For the Left: A Joke, An Open Letter, and a Warning.

A woman, a gay Jew, and an atheist walk into a bar. Progressives completely lose their shit.

That's the joke. Take a look near the bottom of that image; there's a word I want you to remember for later.

My dear Left,

You've gotten complacent. After W, you managed a groundswell that got a black man elected president, and despite identity politics telling you otherwise, the next 8 years you had the lead and took the establishment. It would seem that, after losing the House, Senate, and Presidency, we no longer have that establishment. But in the 8 years that we did, make no mistake: we were The Man, and so the Right went underground and became punk rock. They got to be the rebels. They got to be dissident and fun while we put on our best show of being adults.

Now Trump has the big chair and the Right's got the majority in everything else. We lost. The upside? Here's your excuse to be punk rock again. But I have a few requests this time around:

• Be mature about it. The link I posted above? Stop trying to disrupt, de-platform, or de-legitimize people that are more or less on your side but who have views that dissent slightly from yours. You can't be inclusive if you subject people to the idea of wrong-think. 
• Keep the violence to a minimum, please. Don't blow anything up. Stop setting things on fire. Starbucks donated to Hillary, there's no reason to break their windows. They gave you those nice "inclusivity cups" last year. Remember those? The green ones with all the little people on them? I know you saw them. You were gloating how they didn't have snowflakes or Santa Claus on them. 
• If you tell someone to check their privilege, make sure you're checking your own. No more lecturing McDonald's workers on the gender binary if you have a book deal with a major publishing house or other such nonsense. 
• Pick your targets better, and check your tactics. Stop being awful people just because you think someone's an awful person. If you want to claim the moral high ground, if you want to think you're the good guys, start bloody well acting like it. 

Next, a warning: That word up there I wanted you to pay attention to was Antifa. Antifa is the very definition of "We think we're the good guys." Antifa ostensibly means "Anti-Fascism", which on the whole sounds rather nice. Given Fascism's track record, who in their right mind wouldn't be against it? I mean... Nazis, right?

Wrong. Please, please, please, don't let Antifa speak for you. That guy who punched Richard Spencer? Antifa*. I see you all there, cheering the hero that punched the Nazi. Call Spencer a Nazi if you want to, it makes no difference to me, but anyone associated with Antifa is not a hero. Please don't make the mistake of thinking that just because you have a mutual enemy that you're friends. Antifa are the ones in black masks and hoodies that you see at otherwise peaceful protests smashing things and attacking people, which in turn puts the media attention on the rest of you, making you all look bad. They're the ones that will also attack you the moment you step out of line with their line of thinking.

I leave with a final thought: Trump has broken the Right, and the Sanders/Clinton Schism has broken the Left. All the rest of you, please pick up the pieces and make something new, something better with what's left over. Bring better ideas to the table. Bring more ideas to the table, and talk to each other. I don't want two sides dominating the elections again. There's no good reason for it anymore.

Good luck, Left. Do something productive with this time. 

-Salem


* Editor's note: there is an online source that doxed him  as Antifa, but the author preferred not to provide the link due to content of a questionable nature. "Let that lack of evidence be on my head," says Salem. 

An Open Letter to Rockstar Games

Dear Rockstar Games,

Some six years ago now, we parted ways on the Grand Theft Auto series. It broke my heart to do so, as I'd immensely enjoyed Vice City and San Andreas, but Grand Theft Auto IV was just so grim, annoying, and not fun that it put me off of sandbox crime games for a long time.

Don't get me wrong, it was a well-realized world with a lot to do and lots of depth to it. It's just that grim-faced Slavic protagonist and his annoying, omnipresent cousin, combined with the terrible vehicle handling, resulted in me not even completing the main story, let alone getting 100% like I did with Vice City and San Andreas. The fun characters and dark humour of those two games kept me coming back, and the tighter controls made driving more enjoyable.

In GTA IV, driving half an hour to a location in a vehicle that felt like it had a 500 pound cat on the hood... then failing that mission because of the poor controls... then having to drive half an hour back from the police station or hospital because there were no checkpoints... was just plain annoying. Making it to the final mission, and failing repeatedly because of terrible driving controls, was the last straw.



I even have the two expansions, The Lost and The Damned and The Ballad of Gay Tony, and I've not played more than 5 minutes of them because I can't bring myself to go back to the world of GTA IV. So I abstained from further GTA games.

Eventually, I found alternatives. Sleeping Dogs turned out to be really fantastic. Saints Row 2 was a dodgy port for PC, but still fun and had a great story, and it kept me coming back for 3 more installments in the series. I felt a great deal of vindication playing around in these sandbox worlds again and actually having the fun that I didn't have in GTA IV. Enough fun that when GTA V came out, I was smugly asking "Yeah but Saints Row IV is coming out. Who needs GTA?" while my PC brethren were waiting impatiently for the long-delayed PC port.

A month or so back, around Christmas, someone near and dear to me gifted me GTA V on Steam. It was on sale for 50% off, and I glanced at it, considered, and got a chill as I remembered that final GTA IV mission which, to this day, remains unfinished. When it showed up as a gift, I accepted it and installed it with a great deal of trepidation. The timing couldn't have been better, having recently rebuilt my computer with a new CPU, RAM, and motherboard, as well as a new video card that was barely a week installed. I started the game up, cranked up the settings, and ran the benchmarks, getting a solid 60 frames per second. I started playing the campaign and...

