« First American Indicted for Treason | Main | Hakak »

October 12, 2006

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

... over here .. no, over there ... ooops, back that way .. damn those hyperlinks anyway, can't control the suckers.

"Too fuckin' bad about that", would say ahfukit (I think).

My sense is, or was that in propria persona with the assistance of the Deputy Editor avatar, you chose other, better-class friends, more pragmatic than idealistic (or at least it was suggested that they wore better clothes and controlled their pottymouths).

So, I think the question must be "where are they and why aren't they helping you be less miserable ?" Non ?

Wait just a minute! I'm here. Misery loves company, or is it my company that loves misery? Am I miserable company? Har, har, har! Good ole Tigg, they say at the tank. Always there when people need some happiness coaching. That's my brand, Tutor, and I'm proud of it.

Look, I want to help. In spite of the aggressive nature of the good cheer I try to bring, or enforce as the case may be, I do have a sense of humor. I can even laugh at myself and my work. So I want to share something that shows good ole Tigg at his outreachingest best. I've spent many happy hours playing with these doors. To me, they're better than reading Huxley. Try it, go ahead. The futility is soothing.

Where are I, the Author's high class friends? At work, J.J. They are at work. You got the issue right, though. Had an email and phone interaction with a person who has a rising role in the foundation world. We may do some things together, perhaps. All is going well, until she stumbles on Wealth Bondage. Then it takes a turn towards perplexity and discomfort. I have to explain all the jokes, and she doesn't find them all that funny, feels excluded from the clubhouse, wonders about I, the Author's sanity. I managed to get it back on track, and in the process, learned much about her, and we probably now have a better relationship than had it all remained businesslike.

But the issues are ones we all think about, non? How does the funhouse and making a living in the world of serious people fit together? Do we have to be pariahs 24/7 or can we slip in and out of Wealth Bondage, with two sets of colleagues? What happens when the colleagues inside and outside wealth bondage collide?

Let me say that it can work, and did in Chicago three years ago, at the Open Space for Giving Conference. I believe it could again, maybe through The World We Want, or some other vehicle.

Here is a thought that keeps going through my head, from Bakhtin on Carnival. He is describing a town in the Middle Ages. The town has a priest, of course, who preaches from the pulpit and maintains the cycle of Church Feast Days. But come the Festival of the Ass, he is found copulating on the altar with the town prositute, ok? The next day he is back in the pulpit. It seems somehow that the sermon has more meaning the day after the festival than the day before. It carries more weight, coming from the mortal man, now back in clerical regalia. Somehow that seems to explain Swift's method too. By day he is an Anglican Divine, like Akma, but come certain nights, there he is, a Dungeon Master to the Stars.

You can't preach from the pulpit, consecrate the host, then do the doxy on the altar, all in the same "show." But tradition does tell us that you can do both on successive days.

I had always hoped and still hope that the Dumpster would land in polite company, spewing garbage in all directions. That is the "next step" in this sequence. Engineering it is hard, giving it any kind of form or order is harder yet. If it works, it will be transformational, to the extent it fails - you can only imagine. For a moment there we had a collision of these two worlds, and, since you were there, I would be interested in your sense of it.

Fiasco? Trial run? Dress rehearsal? If we get another chance for a Cakewalk at the big house, what would be do differently, to attract and retain the attention of the higher ups, the men and women of substance in every sense of that word, the proper people, the ones in control, the good people who come to dispense largess and to enlist us in their World We Want?

Seriously, that is what I am thinking about, back and forth and among these blogs and my daily work inside Wealth Bondage?

Can we debrief and see what Phase II might look and feel like?

De-briefing? You first.

Yes, but his briefs are on. I said "de-brief."

¡Híjole!  A Mexican standoff!

I think I would think about using the rout that happened at WB as a case study ... seek out the inflection points where meaning was exposed, bring them up as "best practices" (for learning purposes only), and highlight some of the more egregious behaviour as points where the unwashed can perhaps be coaxed to engage, if not met with confrontation ??

Teachable points of view, I think such situations are called in the lingo of "managing change".

And so on ...

Agreed. Here is the question, can we engage with philanthropists and nonprofits wearing masks? We considered that for the Open Space Giving Conference and were told in no uncertain terms by one of those representing a philanthropic network that WB was unseemly, and out of control. He declined to participate unless all came in propria persona with consideration for their own and others dignity. On the other hand, there are some in the Dumpster who need to protect their real world identity for the sake of employers and the like.

