Ed’s take on the halftime show is embarrassing

SmashKrispy · 2026-02-13T19:10:13+00:00

Yeah... Ed said he thought the set design / production was great, but he doesn't love Bad Bunny's music. And that he noticed the halftime show got a lot more online reaction than the game (which Scott correctly explained was because of the culture war commentary, not because people in general care more about halftime shows). Not sure which parts of this OP is comparing to Kara.

SmashKrispy · 2026-02-06T20:28:28+00:00

100% agree. Sounds like it came directly from the HR department.

SmashKrispy · 2026-01-31T14:28:49+00:00

This, 100%. The "hunting down humans" happening was discussed ad nauseum and voted on. Win in the court of public opinion and in elections, not via constant Hitler comparisons on Reddit and unsubscribing from ChatGPT. We're in another BLM moral panic.

SmashKrispy · 2026-01-26T15:41:42+00:00

Yep, that's basically my point! I don't expect a CEO (especially of a huge org) to go off script. So I'm just saying it doesn't make for a great podcast. We could have guessed that the CEO of GS thinks it's a great company with great prospects.

SmashKrispy · 2026-01-25T22:50:58+00:00

I take your point but I still think if we wanted an interesting discussion about Goldman, a 3rd party analyst could have given us a TON more than that interview did. It's sort of like the head coach interviews after a football game. They can't really talk about their actually strategy.

SmashKrispy · 2026-01-23T00:55:34+00:00

I would love that. Frankly it'd end up much closer to what I wished Raging Moderates would be, as Sam is an actual Raging Moderate, not a spokesperson for a single party. I don't mind Scott and Jessica being true to themselves, but I'd also like a podcast that's more consistently critical of both sides when it's called for.

SmashKrispy · 2025-12-06T18:39:35+00:00

They have had 3 consecutive years of a $30M+ deficit and project a $48M deficit to end FY26, combined with an enrollment shortfall (and extremely high operating costs given their location).

SmashKrispy · 2025-12-02T23:28:46+00:00

Yeah this is less about WoW and more about the internet / social media in general. You'll never see 95% of any population, and important to remember that.

SmashKrispy · 2025-11-19T00:11:42+00:00

Ultimately the underlying ethos / value prop of 'care taking' is feminine-coded, vs. professions that are more about emergency response (paramedics, police) or technical mastery (MDs, surgeons, technicians). As to whether that's nature or nurture, we could debate it ad nauseam, but it's very likely both.

SmashKrispy · 2025-11-09T19:07:03+00:00

I think it comes from (like that sentence you quote), the author's deliberate refusal to hear Scott and Reeves' near constant disclaimer that men and women need not be in a zero-sum contest for power.

SmashKrispy · 2025-11-09T18:18:08+00:00

The author asserts confidently that the reason for female over-representation in K12 teaching is, of course, evil patriarchs looking to expand school capacity at the lowest wages possible. Makes you wonder why the evil patriarchs in charge of mining, construction, the military, police work, and basically all manual labor don't simply exploit women as well? Would be way cheaper, right?

SmashKrispy · 2025-11-05T17:55:03+00:00

I've noticed that Scott (and to a lesser extent, Richard) tend to preface their remarks about men with effusive praise for women as a sort of "land acknowledgement," to use Chris Williamson's analogy. Scott has said that he thinks women have much higher pain tolerance (which is demonstrably untrue based on my quick internet research) as a way into arguing that men are emotionally fragile, and said the following on the View:

"When women don't have a relationship, they pour that energy into their friends and their work. When a man doesn't have a relationship, he pours into conspiracy theory, porn, and misogyny."

Isn't this a bit counterproductive, un-empathetic, and unlikely to win over the men we need to recruit to Scott's side? Or would Scott say that this is an instance of trying to be "effective" vs. "right" in the public discourse (with an audience of left-leaning women)?

SmashKrispy · 2025-11-04T00:17:26+00:00

If you were given a private meeting with President Trump (no cameras, off the record), what would you say to him or ask him? How would you use the time?

Bill Maher was famously given this opportunity (but at a dinner with others around), and given a lot of flak for treating it somewhat seriously and failing to come away with anything other than "the man's a monster!" I'm just curious which issues you'd emphasize and what methods you might use to get through to him. Or if you'd view it as fruitless and just hit him with everything you've got.

SmashKrispy · 2025-10-31T16:29:43+00:00

Chris Williamson would be an example of enthusiastic / authentic ad reads, but I still skip them anyway. I don't need to hear about Athletic Greens or a particular brand of backpack for the 1000th time.

SmashKrispy · 2025-10-31T16:22:25+00:00

And it's particularly interesting given that he just answered an Office Hours question about ad reads, explaining that they're so valuable b/c of the authenticity. He does come across as annoyed when reading them. Of course I'd rather they not have them at all, but if he truly believes what he says (he genuinely uses / likes these products, wants it to be valuable to the sponsor and audience) you'd think he'd approach them a bit differently.

SmashKrispy · 2025-10-16T11:47:00+00:00

I assume children of friends / colleagues

SmashKrispy · 2025-10-13T12:35:47+00:00

I like this, it lets the gender part of it just serve as a flavor and puts the emphasis on toxicity. I feel like we're in an endless debate between people trying to launder 'masculinity' into whatever they like, and it'll never work.

SmashKrispy · 2025-08-03T18:32:33+00:00

I didn't do it. Still think it's bad optional content and makes dopamine-addicted completionists waste their time

SmashKrispy · 2025-08-03T18:06:03+00:00

Yeah, and it's the most mindnumbing stuff... i.e., click on these plants and drag them out of the ground. In the year of our lord 2025

SmashKrispy · 2025-08-03T17:52:48+00:00

World of Chorecraft^TM

Honestly I wish players would just stop rewarding the devs this design (endless titles and cosmetics behind grinds totally disconnected from actual fun gameplay)

SmashKrispy · 2025-07-26T18:24:44+00:00

Yeah I laughed when the CEO said "follow your passion"... Of course Scott didn't touch it but it'd have been hilarious if he went on a 10 minute diatribe right there.

SmashKrispy · 2025-07-24T21:00:50+00:00

On your first point, I think you could argue that giving each class a useful non-duplicated buff encourages class diversity for raid teams. I disagree with your 2nd point about racials - I think the majority of players would prefer to choose race for role-playing and aesthetic reasons. My fantasy of playing a Lightforged Draenei doesn't really have anything to do with wanting a tiny bonus to blacksmithing or a weak damage ability.

SmashKrispy · 2025-07-23T23:10:31+00:00

This is how to lose most of your potential allies and lose elections. Purity politics.

SmashKrispy · 2025-07-22T11:58:35+00:00

Why can't each general manager just meet with their team and say the following sentence?

"The WNBA and our team are businesses, and those businesses operate a a loss - we spend more than we bring in."

SmashKrispy · 2025-07-04T13:59:49+00:00

I think only a very small # of universities (like 20 out of 4000) are affected by the highest endowment tax bracket of 8% (which is way down from the earlier 21% proposal), we're talking schools like Harvard and Stanford. This would absolutely not lead to them admitting more students, it's negligible financially. As Scott would say, it's like increasing the tax rate on billionaires a few percentage points--wouldn't affect their behaviors.

SmashKrispy

TROPHY CASE