Tuesday, October 9, 2012

Top 5 Things I Just Don't Care About

I'm willing to be you don't care about this crap either.

5: What's trending on Twitter.  No matter how many times I hear that something is trending (which, fyi, seems to be the WWE's cause celebre), I just cant bring myself to care.

4: Quidditch.  It's the made-up game in the world of Harry Potter in which wizards fly on broomsticks and try to get a ball (a quaffle) through a goal without getting hit (and maybe killed) by another ball (a bludger) which magically tries to knock wizards off their brooms.  That's all well and good, and understandable, if maybe a little hokey (especially hokey are people who play in real life--without the attendant flying).  But my problem, and the thing that makes me not care is another ball--this one with wings--called the golden snitch.  When the golden snitch is caught, the game ends.  Also, it's worth 150 points.  A regular goal is worth 10.  The matches we see last a few minutes with plenty of irrelevant play before someone finally catches the golden snitch and ends the games.  So why bother with anything but catching the golden snitch?  Who cares?  Not I.

When the guy in the middle gets fired, don't mention him again--pretend he never worked here.
3: People who I no longer work with and am not friends with.  If I didn't like Joe at work, and Joe got fired four months ago, and I haven't heard from Joe since he was fired, I don't need you to tell me about how Joe is doing or bitch that Joe didn't deserve to be treated the way he was.  Screw Joe.

2: Snooki's baby or Honey Boo Boo's mom.  These are just examples; this should be read to be a category including Paris Hilton, Lindsey Lohan, the Housewives of Wherever, and everything in that vein.  I know plenty of losers personally, and try hard to seldom think of them.  I really don't need to spend any time thinking about the trials and tribulations of losers I don't know.

1: Your gym schedule.  Nothing is less important to me than the fact that you just worked out.  Is this meant to make me feel bad for not going to the gym, or make you feel like superman?  From now on, I'll tell the Facebook world every time I leave work.  Read into it what you will.

I do care about your comments and the warm fuzzy feeling that a new "like" on my Facebook page brings me--so hook a brother up!

8 comments:

  1. You know way more about Quidditch than someone that doesn't care about it. Just saying.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ok, so I'm going to argue Quidditch. Not whether you care about it, but whether goal-scoring is more/less important than catching the Snitch.


    We have final scores for seven matches that happen in the books; and "results" for a number more. At least six of those non-score results are clearly dependent on the Snitch-catcher winning the match (for instance, twice Harry caught the Snitch within the first minute of the match, and obviously there were not 150 points scored by the other team in that time). Of the remaining seven, we know the following:


    Gryffindor beats Slytherin 170-60 (Gryffindor catches the Snitch)
    Gryffindor beats Syltherin 230-20 (Gryffindor)
    Hufflepuff beats Gryffindor 240-230 (Gryffindor)
    Hufflepuff beats Gryffindor 320-60 (Hufflepuff)
    Gryffindor beats Ravenclaw 450-140 (Gryffindor)
    Transylvania beats England 390-10 (Translyvania)

    Ireland beats Bulgaria 170-160 (Bulgaria)


    So in the remaining six matches, there are two instances of the loser of the match catching the Snitch, /but/ two others in which the Snitch-catching did not decide the outcome (Gryffindor would have beaten Ravenclaw 300-290, Transylvania would have beaten England 240-160). So 4/13 (30%) of matches were not decided, at the end, but the 150 points given by the Snitch.


    But, there are more levels here. First off, NEITHER of the two international (World Cup) matches we have scores for were determined by the the Snitch catching. Part of that reason, I'm sure, is due to the total length of the game - leaving aside the outliers of multiple-day-long matches (ref: Quidditch through the Ages), it's clear from the preparation for and celebration at the Quidditch World Cup that the 170-160 match was over quicker than was expected. The longer a match goes on, the more goals are scored, and the more chance there is of a 150+ point buffer.


    School matches, however, seem to be over more quickly. The Gryffindor/Hufflepuff 240-230 match lasted 22 minutes, for example, so averaging a bit more than a goal a minute once the 150 points for the Snitch is removed. However, there's one additional piece that makes goalscoring absolutely essential... the Quidditch Cup. The Cup is not actually determined (solely) by Win-Loss record, but by point difference in much the same way as soccer leagues are determined by total points followed by goal difference. Gryffindor's massive 450-140 win over Ravenclaw is an example of this need - they didn't just need to beat Ravenclaw, but they needed to beat Ravenclaw by 200 points in order to secure the Cup. As a result... they needed to be leading by 50 when they caught the Snitch (and therefore, needed to play defense against Ravenclaw's Seeker as well) to win.


    I'm not trying to argue that Quidditch is a completely well-designed game, it certainly isn't. But the "catch the Snitch, win the match" bit won't be a winner in the long run.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah, that covers just about all the bases. #2 should be #1 in my book, but then, I don't have people updating insistently about gym schedules.


    Personally I think the thing about the gym schedules is just people fishing for encouragement. And I didn't know how to spell Quidditch before this post, but its definitely a very ignorant made up game, but then I don't like Harry Potter at all anyways.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Agreed. Yeah, as I was writing it I was coming up with scenarios in which it would be more important to block the opposing team from catching the snitch than catching it yourself. I get it, I just don't care. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  5. lol. That was funny

    ReplyDelete
  6. Holy crap, that's an impressive bit of research there. I'll assume it's all correct. Bravo.

    ReplyDelete
  7. By the way, I didn't go to the gym today, but I DID use the rowing machine. So, yes, I'm better than you. Unless, of course, you used the rowing machine as well.


    Nah, I'm still better.

    ReplyDelete