To Bully or be Bullied

One of the Hot Topics on the Internet this week, is about a video of an Australian kid fighting back against a Bully. The video appears to have been shot by one of the Bully's buddies, and shows a shorter, leaner kid go up to another gawky kid of over weight stature, and begin to hit him and tease him for his size. The heavier stature non-bully appears to at first just ignore the teasing but then finally snaps out, grabbing the shorter kid and slams the tormentor to the ground. The slam was hard enough the tormentor didn't get up right away, and when he did it was to waddle out of the arena.

After the video hit YouTube and went viral, a heated discussion quickly emerged, one that has fluctuated to say the least. Few appear to doubt that the shorter kid was the bully to the heavier stature adolescent. Size does not always correspond to whose the victim and whose the victimizer. Often in the early teenage years and prior, unless those of the heavier stature display some athletic skill, they will be teased more often then not just for being different. The discussion instead mostly surrounds if the victim should have fought back or not.

I will stop here and say, that most people who advocate the "Never fight back" advice, normally haven't been bullied or teased. The reason I say this is that those who have been bullied, teased or victimized, know that although fighting back may just make it worse, not fighting back at all, rarely ends anything either. I once read a philosophical exchange between two characters, in which one character quipped that "War never decided anything". The resounding answer was without a doubt "War almost always decides, it just may not decide the best way". In it's way, violence may not be the solution to a disagreement, but violence is a solution.

I will say that I was teased similarly in my pre-teen years. First for being shorter then everyone else, then for being different then the popular kids. I got into fights very few times as most of the bullying was of the teasing variety with non-physical pranks and jabs. However one day, the teasing got to be just to much, and one of those teasing did physically jab at me. I responded similar to our heavier stature hero in that I grabbed the bully and tossed him across the room. The situation was quick and short. My opponent wasn't hurt more then symbolically, and a teacher quickly saw and intervened. The teacher knew of the bullying but was powerless to stop the source so neither side was punished for the exchange.

The net result was that not long afterward the teasing lessened. The Bullies were now wary of any direct action toward me. It didn't stop completely, but what occurred from there on out was of significantly lessened nature that the Bullies eventually gave up and took their tactics elsewhere.

Could the same outcome have occurred if I hadn't shown such a strength, or reaction? The answer is truly unknown without being able to see such a parallel universe. But having experienced other teasing and other bullying prior to that last incident I can say that the road of inaction will only cause the Bully to stop, when they have found another target. If no other target is available, inaction only fuels their needs to feel superior, whether childish or note. Action on the other hand, also fraught with complications including raising the stakes of the bullying, can prove a catharsis, for the victim at the very least. And in a Bully situation, shouldn't one feel for the victim, and not the Bully?

In the end I will not advocate violence to end Bullying, just as I also won't fail to understand that someone who uses violence sparingly, sometimes does so because to do otherwise would be to be a victim forever.

The Internet Will Never Die, Just Fade Away

Out of curiosity I did a Google search on my handle again today, noticed that unlike a search I did maybe a year or two ago, the best match had fallen to about the 6th 7th links. My full email address alone, only turned up three links, of which two were to comments I had placed a couple of years ago. All this really meant, is that I had a minor epiphany.

In the age of the Internet, it appears nearly impossible to disappear. However, in this same age, given time the information, and your presence can fade. Unless you are active, or "relevant" your persona can slowly fall from the first link, to the back page.

In reality this is due to a number of factors:
1. Year after year, the Internet grows, almost exponentially
2. Search engines are constantly changing to meter out relevance
3. Erasing yourself is probably impossible, but give it a few years and the Internet may effectively do it for you.

The good news is, as I'm not searching for fame or really fortune, this graying of my online persona is not something I'm worried over, other then my handle may be subverted at some point do to non-use. The bad news, I've got to find a Western song in order to ride off in to the Sunset. Since I like ACDC and Rolling Stones more, this may be problematic.

So you want to be famous?

I was talking with a co-worker earlier about some procedures, and what to do in X situation, mostly trying to impart some of my experience on the job, when he came across an official procedures document, that apparently mentioned me in it. Upon examination I found some things I had written when, for lack of a better word, bugging the procedures in the first place. Apparently the people in charge of said procedures and programs, decided to just lift my notes whole and use them. Looking at the document, all my notes showed no bad intentions were in mind when they did so, on the contrary this only enforced a most positive view of me. But what it really did was remind me, that although I've never been the "Cool" or the "Popular" person, I've also been the person most remembered and respected.

