How to Speak to a Grad Student

Hopefully no one reads this and assumes I'm wrote this article because you personally asked me one of these questions. On the contrary, take these ideas as gifts to you. If I were going to take a tour of Google or Microsoft, and if there were certain questions that I shouldn't ask computer programmers because they are annoying or would cause them to make fun of me after I'd left, I'd certainly want to know that before going in. Wouldn't you??

Therefore, please enjoy this public service announcement. You're welcome. 

Three Questions to Never Ask a Grad Student

     1.   What is your dissertation on?

This is by far the most common question graduate students receive. We understand that you mean well. Maybe you're even halfway interested in the answer (though I doubt you're as interested as you think you are—more on that later). Still, keep this one to yourself. It's annoying. Ever get a splint or boot after an injury and have countless hoards ask you what happened? Yeah, it's like that.

Another thought: you really don't care what the dissertation topic is; you're just "making polite conversation." If we answered truthfully, we'd smile and say something like, "Oh! I'm studying Child Self-Regulation in the Context of Poverty-Related Environmental Risk: Neighborhood Crime and Family Instability as Predictors of Cognitive, Behavioral, and Emotional Control!" Halfway through this response you will have looked at your watch, remembered another appointment you had, and wondered if you left the oven on.

Some of you reading this might be thinking, "No, I really am interested!" That's nice for you. We're not. :)

The other side of the coin is: we often don't know the answer and asking us just rubs it in. Coming up with a dissertation topic, let alone researching and writing one, is an insane amount of work. It causes great stress in our lives. Please don't add more stress by reminding us that we aren't even close to graduating yet.

     2.   How's your PhD program going?

When you're sick and you go to the doctor's office, did you know your doctor doesn't have a PhD? (S)he has an MD (or another type of medical degree). If the one profession we actually call "doctor" doesn't even have a PhD, why is it that everyone automatically assumes that all people getting doctorates are getting PhDs!?

The "Ph" in PhD stands for "philosophy." Trust me, not everyone is getting a degree in philosophy. Let me paint an example. Here are some of the many doctorate degrees offered by the nation's universities:

DSocSci (Doctor of Social Science)

DBA (Doctor of Business Administration)

ThD (Doctor of Theology)

MD (Doctor of Medicine)

Pharm.D (Doctor of Pharmacy)

PsyD (Doctor of Psychology)

DMA (Doctor of Musical Arts)

PhD (Doctor of Philosophy)

Ed.D (Doctor of Education)

DDS (Doctor of Dental Science)

...and the list goes on. There are hundreds more. Sure, many areas of study include the study of philosophy (philosophy of education, philosophy of social behavior, etc.) but, statistically speaking, there's a good chance that someone you know getting a doctorate is actually not getting a PhD.

Look, I get it; you mean well. It was an innocent mistake. Remember, however, I'm not here to ridicule you but to help you! We are working very hard to earn these degrees and not all of us are interested in philosophy.

     3.   When do you finish your degree?

When we're having a conversation with you, it's very likely the first moment all week long that we haven't been immersed in research, study, and stress. We're not terribly interested in discussing the degree right now, let alone the aggravating thought that we're never going to finish. Even if we know how much time we have left, it feels so far away. It's so far away it makes us cry. Don't remind us of that.

So what SHOULD you say to a grad student?

Lest this article come across as all negative, here is a list of things you should definitely say to a grad student:

• Hey, sit down. Let me do that for you. You work hard enough as it is. 
• Oh I've got the check; it's on me! I know the grad student life isn't cheap. 
• Can I babysit your kids for free? I'm sure you could use the break. 
• I admire your hard work. I know earning a doctorate is no walk in the park. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help. 
• Here's $20. Just because.

And there you have it. You can now confidently speak with someone in graduate school, armed with knowledge. You're welcome.

Facebook has CIRCLES! Learn How to Use Them!

If you're like me, you find it very annoying when people post things on Facebook like, "Anyone wanna hang out tonight?" as their Facebook status when you live three states away from them! Or, "Can anyone help me move this weekend?" Or, "Does anyone know if the Wal-Mart on 9th still has those lunch boxes on sale?" I don't live anywhere near you... why would I be interested in reading any of those posts?

Did you know you can make your Facebook statuses visible only to specific people of your choosing???

