A FAQ has been written for the board. It can be found here.. A permanent link can be found near the top of the side column.
Voting on the board name, motto and content-posting schedule is still open. Anyone who has not yet voted or wanted to see how the votes are going can do so here.
We are still receiving offers to provide content on both a regular and irregular basis. We will start to get back to guest authors late in the week.
We appreciate all the help offer by the readers.
The Board Administration Team
(hapax, Kit Whitfield and mmy)
An error I noticed in the FAQ:
Also, maybe this is nitpicky, but doesn't this:
...Kinda make it sound like it was Fred who personally abused the banned people?Posted by: Spalanzani | Mar 16, 2011 at 03:41 PM
Another error:
... making every attempt to keep board readers involved in any issues that
effectaffect the general functioning of the site.Posted by: Raj | Mar 16, 2011 at 03:56 PM
Fred has a new post up at the new site. There's a beautiful anecdote in it that almost made me cry at work.
Posted by: Lunch Meat | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:02 PM
Also:
We aim for posts that carry on Fred's theme of living with integrity in today's fraught political culture ...
Shouldn't that be something like, "today's political culture fraught with [something or other]"?
Posted by: Raj | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:02 PM
Why iz yoo giving the mods a hard time abbout there spilling and grammur.
Kit iz a wrytur and shee do that 4 a living. shee noes how two right and spill good. Yoo needs too leeve her alone. It ain't write.
hapax iz a lieberrian. shee reeds lots of buks so shee noes how to spill and right good also cuz she iz smart.
Yoo iz just beeing meen.
Posted by: Jason | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:05 PM
@Raj
I think that's a usage difference rather than a grammar issue. I'm pretty sure "fraught political culture" is a normal British usage, but not so common in the USA. Certainly after spending a couple years over there I came home using "fraught" independently, without any prepositional clause to describe the fraught-ness.
Posted by: Semperfiona | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:05 PM
Jason: pbbbt
Posted by: MercuryBlue | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:07 PM
"chuncks" should be "chunks".
Posted by: Steve Morrison | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:27 PM
Semperfiona,
The Google-Fu I just performed indicates that you're right: "fraught" can be used as an independent adjective. Hmm - I actually spoke British English for years in Singapore (and read a lot of literature at that time), but never came across that usage.
Guess "frott culchurr" iz kewl wif Ceiling Cat.
Posted by: Raj | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:27 PM
I'm pretty sure "fraught political culture" is a normal British usage, but not so common in the USA.
You don't say 'fraught' on its own in the States? Hm.
If people want to point out typos and so on, go right ahead, it can be edited - though for the sake of manageability, it'd be a kindness if you'd just stick to the mistakes rather than stylistic disagreements :-). Also, if anyone thinks there's an important question that we've missed, let us know.
Posted by: Kit Whitfield | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:30 PM
Sweet. That should get a lot of use, I'm sure.
"While Fred continued with his policy of evangelical liberalism at the new location, it was and is a website that hosts a variety of different viewpoints, some of which were troubling to a number of members who felt that they could not, either for emotional, political, or ethical reasons, continue to participate in Slacktivist once it was hosted by Patheos."
That is a sentence. I have a little bit of trouble following the flow of subjects, though - do you think it might be improved by breaking it up a bit?
"a religious discussion websi[t]e[,] in March 2011"
"In his years of running Slactivist[,] Fred"
I'm also used to thinking of "How do I contribute" in terms of cold hard cash, so you might want to address that one, too.
Posted by: Dav | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:33 PM
Oops. Sorry, Kit - our posts crossed.
Posted by: Dav | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:34 PM
Under "Did Fred create the new policies?", "consensus" is misspelled "consenus".
Posted by: Raj | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:36 PM
o hai, im in yur FAQ, nitpikkenning yur riting.
Posted by: Raj | Mar 16, 2011 at 04:39 PM
The following will probably cause TBAT to flog me with wet commas:
However, for a variety of reasons, he decided move his posts to Patheos, a religious discussion webside in March 2011.
There should be a comma after "website".
Concerned that these people would lose an internet 'home', Fred generously handed administration of the original typepad site
"typepad" should be "TypePad" (it's as significant as the difference between "fred clark" and "Fred Clark").
