| |
Bad Money
|
Tuesday, February 24, 2004
|
|
SO SAYETH THE KING
One of the perks of being the King of the Blogs
is that you have the right to issue a Royal Edict, which is a post of
your choosing that all the KotB judges must link to (commentary
optional).
Good King Bill of WalloWorld picked an excellent topic to play with - the left's hypocrisy regarding the effects of imagery on people's minds:
Countless hours spent playing violent video games of course have no
impact on kids (nor could they ever contribute to an environment where
kids shoot their classmates), but The Lord of the Rings can reinforce
racial sterotypes or The Passion is likely to lead to anti-Semitic
violence?
After raising the question Bill sums it up in a quick point:
images have power. They may affect different people in different ways, but every image has an impact.
Dang. After all the times I've harangued Bill for prattling on and on
and on, he picks THIS occasion to say his piece & shut up. I wanted
to see this issue get chewed & tasted instead of being swallowed
whole. I hope he chases this down in the future and talks about which
images have what impact, and what, if anything, should be done about
the effects of negative images.
For my part, I'm of the belief that images don't matter nearly as much
as the message surrounding the image. Take, for example, the often
maligned violent Bugs Bunny cartoons of my youth. People were getting
beat up & hurt left and right. But the moral was always the same:
Bugs was just minding his own business, trying to lead his happy little
bunny life, and some jerk started messing with him. Well, Mr. Jerk got
what was coming to him. He deserved the trouble he got. Justice was
served.
Same thing with Popeye. I don't recall him ever throwing the first punch. He was a peaceable sort of fella.
And even my VERY maligned violent video games (especially the
first-person shooters I love like Doom, Duke Nukem, Quake, Jedi Knight,
Soldier of Fortune, etc.) have a message. Evil people need to be killed
by good people to protect the innocent.
My point being that, while I recall the cartoon punches or the splattery image in the game, I more strongly recall the message - sometimes good men must fight.
I think it's a distraction to argue over whether the image is good or bad. Argue the principle that image supports.
posted by Harvey at 7:04:59 PM permalink HOME
|
|
KING OF THE BLOGS ROYAL RUMBLE RESULTS
Last week was the off-week for the King of the Blogs tournament, which meant that Good King Bill of WalloWorld
got a chance to lounge around on his throne, pick at his bunions, watch
the Royal big-screen HDTV, and be serviced by nubile slave girls.
For six of his kingdom's peasants, however, this was no vacation week.
They were locked in a virtual life-or-death struggle to see who would
go on to battle Bill for the crown this week.
The results are posted here, and the entries are below them in a separate entry.
Here are my reviews. The rest are at the KotB site. Also, if I didn't
link a Rumblor, it's because said Rumblor was a doofus and e-mailed his
entry instead of posting it - thereby passing up a good opportunity for
linkage.
ROYAL RUMBLE RANKINGS
(Rumblors were ranked by relative strength and then awarded points
relative to their positions. 6 points was the highest score, 1 point
was the lowest)
BLOG SUPPLEMENT: 6
CHALLENGE: Insanely over the top!
AD: Goofy & obscene enough to be in the Superbowl halftime, but where's the salesmanship?
MINILUV: 5
CHALLENGE: Multifaceted & hilarious!
AD: Smug, cocky, and threatening, (which is good) but doesn't really SELL…
IRRITABLE BLOG SYNDROME: 4
CHALLENGE: A truly heart-wrenching tale… * snicker *
AD: Excellent pandering, but no selling.
LOBO WALK: 3
CHALLENGE: Grinworthy, but pretty straightforward
AD: Now THERE'S a sales pitch – shame on you for giving away the fine-print secret,
though.
ECUMENICAL INSANITY: 2
CHALLENGE(see KotB site): A good running gag. Needed a little more set-up, but shows potential.
AD: Whatever it lacks in humor it makes up for in enthusiasm.
