Things that I find mildly irritating v.2

[Chino]

Well if it makes any difference, here's a how to video my friend made while installing a shower head and removing the flow restrictor for my shower, I was the camera man for this while he did the work! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7eCFSyE844 Honestly, the water pressure is amazing after removing that.

You know why I love videos like the one above? They get right to the task. No bullshitting for four minutes first about Patreon, thumbs up, or smashing that like button.

[Kotowboy]

Well if it makes any difference, here's a how to video my friend made while installing a shower head and removing the flow restrictor for my shower, I was the camera man for this while he did the work! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7eCFSyE844 Honestly, the water pressure is amazing after removing that.

You know why I love videos like the one above? They get right to the task. No bullshitting for four minutes first about Patreon, thumbs up, or smashing that like button.

I hate those videos. Or the ones that draaaaaag it out for over ten minutes so they get more ad revenue.

[KevShmev]

I think I have mentioned this one before, but:

People who are too stupid to use the "reply to all" button when emailing.

Hey, dumbass, when you replied to just me and then I my next reply back CC'd back in everyone you had not CC'd on the first reply to me, there is a reason why I did that. And then you get pissy because you didn't get a reply right away on your next reply that you sent to just me when I was at lunch, when, had you replied to all, one of my two co-workers, who were part of the CC'd team, would have replied right away (and I am not glued to my emails on my phone during my entire lunch hour like some are, although I do check it when I can so I can forward anything pressing that needs immediate attention).  Freaking shippers...

[chknptpie]

I think I have mentioned this one before, but:

People who are too stupid to use the "reply to all" button when emailing.

Hey, dumbass, when you replied to just me and then I my next reply back CC'd back in everyone you had not CC'd on the first reply to me, there is a reason why I did that. And then you get pissy because you didn't get a reply right away on your next reply that you sent to just me when I was at lunch, when, had you replied to all, one of my two co-workers, who were part of the CC'd team, would have replied right away (and I am not glued to my emails on my phone during my entire lunch hour like some are, although I do check it when I can so I can forward anything pressing that needs immediate attention).  Freaking shippers...

I also want to add the opposite of this. When the company sends an email to everyone, there is no need to reply all. An announcement of some good news does not mean I have to get 20 Good Job team! and Way to Go!. Stop spamming me!

[Stadler]

I think I have mentioned this one before, but:

People who are too stupid to use the "reply to all" button when emailing.

Hey, dumbass, when you replied to just me and then I my next reply back CC'd back in everyone you had not CC'd on the first reply to me, there is a reason why I did that. And then you get pissy because you didn't get a reply right away on your next reply that you sent to just me when I was at lunch, when, had you replied to all, one of my two co-workers, who were part of the CC'd team, would have replied right away (and I am not glued to my emails on my phone during my entire lunch hour like some are, although I do check it when I can so I can forward anything pressing that needs immediate attention).  Freaking shippers...

I also want to add the opposite of this. When the company sends an email to everyone, there is no need to reply all. An announcement of some good news does not mean I have to get 20 Good Job team! and Way to Go!. Stop spamming me!

Word.  This happens in my company a lot.   I get one email from a senior person in France, then I get 25 "Awesome!"'s, and at least one "This isn't for me; please take my name off the distribution", then ten more "Please don't reply all"'s...   Maniacs. 

[TAC]

Agreed.

I played on my church softball team and was on the group texts. So the guy in charge would text out.."the game is still on tonight", which is of course followed by a half hour of "Yay"'s and "I'll be there"'s, not to mention all of the inside joking that I don't even understand.

[chknptpie]

I think I have mentioned this one before, but:

People who are too stupid to use the "reply to all" button when emailing.

Hey, dumbass, when you replied to just me and then I my next reply back CC'd back in everyone you had not CC'd on the first reply to me, there is a reason why I did that. And then you get pissy because you didn't get a reply right away on your next reply that you sent to just me when I was at lunch, when, had you replied to all, one of my two co-workers, who were part of the CC'd team, would have replied right away (and I am not glued to my emails on my phone during my entire lunch hour like some are, although I do check it when I can so I can forward anything pressing that needs immediate attention).  Freaking shippers...

I also want to add the opposite of this. When the company sends an email to everyone, there is no need to reply all. An announcement of some good news does not mean I have to get 20 Good Job team! and Way to Go!. Stop spamming me!

Word.  This happens in my company a lot.   I get one email from a senior person in France, then I get 25 "Awesome!"'s, and at least one "This isn't for me; please take my name off the distribution", then ten more "Please don't reply all"'s...   Maniacs.

omg the reply all to stop the reply all drives me up the wall

[cramx3]

It's so funny how people are completely oblivious to the reply all thing.  This isn't a new feature, I don't think anyone can use that excuse of not knowing these days, but here we are...

[faizoff]

I ranted about the reply all a few pages back. After several of these popping up every week, the company finally installed some group policies where a few large DLs get BCC'd and also restricted who can reply all.

[romdrums]

My Dad had the gift of misusing the reply all feature to the point that, in my family, we called it the "Reply Paul."

