I've gone ahead and implemented the black & white design that Rob worked up for me. Pretty sexy, eh? I love those clocks!

Don't worry, Rob. I saved everything before I started mucking about.

UPDATE: Had some problems to start but I got those fixed with MojoMark's tip. Have some problems now pointed out by Mog. The comments and individual archives still have the old styling. Not much I can do about that at the moment seeing as I'm pretty inept at design stuff. I tried switching stuff in and out but it didn't work (reference previous statement of general ineptitude). For now, just enjoy the beautiful clockworks on the main page and consider the other pages a tribute to a venerable warrior that served honorably and continues stolidly onward despite knowing his doom approaches.

Posted by: Jim at 11:40 AM | Comments (25) | Add Comment
Post contains 141 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Love the clocks in the posts, very snazzy. They remind me of clocks.

Posted by: Tuning Spork at January 31, 2004 12:00 PM (Q316n)

2 In Firebird .7, clicking on the Comments link opens a new window like normal, but also changes the base screen to the same comments content.

Posted by: MojoMark at January 31, 2004 12:22 PM (FXawF)

3 But I do like the new look!

Posted by: MojoMark at January 31, 2004 12:22 PM (FXawF)

4 MojoMark - weird, it's the same in Mozilla 1.6. Not sure why; I took a quick look at the HTML and it looks right to me.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at January 31, 2004 12:57 PM (jtW2s)

5 Me too--maybe I'll come back in IE and see what happpens.. And Jim, I miss the teal!!!!!

Posted by: Susie at January 31, 2004 01:22 PM (0+cMc)

6 Well, well--it's a bug, not a feature...doing it with IE too...

Posted by: Susie at January 31, 2004 01:23 PM (0+cMc)

7 there is a line break between the "return" and the "false" on the comments onClick event. seems to interpret it poorly. see trackback, it works fine.

Posted by: MojoMark at January 31, 2004 03:21 PM (FXawF)

8 Wow, pretty embarrassing for the QA guy, eh? That was it, Mark. All fixed now, folks. My thanks and 2 points to MojoMark!

Posted by: Jim at January 31, 2004 03:34 PM (fkewd)

9 is good. me like.

Posted by: Trey Givens at January 31, 2004 03:43 PM (vsEV6)

10 Very Nice.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at January 31, 2004 03:52 PM (CSxVi)

11 I wanted the blue and orange one! Can't you make it a skin?

Posted by: ilyka at January 31, 2004 05:57 PM (d08lb)

12 Skins are the plan but that's beyond my meager abilities. Black & White had the hover fix for the collapsable lists already in the stylesheet so I went with that one.

Posted by: Jim at January 31, 2004 07:22 PM (fkewd)

13 Very nice work! The clocks in the blog body look terrific.

Posted by: Jess at January 31, 2004 08:13 PM (4irIN)

14 Don't forget to set your background colour ;-) body{ line-height: 1; margin: 0; padding: 0; font-family:Georgia, "Times New Roman", Times, serif; background-color: white; }

Posted by: snafu at January 31, 2004 10:45 PM (CnRw2)

15 Awesome look!!!!! Black and white work for me. I also LOVE the clocks. Keep up the great writing. I read everyday

Posted by: Linda at January 31, 2004 11:03 PM (3XIYy)

16 I love it. Well done. One tiny criticsm, and please don't be angry-the text is awfully narrow and in a small font. Me have headache from tiny text. Me also have hangover, so possibly the two are related.

Posted by: Helen at February 01, 2004 01:37 PM (4QsPZ)

17 God lord ... I'm out of it for a little while and every ones getting delusions of grandeur. Jim, there are templates worked up for the comment pages which apply the styling but there's the whole blog.mu.nu issue to work round (that ones been givin me big ole headaches recently) There's also the 3rd design and the skinable script which is ready to roll out but I'm just not sure how to mod it to work with the other mu.nu blogs ... plus I'll need FTP access to do it properly (well quickly). I'll send you an email tomorrow when I'm not covered in paint (long story) and have a desk (equally long story)

Posted by: Rob at February 01, 2004 04:24 PM (tYI8N)

18 oh and helen - I'm working on a spacing fix for the text - you're right, probably too tight!

Posted by: Rob at February 01, 2004 04:25 PM (tYI8N)

19 All this ticking. First Helen with her Keifer Sutherland, now this! Tic, toc, tic, toc...

Posted by: Simon at February 02, 2004 05:06 AM (FUPxT)

20 That's right. Kiefer and I started all of this. That's for sure.

Posted by: Helen at February 02, 2004 08:04 AM (I+ahF)

21 Cool look, but I miss the simplicity of the old design. I'll be happy, though, as long as the cow picture is somewhere. WHERE'D YOU PUT THE COW PICTURE?!

