Topic: WCDT 28-32 March 2011 (1891-1895) (Read 112540 times)

Average Zombie · « **Reply #150 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 01:12 »

I blame Harry Dresden. That boy goes through apartments like Hanalore goes through Lysol.

JackFaerie · « **Reply #151 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 01:17 »

Quote from: Deadlywonky on 29 Mar 2011, 23:37

as to visiting friends, do Americans not use the train?

Hahah, nope, we don't. Our country sucks that way. Most public transport is extremely inefficient and expensive. (It can even cost less to fly than to take the train for some destinations... and of course, it will be quicker.) For shorter distances, you can drive, or you can take sketchy slow buses that smell weird. A handful of cities have decent metros. But I live in Philadelphia, and though it has a subway system I almost never use it because it takes an hour to get from where I live to most places I want to go... which takes 15 mins by car. (Nevermind that it's never above 3.5 miles' distance, but city driving is city driving.)

akronnick · « **Reply #152 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 01:56 »

Quote from: Andy147 on 30 Mar 2011, 01:31

She didn't say she wouldn't rent to a Wiccan. For all we know, if Dora had said "Yes", she'd have followed on with "In that case, I should warn you that sorcery is banned."

Look up the word 'litigious' and say that again.

I'm not saying that she would automatically lose a lawsuit, but she would spend more defending such a question if the matter ever came to court that it's better to avoid it altogether.

I renter's religion is not the landlords concern, and as long as they neither disturb the neighbors nor damage the property, a renter can do with the residence as she will.

And that especially includes practicing one's religion.

tom_s252 · « **Reply #153 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 02:45 »

Quote from: Deadlywonky on 29 Mar 2011, 23:37

do Americans not use the train?

As a Brit who has visited quite a lot of America, I'll give this a try...

It depends which bit of America. Boston, New York and Washington (and therefore to a lesser extent places like Philadelphia, Baltimore, bits of Connecticut) are connected by nice, relatively quick trains that are comparatively affordable if you book ahead. Chicago's alright because most of the Amtrak network seems to point towards it. But outside the major metro areas, mass transit makes very little sense. I visited some friends in Texas; Dallas' attempt at light rail is laughable, but when you realise that people commute to Dallas from around 75 miles in every direction, spread out in tiny towns, it makes very little sense to try and connect them all.

By the time the price of oil tips the economic scales in favour of something other than private car ownership, it wil be too late to implement a meaningful mass transit in most of America. This, in the end, is what will make GM pull their head out the sand and get on with inventing a practical hydrogen fuel cell car. I hope...

Tergon · « **Reply #154 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 03:29 »

Quote from: akronnick on 30 Mar 2011, 01:04

If I were Jewish, I could might accept a job knowing full well that I would be required to work on Saturday, and fully willing to do so, but it would be illegal for an employer to not hire me simply for because I was Jewish expecting that I would not be able to work on the Sabbath.

Yes, but there's a fine line here. If, for example, you went to the interview to apply for a weekend job, and then informed the interviewer that you would not be working Saturdays because it was the Sabbath, you wouldn't get the job. While it's true that this would be because of your religious beliefs, the employer could argue - quite reasonably and, so far as I know, legally - that religion does not enter into it. He's simply offering you a financial arrangement that carries certain obligations, and you're unwilling or unable to meet those obligations. Therefore, he excercises his legal right to withdraw the offer.

The same applies to Dora here. The landlord may or may not care what her religious beliefs are, and s/he has no right at all to enquire after such. The landlord does, however, have full legal right to expect that the apartment would not suffer structural damage at the hands of a tenant, whatever the excuse behind it may be. The Real Estate Agent that Dora is talking to is being extremely indelicate here, and possibly being more than a little offensive when lumping all "witches" and "wizards" into the "burns shit down" category, but that's it. One middle-aged lady is guilty of vague bigotry, but no discrimination laws have been violated.

