We got a new cat this past weekend. Sapphire is female and tiny. Our existing male cat is approximately 21 lbs and with a large frame (he's slightly overweight, but only by about 1-2 pounds). This new cat is barely 6 lbs, with a tiny frame. She's mostly gray with some white highlights and exceptionally short hair. She is very, very loving. She also really likes my wife, which is exactly what we were looking for in a second cat (Romy is "my" cat; he doesn't actively dislike my wife, but he doesn't go out of his way to cuddle with her either).
We have started the association and integration process. We did the tricks of petting each with a sock and then providing them with the sock with the scent of the other cat on it. We did the crated visits. Last night was the first uncrated visit and it went fairly well.
This morning, when my wife went to workout downstairs, she suddenly noticed a small gray cat watching her. Apparently there are holes big enough for Sapphire to get through, now that she wants to explore, in our unfinished rooms in the basement. Now that she's out, I figured let's just leave the door open to "her" room, where she feels safest, and see what happens. Since I work from home, I can listen for any growling, hissing, or fighting and step in.
So far, it has gone fairly well. Sapphire is walking around like she owns the place. She's not used to the squeeks and sounds of the house, though, so she runs downstairs whenever something surprises or startles her.
I just took a break and went out to the front room. Romy and Sapphire were within a few feet of each other. Sapphire was the one doing any hissing and growling, as if to say, "Back off, buddy! I'm not prey!" Romy did back off a couple of feet, and I petted and praised him. I then walked over to where Sapphire was sitting primly and properly and pet her and praised her.
I left them both in the kitchen/living room area. Romy had staked out his spot on the back of the loveseat and was simply watching her move around again. She was continuing to explore and sniff. All in all, it looks like a mostly successful pairing of the two.
If there are any fights, and I still expect at least a couple of tiffs as Romy finds her using "his" water and food dish, or they meet near their litter boxes, or similar, I do not expect them to be too bad now. While he could seriously hurt her with his size, he doesn't seem all that interested in fighting. And she is small and quick, so there are many places she could go and hide that Romy simply cannot follow. However, there initial reactions indicate a level of tolerance that I think we can foster and turn into something positive.
I'll post some pictures once she is still enough to get some.
-
You were bored and searching for something to read when serendipity brought you to my blog. Many blog responses and emails later, things see...
-
The first flight was a fun-filled trip involving a talkative pilot (on a red-eye) and a lot of turbulence. Not fun. I only cat-napped at bes...
-
On Tuesday night, after chatting with M and then playing a little City of Heroes, I left my PC and did a few things around the house. Then I...
October 18, 2012
October 11, 2012
Diablo 3 - Devil in the Details
I played Diablo and Diablo 2, plus expansions, for years. It was fun to run through the various levels and try new things with characters (for example, doing all levels on a Druid set to cast, as were-creature, and as summoner). The way most of the dungeons were fairly random, and the way the bosses leveled up with each play level, and the random nature of the drops all made for an enjoyable time. And, don't forget the cow level! What a blast that was to do, getting surrounded and mooed at by copious quantities of cows, and then taking on the king cow.
My expectations for Diablo 3 were high. They had 10 years of graphics and computing advances. This one was going to be as fun as the previous two, but with better graphics, better combat animations and fight coding, and, of course, it was going to build on the detailed story from the first two.
The first two chapters of D3 were decent-sized and had some good story elements, but the last two chapters were tiny, with poor story elements, and incredibly railroading to the player. The inclusion of a marketplace where real-world money could be spent to buy in-game benefits really took something away from the game. The graphics were good, but the fight engine had the exact same hiccups and issues that the 10 year old D2 engine had. The feeling of immersion and surprise simply wasn't there.
All through the Beta (did I mention that I was a public beta tester for the game?) we kept complaining about how easy everything was. Some of us would run through it without any gear and would be able to defeat it. It became a challenge (you can find videos on YouTube.com) for us to speed through the beta with no gear in the least amount of time, solo and in groups. We argued that having both potions and the health globes was too much-- pick one or the other, but don't have both. We argued that drops seemed to be skewed. What we heard back was always, "Don't worry, this is only a beta."
I played through the entire game on standard and then the next highest level using a Monk. At standard level it was insanely easy. I had no deaths and never used a single potion. At Nightmare level, I had a couple of deaths but mostly because of me being an idiot or overconfident, not because of anything the game did. Drops seemed to have the same issues as in beta. The fact that the last two chapters were so short/small and railroaded me to the one conclusion possible made those chapters, well, boring to play.
I started a Barbarian and a Witch Doctor, my other two favorites from the beta. I have the Barbarian close to finishing the game at standard and the WD is in chapter 2 and ... I have no desire to continue playing at all. I have no wish to go to Hell or Nightmare difficulty, to continue playing the identical game with the two new characters, and absolutely no desire to play with the other classes. The repetitious nature of the earlier Diablos, where I wanted to play it again and again and try new things simply isn't there. The magic, put simply, was gone. I wandered back to Skyrim, and continued playing my weekly LotRO game, and found excuses to do other things than play D3.
What I found was, once you got the first multi-enemy attack option for whatever class you were playing, you locked that in and increased its ability at every chance and never used anything else. Why would you? It does excellent damage against single-target and multiple-target enemies, it usually has some nice perks you can add to make the range bigger and the power do more damage or have more effects attached, and you can plow through whatever number of enemies the game throws at you. Then you simply need a panic heal or defense option and you are set. You can take on the entire game and never worry about any other powers. On my monk and barbarian, I rarely used more than two or three powers and I could beat everything in the game. Why change that philosophy?
D3 is a success. Blizzard sold enough units in the first month to make their money back and a hugely healthy profit to boot. However, you don't see the sales continuing strong months later. I don't hear my friends talking about the game and we're not excitedly looking to multiplayer the game like we did with D2 and D1. I don't see the same level of involvement with the game and the community that existed with (especially) D2. While it is true that the original audience is 10 years older, Blizzard should have been able to capitalize on all of us and get us to convince younger audiences (our children even) to get into the game too. Instead, I think it is quietly and steadily going into its own game niche and going to die away slowly, rather than have the long-term success of D2.
My expectations for Diablo 3 were high. They had 10 years of graphics and computing advances. This one was going to be as fun as the previous two, but with better graphics, better combat animations and fight coding, and, of course, it was going to build on the detailed story from the first two.
The first two chapters of D3 were decent-sized and had some good story elements, but the last two chapters were tiny, with poor story elements, and incredibly railroading to the player. The inclusion of a marketplace where real-world money could be spent to buy in-game benefits really took something away from the game. The graphics were good, but the fight engine had the exact same hiccups and issues that the 10 year old D2 engine had. The feeling of immersion and surprise simply wasn't there.
All through the Beta (did I mention that I was a public beta tester for the game?) we kept complaining about how easy everything was. Some of us would run through it without any gear and would be able to defeat it. It became a challenge (you can find videos on YouTube.com) for us to speed through the beta with no gear in the least amount of time, solo and in groups. We argued that having both potions and the health globes was too much-- pick one or the other, but don't have both. We argued that drops seemed to be skewed. What we heard back was always, "Don't worry, this is only a beta."
I played through the entire game on standard and then the next highest level using a Monk. At standard level it was insanely easy. I had no deaths and never used a single potion. At Nightmare level, I had a couple of deaths but mostly because of me being an idiot or overconfident, not because of anything the game did. Drops seemed to have the same issues as in beta. The fact that the last two chapters were so short/small and railroaded me to the one conclusion possible made those chapters, well, boring to play.
I started a Barbarian and a Witch Doctor, my other two favorites from the beta. I have the Barbarian close to finishing the game at standard and the WD is in chapter 2 and ... I have no desire to continue playing at all. I have no wish to go to Hell or Nightmare difficulty, to continue playing the identical game with the two new characters, and absolutely no desire to play with the other classes. The repetitious nature of the earlier Diablos, where I wanted to play it again and again and try new things simply isn't there. The magic, put simply, was gone. I wandered back to Skyrim, and continued playing my weekly LotRO game, and found excuses to do other things than play D3.
What I found was, once you got the first multi-enemy attack option for whatever class you were playing, you locked that in and increased its ability at every chance and never used anything else. Why would you? It does excellent damage against single-target and multiple-target enemies, it usually has some nice perks you can add to make the range bigger and the power do more damage or have more effects attached, and you can plow through whatever number of enemies the game throws at you. Then you simply need a panic heal or defense option and you are set. You can take on the entire game and never worry about any other powers. On my monk and barbarian, I rarely used more than two or three powers and I could beat everything in the game. Why change that philosophy?
D3 is a success. Blizzard sold enough units in the first month to make their money back and a hugely healthy profit to boot. However, you don't see the sales continuing strong months later. I don't hear my friends talking about the game and we're not excitedly looking to multiplayer the game like we did with D2 and D1. I don't see the same level of involvement with the game and the community that existed with (especially) D2. While it is true that the original audience is 10 years older, Blizzard should have been able to capitalize on all of us and get us to convince younger audiences (our children even) to get into the game too. Instead, I think it is quietly and steadily going into its own game niche and going to die away slowly, rather than have the long-term success of D2.
October 9, 2012
DC Comics: A Year Later
I have already documented my pros and cons of the overall DC Comics relaunch in previous posts (here and here). In those posts, I mention the things I felt worked and what I felt did not work in a general sense. Here, I'm taking a different tact: how I would have done it or spearheaded the project had I been working for DC Comics.
Once the decision was made to relaunch, I would have started slowly. Instead of forcing the issue with 52 new titles, I would have started with one: Action Comics #1. This would have been an over-sized issue that would set the groundwork for everything to come. Namely, it would introduce Superman as a fully-functioning hero. It would show this as the first time the world at large has seen a person with fantastic powers doing heroic things. Costume changes would have been minimal, and probably consist mostly of a redesign of the S-shield and removal of the red trunks (no armor here!).
In this story, which would take place today, I would NOT have had an origin story. Instead, I would simply show him as a fully realized hero and present, through his actions and words, the philosophical difference between this version and my previous version (I like that the New 52 made him less of a boy scout and more of a bruiser, but he still needs to have the inspirational aspects that would make others want to follow him/follow in his footsteps).
Throughout the story, I would weave in aspects of other characters. For example, I would show a 'not wearing a costume yet' Bruce Wayne, in the cave, and out fighting crime already, and maybe having him start his first dossier on the super-powered community. I'd probably add in a young Dick Grayson helping him out, also without a costume. I'd show a woman named Diana Prince working somewhere and wondering how she can learn more and help more, and then seeing Superman's affect on the media and the world and realizing how she can do it.
The next month I would release the following comics the first week, Action (#2), Batman, Detective, Superman, and Wonder Woman. Action and Detective would show fully-formed heroes, in costume, having adventures. Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman comics would be origin issues.
In the final week of the month, I would then release the group titles. These would include Justice League, Teen Titans, Birds of Prey, World's Finest, etc.
Once the decision was made to relaunch, I would have started slowly. Instead of forcing the issue with 52 new titles, I would have started with one: Action Comics #1. This would have been an over-sized issue that would set the groundwork for everything to come. Namely, it would introduce Superman as a fully-functioning hero. It would show this as the first time the world at large has seen a person with fantastic powers doing heroic things. Costume changes would have been minimal, and probably consist mostly of a redesign of the S-shield and removal of the red trunks (no armor here!).
In this story, which would take place today, I would NOT have had an origin story. Instead, I would simply show him as a fully realized hero and present, through his actions and words, the philosophical difference between this version and my previous version (I like that the New 52 made him less of a boy scout and more of a bruiser, but he still needs to have the inspirational aspects that would make others want to follow him/follow in his footsteps).
Throughout the story, I would weave in aspects of other characters. For example, I would show a 'not wearing a costume yet' Bruce Wayne, in the cave, and out fighting crime already, and maybe having him start his first dossier on the super-powered community. I'd probably add in a young Dick Grayson helping him out, also without a costume. I'd show a woman named Diana Prince working somewhere and wondering how she can learn more and help more, and then seeing Superman's affect on the media and the world and realizing how she can do it.
The next month I would release the following comics the first week, Action (#2), Batman, Detective, Superman, and Wonder Woman. Action and Detective would show fully-formed heroes, in costume, having adventures. Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman comics would be origin issues.
- Action #2 (and ongoing). This comic would be about showing primarily one off or short stories primarily in the action genre (a lot of fights). The Superman title would be used to show more the man behind the myth, origins, and longer-running plots.
- Superman #1. Superman's escape from Krypton, his landing in Kansas, being raised by the Kents, coming to the idea of becoming Superman, and would end with what we saw in Action #1 beginning. This would include any of the changes we saw fit to make to his history.
- I would include Krypton being a larger planet with higher gravity and the Kryptonians being photo-voltaic beings. In this way, they have a natural amount of strength above a normal human being due to the stronger gravity AND can be super-charged by solar radiation. I would show them being conquerors at first, from a planet with a high solar radiation source (like a blue star), and then becoming more scientifically-oriented and peaceful, and then choosing to live on Krypton and "depower" by living under the effects of a red sun (lower solar radiation amounts). In this way, Superman is set up as being above normal even without solar radiation, but gets all of the energy effects from being solar-charged. It sets up better how to hurt him and what happens if he is without solar energy for long periods. Show that Kryptonians helped/fought some of the other alien races, including the Czarnians (Lobo), Martians (Jonn Jonnz), Tamaranians (Starfire), Oans (maybe the fight with the Kryptonians is why they created the Manhunters and then the Lanterns), etc.
- Take away Superman's super-speed (have him be above-average in speed, but not Flash-fast) and super hearing. Instead, he is (without solar energy) simply super strong and resistant to harm. With solar energy, his strength and resistance go through the roof and he gains the power of flight, enhanced vision (including heat vision). This slight depowering makes him a) more relatable, b) less god-like, c) easier to write stories about, and d) more able to be fooled.
- Detective #1. Would simply show a current adventure for the Batman character. No origin story. This title would serve primarily for the less super-heroic stories and instead be about the guy who solves crimes and takes on the shadier side of life in Gotham.
- Batman #1. Bruce Wayne wouldn't need to change much of his history for this new world, simply modernize it. His origin would take place well before the events in Action #1.
- His parents are gunned down in his youth, he pledges to fight crime, he gets a top-notch education, then travels the world learning things he can't learn in academia, and then returns to Gotham City ready to enact his plans. The story would show him doing what he can wearing a ski mask and body armor for a couple of years; being successful, but not overly much. He then adopts Dick Grayson and trains him as his first accomplice. Upon seeing Superman's public debut, he rethinks his strategy and Batman and Robin debut in Gotham. They, however, keep a low profile, trying to be more myth than legend. Batman's costume should be more armored and Robin's should undergo a serious overhaul to make it work in the "city ninja and myth" category (bright red, yellow, and green -- not so much). Show him setting up a network of similarly driven, non-super-powered individuals, like Vic Sage, Oliver Queen, Ted Kord, etc.
