Recent Replies

  • Replying to: @Miraz

    @Miraz @Munish To get the full British effect you have to say, 'I'm sorry, but would you be able…'

    Wait, what I should have said is, 'I'm sorry, but to get the full British effect you have to say, "I'm sorry, but would you be able…"'

  • Replying to: @JohnPhilpin

    @JohnPhilpin That's cool, thanks. Just a further note: for the third highlight on that page, where the highlighted text ends with a link, clicking on the annotation bubble actually takes me to the link. Namely this one: <blog.zgp.org/ad-suppor...>.

  • Replying to: social.lol

    @jeannie Oh, no, can we have a sweet dough day, instead? Or, I mean, savoury dough? I've had it with all this sourdough. Who wants bread that's sour?

  • Replying to: john.philpin.com

    @JohnPhilpin I also tried on the Mac, in Safari, Firefox, Chrome. I see the highlighted sections, the cursor changes to a finger over them, but clicking does nothing. I'm expecting a popup with your comments?

  • Replying to: john.philpin.com

    @JohnPhilpin I tried tapping on your annotated parts, but nothing happens. iPhone, Safari.

  • Replying to: annie.micro.blog

    @Annie Just got that out the library. Don't know if it's the Enhanced Edition, though.

  • Replying to: www.patrickrhone.net

    @patrickrhone I read this while having an afternoon playing old singles. Vinyl, not CD, but I approve of this message.

  • Replying to: mastodon.social

    @Diggory @RecDiffs OK, I now don’t know whether I say ‘object oriented’ or ‘object orientated’.

    But at least if our homes get burgled we don’t have to add an extra syllable (and a zed) and say ‘burglarized’.

  • @jeannie To quote Brent Simmons:

    Please let's stop using the word "consume."

    I eat spaghetti, watch a TV show, use an app, read an article, sip a Scotch, drink a beer, down a shot.

    Not "consume."

  • Replying to: mstdn.social

    @elaine1helen I could knock one together out in the shed for a couple of million. It wouldn’t work perfectly.

  • Replying to: @jsonbecker

    @jsonbecker Though a quick duckduck reminds me that I'd forgotten entirely the term 'political hack', and that Wikipedia article even refers to 'hack gap'.

    Not a term we use on this side of the pond.

  • Replying to: @jsonbecker

    @jsonbecker I followed the link, and I understand the article. I just don't understand the use of the word 'hack'. He doesn't repeat it after the title and the opening paragraph, and he doesn't define it. So I don't understand which part of liberals being 'barely willing to wholeheartedly defend even the things where they legitimately have the better of the argument' is a 'hack'.

  • Replying to: www.rousette.org.uk

    @bsag In case you'd like a Micro.blog comment, to see how it works, here you are.

  • Replying to: @jabel

    @jabel SF very much doesn't have to be dystopian! I've been a fan all my life and I don't really care for dystopian stuff either.

    I've read Becky Chambers's first book, and it's great.

  • Replying to: json.blog

    @jsonbecker Sorry to raise a terminology question, but what does 'hack' mean in this context? My best guess is the journalistic meaning, but I don't see how it applies. Certainly doesn't seem to be anything to do with cracking computer systems. So is it another meaning I'm not familiar with?

  • Replying to: @adoran2

    @adoran2 Cool, sounds like a great idea.

  • Replying to: @jayeless

    @jayeless I've been to a couple of sessions as a critiquer, and so far everyone has been very positive, with constructive suggestions for the writer being critiqued. So here's hoping!

  • Replying to: andrewdoran.uk

    @adoran2 I don't really understand what that site is for. It shows us an album, and then… what?

  • Replying to: www.jayeless.net

    @jayeless Well done for working up the courage. I’m going to be having part of mine discussed at an in-person critique session on Wednesday. It’s quite daunting.

  • Replying to: andrewdoran.uk

    @adoran2 It's interesting to read about this book when I'm currently listening to the podcast The History of Rock Music in 500 Songs. Sounds like works of similar scale.

  • Replying to: www.jayeless.net

    @jayeless That’s quite a sweet dream.

  • @danielpunkass Well I think you’re right, and doing the decent thing.

  • Replying to: @JohnPhilpin

    @JohnPhilpin My mistake. But what I was getting at is, your title implies, ‘I’m going to demonstrate a fribjillator.’

    The reader thinks, ‘Interesting. I wonder what a fribjillator is? The post will explain.‘

    And then they read the post, and it doesn’t mention fribjillators.

  • Replying to: @JohnPhilpin

    @JohnPhilpin Thanks. I think I got all that from your original piece. It was just that your title referred to explaining a thing, and then that thing wasn’t mentioned in the actual piece. Unless I missed it.

  • Replying to: explodingcomma.com

    @petebrown I'm keen to hear what you've got to say about the others. I've always thought Aliens was the best, and I really didn't like Alien 3. But I haven't watched any of them in years.