Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Things Left Undone

This entry will not be a list of sins, exactly, or even a secular confession. Well, maybe a little. The phrase "left undone" appears in the Confessional Prayer in the Episcopal Rite II liturgy. But I'm using it here because it's a convenient way to organize tonight's entry. As usual, there are a number of things I've left undone. In a few cases that's probably a good thing. In others it's not. The other good news is that some of the stuff that had been left undone is no longer that way, or won't be that way shortly.

Yes, I know the previous sentence is confusing. Don't worry about it.

Here we go:

Things I've Left Undone

The Jace Letters
A kidnapped woman's only contact with the world is email from her goddaughter.



1. I failed to get the latest installment of The Jace Letters written on Saturday night.

Yes, it's true, and I mentioned it here before. I simply ran out of time. Sunday night went no better in this respect. Monday night, late, I did finally write and post Part Seven, which I've since rewritten a couple of times. The other thing I left undone--until now--was letting you know it's finally posted. Guess what. It is.

And I've fixed the link. Thanks for the head's-up, Pat!


2. I failed to mention the topic and posting date for the next Round Robin Photo Challenge here at the Outpost.


The topic, "Emotions," comes to us from Chris of My Photographic Life. Like most good Round Robin topics, it has a number of possible approaches. You can depict the way a certain emotion looks on a person or even in an animal - the smile, the frown, the worried look, signs of giddiness, whatever it is. Or how about something that reflects an emotion, such as a color scheme or wild weather? Then there are things that provoke emotions, such as a wedding, a ball game, or a politician - or a dog.

You've got a week to come up with something, because the posting date is Wednesday, June 14th. Please DO NOT POST YOUR ENTRY EARLY! This is definitely something you should leave undone. But DO please get your RSVP in on the Round Robin blog if you plan to participate.

3. I haven't gotten the RR blog's sidebar updated yet.

I'll take care of it.

4. I haven't updated the church web stuff yet this week.

This is mostly because I've lost the bulletin. I hope to get that taken care of tomorrrow night.

5. I haven't done any work on Mages of Mâvarin in a couple of weeks.

But I will. Really.

6. I haven't been back to the gym recently.


See #5.

7. I haven't gotten enough sleep recently.

Obviously.

8. I haven't read more than a few blogs via my FeedBlitz list in about a week.

If you're on anything but AOL, and you sometimes see my comments, you probably haven't seen any lately. I'll get there soon.

9. I haven't done two specific things on Wikipedia this week. This is good news.

First, I haven't done any more work on the Route 66 episode guide since Sunday, except for proofreading someone else's material for it. I'm very happy about this, because it means that another person is doing most of the work, and the result will probably be slightly better this way. I'm very rusty on the specific episodes, and this other person seemingly isn't.

The other thing I've left undone on Wikipedia is responding to one last incendiary and factually-challenged remark on the Barbara Bauer entry's Talk page. Did I tell you last night what finally happened with that controversy? Ah, I see that I didn't. A guy with a grudge against Absolute Write deleted a link to the ISP's explanation why they took the site offline after Barbara Bauer complained about AW with spurious claims of illegality. The link was restored, and he deleted it again, claiming in the talk page that a link to ISP manager James Cordray's own words was somehow unfair to Cordray in that context. Logical, mild-mannered arguments about why the link should be there were met with personal attacks, nonsensical claims that the deleted material amounted to a "witch hunt" against Cordray, and, at one point, the deletion of one of my remarks and one of Jean Marie's.

It was a nasty little impasse, with three people trying to be polite and reasonable, and the fourth seeing everything through a distorting lens and behaving accordingly. Because I disagree with this guy, I am "biased" and an Absolute Write partisan, possibly even a former PublishAmerica author. Um, no. I'm none of the above. I may possibly have seen Absolute Write in passing before this week, but I don't think so. And I've never had any direct contact with PA, a well-known source of misery for starry-eyed new authors. In fact, I've written about them before, in less than flattering terms. (The link in the previous sentence is just one of several entries I wrote during that period that mentioned PublishAmerica.) That was back in 2004. So no, MY, I'm not part of "a cabal of self-interested partisans" conducting "a public lynching." I'm someone with no prior connection with any of the entities involved in this story, except as a reader and sometime commenter on the blog Making Light. I'm merely someone who disagrees with you on the basis of the facts.