- NOTE: You do not need to start with four active Robins (Tim Drake, Dick Grayson, Damian Wayne, and Jason Todd). By doing so, the company limits their growth and ability to create new and different stories for them. Start with one. Maybe leave the others for future stories or make them into new, different heroes with ties to the Batman family instead.
- Wonder Woman #1. I like what they did with the update to WW in the New 52, as already mentioned in previous blogs. Making her the daughter of Hippolyta and Zeus accounts better for her skill-set and power level (roughly akin to Superman's). So keep that idea and change how she becomes the actual persona of "Wonder Woman."
- Show that her mother, and all Amazons, are expected to spend a year on walk-about, learning about the world outside of their mystic shores. Show them having diplomatic relations with Atlantis/Aquaman's people. Show her mother donning a colorful outfit and helping the Allies during World War 1/2 (which can help set up a JSA title or that there were previous "heroes"). Show Diana seeing all the poverty, war, strife, etc. of the world outside her island and, upon seeing Superman's debut, opting to don a costume similar to her mother's and using her powers to help. In the background, always keep in mind her Greek Mythology roots and show her siblings and relatives (the gods and other demi-gods) working with and against her. Show some connection to Dr. Fate, Hawkman (now a mystical Avatar character), Shazam/Black Adam, etc.
The following week I would release Flash, Green Lantern, Aquaman, Green Arrow/Black Canary, Animal Man, Swamp Thing.
- Flash #1. Show Barry Allen be an actual scientist, working specifically in an area that can translate into speed somehow, gaining the power of super-speed (maybe Higgs-Boson? or the use of laser beams as propulsion methods for space missions?). No more "Speed Force," instead make the character have to overcome friction and other issues (or travel more slowly). Make sure each (future) speedster in the DC Universe has a unique way in which they become super fast. Have them all run at different speeds for different reasons.
- Barry Allen - scientifically created, can travel "as fast as a molecule shot in the Higgs-Boson."
- Wally West - struck by lightning and now travel "as fast as electricity" (and creates those classic bolts around his body as seen often when he gets going fast).
- Jay Garrick - created an exo-suit that allowed him to run "as fast as a plane can fly."
- Etc.
- Green Lantern #1. Get rid of all the colors (at least initially) and go back to only Green. Have an alien give his ring to Hal Jordan and Hal is immediately whisked away to Oa, where he learns of the Green Lantern Corp (much smaller). Change them from "intergalactic police force" to more of a "galaxy protectors." Define more simply what the ring can do: the rings are tapped into the universe's quantum field (no longer loses charges). The item, a scientific device with a computer in it, then provides the wearer with a force bubble for protection and the ability to tap into and use the quantum field's energy to create constructs, which happen to be green in color. These constructs are as strong as the will power and imagination of the creator and can be made to do incredible things.
- Aquaman #1. The New 52 version has brought this character to prominence and popularity, finally. So do that, but within the confines of what I have mentioned above. Show his people and him having interaction with the Amazons and other mystical/mythological peoples.
- Green Arrow/Black Canary #1. Do this as a team-up comic. Show them as a (strong) couple who lives and fights together. I think there is a lot of mileage from showing a couple struggling with and overcoming all of the issues of being a couple AND being super-heroes. People need positive couple role models, as the media often forgets that, while 50% of marriages end in divorce, that means 50% also succeed and overcome and work. Show that.
- Animal Man #1 and Swamp Thing #1. The current runs are also successful and praised. Do that, but within the confines of what has been said above. Maybe show the Red and the Green as underlying powers for other super heroes and show that the Red and the Green have been around since the beginning of the planet, and avatars of each have existed prior to this current age of super heroes.
Week three would start to show the lesser-known characters. I'd introduce Blue Beetle, Captain Atom, Firestorm, Catwoman, Hawkman/woman, etc.
- Blue Beetle - I'd still use the Jaime Reyes version (it's a good character and adds to diversity), but make him a protege, apprentice, or science-experiment of Ted Kord.
- Captain Atom - Use the silver-skinned (most popular) form. Keep his military connections and make him more of the "boy scout" than Superman.
- Firestorm - Do NOT have multiple Firestorms! Just have Ron Raymond and Jason Rusch form the duo that can become Firestorm. Maybe update the always too-busy costume with a modern appeal.
- UPDATE: Since I stopped reading Firestorm regularly, they have apparently been whittling down the other Firestorms and have made it so that Ron and Jason are both needed to make Firestorm, so they are heading in the right direction. They should have done this from the start.
- Hawkman - This can be either the male or the female version. Make the character a bridge between the mythological aspects of his history and the Red/Green from Animal Man and Swamp Thing. Make the character more of a magical character with ties to Atlantis and the Amazons through the Egyptian motif.
- Using the current Earth 2 title as a model, show how the characters team up in an organic way. Introduce new characters slowly and integrate them. Show the differences and WHY these people would team together and HOW they can work together.
- Consider changing up the norms by having one or more new/different characters in some groups. The inclusion of Cyborg in the new 52 Justice League is a good example.
- What if Superman is not a member of the Justice League, but that role is replaced by Shazam?
- In this way, you have introduced where (most of) the characters come from and what their motivations are, so you can better show how and why they would team up.
Final thoughts on this relaunch.
- Superman is called the "last son of Krypton." Make that so. Others come along, like Power Girl, Supergirl, Superboy but make them people with powers similar to, but not the same as, and wanting to pay homage or honor Superman by taking his name and image. For example:
- Supergirl - Daxamite who is helped/saved by Superman and asks to be his protege.
- Superboy - Clone with tactile telekinesis works for me; physically weaker than Superman in every way, but his power is on par with (and maybe stronger than) Superman's due to its mental nature.
- Power Girl - The inheritor of the Atlantean version of the Shazam power (giving Shazam/Captain Marvel an opposite number and pulling a small token of one of her many incarnations)?
- Wonder Woman is the result of Zeus' infidelity with Hippolyta. Any of her proteges should have a unique creation, too.
I think, in this way, you better map out your universe, the hierarchy of characters in it, tease some (who will show up later) and develop them in a more organic way. From this launch, you can then move into the more esoteric stuff, like Legion of Super-Heroes, New Gods, expanding the Bat-family, expanding the Green Lantern universe, etc. But you have a solid foundation to start with.
September 24, 2012
NFL Replacement Refs
I don't think the NFL actually cares about player safety. Exhibit A is the ongoing stalemate with the "real" NFL refs; what I have seen through the first three weeks of the NFL this season is a game that the replacement refs have little control over and games in which the players are hitting on many borderline to illegal shots to see if they can get away with it.
These replacement officials are doing, at best, and adequate job of officiating the game. However, they do not have the respect or control over the more abstract aspects of the game that the NFL referees have; you see them changing their mind after talking to coaches, you see them unsure about calls and being swayed by player emotion, you see them not making calls and assuming a replay will save their indecision, and, the worst, you see them unable to cope or deal with it when players get into a scrum on the field.
If the NFL truly cared about the player safety and putting the best product out there, they would get the NFL refs back on the field as quickly as possible. This would cause the players going for the borderline and illegal hits to step back, it would tell the players they cannot push the limits as far as they are trying to, and would increase player safety accordingly. All this for the sum total cost of approximately 1% of revenue being given to the refs. Seems like a win-win to me.
ADDENDUM
The replacement refs wound up affecting the outcome in a few different football games. The two most notable are the Detroit/Tennessee game and the Green Bay/Seattle game.
In the Lions/Titans game, the refs made the mistake of giving Tennessee a 27 yard penalty mark-off on what should have been a 15 yard penalty. This moved Tennessee well into easy field goal range and allowed Tennessee to make an easy chip shot for what became the game winner.
Even more directly, the refs missed an obvious offensive pass interference call on Golden Tate, and then ruled "simultaneous possession" on the final play of the game, giving Seattle the victory. Both the non-call of pass interference and the dubious call of simultaneous possession (sure looked like Green Bay caught the ball and Tate barely had a hand on it) directly affected the outcome of the game, as that was the very last play of the game with no time left on the clock.
In addition, there should have been a replay at least of the final play in the Patriots/Ravens game, as that field goal looked awfully wide right to a lot of people (and also directly affected the final score in the game).
Along with mistakenly giving the 49ers not one but two extra replays, the horrible calls in the Washington game, the multiple game-impacting hits to the head (to the point of knocking the helmets off of some players, but still not called fouls), and the multitude of scrums that the refs didn't stop or call fouls on, and the NFL has a serious problem on their hands.
Have people stopped watching? No, or course not. It is like a car accident on the side of the road -- no matter how much you don't want to see what's there, people still slow down and rubberneck. We're all tuning in not only for the #1 sport in America but now also to see what new screw up the refs can get into.
These replacement officials are doing, at best, and adequate job of officiating the game. However, they do not have the respect or control over the more abstract aspects of the game that the NFL referees have; you see them changing their mind after talking to coaches, you see them unsure about calls and being swayed by player emotion, you see them not making calls and assuming a replay will save their indecision, and, the worst, you see them unable to cope or deal with it when players get into a scrum on the field.
If the NFL truly cared about the player safety and putting the best product out there, they would get the NFL refs back on the field as quickly as possible. This would cause the players going for the borderline and illegal hits to step back, it would tell the players they cannot push the limits as far as they are trying to, and would increase player safety accordingly. All this for the sum total cost of approximately 1% of revenue being given to the refs. Seems like a win-win to me.
ADDENDUM
The replacement refs wound up affecting the outcome in a few different football games. The two most notable are the Detroit/Tennessee game and the Green Bay/Seattle game.
In the Lions/Titans game, the refs made the mistake of giving Tennessee a 27 yard penalty mark-off on what should have been a 15 yard penalty. This moved Tennessee well into easy field goal range and allowed Tennessee to make an easy chip shot for what became the game winner.
Even more directly, the refs missed an obvious offensive pass interference call on Golden Tate, and then ruled "simultaneous possession" on the final play of the game, giving Seattle the victory. Both the non-call of pass interference and the dubious call of simultaneous possession (sure looked like Green Bay caught the ball and Tate barely had a hand on it) directly affected the outcome of the game, as that was the very last play of the game with no time left on the clock.
In addition, there should have been a replay at least of the final play in the Patriots/Ravens game, as that field goal looked awfully wide right to a lot of people (and also directly affected the final score in the game).
Along with mistakenly giving the 49ers not one but two extra replays, the horrible calls in the Washington game, the multiple game-impacting hits to the head (to the point of knocking the helmets off of some players, but still not called fouls), and the multitude of scrums that the refs didn't stop or call fouls on, and the NFL has a serious problem on their hands.
Have people stopped watching? No, or course not. It is like a car accident on the side of the road -- no matter how much you don't want to see what's there, people still slow down and rubberneck. We're all tuning in not only for the #1 sport in America but now also to see what new screw up the refs can get into.
September 7, 2012
Much Better
The reviews are in and most fact-checking sites I'm seeing are giving Obama's speech pretty good reviews.
Obama
I've linked to only one because it seemed representative of the ones I looked at. So, at least, Obama did a pretty good job of telling truths, especially when you compare them to the outright untruths his opponents used. This right here will sway me, as an independent, non-party affiliated voter toward Obama at this state of the campaign, because I feel strongly that campaigners should not be allowed to lie in speeches. So far, that is all I've received from the Republican side.
This is NOT to say I'm thrilled with my choices. I would vote for a strong third-party candidate today if one came up with an actual PLAN for how to do all of the (very similar) things that both Romney and Obama are claiming they will do to turn America around. Neither of these two candidates have actually stated a plan nor the steps they will take to actual enact those plans. Instead, they have simply stated (fairly ephemeral) goals for what they hope to accomplish. A blogger I read often has summarized it nicely, using her past employment as an example.
I am also swayed toward Obama by my health issues, which are covered and cannot be taken away from me by Obama's health care mandates (some of the most important aspects for me come into play in 2013 and 2014). Voting for Romney would (most likely) repeal "Obamacare" and he would create... what exactly? I've been to Mitt's website and listened to his speeches and he has not mentioned what he would replace it with. Which is par for the course, as Obama repeatedly asked for Republican input in creating Obamacare and they refused but never offered an alternative plan or put their ideas out for the American people to review. It may not be great, and there are tweaks and changes that need to be made, but I'll take the bird in the hand over the (so far) non-existent birds in the bush on this one, as it directly affects me.
Lastly, I can't help but think if we had kept the Constitution's original way of electing a President and Vice-President we wouldn't be in this bi-partisan mess we are today. As I have commented before in detail, originally everyone ran for one office: President. The person with the most votes was elected and the person with the second-most votes became vice-president. I believe this was an inherent check and balance as it forced people with differing opinions to work together for the good of the country. It also allowed there to be more parties and diversity in Congress. Looking at it today, there would almost have to be less partisanship if the President and Vice-President were of different parties but working toward the same agendas. And it would also allow the two to go to Congress with a more united front on what needed to be done and why. Congress (and America in general) would likely have more parties and campaigners would have to convince individuals of their plans and goals rather than swaying enough of the other party to vote them into office.
I am, so far, both less than thrilled and less hopeful about this election. At least one party decided not to lie, so I'm not totally without hope at this early stage. Now, let the mud start slinging.
Obama
I've linked to only one because it seemed representative of the ones I looked at. So, at least, Obama did a pretty good job of telling truths, especially when you compare them to the outright untruths his opponents used. This right here will sway me, as an independent, non-party affiliated voter toward Obama at this state of the campaign, because I feel strongly that campaigners should not be allowed to lie in speeches. So far, that is all I've received from the Republican side.
This is NOT to say I'm thrilled with my choices. I would vote for a strong third-party candidate today if one came up with an actual PLAN for how to do all of the (very similar) things that both Romney and Obama are claiming they will do to turn America around. Neither of these two candidates have actually stated a plan nor the steps they will take to actual enact those plans. Instead, they have simply stated (fairly ephemeral) goals for what they hope to accomplish. A blogger I read often has summarized it nicely, using her past employment as an example.
I am also swayed toward Obama by my health issues, which are covered and cannot be taken away from me by Obama's health care mandates (some of the most important aspects for me come into play in 2013 and 2014). Voting for Romney would (most likely) repeal "Obamacare" and he would create... what exactly? I've been to Mitt's website and listened to his speeches and he has not mentioned what he would replace it with. Which is par for the course, as Obama repeatedly asked for Republican input in creating Obamacare and they refused but never offered an alternative plan or put their ideas out for the American people to review. It may not be great, and there are tweaks and changes that need to be made, but I'll take the bird in the hand over the (so far) non-existent birds in the bush on this one, as it directly affects me.