The below description tells you how. It may seem a bit daunting. It probably looks like more steps than it really is, but I've provided screenshots for every step of the way (which is why it seems like a long process. I assure you it is not). Once you do this, it's nothing but a SINGLE click every time you want to post to a list of your choice.

(click on any image to see it larger -- sometimes there are details on the images that you'll want to see)

STEP ONE: Organize your Facebook friends into LISTS (same thing as a Google+ circles). This, admittedly, will be the longest and most tedious step. I know some people won't ever use this amazing Facebook feature simply because they're too lazy to organize their friends into lists. So suck it up, and do this now!


Notice on your Status/News Feed page, on the left, you have "Friends" (pointed out by the arrows in the picture below). When you hover over "friends" a "More" will appear to the right of it (as shown below). Click "MORE" (note: do not confuse this with the "Groups" and the "more" that appears when you hover over "groups." Groups are very different than "Lists")

STEP TWO: On this page you'll see a bunch of already-created "smart lists" created by Facebook. Just ignore those for right now. You can edit/explore/delete them later. Right now, click on "Create List" at the top right, as seen here:

STEP THREE: Title your list and begin adding people to it. What should you title it? What sorts of things would you want to post to only specific groups? If you're a big hockey fan, create a hockey list and only add people to it that would be interested in your posts about hockey. Or what about a "Church Friends" list, or a "Local Friends" list? 

For this example, I titled my list, "Test Group" but I shouldn't have done that. It's misleading. This is not a "group" it is a "list." Moving on: Once you click "create" then you'll see the page below (read my red notes on the image). Here, you can add anyone to this list (or circle or whatever you want to call it) that you choose. You can add them manually here (shown by the arrow) but there are a couple of other easy ways to add people to the list. Keep reading.

STEP FOUR: Once you've added at least a couple of people manually into your new list, Facebook will start providing suggestions to add to this list. Look at the graphic below and discover a few things that are easy to use and understand:

STEP FIVE: Another way to add people to your custom lists is to hover over their name in any part of your news feed. A box will appear and you'll see a button that should look something like this:

Click on the "friends" button for that person. This will bring up an additional window that shows you what "lists" (or circles) this person is a part of. You can add them to a list or remove them from a list by clicking on the list name. If you have lots of lists (like I do) then just click "show all lists" if you don't see the one you're looking for. See here:

STEP SIX: Boom! The "hard" part is done. Now it's all easy and downhill! When you post a status, look under your typing window and you'll see that your post is already geared up to post to a specific list. NOTE: Facebook WILL remember the last list you posted to, so be sure to double check who you're posting to.

Simply change which list you want to post to by clicking the drop-down arrow:

Once there, you can select a "list" that you want your new post to be visible to. Maybe you want this post only visible to your old high school friends, or your old home town friends, or your church friends. Or maybe it's a picture of your kids and you don't really want all 500 of your friends seeing it (400 of which you hardly know). Just create a "Close Friends and Family" list and make it visible only to them!

NOTE: These lists work on the iPhone FB app too!

STEP SEVEN: Honestly, that's the bulk of it. But what if you want a post to be visible to multiple lists? When you click that drop-down arrow to select a list, click on "custom" if you want to post to multiple lists.

That will bring up this window. Choose option: "Specific People or Lists"

Your window will now look like this (below). Read my notes in red on the image below for ideas and further understanding. And note that you can also hide posts from people!

 There you have it, Feeps. PLEASE SPREAD THE WORD! Let's clean up Facebook! Stop posting to the whole world things that are only meant for a specific few!

Put a link to this blog post on your Facebook wall!

Time Travelers Never Die (book)

This blog was meant for my fiction blog at fictionfixation.blogspot.com. I posted it here on accident and decided to leave it up. :)

Yesterday I finished the book, Time Travelers Never Die, by Jack McDevitt. If you know me, you know I love stories about Time Travel. This novel, by an author I'd never read before, was extremely fun and enjoyable.

I'm not going to pretend that it was a masterpiece of literary genius, but it was a story I couldn't put down once it began. As always, no spoilers, so read on.

The book read, at times, like a travelogue that didn't advance the plot. Even so, I found those sequences interesting due to the nature of where (or when?) they were traveling.

The time travel theory was pretty solid and stayed consistent throughout the book--something difficult to find in fiction. The author found a creative, if not trivial, way around paradoxes that I had never thought of before. Perhaps it was a plot device, but it worked.