Quote from: Andy147 on 30 Mar 2011, 01:32

How do you know it's got a spacious living room? It hasn't been shown, and all that was said about it was "east-facing".

Oh, come on... she's a Real Estate Agent. The living room is always spacious. Even if it's literally a closet with a TV inside. At worst it's "cozy", but judging by what we already know about the place, I'm thinking my call has good backing behind it.

akronnick · « **Reply #155 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 03:46 »

Quote from: Tergon on 30 Mar 2011, 03:29

<snip>
The Real Estate Agent that Dora is talking to is being extremely indelicate here, and possibly being more than a little offensive when lumping all "witches" and "wizards" into the "burns shit down" category, but that's it. One middle-aged lady is guilty of vague bigotry, but no discrimination laws have been violated.

And if she asked a halfway decent real estate attorney to defend her in court with that logic, he'd get a nosebleed.

If she had a good attorney he'd be excited because he knows how much her bill would be, even if she won.

Employers and service providers with any experience know to stay far away from issues like that when dealing with potential employees or clients.

Deadlywonky · « **Reply #156 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 04:01 »

Quote from: Tergon on 30 Mar 2011, 03:29

... lumping all "witches" and "wizards" into the "burns shit down" category ...

Does that mean that Faye's a witch too?

BTW has it been clarified that this property is the one that was located 1 arctic trek away from COD?

Tergon · « **Reply #157 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 04:49 »

Quote from: akronnick on 30 Mar 2011, 03:46

And if she asked a halfway decent real estate attorney to defend her in court with that logic, he'd get a nosebleed.

If she had a good attorney he'd be excited because he knows how much her bill would be, even if she won.

Employers and service providers with any experience know to stay far away from issues like that when dealing with potential employees or clients.

I... dunno. So far the Real Estate lady simply asked if Dora was a witch or a wizard, and when prompted why that question had been asked, she responded that the previous tenant caused sorcery-related trouble. That's actually a pretty reasonable explanation. If we're splitting hairs in a court of law, all she's done that might be offensive is use a generic term that may describe a range of people with hobbies and/or religious beliefs pertaining to the supernatural. Sure, a good lawyer could spin that into something bigger... but then a halfway decent defense lawyer could shoot it down just as easily.

I'm not saying the Real Estate lady isn't an idiot, here. Foot-In-Mouth Syndrome is in full effect. I'm just also saying that she's not exactly waving a White Power banner and trying to burn Dora at the stake, either. Being an idiot is not a lawsuit-worthy offence.

chaironic · « **Reply #158 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 04:56 »

Quote from: Tergon on 30 Mar 2011, 04:49

So far the Real Estate lady simply asked if Dora was a witch or a wizard

An illegal question.

StevenC · « **Reply #159 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 05:01 »

Is asking if you are an unicorn also illegal? Cause last time I checked, witches and wizards were not real outside of Harry Potter books. Oh America, you so crazy.

akronnick · « **Reply #160 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 05:13 »

Quote from: chaironic on 30 Mar 2011, 04:56

An illegal question.

Pretty much.

She's not allowed to ask about religion in this instance, it's barred by federal law. The reason behind the question is irrelevant, simply by asking she's discriminating.

There's even an federal executive department in charge of enforcing housing discrimination.

Like I said in a previous post, housing discrimination in the U. S. has a long and dark history. State, local, and federal law enforcement takes it very seriously, as well as advocacy group[s like the NAACP, SPLC and ACLU, not to mention independent civil lawyers out to make a quick settlement.

A Real Estate Agent should know better.

Quote from: StevenC on 30 Mar 2011, 05:01

Is asking if you are an unicorn also illegal? Cause last time I checked, witches and wizards were not real outside of Harry Potter books. Oh America, you so crazy.

Unicorns aren't protected by the Fair Housing Act. Wiccans and women ("witch" could also be taken as a sexist comment

) are.

