Do you care to explain why the distinction you and she are making is a significant one? You know, like I asked in the previous post? And which your whole argument depends? What exactly do you mean to imply by this? It's not a debate about a factual issue. It's a thread on a message board, with a bunch of individual contributions from different users at different times. One would expect, then, that meaning either derives from authorial intention of the thread starter, or the consensus meaning gleaned from all the separate posters. Given that you just derided the latter method, and the first has been called into question (as it potentially conflicts with your belief) how exactly do you propose we determine what a thread is "really" about? Who is the arbiter, that their opinion on the issue magically invalidates everyone elses'? Why should we understand your assertion about the actual nature of this thread as being the most correct? And why do you find it so absurd to expect that we could come to some idea of the meaning of a shared endeavor by polling the opinions of those variously involved in its authorship? Interesting that this is the second time that this has happened in the same thread. No, they aren't the same. But my point doesn't require that they are. It only requires that they are similar in the ways that Kiki found annoying and/or "problematic." To that point, both involve being lectured by superiors. Both involve potentially new or unwanted responsibilities. Both are in a structured format. Both take away time that the individual might otherwise use differently. And, in spite of all of the above, attendees usually recognize both as at being intended to fit theoretically into some greater good, even if the reality falls far short of that hope. Granted, one meeting discusses religious content and the other doesn't. But how is that a meaningful difference? The world is suffused with diversity. It's not that difficult to generate long lists of arbitrary distinctions. Only if they have meaning should we take note of them. In what other context would you possibly say that the severity of a problem doesn't matter, only the type? Anything that points implicitly to the yawning gap between first and third world standards of living should qualify for this thread. Your restriction against those gaps that owe their existence primarily to the severity (rather than type) of problem is bizarre, and not really factual. Some problems, even when common to all humans, are experienced so differently in developed versus developing nations that they highlight the difference in conditions more starkly than anything you would count as actually qualifying. Would you really say, for instance, that a broken fax machine is more emblematic of this disparity than the fact that the number two cause of death in impoverished countries doesn't even rank in the US, and is nothing more than a few hours (or, at most, days) inconvenience there?
My job scheduled me for a training session next week--on Thursday evening, which means I'll miss my regular yoga class.
My weekly meeting means I have to sit in a comfy chair, in an air conditioned room, pretending to listen while surfing the Internet 'instead' of getting paid to read comics at a coffee shop. First world problem.
When I pay for a direct tv movie, I should be able to start watching it whenever I want, not 29 min. later!
Clearly, that's not a first world problem, as third world bathrooms don't have any cell phone reception either, usually being dried out bushes in the middle of the savannah. Please stop ruining this thread by not getting the point. ...
Yes, I'd agree. But it's only a first world problem because it's scale/severity is so trivial. Not because no person in the Third World could ever be annoyed at having to go to a meeting (problem type). This goes to my point that a first world problem has a much broader definition than what ASO and Jello had argued for.
I almost just made an awful joke about what a "third world problem" would be...which probably would have resulted in me getting on trouble on these boards. That fact that I didn't means that I am still sitting in a coffee shop on my computer posting on theforce.net, and consequently might not get my speech finished for tonight, and I might have to wing it instead of be prepared. First world problem.
My car was being a jerk by not allowing it's blutooth to connect to my phone. When I would try to manually pair them is would tell me feature doesn't work while vehicle is moving.
I had to order some Masters of the Universe Hot Wheels online, after seeing that they weren't available at my local Wal-Mart.
My automatic espresso machine keeps telling me to empty the grounds tray, but I did that. I'm telling you, I already did that.
I opened a jar of peanut butter and I realized I had accidentally gotten the "chunky" kind instead of the "creamy" kind. Arrrggh, what's the ****ing point of chunky peanut butter?! It's like peanut butter they didn't bother to finish making!
I've lost my ipods. I have two, so I never have to be without one for long, but now I've gone and lost both.
