Critical Thinking for the Masses

NC “Move Over” Law – Part II

2012-01-05T13:07:00.003-05:00

If you haven’t yet read my initial post, Move it Over - NC "Move Over" Law, please read that, (and optionally, its comments,) before continuing.

The text below is the relevant parts of North Carolina General Statute 20-157 that defines North Carolina’s “Move Over” Law. I have highlighted certain phrases I’ll expand upon later in this post. But first, read what the Statute requires:

(f) When an authorized emergency vehicle as described in subsection (a) of this section or any public service vehicle is parked or standing within 12 feet of a roadway and is giving a warning signal by appropriate light, the driver of every other approaching vehicle shall, as soon as it is safe and when not otherwise directed by an individual lawfully directing traffic, do one of the following:

(1) Move the vehicle into a lane that is not the lane nearest the parked or standing authorized emergency vehicle or public service vehicle and continue traveling in that lane until safely clear of the authorized emergency vehicle. This paragraph applies only if the roadway has at least two lanes for traffic proceeding in the direction of the approaching vehicle and if the approaching vehicle may change lanes safely and without interfering with any vehicular traffic.

(2) Slow the vehicle, maintaining a safe speed for traffic conditions, and operate the vehicle at a reduced speed and be prepared to stop until completely past the authorized emergency vehicle or public service vehicle. This paragraph applies only if the roadway has only one lane for traffic proceeding in the direction of the approaching vehicle or if the approaching vehicle may not change lanes safely and without interfering with any vehicular traffic.

I’m no lawyer, but here’s how I interpret the statute:

If you’re on a highway with two lanes going in each direction and you approach the cop on the side of the road, the law states that you must move over into the next lane if you may do so “safely and without interfering with any vehicular traffic.” If you cannot move over, (or if you’re on a two lane highway – one lane going in each direction,) you’re to slow down, “maintaining a safe speed for traffic conditions,” until you’re past the officer.

So basically the law requires drivers who come upon the officer to make a sudden judgment as to the safety of moving over. If the driver deems it unsafe, they’re to slow down.

So here we go. I’m out on the highway and just as I crest a hill, I see a cop who has pulled over another driver. Within a timeframe of about three seconds, I must say to myself, “OK, is that officer 12 feet from the roadway? He looks to be thirteen feet, but it might be eleven, so I’m going to Move Over. But wait! Is it Safe to do so? I’ve just crested a hill and there may be a motorcyclist zipping along at a good clip and I might Interfere with him if I Move Over. So I guess I will slow down and Maintain a Safe speed for traffic conditions. "For traffic conditions?" What the hell does that mean? I’m guessing it means they don’t want me to suddenly slow from 65 to 25, specially since it’s now raining, lest I should be rear-ended and cause even more Interference. But the guy behind me is speeding towards me and there’s that damned bike right next to him. He can’t Move Over without causing Interference with the motorcycle, and I don’t feel Safe to Move Over, so I think I can slow to about 55. Well, wait a second. I guess the point is moot because now I am being pulled over. I wonder what for? Couldn’t be for speeding ‘cause I was doing 55 in a 70 mph zone.

Me: “Your Honor, it just didn’t feel safe to move over.”

Officer: “It was safe, Your Honor”

Hold on. Doesn’t the law specifically state that I am to Move Over “as soon as it is safe”? Isn’t that up to my judgment??

North Carolina’s Move Over law has good intentions, and will certainly help to reduce incidents of officers and emergency personnel being hit by passing motorists. I’m just worried that it might cause law-abiding drivers to make sudden, unfortunate decisions while trying to follow that law.

Race to the Top???

2010-11-11T07:42:00.003-05:00

Obama's new program, Race to the Top, the intended replacement for the failed Bush program No Child Left Behind, has an interesting title. Race. To the Top.

The term 'race' implies a speedy competition among rivals to strive to be the best. What's the hurry? Who are the rivals? And what is to be done about those 'losers' who never reached 'The Best?' (After all, if you have not won the race, aren't you a non-winner?)

Regardless of how you feel about politicians believing they know what's best for school children's educational needs, the title Race to the Top is about as meaningless and unattainable as the phrase No Child Left Behind. (And don't get me started on that one. NO child? C'mon, that's pretty ambitious, wouldn't you say?)

.

Teen Preggars Rate Increase Due to Hispanics?

2010-02-02T07:25:00.005-05:00

According to an article in The Washington Post,

Rise in teenage pregnancy rate spurs new debate on arresting it

By Rob Stein
Washington Post Staff Writer

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

The pregnancy rate among teenage girls in the United States has jumped for the first time in more than a decade, raising alarm that the long campaign to reduce motherhood among adolescents is faltering, according to a report released Tuesday.

...

The cause of the increase is the subject of debate. Several experts blamed the increase in teen pregnancies on sex-education programs that focus on encouraging abstinence. Others said the reversal could be due to a variety of factors, including an increase in poverty, an influx of Hispanics and complacency about AIDS, prompting lax use of birth control such as condoms.

Wow. An influx of Hispanics, huh? If I were Hispanic I suppose I'd be pretty pissed by that statement, specially without any evidence in support of that claim.

.

No Stupidity Left Behind

2009-08-28T19:04:00.003-04:00

According to this article from yesterday's New York Times, the No Child Left Behind law has been successful in increasing the performance of low-achieving students. The problem, they say, is that this gain comes at the expense of the high-achievers. Consider this quote:

[E]ver since the law was enacted in 2002, analysts and educators have worried that gifted pupils would be the ones left behind. While the law puts extraordinary pressure on schools to lift the performance of low-achieving students, it includes no incentives to accelerate the progress of high achievers.

Let me iterate the last line: "it includes no incentives to accelerate the progress of high achievers." Well, Hullo! It was never intended to help boost the achievement of the already high achievers. To title the article Smart Child Left Behind is an insult to all the parents who counted on the program to help their kids get an education. Smart kids left behind from what? A college education? Puh-leeease.

Here's an idea to help reduce the achievement gap: take the money that would have been spent to give kids who have already "gotten" the material further enrichment and invest in the kids who are struggling. This "give my kid a better education and the hell with all those other kids" attitude will bite society in the butt someday.

.

Double Standard in Sheboygan

2009-03-21T10:11:00.003-04:00

This, out of the Sheboygan Press, January 8, 2009: "Sheboygan boy, 17, charged with allegedly having sex with girl, 14."

One day later, also out of the Sheboygan Press, January 9, 2009: "Sheboygan girl, 17, charged for allegedly having sex with boy, 14."

So within a 24 hour period, two 17 year old kids are charged with having sex with their respective 14 year old girlfriend/boyfriend. Both 14 year olds claimed to their partners that they were 16.

But get this, according to the articles' information on when the younger partners were to turn 15, the 17 year old girl had sex with her boyfriend, "179 months" of age, and got charged with a max 9 mos. misdemeanor. The 17 year old BOY, on the other hand, had sex with his "177 month old" girlfriend, and got hit with a max 25 years felony.

If convicted, he'll also probably have to register as a sex offender for the duration of his life, with all the wonderful "privileges" that come with that distinction.

But there's not a double standard.

Angry Much?

2008-09-19T11:05:00.005-04:00

What does it mean to get angry? Here are some definitions of anger:

A strong feeling of displeasure and belligerence aroused by a wrong; wrath; ire. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
A strong emotion; a feeling that is oriented toward some real or supposed grievance. WordNet® 3.0. Princeton University
An over-reaction caused by an event that does not meet one's perceived expectations. An unconsummated "Should." The Sarcasticynic

One rainy day, two men, Joe and Larry, are sitting in a traffic jam outside a major metropolitan area. Joe is mumbling under his breath about how late he'll be for a meeting. Larry is listening to music on the radio.

Suddenly, a vehicle tries to dart into a small opening in front of each man's car.

Joe's reaction was to lurch his car forward so as to block the merging driver, lay on the horn, shout obscenities and offer a rather rude hand gesture to the driver. He then spent the next twelve minutes cursing the driver, the city, the traffic reporters on the radio, the weatherman, his boss, and everyone else he could think of.

Larry's reaction? First he stepped briskly on the brakes in order not to run into the merging driver, then he smiled and waved the driver into the newly provided space. Afterwards he resumed listening to his music.

In this scenario, the event, stimulus, or trigger if you will, is the same for both men. A vehicle trying to enter their lane. But the reactions were quite different. Whereas Larry's reaction was rather mild, Joe virtually went through the sunroof.

Analyze any anger situation and you will always find these three points:

An event, stimulus, or trigger.
A expectation based on a perceived ideal, (a "should.")
An over-reaction.

Numbers 1 and 3 are pretty self explanatory. The "should," on the other hand, deserves closer examination.

Joe's over-reaction stemmed from his idea on how the roadway "should" be - a free-flowing line of cars all traveling in a manner that allows everyone to get to their destination in a quick, efficient manner. Should anything depart from that "should," Joe gets angry. When he gets angry, he reacts in ways that are extreme and that have little effect on the outcome of events.