The co-worker also enforced this ego by then saying "You're a celebrity and didn't even know it"

My only comment was, "That seems to happen a lot"

I mean, growing up, I'd somehow get my picture in the paper, not as the focus or sole person highlighted in the article, but instead usually with a group of people, or about some project going on. It was rarely with the same people either, but instead it was as if I was riding some human interest wave, from one project to the next. Bouncing between the local newspaper, to the school paper, to the state paper and back. And every time, my name would wind up in the article, and people would notice.

I unconsciously tried side stepping this unintentional "be the story" by joining journalism my last year in high school. I figured, if I wrote the paper, I wouldn't be the paper. Unfortunately, because I didn't concentrate fully on writing, and instead still did a lot of other things my senior year, from founding a NJROTC at my school, to doing a stint as a page for the State House of Representatives, I still ended up in other people's articles. Also of course in an article about the school newspaper, so there was no escaping it there.

Finally I did leave most of the evident very minor celebrity status behind when I went off to college, only to begin a new quasi-very minor celebrity adventure, but having my name show up in the oddest of places, years after I'd left jobs in some cases, because when I left, I usually left a place better, with a bit more understanding, and apparently quite a bit of respect.

Thus, whenever I'm reminded of this unintentional life I lead, I'm glad to know that although I'm not famous as the world knows famous. Instead I'm famous in the way I want to know famous, as the cog that made a difference, and was proud of it

Alcohol, Religion, and Economics (Part 2)

In the previous post I explained what the situation was. In this post I'm going to try to expound on the situation, interjecting some of my own opinions.

Essentially, there are a multitude of problems concerning this religion versus economics squabble brewing in Minneapolis. First and foremost, in a land of freedom of religion, does a company, providing arguably a public service, have a right to discriminate against a religious faction, if that faction hinders and at times halt that public service?

Depending on the example from history you might find, you can say both yes, and no. The biggest example of yes they could and should, actually springs from rather recent times and concerns this nations struggle with racism, in which groups, such as the Klu Klux Klan blocked public services (hospitals, schools, water fountains). The Klu Klux Klan was then prosecuted and basically eliminated as a group by the federal government.

On the other hand, if you were to look at the current debate over Abortion you could see something of a see-saw to the same argument. Abortion by many definitions is an economic versus Religious debate, where the Religious side is claiming it's tenements do not allow or proscribe that anyone, even those not of their religion should be able to have an Abortion. In the current battle this comes down to meaning that doctors have the right not to perform an abortion, if they believe it's against their religion. At the same time, Anti-Abortion groups have with differing levels of severity been restricted from impeding those who want to have an Abortion. Thus Anti-abortionists still picket many clinics that offer this service, but if they cross the line from picket to active refusal, such as by hitting, grabbing, or causing damage they are then actively prosecuted for discrimination and violence. The latest wrinkle to this debate is that a number of supposed Abortion clinics have been popping up where they are really controlled by Anti-abortionists who find ways to delay or convince their patients not to have an Abortion. So far, this unusual tactic when found out, has mostly been closed down by immediate press revelations.

Which brings us back to this problem of alcohol and cab drivers. By all rights, this attempts of the MAC appear to have been honest attempts at compromise to allow the cab drivers their religious freedom, while lessening the impediment of the public. The drivers on the other hand have decided that all these attempts have only been about discrimination and thus have decided to act like it.

The hook in the matter is that although they can say they are being discriminated if the MAC decides to restrict them for refusing a service, they, themselves, are honestly discriminating against others by their very own refusal. They are trying to foster a set of rules on their attempted passengers, which the passengers don't wish to agree to. In most societies where this happens, it then becomes the passengers right to not use that service and instead opt for one which allows the transportation of alcohol. But in this environment, where the cabs all look similar and it's hard to distinguish between them, this attempt to use the service that allows them is causing an undue hardship delay.

My own opinion is thus, in a society of freedoms, any attempt to curtail another's rights, whether religious or not, should be struck down. Thus, the cab driver's wants to not allow the transportation of alcohol in their cabs, although lawful, well meaning, and within their right, should not give them the authority to block a person from using a cab in a timely fashion.