Posted by: Mike the Marine at February 02, 2004 08:54 AM (Zw7Hl)

22 About time. looks good.

Posted by: pylorns at February 02, 2004 09:40 AM (FTYER)

23 The cow has been recovered. It's linked in the "about me" section of the sidebar.

Posted by: Jim at February 02, 2004 10:12 AM (IOwam)

24 Since you asked... The line spacing makes it a bit difficult to read anything longer than three or four sentences. [check the line spacing in the comments] This is just a personal preference, but I think that a sans serif font is a little easier to read. [again, check the font in the comments] A nice roll-down script for your comments and extended entries would be a nice addition to make it a more reader-friendly site. I just hate waiting for the comment box to open, open a new window that I will have to close, switching back and forth between another window, etc. Other than that a very nice design... kudos to Mr Rob!

Posted by: The Bartender at February 03, 2004 05:17 PM (QnE1J)

25 Pretty. Not pink enough, but pretty.

Posted by: LeeAnn at February 03, 2004 10:36 PM (HxCeX)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

UPDATE: Time's up! All are aboard that are coming aboard. Now the waiting begins. Who will be the point winners? Ooooh...you can cut the tension with a butter knife. more...

Posted by: Jim at 07:05 AM | Comments (55) | Add Comment
Post contains 405 words, total size 3 kb.

1 My guess is February 19. Barring any of those monstrous Paris Hilton deals, of course. And why the HELL are you getting 4 times as many visits as I do, yet I get maybe 10 times as many comments?!

Posted by: Helen at January 21, 2004 08:03 AM (hCzWQ)

2 I reckon a more conservative estimate of 03/03/04 of course I could guess for tommorow and just set a bot running but that would be cheating .. wouldn't it?

Posted by: rob at January 21, 2004 08:44 AM (kXZI6)

3 Helen - It's because I'm an erratic poster. People check back through the day to see if I've launched another gem (or another turd as the case may be). You consistently post once per day at around the same time. See? Irregularity has its benefits. And about the comments - the vast majority of my stuff is of the "read and groan" or "read and wonder why you wasted the time" varieties. Yours are almost always "read and BY GOD I've got to respond to that" type. Rob - Yes, that would be cheating and not only would I pout, I'd also pitch a hissy fit. But I'd probably still exult at hitting 100,000 all the same. What can I say? I'm shallow like that.

Posted by: Jim at January 21, 2004 09:10 AM (IOwam)

4 ok so maybe I can start the bot and then people can guess how much it costs me in connection charges to get you up to 200,000 ... but frankly, I can't be arsed. I'm far to busy hitting penguins for 6

Posted by: rob at January 21, 2004 09:16 AM (kXZI6)

5 Phew! Thank God for penguins and Yetis.

Posted by: Jim at January 21, 2004 09:18 AM (IOwam)

6 Hello. Average 1,300 hits per day, you're at 83,000 now - I'm guessing 2/21. And I'll probably account for 20-30 of those hits.

Posted by: Brian Jones at January 21, 2004 09:44 AM (E4NcZ)

7 My guess, Jim, will be 2/29/04. You got it baby...Leap Year.

Posted by: Tiffani at January 21, 2004 10:05 AM (0i1dP)

8 Ooh, Tiffani chose a good date. Damn, wish I'd thought of that. Rob-my personal best with the penguins is now 578. Ha!

Posted by: Helen at January 21, 2004 10:28 AM (I9OSd)

9 20 Feb...... I just want to be close to Helen......

Posted by: Mike the Marine at January 21, 2004 10:29 AM (IOX+E)

10 It will be Feb 4th.

Posted by: pylorns at January 21, 2004 11:15 AM (fD1hc)

11 My guess is March 1st.

Posted by: Sue at January 21, 2004 12:04 PM (rZmE1)

12 damn 577.6 and I can't beat it ... this is worse than that game where you push the bloke down the stairs...

Posted by: rob at January 21, 2004 12:11 PM (kXZI6)

13 There's a game for that? Wow, all those years of real life practice will finally pay off in the virtual world!

Posted by: Jim at January 21, 2004 12:23 PM (IOwam)

14 February 18th, I'm betting on slightly increasing views over the course of the month. and how come the "Remember personal info?" never works for me? are you Mozilla challenged here too?

Posted by: MojoMark at January 21, 2004 02:10 PM (E+LQu)

15 The remember info thing is a bit goofy and I still don't really understand why. It's something to do with the setup here in Munuviana. Many blogs sharing the same comment system. It should be remembering your info across blogs if you're on an individual archive page and when you come back to the same comments only page. If not, it might be your cookie settings.

Posted by: Jim at January 21, 2004 02:25 PM (IOwam)

16 Dang! 100,000 is a heckuva lot of hits. I'm still working on getting up to 65,000 but that's alright. Another sports star will allegedly molest a hotel worker and I'll get a 30,000 hit boost. But I will put my money on March the 11th.

