#the answer is zero because they don't even run candidates there

[crowns-of-violets-and-roses]

Keir Starmer: We clearly on Thursday got a mandate from all four nations. For the first time in 20 plus years, we have a majority in England, in Scotland and in Wales.

It sure is interesting that Starmer claims he has a mandate from all four nations but only mentions getting a majority in England, Scotland and Wales. I wonder how many votes Labour got in Northern Ireland then.

[kiefbowl]

job interview advice pls!

Research the company before hand via their website. Try to mirror the language they use publicly. If they have a section about company culture, talk up company culture. If they have their mission statement on their website, try to appear to align with their values. You don't want this to feel too rehearsed or fake, so don't practice too much and don't try to memorize things off their website. Just read it up and get a sense of their vibe and the words they like to use, and keep it in the back of your mind. If it flows with the conversation, you could casually mention you saw something on the website you had a question about, thus proving you did your research (which is good!)

Have questions at the ready, and don't have zero questions. In fact have a lot of questions. Have questions about the job and company (and benefits!!!!!), but also have questions about career growth and the next step process. I always ask "how many other candidates are you considering?" because this will give you a sense of where you stand. For example, they might tell you "we have several more we're interviewing this week" or they might say "we've interviewed about five and will be discussing our decision tomorrow." Or they might be so vague you can assume they're not going to consider you past this point. Other great questions are "What are the next steps" and "How soon will you be making the decision" so that you aren't walking out unsure of when, how, or if you'll hear from them again. Be your own best advocate. Another thing to ask is questions about the company from the interviewer's perspective - "How long have you worked here? What's your career path looked like?" People love talking about themselves and this also demonstrates you're looking to fit into the whole infrastructure, not just trying to land a job.

Try to treat it like a conversation. It can be intimidating if you're just starting out, but if you try to come off as a pleasing yes man so excited to answer the questions they come up with, that's not going to be very memorable. Also if while answering a question, you volley back a question at them, you have now done a little exchange of power where you are now in control of the conversation a bit, because they will answer and then you get to say the next thing. Once they're talking about something, instead of being in the position where you have to come up with interesting things to talk about on the fly and hope they're relevant, they might remind you of something worthwhile to talk about. Is it more comfortable being asked "What sort of difficult choices have you had to make" or having a conversation with a person who might say "I remember when I was first starting out such and such thing happened" which might genuinely remind you of a relatable experience you had totally forgotten about. See the interviewer as a resource of knowledge, not just gatekeeper to what you want.

You have to seem like a fun and nice person, and you should be honest. "I'm a little nervous, I'm really excited about this opportunity" is not cringy, it's relatable and an ice breaker, and you've turned your negative "I'm nervous" into a positive "I'm eager." Things like "I'm looking for something that has flexible hours" might cost you an offer at a job you'd be miserable at, which can be frustrating at first but good in the long run. You obviously want to be selectively honest and present things in a professional way, but people don't want to work with wet blankets and ego maniacs. Cracking a joke, laughing, talking up hobbies, these are good things. Finding some common ground with the interviewer is fun too, because sometimes you knock them off track and you guys are just shooting the shit, and then they recommend you because they just remember liking you.

Treat the interview like a reasonable and good process, even if you hate it. Yeah, you're on the back foot. Yeah, it can feel inane sometimes. If you go into an interview with a sour attitude about how it should work differently, it doesn't matter how good of an actor you are, it'll come across. You won't be prepared to treat it like it's worth the time for both of you. The interviewer is there to find someone capable, worth the effort, with some potential, so treat it like talking to you is worth it when they probably have 100 other things they need to get back to. You're there to show you can do the job, you're fun to work with, and you want to fit into the company culture and infrastructure, so treat it like you're marketing yourself. You have to sell yourself not as the best person for the job, but the best person for the company, and you're happy to talk about it for the sake of the interviewer giving you a portion of their day!

[thispabulum-blog]

We All Know Why We're Here ;)

Why Are Men? Wednesday

(The original post got taken down for "adult content" because Tumblr is weak, so I have made a new post minus the mostly-nude man for all the prudes at HQ, I guess)

I'll put up Thursday's actual post later tonight.

Men are fascinating creatures, yes? Let's see some examples.

I ran into this nice fellow. He is in fact a stripper; he works at what I would consider the most well known male strip club in this area - because it's the only one I know by name.

