THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Comic Discussion => QUESTIONABLE CONTENT => Topic started by: Gyrre on 10 Apr 2020, 20:24

Title: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 10 Apr 2020, 20:24
Oof.
Figured I'd get the new thread started a touch early in the event of additional drama escalation.

I was originally going to ask whether dealing with someone who had youngest child syndrome or only child syndrome was worse, but that'd have required a disclaimer that I wasn't referring to the birth order hypothesis or using a blanket application of the terms to everyone who's an only child/youngest child, and was instead referring to interacting with those individuals who actually hit all of the negative hallmarks of both questionable syndromes in a supremely negative fashion. For example, my own younger brother (the youngest of us three) is lazy, incredibly narcissistic, manipulative, and a unashamed self-entitled mooch who literally throws fits when he doesn't get his way (he's in his thirties, BTW).

So I opted for this simple poll instead since I couldn't think of anything comic related that hasn't already been done and didn't amount to vague posting. I think of a better poll, I'll swap this one out.

EDIT: typo fixes and some typographical emphases (completely blanking on the word).
EDIT 2: Some slight rephrasing to hopefully eliminate some redundancies and maybe make things a little clearer. Yes, that is a long run-on sentence.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 10 Apr 2020, 20:44
It should be pointed out that a great deal of research has been done to debunk both the birth-order hypothesis and the initial research about only-child syndrome.

BTW, turns out Jeff Bezos is the eldest child of his sibling set.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 10 Apr 2020, 20:59
I'm also curious about people who boys grow up with only brothers vs girls who grow up with only sisters vs boys who grow up with only sisters vs girls who grow up with only brothers vs boys/girls who grow up with brothers and sisters.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 10 Apr 2020, 23:48
I'm also curious about people who boys grow up with only brothers vs girls who grow up with only sisters vs boys who grow up with only sisters vs girls who grow up with only brothers vs boys/girls who grow up with brothers and sisters.

Oh! Good question.
I've just got two brothers, so there was a lot of fighting. ⃰ And, like most middle children, I had to play peacemaker a lot.
(click to show/hide)

EDIT: From what I understand, a lot of it has to do with socialization in each case. Parents who allow their males sons to actually display emotions and work through them, seem to have more sympathetic and less violent boys according to some anecdotes I've read. Carrying out a proper long-term study for this sort of has several confounding factors and some ethical questions involved to boot, so it'd probably be difficult to do.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 11 Apr 2020, 00:46
Well, I am the oldest of three sons. And I can tell you quite uncontroversially that the middle child of the three of us was the troublemaker, not the peacemaker.

There are a lot of interacting factors, as you say. In our case, the fact that the two younger brothers were much closer in age to each other than to me was a big part of the dynamic. The two of them fought a lot.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: pwhodges on 11 Apr 2020, 02:39
As a middle child myself, I was neither a troublemaker nor a peacemaker; if anything I was the most withdrawn of the three of us (and still am).
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 11 Apr 2020, 04:31
It took me a while but, after watching Brent Spiner do it on an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation, I became determined to master it! :-P
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 11 Apr 2020, 08:17
Well, I am the oldest of three sons. And I can tell you quite uncontroversially that the middle child of the three of us was the troublemaker, not the peacemaker.

There are a lot of interacting factors, as you say. In our case, the fact that the two younger brothers were much closer in age to each other than to me was a big part of the dynamic. The two of them fought a lot.
Make no mistake that all three of us fought. I usually played peacemaker either out of exasperation or when my ungrateful younger brother was about to get himself hospitalized (usually figuratively, probably actually prevented it twice).
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: jwhouk on 11 Apr 2020, 09:27
I'm an only child, but I'm not the firstborn of my family. Take that, Adler.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: cybersmurf on 12 Apr 2020, 01:49
I'm an only child, but I'm not the firstborn of my family. Take that, Adler.


Age gap can do that to you. Among other things, which I do not wish upon anyone.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 12 Apr 2020, 04:22
I'm an only child, but I'm not the firstborn of my family. Take that, Adler.


Age gap can do that to you. Among other things, which I do not wish upon anyone.
Though, as I understand it from others, an age gap greater than 3-to-5 years is about the only way to get most siblings to act civil with each other (short of a very specific form of "hippie-dippie" parenting that still provides structure).
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: questionablydiscontent on 12 Apr 2020, 15:15
Brun and Mille are so cute~ :mrgreen:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: St.Clair on 12 Apr 2020, 17:53
Well, I am the oldest of three sons. And I can tell you quite uncontroversially that the middle child of the three of us was the troublemaker, not the peacemaker.

There are a lot of interacting factors, as you say. In our case, the fact that the two younger brothers were much closer in age to each other than to me was a big part of the dynamic. The two of them fought a lot.

Same here, and it's one of those interesting nature-nurture questions (how might have things been different with a different birth order?), as the three of us are almost stereotypical.

I'm the Responsible Eldest, my middle brother is the ****-stirrer (he gets bored and starts poking things and people, though he's mellowed some lately - found a woman who'd put up with him, for one thing), and the youngest spent several years following the middle around (because he was lots more interesting than me, doing my quiet solitary stuff) but eventually figured out who he was, as an independent entity.  (And I'm proud and glad to know that person, separate from him being my brother.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 12 Apr 2020, 18:00
I had thought that Brun would benefit from a companion like Momo but it looks like she already has a friend with a social protocol database.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Zebediah on 12 Apr 2020, 18:04
Yeah, that’s definitely the rule and if you forget the dogs will remind you.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 12 Apr 2020, 19:10
I SORTA can do it, but it's really awkward.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 12 Apr 2020, 19:12
Yeah, that’s definitely the rule and if you forget the dogs will remind you.

Just one small reason out of many that these are tough times.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 12 Apr 2020, 20:09
I SORTA can do it, but it's really awkward.
That's okay.
I can only reverse hands because I'm semi-ambidextrous and have years of video games under my belt.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: awkwardness on 12 Apr 2020, 21:17
I'm an only child, but I'm not the firstborn of my family. Take that, Adler.


Age gap can do that to you. Among other things, which I do not wish upon anyone.
Though, as I understand it from others, an age gap greater than 3-to-5 years is about the only way to get most siblings to act civil with each other (short of a very specific form of "hippie-dippie" parenting that still provides structure).

3 and a half years isn't enough to make my sister and I act civil to one another...ethen again she's hypercritical as a defense mechanism and I'm overly protective of family so it's a default that we clash regardless  :cry:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: awkwardness on 12 Apr 2020, 21:21
I had thought that Brun would benefit from a companion like Momo but it looks like she already has a friend with a social protocol database.

I think it's the other way around based on the previous strips, I think Mil is trying hard to be a good neighbor and nice to Brun but might be the one in this to benefit from getting to know someone just as socially awkward as her but without the AI benefit of the doubt...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 12 Apr 2020, 21:21
I'm an only child, but I'm not the firstborn of my family. Take that, Adler.


Age gap can do that to you. Among other things, which I do not wish upon anyone.
Though, as I understand it from others, an age gap greater than 3-to-5 years is about the only way to get most siblings to act civil with each other (short of a very specific form of "hippie-dippie" parenting that still provides structure).

3 and a half years isn't enough to make my sister and I act civil to one another...ethen again she's hypercritical as a defense mechanism and I'm overly protective of family so it's a default that we clash regardless  :cry:
Everybody is different.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: awkwardness on 12 Apr 2020, 21:23
Yeah, that’s definitely the rule and if you forget the dogs will remind you.

Oh, so that's why dogs and I don't mix: I try to give them space and only approach when they are still and see that their caretaker isn't in trouble...

Plus I've only been around a couple of dogs for more than a few minutes in my entire 37 and a half years of life
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: awkwardness on 12 Apr 2020, 21:23
I'm an only child, but I'm not the firstborn of my family. Take that, Adler.