Tergon · « **Reply #161 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 05:32 »

Man. Either I'm ignorant of similar Australian laws, or else US laws are bizarrely harsh. You can be outright sued for asking what is in context a perfectly reasonable (if poorly-phrased) question? That's... several kinds of insane. Yes, discrimination is bad and all, but that's just unbelievable. Hell, the lady never even hinted at a religious significance: I'm quite sure there are folks out there who do not subscribe to any recognised faith but feel they are capable of using magic. In that case "witch / wizard" is a not only the literally correct term, it's also the most widely-recognised and descriptive term for an individual who would ruin a kitchen performing sorcery at home. Hell, if anything, it's a much more PC than the one I'd personally use: "Kitchen-destroying lunatic".

What you're saying is that I can ask someone a perfectly straightforward question, using terms that are applicable and perfectly correct in context, without making any reference whatsoever to religion or faith, with no implication whatsoever against the person I'm speaking to, and that I am actually required to ask given the very specific circumstances I'm in with a client (the landlord made the "No Destructive Sorcery In The Apartment" rule, the Agent must simply explain that)... and in spite of all of that, by virtue of having spoken those words, I can instantly and easily be sued.

That is fucking terrifying. And terrifyingly idiotic.

DSL · « **Reply #162 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 06:14 »

The working rule in the US is: Anybody can sue anyone else for anything. It's not so much a question of who's right under the law, it's who can better afford to keep the lawsuit going. You'll see plenty of cases on American dockets where a defendant agrees to settle because it's cheaper and/or more convenient than fighting the case -- and it doesn't matter whether the defendant is wrong or right. Do a search on the term "SLAPP Lawsuit" for a particularly egregious example of what I'm talking about.

Near Lurker · « **Reply #163 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 06:17 »

Keep in mind that this is the QC verse we're talking about. It's possible the FHA doesn't cover empirical sorcerers...

Skewbrow · « **Reply #164 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 06:22 »

Well. In many parts of the world political correctness trumps common sense.

I have no exposure to US housing laws, but I will testify that my landlord during my 1st year in grad school had a strict "no gays" house rule. May be you are allowed some leeway, if you sublet your basement? I dunno. If the rented housing consists of 3 beds, a bathroom, a TV room and a kitchenette, then you need some rules. Mind you, another rule was "no late night female guests."

Edit: Oops. A possibly essential part of my personal history missing. The said grad school was at Notre Dame, Indiana. I shared that basement with two other guys. I got what I expected to get for $26 /week.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #165 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 06:27 »

Those seem like conflicting rules.

Also, banning sorcery is reasonable, as everyone knows magic disrupts electricity, and that is not fair to the other tenants.

Karilyn · « **Reply #166 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 06:59 »

There seems to be some gross lack of knowledge about laws in America in this here thread.

While you occasionally get a judge who gets all activist and legislates from the bench, wanting to prove a point, they are a hilariously trivial minority of cases. Easily smaller than 1% of 1% of 1% of all cases.

TL;DR: You would have a very hard time finding any lawyer who would be willing to touch such a lawsuit with a ten foot pole, because of one simple concept. There were no damages. Except for that 1% of 1% of 1% of all cases, if there is not damages, there is no case. And "you made me feel bad because you said vaguely bigoted words in my direction" does not count as damages, because there is no cash value that can be placed on that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damages

People seem to get the impression that you can sue for absolutely anything in America. And while you can, that doesn't mean you have any chance of having any result of your lawsuit other than being laughed out of lawyer offices repeatedly before representing yourself and being laughed out of the courtroom by the judge. The reason people have this impression that you can sue for anything is because of high profile cases such as the McDonalds Hot Coffee lawsuit. Which, actually had very serious damages, third degree burns, large skin grafts. Severe enough that she ultimately died from complications relating to it. That case was mocked and made fun of in the news, but it was a very real and very serious injury, with very real damages.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants

When things aren't sensationalized and took out of context, you'll quickly realize that damages make the legal world go round in America (that, and a few other concepts, but this post doesn't need to be any longer than it already is).

akronnick · « **Reply #167 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 07:08 »

Housing Discrimination against LGBT individuals/families is only banned in 17 states.

