It was a joke...The abnormality I was speaking of was his lack of interest in violent video games.
I know that there is nothing that can be done to stop people like this...Hell, most of them ARE stopped, but there will always be a few that get through, and they will always do damage. All the recriminations and finger pointing, and Monday-morning quarterbacking in the world won't change it. People need to stop racing to place blame, and start trying to find better ways of fixing the problem.
So by saying that my ability to comprehend theory is greater than my ability to solve math problems, you immediately jump to the conclusion that I have zero math ability? How does that follow? You obviously consider yourself a math whiz, but your logic is lacking.
The difference is whether you can take the existing equations and draw new information from them, and explore mathematical tangents, related rates and other such crap, or whether you can simply run through the existing stuff without the mathematical ability to take it to the next level and produce something truly original.
Typical snobbery. I'm basically saying that I think multiple choice should be phased out and problem solving should be emphasized, and the only thing you can come up with is making judgments about my abilities for which you have no accurate gauge.
Hmmm. 80% troll, but I'll respond to the only part with actual substance.
Violent Crime Statistics; note that the drop has been pronounced since the early 90's which coincided with the release of games like "Doom" which ushered in the era of true violent gaming. Correlation does not equal causation, but the argument that games have increased the violent tendencies of the young immediately runs aground on the fact that no such increase exists.
No way! Now we know that videogames didn't do it, we have to find a new scapegoat! Maybe violent movies, or music...Would violent music be more likely to drive someone to murder than the current pop crap on the radio?
"(he) played videogames (yet) none of the videogames were war games or had violent themes..."
Jesus, he was abnormal. Why didn't anyone notice this obvious deviation from normality in time to stop his brutal rampage?
Seriously. I play violent games so I don't kill people. As games have gotten more violent, violent crime has gone down in the big gamer demographics...Correlation may not equal causation, but it is nicely suggestive.
Maybe the gamers and home users can be bribed by the "latest and the greatest" line...
Valve has been complaining about MS's decision to make Direct X 10 Vista only, because the low adoption of Vista among gamers (numbers from the users of their Steam service) has made it extremely difficult to justify working in DX10 at all, and of course, DX9 is pretty obsolescent at this point.
Even among gamers it's considered a dog. Hardcore gamers are all about FPS, and Vista is a lot bulkier than XP...Nobody buys a hardcore gaming rig so their OS will look better.
Meh. Just adjust your work habits. I do mentally intensive crap for about 5 hours a day...Programming, Systems work, debugging, etc. The rest of the time I do some of the piles of pointless crap that are also part of my job...Checking logs, talking to people, writing documentation, doing security audits, fixing stupid problems...Boring, mindless crap.
They may pay you to do X, but there is plenty of other stuff to do when you can't concentrate on X for another second without going berzerk...Or if there isn't, you need to start looking for a job, because your company has problems (or you're doing something really repetitive and menial).
He's mainly speaking about people who are going to get frustrated and quit due to their lack of aptitude.
The problem is those people lack aptitude.
I myself have certain issues with regards to upper level science...Mainly, my capacity to understand theory is kickin but my math skills don't match. So, while I can hold my own in a discussion of theory, I don't have the staying power when it gets down to brass tacks.
I had to take a certain number of physics classes for my degree, and like these tests, there was a decent amount of multiple-choice (some were 100%). My math skills aren't top notch, but my multiple choice skills are through the roof, so I blew through 4 semesters of physics with an easy A average. It may reflect accurately my aptitude for theory, and multiple-choice elimination, but it does not reflect my ability to do the practical calculation that the tests were supposed to measure.
In short, I think it's a crappy idea, and it will result in a lot of people thinking that they have a level of skill that they do not possess, and result in a lot of professors having an incorrect understanding of the comprehension of their students. I know my limits, and I'm never going to be in a position where people are going to be risking their lives on my physics skills, but that is not true of everyone, and dumbing down that sort of science could have serious real world consequences.
Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = Total Fuckwad
That being said, I hope they all get ass cancer, and that their families, not wanting to have to experience watching someone die, abandon them to die alone.
Meh. Winner-take-all effectively disenfranchizes 49% of the people in every state and makes for travesties like 2000, where the guy who indisputably got the most votes overall wasn't elected.
