Neuffy

Waitaminute! You just put Moore on the same level as Coulter? That's just plain wrong. Moore might not get it right (all or some of the time), but at least he isn't xenophobic, racist, sexist, classist, bigoted and hateful. Coulter's opinions are. There's quite a difference between being on different ends of a political spectrum, and the hate emitted by some (on both ends, of course). Other than that though, yeah. I usually end up being equally disgusted by both sides of political arguments. Both sides are crazy. Which is why I personally hate our current electoral system (FPTP) and want a more European-style proportional representation system. Then there would be a much better change of "middle-ground" groups having at least some vote, rather than the partisan polarization that we currently end up with. Which sucks. Oh, and electioneering budgets > $50k suck as well.

On the gun control issue: Yeah, that's the thing. You either have to severely restrict guns, or have enough of them. It's this middle ground that's so dangerous. Personally, my inclination is against guns. But only if we can actually reduce availability sufficiently. Having little "gun-free-zones" doesn't mean a whole lot. Eliminating guns that are designed specifically to kill people (eg. mag size>5 rifles, most handguns) would have made the Virginia Tech incident either not occur, or not occur in the easy-to-arrange-and-highly-effective manner it did, with legally bought guns. But having a gun-free-zone in the middle of a guns-everywhere-legally zone? Without any real measures to prevent the bringing of guns into the gun-free zone (eg. like aircraft security, not that I'm advocating that for universities or schools...). That just seems misguided. Unless, of course, the intent is to prevent the classic "drunk guy with a gun shoots somebody in the heat of the moment" scenario. For that, it may have some merit. In that 5 year old case, IIRC, the guy didn't have ammo left when he was "subdued." If he had intended to continue shooting people, perhaps there would have been a use for the armed students.

Sorry, neglected that. Better? (eg. Are italics sufficient?)

Then, someone said you better not read the Bible in school, the Bible that says "thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal, and love your neighbors as yourself," ....and that the appropriate punishment for women who turn out not to be virgins at the time of their marriage is being stoned to death (Deuteronomy 22:20-1), that those who work on Sunday should be put to death (Exodus 35:2), and, you know, has Leviticus, which is pretty much as intolerantly and evil as it comes. And we said, OK...because using the Bible as a moral guide is truly misguided. ----------------- Dr. Benjamin Spock said we shouldn't spank our children when they misbehaved because their little personalities would be warped and we might damage their self-esteem. And we said, an expert should know what he's talking about so we won't spank them anymore.. (This is wrong how? Children who are spanked have a distinct tendency (statically) to abuse others, and to see the world in a significantly more power-dominated, antagonistic manner.) ------------------ Then someone said teachers and principals better not discipline our children when they misbehave. And the school administrators said no faculty member in this school better touch a student when they misbehave because we don't want any bad publicity, and we surely don't want to be sued. And we accepted their reasoning... Because it really was worse back when schoolchildren were beaten by their teachers. If you think that bringing back corporal punishment to schools will _reduce_ school shootings, you've got another think coming. ------------------ Then some wise school board member said, since boys will be boys and they're going to do it anyway, let's give our sons all the condoms they want, so they can have all the fun they desire, and we won't have to tell their parents they got them at school. And we said, that's another great idea... Because teaching abstinence has worked so well? Because condoms alone increase promiscuity? I'm not sure where this is going...Is this a bibilical morality argument? ------------------ Then some of our top elected officials said it doesn't matter what we do in private as long as we do our jobs. And we said, it doesn't matter what anybody, including the President, does in private as long as we have jobs and the economy is good.... A reference to Clinton, and his mortal sin? ------------------ And someone else took that appreciation a step further and published pictures of nude children and then stepped further still by making them available on the Internet. And we said, everyone's entitled to free speech.... Who has said this? Child pornography is still notably illegal virtually everywhere, and people are charged with it, and jailed, on a regular basis. Actually, IIRC, Texas may soon make child pornography or abuse (can't remember which) a crime worthy of the death penalty. ------------------ And the entertainment industry said, let's make TV shows and movies that promote profanity, violence and illicit sex... And let's record music that encourages rape, drugs, murder, suicide, and satanic themes... And we said, it's just entertainment and it has no adverse effect and nobody takes it seriously anyway, so go right ahead. Wait. Satanic themes? You can't be serious...Illicit sex causes these shootings? Sounds like this would fit in with Westboro Baptist Church's teachings fairly well, wouldn't it? ------------------ Now we're asking ourselves why our children have no conscience, why they don't know right from wrong, and why it doesn't bother them to kill strangers, classmates or even themselves. Truly? Children have no consciences, and don't know right from wrong? Or a small minority don't? There's rather a large difference here. Also, the wording of "even themselves" is indicative of it being worse to kill oneself than to kill strangers or classmakes. Is this being intentionally said? Why? ------------------ Undoubtedly, if we thought about it long and hard enough, we could figure it out. I'm sure it has a great deal to do with... the endemic bullying that takes place in schools along with a failure of mental healthcare, an attitude that belittles those who are either different or unpopular, and easy access to guns. "WE REAP WHAT WE SOW," ...and what we have sown is hatred of the other, indifference ot the suffering of others, and allowed those who want attention through violence to get it. ------------------ Pass it on if you think it has merit! If not then just discard it... but if you discard this thought process, then don't you dare sit back and complain about what bad shape this country is in...especially considering that youth violence has gone down, as has most crime... Not to discard this thought process, but it does seem to make some incorrect, illogical leaps. I hope this wasn't meant seriously.

That's a pretty big "provided"... In my neighbourhood, the primary concern is the sewer backing up. When the river rises (as it is wont to due after heavy rains or mountain snowmelt...it's currently a bit into the trees on either side) our sewers have this wee tendency to ... cause problems.

Actually, on that note: I just finished a philosophy course in which one of the assigned books to read was Robert Whitaker's Mad in America. Fairly interesting look at the history of the treatment of mental illness. Basically, psychoactive drugs are nasty things. Whenever anything happens while somebody is taking them, it is automatically blamed on the condition that the drugs were "treating," meaning that the drugs, by definition, cannot actually cause harm. Realistically, I don't think that antidepressants, antipsychotics, etc should be used to nearly the extent that they are (with the possible exception of lithium), and fully expect the future opinion of this time to be similar to our opinion of medical treatment a hundred years ago. I love how people are blaming the victims. "It's your fault you all died because you weren't brave enough." Really nice. Perhaps that'd work if the guy had had just a knife, but guns change things a bit.

Speaking of squirrels, I just remembered seeing this a while ago:

It's both funny and horrible at the same time. Sorta like accident videos. Unlucky as hell: http://youtube.com/watch?v=VfNTZrYOnYc

Yep. Coilers seem to be known for not folding their noses. Apparently, according to wiser heads, it's due to the long, stiff nose and soft middle. Whatever it is, it's certainly worked for me.

So, I haven't been around much recently (lost this season to school and toenails), but teh intarwebs are useless. Basically, I'd like to replace my old, worn-out round trampoline, and I'm wondering which rectangular competitive trampolines are recommended by members here. I'll be initially using it outdoors, in a yard with plenty of space (so it has to stand up to the elements, eg. not rust), but eventually will likely build an enclosure for it. I know I want something reasonably high-end, but I don't really understand the physics of how trampolines work, and, as I said, google wasn't godly enough (or I'm lacking google-fu). So: 1. Any recommended brands? Specific Models? Vendors in Canada? Particularly if one is involved in gymnastics. 2. Is it correct to say that the advantage of a rectangular trampoline is that you can have a fairly large area, but still have the most central areas within a relatively short distance of the nearest springs? If so, then does this mean that the most important thing is to minimize the width of the trampoline? As far as I have been able to gather, the ideal trampoline can be as long as one wishes, but will not be wider than ten or eleven feet. (And I've seen listings as low as seven feet maximum.) Is this correct? 3. Are there any other factors should should influence the decision? Thanks in advance, Neuffy

Well, kipstar, of course the guy has no sense of fear. (I'm assuming he was a paraplegic.) What's he going to do? Break a leg? Make himself paraplegic? (Please, O Lord, don't let anyone become offended....) In any case, that's an area where technology's helped a hell of a lot

You have jumper's/springer's legs. This is your problem. The ball of muscle on your leg is _very_ high. This means that your calf is quite thin where the boot is in contact. Too thin. Basically, muscle up. A thicker calf will reduce the potential movement and make your boot fit better. [And because someone's going to miss it, I'm being a tad sarcastic. Not entirely, because this would fix it (and may be the root of the problem), but a tad because of the unreasonable nature of this fix.] Personally, I've never gotten shin bang, but my calf muscle extends down almost to my ankle. I have very long muscles. I lean my shins into my boots quite hard, ride varied terrain, etc. Suzukas.

Not to jack, but...a 26 inch inseam? How tall are you? Just because...with my proportions, a 26 inch inseam would make me 4'5". I've got a 36-inch inseam (I'm 6'1", but have somewhat long legs) and am riding flat, with a 17-inch stance. (On a Coiler AM177.) I'm actually on the second-smallest stance width available on this board. Just feels right. And yes, I still can whip the board around and skid it like anything. Perhaps I should increase stance angles with the addition of canting/toe-heel lift...

It's more schadenfreude with a decent dose of natural law than humor, really. Much like the Darwin Awards. Schadenfreude's taking joy in the misery of others. Natural law is how it is appropriate that those who shoot cops get shot. Or how those who drive _way_ too fast wrap their vehicles around telephone poles. Or how rejecting reality results in reality often rejecting you.

On a snowboard, your leg muscles are tensed, which is the mechanism used to drive blood flow upward from your legs. (Your heart doesn't pump blood out of your legs, only into them...valved veins are used in conjunction with muscle contractions to move blood upward to the torso.) A fighter pilot, on the other hand, is not supporting their weight, flexing their legs constantly. They also need higher endurance, as they can't just stop when they have to. I'd think that a G-suit would limit your mobility so much that you wouldn't be able to pull the Gs that you got the suit for...

Well, I was referring my my own, obviously inferior carving. To correct, then, "I cannot fold my Coiler's nose".

Bartron....if you're free, just move West! It appears that we'll have quite a nice season this year. Not to say that there aren't problems with moving, etc. But if you're chasing snow...well, suffice to say that it appears you don't have any. (Which sucks....it means our mountains are going to be busy as hell this winter.)

That Jasey Jay video is...painful. Although, when I've folded a nose (pre-alpine...Coiler can't fold :P) it hasn't been like that. Then again, I've never folded a nose while still on slope. My nose-folding consisted of me moving perpendicular to the fall line, and then having the nose stop. So basically, I did a rotation with my body as the long axis. The last run is evil. Whenever I think "this is my last run" I just don't go. Seriously. If I get to the top, and I think "last run" I just take off my board and take the gondola down. My list of most likely ways to wipe out: (in no particular order) 1. Transition from heelside to toeside - I don't know when this got to be dangerous for me. It just did :( 2. While not carving at high speed. If I'm not in a carve, I don't feel stable. If you're flat-based, a small bump can cause your board to rotate just enough to catch an edge. 3. Side-slipping downhill. Damn that downhill edge! Most painful forms: Hard backward fall, smashing your tailbone (possibly breaking it) and whipping your head into the ground. Hard forward fall, resulting in Scorpioning. (Where your board goes over your head, and into the snow in front of you.) 4. Riding an edge hard, very nice, deep, hard carve. And then....ice. This reminds me...damn, I forgot to stay balanced all weekend! No wonder I fell...In any case, the board loses its edge, and skids out. Hopefully you just slide. 5. Folding the nose: Usually happens in softer snow, particularly upon transition from hard snow to soft snow. As seen in the JJA video, the board starts to carve _way_ harder than it was before. Because it happens so quickly, you don't have time to compensate and lean over further. So...depending on your circumstances, you either get thrown out of the carve like JJA was, or you cartwheel. Injuries: Trees. Damn trees. Also, rocks, drops, jumps, other man-made obstacles. But mainly, other people. Even if you do nothing wrong, there's nothing you can do about the damnfool running into you from behind (at least some of the time).

Yeah, front boot lean killed my front quad this weekend (first day of the season). I realized that night, before my second day thankfully, that the lean mechanism was set to quite a bit more lean than I like. Way better the second day. On a non-canting issue (sorry for the potential jack) it seems that having less forward lean on my front foot _really_ helps my heelsides, and having more forward lean on my front foot _really_ helps my frontsides. I'm screwed. Stance-wise: My first season, I started with the bindings mounted perfectly centered on the inserts. It worked...yes. But it was _way_ better once I narrowed the stance down. I'd personally like to see an assessment of how having your stance set forward or backward on the board affects various aspects of carving. eg. If your tail is washing out, do ????. I honestly do not know if moving my bindings forward or backward will help me pressure the nose. Yes, this is sad. But...still! Perhaps I'll go down to a local hill (really only big enough to do a couple carves and then a single large one at the bottom...) and fiddle with stance/angles.

Yeah, basically that. But that's largely due to exhilaration and hyperventilation in either case, heh. At least, that's what I'm attempting to argue.

The light-headedness and perhaps tingling of the hands and arms (I get this) is more likely due to hyperventilation. I tend to coordinate my breathing with my carving, so the worst form of carving for this (for me at least) is aggressive cross-under. Damn, but I love ending up at the base of the mountain feeling all tingly.

I think we need an accident thread. While I'm hoping this will be mainly non-serious injuries, the community will decide that through action, I'm betting. Well, I was at Lake Louise yesterday, and at Sunshine today. Lots of fresh snow. Beautiful day at Lake Louise. Nice, but a tad chill at Sunshine. Fair number of powder patches at Sunshine, but unfortunately I missed Friday's powder heaven. So...basically, I'm going along smooth semi-groom, doing ~120 degree carves. As I pass a standing skiier, I do a hard backside carve, leaving a decent trench. I quickly cross-through into a very hard frontside carve (elbows could've touched the ground, no problem. Unfortunately, I did not see the patch of powder coming up. At this point, I am going perpendicular to the currently shallow hill. I hit it at full carve, somehow manage to flip, roll backward over my head, onto my board (which is now at 90 degrees relative to motion) and then slam onto my back. Thankfully, this is still inside the powder patch. I now have mild whiplash, and somewhat compressed ribs. I'm just happy I'm lucky. Could've easily gotten way more hurt. On a side note, can anyone explain what happened? I don't understand how my motion went from the long axis of the board ninety degrees so I was moving backward. (Maybe my motion wasn't so far that way yet as I was still in the hard carve?) "It happened so fast..." It seems as though I went from a hard carve to catching my downhill edge? And then my forward motion somehow disappeared? I didn't fold the nose though...no torquing. Just ended up going straight backwards. Perhaps I carved into the powder and then it gave way, leading to me catching the edge somehow? Well, in any case, I look forward to many other crash stories.

I'm almost thinking I might as well just pick up a second board kit. Get a 3, a 6, and the soft e-rings (I've got the med-purples now). On the boots note, I'm in Suzukas. The flexibility of my ankle actually isn't limited by the boot. For the rear foot, at least, it's the ankle. I naturally have quite limited joints (my fingers bend <15 degrees backward) despite stretching. I'm thinking heel lift on the rear foot should help this.

I'll be at Sunshine tomorrow (Banff). 18 cm/last 24 hours 38 cm/last 3 days So while not record...acceptable :D On a last-minute note, it's been a few years since I've been to Sunshine. Any specific area recommendations? (I'm leaving in six hours...)

Threadignore would be awesome.