You know, I've saved lives. Dozens. Maybe hundreds. I reattached a girl's leg. Her whole leg. She named her hamster after me. I got a hamster. He drops a box of money, he gets a town.

Simon ,'Jaynestown'


Natter .38 Special  

Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.


msbelle - Sep 21, 2005 11:09:56 am PDT #9650 of 10002
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb

14th street is 3 stops south of Times Square. The conductor was confused.


Tom Scola - Sep 21, 2005 11:10:44 am PDT #9651 of 10002
Mr. Scola’s wardrobe by Botany 500

The 14th street station is three station stops away from Times Square, heading towards Brooklyn.

The announcements are supposed to be about trains that are about to arrive at Times Square, but that train had already left ten minutes ago.


Jessica - Sep 21, 2005 11:10:44 am PDT #9652 of 10002
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset

Announcement: Ladies and gentlemen: There is a Brooklyn-bound R train approaching 14th Street. --Times Square station

Because Times Square is 42nd St. (It's not really that funny, just wrong.)


tommyrot - Sep 21, 2005 11:11:41 am PDT #9653 of 10002
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

That car survey article mentioned the now-discontinued Pontiac Aztec. I was listening to the radio a few weeks ago, and they mentioned that Pontiac is now claiming that their new entry-level SUV is their first one ever, apparently wiping the Aztec from their history completely. According to the radio report, the company's website has also deleted it from their "history of car lines past" section.

Lincoln did something similar. They made the Continental Mark II in '56 and '57, the Marks III-V in '58-'60, and when they restarted the Mark series in '68, they started with the Mark III. They did a lot of promo stuff over the years since then featuring the various Marks, always leaving out the '58-'60 cars.


bon bon - Sep 21, 2005 11:17:04 am PDT #9654 of 10002
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.

That sounds like it's going to be a tough job.

They'll probably settle. But I was being a bit flip earlier. Whether or not the harm suffered was foreseeable is at the crux of a tort case. It would be argued by the producers that they had no way of knowing that she would commit suicide. The plaintiffs would argue that you take your victim as you find him or her; the exact mechanism by which your harmful act results in injury is irrelevant as long as you could have foreseen that you would cause harm.

ETA:

Williams was supposed to be on the show, McGee was goaded into calling Williams ugly, and the suit contends that McGee committed suicide because Williams was dropped from the show?

I haven't read the complaint but when I looked at the news articles it appeared to me like the reporter(s) muddied the waters by talking about how Williams was dropped. It probably was not claimed as a cause of the suicide.


Emily - Sep 21, 2005 11:17:38 am PDT #9655 of 10002
"In the equation E = mc⬧, c⬧ is a pretty big honking number." - Scola

The 14th street station is three station stops away from Times Square, heading towards Brooklyn.

Got it. So it's like hearing "Ashmont train approaching South Station" when you're at Park Street, then.


Katie M - Sep 21, 2005 11:18:02 am PDT #9656 of 10002
I was charmed (albeit somewhat perplexed) by the fannish sensibility of many of the music choices -- it's like the director was trying to vid Canada. --loligo on the Olympic Opening Ceremonies

Williams was supposed to be on the show, McGee was goaded into calling Williams ugly, and the suit contends that McGee committed suicide because Williams was dropped from the show?

As I understand it, the suit contends that McGee committed suicide because she said all these awful things about her sister and then her sister didn't even get anything out of it.


§ ita § - Sep 21, 2005 11:20:04 am PDT #9657 of 10002
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.

The plaintiffs would argue that you take your victim as you find him or her; the exact mechanism by which your harmful act results in injury is irrelevant as long as you could have foreseen that you would cause harm

There must be a threshold of harm, though, right? I mean, if they would have put her in a bad mood, no big deal. If they thought they'd only put her in a bad mood, are they on the hook for suicide?

and then her sister didn't even get anything out of it

That's judgeworthy.


Aims - Sep 21, 2005 11:20:13 am PDT #9658 of 10002
Shit's all sorts of different now.

Huh.


Wolfram - Sep 21, 2005 11:25:24 am PDT #9659 of 10002
Visilurking

There must be a threshold of harm, though, right? I mean, if they would have put her in a bad mood, no big deal. If they thought they'd only put her in a bad mood, are they on the hook for suicide?

If they put her in a bad mood, there still might be harm. It depends if their behavior could be categorized as intentional infliction of emotional distress, which requires extreme and outrageous behavior. For negligent infliction of emotional distress the plaintiff needs to make a showing of actual physical damages. Death meets that threshold.