Lastly, I can't help but think if we had kept the Constitution's original way of electing a President and Vice-President we wouldn't be in this bi-partisan mess we are today. As I have commented before in detail, originally everyone ran for one office: President. The person with the most votes was elected and the person with the second-most votes became vice-president. I believe this was an inherent check and balance as it forced people with differing opinions to work together for the good of the country. It also allowed there to be more parties and diversity in Congress. Looking at it today, there would almost have to be less partisanship if the President and Vice-President were of different parties but working toward the same agendas. And it would also allow the two to go to Congress with a more united front on what needed to be done and why. Congress (and America in general) would likely have more parties and campaigners would have to convince individuals of their plans and goals rather than swaying enough of the other party to vote them into office.
I am, so far, both less than thrilled and less hopeful about this election. At least one party decided not to lie, so I'm not totally without hope at this early stage. Now, let the mud start slinging.
August 31, 2012
Slinging the Mud
I said before that I thought this election would get bad. I didn't realize the lies would start so soon or be so big this early!
Both Romney's and Ryan's speeches at the RNC are more factually incorrect than correct. When even Fox News people are admitting the fallacies of a Republican candidate, you know they must be pretty bad. I urge everyone to take what is said on both sides of the aisle with a large grain of salt and read the fact checkers thoroughly from around the web before agreeing or disagreeing with anything either side says.
Romney
Ryan (note that I linked to the Fox News site for the list of fallacies used)
If the Republicans are starting this up at their convention, and are heating up the false rhetoric this soon, I can't wait (*sarcasm) to see what the Democrats respond with. I thought it might be ugly, but this could get downright nasty.
I linked to just two (one each) fact checkers; there are at least a half dozen from both biased and independent fact checking groups that all say pretty much the same thing; the Republicans are lying about Medicare, lying about job creation, lying about Social Security, and making statements that needlessly associate the need for welfare changes with blacks (to anger and get the white voters involved and engaged).
With this precedent set, I fear what direction Obama will go in to respond. I hope, as I always do that one side and/or the other will try to remain accurate, truthful, and minimize the spin. I hope it is Obama, since both of the Republican candidates have proven incapable of that, but history suggests I will be disappointed yet again.
Both Romney's and Ryan's speeches at the RNC are more factually incorrect than correct. When even Fox News people are admitting the fallacies of a Republican candidate, you know they must be pretty bad. I urge everyone to take what is said on both sides of the aisle with a large grain of salt and read the fact checkers thoroughly from around the web before agreeing or disagreeing with anything either side says.
Romney
Ryan (note that I linked to the Fox News site for the list of fallacies used)
If the Republicans are starting this up at their convention, and are heating up the false rhetoric this soon, I can't wait (*sarcasm) to see what the Democrats respond with. I thought it might be ugly, but this could get downright nasty.
I linked to just two (one each) fact checkers; there are at least a half dozen from both biased and independent fact checking groups that all say pretty much the same thing; the Republicans are lying about Medicare, lying about job creation, lying about Social Security, and making statements that needlessly associate the need for welfare changes with blacks (to anger and get the white voters involved and engaged).
With this precedent set, I fear what direction Obama will go in to respond. I hope, as I always do that one side and/or the other will try to remain accurate, truthful, and minimize the spin. I hope it is Obama, since both of the Republican candidates have proven incapable of that, but history suggests I will be disappointed yet again.
August 24, 2012
Tripping the Light Fantastic
I love books. I like the look and the feel of them. As long as they aren't moldy, I like the smell of them. I like the sound the paper makes as it crinkles and the page turns. I have a lot of books.
I have had a Kindle* e-Reader for closing on two years now. While I do miss the aspects mentioned above, the change to electronic books is a vast improvement to my reading enjoyment.
My eyesight is not what it once was. I'm at that point where sight starts slowly degrading. In addition, I take medications that are potentially hastening that degradation. My Kindle has the ability to make the text of any book I read larger or smaller so that I can always find a comfortable size to view.
I read a lot in bed while having trouble sleeping. As I don't want to keep my wife up with either the overhead light or my table lamp, I need light to read by. We found the LightWedge to be a great compromise; I have light to read by, and the LW keeps that light primarily focused on the book I'm reading. However, this and similar solutions have issues as well. They require extra weight for you to hold. The LW has to be removed from the book and replaced each time you turn the page, which slows down your reading enjoyment and necessitates more movement than maybe you wish to do. Some clip-lights don't direct light onto the page in a uniform or pleasing way, so you get glare points and dark areas.
I have a clip-on light that works great when using my Kindle to read at night. I can read in low-light situations much more readily than with the standard type in the standard hard or softback book. The e-Ink screen is designed to be anti-glare, so there are fewer hot spots and any darker spots from a clip-on are less problematic when you can simply increase the font size. There are rumors that Amazon is working on an eReader that has, basically, a built in LightWedge, so you would not even need a clip on. Also, many Kindle covers have LED lights that use the Kindle's battery for power, so you basically have one unit that provides all the options you need.
When reading in bed, or in a reclined situation, most people rest the book on their belly. When reading at a table or on a plane, many people rest the book on the table, especially if they are reading War and Peace or anything by Stephen R. Donaldson. Books get heavy quickly. In addition, when the book is resting and you turn a page, the page scrapes across whatever you are resting it against. And you often have to use two hands to hold it and turn the pages. With my Kindle, I typically hold the book with one hand and keep my thumb on the page turn button. I can read either right handed or left handed by rotating the Kindle (and many Kindle models have the page-turn button on both sides of the case, so no rotation is needed). The fact that the average Kindle is much lighter than the average book (even lighter than most softbacks) means you can hold it one hand very easily and for longer periods than you can hold a standard book.
Lastly, my Kindle can read to me. It has a voice and the ability to read anything I put into it. So if I'm in a situation where I won't bother others, but don't want to read for myself, I can ask Kindle to do it for me and still make progress in the latest book. When I ask my wife to read to me, she usually just gives me a look like she's about to call the men in white coats to take me away.
My Kindle does not look or smell or feel like a "real" book. However, the advantages of increasing the font size, storing dozens of favorite or new books, low weight, one-handed reading, and the ability to be read to make the Kindle a replacement that can do far more than an actual book can. It makes some situations, like reading in bed, much easier. Overall, reading a Kindle is actually better than reading a book.
* = I have and use a Kindle eReader. Many of the pros I list are true of other brands of eReaders. However, I caution against using one that uses a back-lit LCD/LED display, as the eyestrain, especially reading at night/in the dark, can add up and make you use the product less. Also, back-lit LCD/LED readers use a lot more power (average of a couple of hours to up to around 10 hours use before a needed recharge. eInk displays only use power when you do something, so my Kindle stays charged for around a month of pretty heavy use (with the Wi-Fi turned off). Your mileage may vary.
I have had a Kindle* e-Reader for closing on two years now. While I do miss the aspects mentioned above, the change to electronic books is a vast improvement to my reading enjoyment.
My eyesight is not what it once was. I'm at that point where sight starts slowly degrading. In addition, I take medications that are potentially hastening that degradation. My Kindle has the ability to make the text of any book I read larger or smaller so that I can always find a comfortable size to view.
I read a lot in bed while having trouble sleeping. As I don't want to keep my wife up with either the overhead light or my table lamp, I need light to read by. We found the LightWedge to be a great compromise; I have light to read by, and the LW keeps that light primarily focused on the book I'm reading. However, this and similar solutions have issues as well. They require extra weight for you to hold. The LW has to be removed from the book and replaced each time you turn the page, which slows down your reading enjoyment and necessitates more movement than maybe you wish to do. Some clip-lights don't direct light onto the page in a uniform or pleasing way, so you get glare points and dark areas.
I have a clip-on light that works great when using my Kindle to read at night. I can read in low-light situations much more readily than with the standard type in the standard hard or softback book. The e-Ink screen is designed to be anti-glare, so there are fewer hot spots and any darker spots from a clip-on are less problematic when you can simply increase the font size. There are rumors that Amazon is working on an eReader that has, basically, a built in LightWedge, so you would not even need a clip on. Also, many Kindle covers have LED lights that use the Kindle's battery for power, so you basically have one unit that provides all the options you need.
When reading in bed, or in a reclined situation, most people rest the book on their belly. When reading at a table or on a plane, many people rest the book on the table, especially if they are reading War and Peace or anything by Stephen R. Donaldson. Books get heavy quickly. In addition, when the book is resting and you turn a page, the page scrapes across whatever you are resting it against. And you often have to use two hands to hold it and turn the pages. With my Kindle, I typically hold the book with one hand and keep my thumb on the page turn button. I can read either right handed or left handed by rotating the Kindle (and many Kindle models have the page-turn button on both sides of the case, so no rotation is needed). The fact that the average Kindle is much lighter than the average book (even lighter than most softbacks) means you can hold it one hand very easily and for longer periods than you can hold a standard book.
Note: The LightWedge actually works pretty well with the Kindle as well. However, it turns into a bit of a flashlight because the LW needs the spine of the book to stop the light from streaming out the far side of the clear plastic lighted area, so it is not optimal. The makers of LW really should put a thin opaque edge all the way around the clear area so that less light "spills out" of the viewing area.Another nice thing about an eReader is that you have so many more options at your fingertips. I often get to bed and think, 'I don't feel like reading that tonight; maybe I'll read this other thing.' Well, when you are dealing with actual books, that necessitates a lot of space used for both books, comparatively speaking. I currently have approximately 75 novels of various lengths on my Kindle, yet they do not take up any more space, or additional weight, than the Kindle itself. I can add up to another approximately 3425 books to my Kindle without increasing the weight I carry or needing any additional nightstand or bookshelf space. When you are traveling, it is nice to "pack" as many books as you want to but only have to carry the weight of one Kindle, especially if you have an unexpected layover somewhere.
Lastly, my Kindle can read to me. It has a voice and the ability to read anything I put into it. So if I'm in a situation where I won't bother others, but don't want to read for myself, I can ask Kindle to do it for me and still make progress in the latest book. When I ask my wife to read to me, she usually just gives me a look like she's about to call the men in white coats to take me away.
My Kindle does not look or smell or feel like a "real" book. However, the advantages of increasing the font size, storing dozens of favorite or new books, low weight, one-handed reading, and the ability to be read to make the Kindle a replacement that can do far more than an actual book can. It makes some situations, like reading in bed, much easier. Overall, reading a Kindle is actually better than reading a book.
* = I have and use a Kindle eReader. Many of the pros I list are true of other brands of eReaders. However, I caution against using one that uses a back-lit LCD/LED display, as the eyestrain, especially reading at night/in the dark, can add up and make you use the product less. Also, back-lit LCD/LED readers use a lot more power (average of a couple of hours to up to around 10 hours use before a needed recharge. eInk displays only use power when you do something, so my Kindle stays charged for around a month of pretty heavy use (with the Wi-Fi turned off). Your mileage may vary.
Armstrong Again
I think Lance Armstrong is right to give up his fight. Regardless of whether he did or did not use PEDs, the USADA is bound and determined to hound him until they get some level of satisfaction. In my mind it is pretty simple: he has dozens if not hundreds of clean tests (scientific, factual evidence in his favor) versus the testimony of a few people who rode both with him and against him and many of whom are on record as hating Armstrong (circumstantial evidence from biased sources).
Even the judge in the case thinks there is bias. "USADA's conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives," such as politics or publicity, U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks wrote.
I've mentioned my stance on this before, a couple of times (here and here). I'll simply sum up here:
This certainly feels like a witch hunt and I respect Armstrong more for stepping away from it after years and years of fighting. He is still an inspiration to Cancer survivors everywhere and hopefully he can focus more on raising money for that worthy endeavor.
And, hopefully, one of the groups like the UCI will continue to challenge this on the merits of the case. Hearsay should not overwhelm the tests. Now, if they were able to test his blood and urine again and this time, with today's technology, they found PEDs, I would be singing a slightly different tune (but, actually, not much). But unless or until that happens, I'm taking the dozens and hundreds of tests over the word of people who hate and envy Armstrong every day.
Even the judge in the case thinks there is bias. "USADA's conduct raises serious questions about whether its real interest in charging Armstrong is to combat doping, or if it is acting according to less noble motives," such as politics or publicity, U.S. District Judge Sam Sparks wrote.
I've mentioned my stance on this before, a couple of times (here and here). I'll simply sum up here:
- Either Armstrong did not use PEDs and he was the superior rider over his rivals of the day, many of whom have been found to have used PEDs OR,
- Armstrong did use PEDs and was the superior rider versus his rivals of the time, many of whom have been found also to have used PEDs.
This certainly feels like a witch hunt and I respect Armstrong more for stepping away from it after years and years of fighting. He is still an inspiration to Cancer survivors everywhere and hopefully he can focus more on raising money for that worthy endeavor.
And, hopefully, one of the groups like the UCI will continue to challenge this on the merits of the case. Hearsay should not overwhelm the tests. Now, if they were able to test his blood and urine again and this time, with today's technology, they found PEDs, I would be singing a slightly different tune (but, actually, not much). But unless or until that happens, I'm taking the dozens and hundreds of tests over the word of people who hate and envy Armstrong every day.
August 20, 2012
I Just Don't Get Suicide
I simply do not understand suicide. While I have been fairly low at certain times in my life, especially dealing with chronic health conditions for years, I have never once even contemplated taking my own life. For as cynical as I am, for as world-weary as I act, I am basically a fairly hopeful person, and I'm sure that helps.
What I do not understand about suicide is simple: as long as there is life, there is hope. As long as you are alive, there is the chance for something to change, to evolve, and new opportunities to come your way. If you are dead, those chances are gone. Zilch.
Suicide, to me, seems like an awfully selfish act. You are, in my eyes, telling your friends and family, your coworkers and acquaintances, that they are have nothing to offer you, they have no hope of understanding you or your state, and that they cannot help you in any way whatsoever. Actually, you are actively taking away their chance to help you, and leaving them with nothing but regrets, questions, and anger. I guess I have an incredible set of friends and family, coworkers and acquaintances, because I simply know that they can help me with anything that comes along. And they have, repeatedly. And I have helped them whenever I could.
Suicide seems like an awfully lonely act, too. You do not often hear of a suicide committing the act in front of another person or a group of people in an intimate setting. I guess, on occasion, some people commit "suicide by cop," or drive the wrong way down a highway until they hit someone, but those seem rare to me. Most suicides go somewhere lonely, away from others, and do it quietly. I would even argue that those who go into public to commit suicide are the closest to being stopped, or the least convinced (subconsciously) that the act is the right thing to do, because they are surrounding themselves with people who might talk them out of it or physically stop them. Why else go into public where any number of people can stop you?
