Re: And you were there, and you, and Ogged was still around.

1

I was just thinking about this thread! It was SEK, not Brock, right?

I doubt I'll ever have a more thrilling internet experience than I did watching it unfold that day.


Posted by: toops | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:27 AM
horizontal rule
2

Oh yes! I think you're right.

Did you use to go by a different handle? I didn't realize you'd been around that long.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:29 AM
horizontal rule
3

Definitely SEK. Was back in '07 maybe?


Posted by: Alvis | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:34 AM
horizontal rule
4

I had similar uncertainty over whether Ogged Himself posted some comments earlier this year. I couldn't find them when I checked a couple of days later.


Posted by: Abelard | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:35 AM
horizontal rule
5

No, I don't think I've ever commented under another name. I just don't pipe up very often because I'm shy like that.


Posted by: toops | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:35 AM
horizontal rule
6

Sorry, 5 to 2.


Posted by: toops | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:36 AM
horizontal rule
7

So do you all remember what went down?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:37 AM
horizontal rule
8

7: yes.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:37 AM
horizontal rule
9

Was it a collective dream?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:38 AM
horizontal rule
10

9: no.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:38 AM
horizontal rule
11

If it was me, I'm not sure which thread you're thinking of. Although it's nice to know I'm in your dreams.

I think you're thinking of the infamous SEK thread (December 2007, I believe).


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:39 AM
horizontal rule
12

I might even have the thread saved on my computer at home.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:39 AM
horizontal rule
13

How frustrating if everyone managed not to tell me! Except I bet you're not that coordinatedly disciplined, mineshaft.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:39 AM
horizontal rule
14

11: No, it was in the springtime, I think.


Posted by: Alvis | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:40 AM
horizontal rule
15

Off to teach.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:41 AM
horizontal rule
16

13: I imagine the statute of limitations on not sharing what went down publicly has not expired.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:41 AM
horizontal rule
17

I agree with toops that it was pretty much the most thrilling internet experience ever.

I sort of remember how it went but since it was removed once and I don't know SEK, it feels sort of weird to recount it here.


Posted by: piminnowcheez | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:41 AM
horizontal rule
18

14: November.


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:42 AM
horizontal rule
19

14: oddly, I remember it being in the springtime, too. But I never saw the thread.


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:45 AM
horizontal rule
20

I once had a dream in which Unfogged comments were falling like blocks in Tetris (down the mineshaft, as it were), and I had to dodge them and avoid getting buried.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:46 AM
horizontal rule
21

I think I missed this thread entirely. Hearing it characterized as the most thrilling internet experience EVER! is frustrating. More exciting than multi-person shooter games? How is that possible?


Posted by: PGD | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:46 AM
horizontal rule
22

More exciting than multi-person shooter games?

A close analogue to that, one might say.


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:48 AM
horizontal rule
23

It was definitely right around April 1, because I remember suggesting that it could be an April Fools prank.


Posted by: peep | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:51 AM
horizontal rule
24

Yes, early April 2007.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:52 AM
horizontal rule
25

23/24: That makes more sense than Nov./Dec., and better matches my memory.


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:54 AM
horizontal rule
26

If you think you actually read it and are just having trouble remembering, I offer the memory prompt "Photobucket." If someone thinks that in itself is too sensitive, delete away.


Posted by: redfoxtailshrub | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:54 AM
horizontal rule
27

I agree with 16. Absent comprehensive anonymization and/or explicit permission of the folks revealing their innermost thoughts, leave it be.

This thread is a test of the principles discussed a few days ago about the internet, privacy and the rest. Perhaps someone should teach folks a lesson by just posting the whole thing and then getting banned for it.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 7:59 AM
horizontal rule
28

Yeah, it was awesome. It should totally be left alone barring SEK popping in and giving the go-ahead. Way too long a half-life.


Posted by: Chopper | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:09 AM
horizontal rule
29

Yes, that was when I stopped reading the thread after maybe post 500 and missed the real blow-up.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:23 AM
horizontal rule
30

I missed the thread, but I went to my first unfogged meetup shortly afterward and had it recounted to me by mrh.


Posted by: Blume | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:26 AM
horizontal rule
31

That was a heroic thread. I updated people in my office on it as it happened.

There was live, real-time Mineshaft advice soliciting. Legal concerns. Possibly a car chase.


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:31 AM
horizontal rule
32

So, with 31, does the thread have to be closed and deleted.

I concur, by the way, that it was pretty good live blogging.


