Topic: miscellaneous musings (Read 547358 times)

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2600 on:** 29 Aug 2016, 15:12 »

How can companies legally say "purchase does not increase odds of winning" if each time you purchase something, you get another ticket?

Kugai · « **Reply #2601 on:** 29 Aug 2016, 15:17 »

It's legal mumbojumbo - covers their asses.

LTK · « **Reply #2602 on:** 29 Aug 2016, 15:22 »

If it's a lie, though, it won't cover anything and exposes them to being reported.

sitnspin · « **Reply #2603 on:** 29 Aug 2016, 19:33 »

Because most of those contests have an alternative means of entry that doesn't involve buying the product

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2604 on:** 30 Aug 2016, 07:14 »

Yes, that covers the "no purchase necessary," but if you can probably only do that once, while every item you buy gives you an extra entry, making the "does not increase odds of winning" false.

sitnspin · « **Reply #2605 on:** 30 Aug 2016, 07:22 »

Actually, you can usually send in as many entries as you want, as long as your willing to pay for all the postage.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2606 on:** 30 Aug 2016, 07:50 »

Fair enough, but that doesn't change the fact that each purchase still gives you an extra entry, thus increasing your odds of winning.

sitnspin · « **Reply #2607 on:** 30 Aug 2016, 07:53 »

Possibly. That's not a disclaimer usually used with that kind of contest. Usually that one is reserved for things like Publisher's Clearinghouse that are basically one entry per person/household. Admittedly, I am no expert as I never enter sweepstakes.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2608 on:** 30 Aug 2016, 08:02 »

I saw it in the Starbucks for Life thing, which I'm only doing because I go there a lot anyway.

sitnspin · « **Reply #2609 on:** 30 Aug 2016, 08:52 »

I usually get my coffee at a locally owned indie coffee place when I don't make it myself. I tend to patronized local establishments in general whenever I can. The closest I come to doing sweepstakes is the occasional charity raffle, in which case purchasing most definitely affects the odds of winning.

sitnspin · « **Reply #2610 on:** 30 Aug 2016, 11:04 »

This summer has been so hot that I discovered a new found appreciation for cold showers and I now prefer them. This may change once winter sets in.

Thrillho · « **Reply #2611 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 01:04 »

This will likely creep out my noble American cousins even more than me - but I've come to the realisation this week that there are now people born in a different millennium to myself that I can legally have sex with.

That is nightmarish.

hedgie · « **Reply #2612 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 02:09 »

Not yet, the new millennium started in 2001.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2613 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 09:30 »

Yeah, what the fuck? How is fifteen legal?

Thrillho · « **Reply #2614 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 09:51 »

I was thinking of it as starting in 2000.

hedgie · « **Reply #2615 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 10:13 »

Yeah, I was being pedantic.

Welu · « **Reply #2616 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 10:22 »

Also there are places where thirteen and lower is the age of consent. Link to chart that is only heterosexuality. Shit's fucked up.

explicit · « **Reply #2617 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 10:44 »

I thought Idaho's age of consent was 14. I'd look it up, but I don't want to end up on some sort of list.

osaka · « **Reply #2618 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 10:48 »

I think Spain's was recently bumped up to 16 but don't quote me on that.

explicit · « **Reply #2619 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 10:57 »

Quote from: osaka on 01 Sep 2016, 10:48

I think Spain's was recently bumped up to 16 but don't quote me on that.

Don't tell me what to do.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2620 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 12:55 »

Quote from: Thrillho on 01 Sep 2016, 09:51

I was thinking of it as starting in 2000.

That's not really better! I know this proves your point about Americans, but...still.

pwhodges · « **Reply #2621 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 14:01 »

I dare say that chart's misleading in some countries. For instance, Japan shows as 13 - and that's true nationally (and people often profess to be shocked by it); but in fact virtually every area has local ordinances that impose a higher age requirement. And in some other places the lower limit might apply only in a "Romeo and Juliet" scenario (one which is not catered for here in the UK) rather than in full generality.

Welu · « **Reply #2622 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 14:29 »

True, just got it from a quick Google and should have gave that disclaimer.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2623 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 15:03 »

I forget if I've brought this up before, but why do people put their feet in vacation photos? I get if you're lying down and it's too much of a bother to move them, but I see pictures that clearly intentionally have a foot or two in frame.

Loki · « **Reply #2624 on:** 01 Sep 2016, 23:27 »

I assume when lying down, it's 'cause "putting your legs up" is culturally linked to chilling out.

The other reason may be that having a body part in there makes it... more personal. I recently took several pictures of a fine half-naked lady[1] in the same pose and the one that feels most intimate to me is the one which accidentally has my hand on it.

[1]

(click to show/hide)

94ssd · « **Reply #2625 on:** 02 Sep 2016, 14:34 »

Quote from: Method of Madness on 30 Aug 2016, 07:50

Fair enough, but that doesn't change the fact that each purchase still gives you an extra entry, thus increasing your odds of winning.

I think the meaning is that entries gained from purchases are still selected randomly from the same pool as people who entered via not purchasing.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2626 on:** 03 Sep 2016, 06:20 »

Quote from: Loki on 01 Sep 2016, 23:27

the one which accidentally has my hand on it

That's where we differ. I would've deleted that one immediately.

