Social Occassions, Linux News, Teh Funnies

[tcpip]

Most important recent social news was attending the wedding and reception of ser_pounce and hathhalla. It was a modest affair (they're modest people) with delightful readings from Plato's Symposium and ee cummings. The reception was but seriously good fun with some great discussions as the night wore on. Huzzah!

Last night was the monthly LUV meeting. Speakers were Tony Tay from Oak Technologies on Distributed Raid Block Devices and Greg Banks from SGI on making Network File System Suck Faster. Leader without Fear phoned me just before the meeting and asked me to take up the chairing role in addition to providing the regular Linux News. Some 75 people were in attendance, the largest number I have seen at LUV; recumbenteer joined us for a glass of wine afterwards; very good to see him. Coming soon is the Ballarat Installfest, Conference and Keysigning

Amusing dedication noted by anivar; Factual and continuity errors in "Hot and Horny Cheerleaders 5. NSW Nationals not really thinking straight with the headline: Labor Most Scrap Soft Policy on Drugs: Stoner.

Comments

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

One boggles to think (given the fact it couldn't have been a drug reference) how such a surname is acquired. I suspect it must be like "Lynch" or some other equally delightful practise.

Wedding was very cool... We were the last to leave the restaurant ;-)

[amazinggoatgirl.livejournal.com]

Well, according to Winslow Geneology, "The meaning of the surname STONER is - one who worked with stone, a stonecutter or mason; one who lived on stony ground or by a notable outcrop of rock."

Stoner's probably just being such a hardass to compensate for his hilarious name.

Like Officer Bogart, the cop who busted my friend for "misconduct on university lands" (smoking a bowl by the lake).

What boggles my mind is how people can tolerate logical leaps like his. What would it mean for harm reduction policies to have "worked," anyway?

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Ah damn. It would have been so much better if it was one who threw stones at people.

What would it mean for harm reduction policies to have "worked," anyway?

Well, that would depend on who you asked. Mr. Stoner seems to be claiming that all drug use is axiomatically bad so therefore there is no "minimal harm" levels (I'm sure he doesn't have a coffee in the morning or a scotch at night either).

A more realistic assesment would include a reduction in the number of people dying from ODs and less people turning to a life of serious crime, rather than engaging in "victimless crimes".

BTW, I've noticed your little debate with volkris. Talk about drugs! He certainly isn't a user and still manages to live in a parallel reality ...

[amazinggoatgirl.livejournal.com]

(I'm sure he doesn't have a coffee in the morning or a scotch at night either).

I bet he actually doesn't, but really should.

A more realistic assesment...

Oh, I know. I just hate it when they act like totally ambiguous things are obvious in rhetoric.

little debate with volkris.

Oh, that volkris. He astounds me. He claims to be a libertarian of some sort, and then is like, "Yay! Tax increases to support more centralization! Trust the government, if they were going to use the Real ID to track us, they'd totally tell us!" Yet he somehow does not seem like a total 'tard in other areas. Meh, he's probably just a really condescending closeted Republican. He probably gets high off exercise, like Dubya.