Apropos of Nothing in Particular

On another site, I read of a gal’s woes ordering lingerie from Amazon. Seems some bras that were delivered were. . . not exactly as ordered.

Off-the-wall and around the corner. . . and since I don’t wear a bra (*heh*), probably not germane, but. . .

I noticed recently that one of my Wonder Woman’s discarded bras might make a couple of good facemasks, with perhaps some added filtration material. Something to think about? *heh*


Neon colors and psychedelic designs (the aforementioned gal’s complaint). . . Jimmy Durante said it best:

Terry McAuliffe is an Idiot. But I Repeat Myself.

The “but I repeat myself” is because “Terry McAuliffe” is a synonym for “idiot.”

[Apologies for the watermark. I cut this lil snippet using a device I don’t usually use for video editing and used a freebie app to do it.]

McAuliffe demonstrates better than usual grasp of (alternative) facts (from the Bizarro Univese), for a Dhimmicrap pol.

Terry McAuliffe_ ‘We Lose 93 Million Americans A Day to Gun Violence’_cut

Seems Like Karma to Me

I already knew, generally, what an M44 was in the context of wildlife management–a baited cyanide device ostensibly used to control [that is, kill] coyotes and other canidae (apparently against foxes in Australia, though using a different poison), but for some reason it popped into my head and I decided to check a few resources for a more detailed description of it and its uses.

The Wikipedia article included an incident in “criticisms” of its use that made me snicker:

“In 2003, Mr. Dennis Slaugh of Vernal, Utah, was on public lands and mistook an M-44 for a survey marker. When he pulled on it, the device shot sodium cyanide powder on his face and chest causing him to become violently ill.” [Wikipedia article on M44 cyanide device]

He THOUGHT it was a SURVEY MARKER on public land, so he tried to pull it up? Asshat. He got what he deserved. The Deuteronomical injunction against moving “boundary stones” came to mind (along with all the laws currently on the books) when I read about this asshat. Since the incident was cited as a criticism of the use of M44 cyanide devices, I doubt the asshat learned the proper lesson from his disgusting behavior. The proper lessons to have learned from that would include:


But, as I said, since the incident is cited as a criticism of the device and its use, I doubt the asshat learned the proper lesson from it. I could be wrong. . . but that’s not the way to bet.

Benefits of Sloppy Yardwork

No, really! There are benefits to lazy, sloppy yardwork. Here’s one:

For some years now, I have ignored some volunteer elms and maples that have grown up along our back fence line. This year, I have started taking them out. Now, while it would have been easy-peasy to have simply mow or weed-whacked ’em down when they first came up as seedlings, I had several reasons (in addition to laziness) for not doing so, but I’ll not go into those right now.

Anywho. . . The elms are slated for

  • chopping (into nice-sized chunks for burning) and
  • chipping

and the maples are slated for

  • milling for handrails and other projects
  • scrap and pieces larger than 1/2” in diameter reserved to make charcoal
  • all smaller scrap and pieces for burning

All pieces slated for burning to be used FIRST in making charcoal out of the maple reserved for that purpose.

Now, THAT is a benefit of “sloppy yardwork” I’m sure that few consider: a nice load of real charcoal. 🙂

Since I also let a “privacy fence” of possum grape vines grow pretty much at will, I have a lot of extra vine I have been trimming and drying. Some, I have already made into charcoal, and all of it I trim (including this year’s batch) is slated to eventually become charcoal, because it’s some of the best charcoal for making black powder. Yeh, small amounts, because it takes a LOT of grape vine to make much charcoal, and I’ve just been trimming here and there.

I suppose I ought to eventually get that tire-based retaining wall built on the South side of the yard, as well. . . maybe not this summer though.

BIG PROJECT (that may now be beyond my capabilities–oh, well): take down two stands of sycamores that need to come out. If felled to fall South, they would cross from the far North boundary of our property and take out our overhead electric service line. Must come down in pieces, a bit at a time. Six sycamores. . . each well over 60′ tall. Oh, well. Might be able to “poll” one and save it, though.

Cressida Dick Says Latest Muslim Terrorist Attack Shows the Strength of London’s Diversity

I’ll look for other sources for this, since ABC “News” has so often purveyed fake news, but if this is indeed genuine, then the police commissioner of London’s Metropolitan Police should go practice her “diversity” with ISIS. (She does have an appropriate last name, though):

London police chief: Attack victims show city’s diversity

Yeh, she’s a real dick, all right.

Making Learning Too Easy?

When I first ran across the Study Guides and Strategies site, my first thought was, “What a wonderful resource! I wish something like this had been available during my undergrad/grad years.”

And then I paused a moment to consider: with such resources as this, and with the vast research and general information resource that is the Internet, why are so very many college students nowadays (and Academia Nut Fruitcakes, for that matter) so very ignorant, poorly-read (which results in formal illiteracy) and flat-out stupid? Hmm.