I doubt Indiana is one of them.

What the Real Estate agent said was probably not discrimination, (certainly not explicitly) but it's within the margin of litigation. And in the U. S., unless the lawsuit is a blatant abuse of the legal system, a defendant's legal costs are on them, win or lose, so it's best to CYA in situations like this.

ysth · « **Reply #168 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 07:14 »

Quote from: Skewbrow on 30 Mar 2011, 00:31

Quote from: ysth on 29 Mar 2011, 21:46
Pornographic xkcd tonight.

I don't think that passes for pornography anywhere. However, there is a distinct possibility that Randall Munroe has, accidentally, clicked a link leading to Oglaf. Then again, the oil spill didn't start running around.

All I can say, is that you clearly are not an oil lamp.

Tergon · « **Reply #169 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 07:18 »

Quote from: Karilyn on 30 Mar 2011, 06:59

You would have a very hard time finding any lawyer who would be willing to touch such a lawsuit with a ten foot pole, because of one simple concept. There were no damages. Except for that 1% of 1% of 1% of all cases, if there is not damages, there is no case. And "you made me feel bad because you said vaguely bigoted words towards me" does not count as damages, because there is no cash value that can be placed on that.

Exactly this.

The only things I know about the Australian Legal System are what I remember from high school Legal Studies and a few books I read at University because I was interested. But even that just makes this seem strange to me. While US and Australian laws may differ in semantics, the generalities seem similar enough.

If, in this scenario, Dora sued the Realtor for discrimination, it'd be a Civil suit and not a Criminal one. Which means that as plaintiff, Dora would have the burden of proof placed upon her, and that takes two parts: One, she must prove that the law applies in this situation, and two, she must prove that the law was broken to the extent she suffered damages.

The law that would apply would be religious discrimination, in that the Real Estate Agent intruded on Dora's privacy and/or showed discrimination against Dora for her beliefs. That hinges on the use of the words "witch" and "wizard". But that implies that those words can reasonably be viewed as offensive - and what other words would you use for a person who destroyed a kitchen attempting to cast a spell? The limitations of the English language cannot be held up as evidence in a court of law. Since there was no mention of religion, then we only have context to go on, and in context there's no application of any laws of discrimination.

As to whether the law was broken even if it applies... well, beyond the fact that Dora said she was not a Witch and thus has incurred no damages, the law remains unbroken in the first place. The Landlord is not refusing to rent the apartment to someone who identifies as a Witch or a Wizard. S/he is simply highlighting a specific example of where destruction and damage to the apartment has caused a problem in the past, and is now frowned upon. Following your faith is legal; inflicting damages upon another party through destructive celebration of your faith is absolutely not. And informing someone that you don't want them to break the law and damage your property is not a crime.
All that's happened here is a simple statement of "If you are a Witch, don't cast spells that will destroy the apartment." No part of that statement is in violation of any law I've ever heard of.

The duty of care was not formed or breached, no law applies or has been broken, no malicious or accidental damage has been inflicted or occured. Aside from the Agent making a minor gaffe which some incredibly sensitive people might overreact to, nothing here has happened.

Basically Karilyn said it best: No lawyer would go anywhere near this case unless they intended to either lie, or simply walk into the courtroom and lose, knowing they'd get paid by Dora anyway. In which case, Dora's the only idiot here, and she's only hurting herself.

akronnick · « **Reply #170 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 07:25 »

Dora, wouldn't because she's not being discriminated against here. (Because she's not a Wiccan.)

But if someone else is, and then she doesn't rent them the place, there could be trouble, and even defending a frivolous lawsuit that gets tossed at summary judgment would cost more (probably much more) than the few thousand in repairs from sorcery gone awry.

