06-18-2010, 01:16 PM | #22723 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
The robots, you mean?
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-18-2010, 01:49 PM | #22725 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
The swimming geckos who've lost their ablity to cling to stuff, but just eviscerate it instead.
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-18-2010, 03:09 PM | #22727 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
druthers
(DRUTH-uhrz) noun One's own way; preference. Usage "If I had my druthers I would go, but I don't think I would a) be able to get my innings over there that I would be able to get here, and b) get the treatment I need." — Rob Bradford; Road Back Unfamiliar; Boston Globe; Mar 18, 2008.
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-18-2010, 07:30 PM | #22729 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
Thanks (for allowing my coincidence monster to come forth).
I was debating where to feature this (it seems everything I "find" somehow makes the most sense being displayed in Found on the Net, ironically; nobody puts me in a corner) but I don't think anybody cares about anything, so I'm not going to bother appeasing the shadows. Another tired sigh. I have no idea who the original author/creator is.
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-19-2010, 09:54 AM | #22736 (permalink) | |
Location: up north
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
06-19-2010, 11:32 AM | #22738 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
It's too late.
I believe the terse yet ubiquitous all-around meaning (meaning: it has lost its "meaning") of 'I think' will become, or it has already breached that line, of becoming a lost, hackneyed and grating expression (much with the same as 'you know', which I absolutely abhor hearing in any sort of social conversing session). What do you think about this?
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-19-2010, 11:56 AM | #22740 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
I'm always meaning to start new threads, new discussions, and one of those being forth a topic of architecture & design, and perhaps something to do with sculptures, monuments, and statues.
Problem is, is the beat down. I'm not going to elaborate further, but my apathy for new ideas comes from their apathy to brush them aside so easily. (I'm also still meaning to start a condensed, rolling TLTE! blog, but I have no idea which date should be the proper time to finally start it up.)
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-19-2010, 04:15 PM | #22744 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
We're all confused. I like the second definition better, despite the reality that the first is the one that inhabited, then exited, the mind.
I already forgot why I came here; I'm still debating whether or not to stay. Let's see what's in my eight-hundred-thousand-link-I-queue:
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-19-2010, 04:16 PM | #22745 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-19-2010, 05:16 PM | #22747 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
I had already forgotten I just posted a glass.
I guess page "569" of TLTE! has inadvertently become known as the "glass + shark" page. One more: a depressing glass of milk click to show
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-20-2010, 07:50 AM | #22749 (permalink) |
░
Location: ❤
|
Oh yes. My 'out of sorts' & cranky moment, has passed over.
Brushing up on word & phrase origins, is therapeutic. "Q From Ron Vaughn: Where does the expression out of sorts come from? What are sorts in this context? My wife accuses me of this malady and I know what she means, but I don’t know why I know. A English idioms are often extremely puzzling and their origins are notoriously difficult to track down. So people invent all kinds of yarns to make sense of them. The most common story about this phrase refers to the printer’s word sorts for the individual metal characters in his boxes of type, so called because they have been arranged, each into its own compartment, with all of one kind together. It would obviously be a substantial inconvenience if a printer were to run out of a sort during composition. The problem with this story is that the figurative expression out of sorts is recorded much earlier than the printers’ term; the first recorded use of it for printers’ type in the big Oxford English Dictionary is from as late as 1784, from Benjamin Franklin: “The founts, too, must be very scanty, or strangely out of sorts”. It would seem he was attaching an already well-known idiom to the printer’s trade, not the other way around. A second idea is that it has something to do with playing cards. A pack that hasn’t been shuffled is said to be out of sort and not suitable for playing with. The problem with this is that the OED doesn’t give any example of its being used in this connection, which it surely would if the expression had been common. The Latin original of our word sort was applied to a piece of wood that was used for drawing lots. Later, still in Latin, it developed into the idea of one’s fate, fortune or condition. This was the first meaning of sort in English, in the thirteenth century. It survived until shortly after Shakespeare’s time, until about the point that out of sorts is first found. But sort soon evolved another meaning in English that related to rank, order, or class. It was used to describe people, especially their qualities or standing. There were once phrases such as of sort that implied high quality or rank. Others that we still use today, such as of your own sort, the right sort, or of all sorts, evolved out of the same idea. It would seem out of sorts developed from this idea of quality (lack of it in this case), perhaps influenced by the other meaning of fate or one’s lot in life, so implying that fortune wasn’t smiling on one, or that all wasn’t well." |
06-20-2010, 08:58 AM | #22750 (permalink) |
still, wondering.
