George Michaels

James McClure:

I heard Father Figure today and it got me thinking:

1. What do you think about the 1980's music revival that we have been experiencing recently? I feel like Hall and Oats may end up with another #1 hit in the next year or so.

2. What happened to George Michaels? I went back and looked at some videos. He used to be the man. He had tons of models and sex with models in the videos. He was the man. How did he become the punch line for every anonymous-homosexual-hand-job-in-the-park joke?

Frank Leyland:

Wait!!! There is a 1980's music revival... Get the car fired up Donny McDork, we're getting the hell out of here!

I think the more interesting question is why did all forms of art suck in the 80's. My theory: The Personal Computer. There has always existed a nitch in our society for people who are commonly referred to as 'nerds'. Up until the mid 80's, this nitch was relatively small and powerless, as most jobs required strength and/or personality. The creation of a 'cheap' computer in the early 80's totally changed the skill set required of the successful American worker, drastically increasing the power of the 'nerd nitch'. People who understood words like "floppy disk" and "DOS" suddenly had more (or at least as much power) as those who were just handsome and charming. It was Darwinism at its finest. My theory (as I wasn't old enough to really experience the 80's) is that nerds, with their newfound power, invaded all forms of life; music, art, clothing, etc. Since they don't have any taste, everything suffered.

Not George Michaels?

Finally, George Michaels became the punch line for "anonymous-homosexual-hand-job-in-the-park jokes" because he got an anonymous homosexual hand job in the park. I think that falls under the category of "you are what you eat". Also, everyone who was born after 1986 confuses him for this guy...

James McClure:

I think it's even worse. I'm pretty sure that he was giving the hand-job.

Dude, I'm loving the holiday music. I'm blasting Last Christmas right now. I don't think that anyone else in the office appreciates this.

Frank Leyland:

It is after Thanksgiving so no one can really bust your balls about the music choice until New Years day. That being said, I'm not sure 'blasting' is the appropriate volume for a work environment unless your job takes place in one of the following settings: "Stadium/Arena" "fishing ship" or "Stage w/ or w/o pole"

Let's bring this conversation back to the 80's (and not the 1880's when half of your lame Christmas music was written). Don't you have any opinion on my Nerd Nitch theory?

James McClure:

Well, I would have to agree that the computer gave power to the nerds. Although, it also took power away from true nerds:

The computer has made tedious, number-crunching, accuracy and precision based tasks relatively easy. This has allowed more people to perform the tasks traditionally dominated by nerds. It has produced the effect of making more people "nerds", and the true, hardcore nerds less marketable.

Frank Leyland:

Yes, and yes. I totally agree that because our generation grew up with computers any advantage 'real nerds' had over everyone else has disappeared. Everyone is a 'nerd' now in the sense that they can work a pc, understand the internet, and even use it to create something awful (i.e. this anti-blog thing). I would point to our friend, Censored, as a great example of this. He definitely fits the strong and personable category and had he not grown up in the 90's (or later) would have never touched a PC. Instead he now crunches numbers for a large bank, essentially stealing a job only a 'true nerd' would have been able to perform in the 80's. He is better suited for this job because he has all of the technical skills a 'nerd' does without all of the awkwardness of a 'true nerd'.

This means that, ironically, the increased power of the 'nerd nitch' that the PC created in the 80's also caused the destruction of said nitch by the 90's, as everyone in our generation became a 'nerd'. As proof of my thesis I would like to point out that the destruction of most forms of art (interpretive dance still sucks, see video) was promptly reversed by the mid 90’s.

James McClure:

This has gone too far. You're up there making the rise and fall of the nerd sound like it fits into some Buddhist cycle. Look, it's simple. The computer is three things: 1) a giant filing system, 2) a giant calculator for complex calculations, 3) a communication device. Its widespread distribution is has replaced a good many things: people who add up numbers in neat rows, secretaries, the calculator, the typewriter, print news, shorthand, and comming soon - network/cable television, and radio.

There is a reason we no longer send telegraphs.

P.S. Was interpretive dance ever popular; worthwile; anything more than a reason for your gay friends to ask you to come to an event?

Doggystyle

Frank Leyland:

Wait, you're saying that Lewbowski's landlord was gay? That thought had not occurred to us dude.

You forgot to mention porn in your list of pc uses... unless giant filing system is your lame code for rub one out.

James McClure:

I'll concede that: the internet is the most penis-friendly invention since doggy-style.

Frank Leyland:

That was a great album...

Hops

James McClure:

[I forget, are you using a pen name?]

