It’s a short way of saying, “fellow”, which is an informal term to refer to a male.

“Hey fellas” == “hey guys”.

Still is

The max size of required pants stretch will be the standard size for the right picture, since each leg already wraps half of the tree. That confirms viability at least, so now I think it’s down to comfort, and does the stretch retract in a restful position, or does stay all loose and cumbersome?

I went from the sole IT person at a small/medium business for 9+ years to a new role at a big company with divisions and shit. In my previous position, depending on the day, I fell in every category, but usually chaotic good on good days. Now I’m pretty much neutral to lawful good. I’ll dabble in the neutral evil as I see fit, because PEBCAK and ID10t issues have no bounds.

Holy shit, how much Chinese Kool aid did you drink?

The words on the case are dumb, and OP’s question is valid, but I hate how the question was asked.

You’re not the first person that unnecessarily censors words, you’re just the current one that I’m calling out. Other people do it with “Reddit”, for example. I think it’s just childish and poor communication. I just want people to say what they mean instead of this. Honestly, regardless of your or anyone’s point, if you can’t use your words, I immediate write whatever you have to say off.

You don’t have to like Google or Pixel, but we’re all adults here. Grow up and use your words like an adult. JFC, you’re not advertising for them, you’re asking a question about it.

Google Google Google Pixel Pixel Pixel

See how hard that was? Hell, you can even follow it up with, “Google Pixel phones suck and Google is a terrible company.” Censoring words for no reason is so fucking childish.

You can dress like a wizard, just do it at sponsored events, or with your kids. Don’t barf on the sidewalk, but the wizard stuff is fine, in moderation.

I got a Dakine wide brim hat a few years back, and it’s easily my favorite hate. It doesn’t have the extra neck protection, but it provides the better all around shading than any standard ball cap, it’s comfortable, and I like the chill style that comes with the hat.

I just got a pair a Kali IN8 monitors last Friday. I play music, and have enough equipment to record, and want to, but I have spent hours just listening to music through them. The fidelity is insane, so if I only ever use them for listening to already produced music, they will still have been worth the money.

I’m alright with someone being paid that much, so long as they are taxed incrementally and heavily.

You established right away in your first post that Amy is a chicken. That means she came from a chicken egg, but it wasn’t a chicken’s egg until Amy was a chicken. Until the hatch it was her parent’s egg, whatever species they may have been.

I think we’re saying the same thing, but in my version, Amy was the first chicken hatched from non chicken parents, and laid the first chicken’s egg, birthing Brenda.

In the end, chicken came first, which in turn made the egg, a chicken egg, and coincidentally that chicken’s egg.

You’re right. I just realized that I typed the opposite of what I meant. And then in another comment said what you did thinking I was defending my og opinion. I’m all over the place this morning.

Right and wrong. It was a chicken’s egg when Amy laid it, but it was a chicken egg when Brenda was hatched. So yes, the chicken has to exist for the first chicken’s egg, but the first chicken hatched from a chicken egg, that was not a chicken’s egg.

To clarify, I’m assuming that in this case Amy was the first evolution of the chicken, therefore she laid the first chicken’s egg that was the second chicken egg, bevause her parents weren’t chickens, so what was laid wasn’t a chicken’s egg until Amy hatched. Schrodinger’s egg if you will.

It was Amy’s egg that Brenda inherited, so now it’s Brenda’s egg. So the OG egg was Amy’s.

The former, otherwise it would be “chicken’s egg”.

That is an idea, but it has nothing to do with this post. You’ve taken my criticism of OP and spun it into something completely different. The post isn’t about the safety of the bike lane. It’s about the supposed hypocrisy of closing down the car lane while doing construction work in it. It’s asinine. You can piss and moan about the barriers not being enough, but regardless of the device being installed, closing off that section of the car lane (and bike lane for that matter) is the only prudent thing to do for the safety of those workers.

I get the point. It’s just a shitty point. We can agree that the bike lane is not sufficiently safe, and you claim that those barriers are inadequate, but comparing the safety of bikers in the bike lane vs workers literally working in the car lane, and somehow correlating them shutting down that lane as hypocrisy is a shit argument. Apples and oranges.

This about the dumbest post I’ve seen today. How dare these people exercise safety so that they can install the fucking safety barriers that you want for the bike lanes. Holy shit, take a step back and get a sense of reality.