Making a buck cleaning Lester's spittle trays on Sequels' 22-year old supermodel abs

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
This ad is a joke (or pathetic). But it does raise a pet peeve I have. Ever sit in an interview and have some dickhead tell you he needs you to do "Far more than an associate at your level would be expected to do"? I've always wanted to snap back "Then why don't you hire a more experienced associate? If you were selling cars and I came in and said 'I want a shiny new Benz at a used Volvo price,' you'd think I was a fool, right? So why make the equivalent pitch here?"

Tom gave up the brush with reluctance in his face, but alacrity in his heart. And while the late steamer Big Missouri worked and sweated in the sun, the retired artist sat on a barrel in the shade close by, dangled his legs, munched his apple, and planned the slaughter of more innocents. There was no lack of material; boys happened along every little while; they came to jeer, but remained to whitewash. By the time Ben was fagged out, Tom had traded the next chance to Billy Fisher for a kite, in good repair; and when he played out, Johnny Miller bought in for a dead rat and a string to swing it with--and so on, and so on, hour after hour. And when the middle of the afternoon came, from being a poor poverty-stricken boy in the morning, Tom was literally rolling in wealth. He had besides the things before mentioned, twelve marbles, part of a jews-harp, a piece of blue bottle-glass to look through, a spool cannon, a key that wouldn't unlock anything, a fragment of chalk, a glass stopper of a decanter, a tin soldier, a couple of tadpoles, six fire-crackers, a kitten with only one eye, a brass doorknob, a dog-collar--but no dog--the handle of a knife, four pieces of orange-peel, and a dilapidated old window sash.

He had had a nice, good, idle time all the while--plenty of company--and the fence had three coats of whitewash on it! If he hadn't run out of whitewash he would have bankrupted every boy in the village.

Tom said to himself that it was not such a hollow world, after all. He had discovered a great law of human action, without knowing it--namely, that in order to make a man or a boy covet a thing, it is only necessary to make the thing difficult to attain. If he had been a great and wise philosopher, like the writer of this book, he would now have comprehended that Work consists of whatever a body is OBLIGED to do, and that Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do. And this would help him to understand why constructing artificial flowers or performing on a tread-mill is work, while rolling ten-pins or climbing Mont Blanc is only amusement. There are wealthy gentlemen in England who drive four-horse passenger-coaches twenty or thirty miles on a daily line, in the summer, because the privilege costs them considerable money; but if they were offered wages for the service, that would turn it into work and then they would resign.


ETA: Law review works under a similar principle.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan

Nicely played, though it is a bit jarring to read it on the same page with a title describing spittle trays.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Gattigap
Nicely played, though it is a bit jarring to read it on the same page with a title describing spittle trays.

Parlance of another time.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Tom gave up the brush with reluctance in his face, but alacrity in his heart. And while the late steamer Big Missouri worked and sweated in the sun, the retired artist sat on a barrel in the shade close by, dangled his legs, munched his apple, and planned the slaughter of more innocents. There was no lack of material; boys happened along every little while; they came to jeer, but remained to whitewash. By the time Ben was fagged out, Tom had traded the next chance to Billy Fisher for a kite, in good repair; and when he played out, Johnny Miller bought in for a dead rat and a string to swing it with--and so on, and so on, hour after hour. And when the middle of the afternoon came, from being a poor poverty-stricken boy in the morning, Tom was literally rolling in wealth. He had besides the things before mentioned, twelve marbles, part of a jews-harp, a piece of blue bottle-glass to look through, a spool cannon, a key that wouldn't unlock anything, a fragment of chalk, a glass stopper of a decanter, a tin soldier, a couple of tadpoles, six fire-crackers, a kitten with only one eye, a brass doorknob, a dog-collar--but no dog--the handle of a knife, four pieces of orange-peel, and a dilapidated old window sash.

He had had a nice, good, idle time all the while--plenty of company--and the fence had three coats of whitewash on it! If he hadn't run out of whitewash he would have bankrupted every boy in the village.

Tom said to himself that it was not such a hollow world, after all. He had discovered a great law of human action, without knowing it--namely, that in order to make a man or a boy covet a thing, it is only necessary to make the thing difficult to attain. If he had been a great and wise philosopher, like the writer of this book, he would now have comprehended that Work consists of whatever a body is OBLIGED to do, and that Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do. And this would help him to understand why constructing artificial flowers or performing on a tread-mill is work, while rolling ten-pins or climbing Mont Blanc is only amusement. There are wealthy gentlemen in England who drive four-horse passenger-coaches twenty or thirty miles on a daily line, in the summer, because the privilege costs them considerable money; but if they were offered wages for the service, that would turn it into work and then they would resign.


ETA: Law review works under a similar principle.

I finally get Geddy Lee out of my head, and somehow, someway, he finds his way back in...

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Parlance of another time.

