Becks, I was meaning to ask: was there a reason you didn't post about that horrible Shamu Modern Love? It stayed at the top of the most-emailed articles for ages and was surely one of the most hideous yet.
I think because it was one of the most hideous yet. I wasn't sure if we'd get much conversation beyond "that's hideous". Someone brought it up in one of the threads a while back and proved me wrong -- the conversation about it was quite good. But, by then, it had already been discussed so I didn't feel the need to post about it.
I try not to post it every week, really I do. That's one of the reasons why I avoided the Shamu article. But it really does suck me in. I mean, "Rock my network"? Come the fuck on.
Perhaps it's because the author seems to be using all of the online stuff for score-keeping - who has the most friends on MySpace, how many sites she can join, etc. Who cares?
Ah, but did you catch the best line?
Meanwhile, MySpace is so big that I can't even seem to find a place to start my own mini-network and branch out. I have 10 profiles, but not nearly enough friends.
Why in fuck's name would you have 10 profiles on MySpace? (Can you rework the Whore/Madonna dichtotomy into 10 different personas?)
Anyways, yeah. She's essentially telling you that she isn't actually engaging in virtual intimacy, she's engaged in the rankest sort of social climbing. She's not there to communicate, she's there, truly, to be seen.
They are the ultimate social currency, public declarations of the intimacy status of a relationship.
It's interesting to me to watch how this evolves. Measuring success by how much money/Prada you have is so old school; now it is how many people can you successfully manipulate. I'd be very interested to see how often serious personality disorders manifest as online roleplaying.
Personally, I expect a collapse; it's like the tech boom. People just get in on the craze, and certainly it will continue to grow, but it'll reach a point of diminishing returns for normal people. And then everyone will be over it.
I guess the "Love" part is less important than the commitment to writing that makes you want bang your head against the wall.
Well, clearly, the target audience is comprised airheaded dipshits. Often this is synonymous with 'young' but not always.
max
['I think they should call it 'Modern Fiction'.']
I kind of think the myspace phenomenona just makes explicit a lot of the thought that different people have long gone into in presenting themselves to the world. Same as it ever was. I do wonder if the Internet helps perpetuate the false steps that a lot of people go through on that path, or if it helps people figure out who they are (or are really building to be) sooner.
But the bizaare reinventing government style data driven coup counting of "I'm popular with people I've never met because my computer tells me so" really does freak me out a little. Its not just the score keeping, its what changes you make in yourself and your behavior to run up the score.
Oh, if only I kept up, Becks. I knew you'd tackled it somewhere.
If you really want to barf into your Wheaties, there's a column in the Park Slope Reader by someone who calls herself "Smartmom" who's married to "Hepcat" and she talks about the dreariness of being white and rich and really super-privileged in Brooklyn. Our neighborhood is mostly occupied by wealthy ladies with Ivy League degrees who spend most of their time either writing articles about how to train your hubby like a dog or explaining to other mommies at the Tea Lounge why they've decided to "freelance" while exploring how to train hubbies like dogs.
Yeah, there was something totally psycho about this Modern Love (as if the others aren't easily DSM IV categorizable in themselves). I'd like to think I'm at the breaking point of forming so many of my relationships online, but seriously. She makes it sound like she's normal. When I say I have a blog and have met people through it, most people IRL back up a few steps.
It's a shame this article sucked because there are interesting things to be said about online communities and why people choose the ones they do. I've had the "no, meeting people through blogs isn't weird" conversation with many non-blogging friends and it always ends without much understanding but I recently had the realization that even blog-people have trouble understanding why you would choose to frequent a particular site. I was at a gathering and someone who was actively involved with another site was asking me all kinds of questions about Unfogged and I found it very difficult to coherently articulate "Why Unfogged?", even though this person understood blogs and had met people through them.
I finally got to the bottom of the column. Says this is adapted from a book:
Theodora Stites lives in New York where she works in market research. This essay is adapted from "Twentysomething Essays by Twentysomething Writers" (Random House, August).
88 lines about 44 women. Thirty Two Short Films about Glenn Gould. 22 Short Films about Springfield. All good. But this book? Meh.
24: Every once in a while, we've trying to articulate it to each other, that is, to the several hundred people in the world, max, who do "get it," and haven't been able to.
Oh, come on guys, this isn't so bad. All it's saying is "I'm still in the stage where I'm enamored of what can be done with social software." And she even says something true--"I've found that I act much as I do in real life, and my SecondLife relationships tend to fail the same way my real-life relationships do." I'm fascinated by that phenomenon.
I keep trying to talk to my boyfriend about this, and it feels a little eerily like "coming out." He understands why I have a blog, and he reads it, and he occasionally dips into the comments if I say something particularly interesting or obnoxious was going on, but I really couldn't say, except in pretty vague terms, that I hung out with people from Unfogged IRL. Like, I'd like to invite you guys to our barbeques and parties. I think it makes sense.
I think it has half to do with his never having been involved in internet communities (while I've been doing it since age 16) and half to do with my wanting to feel free to talk here more openly about stuff I don't talk about on my blog. Different communities have different purposes, and I kind of like that Unfogged is free of taint from the rest of my RL connections.
Also, kind of unrelated, but I was listening to the radio the other day and the DJ was talking about how they were having some happy hour-ish thing for fans of the radio station and he took a few calls from some "OMG! I love your station! Can't wait to meet you!" fans and I was thinking "Damn, that's pathetic. Who would actually go to an event hosted by a radio station or call in to talk to the DJ?" And then I realized that, had I not gone out of town, I had been considering going to the DCist Butterstick happy hour last Thursday and have been known to comment on their site.