Man, we had some great beers on Friday. I'm curious, how do we start the Beer of the week feature?

I would like to start with Nemesis (I'm tempted to go back and get another glass while it is still on tap). To me it's the best beer that I have ever had. I still don't know how Founders did what they did.

Usually, I think that naming other tastes (not even close to beer) and comparing the beer to them is ridiculous. Here I'll make an exception and say that I can actually taste something that reminds me of Dark chocolate (It still sucks when you say that porters/stouts taste like coco-nibs. What are Coco-nibs, and where have you been to taste them.). There is an interesting blend of flavors that balances the total taste of the beer. This black barleywine is like no other un-aged barleywine that I have ever tasted. The only thing that comes close is some of the better 3-4 year bottle conditioned barleywines from last year's festival. I would choose one of these as my first drink in pretty much every month that has an "R". I gave two friends who don't like strong tasting beers one of these; they both ordered a second glass (regretfully, at 12% abv).

The Duck-Rabbit Milk stout was a very good Stout. I know that I like a beer that finishes a little cleaner than you do; this one was pretty much perfect for me. Really, I understand that you think the last taste in your mouth is watery; I just don't like face-making-flavors in my beer.

Finally, I thought that the Bell's Winter White Ale was good. More of what I've come to expect from Bell's. The name is descriptive, and the beer is a solid example of what you expected. This would be a great beer for any holiday occasion/

event - perfect to bring to parties. By the way, Bell's has a Barley Wine: Third Coast. It will become available Nov/Dec, through the spring.

Now, how do we start a feature? Where will it be posted? What type of text do we need to add? Etc...

Frank Leyland:

Warrior Hops

I get the "side bar" format (I’m done calling them “tid bits” because I want people to take us seriously) with info, video, and images from our discussion topic. However, beer of the week and “Say Say's” won't fit the topic and thus are satellite issues. I get that they are important, but I don't know if they should be in the same voice (i.e. two pricks arguing). What is the approach here?

Also, I dislike the terms you use to describe after taste (cleaner and face-making flavors). They are slanted towards an anti-after taste agenda. It sounds like you are trying to ban the use of warrior hops

James McClure:

Of course they are slanted. When you have the opportunity to label your argument you take advantage. I imagine that you will have trouble convincing our readers that face-making flavors are a good thing for beer. I'm also pretty sure that our readers desire a subtle, clean finish to their beer.

The bottom line is this. I'm sick of beer snobs looking down their nose at anyone who doesn't like the "complexity and flavor" of some beer that is over-hopped, unbalanced, and over 7% ABV (alcohol by volume). Do I like a lot of strong, highly stylized, micro-brewed beers? Yes. However, many of them are too strong, taste raw, and leave an after-taste that makes you gag as you swallow. Strong is good, but it cannot come at the expense of taste.

The argument that people like these raw, unbalanced, bitter, alcohol flavors is close to ridiculous (similar to my argument that people think coffee is delicious, but everyone likes it better with cream and sugar).  If people really liked the strong, raw flavors of these beers, then they would prefer a young barley wine to one that has been cellar conditioned for a few years.

http://www.brewwiki.com/index.php/American_Barleywine No one has ever said that they prefer a barley wine at less than one year when compared to one that is 3 or 4 years old. Why? Because the bitter, raw flavors of both the hops and grains have been allowed to mellow in the aged beer - because you don't gag on the bitter-alcohol flavor when you swallow.

At the end of the day there are many expensive "good" beers that are not good beers. Taste, see what you like, and drink what tastes good to you. Too many people are afraid to tell the

pretentious a-hole next to them that they don't like gagging while drinking their beer - that they don't like being left with the taste of roasted death in their mouth after every sip.

Frank Leyland:

You can make up any words you want to slant the argument in your direction, it is my job to point out the fact that you are using hyperbolic language meant to persuade without facts. I would like to point out that you have continued to use absurd rhetoric (raw, unbalanced, bitter, alcohol flavors) in your inane discussion. Speaking of which, let's delve into the "points" you have attempted to make.

First off, I totally agree with you that snobbery of any kind is to be generally avoided. Taste is a personal matter and you should be allowed to like what you like, regardless of what some a-hole tells you. That being said you should:

1. Not care what an asshole thinks

2. Be able to have a discussion about the taste of a beer without crying like a little bitch when the other person doesn't totally agree with you.

