ShortScale.org

i see. at least in the US, anoraks were worn in the 80s sort of ironically, and the girls wore plastic berets and pennyloafers, and tennis dresses.

adorable.



ive thought of getting some 80s "safety" looking glasses.



fucking love those. made by the same designer as mine, i can only get one pair out of my insurance tho, and unfortunately they are too goddamn expensive to just go out and buy. im still trying to find some decent thrifty ones tho.

*facepalm*

Are you actively trying to ensure you never get laid?

Mike wrote:*facepalm*

Are you actively trying to ensure you never get laid?

that must be why cutting edge designers are coming out with them, mike, to keep men from getting laid.




btw i hate getting laid.

People make stupid shit if people are stupid enough to buy it.

The fact that "Cutting Edge" (WTF does that mean in terms of fashion?) Designers make them doesn't change the fact that you will look a Chonst wearing them. I'm trying to help you from becoming a massive cunt.

ugh. designer glasses.

this piece of plastic isn't worth 200 quid you thieving bastards.

Zaphod wrote:ugh. designer glasses.

this piece of plastic isn't worth 200 quid you thieving bastards.

Something you're going to wear on your face every day for a couple of years? Not beyond the realms of possibility. And I speak as the man who has spent a good few hundred quid on boxes that make different flavours of "BRANGGGG" and "WAAAAAAARGH" noises comes out of his guitar.

They come out of the Amp, Tim, not the Guitar.

benecol wrote:

Zaphod wrote:ugh. designer glasses.

this piece of plastic isn't worth 200 quid you thieving bastards.

Something you're going to wear on your face every day for a couple of years? Not beyond the realms of possibility. And I speak as the man who has spent a good few hundred quid on boxes that make different flavours of "BRANGGGG" and "WAAAAAAARGH" noises comes out of his guitar.

thanks for the support. i agree about the face every day bit. besides, almost nothing you buy is worth the purchase price in materials, so get over it.

anyhow, like i said, my company pays for this shit so i get what i like. it's is a multimillion dollar international corporation that can afford to buy me some pricey frames.





anyway, mike, what do you care?

i complement your shirt in PM and then you turn around and bash my shit publicly? not cool.

i realise that by posting pics of self im putting it out there to ridicule, but jesus, everyone here is trying to keep it friendly but you.

Zaphod wrote:anorak. i think it's more a british term for a certain type of person. these types of glasses:



i used to wear them as a kid, harry potter style round frames too.

Yeah, I had ones like this.. my dad STILL wears 'em.

aen wrote:

AWH BLIMEY, WHAT A GUFFTY

looks like a guy that huffs his own flatulence.

william wrote:anyway, mike, what do you care?

i complement your shirt in PM and then you turn around and bash my shit publicly? not cool.

i realise that by posting pics of self im putting it out there to ridicule, but jesus, everyone here is trying to keep it friendly but you.

What on earth are you talking about? I've never received a fruity PM about my shirt from you? Did you send it and then delete it or something, either way I've never received it (last one I had from you was about that Goslings guy on the 4th)? If you wanna be my girlfriend this is a weird way to go about it.

If you don't want people pointing out how stupid your massive glasses are

1. Don't wear massive stupid glasses

or

2. Don't post pictures of above glasses on public forum

or

3. Man the fuck up.

PM'd. I won't be posting in this thread again.

william wrote:PM'd.

About his shirt again?

Apparently he was referring to a PM he sent me so long ago it's not even in my pm box anymore (it's at least pre-January 23rd - I get a lot of PMs).

Fuck knows why I was supposed to remember that. Either way he needs to WORD HARDER

maybe he has a secret man-crush and he thought it was best to get it off his chest in a pm.

i am the iceybomb resurrection

Please excuse my ignorance, but I've always wondered about this; you know the style of bridge/trem style on the Strat on the bottom picture, is it actually attached or does it rely on the pull of the strings to keep it in place?

it's the US standard bridge from 1988-ish to whenever they reverted to 6 screws on the standards again. Think it's still on the deluxe models aswell..

it's held in place by the strings and springs - the baseplate has two semi-circular knife edges that form the pivot points with the two recessed screws. works well for a strat trem..