Dusty Chalk

Pfff.

I don't know, it's just CG -- kind of hard to tell. Either one would be fine with me, but I hadn't yet thought of the "bumping it" problem, which is probably a serious consideration.

Watched Deathproof last night. Fucking sucked. Best thing about it was...uh...erm...that it's over. Oh yeah, the soundtrack didn't suck.

You realize that air smells like sewer, to put it euphemistically. And is also highly flammable (methane). I suspect it's a scat fetish thing, disguised as a fire safety device.

I got temporarily banned, apparently. (Couldn't get back in -- thanks for fixing me, guys! Even though I believe it was a conspiracy on the part of MrRex to try and "lap" me. A couple more of these, and it'll work!) PS I'm using Black Rain now, too -- change of pace from New Damage. Melikey.

So basically, you have the only two in existence that you know of.

Yes, it's correct now -- what did it used to say?

I ate some garlic chicken with garlic earlier. Duangrat's Thai restaurant. i, presumably, fixed your title. unless you were going for some abstract mad libs thing --admin

From a particularly silly audiogon virtual system.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iu5wZtlvIRI]Sex and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and drugs and rock and roll[/ame]

What postjack said -- awesome; I approve, etc. I've done that. I have an amp whose volume control is labelled "attenuation" and goes from infinity to zero. Having a small lapse in reading comprehension, I turned it to zero (I think it also turned the other way). One only makes that mistake once. Fortunately, it was with speakers, but it was still pretty loud.

HIPPIES!!!1!

Oops. And -- it's quite common in the DC area to see military planes of a variety of sorts, so it doesn't freak us out. Although I have to admit to not having seen a B-2 yet. We have several AFB's, plus that whole President/Air Force One thing.

Agreed -- they work great along the knobs...although...are they going to turn in opposite directions? They almost seem to be pointing in the way that they should be turned. Like fast-forward and rewind on a cassette player. If the knobs are going to turn in the same direction, they should be pointing in the same direction. Just an opinion, feel free to disregard.

Nothing wrong with Birkenstocks, but (a) they're not slippers, and ( they're hippie shoes. As long as you are comfortable with your inner hippie, be at peace.

No, we've already had a ruling on them. They're hippy shoes, not slippers.

Have I posted this already? Horror Inc movie script

Aren't cats supposed to wash themselves?

Whut? Remember, he's antisocial, you won't have to interact with him. Is he still on Head-Fi?

Doctor Doom is Latverian, and hence is disqualified.

Funny, that is almost verbatim what I did (I haven't been to school since 1986, though I do have two BS's [twice as much BS!]). Alas, not all employers feel that way -- a lot of them really put a lot of value in that sheepskin, if for no other reason so that they can sell it to their clients.

I understood your point even before that post, my point was that the teachers are also the ones coming up with the criteria for judging whether or not they are successfully teaching. You call that an inherent flaw in the system, I call it grading on a curve. Unless you have a solution (academic internal affairs?), I suggest you accept that it is the system, whether you like it or not.

Yeah, I'm the same way, hence why "get everything" is such bad advice. I totally burnt myself out on Spock's Beard that way, until Snow came out.

This is not good advice. C'mon, man, put some effort into it. Which ones do I get first? I just bought a shitload of SACD's, I need to go through them before I buy many more CD's, I'm not getting every single fochin' one of them.

I think you mean 75 (50 was theoretically the average == C), but you're still wrong -- it was still theoretically possible for a student to get a hundred (he always put problems on the test to see if "someone out there" had the brilliance to figure out the answer, and very infrequently did). So doing that would push the highest score way above 100. But what you're basically doing is getting semantic on me -- that's effectively preparing the numbers beforehand and not calling it a "curve". It was his choice that the numbers turned out between 25 and 75, so what you're saying is, if it had been his choice so that the numbers turned out between 50 and 100, he could have -- and I completely agree, but the whole point is to assign C's to the average students, B's to the above average students, and A's to the highest ranking students, and he did that and successfully. I don't disagree with curves. And "one student" ruining it for the rest of them should fit in a bell curve, too -- statistically, there should be one student way up there. What I disagree with is their implementation. If one student getting a hundred ruins the curve, then you're doing it wrong. The teacher I was referring to always drew distribution charts, and they usually more or less resembled a bell curve. (That first one was an anomaly, it was all distorted towards the bottom of the spectrum. Looked like someone had taken a bar graph and shaken it and tilted it backwards so that all the bars fell towards the bottom of the graph.) And then he would draw lines showing where the C's were, the B's were, and the A's were, and said, "if this were your final score for the class, this is what your grade would be." The tests were used both as part of the final score of the class, and as a gauge to tell you, the student, how you were doing in the class. My point is, teachers are human, and their ability to write a "perfect" test that the average student should get a 75 on is not necessarily perfect, hence the need for a curve. I admit that it could just as well be the inability of the students to learn the material, but that's where judgment calls come in. In the case of the above teacher -- he was usually pretty much right on the mark, so was beyond reproach. (Yes, even by you.)