getting hyper

Monday, March 31, 2003

It gave me a different template, and I can't get anything new to post.........
posted by David Monday, March 31, 2003

I don't know if anyone else is having problems, but my blog is completely messed up......and it's all BLOGGER'S FAULT!
posted by David Monday, March 31, 2003

Steve, that is a pretty cool link. Thanks for helping me out.
posted by David Monday, March 31, 2003

Here is the link to Lynda, Lindsey, and Rae's Project.
It's about how 1984 relates to language & today's society.


posted by Lynda Monday, March 31, 2003

Sunday, March 30, 2003



I dunno if anybody cares or not, but here's a little more background on the car in David's post. The Tucker Torpedo A friend of mine did an informative speech in speech class about that car in high school last year. If anybody's interested in cars, this one's pretty damn cool.


posted by Steve Sunday, March 30, 2003

Very well put, David. ;-)
posted by Norm Sunday, March 30, 2003

I started working on what I hope will be my final project today (the narrative) and boy can a hypertextual type of work become a mess fast. I'm trying to organize it all by writting small pieces on index cards and labeling one side so that I can understand what links to it. Somehow I still have not mastered writting directly in an electronic form without the assistance of traditional media: the pencil and paper.
posted by Marianna Sunday, March 30, 2003

Wow that post by dave was long. Norm, I agree that long bid wars can be bad but they also help to shut out up and coming business man. A case in history that this reminds me of is just after world war II. With all the access money that people had laying around they were ready to spend it on some of the new technology that had been established during the war. The automobile industry was one of these areas. After the war the government had excess Industrial plants where they had made planes and other large items. Most of these plants were huge. The government then accepted bids from companies who wanted to take over these large facilities. One of these companies was the Tucker Automobile company. The developer, Tucker, had designed automobiles before the war and had even designed a tank for a norwegian country but was turned down because the vehicle was too fast. After a little battle, Tucker was able to get one of the largest buildings and started making prototypes of his new car. "The car of tomorrow, today" had many new safety features and back then would have been one of the safest cars on the road. It even had a center headlight that would move when you made a turn so you could see exactly what you were turning into. And i think it even had seatbelts (not sure). With the government selling its wartime facilities off to up and coming industrialists with wonderful new ideas, many people were able to benefit. Tuckers new design and safety features made the larger automobile companies of the time really scared. They saw that this new car was better than theirs. This new competition forced the other companies to improve thier cars. They had to really work hard to come up with better features. Tucker was only able to make 50 of his cars because he ran into some legal battles. The big automobile companies of Detroit saw Tucker as a huge threat and used there influence on the government to wage a legal war against Tucker. (There is a really good movie about this, I know Christa has seen it)

Anyways, after the war I think that this competition should thrive in Iraq. With new competition comes new technology. Its like Aramark. They know they have a contract for the next three years. So they are reducing the aspects of the meal plan while increasing price. If they had competion they would have to pay more attention to the consumer rather than just try to make as much money as they can. With the contract that Cheney's former company got basically just handed to them, I feel that it is a step in the wrong direction. It needs to be spread out to many other companies.
posted by David Sunday, March 30, 2003

Friday, March 28, 2003

http://www.wordspy.com/words/wordburst.asp

Weren't we just talking about word bursts the other day (week?) in class? Seems awfully familiar to me somehow. I think we were actually although maybe not with the same vocabulary, if you follow the link that's in this link I do believe we were at the Daypop website at one point.

Anyway, check out the Word Spy... I get it in my email every day, it's kind of a fun thing to go check out. It's like dictionary.com's word of the day but cooler :)
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Friday, March 28, 2003

Thursday, March 27, 2003

I haven't posted in a while and I feel bad... so I figured that y'all might want to see my thoughts.

today is 3.27.02 and i am feeling extremely sorry about not having posted for since spring break, but i have an excuse. that excuse is that my computers had a hangnail that refused to allow it to access the net and my comp at home is slow as molasses and wont do anything at all. in fact when i went to college i had to get a new computer rather than take the families b/c the one at home doesnt do antything. like for instance if i want to write my autodesk stuff to disk it takes twenty yeats and the n reports that the memory is full or some other similar message. usually ithere is some kind of number reference code like 'error in sector 234980428932-f. ' these are irrelevant and only mean thant the whole thing isnt working and tough cookies. so neways i havent been able to access the net and im in the erc now. jd was really nice and helped me carry my comp down from oit which was supposedly fdixed, except it doesnt work with my mouse. when i plug my mouse in it displays a simple IBM logo and nothing else which is essentiuaklkly useless for my purposes. thats b/c brooksie chewed it and frayed it and the comp eapparently needs to detect a mouse to boot up. stupidf microsoft. so neways its 19:223 amnd om on the library comp and have decided to write my thought s to the weblog auntil i get boered. of coursde that means that i have to type a s quick as possible so i dont klose my train of thought which is a losing battle. and the kid next to me has ta yelloewish t-shirt; it should be a white shirt but the lights in here make it yellow. imve been thinklingt about compression limits a lot today becuase its nice out. somehoew nice weather makes me want to take walks and think a bucnch. i do more chatting i think when its lousy out. but im a gimp momemntaritly =so that failed utterly. that reminds me of matt winter from my school. he halwayhs used to say that. in fact he signed my year book 'o well now ill def fail' meaning that he would miss me at rit. its kinda cruel how we lose track of ppl over the years. thank you im fort keeeping me in contact. i speak from experience. my mom talkes to like 2 of her high school friends. she had a whole slew of friends but only a few best friemnds kinda like me. but then she lost contact w/ them because she was lazy and didnt want to take the time to pick up the phone, call for no reason. caslling for no reason makes us feel uncomfortable but is one of the best networking techniques ever invented. for that matter id like to see someone, anyone who's successful socially - not lauded for some stroke of genius but loved socially - who doesnt make random fone calls. a waste of time my&*(%^ . so limiting information yes. the idea is that a perfect transmission has some lowest possible number of bits that will communicate a given message. we can find out how efficient a language is by how many extra characters is needed to convey a given arbitary batch of information. this gives rise to diff eq's and statistical analysis. i think i would like to do a major project on statistical analysis of language. my H% finding was interesting enough. to merit more work in the field. to be sure it will keep me occupied. i talked to ppl over break which was a plus. also went back to the high school, at kh kcm jh etc. this is not to say btw that one work cant convey a lot of information. it can; one bit is enough to triggger a long process. but if it is that process must be pre-implanted into the compiler. aka an integral sign is just a stupid shape. when discribing nouns compression is always extremely lossy. for instance the word ' book' doesnt tell anything except a rough image. further description is necessary. to describe the phenomenon perfectly requires knowledge of the exact position and momenta of all of the subatomic particles associated with the book, which according to heisenburg is impossible. related is that i think the jewish hot sdogs they offer in ro-bro are for the birds. good german franks like hoffmann's are necessary and proper. the hoffmann hot haus is the bomb. and also i hate hot dogs afgter the contest so they've got to be good. i remember see ing a german postage stamp oif heisenbug with a formula of his , uncertainlty on it. the thing was .85 dm and had a bunch of german sayings onm them so i was reminder fof german fgranks. qed. the time is now 19:42 and wordpad just wrapped over to the next line. it surprisedf me b/c i thought that i cousld simply type forever in the one line and my words would stretch on and on and on to infinisty withought the program ever stopping the procgression of the letterage. i guess i was wrong. another romantic myth exposes.d. its like oatmeal. i thought falling oatmeal would teach me a lot but it didnt excpet for that the littlee grains like the brown sugar falls to the oustside of the pile and faster. also a bnit about waves when i shook the place. stupid old results. i think that i f i had to cook something for myself i would fail utterly. leave me in a kitchen with eggs and flour and sugar and ill eat the eggs, then try on the flour-sugar mix if i get hungery enough, som uch for cookies. my incompreytance is astounding. chex ceraeal. some times i want to eat frosting straisght from the jar. somethimes i dont. on another note i just heard about a kid who would spend like 4 dollars on school food every day: a soda, a personal calzone let's say, a pizza, a cookie, a bunch of sugar. suagr was an important part of this kid's diet. it's interesting to listen to people takl;e about kids like that. two girls just walked in and sat down at the computer next to me. theyre obviouslt unrelated but theyire hair is dyed the same colour and theyre wearing basically the same clothes, def tehe same assemblage. and i found myself wondering weather they werre more than just friends. i guess thats on my mind because of the poster thats posted right outside my door in my dorm proclaiming nat'l gay and lesbian week. or maybe month i didnt read it carefully. i dont consider myself a homophove, too leftist for that, but . but. and i wish theyd move it form right next to my door so that it looks like im pormoting something. i feel confident in my sexuallity but i dont know what other ppl might think. first impressions mean a lot. and one of the girls just took off her shirt. theres a black one underneath so i no theyre no t that way. what a waste of valuable discussion time. i mean seriously. my elbow itches even thou i scratched it and . isnt it funny that when u think about scartching an itch others appear? is that because they realize that u have a propensity for scratching a the moment and theyve been supressing the urge to scream tickle me the whole time? or is it b/c the nerves area ll connected and ur body radiates itches, witchout any real clue of where the itch is. hydra biology is like that. ive always wondered why studying hydras is one of the important things that we do in general bio but never had the opportunity to figure out why. the only thing that i can think of is that its so incredibly different than ppl that the bio ppl think that if someone who takes the regents decides to design an animal a hyhdra will be particularlyhelpful. moves to a diff beat compris? regents pfff. so neways i called up this corey guy who fixed my computer and was going to give him a tongue lashing but i didnt have to b/c he told me how to fix my comp really fast over the phone. guess i had two problems? ah well who knows. a car just drove by. its dark out now, completely, but i could see the headlights through whatever it is that they put over the windows in the erc. actually i wonder why it is that they covered the windows too and also what it is. maybe a little about the company who installed them too, thao thats not terribly inmportamnt. ah yes a sustainable future in our hands. whatever happened to clarkson sustainability? i think we need a class that implements the research that the previous two classes worked on. otherwise, what was the point of their research. r&d without d makes a lot of wasted work. that r might as well stand for rhetoric for all the good its doing. sorry socrates but rhetoric is useless. so is this litttle textual string that im typing. wow that reminds me of ash. useless. Useless. YOU-seless. YOU!! for graduation my friends and i wore hats that spelled out YOU!! which was what we enjoyed screaming at unsuspecting freshmen. good times were had by all back in the day. high school was probably quite unpleasant but all i can remember about it was all of the good times we had. optimism rules. an optimistic person can turn a molehill into a mountain and then climb the mountain and enjoy the view from the top. and sing a lot. yes i remember high school as a whirlwind of a time and will probably remember college as the same.
posted by dave Thursday, March 27, 2003

