If anyone had told me five years ago that I'd work or IBM and like it, I would have laughed myself sick, but when my company got CA-d last year I jumped ship to IBM and I have to report a really nice environment. Obviously there are still a number of old school when-we-were-king types, but in general things are really relaxed (well, relaxed except the workload). I've got freedom to work from home if the client doesn't need me, I've never heard anybody mention dress codes, and if you can survive the mountains of paperwork, you can really be okay. (compare that to CA policies...brrrrrr)YMMV-- divisions and locations can differ wildly, but it's pretty okay.
On the other hand, they still are a giant business. They do flexibility and open source because they think flexibility and open source work-- it's a business model and not a philosophy. Companies this big don't have philosophies, no matter how many True Believers they have on staff.
I assure you that lesbian women are definitely women. Also, lesbians were raised on this planet and in this culture so generally they were socialized in the same way as other members of their socio-economic background. Does sexuality play a part in personality? Definitely! Are all straight people the same? Nope. Are all gay people the same? Also nope. What would that make bisexuals anyhow?
Can you support your assertion that it is sexuality (as opposed to gender) that's the primary difference between men and women? It's funny. I've never seen that particular study. (Why do technical people insist on technical specificity about computers, but toss around generalizations in every other field?)
By the way, I don't have to be homosexual to disagree with you. I'm straight. But a lot of my close friends are gay and-- trust me-- they're pretty representative of their gender as whole.
I've seen three separate promising startups explode because the people involved are friends and they didn't bother to put things in writing. In one case, three guys I know began a company. It became clear after they started being popular that the third guy had very different ideas about what was required (in terms of work) for owning his one third. He started demanding to take money out of the company rather than re-invest it all.
These are things that could have been clarified from the beginning. Money makes people do really weird things, even good friends. Get it in writing from the top.
But do you want to be an exclusive culture? Or do you think I don't have a voice if I don't want it to be? You discuss Katz' arrogance, but what about yours? I don't feel comfortable with flaming. Are my choices to leave or shut the fuck up? As a female geek who's been online for a long time, I've done my share of flaming, but I'll tell you the truth-- it's always felt *mean* and I've always seriously regretted it afterwards. Moreover, I've never felt like it made any sense at all to put new people through some sort of weird gauntlet of flaming for newbies in order to see if they have the right stuff.
I'll go further. It makes me *sick* to hear people in this forum excusing exclusivity or making the point that someone else doesn't belong in this group, or doesn't belong in this community. Reading that kind of sh*t about Katz annoys me (even when his articles annoy me) and makes me wonder where these people went to high school. I got involved in computers in the first place because it was one of the few places I could get away from the constant hysterical insistence that you fit in and be part of a group and follow the program. What's that rhetoric doing here? You have to be a non-conformist just like me? D'oh!
And honesty does *not* equal rudeness (to return to your post). I'm not saying that that's the equation you're making, but I think a lot of people do. I don't know how many times I've seen someone be breathtakingly mean in these forums and when called on it defend themselves by saying that they were "just being honest". I said it yesterday as well-- it's as though nice were seen as the opposite of honest-- but the truth is, the opposite is just as often the case.
Success happened. When fun stuff becomes big business its a lot less fun because theres much more at stake. Money brings every con artist in the book out of the woodwork. It also brings the lawyers. Also, more people are involved, so you can be much less assured that the people who are along for the ride have the same principles and goals that you (the original crowd) had or has.
With any sub-group, theres usually originally a fairly homogenous community. By the fact that someone was involved with Linux, you could make certain assumptions about that persons interests or concerns. Those assumptions werent always true, but they provided a workable basis.
Now that Linux has so much more money involved, you cant assume anything about somebodys involvement. The community has become like a small town suddenly faced with the need for burglar alarms and locks on the front door. Its not fun. Your neighbor used to be able to come over and walk right in. But improved transportation and a suddenly diverse population make that no longer an option. It doesnt feel nice to have to take these preventative measures, but they are (sadly) necessary.
If Linus loses control of the trademark, it doesnt mean that it will be uncontrolled. It probably would just mean that it was controlled by the people with the biggest marketing budgets who could shout down the other people in the conversation. While Im sorry that this sort of legal business is necessary, Im glad that its being handled firmly.
Transportation history seems to require at least one good passenger disaster in order to make it catch on.