So why didn't Larry react the same? Perhaps he doesn't hold the world to the unattainable standard as does Joe.

Consider these other examples:

A child throws a temper tantrum after he doesn't get a toy to which he feels he should be entitled.
A woman gets mad at herself after breaking a dish with which she should have been more careful.
A man becomes perturbed with his boss for giving him more work he feels he shouldn't be saddled with.
A teen is upset with her boyfriend for not calling her as he should know he should do. (A double should.)

In each of these cases, the angered party feels the circumstances should be different than they are. I challenge anyone to come up with an anger situation that fails to contain a "should." But must anger follow in each of these cases? I should think not.

When analyzing an anger situation, try to determine the unconsummated "should" and you'll be that much closer to understanding what brought on the anger. You'll probably find that in many cases, the perception is based on unrealistic or impossible goals. If you are in the position of having to assist those in anger, the better you understand that "should" situation, the better you'll be prepared to deal with those who are angered.

A further note. The event that precedes the outburst does not always have to be the cause of the outburst. Take for example the man who cannot iron his pants because he doesn't know where his wife, who is out of town, keeps the iron. He gets angry knowing he will be late - not because he cannot locate the iron, but because he feels his wife "should" stay at home to care for him instead of visiting her sister - a perception not based in reality.
.

Too little funding for fighting AIDS among Blacks?

2008-07-30T07:34:00.006-04:00

An article in the News & Observer states:

Report: U.S. blacks face AIDS crisis
David Brown, The Washington Post

WASHINGTON - A prominent AIDS organization Tuesday accused the federal government of doing too little to fight AIDS among black Americans, in whom the size and scope of the epidemic resembles that seen in many African nations.

In a 55-page report, the Black AIDS Institute argued that AIDS should be viewed as a threat to the entire black population and not just specific high-risk groups. Unlike in white Americans -- and in the citizens of most industrialized nations -- HIV in American blacks is increasingly transmitted heterosexually through "networks" where men especially have many sex partners at the same time, the report noted.

Sort of reminds me of the joke that begins, "Hey, Doctor, it hurts when I do this."

Anyway, the CDC 's Kevin A Fenton disputes the claim:

The proportion of AIDS-prevention funds devoted to the black community has risen as the epidemic has become more concentrated there and constitutes about $300 million of the $600 million spent each year, Fenton said.

Spending 50% of AIDS-prevention funds on the black community does not sound like "doing too little to fight AIDS among black Americans" to me.

Does it to you?
.

Cyberbullying

2008-07-20T07:52:00.013-04:00

Turn on a TV or read any major newspaper and you're likely to come upon a story about cyberbullying. StopCyberbullying.org defines cyberbullying as "when a child, preteen or teen is tormented, threatened, harassed, humiliated, embarrassed or otherwise targeted by another child, preteen or teen using the Internet, interactive and digital technologies or mobile phones."

Some teens are so affected by the actions of cyberbullies that they have committed suicide.

A News & Observer story about a victim of cyberbullying told of a victimized student:

Gale McKoy Wilkins

The incident involved his best friend and a group of bullies. The bullies planned to teach this young man a lesson on "disrespect," so they beat him after school at an off-campus location. An audience of peers watched and captured the entire altercation on a cell-phone camera. Before the victim could find his six missing teeth in the gravel and dirt, the fight appeared on Facebook, MySpace and YouTube, all before his parents, dentist and school administrators knew what had taken place. That is the instant wrath of cyberbullying.

Matt Ivester, a 2005 graduate of Duke University and founder of JuicyCampus.com had this to say when asked if sites such as JuicyCampus perpetuate online cruelty:

This is the same gossip that happens offline everyday anyhow. With JuicyCampus, though, people have the opportunity to read the gossip that would otherwise be told behind their backs. And if they don't want to know, they don't have to visit the site.

(For another example of the fallacy of such logic, go here.)

Four popular views on the subject of cyberbullying are:

Enact laws against it.
Let the schools deal with it.
Let the parents deal with it.
Leave it alone - after all, it's protected speech.

Each view has its pros and cons, and each has its supporters and detractors.

Another view

It's interesting that we require kids to be at least a certain age and to pass a test before we allow them to drive, yet we give them free reign to post anything they want to the roughly 1.4 billion worldwide Internet users. Can we honestly expect a thirteen year old to grasp the concept of such a potential audience?

In the days of yore, kids who found themselves victims of bullying may have brought threatening notes they've received home to Mom and Dad, who then might have had a phone conversation with the parents of the harasser in order to "chat" about the behavior. Then the bully's parents laid into him/her, hopefully bringing to an end the improper actions.

One problem with cyberbullying, however, is the issue of the anonymity of the harassers. (But posts published in cyberspace may not be as anonymous as you might think.) In a modern adaptation of the way bullying was handled in the past, perhaps the parents, friends and educators of the victim, or maybe the victim him/herself may collect an electronic "paper trail" (e-trail) of the offensive material in order to present via some means, including the police if necessary, to the parents of the evil-doers with hopes that they will act upon such offensive behavior.

Yes, granted the evidence may not be as damning as the victim would hope, but when presented with material implicating one's offspring, it would be hoped that those parents would look more critically at the availability of the electronic commerce they've granted their kids.

Cyberbullying is an unacceptable practice which can be reduced if parents and educators would be willing to keep a closer eye on the means by which our children communicate with their peers.
.

Testing the Theory of Evolution

2008-06-29T05:53:00.007-04:00

A Pastor in South Florida gives the following argument against the theory of evolution:

What are the odds that if you put all the parts of a clock in a bag, and shake it long enough, the clock will come out ticking and working perfectly? The theory of evolution expects us to believe the same for the beginnings of life.

So to put this argument to the test, I performed the following experiment:

Place the parts of a clock in a bag.
Pray vigorously for the parts to turn into a clock.
Remove ticking and perfectly working clock from the bag.

Turns out that didn't work either.
.

Abused Afghan Women go to Jail

2008-05-01T19:34:00.004-04:00

This, from an article about the abuses of women in Afghanistan:

At a Kabul hospital, a 16-year-old girl who is too scared to give her name is recuperating from reconstructive surgery after her husband cut off her nose and ears, bashed out all but six of her teeth with a stone, and poured boiling water on her.

The article talks about how women who try to escape abusive husbands are accused and convicted of adultery. Further, from the same article:

In parts of Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan, where stern social codes prevail, a woman who runs away from home is typically suspected of having taken a lover and can be prosecuted for adultery. Simply leaving her house without her family's permission may be deemed an offense — as in Rukhma's case — although it is not classified as such under Afghanistan's penal code.

The chief prosecutor of eastern Nangarhar province who oversaw Rukhma's case suggested she got off lightly.

"If my wife goes to the bazaar without my permission, I will kill her. This is our culture," Abdul Qayum shouted scornfully during an interview in his office in the city of Jalalabad.

His colleagues laughed approvingly. "This is Afghanistan, not America," Qayum said.

Some culture, huh? I am angered over things like this.

How about you?

Disappearing From the Face

2008-02-26T16:29:00.001-05:00

For those who may be interested, here's where I've been the past few months.
.

Further Abuses Against Women

2007-09-23T16:50:00.000-04:00

From The News & Observer:

Dowries become deadly in India
Henry Chu, Los Angeles Times

PATNA, INDIA -

"[T]housands of wives ... are beaten to death, burned alive, electrocuted, poisoned, pushed out windows or otherwise killed horrifically every year because their husbands' families are dissatisfied with the dowries they bring to the marriage and continue to demand more.

"The practice of dowry in India goes back thousands of years. Its original intent, scholars say, was to protect women, who by bringing property and belongings to the marriage could enjoy some creature comforts and not have to depend entirely on their husbands.

"But somewhere along the line, what was supposed to be security for the bride came to be seen as a bounty for the groom and his family, a way for them to augment their wealth.

"Demanding dowry has been illegal in India since 1961, but the prohibition rarely has been enforced. The problem cuts across all social and class lines, affecting rich and poor, educated and illiterate, urban and rural.

"The increasingly high cost of weddings and demand for large dowries is a contributing factor in the high incidence of abortion of female fetuses, experts say. The government has banned sex-determination tests, but the practice continues, leading to an alarming shortage of young girls in parts of the country.

"Dowry killings, too, are so common that there is a commonly used term for the phenomenon, 'bride burning,' because many newlywed women die from being doused with kerosene and set on fire. The husband's family then reports the death as a kitchen accident, as many households use kerosene stoves."
.

Have Boy, Will Lose Grandkids

2007-09-09T09:49:00.000-04:00

Here's an article that presents a sad yet fascinating fact of modern life. If you give birth to a boy, you face a greater likelihood of losing access to your future grandchildren than if you had had a girl.
.

