Ouch. Well, I bet I know what the next item on the list of turn-offs will be.
Isn't Sandals one of the My Little Ponies? Or maybe American Gladiators.
!Tevas should know that he's been talking about makeup for years.
The first five comments were wasted. This is where you start with Ogged.
Any collection of Unfogged links has to start with the Greatest Thread Evar. Ogged does yeoman's work in comments, though, as I recall, it's Labs that shines.
Yep, 6 is how I first met the gentleman.
And you know, so she can check whether she's his type.
My entry in the summarize-ogged contest.
There's always the selective self-portrait.
This, and the comment thread that follows.
Why would anyone bother getting a prejudice against sandal wearers?
One doesn't "get" such a prejudice, David, one merely "finds oneself" with one, as with a mood (Stimmung).
16: references? (I've already got a Wikipedia tab open!)
[Way off topic: what IS a "standpipe bridgeplate"? It sounds like an unholy cross between plumbing and orthodontia.]
18: There's an entire blog dedicated to explaining that sort of thing. It's my homepage.
Standpipe Bridgeplate is a commenter at Unfogged and elsewhere, David, as one would think would be plain.
This is almost like a game of gay chicken. How uncomfortable can you make ogged? I like it.
In the metro or somewhere like it, in DC a few weeks ago, I saw a round metal plate on the ground that said STANDPIPE on it. Being a country bumpkin from way back, I was surprised and amazed to learn it's more than a cool word (or the well-known and hilarious commenter).
What I like are the signs here or there on buildings on the CMU campus that say "ANNUNCIATOR", with no explanation. I think it's part of some sort of alarm system, but maybe the Angel Gabriel's voice will start coming out of one if a certain virgin walks by.
In the metro or somewhere like it
24: The famous Chicago water tower on Michigan Ave was built to house a standpipe.
I had never noticed those ubiquitous standpipe signs prior to our illustrious commenter's appearance. However, I am unaccountably fond of those inlaid sidewalk plates that say "The space between these lines not dedicated."
In other news, David is reminding me of Frederick.
In other news, David is reminding me of Frederick.
Didn't want to be the first to say it.
I've got a foto at home (otherwise I'd post it now) of a sign I saw in Boston that says "Fire Standpipe"
Much better as the imperative than the adjective.
It makes me very happy that this is one of the google image hits for Oggers.
Here are the posts that got me to switch from reading unfogged occasionally, to reading it every day.
Clearly a different era of unfogged. For balance, the post that lead to the usage "o-earnest".
ogged, FL
I wish there were a town in Florida called Ogged.
I just realized that the comments to this post are more likely than anything else on the blog to make ogged very uncomfortable.
Surely she'll want to know about his overly sensitive member?
I suppose for balance I should also link to this info on the sensitivity of ogged's member.
Of course, it's self-reported and therefore a bit suspect.
This thread is like a sit-com flashback episode: occasionally funny and a little touching, like the very last installment of Laverne and Shirley.
42 - For Ogged's sake, the crowd should really stop throwing money. He's been going since he posted that. He's exhausted.
Could there be a better hovertext than : occasionally funny and a little touching, like the very last installment of Laverne and Shirley or just like the very last installment of Laverne and Shirley?
B.W., I was not asking who Standpipe Bridge is, I was inquiring about he origin/derivation of the blog handle I've seen. (As my parents named me after King David from the Bible; sometimes 'm glad their favorite author wasn't Washington Irving.
Are Stanley and Standpipe the same person, who changed his handle (but not to anything Hitlerish)?
I see now I've been assigned ANOTHER site to read; is such the way to Illuminatiship and a share in the One World Gubmint?
Interestingly, ogged's list of women he won't date overlaps widely with my Preferred Qualities list, though since I quit smoking I prefer they not and since I'm getting deafer I like non-squeaky voices. I wish there was way to turn that kind of information to my benefit.
I think we may have found the reason journalists dislike the internet.
Damn it Cala some of us are trying to restrain themselves here.
Oh, heck with it.
"Interestingly, ogged's list of women he won't date overlaps widely with my Preferred Qualities list"
What a surprise!
