text:
Reading Rage Tuesday: When authors attack book bloggers kamikaze-style.
"You don't owe me anything,
You don't want this sympathy,
Don't you waste your breath;
Monty, this seems strange to me."
–"Monty Got a Raw Deal"
The Reading Rage is back, y'all. Did you miss ranty me?
I actually hadn't planned on writing a reading rage until next week, but some dramz went down over the weekend and I wanted to blog about it. I followed a link from Twitter to the Hey Dead Guy blog responding to an open letter written by author Elly Zupko. In her post, Ms. Zupko put forth a zomgcrazy idea to book bloggers: Hey, book bloggers, since YOU are independent and self-published, and self-published authors are also independent and self-published, maybe you should reconsider policies that state that you don't accept pitches from self-published book bloggers! Le gasp! If only book bloggers had thought of that before!
Ms. Zupko went on to discuss why book bloggers should open their doors to self-published authors, but she did so in an admonishing tone. This? Is not a good way to persuade anybody, even if you're trying to be logical about it. The following was one of the most hotly contested passages in the post:
That you would close your hard-earned doors to people who have the same entrepreneurial spirit as you is at best disappointing. At worst, it's duplicitous and condescending. You chose to go the non-traditional route. So why do you only review the same books the traditional reviewers are looking at?
She also tried to turn the tables on book bloggers, asking us where we would be if publishers decided to stop sending us books. (My guess: we'd be in the same boat that most book bloggers and readers are already in, in that we'd still be fine because books are widely available in libraries and bookstores.) The post, in my opinion, was poorly argued overall; there are great responses at Hey Dead Guy and Caveat Lector, so I'm not going to re-argue it here.
Ms. Zupko, having been inundated with comments and trackbacks arguing her points, replied with another post both apologizing for and defending her original post (which really kind of reads, to me, as "I don't really think I was wrong, but since I want you to review my book, I'm totally sorry… can this go away now?"). She clearly doesn't understand some of the rebuttals to her earlier post, such as when she tries to re-emphasize that, even though authors are trying to sell their work and book bloggers aren't, we're both "not in it for the money"–which misses the point entirely about profit motive. She also says things like, "So while it seems like [book bloggers] are being indiscriminately strafed by indie authors, that's not the case for a lot of us [authors pitching books]." Many, if not most, book bloggers would disagree . . . and in any case, how would she know what we experience? Her concessions didn't read as sincere to me. The post read as an attempt at damage control.
Most rankling about her "apology" post was the assertion that book bloggers have "all of the power" and that we have a "power/peon" mentality instead of an "we're all in this together" mentality; according to her, we were using our position of power to tell her to "sit down and shut up" when we responded to her claims. I found that insulting, but it makes a lot of sense as to why Ms. Zupko wrote such an admonishing post in the first place. I feel gross about the implication that we're on a power trip. We don't accept books because we want to be kingmakers or reject books to give them a death sentence; most of us, on our own, we don't even have the ability to launch a book out of obscurity all by our lonesome. There's really no scenario where we're lounging around on our nonexistent thrones, knighting some authors and beheading others–nor is that the intention of any of the book bloggers that I know. We choose the books we want to read and review because we're hustling our asses off to write good content for the people who read our blogs. If we think a book would make good content, we choose it. A rejection isn't a show of power; it's a message that the book probably won't be agreeable to the collective audience of the blog, or that the blogger herself wouldn't be inclined to read and write a favorable review of the work. The smart thing to do is move on and find the ones that will.
I think what happened here was that Ms. Zupko doesn't really understand marketing herself to book bloggers; this isn't uncommon in the writing community. She doesn't understand how book blogging works or our motivations for putting out content; she also doesn't understand that book bloggers aren't beholden to the industry any more than the average consumer. She even admitted that she didn't understand how deep the issue of not accepting self-published authors goes ("It's eye-opening to me to see so many bloggers having been burned by their personal interactions with self-pubbed authors. I'm really shocked and dismayed at that lack of professionalism and couth"). Yet, she still insisted that her criticisms were accurate. It's her prerogative to put her opinion out there, of course, but Ms. Zupko had an objective: to try to get more bloggers to review self-published books, such as her own. I think we can safely say that this goal was not achieved, and she may have damaged her chances of getting onto some blogs in the process.
What could Elly Zupko have done differently to get her point across and possibly reach her goal? I can think of a number of things. The first thing that she might have done would be to e-mail a few blogs that would have been likely candidates for her book if they accepted self-published works and ask (politely) why they have that policy. She would have discovered before she wrote her post that many self-published authors don't take the time and care that she claims to have taken with her own pitches, something that she admitted that she didn't know until she started getting responses.
The next thing that she could have done, if she still wanted to write the post, was frame it in the positive. Her post chided us; the post read to a lot of us as "you guys are hypocrites for not accepting self-published authors since you are also independent. You're just like us, so why are you kowtowing to traditionally published authors?" Even if that is how she feels, the reaction from book bloggers was less-than-great when she chose to take this avenue. It would be better to sell bloggers on reviewing self-published work by offering reasons that it could benefit their work as a blogger and their blog audiences; book bloggers who have "no self-published authors, please" already know why they don't want to get those submissions, and she didn't really offer any enticing reasons to change their minds besides "hey, this is something you should be doing." But why?
Any good salesperson would recognize where she went wrong there: she was trying to convince us, as a community, to do something she wanted, rather than selling us on why we should want it. Being able to effectively sell bloggers on changing their policies loops back to understanding why bloggers write and why they choose the works that they do. As SQT said in the comments of Ms. Zupko's original post, "We're not being obstinate for no reason. We've learned from experience". Taking this experience lightly doesn't help form a good counterargument.
Finally, when she had a chance to smooth things over, Ms. Zupko stuck to her guns. In some situations, sticking to one's guns is a good thing; in this case, though, Ms. Zupko wrote her post from the point of view of some incorrect assumptions about book bloggers and why they don't accept self-published work. She then continued to defend those ideas instead of listening to the people who were trying to explain (albeit a bit angrily at times–but when you call people "duplicitous and condescending," you have to expect an angry response) why, in fact, they should not have to change their policies, or why that wouldn't be in their best interest. Her non-apology did nothing to smooth over her earlier post and, in fact, made things worse in my opinion.
I think everyone in the business of self-promotion can learn from this incident. What do you think about all this, fellow book bloggers? If you read Ms. Zupko's post, how did you feel about it? Readers of book blogs, would you rather that bloggers rescind their policies about not accepting self-published works, or do you want the bloggers you follow to keep doing what they already do? If you don't care about any of this, tell me about the latest book you read. Leave it all in the comments!
120 thoughts on "Reading Rage Tuesday: When authors attack book bloggers kamikaze-style."
"You won't play with me because you are all just big meanies who will die alone. With no books." Sounds like the best marketing plan ever. I wonder why she doesn't have an agent.
Sigh. I was going to stay out of the fray but this rankles. All I can can say is Wow, really ? I get what she's going for – as a self-pubbed author you're kind of the red-headed stepchild of the publishing industry (sorry any red-headed stepchildren out there, no offense) but this is embarrassing. Bad strategy to start, but bad manners as well – and it brings the rest of us down a notch by association. I may not like some bloggers' policies of not looking at self-pubbed books but I understand it. Like Books I Done Read says, it's your sandbox. For the vast majority of you it's for the love of it, not the money. So Elly, grow up, strap on a pair and move on.
Sadly, it sort of reinforces why many bloggers won't look at self-pubbed books…and even small press books, in many cases. There's just too many people who've gone that route who Don't Get It, and/or have an entitlement mentality. They send out mass email blasts pitching their book to blogs that don't read that genre, or that aren't open for submissions, or whatever, and then get cross – or even nasty – when they're declined, because somehow, they figure the world owes them something.
It's a pity, because there are some gems out there that are being tarred with the same brush.
You're exactly right–I decided to accept NO books for review because I was put off by this kind of crap. I read for pleasure, there's just not enough time in the day not to, and I'm uncomfortable by the solicitations. Especially because so many new authors seem to feel it's ok to lash out at book bloggers who blog for fun.
I respect your decision, Mandy, still it's too bad. I would hope most new authors play very nicely with others and can be permitted to wander about the internet talking to strangers without adult supervision. Am I naive ? Do bloggers really get inundated with verbal lashings ? I truly hope not. It's unfortunate when the occasional passive-aggressive spoils it for the rest of us. And if I may, 'solicitation' sounds like an indictable offense. In fact, I'm pretty sure it is in most countries. I prefer the word 'request'. You blog for fun, we write for fun. There should be no harm in asking, and certainly no harm in you saying 'No'.
Thanks for the thoughtful response GGG.
"Any good salesperson would recognize where she went wrong there: she was trying to convince us, as a community, to do something she wanted, rather than selling us on why we should want it."
That right there is a GREAT point. Any time you want to pitch something to someone, sell them something, sell them ON something, or bring them around to your way of thinking, you need to show them the benefits to THEM. People are inherently selfish; show what your product/service/idea does to make their life easier or more fun, and you'll win them over.
Make them feel attacked? Nooooot gonna get the reaction you wanted.
Can you imagine if Ron Popiel had taken that route? First of all, we would never have "even makes julienne fries" as a way to make a list of sterling qualities even more sterling. And second, those late-night infomercials would be all about "Why aren't you buying my product, you assholes!" Sure, more entertaining for insomniacs, but would you actually own a whiz-o-matic kitchen utensil?
Without sounding too elitist (I hope), I would add, this is one of the huge tasks self-pubbed authors set themselves up for: PR and marketing. It's HARD. When there are roadblocks like "We don't review self-pubbed books" it's even HARDER. But if, for whatever reason, you choose not to go the traditional route to publishing your work, you either have to have serious PR savvy (some do) or hire someone who does (few can afford this). Either way, shouting at the system (as if it is one homogenous group of bloggers) is the wrong way to do it.
You've all covered the points so well I'm just gonna turn REM up a notch and bob my head.
Now, here's a rhyme that you can steal
Put this on your reel to reel
Mischief threw a rotten deal….
I don't like anybody who tries to make their point by first telling others how wrong and stupid they are. Especially when the catalyst for the argument is "No one is paying enough attention to me and I'm butthurt about it."
That said, I do kind of wish that more blogs reviewed a wider variety of books. There seems to be a definite leaning towards literary works in the book blogs that I've seen so far. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this…but they're not usually the type of books I read or am interested in. (Now, having said this, there are a few that I have *gotten* interested in because a book blog reviewed it, but this has so far only happened twice.) As such, I tend to skim over a lot of reviews, or not read them at all.
I like hearing about and supporting new authors and self-pubbed authors a lot. It's kind of my thing. But I also understand that sometimes, bloggers are afraid of shooting down someone's rising star with a bad review. My counter-argument would be there really isn't any such thing as bad publicity, especially not if the review is well composed. (Even if it is negative.)
So while I would love to see a wider variety of reviews in the community, I also understand that most book bloggers are doing this out of a sense of love for books and the blog community, not to make big bucks or to decide Who Lives and Who Dies. They're also not really beholden to their readers beyond providing content for them to choose from, and I certainly don't agree with anyone who tries to make them feel guilty for that.
Also, I may or may not have clicked on the link to this review just to see the picture of Captain Picard and Commander Riker. >.> <3
She actually addressed you as "Dear Sluts."? That is hilarious.
I'm somewhat torn on the issue. It's not as if being "professionally" published is an automatic indicator of quality. Fifty Shades of Grey was published by Random House, and I think we're all aware of the "professional" quality of that turd. Likewise, not every self-published author is self-published because of a lack of story-telling ability, or lack of writing ability, or mental instability.
I know that not everyone can or even wants to use traditional publishing channels, but from what I've seen, in my (admittedly limited) experience, is that most self-published books are riddled with errors. I finished one such book recently, and it was obvious the author didn't even have a second party read it. There were mistakes on every single page—threw instead of through, shinning instead of shining, waste instead of waist, incorrectly-used apostrophes… I could go on all day. These are all things that would have been caught by a professional editor.
Elly might be the exception to the rule and actually run spell-check on her books and let someone else who is literate read it over, but a blanket rule like this just makes sense for most book bloggers. Why should you have to take time away from reading and writing to let yourself be inundated with review requests by every Joe, Dick and Mary who can create a PDF? It's your blog, you have every right to choose what goes on it.
Erin Mitchell had it exactly right: "Many book bloggers choose not to review self-published books. That's their choice. Respect it and move on."
Hmm. I read Ms. Zupko's original post, and, for the first few paragraphs, she seemed to be on an ok track with her argument. She started off on a mostly positive note with statements like this: You are mavericks. You love to read and to help other readers find new books to love, and you didn't get hung up trying break into tough traditional markets. You chose to go it on your own. But more than that, you are entrepreneurial and multifaceted.
If only she'd continued on that track instead of swerving into more condescending, finger-wagging territory. Even in her reply to three of the earliest commenters (who were very diplomatic themselves), she had some good points — yeah, I can see how it would be frustrating to feel like one's book has a "scarlet letter of SP" on it before anyone's even read it.
But, like you say, the answer isn't to get all indignant and throw blanket scoldings at the book blogosphere. You have to find a way to show bloggers why your book is different from the ones that made them so skeptical about SP works in the first place.
How would you go about doing that? If the book blogger has stated "we don't review self-published fiction," I think it would be rude to treat it any differently than any other part of the guideline. If it says "we don't read historical fantasy," and I want them to review a historical fantasy novel, the answer isn't to try and convince them that hey, this is a really great historical fantasy, you'll love it. The answer is to find another person to pitch to.
Because honestly, nine times out of ten, when somebody makes a pitch based on, "I know it doesn't technically meet the guidelines, but this one is different!" well, no, it's not different.
The point is, you should treat the guidelines as ironclad. Which is why a rule like "we don't accept self-published books" is so frustrating: there really is such a huge variation in quality that some books that the blogger would truly love are going to get cut. That's unfortunate, but unavoidable. There really is enough crap out there (and enough authors who have an inflated sense of their own book's merits) that I can see the upsides of such a policy.
Yeah, the original post wasn't all that bad except for some of the (to me) missteps with word choice and faulty argument.
My policy never stated no self-pubbed, so I'm not one of the ones she is addressing. However, I just updated my policy because none of the self-pub authors follow it (publicists and publishers do 95% of the time). I get hit up to read absolutely all types of books when I am pretty clear that I don't read paranormal, fantasy, self-help, or business books. Plus, most of the self-pub authors who pitch to me have really horrid email etiquette. Like it or not, when you get a bunch of these, you paint that group with a pretty broad brush. Most authors do not good PR people make, but that's not my problem. When you self publish, you know these are things you have to do yourself. If an email is riddled with errors or is unprofessional, I'm not going to take that book on. Period. It is indicative of the book and possible future behavior.
I think a lot of people use "no self pub" as quality control and as a way to cut down on incoming emails. It's overwhelming. I work on my blog anywhere from 30+ hours a week for no pay. I do it because I want to, and I enjoy it. And the things that detract from that enjoyment, I remove.
I never wanted or attempted to be a reviewer for a mag or newspaper. I just wanted conversation about books. Through the massive machine that book blogging has become, that has changed. There are expectations & rules. I still do what I want. I know that the publishers/authors have different motives than I do, but I'm ok with that, and I attempt to talk about any book, whether it's an ARC, library book, or book I've bought. Doesn't matter to me, which is where her biggest argument fails. I blogged before I got review copies, and I'll continue to blog without them. It's my choice. I don't exist for authors. I don't exist for publishers. I exist for readers. My blog exists for me.
And lastly, I'd argue that without book bloggers, most self-pub authors would have virtually no exposure. Most of the big guns don't review these. Websites exist that focus on indie & self pub, but for the most part that's like placing a butterfly bandage on a gaping wound. There are so many self-published authors. So when whole blogs exist that focus on indie & self pub, I think it's a bit wrongheaded to indicate it's my or any other blogger's duty to provide a service to self-pub. Nope. Not buying it.
"I never wanted or attempted to be a reviewer for a mag or newspaper. I just wanted conversation about books. Through the massive machine that book blogging has become, that has changed. There are expectations & rules. I still do what I want. I know that the publishers/authors have different motives than I do, but I'm ok with that, and I attempt to talk about any book, whether it's an ARC, library book, or book I've bought. Doesn't matter to me, which is where her biggest argument fails. I blogged before I got review copies, and I'll continue to blog without them. It's my choice. I don't exist for authors. I don't exist for publishers. I exist for readers. My blog exists for me."
That paragraph right there says it all. I agree wholeheartedly.
And now I want to write a paranormal self-help business book. "Unleash Your Inner Werewolf in the Boardroom: Why you're just one gypsy curse away from making partner."
Not enough to write it, of course. If anyone wants to run with it, more power to you.
Now, THAT'S a self-help book I would buy!
It's none of Zupko's business why some of us choose not to review self-pubbed books. End of story.
However, if she must know, I choose not to review self-pubbed books for a few reasons. First and foremost, I have A BAZILLION books to read in my lifetime, and I must have a way of determining which books are worth the time and effort I put into them and which books aren't. Every reader has to do this, whether consciously or not. I choose not to read (most) self-pubbed books.
Secondly, with the exception of a few books written by a friend, I have had bad experiences trying to read self-pubbed works. My experience has been that they have too many typos for me to be comfortable with (and that just interrupts my reading flow and makes me stabby), and they don't sound or feel as polished in most cases. I personally can't handle that without getting ragey. There are plenty of folks out there who will read those books with relish and be able to overlook those things that I can't, and so let them do it and leave me out of it.
Third–and sj already brought this up in her first comment–if I don't like a self-pubbed book and I review it, I'm going to be honest about my feelings. I am going to bring up everything I didn't like about the book, including things like typos. An author who has gone through the process of hiring an editor and getting a deal with a publishing house is going to be making more money (I assume) than a self-pubbed author, and their sales will better handle someone like me saying I didn't like the book and telling folks that I don't recommend it. I really don't want to have to do that to someone who is taking it all on themselves and who's book sales would probably take a hurting because of it.
Just to address the last paragraph: Don't let the fear of hurting someone's sales. Most self-published books aren't earning more than beer money anyway, and those that are are going to get reviews elsewhere.
My policy (I've recently started reviewing self-published books exclusively) is that I only post reviews of things I like a lot. Maaaaaybe I keep the door open for books that I only kinda like, but might have a potential following. I'm not afraid of hurting anyone's sales. I just figure that if a book is bad, I'm not doing anyone any favors by telling people about it.
My standards are different for posting reviews on Amazon, because the people who see the review are very likely considering purchasing it. In that context, it's easy to see how a tough-but-fair review could help someone avoid regretting a purchase.
