I hate it that my kid just shot my 40" Sony Bravia LCD with his air soft pellet rifle. "Oh! I didn't think it was loaded"

Soft my ass.

daj59 wrote:"CONGRATULATIONS! You've been selected to receive a new Apple iPhone."

On so many webpages lately!

That squeaky girl's voice is so GRATING!!!! No kidding! If I got a free iPhone for every hundred times I've heard it, I'd be up to my a** in iPhones...

When at a bridal/baby shower, the guests are now expected to address an envelope to themselves so that the future bride/mother doesn't have to go to all that trouble when sending her thank-you notes.

PemberDucky wrote:When you accidentally light your friend's hair on fire.

Ms. Ducky,

Why do you hate that?

PemberDucky wrote:The screaming hurts my ears.

Ms. Ducky,

Duct tape works wonders for that. Either that, or a gag.

pooflady wrote:When at a bridal/baby shower, the guests are now expected to address an envelope to themselves so that the future bride/mother doesn't have to go to all that trouble when sending her thank-you notes.

What?! Not much of a thank-you note. I would say if that is they way they are going to be I wouldn't want a thank-you. I've never heard of that.

pooflady wrote:When at a bridal/baby shower, the guests are now expected to address an envelope to themselves so that the future bride/mother doesn't have to go to all that trouble when sending her thank-you notes.

http://fray.slate.com/discuss/forums/permalink/1010586/1010327/ShowThread.aspx#1010327

I hate wedding showers and usually don't go, but if I were asked to provide my own thank you card, filled out with my name and address, and supply the postage - my "gift" for the shower would be a gift card of an usual amount, like $4.23, with an explanation that it would have been $10 but I spent the other $5.77 on the thank you card and postage.

FenStar wrote:What?! Not much of a thank-you note. I would say if that is they way they are going to be I wouldn't want a thank-you. I've never heard of that.

The future bride/mother still have to (at least certainly should) write a note on the card thanking for that specific gift.

PemberDucky wrote:Yeah, I know I went through that carp when I got married. Everybody else should have to, too. I'm lefty so I dealt with extra labor as my hand smudged through the ink.

I did delegate some notes to the hubs. I don't care what the books say, if the gift came from his side of the family, he can write the thank-you.

My husband helped me with the thank you notes when we got married. We were standing in the post office when two little old ladies marveled at how he was helping me stamp the envelopes. When they found out we were working on our wedding thank yous, they told me to make sure I held onto him, that he was "a keeper". They both said that they had to write their own thank yous when they each got married. I of course responded that I intended to...I had just married him, right?

Students, who after you give them a study guide, notes, and an extensive help session, still can't find a right answer with two hands, a map (and possibly a cheat sheet).

daj59 wrote:Those freaking silence threads.

The silence thread is okay. Heck, it's on page 45. It's the one that keeps starting over and over and over.

daj59 wrote:That's the ones I'm talking about...complete silence.

If people would stop messing it up, we could finish one.

daj59 wrote:It'll never happen.

Mabe not, Ms. Daj, but for me the fun is in the trying.

daj59 wrote:Perhaps the Rule of Three would be a good rule to follow for that thread

Sure, Ms. Daj!

1. Beginning: Mr. Kneny creates the first one, works through a few until others figure out the mechanics (not the reason) of what he is trying to do
2. Middle: We go through the process of creating and recreating multiple Complete Silence threads, none of which reach 100 pages
3. End: The final Complete Silence thread reaches 100 pages and is locked, and we find out why Mr. Kneny started them.

I'm glad you agree with the whole process!

no1 wrote:Sure, Ms. Daj!

1. Beginning: Mr. Kneny creates the first one, works through a few until others figure out the mechanics (not the reason) of what he is trying to do
2. Middle: We go through the process of creating and recreating multiple Complete Silence threads, none of which reach 100 pages
3. End: The final Complete Silence thread reaches 100 pages and is locked, and we find out why Mr. Kneny started them.

I'm glad you agree with the whole process!

It's never going to happen. And I'm beginning to agree with AZ and Daj. It's getting really annoying.

pooflady wrote:It's never going to happen. And I'm beginning to agree with AZ and Daj. It's getting really annoying.

Lady Poof,

The process of creation of a complex structure can be sometimes messy. My opinion, however, is that participating in creation is always worthy and better than destruction. The threads only have to be restarted only because of a few individuals' destructive impulses. I prefer to be optimistic and believe that creative forces will win out.

no1 wrote:Lady Poof,

The process of creation of a complex structure can be sometimes messy. My opinion, however, is that participating in creation is always worthy and better than destruction. The threads only have to be restarted only because of a few individuals' destructive impulses. I prefer to be optimistic and believe that creative forces will win out.

Ahh but mr. one, creation and destruction are but two sides of the same coin. Without ugly would there be beauty? Without pleasure would there be pain? If there are people with creative tendencies then there must be destructive people as well. We wouldn't want to tear the fabric of the space/time continuum now would we? The consequences could be disastrous. As important as continuing the thread is to mr. 9226, it is equally important to me to destroy it. The meaning may not be clear at present but it will reveal itself, I assure you.

NB: Nice broccoli baby t-shirt. It reminds of the time my 3 yo (at the time) daughter tore of her bathing suit and went running down the beach with me in hot pursuit.

Kenney9326 wrote:Ahh but mr. one, creation and destruction are but two sides of the same coin.

I disagree. Sometimes you have to destroy the old so that something new can be created in its place. But sometimes something new can be created without displacing the old.

