3.13.2009
Political P.S.
I realized that I have another quick, completely unrelated subject I wanted to mention today. But since it's completely unrelated I didn't want to add it as a P.S. to my previous post (and I'm kind of amused by how the title of this post could easily be misread as Political B.S.)...
The Budget.
The Budget that tosses pay equity out the window.
The Budget that Ignatieff the Gutless Wonder passed without a fight.
So let me just do a little mental tally:
(1) Harper may think that his so-called "apology" for residential schools makes up for his government's bad record on Native issues, but it really doesn't (anyone else remember Harper's opposition of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People?). So I know Harper doesn't value the fact that I'm Métis.
(2) Harper has been very clear about how little he values the arts, both in his speech and his budget cuts, so I know he doesn't value the fact that I'm an artist. And now...
(3) He's throwing pay equity out the window for women who work in the federal public sector. Combine this with the fact that there are backroom anti-abortion caucus meetings even though Harper claims that he doesn't want to re-open the abortion debate (if that's really true, why does this caucus still exist?) and it's pretty clear to me that Harper doesn't value the fact that I'm a woman.
Yep, that's our "progressive" government... oh, that's right, they dropped the "progressive" from their party name. Well, at least they've been honest about one thing.
And so how does our new leader of the opposition stand up to this bully of a government? He rolls over and does their bidding. Well done, Ignatieff, well done... I get to keep my nickname for you: The Gutless Wonder.
The Budget.
The Budget that tosses pay equity out the window.
The Budget that Ignatieff the Gutless Wonder passed without a fight.
So let me just do a little mental tally:
(1) Harper may think that his so-called "apology" for residential schools makes up for his government's bad record on Native issues, but it really doesn't (anyone else remember Harper's opposition of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People?). So I know Harper doesn't value the fact that I'm Métis.
(2) Harper has been very clear about how little he values the arts, both in his speech and his budget cuts, so I know he doesn't value the fact that I'm an artist. And now...
(3) He's throwing pay equity out the window for women who work in the federal public sector. Combine this with the fact that there are backroom anti-abortion caucus meetings even though Harper claims that he doesn't want to re-open the abortion debate (if that's really true, why does this caucus still exist?) and it's pretty clear to me that Harper doesn't value the fact that I'm a woman.
Yep, that's our "progressive" government... oh, that's right, they dropped the "progressive" from their party name. Well, at least they've been honest about one thing.
And so how does our new leader of the opposition stand up to this bully of a government? He rolls over and does their bidding. Well done, Ignatieff, well done... I get to keep my nickname for you: The Gutless Wonder.
Labels: harper bashing, politics, rant
1.02.2009
Happy Fracking New Year
This post is for all of my well-meaning friends and family who made my holidays miserable. I have health problems. Most of my friends and family should know that fact by now. Not minor health problems, either, but stuff that affects me every single day in a significant way.
Driving, even in the best of weather, is tiring for me. I hate that fact because I love to drive, but I have had to accept that it drains me. And driving in bad weather obviously makes it worse. Since I only have chunks of energy that last for about two hours, if you (and I speak to the general "you", no one person in particular)... so if you want me to be present at an event that will be longer than one hour (which most holiday functions are) perhaps you could offer me a ride and not just be upset when I honestly say that I'm not up to it.
If you tell me that I can call you any time I need medication or other items picked up from the store, don't be surprised when I take you up on it. And please don't make it sound like I've inconvenienced you, because that's why I didn't want to call you in the first place. But you insisted that you wanted to help out and I foolishly believed you.
I'm sorry that I'm still grieving the loss of my cat. And I'm sorry that I'm having a hard time dealing with my first Christmas since my grandmother died and an even harder time watching my grandfather cope with this Christmas. I don't have much of a reserve to begin with and all of that grief leaves me with nothing left. I did tell everyone that I didn't want to do the holiday thing except for spending Christmas Day with my grandfather, so why are you so upset with me that I did what I said?
This is a marathon I'm running, people, not a sprint. I don't get a day off from it. So I'm sorry if I can't be all sweetness and light and accommodate everybody, but you all seem to think it's a sprint and we should have passed the finish line already. But I will never live to pass the finish line unless they find a cure for lupus, sjögrens and chronic migraines. So you guys go on home and pop your champagne, your sprint is done. I'll just keep limping along in my solitary marathon. I had a feeling I was out there all alone. Now I know for sure.
Driving, even in the best of weather, is tiring for me. I hate that fact because I love to drive, but I have had to accept that it drains me. And driving in bad weather obviously makes it worse. Since I only have chunks of energy that last for about two hours, if you (and I speak to the general "you", no one person in particular)... so if you want me to be present at an event that will be longer than one hour (which most holiday functions are) perhaps you could offer me a ride and not just be upset when I honestly say that I'm not up to it.
If you tell me that I can call you any time I need medication or other items picked up from the store, don't be surprised when I take you up on it. And please don't make it sound like I've inconvenienced you, because that's why I didn't want to call you in the first place. But you insisted that you wanted to help out and I foolishly believed you.
I'm sorry that I'm still grieving the loss of my cat. And I'm sorry that I'm having a hard time dealing with my first Christmas since my grandmother died and an even harder time watching my grandfather cope with this Christmas. I don't have much of a reserve to begin with and all of that grief leaves me with nothing left. I did tell everyone that I didn't want to do the holiday thing except for spending Christmas Day with my grandfather, so why are you so upset with me that I did what I said?
This is a marathon I'm running, people, not a sprint. I don't get a day off from it. So I'm sorry if I can't be all sweetness and light and accommodate everybody, but you all seem to think it's a sprint and we should have passed the finish line already. But I will never live to pass the finish line unless they find a cure for lupus, sjögrens and chronic migraines. So you guys go on home and pop your champagne, your sprint is done. I'll just keep limping along in my solitary marathon. I had a feeling I was out there all alone. Now I know for sure.
Labels: health, rant, special days
10.07.2008
Presidential Debate
I'm currently watching the presidential debate and I'm moved to ask...
Is McCain really that dense? Or is he simply willfully misunderstanding everything that Obama says? Because he keeps repeating his misrepresentations of what Obama is saying and it's pissing me off. I believe it's the latter, which makes it no better really. Neither scenario makes me comfortable with the possibility that thisidiot man might become president.
Is McCain really that dense? Or is he simply willfully misunderstanding everything that Obama says? Because he keeps repeating his misrepresentations of what Obama is saying and it's pissing me off. I believe it's the latter, which makes it no better really. Neither scenario makes me comfortable with the possibility that this
4.10.2008
It Breaks My Art
I'm about to post about something I can barely bring myself to think about, but I believe it needs to be discussed. There's this "artist" that was brought to my attention through Facebook. I had so hoped would turn out to be another Facebook hoax, but I have yet to be able to debunk it:
The gallery exhibition was real. That much I have been able to confirm. The details vary widely from site to site. Some claim that the dog was only tied up for the three hours a day and that it escaped back to the streets after a few days. Others claim even worse details than those stated in the Facebook group. One blog claims to have a statement from the artist:
Is that actually the artist's statement? I don't know. Is there more to the statement that describes that actual exhibit? I don't know. Some bloggers have read the article in the Guardian and been placated. I, personally, would feel better about that stance if there were more legitimate news stories to back it up. Other bloggers say that PETA is already aware of it, but I find no mention of it on their blog. Snopes, the site that I usually look to for debunking, has the status of this rumour as Undetermined. So I really don't know what to believe.