Karilyn · « **Reply #171 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 07:35 »

Quote from: Tergon on 30 Mar 2011, 07:18

Quote from: Karilyn on 30 Mar 2011, 06:59
You would have a very hard time finding any lawyer who would be willing to touch such a lawsuit with a ten foot pole, because of one simple concept. There were no damages. Except for that 1% of 1% of 1% of all cases, if there is not damages, there is no case. And "you made me feel bad because you said vaguely bigoted words towards me" does not count as damages, because there is no cash value that can be placed on that.
The only things I know about the Australian Legal System are what I remember from high school Legal Studies and a few books I read at University because I was interested. But even that just makes this seem strange to me. While US and Australian laws may differ in semantics, the generalities seem similar enough.

Basically Karilyn said it best: No lawyer would go anywhere near this case unless they intended to either lie, or simply walk into the courtroom and lose, knowing they'd get paid by Dora anyway. In which case, Dora's the only idiot here, and she's only hurting herself.

Yeah. Don't let things seem strange to you. It's no secret that most people online don't understand law on even the most basic level. I may only have second hand knowledge, but I tend to listen to Bill Handel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Handel) a lot. And I have become way too accustomed to him laughing hysterically and mocking people who come up with similar irrelivant non-damages "I wanna sue that guy for discrimination cause he made me feel bad!" sorta lawsuits.

Most of them get summed up as the following.

1. Is it just your word verses the defendant, or can you in any way prove that the event occurred at all, and you are not creating a fictitious event?
2. Okay you can prove that the event actually occurred. You are [minority group], and the defendant treated you poorly. Can you prove that the defendant treated you poorly because you were [minority group], and not just because the defendant was an asshole?
3. Okay you can prove that the defendant actually was discriminatory towards you. Did you suffer any financial or physical loss or harm because of discrimination, which a cash value can be placed on?

If you cannot answer all three questions "Yes" Then you have absolutely no case at all in the slightest, goodbye, GTFO of my law office and/or courtroom.

EDIT: TL;DR: For any people who still don't get it, Dora would have to answer "no" to all three of those questions.

EDIT: I swear I'll hear these calls come up 20 times a day during his bloody show. And I'll maybe hear of one case a month that Handel is like, "Oh shit, uh, whoa. You actually answered all three questions with an affirmative. You might actually have a case. Now I'm depressed because I don't get to crush someone's hopes of a quick moneymaking scheme."

jwhouk · « **Reply #172 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 08:21 »

Quote from: Sorflakne on 29 Mar 2011, 23:34

This strip is definitely going to be a Noodles Incident strip, and we'll never find out what actually happened.

"I TOLD YOU, THAT NEVER HAPPENED!"

jwhouk · « **Reply #173 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 08:29 »

As for today's strip: It looks like she's being shown a townhouse-style apartment. Probably two bed, two bath place with an upstairs and a downstairs.

And the whole question about wizards and such? HODGSON'S LAW, people.

Border Reiver · « **Reply #174 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 08:43 »

I see no one brought up the concept of "this exchange was necessary for the punchline" deal.

Seriously, Jeph went for the funny and got a chuckle out of me me anyways. I found the segue into showing the kitchen humourous.

iduguphergrave · « **Reply #175 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 08:56 »

Dora's probably become a little spoiled by living with Sven in his nice upstairs/downstairs apartment. Or maybe she feels like she has to keep up with him. It would certainly fit her sibling rivalry patterns.

As for the debate going on, all the lady said was "you're not a witch or wizard, right?" If Dora wanted to file a discrimination suit, all the real estate lady has to say is "I only said 'witch or wizard', I never said 'are you wiccan?'" She could argue that she just meant to ask if Dora practiced "magic," that doesn't have to mean she subscribes to the wiccan religion. There are people who like to dabble around with spells and stuff without knowing shit about what it means to be truly wiccan. In fact these are probably the the kind of people who did whatever awful thing to the apartment the lady doesn't want to talk about.

