Posts
Yeah, yeah, I'm late.
Saturday, December 29, 2007
Thursday, December 20, 2007
YouTube
I would have liked including a window for watching videos from YouTube with content related to my blog, but their smallest window is 400 pixels wide and more than that tall. I just don't have the time to figure out how to constrain the size of embedded script. If they get one smaller that will fit my page without dominating the content of it, I'll put it back up.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Excuse me, but your language is slipping.
It's no wonder the rest of the world can't figure us out. Look at our idiomatic expressions, most of which have nothing to do with anything grammatical.
I'm not going to list them out, but here are a couple of pet peeves of mine. The use of any of these in my presence is likely to get you at least a glare. If they are used in my direction, the conversation is over. If it's by a politician, you've just lost my vote forever (and I don't care if that means I need to vote the Perot ticket again or not). If it's in a book, I do not put the book aside lightly, I do, in fact, throw it away from me with great force (unless I'm supposed to review it because then i haven't a choice, do I?).
"Taken cared of" - The only person I have allowed to use this in my presence is my wife, for obvious reasons. If you mean something completed in the past say, "It has been taken care of." Yes, jerk, there is a 'be' verb in there. Anyone claiming, "It ends in a preposition!" can keep their Latin grammar to themselves. If you don't know what I mean, then you don't know the history of your own language.
"a myriad of" or "myriads of" - That is so CRAPTASTIC! No one should be allowed to get away with this and live. It's an adjective, which means:
This next one, my friends, is the one that set me off tonight.
"horribly underfunded" - did this politician want top say, "underfunded," "greatly underfunded," or did she really mean that the people funding this project failed to underfund it adequately?
Loose lips may sink ships, but sloppy language destroys the means by which we convey ideas to one another. Screw with it, and it'll screw you.
I'm not going to list them out, but here are a couple of pet peeves of mine. The use of any of these in my presence is likely to get you at least a glare. If they are used in my direction, the conversation is over. If it's by a politician, you've just lost my vote forever (and I don't care if that means I need to vote the Perot ticket again or not). If it's in a book, I do not put the book aside lightly, I do, in fact, throw it away from me with great force (unless I'm supposed to review it because then i haven't a choice, do I?).
"Taken cared of" - The only person I have allowed to use this in my presence is my wife, for obvious reasons. If you mean something completed in the past say, "It has been taken care of." Yes, jerk, there is a 'be' verb in there. Anyone claiming, "It ends in a preposition!" can keep their Latin grammar to themselves. If you don't know what I mean, then you don't know the history of your own language.
"a myriad of" or "myriads of" - That is so CRAPTASTIC! No one should be allowed to get away with this and live. It's an adjective, which means:
- It does not take a plural or possessive because it ain't a noun
- It cannot be used in a preposition in primary position because it is an adjective of numbers and can therefore only modify other adjectives or nouns to indicate how much of those exist
This next one, my friends, is the one that set me off tonight.
"horribly underfunded" - did this politician want top say, "underfunded," "greatly underfunded," or did she really mean that the people funding this project failed to underfund it adequately?
Loose lips may sink ships, but sloppy language destroys the means by which we convey ideas to one another. Screw with it, and it'll screw you.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Business and Faith
I posted this in answer to a question posed on how faith might affect actions in business situations. The person asking added that there should be a personal aspect to how it might affect the answerer.
---------------
I've not yet encountered a business situation where faith has ever been an overt consideration. However, I can see where the psychology of faith (and belief) can play into negotiations and inter-office social networks.
Consider the propensity for individuals to congregate and make distinctions of belonging based on certain aspects of personal behavior. These aspects could be favorite singer, favorite food, nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, or (to the point of the question), faith.
I have made a distinction between faith and religion. A further distinction could be made between faith and belief. the distinctions are analogous to the distinction between ethics and morality. These distinctions are difficult for most people to discern and quantify, so that most do not try.
Given this inability to unconsciously separate faith from belief, as apposed to the conscious act of thinking about the distinction, most who ascribe to a particular religion are more likely to favor dealings with those of the same religion. As an example, I would point out the website you provide in clarification.
