Fort Fun

Hey jerks. I'm producing a video and could use a couple more decent submissions. This is your chance to get off the MWC Board and become INTERNET FAMOUS!!! (You'll also get a $100 walmart giftcard if selected.) Submissions are due today. Lemme know if you have any questions. iPhone videos only, unfortunately. Details below: CASTING CALL: Wal-Mart Disposable Battery Selfie Videos Seeking non-union adults over the age of 18, all genders and ethnicities, to submit selfie videos. We would like to ask you a few questions about batteries. These questions are in reference to everyday disposable batteries – brands like Duracell, Energizer, and Rayovac. There are no right or wrong answers. We just want to know a little bit about your perspective on the battery category! If you are selected, your audition video will be edited into a social media post. **Audition uploads are due by 10pm EST on Sunday 9/23.** Compensation: $100 Wal-Mart gift card for chosen participants. How to audition – it’s as easy as 1-2-3, and should only take 5 minutes! 1. Download the Cinebody app to your phone 2. Create an account and enter activation code AAA 3. Answer the following questions shooting selfie video from the Cinebody app We would like you to film yourself in front of your local Wal-Mart. Make sure when you are filming yourself that you are standing in a place that captures the Wal-Mart storefront logo in the background. This should be a true selfie so your face is nice and prominent next to that Wal-Mart signage. Please answer the following questions, one video at a time, using the Cinebody app. Don’t worry, the app also walks you through the questions and has examples of what we’re looking for! 1. State your Name and that you shop at Wal-Mart. (ex: Hi! I’m Danielle and I’m a Wal-Mart shopper.) 2. What brand of batteries do you usually purchase and why? 3. Are certain batteries worth spending more on than others? a. If so, which ones and why? b. If not, why do you believe this? 4. If you had to choose one thing that was most frustrating about batteries, what would it be? And why? 5. What if a “smart” battery existed and your everyday disposable battery could adapt its energy output based on the need of the device you placed it in? a. What would you think about that? b. How would that address the frustration you mentioned earlier? Again, you will only get a $100 gift card if you are selected. Five submissions will be selected. (maybe more, but most likely five at this point.)

nah, I'm good..

Sexist. And probably racist.

You really going to let yourself get snookered by that old coot? What he does is conflate two arguments (Will the new stadium make money? vs Will CSU make more money with a new stadium as opposed to staying at Hughes?), combines numbers from both arguments and comes up with a ridiculous conclusion to fool people like yourself. The first thing he does is subtract $10 million from the new stadium's revenue figure because CSU would have brought in $10 million in revenue if they stayed at Hughes. (Which is very generous to say the least, $8m or $9m is more accurate.) Subtracting the $10 million makes sense in the second argument, but not the first. So off the bat, the whole thing is disingenuous because he's arguing two different things. Then his bullet points of "new" expenses: $7.8 million in stadium debt service (this number increases to $12.1 million for the next 35 years starting in 2020. This is accurate. $2 million of debt service on projects supporting the stadium's relocation (Plant Environment Research Center relocation, underpasses, parking, etc.) The PERC facilities upgrade was part of the campus master plan, meaning PERC would have been upgraded whether the new stadium was built or not. Did the new stadium push up the timeline a couple years? Probably. But to include it as a stadium expense is a stretch. The underpasses and parking were also part of the campus master plan (they would have been done either way), but got rolled into the $225 million stadium project, meaning they are part of the $7.8 million debt service. The author is double-dipping here by listing them again. $2.4 million of additional operating costs for the new stadium This is accurate. (It's actually $2.3, but whatever) $3.6 million paid to stadium consultant Concert, Sports and Leisure. CSL ran a number of feasibility studies (new stadium and old stadium) in 2012, this was paid for by an "anonymous donor" (Jack Graham, most likely). So the author is including a $3.6 payment of a 2012 study, funded by boosters, as a "new" stadium expense. $3.8 million sinking fund as promised by the university vice president of facilities I'll let the accountants on this board handle this, is a sinking fund considered an expense? I dunno. tl;dr: to make his numbers work, you have to subtract a hypothetical $10 million from revenue and add a bunch of new expenses that aren't actually new or stadium-related. (You also have to ignore that consultants like CSL would have been paid whether we stayed in Hughes or not; PERC, parking garages, and underpasses would have been built whether we stayed in Hughes or not; Hughes had $50 million in deferred maintenance waiting for us if we stayed; any actual improvements to Hughes would be on top of that $50 million; we wouldn't have gotten $20 million to name the field after Sonny Lubick for a second time; it's unknown if Canvas and New Belgium would partner with us at the old facility; and we would still have a shitty stadium out in the middle of +++++ing nowhere that has proven to be a detriment to the football program and the university as a whole.)

Are any other schools doing 2-for-1's any more? I thought at this point everyone was doing 1-for-1's and bodybags. This sets a bad precedent for the rest of us, so I'm going to spin this as a 1-for-1 with a bodybag enhancer.

Damn, I was hoping to see CSU play the Aztecs at Petco. I guess that scenario is pretty much off the table now?

Because you've been fed propaganda your entire life. Just like most things in life, weed is harmless when used in moderation. As an expert on ingesting foreign substances, I'd rank cannabis right next to caffeine.

Four wins, maybe five depending how terrible the MW is. This team isn't very good.

Nice, that's a good one. I guess the crux of the argument is whether you believe the scourge of plastic straws is an issue in and off itself, or if you believe it should be grouped in with the issue plastic waste in general.

Again, another false choice. It is possible for Santa Barbara to ban plastic straws and (possibly) see an improvement in their local environment, regardless of what Beijing does. What if the entire local government operated the way you're suggesting? City Planner has a proposal to improve weekend traffic around State Street, but you know what, +++++ it. As long as there is massive gridlock in Shanghai, what's the point? Meeting adjourned!

Less than 1% isn't 1%. 4% isn't 1%. The guy just pulled 1% out of thin air, sorry if I don't just play along. But if you read my post, I clearly stated that I don't care about the percentage. Try again!

Sooo... not 1%. Good job generic Boise person.

I wish the NCAA would implement the Elam Ending for every game televised on CBS Sports. Might actually see the first 10 minutes of your game for once.

We call this logical fallacy a False Dilemma or Either/Or Fallacy. A straw ban doesn't mean they are or are not "attacking" other forms of plastic waste. I'd like to see where you got that 1% number from, by the way. Even if it's accurate, 500 million straws thrown out by Americans daily is a staggering number. (And I still don't think you understand the fundamental difference between a plastic straw and a Lego in the context of this discussion. But whatever, Boise gonna Boise.)

I voted for Hillary whilst holding my nose and I feel better about it every day. Right now our options for 2020 are four more years of Clown Shoes or a minimum of fours years with whatever yahoo the Dems come up with. If Hillary won, she'd be hamstrung by congress for 4 years and then we'd be looking at 8 years of someone like Kasich or Mitt. We'd be much better off if Hillary won.