To: ernest@alumni.caltech.edu
Subject: Fashion Police; security agreements
X-Mailer: Juno 1.38
X-Juno-Line-Breaks: 0-1,4-9,11-12,17-18,21-22,24-25,29-34
From: lelandbrown@juno.com (Leland F Brown)
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 01:53:27 EST
Ernie,
Yesterday at work I had occasion to use Microsoft Word. It has something
called a "TipWizard" that gives tutorial hints on the software each time
you run it - usually something like:
>Tip of the Day: To undo the last edit, press CTRL+Z.
But yesterday it told me:
>Tip of the Day: Plaid shirts and striped pants rarely make a positive
fashion statement.
Is Bill Gates trying to tell me how to dress now?! This was especially
annoying since I was wearing a plaid shirt at the time. I thought my
plaid shirt looked pretty good. Do I need to worry about this? Does it
mean plaid shirts *and* striped pants - together - are bad, or each one
separately as well?
On another topic . . . yesterday I also had to sign some re-briefing
forms for a security clearance. One of the statements that I signed said
this:
>I understand that I may be required to sign subsequent agreements to
exist whether or not I am required to sign such subsequent agreements.
Read that sentence again, carefully. Does it make any sense at all?? I
think if you make a serious attempt to interpret it you will see that
it's complete nonsense.
--Leland
"The Word became flesh and blood, and moved into the neighborhood."
(John 1:14a, _The_Message_)