The primary system is a fricking joke. Look at the inordinate importance of New Hampshire and Iowa in choosing a new president...Half a dozen primaries and the issue is already decided, even though there are 44 more to go. The odds that someone from New Hampshire will personally discuss views with a presidential contender is immeasurably higher than someone in New York...Or Hawaii, to take another state with a small population. Right now there is a leapfrogging fight among states to push their primaries earlier and earlier because they're actually trying to get their issues addressed for a change.
And it does all come down to two candidates, and sometimes, they actually believe two different things. But half the time it's a Democrat and a Republican trying to out conservative each other, and the most of the rest of the time it's reversed.
And money? Buying votes? Who gives a damn about votes? It's about buying the entire office! You can't win a national election without a lot of money. The last presidential race cost more than a billion dollars. A fucking BILLION dollars. Whoever gets elected on that tide of money owes more favors than a penny prostitute. For '08, they've already raised $265 million, and we're not even to the goddamn election year yet!
It's just a disgrace. Obama went to Harvard. Clinton (both of them) went to Yale. Romney went to Harvard. Giuliani only went to New York Univeristy. Last election, Bush and Kerry both went to Yale...At the same fucking time.
People are just being ring-led. All the so-called differences between the candidates...Their views are all roughly the same. It's conservative or more conservative.
They don't have as much influence as people think they do. They're the "base"; the 20% or so that will ALWAYS vote for you if you hit certain issues. The base on the other side is just the opposite, so really they cancel each other out...They're not going to switch sides; the other side is anathema to them. The only reason the parties pander to them is to keep the voter turnout high.
The real key is the more moderate swing voters, so the goal is to be crazy enough to appeal to your radical fringes, but mainstream enough to appeal to the 60% (100% minus the base for each side) or so who actually decide the election. A true populist candidate who gave the finger to the bases on both sides could win in a landslide, but the system is effectively designed to make sure that doesn't happen.
Eh. My few experiences with them were pretty good, at least compared to Dell. Short calls, to the point, no run-around with the 3-ring binder of crap that Dell requires all tech's to run through before they can do anything for you.
Worked in an area with a lot of lightning, so a lot of fried computers. Called dell for a machine that wouldn't post, which did the post beep code for "dead motherboard" whenever I turned it on. Had to go through ridiculous crap from Dell ("What does it say on the screen?" "NOTHING. It WONT POST" "Is it plugged in?" "It's BEEPING, isn't it?")...Good hour and a half of my life wasted.
Called Gateway with a blown power supply and a (suspected) blown motherboard. I got the guy on the phone, and said, "It's either a blown power supply or a power supply and a motherboard" and they shipped 'em both out to me, and told me to ship back the motherboard if I didn't need it. I did need it, shipped back both of the bad parts, and heard nothing else about it.
Obviously it's just anecdotal, but I had a lot better experience with Gateway...Mind you I've dealt with Dell a lot more often, but it's never any better, and don't tell me "Gold Service" I've dealt with standard, silver, AND gold service, and they all suck.
Just because someone is smart, doesn't mean they won't vote for someone for the same stupid reason as a less intelligent person...Intelligence doesn't come with good judgment of people and their motivations, unfortunately.
"It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see..."
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like to straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"
--Douglas Adams, So long, and thanks for all the fish.
I'd be surprised if Bush didn't ask him to resign. How could you make the AGs office weaker than actually not having an AG? The approval of a new one will take months. I think he just waited for the bulk of the screams to die down, so it wouldn't look like he was caving on his support of someone in his staff...They seem to do that a lot in this administration, to save face.
As for his memory, I think he remembers perfectly well. Protect the higher ups, and your pardon is assured. As long as everyone who has access to dirty laundry sits on it, then no one will be proven guilty.
Meh. I agree. The problem is we really need a multi-party system, but the way the money works, we're forced into a two party system because a third party couldn't get enough cash to make a serious push. We could easily get 6 parties out of the platforms of all our current parties...Separate out the fiscal conservatives from the social conservatives, the environmentalists from the socialists, and the true "liberals" and "populists" from both parties.