And on that note, it wasn't until I came here that I thought of the possibility the woman was trying to change the subject. I thought this was kind of a cliffhanger strip, and her line "Let me show you the kitchen" was her way of beginning to explain what happened, like whatever it was happened in the kitchen.

If this is repeating anything that's been said already, sorry; I'm on my way out the door so a lot of this thread is TL;DR for me right now

Tuitsuro · « **Reply #176 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 09:23 »

Quote from: Karilyn on 30 Mar 2011, 06:59

People seem to get the impression that you can sue for absolutely anything in America. And while you can, that doesn't mean you have any chance of having any result of your lawsuit other than being laughed out of lawyer offices repeatedly before representing yourself and being laughed out of the courtroom by the judge. The reason people have this impression that you can sue for anything is because of high profile cases such as the McDonalds Hot Coffee lawsuit. Which, actually had very serious damages, third degree burns, large skin grafts. Severe enough that she ultimately died from complications relating to it. That case was mocked and made fun of in the news, but it was a very real and very serious injury, with very real damages.

She died 14 years later at the age of 92. I doubt the coffee had as much to do with her demise as it was simply old age.

rje · « **Reply #177 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 09:37 »

Quote from: Deadlywonky on 29 Mar 2011, 23:37

I don't know what all of you Americans are complaining about, I live in Wales. For me the longest drive that I can do in one direction* is 2.5 hrs then i'll either be in the sea or in England, and I live less than 30 mins from the coast. as to visiting friends, do Americans not use the train?

Train? What's that? Sounds fancy.

hahh I keed

But seriously, I've lived in seven different areas of four different states and I've never even seen an above-ground train. They are rare indeed.
Unless a subway counts...does a subway count? I went on one once when I visited a friend on Staten Island. It was such a novelty!

Xader · « **Reply #178 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 09:44 »

Quote from: Shadic on 29 Mar 2011, 17:41

O hai. Portlander here.

I'm heading there in a few days.

I'll wave.

Booknerd86 · « **Reply #179 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 10:32 »

Quote from: Deadlywonky on 29 Mar 2011, 23:37

I don't know what all of you Americans are complaining about, I live in Wales. For me the longest drive that I can do in one direction* is 2.5 hrs then i'll either be in the sea or in England, and I live less than 30 mins from the coast. as to visiting friends, do Americans not use the train?

I live around the St. Paul area in Minnesota and I take Amtrak to visit my best friend who lives in Milwaukee, WI. It is about a half hour to an hour longer than by car, but it's comfortable. This happens every few months. Otherwise I take buses/lightrail to school, but I have to get from the 'burbs to a station. I wish there was better public transportation, but for now I am saving up for a car. Which is difficult to do with no job.

As for the comic, I too wondered if Dora was looking at a house/townhouse/condo.

Tormuse · « **Reply #180 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 10:39 »

Quote from: ysth on 29 Mar 2011, 21:46

Pornographic xkcd tonight.

ARGH! I didn't get that comic until I read this comment. Thanks a lot!

jacjyd · « **Reply #181 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 10:48 »

I wasn't sure which poll answer to choose since I'd be willing to go about 45 min public transportation easily (when else can I read?) but only like...20-30 by car at most. But I also don't own a car so that's hard to say. (I get Zipcars to go where I gotta go!)

Skewbrow · « **Reply #182 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 11:44 »

Quote from: ysth on 30 Mar 2011, 07:14

Quote from: Skewbrow on 30 Mar 2011, 00:31
Quote from: ysth on 29 Mar 2011, 21:46
Pornographic xkcd tonight.

I don't think that passes for pornography anywhere. However, there is a distinct possibility that Randall Munroe has, accidentally, clicked a link leading to Oglaf. Then again, the oil spill didn't start running around.
All I can say, is that you clearly are not an oil lamp.

