Yardstick

This is a late one. And a bit of a lazy one. We've spent a bit of time in A&E. Stomach ulcer's fault, don't blame us.

Anyway, here's a conversation we had recently over MSN. It's really quite amusing.

The Drinker says:
Read my blog... I have posted 'last night' (which I intended to do and forgot so have just backdated now) and am writing an entirely different post now.

ILB says:
OK, let's open that up.
Fuck me with a yardstick, that's hot.

The Drinker says:
No, I don't think I will, thanks.

ILB says:
Damn, you mean I bought it for nothing?

The Drinker says:
We can measure EVERYTHING!
But only if it is smaller than a yard, or it would get inaccurate.

ILB says:
We could always put a pencil mark where the stick ends and then replace.

The Drinker says:
That could work.

ILB says:
Possibly wouldn't be accurate to the millimetre, but it depends what we're measuring.
Possibly not wise to use it to measure the length of my wang, because that seems to change.

The Drinker says:
Oh the changes of the wang, like the fluctuations of the moon, remind us of the changes of nature and the world around us, keeping us grounded with the earth and her creatures.

ILB says:
I didn't know you'd been reading Sun Tzu recently.
Interestingly, Aristotle also had a theory about wang sizes. If you take a proposed length as conveyed over the internet, and divide it into thirds, the length of one third is the actual length of the wang in question.

The Drinker says:
How to accurately solve the wang size debate has puzzled both philosophers and mathematicians for centuries.
And of course through time the most desirable wang size has changed.

ILB says:
You could always do your PhD on my wang. Problem is, it's a long course.

The Drinker says:
Sizes of wang: a critical exploration into the effects of wang and wang size on modernist theory and culture.
Or a PRACTICAL exploration would be more fun...

ILB says:
Yes, but that's strictly extracurricular... for now.

Catch you tomorrow, people. With a real post this time.