Age gap can do that to you. Among other things, which I do not wish upon anyone.
Though, as I understand it from others, an age gap greater than 3-to-5 years is about the only way to get most siblings to act civil with each other (short of a very specific form of "hippie-dippie" parenting that still provides structure).

3 and a half years isn't enough to make my sister and I act civil to one another...ethen again she's hypercritical as a defense mechanism and I'm overly protective of family so it's a default that we clash regardless  :cry:
Everybody is different.

I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing that we are the exceptions to the rule...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Penquin47 on 12 Apr 2020, 21:57
On the other hand, my brother and I are eighteen months apart almost to the day (Mom tried but I just had to be stubborn and hang on past midnight...).  We fought, of course, but most of the time we were friends.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 12 Apr 2020, 23:06
I really, really think that Renee would be shocked beyond words to learn that she is the voice of all Brun knows about how to handle social interactions!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Mr_Rose on 13 Apr 2020, 03:58
Yeah, that’s definitely the rule and if you forget the dogs will remind you.

Oh, so that's why dogs and I don't mix: I try to give them space and only approach when they are still and see that their caretaker isn't in trouble...

Plus I've only been around a couple of dogs for more than a few minutes in my entire 37 and a half years of life
Yeah, dogs are generally the most hyperactive gregarious five year olds you’ll ever meet, for most of their lifespan. That, together with most doggos not going to doggy college (aka obedience school) because most humans forget its even an option, means they never really develop an ‘off’ button. Especially when they’re already all keyed up from being in the park where there are always lots of new smells and people to go investigate and/or beg treats and pets from.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: comicalArchitect on 13 Apr 2020, 06:22
So, important question: does Millefeuille think this is a date? She’s blushing a bit in today’s strip, and that does seem like the exact kind of wacky misunderstanding Brun would get herself into.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 13 Apr 2020, 07:26
following social cues.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Autistic Vulture on 13 Apr 2020, 09:53
So, important question: does Millefeuille think this is a date? She’s blushing a bit in today’s strip, and that does seem like the exact kind of wacky misunderstanding Brun would get herself into.

Millefeuille, IMO, thinks that this might be a date.  More importantly, Millefeuille, between her interactions with Clinton and Brun, is coming across as quite desperate...as in more desperate than I've seen anyone in this strip since Cosette before Steve.

It is likely that by the end of this week we will find out if Brun is interested in dating at all.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: dutchrvl on 13 Apr 2020, 10:12
I'm also curious about people who boys grow up with only brothers vs girls who grow up with only sisters vs boys who grow up with only sisters vs girls who grow up with only brothers vs boys/girls who grow up with brothers and sisters.

There are so many factors that come into play though....
For example, I am the youngest with 4 elder sisters and 2 elder brothers, but I'm also technically an only child.

And even if you grow up with elder siblings, the respective age differences can really affect how all social interactions and hierarchies develop.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tormuse on 13 Apr 2020, 14:55
Regarding Brun and Millefeuille, I don't know where this is going, but it's cute, and I like it.  :)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Oenone on 13 Apr 2020, 15:51
Oof. If anyone seriously hurts Renee, emotionally or physically, Brun is going to be both devastated and PISSED. I like seeing how important Renee is to Brun, but that’s a lot of emotional eggs in one basket.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Zebediah on 13 Apr 2020, 18:33
Comic’s up.

And to quote a comic from years ago: “That’s some heavy-handed subtext.”
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 13 Apr 2020, 19:55
Author: I'm no longer even sure if I'm doing subtext or not!

 :-D :lol: :?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: jesslc on 13 Apr 2020, 21:58
I'm enjoying seeing more of Brun and how she experiences the world.   :-)

It seems very likely to me that we're leading up to a couple of possible comic misunderstandings. Will it be caused by:
a) Millefeuille assuming that her and Brun are dating now
b) Elliot/Clinton hearing about Brun & Millefeuille going out for brunch after sleeping together
c) Elliot/Clinton hearing that Brun ate mille feuille (and they don't realise she's talking about the dessert)
d) all of the above

...I think I'll bet 5 internet cookies on d)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 13 Apr 2020, 23:13
It seems that Brun has a very difficult life all told. Things in her physical reality just don't generally work very well and she's been 'managing' rather than really thriving. I wonder if Millifeulle will be better able to empathise than organics because of the whole potential chassis mis-match issue?

Perhaps someone who knows more on the subject than me can say how typical is Brun's experience of what I'm guessing is some type of ASD? Still, at least all the good boys and girls definitely seem to like her!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: awkwardness on 13 Apr 2020, 23:31
I think the subtext that Geoff didn't know but was trying to get across is there are kindred spirits out there that have exactly the same feelings as you and might be able to help someone in need who just happens to be close by...

We just found out how Rokko will be helped, even if it'll take some finagling by Geoff to get the two together
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Cornelius on 14 Apr 2020, 03:17
I do have the feeling that they're both in need of making new, good, close friends. And perhaps of seeing the people in their life for what they can be. But then, who a m I to talk.

Also: *insert awkward, unfunny joke about heavy handed sub-text*.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 14 Apr 2020, 03:18
I do have the feeling that they're both in need of making new, good, close friends. And perhaps of seeing the people in their life for what they can be. But then, who a m I to talk.

Also: *insert awkward, unfunny joke about sub-text*.
Jeph insists he's uncertain as to whether or not it's meant to be.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Autistic Vulture on 14 Apr 2020, 05:19
Perhaps someone who knows more on the subject than me can say how typical is Brun's experience of what I'm guessing is some type of ASD? Still, at least all the good boys and girls definitely seem to like her!

There is very little time in which I am not stuck in my own head.  As far as the body being too much, not really, though in this case it might have more to do with being female rather than being autistic.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Potato Farmer on 14 Apr 2020, 05:22
Lately I've been having moments where it feels like my body is more a vehicle I happen to inhabit than a true extension of myself. In particular when I'm talking with people in the physical world, as I realize that when they communicate with me they're looking at this physical face which to them represents me.

I don't actually dislike it but I agree with Brun that having a body is... weird.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: fearless_fool on 14 Apr 2020, 05:40
Re: 4242 Multilayered

Jeph says "subtext?"
I say "Innuendo and out the other..."

Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tormuse on 14 Apr 2020, 06:32
Perhaps someone who knows more on the subject than me can say how typical is Brun's experience of what I'm guessing is some type of ASD? Still, at least all the good boys and girls definitely seem to like her!

Speaking for myself, I've been sort of coming to terms with the realization that I'm autistic over the last few years, so I don't know if I can say how "typical" it is, but a large part of it can be summed up as a very generalized fundamental feeling of "there's something wrong with me."  Sometimes, this manifests as a weird contemplation of the strange absurdity of reality and existence, and sometimes, it manifests as everything, everything, everything, everything, everything running through my head all at once and I can't deal with it.

I don't know if that makes sense.  It is a concept and a feeling that is very hard to put into words.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Potato Farmer on 14 Apr 2020, 07:16
Perhaps someone who knows more on the subject than me can say how typical is Brun's experience of what I'm guessing is some type of ASD? Still, at least all the good boys and girls definitely seem to like her!

Speaking for myself, I've been sort of coming to terms with the realization that I'm autistic over the last few years, so I don't know if I can say how "typical" it is, but a large part of it can be summed up as a very generalized fundamental feeling of "there's something wrong with me."  Sometimes, this manifests as a weird contemplation of the strange absurdity of reality and existence, and sometimes, it manifests as everything, everything, everything, everything, everything running through my head all at once and I can't deal with it.

I don't know if that makes sense.  It is a concept and a feeling that is very hard to put into words.
Reality is often absurd but I rarely consider it to be an error on my end, honestly.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 14 Apr 2020, 08:03
Dang.
Brün has dysphoria too?
Dang.

And now I'm  waiting for another prompting from Imaginary Brain Renée:
"Say Millie-- Wanna do brunch again tomorrow? Maybe try that French dessert?"

Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Dinaverg on 14 Apr 2020, 10:29
I'm just putting the components out there and someone else can assemble them:
greg the dumptruck
mille's new dumptruck
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Theta9 on 14 Apr 2020, 12:42
Re: 4242 Multilayered

Jeph says "subtext?"
I say "Innuendo and out the other..."
Groucho Marx once said "Love goes out the door when money comes innuendo."
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Stoutfellow on 14 Apr 2020, 18:11
Comic's up.

So. who is the Dog Whisperer, Brun or Emily?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 14 Apr 2020, 19:01
Awwww. :D

Millie: "My hero!"
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 14 Apr 2020, 21:49
Perhaps someone who knows more on the subject than me can say how typical is Brun's experience of what I'm guessing is some type of ASD? Still, at least all the good boys and girls definitely seem to like her!

Speaking for myself, I've been sort of coming to terms with the realization that I'm autistic over the last few years, so I don't know if I can say how "typical" it is, but a large part of it can be summed up as a very generalized fundamental feeling of "there's something wrong with me."  Sometimes, this manifests as a weird contemplation of the strange absurdity of reality and existence, and sometimes, it manifests as everything, everything, everything, everything, everything running through my head all at once and I can't deal with it.

I don't know if that makes sense.  It is a concept and a feeling that is very hard to put into words.
Is the latter sometimes offset by periods of intense hyperfocusing?

I'm autistic and ADD (ADHD type whatever) and both of those happen to me, too.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 14 Apr 2020, 23:04
I can see the dog's point of view. Millie looks more or less human but she doesn't sound human or smell human, so, naturally, the dog decides to go to 'warning/alarm' mode. Then Brun suddenly steps forwards and knows the Words (or, more accurately, the tone of voice and body language). Then she makes with the skritches and all is right in a certain good boy's world!

As a PS, I don't know what a millifeulle would look like either but I like the sound of it! Curse my diabetes!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tormuse on 14 Apr 2020, 23:27
Is the latter sometimes offset by periods of intense hyperfocusing?


Yeah, sometimes...  and sometimes, I'm even able to channel that into doing something productive!  :)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Cornelius on 15 Apr 2020, 01:24
As a PS, I don't know what a millifeulle would look like either but I like the sound of it! Curse my diabetes!

Some suggestions:
(click to show/hide)

In Belgium, you can get it as a Tompouce, which, however, does not have a middle layer of puff pastry.

In some places, you can get a millefeuille sandwich, which replaces the puff pastry with slices of bread, and the crème patissière with vegetables, cheese, and meats; with some dressings and/or honey, depending on what they put in between exactly.

Edited to fix the image layout a bit, and to add the last bit of information.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: traroth on 15 Apr 2020, 02:20
Even the dog is impressed by Millefeuille's new butt!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Zebediah on 15 Apr 2020, 04:28
Dogs sniff butts. It’s a thing they do.

And again I see parallels between myself and Brun. I may not always understand humans but I totally get dogs and vice versa. I speak their language.

I have a dog sleeping on my foot right now.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 15 Apr 2020, 04:29
So the desert milifuelle is basically a multi-decker sandwich (cake? bar?) made with turnover dough wafers and custard?


Hmmm..... I might have to try to make this.

EDIT: Adding possible substitution words that may fit better than 'sandwich'. I'm no professional patisserie.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Cornelius on 15 Apr 2020, 04:35
Basically. It's not hard to make - if you buy the puff pastry. Even if you don't, not hard to make, just takes time.

Hardest thing is to eat it, without spilling out the custard. :laugh:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Thrudd on 15 Apr 2020, 05:40
Is the latter sometimes offset by periods of intense hyper-focusing?
Yeah, sometimes...  and sometimes, I'm even able to channel that into doing something productive!  :)
Similar - this whole multitasking thing that manager types espouse I find totally alien and from my observations of others generate less efficiency and a higher incidence of errors.
It is something loved and embraced by those who have the attention span of caffeinated sugared up toddler on acid.
This may be why I had a love of the sciences early on and in my working life I fell into QC and latter on ended up a CQE on the engineering side of my industry.
Limited human interaction and predictable and controllable environment. Yeah I despise troubleshooting when going in blind.

As to feeling like an entity sitting in the drivers seat of a "ME" chassis while experiencing interpersonal interactions as "a stranger in a strange land" [I seem to have them fooled so far but seem to be getting suspicious], it is something that bubbles forth into my consciousness only when not having to put energy into said interactions or having external tasks to concentrate on.
This may be why I have a love of computer RPGs and RPGs in general [was the only way I was able to actually socialize] since they are similar to Real Life(tm) but without the negative repercussions and I can pretend at being someone else doing more interesting things that are not possible in  Real Life(tm).
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: traroth on 15 Apr 2020, 05:52
So the desert milifuelle is basically a multi-decker sandwich (cake? bar?) made with turnover dough wafers and custard?


Hmmm..... I might have to try to make this.

EDIT: Adding possible substitution words that may fit better than 'sandwich'. I'm no professional patisserie.

It's layers of puff pastry containing thick custard (crème patissière). Often, you find some sugar frosting on the top, but I prefer just some icing sugar, personaly. I like this one, with hazelnuts, even if it is expensive: https://www.pierreherme.com/2000-feuilles.html
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Theta9 on 15 Apr 2020, 08:06
Dark Shebly  :laugh:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: JoeCovenant on 15 Apr 2020, 09:01
Everybody is different.

...I'm not.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: llondel on 15 Apr 2020, 09:30
I can see the dog's point of view. Millie looks more or less human but she doesn't sound human or smell human, so, naturally, the dog decides to go to 'warning/alarm' mode. Then Brun suddenly steps forwards and knows the Words (or, more accurately, the tone of voice and body language). Then she makes with the skritches and all is right in a certain good boy's world!

Leonbergers are just bouncy and happy a lot of the time and will also do the barking and play bow to get someone to come and play. They can throw a mean punch too (although it's just the dog asking for attention), and it comes in at crotch height so be ready to dodge.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: cybersmurf on 15 Apr 2020, 09:50
Everybody is different.

...I'm not.

All people are equal. Some are equaler.



Comic's up.

So. who is the Dog Whisperer, Brun or Emily?

Brun is what Emily aspires to be.

I'm not surprised Brun is good with dogs. They are "simple", in a straightforward way, and easier to read than humans.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: DaiJB on 15 Apr 2020, 17:15
Brun's in the wrong job! They'd love her in puppy training school!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 15 Apr 2020, 19:54
More dog owners need to get that lecture, annoyingly.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 15 Apr 2020, 22:15
More dog owners need to get that lecture, annoyingly.

Agreed.

Also, I like that some cities have started implementing leash laws for cats.
I'm allergic and our neighbors cats won't stay off of our porch. Putting down cayenne seems a bit harsh and pointless with all the wind and rain on the weekends.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Mordhaus on 15 Apr 2020, 22:21
That is one of my pet peeves. I don't mind if you are taking your dog to an enclosed park that is size separated for small and big dogs, but if you are in a open park with many people and animals around, you should leash your dog.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 15 Apr 2020, 23:25
FWIW, I have already fallen in love with Rupert the Bear-Dog.

Yeah, Brun strikes me as the sort of person who would obey posted rules because they are posted rules and find it odd that anyone wouldn't immediately do so. Meanwhile, this guy has one of the most irritating personality traits that I know of: Just don't bother thinking about the consequences to doing exactly what you want to do, no matter the risks. The number of fatal accidents triggered by this mindset boggles the mind.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Wyrm on 16 Apr 2020, 03:21
Brun's lecture resonates with me a whole lot, too many people don't concern themselves with what consequences their actions might have.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: cybersmurf on 16 Apr 2020, 07:36
FWIW, I have already fallen in love with Rupert the Bear-Dog.