In a more David-friendly world, one would hear the following more often: "Too small, you can have her." But then my member is positively insensitive, thickened by all the fire-breathing dragonesses. [ducking]
(I apologize to Ogged for playing in a thread devoted to him, if he cares.)
My joke in 49 may have come off blunter than it was intended.
Also, did David and I kill the site, or what?
48: Might it be because most MSM journalists are still Old Buoys and the Internet is full of so-called feminazis? (The latter broadly defined by a "real journalist" like Rush the Pillhead as "a woman who thinks she is person.")
52: 49 was a joke? I didn't get that either. That happens a lot these days. But I used to have a high IQ, I swear; just ask my Mommy!
David, I think you have all the information you need for your little experiment. You're not, as they say, adding value at this point.
You'd think if someone'd been trolling since 1997, they'd be good at it. This is awfully dull.
It takes more than time to become a master. A journeyman forever, it seems.
Wow, I was just wondering how long that would take. Is this a record?
It probably took until at least 1999 or maybe even early 2000 until he stopped trying to pry the keys from the keyboard and stuff them up his nose.
45: Thanks Tim. The current hovertext, however, is pretty fucking kickass.
How did David wind up here, anyway? Did he really have an experiment or is ogged alluding to the nonexistent again?
52: sifu tweety, for the first year or so my roommate's three ferrets keep beating up my dog, who's big, clumsy and fluffy but just wants to play. Eventually they accepted him, and now one is his Special Buddy.
And I don't know what ogged's talking about. This place was highly recommended by another ancient Usenetter. Now I wonder if he was playing a JOAK on us all; did Bitch turn his stout lance to a smoking toothpick or something? (I pissed him off once in 2001; "best served cold" maybe?)
One good thing about going on Disability is one gets renomenclated: e.g., "troll" > Bipolar, "sandal-wearer" > Asperger's, "feminazi" > PTSD (as Hysteria is out of fashion).
But I did learn one new lesson: in this New Millennium the Great Kibo might've just started his own blog instead of founding a cult. And (to my critics) I reconfirmed an old one: gated communities are for sissies.
Let's see if my comment stays up or if I get death threats or something.
That's trollish. And you have yet to say something interesting or witty, which might have caused us to overlook the trolling.
63: You've talked about your love life, haven't you?
Was it a Kibologist who recommended this place to you, David? Are you David Pacheco, stripped of everything of interest?
Re 67: Oh, see what you're talking about at least, ogged. I meant that "quip" as self-parodic, in that context there (among MY old buddies who get my so-called wit). I addressed that myself here, i.e. "...an in retrospect astoundingly thudding debut comment like mine here, I'm sure. In my own defense, where I was housesitting my fanatical plunging was so stupendously ineffective that the toilet was stopped up for THREE DAYS before I finally got the owner to get a plumber; that night I was quite literally WAY too full of shit."
I wasn't intending to disrupt your site ogged. If you re-read that thread you'll see I tried to make amends to all who were offended, but the mighty posse here set off after me anyway. So I hoped they'd just get tired or be seduced into harmless banter, which has worked in similar situations before. In any event, I bear no lasting personal animosity toward anybody here; like, despite her animosity toward me I can't help sorta admiring Ms. Bitch -- e.g., assuming the fair-haired girl in that photo is/represents her, there's something admirable about a little kid of any sex/gender giving the Finger to the System or whatever and NOT having to wind up on Disability and even getting a Ph.D. (Which is not meant to be "creepy and threatening" or stalkery: I have never once written to Magic Johnson, let alone camped out on his lawn.) As I see it it's a pity some folks have to be so reflexively hypersensitive; aren't AOL chatrooms better for such dispositions?
And 69, no I'm not a Pacheco. Who/what is he?
(And no Ned, I don't see any way to have packed this into one short sentence.)
By the way, for the old (I gather ex-) Usenetters: one lurker supported me in email (but then she's an old buddy too); so far I've received NO death threats whatsoever (not even from Ottomans). Too bad I'm still without blinding insights that revolutionize quantum physics.
You talk too much
You worry me to death
You talk too much
You even worry my pet
You just talk
Talk too much
You talk about people
That you don't know
You talk about people
Wherever you go
You just talk
Talk too much
You talk about people
That you've never seen
You talk about people
You can make me scream
You just talk
Talk too much
There's all angsty and cliquey and no smileys and leftyish and frattish
and sarcastic and on medication and shit. Academics and shit.
