site banner

Quality Contributions Report for March 2024

This is the Quality Contributions Roundup. It showcases interesting and well-written comments and posts from the period covered. If you want to get an idea of what this community is about or how we want you to participate, look no further (except the rules maybe--those might be important too).

As a reminder, you can nominate Quality Contributions by hitting the report button and selecting the "Actually A Quality Contribution!" option. Additionally, links to all of the roundups can be found in the wiki of /r/theThread which can be found here. For a list of other great community content, see here.

These are mostly chronologically ordered, but I have in some cases tried to cluster comments by topic so if there is something you are looking for (or trying to avoid), this might be helpful.


Contributions to the Main Motte

@Kinoite:

@JTarrou:

@felis-parenthesis:

@George_E_Hale:

@self_made_human:

@Stefferi:

@Rov_Scam:

Contributions for the week of February 26, 2024

Health Scare

@self_made_human:

@ControlsFreak:

Affirmative Faction

@CrispyFriedBarnacles:

@Stefferi:

Why Not Both?

@RandomRanger:

Contributions for the week of March 4, 2024

@guesswho:

@ArmedTooHeavily:

@MaximumCuddles:

@07mk:

@ArjinFerman:

@popocatepetl:

Let's Talk About Us

@FCfromSSC:

@WestphalianPeace:

Contributions for the week of March 11, 2024

@Folamh3:

@Capital_Room:

@RandomRanger:

@hydroacetylene:

What is a Man?

@BaronVSS:

@100ProofTollBooth:

@WhiningCoil:

@naraburns:

Contributions for the week of March 18, 2024

@fauji:

@blooblyblobl:

@urquan:

@FiveHourMarathon:

@PyotrVerkhovensky:

Free as in Software

@Walterodim:

@WhiningCoil:

@ControlsFreak:

Contributions for the week of March 25, 2024

@Walterodim:

@07mk:

@PierreMenard:

13
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Napoleon wanted to become Alexander, so he lived and breathed strategy. He constantly read, and in conversation he'd ask people to rank generals all the time and compare their merits, memorizing all the famous battles.

We actually have copies of homework assignments from the Roman Republic, including the answers of some Great Men of History, where a standard essay question was "Could Alexander have Conquered Rome?" Which was generally analyzed along the same lines that we see historical comparisons of sports teams or boxers today:

-- Competition analysis. Alexander beat up on Tomato Cans, but was overrated for going undefeated against nobodies. Rome beat real tough guys, over and over. Alexander never faced a Hannibal, or even a Vercingetorix.

-- Stars and Scrubs vs Depth. Roman Republic produced more and better generals, it was a factory for Great Men, where Alexander was a once in a century first draft pick superstar. After Alexander died the Macedonian conquests stopped, after the Romans lost a general, or even an army, it was next man up all the way.

-- Common foes and styles. Rome beat Pyrrhus and other Macedonians who used similar styles and modeled their generalship after Alexander.

All of which is to support your point. Rome got good at this, became a Great Man Factory, by focusing on this. They went out there and built the prospects they needed to keep going out and conquering, until the gravitational pull of the Capital became such that further expansion was too difficult relative to civil war.

So many times in the NBA or MLB draft, there's a story of a player just being obsessed with the game from a young age. Bijan Robinson carried a football around like a security blanket from age 4 or some bullshit. I recall reading about a basketball phenom who walked on his tiptoes from second to fourth grades. Arnold Palmer was the son of a groundskeeper who just played golf obsessively in Latrobe, hitting balls long into the night every night.

Obsession has value.

On great men.

NBA has had a huge surge in twins. My trying to explain it is being tall is a huge filter for the nba. But one tall kid by himself won’t develop skills. He’s going to being taller than everyone else and win on that. Anyway feel like this fits with great men factories.

https://www.theringer.com/nba/2024/4/3/24119579/twinning-time-brook-robin-lopez-amen-ausar-thompson

I think this is what made Rome great. They had entire systems that gave great rewards for creating great political leaders and military leaders. And they started grooming people into those positions fairly young. Ambitious young men would seek status by working for a great patrician leaders and later do things like build public works, conquer new territories, or work for the government.

Come to that I think the reason for our current malaise especially for men, goes back to us not allowing men to just be men and therefore learn that they can achieve status by doing great things. Men trash talking and competing learn to achieve. Achievement gets them stays and further develops a taste for achievement. Then they go out and do more in hopes of getting more status and in the meantime build the confidence to actually try. This creates a virtuous cycle and if it’s widespread, it creates a culture of achievement.

You may have already seen it, but there are some cool articles about this here and here. The route to any high office involved a specific series of logistics and command offices. So basically anyone who made it to the Senate had some hands-on experience.