Loki · « **Reply #2627 on:** 04 Sep 2016, 02:41 »

...why? o.O

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2628 on:** 04 Sep 2016, 06:36 »

Because my hand was in it, and I could've easily taken another picture without my hand in it. But like I said, that's where we differ.

Loki · « **Reply #2629 on:** 04 Sep 2016, 21:46 »

Yeah, but... I mean I don't understand why hands detract from the quality of a picture. (It's fine if you don't want to answer, I am just genuinely not sure if you understand what confuses me.)

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2630 on:** 04 Sep 2016, 21:56 »

I kinda get what confuses you, but I'm not sure how to make it less confusing. I just...I don't know, if I want to take a picture of someone, why would I want my hand in there? I get why you elected to keep it, since it added a personal touch, but I just wouldn't see it that way were it my hand.

Welu · « **Reply #2631 on:** 05 Sep 2016, 04:44 »

Sometimes accidental or unintended photos come out better than what was planned. Better can mean looks better, more personal, more dynamic, more natural, or anything else that makes it better to the photographer (either for professional shoot or casual holiday snaps). Or it is what they intended just because they wanted to add that element. They want a photo that depicts them enjoying the situation or scenery, not just the scenery.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2632 on:** 05 Sep 2016, 06:14 »

Sometimez, yeah. I've probably had some pleasant accidents in photos. I just don't see something like a hand being one of them.

Unless of course, I want the hand there.

sitnspin · « **Reply #2633 on:** 06 Sep 2016, 10:48 »

Tried ice cream today for the first time in 20 years. I was not impressed. I'm certain now that my original decision to not eat it again was the correct one.

jwhouk · « **Reply #2634 on:** 06 Sep 2016, 12:55 »

You poor child.

A day without ice cream is like a day without sunshine.

hedgie · « **Reply #2635 on:** 06 Sep 2016, 13:06 »

You mean a great day?

sitnspin · « **Reply #2636 on:** 06 Sep 2016, 19:35 »

Never been a fan of junk food, especially sweets. The only sweet stuff I really care for is fruit.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2637 on:** 07 Sep 2016, 12:22 »

Is sherson the singular of sheople?

hedgie · « **Reply #2638 on:** 07 Sep 2016, 12:44 »

I say baa to the entire idea.

doombilly · « **Reply #2639 on:** 13 Sep 2016, 10:57 »

Quote from: SubaruStephen on 12 Aug 2016, 21:16

Was sitting in traffic today, found that the drumbeat of this song PERFECTLY matched the timing of my turn signal.

http://youtu.be/Huk3eYCnvHI

No variation from start to finish.

It's sad music mostly has no bend, swing, or swerve to it any longer. As a guy who routinely tries to feed a drum machine crooked beats it frustrates me to no end that people with actual drummers have producers that go back and "fix" the beats so that everything is quantized to a grid. But then I'm a failure and people listen to their music so WTF do I know?

osaka · « **Reply #2640 on:** 13 Sep 2016, 18:55 »

It happens. I guess the vast majority of people just listen to what they're fed through the radio. I'm guilty of that as well, and I do enjoy "simpler" musics. I try to listen to everything that falls in my ears tho, that's how I discovered some interesting artists.

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #2641 on:** 13 Sep 2016, 19:36 »

The box I just looked at says it contains a "digital thermometer".

Considering where oral thermometers and rectal thermometers go, shouldn't a digital thermometer be one that you cram into a finger?

nellsen · « **Reply #2642 on:** 14 Sep 2016, 06:49 »

Quote from: doombilly on 13 Sep 2016, 10:57

Quote from: SubaruStephen on 12 Aug 2016, 21:16
Was sitting in traffic today, found that the drumbeat of this song PERFECTLY matched the timing of my turn signal.

http://youtu.be/Huk3eYCnvHI

No variation from start to finish.
It's sad music mostly has no bend, swing, or swerve to it any longer. As a guy who routinely tries to feed a drum machine crooked beats it frustrates me to no end that people with actual drummers have producers that go back and "fix" the beats so that everything is quantized to a grid. But then I'm a failure and people listen to their music so WTF do I know?

1000 times this, that's what makes human performance so captivating and relatable - slight imperfection.

explicit · « **Reply #2643 on:** 17 Sep 2016, 16:43 »

Today I saw a Hummer with a Trump bumper sticker and all I could think was, "yeah, that seems about right".

Metope · « **Reply #2644 on:** 18 Sep 2016, 19:45 »

You know you live in Seattle when you're hanging out with a couple friends and you know exactly how, directly or indirectly, you all work for Paul Allen.

sitnspin · « **Reply #2645 on:** 18 Sep 2016, 22:39 »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrkArXOwUcQ

osaka · « **Reply #2646 on:** 21 Sep 2016, 03:36 »

So I just noticed that my height and weight in imperial units (5'9", 299lbs) could be used as a sale pricetag.

Method of Madness · « **Reply #2647 on:** 22 Sep 2016, 16:07 »

Considering he's still technically the same person and doesn't inherently lose his medical license, why isn't Dr. Jekyll and Dr. Hyde?

Tova · « **Reply #2648 on:** 22 Sep 2016, 17:40 »

Maybe because he is non-practicing.

Akima · « **Reply #2649 on:** 23 Sep 2016, 06:10 »

Because as Hyde he practices surgery?

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: miscellaneous musings (Read 547358 times)