I guess blogs are starting to get really popular. With this war that is going on soldiers are now starting to write in blogs so that friends and family back home can get the dl of what they are going through. I just found that link that jeff had posted and thought the article was really intersting. With family able to read about the daily troubles of the soldiers within seconds of the soldier posting it, it helps to bring the soldier closer to home. In many of the past wars soldiers have communicated with their familys via letters. But these take so long to get to each person. Also, now a family back home can also create and write in a weblog so the soldier can now read about what his family has been doing. Technology rocks. Also i really liked the site www.blogsofwar.com
posted by David Thursday, March 27, 2003

David, if I might, I'll point out that the spoils system has been in existence since the illustrious President Andrew Jackson, if my history serves me. "...Andrew Jackson, a Democratic-Republican from Tennessee. His party had great support in the South and the West. Jackson changed the party's name to Democrats." - http://www.thesurrealist.co.uk/slogan.cgi

But what, exactly, is wrong with giving the contract to a company that has not yet gone the way of Enron, choosing to at least get something that our leadership trusts immediately rather than wading through a long bid war - speaking of which, aren't we all for peace anyway? ;-) :-D
posted by Norm Thursday, March 27, 2003

While reading about the war I came across an article on cnn.com. Apparently, Halliburton, which is a big company just got a big contract to put out the oil fires in Iraq and will help give it rights to taking over facilities after the war. An estimated 600 million dollar contract to help rebuild Iraq after the war will surely be given to Halliburton. "The job will include emergency repair of electrical supply facilities, water and sanitation systems, roads and bridges, public buildings such as hospitals and schools, irrigation structures and ports." But I forgot to mention that the former CEO of Halliburton is now our current vice president. That’s right, Dick Cheney. Coincidence, I think not.
posted by David Thursday, March 27, 2003

“Tragedy tells us that our weblogs are the playthings of the Gods, subject to the whims of fate and fortune.”

Isn’t this an incredible reflection? Yet, is it accurate? I came across this quote by linking from the course reference page, to another page, to another, until I was mildly “lost” as Hope so accurately named the situation in her project, and happened to find this incredibly interesting take on weblogs. I’d like to think that each of us has the background and, therefore ability now to formulate comprehensive, even if they are elusive, opinions as to the accuracy of this statement. To me the statement has been proven, or at least appears to maintain a moderate to highly prominent level of esteem when considering both personal weblog writing and that of our collaborative, class efforts.

In my personal weblogging experience this idea of fate, dictating the ultimate form of weblogging is intriguing. I don’t necessarily agree with the notion of this fate being in the form of a tragedy, because it seems as though the very essence and chaotic beauty of weblogging, is a result of the randomness of thought progression, and somewhat weaker bond (connections) between entries. Weblogging allows one to seamlessly chaotically order thoughts, ideas, notions, metaphors, computer links, and other areas of interest into a mesh or web of knowledge. I find myself writing on anything from frustration, to scholarly and insightful reflections. While even those writers who attempt to orderly or systematically arrange weblogs might feel that fate and chance do not shape their works, in essence the nature in which a weblog is read most certainly dictates some form of entropy, if not respects it as the ultimate glue of such literature.

Our experimentation of a getting hyper is a totally different experience, or perhaps greatly amplified example of how randomness, chance, and whim are driving forces or motives behind a liturgical work. Consider for example the variety of topics explored: politics, class readings, anger at showerheads being stolen, emoticons, weird/interesting links (aren’t they one in the same) personal experiences, cell phones, heated debate…………. It seems as if this all can not even conceivably fit. Yet, the very nature and essence of weblogging expects such a progression of thoughts, if it can be called a progression, especially considering the nature of getting hyper is collaborative. Thus the order (chaos), consistency (complete, utter and confusing randomness), and beauty (murky, mucky, and multi-tonal) consistency of our class weblog, demands reverence to the fateful and miraculous forces forging its grace.

Any other thoughts on this?

By the way, I ordinarily don’t use run on sentences, but in expressing my thoughts of this entry, and any weblog entry for that matter, possibly because the importance of disorder in weblogging, I find that run on sentences consistency match and facilitate the flow of thought from my brain onto the page, as they are expressed in an electronic textual version.

posted by Marianna Thursday, March 27, 2003

Wednesday, March 26, 2003

CNN no more! I'm going straight to the source!
posted by Jeff Wednesday, March 26, 2003

I just wanted to make a comment on "person"'s entry earlier. The comment was made that the president in elected by the American people, yet numerous times in history that candidate with the highest actual votes did not get elected to the office. An example of this is our current president. He did not receive more people's votes than Al Gore, yet he was elected president. I believe this is where some of the classes "anti-politician" attitude comes from. Some of us don't like the way that the country is being run and having a president in office who didn't really win the election as leader of our country tends to fuel the fire. Again this is only my opinion.

