Con policies: Philcon

[Gary McGath]

Philcon's behavior policy is mostly reasonable, but there's Item 5 of
the Weapons policy, which prohibits "explosives or chemicals of any
kind" in the conference areas.

That implies that not only is nobody allowed in the conference areas,
they'll have to be pumped out to hard vacuum. Even then, in practice, an
occasional hydrogen molecule will violate the policy.

https://philcon.org/policies/

--
Gary McGath http://www.mcgath.com

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <tgcnu9$1hv1v$1...@dont-email.me>,

(Hal Heydt)
Hmmm.... Then there are those of us who carry medically
prescribed nitroglycerin pills... (And--FYI--the TSA doesn't even
blink at them.)

[Gary McGath]

Can a nitroglycerin pill explode?

[Magewolf]

Not normally, but if you had enough of them you could make something that
would. But it would be a lot more trouble than just using household
chemicals.

Which reminds me of a story my mother likes to tell about her finding me
mixing all the chemicals I could find together in the sink when I was
little(sades of my future career). Of course it might just show I had a
death wish as a child since there is also the story of how I used a razor
blade to shave the plastic off a power cord while it was plugged in to
see what would happen.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote in
news:tgcnu9$1hv1v$1...@dont-email.me:

> Philcon's behavior policy is mostly reasonable, but there's Item
> 5 of the Weapons policy, which prohibits "explosives or
> chemicals of any kind" in the conference areas.

"Chemicals of any kind" would include, literally, everything,
everywhere, since even the deepest interstellar void has the
occasional hydrogen atom.

Does explosives include methane gas? Do attendees have to purge their
intestinal tract before attending to ensure there will be no farts?
(Do committee members?)

I suspect they're going with some obscure legal definition of the
terms, or at least believe they are. Of ocurse, if that's so, they
probably should have included that fact in the policy document.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Gary McGath]

On 9/20/22 8:51 PM, Someone Else wrote:
> In Message-ID:<XnsAF18AAA2CDE...@85.12.62.232>,

> Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote in
>> news:tgcnu9$1hv1v$1...@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> Philcon's behavior policy is mostly reasonable, but there's Item
>>> 5 of the Weapons policy, which prohibits "explosives or
>>> chemicals of any kind" in the conference areas.
>>
>> "Chemicals of any kind" would include, literally, everything,
>> everywhere, since even the deepest interstellar void has the
>> occasional hydrogen atom.

> <snip>

>> I suspect they're going with some obscure legal definition of the
>> terms, or at least believe they are. Of ocurse, if that's so, they
>> probably should have included that fact in the policy document.
>

> Since this is in the "weapons" section, I rather expect they're
> "going with" a common-sense definition, rather than some legal
> definition.
>
> I could be wrong. But the Philcon rules are a lot looser than the
> ones Gary generally rails at, so I expect this one is also a loose,
> if badly-worded, rule.

Exactly. But I would have expected people running a con to know that
everything is made of chemicals.

[Scott Dorsey]

Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

>Does explosives include methane gas? Do attendees have to purge their
>intestinal tract before attending to ensure there will be no farts?
>(Do committee members?)

I would support this proposal, especially at Chorizocon.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <tgdc48$1jr1i$1...@dont-email.me>,

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>On 9/20/22 1:03 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <tgcnu9$1hv1v$1...@dont-email.me>,
>> Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>>> Philcon's behavior policy is mostly reasonable, but there's Item 5 of
>>> the Weapons policy, which prohibits "explosives or chemicals of any
>>> kind" in the conference areas.
>>>
>>> That implies that not only is nobody allowed in the conference areas,
>>> they'll have to be pumped out to hard vacuum. Even then, in practice, an
>>> occasional hydrogen molecule will violate the policy.
>>>
>>> https://philcon.org/policies/
>>
>> (Hal Heydt)
>> Hmmm.... Then there are those of us who carry medically
>> prescribed nitroglycerin pills... (And--FYI--the TSA doesn't even
>> blink at them.)
>
>Can a nitroglycerin pill explode?

None of mine ever have. On the other hand, I haven't tried
taking one out and hitting it with a hammer. Though the thought
has crossed my mind to try it...

If it could be made to go off, it wouldn't be much of a bang.
The dosage (per pill) is--going by the label--0.4mg.

