I found it while searching for a picture of Maureen Dowd
Yeah, she's a cutie, isn't she?
Maureen Dowd's picture is on her damn column.
Having said that, what do I have to do to get listed on the traitors page?!?!
To quote Tom Bradford, Dick Van Patten's character on Eight Is Enough, who is, as you remember, the editor of a newspaper, on the occasion of one of his kids (I don't remember which) calling his eldest daughter a traitor for writing an opinion piece taking the union's side in a labor dispute at Tom's newspaper: "Traitress."
I know it's on the column; I wanted to compare that picture to other pictures.
I wanted to compare that picture to other pictures.
This seems to me a hole out of which one cannot dig oneself. Anyway, Dowd hasn't been cute in about ten years.
And here's the guy the site is registered too. Making fun of James Brady: pure class.
I don't know, Ogged. Dowd looked pretty good on The Daily Show back in August.
I see that adding a woman blogger hasn't changed the locker room atmosphere in here one little bit.
I was just inspired by this post to do a quick-and-dirty study on rhetorical excess. Google has about 75,300 hits for ("John Kerry" traitor) and about 55,400 hits for ("George Bush" "war criminal"). If you're willing to accept that these are equally factually inaccurate and that zero of the hits are referring to Bush 41 (which is pretty unlikely), and that this measure is a proxy for the right's rhetorical excess versus the left's, you find that the right is only 1.36 times worse. Surely we can do better (they can do worse?) than that.
Or you can just deny that one or both of those claims is un-true, but to do so sincerely you have to be committed to imprisoning the person, and possibly to executing them. So don't do that.
That's pretty funny, launderer. I wonder how many of each of those is of the sort: "I'm so tired of people accusing John Kerry of being a traitor..." which just might be mean that the left whines more.
Hey B, I don't think that just commenting on a woman's looks gets us all the way to locker-room. It's more "boys' club." If apostropher had said, "She looked good, and I'd like to squeeze her titties," that would be locker room.
Don't make me snap you with this towel, b.
Now would be the perfect time for Alameida to chime in with, "Dowd? I'd hit that."
One humorless feminist bitch, begging to differ.
washerdreyer, you can affirm that both those claims are untrue while denying that they are equally factually inaccurate. (Maybe on some theories of truth you can't, but on the ones relevant to rhetorical excess you can.)
And, I'm sure I'm like the last to notice this, but the immediate effect of adding Alameida to the blog is to induce 5 posts from Bob? Guess we know what motivates him.
OK, I said I was the last to notice....
humorless feminist bitch
Good thing you're cute.
Admit it, B, the apostropher's on a roll.
Admitted.
Now, admit that y'all are being obnoxious.
Ok, Weiner's bit about "affirm both...while denying" was pretty rude.
I believe you have just proved my point.
Not rude. Shrill.
(ps re 12: I don't get it.)
(ps re 12: I don't get it.)
That's because you, sir, are a gentleman.
Matt, it's because you haven't spent as much time on Fark as the other boys here obviously have.
Nah, I first heard that phrase from a doctor friend.
Here you go, Matt.
Oh. I did get it. (And apostropher, no one calls me that and, actually I forget what it is that no one calls me that and does.)
I just recovered a memory of a relevant anecdote from my 10th grade history class but this margin is too small to contain it.
locker room? boys club? this is sunday-barbeque-with-the-wife-and-kids. different worlds.
That traitors site blows; I was expecting a thousand actors, musicians, writers, etc., not four pages with five people each on them.
The thing to do would be for a liberal to make some kind of "blacklist" site of every celebrity that had made any kind of remark or done anything that would raise the ire of Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter. And the joke would be, it would be nearly impossible for a freeper-type, if he followed the blacklist conscientiously, to go to the movies, watch TV, follow pro sports, buy music, really to participate in popular culture at all.
Well, given that the "new blogger here" (I have yet to see any posts, but let's call her a "blogger" for this site) was liable to show up at any point in the comments, I don't see how her more active presense (again, going on faith here) would change anything.
Is there really a meaningful concept of distance from the truth? It can believe to me that there would be, and then I understand why what I said earlier is wrong, but I don't recall ever reading anything about it when I was an undergrad philosophy major. And that was last year, so I doubt I forgot. Basically what I'm wondering is who has actually done work in that area and why did I make it through my phil. education without having it assigned to me?
