text:
Real Need for Racing Speed Car
Racing | 46.2MB | Update: 2018-01-04 | Version: 1.6 | Requires: Android2.3.3 or later
Racing | 46.2MB | Update: 2018-01-04 | Version: 1.6 | Requires: Android2.3.3 or later
9Apps services for free Android apps. 20,000+ users downloaded Real Need for Racing Speed Car latest version on 9Apps for free every week! This app is intended for an adult audience. This hot app was released on 2018-01-04. You'll want to use it on your own phones after you know more.
- 4 completely different and engaging race tracks,
- 5 various cars with totally different racing models,
- driving model which guarantee positive feeling of driving,
- leaderboards to compete and achievements to get,
Experience advanced model of driving and accomplish great things on racing tracks. Feel the real speed and need for asphalt stunts. If simulation is what you are looking for, the simulator you will find - just let you immerse into racing world and become champion of the world. Grab the steering wheel and become fastest driver on the leaderboards. Show them who is the ultimately awesome driver.
Try to win every race using different cars from various categories: formula racing, GP, GT or real common retail cars. Obtain grand prix and become champion of the all racing league categories.
Every time you were watching real races, or exciting fastest competition I bet you dreamed about becoming rally expert. Then stop dreaming and become one - press the gas pedal and feel the real speed of dynamic acceleration, enjoy speed and adrenaline in your veins and show other players that you truly deserve glory of being the champion.
Make realistic drifts and experience the simulation driving model which allow you to make amazing tricks on the racing track. Need for speed will be absolutely fulfilled and next time when you will experience the need of race winning, you wouldn't look for another answers - just fire up Real Need for Asphalt Speed.
Chase your opponents on the asphalt road, shift your top gear and test the endurance of the engine, make fastest circuits and win thanks to your skills and courage advantage.
GT car have beautiful body designs and if you are amazed by those design you would also enjoy car designs from this game. Streamlined and futuristic shapes have not only great visuals but also provide awesome driving physics.
Improve your results on circuits and achieve top positions on leaderboards. Receive achievements from various and exciting things.
But if you are interested in arcade racing you will also enjoy driving in this game - scalable realistic model of driving allows you drive however you like.
Best racer game for arcade emotions. Also simulator game style fans would find something here - drag races and fantastic drifts at the every meter of the track. Every gamer interested in fast and speed, in beautiful cars on street circuits or even in hot pursuits with underground stuff should without hesitation start downloading and playing. Shift your mind in proper mindset, focus on first place in the race and begin your unique journey through plenty of tracks and cars. Choose your favorite motorcar and start earning eternal fame and glory. Forza!
Perhaps you'll question the size of the package. This top Racing app is just 46.2M. When running in the background, basically it does not take up much RAM. 9Apps also provides other hot Racing apps(games) for android mobile phone. This app is completely free!!
Race right to the new update! Enhance your gameplay experience and have your breath taken away by extreme speed.


text:
Little RobotBook - 2015
From the critics
Community Activity
CommentAdd a Comment
Reminds me of Iron Giant and Lilo and Stitch. A fun book with a lot of heart.
Gr 1-5 Once again Hatke delivers a delightful graphic novel with a positive female role-model, fun non-humans, and a message of friendship. When a dark-skinned cherubic girl chances upon a robot that looks like a trashcan, she finds a friend worth protecting. Each day they explore the junkyard and the surrounding forest, with the little girl acting as a guide to new sights and concepts. Both love playing together, but when the robot wants to leave, things go downhill. It is up to this resourceful girl to save him from the bad bots of the factory. With her trusty wrench in hand, she repairs parts, builds traps, and fixes hearts. Like the movie Wall-e, these robots have a limited range of facial expressions, so they "speak", and emote, in sound effects. Changes in font size, punctuation, and position, are just as necessary to our comprehension as body language and composition are. We rely heavily on visual cues, for the girl also says little. These two started their journey separately and in silence, but by the end, music and friends surround them. Young readers, and those new to graphica, will find the easy-to-follow illustrations, large borderless panels, and steady pace, welcoming. VERDICT A pleasantly colourful adventure of discovery and friendship. Highly recommended.
*reviewed for School Library Journal
I don't usually read full-color graphic novels because they hurt my eyes, but this one had a more muted color palette and softer edges on the frames, and I really enjoyed how the pictures told the interesting sci-fi story. A little girl finds and befriends a little lost robot, and they have to escape from the big robot that's trying to catch it and take it back to the warehouse. The nameless protagonist is spunky and inventive, and I love her.
With minimal words but plenty of bright and descriptive graphics, this graphic novel from the creator of Zita the Spacegirl features a plucky heroine and her little robot friend who will win over readers' hearts with their creativity, ingenuity, and mutual devotion.
Great graphic novel for a younger crowd from the same author who is the creator of Zita the space girl. There are few words but the message is clear; it's great to have a friend.
Today I came across a web comic from Owl Turd Comix titled "Hooray for Teamwork!" <http://owlturd.com/post/131950162249/hooray-for-teamwork-d-image-twitter-facebook> The dialogue reads:
"You're too late, SuperDORKS! You'll never stop me now!!"
"That's where you're wrong, evil-doer! We will stop you with the powers of:
"Incredible violence.
"And Love!"
"Ah, I, uh, I see you got a new member . . . S-superdorks. P-prepare for battle."
"Wow, guys, we're doing AMAZING lately!!"
I might not have referenced it had the timing been different, but right on the heels of reading Little Robot it was hard not to make a connection. The superteam's power list is quite similar to the book's ingredients--just replace the third one with mild (robot, gore-free) violence and add a good dose of tinkering and tenacity.
In this nearly wordless graphic novel, a bored, mechanically-inclined, young girl wanders a junkyard in search of adventure and entertainment. She happens across a cute little robot that fell off the back of a truck. Over the course of a couple of days, she infuses her new friend with her easy-going spirit of meandering fun. Then the robot's large, menacing, evil creators (also robots) come to reclaim it. The girl, however, doesn't give up on her friends so easily.
Hatke's art is clear, informative, inviting, and pleasant; or, like it's main character, easy-going and fun. The story has just enough conflict and tension to be an engaging tale within an overall package that simply makes you feel good.
Age SuitabilityAdd Age Suitability
CorteMaderaStaff_Judi thinks this title is suitable for between the ages of 7 and 12
Paulas_NB_FC_Kidlit thinks this title is suitable for 8 years and over
SummaryAdd a Summary
There are no summaries for this title yet.
NoticesAdd Notices
There are no notices for this title yet.
QuotesAdd a Quote
There are no quotes for this title yet.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
On the heels of the announcement of a $60-million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for upgrades to and coordination of the country's three major interconnection transmission networks (Western, Eastern, and Texas), T. Boone Pickens has delayed plans to build the world's largest wind farm in Texas due to a lack of transmission capability. As the first pillar in the Pickens Plan — the energy investor's 10-year plan for American energy independence — wind power would generate up to 22% of the nation's electricity, supplemented by solar generation. Not coincidentally, building a 21st century backbone electrical transmission grid is the second pillar of the plan.
In May 2008, Pickens' Dallas-based Mesa Power ordered almost 700 turbines for the 1,000MW wind farm to be located in the Texas Panhandle near Pampa, Texas. In its final stage, the wind farm is expected to generate 4,000MW of power from 2,700 turbines. However, Pickens will now take delivery of only 300 turbines for 2011, siting them at wind farms in Minnesota and Canada. According to Pickens, the wind farm in the Panhandle will have to wait until transmission capability is built.
Limited transmission capacity has been the greatest factor stunting the development of renewable resources in much of the western United States, according to the 2009 Regional Assessment by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC), the regional entity responsible for coordinating and promoting bulk electric system reliability in the Western Interconnection. Whereas total U.S. electricity generation experienced a 1% year-over-year decline in 2008, renewable generation increased by 5% compared to 2007, according to data from the DOE's Energy Information Association (EIA). Yet, combined U.S. installed generation capacity of wind, solar, and geothermal power in 2008 represented less than 3% of the country's total electricity supply (click here to see Fig. 1).
Furthermore, despite a 51% spike in wind generation, the wind sector accounted for only 1.3% of total U.S. generation from all energy sources — a paltry total considering wind power could meet 20% of the nation's electricity needs by 2030, according to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), Washington, D.C., if the appropriate policies and transmission assets are put into place.
Golden triangle
Historically, the nation's three transmission networks have maintained separate systems. Terms for the $60 million in funding from the DOE require the agencies responsible for managing these grids to sign a memorandum of understanding that they will work together on transmission planning and execution. As a result of these planning efforts, each of the awardees will produce long-term resource and transmission planning studies in 2011, with updated documents in 2013, which will inform policy and regulatory decisions in the years to come and provide critical information to electricity industry planners, states, and others to develop a modernized, low-carbon electricity system. This collaboration could finally advance the integration of renewable sources of power on a national scale, allowing it to compete with coal and natural-gas fired generation.
However, engineers at Santa Fe, N.M.-based Tres Amigas, LLC don't want to wait that long. Provided all federal and state regulatory commissions get onboard with their plan, electricity generated from the increasingly abundant wind and solar installations in the American Southwest could more easily and reliably make its way to populated areas of consumption through a one-of-a-kind renewable energy transmission hub that would link access points to the three separate transmission networks.
To be located on 22.5 sq mi in Clovis, N.M., 1 mi from the Texas border, the privately funded Tres Amigas SuperStation is designed to move power between the interconnections. "It's the only place in the country where the three interconnections come together," says Phil Harris, CEO of Tres Amigas, LLC. "And that region of the country has 80GW of renewable energy potential."
