I Just Looked at My Watch But Don't Know the Time
Just a few minutes ago, I stepped out of the post office and made a left down this west-bound ramp because I had ideas about getting a drink or snack at this nearby bodega. About halfway down the ramp, I decided I probably shouldn't, because I really had enough to eat at lunch and there is plenty of cold water at the water cooler at work. I decided it was better that I go back to work.The only problem is that the office is in the other direction, and would require me to make a one-eighty and retreat back up the ramp in the direction I just came from. So, instinctively, I glanced at my watch for a brief second before quickly spinning around. And I did this for no other reason then to try to run some interference on the stupidity and/or oddness factor that occurs when you walk with purpose in one direction, only to turn on a dime and head back in the other direction for no apparent reason.
Do you follow me? You see, I quickly sized up what options I had, given the props I was carrying, and decided my best option was to make it appear as though I suddenly took note of the time and realized that I must be heading towards a time sensitive appointment elsewhere. Just in case someone was watching, they'd figure out that I was not just walking in circles like a crazy man. Quite the opposite, really. "I've got time sensitive business to attend to!"
But don't we do these kind of things all the time? It's akin to when I go into the public urinals and can't get it flowing (it can be tough to relax in the men's room when there is too much activity), but I still flush the thing. After all, I may have walked away leaving it clean, but they don't know that. They would naturally assume I just urinated. So you have to do the routine...stand there for 20 seconds or so to make it look like you went about your business, and then flush, and wash the hands. And if everyone leaves while I'm washing up, I head back to the urinal to try again.
Flush.
posted by Steve @ 12:53 PM
4 Comments:
Yes, it's also akin to walking down the street, tripping on a protruding piece of cement and, not wanting to look like a total ass, start to jog, as though you always start a nice little trot with an awkward jerking-forward motion.
However, Steve, in an effort to be trigonometrically accurate, I believe you meant to say 180°, not 360°.... unless of course you meant to go in a complete circle.
Wow, 180°. You are correct.
It was a "one-eighty" at that point, as I was turning around.
And, you know that a mistake like that is going to bother me sufficiently enough that I must go back and edit it.
However, once I do so, your comment is going to be referencing something that isn't there. Which also bothers me.
So, we have to explain here: I had originally mistakenly written "360," whereas it should now be "180." Or, "one-eighty," as I wll change it to say. After all, it would bother me to think that someone would read it any other way, such as "one-hundred and eighty." "One-Eighty." That's the expression, right? Indeed.
Thanks, Paul, for keeping an eye out for things.
I'm sorry for making things difficult for you. However, I felt it was my duty to inform you, since it makes me feel smarter and better about myself. In all honesty though, I disagree with your handling of the matter, especially knowing your pension for accurate documentation. As you stated, your correction now made my observation a moot point; had it been my blog, I would have left the original error intact, with a notation next to it stating that you meant One-eighty. But, far be it for me to tell you how to run your blog, since you've been doing it alot longer than I have....
<<< I'm sorry for making things difficult for you. However, I felt it was my duty to inform you, since it makes me feel smarter and better about myself. In all honesty though, I disagree with your handling of the matter, especially knowing your pension for accurate documentation.>>>
True, true. I prefer things documented accurately. However, had I left the original line in the post, it would—to twist your phrase around—made me feel "stupider and worse about myself" to have left it in.
<<< As you stated, your correction now made my observation a moot point; >>>
Well, you know, I compromised and used a solution that wasn't pefrect, but I could live with. After all, there is a certain sense of "acuracy" that involves saying what you meant to say, too, right?
<<< But, far be it for me to tell you how to run your blog, since you've been doing it alot longer than I have.... >>>
Very true. A full day longer. Grovel at my feet, young blogling!
Post a Comment
<< Home