Browsed by
Category: Creative

Taking Back – New Design

Taking Back – New Design

I’ve gotten tired of my “mellow melon” colors, and have decided to “take back” the color red. I’m not letting the american neo-cons (or whatever they are) spoil a whole color for me!

It’s still pretty much the same template, just stuck in new images. I’m still not sure about the color of the text area. I want it to be light and this is as close as I could get to what I was picturing.

I’ve aged a bit – the pics I had on here don’t really look like me. This one is more recent and so … um … a little more faded back. I was dolled up for the Green Day concert, so there’s some eye makeup to make my eyes visible. In real life I usually wear glasses; the contacts were in honor of the special occasion.

What I really like is the slight wavy effect. It’s amazing what can happen when you’re aimlessly playing in Photoshop.

What Noble Cause? – Blinkies

What Noble Cause? – Blinkies

These blinkies are careware, freeware, honestyware – snag away! Post on your site, blog, or download and attach to email or stationary, send to friends – whatever you want. I only ask that you not claim them as your own, make money from them, or use my bandwidth. Please do not hotlink (directly link) to the images. There should be nothing in your “img src” that calls for virushead.net. If you would like to credit me, you can refer to virushead.net in text or link, but it is not required.

The Interview

The Interview

I’ve been interviewed by just-rambling, and here are my responses:

1. What are three words you would use to describe yourself?

fair-minded, spiritual, progressive

2. What do you consider your most significant accomplishment?

Finishing the PhD despite all setbacks and obstacles and after so nearly giving up.

3. If you had the power to change one (and only one) thing in the world, what would it be and why?

oooh, so many thoughts. Um. Well.

If I had the power to do so, I would increase every person’s capacity and inclination to make judgments based on a careful and compassionate attention to diverse perspectives – especially in the cases where prejudices would tend to preclude their consideration. Why? I think it would change almost everything if more people could tolerate a contextualist ethics. It would encourage the toleration of complexity and ambiguity without stranding anyone upon a helpless morass of indecision. It would decrease both the dehumanization and the romantic idealization of others. It might even make some headway into the problems of greed and corruption. It would certainly give us a decent ground for discussion, especially regarding difficult and controversial issues that divide us as well as “group” us. Anyway, it would be a start – and it would be something that I think would have a minimum of negative consequences.

4. If you found a penny on the sidewalk, would you pick it up or leave it there?

Pick it up – don’t you know all the day you’ll have good luck? (grin)

5. If you could go back in time and meet yourself 10 years ago, would you tell your former self anything about the future?

Only ten? Yes, I would tell my former self about the future – she really needed to hear that everything in her personal life was going to be ok – that she would be happily married, that she would have a wonderful son. I would warn her to spend more good time with Dad before he was gone. Most of all, I would tell her to stop researching, stop driving herself nuts trying to write the masterpiece of the century, and just start writing 8-9 pages a day on that dissertation. If I had finished writing it then, I wouldn’t be anywhere as deeply in debt, I would have been the first to write on the topic, and I would probably have gotten a tenure-track position while universities were still hiring in the humanities in interdisciplinary fields. I could have saved myself a truckload of misery if I had taken it all less seriously. I would tell her that the loans were already accruing interest while she was in school (she didn’t know). I would have told her that some of the things she thought were so important wouldn’t matter very much in ten years – of course I would have told her which ones! My 31-year old self was floundering – I would give her an informed refocus and pep talk. I wouldn’t tell her everything – just enough for her to avoid a few significant time-wasters.

Here are the rules:
1. Leave me a comment saying ‘interview me please’
2. I will respond by asking you five questions (not the same questions you see here)
3. You will update your blog/site with the answers to the questions
4. You will include this explanation and an offer to interview someone else in the same post
5. When others comment asking to be interviewed, you will ask them five questions

Missing Roddy McDowall

Missing Roddy McDowall

I’m one of those people who really mourn. I suddenly remembered that Roddy McDowall is dead, and felt a pang. So many memories – Lassie Come Home, the Bookworm on Batman, the Planet of the Apes movies, Cleopatra, Bedknobs and Broomsticks, The Poseidon Adventure, Funny Lady, The Cat from Outer Space, Alice in Wonderland, Around the World in 80 Days – and even voiceovers (A Bug’s Life and Snowball on “Pinky & the Brain”). He did lot more, I know, but these are the things I remember. I don’t know why I suddenly think of certain movie and television stars who have died and miss them so terribly – it happens all the time.