In his years of running Slactivist Fred only banned two posters
There should be a comma after "Slacktivist". Also, "Slacktivist" is misspelled.
Posted by: Raj | Mar 16, 2011 at 05:12 PM
@Raj
Re: independent fraught
It's a usage that I personally find very useful, so I adopted it. People here sometimes look at me funny but they were doing that already so I don't care much.
Posted by: Semperfiona (Giving a good home to useful bits of language since 19...ah, maybe I won't say) | Mar 16, 2011 at 05:18 PM
Raj: After having been in a room with 10 college professors, three of whom were full professors in the English department and one of whom ran the remedial writing services of the college, all of them arguing for over half and hour over the placement of a comma, I stopped thinking that there are simple rules for when to use them.
TBAT have occasionally had to resort to a vote about the inclusion or exclusion of commas. The British, Canadians and Americans do not use exactly the same rules.
Posted by: Mmy | Mar 16, 2011 at 05:39 PM
Re: independent fraught: I'm a fairly provincial USian, and I've heard it used that way.
Since we're proofreading:
any post with that signiture prior to March 9 2011, either as main as a main post or (very rarely) in the comment treads ,is by Fred Clark.
should be signature
and threads, is
Of course, around here, threads have been known to be re-treads, or a hard old slog, but still.
Mmy: TBAT have occasionally had to resort to a vote about the inclusion or exclusion of commas. The British, Canadians and Americans do not use exactly the same rules.
No doubt you are correct, (But Raj is right, dammit!...Er, that is, I've spent the last week proofreading for someone who doesn't see the necessity of commas at all, or balanced quotation marks, or the difference between a hyphen and a dash...it's a fraught subject.)
Also, yes, some clarification on the function of the Tip Jar would probably be good. That is, is this site paid for by you guys, or Fred, or what, and are contributions helpful?
Speaking of Fred, since he's not here anymore but we'd hate to lose the connection, when you get around to playing with the sidebar some more, maybe "Repeating myself" could be changed to "Classic Slacktivist" or "Essential Slacktivist" or something cleverer of that sort.
There were too many commas in that sentence, but I am suddenly out of time for rewriting.
Posted by: Amaryllis | Mar 16, 2011 at 06:00 PM
Re typing errors: We wanted to get this out quickly and so the last revision didn't get as tight a rereading as usual.
Re commas: Had a student who went on to get a graduate degree in England. She sent everything she wrote to mmyspouse so he could catch the "not British" uses. Then when she later applied to American colleges to do a second graduate degree she had to go over anything she was submitting to re-Americanize it.
And as for "doesn't see the necessity of commas" I have had students who either
a) didn't really see the necessity of paragraphs
and
b) who thought that a sentence could always be improved with the addition of another comma. Or semi-colon. Or colon.
Re tip-jar -- still trying to figure things out. Right now it isn't going to TBAT.
Great idea re the "Classic Slacktivist." I was just looking at the side bar today and wondering what to call them. I like it.
Posted by: Mmy | Mar 16, 2011 at 06:14 PM
Re: fraught (unmodified). This has been a topic of some heat in usage circles. The late William Safire wrote about it probably ten years ago. You can read a language blog post about it here.
New subject: Did we know Patheos hosts an atheist columnist? I don't remember that coming up in our, erm, discussions with Admin there. Just ran across him
Posted by: Pho | Mar 16, 2011 at 06:50 PM
OK, don't know why Typepad just cut off the end of my comment. The Atheist columnist on Patheos is here. They have him hidden away in the "Resources" section.
Posted by: Pho | Mar 16, 2011 at 06:52 PM
Commas are amazing. They are wonderful. Today while I was translating one of Horace's odes I was thinking today that whoever invented the comma should be praised for all time. I rank commas up there with lowercase letters and the letter v as incredible achievements in writing.
Posted by: chris the cynic | Mar 16, 2011 at 07:04 PM
@chris the cynic: whoever invented the comma should be praised for all time. I rank commas up there with lowercase letters and the letter v as incredible achievements in writing.