Posted by: Johnny Huh? at January 21, 2004 02:57 PM (AyewP)

17 Feb 25th. Because it's not yet taken. And if I hit the refresh button enough times that day I might make it!

Posted by: Simon at January 22, 2004 03:58 AM (aPjRW)

18 well, I'm not too good at forecasting these sort of random events, so I'll pick Feb 13th, my son's birthday!

Posted by: jim at January 22, 2004 09:39 AM (lN8eP)

19 I'm sure it will be February 17. Hope that's better than my Iowa prediction.

Posted by: Dan Spencer at January 22, 2004 01:38 PM (KZyUq)

20 February 23. Is that better? Did I underestimate your charisma enough this time.

Posted by: LeeAnn at January 22, 2004 06:36 PM (HxCeX)

21 Please let it be on my birthday. (February 10 for those playing at home.)

Posted by: margi at January 22, 2004 07:07 PM (kpNlZ)

22 Shoot. I have to re-learn my freakin' URL. Sorry 'bout that. But hey, I have a very motivated expression on my face right now. Aheh.

Posted by: margi at January 22, 2004 07:08 PM (kpNlZ)

23 Feb 24th

Posted by: Tuning Spork at January 22, 2004 09:18 PM (52bP5)

24 I din't say Feb 02! I said Feb 21! Unless Rob really does his bot thing...

Posted by: Brian Jones at January 23, 2004 09:56 AM (E4NcZ)

25 Oops! Sorry Brian. It's fixed now.

Posted by: Jim at January 23, 2004 10:01 AM (IOwam)

26 Ok..I really wish it would be Mar 31, for my birthday, but I know it's going to be March 5...

Posted by: Mitzi at January 24, 2004 09:50 PM (uvaqj)

27 I bet that Sitemeter will crash on Feb 22, and that they will discover that all their recent backups are bad. Therefore you will not make the 100,000 mark until Jul 03.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at January 25, 2004 07:11 AM (jtW2s)

28 100,000 in just over 4 months? I'm flattered.

Posted by: Jim at January 25, 2004 08:32 AM (fkewd)

29 I'll pick March 13! That's my co worker's birthday and also another co worker is getting married that day. It may bring me luck too

Posted by: Linda at January 28, 2004 08:01 AM (k9RaT)

30 I can't believe I didn't respond to this earlier! I'm such a schmuck, and now I've let Rob beat me (yet again)! So if I can't have my birthday, I'll just go one day before. Please sign me up for March 2nd. (Absolutely no scientific research went in to choosing this semi-arbitrary date.)

Posted by: Clancy at January 28, 2004 10:36 AM (EGVPL)

31 Put me down for March 4, if no one's got it yet.

Posted by: Joey at January 29, 2004 12:31 AM (Sk2Wf)

32 Clancy - I've revised my algorithm* and March the 2nd is now the outright leader with a predictive probability of 62.32% Wanna swap? *a truly scientific methodology which has nothing to do with calendars and a dartboard - honest!

Posted by: Robert at January 29, 2004 06:39 AM (kXZI6)

33 Rob - thanks for the offer, but I think I'll stick with 3/2.... I was late. Very late.

Posted by: Clancy at January 29, 2004 08:55 AM (EGVPL)

34 I have to agree with Rob. My algorithm (which takes into account the phases of the moon and their effect on browsing patterns — or something like that) predicts March 2 as well. Since that wasn't available I had to sign up for the next date that was.

Posted by: Joey at January 29, 2004 11:15 AM (Sk2Wf)

35 Despite being the holder of the highly prized spot, I believe it's gonna happen earlier. We haven't taken in account all extra refresh clickage that will be going on to boost the date.... I've gotta stop coming back here so often - I'm just boosting his numbers now....

Posted by: Clancy at January 29, 2004 11:28 AM (EGVPL)

36 I'll take Feb 14, that holiday was invented for me and the wife. Thank you

Posted by: AlGore at January 29, 2004 05:47 PM (c0+Pw)

37 Al! Welcome back. Thought we lost you, you've been so quiet lately. A true romantic, too. Very nice.

Posted by: Jim at January 29, 2004 08:09 PM (IOwam)

38 C'mon Jim. You're falling behind. We need some scandal, some google bait, something. Feb 18 is coming too quickly and the sitemeter seems to be in slow motion. Here, try this..... JOSH DUHAMEL NAKED PICTURES. that got me over 1700 hits just yesterday (my average is about 300)

Posted by: MojoMark at January 30, 2004 12:34 PM (E+LQu)

39 I don't think it'll help since I don't have Sitemeter counters in the comments. Hmmm...I bet I could double my hits if I put those in...