Now I don't usually post about something when I don't have all the facts but this is just so disturbing and, unfortunately, too easy to believe. So assuming this to be true, here's my rant…
If the "artist" REALLY cared about the plight of these dogs there is no way on this earth that he would have killed one so slowly and so cruelly. What could he have done if his intention was REALLY altruistic? Let's see… record the dogs on the street with video, film or photographs, pretend to be the dog yourself in the gallery, hire an actor to be the dog, use paint, sculpture or cuts of meat from a butcher to create a symbolic dog, combine any or all of the above with other images or installations to allow the viewer to make connections that weren't apparent before. By God man, there are infinite humane ways to shed light on this issue. If this "artist" was REALLY trying to do as he claims, he was--in the words of Joan of Arcadia--suffering from a failure of imagination. So what kind of "artist" does that make him? A fraud and a hack. And what kind of a person does that make him? Well, let's just say that I believe this man deserves to experience everything that he forced that dog to experience. Everything.
And if it turns out that the Guardian article is true and the dog was actually fed during the run of the exhibit? Well (a) if you look at pictures of the dog (I couldn't stand to post them here, but just Google and you'll see), that dog should have been at the vet's not on display at a gallery and (b) it still ain't art. Art requires imagination. And for my comments about the imagination of this "artist", see above rant.
In 2007, Guillermo Vargas Habacuc, a so called artist, took an abandoned dog from the streets, tied him to a very short rope to a wall in an art gallery, and left a kettle of food on the other side of the room, beyond his reach, and left him there to slowly die of hunger and thirst.
The gallery exhibition was real. That much I have been able to confirm. The details vary widely from site to site. Some claim that the dog was only tied up for the three hours a day and that it escaped back to the streets after a few days. Others claim even worse details than those stated in the Facebook group. One blog claims to have a statement from the artist:
The purpose of the work was not to cause any type of infliction on the poor, innocent creature, but rather to illustrate a point. In my home city of San Jose, Costa Rica, tens of thousands of stray dogs starve and die of illness each year in the streets and no one pays them a second thought.
Now, if you publicly display one of these starving creatures, such as the case with Nativity, it creates a backlash that brings out a big of hypocrisy in all of us. Nativity was a very sick creature and would have died in the streets anyway.
Is that actually the artist's statement? I don't know. Is there more to the statement that describes that actual exhibit? I don't know. Some bloggers have read the article in the Guardian and been placated. I, personally, would feel better about that stance if there were more legitimate news stories to back it up. Other bloggers say that PETA is already aware of it, but I find no mention of it on their blog. Snopes, the site that I usually look to for debunking, has the status of this rumour as Undetermined. So I really don't know what to believe.
Now I don't usually post about something when I don't have all the facts but this is just so disturbing and, unfortunately, too easy to believe. So assuming this to be true, here's my rant…
If the "artist" REALLY cared about the plight of these dogs there is no way on this earth that he would have killed one so slowly and so cruelly. What could he have done if his intention was REALLY altruistic? Let's see… record the dogs on the street with video, film or photographs, pretend to be the dog yourself in the gallery, hire an actor to be the dog, use paint, sculpture or cuts of meat from a butcher to create a symbolic dog, combine any or all of the above with other images or installations to allow the viewer to make connections that weren't apparent before. By God man, there are infinite humane ways to shed light on this issue. If this "artist" was REALLY trying to do as he claims, he was--in the words of Joan of Arcadia--suffering from a failure of imagination. So what kind of "artist" does that make him? A fraud and a hack. And what kind of a person does that make him? Well, let's just say that I believe this man deserves to experience everything that he forced that dog to experience. Everything.
And if it turns out that the Guardian article is true and the dog was actually fed during the run of the exhibit? Well (a) if you look at pictures of the dog (I couldn't stand to post them here, but just Google and you'll see), that dog should have been at the vet's not on display at a gallery and (b) it still ain't art. Art requires imagination. And for my comments about the imagination of this "artist", see above rant.
Labels: animals, art and photography, rant
3.04.2008
Alberta Politics Suck
More Tories than ever? Are you fracking kidding me?
"Voter turnout Monday hit a new record low" (The Canadian Press)
No sh!t, Sherlock. The conspiracy theorist in me starts to look at the fact that they moved a whole slew of polling stations but didn't bother to send that information out to many of us nor did they publish that information in any of the newspapers (something that used to be standard practice). No, they only posted that information on a website that crashed because of too much traffic yesterday... gee, how could they possibly have predicted the site would get so much traffic on election day?
Are you buying that bullsh!t? Because I'm not.
"Voter turnout Monday hit a new record low" (The Canadian Press)
No sh!t, Sherlock. The conspiracy theorist in me starts to look at the fact that they moved a whole slew of polling stations but didn't bother to send that information out to many of us nor did they publish that information in any of the newspapers (something that used to be standard practice). No, they only posted that information on a website that crashed because of too much traffic yesterday... gee, how could they possibly have predicted the site would get so much traffic on election day?
Are you buying that bullsh!t? Because I'm not.
2.24.2008
Bad Effing Day
I'm having a crappy day and the few people that I actually talk to about my problems are either the cause of them, trying to head shrink me or watching the $#@%! academy awards. You might be expecting me to be watching it, too. And I was looking forward to it, albeit only because Jon Stewart is hosting. But I'm in no mood to gain enjoyment from it now, so why make myself feel worse by watching something that I know I ought to be enjoying but I can't because of my crappy day that I can't vent about.
I was hoping that I would feel better after writing here but, because I refuse to publicize the details about my day, it really is doing nothing to exorcise my demons. I guess it was worth a shot, but it's done frack all. I'm still pissed off, crying and missing Jon Stewart making fun of Hollywood. Can we please skip the rest of today and just wake up tomorrow? Please?
I was hoping that I would feel better after writing here but, because I refuse to publicize the details about my day, it really is doing nothing to exorcise my demons. I guess it was worth a shot, but it's done frack all. I'm still pissed off, crying and missing Jon Stewart making fun of Hollywood. Can we please skip the rest of today and just wake up tomorrow? Please?
Labels: rant
12.06.2007
FFWD Can't Make Up It's Mind about WAOM
I just read a review in FFWD about "Walk All Over Me" that complained about the plot leaving its "study of the dominatrix world" and turning into "a fumbling caper." The reviewer was disappointed that the film didn't live up to its "potential of exploring a sexy master-and-apprentice relationship"... um, yeah but that's not what the movie is about. Maybe that's what certain types of people would want a movie starring Tricia Helfer and Leelee Sobieski in dominatrix garb to be about, but thankfully it's a much better and more universally relatable story than some penthouse channel piece of trash that Lisha Hassanali apparently wanted to see.
Perhaps she should have read the FFWD article about the movie during the Calgary International Film Festival, where a much more discerning reviewer wrote: "Despite its dalliance in the world of S&M and the prerequisite violence of all indie-crime movies, the film isn't the lurid exploitation film the description evokes."