Someone who has a different opinion and is willing to share that opinion with you doesn't make them a snob, it makes them interesting. I can disagree with you about taste, but still understand and respect your opinion. A snob is someone who, upon discovering that you don't feel exactly the same way they do about beer, movies, post-post-modern art, etc, decides that you are not worth their time. It is a subtle, but very important, distinction.

American IPA

The retarded part of your argument is that while you are accusing me of being a snob, you are, in fact, being the snob. Just because you think something is over-hopped doesn't mean it tastes so to another person. Yet, you repeatedly attack those of us who enjoy a strong double West Coast IPA basically calling us liars ("The argument that people like these raw, unbalanced, bitter, alcohol flavors is close to ridiculous"). It isn’t ridiculous; it's just that I don't have your tongue in my mouth.

Also, you age a barleywine because barleywines are meant to be aged. In fact, the "raw, over-hopped" beers you dislike typically cannot be cellared.

Your last paragraph makes perfect sense. However, your previous three paragraphs destroy any credibility you have. Therefore, I find it necessary to repeat (with a few minor edits) your comments so that these important words can be heard from a reasonable voice.

At the end of the day good beer is about your taste, not price. Taste, see what you like, and drink what tastes good to you. Too many people are afraid to tell the pretentious a-hole next to them that they don't like gagging on a beer that doesn't fit their particular taste profile, and end up drinking a "popular" beer instead of a good one.

Pliny the Elder

Frank Leyland:

I'm drinking a Pliny the elder on tap in San Diego right now. It's delicious... Fuck you and your non-hop agenda

James McClure:

You know that I like hoppy beers. It's just that not all hoppy beers are good, and hoppier does not always mean better.

Lost Abbey 

Frank Leyland:

Now I'm drinking Lost Abbey Deliverance.

Equally amazing but totally different. Strong malty bourbon finish. Unreal.

Yes I know you like good beer of all profiles. But if we don't 'pick sides' and yell at each other why in the world would anyone read this.

Side Bar: Hops - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hops

James McClure:

P.S. Let's not ever talk about my tongue in your mouth again. Just reading that sentence while proof reading made me gag a bit.

Spray Paint

Frank Leyland:

Dear  Tom McMato,

After our last rousing discussion topic, I've decided to swing our conversation into a slightly more awesome direction: Spray paint. One of the streets I drive to work every day has a total lack of lines on it. The road is wide enough for two cars, but no one is ever really sure if it should be two lanes or not. Even worse, at one point in the road there is a stop light at  a "T" intersection. My road continues straight and there is a side street (though well traveled) intersecting at the right (see attached image). The problem is that most normal people stay to the left side, even though there isn't any indication that you have to, so that anyone who wants to turn right while our light is red can pull up to the intersection. This is common sense. However, there is always someone who sees the line of cars to the left, goes into the right lane even though they are going straight as well, and them blows by everyone when the light turns green. This angers me to no end. There is an easy solution to this, and that is to sit in the middle of the road so that no one can pass you, however, then you end up feeling like an asshole because you are preventing anyone from turning right no red. It's a catch 22.

So my solution is to go out at night and spray paint lines and arrows on the road, making it clear to everyone what you should be doing. Does this make me a super hero? I'd like to think so. Anything you would like to paint?

James McClure:

I will reply in more detail, but the solution to this is to get in the right hand lane and pass everyone sitting in the left. Use the rules to your advantage. That is what they are there for.

Yes, landscapes and still life in a realistic/impressionistic style.  Come on.  Paint.  This is what you come up with... spray paint.  We have covered one topic and you jump straight to spray paint.  Of all of the worthwhile topics, I can't believe that you jump to this.  List of worst topics that we've covered: 1. Spray paint, 2. Tomatoes and their botanical classification schemes.  Unfortunately, list of best topics that we've covered: 1. Tomatoes and their botanical classification schemes, 2. Spray paint.

  

You have a misunderstanding about the road system.  The point is to get traffic through points in the most efficient way possible; one car can wait where it could otherwise make a right on red to prevent congestion above an intersection.  If the city planners wanted a right turn only lane they could have easily created one.  I imagine that the light cycles are set to avoid excessive waiting on the two way side of the intersection.  Because the two way street is two lanes above and below the light, it is beneficial for traffic to utilize both lanes to proceed straight.  The people making right hand turns can wait with everyone else.  When the majority of traffic moves left in order to facilitate the few cars proceeding right, they back traffic up, possibly to lights further up stream than the one you are at.  Further, not as many cars can pass this point on any one cycle using the left only, leading to more congestion.  If both lanes are used this intersection would be less likely to serve as a funneling point.  You and your over-considerate companions have turned this light into an hour glass with two lanes above and below, but only one passing this point at any time.