While I appreciated the flattery at the beginning of Zupko's post, I didn't feel like it was truly addressing me or the majority of book bloggers. I am not a maverick, thumbing my nose at the professional journalism routes of reviewing books. I am not a failed journalist. I'm just this girl who has always liked to read books and talk about them. Blogging is just a fun hobby that branches off from my real passion of reading.
Thus, for me, Zupko's post ultimately failed because she doesn't really understand book bloggers at all. Sure, there are some maverick book bloggers (Susie), but the majority do it for fun. This isn't a job, I'm not getting paid for it, and I'm certainly not going to put up with some bullshit from some Joe Schmo author because I don't want to read her book. For me, it's the equivalent of following me around at the bookstore, criticizing me because I'm checking out the latest Stephen King novel instead of Her Little Indie That Could.
Back off man! I do what I want!
As a suggestion, though, I really appreciate the authors who engage in blogging and get to know other bloggers. There are a few self-published authors I'm interested in reading simply based upon the engaging conversations I've had with them about other books. Get involved in the community, make connections on a non-intimidating level, and everyone wins. I'm terribly interested in reading Nicole Hamlett's self-published books (SJ's buddy) simply from what I have heard from SJ, and from what I have learned about her own reading interests, based off of Goodreads and her blogging comments.
It really is a shame that these types of riffs constantly seem to arise between book bloggers and new authors.
Hee, Little Indie That Could!
And, yeah, Nicole is super engaged on her blog AND her fb page, which I think is outside the norm, sadly.
You should probably shoot me an email about this Nicole person. Give me the deets, please.
Indeed. EssJay's talking about what a generally cool person Nicole is has made me want to check out her books. I know that 1. Because of EssJay they won't be typo orgies and 2. EssJay has generally good taste so 3. There is a good chance I might like Nicole's books even if they're not the kind of stuff I generally like to read. I'm willing to take a chance on Nicole because she has been wise in her choice of ambassadors.
Dooin' it rite!
I just almost blew Pepsi out of my nose at "Little Indie That Could." Hahaha!
I agree with what you said about connecting with people on social networks/blogs and building some form of connection–one of the self-pubbed books that I've really enjoyed came from someone who I had been chatting on Twitter with for quite some time. We had a mutual interest in books and when she wrote hers, I automatically agreed to proofread it for her, and review it (and it was really good).
I think this is a really interesting and thoughtful discussion of Elly Zupko's letter. I feel like I have a little bit of a different perspective as an author (although not self-pubbed) – full disclosure!
I think there's a good argument to be made for reviewing self-pubbed books. Not all, not even most, just the occasional one that catches your fancy and sounds good. If, 5 pages in, it's terrible, you can put it down (I am a compulsive reader so I know that can sometimes be hard). If not, keep reading. I go to book bloggers to figure out what to buy next when I'm out of my favorite authors, and I love to be the first one of my friends to recommend a series that then goes viral within my friend group. Maybe you can help me do that with some self-pubbed books.
I've seen a few comments that have indicated that bloggers don't want to be responsible for bad reviews of self-pubbed books. While I appreciate your kind-heartedness and I won't lie that my fingers tremble every time I click on a review of my book, authors ought to be able to handle it. Personally, I temporarily considered going the self-pub route as a "can I cut it?" test. Feedback at that point (and even now) is helpful – how do I make my second book better? Should I continue to pursue this profession? No "crushing your dreams" excuses. I want to know, and I'm an adult. Once I read a bad review, and after I curl into a fetal position and bawl my eyes out, I'm going to put my big-girl pants on and get on with my life.
No author should behave badly. And we should be able to work together well, especially since you're providing an amazing (and honest) service to not only us authors, but to the people we both care about: the readers.
I hope Miss Zupko is still reading these comments, because this is for her. Clearly, if you're biting the hand that feeds you, perhaps you have some things to learn about the publishing industry.
There's a reason that self-published authors have such a bad reputation in this community. The complaint with them is usually that their work is poorly edited, that their pitches are done badly, and even if their creative writing is good, their communication writing is awful. Traditionally published authors have an entire team of editors, marketers, cover designers, etc. working to turn their writing into a marketable product. Each member of this supporting team has a specific job to focus on, and they can do it much better than even an above average self-published author. The only way for a self-published author to truly succeed and succeed consistently is to learn how to perform every single job that an entire staff does at a traditional publishing company. Few people are that capable.
If I were an author, I would figure out how to get traditionally published. If you can't even sell your work to a publisher, what make you think you will sell to an audience?
I'm not saying this to crush anyone's dreams or kill their hope. Quite the opposite; I want authors to succeed! But you have to realize that publishing is a lot more than just writing, and if writing is your job, then you must learn how to do the business ends of the job as well.
I object, sir!
Objection the first: while the traditional publishers may know how to do their jobs, their jobs can be learned or outsourced. And while they may have assembled a crack team of twelve Marketing/Typesetting/CoverDesigning Avengers, that crack team is probably responsible for putting fifty books through the process. How much of their time are you going to get?
Take, for example, J.K. Rowling. She got twelve rejection letters, followed by a $1500 advance from a small publisher, along with a genuinely kind note saying, "You'll probably never make any money at this, so don't quit your day job."
Let's set aside the slush pile fiasco that would let Harry Frikkin Potter slip through twelve publishers' fingers. Given the $1500 advance, how much time could her superhero team have really devoted to editing and marketing her book? I think it's safe to say that the services she got from her publisher helped, but that what mostly sold the book was the book itself. [Just an aside: their marketing decision to take half the first (thousand copy) run of books and get them placed in libraries was brilliant, and not something a self-publisher would be able to pull off.]
Objection the second: The crack team doesn't really know you, only a couple of them have read your book, and so the team may not have any idea how to market it effectively. That's why publishers so frequently pass on books that live in the no-man's land between genres. If it's clearly sci-fi, they know how and where to market that. If it's clearly romance, they know how and where to market that. If it's nanotech-based dystopian fantasy with AI gods and a pseudo-classical gothic writing style… um… "We don't feel this book meets our needs."
Lack of understanding can also lead to cover art disasters. The most infamous one I can think of is Liar, where the book is about a young black woman who is a compulsive liar. The initial cover, they put a young white woman on it, either out of habit or out of fear that "books with black people on the cover don't sell." After going the rounds with her publisher, she eventually had to hit the blogs and summon the Internet Hordes to get it fixed.
It's not fair to judge the entire industry by one gruesome disaster. But compare this to my own experience: I spent an exhausting amount of time coming up with ideas for my cover, and trying to execute them myself. Result? Disaster. Then I found someone who actually knew Photoshop, went back and forth for a while, hired a friend to act as the model, and eventually got a cover that I was very happy with. It took a long time, and it was more expensive than I'd have preferred. But the book truly feels like it's mine in a way that it wouldn't had the cover been under someone else's control.
Objection the Third: The way I see it, traditional publishers are going away. The signs indicate that they're running way leaner than they once did. There was a time when they would invest a lot more effort in books that they didn't expect to be bestsellers. Now, you have to come to them with a book that's 98% ready to print to even have a chance. And they're investing less energy in discovering books, treating the self-published world more and more like their slush pile. Amanda Hocking has pulled one series of books in preparation for a print publication debut. The awful Fifty Shades got picked up entirely on the basis of prior self-publishing success.
I think this strategy is a mistake, because it's redefining the publishing world in a way that lends Amazon a huge competitive advantage. They have CreateSpace, and access to detailed sales figures on every book in it, so they know better than the publishers do which ones are worth taking a gamble on. To me, it smacks of desperation on the part of publishers.
Even their role as curators could easily go away, and that's the one competitive advantage they have left. It's not as though people don't have options for finding out which books might be worth their time. Book blogs, topical forums, Amazon reviews/suggestions/sample chapters, all of that takes the place of the publishers' traditional role of connecting people to the books they'd enjoy.
Which I think is a good thing. After all, before a publisher will start trying to connect people to a book, they have to decide that enough people will be interested to make it worth their while. This means that if the topic is very obscure or has a niche audience, they likely won't make the attempt. Books that would be absolutely wonderful for a few thousand people — an expert's guide to dumpster diving, or a novel about drag racing that's thoroughly obsessed with the mechanics and physics of racing — are either never going to see the light of day, or are going to receive pressure from the publishers to make them more inclusive or easier on casual readers. That's kind of a shame, since there are other motivations for writing a book than gross sales, and "the respect of the community I'm a part of and writing about" is a pretty good one. That's one of the places where self-pub can really shine: everyone's tastes are so unique that a very imperfect book can nonetheless be perfect-for-you.
I stand by what I've said about self-publishing. It takes a true renaissance man (or woman) to be successful at it. In my opinion, the only valid reason to self-publish is because you enjoy the challenge and you're into DIY.
I don't think traditional publishers are going away. Their industry is undergoing major changes due to technological advances, but at the heart of it, there will always be the written word, and publishers will find ways of extracting it from writers and providing it to readers.
Publishers are like every other business: some of them are very effective and good at what they do, and others are awful. They all have a specific customer they're trying to reach. When you mentioned niche audiences, there are publishers who specialize in that, and they're going to have a much easier time tapping into that audience than you are, especially if your business sense is too weak to sell your work to a traditional publisher.
Part of the writer-as-a-business-professional concept is doing your research to find publishers who are right for you (and avoid the ones who are wrong for you). After that, your work is still not done. You have to find ways to make your manuscript stand out. Following submission guidelines are a necessary start, but you also need to give the editors a reason to pick your manuscript. Your J.K. Rowling anecdote above just goes to show that it doesn't matter how brilliant your work is; if the publisher doesn't know who you are, you're just dropping another manuscript into their slush pile. You will be subject to the moods and tastes of whomever picks it up whenever they finally getting around to picking it up.
But if you network and build rapport with the right people, someone may put in a good word. Do whatever it takes for them to see your name on the cover letter and say, "Oh, I recognize that name. I've read his blog! I'll take a look at this one." The writing doesn't even have to be that great as long as it will sell. Fifty Shades of Grey and The Hunger Games are both great examples of successful books that sucked. Not that I want sucky writers to be successful, but if they can succeed, so can you.
I am self-published. I was able to gain a lot of success without the help of book bloggers, but it's only because I'm really good at making websites/apps/and marketing stuff.
Everyone needs to learn to play nice in the sandbox. It would be nice if book bloggers just made a general disclaimer like, "If you're self-published and I find a typo within the first 50 pages, I'm throwing the book into the circular file & you're not gonna get a review." I think it's really about the quality of the books that come across your desk/slushpile/inbox. John Grisham's first book was self-published. There are some case studies. But all in all, this gal has gained some notoriety. Maybe (just maybe) someone will offer to read her book – even if it's just to bash it. What is it that they say about publicity?
I used to read and review a lot self-published fiction, but had to give it away. Life's too short. I read because I love books, not because I want to drag myself through vomit. I know that sounds harsh, but it's my experience. There were a few self-published titles I read that fell into the excellent-but-too-weird category, the too-weird being the only thing that prevented their authors getting mainstream deals, I'm sure. But the rest ranged from not-quite-there through plain bad to utterly abysmal, with a strong leaning towards abysmal. I'm a big reader, but at 41 I will read, what, probably another 1000-2000 books before I die? I refuse to commit any more of that number to fantasists' attempts to find the books that clearly aren't inside them. My loss, possibly. But I'm willing to risk it.
That said, there are literally dozens, if not hundreds, of book blogs that specialise in self-published work. Zupko should stop whining and focus on them, and be aware that she might need to pay a small fee for their efforts. She's asking people to commit hours of their personal time to deliver her what she hopes will be lucrative publicity. That's worth $20-40 a pop, I should think (which was the going rate last time I was asked to review one). These blogs aren't backwaters read solely by other self-published authors. Plenty of mainstream publishers watch them closely because they're keen to snap up the next Amanda Hocking before their competitors do. These blogs can be a pathway to the mainstream deal for that rare self-published work that is strong enough or entertaining enough to find a wide audience, despite what risk-averse publishers might have thought when they rejected it.
Long, grumpy comment. I was really floored by this one. I'm with Kate on zeroing in on your observation that "she was trying to convince us, as a community, to do something she wanted, rather than selling us on why we should want it." Bingo. And she still seems unable to grasp that that's what she's doing.
Does she honestly not understand that the book bloggers who have the policy she's trying to get them to rescind haven't somehow "overlooked" something? As has been pointed out, she's given no new reason for bloggers who have made the no-self-pubbed decision to reconsider, other than Yes But MY Book Is Good! and We're All In This Together, which simply isn't true, although I'm sure she'd LIKE it to be.
(Although I doubt she meant it to come out this way, all of her complimentary words are poorly chosen, in that they sound like precisely the kind of blanket flattery used by somebody who doesn't know you very well and is only complimenting you because they want something. Just like in Cruel Intentions when Ryan Phillipe's character tells Reese Witherspoon how great she is, and she laughs in his face! I love that scene.) (It comes out as well in her original comment on Caveat Lector, where she says "Thanks for this response. I can tell you are really passionate about what you do, and you challenged me on a number of really good points." Apparently Ms Zupko is unaware of how forced it sounds when one tries to turn an obvious truth into a conciliatory compliment – like she couldn't think of anything better to say. Um, OBVIOUSLY the Review Lady is passionate. Telling her that won't make her nicer to you.)
I DON'T think she did it to get attention, as has been suggested; in all honesty, I think she's much too clueless for that. No, I think she honestly believes that if she can just spin it right, book bloggers will realize that they're Just Like Self-Pubbed Authors, and there will be a magic click and some fairy dust and suddenly everyone will realize They've Been Wrong and thenceforth open their slushpiles.
I mean, where she says in her "Reconsideration": "There are some really beautiful book blogs out there, and there are some really, really horrible ones—riddled with typos and "creative" grammar choices, terrible formatting, flashing ads, etc. But I don't judge all book blogs based on the bad ones. I judge each one on its merit and policies, and I go through each one." (Yeah. Of course you do. You know why? BECAUSE YOU WANT THEM TO REVIEW YOU. Unlike bloggers, who really don't want anything at all from you. Especially now, sadly.) She's working so hard to make the parallel, and I think she just really and truly doesn't get that it doesn't stick.
The whole "I was only asking to be judged by myself and not by my peers" thing? Yeah, see, the thing is that bloggers have to get through your peers to get to you. Why should they? IN CASE you're awesome and we MISSED it? Lady, in the meantime, I'd advise you maybe write an open letter to other self-pubbing authors telling THEM they're entrepreneurial and whatever and could they please start using spellcheck so more bloggers will review your book.
Final growl: she told Erin Mitchell that "this industry is a quickly changing landscape, and we all need to be flexible and open to changes that can affect what we're doing." Oh, dear. By we, Ms Zupko, I'm assuming you mean the Royal We, because by now it is uncomfortably transparent that you are trying to flatter, wheedle, and now scare bloggers into siding with you and the rest of the Dinky Non-Trad Writers you imagine having with you to fight in the war against Big Evil Publishing, or something, because you are Very Uncomfortable about the stigma around the way you've chosen to publish, and you want book bloggers to make it go away – and if they don't, it's because they're closeminded! and mean! not because they have reasons behind their choices, oh dear me no. Oh, if only Douglas Adam's SEP field was real.
Well, this has been an eye-opener for me. I've been in my awesome little corner for too long now, apparently, because I had no idea there were all these indie authors running around hitting up book bloggers for reviews. Keep outing those people because they truly are doing it wrong.
For my money (and that's where a lot of it goes — and btw, everything I write about on my blog is stuff that I have gone out and chosen to acquire myself, just like EssJay), the indie authors who are doing it right can very easily be found in one place: Podiobooks.com. Yes, they're doing even MORE work than just writing the things, they're also recording (usually themselves narrating) them as audiobooks and giving those away for free to build a fan base (who is pretty generous at the PayPal tip jar because they appreciate the effort, the stories, and the fact that the product costs WAY less than Audible) who is then all ready to snap up snazzy paper or ebook editions of those works (for money) when those are available later on.
If the work is at all good, it does find those fans, and if the author also happens to be a quality follow on Twitter (which all of my favorite podiobooks authors are), engaging, talking about the rest of the world and not just "buy my book" and, yes, playing hashtag games with fans, then that snowballs. There are only a few Scott Siglers, but there are some Nathan Lowells, too, and they seem pretty happy to be that.
And they NEVER, EVER bother book bloggers for reviews. They might every once in a while ask their fans to say a little something on Amazon or Smashwords, but that's pretty much it.
And those people get ALL MY MONEY now. There's a tiny handful of name authors whose books I still buy, but these indies who feel like my FRIENDS are who I buy the most.
"And they NEVER, EVER bother book bloggers for reviews. They might every once in a while ask their fans to say a little something on Amazon or Smashwords, but that's pretty much it." "Keep outing those people because they truly are doing it wrong."
I don't understand your criticism here. Most of the book blogs I've found have submission guidelines. What's wrong with "bothering book bloggers for reviews" when you're following their submissions guidelines?
Every book blogger should have a prominent link to submission guidelines. Even if the text being linked to says, "I find my own stuff. Please don't pitch books to me. Full stop."
Re: Podiobooks.com. Your post seems to say, "This is how I find my indie authors. Therefore, this is how indie authors should be marketing." It may be a valid strategy, but there are others. I personally don't have the voice talent, and mostly write female protagonists anyways. Nor do I have the recording equipment. I'm not willing to pay the sort of money or social capital needed to audify my book.
I'd just like to make one point about the "don't worry, there are other book blogs out there." I'm not a connoisseur (thanks, spellcheck!) of book blogs, and I'll admit I don't know the landscape. But in most niches like this, there's sort of a power law in web traffic. That is to say, the ten most successful blogs might have twice the readership of the next ten, who themselves have twice the traffic of blogs 21-30. So for the same amount of publicity, you could successfully place your book with:
1) One of the top blogs.
2) Two of the next group.
3) Four of the third group.
4) Every blog in the fourth group.
5) Every blog in the fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth groups.
On the other hand, I suspect "number of pitches received" would correlate well with readership, and hence exhibit the same power law. So if one of the top blogs opens themselves to selfpub even a tiny crack, they're going to get flooded.
The point is not to reach people; it's to reach the right people. It's more effective (and less work) to tailor your pitch for a few bloggers who will be interested, and it helps if you actually read their blog and leave insightful comments that people enjoy reading.
Holy Moly! I'm glad I missed this one. I think you did a bang up job summing up the issue and providing some positive lessons that can be learned and taken away.
Things like this make me appreciate how far off the radar I am ;)
Pingback: "Please Give Something Back" - Before You Share It, Have You?
Pingback: How self-published authors can overcome the DIY stigma. | Insatiable Booksluts


