In other words you see yourself as a benign dictator.
I foresee great funeral games strenuous efforts being made to keep this thread from devolving into shocking-to-our-bien-pensant-sensibilities traditionalism about gender roles, and failing.
[Sighs, does as he's told.]
1: My people love me.
But seriously, you've misunderstood. If I could win any fight I wanted to, but chose to fold on a number of issues, that'd be benign dictatorship. That's not how it works. I'm just reliable at identifying the fights I can win before we have them. Doesn't raise my win percentage on issues, it just lowers the number of open conflicts because we don't have to go through the fight if I was going to lose anyway.
I scatter, I burn my enemies' tents. I take away their flocks and herds. The Turks pay me a golden treasure, yet I am poor! Because I am a river to my people!
3
... If I could win any fight I wanted to, but chose to fold on a number of issues, that'd be benign dictatorship. ...
Well you said you folded when winning would do too much damage.
That would be the distinction between fights I can win and fights I want to win.
The greatest achievement in marriage is to lose without fighting.
This is the most surprising post in the history of the blog. We are all shocked! Shocked!
You might have what it takes to be a pretty good poker player.
But of course from Buck's perspective, any time there's conflict at all, I win.
As you describe it I believe this is related to a common recall error that JRoth made in the other thread about Pittsburgh's snow history over the past 20 years or so.
Kenny Rogers style, anyway.
I am actually a fairly terrible poker player, not having played much outside of a weekly very-low-stakes game in law school with a bunch of other women who weren't card players at all. This builds bad habits.
11: I recall the lyrics to that song being rather depressing, albeit in a hackneyed, '70s, Robert Altman-ish way.
Depressing? It's as if you've never had the rhythmic sound of the rails lulling your troubled mind to sleep as you left the only home you'd ever known behind.
6
That would be the distinction between fights I can win and fights I want to win.
Not wanting to win when it would do too much damage sounds like a benign dictator to me.
Well, I aspire to benignity. Dictatorship, less so.
[T]he rhythmic sound of the rails lulling your troubled mind to sleep as you left the only home you'd ever known behind sounds like a benign dictator to me.
Baseball be berry berry benign to me.
11.2: This builds bad habits.
The fact that you recognize that is yet more evidence.
I'm not a big player, but "you never count your money when you're sitting at the table" is really terrible poker advice.
||
In unrelated news a few years ago I got a settlement voucher from a suit against Microsoft. What with one thing and another I didn't get around to mailing it in. Now I find out the final deadline was March 1. This has annoyed out of all proportion to the trivial amount involved. I blame the lawyers.
|>
I learned to play Blackjack last weekend. And by "learned" I mean this old guy told me the rule was: assume every card you can't see is worth ten and bet accordingly.
I won money, so obviously the old guy knew something.
21: it does strike me as a fundamental error along the lines of not taking account of the resources of various parties before launching a legal action.
Are there any actual gamblers who hang out here? I've not heard it come up seriously. I for one majorly suck at any gambling where my own behavior is a factor.
Whoa, that came out dark. All I meant was that we waste time.
Too late. We've already loaded the revolver.
I've played some poker and can hold my own in a friendly game but am mostly bad and will be beaten by reasonably decent players, which has meant that casinos are off limits post poker boom.
My old firm used to have a high stakes poker game at retreats. One year, a summer associate [aka second year law student] got $65,000 in debt at the table, and was offered a choice: don't come to the firm, and the debt is forgiven, or come and you have to pay it off. He very wisely chose not to go to the firm.
I won north of $2000 in Vegas last year, but only playing the stupid games. I still hate Vegas.
I'm a terrible poker player. As for gambling in general, I tried to play some kind of fancy computerized slot machine game in a casino once and couldn't even figure out how the buttons worked or what I was supposed to be doing. Basically I fed it $10 and it flashed a bunch of stuff on the screen and took my money.
My gambling high point was accidentally losing my cab fare to the airport playing video poker in Vegas.
