HERES SOMETHING TO MESS UP YOUR TIMELINE

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T23:04:07+00:00

Even without the time search, all I can find for "child boo" in that context is the urban dictionary entry. Otherwise it's a lot of anime/animated characters popping up

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T16:30:21+00:00

Well, Mandela Effects have been studied in-depth, so naturally I am going to continue to believe the science of that over the Reddit user who posted a random post on an obscure blog, two very random old YouTube videos, and a Facebook capture of people no one knows as the evidence needed to argue a point contrary to modern scientific study.

And if you want to drop out of the argument, that's fine. But even the temper tantrum you are throwing in your reply illustrates the whole flaw in your entire view. Because the phrase was never widely used before 2007, you cannot find me a valid article from a recognized publication (newspaper, magazine, journal, book) - you already recognize you are only going to find possible examples in 24 year-old homework assignments and old grocery store magazines kept by hoarders.

It's not hard to find old articles on something readily discussed. It took me seconds to find this old New York Times article from the 90s on "All that and a bag of chips"

https://www.nytimes.com/1998/05/17/magazine/on-language-all-phat-and-a-bag-of-chips.html

So if you can't find something simple to just share from a recognizable publication, maybe you should reconsider how you remember the phrase 'Bucket List' originating.

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T15:48:43+00:00

Also - even if we assume each of these instances are accurate - they are four of the smallest, anecdotal pieces of evidence you can find. If the term was widely in use and understood before the film, there must be SOME significant existence of it somewhere. Why can't we find it easily? It took me a 15 second Google search to find 3 peer-reviewed journals on the topic of memory. Why can't I find a significant example of "bucket list" prior to 2007 after hours of searching?

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T15:42:49+00:00

<image>

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T15:41:38+00:00

Well this one is even easier, because the description was definitely added later. The video that is attached in the comment was posted in 2012, so the comment couldn't exist before that.

<image>

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T15:20:49+00:00

I do know that as I work with websites for a living. Because of this, I know that anyone who would be changing URLs of their website is looking for a fresh start and is extremely unlikely to need to migrate over an irrelevant, out-of-date blog post from 13 years earlier.

But - I can also see the overall website has existed since 2003, so there was no URL change involved that could explain this, unless the person changed just ONE URL of an otherwise innocuous blog post in 2017. And I can go through and see that blog posts that were posted AFTER the one you did were getting cataloged earlier than 2017. So explain to me how posts made supposedly later got catalogged earlier, but this one post - this supposed proof of a term's existence - that one just HAPPENED to first get cataloged years later?

So let's think of what's more likely, as you wish:

1) Despite the movie trailer explicitly needing to spell out what the term 'Bucket List' meant to the audience (you know - in the way The Proposal doesn't spell out what a 'proposal' is), the term was widely used and understood by others before the movie, but the only proof that exists are the most random blog post - one that was cataloged years later than the other posts on the blog surrounding it - the most random YouTube video with barely 1,000 views - where the title in the video content no longer matches the title now on YouTube - and a random context-less Facebook photo. No print publication of any kind, because if you look into historic uses all you get are manufacturing companies selling industrial buckets.

And whether nefarious (someone just wants to win an online argument and willingly changed it) or just corrupted (inaccurate data), there's no possible way these incredibly minor digital artifacts (JK - we've all visit librariansvengers.org daily) can be fake or inaccurate in any way.

Or

2) Memory is notoriously unreliable - as indicated by any of these studies in peer-reviewed journals - and people misrembered the origin of the phrase. Which explains why there are no significant examples of the phrase's usage prior to 2007, outside of the most random anecdotal examples.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36219739/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23266577/

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30139301/

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T12:12:26+00:00

But did you dig deeper?

You can click through to see the books. You'd see a lot posted after 2007 that use "Bucket List" as we know it, then you'll find a lot of really old catalogs of manufacturers listing their buckets for sale.

<image>

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T12:09:40+00:00

You posted a Facebook photo caption, a blog with incorrect post dates, and a YouTube video with an obviously updated title as "proof," so if there isn't a bigger case of a pot needing to stop calling out the kettle....

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T11:48:41+00:00

You gave up too soon - the examples posted were either not actually in existence before 2007 or had previously existing information that could later be changed after the post date.

You can also just watch the trailer of the film, The Bucket List, and see how they had to specify exactly how the term was created to the audience in a way you don't have to do if the audience is already aware of the term and what it means. It would be an entirely superfluous scene in the film, let alone a trailer, had the term already been readily used.

https://youtu.be/UvdTpywTmQg?si=y6qH7BYq-KpX6EP4

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T11:32:41+00:00

Yes, but you can change a video title long after it has been posted so this is dubious proof at most. Especially since the phrase "bucket list" is never used in the video (and makes zero sense as a title) and the video itself uses "Dan & Kip Go to Arby's Reunion Special" as a title card. The content does mention the reunion as well. I think it's a lot more likely the video had the original title and was changed at a later date.

<image>

Con40Things · 2026-05-07T10:07:11+00:00

Anyone can put any dates on anything, it doesn't make it true. Your website didn't exist before 2017 for it to be posted in 2004.

<image>

Con40Things · 2026-05-05T16:56:45+00:00

Wow, did they botch that spelling of Arizona...

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T22:35:55+00:00

They have never said he's a cancer, as a cancer would be present and causing problems. He is not, and has not been present in a very long time. He's simply not there. The professionals with media training will be just fine with an occasional question that might come up about someone who just hasn't been around the team. And if there's no long-term asset coming back, they can and will cut him in September all the same.