Many people are quite unaware of the fact there punctuation itself has a history. About once a year I would demonstrate the power of punctuation, lowercase letters and spacing by taking the front page of the New York Times and show what it would look like without punctuation, regularly spacing and upper and lowercase letters.
I would use a story that didn't have easily recognizable words (avoid Afghan or United States or baseball) and see how long it would take people to read it.
Posted by: Mmy | Mar 16, 2011 at 07:11 PM
Isn't there an internet law which says that any post correcting someone else's errors will contain an error of its own?
Therefore, I would humbly like to replace
No doubt you are correct,
with
No doubt you are correct.
which may not be elegant prose style, but at least it stops where I meant it to stop.
---
Mmy: Many people are quite unaware of the fact there punctuation itself has a history.
You know those verses in 1 Corinthians 14 about women keeping silent in church?
34Let women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
I have occasionally run across the theory-- most recently via a link from Patheos, in fact-- that those lines, according to modern usage, should be enclosed in quotation marks.
That is, that Paul was responding to something that had been written to him, and that the next line
36What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
should be interpreted as a first-century "WTF where'd you get that one from?"
I am neither a Greek linguist nor a Biblical scholar, so I have no idea if there's any validity to this-- I've seen dozens of different interpretations of that passage-- but it makes me laugh.
Posted by: Amaryllis | Mar 16, 2011 at 08:46 PM
I use "fraught" just like that.
Posted by: Pecunium | Mar 16, 2011 at 08:53 PM
Mmy: that is a really awesome teaching strategy.
Posted by: alienbooknose | Mar 16, 2011 at 08:55 PM
Jegursilac is back on the new site...
All I know about her is secondhand, but I kind of doubt we'll get along.
Posted by: Jason | Mar 16, 2011 at 09:24 PM
Why iz yoo giving the mods a hard time abbout there spilling and grammur.
Hey, they're just helping out. People miss stuff.
Posted by: Sue W | Mar 16, 2011 at 10:22 PM
@mmy For an added bonus, ROT3 the article. If they can figure it out, congratulations! They've accomplished a feat similar to one of Julius Caesar, who could sight-read Latin, a language without spaces or punctuation, and used ROT3 encryption to communicate secret messages to his generals.
@Amaryllis Among people at the Jesus Seminar, I believe that line is typically attributed to an external source, possibly the same one who wrote 1 Timothy (which is overwhelmingly believed by bible scholars to be a non-Pauline author). The reason being, in other epistles, Paul actually addresses female congregation leaders and doesn't really care, and will even speak approvingly of their work. Of course, this assumes that the Bible is mutable which some people disagree with.
Posted by: Ravanan | Mar 16, 2011 at 11:02 PM
It sounds like fraught is particularly fraught. >.>
Posted by: Deoridhe | Mar 17, 2011 at 05:16 AM
It's good to see Jesurgislac* posting again. I think if you go into things thinking you'll not get along with her, Jason, that might be a self-fulfilling prophecy. But I have seen her post some good things. She does not suffer anti-feminists gladly (there was a particular gentleman or two who used to butt heads with her on the subject), and is rather a 'nuker' sometimes. But I wouldn't write her off.
*whose name, if I recall correctly, was an attempt to translate "I rise from the lake" into French ("Je surgis lac"), and, while acknowledged to be ungrammatical, was a reference to King Arthur--possibly the Monty Python version. Which helps me remember how to spell it, is my point.
Posted by: Nenya | Mar 17, 2011 at 07:17 AM
@Sue W-
Hey, they're just helping out. People miss stuff.
I know. I was just joking around.
Posted by: Jason | Mar 17, 2011 at 08:52 AM
I have definitely the same experience with Jes. I've liked some of her stuff and been frightened of her, as well. I think of her as @MadGastronomer, the Prequel. Or actually, that @MadGastronomer was the Sequel to @Jesurgislac.
Posted by: Thalia | Mar 17, 2011 at 12:05 PM
New (probably The) Slacktiverse post up.
Posted by: The Board Administration Team | Mar 17, 2011 at 12:26 PM
I think of her as @MadGastronomer, the Prequel. Or actually, that @MadGastronomer was the Sequel to @Jesurgislac.