Hmm. I don't know whether I should be flattered, relieved, insulted or disgusted by your comment?

lunakitten · « **Reply #183 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 13:00 »

While I know it was just the set-up for the punchline, I do want to address the points above regarding discrimination. Dora (or our theoretical renter) wouldn't have to go get a lawyer. She could just call the Fair Housing Administration that covers the area, and they would investigate, sanction, fine or carry out a lawsuit on her behalf. It's as easy as clicking here: http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp

Not to guarantee that anything would come of it, but she wouldn't have to spend a dime on a lawyer. It's all moot though- if she's a property manager for any larger company, this gets drilled into you regularly- you don't ask religion, race (or in CA, orientation or if they have children if it's not a senior complex) before renting. For a real estate agent I'm not as sure, but I can't see them not getting the same basic training- in enlightened self interest if nothing else.

TheEvilDog · « **Reply #184 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 13:08 »

Well, the discussion today has really put the incident when I got my first apartment into perspective. After being shown around the apartment, the landlord turned to me and said "Do you have any pets? Dogs, cats, lizards or the like?"

I said "No, but I do know a real bitch."

He did not look pleased.

To this day I'm still surprised I got the apartment.

iduguphergrave · « **Reply #185 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 13:16 »

Quote from: TheEvilDog on 30 Mar 2011, 13:08

I said "No, but I do know a real bitch."

I lol'd. And I'm a woman

Doctor Online · « **Reply #186 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 13:22 »

Quote from: rje on 30 Mar 2011, 09:37

Quote from: Deadlywonky on 29 Mar 2011, 23:37
I don't know what all of you Americans are complaining about, I live in Wales. For me the longest drive that I can do in one direction* is 2.5 hrs then i'll either be in the sea or in England, and I live less than 30 mins from the coast. as to visiting friends, do Americans not use the train?

Train? What's that? Sounds fancy.

hahh I keed

But seriously, I've lived in seven different areas of four different states and I've never even seen an above-ground train. They are rare indeed.
Unless a subway counts...does a subway count? I went on one once when I visited a friend on Staten Island. It was such a novelty!

Sometimes, if I'm feeling not up to driving (or just not trusting my car) I take the Amtrak from South Carolina to Virginia to visit my family. The only thing that sucks about it is when I get there, I'm pretty much stuck at my parents house unless a friend comes to pick me up to visit them. There's a Amtrak running from at least Georgia to New York on the east coast (correct me if I'm wrong). It takes about an hour longer than the drive, but I absolutely hate Carolina drivers. I live about 20 minutes from Charlotte, I use the bathroom before leaving on my trip and 10 minutes after I get out of Charlotte the drivers have scared me so bad I have to stop to go again. (I'm like a little dog haha.) Also, Durham, don't get me started on how bad (stupid) the traffic is in Durham. I love I-85 once I hit Va, two lanes one way, and the only thing you have to look out for is deer, other than that, trees and hills galore... until 85 becomes 95, then it's hell all over again.

Mr_Rose · « **Reply #187 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 13:46 »

Quote from: Andy147 on 30 Mar 2011, 13:20

Quote from: Tergon on 30 Mar 2011, 03:29

Quote from: Andy147 on 30 Mar 2011, 01:32
How do you know it's got a spacious living room? It hasn't been shown, and all that was said about it was "east-facing".
Oh, come on... she's a Real Estate Agent. The living room is always spacious. Even if it's literally a closet with a TV inside. At worst it's "cozy", but judging by what we already know about the place, I'm thinking my call has good backing behind it.

Ah - spacious in the sense of "occupying space"

Moar liek specious, amirite?

Carl-E · « **Reply #188 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 13:57 »

Quote from: Skewbrow on 30 Mar 2011, 11:44

Hmm. I don't know whether I should be flattered, relieved, insulted or disgusted by your comment?

e) all of the above.

Watched Pot · « **Reply #189 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 14:04 »

Quote from: Deadlywonky on 29 Mar 2011, 23:37

* I'm deliberately not saying straight line, almost every road in this country is ancient and winds around the hills like a pissed snake.

