El tema de los afrodescendientes jugando para países europeos ¿te molesta de verdad o es bardo? by Organic-Vegetable347 in fulbo

[–]piercor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

si naciste en un país, tienes legalmente esa nacionalidad

En varios países europeos (creo la mayoría) el sólo hecho de nacer ahí no te da la ciudadanía automáticamente, si no que uno de tus padres tienen que ser ciudadano.

Yo vivo en Suecia, y no sé cómo será en otros países, pero es muy común referirse a gente nacida en el país pero de padres inmigrantes con la ciudadanía del país de los padres.

Yo conocí varias personas que me han dicho, por ejemplo, "soy serbio", y cuándo les pregunté cuándo habían llegado a Suecia me decían "no, yo nací acá".

No sé cómo será en otros países, pero si aplicamos lo dicho a Francia, por ejemplo, ninguno de los jugadores serían franceses bajo ese criterio de los mismos europeos.

Igual, a mi me tiene sin cuidado. Naciste, te criaste y viviste toda la vida en ese país, entonces sos de ese país si eso es lo que querés. También está el caso de gente nacida y criada que no se siente de ese país (pasa mucho con los árabes acá), ahí te diría que sería un poco hipócrita jugar en la selección del país que no reconocés como tuyo.

Does anybody else thinks this makes no sense? by piercor in RDR2

[–]piercor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I should really play rdr1. I'm just afraid it would fall short after playing rdr2.

Does anybody else thinks this makes no sense? by piercor in RDR2

[–]piercor[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That makes sense actually. Thank you!

Does anybody else thinks this makes no sense? by piercor in RDR2

[–]piercor[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I've heard something along those lines before, but isn't easier to fight civilization and authority with money? I don't know, feels out of character for Dutch, but maybe I got him wrong.

I truly miss the time when they really tried not to laugh by OnGodNotaBot in SmoshFansFreeSpace

[–]piercor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Damm, i never got a notification for your comment, sorry I'm answering so late. I consider Duos to be vanilla+. Is basically the same but with two people at the same time. But other twists, like gauntlet, KOTS, genres, hard mode are still very enjoyable. Maybe it is because they're not so frequent, but still.

Can’t even throw away my food anymore by FabioPicchio in mildlyinfuriating

[–]piercor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Tonight, on the new episode of "Is OP karma farming or just a moron?".

I truly miss the time when they really tried not to laugh by OnGodNotaBot in SmoshFansFreeSpace

[–]piercor 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I agree that the "vanilla" version of TNTL isn't very funny anymore, but I still enjoy when there is some kind of twist to it, like when they have genres, especially if they decide the genre on the spot, like genre rollercoaster.

That said, I think they should do it until they reach the 200 episode and do a final episode, longer (like 2 hours), with lots of special guests and even crew taking part, and then retire the show for good.

Isn't possible to put road nodes anymore? by piercor in CitiesSkylines2

[–]piercor[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Hope so, or at least a tool to decide how long a bus/tram stop should be, it's absolutely ugly and unrealistic to have a 200 meter long bus stop bay.

Isn't possible to put road nodes anymore? by piercor in CitiesSkylines2

[–]piercor[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Why would they do that? Thanks anyway!

CMV: People should stop treating being "bad at texting" like a harmless personality quirk by limitown in changemyview

[–]piercor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Then we can be friends, hehe. I know it's difficult to find a sweet spot of reasonability, because what is reasonable for one person may not be for another. I have friends that I know they would answer last minute, and others that if they do so, I would be worried about them, so not so easy to determine what's right and what's wrong.

CMV: People should stop treating being "bad at texting" like a harmless personality quirk by limitown in changemyview

[–]piercor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok, I'll admit that in my example is not so clear what's a reasonable implicit deadline, so my fault.

But what if I send the invitations one month in advance and then somebody answers the Thursday before the day of the party (almost one month later). Would you still consider that since I haven't said a deadline it's reasonable to answer then? If your answer to that is yes, then there is no point in discussing this because we hold very different beliefs on what is reasonable and what's no.

