As the guild spins....

So, I've been offered a seat on the code development council for the local fire guild.
I've turned it down.
And I think some folks will want to know why.

First, I feel that this is an ill conceived attempt to patch things up with NAFAA as suggested by the State Fire Marshall at the last meeting. I say 'ill conceived' because my presence on this council could be interpreted as an endorsement of the group's actions. And, let's face it, this guild was formed as a reaction to NAFAA actions and built in a specific attempt to contradict them. A NAFAA endorsement at this point would be confusing at best, damaging to both at worst.

Second, I have always made myself available to any questions anyone has had regarding NAFAA info, or local codes. When this guild was formed, I reiterated that offer and it was ignored. I'm thinking that this guild needs to begin the process of extending beyond itself, and tapping other resources, like state fire codes, local laws, etc before I can consider being a part of it.

Finally, I still maintain that my absence in the guild actions has, is and will continue to encourage average performers to take some more direct action in the process than looking my way. Once the nickname "safety nazi" began to fade a bit, people started relying on me a little to frequently and too heavily in their safety concerns. For several years, it seemed that anytime someone wanted a permit, my phone rang. And when anyone asked a fire safety question in my presence, all eyes turned to me. Hopefully, after that last guild meeting there's a few people reading the NAFAA wiki, and reviewing the performer safety guidelines to get answers of their own.

Keep in mind that all these decisions are personal. My decision to keep a distance from the guild should not deter other people from joining it. It is not an endorsement for, or against, the guild.

Digital TV

Okay folks. Sometimes it pays to watch PBS news. I have some interesting news about DTV.

Background
If you watch broadcast TV, not on a cable box, but actually with an antenna, your TV receiver (TV's, many VCRs, some DVD-Rs and Tivos) will no longer receive a signal as of February 2009. The current bandwidth will be converted into digital signals to free up space for emergency broadcasting. Digital transmission offers many advances including:
-more than 4x more efficient use of bandwidth
-increased reception clarity
-high def
-enhanced V-chip functionality (all digital programs can be forced to comply with v-chip standards)

If you have satellite or cable, you're done. They'll be converted over to DTV in a month or so. However, if you don't, you will need a digital receiver or converter box. Many new TVs and recorders are ATSC compliant (ie digital), but a lot of them out there bear that cute little waring that says it will no longer work after feb 17th, 09.

Fortunately, the Government actually thought ahead on this one. If you have recently purchased one of these labeled devices, or just have old equipment that you'd planned to keep running as long as physically possible, then you can get an approved convertor box at a discounted rate. Basically, you get a $40 coupon that you can apply to an approved converter box.
This is the current list of qualifying converter boxes:
* DigitalSTREAM D2A1D10
* DigitalSTREAM D2A1D20
* Zenith DTT900
* Magnavox TB100MW9
* Philco TB150HH9
* MicroGEM MG2000
* Sansonic FT300RT
* MaxMedia MMDTVB03
* Apex DT1001
* ECHOSTAR TR-40
* AMTC AT-2016

Average expected price for approved boxes is about $50-60. Meaning that you may only need to shell out $20 to get up to date.

So, you just go to this website
dtv2009.gov/
and apply for a coupon, or two. The site will handle everything, and let you know what's to come.

Pulp verification

I remember watching Pulp fiction for the very first time and thinking to myself that I'd seen the Heroine overdose scene before. I knew EXACTLY what was going to happen every moment, I even nailed the timing on Mia popping up back to life. But, for the life of me, I could not place the other film. Well, on a whim, I tripped across this on IMDB:

"The storyline involving Mia's overdose and her revival by an injection of adrenaline into her heart is transcribed word for word from a story told in American Boy: A Profile of: Steven Prince (1978), a documentary directed by Martin Scorsese."

*sigh* I feel so much better.....

Worth it....

What the History channel has to say about Xmas

Y'all come back now... [again]

Dictionary [oxford]
y'all |yôl|
contraction of
you-all.

you-all |ˈyoō ˌôl; yôl| (also y'all)
pronoun dialect
(in the southern U.S.) you (used to refer to more than one person) : how are you-all?

One of the things that started bugging me about the English language was the inconsistent plural "you". Other languages differentiate between the singular and plural forms of you, why don't we? For example, the famous song "voulez-vous couchez avec moi c'est soire" is actually a reasonably gross misuse of the french language. 'Vous' is the french formal or plural form of the word You, and one would never use it to propose sex. However, I imagine that "Veux-tu couchez avec moi" just didn't have the same bounce. You see, "Tu" is the singular or informal method of using You. The formal and informal seems to stem from the Royal "We", where royalty speaking in a formal sense would refer to themselves as the representative of their fiefdom, and therefor spoke as the entire realm "We". The formal You (or Vous) responded to the plural first person with a plural second person.

But english doesn't have anything like this. So we're stuck saying stupid repetitions of the same word and trying to parse things our contextually. For Example, say you're talking to Bob, who's with his family, and they're all wearing Raider's hats at a football game. You might find your self saying "You and I should get a beer, but not until you come over and meet my family, then we can watch you loose to the Cowboys." Without some gestures, such a sentence is a bit confusing.

So, I have adopted the word: y'all. It's the only current, modern english form of the plural You. It's a contraction of you-all, and a strange one at that. Some people mistakenly try to contract it as ya'll, like you would with he'll (he will). But that's not it. In fact if you were going to contract that way, it would be at least yo'll, which is a bit too close to you'll (you will). Nope, it's y'all , the second person plural pronoun for me. So, let's take it back to Bob: "You and I should get a beer, but not until y'all come over and meet my family, then we can watch y'all loose to the Cowboys." It still falls short differentiating between plural inclusive and plural exclusive, But it at least clears one thing up:
"[Do] y'all want to sleep with me tonight?"
Clearly the song is a proposal for group sex ... :)

So, formally
y'all |yôl|
contraction of you-all.
pronoun [ second person singular ]
used to refer to the people that the speaker is addressing : Y'all come back now.

