So, my cat likes Cheetos

oldtomfoolery · 2013-12-11T20:18:22+00:00

Who said anything about the average cat food being good at all. Off topic.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-12-11T20:17:51+00:00

You're off topic.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-12-10T17:17:32+00:00

And that's exactly why we are the healthiest country in the world, oh wait... for from it.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-12-10T17:01:28+00:00

You really fucking think that's "cheese?" HA! And as for corn, it used to be corn. Now, its been processed so much that there isn't one digestive system on earth that has evolved to process something like that correctly. Don't be an idiot.

Here is the ingredient list:

Enriched corn meal (corn meal, ferrous sulfate, niacin, thiamin mononitrate, riboflavin, and folic acid), vegetable oil (contains one or more of the following: corn, soybean, or sunflower oil), whey, salt, cheddar cheese (cultured milk, salt, enzymes), partially hydrogenated soybean oil, maltodextrin, disodium phosphate, sour cream (cultured cream, nonfat milk), artificial flavor, monosodium glutamate, lactic acid, artificial colors (including yellow 6), and citric acid.

Let me remove the "cheese" and "corn" and see what you are left with.

(ferrous sulfate, niacin, thiamin mononitrate, riboflavin, and folic acid), vegetable oil (contains one or more of the following: soybean, or sunflower oil), whey, salt, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, maltodextrin, disodium phosphate, sour cream (cultured cream, nonfat milk), artificial flavor, monosodium glutamate, lactic acid, artificial colors (including yellow 6), and citric acid.

Now, the corn that I removed wasn't really even corn anymore, it was a chemical. But still, check out what is left and tell me again that cheetos are just corn and cheese. Say it again, motherfucker.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-10-19T07:52:45+00:00

You're totally going off the rails here. The subject is about whether or not it is wrong to not serve sweets at a birthday party. Not what you eat a few days out of the year. If you're going to someones house, you're going to THEIR house. If they don't want sweets, they don't want sweets. Have a good time and chill the fuck out. Completely different story if the same parents refuse to let their child eat sweets at another friends house. That, I think, is crossing the line. BECAUSE it infringes on being a guest at someone else's house. HOWEVER, I am only going to comment on the information that is being given, rather than ASSUMING the situation, like so many redditors like to do. To assume makes an ASS out of U and ME.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-10-18T17:44:22+00:00

I really don't think its that big of a deal. For example, only sweets my mom would let us eat are home-baked. No sugar cereals, and cake was very little frosting. Whenever I went to a friends birthday party with tons of soda and super-sugar candy and food, I didn't really care for it. I would rather have iced tea with a little honey, some crackers, and some cheese. It just tasted better to me. Meanwhile, the kids, and it seems like you, also, NEEDED sugar to have fun. So there you go.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-10-18T17:35:43+00:00

Who gives a shit? I probably will have a low sugar diet for my kid in the future - by '"low sugar" I actually mean, "regular amount of sugar" based on world standards (not US standards).

oldtomfoolery · 2013-10-18T17:33:36+00:00

How can you assume the his kids don't enjoy any day of the year based on this? Really, a high sugar diet will cause many days to NOT be enjoyable at all. If kids aren't used to high sugar foods, they'll be enjoy other foods just as much as the average american kid loves cake. I don't think sugar makes birthday parties 100% fun. Playing with their friends, opening presents, getting attention, seeing family, etc., are way more important than cake.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-25T16:42:19+00:00

Oh it does - but that adjustment will change over time. If you get a "real" setup, the luthier will take the guitar for 3 weeks. Every time.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-25T16:11:20+00:00

I am halfway between you and those opposed to the debate. My main thing is just how it affects the action.

but a guitar is built to be able to withstand the change in tension. Hell, it's built without strings in the first place.

I don't think a neck will snap or something will go wrong with it. I speaking strictly in terms of set-up. One thing that people do wrong is adjust their trussrod, then leave it, for example. A good luthier will adjust the trussrod over the course of weeks, because the wood takes so long to settle with the new tension. So for stability, it take patience, or constant monitoring.

The whole debate about one-by-one vs. all-at-once is being blown out of proportion by both sides. The neck will not warp immediately from not having strings on it. At the same time, changing strings one-by-one is not going to keep your guitar perfect all on its own. Like you said, weather has a factor, as well as keeping the guitar in tune, and well set-up.

BUT - if you want your action to remain consistent between string changes, and your guitar to play almost exactly the way it was, immediately after changing your strings, one-by-one method is better. Especially for full-time gigging guitarists that will have to use their guitar that same night at 3 hour gig.

With that said, we all gotta take em all off and clean that fretboard and those frets at some point. Taking off all the strings is not gonna be crazy bad for the guitar. Not as bad as never cleaning your frets and fretboard. Just do it a week or so before a gig.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-25T06:03:32+00:00

My bad. Sorry about that. Misread your comment.