A promising sign of sorts: The World We Want book is quite dignified, yet Tutor and the Dumpster get the last word. What does that portend? That getting inside the firewall of polite society is step one, and the step two in landing a bit of Carnival inside the sacred precints.

Operating in propria persona for me means operating as a walking dead man. But if the AF can get me into his world, I can teach a lesson or two within it.

That is as far as I can see. I am interested in further thoughts towards a Harvard Case Study on the Rise and Fall of Wealth Bonddage.

I should add that our web conversation has had an effect on Peter Karoff. He asked me not to blog his thoughts until he is ready, but the contrast between the open and feisty conversation of democracy, and the more decorous conversation of philanthropy is not lost on him. What he does with what he has seen, or if he does anything with it, I don't know, but I do know that the points made about the democrictization of giving registered with him. So, as difficult, and sometimes futile as this all seems, maybe we collectively are doing some good, who knows.

So, as difficult, and sometimes futile as this all seems, maybe we collectively are doing some good, who knows.

Tutor, I've maintained for a while that this is a very successful, somewhat anarchic project.

Progress in human affairs works in the tangents and digressions. T.V. has found an engaging and important discussion of the pre-political here. I could compare that discussion to the importance of basic research in science. The social sciences are difficult and frustrating. So often they're turned into tools of misanthropic social engineering.

I think some of the sense of futility may come from measuring a raw democratic project too soon. I think we're still at the stage of developing a methodology and fixing some of the badly broken tools that are the legacy of Wealth Bondage.

"The Legacy of Wealth Bondage," now there is a phrase. Or, "Legacy Wealth Bondage Systems," or "Wealth Bondage Legacy Systems," or, "Wealth Bondage Legacy Advisors."

I think you may have misunderstood the sense of legacy here. A legacy system is one you have to keep supporting because its replacement is still in development and won't be ready for some time. When the replacement starts to work, there is a trial period and parallel operations, but when that is done, you just pull the plug on the old systems and move on.

Legacy here is a euphamism for the crap that a long gone crew of developers left for you.

Thanks, Gerry. That's the analogy I wanted to convey.

I get it. What struck home, but was not intended, was the word legacy. In Wealth Bondage, Legacy is the most popular word for advisors to Wealth who do estate and philanthropic planning. "Legacy Advisors" - I know many who are.

RE: Democracy are the legacy systems broken or were they sabotaged by the stewards, our elected representatives?

It struck me this morning when I got out of bed, rolled up the hose, strapped on the pig nose, donned the curly toed shoes and pawed through the closet for a fresh jerkin that we are all complicit in the destruction of the "legacy system" of democracy. The power of discernment necessary to distinguish between a knave and a wretch is given to all of us, but the pride that stands in the way of a good person joining the lists also seems to be a general condition. So if we are faced over and over with choices between knaves and wretches and good men withdraw from the field, then the legacy system will come to its knees. As we used to say back in the day, "Garbage in, so's yo mama." Or something like that... it was in the days before automated voting machines and my memory's a little dim.

p.s.
Your friends haven't abandoned you, as must be clear from the traffic here.

Right, we are regrouping. How to "enter the lists" effectively is the question, not just by talking to ourselves on the sidelines, but by entering public conversations with public figures, or those who have public influence. Since they have no incentive, really, to even notice us, convening such a conversation is difficult. Diogenes solved the problem by literally running around naked in the public square, as "the mad Socrates," accosting the leaders of his day.

In the age of the specticle, such tactics only get you noticed long enough to dismiss you. That came up at a discussion of the Pirate Party at a local hacker gathering this past weekend.

The word political has had its negative connotation for a long time. The question it seems to me has always been how to establish open processes for civic participation that are immune or at least resistant to manipulation and corruption by power players. The impulse to turn away from such a conflicted space is strong, and activists have much better things to do with their time. But what are the consequenses of abandoning this field to the Knaves and Fools? The anarco-libertarian impulse is to limit or eliminate this field, but the power brokers always seems to find a space to operate from and set up their own invisible levers of control.

That is as far as I can see. I am interested in further thoughts towards a Harvard Case Study on the Rise and Fall of Wealth Bonddage.

Call me. Or me. Or Lydia. Either way.