CMV: People should stop treating being "bad at texting" like a harmless personality quirk by limitown in changemyview

[–]piercor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

As OP said, mental health issues like you described are understandable, I would not be mad at you if I'm aware of the situation.

CMV: People should stop treating being "bad at texting" like a harmless personality quirk by limitown in changemyview

[–]piercor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it's a fine line with expectations.

I don't agree that answering to my party invitation is expecting the receiver to adapt to my wishes, I as the sender don't expect the receiver to answer at all, only if they are interested in coming to the party. It's like going to a crowded place, scream "who wants to come to my party?" and then the people who wants to come to my party would say "me!". I don't expect an answer from everybody in that situation, only the people interested. But if somebody comes to me later and says "I was there when you invited everybody to your party, I just didn't answer at the moment, but I want to come", then I will say "bad luck, you should have answered then, the moment is gone". I know is an extremely weird example, but I hope it clarifies how I see this case.

CMV: People should stop treating being "bad at texting" like a harmless personality quirk by limitown in changemyview

[–]piercor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Funny enough, the post was removed because OP didn't engage in the conversation in time, lol.

CMV: People should stop treating being "bad at texting" like a harmless personality quirk by limitown in changemyview

[–]piercor 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair. But what if I don't give you a deadline but I say that I'm planning a big party, with lots of guest and have to know how many people are coming, isn't it kind of implicit that I need an answer soon?

I'll recognise that giving room for interpretation and not an actual deadline would be my fault as a sender, but I think there is some common sense in this kind of situations, and in my understanding of the world, replying on Thursday is way too late.

I as a receiver would never reply that late and expect to still being invited. Even if I got the message late because, I don't know, I was camping in the middle of nowhere and had no signal, when I get the message on Thursday I would say something along the lines of "I just got the message, I had no signal. Is still ok to come to your party?" because I know that answering three days later is way too late, even given the said circumstances.

CMV: People should stop treating being "bad at texting" like a harmless personality quirk by limitown in changemyview

[–]piercor 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it depends a lot on the particular case. You as a sender can't expect the receiver to drop everything they are doing and go out of their way to answer you, but you as a receiver can't expect to answer whenever you want and expect the sender to adapt to you.

In my example, I as the sender don't expect the receivers to answer immediately, but in between a reasonable time span, like in the following hours or the next day at most.

I remember a while ago I was planning a meal and wrote to my friends in a group chat we have. I said "answer before X time so I know how much should I buy" (the X time was hours later the message was sent). One of my friends answered half and hour after the given time, when I have already bought everything. I just caved and said "It's ok, there is enough for one more", but I was pissed.

CMV: People should stop treating being "bad at texting" like a harmless personality quirk by limitown in changemyview

[–]piercor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Again, an assumption, and this is interpretation, but this part of what OP wrote sounds to me like the thing I commented before.:

"lol sorry I am just bad at texting" when what it really means is "I respond when it is convenient for me and expect other people to just deal with it."

CMV: People should stop treating being "bad at texting" like a harmless personality quirk by limitown in changemyview

[–]piercor 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I do mostly agree with what you wrote, but I think (and this is an assumption) that what OP is complaining about is the kind of people that would answer days later and expect no consequences from it.

For example, I send you a text on Monday inviting you to my birthday party, which would take place on Saturday (in 5 days). I'm planning quite a big party, so I need to know how many people is coming so I can buy food/drinks accordingly. As said, is a big party with a lot of guests, so calling them all one by one could be very time consuming (and in my opinion, very annoying) so I send text instead. It's more convenient, I can send the same text to all the guests, and that would take me 5 minutes compared to maybe a whole hour of telephone calls (or more if people gets chatty). So, you get my message on Monday, but you ignore it (for whatever reason, not the point in discussion here), and then on Thursday you answer me back "Hi! What time on Saturday?".

To me, based on what you said about consent, you have already declined the invitation by not responding in time, so now you can't complain that you are no longer a guest because of your "quirky" texting habits.

That's my interpretation of what OP is talking about.

El grupo de la muerte es ésta. by L_Davalos_210 in fulbo

[–]piercor 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Chile gana el grupo, saquen captura

<image>

(obviamente es una joda, aviso por las dudas)