With you too, likewise. Ciao ciao!

Really, it's "ridiculous?" It may not be the correct analysis, but there's easily sufficient material to take it out of "ridiculous" territory.

Typos have actually gotten tougher in some ways with the new autocorrect that was introduced about a year ago!

And thanks for your civil response, too.

I disagree quite a bit.

I think it is almost, though not quite, universally unacceptable to cry at work. If it's useful to you re your being stunned, I offer the following:

So, based on the pics above, red flags include:

Hey now, most of these Jez writers would lose 1/2 their material if they weren't obsessing about small stuff and/or manufacturing worry or outrage.

Schwyzer you are such a loser.

It seems to me like if you're asking people questions that can be easily googled, unless they're something like your secretary, then *you* are probably the one being a cock. My view on this is bolstered by you indicating that you do/might write them up for it in your daily report.

I would say she's more ignoring the smaller context, which Sinixstar offered to us, than she is introducing the larger context.

I'm not sure you're reading Sinixstar's comment accurately.

These are both extremely dumb. Entertainment is a matter of taste, but there are limits; these are objectively dumb. Not cute, certainly not clever ... just lower-my-opinion-of-you dumb.

If it's a "whole package" deal, which I agree it should be, then why are you pointing out one feature, and avoiding the rest of the package below the shoulders?

Yep. It brings to mind a story I read as a child:

Only two women received direct compliments on their looks in this entire live-blog or whatever it is (as of 10:14 p.m. Eastern):

Ha, good point! I forgot about that!

Those are fair points. And I get that you're responding to Ginger. But I want to point out that your points don't justify the post. As you yourself point out, the USPS's purpose is to ensure mail delivery to all. Its purpose is not to be a job program.

"And I swear to god, if he were a woman people would be bringing up PMS left and right when this happened."

Anecdotal evidence rules the roost in Jezebel commenting. Commenters tend to post a personal anecdote, rather than an insight or thought or analysis of the post's content. This happens on Gawker too, but the ratio of personal anecdote comments to analytical comments is far more heavily skewed here on Jezebel. Some…