Not trying to claim that I should have read it just by majoring in the topic, I think it sort of sounds like that. More like I expect (and regret) that there are volumes upon volumes of interesting work I missed (via laziness or otherwise) and wouldn't mind checking some out now that I'm thinking about it.
More like I expect (and regret) that there are volumes upon volumes of interesting work I missed
For certain values of "interesting", maybe (pdf link).
W: yes. There's been some work on this in the philosophy of science, e.g. in discussions of successive theories as closer approximations of the true. I remember reading Richard Boyd on this, but he isn't as clear as he might be about the idea of distance from the truth.
Humph, I see no EMAIL address on that site for submitting my own name as an "American Traitor" (i.e., someone who does not properly lick George W. Bush's Constutitution-defrenestrating penis upon command the way the Reich Wing does). What a loser.
Remember, boys and girls, if you believe in the Constitution of the United States and the rights and llimitations upon government power therein, you are a traitor!
- Badtux the Traitorous Penguin
2. I'd hit it
Vernacular commonly used by males, meaning, «I would NOT MIND having sexual relations with that woman.»
There's a big difference between «I'd hit it..." and "I'd definitely hit it!"; same as between «I'd do her.» and «I'd definitely do her!»
The first sentence indicates that the person who is speaking is moderately interested in the woman in question. The second sentence indicates that the person is considerably interested in the woman, and might swoop down for the kill, if given the opportunity.
Situation #1:
«Wow, is Halle Berry hot, or what?!»
«Yeah, I'd hit it...»
Situation #2:
«Wow, is Halle Berry hot, or what?!»
«Shit yeah, I'd definitely hit it!»
I'd like to object that the regulars here are far too nice to people who don't comment regularly. Rather than recieving some helpful information, I should have been torn apart for a second sentence which includes the nonsensical clause , "It can believe to me that there would be." I know what I meant to say, and I can still barely parse that.
Not only that, but you spell "dryer" incorrectly.
If apostropher had said, "She looked good, and I'd like to squeeze her titties,"
Well now, that would just be crass. I would, however, like to see me some Bob Herbert in a pair of these.
The concept of "distance from the truth" I had in mind is kinda like this: It is false to say that Glenn Reynolds is just like Ann Coulter, and it is also false to say that Ogged is just like Timothy McVeigh (maybe this one). But one of those is a whole lot more rhetorical excess than the other.
I'm pretty sure that's not what Weatherson's on to, and I don't think it's exactly the notion at issue in the philosophy of science stuff. Though both this and the philsci stuff might start with the following easy case: If parameter X is 300, and theory 1 says X is 350, and theory 2 says X is 1,000,000, then theory 1 is closer to the truth than theory 2 even though both are strictly speaking false. One of my old colleagues is working on a book about partial truth that might be useful in both these cases.
I don't work on this stuff, BTW, so I don't know the literature at all. But it's not the sort of stuff every undergrad major should have read.
BTW 2: b, I'm not sure I take 24/26 as a compliment. It sounds kinda like you're saying they're too rough and I'm too delicayte.
BTW 3: I first encountered "hit" as a synonym for "fuck" in a Smoove B column, I think.
BTW 4: Don't I get any credit for dropping a Fermat joke in a discussion of synonyms for "fuck"?
Matt, if it clarifies anything, I have nothing but utter disdain for Fark. Has nothing to do with rough and delicate, 'tall. Has to do with stupid.
Y'know, Brian Weatherson's latest post (AOTW) is actually relevant to this discussion:
The most successful kind of assertion one can make is when one asserts something that is plainly true. But nothing follows from that about truth value gaps unless we say that all the ways of not making a completely successful assertion are ways of being equally unsuccessful.
b, thanks, tho' deep down I'm going to remain insecure about this. Do not attempt to reason with my insecurities! And note how I tried to compensate by slipping a fratboy joke into the first paragraph of #39.
I have yet to see any posts, but let's call her a "blogger" for this site
Isn't this just what ogged was looking for?
re Fark - come on b, why no love for wookies photoshopped into chinese spelling bees?
I wasn't trying to reason with your insecurities! I was trying to insult everyone else. Either I misfired badly (which of course is impossible, as I am perfect and without flaw) or else the fratty united front deflected the shot, hence you = collateral damage.
'Course I'm being all girly, apologizing to you. If I were a Real Man (TM), I'd say something gruff and Rumsfeldian about how war is hell and mistakes happen and blah blah cost of freedom.