You mentioned the Titanic, but the Hindenberg is probably more appropriate as a comparison, since we're probably talking flameball rather than iceberg bait.
We need a good civilian casualty in space so that we can all have a national debate about 'what is a hero' (a la Christa McAuliffe) although it should be a lot funnier when the casualties are silicon valley zillionaires instead of saintly kindergarten teachers.
Don't jump in with both feet. I didn't do my homework on one set of stock options that I was offered and for accepting the stock options I had to pay through the nose for taxes and I made nothing from them. My "incentive" options ended up costing me nearly $2,000!
If you are seriously considering doing this and the amount of money is significant enough, I would go to a good landshark and get the situation evaluated. There's a difference between non-qualifying options and ISOs and the tax laws are complicated and definitely *not* user friendly. (Aside-- why can't the tax office get a user interface design overhaul?). You're goign to need to know lots of things like the grant value, the market value, the vesting time, etc.
It seems like a really cool idea if its done correctly, since the Matrix was such a patchwork of ideas from different pop culture (and deep culture sources).
You could start with some of Philip K. Dicks essays on the nature of reality (particularly around his VALIS idea) and talk about the ideas in philosophy and religion to which they connect.
Dick could lead you into science fiction, cyberpunk, and national anxiety about control.
Bring in other films like Existenz and talk about self-reference in video games like Nomad Soul.
I really don't know about this. It makes a nice line and I sure as heck felt like that as a teenager, but at the risk of sounding like a stuffy adult I'm just not sure that it's *true*.
Further, I think it's borderline really weird to put children in the same category as oppressed groups comprised of adults. It seems like a category mistake of a fairly large order.
The point where you're a kid versus when you're a grown-up seems to me to be a moving target, and has only something to do with grace under pressure or adversity. I grew up in a dying farm town with a lot of damn poor people, and for every kid who faced hard times with maturity, there was some poor 15 year old girl making a living giving blow jobs in the trailer behind the local bar.
*You* were mature. I tend to think that I was mature, but I don't think that kids need to be doing all the things that adults are doing at the same time. The lines are fuzzy. There are some 12 year olds who are more mature than most grownups, but that's the exception rather than the rule. And waiting a few years for some privileges never killed anyone.
This said, I'm not supporting black list censorware for use in any place-- particularly for teenagers. The lists themselves are usually stupidly written and most of the writers can't seem to resist the temptation to include politics. If schools don't want kids looking at porn online (and I can see that they don't) then there's nothing to replace some good 'ol supervision. Review logs if you must and deal with each case one by one.
I *can* see the use of white lists when you had Internet access for any but the very youngest, but then we're discussing equal opportunity censorship, which is somehow less offensive to me than blacklists.
On the one hand, people who want to be independent and work as contractors should be free to do so. Often its a better lifestyle (particularly when the market is good) then the normal job can provide.
However, I remember all too well when I graduated from college in the late 80s when no jobs were to be had and all I could find was a job as a temp employee. Companies regularly hired people as these so-called temp to perm positions where they essentially hired you through a temp agency with the promise that youd be made a permanent employee after the trial period. The trial periods were regularly extended and extended without any appeal possible on the behalf of the worker. It got to the point where most of us had been working for a year or more for all intents and purposes as permanent employees, only we had no health insurance, no benefits, no nothing. Its a horrible position to be in, particularly if you arent making enough to save for the eventuality of being let go without warning.
I dont have enough information about the complaintents to really judge, but from what I understand these are not people who chose a free-wheeling high-income contractor lifestyle, these are people who have not had the option to be permanent employees extended to them.
Temp employees should be temp employees, and if youre using somebody like a permanent employee, they should be really legally hired (if they should so choose).
It's worth noting that more stands at stake for the studios than just getting paid more in different regions for films. Removing the regional release system would essentially require a Very Large system change on their part. Not that I think it won't come, it will, but they will fight it tooth and claw. I think it's going to end up being-- if not impossible to maintain-- much more trouble than it's worth to maintain.
One big reason they want it is release schedules. They're releasing in the theaters (for instance) in Europe much later than in the US, and using what they learn in the US to market the thing. The large high-quality films people will go see in the theater regardless, but if you can get the stinkers on DVD before they hit the theater, people won't go to the theater. So the release scheduling would also have to be changed. Hollywood uses foreign releases as a way to make a profit on even the most abysmal films.