Posted by: CharleyCarp | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:44 AM
horizontal rule
33

I doubt I'll ever have more severe Internet blue balls than I do today.


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:48 AM
horizontal rule
34

This is a very weird and somewhat unfortunate concept for a thread. It was deleted for a very good reason! We shouldn't talk about it! It's pretty damn rude (to a commenter who basically doesn't show up here anymore) to even be talking about it now!

It strikes me as unlikely even as I write this that I should be discovering my inner prude in such a fashion, but you know, tacky.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:54 AM
horizontal rule
35

Ok, Jammies remembered, so I could have just asked him, and then one or two of you guys e-mailed me. So my curiousity is sated.

But I don't it's actually too sensitive to write about now, right? I mean, the married couple has long suffered whatever fallout happened, and "probably" would never stumble across this thread anyway, and if need be we could edit out the commenter's name in this thread.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:58 AM
horizontal rule
36

Or just call him "Brock".


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:58 AM
horizontal rule
37

People could get whacked.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 8:59 AM
horizontal rule
38

A: Remember that time?
B: Which time?
A: You know: that time.
B: Oh, you mean that time.
A: Yeah.
B: Yeah. That was awesome.
A: Totally.
B: Good times.
Me: Will you two shut the fuck up!? I was there and I don't even remember it! Just stop!
Sifu: He's right. That time was way too awesomely great to talk about now.
Me: Gah!


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:00 AM
horizontal rule
39

BTW, I assume this isn't about the time that the couple was fucking in his office. I mean, everyone knows about that. It was, like, in the HuffPo.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:02 AM
horizontal rule
40

Aren't you married to AB?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:02 AM
horizontal rule
41

I mean, is she talking to herself? Just ask her.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:04 AM
horizontal rule
42

It was the time the famous musician was caught dipping his penis into the yogurt.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:05 AM
horizontal rule
43

35: I believe the anticipated desired statute of limitations, as it were, was discussed in the thread, and was of pretty long duration. Like, years.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:06 AM
horizontal rule
44

Hasn't it been years?


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:07 AM
horizontal rule
45

Okay, look I'll fix this.

Dear Mineshaft,

I'm about to go knock over a bank and liveblog it. I was thinking of (a) wearing an Obama-Joker mask and (b) taping the yogurt to my penis so I wouldn't have to leave it behind. Any thoughts?

Yours,
Sifu


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:08 AM
horizontal rule
46

Too few years.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:08 AM
horizontal rule
47

I think you all are paranoid.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:09 AM
horizontal rule
48

You could ask the relevant former commenter pretty easily.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:10 AM
horizontal rule
49

47: it strikes me as not properly our decision to make.


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:11 AM
horizontal rule
50

If you're using Greek yogurt, it should hitch a ride on your penis without too much mechanical intervention. Good luck robbing that bank!


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:11 AM
horizontal rule
51

Are you wearing pants, Sifu? That would complicate things.


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:12 AM
horizontal rule
52

If it was me, I'm not sure which thread you're thinking of. Although it's nice to know I'm in your dreams.

It might have been the one where you were talking about how your massive unexplained weight loss and other health problems were no big deal, and people were trying to convince you that it was.


Posted by: Cryptic ned | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:13 AM
horizontal rule
53

9: Isn't everything?

I have a vague, tantalizing sense that I was around for whatever you all are talking about, but no idea of any of the details. Damn.


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:13 AM
horizontal rule
54

50: yes, but then you don't get the yogurt running down your leg, and that's half the fun.

If I taped magnets to the yogurt container, I could maybe then shove some other magnets into my urethra, but would they hold it well enough?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:13 AM
horizontal rule
55

51: I'm wearing tight quarters.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:14 AM
horizontal rule
56

All right, I sent him an e-mail.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:16 AM
horizontal rule
57

56: If he responds with an "all-clear", what then? Will you undelete the old thread and post a link here, or do we have to recreate the entire thread from memory?


Posted by: Brock Landers | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:18 AM
horizontal rule
58

57: all the high school drama people will re├źnact it.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:18 AM
horizontal rule
59

Ooh, I remember that thread. I was transfixed by the post and the first hundred or so comments ... then I had to go somewhere and the next time I looked it had been deleted. I think mike d. kindly emailed me the thread so I could see what happened. IIRC SEK later made a brief tangential reference to subsequent events, maybe on his own blog. Essentially trying to do the right thing got him no thanks from anyone.


Posted by: emir | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:19 AM
horizontal rule
60

The reason given at the time for removing the thread is that it's the sort of thing that a newspaper might have been interested in (especially with the internet angle). I don't think it's enough time that an enterprising reporter might not still be interested.


