Wouldn't it be easier to stop calling Musk's toy "X, formerly known as Twitter" or "TwitterX" and start calling it "Xitter". So much easier, don't you think?
However, if the subject of the stupid tax includes episodes involving panhandlers, there is a recent instance in which I gladly paid a stupid tax. A revolving cast of panhandlers works a major intersection with Route 50 in Fairfax. I had never given any money until recently. As I pulled into the left turn lane at the intersection, I saw the panhandler, a wild-looking black man in his 30s who was manically shouting and gesturing at a car in the far right lane. I figured that there had been some sort of confrontation, and locked my car door. However, as the panhandler was walking up the median next to the left turn lane, I saw his sign.
It read [I shit you not]: "Help a N***a" . I picked up my jaw from my lap, took a $5 bill out of my wallet, and lowered the window. The panhandler was already past me and the light had just changed. I yelled out, "Yo, Man!" and waved the bill. The panhandler run up, took the money just before I had to make the left turn, and thanked me profusely.
I drove away smiling. I have not seen that guy since.
If I once paid a stupid tax by giving $5 to "Help a N***a," then I'm happy to do so.
What reportedly got the Smothers Brothers kicked off the air by CBS in 1969 was the national audience reaction (and no doubt, as these things go, the reaction from the "told abouts" as well ) to the two "sermons" on their show from David Steinberg, the then Canadian comedian and subsequently also actor, writer, director, and author. This is apparently the straw (sermon) that broke the censor's back, as the mixed metaphor goes:
So I finally decided to answer the poll as "I have an account but don't use it much." I actually haven 't used it in years. I guess that qualifies. I got an account very early on in X's existence. Right off the bat, I started getting strange women following me. Turns out, there is an actor/director in Hollywood, named...Tom Logan. And so is the Wolverine, so I've never found myself in a Google search other than a White Page listing, but you have to know my address (and there is/was ANOTHER Tom Logan in the White Pages close enough in proximity that I got a lot of wrong number calls. I'm not saying I'm not in there, I just gave up after 100 pages or so.
I gave the same answer. I actually have two accounts, one personal one and one on behalf of the Rotary club of which I am executive secretary. I visit each one once a week, the personal one to post an announcement of the upcoming program of the Tuesday Book Review & Lecture Series at the library, of which I am program chairman, the Rotary one to announce the program for the coming week's meeting. I have pretty much given up following anyone, and I almost never read any of the feed since it became X (especially since it's no longer chronological or even guaranteed to be posts from those I do follow). I suspect that neither of my accounts any longer has any followers, but I persevere anyway. I do get a lot better response from my Facebook posts about the book review programs (which aren't limited to 280 characters).
I get irritated by the idea that supporting some extremely ordinary idea (men and women are different!) is brave and daring if it goes against "political correctness". Every conservative comedian is trying to live that, and most of them are terrible.
Gene, "Because political correctness" is a lazy answer that's not worthy of you. I mean, it may be exactly the honest and proper answer for what you were thinking in the first place, but it doesn't address anything I said.
Do the magic words make my argument wrong? Did I say talking about sex differences was unacceptable? I thought I was rather careful not to. I'm not outraged, and I'm not leaving, and I will continue to enjoy the heck out of your work. What I asked was, who benefits if I talk about sex differences? In other words, the question shouldn't be why can't I, why shouldn't I, but rather why should I?
And haven't you seen enough of the right-wing provocateurs whose opening gambit is always to exaggerate the perils of political correctness and pose as a breath of fresh air before tearing down 3/4 of humanity to not want to look like you're taking the first step down that path, even if you have no inclination to take another?
God, that last sentence needed some kind of punctuation or pause for breath in it but I can't figure out how.
To the contributor who suspects something like asexuality: Sounds a lot like my son, who is definitely asexual but didn't even realize that was a thing until adulthood. He relates to very few movies and TV shows because it seems like most plots revolve around sexual attraction.
This being the age of social media, you won't be surprised to learn that there are groups! Seek them out. There are other people who want relationships that don't involve, as you say, sticking your penis in that.
I can't think of any relationship with a government or corporate entity that does not include a stupid tax. It all stems from a power differential. They have much more power in the relationship than you do. If you doubt me, consider the story in today's edition about Maryland coming after someone for rounding their taxable amount. Or consider your experience dealing with your local cable provider or cell phone service.