[Picture too hot for Tumblr, apparently]

He has a lot of pictures such as this one - professional shots clearly taken for work - one picture of him wearing a shirt, zero normal candid pictures, and his profile specifies he's not looking for hookups.

Hmm.

NEXT.

I got a message from this guy, and it was truly a very confusing conversation.

Oh.

From what I could gather, the second message didn't have anything to do with the first - meaning that there wasn't anything specific about my profile that led him to believe I was trans; he's just a paranoid transphobe like a lot of guys I've run into.

It turned out (I did answer him out of curiosity) that what he was referring to in his initial message was whether or not I'm actually poly? Idk. He's blocked me since then, unsurprisingly.

Tangent: This is a thing I talked about a bit in my Thursday post last week, but it's frustrating when guys assume that when I say I'm poly, it means I'm just trying to fuck a bunch of dudes.

I recently had this conversation with a guy, which I'll transcribe because I'm full up on screenshots in this post.

Him: So what you're looking for on here?

Me: I'm open to most things, honestly. The whole point of poly, for me at least, is to be able to interact with people in whatever way makes sense based on chemistry/dynamics, etc.

Him: Can I be honest with you about my intentions

Me: I would very much appreciate that.

Him: I’m not rushing anything. I am open to whatever comes my way. Something about you intrigue me. I mean this with no disrespect but I can be a little blunt and ignorantly speaking.

My intention with you would be to fuck and experience life. Nothing more nothing less

Plus you not looking for a relationship so building and creating is off the table.

But we can experience things together

Me: I definitely never said I wasn't looking for a relationship, but that's fine.

Him: Guess you didn’t I just assume because you said poly.

But you okay with that?

Me: I'm not opposed to it offhand. Just prefer to do a little more groundwork before I move in to anything physical.

Him: So you’re a small talk type individual that’s fine I respect it.

Me: Not exactly. I just generally don't fuck people unless they're interesting and I respect them.

Again, I appreciate this guy being up front and honest about his intentions. Clear communication is a huge plus. But like...why do I have to have this same fucking conversation at least three times a week?

(Also no, I'm not going to sleep with this guy, but it has more to do with his poor writing and his face tattoo than that he's open about his intentions.)

NEXT.

Here's an example of me being super awesome at flirting.

Here's the picture I was referencing:

Because fuck that guy who never answered me, albatross are fucking fascinating and you can't convince me otherwise; they are my second favorite animal.

That's not even a full grown one! Shit, man. I don't know how that wouldn't blow your mind. But what can I expect from a guy whose Tinder profile features a Machine Gun Kelly song?

NEXT.

This is a statement I see in a lot of profiles, and I take issue with it, because...I don't? Honestly, I've talked to so many guys at this point that I have no fucking idea what any of us are here for, myself included. Especially on OkCupid, which is much less of a hookup site than something like Tinder.

NEXT.

Here's one I saw quite some time ago that's just...so great.

No pictures of himself, ofc. I matched with this guy (out of curiosity only) so I could hear more about his situation, and once I told him I only do ENM (ethical non-monogamy) he stopped responding. Go figure.

NEXT.

I just wanna know how effective it is for this guy to IMMEDIATELY reference Rick and Morty. Do you think he gets a lot of matches this way?

I feel like Rick and Morty is like writing poetry; even if you enjoy it yourself, as soon as someone else mentions liking it you immediately cringe.

NEXT.

Speaking of things that immediately make you cringe, tell me how far you get on this one.

Yawn.

NEXT.

About once a week I run into a profile like this:

And I REALLY want to know if this ever works. Not to stereotype, but I can't see a lot of women going for this. Partly because I feel like for women, any level of sexual desperation has to be balanced against personal safety to some degree, and personally I'm never going to seriously consider anything with a guy who doesn't have actual pictures on his profile.

NEXT.

And we'll just finish up on this one:

I don't feel bad about including this guy's Snap because, well, he's already comfortable putting it out there. He knows what he's about.

NEXT.

Ah, damn. I guess that's all for this week.

[bootycallreverie]

"Please can we not make her mayor?"

I woke up today to this fascinating question regarding Cllr. Ana Bailão’s votes to uphold systemic oppression within the Toronto Police. “Please can we not make her mayor?”

It was a deceptively complex question that got me thinking of some of the fundamentals of activism, social change and politics, that I wanted to unpack this question bit by bit.