About right, Dr. Wealth Bondage starring the Marx Brothers, Karl playing piano.

The social sciences are difficult and frustrating. So often they're turned into tools of misanthropic social engineering.

I think some of the sense of futility may come from measuring a raw democratic project too soon. I think we're still at the stage of developing a methodology and fixing some of the badly broken tools that are the legacy of Wealth Bondage

... what J. Alva said

Dr. Wealth Bondage starring the Marx Brothers, Karl playing piano.

... what Wealth Bondage puts on offer, consciously or not. Means of production and all that, nudge nudge. Where's Kombinat! when we need him most ? Off booking the Marx Bros. next gig, probably.

K! is in fact central to the endeavor, as the carrier, consciously so or not, of a whole eastern European tradition of dissent, humor, satire and artistic resistance to propaganda and brute force.

Well, where is he then? Off selfishly enjoying his family, I suppose.

I had always hoped and still hope that the Dumpster would land in polite company, spewing garbage in all directions. That is the "next step" in this sequence.

It did before ... it was a living, breathing "thing" and it had already gotten the space noticed, as was politely pointed out. Maybe what happened was a pruning, one of those things a gardener does without knowing what exactly will happen ? If I am not mistaken, some people make developing gardens over time a life art (there have even been business books .. more than one ... comparing purposeful organizations to gardens).

It's a prominent feature of now-public spaces outdoors in Europe, and public gradens have never ceased to inspire people. The generation of garbage by the community is the perfect compost and mulch.

Bonsai?

Yes, WB did land in the midst of The World We Want, no doubt about it. Yet we had the place all to ourselves. Not much fun or effect in that, do you think?

How is that public space over at TWWW, now that the riff-raff have been moved to another part of town since "The Show" was supposed to come in ? Real estate values started to pump yet ?

Yes, you see the issue. Let me put it this way; those who go to a charity dinner and gala ball do not expect to be seated outside in a Dumpster.

What good is a gala ball to anyone? Inside the poverty pimps offer their wares; pick your sceneroom and pay the fee.

Nobody invited to the ball are assigned a seat next to the dumpster, but if some hear the blues coming from out back and drift out there that is there choice. It's a fee country, at least it used to be.

The blues drifting in unbidden is a good image, and not a bad plan. But when the homeless show up for the Charity Ball to Benefit the Homeless, then very little money will be raised, since the hall will quickly empty. Philanthropy is cultivated in "safe spaces," which by definition exclude the importunate, the trouble-makers, and those who would insult or call to task those who have voluntarily taken it upon themselves to be generous.

In a free country, the price of a ticket to the charity ball is set high enough so that those who should not attend won't, since they cannot afford it.

Reminds me of an excellent cartoon showing a farm with a bull in a pasture surrounded by a fence. The caption reads, "Never tear down a fence until you understand why someone put it there."

Tearing down the walls between philanthropy's safe places and the general public is not what one would call "Wordly Wise." I am trying to do it, but can not anticipate keeping both the traditional high end givers happy and also the Dumster Trash.

"You mean I am not invited?" asks the Bum incredulously, standing outside the Charity Ball to Benefit the Homeless. Exactly, the Bum is not invited and will not be tolerated. When the money is raised, it will be meted to the Homeless through intermediaries, sparing donors direct contact, unless they actively seek it out.

What do they call that two wheeled cart that people ride on their way to the guillotine?

Tumbril - FP, you expect Marie Antoinette to invite the mob to her party? That was then, this is now. Philanthropy is all the rage. Big givers are in the news and in People Magazine. They are celebs. Everything is working according to plan. There is no dissent, no unrest, and the poorest schmucks vote Republican as "values voters." The only Tumbril is headed to GITMO and you will be in it if you get out of line.

Will they have cake?

http://movies2.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/movies/13mari.html?ref=movies

Cake

Great picture. The woman buffing Marie's pumps is her Philanthropic Advisor and Family Values Consultant.

Blogged the photo

here

at gifthub for the benefit of my fellow wealth bondage professionals.

I don't know Tutor, I think you are slipping. I did not suggest that we roll the dumpster into the big room, but that those invited to the big house will be welcome to pull up a crate and join in the fun out back. If they choose not to, then so be it, we will have a fine time with or without them.