If they want to continue this religious choice, either they should then accept a compromise that allows a person to choose their cabs, or they should expect to lose the business of passengers.

As an aside, while working on this post I got in to a lengthy discussion with some co-workers about this particular issue. From his POV (Point of View), the only "discrimination" that was going on was against the cab drivers. Thus from his POV, he believes either the cab drivers will eventually compromise, or the airport will just restrict all alcohol transportation. I disagreed and then we launched in to a long debate on discrimination, which I will post at another time.

Alcohol, Religion, and Economics

Via Cnn.com comes an article about a group of cab drivers in Minneapolis (Minnesota) who have been refusing to transport anyone carrying alcohol. What makes the situation more complicated then simple economic driven supply and service is that the group of cab drivers are Muslims, predominately from Somalia.

Essentially the Muslim religion teaches that transportation, consumption, or any other use of alcohol is strictly forbidden, and a sin. Thus the cab drivers, even though they should be driven by economic forces to transport another person, even one not of their religion, who has partaken or is carrying alcohol, would be committing a sin to do so.

Normally in a mixed religion nation such as ours, this particular problem doesn't crop up that much, as the mix is great enough that a person refused a service because of religious issues could easily get service from some one else. The problem in Minneapolis is that the group of cab drivers refusing service is so large, that it's causing major bottleneck problems at the local airport.

According to the article, in the last years approximately 5,400 people were initially denied service from a taxi at the airport at least once, for this reason alone. One commuter interviewed even described being denied a taxi cab five times, and having to wait twenty minutes for carrying a sealed bottle of wine he had bought on his vacation.

The local authorities (Metropolitan Airport Commission or MAC) then tried to step in and work out a compromise that wouldn't violate the religious freedoms of one group, or discriminate against the freedom of another group. Unfortunately what should have been a simple matter of compromise took a wrong turn when the MAC was rebuffed twice.

The first time then went to local religious leaders and asked for a special dispensation for the cab drivers. The local leaders disagreed and reiterated the doctrine against transportation of alcohol. The MAC then tried a different approach of asking those who didn't want to transport alcohol to use some identifying symbol on their cabs so that patrons could know which they couldn't use, and which they could. They were again rebuffed as the group cried this discrimination.

Now the MAC has been left with little choice but to either impose harsh penalties on cab drivers refusing to pickup passengers for trying to follow their religious faith, or to get hit with lawsuits and other economic penalties for not providing a service for their customers.

A blog is a Journal

When sitting down to write every day, I usually have to brain storm for several minutes (err hour). What should I write today, I muse. Which inevitably becomes, what's the focus of the blog? You see blogs, from my perspective, are supposed to be places where someone comments or informs the reader about something, such as people, or places, or news, or about other blogs. These can take the form of opinion pieces, or even just a link fest telling people whats the hip today. But they are still, first and foremost, a portal of information.

Again, why does this matter?

When I write pieces like this, I don't feel like I'm a commentator, or a portent to information. Instead I feel like I'm writing in an diary, only one that is online. This counter to the fact I'm writing a post on a site with blogger in the address only adds to internal debate over whether I'm seriously writing, or just venting where someone might see, and still not care.

So every time I begin to write here, I have to go this internal debate over what to write, and why. Because if I'm not a blogger, and this isn't a blog, then what is it? On the other hand, maybe it's just my perception that's wrong.

Via Dictionary.com, and according to Webster's New Millennium™ Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.6) a blog is: an online diary; a personal chronological log of thoughts published on a Web page.

It is not however, strictly journalistic, although other definitions use journal in them. Then again, I've been using the web long enough I remember livejournal before blogging became the term to use.

What all this really adds up to, is that why contemplating the focus of this blog, I decide two things. One, I can't figure out what my focus interest is just yet. And two, the one entry a day must be an opinion piece, either on life, or something I've read that day. Other then that, I can have more then one entry a day, it's just the first entry, must be an opinion post.

Really, why did this all come up? Beyond the semantic impression of the word blog, I had been debating whether a review piece on a book I picked would fit in to the style here, and whether it would suffice for the one post a day. Nope was answer I came up with, for the later not the former. Later on I'll post reviews of books, movies, and maybe even link some popular stories, but every day I'll start with some rant, opinion, or other rumination. And eventually I'll find a balance once more.

