Sunday, February 3, 2008
Posted by
Janiece
at
12:43 PM
According to Nathan, I am not in compliance with the required pet-posting regulations in the Blogosphere. As a result, I'm required to post two pictures of dogs in lieu of one cat.
I'm losing track of the subsections and clauses and stuff, but somewhere, it says,
"The posting of said pictures shall satisfy the requirements of this law without regard to the attractiveness or lack thereof of the pet so pictured. It is not the intent of this law to have a bearing on what pet a particular blogger should possess, but rather to elicit feelings of envy, sympathy or even pity from the readers of said blogs."
In other words, the law doesn't care if the picture makes viewer go "Ooooooh" or "Ewwwwww".
I am a Hot Chick living in Castle Rock, CO with my fabulous family. We have a rescue dog named "Jackson," and she's a Basenji/Shepherd mix. She's something of a head case, but we love her. I'm a U.S. Navy vet, and I currently work as an Enterprise Solutions Architect, specializing in VoIP and multimedia contact center design. I care about social justice, libraries, science, the U.S. Constitution and the military. I'm a tax and spend liberal in a largely red county, but I try not to be stabby about it. I knit for charity. Stupidity, cupidity and wanton assholery piss me off, and I'm more than a little soft when it comes to dogs and those who serve others. I blog about whatever I feel like. I use foul language, so if that sort of thing offends you, feel free to fuck off now - if I'm unwilling to clean up my language for my fabulous Great Auntie Margie, I'm unlikely to do so for you. Newcomers are welcome here, especially those who disagree with me, but trolling and spamming will be met with the Shovel of Doom™.
10 comments:
Referring to the first one:
Is that thing alive?
Oh, and you win.
He was when the photograph was taken, but has since passed away.
Erm. Wasn't there a clause about cuteness somewhere? o.O
MWT, I don't believe so.
Bwahahaha!
I'm losing track of the subsections and clauses and stuff, but somewhere, it says,
"The posting of said pictures shall satisfy the requirements of this law without regard to the attractiveness or lack thereof of the pet so pictured. It is not the intent of this law to have a bearing on what pet a particular blogger should possess, but rather to elicit feelings of envy, sympathy or even pity from the readers of said blogs."
In other words, the law doesn't care if the picture makes viewer go "Ooooooh" or "Ewwwwww".
John Scalzi said:
"Well, the letter of the law is fulfilled by posting a picture of any cat, but the spirit of the law demands that it be a cute one."
Hah! I knew there was a cuteness clause somewhere.
You've got dog pics posted permanently in your sidebar. I should have thought that would have counted.
Though if you want to post pictures of naked mole rats, that's fine with me.
Is that what that top beastie is? I was thinking maybe a bat/xolo cross.
Janiece... you win. In my book, you have a permanent exemption from any further animal picture posting requirements!
Or, in other words -- Please. Don't. Stop. We'll pay you not to. ;)
The top pic is indeed a dog. An extremely ugly, sick, old dog.
I believe he was a Chinese Crested something or other.
Post a Comment