I believe I found the reason my star shoot post wouldn't load.
The picture of the tripod (shot with phone) showed as on its side in Typepad (90 deg anti-clockwise to how shot). It appears normal in Windows Explorer.
So, I tried to use the Typepad tools to rotate it so it appears in correct orientation:
if I didn't try to fix the orientation 'publish' worked. If I adjusted the orientation in Typepad it would not publish.
weird.
some programmer somewhere should be smacked, hard.
I blog on two web site.
On one, I have posted several discussions, quizzes and replies in April.
On the other I have posted several discussions and comments in April
In one, many people comment on my posts and even "like" some of them.
In the other, only I comment on my posts (or anyone's posts).
Perhaps I do not need two blogs.
I just thought I should clarify for those who read the daily mails why there has been a slight change to the displayed scores.
Paul remains the top blogger in terms of number of blogs, number of words, number of comments and number of images. This is after all his baby and it is growing into a Google resource of Climate Science propaganda, war game review and meaningless propaganda (after the initial week) on EDEE. (No complaints - it is our meaningless propaganda, and that means something.)
Talking of meaningless propaganda, the observant may note that the daily score card seems to be suggesting that a Novus Homus is more deserving of credit. The situation is comparable to that of Ancient Rome. The Patricians did all the hard work in founding the early Republic and then quite rightly were entitled to rest on their laurels. When Novus Homo, like Cato the Elder pictured on the right, arrived and reformed, legislated, prosecuted, won wars and generally made Rome a better place, the patricians decided that the Roman populace were fickle for getting excited about the new and forgetting the past.
Alas the blog score is the same - fickle! Paul has posted most of the big articles in this blog, but many of the those posts are now over a year old, so no longer make the score. But that means nothing - let Paul rest on his laurels and let the young and energetic ones take over the mantle of top blogger in the last twelve months. The future is uncertain - only the past has credibility!
Because boys will be boys. Paul and I can co-operate on nothing without some way of knowing who is the top dog at any point of time.
I always thought that quote was from Chairman Mao, but the internet is an amazing tool, so I can benefit from the researches of others. One clever bunny found the quote in a Teddy Roosevelt letter, and no other references. He conjectures that "The West African proverb" is like us saying "Confucius say" these days, so Teddy heard it somewhere and wanted to requote it and give it authenticity. It appears to have achieved "meme" status in the pre-meme world, so I just have to include this book cover as I am a
fan on Beagles, and probably Peanuts too, although I was a bit on the young side. I did read several as a pre teen in French-speaking Belgium when rationed to one English book a month.
But the meaning is simple. If you are fortunate enough to have a decent stick, don't brandish it or scream with rage or whine with frustration. Just make sure that your point is understood and the listeners see what is in your hand and then wait for the penny to drop.
I think that was Luke's mistake when he confronted Jabba the Hutt. He definitely spoke softly but had no obvious stick. His claim to be a Jedi convinced no one - I'm sure noone in the audience believed him at the time either. As a result, he made a rescue mission much more dangerous than it needed to be, and perhaps even destroyed a potential resource for the rebellion. I am sure a supportive Hutt could make a userful distraction to an Empire fretting on the location of a rebel fleet.
The post prior to this titled "Waiting for a turn of EEDE" contains 8 references to one specific topic. The "2007 + 7 = Epic Fail" post has another 4 on the same topic. Both were posted in the month of September 2014. The agreement from the 22 July 2014 states that Paul and I are entitled to one post on Climate Change per month and one single reference to climate change in other blogs. So I kindly request that one of the posts "Waiting for a turn of EEDE" or "2007 + 7 = Epic Fail" be reduced to a single reference, or embargoed to 1 October 2014.
Honestly, I should be sending an EEDE turn, but I have a cunning plan that cannot fail, milord. I think I can knock this up in about an hour: an email tool that create an web post from a reference to another article and a start and an end point.
For example, suppose I type "Science News" into Google and I see "Algae evolves to keep up ...", I could send an email to [email protected]. Listening on this email would be a Web 2.0 script. It would first validate that the sender was a registered poster (we would not want spam appearing in the blog, now would we), it would then look for the terms
Start German Scientists
End we previously thought", he said.Link http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2014/09/15/4087744.htm
The script, written in Python of course would download the link, strip out everything before and after the "start" and "end" terms and email the body and images to the blog. This way we would avoid all the advertising and links but get some quality blogs on top topics. It would then be up to me to log on and fix the category. I believe I could effect 25 posts in an hour (a post every 4 minutes) using this tool. I have a bit of time on Wednesday night, so I plan to set a timer for 30 minutes and see if I can get 12+ posts done in that time.