Another reason is that it's very profitable to sell exclusive release rights into foreign markets. Something not possible without regional lockout.
What's nuts is that they won't realize when they're beat, and are trying to use lawyers to sit on the cork and keep the genie in the bottle. Now would be the time for them to think about alternatives rather than lawsuits.
Your Question: So, the question is; How do we inform computer illiterate managers that the Web is a collaberative community of standards, rather than a dictatorship governed by high school bully tactics?
My indirect reply: I have the doubtful good fortune of being one of the people whose job it is to translate between the wishes of managers and the work of development staff. I'm the one who either has to persuade the managers that what they said is a really bad idea and shouldn't be passed on, or I have to take that message and go to the developers and try to negotiate a solution that is both possible and accomplishes what they want.
I run into the situation that you're describing a lot-- particularly with cross-browser and standards issues-- and I've won a lot of those battles on the behalf of open (at least relatively open) standards-- but I think we need to look at how you're framing your question here.
Managers are illiterate about computers. Often about Internet. Very true. They do, however, understand their own business. You need to ask them to care about things like usability across multiple platforms and open standards because, and only because, it impacts their business. If you talk to them about community standards and collaboration and Internet history their eyes are going to glaze over and roll back in their heads. And why shouldn't they? Do you care about every issue in every field of every portion of life that impacts your core business? Would you stand around wanting to debate the relative merits of--oh, I don't know-- plastic formation methods just because your keyboard is made of plastic? No. (Unless you're hopelessly eclectic) You'd want to know what difference it makes to you and whether you should care about it in buying keyboards.
Managers are precisely the same. If you tell them that they should make their website accessible to all browsers because it isn't fair or violates good design standards or whatever, that's going to mean nothing to them. If you take the same situation and use arguments relating the issue to their website, however, that will (generally) sink in. For instance, I frequently discuss how unstable the browser market in general is and how features can differ from even one version of a browser to the next-- so some cool proprietary gimmick they want to use may not be implemented in the next. That leads to the inevitable question. "Surely there are safe features?" I then talk about standards and their purpose.
Generally there's a problem because they've got some home-grown genious working for them who learned how to build web pages with Front Page and couldn't write good code if his life depended on it and is in love with some plug-in dependent navigation element. He or the boss will object that it's 'too difficult' to write code that will work everywhere. I then will sit down with the manager and do the cost figures with them about what it would cost in time and manpower to do it properly now versus what it would cost them to redo completely should their mistakes this time make it necessary. That comparison generally hits home rather close to where it really hurts.
Above all, if you want to communicate good practice to management and non-IT people in general, be patient, try to understand their point of view of the matter, and don't assume they're stupid people just because they're stupid about computers.
Except, of course, for those of us who ordered well into the range of ontime and whose gifts still haven't arrived.
I ordered a digital camera for my father at the end of November. They told me it was in stock. I even phoned especially to make sure there would be no problem. No problem, they told me, it'll be going out by tommorrow. I went on vacation. When I came back, one week before Christmas, I went to check on my order status and saw it was now listed as "Backordered".
It still (December 26) hasn't been shipped and they claim Canon refuses to tell them when it's coming in. Every person I call seems to have a different story. This is a major e-commerce site we're discussing and as far as I can tell, they hire mostly the mentally challenged to answer their damned support phones. (I'd like to note that they're still listing the camera on their site even though they haven't had one in stock for more than four weeks.)
All the same, it's a lot easier for me to explain to my Dad that he doesn't have a gift under the tree then it is for someone to explain it to a kid. People who got shafted by Toys R Us didn't wait until late to order-- many of them were ordering on the 9th and still didn't get their packages.
Perhaps merchants shouldn't promise delivery on time if you order really late, but the time frame for online shopping shouldn't be "whenever we feel like sending it" either.
