Round 1

Side 1: Bottled water may seem like a great beverage option, but roughly 70 percent of them end up in landfills or as litter. They are one of the most common waste items found in the ocean, which is horrible for the plants and animals living there. Plus, since plastic requires oil in its production, it takes millions of barrels of oil to produce enough bottles for the entire U.S. for one year. That’s a lot of wasted oil, which has its own environmental issues to deal with. It’s also less expensive to use water fountains and other tap options. Buying bottled water for a couple bucks per 8-12 ounces is not exactly the best use of your money. A reusable bottle makes it convenient and cheaper and doesn’t leave nearly as much waste or take as many resources to make. All things considered, bottled water is a really good candidate to get rid of.

Side2: Yeah, it’s horrible that so many bottles end up in landfills or as litter, but that doesn’t mean that bottled water doesn’t serve an important purpose. Think about shops and fast food places that only serve bottled beverages. If there was no bottled water, customers would be reduced to choosing from much less healthy options, like soda or really sugary teas and coffees. The customers are far more likely to choose one of the unhealthy options than they are to choose tap water. These items also typically have plastic containers, but, even though they have deposits in some states, there’s not an easy way to reuse those bottles and they’re just as popular. So why ban the one and not the other? Also, by banning bottled water, small businesses may be at a disadvantage compared to larger businesses. They may not have an appealing tap water option but they could have offered bottled water, while the larger businesses may have water coolers or soda fountains with a water option to choose from. If a person is very determined to have just water, they’re not going to stay at a smaller business.

Round 2

Side 1: Bottled water is also important because of health and safety concerns. What about areas that might not have safe tap water to drink? Bottled water is much safer, even if it is more expensive. Would you rather the 10-30 dollars a week for water or the hundreds of dollars in hospital bills or meds because you got sick from bad tap water? Not only can tap water be kinda sketchy sometimes, what happens when there is no tap water at all? This happens quite a bit during emergency situations. If there is a hurricane, flood, fire, earthquake or tornado, the infrastructure of an area can be completely disrupted or destroyed. This leaves emergency personnel and the people they’re helping without water and other amenities so they have to rely on things like bottled water to survive. We can’t just replace those with reusable bottles since there’s nothing to fill them with, and it’s just impractical to ship reusable bottles back and forth to use and refill them. If it comes down to plastic waste or health issues, maybe we ought to be encouraging better recycling habits than anything else.

Side 2: Granted, in cases of emergency, bottled water is super important, but outside of that, it’s typically healthier to drink tap water. When it comes down to a comparison between the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which tests bottled water, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which tests tap water, the latter is much more stringent with testing for contamination and health issues. Plus, since companies that sell bottled water tend to drain local water supplies, what’s really happening is that communities that really need the water are losing it to people who are only out to gain more money. That’s not healthy for the community or the local environment either. As for recycling habits, there are plenty of recycling places that simply dump their recycling in landfills in poorer countries who can’t protest. Creating a good recycling habit needs to include more reusing and repurposing and less “recycling.” It also needs to include more reducing, which (guess what?!) means fewer bottles in whatever way we can make it work, especially for relatively straightforward items like reusable water bottles.

To my little sister.

You are one of the most amazing people I’ve ever had the pleasure of knowing. Being around you is so much fun and you always put effort into making me feel better about myself, no matter what my insecurity is that day.

You are always there to listen to me, and I hope that you know I’ll always be there for you as well. Whether it’s complaining about work or sharing the pleasantries and challenges of taking in a stray cat or raising a new puppy, we are each other’s support and for that I am so grateful.

I am grateful that we have a strong bond and that we don’t compete with each other, because I don’t know what I would do if I didn’t have you standing up for me — even against myself.

You are my sister, my best friend, my partner in crime, my troublemaker and so, so much more to me.

Thank you for always being there. Thank you for always looking out for me. Thank you for caring about me. Thank you for being the best sister a girl could ask for.

Love,

Your big sis

Round 1

Side 1:

While the platonic love we feel for family and friends is an important part of a happy life and good for our mental and emotional well-being, romantic love deserves a celebration simply because it’s less common. Yes, plenty of people have romantic connections, but if you look at how many platonic connections a person has compared to romantic ones, the platonic relationships are usually much more frequent and long-lasting. Part of this may be because we have higher standards for romantic relationships than other types of human connections, but part of it is just that it requires a higher level of compatibility. You can get along with a friend or family member who doesn’t have a lot in common with you and you can still love them, but romance means more intertwining of lives, which means more relationship work. Because it takes more work, the success is all the sweeter and thus, it deserves to be celebrated for the special closeness that comes with it.