[Stadler]

My Dad had the gift of misusing the reply all feature to the point that, in my family, we called it the "Reply Paul."

HAHAHA, that's funny!   

[pg1067]

Some form of the "reply to all" diatribe comes up every five pages or so in this thread.  A similar issue exists with Microsoft Teams.  Every time we have a company-wide Teams "meeting," I get a bunch of random posts in the thread for a good 5-10 minutes after the "meeting" has ended.

[KevShmev]

I think I have mentioned this one before, but:

People who are too stupid to use the "reply to all" button when emailing.

Hey, dumbass, when you replied to just me and then I my next reply back CC'd back in everyone you had not CC'd on the first reply to me, there is a reason why I did that. And then you get pissy because you didn't get a reply right away on your next reply that you sent to just me when I was at lunch, when, had you replied to all, one of my two co-workers, who were part of the CC'd team, would have replied right away (and I am not glued to my emails on my phone during my entire lunch hour like some are, although I do check it when I can so I can forward anything pressing that needs immediate attention).  Freaking shippers...

I also want to add the opposite of this. When the company sends an email to everyone, there is no need to reply all. An announcement of some good news does not mean I have to get 20 Good Job team! and Way to Go!. Stop spamming me!

Oh, I agree.

Of all of the account managers where I work, I am in the minority of those who will remove everyone who doesn't need to be on the emails from the replies.  For example, a customer might email the entire company and some account managers will carry on a 2-hour back and forth email chain with both sides constantly replying to all, and it's like, "I already get 398 emails a day, I do not need 33 more than have nothing to do with me!"  I always reply to our whole company (while taking the customer out of that email) and say I will reply to it, and then reply to just the customer and CC in the few from my company who need to be in the loop. Not sure why that is so difficult for others to do.

[wolfking]

I think I have mentioned this one before, but:

People who are too stupid to use the "reply to all" button when emailing.

Hey, dumbass, when you replied to just me and then I my next reply back CC'd back in everyone you had not CC'd on the first reply to me, there is a reason why I did that. And then you get pissy because you didn't get a reply right away on your next reply that you sent to just me when I was at lunch, when, had you replied to all, one of my two co-workers, who were part of the CC'd team, would have replied right away (and I am not glued to my emails on my phone during my entire lunch hour like some are, although I do check it when I can so I can forward anything pressing that needs immediate attention).  Freaking shippers...

I also want to add the opposite of this. When the company sends an email to everyone, there is no need to reply all. An announcement of some good news does not mean I have to get 20 Good Job team! and Way to Go!. Stop spamming me!

This 100%.  People trying to bignote themselves by replying to everyone.  Happens at my work when the 5/10/15/20 years of service emails come to everyone.  You always get their colleagues saying 'well done and 'you're the best.'  I don't even know the person, they are in a different department, don't bloody reply to me, just send it to them ffs.

[Stadler]

So, I've been working outside all day and I'm tired and cranky, so... PETTY, IRRELEVANT RANT COMING UP:

The way people talk.  It's almost like the art of conversation is lost.   I was watching a tape of the morning news and they had a local chef showing how she makes her signature dish (a lobster in a cream sauce).   First off, everything was "super"...  the lobster was "super fresh", the cream made it "super creamy", the spinach she added was "super healthy" (in a butter sherry cream sauce; m'kay on the healthy).   Then she kept saying "and you're going to want to..." before adding each ingredient. "You're going to want to add some sherry and burn off the alcohol... you're going to want to add the butter later so it doesn't burn...."

Am I?  Am I GOING to want to?  Or do I want to NOW?  Or maybe, maybe I just ADD the ingredient instead of worrying about my future emotional wants and needs?     

I've also noted that people are now switching pronouns more often.  They will start talking in the first person, then they switch to the second person.   "I found a flaming bag of dog poo on my front porch this morning... you feel angry, you feel hurt, you feel disrespected."  Do I?   I don't think I do.   I think I'd think it was funny for about nine seconds, then after I cleaned it up I would check my Ring doorbell to see whose front stoop is getting a return package.   My therapist says this is either a way to distance from the emotion, or a way to assume connection to others with the emotion.  A sort of emotional insecurity. 

END RANT.

I know there are more important things; I just am sitting here watching Neil Peart destroy De Slagwerker, I'm on my second vodka, and I thought, "better this than get bummed about serious things."

[Cool Chris]

I've also noted that people are now switching pronouns more often.  They will start talking in the first person, then they switch to the second person.   "I found a flaming bag of dog poo on my front porch this morning... you feel angry, you feel hurt, you feel disrespected."

I have never noticed this.

[wolfking]

I've also noted that people are now switching pronouns more often.  They will start talking in the first person, then they switch to the second person.   "I found a flaming bag of dog poo on my front porch this morning... you feel angry, you feel hurt, you feel disrespected."

I have never noticed this.

Yeah, I don't think I've ever come across that.

