sexting: (71)
Cambridge; I. Moore ([personal profile] sexting) wrote in [community profile] ataraxion2012-10-11 09:08 am

[ text ] oh, no.

Unlike my predecessor I have the benefit of knowing better than to demand to know if any of this is some kind of terribly unfunny joke. That being said, the sorry state of these so-called uniforms is the worst kind of hilarious. I don't suppose anyone on board has the good luck to have a spare set of clothes (of a decent standard, if you don't mind) and the good grace to share?

100% PRIVATE TO CHAPEL HILL ( + OXFORD FOR ENTERTAINMENT VALUE )
Mr. Sinclair, you do realise we put the LHC where it is for a damn good reason, don't you? Namely because nobody in the Order would split a bollock if Switzerland was blown to hell, least of all the Swiss themselves. So what in God's name ever convinced you and that Temple fellow that it was a good idea to build your own? No matter how redeemingly phallic it must be for you to have control over something that size and shape that doesn't mean you can play with it whenever you feel like it, you know.

And maybe when dear Aberdeen's skills as a hacker matched her arrogance then perhaps getting your sticky little fingers all over those nanites would have been a good idea. Perhaps.



( ooc: rather than clog up the ooc comm with another intro from me I thought I'd pop a quick note here! This is an alternate universe version of the previous Cambridge that was on board before, except this one has 100% more penis but roughly the same amount of terrible attitude. Enjoy, or not. )
tarheel: ➤ ᴄʀıᴛᴇʀıᴏɴ (❝ apéry ❞)

» text | private 100%

[personal profile] tarheel 2012-10-11 08:22 am (UTC)(link)
hi cambridge. welcome to space.

before i actually respond to all of that: do you actually care about what i have to say, or did you just want to rant at someone?


[ also, it's doctor.

also, you're kind of an asshole.
]
romanticism: (009)

text; private 100%

[personal profile] romanticism 2012-10-11 12:42 pm (UTC)(link)
I take it someone is feeling somewhat better.
romanticism: (084)

text; private 100%

[personal profile] romanticism 2012-10-11 12:48 pm (UTC)(link)
Clearly. You've no idea how glad I am to hear it - or rather see it, as the case may be.
romanticism: (079)

text; private 100%

[personal profile] romanticism 2012-10-11 12:59 pm (UTC)(link)
I don't doubt that claim for a moment, and in fact, I will even hold you to it. We've gone far too long here without your contributions as an impossible bastard.
romanticism: (094)

text; private 100%

[personal profile] romanticism 2012-10-11 01:33 pm (UTC)(link)
You underestimate how long several months start to feel when you're in space.

She was quite the character, wasn't she? I'd grown quite fond of her.
romanticism: (082)

text; private 100%

[personal profile] romanticism 2012-10-11 01:45 pm (UTC)(link)
I'll admit I wouldn't necessarily have thought much of the shoes on their own, but they gained a certain allure when she wore them.

[ ha ha ha oxford behave ]
romanticism: (072)

text; private 100%

[personal profile] romanticism 2012-10-11 01:54 pm (UTC)(link)
I suppose it must take the right sort of individual for me to take any interest in high heels, though admittedly I am not surprised that it would be your female counterpart to have such an effect on me.
starked: (pic#3394835)

text; i'm actually giving you two, because i c a n

[personal profile] starked 2012-10-11 02:22 pm (UTC)(link)
The airlock comment would have fit right in last month, darling.

[ someone take the communicator away from tony this is not going to end well. ]
romanticism: (097)

text; private 100%

[personal profile] romanticism 2012-10-11 02:22 pm (UTC)(link)
The image is a little odd, I will have to agree. Personally, however, I quite like you just the way you are, so I feel high heels are simply unnecessary in this case.
adlered: (pic#3758628)

text; ah yes, the second of the two i said i was doing.

[personal profile] adlered 2012-10-11 03:43 pm (UTC)(link)
That depends on what you mean by decent. After all, everyone does seem to have such varying definitions of it.
bonus: (065)

voice;

[personal profile] bonus 2012-10-11 08:54 pm (UTC)(link)
Predecessor? Didn't know we had those.
bonus: (003)

[personal profile] bonus 2012-10-11 09:39 pm (UTC)(link)
And what would your case entail?
bonus: (068)

[personal profile] bonus 2012-10-11 10:03 pm (UTC)(link)
[The answer should be quite prompt, but Moniz still holds on to it for a beat.]

Wouldn't have a job without them.

[So quite a bit.]

Page 1 of 7