More parties you have more room for compromise, because the lines aren't drawn so firmly, and coalition is pretty much the only way to fly. Of course, look at the Brits...They've got multiple parties, but one is utterly dominant, with no need of compromise. Ugly scene.
Your taxes will still be paying for congressional pork. Hell, it'll be paying for more pork in the coming years, because the Dems need to solidify their position, and that means pork. Still Dem pork tends to go to schools and social programs and such, college aid, etc, and that money would be good for us right now.
The problem with local taxes going to roads and schools is that smaller, poorer communities have disproportionate burdens as compared to larger communities. Money from the Fed evens that out, so I don't have to have my property taxes going up a mill or a half mill a year.
The latter. She'll never make it as a candidate, but it'll be such a pointless rehash it'll make the more experienced stealth conservative more easy to push through. The administration doesn't have anything to lose by fielding worthless candidate after worthless candidate to soften up the Senate for the person they really want.
We pay lip service to the people, but really, the people have very little say.
When the country was founded, the founding fathers envisioned the electoral college as a hedge against mob rule...The members of the electoral college were typically rich landowners, and they weren't required to vote based on the votes of the citizens beneath them, so if the rich landowners didn't like candidate A, they could just vote for candidate B, regardless of how the people voted.
That's not the case these days. These days, most states require the EC to vote based on how the people in the state vote...No wealthy landowners here!
Except...Who do the people vote for? The candidates chosen by the two big political parties. How do the big political parties choose their candidates? Effectively it's money. Whoever can line up the most wealthy landowners behind them, that person wins. That's pretty much the point of the primary system...Trot out the candidates, and see which one the money guys like best.
Sure, there are two guys up on stage, but really they're the same. They go to the same schools. They know the same people. They do roughly the same crap in office.
Power to the people will be a first in this country, if it ever happens.
Lot of liberals aren't happy with it either, and the difference is, they didn't vote it in in the first place. If you voted for the republicans in any of the last 3 elections, you've got to accept responsibility for your choice.
Don't get me wrong; I don't blame the conservatives. They always vote the same way (well, some vote libertarian). Same with the libs when it's their party who is screwing stuff up; gotta ride that sinking ship right to the bottom. The thing that pisses me off is the damn fickle swing vote. You'd think, since they're not really wedded to an ideology, they'd be better than the right or the left, but really, they're just a bunch of jokers who vote based on whether a candidate has "Presidential Hair" and other such simplistic crap.
We may blame all the problems on the government, but it's the responsibility of the people to demand good government, and to put good people in power.
I tend to vote for the candidate rather than the party...It's a shit sammich either way, but at least I know what I'm getting before I take a bite.
And what the hell? One party rule sucks regardless so therefore...What? The system is out of balance right now, and we've had a long period of one party. The system is going to swing back, and a few years of the Left undoing some of the more ridiculous abuses of the Right before we lock 'em down with an unfriendly congress/executive will do us all some good. I'm tired of my damn property taxes going up every year to pay for schools and roads because the fed "Doesn't raise taxes."
A good solid electoral bitchslapping will maybe add some humility to the Repubs, and maybe knock them back toward the middle a bit.
Good luck on that. The AG post is appointed by the President, so we'll just have another situation where he appoints a couple of losers, then one acceptable candidate who will slide through the senate because he's not as annoying as the early appointees.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Harriet Miers again.
Slashdot Mirror
It was a joke...The abnormality I was speaking of was his lack of interest in violent video games.
I know that there is nothing that can be done to stop people like this...Hell, most of them ARE stopped, but there will always be a few that get through, and they will always do damage. All the recriminations and finger pointing, and Monday-morning quarterbacking in the world won't change it. People need to stop racing to place blame, and start trying to find better ways of fixing the problem.
So by saying that my ability to comprehend theory is greater than my ability to solve math problems, you immediately jump to the conclusion that I have zero math ability? How does that follow? You obviously consider yourself a math whiz, but your logic is lacking.
The difference is whether you can take the existing equations and draw new information from them, and explore mathematical tangents, related rates and other such crap, or whether you can simply run through the existing stuff without the mathematical ability to take it to the next level and produce something truly original.
