Forgot your password?

Hallowe'en is coming. Trick-or-Treaters who visit ...

Displaying poll results.
Will get some conventional candy treat.
  4115 votes / 34%
Will get an above average candy treat
  1747 votes / 14%
Will get fruit, religious pamphlets or other non-candy
  1248 votes / 10%
Get to see my awesome haunted house (but fun)
  206 votes / 1%
Will get scared out of their wits, at least that's the goal
  1051 votes / 8%
Will probably egg or otherwise vandalize my house.
  3659 votes / 30%
12026 total votes.
[ Voting Booth | Other Polls | Back Home ]
  • Don't complain about lack of options. You've got to pick a few when you do multiple choice. Those are the breaks.
  • Feel free to suggest poll ideas if you're feeling creative. I'd strongly suggest reading the past polls first.
  • This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hallowe'en is coming. Trick-or-Treaters who visit ...

Comments Filter:
  • by klingers48 (968406) on Wednesday October 10, 2012 @11:05PM (#41615747)
    ...Will be told summarily to go away because this is Australia and we're not obligated to follow American traditions they've seen on television. There's always a few every year... [/getofmylawn]
  • by droopus (33472) * on Thursday October 11, 2012 @12:26AM (#41616095)

    As always, I will be distributing beer and fried chicken embryos.

    That is how we celebrate Halloween in France. [wikipedia.org]

  • by AbRASiON (589899) * on Thursday October 11, 2012 @05:31AM (#41617359) Journal

    Completely agreed, fucking tired of kids copying shit they see on US television over here. We don't fucking do trick or treat here.

  • Re:Sanctimony (Score:5, Informative)

    by camperdave (969942) on Thursday October 11, 2012 @09:28AM (#41619107) Journal

    As far as the religous example goes, if you have to proselytize then you don't truly believe.

    Not true. Proselytizing is a command of scripture, so if you're NOT doing it, then you don't truly believe.

  • Re:Sanctimony (Score:4, Informative)

    by geekoid (135745) <dadinportland AT yahoo DOT com> on Thursday October 11, 2012 @09:50AM (#41619339) Homepage Journal

    really? REALLY? are you really that fucking stupid? The first lady wants people to get out side, kids to play more, and for people to grow their own food,. is possible.

    What kind of asshole has a problem with that? I mean, beside you.

  • Re:WTF? (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 11, 2012 @10:59AM (#41620041)

    Seriously?

    It's lumped in with it because they're all examples of things kids don't generally want. We all HATED the houses that give you crap like this. I remember one house used to give out nickles or pennies. Gee thanks.. I can't even BUY a candy bar with that. Promoting your own ideas of what's nutrition or proper halloween behaviour is really against the spirit of the holiday.

  • Re:Sanctimony (Score:3, Informative)

    by camperdave (969942) on Thursday October 11, 2012 @05:17PM (#41624543) Journal

    Michael Grant (a classicist) states that "In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary." in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels by Micjhael Grant 2004 ISBN 1898799881 page 200

    Richard A. Burridge states: "There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more." in Jesus Now and Then by Richard A. Burridge and Graham Gould (Apr 1, 2004) ISBN 0802809774 page 34

    Robert E. Van Voorst Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence Eerdmans Publishing, 2000. ISBN 0-8028-4368-9 page 16 states: "biblical scholars and classical historians regard theories of non-existence of Jesus as effectively refuted"

    James D. G. Dunn "Paul's understanding of the death of Jesus" in Sacrifice and Redemption edited by S. W. Sykes (Dec 3, 2007) Cambridge University Press ISBN 052104460X pages 35-36 states that the theories of non-existence of Jesus are "a thoroughly dead thesis"

    The Gospels and Jesus by Graham Stanton, 1989 ISBN 0192132415 Oxford University Press, page 145 states : "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".

    Not believing, or not even taking the time to look at some writings on the subject, is the easy answer. It is the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and singing the Flintsones theme. Even to a casual historian, something pretty strange happened 2000-ish years ago.

  • Re:Nope. (Score:5, Informative)

    by mosb1000 (710161) <mosb1000@mac.com> on Friday October 12, 2012 @01:31AM (#41627805)

    Sucrose is not a simple sugar (it's a glucose joined with a fructose). Most plants do not contain sucrose. Fruits are high in fructose, while grains are high in glucose. To make high fructose corn syrup, they remove part of the glucose in corn-syrup to get it to a 50/50 mixture so that it will taste more like sucrose, though it does taste a bit sweeter. None of these things are chemically altered in any way when the remove them from their plant based sources and put them into processed foods. However, they remove many other nutrients, as well as fiber, from the plants during this process. That is why processed foods aren't as nutritious. The sugar is the same.

  • Re:WTF? (Score:3, Informative)

    by collet (2632725) on Friday October 12, 2012 @05:06AM (#41628821)

    This a great idea! So great, I shall copy it.

    Kids will have a one in three chance of walking away with Arch.

  • You can see the original editorial faq [solidot.org] page still at solidot.org.

    Slashdot seems to be very U.S.-centric. Do you have any plans to be more international in your scope?

    Slashdot is U.S.-centric. We readily admit this, and really don't see it as a problem. Slashdot is run by Americans, after all, and the vast majority of our readership is in the U.S. We're certainly not opposed to doing more international stories, but we don't have any formal plans for making that happen. All we can really tell you is that if you're outside the U.S. and you have news, submit it, and if it looks interesting, we'll post it.

    Dunno why they removed that particular FAQ entry, because it's still obviously true.

The tree of research must from time to time be refreshed with the blood of bean counters. -- Alan Kay

 



Forgot your password?
Working...