From: mrlich	Date: August 23rd, 2007 04:44 pm (UTC)		(Link)

I could see this going over big in an accounting office.

Side note: I have the images done for the design. I just need to know how you would like to compose them - or if you would like me to just do what I think looks right. Will send you the raw images later today.

	From: mrlich	Date: August 23rd, 2007 04:45 pm (UTC)		(Link)

Also - I have a couple thoughts on the network site backbone stuff you're working on. Nothing earth shattering, but might be fun. Remind me later and I'll let you know.

	From: glaucon	Date: August 23rd, 2007 04:52 pm (UTC)		(Link)

This is completely idiotic and therefore hilarious.

it's just so damned...1997!

	From: glaucon	Date: August 23rd, 2007 04:52 pm (UTC)		(Link)

makes me want to fire up jennicam and do some day trading.

	From: arguchik	Date: August 24th, 2007 12:27 am (UTC)		(Link)

LOL--i guess that depends on your definition of "irony." i find it highly ironic that it kinda turns me on, despite the fact that it's "completely idiotic." a further irony: that i don't mind admitting this to you and to your public.

	From: boutell	Date: August 24th, 2007 01:08 am (UTC)		(Link)

You have reclaimed the deconstruction of the faking of the orgasm. Do I have a PhD in semiotics yet?

	From: arguchik	Date: August 24th, 2007 09:06 pm (UTC)		(Link)

Do I have a PhD in semiotics yet?

for the computer languages that you know, alone...

what do you suppose it means, that the sound of a faked orgasm is almost (?) as titillating as the sound of a real one? (my upstairs neighbor's girlfriend is a screamer, and he either takes viagra regularly or has a jackhammer for a cock. his floor/my ceiling is thin, plus his bedroom window is right above mine. we both leave our windows open a lot. it has been an entertaining summer.)