118 thoughts on “March 30, 2012: Relaxed”

    1. I follow Spike, and he routinely says things without thinking. Also, though he's such a huge Knicks fan he's practically a mascot, he seems to have little understanding of what would make his team better.

  2. I hope this doesn't cross into the Forbidden Zone -- a Salon essay on the "R" rating given to the documentary Bully.

    Over and over again in “Bully,” we see adults who feel bureaucratically paralyzed, who look the other way, who are unwilling to make judgments between perpetrators and victims, or who actively condone vicious and sadistic behavior as the Darwinian natural order of childhood. In many cases you can feel considerable sympathy for these people. After all, the schools must try to educate bullies as well as victims (and the latter often turn into the former), the distinction between normal horseplay and bullying can be hard to parse, and no adult can protect a child from all possible harm. Declaring that underage kids can’t even see this film without a grown-up to hold their hands, however, falls somewhere near the nastier end of that spectrum of indecision. With the stated goal of not offending anybody, the MPAA has essentially told the bullied teens in the movie and outside it — gay and lesbian kids, autistic kids, disabled kids, fat kids and nerds and Goths and plain old weird kids who don’t fit in — that their very existence is too upsetting for normal kids to see, and they should crawl back under their rocks.

    1. Ever see that documentary about the ratings board? The disturbing thing for me was how anonymous all the members were.

      1. thankfully those two really-didn't-need-to-be-included-in-the-documentary-nearly-as-much-as-they-were PIs were on their trail.

      2. That documentary was amusing and infuriating. I loved when they put two scenes side-by-side and pointed out that the exact same content was given different ratings based on minor differences.

        1. It's been in my queue forever, but I'm already so infuriated by what I know of the stuff that I'm just not sure I could watch a feature-length doc on it.

              1. I meant it generally, but I can see the comment working for you specifically too. I just remember watching it and thinking "Yeah! Trey and Matt are way better than those jerk ratings people! Yeah!"

        1. it's worth a watch. it can pretty much be summed up by a quote from the south park movie though:

          "Just remember what the MPAA says: Horrific, deplorable violence is okay, as long as people don't say any naughty words!"

          [or show their naughty bits]

        2. Does anyone know off the top of their head if this is on Netflix? I need something to watch tonight.

            1. holy crap! I was wondering if one of these things existed. You made my day Mag!

              edit... of course I can't see it at work 🙁

        3. Okay, so I watched This film is not yet rated tonight, and I have a strong disagreement with many of the arguments presented in this movie. I don't think I'll go into them here because I want to be civil, but man... so many arguments just totally misdirected.

  3. So, fully understanding that I just wasted a dollar, I bought myself a ticket for the lottery today.

    1. maybe the Cryptkeeper Treasurer for the WGOM could buy one on behalf of the .org today???!!!!

      1. I'd be okay with this...I'm going to get one myself. $550 M is fun to dream about. That's worth a dollar just to make the fantasy more palpable.

            1. You have no chance of winning with 0 tickets, therefore possession of a ticket increases your odds infinitely. Even though the odds are still infinitesimal.

      2. can one plate a website in 24k gold? how about a banner of gems, jewels, and diamonds?

        if those aren't available, maybe spread the winnings across the citizens based on comment counts. would that suit you, bs?

              1. it's like with SETI@home -- you need a thousand bots posting comments.

                Not that I've ever done that.

          1. that should definitely figure into the formula, yes (and thank you for not spreading this across 14 posts).

            1. I really don't think I need to do anything to artificially raise my number of posts 🙂

    2. I went in on the office pool just because I couldn't live with myself if they won without me.

    3. Just remember if you win, all those dollars came from poor people who spent what little they had in the hopes of a big payoff to end all their troubles. Pleasant dreams 🙂

      1. It's ok, because I work at legal aid and spend my days serving those same poor people.

        The only benefit to my job is the smug feeling of superiority. Guilt-free lawyering.

  5. Hey Spooks, hope your store, didn't make the cut.

    Here's a dickish thing that Best Buy does (probably other retailers too). I have made a number of purchases at Best Buy with my BB card. Some charge interest, some are interest free for 12, 18 months, whatever.

    When I make a payment, I pay more than the minimum amount, however, Best Buy's credit card company only applies the minimum amount to the charge that accrues interest and puts the rest toward the charges that don't. That means they get a little interest from me, even thought the interest-accruing charge is the oldest and should have been paid off by now. Granted it's not a lot (25 cents this past statement) but still the gamesmanship that pisses me off and makes me question why am I a customer at Best Buy?