Through a triangle of 3-ft underground pipeline containing high-temperature superconducting (HTS) cables that will act as a bus work for terminals containing solid-state voltage source converters (VSCs) at each point of the triangle, the Tres Amigas station would convert the alternating current (AC) power flowing from the power lines feeding into the hub from wind and solar installations from states such as Idaho and Oklahoma into DC power and then transition the DC power into AC power at the adjacent terminals.
In essence, the Tres Amigas station would resemble a power roundabout, according to Harris, with superconductor cables serving as the main pathway for electricity and VSCs acting as on-ramps and off-ramps. To further mitigate intermittency, the station would be equipped with large-scale 150MW batteries, which would handle the numerous charge-discharge cycles needed for reactive system support. "Tres Amigas, by its design, solves the major issues of bringing intermittent renewable generation into an AC-interconnected network," Harris explains. "These are real problems when you start getting a larger percentage of renewable resources as part of the total on the AC system."
At the outset, the proposed station would have the capacity to move 5GW of electricity among any or all of the three grids, with the potential to move up to 30GW once all modules are built. However, before the station can be built, Tres Amigas first needs approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, now occupied with the DOE plan for collaboration among the transmission networks.
Hot wired
Recently, this type of heavy investment in a national, centralized electrical infrastructure has come under some criticism. In a New York Times op-ed column from March 2009, Ian Bowles, the secretary of energy and environmental affairs for the State of Massachusetts, warns against legislation fortifying transmission systems to carry bulk energy generated in remote areas to populated cities as too expensive and too large of an undertaking. Instead, Bowles argues regions should take advantage of their own natural resources, such as hydroelectric capacity in the Northwest and offshore wind farms in the Northeast. "Renewable energy resources are found all across the country; they don't need to be harnessed from just one place," Bowles writes. "In each area, developing these power sources would be cheaper than piping in clean energy from thousands of miles away."
The La Crescent, Minn.-based grassroots group, the Citizens Energy Task Force (CETF), represents the concerns of citizens who question the need for particular high-voltage power lines in Minnesota and Wisconsin and support clean, sustainable, locally generated power sources. CETF would like to see the United States move toward local power generation and advocate conservation and energy management; the use of diverse clean, renewable energy that is community-based and community-owned, helping to develop wealth and strengthen the area's rural economy. The group also champions compensation for landowners whose property is used for wind turbines, power lines, or other energy facilities. "We're not against shoring up the grid," says Jeremy Chipps, CETF member. "But we are against massive costs of systems only designed to retain market share of big power companies. We think it would make more sense for power to be generated much closer to where it is used."
Renewable distributed energy generation technologies — principally wind and solar photovoltaic (PV) installations between 1kW and 5MW located close to the point of consumption — are one way around costly investment in transmission systems, according to a new report, "Fuel Cells for Residential, Commercial, and Industrial Applications: Market Analysis and Forecasts," published by Pike Research, the Boulder, Colo.-based market research and consulting firm that provides in-depth analysis of global clean technology markets. The report reveals the use of renewable energy distributed generation experiences strongest growth in areas of the country with the highest prices for conventional electricity combined with the highest levels of environmental consciousness. Simultaneously, with technological advances and resulting cost reductions, renewable energy distributed generation technologies are generating power at prices comparable to grid-produced electricity.
For example, a 500kW PV system was recently completed on the roof of a historic building at a former military installation in Watertown, Mass., purchased by Cambridge, Mass.-based Harvard University in 2001. The project was made possible through a $1.1-million rebate provided by the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, Westborough, Mass. The system is owned by Crimson Solar, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Integrys Energy Services, De Pere, Wis. Harvard has committed to buy the power generated from the system and the associated renewable energy certificates, for 25 years at a predetermined rate, with no up-front capital cost.
Independent variables
The system at Harvard is tied to the grid. In fact, distributed generation systems are becoming increasingly grid-tied. Prior to 2004, off-grid PV installations accounted for more than half the market, according to the recent report, "Rebound: U.S. Photovoltaic Market Growth Through 2010," from AltaTerra Research, New York. In 2008, only 15% of PV installations were off-grid. For 2010, the growth rate for grid-tied PV in the United States is expected to reach 1GW. In 2008, the U.S. small wind turbine market sold 3,764kW of off-grid wind-produced energy, compared to 13,610kW from on-grid sources (click here to see Fig. 2).
The primary benefit of a grid-tied system is the assurance of receiving power from the electric utility when the system is not producing power, eliminating the need for an energy storage system (Storage Units). "The grid itself provides the storage that you need," says Michael Goggin, manager transmission policy at AWEA. "As many as hundreds of wind turbines are not going to significantly affect the stability of the grid."
Goggin explains that output from wind turbines is random. In general, in low penetrations, especially with smaller-scale turbines, the grid provides all the services needed for integration. "All that variability balances out on the grid," he adds.
An additional benefit for grid-tied power generators is the ability to sell power back to the electric utility through net metering.
The use of distributed generation can also benefit the electric utility, according to San Francisco-based Solarbuzz, an international solar energy research and consulting company. Grid-tied distributed generation helps meet peak power loads, diversifies the range of energy sources in use, and increases the reliability of the grid network. Distributed resources can also provide needed system support during emergencies and lower the cost of power.
Mandates limiting the installation of new transmission lines and construction of power plants, coupled with requirements for higher reliability and a potential federal mandate requiring a percentage of electricity to come from renewable sources (possibly 20% by 2030), are prompting utilities to consider distributed generation options. An electric utility's portfolio of energy storage and distributed generation systems could be key essential assets in future smart grid configurations. The ability to accommodate a diverse range of generation types — including both centralized and distributed generation — could play a major role once the smart grid comes to fruition.
Million rooftops
Gary Hunt, a San Francisco-based global power market strategy and risk advisor, predicts that a convergence of market, economic, environmental, and regulatory forces will require investor-owned electric utilities to add renewable energy distributed generation to their portfolios. "The central station electric utility business model is largely under assault because of the desire for more of a distributed generation renewable-based supply mix," Hunt explains. "Solar, especially, is a credible threat in that it is possible for players other than the traditional electric utility provider to aggregate customers and deliver energy."
As part of its $50-million solar rooftop program, Duke Energy, Charlotte, N.C., has installed PV panels atop four commercial buildings in the state. At all four installations, Duke leases the rooftop but owns the solar array. Power generated at the sites feeds directly into the local electrical grid.
To hit its 8MW goal, Duke will announce additional commercial, industrial, and residential rooftop sites in 2010. Renewables must account for 12.5% of the electric utility's retail sales in North Carolina by 2021. "There's no reason we couldn't do something similar in a wind-power project capacity, but where we normally site wind power projects, there's not a ton of development in those areas," says Greg Efthimiou, communications manager for Duke Energy. "They're not sited in urban areas or population centers." (See Urban Wind Power) Although Duke has invested heavily in renewable energy in the last two years — $1 billion alone in wind energy — Efthimiou estimates it currently generates less than 5% of its overall electricity from renewable sources.
To cover its costs in the solar rooftop program, Duke will add 16 cents a month to residential customers' bills and can reap federal tax credits for 30% of its investment and accelerated depreciation, whether the electric utility makes its own solar power or buys it. North Carolina awards tax credits worth 35% of the investment and excuses property taxes on 80% of the property's value.
Hunt says the only thing standing in the way of solar right now is cost. But in the future, when solar technologies are affordable and more efficient, Hunt foresees a policy goal of net-zero for every commercial building and home — and the electric utility will no longer have to balance the pluses and minuses of energy use. "We're moving to a world that opens the door to aggregation of customers and distributed generation in ways that we haven't seen before," Hunt explains. "The technology is still young, the costs are still high, and the efficiency is still low. But I think that's the way it's going."
Sidebar: Urban Wind Power
Difficult local permitting practices or a lack of permitting thwart an estimated one-third of all potential small wind turbine installations, according to the "AWEA Small Wind Turbine Global Market Study," published by the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), Washington, D.C. Unnecessarily restrictive regulations, particularly height limitations, can limit a turbine's productivity, discourage customers and investment, and repel local industry-related businesses from communities, the study notes.
In urban settings, turbines are scarce. In 2008, approximately 200 building-mounted turbines were sold to be used for urban or rooftop applications in the United States, according to AWEA. Although this represents less than 250kW of the 80MW of installed small-wind capacity (less than 0.002% of the U.S. small-wind market), it marks a slight increase over the approximately 100 units sold in 2007.
For more information on permitting rules, read the AWEA permitting guidebook, "In the Public Interest: How and Why to Permit for Small Wind Systems," at www.awea.org/smallwind/pdf/InThePublicInterest.pdf.
Sidebar: Storage Units
Energy storage technology is an emerging and controversial topic in the renewable energy arena. Advocates say it will allow higher penetration levels of intermittent energy sources, whereas those in opposition argue its redundancy.
Charlotte, N.C.-based Duke Energy intends to match a $22-million grant from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to design, build, and install large-scale 20MW batteries to store wind-produced energy at its Notrees Windpower Project wind farm in Ector and Winkler counties, Texas. The batteries at the wind farm will store excess wind-produced energy and discharge it whenever demand for electricity is highest. The intent of the grant is to demonstrate how energy storage can help overcome the problem of intermittency with solar and wind energy sources. "You don't get power if the sun's not shining or the wind's not blowing," says Greg Efthimiou, communications manager for Duke Energy. "Energy storage could turn that equation on its head by letting us store wind power, and then use it at times when demand is highest and perhaps when the wind isn't blowing."
The 95 wind turbines in operation at Duke Energy's Notrees site can generate 151MW of electricity. Duke will work with the Energy Reliability Council of Texas to understand the project's implications and establish requirements for its implementation. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Palo Alto, Calif., will provide advisory services throughout the development of this energy storage project. This project represents one of the nation's first demonstrations of energy storage at a utility-scale wind farm. "We believe that large-scale energy storage in the form of these very large batteries holds the potential to be a true game-changer for renewable energy," Efthimiou continues.