The point is that they are the ones in chains with all their rules and barriers to entry. I'm perfectly happy out back. You may be going about it backwards. Instead of landing the dumpster in high-society, we need to make the dumpster sing. Heat things up so everyone dances and the dumpster starts to fly on the energy.

Good advice, Gerry. "We need to make the Dumpster sing." We. I can't do it alone. Plus, as you say, I am slipping into my dotage.

I don't know Tutor, I think you are slipping. I did not suggest that we roll the dumpster into the big room, but that those invited to the big house will be welcome to pull up a crate and join in the fun out back.

This is it, I think ... everybody knows when you go to conferences, galas, weddings, bar mitzvah's etc. that the best fun is out back, where the mickeys open, the spliffs get passed, the plans for making out with that lonely wife or husband, etc. are made.

That's where life without the bunting and re-heated food continues, and where the openings for changing perspectives (and then eventually ways of seeing, believing and living) are to be found.

Excellent. This is an important shared insight. "Out back" is where the Dumpster resides, like the places where smokers guiltily congregate outside highrise office buildings which prohibit smoking.

So - with that shared understanding and at the risk of reopening prior wounds - what does that mean about the proper attire and behavior inside the wedding reception, the office building, inside The World We Want Blog, inside Wealth Bondage per se, including the Philanthropic Scene Room?

Is it wrong to suggest that there be a site which stands to WB as Wedding in Church stands to Carnival by the Dumpster?

It could be Gifthub or The World We Want, but we need a place, I think, where the out of town relatives, including the Evangelical wing of the family, the LDS wing, and Rotary Club members feel at home, or welcome as guests, along with the East Coast Minims, and Mummy's Hyena Clan.

I truly believe that democracy means inclusive. And to be inclusive requires good manners, tact, and the conventions of sharing real names, and real life info. Such "truths" conceal as much as they reveal, and they inhibit discourse by forcing on all concerned highly limiting assumptions, but that is why we have the Dumpster out back for those who feel the need to escape the hothouse atmosphere.

Sermon and Satire is how I conceptualize this to myself, thinking of Pindar ("Praise what deserves praise and sow blame for wrong doers") and certainly Swift, a preacher and satirist of the most scatological and virulent strain.

Another example, from Blake, is Songs of Innocence and Songs of Experience, each poem in the sequence playing off against the same themes played in the parallel sequence. So a childlike hymn admiring charity schools is set off against one bitterly inveighing against the hypocrisy of same. The point for Blake was not to resolve the tension in favor of either pole, but to hold both in dialogical tension, neither naive nor bitter, but an "achieved innocence."

That was where I was trying to go with the propria persona rule, to create a proper space like a wedding chapel, or business center, (or funeral parlor) where Peter could in good conscience invite his out of town guests and where they would be assured of being treated honorably, and not "unmasked" or ambushed as Bloodsucking Capitalists by people they have never met, talking a strange symbolic language full of insider jokes, and operating sometimes snidely from behind masks.

Clearly the tone that prevailed there at that time made it completely impossible for Peter to invite, say, an 80 year old woman who might have recently endowed a foundation for literacy, or a CEO of a company with a corporate foundation devoted to homelessness, or the head of Pew Foundation, or the Govenor of MA, or a Rockefeller. See? They would take one look at the snarky, masked comments, and say, to Peter, "Surely, this is not what you intend? Why invite us here only to have us systematically insulted?"

My hope was to have a formal conversation where all who enter are in propria persona and on their best and most "civil" behavior (or they don't come at all), but which would be situated within earshot of the Dumpster, where an altogether different commentary would take place, with links back and forth, but with the guests at The World We Want free to tactfully ignore the craziness outside in the Dumpster. (Or, they might well sneak round for a look while pretending they did not. Only the chortles from out of the darkness would betray the strayed guests wandering in from The World We Want.

Tell me what you think of this, please. You understand that inside the World We Want, I would most likely be acting as moderator, host, and Bouncer. That could be misunderstood as personal animus. It was so misunderstood, I think. But the role comes with the genre and with the exigencies of getting and keeping well know n people in conversation with others from other walks of life. For that to work there have to be groundrules, and a decorum that does not insult guests. "Take it outside" would be the suggestion, and outside the Bouncer will meet you for a smoke, and to ventilate his real opinions in parable. That will or could set up a dissonance that would be productively disruptive of the status quo, while respecting the norms of Sermon there and Satire here.

