What's new
By:
Filters

Stupid Pet Peeves

Wes Mantooth said:
Yep. Hell, we went to Disney when we had just one and she was 20 months old. We went to dinner off the premises one night and she was not sitting still, and after repeated corrections by me, proceeded to try to climb onto the table. I took her out of the restaurant and stayed in the car with her until my wife came out about 30-40 minutes later. The **** if my kid is gonna act like that in public.
Click to expand...

Last time I tried to force my kid to stay in his seat and covered his screaming mouth... this was in a sandwich shop here called Sensuous that is pretty much designed for families with kids, not some sit down restaurant or even on the low key scale of something like Pizza Pie Cafe, and I was by myself with three kids so I was doing what I could in the moment ...some ******* got in my business about it telling me something like "maybe he wouldnt scream if he could breathe".. I was so close to punching him in the balls.
 
Philips screws and daylight savings!

Also, the use of the word "optics" as a metaphor to describe how the public perceives something, usually in political conversations. For example, "holding the board of directors meeting at a beach-front resort was bad optics". To me, optics are things like binoculars or camera lenses, and they affect how I personally see something, not how the majority of people see something. And nobody else has any control over what optics I use to view something. If a tree is green, most people will see it that way. If I view the tree with a filtering lense that makes it appear purple. It just looks purple to me. It doesn't change the tree's color and it doesn't change how millions of other people see the tree. That's optics. But that's not how people use the term. A column written by a biased auther about some event might be a better example of optics, but the event itself is not IMO. The metaphor doesn't work for me, and I think it sounds pretentious.
 
Greasy84 said:
Philips screws and daylight savings!

Also, the use of the word "optics" as a metaphor to describe how the public perceives something, usually in political conversations. For example, "holding the board of directors meeting at a beach-front resort was bad optics". To me, optics are things like binoculars or camera lenses, and they affect how I personally see something, not how the majority of people see something. And nobody else has any control over what optics I use to view something. If a tree is green, most people will see it that way. If I view the tree with a filtering lense that makes it appear purple. It just looks purple to me. It doesn't change the tree's color and it doesn't change how millions of other people see the tree. That's optics. But that's not how people use the term. A column written by a biased auther about some event might be a better example of optics, but the event itself is not IMO. The metaphor doesn't work for me, and I think it sounds pretentious.
Click to expand...
I haven't heard optics used in that way, but I did have a boss who said something similar. He was 1) a bigoted ******* and 2) an idiot. He screwed up pretty much every idiom or even big word he tried to say to try to sound intelligent. One he latched onto was "myopic" but he couldn't say it right so he said "myoptic". He used it for everything from someone being wrong, to having insufficient data, to not liking the same sports teams. It was both gratingly stupid and hilarious.
 
Greasy84 said:
Philips screws and daylight savings!

Also, the use of the word "optics" as a metaphor to describe how the public perceives something, usually in political conversations. For example, "holding the board of directors meeting at a beach-front resort was bad optics". To me, optics are things like binoculars or camera lenses, and they affect how I personally see something, not how the majority of people see something. And nobody else has any control over what optics I use to view something. If a tree is green, most people will see it that way. If I view the tree with a filtering lense that makes it appear purple. It just looks purple to me. It doesn't change the tree's color and it doesn't change how millions of other people see the tree. That's optics. But that's not how people use the term. A column written by a biased auther about some event might be a better example of optics, but the event itself is not IMO. The metaphor doesn't work for me, and I think it sounds pretentious.
Click to expand...

****** management speak it gives me the ***** too, I've been hearing it a lot over the last few weeks, makes me think that it is indicative of the prevailing management culture, where it is more important to be seen to do the right thing than it is to actually do the right thing. The world of appearances without substance, ***** me up the ****ing wall. I've actually lost a couple of hours sleep tonight thinking about **** that is happening at work that I have very little control over, that I know is completely ****ing wrong but will not change because of the insurmountable levels of ******** that have to be overcome to fix it. All of it needs to be addressed well above my pay grade and the vast majority of people in those positions are all more concerned with appearing to do the right thing and covering their own (and their various institutions) arses than actually fixing a ****ing problem.
 
Rubashov said:
****** management speak it gives me the ***** too, I've been hearing it a lot over the last few weeks, makes me think that it is indicative of the prevailing management culture, where it is more important to be seen to do the right thing than it is to actually do the right thing. The world of appearances without substance, ***** me up the ****ing wall. I've actually lost a couple of hours sleep tonight thinking about **** that is happening at work that I have very little control over, that I know is completely ****ing wrong but will not change because of the insurmountable levels of ******** that have to be overcome to fix it. All of it needs to be addressed well above my pay grade and the vast majority of people in those positions are all more concerned with appearing to do the right thing and covering their own (and their various institutions) arses than actually fixing a ****ing problem.
Click to expand...

I call it boardroom speak. Loathe it. But if you want to advance, learn it...
 
What's with all the Phillips hate? They are so much better than regular slotted screws.

In other news I found this fun image:
550-screw-heads.jpg
 
I've never had a slotted get so worn that the driver just spun around in the head. I've had that happen on Phillips, torx, and Allen.
 
One Brow said:
I've never had a slotted get so worn that the driver just spun around in the head. I've had that happen on Phillips, torx, and Allen.
Click to expand...

Ya know, that doesn't happen on torx and Allen's if you use the right freaking size! On your Allen, get it in, then tap it in a little more with a hammer. You won't round it that way. I've never rounded out a torx and I use them a lot.
 
colton said:
If we say torx and square are 10s, I'd put Phillips still at about an 8.5. But regular slotted is like a 3.
Click to expand...
Not sure what would be a 1. I would put square and torx at 10 on that scale, slotted at 1. Phillips would be about a 3.5 to maybe a 5 depending on the material the screw is made of. The problen with Phillips is they are inherently weak. they strip far easier than almost any other drive system. The only thing that puts them above straight slot is the bit locks into the screw. If you had an enclosed straight slot it would be better than a Phillips imo.
 
In a lot of scenarios, Phillips is adequate. If you’re driving something that isn’t threaded or pre-drilled, do not use a Phillips. It will strip out the head.


Sent from my iPhone using JazzFanz mobile app
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top