text:
Nina Dobrev's CW Morning
Posted Wednesday April 27, 2011 11:26 AM GMT
Paying a visit to her employer's headquarters, Nina Dobrey was out and about in New York City on Wednesday morning (April 27).
The 22-year-old actress flashed her gorgeous smile as she popped in and out of CW studios to chat about work matters.
The CW visit comes just as it was announced that the network has picked up Nina's show "The Vampire Diaries" for another season this fall.
With "Gossip Girl," "90210" and "Supernatural" also being renewed, "The Vampire Diaries" continues to be the CW's most-watched program - pulling in an average of 4 million viewers in its current second season.
Enjoy the pictures of Nina Dobrev out at CW studios in New York City (April 27).
Photo Credit: SplashNewsOnline.com
filed under Celebrity Sightings, Star Style, Television, Nina Dobrev, The Vampire Diaries

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Medical Dictionary
Castellani's paintplay
Medical Definition of Castellani's paint
Biographical Note for castellani's paint
Castellani \ˌkas-tə-ˈlän-ē\play ,
Aldo (1878–1971), Italian physician. Castellani was a specialist in tropical diseases. His numerous contributions to tropical medicine include the discovery in 1903 of a species of trypanosome (Trypanosoma gambiense) in the spinal fluid of patients suffering from sleeping sickness, the discovery in 1905 that yaws is caused by a spirochete (Treponema pertenue), and the isolation of new strains of fungi causing dermatoses.
Seen and Heard
What made you want to look up Castellani's paint? Please tell us where you read or heard it (including the quote, if possible).


