posted on July 28, 2000 05:46:46 PM
Marwin, in need of attention,
finds provocative topics to mention.
His equations ersatz -
That we answer him? That's
a matter beyond comprehension.
It's been quite some time since I faced
the size of my hair and my waist.
Perhaps it sounds vain,
But I'd wager your brain
is smaller...a matter of taste,
N'est ce pas?
[email protected] (willing to accept any AW formal warnings for injudicious poetic license...)
posted on July 28, 2000 05:52:36 PM
Let us not overlook one thing, Ms. Jump. I don't think I've ever seen the thick waist of an aging woman described as "opulent." If that ain't a pearl in the piffle, I dunno what is.
- Pareau
posted on July 28, 2000 05:57:43 PM
Ah, pareau...although I could potentially wrap my hair round mine at present, I fully expect that as I thicken, my husband will wear out the dictionary in pursuit of the proper phraseology. Beauty is in the eye of the enslaved, heheh.
posted on July 28, 2000 06:21:59 PM
Marwin, but noting the High German root of *saft*, you could reasonably be accurate as well.
Let's call it a tie.
(Off to create waffles and strawberry ice cream in the attempt to thicken my little ones' waists, hahaha!)
And in case you missed my edit up there, Marwin, thank you for taking such a good-humored approach to my nastiness. My best friend calls it *instant karma*, this thing that happens to me...try to be mean for a minute and someone immediately responds with goodness. You made me ashamed of myself.
And that's the thing...it's not our sizes or shapes, it's our unexpected ability to disarm others with kindness or humor that is the real measure of a person when it's all over, eh?
posted on July 28, 2000 06:50:57 PM
mybiddness: The study said that a survey of men who wear almost exclusively polka dot ties shows them as having an average income some $21,000 above the US median income and having about 30% fewer car accidents than the rest of the male population... Needless to say, am off to the haberdasher first thing in the morning...
posted on July 28, 2000 06:55:03 PM
But don't ya wonder how they came up with that? Sounds a little too easy to me. BTW, who gets paid to come up with that stuff? My auctions are slowing way down lately... may be looking for more work.
posted on July 28, 2000 07:14:29 PM
mybiddness: It's not too difficult to prepare surveys which result in some surprising fact or statistic. It has a lot to do with how you slice the numbers and your methodology. In other words you start out with a fact and then basically try to come up with numbers to back them up. So, the results are correct but by the same token they are statistical aberrations.
For instance, let's say that you want to demonstrate something special about people who use a cordless phone instead of a cord phone. You would have a large group of users you could survey on a zillion things.
Maybe one of the results would show a substantial variation as compared to the general population, or you could "slice" your group to try to come up with something, by gender, or age, or race, or location, or height, or income, etc. the list is endless.
Eventually you may end with something like "Single women using cordless phones eat twice as many potatoe chips"...
posted on July 28, 2000 07:32:36 PMMarwin So (just for grins) - what you're saying is that if we took Pareau's old theory of AW posters sucking at the moon - we could statistically back into the exact # of posters that would have to suck in order to rectify that whole moon problem? But, would we have to first calculate the exact suck-shion-ability of each poster? Pareau hasn't stated the most recent position of the moon, but this could be a worthy cause.
Hey Pareau And I said all that without benefit of cheap wine!
I only wish I'd come up with that brilliant scheme to save the moon, but it was you who came up with collective suction as the moon-saving move. Under the dual influence of wine and bear anxiety, too. All I thought of was string.
- Pareau
posted on July 28, 2000 08:07:05 PM
Wow! You're right - that was me! And, all this time I've been awe struck by your brilliant suggestion. Does this mean I should be awe struck of me? I'm so confused!
And, BTW, the whole tubers thing went right over my head. This place can tax my poor little brain cells in the worst way!
posted on July 28, 2000 09:46:31 PM
I must have been born old, then As a child I *hated* having longish hair. My mother wanted to curl my hair & had to sit on me to do it. To her horror she came into a room one day when I was little (about 4 or 5) to find that I had cut off my hair. Real short. And it stayed that way In my 30s I flirted with the notion of long hair--for about 2-3 years I didn't cut it. It grew down past my shoulders. *What a royal pain!* Long hair is hot. You have to *do* things with it. Yeech! Finally I said, "well, been there, done that" and cut it all off again. Aaaah! Yesterday I went for a trim & ended up deciding to have it even shorter: right now I am luxuriating before a cool fan with hair that is maybe a quarter in long on the sides & back with two inches on the top. Happy, happy, happy.