However, analysis from Washington, D.C.-based American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) claims that the necessity for energy storage with wind installations is a persistent myth. According to the analysis, the United States was able to add over 8,500MW of wind power to the grid in 2008 without adding any commercial-scale energy storage. Flexible power, large regional balancing areas, and wind forecasting techniques allow large amounts of wind energy (and other variable renewable sources) to be integrated onto the grid. "Every day, grid operators accommodate variability in electricity demand and supply by increasing and decreasing the output of flexible generators — power plants like hydroelectric dams or natural gas plants that can rapidly change their level of generation," says Michael Goggin, manager transmission policy at AWEA. "Grid operators use these same flexible resources to accommodate any variability introduced by wind energy. Because these power plants and other sources of flexibility have already been built, it is almost always much cheaper to use this flexibility than to build new sources of flexibility like energy storage facilities."


text:
Reissued Waxed Cotton Gabardine Car Coat
€1,990.00 €1,990.00
€990.00 €990.00
All orders will be fulfilled by Burberry Limited and shipped from the UK. When you place your order, you accept Burberry's Terms and Conditions and confirm that you have read our Privacy Policy.
Size Guide
Use the Size Guide to choose the best fit for your measurements.
In this window, you can find out the shipping and returns options for the selected item.
In this window, you can contact customer service for further assistance.
- A reissue of our 1994 Tiverton car coat with knotted leather buttons and a diamond-quilted lining.
- Coat length: 140cm/55.1in. This is based on a size UK M as proportions change slightly according to size.
- Model's height: 185cm/6ft 1in. Model wears a size UK L.
- Outer: 100% cotton
- Lining: 100% cotton
- Second lining: 100% viscose
- Filling: 100% polyester
- Buttons: leather, buffalo horn
- Single-breasted closure
- Flap patch pockets
- Signature detail: storm shield
- Specialist dry clean
- Made in Italy
Item 45478061
Complete the Look
€130.00 €260.00
Archive Logo Jersey Sweatpants
€260.00 €520.00
The Classic Cashmere Scarf with Archive Logo
€270.00 €390.00
Recommended Products


text:
April 19, 2009
CAMBRIDGE, Mass. - The MIT lightweights competed in the 46th running of the Geiger Cup Regatta on Saturday against Cornell and Columbia coming up just short in close racing.
In the Varsity race, the engineers started powerfully and established a four-seat lead on the Lions and were just down against the Big Red. At 1000 meters, Cornell had established a boat length lead to MIT, which had sustained its position over Columbia. With 1200 meters completed, the Lions raised their cadence and made a move on MIT that established a two-seat lead. MIT responded but Columbia was able to hold off subsequent charges by MIT.
The MIT freshmen continue to show solid progress. In the first freshmen race, MIT came off the line well and was challenging Columbia through the first 1000 meters. In the second half of the race, Columbia was able to press harder and took charge of second place while Cornell maintained a strong lead to the finish.
The Engineers next race in Philadelphia against Pennsylvania on May 2.
Cornell 6:16.2
Columbia 6:24.8
Cornell 6:25.5
Columbia 6:30.8
Cornell 2F 6:33.0
Second Varsity
Cornell 6:25.9
Columbia 6:34.0
Cornell 3V 6:34.7


text:
- Inside Athletics
- Tickets
- Fan Zone
- Media Zone
- Social
- Shop
- Donate Now
The Buccaneers, who will join the Atlantic Sun Conference on July 1, will play a 20-game conference schedule along with seven non-conference games. In addition, the Bucs could play as many as three more home games when they host the Atlantic Sun Conference Tournament at
"We really like this schedule and what we were able to do with it," Bartow said. "Obviously, when you look at it, playing
"It's also important to us that we play local colleges as part of our exhibition schedule. We think having Milligan and Mars Hill come in will create a lot of local interest."
Since joining the A-Sun, a main concern for some fans has been the perception that traveling to road games will be difficult. However, last season the Bucs played 24 of their 27 games within a five-hour drive of
Also, the Pirate Club will be planning fan/alumni bus trips to
"We're playing 23 of our 27 games within a reasonable driving distance of
Also important will be an early season homestand against Marshall and a pair of strong A-Sun programs, Belmont and Lipscomb.
"Coming off road games at
Season tickets for ETSU men's basketball will go on sale later this summer. At that time, fans will also be given an opportunity to purchase 2006 A-Sun Tournament tickets at a reduced rate. Check ETSUBucs.com for more information throughout the season.
2005-06 Men's Basketball Schedule
* -- denotes A-Sun game//home games in BOLD
Thursday, Nov. 10 Mars Hill (exhibition)
Friday, Nov. 18 at
Tuesday, Nov. 22 at Radford
Saturday, Nov. 26
Monday, Nov. 28
Thursday, Dec. 1
Saturday, Dec. 3 Lipscomb *
Friday, Dec. 9 at Clemson
Saturday, Dec. 17 at
Wednesday, Dec. 21
Thursday, Dec. 29
Wednesday, Jan. 4
Saturday, Jan. 7 at
Monday, Jan. 9 at Gardner-Webb *
Thursday, Jan. 12 at
Saturday, Jan. 14
Monday, Jan. 16
Thursday, Jan. 19 at Stetson *
Saturday, Jan. 21 at Mercer *
Wednesday, Jan. 25
Saturday, Jan. 28 Stetson *
Monday, Jan. 30 Mercer *
Friday, Feb. 3 at
Sunday, Feb. 5 at
Thursday, Feb. 9
Saturday, Feb. 11 Gardner-Webb *
Thursday, Feb. 16 at
Friday, Feb. 24 at Lipscomb *
Sunday, Feb. 26 at
March 2-4 Atlantic Sun Conference Tournament (in


text:
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Main Page"
StalkingTime (talk | contribs)
(→Bogus Asian-language translation?: new section)
|Line 307:
|Line 307:
Consensus was reached in the [http://news.gmane.org/gmane.politics.activism.metagovernment mailing list] about reverting the Main Page to the revision before this matter. Please StalkingTime don't take this as a bad action, it happens sometimes. (Once in another project I spent 4 hours writing an article that didn't make it because it wasn't supported.) [[User:Matías Battocchia|Matías Battocchia]] 16:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Consensus was reached in the [http://news.gmane.org/gmane.politics.activism.metagovernment mailing list] about reverting the Main Page to the revision before this matter. Please StalkingTime don't take this as a bad action, it happens sometimes. (Once in another project I spent 4 hours writing an article that didn't make it because it wasn't supported.) [[User:Matías Battocchia|Matías Battocchia]] 16:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Revision as of 16:28, 5 May 2010
Use this page to discuss the Main Page before you make changes to it.
To add a new section to this page, you can click the + tab at the top of this page, or click here.
When posting on a Discussion page, please sign your comments by typing four tildes (
~~~~). And be sure to click the Preview button before saving your changes. For additional help, please use the Wikipedia help page.
- 1 Consensus
- 2 Basic principles
- 3 Transition
- 4 Direct democracy
- 5 Jefferson letter to Samuel Kerchival
- 6 Development status
- 7 Discussion of 2008/08 changes
- 8 Simple but no simpler?
- 9 Metagovernment Logo
- 10 MediaWiki
- 11 edit policy
- 13 Objection to revert: Revision as of 16:33, 3 November 2009 by User:Targetrace
- 14 Bogus Asian-language translation?
This was written before the mailing list discussion started.
Many things written here seem to have garnered agreement on the ml, whereas others seem to have spawned controversy.
Would it be ok to edit-out sections of hte main page that do not yet have consensus on the mailing list?
Today I showed the (static version of the) page to an activist who replied with disagreement about a few topics that I knew don't have consensus, and it made me think that maybe we should show a more updated vision to newcomers...
--AurSaraf 00:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, I think that would be a good idea. Hopefully others will contribute to your edits. — Ed Pastore 02:32, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Basic principles
For a discussion of the Basic Principles section of this page, please see: Talk:Basic principles.
The easiest and most practical way to transition from representative democracy to an open source government might be to have dummy candidates run for office. By that I mean have a candidate run for office under the "open source party", and if elected have them legislate as they're instructed to by the metagovernment. As the metagovernment would have to function within the existing framework of representative democracy, its abilities would be somewhat limited, and may not allow for the more sophisticated scoring system. For example, within a parliament or congress, metagovernment legislators would often be limited to voting "yes" or "no". Despite these limitations, this may be the most pragmatic and quickest way to achieve a kind of open source government.
Once the metagovernment has a large enough majority more fundamental institutional changes could be made, such as the implementation of the scoring system.ErikPressman 14:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- this is not really acceptable in many countries. For what I know politicians, ones they get in the job the swear that they will vote according to their consciens and not following external influences. I know many (most? all?) politician do not follow this code of conduct and are instead up for grab t the biggest lobby, but to have a strategy that openly requires it is just asking for trouble. It's a bit like the story of the man pissing in the swimming pool. He was harshly criticised: "don't you know it is illegal to piss in the swimming poll?". "But everybody does it!". "Yes, but not from the diving board" :)
- --Pietro 12:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I think the transition will follow two paths. One will be the introduction of shadow governments, dedicated to watching existing governments. Existing legislation will be put in a repository and the discussions in the parliament will be transferred into metascore. The communities using metascore will then generate feedback which the government won't be able to ignore. The shadow governments, will become ''the place to go, in order to talk about politics and it will be much easier and effective, than writing to your senator.
The other path will be organizations who adopt metascore to cope with their organizational complexity. I think many large organizations could use our system, to eventually direct the company, according to the will of its employees, rather than its CXOs.
