Questions you want answered.

Found the Wired article.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...

Rykin wrote:

I have a friend who has only seen season 1 of Heroes. Sometimes we talk about that show and I have to watch it since he says he wants to watch it at some point.

Honestly, you should just do the merciful thing and spoil the rest of it for him.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

That seems to be a spoiler everyone is comfortable posting and reading, even if they haven't played the game, without anyone accusing anyone else of being a dick.

So it is a calculated dick-move with minimal consequence... still a dick move.
It is easier for me to frame the following sentences at a person I am talking to, but please recognize that I am NOT trying to call you out or speak directly to you, ClockworkHouse.
If you MUST post a spoiler then own being a dick. Realize that what you posted may lessen the sense discovery and enjoyment of others and either stand firm in the desire to educate and discuss, or censor yourself and pretend that you didn't have that impulse to be a dick.

iaintgotnopants wrote:
Rykin wrote:

I have a friend who has only seen season 1 of Heroes. Sometimes we talk about that show and I have to watch it since he says he wants to watch it at some point.

Honestly, you should just do the merciful thing and spoil the rest of it for him.

Yeah, but spoil it completely wrongly, just in case he does watch it one day.

SYLAR WAS A CYLON! COME ON, IT'S OBVIOUS FROM THE NAME!

ClockworkHouse wrote:
Rezzy wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:

A question for those of you concerned about spoilers in your media: is there a statue of limitations on spoilers?

I'd like to perhaps answer your question by paraphrasing it:
The audience of my public forum post is split into two groups. At which point is it okay to be a dick to one of them? Should I wait until the group I would be a dick to is smaller than the other? How long does it take before it is actually their own fault that I'm being a dick to them?

Spoiler:

In reality it depends on the spoiler. A lot can be forgiven if it is funny or clever... within reason.

How about a thought experiment? At what point did it become okay to post "Aeris dies in Final Fantasy VII" without spoiler tags? The game released in January of '97 in Japan, September of '97 in the US, October of '97 internationally, and November of '97 in the EU and Australia. It released in June of '98 for the PC. That seems to be a spoiler everyone is comfortable posting and reading, even if they haven't played the game, without anyone accusing anyone else of being a dick.

If you really try to analyze spoiler sensitivity, it gets really complicated. Some things become part of pop culture, Empire Strikes Back's big twist is a prime example. Some don't. I think Aeris is the video game equivalent of Darth Vader.

Sometimes it's just the fact that there's a twist that gets spoiled, and not the twist itself. My anecdotal experience with The Sixth Sense was like that. Everyone talked about the twist ending, no one actually spoiled it for me though. Although I figured it out just by it's existence, so then you've got a whole meta level of analysis there.

It's much easier when talking in person. I'll usually ask whomever I'm talking to if they've seen it or have any plans to see it and/or minds if I spoil it.

KingGorilla wrote:

Found the Wired article.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...

Right on.

Although could you change link text? It spoils the conclusion of the article.

ClockworkHouse wrote:

...is there a statue of limitations on spoilers?

Statue of Limitations?

IMAGE(http://images2.makefive.com/images/experiences/life/most-misused-words-and-phrases/statue-of-limitations-7.jpg)

IMAGE(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-X_r7BC1V4wc/Tbr8Y--izFI/AAAAAAAAAEg/ovRBDvBKVuk/s1600/kramer.jpg)

ClockworkHouse wrote:

How about a thought experiment? At what point did it become okay to post "Aeris dies in Final Fantasy VII" without spoiler tags? The game released in January of '97 in Japan, September of '97 in the US, October of '97 internationally, and November of '97 in the EU and Australia. It released in June of '98 for the PC. That seems to be a spoiler everyone is comfortable posting and reading, even if they haven't played the game, without anyone accusing anyone else of being a dick.

Wait, Aeris dies?

[size=1]Maybe I should get around to playing it one of these days?[/size]

I just want to say that I'm glad nobody has tried to correct the spelling of Aeris.

iaintgotnopants wrote:

I just want to say that I'm glad nobody has tried to correct the spelling of Aeris.

I think you mean エアリス. ಠ_ರೃ

Gravey wrote:
iaintgotnopants wrote:

I just want to say that I'm glad nobody has tried to correct the spelling of Aeris.

I think you mean エアリス. ಠ_ರೃ

Dunno what you boys are talking about, she was called Flahbint back when I played it. You know, a bint 'oo flogs flahs, innit? (Cockney translation - a lady who sells flowers)

Spoiler:

Tifa was re-branded Analbeard. I blame strong cider for that one.

