Posts by recordari
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Gaying Out, in reply to Idiot Savant,
And then christian churches wonder why their religion is associated with bigotry in the public mind.
Associated with? That's generous.
-
The whole 'award for not being completely shit, like everyone expected' thing is a bit irksome.
So awards are decided by how many people notice, times the expectation of failure, divided by the number of players not available through injury, brackets, it's your turn and you're a boy's team.
Lets see how this equation looks when Richie's stress fracture doesn't heal, Ali forgets how to lock, and Dan gets a million dollar contract from Victoria Secrets.
-
Look, someone's made this helpful instructional video.
-
Up Front: Say When, in reply to giovanni tiso,
Yes but to keep digging is very masculine, hence becoming.
Step 1. Awareness. ;-)
Here, have my spade, I'm trying to give them up.
-
Just to clarify, I don't actually approach strangers in the street and make NTM comments on their hair, or any other aspect of their appearance. That was to add a satirical air to my post, to hopefully reduce the backswing.
This is, and rightfully so, a sensitive area, because making apparently innocent comments about people's appearance can very quickly fall into the category of 'judgey-pantedness', 'oppressive social normativeness', or other long words ending in 'ness' (dumbarsedness 4egs). While that is something we have to come to terms with as social human beings, it would be good if the instruction manual had a bit more detail on this subject.
I'm looking forward to that FAQ I've heard rumour of.
-
Up Front: Say When, in reply to Deborah,
And to hell with what anyone else says.
Joining the slapping queue, while of course you should do whatever it is you want with your hair, is it completely unallowable for friends, partners, people passing on the street who you don't know from Adam, to express an appreciation for hair of a certain type on a certain person?
I mean once you've made your decision, people should STFU, but just wondered how careful one should be.
[Slap]
-
It does seem putting a universal tax on the family home could have some serious implications for some people. Like widows/widowers, people who retire, downsize to the semi-detached, apartment or retirement village, and want to release some cash from land capital to pay the bills. CGT in those situations would seem a bit like death duties, but for the living.
I guess having been in the situation where the value of a first property, ex-state house, rose sufficiently to move up the ladder at just the right time when three children arrived on the seen, makes me think we would have struggled had such a tax been in place. Depending on how significant it was, of course. Mind you, perhaps if there were such taxes, the overall house prices would have stayed lower, allowing greater flexibility in any case.
-
OnPoint: Election 2011: GO!, in reply to BenWilson,
Glad to see the taxonomy of this conversion moved on to bigger issues, like the sun coming up in the morning, and self combusting toilets.
-
Muse: TV Review: Good Gods Almighty!, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
Give her a break! It’s her first TV review.
But not her 'first sally upon the field of criticism', per se.
-
Enough of this sticky wicket. Time for a counter-argument, although it's almost too obvious.