What will disrupt Wealth Bondage is for insiders who know the rules and can play by the rules and who are entrusted to enforce the rules, do exactly that inside The World We Want, and the sidle out to the Dumpster and joyously satirize their own role, their own game, and the whole setup.

Please say your piece about this "set up." There is a chance that Peter will in fact ask me, or The Author Function, to moderate such a safe space. In that role, I will have to ask that people play by certain rules and not take gratuitous potshots from behind an alias and blow up the whole game before I can get it going. Two conversations running in parallel inside and outside Wealth Bondage or the World We Want, whichever way you look at it.


Haven't read the rest yet, stopped here:

we need a place, I think, where the out of town relatives, including the Evangelical wing of the family, the LDS wing, and Rotary Club members feel at home, or welcome as guests, along with the East Coast Minims, and Mummy's Hyena Clan.

I truly believe that democracy means inclusive. And to be inclusive requires good manners, tact, and the conventions of sharing real names, and real life info. Such "truths" conceal as much as they reveal, and they inhibit discourse by forcing on all concerned highly limiting assumptions, but that is why we have the Dumpster out back for those who feel the need to escape the hothouse atmosphere.

Yes, but I have been thinking for quite a while that "all" of this messiness ... not knowing how or when to make or use decorum as a part of the process of deconstructing and reconstructing what is arguably an out-of-balance set of social constructs .. is a necessary catharsis that will unfold as it will.

Unfortunately, i think we are about to discover, slowly, over the next decade or two, that the damage wrought to society by nearly-untouchable power, and the combination of sunlight, muck occasioned by hyperlinks and electronic this-and-thats and much citizen frustration at the perverted governance of soc iety(ies) ... will take a long time and much work (both planned / rational and the wild cards of social outbursts and / or purposeful movements) to achive clear and discernable patterns of results.

It's my opinion that an interesting (and frustrating) part of western culture is that we all try to figure things out very very fast, apply analysis, rationality and yes, even anthropological observations. I have seen this time and again with all the Web 2.0 stuff being rolled out for the last 3 years or so, week after week, with analysts and pundits piling on ... but what takes root rarely turns out to be what people rationally think or plan to be the answer.

I think it goes back to rabble-rousing as a key element in giving voice to the sociological currents that begin to flow when voice awakes ... continuing to chirp and peck away at what instinct, literature, moral lessons over history, etc. tell us what it means to be human, to be inhuman and so on, will help to open the big tent of wealth bondage.

I am certain, tho' cannot describe well nor quantify, that blogging and podcasting and vlogging have made considerable change possible over the past five years. Imagine what things would be like today if we had not had the "out back" of blogging etc, lo these past five years, but only the NY Times, LA Times, WaPo, CNN, CBS, ABC and Fox.

The idea of a safe space needs to be unpacked some more .. what does "safe" mean, and from what or for whom ?

What about a structured Improv Q&A, from the decorous to the unwashed and vice-versa, with some basic guidelines about eschewing clearly embarrassing rebuttals or heaps of condescension, even if deserved .. etc. ? Published as a series, for all to see ... Lenore E. and fp as a dyad, or Dr. Trotsky and Bill Schambra, or Karoff v. Ruesga ...

Ai-yi-yi-yi !!

I like the idea of one on one exchanges and moderated panels. But you have to face up to one thing, in the part you skipped, JJ. You too, all of us, have a "real life" in propria persona. We all use masks here to preserve that real life persona, no matter how compromised, as a negotiable commodity. When The AF and Peter put their personal relationship capital on the line to interact with "important people" in propria persona, you have to ask yourself - you do personally - why you can't or wont, and why you resist that simple set of ground rules so strenuously? What is "unthought" in the violence of your reaction to the idea that you would come as your charming and urbane self, in your own name? Why not, really? You would fit right into Wealth Bondage, you have in the past, and could again. Why the fury over the simple rule that you would use your own name in one space and a mask in another? That is what as buried in the part of my prior post that you skipped.

How our selves fit together, in their various social contexts, which self is real and which authentic, which perjured and paid and which true and at risk is a rather important question, one posed not in theory but in practice as we move back and forth between the frames.