Typical snobbery. I'm basically saying that I think multiple choice should be phased out and problem solving should be emphasized, and the only thing you can come up with is making judgments about my abilities for which you have no accurate gauge.
Hmmm. 80% troll, but I'll respond to the only part with actual substance.
Violent Crime Statistics; note that the drop has been pronounced since the early 90's which coincided with the release of games like "Doom" which ushered in the era of true violent gaming. Correlation does not equal causation, but the argument that games have increased the violent tendencies of the young immediately runs aground on the fact that no such increase exists.
No way! Now we know that videogames didn't do it, we have to find a new scapegoat! Maybe violent movies, or music...Would violent music be more likely to drive someone to murder than the current pop crap on the radio?
"(he) played videogames (yet) none of the videogames were war games or had violent themes..."
Jesus, he was abnormal. Why didn't anyone notice this obvious deviation from normality in time to stop his brutal rampage?
Seriously. I play violent games so I don't kill people. As games have gotten more violent, violent crime has gone down in the big gamer demographics...Correlation may not equal causation, but it is nicely suggestive.
Maybe the gamers and home users can be bribed by the "latest and the greatest" line...
Valve has been complaining about MS's decision to make Direct X 10 Vista only, because the low adoption of Vista among gamers (numbers from the users of their Steam service) has made it extremely difficult to justify working in DX10 at all, and of course, DX9 is pretty obsolescent at this point.
Even among gamers it's considered a dog. Hardcore gamers are all about FPS, and Vista is a lot bulkier than XP...Nobody buys a hardcore gaming rig so their OS will look better.
It is quite true that arguing with anonymous retards is about the stupidest possible thing to do on the internets.
Therefore, little anonymous troll, I bid you adieu.
Meh. Just adjust your work habits. I do mentally intensive crap for about 5 hours a day...Programming, Systems work, debugging, etc. The rest of the time I do some of the piles of pointless crap that are also part of my job...Checking logs, talking to people, writing documentation, doing security audits, fixing stupid problems...Boring, mindless crap.
They may pay you to do X, but there is plenty of other stuff to do when you can't concentrate on X for another second without going berzerk...Or if there isn't, you need to start looking for a job, because your company has problems (or you're doing something really repetitive and menial).
What, hating vile little cowardly scum who insult a guy whose girlfriend died of congestive heart failure makes me a fuckwad? Oh, I think not.
If you want to state an opinion like that, have the stones to own up to it.
He's mainly speaking about people who are going to get frustrated and quit due to their lack of aptitude.
The problem is those people lack aptitude.
I myself have certain issues with regards to upper level science...Mainly, my capacity to understand theory is kickin but my math skills don't match. So, while I can hold my own in a discussion of theory, I don't have the staying power when it gets down to brass tacks.
I had to take a certain number of physics classes for my degree, and like these tests, there was a decent amount of multiple-choice (some were 100%). My math skills aren't top notch, but my multiple choice skills are through the roof, so I blew through 4 semesters of physics with an easy A average. It may reflect accurately my aptitude for theory, and multiple-choice elimination, but it does not reflect my ability to do the practical calculation that the tests were supposed to measure.
In short, I think it's a crappy idea, and it will result in a lot of people thinking that they have a level of skill that they do not possess, and result in a lot of professors having an incorrect understanding of the comprehension of their students. I know my limits, and I'm never going to be in a position where people are going to be risking their lives on my physics skills, but that is not true of everyone, and dumbing down that sort of science could have serious real world consequences.
Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = Total Fuckwad
That being said, I hope they all get ass cancer, and that their families, not wanting to have to experience watching someone die, abandon them to die alone.
Meh. Winner-take-all effectively disenfranchizes 49% of the people in every state and makes for travesties like 2000, where the guy who indisputably got the most votes overall wasn't elected.
The primary system is a fricking joke. Look at the inordinate importance of New Hampshire and Iowa in choosing a new president...Half a dozen primaries and the issue is already decided, even though there are 44 more to go. The odds that someone from New Hampshire will personally discuss views with a presidential contender is immeasurably higher than someone in New York...Or Hawaii, to take another state with a small population. Right now there is a leapfrogging fight among states to push their primaries earlier and earlier because they're actually trying to get their issues addressed for a change.