I've often thought there was more behind the frequent historical pushes to ban his books from school libraries than his mere use of a racial slur. Does nothing for the "treadmill" to consider the truth raised in those three paragraphs.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Mr. Man
Just because it is tuned down 3 steps in drop D and played with PRS singlecut through an Uberschall with a 4x12 vintage cab doesn't mean it's not a love song.

That is so hot.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by ABBAKiss
Who will be in Chicago this weekend?

I will.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I've often thought there was more behind the frequent historical pushes to ban his books from school libraries than his mere use of a racial slur. Does nothing for the "treadmill" to consider the truth raised in those three paragraphs.

It makes me sad that Mark Twain killed the board.

In an effort to make up for it, a scenario:

Couple in social group breaks up in mid-March. He (Guy A) is one of the primary centers of the group (has the big parties, knows everyone, organizes events). She's a pretty amazing woman. Gorgeous, smart, has a pretty successful business. Due to overlapping friends, major efforts have been made to keep hostilities to a minimum. He encourages everyone to stay friends with her and vice versa. I love them independently of each other and think it was probably a good idea for them to break up given their personality quirks (i.e. he flirts with everything that walks, and she has inexplicable insecurities).

Two weeks ago a guy (Guy B) in the group asks her out. She says yes and they've been dating since then. I saw them together at a party on Friday, though I thought they were there as friends, because frankly, I think he's way out of her league. Saturday, Guy B tells Guy A that he's dating ex. Doesn't exactly go over well.

Guy B was brought into the group by the Guy A. Invited to a lot of parties, introduced to a lot of people, etc. Guy A has gone through a lot of shit in the last six months, including the death of a parent, another close family death, and breakup of longstanding relationship. Guy B knew all about this, and in fact got drunk with Guy A the night of a particularly painful funeral.

The rumor mills have been flying, and Guy B has declined a lot of lot of party invitations in the last two days (including my birthday party).

Questions:

1.) Should Guy B have made a move on Guy A's ex? Should he have waited longer?

2.) Should Guy B have told Guy A about the move on his ex earlier? (Note: Guy A was in Mexico the first week that they were dating.)

3.) Should Guy B expect to be cut out of Guy A's life (and possibly social circle) because of moving in on Guy A's ex?

4.) Should Guy B have apologized to Guy A about his actions?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Questions:

1.) Should Guy B have made a move on Guy A's ex? Should he have waited longer?

2.) Should Guy B have told Guy A about the move on his ex earlier? (Note: Guy A was in Mexico the first week that they were dating.)

3.) Should Guy B expect to be cut out of Guy A's life (and possibly social circle) because of moving in on Guy A's ex?

4.) Should Guy B have apologized to Guy A about his actions?

Guy A needs to get over it. If he didn't want other people to date her, he shouldn't have broken up. Guy B has nothing to apologize for. The same rules apply as for discarded property.

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Questions:

1.) Should Guy B have made a move on Guy A's ex? Should he have waited longer?

2.) Should Guy B have told Guy A about the move on his ex earlier? (Note: Guy A was in Mexico the first week that they were dating.)

3.) Should Guy B expect to be cut out of Guy A's life (and possibly social circle) because of moving in on Guy A's ex?

4.) Should Guy B have apologized to Guy A about his actions?

1.) Yes. No. This answer assumes the moves were made and welcomed because of genuine attraction and not any desire to get back at Guy A in some way. People don't own their exes after a breakup and neither ex should be restricted as to whom they can date, with an exception for anyone in the ex's immediate family.

2.) Earlier? Sheesh! It's been two weeks. It's not like she's pregnant already.

3.) Maybe he should expect it, but it wouldn't be right.

4.) What's to apologize for? See 1. This is not to say he shouldn't be sensitive to Guy A's troubles. The timing is unfortunate, but nobody's obligated to honor some emotional moratorium.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
It makes me sad that Mark Twain killed the board.

In an effort to make up for it, a scenario:

Couple in social group breaks up in mid-March. He (Guy A) is one of the primary centers of the group (has the big parties, knows everyone, organizes events). She's a pretty amazing woman. Gorgeous, smart, has a pretty successful business. Due to overlapping friends, major efforts have been made to keep hostilities to a minimum. He encourages everyone to stay friends with her and vice versa. I love them independently of each other and think it was probably a good idea for them to break up given their personality quirks (i.e. he flirts with everything that walks, and she has inexplicable insecurities).

Two weeks ago a guy (Guy B) in the group asks her out. She says yes and they've been dating since then. I saw them together at a party on Friday, though I thought they were there as friends, because frankly, I think he's way out of her league. Saturday, Guy B tells Guy A that he's dating ex. Doesn't exactly go over well.

Guy B was brought into the group by the Guy A. Invited to a lot of parties, introduced to a lot of people, etc. Guy A has gone through a lot of shit in the last six months, including the death of a parent, another close family death, and breakup of longstanding relationship. Guy B knew all about this, and in fact got drunk with Guy A the night of a particularly painful funeral.