The vast majority of the world holds Judeo-Christian/Abrahamic beliefs, being predominantly Christian or Muslim. Throw in Jews and the various "Unitarian" style religions (that predominately follow Judeo-Christian belief structures) and you have approximately 55-60% of the entire world's population covered. And in every case, suicide is considered one of the most dire of sins. (Yes, even in Islam. Look it up.) Hinduism is also negative toward suicide, feeling that it is without purpose, and it makes up approximately another 13% of the world's population. How is it that so many people still commit suicide when their belief system tells them not to? How could people in these low points of their life not seek out their religious leaders and ask for help, when they know that their religion frowns on these acts (at best) or considers it something that will cost them their eternal reward (at worst)?
No one who knows me well would accuse me of empathy. There are certain emotional reactions and situations that I simply do not understand and have trouble "getting." Yet I've had a couple of friends who have said that I "saved" them from their lowest points. Neither said the word suicide, but it was strongly implied. Apparently my strong conviction in life, in change, in opportunity swayed them to hold on a while longer and something positive happened. I once had a teacher tell me that an off-hand comment I made to him caused him to rethink his direction, lose over 100 lbs, get into better shape, and get a much better attitude.
I guess my point here is that you never know where that life-changing, mind-altering affirmation of YOU is going to come from. It might even come from that totally-lacking-in-empathy friend/acquaintance you have who has totally missed any and all clues that you are low and sinking lower. It might come from a close loved one, a bumper sticker, a religious intervention, or from a strange, unexpected other source. But, if you aren't there to receive it, it will be wasted. Why not hold on and see what's around the bend?
What I do not understand about suicide is simple: as long as there is life, there is hope. As long as you are alive, there is the chance for something to change, to evolve, and new opportunities to come your way. If you are dead, those chances are gone. Zilch.
Suicide, to me, seems like an awfully selfish act. You are, in my eyes, telling your friends and family, your coworkers and acquaintances, that they are have nothing to offer you, they have no hope of understanding you or your state, and that they cannot help you in any way whatsoever. Actually, you are actively taking away their chance to help you, and leaving them with nothing but regrets, questions, and anger. I guess I have an incredible set of friends and family, coworkers and acquaintances, because I simply know that they can help me with anything that comes along. And they have, repeatedly. And I have helped them whenever I could.
Suicide seems like an awfully lonely act, too. You do not often hear of a suicide committing the act in front of another person or a group of people in an intimate setting. I guess, on occasion, some people commit "suicide by cop," or drive the wrong way down a highway until they hit someone, but those seem rare to me. Most suicides go somewhere lonely, away from others, and do it quietly. I would even argue that those who go into public to commit suicide are the closest to being stopped, or the least convinced (subconsciously) that the act is the right thing to do, because they are surrounding themselves with people who might talk them out of it or physically stop them. Why else go into public where any number of people can stop you?
The vast majority of the world holds Judeo-Christian/Abrahamic beliefs, being predominantly Christian or Muslim. Throw in Jews and the various "Unitarian" style religions (that predominately follow Judeo-Christian belief structures) and you have approximately 55-60% of the entire world's population covered. And in every case, suicide is considered one of the most dire of sins. (Yes, even in Islam. Look it up.) Hinduism is also negative toward suicide, feeling that it is without purpose, and it makes up approximately another 13% of the world's population. How is it that so many people still commit suicide when their belief system tells them not to? How could people in these low points of their life not seek out their religious leaders and ask for help, when they know that their religion frowns on these acts (at best) or considers it something that will cost them their eternal reward (at worst)?
No one who knows me well would accuse me of empathy. There are certain emotional reactions and situations that I simply do not understand and have trouble "getting." Yet I've had a couple of friends who have said that I "saved" them from their lowest points. Neither said the word suicide, but it was strongly implied. Apparently my strong conviction in life, in change, in opportunity swayed them to hold on a while longer and something positive happened. I once had a teacher tell me that an off-hand comment I made to him caused him to rethink his direction, lose over 100 lbs, get into better shape, and get a much better attitude.
I guess my point here is that you never know where that life-changing, mind-altering affirmation of YOU is going to come from. It might even come from that totally-lacking-in-empathy friend/acquaintance you have who has totally missed any and all clues that you are low and sinking lower. It might come from a close loved one, a bumper sticker, a religious intervention, or from a strange, unexpected other source. But, if you aren't there to receive it, it will be wasted. Why not hold on and see what's around the bend?
August 15, 2012
Get Low
I don't have much to post today except that the Presidential race this year may be one of the dirtiest we've ever seen. I'm already shocked and surprised at the lies and acid that are being slung about by both parties. I'd like to reiterate that I think lying in political ads and speeches should be illegal and the party that is found guilty of it should be automatically disqualified from the race.
And I am so tired of only hearing the far right and far left talk. We need moderation, we need consensus, and we need to work together to get America back on track. Why is it when my educated friends from the far left and right get together, we can agree on middle ground and reach consensus on most every issue, yet the country's official politicians can't do that to save their lives?
And I am so tired of only hearing the far right and far left talk. We need moderation, we need consensus, and we need to work together to get America back on track. Why is it when my educated friends from the far left and right get together, we can agree on middle ground and reach consensus on most every issue, yet the country's official politicians can't do that to save their lives?
August 3, 2012
Protopage
Originally, I used Yahoo! as my home page. However, I never liked how everything sort of got clumped together with ads and other things that just made it seem overly cluttered and without any sort of purpose. When Google released iGoogle, I switched to that because I could finally create tabs of information, separate out things I wanted to see, and keep some sanity on my home page.
Google recently announced that they are doing away with iGoogle in November of 2013. At first I was upset by this, as I had used iGoogle for a number of years as my home page and it displayed information in a way that made sense to me. I had a lot of control over the display and how I saw and interacted with the data I wanted. But, now, I'm thanking them for making this decision, as it has turned me onto Protopage.
My wife sent me a link to an article that gave the pros and cons of both NetVibes and Protopage as good iGoogle replacements. After reading the article, I decided to try Protopage and see if I could recreate what I had in iGoogle quickly and easily. If I could not, or didn't like how it worked or what I had when I was done, I was going to move on and try NetVibes. However, I was able to easily recreate every tab I had in iGoogle with more color choices, more column choices, and more freedom of where and how I placed the widgets and gadgets of information. I was able to recreate all but two of the widget I had in iGoogle, and those two are really just "would be nice" ones (seeing my stock portfolio via Google's own stock ticker widget and the Dailyhoroscope.com widget that I can't seem to find a replacement for in Protopage... yet). Protopage allowed me even greater freedom.
I now have some widgets spread over multiple columns. I have at least four columns on each tab, and five on a couple (iGoogle couldn't do more than four, and had best results for three or fewer columns). There is even an option for manual placement anywhere on the page! I have color themes for each tab so that I can tell at a glance which one I'm on, and I am actually now using more widgets and gadgets than before, as I found it so easy to add them. There is a search tool at the top right that I customized to the things I most often search (Google, IMDb, Wikipedia, Dictionary.com, Thesaurus.com, and Yahoo), and there are literally about 100 more I could turn on if I wanted to -- but I don't see a reason to clutter my search area up with those at this time.
In deciding to do away with iGoogle, Google said they felt there were plenty of other options available to users. Thanks to their decision, I have found one that, for me, works as well or better than their's. Thank you, Google!
ADDENDUM (1/4/2013)
Protopage has added a Yahoo Stock Ticker that you can put on your page. It is not complete and it only does certain stocks, but it is a start. Click Add Widgets and look in the Add a Widget section. There will be a "Stock Ticker" option.
Google recently announced that they are doing away with iGoogle in November of 2013. At first I was upset by this, as I had used iGoogle for a number of years as my home page and it displayed information in a way that made sense to me. I had a lot of control over the display and how I saw and interacted with the data I wanted. But, now, I'm thanking them for making this decision, as it has turned me onto Protopage.
My wife sent me a link to an article that gave the pros and cons of both NetVibes and Protopage as good iGoogle replacements. After reading the article, I decided to try Protopage and see if I could recreate what I had in iGoogle quickly and easily. If I could not, or didn't like how it worked or what I had when I was done, I was going to move on and try NetVibes. However, I was able to easily recreate every tab I had in iGoogle with more color choices, more column choices, and more freedom of where and how I placed the widgets and gadgets of information. I was able to recreate all but two of the widget I had in iGoogle, and those two are really just "would be nice" ones (seeing my stock portfolio via Google's own stock ticker widget and the Dailyhoroscope.com widget that I can't seem to find a replacement for in Protopage... yet). Protopage allowed me even greater freedom.
I now have some widgets spread over multiple columns. I have at least four columns on each tab, and five on a couple (iGoogle couldn't do more than four, and had best results for three or fewer columns). There is even an option for manual placement anywhere on the page! I have color themes for each tab so that I can tell at a glance which one I'm on, and I am actually now using more widgets and gadgets than before, as I found it so easy to add them. There is a search tool at the top right that I customized to the things I most often search (Google, IMDb, Wikipedia, Dictionary.com, Thesaurus.com, and Yahoo), and there are literally about 100 more I could turn on if I wanted to -- but I don't see a reason to clutter my search area up with those at this time.
In deciding to do away with iGoogle, Google said they felt there were plenty of other options available to users. Thanks to their decision, I have found one that, for me, works as well or better than their's. Thank you, Google!
ADDENDUM (1/4/2013)
Protopage has added a Yahoo Stock Ticker that you can put on your page. It is not complete and it only does certain stocks, but it is a start. Click Add Widgets and look in the Add a Widget section. There will be a "Stock Ticker" option.
July 27, 2012
The Dark Knight Rises
* There is really no way to discuss this without SPOILERS. *
After watching Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, I was wowed. I left the theater wanting to discuss the movies and constantly thinking about scenes and story elements. Batman Begins introduced Batman in a way that showed you exactly who Batman/Bruce Wayne was and what drove him. That opening scene in TDK introduced the Joker in exactly the right way to show who he was, what he was about, and how cold, calculating, and insane he was. The rest of the movie simply built on that.
TDKR is a different animal. The opening scene presents Bane, but doesn't really show you what he is all about. In contrast, although it is very poorly edited, the intro of Catwoman was excellent at showing you the character and what she was all about, reminiscent of the Joker scene from the previous movie. You know all you need to from her scenes, and understand her, without a lot of dialog getting in the way. Her actions and reactions show you.
The entire first hour of TDKR is mostly people talking about what has happened, what's going on, and what will happen, rather than showing the audience. It has some editing and a lot of sound issues, which I found unusual for a Nolan production. After watching it, as my wife and I discussed it afterward, I immediately came up with a way to show the same things and take about 20-25 minutes instead of an hour to do so. I'm sure most viewers can do so.
Once you get beyond that first hour or so, the movie starts picking up. The second act starts bringing together all of the disparate aspects of the story, as John Blake becomes a detective and works with Gordon, you see Catwoman working with both Batman and the bad guys trying to get information, and you watch as Bane's plans start to bear fruit. This section, combined with the long opening first act, really emphasizes that more story is being told than is needed:
After watching Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, I was wowed. I left the theater wanting to discuss the movies and constantly thinking about scenes and story elements. Batman Begins introduced Batman in a way that showed you exactly who Batman/Bruce Wayne was and what drove him. That opening scene in TDK introduced the Joker in exactly the right way to show who he was, what he was about, and how cold, calculating, and insane he was. The rest of the movie simply built on that.
TDKR is a different animal. The opening scene presents Bane, but doesn't really show you what he is all about. In contrast, although it is very poorly edited, the intro of Catwoman was excellent at showing you the character and what she was all about, reminiscent of the Joker scene from the previous movie. You know all you need to from her scenes, and understand her, without a lot of dialog getting in the way. Her actions and reactions show you.
The entire first hour of TDKR is mostly people talking about what has happened, what's going on, and what will happen, rather than showing the audience. It has some editing and a lot of sound issues, which I found unusual for a Nolan production. After watching it, as my wife and I discussed it afterward, I immediately came up with a way to show the same things and take about 20-25 minutes instead of an hour to do so. I'm sure most viewers can do so.
Once you get beyond that first hour or so, the movie starts picking up. The second act starts bringing together all of the disparate aspects of the story, as John Blake becomes a detective and works with Gordon, you see Catwoman working with both Batman and the bad guys trying to get information, and you watch as Bane's plans start to bear fruit. This section, combined with the long opening first act, really emphasizes that more story is being told than is needed:
- The entire Daggett subplot is not needed. He was only used to bring Bane to Gotham and then is killed off by Bane when he tries to exert pressure on the villain. Bane is smart enough and brazen enough that a better opening could have been written to bring him to Gotham without Daggett. This would have saved 10 or 15 minutes of film time.
- With the slow opening, Bruce deciding to suit up and go after Bane seems a bit too sudden. He doesn't listen to the advice of Alfred, who has never steered him wrong, and leads to a break with his manservant (which is out of character for Alfred). When Bane defeats him, it is anticlimactic because you know it is too soon in the story. Again, rewriting and redoing the opening Act would allow you to get to this sooner, and with more tension, and would allow you to break the Bat in a more organic way for his re-dedication to being Batman. The flow would be better in the film.
The second half of the second act and all of the third act are where the action and the tension reside. It is well done, taut, and action-packed. Batman actually goes after Bane with some smarts and detective work, rather than blindly rushing ahead. During this section, you finally learn that Miranda is really Talia al Ghul, daughter of Ras (from the first film), and is controlling Bane. And this isn't needed at all. Bane is a strong enough, interesting enough, and intelligent enough character that he could have planned and executed the entire plot without this needed "reveal" and extra villain. Even though Marion Cotillard does an excellent job with her role, she could have been written out (saving a good 30 minutes of film time) and the film would be better, tighter, and more exciting.
With so many people knowing who Batman was, it was inevitable that they had to "kill off" Batman. It is not the end of Bruce Wayne, or Batman, as revealed in the final scenes before the credits. How they do it feels alright and fairly organic to the story.
The breakout star for the movie is Anne Hathaway as Catwoman. She hits all the right notes, is excellent and believable in the role, and shows many facets and aspects to the character. She does such a good job that she makes Cotillard's Miranda unneeded as a love interest (and eventual twist reveal villain).
Things any viewer should be aware of going into the movie are:
- The bad edits throughout, but in particular in the first act of the film. During Selena Kyle's intro, there are some really bad edits between her scenes and other scenes. There is a scene with Bane at the stock exchange where they enter in daylight, start a program that needs to run for 8 minutes, and when they leave it is night time. Oops.
