Content-Type: text/shitpost


Subject: Philadelphia street tree streets
Path: you​!your-host​!wintermute​!hardees​!m5​!plovergw​!plover​!shitpost​!mjd
Date: 2018-05-21T19:45:30
Newsgroup: alt.sex.street-trees
Message-ID: <e287459b4fff8935@shitpost.plover.com>
Content-Type: text/shitpost

DEAR PHILADELPHIA CITTY PLANNING COMMISSION:

Philadelphia's east-west streets are famously named for trees, ever since the time the city was planned by William Penn in the 1680s. Chestnut, Walnut, Locust, Spruce, and Pine are major streets. Race Street was formerly named Sassafras, and Arch used to be Mulberry. South Street was formerly Cedar, and in West Philadelphia the street at that position is still Cedar. West Philadelphia also has Osage and Larchwood Avenues.

My previous shitpost depicted a spruce tree, at the intersection of 45th and Pine Street. There are some osage trees near where I live, but none of them is on Osage Avenue. I know where there are some cedar trees, but they're on Spruce. I know where there are some other spruce trees, but they're on Pine. There are a bunch of mulberry trees, but they are all on Ludlow. (There used to be some on 46th but they were cut down.) My courtyard has eight big locust trees, but it is not on Locust Street; it is between Spruce and Pine.

I don't think there are any walnut or chestnut trees at all. Most of the trees around here are London Plane trees and we have no Plane Street and no Sycamore Street.

NOT VERY GOOD PLANNING IS IT NOW? PLEASE DO YOUR JOB AND FIX THIS AT ONCE.

OR SUFFER THE UNSPEAKABLE CONSEQUENCES


Subject: Spruce hats
Path: you​!your-host​!wintermute​!wikipedia​!uunet​!asr33​!kremvax​!hal9000​!plovergw​!shitpost​!mjd
Date: 2018-05-21T19:24:13
Newsgroup: alt.sex.spruce-hats
Message-ID: <46cd74fd56497858@shitpost.plover.com>
Content-Type: text/shitpost

On the corner of 45th and Pine Street is this tree:

Closeup of
branches of a small spruce tree.  The clusters of fresh green needles
have small golden-brown covers on their ends.

The new tufts of needles grow out of the twigs with these little protective hats on them. Once the tufts are all the way out, the hats fall off.

Note that despite the location, this is not a pine, but a spruce. Spruce street is one block over.


Subject: Well okay then!
Path: you​!your-host​!wintermute​!uunet​!asr33​!gormenghast​!extro​!central-scrutinizer​!fpuzhpx​!plovergw​!shitpost​!mjd
Date: 2018-05-21T18:51:48
Newsgroup: misc.gmo
Message-ID: <934a0e0a9b7585a7@shitpost.plover.com>
Content-Type: text/shitpost

So I was out in Cleveland last week looking for breakfast, and there was this place in Public Square that I was about to go into, but it had this on the door:

A glass restaurant door with the
message “A BIG %#*$ OFF TO GMOs / PEOPLE ARE NOT A SCIENCE
EXPERIMENT”

That seemed to me to be clear a signal as any that they wanted someone else's business and not mine, so I took the hint and ate at the anti-vaxxer place down the street.


Subject: Mysterious markings on my Water-Pik
Path: you​!your-host​!walldrug​!prime-radiant​!skordokott​!mechanical-turk​!berserker​!plovergw​!shitpost​!mjd
Date: 2018-05-21T18:47:39
Newsgroup: talk.mjd.water-pik
Message-ID: <c8e66ec10387054a@shitpost.plover.com>
Content-Type: text/shitpost

Here are the volume graduations on the tank of my Water-Pik:

The graduations are in two
columns.  The left column is marked ‘OZ.' and contains the numbers 19,
16, 12, 9, 6; the right column is marked ‘ML.’ and contains the
numbers 600, 500, 400, 300, 200, 100.

Now what is going on here?

I measured the heights of the marks in pixels in the photo:

A smaller part of the same
picture, this time with perfectly horizontal yellow and orange lines
drawn across it at the same heights as the graduations.

OZ.ML.pixels
 600 1094
19  963
 500 838
16  707
 400 590
12  456
 300 335
9  199
 200 86
6  -50

Then I ran linear regressions.

For the milliliters values, the line is $$\text{px} = 2.59\text{ ml } -419$$ with a correlation of 99.9988%. Fair enough.

For the ounces values, the line is $$\text{px} = 76.5\text{ oz } -495$$ with a 99.86% correlation. That slope of !!76.5\frac{\text{px}}{\text{oz}}!! is exactly the same as the !!2.59\frac{\text{px}}{\text{ml}}!! slope in the previous line. If we correct the two suspicious ounce numbers from 16 and 19 to 15 and 18, the correlation goes up to 99.9988% but the slope increases to !!84.5\frac{\text{px}}{\text{oz}}!!.

I guess the next step would be to measure the amounts but


Addendum: That's the point at which I lost interest and broke off mid-sentence. It's now about 24 hours later and I've decided to publish what I have.

Enjoy!