LEGAL MEMO-RANDOM: 1
CHALLENGE(see KotB site): A bland effort
AD: Bleah!
posted by Harvey at 7:12:05 AM permalink HOME
|
|
|
|
Tuesday, February 17, 2004
|
|
KING OF THE BLOGS TOURNAMENT RESULTS
Apparently beal
causes more than just writer's block - it's causing poster's block
(where thought you posted an entry, but it's just sitting there in
draft mode, mocking you). Happened to me at Alliance HQ, had a posting
failure a couple days ago right here, and now at KotB.
Nevertheless, the results are finally up.
Walloworld is the new King of the Blogs, and, as I predicted, his self-absorbed narcissism will serve him well as he rolls the betrayed and murdered corpse of Christweb off of what is now HIS throne. I expect he'll link himself at least a dozen times in his acceptance speech.
As for the reviews themselves, it's nice to see Marty of Vigilance Matters
back in the thick of things, swinging his Louisville Slugger around.
He's always been the Oscar the Grouch of the Judge's bench, but I think
someone whizzed in his Wheaties the morning he wrote his reviews. He
seemed slightly more uncharitable than normal.
Susie's a little more descriptive than usual, and spent a little time fawning over Charlie's gratuitous ass-kissing.
Mr. Dodge - still stuffy.
Pietro - well, for all his Fozzie-bashing, I was shocked at how kindly & supportive he was when doing Charlie's review. Elsewhere, he gave a detailed breakdown in the whole-blog review section that new KotB participants will want to pay close attention to. I think I'm gonna like working with this guy.
Rick & Dawn were probably out drinking all weekend & missed the review submission deadline. Pity, that.
Coming later this week, while Good King Bill sits on his throne, idly
tossing stones & knives at his Royal Lackeys for his own amusement,
there will be a free-for-all amongst a select list of next week's
potential King of the Blogs participants: The Royal Rumble.
Participants will all answer a single question in 150 words or less,
the top 5 entrants will advance to do battle with the current King of
the Blogs in the next tournament.
The losers? - back to the end of the line.
More news on that as it becomes available.
posted by Harvey at 7:58:16 PM permalink HOME
|
|
|
|
Saturday, February 14, 2004
|
|
KING OF THE BLOGS:
WEEK 2 – CHALLENGE & WHOLE BLOG REVIEWS
Here are my judgments with scores omitted to retain suspense. The final
results will be available at the KotB home page soon, and I'll let you
know the outcome. If you're a betting man, put a couple on ChristWeb.
He's gonna be tough to beat forever.
The Challenge Question this week: Why do you think what you have to say is important to blog readers?
CHRISTWEB
(Challenge)
GOOD POINTS: Wants his readers to attain enlightenment. Will make a fine Buddha some day.
BAD POINTS: Forgot to drop Jesus's name in the list of important things
he has to say. Stephen should probably expect a small box of wrath to
be FedEx'd to his door in the near future for the omission.
WALLOWORLD
(Challenge)
GOOD POINTS: Bill comes clean about the source of his
succinctness phobia. Apparently it was something he picked up in law
school. He also takes the opportunity to LINK HIS OWN BLOG SEVEN
FREAKING TIMES in one post. Such self-absorbed narcissism will serve
him well should he step over Stephen's twitching corpse to ascend to
the throne.
BAD POINTS: Took so long to finish reading this post, that, before I
got the end, I had to stop to shave. Twice. This isn't the OJ trial,
it's a blog entry. That nascent wit you're working on? Brevity is the
soul of it.
WHERE THE HELL WAS I?
(Challenge)
GOOD POINTS: "I don't." he says. "YES!" I say. Someone finally got the answer right by rejecting the premise of the question. Kudos, Charlie. Bonus for the phrase "upsnort Sanka".
BAD POINTS: I was going to take about 5 points off for tossing in all
those gratuitous, stream-of-consciousness asides, but I had a
growing-Grinch-heart epiphany – this sort of unplanned bizarrity IS
Charlie. That aside, I must still remind him that throwing darts at
stamps has nothing to do with chewing on gems. Please don't met your
mixaphors.
NOTE: While it might seem unfair that
I dinged Bill for prattling on, but not Charlie, I do so with reason.
With Charlie, it's a deliberate technique – the shotgun approach to
comedy: say enough things, and something will hit somebody's target.