I can vouch for the theory that donors might be suffering from false consciousness. In fact they are yearning for a full and frank exchange of views, if only they knew it. But no one has ever tried! No one has attempted sweet reason or carefully explained! No one, and I do mean no one, has ever approached them in good faith and offered them an honest view of the world. Oh, misery, misery and wasted opportunity! The poor dears are like lost sheep, ignorant of the world around them and hungry for the magic words offered in a fair setting -- the words and the ways that will bring them into the fold; or into a fold-like state of mind, anyway.

Whoops! That was my patron on the cell. I'll get back to this, I promise. But before I go I want to assure you all of the deep respect I have for this unique venture. I think further blandishments will make these angry, highly emotional people see the light, Tutor. They, too, are suffering from false consciousness and it's up to us to explain the real world to them.

"You can't win, if you don't play," Tigg, as they say in the lottery ads. Every venue has its price of admission.

That's exactly what I'm saying! The choice as I see it is between this or moping around fecklessly. A lot of these comments have the appearance of coming from people who have been around the block a few hundred times, but they're really just the cynicism of inveterate gripers. We can safely negate their experience. Note that not one has ever offered a competing vision. Ever. Or at least not one that I can recall. And I certainly would recall it if it were viable.

Shut up, Tigg.

Tutor, it's mind boggling to me that when you're already doing something unique and worthwhile you'd want to venture into something experience and analysis indicate is a waste of time. The Dumpster is the elephant in the parlor that "decent" folks strain to ignore. This is the dialogue, right here. It's just that there's no refuting this end of it. Hence, no commentary from the decents.

To clarify a bit, the pre-political like basic research doesn't yield immediate results. How many places have a real discussion of how then must we live?

The only critiques of the Dumpster have been a fatuous dismissal of the proprietor as a "tax and spend" Democrat and an alarmingly unselfconscious accusation of whiggishness from professional equivocators.

So there!

But you have to face up to one thing, in the part you skipped, JJ. You too, all of us, have a "real life" in propria persona. We all use masks here to preserve that real life persona, no matter how compromised, as a negotiable commodity.

I believe I am being hnest when I say that i for one don't care about masks or in propria persona on the Web. This is the only place i have a mask, and JJ used to post often as his kissin' cousin Jon Husband.

I've said anough stupid or socially unacceptable-in-some-crowd or another somewhere on the Web that i don't, honestly, give a rat's ass if someone I don't know knows who I am or what I think. persoanlyy, I think it is a major indictment of the systems we live in that so many people feel the need to run around talking about the most important things in their or our lives, while doing all the pretend stuff (real bidness) in propria persona, where you have to act all polite even if what you are on the receiving end is unadulterated bullhooey.

I am certain that I have forgone, or lost, opportunitites to do things for which I might get paid becasue ten minutes with my name and Google will net you a lot of wannabe "liberal" thoughts I've expressed, naively or not.

I repeat, i don't give a rat's ass what anyone thinks of me. I generally know right from wrong, don't lie, am polite to people in the real world, pay my bills, brush my teeth, wear deodorant, and pay attention to most laws .. that's all the socialization I need given to me by others.

It's not that I am resisting those ground rules so strenously .. I can work a VC forum with the best of them, or speak ata conference without alienating people. I'm told that i can even be charming.

The point is that the refusal to acknowledge that not everything is or need be genteel, that there must be meaningless ground rules (I differentiate from meaningful ones, such as the 4 principles of Open Space). These people are phoneys if they do nbot want to listen to or engage with the disenfranchised, or aat least those that are not necessarily seeking to be fixed through some philanthropic initiative or other (which is what i imagine most, but I stress not all, are ... extensions of programs already offered by the dominant society, but just extended through an additional but different source of the lifeblood money.

What I emphatically stand for is the minimization of phoniness (to the extent that i am consciously aware of it, and eschew it in my personal expression and behaviour).

I need to remember to discipline myself to use Preview, so as to enhance any one else's reading experience.

Sorry for all the typos above.

basically, I forgot to say .. i adopted the JJ mask whn you implemented gravatars, and I believe when I responded in that way it was due to my sense that there was a subtle request from the Tutor for us to do so.

Prior to that I always posted as Jon Husband, and I am perfectly happy to go back to so doing. JJ doesn't add anything to what I have to say, tho' it would be nice to keep the gravatar of my ill-executed jacknife into the Dumpster.

Polite and geneel business people annoy me more and more and more, come to think of it. You have all these grown people grinning at each other and speaking in tongues, and I'll bet many of them actually think more often than not that they are doing something important.

Sheesh !

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)