Except, of course, for those of us who ordered well into the range of ontime and whose gifts still haven't arrived. I ordered a digital camera for my father at the end of November. They told me it was in stock. I even phoned especially to make sure there would be no problem. No problem, they told me, it'll be going out by tommorrow. I went on vacation. When I came back, one week before Christmas, I went to check on my order status and saw it was now listed as "Backordered". It still (December 26) hasn't been shipped and they claim Canon refuses to tell them when it's coming in. Every person I call seems to have a different story. This is a major e-commerce site we're discussing and as far as I can tell, they hire mostly the mentally challenged to answer their damned support phones. (I'd like to note that they're still listing the camera on their site even though they haven't had one in stock for more than four weeks.) All the same, it's a lot easier for me to explain to my Dad that he doesn't have a gift under the tree then it is for someone to explain it to a kid. People who got shafted by Toys R Us didn't wait until late to order-- many of them were ordering on the 9th and still didn't get their packages. Perhaps merchants shouldn't promise delivery on time if you order really late, but the time frame for online shopping shouldn't be "whenever we feel like sending it" either. Bah humbug.
Re:This site annoys me a little
on
Dumb Laws
·
· Score: 1
I kinda agreed. I went there very prepared to be amused and since I know that the Netherlands (where I live) has a plethora of strange and outdated laws, I went directly there. And instead of any of the good ones, they picked on the fact that it's semi-legal to smoke pot and that prostitution is legal as long as you pay taxes. Those would be two of the laws I find eminently sensible.
I have to say that it's pretty disappointing to see all the "why is this here?" postage. Don't like it? I suggest you skip it.
We aren't all fascinated by the same topics, nor are we all the same kind of nerd-- Madeline Kahn, IMO, is far more of a nerd topic than Star Wars which matters to me not at all.
The reason I like Slashdot is the idea I get that the editors are real people with real people's interests that don't always intersect with mine. What was that stoopid post with "not fitting our geek agenda" all about?
Slashdot Mirror
On the other hand, they still are a giant business. They do flexibility and open source because they think flexibility and open source work-- it's a business model and not a philosophy. Companies this big don't have philosophies, no matter how many True Believers they have on staff.
I'm sorry. I repeat, 'what?'.
I assure you that lesbian women are definitely women. Also, lesbians were raised on this planet and in this culture so generally they were socialized in the same way as other members of their socio-economic background. Does sexuality play a part in personality? Definitely! Are all straight people the same? Nope. Are all gay people the same? Also nope. What would that make bisexuals anyhow?
Can you support your assertion that it is sexuality (as opposed to gender) that's the primary difference between men and women? It's funny. I've never seen that particular study. (Why do technical people insist on technical specificity about computers, but toss around generalizations in every other field?)
By the way, I don't have to be homosexual to disagree with you. I'm straight. But a lot of my close friends are gay and-- trust me-- they're pretty representative of their gender as whole.
Sigh.
These are things that could have been clarified from the beginning. Money makes people do really weird things, even good friends. Get it in writing from the top.
I'll go further. It makes me *sick* to hear people in this forum excusing exclusivity or making the point that someone else doesn't belong in this group, or doesn't belong in this community. Reading that kind of sh*t about Katz annoys me (even when his articles annoy me) and makes me wonder where these people went to high school. I got involved in computers in the first place because it was one of the few places I could get away from the constant hysterical insistence that you fit in and be part of a group and follow the program. What's that rhetoric doing here? You have to be a non-conformist just like me? D'oh!
And honesty does *not* equal rudeness (to return to your post). I'm not saying that that's the equation you're making, but I think a lot of people do. I don't know how many times I've seen someone be breathtakingly mean in these forums and when called on it defend themselves by saying that they were "just being honest". I said it yesterday as well-- it's as though nice were seen as the opposite of honest-- but the truth is, the opposite is just as often the case.
I repeat: "feh".
With any sub-group, theres usually originally a fairly homogenous community. By the fact that someone was involved with Linux, you could make certain assumptions about that persons interests or concerns. Those assumptions werent always true, but they provided a workable basis.
Now that Linux has so much more money involved, you cant assume anything about somebodys involvement. The community has become like a small town suddenly faced with the need for burglar alarms and locks on the front door. Its not fun. Your neighbor used to be able to come over and walk right in. But improved transportation and a suddenly diverse population make that no longer an option. It doesnt feel nice to have to take these preventative measures, but they are (sadly) necessary.
If Linus loses control of the trademark, it doesnt mean that it will be uncontrolled. It probably would just mean that it was controlled by the people with the biggest marketing budgets who could shout down the other people in the conversation. While Im sorry that this sort of legal business is necessary, Im glad that its being handled firmly.
You mentioned the Titanic, but the Hindenberg is probably more appropriate as a comparison, since we're probably talking flameball rather than iceberg bait.