Thank you! Nor is it supposed to be lurid or exploitive.
If "Walk All Over Me" was an onion, the outer skin would be the dominatrix layer. (And I think we can all agree that it's a very attractive layer.) Peel that back and you've got a caper flick, with both the danger and the comedy of the classic capers and a bit of buddy movie thrown in. But at it's core, "Walk All Over Me" is a coming-of-age movie. The young woman in question, Alberta (played by Leelee Sobieski), just happens to come of age in a crime thriller laced with dark humour. But the whole dominatrix bit is largely a means of getting Alberta's journey started, the journey of a guileless woman beginning to find her confidence.
So how is it that a published film reviewer is unable to comprehend that the dominatrix subplot is a METAPHOR for a young woman learning how to take control of her own life? Yes, it's a metaphor that happens to add humour and spice, but it's still a metaphor. Do you know what a metaphor is, Lisha? Here, this might help: Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.
Perhaps she should have read the FFWD article about the movie during the Calgary International Film Festival, where a much more discerning reviewer wrote: "Despite its dalliance in the world of S&M and the prerequisite violence of all indie-crime movies, the film isn't the lurid exploitation film the description evokes."
Thank you! Nor is it supposed to be lurid or exploitive.
If "Walk All Over Me" was an onion, the outer skin would be the dominatrix layer. (And I think we can all agree that it's a very attractive layer.) Peel that back and you've got a caper flick, with both the danger and the comedy of the classic capers and a bit of buddy movie thrown in. But at it's core, "Walk All Over Me" is a coming-of-age movie. The young woman in question, Alberta (played by Leelee Sobieski), just happens to come of age in a crime thriller laced with dark humour. But the whole dominatrix bit is largely a means of getting Alberta's journey started, the journey of a guileless woman beginning to find her confidence.
So how is it that a published film reviewer is unable to comprehend that the dominatrix subplot is a METAPHOR for a young woman learning how to take control of her own life? Yes, it's a metaphor that happens to add humour and spice, but it's still a metaphor. Do you know what a metaphor is, Lisha? Here, this might help: Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary.
11.28.2007
No More Top Model for Me
True confessions time... America's Next Top Model is one of my guilty pleasure reality shows. Correction... was. Because it is a pleasure no longer. The beautiful and stunning Heather Kuzmich has been eliminated. The woman whose talent dwarfed her disability. (She has Asperger Syndrome and while everyone else tried to make it an issue for Heather, to her credit, she herself never focused on it.)Not one other girl on the show can hold a candle to Heather physically, and as for their personalities... can we say boring and bitchy, boys and girls? I won't bother watching the rest of the season because I don't give a crap about the remaining four girls. How come the quality rarely rises to the top in these model shows? I think I'm giving up on the whole franchise. There's just no point anymore.
Addendum 12.07.2007: I knew that Heather was an artist but I just discovered that she has some of her art up on deviantART under the name 0Pandoras0tear0. She is one wonderfully weird and wacky artistic gothic geeky gal. Kinda makes me wanna hang out with her. I wonder if she watches Battlestar Galactica...
10.22.2007
Pet Peeve of the Day
Taco Bell closes at 9:00 p.m. on weeknights! What kind of self-respecting fast food joint closes that early?!
Here's the deal... every two or three months, I do a big grocery shop at Superstore. I hate Superstore. But their prices make a convincing argument. So I make a deal with myself: if I go grocery shopping at Superstore, then I bribe myself with supper at the Taco Bell that's in the same shopping centre (there's no Taco Bell in the city centre so, strange or plebeian as it sounds, that really is a treat for me). But tonight took a little longer than usual since they've completely rearranged the Superstore that I shop at and I couldn't find a damn thing (before the Taco Bell incident, that would have been my pet peeve). Anyway, I finally finished my shopping and went with a relieved heart to reward myself with yummy faux-Mexican fast food, got there at 9:13 p.m. and it was locked and dark!!!!! Rassa frassa fricka fracka... arghh!
Here's the deal... every two or three months, I do a big grocery shop at Superstore. I hate Superstore. But their prices make a convincing argument. So I make a deal with myself: if I go grocery shopping at Superstore, then I bribe myself with supper at the Taco Bell that's in the same shopping centre (there's no Taco Bell in the city centre so, strange or plebeian as it sounds, that really is a treat for me). But tonight took a little longer than usual since they've completely rearranged the Superstore that I shop at and I couldn't find a damn thing (before the Taco Bell incident, that would have been my pet peeve). Anyway, I finally finished my shopping and went with a relieved heart to reward myself with yummy faux-Mexican fast food, got there at 9:13 p.m. and it was locked and dark!!!!! Rassa frassa fricka fracka... arghh!
Labels: rant
9.28.2007
You Probably Think This Post is About You...
It's interesting how some people are quick to assume that you're talking about them in a blog post. To those people: Just because you're connected to the topic in question, doesn't mean you are the person I am referring to. All you need to do is read the details and it should be clear to the people involved who I'm actually talking about. As for reading negative things into my comments and assuming they're directed to you… well, that's not what I wrote, that wasn't my intention, so that interpretation is coming from you and you only.
I find myself wondering what makes somebody assume that someone else is talking about them: A guilty conscience? Insecurity? A gossipy friend? I truly don't know. But it's a self-fulfilling prophecy, because now I really am talking about you.
I don't appreciate having a friend of many years take the word of near strangers over mine. I don't appreciate being told that I didn't help with the wedding when I designed, printed and helped assemble the invitations; when I drove around with you looking at tiaras and veils and flowers; when I helped you figure out the flowers that would be just perfect for your bouquets and boutonnieres; when I found the photos of bouquets and boutonnieres incorporating those flowers for you to show the florists; when I assembled a list of florists in your neighbourhood to make your search quicker and easier; when I went to the salon with you for your hairstyle consultation; when I made the appointment that you were too uncomfortable to make with the caterer and went with you to that appointment, even though it was at an ungodly hour for me; when I put together a list of readings that you might want to use in your ceremony and you actually chose to use two of them; when I put together the list of music you requested to choose from for the processionals; when I was the one who encouraged you to invite your friends and not just your family; when I desperately tried to arrange a bridal shower for you which you kept on insisting you didn't want (but you have conveniently forgotten that last part), so I respected your wishes on that count; when I went with you and paid for your manicure and pedicure as a replacement for that shower that you said you didn't want (an arrangement that we'd made this summer that you also apparently forgot); when I went to the seamstress with you for all of your fittings (except for the one time when I was in a workshop that I absolutely couldn't miss); when I dealt with said seamstress after you were stunned and devastated and asked for my help, but you've now apparently decided I was the villain of that particular play.
Yes, there were some things that I missed out on but most of those were things that you didn't bother to include me in. There was a time when you wanted to involve me in everything, but there was also a time that you told me I was the best friend you'd ever had. Obviously that's changed but I don't know when or why. All I know is that my conduct in this friendship did not change. And I know that I knocked myself out trying and wanting to help you with this wedding, so my conscience is clear.
I find myself wondering what makes somebody assume that someone else is talking about them: A guilty conscience? Insecurity? A gossipy friend? I truly don't know. But it's a self-fulfilling prophecy, because now I really am talking about you.