73: To be fair, that's a pretty accurate description.
And (to my critics) I reconfirmed an old one: gated communities are for sissies.
Yes, well, that explains how you got in. Don't let the gate hit your ass on the way out.
Now I feel bad for posting stupid canon, in a thread that's supposed to be for the best. Well, I remember laughing at this post.
By the way, for the old (I gather ex-) Usenetters: one lurker supported me in email (but then she's an old buddy too);
I wasn't on Usenet until it had, arguably, already gone to seed (not until around 1999, that is), but even I recognize "the lurkers support me in email" as a tired dodge—so tired, in fact, that I suppose this statement was intended to troll and I should go ahead and have a nice day, something that, in fact, I wouldn't mind one bit.
I suppose this statement was intended to troll
I read it more as a Usenet joke, not that it makes that big of a difference.
On the other hand a genuine old Usenet hand would probably be familiar with the norm that one should lurk for a month or two before participating.
Clearly a joke, although a trollish joke. Or a jokey troll.
Er, I meant this one. Same point still stands.
And I really shudder to think of what looking to Usenet as a source of social mores for Unfogged implies.
Why has nobody linked to ogged's other blog? Too earnest? Too sympathetic? No snarky commenter's taking the piss out of him? Or is there a sense of abandonment that the unfogged community has not gotten over?
Just asking.
82: That you, too, can be an American citizen!
I'm amazed: doesn't everybody know that since 1997 "the lurkers support me in email" has always been a joke? Which I underlined by referring to ONE lurker, even further qualifying that by "but then she's an old buddy too"? C'mon Cunctator, you must be tired; you shouldn't need a BLINK tag.
And Jake, believe it or not I've never seen that "pome" before. Very droll, very droll.
Emerson, you undercut your own "point" by posting the whole thing when a link would suffice. You could break somebody's Blackberry like that!
I am tired, that's why I wished for a nice day, dumbass.
My point about lurking still stands. Please, go and lurk a while.
It's far from too late to make it a nice day.
And I can't believe I clicked on that. Given the amount of trouble I've had finding that link when I was looking for it, to have it appear on my screen unbidden... truly I have been blessed.
I already know to avoid Apo's links at work, but that one came out of left field. Tricksy!
It pleases me that 90 and 91 were cross-posted.
I lurked here a long time before posting, but it didn't do me any good. Reading the thread backwards, I clicked on *both* those damn links. I'm going to have nightmares tonight, I tell ya.
Oh thank god for tabbed headers, that kept me from actually clicking over to see those links. You guys are mean fuckers.
The URL from the second one contains a dire warning for those who know of such things, but the first one came out of left field.
2nd link: just how misogynistic? When I try to think of how much money I'd have to get paid to do that, have it photographed, and spread over the internet - I literally don't think there's enough money in the world.
85 Which I underlined by referring to ONE lurker
You misspelled "undermined".
If you guys had lurked for a while, it wouldn't have come out of left field.
But who wants to read about putzing around with internet domains and redirects?
And unless I'm mistaken, the one you linked to is not actually the most famous picture of its type. I didn't realize there was a sequence.
It was the first one I found, and I wasn't inclined to comb through a lot of them to find the canonical image.
Don't click here unless you really want to see the original goate picture.
So a thread intended to introduce Ogged to Sandals leads to goatse. Nice.
All threads lead to goatse. Some just take longer than others.
I already know to avoid Apo's links at work
I do try to give NSFW warnings, but I'm getting old and absentminded.
106: feeling sort of bad about that, in a way. "He seems nice, but his friends..."
Re 89: w-lfs-n, that was awesomely tasteless and juvenile. Beneath even me. You should be proud of yourself. Keep practicing in your buddy's sandbox, someday you'll be a star! (I love it when they try to "outclass" me with their superior "maturity" like that.)
I'm not clicking on those other links, I just washed stir fry down with aguardiente. It's hard to find real keyboards these days.
106: As far as I'm concerned, I was just correcting a bad citation. This thread had already gotten ugly.
110: I thought it was kind of sad at first, but cheer up. It was the ultimate collective cockblock!
