Doug Swinskey wrote:
discuss....

this is superfluous.  You've stated the obvious.  models who don't model get far less work than the models who do.  it's a natural selection thing... which, by the way, is not a valid scientific theory.

Ian Weintraub wrote:

this is superfluous.  You've stated the obvious.  models who don't model get far less work than the models who do.  it's a natural selection thing... which, by the way, is not a valid scientific theory.

*thinks Ian is thinking too hard*

CrazyIsabelAurora wrote:
*thinks Ian is thinking too hard*

this... from the crazy lady!!

Actually, if you really knew me, you'd know that I'm not capable of thinking very hard.... when i was a child, other kids at school pointed and laughed or yelled things like this at me... "hey moron... eat this.. it's tastes good, you'll like it."

Scaldis wrote:
Then i ruin it for myself!!

or not.

Hmmmmmm.

yeah... no matter how you look at it... you're pretty much f*%ked.

Ian Weintraub wrote:

this... from the crazy lady!!

Actually, if you really knew me, you'd know that I'm not capable of thinking very hard.... when i was a child, other kids at school pointed and laughed or yelled things like this at me... "hey moron... eat this.. it's tastes good, you'll like it."

Ahhhhh!   I remember you...  :p

Ian Weintraub wrote:
this is superfluous.  You've stated the obvious.  models who don't model get far less work than the models who do.  it's a natural selection thing... which, by the way, is not a valid scientific theory.

I suppose you're one of those people who maintains that "I think therefore I am" is merely soloistic redundancy...

It is within the statement's simplicity that the true genius of it can be found.


:::snicker:::

WhiteBears Visions wrote:

Ahhhhh!   I remember you...  :p

Bastard!

Jay Bowman wrote:

I suppose you're one of those people who maintains that "I think therefore I am" is merely soloistic redundancy...

It is within the statement's simplicity that the true genius of it can be found.


:::snicker:::

i'd like to respond but i have to go get this throbbing vein in my forehead looked at immediately!!

Doug Swinskey wrote:
are models that dont model...models?

only you can answer that question... look deep within yourself and you will find the information you seek.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
are models that dont model...models?

Nah, they're just people who sit there and try to look cute...




Wait.  That... that was a trick question, wasn't it?  Like "Is a model a model on his/her off day?" or something?

Doug Swinskey wrote:
are models that dont model...models?

many seem to think they are

spyro2122 wrote:
hmmm I guess If they arent modeling then they arent models.i think that is what im trying to say.

if you had "one" modeling job...does that make you a model?..

if you catch one fish..that doesn't make you a fisherman...or does it?

Doug Swinskey wrote:

if you had "one" modeling job...does that make you a model?..

if you catch one fish..that doesn't make you a fisherman...or does it?

Pose a model and she will earn one modeling fee.  But teach a model to pose and she will model for a lifetime.  OK, maybe that's not a good thing.

William Coleman wrote:

Pose a model and she will earn one modeling fee.  But teach a model to pose and she will model for a lifetime.  OK, maybe that's not a good thing.

oooo good answer....

Ian Weintraub wrote:
god I love lapis...

oooooooooh, funny and irony-istic answer

CrazyIsabelAurora wrote:

many seem to think they are

Hey, i sometimes resemble that remark.........

Scaldis wrote:
Phew.....

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooom!

Scaldis wrote:
And i do love Lapis as well, though i dont really know her at all, she seems sexy and fun and has left me some very very nice comments in the past............

just thought it was funny.

Phew.....

that's ok.. i don't really know her either.. by that, i mean had sex with her... while in the same room...(phone sex doesn't count!!)..  but she seems nice.
and thanks for noticing.. because sometimes i wonder, if a photographer makes a joke in the forums and no one notices, is he really a photographer??

Diana Moffitt wrote:
Apparently just being on model mayhem makes you a model.  Because once you create a profile and smack up some pics you have a ''model'' title.  Gotta love the internet....it makes all dreams come true   LOL

Hey, don't knock it, they let me pretend to be a photographer.

David Moyle wrote:

Hey, don't knock it, they let me pretend to be a photographer.

I'm not knocking it!  MM makes all dreams come true. 

Jay Bowman wrote:
I suppose you're one of those people who maintains that "I think therefore I am" is merely soloistic redundancy...

It is within the statement's simplicity that the true genius of it can be found.

Renee DeCarte was a drunken fart.
I dink, therefore I am.

Doug Swinskey wrote:
if you had "one" modeling job...does that make you a model?..

if you catch one fish..that doesn't make you a fisherman...or does it?

In Zen, the act of fishing makes you a fisherman, no fish need be caught.
Then again asking a Zen Master might get you smacked with a wet mackerel  :p

Ian Weintraub wrote:
superfluous.

Great word.

Nihilus wrote:

Great word.

is it pronounced: su-per-flu-ous or super-fluous??