Posted by: Jim at January 30, 2004 01:01 PM (IOwam)

40 March 7, hey why not.

Posted by: mog at January 31, 2004 09:57 PM (Dqis0)

41 Bitch... where's my Josh pics???

Posted by: Josh Fan at February 04, 2004 04:18 PM (ttYCf)

42 Uh...what? What is a Josh pic? I've got The Joshua Tree but I'm sure not planning on giving it up.

Posted by: Jim at February 04, 2004 04:29 PM (IOwam)

43 crap, your JJ boobalanche has thrown my predictions out of the window ... looks like it will fall 6 - 8 days from now!

Posted by: rob at February 06, 2004 01:16 PM (kXZI6)

44 Yes, the bounty of boobies continues to fall upon me. You should have used double exponential smoothing in your algorithm. It would have predicted Janet's boob show. Or at least the effects of it.

Posted by: Jim at February 06, 2004 02:05 PM (IOwam)

45 Ease up Sitemeter. You're just grinding metal.

Posted by: MojoMark at February 06, 2004 03:42 PM (E+LQu)

46 God lord we're getting close now aren't we...

Posted by: Rob at February 10, 2004 04:00 PM (VJffY)

47 Yup. It's that last sprint to the finish line. Will Margi get it today? If it happens tomorrow, how shall I distribute the points as nobody picked that date. Oooooooh, the pressure's getting to me.

Posted by: Jim at February 10, 2004 04:02 PM (IOwam)

48 I've applied a lot of scientifical (that's a real word, you know?) analysis to this problem and I hereby predict the magic date to be February 11th. When I said March 2nd before I was just guessing based on itÂ’s proximity to my birthday... Anyway - you read it here first!

Posted by: Clancy at February 10, 2004 08:32 PM (9Cq92)

49 Wow, Clancy. I think you might be right! Damn, you're good.

Posted by: Jim at February 10, 2004 08:45 PM (saeHM)

50 hahahaahaha it will not be the 11th, it will be the 12th (wait, is this one of those time zone issues again? I mean you guys are over an international date line and all ... so basically we in the UK are however many days ahead it takes to make it March 3rd on what ever day you hit the Hundred thou - yeah that works and I'll even upload a photo of my watch to prove it!)

Posted by: Robert at February 11, 2004 09:06 AM (kXZI6)

51 Nice try, Rob, but I happen to know that it is already April in the UK so you've missed your date. Besides, to make things easy on me (and really, isn't that what should be your major concern at all times?) all times are Atlanta local. That's EST (aka GMT-5).

Posted by: Jim at February 11, 2004 09:34 AM (IOwam)

52 Ta Da! The winner is.... nobody.

Posted by: MojoMark at February 11, 2004 06:24 PM (E+LQu)

53 No dead on winner but I'll be distributing those points as promised to the folks closest to the date. Hey, Rob! Can I muck about in my sidebar yet?

Posted by: Jim at February 11, 2004 06:31 PM (saeHM)

54 #100,003 Ta Da! and the winner is..... Nobody! Janet Jackson's Boob was the killer, skewing all scientific theories.

Posted by: MojoMark at February 11, 2004 06:39 PM (E+LQu)

55 The 100,000th visit was by someone on the aol network at a shade past 5:00 PM. A tenth of a million. Hot damn!

Posted by: Jim at February 11, 2004 10:05 PM (saeHM)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Dear Y'all:

The group mailing address that sends email to everybody in the company is a feature that should be used sparringly. Its purpose is to allow a simple way for people like the President, CFO, and Bob to tell us when people are fired, when our W-2 forms will be ready, and when the gas leak is fixed, respectively. Occassional use by other people is okay, but only when they have an actual message imparting information that applies to the entire company. For example, it's okay when the receptionist sends out an email that the car wash guy is here. It's okay for someone to send an email when they put homemade cookies in the break room. more...

Posted by: Jim at 03:54 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 935 words, total size 5 kb.

Apparently I'm a shoe in for Bush, which is pretty much what I figured already. Some of the other results were surprising though.

Bush: 100%
Leiberman: 93%
Edwards: 86%

Not unexpectedly, Kucinich was number last.

Find your perfect match.

Posted by: Jim at 06:36 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 49 words, total size 1 kb.

The most absolutely amazing thing about this picture of Lovely Wife with Nicki (pup #1) is not the teasing swell of hip, so rounded and shapely that even the big droopy shirt can't hide it. It isn't the seductive "come hither" look in her eye. It isn't that she's lying down with a dog who's exposing his genitals. It's not even the gargantuan size of the graphic due to me not realizing how big it was as I uploaded it and being far too lazy to edit and upload another picture.

No, my friends. The most amazing thing is that Lovely Wife gave me verbal permission to take the photo. That's right. Actual permission. "You can take a picture if you want" will forever be scored upon my forebrain. She even told me where the camera was when i couldn't find it.

This is big, y'all. Is Lovely Wife losing her abject hatred of being photographed? Is she coming to appreciate the camera's lecherous stare?

Or perhaps I should be off to the shed to look for empty pods.

