Naturally. What else?
I'm reading the Los Osos forums in the SLO Tribune. I am up-to-speed enough that most of the abreviations don't slow me down. WWTF? Wastewater Treatment Facility. PZ? Prohibition Zone. TW? Taxpayers' Watch.
But T&F? What was that? It keeps coming up, about the different boards of directors. They aren't initials... not the name of a report... not a government agency. Was it used as a verb... AHA! Tarred and feathered. Love it.
(A very interesting feature of the forums is that readers can vote (1-5 stars) on each comment. You see the number of votes every comment received. It gives a measure of the degree of lurker support for each sentiment, which I haven't seen done elsewhere. Things aren't true because lots of people agreed, but I quite like the constant gauge of imaginary support.)
But T&F? What was that? It keeps coming up, about the different boards of directors. They aren't initials... not the name of a report... not a government agency. Was it used as a verb... AHA! Tarred and feathered. Love it.
(A very interesting feature of the forums is that readers can vote (1-5 stars) on each comment. You see the number of votes every comment received. It gives a measure of the degree of lurker support for each sentiment, which I haven't seen done elsewhere. Things aren't true because lots of people agreed, but I quite like the constant gauge of imaginary support.)
posted by Megan at 1:12 PM
26 Comments:
Can you point us to a short introduction to Los Osos? I have never heard of it.
See? Public demand for the Los Osos story is insatiable!
How can someone who claims to be so smart be such a no class tramp?
The public demands a 2000 page treatise on Los Osos. Nothing less would be worthy. I'm particularly excited to detail the history of funding for wastewater treatment plants, the history of Chapter 9 bankruptcy, how septic tanks work and other on-site treatment options, the reasons for the increase in construction costs in the late Nineties, the primary mass treatment options for sewage and the natural geography of the Central Coast. I'm wondering whether an aside about the wastewater permitting process would bog down the story too much, but I think I can keep it quick and punchy.
I still want to know how these people see themselves, what they think they're doing and standing for.
They see themselves and each other in lots of different ways. One person I talked to said that one of the reasons the conflict got so deep is that everyone in it is working from a sincere belief that they're doing the best they can for the town they live it. I'm also coming to that conclusion; that every person involved has a very passionate vision of the city and community. Feelings have escalated into real anger, but (from what I've seen so far) the people involved weren't knowingly malicious for self-gain.
From what I can tell, there is a contingent that feels hemmed in by what they consider to be a conspiracy of past bad decisions, intrusive governmental regulation and unnecessary costs. They opposed by a group that accuses them of current bad decisions and blindness to physical realities. They both love their community deeply and want to find a not-financially-ruinous way to maintain a smalltown lifestyle.
That is all very abstracted, but I can spice it up with digressions about the implications of the Brown Act and the Regional Board's administrative hearing procedures.
T&F="Tarred and Feathered"? Gag me with a spoon. Do B&D and S&M come up in your reading much, too?
Remember, you mind is supposed to be on the sewer, not in the sewer!
That's about what I thought, with a certain amount of denial and wishful thinking.
Was there in fact a ruinous single course of bad decisions, or was there an accumulation of small ones? Has anyone else ever got into this kind of trouble before?
So I guess I should skip the Los Osos posts. Can you flag them somehow to make avoidance easier?
Mike Jenkins:
I mark them with my exclamation points of delight.
"A very interesting feature of the forums is that readers can vote (1-5 stars) on each comment. You see the number of votes every comment received"
*
wondering whether an aside about the wastewater permitting process would bog down the story too much, but I think I can keep it quick and punchy.
Really.
That is all very abstracted, but I can spice it up with digressions about the implications of the Brown Act and the Regional Board's administrative hearing procedures.
OK, you were definitely kidding that time, right?
As a really smart tramp with no class, I'm confused by 4:28's question.
Spungen, yes , how odd. Apart from the bad manners one would have expected him (it must be a him) to write "no-class tramp" or "a classless tramp" or "a tramp without any class".
'No class tramp'. Why , it ain't got no class to it.
Apparently we have decided to feed the troll/trollette (I can't complain, DNFTT always seemed so cruel to me, but the sex is by no means obvious), so allow me to remark that, if anything, "trampiness" (assumed to mean "an interest in sex") appears to be positively correlated with smartness. Dumb people just don't have the imagination.
Based on my reading so far, while our delicious hostess would definitely like to be "trampier" than she currently is, even an improvement in that direction would not raise her TQ (tramp quotient) to very impressive levels.
The class reference, though, made no sense to me at all, which is why I at first resolved to simply ignore the comment.
Besides, I've always preferred "slut" to "tramp" because it sounds so much cuter. This probably has to do with being a computer programmer, and reading about SLUTYPEP, which -- although I've never used it -- sounded like one hell of a communication protocol to me.
If IBM offers SLUTYPEP support, why can't we all?
Jens, I always thought "slag" sounded so much better (don't know if you have slags in the States-the word, I mean) and much better than the local "slapper".
Is tramp the correct word, maybe not. But something's wrong with thinking a woman in law school drunk and topless on the sidewalk is "fun". Because a smart person should be embarrassed to participate in or endorse such behavior. And a tramp isn't someone who is interested in sex, it's someone who spreads herself around. Spungen does your husband know youre a tramp?
1:13 Anonymouse:
Couple quick things.
Speaking for myself, someone's sexual inclinations is one of the very last things I evaluate when I come to conclusions about someone, with things like nice person, insightful, respectful, fun, cheerful, good speller, clean hair, and nearly anything else coming first. On those axes, Dizzy seems like a person I would like a great deal.
Second, and much more important. If you are new, you might not have seen my comment policy. Call me anything you like. No-class tramp made my day yesterday, 'cause it sounds catchy and is a new way for me to think about myself. But I am very strict about treating your fellow commenters with affirmative kindness. Address them with the kindness you would use toward a friend you love and respect, or say nothing. Of course, they'll do the same for you. (I'm saying.)
Thanks!
So you like being insulted?
I didn't mean to insult Spungen. She called herself a tramp first.
I sure hope the Trivial (oops I mean the Tribune) forum is not the extent of your research on the Sewers of Los Osos! The extremists hang out there, for sure.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
(my formatting sucked)
> But something's wrong with
> thinking a woman in law
> school drunk and topless on
> the sidewalk is "fun".
I've got to agree with THAT! At best that would be a promising beginning. But if you can get her pants down AS WELL????
Merriment ensues!
But if you can get her pants down AS WELL???? Merriment ensues!
By which, I take you to mean:
should she decide, non-coerced, out of her own sense of adventure, confidence in herself, the situation, and her peers, that she would enjoy such a thing, why, there's nothing wrong with that.
Is apostrophe-challenged anonymous (I agree with Billo, it must be a male) stalking me and/or Megan from blog to blog? I don't remember any previous discussion here about the topless sidewalk "debate" referenced herein. And it's creepy that he dragged my husband into it.
Spungen:
As you would address or discuss a dear friend, please. Remember, all, that your host is conflict-averse.
That's funny, 'cause I get a female vibe. It doesn't matter though. It does seem like a continuation from the comments on a different blog. We are so lucky to have such dedicated readers, who want so much to know all the things we think!
>...should she decide, non-coerced...
You know, I hadn't even considered any other possibility! I was assuming the topless and drunk part was voluntary as well. Maybe even the law school part, although that would be stretching credulity.
But tell us more about this sidewalk incident, because apparently I am not reading the right blogs.
Not that there's anything wrong with the sewers!
Post a Comment
<< Home