Okay, all right, it was fun. After a brief introduction that featured criminals yelling at each other and shooting at cops, I was greeted by characters that had depth, flaws, issues, and a sense of humour. I got a storyline that was actually really good, gripping, and fun. And unlike GTA IV, the entire world seems to radiate a sense of warmth and fun that I dearly missed from titles like Vice City and San Andreas. So that problem's solved. I finished the campaign the other night, doing most of the side missions, and I can say I'm satisfied.

Trevor Phillips, everybody. The most entertaining sociopath in the GTA series so far.

But you're not off the hook, Rockstar. We still have to talk about something. Maybe I've been spoiled by other games, but why are your controls so terrible?

I'm using a gamepad, which is what your game was designed around. Why do you click the left stick to "stealth walk" when most games use that to run? Why do I press A to jog and tap A repeatedly to sprint, when most games have you click the left stick? Why am I pressing X to jump when A has been the standard for jump since Super Mario Bros? Why do your characters drunkenly wobble around the screen when Saints Row has them leaping and sprinting effortlessly? Why do they swing blindly when attacking when Sleeping Dogs has an entirely fleshed out hand-to-hand combat system based around real-world martial arts?

It's the little things..

Truly, my only complaint about GTA V is the on-foot controls. They're terrible, atrocious, and they've not only been that way since GTA III but they've progressively gotten worse. How long are we going to let you get away with this, Rockstar? You can do better than this.

Please, fix this. If your next game controls better on-foot, I'll consider putting in a pre-order. Until then, Rockstar...

Ta,
Salem.

About Recent Events

I have, in general, kept quiet about the whole Charleston, SC shooting because

1. my regular readers doubtless know my feelings on the matter anyway, and 
2. it's really tiring having to make the some arguments that fall on the same deaf ears.

I have however felt the need to say something to counter, or at least address, all the invective being thrown at gun owners. This manifested in a series of  Facebook posts yesterday that were complete nothing statements like "As a responsible gun owner, I feel it's my duty to inform everyone in Charleston that I like pie."  And while that was good for laughs on Der Lederhosen, it struck me at being insufficient for this blog. 

Then I came across a very interesting article (courtesy of Sebastian), and I knew what I wanted to say. 

Dear Gun Control Adherent or Undecided Reader:

I, like you, was shocked and horrified about what happened in Charleston last week. Two days after that, though, something else occurred which also shocked and horrified me;

At least three killed in Austria after man drives into crowd before 'stabbing passers-by' in Graz

A seven-year-old boy is reportedly among the three people killed in Austria by a man who ploughed his car into crowds in the country’s second-largest city and then reportedly started stabbing people.

A witness told the Wiener Zeitung newspaper that dead bodies were left lying face down in the road after the vehicle sped through streets near the the historical Herrengasse in Graz.

The killing only stopped when the driver parked his battered car outside a police station.

More than 30 pedestrians, including three children, were hurt at several locations during the rampage and 10 victims were in hospital with serious injuries. One patient was in a critical condition on Saturday afternoon.

Now, I am certain we can all agree that this is a terrible tragedy. 

However, I put it to you: If, after reading this, you do not feel that Austria needs to immediately implement stronger, "sensible" car control legislation in order to prevent tragedies like this from happening again, then I wish to congratulate you:

You are now thinking like a gun owner.

After all, you didn't get in a car and run into 30 people, killing 3 and seriously injuring 10. So why should the government restrict your car-driving rights? Why should the kind of car you own be regulated simply because some vicious jerk decided he wanted to hurt a lot of people?

This tragedy was performed with an SUV, but no one is seriously considering banning, restricting, or regulating SUVs. When people are killed by arson, no one seriously considers banning, restricting, or regulating matches and gasoline. So why, then, should we law-abiding and responsible gun owners be penalized when one jerk decides to shoot people?

If, however, you are now thinking "Hmm, yes, more car regulation would be a good idea," I would like for you to carefully consider the following questions:

• Are you willing to give up your car in the same way you are asking gun owners to give up their firearms? After all, it could be reasonably asked that who, in an urban area, needs a private vehicle? Regulated public transport or specially trained and vetted taxi operators would suffice.
• Are you willing to accept licensing and restriction upon internet access and electronic devices simply because they might be used in terrorism, or in cyberstalking, or in child pornography?
• At what point are you willing to say "Enough is enough! These are my rights and I will not tolerate more encroachment upon them. I have committed no crime; I will not tolerate being punished for the criminal acts of others" ?

You need to know the answers to these questions, because eventually the attitude of "Pass more laws to prevent human behavior" will result in you losing something which is important to you. And when that happens, dear reader, you will discover how little-c conservative you are regarding this change. 

To which I will say: Welcome to our party. 

My Taurus Experience

(Remember Monday, when I said I had a post that became a letter to a corporation? This is the result of that letter. Never let anyone tell you that blogging is dead.)


I am going to tell you about a negative experience I had in the Taurus booth at the NRA Annual Meeting in Nashville, and then I am going to tell you how that experience was turned into a positive one by Timothy Brandt, the Director of Marketing for Taurus USA.

In order to tell you what happened at NRAAM, I am going to share (with his permission) the email conversation I had with Mr. Brandt.