Posted by: Jim at 06:23 AM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Ahum.....Now I hate it even more because you EXPOSED me!!:-P

Posted by: LW at January 30, 2004 08:21 AM (fkewd)

2 Hey, at least I didn't put up any of the nudies. ;-)

Posted by: Jim at January 30, 2004 08:46 AM (IOwam)

3 Well, I think both photograph subjects look cute and well-rested!

Posted by: Helen at January 30, 2004 09:50 AM (mjzOu)

4 Cute picture....Love the sock in the background!

Posted by: Tiffani at January 30, 2004 09:53 AM (0i1dP)

5 Tiffani, I don't think that's a sock. Looks like a waistband, and you can kinda make out the letters... A-I-N-E-S.... Haines. oh shit. Jim didn't have any underwear on while he was taking the photograph! No wonder LW looks half asleep.

Posted by: MojoMark at January 30, 2004 12:30 PM (E+LQu)

6 H-A-N-E-S. No "I". :-P Everybody in my household takes their socks off at any random time throughout the day. You can find them on the couches, the floor, the fireplace, the dog food bowl...you name it. I don't even have a visual recognition factor for them any longer. They are effectively invisible to me. Regarding underwear, it's far easier to pick out the times that I am wearing a ball control device that the times that I'm not. Do your balls hang low? Do they wiggle to and fro? Can you tie 'em in a knot? Can you tie 'em in a bow? Do you wear 'em on your shoulder, Like a continental soldier? Do your balls hang low?

Posted by: Jim at January 30, 2004 01:22 PM (IOwam)

7 2 things.. 1. IF and that's a big if - Jim was naked where's the cow? I thought she was major part of his sex life. 2. Please God tell me you don't wear tighty whitey's. Jim say it aint so....

Posted by: Tiffani at January 30, 2004 01:26 PM (0i1dP)

8 Tiffani figured it out. As there's no cow in the picture I am obviously clothed. I have both tighty-whiteys as well as boxers in the drawer. Depending on the pants worn I'll favor one style over the other. With shorts I'll generally wear whiteys to prevent peek-a-boo effect. Right now I'm in boxers.

Posted by: Jim at January 30, 2004 02:05 PM (IOwam)

9 How adorable, Jim.

Posted by: annika at January 30, 2004 02:09 PM (zAOEU)

10 If the spousal unit is authorizing photos in this new fashion, I suggest you call Mulder & Skully... She's been switched!

Posted by: Nate at January 30, 2004 05:00 PM (l/r8N)

11 Rule number 1 of dog photos is any human in a dog photo looks fine as said dog is the focus of the photo. Now you have to count the days until someone stops LW in the street and starts with "I was on this website the other day..."

Posted by: Simon at February 02, 2004 05:09 AM (FUPxT)

12 She is beautiful (LW, not the dog), but I notice no ring on her finger.....????

Posted by: me at February 07, 2004 11:26 AM (ulInj)

13 That's correct, me. And no, I'm not telling you where it is.

Posted by: Jim at February 07, 2004 05:08 PM (saeHM)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

This is a very special Cheddar X. This week we're serving a very bitter cheddar, as the answers to the questions should amply show. more...

Posted by: Jim at 07:57 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.

I was just reading about it being Michele's 3rd blogiversary and I realized that it's my own .5th blogiversary. (Or would that be hemi-anni-blogiversary?)

6 months of Snoozitude. That floors me. It feels like just yesterday when I started this thing.

No maudlin' or "what I've learned" stuff this time - you'll get punished with that when the blog's a year old. This post is really just an excuse for another point earning opportunity for y'all.

POINTS: 2 points for the artist of the song in the title of this post. 1st correct answer only, of course. And no searching, of course. And it's all on the honor system so I won't know if you cheat, of course. But I'm pretty sure y'all are as honest as Clancy since it's just for fun, of course. I'll stop with the "of course" stuff now, of course.

Damn, just couldn't resist that one more. I stepped over the line, didn't I? Turned it right from mildly amusing (or at least only slightly pathetic) right to irritating. I'm such a slave to my impulses.

Posted by: Jim at 10:55 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 185 words, total size 1 kb.

This morning in the shower I was accosted by an unnatural sensation. No kids yelling. No dog barking. No cat attempting to dig to China via the litter box. Just the delicate sound of the water sluicing off my naked body. The silence was unnerving.

I did the only thing a rational person with absolutely no singing ability could do in this situation. I made sound effects. more...

Posted by: Jim at 10:05 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 408 words, total size 2 kb.

David Bradley spent five minutes writing the computer code that has bailed out the world's PC users for decades.

That's right. This is the fellow that wrote the code for the three finger salute (that's 'ctrl-alt-del' for the helmet wearers). He's retiring after 28 1/2 years at IBM and will be teaching at NC State University. Fare thee well oh handler of computers and bring some of that humor to the classroom.