Previous Work History

2007-08-27T21:41:00.000-04:00

What's up with employers' preoccupation with previous work history on ones application? I mean, yeah, I can understand that they want to know what you did before you came knocking on their door for a job, but I think they put undue emphasis on the importance of only the last several of your previous employers.

Case in point. An acquaintance of mine was an accountant for twenty years after he graduated. He loved accounting, but his company got sold and he lost his job in the transition. While seeking employment as an accountant elsewhere, he bounced from odd job to odd job trying to keep ends met with his obligations. He even had a few holes where he had no job at all.

Eventually, he'd held five different jobs, none of which had much to do with accounting, over a seven year period. Now, every time he fills in an on-line application, his 20 year stint as an accountant drops another notch down the page of jobs he's held.

Look at it from the perspective of the Human Resources person looking over his application. Guy applies for a job as an accountant. Last five entries show nothing about accounting - in fact, what they "show" is that this guy who graduated some 27 years ago can't seem to hold a job longer than 12 months. That recruiter might not even get to the listing that shows his qualifications to fill the vacancy.

The way my friend tries to recover from this discrepancy is to write an outstanding cover letter that begins with his accomplishments of two decades duration. Start with the big stuff and let those ridiculous odd jobs fall out the back where nobody would notice them. He hopes the HR guy will read the cover first, (as he's supposed to,) which should minimize, or at least help explain the fact he's not done accounting for the last few years, yet remains highly qualified.

Side note: One application he filled out wanted him to account for every period greater than one month that he was not employed anywhere since graduation. What the heck does a potential employer do with that kind of information?? He had a solid job for 20 years, but because he had a few periods of idleness while seeking a return to his career, that makes him unemployable?

A Solution?

I would like to see job applications allow one to list their previous employment in an order that differs from simply most recent to least recent. How about if they let you list them in the order that they apply to the position you are seeking? That way, any jobs you held that were minor or didn't apply would just drop to the bottom, even if they were recent. In the end, wouldn't that make more sense?
.

Wikipedia edited by CIA

2007-08-17T19:08:00.000-04:00

Popular free on-line info source Wikipedia has been edited, presumably anonymously, by the CIA and by other high profile sources.

If the CIA can't even hide their covert editing operations, what makes you think that you can?

.

Insurance Claims Processing Times Twelve

2007-07-25T07:52:00.000-04:00

Simple shift could give 10,000 kids insurance

Lynn Bonner, Staff Writer
The state could save nearly $16 million and use the money to provide about 10,000 more children with government-sponsored health insurance by switching responsibility for handling medical bills from one state office to another, according to a state audit.

The state Department of Health and Human Services can process claims for the state children's health insurance plan cheaper than the state health plan, said a report that State Auditor Les Merritt's office issued Tuesday.

...

The health and human services department uses Electronic Data Systems Corp. to process Medicaid claims at a cost of 41 cents per claim. It costs about 12 times more, or $4.88, to process a medical claim through the state health plan, which uses Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, the audit said.

Four dollars and eighty-eight cents versus forty-one cents. Sounds like BCBSNC needs to talk to EDS about how to save money on claims processing.
.

A Consumer Blacklist?

2007-07-11T07:01:00.000-04:00

Please read this short post first, The Customer is NOT Always Right.

Now, fast forward to some time in the future.

A roofing contractor gets a call from a homeowner who wants some work done on his roof. Prior to returning the homeowner's call, the roofer performs a few searches of the potential client's name on the Internet. He learns some interesting things.

This homeowner has a lawsuit pending against a plumber, one against an electrician, and one against a swimming pool maintenance company. The roofer says to himself, "Nope - too much baggage," and chooses not to return the homeowner's calls.

Let's look even further into the future. Same scenario. A potential customer wants some sort of service. What he doesn't know is that there are websites that have been developed that track customer complaints and name names for those who are chronic complainers. Service organizations who are contacted cold by consumers may consult these sites, sort of the way consumers look at the Better Business Bureau to determine poor business practices. If a particular customer's name's on the list, they may just choose to send them packing.

Is there a law that states whomever contacts a business, the business must give them their business? I doubt it, In fact, I think I have seen disclaimers that say, "We have the right to refuse to serve anyone for any reason." No shirt, no shoes, no service.

Where does this leave the consumer? Does this mean if you're wrongfully served, you shouldn't take action in the event that some time in the future there may be a website tracking your activity? I don't think so. The BBB reports companies' track records for serving their customers. I can't speak for others, but I don't think I would boycott a business just because they had one unresolved complaint.

But if you are a chronic complainer, and have nothing better to do than to try to bring suit against everyone who tries to serve you, don't be surprised if some time in the future you may find it difficult to find anyone who wants your business.
.

Can an Injured Intruder Sue a Homeowner?

2007-07-06T06:53:00.000-04:00

A warning shot fired by a 79 year old former Army sharpshooter ricocheted off the ceiling and lodged into the skull of an intruder in Hickory, NC this week.

From Warning shot wounds intruder in The News & Observer,

Cook used his .22-caliber gun to fire a warning shot into the ceiling, but the bullet ricocheted and part of it hit the intruder in the forehead, said Lt. Hank Guess with the Hickory Police Department. "I wasn't aiming for him. If I wanted to hit him, I would have," Cook said.

The intruder ... had a bullet fragment in his skull and a fractured hand he suffered while breaking in. He was arrested.

Let's hope the intruder doesn't decide to sue the homeowner for injuries suffered while "visiting" his home. Stranger lawsuits have occurred in this country. In that case, Cook may have wished he had aimed a bit lower. To paraphrase a popular expression, Dead Men Do Not Hire Lawyers.
.

Should the Childless Pay School Tax?

2007-06-08T07:47:00.000-04:00

"I never had any kids," says a 64 year old taxpayer, "so why should I pay school tax?"

"My kids are grown, so why must I still pay school tax?" queries a middle aged parent.

"I no longer have kids in this county's school system," says a divorced father of two, whose kids live with his ex in another state. "So why am I still paying school tax for them?"

This has got to be one of the most selfish arguments I've heard.

However, cynic that I am, I'd like to propose that from now on, non-parents should be allowed to apply for a waiver that exempts them from having to pay school tax. By their own definition, they don't gain anything because they have no offspring in the school system, so they can be excused. Let all the people who HAVE kids pay a little extra for that benefit.

But in order to qualify, these non-parents must wear a t-shirt that says, in big bold letters, "I HAVE NO SCHOOL CHILDREN, SO I WILL NOT PAY ANY SCHOOL TAXES."

Then maybe the public can help to explain to them why EVERYBODY should pay school taxes.
.

Who ARE You??

2007-05-19T11:09:00.000-04:00

Do you post entries on your blog under a pseudonym? Do you identify yourself by name in your profile or elsewhere in your blog? What about your hometown?

Is there any way someone could find out who you are by reading your blog?

What about comments you make on others' blogs? Do you post as your blogger ID or by some other alias? Can someone learn your identity by comparing things you say on other blogs with that which they can find on your blog via a link you provide? What if they did a search on your alias and cross checked entries they've found? What can they find out about you?

Perhaps you post comments anonymously. That's right - you see something on a blog about which you feel strongly, but may not want your comments associated with your regular blogging activity, so you post your ideas incognito.

Or maybe you're the type who doesn't want to give up anything about yourself and just wants to blast the blogosphere with garbage and trash talk because you can get away with it - disguised as an unknown entity.

Have you ever made a comment on a blog, pseudonymously or otherwise, that you have rued?

Modern Technology and Anonymous Comments

Anybody with a lick of sense knows that it is difficult to truly hide one's identity from the Internet, thanks to utilities that identify IP addresses, etc. Anyone who doubts they can ever be "outed" after posting an anonymous comment should read A technical guide to anonymous blogging by Ethan Zuckerman. This is about a fictitious woman who wanted to blog anonymously to protect her identity. The article tries "to approach the problem from the perspective of a government whistleblower in a country with a less-than-transparent government."

Though the article refers to a person trying to blog anonymously, the content can carry forward to one who may want to comment on someone else's blog without revealing their identity.

A Case in Point

OK, so now enter a boy out there with a chip on his shoulder and a computer on his lap. He thinks he's just a gift to society with his rambunctious self. He's got the power to blast anyone and anything via his laptop, and he worries little about anyone, (least of all his parents,) finding out who he is because he publishes all his diatribe uncredited.

Perhaps he doesn't realize that technology exists that can identify him via traces he sends out with his camouflaged identity.

Currently, law enforcement needs a subpoena to acquire identifying information from an ISP or other organization that can track such data. A kid with too much time on his hands and not enough homework would probably fall under the radar of anyone interested in tracking terrorist plots, and such.

But not everyone who can control such identifying information works well with the law. In fact, many who have nefarious goals may decide to publish information associating certain rude comments with identifying information leading right to the name of the individual who made such comments.

Exacerbating the problem is that once the comments are out there, they're out there permanently in many cases.