Location: South Minneapolis, somewhere near the gorgeous gorge
|
It's complicated,
reflecting while projecting, hearing while speaking, but hearing ourselves as we say what we're thinking is more so, in spades.
__________________
BE JUST AND FEAR NOT |
06-20-2010, 01:42 PM | #22756 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
Well, I've been ousted from from the creature comforts thread, so I suppose I can, and eventually will, seek to fill the void elsewhere, but without any of the internet mentality leaking into it. Serious animals, real photography, that's all I want.
I get the feeling you are starting to dislike my forewords, if only because I also am beginning to dislike having to write them anymore. Reason: this belongs here because I think you are the only ones who shall appreciate it. An elephant plays with a soccer ball given to him by a tour guide as toy at the Lion Park in Ceperdown, west of Durban, South Africa, Sunday, June 20, 2010. -- (AP Photo/Thanassis Stavrakis)
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi |
06-20-2010, 04:15 PM | #22759 (permalink) |
The Reforms
Location: Rarely, if ever, here or there, but always in transition
|
Verbal jousts are nice at times, but when you (meaning: me) keep offending and somehow "rubbing-a-dubbing" a few females the wrong way, I have to wonder, is it all just misplaced context, or do I come off being perceived as a condescending twit? I am recalling a previous member who always seemed so serious all the time, and at the moment of apex, he ofered up the sugestion of using more "smileys" to get across his point better (which is ludicrous) but it seemed to work out for a while. No one got on his case. Am I missing those ubiquitous, lost-meaning faces to elocute my contentions now?
I go to great lengths to sound absolutely neutral at all times, and pardon my way of writing style by never thinking afore-hand, as this is a stream-of-consciousness effort on my part, but this is how I actually speak in reality as well. It goes nowhere to say "you misunderstood me" because I've offended their sensiblities in questioning why this point is a relevant one in the first place, and I try to provide insight by thought expansion. Is this a rant? I get too easily lured into these, by own making. Back to basics, I need to start at least one new thread today, if not a two-fer; so, I ask, which of these thread titles appeals to you the most? Hopefully I get two congruent replies before 9pm NYC Standard time. Camera holding lying down game Modern Life is Rubbish TFP Aquarium TFP Zoo (I hate this title, but it will be the Animals Thread, Pt. 2, sans the LOLs, sexual innuendos and the ilk) Destinations The Red Button Partial Symmetry (incompleted) AUTO History of Pez (probably the most likely one to be started today) HIstory of Sayings Architecture / Design Thread Glasses (I think this is referring to 'sexy chicks with glasses; there's only one link in the queue, so not a likely starter) Bodypainting
__________________
As human beings, our greatness lies not so much in being able to remake the world (that is the myth of the Atomic Age) as in being able to remake ourselves. —Mohandas K. Gandhi Last edited by Jetée; 06-20-2010 at 04:18 PM.. Reason: the buzzer sounded... |
06-20-2010, 04:28 PM | #22760 (permalink) |
░
Location: ❤
|
I'm trying to recall the instances you speak of.
Perhaps when you begin a reply with: "Not to be snippy here." The next poster may well decide, "I'm on the defensive, cuz he's going to get snippy." When in fact your intentions were exactly the opposite. But, by mentioning that fact, up front, that your post could be offensive, that puts the idea, 'offensive' at the forefront of the reader's mind. I'm just brainstorming here...that's all. I'm curious to what 'the lying down game' might entail. |
Tags |
longest, thread, tlte! |
|
|