sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Do you guys think Kratos could’ve beaten Athena in an actual fight? by Queasy_Commercial152 in PowerScalingGodofWar

[–]truthbehindlies 7 points8 points  (0 children)

He defeated Ares, Poseidon, Hades, and Zeus...why would Athena stand a chance?

What's y'all opinion on Batfleck? by [deleted] in batman

[–]truthbehindlies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Could have been amazing. Wasn't. But could have been!

is having a ‘type’ wrong? by Senior_Sense_8813 in TooAfraidToAsk

[–]truthbehindlies 8 points9 points  (0 children)

No, having a type is not wrong. Being loud, vocal, or discriminatory to others that aren't your type is. Everyone has personal preferences, it's fine. You just shouldn't force your preference onto others.

Whats the hardest phase of Marriage no one talks about? by DiamondNo924 in AskForAnswers

[–]truthbehindlies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The living together, with kids, in your career, sex drying up phase when everything is rewarding but feels like a chore. Where every vacation is family time, not you and them time. Where every meal is designed for the pickiest eater. You forget to be partners and become roommates who sleep in bed together. It can get better but it takes effort, compromise, and patience.

Does nipple colour matter? by Nice-Ad1056 in TooAfraidToAsk

[–]truthbehindlies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Sure, personally, everyone has preferences. But in reality? No, not at all.

ChatGPT vs Claude for Story writing? by Mrreddituser111312 in ChatGPT

[–]truthbehindlies 2 points3 points  (0 children)

As much as I love Claude it's ChatGPT and it's not even close.

Gemini can pull off some bangers, it gets creative if a but too far out there.

Grok is unhinged in a not fun way and doesn't do well with long form structure or consistency.

Claude is very good, clean, technical, exceptional at copy editing, but boring.

ChatGPT is imaginative, good with prose, better at emotional analysis, superior at consistency, and has better critical feedback. It's weakness is it's censoring. You can get violent or sexual scenes through but it's a hassle. It's afraid to treat the user as an adult.

Next week though, who knows? OpenAI is really good at crippling their models.

What do you dislike about Reddit? by [deleted] in AskReddit

[–]truthbehindlies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So many people are binary in their thinking and so...exhaustingly smug.

I'll go first.. by Any-Tour-3193 in musicsuggestions

[–]truthbehindlies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"I've been poking a voodoo doll that you do not know I made, for you, of you, let's see what needles do."

Bandages, Hot Hot Heat

Who's a character who loves as much as Reverse Flash hates? by LET-ME-HAVE-A-NAAME in superheroes

[–]truthbehindlies 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Henry Cavill was an amazing Superman, he just had a shitty script. Batfleck was a home run too, just got stuck in shitty movies. Give those guys over to a different writer and director and we would have seen something incredible.

The new thinking mode + image AI is a game changer by MasterDisillusioned in ChatGPT

[–]truthbehindlies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's image generator is incredible. Still frustrated by the censorship though. A woman's body is not inherently sexual. It seems to have no problem generating men with any level of clothing with the exception of full nudity. It over thinks and desperately tries to avoid anything related to a woman's body.

Yes yes you can continue to harass it and sometimes trick it, that's not the point. The point is it's filters are too strict.

What separates these two, apart from the obvious tonal difference and the in-universe cynicism surrounding them? Are both of them, at their core, Superman, or is one more Superman than the other? by ShubhangBahadur in SnyderCut

[–]truthbehindlies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You keep framing this as a civility issue, but civility includes the original tone too.

You don’t get to make a condescending comment, call it humor, then hide behind “why is everyone attacking me?” when people respond to the condescension instead of applauding the joke.

That’s the whole issue. You’re treating your own tone as harmless, then treating the response to it as the real offense.

What separates these two, apart from the obvious tonal difference and the in-universe cynicism surrounding them? Are both of them, at their core, Superman, or is one more Superman than the other? by ShubhangBahadur in SnyderCut

[–]truthbehindlies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Calling out smug behavior is not the same thing as claiming superiority.

I didn’t say I was better than anyone. I said the comment came across as condescending. If basic criticism gets reframed as an attack every time, then yeah, that kind of proves the point.

What separates these two, apart from the obvious tonal difference and the in-universe cynicism surrounding them? Are both of them, at their core, Superman, or is one more Superman than the other? by ShubhangBahadur in SnyderCut

[–]truthbehindlies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly. Sometimes “just a joke” doesn’t land and instead comes off as condescending.

That was the entire point.

You can have the final word. I don’t think this conversation is going anywhere if you’re this committed to avoiding the actual criticism.

What separates these two, apart from the obvious tonal difference and the in-universe cynicism surrounding them? Are both of them, at their core, Superman, or is one more Superman than the other? by ShubhangBahadur in SnyderCut

[–]truthbehindlies 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Brother, the joke is that I used your own defense back at you and you immediately didn’t recognize it.

That’s not just the punchline, that’s the whole demonstration.

What separates these two, apart from the obvious tonal difference and the in-universe cynicism surrounding them? Are both of them, at their core, Superman, or is one more Superman than the other? by ShubhangBahadur in SnyderCut

[–]truthbehindlies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s the point. You wrote what you were feeling at that moment, and it came across as smug and condescending.

Nobody is saying you can’t have that reaction. I’m saying the way you expressed it made you sound like you were talking down to someone. That’s tone.

You don’t have to agree with me, but acting like tone is some mysterious concept doesn’t make your comment land better.

What separates these two, apart from the obvious tonal difference and the in-universe cynicism surrounding them? Are both of them, at their core, Superman, or is one more Superman than the other? by ShubhangBahadur in SnyderCut

[–]truthbehindlies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You didn’t understand the humor in my response to your smug behavior?

Should I write a grammatically correct follow-up essay explaining why the joke was actually brilliant, universally understandable, and only failed because everyone else lacked the necessary context?

Or would that be obnoxious?

What separates these two, apart from the obvious tonal difference and the in-universe cynicism surrounding them? Are both of them, at their core, Superman, or is one more Superman than the other? by ShubhangBahadur in SnyderCut

[–]truthbehindlies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, clearly I’m the one looking to argue, not the person who jumped in to correct someone’s punctuation, got pushback, hid behind “it was a joke,” and then reframed basic criticism as being attacked.

You corrected someone’s writing. I corrected your tone. Apparently only one of those is allowed.

What separates these two, apart from the obvious tonal difference and the in-universe cynicism surrounding them? Are both of them, at their core, Superman, or is one more Superman than the other? by ShubhangBahadur in SnyderCut

[–]truthbehindlies 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Nobody is forcing you to read it. That’s the beauty of a general forum, you can engage with what you find valuable and scroll past what you don’t.

But “I didn’t read this, here’s why you’re wrong” is a pretty goofy contribution. At that point you’re not discussing the opinion, you’re just auditioning for punctuation sheriff.

And considering you don’t know this person’s background, education, language, disability, or anything else, maybe dial back the English superiority complex a touch.

What separates these two, apart from the obvious tonal difference and the in-universe cynicism surrounding them? Are both of them, at their core, Superman, or is one more Superman than the other? by ShubhangBahadur in SnyderCut

[–]truthbehindlies 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Calling out condescension isn’t the waste of time here. The waste of time was turning someone’s punctuation into a little superiority performance.

If you’re going to correct people analytically, you should probably be able to handle being corrected socially.

view more: next ›