Side 2:

Yes, romantic love is a special bond between two compatible people of incredible closeness, but platonic and familial love is not celebrated enough. There are not any significant days like Valentine’s Day and platonic love is overlooked because of it. Yes, a person can have many friends and tons of family members but to develop an unbreakable bond is equally, if not more, rare than romantic ones. These bonds, just like romantic love, can last a lifetime and carry as much emotional attachment as a romantic relationship. However, this is not celebrated in the slightest. “Love” is always expressed as being a romantic feeling but the love between friends or family members is just as grand.

Round 2

Side 2:

A best friend and a significant other are two very different people. However, they do have similar bonds and connections. Studies support the idea that strong platonic relationships can help us develop steady, healthy romantic relationships. If this is the case, if platonic love is at the base of this love pyramid, why is it not seen as such, since it is crucial to have and maintain these bonds? They help us develop emotionally and begin to set building blocks of seeing new perspectives and how to communicate effectively. They motivate us and hopefully push us to be better. They teach us how and when to create  boundaries and how and when to make compromises; both of which are especially crucial in the case of romantic love.

Side 1:

It’s true that platonic bonds are incredibly important to a person’s well-being and happiness, and healthy habits in platonic relationships can definitely help improve romantic relationships. After all, they say that a significant other should be a best friend as well as a romantic partner. There is no denying platonic love’s importance. However, the proverb about lovers being best friends also has another meaning. It means that a romantic relationship is like a platonic relationship multiplied by two. It is more intense, more in-depth and more interwoven than a platonic relationship. Romantic relationships are meant to make people close enough to be considered almost a single entity when facing the world, which, while possible, is not something that occurs as frequently in friendships. It is these facets of romantic love that make it worth celebrating so much; though platonic relationships deserve lots of celebrating and appreciation, they don’t deserve quite as much as romance does.

Round 1

Rebecca Barkdoll (Opinion Editor)
There are so many qualities that a good leader needs that it can be hard to say what is the best quality to have. However, the reason we pick leaders is so that someone can give us direction. If a leader doesn’t have the determination necessary to complete the tasks or give commands, the entire group will end up wandering through the situation aimlessly. If they still get the task done, it would be because of pure coincidence or others stepping up in unofficial leadership, determined to get the job done. A good leader knows that they are the one forging the way, but that they are not doing it alone. If their goal includes the success and happiness of the whole team, then their determination to achieve it will mean that they won’t leave their team in the dust as they aim for success. Determination is necessary for success, and a good leader will want their team to succeed.

David Disney (Lode Writer)
I should start by saying obviously a little of both characteristics are needed in a good leader. That said, a patient leader can keep a team together as well as plan better for the future. Let’s say you want to start a business and you’re now the leader of your employees. Let’s say you are absolutely passionate about window repair, and you just rush ahead to get as many clients and repair as many windows as you can, but you forget to file your business taxes and get shut down. If you had been a more patient and forward-thinking leader you’d have remembered that a business requires lots of paperwork and bookkeeping; now you and your employees are out of a job. I think patience does not have to equal a lack of passion, it’s just taking the time to decide what roles need to be filled for the best outcome. Sometimes looking before you leap is just as important as leaping.

Round 2

David Disney (Lode Writer)
A leader must be able to keep their team spirits high and stress low. A determined leader may lead by example, but they can easily cause undue stress and anxiety in their team that will ultimately hurt whatever efforts they have. I recently listened to a documentary about Alexander the Great. No doubt he led by determination first. This single-minded determination indeed meant he’s remembered to this day. It also meant he died at age 32 and committed untold acts of cruelty to those both in his ranks and in the lands he conquered. I wonder how history would have changed if he had been more patient. He may have just gotten a knife in the ribs, but maybe the cultural boundaries we see today would be totally different. To get back on topic, I think determination can be an attractive quality in a leader, but determination alone is not stable. Without a patient mind to plan out your next move or keep your team happy, you’re bound to collapse.

Rebecca Barkdoll (Opinion Editor)
Granted, patience and understanding are also important traits for a leader to have. Without those, it would be too easy for the workplace (or sport or project) to become toxic, either because people can’t get help and guidance from their leader for interpersonal disputes or the leader themselves becomes a problem. However, too much patience and understanding without assertiveness means that the leader may only be a leader in name, simply because their patience has become passiveness and their understanding has made them uncertain due to too many conflicting ideas and opinions. This is why determination is incredibly important as a leader. Yes, they do need to be careful not to get carried away, but if they set their determination on being the best leader they can be, then the empathy and the goal-oriented focus can co-exist. The thing here is not to simply be determined, but to be determined for your team.