If I had to point out one main flaw in the book, I would say that it was extraordinarily predictable. Throughout about 60 percent of the book, I already knew what would happen next, or down the road. Some things were plainly (and painfully) obvious. The main characters didn't seem to be able to figure out how to solve problems they were encountered with until chapters (or even half the book) after I had already figured it out.

Don't get me wrong. It may sound like I'm being nothing but negative about this novel. In spite of the predictability I found it extremely enjoyable to read. It was, as I said, a very fun story. It was not overly nail-biting or suspenseful but it was an adventure that I didn't want to end.

The final few pages were a bit confusing, and there's one major point that was so confusing that I actually went back to re-read the chapter. It didn't help. Still, it wasn't enough to ruin the book for me. It left me wondering a bit, but did not affect the overall story.

One thing that struck me about the book after I had finished it was how clean it was. Hardly any bad language (if any), and no sexual content. Just an overall fun adventure through time with a few small mysteries mixed in. I enjoyed this book, and the author, enough that as soon as I put it down, I went to the computer and bought another book by the same author.

As it turns out, the author is 81 years old and has written many novels (and won many awards). His newest book (which sounded very interesting) turned out to be book 6 in a series. So I went and ordered book 1 of the series: A Talent for War (Time Travelers Never Die is a stand-alone novel and not related to this 6 book series). I'm excited to find a new author to read and hope this next book of his will be just as good.

My Rating: 4.2/5

My Recommendation: Read this book if you enjoy time travel stories. It was well thought-out and well executed. I didn't give it a 5 only because, while I loved this book, I can't say it's on my top list of best books ever. I just can't bring myself to categorize it with other great books that I've given a 5 to. This is likely due to some sections that seemed a bit slow in travelogue style. But don't let that sway you. It is fun and WORTH READING! :) Enjoy.

A Comparison of Duo Seraphim Treatments

The text has been composed into late renaissance and early baroque pieces many times. Each composer treats it differently. This is a brief analysis if their differences.

Original Text	English Translation
Duo seraphim clamabant, alter ad alterum: Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus, Dominus Deus Sabaoth. Plena est omnis terra gloria ejus. Tres sunt qui testimonium dant in coelo. Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus Sanctus et hic tres unum sunt. Laus et perennis gloria Deo Patri cum Filio, sancto simul Paraclito in sempiterna secula.	The two Seraphim proclaimed, one to the other: Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Hosts. The whole earth is full of his glory. There are three who give testimony in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one. Praise and continuing glory be to God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit now and forevermore

The text clearly explains that there are two angels proclaiming that God has all glory and the earth is full of His glory forever. Is it enough to simply set the words to music? Or is it preferable to compose the music in such a way that it reflects the text.

Claudio Monteverdi (1567 - 1643) starts with a duet, representing the two seraph angels. When the text "Three bear witness in heaven," comes in, a third voice sings to represent the holy trinity. It remains a trio the rest of the piece.

Monteverdi Recording

Monteverdi Score

Hans Leo Hassler (1562 - 1612) starts out with a duet but goes to full double chorus by the words “Sanctus”

Hassler Score

Hassler Midi Recording

Jacobus (Jacob) Gallus/Handl (1550 - 1591) wrote a double chorus in the antiphonal style but did not start out with two voices.

Gallus Recording

Gallus Score

Francisco Guerrero (1528-1599) writes a duet to start but brings in the rest of the chorus by “Sanctus” (as Hasller did). Interestingly enough, he maintains a tri-choral piece instead of a double chorus. This is reminiscent of Monteverdi’s trio, probably referencing the holy trinity, but not painting the text (the fact that there are only two angles singing). He brings the three choirs in on "Sanctus" rather than on "three bear witness" as Monteverdi did.

Guerrero Score

Guerrero Recording

Richard Dehring (1580 – 1630) writes a Duet throughout.

Dehring Score

Dehring Recording

Tomas Luis De Victoria (1548 - 1611) also starts out with a duet but, like Hassler, brings the full chorus in by “Sanctus.” He does, however, use only three parts (like Monteverdi and Scheidt) when describing that there are “three” that bear witness in heaven. Victoria also writes the score for SSAA or TTBB (however you choose to interpret his score). This makes sense as the song is about angels proclaiming about the greatness of God. It takes gender out of the equation and makes it easier to envision that these are angels singing, and not “men and women.”