???
!!!
...
***
Posted by: MadGastronomer, who isn't here and isn't saying anything, but really? Seriously? Sequel? Way to make a girl feel special. | Mar 17, 2011 at 02:18 PM
Hey, MadG. Hope you're well. :-)
Posted by: Kit Whitfield | Mar 17, 2011 at 02:29 PM
@MadG: great to see you
Get the REAL MadGastronmer. Accept no substitutes!!
Posted by: Mmy | Mar 17, 2011 at 02:39 PM
*waves to MG* No substitutes indeed.
Posted by: Literata | Mar 17, 2011 at 02:48 PM
*waves* Glad to see signs of your presence, MadGastronomer.
---
Oh...
*stops working on his nearly-completed simulated soy-based MadGastronomer equivalent*
Posted by: Will Wildman | Mar 17, 2011 at 03:24 PM
!!!
♥♥♥
Posted by: interleaper, who totally isn't here either and hopes the restaurant gets better soon | Mar 17, 2011 at 03:47 PM
(Oh, that did not come out right. I mean I hope the restaurant soon recovers from whatever has it closed for repairs.)
Posted by: interleaper | Mar 17, 2011 at 03:49 PM
For my buddy MadGastronomer:
I am SOOOOOO making it to Seattle ASAP. When I got together earlier this year with Nicole LeBoeuf-Little (one of the most awesome Slacktivites EVVVVAH), your name came up when we were talking about all the wonderful people we have been fortunate enough to meet here (right, Niki?).
Posted by: Raj | Mar 17, 2011 at 04:57 PM
MadG is back?!?! *happy dance*
Posted by: Sue W | Mar 17, 2011 at 06:57 PM
Aww, thanks, folks.
I've been lurking, and I'm going to generally stick to lurking for a while. I still need to keep my distance a bit, things had gotten really toxic for me, and there are some really big problems I'm having to deal with IRL right now. It's just better for everyone, myself included, if I stay quiet. I'm around, and if you really want me to weigh in on anything, feel free to ask me, but I'm not going to comment unless addressed, for now.
I wasn't going to say even this little yet, but I could not let being referred to as a sequel go past without comment.
Posted by: MadGastronomer, who feels the love | Mar 17, 2011 at 10:01 PM
MG is back! *squee* Hope the problems get better.
Posted by: MercuryBlue | Mar 17, 2011 at 10:10 PM
{{{MadG}}}, whether she chooses to lurk or dives right in.
Posted by: hapax | Mar 17, 2011 at 10:53 PM
{{{MG}}}
Posted by: P J Evans | Mar 17, 2011 at 11:41 PM
And yet you call yourself a girl...? I should think that if you're running a restaurant, your age is properly SOMEWHERE in "woman" territory...{dons Red Dragon Scale Mail [30, +27] to be on the safe side}
Posted by: Skyknight | Mar 18, 2011 at 12:50 AM
*posts a sign*
PLEASE DO NOT TEASE
OR POKE THE GASTRONOMER.
THANK YOU.
Posted by: MadGastronomer, who is very tired | Mar 18, 2011 at 02:03 AM
{{MG!}}
*stupid Typepad hasn't let me post on this thread for hours*
Posted by: Dav | Mar 18, 2011 at 02:34 AM
MadGastronomer! I thought that was you lurking and occasionally hitting the "Like" button over on the other site. I totally understand about wanting to (mostly) lurk for now, but it makes me happy to think of you being around, in that invisibl cloud of people-who-are-here-even-if-they-don't-post. It is a relief to see that you haven't fallen off the edge of the planet.
Posted by: Nenya | Mar 18, 2011 at 04:18 AM
A question for both genders. Guys, do you think you have to to go all out and spend a ton of money on an engagement ring to please your girl?
Girls, does the amount spent on the ring actually increase how much love you feel for your man?
I dont have a huge amount to spend but the ring I got for my potential wife the other day she said was to small so that hurt and now I don't know what to do. So, what's your thoughts on this?
Posted by: johnck | Mar 18, 2011 at 08:56 PM
@johnck
1: "Small" might be referring to the size of the band, not the jewel. If she's going to have any ring, wedding or otherwise, it should certainly be one that fits her finger.
