Comments on: The naughty shower

By: LJ

LJ — Fri, 24 Mar 2006 17:16:01 +0000

Mike, I think you should have a raffle at your housewarming party…something along the lines of people guessing the maximum number of people who could fit in the shower at the same time.

By: Mike

Mike — Sat, 04 Mar 2006 04:18:43 +0000

“broken in some way”

That has to be the most descriptive error condition ever.
What is wrong with it? It seems to work fine for me.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Thu, 02 Mar 2006 21:45:43 +0000

PS the RSS for your site seems to be broken in some way

By: GM

GM — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 23:56:51 +0000

Bathroom Mike would be in his fully glory seeing your shower…

By: Matthew

Matthew — Wed, 01 Mar 2006 00:48:00 +0000

I agree with Collin. I saw the two sets controls and came to the same conclusion, albeit not with the razor.

By: Collin

Collin — Tue, 28 Feb 2006 13:26:02 +0000

In response to Adam comment that “two shower heads does not necessarily imply two shower occupants.”

I would draw the court’s attention to the two separate temperature and flow adjustment handles within the shower.

It is doubtful that one person sometimes just wants to face the opposite direction or take a shower at two separate temperatures.

Therefore, I give you Collin’s razor: “Given two equally predictive theories, choose the one that is sexier.”

By: Matthew

Matthew — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 23:32:15 +0000

And yes, it is true. Either I cannot type or I cannot spell. Probably the former.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 23:29:31 +0000

Scanalous. Do you plan on leaving that shower curtain in or putting a different one in? You could make it reminiscent of PSU by putting up a flimsy white one.

By: newmike

newmike — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 16:38:31 +0000

sign me up for some of that action

By: Adam

Adam — Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:56:52 +0000

Are you sure it’s not just to provide a more even, well rounded shower experience? Two shower heads does not necessarily imply two shower occupants.