Solution: stop trying to save the world, use the right lane, stop causing traffic, let civil engineers plan traffic patterns, and leave the spray paint in your garage

\

Frank Leyland:

This isn't really a topic about spray paint, more a conversation about traffic patterns, which, while falling ahead of Tomatoes on the "best of" List, is still fairly awful. Still, I find it favorable for our future prospects that we can generate lots of words about boring shit.

The basic flaw in your argument is that you assume Pittsburgh has a city planner. This is a city that 'created' a beltway system by putting up signs with colored dots on random roads around this city.

Notice that three of the ‘belts’ don't even connect, making them squiggly lines, not belts.

Further, this city has a single road (and a rather major one at that) that follows this path.

That is correct; you must turn 3 times to stay on this road.

Plus, you missed the part where the road isn't marked as a two lane road. I would be fine with it being two lanes and both can go straight, but then mark it that way and cut out all the confusion. I'm not trying to save the world, I'm just trying to get to 'work' without thinking too much.

p.s.  I don't live with my parents so I don't have a garage

James McClure:

First: we will be editing your P.S. message out of this string.

Second: this isn't a discussion about the poor road planning in Pittsburgh (let’s not regionalize ourselves like that).  This is a conversation about you not appropriately using the right hand lane to your own benefit when you travel to work.

Frank Leyland:

[What’s wrong with my ps?]

[Let's use these guys "[ ]" for non-article side bars]

There ISN’T an actual right hand lane. There is just a one lane road wide enough for two cars. The road needs a line, and I want to put it there because I've been dealing with this bullshit for 5 years. I'm doing the public a service.

Plus, I didn't regionalize this conversation by discussing some of Pittsburgh's finer roads because I provided maps. If I just said "You know how F-ed up Bigelow street is...”, that would be regionalized. The maps makes it very clear to anyone on this or any other planet that I am talking about a city that has a street that is in the shape of a fishing hook.

James McClure:

I'm just suggesting that I wouldn't be that interested in the "crazy" roads of St. Louis.  I'd never get to the maps.

Frank Leyland:

You don't have to go to the maps dude. The map would be a "tit-bit" on the side of the conversation. It would be right there. You would literally HAVE to look at it. Isn't that your idea...

Plus, are you telling you don't find it interesting that there is a road that is 3.6 miles long, but only travels 2.1 miles in linear distance.

James McClure:

all in all, not bad.

Frank Leyland:

[I think you meant to bracket that last comment]

[this still feels like it is missing a concluding statement(s). perhaps we should always either end in total agreement; complete with heaps of glorious praise for each other, or in total disagreement; with several slanderous remarks.]

Tomatoes

James McClure:

So now that I've looked it up I know that tomatoes are not only fruits, but they are also berries (not berries: blackberries, raspberries, strawberries, and mulberries). Vegetables are all of the edible plant parts (fairly self explanatory - the edible vegetative portions of plants). We have that Supreme Court Case that is interesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden . I think that it is fairly obvious that the court was not going to rule against the tax. If it were a fruit tax (vegetables exempt), I can't imagine that the case would have been taken on appeal. If it were it would have probably been two lines: "The tomato is a fruit. It is clearly subject to this properly assessed tax."

In general we have most of the information necessary to put this article together. Maybe we need a rotten tomato video, or a quick salsa or sauce recipe to link/reproduce, but most of the meat is here.

How do we start one of these topics? Do we need to write fictitious messages to start the chain? It won't be very interesting if I blast out 500 words about the entire topic. So, where to now?

Frank Leyland:

Here are the issues I see.

1. I totally agree that brevity within any individual email is key. This should read as a conversation, not dueling diatribes.
2. This issue is kind of dead in the water because we already know the answer. We need topics that either A: doesn't have a definitive answer, or B. have definitive answers that we don't know (this leads to an argument followed by a solution brought to us by "The Google")
3. This particular topic could fit into one of your small running segments titled "Functional Definitions" where we explain differences between calzones and stromboli or fruits and veggies.

James McClure:

This one has a lot of great side info that could float around the primary topic in little side boxes.For example:

Heirloom tomato varieties and histories.

Tomato salsa recipes.

Gazpacho, history and a suggested plating.

berries, and not berries.

best available YouTube video for tomato.

Common tomato pests and diseases.