text:
A molecule best known for fighting off cellular clutter is now recognized as an important defender against another cellular threat: viruses. New research from HHMI investigator Zhijian Chen shows that ubiquitin, which helps cells identify unwanted proteins so that they can be removed, is also a vital component of the innate immune system.
Please login/join to leave a comment


text:
A Nicole Kidman Pregnancy
Now that Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban have finally gone public with their romance, the pregnancy rumors have started. Take for instance th occurrence on Oscar night that took place between George Clooney, Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban.
Word is a reporter paid a waiter to hover around the couple for any insight. At one point, George came up to them to congratulate them in advance of their March 11th plans and Nicole replied that everything has now been 'moved to June'. Two days later, another spy caught her mid conversation on her cell, visibly agitated, and he claims to have heard her say 'the baby is your priority, but what about me? What about ME?' before clicking off. And you don't need a Ph.D. in gossip to figure out who she might have been talking to.
Nicole & Keith: wedding watch update [Lainey's]
(Images via JJB)


text:
I have a small, cold, black heart that occasionally warms.
Not really though.
I also sleep a lot. Like, a lot.
Music: The Beatles, Bad Religion, Nine Inch Nails, Bright Eyes, Elliott Smith, NOFX, Fleetwood Mac, Leonard Cohen, Bob Dylan, The Rolling Stones, Otis Redding, The Pixies and then, you know, modern music
TV: Mad Men, Dexter, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia
Movies: Blow, Pirate Radio, The Graduate, Django Unchained, Saving Private Ryan, The Royal Tenenbaums, The Shining, There Will Be Blood, Blackhawk Down, Annie Hall, Pollock, Knocked Up
Food: I'd consider bread, cheese and champagne a perfectly acceptable dinner.