I don't appreciate having a friend of many years take the word of near strangers over mine. I don't appreciate being told that I didn't help with the wedding when I designed, printed and helped assemble the invitations; when I drove around with you looking at tiaras and veils and flowers; when I helped you figure out the flowers that would be just perfect for your bouquets and boutonnieres; when I found the photos of bouquets and boutonnieres incorporating those flowers for you to show the florists; when I assembled a list of florists in your neighbourhood to make your search quicker and easier; when I went to the salon with you for your hairstyle consultation; when I made the appointment that you were too uncomfortable to make with the caterer and went with you to that appointment, even though it was at an ungodly hour for me; when I put together a list of readings that you might want to use in your ceremony and you actually chose to use two of them; when I put together the list of music you requested to choose from for the processionals; when I was the one who encouraged you to invite your friends and not just your family; when I desperately tried to arrange a bridal shower for you which you kept on insisting you didn't want (but you have conveniently forgotten that last part), so I respected your wishes on that count; when I went with you and paid for your manicure and pedicure as a replacement for that shower that you said you didn't want (an arrangement that we'd made this summer that you also apparently forgot); when I went to the seamstress with you for all of your fittings (except for the one time when I was in a workshop that I absolutely couldn't miss); when I dealt with said seamstress after you were stunned and devastated and asked for my help, but you've now apparently decided I was the villain of that particular play.
Yes, there were some things that I missed out on but most of those were things that you didn't bother to include me in. There was a time when you wanted to involve me in everything, but there was also a time that you told me I was the best friend you'd ever had. Obviously that's changed but I don't know when or why. All I know is that my conduct in this friendship did not change. And I know that I knocked myself out trying and wanting to help you with this wedding, so my conscience is clear.
Labels: rant
9.27.2007
Sometimes the Truth Hurts
I was told that my post yesterday was "harsh." Well, it was the truth, and maybe it was a harsh truth, but I reported it accurately. I feel absolutely no need to retract anything I said and I believe I was a model of restraint given how badly this woman behaved and how horribly she made me feel, so I stand by everything I said. I don't care how sweet she may have behaved to others afterwards in an attempt to paint herself as the victim. I was there; I know how our conversation actually went down. Sometimes the truth hurts. Deal with it.
Labels: rant
9.26.2007
An Open Letter to Future Brides
Future brides… be very careful when choosing a seamstress. Just because she seems nice when you first meet her and she does good work, does not mean that you will have a good experience working with her. It doesn't matter how good the work is if your seamstress refuses to tell you how much it will cost for the little extras you enquire about. And do NOT accept, "it'll just be a little bit more" as an answer. My friend's initial quote was $200 and her final invoice—that was supposed to "just be a little bit more"—was $530. (Can we say 165% higher than the initial estimate, boys and girls?) And then when my friend paid her $550 in cash, the seamstress didn't have any change and simply kept the extra $20 for herself.
And that's not the worst of it.
Beware of any seamstress who, when you call her from the mall unable to find what she sent you to look for, tells you to wait there so she can meet up with you and go shopping and that it's really no problem at all… without telling you that she charges $30/hour for shopping trips.
And if you ask your seamstress to work on your veil, make sure that you know for a fact that she is capable of working on veils. Otherwise, you might suffer the devastation of having your beautiful veil damaged when it only needed a tiny bead every six inches along the hem rather than an orgy of beads and sequins, with the work resulting in a dime-sized hole in the veil.
Then god forbid that you call your seamstress on any of that stuff. Because no matter how polite you are, no matter how much you preface it by saying that you think she's a very nice person and does good work but you just have some questions about the invoice… well, there are some people who apparently jump to the defensive so quickly that they perceive that as a personal attack.
According to these people, suggesting that they be up front about their business charges seems to be considered offensive and apparently amounts to telling them how to run their business. And speaking firmly and not backing down is apparently tantamount to yelling at them. And I guess that correcting them when they put words in your mouth is considered a disrespectful interruption (regardless of how much more disrespectful the words being put into your mouth are). And it would appear that some people are under the delusion that being called a freelancer is as scathing an insult as some four or five letter words that I can think of… all I can say to that is try looking it up in the dictionary. I am at a total loss as to how any self-employed individual could consider "freelancer" an insult unless they simply don't understand what the word means. In which case, it's their own ignorance so why the heck are they getting so ridiculously mad at me? So mad in fact that the seamstress in our case decided not to drop the dress and veil off when she promised (mere days before the wedding) because she claimed to be afraid that I would be present. (Really? Really??? I wasn't rude. I didn't yell. I was perfectly civil, logical and professional. Enough with the bullshit, thank you very much.)
So make sure that you're dealing with someone who knows how to run the business side of their business. Design talent is NOT enough. Otherwise, you might become one of those wedding horror stories. (Or if you happen to have a Maid of Honour to deal with these people for you, be very appreciative of her for sparing you this grief… otherwise her efforts to save the wedding experience for you will pretty much have ruined it for her.)
And that's not the worst of it.
Beware of any seamstress who, when you call her from the mall unable to find what she sent you to look for, tells you to wait there so she can meet up with you and go shopping and that it's really no problem at all… without telling you that she charges $30/hour for shopping trips.
And if you ask your seamstress to work on your veil, make sure that you know for a fact that she is capable of working on veils. Otherwise, you might suffer the devastation of having your beautiful veil damaged when it only needed a tiny bead every six inches along the hem rather than an orgy of beads and sequins, with the work resulting in a dime-sized hole in the veil.
Then god forbid that you call your seamstress on any of that stuff. Because no matter how polite you are, no matter how much you preface it by saying that you think she's a very nice person and does good work but you just have some questions about the invoice… well, there are some people who apparently jump to the defensive so quickly that they perceive that as a personal attack.
According to these people, suggesting that they be up front about their business charges seems to be considered offensive and apparently amounts to telling them how to run their business. And speaking firmly and not backing down is apparently tantamount to yelling at them. And I guess that correcting them when they put words in your mouth is considered a disrespectful interruption (regardless of how much more disrespectful the words being put into your mouth are). And it would appear that some people are under the delusion that being called a freelancer is as scathing an insult as some four or five letter words that I can think of… all I can say to that is try looking it up in the dictionary. I am at a total loss as to how any self-employed individual could consider "freelancer" an insult unless they simply don't understand what the word means. In which case, it's their own ignorance so why the heck are they getting so ridiculously mad at me? So mad in fact that the seamstress in our case decided not to drop the dress and veil off when she promised (mere days before the wedding) because she claimed to be afraid that I would be present. (Really? Really??? I wasn't rude. I didn't yell. I was perfectly civil, logical and professional. Enough with the bullshit, thank you very much.)
So make sure that you're dealing with someone who knows how to run the business side of their business. Design talent is NOT enough. Otherwise, you might become one of those wedding horror stories. (Or if you happen to have a Maid of Honour to deal with these people for you, be very appreciative of her for sparing you this grief… otherwise her efforts to save the wedding experience for you will pretty much have ruined it for her.)