Dear Taurus USA,

I would like to bring to your attention a stunning display of unprofessionalism by one of your sales reps during the NRA Annual Meeting in Nashville. So stunning, in fact, that a blogger who was contemplating purchasing a Taurus PT-22 has instead decided to spend $100 more and buy a Beretta Bobcat instead.

The incident happened on Friday, the first real day of the convention, and I was hanging out with my fellow bloggers Oddball, The_Jack, and Awelowynt when one of us decided to check out the your booth.

I would like to state now, for the record, that both Oddball and I were wearing versions of "SERIOUS GUNBLOGGER" t-shirts. This was his, only in black:

And this was mine: 

Add that to the fact that all four of us were wearing Media Badges, and it should have been pretty obvious that: 

1. We were press.
2. We were bloggers.
3. We liked guns.

In short, it should have been patently obvious that we were on the same side as the vendors on the convention floor. Please keep this in mind, as it will become relevant soon enough.

As I was saying, the four of us had walked up to the Taurus booth and were looking at its wares when a Taurus employee (who looked a surprising amount like Titus Welliver) walked up to us. I know he was part of the Taurus delegation because 1) he was wearing a sports coat, and no one on the convention floor wears business clothes unless they are working a booth, and 2) his vendor tag had "Taurus USA" on it.

The sales rep's name was Kim Kyle. I'm going to say his name as many times as possible, so that it makes as much of an impression in your mind as his actions did in ours. [Author's note: at the request of Taurus USA, I have reduced the number of times I mention Kim Kyle by name. All further references will be replaced with [Sales Rep] to indicate where his name was in the original letter.]

[Sales Rep] walked up to me and looked right at my shirt, tilting his head to read what it says because my badge -- my MEDIA BADGE, mind you -- is in the way. I obligingly lifted the badge up so he could have an unobstructed view. 

When he got to the bottom of the shirt, which has my blog URL listed on it, he murmured "Lurking Rhythmically?"  I helpfully explained that "Yeah, it's a bit of a private joke." At that point [Sales Rep] then looked at me and, in a sneering tone, said"Well, it should have stayed private."

And that, as the saying goes, is where things took a turn. Taurus USA, [Sales Rep] truly covered himself in glory that day, for not only did he start a conversation by insulting someone with a media badge, he then continued to dig a deeper hole by launching into a tirade about bloggers in general and how awful and stupid we are. 

I cannot recall exactly what he said then as I write this article now, because I was getting hot under the collar at the time and anger tends to cloud my memory. Therefore I will postulate two approximations of what he said, with the explicit understanding that what I am saying here is not a direct quote. 

Conversation approximation #1: "This one time I really needed to make myself vomit, so I went online and read what bloggers said about guns."

Conversation approximation #2: "There was this one time I was really sick, I mean puking my guts out, and that still pales in comparison to how I sick to my stomach I felt when I read a gun blog."

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is how [Sales Rep] introduced himself to four gunbloggers with media passes. Remember, as a sales rep, he needs to make people like him so that they will buy his client's product. In other words, his entire job hinges on making a good impression, and his disdain for online media was such that he deliberately made a bad impression not just for himself, but for Taurus USA as well. After all, he was in the Taurus booth and wearing a Taurus badge.

I happen to get upset easily, and so when [Sales Rep] started spewing his bile, I decided I had better things to do than listen to him and so I wandered off to take a look at the Curve. However, another of my blogger friends stuck around to hear him out; you can read Oddball's side of the story here but I'm going to quote him directly:

He [Kim Kyle] almost instantly started on a 5-10 minute rant about how evil and mean gun bloggers were, and how we only spew lies. I tried to give him a couple outs, since I know that there are many out there that bash Taurus because that’s what all the cool kids do, and not because they’ve had bad experiences/done research/etc. They’re not the only company that has that issue. Some deserve it, and some don’t, and I have been giving them the benefit of the doubt. He failed to act like I might be different. Thanks to Taurus’ sales rep, I have learned that they do not wish to have the benefit of the doubt, nor would they like my good will, business, or recommendations to others.

Oh, and I very much was considering buying one of their products in the near future (the PT-22), but it looks like I will be spending about $100 more on a Beretta Bobcat instead because I’m not a fan of giving money to companies whose representative talk shit about me to my face. I will also no longer even consider telling people to consider buying a Taurus… something that I’m asked on a regular basis.

Later the four of us reconvened on the far side of the booth (well away from [Sales Rep]), and we were all shaking our heads and going "Can you believe that guy? Jeez." Right before we left, I asked my friends if anyone had gotten his card, and they all said no. I decided I would go back and ask him for his card.

Why did I ask him for his card?  A few reasons. First, I wanted his name in writing for accountability, purposes. Second, I though that perhaps he might have realized he'd made a mistake (especially since I was asking for his card) and possibly apologize. I was, in fact, giving him a second chance to make a first impression. 

"No, I don't have a business card," said [Sales Rep], "but can I have yours?"

Pardon me while I interrupt my own letter here, but I do not for one second believe that someone who works in sales doesn't have business cards with him while he's working one of the biggest industry conventions of the year. I just don't, full stop. I think he simply didn't want to give one of his cards away to someone he regarded as a dumb blogger.

The only other option here is that he's so incompetent that he doesn't actually have business cards with him for one of the biggest industry conventions of the year, and if he were truly that incompetent he wouldn't be working the booth at all.