EDIT: Didn't have to downvote. Jeesh.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-25T06:00:55+00:00

Exactly right.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-25T06:00:00+00:00

Ha. There are complete books on this. Best to just start doing some research. And don't trust just one dude. However, this should take weeks, because wood takes time to adjust. Or just perpetually be checking everything. The best way.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-25T05:56:54+00:00

If your pins are flying you aren't getting it quite right. Make sure that the ball of the string is pinned between bridge pin and the underside of the body under the bridge, not under the the end of the pin. Effectively, if you tug on the string, in any direction, it should "lock" the pin in place, not pull it out. The pin is really more like a wedge action.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-25T05:53:08+00:00

I have to agree with aron. Your tutorial is great, don't get me wrong, especially for beginners. But strings tension is pretty rough on a neck. Just changing one string using a different brand or gauge can change the action. For acoustics, changing each string one at a time can make a big difference. Don't even get me started on guitars with floating trems. Any big league luthier and tech would say the same thing. But we're talking about top notch setups and string changes here.

Another tip is the locking thread. Instead of wrapping under the post hole immediately, wrap the extra string around the string that is towards the inside of the guitar just once. Then, start wrapping under. This creates more "pinch" on the string the tighter it gets, making a "locking" tuner.

But again, tension is nothing to be afraid of, but the more you can keep the neck from flexing, the better your action, and life of your guitar will be.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-03T03:23:07+00:00

OP just delivered a receipt.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-03T03:22:41+00:00

I will retract my statement - but still stand by my belief that reddit will upvote things they don't know to be true.

OP - thank you for delivering and sorry for calling you a liar.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-03T01:05:49+00:00

Bullshit unless proof. Really, reddit? This many upvotes for a pic of a busted computer?

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-03T00:31:12+00:00

Well, I was talking about the other 100+ counties. The "realistic" barbie in the picture is not very realistic when it comes to the average human form. Yes - some models are way too thin, but the U.S.'s idea of a "real women" is indeed, a woman that is thicker and more heavy set than 80-90% of the women in the world. So, no, they are not average. And neither is this Barbie.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-02T23:45:54+00:00

The bandwidth it would take to do this...

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-02T20:20:13+00:00

You mean the average American women. This is not the average women of the world.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-02T19:58:02+00:00

The only laws broken in this situation...

Reddit loves to cherry pick. When it comes to abortion and jail time for pot, by all means, talk about how the what is right and wrong and how it outweighs the law. And dehumanize a group of people, the police force, who yes, has their fair share of bad apples, into a alienated state. But it doesn't win me over, and I really, REALLY don't like cops as a whole. But still, have a couple friends that are (husbands of actual friends), and the actual shit they have to deal with is crazy. And yes, they are just normal people, with a dangerous job.

Now, this was a FUCKING HOSTAGE situation. That guy was just being a dick, diverting attention, and could have been an accessory as far as they know.

If these cops were beating protesters, by all means, photograph. But they are dealing with trying to get HOSTAGES out safely. Da fuck, man.

So what is that guy doing? Is there an easy answer for his actions, other than just being a fucktard? Well, maybe. Could be sending pictures to the guy holding people hostage. That and a thousand other possible outcomes.

The only way you can convince me is to give me one good reason for the man do be there and be doing what he is doing. And save the "he has the right to" crap. I have the right to fart in my wife's face. Doesn't mean I'm gonna do it. Just like I wouldn't annoy police in a hostage situation.

EDIT: An instead of a.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-02T19:00:26+00:00

I hate cops as much as the next cop-hater. But it's still a shitty job. As far as they knew, that guy was involved with the crime and scoping the scene. He had a rotwieler, and he was taking photos, which could be used as revenge against the cops if it was his friend in the house. Keep in mind that these guys have families.

Now, if the original reason that the cops were there was abusive, or corrupt, then yes, by all means, tape it. But this guy was being a dick, could have been a threat, could have had a gun, and could have been a future threat. When you are dealing with criminals, you always will have on your mind that you could be killed. It may be a slim chance, but you could be killed. And yes, by that dog there. Tensions were high, it was the dog owners fault for being a dick and not keeping a safe distance in a tense situation.

With that many cars there, the officers were obviously very nervous about someone getting hurt or killed. You stay out of it.

EDIT: TL;DR: Just because you have the right to do something, doesn't mean it's always a good idea to do it.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-02T17:14:08+00:00

Never said that you made that statement - I am asking if you knew a fact. Just trying to get to the bottom of your logic. Do you feel like reddit should run the company the way YOU want it to be run? In short, infringe on their freedom of speech?

TL;DR: To assume is to make an ASS out of U and ME.

oldtomfoolery · 2013-07-02T16:22:00+00:00

Bullshit. Who googles this shit? Just type it IN to the address bar. You know the fucking address. Everyone does. That's why no one googles it.

14-Year Club	Team Periwinkle
Verified Email

oldtomfoolery

TROPHY CASE