text:
March uploads and New websites
Expand Messages
- The Olive Tree Genealogy Newsletter --- helping you find the roots
and branches of your family tree.
V. 3 #7: March uploads and New websites
Hi everyone,
April is half over and I have been so busy trying to get Olive Tree
packed and ready to go for its big move, that I haven't had time to
upload any new databases. Volunteer transcribers Laura, Peggy, Liz,
Karen and Georgia have been hard at work and I have quite a large
pile of new (free) databases waiting for me to get online. I will do
that as soon as I can, I think you'll like what we've got
Meantime I thought I'd just take a minute to remind you of the new
databases I uploaded in March (in case you missed any), and tell you
about a couple of new sites I think are worth visiting.
First - March 2004 FREE Databases from Lorine at
Olive Tree Genealogy databases http://olivetreegenealogy.com/ :
- Aller, sailing from Bremen Germany via Southhampton to New York on
7 July 1888 (21 images of the passenger list plus a transcript of the
- SS Montrose, from Liverpool arrived 19 June 1926 at Quebec - page
67 (Sheet 23)
- S. S. Melita Liverpool to Quebec carrying soldiers dependents in
- Ship Count de Toulouse - La Rochelle France to Louisiana 15 Nov.
- Ship Le Philippe - La Rochelle France to Louisiana 25 Jan. 1719
- Ship Le St. Louis (The St. Louis) - La Rochelle France to
Louisiana 21 March 1719
- Ship The Marie - La Rochelle France to Louisiana 28 May 1719
- Ship The Union - La Rochelle France to Louisiana 28 May 1719
- Ship Les Deux Freres (Two Brothers) - La Rochelle France to
Louisiana 19 Aug. 1719
- Ship Le Marechal d'Estrees - La Rochelle France to Lousiana 19
Aug. 1719
- Ship Le Duc de Noailles - La Rochelle France to Lousiana 16 Sept.
- Ship La Duchesse de Noailles - From Louisiana to La Rochelle
France (no date)
You can get to these from http://olivetreegenealogy.com/free0304.shtml
Past Voices databases:
- Letter from Elizabeth Baggott, Dayton, Montgomery County, Ohio, to
Mrs. Eliza Thornton, Alamucha P. O., Lauderdale County, Mississippi,
March 14, 1847
- Letter to Miss Louise Lovejoy, Care of C. D. Ferries, Esq.,
Buffalo, New York, from "Gustaf," New York, January 20, 1849
- Letter from Mary P. Parsons, Goshen, Massachusetts, to her cousin
Miss Julia A. Joy, Care of C. C. Grugan, No. 140 Chesnut Str.,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, November 20, 1843
- Letter from Henry T. Spencer, Albany, New York, to Mr. George S.
Riley, Rochester, Monroe County, New York, April 6, 1849
- Letter to Samuel Cox, Jr., Theological Seminary, Chelsea Square,
New York, from his mother, A. M. Cox, April 12, 1847; postmarked
Philadelphia [?], Pennsylvania, April 12
- Letter to Mrs. Amey French, care of Calvin French, Esq.,
Proctorsville, Vermont, from "Amey," Providence, Rhode
February 11, 1848
- Letter to D. S. Edwards, M. D., Surgeon U. S. S. North Carolina,
New York, from his brother, H. Edwards, New Orleans, Louisiana,
September 20, 1845
- Letter from J. M. Earle, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to his wife
Sarah H. (Hussey) Earle, Care of J. M. Earle, Worcester,
Massachusetts, May 28, 1846
- Letter to Arthur G. Hatch Esq., American Exchange, Paris, France,
from "Perce" Moore, Low & Sanford, Attorneys and
Counsellors, New
York, July 14, 1884
- Letter from Mary Hogg, New York, to Miss Euphemia Taylor, Norwalk,
Connecticut, February 7, 1844
- Letter to Mrs. B. C. Attwood, Bangor, Maine, from her brother,
Benjamin Gilbert, Boston, Massachusetts, July 7, 1842
- Letter to Mr. Jas. B. E. Daugherty, No. 140/2 High St.,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, from his brother, M. Jos. Daugherty,
Lancaster, Ohio, October 24, 1842
- Letter to Mrs. Henry W. "Martha" Taylor, Care of C. C.
Esqr., Detroit, Michigan, from her father, M. O. Masters, Montgomery,
Alabama, December 20 and 24, 1840
- John King, Ledyard, Cayuga County, New York, to Thomas B. Gould,
Newport, Rhode Island, February 5, 1855
- Letter to Mr. A. J. [L. J.?] Millard, Port Clinton, Ottawa County,
Ohio, from W. A. Thomson, Concord, Pennsylvania October 19, 1845
- Letter to Mrs. Julia E. Terry, Care of Ward Woodbridge, Esq.,
Hartford, Connecticut, from her husband, Charles A. Terry, Cleveland,
Ohio, August 17, 1842
You can get to these from http://olivetreegenealogy.com/free0304.shtml
NaturalizationRecords.com databases:
- Declarations of Intent, New York 1827-1895, Justice's Court,
Albany, New York, Index to Book 4, 5 & 6 (1837-1843) (Surnames A, C
online so far)
- Declarations of Intent, New York 1827-1895, Justice's Court,
Albany, New York, Index to Book 7 & 8 (1843-1850) (Surnames V, W, Y,
Z online so far)
- Declarations of Intent, New York 1827-1895, Justice's Court,
Albany, New York, Index to Books 9-12 (1850-1856) (Surnames A, B
online so far)
- Added links to online searchable Washington State Naturalization
You can get to these from http://olivetreegenealogy.com/free0304.shtml
Websites worth looking at -
Ancestors at Rest at http://ancestorsatrest.com/
A site devoted to helping you find your ancestors death records.
There is an interesting collection of coffin plates, funeral cards
and other death records (obits, wills, funeral home records etc)
Submissions welcomed.
Database of Burials in 120 National Cemeteries at the US Veterans
Administration at http://gravelocator.cem.va.gov/ A busy site,
sometimes slow but worth the wait
I hope these help you find an ancestor!
Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.


text:
In addition, eighteen months have not been kind to Dark Messiah in some really key respects. Ubisoft Annecy deserves credit for adapting the game so well from keyboard and mouse to gamepad, and for streamlining some of the levels and game mechanics for a console audience. However, it's a simple fact that this Source-powered game no longer looks a match for other FPS games that have emerged in the last year. Yes, the water effects still look great and there are some lovely open vistas from time to time, but put Dark Messiah next to Gears of War, Call of Duty 4 or Bioshock, and its slightly dull textures and murky scenery just don't cut the mustard. The lighting is bit flat and uninspiring and the implementation of HDR is plain weird. There's no subtle fade or sudden bloom between the stygian gloom of many interiors and the bright outdoors scenery, just a nasty artificial switch. Up-close, many of the monsters and human enemies look surprisingly rough.
Worse, there are several technical issues holding the game back. The most irritating is loading times between levels and when reloading saved games or checkpoints. Nothing spoils the flow of gameplay more than a lengthy wait after every death - particular in the more difficult sections of the game. Stuttering frame rates and the odd visual glitch really shouldn't happen on a game that doesn't look all that cutting edge, and the game has crashed more than once while trying to load a cut-scene. Usually I'd put this down to pre-release software, but here I'm not so sure.
Even some of Dark Messiah's best gameplay features suffer in comparison to what we've seen in Bioshock. After freezing, flaming and electrocuting our way through Bioshock, Dark Messiah's more obvious and prompted uses of spells and environmental kills no longer seem quite so brilliant.
Despite all this, Dark Messiah isn't a bad game - it's just an inconsistent, irritating and only occasionally brilliant one. The single-player campaign is fairly lengthy, and the multiplayer options, which put the emphasis on Battlefield-style teamplay, are intriguing (though a shortage of players curtailed my exploration of them). If you're a fan of fantasy and FPS and you're prepared to turn a blind eye to the dated visuals and some of the more tiresome chunks of gameplay, then there are elements of Dark Messiah: Elements that you'll definitely get a huge kick out of. Those are some fairly big caveats, however, so if you're just looking for a good, solid action game or an epic adventure to lose yourself in, look elsewhere.
A fantasy FPS/RPG hybrid packed with good ideas, but let down by inconsistent pacing, difficulty and visuals. Hardcore dungeon delvers may enjoy it, but mainstream FPS fans have better options to consider.
Xbox 360 Dark Messiah Of Might And Magic Elements Disc Only - Tested$6.63 View Item
MINT / BRAND NEW Dark Messiah of Might and Magic Elements - Xbox 360 WN30$9.99 View Item
DARK MESSIAH OF MIGHT AND MAGIC ELEMENTS Microsoft Xbox 360 UK PAL Video Game£3.93 View Item
Dark Messiah of Might and Magic ElementsCA$7.96 View Item
Dark Messiah of Might and Magic Elements (Xbox 360, 2008)CA$7.49 View Item
More information -
Trusted Reviews is part of the Time Inc. (UK) Ltd Technology Network
Get TrustedReviews' award-winning reviews and advice delivered to your inbox for free!


text:
I trooped as Boba Fett for the first time last week ... was a lot of fun!8) It was my first time wearing the costume, and after doing so, I think I am going to need to do a few modifications on it. Here are some pictures
The biggest modification I want to do is get a new jumpsuit as my legs are WAY too big for the one I've got now. Does anyone know where I can get a really baggy one that looks screen accurate?
Oh yeah ... I do welcome any suggestions for modifications to that costume. Please feel free to let me know what you think.


text:
Fairfield Woman must Remove 5 of 7 Dogs from Home
(Cincinnati)--A woman must decide which five of her seven dogs must be removed from her home to comply with Fairfield's two-dog limit.
Karen Glardon must comply with a nearly 30-year-old pet regulation that limits homes to two adult dogs. She has signed a settlement with the Ohio Civil Rights Commission, and had a Nov. 4 deadline to comply with the limit.
Glardon says she has Parkinson's disease and multiple sclerosis and that the dogs are therapeutic for her.
The northern Cincinnati suburb may not take any action in the case until Feb. 1.


text:
Main Page
From CSDMS
Explore Earth's surface with community software
Just out in Earth Surface Dynamics is a paper by Dan Hobley on the Landlab Toolkit. This toolkit allows faster development of your own new earth surface process model. More...
Nominate a science announcement
See how you can contribute to CSDMS
Find out what the CSDMS community has to offer...