Of course, his behavior has basically demonstrated he makes poor interpersonal decisions anyway, so perhaps he truly is that incompetent. 

"Can I have your card?" he asked, and I said "Oh, you wouldn't want mine. I'm a blogger." I turned and walked away, and again [Sales Rep] made no move to apologize.


Ladies and gentlemen of Taurus USA, some of you may be wondering, "Are hurt feelings truly worth someone losing their job?"  And that's a valid question. It's a decision I grappled with over the following days. 

What it ultimately came down to were these conclusions:

1. Jobs are tight, and [Sales Rep] is a jerk and possibly incompetent. He's taking a job away from someone who deserves it more. 
2. Taurus USA's public image is taking a beating lately, what with the poor reception of the Curve and its partial recall, and your Brazil-based parent company recalling all 98,000 pistols issued to the state police because their pistols discharged after being shaken, even with the safety on. And then there are the multiple videos showing various Taurus pistols going full-auto. 
3. What I feel Taurus really needs to do to fix both #1 and #2 above is to jettison the incompetent people in order to get the company back on track, because right now I'd rather own a Hi-Point than a Taurus. 
4. As far as I'm concerned, this is not "My feelings are hurt and I must get revenge". Rather. this is "I detect a definite pattern within Taurus' corporate culture, and the only way it will likely get fixed is by hitting the company in the bottom line."
5. Clearly I'm not the only one who feels this strongly, as Oddball (who doesn't blog very often) was moved enough to complain about it. And then Miguel of gunfreezone.net responded by saying that the Latino business model is "Shut up and buy it as is."

In conclusion, ladies and gentlemen of Taurus USA, you have a PR problem when the actions of one of your employees ([Sales Rep]) spurs the creation of two blog posts, the promise of a third, and this letter. I was going to turn it into blog post, but I was persuaded by Oleg Volk to send it to you first so that you could take appropriate action. 

I look forward to hearing from you in this matter, and am more than happy to answer any questions about what happened that day. 

Sincerely, 

Erin Palette

Gun Blogger and Product Reviewer 

Mr. Brandt immediately replied with the following:

Good Morning Erin,

First and foremost, I want to apologize for the experience you had in our booth in Nashville. I appreciate you sending this note our way, and wanted to respond and let you know that we have received it, and are taking it very seriously. I have plenty more on this topic, but would like to speak to you in person.

On that front, I am tied up most of today, unless you are free in the next hour or so. I do have some time tomorrow morning--and into the early afternoon. Is there a chance your schedule allows a conversation during this timeframe? If not, I have a pretty flexible schedule next week, and want to make it a priority to speak with you on this matter.

Please know that your experience was outside (an understatement) the norm of what we strive to deliver at our shows, and in general day-to-day contact with those interested in our brand and products. There is no excuse for the behavior exhibited, and it is being addressed immediately. We hold our employees and representatives of our company to very high standards, and clearly they were not met here. I look forward to providing more insight on this topic, and a few others you mention in your email, but think it is best to discuss when we're able to set up a time for a call.

Please let me know when you're available to discuss. I look forward to speaking with you soon.

Tim

Tim Brandt
Director of Marketing
Taurus Holdings, Inc.

The "tomorrow morning" Mr. Brandt mentioned was today (Friday), and I had a nice long conversation (more than 30 minutes) with him. During that conversation he again apologized for the conduct of Kim Kyle and reassured me that my concerns did not fall upon deaf ears. He also mentioned the following, which I shall bullet point so that they do not get lost in the text:

• He acknowledged that the culture within Taurus needs to change, and that he and others in management had been brought in to effect that change. 
• He acknowledged that change does not come overnight, but things are changing, and for the better. 
• He thanked me for bringing all of these points to his attention -- not just the actions of Kim Kyle, but Taurus' public image in the eyes of the general public -- and reassured me that they were being addressed. 
• He specifically addressed Miguel's point and mentioned that Taurus USA is in the process of becoming more than a sales and advertising branch of its parent company. Not only is it building research and manufacturing capabilities in its own right, it is also developing new products specifically for American customers that will be manufactured within the United States.
• He encouraged gun owners to give Taurus guns a chance, as (again) the company is working hard to correct the problems I mentioned in the video links above. 

Overall I would rate this as very good customer service by Mr. Brandt on behalf of Taurus USA. It heartens me to know that a corporation cares about what bloggers think, and I appreciate that he went out of his way to turn a negative experience into a positive one. I also appreciate the fact that instead of closing ranks the way a lot of companies do, Mr. Brandt acknowledged that there was room for improvement and he outlined ways that Taurus was looking to improve.

Mr. Brandt's remarks might not change Oddball's mind; that's up to him to decide. Speaking for myself, however, I will say that the next time I am looking to buy a gun, I will not dismiss a Taurus.

Because It Amuses Me

There's no A Funny Thing Happened On the Way to the Game Store from Von this week; he's currently out of a job and finding gainful employment is more important than writing for my nerd blog.

Speaking of writing for my blog, last week I received quite the interesting email on the very topic of being a guest writer.  I responded, because it amused me so to do, and because I don't like leaving some of my better material unpublished I figure I ought to post it here where it can be admired.

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 15:47:10 +0800
Subject: Guest Blogging Inquiry
From: Nicole Pretty
To: erin.palette@gmail.com

Hi Palette!