So here's some advice:

If you've never published a comment you feel you would later regret, don't.
If you HAVE commented in a manner that is less than respectful, and have cloaked yourself in anonymity, stop.
And if you continue to think that anything you say anonymously will never EVER come back to haunt you some time in the distant future, beware.

Communication Gap

2007-05-13T21:05:00.000-04:00

An American walks into a hat store in a foreign country and finds one that he likes.

"How much is this one?" he asks the sales person.

"Five hundred US dollars," she answers, in adequate English.

"$500? That's just a little more than what I wanted to spend ..." he says, somewhat disheartened.

"Then for you, I will lower the price to $475."

He says, "Thanks, anyway," and walks out.

She is somewhat confused as to why this customer did not buy the hat after she adjusted the price in a manner she thought was in line with what he requested.
.

Would you leave a lousy tip?

2007-04-28T07:15:00.000-04:00

This week we hit one of our usual haunts. But this time, we had somewhat bad service, which is unusual given that we've mostly been pleased with this place over the years.

That happens - you never know what can go wrong in a busy dining establishment at dinner time. One tragedy, such as a failing oven, can throw the whole system out of balance.

In this case, we waited a bit longer than usual for a server to approach us - Problem #1. The dining room seemed a bit busier than we've seen, so I guess that was the reason. One server finally noticed we'd been sitting there and had not yet had coasters placed on our table, (the secret sign that servers use to tell each other that your table has been "claimed.")

"Well, I guess I'll help you since apparently nobody cares," she said, though I thought that was an odd statement to share with the customer, but then I don't know much about the business practices. We sort of felt honored, I suppose.

She brought our drinks and took our orders. But then Problem #2 came up. My meal normally comes with beans, but they were out of beans. No biggie, I guess, so I reluctantly chose from the alternatives she offered.

Our meals arrived somewhat delayed because of the great numbers of diners, I would imagine, but alas, so too did Problems #3 and #4. There was no silverware, and the fries weren't quite ready. She said, "Sorry there's no silverware - the kitchen's running a little behind. I'll be out with your fries shortly."

So there I am eating my hamburger, and my wife is sitting there with a more traditional meal waiting for her silverware. I got about halfway through my hamburger, wishing I had some fries to break up the monotony of that single item, while my wife sat there busily watching her food get cold when the server finally arrived with my fries.

I said, "Is her silverware coming?" She looked at me with a look that said, Oh, Yeah! Sorry about that, and ran off again. Now I had fries to eat with my hamburger, to which my wife helped herself, given that she was still staring at her ever-growing colder meal. The server returned with the silverware so my wife could begin eating. I finished my burger a few moments later, so I just sat and picked at the fries while she finished her meal so that there was some semblance of dining together.

Who is at fault?

So basically our dining experience was affected by at least four things:

The delay in establishing an initial relationship with a server
No standard beans with the meal I ordered
No silverware
No fries

Of these, which are the responsibility of this specific server?

Problem #1 - though we found it annoying that we sat waiting for our server, this particular server decided to break away from her station to serve us. Can't find fault with that.

Problem #2 - unless this server was somehow "pushing the beans," I can't think of any way this could have been her fault.

Problem #3 - she claims the kitchen was not producing clean silverware as they should. She went on to state that the dish washer told her that servers were discarding silverware, so it wasn't his fault. I'm not sure how that information was to add to our dining experience, but there it was. It's debatable at what point the silverware became available versus when this server found the time to deliver it, so responsibility for Problem #3 goes unclaimed.

Problem #4 - this is also debatable. Is the delay of fries the kitchen's fault, or the server's fault? She had no story about arguments with the kitchen over the fries, and it may be a standard in the restaurant business to serve fries when one is halfway finished with their hamburger, so this goes unclaimed as well.

How much to tip?

One thing that seems to add to the already controversial subject of tipping is the fact that in most cases, you're tipping your main server, but sometimes the service for which you are compensating is beyond the control of that server.

Is it fair to penalize a server who is delayed because it's extra busy at that hour? That's more a function that management is supposed to be handling. And THIS server stepped in. We cannot limit the tip from the person assigned to that table who never showed up.

What about the beans, silverware, and fries? Suppose those were entirely the kitchen's fault. The kitchen's not delivering, and who takes the brunt? The server who's not bringing out the items to serve our needs. How can we hold the server at fault for that? Yet many do.

But it is indeed the server to whom we turn to measure a restaurant's fulfillment of the overall dining experience, and the server to whom we measure the amount of additional compensation to apply in the form of a tip based on that experience.

All that said, a server does present the face of the establishment, and can go great lengths to turn problems into solutions. In our minds, this server's critique of her fellow servers and the kitchen staff left us with little belief that she was seeking to preserve much more than her tip.

However, perhaps that is the environment in which servers, the customer service representatives of the restaurant business, are placed in order to secure a living.

We took everything into consideration and ended up leaving her what we would have if service was more like what we have come to expect from this establishment.

But many would have left a lesser tip, or worse, because of the perceived lack of service. When thinking about what to leave as a tip, please consider who you're tipping, and why.
.

I Don't Like Mondays Either, But ...

2007-04-17T16:59:00.000-04:00

On January 29, 1979, a Monday, sixteen year old Brenda Ann Spencer wounded eight children and one police officer and killed the Principal and Head Custodian in a shooting spree at Cleveland Elementary School in San Diego, California.

According to wikipedia:

When the six-hour incident ended and the sixteen-year-old was asked why she had committed the crime, she shrugged and replied, "I don't like Mondays. This livens up the day." She also said: "I had no reason for it, and it was just a lot of fun," "It was just like shooting ducks in a pond," and "(The children) looked like a herd of cows standing around, it was really easy pickings."

Spencer's crime, lack of remorse, and inability to provide a serious explanation for her actions when captured inspired the song "I Don't Like Mondays" by The Boomtown Rats, written by musician Bob Geldof.

The lyrics of this chilling song may be accessed here.

I don't like Mondays either. But I find productive ways of dealing with it.

By the way, Have You Seen This Man?
.

Carpooling

2007-04-15T14:16:00.000-04:00

Four cars are driving in the carpool lane. The first contains five men in business suits; the second has a man and three high school students; the third, a woman and her young daughter; and the last, a pregnant woman. Which car or cars do not belong in the carpool lane?

To answer this, one might first ask, "Which cars have the potential to prevent another car from having to be on the highway?" Are the businessmen carpooling? Probably. They might have driven separately.

Shuttling students around cannot be keeping cars off the highway if they are not old enough to drive yet, right? Doesn't matter. If the man is taking his son and two teammates to soccer practice, he may be keeping two other cars off the road.

But the mother has just the young girl. Which car is she taking off the highway? None. But you might consider it carpooling if Mom dropped Becky off at ballet on her way to work instead of asking Dad to make a special trip.

In each of the examples above, the possibility exists that a car is being kept off the road. The potential is there; there's just no way to be certain.

As for the pregnant woman, how many cars can it take to transport a baby who has yet to be born? More than one? There's just no way.

.

Phone Hell, Part II

2007-03-31T08:44:00.000-04:00

On one of my other blogs, I posted about Phone Hell. Here's a similar experience.

Don't you just love automated menu-driven telephone systems answering when you call a business? I've come to accept them somewhat, finding that many times, through patience and careful listening skills, I can get the info I need without troubling someone on the payroll.

However, sometimes you just need to talk to a person. The menus are usually very comprehensive, but they don't cover it all. The VERY LAST item on the menu is what you need to press "to speak with a Customer Service Representative."

I've found that sometimes, however, if you don't press anything at all, you will get transferred to a human immediately because they think you have a dial telephone line. This trick is specially handy if they are looking for ten forms of ID before you get the menu.

"Please enter your mother's maid's name."

Recently, I had the need to call an institution to inquire about a service that I was certain would not be in the menu. Here is how I was originally greeted:

"If you are calling from a TouchTone ® phone, please enter your account and PIN number, NOW!"

Never mind the fact that "PIN number" is redundant. I opted to hold. A few seconds later:

"If you are calling from a TouchTone ® phone, please press One, NOW!"

Apparently, the computer knew that I MUST have a TouchTone ® phone. I mean, after all, who doesn't?? Is there really a likelihood that a person calling such an institution would still be using a DIAL phone? C'mon! Let's get with the technology, huh? It was obvious that the computer was on to me. It wanted to trick me into admitting that I had a TouchTone ® phone. I continued to hold. Finally, the biggest laugh came a few seconds later:

"We are sorry you are having trouble. Please hold, and a Customer Service Representative will be with you shortly."

"HAVING TROUBLE"??? I didn't even realize I was having trouble! It was no trouble at all to sit on the phone and wait to talk to a REAL person, which eventually occurred. The only trouble I remember was trying to think of who is "We" that felt sorry for me.

Another try ...

This reminds me of another recent attempt to call a business and actually try to talk to a person.

I was on my fourth 800 number. I was looking for someone to tell me some information from my employee profile. A recorded voice said to me, "To speak to a Human Resources representative, press 7."