I think there are things that could have been done to avoid the present war we are in. Im not going to start the whole war debate because it will probably end up like the debate we had in class about the astronauts. But, I do believe that things could have been done to avoid it and spare American lives. The fact that before we entered the war, a lot of Americans ( I won't say majority because Im not entirely sure ) were opposed to war. Now if we live in a democracy, shouldn't the leader of the country listen to what the people are saying? Now that we are in the war, I know a lot of Americans, and I know this is the majority, are supporting it, but what else is there to do. Once it is started, it would be quasi pointless to still oppose it. Once its started, it has to be finished.

Personally, and I really really emphasize peronsally, I don't like George W. Bush, and I don't like the way he is running our country. The "trickle-down" effect he is hoping for with tax cuts is one of the stupidest ideas I have ever heard. Here lets make the people who have the money pay less on taxes while letting the people who dont necessarily have the money pay the same. Now, to me that really doesn't make any sense. Another thing I don't like about him is his policy, or what I have seen of his policy on dimplomacy. But again, I am not as fully informed as I could like to be on the that topic in order to make a discussion out of it.

I would just like to emphasize again that these are my own personal views and I hope I didn't offend anyone too badly :-)
posted by Sharon Wednesday, March 26, 2003

I'm impressed (with what or whom, I do not know). I am interested in this discussion. I think there are lots of people in the class that are not "anti-politician" (as I implied in my previous entry, which is the one with the red letters).

I believe that countries do need political leaders. That is why all the countries in the world have them (at least, I can't think of any that don't -- can you?). A country cannot exist in competition with other countries without someone having power and responsibility.
posted by Nadeeka Wednesday, March 26, 2003

Sure it published that insignificant piece of hypertextual junk.
posted by Marianna Wednesday, March 26, 2003

Okay, so I just spent about 15-20 minuets typing lengthy and insightful entry and the computer erased it!
This is frustrating!
posted by Marianna Wednesday, March 26, 2003

Is anyone in this class not "anti-politician?" As a country, don't we need political leaders? Our leaders are elected by the American people, and the powers and actions of the president are checked by the other branches of the government, which include hundreds of other elected representatives. Therefore, theoretically, one person is not responsible for any decision, but rather many elected officials who represent the citizens of the U.S. The way I look at it, if there is a serious problem with the way the government of our country is running everything, there's probably a serious problem with our country as a whole (or at least the majority of the country). Our government should reflect our people, and for the most part I think it does. It just seems like everyone is being very harsh on government in general, rather than actual policies that they don't agree with.
posted by David Wednesday, March 26, 2003

I just want to congratulate Hope on a very good project. I was very impressed with how complete a job you did. I found the idea very interesting, and relevant. I especially like your conclusion about hypertext and books being able to co-exist.

posted by Justin Wednesday, March 26, 2003

Tuesday, March 25, 2003

It's encouraging to claim that books will not become obsolete. Personally, I think huminity would become even lazier than it presently is if computerized literature became the essence of reading. Could literacy completely be abolished some day if electronic type text revolutionized so far that visulizations, sounds and media we can't even presently concieve replaces words? If this occured would literacy become null, or would the ultimate meaning of being literate merely change?
posted by Marianna Tuesday, March 25, 2003

*scathing comments towards people who want to discuss the war in class*

Hey, I have a quote!

"We tend to create our reality by consensus." -- Joseph Duemer

I agree with that, and was pleasantly surprised to be able to quote someone as saying it (besides my humble self)

posted by Nadeeka Tuesday, March 25, 2003

Today in class Prof. Duemer said something like "... and don't even get me started on the war." Today was not the time because we had other work to do, but after the presentations are done we should have a class dedicated to discussing it. There are some planned class cancellations, but I think that time could be used for discussion sessions about the war. It is quite important. To keep within the class context we could talk about rhetoric in the war. It is big news and everyone has opinions.

Before break I was talking with some classmates about a final project idea. This was before actual war was declared, but it still holds. We were going to incorporate all the different avenues that could be taken in dealing with Saddam Hussein and Iraq and make it into something with hypertext. So even if we don't talk about it in class it might come up with a presentation.

posted by Ken Tuesday, March 25, 2003

Click HERE for David, Sig, and Melinda's project. Quick intro: We decided to look specifically rhetorical devices used by US presidents in speeches such as the State of the Union. We found a variety of devices from a variety of presidents, and then looked at what each device does for the speech. Most of the examples we found were of honest uses of rhetoric where the president is simply using language effectively, rather than using rhetoric to decieve the public.

posted by David Tuesday, March 25, 2003

I just wanted to say I really enjoyed Hope's presentation. I found the same topic in Lanham interesting as well. There is definitely strong connections between hypertext and our traditional text. Although we have all these new digital aspects to rhetoric we haven't completely made the old ways obsolete. There is a new reality where humanities still have role; this "reality depends on precisely the rich signal of mixed word, sound, and image...Teaching us how to live within this reality will be the job of a new kind of humanistic action." (p.229)

posted by Melinda Tuesday, March 25, 2003

For all you avid disciples of the (hyper)text debate, here is the link to my project site: http://www.clarkson.edu/~matish/Hypertext.htm
posted by Hope Tuesday, March 25, 2003

Dave, we (Christa, and Mike) totally agree with you. It's easy to be noble when you don't have to back up your words. We'd like to see those protesters try and find a diplomatic solution to SADDAM HUSSEIN!

On the other hand, it might be kind of nice. At least we wouldn't have to put up with those protesters anymore...(hehe).
posted by Christa Tuesday, March 25, 2003

What's the deal with all of this protesting? I think that it is ok for people to protest before the war, but I don't think that there should be all of these massive protests once the war has started. Over the weekend there were some 400 thousand people protesting in NYC, and they had another pretty large protest in San Francisco. The soldiers risking their lives for our country need our support. Yes, people are frustrated with the way that Bush is dealing with this situation but someone needed to do something. How much longer was Saddam going to get away with what he had done in the past and could possible do in the future. Many of the people protesting this war don't know too many facts about why we are putting our soldiers at risk to take down Saddam’s régime. I think people are just getting caught up in the moment and think that war is bad and are just doing this because they see others doing the same. At my old high school over break about 30 students held a little protest against the war. In reaction to this another 300 students held a protest to protest the other students who were against the war. I believe that many Americans agree that something should be done; it’s just that they don't want to be the ones to do the dirty work. Too bad the French and other members of the UN are too scared to fight.
posted by David Tuesday, March 25, 2003

Monday, March 24, 2003

I agree. The media go way too far when they cover just about anything. They will talk about anything so long as people are interested. Which makes you wonder about the American people as a whole, since it seems the media cover almost exclusively the bad news in the world...Or the violent news... - Mike
posted by Christa Monday, March 24, 2003

Christa... I'm glad you are agreement with me that it seems like CNN knows about new war developments even before military personel that are involved in the war... Maybe you have gone too far when soldiers are watching CNN for news updates about the war that they are part of. And another thing... Not to belittle any of the forces that are over there--I have complete respect for the situation that they are in--but the media is building mountians out of molehills. On the first night when the US hit the "target of opportunity" they talked about it for well over and hour while I was watching it.. hashing and rehashing it... they even commented on a dog walking by the camera that was stationed in Baghdad... What's the deal? I know they have up to the minute coverage, but sometimes maybe they should get away from it.
posted by Josh Monday, March 24, 2003