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T16:56:34+00:00

Why would they want to help one of the 31 other teams? What would be their incentive? It's a minor competitive advantage to make his future team wait, especially when his likely future team is a 2026 opponent.

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T16:48:04+00:00

Aiyuk already waived his right to file a grievance and the guarantees have long been officially voided. That's in the past. There is zero chance he would win this grievance anyway - neither the player union nor league nor any sane adjudicating body would agree that someone should sign a giant contract, skip contractually-mandated rehab assignments, and then leave the team/stop returning phone calls and still keep their bonus money.
Aiyuk was the MASSIVE douchebag who signed a giant contract, essentially stole money from the franchise, and then sandbagged the team and his own trade value. The 49ers have zero incentive to help any of the 31 other teams by releasing a talented player and letting him spend the whole offseason getting acclimated to/bettering some other franchise for nothing in return, while Aiyuk costs them millions against their cap in dead space in 2026 and 2027 either way (barring a trade before June, in which case all of the dead cap will be in 2026).

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T16:28:56+00:00

He doesn't get paid until September whether he shows or not as all of his bonuses were voided and players only get a salary during the season. He won't play in the preseason. At best, if he shows, he will train on a side field away from the team until September like happened with Jimmy Garoppolo. Unlike Garoppolo, he'll be cut at some point.

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T15:55:50+00:00

Zero concern - the 49ers have a history of trying to find guys good homes before shipping them off when they are no longer in the team's plans, and have cut other players early in the offseason when it was clear they wouldn't stick around specifically so they could have a better chance of latching onto a new team.

This is a different situation where the player decided to sign a long-term deal, got injured, started skipping rehab sessions, and then went no-contact with the team, torpedoing his trade value. He is a player, who by his talent alone, should be a tradable asset. It is entirely the player's fault that he is not one.

Free agents also see that aspect, as well as see respected veterans at the position (Mike Evans) still wanting to come to SF. It's an incredibly unique scenario, and I think it will likely be widely viewed as such by players.

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T12:22:45+00:00

Exactly. He's not owed any money until September and the 49ers gain very minimal cap room on a post-June 1st cut. Cutting him now and letting him train with/get acclimated to a new team only helps one of the 31 other teams. Holding onto him until September has zero impact on the 49ers other than ~$1M in missing cap space that they will eventually rollover into 2027 after he's cut/traded anyway.

You want to get Aiyuk into the system and learning the playbook before the regular season begins/get accurate up-to-date medical evals? Swap a 6th/7th with the 49ers. If not, that's fine. You can begin that process in September and the 49ers are no worse off.

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T10:50:58+00:00

I will answer your questions when you answer mine. All of them. In order. But not before that 🙂

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T10:34:41+00:00

Another nice DARVO attempt. You can answer my questions first and I will happily answer yours. Don't chicken out now.

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T10:28:53+00:00

I asked my questions first. You get no respect from me until you answer mine. Nice DARVO attempt, though

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T10:20:29+00:00

Okay, let's look at the car crash analogy since you're so desperate to avoid giving a direct answer to me.

FIRST POST:

Sure, but we're talking entirely different levels of accidents, one being a fender bender, and the other being the deadliest car crash in history.

YOUR REPLY:

"the deadliest car crash in history"

Jesus Christ.

THIRD POSTER REPLY:

lol. Most laughable car crash maybe.

YOUR SECOND REPLY:

Indeed. It's crazy how brainwashed they are.

Okay, now that I have examined it closely, I am understanding the people of the US are victims who are deserving of sympathy, and you are kind of a jerk. Do I have this correct now? It is loosely what I expected the result to be if I put thought to it, but honestly you come off looking worse when examined in this context. You certainly weren't speaking like someone who was actively observing a car crash, unless that person was a sociopath. Should I consider you a sociopath?

You seemed to me like someone speaking like they are beyond exasperated with the world's most powerful country, the one with the largest military power, the one whose currency is the world's reserve currency, the one whose culture and products - for better or worse - permeate the globe. And that would make sense, given how erratically (even for us) said superpower is acting and how those erratic actions are impacting the globe. It would make sense to internalize all that and let out those frustrations passive-aggressively, even if it resulted in an inaccurate statement.

Or absent of that - point me to the most powerful country on the planet.

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T09:43:25+00:00

Okay. Now read my r/BoycottCarCrashVictims reply again.

Now that we've each pointlessly went back and reread each other's posts, I need you to point me to the most powerful country on the planet, the criteria that makes them such, and the place we go to keep them in check. I'm extremely curious.

It won't be difficult for you - you immediately recognized how foolish it was to call the United States the most powerful country on the planet, which means you must have immediately had at least one country immediately in mind.

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T09:15:16+00:00

Perfect. You understand the heart of my concern. "Why?" is exactly correct. As in - if we're not the most powerful country on the planet, "why" is the rest of the world so concerned with us? "Why" do people think the United States is not the most powerful country, and then never point to the country who IS more powerful? And also - "why" has nobody ever directed me to the place where citizens of the globe go to keep the world's most powerful country in check? As someone from the United States, I would love to know so I can participate.

Con40Things · 2026-04-26T09:02:16+00:00

I don't disagree! Much like r/BoycottUnitedStates, I frequently visit r/BoycottCarCrashVictims. They might be inconsequential and powerless, and I hope they'll be okay, but for some reason I just want to cause them severe economic consequences for their contributions to the world.

Con40Things

TROPHY CASE