So, kind of a real-world vs. internet version of "Community A rulez! Community B droolz!"
24/28 - really? What about "great group blog with very active group of highly intelligent, witty, all-around-interesting commenters"? That's why I'm here.
The DC contingent here does seem to hang out together IRL a bit. I've convinced some people close to me that this is real, and am also looking to put together people I know from these two worlds a bit to see if it works. I don't see why not.
So the question she doesn't ask is interesting: how and why are RL interactions more/less intimate than online ones? How are the ways we choose RL communities different/similar to the ways we choose online ones? Why are people who have totally satisfying lives otherwise drawn to online strangers?
11 wasn't really serious; I'm sure they're different people. I can just usually identify a post by any of the other bloggers here with reasonable accuracy (without looking to see who posted), based on subject matter, writing style, personal details, etc. Whereas Becks and Cala = totally interchangable, to me.
I don't think I would really want people I know IRL to know about my online activities. I'd like to be able to talk about some stuff without worrying that someone I know is going to see it. This is the main reason I'm pseudonymous; there's no real danger to me if someone knows my identity, but I'd prefer to keep my online persona relatively hidden from people I know in other ways.
Why are people who have totally satisfying lives otherwise drawn to online strangers?
I think I'm drawn to fairly similar people online and IRL. I'm drawn to "online strangers" for the same reasons I'm drawn to real-life strangers-- I like to meet interesting new people. The internet just facilitates this in a lot of ways that real-life doesn't.
Re: What about "great group blog with very active group of highly intelligent, witty, all-around-interesting commenters"?, I think the reason it was hard to articulate was that I was pressed on why it was different/better than other sites that he considered to have intelligent, witty, and interesting people. Um, we have cock jokes!
I'd like to be able to talk about some stuff without worrying that someone I know is going to see it.
Though this is totally true. I'm a lot more open, especially with new people, when I'm pseudonymous and can choose if necessary to never interact with them again. This is one part of the "facilitation" I described in 46.
41: Exactly -- these are fascinating questions. What is meant by "intimacy"? On the author's view, it seems to mean knowing people's geographical locations, having the ability to click on the carefully-constructed profiles of friends-of-friends-of-friends, and getting token forms of cyber-attention.
I have gotten to know a few people quite well through on-line interaction, and the process seemed a lot less stressful and laborious than trying to build up intimacy in real life.
Also, Becks has keys to the blog, is reasonable, articulate and I derail comment threads by getting hung up on the niceties of argument. (DO YOU TRUST WOMEN OR NOT, B?)
As for online interpersonal relationships:
1) The author of the article is a tool. Or she's treating Friendster like a game.
2) I have met people that I've known through games (the boyfriend), through blogs, through random shit. My father still refers to my boyfriend as my 'internet boyfriend' and while that's annoying, it's not nearly as annoying as having my boyfriend hint that one day he'll respond with 'Yeah, but i'm banging her, so?' and then my parents' eyeballs will melt.
3) I believe that excessive online interaction belies and I'm even willing to say causes, at least moderate depression & OCD.
I guess, because of the way most commenters here assume the best of one from the get-go, which I can't get from a conversation at my grad school, I feel free to talk about stuff that RL friends might sit around judging me for later. Like, I can assume y'all aren't going off into some room to talk about what a whore I am. I'd like to think that's not true of people I know equally well IRL, but it's not.
45: the pseudonymity issue is very interesting. I have a compromise position where I'm kind of pseudonymous but if someone wanted to put some effort in, they could figure out who I was. I wish now that I was totally pseudonymous, because my blog would be a hundred times more interesting if I could express myself with absolute freedom and no reprisals from anyone.
What I like about on-line communities is that there are very few formalities. Dive right into the conversation, and if it's boring or time to go to bed, I can just log off without spending half an hour trying to wind the conversation down or excuse myself.
I'm a lot different IRL. That is, I hope I am. I'm probably blunter in these threads than I am in actual conversation. There's something about the lack of faces that brings that about I think. Sorry, all.
I don't think this is "Unfogged is so special" masturbation as much as actually trying to figure out what makes various communities different. I suspect even Bridgeplate wouldn't pull out the yellow card for this conversation.
67 & 68 - I don't know! That's what I had trouble answering. I think a lot of it has to do with the level of commitment of the commenters. But then that loops back to "but why are people so committed?" and it's an endless loop of questions. I think another is something people touched on in the Bowie thread, which is that people genuinely want to explore questions and can do so civilly.
I derail comment threads by getting hung up on the niceties of argument. (DO YOU TRUST WOMEN OR NOT, B?)
Awww. I like that you do that, even though in the moment it usually drives me nuts, because it keeps me honest. You're amazingly good at niggling over arguments while maintaining equanimity and good humor.
Re. AWB, I for one was very excited when she showed up here.
I believe that excessive online interaction belies and I'm even willing to say causes, at least moderate depression & OCD.
I've always found that level of participation online puzzling. I largely look at this site at night while I'm at work. I have two monitors, and the tools I use have these small time lags while they load cases. Nothing very long, just regular little time gaps that are perfect for glancing at comment threads. But my internet usage is primarily reading the news and related political and science blogs, magazines, etc.. I've never been able to get into things like online gaming, or other extensive online interactions. Just never seems as attractive as actually doing something IRL.