I don't know about the rest of you, but I was glued to the television over break. While I think that television coverage of the war is crucial, I'm really displeased with just how much the media is showing us. I don't want to see the combat footage. I'm sure wherever Saddam Hussein is, whether he's injured or not, he's watching CNN and finding American television EXTREMELY informative...who needs satelite technology when we've got reporters embedded within almost ever military group that's been mobilized? They'll just broadcast their location and intentions!--Christa
posted by Christa Monday, March 24, 2003

Saturday, March 22, 2003

I guess vacation is coming slowly (quickly??) to an end... And I promised myself I would post to the class weblog before it was over, so here goes. After Andy had presented on hyperlinks and how they interconnect webpages in a very web-like manner (well that would make sense), bringing up points about the different types of links that exist I got to thinking about that idea of any page being able to connect anywhere. More specifically I thought (more) about a "correct" link and an "incorrect" link. I think the web is very neat because you can link to anywhere else on the web, but at the same time, you need to ask yourself, do I want to? I mean I could go through my post afterwards, take key words and phrases, paste them into Google, and make it link to the first hit that comes up... But how pertinent is that? Or is it? Since the web links thoughts & ideas, wouldn't it just make sense to see where other words or phrases popped up on the net and link those ideas to/from my own? Or would linking a lot just distract too much from what I am trying to convey with hypertext? Or would it offer more flexibility to the hypertext reader to branch off from my thoughts into their own ideas? I really have no answers for this, but those are some questions that I have been considering. As a side question... what does everyone think makes a good website? (other than having a specific purpose...) Like... design features I guess. When you first go to a website, what do you want to see? What makes you immediately hit the back button? What makes you stick around and read what there is to say? Hmmm...

posted by Josh Saturday, March 22, 2003

Friday, March 21, 2003

WE BOMBED HIM GOOD!!
posted by PugBy Friday, March 21, 2003

Wednesday, March 19, 2003

10:15 PM Wednesday night March 19, 2003

And so it begins!

Tonight I am proud to be an American.

posted by Justin Wednesday, March 19, 2003

OH, I FORGOT SOMETHING. ITS ABOUT TIME WE HAVE A REAL PRESIDENT, SOMEONE WILLING TO DO WHATS RIGHT AND NOT JUST DO WHAT HE THINKS WILL BE POULAR. GO DUBYA
posted by PugBy Wednesday, March 19, 2003

I WILL POST DURING BREAK TOO JUSTIN. AND I AM THRILLED THAT SOMEONE BROUGHT UP THE WAR BECAUSEI THINK IT IS A GOOD SUBJECT TO DISCUSS. I AM NOT A WAR MONGER, BUT WHEN IT IS NECESSARY, I THINK WE SHOULD DO WHAT WE NEED TO DO. AND I THINK IT IS NECESARY. AND FOR THOSE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO RESPOND, LETS TRY DIPLOMACY, I SAY, WE HAVE. IT DIDNT WORK. WE GAVE HIM TWELVE YEARS TO DISARM AND HE DIDN'T BECAUSE LIKE JUSTIN SAID, THE REST OF THE WORLD VIEWS US AS SPINELSS COWARDS AND DOESN'T THINK WE WILL EVER DO ANYTHING. WELL, WE AREN'T FRANCE SO WE WILL TAKE CARE OF BUSINESS. THIS IS A DANGEROUS MAN AND HE SHOULD BE TAKEN OUT OF POWER. WE GAVE HIM ONE LAST CHANCE, 48 HOURS TO LEAVE AND HE NOW HAS 12 HOURS LEFT. I AM PRETTY CERTAIN HE WILL NOT CHANGE HIS MIND BECAUSE HE WOULD RATHER KILL HIMSELF AND HIS PEOPLE THAN TO GIVE UP POWER. HE HAS CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL AND WHO-KNOWS-WHAT OTHER KINDS OF WEAPONS AND IS CRAZY ENOUGH TO USE THEM. WE NEED TO SUPPORT OUR TROOPS THROUGH PRAYER AND UNITY. AS FOR MY OPINION ON THE LACK OF UN SUPPORT, WE DON'T NEED FRANCE, THEY WOULD CONTRIBUTE NOTHING ANYWAYS BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO POWER AND HAVE DONE NOTHING IN MODERN TIMES. OF COURSE THEY WILL BE AGAINST WAR BECAUSE THEY ARE THE BIGGEST BUNCHA COWARDS EVER. THE CANADIANS COULD DEFEAT THEM IN WAR! AS FOR RUSSIA, I DON'T KNOW WHY THEY DON'T SUPPORT WAR. CHINA IS AGAINST WAR BECAUSE THEY PROBABLY SEE NOTHING WRONG WITH WHAT SADDAM HAS DONE. HOWEVER, THE USA, BRITIAN, SPAIN AND EVEN AUSTRALIA ARE GOING TO FIGHT FOR WHAT IS RIGHT ANYWAY BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THIS MAN NEEDS TO BE TAKEN OUT OF POWER AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. GOOD LUCK TROOPS!!
posted by PugBy Wednesday, March 19, 2003

Tuesday, March 18, 2003

I hope every one else saw The President’s speech last night. GO America. It’s about time. 24 hours till war and it is finally done.

I hope you got the wrong impression from that introduction. I only want people who read and understand it, to read the rest of what I have to say.

I do not like the idea of war. I don’t like the idea of killing ether. But I think that some times both are needed. This whole country has been so taken up with the idea of war for so long that it has become like a hypnotic state that no one can get out of. That goes for both sides; war and anti-war alike. That is not good for that country, and it needs to be broken. In addition, the US set a goal, and as a matter of honor it must now back it up. We have given Iraq far more chances then we should have. We set the goal, peace; and we told the world what the price would be. And now that Iraq has shoved it back in our face, we must act or lose what little credibility we have left with the rest of the world. And we can’t afford to do that. Too many nations already view us as spineless coward that can’t see anything through to it end. This puts this nation in a very difficult spot. The last time the US finished the job it set out to do was WW II and ever since we keep falling short because we no longer have the will to follow through. It can be seen in a lot of what goes on in this country. It sickens me, that the greatest and most powerful nation ever to exist has been reduced to this. We need to pull our self’s back together, and show the world that we are willing to fight for what is right. That is way this war needs to be fought. And that is why I hope we go to war.

posted by Justin Tuesday, March 18, 2003

I enjoyed the hero presentation be Sharon and her group. I have my own well defined ideas of what it means to be a hero, so seeing what others think is very interesting. Meaning no offence to Sharon and her group, but I don’t agree with your interpretation in the least. You seemed to indicate that a hero is made by their actions, and that those actions most be of an exemptible standard in order to matter. For example, the astronauts that died in the shuttle crash are not heroes, but a fire fighter the die in the line of duty would be. Ok, if you want to look at an action, that’s fine, but I think you are missing that big picture. Actions are only the surface; the makings of a hero are much deeper. It is true that in some cases the actions can reflect the true meaning, but most of the time the meaning is obscured. What makes a hero? Three things; integrate, respect, and honor! Without them, you can do whatever you want; you will never be a hero in my mind. Yet anyone that holds these values sacred, as I do, and lives and acts according to them IS a hero to me. Before you say that that means everyone is a hero, look at the system (the political system, the economic system, and the social system, of this country and the world) and you tell me how many people really act with honor, integrity, and respect. My answer is not many. And the few that do, are being destroyed be the system. Anyone who has ever read Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand will know what I am talking about. If you have not read it, do so. You will never look at the world in the same way again. I promise you that.
posted by Justin Tuesday, March 18, 2003

Let’s see if anyone but me will post during the break?
posted by Justin Tuesday, March 18, 2003

Friday, March 14, 2003

I enjoyed Josh's presentation yesterday on differences/blending of real life and virtual reality. While I have seen the application of most of the things that were talked about, and used many of them (video games, online encyclopedias, email, etc.), I think I found the part on cybernetics most interesting. This seems so much more like something that would be read about rather than something that is actually happening. But then again, if you think back to when the internet was just beginning, when we had access to the really old, slow computers that are now considered ancient, a lot of the stuff that we are now doing on the internet we would have only imagined doing.
If the cybernetics can actually be used for rehibilitation, it could have a great impact on so many lives. For those left paralyzed or with congenital defects, the possibly of being able to use a part of their body that couldn't, or to perform tasks that they had only thought of, would be such a gift for them. While there are some applications of this technology that would be just for pleasure, the positive implications of this technology are just as numerous.