Labels: fashion, rant, special days
7.27.2007
Reefer Madness
I wasn't planning on posting anything right now, because I'm getting ready to head out the door. But I just read this ridiculous article in the Globe & Mail that claims "using cannabis even once can significantly increase a person's risk of suffering from a psychotic illness later in life." This report, published in a British medical journal, was based on results from seven previous studies on the long-term effects of marijuana use. So this isn't even an actual study using standardized procedures to determine if there is any causal relationship between cannabis and psychosis. This is simply going back through old studies hoping to find sufficient evidence to back up something that I think they've already decided would be a convenient truth. I see this as "Reefer Madness" based on the fact that several British politicians recently admitted to having smoked pot in their past.
The authors said people diagnosed with mental illness prior to their participation were excluded from their research. But did they actually bother to test the people who participated who had yet to be diagnosed. Because a lot of people who have some symptoms of mental illness will use cannabis in an attempt to relieve them, but they haven't actually been to a doctor about those symptoms and therefore haven't been diagnosed. But the study doesn't count that... because it's not an actual study! It's report based on several different studies that had several different parameters and objectives.
Aside from the fact that it's an obviously biased report, it's just plain bad science! So please, don't believe everything you read. Find out the actual facts and reach your own conclusions. Because this report is just a bunch of B.S.
The authors said people diagnosed with mental illness prior to their participation were excluded from their research. But did they actually bother to test the people who participated who had yet to be diagnosed. Because a lot of people who have some symptoms of mental illness will use cannabis in an attempt to relieve them, but they haven't actually been to a doctor about those symptoms and therefore haven't been diagnosed. But the study doesn't count that... because it's not an actual study! It's report based on several different studies that had several different parameters and objectives.
Aside from the fact that it's an obviously biased report, it's just plain bad science! So please, don't believe everything you read. Find out the actual facts and reach your own conclusions. Because this report is just a bunch of B.S.
7.19.2007
My Poor Car
As I promised in Here's What Happened, a photo of my poor beloved Honda named Newt... post drunken idiot schmucking into it:
And what you can't see... all of the other wheels are pointing straight ahead, which this one obviously isn't (can you say "bent rear axle," boys and girls?). Plus there are scratches all along the side of my car where the other car dragged against it for a while.
I still don't know if I'm getting any compensation from the insurance company even though it happened over a month ago. And I fear that my dear sweet car may be a write off, because the door doesn't seem to be closing properly... not a good sign in a car with unibody construction. But I'm waiting for the estimate until the insurance company rules yay or nay, because Newt is obviously not driveable at the moment and towing it back and forth from the garage is not the way I want to spend my time or money (or more accurately, my limited number of CAA tows).
The lack of a car is wreaking havoc not just with my daily routine but also my health. You can't see it in the photo, but Newt has tinted windows. And no, it's not to look cool, it's to protect me from the sun because exposure to sunlight triggers Lupus flares. Needless to say, taking the bus leaves me a little overexposed. Especially because (a) the buses in Calgary don't run often enough and they don't run on schedule, so there are often very long wait times involved and (b) for some reason, even though Calgary is probably one of the sunniest cities in Canada, they don't believe in providing shade in their bus shelters... the roofs are clear plexiglass! What the frack?
Anyway, I'll be very glad when this all gets sorted out. And fortunately, my Dad has stepped in so I'll be able to cope even if the insurance company shafts me. But I'm still crossing my fingers that it'll all work out all right.
And what you can't see... all of the other wheels are pointing straight ahead, which this one obviously isn't (can you say "bent rear axle," boys and girls?). Plus there are scratches all along the side of my car where the other car dragged against it for a while.
I still don't know if I'm getting any compensation from the insurance company even though it happened over a month ago. And I fear that my dear sweet car may be a write off, because the door doesn't seem to be closing properly... not a good sign in a car with unibody construction. But I'm waiting for the estimate until the insurance company rules yay or nay, because Newt is obviously not driveable at the moment and towing it back and forth from the garage is not the way I want to spend my time or money (or more accurately, my limited number of CAA tows).
The lack of a car is wreaking havoc not just with my daily routine but also my health. You can't see it in the photo, but Newt has tinted windows. And no, it's not to look cool, it's to protect me from the sun because exposure to sunlight triggers Lupus flares. Needless to say, taking the bus leaves me a little overexposed. Especially because (a) the buses in Calgary don't run often enough and they don't run on schedule, so there are often very long wait times involved and (b) for some reason, even though Calgary is probably one of the sunniest cities in Canada, they don't believe in providing shade in their bus shelters... the roofs are clear plexiglass! What the frack?
Anyway, I'll be very glad when this all gets sorted out. And fortunately, my Dad has stepped in so I'll be able to cope even if the insurance company shafts me. But I'm still crossing my fingers that it'll all work out all right.
6.27.2007
No one is available to take your call right now...
Blog temporarily suspended due to extreme frustration with the crap that is my life.
Labels: rant
5.20.2007
ABC Sucks
Remember my post about Cyberstalking? Well, ABC did NOT do justice to this story or our fellow blogger.
Kat was interviewed by ABC for this piece about cyberstalking. The final edit left a great deal to be desired. Kat is a strong woman who wants tough cyberstalking laws and is not afraid to speak out about her own situation. The ABC story implies that she is hiding and quaking in her boots, which is absolutely not true.
read more | digg story
And if you want to watch the oh-so-pathetic piece, here it is:
Kat was interviewed by ABC for this piece about cyberstalking. The final edit left a great deal to be desired. Kat is a strong woman who wants tough cyberstalking laws and is not afraid to speak out about her own situation. The ABC story implies that she is hiding and quaking in her boots, which is absolutely not true.
read more | digg story
And if you want to watch the oh-so-pathetic piece, here it is:
Labels: blogging, politics, rant
5.18.2007
Best Movie Ever... How Do You Decide?
I've got a shelf full of movie books. Some are general film and video guides, some discuss film theory, some are books about the making of specific movies and then there are the "best movie" books. But what criteria do you use to consider something a "best movie"? Number of Oscar wins? Amount of money grossed? Breaking new ground? Do you judge based on story, cinematography, acting, directing, emotional impact?
Personally, I don't care who wins the Oscars. And I care even less about the amount of money grossed. If we went by that standard, Miss Congeniality would be a better movie than Memento... and so help me, if you think that's actually the case then you might as well just stop reading now because du bist ein dummkopf!
Of course, if you head over to the American Film Institute, their top 100 is predictably classic with their best movie being Citizen Kane, followed by Casablanca, The Godfather, Gone with the Wind and Lawrence of Arabia. Yawn.
If you were to go by the Internet Movie Database, the best movie ever would be either The Godfather or The Shawshank Redemption (I admit to being surprised at seeing Shawshank that high). Now I'm not saying The Godfather is not a good movie, but I'm sooo sick of hearing it touted as the best movie of all time. Personally, I think a lot of the people out there who claim it to be the best are just sheep, following the lead of so-called experts.
Pulp Fiction is right up there on IMDb and that would be one that I would be more likely to pick because I think its chronology is wonderfully mind-bending, the acting is outstanding, the script makes me wish I could write like that and of course the ending elevates it from a good movie to a fracking brilliant one. But that's not what I'm picking as my best movie ever.