To my friends at Tech,

I’m in a pretty good mood so I guess I have a lot to be thankful for.

The other night, I worked on homework in my friends’ room. I brought a package of dubble bubble gumballs with me to share. I had about three. One friend ate the rest all at once. It was one of the most horrifying and impressive things I’ve ever witnessed.

He chomped down on each gumball with a crunch loud enough to convince me he broke a tooth. Six gumballs went into his mouth, creating the worst glob of food(?) I have ever seen. He then decided he was going to blow a bubble.

Imagine, just for a second, having a semi-melted block of cheese in your mouth and trying to blow enough air into it to create a bubble. Now imagine the block of cheese is gray with small spots of bright colors and your friend is blowing so hard he’s red in the face.

This is the glory that I witnessed. Needless to say, I’ve made some wonderful friends here at Tech.

Sincerly,

Anonymous

Round 1

Side 1: While zoos are certainly fun to go to, they aren’t exactly the best places for animals. One major reason is that there is only so much room that a zoo can give to each animal species, so they are crammed into spaces far too small for them and surrounded by crowds of chattering people day in and day out. This leads to physical and psychological harm. Zoo animals have been diagnosed with depression, anxiety, OCD and other such mental illnesses—to the point where they are being prescribed meds to treat them. Also, the cramped quarters lead to pacing, overeating, teeth-grinding, vomiting, self-harm, shorter life spans and higher infant mortality rates. Zoos may mean well, but in no way are they creating truly healthy atmospheres for Earth’s wildlife. There are better ways to interact with animals and include them in our world.

Side 2: While zoos can certainly be a limiting environment for the animals in them and certain animals certainly do worse in captivity than others, we can’t ignore the conservation aspect zoos provide. Zoos can be a place away from predators for the world’s most endangered species. Would giant pandas still be alive had they not been captured and put in a place where they could live or reproduce without fear of predation? Tigers are a targeted species because of the threat they can impose on local villages. Would the tiger population be at an acceptable level without a number of tigers in captivity? I understand that a zoo can be an incredibly small place compared to the territory the wilderness provides. However, zoos are one of the most powerful tools we have left in a world of increasing human expansion.

Round 2

Side 1: Zoos are also a great way for younger generations to get introduced to science early on. How many biologists can trace their careers back to family trips to the zoo? I’d imagine quite a few. In a society based so much on junk entertainment, a zoo can fill a similar role to a museum in fostering a more aware, smarter future. These same kids learning from zoos may grow up to be environmental scientists or conservation officers making it more possible for animals to be safe in the real world. We can only lower the need for zoos if we can become more environmentally aware, and I think zoos, ironically, teach this best. This isn’t to say zoos are infallible. Places like Sea World exploit intelligent creatures, effectively killing them. This is inexcusable, but most zoos aren’t Sea World. I guess my main point here is that while zoos can be seen as human meddling with the environment, they can help us get to a future where conservation won’t rely on captivity to save endangered species.

Side 2: Yes, zoos can help save the fate of more endangered species, but at a certain point it comes down to the quantity of life versus quality of life, which would take its own debate to even briefly explore the question. Zoos as temporary places to save animal lives make sense because it wouldn’t be like they’re being imprisoned their whole lives. However, keeping an animal alive only for it to be miserable is a little cruel, even if it is unintentional. Places like preserves, however, mimic their natural environments better and are thus a better option. They do require more land and resources, but since part of our environmental issues stem from lack of natural spaces (i.e. lack of groundwater absorption due to roads and rooftops and lack of forests due to monoculture crops), this isn’t a bad thing to encourage more of. And yes, zoos are educational. But so are TV shows about wildlife and these are more accessible to kids from lower-income brackets or with guardians with no time to take them. The TV shows also can have a lot more variety and depth, so for a kid who’s really interested, that’s the better option anyway.

Dear fanfiction.net,

Thank you for giving me a constant source of entertainment for moments when I don’t quite want to get invested in a new book or series on television, yet still feel like reading more. While the stories might not always be of the highest quality, there are such a variety of options that it is nearly impossible to not find something entertaining to read.

Even if there is not an entertaining story available for reading, there is always the option to write something myself. While likely not the most productive of hobbies, writing does let me practice written communication skills that could eventually help me later in life, even if it is starting with a more creative format online.