There wasn't quite the perfect poll choice for me, but I'm proud of how I've responded to the Musk takeover:
I always loved Twitter for sports, and particularly for using it during baseball games, where I consider myself part of "Nats Twitter" community (I have a few thousand followers, and follow several hundred people who mainly tweet about baseball and the Nationals in particular).
For example, when I'm at a game, and something crazy (or confusing) happens, I'll open Twitter to see what the beat reporters are saying about it. Or if it's relevant I'll add my perspective (or a photo) from inside the park. When I'm watching from home, I similarly feel connected to those in the park. It's really enhanced the sports experience for the past decade.
I've encouraged folks to move to another platform, but that's taking years.
I'm the meantime, this past season I committed to never "scrolling" through my "X" feed again (which is where Musk shows most ads).
I didn't uninstall the app, but I removed the "X" shortcut from my home screen.
I set up notifications (silent ones) for a few people that I follow. When they post something, the full tweet shows up in my notifications, and I can scroll through them, and "like" if I want, without opening the app or seeing any ads. This works on Android. I don't know if it works on iPhone.
And for those occasions when I want to quickly check on what just happened, or share myself, I can still open the app, with intention and focus, see only what I wanted to see from those I'm looking for, and then close the app immediately.
I've encouraged other baseball Twitter addicts to do the same. That's how I'm dealing with him.
Speaking of the expected annus horribilis we have just entered (no need to thank me publicly Gene --- an email expressing your heartfelt gratitude will do)--- now that we've reached the one year mark of the New Age of Enlightenment (which for only pennies a day can include the internationally acclaimed --- except for San Marino --- Pat and Gene's Really Swell Invitational), no doubt Gene will be sending out emails to complement his shameless beseechment here for paid subscriptions. These will ask you to select from an excessively long list of reasons why you decided (so far) not to take advantage of the bargain opportunity of a lifetime. The reasons tend to be of the "don't like the font," or "wrong size," variety and never really get to the underlying motivations for the declination. So, in the interest of actionable market research, I offer the following justifications (feel free to add your own):
* Can't compete week in and week out with Gene and Pat's love children;
* There is not as much discussion of bodily functions and fluids as expected;
* I am still "Most Likely to be Occasionally Amusing" even if Pat and Gene don't agree with my yearbook superlative;
* Pat and Gene hate me. I can hear it in their posts. (And by the way, I hate mustaches and tiaras);
* I am a distantly related Romanov and am offended by the appropriation of my birthright ("Czar," indeed !");
A sign of the times (or lack thereof...) is that I no longer see "Will work for..." placards. While I'm certain there are exceptions, a great many spangers these days are professionals, down to skillfully using the illusion of truth or confirmation bias, like a recent encounter when I was told, "I won't lie to you, I need a drink." Then again, who, at some point, hasn't "needed a drink" literally or figuratively ? That, and your discussion of "Brand X" continue to demonstrate the truth of the aphorisms attributed to H.L. Mencken and P.T. Barnum that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public and there's a sucker born every minute. Although the way he's going, MuskMan may disprove the first one.* "Brand X" also demonstrates what I call the "Billionaire Fallacy" or delusion/self-deception: just because you have success in one area, whatever role or skill you had in accomplishing that --- earning obscene amounts of dosh --- it is automatically transferrable to another. 'Taint so as we have seen over and over again.
* You may have read that "Brand X" is now worth less than a third of what MuskMan originally paid for the then Twitter according to an estimate by investor Fidelity. With "Brand X" now privately held, Fidelity's estimates are closely watched indicators of the company's health. But then again, he has enough money to be stupid longer --- an expression I had occasion to use more than once in the past.
I’ve run into those “I just need train fare,” “I just ran outta gas” panhandling jerks so many times. I know they are lying, and yet I always give a couple of bucks for the effort. If they are that hard up, pity overcomes me. Sad,I know.
I was walking through Grand Central Station in NYC when a guy came up and said he needed money to take the train to D.C. I told him I'd give him a piece of advice instead: Go to Penn Station -- Grand Central doesn't have any trains that go to D.C.
Just gotta say thanks for the link to the Smothers Brothers on Johnny Carson. I haven't laughed that hard for awhile and I needed it.
Stupid tax - I don't play the lottery; I "invest in my 401K." The return is about the same lately.
Wouldn't it be easier to stop calling Musk's toy "X, formerly known as Twitter" or "TwitterX" and start calling it "Xitter". So much easier, don't you think?
Brand X would be the best, since it would really offpiss him.