So now we come to the big reveal. What movie will I proclaim as the best movie ever? Drumroll please... Mary Shelley's Frankenstein by Kenneth Branagh.
Why? First off, let's just say right off the top that Branagh is an artistic genius. Dislike his ego all you want, but his genius should never be in question. But why Frankenstein, which was far less "successful" than Hamlet or Hank V or most of his other films? Because for the first time someone actually captured the true vision of Mary Shelley, instead of the Hollywood horror films that completely failed to understand what the story was about. It makes my blood boil when people claim that it was Branagh who missed the mark when they've never taken the fracking time to read the actual book! Branagh's film portrayed the tragedy of the creature's life and the philosophy that infused Shelley's original novel, that of Locke's sensationalism and her own father's philosophy of the importance of companionship and the social affections. And I do believe that holding true to the original source is an important aspect of a good movie. But certainly not the only thing.
And allow me to address the scene of the creature's "birth." It is not "ridiculous" as some reviewers claim. It is compelling and beautiful and heartbreaking. And if you can't see that, if all you see is two actors rolling around in a bunch of slime, then you just don't get it, won't get it and maybe don't even deserve to get it. Think context, think subtext... just think! And maybe you'll come to appreciate it rather than mock it.
But film is, above all, a visual medium. The stark settings of Branagh's Frankenstein add a surreal quality to the film and that sweeping staircase in the Swiss castle is fantastic... in the true fantasy sense of the word. And with it's grand imagery, spiraling cinematography and exponentially increasing pace, Branagh's Frankenstein truly becomes the nightmare that inspired Mary Shelley to write her story.
So maybe next time you go to rent movies, you'll give this underrated but brilliant movie a chance.
What movie do you think is the best ever? Have I dissed it in the course of this diatribe? Let me know.
Personally, I don't care who wins the Oscars. And I care even less about the amount of money grossed. If we went by that standard, Miss Congeniality would be a better movie than Memento... and so help me, if you think that's actually the case then you might as well just stop reading now because du bist ein dummkopf!
Of course, if you head over to the American Film Institute, their top 100 is predictably classic with their best movie being Citizen Kane, followed by Casablanca, The Godfather, Gone with the Wind and Lawrence of Arabia. Yawn.
If you were to go by the Internet Movie Database, the best movie ever would be either The Godfather or The Shawshank Redemption (I admit to being surprised at seeing Shawshank that high). Now I'm not saying The Godfather is not a good movie, but I'm sooo sick of hearing it touted as the best movie of all time. Personally, I think a lot of the people out there who claim it to be the best are just sheep, following the lead of so-called experts.
Pulp Fiction is right up there on IMDb and that would be one that I would be more likely to pick because I think its chronology is wonderfully mind-bending, the acting is outstanding, the script makes me wish I could write like that and of course the ending elevates it from a good movie to a fracking brilliant one. But that's not what I'm picking as my best movie ever.
So now we come to the big reveal. What movie will I proclaim as the best movie ever? Drumroll please... Mary Shelley's Frankenstein by Kenneth Branagh.
Why? First off, let's just say right off the top that Branagh is an artistic genius. Dislike his ego all you want, but his genius should never be in question. But why Frankenstein, which was far less "successful" than Hamlet or Hank V or most of his other films? Because for the first time someone actually captured the true vision of Mary Shelley, instead of the Hollywood horror films that completely failed to understand what the story was about. It makes my blood boil when people claim that it was Branagh who missed the mark when they've never taken the fracking time to read the actual book! Branagh's film portrayed the tragedy of the creature's life and the philosophy that infused Shelley's original novel, that of Locke's sensationalism and her own father's philosophy of the importance of companionship and the social affections. And I do believe that holding true to the original source is an important aspect of a good movie. But certainly not the only thing.
And allow me to address the scene of the creature's "birth." It is not "ridiculous" as some reviewers claim. It is compelling and beautiful and heartbreaking. And if you can't see that, if all you see is two actors rolling around in a bunch of slime, then you just don't get it, won't get it and maybe don't even deserve to get it. Think context, think subtext... just think! And maybe you'll come to appreciate it rather than mock it.
But film is, above all, a visual medium. The stark settings of Branagh's Frankenstein add a surreal quality to the film and that sweeping staircase in the Swiss castle is fantastic... in the true fantasy sense of the word. And with it's grand imagery, spiraling cinematography and exponentially increasing pace, Branagh's Frankenstein truly becomes the nightmare that inspired Mary Shelley to write her story.
So maybe next time you go to rent movies, you'll give this underrated but brilliant movie a chance.
What movie do you think is the best ever? Have I dissed it in the course of this diatribe? Let me know.
5.17.2007
Google Disappointment
I was getting all prepared to add a "Most Popular Posts" feature to my sidebar, when one of my posts dropped off the Google map, so to speak. My post that talks about my tribal sun tattoo was attracting huge amounts of traffic but then that traffic completely disappeared overnight. Formerly, when you would do a Google image search for "tribal sun tattoo" or "hebrew tattoo", the image from my post used to be right there on the second page out of thousands of images:
Well, it isn't there anymore. And it didn't just drop down in the rankings. It's simply not there. I know because when I added "Limes with Orange" to the search there were no results. How can it go from being one of the more popular tattoo images on Google to being invisible to them? Very disappointing.
Update May 24, 2007: I don't know what happened there for a while, but whatever it was appears to have been fixed. My tattoo is back and even higher than before in the search results. Cool!
Well, it isn't there anymore. And it didn't just drop down in the rankings. It's simply not there. I know because when I added "Limes with Orange" to the search there were no results. How can it go from being one of the more popular tattoo images on Google to being invisible to them? Very disappointing.
Update May 24, 2007: I don't know what happened there for a while, but whatever it was appears to have been fixed. My tattoo is back and even higher than before in the search results. Cool!
5.10.2007
Bad Day
Well, today is the long awaited day of the screening of my herland festival workshop film... and I'm having a crappy fracking day! My car got towed, my phone went haywire, the film union misplaced my information, my carefully scheduled recording time for my other film is all fracked up now, my friends are acting unfriendly, you name it, it's happening to me today. I just want to go back to bed and wake up tomorrow and have everything be okay. But I can't so I just have to suffer through this god awful day and try not to let it completely ruin my very first screening ever. Kinda hard when you just feel like shouting from the rooftops: Life sucks!
Labels: rant
3.04.2007
Copywrong
A couple of articles on Boing Boing started me musing, once again, on the ridiculous abuse of copyright. (Remember "Apathy Reigns Triumphant" and "Tunes on TV"?)
First article: Vancouver Olympics will own words like "winter," "2010" and "Vancouver"
Um... huh? Since when can you grant someone the right to govern the use of generic words like "winter"?
Second article: Dear CSPAN: you're not Disney, Congress isn't Mickey
No shit, Sherlock. Oops, was that my outside voice?
These both reminded me of the whole Starbucks vs. HaidaBucks debacle. (At least the little guy won out that time! Check out their amusing comparison of the two companies and their even more amusing comparison of Starbucks and other common bucks
.)