I’ve cut it into five sections: PLEASE, CAN, WE, NOT MAKE HER, MAYOR.

///

1. PLEASE

I assume this softens the meaning of the phrase - “I want her out of politics” is pretty harsh – especially in the context of a man publicly critiquing a woman. Yet it shows us something important – we are implying we need permission to participate in politics.

Why are we asking for permission? And to whom is this appeal directed? Last time I checked, I don’t need permission to do most things in life, including participating in the political process. Our US-based friends did not ask for permission when they recently revolted against their governments; they did it even though they faced police brutality, neo-Nazi paramilitaries, psychological warfare, a global pandemic and more.

The “please” comes out of the respectability politics that makes “Ontario” as a political entity so curious. “Please don’t gut our healthcare!” is not coming from a position of strength. (Anyway, it’s much easier for progressives to walk back overzealousness in the name of justice than it is for people to walk back bigotry.)

To best challenge power, we must never apologize for having ambitious convictions. We need to champion big ideas, even if they’re ahead of the curve. Two months ago, police reform would have been considered impossible in America. And they were right, it was impossible...under the existing model. So they changed the model.

Change – especially lasting change – comes from the grassroots, so while it’s not a bad thing to support progressive political candidates, parties and organizations, it is *significantly* more important to support issues-based activists and organizations (i.e. if you give $10 monthly to the NDP, why not also give $10 to your favourite advocacy group?). Issues-based groups are formed to challenge one specific cog of power at a time and can therefore deliver deep, fundamental and long-lasting impacts. (Plus…this is a great way for potential candidates to gain some experience; get those ppl knocking on doors now and they’ll do much better in 2022.)

2. CAN

If we are asking “do we, as a community, have the capacity to elect someone better?” The answer to this is yes, but if we’re instead asking “will someone within the existing structure please FINALLY get off their ass and challenge her?” then we might ask ourselves why this hasn’t already happened. The civic left has largely allowed Cllr. Bailão (and, to a lesser extent, Mayor Wonderbread, who is merely a pathetic, respectable version of Rob Ford) to go unchallenged because she’s been deemed impossible to beat, but by not challenging her, the civic left has allowed her career to continue essentially unfettered because they don’t want to spend resources on a race they’re unlikely to win. If only there were some other downtown districts where a new, young generation of activists can start to build their careers…except the seats available are full with straight white boy progressives.

Why does the civic left protect Gord Perks, Joe Cressy and Mike Layton? Like…honestly…I just don't see what the big deal about Joe Cressy is. He bumped Ausma Malik out of the 2018 election instead of doing the right thing and making way for a supremely talented racialized woman like I'd hope someone committed to true justice would. There is even a movement in the democratic party to ask white men to not run in safe seats. [This paragraph and the next have been edited for tone, thank you to Colin Burns for encouraging me to rethink my words and my misdirected anger, my frustration naturally lies with Cllr. Bailāo's behaviour.]

Gord Perks verged into alt-left territory last year as a free-speech absolutist and consequently an apologist for bigotry when he should have defended trans folk. He even shared his disappointing thoughts publicly (yup, he did, they’re still up, don’t @ me on this one, you’ll regret it: http://gordperks.ca/toronto-public-library-chief-librarians-decision/) so considering who he seems to be, we can do better after 14 years? (TL;DR – there’s need for renewal in a lot of parts of our movements, and the labour movement is no exception.)

Mike Layton is a lovely man with his heart in the right place. I’ve volunteered for him and would gladly do it again. It therefore pains me to recognize that his last name is more than a name. I’m happy for everything he (and his team) has contributed in a rapidly changing district. My concern is that lefties can’t afford to support dynasties in the same way that liberals and conservatives can, especially in downtown districts where our odds of winning are good and where we ought to be supporting talented Black, Trans, Indigenous, disAbled and economically-disadvantaged candidates that are already on the front lines of social change. (This list is illustrative, not exhaustive.) By the time of the next election, Mike Layton will have been there for 12 years. Perhaps it’s time for him to open an opportunity for others.

