I care more about *how much* and *how often* you read, than *what* you read.
So, quantity over quality? Really?
If you read more than 50 books a year that tells me a lot more about you than the titles you read.
All that tells me is that you are probably unemployed.
I think everyone should read at least 20 books a year, with two or three genres of fiction and non-fiction represented.
You forgot to mention why. Why at least 20? Why both fiction and non-fiction? Assuming that everything you read is well-written, what is wrong with only reading blogs and periodicals? What is wrong with only reading non-fiction? What is wrong with only reading fiction? What is wrong with only reading and writing personal correspondence? What is wrong with not reading anything thick for 2 years while writing your own novel?
A great list. To add, there ain't nothing wrong with tobacco that ain't also wrong with alcohol. Just like any other toxic and extremely addictive drug, it should be 100% legal, but regulated tightly: tax it as much as the market will bear, forbid all ads, mandate plain brandless packaging.
Please, don't use Tor to harass and be an asshole. Real freedom fighters need Tor, not you and your lulz.
Almost everyone needs anonymity, at least some of the time. The more people use Tor (without cheating), the more robust is the network, so your uppity attitude is completely out of place. Tor is for lulz as much as it is for freedom fighting.
His first sentence is all about ejaculating uncontrollably into his own clothing, somehow because of video games. Interesting, perhaps, but it surely is not insightful.
Actually, his first sentence makes a cognitive leap from observing an involuntary visceral reaction to the Valve branding, to concluding that it is now time for some new underwear. An average slashdot moderator is not in the habit of thinking this far ahead.
"If I do not want others to quote me, I do not speak." -- Phil Wayne