Hope everyone has a great break!
posted by Darci Friday, March 14, 2003

Thursday, March 13, 2003

Kyle and I presented the misuse of rhetoric. We purposefully avoided the other side because we wanted to; it was a lot easier and more entertaining to see the misuse of rhetoric in famous cases than trying to see how everyone uses rhetoric for good causes. I am not suspicious of political leaders. I believe what they say because there is little else you can get information from. I try not to point the finger at them because I accept that it is their job to be honest and trust them to do just that.
posted by Ken Thursday, March 13, 2003

Well, hello again everyone~
My silence is finally broken; you may all cheer or curse according to your preference - weblog anonymity! Here's my "overwhelmingly insightful" idea for today.

On Hope's page, there is a quote by John Brunner that says, "There are two kinds of fool. One says, 'This is old, and therefore good.' And one says, 'This is new, and therefore better,'" that I like, though certainly there is a myriad of other kinds of fools. I must always remind mysel - *sigh* I'm out of inspiration already.

I feel like I'm sinking. Sinking more and more into a world where it is promised that all knowledge will be laid out for all to find and yet is held just beyond availability; a world where attention span is shortened by every single electron that pulses through every single wire that brings organized messages to an output device; a world where I cannot learn or concentrate or even read for more than thirty seconds without being distracted by someone just as bored as I am, or a new link, or some overly cheap, quaint, and sensational self-help article or advertisement.
The people we have to choose from to run our country are no kind of leaders worth considering. Their debates prove to be no more than a slugging match between two oversized, gymclass morons. Our televisions and computers (they are the same thing), however, glorified them, and we accepted it like sheep as important political debate! I'm sinking.
We live in an age where some people actually blur the distinctions that make life real, and people can clone themselves, create cyborgs - sure a Godsend for the paralyzed - and actually prefer it that way because life means no more to them than going to a dead end job every day, making money and getting laid. They take it just as easily. I'm sinking and drowning and it feels so meaningless. The Stranger, anyone?
This post has taken me longer than half an hour. How long would it take you? I'm sinking and it feels so urgent to break out, to learn and to do, but this post will go down with the rest, and some people might respond to it, and I'll read what comes next and next and next. I'll go play a computer game now because I don't really want to do my homework. What was I writing about, again? I have to break the cycyle, have to - and yet I am posting to this weblog.
posted by Norm Thursday, March 13, 2003

For those of you who didn't think I could do it before getting distracted: Introducing the Inverse Laplace Transform on Matlab, with the definition and other methods of solving it. So ha!
posted by dave Thursday, March 13, 2003

Here's Jeff's "visual aid." It's probably one of those things you have to be there for to make much sense, but take a look if you would. It would be helpful to review the Eastgate stories I've listed.
posted by Jeff Thursday, March 13, 2003

Darci's, Greg's and my story: http://www.rebeccapolewczak.com/Bunny/Meet_Bunny.HTM


posted by Rebecca Polewczak Thursday, March 13, 2003

Wednesday, March 12, 2003

The URL to Josh Harwood's PowerPoint presentation on Virtual Reality is http://www.clarkson.edu/~harwoojt/VR.ppt. Its just not the same without the voice-over, but hopefully it will give you a sense of it so it will make more sense later.

posted by Isaac Wednesday, March 12, 2003

O.K. Here's is my project site:
http://www.clarkson.edu/~markerdf/emoticon/emoticon.htm

Keep in mind that there is a lot more explanation that is not written up (that I might eventually present) than is on the site right now. So no bashing it (yet, at least).
posted by Dan Wednesday, March 12, 2003

Politics: The art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation, and the administration and control of its internal and external affairs.

I also enjoyed Justin's project very much. Perhaps (as Marianna seemed to imply) he was trying to expose the "superficial context of political speech". However, I have to wonder if an unsuperficial speech would be accepted by the public at large. This also brings up the issue (which I observe very often, not the least of in myself) of regarding the public as a conglomeration of outrageously stupid people, of which we are the elite gifted with the power of thought. Now, that's a little snobbish, isn't it?

Everyday speech is littered with superficial statements that mean... well, nothing. eg. "Hi, how are you?" "Good, how are you?" "Good."

We require a certain amount of superficiality to function as a society, I think. It is necessary to have a sense of knowing someone without getting too close to them. How many of your friendly aquaintances do you think you could get along with if you were talking about your opinions on hot topics like abortion or euthanasia instead of the quality of lunch at Graham or last night's hockey game? I suppose that a political speaker may use superficial statements to cover up his agenda. However, maybe years of experience has made it intuitively obvious that you must use superfical statements in order to get an audience to warm to you. Otherwise they have no bonding to the speaker as soon as one logical disagreement is reached. There is no sense of loyalty, or friendship. And political leaders, no matter what you think of them, give the people something to hold in common. If you don't agree, think about how EVERYONE can argue about all of this.

posted by Nadeeka Wednesday, March 12, 2003

Tuesday, March 11, 2003

Asimov! I read a book by him this semester. At the end it had some of his essays, which I really enjoyed. I particularly liked his essay "the new teachers." He suggests that the education system be redone and that learning should be considered a lifelong process. I'm sure we've all heard that before, about lifelong learning, but he proposes that we keep being formally educated. Well, the teachers are actually "teaching machines," one for every person. They can modify themselves to adjust for your personal interests. All learning would be fun, he claims, because it is unique to each person, and stems from there interests and talents. He asks, would each person then be able to learn about anything he or she desires, would they have unlimited knowlege at their fingertips? If it was a self-contained machine then no, but he proposes a central library of sorts that transmits information to your "teacher." The students are also contributors to the library. As they learn, they are also bound to think of new thigns he claims and those new things would be transmitted back to the central library.
Asimov wrote that in 1976, speculating on what might be. This sounds like the internet in some respects. However, I think it would be great to have my own machine-teacher that would adjust to my interests and go at my pace. It sounds like a very neat idea to me- I think a lot of people would get more enjoyment out of such an education system.
posted by Kim Tuesday, March 11, 2003

Just a note to anyone who may be avoiding the latest reading assignment in Lanham: I actually enjoyed Chapter 9. Seeing that this has never happened for me before with Lanham, I would highly recommend that you guys take the time to actually read the chapter. It's actually kind of amusing.
posted by lkjawefoijalkjsdf Tuesday, March 11, 2003

For another spin on political rhetoric (unintentional pun), take a look at Rhetoric of World Leaders. Chris, Steve, and I analyzed several speeches by world political leaders with respect to the three points of Aristotelian rhetoric: Logos (facts and logic), Pathos (emotions and morals), and Ethos (credibility and trust).
posted by pyotr Tuesday, March 11, 2003

I remember that someone in my class mentioned Asimov in relation to rhetorical techiques. I have another comment relating Asimov to rhetoric, this time directly linking it to the relative ease of swaying masses of people compared to swaying an individual person.

I seem to remember a argument in one of the books going something like this:

As you speak to a greater number of people, they are more likely to be swayed by emotions than reason. Since reasons are many and emotions are few, it is easier to control a crowd than an individual.