- There are bad sound issues. Most of the voice soundtrack is so low in comparison to the music and effects track that it is hard to hear people. Bane's mask also obfuscates Tom Hardy's role (both his ability to act and his voice) which, when combined with the sound issues, makes him very hard to understand.
- You just have to get through the first hour. You may find yourself looking at your watch during this time, but you need to pay attention so you understand all of the characters and the stories so that, when they start drawing together, you aren't lost.
- Similar to the "it is not what you say, but what you do that matters" in the first film, this movie sort of beats the audience over the head with the "anyone could be Batman" theme. Take a few of those out and let the audience come to it more organically.
Overall, I was entertained. The story is a good one, there is just more in it than is needed. The 2:44 run-time simply isn't needed; Nolan should have cut Miranda and Daggett from the movie, revised Bane to be the one and only villain, and put more Catwoman in it. This would have achieved a closer to 2 hour film that would be tighter. Blake was a good addition to become the moral center of the film, since Gordon cannot be that in this film. Alfred should not have left, and Michael Caine hits a home run with his scenes.
All in all, this is a good ending to the trilogy. It is about as good as Begins, but nowhere near as good as TDK. The payoff at the end is worth the first hour. I'd give it a solid B (compared to an A- for Begins and a solid A (or even A+) for TDK).
July 23, 2012
Penn State Fall-Out
The sanctions and penalties applied to Penn State just came out. I completely understand the $60 million penalty, specifically for use to fund anti-molestation and child protection services external to the college. I fully support the four-year Bowl ban; the people involved (and other college personnel at other colleges) need to know that covering up something this heinous is not proper behavior. I even understand the forfeiture of scholarships, as a lack of scholarships greatly impacts their ability to recruit and put out an excellent product, although all that really does is hurt the ability of some 20 student athletes that otherwise could have gone to college from going.
What I don't get is the vacating of all wins from 1998-2011. There were around a dozen coaches each year, each teaching the nearly 100 student athletes how to play football, how to be good athletes, and how to win games. How does one man molesting children (and, apparently, none of those he coached) and other men covering up for him in any way relate to the conduct and success of the students on the field? I agree that there is no more heinous action than child abuse in any form, but the players who worked out, practiced, and played in those game had nothing to do with it -- why would taking away their efforts be somehow an appropriate punishment for Sandusky (in jail, probably for life), Paterno (fired, shamed, and passed away), or the heads of the school (fired and likely won't be able to work in that environment ever again)?
When OJ Simpson was accused of, and found responsible for (in civil court), the deaths of Nicole Simpson Brown and Ron Goldman, there were some who wanted to take away his football accolades (Heisman Trophy, Hall of Fame, rushing titles, etc.). In the end, people rightly agreed that his accomplishments on the field were not negated by something he did years later and off the field.
When it is a possible one-to-one relationship, I can understand vacating wins and accolades. For example:
The other harsh penalties are all but killing the football program at PSU. Penn State's athletics will have trouble recovering from these sanctions. And rightly so. I simply do not see or understand the reasoning behind the penalty forcing the school to vacate wins. This makes no sense to me, and simply seems to punish the student athletes, the coaches, the boosters, the many people who were adjunct to the football program (cheerleaders, band, students who worked the concessions, etc.) and does not address the people responsible for, or negligent for, the child molestation. This penalty only harms innocents; sort of like Sandusky himself.
What I don't get is the vacating of all wins from 1998-2011. There were around a dozen coaches each year, each teaching the nearly 100 student athletes how to play football, how to be good athletes, and how to win games. How does one man molesting children (and, apparently, none of those he coached) and other men covering up for him in any way relate to the conduct and success of the students on the field? I agree that there is no more heinous action than child abuse in any form, but the players who worked out, practiced, and played in those game had nothing to do with it -- why would taking away their efforts be somehow an appropriate punishment for Sandusky (in jail, probably for life), Paterno (fired, shamed, and passed away), or the heads of the school (fired and likely won't be able to work in that environment ever again)?
When OJ Simpson was accused of, and found responsible for (in civil court), the deaths of Nicole Simpson Brown and Ron Goldman, there were some who wanted to take away his football accolades (Heisman Trophy, Hall of Fame, rushing titles, etc.). In the end, people rightly agreed that his accomplishments on the field were not negated by something he did years later and off the field.
When it is a possible one-to-one relationship, I can understand vacating wins and accolades. For example:
- Peter Rose betting on his sport and his team, which may have affected the outcome of games, or
- People taking steroids and getting phenomenal results that affected wins/losses by an individual or a team (Tour de France victories achieved while using PEDs, the many baseball players convicted of steroid use, Olympic athletes who used PEDs, etc.).
The other harsh penalties are all but killing the football program at PSU. Penn State's athletics will have trouble recovering from these sanctions. And rightly so. I simply do not see or understand the reasoning behind the penalty forcing the school to vacate wins. This makes no sense to me, and simply seems to punish the student athletes, the coaches, the boosters, the many people who were adjunct to the football program (cheerleaders, band, students who worked the concessions, etc.) and does not address the people responsible for, or negligent for, the child molestation. This penalty only harms innocents; sort of like Sandusky himself.
July 18, 2012
Lies
Both candidates are fabricating half-truths and lies that they think will help get them (re)elected. They are helped by the fact that, it seems, the majority of Americans will not verify the information for themselves, cannot think critically enough to understand the deceptions, and/or refuse to remember the past.
There should be a law that disallows any candidate from using fabricated, questionable, or misrepresented information in any advertisement or campaign speech. Basically, if it is not in the voting record, if it is not published, or if the inferences drawn from the information cannot be backed up with data, you cannot use it without a severe penalty. Any person or group who solicits an ad or a speech for a candidate, whether or not they have the candidate's endorsement, would also affect the candidate. In order to make this law have teeth, I would say the penalty for doing so is one warning. If it happens again, the penalty is immediate forfeiture of the race, or the office if they win the position.
If the penalty was forfeiture of the race, you can bet that politicians would hire the best and the brightest campaign managers and people to run their campaigns. They would double- and triple-check all ads and statements they were making to ensure any comments about what they have done (if already in office) and what their opponents have or have not done are as accurate as possible.
My thinking with this plan is that it would be easiest to talk about yourself, your goals, and what you plan to do and push for when in office, rather than run a smear campaign against your opponent. And, of course, the side-benefit would be that then, once you had served a term, you could only use those things you actually accomplished while in office, or actually voted for, etc. in your re-election campaign, as to do otherwise would violate the rule (and make you forfeit the race). In other words, campaigns would be primarily positive and about the candidates themselves, rather than negative attack ads designed to destroy the opponent and make people vote for the remaining campaigner by default.
In order to be fair, a campaign ad review board would have to be set up to monitor the campaign speeches and advertisements. The group would have to be fair and impartial, so would likely need a conservative, a liberal, and a moderate member, at the least. It would be to these people that each advertisement and speech would be given. Working somewhat like the Supreme Court, they would review the information and the pertinent facts and determine, by majority, whether the ad or speech violated the rule. If they determined yes, the person's campaign would get one warning. If a second violation occurred, they would immediately forfeit the race (or office). I would make the law have strong teeth in that the warning and then forfeiture is total for all campaigns by that person. In other words, if you run today for President and get one warning, and then you run next election and you have another questionable ad, you are out... the four years between does not matter.
Is my solution harsh? Yes. But the attack ads and negative campaigning are getting so extreme that I think something harsh is the only way to solve the problem. Let's take back control of the government any way we can. Remember, people shouldn't fear the government, government should fear the people.
Next up, a plan to solve the PAC, super-PAC, and spending issues with campaigns.
There should be a law that disallows any candidate from using fabricated, questionable, or misrepresented information in any advertisement or campaign speech. Basically, if it is not in the voting record, if it is not published, or if the inferences drawn from the information cannot be backed up with data, you cannot use it without a severe penalty. Any person or group who solicits an ad or a speech for a candidate, whether or not they have the candidate's endorsement, would also affect the candidate. In order to make this law have teeth, I would say the penalty for doing so is one warning. If it happens again, the penalty is immediate forfeiture of the race, or the office if they win the position.
For example, in a previous election a group allegedly not affiliated with Bush in any way produced a series of attack ads against Kerry. It was fairly quickly proven that those ads were almost entirely fabricated, but the damage was done. In this law, even though they were not affiliated with Bush in any way, the Bush group would get the warning. If another ad was produced "helping" Bush's campaign, the Bush campaign would forfeit the race.My thinking here is that it causes both campaigns to actively seek out and stop any negative campaign ads by their own party or people associated with them in any way. Further, if a group knew they could potentially cause the candidate they are promoting to lose the race via their attack ads, they would be disinclined to run those ads. It's not a perfect system, but it is better than what we have now.
If the penalty was forfeiture of the race, you can bet that politicians would hire the best and the brightest campaign managers and people to run their campaigns. They would double- and triple-check all ads and statements they were making to ensure any comments about what they have done (if already in office) and what their opponents have or have not done are as accurate as possible.
My thinking with this plan is that it would be easiest to talk about yourself, your goals, and what you plan to do and push for when in office, rather than run a smear campaign against your opponent. And, of course, the side-benefit would be that then, once you had served a term, you could only use those things you actually accomplished while in office, or actually voted for, etc. in your re-election campaign, as to do otherwise would violate the rule (and make you forfeit the race). In other words, campaigns would be primarily positive and about the candidates themselves, rather than negative attack ads designed to destroy the opponent and make people vote for the remaining campaigner by default.
In order to be fair, a campaign ad review board would have to be set up to monitor the campaign speeches and advertisements. The group would have to be fair and impartial, so would likely need a conservative, a liberal, and a moderate member, at the least. It would be to these people that each advertisement and speech would be given. Working somewhat like the Supreme Court, they would review the information and the pertinent facts and determine, by majority, whether the ad or speech violated the rule. If they determined yes, the person's campaign would get one warning. If a second violation occurred, they would immediately forfeit the race (or office). I would make the law have strong teeth in that the warning and then forfeiture is total for all campaigns by that person. In other words, if you run today for President and get one warning, and then you run next election and you have another questionable ad, you are out... the four years between does not matter.
Is my solution harsh? Yes. But the attack ads and negative campaigning are getting so extreme that I think something harsh is the only way to solve the problem. Let's take back control of the government any way we can. Remember, people shouldn't fear the government, government should fear the people.
Next up, a plan to solve the PAC, super-PAC, and spending issues with campaigns.
July 12, 2012
ENT Response
Update:
Just heard back from the office. I can have my CT/X-ray scan at one hospital on July 17th and my hearing test and other stuff on August 8th at another hospital. They couldn't coordinate everything for the same day without pushing it well into August. Even still, I'll have to put up with the vomiting for at least almost another month, until I see the doctor for the review on August 8. *sigh
_______________
Three weeks ago today I had my first appointment with my new Ear, Nose, Throat (ENT) doctor for my morning vomiting issues. When I sat down, he read off the referral from my GP which pretty much said, "Patient is complaining of throat irritation."
With my medical history, all the years of chronic issues, and with all that I explained to my GP when asking for that referral, I'm more than a little shocked that he did not include more than that in the referral. Needless to say, that did not start out the appointment on a good footing.
First, I explained the sensations I have in the morning that lead to the gag reflex kicking in and causing me to vomit or dry heave (or have to fight it off, rarely successfully). I then told him about the four medications I am currently taking, which led to explaining the chronic conditions I have, which led to explaining the hiatal hernia I have, which led to the multiple endoscopies I've had, which led to the ulcer in my throat I had.
My doctor said, "Well, that's one I haven't heard before" when I described the initial problem and, by the end, was saying, "Jeepers" under his breath.
In the end, he decided to schedule me for X-rays of my nasal passages, some sort of scoping of my throat and nasal passages, a hearing test (I've had ringing in my ears for decades), and a consultation. The office was going to do its best to schedule time for all of these on the same day, at the Regional hospital, so that I could come in and get everything done at once.
Needless to say, he had a full page of notes scribbled out by the time we were done. He went back to the original referral, reread it out loud, and then gave me a sigh and an eye roll. He mentioned something about possibly calling my GP and suggesting that one line wasn't really enough.
In the three weeks since that appointment, I have continued to have the issues. This week, for example, I have not been able to overcome the gag reflex and have painfully thrown up every day starting Sunday through this morning. Pretty much every time now I am seeing either blood or dark globs in my sputum when I throw up. I am certain this is not a good sign.
Since I haven't heard back from the doctor's office yet, I called and left a message (their answering machine kicked in when I called) for them asking where my appointment coordination stands. I guess telling them I'm throwing up every day wasn't enough to light a fire under them to get this moving. I will be explicit when they call back (or if I get ahold of him first).
I already have: problems with gum recession, my tooth enamel, my throat, and headaches. Each of those issues is getting worse with nearly daily throwing up, as the acids are hurting my throat worse, eating away at the enamel on my teeth, causing worsening gum recession, and the painful way this is whole-body heaving doesn't help my headaches.
Hopefully I will hear back from the ENT soon on the testing appointment. Sometimes I really miss my GP, Gastro, and Arthritis doctors from Southern California, as they knew me well, and would have gotten me in to see an ENT or for further testing within a week or two at the most from lodging my complaint. Here, they usually get you in for tests either after you've died or after whatever was causing issues is cleared up; either way, they can say they didn't find anything and move on. But at least it is "free" (and by "free" I mean paid for with a high income tax and double-digit sales taxes). *sigh
Just heard back from the office. I can have my CT/X-ray scan at one hospital on July 17th and my hearing test and other stuff on August 8th at another hospital. They couldn't coordinate everything for the same day without pushing it well into August. Even still, I'll have to put up with the vomiting for at least almost another month, until I see the doctor for the review on August 8. *sigh
_______________
Three weeks ago today I had my first appointment with my new Ear, Nose, Throat (ENT) doctor for my morning vomiting issues. When I sat down, he read off the referral from my GP which pretty much said, "Patient is complaining of throat irritation."
With my medical history, all the years of chronic issues, and with all that I explained to my GP when asking for that referral, I'm more than a little shocked that he did not include more than that in the referral. Needless to say, that did not start out the appointment on a good footing.
First, I explained the sensations I have in the morning that lead to the gag reflex kicking in and causing me to vomit or dry heave (or have to fight it off, rarely successfully). I then told him about the four medications I am currently taking, which led to explaining the chronic conditions I have, which led to explaining the hiatal hernia I have, which led to the multiple endoscopies I've had, which led to the ulcer in my throat I had.