I like this "cost of freedom" business. Whenever I offend someone: sorry, cost of freedom, bud.
Or as Rumsfeld would say: blogging is untidy.
why no love for wookies photoshopped into chinese spelling bees?
Now, I don't hang around fark—never even visited. But I doubt their photoshopping prowess exceeds that of SomethingAwful's forum goons as displayed on Photoshop Phridays.
I was trying to insult everyone else.
And it would have been a direct hit...if you didn't throw like a girl.
war is hell and mistakes happen
"Democracy is messy."
Democracy is messy, right, that's it. I left my copy of The Wit and Wisdom of Donald Rumsfeld in the sanitary napkin dispenser in the ladies' washroom.
Disposal, not dispenser. Goddamnit. Well, whatever, being a girl I'm completely illogical and all that.
It was a direct hit, actually. It's just that frat boys everywhere consider "neanderthal" a compliment.
God, I am in such a foul fucking mood today.
Happy F'in Valentine's Day, b. Hope your mood lifts.
Thank you. If I were slightly crazier, I'd drop the remaining vestiges of self-restraint and just start an all-out fight, v. Rumsfeldian, which would be much more satisfying. As it is I'll probably spend the day feeling sour. Maybe I'll grade the papers I have to return by Friday and take my mood out on my students.
As you probably know, there is a collection of Rumsfeld's maxims.
Because of the actual flu bug hitting my family, I am also in a foul mood. Too foul to join in the clever banter, but I think the "good thing she's cute" remark by apostropher was awesome. It was clever, self-referential, and used a supposed compliment as a barb.
But, BPHD, you know we know you are brilliant, talented, strong, and can dish it out, so 'cute' is just an added bonus, not the essence of your 'I."
flu bug hitting my family
Is that why you're over at my place dissing bacon? I might let it slide if you're running a fever.
No one here knows what I look like. I could be ugly and, you know, fat.
For public consumption, Labs, yes it is.
Hey, whatever y'all are talking about, it's making me suspicious and liable to go to the authorities. You've been warned.
B makes crystal meth-- didn't you know, ogged?
Right. Crystal meth, whoring, let's see, what other laws can I break? I also run a puppy mill.
Cock fighting. Go for cock fighting.
Yeah, that too. I also brew moonshine in my back yard.
Not the way I do it.
Oh, and I don't pay social security taxes on my nanny, either.
Okay, I'll step into the mine field. In my opinion, "ugly" is an attitude, and fat can be cute.
So I don't think bitchphd is ugly. Yeah, she nails people, but they deserve it.
Nuances, I got your nuances here.
So Tripp, what you're saying is that bitchphd is cute when she's angry?
[ducks, runs away in zig-zag pattern]
I'm sure everyone bitch nails deserves it.
(What I meant to say earlier was, deep down I fear that real men are fratboys. And catering to my showing off my neuroses is not a good idea, since it just encourages me to do it more. Or, as in this case, just to go with the flow. As Lily Tomlin says in The Search for Signs of Intelligent Life in the Universe, "Bob, you're not actually sensitive, you're just passive aggressive!"
)
(Is w-lfs-n going to give me a concrete overcoat for busting in on his territory now?)
The fewer improperly balanced parentheses, brackets and braces there are in the world, the happier I am, Matt.
Oh, pshaw. I'm always amused and annoyed when men pull the "we're all dogs" card. I know men. Lots of them. And they're not all frat boys.
But when y'all encourage each other to be frat boys, and ain't none of you feminist enough to point it out, and I have to step in and say it, then that pisses me off. Y'all are smarter than that, or should be.
(Which is why I said upthread, it isn't the new girl's job to "make the boys behave." What a bunch of crap.)
I know men. Lots of them. And they're not all frat boys.
But perhaps it's just that they don't act like frat boys when they're around you? Give them pseudonyms and turn them loose on the internet, that's the real test.
Much as I hate to be drawn into B's neuroses: every one of us knows that none of us is a "frat boy" as the term is commonly used. The difference between a frat boy making a frat-boy joke, and someone here making a frat-boy joke is that in the former instance, the suspicion is that it's the expression of a forbidden belief (eg, when frat-boy makes a joke about dumb bitches, it's a clue that he really is less likely to hire a woman); in the latter instance, it's guys playing at being what they're not, and having fun precisely because they despise that which they are pretending to be. We're not in need of reform or guidance, and I, for one, plan to keep the Jabba the Hack and dumb fatty jokes a'flowin'.