For a moment, I thought I had found my key! The voice used the "H" word! Human! To speak to a "Human" resources rep! Then it dawned on me that the voice was not promising a "Human" resources rep, I was to be hooked with the "Human Resources" dept. Oh, well. Maybe there will be a "Human" on the other end of THIS selection.

"All of our Human Resources representatives are busy helping other clients just like you! Please hold and the next representative will BE RIGHT WITH YOU!!!" (emphasis mine.)

Well, finally I was connected to a human, feeling secure in my belief that my journey through recorded telephone hell was at its end.

"Thank you for calling Human Resources; this is Elaine; How may I direct your call?"

.

Metrics Anyone?

2007-03-12T17:40:00.000-04:00

Managers sometimes come to their employees requesting "metrics" data. What is Metrics Data, you might ask? Metrics data is a measurement that teams come up with to demonstrate "continuous improvement" in the form of a number or numbers that are supposed to go up or down, depending on what's being measured.

Who is the audience for metrics? Usually the boss's boss. He doesn't necessarily want to see specific information about the product to get a feel for the quality, he wants to see some sort of quantifiable number to show that his product is improving.

AN EXAMPLE

Suppose TEAMX produces widgets. They produce between 10 and 60 widgets a month, depending on demand.

TEAMX's boss's boss has requested metrics. Since TEAMX's boss feels the members of TEAMX are best familiar with their own process, he tells them THEY must come up with some sort of measurement he can show to his boss to indicate that TEAMX is dedicated to continuously improving their process in order to increase the quality of the widgets they produce.

TEAMX, a very busy team, couldn't think of a way one could really quantify how they're improving the quality of their production of widgets at first. They decided to use the number of widgets produced each month as their metric. Their goal was to increase production 10% per month. Here's their first 4 months' "metrics:"

Jan 50 widgets
Feb 40 widgets
Mar 30 widgets
Apr 20 widgets

When asked why the numbers were dropping, TEAMX said, "Well, there was decreasing DEMAND for our widgets. We only produce what's ordered by the customer."

SECOND TRY

TEAMX was asked to find another metric, so they decided to measure the number of defects closed per month. The goal was to close 10% more defects each month. Here's the next four months' "metrics:"

May 120 defects closed
Jun 40 defects closed
Jul 160 defects closed
Aug 80 defects closed

When asked why their numbers were all over the place, TEAMX said, "Well, June and August were our busiest months for orders, so we had less time we could devote to fixing defects. Also, there were fewer defects opened during those months."

THIRD TRY

Once again, TEAMX was asked to find another metric. They asked their boss, "What are you looking for?" He stated, "We just need something that shows a regularly improving number that indicates we are increasing our quality."

So TEAMX decided to measure the amount of time it took to produce a widget. Normally, it took about 2.5 person-hours to produce a widget. They decided their goal was to decrease the amount of time to produce a widget by 10% per month.

Over the next several months, they found many ways to cut costs, cut corners, and cut waste in order to reduce the length of time it took to produce a widget. Here's the next four months' "metrics:"

Sep 2.47 person-hours
Oct 2.44 person-hours
Nov 2.41 person-hours
Dec 2.38 person-hours

Their boss's boss was thrilled with the numbers. Each showed a decrease in the length of time it took to produce a widget. However, there was some fallout from this exercise.

FALLOUT

Here's TEAMX's next four months of defects opened:

Jan 80 defects opened
Feb 90 defects opened
Mar 100 defects opened
Apr 110 defects opened

The following month, management decided to just let TEAMX produce widgets and not try to make them think of some sort of measurement that showed continuous improvement in the product's quality.

Management learned three things:

1. Asking teams to come up with a measurement that can be quantified will always result in a quantifiable measurement.

2. There is not always a quantifiable trigger you can key off of to measure quality.

3. Showing "improvement" in the measurements that CAN be quantified is not always an indication of quality.

.

Mandatory 20% tipping

2007-02-21T07:34:00.000-05:00

In my neck of the woods, plenty of debate has been aired over the mandatory 20% tip thing. The talk always ends up with diners versus servers swapping stories of poor service versus poor customer behavior.

If my wife and I dine out twice a week, that's two hundred meals a year between us. But a server who serves only three tables of two patrons per hour over an eight hour shift has served twelve thousand people in a year. Seems to me a given that servers can easily top any horror story a patron can give with one of their own about poor patronage.

Personally, I am in favor of the mandatory 20% tip. Since all meals will now be 20% higher, food quality will become the competitive edge. And when service goes down the tube as a result of the loss of merit pay, restaurants will have to lower their prices to keep the customers coming in. Eventually everyone will be paying less, and restaurants will need to ensure they hire only the finest staff because of the competitively tight profit margins. The service we used to get will return, and the attitude-laden service will diminish. Problem solved.

.

What kind of adman ARE you?

2007-01-26T23:26:00.000-05:00

An advertising executive stood there and admired his work. He spent weeks on the proposal. It was his slickest piece ever - he was proud of his creation. He could hardly wait to present it to the client.

As the big "reveal" date approached, he could barely contain himself. His wife was sick of hearing him talk about this campaign. He fretted over his presentation.

When the big day arrived, he was pleased as he watched the client smiling at everything he said. It was in the bag.

As his pitch grew to a close, he watched in anticipation as the client gathered his initial thoughts. This was the moment for which the adman had waited - the moment when the client would swoon over his production.

The client lifted his head from his pose of deep thought, then spoke.

"This is great!" he began. The adman sighed relief. "But I am wondering something ..."

"Yes!" encouraged the adman. "What are your thoughts?"

"I was wondering if you could do something with dancing elephants."

Dancing Elephants?!? the adman thought to himself.

"Dancing elephants?" the adman meekly queried.

Bottom line was that the client was amused, and perhaps even somewhat enthused by the advertising company's product, but actually had something specific in mind from the start. He had failed to make his ideas known in the initial meetings with the company.

The adman was crushed. Dancing elephants. Well if dancing elephants was what the customer wanted, then dancing elephants he would get. Never mind if he never sold any of his product, this client would get EXACTLY what he had ordered - nothing less, and nothing more.

The greatest homepage ever

What was the motivation for this introduction? I was asked to create a website for my employer. I had never created a website before, so I acquired the web development software, learned it, and began developing my first homepage. It was great! It was flashy. It was dynamic. It incorporated many of the elements I enjoyed from other websites I had admired. Best of all, I believed it to be highly usable - no matter what you needed from my site, you could navigate to it with just a few clicks.

I presented it to my boss, (the "client,") and he was less than impressed. He said, and I quote, "It's a little 'busy,' don't you think?"

Never mind that I was reeling from the crushed feeling one gets from having ones work criticized by the boss - the fact that he asked me "don't you THINK?" really burns.

He went on to state his "vision" of what makes a good homepage - one that is simple, with very few buttons, and no "fluff" like pictures and stuff.

No Pictures?!? See, this is why company executives should never be webmasters. They can be clueless as to what makes a good website. My first inclination was to say to myself, "If the boss wants a simple website that will attract absolutely NO visitors, and no corresponding business, than that is what I will build for him."

Then I thought of the story of the adman. I asked myself, Do I want to be like the frustrated adman - so sure of himself and his product that any criticism of its greatness would be met with resign to provide the WORST results - in order to "prove" ones righteousness?

Not me. Instead, I told myself, "If this client, (my boss,) wants 'dancing elephants,' then I was going to produce the BEST website I could create with Dancing Elephants. I developed a homepage that somehow managed to incorporate nearly all of the elements of my original whiz-bang creation, but stayed within the guidelines provided, (albeit late,) from the boss.

So the question to you is, What kind of adman are you? Are you the kind that delivers the worst you can muster, due to some misdirected belief that no person's concept of good work can compare to that of your own, or are you the kind that can work with the client's ideas to create the best "Dancing Elephants" product on the market?

Magazine diet articles cause teen smoking

2007-01-06T08:59:00.000-05:00

A story I read in our local newspaper told of research that suggested weight-loss and diet articles in teen magazines caused unhealthy practices such as extreme weight-loss measures as many as five years after reading such material, versus those who have never read such articles.

Of course, it is nothing new to associate teen mag diet articles and ads to extreme behavior. How this study differs is in the suggestion that these articles have a lingering effect - even when a girl is well past the teen years during which she read the material.

What I found particularly interesting was the following quote:

"Girls in middle school who read dieting articles were twice as likely
five years later to try to lose weight by fasting or smoking cigarettes,
compared with girls who never read such articles."

Diet articles cause teen smoking. And here you thought that teen smoking was just a peer pressure thing.

"Hey, Ashley, what's with the cigarette? Did other kids talk you into smoking?"

"Oh, Mo-ommmm. I'm twenty years old. I haven't caved to peer pressure since middle school."

"Then how do you explain this behavior, Ash?" (Pun intended.)

