Gadget

(no subject) (re: Document Player Killing Areas)

Do you have some photos of the taped off areas?

(no subject) (re: Create A Personal Alphabet)

Ditto to what star5 said. It's a cool font, but it's not your own alphabet.

(no subject) (re: Physical Representation Of A Virtual Occurrence)

Cracks me up!

(no subject) (re: Motion Sickness)

Arrr! No pirates to speak of?

(no subject) (re: (Il)legal) +2

I've had quite a few arguments with myself about the "legal channel" portion of this task submission. Here's my reasoning.

If you accept the common belief that defacing US currency is illegal, then my defacement of US currency was, in fact, illegal. On the other hand, a legal channel for defacing US currency is to do it in such a way that the bills are not rendered unusable. Given that the defacement is not readily visible to the naked eye and that I was able to spend the bills, I think it's safe to say that they have not been rendered unusable. As a result, one could conclude that the act of defacement was illegal yet it was performed through a legal channel. The problem is, if I go with this argument, then I start to question whether this defacement is really illegal at all. That's a slippery slope as I start to question if anything can be both illegal and legal at the same time.

My impression is that this task is really about finding creative ways to ride, and sometimes cross, the fine line between what's legal and what isn't. I feel that I accomplished that completely. None-the-less, I value your criticism, waterdragon, so keep it coming if you still disagree.