Yes, if I really espoused what you label "frat boy" beliefs, I wouldn't be married to a woman with a master's degree in Women's Studies and a work history primarily in DV/sexual assault counseling. Not that I get any feminist merit badge by proxy, just that she wouldn't have married anybody touting an honest-to-god misogynistic worldview.
By the way, I met her while we were both members of my fraternity. So there.
Dude, your wife was in your frat? That's hot
Want to know the better part? Both of my wives were in my frat. And we all live in the same neighborhood now, though the current Ms. Postropher's first husband, also a brother, is living down in Charlotte, with yet a third sister.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
Intentional fallacy. When the fat/ugly jokes are directed at men as frequently as they are directed at women, I will concede the point.
Oh, and "neurotic" isn't sexist? Please.
I will concede the point.
Women do that?
Oh, and "neurotic" isn't sexist? Please.
You are so far over the humorless line...
Ogged, f'real, I call bullshit. I, you, and most of the people around here are not fratboys for the most part, agreed. But it would, I think, be deceiving ourselves to think that there is no vestige of fratboy within us, and that therefore any fratboy pose we put on is ironical and an expression of higher consciousness. We despise fratboys, but do we also not concern ourselves with a woman's looks? I mean, I know I for damn sure have noted in the past that Maureen Dowd is cute (at least in some pictures), and it's not that in doing so I try to Become What I Despise. And I'm the one who quotes the Smiths here (of course, the Smiths are defined by the sensitive/passive-aggressive comment I made upthread).
So I would not be sure that, in making a fratboy joke, we are not expressing forbidden beliefs. Except that in our cases we ourselves are forbidding the beliefs, whereas the fratboy might only consider those beliefs to be forbade by others (and might well come right out and say it in the right company).
Incidentally, "fratboy" != member of frat. Not that I feel too bad about that stereotype.
That said, I probably won't refrain from commenting on women's looks here. If I'd been feeling really fratty I would have reversed the "bitch nails people" quote.
bitch, I didn't really mean to play the "we're all dogs" card--more like expressing some sort of insecurity about my relation with the ideals of contemporary American masculinity. I mean, I really don't like fratboys, but also I don't want to be constantly suppressing myself like the guy in The Horned Man (fantastic book, read it, though the satire of sexual harrassment codes is ridiculously hackneyed). Not that I think not suppressing myself requires being a fratboy. But, I went to a fancy East Coast school and came out hating guys like GW Bush, GW Bush went to a fancy East Coast school and came out hating guys like me, and who got more votes in the last election? Not that I have doubts about who's right in that argument. But I feel out of step with my society.
B, I was actually the first to use the word "neuroses" on this thread, applied to myself; so maybe it isn't so sexist here.
I have a hidden agenda in some of these posts, BTW.
(Oh, and upthread, AOTW="As of this writing." Can we start spreading that as an abbreviation.)
Oh, and "neurotic" isn't sexist?
Given that, up to this point, that word has shown up over and over again here almost exclusively in reference to Ogged, I'd have to say no.
Also, I don't know if this is obvious, but I think b isn't currently laughing at our "sexist" jokes, and she has said she's in a bad mood, so I propose laying off. Make fun of me instead!
Matt, fair enough. I won't deny my vestigial frat-boyishness. But the (nicely drawn) distinction between forbidding ourselves and feeling forbidden by others seems the salient point.
Neurosis isn't inherently sexist, no; but in context, I'd argue that dismissing my point as an expression of my neurosis is, or at least that the distinction is so fine as to be nearly invisible.
Yes, the salient point is precisely that: the "oh all men do that when women aren't around" thing. First of all, b/c hello, women are, in fact, around: this is a public forum. Second of all, and much, much more importantly, b/c arguing that, as intelligent lefty men, we (you) are all free of sexism, is patently ludicrous. You were raised under rocks? Third, b/c, I am sorry, but I (mistakenly) presumed that part of the reason for bringing a woman on board was b/c y'all realized that the blog, much as I like it, is in fact, not as feminist as (I presumed) you would like it to be, being enlightened lefty men.
And yes, I have already said that I am "humorless" on this point. I also haven't shaved my legs in weeks.
Well, it seems to me to be an important distinction. But were I a woman sitting around in a faux locker-room atmosphere, surrounded by jokes of the sort we make made in a semi-ironic tone, it might not seem to be the most salient distinction.
