narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (silent)
A matter of terabytes )

On the topic of biological efficiency )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (devious)
Having mentioned religious faith in my brief rundown of objectivist points and being still being prey to insomnia for the sake of covering the entire argument I ought to clarify my argument.

Read more... )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (drained)
Read more... )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (pathway)
Read more... )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (flashback)
Read more... )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (dutiful)
In summary )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (pathway)
Prompted by this [livejournal.com profile] bad_rpers_suck post I have to say that I’ve never understood this RP buddies = actual friends theory. I can understand becoming friends with the people you RP with, I can understand joining an RP because your friends are involved in it, I can even understand that perhaps many people do genuinely ‘want to meet new people’ and other such stock tripe that gets put on UCAS applications but that still doesn’t make friendship an instantaneous occurrence.

Read more... )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (masks)
On the night of the full moon )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (reading)
- If you cannot explain your point even in vast swathes of words you are simply inarticulate. If you can only make your point in vast swathes of words then you’re not all that articulate either.
- If your argument results in creating a different impression to the one you had been seeking the onus is on you to rearticulate your argument or settle for being misunderstood.
- If you have to tell your audience that you possess a certain character trait in the course of your argument that they have not noticed in you themselves, you probably don’t actually possess it.
- Regardless of the impression you create you cannot dictate your audience’s reaction. And in fact attempting to do so is more likely to do your cause harm than good.
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (legum)
Read more... )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (魔道士)
This update from the LJ staff is an interesting thing by way of social networking.

Which is more a case of stating that I shall gladly be opting out )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (legum)
Read more... )
narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (phantasmagoric)
Gauged in something of a degrees of repetition fashion the general trend seems to be as follows:
Step 1 – the joke is actually funny.
Step 2 – it’s getting a tad old.
Step 3 – the response to your telling it is either, being ignored outright or shrugs of indifference.
Step 4 – people actively tell you to stop.
Step 5 – people start to get distinctly uncomfortable when you start taking.

All of which applies to many things beyond bad joke renditions and may in fact already have a similar framework outlined in the Promethean sourcebook in regards to disquiet.

Bette Davis centenary The Telegraph
Which sports a wonderful image from The Private Lives of Elizabeth and Essex, which is one of those marvellous films along with The Prisoner of Zenda that I’ve always adored.
The Cure: Ghouls who refused to die The Telegraph

Read more... )

Profile

narcasse: Sebastian Flyte.  Brideshead Revisited (2008) (Default)
Narsus

June 2017

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
181920212223 24
252627282930 

Syndicate

RSS Atom
weebly statistics

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags