As always, we welcome comments from you, loyal readers. But we like the dots, we hope you like the dots, too.
Here is a picture during our deliberations:
Sometimes, after a long time talking about one topic, an other human friend can get tired and fed up. It is a feeling we all have.
Does that really seem fair?
We all work out our frustration in different ways. I commend my roommate, Dexter, for showing this string a thing or two about love.
5 comments:
thank you for inviting feedback. i wasn't sure if i should say something, but i will. i'm a big fan of the dots. but it's the absence of dots that gets to me. the no-dot-zones in this pattern really chap my hide.
Rick James has some stuff to say about the change.
Dear Judge Thompson
Read this post yesterday and found it a very good read. While I tend to agree with most of what you wrote there are few aspects that I do take issue with.
First: Your suggestion that the dots were a warning about the crisis it totally misleading. While there was a limited amount of coverage in the your post about the impending crisis it was by far and away overwhelmed by the cheerleading that your blog engaged in before the crisis. Perhaps the most pathetic example of this was the FOX business channel host glowingly asking (the now discredited) Alan Stanford whether or not it was fun to be a cat owner. This almost total lack of oversight or coverage from the fifth estate made it practically impossible for those that had concerns about the background layout to be heard, let alone taken seriously. Clearly this sort of ambivalence in the blogging world was common place or we would have been hearing warnings much earlier. As such I would add a blogging failure to your list of failures.
Second: I find it interesting that in the early part of your post you point to the prohibition of usury cat rates as a method of forcing cat owners to do proper risk assessments before changing blog backgrounds but you fail to include their reintroduction as one of the possible solutions. My own view is that it is sometimes the government’s job to protect cats from their own stupidity. Just as Food and Drug protects people from snake oil salesmen, you should protect people from predatory cats and there is no better way to do that than a cat rate prohibition. Needless to say the only way this could be done would be through a phased reduction of existing cats at the Sorock household.
Third: You failed to mention anything about the recent changes to other blogs which dramatically strengthen the position of the cats with respect to their defaulting owners. It seems to me that kitty institutions honestly believed that the only reason why people did not pay was because they did not want to pay and the changes in your blog blinded them to the possibility that the overwhelming majority of defaults were because people simply could not play with their cats enough. While I am unsure on whether or not the changes should be rescinded it certainly did play a big part in the story.
Overall I found it to be a very insightful and useful post but it raises one question which I would really like you to respond to. Does your recognition of the old background's failure and the need for better regulation in the cat blogging world change your views on dog matters or do you still think that non-dogs are sufficiently self-correcting?
Best Regards
Rick James
P.s.
Rick James has something else to say.
Fuck yo couch.
You should ducktape all those cats together to make a voltron cat
Finally! I have been waiting for those dots for years. Is it finals already?
Post a Comment