I tried to play some kind of fancy computerized slot machine game in a casino once and couldn't even figure out how the buttons worked or what I was supposed to be doing. Basically I fed it $10 and it flashed a bunch of stuff on the screen and took my money.
Sounds like you did exactly what you were supposed to.
I thought I was supposed to feel more of a sense of agency.
No, if you want to feel agency you play poker. Slot machines are for the people who want to leave everything up to the machine.
I once almost took a job with a video-poker-machine company. They were hiring Spanish speakers ahead of a big push for the gambling market in Mexico. Lots of travel and crazy times. A friend had gone to work there, and I gather she's doing quite well. I often "What if...?" that decision, not that I seriously regret it.
From limited experience, my poker face is much better outside poker games than in. There is a small chance of my being able to re-test that soon, but the man whose daughter gave me a desultory invitation has apparently been failing to set up this Monthly Poker Night for years.
Unless you're skilled enough to play poker (or horse racing) successfully, which you probably aren't, craps is by far the most satisfying game. The odds are the best, there's a nice sense of communal bonhomie, and you can play it successfully while very drunk. It's still a scam that steals your money, though.
37: I guess "video-gambling-machine" is a better descriptor of their devices.
My only actual gambling has been on thoroughbred racing, and much of that was done illicitly while I worked behind a betting window in the summer. I believe my most successful bet matched almost exactly the amount I was fined for speeding - not egregiously - while driving back from Saratoga.
"Tuna cannery" is a worse descriptor.
You worked at Saratoga? I love Saratoga. I used to go with my grandfather (former CPUSA member) who had an elaborate betting system that he had awesomely sold to Texas Instruments in the 70s to create a never-actually-marketed "betting computer." I got to see the prototype.
We gamble on life here, Stormy.
We deal in lead, friend.
I had a relative in middle-management at a casino in Vegas for a few years.
I have never even bought a single lottery ticket. No desire to gamble at all. Not sure why. Also have never engaged in some dangerous or terminal recreational activities, like driving fast, climbing, open sea travel, flying, sex and marriage.
I have engaged in activities that could kill me on the spot:violent situations, needles and iffy powders, hitchhiking, dealing and transporting, kiting, skipping out on debts with bad people.
Maybe I don't like the calculating and hoping and counting on good fortune. Nihilism or nuthin.
A lottery win, 10 million dollars, would just be a pain. There are no safe places to store value. I would have to think, to pretend I cared.
Wouldn't mind ten thousand.
I can only interpret 46 as meaning that the S Crow recruited Stanley to work for his video poker company, which is blowing my fucking mind.
I did work at Saratoga, I enjoyed working there, and I'm still close enough to go up twice or thrice a summer.
I do figure I could more easily enjoy it since I was too junior to work high-money/high-stress windows, and saw mostly tourists, families, and others who were predisposed to view their day at the track as leisure, and treat all possible outcomes as part of the fun.
32, 34: I recall some gambling writer claiming that something like 80 (90?) percent of "virgin" money that enters a slot machine never leaves the casino (in the hands/accounts of anyone other than the proprietors).
There are no safe places to store value.
Don't you get it? The squirrels figured it out, bob. It's nuts!
46: Sanctity through obscurity sort of works as Halford demonstrates.
I'm okay with 48 being the blog lore.
49 - fun. I haven't been in about 15 years, but fantasize about taking a "me" weekend there every summer. Call it my personal Burning Man.
I also strongly associate the Saratoga flattrack with teaching myself to like black coffee, since I didn't want to go without coffee or to use the cream that stayed out on tables in sultry rooms.
I very rarely gamble and have basically no interest in it as a personal activity. I find it fascinating as a societal phenomenon, though.
It will actually be 14 years this summer since I first worked at Saratoga. I hadn't done that specific calculation before and I'm kinda amazed by the number.
