There can and have been people killed in crowd crushes at Black Friday events. Would that more of the chains use the Best Buy method.

I still haven't left Mom's for my shopping, but then again I don't Have To.

Yesterday, as part of Thanksgiving, my brother's family brought their Golden Retriever, who is a freaking genius for her breed. If she caught you making eye contact with her, you were in for some lovin' -- which since she practically outweighs my Mom could be bad, so we kept telling Mom not to look at the dog... :-).

YMMV

Mine absolutely does. I don't waste time by responding to people, I get work done by responding to people. That's *such* a variable point to make. I'm not even in customer service, but much of my job is communicate, talk, talk, facilitate, arrange, inform, and respond.

I will never create more than I consume, and the only way I'd be able to do that is to cut down on my consuming, because I can't significantly up my creation, and there's a quantum jump between the two levels. I would not be a better person for consuming less. I like learning and expanding my horizons. It's a thing.

Speaking of vanity metrics, I just bumped into klout, and while I think it's wanky in the a lot of the British sense of wanking, surely if I'm going to create more, isn't it better if my creation has an audience? That I can inform and influence people? What's the point of creating in a vacuum? That is also onanistic.

I also wonder if many of the people who say they multi-task efficiently don't mean the same thing as the people who criticise multi-tasking? But what do I know? I have to respond to people, and I can't always do it on my own schedule. Nowhere near as much as I'd like to, anyway. Still, I will get evaluated on responsiveness, so if I push back too hard on multi-tasking, I will be marked down for it. But working at home means I have more control over things.

At least today is a nice quiet day where I get to respond on my own schedule, and no one is calling me. Sadly, however, I can't get anyone to respond to me. I also need that to be productive.

Individual cops that I talk to get really upset at having to shoot because if they are at the point of shooting and that it most likely means someone dies. They don't shoot to warn, they shoot to stop life.

Absolutely. Training says every shot is supposed to be a kill shot (which is why I wonder at all the gun-pulling on TV. Please tell me that doesn't happen as much in real life--if you're not going to shoot, don't point. That's not what you were taught). However, it may just be a result of what makes news, but excessive shooting gets reported, and I also know individual cops who are damned violence and trigger happy, because they believe bad people need to be taught a lesson.

So? Bananas.

For me, I think the key to avoiding internet slap fights is that I've found a way to circumvent my need to be right with the moral superiority of I Don't Have Time for This Bullshit.

I've found that "S/He's not worth arguing with" works pretty well.

I've found that "S/He's not worth arguing with" works pretty well.

Yeah, I'm pretty much in the "arguing with idiots is a waste of time" group.

Do you argue with people because they're wrong, or because you enjoy arguing? I mean, if I didn't enjoy arguing, I wouldn't do it. People are just as frustrating when they're wrong whether I say anything about it or not--I just get more out of it if I engage in a discussion.

Do you argue with people because they're wrong, or because you enjoy arguing?

I usually only bother arguing when I'm trying to understand or articulate my own position. Putting things into words is a thought process for me taking inchoate ideas and finding the coherence or logic or lack therein.

So, arguing about "gypped" wasn't about winning that argument, but trying to figure out why I think that way and whether it's defensible.

But sometimes I'll argue online because I have a better grasp of the facts on some issue, or it's an area of expertise and I can add context. If it has something to do with the history of pop music in the 20th century, or the development of the English sonnet or baseball I can speak with some authority on it.

Jilli, how do you feel about these?

So, arguing about "gypped" wasn't about winning that argument

For me arguing about gypped was because I was offended and wanted to make that clear. I didn't think it was something to win. In fact, I didn't really think of it as an argument, not like Steph was outlining above.

But I don't usually take an argumentative position unless I already understand how I feel. If I don't know how I feel, I take an inquisitive position.

No comment on organization . Or wrong on the Internet, I am a disengage-ish type.

Had catastrophic luggage failure, but Kat saved the day with a pink loaner. Bye Bye old overnight bag. Served 20 ish years. And now I don't feel guilty about wanting a new one. Now I need it!

Lovely visit, short of photo proof. Kids=awesome. Miss people already.

Autocorrect=weird.

Plane here. Bye!!

Jilli, how do you feel about these?

That I have Draculaura and Frankie Stein, and if I had more disposable income I'd have a LOT of the accessories. I love them to bits. Still haven't watched the webshow, but love the dolls.

Also, one of the munchkins that follows me on Twitter is convinced that I'm Draculaura's auntie, which fills me with glee.

I love when things make me think of you, Jilli, and I'm not actually off base. It makes it feel like the world is making a little bit more sense. Plus? The things are usually very pretty.