More importantly, 2: That's quite a lovely spam message you have there. I'm impressed.
Posted by: Brin (not Meir) | Mar 18, 2011 at 09:05 PM
@johnck -- I suspect that it was not the RING that your girlfriend thought was "too small."
I dunno... Should I put on my mod hat and plonk this spam, or do we all want to have fun mocking it some more?
Posted by: hapax | Mar 18, 2011 at 09:23 PM
Hi all. I feel the need to rant a bit. Sorry.
I know we've talked in the past about people who believe hurtful new-agey medical twee.
My father-in-law is such a person. He believes that all physical ailments are outward expressions of unresolved anger issues, and therefore the first, best, and only treatment for any malady is to work out what you're angry about and resolve it.
Well, my father-in-law is in the hospital, because his unresolved anger gave him diabetes. (He doesn't know that I have it. My wife dated a guy with diabetes before me, and so she knows what would happen, and wanted to spare me the hard-sell that he could cure me with new-agey therapy, meditation, and crystals.). They just amputated a toe, and there is disagreement among his doctors whether they should amputate the rest of them, the entire foot, or the entire leg.
Obviously, my wife went up to New Jersey to be with her father. I didn't go, for two reasons:
First, I've had a criplling toothache for the past three days. Yesterday, I saw my dentist, who guessed it was a sinus infection, but couldn't be sure. He gave me antibiotics and pain medication (which didn't work. It made me loopy and deadened every sensation in my body except the pain in my jaw). Last night, I was running a 100.7 fever. Since then, my fever has broken and the pain moved along the path of my sinus so that it no longer hurts my teeth, but is still causing considerable pain in my cheekbone.
Second, my parents' fortieth anniversary is this weekend. My wife and I agreed to throw them a party. I've got guests coming, it's really too late to call things off, and now it's just me, and I'm alternating between just-pain and pain-and-flulike-symptoms.
Posted by: Ross | Mar 18, 2011 at 09:56 PM
{{{{Ross}}}}
Oh, do I hear you with the reflected sinus pain. I once startled my physician by accurately tracing the complete pathways of the trigeminal nerve, simply by knowing where I hurt.
Sympathies on the in-law and the hosting situation. My only suggestions are hot steamy showers, lemon-ginger tea, and an air of barely suppressed martyrdom.
Posted by: hapax | Mar 18, 2011 at 10:05 PM
{{{Ross}}}
Posted by: renniejoy | Mar 19, 2011 at 05:00 PM
Oh Ross, I'm so sorry. What a horrible situation for both your father-in-law and the rest of the family. Hugs from down here in the Diabetes Belt, and I hope you can get some effective help for the sinus/tooth pain REAL SOON.
Posted by: Lila | Mar 19, 2011 at 05:14 PM
hapax: mockity mock. I never got the point of engagement rings anyway, and would hate if my guy spent any significant amount of money on the thing.
Ross: oh ow ow ow. Sympathies all round.
Posted by: MercuryBlue | Mar 19, 2011 at 06:39 PM
@MercuryBlue: I never got the point of engagement rings anyway,
Have you ever had that feeling that you weren't at school the day the notices got sent out? That's how I feel about spending a lot of money on engagement rings. Want to give me something that I will love forever? Buy something that is meaningful to me rather than something that is expensive.
Want to spend a lot of money on me? Put a down payment on a house. Buy me a car. Buy me a computer. Build me a bookcase. Start a stock portfolio for me......
Posted by: Mmy | Mar 19, 2011 at 07:21 PM
(((((((Ross))))))
I had excellent results with ibuprofen when I was recovering from a root canal recently.
Posted by: Raj | Mar 19, 2011 at 07:28 PM
hapax: Should I put on my mod hat and plonk this spam, or do we all want to have fun mocking it some more?
We don't see a funny, mockable spambot too often. I say let it continue to provide mockery fodder.
AWWWWW, johnck went to Jared!
It could only be JAAAAARED!
Wait, what? He didn't go to Jared? Drag him to the village market square, that the good villagers might pelt him with steaming produce drenched in butter!
