Past performance is no guarantee of future results.
It’s a standard disclaimer in the financial-management business, but I didn’t know until just now that it’s a Rule.
SEC Rule 156 requires mutual funds to tell investors
not to base their expectations of future results
on past performance before they invest. – Forbes
Of course, the Rule applies to many things beyond investments: cooking (especially if one is, ahem, inclined to the casual with respect to recipe adherence), birdwatching, and any artistic endeavour.
But who knew that it also applied to face-finding? I can find several faces in a day, and then find nothing, nada, zilch for several months. Maybe that’s a good thing: Like spotting sand dollars, it never deteriorates to an expectation, much less an entitlement. Instead, each sighting in the wild is a surprise and a small joy (setting aside whether joys, like miracles, can even be small).
In any event, this week the universe and an employee of a baby-stuff emporium collaborated to give me this.
In all the excitement I failed to identify the piece of clothing, and I have to say I’m not actually sure what it is.
🙂 I don’t know either…..
Ralph – LOL – I might have to organize a field trip.
It looks like something I saw once, but for the life of me I can’t remember where!
Tom – Hahaha. OK, thanks.
If you hadn’t said baby-stuff emporium, I’d have guessed an elaborate coat for a dog.
Jim R – 🙂 I really might have to go back . . .
It’s a face mask!
Barbara – A scary face for a baby! But at least that seems to match the (presumed, underlying) anatomy.
Randomness also affects my punny name collection – in fact have heard or seen few in the last long while.
Perhaps it is an elaborate coat for an infant – might be a sleeveless vest and outer coat. I feel sorry for the baby.
Judith – “Vest” was my first thought, but then I struggled to see how it might actually work. Oh, well, not everything is even worth understanding.
Thanks, Isabel, not only for the laughs but for giving me a problem to solve at odd moments. Nothing I can think of for a human, however small, seems plausible. And at one time I designed and made costumes professionally. If it were attached to a Native infant board, it might work as part of a swaddling arrangement. Less elegant but perhaps warmer than the traditional methods. I will watch this space to see who wins the identification prize.
Laurna – OK, I’m gonna have to go back. I sure hope it’s still there!
Isabel, I’m going Canine Coat, or Pup Parka. When it’s raining outside, I prefer the Shih Tzu Slicker.
Ken – I should have set up something on Survey Monkey. 🙂
I’ve been looking at this thing, and looking at this thing, and have come to the conclusion that if it had armholes, it could be considered quite, umm, tittilating.
Jim T – Baby-stuff emporium. Baby stuff. No titillation here.
Pingback: The Nominees are . . . | Traditional Iconoclast