I think the two biggest distinguishing features of Unfogged are the informality/joviality, and the habit of self-deprecation practiced by pretty much everyone. We don't have anyone unwilling to back down when they should, and admit error or ignorance. Basically, we have an extremely low asshole factor. I think all the humor around here helps people feel more free to act like a falliable humans, and to not worry about not being accepted by other commenters.
I think the fact that this isn't primarily a political blog anymore has a lot to do with it. Discussing politics is tiring and can be divisive, but if it's leavened with enough posts about David Bowie and vibrators there's no adverse effect on overall morale.
I don't understand how you all can calmly discuss socio-economics when Zidane's future legend is up for dispute.
If you aren't into that, everyone mentioned in a NYT "Modern Love" article is autonomatically in the wrong; it just might take 1,000 online iterations to discover the conventional wisdom that makes them so.
And my goal is to figure out how to make better pastries than all their asses.
With that, I had better sign out, à la Becks, ` qui je me tippe le chapeau.
I don't understand how you all can calmly discuss socio-economics when Zidane's future legend is up for dispute.
If you aren't into that, everyone mentioned in a NYT "Modern Love" article is autonomatically in the wrong; it just might take 1,000 online iterations to discover the conventional wisdom that makes them so.
And my goal is to figure out how to make better pastries than all their asses.
With that, I had better sign out, à la Becks, &aagrave; qui je me tippe le chapeau.
59 is exactly wrong. Becks is not into stirring up shit, which Ogged manifestly is (if only up to a point).
Please don't make me find the thread in which everyone previously conceded this point. Including you. Simply accept that my penis gives me access to a higher, greater truth. And Labs.
I think it's more a political blog than it used to be, actually.
Also, text's 62 is largely true of me as well. IRL I'm perfectly capable of the kind of pushy opinionated argument that I do online, but I mostly only do it around good friends who enjoy the performance. Also, I sometimes have a long quiet observation period in person which I don't demonstrate online (at least, you can't see people lurking while they try to decide if X online place is worth contributing to).
I think it's more a political blog than it used to be, actually.
It's certainly more political than it was when I started reading, but I hear tell that long ago it was very political and quite different from it's current form. Anyway, it's not primarily political, which is my point.
I think it's more a political blog than it used to be, actually.
That is true, and largely thanks to LB. It's made more of an honest woman out of me. When I talk about Unfogged to people who don't know that I blog I call it "the political group I belong to".
Also, continuing to muse on what I, me, my own fascinating self, am like irl vs. online, I think that my tendency to lurk/hang back while I suss out whether X group of people is compatible is one reason I'm so impatient with trolls. One of my dearly held social norms is that you just don't walk up and start insulting people/showing off. If you're stuck having to make conversation with people you dislike, you murmur the occasional non-committal monosyllable, express mild disagreement if really offended, and get away as soon as possible, making a mental note to avoid those people in the future.
If you're stuck having to make conversation with people you dislike, you murmur the occasional non-committal monosyllable, express mild disagreement if really offended, and get away as soon as possible
Sometimes a more Ogged like approach is called for.
I'm not sure I buy this comparison with IRL. I'm not like anything "in real life." It varies with the situation. This probably approximates what I'm like around a bunch of people with whom I'm comfortable.
I don't have any compelling reason to be anonymous, but occasionally I wish I did. I run into a problem in that a good number of my IRL friends read Unfogged, and I found, for example, that recently when I was tempted to moan about how my relationship with s. was turning upside down, it was never appropriate even when it was banal or totally germane. It was problematic, because I like to maximalize outlets for talking about me.
What I really enjoyed was how he waited to do it. He just jogged along nonchalantley--ho, hum. Then he turned--bam--then back to jogging. He never showed any facial expression. A showman.
As for the outrage, it seemed to come from the American commentator who knew very little about soccer, and less from the other guy. Not knowing much about the sport, I don't think I can condemn Zidane. It might be, that sort of thing happens. And if so, the way he did it was pretty sweet.
106: Well, that's what I do. I'm not good at being amusingly good-humored with people who annoy me. I am good at being amusingly good-humored with near strangers, sometimes, but then half the time they end up being the ones annoyed by it.
110: I have the same kind of problem, because I've stupidly told the people I love and trust about the blog. Which means that I can't complain about them on it.
110 does bring up a good point. When you go online partly to be able to freely discuss things about your personal life away from people who know you IRL and then form IRL relationships with people online that have their own issues you want to discuss, where do you turn? I know I've run into that dilemma before. (I usually end up telling my friend Ellie in Texas and she's like "Who the hell are these people? Why do you need to work this out? Can't you just stop reading that site? Problem solved!")
I don't think I have the same kind of sexual bravado I probably sometimes come off as having around here IRL. I might frequently say the same things, but it's tempered by my physical presence, which is generally not the kind of presence you associate with a lot of sexual bravado. There was a period when I was uncomfortable with how I felt my bravado here was insufficiently tempered with my natural dweebiness, so I made a conscious effort to dweeb it up. I will almost never argue as aggressively IRL as I do sometimes here. Also, I've been in the weird position of admitting things online that I've never talked about to RL friends, or, I guess, just talked about to Clementine, but then transitioning some Unfogged people into real life, and being in an odd situation where relatively new people knew some things about me I hadn't told some of my much older friends. OTOH, there's plenty I don't talk about on this blog about my family and relationship history that my RL friends have the whole scoop on, and I'm not even reluctant to give that scoop to someone who expresses interest; it's just not blog fodder.
