But that's just my point! You she obeys! She obeys you! There's obeying going on right under my nose!

Wash ,'War Stories'


Natter 52: Playing with a full deck?  

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.


Sophia Brooks - Jun 06, 2007 9:43:52 am PDT #1387 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here

I have found that people who say "no t-shirts" don't really know what T-shirts are. I think they mean casual t-shirts or that you need to wear a blazer or sweater over the nice t-shirt.


shrift - Jun 06, 2007 9:49:01 am PDT #1388 of 10001
"You can't put a price on the joy of not giving a shit." -Zenkitty

I'm just glad they didn't specifically rule out sleeveless shirts or open-toed shoes, because it's supposed to be 90 tomorrow and I'd like to not die.


lisah - Jun 06, 2007 9:49:27 am PDT #1389 of 10001
Punishingly Intricate

They say no T-shirts, but do Ann Taylor T-shirts count?

No t-shirts I think usually means no Men in t-shirts. And, probably, no slogan-y t-shirts.


Jesse - Jun 06, 2007 9:54:05 am PDT #1390 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.

I think most people who wonder if they're following dress code usually are. Although I did have a minion who really talked herself into believing that her "denim trousers" weren't jeans, when they TOTALLY WERE.


Atropa - Jun 06, 2007 9:58:14 am PDT #1391 of 10001
The artist formerly associated with cupcakes.

So here's a dress code question I've been pondering (because let's face it, my take on dress codes is not everyone else's). Tube tops or other strapless tops at the office, yes or no? Even if they're under an unbuttoned cardigan?

My take is no. If you constantly have to yank your top up, it is not appropriate for office wear. But apparently I'm some sort of crazy prude, because I've been seeing a lot of those sorts of tops around the office.


shrift - Jun 06, 2007 10:00:35 am PDT #1392 of 10001
"You can't put a price on the joy of not giving a shit." -Zenkitty

It's the insurance industry, so I've been dressing in a more conservative business casual style anyway. I mean, really, the closest I skate into unprofessional is sometimes wearing a fitted dark jean jacket to and from the office (never while in my cubicle), wearing Ann Taylor T-shirts with skirts and dress pants, and that one time I changed into jeans before leaving the office for the train station after my official work hours.


juliana - Jun 06, 2007 10:02:22 am PDT #1393 of 10001
I’d be lying if I didn’t say that I miss them all tonight…

If you constantly have to yank your top up, it is not appropriate for office wear.

Word. Anything strapless is not office attire.


tommyrot - Jun 06, 2007 10:03:13 am PDT #1394 of 10001
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

5 Bizarre Theme Park and Carnival Ride Accidents

Is it just me, or is flinging a human 100 ft with a trebuchet an obviously bad idea?

Also, should the person who put a chain across the bottom of a giant, 3-story slide when the amusement park was closed have allowed for the possibility of a child sneaking into the closed park at night to ride the slide?


lisah - Jun 06, 2007 10:06:51 am PDT #1395 of 10001
Punishingly Intricate

If you constantly have to yank your top up, it is not appropriate for office wear.

If you constantly have to adjust a piece of clothing it is not appropriate for you to wear. period. (So Sayeth the Tim Gunn!...I actually have a cute sweater with a keyhole that I know I adjust quite a bit because I'm sure the hole has drifted too low and my bra is peeking out. But I love the sweater and I will not give it up. I also don't wear it to work.)


tommyrot - Jun 06, 2007 10:13:38 am PDT #1396 of 10001
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.

If there is other intelligent life in the universe, why haven't we heard from them? This question is known as the Fermi Paradox. Here's a fairly new possible explanation for the paradox:

This is the Great Temptation for any technological species — to shape their subjective reality to provide the cues of survival and reproductive success without the substance. Most bright alien species probably go extinct gradually, allocating more time and resources to their pleasures, and less to their children.

...

Technology is fairly good at controlling external reality to promote our real biological fitness, but it’s even better at delivering fake fitness — subjective cues of survival and reproduction, without the real-world effects. Fresh organic fruit juice costs so much more than nutrition-free soda. Having real friends is so much more effort than watching Friends on TV. Actually colonizing the galaxy would be so much harder than pretending to have done it when filming Star Wars or Serenity.

Thus Miller’s answer to the Fermi Paradox — SETI won’t work because alien civilizations are all addicted to computer games and runaway consumerism. Why even attempt communication with actual beings (who are in any case quite difficult to reach and perhaps impossible to understand), when you can create a virtual reality that’s so much more malleable and responsive to your needs? That’s a dark view indeed, but we’ve a long way to go before drawing any serious conclusions about Fermi’s ‘Where are they?’ question.

[link]

Maybe the first intelligent species in the universe did look for other intelligent life, but since they were the first, they didn't find any, so they gave up. Then when the second intelligent species arrived, they couldn't find the first species (because of the having given up already) so they gave up too. And so on and so on....