On nomenclature (Soylent Green is... is..)

[minus3db]

Ok, so, apparently in certain circles of defense parlance, you do not blow up people. Well, you do, but the correct euphemism is "soft targets" (as opposed to "hard targets", such as tanks, buildings, etc.). Referring to soft targets as people is rather frowned upon. I managed to inadvertently silence a getting-out-of-hand meeting yesterday as

Comments

[parsemand]

Ah... the simple yet evocative 'Biscuit'.

Anyway, why not be more creative with the target types:
'wankers' and 'tankers',
'baked' and 'mashed',
'chewies' and 'crunchies',
'biscuits' and 'gravy' ...

[parsemand]

I'm confused, though: what makes you think your coworkers misunderstood your brown ppl comment as *you* being racist, instead of as you saying/joking that the US govt is racist (ala Carlin)? Wouldn't the latter be a worse faux pas than the former in a defense contractor mtg?

You know, the whole problem could be solved with an even more creative euphemism:
chocolate pudding targets
caramel candy targets
Mr. Hanky targets

[minus3db]

Mostly, I was just shocked and saddened by the fact that not one person had heard the infamous Bush / Brown People / Phallic Symbols rant. I can't say whether it came off as me being a racist fuck vs. Uncle Sam, but I can say that (amidst all the other talk in the room not taking the matter seriously) mine is the one that definitely registered as a non-kosher comment.

Luckily this was an internal-only brainstorming session, no DoD folk were there. (If the company does go seriously chasing a weapons contract, I don't think I want a part of it.)

The concept of a mixed target was never addressed. For example, what would a fully loaded clown car be? I guess they could call that kind of target a Tootsie Pop. "How many pellet-dispersion licks does it take to get to the center..."

[mephistakitten]

Hehe, they mailed out the meat VNC IP list a few days ago. (Someone compiled a page of phone numbers and e-mail addresses for all the students in our department.)