The rumor mills have been flying, and Guy B has declined a lot of lot of party invitations in the last two days (including my birthday party).

Questions:

1.) Should Guy B have made a move on Guy A's ex? Should he have waited longer?

2.) Should Guy B have told Guy A about the move on his ex earlier? (Note: Guy A was in Mexico the first week that they were dating.)

3.) Should Guy B expect to be cut out of Guy A's life (and possibly social circle) because of moving in on Guy A's ex?

4.) Should Guy B have apologized to Guy A about his actions?

Guy B should send Guy A a fifth of his favorite booze and a note saying: "I know you're in pain but you're also an idiot. May you drink and forget."

Guy A should drink and forget. Women B and C in Group should comfort Guy A to help him forget.

Of course, if Guy A didn't put down his paintbrush, none of this would have ever happened.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Questions:

1.) Should Guy B have made a move on Guy A's ex? Should he have waited longer?

2.) Should Guy B have told Guy A about the move on his ex earlier? (Note: Guy A was in Mexico the first week that they were dating.)

3.) Should Guy B expect to be cut out of Guy A's life (and possibly social circle) because of moving in on Guy A's ex?

4.) Should Guy B have apologized to Guy A about his actions?

1.) How long were they dating? Probably should have waited more than 2 months to date publicly.

2.) If they've only been dating 2 weeks, I'm not clear how much earlier B could have told A. This seems to me like a non-issue.

3.) Of course there is always a risk of that if dating from the same pool. One would think that friends would not be judgmental enough to kick B to the curb, but can't blame A for cutting him out if it really bothers A that much. Shouldn't expect invites to A's parties.

4.) Sure. Or at least apologized for A's hurt feelings.

Seems to me that the main problem is lack of time for break-up wounds to mend. Asking permission to date might be nice, but if you're going to do it anyway, regardless of permission or not, is just a formality, right? Shouldn't be sprung on A by showing up at an event together though. Either the woman or B should have given A a heads up.

I bet it all blows over, but B has to be prepared for worst case scenerio just in case.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
It makes me sad that Mark Twain killed the board.

In an effort to make up for it, a scenario:

Couple in social group breaks up in mid-March. He (Guy A) is one of the primary centers of the group (has the big parties, knows everyone, organizes events). She's a pretty amazing woman. Gorgeous, smart, has a pretty successful business. Due to overlapping friends, major efforts have been made to keep hostilities to a minimum. He encourages everyone to stay friends with her and vice versa. I love them independently of each other and think it was probably a good idea for them to break up given their personality quirks (i.e. he flirts with everything that walks, and she has inexplicable insecurities).

Two weeks ago a guy (Guy B) in the group asks her out. She says yes and they've been dating since then. I saw them together at a party on Friday, though I thought they were there as friends, because frankly, I think he's way out of her league. Saturday, Guy B tells Guy A that he's dating ex. Doesn't exactly go over well.

Guy B was brought into the group by the Guy A. Invited to a lot of parties, introduced to a lot of people, etc. Guy A has gone through a lot of shit in the last six months, including the death of a parent, another close family death, and breakup of longstanding relationship. Guy B knew all about this, and in fact got drunk with Guy A the night of a particularly painful funeral.

The rumor mills have been flying, and Guy B has declined a lot of lot of party invitations in the last two days (including my birthday party).

Questions:

1.) Should Guy B have made a move on Guy A's ex? Should he have waited longer?

2.) Should Guy B have told Guy A about the move on his ex earlier? (Note: Guy A was in Mexico the first week that they were dating.)

3.) Should Guy B expect to be cut out of Guy A's life (and possibly social circle) because of moving in on Guy A's ex?

4.) Should Guy B have apologized to Guy A about his actions?

I don't have answers to your questions, because I don't care. Maybe if you had called them by their names, or made up names for them, I would have gotten more engaged. But all this Guy A, Guy B stuff makes them seem almost like stick figures to me. Who cares if or whom they fuck?

I am curious about Guy B, though. He has "declined a lot of lot of party invitations in the last two days"? What the fuck? I have received absolutely zero party invitations in the last two days. What's up with this dude? Does he have really good blow or something?

I'll be logging in under the FBA in a bit to wish you a happy birthday, you certain special somebody!

[Gattigap]

A signpost in the inevitable decline of any major personality includes the tell-all publications from those close to the fading star. Usually, these "tell-alls" tell us little of substance, and are reviewed, if at all, for their amusing minutae.

So it is with PLF. Today's "Sleeping with the President" has been reduced to a mere blog entry, but such are the sad times we live in. At least the language is colorful. PLF, we shall miss you.

(Yes, I know it doesn't mention PLF by name, but bitch, please. Whose razor do you think it is?)

[robustpuppy]

Anytime you feel sad about PLF's so-called decline, just go to the most stupid blog ever , and I promise, you will feel better.