I am perfectly aware "pissed" has a different meaning on the other side of the Atlantic, but I'm pretty amused by the mental image of a snake shaking with such uncontrollable rage that it is physically incapable of moving in a straight line.

Kugai · « **Reply #190 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 14:26 »

Maybe she was just making sure she didn't get another follower of Sauron in the apartment.

After all, those Uruk-Hai parties are hard to clean up after.

Akima · « **Reply #191 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 15:22 »

Quote from: Watched Pot on 30 Mar 2011, 14:04

I am perfectly aware "pissed" has a different meaning on the other side of the Atlantic, but I'm pretty amused by the mental image of a snake shaking with such uncontrollable rage that it is physically incapable of moving in a straight line.

In Australia, we call that condition being "As mad as a cut snake".

Dora looks better in the current comic, and I think the estate-agent lady is particularly nicely drawn. Dora seems to be moving up-market; the place she's viewing looks like a townhouse or maisonette rather than an apartment. Keep guzzling the coffee Northampton!

I'm boycotting the poll, because there is no cycling option!

TheEvilDog · « **Reply #192 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 15:38 »

Quote from: iduguphergrave on 30 Mar 2011, 13:16

Quote from: TheEvilDog on 30 Mar 2011, 13:08
I said "No, but I do know a real bitch."

I lol'd. And I'm a woman

Glad someone laughed. I was really nervous when I left the interview, it was a really good apartment, cheap too.

Border Reiver · « **Reply #193 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 17:09 »

It has that other meaning on this side of the pond as well.

mike837go · « **Reply #194 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 20:41 »

What about "requires hyperdrive/warp drive" on the poll?

Why exclude fictional places?

TheEvilDog · « **Reply #195 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 20:45 »

Quote from: mike837go on 30 Mar 2011, 20:41

What about "requires hyperdrive/warp drive" on the poll?

Why exclude fictional places?

Because we obviously don't have the technology yet.

~~cesariojpn~~ · « **Reply #196 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 20:52 »

Oh fuck me, now I can't get the image of Hanners in colored underwear outta my mind.

Quote from: TheEvilDog on 30 Mar 2011, 20:45

Quote from: mike837go on 30 Mar 2011, 20:41
What about "requires hyperdrive/warp drive" on the poll?

Why exclude fictional places?

Because we obviously don't have the technology yet.

Then I demand an option for the TARDIS.

musicalsoul · « **Reply #197 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 21:35 »

Quote from: Skewbrow on 30 Mar 2011, 06:22

Well. In many parts of the world political correctness trumps common sense.

I have no exposure to US housing laws, but I will testify that my landlord during my 1st year in grad school had a strict "no gays" house rule. May be you are allowed some leeway, if you sublet your basement? I dunno. If the rented housing consists of 3 beds, a bathroom, a TV room and a kitchenette, then you need some rules. Mind you, another rule was "no late night female guests."

Edit: Oops. A possibly essential part of my personal history missing. The said grad school was at Notre Dame, Indiana. I shared that basement with two other guys. I got what I expected to get for $26 /week.

In GA, a house being rented through a real estate company (as opposed to being rented out by the owner) cannot have more have more than two women listed on the lease or it's considered a brothel and isn't legal. I live in a college town, I see this as one of the dumbest laws ever.

Also, I don't know if it's all of GA or just my county and a few of the surrounding counties.

CompSarge · « **Reply #198 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 21:59 »

Awww, Hanners. You're so adorable when you're having a social crisis.

CEOIII · « **Reply #199 on:** 30 Mar 2011, 22:25 »

Person with OCD + changes in their routine = Not Good Times.

*hugs Hanners* It'll be OK. Go slip on some teal panties, you'll feel better.

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Poll

And now - the QC "MOMENT... OF... THE WEEK!"

Author Topic: WCDT 28-32 March 2011 (1891-1895) (Read 112540 times)

Average Zombie

tom_s252

TheEvilDog

TheEvilDog

TheEvilDog