This actually has real-world effects--some of the women in my PhD program (everyone please pretend you don't know which one that is) complained that there was a locker-room atmosphere in the grad student lounge. And the guys there were probably a lot nerdier on average than the ones here, though I may have set the curve in both places. That program when I was about to leave started doing a much better job of attracting women, and I hope that created a bit of a snowball effect--maybe having more women around lessens the locker-room atmosphere, which makes it easier to get more women involved, which etc.
Purely in the interest of clarity, I'd note that if this were truly a forum for fratboy attitudes, someone would already have asked ogged to check BPhd's posts from a month ago to see if there might be a pattern. Which means, at most, that this discussion is probably fratboy-like; this probably connects in ways I don't understand to w/d, Weiner, and FL's discussion of degrees of inaccuracy.
More seriously, BPhD probably has a point, but it seems like a relatively minor one. Everyone has friends who have sides to them that we're not crazy about; if the faults are minor (and surely, frat-lite on an anonymous forum with no meatspace analog is minor), we ignore them or avoid those friends during that period. Or at least I have (and am) said friends, and it might reflect moral laziness on my part, but it works.
Hey! Who you calling anonymous? Some call you Tim, but all call me Weiner.
There's a bit of a problem here, which is that if b decides to avoid us, her friends, when we're being frat-boy lite in a silly forum, then we'll never see her. 'Cause this forum is the only way in which we are her friends. (Except, apparently, for Labs, who is part of her drugrunning ring or something.) Also, I think b is a bit of a stakeholder in the forum--it wouldn't be as much fun without her--so if she's got a problem maybe we all have a problem. Of course, I don't think the site would be as much fun if we stopped being fratboyish, or if w-lfs-n stopped checking our typos. Boy, human relations are a problem.
I like cock jokes as much as the next person. All I'm saying is, admit that there is a difference between inclusive cock-jokery and tiresome "fat / ugly chicks are so funny" jokes. I didn't get bent when ogged implied that I was on the rag in a previous disagreement, so it isn't even jovial sexism. It's exclusively that I think the "fat / ugly" joke is excessively obnoxious. Don't mind it applied to me personally, as it just rolls over into mutual shit-giving; do mind it as an easy, recurring gag.
Like I said, a little too Fark-like.
How do "Hot or Not" jokes rank here? 'cause it seems to me that the MoDo discussion wasn't quite up with the K-Lo discussion, which did get kicked off by the BwO. But on the other hand the MoDo discussion probably wouldn't have made women feel too comfortable in the grad lounge.
I think the point is the ease with which the joke is, not unfrequently, made.
As to the BwO, see my previous post re. "not raised under rock." Girls can buy into sexism too. I do. I've written about it, most recently, here.
Hm, as far as "raised under rock" goes I might have thought that this fell into the category "members of relatively marginalized group can make jokes about that group that non-members can't." For instance: I was playing poker with some buds recently and I commented, "You notice how the Jews have all the chips?" If one of the goyim had said that there'd have been trouble. (They were quite nice about my gloating.)
But of course Alameida is known non-ugly, so that may make a difference.
the ease with which the joke is, not unfrequently, made.
Really? I honestly don't remember any fat/ugly chick jokes.
In fact, a search for "fat" or "ugly" turns up nothing relevant. Maybe we used different words. I still don't remember any.
Jabba the Hack, on the other hand...
That too, but at the risk of dissing Alameida, who is not here to join the discussion and who is new so I feel bad, I'd say that making a "marginalized group" joke when one is surrounded by the dominant group is not quite the same, no? Also, you will note that she prefaced it by acknowledging that it was puerile.
FL's link to the 80's hair chicks, for one, which I commented on at the time but no one realized what I was saying.
Fuck fuck fuck, apo beat me to it. 100 on a Labs post, without a single post about how many posts there were until the 100th! I am so happy. Too bad most of the posts were about what jerks we were being.
(b, at the poker game we were also surrounded by the dominant group, but the Jewish-non thing is not so fraught as the woman-man thing, I don't think, so it's not a great analogy.)
Also, Weiner, are you, like, fat or something? Maybe spiritually fat?
We had that problem in my grad lounge too. Funny how that happens. For a second I thought we went to the same graduate school. What a hoot.
No, I think it's a valid analogy: it depends on context. You weren't the only Jew in the room, presumably, and you were among friends. Same reason I don't mind cocktalk and the like here, usually. This time, I did. If anything, I find it most telling that initially there was this whole "nuh-uh, we're not really sexist" response rather than, as I sort of expected, a kind of good-humored "ok, yes, that's pretty obnoxious" response.