Bill, on the other hand, is a professional wordsmith, and should be
able to tighten up his writing without losing anything in the process.
I think he has the talent to do better in this area.
THE WHOLE BLOG: TECHNICAL MERIT & PERSONALITY
Technical things I look for:
Comments enabled
Permalinks working
E-mail contact info available
Blogger's name/pseudonym prominently displayed
Site search feature enabled
Link to an "About Me" post on the sidebar
Blogger's gender is easily discernable
Blogroll
Readable font style & size
Readable color scheme (for example, NOT bright red type on bright green
background)
Divisions between posts clearly marked
Paragraphing in entries (NOT just writing one fat block of text)
CHRISTWEB
GOOD POINTS: He was technically perfect last week, he's still technically perfect this week.
BAD POINTS: I'm going to ding him slightly on the personality issue. I
still don't understand his penchant for hiding his thoughts in an
extended entry. Your thoughts are the reason people come to your site.
I can see using extended entries to hide a joke's
punchline or to hide a picture as a courtesy to people on dial-up, but
"too many words" isn't a good reason to use it. If people read an entry
half way, they'll read to the bottom. Don't make them fumble for their
mouse for no reason. It's distracting and unnecessary.
WALLOWORLD
GOOD POINTS: Technically excellent. I like that he prominently displays a fix for a known bug in the sidebar.
BAD POINTS: If Stephen's misuse of extended entries is a misdemeanor,
Bill's is a felony. Stop holding your words as political prisoners
behind the iron bars of the extended entry links. Other minor flaws
would be that the bug fix should be a little higher
so it can be seen without having to scroll down, and you might want to
place that contact e-mail address on the front page as well as in the
"about me" post.
WHERE THE HELL WAS I?
GOOD POINTS: Technically perfect, plus I really like the contrasting
color scheme between the sidebars and the middle column. I also like
the prominent featuring of the search feature in the header, which
space is usually eaten up by a banner on most blogs.
BAD POINTS: Gave KotB Judge Susie's ass
a firm, wet smooch with his finely-tailored blogrolling of her, and
completely ignored my hairy hinder. However, considering the
rosy-cheeked delight that is Susie's sittin' spot, I guess I can't
blame him.
posted by Harvey at 9:06:56 PM permalink HOME
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, February 11, 2004
|
|
LOOKING FOR A FEW GOOD BLOGS...
...to participate in the King of the Blogs Tournament. I'm stealing the short description from the KotB site:
I would like to introduce everyone to the King of the Blogs
tournament, open to all blogs under size Large Mammals in the Truth
Laid Bear ecosystem.
This contest is a two round competition, with a bye-week after the
second round. In week one five blogs will enter to compete against the
reigning "King of the Blogs" for the crown. The first round judges a
submitted post, and a an answer to the Host's Challenge question. From
these six blogs three advance, where their entire blog is judged, and
once again the Judge's challenge question. There are six judges that
will be judging your blog, and they change from time to time. In the
end only one blog moves on, and the rest may comeback another day to
try again.
Currently we are starting a new competition to pick the entrants to
the tournament. This is the mini-challenge. Each bye week (the week
after round two where the king reigns a week unchallenged) a slate of
10 blogs compete to enter the tournament, and challenge the king. To
win, and thus compete in the next tournament, they must impress three
judges with an answer to a challenge question, which can be no longer
then 100 words long.
Interested? There's a sign up form here.
If you're looking for attention, I really recommend throwing your hat in the ring. I got my first big break in blogging through a blog contest, and had a lot of fun doing it.
posted by Harvey at 7:31:25 AM permalink HOME
|
|
|
|
Sunday, February 08, 2004
|
|
KING OF THE BLOGS BACK IN BUSINESS
After taking a little time off for some conceptual re-tooling, the King of the Blogs Tournament has returned and this time around it's pretty darn good. I'm a little sad that Marty from Vigilance Matters wasn't around to judge this week. He has some of the best reviews. That, and he appreciates goofy humor, which some of the stuffier judges don't.
Here are my takes on the contestants' entries. The other reviews are here.