At a 20-year celebration for the IBM PC, Bradley was on a panel with Microsoft founder Bill Gates and other tech icons. The discussion turned to the keys.

"I may have invented it, but Bill made it famous," Bradley said.

Gates didn't laugh. The key combination also is used when software, such as Microsoft's Windows operating system, fails.

You can use it for more than Windows crashes? Wow, the things you learn.

(Hat tip to Dopple-G)

Posted by: Jim at 09:41 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 164 words, total size 1 kb.

Purrrrrr

(Hat tip to Dopple-G)

Posted by: Jim at 09:36 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 15 words, total size 1 kb.

I guess I've been around a bit. This map shows the states that I've actually lived in. It's supposed to be a "visited" map but that just turns most of it red for me. If you're curious about what states I've visited just figure every state that touches one of these and that'll be pretty close.

create your own visited states map
or write about it on the open travel guide

(Hat tip to Susie)

POINTS: 2 points for the first person to name the inspiration for this post title. No searching please, you naughty little monkeys.

UPDATE: Lovely Wife's visited states and visited countries are in the extended entry. Wow, she really gets around, doesn't she? more...

Posted by: Jim at 08:27 AM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 137 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Babe, you need to get out more. I mean-you haven't even been to Texas! I thought EVERYONE had been to Texas!

Posted by: Helen at January 29, 2004 08:59 AM (TZJXp)

2 No, that's "Everyone had a Texan". ;-) Texas is too big. I like smaller states where I can touch the walls for that comfy secure feeling.

Posted by: Jim at January 29, 2004 09:25 AM (IOwam)

3 I got the answer, but I was a dirty monkey. (and I'm honest about it!) I seriously doubt that anyone's gonna get that... "It's Peter, Go Peter, I'm so Peter, Yo Peter, Let's see Regis rap this way"

Posted by: Clancy at January 29, 2004 09:29 AM (EGVPL)

4 All "Family Guy" references aside, didn't MC Hammer bust that rhyme in "U Can't Touch This"?

Posted by: Mike the Marine at January 29, 2004 11:03 AM (Zw7Hl)

5 Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! That's the one, Mike. I've been around the world, from London to the Bay See, Clancy? I had faith that there were other old farts out there that rocked out to Hammer back in the day. Not that we're proud of that fact now, of course.

Posted by: Jim at January 29, 2004 11:10 AM (IOwam)

6 Now why are there points for this "inspiration" but not points for the Peter Finch one? Huh? Huh? That's the whole point, isn't it? You change the words a little but still have a recognizable source?

Posted by: Susie at January 29, 2004 12:47 PM (0+cMc)

7 Susie, Susie, Susie...dear, sweet Susie... It was my fault. Totally and completely. I just totally dropped the ball on that one. I don't know why, but it just didn't click as a point source when I was writing that post. It happens sometimes, what with the state of the free world in my hands and all I just get so busy sometimes. I can't contaminate the Snooze Points by awarding them without having offered. Therein lies chaos! But I can try to put that smile back on your face. I'll give you all of the Cheesy points that I've accumulated from LeeAnn. There are three over here and a couple others somewhere else that I can't find 'cause the search isn't working. All for you. (I wonder if I just established relative value between Snooze Points and Cheesy Points. Hmmm... 2 to 5 isn't so bad.)

Posted by: Jim at January 29, 2004 01:10 PM (IOwam)

8 Hmmm..does LeeAnn know about this? cuz the last thing we want to do is tick off The Cheese...that would be a Bad Thing™

Posted by: Susie at January 29, 2004 01:24 PM (0+cMc)

9 I'll check on that, Susie. If not, I'll have to try to smuggle them to you through the cheese underground.

Posted by: Jim at January 29, 2004 02:18 PM (IOwam)

10 It's official. I just got confirmation from LeeAnn. The Cheesy Points are yours, Susie. And there was much rejoicing. (And no, you don't get points for sourcing that one.)

Posted by: Jim at January 29, 2004 03:16 PM (IOwam)

11 I learned two things from mapping out states and countries I've visited. One, I've been to almost all the US (76%) and not very much of the rest of the world (a measly six countries from the list but two of my countries weren't listed under anything I knew them as).

Posted by: Johnny Huh at January 29, 2004 06:11 PM (AyewP)

12 I learned two things from mapping out states and countries I've visited. One, I've been to almost all the US (76%) and Two, I've not seen very much of the rest of the world (a measly six countries from the list but two of my countries weren't listed under anything I knew them as).

Posted by: Johnny Huh at January 29, 2004 06:11 PM (AyewP)

13 He's right, Susie, he cleared Cheesy Transference with me first. I should be freer with the Cheesy points. This is probably why I wasn't that popular in high school.

