Are you sure they were squatting instead of using a more traditional position? I guess the room was pretty crowded, so there wasn't room to stretch out.
When was it that life completed its transformation into a Monty Python skit?
Right around the time of the 2000 presidential election. Now we're just playing out the string, see the dead parrot up ahead? And Rumsfeld is in charge of the Ministry of Silly Walks.
And yes, that's the actual course number. It's almost enough to convince me a bureaucrat somewhere has a sense of humor. (If you click on the link, you'll see it's a class in which they watch porn and talk about whether it's appropriate to use a dildo while menstruating.)
"Everyone is linking to it, but that's because you have to read it."
I'm wondering who to complain to after seeing it linked over three times. I'm particularly annoyed at Holbo, who presented it as if it was new, and didn't label it, but I'm frankly irritated at everyone who presents stuff without labeling as if it were New! Exciting! Never Before Seen!
snigger. I reckon passing along somebody's amusing blog post is not the kind of thing that demands attribution for who pointed you to it. Is there a situation here where Amygdala was the first blog outside of Scott Kaufman's to note the presence of the post in question on Scott Kaufman's blog, and now you Gary are complaining at not being credited for this discovery? Or is it a more general notion that ideally, every blogger who passes along a link he found at some other blog, should credit the place where he found it, so that an interested party can trace back through the loop and discover who originally pointed out that there is a funny post about students having sex in his office, on Scott Kaufman's blog? This particular bit of information does not seem valuable enough to me that I would ask people to expend the effort.
I think Gary's complaint is that he kept clicking different links and getting the same old story. When one uses the same computer over and over again often one's browser will indicate that one has already looked at a webpage, but if one doesn't one may find onself reading the same story three times, I guess. This won't happen under our new Pajamas Media Overlords.
Ah I see. Well that makes a bit more sense I guess. I don't really experience that problem much since I tend to hover the mouse over a click and see where it is directing to before I follow it.
I guess the problem with this story was that no one wanted to spoil it by telling what it was about, so you couldn't tell what it was without clicking through (or looking at the url the link was pointing to, like Osner does).
Personally, I wouldn't have minded reading that story three times, because it's just so hilarious.
Are you sure they were squatting instead of using a more traditional position? I guess the room was pretty crowded, so there wasn't room to stretch out.
Posted by SP | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 12:26 PM
When was it that life completed its transformation into a Monty Python skit?
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 12:28 PM
When was it that life completed its transformation into a Monty Python skit?
Right around the time of the 2000 presidential election. Now we're just playing out the string, see the dead parrot up ahead? And Rumsfeld is in charge of the Ministry of Silly Walks.
Posted by Ugh | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 12:46 PM
This should be made into a short story. And I don't mean a slash story. More like one which shows why everyone's actions looked so reasonable to them.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 12:57 PM
Can't it be both?
Posted by Matt F | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 12:57 PM
transformation into a Monty Python skit
American politics in the 21st century has been one long game of Spot the Loony.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 1:00 PM
Note, in comments, the course number for Sociology of Sexuality.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 1:08 PM
American politics in the 21st century has been one long game of Spot the Loony.
The Upperclass Twit of the Year competition has gotten boring lately, since GWB pretty much has a lock on the gold medal.
Posted by My Alter Ego | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 1:11 PM
And yes, that's the actual course number. It's almost enough to convince me a bureaucrat somewhere has a sense of humor. (If you click on the link, you'll see it's a class in which they watch porn and talk about whether it's appropriate to use a dildo while menstruating.)
Posted by Scott Eric Kaufman | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 1:39 PM
from the D- to the I- to the L- to the DO
what can i say?
they can't stay away from the best cock
on the block todaaaaay
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 1:48 PM
Listen here (mp3).
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 1:55 PM
SB, I remain awed.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 1:56 PM
And I remain odd.
Posted by apostropher | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 2:00 PM
But not eternally hard.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 2:00 PM
Awesome, SB
Posted by baa | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 2:21 PM
Thanks. Yay Bitch and Animal.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 3:09 PM
You're gonna like morningwood.
Posted by baa | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 3:28 PM
For premiumer comment experience, read 14 non-rhotically.
thankyouspaceladyiloveyougoodnight!
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 12- 1-05 8:26 PM
What means it, "rhotic"? Ya sayin' we should not pronounce the "r"s in order to acheive cloud 9? I am not getting it. (But I long to.)
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12- 2-05 5:30 PM
"Everyone is linking to it, but that's because you have to read it."
I'm wondering who to complain to after seeing it linked over three times. I'm particularly annoyed at Holbo, who presented it as if it was new, and didn't label it, but I'm frankly irritated at everyone who presents stuff without labeling as if it were New! Exciting! Never Before Seen!
Because it never is.
So who do I complain to?
Posted by Gary Farber | Link to this comment | 12- 3-05 7:14 PM
The people who raised you, I think.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 12- 3-05 7:19 PM
The people who raised you, I think.
snigger. I reckon passing along somebody's amusing blog post is not the kind of thing that demands attribution for who pointed you to it. Is there a situation here where Amygdala was the first blog outside of Scott Kaufman's to note the presence of the post in question on Scott Kaufman's blog, and now you Gary are complaining at not being credited for this discovery? Or is it a more general notion that ideally, every blogger who passes along a link he found at some other blog, should credit the place where he found it, so that an interested party can trace back through the loop and discover who originally pointed out that there is a funny post about students having sex in his office, on Scott Kaufman's blog? This particular bit of information does not seem valuable enough to me that I would ask people to expend the effort.
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12- 3-05 7:31 PM
I think Gary's complaint is that he kept clicking different links and getting the same old story. When one uses the same computer over and over again often one's browser will indicate that one has already looked at a webpage, but if one doesn't one may find onself reading the same story three times, I guess. This won't happen under our new Pajamas Media Overlords.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 12- 3-05 7:40 PM
Ah I see. Well that makes a bit more sense I guess. I don't really experience that problem much since I tend to hover the mouse over a click and see where it is directing to before I follow it.
Posted by Jeremy Osner | Link to this comment | 12- 3-05 7:43 PM
I guess the problem with this story was that no one wanted to spoil it by telling what it was about, so you couldn't tell what it was without clicking through (or looking at the url the link was pointing to, like Osner does).
Personally, I wouldn't have minded reading that story three times, because it's just so hilarious.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 12- 3-05 7:44 PM