Posts by Damian Christie
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Cracker: What Would Charlotte Do?, in reply to Sacha,
Yep. Any time there’s too much divergence in underlying fundamental beliefs
Yeah, or when you believe almost completely the same things, but someone's giving up smoking... or hasn't had their morning coffee... or got out of bed wrong etc...
-
@David - I'm not saying it can't be done, and I can't imagine having a nasty heated debate with Lew in any forum, it's more that when an argument starts heading downwards, Twitter is an incredibly frustrating medium to try and pull it back, explain EXACTLY what you meant by the previous tweet that has been misconstrued, without digging another hole right beside the one you've already found yourself in....
-
Speaking of my son, this is for Steve & Sofie, who gave me a gorgeous jumper for Harry when he was born. I came home last night and he's finally grown big enough for it :) Thanks once again!
-
Cracker: What Would Charlotte Do?, in reply to Hilary Stace,
If my own son at 18 has a picture of himself shaking the hand of Roger Douglas as his profile pic, it will:
1. Prove my point that Roger Douglas keeps himself alive drinking puppies' blood
2. I shouldn't have left my old Ayn Rand books in the same draw as my porn.Serious point though, nothing against any kid from Whangarei or wherever, I just don't need them to be my facebook friend. And I'm pretty sure they don't need to be mine. We all choose how we want to manage our own social media, this is how I'm choosing to manage mine - by only being "friends" with people I have met. It's a pretty low bar.
-
Thanks Robyn - yeah I did an edit already you might've missed above, pointing out that I'd just been told that about conversations. Having said that, Russell, Graeme and a few other people are having a mind-numbing (to anyone other than us who has to read it I'm sure) discussion about exactly how that does or doesn't work. Apparently the native Twitter client only looks at the first @ in the tweet to determine whether you get to see that or not. So in a conversation between three people, someone will get to see it as long as the follow the first person whose name appears in the tweet (and presumably the person who sent the tweet), they don't have to be following all three. Got it? Yeah me neither... :)
-
Cracker: Bloggers: Pr*cks, Ars*holes,…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
there are plenty of senior political journalists on the same rung of the career ladder as Armstrong who’ve been laid off
Also, unless this has been happening in the couple of days I've been in Sydney, I'm not sure who these plenty of people are you're referring to - please illuminate (I'm being serious here, I have no idea).
-
Cracker: Bloggers: Pr*cks, Ars*holes,…, in reply to Craig Ranapia,
That needs a slightly more serious and nuanced response than “Harden the fuck up, whiny bitch.”
As someone - Russell? - pointed out, if you've got time to write a tourism story while you're there too...
-
...Actually it may have been London Bookshops. So at least it looks dated!
-
@Islander - I was going through the archives the other day putting together "This Week in TV History" - it's the anniversary of that prize you won, you know the one... ;) So I pulled up the archive material and all it was, was some bloody boring video of the paperback sitting in Whitcoulls on display - was hoping to have something a bit better to share with you!
-
Cracker: Bloggers: Pr*cks, Ars*holes,…, in reply to Jdrinnan,
You’re not a prick Damian
Ha, thanks - but I think I was a prick long before I was a blogger!