This is turning into a rant, so I'll try to finish the story quickly. All this went on for several days. Then a fifth person with no particular connection to the issue (like me, but with more wikijuice as an experienced Wikipedian) restored the deleted text on the article, pointing out that a consensus existed except for one ill-behaving individual. He also said that "wikiauthorities" would be called in if the text was deleted again. Around that same time, the serial deleter left one last attack on the Talk page, stating the same arguments that had already been refuted. I decided to let him have the last word. Why provoke him? He's already lost the argument.

But then I noticed factual errors in what he had said. I spent about an hour writing two paragraphs in reply - and then didn't post them. Anyone who checks the links he mentions will quickly discover that the linked text doesn't say what he thinks it says. That will have to be good enough. There are better things to do with my life than argue endlessly with someone who is incapable of considering the possibility that he may be wrong - not just mistaken, but actually wrong in his attitudes, approach, and in the conclusions he draws. Still, I hope he figures it out someday, and wish him well.

Okay, that's over. The Cordrays did eventually make the database available to the Absolute Write people, their site is up and running at the new ISP, and the Wikipedia entry has apparently stabilized for the time being. Barbara Bauer may still being trying to put out the fires of negative publicity, but there are an awful lot of them now, and she's not likely to get to me anytime soon. Really, the best thing she can do for herself now is stop threatening people and sell one of her clients' books. Meanwhile I can stop ranting about it all. I can tell you're relieved about this.

**** Update ****
I spoke too soon. The Talk page erupted again, and I was part of it. Oh, well. I tried to restrain myself, but it didn't help.

Last thing left undone (okay, aside from cleaning, sorting mail, dieting, etc.):

10. I didn't return the camera I got in March at the first sign of trouble.

I've been getting a "Lens error" since about the second week I had my new Nikon Coolpix P1. Usually I just pull the battery out for a second to turn the camera off. But in April I had a problem en route to Sedona, with the plastic iris that covers the lens only opening part way. This has gotten substantially worse in the last few days. I'm cleaning the lens barrel and the iris, very very gently and carefully with a lens cloth and compressed air, and it's helped a bit. But John's urging me to take it in or send it away, now while it's still under warranty. And of course he's right. I don't want to end up with another dead camera, as I did when the Canon died on me. But how can I stand to give up the camera long enough to get it fixed or replaced?

Here is one of the pictures I took tonight at dusk. Notice the dark wedges at the top and bottom of the picture? That's where the iris was still covering the lens.


dusk obscuraMakes for an interesting photo, though, doesn't it?

Paul tells me in email this morning that my warranty period is only 90 days. If that's true I'm already too late, barely. I think I actually do have a longer one though, and will research it today.

Oh, well. At least my list of things undone is now just a smidge shorter.

Karen

Technorati Tags: , , , , , ,

4 comments:

DesLily said...

Hi Karen.. well two things here.. first off for some reason (probably blogspot) the link to entry 7 of the Jace letters just gives me a "can't find error".. even tried typing in "seven" when on "six" in the address line. Did't work..

and second.. SEND THE DANG CAMERA BACK WHILE IT'S UNDER WARRANTY!!!... please heh.

Sarah said...

Heh. I like that photo. The idea of everything photo you take being framed in that way from now on amuses me.

But, uh, yeah. You probably should see what can be done about that.

Carly said...

Well darlin

If it gets to the point that it won't work period, and it is no longer under warrenty, then that won't be too good either. I have to agree with Pat here, make it a priority and send it in. PRONTO. :)

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.