We neither confirm nor deny our spies have determined Stephanie is a pseudonym for one of Brian’s many young starlets in waiting.
|
|||||
|
Since I have always fancied myself as a bit rugged and rather dashing, I was unable to resist taking this much-touted test so as to ascertain exactly what type of sleek and hi-tech manifestation of military armaments engineering best reflected my personality To be informed that the firearm I most resemble is a Fisher-Price ‘Mr.Wallop’ Potato Gun is not just disappointing it is also deeply degrading I shall not be taking that so-called ‘test’ again! March 4th, 2002 | Comments are closed
 This quiz on what firearm you resemble most certainly fits our ethos better than some of the other tests I’ve seen recently. I think I could do worse than be compared with the H&K, although I’m more familiar with the Beretta: # 1 H&K PDW March 4th, 2002 | Comments are closed
Lists of wisdom culled from half a lifetime of banging around doing this and that are all the rage on the Internet just now, and why not? They can be a good laugh, and coming from libertarians they can even smuggle bits of the libertarian meta-context into the mainstream of polite society. So here are some of my bits of attempted wisdom of this sort, in no particular order: (a) The importance of a country is inversely proportional to the splendour of its postage stamps. (b) Nothing ever happens in rooms with matching chairs. (c) Nothing guarantees the ruin of a large institution more certainly than the construction for it and by it of an architecturally magnificent custom-built headquarters. (I got this many years ago from a book by the famous Professor C. Northcote “work expands to fill the time available for its completion” Parkinson. But two questions: What was the Enron HQ like? And: How come Microsoft is still staggering onwards?) (d) Speculative booms spike and begin their plunge downwards at the exact moment that the rule which all the suckers were following (“being a Lloyds name is a license to print money” (see (c) above), “you’ll never lose if you buy bricks and mortar”, “get your money into dotcoms, mate”, etc.) gets to me. (e) Movies advertised with quotes in big letters from movie critics, rather than the names in big letters of movie stars, are best avoided. (f) Any movie described by a movie critic as containing no ideas is packed with ideas, but of a kind that the movie critic disapproves of. (g) “Courageux” is the French for stupid. (h) Anything described as “the new rock and roll” is not now very big, and is about to get smaller. (i) “Interesting” is English for stupid. (Well maybe not always, but it is when my mother says it.) (j) Bad food is bad for you. Good food is good for you. To avoid doing bad to yourself when you eat bad food, eat an equal amount of good food, thus cancelling out the badness of the bad food. (This one is untrue. Sorry about that (see (m) below).) (j) Whenever an “alternative” view is promised, it will be the same damn view as the last one, and the one before that, and the one before that … (k) Whenever anyone says “there is no question of ” whatever it is, it means that there is and someone has just asked it. (l) Actually following your dream is fine, but avoid using these words out loud. “Following your dream” is American for stupid. (m) “Sorry” is the English for, well, pretty much anything an English person happens to be thinking. It seldom means that he’s sorry (see (j) above), although it does sometimes. March 1st, 2002 | Comments are closed
Perry is doubtless on to something in his post below. Stephanie Dopeout or Stuffy Dupont or whatever the bit of fluff mishandling Brian Linse’s office calls herself is doubtless miffed at not being invited to the Bash. I wouldn’t be surprised if she’s also more than a tad jealous that Brian is enjoying the company of other women, especially intelligent ones that don’t have a price tag dangling in their cleavage. Has anyone else noticed how familiar Stephanie is with that whole “babe for cash” routine? Here’s a tip, Stephanie. Copy Brian’s Roladex (that’s a phone number index, not a watch) while you have the chance. Stockholm Syndrome aside, we at Team Samizdata can be persuasive, verrry, verrry persuasive, and I would not be at all suprised if, upon his return, Brian sends you back to the low budget temporary help office where he found you. If you’re lucky, he’ll even give you a map so you don’t get lost again. One more thing. Brian can’t afford a PETA lawsuit, so go easy on the hamsters. Remember: The water goes in the bottle. The food goes in the bowl. February 27th, 2002 | Comments are closed
I thought I would try the same test Perry tried to see where I was rated. I too was surprised to see some of the influences attributed in the listing though the top three seem about right for me. 1. Rand (100%) February 26th, 2002 | Comments are closed
The Ethical Philosophy Selector is an amusing attempt to see what a person’s philosophical influences are. Many blogs seem to be taking the test so I thought “what the heck”… My results leave me rather bemused given my dislike for Sartre. 1. Rand (100%) February 26th, 2002 | Comments are closed
BraWarstm! Nice Will Vehrs over on Blog Watch 2 makes a request for a Valentine Day Party report and next thing I know I have caused an international incident. So do Megan and I get those cool light-sabre thingies? Just call me Chaos Girl February 18th, 2002 | Comments are closed
There is nothing to the rumour that mentioning BRITNEY SPEARS increases the hit rate for a blog. 
Blog me baby one more time! February 10th, 2002 | Comments are closed
Miss Veen has a series of sublime cat haiku which will be immediately recognisable to people who live with cats. For example:
Read them all. Meow. February 10th, 2002 | Comments are closed
[Thanks to dear friend and Samizdata reader Ed Collins for supplying the photo] February 10th, 2002 | Comments are closed
Perry, question. Did not one of your dead relatives preside over the manufacture of an airplane named like the above? Was it not one of those post-war jet-propelled contrivances with a pod in the middle for the driver and the engine, and then two sort of strut things going backwards from the two wings to support the tail, in the manner of those flaps they have on the back of grand prix cars? If I’m right about this, and following on from David Carr’s outing of himself and myself as vampires, do we not have a collective name for us all, or at least for David and me? Yes I think I finally have an answer, after more than half a century, to that Question you always get asked in bars and at parties: “What do you do?” “I am a de Havilland Vampire.” February 8th, 2002 | Comments are closed
|
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