Posted by: LeeAnn at January 29, 2004 07:37 PM (HxCeX)

14 Not popular, LeeAnn? The mens' room wall disagrees. [duck] [SMACK!]

Posted by: Jim at January 29, 2004 07:40 PM (IOwam)

15 Well, as long as LeeAnn approves: Thanks, Jim!

Posted by: Susie at January 29, 2004 08:44 PM (0+cMc)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Occasionally, when I have absolutely no idea what to post desire to give y'all a particularly lighthearted and spirited little humorous romp, I'll delve into the recent searches on my site to see what people are looking for when they find this site out of the blue. I then generally humiliate them for our collective amusement try to help those poor souls who couldn't find what they were looking for here. Shall we begin? more...

Posted by: Jim at 06:25 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.

Normally I only post a recipe when I've just made the food. Then I give a little anecdote style offering along with the actual recipe (or reasonable facimile of a recipe - this stuff just comes out of my head most of the time). It's sort of like my own Chicken Soup For the Soul. Maybe I should make a category for it: Chicken Soup That Will Melt Your Soul Because Almost All Of The Recipes I Have Are Hotter Than Your Ass Will Be Able To Safely Contain The Next Day or something like that.

I'm going to make an exception to the unwritten "write up the recipe after you've cooked the food" rule this time because I saw Kate's chili recipe and discovered that Sgt. Hook needs my recipe in order to save the blogosphere from the weak-ass nastiness that has so far been submitted to his chili cook off.

DISCLAIMER: I'd already been hankering for some chili lately and tried to find my Death Chili recipe with no luck. There's an actual recipe for this one and it's for a good reason. I tend to be making chili at the same time I am consuming beer. Depending on how much beer I consume the chili will grow to inedible levels of hotness. Even for me, and that's pretty freaking impressive.

Anyway, I can't find the recipe but I'm going to reproduce it here for you from memory. It should be safe as I am currently completely sober (a bit jumped up on coffee but I don't think that'll affect anything except spelling errors). more...

Posted by: Jim at 01:27 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 1103 words, total size 6 kb.

My last "Nigerian Scam" email said I had inherited farmland in Zimbabwe.

Posted by: Jim at 10:26 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 22 words, total size 1 kb.

Weakened Parental Leave Bill OK'd

That's "weakened" as in lacking strength, not "weekend" as in Saturday, Sunday. The Georgia House passed legislation yesterday to mandate diddly squat. The original proposal was to allow parents up to 8 hours each year to attend school functions for their children. Things like parent-teacher conferences, volunteer work, etc would have been covered. But in a move that would do Armin Meiwes proud the Senate emasculated it before passing it.

House members approved the bill 158-6, but first they approved an amendment to change the wording. Instead of telling employers they "shall" give the parental leave time, the bill says employers "may" give the leave time.

So legislation has been approved that legally allows businesses to let parents attend their childrens' school functions. Were businesses not allowed to do this before? Another pointless law with no teeth that serves no function except to further clutter up the books. What a joke. more...

Posted by: Jim at 09:35 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 288 words, total size 2 kb.

The other day, Bacon walked by the puppy and gave her a kick. Not a mean kick, just a little "Hey there, I'm kicking you, what are you going to do about it?" type of kick.

Lovely Wife was the first to react as she yelled out ''Why did you do that!?" and he replied with only a look, head cocked just so and a facial expression that clearly said ''I haven't the foggiest idea what you are talking about". She rephrased her query ''Why did you kick the puppy?" He shrugged his shoulders and uttered the classic ''I dunno" that all parents are infinitely familiar with but his look clearly still indicated that he was clueless as to the subject under discussion.

So yesterday I was reading a story to little Burger. Kota was laying next to me, hoping for some petting action. The other two were sitting around having their brains sucked out by the evil glowing box in the corner. Kota got bored waiting for me to pay her attention and got up to find our other dog, Nicki. As she passed by Bacon, she calmly and casually turned her head to bite him as she passed. Not a mean bite, just a playful puppy bite. A bite that said "I bit you. Do something about it."

I yelled out "Kota! No! Why did you do that?" (animals can understand complex questions as long as you are angry when you ask them.) She sat down and looked at me, head cocked just a little bit and wearing an expression that said ''I haven't the foggiest idea what you are talking about." I didn't bother rephrasing the question.

We're in trouble.

Posted by: Jim at 06:30 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.

There's a load of great new stuff over at Zero Intelligence. We've got a nominee for worst zero tolerance abuses, a blatantly racist school policy and a very angering decision against hiring the best candidate (it might upset the kids if there's a successful role model in the school).

Phillip Coons has also joined the staff. Welcome aboard, Phillip! Look for good stuff from him starting later today.

Posted by: Jim at 10:48 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 72 words, total size 1 kb.

Guess that's not bad for being down here for 3 years. Dopple-G's been here for twice as long and he's still 39% yankee. How 'bout y'all? Find out how much yankee blood you have here.

(Hat tip to Dopple-G)

Posted by: Jim at 10:29 AM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 45 words, total size 1 kb.