Of course at first, we will need to sell the system to them as a way to filter and distil all the information in the organization, get feedback from shareholders, so that they can make better decisions. Of course the transparency in the organization, that comes with the system, will force them to stay in line, with the those participating in the discussions. Eventually people will realize that they don't need the people in power, and that they can govern by themselves. By then, the system will already have been put in place and the transition will be complete. Manuel Barkhau 20:20, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- This is very similar to how I see it working as well. The beauty of this approach is that it does not require any sort of active attempt on our part to displace any government; we simply invite societies to change their form of government to ours when they see fit.
- It is significant to note here that several national projects seem to be getting underway. In addition to our Israeli friends at myvote.org.il, there is also Free Government recently launched in the United States and Demoex in Sweeden. And probably more I am not aware of. While these efforts are all fantastic... I am starting to wonder how they can be brought together. Making insular national governments seems necessary for the shadow government stage, but at some point, the world is going to realize that we are one internet. Restricting participation based on geographic happenstance doesn't seem useful anymore. — Ed Pastore 23:22, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I was wondering, what if instead of getting power from the current government, we went straight to the people and asked them to ratify a constitution? We could copy the US and require 75% of nations to approve the constitution with a majority vote. We could conduct the vote online. — Ben Ochoa 13:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- That is pretty much the approach we are following, but we're trying to be patient about it. First, we need some software. Then we need some participants in the software. Then once we have something that people find to be superior to the status quo... people should have the motivation to figure out the best way to make it become the real government. — Ed Pastore 15:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
- A system of governance is usually put in place because it has a strong track record (hence the adoption and metamorphosis of democracy. Instead why not petition the current governing body to "try it out". For example it could be applied temporarily to a small municipality. Or perhaps you could work with a Native American tribe (in possession of tribal lands)to institute it on their land. If it worked, it would begin to gain the reliability all new systems lack. Symetrist 15:58, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- This is currently being discussed on the Startup list server. See the thread starting here: http://metagovernment.org/pipermail/start_metagovernment.org/2008-August/000497.html Basically, we hope to use ourselves as the first test case, then to offer it to any other community wishing to try it. We have had an offer (in the message above) for an institution to use it, and we also have a couple of political projects which have expressed an interest, as noted here: Related projects#Affiliated_projects — Ed Pastore 03:38, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Direct democracy
I reverted a change in the Main Page (by G Fencer ) that was not being discussed here. The change was saying that the metagovernment would be a form of direct democracy. Since we asked in the first line to
Use this page to discuss the Main Page before you make changes to it.
DO we all agree that "metagovernment would be a form of direct democracy"? Should we put it back?--Pietro 15:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
- I would say that yes, the word is a good description of this project. But as we note on the direct democracy page, this implementation should avoid the pitfalls of conventional direct democracy. "Open source governance" is probably a more accurate description (if for no other reason than that we are in the process of defining open source governance). But it may be useful to use the words "direct democracy" somewhere on the home page, so that people more readily get it. — Ed Pastore 14:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- Also, I should mention here that I had recently made some undiscussed edits to the Main Page, though they were mostly removal of old sections which may not be relevant anymore. However, I'll restore the timeline at Startup/Timeline and see if anyone wants to help bring it up to date. — Ed Pastore 14:47, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
- I personally would vote against. I agree that it does represent quite well the project. But as we said elswhere direct democracy on the net is different than outside where it runs the risk of becoming populist. I think we more risk of losing people who do not want to support a populist project, more than gaining people. Who is really for direct democracy on the net, is generally well aquainted with the fact that what they want can also be described as open source governance.--Pietro 21:28, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
- That makes sense. In that case, I think we should probably remove the reference to wiki government as well. I just got done replying to a blogger who got the impression that we were advocating simple government by wiki. — Ed Pastore 22:55, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
- I just removed that ref. to wikigovernment, since the Wikipedia page has been deleted. — Ed Pastore 17:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Jefferson letter to Samuel Kerchival
I noticed the nice quote on the right, and went away to attribute it and add it to Wikiquote, only to find conflicting dates.
According to bottom of this, which gives a more complete quote, it was July 12, 1810. Project Gutenberg etext 16784 has the complete letter identified as CXXXV, and a date of July 12, 1816. To confirm the PG etext was accurate, I have put a digital edition of the four volumes onto Wikisource. The quote begins on leaf 302, and the date can be seen on leaf 297. The entire letter can be read at Letter to Samuel Kerchival - July 12, 1816.
The revision that introduced the "1810" makes me wonder where it came from. I'm not feeling bold enough to change the main page on my
first second edit, especially as I've only checked one set of historical pagescans. John Vandenberg 13:47, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
- Welcome aboard, John! I think that even though it is a single source, a scan of the original document trumps something that I dug up probably out of Wikipedia. I'll change it now, and if anyone seems to find a better date, they can always change it again. :) — Ed Pastore 16:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Development status
Since the timeline is no longer on the home page, I added in a sentence about the development status. This was in response to a conversation I had with Dan Rosenthal, after he posted in this thread (fourth post). — Ed Pastore 16:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Discussion of 2008/08 changes
for brevity, i would just name the basic principles with a link to a more detailed description thereof. i think there is no need to repeat the interpretation of the principles on the main page. such an approach will lead to double work in terms of editing. rustahm 04:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
- I think the basic principles are (somewhat) static though? I see your point, but I also remember being intrigued by the scope of the 'transition' section at the bottom of the page -- which, with an editors eye, would seem to be out of place. Richard Franks 06:18, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
- static? nothing's ever static in this world. especially when we are talking about people's perceptions about abstract things, such as principles. fundamental movements are everywhere. remember Large Hadron Collider? ;-) so, description of the basic principles is subject to changes. like there might be one Bible but many interpretations thereof.
- as for the section "Transition", i think a dedicated page would be more appropriate, again with a link thereto from a short passage on the main page.
- rustahm 16:56, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
- As of this revision, I changed the basic principles to a transclusion from the basic principles page. So changes on that page are automatically reflected on this page. That said... the basic principles should remain mostly unchanged, and at some point I think we should protect the page from modification. — Ed Pastore 21:47, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Simple but no simpler?
From the current lede:
Anybody with enough time and dedication should be able to participate
The terms "enough time" and "dedication" are highly subjective - perhaps giving rise to the idea that it is a walled garden?
Disputes are resolved through synthesis, rather than voting or compromise,
This would mean nothing to a newcomer.
I suggest that the lede is kept as simple as possible - providing information without raising any questions or nuance e.g.:
The goal of the Metagovernment project is to make the governance of any community as accessible as a free software project; not everyone must participate, but everyone must be allowed to participate.
People may help govern any community as much or as little as they wish by creating, discussing, and supporting resolutions. User input is weighed by other users through a scoring system and brought to the attention of other participants interested in that input.
The Metagovernment project governs and develops Metascore, the software to aid and manage community-based, open source governance systems. It is a global project in the startup phase, and you are encouraged to participate.
- I believe this is a good enhancement for the main-page opening paragraphs--let the links give greater detail if need be. I'd say this opening lede(?) is concise, inviting, without excessive technical jargon, and easier to follow than the original.
- On a side note, if we all help watch the main page, do we really need to treat it specially (for example, how long did this suggesting sit here?). It would be much worse for a good contributor to leave thinking that their input didn't get attention (or that the project is dead), than the occasional poor edit/vandal that can be corrected easily enough by nearly any of us. (If more watchdogging because necesssary, I'm sure the community will find a way distribute the responsibility.)
- Consider also, that (unless the reader had a [non-English, for example?] misunderstanding) every edit is attempting to communicate some inadequacy in the existing document, however failingly. If an edit seems to make less sense, it's probably because while the general [valid] feeling is there, the grammar is not. It's up to the editors (i.e. you and me) to look at the suggestion with enough detachment to tease out the original inadequacy and to re-fit the new contribution in some way. In this way it becomes something like Pietro's project, nothing ever really gets discarded, but the suggestions that have value will continue on to the next generation.... Marcos 18:27, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
The following principles have been proposed but disputed. See basic principles and Talk:Basic principles for the dispute.
I wouldn't list the disputed principles on the main page, but I'd try to turn it into a selling point, e.g.
Following the principle of radical transparency, please see basic principles and Talk:Basic principles for details of principles which have been proposed but disputed.
Transition - I'd be tempted to put a hook at the end - I think there is more power in humility here, especially as not to come across as radical looneys - so perhaps something like:
The Metascore software in current development may not be the tool which gains widespread adoption among the populace, but that's not a reason not to write it. The path transition takes will undoubtedly take us on many unexpected turns, but that's not a reason not to lay the foundations. We are confident that the philosophies, principles and practices we are developing together will form the cornerstone of the next major revision of democratic participation in governance.
While we do hope that you choose to participate in Metagovernment, we also encourage you to look at these related projects.
Metagovernment Logo
This is my first visit and post to the Metagovernment website. Although I am still learning about the project, I guess first impressions do count and tend to be underrated later on. My intent with this post is to express that I am very impressed by the work done here and I will try to help, even if from a distance since I am no more than a web user.
Abiding by the tenet of "first things first", I have a suggestion about the Metagovernment logo design. The design is ok, but really does not convey to the observer any of the goals of the project, except where written "Government of, by, and for the people". My opinion is that the graphic part of the logo should be more representative of such a new way of governance. Also, as the first thing you look at, the logo should capture the observer's interest and curiosity, particularly in a project like this.
I like the metaphors conveyed by the saying "turning the world upside down". The metaphor has many possible interpretations in the political context, but I think the most straightforward of them would read as this: a new way of thinking which changes fundamental aspects of preordained and accepted beliefs.
