other mostly yellow. One you can eat the skin of, the other you probably shouldn't. 

Let's try two things even less similar and see if we can still compare them. Hmmm.... bicycles and a cardboard box. One's primarily meant for storage, the other for transportation or exercise. One's made of cardboard, the other of metal. Both could cause potential injury. So on and so forth. 

4 hours ago, Archy1221 said:

You mean the one that ZERO convictions for the the actual issue it was tasked with investigating.   Oh yeah, that one.  

No I think he means the one that purposefully did not attempt to make a legal conclusion about what it was investigating, but did say that if the President would have been exonerated by the investigation, they would have said so, and they didn't.

Good game, I had the Bengals in a small bet and was pulling for em. If I was that left guard for Cincinnati I don't think I'd be able to sleep soundly for a few months.

1 hour ago, nic said:

What has the Durham probe found? I haven’t been paying attention. It will probably end like Mueller’s did… With a whimper. Politicians rarely get in real trouble.

The Mueller report ended with 37 indictments, 14 criminal cases referred to other parts of the justice department, proof of a systemic Russian interference in the 2016 election, and overwhelming compelling evidence that Trump's team obstructed justice. That's not really a whimper.

Color of gatorade dumped on winning coach being orange

14 hours ago, knapplc said:

I've seen quite a bit of negativity about this show. I've stayed away from conversations because we've been a few episodes behind throughout.

 

But we just finished this, and I'm not getting the gripes. Was this a case of unrealized expectations?

 

I walked into this show knowing nothing about it. Expecting nothing other than to be immersed in the Star Wars culture for a few episodes, and learn what happened to Boba Fett after ROTJ.

 

I'm fine with what this was.

 

What was wrong with this?

It had some moments but the overall craft of the writing was so lazy as the first big criticism from me. I'll go ahead and rant about some specific examples and hope they paint a larger picture (spoilers below):

• Why do the raiders take him prisoner? What's their motivation? Is it to repeatedly rape him like they did with Shmi Skywalker? Doesn't seem like it, since Disney is trying to "humanize" their culture and make them interesting, but then...why? Why does an isolated hidden tribe of nomads take a prisoner that is just going to take up more food and water of which there is very little? And why ignore their documented savage history instead of integrating it?

• Why does Boba decide to become crime lord of Jabba's palace? What's his goal? Is it for a more interesting character reason than they already have all the sets and costumes and renders for Tattooine and they did this series on the cheap? People might say the answer is for riches, which doesn't make sense because (for some inexplicable reason) there's nobody around when Bib Fortuna is on the throne and he could have just emptied the vaults and left to go anywhere. People might say it's for revenge, which would make you think he'd say a single thing about the raiders and that story at least one time ever in the later storyline.

• Why are all these local tribes giving offerings to the new crimelord? He has a crime syndicate of....two total people. How s#!t are these established crime families that they let this happen? If it's because he's so feared, then you'd think that fear would quickly disappear with how often he gets his a$$ beat. Jabba ruled because he had infrastructure, fealty, the Hutts working as a mafia-like family, etc. Boba Fett has Fenic Shand and that's literally it, and everyone's like, "oh thank you for your protection here's a lot of money". What protection? A literal line from the series:

"I'm confused."

"He wants you to pay him."

"What? I'm the crime lord, he should pay me."

A+ work there.

• The biggest gripe I have is this awful writing crutch where the new characters explain stuff to the old characters that the old ones should well already know. They just write these characters to be convenient exposition dumps moving the "plot" forward. So many times we see Fennic Shand saying things like, "They're used to seeing the Hutts parading around these streets." Boba Fett lived in Jabba's palace for 3 years and worked for him for longer, why is she saying all of this to him and why does he just stay silent acting like he's never set foot in this town? "Jabba rarely left his chambers" Oh but you just said... nvm. 

I saw Jurassic World in theaters and maybe once after, and I saw JW2 in theaters I think? Haven't seen it since, can't even explain how awful of a film it is.

But this one looks to potentially actually be decent.

5 hours ago, Decoy73 said:

Maybe we can convert one of our 25 running backs into a LB?

Worked really well for Cody Glenn!

31 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

If people stopped with the knee jerk reaction to the kneeling and read who convinced him to kneel and why, they might have a different reaction to it.

I don't find anything questionable about what started all of this. He found something important to him, encouraged by a vet, and started kneeling on his own "privately" and did it for seven games before anybody even noticed or made mention of it. 

Later on is when it started to feel opportunistic, but I'd blame that on Nike as much as anyone else. "Believe in something, even if it means sacrificing everything" is a bit sanctimonious for a millionaire getting paid more millions to be the spokesperson for the message.

5 hours ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

As I was reading I was honestly expecting us to be Top 10. Had no idea our facilities had fallen behind the likes of Mizzou and Texas Tech. 

I still don't understand exactly why or what the judging metrics are, but we've been considered pretty far down for a while.

5 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

Unless you think the people who voted him Breakthrough Athlete of the Year (all sports, not just football) didn't have your acumen with stats, or that they gave even a fraction of that respect to Tim Tebow. 

Piggybacking off my previous post (and please don't ascribe arguments to me that I've already made because I have zero ideological conviction against Kaepernick), this means nothing.

Unless you think that winning a grammy or an oscar is what defines success as a musician/filmmaker, then you're at least consistent but awards like this are really just about compelling narratives and very little to do with performance. I mean look at all the years Nick Saban hasn't won SEC coach of the year.

44 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

I was more interested in the qualitative assessments, which is where the Superbowl appearance, rushing QB records, ESPN awards, and the #1 jersey in the NFL come in. Kaepernick was hot s#!t for two years prior to any controversy, and that was the assessment of the football world, not just the media. 

 

To be honest, those might be the last four things I'd look for on a list trying to measure quarterbacks. Trent Dilfer won a superbowl, quarterbacks primarily pass, and the other two are popularity which as we've seen with Tebow is not correlated with talent.

Robert Rodriguez is so trash as a director my god.

That finale was traaaaaaaaaash.