I saw many of the answers are correct. But the way I deal in answering is different .If convinced I find pleasure in it. 1. It is I who am responsible for your success.2. I am the only one who thinks..............Look at the above two sentences. The word ‘who’ is used as a Relative Pronoun and the antecedent in the first sentence is ‘I’ and as such the verb ‘am’ is used . In the second sentence , the antecedent is 'one' and it is an indefinite pronoun , in third person singular number .Since both sentences are in Simple Present tense , the V1 ( main Verb ) with suffix s ores is used. Hence “ who thinks ‘ is the only correct answer.
Even the most popular and best-reviewed books and films will have detractors on Quora--and in every large sample of people. Humans have different preferences and perspectives. That said, I personally love The Hunger Games (creative franchise).In my opinion, the first Hunger Games book was a masterpiece, the second one quite good, and the third one a a disappointment. So far (not having seen the second Mockingjay film), my personal preference regarding the films has gone in the reverse order. The books have character development and plot points that are deeper and more nuanced than the films, but you may not like even the books if the general premise of the Hunger Games world does not interest you.Some Quora questions and answers where you will find reasons why I and others love The Hunger Games (2008 book) and other parts of the series:Is The Hunger Games technically good literature?Why are The Hunger Games books so popular?What makes The Hunger Games so good? Why is it so much better than other movies/books that deal with the "reality deathmatch" theme?Why do young adults like The Hunger Games books and movies so much?
Am i the only one who thinks that people shouldn't smoke around children/babies?
I'm a teenager, and I HATE smoking/drugs of any kind. I've got a few friends that do it and I would never ever join them or even be with them while they did it. I can't stand people smoking near me, I'm terrified of the health effects! I totally agree about children and babies, it's disgusting and SO unhealthy. Poor children! They may be getting seriously damaged inside their lungs, and later in life could die from it! Some of my friends go to a school where they are the only ones who have never smoked in their year. It's so sad, I wish smoking was illegal - even if a few people did it illegally it would stop so many people. It's just my opinion, but I think everyone would be better off without it. I hope nobody gets pressurized to do it, or does it in front of impressionable children who can be seriously harmed by it!
Am I the only one who thinks this is ridiculous?
I don't like them. All kids should have their diapers covered up with some sort of clothing. I would never allow my child to go out in just a diaper....even if the diapers are "stylish".
Am I the only one who thinks The Dark Knight is overrated?
Its a masterpiece ..Indeed, why - Those who say less dialogues and more pyros haven't seen this movie at all. - Heath Ledger alone surpasses the overacting from Keaton and Nicholson movies (he alone make that movie series no more than a stage drama). - It had a better and darker side of a superhero which was portrayed as a detective slash superhero that wears his undies over pants in the previous movies (yeah I am looking at you Keaton). - Harvey Dante is much closer to how two face was in comics. - Moreover Nolan's movies are the best adaptations of Batman so far and he also succeeded in making his movies as close to the original comics. His success and bigger fan base disapproves every BS spitted by some guys here.
Am I the only one who thinks all the "pregnant teens" and "teen moms" on here are phoney?
It seems these days like half of the users in the adolescent section are "pregnant" or "teen mothers" And they do such a good job to sound like they're so perfect. Like: I'm pregnant, due to rape, but I'm keeping my baby and they're going to have such a good life, and I'll be such a good mom and blah blah BLAH!" Then there's the ones who say they already had kids, and that they're amazing mothers who have miraculous stories of staying in college. Oh and don't leave out the posts that are all: Ma baybayy daddy iz sooo amazin, we grate parentzzzz, it been hard but we go 2 skewl and raize our baybaaaaa Am I the only one who finds this completely fake? If these teens are having kids/have kids, shouldn't they be out doing something for their children instead of hanging around on the adolescent section of Y!A? Seems like a load of crap to me...