As you may very well have forethought, my suggestion is that the logo of the open half-world should be turned upside down. This is not a new idea and even some countries of the south hemisphere sell maps of the world turned upside down (south hemisphere at the top while the north hemisphere at the bottom). My suggestion, however, is not to be misinterpreted as a clash between national powers (such as south vs. north). The correct interpretation is that an observer would be interested in knowing the reason why a predetermined and uncritically accepted map design has a new appearance. Just as important, it stimulates critical thinking of preordained beliefs and openness to new ideas. -Menezesgc 19:15, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
- That's a very interesting idea, Menezesgc. I'm going propose it to the group on the prototype and the list. FYI, while we have some discussions here, the majority of discussions currently take place on the Startup list server. You are welcome and encouraged to join. — Ed Pastore 01:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
I'd also suggest a reconsideration of [Abe] Lincoln's ideal ("government of, by, and for the people"). In a global system, it's not just "the people" who a system of governance should be "for". The government must also be for the natural world which, need it be said, cannot easy participate in "open governance". Marcos 20:59, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
A note for consideration, UCSC has developed a wiki-trust extension to the MediaWiki software--would be interesting to have it start building a reputation ranking for all the edits which get done. (Basically, it tracks revision histories to see which user's edits tend to be preserved--no extra voting required! --the edits themselves inform the metric automatically!)
edit policy
there is a recent discussion about the edit policy for this page here --Jacki Buros 22:49, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
how about adding "__NOTOC__" to the main page? Wikademia
I've been thinking about that too. I'd give it thumbs-up to give it a try. Marcos 04:48, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Objection to revert: Revision as of 16:33, 3 November 2009 by User:Targetrace
Rationale includes: "only has one editor and does not necessarily express consensus of the project. Also, question format of the link does not flow in the text of page"
The number of wiki pages created with more than one editor is nearly zero, so the first objection seems inapt. It is understood that the Main Page requires special handling, and I considered that before making what is a fairly small change targeted for a specific set of users--so I took those issues to heart and the small addition is and was not a wanton act of individualism. I strongly encourage a look at Jackie Buro's writeup on edit policy addressing this exact issue.
Secondly, the spirit of a wiki (and the metagovernment project in general) is to build consensus, not veto trial runs by fiat--it, in fact, generally prefers editing first and building consensus as you go (cf. WikiPedia:WP:Be_Bold). You also, instead of simply undoing the change, could have created a discussion where the modification could be debated or enhanced as you suggested for me along those lines, but the simple revert, sadly, denies any further collaboration. So, I've done it for us :)
Additionally, each sincere user edit should be seen as a reflection of some deficiency in the existing text. As such, editors should try to tease out the deficiency and find a way to merge what the user trying to get at (however failingly) and what he/she wants as maintainer, finding a way to incorporate both in a synthesis-style reduction--much like I did, by the way, to your recent edit on Trust. There you will see I incorporated some of your (valid) objections to the original content without compromising on its original, and still valid (until shown otherwise), intent. Namely, I toned down the focus on trust as an "ultimate" requirement, kept your spelling corrections (thanks), and added some text to address what I think is a slight misunderstanding on your part (though I'd still invite further questions on that) so as to avoid similar misunderstandings by other users.
Regarding the last point that the edit "does not flow in the text of the page"--that is somewhat deliberate. Since its purpose is to draw a certain segment of users away from the main page, it must have enough of a hint to give said users a clue that following that link will give something explicitly made for them.
So, to summarize and address the criticisms, the page in question is:
- freely editable by you and others to correct whatever (note: unmentioned) failings of that page are, is
- off the main page, so as not to mix the style,
- is aligned with the spirit and vision of the project
- fills a gap that the rather dry and academic main page makes towards its audience--new users won't necessarily know why this project is important, nothing on the main page tells you or engages the spirit--it only tells you its vision, principles, and hopes (or assumes) that you "get it", hence the slight break in tone--made more glaring by the perhaps overly-academic/political voice used in the original.
I would argue that objection that it "does not necessarily express consensus of the project" is
- too vague,
- presents a severe impracticality -- if we waited for consensus before approving updates, movement forward would come to a standstill (note that, in several ways, it already has...),
- in the absence of any concrete objection to the article's content, one can only conclude that the real issue is one of control.
Wiki policy evolved over many years and much experience--there's a reason it encourages jumping in and making changes--because the projects that didn't, faded away from lack of interest.
While I give Ed and other project starters a lot of credit for putting up this site and making the progress you have, an active community requires a feeling of mutual ownership, otherwise people move elsewhere due to the feeling that they're making effort and putting energy into what will ultimately still be on someone's personal "property" with little protection for their investment (consider how much the N.I.M.B.Y. phenomenon and slows down politics).
Any further objections? Marcos 04:48, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
- Part of my objection was because I mistakenly read the Talk page and thought it was the page being linked to. That Talk page expresses a lot of significant political bias and wouldn't be an appropriate link to follow from the main page. That was why I reverted so hastily. But again, I was mistaken about the nature of the linked page, as you can see from my self-revert shortly after that.
- Fair enough -- that motivation I could indeed support. Though to be clearer, I would call it more a personal or spirited diatribe than political bias.
- Concerning your direct points, I would note that consensus before changing the Main Page has been successful in the past. Look at the first Main Page. It is absolutely nothing like the current one. It has undergone many significant changes since it was first written. And all of those changes, except for minor copy-edits and such, were with consensus before proceeding with the actual change. This has not stalled the project at all. This is a deliberative group, and waiting a couple weeks before proceeding with changing the most public face of the project is not necessarily a bad idea.
- To say they have been "successful" measures only those who are already participating in the project and neglects to consider the amount of people who have been turned away through lack of interest, unpersuaded. How will you gauge that? Don't underestimate the value and importance of immediate feedback.
- Then make a new, alternately named Main Page and ask the group if they think it is better.
- But note, that is an order of magnitude more bureaucratic. And it's simply a chore to go back and forth between two different arenas for collaboration. Alternately, I would suggest to you to leave the change in rather than reverting and see what the group does with it and how many page views the linked text receives.
- If the spirit of the editing is innocent, users should be free to edit without feeling guilty--including, of course, my own contributions. The thing which absolutely blocks progress and turns people away is when things are enforced blindly, even and especially when they are respecting the spirit of the place. It's the spirit which should be nurtured--not the laws.
- As the START list has recently discussed, participation is very disappointing.
- That is rather subjective, and participation is rather strong for a very small list.
- Okay, but why is the list small? And I don't buy that participation is "rather strong". This is a cool and important project. The lack of participation is concerning.
- Yes, I understand that consensus is something that is built, but the Main Page is a special case because many times it is the project's only chance to win someone over. If it has a flaw, then that person is lost and will not return. On other pages, consensus can be built through the rough-and-tumble of edits over time, but for the Main Page (as with many, many other wikis), change should be more deliberate.
- Like it or not, rough-and-tumble edits are really the only way things get done; particularly when there is no clear, leading superior. As wiki has shown, postponed perfectionism is one of the main sources of failure in a collaborative project--it's simply impossible to synchronize everyone's interest sufficiently. Waiting a couple of weeks, for example, as you suggest, would kill the individual's motivation unless they are already deeply committed to the project. As for comparing to other wikis I think you will find a strong correlation between the amount of participation and the looseness of control. Are there any popular sites that disallow free editing on the main page, for example? Many a site has hoped to use wiki to duplicate the popularity of wikipedia, but few have had the courage to be as open. I would be curious if there are actually any popular sites with such controls.
- Wikipedia allows people to make edits to almost any page -- but NOT the home page. Same for every other MediaWiki project. Why? Because if they did, it would be a catastrophe, plain and simple.
- That is crassly neglecting its history. In its early days (like metagovernment note), the front page was freely editable to encourage maximum participation and rapid approach to maturity. Now that it has gotten more mature, there is more desire and more reason for it to limit itself--(note I say "itself"--no one outside is imposing the limitation--any more than someone is limiting you when you no longer accelerate off a stop light--you're simply not a teenager anymore--rough analogy, but I hope you get the point). Besides, it would not be (and note: WAS NOT) a catastrophe. Check the history. Those concerns, quite simply, are fears of the Old Paradigm--fear of the masses, of losing control. Remember--the masses are also helping to keep it clean and usable--that's the magic which keeps it all checked and balanced.
- Also, I disagree that the change is minor: specifically because, as you later note, the link breaks the flow of the page deliberately to draw attention to itself. Everything on the Main Page is relevant, and that linked page is not a special case. Especially because it has had no input from anyone else, nor has the rest of the project even been specifically invited to look at it.
- By the nature of wiki, everyone is ipso facto invited to look at it.
- In this particular group, more focus is on the list, and when people make a significant change to the wiki, they mention it on the list to ensure people look at it.
- I think that would be a big letdown if there is more focus on the list than the wiki.
- And my greatest objection: it just does not make sense to have a random question thrown in the first paragraph, demanding attention. If you want to speak to new users, then put it in the Participate section. Or make it a subtler link. The specific objection to the edit on the Main page was that it was so disruptive to the most important page of the project. Yes, I could have just transformed it into a less obnoxious link, but I do not really see a need for it on the Main Page at all. The Main Page itself explains why the project is needed. If the Main Page can't speak to that fundamental point by itself, then it is a complete failure.
- It is not a random question, and it is in the first paragraph because it is most relevant to a new user, not immediately interested in what, to them, is perhaps somewhat a random site that they might have gotten referred to, and so needs to connect with that user immediately to answer the question in that users mind Why am I f*ing here!? Why am I bothering with this site? Not everyone is sitting in front of their computer with the luxury of "creating a new site for new forms of governance". Many will arrive with an interest in immediately finding out: Is this site worth my friggin' time? And those visitors are valuable: they are often those who know their time is important and aren't going to waste their time for long. Putting an entry in the Participate section, as you suggest, already assumes that the user has accepted participation(!) and has gotten interested enough to wade through more material. This is explicitly for those who don't yet know whether or why they should participate.