54: I have a cow-orker who does yearly week-long pilgrimages with a group of friends to Saratoga (also one to the K Derby). It sounds boring as hell like quite a scene.
56 -- yes. Most of my most interesting cases have involved casinos, and I would do that legal work exclusively if I could.
[Danger: long comment ahead. I think about these things too much.]
This is mostly how I behave on a personal level. Professionally, when there is conflict, I can be a bit Machiavellian. My job (IT-everything person at a small tech company) involves a high degree of trust from literally everyone at the company, and I have to maintain a very friendly mask, so that people come to me with their problems, so I can fix them and the company keeps making money. I haven't been at this job long enough to have conflicts with anyone, but having done this role elsewhere, let's just say that if your IT person decides you are a problem, your manager is going to start asking you a lot of questions and you may find that routine things that used to transparently part of your day are suddenly really problematic. I know that sounds horribly passive-aggressive. But I have to keep everone's trust. Yes, I do know that person X uses the company phone to sext and that person Y looks at porn at work. I manage the bills and the logs. No, I don't care, and the only reason I would ever share that knowledge is if (a) X or Y's behavior endangers the company or (b) they attack me.
One important thing to keep in mind when in conflict (I suspect the lawyers among us are well aware of this) is that whether a participant in the conflict knows it or not, they have a scripted set of expectations for how it is going to go. So do you. Question your own expectations, know what you are willing to give up, and think hard about what their expectations are. This goes both for when you care about the person and when you don't. Of course, how you use your conclusions varies based on that. Game theory can be hard, especially when fighting with a loved one.
As a volunteer non-confrontational mediator at events that can be very stressful, we have a saying. First, do nothing. It actually isn't a dumb Zen koan, and can be very hard to follow. It is partially about making sure you don't make incorrect assumptions about a situation, partially to use the "social capital" our org has accumulated as a calming effect (this is domain-specific, and should be ignored by nearly everyone), and partially to give people in conflict a chance to work things out for themselves. And yes, it is a hard thing to do when someone is clearly being an incredible ass. But more than once, even when it looked like someone was being a flaming asshole, it turned out to be good policy, because I was wrong. Not about them being an asshole, but about how the situation should be resolved.
You should totally have had this fight. Then, when he recounted all the fights you've won, and that he's never won any, you could say 'oh, I guess you're right.' And by doing so, you'd have won.
23 The lawyers blame the clients.
58: The prices locals are rumored to charge for monthlong rentals are startling, and I wish I could remember now some stories of other locals' efforts to cater to moneyed people.
My favorite thing to do at a casino, when at a casino with other people who are gambling like mad, is to wait. Wait till someone notices you're not gambling and then let him or her make a thing of it. Then finally give in and walk over to the roulette table, totally cool. "Twenty on black."
It's a 50/50 bet, but when it goes your way, it's hilarious.
And that's basically how I entertain myself at casinos.
56: I find it fascinating as a societal phenomenon, though.
I do love exploring the various fallacies of gamblers that I know. My FIL* was a treasure trove. His systems always exhibited a "mathematical complication" level of C+δ; where C= a system for which he could reasonably calculate the expected value in his head. He was reasonably good at calculation so they were somewhat complicated.
Then there was the following (surely annoying to him) conversations.
Me: "Explain again why you think they are comping you even though you always come out ahead?"
*But I am unkind; I did have what was surely my most endearing day with him on a surreal daytrip to Atlantic City rather late in his life.
What I have come to appreciate is that for some people I know the gambling itself is "entertainment" and that they are morons view their losses the way I would view the price of a concert ticket.
63: 58: The prices locals are rumored to charge for monthlong rentals are startling
Yeah, they are rather well-off DINKs who otherwise do not have an ostentatious lifestyle or buy expensive things. So I think they view it as a yearly release*.
*I sort of envy people who can transcend their normal spending discipline on vacations--I'm always all "But that's exactly what they want you to do!" However, it is good to be aligned with your spouse on this one; I have witnessed/heard of some truly hellish debacles when that is not the case.
