I'VE HAD JUST ABOUT ENOUGH OF YOU SONNY
Heads up. CBN DJ just announced he is playing new FLaming lips cover album of Pink FLoyd DSOTM in its entirety at 2 pm ET, and he encouraged everyone to turn on if they possibly can. Right now he is seguaying into GBV. FWIW.
Best Bond Villain: Auric Goldfinger. Close second: Largo. Please discuss.
OK, I just got done watching all the bonds (took me about a month), and I know I am going to get negged for this, but in my heart I truly 100% believe that Roger Moore was the best James Bond. Sean Connery was great, but Moore just had way more class and pinache than any other bond. Roger Moore was also the best at uttering the words, "Bond, James Bond" Connery was more of a cocky tough ass. Does anyone else agree with me?
Also, I think Daniel Craig is the worst James Bond. I give him 1-2 more movies before Clive Owen takes the role as JB.
EDIT. Did you know that Roger Moore had the longest James Bond career, both in years and movie volume.
So, three days after my 32nd birthday, I quit smoking. This was after half my life addicted to those little sticks of joy. As of today, I have been smoke free for almost 40 days.
For those who smoke, do you ever think about quitting? For those who have quit, what do I have to look forward to?
(Haha, I just saw another post about quitting red meat. Man, we're just a bunch of quitters.)
I thought I would give the MGoDevelopers first dibs on this...
This is at least a 3-month position, but if the fit is right, it could be more.
If you are interested in learning more, shoot me an message by using my contact form (link is to my personal site) or reply with your email address.
This has pretty much been bugging me since the beginning of time, but the recent sanctions discussions really drive it home--arguing by analogy is a terrible, terrible way to get a point across. It is what people do when they (i) do not have a strong argument on the substance of the claim (ii) do not know how to articulate their point, and/or (iii) they have exhausted all standard arguments and just want to be argumentative.
The other main problem is that the vast majority of situations just aren't comparable enough to make any sort of analogy worthwhile. Even if they are, many people aren't able to make the infinite clarifications/caveats/distinctions necessary to satisfy those that will challenge the analogy. Therein lies the issue: 95% of arguments on this board (and in actual conversations, etc.) involving analogies devolve into a sub-thread debating the merits of the analogy itself rather than the substance of the discussion.
What was the point of this? I don't know. Raise awareness about a pretty minor issue? Is it still the offseason? Yeah.