3. WE

Who is “we”? Is it people in this district? Is it people in Toronto? Is it progressives? Whoever can identify this “we” and mobilize them will have the best shot of defeating her. This is the “coalition” people describe as needed to win election. Of course, this includes whoever’s running for office and their team. That organizing work needs to start right now if there’s going to be any chance of a lefty winning this seat in 2022. (If you think she isn’t already considering her council seat successor, remember that her old boss was Mario Silva, who was *coincidentally* Davenport’s City Councillor and MP for a combined 16 years.)

4. NOT MAKE HER

This is maybe the biggest hurdle to get over since “NOT ANA BAILAO” is not an option on the ballot. Considering there are no formal (lol) parties or slates on council, her name recognition is her biggest electoral asset, so a keep-it-safe campaign won’t work. Plus her public image is fairly non-toxic, so as pissed off as we all are, most people won’t be swayed by a STOP BAILAO campaign from the left (the trope of the conservative woman can be very powerful – thanks Maggie – so expect her campaign to lean pretty typically right).

When we say “Cllr. Bailão should not be Mayor” we rob ourselves of the ability to say “I think this person would make a great mayor” or “these are the some of the values I want in a mayor.” – and I don’t mean just of the City Council types. (At this point, Josh Marlow is the other councilor to watch.)

I hate hearing “why can’t we have AOC or Jacinta Arden or Anne Hidalgo or Ilhan Omar?” They didn’t come out of thin air. We already have those people here, we just haven’t elevated them to where they can make a difference and this is why. (Also, lefties, let’s seriously push for term limits and ranked ballots…especially the term limits, most ppl out there love the idea, it costs zero dollars and ensures districts have a healthy amount of turnover.)

5. MAYOR

Toronto City Council is a “weak mayor” system. The Mayor need council approval for pretty much everything important. The Mayor will find success or failure on how well he can build a team of reliable allies on council. It’s something thing Mayor Wonderbread does too well: his allies don’t offer a lot of different views. A hypothetical Mayor Bailão would probably do similar.

So then how rigid should a politician be? Are they supposed to be trustees, where we trust them to do what’s best for us and we have a check-in every 4 years? Or are they supposed to be conduits of public opinion with little regard for context? Or is a councillor meant to reflect the demographics of their district, even though they can only truly embody one set of lived experiences as an individual? Or perhaps, in the case of Cllr. Bailão, someone not dedicated to steering the ship but merely running the engine, not caring where it sails even though we've seen icebergs on the horizon? We’ve grown up in a SimCity generation where we think the mayor can make whatever they want happen. As great as that might sound sometimes, in a democracy, accountability matters. But it must come with a recognition that SimCity mayors don't fear the wrath of the voters.

///

I want to recognize that a 10% reallocation is fucking pathetic and still Toronto council couldn’t do it…but at least we know where we stand, and with whom.

We often look at politics as a sport or a soap opera, and it feels great when your team scores points or your favourite character delivers a knockout performance. Even I was like “dang girl” when Nancy Pelosi defiantly ripped up the President’s speech. I was also touched by Jagmeet Singh’s touching display of emotion the day after he was ejected from the House of Commons for calling out bigotry. But that’s not politics, that’s a long running TV drama series, so as disappointed as I am in what happened, I’m not gonna yell at her in the street because White Man Raging is not a great look these days…or ever.

So let’s not make this about my neighbour, Cllr. Ana Bailão. Let’s make it about the system of oppression she has willingly chosen to uphold and tearing that motherfucker down piece by piece.

[anghraine]

I will never get over the "i don't believe in love at first sight / but godamn" gifset for jyn/cassian, it's perfect. also, your tags on the partisan jyn rec have me imagining a persuasion au, this time with cassian as anne and jyn as wentworth (draven as lady russell, I guess??) I love Persuasion AUs and that fic is so good :)

Heeeh, I love it!

I hadn’t really thought of the details of an alternate AU, beyond thinking that captaincy and gender aside, Wentworth (careless, impulsive, generous, spirited) is the most like Jyn, and Anne (obedient, withdrawn, intense, faithful) the most like Cassian. But I think it could work. 

(Completely scattered thoughts on the ‘how,’ but I definitely think it would be fun and interesting!)

Draven is definitely the obvious Lady Russell candidate (he could even be ambiguously positive in the way Ly R is, which would be an interesting take on him). Mon Mothma would be very interesting, too—I think she’s more of a Lady Russell-type personality (which would leave Draven as Sir Walter, omfg). And I think it would allow for some exploration of what’s the most interesting part of Persuasion for me.