99: Oh my, I've never heard of "creative re-spelling" before. Where'd you think it up? Are there more where that came from?
With any luck, Ogged can turn this into a positive, of the "yes, while I have since become a highly cultured and dare I say suave gentleman, I still have love for the streets, and by streets I mean my once and future friends and their cock jokes" sort.
David, I think it might be time for you to quietly take your leave from the site.
Dear Ms. NoSandals, You could do far worse than Ogged. See?
89 did not bother me nearly as much as 90 did. Just don't look at 90; it's really revolting.
It pleases me that so many Unfogged folks had never seen tubgirl before meeting me. Like I've done my little bit to make you all worse people.
you know what's weirder than realizing your real-life interlocutors don't know about blogs? realizing (with surprise) that they haven't heard of tubgirl.
120: That is amazing. That picture has been basically ubiquitous in my life for so many years that I forget sometimes how odd that is.
120: I'm sure I've linked this before, but this (totally work-safe and undisturbing) Flickr gallery of people seeing their first goatse still cracks me up.
It pleases me that so many Unfogged folks had never seen tubgirl before meeting me.
Actually, I still haven't looked at that picture.
Anyway, is it unforgivably rude if I threadjack with a dating/social etiquette question? I feel ungenerous taking over Ogged's thread like that, but then again it's already deteriorated into shock sites.
Go for it, Witt, but it better not be a boring dating question.
I really want to find Sandals' profile, but can't seem to do so.
I have to confess that I'd never seen tubgirl. Now that that photo has seared my retinas, I look back wistfully on my pre-tubgirl life as a time of pre-lapsarian bliss.
Well, it's mostly rhetorical. I'm just out of sorts and looking for people to confirm my biases (or smack me upside the head for being a twit).
Here goes:
When you're having a short date (just coffee or a drink after work), what is your obligation to be courteous, engaging, even cheerful towards the other person?
Say you decide immediately that they're not your type. Say that nevertheless, you had already had exchanged a handful of pleasant e-mails and know that you have interests in common.
Say, moreover, that you are the party that rescheduled the date *and* that you were late. Say that the other party is being pleasant and friendly, not giving off clingy vibes or otherwise signaling that this date will last longer than an hour or so.
In fact, say that the other party is putting a fair amount of effort into generating new conversational topics, paying attention to your responses, choosing light but relevant forays into subjects you have already indicated are of interest to you.
Say that you sit there, lumpishly, sourly even. Say that you do not help the conversation along, that even though it is a gorgeous spring evening and there are street musicians and entertaining people-watching and a nice waiter. Say that you stare at your cell phone, that you give brief answers, that you in general fail to exert appreciable effort.
Is your companion then justified in thinking you were poorly raised?
Yes, or that maybe somebody close just died.
The companion would probably tell if someone close just died. I mean they were just across a table from each other.
Yes. Barring a scenario like the one imagined by apo, I don't see how there could be any dispute over this.
I suspect you already know the answer to this question, Witt.
127: poorly raised? Yes, unless the Imodium has stopped working.
Is your companion then justified in thinking you were poorly raised?
Yup.
No apparent controversy, Witt. Booooring.
I've been to enough coffee "dates" now that I've started thinking that one of the few perks is saying exactly what you think to someone you're never going to see again. After enough effort to be sure that the other person isn't going to become a pleasant conversationalist, I've started saying things like "This is going nowhere, shall we call it off?" or "We don't seem to have anything to say. It was nice meeting you." I suppose that means that I've abandoned my manners too, but it seems like a rare opportunity to be frank.
You should definitely email your date a tubgirl.
How do we know that Witt wasn't the surly one?
I had assumed that Witt was the surly one, actually, as a result of his presentation.
"This is going nowhere, do you want a tubgirl?"
Typical rightwing response, blaming the parents. But since this isn't meant to be a nature versus nurture question, yes. The answer is yes.
It doesn't matter which party Witt was, the tubgirl must be sent.
"Hey, Surly only looks out for one guy...Surly!"
Say that you stare at your cell phone...Is your companion then justified in thinking you were poorly raised?
To say the least.
I suppose that means that I've abandoned my manners too, but it seems like a rare opportunity to be frank.
No, see, that would be fine too. Honesty is a good thing.
