I guess a thread like this is what you get for acting out of character.
Of course, number of comments does not always equal quality. For example, that Chaucerian pick-up lines post was great. And this one's great too, I guess there's just not much to say.
On the other hand, Tia's Colbert post was clearly superior to Ben's, as the respective numbers of comments bear witness.
Bless you. I was about to put up a comment saying "You all suck" if no one said anything soon.
A lack of comments does not necessaril imply a lack of interest. I can bloviate with the best of them, but sometimes I like to keep quiet when I feel that I have nothing useful to add to a discussion. That's why I wasn't a Gov. Jock.
We were this close to an historic all-M/lls comments thread.
Well, here's an historic comment thread that's about 98.6% M/lls.
And just for the record, in case anyone is holding back from contributing, I will remain happy with that thread as long as my contribution remains at about the 80 to 85% level.
Well, we do all suck, but not usually because we have nothing to say.
I'm surprised no one's blogged this article? Just a paragraph in I thought it's classic unfogged material.
An interesting article David posts. Perhaps our resident Weiner can explain to me the usage of "if" at the beginning of paragraph 5, which seems kind of biscuity but not exactly, and which has always bugged me since I was a kid.
And, speaking of Weiner, he actually blogged that article earlier this week.
Well, there you go. There been less of those social-mores-w-a-political-angle discussions lately.
I know, those were my favorite posts to comment on, and I just don't seem to come up with them. Becks comes up with some, but not like ogged.
Yeah, I actually started to blog that article but things have been so crazy this week (we have a software release on Friday) that I couldn't arrange my thoughts into anything coherent.
I wonder if I don't think about charity that much because I already work with the poor. Once I've done my bit and lock the office door, it's all champagne and caviar and snorting coke at the club. Well no. But feels like it should be.
Yeah, and that's why I do think about it -- because my job is so clearly the reverse of giving anything back. One of the things I really like about the internet is the potential for impulse charity. I don't give nearly enough by my own standards, but I'm much more likely to give when something appealing catches my eye: this, Audrey's Send A Cow thing, whatever.
I mostly missed a busy comment day, it looks like.
Pretty much the whole point of my post was so one of y'all would pick it up and we might have an interesting discussion here. If no one can arrange thoughts about it coherently enough to start discussion, feel free to blockquote my first two paragraphs or so.
As for the "if": I think it's more perspicuous as: "If friendships are more easily made than kept, money can add another obstacle to maintaining them." And I think what this is is a pretty straightforward "If A then B" with a very strong suggestion that A is true, and thus so is B. That's just a quickie analysis; it's like the biscuit conditional in that B is really asserted in its own right, but unlike it in that there's really supposed to be a connection between A and B.