    1. Hmmm, when I buy something that isn't interest free with my BB card, I pay it off and add whatever monthly payments I've calculated for my interest free charges and I find that the interest-gathering charge that I've attempted to pay off gets paid off. Maybe I should double check my statement to make sure what you describe isn't happening to me.

    3. That's bank HSBC, not Best Buy. Seriously, though, just don't use credit cards ever.

      A lot of people I know were affected in Minnesota (Lakeville, Edina, Hutchinson, Brooklyn Center and one unnamed MN store are closing). Nothing's been said about AZ yet. I can't imagine we're going down since we're a high-performing store, but we're also three and a half miles from a store that does about the same and is larger.

      I'm torn on whether I want the store to close or not. I really need an excuse to leave again.

        1. Ditto. Essentially a shopping wasteland out there, though doesn't look as bad now that Brookdale no longer exists.

          2. Lots of nice parking lots out there, if you're into that sort of thing. I haven't been back since Brookdale turned to dust. Which means we probably need to get to the 50's grill sometime soon.

      3. Don't use credit cards? Duude, not only is that un-merican, it is inefficient. Just pay the thing in full each month. free float.

        2. The decision on whether or not to use credit cards (and pay them off every month) is a bit like the decision in prisoner's dilemma for whether or not the prisoners should confess.

          In terms of price, we'd be best off if no one used credit cards and retailers didn't have to pass on the fees to us. (The equivalent of both prisoners remaining silent.) If everyone uses credit cards, then everyone gets the impact of the added fees, but also the cash back. (The equivalent of both prisoners confessing.) Those who don't use credit cards while most everyone else does are the prisoners who remain silent while the other prisoner confesses--they are stuck with higher prices from the fees to retailers, but they don't get the "cash back" "rewards" either.

          Certainly there are some advantages to using credit cards which might warrant paying a fee, but I'd feel better if those fees were more transparent to the end user.

  6. For those of you not into genealogy, next week is a big one: the release to the public of the 1940 US Census. My father missed the 1930 census by days, so I'll looking forward to showing him in the 1940 census.

    While the 1930 census rollout went fairly well, this time around it will be free and indexed on the first available day, April 2nd. Time to blow the dust off the database and make some additions.

    1. A few years ago, I was pretty bored and started entering all the family tree info I could find and got up to about 500 family members. I would love to spend more time on it, but I couldn't justify spending money and most of my dead ends seem to have "help" beyond the pay wall I didn't want to cross.

      1. <-- (cheap b@st@rd) I'm the same way. There is an AWFUL lot available free online, and even more available free through your local library. I've spent a little to obtain vital records of some direct ancestors, but otherwise it's been free or via other researchers with command branches that I've run across. I had to rein myself in from delving deeper back (where more errors can occur) and instead find more info on the ancestors and families more recent.

        1. Ok, I just logged into my account for the first time in a couple of years. I built a tree involving 1,434 people. Sadly, I have yet to complete my goal of connecting me with Abraham Lincoln (my paternal grandmother's maiden name was Lincoln, and we have old letters written in the 30s and 40s that talk about how we're one-line removed from him, but I haven't been able to find that link).

          1. I'm reasonably confident that your mother's family changed their name from "Hitler" to "Lincoln." That's why you can't find the link.

            1. Actually, my mother's family's name is an Anglicized version of a Bohunk name. However, I have traced the tree in that lineage all the way back to my 6th great-grandfather (born in 1750) who immigrated to the US. I believe the original name was Farutt (rather than Fratt). My 5th great-grandfather was born in Philadelphia on April 2, 1801. For some reason, I find that stuff fascinating.

              1. It really is very cool. Especially when you start getting into name changes and what-not (hence the joke). I have a great-uncle who does a ton of this stuff. I almost got into it for a while (and have a lot of materials for doing so stored away somewhere), but never quite pulled the trigger.

          2. I'm related to Lincoln by marriage. Also Lady Bird Johnson, which is better documented. Those kind of links just don't excite me, though, since they're so untenable. The interesting stuff is when you get into DNA matching.

    2. Rizzotti's been moved around a lot--presumably because he has a Custian strikeout rate.

      .292/.388/.482, 21.6% K% -- Rizzotti, minors
      .285/.429/.516, 25.6% K% -- Cust, minors

      Okay, so Cust struck out a little bit more, but it looks like an intriguing comparison.

