←back to thread

Melbourne man discovers extensive model train network underneath house

(www.sbs.com.au)
402 points cfcfcf | 1 comments | 30 Jun 25 23:53 UTC | HN request time: 0.208s | source
Show context
alnwlsn ◴[01 Jul 25 03:27 UTC] No.44430287[source]▶
Reminds me of an estate sale I went to one time. Unassuming place, one of those tiny postwar homes about the same size as the one in this article - but with at least double or triple the density of this train layout in the basement. The owner must have been a very thin person, as the narrow winding paths around the basement in places measured no more than 8 inches, and the widest parts were only about 2 foot wide. In a 900 sq. foot basement, there was probably only about 50 sq foot of floor you could actually rest your feet on. The rest was all layout and boxes of trains and train accessories of all sorts - hundreds of tiny pots of specialty paint, miniature trees, "grass powder", special linkages and wheels, and more. Probably most of it got thrown away at the end of the sale.

People have hobbies, but I can't think of any circumstance in which I'd convert my basement into a deathtrap. There was less room than those hoarder houses you see on TV (but much more organized). It was genuinely concerning that they even decided to hold a sale there open to the public.

Truly one of the more bizarre things I've seen. Also, the upstairs? Mostly normal - you wouldn't even know the guy liked trains.

replies(6): >>44430643 #>>44431376 #>>44431637 #>>44432939 #>>44433647 #>>44435355 #
tenuousemphasis ◴[01 Jul 25 04:41 UTC] No.44430643[source]▶
Sounds like he was neuro divergent and his wife made him keep his obsession in the basement.
replies(4): >>44431122 #>>44431453 #>>44433585 #>>44438581 #
FirmwareBurner ◴[01 Jul 25 07:24 UTC] No.44431453[source]▶
>Sounds like he was neuro divergent and his wife made him keep his obsession in the basement.

Men do noting but chill: "They're losers, incels, etc".

Men have cool hobbies that don't bother anyone: "They're neurodivergent".

Men just can't catch a break these days.

replies(2): >>44432125 #>>44432555 #
somewhereoutth ◴[01 Jul 25 09:32 UTC] No.44432125[source]▶
If Men have the time and opportunity to do nothing but chill, or to have cool hobbies, then they are very definitely catching a break.
replies(2): >>44432145 #>>44432476 #
em-bee ◴[01 Jul 25 10:37 UTC] No.44432476[source]▶
or maybe they are so overwhelmed that they are procrastinating. the problem here is expectations. you have the expectation that one should not chill or focus on a hobby when they should be looking for a job, or spend time with their children, or whatever else they could be doing when they don't chill or work on their hobby.

i know that feeling. i have been there. more than a year out of work, i could not focus on anything, whatever i did felt wrong because i thought i should use that time to apply to jobs. it was exhausting, and i was procrastinating a lot. i had to remind myself that i could not be writing job applications all day, and i used my hobbies to relax and get energy. so no, chilling or having cool hobbies are not a sign of someone catching a break. not without knowing more about their actual circumstances.

replies(1): >>44432667 #
somewhereoutth ◴[01 Jul 25 11:09 UTC] No.44432667[source]▶
My point is that many people do not have the time and opportunity.
replies(1): >>44433519 #
1. em-bee ◴[01 Jul 25 13:03 UTC] No.44433519[source]▶
the problem is that people who slack off or do their hobbies when they should be doing something more important are worse off than those who are just busy. saying they are catching a break is like saying that an alcoholic is catching a break because they got the money to buy alcohol. or (from my perspective) if you have time for tv, youtube and tiktok you must be catching a break, because i don't.

the problem is the generalization. sure, when you catch a break then you can afford to slack off or do your hobbies. but the reverse conclusion is not true. not everyone who is slacking off is catching a break.

it's this judgement of people that when they do that it must be because they are well off that bothers me.

i faced this multiple times. when i grew up we lived on welfare but we could afford things that other people could not because we were thrifty and we saved money on other things we didn't need but were common otherwise, like a car and a TV. but because we were able to afford certain things people thought we were better off. i had time for my hobbies because i didn't spend time watching tv.

they were measuring my life through their perspective.

the same goes for hobbies and hence, your statement.