I wanted to take the opportunity and introduce myself! My name is Nicole and I work with eMerchantBroker.com, a high risk merchant processing provider. We're looking at the opportunity to write an article as a guest post on http://lurkingrhythmically.blogspot.com/.

Our company's co-founder "Blair Thomas" would be the one providing the article. He'9s a self-made entrepreneur, has blogged on hundreds of sites, has exhibited at various industry conferences in the US and he has 10+ years in the electronic payments industry managing several successful businesses, agent offices and registered ISO's.

The article we're thinking about writing would focus on the Firearms Industry and tailored to your site. However if you would like Blair to take a different approach, we're open to hearing any other related suggestions you know would better suit your site's audience.

As an additional benefit for publishing Blair's article, we will share the published article to our social media networks :) and also give you the opportunity to post a related article onto our blog as well.

I appreciate your time and consideration and look forward to hearing from you soon!

Best Regards,

Nicole Lopez
Blog Marketer
eMerchantBroker.com

Now this is fairly obviously spam, and I wasn't sure if I'd get a response, so I kept mine terse so that I wouldn't waste any effort. (Also, I was a bit miffed I was referred to simply as "Palette" and not "Erin" or even "Ms. Palette".)  But still, I decided to take a chance. You don't ask, you don't get, am I right?

Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 22:12:07 -0400
Subject: Re: Guest Blogging Inquiry
From: Erin Palette 
To: Nicole Pretty 

How much?

-- Erin Palette

"Many people hear voices when no-one is there. Some of them are called mad and are shut up in rooms where they stare at the walls all day. Others are called writers and they do pretty much the same thing." -- Margaret Chittenden, writer

And then -- oh joy! Oh frabjous day! -- I actually received a response.

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 14:04:54 +0800
Subject: Re: Guest Blogging Inquiry
From: Nicole Pretty To: Erin Palette

Hi Erin, 

Thank you for your prompt response.

I just want to clarify - Do you require payment for posting articles on your site as a guest blogger? 

We were thinking of mutually helping each other draw visitors to our sites. If you could allow to us post articles on your site that is relevant to your niche, we'll also promote your site on our social media accounts and if you are interested, we'll also let you post articles on our blogs. 

Let me know if this is something you'd be interested in. 

Thanks, Nicole

Well then! Now that I knew there was a human being behind this who actually had to read whatever I say, I decided to have some fun. I did some brief Googling of of this "Blair Thomas" -- does Nicole's use of quotation marks strike anyone as being suspicious -- and I determined that this bank does exist, and it services  "questionable" industries like adult entertainment, bad credit, credit repair, collection agencies, electronic cigarettes (why? I dunno)  and online firearm sales.

Because we all know that tons of gun dealers and FFLs read my site, right?

The other thing I determined is that "Blair Thomas" writes some of the most boring articles on the planet, typically about banking or finance or retirement. Just the kind of thing that would fit right in at Lurking Rhythmically, eh?

So here's what I wrote back, because fuck it.

Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 15:20:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Guest Blogging Inquiry
From: Erin Palette
To: Nicole Pretty

Dear Nicole,

>I just want to clarify - Do you require payment for >posting articles on your site as a guest blogger?

Yes, I do.

You see, your company's co-founder, "Blair Thomas", clearly didn't get where he was by doing things for free. He's a successful businessman, after all. And so I ask myself, "Why does this person want to write an article for my blog that has nothing to do with merchant banking?"

And then, as you so handily said,

>We were thinking of mutually helping each other draw >visitors to our sites.

That's called "advertising", Nicole. You are a business; I am a hobby blogger and a struggling writer. What you are attempting to do is buy advertising space on my blog without paying for it. While this makes perfect sense for someone like "Blair Thomas" to do -- after all, one
doesn't become rich and successful by paying for things when one can get them for free -- it also makes the same amount of sense for me to require payment for you to use my blog as an advertising venue. Come on, you certainly have the money for it; after all, I'm probably less expensive than some ad campaigns you've run.

>If you could allow to us post articles on your site
>that is relevant to your niche, we'll also promote your
>site on our social media accounts and if you are
>interested, we'll also let you post articles on our >blogs.

Ah, so now we're at articles, plural. Previously it was just one article, and now you want to do several. This only lends credence to my assertion that you want to use my blog for advertising.

>Let me know if this is something you'd be interested in.

Look, I'm a capitalist. I am all about the exchange of money for goods and services. If you good folks want to use my blog as an advertising platform -- and clearly you do, because we're having this conversation instead of you just deleting my email that asked "How much?" -- then I am fine with that.

Provided, of course, that you pay me.

Why should you pay me? Because clearly I have something that you want. If I give you that thing for free, then not only do you get what you want at my expense, but I've now told you that my work -- and believe me, I've worked hard over the past 7 years to make my blog worth noticing -- is essentially worthless, as it can be bought with vague promises of traffic being sent my way.

To quote the 13th Ferengi Rule of Acquisition: Anything worth doing is worth doing for money.