It's really one of those "principle of the thing" points. If you
ban "all explosives", you have just banned medically prescribed
nitro tablets. Anyone with a history of a heart condition might
be carrying some. It's where "zero tolerance" becomes stupid.
It also shows why simplistic rules are bad, but good rules
probably aren't going to be simple.

[Ninapenda Jibini]

Someone Else <someon...@example.com.invalid> wrote in
news:2nnkihh9dbqhpisor...@4ax.com:

> In Message-ID:<XnsAF18AAA2CDE...@85.12.62.232>,

> Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

>>Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote in
>>news:tgcnu9$1hv1v$1...@dont-email.me:
>>
>>> Philcon's behavior policy is mostly reasonable, but there's
>>> Item 5 of the Weapons policy, which prohibits "explosives or
>>> chemicals of any kind" in the conference areas.
>>
>>"Chemicals of any kind" would include, literally, everything,
>>everywhere, since even the deepest interstellar void has the
>>occasional hydrogen atom.

> <snip>

>>I suspect they're going with some obscure legal definition of
>>the terms, or at least believe they are. Of ocurse, if that's
>>so, they probably should have included that fact in the policy
>>document.
>

> Since this is in the "weapons" section, I rather expect they're
> "going with" a common-sense definition, rather than some legal
> definition.

If so, they have failed pretty thoroughly.

>
> I could be wrong. But the Philcon rules are a lot looser than
> the ones Gary generally rails at, so I expect this one is also a
> loose, if badly-worded, rule.
>

It's either stupidly comprehensive, or ambiguous enough to be
meaningless.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

[Ninapenda Jibini]

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote in

news:tgdnip$1kmqb$1...@dont-email.me:

You'd think that, yes.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

[Gary McGath]

On 9/20/22 8:58 PM, Gary McGath wrote:

>> Since this is in the "weapons" section, I rather expect they're
>> "going with" a common-sense definition, rather than some legal
>> definition.
>>
>> I could be wrong. But the Philcon rules are a lot looser than the
>> ones Gary generally rails at, so I expect this one is also a loose,
>> if badly-worded, rule.
>
> Exactly. But I would have expected people running a con to know that
> everything is made of chemicals.
>

Now I'm wondering if there even is a "common-sense definition" of
chemical. If you call water dihydrogen monoxide, does that make it a
chemical?

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <tgf9cq$1rfoi$1...@dont-email.me>,

(Hal Heydt)
One rather suspects that the "common sense" definition is
something like a "name I'm not familiar with".

It's rather like "organic food". I've yet to see anyone be able
to point out any INorganic food.

[Kevrob]

NaCl? Other necessary minerals?

--
Kevin R

[Tim Merrigan]

In the produce department the cheaper fruits and veg. are generally
not "organic", though, as you point out, they're also not INorganic
(in either sense of the word, they grew, and they contain carbon).

BTW water (for instance), properly, shouldn't contain any carbon.
--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

[Scott Dorsey]

Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>Can a nitroglycerin pill explode?
>
>None of mine ever have. On the other hand, I haven't tried
>taking one out and hitting it with a hammer. Though the thought
>has crossed my mind to try it...

My ex's brother tried it with his father's heart pills. Also tried
heating them. There's not enough in there to be fun.

[Scott Dorsey]

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>
>Now I'm wondering if there even is a "common-sense definition" of
>chemical. If you call water dihydrogen monoxide, does that make it a
>chemical?

"Do you mean chemicals or reagents?"
-- Mr. Devlin, my 9th grade science teacher

[Scott Dorsey]

Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>

>It's rather like "organic food". I've yet to see anyone be able
>to point out any INorganic food.

Salt.
--scott

[Peter Trei]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 12:26:30 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

1. Salt.
2. The 'iron fish' used to supplement poor diets

pt

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com> wrote in
news:917ae990-2774-4a44...@googlegroups.com:

There's a carb-substitute filler material that is guaranteed to have
zero nutritional value. It is 100% artifical.

--
Terry Austin

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote in

news:tgf9cq$1rfoi$1...@dont-email.me:

During the height of the "Coalition to Ban Dihydrogen Monoxide" meme,
a lawyer friend of mine was present at a local city council meeting
in which they had scheduled a vote to ban this evil chemical. (They
aborted the vote when an assistant explained it to them.)