It's just -- I go into these things with a basic assumption that other people are interesting in some way, that if we've clicked enough in e-mail to bother meeting in person, then there's no harm in talking for an hour, and that there are a million reasons in this not-too-huge city of mine to connect with somebody. Business contacts, setup with friends, etc. etc.
I can't be the only person who has come home from a date and said to a loved one, "Not for me, but I know just who I want to introduce!"
Not enough controversy, Cala. You heard the host.
No can do, I'm afraid, but here's the CL ad of the night:
"Normal" SWM seeking "Gentleman's Club Dancer" for LTR. - 42
Ties in with that earlier discussion....
153: And the other one Kurt Waldheim. And they should get together over turnips and Budweiser.
Roasted turnips was one of my happiest discoveries of the past year. Mmmm.
155: I think it's interesting that he says little about himself, but makes a point of mentioning that he has a pool table.
If large pieces of recreational furniture draw the chicks, maybe ogged should totally play up the elliptical machine in his bedroom.
Apo, I find the tenor of your love for vegetables highly inappropriate.
I wish I had a friend who owned a pool table.
I doubt "pool table" and "elliptical machine" fall into the same category in terms of impressing chicks.
With a pool table and a view of the water, I'm kind of interested myself.
For one, it's not a game you can play. For two, you can't have sex on an elliptical machine.
I have access to several foosball tables, and I'm single. I thought everyone should know.
you can't have sex on an elliptical machine
You can't have sex on a pool table either, Cala; you'd ruin the felt.
165: If it were Flash Bowling, then we'd be talking.
I just thought it was funny that he qualified himself as "non-strip-club-attending" in a post in which he explicitly asked for a stripper. How's that work, exactly? Is he conflating works in a strip club with likes sex? Seems odd.
Some college gyms have elliptical machines, Cala.
I can't be the only person who has come home from a date and said to a loved one
?? I thought I was the only person who did that.
You'd need phenomenal balance to have sex on an elliptical machine. But maybe it can be done. Whaddya say, Tweety?
169: He's too upright to go to a strip club, but he caught a glimpse of Real Sex on HBO, and was enthralled by the silicone and body glitter on display.
Or he's a total liar.
Could be either.
169: Maybe he's conflating "works in a strip club" with "hott."
170: Some college community centers have pool tables, too.
173: Only if we can put on some Rush.
171: I will wreck you at foosball, even if you are a grad student.
enthralled by the silicone
No, he explicitly specifies no silicone.
169.--He's auditioning in the role of Savior. You've got to pretend to be pure for that.
Don't comment about pretend sports, ogged.
How's that work, exactly? Is he conflating works in a strip club with likes sex? Seems odd.
My impression was that he wanted to save her from a life of moral turpitude, based on this: if you are wondering
if you can make a wrong turn and still get back on the right track;
He's got a fantasy about rescuing a damsel in distress who will be so grateful that she'll give all her nympho freaky lovin' just to him.
You can see how it might sound good on paper.
Teo's also right. He wants someone he assumes is highly sexual and experienced.
170, 176: Is the working assumption that anything on a college campus, at least anything accessible to students, sees action? Because if that's the case, I'm going to start being more careful about what I touch.
large pieces of recreational furniture
You've heard about Apo's unit, too?
moral turpitude
Wow, I didn't know anybody outside of the nineteenth century and the court system actually used that phrase.
who doesn't hate all men
Oh, this guy's a real winner.
190: It's used in Porky's, Witt.
190: I'm pretty sure I got the phrase from one of those immigration forms I had to fill out a few months ago.
I swear that I have never been accused of moral turpitude, and I have never been a habitual drunkard.
190: I'm pretty sure I got the phrase from one of those immigration forms I had to fill out a few months ago.
I swear that I have never been accused of moral turpitude, and I have never been a habitual drunkard.
Is there a legal definition for "moral turpitude"?
Maybe I can use it against my roommate.
188: The working assumption is that Cala will be cured of her naivete when she gets to college.
OK, I've been a drunkard, just not habitually.
And I really shudder to think of what looking to Usenet as a source of social mores for Unfogged implies.
I look forward to the time when ogged posts videos of nut-tasering in the Usenet fashion: 47 sequential posts, all blocks of uuencoded text with comments disabled.