Surgery is a Powerful Word, Part 2

In only a few hours I will be going under the knife. A specialist in oral surgery and dental medicine will be cutting into the gumline just above my canine, in order to cut out a small cyst hanging onto the root of the tooth. Before you eep though let me explain a few things. Cysts are actually not very uncommon around teeth. Frequently they are caused by blood being cutoff from the tooth, and causing some organic decay. Root Canals are the usual treatment of such Cysts, and as evident by how common the procedure is, quite easy to fix.

In my case, the tooth in question has already had a root canal. Normally then, the dentist, would just retreat the tooth (do another root canal) and fix the problem. Unfortunately, because it was a canine, I had a post put inside the tooth during the last root canal, in order to stabilize it and keep from losing the tooth. Here's where the problem set in. Although a post can be removed and a root canal performed, my canine has been deemed to integrated into the post to risk removing it (it'd probably destroy the tooth). Instead the doctor will go in above the tooth, and perform a kind of reverse root canal. The procedure itself should take about 20-40 minutes, and isn't considered dangerous. However, in order to do it, the dentist will still have to cut into live flesh, and then stitch it close again, ie, it becomes Surgery.

For the non-layman, Surgery is a bogey-man kind of word. The average person does not cut into themselves deep enough to draw blood daily, nor does the average person tie flesh back together after-wards. Although Surgery is so common place these days, with all the corrective procedures available, and the wonderful world of plastic surgery to alter one's appearance, Surgery itself still holds a residual charge of emotion.

Most of this emotion stems from the association people have between surgery and pain. Coupled with the fact that people dread anything to do with changing their body, and that until this last century, surgery had a very high rate of death, and you've created a very highly perceived source of danger. On the other hand, a lot of it is just perceived notions of association.

Why is association so powerful? The human mind is a very powerful tool, most of revolving around memory. Association is a big tool that memory uses in order to link similar things together in order for a person to complete thoughts and ideas. Thus in order to assure that a person, doesn't devolve in repetition, association between thoughts takes place at a more base level motivator. Take for example a dog. Common four legged animal, it generally like to explore and be active. When it comes across another dog that is larger and more angry then it, one usually leaves with a couple of scratches vowing never to return. Ie, to the Dog, pain = Big Dog = don't go near that area or dog again. In humans, its roughly the same way, the more real pain is, the more a person wants to avoid it, ie Surgery. Oddly enough, because the mind can be so screwed up, sometimes this doesn't always prove out. Course it more often then not does, as evident by drug addiction and the like.

The end result? Although Surgery is a powerful emotion motivator, you have to realize that it's not all that bad. Frequently surgery is a needful tool to make sure you don't have a longer pain from something you refuse to treat. That is, get done with the sharper pain immediate, and spare the longer more nerve racking pain from occurring.

Yes, I Really Want my Work Interuppted

Have you heard the old adage, "Give them an inch, and they'll take a mile?" Well, according to AdAge, "Online advertising software vendor Unicast is introducing a new kind of Internet ad that doesn't just pop up over a portion of the browser but rather fills the entire screen of the computer user." An Ad that takes up the whole screen of your computer, for at least 15 seconds, when you click on a link between parts of a story? Can AD's get anymore intrusive?

What can I recall that is wrong about this type of ad, let me recount the ways.

First off, haven't these people been watching the huge customer service backlash on AOL over pop-up ADS?. [Unicast promotional materials suggest the new format will enable advertisers to reach their audiences "with the same impact" as TV.] Um, dude, ever wonder why Tivo's, fast forward buttons on VCR's, skip buttons on DVD's, etc, became so popular? In general, ads on Television are considered a nuisance, and most people have a tendency to channel surf past these commercials, or frankly use them for snack or bathroom breaks. Numbers wise, ads on television are barely break even propositions except that good research can properly target a correct audience and catch a fraction of their attentions. The web however is less homogenized and thus loses some of that target capability.

Besides a person's computer is theirs to control, not yours. Unlike with television, you do not have inherent control over the channel content. A computer desktop is made of a couple of dozen different channels, only one of which you might control at any given time, to control more means your are monopolizing a device, that is designed not to be monopolized. You should not be able to block someone from being able to do anything but look at your ad, even if it is just for 15 seconds. If you want to do that, direct your capability to something like an XBox.