And it does all come down to two candidates, and sometimes, they actually believe two different things. But half the time it's a Democrat and a Republican trying to out conservative each other, and the most of the rest of the time it's reversed.
And money? Buying votes? Who gives a damn about votes? It's about buying the entire office! You can't win a national election without a lot of money. The last presidential race cost more than a billion dollars. A fucking BILLION dollars. Whoever gets elected on that tide of money owes more favors than a penny prostitute. For '08, they've already raised $265 million, and we're not even to the goddamn election year yet!
It's just a disgrace. Obama went to Harvard. Clinton (both of them) went to Yale. Romney went to Harvard. Giuliani only went to New York Univeristy. Last election, Bush and Kerry both went to Yale...At the same fucking time.
People are just being ring-led. All the so-called differences between the candidates...Their views are all roughly the same. It's conservative or more conservative.
They don't have as much influence as people think they do. They're the "base"; the 20% or so that will ALWAYS vote for you if you hit certain issues. The base on the other side is just the opposite, so really they cancel each other out...They're not going to switch sides; the other side is anathema to them. The only reason the parties pander to them is to keep the voter turnout high.
The real key is the more moderate swing voters, so the goal is to be crazy enough to appeal to your radical fringes, but mainstream enough to appeal to the 60% (100% minus the base for each side) or so who actually decide the election. A true populist candidate who gave the finger to the bases on both sides could win in a landslide, but the system is effectively designed to make sure that doesn't happen.
Eh. My few experiences with them were pretty good, at least compared to Dell. Short calls, to the point, no run-around with the 3-ring binder of crap that Dell requires all tech's to run through before they can do anything for you.
Worked in an area with a lot of lightning, so a lot of fried computers. Called dell for a machine that wouldn't post, which did the post beep code for "dead motherboard" whenever I turned it on. Had to go through ridiculous crap from Dell ("What does it say on the screen?" "NOTHING. It WONT POST" "Is it plugged in?" "It's BEEPING, isn't it?")...Good hour and a half of my life wasted.
Called Gateway with a blown power supply and a (suspected) blown motherboard. I got the guy on the phone, and said, "It's either a blown power supply or a power supply and a motherboard" and they shipped 'em both out to me, and told me to ship back the motherboard if I didn't need it. I did need it, shipped back both of the bad parts, and heard nothing else about it.
Obviously it's just anecdotal, but I had a lot better experience with Gateway...Mind you I've dealt with Dell a lot more often, but it's never any better, and don't tell me "Gold Service" I've dealt with standard, silver, AND gold service, and they all suck.
Just because someone is smart, doesn't mean they won't vote for someone for the same stupid reason as a less intelligent person...Intelligence doesn't come with good judgment of people and their motivations, unfortunately.
Still, it is discouraging to think that the "average person" is choosing our leaders. "None of us is as dumb as all of us."
"It comes from a very ancient democracy, you see..."
"You mean, it comes from a world of lizards?"
"No," said Ford, who by this time was a little more rational and coherent than he had been, having finally had the coffee forced down him, "nothing so simple. Nothing anything like to straightforward. On its world, the people are people. The leaders are lizards. The people hate the lizards and the lizards rule the people."
"Odd," said Arthur, "I thought you said it was a democracy."
"I did," said ford. "It is."
"So," said Arthur, hoping he wasn't sounding ridiculously obtuse, "why don't the people get rid of the lizards?"
"It honestly doesn't occur to them," said Ford. "They've all got the vote, so they all pretty much assume that the government they've voted in more or less approximates to the government they want."
"You mean they actually vote for the lizards?"
"Oh yes," said Ford with a shrug, "of course."
"But," said Arthur, going for the big one again, "why?"
"Because if they didn't vote for a lizard," said Ford, "the wrong lizard might get in. Got any gin?"
--Douglas Adams, So long, and thanks for all the fish.
I'd be surprised if Bush didn't ask him to resign. How could you make the AGs office weaker than actually not having an AG? The approval of a new one will take months. I think he just waited for the bulk of the screams to die down, so it wouldn't look like he was caving on his support of someone in his staff...They seem to do that a lot in this administration, to save face.