text:
The BASIS Schools meets as necessary and with the establishment of a quorum. Board meeting notices are posted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting on a front lobby window of each school, which is visible to the public 24 hours per day, seven days a week and on this website.
BSI Schools:
Public Meeting Announcements
BASIS Ahwatukee, 10210 S. 50th Place Phoenix, Arizona 85044
BASIS Chandler, 4825 S. Arizona Ave. Chandler, Arizona 85248
BASIS Chandler Primary - South Campus, 204 W. Chandler Heights Road, Chandler, Arizona 85248,
BASIS Chandler Primary - North Campus, 1800 E. Chandler Blvd, Chandler, Arizona, 85225,
BASIS Flagstaff,1700 N. Gemini Drive Flagstaff Arizona 86001
BASIS Goodyear, 15800 W Sherman St. Goodyear, AZ 85338,
BASIS Goodyear Primary, 15800 W Sherman St. Goodyear, AZ 85338,
BASIS Mesa, 5010 South Eastmark Parkway Mesa, Arizona 85212,
BASIS Oro Valley, 11155 N. Oracle Road, Oro Valley, Arizona 85737
BASIS Oro Valley Primary, 11129 N. Oracle Road, Oro Valley, Arizona 85737
BASIS Peoria, 25950 N. Lake Pleasant Parkway, Peoria, Arizona 85383
BASIS Peoria Primary, 25950 N. Lake Pleasant Parkway, Peoria, Arizona 85383
BASIS Phoenix, 11850 North 32nd Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85028
BASIS Phoenix Central, 201 E Indianola Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85012
BASIS Phoenix South, 19th Ave./ Southern Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona 85041
BASIS Prescott, 1901 Prescott Lakes Parkway, Prescott, Arizona 86301
BASIS Scottsdale, 10400 N. 128th St, Scottsdale, Arizona 85259
BASIS Scottsdale Primary, 11440 N. 136th Street, Scottsdale, Arizona 85259
BASIS Tucson Primary, 3825 E. 2nd Street, Tucson, Arizona 85716
BASIS Tucson North, 5740 E. River Road, Tucson, Arizona 85750
Arizona Department of Education
Click on Annual Charter Financial Reports to review each school's report.
BSI Schools: 2017 School Budget Summary
Ahwatukee Budget Summary
Chandler Budget Summary
Chandler Primary North Budget Summary
Chandler Primary South Budget Summary
Flagstaff Budget Summary
Goodyear Budget Summary
Goodyear Primary Budget Summary
Mesa Budget Summary
Oro Valley Budget Summary
Oro Valley Primary Budget Summary
Peoria Budget Summary
Phoenix Budget Summary
Phoenix Central Budget Summary
Prescott Budget Summary
Scottsdale Budget Summary
Scottsdale Primary Budget Summary
Tucson Budget Summary
Tucson North Budget Summary


text:
BRISTOL, Conn. — December always brings an early Christmas gift to the members of the Connecticut B.A.S.S. Federation Nation (CBFN), and to scores of children.
"Last year, we were concerned that the economy would affect our donations," said Sylvia Morris, CBFN vice president. "It did, but not in the way we thought. It was our best year ever. People realize the importance of giving in this tough environment."
Morris is referring to CBFN's participation in the Marine Corps Toys for Tots drive. Started by the Mohawk Valley BassCasters several years ago, the program has grown into one of Connecticut's most successful benevolent programs.
"Every year in early December, we pull a couple of bass boats into the parking lot of our local Walmart in Bristol. Early that morning, our clubs drop off their contributions. We put them in the boats. This creates an immediate impression of success and tells the shoppers what we're all about.
"Most people give something. Some will fill a cart inside the store and drop it off on their way out. Others buy bicycles and donate them. And Walmart gives us 20 percent off when we spend cash donations. It's huge. We finish with hundreds of toys."
Once the drive is over, Marines from the local base pick up the toys and distribute them to children in need through the Marine Toys for Tots Foundation.
According to Morris, the success of their toy drive can be attributed to a culture of service within Connecticut B.A.S.S. "We don't look at things like this as an obligation. We view it as a privilege."
Paul Carter, President of the CBFN, agrees. "It's something we do that comes from the heart. We get as much out of it as the kids do, maybe more."
Morris and Carter both emphasize that any CBFN officer is available to help start a similar program anywhere in the country. For guidance in started a program for your state, visit http://www.ctbass.com/index.asp?Mode=OFFICERS.


text:
Gay Porn Access - Shower Power - Free Gay Porn
Hot horny hunks in the shower touching each other and feeling each others nice hard cock! Give a little, take a little...That feels so good!
Watch full-length Gay Porn Access video Shower Power
Category: Blowjob
Favorite Share
Did "Shower Power" make your cock hard?
|Added: Aug 9, 2011 12:00am
|Views: 1,561
|Ratings: 2
|Favorited: 0
|Records: 2257
Recently Rated


text:
Difficulty Identifying Feelings, Distress Tolerance and Compulsive Buying: Analyzing the Associations to Inform Therapeutic Strategies
- First Online:
DOI: 10.1007/s11469-012-9389-y
- Cite this article as:
- Rose, P. & Segrist, D.J. Int J Ment Health Addiction (2012) 10: 927. doi:10.1007/s11469-012-9389-y
- Citations
- 528 Downloads
Difficulty identifying feelings (a component of alexithymia) and distress tolerance both appear to play a role in impulse-control problems. The goal of the present study was to build upon past research by developing a model of the relations between these constructs and compulsive buying. Participants from the United States and Canada completed a survey containing well-established measures of demographic variables, difficulty identifying feelings, distress tolerance and compulsive buying. In support of a hypothesized model, the three constructs were significantly related in predicted directions and distress tolerance fully mediated the relationship between difficulty identifying feelings and compulsive buying. These results confirm the relationship between alexithymic tendencies and distress tolerance and extend previous findings concerning the problematic behaviors (e.g., substance abuse, pathological gambling) of people who have difficulty identifying their feelings. They also highlight attributes and skills (e.g., tolerating distress, identifying feelings) which clinicians might beneficially target while working with clients who buy compulsively.


text:
|Thread Tools
oxy acetalene pressure
what should I set my gages at for just basic heating and light cutting less then 1/4" thick
Actually there is no "one size fits all" and the answer would depend on several things, such as tip size and what you would be using it for. For cutting steel around 1/4" you would need to determine the tip size, a couple of sizes would work ok and the specific size no. would depend on torch brand and type but a decent starting point would be about 3 to 5 PSI on the fuel and about 20 to 25 PSI on the Oxygen. As long the fuel is set high enough to deliver the volume required then the actual setting will not matter much as long as you keep it well under the safety limit (15 PSI for Acetylene, NEVER exceed that!) but it should be high enough so that the flame will start to break away from the tip without oxygen as the valve is opened. The Oxygen setting makes a huge difference when cutting however and that is something you will need to develop a "feel" for. This is not at all hard to learn and with a bit of practice you should catch on quickly, too much Oxygen will not only waste it but will result in a poor cut with an exaggerated kerf while not enough will result in failure to cut all the way through, blow-backs and lots of slag. Of course the wrong tip can and will cause these same problems so until you get the hang of it a chart for your particular brand of torch should help immensely in selecting the right tips and settings. No matter what anyone tells you there just is not any one setting that works for everything and adjusting the pressure settings is just part of the process and will need to be done for whatever task is at hand.
thanks that helps will practice with it
oxy acetalene pressure.
The Regulators for Oxy-Act should be set to 7 PSI for both the Gases, when you are welding.
When Cutting, the Oxy is set to 40 Psi. and the Act is still 7 PSI.
If you have a problem with Tip Size, (Poping back) increase Pressures.
Should not be more than 10 PSI for either.
This usually occures when to close to the work and the tip is the wrong size.
The way to adjust the torch is
"Turn on the Act" a small amount.
Light it. It will Smoke a lot.
Open the act valve more until it just quits Smoking. This is for any size tip.
Then Open Oxy until you get a Flame that is Burning clean.
A soft Flame has Excess Act and is Fuzzy with a long Soft Flame.
With an Excess Oxy flame, The flame is very Sharp, and Shortens with more OXY.
The Soft Flame is good for Slow heating as in Silver Brazing or Soldering of Radiators. It does not Oxidize the surface.
The excess Oxy is "Ain't no good for anything".
Some folks like it to speed-up pre heat when cutting. I don't think it Speeds anything But Burning of the Metal. It causes Oxidation, and this slows the Preheat.
Anyway, the best way is to jump in.
DoNOT allow the flame to Pop Back into the torch!!
This will damage the Torch and Burn up the Seals.
If it Pops Back, You have the wrong size Tip for the Job.
Happy Trails
No that is just plain wrong! 40 PSI Oxygen to cut 1/4" plate, are you kidding? That is exactly what I was talking about NOT doing, there simply is no one setting that does everything for cutting and welding and anyone who says there is does not know what he's talking about! Also unless he's using a very large tip 7 PSI on the Acetylene is more than enough and turning higher would make no difference, Acetylene pressure does not matter as long as it is high enough to deliver enough volume to the tip.
A cutting torch is adjusted by first making sure all the valves are off then just crack the Acetylene valve, open it until the flame just starts to break away from the tip then close it slightly until the flame just reattaches. The next step depends on the type of torch, if it only has one Oxygen valve then open that slowly and watch the inner flame. Continue opening the valve and as the inner flame gets smaller there will be sharp defined cones with a "feather" flame of a lighter color emanating from them, continue opening the valve until that "feather" just disappears and no more than that. Trigger the cutting lever and see if the "feather" reappears slightly (it usually will just a tiny bit) then adjust that "feather" out while holding the cutting lever open, if the inner "feather" is large when it reappears after depressing the cutting lever (if it reappears more than about 1/2" long or longer) then shut the torch off and increase the Oxygen pressure on the gauges about 5 PSI more. An excessive "feather" reappearing when the cutting lever is tripped is indicative of the Oxygen pressure being set too low. If the torch design has two Oxygen valves then the process will be exactly the same but open the one on the handle (the one beside the Acetylene valve) ALL the way and then adjust that inner flame using the one on the cutting torch. Telling someone to just set torch gauges to any one setting, 10 PSI for fuel/40 PSI for O2 is just plain nonsense!
buggyman, Not sure what brand torch you have but since you have been given conflicting advice I will provide a link to Victor, the most common type. This works for most Victor and the very common Victor clones out there, if your torch uses a Victor tip then this chart is just the ticket.
As you can see there are wide variations in pressure settings and these are guidelines not absolute settings that must be used, you can vary one way or the other as the situation demands but this comes naturally after using your torch for a while. NEVER exceed the safety limit of 15 PSI on the Acetylene, you will probably never need that much pressure anyway and if 7 to 8 PSI is not enough then your tip is too small unless you're cutting some really heavy stuff with a large tip that exceeds the hose capacity at 7 to 8 PSI. As long as the Acetylene is set high enough for the flame to break away from the tip then going any higher does nothing, Acetylene on a torch is a matter of volume not pressure so in other words if the pressure is high enough for a proper flame then the torch simply would not know the difference, setting a higher pressure would only result in less opening of the fuel valve.
I made a mistake there, that should have been tip too large, but the thing is for 7 to 8 PSI to not be enough it would have to be a really big tip or a very small restrictive hose in relation to the tip. Just use the manufacturers guidelines and you will not go wrong. Sorry about the error.
welding-cutting site
There is a lot of info on the Welding Tips and Tricks website. He usually has a short video each week, reviews of new products. some stuff he sells and other stuff other companies have.
oxy acetalene pressure.
I believe what the gentleman is Saying about the "Victor Chart" is a Excellent Suggestion.
I was tought that when cutting, 40psi will Cut clean with
the Correct Size Tip.
One size does NOT do all.
If a person only has one size tip, Then invest in a good Grinder.
If an individual does a lot of Cutting, then invest in several Cutting "Heads".
One for each size that is used most.
You can "Push" a torch, but, sometimes it is a rough Finished Job.
If I were the Group, I think you should listen to The Other Man.
His way does work.
I enjoy a good discussion.
That is how you learn.
Thanks Group.
good info guys I have victor 2 stage ?? industrial gauges smith torch, size 12-0 12-3 12-2 12-4 tips 3/16" hose 25' long just use it in my garage vary rarely to heat and maybe cut a little mosltly to haet and bend stuff on occasion this site is great thanks for the help
went out and hooked everything up have a question shouls I be able to hear the oxygen flowing thru regulator I only hear it with torch open if I shut it off the gages stayput the pressure does not drop sound normal???
What kind of sound are you hearing? Try this, close the tank valve then bleed the pressure off the regulator then open the torch cutting lever. With the lever still depressed and the regulator adjusted all the way out to zero turn the tank back on and see if you get any Oxygen flow, you should not and if you do the regulator is leaking internally.
the noise is kinda hollow like !! I went out and did what you said and no oxygen flowing out so reg is working I guees what I'm hearing is normal I'll listen to one at work in the maintnece dept and see how they sound
oxy acetalene pressure.
It sounds like BigRed is telling you wright.
Yes. You can hear the Gas passing thru the Reg.
We here use Micro Minature Torches About the size of a Ball Point Pin
We put a two Stage Butane Reg in series With the Victor with Pressure set at 5 Psi.
The 2 Stage Butane Reg drops it to .8 Psi... Read that again.
We also cut 14 Inch Hot Roll Plate... Read that again.
LargeRed is Correct. You can't Just say that one size fits All.
Get you a Heavy Duty 9 Inch Grinder and many Pebbles.
You may need em.
Anyway Start at 40 PSI and play.
Make sure you have the "Anti Blow Back" valves .
Always be aleart that no one puts ANY oil on the OXY thraeds.
You then have a "ONE CYLINDER DISEL".
I have seen Two men Killed.
Totally Cut in Half.
Have a happy Day.
|Recent Garage - Tools posts with photos
|Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|Thread Tools
|Similar Threads
|Thread Starter
|Last Post
|radiator pressure to correct radiator cap lb pressure
|General Rodding Tech
|Pacific Pressure pressure washer
|Garage - Tools
|Can oil pressure gauge be used for fuel pressure?
|Oil Pressure Guage = Fuel Pressure Guage
|Hotrodding Basics
|Crankcase pressure effect on oil pressure?