Yeah, Brun strikes me as the sort of person who would obey posted rules because they are posted rules and find it odd that anyone wouldn't immediately do so. Meanwhile, this guy has one of the most irritating personality traits that I know of: Just don't bother thinking about the consequences to doing exactly what you want to do, no matter the risks. The number of fatal accidents triggered by this mindset boggles the mind.

"Rules are not binding, only guidelines. If enough other people keep to the rules, nothing will happen". Seen enough of those people who only keep to the rules if it's in their favor.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: stayctee on 16 Apr 2020, 08:09
I don't care what the rules are. If a stranger lectured me in public like that (A person of Brun's age no less--how old is she 20? 21?) I would LOSE MY SHIT.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 16 Apr 2020, 08:25
Would it matter whether or not you were in the right?

And, welcome, new person!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 16 Apr 2020, 15:42
Brün is clearly in the right, and Rupert's person is man enough to admit it. Maybe another new friend?
Brün can take a stand on things that matter to her. And she's open to new experiences. (Millefueille is now on my own list of Things to Try.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Zebediah on 16 Apr 2020, 18:29
Comic’s up.

An explosion is imminent. Or probably not. Foreshadowing is never foreshadowing until it is.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 16 Apr 2020, 18:30
If I remember, Brun was pretty deadpan when the old bar burnt down too.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Baz_Yat on 16 Apr 2020, 19:04
I don't care what the rules are. If a stranger lectured me in public like that (A person of Brun's age no less--how old is she 20? 21?) I would LOSE MY SHIT.

What does Brun's age matter? He was in the wrong. So would you have been in that situation.

If I watched this scenario, and you lost your shit verbally, you'd be getting a second lecture from me about being an a-hole and listening to the rules.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Autistic Vulture on 16 Apr 2020, 19:18
An explosion is imminent. Or probably not. Foreshadowing is never foreshadowing until it is.

Brun has already recently been in the area of an explosion; the aftermath was the start of this current storyline.

Did anyone else notice that Rupert's owner looks an awful lot like a smaller Elliot?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: chris73 on 16 Apr 2020, 21:30
I don't care what the rules are. If a stranger lectured me in public like that (A person of Brun's age no less--how old is she 20? 21?) I would LOSE MY SHIT.

I wouldn't lose my shit about it as what she said in the second and third panel was fair enough but the lecturing tone and condescending pose by the last panel would have tested my patience.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 16 Apr 2020, 21:36
Do people still ask for phone numbers these days? Seems archaic.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 16 Apr 2020, 21:39
Awww.

Too many things in Brün's life have blown up or burned down.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 16 Apr 2020, 21:41
Do people still ask for phone numbers these days? Seems archaic.
No one is going to call, obviously, but you still need a number to text someone.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: SeattleCrochetWoman on 16 Apr 2020, 22:11


Meanwhile, this guy has one of the most irritating personality traits that I know of: Just don't bother thinking about the consequences to doing exactly what you want to do, no matter the risks. The number of fatal accidents triggered by this mindset boggles the mind.

People who refuse to follow shelter in place or social distancing rules during this pandemic because “they aren’t among the most vulnerable” kind of have this attitude.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: BenRG on 16 Apr 2020, 23:26
This is Brun though, isn't it? She doesn't waste time on sugar-coating things, especially with those with whom she has no real personal connection. She isn't interested in a person who ignores rules and puts good boys in danger, so she isn't interested in further association with that person. Why should that fluster her? Sometimes she's quite certain that her copy of the manual "How to Human" was missing a few pages... or maybe even chapters... but she manages.

Meanwhile, if there is any foreshadowing here, I suspect that it will be that Milliefeulle is destined to be there when Brun gets flustered at something that isn't an explosion.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 16 Apr 2020, 23:46
Do people still ask for phone numbers these days? Seems archaic.
No one is going to call, obviously, but you still need a number to text someone.

I still thought people had moved on from boring SMS. Like whatsapp, tiktok, instagram, signal, whatever.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 17 Apr 2020, 00:34
I dunno. I still keep my real life shit and my online shit as separate as possible. Online is my refuge from real life. I don't want the people I am physically involved with tracking me down online, too, if I can help it.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 17 Apr 2020, 02:00
I'm the same way, but I always figured that was just because I'm old.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: QuestionableIntentions on 17 Apr 2020, 02:22
Really, Jeph? Really?

"Don't ask Strangers for their number! It could...gasp!...make them feel uncomfortable! And the last thing we can expect grown, adult people to deal with is...feeling uncomfortable!"
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Reaver on 17 Apr 2020, 02:36
I mean  telling people they cant leave because you want to pet their dog after lecturing them probably also makes people uncomfortable.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: pwhodges on 17 Apr 2020, 02:40
Do people still ask for phone numbers these days? Seems archaic.

Plenty of social media apps use a phone number as a possible way to identify people.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: MrNumbers on 17 Apr 2020, 04:16
Man wouldn't it be great if it were possible to have the dating experience without anyone having to be uncomfortable at any point?

I think asking is always okay as long as you're prepared for the answer to be no, and you know 'no' means 'no'. Dating is super hard. Meeting people is super hard. You have to make yourself super vulnerable to rejection, which sucks too.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Thrudd on 17 Apr 2020, 06:02
I don't care what the rules are. If a stranger lectured me in public like that (A person of Brun's age no less--how old is she 20? 21?) I would LOSE MY SHIT.
/Begin John Cleese Voice
"Loosing ones shit" would imply that one would no longer be full of it.
But please mind that there are health and decency laws to consider, so please do so in the appropriate facilities.
/End John Cleese Voice

On the topic of explosions.

Explosions are bad.

Also they tend to surprise you when you aren't expecting them and elicit varying levels of panic and secondary followup emotions.

Balloon or air-pack pop - surprise/shock followed by mild hostility at perpetrator
Bicycle tire - Surprise and dismay if it was your bicycle
Bulging can - surprise and varying levels of disgust depending ones proximity to said can when it evacuated itself and the state of the contents - soda=annoyed  Surströmming=retch
Car tire - Surprise/Fear then just cold fear that you don't crash into anything while trying to maintain control
Bug spray can in campfire - Surprise then fear of a fire being started followed by rage at the idiot who thought it would be funny
Being rear ended in a car - Surprised shock followed by concern/anger
Pressure safety blowing out on a nearby tank being steamed - surprise [it is VERY loud] immediately followed by concern as one tries to find the exit in the clouds of steam
Gas main blowing out - WTF? Earthquake?  "Oh Shit" when you realize it is really bright and warm for the middle of the night.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 17 Apr 2020, 06:28
Brun's lecture resonates with me a whole lot, too many people don't concern themselves with what consequences their actions might have.

And then there's the folks that only think of the immediate/short-term consequences that benefit them and they couldn't care less about everyone else.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: haikupoet on 17 Apr 2020, 12:42
Two questions:

1. Does random dude with Rupert realize Millefeuille and Brun are on a date?
2. Do Millefeuille and Brun realize they're on a date?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Autistic Vulture on 17 Apr 2020, 14:33
Two questions:

1. Does random dude with Rupert realize Millefeuille and Brun are on a date?
2. Do Millefeuille and Brun realize they're on a date?

1. Probably not.  He doesn't strike me as too bright or observant; also, he's probably quite heteronormative.
2. Millefeuille, 65% chance of yes.  Brun, 97% chance of no.  (Source for Brun: my personal experience.  It takes me 2-3 months of interacting with someone before I realize that we're dating.  That's why I gave it up circa 2000.)

Please note Brun's different reactions to George (the name I'm giving to Rupert's owner until we have one) asking for her phone number and Clinton giving her his digits.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 17 Apr 2020, 15:48
If no-one realises it's a date, is it really a date?

He doesn't strike me as too bright or observant

Don't be so harsh on him, he doesn't have access to the Official Shipping Channel.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: ihaveavoice on 17 Apr 2020, 20:23
Man wouldn't it be great if it were possible to have the dating experience without anyone having to be uncomfortable at any point?

