What non political controversial position do you hold?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Extra time on testing is BS. It's a way for people to try to game the system and the reality is their kids just can't cut it. The "learning disability" whether true or not is simply the explanation of why the kid can't cut it. There is no extra time in life, if you have a competitive job you need to produce on a deadline every day. The extra time on testing is just delaying the inevitable day of reckoning and trying to obfuscate the reality that will eventually become clear regardless.

My controversial opinion is that being able to do well quickly on a standardized test does not show any true smarts, is a fairly useless skill, and is a silly way to assess intelligence. I have been in tech for over twenty years. I have worked with literal geniuses who are now multimillionaires hundreds of times over who did terribly on standardized testing in high school because of the artificial time constraints. I think people who like the time limits on standardized testing tend to be the paper pushers who like useless data points, not the actual smart people who make things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Book banning should just stop by both sides of the aisle. If you are going to start that shite in a school or bookstore, you better take out ever bible:

What books are banned by the left?

Exactly none.

Wrong.

Ok, then give us an example.

Uh Liberals tried to cancel Dr. Seuss.

That wasn’t the left. That was an Asian rights group.

[Anonymous]

Stop referring to your self as fluffy. You are either obese or morbidly obese.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Book banning should just stop by both sides of the aisle. If you are going to start that shite in a school or bookstore, you better take out ever bible:

What books are banned by the left?

Are you okay if the library contains The Story of Little Black Sambo and if it is read in Public school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Book banning should just stop by both sides of the aisle. If you are going to start that shite in a school or bookstore, you better take out ever bible:

What books are banned by the left?

Lolita, Harry Potter, To Kill a Mockingbird, Dr Seuss, Adventures of Huckleberry Finn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extra time on testing is BS. It's a way for people to try to game the system and the reality is their kids just can't cut it. The "learning disability" whether true or not is simply the explanation of why the kid can't cut it. There is no extra time in life, if you have a competitive job you need to produce on a deadline every day. The extra time on testing is just delaying the inevitable day of reckoning and trying to obfuscate the reality that will eventually become clear regardless.

My controversial opinion is that being able to do well quickly on a standardized test does not show any true smarts, is a fairly useless skill, and is a silly way to assess intelligence. I have been in tech for over twenty years. I have worked with literal geniuses who are now multimillionaires hundreds of times over who did terribly on standardized testing in high school because of the artificial time constraints. I think people who like the time limits on standardized testing tend to be the paper pushers who like useless data points, not the actual smart people who make things.

my 30year old son got extra time for a CPA exam. He's losing his central vision. He legit needs more time. It's not BS.

[Anonymous]

Fries with mayo is a very good flavor combination as is a mixture of mayo-ketchup. Also I wish the US sold ketchup chips. I randomly found a small bag at Giant a few years ago and almost cried of happiness. Maybe I should have been born a Canadian but I also can’t stand the cold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extra time on testing is BS. It's a way for people to try to game the system and the reality is their kids just can't cut it. The "learning disability" whether true or not is simply the explanation of why the kid can't cut it. There is no extra time in life, if you have a competitive job you need to produce on a deadline every day. The extra time on testing is just delaying the inevitable day of reckoning and trying to obfuscate the reality that will eventually become clear regardless.

My controversial opinion is that being able to do well quickly on a standardized test does not show any true smarts, is a fairly useless skill, and is a silly way to assess intelligence. I have been in tech for over twenty years. I have worked with literal geniuses who are now multimillionaires hundreds of times over who did terribly on standardized testing in high school because of the artificial time constraints. I think people who like the time limits on standardized testing tend to be the paper pushers who like useless data points, not the actual smart people who make things.

Agree. My husband is one of the smartest people I know. He can’t take a standardized test to save his life.
I am ordinary and average, and could probably ace any standardized test you put in front of me. I just test well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extra time on testing is BS. It's a way for people to try to game the system and the reality is their kids just can't cut it. The "learning disability" whether true or not is simply the explanation of why the kid can't cut it. There is no extra time in life, if you have a competitive job you need to produce on a deadline every day. The extra time on testing is just delaying the inevitable day of reckoning and trying to obfuscate the reality that will eventually become clear regardless.

My controversial opinion is that being able to do well quickly on a standardized test does not show any true smarts, is a fairly useless skill, and is a silly way to assess intelligence. I have been in tech for over twenty years. I have worked with literal geniuses who are now multimillionaires hundreds of times over who did terribly on standardized testing in high school because of the artificial time constraints. I think people who like the time limits on standardized testing tend to be the paper pushers who like useless data points, not the actual smart people who make things.

And I know people who did well on standardized tests who are bright, innovative people. You sound bitter with this post. Sour grapes?

Standardized tests are unfair and not a good way to assess intelligence. Therefore, you don't make broad generalizations about people's usefulness based on them either way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dads shouldn’t get maternity leave.