Now if you want some good proof that what your suggesting is a really bad idea, go research college computer culture at MIT and NCSU from a decade ago. Both places had in place (and there are probably others), a rudimentary instant messaging program called Zephyrs. Zephyrs were the basis for AOL's IM, ICQ, and all the other IM programs on the market now. Zephyrs were an in-house computer to computer instant messenger. They did not save, nor store messages. You had to be logged in to use them, and they were easily direct-able by email address directions.

However, Zephyrs, unlike later IM programs, were an open ended GUI system based on Unix gui(s). As such, when a message came through, all it did was open a new window, and put the pre-formatted message in it, and put it up on a person's desktop. The problem was, that new users quickly figured out, that by either upping the font, or filling the message with lots of text, could make the window you receive so large, it'd block your entire screen and interrupt whatever you were doing. Intrusive, yes, very much so. These early screen cobbling messages quickly became known as Zephyr Bombs, or Zephyr Nukes, because as long as you had Zephyr program running, anyone who knew where you were, could interrupt your work.

Admittedly, these weren't ads, but instead were deliberate attacks on people through a less then option-able client. The point however is similar enough. People will not like having their screen taken over. Initially people won't care about it of course, but given time, such a drastic intrusion will have deterious effects on website advertisement as many seek out un-aded sites, or at the very least, smarter, less intrusive AD sites.

One further note for the brains behind this. Although you've already set it up so that the ad doesn't run until its fully loaded, think about modem users downloading 300k every time the click a new link. You are eating their bandwidth up as well, and causing them to lose time that they might just use to actually want to read about your product. Also note, that even if it doesn't run, by the current implementation your suggesting, it's still going to pause the link access, until its closed, so it's going to be longer then 15 seconds until a person can access that next link that your ad is locked to.

[TB] Sex, Politics, and Religion

At formal dinning events, it is always advised that one avoid three heated topics; Sex, Politics, and Religion. The numero uno reason why, is that these three topics have the most disparging, and dangerous opinions in the world today. If you want to get a heated arguement going, you just have to mention an opinion on one of these, and the night could end in a fist fight. Thus of course, I've decided to write about one of these topics here.

However, before you go flying off at the handle, let me expound a little. This past weekend I visited my parents and sister. While talking about web coding I ventured to show them this webpage. Of course my sister, being the way she is, wondered if I had written anything about the current conflict. Being the way I am, I had not. Invariably, this lead to a discussion on politics in general, why I haven't discussed them and why I might. The answer as it were, might just astound you.

The truth of the matter is that I had begun to write a political discourse on friday. I even had a page set-up for further political editorials. The only real reason I hadn't posted one, was that I had felt that what I had written was so much crap, that I deleted it entirely twice before giving up for the day. As a side note if you will, you might notice that on Friday's I've been writing just reviews on entertainment, this is entirely because by Friday, the whole weeks worth of stress has effectively made my brain taffioca. You might also notice that Monday's articles are always such higher quality then the rest of the week and thus you might presume why.

Politics by their very nature, are actually broad enough to cover the other two topics entirely, as politics are really about one's opinions and beliefs on virtually everything. Thus to attempt to avoid discussions about politics, would be rather pointless as anything you'd write, would reflect your politics in some way. What I'm really doing is avoiding those extremely heated and pointed discussions about current events. I am still voicing my opinion in these blogs, and thus my politics, but I am also doing so only tangently.

As it were, I prefer to write about these things borderly, mostly due to my own personal politics. You see, in life, I am what you'd call a Moderate, or Independent. I have not, and probably will not ever give allegiance to either of the two dominant political parties. I do hold several opinions to be the same as both mind you, but my own personaly beliefs keep me aligning with one side or the other permenantly. Instead I continue to question both sides, as well as my own, and in the process hopefully maintaining some balance and sense of abjact opinion.

The problem arises, is that by not joining one party or the other, when it comes down to it, I really have no say so in the creation of policy. As a moderate I only have the say so in accepting the proposals or not. The upside is, that my vote is more powerful because of this. Yes, my vote is more powerful as a Moderate, then as a Republican or Democrat, believe it.