- It is a random question in the nature of its flow. It does not make any sense to the outside reader to be reading statements, then have a question in there that is not then answered. Maybe in a side box, or with some sort of lead-in, but not just an unrelated question shoe-horned into the flow of the prose.
- A side-box, interesting idea! And that is precisely the design and merit of the wiki--you enhance and synthesize, building incrementally and collaborately rather than revert and throw out. Why didn't you do it? I think contemplating that would be illuminating and inform you or your relation to power in general (which, of course, metagovernment either fails or succeeds based on its relationship to that issue). Reverting is really for vandalization or complete errors on the contributors part. Can you think of any other reason to limit contribution? (Do you not trust your fellow collaborators?)(!!)
- And, indeed, The Main Page does not explain why the project is needed, it only really explains what it is. But, hey, thanks for the dialog...
- Then make a new one and ask the group to edit it until it is ready to replace the existing one. That is the model that has worked so far. targetrace 14:18, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, you can't really say it has "worked so far" when it has already been [effectively] stated on the list that participation is low, so I'm not sure you're really defending anything except the status quo.
- Marcos 06:52, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
- targetrace 05:48, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
- Marcos 03:28, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
- Note on main page edit comment: Oops! I meant to put a question mark after the word "synthesis" in my edit comment--don't want to presume that the edit is a complete synthesis....
- It is not bureaucratic to make edits on a draft page before publishing to the Main Page. It is the way this project has evolved. There is nothing difficult about it: the current page stays as it is until a consensus decides it should be the new page. That way the draft page can be edited at will without concern for outward appearances, until it is ready to firm up into a final consensus. By its very nature, consensus is slow and deliberative, and that is how edits to Main Page should be done.
- Your suggestion is very reasonable for a major revision of the main page, but not very reasonable for minor ones.
- I really doubt that the linked page is going to increase participation in this project. In an effort of good will, I attempted to edit Why this project is needed. but could not think of anything that could fix it. It is hard to read and does not correspond with why I am interested in this project. It appears mostly to be your view of why you think this project is important, and probably should go into your userspace.
- Dude! Your doubts aren't very relevant: IT isn't made for YOU! And whoa! "In an effort of good will"(?!!?) why did you think that you had to try to "think of something to fix it [a page that is already off the main page]"? Not everything needs your stamp of approval--just leave it be and let the community decide. How do I communicate this? I'm targeting, as I said, explicitly those who don't have a lot of patience with (what to them will necessarily always be) inefficient overhead--those who are either completely unfamiliar with the concept or those who work from the bottom and don't need all the familiar boilerplate. So of course (surprise!), it doesn't speak to you or make that much sense to you. Imagine the CEO of GM reading the geekspeak of a developer mailing list discussing the database and code which actually holds the company together at the bottom--I'm talking about two very fundamental ways in which participation and influence happen--there is the top-down and the bottom up. Each has their own language and power and they don't always make sense to the other--so stop worrying about it. The main page speak nearly entirely to those who are needing to be convinced at the top. How are you reaching those at the bottom!?
- I understand your intentions in making this page, and they are genuinely good intentions. However, [Why this project is needed.|the page]] as it now stands is not a good page. It is difficult to read, extremely biased, full of political ideology, and poorly written. I am not trying to be offensive, and have tried to show tact here, but the page is simply awful. If the purpose is to attract people to the project, it will have the opposite effect. Maybe PhDs in philosophy will think it makes sense, but it is not a general-audience page. At all. That is why I tried to fix it, and I just don't know where to begin. I want to re-write it completely, but you'll probably complain and revert it back.
- Am I in the twilight zone? I thought I just said that the page in question is explicitly NOT a general-audience page.
- That is exactly the problem: I cannot tell what you are talking about. Who are "people at the bottom"? Is that a common term? At the bottom of society? Of intelligence? Your writing maybe clear to you, but it does not make sense to the outside reader. There is the same issue with the page in question. It is incomprehensible. Who exactly is it meant to attract?
- If as you say you are targeting those without time to read inefficient overhead, then the page is a complete failure. It is a multi-syllabic, overly intellectual discourse on your personal philosophy. If you think the Main Page is geekspeak, then what is your page? It absolutely is not generally accessible language.
- I'm puzzled because I actually was referring to the opposite of what you're saying; i.e. Main Page as not geekspeak, but as too traditional boilerplate while "my" page as intended for those geeky types to need this project but don't know it yet. (This is the audience I'm intending it for.)
- Oh. Is that what you said above? I don't see it. But in that case, I do not see a need for this page being singled out from the main text of the home page. If you are targeting geeks, then they can find a link from the sidebar. Also: I do not think the page in question speaks to geeks. It is not easy for anyone to read.
- In any case, we don't need to speculate or go through the extra overhead of what you're suggesting, leave the link in and monitor the page views at the bottom of the page--that will give some indication of how many have followed the link. (It's too bad there isn't an ability to express a vote up/down on every page for users to express their feeling toward it.)
- Well, you made it italics, and placed it in the top section of the Main Page, making it stick out rather well. So it is probably getting some hits (the count on the page also measures search robots etc). But how does that measure increased interest in the project?
- That not what I said. It gives some indication as to the interest (and thereby usefulness) of the link and the question pertained therein.
- Twilight Zone moment #2: Surely you are familiar with many new-concept sites (project X) which nearly always have a "Why X?" section off the main page if not directly on it. It is not unusual at all. If you've been on the Internet for more than a few years, you surely must be familiar with this idiom (which is why I'm puzzled by your objections on its relavance).
- This site already has the Main Page, which explains what the project is. Then it additionally has Mission and vision which explains what the objectives of the project are. How many different mission pages should there be?
- Additionally, if you think there should be some explicit Why X page "off to the side", then why put it in the main part of the text? Why not in the sidebar?
- I repeat my assertion that this page belongs in your Userspace, as it is your idea alone. targetrace 13:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
- List participation is not low. It is much more active than many lists with many more members, and it serves its purposes well. Just because one person mentioned low participation at one time does not make it permanently true. And regardless, it is much more active than the wiki, which clearly indicates that the energy in this project is on the list, not the wiki. And anyway, if you are concerned that participation on the list is low, then participate on the list. Why don't you mention this page there? Why has nobody else in the project edited that page?
- Do you actually think the project is going to succeed by listserv discussions? If there is not participation on the wiki, (or some other related site), then the project is failing. And note the tone in the last question seems holds an underlying presumption about who's invited to participate. As to its answer, I would point out that the number of changes to a page is not strongly correlated to it's desirability or quality.
- Nobody else has edited your page because it is a mess. My opinion, granted. But it is so far off from intelligible that I do not see how it can be edited toward any sort of accessibility.
- More importantly, the measure of the success of this project is not by listserv discussions or wiki editing or anything like that. It is by participation in the other active projects. And to get to that, those projects have to improve. And to get to that, the listserv is the correct place for conversation to happen. if you want to directly increase participation, however, then work on the code of one of the member projects and make it something that people would want to participate in.
- I don't want to get in an edit war, but I don't think your edit should stay, nor do I think the linked page is useful or salvageable. The best edit I can think of to improve what you have done is to undo it. This project is not needed, it is useful. To say it is "needed" is to claim some sort of moral superiority. targetrace 03:14, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
- Dude, this project IS needed. I need it -- so I'm not making any kind of "moral superior" statement. You're making a common and subtle categorical error and conflating two types of participation. One at the collective level and one at the individual level. Those levels relate to each other and participate differently. To conflate the two confounds efforts to maintain a stable structure, because they act at cross-purposes. It's much like the separation between the executive ("individual") and legislative ("the many") branches.
- Which is where the solo nature of this page comes into relevance. You seem to need it. Nobody else has made any attempt to participate in your page, suggesting that this is your thought alone.
- Lastly, I'm totally mystified as to why you continue to violate one of the basic tenets of metagovernment: synthesis. Specifically, the ideas presented in the fourth paragraph of this discussion branch above..? Also why you're unconcerned about the lack of activity on this project's main internet presence: the wiki!
- Here is my proposed synthesis: move your solo idea to your Userspace, i.e. to User:StalkingTime/Why this project is needed.. When I have more time I will make my own userspace page which will be utterly different from yours. Then your Why this project is needed. page can be replaced with links to both of our alternative pages. Like I said, I am out of time now, but will do that next time I am editing, if you do not first.
- Or if you do not like that synthesis, then here is the one I offered before: write a simple two-sentence post on the listserv asking if anyone else might have any sort of opinion on your page or this dispute. If you are so into the core beliefs of the project, then remember consensus is another. Work for a consensus, instead of just arguing with one other minor figure on the wiki.
- Aargh! That's all I have time for, for now. I believe the last revision I did was a decent synthesis -- taking the line out of the first paragraph and weaving the sentence into the flow of the second. Demanding a completely different draft page (which isn't even findable by the general user) in order to discuss (over a "two-week period"?) a one line change is unacceptable and overly bureaucratic. Sorry... Marcos 05:45, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- A synthesis to my edits would have been to add a link to the proposed revision to the top of the Main Page. That is how other changes to the main page have been done. And while your edit seems minor, it makes your page a major part of the wiki, so it is a BIG change you are making. It has the project formally stating on our main page that the reason we exist is for the indecipherable reasons you state on your new page. It makes it sound like we all think that in those big, overly-intellectual words that are sure to drive people away from the project. Either your link should go, or the linked page should make sense. targetrace 21:44, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Consensus was reached in the mailing list about reverting the Main Page to the revision before this matter. Please StalkingTime don't take this as a bad action, it happens sometimes. (Once in another project I spent 4 hours writing an article that didn't make it because it wasn't supported.) Matías Battocchia 16:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Bogus Asian-language translation?
the Asian-language translation looks bogus -- designed to lure people onto their own site.... Marcos 21:28, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


text:
Happy Birthday, Buffalo Bill.