I used to go to speed skating meets in Saratoga. They were a powerhouse, back in the day. Not sure if they still are.
I'm also never in conflict with anyone, about anything, ever.
Playing poker is pretty much like every other skill I've ever had: I thought I was pretty good until I played with people who were actually good. And other than poker, gambling bores the shit out of me.
66: I feel about the same way about grad school in history.
... and now our internet cut out. I hope this isn't Grumbles's way of responding to my comment #69. (I jest!)
Actually 71 is not quite true. It really just applies to more recent history research I did. Formal grad school cost only years of my life.
70 and 71 both express familiar sentiments!
71's proximity to 70 feels like more than a coincidence. (sob)
(Indeed, I see 71 is more apt for me than for fake accent: The most important lesson that I learned in grad school for history was that I didn't want to teach and wasn't cut out for research, so to the extent that I now appreciate having gone it's because I engaged with it on a level not that far from entertainment.)
75: What, you've come to realize that you're just a patzer when it comes to discouraging history grad students?
History grad school taught me I could do research. Problem was, I didn't know when to stop!
Not going to history grad school taught me that not going to history grad school was an excellent decision.
I don't think I've ever won an argument. If I know I'm right about something and someone else disagrees, I just give up because they are obviously irrational and can't be reasoned with. And if I know my logic is less than airtight or I made some sort of unfounded assertion, I just give up because I assume they're going to point that out. The latter is what happens on the internet any time I say anything that generalizes about men or women in any way.
Dog racing for small stakes can be fun, because it's small scale enough that you can see everything all the time. Our local track has a covered bar with a plate glass front overlooking the circuit, and the waiters take your bets.
Can't be doing with horses or cards, because people get so intense about them. Fuck that noise, it's meant to be a fun day/night out.
62
23 The lawyers blame the clients.
The whole thing is annoying. It was set up this way (vouchers and some pointless hoops to jump through to redeem them instead of checks) so as to minimize the amount actually paid out.
C used to go to the dogs a lot in Oxford before I met him. He has fond memories of losing £300 one Friday afternoon! He doesn't gamble on that scale anymore, what with being a responsible family man and all that, but he does still bet occasionally - a tenner here and there on football matches (he likes to superstitiously bet against Reading, so he has some consolation if they lose) etc. Won about £800 over several months a few years ago doing matched betting. But of course, any betting he does now, he does online (although we have loads of betting shops in our town, new ones keep opening - evidenc for theories about people gambling more in shitty times?), which I understand you can't do in the USA?
As for arguing, had never really thought about it, but I guess that for many things that I might have an opinion about, but not a strong one, like where to go on holiday, I will go with whatever C wants. If I really care, I will prevail.
Which means, like Buck, he thinks that I get my own way all the time, forgetting all the unchallenged decisions he makes.
When it comes to gambling, I do the same mental calculation that LB talks about in the original post, except the question I'm asking myself is "How annoyed/angry am I going to feel if I lose this money?" The answer is always "Too much." And that is one of nine million reasons that I never gamble.*
*I have mellowed slightly in my older years, in that when given lottery tickets I will scratch them off. Almost everybody knows better than to give them to me, though. The guy who cuts my lawn doesn't know me well enough, so I get one every Christmas from him.
I am a member of a lottery syndicate comprised of (now mostly retired) people from work, because it would have been excessively curmudgeonly not to join.
The way this works out is that I'm pretty easy-going about most things, and I really, really don't like fighting and losing. So if I'm unhappy about something, I'll talk about it and see if we can consensually get on the same page. ...
Suppose Buck is unhappy about something? Is there a pattern to your conflicts in which one of you is consistently wanting to make changes while the other prefers the status quo?
@73
I didn't notice the failure. That isn't weird, because I'm not in the house much. Please, just email out he complaint. I want to fix it, if ican. This place might have been useful for us to meet,but most days I am available after 6 or so.