text:
Quote:As for 'black belt clubs'. Seems to me, that if one has so many students that it becomes appropriate to have a special time for 'bb and above training'...that it shouldn't cost any more. Unless, of course, one is using a space that requires payment for that hour. I think a class of 10 BB's could probably cough up...what $40??...between them for an hour of 'BB training'.
Offering stun guns, pepper spray,
tasers and other self defense products not available in stores.
Online distributor of self defense supplies like videos,
stun guns, Tasers and more.
Surveillance, Hidden Cameras, Nanny Cams, Digital Recorders, Spy Equipment,
Pocket DVR's and more
Stun Gun
Wholesale Directlhy to the Public! Stun gun and Taser Guns and personal protection products. Keep your loved ones at home safe!


text:
Criminals robbing criminals, bodies cut open and thrown into rivers and arrests on stormy days are some of the recent stories related to piracy along the Amazon River and its tributaries.
BELÉM, Brazil – Pirates aren't limited to operating on the high seas. Even on the rivers of the Amazon region, there are gangs that specialize in overtaking and pillaging all types of vessels.
Recent incidents show river pirates of the Amazon may be just as cruel as the Somali pirates portrayed in Captain Phillips, the Oscar-nominated film that tells the story of a ship overrun by pirates on the Indian Ocean.
In February 2013, the body of the owner of a speedboat was found in the Rio Negro River in Manaus, the capital of the state of Amazonas. He had been killed by the gang known as Piratas do Rio Negro.
Also known as Barriga D'água, the gang has robbed vessels, killed their victims and thrown their bodies into the river, with the abdomens sliced open so the bodies wouldn't float.
The gang's alleged leader, Arlindo Jabelo de Sena, was arrested last May. He has been charged with three robberies, but the police suspect he has committed at least another 10 crimes along the riverside in Manaus and municipalities in Amazonas.
To read the entire article, please click here.


text:
DVD43 is a free DVD decrypter that runs in the background and decrypts DVDs on the fly. It will decrypt (unlock) a movie DVD so that your copy program can read it. It is a pure decrypter, it does not alter the image of the original DVD and will not remove copy protection (other than CSS encryption) added to the DVD. If the DVD structure is non standard or the DVD contains bad sectors, your copy program needs to take care of that.
- Improved decrypting of newer DVDs with bad sectors
Reviewing 4.6.0 (May 18, 2016)
It is much easier for DRM to be relatively impervious in 64-bit Windows. DVD43 came up with this stopgap method buy I believe DirectShow now operates as a kernel mode API and so video cannot be sampled off a DVD like original DVD43 did so well.
Anyhow, here's their link to the best effort: http://www.free-codecs.c...?d=5753&s=136&r= . This is DVD43 v184.108.40.206 and it's old. Make sure you are burning with "burnproof" and/or "simulate mode" on first, or just do a dry run before each title with a DVD-RW.
Judy Smith | Tech Support
Reviewing 4.6.0 (Aug 23, 2013)
dvd43 rocks
Reviewing 4.6.0 (Aug 22, 2013)
good stuff
Reviewing 4.6.0 (Oct 31, 2010)
when everything fails, try isoBustor also
Reviewing 4.6.0 (May 18, 2010)
way past overdue for a update whats with that???????
For all those having a problem with DVD43, try ANY DVD, at slysoft.com.
This is not free, but it works on 64 bit and has regular updates available.
I have both a 32 bit and a 64 bit. I use dvd43 on one and ANY DVD on the 64.
anyone know when dvd43 will be able to be used with windows 7 64 bit system i just bought a new computer i'm running 1 click dvd copy pro on my old one would like to transfer to the new one
During Boot I receive the message that DVD43 is not installed properly. Please reinstall. I did and I keep getting the same message. The tray icon is gray. I moved from a P4 to i7-920 on Asus P6T MB running Windows XP Home (32 bit). I read the DVD43 help where it says that it doesn't work with 64 bit s/w but does that mean it won't work with new MBs or what?
Point me in the right direction PLEASE.
I am trying to backup Transformers 2. I downloaded dvd 43 4.5 and it only copies part of the movies...What can I do to back up my movie
Can anyone help. I am trying to download and run dvd43. I am having trouble removing two file that are stopping me from installing the new program of dvd43. I am being told that windows wants permission to remove these files. How do i do this. HELP
A fine piece of software!
Is there a version for Linux?
I like to have this in my NMT (PCH), this is much less hassle than anyDVD!
I was told that if you run it in compatability mode that it would work fine with Vista. I haven't tried it yet because I am waiting for my new machine with Vista on it.
Anyone tried this
Thanks for the program. It's helped me a lot in setting up my media server. However, the last two new releases I purchased locked up my computer during a copy transfer to my hard drive. I tried your program on an XP machine and a Vista 32 machine and it locks up on both. The DVDs play fine normally. In all cases I show the green smiley face. Is this something new in the newer releases?
I keep getting this error message: DVD43 "The driver is inactive or not installed properly. please reinstall DVD43 to enable dvd driver". I have uninstalled and reinstalled but keep getting the same error. I have Vista 32 bit and have used DVD 43 for years and just now having this problem. Any advice on how to fix it would be great!
I recently had to reinstall Windows XP. I have used DVD43 in the past without incident so I downloaded version 4.40. This morning when I turned on my PC I got a message stating " a serious error had occurred" and the source was caused by DVD43's DVD43LLH.SYS file. I rebooted and everything appears to be o.k. for the moment. Has anyone else had this error message? How concerned should I be? Do the DVD43 folks have a comment or fix? I would appreciate any info. Thanks
Have just downloaded DVD FAB 5 and used the Platinum version (free for 30 days). Worked beautifully on my Vista 64 bit system. I would have preferred DVD 43, but not available in a 64 bit version.
I will have to pay in 30 days for FAB 5 Platinum, but it's worth it. Too bad that DVD43 wouldn't develop a Vista 64 bit version.
I have a question!
I used dvd43 for a long time now and it works perfectly!
But now I have a Sony laptop which has a Mashusita DVD drive and here it does not work.
The regular balloons come up saying that everything is okay but then the drive says it can not play the DVD due to region incompatability!
Cab anyone help?
Will DVD43 be revised to run on Vista (64 bit) anytime soon?