"Well, it was all the diet and weight loss articles I read in those magazines you bought me. I figured a good way to lose weight was to start smoking. After all, look what it did for Aunt Ida. She smoked all her life and got herself down to 86 pounds when she died at 45."

Parents, please! I don't know if things read in teen mags cause bizarre behavior or not, but if your daughter is so convinced she needs to lose weight that she is considering or has begun smoking, by all means get her the help she needs.

Who, Meme?

2006-12-30T04:18:00.000-05:00

Thanks to James Burnett, famous columnist for the Miami Herald and blogger extraordinaire, I have been tagged to list five items to answer the following question: "What things about yourself do you worry about too much, where other folks' opinions of you are concerned?"

So basically, James, you're asking what about myself I am most embarrassed, aren't you? If so, first I've got to thank you for putting me through this self-examination, because nothing is more pleasant at this time of year, (end of year resolution gathering,) than a good dose of critical thinking.

That said, I decided to provide my list, along with my immediate excuse as to why everybody is wrong if they actually think these things of me about which I worry.

I'm not antisocial, I just respect people's privacy.
I'm not too self-absorbed, I'm just not easily distracted.
I'm not lazy, I'm just efficient.
I'm not immature, I'm just too old for my lifestyle.
I'm not controlling, I prefer to think of myself as "actively engaged."

So there you have it. The top five things apparently on which I need to work during 2007. Wish me luck! (Not that I worry you will think less of me if I don't.)

The Sarcasticynic

Last to be picked

2006-12-10T10:15:00.000-05:00

When I was in school, my best friend and I always knew who would be chosen last for team membership in gym class. Without fail, he was second to last to be picked, and I was last. We were at the bottom of the list of students expected to do well on the field, and never got to play on the same team.

Actually, I need to provide a correction to a statement above. My friend was the last to be chosen. After a team captain called out his name, and I was the last kid standing, the two teams just turned around and headed out to the field. After all, it was assumed I was on the other team, right? They didn't even give me the dignity of calling my name.

Many times I was tempted to just return to the locker room.

"Hey! Where're you going?" the Gym Teacher would've called.

"To the lockers."

"Get back onto the field and join your team," he'd've shouted.

"I have no team. Nobody picked me."

That's what I imagined would have happened. Instead, I trailed my "team" onto the field and tried my best.

I never forgot that.

Coincidences

2006-12-02T07:21:00.000-05:00

Take a look at the photo. This is how our paper arrived one morning. Somehow, the front page and the first few pages after that had about a quarter of each page torn away, for whatever reason, and were nowhere to be found. Personally, that didn't bother me much. Accidents happen, and I doubted my life would be significantly altered by the lack of a couple square feet of missing info from that morning's edition.

What I did find amusing, of course, was the headline that was affected by the accidental shredding of my morning paper. I later learned from visiting the online version of our paper that that headline was supposed to say, "Tornado tears apart 3 families." Instead, the paper itself was torn. Some coincidence, I thought to myself.

Then I thought about coincidences in general, as well as specific coincidences that have happened, or could happen.

The first time I remember noticing and thinking about coincidences happened when I was a teen. I was walking through a department store with my mother, and as we went up the escalator, I saw our neighbor on her way down. Mom was occupied with her purse or something, and the neighbor was equally distracted, so she didn't see us. As we were about to cross paths, it occurred to me I should say something. But the thought of my mother engaged in a lengthy conversation with this person whom I felt already spends WAAY too much time chatting with my mother didn't sit too well with my personal teenager schedule, so I kind of ducked my head as teens are so skilled at doing. She never saw us.

I glanced over my shoulder as the neighbor continued down the escalator, and back at my mom who was completely oblivious to the "coincidence." I thought, Wow! That is so cool! We were all together for a brief moment in time, yet if I were distracted myself, (such as if there had been a teenaged girl either in front of or behind our neighbor,) the coincidence may never have been discovered.

Which got me thinking about the things that have to happen to make up what we call a coincidence. Of course, two or more events have to happen at the same time or close together. But another thing is that someone has to recognize the connection between the events, after which they may or may not report it.

By definition, a coincidence needs neither a witness nor a reporter, but unless such support exists, nobody knows there has been a coincidence. Coincidences happen all the time. Your boss's niece may have dated your sister-in-law's neighbor's cousin. Your maid of honor may be related to your co-worker's family doctor. Your social security number might be the next winning lottery combination. Well, OK, except for the last one, these coincidences may be "available," but until the evidence somehow comes out, and someone notices it, and knows enough about the circumstances to recognize a pattern, the coincidences "don't really exist" for any practical purposes.

Anyway, here are a couple more coincidences that happened to me, as well as a freaky one that I thought up.

1) I learned through my mother's conversation with her cousin that her cousin's daughter lives in the same town as me. Both of us live many states away from where we grew up. Further research yielded that within this town of over 30,000, her relative lives within walking distance of me.

2) Recently I contacted my childhood friend I hadn't seen in decades through his 80 year old mother, who still lives in the same house as where he grew up. She put me in contact with him. Turns out he was visiting my town at the time, several states away, and we got the chance to meet again - first time since we were 12 years old. We then found out that we both worked for the same company, and he lived on the same street, walking distance in fact, from a former manager of mine.

These coincidences were in place for quite some time, years in certain cases, but until someone comes in and puts two and two together, they simply remain undiscovered.

Here's a freaky coincidence that could happen. In fact, something like this may occur many times in some form or another. A man is in his garage working with power tools. There's a lightning storm outside. He thinks to himself, I should unplug this appliance and go in the house. While standing in a puddle of water that has seeped under the garage door from the storm, and just as he is about to reach up to grasp the power cord, which happens to have exposed wires, a bolt of lightning wipes out the power in his neighborhood. He pulls out the cord in the dark and goes inside. Had that lightning not killed the power, that exposed cord would still have been live, and he might have gotten electrocuted. A coincidence? You'd better believe it. Anyone notice? Probably not.

Divine Intervention? That's a topic for another discussion.

Got any amazing coincidences you'd like to share? Respond in the comment section if you do.

The problem of the three cakes

2006-11-10T13:06:00.000-05:00

A Norwegian, a Swede, a Dane, and an American were attempting to solve a problem. They were trying to decide who is best qualified to split three cakes into four equal pieces.

The Swede said, "I think I should be the one who cuts the cakes. Everyone should know that Swedes are blessed with the ability to come up with many ideas, and then to select from them the ones best capable of solving the problem. Do not forget that it was a Swede, inventor Alfred Nobel, who said, 'If I have a thousand ideas and only one turns out to be good, I am satisfied.'

The Norwegian said, "No, It should be me who divides them. We do not need several methods to solve this problem, just one. After all, Norwegian playwright Henrik Ibsen said, 'The great secret of power is never to will to do more than you can accomplish.'

The Dane had had enough, and she spoke. "It is obvious that I should be the one who slices the cakes. You are both looking at the problem entirely wrong. Who would not remember that it was Danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard who said, 'Life is not a problem to be solved, but a reality to be experienced.'

The three then turned to see what the American would say, but he was nowhere to be found. In addition, all three cakes were missing.

A small child was standing nearby and spoke. "While you were arguing over who should cut the cakes, your companion has walked off with them."

"Did he say anything before he left?" asked one of the remaining.

"Yes," the child began, "Actions speak louder than words."

Fixing High Health Care Insurance Premiums

2006-10-01T20:00:00.000-04:00

Did that title get your attention? I wish the body of this post could provide what the title suggests. Unfortunately, all it offers is more griping.

According to a recent article in The AARP Bulletin, two states, Massachusetts and Vermont, have made inroads into providing some sort of universal health care to their residents.

That's great. More states should look into this remarkable attempt at providing relief from high health care insurance premiums.

But there is one thing these new plans do not consider. As long as the current trend of the COSTS of treatment keep increasing, so too will the costs of the premiums. So even if some states can manage to make the costs of premiums more affordable for all of its constituents, in a few years the costs will become unmanageable and they will be back in the same boat again.

Let's say current average premiums for a family of four were $1200 per month in State X. The state's government creates a law that allows the typical family to get the same level of coverage for half the cost - $600 a month. The state's populace swoons, the media swarm the lawmakers, and more states are focusing their attention on State X and how they brought many thousands of formerly under- or uninsured families back into the covered health care fold.

But in the years that follow, new, exciting (read: expensive) medical breakthroughs occur, as well as new, powerful drugs hit the marketplace. Someone's got to pay for all these bold new treatments and that would be who it's always been - the insured.

Before you know it, that $600 a month premium has crept back up to an unaffordable level, and our hapless family of four in State X is back to where they were.

Bottom line - until state or federal government officials work to bring the total costs of health care down by great amounts, no effort to reduce current insurance premiums will have more than a short-term effect.

Would YOU leave negative feedback on eBay?

2006-09-10T09:00:00.001-04:00

Would you leave negative feedback on eBay?

I'm not sure that I would.