I know there are many, many reasons for the ignorance, subliteracy, and stupidity, but perhaps one reason could be that such sites as the Study Guides and Strategies site seem to obviate the need to discover ways to comprehend–preferably master–subject matter. Just plug things into a formulaic study system and bang! It’s done!

Of course it is not that easy to do, but without at least some hard work discovering or creating one’s own study style, I suspect the hard work of conquering new subject matter is harder still.

I suspect that attempts to make learning easy could make it seem too easy. [Not gonna deal with all the aspects of this right now. Just suffice it to say this seems to be both a problem preparing students for college and an ongoing issue in college. . . and beyond; if it’s easy, it ain’t worth much, but if it ain’t easy, it’s avoided, etc.]

Still, since I’m already familiar and competent in my curent reading and study styles, I think I can find some good things to apply to my current learning efforts at Study Guides and Strategies.

Note: I was very briefly introduced to the SQ(W)3R study system in the Summer of ’68 during a freshman level p-sych course (the only useful thing I gained from the course), but I modified it greatly to fit my own reading/study styles, instead of following the brief (15 minute?) outline the prof suggested we use for the course readings.

But yes, given my (apparently increasing) absentmindedness recently, a slightly more detailed application of the SQ(W)3R system has already been implemented. *heh*

Sometimes, Even Subliterate Writers Can Be Entertaining. . . Though By Accident

Sometimes, text written by a subliterate writer can lead to fun stuff. A silly, 20-something self-pub subliterate writer (whose “editorial” helpers are no more literate than he is) provided such a brief moment, before I ashcanned his stupid book.

“. . .tells me that a newly discovered landmark was uncovered by the storm and that the ruin is not in any kind of withered [sic] state.”

Oh, my. The subliterate writer was probably groping for “weathered,” but since

a. his ears are apparently dull and
b. he just flat-out doesn’t know the differences between “wither” and “weather,”

. . .he went with a near homophone that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

But. . . then I paused and thought of the different meanings of wither, and their etymologies. (Yes, because I spent much of my youth reading dictionaries–and still do to this day, for that matter–and have a wide range of interests in disparate fields, I knew that the noun “wither” and the verb “wither” came from two very different roots. *shrugs* So? 🙂 ) So I had a bit of personal entertainment contemplating a horse’s withers and the withering of a plant.

And then, back to the Badly Written Text to a further description of the “ruin”:

“In fact, it doesn’t look “ruined” at all! It appears to be in perfect condition!”

*head-desk* Then why, oh why, did the “eminent archaeologist” initially refer to it as a “ruin”?

Because the writer had no appropriate vocabulary to describe it else, of course.

Well, this lil incident combined with four others in the two pages since I picked the book back up to convince me I needed to delete it from my library entirely, so as not to even accidentally pick it back up.

Oh, well. At least I managed to get all the way to 4% of the thing this time. . .

More Literacy Annoyances

Sadly, while I have seen this issue in many self-pub books written and “edited” by subliterates, this is becoming much more common in books from tradpub houses, as well.

ONLY, and I do mean ONLY, in the case where a subjective pronoun is used in a predicate nominative renaming of the subject is using a subjective pronoun in an otherwise objective position proper. The definitive example is: “I am he,” from which it follows that “You are she,” etc., are proper.

unfortunately, all too many subliterate “writers” (and yes, speakers) insist on thinking that ALL (or most–some are amazingly inconsistent) personal pronouns in objective case position) within a predicate are subjective case, based on this one exception (where the initial subject is used, as previously noted, to simply rename the subject they simply misuse a subjective case pronoun, viz.,

“I am better than he.” [WRONG]
“I am faster than he.” [WRONG]


For some reason–possibly because they mistakenly think it sounds “classy” or some such–many subliterates cling to such uses. Of course, rarely are the examples as plain, as stark, as the ones I have given above. Most often, the predicate is complex, poorly-constructed, and amphibolous, as well, obscuring the objective case.

I find this annoying. OK, in dialog, as long as the writer is trying to establish the speaking character as either barely literate or illiterate, OK. Barely. But when it occurs in descriptive narrative, no matter how otherwise interesting the content–fiction, non-fiction–I am sorely tempted to trash the text and move on to* something else. Time is just too precious to spend it translating badly-written text.

Continue reading “More Literacy Annoyances”

Inigo Montoya Has a Better Vocabulary

As I was scanning an article that was arguing that Me$$y$oft’s unscrupulous Win10 “upgrade” shennanigans led to (actually the shennanigans contributed to, but why let clear distinctions get in the way of “journalism” *gagamaggot*) the WannaCry Ransomeware debacle, I read,

“violates the trust people hold in the sanctity of Windows Update”

Really? Windows update is a sacrament of some religion or some such? Prior to our post-literate society, “sanctity” was the quality of being sacred or holy. Now, I guess it means whatever the hell (and you can take it I’m speaking theologically here) some subliterate moron wants it to mean.