have 3 coworkers that live in the NoLibs area. they all like it. it is kind of separated away from things though.

Whatever happened to that one you posted from craigslist a couple weeks ago?

Got talked out of that area.

Since then I've been trying for Rittenhouse/Grad Hospital area. Lots of bullshit trying to find a place there. Move in dates that keep getting pushed back, rents that aren't what were listed..that sort of stuff. Now I just want a place so that I can get going with my life.

you'll probably overpay a little bit for the size of the apartment, but the location is fantastic. a ton of great restaurants, bars, and clubs in walking distance. if it's convenient to your work, go for it.

Yes, dropping snark out of it, you're unquestionably in one of the two or three best neighborhoods, you have access to a bunch of options, you're far away from certain things but then again, if you lived in grad hospital, you'd want to go out in nolibs from time to time and have to drive so why not do it the other way.

The safety issue is a complete non-factor for a street smart 26ish year old man.

I guess what any apartment does is knock out the opportunity to hit a grand slam with your housing situation where you get the perfect brownstone/walkup that is ridiculously affordable, unique, blah blah blah. So you've kind of capped yourself out at an 8 out of 10 for housing. But you've also raised your floor significantly. The worst thing that happens is that you get a feel for the city, go there a year, have a decent but not great time, and then move out in 12 months for a better situation.

I dunno much about that area but a quick look at Google maps suggests you'd be like a five minute walk from the Market-Frankford Line, which would be like another eight minute ride to center city. So live there with a TransPass for about $80/month and you're pretty much good to go IMO.

Just finished at the rehearsal for my friends wedding and get out to my car to find I have a dead battery. Awesome.

swishnicholson wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:is there a team for when you make an offer that you know will be declined? for fake brownie points or whatever

Counterfeit,maybe. But, you're right, I feel like there must be a better idiomatic term that covers this situation.

i think 'gratuitous' covers this??

bury me wrote:1980's Neil Young is my favorite sometimes. every album is incredibly interesting. 2000's are close

There is nothing interesting about Landing on Water. It's boring dreck.

Everybody's Rockin' is interesting in a trainwreck kind of way. But I have no reason to hear anything from it except "Wonderin'" (a leftover from the early '70s) ever again.

Hawks and Doves is half a good album. Really all over the place.

Trans is a legitimately good album if you can get past the vocoders. Some of the songs are actually among his most emotional.

Old Ways has (mostly) good songs saddled with schlocky production. The International Harvesters were an awesome live unit, though, and their one official live release, A Treasure, is a must.

Life, like Old Ways and Landing on Water, suffers from terrible overproduction. The songwriting is inconsistent but the highs are really good.

This Note's for You is flat except for the title track. The Bluenotes' live shows were a much better representation of what they could do. I hope they get an official live release like the Harvesters did.

Freedom doesn't really count as an '80s album, he was back to just being Neil by that point.

And how DARE you like things other people think are crap!

weird to me that Philadelphians think NoLibs is isolated from the rest of the city

re: NoLibs

It's a happening neighborhood, as mentioned. Jeff is right about the accessibility between G-Ho/Rittenhouse, but it I had to choose I'd probably take living and NoLibs and being far away from Rittenhouse than the other way around. And like mickbayne said, you're around the corner from Front and Girard so the El is in play. Only problem with that is that it stops running at about 12:30 every night so if you're out of the neighborhood late night you're stuck with a long cab ride sometimes.

The safety issue probably warrants mentioning, but I agree that a dude our age should be fine. It's probably safer than it gets credit for, but the incidents that do occur get more attention than they would in Center City imo.

Even with the drawbacks, the proximity to all those great beer bars and shows at Johnny Brenda's and The M Room and The Fire and The Barbary and the free shows in the Piazza, the Phils games on the huge projector screen they have...the biggest concern might be that there's too much going on. If the price is right I'd go for it.

why is this plagiarism? I'm not saying it isn't - he apologized. But why can't you mention the same central point about a book. Assuming he then went on to write different stuff than the New Yorker article...

I mean to some extent, if I want to write about Albert Pujols, and I mention his batting average and someone else mentions his batting average, did we plagiarize each other?

http://news.yahoo.com/zakaria-suspended ... 23178.html

jeff2sf wrote:why is this plagiarism? I'm not saying it isn't - he apologized. But why can't you mention the same central point about a book. Assuming he then went on to write different stuff than the New Yorker article...

I mean to some extent, if I want to write about Albert Pujols, and I mention his batting average and someone else mentions his batting average, did we plagiarize each other?

http://news.yahoo.com/zakaria-suspended ... 23178.html

WAT

jeff2sf wrote:why is this plagiarism? I'm not saying it isn't - he apologized. But why can't you mention the same central point about a book. Assuming he then went on to write different stuff than the New Yorker article...

I mean to some extent, if I want to write about Albert Pujols, and I mention his batting average and someone else mentions his batting average, did we plagiarize each other?

http://news.yahoo.com/zakaria-suspended ... 23178.html

It's plagiarism--basically, the passages are identical except for a few minor changes in wording. Even if you want to quibble and claim they're paraphrases, at the very least, zakaria would need to give the first author credit.

This is very different from mentioning a commonly used "fact" like Pujol's batting average.

U.C.L.A.

right and what I'm trying to understand is the why. She writes a two line sentence that, in essence, says " this book makes a good point about gun control". He makes the same point.

Again, I'm not debating, I'm asking why. Because I just don't see it. If he had said "you know, gun control's been around forever". I could see it because he's taking credit for some author's point. But here he's not taking credit for the idea, he clearly says someone else came up with it. I just don't see the point of saying "I read someone who read someone"

jeff2sf wrote:right and what I'm trying to understand is the why. She writes a two line sentence that, in essence, says " this book makes a good point about gun control". He makes the same point.

Again, I'm not debating, I'm asking why. Because I just don't see it. If he had said "you know, gun control's been around forever". I could see it because he's taking credit for some author's point. But here he's not taking credit for the idea, he clearly says someone else came up with it. I just don't see the point of saying "I read someone who read someone"

The two sentences are virtually identical. And, remember, the article said there were paragraphs--the specific quotation was merely used as an example.

Hope kruker's "job" isn't being a waitress at PYT. If it is, at least you're close.

TenuredVulture wrote:

jeff2sf wrote:right and what I'm trying to understand is the why. She writes a two line sentence that, in essence, says " this book makes a good point about gun control". He makes the same point.

Again, I'm not debating, I'm asking why. Because I just don't see it. If he had said "you know, gun control's been around forever". I could see it because he's taking credit for some author's point. But here he's not taking credit for the idea, he clearly says someone else came up with it. I just don't see the point of saying "I read someone who read someone"

The two sentences are virtually identical. And, remember, the article said there were paragraphs--the specific quotation was merely used as an example.

I just read jeffs link. The author of the yahoo article used a crappy example to show that is was plagerism. Citing someone else's work seems nebulous at best especially the line quoted, if it is indeed plagerism the yahoo ahuthor should have chosen something that wasn't already attributed to someone else to show it.