I have never seen tubgirl or a tubgirl if there are many, or whatever, and hope I never do. I learned my lesson at apostropher's blog a long, long time ago.
200: It's actually perfectly inoffensive; that's the whole joke.
182, 198: Teo and Ben are making me laugh.
JM, what's going on with the roommate? Does he see this as you guys vs. the landlords, or everyone vs. him?
Teo's also right. He wants someone he assumes is highly sexual and experienced.
Thanks, but that's not actually what I said. Unless "he" in the second sentence refers to me, in which case I would wonder how you figured that out.
Witt, I'd probably classify the date as "self-involved asshole," personally; not raised right is both more tasteful and accurate.
I am glad to see that there are so many who know of tubgirl but have never seen her.
Apo should just print it out and shove it in your face next time you see him.
Here's the legal definition of moral turpitude, btw.
Witt, it's hard to say. He left the apartment after the talk and hasn't been back since, as far as I can tell. During the talk he saw it as him against the landlords, nevermind the consequences to us; we haven't yet told him that we hate him and want him out. I doubt he's laboring under the delusion that we're on his side, though.
109: It's less NSFWness and more my audible reactions, followed by attempts to fend off my nosy coworker.
Unless "he" in the second sentence refers to me
Well, that's a given. Actually, I had read your 'hott' as meaning 'freaky' as well as 'bootylicious.' My mistake.
The precise definition of a crime that involves moral turpitude isn't always precise
Is that so?
It's probably against the law to treat him with moral turpentine, so I won't recommend taht course of action.
You can get odorless turpentine these days.
Is there a legal definition for "moral turpitude"?
Sort of. Having comitted a "crime indicating moral turpitude" renders one inadmissible from the U.S. It's roughly the distinction between a felony and a misdemeanor, but there are some misdemeanors which count as CIMTs.
I think 183 and 185 have it right. Pretty Woman fantasy. Also, you could probably use the ribbons on the elliptical for stability.
He's suffering from moral honkitude, too.
I think this is the bottom line:
It is a broad and subjective term that can be used for any crime that USCIS considers offensive.
Also, hey, McManly Pants -- I liked your Amtrak post from a few weeks back.
Your elliptical has ribbons? You know a lot of big words for a seven-year-old.
Although the conviction must occur within five years of entry, any entry into the United States may be used to support the charge of deportability.
I never understood why our immigration system seems, in certain ways, slanted against aliens who travel internationally. Should it matter that the (hypothetical) murderous bastard that has lived in this country for 10 years happened to visit Paris three years ago?
It's almost like non-citizens can't vote, or something.
219: Not to mention playing cards in the spokes and the banana seat.
I'm pretty sure I got the phrase from one of those immigration forms I had to fill out a few months ago.
I'm in the process of getting a green card. last week I had the mandator medical exam, where a doctor had to fill out a form which had boxes where she could indicate whether she had discovered evidence of "chronic alcoholism", "past drug abuse", and "sexual deviance."
I like the Blacks iteration: The act of baseness, vileness or depravity in the private and social duties which a man owes to his fellow man or to society in general, contrary to accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and man.
For the first year and a half I lived in the US, I couldn't leave the country and be assured of re-entry without my "Advance Parole" form.
mandator medical exam
And I thought you were married.
What'd she find?
Technically I don't know, because the results of the exam go into a sealed envelope that is opened (with a flourish, I imagine) at he goddamned interview at some undetermined future date.
I also typed up my request for Advanced Parole last week.
a doctor had to fill out a form which had boxes where she could indicate whether she had discovered evidence of "chronic alcoholism", "past drug abuse", and "sexual deviance."
Wow -- I don't remember that from my exam. I just remember having to prove that I had neither AIDS nor tuberculosis.
I wonder what they consider "sexual deviance" to be.
Are titles of nobility still prohibited?
Still prohibited. I had to give up my title of "Queen of the Harpies."
I just remember having to prove that I had neither AIDS nor tuberculosis.
Ditto mine; I don't remember the other stuff either, but maybe they were just questions on a form at that point.
I just remember having to prove that I had neither AIDS nor tuberculosis.
Also gonhorrea, syphilis, measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, peritussis, etc, etc.