How I am online is pretty similar to IRL. I guess it's more accurate to say I'm a bit slower to make a judgement about someone online rather than "nicer." There's a lot of things in face to face interactions like body language, tone of voice, etc. that give a better indication as to someones intent when they make an argument.
131 - That would kill me. You should be like the girl I know with a podcast and keep asking me if I keep up with it every week. Then I'd surely flake and not read it.
Try the highbrow version.
Posted by Andy Vance | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:28 PM
1: "Try the highbrow version." s/b "FRIST!"
Posted by M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:31 PM
Becks, I was meaning to ask: was there a reason you didn't post about that horrible Shamu Modern Love? It stayed at the top of the most-emailed articles for ages and was surely one of the most hideous yet.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:48 PM
That Flavorpill guy messages everyone to say, "Want to go on a date? If not, want to join my obsessive community?"
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:52 PM
I think because it was one of the most hideous yet. I wasn't sure if we'd get much conversation beyond "that's hideous". Someone brought it up in one of the threads a while back and proved me wrong -- the conversation about it was quite good. But, by then, it had already been discussed so I didn't feel the need to post about it.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:53 PM
It's still up at the top. I had to dig for this week's Modern Love because I wanted to see the response here.
I've been sucked in, haven't I.
Posted by Halfway Done | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:54 PM
I try not to post it every week, really I do. That's one of the reasons why I avoided the Shamu article. But it really does suck me in. I mean, "Rock my network"? Come the fuck on.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:56 PM
Perhaps it's because the author seems to be using all of the online stuff for score-keeping - who has the most friends on MySpace, how many sites she can join, etc. Who cares?
Ah, but did you catch the best line?
Meanwhile, MySpace is so big that I can't even seem to find a place to start my own mini-network and branch out. I have 10 profiles, but not nearly enough friends.
Why in fuck's name would you have 10 profiles on MySpace? (Can you rework the Whore/Madonna dichtotomy into 10 different personas?)
Anyways, yeah. She's essentially telling you that she isn't actually engaging in virtual intimacy, she's engaged in the rankest sort of social climbing. She's not there to communicate, she's there, truly, to be seen.
They are the ultimate social currency, public declarations of the intimacy status of a relationship.
It's interesting to me to watch how this evolves. Measuring success by how much money/Prada you have is so old school; now it is how many people can you successfully manipulate. I'd be very interested to see how often serious personality disorders manifest as online roleplaying.
Personally, I expect a collapse; it's like the tech boom. People just get in on the craze, and certainly it will continue to grow, but it'll reach a point of diminishing returns for normal people. And then everyone will be over it.
I guess the "Love" part is less important than the commitment to writing that makes you want bang your head against the wall.
Well, clearly, the target audience is comprised airheaded dipshits. Often this is synonymous with 'young' but not always.
max
['I think they should call it 'Modern Fiction'.']
Posted by max | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:57 PM
I kind of think the myspace phenomenona just makes explicit a lot of the thought that different people have long gone into in presenting themselves to the world. Same as it ever was. I do wonder if the Internet helps perpetuate the false steps that a lot of people go through on that path, or if it helps people figure out who they are (or are really building to be) sooner.
But the bizaare reinventing government style data driven coup counting of "I'm popular with people I've never met because my computer tells me so" really does freak me out a little. Its not just the score keeping, its what changes you make in yourself and your behavior to run up the score.
Posted by benton | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:58 PM
Oh, if only I kept up, Becks. I knew you'd tackled it somewhere.
If you really want to barf into your Wheaties, there's a column in the Park Slope Reader by someone who calls herself "Smartmom" who's married to "Hepcat" and she talks about the dreariness of being white and rich and really super-privileged in Brooklyn. Our neighborhood is mostly occupied by wealthy ladies with Ivy League degrees who spend most of their time either writing articles about how to train your hubby like a dog or explaining to other mommies at the Tea Lounge why they've decided to "freelance" while exploring how to train hubbies like dogs.
Yes, I'm posting Becks-style.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:59 PM
This may be a bit off topic, but is anyone else suspicious that Becks and Cala are really the same person?
Posted by Urple | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 8:59 PM
Yeah, there was something totally psycho about this Modern Love (as if the others aren't easily DSM IV categorizable in themselves). I'd like to think I'm at the breaking point of forming so many of my relationships online, but seriously. She makes it sound like she's normal. When I say I have a blog and have met people through it, most people IRL back up a few steps.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:02 PM
11 No. But I used to wonder if Standpipe was a creation entirely of Ogged's frenzied imagination.
Posted by benton | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:03 PM
11: Don't get that at all; would require a Shakespearean capacity to inhabit another persona. Very different.
Posted by I don't pay | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:03 PM
Cala: more violent.
Becks: more into Sleater-Kinney.
That's how I keep them separate.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:03 PM
This week's Modern Love is written by a narcissist.
She says she spies on her exes on line. She also says that their not replying to messages (presumably hers) is "aggressive". Keep away!
Posted by md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:04 PM
Right. She's the one everyone I dated on Nerve was complaining about.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:06 PM
15 And as someone who is only recently into Sleater Kinney, them going on hiatus/breaking up is a shame. (Now lets see if Cala agrees...)
Posted by benton | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:07 PM
I wanted to say that this week's column is about self-love, but that's a different column.
Posted by md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:08 PM
This place is getting overrun with kittens. They all look the same too.
Posted by md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:09 PM
What is more modern than cybernarcissism?
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:09 PM
Myspace.
