Just the Answers
Monday, 15 September 2008 17:48![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
A meme that's apparently spreading around the Support community:
You answer a list of questions with the names of your LiveJournal friends that any of these questions apply to. However, you cannot see the questions, only the answers, unless you agree to report this in YOUR journal. Soooo... if you want to see the questions, you have to let me know in comments, then you have to post in your own LiveJournal.
(In the spirit of this meme, I'd appreciate it if only those who intend to post the meme themselves take up the offer of receiving the answers).
I've tried to restrict my answers to mutual friends, not only because non-mutual friends will probably not see this but also because I probably know mutual friends better than non-mutual friends.
Even so, it was still hard to pick, either because I hard a hard time thinking of anyone who fit the question exactly, or because several (or even many or most) of the people on my friends list seemed to fit. I also tried not to use the same name too often, but for some questions, the same name came to my mind first.
1) missysedai
2) fridoline
3) Nobody
4) missysedai
5) cuddled
6) I can't think of anyone
7) kait_the_great
8) muckefuck
9) missysedai
10) aquariumgirl
11) cuddled
12) lt_black_fire
13) zompist
14) jpallan (reinterpreting the question a little) /
ubykhlives
15) uon
16) arthur_sc_king
17) cuddled (and I mean that in the nice way!)
18) wingflutter
19) mendel
20) livredor
21) Nobody, I hope?
22) missysedai (starting with her, let's say, "food" tag)
23) psitticism
24) cuddled
25) afuna
26) No offence intended to anyone I've left out!
I seem to have Maggie and Cassia down there most of all; interesting.
Though even before I thought about the questions individually, I thought Maggie might come up a couple of times, simply because she's on my shortlist of totally awesome people I'm glad I know and wish I knew better.
(Is that drama-inducing? I hope not; it's certainly not meant to be. If everyone were exactly the same measure of awesome, they'd all be average again. Different people can be awesome in different ways. "Not awesome" is not the same as "useless". Your mileage may vary. Take only under the direction of a competent physician. Void where prohibited.)
Also, when thinking of some people, I think of older usernames first (e.g. cuddled, aquariumgirl). Fortunately, LiveJournal auto-redirects the names and displays the current username if you used the old one in an lj user tag, so I took advantage of that fact.
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 16 September 2008 02:57 (UTC)no subject
Date: Tuesday, 16 September 2008 04:37 (UTC)That's not immoral, that's just resourceful :)
Perhaps no answers through Google because they tend to get sent privately (in my case, a comment which was deleted immediately, so I had to use the comment notification email) rather than posted on a web page somewhere.
I'll bet number 23 is something along the lines of "which person from your friends list is such a loser as to be driven absolutely batty over a silly internet meme?"
Or perhaps it's "Which person is most interested in Persian *and* the Sims?"... or "Which person do you think will be emperor of the universe some day?". You'll never know :)
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 16 September 2008 04:38 (UTC)You also have a pretty small friends list, which (I could imagine) might make it harder to pick people for the answers.
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 16 September 2008 15:35 (UTC)Plus, I think my lj friends would mostly be annoyed at being tagged. So I probably should not do the meme. But I will DIE of curiosity. I'm DYING. You are KILLING me < /drama>.
no subject
Date: Tuesday, 16 September 2008 15:44 (UTC)I beseech thee, speak plainly, "give me the questions and I shall post answers to them!" or "give me not the questions, lo, though I do die of curiosity, for I am loath to inflict them upon my nearest and dearest!", that I may understand thee!
no subject
Date: Saturday, 20 September 2008 18:47 (UTC)no subject
Date: Saturday, 20 September 2008 19:23 (UTC)So if you take out 21 22 23 and 28 from her/your version, you'll have my version.
Or match them up like this (top is her/your 30-question version, bottom is my 26-question version):
... 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
... 19 20 00 00 00 21 22 23 24 00 25 26
I've no idea who added (or dropped) the four questions that make the difference between our two versions.
(Does that help? Otherwise email me.)
no subject
Date: Saturday, 27 September 2008 00:35 (UTC)