My doctor said, "Well, that's one I haven't heard before" when I described the initial problem and, by the end, was saying, "Jeepers" under his breath.
In the end, he decided to schedule me for X-rays of my nasal passages, some sort of scoping of my throat and nasal passages, a hearing test (I've had ringing in my ears for decades), and a consultation. The office was going to do its best to schedule time for all of these on the same day, at the Regional hospital, so that I could come in and get everything done at once.
Needless to say, he had a full page of notes scribbled out by the time we were done. He went back to the original referral, reread it out loud, and then gave me a sigh and an eye roll. He mentioned something about possibly calling my GP and suggesting that one line wasn't really enough.
In the three weeks since that appointment, I have continued to have the issues. This week, for example, I have not been able to overcome the gag reflex and have painfully thrown up every day starting Sunday through this morning. Pretty much every time now I am seeing either blood or dark globs in my sputum when I throw up. I am certain this is not a good sign.
Since I haven't heard back from the doctor's office yet, I called and left a message (their answering machine kicked in when I called) for them asking where my appointment coordination stands. I guess telling them I'm throwing up every day wasn't enough to light a fire under them to get this moving. I will be explicit when they call back (or if I get ahold of him first).
I already have: problems with gum recession, my tooth enamel, my throat, and headaches. Each of those issues is getting worse with nearly daily throwing up, as the acids are hurting my throat worse, eating away at the enamel on my teeth, causing worsening gum recession, and the painful way this is whole-body heaving doesn't help my headaches.
Hopefully I will hear back from the ENT soon on the testing appointment. Sometimes I really miss my GP, Gastro, and Arthritis doctors from Southern California, as they knew me well, and would have gotten me in to see an ENT or for further testing within a week or two at the most from lodging my complaint. Here, they usually get you in for tests either after you've died or after whatever was causing issues is cleared up; either way, they can say they didn't find anything and move on. But at least it is "free" (and by "free" I mean paid for with a high income tax and double-digit sales taxes). *sigh
July 9, 2012
Contract Negotiations
I have been reading many articles from the NBA and NFL about athletes who are asking for new contracts before the current contracts are done and saying they will not honor contracts to the new city if they are dealt by their existing teams.
I think all professional sports needs to have a standard, CBA-approved system by which a contract may be disputed. Outside of that system, a player should have to honor their contracts. These contracts are legally-binding agreements between the team and the player for services to be rendered by the player to the team.
Here are the steps I would institute in any professional sport in order to minimize this issue and (try to, at least) maximize the value that a player gets for the contract:
I think all professional sports needs to have a standard, CBA-approved system by which a contract may be disputed. Outside of that system, a player should have to honor their contracts. These contracts are legally-binding agreements between the team and the player for services to be rendered by the player to the team.
Here are the steps I would institute in any professional sport in order to minimize this issue and (try to, at least) maximize the value that a player gets for the contract:
- If a player decides to retire, hold out, or in any other way not play while under a current, valid contract, their contract terms are suspended until such time that they decide to play. At that point, the original contract kicks back in and they either play for that team and that contract or they go through the CBA-approved dispute process (and are legally bound by the decision made during the process).
- The dispute process will involve three arbiters who are hired by the sport's management, the sport's player's association, and one outside, neutral party. A majority agreement either positively or negatively will approve or deny the contract issue(s) in cases of a dispute. Once a ruling is made, the dispute is final and both sides agree to honor it.
- Contracts will be for between one and four years, maximum. Rookie contracts will be for four years and veteran contracts (players who have been in the league a minimum of four seasons) can be as short as one.
- The younger the player, the longer the contract to help maximize the team's value for that player. The older the player the shorter the contract, so the player can try to get the maximum value for their play the longer they play (although both sides, if mutually agreed, can sign longer-term contracts if desired).
- All contracts will have reasonable positive and negative incentives for both the team to play the player and for the player to play his best in order to maximize the value of the contract.
- I realize this is a tricky one, but I think "reasonable" is the key here. No incentives should be based on a snap count (too easy for the team/coach to decide to sit the player so they do not hit that incentive).
- Some incentives should be roughly equivalent to the "Franchise tag" in football; if you play equivalent to a top 5 player at your position, X incentive kicks in. If you play like a top 15 player at your position, Y incentive kicks in. If you are voted to the Pro Bowl (or equivalent, depending on sport), Z incentive kicks in. (Basically, you should get paid more if you play "above your contract," at least as an inherent increase to your following season's pay if not a bonus to that season.)
- Alternately, if you play in the bottom 5, 10, or 15 of your position, you should maybe be penalized (i.e., the team gets to keep a percentage of the pay for your position, or your salary for the following season goes down a tier, or similar).
- Create a tiered veteran's minimum scale based on a block of years and/or a percentage increased based on quality of play.
- For example, the year blocks could be 5, 10, 15, and over 15 years. Five years is $250,000 minimum (this would be based partly on the sport, partly on the CBA for that sport, and partly on what the market can bear; consider all the numbers I put here as examples only), 10 is $350,000, 15 is $450,000, and over 15 is $550,000 minimum. However, if you are in the top 50% for you position, it is +10%. If you are top 25%, it is +20%. If you are top 10%, it is +35%. Top 5% would earn an additional +50% on that value (not including other performance incentives).
- Some incentives could be based on aggregate goals for the position. For example, the sport could determine a baseline average for each position for things like offensive and defensive production and then base some bonuses and penalties on the player being a certain amount or percentage over or under those baseline statistics. Penalties can apply if the player is below those averages.
I'm sure others can come up with other, meaningful, and fair ways in which a team and a player can maximize profits and minimize disputes. It seems to me that highly incentivized contracts and a dispute resolution system that is binding are the first step.
Do you agree or disagree with my hypothesis and (generalized) plan to solve it? If not, how would you do it? Do you have any additions to these rules?
July 6, 2012
TiVo and Network Troubles
For a few months now, we have been struggling with an odd issue with our home network and Tivo setup. We have a total of five TiVos, but only four are installed and running on the network. Around the beginning of the year, we started noticing that the bedroom TiVo would drop all connections to the other TiVos (but usually not lose the connection to the TiVo emulator on my desktop PC). The other TiVos, meanwhile, could usually still see and get data from that TiVo. It would usually be alright for around 48 hours, then drop to this state, and then sometimes would drop to a state where it couldn't see out and the other networked devices couldn't see in.
What made this very odd is that we have an official TiVo wireless dongle. When plugging this in, the exact same thing would happen: for approximately 48 hours it would be fine, then it would drop the outside looking connections to the other devices but they could still see (and transfer from) this device, with sometimes it dropping completely and no connectivity is allowed.
Over the last month or so, we have been steadily testing every possibility that we could conceive. First, I contacted TiVo; the support rep confirmed what I was saying by logging into the machine and looking at its error logs -- the TiVo would connect for about 48 hours and then drop. All the testing he could do from his end indicated the TiVo was working properly internally. His suggestion was either send it in for testing and fixing or buy a new one. Since buying a new one was actually cheaper, we opted to do that.
We plugged in the new TiVo and, after a few days, it started doing the exact same thing as described above. The "bad" TiVo was moved to another room, plugged in, and has worked steadily ever since without issue. So, it must be the home network, right?
My wife is in IT and she brought home some testing equipment and we tested the wires between the fiber op modem and that TiVo -- everything tested fine (no shorts, nothing to indicate bad wires). We then thought maybe it was a bad switch at our network hub; using different ports and switching with "known good" ports resulted in the same issue after about 48 hours. We have used a total of three different switches, all with the same result. Wireless still had issues.
Finally, we had our entire internet go down. Turns out we had a bad fiber op modem, and the repair guy switched it out. I noted that when he was talking to his helper by phone (the guy who was pinging and testing from the company's side), one of the first things he asked me and something he reiterated later was 'how many devices do you have connected?' Since these devices can, standard, work with upwards of 255 devices, I found this odd and worth remembering. Maybe the company in question (Bell Aliant) manually sets a device limit in the modem?
Since the new modem was installed, things have been faster and more secure online. However, our network issue with that one TiVo has remained. We had a knowledgeable friend come over and fix the downstairs jack for us. Everything tested as working, but when we plugged everything in ... nothing. The light didn't come on in the switch at our network hub and the TiVo didn't even get a DNS or IP from the network. It was not connected.
Another friend had a good idea; bypass the jacks and wires in the network and run an ethernet cable directly from the TiVo in question to the switch downstairs and see if that works. Sure enough, this morning, I did just that. The light on the switch came on very steady and the TiVo grabbed a DNS and IP and is working. It can see all three other TiVos plus my PC without issue. This seems to indicate that it is an issue with the cables or jacks between the switch and the TiVo; the cables continue to test as fine and one jack has been replaced. We may have to replace the other jack to solve this problem (it is in an awkward spot and will not be easy to get at).
So, we wait. If, after about 48 hours, this is still working, then we know somewhat what the problem is and can try fixing it via the jack replacement. Hopefully that solves the problem.
But I'm still left with the question: why does the wireless connection have the exact same issue?
What made this very odd is that we have an official TiVo wireless dongle. When plugging this in, the exact same thing would happen: for approximately 48 hours it would be fine, then it would drop the outside looking connections to the other devices but they could still see (and transfer from) this device, with sometimes it dropping completely and no connectivity is allowed.
Over the last month or so, we have been steadily testing every possibility that we could conceive. First, I contacted TiVo; the support rep confirmed what I was saying by logging into the machine and looking at its error logs -- the TiVo would connect for about 48 hours and then drop. All the testing he could do from his end indicated the TiVo was working properly internally. His suggestion was either send it in for testing and fixing or buy a new one. Since buying a new one was actually cheaper, we opted to do that.
We plugged in the new TiVo and, after a few days, it started doing the exact same thing as described above. The "bad" TiVo was moved to another room, plugged in, and has worked steadily ever since without issue. So, it must be the home network, right?
My wife is in IT and she brought home some testing equipment and we tested the wires between the fiber op modem and that TiVo -- everything tested fine (no shorts, nothing to indicate bad wires). We then thought maybe it was a bad switch at our network hub; using different ports and switching with "known good" ports resulted in the same issue after about 48 hours. We have used a total of three different switches, all with the same result. Wireless still had issues.
Finally, we had our entire internet go down. Turns out we had a bad fiber op modem, and the repair guy switched it out. I noted that when he was talking to his helper by phone (the guy who was pinging and testing from the company's side), one of the first things he asked me and something he reiterated later was 'how many devices do you have connected?' Since these devices can, standard, work with upwards of 255 devices, I found this odd and worth remembering. Maybe the company in question (Bell Aliant) manually sets a device limit in the modem?
Since the new modem was installed, things have been faster and more secure online. However, our network issue with that one TiVo has remained. We had a knowledgeable friend come over and fix the downstairs jack for us. Everything tested as working, but when we plugged everything in ... nothing. The light didn't come on in the switch at our network hub and the TiVo didn't even get a DNS or IP from the network. It was not connected.
Another friend had a good idea; bypass the jacks and wires in the network and run an ethernet cable directly from the TiVo in question to the switch downstairs and see if that works. Sure enough, this morning, I did just that. The light on the switch came on very steady and the TiVo grabbed a DNS and IP and is working. It can see all three other TiVos plus my PC without issue. This seems to indicate that it is an issue with the cables or jacks between the switch and the TiVo; the cables continue to test as fine and one jack has been replaced. We may have to replace the other jack to solve this problem (it is in an awkward spot and will not be easy to get at).
So, we wait. If, after about 48 hours, this is still working, then we know somewhat what the problem is and can try fixing it via the jack replacement. Hopefully that solves the problem.
But I'm still left with the question: why does the wireless connection have the exact same issue?
July 5, 2012
DC New 52 Revisited
When DC Comics decided to do a hard reboot of their comic book universe, the buying public stood up and took notice. Many new and lapsed fans came back to take a look, and many current fans went to the web to complain. I gave my first impressions here.
I initially planned to provide another review after six months, and then again at a year, if I was still reading. It has been 8 months, so I am a bit behind.
My initial response to the new titles is: didn't you learn from the six you cancelled? GI Combat will sell poorly (another war comic), Ravagers will have to have excellent writing and art to do well enough to keep, Dial H is more of a mini-series title than an ongoing. Batman Incorporated takes a bad idea from the previous universe and brings it into this one; Batman funds a global bunch of Batmen to take on crime around the world. It didn't sell particularly well last time and it won't sell particularly well this time.
The two standouts are Earth 2 and World's Finest. These titles, and Earth 2 in particular, are much more along the lines of what DC Comics should have done with all of the new 52 from the start. These titles are a completely new, fresh, from-scratch retelling of the creation of the Justice Society and introduction of Huntress and Power Girl into the new DC universe. Earth 2 feels completely different yet totally the same. Where the characters come from and how they got their powers is totally new. How they are starting to interact is also fresh. World's Finest is strongly written and has decent art and is interesting in showing the dynamic of these two characters as a team.
I have cancelled Firestorm, Nightwing, and Action Comics due to poor writing, poor editing, and/or boring stories. Nightwing was "gigolo in skin-tight costume screws women and occasionally fights crime," and it just wasn't holding my attention. Action Comic has one of my favorite characters, Superman, but the stories were told poorly, there were many plot holes, the art was childish and inexpressive, and it, too, did not feel like it was going anywhere. Firestorm was just too busy, what with there being more Firestorm-powered characters than normal human beings in the comic.
I will likely become a (mostly) lapsed comic book reader again in the near future. The overall changes are not enough, the titles in general are not strong enough, and I'm already seeing similar stories to what I read for almost 30 years. When you couple that with Marvel Comic's soft reboot of their line (coming shortly, as of this writing) and that company's event-driven sales tactic, I can better spend my money elsewhere.
What I may do is buy the comics digitally, after waiting a few months for the title prices to drop. But, more than likely, I will just slowly winnow the list down to a few titles, like Earth 2, Animal Man, and Wonder Woman, that are the best, and cancel all the rest.
I initially planned to provide another review after six months, and then again at a year, if I was still reading. It has been 8 months, so I am a bit behind.
Changes
My initial impression was that they did not go far enough, and that still stands. A few titles have been canceled due to poor sales, and new ones issued. The cancelled titles are: Hawk & Dove, Men of War, Mister Terrific, OMAC, Static Shock, and Blackhawks. These cancellations are not very surprising to me, as two of them are war comics (rarely good sellers), and the rest are second-tier and not well-known characters in the pantheon. The new titles to replace them are: Earth 2, World's Finest, Dial H, Batman Incorporated, Ravagers, and GI Combat.My initial response to the new titles is: didn't you learn from the six you cancelled? GI Combat will sell poorly (another war comic), Ravagers will have to have excellent writing and art to do well enough to keep, Dial H is more of a mini-series title than an ongoing. Batman Incorporated takes a bad idea from the previous universe and brings it into this one; Batman funds a global bunch of Batmen to take on crime around the world. It didn't sell particularly well last time and it won't sell particularly well this time.