Have fun with it y'all, but don't you even think of over using it... :)

Xmas List

So, despite shaking off the last remnants of Catholicism, I still feel something for Xmas. And as I look at my calendar, I notice that it's a national holiday. Yes, that's right, it's a Secular, non-religious, government approved holiday. And if you look at the history of christmas, you'll see that it pretty much is an american concoction.

The term "Christ- mass" was applied to the Saturnalia/Yule/Solstice celebrations, despite the overwhelming biblical evidence indicating that it wasn't the time of year that Jesus was supposedly born. Clearly this time of year was borrowed. Also, the various christian churches have disavowed the holiday several times. But don't take my word, look it up...

*sigh* So, this makes Xmas essentially a Hallmark Holiday. It may have started as a way to ethically find a way to spoil the kids a little, during creatively oppressive times. But now, marketing has taken it to a very dark place.

So, I'm gonna take things in a [hopefully] new direction. Here's my Xmas list this year.
#1 Give a bum a dollar.
#2 Give a bum more than a dollar and send me a card saying so.
#3 Give your car a thorough tune-up and make sure the tires are filled.
#4 Start a carpool at work.
#5 Spend a day hugging everyone you see
#6 Toss someone a mercy fvck.
#7 Spend a day working to make the world a better place.
#8 Find someone you'd normally ignore and have an extended conversation with them.

Call or email me the results.
Thanks.

There's a new fire guild in town.

For those of you who've seen this:
people.tribe.net/quin/blog
Yes, I know about it.

Yes, I know it could be taken as a back handed slap at me. Though I'm assured that wasn't the intention.

I'm not going to be participating in this and I think my local friends need to know why.

"Been there, done that"
Several years ago, I co-organized NAFAA and the local chapter guild 'Hearthfire'. It was torn apart. Probably for the same general reasons that almost every other fire organization has failed. And if I knew what those reasons are, I might try to help avoid them. I can point to the petty inter-personal politics that had nothing to do with the group, but in the end, I think it's just a matter of ego. Not really in a bad way, just that you need a strong ego to spin fire in the first place and when you get a room full of them, they often collide. But what may be the most important part is that I remember the years it took to write the nafaa code, the $1000s of dollars I spent researching and educating fire departments, and the difficulty I had keeping together over 500 active members of NAFAA. I don't want to start all over again. I'm way done with fire politics.

"Fact and fright"
If you glance over the invitation to the group, you'll see first that they're using scare tactics to get members to join. This is not a healthy way to start anything, Just look at the Bush Administration. But, also, they're working from snippets of reality without first getting the whole; getting the facts. I'm not sure I can, nor want to, work with people who will build from gossip as their foundation.

"Not enough time"
I'm falling behind on my personal schedule for Red Swan. There's a ton of work I haven't done on the website and 100 phone calls to make after I do. We're still getting jobs in, and we haven't really started on our planned programs. Now, Red Swan is something I completely believe in. I think it can go very far, but can also help place the fire community in much higher standing than back yard birthdays, and mistreated rave nuisances. Our goal is to provide the fire community with avenues that not only pay well, but pay regularly. We'd love to see people *making a living* at fire performance rather than just have it as a weekend gig-thing. So, if I don't have enough time for something I really believe in, I certainly don't have the time for something I'm dubious about.

"Convenience"
And, of course, They're holding this meeting on a Wednesday. While it's true that there are 3 people who can run the park, it still feels like an imposition to ask. But more importantly, I like going to burn club. Why would I want to give up Doing fire to Talk about fire? Seems counter-productive.

So, should this be taken as my suggestion to avoid this group? No. In the end of it all, I see one of two things happening. Either the forces that killed so many other fire guilds apart will do the same here. In which case, I will have wasted time and effort. Or something solid, factual and beneficial will happen. And if *I'm* part of it, people will probably look to me to make that happen. I've spend the time in research, I've attended quarterly 9am meetings on weekdays, I've distributed enough DVDs that my drive finally died on this very machine, I've talked city after city into using the NAFAA code so that it's easier to get permits in LA, possible to get them at all in Santa Monica, and easier to get them in Orange County. I have fought against the tides of bureaucratic red tape and the insipid fears of our community long enough. Time for other people to stand up. Maybe Ty and Rebecca will start showing up regularly at SAFFE meetings, maybe Fire Groove will get serious about fire safety, heck, maybe Josh will step up as a community leader, Who Knows? But the point is, it will be less likely for someone else to step up if I'm still active.

I'm stepping out of this guild in hopes that people will actually READ the NAFAA regs, even the annotated version. I'm hoping that other people will devote time and money to researching the deeper truths about fire performance. I'm hoping that in a large group, someone will grow a pair and bother to ask other people about the whole story instead of convenient little snippets. I'm hoping that the LA fire community won't continue to lean on me as the sole source of fire safety info and starts doing some of this work in an organized and distributed manner. And, of course, I'm hoping that they'll deliver this information to the NAFAA site for posing in the wiki. :)

So, If you've read this far, just sign your name at the top of your answer sheet and turn it in whistling. I thank you for putting up with my ramblings. Also, I might add that by getting this far, you have the makings for the kind of person I'm talking about here. Maybe you should join this guild just to help keep their facts straight for them. :) Don't worry, I don't have a problem with anyone else joining up.... ;)


[oh, and for the record, this definition:]
ego |ˈēgō|
noun ( pl. egos)
• Psychoanalysis: the part of the mind that mediates between the conscious and the unconscious and is responsible for reality testing and a sense of personal identity. Compare with id and superego .