But perhaps I am being unfair. Perhaps "Blair Thomas" is a friendly sort of fellow who enjoys writing guest articles for the sheer joy of it. If that is the case, then I choose to exercise the "take a different approach" option you mentioned I had in your first email. Any of these topics will do:

- Blair's thoughts on Peter Capaldi as the 12th Doctor, and what that means for the series vis-a-vis its return to the "cranky old man" doctor of the 1960s versus the "pretty boy eye candy" of recent years.
- What he thinks about the upcoming 5th Edition Dungeons & Dragons, and which edition is his favorite. (Note: Pathfinder is also an acceptable edition.)
- Which would win in a dogfight: a Viper Mk.VII from Battlestar Galactica, or an SA-23E Starfury from Babylon 5.
- Which My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic pony is the best pony, and why.

If "Blair Thomas" wishes to write an article on any of these subjects, he may do so for free. If he does not approve any of those topics, then it's going to cost you to advertise on my blog.

I have a Google pagerank of 4 out of 10 according to checkpagerank.net, and from my stats page you can see that I'm currently averaging about 7,650 unique visits per month.

Doing some quick and dirty math, that brings me to a figure of about $250 per blog post. If you'd like to buy a multi-post subscription we can certainly haggle some and probably get you a bulk discount.

Here are the rules:

- I'm not going to publish guest posts back-to-back. The most you'll get is once a month.
- No more than two links to whatever you're selling per post.
- I reserve the right to edit those posts for grammar and content.
- I reserve the right not to post the article if subject is not relevant or the writing is too poor to salvage.
- I reserve the right to decide when the guest post airs.

If these terms are acceptable to you, then we can do business. If not, we can haggle. But you're not getting free advertising from me.

Sincerely,

-- Erin Palette

Oddly, I haven't received a response back.  Gosh, I wonder why?

Perhaps next time I should just include a link to this internet classic. 

So, that happened.

An open letter to a certain blogger, who shall remain nameless:

You know, I thought we were friends. And, as friends, I thought that meant we could disagree on certain things without taking it personally.

Apparently I was wrong, as you have currently written not one but four screeds on your blog, each one more frothingly upset than the last, where you manage to insult me, my hobby, my blog, and my co-writers, using such words as "bigotry" and "bullshit" and "masturbatory".  What is worse, you also withdrew your written statement of support for my coming out -- which, to be fair, is not a big deal in and of itself, but the fact that it happened at the same time you wrote these angry blogs is pretty darn telling.

And all of this because I disagreed with you. Wow. Just wow, dude.  That really hurts.

I'm not sure what hurts me more:  That you value our friendship so little that you're willing to throw it away over a disagreement as trivial as this; or that you talk trash about me and mine in an attempt to get back at me; or that you'd rather badmouth me behind my back than talk to me, in person, like an adult.

I don't think you truly understand how much this has hurt me, that you would throw our friendship away over what amounts to a simple "Your Thing X sucks. My Thing Y is better."   The distress you've caused me has basically ruined my entire day, as I've tried to figure out why you'd do this to me.

You have a track record of letting your mouth and your temper get you into trouble. I know all too well that there are bloggers you will have no dealings with because, in one way or another, they offended you. When this happened I would give you my advice and defend you to others.  I have defended you a lot over the years, both because I knew you and your intentions to be good, and because I give my friends the benefit of the doubt.  I feel hurt, I feel sick, I feel betrayed that you could not extend this simple courtesy to me as well.

So be it. It is with heavy heart that I accept your un-friending. While I would like to keep our friendship, I see that this is a pattern with you and that I am not immune from your rage, your temper, your verbal abuse. I respect myself too much to be subject to this kind of thing, especially when I do not deserve a single drop of it.

Goodbye.


PS:  You will note that I have not mentioned your name. I do not intend to mention it to anyone who asks. However, if you should decide to comment here, please note that you are outing yourself in so doing, and therefore opening yourself up for further criticism.  Were I you, I would simply let the matter drop.

An open letter to OWS and MoveOn.org

Warning: politics ahead. Feel free to tab out if you come here for the lulz, ponies, and weirdness; it certainly won't hurt my feelings.


Dear Occupy Wall Streeters and MoveOn.org:

I applaud you for hauling out the Constitution and maintaining that it is your First Amendment right to gather and protest. Bravo. This proves to me that you've read the damn thing.

Now kindly please stop trying to infringe, restrict, and redefine my Second Amendment rights. No, don't try to tell me that it's a matter of interpretation or that it only applies to muskets or government agencies or whatever, because if you do that then I will say that the First Amendment only applies to, say, newspapers or protesters with permits.

You've read the Bill of Rights. You know what it says. What part of "Shall not be infringed" was unclear?

So tell you what, I'll make you an offer: You stop trying to take away my ability to defend myself from predators, and not only will I support the OWS movement, I'll go up there and STAND GUARD while you sleep. Because, y'know, I'll be armed.

Do we have a deal?


Love,
Erin Palette

An open letter to CSI: Crime Scene Investigation

Dear CSI,

It's not me, it's you. You just aren't the same show any more.

From the moment I caught your first episode on a SPIKE TV marathon and I was instantly hooked. I would race home from work and watch 2-3 hours of you while I ate dinner and decompressed. I got caught up with 4 seasons of your show in a period of a few months, and then I watched your new episodes every Thursday.

But you changed. My first indication that you were moving on should have been when you took Greg out of the lab and put him in the field, but I liked the tow-headed little rascal and wanted to see him do well. I started to look askance at our relationship when George Eads was almost kicked out due to contract negotiations, because Nick Stokes is my boy, yo. And that's when things got abusive.

