[Most Recent Entries]
Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in
[ << Previous 20 ]
[ << Previous 20 ]
|Saturday, December 15th, 2012|
|Thursday, September 20th, 2012|
|Friday, July 6th, 2012|
|Tuesday, June 5th, 2012|
Theferrett posts here ( http://theferrett.livejournal.com/1730479.html
"There’s one of three reasons people read what you write on the Internet:
"1) They’ve come to trust your opinion enough to want to know what you have to say. (Thankfully, this is the most common reason.) 2) They think you’re a fascinating train wreck, and want to see what sort of dysfunction you’re up to this week. 3) They think you’re an active hazard, and your blog is a lighthouse warning of what deplorable fuckeries you plan on committing."
Based on lack of comments, 1) isn't true for this LJ if it ever was.
2) is nasty
3) is worse
So I think I'm done here. RIP rockythecat.
|Saturday, April 7th, 2012|
|Sunday, March 4th, 2012|
|Tuesday, February 14th, 2012|
It's 14 February. We all know what that day is.
Got anything you'd like to say to me? Feel free. Note: public post, so if you can see this, you can comment.
I don't even insist on loving, thoughtful or even positive comments. It'd be nice, but what I really want to do is hear from _you_. Yes, even you. Or you. In honor of the occasion, even you.
All comments screened.
You can comment here or at Dreamwidth
. Makes no difference to me.
|Saturday, December 24th, 2011|
|Friday, December 23rd, 2011|
|Sunday, December 4th, 2011|
|someone I really have to do some reading of: Rebecca West
crosspost from DW, reminding me of caprine
"Just finished Victoria Glendinning's biography of the extraordinary Dame Rebecca West, novelist, reporter, political thinker, and feminist. She started off as an enfant terrible in the London literary scene, lived and wrote and bore a child and kept writing, and grew into a difficult, brilliant, highly successful old woman. Born in 1892, she lived until 1983, and she was vigorous until a few months before the end. "http://modernism.research.yale.edu/wiki/index.php/Rebecca_Westhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_West
"I wonder if we are all wrong about each other, if we are just composing unwritten novels about the people we meet?"
"I myself have never been able to find out what feminism is; I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute."
|Tuesday, November 15th, 2011|
|Friday, November 11th, 2011|
|how to save the Occupy movement from its own success
Signal boost from mantic_angel
in the post here
. It is worth the full read:
"When I first saw the problem, it occurred to me, what a brilliant failure state in every revolution. If you make yourself a safe haven for the downtrodden, the oppressed, the "dregs" of society (so to speak), then naturally you will attract the unpopular outcasts too - in this case, violent and drug using people.
If you let them stay, you give authority an excuse to shut you down - your very presence shields these ne'er-do-wells, and thus you are a threat to public safety! ...
"The catch is, the movement can't kick them out, either. If it kicks them out for the sake of image, then it is vain. If it tries to police them, then it is as tyrannical as the system it seeks to replace. If it rejects them as scum, then it is as lacking in compassion as the mainstream. There is no way to expel them without sacrificing the moral high ground, and no way to keep them without giving authorities a clear excuse to disperse the crowd."
There are two ways in which police deal with crime and anti-social behavior they don't like. One is by presence and direct action, as when UCPD employees (I now twitch at calling them 'peace officers') used batons against students pitching tents on Sproul Plaza at UC Berkeley.
The other is by withdrawing their presence completely. No longer responding and letting it be known that they will no longer respond, in the surety that the criminal element will take care of the rest. Left alone long enough, this creates "denied areas" in which neither police nor the rule of law operate -- which is toxic in several highly undesirable ways.
And thus it is, my Internet friends, that criminals are essential to upholding social order. Even in the Russian prison system, there were two tiers: criminals and political prisoners, the latter kept from rebellion because the former were empowered to beat and abuse them freely.
How can Occupy deal with this serious problem? This is a classic security issue.
1) Designate pairs with a distinguishing feature (vests, armbands, buttons) to patrol the perimeter. THERE MUST BE TWO for a variety of reasons, including safety, control, preventing abuses, crowd dynamics in conflict, etc. Here's a training manual: Black Rock Rangers
. Powerful flashlights and video cameras should be available. Good communications skills should be considered absolutely necessary.
2) Have a reaction plan in the event of a major incident. Three hundred people pointing and shouting, "NO! NO! This is not our culture!" can be a major deterrent even to multiple armed suspects. What are they going to do, shoot them all?
3) Designate a liaison team to deal with the police. This team's purpose is to document that the 911 call was made, that unit IDs of responding agencies are recorded, that officers are told what was witnessed prior to their arrival, to decide whether or not to co-operate or withhold cooperation, and report back to the group on the actions taken. They could on occasion offer "Mike Check" privileges to the police -- but these have to be earned, not taken for granted.
4) Set up housing in a communal fashion specifically so that inappropriate behavior can be detected and persistently abusive people kicked out of the community. This also prevents injection of hard drugs which could result in tragedy, as at Occupy Vancouver.
Just my 0.02
|Sunday, November 6th, 2011|
Had a fun time at Howloween
this evening. Met a lot of cool new people -- please feel free to say hi below!
Awesome sushi dinner at Fish On Rice
and several other furries. I have now eaten at three awesome sushi restaurants in this area.
Got my Halloween candy. Shot a nerf gun at a samurai. Saw Death throw a fireball. Met several more people including a nice person from 100 Mile House whose name temporarily escapes me. (Jessi?)