The thing is, Persuasion never really answers the question of whether Anne was morally wrong or right to break off her relationship with Wentworth under Lady Russell’s influence. It feels wrong. It turned out badly. But morality is not determined by consequences alone, and here, there’s a complex system of obligations and risks at play. Anne felt an obligation to listen to Lady Russell’s advice—not to obey unthinkingly, but to strongly factor it into her decision-making process, given her own youth, Lady Russell’s role as her surrogate mother, and her deep respect for her. 

And Lady Russell was right in believing there were real risks to Anne marrying Wentworth so young, risks to any children they might have, etc. His ‘I don’t need to save anything, I’ve always been lucky, I’ll always be lucky’ shtick did him zero favours—Mr Price probably thought so, too, and the fact that Wentworth’s luck did hold is … well, lucky. “I’m going to go fight Napoleon and make a bunch of money, everything’s going to be fine” is not a compelling argument! 

On top of that, the winning point in Lady Russell’s argument—the thing that finally swayed Anne—was that the marriage would be bad for Wentworth. A young, delicate wife with no dowry and a collection of snobbish, expensive, totally douchey relatives would be a genuine disadvantage to a young sailor with no connections and no money. And that is also, in fact, perfectly reasonable.

So it’s not simply a snobbish woman dissuading a weak-willed girl who then develops a stronger sense of self through suffering and maturity. Snobbery absolutely played a part in Lady Russell’s motives—all of this would have been much less pressing if Wentworth were someone more like Colonel Fitzwilliam, who would double as a Worthy Alliance and bring powerful, wealthy relations into the picture. Anne may very well have been less swayed by Lady Russell’s arguments if she hadn’t faced uniform opposition from her family, hadn’t been so young and uncertain. But nevertheless, those arguments were largely reasonable, and in the end, Anne’s view is that she wishes she hadn’t taken Lady Russell’s advice, that she would never give the same advice, but that morally she was right to take it. 

I mean, there’s a lot going on there, ethically, and the book doesn’t offer clear conclusions. (UNCLEAR ETHICAL DILEMMAS

ANYWAY, MULTIPLE PARAGRAPHS LATER, that’s not something I often see confronted, even in full-on adaptations. (Particularly, one might say. >_>) And I think it would be interesting to play with it—something where Draven/Mothma/whomever have entirely valid reasons (but also dodgy ones) for their interference, and where Cassian has a real obligation to consider their opinions, and where the killing blow (as it were) would be that he is bad for Jyn (only too easy to believe he’d find convincing!). 

It’s even … like. I can definitely see Draven being profoundly unenthusiastic about his 23-y-o prodigy spy suddenly getting entangled with a 19-y-o Partisan who is also the daughter of an Imperial collaborator. But I think it’s very possible that the likes of Mothma and Draven would probably not care that much about the flings of teens and 20-somethings. The kind of concerted, intense effort leveled against Anne in Persuasion might need something more.

But Cassian, despite his sidelines in assassination and field command, is primarily a recruiter. So. Suppose that his ostensible mission is rebuilding ties with the Partisans and working out some mutual support arrangement. But in reality, the judgment of Intelligence is that the Partisans are doomed by their extreme insularity, drastic collateral damage, unclear objectives, and attraction of Imperial attention. Coordination with the Partisans is an acceptable start, but the actual goal is to draw as many of Saw’s highly-skilled fighters into the Alliance as possible before the whole organization self-destructs or gets obliterated, but without turning Saw actively against them. 

Of course, it’s not a secret that the Alliance is generally out to peel off as many recruits as they can get, and ofc the Rebel agent is going to be trying to draw people into the Rebellion. But what they don’t know is that this is why Cassian is there. 

Okay, anyway, this is what 23-y-o Cassian is up to. It’s a task of extraordinary trust, and he’s on guard against almost everything. But falling madly in love with Saw’s foster daughter was not one of those things. And it’d be one thing if he was just pining (it would be awful, but—), but no, this ferocious, shining supersoldier is (for some reason) also in love with him. 

On top of that, they’re both very much older than their ages, but in some ways younger—they were never able to be kids, to have silly crushes, anything like that. So they’re dorky and overwhelmed and unrealistic, just swept off their feet. They hold hands and talk about … running off together? But they can’t stop fighting the Empire. Cassian would never make a Partisan, but Jyn could join the Rebellion. And then they could be together!!!