Posted by pdf23ds | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:10 PM
I have a few portraits of a kitten (now deceased) you could add to spice things up.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:11 PM
It's a shame this article sucked because there are interesting things to be said about online communities and why people choose the ones they do. I've had the "no, meeting people through blogs isn't weird" conversation with many non-blogging friends and it always ends without much understanding but I recently had the realization that even blog-people have trouble understanding why you would choose to frequent a particular site. I was at a gathering and someone who was actively involved with another site was asking me all kinds of questions about Unfogged and I found it very difficult to coherently articulate "Why Unfogged?", even though this person understood blogs and had met people through them.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:12 PM
I finally got to the bottom of the column. Says this is adapted from a book:
Theodora Stites lives in New York where she works in market research. This essay is adapted from "Twentysomething Essays by Twentysomething Writers" (Random House, August).
88 lines about 44 women. Thirty Two Short Films about Glenn Gould. 22 Short Films about Springfield. All good. But this book? Meh.
Posted by md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:13 PM
It is an interesting issue, especially with the proliferation of blogs and social networking sites and the many choices of online venue this creates.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:14 PM
26 to 11.
Posted by Urple | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:16 PM
24: Every once in a while, we've trying to articulate it to each other, that is, to the several hundred people in the world, max, who do "get it," and haven't been able to.
Posted by I don't pay | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:16 PM
I'm quite sure Becks and Cala are different people, though I admit they're somewhat similar.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:17 PM
Oh, come on guys, this isn't so bad. All it's saying is "I'm still in the stage where I'm enamored of what can be done with social software." And she even says something true--"I've found that I act much as I do in real life, and my SecondLife relationships tend to fail the same way my real-life relationships do." I'm fascinated by that phenomenon.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:17 PM
Cala: more violent.
And on the rifle team in high school. She's Unfogged's "Most Likely to End Up in a Clocktower"
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:18 PM
I keep trying to talk to my boyfriend about this, and it feels a little eerily like "coming out." He understands why I have a blog, and he reads it, and he occasionally dips into the comments if I say something particularly interesting or obnoxious was going on, but I really couldn't say, except in pretty vague terms, that I hung out with people from Unfogged IRL. Like, I'd like to invite you guys to our barbeques and parties. I think it makes sense.
I think it has half to do with his never having been involved in internet communities (while I've been doing it since age 16) and half to do with my wanting to feel free to talk here more openly about stuff I don't talk about on my blog. Different communities have different purposes, and I kind of like that Unfogged is free of taint from the rest of my RL connections.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:19 PM
Actually, one interesting thing to discuss would be which sites people here frequent and participate actively in.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:19 PM
Also, kind of unrelated, but I was listening to the radio the other day and the DJ was talking about how they were having some happy hour-ish thing for fans of the radio station and he took a few calls from some "OMG! I love your station! Can't wait to meet you!" fans and I was thinking "Damn, that's pathetic. Who would actually go to an event hosted by a radio station or call in to talk to the DJ?" And then I realized that, had I not gone out of town, I had been considering going to the DCist Butterstick happy hour last Thursday and have been known to comment on their site.
So, kind of a real-world vs. internet version of "Community A rulez! Community B droolz!"
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:19 PM
24/28 - really? What about "great group blog with very active group of highly intelligent, witty, all-around-interesting commenters"? That's why I'm here.
Posted by Urple | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:20 PM
Becks and Cala are both quite levelheaded, but they express it in very different ways.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:20 PM
32 to 24
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:20 PM
It's fascinating that this vapid woman uses variations of the word "intimate" six times in her piece.
Posted by dagger aleph | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:20 PM
31: If I recall correctly, Becks is quite skilled with the firearms herself.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:20 PM
The DC contingent here does seem to hang out together IRL a bit. I've convinced some people close to me that this is real, and am also looking to put together people I know from these two worlds a bit to see if it works. I don't see why not.
Posted by I don't pay | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:25 PM
So the question she doesn't ask is interesting: how and why are RL interactions more/less intimate than online ones? How are the ways we choose RL communities different/similar to the ways we choose online ones? Why are people who have totally satisfying lives otherwise drawn to online strangers?
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:25 PM
11 wasn't really serious; I'm sure they're different people. I can just usually identify a post by any of the other bloggers here with reasonable accuracy (without looking to see who posted), based on subject matter, writing style, personal details, etc. Whereas Becks and Cala = totally interchangable, to me.
Posted by Urple | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:25 PM
If I am to be confused with someone, I'm flattered that it is Cala. Maybe that means I can borrow the calabat sometime. Woo!
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:27 PM
You only had but to ask, sweetpea.
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:28 PM
I don't think I would really want people I know IRL to know about my online activities. I'd like to be able to talk about some stuff without worrying that someone I know is going to see it. This is the main reason I'm pseudonymous; there's no real danger to me if someone knows my identity, but I'd prefer to keep my online persona relatively hidden from people I know in other ways.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:28 PM
Why are people who have totally satisfying lives otherwise drawn to online strangers?
I think I'm drawn to fairly similar people online and IRL. I'm drawn to "online strangers" for the same reasons I'm drawn to real-life strangers-- I like to meet interesting new people. The internet just facilitates this in a lot of ways that real-life doesn't.
Posted by Urple | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:29 PM
Re: What about "great group blog with very active group of highly intelligent, witty, all-around-interesting commenters"?, I think the reason it was hard to articulate was that I was pressed on why it was different/better than other sites that he considered to have intelligent, witty, and interesting people. Um, we have cock jokes!
