| Arwen-Undomiel.com http://arwen-undomiel.com/forum/ |
|
| Camille and Kennerly http://arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=23260 |
Page 2 of 2 |
| Author: | Hanasian [ December 29th, 2017, 10:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
Elora Starsong wrote: Blondes in corsets cavorting...I'm rather surprised, Durian! You appear to be diversifying away from Brunettes... And they say you can't teach an old dog new tricks...   Yes.... or getting back to the roots....... 
|
|
| Author: | Elora Starsong [ December 29th, 2017, 11:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
No corset there, pal...you'll have to go back to 2003 for that one (the Seattle Christmas Tree assault - Aussie's Run Amok in City Centre) 
|
|
| Author: | Hanasian [ December 29th, 2017, 11:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
Elora Starsong wrote: No corset there, pal...you'll have to go back to 2003 for that one (the Seattle Christmas Tree assault - Aussie's Run Amok in City Centre) Ah yes....unruly Eowyn... the reason they put a barrier around the Seattle Christmas Tree these days... 
|
|
| Author: | Elora Starsong [ December 29th, 2017, 11:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
I like to make an impact on each and every place I visit.   Also, just noticed... Quote: Getting back to the roots... Is that an antipodean idiom perchance?
|
|
| Author: | Hanasian [ December 30th, 2017, 1:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
Mayhem in Seattle 2003 by a blonde, corseted Eowyn.... 
|
|
| Author: | Gandolorin [ December 30th, 2017, 1:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
I can state unequivocally, without the slightest doubt, that the city skyline shown in the above picture is utterly unknown to me. Though Seattle might not be the wildest guess for various reasons. But as for blondes - I was a natural-born one, but after a longish period of not-unusual darkening the trend was reversed so that it pretty much resembles Hanasian’s cerebral fuzz, as per a picture he posted wearing some LoTR-appropriate attire somewhere (except that my cerebral coverage with said fuzz is still far greater). Great. Got lost on a tangent again. Right. Blondes and roots. The percentage of natural blondes is, for genetic reasons, a rather small minority. And the darkening I mentioned above also seems to be common. So as per my memory the mention of roots in the presence of people (and here women do statistically appear to be a large majority) nominally, but not genetically blonde, causes the local social temperature to take a serious plunge towards freezing. Unwanted reminders of “dark pasts”. And foot landing squarely in mouth. And while I’m at foot-and-mouth disease: corset. That picture Hanasian posted wearing some LoTR-appropriate attire somewhere. Why does some nearly-mulched memory wheeze the suggestion of a connection …? |
|
| Author: | Gandolorin [ December 30th, 2017, 1:29 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
And this thread has also gotten severely HiJaxed from the original intent of the original poster ... |
|
| Author: | Hanasian [ December 30th, 2017, 5:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
Gandolorin wrote: That picture Hanasian posted wearing some LoTR-appropriate attire somewhere. Why does some nearly-mulched memory wheeze the suggestion of a connection …? I can guarantee sir, that I was not wearing a corset in any picture. Gandolorin wrote: And this thread has also gotten severely HiJaxed from the original intent of the original poster ... I'm sure Camille & Kennerly won't mind. |
|
| Author: | Elora Starsong [ December 30th, 2017, 5:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
Hanasian wrote: I'm sure Camille & Kennerly won't mind. Or the person who kicked this thread off, whatever his name might be at any given point in time. |
|
| Author: | Gandolorin [ December 30th, 2017, 12:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
Hanasian wrote: Gandolorin wrote: That picture Hanasian posted wearing some LoTR-appropriate attire somewhere. Why does some nearly-mulched memory wheeze the suggestion of a connection …? I can guarantee sir, that I was not wearing a corset in any picture. Though it might have been a good idea? … Nah, never mind, I don’t need to look in the mirror to realize that some physiques are beyond the help of any corset … Elora Starsong wrote: Hanasian wrote: I'm sure Camille & Kennerly won't mind. Or the person who kicked this thread off, whatever his name might be at any given point in time. Hmyes – some anonymous antipodean – though not without the help of someone else rumored to be living on the same continent … |
|
| Author: | Elora Starsong [ December 30th, 2017, 5:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
Gandolorin wrote: Hmyes – some anonymous antipodean – though not without the help of someone else rumored to be living on the same continent … Rumoured, eh? Sounds mysterious. 
|
|
| Author: | Gandolorin [ January 1st, 2018, 12:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
To be honest, isn’t most of the Internet just one huge rumor? I mean with all these anonymous user names, a non-existent quality control on most content, those fake avatars – I’ll take a shot at starting a revolution: there’s this concept called honesty which may be alien to the Internet (is it in Wiki?). I’ll ‘fess up. I am not a Maia. 
|
|
| Author: | Elora Starsong [ January 2nd, 2018, 3:55 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
For the internet, which is a wide & sea of information once you delve into the grey and dark/deep web levels, for it to be mostly rumour would be an exaggeration. |
|
| Author: | Gandolorin [ January 2nd, 2018, 2:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
Regarding the term “information”, there’s a (to me) very interesting chapter called “The Information Challenge” in Richard Dawkins’s 2003 book “A Devil’s Chaplain” (the rest of the book is also very interesting). The term has only been defined in a specific technical form (and this bears on the term IT, too) since 1948. I don’t know if anyone anywhere still has a vague overview of all of the sites on the Internet by now. One claim of a while ago that I remember reading is that about half of them are devoted to pornography. I’d guess that many sites devoted to discussions (as ours is to a degree), or discussion forums in some sites, news outlets of whatever ilk, and of course “dear old” Facebook, contain a hefty proportion of gossip, which is more or less (if not entirely) identical with rumor. From what occasionally surfaces in our media about the darknet, it seems to be mostly dedicated to some form of criminal activity. So perhaps this part has almost the least to do with rumor / gossip, since transactions here would probably be based precisely on people not asking questions – just my guess. |
|
| Author: | Elora Starsong [ January 3rd, 2018, 4:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Camille and Kennerly |
Gandolorin wrote: Regarding the term “information”, there’s a (to me) very interesting chapter called “The Information Challenge” in Richard Dawkins’s 2003 book “A Devil’s Chaplain” (the rest of the book is also very interesting). The term has only been defined in a specific technical form (and this bears on the term IT, too) since 1948. I don’t know if anyone anywhere still has a vague overview of all of the sites on the Internet by now. Information science emerged post 1948, and this has had a significant bearing on how the word information is now understood in both common and technical parlance. As a relatively new field, it is quite dynamic and I would caution against using sources as dated even as 2003, much less 1948, unless they are considered seminal works in the field. As for a vague overview of all the sites on the web, in answer to that in totality - no one does for there are layers of the internet. The surface layer most of us see and use (provided we are not on the wrong side of the digital divide) is best covered by Google. At this point, Google has archived impressions of webpages the world over and rival search engines struggle to keep up. Google, like any other search engine used in this context, is what they call a spider - it crawls along the surface (all those imprints) to retrieve findings consistent with your search inquiry using Boolean logic. There are more customised search engines for specific application and other levels of the internet - grey and dark. Once we start delving, searching becomes complex due to the inherent nature of content on these strata. Of course, now we're having a whole other discussion...but suffice it to say that the Internet is an ecosystem. Most of us engage with it on a macro level, but you can delve down to the cellular, molecular and deeper still. As for one tool to pull it all together - impossible to do without significant advances in how we gather and process Big Data. |
|
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|