Skip to main content

The Aftertrack Agreement 

A spiritually void and grotesque post-fatality ritual enacted by two train drivers who, instead of alerting emergency services, descend into a depraved state of edging-fuelled madness known as gorping. The scene begins with one driver stripping off his hi-vis, slathering himself in DAZ1901 axle grease, and whispering locomotive jargon as if invoking a dark rail deity. The recently deceased body — ideally pregnant in the most abominable variants — becomes the gorp vessel. The act involves intimate interaction with trauma sites, huffing bodily vapors, sliding against exposed abdominal tissue, and softly edging in sync with the rhythmic ding of nearby level crossing bells. The ritual peaks when one driver leaps off the station platform directly onto the body, while the second kneels on the ballast below, mouth agape, ready to catch any expelled viscera, fetus, or gore as a sacred communion of the rail. The act concludes with both men locked in a smegma-slick embrace, whispering “she’s ballast now.” Long-term consequences include bans from crib rooms, permanent pelvic tremors, and unshakable spiritual tinnitus.
Tom: "I didn’t want to do it, mate… I just froze. I was still holding the radio."
Dawko: "You saw her, Tom. She jumped for this. It was meant to be. I’ve never gorped that hard in my life."
Father Eric (emerging silently from the shadows and adjusting his collar): "The Aftertrack Agreement... this is not the way of the pill."

North American Free Trade Agreement (nɔ (r)θ əˈmerɪkən fri treɪd əˈɡri mənt) 

Meaning of North American Free Trade Agreement in English:

North American Free Trade Agreement

PROPER NOUN

(also NAFTA)
An agreement which came into effect in January 1994 between the US, Canada, and Mexico to remove barriers to trade between the three countries over a ten-year period.
How to use North American Free Trade Agreement (nɔ (r)θ əˈmerɪkən fri treɪd əˈɡri mənt) in a sentence is still unknown.

North American Free Trade Agreement (nɔ (r)θ əˈmerɪkən fri treɪd əˈɡri mənt)

EULA (End User License Agreement) 

A EULA (End User License Agreement) is a contract a manufacturer makes you sign before they let you buy or lease their product. Products that come with a EULA (pronounced "YOO - lah") are high-tech, big-ticket items: cars, cell phones, appliances, etc. EULAs contain do's & don't's for using a product. Violating the EULA will usually void the warranty.

A EULA is not the same as a TOS (Terms of Service Agreement). A TOS is for a service, not a physical object.

Legally, a EULA gives you permission (gives you a "license") to use the product after you buy it. Presumably, the manufacturer can "revoke" that "permission" at any time, and they will do so by remotely shutting down the product (called "bricking" your product), rendering it inoperable.

The language of a typical EULA includes "hold harmless" clauses to protect the manufacturer from lawsuits. Additionally, you will (usually) be agreeing to let the manufacturer gather personal data about you via the product. This includes your locations, shopping habits, medical information, sexual orientation, etc. A EULA will also usually dictate that you resolve disputes via arbitration (not lawsuits), and stipulate that the arbiter will be hired by the manufacturer (so the arbiter works for the manufacturer, and will do as they say).

EULAs will become more common as modern manufacturers move away from the business model of selling things, and embrace the model of leasing things. That way, "you will own nothing and be happy."
I tries to read the EULA (End User License Agreement) that came with my new cell phone, but it was over 30 pages long, so I just gave up and signed it anyway. I hope that by signing it, I didn't agree to anything too crazy.

straw man arguement 

A locical fallacy in which the arguementative point is made into a caracature of it's original point. Extremely effective because it's not based on facts, but lies and assumptions. The burden of proof then lies in the defense, not the offense. Especially effective when the defense isn't allowed to offer objection. Popularized by right wing talk radio hosts Rush and Hannity.

Step one: Build the straw man. Ignore facts and make outlandish lies/slander. Redefine the facts. "liberals want to take your guns away and turn the U.S. over to the U.N."

Step 2: Knock down the straw man. "That flies in the face of everything we Americans believe in."

Step 3: Connect step 2 to step 1. "Only a communist would think of something like that."

Step 4: "Negate" your opponant by opposing the conclusion in step 3. "I hate those liberal communists. If they think us right-wingers will sit quietly while they destroy the country the're dead wrong."
Rush and Hannity can't argue the facts, so they have to make up the "evil liberal agenda" and then appear patriotic by opposing it.
straw man arguement by spot December 6, 2004