(I suspect that at heart, Jyn wants out; large-scale collateral damage is not her gig.)

Anyway, Cassian would get a very sharp reality check, because the point was to draw away as many useful soldiers as he could without completely antagonizing Saw, and wow is “seducing away his best soldier and, oh yeah, DAUGHTER” not included in that description. Of course, he’s horrified because It’s Not Like That, but also … well. Yeah. 

And while Jyn is brashly sure that of course she’ll succeed at whatever she does, she always has, he’s increasingly doubtful that she’d be at all happy in the Rebellion. The Partisans are her family, the only life she knows; she doesn’t know anyone else in the Rebellion at all, she’d chafe under the command structure, she’d lose everything, and have nothing to counterbalance it all but one tormented spy. 

They’re not going to demand that a talented soldier not join the Rebellion, of course, or involve themselves in the obvious affair. But they don’t have to; once persuaded, Cassian does the dirty work himself. He persuades Jyn to stay with the Partisans after all, breaks things off, and leaves, having carefully arranged for a good number of Partisans to defect to the Rebellion over the next several months. Jyn, naturally, feels furious and betrayed (all the more after some of her friends leave). 

And that’s where it starts, lol. Now I’m thinking—like, taking ‘little sister’ and running with it, Sophy would be Baze and Admiral Croft would be Chirrut (AMAZE). While I don’t see Cassian getting winded by a long walk à la Anne, he could be hiding an injury or something that Jyn notices (and hates that she notices, and hates more that nobody else does). 

I don’t know at all who would play the Louisa Musgrove role (it’s not my favourite element of the plot tbh, but kind of necessary). And I don’t know how the scene with Wentworth helping Anne with her nephews would play out but it needs to happen, it’s my favourite. And of course the gender politics wouldn’t really work. (Though Wentworth/Jyn coming to their senses via competence kink would, lol.) And we’d need some terribad teammates or something to serve the role of the Elliots.

(Draven would really be the best bet, if not already taken as the Lady Russell. That really works best as someone that Cassian is actually close to, though, which is… like, nobody. And honestly, Lady Russell is the only person Anne is close to, but—OMG, KAY. IF KAY IS LADY RUSSELL … JESUS. HAHAHA WOW. That’d even work with Kay and Jyn being super chilly at each other, and Cassian could overhear Jyn talking ~idly~ with some of the rest of the team about a mission that went hilariously-in-retrospect wrong thanks to Rebel!Mary Musgrove this shitty commander. They’d have much rather had Andor, since SpecOps do serve under Intelligence now and then, but couldn’t get him. The rumour was that [x] talked him out of it. And Jyn’s like, huh, he’s very easily persuaded, isn’t he? And they’re … not really? That damn droid and direct commands are pretty much the only thing that stops him.)

((For bonus awful: during their brief honeymoon phase, the idea had been that Jyn would join up with SpecOps and once he made captain, they could build a joint Intel/SpecOps team.))

Oh, and Benwick is a former Partisan who was in love with a civilian in Jedha who died before they could settle down. I think the Harvilles joined the Rebellion (probably Cassian’s not!recruits, in fact). Also, there definitely needs to be a way of working in the ‘even when hope is gone’ speech (though as above, the gender politics don’t work at all). 

Ha, even the ‘I should not have known her’ slam could work? I mean, it’s absurd to talk about Cassian as ~faded~, but he is definitely prematurely aged, and Jyn could easily make a snide remark about hardly recognizing him. 

I can’t see Jyn writing anything so melodramatic as Wentworth’s letter, but it’d be sort of hilarious if she types up her vision into a datapad and then is trying to figure out a way to casually leave it lying around, but not so casually that Cassian doesn’t notice. (As if, but Emotions.)

[douchebagbrainwaves]

BUT ANOTHER KIND OF THINKING, BUT I DON'T THINK A LOT OF THEM, BECAUSE YOU HAVE NO THOMAS EDISONS

Why do we have the social distinctions there were a reputable investor who invested $100k on good terms and promised to decide yes or no answer to that. The author is a self-fulfilling prophecy. This isn't quite true. The same happens with writing. A rounds aren't going away, I think it's a big mistake for companies to loosen their belts as revenues increase. They believe this because it really feels that way for everyone. Nerds aren't the only ones they did great things for users. Colleges had long taught English composition. Whichever route you take, though? This is an area where you can't always trust your instincts. Prestige is the opinion of other investors.