[Kotowboy]

I hate Jeremy Clarkson but he said the same thing once

I can't remember the exact wording - but he was on a plane or something - and the Steward said something like

" I'm gonna have to need to ask you to put your seatbelt on " or something really mealy mouthed like that.


Whilst i'm watching Netflix or Prime Vid or something - I usually just scroll thru Instagram and the amount of posts I see with a spelling mistake is easily 95%.

It's like nobody looks at the their phone whilst typing - and then don't check before they press send.

[Chino]

Whilst i'm watching Netflix or Prime Vid or something - I usually just scroll thru Instagram and the amount of posts I see with a spelling mistake is easily 95%.

It's like nobody looks at the their phone whilst typing - and then don't check before they press send.

Like that? People fuck up sometimes.

[Evermind]

I'm a staunch grammar nazi when I'm typing in Russian but I've sent some hilarious shit due to autocorrect quite a couple of times.

[TAC]

I know there are more important things; I just am sitting here watching Neil Peart destroy De Slagwerker, I'm on my second vodka, and I thought, "better this than get bummed about serious things."

I love Neil Peart. You love how he composes a solo.

[Stadler]

I know there are more important things; I just am sitting here watching Neil Peart destroy De Slagwerker, I'm on my second vodka, and I thought, "better this than get bummed about serious things."

I love Neil Peart. You love how he composes a solo.

That COULD be my favorite drum solo of all time.   Blows me away that latter day Rush shows had THREE drum solos, and I loved all of them; 98% of bands have ONE drum solo and I'm heading for the beer cart.

[King Postwhore]

As bad as not putting a cart back in the corral.

[TAC]

The guy probably pokes the thigh.

[King Postwhore]

I let him know he was an ass

[ReaperKK]

Taxes. My wife and I changed our filing status to married because well, we are married. Doing out taxes yesterday and we owe almost 11k. Upon doing some research it appears that the married status is if one spouse is working and one isn't, since we both work we now owe. I thought there was a tax benefit to being married, well there isn't. We had to change our filing status to "Married with single deduction"

[Spiritus]

Tactical.   

[Stadler]

Taxes. My wife and I changed our filing status to married because well, we are married. Doing out taxes yesterday and we owe almost 11k. Upon doing some research it appears that the married status is if one spouse is working and one isn't, since we both work we now owe. I thought there was a tax benefit to being married, well there isn't. We had to change our filing status to "Married with single deduction"

I'm not a tax guy, I don't play one on TV, and I didn't stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night, but... that doesn't sound right to me.  You might want to double check that.

Almost always, Married Filing Jointly is the better option; the only times where Married Filing Separately works is if one spouse has a significant number of specific deductions, like medical expenses, or, potentially, if your income is VERY high.   The married BONUS is less if you both make a decent AND similar amount, but it still should be a net plus.   Generally speaking, there are more credits available to MFJ than not.  (You should also file MFS if your spouse is a scumbag and you don't trust her numbers on the return.  Kidding, for you, but not in general.)

Again, I'm not giving you tax advice, I'm not saying you did anything wrong, and I'm not saying I'm 100% right.  I'm just sharing an observation, in the hopes maybe with further pencil sharpening you can beat down that 11k check.

[ReaperKK]

We did end up meeting with a pro yesterday and sadly it's right, we were able to nail it down to $9600 in the end. Basically what happened is that her job simply didn't withhold enough from her paycheck throughout the year when she switched to married status, same story for me but not as bad. Their recommendation was simply change it to married filing single to get more withheld. We both make about the same amount of money and we have pretty decent salaries.

[Stadler]

We did end up meeting with a pro yesterday and sadly it's right, we were able to nail it down to $9600 in the end. Basically what happened is that her job simply didn't withhold enough from her paycheck throughout the year when she switched to married status, same story for me but not as bad. Their recommendation was simply change it to married filing single to get more withheld. We both make about the same amount of money and we have pretty decent salaries.

Ah, okay, I'm glad you have it figured out (though I would add that "what you withhold" and "what you file as" are related but not the same thing). 

[pg1067]

My wife and I had something like that happen when we got married (although not on that scale).  It's pretty common not to get the withholdings right when both spouses are working.  "Married and 2" for both is typically not the way to go.

[JayOctavarium]

Calling unemployment office to check on my extension. It's already a mess and takes hours of calling to get through. Got through to someone who had to transfer me to someone higher. Woman answers and literally shames me for being unemployed, calls me lazy, and basically tells me to stop mooching off the government.

Bitch you don't know my life. Turns out she wasn't a higher up.

But seriously... To shame someone for calling unemployment and accuse then of shit... When honestly that person's job isn't even to determine eligibility... That's fucking crazy.

[King Postwhore]

WTF!  She should lose her job.

[Ben_Jamin]

Now that's someone you should shame on Social Media and get cancel cultured.   

I do hope you complained about her. Because that's not her job to scold people.

[ReaperKK]

Now that's someone you should shame on Social Media and get cancel cultured.   

I do hope you complained about her. Because that's not her job to scold people.

Right. Also I'm not sure of the laws in California but those calls might be recorded which you could get through the freedom of information act.