Since we can buy or rent their images, it seems as though we have a Book of the Dead to open anytime that we want. The images somehow represent absence through their presence – more so for film (or dvd). Perhaps religious beliefs about avoiding images may have a certain truth embedded in it. Perhaps we are all idolators at heart.

On the other hand, Roddy McDowall himself worked very hard to support film preservation and edited books of his own photographs (including many other stars). He collected movies and a few days before he died of the cancer that had spread all over his body, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences named its photo archive after him. So, in that spirit I’ve made a little graphic of some of my favorite photos of him (and changed them enough that I hope I’m not treading on any copyright/permissions issues).

Thinking of Roddy

When he deceives us

When he deceives us

I remember hearing W say in a speech that if someone isn’t doing anything wrong, why are they hiding.. or being deceitful… or something like that. It might have been about Iraq before the war, I really don’t remember. Comment if you have the exact words or occasion. What really stuck with me was the look on his face, the tone of his voice, the petulance – and I’m working on a poem about it. I don’t have time to work on it any more this afternoon – here’s the first stab at the first stanza.:

Speaking to the fearful souls
More simple than himself
Inflection rise at sentence-end

Like the reiteration of the obvious
to the thickheaded
– when he deceives us.

Meanwhile, here are a couple of things that Washington blocked the public from knowing…

– The President’s Daily Briefing from the 9/11 Commission
– Documents related to the leak investigation
– Cheney’s influence in Halliburton deal
– Cheney’s Energy Task Force deliberations
– The true cost of the Medicare bill
– John Bolton’s secret intercepts
– Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse report

Keep an eye on what is witheld. What is absent is important.

Drama at the Poetry Forum

Drama at the Poetry Forum

[–06/25/06 – It’s almost a year later! – With this post, I inadvertently stepped into an extended flame war. It’s still going on, if you can believe it. I’m leaving the post up because I don’t like to delete my posts, and in any case I was simply recording the reality of my own experience. As you will see if you care to scroll to the last comment, the situation between Rose and myself was eventually resolved to our mutual agreement. I really don’t care about the hostilities (either defensive or aggressive), and would prefer to be left out of it. Comments on this post are closed. –]

Ever have an experience online with someone who can’t communicate in a reasonable fashion? I was just invited, both by guestbook and by email, to join this women’s writing community. When I looked at the legal terms, I decided not to join. What followed really surprised me.

Here is the invite I got by email:

Hello, I would like to take this time to invite you to join Today’s Woman Writing community. We are a supportive online community for men and women over 18. We have many features such as a poetry and story board , authors interviews , calls for submission , interactive forums, dictionary , regular columns , writing lessons , book store , book reviews and many more features. There is no cost to joining. I look very forward to welcoming you as a new member. Come be apart of a community where you can share your writing with other adults.

Sincrerely,Rose
http://www.todays-woman.net

Well, I was a bit skeptical, not least because of the irregular commas, typos like “Sincrerely,” and the familiar errors of “no cost to joining” and “apart of.” I understand that when you’re trying to invite new members to an online community it’s easy to be hurried and a bit sloppy, so I checked it out anyway. The site is nicely designed, but the first article I saw claimed that poets should always use “understandable language.” Well, sometimes great poets do and sometimes they don’t. Accessible language, if used well, can be fine. Then again there are times when it is more useful or aesthetically pleasing to be a bit opaque. In any case, it wasn’t a great first impression. I went to register for the forum. Before I signed off on the terms of service, I read them.

Some people don’t read the terms of service. I usually do. I wrote the following reply:

Thank you for your invitation!

However, a published poet should never agree to your terms of service, which include:

“(a) you agree to grant to us a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive right and license (including any moral rights or other necessary rights) to use, display, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, distribute, perform, promote, archive, translate, and to create derivative works and compilations, in whole or in part. Such license will apply with respect to any form, media, technology known or later developed;”

Sorry, my work is mine.

Thanks anyway,

Seemed kind of semi-polite to me. Here was the part I didn’t agree to, and so I didn’t feel comfortable joining. I might simply have ignored her invitation, but I felt that it would be polite to give some feedback on an important issue to writers of any kind. Rose turned out to be the founder, and this was her response:

Obviously you do not understand the terms of service and obviously you did not read further. Let me correct your ignorance.