No one did more to shape our concept of the American West than William Frederick "Buffalo Bill" Cody, the hunter, would-be cowboy, and showman whose traveling revue, "Buffalo Bill's Wild West and Congress of Rough Riders of the World," helped create the dime-novel image of frontier life that persists to this day. Cowboys, injuns, tipis, headdresses, firewater, peace pipes, weathered wide-brimmed hats, fearless feats of derring-do, stagecoach heists, impossibly accurate gunplay, bucolic campfires, tremulous harmonicas, bareback rides across windswept prairies, vast herds of grazing bison, virile stallions, lawless lands, hootin', hollerin', spectoratin'—the whole whooping metaverse came straight out of Bill's fringed leather pockets. Today, his story exists in a kind of liminal space between history, mythos, and stagecraft; no one really knows what's true and what isn't. But however he lived, the dude gave us the Western, and he reminds of simpler times. He staked his massive celebrity on the speed with which he could dispatch a herd of buffalo—think about that.
These illustrations pay fitting tribute to the Buffalo Bill zeitgeist: its bumptious individualism, its rugged sense of adventure, and, yes, its racial insensitivity. Except where noted, they come from the first of his two autobiographies, 1879's The Life and Adventures of Buffalo Bill, and from Buffalo Bill Stories, "a weekly publication devoted to border history" from the early twentieth century. As bigoted as some of these images are, though, it's worth noting that Bill hired many Native Americans to tour in his troupe—"show Indians," as they were pejoratively known—and he shared in their horror as the West he knew was tamed, subdivided, denatured, and "civilized." Quoth Wikipedia: "He called [Indians] 'the former foe, present friend, the American,' and once said, 'Every Indian outbreak that I have ever known has resulted from broken promises and broken treaties by the government.'"


text:
6:00 pm
William and Mary William and Mary take Kate to Oxford for her university interview. Mary tries to persuade William not to smother Kate and let her find her own way around.G
7:00 pm
Outdoor Idaho "Hometown Ski Hills" Community ski hills are scattered throughout Idaho, each with its own "field of dreams" story to tell. We profile three of them - Bogus Basin near Boise; Little Ski Hill by McCall; and Pomerelle near Albion - to learn what makes each of these ski areas unique.G
7:30 pm
Call the Midwife Holiday Special In this special, newly married Chummy and Nurse Jenny Lee are hard at work during their first Christmas in Nonnatus House. As nurses and nuns minister to an abandoned newborn and search for the mother, and Jenny tries to find the children of an elderly vagrant, Chummy plans an ambitious nativity play. In true Chummy fashion, mishaps ensue. D
9:00 pm
Masterpiece Classic "Downton Abbey (S2 E7)" In the finale, the family gathers at Downton Abbey for Christmas. D
11:00 pm
New Tricks "Nine Lives" An elderly woman leaves her estate to her beloved cats but when the last of her feline beneficiaries dies, there are still unanswered questions about her death. There also is no shortage of people laying claim to the remains of the estate. The team decides to reopen the investigation into the woman's death.G


text:
2016 Zeeko Alloy Foil Black and White Edition
Available February 1st 2016, pre-order at : www.kitesurferstore.com
The R&D Zeeko department designed a brand new foil in the 2016 range : an alloy foil with the best quality/price ratio.
After winning all the magazine tests in 2015, the new 2016 Alloy Hydrofoil pushes the limit of the quality and the rigidity.
The front and back wings of the alloy foil are inspired by the shape of the Carbon Series, allowing to increase the performance of its foil by simply changing mast and fuselage.
The alloy foil is fully removable, comes with carry strengthened case, protecting each element of the foil, allowing easy storage and transport.
What's new in 2016 :
- New Design of the fuselage
- New plate
- New wings


text:
What do you do if you want to go for a nice, warm swim but live in the chilly Northeast? You can build an indoor pool, but would you use it in the summer? Sure, if it has a retractable roof. That's what this homeowner did when he built a pool with a motorized glass roof. The top panels slide down at the press of a button on one of the Crestron touchpanel controllers. A retractable pool cover is likewise motorized.
That's not the only entertainment in this spacious indoor/outdoor room. "He's a big TV fanatic and wanted a nice warm pool to go into in the wintertime. He'll also go in there to watch football," says Bob Smith of the custom electronics installation firm Allwired Technologies of Lakewood, NJ.
So a 61-inch Pioneer Elite plasma screen is mounted to the brick wall and is accompanied by a surround-sound speaker system. Four weatherproof Boston Acoustics Voyager speakers were set in the corners, while a custom-made Leon center-channel speaker is mounted below the screen to match the plasma. Two Boston Acoustics subwoofers pump the necessary bass from the front corners.
In the equipment rack on the brick wall are a Denon audio/video receiver and a DirecTV HD satellite receiver with TiVo. The room also has access to the housewide Axonix MediaMax server that stores both DVDs and CDs to a hard drive system. The homeowner can select his entertainment pleasure from an in-wall Crestron touchpanel near the entry or a wireless touchpanel elsewhere in the room and control it with a handheld waterproof remote. The Crestron system also operates the pool cover and the retractable roof. "We just had to tie in the motorized equipment with some low-voltage relays," Smith says.
Before the room and brick wall were built, wiring was run for the entertainment and pool systems. Smith explains that while there are no sensors to automate the roof depending on temperature or precipitation, there is a going to be a pool button in the master bedroom that will open the ceiling.
For indoor entertainment, a nearby billiards room features a 50-inch NEC plasma. The space is its own music zone with a separate HD satellite receiver and access to the MediaMax server.
When it's time for a movie, everyone heads to the 15-seat home theater, which boasts a 123-inch screen that receives images from a high-def Sharp DLP projector, a 180-watt per channel sound system with nine Boston Acoustics speakers disguised behind fabric and in columns, and three subwoofers. To reduce noise, the room was built with two layers of Sheetrock and Sound Attenuation Board (SAB). The ceiling was painted a dark color to prevent light reflections when a movie is playing.
System Design & Installation
Allwired Technologies
Lakewood, NJ
Pool House
Omega Pools
Toms River, NJ


text:
As FX's new drama "The Bridge" opens, two detectives find a corpse at the midpoint of the passage between El Paso, Texas, and Juarez, Mexico. But it is not the body of one person — the top half belongs to an anti-immigration American judge and the lower half is from the body of a vanished Mexican teenager.
It is a gruesome but highly effective set-up for the first American scripted series to depict life on both sides of the southern border and capture the region's compelling contemporary geopolitics. With one victim from El Paso and the other from Juarez, and one detective hailing from each city as well, the mystery takes place in a world where English, Spanish, and Spanglish are spoken and children and adults cross the border every day to go to work, go to school or visit family.


text:
Gerard Butler, Vin Diesel wanted for Kane and Lynch
- Bang Showbiz
- 5 November 2013
Gerard Butler and Vin Diesel are being eyed to star in video game adaptation, 'Kane & Lynch'
Gerard Butler and Vin Diesel are being eyed to star in 'Kane & Lynch'.
The actors are wanted to play the lead roles in a new video game adaptation, which would reunite Butler with his 'Law Abiding Citizen' director F. Gary Gray.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, Butler is circling the role of Kane, while an offer has been made to Diesel for the role of Lynch.
The movie is based on a video game which follows Kane (Butler), a death row inmate who breaks out of prison, along with schizophrenic killer Lynch (Diesel), in the hunt to find a stolen fortune. The pair travel across Los Angeles, Japan and Cuba to find the loot, with Lynch acting as the team's watchdog in order to protect his wife and daughter.
The big screen adaptation, to be produced by Nu Image and Millennium Films, has been in the works since 2007 when Lionsgate was behind the project and had eyed Bruce Willis and Jamie Foxx for the lead roles.
The script comes from Skip Woods and Kyle Ward.
Butler is currently filming fantasy movie 'Gods of Egypt' and has just signed up for a sequel to his hit film, 'Olympus Has Fallen', which will be titled 'London Has Fallen'.
Diesel will next be seen in the seventh 'Fast & Furious' film and in Marvel's 'Guardians of the Galaxy', both of which are due for release next year.


text:
Court Says Border Patrol Can Take Your Laptop For Off-Site Search If They Have Reasonable Suspicion
from the 4th-amendment? dept
- You mostly store everything on your laptop. So, unlike a suitcase that you're bringing with you, it's the opposite. You might specifically choose what to exclude, but you don't really choose what to include. With a suitcase, you specifically choose what to include.
- The reason you bring the contents on your laptop over the border is because you're bringing your laptop over the border. If you wanted the content of your laptop to go over the border you'd just send it using the internet. There are no "border guards" on the internet itself, so content flows mostly freely across international boundaries. Thus if anyone wants to get certain content into a country via the internet, they're not doing it by entering that country through border control.
Either way, this issue has received plenty of attention over the years, with some officials trying to change the law (without much success). Homeland Security initially claimed that there were basically no rules limiting what it could do. However, more recently, the new administration clarified the rules somewhat -- though they're still pretty free to search anyone's laptop. But, one of the rules was that you were allowed to be present in the room while your laptop was being searched (though, you didn't get to see what they were doing).
It seems one aspect of that was broken by a border patrol computer search that involved taking a guy's broken computer to search it. The guy then sued, saying that the content on that laptop's hard drive (which included child porn) was inadmissable, because the search occurred off-site. A court recently ruled that the guy was half right. It basically said that border patrol can't just take laptops off-site for searches, but if there was reasonable suspicion to inspect the laptop, then it was okay. In this case, because some child porn had already been found on another laptop the guy had, it was deemed that taking the broken laptop off-site was reasonable.