I think asking is always okay as long as you're prepared for the answer to be no, and you know 'no' means 'no'. Dating is super hard. Meeting people is super hard. You have to make yourself super vulnerable to rejection, which sucks too.

Yeah, where the extreme discomfort comes in is when the asker refuses to HEAR the no. My guard is immediately up now whenever a man asks me this after having certain experiences of that type. It shouldn't be such a huge relief when a guy doesn't try to browbeat you into giving him your personal information, but here we are.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 17 Apr 2020, 23:00
Regular conversation with my wife:
"Thank you for saving me from dating."
"No, thank you for saving me from dating."
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: los_alamos_bomb on 19 Apr 2020, 07:45
Quote
Really, Jeph? Really?

"Don't ask Strangers for their number! It could...gasp!...make them feel uncomfortable! And the last thing we can expect grown, adult people to deal with is...feeling uncomfortable!"

Thank you!  I almost never post to these forums, but Jeph's declaration against asking for phone numbers is just awful enough to draw me in.  You should definitely be willing to take no for an answer (graciously), but the idea that we can't pursue or even inquire about people we find interesting is just insanity.  If bonds are to be built, someone has to take a chance, or we all just end up huddling in our own caves alone.

If you're one of those people who takes a lot of social cues from QC, please hear me when I say this: Jeph sometimes really gets wound around his own axle about his own hangups, which are often highly skewed from the standards of normal social interaction.  On this issue, he is just plain wrong. If you like someone, talk to them.  If you want to see them again, say so, ask for their number, ask them out.  Be kind, be gentle, be gracious in rejection, but for the love of god don't isolate yourself even further in this already isolated world because you're terrified that you might for ten seconds make someone slightly uncomfortable.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Thrillho on 19 Apr 2020, 08:37
Thank you!  I almost never post to these forums, but Jeph's declaration against asking for phone numbers is just awful enough to draw me in.  You should definitely be willing to take no for an answer (graciously), but the idea that we can't pursue or even inquire about people we find interesting is just insanity.  If bonds are to be built, someone has to take a chance, or we all just end up huddling in our own caves alone.

I don't necessarily agree with Jeph either, but I think you're overreacting.

Quote
If you're one of those people who takes a lot of social cues from QC, please hear me when I say this: Jeph sometimes really gets wound around his own axle about his own hangups, which are often highly skewed from the standards of normal social interaction.  On this issue, he is just plain wrong.

There is no such thing as 'wrong' in this particular arena. Jeph said that in his opinion, he doesn't think you should ask someone for their phone number. By its very nature it's impossible for him to be wrong.

Measuring against 'normality,' as if normal is a concept that exists or there is an agreed consensus, is perfectly fine unless you're trying to claim this amorphous 'normal' concept as the only correct way to exist.

Quote
If you like someone, talk to them.  If you want to see them again, say so, ask for their number, ask them out.  Be kind, be gentle, be gracious in rejection, but for the love of god don't isolate yourself even further in this already isolated world because you're terrified that you might for ten seconds make someone slightly uncomfortable.

I don't agree with this as blanket advice.

As I said, I do not agree with Jeph that asking someone for their phone number is something that should be never done. However, what is rarely discussed in these scenarios is the nuance involved. I don't think you should always talk to someone if you like them. There are contexts here. Somebody might have just broken up with another person and not be interested in a relationship. They might have trauma. If you don't know them that well, you might have no idea what is going on in their lives that make that conversation difficult before you start it, with them unprepared.

However, at the same time, the common response to this kind of feedback is 'so I guess nobody can ever talk to anybody ever!' as if there are no social cues whatsoever, and that you can't learn to read body language. I'm not saying there is a universal body language for 'come and get it,' but I think body language that reads 'please leave me alone' is pretty easy to pick up on if you bother even slightly with it. This is one of the most malignant aspects at the centre of pickup artistry - that it focuses on trying to break down barriers that a woman puts up and override them rather than simply trying to read whether they're interested. I'm autistic, it should be harder for me to do this than anybody else.

And it's not like that's the only kind of context. Is a woman walking in the park in casual clothes with a friend really cruising for ass?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 19 Apr 2020, 08:47
Quote
Really, Jeph? Really?

"Don't ask Strangers for their number! It could...gasp!...make them feel uncomfortable! And the last thing we can expect grown, adult people to deal with is...feeling uncomfortable!"

Thank you!  I almost never post to these forums, but Jeph's declaration against asking for phone numbers is just awful enough to draw me in.  You should definitely be willing to take no for an answer (graciously), but the idea that we can't pursue or even inquire about people we find interesting is just insanity.  If bonds are to be built, someone has to take a chance, or we all just end up huddling in our own caves alone.

If you're one of those people who takes a lot of social cues from QC, please hear me when I say this: Jeph sometimes really gets wound around his own axle about his own hangups, which are often highly skewed from the standards of normal social interaction.  On this issue, he is just plain wrong. If you like someone, talk to them.  If you want to see them again, say so, ask for their number, ask them out.  Be kind, be gentle, be gracious in rejection, but for the love of god don't isolate yourself even further in this already isolated world because you're terrified that you might for ten seconds make someone slightly uncomfortable.

Spoken like someone who has never had a dude threaten you because you said no to him.

Asking for them number of someone you just met, especially one you have barely interacted with (like this instance) is rude and presumptuous.

Just mho.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Autistic Vulture on 19 Apr 2020, 09:02
As I said, I do not agree with Jeph that asking someone for their phone number is something that should be never done. However, what is rarely discussed in these scenarios is the nuance involved. I don't think you should always talk to someone if you like them. There are contexts here. Somebody might have just broken up with another person and not be interested in a relationship. They might have trauma. If you don't know them that well, you might have no idea what is going on in their lives that make that conversation difficult before you start it, with them unprepared.

Speaking here as an autistic guy who grew up in a small town...

...I've never asked a woman for her phone number.  Part of that is growing up in a small town; you didn't need to ask for numbers because they could (usually) be easily found in a 2-3 page section of the provincial phone directory, and memorizing was easy because you only needed to know the last four digits (up until the mid-80s, that was all that was dialed; after that, you still only needed the four digits because everyone had the same exchange).  Everyone knew (approximately) where everyone else lived, so finding the right name out of a list of (at most) 4-5 identical surnames caused no difficulty whatsoever.

And thus asking for a phone number just wasn't done.  So, to this day, I don't do it because it doesn't occur to me.

Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 19 Apr 2020, 09:19
Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Zebediah on 19 Apr 2020, 10:25
Possibly a significant point in this debate: Jeph said you shouldn’t ask strangers for their phone numbers. He did not say you shouldn’t ask anyone for their phone number.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: los_alamos_bomb on 19 Apr 2020, 13:44
Quote
. However, what is rarely discussed in these scenarios is the nuance involved. I don't think you should always talk to someone if you like them. There are contexts here.

Quote
And it's not like that's the only kind of context. Is a woman walking in the park in casual clothes with a friend really cruising for ass?

Of course Brun's not necessarily cruising for ass; then again, neither is the guy who asked her out.  He was polite and lovely, and we have every reason to believe that he thinks Brun has a good energy, as he pretty openly states that he values his dog's judge of character.  And yes, of course there is context to when you should try and deepen your contact with someone.  Context absolutely matters.  But good lord, if this isn't the right context, when is?  They just had a totally harmless interaction in a public place, the ice is already broken, he saw something in her that he liked... That's the perfect time to be up front about the fact that you're interested in someone.


Quote
Spoken like someone who has never had a dude threaten you because you said no to him.

I'm sorry that you've had that experience.  Men like that are awful and I would never advocate on their behalf.  But the solution cannot be "just don't ask people out."  The gears of dating grind to a halt that way.