Simply put, Yes Virigina, every vote does count. Like every drop of water in the river, take away a vote, and it loses its meaning in the flow, add it, and that one little drop will help to shape the course of even the mightest river. Every vote does count, but when you are talking about two balanced sides, a third side can count for a heck of a lot. Lets put it another way. Currently the United States of America is divided into two significantly distinct parties, the Republicans, and the Democrats. Unfortunately, the number of registered voters, only makes up roughly 40% for each party, that is 40% of votes are Republican, and 40% are Democrat, making up 80% of votes. Of the other 20%, Thrid parties make up about 2%, with the other 18% being Moderates. Thus when an election comes along, its almost automatically guaranteed that each party will win 40% of the vote. The other 18% however is what they fight over. Thus even though Moderates don't make up a majority of votes, their votes tend to count just a tad more since they become the fulcrum by which votes can be turned.

Or putting it another way: I could be called a Liberal Conservative, or a Conservative Liberal, but the truth of the matter is, I'm a Strong Moderate. In everything I write, I voice an opinion, on ethics, on privacy, on law, and civil rights. I have since day one been writing about polictics, just like at a formal dinner party, I've been doing it by sneaking it in through the backdoor of discussion. I have also not been conscience of the process, but instead have been just being me. Eventually I will discuss specific topics on politics, but like Sex and Religion, I will wait till the lightning strikes and I'm more informed and eloquent on the topic, so that I might not deprive you of the fun of a heated arguement.

[TB] Aye Captain, the wind is taking us West!

Tis Wednesday and time is running short. I have practice this evening and thus little time to do anything but work, eat, and sleep. Yet, here I am typing away once more. At the moment, this all seems a little pointless. After a morning of catching up on some blogs that I like to read, checking up on all the news, editorials, comics and what not, I've come to the startling conclusion. This blog has no Direction! Whatever shall I do?

Yes, I freely admit it. This blog has no set Direction. In the week it has been alive, I have yet to take control of the rudder and steer this webpage into a definitive direction. Which of course begs the question, why haven't I? The answer: I'm not quite sure. It's true I have yet to set a purpose for this website. It's also true that my topics have jumped rather widely, from computers, to like, to a book I had just finished reading. I know that my initial stated purpose was to get myself writing again, but I also expected to find something specific on which to alight. And yet I still haven't.

Maybe its because setting a direction would lock my course to one subject, thereby driving me insance because one day I can't espouse on the political problems of China. That can't be it, can it? I mean I always though Direction was a good thing. It gives you goals to work toward, narrows the field of topics such that you don't get overwhelmed trying to think of a topic, and in general shows you have determination. Also having a direction allows one to fit you into a niche, and decide if they want to keep track of your blog too. So is it really such a good idea, to not have forced a direction on oneself allready? Fine, lets pick a topic to stick to.

How about Computers? Sure I want to talk all day long about how to install a motherboard properly, what a pain in the arse it can be to answer some customer's questions, and though it's a rather neat idea, I don't think I could talk about the sociological ramifications of computers on society, all day, everyday.

What about Politics? You pinko, commie, ultra-conservatice, peace loving, warhawk you... Okay, lets put this to bed right now, I'm neither Republican, nor Liberal. I have views on both, but belong to neither. I'm a moderate and very passionate about it. But even I'm not crazy enough to do a blog on politics all the time!

Humor? Mel Brooks I am not. Although I believe myself to be funny, I know that honestly I can be rather dry, and that often I miss my mark all because my brain runs to fast for my mouth. So the funny, no. I'll warn you though, I will occasionally force you to listen to what I pass for humor, especially on stuff I laugh at that I do.

Medicine? Dammit Jim, I'm a writer, not a Doctor

Err Computer Games? *boink* See Computers stupid. I don't play enough games to rate being an expert on all of them. Those I do, I can sometimes talk for hours on end about, but once I'm done, its hard starting again till inspiration does strike.

Education? Me Chris. Me hit you on head real hard. Me let you know, how much I can type about Edumucation. Get the idea Poindexter? I haven't been in school for several years, I currently have no kids, so discoursing for weeks on end about the education system is not something to swear a warrant out about.

Entertainment? Do you really want me to inform the RIAA on you? Yes, I have a few books I'd like to write about Hollywood, the music industry, and what not. At the same time, I don't want to piss them off that bad. Someday I want them to buy one of my books and make it into a movie. So yes I can write about them, but no, it won't be all the time.

Oo, Oo, I've got it, books! Here, put read this closely. Snap! Let that be the end of that thought. I want to write them, not be a critic of them all the time. Opinions, fine, nothing more, thank you very much.

