Impolite Company Is Alive

My political blog, Impolite Company, is open for business. There’s not much there yet, but that soon will change.

It’s been a while since I started a new WordPress blog. There’s a big difference between starting a basic blog and one that has those features and capabilities I consider necessary. Domain names, styles, comments, and feeds, oh my! That sounds like a topic for another post.

In the mean time, drop on by Impolite Company, leave a comment, subscribe to the feed, and prepare to join in the discussion. And for those of you who don’t like politics, relax in the knowledge that I won’t write politics here on blogan.net.

If you liked this post, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Additional info on subscribing can be found here. Thanks for visiting!

How An Engineer Folds A T-Shirt

Cardboard? Cardboard?!

A true engineer would use materials appropriate for the task at hand. I’m thinking something rigid for durability but not slippery and no loose fibers to transfer to the t-shirt.

This needs to be modified for dress shirts. Dress shirts are longer so it would need two flaps that fold up to fold the shirt in thirds in both directions.

___
Hat tip. Jeff Moriarty.

The Political Blog

Recently, I committed to quit writing about partisan politics on blogan.net. I must admit, I’m not sure how successful I’ve been. First a couple of points, and then my solution.

  • I used to excuse writing about politics because I thought “you get what you get and you don’t throw a fit.” You read my blog — you get me. And not just a part of me, but my stream of thought on various topics. I guess that’s valid, but it’s also a good way to limit readership. Some people might want to read about technology or WordPress or even religion, but be completely turned off by my political rants. I know I’ve unsubscribed from some blogs, FriendFeeds, and Twitter streams because of their political views. My blood pressure thanks me. I assume others have done the same to me.
  • I like writing about politics. Although I may not know much on a topic (I still don’t understand the bailout debacle) I like to write what I’m thinking and get a response.

The solution is simple: start another blog and write about politics there. Those who want to read my political rants could go there. The rest of you who don’t care about my politics don’t have to read it.

Now all that’s left is to determine exactly how to implement the blog. Stay tuned…

Quote of the Day — House of Representatives Website

The House of Representatives is currently experiencing an extraordinarily high amount of e-mail traffic. The Write Your Representative function is therefore intermittently available. While we realize communicating to your Members of Congress is critical, we suggest attempting to do so at a later time, when demand is not so high. System engineers are working to resolve this issue and we appreciate your patience. —House of Representatives Website

Looks like the House didn’t get the message…

___
Hat tip. Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Self Censorship Online

Gary Walter asks about self censorship — do we trade off authenticity for safety?

I gave my opinion in his comments, but because it ended up being so long, I’m reposting here (with minor modifications):

Gary, we all self-censor. People ask us for an opinion about clothing or hair style and want affirmation. They don’t want to hear that it makes them look fat or old. So we don’t tell them. We say it makes them great or young or vibrant or whatever. We’re protecting their feelings and letting them know they’re loved.

Other times we self-censor because we don’t want to admit that we’re not perfect, that we’re still figuring things out, or that we hold opinions or do things that others might consider unacceptable. This self-censorship is not about protecting others, it’s about protecting ourselves. It’s more insidious because we still justify that we’re protecting others from the conflict that might occur. But we’re just fooling ourselves.

Does that make it wrong to self-censor? I don’t think so. I don’t have to bare every thought or impulse or action just because I have a blog and a twitter account. Part of this journey we call life is learning how and when to disclose to others, who we can and should trust.

I’m not “authentic” enough to tweet that my wife and I had a fight on the way to church and then paste on smiles to shake hands and say “fine” when asked how I am. Maybe that’s part of what’s wrong with church. We need to be more open and honest about our true condition. Yet it’s hard. Those who volunteer at church, even playing the piano, are expected to meet certain standards (at least in some eyes) and is authenticity really the battle we want to fight? I’m not there yet and may never be. I rationalize that this problem is as much with the church as with myself, but am only half convinced.

With social networking, authenticity is even more difficult, or maybe it’s easier. Most of us have never met you, yet feel like we know you from your blog posts and tweets. We come to this relationship with no expectations other than that you entertain us or make us think once in a while. It’s working.

It’s when the “in real life” and “virtual” lives cross paths that difficulties arise. Those in real life don’t understand how or why we bare our lives online. It rocks their paradigm in ways they don’t understand. How dare you admit that or hang out with those people or do that?

It’s a personal decision. What do you get from online sharing? Is it a self-discovery process that could just as well be done with a private diary? Is it an ego trip where you fool yourself into thinking that the world is interested when you get your drink and piece of free fruit from the cafeteria? Or is it a way of making friends in a new world and you’d no more censor yourself with us than you would with your friends in real life? After all, why would we be authentic with you if you’re not willing to do so with us?

Maybe the real question is why would you be willing to share something online that you wouldn’t share in person?

Questions only you can answer. Good luck! And I’m looking forward to reading your answers online. ;-)

What do you think? What are you not willing to share online and why not?

Update. Check out the comments on Gary’s post. Gary responds to my comment and at least a couple others.

Update 2. Gary promotes his comment response to a new post and embeds an interview with on StrangeLove covering the topic.

Stop The Bailout

I’m not an economist nor do I play one on TV. I offer no expert opinion on the credit crunch. All I know is what I see in congress.

In times of true national crisis, congress puts aside party politics and does what’s right for the country. In times of crisis, congress is filled with patriots, not politicians.

And congress, with economic advisers on staff who know stuff, is not acting as if we’re in a national crisis. Rather than approve the bailout bill last Friday, the House or Representatives postured and pontificated and pointed fingers and ultimately voted no. Pundits posited the proposal was unpopular. Public opinion be damned — in serious times congress acts serious, and yet it didn’t. These must not be serious times.

This week, I see more political posturing. I see piles of pork. I see tons of tax cuts.

If a bill’s not worth passing without “incentives,” it’s not worth passing at all. Vote it down!

Update. It’s easy to contact your representative. There’s a simple official web site. It takes only a couple of minutes and you don’t have to be eloquent to get your opinion heard and counted.

Update 2. It’s now too late. The House passed the bailout package.

Tag 5 To Vote

I don’t normally participate in blog memes, but this one’s important. If you want to vote, you need to register. Time is running out.

I’m tagging the following five people:

You guys know what to do. Register — and pass it on.

___
Hat tip: Matt Cutts.

House Votes Against Bailout

I was curious to hear Nancy Pelosi’s speech, so here it is.

The vote by party was:

  • Democrats: 140 for, 95 against
  • Republicans: 65 for, 133 against

There’s enough blame (or credit) to go around. Let’s just hope those predicting dire consequences are wrong.

___

Hat tip. Stephen Bainbridge.

Quote of the Day — Stephen M. Nipper

My 2nd grader will prob fail his Sci test tomorrow when he lists “Congressmen” as a type of invertebrate. Not a good day to study with Dad. —Stephen M. Nipper.

DRM Sux, Again…

Another example of Digital Rights Management screwing the paying customer.

At least Wal*Mart is giving a little warning and no longer sells DRM-crippled music.