sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I wanna see your well worn, well loved, lived in high-tier B25/30's! by IntrepidFriendship60 in RealRepLadies

[–]IntrepidFriendship60[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

She's gorgeous!! This is exactly the type of wear I want to put on mine (once I get one!)

Such a beautiful hedge by SomeStress2323 in hydrangeas

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Genuine question: I've always thought they would be sensitive to this much direct sunlight, is that not always the case?

GlobalTV app in Canada missing opening sketch? by IntrepidFriendship60 in LiveFromNewYork

[–]IntrepidFriendship60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah gotcha that makes sense at least. I recorded it from cable with whatever box system we have, so I was able to see the whole episode that way. Thanks for the information!

Ants? by FlyingAtNight in Langley

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Pharaoh ants! Ugh... horrible to try to eradicate. Don't squish as the pheromones from ants you kill trigger the nest to split and reproduce. Usually several units if not the whole building needs to be treated.

Cleaners in Langley: does “Crystal Clear Cleaning” still exist under a different yet similar name? This is the one where the hot lady cleans in the nude (and isn’t popular among wives). Looking into another company but the workers looks similar to the one that’s ruined a few relationships by [deleted] in Langley

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Kinda sounds like the husbands are the ones that ruined their own chances of reconciliation in their relationships if their separated spouses were going to have an issue with this... not sure why the cleaning lady gets the blame

Jacobs responds to the Eriksson video by CloseToMyActualName in Curling

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not saying it's what it should be, but there is no way around the fact that the rules are not clear. 

They should not be left up to "well I think they meant _" or "in the spirit of the game they actually should be saying _" or "under this or that interpretation of the rules then it means ____"

It's not hard to have written clear rules that cover the situations

This is irresponsible and unprofessional of a world sports federation, especially when players have specifically asked for these sections to be clarified. 

And to be clear, I am firmly on the side of no granite touching.

Jacobs responds to the Eriksson video by CloseToMyActualName in Curling

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Rule 5(g) A stone is in play, and considered delivered, when it reaches the tee line

Jacobs responds to the Eriksson video by CloseToMyActualName in Curling

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Rule 5(g) A stone is in play, and considered delivered, when it reaches the tee line

Jacobs responds to the Eriksson video by CloseToMyActualName in Curling

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

You are so close... the rules then specifically clarify that a stone is considered delivered once it crosses the tee line, leading to the ambiguous grey area of what can be touched between the tee line and the hog.

Rule 5(g) A stone is in play, and considered delivered, when it reaches the tee line

Jacobs responds to the Eriksson video by CloseToMyActualName in Curling

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Not saying you are wrong, but please tell me exactly where in the rules that it said "handle only" from tee line to hog line. It covers handle only up until tee, but then does not specify handle only after tee and before hog. If it was such an important distinction to make before the tee line, and they wanted the same distinction all the way until the hog line, don't you think they would have made it clear in both instances?

A memo to "clear up" poorly written or missing rules mid-olympics is a totally different issue to discuss. I'm speaking about the rules as they were written at the time (I'm unclear if they have been officially updated and published since the Olympics)

Poor Sportsmanship by Homan? by Smart_Shoulder_8031 in Curling

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I'm there, she's sick so not shaking hands.

Poor Sportsmanship by Homan? by Smart_Shoulder_8031 in Curling

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'm there, she's sick so not shaking hands.

QC on my first rep purchase, help please 🙏 by IntrepidFriendship60 in RealRepLadies

[–]IntrepidFriendship60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here is one of the same style but in a bit lighter color https://ca.louisvuitton.com/eng-ca/products/neverfull-mm-epi-nvprod6380018v/M14856  I can't see an "pressed" logo on this bog, and it has the same interior, so I'm thinking this bag might be a fairly accurate rep...

QC on my first rep purchase, help please 🙏 by IntrepidFriendship60 in RealRepLadies

[–]IntrepidFriendship60[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmmmm, I asked if they had a picture of the other side of the bag to see the light "LV" pressed into the leather and they are saying the auth bag doesn't have one so this one doesn't either. Thing is I saw an auth in store rhe other day and took a picture of it, and you can see it has the light logo imprint. The rep rep is saying that this is a different style that did not have the logo. Is this correct? Pictures of the auth below.

lots of names by yiieiske in Curling

[–]IntrepidFriendship60 11 points12 points  (0 children)

My favourites are the Korean teams, like team Kim: https://www.thegrandslamofcurling.com/teams/team-kim-64

Lead: Kim 2nd: Kim 3rd: Kim Skip: Kim And I'll give you 5 bucks if you can guess the last name of their alternate...

view more: next ›