SAY WHAT YOU WANT ABOUT LOBSTERS
They make excellent watchdogs.
« Previous | Main | Next »
They make excellent watchdogs.
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Your Information
(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
How many lobster "on time" comments can they squeeze into one article? About two too many.
Posted by: Liljazzcat | June 25, 2004 at 01:29 PM
A note about being first:
Now that you can connect a Blog watcher to the XML link on the left, i just don't get why it's sporting or even interesting to say FIRST anymore.
kinda like playing tic-tac-toe, ya know.
anyway, Rock Lobster is still one of the coolest songs ever.
Posted by: igwanna | June 25, 2004 at 01:29 PM
Sorry, igwanna. I purposely avoided saying "first!", as it has been brought to my attention that it is juvenile and uncouth. Also annoying.
Posted by: Liljazzcat | June 25, 2004 at 01:45 PM
FIRST!
Posted by: Wheat | June 25, 2004 at 01:59 PM
We only say "First" to annoy those who are annoyed by us doing it. That's the point! Looks like it's working...
FIFTH!
Posted by: Lee | June 25, 2004 at 02:08 PM
Timex is trying to get this lobster for a new series of "And It Keeps on Ticking!" commercials. This new batch would feature the lobster, with the watch strapped on him, being dipped into boiling water, melted butter, etc. to show how sturdy and durable the watch is. No telling about the lobster, though.
Posted by: Lairbo | June 25, 2004 at 02:11 PM
igwanna, you have an interesting point. I didn't know about XML and some sortof blogwatcher program. I doubt many of us do...until now....
I do agree that said use would be "unsporting".
However, I think the anti-First! crusaders have been more detrimental to The Blog commenting humor than the First!-posters.
And in this case, topic-relevant commenting lasted all of the first post!
Can I suggest we ALL take a time-out on this issue, please?
Let the lobster say "when" ;-)
Posted by: eadn | June 25, 2004 at 02:13 PM
Oops! Exception to Lairbo who posted ahead of me! :-)
Posted by: eadn | June 25, 2004 at 02:17 PM
randy fellows these crustaceans. maybe he was late for something, and just couldnt remember what. probably thought it was his long lost love. poor thing. but yummy.
Posted by: queensbee | June 25, 2004 at 02:27 PM
Perhaps the lobster wanted to have the watch to make some quick cash. Ebay maybe? Or those emails I get at work that say I can get a Rolex for dirt cheap. Those blasted emails are coming from that lobster! I'm glad they got him; one less spammer!
Posted by: SMFTC | June 25, 2004 at 02:29 PM
Lobster Spam WBAGNFARB. Or a bizarre recipe.
Posted by: Mike Weasel | June 25, 2004 at 02:48 PM
OK, let's say I was diving and I saw a lobstah gawding a watch. The fawst thing I'd look for is anothuh lobstah gawding an air tank or a fin. If I saw anothuh lobstah gawding othuh SCUBA equipment, I would not mess with any of the lobstahs.
Posted by: Brad | June 25, 2004 at 03:07 PM
A guy with an MBA has to wait 35 years to get a watch from his/her company, but a lobster reaches 30 years and is given a watch AND luxury digs.
Can I see that food chain chart again please?
Posted by: Lmd33 | June 25, 2004 at 03:24 PM
Hmmmm. XML blog watching... I'm writing some VXML right now, so if I combined the two I could get my post to yell FIRST! at anyone who opened the comments. I'll work on it...
Posted by: pogo | June 25, 2004 at 03:26 PM
Ya know, I can just imagine since sound travels better underwater, that lobster finding it and sayin', "Ooh, baby! Ya got the beat for my meat!"
Oooh, that one's bad, but it does spin well ;-)
Posted by: eadn | June 25, 2004 at 03:37 PM
For your information, the watch was a Citizen Pulsar.
Posted by: Thomas | June 25, 2004 at 05:05 PM
My brother-in-law only buys his Rolexes and Citizens of the sidealk in NYC when he visits, and they are certainly knock-offs for a cool $10 each.
The bizarre part is, he's taken them diving manmy times, and they are good to quite a depth, even tho fake.
So I'm thinkin, maybe this lobstah isn't so set up for life.
Still he's a crustacean with a whole new station.