ClockworkHouse wrote:
Rezzy wrote:
ClockworkHouse wrote:

A question for those of you concerned about spoilers in your media: is there a statue of limitations on spoilers?

I'd like to perhaps answer your question by paraphrasing it:
The audience of my public forum post is split into two groups. At which point is it okay to be a dick to one of them? Should I wait until the group I would be a dick to is smaller than the other? How long does it take before it is actually their own fault that I'm being a dick to them?

Spoiler:

In reality it depends on the spoiler. A lot can be forgiven if it is funny or clever... within reason.

How about a thought experiment? At what point did it become okay to post "Aeris dies in Final Fantasy VII" without spoiler tags? The game released in January of '97 in Japan, September of '97 in the US, October of '97 internationally, and November of '97 in the EU and Australia. It released in June of '98 for the PC. That seems to be a spoiler everyone is comfortable posting and reading, even if they haven't played the game, without anyone accusing anyone else of being a dick.

God dammit, Clock!

Minarchist wrote:

Statue of Limitations?

I typo for you, Minrachist. You.

iaintgotnopants wrote:

I just want to say that I'm glad nobody has tried to correct the spelling of Aeris.

+1 I hate "Aerith". It's just "Aeris" with a lisp.

Jonman wrote:
Gravey wrote:
iaintgotnopants wrote:

I just want to say that I'm glad nobody has tried to correct the spelling of Aeris.

I think you mean エアリス. ಠ_ರೃ

Dunno what you boys are talking about, she was called Flahbint back when I played it. You know, a bint 'oo flogs flahs, innit? (Cockney translation - a lady who sells flowers)

Spoiler:

Tifa was re-branded Analbeard. I blame strong cider for that one.

Spoiler:

Flahbint dies!

ClockworkHouse wrote:

+1 I hate "Aerith". It's just "Aeris" with a lisp.

Aerith's not dead anyway, she's hanging out in Hollow Bastion.

Demyx wrote:

Aerith's not dead anyway, she's hanging out in Hollow Bastion.

This.

And the "TH" was just a very bad bit of Japanese localization in the sea of bad localization in that first release. While I'm usually the first person to harp about authenticity/canon, this is one that doesn't bug me so much because it's actually a mistake and the "correction" was actually the correct name (at least according to my friend Yuki).

KingGorilla wrote:

Found the Wired article.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...

This seems pretty similar to another study I read regarding how men are equally good listeners to women, but we listen in different ways. Women tell stories beginning at the beginning, and including all the details and proceeding from start to finish chronologically. Men tend to tell stories by giving the gist of the story first, then fleshing it out as necessary. These two different ways of approaching story telling leads to different expectations and different listening habits. Obviously I am bastardizing the hell out of it, but I hope the point is coming across. In my experience, this is reasonably accurate, and has improved my ability to listen to women (I think...)

Dakuna wrote:
KingGorilla wrote:

Found the Wired article.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...

This seems pretty similar to another study I read regarding how men are equally good listeners to women, but we listen in different ways. Women tell stories beginning at the beginning, and including all the details and proceeding from start to finish chronologically. Men tend to tell stories by giving the gist of the story first, then fleshing it out as necessary. These two different ways of approaching story telling leads to different expectations and different listening habits. Obviously I am bastardizing the hell out of it, but I hope the point is coming across. In my experience, this is reasonably accurate, and has improved my ability to listen to women (I think...)

Now that you've given us the gist of it, I'll just wait for you to flesh it out as necessary.

If a sizable meteorite made out of solid gold crashes through a neighborhood and does considerable damage to homes in its path BUT comes to rest squarely on a property I own, do I own the meteorite free and clear? If not, who has rightful ownership of it?

Also, if it turns out that I do own it free and clear:
A) Do I have to pay taxes (US resident) on it from sale proceeds?
B) Am I liable for any of the damage it caused before it came to land in my yard?

Oh well. Just random thoughts before I get back to my assembly line of attaching frickin' lasers to my parade of dolphins.

/Evilly yours,
ESA

EvilShawnAndrich wrote:

If a sizable meteorite made out of solid gold crashes through a neighborhood and does considerable damage to homes in its path BUT comes to rest squarely on a property I own, do I own the meteorite free and clear? If not, who has rightful ownership of it?

Also, if it turns out that I do own it free and clear:
A) Do I have to pay taxes (US resident) on it from sale proceeds?
B) Am I liable for any of the damage it caused before it came to land in my yard?