      1. He's stayed within the same organization though. He has played for quite a few teams, but it doesn't seem too strange. I'm not sure why he spent four games on a rookie team, but it could have been because of an injury. He wasn't promoted back to A- but instead to A and played in 106 games that year, fewer than the maximum available.

        The strikeout rate is concerning, but the Twins already corrected the player he's replacing. However, it might be too late for him. Parmelee was 22 when his swing was changed while Rizzotti is now 26.

  8. Joe Pos leaving SI

    as a person who still reads SI every week (I live in the stone age because I like reading magazines in my recliner, and an idiot because most people say SI is crap nowadays) he will be missed. Always had the best articles no matter what the subject.

    1. Didn't JoePos just join SI like a year ago?

      Edit: The article says "less than three years". It does not seem that long ago at all he was leaving the KC Star.

    2. Obviously, this is a big loss for Sports Illustrated, which lost its baseball “news” guy Jon Heyman to CBS Sports in December.

      i like how they put "news" in quotations.

  9. Hey Spooks - I grew up a mile north of Hubbard on Long Lake, about 12 miles south east of Park Rapids.

    1. And, if you're looking for a road trip, Leech Lake Brewing is just outside of Walker. The tap room is open from 4:00 - 6:00. We spent a week up on Woman and I went to the brewery three times. Good stuff.

    1. If he makes their roster, that'll be the 8th different team for which he's made an MLB appearance. I've kind of got a soft spot for him, to be honest.

        1. I went to the list of "least linkable" players on the oracle and found this guy. McDoolan. 1 game, 1 loss. 9 IP, 24 R, 3 ER. As a hitter, no hits, but he scored a run (probably reached on error.)

      3. Oh geez yes. I'm so happy that a few guys like him can stick around in the majors.
        Glad he's not in the AL, the dude deserves a chance to hit.

  11. Fantasy baseball analysis of Delmon Young-

    If he can jump on fastballs earlier in counts, he could establish new career benchmarks in several categories.

    He'll have to start swinging at pitches from the on-deck circle, I guess.

      1. Still just 26 and only a season removed from a top-30 campaign with the Twins, he has yet to reach his career nadir.

        That's just great. Still only 26! And I'm not sure that nadir means what the author thinks it means.

        1. Said nadir can only come when (nay, if!) some greater number of people than "nobody" begin doubting his talent.

          The "Still just 26" line just kills me. They're going to be saying "he's only 36!" in 2022.

        2. Nadir means "the lowest point", the opposite of zenith. I don't think it's what the author meant, but I think it's more fitting than the word he was probably looking for. I'm sure Delmon can have worse seasons than he's had to this point, and I'm glad he'll be having them in a non-Twins uniform.

  12. Ahh, spring. When a young man's fancy turns to basebrew.

    and, not to rub it in or anything, but five of their top 10 reviewed American porters are local to California, four of them from Norcal.

  14. oh my goodness, no one won the MegaMillion jackpot tonight. its going to cross over a billion dollar jackpot. I actually bought a few tickets for this last drawing (I gave up buying lotto tickets on a regular basis a long time). I say it wwould be awesome to win the jackpot, but Im perfectly happy matching 5 numbers and cashing in 100gs, or whatever the second prize is. Im not greedy.

    1. Well then my prayers were answered, for everyone.
      Winning the whole thing ruins folks' lives. I'd start playing if the 100K category had more hits rather than the jackpot getting bigger.
      I think the best thing would be for a huge office pool to win it.
      If I had played and actually won, I'd think long and hard about anonymously sending it to a charity I believe in.

      1. The father-in-law of one of my really good friends growing up won the Powerball back in 2002 or 2003. He's subsequently been divorced thrice. Correlation doesn't equal causation, but . . .

        1. Well, it goes like this. People who tend to manage their lives poorly continue to manage their lives poorly regardless of how much money they have.

      2. Oh yeah, there would be lots and lots and lots of giving away to charity if I ever won the lottery. I think there are certainly people who could manage that type of wealth well, but that they are generally the type of people who don't play the lottery, and so don't often win it.

        1. Oh, I meant put the winning ticket in an envelope without redeeming it, and hand-deliver it to the charity without explaining what it was.

          1. Wouldn't you still be liable for taxes on the winnings (mitigated by the charitable donation, of course)?

            Me, I wouldn't give it all away. In the immortal words of Latrell Sprewell, "I got my family to feed."

            1. That's why I'd give them the ticket anonymously. If I'd win the jackpot, I wouldn't want to touch it.
              As for feeding my family, see my above statement about how the jackpot ruins lives. I doubt I'd be immune.

Comments are closed.