No, but so do I. :)I am an introvert. I don't keep myself completely away from the people though. I interact very freely and stay very jovial with my friends or even strangers.But again, I don't like spending too much time with people. When I spend too much time with my friends I get exhausted. Sometimes there's no need to even spend too much and I still feel I am wasting my time.I have tried to figure out why?Being an introvert I get my energy by being alone for some part of time in a whole day. But that wasn't all. I learn things and I expect to learn more from people around me. But I don't find most of my friends to be informative enough except for a very few. Though most of them are fun it isn't worth the time spent.After spending some time with friends I come to realize I've been wasting my time. It's like there's a resistance in learning when I am with them. It's like a void growing bigger everytime in my chamber of knowledge.It is absolutely fine if you don't spend time with friends. You can have your own reasons for that.But, you're definitely not the only one. :)
At some point in my life I started questioning existence itself, like “why are thing the way they are? Why am I even THIS person and not another one?”. And the fact is that, from my point of view, I am the only conscious being. I mean, if you think enough about this, other people MIGHT be conscious just like you, but even then, this is YOUR world, eveything happens from YOUR perspective, everything comes ultimately from you. You don’t see other people, the sky, the trees, the cars… you literally project them. It’s all a projection of a mind.Well, I had 2 experiences about this, one quite strong but the other was absolutely terrfying.About 2 years ago I was going back home walking from the club at morning, thinking exactly about this. And generally what happens is that if you think long enough about something, you’ll eventually have an insight about it. That’s what I had. Suddenlly I started seeing eveything as a part of me. The trees, the street, the sun, eveything was not outside anymore, they were just as me as anything else. It was a mesmerizing experience. I stopped and stood still for about 40 seconds. Then I set down and continued to contemplate that feeling for minutes.The other one I had taken a hallucinogen. It was night, I set down on the backyward to meditate. Because of the effect of the hallucinogen, I was able to “get into myself”, more and more. I kept going and going… just like entering a vortex of dark consciousness (because my eyes were closed, but I was still entering on something deeper). Finally I reached this point which seemed too real. So real that what we call “real life” seemed fake. Like I was confronting the truth, the real truth. And the truth was that I was just fooling myself into believing that what I called “real life”, believing that I was not alone, or that I had limitations, or that there was something “out there” to reach, to fight for. But the truth was that I was completaly alone, there were no limitations, I could do anything, absolutely anything I wanted. It was all my invention: everyone, everything, every idea, everything I wanted, or feared, etc.But the terryfing part is that I felt stuck with it. Existence would always look like that, no matter what I did. No way out, for all the eternity like that. It felt pretty bad. I hope I am wrong.
Despite the fact that censorship spoilt that film for me when I watched it in Mumbai, I loved the film. While I do agree that the film might not have the simple structure or those points which makes it easy for the viewer to summarize the plot to friends. The film in itself is as gripping and engaging as the other films of QT (may be more). The film grabbed me with my neck from the very first opening shot. It had a nice flow to it. I felt one with most of the characters, and I feel here weather also plays a very important character. I could feel the hatred all around which was the point of the film.Every film has some weak points in the plot, I could sense that logically it was less appealing, like someone answered with the tendency to plan the attack and killings. But characters in real life also do something without logic. Well if you wish, apply logic to the world there and should be no violence right! But we are not so sorted in our heads.Anyway, that's just me! So the answer to your question - I think this was a different film, where the hatred was more tactile feeling than revenge. Generally, with that revenge is there has to be a strong emotional exchange with the plot and events in the life of characters. Remember Kill Bill or Death Proof or Inglorious Bastards - so much revenge, that I was full with rage as a viewer.This one for me was more like Pulp Fiction, hatred and violence. In fact in one scene Samuel incites hatred in the old man's heart just to find a reason to be violent. The story that he gave of him being the killer of old man's son was bollocks.We, all are like that old man, sitting in the corner of a room, waiting to pick up our gun, QT's characters keep giving us a reason (real or fake) to incite violence and revenge to kill and get killed. I think I have to watch this gem again, without cuts this time :)
Am I the only one who thinks this is a flawed rule?
A few weeks ago there was a play at the trop when Rays played the Redsox. to sum it up quickly the Redsox player made a bad throw on a force out at first and atleast one runner would have scored the throw was so bad but sadly there was some equipment bags left near the bulpen and it became lodged underneath wich in acording to baseball rules if the ball becomes out of play any runners advance mayonly advance 2 bases from where they were currently at when the pitch was thrown. there was one runner on first so he had to stay at third, when i say he would have scored i mean he was rounding third before the right fielder even realized the ball was lodged, so if the ball wasnt logded logic would tell u that he would have picked up the ball when the player was merely a cpl feet from scoring at worst. NOW HERES WHAT I MEAN is it right to have a rule that takes a run away from a team? i ASKED this question the night it happend and i wonder was it simply bostons IDIOT fans answering my question defending the rule. or was it normal baseball amking more sence and im the one who is defending my team? AND YESS i know the right call was made on the feild, but is that not a gray area for that rule? judgment cant be made by the umpires in especially with todays instant replays becoming more popular on calls like that? if it was the other way around and boston had the run taken back i wouldnt feel any different just maybe a little lucky...so screw u if u think im just sayin this cuz my team didnt get the run!