You put Catherine through such an emotional wringer that I almost wanted her to leave because every episode that focused on her was angst-ridden. You killed Warrick, who I admit was never my favorite character, but I liked the way he interacted with Nick and Grissom. You got rid of Sara -- a move of which I approved, thank you very much -- but then, in defiance of all logic and continuity, you brought her back.  Meanwhile, you allowed Grissom to leave. I understand that the actor wanted out and you didn't have much control over that, but Grissom was very much the soul of the show and when he went, the show stopped being an ensemble techno-mystery and became...

Well, it became lame, if not flat-out awful. I mean, just look at the vast majority of last season's episodes and you'll see what I mean. A shark, in a pool, in Vegas? Oh, a pool shark, how droll.

But I digress. I liked Gil's replacement, Ray Langston, quite a bit. Laurence Fishburne is an excellent actor, and he's married to Gina Torres, so that makes him a Browncoat as far as I'm concerned. I even enjoyed the arc with his nemesis, Nate Haskell. It's just that, well, sometime in the past few seasons the show stopped being about an ensemble and focused on Langston. I realize he is a big name actor, and you wanted to get the most out of what is probably an enormous salary, but he became the star of the show. Look, there is a reason I don't watch CSI: Miami or CSI: New York, and that reason is A) I don't want to watch a star vehicle (even though I have much love and respect for Gary Sinise as a person and as an actor), and B) I cannot stand David Caruso and I wish he'd die of cancer of the aids of the leukemia of the eye.

But you know what the final nail in the coffin of our relationship was? It was when you made that execrable David Hodges  into a full cast member. I cannot explain how much I hate that smarmy little toad of a man.

Still, I couldn't quite break away. There were characters I still cared about, and plotlines I wanted to follow. But at the end of last season, you gave me a perfect exit point when you wrapped up the Haskell/Langston arc while, at the same time, not ending on a cliffhanger. Add to that the fact that Fishburne wanted to leave the show, and that you were going to replace him with Ted Danson -- TED DANSON, for crissakes -- and my breakup with you could not be more perfect than if I had received an engraved invitation cordially inviting me to tell you to shove it.

I should have left long ago, when William Peterson left. I see that now. The weakness was mine. But I'm stronger now, and I need to end this. So, come next fall, I will no longer be watching you, CSI: Crime Scene Investigation, on Thursday nights. I do sincerely wish you continued luck and happiness as we go our separate ways.

Although, if I may: get rid of that damned Sara Sidle. That little weasel-mouth smirk of hers disgusts me about as much as Hodges' ass-kissing.

Love and kisses,
Erin Palette

An Open Letter to Blogger

Dear Blogger,

Thank you so much for your 24+ hours of downtime that culminated in the loss of Wednesday's post. I suppose I should be glad that it was only a toss-off Wednesday Night Wackiness post that was eaten and not something more important. However, I am still not convinced that you've stop finished shitting yourself, or that you haven't secretly eaten something else of mine.

I suppose I should thank you for this reminder that I need to make backups of the posts I prize most. Rest assured, I plan to get on that this weekend.

I realize you are a free service and that I get what I pay for, but you need to realize that people who use Blogger are essentially free advertising for the Google Internet Mega-Conglomerate. Piss off enough people with things like this, and they will stop using you, and with that stoppage comes the loss of your tasty, tasty ad revenue.

In short: Cross me again and I will cut you, bitch.

Kisses,
Erin Palette

Hello, DC Comics...

Look at your Superman, then back to Thor. Now back to Superman. Now back to Thor. Sadly, Superman isn't Thor, but if you took a lesson from Marvel and gave him interesting villains, he could do as well as Thor.

Look down. Back up. Where are you? You're at a hugely successful movie premiere with the man your Superman could be if you'd only give him good writers.

What's in your hand? Back at Thor, he has it. It's a movie with drama and pathos. Look again. The movie is now worth its weight in gold!

Anything is possible when your Superman is actually super and not an emo boy fighting a real estate plot.

I'm beating a dead horse.

(Link) View more Old Spice Sound Clips and Bruce Campbell Sound Clips

An Open Letter to Trollsmyth

Posted here because my reply to his post was too long for his comments section.

Trollsmyth,

Yours is a position I have heard several times before, and each time it leaves me shaking my head. In this reply I am going to detail exactly what is wrong with this system, and why it is good to have to at least SOME rules about social interaction.

First I shall establish a few facts for those who are reading. Prior to writing this, I talked to Trollsmyth over IM and asked him the following questions:

Erin: I believe your thesis to be "We do not need rules for social interaction because that is what talking in character, i.e. role-playing, is for."

Trollsmyth: Yep. For certain values of "we."

Erin: How would you define "we", then?

Trollsmyth: People who want a game about social interaction.

Sir, your thesis is flawed. Allow me to point out these flaws to you. 

Your System is Open to Abuse 

Let us say that I am an unethical type of gamer – perhaps not a cheater as such, but one who is willing to exploit gray areas in order to have a more powerful character – and I am playing in a game such as this. My immediate thought will be "Since social actions will be carried out through role-play alone, and without consultation of stats or rules, Charisma will become my dump stat because I won't need to roll it ever and I can count on my natural quick wits and ability to improvise to keep me afloat. Meanwhile, all the points which would have gone into social skills can now go straight into combat abilities, which I will be rolling quite frequently."