Picture this scenario. I make a bid on eBay. The bidding ends at 11:11 at night, and the next morning, I learn I won. Needing to rush out the door to go to my day job, I plan to pay in the afternoon, knowing it is expected that I have at least five days to pay. When I come home in the afternoon, I pay using PayPal.

Now all I have to do is wait for my merchandise.

And I wait. And wait.

Thirty-six days later I get my product. When I open it, my first thought is, Did I order this? Then I remember I did, but I have received about a half dozen other things I had won from eBay since then.

And if that were not bad enough, the item is broken. There's no real reason it should be broken; if it had been properly packaged, it should have been fine. But this looks like it was thrown together at the last minute and sent out the door. No considerate marketer would have sent out an item packed so shoddily.

So I contact the seller for resolution. No response. I follow up with another request. Still no response.

Now I am not normally the type who would say, Well, this guy's a jerk and I am going to slam him with negative feedback. In fact, as a relatively new eBay member, I have been pretty pleased with the service I have received so far. I have only given positive feedback to this point - an accurate reflection of the service I have seen.

But this crosses the line. To have to wait a long time for a package that arrives obviously carelessly packaged, and to have multiple requests for resolution ignored, is more than the average eBay purchaser should have to endure.

So for the first time ever, I leave negative feedback on eBay. Here's my statement:

Negative: Pkg came after 36 days and was damaged. 2 requests for service went unanswered.

Mine was the fifth negative left out of 100 responses for this guy, or in other words, he has a 95% positive feedback rating. Most of his negatives have been in the last 60 days.

His response to my response? Guy didn't pay right away.

Though true that I didn't pay a moment after winning at 11:11 at night, I paid within 24 hours. I thought that a lame response to my issue.

But here's where it gets interesting. Prior to this incident, I had 19 feedback comments on eBay. I sign into eBay one morning and see I have a new feedback comment. Sure enough, it's from my old friend with the broken product/no service thing, and it's negative.

Negative: dont buy from this guy he takes forever to pay you

Great. So now my 20th feedback comment is negative - undeservedly, in my opinion, and my feedback rating is the same as his: 95%. I've got the same feedback rating from one disgruntled seller as he does from five disgruntled buyers. I choose to take the high road on my response.

Response: I apologize if you feel my service was lacking.

I guess the lesson to take away from this is, Don't leave negative feedback until you've sold enough to be able to absorb some negativity thrown your way, too, whether or not you have it coming.

Or don't leave negative feedback until the other person leaves yours first. (Yeah, like a poor salesperson is going to rush in and praise you.)

Or just don't leave negative feedback at all. Considering feedback is a two way street, is it truly worth it to criticize someone when they hold an equal card against you?
.

UPDATE: eBay has now eliminated the abilities of sellers' to leave negative feedback for buyers. Perhaps that was in response to buyers' stories such as this one?
.

Folding Profits Back into your Business

2006-08-03T15:33:00.000-04:00

I do a little disc jockey work on the side. I believe my charges are reasonable, and people tell me they like my tunes.

I started DJ as a hobby, volunteering my services until I gained enough experience to begin charging. When I first started to get paid for my work, I took that first paycheck and handed it over to my wife.

"What's this?" she asked.

"My payment for my DJ gig."

"What are you handing it to me for?" was her next query. She probably figured I wanted her to cash it so I could blow the cash on something trivial.

"Put it in our savings or checking account," I offered.

"Really?" she said, "I thought you would have wanted to spend it on your equipment or something."

Why would I want to do that? Probably because that's what most startup businesses do with those first few paychecks from their new business - put it back into the business. It makes sense. Most new businesses have expenses that need to be paid. If few, there is always more that can be invested back into the business to grow it for even more profit.

Granted the thought crossed my mind to use that first check to upgrade my system a bit. Another CD player would be nice.

Then I got to thinking. Would another CD player make me a better DJ? Would it allow me to charge more for my services? After all, you can only play one song at a time anyway - the two players I have now work just fine in that regard.

But when it came to the ultimate decision on what to do with that first paycheck, two stories came to mind.

-------------------------------------------------------------
Ten thousand songs

There once was a startup DJ, let's call him Fritz. When Fritz began his disc jockey career he had a collection of about 500 songs. Over the years, as he performed, he would invest his earnings to by more CDs to add to his collection. Soon he had over a thousand songs. One day, Fritz happened upon a disc jockey playing at a festival in his town, and he struck up a conversation. At one point, the discussion turned to their collections.

"I have over a thousand titles in my playlist," Fritz boasted.

"A thousand?" began the professional, "that's a pretty good start. We have built our playlist to include over ten thousand titles."

Fritz was crestfallen, but at the same time inspired. He set himself up with a personal goal to acquire ten thousand songs. Every time he received a check for payment, he turned it around and ordered more songs. He hit all the sites: eBay, Amazon.com, etc, as well as hitting the yard sales and flea markets.

After a few years, Fritz was halfway there. He had over 5000 songs under his belt. He could play nearly every request placed on him, and was able to perform gigs that were quite varied in style and substance, given the range of his selections.

But soon after that, Fritz was finding himself losing interest in being a disc jockey. A cousin got him interested in old cars, and now Fritz found himself with a new challenge. He had to have a classic car. But naturally, he lacked the cash for such a purchase. In his mind, his only available option was to sell his disc jockey business. Since he was taking less and less gigs, he realized that "the gig was up," so to speak, and he knew it was time to sell.

He needed $6000 for a down payment on the classic car of his dreams. He figured he paid $4000 for his gear, so that should be worth something, and though he knew he wouldn't get near what he paid for his CDs, he supposed somebody would want such a large collection of over 5000 songs.

The gear sat on eBay and message boards for several weeks and Fritz was starting to get discouraged. Eventually he sold the system for $1800. The 5000 song playlist languished. DJs either were not interested in adding his songs, many of which they already had, or offered him pennies on the dollar. He eventually sold the CD collection for $400 on eBay.

So now, after several years of being a relatively successful DJ, playing well over 200 hours across dozens of gigs, and spending about $8000 for the equipment, songs, and expenses, he now had twenty-two hundred dollars. A fraction of what he needed for the car's down payment. All because he had invested all his earnings back into his business.

Ultimately, Fritz worked a couple hundred hours that netted him a fraction of what he was charging. Had he spent some of his earnings on other than back into his business, Fritz would have had more to show for his work. But he wanted a lot of songs.

-------------------------------------------------------------

The Unlucky Wedding Photographer

There was a photographer, let's call him Graham, who loved taking pictures. He did this as a hobby for years until a friend suggested he turn his hobby into profit. So Graham invested money into his hobby by purchasing enough equipment to shoot weddings.

His first few gigs didn't bring in much money, barely enough to cover the extra equipment and some of his expenses, but as he gained expertise, the profits climbed. As more and more people learned of his talents, his calendar became booked with wedding dates and he was busy as a man can be.

In each and every case, Graham reinvested his earnings back into his business. In only a few years, his equipment went from a single small format camera, a flash, and a few lenses to several medium format cameras, two flashes, a slew of lenses and a motor drive. He had the equipment that beginner photographers drool over.

In the mean time, Graham's business was increasing further. People had to book him eighteen months in advance and he frequently had to turn down gigs to avoid double booking. At one point, he even considered hiring an assistant.

Then one year it happened. Bad luck had befallen Graham, and disaster struck when a huge, high publicity wedding of a very famous couple went sour. The professional photoprocessor that Graham utilized had a fire and all the photos were lost.

There were no professional photos from the couple's wedding.

Heartbroken, there was nothing Graham could do. Though his contract had verbiage that was supposed to protect him, the couple had a high priced lawyer and they sued Graham for the lost memories because he could not deliver as he promised. Graham lost the suit. Big time. Though he was able to keep his house and most of his possessions, he needed to sell most his camera equipment to pay off the lawsuit and his lawyer.

He was able to keep some of the lesser expensive equipment for himself, but the bottom line is that he lost all he had built up over the years. He ended up with basically the same setup he had when he did this for a hobby, but because he invested every dollar back into his business, and lost the business, he had nothing to show for it. Ultimately, Graham worked hundreds of weddings for free.

Had he have put at least a small percent of his earnings towards his monthly mortgage or cable bill over the years, he would have had fared a little better than he did. But Graham wanted his business to be as big as possible.

-------------------------------------------------------------

So does that mean a person new to small business should not reinvest back into the business? Of course not. There is no assumption that you will get pennies on the dollar for your business, or that you will lose it all on a lawsuit.

But care should be taken to ensure that one doesn't reinvest 100% of the profits back into the business even if there is relative certainty that one could get much of it back.

Better to take a smaller percentage of the profits and put it back into the business, but keep a portion aside and spend it on things that also matter - new furniture, clothes, or just paying down your credit card a bit.