text:
'There was no power outage downtown. The Sabres entered the game having been outshot in all three periods for the season and were 18th on the power play. They rolled up 29 shots through the first 40 minutes and converted two of their five power plays.'
Buffalo turns on the juice
October 15, 2006 Submitted by
Via: Buffalo News


text:
Some chroniclers recommend that the development of rusks was merely a standard requirement for home-cooks to obtain far from the day-to-day rub and also to create the bread last much longer. It is claimed that the initial rusk was made by an oriental baker.
Cake rusks are a legacy of Elizabethan naval provisions. These were small swellings of bread two times baked so regarding be unbreakable sufficient to last out a lengthy trip mixed-up. The earliest well-known recommendation to them becomes useful an account of Drake's trips, written in 1595: 'The arrangement … was 7 or 8 pies of biscuits or rusks for a guy.'.
The modern-day, a lot more polished pie rusk is cut pie; re-baked, crisped as well as dried out, as well as it dates to the mid-18th century.
These solidified fascinating pies were delighted in at tea times as well as were excellent for dousing in night time tea or milk. These were re-introduced (in their contemporary type) to the sub-continent from England, where they were commonly acted as shipboard price; dried out, tinned or kept for extended periods of time.
When the moment showed up making pie rusks, I relied on my Italian Pakistani buddy. Obviously, they ended up tasty, ideal for a night, of pie rusk as well as chai. Below it is, from my kitchen to yours.
Had I understood that pie rusks could be made in your home, pastry shop design, I would certainly have plagued Ammi making them daily of my youth.
Unusually sufficient, I did not come across this entry till a week back, when my six-year-old child got back from institution claiming that he wished to have, 'pie rusk and also chai'. I checked out him quizzically, to which he stated, 'If we do not have them, can we make them?'.
In 510 BC, starving soldiers of Emperor Darius were near the river Indus, when they uncovered some 'reeds that create honey without '. Seemingly, this very early contact with the Oriental resources of sugar walking stick made no fantastic perception, so it was entrusted to be discovered in 327 BC by Alexander the Great, that dispersed it's society via Persia and also presented it in the Mediterranean. This was the start of among the initially recorded sugar and also [pie] items of the Center Ages.
I called up a friend of mine, who is a baker of sorts, and asked her if it was possible to make cake rusks at home. She giggled as well as claimed, 'Certainly, exactly how do you believe biscotti and also pie rusk became, do you desire my Italian nana's dish for biscotti or my Pakistani dad's dish for pie rusk?'.
It is stated that the earliest contemporary cookie pies are from 7th century Persia, considering that it was among the very first couple of areas to grow sugar, 2nd to the area we understand as the sub-continent, our personal residence.
Sugar infected Persia and afterwards to the Eastern Mediterranean and also Arabia, as well as with the Muslim intrusion of Spain, as well as the Crusades we saw the arrival of the establishing flavor profession. The food preparation methods, as well as active ingredients of India, Arabia as well as Persia, dispersed right into Northern Europe. We can safely assume that the modern day cakes travelled to Europe from Asia, and then back to Asia as if it was an import from Europe.
In the post entitled Exactly how Pleasant It Was: Walking cane Sugar from the Old Globe to the Elizabethan Duration, Brandy as well as Courtney Powers state:.
What do you think my answer was?
My research tells me that eating stale bread was a norm in ancient Europe. Ancient Roman soldiers are said to have carried a hard bread known as viscous, literally meaning 'twice cooked'.
The sub-continental cake rusk may very well be a descendant of the ancient viscous. Food historians mention that recipes for foods named Rusk began showing up during the reign of Elizabeth I.
The Oxford English Dictionary mentions that the word 'rusk' dates back to the year 1595, when referring to a twice baked bread.


text:
Hey guys!!! *wave*
So I just wanted to point you guys to my facebook page
Its www.facebook.com/CharlottePerryPhotography
Anyways, So I'm trying this new treatment on my nails to try and stop me from biting. I've been biting them since I could chew so Its a difficult habbit to break but I think its working I havent chewed in days. Yay! :p
I am also majorly excited to see Jimmy Carr on Thursday!! He's friggin hilarious I also have a job interview on thursday so fingers crossed for me
Hope everyone is doing fabulous


text:
Note: This message is displayed if (1) your browser is not standards-compliant or (2) you have you disabled CSS. Read our Policies for more information.
The Indiana Department of Transportation, through the Indiana Department of Administration, is offering .24 acres of vacant land at 425 South Third Ave. and 416 Clark Street in Evansville, Indiana. (View Aerial). The rectangular shaped parcel is zoned M-1 and is surrounded by commercial, retail, light industrial and municipal green space. Don't miss this great opportunity to purchase vacant land in downtown Evansville.


text:
We all remember how the MSM climbed all over Hillary Clinton when a few years ago she thought it was funny to claim that Mahatma Gandhi "ran a gas station down in St. Louis." Or more recently when she made her "plantation" remark.
And of course we recall the liberal media saying it was a career-ender for Joe Biden to have said "you cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking,"
Or not. By the way, 'haunt' seems to be the MSM's word of choice in these circumstances. When Biden made his Dunkin Donuts remark several weeks ago, former Wonkette Ana Marie Cox claimed it wouldn't hurt him, but, incredibly, that Alaska Sen. Stevens would be 'haunted' by his somewhat clumsy description of an the internet!
But let George Allen make a similarly insensitive comment, and the MSM is ready to call it curtains on his career. Let me preface by saying that Allen was wrong to have said what he did. For that matter, his claim that he was unaware of the meaning of the term he used, 'macaca', is unconvincing given that his mother is of French Tunisian background, in which circles the term is apparently used.
That said, this morning's Good Morning America was a study in piling on.
Co-host Bill Weir introduced the segment by darkly musing whether this was an innocent case of foot-in-mouth disease, or something - pause for dramatic effect - "more sinister."
ABC reporter Jessica Yellin narrated the segment, and to make the case against Allen, ABC was even willing to feature a competitor, as NBC/MSNBC's Chris Matthews popped up in a clip, gleefully speculating whether this was "suicide by George Allen."
Pouring gasoline on the fire, GMA displayed an image of the type of macaque monkey to which the comment reportedly refers.
Yellin interviewed S.R. Sidarth, the object of Allen's comments and the Webb campaign volunteer who apparently has been following Allen around the state, videotaping his appearances for opposition research purposes. Yellin's only question aired: "would you like the senator to apologize to you?" He would.
The only other person whose comments on the matter were aired was Ryan Lizza of the liberal New Republic. Yellin introduced her guest by informing us that Lizza is of the view that the incident "could cripple the senator's presidential ambitions." Lizza was shown saying "I think it's pretty bad . . . and I don't think he's going to overcome it."
Yellin concluded by flatly claiming "you can be sure that the gaffe will continue to haunt Sen. Allen for years to come."
Yellin is probably right - as long as the MSM is around. And you know what I'm talking about!
Finkelstein lives in the liberal haven of Ithaca, NY, where he hosts 'Right Angle,' the award-winning public-access TV show. Contact him at email@example.com


text:
Road shows are currently under way for both our BlueBerry (phono and line) and Peach (line only) tube preamps. Join the road show and get a one week test drive in your home with your system. For complete information, visit our web site at juicymusicaudio.com and click on the road show link.
Thank you--
Mark Deneen
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Topic - Test Drive - BlueBerry Tube Preamp - Join Road Show! - JuicyMusic 07:25:14 10/26/04 (0)


text:
The era of capitalism that was ushered in by Ronald Reagan in 1981 is now drawing to a close. The happy Republican leader was always ready with another story about "welfare cheats" who lived off government handouts or how people on welfare became lazy, but rarely, if ever, did Ronald Reagan ever discuss greedy and self centered leaders of industry and the finance world. Reagan, Libertarians, and Ron Paul supporters have been claiming for nearly three decades that "government" was the problem, not financial leaders or captains of industry. They have assured the American people once all government regulation is ended the United States would witness a tremendous growth in wealth that benefits both rich and poor.
The Reagan-Ron Paul belief in ending regulation in order to create prosperity was a fairy tale, one told by idiots, full of sound and fury and signifying nothing but a pack of lies. Yesterday, the American people lost over $1 Trillion due to the stock market decline, but it is doubtful if the financial manipulators who created the current mess will actually suffer financially. An open unregulated market is like fool's gold, it looks nice on the outside, but once in close proximity, the ugliness and brutality surface and one is confronted by a giant shell game in which those who are in power will invariably win.
It is time to reconstitute capitalism to ensure close government regulation of the market. It is time to institute salary limits such as forbidding CEOs from earning more than 70 times the average wage in their industry. It is time for national health insurance paid for by the government. It is time for a minimum wage that really allows those on the bottom to earn decent wages so they can purchase goods and stimulate the economy. It is time to make unionization possible because unions always raise salaries and thus put more money into circulation in purchasing goods, not stocks. It is time for equity for women and other groups presently damaged by wage discrimination.
The United States government is becoming involved in ownership of businesses and homes. Perhaps, it is time to explore how such a situation can benefit the economy and marketplace.


text:
2011 ford focus fuel filter location
I have 2012 Ford Focus SES. Anyone know where the fuel filter is on this thing?
I'm not 100% sure, but just to give you a quick response in case you need it. My 09 doesn't have one. They have a "lifetime" fuel filter in the fuel tank. So maybe they continued to not use it for the 2012 and stuck with the lifetime one in the tank. Once again not 100% on wether this is the case for the 12.
EDIT: Well now I'm not to sure I don't have one. Cause I went to search for yours and I see there are a bunch to purchase for my year also......? Ford mechanics told me I don't have one though.....I'm gonna have to go look.
2nd EDIT: Ok. Just looked and mine is a lifetime in tank filter....so yours probably is too.
I'm not 100% on this because I have an 03 zx3 buts right up under the fuel tank. And might I add is a son of a b[:)][:)][:)][:)][:)][:)]h to get off...
You know what this lifetime filter is? Just a screen?
00-08 the filter was where pacman was describing, but From what I just looked up in 09 they started to use a lifetime fuel filter that's built into the fuel tank. Not sure what it is exactly, but ford wouldn't keep using it if it didn't work(I'd hope). I'd just wait till tomorrow and just call Ford to double check. Or just wait till someone else who knows 100% comments. Don't ask the parts store guy cause he'll sell you anything.
The Focus is equipped with a lifetime fuel filter that is integrated with the fuel tank. Regular maintenance and replacement is not required. Youll find this info on page 358 of the Owner Guide.
Have a great day!
Oh no.... lifetime filters = bad idea. Like the lifetime air filter of 05-07? What's next 2 piece spark plugs for everyone?
Now I know that most people never change their fuel filter until the pump goes bad, and probably this filter is built into the pump assembly. STILL, there are some people who'd like to replace their filter regularly so that the pump will last longer than 120k miles or so. I want to see how long mine will go. I'm currently at 140k with regular changes every 25k miles.
My sister owns a 2011 Ford Fiesta S? (brand new from the dealership back in 2011). She is the one and only owner.
I was wondering if you had any information on changing the internal "life time fuel filter."
What I mean is: Is it possible to change it (if so: Where at, and how much)? Is it actually integrated in the fuel pump itself?
And! How many miles are you at now (without having had changed it)? Or were you saying your vehicle (not a 2011 Ford Fiesta) gets changed every 25k miles?
Thanks. [:I]
All I can say after working on hundreds of cars and seeing all the stuff that ends up in the fuel, is, good luck with that..............in my view there is no such thing as a lifetime fuel filter, Mopar did it and we had scads of people trying to buy them when they stopped up, guess what, you can't get 'em. Change the pump only to get it. So now a $15 part now $400, great job there. One more instance of trying every way they can to steer the work to dealer only, and make the part more expensive. I can't wait to have to buy an engine to get lifetime spark plugs.
|All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:37 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.