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
news:rIJEH...@kithrup.com:

Zero tolerance policies are a (bad) response to discriminatory
enforcement. When human judgement is involved, some people will be
*bad* calls. Attempting to remove that element causes far more
problems than it solves.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <917ae990-2774-4a44...@googlegroups.com>,

Making a meal of enough table salt for it to be the principle
ingredient really wouldn't be good for you, so while it can be
classed as a condiment, food would be a real stretch.

[Scott Dorsey]

Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:

Does it cause anal leakage?

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote in
news:tgg2hu$rgm$1...@panix2.panix.com:

The manufacturer says not.

[Gary McGath]

On 9/21/22 6:17 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:

>> There's a carb-substitute filler material that is guaranteed to have
>> zero nutritional value. It is 100% artifical.
>
> Does it cause anal leakage?
> --scott

Back in ancient times a story of mine, "The Unfood," was published in
Analog. Very quick summary: A company offers "Nothing Munchies" as a
diet food. It's tasty but has no nutritional value. The FDA bans it
because rats will starve to death eating it, even preferring it to real
food. The manufacturer re-brands it as rat poison.

Good Omens by Pratchett and Gaiman describes a similar product, called
MEALS, and refers to it as "unfood." I'd like to think one of them had
read my story.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in

news:rIKx6...@kithrup.com:

Unless, of course, one is a salt vampire from M-113.

[Scott Dorsey]

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>On 9/21/22 6:17 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>> There's a carb-substitute filler material that is guaranteed to have
>>> zero nutritional value. It is 100% artifical.
>>
>> Does it cause anal leakage?
>

>Back in ancient times a story of mine, "The Unfood," was published in
>Analog. Very quick summary: A company offers "Nothing Munchies" as a
>diet food. It's tasty but has no nutritional value. The FDA bans it
>because rats will starve to death eating it, even preferring it to real
>food. The manufacturer re-brands it as rat poison.
>
>Good Omens by Pratchett and Gaiman describes a similar product, called
>MEALS, and refers to it as "unfood." I'd like to think one of them had
>read my story.

The problem with fiction that exaggerates reality is that reality is already
so extreme. This sounds VERY close to the story of Olestra, except that
after it was banned, people picketed the FDA demanding to be allowed it.

[Gary McGath]

On 9/21/22 7:43 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> The problem with fiction that exaggerates reality is that reality is already
> so extreme. This sounds VERY close to the story of Olestra, except that
> after it was banned, people picketed the FDA demanding to be allowed it.
> --scott

The Wikipedia article doesn't say that Olestra was ever banned in the
US, though it was in Canada and the EU.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olestra

[Gary McGath]

On 9/21/22 12:08 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> Now I'm wondering if there even is a "common-sense definition" of
>> chemical. If you call water dihydrogen monoxide, does that make it a
>> chemical?
>
> (Hal Heydt)
> One rather suspects that the "common sense" definition is
> something like a "name I'm not familiar with".
>
> It's rather like "organic food". I've yet to see anyone be able
> to point out any INorganic food.

This year, I was in a German hotel where a sign in the bathroom said not
to put any "products" into the toilet except toilet paper. It said the
same in both English and German (Produkte), so it wasn't a translation
error.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote in

news:tghms4$255jq$1...@dont-email.me:

That does appear to be the case. Most of the side effects that
tarnished its reputation are either the result of serious
overconsumption, or just not supported by the evidence.

https://www.delightedcooking.com/what-is-olestra.htm

[Jay E. Morris]

It is fun though to ask where the inorganic bananas are, just to see how
many employees get involved until someone calls you on it. Although the
last couple times I tried they just laughed. They either knew or had
been warned. My best was four.

[Tim Merrigan]

In the pet toy section? No, those are plastic, and as such, organic.

Maybe the Christmas decoration section, those are glass.

[Scott Dorsey]

Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:

>That does appear to be the case. Most of the side effects that
>tarnished its reputation are either the result of serious
>overconsumption, or just not supported by the evidence.

The same can be said of the organic fats that it was intended to replace,
though. But people want a product they can overconsume!

[Kevrob]

On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 3:02:30 PM UTC-4, merri...@gmail.com wrote:
[snip]

> BTW water (for instance), properly, shouldn't contain any carbon.