Fanfiction has given me a place to go to when I want to relax and take a break from studying and work. I am glad that it exists, and hope to continue enjoying it well into the future. So, thank you again, for giving me some form of entertainment to utilize in my down time.

Sincerely,

Your biggest fan

A tribute to warm Yooper culture

I wanted to thank you guys for being there for me while I went through a variety of personal troubles that could have really derailed my life.

You guys have inspired me every day with your positive outlooks for life even when things are going horribly wrong. You help me to see past the present situation and towards brighter horizons.

Thank you for reminding me who I am and what I love in life. Thank you for playing silly online games with me so that we have something lighthearted to talk about when exams and projects are bogging us down.

Thank you for encouraging me to polish my skills and lifting me up when I don’t think too much of myself. Thank you for caring for me and driving out to the middle of nowhere just to spend time with me. I’ve looked a long time to have friends like you two.

Thank you for being such good friends.

Love,

Anonymous

Introducing The Nice List, a place for the editors, copy editors, students or denizens of Houghton-Hancock to thank or acknowledge someone or an organization who made their day, week, or experience in life a little bit better or a little easier. We want to give the community a chance to put something kind in the paper as a thank you to all those people who make life nicer. If you would like to participate in this column, please send your submission to
lodesubmit@mtu.edu.

Round 1

Side 1: Recently there’s been a lot of hype about Marvel, but is it really all that everyone claims it to be? Not quite. Marvel’s recent popularity seems to be caused by its crazy flood of recent movies, which is going to make them seem more popular because they have more viewers in a given time frame, even if they were to get the same amount, or less, viewers per movie when compared to DC ones. Meanwhile, DC has been going crazy with TV shows for ages, and many of them are pretty popular, while Marvel seems to have only recently gotten into this area. This, of course, does not in itself make DC better, but the fact that they have had so many popular TV shows at all says something about their storytelling and animation. It also helps that DC hasn’t had to worry about copyright issues when creating their TV shows and movies, which is something that has limited Marvel quite a bit. This gives them more freedom of creativity and plot creation, thus making it easier to produce high-quality entertainment.

Side 2: Although DC has made a few great movies, usually involving Batman, they can’t hold a candle compared to the list of hits Marvel has put out. We need to remember the 2002 Sam Raimi Spiderman films were huge contributors to the current superhero movie phenomenon. I worked in a movie theater for a few years, and I asked the owners what their busiest movie was; they told me when the original Spiderman movie came out they had a line out the door and wrapping around the parking lot. Marvel has managed to make something that was once either purely children’s entertainment or the hobby for nerds into a mainstream sensation. As far as TV shows are concerned, DC may have more live action dramas than Marvel, but I’d bet way more people will recognize an animated Spiderman or Hulk than the live action Arrow stars. To put it simply, Marvel just has a way better image than DC. Even their worst movies are better than Batman vs Superman.

Round 2

Side 1: To say that Marvel has the most recognizable characters is a bit simplistic. Yes, maybe more people would recognize Spiderman before they would recognize the Green Arrow, but that same argument could be reversed. More people are likely to know who Superman is than they would know Hawkeye. Plus, it’s a common belief that Superman is the original superhero in terms of defining what a superhero is. If that’s not a point in DC’s favor, I don’t know what is. Also, in terms of villains, whose are the most well known? DC’s villains. The Joker, Harley Quinn, The Riddler, all of these are names that most kids grew up hearing, while, until recently, Marvel’s villains were not quite as infamous. Why would they be so well known if they weren’t great villains? In this area, DC has done much better for far longer than Marvel has. Marvel may be the current fad, but the question of who will remain superior is something that only time will show, and that is something DC has been pretty good at keeping up with.

Side 2: Marvel didn’t just change how modern cinema portrays comic heroes. They revolutionized modern television writing in general. Marvel was a pioneer of crafting connected worlds that impact each other, something DC is trying to catch up to. By writing their films in a way that even the most minor character in some sequel can come back in an Avengers title, Marvel is able to increase audience engagement, even if it’s in the third Thor movie. What’s more important, is that their movies generally star characters that all ages can enjoy. Recently DC has tried to make their movies way too dark. I’m sorry, but you can’t have your main character wear a red spandex and cape then try and have a serious plotline. Not to mention the fact that Marvel movies almost always have way better special effects. I think it speaks for itself that their biggest villain is a large, wrinkly chinned, purple giant with a magic glove, and I still totally believed he was actually walking around on set.

Side 1 argued by Rebecca Barkdoll and Side 2 argued by David Disney