Mew! Current Mood: exhausted
|Saturday, October 29th, 2011|
|Friday, October 14th, 2011|
|What Are The Wall Street Protesters Unhappy About?
Don't know why people are in the streets protesting about the economy?
Read these two articles. One is screencaps of a talk show and the other is cold hard statistical charts.http://www.businessinsider.com/alan-grayson-bill-maher-wall-street-protests-2011-10?op=1http://www.businessinsider.com/what-wall-street-protesters-are-so-angry-about-2011-10?op=1
The short version:
-- The economy is as bad as it was during the Great Depression.
-- Millions of Americans are out of work, and this isn't going to get better anytime soon, if ever.
-- The rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer.
-- Income disparity is at an all time high.
-- The Republicans are in bed with big money. The Democrats merely bed-hop. Either way, big money runs the government.
-- Not a single person has been indicted or prosecuted for destroying 20% of our nation's net worth three years ago.
This morning, the protesters are going to be street-cleaned out of a nearby park. This isn't going to fix any of these items.
One fix is simple and obvious, but not going to happen: jobs programs, whether public or private, for profit or non profit. Millions of Americans are not going to quietly go away and starve.
The longer term fix is to vote neither Demopublican nor Republicrat. A vote for the main parties is a vote in support of the legitimacy and fairness of the present system.
You can comment here or at Dreamwidth
. Makes no difference to me.
|Sunday, October 2nd, 2011|
[edited for gender referents] female version (below the cut) and male version:( F, if you need itCollapse )
M: I told him it was not okay, that it was unacceptable, that it was illegal and that I would call and report this latest, horrible thing. But I did not tell him it would stop. I did not promise that anyone would intervene. I told him it would likely go on and he’d have to survive it. That he’d have to find a way within himself to not only escape the shit, but to transcend it, and if he wasn’t able to do that, then his whole life would be shit, forever and ever and ever. I told him that escaping the shit would be hard, but that if he wanted to not make his father’s life his destiny, he had to be the one to make it happen. He had to do more than hold on. He had to reach. He had to want it more than he’d ever wanted anything. He had to grab like a drowning boy for every good thing that came his way and he had to swim like fuck away from every bad thing. He had to count the years and let them roll by, to grow up and then run as far as he could in the direction of his best and happiest dreams across the bridge that was built by his own desire to heal.
I wish I'd had someone to tell me something like that when I needed to hear it. I had to figure it out on my own.
|Saturday, October 1st, 2011|
|Wednesday, September 28th, 2011|
|PRAVDA: "The Media Is Not Censored"
An amusing article here: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/09/media-non-coverage-occupy-wall-street-gets-lots-media-coverage/43013/
This is a thoroughly tongue-in-cheek article:
"This, of course, gave journalists at several "major news outlets" a great opening to go ahead and cover the Occupy Wall Street protests using their favorite self-reflexive method: covering the (non) coverage. And their verdict? No foul. Columnists at well-regarded news outlets who chose to respond concluded that there were plenty of great reasons not to cover Occupy Wall Street. In delineating those reasons throughout this week, they got to write at length about the protestors' quirks and shortcomings, making their defense of non-coverage of a protest read a lot like colorful coverage of a protest."
Remember, citizens. The media is not censored!
|Monday, September 26th, 2011|
|just to be clear...
I am not a police apologist. I am a police realist.
This means recognizing some key facts:
1) Police are people too. They put their pants on one leg at a time, love their families, screw up sometimes, and don't want to die.
2) The increasing separation between the police and the population they serve should alarm two groups: the police, and everyone else. The police are outnumbered on average 2,000 to 1 and utterly depend on community support. The community needs the police and is paying for them.
3) The police are often put into the position of being tools of the political machine. They don't like it. They especially don't like it when pushed into no-win positions between politicians and demonstrators. They are not allowed to beat the politicians . . .
4) Like dogs, police chase and bark. If pushed, they fight, and not fair.
5) Just who do you think is writing the police report? You?
6) The most damaging thing the police can do to any community is to stop doing their job: just park it, or drive around a bit and not see anything.
7) 5% of officers generate 40% of arrests and 20% of citizen complaints. 5% of criminals generate 40% of violent crimes and over 50% of homicides.
8) A Taser is a less lethal weapon used to save lives. It is not a pain compliance tool and it is not a way to assert ego. Assuming the ACLU is right about every Taser death, the odds of dying from being shot with a Taser are about 1/2 of 1%. The odds of dying from being shot are about 35%. Take your pick.
9) If you go hands on with someone fifty times, and your odds of getting hurt each time are 1%, your overall odds of suffering an injury in those fifty times is 40%.
10) To quote Heinlein, "A wounded policeman is far, far more dangerous than a wounded lion."
|Monday, September 19th, 2011|
|in honor of International Talk Like A Pirate Day
In honor of International Talk Like a Pirate Day:Pirate Code
Many of the pirate groups had Articles by which they ruled their lives.
"IX. If at any time you meet with a prudent Woman, that Man that offers to meddle with her, without her Consent, shall suffer present Death."
Pirate code - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A pirate code was a code of conduct invented for governing pirates. Generally each pirate crew had its own code or articles, which provided rules for discipline, division of stolen goods, and compensation for injured pirates.
If you'd like to actually see some source material:http://digital.lib.ecu.edu/historyfiction/item.aspx?id=joh