Mighty fine filtration needed to avoid trace elements, if it
comes from a river or lake. Heck, even ground water will have
some microscopic organisms.

http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/La-Mi/Microbes-in-Groundwater.html

--
Kevin R

[Tim Merrigan]

On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 21:09:14 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com>
wrote:

Not to mention any mineral carbon dissolved in the universal solvent.

[Gary McGath]

On 9/22/22 3:47 PM, Jay E. Morris wrote:
> On 9/21/2022 11:08 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <tgf9cq$1rfoi$1...@dont-email.me>,

>>

>> (Hal Heydt)
>> One rather suspects that the "common sense" definition is
>> something like a "name I'm not familiar with".
>>
>> It's rather like "organic food".  I've yet to see anyone be able
>> to point out any INorganic food.
>
> It is fun though to ask where the inorganic bananas are, just to see how
> many employees get involved until someone calls you on it. Although the
> last couple times I tried they just laughed. They either knew or had
> been warned. My best was four.

In Europe they tend to call them "bio" foods. Same problem. There isn't
much food that isn't make from formerly (or in a few cases, currently)
living things.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <0kcqihlf3ngf5b1l1...@4ax.com>,

Tim Merrigan <tp...@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 21:09:14 -0700 (PDT), Kevrob <kev...@my-deja.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 3:02:30 PM UTC-4, merri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>[snip]
>>
>>
>>> BTW water (for instance), properly, shouldn't contain any carbon.
>>
>>Mighty fine filtration needed to avoid trace elements, if it
>>comes from a river or lake. Heck, even ground water will have
>>some microscopic organisms.
>>
>>http://www.waterencyclopedia.com/La-Mi/Microbes-in-Groundwater.html
>
>Not to mention any mineral carbon dissolved in the universal solvent.

Or simply CO2 absorbed out of the air.

[Ninapenda Jibini]

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote in

news:tgk14k$2gjc5$1...@dont-email.me:

That is what happens when you have a marketing term with no legal
definition.

--
Terry Austin

Proof that Alan Baker is a liar and a fool, and even stupider than
Lynn:
https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/sw-border-migration

[Mike Van Pelt]

In article <tgg2vb$1u0lt$1...@dont-email.me>,

Gary McGath <ga...@REMOVEmcgathREMOVE.com> wrote:
>Back in ancient times a story of mine, "The Unfood," was published in
>Analog. Very quick summary: A company offers "Nothing Munchies" as a
>diet food. It's tasty but has no nutritional value. The FDA bans it
>because rats will starve to death eating it, even preferring it to real
>food. The manufacturer re-brands it as rat poison.

This reminds me of a William F. Buckley column back when cyclamates
were banned because when you surgically implant a pellet of
cyclamate in a rat's bladder, it has an increased risk of cancer.

He suggested they simply re-lable cyclamate as rat poison, so
"... us brave souls can put it in our tea, and those who want
to poison rats can make the bastards die *real* *slow*."

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <540101...@mikevanpelt.com>,

(Hal Heydt)
Hmmm... Getting rid of rats...

There's the method my father described for getting rid of rats on
a ship.

1. Make sure there is NO source of drinking water the rats can get at.
2. Make sure--to the extent possible--that there is no food for
the rats.
3. Place containers of grain at places of your choosing.
4. Wait a couple of days.
5. Put out water in a place easy to clean.

[Keith F. Lynch]

Mike Van Pelt <use...@mikevanpelt.com> wrote:

> This reminds me of a William F. Buckley column back when cyclamates
> were banned because when you surgically implant a pellet of
> cyclamate in a rat's bladder, it has an increased risk of cancer.

> He suggested they simply re-lable cyclamate as rat poison, so
> "... us brave souls can put it in our tea, and those who want to
> poison rats can make the bastards die *real* *slow*."

The most common rat poison, warfarin (aka Coumadin, aka Jantoven),
is also sold, for a much higher price, as a medicine for people with
clotting disorders. It's a vitamin K antagonist, so overdoses are
easily treated with that vitamin. Rats bleed internally, so they get
thirsty and leave the building in search of water and die outside,
rather than dying indoors and stinking up the building.