People will trend toward dealing more with those within their perceived group. While people may deal with those outside these groups, they will be more likely to impose greater restrictions during negotiations with those others. It is an unconscious, not easily controlled compulsion usually ingrained from early development in childhood in what some might call, "indoctrination." I, however, see this more as, "tribal education." Each faith group is a subculture requiring its members to be educated in proper action toward others in that subculture. Humans are social creatures and must feel that they belong to a group. Religion is a fast and easy way to belong.
Although I was not raised under any particular faith, I was surrounded more by those who were Christian than those of any other religion. While I do not subscribe to their tenets of faith, because of my early development I do understand them and their actions toward one another more than I do any other religious group.
While these group interactions will be subverted under he daily activity of the business as a whole, I would be able to enjoy a normal working relationship with most people, personality clashes not-withstanding. I think that if there ever were an overt display of religion, or even an implied requirement to be of that religion in order to enjoy a normal working relationship with the majority of people in the office, I would be packing up quickly and going away. I do not include Christmas or Hanuka displays as there really is no way to avoid either in most nations and especially in the USA. I also do not include charity drives even when run by a religious group, as I do not believe that morality or ethics live within any religion - they are just a good place to start - so the act of charity belongs to all.
---------------
I've not yet encountered a business situation where faith has ever been an overt consideration. However, I can see where the psychology of faith (and belief) can play into negotiations and inter-office social networks.
Consider the propensity for individuals to congregate and make distinctions of belonging based on certain aspects of personal behavior. These aspects could be favorite singer, favorite food, nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, or (to the point of the question), faith.
I have made a distinction between faith and religion. A further distinction could be made between faith and belief. the distinctions are analogous to the distinction between ethics and morality. These distinctions are difficult for most people to discern and quantify, so that most do not try.
Given this inability to unconsciously separate faith from belief, as apposed to the conscious act of thinking about the distinction, most who ascribe to a particular religion are more likely to favor dealings with those of the same religion. As an example, I would point out the website you provide in clarification.
People will trend toward dealing more with those within their perceived group. While people may deal with those outside these groups, they will be more likely to impose greater restrictions during negotiations with those others. It is an unconscious, not easily controlled compulsion usually ingrained from early development in childhood in what some might call, "indoctrination." I, however, see this more as, "tribal education." Each faith group is a subculture requiring its members to be educated in proper action toward others in that subculture. Humans are social creatures and must feel that they belong to a group. Religion is a fast and easy way to belong.
Although I was not raised under any particular faith, I was surrounded more by those who were Christian than those of any other religion. While I do not subscribe to their tenets of faith, because of my early development I do understand them and their actions toward one another more than I do any other religious group.
While these group interactions will be subverted under he daily activity of the business as a whole, I would be able to enjoy a normal working relationship with most people, personality clashes not-withstanding. I think that if there ever were an overt display of religion, or even an implied requirement to be of that religion in order to enjoy a normal working relationship with the majority of people in the office, I would be packing up quickly and going away. I do not include Christmas or Hanuka displays as there really is no way to avoid either in most nations and especially in the USA. I also do not include charity drives even when run by a religious group, as I do not believe that morality or ethics live within any religion - they are just a good place to start - so the act of charity belongs to all.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
MASSIVE Drool!
I have no conceivable use for this, but the "I wanna play with it" factor is incredibly high.
Added some stuff
Don't speak my language? Got something up top that'll do for ya. Mostly. Some languages make the translator gag. I didn't write it (don't think I could) and they don't claim it's 100% either. Also, it is a tad slow, so be patient.
Want to join with some nutballs? Wanna be on of the few, the proud, the truly underappreciated - and become a soccer referee? Well, then click on one of the two logos. Top one takes you to the National site, bottom one takes you to the Northern California site. From the National, I believe you can navigate to the International. Or just search on FIFA.
BTW, although I can,I don't like to code. The less HTML editing I need to do, for anything other than work, the better. I don't script for New Tab or New Window for the links on my blog. Two reasons (3 if you count the above statement):
[12/18/2007] Fine, you tarts! It's done. Click away.
Want to join with some nutballs? Wanna be on of the few, the proud, the truly underappreciated - and become a soccer referee? Well, then click on one of the two logos. Top one takes you to the National site, bottom one takes you to the Northern California site. From the National, I believe you can navigate to the International. Or just search on FIFA.