Victoria Score

Victoria Recording

Samuel Scheidt (1587 - 1654) creates a lot of text painting, choosing to start the piece with two “angels” singing. Not until “the world is full” does the full double chorus come in. This makes lyrical sense. Even when the full chorus is in, he keeps the polychoral piece in the antiphonal style, not letting us forget that there are in fact only two angels crying out the name of the lord at this time.

Scheidt Score

Scheidt Midi Recording

Scheidt Japanese Recording

Back to College Life

So much going on in life right now, I thought it'd be appropriate to blog about my adventures in Colorado. Whether or not anyone cares enough to actually read my upcoming blog posts matters not. If nothing else, this will serve as a good journal for me.

In the past two weeks:

• I attended Harmony University for my first time
• My Grandma died and I attended her funeral
• My wife and daughters were in a bad car accident
• I moved to Colorado from Nevada
• I am starting back into school after seven years

Needless to say, I am busy.

Today was my first day on campus (University of Colorado, Boulder). School doesn't actually start until next week but I will be taking exams this week. Today I got my "BuffOne Card", met a few of the graduate students, etc. I also attended my first meeting, an informational meeting about a Graduate Teaching Program, and promptly fell asleep. ...and I was in the front row. Ugh. I need more sleep. Will someone please get that memo to my children?

Boulder is gorgeous! The campus is beautiful and the surrounding mountains are breathtaking. The weather here is wonderful as well (though that's not hard compared to Vegas). Ask me again in the winter and I'll let you know if I still hold this opinion.

Today I started my preliminary exams in Aural Theory, Written Theory, and Tonal Analysis. This afternoon I take Post-Tonal Analysis, and Counterpoint. Sound fun? Yeah, I'm pretty worried about some of these. I felt okay about this morning's exams but they are hard! I've spoken to some other graduate students and they have put my mind at ease a bit. They assure me it's not all that big a deal to fail the exams. Some of the material is hard because I was never taught the information in my undergraduate work. Other stuff is hard because I simply don't remember.

I can already feel that I will be extremely busy. My class schedule is a bit up in the air but from the looks of things, I'll be on campus from morning until night, working hard. I'm ready, though. Let's do this.

In other news, I'm extremely excited to be joining the Sound of the Rockies Chorus. They are a 3rd place international level chorus with the Barbershop Harmony Society. One of the biggest reasons I'm pursuing my advanced degrees is so that I have more education to bring to the society, so being a part of this chorus is a great thing on my barbershop journey. I am excited to see how I can contribute to this ensemble. Last Thursday (their rehearsal night) I was moving so I missed out on my weekly dose of harmony. I'm craving some locked chords right now.

So that's my introduction to my new life out here in Colorado. New house, new school, new scenery, and even soon to be a new car (because of the aforementioned totaling of our van -- everyone was okay by the way).

The Absurdity of the Win-loss Stat in Baseball

Today’s headline on the sfgiants.com homepage said, “Bumgarner Seeks His First Win.” Sports announcers talk about his current 0-5 record as sad and disappointing. There is no doubt that it is disappointing that the Giants have not been able to win under his watch, but in no way does his 0-5 record prove that he is pitching poorly. I propose that the wins and losses stat in baseball is quite possibly the worst stat that is widely accepted by the baseball community.

There is far too much importance and noteworthiness given to this statistic. Pitchers are graded by this record more than any other redeeming (or non-redeeming) achievement they may have made. When a new pitcher comes onto the mound, this is the stat they flash at us. When a “struggling” Ubaldo Jimenez goes 0-2 in his first five starts, he is considered to be in a funk.

Personally, I believe that this statistic has almost nothing to do with how good a pitcher really is and baseball fans and sports announcers should stopy analyzing it as the end-all measurement of a pitchers effectiveness.

A nearly perfect pitcher can get slapped with a loss. Let’s analyze this scenario: Johnny “The Missle” Fastballer pitches 8 perfect innings. So far a no-hitter, a perfect game even. But the score remains 0-0 because his opponent (Jimmy “Knuckles” Speedster) has given up only 3 hits and no earned runs. Because of his perfect game, Johnny Fastballer’s manager leaves him in the game. It’s the bottom of the 9th and Fastballer throws a 96 mph fastball down the middle. Sammy Slammer knocks it out of the park. A walk-off homerun. The game ends. Fastballer takes the loss.