Posted by: Unfoggetarian: "Pause endlessly, then go in" (9) | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:20 AM
horizontal rule
61

57: Well, I'd start by posting a bunch of photos.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:22 AM
horizontal rule
62

I once knocked over a convenience store will kefir tied to my scrotum. Good times. So I suggest string, Sifu.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:23 AM
horizontal rule
63

62: will wouldn't let you tie him on there without the kefir?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:24 AM
horizontal rule
64

Will is totally into probiotics.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:25 AM
horizontal rule
65

And proboscides.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:27 AM
horizontal rule
66

iz antipos the snglar of antipodes


Posted by: Standpipe Bridgeplate | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:30 AM
horizontal rule
67

wat


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:35 AM
horizontal rule
68

"any tubular organ for sucking, food-gathering, sensing, etc."

Heh.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:36 AM
horizontal rule
69

Two out of three ain't bad.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:38 AM
horizontal rule
70

I wish mine could sense.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:40 AM
horizontal rule
71

Quit feeding it.


Posted by: Bave Dee | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:42 AM
horizontal rule
72

Perhaps the relevant commenter's name could be redacted, and we could continue to discuss the deliciously scandalous matter ever so obliquely without offending Sifu's delicate sense of internetical decorum.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:48 AM
horizontal rule
73

I'm suffering from a conflict of ethical sense and prurient interest here. Ethics is in the lead for now, but my cock is remarkably persistent.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:50 AM
horizontal rule
74

but my cock is remarkably persistent

Funnily enough, there was one like that in the story.


Posted by: Jesus McQueen | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:54 AM
horizontal rule
75

73: or hungry.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:55 AM
horizontal rule
76

72: When I hear back from the relevant person, I'll be totally game to do so if they give it the go ahead.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:55 AM
horizontal rule
77

76: If he says "no", we all need to start pressuring him to not be such a wuss and making fun of him and the like.


Posted by: M/tch m/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:56 AM
horizontal rule
78

I changed up my pseud up in 77 so, um, Essy Kay won't know who instigated the bullying campaign, should it occur.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 9:57 AM
horizontal rule
79

78: slick.


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:09 AM
horizontal rule
80

Not to be a killjoy here, but the major rationale for deleting it on the first go-round was the fact that there were rather a lot of minor children indirectly involved. No matter what titanic stupidity their parents got up to, they really don't deserve to have a bunch of strangers on the internet raking it over, and leaving it sitting in archives for some malicious person to find and run with in a year or three years for a newspaper article.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:14 AM
horizontal rule
81

Actually, I'm should have said I'm happy to be a killjoy. I don't think this should be talked about, period.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:15 AM
horizontal rule
82

||

Hey, there's a new Living Colour album out. Anyone know anything about it?

|>


Posted by: JRoth | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:20 AM
horizontal rule
83

I'm glad when you kill my joy, Witt. I don't have the willpower to do it myself.


Posted by: Cryptic Ned | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:21 AM
horizontal rule
84

81 to 82.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:29 AM
horizontal rule
85

I participated in the beginnings of the thread, so before this one gets deleted (and it sounds like it should be), could someone email me the thread or at least an acount of what went down?


Posted by: David Weman | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:32 AM
horizontal rule
86

85: Why in the world should this thread here be deleted? People have said that minors were involved and that SEK was involved, and that's it.

This is starting to sound like some Lovecraftian horror. The thread that must not be named! To read in its entirety would drive one mad! They daren't even quote it, or talk about quoting it, or talk about talking about...


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:35 AM
horizontal rule
87

82: WaPo review, Rolling Stone review, BlogCritics review.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:37 AM
horizontal rule
88

87: See, it's already in major publications. I think we can blog about the scandal here with impunity.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:44 AM
horizontal rule
89

Cyrus--isn't it enough that the majority of people who remember the details of the thread in question agree it shouldn't be discussed barring Essy Kay's approval? Seriously, there were real-life negative consequences if it got out.

For the non-remembering/unpresent, it was just people showing their tawdry, unfortunate selves. What made it spectacular was the realtime recounting of the action.


Posted by: Chopper | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:45 AM
horizontal rule
90

I'm not really sure Living Colour's music aged all that well, and I say that as someone who was a big fan first time round. I listened again recently and there were two or three really good songs, and the rest .. meh.