Ow, that hurt you bully... Hey, I know, Violence! Sigh, okay, lets set the record straight. Yes I appear to be a rather violent person, right here, and right now. The truth is, I'm not. In real life the most violent I get, is when I'm practicing in the SCA, using heavry Ratan bats on another human being, who is trying to do the same to me. The upside is that we are both wearing 40-50 pounds of protective armor, and secondly, I'm not that good yet so I usually take more blows then I deal. When I write however, I tend to exhibit a cartoonish sort of violence, because its funny to me. Hey, blame it on cartoons.

Life? Ah, life, that sciopathic exsistence that careens madly, to the beat of coincedence and chaos. Yet, people do seem to be learning, even with the occasional set-backs. I can discuss life to no end, however I freely admit, I'm no phillosopher. I don't know the meaning of life. And though I trully do like it, I'm not sure I could write about something different everyday.

Okay, I give, you pick. What do you think I've been trying to do for the last half dozen paragraphs? Talking with myself.... okay, so I have, big deal. So I can't seem to convince myself to concentrate on any one topic, and yet, I believe I have found a direction.

Like life, direction isn't always about getting from one place to another. Direction is sometimes about the getting there. Just take a look at humanities constant need to explore the world, to push new boundaries, to develop new technologies, to grow. This webpage was started because I wanted to write again. In the week that I have, I've also been constantly fiddiling with the html coding, improving pieces here and there, understanding new techniques, seeing life in new ways. In short, I've been growing. Thus in retrospect, I have found a direction for the webpage. It may not be a standard topic, but it is a topic. And although there is no one word to describe, it is a direction, that is, to learn, to grow, to explain, and to experience. The journey then is the direction, and here's to it!

"Mr Davenport! Raise the sail. We have a new course, and it is the New World!"

[TB] Day 2 Blues

So its day two, and allready I'm feeling the pinch. This morning I got up, brimming with ideas for articles, wondering if I could keep myself from burning out to soon from writing. However now its the afternoon, and all those same ideas have fled. In this case though, I blame work. No, really, I blame work. Still don't believe me, allright how about I blame having worked on the webpage a lot more then I had intended today? Satisfied, then let's continue.

At this point I freely admit, that drained me of all creativity was the work on the webpage. Coupled to the fact that I'm a wee bit tired from having stayed up to late and this blog has just become a liability. However, I made a deal with myself, and a deal is a deal. So here I sit, writing something for today.

Hmmm, what should I write about then? The War going on over in Iraq? The game I'm in Beta testing with right now, that I really want to talk about, but can't cause of the NDA (such are the hassels of being in an Exclusive Beta. Luckily Open Beta will begin shortly.) How about my Big Fat Greek Life? Course, I'm neither Big, Fat, or Greek, but this is a column on life, and the general quirks, so I guess it'll do.

As Forrest Gump would say, "Life is like a box of chocolates."

Aaaannnnngggg.... Wrong Forrest, life isn't like a box chocolates, but tell him what he wins as a consolation prize Johnny? Well Chris, how about a meaningful life, full of surprises, sadness and happiness.

On the other hand, life trully is a strange thing, and a lot of times, you never know whats going to happen next. Whether you get a rich cholocate piece that puts a smile on your face, a carmel filled drop core, that sticks to the roof of your mouth like a bad aftertaste. And like a box, you have to take the good with the bad, till all is done with.

The silver linning in all this, is that over time you learn to appreciate the good with the bad, and the good becomes just that much sweeter to grab hold of. For example, right now...

Right now, it's cold and it's raining outside. It has been raining for four days and I'm starting to feel like I need to go out and found two of each animal, and get them on to the nearest boat. I'm tired, I'm cranky, I spent to much time awake last night, I forgot my checkbook, I'm just one straw short of breaking that camel's back. But then I take a step back metaphorically and look at what's really going on around me. I take measure and my optimistic streak kicks in and I smile.

Why? Cause I'm writing. I'm bloody, balls to the wall writing. I sat down at this computer with nothing to say, and yet now I've written out an editorial. Admittedly it may not be my best, and it may tend to repeat itself, but I have written several paragraphs worth of semi-meaningful stuff. I've actually accomplished another day's worth of creativity and in the process kept my outlook going on this life.

Even more then that, I feel good about myself.