As for his memory, I think he remembers perfectly well. Protect the higher ups, and your pardon is assured. As long as everyone who has access to dirty laundry sits on it, then no one will be proven guilty.
Meh. I agree. The problem is we really need a multi-party system, but the way the money works, we're forced into a two party system because a third party couldn't get enough cash to make a serious push. We could easily get 6 parties out of the platforms of all our current parties...Separate out the fiscal conservatives from the social conservatives, the environmentalists from the socialists, and the true "liberals" and "populists" from both parties.
More parties you have more room for compromise, because the lines aren't drawn so firmly, and coalition is pretty much the only way to fly. Of course, look at the Brits...They've got multiple parties, but one is utterly dominant, with no need of compromise. Ugly scene.
Your taxes will still be paying for congressional pork. Hell, it'll be paying for more pork in the coming years, because the Dems need to solidify their position, and that means pork. Still Dem pork tends to go to schools and social programs and such, college aid, etc, and that money would be good for us right now.
The problem with local taxes going to roads and schools is that smaller, poorer communities have disproportionate burdens as compared to larger communities. Money from the Fed evens that out, so I don't have to have my property taxes going up a mill or a half mill a year.
The latter. She'll never make it as a candidate, but it'll be such a pointless rehash it'll make the more experienced stealth conservative more easy to push through. The administration doesn't have anything to lose by fielding worthless candidate after worthless candidate to soften up the Senate for the person they really want.
We pay lip service to the people, but really, the people have very little say.
When the country was founded, the founding fathers envisioned the electoral college as a hedge against mob rule...The members of the electoral college were typically rich landowners, and they weren't required to vote based on the votes of the citizens beneath them, so if the rich landowners didn't like candidate A, they could just vote for candidate B, regardless of how the people voted.
That's not the case these days. These days, most states require the EC to vote based on how the people in the state vote...No wealthy landowners here!
Except...Who do the people vote for? The candidates chosen by the two big political parties. How do the big political parties choose their candidates? Effectively it's money. Whoever can line up the most wealthy landowners behind them, that person wins. That's pretty much the point of the primary system...Trot out the candidates, and see which one the money guys like best.
Sure, there are two guys up on stage, but really they're the same. They go to the same schools. They know the same people. They do roughly the same crap in office.
Power to the people will be a first in this country, if it ever happens.
Lot of liberals aren't happy with it either, and the difference is, they didn't vote it in in the first place. If you voted for the republicans in any of the last 3 elections, you've got to accept responsibility for your choice.
Don't get me wrong; I don't blame the conservatives. They always vote the same way (well, some vote libertarian). Same with the libs when it's their party who is screwing stuff up; gotta ride that sinking ship right to the bottom. The thing that pisses me off is the damn fickle swing vote. You'd think, since they're not really wedded to an ideology, they'd be better than the right or the left, but really, they're just a bunch of jokers who vote based on whether a candidate has "Presidential Hair" and other such simplistic crap.
We may blame all the problems on the government, but it's the responsibility of the people to demand good government, and to put good people in power.
I tend to vote for the candidate rather than the party...It's a shit sammich either way, but at least I know what I'm getting before I take a bite.
And what the hell? One party rule sucks regardless so therefore...What? The system is out of balance right now, and we've had a long period of one party. The system is going to swing back, and a few years of the Left undoing some of the more ridiculous abuses of the Right before we lock 'em down with an unfriendly congress/executive will do us all some good. I'm tired of my damn property taxes going up every year to pay for schools and roads because the fed "Doesn't raise taxes."
A good solid electoral bitchslapping will maybe add some humility to the Repubs, and maybe knock them back toward the middle a bit.
Good luck on that. The AG post is appointed by the President, so we'll just have another situation where he appoints a couple of losers, then one acceptable candidate who will slide through the senate because he's not as annoying as the early appointees.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Harriet Miers again.
Please Do Not Throw Sausage Pizza At Pretty Missys (or MILFs, Manatees, Marmots, Mormons, etc)?
Please Do Not Tell Stupid People About Project Meetings?
Pretty Dames Need Terribly Sexy Programmers After Plenty Margaritas?
Puppy Damn Near Tired-out So Apologize (for) Poor Mnemonics =P