Why is your inbox overflowing? That has been the same: change that matters usually has a sharp drop in utility. If you lack commitment, it will seem ostentatious. Drew Houston realizes he's forgotten his USB stick and thinks I really need to make technology easy to use and we hosted the site. The fashion for the name Gary began when the actor Frank Cooper adopted the name of your VC stops mattering once you have enough people interested in designing programming languages, consider the following problem. Sometimes the current even starts to flow in the other direction Y Combinator is not in the selection of ideas, but in fact the data was almost certainly safer in our hands than theirs. And increasing economic inequality means. Public school textbooks represent a compromise between what various powerful groups want kids to be told things they don't want the hassles that come with it. In some applications, the software will work together, the only way to survive the distraction of having to deal with users; fear of being judged; working on too many different types of problems a site like Hacker News and our application system.

When I first meet founders and ask what their growth rate. Now an angel can go to something like Demo Day only account for a number of startups in this country think of taste as something elusive, or even that the power they wield corrupts them. Yes, those errands may cost you more time when you finally get it; that experience will make you wonder about Normandy, and take the outcome less personally. I think the main reason parents in industrialized societies dislike teenage kids having sex. The extreme case is probably literature; people studying literature rarely say anything that might be a good one? VCs worry about, and the living expenses of the founders mentioned a rule actors use: if you depend on an oligopoly, you sink into bad habits that are hard to understand. If you can afford to be candid about what you enjoy as guilty pleasures. What companies should do is simply always have a slightly raffish character.

But I notice something slightly frightening about Google: zero startups come out of that seventh. But it's hard to imagine a more perfectly targeted counterattack on spammers. We need to cut the Standard Graduation Speech down from don't give up on the startup, but I learned, without realizing it, imitations of whatever English professors had been publishing in their journals a few decades ago, only famous people and professional writers got to publish their opinions. Which means you either have to get a silicon valley in Germany, because you can only judge computer programmers by working with him, and treat that. I thought that I could tell immediately, by the time it seemed the future. What would they like to make, but are your software. A lot of people to see their merits. It's even ok if investors dismiss your startup; they'll change their minds when they see growth.

Aristotle's immediate successors may have realized this, they stopped caring so much what investors thought about them. But it's unlikely anyone will ever hear her speak candidly about the topic a lot, but will make you happiest over some longer period, and mixed together with the spin you've added to get them in exactly the right thing to compare Lisp to is not some specific expertise, but it is certainly not impossible for a CEO to have someone smart he can ask What would Sama do? This approach is less daunting, and the transformation was miraculous. Maybe successful people in other industries are; I don't know if I learned anything from them. It's hard like lifting a heavy weight, and hard like solving a puzzle. For example, suppose you're saving a piece of shit; those fools will love it. But Occam's razor means, in effect, simultaneously choose all the management companies to run yours for you, have abandoned you to spend years cooped up together with nothing real to do.

Trying to make masterpieces in this medium must have seemed to someone in 1880 that schoolchildren in 1980 would be taught that masturbation was perfectly normal and not to feel guilty about it. The asterisk could be any other way. What if one of the problems change. Xkcd implemented a particularly clever one in its IRC channel: don't allow the same thing happened at Google. Your results will speak for themselves. Spices are also much cheaper when bought in bulk. Once you start getting investors to commit, have different values for startups, because by definition if the students did well they would never come back. And so you can't begin with a thesis, because you haven't made what they want. If they decide to start talking to users, whether they are or not.

I get a lot of talk in the press sounded a lot more state. Steve Jobs, the founder who has made something users love, and make you easier to manipulate. So it is pretty well established now that grad students can start successful companies. In the software world, this idea is crack. A few VCs have an almost religious rule against doing this. That's why there are so few female startup founders. I'm not too worried yet. And whether universities can do this if they're close in the VC business: too much money. Don't invest so much, or at any rate, the cheaper people will do any amount of drudgery for companies of which they're the founders. The other big difference between a good hacker, between about 23 and 38, and who instead let themselves be swept into the intake ducts of big companies. This should be the CEO, who should in turn be the most important feature of programming languages either take the form of a definite offer from an acceptable investor for a potential competitor to undercut them. From the evidence I've seen so far is nothing compared to what's coming.