The internet failure clearly shifted the comment numbering at Conflict House.
Jammies hates arguing. He has an overwhelming emotional response to that kind of conflict, and takes a long time to relax back to his baseline. So I "win" often because he concedes, anticipating an argument, and I had no idea that he wasn't actually on the same page as me. I just want to hash out who feels what! The avoidance of discussion leaves me feeling a little impotent at times.
What works best is to IM him when he's at work, so that he can take time to compose answers, and to moderate the intensity of his emotional response.
I'm not good enough at the strategy of poker to enjoy it, and can't bring myself to play anything based on luck. So I don't enjoy gambling.
The Dwarf Lord and I have sort of settled on a moral-sand-hazard rule in which, if one of us is unwilling to compromise on something, that one does *all* the boring work on it. We hates boring. There are problems this won't resolve, but it helps.
System which didn't work: one cooks, t'other cleans. Only one of us learned clean-as-you-go. The other is hoping that a years' LDR teaches it.
I tend to give in or accept fault a lot more than J' does. She hates arguments and sees them as a sign of something terrible, whereas I don't. I can forget I was even in an argument minutes after its over and tend to think that some moderate amount of arguing is normal. So given the price of emotional price of confrontation seems to be born more strongly by her than me, I tend to just cave a lot more than I would. I also tend to care a lot less about losing.* I also suspect I get my way at least as much as she does, so it's not like either of us is particularly hard done by.
That said, those times I do decide to argue aren't always moments of high principle. They tend more to be when I'm pissed off and tetchy about something trivial, and in the mood to get grumpy about it. So I can't really claim the moral high ground.
* unlike academic/work arguments, when I _will_ win.
93 describes me, with added problem that if I'm gambling on a game of skill I should win, I feel the losses much more acutely than the wins.
Interesting post. I feel like I lose every argument with my gf but maybe there are loads of category 3s I never hear about.
Susan J Pharr Losing Face Intro
Conflict theorists and many political scientists--Schattschneider and Giuseppe DiPalma are two examples-- have long upheld the value to political systems of allowing social grievances to be aired and of creating and maintaining institutionalized channels for the resolution of social conflict, arguing that openness to conflict and responsiveness to new interests assure the long-term health, viability, and stability of democratic systems.Protest movements, some hold, advance the "statemaking" process
itself. In Western democracies, moreover, these views of social scientists are generally backed by
both average people and public officials (even though official support sometimes proves more
rhetorical than real when actual social protests arise).Authorities in Japan, as we shall see, take a dramatically different view of social conflict and
protest, and of what should be done about it. The legacy of Confucianism, with its emphasis on
harmony as a social good, causes even rhetorical tributes to the value of airing social grievances
to be rare. Meanwhile, the tests that a social protest must meet if it is to be judged legitimate by
the watching public and potential supporters are rigorous. If social conflict cannot in the end be
avoided, authorities in Japan seek to contain it to the extent possible, using strategies that tend to
marginalize protesters and to keep the protest outside existing channels and institutions of
conflict resolution and policymaking.At the same time, however, in what is a crucial part of the "Japanese formula" for handling social
conflict, authorities do address--if less adequately than protesters generally would like--the
issues raised as a means of heading off future conflicts. In daily life the unilateral granting of
preemptive concessions is powerfully supported by societal norms that enjoin status superiors to
avoid abusing their authority, to anticipate the needs of inferiors, and to be sensitive to how their
behavior is viewed by the watching public. At the national level these same norms, which
combine elements of paternalism and of communitarianism, have translated into a society in
which social welfare measures compare favorably with those in place in the United States, and
where the gap between the rich and the poor ranks Japan near Sweden as one of the more
egalitarian nations--economically speaking--in the world. Given the country's extraordinary
record of stability and governability in the postwar era, Japan's approach of privatizing social
conflict while granting preemptive concessions challenges the assumptions of many conflict
theorists and invites examination by scholars and policymakers alike.