Thoughts?
posted by Nadeeka Tuesday, March 11, 2003

Justin-- awesome project! I totally agree to your interpretation of Presidential rhetoric. In a way your presentation resembles a computerized version of a political cartoon, which brings up some very interesting points. I thought your presentation was particularily affective in the manner in which certain pharases were given the exact same definition as others, indicating a uniformity in the manner of presidental rhetoric.

In another sense though, your presentation was biased, or well-- more exactly just another utilization of rhetoric to express your opinion as to the superficial context of Political speech. It would be really interesting for someones else to build upon your project by interpreting your interpretations.
posted by Marianna Tuesday, March 11, 2003

Ok, everyone, here is my project. I hope you have fun!!! What A Politician Says and What A Politician MEANS!
posted by Justin Tuesday, March 11, 2003

I agree with what Josh posted a week ago about the personalness of a weblog in response to Norm's presentation. I write on the weblog mainly for myself, although sometimes I comment on what Rebecca has to say since we share one. We have talked about this numerous times in class - about the issue if as authors we are consciously aware of who the audience is. Personally I just write whatever I am thinking about and however it comes out is a reflection of myself and what I am feeling at that specific time. I do not think to myself, wow you know anyone can read this weblog while I am writing it. Sometimes I write about my day or what I am interested in, other days I rant about my car or music or nothing really at all. Once in a while I use it to write about issues in my life I do not necessarily like to talk about it to anyone but bother me nonetheless. The blog in this case seems to enable a sort of theraputic spin on the issue I am trying to deal with. I realize that other people use the blogs for different things - discussing issues with others, exchanging information, etc. I guess it depends on how the person views the blog they participate in and what they want the content of their blog to contain. Regardless I would much rather write a blog any day over an essay and I am pretty sure most people would probably agree with that statement.
posted by Greg Tuesday, March 11, 2003

World War II all over again. This is crazy. I guess it could be tied into rhetoric.
posted by Justin Tuesday, March 11, 2003

Click HERE for David, Sig, and Melinda's project. Quick intro: We decided to look specifically rhetorical devices used by US presidents in speeches such as the State of the Union. We found a variety of devices from a variety of presidents, and then looked at what each device does for the speech. Most of the examples we found were of honest uses of rhetoric where the president is simply using language effectively, rather than using rhetoric to decieve the public.
posted by David Tuesday, March 11, 2003

The web address to Andrea Fischer and David Swan's presentation is...http://clarkson.edu/~swandc/emotions_presentation_files/frame.htm
posted by David Tuesday, March 11, 2003

Monday, March 10, 2003

Just to go back to Saturday's conversation for a bit...
"A person is smart, but people are wild, panicky, dangerous creatures, and you know it."
-MIB

Basically what I'm trying to say with that there random movie quote is this. It is very hard (bordering on impossible) to change a single person's opinion; but it is very easy to sway the opinion of a group of people. Rhetoric is a tool which can be used to sway the masses, not so much to sway individuals. That sounds like a conflicting statement, but it's true. The most dangerous thing on the earth is stupid people in large groups.

:edit: Kyle was, is, and will always be, wrong.
posted by Dan Monday, March 10, 2003

I saw this reading CNN.com this morning and thought it would be quite relevant for our weblog discussions:
Blogging goes mainstream: Success of Web journals heralds an even bigger future

The online diaries known as Weblogs, or "blogs," seemed like a lot of inconsequential chatter when they surfaced a few years ago. But as more people have embraced the concept, what once seemed like a passing fancy has morphed into a cutting-edge phenomenon that may provide the platform for the Internet's next wave of innovation and moneymaking opportunities.


posted by pyotr Monday, March 10, 2003

Sunday, March 09, 2003

Last night I realized that something someone (I can't remember who) said during J.D.'s (or Pugby's) presentation isn't exactly true. The topic was Instant Messaging (IM), and the comment was that the more conversations we are involved in, the lower the quality of the conversations get. On the contrary, I think that IMing offers unique opportunities to do just that. Think about it; can you hold multiple conversations, not just multiple people but multiple topics, simultaneously on the phone? Certainly not, and it's even more impossible to do so in person. But I've been had 8 IM windows open of which 3 or 4 were in depth conversations. It's not 20 but I think that my grandparents would be amazed at such an idea.

I think the capability to do this comes from the time to think and "switch gears" to put it plainly that IMing offers. When talking on the phone or in person it's not customary or polite to take a minute to pause, reflect, and compose a reply. However, when IMing, one can compose, revise, and edit an entry without being looked down upon. Boy do I wish I had that capability in person sometimes! With this extended reply time, I don't see why internet conversations should decrease in quality as the number of conversations increases. This is not to say that IM conversations are of more quality than telephone or verbal conversations, but that's another topic for another time.
posted by Jeff Sunday, March 09, 2003

Saturday, March 08, 2003

In response to Hope's argument: another twist on that could be, are we inherently easy to persuade? And then, once persuaded, are we inherently quick to "point the finger" in a negative way at politicians for being masters of rhetoric--a qualification most people would say is a requirement for the job?--Christa
posted by Christa Saturday, March 08, 2003

I think Hope might have hit something in asking if we are too inherently suspicious of politicians. People, for as long as I can remember, have always been very suspicious of politicians. Whether it be lawyers or governors or presidents even, trust is a very hard thing to come by it seems when thinking of people in politics. With lawyers, I guess it could come from the fact that many times they are forced to defend people who are obvisiously guilty, and some are good enough to make a guilty person seem innocent enough to get away with a crime, example OJ Simpson. With presidents, ever since Watergate, I think people have always been on edge with presidents lying. Clinton also aided in this when he denied having sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky ( sorry if I spelled that wrong ). I think many times, due to our suspicions, we look too far into things that are said to find alternative meanings that might make it look like something was trying to be said that wasn't really said.
posted by Sharon Saturday, March 08, 2003

Friday, March 07, 2003

Couldn't help but notice the negative side of rhetoric put forward in K&K's presentation on Thursday; I realize only that one side was being tackled, but...is everyone who stands behind a podium to be immediately discounted as manipulative and deceptive? Are they actively attempting to pull the wool over our eyes and sway us into accepting flawed beliefs, or are they simply trying their best to be convincing? Are we too inherently suspicious to decide?
posted by Hope Friday, March 07, 2003

At the moment, I can't seem to remember any Hitler-specific websites that were much help to our project, but one website that seemed like a great resource was AmericanRhetoric.com. While this site is obviously concentrated on American rhetoricians, they have lots of resources available including sound clips and speech transcripts. Feel free to use that for your upcoming presentation as well.
posted by Kyle Friday, March 07, 2003

Nice presentation yesturday. I think it would be interesting to look more deeply into the the rhetoric utilized by Hitler, even some specific examples. Did you guys come across any interesting resources for speech or visual examples of Hitler's rhetoric that are web based?

posted by Marianna Friday, March 07, 2003

Thursday, March 06, 2003

Here's just a quick little response to the second presentation we saw today about the changes in anti-war campaigns due to the internet. (sorry I couldn't remember the presenter's name). It was very clear from the presentation how there is a difference in the rate at which anti-war campaigns have spread. If I remember correctly, it was stated that it has only taken 6 months in comparison to the 4 years it took during the Vietnam war. However, can we owe this momentum mostly on the use the internet as a medium? The world is very different now than it was in the 60's. Politically, socially and economically, the world has changed four fold. Because there is such an ambundance of socialist ideas and countries, anti-war campaigns might be much more easily accepted and spread. Sure the internet definately has had an effect on the availibilty of information, but we might be placing more of an emphasis on it than it rightly deemed appropriate.
posted by Frederick Thursday, March 06, 2003

I also have quite a few nicknames, and just like Christa, some are pointless. For instance, ever since I went to my first day of kindergarden, I have been called "Pickle", because of my last name being Dill-on. My family has called me "Ruxpin" since I was 5 and I got a talking teddy ruxpin and I brought everywhere with me. I wouldn't go anywhere without it. There are a lot of other nicknames too, "Pins" because I'm a bowler, "Tynkerbelle" from when my mom and I drove across the country and we took a personality test at Disneyland, "Pickleannemarie" from my friend Mike ( don't exactly know where he got this one from ), ''Squeaky" from band, and "Monkey" from this summer.