My “ignorance”? She included FAQ (number 48, no less) in her reply, so it seems as though this issue has come up before.

What does section 7 of terms and service mean?

I think the general confusion is based around the belief that Todays-Woman would be taking over the rights of content submitted on the Todays-Woman site. You give us a royalty-free and non-exclusive right – which means we don’t pay a licensing fee for the content and our agreement is non-exclusive. This clause points out you are the owner of your work and hold all rights to your content. You grant marketing and advertising, provided Todays-Woman credits you and/or the original artist as actual owner of the content added. By marketing I mean permission to promote you in advertisement or print one of your articles, poetry , stories in our newsletter. We run ads and promotions to drive traffic to our member’s websites. Such as writer of the month , press releases interviews etc. If you or Todays-Woman.net terminate your account, Todays-Woman will remove any of the content you have submitted to Todays-Woman within 48 hours, you also have the option to remove your work should you terminate your account. Once you cancel your relationship with us, we can no longer post your content.

What rights do you ask for?

By submitting a poem or story to Todays-Woman.net , You retain all copyrights to your poem or story. You are only giving Todays-Woman.net non-exclusive rights to post your writing in the following section Todays-Woman website, archives and in digital print media, such as our newsletter. By submitting your poem or story you understand that we will act in our best judgment and remove any work if it does not fall within our existing guidelines. If you would like to remove your work anytime from Todays-Woman.net you have the option to delete your own work.

After cutting and pasting from the faq, she added the following in a different font:

Now I do believe you owe me an apology. We have no desire to take your work and several published poets have agree to our terms that are the same terms set out by anyone who operates a forum board as we do. I suggest you look closely at ezboard’s terms.

Well, I don’t use their board either. Arguments to authority have never been terribly persuasive to me. This is a support community for contemporary female poets? Sheesh. So (sorry if this is getting boring – skip to the next post if you like) I wrote back the following:

As a woman of today – and a feminist – I’m a bit taken aback by your response. Despite my deep “ignorance,” I am aware of some of the legal matters involved in your clause.

In fact, whether or not my content is “taken down,” this clause gives you the right to do whatever you want with any member’s poetry, in perpetuity, without paying permissions royalties or profits – despite anything else that may follow. It means that you don’t even need my permission to publish it in any book, periodical, or any other format media. A conventional publisher does not have this kind of clause. A forum is a different entity than a publisher, I realize that. However, it is my choice and my option to make all decisions about rights to my poetry. If the clause does not mean what it says, then it needs to be reworded by a legal professional who will incorporate the “explanation” into the actual wording of the legal agreement.

And no, I’m afraid you don’t get an apology – although normally I would try to work toward greater understanding. Such condescension as you have offered to me does not immediately invoke the need or desire to apologize. A person who understands language and courtesy does not offer to “correct ignorance,” and in any case my comments only quoted your own terms and asserted my right of decision on these matters.

I might well have been inclined to join had your terms and or/response been different. Perhaps you might confer with others on your staff to see how this might be avoided in future.
Best wishes anyway,

The note I back from that was almost rageful.

No it does not and I suggest that you go to yahoo.com, hotmail.com, ezboards.com, invision board, cafepress.com and read their disclaimer. We are not a publisher. We are a writing community, where you share your work and we also have a forum board that is why that disclaimer is in place. It covers our butt.

Our declaimer was worded by a lawyer and you are out of line. As for your joining my community, you are no longer welcomed.

As for an apology, I did not expect to receive one, as you can not see or understand your own ignorance.

As for my staff, feel free to email any of them and they will explain to you, the same thing that I have.

This conversation is over.

Well, all righty then. I’m no longer “welcomed.” Glad to have found out the nature of the thing before I handed over any of my poems. Should they decide to publish a collection, like my other community did, they wouldn’t need to get permissions or have signed contracts or anything at all. It does indeed “cover” them – much too well, in my opinion.

Perhaps it is intended as a hobby-group? Perhaps English is the founder’s second language? I still think that the basic motive of the site could well be a good one. Still, if that’s the way the founder responds, you could probably do better.

Care to share a similar experience with miscommunications on the net? I have a feeling such problems are not terribly uncommon.