How many layers of cloth do you consider an appropriate barrier between your buttocks and those of another patron who is at a temporal remove? Just asking for, y’know, science.
“Buy land, they’re not making it anymore.” ~ Mark Twain
“I’m sorry ma’am, but Earth is private property. We don’t allow people dressed in early 21st century North American dress costumes…or hijabs.” ~ 22nd century space elevator attendant.
As many as possible. Sagging, especially when sitting down on something, is kind of an extra “fuck you” because you could pull them up but choose not to. There’s no reason to sag intentionally aside from a desire to engage in flagrantly antisocial behaviour. It’s like pissing on someone’s door instead of that tree five feet away.
As an aside, I’m mystified how that even works. Absent a belt or suspenders, my butt is the only thing holding my pants up, and even that’s not a sure thing as it gets older and flatter. Once the pants slip below the cheeks it’s a matter of seconds before they fall all the way down. Are sag pants sewn or velcroed to the end of the underlying boxers?
1 Like
One could argue that the Web 2.1 sense of “monetize” isn’t necessarily incorrect, in that views or likes or retweets or ISK can actually be treated as currency, to various degrees of proxy. You’re right that the strategies of “sell ad banner space on our website” and “have employees walking around in costume” don’t fall under the definition though.
1 Like
No one said you were obligated, but thank you for acknowledging what we all suspected: you aren’t interested in discussion, only driving trollies.
3 Likes
With all due respect to Mr. Twain…
5 Likes
That would be…
Just because you advised me of a bullshit policy in the fine print of a ticket I bought does not mean that the bullshit policy is legal or justified or sensible or inoffensive.
M_dub, art, it pains me when I feel the need to say Stop Your Shenanigans–I love shenanigans. But stop it.
2 Likes
I missed that. So, not in the first of your two examples, and in your second example it was only one word in a long list of adjectives at the end of a much longer post. And we’re well over 200 posts at this point.
You’ve proved @Skeptic’s point: the posters on this thread aren’t arguing that the policy is illegal.
2 Likes
No, just not interested in playing someone else’s game. The “because” doesn’t matter. Butchart Gardens, thought they did offer an explanation of their rules (as well as listing a number or other facilities with similar rules), there were not under any obligation to do so.
Personally, I don’t need an explanation from them, because it’s pretty obvious. The couple could easily be confused for park employees. Someone here assumed that the worst that could happen is that a visitor might as them a question, and not get a correct answer. That’s hardly a worst-case scenario. Imagine that the couple get into an argument with someone that develops into a shouting match Twenty people see this, and tell all their friends and twitter followers about how rude the employees are, and that no one should ever go there.
There’s a saying in the restaurant business - If some has a good experience at a restaurant, they might tell one person. If they have a bad experience, they’ll tell ten.
I could have found many more, but this forum software is of the “load as you go” type, which makes the usual browser Find function next to worthless, and their built-in search sucks, because it doesn’t show finds in context.
I’m sorry I didn’t keep a list, but I didn’t know there would be a pop quiz.
Seems like they’re telling thousands.
5 Likes
Stop digging.
(I should know, I am as guilty as any)
4 Likes
I basically agree with you on the whole private property angle. But, you’re kinda being a jerk about it.
4 Likes
I’m good with that.
I’m starting to think that that was the Chrismans’ whole objective - to drum up publicity for their 3 books (printed with a steam powered press, I’m sure) and their website, which I guess they maintain on a whale oil powered Mac Pro. I have no proof of this, of course. Just seems a bit fishy. Or maybe that’s just the whale oil.1
1 yes I know whales aren’t fish.
1 Like
I’d never have thought a thread about LARPing could bring out such passion in people. This place can be awesome sometimes 
7 Likes
I don’t think you can lose money “hand over fist.” The idiom comes from hauling in a line, as on a ship or pier. Extended to money, it suggests hurriedly pulling in wads of cash.
(I wouldn’t mention it if we hadn’t already been discussing the finer points of “monetize.”)
monetize with a z
which is pronounced “zee,” not “zed.”
Zed’s dead, baby.
3 Likes
And which side of it is Twitter on?
Trick question! It’s on the Pacific.
Let me clarify; the second definition refers to an activity, an organisation, a made article, etc. So at one end of that you have a society that goes from subsistence agriculture to agricultural export. At the other end, someone who walks their dog every day and decides to start walking other peoples’ dogs for money, is monetising the activity. I guess that ‘commercialisation’ is a close cognate to the latter meaning, but the reason it is not always appropriate for business users is that the activity in question may already be recognised as commercial and be producing non-monetary value for the business - for example, a news outlet might introduce a paywall in order to directly monetise the news content that previously drove circulation, reputation and ad viewing figures.