1 37% (Yankee). You have a good Yankee score. "When God made me born a Yankee, he was only kidding"

Posted by: Clancy at January 27, 2004 11:03 AM (EGVPL)

2 If I did the points thing, I would offer points for the source of my quote above. However, I have to admit it kinda' scares me what the source might reveal about me... (And I wrote it from memory - the actual source may differ slightly.)

Posted by: Clancy at January 27, 2004 11:07 AM (EGVPL)

3 39% (Yankee). You have a good Yankee score. I swear to god...G is my evil twin!

Posted by: LW at January 27, 2004 11:42 AM (fkewd)

4 43% Yankee, thank you very much. I think it was the "Rolling" that lowered my score.

Posted by: Helen at January 27, 2004 12:44 PM (O7oDa)

5 44% I'm actually surprised it's still this high. In the last 5 years, I've lived in 4 different states - all of them south of Masie-Dixie.

Posted by: Mike the Marine at January 27, 2004 01:04 PM (IOX+E)

6 45% (Yankee). There are traces of Yankee in you. Is this good or bad?

Posted by: Tiffani at January 27, 2004 01:35 PM (0i1dP)

7 It's not too bad, Tiffani. Traces of yankee can be removed with consumption of suitable amounts of grits and/or collard greens. If you're willing to take these measures then you have nothing to worry about. If you let it fester though you'll find your yankitude growing beyond your ability to correct it.

Posted by: Jim at January 27, 2004 01:43 PM (IOwam)

8 35% Yankee. Most of my answers were common to the Great Lakes region. What a surprise!

Posted by: Susie at January 27, 2004 01:48 PM (0+cMc)

9 Wow! 38% yankee, and I have lived in Texas for over 20 years now, I guess old habits are hard to break.

Posted by: Linda at January 27, 2004 02:18 PM (yDeX9)

10 Good God! I scored on 49%!!! I was born and raised in Maine! To be fair tho, I haven't lived there since I was 19 - which is way too long ago - so maybe 49% is still good. It must really be something to listen to me - tawkin' bout takin' my cah down thaya to tha brew thru for a pop or a beya, ya'll! Yeah, I've lived all over the US courtesy of the US Navy so I tend to be a hybrid of it all.

Posted by: Suz~ at January 27, 2004 08:26 PM (bYATc)

11 49% Yankee. Erm... Mind you, I crashed and burned on the first question: How do you pronounce Aunt? o Like the word want o Like the word ant o Like the word caught o I pronounce them all the same In Australia (and, I think, England) all of these have different vowel sounds. Apparently, there are more vowels in Australian english than in U.S. english. Oh, and the tiny lobster that crawls around in creek bottoms is a yabbie.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at January 28, 2004 08:10 AM (jtW2s)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The Scene: Lovely Wife is in the supermarket with the spawn children. They spy an unnecessary but not out of bounds pricewise item that they covet.

Bear: Momma, can we get that unnecessary but not out of bounds pricewise item that I covet?

Lovely Wife: No, Bear. I don't have the money for it right now.

Bear: You can use your card! more...

Posted by: Jim at 09:59 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 326 words, total size 2 kb.

If you've been reading me a while you've probably figured out that one of the things that most irritates me in this world is intentional stupidity. Come to think of it, that might be the only thing that really irritates me. Anyway, the height of this stupidity in recent years has been the preponderence of zero tolerance policies. These are the rules made up by school systems out of fear or knee-jerk reaction that forcibly compel school administrators from using common sense or whatever intelligence they might normally posess.

Gone are the days of leniency for honest mistakes, compassion for lack of understanding and any concept of letting the punishment fit the crime. Taking an Advil at school is now the same as pushing crack. Leaving the tools from your lawn care side job in your locked trunk will get you arrested. Having the wrong pencil sharpener or wallet earns expulsion. This lunacy has got to stop.

To that end I have started a new website called Zero Intelligence that will collect stories of the harmful effects of these policies as well as showcase the abuses caused by them. We will explore the reasons that they are adopted and point out the errors that lead to these very poor solutions. Although there is a great amount of indignation about zero tolerance policies there doesn't seem to be any organized discussion or action against them. I hope that Zero Intelligence will provide this greatly needed forum.

I would like to send humongous mountains of thanks to Matt Drachenberg (of Overtaken by Events). Matt volunteered to help with the site before it was even set up and there is absolutely no way it would be ready for use now without him. He did all of the plug-in stuff and the widgets and doodads and made it all actually work. Matt is serving as the site admin to handle all of the boring and frustrating technical problems that will pop up while I get to relax and handle the human element. He'll also be contributing content of course.

Speaking of content, it's light at the moment as we're just starting out. You can help in this regard by sending tips, commenting on the posts, or even becoming a contributing poster.

Posted by: Jim at 10:52 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 401 words, total size 2 kb.