"Pretty bad tear" is the verdict. Walking cast for now and ortho guy later.
This is not super compatible with the above outlined agenda.
I'm going to see to Wesley, see if he's still whimpering.
Giles ,'Chosen'
Natter 70: Hookers and Blow
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.
DavidS - May 22, 2012 2:10:54 pm PDT #6268 of 30001
"Look, son, if it's good enough for Shirley Bassey, it's good enough for you."
Hil R. - May 22, 2012 2:26:51 pm PDT #6269 of 30001
Sometimes I think I might just move up to Vermont, open a bookstore or a vegan restaurant. Adam Schlesinger, z''l
Are there spoiler standards for facebook? One of my friends posted that he was pissed off at last night's episode of House. I commented on that post, asking what had pissed him off about it, and mentioning one plot point that I thought didn't make sense. One of his friends then posted at me in all caps for posting a spoiler. I've been scrolling past a bunch of discussion of Sherlock, since I haven't seen the latest episode yet, and I figured that something that's already aired, and which is mentioned in the original status, is fair game for comments on that status.
Connie Neil - May 22, 2012 2:28:59 pm PDT #6270 of 30001
brillig
Crap. Medical crises just derail everything so damned fast.
Sheryl - May 22, 2012 2:40:39 pm PDT #6271 of 30001
Fandom means never having to say "But where would I wear that?"
Timelies all!
Happy Birthday Java Cat!
I'm sorry, Liese.
§ ita § - May 22, 2012 2:41:00 pm PDT #6272 of 30001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Good god, if you know a 7:30am meeting is cancelled, why not tell people?
Jessica - May 22, 2012 3:08:58 pm PDT #6273 of 30001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Does AA have a legal expectation of privacy, or is it inherent in the name, or the rules of the organisation? I mean, how far do I have to go to establish *this* roomful of people having an expectation of privacy, when the group that meets in the same room in an hour might not?
It is in the rules of the organization, which are (IME) posted on every visible wall surface available, and stated explicitly by the meeting leader before they begin. It would take an immense amount of stupid to be present at an AA meeting and think it was ok to take pictures.
tommyrot - May 22, 2012 3:11:29 pm PDT #6274 of 30001
Sir, it's not an offence to let your cat eat your bacon. Okay? And we don't arrest cats, I'm very sorry.
§ ita § - May 22, 2012 3:16:16 pm PDT #6275 of 30001
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
It would take an immense amount of stupid to be present at an AA meeting and think it was ok to take pictures.
I'm not so curious about okay, more about legal. What specific threshold does AA meet to make it illegal. Does it have to be on the walls? In the name? Group papers?
Basically--what's the minimum I have to do to establish expected privacy in an otherwise public space?
Jessica - May 22, 2012 3:19:25 pm PDT #6276 of 30001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Ah, that would probably take a lawyer to answer.
Amy - May 22, 2012 3:22:07 pm PDT #6277 of 30001
Because books.
Not a lawyer, but I think it would have less to do with the space than the rules of belonging to the group/participating in a meeting. Unless you mean someone who isn't in the group taking pictures. Refraining just seems like common sense and respect.