I note that this article has only one reference to the topic that Paul reference 12 times in two articles this month. As a further note, I am pleased to see the dearth of Nazi references despite this month being devoted to Vladimir Putin and Lord Monckton.
With the new Prestags scoring system, both Paul and I have realised the importance of pictures and being outrageous. Outrageous is quite easy for both of us, and probably unnecessary as, I suggest, there is some mutual politeness in commenting on each other blogs (and about a 0.003% change Thygs will comment, equivalent to the proportion of peer review publications that suggest that Anthopogenic Climate Change is a myth).
Pictures are the key both Paul and I are pushing to get a decent score on this blog. I find getting good pictures quite tricky. Sometimes I have to play 40 minutes of EEDE to get two. Another time I had to listen to 50 minutes of Paul Reiter to get one, and in the case of my "Who is the more foolish" review, I had to wade through hundreds of Euan Macgregor images to get a few pensive Alec Guinesses. My Civ 5 articles cost 39 hours of effort!
Paul's tactic is far more efficient. He recycles the images of others, perhaps with a quick thought bubble or Swastika, to accentuate. Even more galling is that there is no attribution. Should you accept a score for the work of others? Consider the following:
| Daily Mirror | Paul |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I acknowledge the Time cover represents an original contribution. However, given the text was a rip off of the Daily Mirror is represents small effort and zero attribution for 10 blog points
| My Blog on Lord Monckton | Paul |
|---|---|
A serious contribution or a four point snatch?
| My Blog on EEDE | Paul |
|---|---|
You have to go back almost a year to see any maps of Paul's conquests. The efforts of others for a cynical 3 points.
| Official Beyond Earth Web Site | Paul |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Seriously. Say something, anything. At least say "Yippee! Five more blog points!"
I do like Paul's last contribution. It is clever, original and shows the true impact of ignoring science. I think it is worth the 6 points, but I would like to see a bit of clever text that almost seems to say what may not be said, but subtlely changes tack at the last moment.
I've had a few clean runs of the new Prestags Report. It looks pretty correct, although Paul still seems to lead in every category. It will start arriving from tomorrow morning a few minutes before the old one. I welcome feedback and bug reports, as I have not done much data validation.
As a quick reminder, the new score is 3 pts per blog + 1 for every hunderd words (rounded down) + 1 for every image + 1 for every comment on it that you did not make. (Note: Leader22 is you!)
While I was testing the new report, I noticed it did not read past page 9. With horror I found this problem was also with the old report and that I had fallen for one of the oldest IT faults in the book: "9" > "10". (Your brain says, "No, 9 is always less than 10". But when you store strings of characters in a computer, and you find two links, one is http://www.prestags.com/pages/9/ and the other to http://www.prestags.com/pages/10/, the computer says the two URLs are the same up to the first digit and 9 comes after 1 so 9 must be the last page and we stop there.) This means that since about March, the post count has not increased. Paul should have noticed. I actual blame Joe Hockey for distracting us with his budget flagellation. Anyway, I fixed the old report so you can expect the numbers to nearly double tomorrow morning. (I fear that every article since about November last year will get "rediscovered" too. It'll be a one off.
There was a discussion I meant to have on the Boys Weekend: Do we want to make any changes to this daily report? Do we like the scoring system? Should a new metric be added. Does Joe Hockey get enough credit? Should it be Vlad's fault if there are too many posts on a day, or Lord Monckton's? Should posts more than 12 months old be dropped from the score?
In particular, the Empire score refers to a game we started several years ago and is now meaningless. Should I remove it?
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
J.R.R. Tolkien: The Fall of Arthur
This book is recommended by Thygocanberra. I have a copy and will read with interest.
J.R.R. Tolkien: The Lord of the Rings
What can I say. My favourite book. I think I have at least four different editions.
R. G. Grant: Battle: A Visual Journey Through 5,000 Years of Combat
This is the dream book for wargamers. Literally hundreds of battles. Over 350 pages of full colour illustrations. I cannot recommend it highly enough.
John Gibson Warry: Warfare in the Classical World: An Illustrated Encyclopedia of Weapons, Warriors, and Warfare in the Ancient Civilizations of Greece and Rome
We all have a wonderful book with fantastic illustrations, that amazed us in childhood, and followed us to our grown up bookshelf. This is one of those books. (*****)
Antony Beevor: Stalingrad: The Fateful Siege: 1942-1943
In school we were taught such an English view of World War II. Now I have discovered the epic battles on the Eastern Front, truly gargantuan conflicts. This book is a great introduction to the Eastern Front and a brilliant history book. (*****)
Recent Comments