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:30 PM
Attention seeking on the internet is sick! Sick, I tell you!
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:30 PM
I'd like to be able to talk about some stuff without worrying that someone I know is going to see it.
Though this is totally true. I'm a lot more open, especially with new people, when I'm pseudonymous and can choose if necessary to never interact with them again. This is one part of the "facilitation" I described in 46.
Posted by Urple | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:32 PM
It comes closer here to a real conversation, of a kind quite rare in IRL, than anywhere else I've seen.
Posted by I don't pay | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:32 PM
41: Exactly -- these are fascinating questions. What is meant by "intimacy"? On the author's view, it seems to mean knowing people's geographical locations, having the ability to click on the carefully-constructed profiles of friends-of-friends-of-friends, and getting token forms of cyber-attention.
I have gotten to know a few people quite well through on-line interaction, and the process seemed a lot less stressful and laborious than trying to build up intimacy in real life.
Posted by dagger aleph | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:34 PM
Also, Becks has keys to the blog, is reasonable, articulate and I derail comment threads by getting hung up on the niceties of argument. (DO YOU TRUST WOMEN OR NOT, B?)
As for online interpersonal relationships:
1) The author of the article is a tool. Or she's treating Friendster like a game.
2) I have met people that I've known through games (the boyfriend), through blogs, through random shit. My father still refers to my boyfriend as my 'internet boyfriend' and while that's annoying, it's not nearly as annoying as having my boyfriend hint that one day he'll respond with 'Yeah, but i'm banging her, so?' and then my parents' eyeballs will melt.
3) I believe that excessive online interaction belies and I'm even willing to say causes, at least moderate depression & OCD.
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:35 PM
I thought there was a general moratorium on "Unfogged is soooooospecial" comments?
That being said, this is the only place I comment regularly, and when I do comment elsewhere, it's usually at an Unfogged blogger/commenter's site.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:36 PM
I guess, because of the way most commenters here assume the best of one from the get-go, which I can't get from a conversation at my grad school, I feel free to talk about stuff that RL friends might sit around judging me for later. Like, I can assume y'all aren't going off into some room to talk about what a whore I am. I'd like to think that's not true of people I know equally well IRL, but it's not.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:37 PM
Actually, I think 53 is right about the masturbatory comments.
I am banned!!
Posted by Urple | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:39 PM
45: the pseudonymity issue is very interesting. I have a compromise position where I'm kind of pseudonymous but if someone wanted to put some effort in, they could figure out who I was. I wish now that I was totally pseudonymous, because my blog would be a hundred times more interesting if I could express myself with absolute freedom and no reprisals from anyone.
What I like about on-line communities is that there are very few formalities. Dive right into the conversation, and if it's boring or time to go to bed, I can just log off without spending half an hour trying to wind the conversation down or excuse myself.
Posted by dagger aleph | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:40 PM
Shit! Guys, never mind about the eetingmay behind the oodshopway to talk about WBAY being all horeyway.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:40 PM
55: Rg, I think I'm banned too, I guess. Bedtime anyhoo.
Sometimes I feel like enough of an outsider that I still get to say shit like 54. I never got my fruit basket.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:41 PM
Whereas Becks and Cala = totally interchangable, to me.
I thought Becks=female ogged was the most common reaction. You know, because she can dunk.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:41 PM
There's only one frequent commenter who really objects to the "Unfogged is so special" stuff.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:42 PM
I'd like to be able to talk about some stuff without worrying that someone I know is going to see it.
This part really doesn't bother me as
A. I don't have any kind of compelling reason to be anonymous.
B. The things I say on the internet are things and have/would have said IRL anyways.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:43 PM
I'm a lot different IRL. That is, I hope I am. I'm probably blunter in these threads than I am in actual conversation. There's something about the lack of faces that brings that about I think. Sorry, all.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:43 PM
57: I hope you're talking about BW, who is a total whore.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:43 PM
Night, y'all.
Posted by A White Bear | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:45 PM
I don't think this is "Unfogged is so special" masturbation as much as actually trying to figure out what makes various communities different. I suspect even Bridgeplate wouldn't pull out the yellow card for this conversation.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:45 PM
OT: does anyone else think that the flares soccer fans light when their teams score goals look like great big Mordor war fires?
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:47 PM
65: So what's the answer, Becks?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:47 PM
65: I agree. So, what makes Unfogged different?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:47 PM
Well, to be fair, I was masturbating when I wrote 35.
Posted by Urple | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:47 PM
I think Cala and Becks are in complementary distribution.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:48 PM
Like the narrator and Tyler Durden?
I am Jack's lonely comment box.
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:50 PM
Pretty much, yeah. Think about it.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:50 PM
67 & 68 - I don't know! That's what I had trouble answering. I think a lot of it has to do with the level of commitment of the commenters. But then that loops back to "but why are people so committed?" and it's an endless loop of questions. I think another is something people touched on in the Bowie thread, which is that people genuinely want to explore questions and can do so civilly.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:52 PM
So which of us is the crazy one?
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:53 PM
Well, to be fair, I was masturbating when I wrote 35.
I came twice while I was reading this.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:53 PM
I derail comment threads by getting hung up on the niceties of argument. (DO YOU TRUST WOMEN OR NOT, B?)
Awww. I like that you do that, even though in the moment it usually drives me nuts, because it keeps me honest. You're amazingly good at niggling over arguments while maintaining equanimity and good humor.
Re. AWB, I for one was very excited when she showed up here.
Plus it gives us someone new to gossip about.
