Tedesche

joined 2 years ago
[–] Tedesche 6 points 2 weeks ago

Came here to say this. Their pricing strategies definitely are justifiable but their petty lawsuits do little-to-nothing to protect their bottom line.

[–] Tedesche 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

They're definitely cheaper than using cartridge razors, but personally I found decent cartridge razors just get a closer shave than safety razors. And it wasn't for failing to learn how to use a safety razor either. I used one for several years, got good at it, but later switched back to cartridge razors on a whim and found that they simply get reliably closer shave than a single blade does. I still use soap and a brush rather than canned shaving cream, because it is much better and more economical, but for me the closer shave that comes with a cartridge razor is worth the price.

[–] Tedesche 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What do you find pointless about them?

[–] Tedesche 4 points 2 weeks ago (8 children)

That's naïve. One can appreciate differences in grammar usage and take them into account when trying to understand someone else in the context of cultural differences and still acknowledge that grammar has formal rules. If you're just going to say that grammatical rules can be ignored, why bother teaching grammar at all? Because as much as there might be deviations from the norm, there is still a norm, and it's important there is one. One cannot appreciate jazz without learning classical musical structures; the existence of jazz does not negate that music has said structures, and jazz wouldn't be jazz without them.

[–] Tedesche 5 points 2 weeks ago

Lou Ferrigno is Ultra-Hulk, always will be.

[–] Tedesche 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (15 children)

It's a double-negative. Classic grammatical mistake that is sadly quite common in some modern parlance. Blame culture or the education system, but don't make the mistake of thinking the person saying this is actually trying to slyly indicate they did do something while seeming like they're denying it. That's not what's going on.

Remember: don't use no double-negatives and don't never use no triple-negatives!

[–] Tedesche 4 points 2 weeks ago

Xenogears. 80-hour game, and that’s without grinding for everything. And, it probably would have been close to twice as long if they’d been funded enough to complete it. As it was released, the second disc began with a 2-hour cutscene with a save point in the middle, which essentially summed up most of the second half of the story. Amazing game. Like playing through an entire mecha manga.

[–] Tedesche 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

She made a direct reference to the slogan used by the guy who murdered an insurance company’s CEO, then said, “you people are next.” That absolutely can reasonably be construed as a direct threat of violence. Whether or not you think the person making the threat will actually do it is another question, but the context and grammar the direct threat interpretation totally logical.

[–] Tedesche 0 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

I don't believe that "You people are next." is a direct threat.

Sounds pretty direct to me, especially in the context of recent events. I don’t fault the CS rep at all for reporting it to her superiors and the police. Totally reasonable to be wary of copycat crimes or just similar acts of violence against healthcare insurers in general.

[–] Tedesche 2 points 2 weeks ago

I don’t think she was actually making a threat, but she sure chose to sound like she was, which was fucking stupid on her part. Given how the rest of the evidence makes it clear the threat wasn’t serious, I don’t think she should be charged as such, but perhaps a lesser charge that affords her a fine or something. Can’t let people get away with that shit, but charging her like she’s making a serious threat of violence is a waste of taxpayer money.

[–] Tedesche 11 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Yeah, people will probably get angry and say mean things to you but those are just words which can be ignored. Offence is taken, not given.

This is naïve. The no one likes being insulted and downvoted for expressing their views. Sure, it doesn’t bother some people as much as others, but it’s not a conscious choice to “just ignore it,” as though that will prevent any negative feelings. The reality is that people with unpopular views stay silent to avoid these consequences, and that’s an entirely rational choice. You would do better to spend your time chastising people who attack those with unpopular views than to try to convince those with unpopular views to willingly expose themselves to online abuse.

view more: ‹ prev next ›