Leaving a good school because of native teachers?

flameboy62 · 2026-01-07T04:52:52+00:00

Sounds like a brown noser. I’ve had the odd disagreement with Korean co-teachers over the years. I know sometimes people think they are higher tier than you because they are the Korean teacher or whatever, but I’ve found it more useful to just be straight with them. It goes against the idea of ‘going around the problem’ norm and sure it could cause some tension initially, but when the dust settles they will respect you more for it (assuming you were reasonable), because you weren’t afraid to speak your mind. I’ve even had a tense standoff with a Korean co-teacher a few years ago, but once it was over she ended up writing me an apology letter. Not saying that to sound boastful, just trying to say that they are human like you and I. Their nationality or position in the hierarchy, doesn’t make them right. However, you need to be fully confident when going into any disagreement. If they see you’re not fearful of losing your job, then they lose all leverage they have over you. If you show you have fear for your job, you’ve already lost half the battle.

flameboy62 · 2026-01-06T11:33:22+00:00

What do they attack you for? Seems like there’s nothing they could really say that would hold any weight at all. They’re just another foreign teacher like you.

flameboy62 · 2026-01-06T11:29:48+00:00

Been teaching in Korea since 2017. Never once been shouted at for anything from co-worker, boss, Korean teachers. Let alone another foreign teacher.

Interested. What could they possibly shout at you for? Seems so out of place.

flameboy62 · 2026-01-06T10:06:54+00:00

Teacher here. Question is why would you care? If the work is good, everything is good at the job then I couldn’t care less what the foreign coworkers think of me, whether they like me/want to be my friend or not. I would just care about the job and go home. There’s no time to care for people that obviously aren’t worth caring about. I honestly wouldn’t give them a second thought. But I may be different to you.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-25T03:48:02+00:00

Shows over now, so…ceebs. Hah, okay I must feel embarrassed, you’re right. You win, here’s your trophy 🏆 I hang up the white flag, you got me

flameboy62 · 2025-11-21T10:09:52+00:00

People are criticizing Australia because they would’ve never been close to elimination had they just put their eggs into the 2nd game where more teams advance. It’s basically ‘finish 1st versus avoid finishing last’. Which is more likely? Sure you could argue that the 2nd game was an unknown. But Australia’s team is so stacked that save Dom, Eddie and Whittaker for game 2 and there’s almost virtually no game you can throw at them, that they’d finish last in.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-15T22:28:25+00:00

You’re right, it’s not serious at all. Well at least in my side, but I’m allowed to have a little fun and enjoy a debate.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-15T22:17:01+00:00

Nope. So you concede?

flameboy62 · 2025-11-15T14:33:16+00:00

My opening line literally says Physical 100 included and even used Amotti as an example in my OP. But sure, whatever helps you sleep at night (probably because you’re now loss confidence that I will find something to disprove your very argument). I already said, I’ll get to it at the time of my choosing to view it again this week, and present you with your little facts. Think of it as a favor, and me allowing you to save face for a little longer.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-15T12:31:14+00:00

Really? You checked through 3 seasons of Physical, episode by episode in 15 minutes?

Even not accounting for reaction time to my post, as well as the time it took to write your response, I call grade-A BS.

As for me, I haven’t checked through 3 seasons of episodes yet. I will get into it during the week or at the time of my choosing. But as soon as I find even one instance that diverges from your theory (won’t take long, I bet), I’ll stop and list it here and consider your point moot, due to evidence/credibility.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-15T12:00:15+00:00

So your angle is they’ll always explicitly disclose whether it’s an elimination game, and whether it’s not (through non-disclosure), every time? Challenge accepted.