Quote
Asking for them number of someone you just met, especially one you have barely interacted with (like this instance) is rude and presumptuous.

It would only be presumptuous if it was a demand.  As a simple request, I don't see it.  Also, how is he supposed to interact with Brun more if he's not allowed to ask for more interaction?  I shudder to think about a world where we can only get to know people that we're already in contact with for other reasons (e.g. coworkers or classmates).


Quote
Possibly a significant point in this debate: Jeph said you shouldn’t ask strangers for their phone numbers. He did not say you shouldn’t ask anyone for their phone number.

Except that contact info is often necessary if you want to turn a stranger into not-a-stranger.  That puts a Catch-22 onto huge swaths of relationships.

It boggles my mind how we, as open-minded, free-thinking, socially-enlightened people, can claim over and over that 'clear communication is key' for any relationship, and then in the next breath slam shut gate after gate on clear and open communication.  "I like you, do you like me," is about as simple as these things get.  Why are we so afraid of saying it out loud?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Thrillho on 19 Apr 2020, 15:06
I'll come back and reply in more detail later, but earlier in your reply asking what we're afraid of, you replied to spin telling us one example of what people are afraid of.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 19 Apr 2020, 15:18
Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am not one to try to exchange phone numbers in these kinds of situations, but I have to ask. Is giving your number to someone really less likely to cause awkwardness than asking for theirs? I would have thought that handing your phone number over could also be awkward.

My impression was that this guy handled it pretty well. What could have been very uncomfortable would have been if he'd reacted in any way negatively to the refusal, but he accepted it with perfectly good grace.

And Brun was not uncomfortable at all. You may point out that not all people would have been like that, but maybe this guy actually correctly figured that she would be the type not to be bothered by it. It's possible.

I would bet that for every person out there who is a bit uncomfortable with someone making an advance like that, there is another who wishes people would be a bit more willing to be more forward.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Reaver on 19 Apr 2020, 18:22
Quote
Really, Jeph? Really?

"Don't ask Strangers for their number! It could...gasp!...make them feel uncomfortable! And the last thing we can expect grown, adult people to deal with is...feeling uncomfortable!"

Thank you!  I almost never post to these forums, but Jeph's declaration against asking for phone numbers is just awful enough to draw me in.  You should definitely be willing to take no for an answer (graciously), but the idea that we can't pursue or even inquire about people we find interesting is just insanity.  If bonds are to be built, someone has to take a chance, or we all just end up huddling in our own caves alone.

If you're one of those people who takes a lot of social cues from QC, please hear me when I say this: Jeph sometimes really gets wound around his own axle about his own hangups, which are often highly skewed from the standards of normal social interaction.  On this issue, he is just plain wrong. If you like someone, talk to them.  If you want to see them again, say so, ask for their number, ask them out.  Be kind, be gentle, be gracious in rejection, but for the love of god don't isolate yourself even further in this already isolated world because you're terrified that you might for ten seconds make someone slightly uncomfortable.

Spoken like someone who has never had a dude threaten you because you said no to him.

Asking for them number of someone you just met, especially one you have barely interacted with (like this instance) is rude and presumptuous.

Just mho.


It's also ungodly rude to tell someone "I didn't say you can leave, you have to stay so I can pet your dog"

Guy was a jerk for not having his dog on leash, he acknowledged that and apologized, Brun proceeded to be ruder than him by informing him SHE never said he could leave, and then lectured him yet again after a polite request, that was easily accepted as a no.


I just don't care for the attitude of "If main character is rude/problematic it's absolutely fine, if other character does it, WOW HOW RUDE"
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Autistic Vulture on 19 Apr 2020, 19:12
Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am not one to try to exchange phone numbers in these kinds of situations, but I have to ask. Is giving your number to someone really less likely to cause awkwardness than asking for theirs? I would have thought that handing your phone number over could also be awkward.

My impression was that this guy handled it pretty well. What could have been very uncomfortable would have been if he'd reacted in any way negatively to the refusal, but he accepted it with perfectly good grace.

Sure, he handled it well.  That doesn't always happen IRL.  There are certain people that will harass the object of their interest if they don't get the number, or will react with anger, etc.  Giving the number makes these outcomes much less likely.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: chris73 on 19 Apr 2020, 19:48
Quote
It's also ungodly rude to tell someone "I didn't say you can leave, you have to stay so I can pet your dog"

Guy was a jerk for not having his dog on leash, he acknowledged that and apologized, Brun proceeded to be ruder than him by informing him SHE never said he could leave, and then lectured him yet again after a polite request, that was easily accepted as a no.

I just don't care for the attitude of "If main character is rude/problematic it's absolutely fine, if other character does it, WOW HOW RUDE"


Thank you for this, its what I wanted to say. To me she lectured him for longer than was needed, then proceeded to do something that could be taken as flirting (or being forgiven) ie stay so I can pet your dog.

He picks up on that and asks, politely, if he can have her number which she refuses (no problems there) and the last thing she says to him is again another rebuke (keep the dog on the leash)

But yeah hes the one in the wrong
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 19 Apr 2020, 20:24
Okay, so I can buy that it would have been more polite/less potentially discomfit-inducing for dog guy to give his number rather than ask for Brun's.

And it would have been more polite for Brun to stop lecturing once dog guy acknowledge his wrong-doing.

All fair points, but can we maybe keep things in their proper perspective rather than outright label one side or the other as RUDE or IN THE WRONG?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: shanejayell on 19 Apr 2020, 20:28
Or just drop it & move on.

New comic's up, new thread is calling. :D
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 19 Apr 2020, 21:30



It's also ungodly rude to tell someone "I didn't say you can leave, you have to stay so I can pet your dog"

Guy was a jerk for not having his dog on leash, he acknowledged that and apologized, Brun proceeded to be ruder than him by informing him SHE never said he could leave, and then lectured him yet again after a polite request, that was easily accepted as a no.


I just don't care for the attitude of "If main character is rude/problematic it's absolutely fine, if other character does it, WOW HOW RUDE"

Here's a weird idea: maybe they  both were wrong. Shocking thought, I know.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 19 Apr 2020, 23:32
They're not both wrong, whatever that is supposed to mean, they're just your average flawed human beings doing their best, and no I will not let this go.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 20 Apr 2020, 01:39
Those are not mutually exclusive concepts.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 20 Apr 2020, 03:51
They're not both wrong, whatever that is supposed to mean, they're just your average flawed human beings doing their best, and no I will not let this go.
sitnspin may have been referring to the oft neglected concept of shared blame.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 20 Apr 2020, 04:06
Both made sub-optimal social interaction choices.

Being rude or wrong doesn't inherently make one a bad person, which seems to be the two ideas you are conflating.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 20 Apr 2020, 05:09
Those are not mutually exclusive concepts.

I never said they were mutually exclusive.

They were neither rude nor wrong. Whatever "wrong" means in this context.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 20 Apr 2020, 05:23
We're all big believers in here, aren't we, that the feelings of the recipient of a behavior are more important than the intent behind it. Right?

Well, Brun and the dog guy are both perfectly fine. Neither of them have been even remotely hurt by this exchange. I imagine they'd both be puzzled by the fuss being raised here.

The suggestion that, for example, it's more polite to give your phone number is a perfectly reasonable one, but that doesn't mean that anything less polite than that is rude.

"Sub-optimal" and "rude" are not synonymous.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 20 Apr 2020, 05:37
I am beginning to suspect the disagreement here primarily comes down to how much respective emotional weight we place on the word "rude". You seem to place much more on it than I do, so I will bow out.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 20 Apr 2020, 05:40
Yes, I do think that "rude" is a serious charge. Are you in the habit of leveling it at people who behave "sub-optimally?" Are you then surprised when they are offended or upset?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Thrillho on 20 Apr 2020, 08:49
The thing is the bones of the last bit of your argument there don't necessarily work.