BTW, although I can,I don't like to code. The less HTML editing I need to do, for anything other than work, the better. I don't script for New Tab or New Window for the links on my blog. Two reasons (3 if you count the above statement):
- I hate it when some site keeps opening new tabs, new windows, or extra pop-ups. Pop-up blockers would prevent that.
- I want people to reach the links I take the time to put in. So I leave it up to the reader to choose how they get there.
To that end, I've put in a little note reminding some (and maybe educating others) that there is a way to open tabs or windows and see those thngs without having to leave my wonderful little slice of paradise.
[12/18/2007] Fine, you tarts! It's done. Click away.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
So, how long's it been? 20! holy....
Okay. So I'm not just now realizing that my 20th high school reunion thingy is coming up in 6 months, but that doesn't mean I can't be surprised by it anyway. Especially when you consider that I just finished up a BA.
Yeah, I procrastinate. In fact, I've procrastinated my procrastination. I'm good at that. It's hard work, procrastination. It's not laziness at all. It is an active decision not to do something that I probably should be doing, but no one will die if I don't, so I won't. See? Lot's of brain power there. Took 1.5 seconds to think it and 30 seconds to type it out without errors......
Anyway, back at the Ranch......
My high-school graduating class had one other reunion, the 11th. Seems that the class officers have fallen off the face of the earth (especially the pres [and we thought she'd be the first inna White House]) so other people, mostly the ROTC people, got it going. It's funny how that works out. It was the same people that a few years later organized an "Every Year" ROTC reunion to honor the instructors (which surprised the hell out of them). We all had fun.
So now I wait for someone to organize an "Every Year" reunion for the band so I can get my double geek goin'. Get Fanfare for the Common Man and Rhapsody in Blue goin'. Some of us wheezers might even be able to swing some Birdland. You can keep the marches, thank you.
So now I've plopped my 80 bucks down and wait, nearly patiently, for the day to arrive when I find out that practically no one (except the 4 VPs that I know about) are doing any better than me. If they remember me, and unless you count the fact they got their degrees first.....
Yeah, I procrastinate. In fact, I've procrastinated my procrastination. I'm good at that. It's hard work, procrastination. It's not laziness at all. It is an active decision not to do something that I probably should be doing, but no one will die if I don't, so I won't. See? Lot's of brain power there. Took 1.5 seconds to think it and 30 seconds to type it out without errors......
Anyway, back at the Ranch......
My high-school graduating class had one other reunion, the 11th. Seems that the class officers have fallen off the face of the earth (especially the pres [and we thought she'd be the first inna White House]) so other people, mostly the ROTC people, got it going. It's funny how that works out. It was the same people that a few years later organized an "Every Year" ROTC reunion to honor the instructors (which surprised the hell out of them). We all had fun.
So now I wait for someone to organize an "Every Year" reunion for the band so I can get my double geek goin'. Get Fanfare for the Common Man and Rhapsody in Blue goin'. Some of us wheezers might even be able to swing some Birdland. You can keep the marches, thank you.
So now I've plopped my 80 bucks down and wait, nearly patiently, for the day to arrive when I find out that practically no one (except the 4 VPs that I know about) are doing any better than me. If they remember me, and unless you count the fact they got their degrees first.....
Friday, December 07, 2007
Rampant Stupidity
Not so recently, I bought tickets through TicketMaster. I had a whole rant that I was going to post, but I've decided that I'm just going to post the BBB process complaint and then post my thoughts and what I plan to do afterward and why.
"" = equals some modicum of privacy for me (although it ain't hard to figure out who I am) and the person from whom I received the company's boiler-plate response, or some dumb mistake which I feel would embarass the BBB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Complaint Description
IAC, doing bus as Ticketmaster, which operates www.ticketmaster.com, is not properly disclosing all costs associated with ticket purchases before such purchases are made. I had ordered 3 tickets. The Purchase page showed seat locations, the delivery options & costs of the tickets. There was no mention of any other fees associated with the purchase. Agreeing to the price & selecting the delivery method (Regular Mail) I clicked Purchase. The next page was for payment info. There was still no mention of the fees. I also didn't notice that my delivery method had changed from Regular Mail to TicketFast ($2.50 fee). After purchase, the price quoted on the Purchase Page for 3 tickets had increased by 26% of the $49.50 ticket price by the addition of delivery fee + a $10.50, 'Convenience Charge,' per ticket. There was also an order processing fee of $4.15 not previously mentioned or noticed. I've understood that they do have the right to charge these fess, but such fees must be disclosed & enumerated on the purchase order, before the trans is concluded or the service is performed. Attempted suits have been made, & lost, regarding their practice of charging such fees & the possibility of lowering them (Band Pearl Jam vs. Ticketmaster [or equiv).They should, be held accountable for disclosing them, openly & on the purchase price page, before the purchase is fait accompli. I'm waiving the processing fee, as service was provided. Had it been properly disclosed, I wouldn't have objected.
Company's Response
Tickets purchased on Ticketmaster.com are typically subject to a per ticket convenience charge and a non-refundable per order processing fee. In many cases, delivery prices will also be owed." [From their ToU policy]
There is no disclosure of the percentage or fixed amount charged. Whether agreed to or not, there is no way to determine the cost of those charges prior to purchase without the disclosure on the purchase page.
Complaint is directed at parent company (IAC), not TicketMaster.
Company's Final Response
Final Response - Posted
We are in receipt of your complaint. We understand that your complaint was directed to IAC, but the charges in question are set in place by Ticketmaster. As previously stated you are requesting that Ticketmaster refund a purchase that you placed on our website. During the Internet ordering process, all information is re-confirmed. By proceeding with your order, you acknowledged that you would abide by our terms. Since you agreed to those terms we respectfully decline to grant your request for a refund as we do not believe that Ticketmaster was at fault in this instance. We trust this explanation will be satisfactory to fully resolve this matter. Sincerely, "" -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was never interested in receiving the entire purchase price, just the price of the undisclosed amount.
Their practice is the equivalent of a moving company saying, "There will be a transportation fee of an amount that we cannot disclose because we don't know how much it will be." After you've already signed the work order saying that you'll pay it, they have your stuff. Then they charge you extortionist fees in order to get your stuff back.
That kind of practice has been determined in court (for moving companies, at least) to be tantamount to fraud because they did not disclose the fixed amount, percentage amount, or amount to be charged per mile on the contract before signing. TicketMaster also does not disclose a percentage amount or fixed rate for their fee.
I'm very close to pursuing a class action lawsuit not only for the amount of my fees, but for the total amount of fees charges by TicketMaster since the inception of their online ticket purchasing outlet for tickets purchased through that outlet. Why would I start there? Because, when buying a ticket through previous outlets (i.e. at the venue, licensed outlets like the Wherehouse, etc.) there was always a disclosure of the amount to the customer before the customer had payed for the tickets. Up until they made the purchase, the customer had the right to cancel the transaction due to knowing the amount of the fee. In the case of the online purchases, there is no monetary disclosure until after the purchase is complete.
How much is this likely to hurt them? Well, my fees were around $10.25 per ticket. Multiply that by millions of ticket since the inception of the online venue. The lawyer is likely to be happy with 3% of that as a fee, but against such a large company it might be as high as 10%. As first party, I'll be happy with 1.4%, but might get by with 2%.
Now think of the money they could have saved by giving me my 40 bucks.........
Of course, that's only if I go through with it. Maybe someone else will beat me to the punch. I wouldn't mind much as long as I got my 40 bucks.
"" = equals some modicum of privacy for me (although it ain't hard to figure out who I am) and the person from whom I received the company's boiler-plate response, or some dumb mistake which I feel would embarass the BBB.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Complaint Description
IAC, doing bus as Ticketmaster, which operates www.ticketmaster.com, is not properly disclosing all costs associated with ticket purchases before such purchases are made. I had ordered 3 tickets. The Purchase page showed seat locations, the delivery options & costs of the tickets. There was no mention of any other fees associated with the purchase. Agreeing to the price & selecting the delivery method (Regular Mail) I clicked Purchase. The next page was for payment info. There was still no mention of the fees. I also didn't notice that my delivery method had changed from Regular Mail to TicketFast ($2.50 fee). After purchase, the price quoted on the Purchase Page for 3 tickets had increased by 26% of the $49.50 ticket price by the addition of delivery fee + a $10.50, 'Convenience Charge,' per ticket. There was also an order processing fee of $4.15 not previously mentioned or noticed. I've understood that they do have the right to charge these fess, but such fees must be disclosed & enumerated on the purchase order, before the trans is concluded or the service is performed. Attempted suits have been made, & lost, regarding their practice of charging such fees & the possibility of lowering them (Band Pearl Jam vs. Ticketmaster [or equiv).They should, be held accountable for disclosing them, openly & on the purchase price page, before the purchase is fait accompli. I'm waiving the processing fee, as service was provided. Had it been properly disclosed, I wouldn't have objected.
Complaint Summary
IAC, doing bus as Ticketmaster, which operates www.ticketmaster.com, is not properly disclosing all costs associated with ticket purchases.
Resolution Sought
Refund of undisclosed fees.
| Additional Information | |
| Date Problem First Occurred: | 11-17-2007 |
| Product or Service: | computerized ticketing sales |
| Model Name or Number: | "" |
| Date Purchased: | 11-17-2007 |
| Order Number: | |
| Amount Paid: | |
Company's Response
Dear Mr. "":
We are in receipt of your request for a refund. Thank you for your patience while we researched the facts relevant to your transaction. As you may recall, you are requesting that Ticketmaster refund a purchase that you placed on our website. Ticketmaster strives to provide excellent customer service and sincerely regrets that an error apparently occurred in connection with your transaction. We welcome this opportunity to explain why your refund request is being denied. During the Internet ordering process, all information is re-confirmed. This confirmation includes venue, day, date, time, and number of tickets, itemized and total charges. Before a consumer can complete their transaction, the consumer must agree to our Terms of Use. By proceeding with your order, you acknowledged that you would abide by those terms. Further, under our Purchase Policy, subcategory Refunds and Exchanges, it clearly states that before purchasing tickets, carefully review your event and seat selection. Policies set forth by our clients, including venues, teams and theaters; prohibit Ticketmaster from issuing exchanges or refunds after a ticket has been purchased or for lost, stolen, damaged or destroyed tickets. I sincerely regret to learn that you were disappointed with your experience utilizing Ticketmaster. However, since you agreed to our Terms of Use prior to completion of the transaction, we respectfully decline to grant your request for a refund as we do not believe that Ticketmaster was at fault in this instance. Thank you for the opportunity to respond and formally address your concerns. We trust this explanation will be satisfactory to fully resolve this matter. Sincerely, "" Consumer Support Specialist
Initial Response Summary
Thank you for your patience while we researched the facts relevant to your transaction.
Rebuttal - Posted 11-28-2007
Tickets purchased on Ticketmaster.com are typically subject to a per ticket convenience charge and a non-refundable per order processing fee. In many cases, delivery prices will also be owed." [From their ToU policy]
There is no disclosure of the percentage or fixed amount charged. Whether agreed to or not, there is no way to determine the cost of those charges prior to purchase without the disclosure on the purchase page.
Complaint is directed at parent company (IAC), not TicketMaster.
Company's Final Response
Final Response - Posted
We are in receipt of your complaint. We understand that your complaint was directed to IAC, but the charges in question are set in place by Ticketmaster. As previously stated you are requesting that Ticketmaster refund a purchase that you placed on our website. During the Internet ordering process, all information is re-confirmed. By proceeding with your order, you acknowledged that you would abide by our terms. Since you agreed to those terms we respectfully decline to grant your request for a refund as we do not believe that Ticketmaster was at fault in this instance. We trust this explanation will be satisfactory to fully resolve this matter. Sincerely, "" -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was never interested in receiving the entire purchase price, just the price of the undisclosed amount.
Their practice is the equivalent of a moving company saying, "There will be a transportation fee of an amount that we cannot disclose because we don't know how much it will be." After you've already signed the work order saying that you'll pay it, they have your stuff. Then they charge you extortionist fees in order to get your stuff back.
That kind of practice has been determined in court (for moving companies, at least) to be tantamount to fraud because they did not disclose the fixed amount, percentage amount, or amount to be charged per mile on the contract before signing. TicketMaster also does not disclose a percentage amount or fixed rate for their fee.
I'm very close to pursuing a class action lawsuit not only for the amount of my fees, but for the total amount of fees charges by TicketMaster since the inception of their online ticket purchasing outlet for tickets purchased through that outlet. Why would I start there? Because, when buying a ticket through previous outlets (i.e. at the venue, licensed outlets like the Wherehouse, etc.) there was always a disclosure of the amount to the customer before the customer had payed for the tickets. Up until they made the purchase, the customer had the right to cancel the transaction due to knowing the amount of the fee. In the case of the online purchases, there is no monetary disclosure until after the purchase is complete.
How much is this likely to hurt them? Well, my fees were around $10.25 per ticket. Multiply that by millions of ticket since the inception of the online venue. The lawyer is likely to be happy with 3% of that as a fee, but against such a large company it might be as high as 10%. As first party, I'll be happy with 1.4%, but might get by with 2%.
Now think of the money they could have saved by giving me my 40 bucks.........
Of course, that's only if I go through with it. Maybe someone else will beat me to the punch. I wouldn't mind much as long as I got my 40 bucks.
Monday, December 03, 2007
By way of clarification
For those of you thinking that the previous two post contradict each other: They don't.
The article from 11-29-07 deals with intolerant behavior toward another for perceived inequality.
The article from 12-03-07 deals with ... well it's about ... and they were dumb and ...
Okay, so I'm intolerant of stupid acts by otherwise intelligent people. So I'm addressing the outward actions of the people and not making judgments about their inherent inferiority at all.
- - -
Aw, hell! Yeah, you're right they do contradict each other. A little. I did say I was guilty of it, didn't I?
The article from 11-29-07 deals with intolerant behavior toward another for perceived inequality.
The article from 12-03-07 deals with ... well it's about ... and they were dumb and ...
Okay, so I'm intolerant of stupid acts by otherwise intelligent people. So I'm addressing the outward actions of the people and not making judgments about their inherent inferiority at all.
- - -
Aw, hell! Yeah, you're right they do contradict each other. A little. I did say I was guilty of it, didn't I?
A year inna Tree? Holy CARP!
It's been an entire year now that some U.C. Berkeley students(?) decided to save some trees by climbing into them and refusing to come down. The trees are happy, I'm sure, with all that free fertilizer - coming out of both ends.
"I like this tree, so to save it I'm gonna nail some boards to it." Um.....DUH!
This article is about a year old now as well, but it speaks plainly of the soft-headedness that pervades supposed "right thinking" people. Not the religious right, not the Republican right, heck, not even the right coast. Just, "I'm right and you're wrong. Nyah!"
These children weren't allowed to fall down enough onto concrete from high enough places when they were children. If they had been, maybe we wouldn't be wasting even the minimal amount of pixilated bits I'm producing right now. These are the kind of people that also advocate replacing sand with rubberized flooring in exterior parks. Anyone ever tell them what that material is made from?
Okay, I understand why they want to save the trees. I also understand why Berkeley wants to build a new stadium. Both sides are stump dumb, though. The kids for thinking their opinions mean much, and Berkeley for making such a big deal out of building a structure that has absolutely nothing to do with education, but has everything to do with how many "donations" the school can obtain.
The trees in question are, in fact protected. That's fine. However, one of the responders to the linked article states, "The current oak grove is a complex functioning ecosystem." Really? I don't think the odd squirrel, nesting bird, creeping crud, or a few lichen constitute much of an ecosystem. Especially now that for a year the apes in the trees have scared them all off. I have a couple of questions:
Current building codes of California are extremely strict about the redesign, refit, or rebuilding of any structure that lies directly on, or is sectioned in any way by an inherently active fault. At the time the building they are trying to "fix" was originally built, these codes were not as strict. They can build it, but it's going to cost a whole lot of money. Last figure I can recall was somewhere in the order of half a billion dollars (for those using British measurements, think 10x10^12 not 10x10^9) for studies, permits, consultants and (maybe) some construction. Heck, these are the guys who, in 1995, spent $1.5 million just to put real grass back into the stadium. Just grass. Which gets painted, trudged on, burnt with petroleum products, hammered, ground into mud, and ripped up, for all of which reasons it must be replanted every season. Probably at the same cost.
Hey, Dean, how many books could you buy for $1.5 million? How many students' educations could you completely pay for with $1.5 million?
Both of these groups should never be allowed near money. Heck, neither of these groups can think past their own ideologies enough to see what money is. And these are supposed to be the best and brightest. If they are, we are doomed.
I would have solved this thing in about a week. I'd give them that long to get the heck outta the tree. If they didn't, I wouldn't wait for the courts. Why? Well, ya see, we have this wonderful thing called a, "tranquilizer dart." We also have these things called, "foam mats." (Don't worry, Dean, the kinesthetics department can help you out with the mats. I know it's complicated for you.)
What? Too Violent for you? Think about that the next time you applaud the killing of a mountain lion simply because it's in someone's neighborhood. Or maybe the next time someone vilifies that same mountain lion when it attacks after being cornered by Joe red-neck and his beer-swillin' ape buddies building fires where they shouldn't and wondering what that rustlin' is inna bushes...
"I like this tree, so to save it I'm gonna nail some boards to it." Um.....DUH!
This article is about a year old now as well, but it speaks plainly of the soft-headedness that pervades supposed "right thinking" people. Not the religious right, not the Republican right, heck, not even the right coast. Just, "I'm right and you're wrong. Nyah!"
These children weren't allowed to fall down enough onto concrete from high enough places when they were children. If they had been, maybe we wouldn't be wasting even the minimal amount of pixilated bits I'm producing right now. These are the kind of people that also advocate replacing sand with rubberized flooring in exterior parks. Anyone ever tell them what that material is made from?
Okay, I understand why they want to save the trees. I also understand why Berkeley wants to build a new stadium. Both sides are stump dumb, though. The kids for thinking their opinions mean much, and Berkeley for making such a big deal out of building a structure that has absolutely nothing to do with education, but has everything to do with how many "donations" the school can obtain.
The trees in question are, in fact protected. That's fine. However, one of the responders to the linked article states, "The current oak grove is a complex functioning ecosystem." Really? I don't think the odd squirrel, nesting bird, creeping crud, or a few lichen constitute much of an ecosystem. Especially now that for a year the apes in the trees have scared them all off. I have a couple of questions:
- The law that prohibits the cutting down of live oaks: it applies to the city or the county?
- If either, is the campus properly within either?
Current building codes of California are extremely strict about the redesign, refit, or rebuilding of any structure that lies directly on, or is sectioned in any way by an inherently active fault. At the time the building they are trying to "fix" was originally built, these codes were not as strict. They can build it, but it's going to cost a whole lot of money. Last figure I can recall was somewhere in the order of half a billion dollars (for those using British measurements, think 10x10^12 not 10x10^9) for studies, permits, consultants and (maybe) some construction. Heck, these are the guys who, in 1995, spent $1.5 million just to put real grass back into the stadium. Just grass. Which gets painted, trudged on, burnt with petroleum products, hammered, ground into mud, and ripped up, for all of which reasons it must be replanted every season. Probably at the same cost.
Hey, Dean, how many books could you buy for $1.5 million? How many students' educations could you completely pay for with $1.5 million?
Both of these groups should never be allowed near money. Heck, neither of these groups can think past their own ideologies enough to see what money is. And these are supposed to be the best and brightest. If they are, we are doomed.
I would have solved this thing in about a week. I'd give them that long to get the heck outta the tree. If they didn't, I wouldn't wait for the courts. Why? Well, ya see, we have this wonderful thing called a, "tranquilizer dart." We also have these things called, "foam mats." (Don't worry, Dean, the kinesthetics department can help you out with the mats. I know it's complicated for you.)
- Put foam mats under trees
- Use either a blowgun or a tranquiler rifle (both of which the Department of Fish and Wildlife can loan you) to pick 'em off
- They fall onto mats
- Anyone trying to get in the way gets a dart, too
- You arrest them
- Problem solved.
What? Too Violent for you? Think about that the next time you applaud the killing of a mountain lion simply because it's in someone's neighborhood. Or maybe the next time someone vilifies that same mountain lion when it attacks after being cornered by Joe red-neck and his beer-swillin' ape buddies building fires where they shouldn't and wondering what that rustlin' is inna bushes...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)