I think Christa is also right about the reason people give you nicknames is to remember certain times in your life so instead of telling the story behind you can just say the nickname and it brings those times back to memory without having to tell the whole story. I also think everyone has a nickname from one time in their life. Its something that everyone can relate to, because everyone has one. Whether they are embarassing or serious or whatnot, they bring back times that you don't necessarily think about all the time, and bring back some funny or nice memories!
posted by Sharon Thursday, March 06, 2003

Wednesday, March 05, 2003

Just as a thought I had when Norm was giving his presentation... Or, a thought of which Norm reminded me....
Norm described a gradient of sorts in formality of writing. With a hypertext weblog "journal" of sorts being the most unstructured/free form and a "traditional" essay as the most structured. I think the one of the most unique things about a weblog is that people have no "template" for how a weblog should be... There is no right and wrong with a weblog. With an essay, you need to have particular parts--an introduction, body and conclusion (usually). However, with a weblog, you can pop in start and entry anywhere, end it anywhere, and say it in any way you want. A weblog is an excellent way (in my opinion) to open up a tap of your consciousness and your thoughts and just let them drain out for others to see. Not everything, but selected parts that you think are significant. That feature, in combination with the hyperlink allow for ideas to build on one another...maybe you dont need to write the whole paper. You can just link to someone else's idea that you are building off of.
When I sit down and write on my weblog more often than not I am writing for myself. Expressing myself, letting off some steam in some cases, addressing what is interesting to me in others. My long term goal is to look back on my weblog after I have been working on it for a few months and ask myself: does this reflect who I am? Do I see myself in my own weblog? If I can answer honestly yes, then I have been successful. The flexibility of a weblog I think has the ability to better capture all of the unique traits that make up a person...much better than the voice in any essay could...*wanders off into more thought...*

posted by Josh Wednesday, March 05, 2003

Names
Do you really think your name effects the way you act or maybe the way people view you? People know me as Matt Dolloff. But my real name is Frederick Dolloff. Matthew is my middle name. I personally don't really care whether people call me by Fred or Matt, although I am used to Matt. I would still be the same exact person whether I was called either, but would that really make any difference to other people. Maybe somebody met a Matt and absolutely hated him and therefore is predetermined not to like anymore. Sounds superficial, but is it? On the same respects, can we apply similar logic to the name of websites or hyperlinks. One of my good friends, as a joke sometimes sends links of unpleasing sites to people with the hyperlink hidden under titles like "Puppy Dog's are cute" or somthing similar. Although its very easy to see the real link by holding your mouse over it, you'd be surprised at how many people just click away. If Yahoo was named something else, would it still have the customer base it does today? Or do people when using the internet have open minds about names and look at the content of the website?
posted by Frederick Wednesday, March 05, 2003

WOW, NICKNAMES, I GOT HUNDREDS OF THEM, I HAVE TWO REAL NAMES, PUGBY BURROWS AND JONATHAN MCGEOCH AND SEVERAL NICKNAMES WITHIN EACH NAME. I ENJOY IT BECAUSE I BELIEVE EACH NAME ALLOWS ME TO EXPRESS A DIFFERENT SIDE OF MY PERSONALITY. PUGBY BURROWS NICKNAMES INCLUDE PUG, UNCLE PUGBY AND PUGBY. PUG IS KIND OF A CRAZY GUY WHO DOES WHATEVER HE FEELS LIKE WHENEVER HE FEELS LIKE. PUG TENDS TOAVOID 'GROWN-UPS' AND HANG OUT WITH THE YOUNGER CROWD. HE HAD TWICE RECENTLY FELL HARD ON ICE AND SLICED KNEES OPEN, BUT IT WAS WELL WORTH IT. HERE IS A COOL PICTURE OF ME BEING PUG. PUGBY IS SIMILAR AND LIKES TO EAT SQUID PENIS AND DO OTHER NASTILY FUN STUFF LIKE GET SHOT AT WITH STAPLE GUNS WHILE WEARING BALLOONS. UNCLE PUGBY IS THIS RELAXED OLD MAN WHO LIKES TO READ STORIES OUTLOUD TO LITTLE KIDS. HIS FAVORITE STORY IS "HOW TO BE A COW" BY BO VINE. THAT IS JUST A SMALL SAMPLING OF HOW I EXPRESS MYSELF THROUGH PERSONALITIES PORTRAYED THROUGH NICKNAMES.
posted by PugBy Wednesday, March 05, 2003

Thank you, Marianna. I appreciate it and your presentation makes a lot more sense to me now.
posted by Sigmund Wednesday, March 05, 2003

Tuesday, March 04, 2003

Okay, first of all: http://www.clarkson.edu/~petkodl/Exploring%20Rhetoric.htm is the URL to our project website if anyone cares. Second, I find that I am very particular with who uses certain nicknames of mine. My friend Sean at home calls me D, and when he calls me D I like it, but if anyone else calls me D, it kind of makes me shudder. I have other nicknames, such as Danielle-Michelle (which we won't get into), and although I don't like them at all, I've come to accept them from the people who originally came up with them. If anyone else calls me that, they get glared at. But yeah.. good night.
posted by lkjawefoijalkjsdf Tuesday, March 04, 2003

Think about this linkAstroids: CNN (taken from Daily Jolt)

Scary and fuel for a heated debate, I might say.
posted by Marianna Tuesday, March 04, 2003

The link between greek rhetorical philosophy and modern presidents, dealt primarily with the responsiblity of the president to use rhetoic in a moral manner, and the power rhetoric itself was described as providing. Isocrates, claimed that a greater power could be obtained by a political leader, if rhetoric was used in an ethical manner, proving the leader was the eptiome of citizenship. Likewise, other philosphers like Plato warned that rhetoric was nothing but harmful to the public, and a manipulative art. Both of these ideas directly played into the presidents' attempts to both appear ethical (Bush and Reagan) while disguising other motives, and to become like all other citizens (FDR).
posted by Marianna Tuesday, March 04, 2003

Justin: I figured out how to do your mouseover with a box. Use: a title = "text you want in a box/screen tip" surrounded by pointy brackets & close it with /a also in brackets. I can't put the brackets here because the text will be interpreted as html. There is a way to display html as html but I forget what it is & I'm too tired tonight to haul my butt downstairs & look it up.
posted by Joseph Duemer Tuesday, March 04, 2003

I think Christopher is onto something here. There's a relationship to the discussion of names, nicknames & titles, but the biz about identity is important, I think.

As for my various facets, I'd say that we are all composed of many facets. As a blogger I speak only for myself & I tend to speak personally because the medioum seems so conversational. In the classroom, though, while you can always trust that I believe what I say, I often consider my audience. I realize that I have students with various political, religious & social views & while it is my role as a teacher to get students to think critically about their beliefs, I don't want to impose my own positions on students. It's not that I try to hide my beliefs, but I tend to keep them in the background. What's important to me is that whatever beliefs a student has, they have been arrived at thoughtfully & honestly & not merely adopted from others.
posted by Joseph Duemer Tuesday, March 04, 2003

Here is one of my favorite bloggers talking about politics & blogs. Interesting.
posted by Joseph Duemer Tuesday, March 04, 2003

I think a nickname can definitely convey something about you and how you interact with the poeple you love--not necessarily about your personality. When I was born, my grandmother said I looked like, "peaches and cream." I've seen the baby pictures--I have no clue what she was talking about, but it stuck. I've been "Peachy" ever since. My other childhood nickname was "Scootie." My father gave me that one. He (apparently) was amused by my many determined attempts to "scoot" around the floor at a young age. I still get these names on a regular basis, and I wouldn't have it any other way. My dad gave a lot of other good ones too. For instance, he used to call me "Elvira," because I had this nasty habit of staying up till all hours of the night doing homework, or watching tv. "The bat" was the favorite alternative to "Elvira" for these occassions.