The two standouts are Earth 2 and World's Finest. These titles, and Earth 2 in particular, are much more along the lines of what DC Comics should have done with all of the new 52 from the start. These titles are a completely new, fresh, from-scratch retelling of the creation of the Justice Society and introduction of Huntress and Power Girl into the new DC universe. Earth 2 feels completely different yet totally the same. Where the characters come from and how they got their powers is totally new. How they are starting to interact is also fresh. World's Finest is strongly written and has decent art and is interesting in showing the dynamic of these two characters as a team.
I have cancelled Firestorm, Nightwing, and Action Comics due to poor writing, poor editing, and/or boring stories. Nightwing was "gigolo in skin-tight costume screws women and occasionally fights crime," and it just wasn't holding my attention. Action Comic has one of my favorite characters, Superman, but the stories were told poorly, there were many plot holes, the art was childish and inexpressive, and it, too, did not feel like it was going anywhere. Firestorm was just too busy, what with there being more Firestorm-powered characters than normal human beings in the comic.
Titles
These are the titles I was/am getting and a brief impression:- Action Comics: Bad writing, poor stories, and bad artwork made me cancel this. There are multiple moments where you can look at one panel on a page and the next panel has nothing to do with the previous and the story just skips ahead. Cancelled.
- Animal Man: One of the standouts from the new 52. Tight writing with good direction, decent artwork, and a good feel for what it wants to be (a superhero horror book) and where it wants to go.
- Batman: Good writing and art. As mentioned above, I would have preferred a complete reboot of this title, a cleaning of continuity and history, and a more modern approach to the background and character.
- Captain Atom: One of my favorite characters. DC changed him quite a bit; this is the one case where they may have gone too far. The character is so powerful it isn't really a superhero book any more, and he rarely fights super villains and hasn't interacted with any other heroes. They need to depower him, get him interacting, and improve the artwork on this one. I bet this is firmly on the "cancellation" list for DC, as its sales are pretty low. On the Cusp.
- Detective Comics: Pretty much "Batman, the Second Book." Good story and art keep me buying it, but I can't say for how much longer.
- Earth 2: Excellent. Good story, good art, and what the new 52 should have been from the start. Worth getting, so far. I look forward to each new issue.
- Fury of Firestorm: The Nuclear Men: The problem with this title is DC took an accident that produced one, unique character and made it a virus that anyone could get. There are a dozen or so Firestorms running around in this title and the convoluted intrigue subplot was hard to follow and not very believable. Cancelled.
- Justice League: A solid title. I like what they've done with the characters, I think the art is fine. Some of the stories jump around a lot, and I hated the "suddenly, years later" jump that DC did. They need to take a look at Morrison's run of the mid/late 90s to show how to write these characters and have them interact. Right now, GL is a big jerk, Superman is a blank slate, Flash is "law boy," and Batman is pissed on. Doesn't make a lot of sense, especially after being together as a team this long (after the jump).
- Nightwing: As mentioned before, there just wasn't enough here to keep me reading. I like the character a lot, but was bored with his taking over the Haley Circus and his "Saiko" (Psycho) nemesis plotline and his interaction in Night of Owls and revelation he was supposed to be an Owl. Cancelled.
- The Ray: (Miniseries) With as well-received as this title was, I'm surprised it didn't get picked up for one of the new ongoing titles when DC cancelled some other titles. Good art, good writing, and a good revamp of a character had me reading and enjoying it.
- Superman: I keep getting this one, and hope it improves. Supes is a favorite of mine, but I still don't get the costume. I want to see more from one of the flagship characters. A new writer and artist is coming on board soon, so maybe things will improve. (I keep thinking that Superman and Justice League should be quarterly comics; that way, DC can solicit and choose to publish the best stories for both, rather than trying to come up with ongoing stories each and every month.) On the Cusp.
- Static Shock: I like this character, and he just didn't take off. The writing was horrible, the artwork was horrible, and I stopped getting it after 2 issues (and looking at the third). DC agreed and cancelled it, too. He should probably join Teen Titans as an ongoing character. Cancelled.
- Teen Titans: Overall impressions are good, but the title jumps around a bit and is uneven. The cross-over with Legion was pretty poor, and the new Ravagers spin-off will likely go nowhere. We need a bit more back-story on some of the characters to start working its way into the title, like Wonder Girl.
- Wonder Woman: One of the better titles of the New 52. The artwork is hard to take and overly stylish, which I wish they would change, but the amount of change to the character and the current stories are both well done. A bit more clarity on some of the introduced characters, so that readers can start to identify them and who they are in the pantheon, would be nice (I think the smoker is Achilles, but I can't be sure).
Overall
I am likely to continue to cancel titles rather than to add more titles. DC Comics had the rare opportunity to do something really good, unique, and lasting by changing their entire lineup, reinvigorating it, and bring it into the new millennium. Instead, it mostly just reissued new #1s and kept the same stories and characters. For example, as mentioned in my first post on this, Batman was a prime opportunity to really use the movies and today's technology to bring the character forward and make him new while also cleaning up years of convoluted history and back-story for him and the many other characters in Gotham City. Instead, they pretty much kept all of the characters the same and slapped a new #1 on the front cover. The Bat-universe will now have: Batman, Batman: The Dark Knight, Batman: Detective Comics, Batwoman, Batgirl, Nightwing, Red Robin, Batwing, Batman Incorporated, Batman and Robin, Catwoman, Red Hood and the Outlaws, Teen Titans, and Birds of Prey. That's fully 25% of their 52 titles based on one character and his support crew. When you take the four Green Lantern family titles, the four Superman family titles, and the various comics that have some or all of these three characters or their family in them (like Justice League, Teen Titans, etc.) into account, about half of all of DC Comics new titles deal with just three characters and their family members. Way to diversify.I will likely become a (mostly) lapsed comic book reader again in the near future. The overall changes are not enough, the titles in general are not strong enough, and I'm already seeing similar stories to what I read for almost 30 years. When you couple that with Marvel Comic's soft reboot of their line (coming shortly, as of this writing) and that company's event-driven sales tactic, I can better spend my money elsewhere.
What I may do is buy the comics digitally, after waiting a few months for the title prices to drop. But, more than likely, I will just slowly winnow the list down to a few titles, like Earth 2, Animal Man, and Wonder Woman, that are the best, and cancel all the rest.
June 15, 2012
More Heaving
As I mentioned before, I have been having problems with vomiting in the morning. This has been going on for some months and the slow process of medical care here means that I finally have my Ear Nose Throat doctor appointment next week.
I mention it here because the vomiting has been slowly getting more violent and painful. This morning, for example, I was walking around collecting the trash when it struck me and struck me hard. Thankfully, I was holding a garbage bag. The pain and effort was such that I collapsed to my knees. The problem comes from having nothing in my stomach but air, mucus, and stomach acids. So, when the air and the mucus in my throat irritate enough to trigger a vomit reaction, all I have to throw up is more air, mucus, and stomach acid. And, since the trigger is air and mucus in my throat, I keep throwing up until the mucus in the throat is moved enough to no longer tickle things.
This whole event leaves me exhausted, feeling bad, sore, and out of sorts. This morning's session was so bad that I started having blood come out. In addition to those other reactionary symptoms, I now have an excruciatingly painful sore throat where the blood comes from. Because I have nothing in my stomach after a night's rest, and because the vomiting reaction is trying to remove something from my throat, my body is heaving much harder than in a normal, regular, flu-induced or bad food-induced vomiting scenario. As my wife can attest, my entire body is tensing and releasing and sometimes it seems like I won't stop (because the tickle remains in the throat and the heaving isn't forcing enough up and out to remove that feeling, or all the air).
I had an endoscopy not too long ago. Other than obvious signs of acid reflux, for which I take medication every day, they saw no other damage. I find this hard to believe with the fact that I have been throwing up (really, dry heaving) for months now, to the point where it is getting bad enough to cause blood.
If I can eat or drink early enough/quickly enough in the morning, the food and drink can wash the discomforting feeling out of my throat and help me to avoid throwing up. However, some morning even that is not tincture, and I throw up anyway (only this time with something in my stomach).
In the end, I hope that my ENT doctor is quality and will take the time to ferret out this issue and resolve it. It makes life much harder when you throw up (one of the most unpleasant things a body can do) nearly every morning to start your day. In addition, I'm hoping he can figure out a way to stop the near constant ringing in my ears I've had for around 25 years now. Boy, wouldn't that be some sort of awesome?
I mention it here because the vomiting has been slowly getting more violent and painful. This morning, for example, I was walking around collecting the trash when it struck me and struck me hard. Thankfully, I was holding a garbage bag. The pain and effort was such that I collapsed to my knees. The problem comes from having nothing in my stomach but air, mucus, and stomach acids. So, when the air and the mucus in my throat irritate enough to trigger a vomit reaction, all I have to throw up is more air, mucus, and stomach acid. And, since the trigger is air and mucus in my throat, I keep throwing up until the mucus in the throat is moved enough to no longer tickle things.
This whole event leaves me exhausted, feeling bad, sore, and out of sorts. This morning's session was so bad that I started having blood come out. In addition to those other reactionary symptoms, I now have an excruciatingly painful sore throat where the blood comes from. Because I have nothing in my stomach after a night's rest, and because the vomiting reaction is trying to remove something from my throat, my body is heaving much harder than in a normal, regular, flu-induced or bad food-induced vomiting scenario. As my wife can attest, my entire body is tensing and releasing and sometimes it seems like I won't stop (because the tickle remains in the throat and the heaving isn't forcing enough up and out to remove that feeling, or all the air).
I had an endoscopy not too long ago. Other than obvious signs of acid reflux, for which I take medication every day, they saw no other damage. I find this hard to believe with the fact that I have been throwing up (really, dry heaving) for months now, to the point where it is getting bad enough to cause blood.
If I can eat or drink early enough/quickly enough in the morning, the food and drink can wash the discomforting feeling out of my throat and help me to avoid throwing up. However, some morning even that is not tincture, and I throw up anyway (only this time with something in my stomach).
In the end, I hope that my ENT doctor is quality and will take the time to ferret out this issue and resolve it. It makes life much harder when you throw up (one of the most unpleasant things a body can do) nearly every morning to start your day. In addition, I'm hoping he can figure out a way to stop the near constant ringing in my ears I've had for around 25 years now. Boy, wouldn't that be some sort of awesome?
June 13, 2012
Dreams
Last night's dream was vivid and detailed. I was living in some metropolitan area that was both spread out (like LA) and with a large number of tall buildings (like NY). I was frequently visiting a friend, Sean, in his funky apartment that happened to be made from a former bank vault. It was a very nice apartment, done in a pseudo-70s style, and had the luxury of being the only one in the complex without a neighbor beside, behind, above, or below it. (This apartment has actually appeared in more than one dream; I often re-use people, locations, and things in my dreams. I guess my subconscious is frugal.) Sean was dating/seeing/married to (I never quite got the exact relationship) my sister. Two of my friends, Jay and Lisa, were often found eating breakfast at Sean's place.
Wherever this took place, I was going to school. The school was close enough that I often stopped by Sean's in order to visit, waste time, or eat prior to or after returning from school. On this particular day, it was raining like the rain we experienced after the U2 concert in Montreal, I was running late, and I couldn't find my class. I went to the building it was supposed to be in, but the classes there were all math related; I saw economics, programming, physics, and accounting classes and students. No one knew where my actual English class was, and I had to find it. (Interestingly, this part of the dream was also re-used; I had the similar dream a few months ago and it was located at the same school.)
I finally, soaking wet by this time and shivering, walked back to Sean's and tried to get in so I could call my wife to come pick me up -- I didn't want to stay out in the cold and wet any longer.
I do not go in for Freudian or any other sort of dream interpretation. I think dreams are just your subconscious's way of working on things and, most likely, if you dream about flying you are dreaming about flying and everything that comes with flight. In this case, I think some stresses with work are seeping in (the late, can't find the classroom, etc. parts), but what I am unsure of is why I am mixing in such an odd group of people who don't know each other. And why have I glommed on to the bank vault apartment in a few dreams now? Sean is recently married to someone who does not look or act like my sister. My sister is getting married to someone who does not look or act like Sean. Jay and Lisa know neither Sean nor my sister.
Made for an interesting night's rest, to say the least. What odd, disparate dreams have you had lately?
Wherever this took place, I was going to school. The school was close enough that I often stopped by Sean's in order to visit, waste time, or eat prior to or after returning from school. On this particular day, it was raining like the rain we experienced after the U2 concert in Montreal, I was running late, and I couldn't find my class. I went to the building it was supposed to be in, but the classes there were all math related; I saw economics, programming, physics, and accounting classes and students. No one knew where my actual English class was, and I had to find it. (Interestingly, this part of the dream was also re-used; I had the similar dream a few months ago and it was located at the same school.)
I finally, soaking wet by this time and shivering, walked back to Sean's and tried to get in so I could call my wife to come pick me up -- I didn't want to stay out in the cold and wet any longer.
I do not go in for Freudian or any other sort of dream interpretation. I think dreams are just your subconscious's way of working on things and, most likely, if you dream about flying you are dreaming about flying and everything that comes with flight. In this case, I think some stresses with work are seeping in (the late, can't find the classroom, etc. parts), but what I am unsure of is why I am mixing in such an odd group of people who don't know each other. And why have I glommed on to the bank vault apartment in a few dreams now? Sean is recently married to someone who does not look or act like my sister. My sister is getting married to someone who does not look or act like Sean. Jay and Lisa know neither Sean nor my sister.
Made for an interesting night's rest, to say the least. What odd, disparate dreams have you had lately?
June 11, 2012
Adobe Redux
Part 1 is here.
I finally received all of the emails from Adobe needed in order to follow links, get my software, and install it... or so I thought.
This morning, I went to Adobe's Licensing website to download my install files and get the new version of the software on my system. I figured it would be pretty fast, and I could start using FM 9 this morning as I continue my project for the client.
The downloads went smoothly but I noticed on the Serial Numbers page of the website, only FM 10 was shown. I figured that the one serial number must be good for both products and continued with the installation of FM 9. I got to the serial number screen of the installation process and it wouldn't accept what I provided.
I went to Adobe's support site and got stuck in an endless loop of "Start here" and "if this page doesn't answer your questions" links that just took me from one to the other. I finally figured out where the Adobe support call number was, called them, and spoke with a nice woman about the issue.
Initially, she kept asking me questions that, apparently, the answers didn't matter. For example, she asked me if I was on the Licensing site now. Yes. Can you see the licensing for your former product? No. Oh, well, I wouldn't, she said. Er, okay. Why ask me then? Do you plan to continue using the FM 7 license? Probably not, I said. Well, it will still be valid regardless, she answered. Er, okay. Why bring it up then?
I briefly explained the entire FM 10 and a back license to FM 9 issue. I then explained that I was installing FM 9 but the emails said the Licensing website should have my serial numbers and it did not. I was stuck on the serial number entry screen and needed that number so I could complete the installation. She then told me that the reseller who sold me the back license should have provided it. I explained that he was explicit that it would be provided by Adobe via the Licensing website. She put me on hold for a few minutes.
She came back and told me that one of the two emails that Adobe sent me should have the serial number listed for the back license. I opened the two emails and read to her the part where it explicitly states to go the Licensing website to obtain that information. She put me on hold again, for a bit longer.
She returned and told me that with back licenses specifically the customer must call Adobe to obtain the serial number, that it will not show up on the website. I then reread the passage from the emails, explained that not one of the many, many people from both Adobe and the reseller ever explained this to me, and that everyone directed me to the Licensing website. I then asked how I was supposed to know that when the official information provided by Adobe contradicted what she was telling me? She put me on hold for even longer.
When she returned to the call this time, she explained that she went to her manager, explained the situation, and had the manager create a serial number for me. She provided me the working serial number, and then apologized on behalf of the company, the original Adobe rep I dealt with, and the reseller. She agreed with me that the email was unclear and said that she and her manager discussed it and were sending this issue report up the chain of command to see if they couldn't get the email more clearly worded to avoid this problem in the future. She then promised to send me an email containing the information. I thanked her and finished my installation.
When I received the email from Adobe asking for my opinions of the support case and how it was handled, I gave her generally high marks (she was, after all, able to solve my problem in one phone session). I also made sure to make the same comment about the how the email should be more clear on the process for obtaining serial numbers for back licensed products.
Adobe is a very large company with many product lines. It is in many countries. But the processes I had to go through in order to simply upgrade my software from an older version to a newer version would be daunting to many people. I know a few people who would not have been as persistent as I was in both getting the correct pricing as well as getting the serial number. Some would have been irritated dealing with an India call center (both for the pricing and for the support call); I'm not-- as long as I can understand you and get the information I want, I don't care who I'm talking to. I only have issue if I can't get the assistance I need or cannot understand the person with whom I'm talking.
In the end, it all worked out and I now have Adobe FrameMaker 9 on my system, which is the same version my current customer is using. We should not have any more compatibility issues with my projects going forward. But I should not have had to go through such a frustrating process in order to upgrade to this point, and especially not when dealing with a large company like Adobe. Customer service should always be job one, and they dropped the ball repeatedly in this case.
I finally received all of the emails from Adobe needed in order to follow links, get my software, and install it... or so I thought.
This morning, I went to Adobe's Licensing website to download my install files and get the new version of the software on my system. I figured it would be pretty fast, and I could start using FM 9 this morning as I continue my project for the client.
The downloads went smoothly but I noticed on the Serial Numbers page of the website, only FM 10 was shown. I figured that the one serial number must be good for both products and continued with the installation of FM 9. I got to the serial number screen of the installation process and it wouldn't accept what I provided.
I went to Adobe's support site and got stuck in an endless loop of "Start here" and "if this page doesn't answer your questions" links that just took me from one to the other. I finally figured out where the Adobe support call number was, called them, and spoke with a nice woman about the issue.
Initially, she kept asking me questions that, apparently, the answers didn't matter. For example, she asked me if I was on the Licensing site now. Yes. Can you see the licensing for your former product? No. Oh, well, I wouldn't, she said. Er, okay. Why ask me then? Do you plan to continue using the FM 7 license? Probably not, I said. Well, it will still be valid regardless, she answered. Er, okay. Why bring it up then?
I briefly explained the entire FM 10 and a back license to FM 9 issue. I then explained that I was installing FM 9 but the emails said the Licensing website should have my serial numbers and it did not. I was stuck on the serial number entry screen and needed that number so I could complete the installation. She then told me that the reseller who sold me the back license should have provided it. I explained that he was explicit that it would be provided by Adobe via the Licensing website. She put me on hold for a few minutes.
She came back and told me that one of the two emails that Adobe sent me should have the serial number listed for the back license. I opened the two emails and read to her the part where it explicitly states to go the Licensing website to obtain that information. She put me on hold again, for a bit longer.
She returned and told me that with back licenses specifically the customer must call Adobe to obtain the serial number, that it will not show up on the website. I then reread the passage from the emails, explained that not one of the many, many people from both Adobe and the reseller ever explained this to me, and that everyone directed me to the Licensing website. I then asked how I was supposed to know that when the official information provided by Adobe contradicted what she was telling me? She put me on hold for even longer.
When she returned to the call this time, she explained that she went to her manager, explained the situation, and had the manager create a serial number for me. She provided me the working serial number, and then apologized on behalf of the company, the original Adobe rep I dealt with, and the reseller. She agreed with me that the email was unclear and said that she and her manager discussed it and were sending this issue report up the chain of command to see if they couldn't get the email more clearly worded to avoid this problem in the future. She then promised to send me an email containing the information. I thanked her and finished my installation.
When I received the email from Adobe asking for my opinions of the support case and how it was handled, I gave her generally high marks (she was, after all, able to solve my problem in one phone session). I also made sure to make the same comment about the how the email should be more clear on the process for obtaining serial numbers for back licensed products.
Adobe is a very large company with many product lines. It is in many countries. But the processes I had to go through in order to simply upgrade my software from an older version to a newer version would be daunting to many people. I know a few people who would not have been as persistent as I was in both getting the correct pricing as well as getting the serial number. Some would have been irritated dealing with an India call center (both for the pricing and for the support call); I'm not-- as long as I can understand you and get the information I want, I don't care who I'm talking to. I only have issue if I can't get the assistance I need or cannot understand the person with whom I'm talking.
In the end, it all worked out and I now have Adobe FrameMaker 9 on my system, which is the same version my current customer is using. We should not have any more compatibility issues with my projects going forward. But I should not have had to go through such a frustrating process in order to upgrade to this point, and especially not when dealing with a large company like Adobe. Customer service should always be job one, and they dropped the ball repeatedly in this case.
June 5, 2012
Take My Money... Please!
Sometimes I wonder if businesses actually want to take my money. I asked for a quote on an upgrade to my Adobe FrameMaker 7 license to FrameMaker 9. I started a phone and email conversation with one of Adobe's representatives, whom I will call "Jim." I explained my situation in detail, Jim told me that I could not upgrade to FM 9, as the company no longer directly sells that version, but that I could upgrade to FM 10 and purchase a separate back license for an additional $20. Because the pricing ($1120) was way too rich for my independent contractor finances, I thanked him and moved on.
About a week later Jim informed me via email that Adobe was having a short-term promotion where they were knocking $400 off the license fee, meaning I could get the same deal (FM10 with a back license for FM 9) for $720. Still way to expensive for software, but much more manageable than before. I checked to make sure I could write off the cost on my taxes (yes), talked it over with my wife (since we would have to pay for this out of our own money), and decided to pull the trigger on the deal.
Somehow, the details of the conversation I had with the Adobe rep got lost as he transferred them first to another Adobe rep, whom I will call "Roy," and then that rep sent them on to distributor (whom I will call "Lori") to process the transaction. She sent me a Purchase Order for FM10 for $740.
I emailed her back, re-explained the situation to her, and asked her what the issues were. She apologized for the confusion, she wasn't given the information on the back license (and she would have to talk with someone in house to make sure they could do it), and that they were from a different country, so the discrepancy in cost was due to the variations between the countries.
Lori verified the FM 9 issue and sent me a new PO. I got the new PO with FM 10 for $740 and the FM 9 license for $25. With that country's taxes, the grand total was a whopping $865. Still better than the $1120 I was originally quoted, but well above what I was expecting or wanting to pay. She called, we talked, and I told her I would hold onto the PO but I was going to try to get the American pricing from an American distributor if I could. She was fine with that arrangement.
Today, I sent Roy a follow up email and asked if there was any movement on this. He immediately forwarded my info to three other people. However, it is the end of the work day and I did not expect a reply until tomorrow.
And then my phone rang. It was a brand new Adobe rep (we'll call her "Mona"). She was verifying whether I wanted to proceed with an upgrade to my Adobe FM 7 license, as time was running out. Soon, there would not be an upgrade path from 7 to any higher version FM. Yes, I said, I know... Jim explained this to me when we spoke by phone and email. I had to explain to her that I was already in the loop, already trying to purchase this upgrade, but that Roy had needed to send my info to a new distributor as the first one was giving much higher pricing. She kept reiterating that the pricing was limited time only and I would need to upgrade soon. No matter how many times I explained it, she didn't seem to get what I was saying.
Adobe apparently uses India to answer these types of requests, as Jim, Mona, and Roy all have Indian names and accents. While Jim was very polite, understanding, and easy to talk to, Roy seems more of a delegator, and Mona was simply not getting what I was saying (and I was having a hard time understanding her). I'm hopeful that either Jim will get involved again or the new people that Roy sent my info to will get the pricing correct and get me a PO in short order that I can pull the trigger on. If they cannot, then I will go back to Lori, accept and pay for her quote, and just eat the extra $100+ cost, as she was easy to talk to, understanding, and personable.
Adobe should have a much lower solitary user license fee as well as a much simpler online process for making a purchase. Frankly, I didn't need to have all of these phone calls (4) and emails (12) for what should be a relatively easy upgrade. I'm not sure why my original request to Adobe wasn't forwarded to Lori (or one of the new people) in the first place, and then she could call and I could speak with her directly. The run-around of going through an account rep, a second account rep, a distributor, back to the second account rep, to another distributor, and then having a third account rep call is frustrating and off-putting.
It's like the company doesn't actually want my money or is used to dealing with independent contractors.
ADDENDUMS
1. One of the new Adobe reps, whom I will call "Dan," just emailed me that he will be sending my information to yet another rep located in my area, whom I will call "Rich." Rich will be the one contacting me about the PO. Geez, Adobe, enough!
2. Rich just called. He isn't sure if I can go from 7 to 9 or 10 (he only has upgrade paths from 8 or 9 to 10) and he's not certain if he can provide the back license to 9 for me, even though I have been clear with every person that this is the primary reason for doing this. I asked him to call someone, a manager, anyone, and verify this before he sends me a PO. He was more than happy to and will call me back shortly with the results.
3. Rich called back; I was right, he was simply unaware of the promotion going on. I now have a PO for a grand total of $760.00, rather than one for $865 or $1120. I will pull the trigger on this deal before anything else changes!
About a week later Jim informed me via email that Adobe was having a short-term promotion where they were knocking $400 off the license fee, meaning I could get the same deal (FM10 with a back license for FM 9) for $720. Still way to expensive for software, but much more manageable than before. I checked to make sure I could write off the cost on my taxes (yes), talked it over with my wife (since we would have to pay for this out of our own money), and decided to pull the trigger on the deal.
Somehow, the details of the conversation I had with the Adobe rep got lost as he transferred them first to another Adobe rep, whom I will call "Roy," and then that rep sent them on to distributor (whom I will call "Lori") to process the transaction. She sent me a Purchase Order for FM10 for $740.
I emailed her back, re-explained the situation to her, and asked her what the issues were. She apologized for the confusion, she wasn't given the information on the back license (and she would have to talk with someone in house to make sure they could do it), and that they were from a different country, so the discrepancy in cost was due to the variations between the countries.
Lori verified the FM 9 issue and sent me a new PO. I got the new PO with FM 10 for $740 and the FM 9 license for $25. With that country's taxes, the grand total was a whopping $865. Still better than the $1120 I was originally quoted, but well above what I was expecting or wanting to pay. She called, we talked, and I told her I would hold onto the PO but I was going to try to get the American pricing from an American distributor if I could. She was fine with that arrangement.
Today, I sent Roy a follow up email and asked if there was any movement on this. He immediately forwarded my info to three other people. However, it is the end of the work day and I did not expect a reply until tomorrow.
And then my phone rang. It was a brand new Adobe rep (we'll call her "Mona"). She was verifying whether I wanted to proceed with an upgrade to my Adobe FM 7 license, as time was running out. Soon, there would not be an upgrade path from 7 to any higher version FM. Yes, I said, I know... Jim explained this to me when we spoke by phone and email. I had to explain to her that I was already in the loop, already trying to purchase this upgrade, but that Roy had needed to send my info to a new distributor as the first one was giving much higher pricing. She kept reiterating that the pricing was limited time only and I would need to upgrade soon. No matter how many times I explained it, she didn't seem to get what I was saying.
Adobe apparently uses India to answer these types of requests, as Jim, Mona, and Roy all have Indian names and accents. While Jim was very polite, understanding, and easy to talk to, Roy seems more of a delegator, and Mona was simply not getting what I was saying (and I was having a hard time understanding her). I'm hopeful that either Jim will get involved again or the new people that Roy sent my info to will get the pricing correct and get me a PO in short order that I can pull the trigger on. If they cannot, then I will go back to Lori, accept and pay for her quote, and just eat the extra $100+ cost, as she was easy to talk to, understanding, and personable.
Adobe should have a much lower solitary user license fee as well as a much simpler online process for making a purchase. Frankly, I didn't need to have all of these phone calls (4) and emails (12) for what should be a relatively easy upgrade. I'm not sure why my original request to Adobe wasn't forwarded to Lori (or one of the new people) in the first place, and then she could call and I could speak with her directly. The run-around of going through an account rep, a second account rep, a distributor, back to the second account rep, to another distributor, and then having a third account rep call is frustrating and off-putting.
It's like the company doesn't actually want my money or is used to dealing with independent contractors.
ADDENDUMS
1. One of the new Adobe reps, whom I will call "Dan," just emailed me that he will be sending my information to yet another rep located in my area, whom I will call "Rich." Rich will be the one contacting me about the PO. Geez, Adobe, enough!
2. Rich just called. He isn't sure if I can go from 7 to 9 or 10 (he only has upgrade paths from 8 or 9 to 10) and he's not certain if he can provide the back license to 9 for me, even though I have been clear with every person that this is the primary reason for doing this. I asked him to call someone, a manager, anyone, and verify this before he sends me a PO. He was more than happy to and will call me back shortly with the results.
3. Rich called back; I was right, he was simply unaware of the promotion going on. I now have a PO for a grand total of $760.00, rather than one for $865 or $1120. I will pull the trigger on this deal before anything else changes!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)