Posted by Anonymous | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:53 PM
Feckless thug.
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:53 PM
I believe that excessive online interaction belies and I'm even willing to say causes, at least moderate depression & OCD.
I've always found that level of participation online puzzling. I largely look at this site at night while I'm at work. I have two monitors, and the tools I use have these small time lags while they load cases. Nothing very long, just regular little time gaps that are perfect for glancing at comment threads. But my internet usage is primarily reading the news and related political and science blogs, magazines, etc.. I've never been able to get into things like online gaming, or other extensive online interactions. Just never seems as attractive as actually doing something IRL.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:54 PM
I think the two biggest distinguishing features of Unfogged are the informality/joviality, and the habit of self-deprecation practiced by pretty much everyone. We don't have anyone unwilling to back down when they should, and admit error or ignorance. Basically, we have an extremely low asshole factor. I think all the humor around here helps people feel more free to act like a falliable humans, and to not worry about not being accepted by other commenters.
Posted by pdf23ds | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:54 PM
I bet you say that to all the thugs.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:54 PM
I think the fact that this isn't primarily a political blog anymore has a lot to do with it. Discussing politics is tiring and can be divisive, but if it's leavened with enough posts about David Bowie and vibrators there's no adverse effect on overall morale.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:55 PM
Fuck! 77 to 75. Look SB, I have to call you feckless thug now and then or else the phrase will work itself into my dissertation.
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:55 PM
59 is exactly wrong. Becks is not into stirring up shit, which Ogged manifestly is (if only up to a point).
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:56 PM
57: WBAY has Brad Spakowitz, who has been rumored to be a little horeyway.
His MySpace profile is under "Darby Zwitokaps". Or will be soon.
Posted by Halfway Done | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:56 PM
I'm a lot different IRL. That is, I hope I am. I'm probably blunter in these threads than I am in actual conversation.
I'm much nicer online. Tone and intent are harder to discern, so I'm more willing to give people the benefit of the doubt.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:57 PM
I don't understand how you all can calmly discuss socio-economics when Zidane's future legend is up for dispute.
If you aren't into that, everyone mentioned in a NYT "Modern Love" article is autonomatically in the wrong; it just might take 1,000 online iterations to discover the conventional wisdom that makes them so.
And my goal is to figure out how to make better pastries than all their asses.
With that, I had better sign out, à la Becks, ` qui je me tippe le chapeau.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:57 PM
I don't understand how you all can calmly discuss socio-economics when Zidane's future legend is up for dispute.
If you aren't into that, everyone mentioned in a NYT "Modern Love" article is autonomatically in the wrong; it just might take 1,000 online iterations to discover the conventional wisdom that makes them so.
And my goal is to figure out how to make better pastries than all their asses.
With that, I had better sign out, à la Becks, &aagrave; qui je me tippe le chapeau.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:58 PM
59 is exactly wrong. Becks is not into stirring up shit, which Ogged manifestly is (if only up to a point).
Please don't make me find the thread in which everyone previously conceded this point. Including you. Simply accept that my penis gives me access to a higher, greater truth. And Labs.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:58 PM
Oh, hell. Well, that's a sign, if ever I've seen one. G'night.
Posted by Jackmormon | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 9:59 PM
89: Goodnight, Gracie!
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:00 PM
How about I cop to Ogged's fussiness and concern about social norms but not his shit-stirring tendencies? That make everyone happy?
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:00 PM
I think it's more a political blog than it used to be, actually.
Also, text's 62 is largely true of me as well. IRL I'm perfectly capable of the kind of pushy opinionated argument that I do online, but I mostly only do it around good friends who enjoy the performance. Also, I sometimes have a long quiet observation period in person which I don't demonstrate online (at least, you can't see people lurking while they try to decide if X online place is worth contributing to).
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:00 PM
There's only one frequent commenter who really objects to the "Unfogged is so special" stuff.
What's LB, chopped liver?
I love this blog, but if it ever tweaks my nipple it's going down.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:01 PM
That make everyone happy?
See, pure ogged.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:02 PM
I think it's more a political blog than it used to be, actually.
It's certainly more political than it was when I started reading, but I hear tell that long ago it was very political and quite different from it's current form. Anyway, it's not primarily political, which is my point.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:03 PM
I think it's more a political blog than it used to be, actually.
That is true, and largely thanks to LB. It's made more of an honest woman out of me. When I talk about Unfogged to people who don't know that I blog I call it "the political group I belong to".
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:03 PM
its
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:03 PM
I love this blog, but if it ever tweaks my nipple it's going down.
Of course we would. We aren't a bunch of teases, SB.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:04 PM
What's LB, chopped liver?
Or Farber, for that matter?
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:05 PM
That was a reach-around nipple tweak followed by a variant form of giving head. Those footballers are so daring.
Posted by md 20/400 | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:05 PM
"Also, I sometimes have a long quiet observation period in person which I don't demonstrate online."
That's also me.
85 drives me to say: Hey all, remember that time? I was kidding!
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:05 PM
You know, Zidane's headbutt was a definite red card.
But it was a really sweet headbutt. It was like the Italian player was a soccer ball. Wham! Pwned!
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:05 PM
91 works.