In this example, arguably an extreme case, Johnny Fastballer pitches one of the best games in baseball history but is credited with the loss. Ouch. This scenario, of course, could be played out in many different ways. It’s still early in the season as of this posting (mid-May) and already I’ve seen many amazing games pitched only to go sour in one or two at-bats.

I’ve seen pitchers go 5, 6, and 7 innings, pitching beautifully, only to give up a run or two before being pulled. And he gets the loss. The problem here is that nobody ever seems to recognize the fact that these pitchers pitched superbly! All they focus on is that pesky win-loss record.

In my example above, Johnny Fastballer pitched a nearly perfect game, and ended with an ERA of 1.0 and a WHIP of 0.11. And he probably also had about 12 K’s. ….and the loss!

A win credited to a pitcher is probably more of an accurate scoring mechanism than is a loss. If his team wins, it’s because the pitcher was able to hold off the opponent while his own team worked out their offense. Still, it’s not a perfect system.

Take for example a pitcher that gives up 6 runs in 6 innings. And ERA of 9.0. Terrible by any standard. It just so happens that his own team’s offense scores 7 runs during their at bats. This pitcher gets the win while boasting a 9.0 ERA. If he does this consistently, depending on his teamate’s bats, he goes 5-0 in the first 4 weeks of the season. Is he a good pitcher then? NO! His ERA is terrible, his WHIP is terrible, and his K:9 ratio is in the gutter.

Last night, the Giants and Rockies were tied at 3-3 in the 9th inning. Top of the 9th, Bochy puts Brian Wilson (the closer) on the mound. Three up three down. On to the bottom of the 9th. A walk-off base-hit wins the game for the G-men. Brian Wilson is credited with the win. Um, WhAt!?! Good for beard-man for his one inning pitched. But HE gets the win?? What did his three outs have to do with the Giant’s offense coming to life in the bottom of the 9th?

This is absurd. Multiply this by half a season and Wilson now has a closing record of 5 wins he doesn’t deserve and Fastballer goes 0-12 while pitching nearly perfect games in every outing.

If you want to see how good a pitcher really is, look at his innings pitched, his ERA, his WHIP, his strikeouts:innings pitched (K:9) ratio. These are the things we should be looking at. Everyone feels bad for Ubaldo Jimenez and Madison Bumgarner, but have you looked at their other stats (arguably they’re not great, but that’s beside the point)?

Tim Stauffer has pitched 41 innings to date and has zero wins, but he maintains an era of 2.61 and a WHIP of 1.16. In other words, the guy is dang good! But his win-loss record stands at 0-1. Josh Danks, same story: He’s 0-5 with 47 innings pitched and a 3.83 ERA. Sure the ERA could be lower. He doesn’t have 5 losses for nothing. But a 3.83 ERA for a regular starter isn’t terrible. Also, I can give you at least three pitchers that have 4 wins and a 4.20+ ERA. Case in point: the win-loss stat does not give us an accurate picture of the quality of a pitcher.

Play ball!

Why the Giants Deserve a World Series Title MORE Than the Rangers

There has been a lot of hype around the Rangers. They succeeded in out-scoring, out-pitching, and out-playing the hallowed Yankees. And to top it off, they had never won a post-season series before, not even at the division level.

What a story. I can see a movie being written right now. This is the Cinderella team of 2010. It's a feel-good story. From the depths of facing bankruptcy, to the outright win of the American League title, and on to the World Series. The country will be rooting for them, praying that they will put the final coat on their Cinderella story.

But they don't deserve it.

At least not as much as the San Francisco Giants do.

Here's why:

First of all, let's just be clear on the fact that The San Francisco Giants have also NEVER won a World Series either. It's not like they have tasted the limelight that the Rangers have been robbed of. It's a luxury neither team has experienced. They are on equal ground in that regard. Sure the Giants have won their share of post-season series, and have even made it to the World Series a number of times, but they've never won.

The "Giants" won their last World Series in 1954 against the Indians. Swept that series... but they were the NEW YORK Giants. That was not this team. Saying the New York Giants is the same team as the San Francisco Giants is like saying the Washington Nationals is the same team as the Montreal Expos.

But I'll indulge your snide disagreement. Let's just say that we have to count them as the same team and therefore concede that the "Giants" have won a World Series while the Rangers have not. Even if that were the case, the Rangers weren't in existence until 1961.

So let's do the math. The Rangers have been waiting and hoping for a World Series title for 49 years. But the [New York] Giants, having won their last title in 1954, have been striving for that coveted pinnacle of bragging rights for 56 years.