*villagers roar in the background*
Posted by: Raj | Mar 19, 2011 at 07:46 PM
I like the idea of having an engagement ring. An expensive one, even. But once it gets to a choice between ring and house payments... go with house payments.
Posted by: Deird, who doesn't like diamonds *that* much | Mar 19, 2011 at 09:40 PM
I dislike diamonds exceedingly, especially knowing the blood that is spilled in the trade.
Spouse (then fiance), knowing this, picked me up a pretty little emerald when he was on a dig in Colombia. He'd never have been able to afford it if he hadn't it bought it direct from the miners (or perhaps the smugglers; I never did get that straight)
Neither of us knew that emeralds were supposed to be unlucky, especially as wedding rings. Probably explains why our marriage has been almost a quarter century of misery. :-)
Posted by: hapax | Mar 19, 2011 at 10:39 PM
I never liked engagement rings because hand-jewelry that has sticky-outy parts on it always gets caught on things and then my finger hurts. Not particularly romantic! (Also, the whole "MY man loves me MOAR because MY ring is bigger" just makes my stomach hurt. So utterly vapid.)
I felt this way even when I (thought I) was straight. I'm not against rings as symbols of commitment (though again, not so much with the jewels that stick out part). An engraved band--or rather a pair for the both of us--could be extremely meaningful to me.
And hey, if you want to get me something that a) costs money and b) will make me think of you every time I use it? Get me an iPad! Donate to help_japan and get me a cute anime plushie! Heck, pay my rent for a month. The options are endless.
Posted by: Nenya | Mar 19, 2011 at 10:59 PM
I gave my wife a pearl ring myself. It was particularly nice because it had been my mother's. Her father had given it too her when she was a child as she was the first girl in the family. So it was kind of significant for my wife to become her first girl. I don't know, but we like that the ring has some significance rather than being the standard diamond ring. That and I refuse to get any diamonds from the African trade. All around horribleness there.
Posted by: Albanaeon | Mar 19, 2011 at 11:07 PM
I don't mind the idea of a traditional diamond ring as long as it's not a blood diamond, though I wouldn't mind having another gem on it to add some colour as well. However, the main thing I care about is that I get to help pick the design. I'm afraid of being proposed to by someone I love, him opening up the ring box, and me realizing that the ring is really not something I want to see on my hand for the rest of my life. I would feel horribly, horribly guilty about not liking the ring, and the guilt would ruin the experience of the proposal for me.
Posted by: kisekileia | Mar 19, 2011 at 11:33 PM
A friend got his wife an engagement ring with teeny (but high-quality) emeralds and diamond (in a channel setting: not sticky-outy parts), and her wedding ring was made to be the ring guard for it. They've been married more than 20 years, so I guess it's okay.
My parents had matching plain gold bands for their rings. (Nearly 45 years, and death parted them.)
Posted by: P J Evans | Mar 20, 2011 at 12:06 AM
kisekileia - definitely. If I'm going to be wearing something for the rest of my life, I want to help decide how it's going to look.
(Especially since the one person who ever might possibly propose to me would automatically buy a gold ring, and I'd want a silver-coloured one.)
Posted by: Deird, who is picky | Mar 20, 2011 at 12:15 AM
@kisekileia, Deird: Amen. That does, I suppose, undercut the traditional "surprise!" part of the engagement/proposal thing. But I would honestly rather be proposed to and then go pick out rings together (especially since I would want us both to have a ring--I think I would feel this way even if I were marrying a guy, but as it is I can't imagine me having a ring and my fiancée not having one, especially as she likes sparkly things too).
@PJ Evans: ooh, a channel setting, is that what that's called? I had a coworker, a nurse, who had the most gorgeous wedding ring (combined wedding & engagement, I think; they did not have the money to throw around when they were young things) which was a plain gold band with three teeny little diamond chips set into the band (not sticking out). Because it didn't have pointy bits, she could still wear it when she was working (under medical gloves and such). I have always said since then that that's probably what I want if I get anything with gems in it. It was so pretty! and practical!
Posted by: Nenya | Mar 20, 2011 at 04:56 AM
Hugs to Ross.