That logic definitely makes sense, but I'm still wondering why we're using border patrol resources for this kind of thing? Yes, cracking down on child porn and the like is important, but that's got nothing to do with securing the border. If anything you wonder if this kind of thing becomes a distraction?


text:
Birgitt Schuele, MD
The Parkinson's Institute and Clinical Center
Birgitt is an Associate Professor and Director of the Gene Discovery and Stem Cell Modeling Program at The Parkinson's Institute. She studied medicine at the Georg-August University in Göttingen and the Medical University in Lübeck, Germany. She completed a postdoctoral fellowship at Stanford University before joining The Parkinson's Institute in late 2005.
She heads a gene discovery program for Parkinson's disease and has built a stem cell program developing novel "disease-in-a-dish" iPS models of Parkinson's disease for studying disease mechanisms and the effects of environmental toxicants, and for developing new strategies of innovative drug discovery. Over the last two years, Her lab has been working with scientists at Life Technologies to optimize and improve current iPS models.


text:
That's me, I'm sewing on the buttons in the car! This is typical of me at Christmas, there's always one or two last minute sewing projects. Only, these shirts were begun two weeks ago!
I still can't believe that I actually finished (except for the buttons) the two shirts for my boys before supper yesterday. But then I've been burning the midnight oil almost every night this week. I can feel the crash coming on, and the only way to stave it off is with many cups of tea. Thank goodness for all the Tim Hortens on the highway (every small town in Canada has at least one!)
Here's as few pics of them so far. (I hope they're not upside down, cause it looks like this blogger app on my smart phone has flipped them! – Updated: I fixed this once I got home!) I'll post more details when I get back.
Merry Christmas!


text:
LONDON (Reuters) - Piers Morgan, one of the biggest names in British media and a CNN television host, has been questioned by London police in connection with allegations of phone-hacking at the Daily Mirror tabloid he used to edit.
Morgan, a former judge on "America's Got Talent" show who replaced Larry King on CNN in 2011, said in a statement on Thursday he had been interviewed by officers after voluntarily attending a police station in December.
The 48-year-old, who has always denied any involvement in phone hacking, was quizzed as part of wider investigations into illegal practices by journalists at Rupert Murdoch's now-defunct News of the World newspaper.
Trinity Mirror, which publishes the Mirror tabloid, declined to respond and CNN, which released the statement, declined to make any further comment.
Britain's newspaper industry was rocked in 2011 by the closure of Murdoch's best-selling 168-year-old Sunday tabloid after revelations some staff had regularly hacked into phones to generate front page scoops.
Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson, two former News of the World editors who are both close associates of Prime Minister David Cameron, are currently on trial in London accused of conspiracy to hack phones between 2000 and 2006.
Morgan edited the rival Daily Mirror from 1995 to 2004. He had also edited the News of the World from 1994 to 1995.
"A 48-year-old man, a journalist, was interviewed under caution on December 6, 2013 by officers from Operation Golding in connection with suspected conspiracy to intercept telephone voicemails," a spokesman for London's Metropolitan Police said.
"He was interviewed by appointment at a south London police station. He was not arrested."
Operation Golding is the inquiry into phone-hacking at the Mirror newspaper and was a spin-off from the long-running News of the World investigation.
Morgan had written in his published diaries about a "little trick" for eavesdropping on voicemails that he heard of as early as 2001, and in an interview with the Press Gazette industry magazine in 2007 he described phone-hacking as "an investigative practice that everyone know was going on at almost every paper in Fleet Street for years".
In a newspaper column in 2006 he also wrote about listening to a personal voicemail former Beatle Paul McCartney had left for his ex-wife.
Giving evidence to a public inquiry in December 2011, which was ordered by Cameron in the wake of the News of the World closure, Morgan refused to say who had played him the recorded message of the call, saying he was protecting a source.
In his report, Brian Leveson, the senior judge who oversaw the major inquiry into press ethics, said he was not impressed by evidence Morgan gave to him.
"Overall, Mr Morgan's attempt to push back from his own bullish statement to the Press Gazette was utterly unpersuasive."
Leveson added: "I have concluded that Mr Morgan was aware of the use of the technique of phone-hacking in the industry and that articles were likely to have been published on the basis of the material obtained by that technique."
Additional reporting by Jennifer Saba in New York, editing by Guy Faulconbridge and Jon Boyle


text: With influential abilities and a key eye for detail, Mizuki Nagasawa deftly blends signature philosophies with art and fashion. Having moved from Japan to New York City at a young age, Mizuki Nagasawa takes inspiration from the infusion of western culture with her own Japanese values and sensibilities. Adorned with colored beads, diamonds, pearls and quirky charms, Mizuki earrings are imbued with a delicate and whimsical flair. From classic studs to hoops to drop earrings, Lyst's edit features plenty of elegant indulgences.


text:
MOBILE, Ala. (AP) Augustine Rubit scored 20 points, Mychal Ammons added 19 points and 13 rebounds, and South Alabama buried William Carey in the second half for an 82-64 victory on Wednesday night.
The game was tied at 36 at the half.
Rubit also grabbed nine rebounds, and Xavier Roberson made 4 of 7 from beyond the arc and scored 15 points for the Jaguars (2-0), who beat Florida State 76-71 on Friday in Tallahassee.
Daron Bell led the Crusaders (2-1) with 17 points and Douglass Larue scored 10.
The Crusaders shot 53.8 percent (14 for 26) in the first half to stay in the game, but the Jaguars pulled away in the second half with 60 percent (18 for 30) shooting, including 6 for 12 from beyond the arc after going 0 for 6 in the first half. South Alabama also outrebounded William Carey 43 to 30.


text:
Welcome to the TEACH South Africa Online Application
Thank you for your interest in becoming a TEACH Ambassador. This year there will be one application deadline of 20 September. TEACH South Africa strongly encourages applicants to begin the application processes as early as possible to allow yourself enough time to complete the online application form.
Congratulations on taking the first step towards becoming a TEACH Ambassador. All applicants must complete the online application as no paper-based applications will be accepted. TEACH South Africa is a secure, web-based application system which is available 24 hours a day. It can be used anywhere as long as you are able to access to the internet, so you can fill in your application where and when it suits you. In order to begin the online application you need to register first.
Once you have successfully registered take note of the following:
- To ensure secure access to the online application, TEACH South Africa will send you a confirmation email of your login information.
- All questions must be answered.
- You may enter and leave the online application website as often as you wish. All information will be saved as long as you select the save button found at the bottom of each page.
- Once you have successfully submitted the application, you will receive an email notification informing you that we have received the completed application.
If you have applied before, there are a few things you need to know:
- You can only send us one application in each year's application cycle. If you send a second application in the same year, it will be cancelled.
- If you applied in a previous year and would like to apply again, you'll need to complete a new application and cannot reuse a previous one.
To learn more about TEACH South Africa's selection process, please click here
Having problems registering? Please contact email@example.com.


text:
Marimekko in the Kitchen
The bright and bold prints by Marimekko bring a spring-like vibrance to fashion, interiors, and even kitchens! Check out how this Finnish design house has permeated into the heart of the home:
1 & 2: Here, a Unikko fabric panel by Sooki at Lukas, covers an under-counter recycling area in the kitchen.
3: A kitchen table covered in the same pattern, in a kitchen dating back to the 1970's. Via NIBS.
4: More Unikko in a simple window covering via Casapinka.
5: A Kaiku print wall hanging via Theresa's Light & Thrifty Small Cool entry from last year.
6: An entire wall in the kitchen, from Forr via A Touch of Happiness.
7: A print wall hanging from Anna's Old-and-New Newburgh Victorian house tour.
8: Marimekko serving trays propped up on a shelf via Design*Sponge.
Find some for yourself at marimekko.com.
Related: Bottna Pot Holders
(Images: Lukas, NIBS, Casapinka, Theresa Anne, Forr, Apartment Therapy, Design*Sponge)


text:
Are Sites Like Digg, YouTube And MySpace Still Exploitation If People Get What They Want?
from the non-monetary-payments dept
Nick Carr, as per usual, cuts through the clutter in pointing this out -- but then goes on to make some questionable assertions about how this is a modern form of sharecropping -- whereby the "land owner" aggregator sites like MySpace and YouTube are somehow exploiting the "sharecropper" users, who are willing to create content for those sites for nothing. Carr attributes this to the difference between the "attention economy" and the "cash economy" and seems surprised that the two overlap -- suggesting that Carr actually hasn't been paying much attention. There aren't separate economies at all. They've always overlapped and always will. What's really going on is a recognition that not everything needs to be paid for in monetary terms (which isn't a new concept). It's not that the users are somehow being "exploited" by being tricked into giving up value in exchange for attention. They are making the choice and recognizing the benefit. The attention is a benefit to them. It is payment -- not exploitation. This is the same mistake that others have made in claiming that Google is somehow exploiting sites by organizing and pointing people to those sites -- while making money in the process. Once again, that's a case where Google is providing some benefit (traffic, or if you must, attention) to those sites. Those who complain about the lack of monetary payment are under the same delusion as Carr, that benefits like attention are somehow separate from the cash-based economy. Just because some of the direct benefits are not in cash, doesn't mean that one side is any more exploited than the other.


text:
This is a very inspiring track created for corporate use. Motivational and energetic track with orchestral elements, catchy synth pads, a cutting edge drum beat and an electric bass expressing a lot of positivity and strong confidence. This track would be perfect for any media that needs uplifting, inspirational, motivational music.
MP3 and WAV files included in ZIP.