Of course, at the same time, there is a whole lot of social protest and conflict, labor activity and strikes, and street marches in Japan. Much more than in the US. One thing I have seen is the balance between formality and structured sociality and the room it seems to give to intense conflict and argument almost to the point of mild violence.
How to Protest Like the Japanese ...in a way we Americans can't understand. Really.
Perhaps the nub of the contradiction at play is summed up by the pamphlet's explanation that, "protests are similar to society; it's important to find a place you feel comfortable in and to stay there."
it's important to find a place you feel comfortable in and to stay there
I'm going to take this as the answer to my question on the other thread and go to the bar, then eat.
Professionally, I operate as LB describes in the OP - totally pleasant, even slightly concilatory, until I suddenly don't give an inch. It's a large part of my job to seize control of situations and not let go, and the way I frame it is: never argue. To be in an argument is to be admitting the other person has a voice in the situation. I simply inform people how it is, and consider it on them to adjust to it. One advantage to this is that I can stay totally pleasant and positive while not giving an inch - because I don't feel like I'm in an argument.
This does not work at home at all, however.
That was a great burger. Thanks bob.
I think freight train must work in HR or one of the related evils.
Concert and event production, actually. When a touring band comes in at the start of the day, they need to understand that I'm there to support them and get them what they need, but when push comes to shove they're doing things my way. For their own good! Likewise with vendors, unions, etc.
Pretty much the same as HR. The guy next to me at the bar fell sleep and I wasn't even talking.
I think he was hitting on a lesbian, but it doesn't seem polite to ask.
Well, if you don't wake him up they'll probably throw him out.
Does he have a special bar pillow?
Huh. They did kick him out, but very nicely.
Apparently, napping looks a lot like passing out. Who knew?
He clearly wasn't really drunk. I tried to get him to start a fight and he assumed I was joking.
All I know is that bars tend to interpret falling asleep as a sign of drunkenness and to be pretty strict about kicking people out for it.
They never kick me out for slurring words.
Well, that one's more of a judgment call.
Depends what kind of fight, I guess.
If essear isn't Brian Leiter, he's probably Paul Frampton.
I've gotten kicked out of a bar (well, a bowling alley) for falling asleep before. But then, miraculously, my friends convinced them that they were being ridiculous and I got back in.
It was miraculous, of course, because I was fucking wasted and probably it was smart of them to pick up on that.
I didn't try anything to get him un-kicked out. I was afraid I was boring him. Plus, it was about time for me to leave as I'm old.
I didn't try anything to get him un-kicked out. I was afraid I was boring him. Plus, it was about time for me to leave as I'm old.
People have gotten kicked out of bars for being old, I bet.
They've definitely gotten booted for double-posting.
124: I almost finished your book, but I got a bit lost in the part where the trio kept camping while looking for horcruxes.
||
I ordered The Dark Crystal from Netflix, because I thought it would be a good movie for the whole family to watch. The kids, of course, rejected it. Joey: "Those things look like puppets!" Molly wasn't real enthused either, so now I am watching it alone.
|>
I was literally kicked by a stripper for falling asleep at a club once. I wasn't drunk, just tired.
133: Those things were puppets, right?
Once I gave a stripper a hug without thinking about it, but somehow avoided getting kicked out of the club and/or getting my ass kicked by bouncers. It probably helped that I was dressed like Santa.
That's why I never got to strip clubs. I can't figure out how to dress. Also, something, something patriarchy.
In truth, most of the times I've ever been at a strip club I was dressed like Santa.
So I finally just read who Paul frampton is. What a weirdo.
||
Man, this is weirder and creepier than I remembered.
Huge beetle puppets! I'm probably the only one in the family weird and creepy enough for this movie.
|>
"In the national park system, the native peoples are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: the government employees who shoot natives and the government employees who make monuments to those who have been shot. These are their stories."
||
Our hero has sought out a wise teacher-puppet who makes the same grunting noises as Yoda, but uses English word order. Also you can see the nipples of her matronly bosom under her shirt.
|>
143: Is he really that weird for physics?
