Ha! (I realize this is probably A Thing That People Know, but I did not!)
May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.
Mal ,'Bushwhacked'
Natter 71: Someone is wrong on the Internet
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.
Jesse - Jun 12, 2013 9:32:55 am PDT #25660 of 30001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
msbelle - Jun 12, 2013 9:34:55 am PDT #25661 of 30001
I remember the crazy days. 500 posts an hour. Nubmer! Natgbsb
oh yeah, we went to a Pompeii exhibit in museum down here when I was growing up. It must have been a big deal traveling exhibit, but all the phallic statues were startling to elementary school-aged me.
sumi - Jun 12, 2013 9:41:13 am PDT #25662 of 30001
Art Crawl!!!
Cool origami street art and check out this amazing work from a Vietnamese origami artist.
javachik - Jun 12, 2013 9:49:32 am PDT #25663 of 30001
Our wings are not tired.
Need some lawyer-related business advice, if you're willing.
At my past company, every regulatory submission I created had the application number, "CONFIDENTIAL" and the page n of x stamped at the bottom (in a row across). It was standard, and we did it across all documents.
At current job, boss says that to stamp "confidential" on the bottom of a page that already has "confidential" on it elsewhere actually degrades the strength of the implied confidentiality. So instead of using my page stamper on the entire (sometimes hundreds of pages!)document, I have to painstakingly go through the entire doc and only stamp "confidential" on the pages without that word already somewhere on the page.
So, this seems silly to me. Is it true that the "confidential" more than once degrades the concept? I'd love to know if this is a myth she heard somewhere or if it's true.
Sophia Brooks - Jun 12, 2013 9:51:27 am PDT #25664 of 30001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
You have a stamp with the page number???
Jessica - Jun 12, 2013 9:52:36 am PDT #25665 of 30001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
So, this seems silly to me. Is it true that the "confidential" more than once degrades the concept? I'd love to know if this is a myth she heard somewhere or if it's true.
It seems silly to me too.
javachik - Jun 12, 2013 9:56:16 am PDT #25666 of 30001
Our wings are not tired.
Sophia, I use a software program with a stamping tool - sorry I wasn't clearer on that.
bon bon - Jun 12, 2013 10:10:19 am PDT #25667 of 30001
It's five thousand for kissing, ten thousand for snuggling... End of list.
That is extremely dumb. Two confidentials make a non-confidential? Where it's completely common to stamp every page confidential? WTF?
ETA: like what court/regulator is going to say, "well, this page says it's confidential, but this stamp also indicates it's confidential, so clearly the intention was to disclose this page exclusively."
Jessica - Jun 12, 2013 10:12:35 am PDT #25668 of 30001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Is Gmail being wonky for anyone else or am I just in the office corner with crappy wifi?
Scrappy - Jun 12, 2013 10:16:27 am PDT #25669 of 30001
Life moves pretty fast. You don't stop and look around once in a while, you could miss it.
It's good for me.