The fact that harm was no caused does not mean that it is not potentially harm causing behaviour, regardless of what we're talking about.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 20 Apr 2020, 09:50
It's not like Brün will never see him again. He and Rupert are probably in the park on a pretty regular basis.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: los_alamos_bomb on 20 Apr 2020, 10:07
Quote
I just don't care for the attitude of "If main character is rude/problematic it's absolutely fine, if other character does it, WOW HOW RUDE"

Exactly right.  This sort of thing actually stopped me from reading QC for about a full year, earlier in its run.  Jeph has a lot of demons about virtue signaling and double-standards of justice that infect a lot of his writing, and it's been super troubling to me at times.  Brun's overwhelming rudeness in the Rupert strips is one mild example, but what drove me away from QC for a long time was Faye being outright physically abusive to Marty for a long time, something for which she sees zero consequences.  It's like the more anxious or anti-social or sparkle pony-ish a character is, more Jeph (and many people on this forum) feel its ok for them to get a justice boner while their victims play strawman for the audience.  It's at times extremely frustrating to read.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Thrillho on 20 Apr 2020, 10:34
Global Moderator Comment Discourse about the physical violence stages of Marten's relationship with Faye is extensive. If you're looking for more detailed discussion on that, I might recommend starting another thread, because I think any real discussion about it in another would involve necroposting and it is not relevant to this specific thread. I would also advise it might shaky ground to use terminology like 'virtue signalling' in this space but that can definitely be up for discussion in the Discuss sub forum if you would like.
As a mere user of the forum I would find such a thread enriching to participate in.
I too would take issue with Jeph using the characters as sock puppets generally, and can't think of specific examples where I noticed that but I largely give QC a pass anyway because it so often lines up with my own values, so I definitely do that as a consumer of the comics.
As someone who discusses the comics on here though, I have personally never employed a 'the character is right because they are the protagonist'-type argument, nor can I remember anyone deploying that, including but not limited to this thread, so I'm not sure where you're getting that.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 20 Apr 2020, 14:41
I will point out that just because a character does something that doesn't mean Jeph thinks it's good. A lot of the humor comes from characters doing inappropriate things.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 20 Apr 2020, 15:11
The thing is the bones of the last bit of your argument there don't necessarily work.

The fact that harm was no caused does not mean that it is not potentially harm causing behaviour, regardless of what we're talking about.

By "potentially harm causing", do you mean that someone else in Brun's place would have been harmed and thus it was rude, or that it had the potential to lead to harmful behaviour?

Because I argue that the first is not the case, and the second is awfully broad.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 20 Apr 2020, 16:00
Okay, I have a further question.

Is "rude" just subjective? Or can there be objective rudeness?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Thrillho on 20 Apr 2020, 16:51
Rude is absolutely subjective.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 20 Apr 2020, 18:14
Okay. I won't argue any further with your subjective viewpoint. I think we understand each others' points of view.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: jesslc on 20 Apr 2020, 23:01
Kind of late to the discussion but as a woman reading this thread, I can't help wondering if those thinking Jeph is wrong for saying "Don't ask strangers for their number" are men...

Because based on my life experiences as a woman, I completely agree with Jeph's comment and with these posts:
 
Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.

I don't speak for all women. Possibly some of them are fine with strangers asking for their number. Personally I would love it if I was never asked for my number by a stranger ever again. And yes - I do mean 100% love it, with no regrets what-so-ever.

If society changed in this way that I'd like it to, that doesn't mean I'd never date ever again - people could still give me their number, or I could give them mine, or they could wait until we're at least acquaintances before asking, and so on... It would just mean I'd avoid a number of fairly unpleasant interactions.

The last person to express interest in dating me gave me his number and facebook details on a piece of paper. That was great and I totally recommend it. Since the interest was mutual, I sms-ed him pretty much immediately so that he had my number too. (He was also a long time acquaintance, so Jeph's "don't ask strangers for their number" advice doesn't apply anyway. Still, I preferred it this way.)

I can't help wondering if it's an unwillingness to give up control (and/or the chance to badger someone into giving out their number when they'd rather not) that makes some people so resistant to switching to giving out their number instead of asking for the other person's number. If the ideal goal is to date someone where there's mutual interest, then surely the approach detailed in the last paragraph is the best approach... But perhaps that's not the goal for these people who claim they "just have to be allowed to ask for a stranger's number or dating will grind to a halt". Because it won't. But for some reason some people keep on believing it will.

---

Also I totally agree that Brun was very rude to tell Rupert's owner he had to stay and let her pet Rupert after she stopped lecturing him on the need to keep his dog on a leash. That doesn't change what I said above though. I'd still have 100% no regrets if the idea that it's okay to ask a stranger for their number died out forever today.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Tova on 21 Apr 2020, 03:47
In spite of my earlier belligerence, I will say that I don't think I've ever asked for a phone number. And I certainly won't now. I honestly had no idea that it was still a thing (as I think I mentioned earlier).

But I'm not sure I've given a phone number either. I have given Facebook details, which admittedly is easy for me because my name's spelling is unusual. I think that is preferable, because checking a Facebook profile is not as big a deal as phoning a number, I would think.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 21 Apr 2020, 06:15
People still use Facebook? I haven't had an account in years.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Theta9 on 21 Apr 2020, 08:11
People still use Facebook? I haven't had an account in years.
It refuses to die.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: oddtail on 21 Apr 2020, 08:21
People still use Facebook? I haven't had an account in years.

Is there something that replaced it, or threatened to replace it, in terms of staying somewhat connected to people you mostly know online, or to casual friends you don't really interact with day-to-day?

Because that's how I use my FB. I resisted using it for years, but it was really the most convenient way to know what was up with some groups of my friends. Including people who are not really online in any capacity outside of Facebook. I mean, it's not like I'm gonna text everyone I know once a month and ask "so... what's up?".
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: sitnspin on 21 Apr 2020, 08:45
honestly, if you're not someone i interact with directly on the regular, i'm not really interested in staying connected. twitter for online people and texting for people i know in real life works fine for me.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: cesium133 on 21 Apr 2020, 09:00
I try to minimize my exposure to Facebook (the Facebook news feed is a cancer on the internet). I have several friends who insist on using Facebook Messenger as a substitute for texting, though, so I have Pidgin set up on my laptop for that. That way, I don't have to go to the site for it. If I have to go to the site for it, mbasic.facebook.com is a semi-tolerable version: simple interface, no scripts, minimal ads.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 21 Apr 2020, 09:11
People still use Facebook? I haven't had an account in years.
It refuses to die.
Zuckerberg is currently briarpatching in regards to social media regulations (which would ultimately cement the current ones) last I had heard.

I pretty much only use it because that's what my extended family uses to plan reunions now.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Thrudd on 21 Apr 2020, 12:11
I hadn't heard the tern Briarpatching but Walled Gardens were something he was pushing for the "FREE" internet access for the impoverished areas like India.
Fortunately the government caught on, weren't influenced by contributions and killed it right off.
Sadly the EU bureaucrats, where some might have good intentions, have made a right awful mess of things trying to kick the Big US companies in the jewels and effectively locked local startups out.

Sadly the alternatives have died off and/or been consumed and the new ones are even more problematic - TikTok anyone?  :psyduck:
Everyone is a psychopathic data overlord wanting to make the most $$$ out of you no matter what the consequences.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 21 Apr 2020, 17:47
I just realized the tech industry is a perfect example of the saying "Everything begins as a movement, turns into a business, and ends as a racket".
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 21 Apr 2020, 19:28
I hadn't heard the tern Briarpatching but Walled Gardens were something he was pushing for the "FREE" internet access for the impoverished areas like India.
Fortunately the government caught on, weren't influenced by contributions and killed it right off.
Sadly the EU bureaucrats, where some might have good intentions, have made a right awful mess of things trying to kick the Big US companies in the jewels and effectively locked local startups out.