Agree. Though, I’m okay if it is a shorter timeframe than a mother who carried the baby since the physical recovery and demands are different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extra time on testing is BS. It's a way for people to try to game the system and the reality is their kids just can't cut it. The "learning disability" whether true or not is simply the explanation of why the kid can't cut it. There is no extra time in life, if you have a competitive job you need to produce on a deadline every day. The extra time on testing is just delaying the inevitable day of reckoning and trying to obfuscate the reality that will eventually become clear regardless.

My controversial opinion is that being able to do well quickly on a standardized test does not show any true smarts, is a fairly useless skill, and is a silly way to assess intelligence. I have been in tech for over twenty years. I have worked with literal geniuses who are now multimillionaires hundreds of times over who did terribly on standardized testing in high school because of the artificial time constraints. I think people who like the time limits on standardized testing tend to be the paper pushers who like useless data points, not the actual smart people who make things.

Agree. My husband is one of the smartest people I know. He can’t take a standardized test to save his life.
I am ordinary and average, and could probably ace any standardized test you put in front of me. I just test well.

By definition you are not average if you ace them. You may both be very bright and wonderful people who have different strengths and skill sets.

How about having useful criticisms of standardized tests (there are many) without putting down some group of people? Both you and the PP you are responding to just sound like you are looking to be hurtful instead of thinking critically about standardized tests.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Squirrels are just rats with benefits. Take away the fluffy tail and big eyes, and you have a rat. They cause so much destruction, yet people think they are cute. Possums do so much more to benefit our ecosystem, but people are skeeved out by them because of the tail. We need more possums and fewer squirrels.

I think the American college system, with the emphasis on athletics and extracurriculars for college admissions, and portfolios instead of test scores, is a lot of nonsense. We should do it the way many European countries do it and go strictly by grades and test scores. Fewer people should be going to college, and there should be better job skill training for those who don't.

I think GPA and test scores still count the most. The issue is that grades don't mean much if there is a huge disparity in quality of education. I think the problem with ECs nowadays is that students need to excel at them or have leadership positions which means kids don't get to explore interests as much. For example, t's sad that kids have to pick a sport in like elementary school and focus on excelling in it from a young age vs. trying out different things.

And leadership often means starting a new club or nonprofit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Book banning should just stop by both sides of the aisle. If you are going to start that shite in a school or bookstore, you better take out ever bible:

What books are banned by the left?

Exactly none.

Wrong.

Ok, then give us an example.

Uh Liberals tried to cancel Dr. Seuss.

That wasn’t the left. That was an Asian rights group.

No that was the estate of Dr Seuss

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Extra time on testing is BS. It's a way for people to try to game the system and the reality is their kids just can't cut it. The "learning disability" whether true or not is simply the explanation of why the kid can't cut it. There is no extra time in life, if you have a competitive job you need to produce on a deadline every day. The extra time on testing is just delaying the inevitable day of reckoning and trying to obfuscate the reality that will eventually become clear regardless.

My controversial opinion is that being able to do well quickly on a standardized test does not show any true smarts, is a fairly useless skill, and is a silly way to assess intelligence. I have been in tech for over twenty years. I have worked with literal geniuses who are now multimillionaires hundreds of times over who did terribly on standardized testing in high school because of the artificial time constraints. I think people who like the time limits on standardized testing tend to be the paper pushers who like useless data points, not the actual smart people who make things.

And I know people who did well on standardized tests who are bright, innovative people. You sound bitter with this post. Sour grapes?

Standardized tests are unfair and not a good way to assess intelligence. Therefore, you don't make broad generalizations about people's usefulness based on them either way.

Opinion: People who immediately jump to “you sound bitter” or “sour grapes” on DCUM tend not to be very bright no matter what the subject matter. It’s a defensive reaction they use because they can’t understand or engage with the actual content of the post they are upset by.

This is also true of the people who respond with “you are just jealous” when they read something they don’t like. That response betrays a lack of intelligence. They can’t respond with any substance so they jump to “you are just jealous” to cover their lack of ability to engage in a substantive discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think ADHD is caused by poor or neglectful parenting.

That isn't just controversial, it's so ignorant. I have ADHD. Damn, I wished I had been diagnosed in my youth and gotten proper treatment. My life is night/day with treatment.

I think adhd is a normal variation on behavior that helped propel society forward (someone had to be the dreamers and the doers!). But now schools want to medicate it instead of adapting the school environment to help kids succeed. (Not that medication is bad, but why should it be the first thing teachers and admins say needs to be done, instead of having special Ed classrooms adapted to adhd kids?)

But it doesn’t propel society forward anymore. Society now demands focus. Not just in classrooms but in almost jobs as well. I absolutely agree there is an overemphasis on sitting down and shutting up, and that many accommodations for movement are needed. But this is the world we live in.

For a person with ADHD, one overlooked aspect of IS intense focus.