Ugh. Choices. They're both really good, but Xitter is my pick. It has so many levels of meaning, and requires no explanation.
However, if the subject of the stupid tax includes episodes involving panhandlers, there is a recent instance in which I gladly paid a stupid tax. A revolving cast of panhandlers works a major intersection with Route 50 in Fairfax. I had never given any money until recently. As I pulled into the left turn lane at the intersection, I saw the panhandler, a wild-looking black man in his 30s who was manically shouting and gesturing at a car in the far right lane. I figured that there had been some sort of confrontation, and locked my car door. However, as the panhandler was walking up the median next to the left turn lane, I saw his sign.
It read [I shit you not]: "Help a N***a" . I picked up my jaw from my lap, took a $5 bill out of my wallet, and lowered the window. The panhandler was already past me and the light had just changed. I yelled out, "Yo, Man!" and waved the bill. The panhandler run up, took the money just before I had to make the left turn, and thanked me profusely.
I drove away smiling. I have not seen that guy since.
If I once paid a stupid tax by giving $5 to "Help a N***a," then I'm happy to do so.
What reportedly got the Smothers Brothers kicked off the air by CBS in 1969 was the national audience reaction (and no doubt, as these things go, the reaction from the "told abouts" as well ) to the two "sermons" on their show from David Steinberg, the then Canadian comedian and subsequently also actor, writer, director, and author. This is apparently the straw (sermon) that broke the censor's back, as the mixed metaphor goes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLHTivRmLbM
So I finally decided to answer the poll as "I have an account but don't use it much." I actually haven 't used it in years. I guess that qualifies. I got an account very early on in X's existence. Right off the bat, I started getting strange women following me. Turns out, there is an actor/director in Hollywood, named...Tom Logan. And so is the Wolverine, so I've never found myself in a Google search other than a White Page listing, but you have to know my address (and there is/was ANOTHER Tom Logan in the White Pages close enough in proximity that I got a lot of wrong number calls. I'm not saying I'm not in there, I just gave up after 100 pages or so.
I gave the same answer. I actually have two accounts, one personal one and one on behalf of the Rotary club of which I am executive secretary. I visit each one once a week, the personal one to post an announcement of the upcoming program of the Tuesday Book Review & Lecture Series at the library, of which I am program chairman, the Rotary one to announce the program for the coming week's meeting. I have pretty much given up following anyone, and I almost never read any of the feed since it became X (especially since it's no longer chronological or even guaranteed to be posts from those I do follow). I suspect that neither of my accounts any longer has any followers, but I persevere anyway. I do get a lot better response from my Facebook posts about the book review programs (which aren't limited to 280 characters).
I get irritated by the idea that supporting some extremely ordinary idea (men and women are different!) is brave and daring if it goes against "political correctness". Every conservative comedian is trying to live that, and most of them are terrible.
Gene, "Because political correctness" is a lazy answer that's not worthy of you. I mean, it may be exactly the honest and proper answer for what you were thinking in the first place, but it doesn't address anything I said.
Do the magic words make my argument wrong? Did I say talking about sex differences was unacceptable? I thought I was rather careful not to. I'm not outraged, and I'm not leaving, and I will continue to enjoy the heck out of your work. What I asked was, who benefits if I talk about sex differences? In other words, the question shouldn't be why can't I, why shouldn't I, but rather why should I?
And haven't you seen enough of the right-wing provocateurs whose opening gambit is always to exaggerate the perils of political correctness and pose as a breath of fresh air before tearing down 3/4 of humanity to not want to look like you're taking the first step down that path, even if you have no inclination to take another?
God, that last sentence needed some kind of punctuation or pause for breath in it but I can't figure out how.
To the contributor who suspects something like asexuality: Sounds a lot like my son, who is definitely asexual but didn't even realize that was a thing until adulthood. He relates to very few movies and TV shows because it seems like most plots revolve around sexual attraction.
This being the age of social media, you won't be surprised to learn that there are groups! Seek them out. There are other people who want relationships that don't involve, as you say, sticking your penis in that.
I’m still on Twitter and have been a follower of yours for years. Can you tell us if you’re using one of the alternatives? Do you like it?
I can't think of any relationship with a government or corporate entity that does not include a stupid tax. It all stems from a power differential. They have much more power in the relationship than you do. If you doubt me, consider the story in today's edition about Maryland coming after someone for rounding their taxable amount. Or consider your experience dealing with your local cable provider or cell phone service.