Sadly the alternatives have died off and/or been consumed and the new ones are even more problematic - TikTok anyone?  :psyduck:
Everyone is a psychopathic data overlord wanting to make the most $$$ out of you no matter what the consequences.
Criminy......

Briarpatching: A form of reverse psychology whose name is derived from one of the stories of Br'er Rabbit. The titular Br'er Rabbit emphatically pleads for Br'er Fox to do anything but throw him into the briar patch. Which Br'er Fox proceeds to do, thus allowing Br'er Rabbit to escape.
Effectively the  no no anything but that (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BriarPatching) trope.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Subtext on 21 Apr 2020, 22:46
Kind of late to the discussion but as a woman reading this thread, I can't help wondering if those thinking Jeph is wrong for saying "Don't ask strangers for their number" are men...

Because based on my life experiences as a woman, I completely agree with Jeph's comment and with these posts:
 
Clinton did it right.  Giving your number to someone causes much less awkwardness than asking for a number.  The pursued person thus doesn't have to give a response at that time, and everyone can be on their way with much less tension in the air.

This right here. You make an offer, it is on them to use it or not. You are offering them something rather than making a request of them. That is how you demonstrate your interest in someone and establish a modicum of trust.

I can't help wondering if it's an unwillingness to give up control (and/or the chance to badger someone into giving out their number when they'd rather not) that makes some people so resistant to switching to giving out their number instead of asking for the other person's number. If the ideal goal is to date someone where there's mutual interest, then surely the approach detailed in the last paragraph is the best approach... But perhaps that's not the goal for these people who claim they "just have to be allowed to ask for a stranger's number or dating will grind to a halt". Because it won't. But for some reason some people keep on believing it will.


Well, I'd find it a lot more uncomfortable to offer my number to someone else or rather...I'd get uncomfortable if someone offer me theirs. I'd feel put on the spot...saying no to an offer comes off as a lot more rude than declining a request.
Also, accepting the offer and then never calling isn't particularly nice either. Keep in mind that it's already a big step for many many guys to even approach someone else. It's not so much an unwillingness to give up control  - you aren't in control to begin with as the person asked can always say no - but more an unwillingness to surrender to the mood of someone you barely know and can't judge when you're nervous to begin with. Many also already fully expect rejection, so getting a no might not be the best thing in the world but it's something you can prepare for. Waiting for the call that never comes...not so much.

Asking and getting declined is easier...it ends the interaction right there and then, nothing else to do. Plus...it does save some face if one gets declined after asking compared to offering the number...and getting turned down. The latter would look a tad more desperate.

I suppose it's obvious but I'm saying that as a guy by the way (and I did find your initial question a little rude btw).
On a personal note, I don't usually ask for a phone number. If possible, I try to arrange a meet up or just ask what's the best way to reach her. I can fully get someone being private about their phone number but being comfortable offering other ways of contacting them.
Title: Are their flaws not what of them are wrong?
Post by: TorporChambre on 22 Apr 2020, 00:52
Lately I've been having moments where it feels like my body is more a vehicle I happen to inhabit than a true extension of myself.
A notion has person as the psyche, his body as all the by psyche controlled; partly, his flesh (where apropos, whollier, chassis) is of his (i.e. extended) body---with property (lucid or illicit). (With such notion is measure: body fitness (psyche's); dysphoria bodine may be about low such fitness, may be about that body an other using. e.g. By loathed task, externity, sensible continuent, yondly farthens, whither directing, nigh imparticipating. Beware intruders et alia.)
In particular when I'm talking with people in the physical world, as I realize that when they communicate with me they're looking at this physical face which to them represents me.
Alien such factoring as referent an exherant is. My his face an alloy ideal (with germane (how can be, save where carnal interactions are, anatomical face so?) some exherants) is.
I don't actually dislike it but I agree with Brun that having a body is... weird.

pun unintended

We're all big believers in here, aren't we, that the feelings of the recipient of a behavior are more important than the intent behind it. Right?
Wrong. Any one's feeling, intent, is only hisself's. To only who has the intent, feeling is it important. To both the action's effects on their common reality are important.
"Sub-optimal" and "rude" are not synonymous.
Rudity may be suboptimal.
Suboptimality is wrong.
The fact that harm was no caused does not mean that it is not potentially harm causing behaviour.

cautious libertarian explaining his nonleashing canidal

find it odd that anyone wouldn't immediately obey posted rules because they are posted rules
Quote from: translinguage mine
I not, as popular ideals, have whatever against authority; thereof sit I antiservilian: proffering authority unfound whomto oughtta've none---unsound.

e.g. This text; Even if was meant a number, of which are made our machines informatic, I might manuscript. I not
need a number to text

I dunno. I still keep my real life shit and my online shit as separate as possible. Online is my refuge from real life. I don't want the people I am physically involved with tracking me down online, too, if I can help it.
Wherefor multiple unlinkable own personæ may be; one's fleshbound presence may be, with each his other, linkless, enhanced (post) modern informatically. (About informatic techniques psychic associations preferred separate from fleshbound activity may be.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Meander on 22 Apr 2020, 02:53
I just wanted to squee about Brun and Mille holding hands...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Thrillho on 22 Apr 2020, 02:55
I don't know what that prior post means but I am definitely not a libertarian.

And by all means squee! Squee to your heart's content.
Title: Re: Are their flaws not what of them are wrong?
Post by: Cypher on 22 Apr 2020, 06:57
A notion has person as the psyche, his body as all the by psyche controled; partly, his ``human'' body (where appropriate, more wholly, cybrid chassis) is of his (AKA extended) body---with property (lucid or illicit). (With such notion is measure: body fitness (to psyche); dysphoria bodine may be about low such fitness, may be about that body an other using. e.g. During loathed task, externity, continuent sensible, yond-dimensely farthens, whither directing, almost not participating. Beware intruders et alia.)
... Alien such factoring as referent an it's aspect, especially accidental, exherent, is. In my, his face an alloy ideal (with germane (how can so be, save where carnal interactions are, anatomical face?) some exherents) is.

...Rudity may be a suboptimality. Suboptimality is a wrongity.
... cautious libertarian explaining his nonleashing canidal

... Wherefor multiple unlinkable own personae may be; one's in-the-flesh presence may be, sans link with any his others, enhanced by (post) modern informatics. (About informatic techniques psychic associations preferred separate from in-the-flesh activity may be.)
I mean, I'm sorry, but WHAT? Is this actually intelligible to... anyone else? Am I missing some joke or other? "Wrongity" and "canidal", for one thing, aren't even words, and that's leaving quite aside the essential- and, one feels, very contrived- incomprehensibility of this whole post.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: notStanley on 22 Apr 2020, 12:14
I have been wondering if TorporChambre is related to amanfrommars over on theregister.co.uk.  Whether or not they are sincere, a troll, a bot, ...; if you find them annoying the best response is to ignore them.  Once I get a couple sentences in and realize where I am, just skip on to the next post.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 4241-4245 (13th April to 17th April, 2020)
Post by: Gyrre on 22 Apr 2020, 14:13
[snip]

Asking for them number of someone you just met, especially one you have barely interacted with (like this instance) is rude and presumptuous.

Just mho.

That's actually one of the pieces of dating advice my father gave me; offer her your number, don't ask for hers. He also specified that I should only offer it if we seemed to 'hit it off'.

EDIT: To avoid double posting.
[snip]

In the interest of full disclosure, I am not one to try to exchange phone numbers in these kinds of situations, but I have to ask. Is giving your number to someone really less likely to cause awkwardness than asking for theirs? I would have thought that handing your phone number over could also be awkward.

[snip]
It's awkward if the two of you haven't 'hit it off' and she didn't enjoy herself during the time she interacted.
If you're having trouble telling, there are different types of smiles (https://www.healthline.com/health/types-of-smiles). If you only get a polite smile (or worse a pained grimacing smile), don't bother giving the person you're interested in your number.