The Giants have been waiting longer for this than the Rangers have. No matter how you look at it, this is the case.

But, going back to reality, the San Francisco Giants have never won the title. This series will be played by two teams that have never had the honor. No matter who wins, it'll be their first time. What an awesome series to watch.

So don't go rooting for the Rangers simply because of the media hype. Look at the stats. Look at the real numbers. All things being equal, the Giants have waited longer than the Rangers. They're further ahead in the waiting line.

Don't you hate it when people cut in line? Step back, Rangers. This is the Giant's year!

How to Cure Baseball

I haven't written a blog in a long time, favoring Facebook over Blogger. But this past weekend I got to return to my hometown in Gilroy California and I was consequently re-immersed into a culture that loves Baseball.

Growing up, I loved baseball more than any of my friends. I was fanatical. I remember being in 6th grade and running to find the newspaper in order to memorize all the most updated stats that had been achieved the previous day. And on Christmas morning, if 90% of my presents didn't have the San Francisco Giants logo on them, then Christmas wasn't successful.

I even stuck through the baseball strike of1994-1995. A year and a half with no baseball. MLB suffered and many baseball fans turned to other sports, never to cast their eyes back at the sport they used to love. I stayed with it, and when the players finally came back, I was their first fan.

Eventually I went off to college. Not only did I move to a state that had no professional baseball team and no televised or radio access to the Giants, but my studies and part-time job kept me on campus from 7am to 11:30pm (literally) every single day. Needless to say, I lost track of baseball. I still watched the playoffs and World Series for a few years, but eventually Baseball took a backseat to more important things.

...like college football. Growing up, I had never been a football fan. Never. I tried to like it for years, but I could never get into it. College changed all of that. Suddenly the game made sense, and it also helped that I now had an alma mater that I could cheer for.

I quickly learned that football was widely loved by most people, while baseball was loved only by a very select few. As a matter of fact, I was hard pressed to find a single person in my 3 years at BYU that even remotely enjoyed baseball.

For the past 7 or 8 years, college football has filled my thirst for sports. But in the past few months, I've been finding myself more and more interested (re-interested) in baseball. After all it was the sport that I devoted so much of my life to.

So I've been thinking: why is it that a majority of people don't care for baseball but adore football? Sure, if you live in the Bay Area, or in Boston or New York (for example), most people will live and breathe baseball. But, having lived in two states now that have no pro baseball teams, I can say with full confidence that most people love football, and not baseball.

The reason is this: every football game counts. Every football game is crucial to the team's standings and to their possibilities of getting to the playoffs or to the coveted bowl game. In baseball, each team plays approximately seven million games a year. The games aren't important for themselves. If you miss a game, no big deal; it will barely put a dent in their standings if they lose anyway.

Here's the solution: baseball needs to go the way of football. They should have about 20 games in a season. Period. One a week for 20 weeks. I don't care that the reason football has only one game a week is to let the players physically recover, and that baseball players don't need to recover (other than pitchers). Big deal.

Baseball should play one game a week, let's say Saturdays (great day for a ballgame). This way, each team would have one starting pitcher that would pitch every week. He would become the "quarterback" of the team. Commercial products would glamorize him and clothing would be created in his name. He would lead the team. You'd have your second and third stringers as well but they'd rarely play.

You could raise ticket prices a bit to make up for lost revenue, but consider this. Rarely does a baseball stadium sell out for a game (there are a select few that are always full, but as a whole, very few). Therefore, if you held only 20 games, one a week, people would flock to that one game as they do with football. Take the tickets sold for the previous 5 games of a normal season (as it is now) and cram them into the stadium on that one day. They wouldn't lose any money. Not to mention the rise in revenue from more effective product placement and glamorization of the sport.

Then come the playoffs. Single elimination, just like football. The World Series? You do one game. It would be as big as the Super Bowl.

There, I've solved baseball's issue. Do it my way and baseball would have 10 times the fans it does now. Sadly, this will never happen. And so, while I am becoming more interested in finding a way to follow baseball again in my MLB-less state of Nevada, I will stick to my college football and catch the occasional baseball scoreboard.

Brooklyn LeIsle Dougherty

Brooklyn is HERE! She was born yesterday, Friday January 8th, 2010, at 8:13am. She weighed in at 10 pounds and 3 ounces! Whew! 22 inches long too!

