"Wow, I've never seen student housing with closets you can actually fit things in!" -Hillary, Condos of Narnia, Divine Comedy March 2006

Hey you! We've got some big news! For the full rundown, check out Board Question #90641, but the short version is that we're changing our URL! As of Monday, November 13th, the 100 Hour Board you know and love will now be found at 100hourboard.org. Be sure to update your bookmarks so you don't miss a thing!

Question #90971 posted on 02/20/2018 1:06 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Do most people wash their genitals and butt with the same shower poof, washcloth, etc. that they use for the rest of their body? Isn't that unsanitary?? Wouldn't it make more sense to have a separate washcloth and then wash your hands afterwards? Please explain people's way of thinking to me.

Thanks,
guitar

A:

Dear Guitar,

I don't know, do they??? The amount of time I spend thinking about how other people wash their genitals/butt is pretty much zero, so I really can't explain to you "people's thinking" when it comes to this. But you know what, so far, not knowing hasn't had any sort of negative effect on my life whatsoever. If it grosses you out, don't do it, but spending time and energy worrying about what other people may or may not do with regards to their own personal hygiene doesn't seem very productive to me. If you're really worried about it, just don't walk around touching other people's faces.

-Alta


0 Corrections
Question #90926 posted on 02/20/2018 1:01 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Why are togas and loincloths socially unacceptable attire? They're definitely more comfortable than pants.

-Greek Life

A:

Dear Greek,

The short answer is because this isn't Ancient Greece or Rome. The long answer has to do with changing social norms, underlying culture, prevailing attitudes about fashion and modesty, and availability of resources, but I'm not enough of a sociologist, psychologist, or economist to really give a full explanation of why all of those things changed. You may just have to content yourself with knowing that because we live in neither Ancient Greece nor Ancient Rome, the way we live our lives is quite different from the way they lived their lives in a lot of ways. And if that means we don't get the comfort of togas, at least it also means our society doesn't encourage slavery as the spoils of war, and I'm pretty okay with that.

-Alta

A:

Dear Greco,

Anciently togas were only to be worn by Roman citizens, and foreigners and slaves were forbidden from wearing them1. Are you a Roman citizen? If you aren't a land owning Roman citizen then not only is it it socially unacceptable, but illegal under ancient Roman law.

While togas are strictly off limits, there are still places that wear loincloths. I was hesitant to do too much Google searching for reasons that should be obvious, so I didn't find anywhere specific for you. Wikipedia did say that there are native tribes in the Amazon Rain forest that still wear loincloths. So if you really want to wear a loincloth all you have to do is find a place where it is socially acceptable. As you may have noticed, the USA is not one of those places.

Peace,

Tipperary

A:

Dear GL,

Togas and loincloths are only socially unacceptable because not enough people wear them. If they're as comfortable as you say they are, you should have no trouble finding a band of people to wear togas and loincloths, convert a celebrity to your cause, get a photo shoot, convince all of America that they should be wearing them as well, and make America the new Ancient Greece!

-guppy of doom

A:

Dear Grecian,

Are you telling me this is why I get so many strange looks when I go out in public?

~Anathema, needing to seriously rethink her wardrobe


0 Corrections
Question #90783 posted on 02/20/2018 1:01 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

On the TV show Futurama Nixon's head in a jar is the leader of the country (planet?) and he/it lives in the White House with the headless body of Spiro Agnew.

So in the episode in which we see that Fry has a second job as a security guard at the head museum, where all the US Presidents' heads sit, in any of the shots showing all the presidents, is Nixon there, or a conspicuous empty space where he should be?

-comicon panel nerds want to know

A:

Dear Comicon,

Nothing gets me going like an excuse to watch an episode of Futurama, so I was really excited when I saw this question. A quick google search showed me that the episode in question is called "All the President's Heads," and it's in season 6, episode 20 (Wikipedia says it's episode 23, but IMDB says it's episode 20, and I trust IMDB more for this). Unfortunately, Futurama is no longer on Netflix, Hulu only has up to episode 16 of season 6, and Amazon Prime makes you pay to watch Futurama. I wasn't even able to find it on Youtube. I kept waiting to see if it would come back on any of those sites, but alas, 'twas to no avail.

However, I wasn't about to give up that easily, not when Futurama is on the line. I can tell you that the Wikipedia page for that episode doesn't list Richard Nixon as one of the cultural references along with all the other presidents in the hall, and Billy West, the actor who voiced Nixon, did not voice Nixon in that episode. In light of that information, my guess is either that there's a conspicuous absence on the shelf where Nixon's head used to be, or that they just filled in that area with other heads. Sorry I couldn't give you a more definitive answer. I tried, I really did. 

One thing I did learn while researching this answer, though, is that Billy West voiced a ton of the characters on the show, including but not limited to: Fry, Professor Farnsworth, Zapp Brannigan, Dr. Zoidberg, and Richard Nixon. I just want to take a minute and point out that all those characters have very different voices, and I'm very impressed that Billy West did them all. What a guy!