My high school nicknames were much more random and senseless (if you can imagine more random and senseless names than "Peachy" and "Scootie"), and more often reflected interactions with friends. For instance, my friend Colleen used to call me "The Italian Stallion"--simply because I'm Italian. Before every exam we took she used to rub my shoulders and chant, "Come on Italian Stallion--you can do it!" Cheesy, but I guess considering where I am now, it worked.

Then there were the numerous nicknames from the high school theatre productions I participated in. My favorite was "French Meat / French Me." Those came about during the musical Grease, when during a line through two different people butchered the line, "Hey Frenchy." I think you can figure out how they goofed....

Then there was the nickname Cherryblossom--which sprouted from my neverending desire in high school to be a red head. I never quite achieved that goal.

Anyway--nicknames, in my opinion, are simply a way for a person to relate funny stories and experiences between themselves and people they love--without say, "Hey remember that time...." Instead, you simply say, "Hey French ME!"

(***Disclaimer, DO NOT attempt to use any of these nicknames on me. I can guarantee the attempt will be met with an undesired reaction...)
posted by Christa Tuesday, March 04, 2003

I just want to write a brief entry on today's project. I felt the project was done rather well and I enjoyed the presentation. I found it interesting, especially the focuses on the deception by the two presidents. My only question is, I missed the link drawn between the Greek philosophers and today's presidents. I must have missed that, and I was just curious to learn the overall relationship between the past and present. If someone could answer my question, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you.
posted by Sigmund Tuesday, March 04, 2003



I've had several nicknames, mostly from my friends at home. I've been Wizard Boy, due to one of my roles in a school musical, Steve-o, which has nothing to do with Jackass, just plain Steve, and my personal favorite, Tiki. I got that one when I wore my Barber Giants jersey one day, and a friend of mine turned to her friend and said, "do you realize who's sitting next to us? It's Tiki Barber!" My nicknames don't really say much about my personality, but they do help me identify myself in a way that's kind of hard to explain. It's more of a confidence booster than anything. When someone knows you well enough to assign you a nickname, it's really a sense of being accepted, and in a weird sort of way, loved. I can always tell who my friends are when I hear a nickname, even if it is just plain old boring Steve. Only my grade/high school teachers call me Stephen, and that's the minority of the teachers that I haven't known for years (both my parents work for the school district, so I've known many of the teachers for a long time). But as I said, for me, the only nicknames I've received have nothing to do with my personality. Two are just a coincidence, one's common, and one's more of a "pet name" than anything.


posted by Steve Tuesday, March 04, 2003

For those of you who couldn't get enough during today's presentation, here's the link to our site for exploration. Exploring rhetoric Also, It feels GGGGGGGGRRRRREEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! to have our project done.
posted by Marianna Tuesday, March 04, 2003

Well if nicknames tell a lot about your personality (or AIM names) then what does brncrmp (Braincramp) say about me.... oh wait... :-) I think this is a neat concept. In some ways it can be how you label yourself, but in other cases, it can be how other people label you. I won't be too "manly" to admit that I have had the nickname "Joshie" since highschool... Brings out my feminine side I guess? It was given to me by my US history teacher... but that is a story for another time...
posted by Josh Tuesday, March 04, 2003

I think nick-names are a major part of someone's personality, at least in some cases. For example, in high school, I was just Mike. I was totally okay with that - I really didn't want a nickname. Then one day some kids on the swim team found out that I taught karate. Well, "Sensai Gumuka" almost became a war-chant over night. There were times the guys would be almost screaming it before a match. I have no clue why. Personnally, I hated it. I wasn't the best (in fact I was probably only middle-of-the-pack, if that), but that's what they did. It was a morale booster, which is why they did it (I suppose). Anyway, the point of the story is that I became "Sensai", not just Mike. People knew me as Sensai rather well, and yet some of them never knew my real name. I liked it. I even started talking like Mr. Miyagi (no clue how to spell that - but he's the guy from the Karate Kid movies) after a while, just to make people laugh. I loved it. It has also become part of my screen name - because as weird as it sounds, I don't like the idea of not being Sensai Gumuka. Maybe that is why people like AIM and on-line games so much - it allows them to have whatever "nickname" they want. Anyway, I hope that kind of answers your question. - Mike
posted by Christa Tuesday, March 04, 2003

How do you think nicknames affect the formation of people's personalities? I never had a nickname until I was in 10th grade. Now I have many.

Maybe I have a disadvantage in some sense because unlike "Chris" and "Christopher", there is no way for me to shorten or lengthen my name in a way that makes it immediately obvious that I am trying to convey a sense of informality or sophistication.
posted by Nadeeka Tuesday, March 04, 2003

Monday, March 03, 2003

Does anyone know how to make a mouse-over work for text instead of a picture in HTML, or Java or any other web program? If so please let me know. E-mail slabyjm@clarkson.edu
Thanks
-Justin Slaby

posted by Justin Monday, March 03, 2003

Sunday, March 02, 2003

Here is an interesting idea. More on this. (Note that the "Arete" on this page, which means "excellence" in Greek, has nothing to do with CU's Project Arete. Here is this person's weblog. Read it. (She appears to be a grad student with an interest in the web & rhetoric. I'm particularly struck by her notion that weblogs might represent some sort of merger between oral & written discourse.)
posted by Joseph Duemer Sunday, March 02, 2003

Go check out the Internet Public Library.

http://www.ipl.org
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Sunday, March 02, 2003

Saturday, March 01, 2003

Awhile ago we were talking about access to literature and the like. I just came across this New York Times article that states:

...The directors of the new Alexandria Library, which christened a steel and glass structure with 250,000 books in October, have joined forces with an American artist and software engineers in an ambitious effort to make virtually all of the world's books available at a mouse click. Much as the ancient library nurtured Archimedes and Euclid, the new Web venture also hopes to connect scholars and students around the world.


I think that's such an ambitious project. They're going to run into some funding, copyright, and language problems, but what an accomplishment that would be if you could access every book ever written!
posted by pyotr Saturday, March 01, 2003

I would be Princess Rebecca, Grand High Protector of Bunny

Yeah...

You'll just have to wait and see my group's presentation I guess. :)

Darci, Greg, I'm workin on our outline... feeling like I'm losing my sanity rather quickly. I'll post the outline within the hour to our project blog...
posted by Rebecca Polewczak Saturday, March 01, 2003

good question........hmmm, I'll have to think about it

posted by Marianna Saturday, March 01, 2003

How about M. Worczak CUHPFRBMSCSS?

I just want to know how to pronounce it.
posted by Joseph Duemer Saturday, March 01, 2003

Here's some more information on the misuse of rhetoric, i.e., propaganda.
posted by Joseph Duemer Saturday, March 01, 2003

Interesting idea Prof. now what should my title be. How about M. Worczak CUHPFRBMSCSS.

Anyone want to guess what that means? I made it up of course: Clarkson University Honors Program Freshman Runner Biomolecular Science Constantly Stressing Student.

I don't know, what should a title signify? Who you are, how you should be treated? Or what you occupation is? Does this satisfy them all?

posted by Marianna Saturday, March 01, 2003

Powered by Blogger

 

group weblog for hp:101 / spring 2003

Past
current


hp101 home