Also, continuing to muse on what I, me, my own fascinating self, am like irl vs. online, I think that my tendency to lurk/hang back while I suss out whether X group of people is compatible is one reason I'm so impatient with trolls. One of my dearly held social norms is that you just don't walk up and start insulting people/showing off. If you're stuck having to make conversation with people you dislike, you murmur the occasional non-committal monosyllable, express mild disagreement if really offended, and get away as soon as possible, making a mental note to avoid those people in the future.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:05 PM
Huh.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:06 PM
102 gets it exactly right.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:08 PM
If you're stuck having to make conversation with people you dislike, you murmur the occasional non-committal monosyllable, express mild disagreement if really offended, and get away as soon as possible
Sometimes a more Ogged like approach is called for.
"You people are high. You know that, right?"
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:09 PM
I'm not sure I buy this comparison with IRL. I'm not like anything "in real life." It varies with the situation. This probably approximates what I'm like around a bunch of people with whom I'm comfortable.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:09 PM
You say you're more confrontational IRL, gswift?
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:10 PM
47-year-old balding man. Persona. I'm not sure how it would compare, except that in real life, I type better.
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:11 PM
I don't have any compelling reason to be anonymous, but occasionally I wish I did. I run into a problem in that a good number of my IRL friends read Unfogged, and I found, for example, that recently when I was tempted to moan about how my relationship with s. was turning upside down, it was never appropriate even when it was banal or totally germane. It was problematic, because I like to maximalize outlets for talking about me.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:11 PM
I agree with 107. I'd say my persona here is pretty similar to what I'm like when I'm with people I'm very comfortable with.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:11 PM
What I really enjoyed was how he waited to do it. He just jogged along nonchalantley--ho, hum. Then he turned--bam--then back to jogging. He never showed any facial expression. A showman.
As for the outrage, it seemed to come from the American commentator who knew very little about soccer, and less from the other guy. Not knowing much about the sport, I don't think I can condemn Zidane. It might be, that sort of thing happens. And if so, the way he did it was pretty sweet.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:12 PM
I am much sexier IRL.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:12 PM
106: Well, that's what I do. I'm not good at being amusingly good-humored with people who annoy me. I am good at being amusingly good-humored with near strangers, sometimes, but then half the time they end up being the ones annoyed by it.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:13 PM
113: That hardly seems possible.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:14 PM
I am imperceptibly less sexy IRL.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:16 PM
115: You'd be amazed.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:16 PM
110 - (Oh man, sorry to hear it, Smasher.)
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:16 PM
Smasher, just type your name backwards and then we'll talk about your love-life with impunity.
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:16 PM
IRL I think sex is dirty and disgusting.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:17 PM
110: I have the same kind of problem, because I've stupidly told the people I love and trust about the blog. Which means that I can't complain about them on it.
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:18 PM
119: Provided all his friends went to Harvard. Which I think they did.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:18 PM
110, 121: See, that's the kind of thing I'm trying to avoid, which is why I'm pseudonymous.
Posted by teofilo | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:19 PM
110 does bring up a good point. When you go online partly to be able to freely discuss things about your personal life away from people who know you IRL and then form IRL relationships with people online that have their own issues you want to discuss, where do you turn? I know I've run into that dilemma before. (I usually end up telling my friend Ellie in Texas and she's like "Who the hell are these people? Why do you need to work this out? Can't you just stop reading that site? Problem solved!")
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:20 PM
Stop reading???
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:21 PM
I don't think I have the same kind of sexual bravado I probably sometimes come off as having around here IRL. I might frequently say the same things, but it's tempered by my physical presence, which is generally not the kind of presence you associate with a lot of sexual bravado. There was a period when I was uncomfortable with how I felt my bravado here was insufficiently tempered with my natural dweebiness, so I made a conscious effort to dweeb it up. I will almost never argue as aggressively IRL as I do sometimes here. Also, I've been in the weird position of admitting things online that I've never talked about to RL friends, or, I guess, just talked about to Clementine, but then transitioning some Unfogged people into real life, and being in an odd situation where relatively new people knew some things about me I hadn't told some of my much older friends. OTOH, there's plenty I don't talk about on this blog about my family and relationship history that my RL friends have the whole scoop on, and I'm not even reluctant to give that scoop to someone who expresses interest; it's just not blog fodder.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:22 PM
You say you're more confrontational IRL, gswift?
How I am online is pretty similar to IRL. I guess it's more accurate to say I'm a bit slower to make a judgement about someone online rather than "nicer." There's a lot of things in face to face interactions like body language, tone of voice, etc. that give a better indication as to someones intent when they make an argument.
Posted by gswift | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:22 PM
123: The problem is that I'm vain and like to brag. "Ooh, I have this blog and a lot of people read it!"
Posted by bitchphd | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:24 PM
Tim is hidebound and reactionary.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:24 PM
115: Keep up the sweet talk and I might just have a little something extra for you, Tim.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:24 PM
And I tell people about the blog now, but they all understand I'd prefer them not to read it.
Posted by Tia | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:24 PM
131: No way would that stop me. I'd just pretend, and it would be awkward. Then we'd drift slowly apart. Then, the late night drunk dialing!
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:26 PM
The prospect of an ex with a blog sounds dreadful.
Posted by Armsmasher | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:26 PM
Then, the late night drunk dialing!
Then, the stepping into the communal shower and letting the cold water zing you in the buttness.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:27 PM
131 - That would kill me. You should be like the girl I know with a podcast and keep asking me if I keep up with it every week. Then I'd surely flake and not read it.
Posted by Becks | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:27 PM
then what?
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:29 PM
then what?
Don't make me say it. You say it.
Posted by Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:30 PM
I use fewer hyperlinks in real life.
Also reactionary s/b timid.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:31 PM
the indian princess outfit?
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 07- 9-06 10:31 PM