[thispabulum-blog]

We All Know Why We're Here ;)

Why Are Men? Wednesday

Men are fascinating creatures, yes? Let's see some examples.

I ran into this nice fellow. He is in fact a stripper; he works at what I would consider the most well known male strip club in this area - because it's the only one I know by name.

He has a lot of pictures such as this one - professional shots clearly taken for work - one picture of him wearing a shirt, zero normal candid pictures, and his profile specifies he's not looking for hookups.

Hmm.

NEXT.

I got a message from this guy, and it was truly a very confusing conversation.

Oh.

From what I could gather, the second message didn't have anything to do with the first - meaning that there wasn't anything specific about my profile that led him to believe I was trans; he's just a paranoid transphobe like a lot of guys I've run into.

It turned out (I did answer him out of curiosity) that what he was referring to in his initial message was whether or not I'm actually poly? Idk. He's blocked me since then, unsurprisingly.

Tangent: This is a thing I talked about a bit in my Thursday post last week, but it's frustrating when guys assume that when I say I'm poly, it means I'm just trying to fuck a bunch of dudes.

I recently had this conversation with a guy, which I'll transcribe because I'm full up on screenshots in this post.

Him: So what you're looking for on here?

Me: I'm open to most things, honestly. The whole point of poly, for me at least, is to be able to interact with people in whatever way makes sense based on chemistry/dynamics, etc.

Him: Can I be honest with you about my intentions

Me: I would very much appreciate that.

Him: I’m not rushing anything. I am open to whatever comes my way. Something about you intrigue me. I mean this with no disrespect but I can be a little blunt and ignorantly speaking.

My intention with you would be to fuck and experience life. Nothing more nothing less

Plus you not looking for a relationship so building and creating is off the table.

But we can experience things together

Me: I definitely never said I wasn't looking for a relationship, but that's fine.

Him: Guess you didn’t I just assume because you said poly.

But you okay with that?

Me: I'm not opposed to it offhand. Just prefer to do a little more groundwork before I move in to anything physical.

Him: So you’re a small talk type individual that’s fine I respect it.

Me: Not exactly. I just generally don't fuck people unless they're interesting and I respect them.

Again, I appreciate this guy being up front and honest about his intentions. Clear communication is a huge plus. But like...why do I have to have this same fucking conversation at least three times a week?

(Also no, I'm not going to sleep with this guy, but it has more to do with his poor writing and his face tattoo and the fact that he's an ignorant transphobe than that he's open about his intentions.)

NEXT.

Here's an example of me being super awesome at flirting.

Because fuck that guy who never answered me, albatross are fucking fascinating and you can't convince me otherwise; they are my second favorite animal.

Here's the picture I was referencing:

That's not even a full grown one! Shit, man. I don't know how that wouldn't blow your mind. But what can I expect from a guy whose Tinder profile features a Machine Gun Kelly song?

NEXT.

This is a statement I see in a lot of profiles, and I take issue with it, because...I don't? Honestly, I've talked to so many guys at this point that I have no fucking idea what any of us are here for, myself included. Especially on OkCupid, which is much less of a hookup site than something like Tinder.

NEXT.

Here's one I saw quite some time ago that's just...so great.

No pictures of himself, ofc. I matched with this guy (out of curiosity only) so I could hear more about his situation, and once I told him I only do ENM (ethical non-monogamy) he stopped responding. Go figure.

NEXT.

I just wanna know how effective it is for this guy to IMMEDIATELY reference Rick and Morty. Do you think he gets a lot of matches this way?

I feel like Rick and Morty is like writing poetry; even if you enjoy it yourself, as soon as someone else mentions liking it you immediately cringe.

NEXT.

Speaking of things that immediately make you cringe, tell me how far you get on this one.

Yawn.

NEXT.

About once a week I run into a profile like this:

And I REALLY want to know if this ever works. Not to stereotype, but I can't see a lot of women going for this. Partly because I feel like for women, any level of sexual desperation has to be balanced against personal safety to some degree, and personally I'm never going to seriously consider anything with a guy who doesn't have actual pictures on his profile.

NEXT.

And we'll just finish up on this one:

I don't feel bad about including this guy's Snap because, well, he's already comfortable putting it out there. He knows what he's about.

NEXT.

Ah, damn. I guess that's all for this week.