![]() ![]() TV and radio commentators are already talking about how some teams will likely have players start to move across the diamond as the pitcher starts to throw, as if they're a wide receiver running a route, in order to capitalize on the benefit of the shift while being in line with the rules. ![]() It feels incredibly odd to me that a rule would be instituted that seems to go against what is nothing more than common sense: be where the ball will be. Intuitively, as a player, you'd think it would make sense to 'shift' to where the batter will likely hit the ball. Effectively, the first rule bans the infield shift and the second rule bans the outfield shift. Starting in the 2023 season, there will be a new rule requiring two infielders to be positioned on each side of second base as well as a rule prohibiting infielders from the outfield grass. But regardless of any benefit to some hitters, the league decided that this was a bad thing for the sport. But at the same time, it benefited those who were able to 'beat the shift', and hit baseballs to the areas of the field where the outfielders didn't expect the ball to go. This made hitting much more difficult for batters who consistently send line drives in the same direction. When I started watching again this year, around mid-season, I started to hear all about ' the shift' - essentially, instead of having four infielders and three outfielders, teams have started to move infielders into the positions to where the batters would be most likely to hit usually stacking three infield players to the left of 2nd base for right-handed batters and three infield players to the right of 2nd base for southpaws. I'm a baseball fan in my mid-twenties, and I had taken a break from watching my team for around 7 years because I was focusing on my academics. I would be a-okay with requiring professors to answer a more broad question like "explain how your work furthers humanity in a positive way" or even "the university cares about these 10 issues, please explain how your work advances at least one of them." This is as silly to me as if suddenly all professors needed to say how their work helps to solve climate change or alleviate childhood malnutrition or stop human trafficking. What I am arguing is that there are MANY problems in the world, and it is not necessary that all professors work on solving the same problem. I am not arguing that these issues are not important - if you try to convince me that diversity is important or that systemic racism is a real problem, you will not change my mind because I already believe those things. She was just told that there is a new criteria that she will evaluated on going forward to determine whether she receives tenure: how her work advances diversity efforts. Jonathan Haidt, a professor of social psychology at NYU, recently resigned from the Society for Personality and Social Psychology because they said that in order to present at their annual conference, he must explain "whether and how this submission advances the equity, inclusion, and anti-racism goals of SPSP.” linkĪ good friend of mine is a professor of epidemiology at a top research university. Change my mind professional#There seems to be a new(ish) trend where universities (and professional associations for university professors) require that their professors make explicit how their work advances diversity. I say this as someone who has worked both a job that requires tips, and has worked a job that pays above minimum wage but has the tip screen on the square reader. It is just a system built into the Square program If I go to a local bowling alley, and they turn the iPad around to show me a tip screen just for grabbing my shoes on the shelf behind them, I don’t feel the tip is necessary, because they didn’t do anything more than an employee at Walmart or Target would do. I’d say the same for any artist that works off commissions and sets their own agreed upon price when you hire them. You don't tip the your tax lawyer because they have to pay for internet service. Even if they're paying for their own supplies. I don’t know why an additional $100 tip is necessary. ![]() People like Tattoo Artists charge hundreds of dollars for their pieces, usually adding up to an average of making $50 an hour. Pays a wage that requires tipping, such as a waiter/waitress My personal rule for tipping is I will tip if the job that the person is doing for me is a job that either: ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |