Sunday, August 30, 2009

Come join the party, it's a celebration

I am back in Fort Lauderdale after a rather busy trip back home to San Antonio. The main purpose of my going was to attend the retirement party for my club (swimming) coach. I had missed a similar fĂȘte this past Memorial Day weekend for my high school coach, as I was working in Chicago the day of the event. However, for this one, I was able to secure a day off from work (Friday), despite our main annual event being just over a week away. The actual party was great: I got to see so many people that I have not seen in many years. It was good to get caught up, and hopefully, reconnected (although Facebook is a great help here as well).

I noticed two rather perplexing things this weekend:

  • At the party, I arrived and ended up parked in one location for the just over two hours I was there, as people came over to chat. It was quite nice, but to those on the other side of the backyard, I am sorry I did not make it over to y'all.

  • The other perplexing thing that I noticed this trip has to do with the flights. Have y'all noticed that while online and on your boarding pass, the exit row is called "Exit Row"; but in the announcements at the start of the flight, the row is identified as "If you are sitting in a row designated by a sign stating 'No Children in this Row'...." This baffles me. While this demarcation is present on the window of the aisles involved, it's only on the window. It's not on the back of each seat in the row, nor is the window sign that big. It really can't be seen from the aisle, unlike the large "Exit" signs on the doors, nor probably any seat other than the window seat. How would someone not in said row know if they were or were not in an actual "No Children" row?

So, I am perplexed. But I did have a good time at the party.


Think about it, doesn't matter, and if
It makes you feel good then I say do it
I don't know what you're waiting for

Thursday, August 27, 2009

And just tell me why nothing is good enough

I sit at the airport, awaiting a flight to San Antonio, via Houston. And while I recover from a rather rapid jaunt from the office to the airport--so that I could catch this flight (luckily traffic was light both on the road and in the security line)--a brief comment. As I mentioned earlier this week, the September issue of Wired has an article about wanting to update craigslists with "useful" features that in my mind would only serve to bog it down. (That author also seemed perplexed as to how the site was so popular without any of those "useful" features.)

Rather ironically, following the craiglslist article in the same issue is one entitled:
The Good Enough Revolution: When Cheap and Simple Is Just Fine
which, in addition to fitting right-up-the-alley part of my boss's philosophy, seems to explain why craigslist works and is successful.

Maybe the author of the second article should speak to the first. And perhaps the Wired editor is having some fun with juxtaposition....


So don't tell me why he's never been good to you
Don't tell me why he's never been there for you
Don't you know that why is simply not good enough

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

You say goodbye and I say hello (hello, hello)

So tonight I went out to dinner with some friends to celebrate my birthday.

As I opened the door to the restaurant, one of my friends was exiting. Upon seeing her, I said hello, to which she responded goodbye (and then explained that she needed to run back to her car and feed the parking meter of the space it was in, and that she would return).

You say yes, I say no
You say stop, and I say say go, go go
You say goodbye, and I say hello

Monday, August 24, 2009

Say, say, say, what you want

So the new edition of Wired arrived in my mailbox the other day (it's pictured at right). The cover article is entitled, Why Craigslist is Such a Mess. In it, the author expounds on all that is wrong with craigslist, mostly stemming from the fact the Craig (the man who's list it is) refuses to adopt any web tech from after 1999. Because of this the site is "lacking": it has none of the bells and whistle the author apparently likes. This lack, and the fact that the site is one of the most popular online, perplexes the author. He believes the site would be better if updated with modern net gadgets.

To this I say: sometimes more is just more. It is not, in fact, better. Perhaps craiglist is such a success because it is simple. Perhaps it really is not that hard to navigate, once you have looked at it. Perhaps it succeeds because it does not have all those bells and whistles that most of the time are unnecessary and just add flash to a page. (Perhaps there's a reason for why that program is called Flash.) Perhaps the craigslist site succeeds because it doesn't take time to load, because it does not have a bunch of junk to load. (No, it just allows you to sell your junk.)

Perhaps craigslist succeeds just because it has a best of page....

And while I'm tangentially referring to webdesign, I will mention that perhaps certain websites will re-format their stories so that the text occupies more than 1/6th of their page and the structure/ads occupy less than the 5/6th's they currently do (and I won't even start on auto-loading of video clips and ads).

Say, say, say what you want
But don't leave me with no direction

Saturday, August 15, 2009

Now it's guitars, Cadillacs; hill-billy music

So, the executive committee (it's actually called the "Executive Board") of the International Olympic Committee (aka IOC) met this week, doing prep work for the meeting of the whole IOC at the beginning of October. At the meeting, the Board considered alterations to the sports for the 2012 Olympics, as well as reviewed 7 possible sports to fill 2 slots for the 2016 Games.

Now, on the former--the changes to the 2012 "programme" as it's called (and not spelled "program", instead in what I presume is British English)--the Board:

  • swapped out some events in canoe/kayak and modern pentathlon;
  • denied expansions to swimming, wrestling and cycling (because the Summer Olympics are almost too big for a host to manage, so the IOC is trying to make sure the size stays manageable);
  • held a bait out to tennis (if you make sure those really, really cool/popular people--i.e. the top ranked players on the professional circuit--come to the party, then you can add mix-doubles--never mind if said cool people don't actually care about said party and that their mere presence might diminish said party); and...
  • approved the addition of women's events to boxing. Yes, boxing. (This is part of the IOC's ongoing efforts to have equal numbers of men and women at the Olympics.)

And as if watching women box seems strange to you, be prepared: the same group has recommended that rugby-7s and golf be added for the 2016 Games (and yes, women's rugby as well as men's). Golf seems to be being added so that a cool kid (Tiger Woods) can get an Olympic medal (with the hope being that subsequently some of Tiger's coolness will rub off on the Olympics). As for the 7s, I'm not quite sure as to why it was selected over the likes of baseball, karate, roller sports, softball, and squash. My guess is that:
  • baseball and softball were doomed by the fact that they are considered 2 separate sports and they are each one gender (as proposed), so with the addition of golf (we really have to let Tiger get a medal), the Board didn't feel ok adding one (which would've most likely been softball--women's numbers are still lower--rather than the seemingly more popular baseball) and not the other (nor deal with the storm that that one-side addition might have caused). That both have already been in the Games and have been taken out can't have helped either.
  • karate--though no doubt different--appears too similar to the included taekwondo (and if the Olympics have come to symbolize peace, should there really be more fighting sports involved?).
  • roller sports also appear to be victims of a similarity to another sport: the winter's ice skating (and roller has just as many variants as those on ice--both artistic and speed oriented, although the speed races where what were proposed for addition, including a marathon....). Seeking out a diversified field of sports gets hard when one opts for variants-on-a-theme.
  • squash appears to be a victim of a lack of development (it is the newest recognized sport of the seven, as well).

7s brings another team event in (those are better, no?--the American audience has difficulty understanding individual sports and works much better with team events? If one even assumes that the IOC really case that disproportionately about the USA audience...).

In any case, golf and rugby are what have been recommended. One wonders (and I somewhat hope) that a mutiny of sorts will occur in Copenhagen in early October, and one of the other sports will move from the 5 to the 2 and bump one of the 2 to into the 5. Alas, my hoping may be all for not: I've seen indications that the general IOC membership will only get to vote to accept the Board's 2 recommended choices, and not even get to the other 5 that are to be left behind....

My general recommendation to the IOC: re-find your identity and don't do it by seeking out new sports. You had one. I know you used to have one, because that's what I strove for. You probably still have it. Realized that it has value--if you don't, it makes it really difficult for anyone else to? I don't think the way to find your identity is to invite the cool kids to the party, rather it is to be secure enough who you are that you are cool, as are values you present/represents. Go forward from there. It is a harder, higher, road to take, perhaps; but isn't it supposed to be about the non-easy path? About being swifter, higher and faster....


Yeah my guitars Cadillacs, hill-billy music
Is the only thing that keeps me hanging on

Friday, August 07, 2009

Verb! That's what's happenin'

In honor of today's date, if one takes a more continental approach to date formation, today is the 7th of August 2009 or:
07/08/09
(in the USA that was a month ago, on July 8th)


So, in honor of this, a (childish) joke:

Q: Why is 6 afraid of 7?

A: Because 7 8 9.


(Playing on the fact that eight and ate are homophones....)


I get my thing in action (Verb!)
That's what's happenin'