I had an engagement ring, but it wasn't crazy expensive. It's a teeny little emerald set inside a 'claw' that was cast from a flower bud. I'd always said that if there was an engagement ring I'd want to choose, so my husband just proposed and we talked about the ring later. I really like the ring we got.
We both have silver wedding rings which cost very little - I think £15 for his and £30 for mine. He got his from a local market stall; he bought it partly with the idea of trying out the size for a few days and seeing if it was comfortable, and then we decided, 'You know what? That's a perfectly okay ring, let's just go with it.' Mine's hammered silver and the pattern's wearing down a bit, though, which saddens me, so I don't wear it much. (Any jewellery experts got any suggestions?)
Posted by: Kit Whitfield | Mar 20, 2011 at 07:21 AM
My engagement ring was my husband's grandmother's engagement ring. It's beautiful and I love it, but I haven't worn it for years because the setting is not secure and we don't have the spare cash to get it restored. (Maybe when the youngest graduates from college....)
Posted by: Lila | Mar 20, 2011 at 09:08 AM
My wonderful friend Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little has Teh Kewlestest Engagement Story Known to Human Civilization. I wish I could remember the thread on which she posted it.
Posted by: Raj | Mar 20, 2011 at 09:26 AM
I dislike diamonds exceedingly, especially knowing the blood that is spilled in the trade.
Artificial diamonds.
However, the main thing I care about is that I get to help pick the design.
Dad bought a cheap sparkly to propose to Mom with, then they picked out her engagement ring and the wedding rings together.
Posted by: MercuryBlue | Mar 20, 2011 at 11:47 AM
I didn't have an engagement ring for my first marriage because ex was going back to grad school. After miserable first marriage, I told hubby to be two I wanted a ring. It's not huge, but I did have in the back of my mind that I wanted to see how much he was willing to please me. We did shop for it together. I love it. Him, too.
Posted by: Coleslaw | Mar 20, 2011 at 01:12 PM
Especially since the one person who ever might possibly propose to me would automatically buy a gold ring, and I'd want a silver-coloured one
Warning: The story following is not for the squeamish
When spouse and I were shopping for wedding rings, he happened to be supporting himself teaching gross anatomy to med students while he was working on his PhD. Since this involved prolonged exposure to highly corrrosive chemicals, we wanted to get a band with the highest gold content possible.
One sales clerk could just not get the notion that 14K would not do. Since I was quite used to spouse's occupation, I didn't think about it before saying, "No, you don't understand, he has his hands in dead bodies all day every day."
Then I saw the clerk very slowly sidling away...
Posted by: hapax | Mar 20, 2011 at 01:33 PM
hapax: "No, you don't understand, he has his hands in dead bodies all day every day."
hapax, here's a difference between us: I would *totally* have said that on purpose.
Posted by: Raj | Mar 20, 2011 at 01:57 PM
@Nenya: Of course you of all people don't want a diamond ring. After all, you are a diamond ring, one which the Dark Lord's hand never touched or sullied. What you need is an Elven-lady to wear you!
Posted by: Steve Morrison | Mar 20, 2011 at 06:38 PM
My wonderful friend Nicole J. LeBoeuf-Little has Teh Kewlestest Engagement Story Known to Human Civilization. I wish I could remember the thread on which she posted it.
I remember that it was awesome. I don't remember what it was! I hope she'll post it again.
Posted by: Rebecca | Mar 21, 2011 at 04:24 AM
The idea has alternative. A little mystery novel!!
Posted by: Nike Shox | May 18, 2011 at 03:54 AM
The idea has alternative. A little mystery novel!!
Posted by: Nike Shox | May 18, 2011 at 04:00 AM
The idea has alternative. A little mystery novel!!
Posted by: Nike Shox | May 18, 2011 at 04:11 AM
PLEASE DO NOT TEASE
OR POKE THE GASTRONOMER.
THANK YOU.
Do not taunt Happy Mad Gastronomer.
Posted by: Raj | Jun 21, 2011 at 07:52 PM
As for NikeShox, **** off, spambot, and have a nice day :)
Posted by: Raj | Jun 21, 2011 at 07:55 PM