All of this leads me back to the common question of why common sense is so uncommon? (So trite, but so true.) I wish I had a good answer but damned if I know. I don't even have the energy for a full-scale rant on the subject, it's just too depressing. But further insight (or perhaps I should say "actual insight") on copyright issues can be found in Cites & Insights: Crawford at Large (check out his Copyright Currents section) and the Fair Use Network.
P.S. I wonder if I should now be worried about getting a takedown notice from Boing Boing or the Vancouver Olympics or Starbucks or the creators of the Rocky Horror Picture Show or anyone else that I referenced or quoted.
First article: Vancouver Olympics will own words like "winter," "2010" and "Vancouver"
"Canadian Industry Minister Maxime Bernier recently introduced Bill C-47, the Olympic and Paralympic Marks Act, through which the Vancouver Olympics are guaranteed exclusive public use of the following words: winter, gold, silver, bronze, sponsor, Vancouver, Whistler, 2010, tenth, medals, and games..."
Um... huh? Since when can you grant someone the right to govern the use of generic words like "winter"?
Second article: Dear CSPAN: you're not Disney, Congress isn't Mickey
"Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi posted a minute of video of herself testifying on her blog. C-SPAN sent her a take down notice and shecaved incomplied. The Speaker should have stuck to her guns and told C-SPANto fuck offthat she was asserting her fair use rights to that material..."
No shit, Sherlock. Oops, was that my outside voice?
These both reminded me of the whole Starbucks vs. HaidaBucks debacle. (At least the little guy won out that time! Check out their amusing comparison of the two companies and their even more amusing comparison of Starbucks and other common bucks
.)All of this leads me back to the common question of why common sense is so uncommon? (So trite, but so true.) I wish I had a good answer but damned if I know. I don't even have the energy for a full-scale rant on the subject, it's just too depressing. But further insight (or perhaps I should say "actual insight") on copyright issues can be found in Cites & Insights: Crawford at Large (check out his Copyright Currents section) and the Fair Use Network.
P.S. I wonder if I should now be worried about getting a takedown notice from Boing Boing or the Vancouver Olympics or Starbucks or the creators of the Rocky Horror Picture Show or anyone else that I referenced or quoted.
2.06.2007
PayPerPost Rant
As I've mentioned before, I've been picking up the occasional PayPerPost (PPP) opportunity and blogging about it. It seemed like a symbiotic relationship. I could choose to blog only about things I would want to blog about anyway, I got to discover new websites that I might not have discovered on my own, plus I made a little spending money while helping to advertise things that I thought were worth advertising.
No more. They've just done this whopping "upgrade" that is so glitchy that it's not even funny. I mean, there's Beta and then there's just not-even-remotely-ready-for-use. I spent the time to write an interesting and funny (I thought) post for something that intrigued me only to lose out on the opp because of a glitch that kept repeating until the opp was no longer available. And could I get any response about why this was happening? Of course not!
At the very, very least, PPP should have written a detailed post about the changes, the new features and how to use them, along with spelling out new requirements either as required by PPP or ones that can be requested by advertisers. And this should have happened BEFORE they launched this new glitchy version. (Can we say "common sense" boys and girls?!)
And as if the glitches weren't bad enough, advertisers can now insist that bloggers include a new "disclosure" badge (which is bullshit, not that I have ANY problem with disclosure but I already have a perfectly clear disclosure policy, thank you very much) and this new badge would create a pop up when your mouse rolls over it (I HATE pop ups) and include content that the blogger (i.e. me) has no control over. No fracking thanks!
Unless somebody sorts this crap out soon and dumps some of these obnoxious new ideas, any respect I might have had for PPP will have evaporated. They'll just be blatant, obnoxious advertisement brokers who don't give a shit about quality or integrity. Just proving that all the naysayers out there were right all along. So c'mon... get your act together guys!
Addendum: I wanted to give PPP the benefit of the doubt and went back to their site today and saw that there was something interesting that I wanted to post about, but now I'm getting a new glitch... some bullshit about my host url hostname not matching the selected blog. And I'm not the only one with this problem. WTF?!?! Now that's two fracking posts that I wasted my time writing.
No more. They've just done this whopping "upgrade" that is so glitchy that it's not even funny. I mean, there's Beta and then there's just not-even-remotely-ready-for-use. I spent the time to write an interesting and funny (I thought) post for something that intrigued me only to lose out on the opp because of a glitch that kept repeating until the opp was no longer available. And could I get any response about why this was happening? Of course not!
At the very, very least, PPP should have written a detailed post about the changes, the new features and how to use them, along with spelling out new requirements either as required by PPP or ones that can be requested by advertisers. And this should have happened BEFORE they launched this new glitchy version. (Can we say "common sense" boys and girls?!)
And as if the glitches weren't bad enough, advertisers can now insist that bloggers include a new "disclosure" badge (which is bullshit, not that I have ANY problem with disclosure but I already have a perfectly clear disclosure policy, thank you very much) and this new badge would create a pop up when your mouse rolls over it (I HATE pop ups) and include content that the blogger (i.e. me) has no control over. No fracking thanks!
Unless somebody sorts this crap out soon and dumps some of these obnoxious new ideas, any respect I might have had for PPP will have evaporated. They'll just be blatant, obnoxious advertisement brokers who don't give a shit about quality or integrity. Just proving that all the naysayers out there were right all along. So c'mon... get your act together guys!
Addendum: I wanted to give PPP the benefit of the doubt and went back to their site today and saw that there was something interesting that I wanted to post about, but now I'm getting a new glitch... some bullshit about my host url hostname not matching the selected blog. And I'm not the only one with this problem. WTF?!?! Now that's two fracking posts that I wasted my time writing.
Labels: blogging, payperpost, rant
12.27.2006
MySpace... Aaargh!!!
As I mentioned previously, I recently started a Film Blog over at MySpace. I don't know why exactly I felt the need to separate those posts from the rest of the stuff I write about, but it seemed like a good idea at the time.
But, Oh... My... God! MySpace has to be the glitchiest website around. Not a day has gone by that I haven't received at least one error message. Today, it's taken me two hours (2!) to attempt to post my latest entry. Apparently it posted my first draft twice and hasn't posted my edited entry at all. I am currently attempting to remove one of the drafts so I can then edit the other... attempting. *sigh*
I'm also still waiting to hear back from their tech support (what a joke) about a problem with a link to this website that MySpace somehow arbitrarily changed to a non-existent URL and—this is the "best" part—it won't let me access it to edit it! And when I emailed them a very specific help request about this very specific problem, do you wanna know tech support's response?
So NOT helpful! I emailed them back:
That was three weeks ago and not a peep from the folks at MySpace. Could someone please explain to me why that site is so fracking popular?
But, Oh... My... God! MySpace has to be the glitchiest website around. Not a day has gone by that I haven't received at least one error message. Today, it's taken me two hours (2!) to attempt to post my latest entry. Apparently it posted my first draft twice and hasn't posted my edited entry at all. I am currently attempting to remove one of the drafts so I can then edit the other... attempting. *sigh*
I'm also still waiting to hear back from their tech support (what a joke) about a problem with a link to this website that MySpace somehow arbitrarily changed to a non-existent URL and—this is the "best" part—it won't let me access it to edit it! And when I emailed them a very specific help request about this very specific problem, do you wanna know tech support's response?