And here's one from an administrative decision applying New York law: "Moral turpitude" is "the quality of crime involving grave infringement of the moral sentiment of the community as distinguished from statutory mala prohibita...an act of baseness,vileness or depravity in the private or social duties which manowes to his fellow men or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and man." People v Ferguson, 55 Misc.2d 711, 286 N.Y.S.2d 976, 981 (1968)(citations omitted). "In general it mean neither more nor less than 'turpitude', i.e., anything done contrary to justice, honesty, or good morals." Black's Law Dictionary (5th ed. 1979).
do not get me started on trying to figure out what is and is not a crime of moral turpitude. So, so, so stupid. But we're stuck with it until Congress comes out in favor of moral turpitude.
(It's not actually the stupidity of the phrase that's the primary problem--figuring out what is an "aggravated felony" or "particularly serious crime" is no more fun and no less arbitrary).
So if my roommate once again fails to remember to wash his dashes or buy toilet paper and trash bags, I've got a case, right?
90 to 228.3
Yeah, I hope the doctor doesn't accidentally put a picture of tubgirl in the envelope. That would be pretty embarrassing.
So if my roommate once again fails to remember to wash his dashes or buy toilet paper and trash bags, I've got a case, right?
Depends on the judge. I'd go with the post-coital oatmeal habits, myself.
230 That sucks.
I always thought that Article 1 only says that neither the country, nor the states, can grant titles of nobility, and that officeholders may not accept foreign titles (or presents)....
Let the Queen of the Harpies have her due!
yes, "baseness, vileness, or depraved." That's right up there in the "legal definitions that don't actually tell you anything" category. (Though the all time best has got to be the definition of "outrageous conduct" as conduct that would cause a bystander, upon hearing about it, to exclaim "outrageous!")
I find even clean colons more distasteful that dirty dashes, not to bring up an earlier topic.
By the way, the administrative decision I linked concerned whether a man who pled to sexually abusing his 4 year old daughter should be allowed to renew his barber's license.
Possibly a false accusation, though.
He has stopped making oatmeal, or anything at all, for that matter. He only consumes ice cubes.
244: No. He should be forced to work in a daycare.
I'd kill for an air hockey table.
--figuring out what is an "aggravated felony" or "particularly serious crime" is no more fun and no less arbitrary
IANAL, but in Utah, for things like sexual abuse of a child, there's specific circumstances that elevate it to "aggravated". Is it not this way for most felonies? More arbritrary or something?
I'd go with the post-coital oatmeal habits, myself.
Or the spanking.
I think killing for an air hockey table is definitely an aggravated felony.
Only if you intend to have sex on it.
I think killing for an air hockey table is definitely an aggravated felony.
If you'd played more air hockey, you'd know it's clearly justifiable homicide.
Impossible to know whether the spanking is consensual.
Yes. Totally arbitrary. A combination of:
--the intrinsic difficulty of trying to integrate one federal immigration law system with the laws of 50 different states.
--the fact that plea bargains are so common--making it very difficult to figure out exactly what somebody was convicted of. You can't, e.g., rely on the police report.
--the fact that the lawyers who negotatiate those plea bargains often have no clue about the immigration consequences--a nolo contendere plea, etc. that results in no jail time; alternative to prison pleas that can get your record expunged, and other good deals in the criminal law context can utterly screw you over immigration-wise.
--the combination of immigrants & criminals is an irresistible target to Congress & the laws just keep getting more and more punitive and arbitrary.
A misdemeanor marijuana possession conviction can be an "aggravated felony," in some states, depending on an arcane combination of state drug law, the controlled substances act, and exactly what you pled to. And it can bar you from asylum.
On the other hand, you can beat someone to a bloody pulp and it might not be aggravated. It's just utterly arbitrary.
Signs point to "consensual, or at least mostly," however.
I know of a couple, trying to move to the US from the UK. She's American, he's British. They file for a spousal visa, and at the interview he's denied because he had been caught at age 19, with some friends who had marijuana.
Now, usually, simple possession isn't enough to deny you a visa. But his conviction wasn't for possession. At the time, they offered him a plea agreement of a fine, no jail time, and he took it. Unfortunately, it was some low-level equivalent of trafficking, because he and his buddies were caught while on some kind of ferry between England and I want to say Wales. That was 38 years ago.