We need a good civilian casualty in space so that we can all have a national debate about 'what is a hero' (a la Christa McAuliffe) although it should be a lot funnier when the casualties are silicon valley zillionaires instead of saintly kindergarten teachers.
If you are seriously considering doing this and the amount of money is significant enough, I would go to a good landshark and get the situation evaluated. There's a difference between non-qualifying options and ISOs and the tax laws are complicated and definitely *not* user friendly. (Aside-- why can't the tax office get a user interface design overhaul?). You're goign to need to know lots of things like the grant value, the market value, the vesting time, etc.
You could start with some of Philip K. Dicks essays on the nature of reality (particularly around his VALIS idea) and talk about the ideas in philosophy and religion to which they connect.
Dick could lead you into science fiction, cyberpunk, and national anxiety about control.
Bring in other films like Existenz and talk about self-reference in video games like Nomad Soul.
Heck, Id take the class.
Further, I think it's borderline really weird to put children in the same category as oppressed groups comprised of adults. It seems like a category mistake of a fairly large order.
The point where you're a kid versus when you're a grown-up seems to me to be a moving target, and has only something to do with grace under pressure or adversity. I grew up in a dying farm town with a lot of damn poor people, and for every kid who faced hard times with maturity, there was some poor 15 year old girl making a living giving blow jobs in the trailer behind the local bar.
*You* were mature. I tend to think that I was mature, but I don't think that kids need to be doing all the things that adults are doing at the same time. The lines are fuzzy. There are some 12 year olds who are more mature than most grownups, but that's the exception rather than the rule. And waiting a few years for some privileges never killed anyone.
This said, I'm not supporting black list censorware for use in any place-- particularly for teenagers. The lists themselves are usually stupidly written and most of the writers can't seem to resist the temptation to include politics. If schools don't want kids looking at porn online (and I can see that they don't) then there's nothing to replace some good 'ol supervision. Review logs if you must and deal with each case one by one.
I *can* see the use of white lists when you had Internet access for any but the very youngest, but then we're discussing equal opportunity censorship, which is somehow less offensive to me than blacklists.
However, I remember all too well when I graduated from college in the late 80s when no jobs were to be had and all I could find was a job as a temp employee. Companies regularly hired people as these so-called temp to perm positions where they essentially hired you through a temp agency with the promise that youd be made a permanent employee after the trial period. The trial periods were regularly extended and extended without any appeal possible on the behalf of the worker. It got to the point where most of us had been working for a year or more for all intents and purposes as permanent employees, only we had no health insurance, no benefits, no nothing. Its a horrible position to be in, particularly if you arent making enough to save for the eventuality of being let go without warning.
I dont have enough information about the complaintents to really judge, but from what I understand these are not people who chose a free-wheeling high-income contractor lifestyle, these are people who have not had the option to be permanent employees extended to them.
Temp employees should be temp employees, and if youre using somebody like a permanent employee, they should be really legally hired (if they should so choose).
One big reason they want it is release schedules. They're releasing in the theaters (for instance) in Europe much later than in the US, and using what they learn in the US to market the thing. The large high-quality films people will go see in the theater regardless, but if you can get the stinkers on DVD before they hit the theater, people won't go to the theater. So the release scheduling would also have to be changed. Hollywood uses foreign releases as a way to make a profit on even the most abysmal films.
Another reason is that it's very profitable to sell exclusive release rights into foreign markets. Something not possible without regional lockout.
What's nuts is that they won't realize when they're beat, and are trying to use lawyers to sit on the cork and keep the genie in the bottle. Now would be the time for them to think about alternatives rather than lawsuits.
Shrug.
So, the question is; How do we inform computer illiterate managers that the Web is a collaberative community of standards, rather than a dictatorship governed by high school bully tactics?
My indirect reply:
I have the doubtful good fortune of being one of the people whose job it is to translate between the wishes of managers and the work of development staff. I'm the one who either has to persuade the managers that what they said is a really bad idea and shouldn't be passed on, or I have to take that message and go to the developers and try to negotiate a solution that is both possible and accomplishes what they want.
I run into the situation that you're describing a lot-- particularly with cross-browser and standards issues-- and I've won a lot of those battles on the behalf of open (at least relatively open) standards-- but I think we need to look at how you're framing your question here.