The downside of its use as a medicine is that the effective dose
depends on what you eat. If you switch to consuming a diet much
higher in vitamin K, your previous daily dose will be ineffective.
If you switch to consuming a diet much lower in vitamin K, your
previous daily dose may kill you.

(No, I've never used it. I'm ridiculously healthy for someone
my age.)
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.

[Paul Dormer]

In article <ti59t1$b3e$1...@reader2.panix.com>, k...@KeithLynch.net (Keith F.

Lynch) wrote:

>
> The most common rat poison, warfarin (aka Coumadin, aka Jantoven),
> is also sold, for a much higher price, as a medicine for people with
> clotting disorders.

My father was on that, I recall. Following my operation last year they
put me instead on Clopidogrel.

[Scott Dorsey]

Paul Dormer <p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:
>
>My father was on that, I recall. Following my operation last year they
>put me instead on Clopidogrel.

Clopidogrel sounds like the name of a centaur in a bad fantasy novel.

[Paul Dormer]

In article <ti6m4g$6qn$1...@panix2.panix.com>, klu...@panix.com (Scott

Dorsey) wrote:

>
> Clopidogrel sounds like the name of a centaur in a bad fantasy novel.
> --scott

Indeed. Other drugs I'm on include Lansoprazole, which is, I think, in
the Canary Islands, and Amiodarone, which I think I've had in an Italian
restaurant.

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk (Paul Dormer) wrote in
news:memo.20221012...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk:

Medications all have technical, scientific names that the
manufacturer don't use because they're difficult or impossible to
trademark. The trade names - the ones they *can* trademark - are, in
many cases, literally generated with random word programs.

--
Terry Austin

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <memo.2022101...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk>,

(Hal Heydt)
OBSSF... David BRin made use of it _Sundiver_.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <ti6m4g$6qn$1...@panix2.panix.com>,

Scott Dorsey <klu...@panix.com> wrote:
>Paul Dormer <p...@pauldormer.cix.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>My father was on that, I recall. Following my operation last year they
>>put me instead on Clopidogrel.
>
>Clopidogrel sounds like the name of a centaur in a bad fantasy novel.

(Hal Heydt)
Or just an equine that writes low grade poetry.

[Joel Polowin]

On 2022-09-21 3:49 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>>Can a nitroglycerin pill explode?
>>
>>None of mine ever have. On the other hand, I haven't tried
>>taking one out and hitting it with a hammer. Though the thought
>>has crossed my mind to try it...
>
> My ex's brother tried it with his father's heart pills. Also tried
> heating them. There's not enough in there to be fun.

I haven't done any research, but I assume that the nitroglycerine is too
dilute for a chain reaction to occur -- decomposing molecules releasing
enough energy to trigger more molecules to decompose.

In the last chemistry lab I worked in, a couple of decades ago now, we
had one refrigerator for the really toxic chemicals, and another for the
ones that were relatively safe. The latter wasn't "spark proof", i.e.
safe to store flammable solvents in. Therefore, by workplace safety
regulations, we weren't allowed to store solutions containing any
non-negligible amount of flammable solvents, even in well-sealed
containers. And therefore, we weren't allowed to chill the bottles of
champagne or other alcoholic beverages that we used to celebrate
successful thesis defenses. If it contained alcohol, it was deemed to
be a fire/explosion hazard.

Joel

[Tim Merrigan]

I would think that the pressurized CO2 would be more likely to make
the Champaign "explosive" than the alcohol in the concentrations it is
in anything not distilled.

--

Qualified immunity = virtual impunity.

Tim Merrigan

[Jibini Kula Tumbili Kujisalimisha]

Tim Merrigan <tp...@ca.rr.com> wrote in
news:gcmmphdjg9m2300lt...@4ax.com:

Safety Nazis are often too dim to deal in anything but absolutes.
Alcohol, in enough concentration, is a fire hazard. The presence of
the qualifier makes it too complicated for the SNs, so they ignore
it.

[Scott Dorsey]

Tim Merrigan <tp...@ca.rr.com> wrote:
>
>I would think that the pressurized CO2 would be more likely to make
>the Champaign "explosive" than the alcohol in the concentrations it is
>in anything not distilled.

Don't mention that or they'll make you fill out paperwork on pressurized
gases and register that Pol Roger as a gas cylinder.