Posted by: igwanna | June 25, 2004 at 06:16 PM
The lobster probably sets the watch ahead and back to keep accurate time, unlike our beloved Blog here.
Posted by: D'Artagnan | June 25, 2004 at 06:55 PM
As a matter of fact, yes, I do. Or did, at least, until they shoved me in this stupid giant fish tank for no good reason at all. I want my watch back!
Posted by: The Lobster | June 25, 2004 at 06:57 PM
In Paris you watch your lobster or fish swimming
around in a tank before you choose it. I am
sorry. I can't eat anything that I watch swimming
around. I imagine it has a mate, baby, or family
somewhere. And after watching "Finding Nemo" I am becoming a vegeterian. We have polluted all the creatures in the sea anyway.
Posted by: Candy | June 26, 2004 at 06:06 AM
'Waterproof Replacements' ain't a bad name.
I think this watch was defintiely a knockoff for sure.
The kind where the 9 has fallen off the dial and
rattling around inside.
Still, did anyone consider just leaving the lobster be? Candy did.
Posted by: chucke | June 26, 2004 at 07:29 AM
That's strange Candy, 'cuz when I see a fish or lobster swimming/crawling around, I think Dinner! It takes all kinds to revolve this crazy world of ours!
Posted by: Brian B | June 26, 2004 at 01:13 PM
that's such a happy story :)
Posted by: Adeilos | June 26, 2004 at 01:38 PM
This has nothing to do with this blog post, but can anyone direct me to the website that has the game with the castle that you have to defend against stick people by throwing them up in the air? You can email if you know where it's at. Thanks a bunch.
Posted by: tammy | June 26, 2004 at 03:13 PM
Sweet story
Posted by: Erika | June 26, 2004 at 04:40 PM
Brian B:
Yah, it takes all kinds, and boy, do we ever have kinds.
We've got kinds like 'Carter's got pills'.
I once signed up for a lobster at a company clambake,
and asked to have my lobster live. I was going to set it free. They wouldn't let me. Now THAT's sick.
Posted by: chucke | June 26, 2004 at 05:12 PM
I would have freed him also.
Freed him of that pesky shell.
Posted by: Graz | June 26, 2004 at 05:21 PM
Well, I know we hate reality instrusions, but in your
lifetime, there will probably be no more lobsters.
Before we started industrial fisheries, or back in the
early colonial period, an oyster (out of the shell) was
the size of a dinner plate. One oyster was dinner.
And so with lobsters, You are eating the little-kid
small-fry lobsters, and occasionally finding a greybeard granddad lobster guarding a ticking watch.
You might see the irony in that.
Posted by: chucke | June 26, 2004 at 05:54 PM
Crustacean Station would be a good name for a Reggae band(thanks to Igwanna's post for the inspiration).
Oh my, Waterboy. I clicked on your name, and I'm going to be in game heaven...Lol. My hubby won't ever get the 'puter now.
Posted by: Kiki B. | June 26, 2004 at 10:48 PM
This has nothing to do with lobsters either, but why do people always point out a 'good name for a band?' I for one think that '2 foot long lobster' would make a particularly bad name for a band. On the other hand, it'd make an interesting name for a seafood restaurant.
Posted by: MutantHamster | June 27, 2004 at 04:36 AM
That's such a cute story! I have decided not to eat any lobster over 25 years old.
Posted by: Stash | June 27, 2004 at 08:46 AM
Stash,
I cannot fathom (nautical joke, couldn't resist) why we eat the adult breeding stock and let the non-productive young live. From a farm, younger is better, if we hunt or fish it, we want bigger. Doesn't that feed egos more than bellies?
After Dave's observations that lobsters are just big bugs they are fairly safe from my appetite because they DO look too much like bugs now! Maybe I should eat the watches.
Posted by: waxwing | June 27, 2004 at 09:32 AM
Boo.
Posted by: Buddha | June 27, 2004 at 12:01 PM
Did any body wonder IF the watch's time was accurate or not? THERE's the sidebar story.
Posted by: kibby F5 | June 28, 2004 at 01:05 AM
is that that the one that goes, ' I lobster, then I flounder,
but she did want to get scrod, she had a haddock'?
Posted by: chucke | June 28, 2004 at 05:08 PM
'didn't'
Posted by: chucke | June 28, 2004 at 05:10 PM