PRAGMATIC CONSERVATISM
(Submitted)
GOOD POINTS: Loved the quote from the idiot liberal professor, as well
as this zinger: "Is this rise of conservative viewpoints among youth
caused by liberal mothers aborting their children?"
BAD POINTS: This post covers 2 topics: "idiot liberals on campus" and
"the decline of liberalism as a youth trend". Mixed together as they
were, the post seemed a little jumbled. Might've been better as 2
separate, more tightly focused posts.
SCORE: 7.5
(Challenge):
GOOD POINTS: You are puny. Dan will crush you. Arnie rocks, and Dan's
in top form in this homage to one of my favorite silly violent action
flicks, Commando.
BAD POINTS: None visible
SCORE: 10
SOUTHERN MUSINGS
(Submitted)
GOOD POINTS: Female Groomsmen? Obviously a sign of the apocalypse!
However, it's still a well-constructed piece. Gives you just enough
background to understand the players and never prattles off onto an
irrelevant tangent - an easy thing to do when telling a wedding story.
BAD POINTS: My personal preference. More active verbs, fewer passive
ones. Forgo, when possible, the evil verb "be" and its dark minions.
They dull your writing.
SCORE: 8.5
(Challenge)
GOOD POINTS: In her introductory musings, she lists several strong
female movie characters worthy of emulation. In her answer, she gives
us an honest glimpse of who she is by her selection.
BAD POINTS: I think Anastasia missed the point on this question
somewhat. You could have been ANYONE, but you played it safe by
sticking with a fairly earthbound character. Next time, dream big.
SCORE: 8
CHRISTWEB
(Submitted)
GOOD POINTS: Well-written, well-argued, informative. I had no idea that the border patrol had a catch & release program
BAD POINTS: Went off on a couple tangents toward the end. The point
about needing to spend more money on renting detention cells is well
taken. The side thoughts on jobs and terrorism were off-topic, and
didn't belong in this post.
SCORE: 9
(Challenge)
GOOD POINTS: There can be only one, and Stephen makes a compelling
argument that being that immortal one would be fun, exciting, and
fulfilling.
BAD POINTS: Has the audacity to disagree with Zefram Cochrane that
immortality consists largely of boredom. However, since Stephen
wouldn't be spending his life trapped on an isolated planet with a
gaseous girlfriend, I'll give him a pass.
SCORE: 10
WHERE THE HELL WAS I?
(Submitted)
GOOD POINTS: Manages to blather on for 12 pages on the sorry premise of
being a stand-up comedian. I find myself not bored. Entertained, in
fact. Ok, amused. All right, all right, I confess. I laughed.
BAD POINTS: Yet another blogger that I'll never be funnier than. I hate these people.
SCORE: 10
(Challenge)
GOOD POINTS: Talks about naked Heather Graham
BAD POINTS: Insane stream of consciousness humor, while generally a
good thing, doesn't work here. A question needed answering, and a more
focused format was in order.
SCORE: 8
WALLOWORLD
(Submitted)
GOOD POINTS: Makes a compelling argument that iTunes 99 cents per song
pricing model is flawed, and that older, less popular songs should be
cheaper.
BAD POINTS: Must've gotten paid by the word for this piece. Could've made the point more succinctly.
SCORE: 8
(Challenge)
GOOD POINTS: Really got into the question and makes half a dozen cogent analyses of which character would be good to be.
BAD POINTS: Uh, you REALLY only needed to answer the question ONCE. I
know that sometimes you have to do some preliminary writing to get the
creative juices flowing, but once you have the gold, discard the silver
& bronze. Make the DELETE key your friend.
SCORE: 7
After everything was totaled, Where the Hell Was I?, Walloworld, and Christweb made it to the next round. Southern Musings and Pragmatic Conservatism get beaten with sticks, tossed in the dumpster, and left for dead.
We'll see how it goes next week. Should be interesting, since the top 3 scored within a 2 point range.
posted by Harvey at 11:00:06 PM permalink HOME
|
|
|
© Copyright 2005 Harvey Olson.
Last update: 9/10/2005; 4:36:24 PM.
|
|
|