Move it Over - NC "Move Over" Law

2006-07-01T08:59:00.000-04:00

In January of 2002, North Carolina enacted their version of the "Move Over" Law. The law, General Statute #20-157, requires motorists who encounter a police officer or other emergency personnel on the side of the road to "move over" to an adjacent lane if it is safe to do so. Otherwise they are required to slow down in their current lane.

And starting today, July 1, 2006, this requirement will also be enforced for tow trucks and other non-law enforcement emergency vehicles.

This is to help prevent the numbers of injured and killed emergency response personnel and motorists at our state's roadsides, which are increasing every year.

The law is a good one, and as North Carolina joins other states in enacting such statutes, we should see a significant drop in the needless deaths across the state as motorists become more familiar with the law.

The transition

It is the transition into the habit that concerns me.

Any time you add a new law that affects how motorists drive, there is the possibility of the results being worse than the catastrophe they are designed to reduce, until the law is fully understood and properly practiced by the state's drivers.

The current consequence for a NC driver who fails to move to an adjacent lane if it is open or to slow down is up to $350 in fines and court costs. This can cause some motorists, particularly young drivers, to overreact and possibly to create an unsafe situation for surrounding drivers if they suddenly encounter a cop on the side of the road and are worried about breaking this law.

Cops pull over drivers every day, probably by the hundreds. That's part of their job, and it adds to the overall safety of the state's roadways.

Even the mere presence of a pulled over motorist is often enough to get others to slow down. And slow down they do. What worries me is the requirement to move over. In the ten minutes or so that a police officer has a car pulled over for some infraction, or whatever, hundreds, or even a thousand or so cars may pass alongside. It scares me to think about some of these already distracted motorists who may be fearful that the cop will jump in his cruiser, leave the ticketless motorist they had stopped, and chase them down because they hadn't moved over. So they lurch around to see if it is clear, then may make hasty decisions to cross lanes, perhaps jeopardizing their own safety, the safety of others, or ironically, the very safety of the stopped personnel and motorist!

What's needed

Please don't twist my words, and believe I am saying it's a bad law. Anyone tempted to comment that they know of officers or emergency personnel who have been killed because of failure to allow sufficient space has my support and sympathy. It's a great law and I highly encourage its adherence and enforcement.

But we need to understand the law. And we need to follow best judgment on determining when it is truly safe to move over versus when it would be better to slow down.

And we need to talk to our children - today's young drivers just out of Driver's Ed - to ensure they understand the law and are prepared to follow it properly.

North Carolina's "Move Over" Law is a step in the right direction and should serve to bring additional safety to our emergency personnel as has been found in other states who have similar laws. Understand the law, and its consequences, and practice safe and responsible compliance to ensure the law can properly serve its purpose.

California's Three Strikes Law

2006-06-01T21:46:00.000-04:00

In 1994, the State of California enacted a law colloquially called "The Three Strikes and You're Out" Law.

Baseball references aside, the law basically stated that upon the third felony conviction, a person would have to serve time in prison if they have two violent felonies behind them.

I lived in California in '94 and I remember that support for the law was great among the citizens. California was ready for more "get tough on crime" legislation, and Three Strikes seemed to be a step in the right direction.

But the law was somewhat flawed. Suppose a person commits some crimes - really bad ones - murdering a neighbor, and burning down a building. Bad crimes, no question. But after serving due time for the crimes, he's released. A few years later, he gets busted for simple possession of a controlled substance. A felony. Thanks to Three Strikes, he's back in prison. Opponents of the law feel that the third felony should need to be one of violence rather than just any old felony in order to trigger Three Strikes.

The other way the law was flawed is that it made felonies committed prior to the law being enacted countable towards that third strike.

An example

One of the felonies that qualify for a strike is robbery of a residence in which a deadly or dangerous weapon is used. Let's say in 1972 a criminal breaks, enters, and robs a home. Homeowner hears the ruckus, comes out in his bathrobe, gun in hand, and encounters the criminal. Shots are exchanged. Nobody dies. The robber goes to trial, gets convicted, and gets sentenced to 10 years in prison. Serves seven, and gets released for good behavior.

Flash forward to 1987. Pretty much the same story. Same guy robs another residence. This time the unarmed homeowner startles the convict, who turns and fires at the homeowner. Nobody dies. Guy goes to trial again, gets convicted, and receives a twelve year sentence. Serves seven, gets out on some state sponsored work-release program.

But now it's 1994, and California's Three Strikes and You're Out law is in place. The hapless criminal may or may not know about the law, but that doesn't stop him from setting fire to his estranged girlfriend's car while she was visiting relatives in another town. Nobody dies. Doesn't matter. This felonious case of arson counts as the Third Strike, and now the criminal is sent to prison for twenty five years or more.

So no matter what crimes were committed prior to the law's enactment, and no matter what the punishment for those crimes were at the time they were committed, they now will be counted as a Strike.

A discussion on the matter

It is over this point that I conversed with a colleague during the heated debates the bill generated before it passed.

"What do you think of the Three Strikes and You're Out law they are proposing?" I asked.

"If you can't do the time, don't do the crime," cliched my colleague.

"Don't you think that it is unfair to have a retroactive punishment that differs from the original punishment that was in effect at the time the crime was committed?" I offered.

"No," he started, "if you are dumb enough to commit a crime, you should realize that you are going to be held accountable for your actions. What makes the difference if the laws were more lenient when the crime was committed?"

Case in point

So I told him this. Suppose in 1972 you are 17 years old. You're cruising with your friends, got the radio cranking, and you're driving rather recklessly. Your girlfriend is hollering at you to slow down, but you don't care. You're only going 10 miles over the limit. What's the worst that can happen? Your best friend got caught speeding 15 miles over the limit just last month and he just got a $50 fine and lost his license for two weeks.

But sure enough, a cop saw you and pulled you over. You got a ticket. Twelve miles over. A hundred and fifty bucks and license suspension for a month. Dad took away car privileges for another month. Tough break when you're seventeen and all your friends still have their wheels. But you suck it up and move on.

Flash forward to 1990. You're 30 years old, and you're late for a doctor's appointment, so you're going a little over the limit in your BMW. Your wife is hollering at you to slow down, but you don't care. What's the worst that can happen? The maximum fine for speeding is $500, (hell, you earn that in less than three days,) and you REALLY don't want to be late.

But late you'll be because a cop saw you and pulled you over. You got a ticket. Twelve miles over. Four hundred and fifty dollars and a date with Traffic School. Tough to swallow when you're booked to the earballs with work, church, soccer camp coaching, etc. But you suck it up and move on.

But now it's 1994, and California is working on a new law. An interesting law that states that after you are convicted of your third speeding violation, you will lose your driving privilege for one year. And on top of that, any previous speeding conviction you had prior to this, (no matter what the consequences were at the time,) would be counted against you under the new law. You would have to take public transportation or be driven to work, church, soccer camp, etc.

"Still feel that a retroactive punishment that differs from the original punishment in effect at the time you sped before is fair?" I asked my colleague.

He did not respond.

Motorcycle Helmet Laws

2006-05-05T09:06:00.000-04:00

In 1992, California joined many other states in mandating a Motorcycle Helmet Law. It became illegal to ride a motorcycle in the state without a helmet.

I lived in California during '92 and I remember when state legislators were pushing for such a law, and the backlash it created before it passed. The most vocal opponents, as you can imagine, were the bikers.

"I'll give up my bike when they pry my cold, dead hands off ... "

Oh, hold on, that was GUN laws. My mistake.

"I'll be darned if I let the state tell me I gotta wear a gosh-darned helmet," or variations thereof, was the cry of the day by these bikers, some of which sporting tattoos.

Opinions of a non-rider

I don't ride, and none of my friends ride. But one day I asked a colleague how he felt about pending legislation regarding motorcycle helmets.

"I don't care. I don't ride a motorcycle," he responded.

"But what about those who do? What is your opinion about their point of view?"

"If they want to kill themselves by refusing to wear a helmet, by all means that is their prerogative. Why should I think any differently? Why should I care if bikers haven't the sense to protect themselves?"

Case in point

So I told him this. Suppose you're cruising down the 101 Freeway in your sedan. You're talking on your cell, you got your tunes cranking, and you reach down to change the station. When you look up, you suddenly see traffic is coming to a standstill, and the last vehicle in line is a motorcycle.

You slam on the brakes, but it's too late, you clip the bike, sending it careening off the road. Rider and motorbike separate, and the poor fellow slides into the guard rail.

Make no mistake, the accident is your fault. No jury will be convinced that any blame can be placed on the biker - you slammed into him from behind. You will most likely be held liable for all consequences. You may be sued. You may even be charged with a crime.

Now here's where it gets interesting. If the biker was wearing a helmet, his injuries may not be life-threatening. If he wasn't, he may die. If he dies, the consequences of your actions will have a measurably different effect on you than if he lives - financially, legally, emotionally, maybe even spiritually. You have a vested interest in people you involve in an accident not dying.

"Still don't care if bikers in this state wear a helmet?" I asked my colleague.

He stood in silence.