I'm sure that there are others. I think that this could be the successful format. Center article you and I discussing the classification of tomato as a fruit/vegetable/berry, and the related info to that, with basically "related links" around the perimeter. So that there is a whole bunch of bs factoids floating out there. I think that our arguments are plagued by a lot of that, but if we try to inject that into the meat of the article the point of the article will be lost. (the berry/not berry is a good example of this)

Frank Leyland:

Dude, we cannot possibly have an entire periodical about tomatoes. No one cares that much about tomatoes, not even H.J. Heinz. What is the primary topic anyways? Are tomatoes fruits or veggies? Who cares? They taste like shit unless soaked in vinegar or sugar, smashed, thickened, and placed on top of bread and a ton of melted cheese. We need to discuss real issues like which one of the Olsen twins is the F-ed up one? (seriously, I can't tell them apart), or where does curling rank on the list of best beer drinking sports?

James McClure:

1. I think that both Olsen twins are F-ed up. Why can't they just be hot and have successful careers?Seems like there is a lot of wasted potential there.
2. Heinz cares plenty. I'm pretty sure that they have their own tomato breeding program. Come on, they're whole corporate identity is based on the tomato. They care.
3. I don't see why we can't have a main portion of the article with related subjects surrounding it. Small box tid-bits, not full blown discussions. In fact, the small boxes should only be one person's work.
4. I don't think that curling even makes it into the decathlon at the beer Olympics.
5. Grow your own tomatoes. I never liked raw tomato until I grew my own. Home-grown fresh tomatoes are actually good raw.

Further, even if you don't like them by themselves, you can barely find an american food that doesn't include tomatoes: BBQ sauce, ketchup, all vegetable based soups, pizza/pasta sauce (therefore, all Italian-American food), salsa (therefore, all Mexican-American food), all deli sandwiches, nearly every salad, and a whole bunch of specific dishes - they're in most Mac-and-cheese recipes. If you never eat tomatoes or tomato products, you would be likely to starve in america. Show some respect.

P.S. The idea of a side article about definitions isn't a bad idea. The name "Functional Definitions" is the worst name ever suggested. No one would ever know it was a section about the several varieties of Italian meat and cheese breads.

Frank Leyland:

Forgot to use italics with Heinz. Sorry. I meant to say Not even H.J. Heinz cares about tomatoes.

I'm not saying we can't have 'tid-bit boxes" (great name by the way, did you pick that up from play time at your kindergarten class?), I'm just saying that a box discussing gazpacho is really gay. I guess when you converse with a guy named Jay McGay, you get some really bad ideas. (Editors note: For all past and future bloarticals neither of us are using the word "gay" in a way discriminating against anyones sexual persuasion. We are using it in the "South Park" manner (reference: South Park Season 7 Episode 8 http://www.southparkstudios.com/guide/episodes/s07e08-south-park-is-gay ).

Do you read what I write? I said tomatoes only taste good when mashed, thickened, and sugared (re: BBQ sauce, ketchup, all vegetable based soups, pizza/pasta sauce (therefore, all Italian-American food), salsa (therefore, all Mexican-American food)

James McClure:

I understood that when you said gay, that you didn't mean to offend anyone but me. I think that everyone else is up to speed with this fine Joey Porter type logic http://deadspin.com/#!221529/joey-porter-didnt-mean-to-offend-you-he-just-meant-to-offend-the-fag .

Frank Leyland:

Before you proceed to insult Joey Porter we might want to put this issue to rest...

James McClure:

Some video Links for the “side topics”

Rotting tomato:

I'm afraid that this is who we really are:

By far the best that I've found:

This gem is unrelated, but was found during the search for tomato vids:

Frank Leyland:

Can't get the first video, the second is exactly why we won't be doing a post about tomatoes; the third... what the fucking Fuck?!?

ps. The last one is hilarious.

James McClure:

I think the sexy tomato is perfect for the tomato article: best youtube vid. The one with the kid talking is perfectly critical of our idea.

Frank Leyland:

Wait... are you serious about the tomato article? I thought that us arguing about including a tomato article was the article.

You’re talking about pen names, and tomato growing seasons, and sending videos of a fruit and a vegetable having sex. I can't tell which way is up... this idea is totally fucked.

James McClure:

No, I agree, I thought that we wrapped up the basics, now I'm doing some tid bits. Do you have any suggestions?

Frank Leyland:

These guys rule:

Also, did you know peoples use to think tomatoes were poisonous, until one dude ate a basket full trying to kill himself and didn't die.

James McClure:

See, perfect tid bit.

Frank Leyland:

Much better than gazpacho recipes. I think this one is wrapped up with a bow. Still need a website... And a name

James McClure:

Yes and yes.