(e:Terry) says he logged 48 hours of work this week; I was there for most of it AND I studied. I'm so sick of this. I slept through most of yesterday - took a little nap that lasted about six hours. At least we went to beer club on Wednesday. Next one is 3/14 - heads up to (e:MrMike) and (e:Uncutsaniflush)! Get your tickets early at Mr. Goodbar. March features stouts.

Did anyone else see this news?

Why a mobile phone ring may make bees buzz off: Insects infuriated by handset signals

Signals from mobile phones could be partly to blame for the mysterious deaths of honeybees, new research shows.
In the first experiment of its kind, a bee expert placed a mobile phone underneath a hive and then carefully monitored the reaction of the workers.
The bees were able to tell when the handsets were making and receiving calls, and responded by making the high pitched squeaks that usually signal the start of swarming.

Read more:

Is this white stuff?

Nisha got scared of the office chickens so Bill protected her.

Happy bamboo-munching elephant :-)


(e:Terry) tried to install the plant hangers but ran into trouble with it.


We got this fabulous whiteboard cabinet from Buffalo Business Interiors but it needs some special attention before it can be hung. I've been using it anyway, sitting on the floor making pictures & lists. It has corkboards on the insides of the doors and hooks for hanging big pads of paper. It's really my dream whiteboard.

I'm reading the info on distinctions between Pennsylvania contract law and common law or Uniform Commercial Code Art. 2 and it includes promissory estoppel, which (e:kookcity2000) thinks is interesting.

Promissory estoppel allows a promisee to enforce a promise against a promisor even when there's no consideration. Consideration is a legal detriment that binds one to a contract. It's usually money for service or product but it could be product for service or something else.

Example: (e:Lilho) promises (e:Paul) that she will give him a year's worth of tortoise food if he stops going out dancing for a month. (e:Paul) thinks this is a good bargain and stops growing dandelions and strawberries for Basra and T2. At the end of the month, (e:Paul) hasn't been dancing but (e:Lilho) laughs and says she wasn't serious. Now Basra and T2 are hungry. Can (e:Paul) sue (e:Lilho) for tortoise food?

Yes! Why?
- Was a contract formed? (e:Lilho) made an offer, (e:Paul) accepted, so yes.
- Was there consideration? (e:Lilho) isn't getting anything for her promise, so no ((e:Paul) not dancing for a month doesn't affect (e:Lilho)'s life although that's what she asked for).
- So why can (e:Paul) sue? Promissory estoppel: Because he relied on (e:Lilho)'s promise by tearing out the dandelion and strawberry garden and an injustice will occur if (e:Lilho)'s promise is not enforced - Basra & T2 would go hungry. Was it reasonably foreseeable (or even just reasonable) that (e:Paul) would rely on the promise? Yes, because (e:Paul) thinks growing tortoise food is a pain.