-Alta


0 Corrections
Monday, February 19, 2018
Question #90970 posted on 02/19/2018 10:48 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Isn't this fun?!
Isn't this what life's all about?!
Isn't this a dream come true?!
Isn't this a nightmare toooooo?

-Oingo Boingo

A:

Dear O,

The Board is fun and all that, but no, it is not actually the purpose of all life.

-apathetic


0 Corrections
Question #90961 posted on 02/19/2018 4:36 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

As I was walking to the Testing Center, I noticed that between the Brimhall building and the JSB there is a tree by the bike racks. The tree in question has a metal wire that was attached to one of the branches at one end, and was dangling a sawed off branch on the other end.

Any ideas for the purpose of this coniferous conundrum?

-Trying to Look Up More

A:

Dear Up,

For those who are unaware of this mysterious branch I venture yonder to the land between the Brimhall and JSB to provide some photographic evidence.

9E11184F-8D6C-4715-B94A-61AAE76128B6.jpeg

(Sorry it's sideways, formatting pictures on the board is hard sometimes)

A peculiar piece of plantage indeed. My theory is that the wire was attached to a branch to provide additional support and to prevent it from crashing down upon students in the event of the branch breaking. I think that the branch broke, and grounds crew found it would be a lot more convenient and nicer to the tree to just saw off the excess branch rather than yank the wire out from the trunk. Thus we are left with a miniature hanging log. Anyways, that's just my guess. If anyone knows the actual reasons for this feel free to drop a correction.

Peace,

Tipperary


0 Corrections
Question #90908 posted on 02/19/2018 3:24 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

At one point there was a regular event at BYU where people met just to play orchestral music. Everyone would practice on their own and then meet up so that they could all have the chance to play a famous piece. Is this group still a thing?

Thanks,

music

A:

Dear music,

Sorry to tell ya, but none of my friends who do orchestra stuff at BYU know anything about this, or anything like it. I doubt it's still a thing if they don't know about it, and I have no idea how to investigate further. Good luck!!

Keep it real,
Sherpa Dave


0 Corrections
Question #90959 posted on 02/19/2018 3:24 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Okay I know you're not lawyers but

I'm a freelance artist and I bought a taxidermy crow for kicks and it cost a pretty penny but then I realized I can use it as an anatomy reference (I draw a lot of birds, dead and otherwise), AND IF I DO, can I write the cost of the crow off my taxes as a business expense??

- Crow Mom

A:

Dear denizen of brownie hell,

So, knowing who you are, I'd like draw everyone's attention to the fact that YOU SPENT ENOUGH MONEY ON A TAXIDERMY CROW TO CONSIDER USING IT AS A TAX WRITE-OFF. Which is a decision in and of itself. 

I went for the easy way out but, surprisingly, taxidermy crow/any variant of birds (dead or alive) did not come up on any list of things you can write off on your taxes, even on Entrepreneur's "75 Items You May Be Able To Deduct From Your Taxes". I guess you're just gonna have to decide this one on your own with your brain powers.

Keep it real,
Sherpa Dave


0 Corrections
Question #90905 posted on 02/19/2018 3:24 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

When, "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" issues a statement, for example, this, is that the First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve? An intern in the Mormon Newsroom?


-DACADACADACA

A:

Dear DACA,

Although I doubt that the First Presidency writes these statements, I imagine that someone higher up than an intern is penning them. However, I'm 90% sure that the First Presidency reads them before they are released.

But who knows? Maybe President Nelson paces around his office, dictating these statements to an intern that's furiously scribbling down notes and then they go type it up. So both, maybe?

-Mitty

A:

Dear DACA,

Here's what I would say. If it's signed by the First Presidency it's almost certainly written by them, or at least primarily written by them. If it isn't signed by anyone, as is the case with the DACA statement, it's most certainly just written by a writer for the Mormon Newsroom.

Keep it real,
Sherpa Dave


0 Corrections
Question #90963 posted on 02/19/2018 10:18 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

At what point in a relationship/friendship/getting-to-know-you-stage would you use the heart eyes emoji with some of the opposite sex?

Thanks,
apparently most people would use it much sooner than I would...

A:

Dear you,

It's going to be different for every person, of course. Personally, I'm not an emoji fan, so using one at all would imply a degree of emotional familiarity that can't be communicated by words. So if I were to use it at all, it wouldn't be until after I had already communicated my love to the person.

Love,

Luciana

A:

Dear Sooner,

I just wouldn't use the heart-eyes emoji at all because I barely ever use emoji. I prefer emoticons because they are less defined and therefore leave more to the imagination.

-Frère Old-Timer

A:

Dear Apparently,

Um, like once you're married. Before that I don't think I ever sent heart-eye emojis to anyone (but then, I'm not a big emoji user).

-Alta

A:

Dear you,

Apparently I'm an outlier here, because I don't have any qualms with using such emojis in casual texting conversations, including conversations with the opposite gender. Not that I've actually used that emoji in such a situation, but I can easily see myself using it if it just seems to fit with the current conversation--though most likely I'd be using it ironically.

~Anathema


0 Corrections