Yeah, I also can’t stand it when words are used to convey meanings they’ve had for roughly five hundred years.

Etymology of "ouster’

I agree with all you’ve said, and I tend to add both systems when expressing a meaningful measurement. My statement is pointed more towards situations where someone hasn’t done so and it throws some poor soul into a meltdown.

Counterpoint: there is no continent named “America.” “North American,” “South American,” and even “Central American,” or “Latin American,” for added specificity, are completely sufficient demonyms for the denizens of the continents (and subreigon) writ large.

Regarding weights and measures:

I don’t think in metric, and there’s a strong possibility that I never will. I came of age in an educational system that taught metric units alongside imperial, but also in a day-to-day world that heavily skews towards imperial units.

If I see metric units that I can’t immediately interpret in my head, it’s absolutely trivial for me to get the conversion by other means. It’s equally as trivial for someone who uses metric to make the opposite conversion.

Anyone losing their shit about it is acting performatively.

Wouldn’t it need to be “dunp”?

Could? Possibly, sure.

Would? Why should any ticket guarantee a win based solely on arbitrary characteristics of the candidates? Nothing about being a woman, a man, trans, cis, gay, straight, bi, ace, black, white, Latino, Asian, biracial, triracial, short, tall, hirsute, bald, balding, skinny, jacked, overweight, or any other randomly chosen descriptor should be a factor in electability. The fact that it’s even in question is a strong indictment of how we view politics in a broad sense.

I agree with your list, but I also have to point out the irony of throwing in a “for the 'muricans” in reference to an American multinational company.

That’s one hell of a shelf life…

Because I haven’t seen it mentioned:

They Live

If they had infinite resources, they wouldn’t need to worry about adblockers.

I find it hard to take seriously anyone who throws the term FUD around with no sense of irony.

Sensationalist journalism. This manifests as clickbait headlines, agenda pieces, and other such tactics.

Blackberry jam is my go-to

Why are you cutting a 2x4 with a hacksaw?

The Aquabats

That’s a big reaction for a tongue-in-cheek comment on an unpopular opinion post! Joe, is that you? I’m sorry they used Steve in Crossroads instead of you, but you gotta let it go! Sometimes the student becomes the teacher!

Joking aside, the whole “soul” thing can be seen as somewhat of a compliment in a sense. Blackmore, Yngwie, Satch, Petrucci, Vai, Johnson, and other neoclassical players strove for technical perfection. The bits and bobs of music that are generally lumped into the idea of “soul” are the mistakes, the imperfections, the unintended, the miniscule fuckups. As an off the top example, think of Merry Clayton’s voice cracking as she belted out a vocal masterwork in her pajamas and curlers after being dragged out of bed at midnight to back up Mick Jagger. It’s imperfect, it’s unrepeatable, and it’s amazing.

Contrast that with what the technical shredders were intending to do: they wanted to hit every note with exacting precision every time they played. It’s no less impressive than those one-off moments like Gimme Shelter, but it’s markedly different. Listeners who don’t identify with the sound sometimes perceive a sort of sterility in the style, whether deserved or not. The degree of technicality alone can almost come across as machine-like. That doesn’t mean that it has no merit, or that anyone who feels it deeply is in some way “defective”. These guys wouldn’t have had 40+ year careers if nobody was feeling what they were doing.

Enjoy what you enjoy, groove to what grooves you, and above all else, be secure enough in your own taste that a bit of banter about a genre doesn’t seem like a personal attack. Remember: Barry Manilow has sold over 85 million albums, so there really is a market for everything!

Through the magic of buying two of them.

No? Well…

For me, that description fits Yngwie more than Satriani. Satch had at least 1%, maybe even a whopping 2% soul. Vai is probably sneaking up on double digits.

I like the list, but there’s a disturbing lack of Steve Earle.