Dark Crystal scared the crap out of me when I saw it in the theater.
I'm just gonna pretend I didn't see 147.
Don't worry. I'm sure the stripper really loves you.
Weirder than professors in dorky subjects that I know. But not entirely unrecognizable. The chief weirdness - the narcissism - isn't generally a dorky subjects trait.
140: It's entirely likely that you were around when mrs. k-sky broke up with her ex. Cheetahs, 2004?
That's why I never got to strip clubs. I can't figure out how to dress. Also, something, something patriarchy.
I was once hanging out in New York with some friends, most of whom were in town for a few days and interested in doing some touristy stuff like going to a Broadway show. When we decided to do that I realized that I might seem underdressed in my t-shirt and jeans, so I went to Old Navy and bought a nicer shirt to wear over the t-shirt. (This was a better option than taking the train back to NJ to change.) As it turned out people were dressed all sorts of ways at the show, but later that night we ended up going to a strip club and I would definitely have felt underdressed there in a t-shirt, so I was glad to have bought the nicer shirt.
The patriarchy hurts men too, if they wear shitty shirts.
I actually happen to be wearing that shirt right now (the nice one, not the t-shirt).
I can't keep pretending I don't love pants anymore.
I can't keep pretending I don't love lamp anymore.
||
La Fin du Monde is good, but hoo boy is that a lot of alcohol for a beer. Whee!
|>
Netflix now has the original Tremors. That is all.
||
In a world where evil was punished and virtue rewarded, the flying justice squads would have caught up with this asshole several months ago:
http://www.friendsofanimals.org/news/2012/october/beautiful-female-wol.html
People are terrible.
||>
||
Isn't it funny how you see pareidolia everywhere you look?
|>
163- That's middle of the road for Unibroue. They have a really strong one called Terrible, it's 10.5%. They are also the brewery for one of Trader Joe's house beers, I think that one's only 7%.
167: on the veldt failing to see a face in a rock would get you killed.
Oddly, I am not kidding.
I drank an 11% beer at brunch today. This'n. It was tasty!
I HEAR YOU WENT UP TO SARATOGA.
169- Yeah, those cave painters didn't respond well to art critics.
There is no such thing as dressing wrong for a cultural event in NYC. Or dressing unforgivably wrong, anyway. Mr. Fire Island 1973 always wears his regalia to opening nights at the Metropolitan Opera and people do look quizzically but that's the end of it.
170: Rye on Rye is nice. This Wednesday I had a 10% stout (errrrr, two of them). Madhouse Templeton Rye Imperial Stout. It was delicious, but I really could not figure out how drunk I was. (I was pretty drunk.)
I haven't been to this reasonably nearby bar yet, but a friend went and said it's like being in heaven but for beer. That's a killer tap list.
The fondest wish of the beer soul is to be swallowed and digested.
167: Isn't it funny how you see pareidolia everywhere you look?
When correctly viewed,
Everything's a pseud.
Actually, I keep seeing pareidolia as paradiddles.
Since this is the seeing faces thread, allow me to link to this MeFi discussion of porn stars without makeup. Mostly because I was reading the MeFi comments and found myself thinking about one of them, "what a thoughtful, critical yet not unnecessarily argumentative consideration," and it was Frowner.
Re pareidolia, iPhoto once tagged a friend of mine onto a picture of three bagels.
I don't do war games. I generally stay jolly and oblivious for a long time, then quickly transition to scorched earth.
I just really enjoy the image of LB saying menacingly "I can predict your every move. Your every word. I've already run this argument a million times in my head. I win every time" like the litigation version of the Midnighter.
It's exactly like that. Also, my eyes turn yellow, with vertical pupils.
Well, obviously. You're a New York lawyer. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGR4SFOimlk