Managers are illiterate about computers. Often about Internet. Very true. They do, however, understand their own business. You need to ask them to care about things like usability across multiple platforms and open standards because, and only because, it impacts their business. If you talk to them about community standards and collaboration and Internet history their eyes are going to glaze over and roll back in their heads. And why shouldn't they? Do you care about every issue in every field of every portion of life that impacts your core business? Would you stand around wanting to debate the relative merits of--oh, I don't know-- plastic formation methods just because your keyboard is made of plastic? No. (Unless you're hopelessly eclectic) You'd want to know what difference it makes to you and whether you should care about it in buying keyboards.
Managers are precisely the same. If you tell them that they should make their website accessible to all browsers because it isn't fair or violates good design standards or whatever, that's going to mean nothing to them. If you take the same situation and use arguments relating the issue to their website, however, that will (generally) sink in. For instance, I frequently discuss how unstable the browser market in general is and how features can differ from even one version of a browser to the next-- so some cool proprietary gimmick they want to use may not be implemented in the next. That leads to the inevitable question. "Surely there are safe features?" I then talk about standards and their purpose.
Generally there's a problem because they've got some home-grown genious working for them who learned how to build web pages with Front Page and couldn't write good code if his life depended on it and is in love with some plug-in dependent navigation element. He or the boss will object that it's 'too difficult' to write code that will work everywhere. I then will sit down with the manager and do the cost figures with them about what it would cost in time and manpower to do it properly now versus what it would cost them to redo completely should their mistakes this time make it necessary. That comparison generally hits home rather close to where it really hurts.
Above all, if you want to communicate good practice to management and non-IT people in general, be patient, try to understand their point of view of the matter, and don't assume they're stupid people just because they're stupid about computers.
Gee, this was really long...
I ordered a digital camera for my father at the end of November. They told me it was in stock. I even phoned especially to make sure there would be no problem. No problem, they told me, it'll be going out by tommorrow. I went on vacation. When I came back, one week before Christmas, I went to check on my order status and saw it was now listed as "Backordered".
It still (December 26) hasn't been shipped and they claim Canon refuses to tell them when it's coming in. Every person I call seems to have a different story. This is a major e-commerce site we're discussing and as far as I can tell, they hire mostly the mentally challenged to answer their damned support phones. (I'd like to note that they're still listing the camera on their site even though they haven't had one in stock for more than four weeks.)
All the same, it's a lot easier for me to explain to my Dad that he doesn't have a gift under the tree then it is for someone to explain it to a kid. People who got shafted by Toys R Us didn't wait until late to order-- many of them were ordering on the 9th and still didn't get their packages.
Perhaps merchants shouldn't promise delivery on time if you order really late, but the time frame for online shopping shouldn't be "whenever we feel like sending it" either.
Bah humbug.
Except, of course, for those of us who ordered well into the range of ontime and whose gifts still haven't arrived. I ordered a digital camera for my father at the end of November. They told me it was in stock. I even phoned especially to make sure there would be no problem. No problem, they told me, it'll be going out by tommorrow. I went on vacation. When I came back, one week before Christmas, I went to check on my order status and saw it was now listed as "Backordered". It still (December 26) hasn't been shipped and they claim Canon refuses to tell them when it's coming in. Every person I call seems to have a different story. This is a major e-commerce site we're discussing and as far as I can tell, they hire mostly the mentally challenged to answer their damned support phones. (I'd like to note that they're still listing the camera on their site even though they haven't had one in stock for more than four weeks.) All the same, it's a lot easier for me to explain to my Dad that he doesn't have a gift under the tree then it is for someone to explain it to a kid. People who got shafted by Toys R Us didn't wait until late to order-- many of them were ordering on the 9th and still didn't get their packages. Perhaps merchants shouldn't promise delivery on time if you order really late, but the time frame for online shopping shouldn't be "whenever we feel like sending it" either. Bah humbug.
Perhaps I'm just way too literal these days.
We aren't all fascinated by the same topics, nor are we all the same kind of nerd-- Madeline Kahn, IMO, is far more of a nerd topic than Star Wars which matters to me not at all.
The reason I like Slashdot is the idea I get that the editors are real people with real people's interests that don't always intersect with mine. What was that stoopid post with "not fitting our geek agenda" all about?
Sheesh.
Boojum_UC