Both baby and mom are doing great. I haven't posted on this blog for almost a year, but I know not everyone has Facebook (there's still time to repent), and so I thought I'd share some pictures here for all you non facebook-ians.

By the way, for those curious, LeIsle is Megan's middle name too. It's a family name. It's pronounced: Lee-Eye-Uhl (silent "s").

Blogging Obsolete?

I'm on Facebook all day every day it seems. It's like a miny blog. Anything I'm doing I post there instead of here. Anyone that normally reads my blogs are on Facebook anyway. I can post pics, videos, etc. I'm starting to not find a use for my blog...

If you're missing my blog updates (which I doubt), get 0n Facebook, add me as a friend, and check your FB every now and then. It'll all be there.

If you're not a FB person, REPENT!

Hey everyone, I'm texting from the top of Half Dome! I MADE IT!!! It was SERIOUSLY hard and very scary at times, but I'm here! YEA! <-Jay>

Happy Memorial Day. And a huge thank you to all those who serve or who have served in our armed forces!

Facebook and the Allusion of Grandeur

Okay so I'm a Facebookian now. A lot of people I know have been using Facebook for years. I've had an account but never even looked at it to see what it was. I was bored the other day so I checked it out.

The main feature on Facebook is "The Wall." This is bascially a place for you to post short messages about what you're up to at the time (such as: "I started reading Angels & Deamons today" or "I just found a really great Mexican restaurant in Vegas" or "I can't wait for the season finale of American Idol"). When you post something, it automatically shows up on your friends' walls as well. So when they log into Facebook, they can quickly, at-a-glance, see what's going on in your life.

So basically the whole system opperates on the assumption that people actually care about what you're doing at any given hour of the day. Saddly enough, it seems to be true.

I actually find it quite interesting to check my Facebook and see what my "friends" are up to. Some are talking about how excited they are for the Survivor Finale; I wouldn't have known they were fans of the show otherwise. Others are preparing to run a half-marathon and are posting about how they're preparing. My best friend, Rich, recently posted pictures of his kids and the crafts they made at school. These wall postings are all very interesting.

What's annoying (but rare it seems) is when someone takes up wall space with a comment like "I'm bored" or "I'm tired."

You can, of course, post comments on your friends' wall postings as well.

BUT HERE'S THE BEST PART! I've discovered the JEWEL to Facebook (it was no secret, but I'm new and just found it). You can set up your cell phone to be able to text a posting directly to your wall. What this means is that now I can be anywhere in the world and send a text to Facebook about what I'm doing (assuming, of course, that anyone actually cares... regardless of that answer, it's still fun).

I have a friend (another choir teacher) that is currently on his choir trip and he's been posting all weekend about the progress of his trip via text message from his cell phone. He's posting how his kids did at the competition, etc. I'd know nothing about his experience otherwise.

Another great thing I recently discovered, is that when I text in a post to my wall, and someone comments on my post, that comment is sent to me as a text, to which I can text a response to the comment. And all of this is logged on my Facebook Wall for all my other "friends" to see.

So I'm hooked. I'm totally into the facebook thing. Unfortunately, a LOT of you (that read my blog) are not. It's unfortuante because I'd be interested to read each day what you're thinking about, what you're up to, what is annoying you, what you're excited about, what fun thing happened today. And just look how easy it'd be??? You don't even have to ever GO to the Facebook homepage. After it's set up, you could send that info to all your "friends" via text to your Facebook wall.

So what are you waiting for? Go check out my Facebook page, add me as a friend if you don't have me already, and GET STARTED.

Looking forward to seeing you there!

Jason Dougherty's Profile

I just set up my phone so that i can post directly to my blog via text message. This is so awesome. Also i just started using Facebook a lot, go check me out!

Real Superhero: Shadowhare

This is the best story I've ever heard. Apparently there is a guy in Cincinatti that has literally put on a cape and mask and has begun roaming the streets as a superhero. The guy doesn't actually have any powers so I guess he's not "super" but he claims to protect the citizens and help the homeless.

I watched a few videos about the guy and it looks like most of his time is spent whole-heartedly and genuienly helping the homeless. I commend him for that. His costume is silly and he walks around in broad daylight but after watching a few videos and reading a few articles, I actually find myself feeling a bit of hope--which is his self-proclaimed goal.