Posted by: nattarGcM ttaM | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:45 AM
horizontal rule
91

90: I was meh about Living Colour before it was cool.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:46 AM
horizontal rule
92

Speaking of albums, I was amused by this tongue-in-cheek review of the Beatles.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:48 AM
horizontal rule
93

All joking aside, I think 89 gets it right.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:49 AM
horizontal rule
94

89
Cyrus--isn't it enough that the majority of people who remember the details of the thread in question agree it shouldn't be discussed barring Essy Kay's approval?

I never said otherwise. The "Lovecraftian" bit was just an expression of mirth. The question about what, if anything, in this thread could possibly require deletion still stands. (Maybe I'm just forgetting about it, and I have a meeting now so I can't reread this thread to answer my own question.)


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:50 AM
horizontal rule
95

I have no idea what the fuck ya'll are on about, since that was one the (fairly brief) time periods when I was paying attention. I'm sure it was very exciting if you like that sort of thing. I've seen so many intertubular dramatics that I can't bring myself to care, particularly since I'm apparently supposed to not recall what I didn't experience, which works out fairly well.

max
['What was this thread about again?']


Posted by: max | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:52 AM
horizontal rule
96

Shorter max: You kids oughta have seen Usenet back in the day.


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:56 AM
horizontal rule
97

96: You're just flirting with max on account of his fedora.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
98

Haven't we had enough drama recently?


Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 10:58 AM
horizontal rule
99

98: Indeed. That "The Dressing Room As It Was" thread is, AOTW, already up to 143 comments!


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:00 AM
horizontal rule
100

You're just flirting with max on account of his fedora.

Thank God someone noticed. Too bad now lunch is ending and I'm back to work....


Posted by: Witt | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:01 AM
horizontal rule
101

87 to the thread under discussion.


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:02 AM
horizontal rule
102

I have received word that both gerbils made a full recovery.


Posted by: Minivet | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:05 AM
horizontal rule
103

88 to 101.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:06 AM
horizontal rule
104

101 pwned a very long time ago.


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:07 AM
horizontal rule
105

104 pwned a very short time ago.


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:07 AM
horizontal rule
106

Ah yes, that thread. As long as we're reminiscing (this is like "Where were you when Kennedy was shot/the Challenger exploded?", right?), I'll share my story. You see, it was only a couple months after I had come across this place called Unfogged. I still wasn't quite hooked. I still was learning the personalities. I started to read the thread in question, and at the beginning it only seemed like an unfortunate-yet-hardly-shocking tale of life in the Internet age. Then I went to the airport and got on a plane. By the time I was able to get internet'd again, there was a post in my RSS reader along the lines of, "Whoa, we better delete that." So I never found out why it was such a big deal. And then I looked in my wallet and--whaddya know!--I found five dollars.


Posted by: Otto von Bisquick | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:08 AM
horizontal rule
107

85: Done. Also, what I remember from the follow-up;
The "victim" did not take the course of action we all assumed was inevitable but decided to go with the status quo.
There was apparently a background of competition in this type of thing between the "perpetrator" and other similarly-minded friends and they collected evidence of their, um, achievements.
The original poster was threatened and harassed for his actions by several people in that circle.


Posted by: emir | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:09 AM
horizontal rule
108

I would vote for letting sleeping dogs lie.


Posted by: James B. Shearer | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:10 AM
horizontal rule
109

Most dogs wake up when you shout "YOU LIE!" at them.

Dalmations not so much, but most dogs.


Posted by: M/tch M/lls | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:11 AM
horizontal rule
110

All joking aside, I think 93 gets it right.


Posted by: togolosh | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:20 AM
horizontal rule
111

Why do we need to put joking aside?


Posted by: Otto von Bisquick | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:20 AM
horizontal rule
112

I would love for someone to email me the thread. I will hold it close.


Posted by: k-sky | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:21 AM
horizontal rule
113

The "victim" did not take the course of action we all assumed was inevitable but decided to go with the status quo.

There was apparently a background of competition in this type of thing between the "perpetrator" and other similarly-minded friends and they collected evidence of their, um, achievements.

People are so weird. Sometimes I wonder if they are worth the effort.


Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:23 AM
horizontal rule
114

108:

I agree with Shearer. Let's move forward, not focused on the past. (geez, that sounds a little like, "we shouldnt investigate torture"....)


Posted by: Will | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:25 AM
horizontal rule
115

Actually, I'm should have said I'm happy to be a killjoy. I don't think this should be talked about, period.

Yes please. I was there for part of the thread, I don't think I saw the whole thing, but based on what I remember this discussion makes me uncomfortable.

There's simply no good reason to dig it up, other than as tawdry entertainment, and that seems wrong.


