Most active commenters
  • butterfly42069(5)
  • blitzar(3)
  • robertlagrant(3)

←back to thread

424 points notamy | 18 comments | | HN request time: 0.625s | source | bottom
Show context
butterfly42069 ◴[] No.41844687[source]
They said he had balls of steel to try that one

For the yanks and elsewhere, yes conkers is well known in Britain. You basically put a chestnut (but its a conker) on a string by making a hole in the middle. Take turns swinging them on the string, whoever's breaks is the loser.

It used to be great fun till it was banned/requires eye protection now. There's an opportunity there, someone could make a perfectly safe conker app. I'm sure that would adequately replace it. /s

replies(2): >>41844738 #>>41844983 #
1. ungreased0675 ◴[] No.41844983[source]
How is it banned? Banned in schools you mean?

Because I can’t see how authorities could ban anyone from picking up a conker from the ground and tying a string to it.

On a different note, if you’re just pulling a random one out of a bag, what is the competitive aspect? Is there a technique involved? Or just RNG?

replies(2): >>41845002 #>>41845543 #
2. Nursie ◴[] No.41845002[source]
IIRC at some point schools decided to put a stop to it (it was a popular playground game in Autumn) because of the possibility of injury.

Or that might have just been a tabloid outrage-bait headline.

replies(1): >>41845085 #
3. ascorbic ◴[] No.41845085[source]
It's such a persistent myth that a health and safety organisation decided to sponsor the championships to try and debunk the idea. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7637605.stm
replies(1): >>41854919 #
4. butterfly42069 ◴[] No.41845543[source]
It is banned in schools. As I said in another comment, that outlaws it for the vast majority of players at the place they used to play it.

Believe it or not adults playing conkers or people playing conkers outside of schools isn't a common pass time.

It is pretty much RNG, though you can massively nerf a conkers structural integrity by making the hole through the middle poorly, so there are some techniques. People also used to use thicker shoelaces like in vans, which I think made the centre more solid. I've never run an experiment to verify the difference that might make.

replies(2): >>41845800 #>>41847474 #
5. Symbiote ◴[] No.41845800[source]
It's not banned, but the Daily Mail would like you to think the EU banned another British tradition.
replies(1): >>41845842 #
6. butterfly42069 ◴[] No.41845842{3}[source]
I don't read the daily mail. Try again. Maybe be less partisan.
replies(1): >>41845980 #
7. blitzar ◴[] No.41845980{4}[source]
Page 3: "Carly 32D, 21 from Ipswich, thinks EU regulations on conkers is against British traditions"
replies(1): >>41846183 #
8. butterfly42069 ◴[] No.41846183{5}[source]
I'm not sure if that betrays more about your opinion of women than you may have been aware.
replies(2): >>41846383 #>>41847929 #
9. blitzar ◴[] No.41846383{6}[source]
It probably betrays more about my contempt for how peoples biggotry is exploited to make them believe things that are not true. When that is not enough then show them some tits with the message and they will tell you all about how pigs fly.
replies(2): >>41846580 #>>41846638 #
10. robertlagrant ◴[] No.41846580{7}[source]
It just looks as though you have your own set of biases, just against people instead of against overly coddling rules. No one's mentioned the Daily Mail or the EU other than you and the other poster with similar biases.
replies(1): >>41846644 #
11. butterfly42069 ◴[] No.41846638{7}[source]
I sincerely hope life starts treating you better than it clearly has.

I also hope you see the irony of your ways.

12. blitzar ◴[] No.41846644{8}[source]
The "legislation against playing conkers" is demonstrably false.
replies(1): >>41847106 #
13. robertlagrant ◴[] No.41847106{9}[source]
You're writing that as though you're quoting someone. Where are you quoting that from?
replies(1): >>41847919 #
14. philipwhiuk ◴[] No.41847474[source]
I doubt it's banned in all schools. It'll be banned in a few which made headlines.

The HSE is pretty clear it doesn't justify it:

> The HSE said the safety risk from playing conkers was "incredibly low and not worth bothering about"

15. SteveSmith16384 ◴[] No.41847919{10}[source]
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/dangerous-daffodils-and-1...
replies(1): >>41867484 #
16. SteveSmith16384 ◴[] No.41847929{6}[source]
I think they were just parodying the typical text that used to be shown against a page 3 girl bitd.
17. Nursie ◴[] No.41854919{3}[source]
Interesting!

I have a weird memory of seeing kids in safety glasses on the tv sometime around the turn of the century…

Looks like, as with all good myths, there’s a kernel of something resembling a twisted half-truth that got blown up out of hand - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2009/dec/09/conker...

18. robertlagrant ◴[] No.41867484{11}[source]
But not anyone in this conversation, though? I'm not sure "someone said this on the internet" is a reason to respond to it.