Regina George McFly

Now Biff, that's never going to happen.

[kata4a]

"what's the snail song?"

"what?"

"the snail song! snamen?"

"...do you mean take me to church by hozier?"

"YES!!"

[quantumofawesome]

Sometimes I long to return to the simpler times in my life 🥲

[kata4a]

I don’t care about your stance on the oxford comma unless you’ve seriously considered all of the following constructions.

I spoke with two women, alice[,] and charlotte. (four women total)

I spoke with two women, alice and charlotte. (two women total)

I spoke with two women, alice, and charlotte. (talking to alice)

I spoke with a woman, alice[,] and charlotte. (three women total)

I spoke with a woman, alice, and charlotte. (two women total)

I spoke with a woman, alice and charlotte. (talking to alice and charlotte)

[kata4a]

“oh I just use whichever is less ambiguous” well then consider the following sentence:

I spoke with his sisters, a pair of studious-looking girls, and Alice

this is ambiguous: did you speak with his sisters, who seem studious? or are the studious girls different people from his sisters?

however, if we take the exact same sentence without that oxford comma,

I spoke with his sisters, a pair of studious-looking girls and Alice

we have a precisely analogous ambiguity: is this three groups of people (sisters, teacher’s pets, alice), or is everyone here one of his sisters (with a weird dis on alice’s studiousness)?

furthermore, while you cannot disambiguate both of these sentences, having a universal rule of either always or never use the oxford comma can disambiguate one of these (depending on which rule you use)

for example, if I know that you, the writer, always use the oxford comma, then I know that the second sentence must be describing the composition of a single group of people (his sisters) - because if you intended to talk about three distinct groups of people you would have written the first sentence

analogous logic can be used to show that the first sentence is unambiguous if the writer is known to never use the oxford comma

[quantumofawesome]

one of the ones that made me want to marry her

[quantumofawesome]

Okay for the record it didn't really make me want to marry her, it made me want to DATE her, but, well, you know, dominos. And now that we're married, re-reading definitely makes me feel like I won by getting her. 😍

[kata4a]

so the thijg is that good parties are really so so good

[kata4a]

kind of amazing how wide the range of experiences im capable of having on, whippets of all things

[quantumofawesome]

hold me purse

[quantumofawesome]

Wait is it supposed to be hold my beer?

[kata4a]

kind of amazing how wide the range of experiences im capable of having on, whippets of all things

[quantumofawesome]

hold me purse

[kata4a]

I don’t care about your stance on the oxford comma unless you’ve seriously considered all of the following constructions.

I spoke with two women, alice[,] and charlotte. (four women total)

I spoke with two women, alice and charlotte. (two women total)

I spoke with two women, alice, and charlotte. (talking to alice)

I spoke with a woman, alice[,] and charlotte. (three women total)

I spoke with a woman, alice, and charlotte. (two women total)

I spoke with a woman, alice and charlotte. (talking to alice and charlotte)

[kata4a]

“oh I just use whichever is less ambiguous” well then consider the following sentence:

I spoke with his sisters, a pair of studious-looking girls, and Alice

this is ambiguous: did you speak with his sisters, who seem studious? or are the studious girls different people from his sisters?

however, if we take the exact same sentence without that oxford comma,

I spoke with his sisters, a pair of studious-looking girls and Alice

we have a precisely analogous ambiguity: is this three groups of people (sisters, teacher’s pets, alice), or is everyone here one of his sisters (with a weird dis on alice’s studiousness)?

furthermore, while you cannot disambiguate both of these sentences, having a universal rule of either always or never use the oxford comma can disambiguate one of these (depending on which rule you use)

for example, if I know that you, the writer, always use the oxford comma, then I know that the second sentence must be describing the composition of a single group of people (his sisters) - because if you intended to talk about three distinct groups of people you would have written the first sentence

analogous logic can be used to show that the first sentence is unambiguous if the writer is known to never use the oxford comma

[quantumofawesome]

one of the ones that made me want to marry her

[quantumofawesome]

THANK YOU SO MUCH NUMA NUMA GUY I HOPE YOU ARE HAVING A GOOD TIME

[kata4a]

"I definitely want to have the experience of eating coffee ice cream from dolcezza if I want ice cream from dolcezza. but I don't know if that experience is available to me"

[quantumofawesome]

me right now :(

[quantumofawesome]

"Chandelier" by Sia is a good sign

[quantumofawesome]

problematic hangover gap relationship

[quantumofawesome]

"you're like a rationalist but pleasant to be around"

[inkandguns]

[gallusrostromegalus]

Me: I wish to spend an extended time rubbing my fingers over some small patch of pleasantly-textured surface. Perhaps the fur of an animal?

The miniaturized apex predator with which I share my home: [vibrates at a soothing frequency to encourage this behavior]

[kata4a]

skittery scuttley taylor anne hebert was blessed with a power one might call unclean

making new friends and then going on errands to arthropopsychically blow off some steam

[kata4a]

whispery rustly given the trees have a name, who let go of their leaves in the snow

surely my kittens who shed in the summer are estideciduous creatures, you know?

[natoraptor]

“Tour Guides”

-2026

[synoddiane]

I’d forgotten how short the first Murderbot novella is.

[quantumofawesome]

Wow I am also consuming this piece of media right now, we must be cosmically linked! 🤯