Posted by: NickS | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:29 AM
horizontal rule
116

Sheesh. Sorry all for posting this. I don't think any harm has been done by the existence of the thread. If you're curious, e-mail me, and as long as I don't think you're an intrepid reporter, I'll share the skeleton of the story.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:30 AM
horizontal rule
117

Is this not covered by the established rule regarding the sanctity of off-blog communications? Given that the communication was taken off the blog.

Also, it is my understanding that SEK is not a fictional character and my firm conviction that his expressed feelings -- which have not been withdrawn -- ought to be respected.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:32 AM
horizontal rule
118

There's simply no good reason to dig it up, other than as tawdry entertainment, and that seems wrong.

Oh for crying out loud. Tawdry entertainment is like half my life.


Posted by: heebie-geebie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:32 AM
horizontal rule
119

The other half is breastfeeding.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:33 AM
horizontal rule
120

People have said that minors were involved and that SEK was involved, and that's it.

Also some goats, three peaches and a strong opinion but hey, what's done is done.

96 cracked me up.

I do recall the thread and will simply note the thrill I got when apo and I were standing outside a for-reals formal event, tuxedos and everything, smoking cigarettes while he told me about it.


Posted by: Robust McManlyPants | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:35 AM
horizontal rule
121

I am never closing this tab again.


Posted by: Mo MacArbie | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:38 AM
horizontal rule
122

I'm only the 40s of this thread, so maybe someone has said what I'm about to say already, but please do stop talking about this. In fact, I'd urge you to delete this thread. Having recently (well, a few months back) talked to the commenter in question about this story, I can tell you that he remains very anxious about the whole thing. So, absent direct permission from him to talk about these events, why do it?

Again, perhaps someone has already said all this, or perhaps someone has e-mailed the commenter in question (with a question, no less), in which case, sorry for being such a scold. But given the known knowns, I really don't think this discussion makes much sense.


Posted by: ari | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:41 AM
horizontal rule
123

Having now arrived at the end of the thread, I'd second 89. And I'd note that 92 suggests that Witt and I are like-minded. Who knew?


Posted by: ari | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:46 AM
horizontal rule
124

118, 119: you know, you can combine the two!


Posted by: rob helpy-chalk | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:49 AM
horizontal rule
125

Every time you kill a joy, a sleeping dog lies.

(Which is to say I agree with Witt et al.)


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:49 AM
horizontal rule
126

How come Witt gets all the credit when I was first to suggest we shouldn't talk about it? It's the fedora thing, isn't it?


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:52 AM
horizontal rule
127

126: Because it's such a pain to scroll on this phone.


Posted by: eb | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:55 AM
horizontal rule
128

Stupid Apple.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:56 AM
horizontal rule
129

Wasn't 92 about Klosterman's Beatles review? Yes, yes it was. It was in that regard that Witt and I are like-minded. You needn't worry, jetpack: I took approving note of your prudishness.


Posted by: ari | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 11:59 AM
horizontal rule
130

Well. I'm kind of late to the party here, but as someone else who remembers the thread (and even archived it on his own computer) I'm going to agree with ari, 89, and assorted other commenters that it should NOT be repeated, and that probably even this post should be deleted.


Posted by: Tom Scudder | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 12:18 PM
horizontal rule
131

I love that there's Unfogged samizdat threads being emailed around the globe. Anybody who wants to forward me a copy at the email address ascertainable from my signature can be assured of their anonymity.


Posted by: Yawnoc | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 12:25 PM
horizontal rule
132

126: Because courteous discretion is so uncharacteristic for you, they assumed it was some kind of double-backflip sarcasm?


Posted by: Cyrus | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 12:29 PM
horizontal rule
133

133: so I wondered.

We all have our pet discretions, though.


Posted by: Sifu Tweety | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 12:30 PM
horizontal rule
134

118

Oh for crying out loud. Tawdry entertainment is like half my life

Then this is the blog for you.


Posted by: James B. Shearer | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 12:36 PM
horizontal rule
135

I feel as though a deal can be worked out: I e-mail the relevant thread to other commenters in exchange for them explaining to me the enormous number of Unfogged in-jokes that I don't get.

Actually, here's the solution: We post the thread on Standpipe's other blog.

(And yes, in addition to all of the wise suggestions above that we drop this, I want to add this disclaimer: I feel bad about goofing on a matter that was so painful to the people - and commenter - involved.)


Posted by: politicalfootball | Link to this comment | 09-16-09 12:37 PM
horizontal rule