You need to do yourself a favor and read this article: http://www.wlwt.com/news/19305002/detail.html

In addition to the video posted here on this blog, I recommend the "web only" video about a day in the life of Shadowhare (or just click here: http://www.wlwt.com/video/19322147/index.html)

YouTube SUCKS!

I hate Youtube now. I make great videos. I like to upload them to show my friends and family how we're doing. One of the things that makes my videos great is my choice of music as a background for what's showing.

Well all of a sudden YouTube has decided to ban videos that have "unauthorized" music in the soundtrack. Are you KIDDING ME??? What is with these people? It's just a stupid video. I'm not making any money on it. I'm not promoting or demoting any musician or "pirating" their material.

These copyright laws and piracy laws have gone WAY too far. YouTube even sent me an email saying that my video had been removed due to content that was "owned or licensed by WMG."

GIVE ME A FREAKIN' BREAK! I used to love YouTube. Well I'm here to tell you that they HAVE SOLD OUT! Google owns them now and I'm seriously disappointed. They used to have a motto at Google: Don't Be Evil. Well you screwed up this time. Now you've got one seriously unhappy customer and I'm blogging about it in hopes that I can convince at least a few other souls out there that Google is making a turn to the dark side.
And for the record, the video was a documentary of a camping trip my Dad and I took to the Anniversary Narrows. It was an amazing trip. But now, thanks to Google/YouTube, you'll never get to see it.

Digg this post! Forward it. GET THE WORD OUT! GOOGLE/YOUTUBE DESERVES TO SSSUUUUFFFFFFFEEEERRRRRR!!!!


*p.s. okay, I'm being overly dramatic... but I'm just messing around.... except for the part about everything above...

Pwned!

I subscribe to "nigahiga" on Youtube. I love thier videos. Seriously funny stuff such as "How to be a Ninja" etc. But they posted a new video this week that got me laughing outloud. If you've seen the phrase "pwned!" online then you'll think it's funny. If you've never heard of it, then you'll be totally confused. Still, pretty funny:

Revenge of the Fallen

I'm surprised I hadn't heard anything about this until I stubled accross it on Fandango..... Wow. Bring it on. Can't wait. Take a look for yourself:

Best. Rumor. EVER.

For those of you who don't know, aintitcool.com is the leading source for accurate and validated "rumors" on the internet. They mostly divulge rumors about movies and often conduct their own interviews with actors, directors, and producers, and then posts the results. It's a fairly legit site that doesn't post any old stupid fanboy rumor (*cough* imdb *cough*). Aintitcool.com takes "rumors"only from the primary source. ;)

And today I read the BEST rumor I could have read. See here:

"Bryan Singer has refused to undertake a re-boot of the Superman franchise and has left the Executives at WB with no choice but to take a fresh creative direction.

He stated the Wachowski Brothers had been approached to re-boot the franchise as a trilogy and they are currently reviewing their options as its like being asked to take the final play in a superbowl final. Says if they do agree, he will likely either succumb to providing second unit support on the movie or will champion the directorship of Plastic Man - He started to giggle as he stated its like a young child for the Brothers and they wont give that up easily.

Says, the very thought of the brothers making a superman movie is unbelievable as they have grown up in the world of comic books and they would be ideal for the project.

Stated that Bryan Singer is looking to move on to Logan's Run a movie to be produced by Joel Silver."

In my opinion, havign the Wachowski brothers (Matrix, Speed Racer) do Superman is only a winning combination. It would be AMAZING. I think I would have a seziure of glee.

To read the whole article, click here.

P.s. For the record, the top photo is just a joke. Of course it wouldn't be the matrix cast in the new movie. :P

Letter from the Govenor

Some of you know that I, along with all Nevada state employees, are receiving a 6% pay cut due to a poor economy. I just got a letter from the Governor (below). Apparently he is going to give us some resources to help us cope with the pay cut. See his letter below:

Important Notice to All State Employees and Teachers!

All State employees will now be required to look happy while working, even after your pay and benefits have been reduced . State-approved supplies will be provided to each State employee at little or no cost to meet this new requirement.

Each employee will be supplied 2 paper clips and rubber bands. (See Fig 1.)

Fig 1.

Assemble items as shown in Fig 2.

Fig 2.

Apply as shown in Fig 3.

Fig 3.

Enjoy your day. This new office equipment will help you to reach the end of a low pay productive work day with a smile on your face!

Cheers!

-The Governor