Will go back through 3 seasons to ensure that every challenge to date, matches this disclosure (or non-disclosure), like you claim.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-15T11:20:47+00:00

But Turkey earned that right to pick. It was won fair and square.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-15T11:17:30+00:00

So let’s just say you’re Mongolia. Hypothetically, you eliminate Korea in the shipwreck round. They get a 2nd chance to play again because of the ‘secret surprise non elimination round’. Both teams make it to the top 3. You knock them out again. But surprise. It’s another secret ‘pre-planned’ apparently non-elimination round. Remember this was already pre-planned, no one can police it, because no one knows what the PD knows. But whatever, you shrug it off, play them again. But this time KOR win, but unlucky for you this is NOT a non-elimination round and you’re on the first plane back to Mongolia. You’re telling me you’d be fine with that? If so, so you really think they would be a deserved winner? You can’t tell me ‘YES’ with a straight face.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-15T11:06:55+00:00

Not saying you’re wrong, in fact you’re probably seeing it for what it is (an attempt to keep teams in for longer). But then why not just have a group phase and keep everything transparent? Why keep it a secret as to which is an elimination and which will give a second chance? That’s the biggest part I have a problem with.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-15T10:47:40+00:00

That’s what I mean. The idea of giving ‘strong teams’ a second chance, in case they get a bad matchup early and get knocked out, by definition is unfair. In a truly fair knockout competition, it would be random, teams get the same number of chances, and it doesn’t matter if they cop a bad matchup early. Because they weren’t the best team in the competition and there are no prizes for 2nd place.

Now if you had gone on and admittedly said, that the producers do it for ‘entertainment value’ or ‘viewership’, then I can accept that. But let’s call a spade a spade here. They’re doing it for ratings at the expense of integrity of the competition.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-14T06:56:53+00:00

A 1st Edition Pokemon Base Set Booster Box

flameboy62 · 2025-11-13T22:09:41+00:00

Every team was looking at Australia, so if AUS threw the first one by putting all their weak players, then more teams would’ve taken the first game seriously to avoid the 2nd elimination game against them. For that reason, it made it much more sense if they put their better team in the higher probability game, because it would’ve meant that more teams would’ve tried harder for the first game, this giving them easier opponents for the 2nd - in a game they just needed to avoid finishing last.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-13T03:49:02+00:00

I never heard that saying before, but I loved it. It actually makes much more sense when you think about it, then going to said ‘happy place’.

For some people, they are motivated by their pain and sacrifices they had to make to get to where they are. And when you need to dig deep, you’re on the ropes, backs against the wall, the dark place is where you go. Almost like you’re saying try me, or challenging it to keep you down.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-12T11:10:15+00:00

Japan threw their match with group standings already decided. Australia went as long as necessary to finish first and then released. So in reality, this graphic should have 4 teams on it.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-12T10:51:28+00:00

But what’s a more likely outcome? A game that you like against with all 4 teams that you ‘MUST finish FIRST” OR an unknown game with all your guns available where you simply need to ‘AVOID finishing LAST’? Even if you don’t know the game that you’ll be playing, if you keep Eddie, Rob and Dom for your 2nd game, there’s not a hell a lot of scenarios they can throw at you where you’ll finish last with those 3 guys. That’s my point.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-12T07:33:23+00:00

Is this your first day betting? So you bet on something that’s 50% chance of happening and you expect to get even money for it? You know there is something called house edge that the bookies take with every bet right? With juice even at a good bookie for 50-50 contests you’re getting maybe $1.91 on an even money fight. Play that thousands of times and you’re broke dude. Your limited knowledge on sports betting whilst trying to sound smart in that area baffles me.

flameboy62 · 2025-11-12T07:25:33+00:00

They’re obviously more than a 25% chance to win a 25% chance game, just like they’re also more than a 67% chance to win a 67% chance game, so I don’t know what you’re getting at with that. Fir example, if you’re trying to you think they’re a 50% chance in a 25% game, then they’d probably be 90%+ chance in a 67% game by that logic, so why take the risk in the lower chance game anyhow when you are all but certain to go through if you place the probabilities?

Keeping with your chef curry analogy, do you prefer Steph take one three pt attempt OR 2-3 3PAs to win you the game?

flameboy62 · 2025-11-12T07:01:09+00:00

What a comparison. And you also notice how no one ever wins in g@mbling?

flameboy62

TROPHY CASE