Posts by Tom Beard
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
As someone who was once 'done' for being over the limit and who never wants to get 'done' again but who also enjoys a social drink I hate the uncertainty.
I've never been "done" and don't think I've ever driven over the limit, but I certainly want to avoid the uncertainty. My advice: give up driving.
-
ferment my own pickles
That Stephen Judd, you know he "ferments his own pickles".
If you know what I mean </hubris>
-
Is it possible that those who decry his efforts need some protection for their own drinking habits?
I think this may be an apposite time to quote Baudelaire (though when is it not?):
"There are wicked drunkards; they are people who are naturally wicked. The wicked man becomes abominable, just as the good man becomes truly excellent."
- On Wine & Hashish (p15)
-
Oh dear, there is a lot of self-righteous smuggery around cooking things the hard way, isn't there?
I consider myself a good cook, but in my current situation (single, in my own apartment with an active social life) I just don't see the point. On the rare occasions that I'm home at dinner time, I don't really see the point of faffing around when there are perfectly tasty pre-made meals available. They don't require planning your meals in advance or buying a lot of ingredients that would be too much for one person and then go to waste.
If I'm too tired to go out, then I'm too tired to cook. I have no problem paying a mere $12 for a ready-meal rather than $5 or so for the basic ingredients: to me, that's $7 well spent.
-
Re: the difference between Twitter & Facebook. The distinction seems to be gradually collapsing, but it seems that Twitter is generally favoured by erm, how shall I put it? Early adopters? Techonology enthusiasts? Oh, all right, geeks.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
But I can't do what some of my friends have done and give up on FB for keeping up with friends, leaving it just for "catching up with family". That seems a little patronising to me, with the implication that it's only clueless uncles and cousins who would be stuck with FB, when all those in the know are switching to Twitter.
But I'd say that, at least until recently, about 90% of my Twitter followers/followees were web professionals or enthusiasts (coders, writers, designers, consultants), but only about 50% of my FB friends were. The other 50% were nurses, moteliers, hairdressers, painters, policy analysts, jewellers, full-time parents, planners, cobblers, musicians, architects, fashion designers, bartenders and so forth.
Things are gradually starting to change, and it may just be about my varied circles of friends, but Twitter in NZ still seem to appeal more to people who are interested in technology for its own sake. As strange as it may seem, there are people out there who don't know what Webstock or Foo Camp are, think that CSS is a Brazilian electro band, don't drool over iPhones and don't care about whatever Joss bloody Whedon is doing next.
Sorry if that sounds like a bit of a rant, but as much as I love Twitter, it won't be my exclusive online social networking tool until it broadens its demographic reach a little.
-
I suppose it had to happen, given that Cadbury's has been doing their Old Gold brand for some time, and needed a point of difference between that and its other brands. You'd think they'd make the OG better rather than the DM worse, though.
So the Old Gold range hasn't changed? I've been steering clear of that too since this fracas emerged, but if it's still the same then I might go back to indulging in a bit of Jamaica Gold as a cheap & cheerful treat.
But really, with all the smaller brands out there, there's not much need to eat either Cadbury's or Whittaker's.
Some of those Shoc dark ones look interesting too. I've never tried 100%, let alone shattered nibs of cocoa bean.
I've tried both at Schoc, and the 100% is utterly inedible. Even the cocoa nibs seemed sweeter. Think of it as an ingredient rather than as something to eat in its own right. Mind you, I've been gradually nibbling away at a block of 90% from some obscure Polish brand (found at the Russian deli in Kilbirnie), and it's austere but very tasty.
while some people are saying "I really like the Schoc 70% bar" or the Bennetts/Devonport Chocolates/de Spa/Makana or whatever brand you identify with, the sad truth is that they are all the same base product melted down, tempered and molded by different people.
Do they do their own conching? Would that make a difference?
unless you are enjoying one of the "flavoured" bars (and why would you?!)
Because they're awesome? As much as I can enjoy sipping a good gin on its own, I also love martinis, gimlets and the odd negroni; similarly I often enjoy the flavour combinations that can be made with chocolate and unexpected ingredients rather than remaining a purist.
Also, while they may use the same base product as other local artisan producers, can I just give a little mention of Melting Perfection? Especially their Balsamic Vinegar & Honey truffles.
-
But if you haved two porn films of the same degree of explicitness, and one's vanilla porn and the other's BDSM porn? One gets restricted and the other gets banned?
I wonder whether there may be three scenarios:
- BDSM shown clearly as consensual play
- Acts of bondage, coercion and infliction of pain that are presented as if real rather than play, but the context makes it clearly part of a fantasy (as in "Oh no, the wicked pirate/slavemaster/alien/cop has tied me up and is about to have his/her way with me!")
- The presentation of coercion and violence in a situation that seems realistic, and where the inflictor seems to gain a malicious pleasure from humiliating and torturing his/her victims. I write "his/her", but I imagine that the extreme end of this would tend to be misogynistic as well as exploitative, angry and mean-spirited.
The first two would probably seem acceptable to most liberal people, even if not to their particular taste. But the last variety would (or even perhaps should) seem objectionable, and while there are likely to be nuances even within this part of the spectrum, there would seem to be a point at which the hateful and disturbing can be distinguished from the edgy and transgressive.
-
The pictures of it that I have seen were in a book in a university library. So you'll have to find your own :)
Don't worry, I will ... though I may wait until I'm home before searching :-)
-
If you were a gentleman, looking for a club
If I were the sort of gentleman who frequented that sort of club, I would imagine that it's not the age of the owner that would be uppermost in my mind.
-
Regardless of the legality of it all, it is a bad look. The reality is everyone has a general internal moral compass of what sorts of business one thinks it is appropriate for any particular individual to be engaged in.
There are perhaps three issues involved: legal, "sexual" moral and "exploitation" moral:
- Legality is a non-issue now.
- "Sexual" morality shouldn't be a question, unless he's representing the Mormons or United Future.
- The morality of the sex industry, in terms of the extent to which its workers are exploited, could indeed be up for debate. Of course there is a lot of misery and exploitation in the sex industry, but I've known women who've worked in the industry and say that that stereotype is far from universal. On those grounds, it might be worse if he'd taken out shares in certain multinational corporations.