U.S. drug law is very strict, and because of what it said on his record, they were denied the visa, and while there is a provision to be able to file for a waiver of inadmissibility due to his being a spouse of an American citizen, if I remember the details correctly, drug dealers aren't eligible to do so. (I am not looking up the statute this late at night.)
Anyhow, the distinction's pretty arbitrary. Most of it makes some sort of intuitive sense. But the devil's completely in the details, and more than a few things that count as CIMT fall into the "stupid mistake when I was 19" category.
I've played some: PK is really into it and can't pass up a table at McD's or in one of those goddamn arcades that are now everywhere from movie theaters to mini golf places. It's fun.
I was really jealous as a kid of people who had air hockey tables at home. What a great game. All we had was ping-pong.
We had an air hockey table and a ping-pong table when I was a teenager, but the ping-pong table got WAY more use.
I think air hockey has a fairly low replayability bar if it's just there all the time.
Seriously? Foosball? A game for kings.
This comment is an implied rejection of any joke possibilities contained in 259.
he and his buddies were caught while on some kind of ferry between England and I want to say Wales.
They were definitely high then :)
The general point is valid though. My lawyer tells me that recently they've been asking whether you have ever done drugs (not ever been caught or convicted, just ever used), and denying on that basis. This presents an interesting dilemma, because if you truthfully answer "No" (with the unarticulated subtext: we just used to get blind drunk instead) then they won't believe you.
For two, you can't have sex on an elliptical machine
Surprisingly Unsurprisingly, this topic was discussed at-length at the pre-party to the party from which I've just returned.
Hivemind. Buzzzzzzzzzz. GET OUT OF MY HEAD!!1!1!!
I think air hockey has a fairly low replayability bar if it's just there all the time.
Air hockey rules when everyones got a good bit of alcohol in them. I've never played foos.
270: Too easy. I'm gonna quit while I'm behind. Hope it works out, ogged.
I would like to register my protest that w-lfs-n left the party before I could introduce myself and compliment him on his fine goatse technique. Dude was gone by 9:30 at the latest.
263: Yeah, I knew it didn't sound right but was too tired to look up the details. Ferry was from Swansea to somewhere in Ireland. That made the charge "drug offence - attempted exporting." And that offense is unwaiverable. I think the total amount of marijuana was around 30g.
Immigration law is also weird to the extent that a conviction, or an admission to an interviewing officer, can be enough to indicate moral turpitude. So if you've never been caught but you admit to murdering someone, they'll deny the visa. It's a little weird. A common technique at some consulates, if they suspect the woman fiancée of being a prostitute (a guess based on her hometown, usually), is to tell her that if she confesses it, she won't be prosecuted. Which is true. U.S. consulate can't prosecute prostitution. But they can, and will, based on the admission, deny the visa.
Jake, if you were actually at the party I was at last night, I was there at least until 10:30.
Irony! I left because I only knew like four people there.
I only knew like four people there
All before 10:30? Sounds like a busy night, wink-wink, nudge-nudge...
Well, he did buy four sets of portable genitalia at the door. So at least there was no refractory period.
They decide you're a prostitute based on your hometown? hmm. Godalming?
The cases I've seen it reported have tended to be in Brazil or Vietnam, where apparently (I only have testimony here, no first-hand knowledge) living in a certain district makes it a pretty safe bet.
I was at the party. I kept on trying to ask An/gela and La/el to point you out, but it was pretty busy, and by the time they actually got around to it, you had left.
Irony indeed - I didn't know any of the people there either (well, I knew maybe six or eight, which is more than four, but less than the 30 that were present).
Is it the case that all use of illegal drugs is counted as "abuse"? I seem to remember that when I last got a journalist visa I had to testify not only that I had never even caught doing any such thing but that I had never abused any such drugs. I shudder to think of the anguish faced by younger or less strait-laced colleagues in the face of such an enquiry.
The correct answer is that you always used drugs soundly, without abusing them. "End drug abuse: use drugs soundly!"
if you've never been caught but you admit to murdering someone, they'll deny the visa. It's a little weird.
That actually seems kind of sane, in and of itself.