There wasn't quite the perfect poll choice for me, but I'm proud of how I've responded to the Musk takeover:
I always loved Twitter for sports, and particularly for using it during baseball games, where I consider myself part of "Nats Twitter" community (I have a few thousand followers, and follow several hundred people who mainly tweet about baseball and the Nationals in particular).
For example, when I'm at a game, and something crazy (or confusing) happens, I'll open Twitter to see what the beat reporters are saying about it. Or if it's relevant I'll add my perspective (or a photo) from inside the park. When I'm watching from home, I similarly feel connected to those in the park. It's really enhanced the sports experience for the past decade.
I've encouraged folks to move to another platform, but that's taking years.
I'm the meantime, this past season I committed to never "scrolling" through my "X" feed again (which is where Musk shows most ads).
I didn't uninstall the app, but I removed the "X" shortcut from my home screen.
I set up notifications (silent ones) for a few people that I follow. When they post something, the full tweet shows up in my notifications, and I can scroll through them, and "like" if I want, without opening the app or seeing any ads. This works on Android. I don't know if it works on iPhone.
And for those occasions when I want to quickly check on what just happened, or share myself, I can still open the app, with intention and focus, see only what I wanted to see from those I'm looking for, and then close the app immediately.
I've encouraged other baseball Twitter addicts to do the same. That's how I'm dealing with him.
Stupid tax: bothering to waste time on a quiz set up to prove something to someone who is convinced he is always right.
I would argue that "wasting time" isn't much of a tax.
I would disagree. But that's almost without saying.
not to mention psychic energy.
I sense you're holding back. Tell us how you really feel.
Speaking of the expected annus horribilis we have just entered (no need to thank me publicly Gene --- an email expressing your heartfelt gratitude will do)--- now that we've reached the one year mark of the New Age of Enlightenment (which for only pennies a day can include the internationally acclaimed --- except for San Marino --- Pat and Gene's Really Swell Invitational), no doubt Gene will be sending out emails to complement his shameless beseechment here for paid subscriptions. These will ask you to select from an excessively long list of reasons why you decided (so far) not to take advantage of the bargain opportunity of a lifetime. The reasons tend to be of the "don't like the font," or "wrong size," variety and never really get to the underlying motivations for the declination. So, in the interest of actionable market research, I offer the following justifications (feel free to add your own):
* Can't compete week in and week out with Gene and Pat's love children;
* There is not as much discussion of bodily functions and fluids as expected;
* I am still "Most Likely to be Occasionally Amusing" even if Pat and Gene don't agree with my yearbook superlative;
* Pat and Gene hate me. I can hear it in their posts. (And by the way, I hate mustaches and tiaras);
* I am a distantly related Romanov and am offended by the appropriation of my birthright ("Czar," indeed !");
* I thought this was the David Sedaris website.
A sign of the times (or lack thereof...) is that I no longer see "Will work for..." placards. While I'm certain there are exceptions, a great many spangers these days are professionals, down to skillfully using the illusion of truth or confirmation bias, like a recent encounter when I was told, "I won't lie to you, I need a drink." Then again, who, at some point, hasn't "needed a drink" literally or figuratively ? That, and your discussion of "Brand X" continue to demonstrate the truth of the aphorisms attributed to H.L. Mencken and P.T. Barnum that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public and there's a sucker born every minute. Although the way he's going, MuskMan may disprove the first one.* "Brand X" also demonstrates what I call the "Billionaire Fallacy" or delusion/self-deception: just because you have success in one area, whatever role or skill you had in accomplishing that --- earning obscene amounts of dosh --- it is automatically transferrable to another. 'Taint so as we have seen over and over again.
* You may have read that "Brand X" is now worth less than a third of what MuskMan originally paid for the then Twitter according to an estimate by investor Fidelity. With "Brand X" now privately held, Fidelity's estimates are closely watched indicators of the company's health. But then again, he has enough money to be stupid longer --- an expression I had occasion to use more than once in the past.
I’ve run into those “I just need train fare,” “I just ran outta gas” panhandling jerks so many times. I know they are lying, and yet I always give a couple of bucks for the effort. If they are that hard up, pity overcomes me. Sad,I know.
I was walking through Grand Central Station in NYC when a guy came up and said he needed money to take the train to D.C. I told him I'd give him a piece of advice instead: Go to Penn Station -- Grand Central doesn't have any trains that go to D.C.
Haha!
It worked on me the first time, too. I think I'd rather just be asked for help, which I'm likely to give, than to be scammed.
Agreed.