Hello,
Adding color, graphics, and sound to your profile page is easy and requires only a basic knowledge of HTML (the programming language used to create web pages on the Internet).
Simply go to "Edit Profile" and enter the desired HTML coding where appropriate. If you do not know HTML, you can reach out and make a new friend by asking someone who has color, graphics, and/or sound on their Profile page how they did it.
People on MySpace are friendly and always willing to help, so just ask! This is a great way to meet new people!
If this does not answer your question, please click:
http://viewmorepics.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=misc.contact
Thank you,
MySpace.com
So NOT helpful! I emailed them back:
I do know HTML. If you had bothered to read my question, you would know what my actual problem is:
(a) I entered the appropriate HTML code to create an active link to my website (http://www3.telus.net/weirdgrrl/) but somehow MySpace modified my link to something that doesn't exist (http://editprofile.myspace.com/www3.telus.net/weirdgrrl/); and
(b) I can no longer even get into the "Website" box of the Film Maker Details to edit it.
Please address the actual problems that I am encountering and don't just send me back to a very sparsely populated FAQ.
That was three weeks ago and not a peep from the folks at MySpace. Could someone please explain to me why that site is so fracking popular?
12.04.2006
Sound and Fury
There's this guy over at TechCrunch who seems to have made it his life's mission to bash this internet initiative called PayPerPost. I looked around his site to see what made him feel that his opinion is so much more valid than everyone else's. On the "About" page of the site it says:
Obsessively? Hmm... what a very interesting choice of words. Shall we have a chat with Dr. Freud about that?
Anyway, Arrington's most recent post is entitled: "PayPerPost Chronicles Their Amorality" where he bashes rockstartup.com, which records the birth of PayPerPost. Arrington goes on to refer to PayPerPost as an "ethically-challenged startup."
Reading his multitudinous previous posts on the subject, I gather that he objects to the fact that PayPerPost doesn't require people to disclose that they are receiving compensation for a particular post within the post itself, and yet he goes on to say it's "absurd" that PayPerPost recommends that every blogger that posts for them has a Disclosure Policy on their site.
Umm... let me get this straight, Arrington wants bloggers to disclose, but considers it absurd unless they do it in every single post. If you're giving your honest review about something (and your readership is aware that sometimes you get paid), should you really have to go out of your way to say—in that very post—that you're getting paid for your opinion in this particular case? Especially when it's simply an honest opinion, not an ad. (Arrington has ads all over his site which is highly distracting. I wonder if he actually agrees with every company that advertises there.)
And speaking of opinions, Arrrington is under the false assumption that "bloggers are required to only express positive comments" which is patently untrue. Some advertisers with PayPerPost do request positive comments, but the majority of them ask for neutral reviews. Plus, bloggers have the option of not blogging about something that they don't agree with. Apparently Arrington credits bloggers with little sense and even less intelligence. Wait a minute... isn’t he a blogger, too?
"TechCrunch, founded on June 11, 2005, is a weblog dedicated to obsessively profiling and reviewing new Internet products and companies. In addition to new companies, we will profile existing companies that are making an impact (commercial and/or cultural) on the new web space. TechCrunch is edited by Michael Arrington, who also writes a companion blog, CrunchNotes."
Obsessively? Hmm... what a very interesting choice of words. Shall we have a chat with Dr. Freud about that?
Anyway, Arrington's most recent post is entitled: "PayPerPost Chronicles Their Amorality" where he bashes rockstartup.com, which records the birth of PayPerPost. Arrington goes on to refer to PayPerPost as an "ethically-challenged startup."
Reading his multitudinous previous posts on the subject, I gather that he objects to the fact that PayPerPost doesn't require people to disclose that they are receiving compensation for a particular post within the post itself, and yet he goes on to say it's "absurd" that PayPerPost recommends that every blogger that posts for them has a Disclosure Policy on their site.
Umm... let me get this straight, Arrington wants bloggers to disclose, but considers it absurd unless they do it in every single post. If you're giving your honest review about something (and your readership is aware that sometimes you get paid), should you really have to go out of your way to say—in that very post—that you're getting paid for your opinion in this particular case? Especially when it's simply an honest opinion, not an ad. (Arrington has ads all over his site which is highly distracting. I wonder if he actually agrees with every company that advertises there.)
And speaking of opinions, Arrrington is under the false assumption that "bloggers are required to only express positive comments" which is patently untrue. Some advertisers with PayPerPost do request positive comments, but the majority of them ask for neutral reviews. Plus, bloggers have the option of not blogging about something that they don't agree with. Apparently Arrington credits bloggers with little sense and even less intelligence. Wait a minute... isn’t he a blogger, too?
11.29.2006
Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way
There's a particular topic much on my mind these days that I've avoided writing about. I think it's because the outcome matters too much to me and I'm afraid to say my piece and then have it all go to hell. What am I getting so overly dramatic about? The Liberal leadership race.
There are probably those of you out there who think I'm silly to be so worked up about this, but I AM worked up about it and dammit I think you should be too. Apathy has reigned for far too long in this country's political sphere. Our country's falling apart and our international reputation is being flushed down the toilet by our current Prime Minister. Something's gotta change. ("I realized right then that it was all wrong, that it all had to change, and that change had to start with me." ~ Utah Phillips, Korea, The Past Didn't Go Anywhere)
If Bob Rae does not win the leadership, I don't know what hope this country has. There, I've said it. And I'm not the only one saying it...
Bob Rae is our best chance to defeat Stephen Harper's Conservatives. I even joined the Liberal party to support this man! I couldn't bear it if he doesn't win. This man is a born leader, please let him lead this party... and this country. Please.
There are probably those of you out there who think I'm silly to be so worked up about this, but I AM worked up about it and dammit I think you should be too. Apathy has reigned for far too long in this country's political sphere. Our country's falling apart and our international reputation is being flushed down the toilet by our current Prime Minister. Something's gotta change. ("I realized right then that it was all wrong, that it all had to change, and that change had to start with me." ~ Utah Phillips, Korea, The Past Didn't Go Anywhere)
If Bob Rae does not win the leadership, I don't know what hope this country has. There, I've said it. And I'm not the only one saying it...
Rae our choice to lead Liberals
November 29, 2006 | Toronto Star Editorial
"In our view, Bob Rae stands out as the best choice to lead the Liberals because of his vision, progressive policies and experience. From the outset of the race, Rae rightly projected a vision of the country that started with the premise, as he says, that "prosperity matters, wealth creation matters." But he adds, with equal conviction, that "sharing opportunity" matters "because it is right. But also because it creates more prosperity and better social cohesion." On this, Rae is truly passionate. …in the Star's view, Rae is the person who should lead a revitalized Liberal team into the next election. He offers the best prospect of renewing the party, moving it boldly forward in a socially progressive direction and giving Canadians the government they deserve."
Bob Rae is our best chance to defeat Stephen Harper's Conservatives. I even joined the Liberal party to support this man! I couldn't bear it if he doesn't win. This man is a born leader, please let him lead this party... and this country. Please.
![[Valid Atom 0.3]](http://www.weirdgrrl.ca/images/valid-atom.png "Validate my Atom 0.3 feed"){kind=small}
About Weirdgrrl
