In 2010, I resolve to no longer engage in arguments such as “Can you imagine what the media reaction would be, if a member of The Other Political Party had done this?” with the implication that the media would have just crucified one of Our Guys and therefore is biased in favor of The Other Guys.  Because, really, what kind of argument is that?  No matter how biased the media seems to be, or how hypocritical Those Other Guys are, imaginary scenarios aren’t just not proof of it, they’re… I don’t know, whatever the polar opposite of proof is.  Un-proof, maybe, or anti-proof: something so stupid that it makes one want to stop arguing with the person who presented it on the grounds that people who support hypotheses with persecution fantasies out of their own febrile imaginations have failed logic forever.


Also in 2010, I resolve to write a generic, all-purpose response to those “women discover geekdom” articles, so as to save me valuable time to finish the media jukebox I’m building in the garage.