Posts by InternationalObserver
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
supercali.... was a nice piece though
Yup! I'm no Size Queen but you had to marvel at it's length!
a whole article about a homeowner who had to paint his fence almost weekly with the jist of the article being that it is no big deal.
I don't think he thought it was no big deal, just an ongoing chore like mowing the lawns
There's something in that which suggests there's something you can do short of stabbing people...
Best thing you can do is what the chap in the article mentioned above does: paint them out first thing in the morning so the taggers don't get their tag seen ie they get no props
There might be a code of conduct somewhere, (y'know, that mythical "no tagging other people's work" thing), but in practice some people are just fuckwits.
It's not a myth, but it has gone the way of all good manners. Maybe it's time TVNZ re-screened **Style Wars** to remind the kids about what is art and what is pissing on a lamp post like a dog. According to **Style Wars** tagging someone's piece is wack. According to **Beat Street** if you do it you shall get burned.
The angry git in me still wants to vandalise those big electric security gates that people put across their drives...
Weird. Only today I was telling myself how great it was to a have a FO electric gate. It stops people from wandering up and forces them to buzz me on the intercom and announce their presence. Meaning I don't have to put my pants on unless I want to see them.
-
But upon reading the article, it became obvious that the government action was going to be towards taggers, not graffiti artists. I emailed the Herald to let them know the difference.
The Herald are clueless. Sideswipe featured a photo of a piece that said 'Supercalifrajilisticexpelidocious' (sp?) with the caption "Nice Tag". Sorry Ana but that was a 'piece', not a 'tag'.
FYI - tags are those scribbles you see on wall everywhere, usually monocolour. A 'piece' is something that requires a lot more effort. Taggers are lame Rs fools, one step below throw ups.
-
off topic but but tangentially related perhaps ...
I've just spent the morning watching segments of the TV show FAME on Utube. I could take a cheap shot at the fan who posted 400 videos but it was strangely addictive. They just don't make TV like that anymore. So cheesey!But anyway, as I was watching the old bits I was feeling quite nostalgic. And I thought: I'd buy that for a dollar! (Robocop)
And the penny dropped. That's the Apple masterplan. Music is one thing but TV will be the next*. In 5 years we'll all be watching TV shows downloaded in hi-quality off the web. That's what the Writers strike is all about.
(*yeah, I know it's been touted for years, but only now am I starting to believe it will happen) -
made redundant and invited to reapply for her job
Isn't that illegal? I thought that was constructive dismissal. Totally abusive, anyway.
I think you'll find employers get round the law thusly: Your job was to do A,B,C,F, & J. We have reassesed the roles required by our company and have disestablished your position. You are therefore redundant. But because you have been so great*, we invite you to apply for a newly created position that requires the following skills: A,B,C, G & K.
During the interview process you explain how you're already a master at A, B, & C and F & J aren't too far removed from G & K. They thank you for a great interview but sadly, oh if only it could be different, you haven't got the job. They really need someone with experience in G & K.
*translation: we don't want you going psycho and stealing all our IP, or stationery.
-
(that's right up there with: The only way we can get out of Iraq is to send more troops in)
-
Evidently they're not __demolishing __it they're __renovating __it. But in order to do the renovation justice they need to reduce the house to it's floorboards and start building again.
It's the same way you get kids out of cults ... break 'em down and then build 'em up. It's for the better ...
What is the Auckland City Council doing with all those staff if they can't even interpret and apply their own by-laws. Don't worry, they'll just approve a retrospective building permit so they won't have to sort out their own failing processes...
Nothing retrospective about it. They already have a consent for their 'renovation'. Get this: __Due to the Governments onerous building code, the only way to prevent 'Leaky Building Syndrome' is to remove the walls and start again. __That way the new walls will meet the new building rules on cladding systems.
Heh heh heh .... Auckland!
-
-
I've not seen the offending imagery or text but have heard enough to not need to.
I need to, so where's the link?
-
For the record: I totally got what Ross meant when he said "We were on a break". Rachel had broken up with him remember, so he was entitled to shag someone else.
-
I'm in favour of porn and sod anyone else's work filter.
Context-washing in progress...
Have I just been Obama'd?