Oh well. Just random thoughts before I get back to my assembly line of attaching frickin' lasers to my parade of dolphins.

/Evilly yours,
ESA

Dear ESA,

I believe this is settled in the case law for Finders vs Losers.

While the meteorite lands on your property, it is yours to do with as you wish. I would still recommend sending a fruit basket or one of those Edible Arrangements to each of your effected neighbors.

Cheers,

McIrishJihad

EvilShawnAndrich wrote:

If a sizable meteorite made out of solid gold crashes through a neighborhood and does considerable damage to homes in its path BUT comes to rest squarely on a property I own, do I own the meteorite free and clear? If not, who has rightful ownership of it?

Also, if it turns out that I do own it free and clear:
A) Do I have to pay taxes (US resident) on it from sale proceeds?
B) Am I liable for any of the damage it caused before it came to land in my yard?

Oh well. Just random thoughts before I get back to my assembly line of attaching frickin' lasers to my parade of dolphins.

This seems relevant.

Holding: Yes. When meteorites fall to earth, they become part of the soil, and thus belong to the owner of the soil.

Reasoning: By the doctrine of accretion, soil may be moved by natural causes from one person's field, and deposited into that of another. The court reasoned that this meteoric event was accretion on a planetary scale, and thus the meteorite which was previously unowned, became the property of the [claimaint] by virtue of becoming part of his soil.

It appears that you would be subject to capital gains taxes if you sell it.

I believe you would not be liable; owners of the other property would have to file a claim with their homeowners insurance -- wouldn't it be covered (or not) under the same sort of circumstances that allow a payout if a tree falls on your car or roof?

Katy wrote:

I believe you would not be liable; owners of the other property would have to file a claim with their homeowners insurance -- wouldn't it be covered (or not) under the same sort of circumstances that allow a payout if a tree falls on your car or roof?

Of course, their homeowner's insurance will probably chalk this up to an "act of god" and not pay anyway.

ESA should still get them a fruit basket.

McIrishJihad wrote:

Of course, their homeowner's insurance will probably chalk this up to an "act of god" and not pay anyway.

ESA should still get them a fruit basket.

Per this article:

Tully Lehman, the spokesman for the Insurance Information Network of California has some advice for those asking that question.

"That is one of the things that is definitely covered under your homeowners insurance policy. A lot of people may not realize it because it doesn't happen that often. But if it does it is something that would be covered," he said.

"In Russia at this moment it's believed that it's the sonic boom that caused a lot of the damage. Would I be covered for that?" Finney asked.

"With the concussion of a meteor, a homeowners insurance policy would cover things like explosions for example. This would be covered under that kind of language in the policy," Lehman said. "So yeah, that would be covered for any sort of glass breakage and that sort of thing."

Stengah wrote:
Dakuna wrote:
KingGorilla wrote:

Found the Wired article.

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/20...

This seems pretty similar to another study I read regarding how men are equally good listeners to women, but we listen in different ways. Women tell stories beginning at the beginning, and including all the details and proceeding from start to finish chronologically. Men tend to tell stories by giving the gist of the story first, then fleshing it out as necessary. These two different ways of approaching story telling leads to different expectations and different listening habits. Obviously I am bastardizing the hell out of it, but I hope the point is coming across. In my experience, this is reasonably accurate, and has improved my ability to listen to women (I think...)

Now that you've given us the gist of it, I'll just wait for you to flesh it out as necessary.

In this case, the flesh isn't actually necessary, so I threw it out.

Does anyone have any experience vacationing in Bora Bora that would be beneficial to hear about?

Dakuna wrote:

Does anyone have any experience vacationing in Bora Bora that would be beneficial to hear about?

Sadly no but I'd be happy to join the exploratory committee if you'd like to send us ahead first.

(Have a great trip!)

Rahmen wrote:
Dakuna wrote:

Does anyone have any experience vacationing in Bora Bora that would be beneficial to hear about?

Sadly no but I'd be happy to join the exploratory committee if you'd like to send us ahead first.

(Have a great trip!)

Haha yeah, I dunno. It looks like it would be $5399 per couple, and I'm not sure if I can be convinced without some anecdotal evidence. Feel free to go ahead and do some advance scouting, sadly you will have to look for funding elsewhere as my funds are all tied up right now.

Dakuna wrote:

Does anyone have any experience vacationing in Bora Bora that would be beneficial to hear about?

Bora Bora? I 'ardly know 'er!

< rimshot >