Kenney9326 wrote:Without ugly would there be beauty?

Yes.

Kenney9326 wrote: Without pleasure would there be pain?

Yes.

Kenney9326 wrote:If there are people with creative tendencies then there must be destructive people as well.

I disagree. You have presented no evidence for this assumption.

no1 wrote:I disagree. You have presented no evidence for this assumption.

But mr. one, I have presented you with plenty of evidence. There is a balance in life. Good/bad, smart/dumb, male/female, yin/yang. If we don't have contrast we don't know what we have. How would you know pleasure if you felt good all of the time? You wouldn't. Life works because of contrast. Look at the people that say they prefer to live where there are 4 seasons. They like the contrast. Often, people who live where the weather is always nice get bored and long for snow. Look at religion. Heaven and hell. Heaven would be meaningless without hell wouldn't it? I think you are just being contrary actually. You know, taking an opposing view.

PemberDucky wrote:And I HATE HATE HATE the twirly, achey misery of hangovers.

http://cocktails.about.com/od/healthsafety/ht/hngovr_rmdy.htm

Kenney9326 wrote:But mr. one, I have presented you with plenty of evidence. There is a balance in life. Good/bad, smart/dumb, male/female, yin/yang. If we don't have contrast we don't know what we have. How would you know pleasure if you felt good all of the time? You wouldn't. Life works because of contrast. Look at the people that say they prefer to live where there are 4 seasons. They like the contrast. Often, people who live where the weather is always nice get bored and long for snow. Look at religion. Heaven and hell. Heaven would be meaningless without hell wouldn't it? I think you are just being contrary actually. You know, taking an opposing view.

That's not evidence, that's your reasoning. Plenty of contrast is provided between creation and not-creation, which is not the same as destruction. You don't need to kill thousands of people in ethnic cleansing to appreciate a rainbow after a spring rain. Your destruction is unnecessary and malicious.

daj59 wrote:"CONGRATULATIONS! You've been selected to receive a new Apple iPhone."

On so many webpages lately!

Those ads are vexing, I agree.

If you download a little program called "Adblock Plus", it blocks all those jumping monkey and dancing bullfighter ads - I cruise the 'net now with ZERO ads popping up/showing up. One nice thing about it is that it doesn't work its way all into your software, either. It has a very small footprint and keeps to itself, running in the background. You can find it with Google.

EDIT: Sorry, I would say I "hate" something, but I prefer not to use that word. I do intensely dislike the taste of scotch.

no1 wrote:Your destruction is unnecessary and malicious.

Well that is your reasoning. Point is at some point the sand castle had to be destroyed to appreciate its beauty. Just as the village had to be destroyed in order to save it. No, wait that last one was all wrong. Knowing we die sure does put a certain zest in to our existence. Speaking of which I am reasoning existentially and your reasoning is rather limited in its scope. Not being offesensive ther, just saying look at the big picture. Or if you prefer, the big broccoli.

PemberDucky wrote:Next time I see a bunch of children happily playing in a sandbox, I'm going to destroy their little sand-creations and as they're crying, I'll be like, "Hai kidz! I had to do that so you'd know how much fun you WERE having!"

To stay on topic for this thread, I hate the Kenney imposter-troll who's self-important enough to believe HE has to destroy something that we might know the goodness of a successful silence thread.

And I HATE HATE HATE the twirly, achey misery of hangovers.

Hate is a very strong word m? ducky. But as long as you brought it up, i will say again, if it weren't for love there wouldn't be hate. Hate is perfectly appropriate for hangovers I believe.

Kenney9326 wrote:Hate is a very strong word m? ducky. But as long as you brought it up, i will say again, if it weren't for love there wouldn't be hate. Hate is perfectly appropriate for hangovers I believe.

Mr. Kenney, are you actually referring to duality when you talk about contrast and balance? We live our entire lives in duality, after all.

(To honor the topic, I will say here that I very much dislike olive color shirts).

Kenney9326 wrote:Well that is your reasoning. Point is at some point the sand castle had to be destroyed to appreciate its beauty.

Most people appreciate a sand castle's beauty before it is destroyed. The contrast from the formless beach is enough. The first sand castle needed very little destruction.

Your line of reasoning justifies murder, snuffleupagus, genocide, and all crimes as necessary. I am never going to agree with that.

no1 wrote:Most people appreciate a sand castle's beauty before it is destroyed. The contrast from the formless beach is enough. The first sand castle needed very little destruction.

Your line of reasoning justifies murder, snuffleupagus, genocide, and all crimes as necessary. I am never going to agree with that.

I beg to differ mr. one, my reasoning does not justify anything, it simply explains what is and why we perceive what we perceive. All these horrible things you mentioned exist. Our perception of them is what it is due to what we experience.

Kenney9326 wrote:I beg to differ mr. one, my reasoning does not justify anything, it simply explains what is and why we perceive what we perceive. All these horrible things you mentioned exist. Our perception of them is what it is due to what we perceive.

If you aren't trying to justify your actions, then why do you post at all? Your so-called "explanations" don't explain anything. They just seem a poor attempt to make your actions seem clever.

I am done trying to communicate with you.

PemberDucky wrote:Ordinarily, I wouldn't use the word. I figure since you don't even have the nuggets (or integrity) to operate under your own identity, I don't have to offer you *my* full integrity or respect. It would be a waste.

Well ok. So you have that going for you then. I guess if you had "nuggets"(*) you wouldn't hide behind a ducky name either.

(*) "Nuggets" as in literally or figuratively as the name is gender non specific.