Hey, fat? Where'd that "fat" come from? (Also, maybe I shouldn't ask this, but doesn't your name provide a clue to your alma mater?)
b, I interpreted those original comments as humorous exaggeration of the sexism. But I wasn't the one getting snapped with the towel.
Who the fuck cares if you didn't like it? You're being neurotic and I have no idea why Weiner is humoring you. If we're sexist, it's not in any sense beyond "we're all inevitably somewhat sexist" and it doesn't describe anything important about us. To hammer on that among some of the least sexist people around is just fucking humorless. No, it's fucking rude.
Furthermore, calling someone fat and/or ugly is a perfectly legitimate point to make about their character. Except for cases of disfigurement, people of good character just aren't ugly. And fat people suck. Lose weight, fucking fat people!
Well, fair enough. It's possible that I'm wrong; I defer to y'all's consciences on this one. Anyway, I don't want to belabor the point. Either it's valid, or it's not.
I'd hate to be a cunt about it ;)
But I wasn't the one getting snapped with the towel.
Oh, you're next, Jewboy.
And fat people suck.
I'm not fat. I'm big boned, towelhead.
The mulletheaded redneck jokes may begin in 3, 2, 1...
My comment was a response to Matt, by the way, in case that wasn't obvious. To ogged, while I don't want to fan the flames, I will say that the least sexist people around are precisely the people I would be most likely to hammer on this point with: people who are overtly sexist, it's a waste of time. I did my best to avoid rudeness.
Damn apostropher, you have really been killing lately.
OK, my hidden agenda (I had one, look it up) was to get to 100 no matter who got hurt, and I'm going home. (Labs, if you're trying to ask if I got picked on as a kid: Hells yeah.)
We're all puppets, dancing for Weiner.
Man, you go away for a few hours... Legitimate question: how is "neurotic" sexist? Really. 76 reminds me of the section on racist jokes in Jokes: philosophical thoughts on laughing matters, a book with many good jokes.
Re 89 (which I see contains an explanation of the neurosis bit): ogged said when meeting with Unf, Kotsko and me that one reason is that the unfogged is kind of a sausage-fest (his words).
Oh, I could lose a couple-twenty pounds, but I'm moderately weighted enough that it doesn't make me feel bad. I feel bad for making you feel bad, though. I look like this (I'm the one in back).
Ogged, I am so going to quote that out of context every chance I get.
And, if you want to make fun of me, make fun of me for being a goddamned liar.
ogged said when meeting with Unf, Kotsko and me that one reason is that the unfogged is kind of a sausage-fest (his words).
Eh?
You know--the quarterly meeting of the Steering Committee.
When Ben wrote "Man, you go away for a few hours..." I think he meant to finish with "and you lose 30 IQ points," which also accounts for the unfinished thought. What he's trying to say is that when we had the Great Unfogged Real-Life Gathering, I said that Unfogged could really use BwO, because the blog was becoming something of a "sausage fest." My words, true, but a phrase I picked up from Unf (credit where due).
A lying jew? How much worse can this get?
As for my SuperSecretIdentity, Matt, I had to come up with a dumb name so I could make fun of Ogged on the Invisible Adjunct site lo these many years ago. Then I was sort of stuck with it, even though it's not really good at preserving the secretness of the aforementioned SuperSecretIdentity, as Ogged learned when he solved the big mystery in about five minuted. With very, very little effort, you can be king of Thebes!
I have no problem with Jews, I just hate when they flaunt it.
So what, you want they should do something else if they got it?
Labs, you are totally all up in my grill challenging me to figure out your identity in about 5 minutes, aren't you? And I'm not going to be able to do it. And I'm going to be awake all night because of it. Damn you. (Actually, I bet Ogged got to use IP addresses.)
Ok, I'm real gone for real.
Look, wearing a yarmulke is fine, but this other jew stuff, like controlling the rest of us, and making distinctions, and all that shit, it's just not right.
Matt, if you stick around, I'll tell you who Labs is, and send you a picture of him in a Speedo.
He's right about the IP addresses. Makes a big difference.
a picture of him in a Speedo.
I want! I want! Me! Me! Me!
I know you're deadly serious.
You have no idea.
I don't remember exactly how I tracked you down, but the IP addresses were invaluable.