Congratulations, you (the DM) have just made your problem worse. Would you care to do the same for mental skills and have puzzles etc. be handled with player brains instead of character abilities? Wonderful! Now I can dump all that as well and become even more of an unbalanced twink. And when you call me on it, I will argue with you that I am just playing the game the way you laid it out, where (obviously) the only mechanics which matter are those for combat, and everything else is player ability.

Good luck getting the genie back into that particular bottle. Even if you win that argument, it's a fair bet that the rest of that game session is a total loss. 

Your System is Not Fair to the Players

Conversely, sometimes I want to play someone who is far more skilled than I am. What if I, the player, have no social skills whatsoever, but I still want to play a smooth-talking seducer or a quick-witted scoundrel? Well then I am screwed, because it doesn't matter what my Charisma score is, because you won't let me roll it (no rules for interaction, remember?) and I am forced to embarrass myself in front of friends as I fumble an attempt to be suave.

The same holds true for mental abilities. Too bad for the player who wants to play a genius if he's not one himself. Again, he is unfairly penalized for wanting a character who is greater than himself, and once again the attitude that "Only combat stats are important because they are the only ones which have rules attached to them" reigns. If I were this player, having made a social or brainy character only to be effectively told that it didn't matter what my PC's Intelligence or Charisma was, I would loudly complain that I had been screwed and I would quit your game immediately.

Your System is Prejudiced

Do you require your players to actually swing swords to determine if their characters hit in combat? Do you require them to perform acts of dexterity to adjudicate success with lock-picking? No? Then why do you require actual performance of actual social abilities? Especially since, as I have mentioned earlier, not everyone is comfortable talking in character? Are they somehow less deserving of a game they can enjoy? Are they simply not welcome at your table? Or are they forever doomed to be the big stupid beatsticks and meatshields of the party?

In Conclusion

Unless you are gaming with a group of theater majors or other actors, odds are excellent you will have at least one player with sub-optimal social and communication skills. You state that "Festooning [social interaction] with mechanics undercuts [the game]. The players never really care about the in-game reality, because they're too busy dealing with mechanical bits that have been bolted on top of them," but in my experience, mechanics are sometimes the only way to make sure that some players are given a fair chance to shine. The shy girl who wants to play a social butterfly and be popular for a few hours; the slow-thinking guy who wants to pretend that he is brilliant and on top of every thing; these people are disenfranchised with your system, and worse, those players who are smart and quick-witted and smooth-tongued are probably going to run roughshod all over them.

I am not advocating a bloated rules system to be tacked onto social interaction. But I very, VERY strongly feel there should be at least some rules, because your system as stated is not fun for a significant chunk of the gaming population. Role-playing is supposed to be inclusive, and your approach is exclusionary.

Your post is titled "Support, not Replacing." In that vein I urge you thusly: support your players, or you will certainly be replacing them.

Sincerely,
Erin Palette

Cranky Palette is Cranky

To whom it may concern:


1) Requiem for a Dream is an awesome piece of music. Please, for the love of God, stop hitching it to every banal piece of Hollywood shit in existence (I'm looking directly at you, America's Got Talent).

2) 420 stainless steel is complete and utter shit and suitable only for dinnerware and pocketknives. If the knife catalog only says "stainless steel" then I guarantee you it's 420-440 because if it was anything better, they would say so in the ad copy. For more information about what steels you should choose, go here.

3) There is a special circle of Hell reserved for people who replace C's with K's and I's with Y's, and vice-versa. If you have named yourself Kandi Magyk, I will bludgeon you with the collected works of the Brontë sisters until you learn that there is a difference between English adapting to changing times and being lazy for the sake of sensationalism.


Kisses,

Palette

Erin to Sortelli: I WIN

I've said before that I am prescient (though really, it's more a case of noting patterns and deducing their conclusions), but never before have I been right about something twice.

I am sharp. Sharp as a goddamn stiletto.

For those who followed the link, you will see I posited that A) Josh Sortelli had abandoned Elf Only Inn, and that B) it would be at least 2008 before he updated it again. I was right on both counts. However, as luck would have it, I wasn't precisely correct. But pray, read on and let me explain and I'll spin you a tale of woe.

Some of you may be wondering, "But Palette! You swore you were done reading EOI! How would you know any of this if you had ceased to give a damn?" More on that later, I promise.

A chronology:

May 25, 2007: Josh Sortelli announces he is having an awesome Memorial Day and will be back Wednesday. Most readers believe this to mean May 30, 2007.


June 5: Canny reader Erin Palette realizes that Sortelli never specified which Wednesday, or indeed which year. She promptly throws a shit-fit.


June 18: Sortelli returns to EOI. There may or may not have been an apology regarding his absence. Strip appears in color for the first time since 2004. Ironically, June 18 is a Monday and not a Wednesday.


August 1 (yes, you read that correctly): First EOI update since 6/18/07. Strip is no longer in color, so that's no excuse for its lateness.


August 27 - September 25: EOI updates intermittently five times, then stops. There may or may not have been an announcement about it; I'm betting on "not".


March 16, 2008: Roughly 7 months after abandoning it, Sortelli returns to EOI. My first set of predictions is proven correct. (This isn't a Wednesday, either.)


March 24: Color returns. Whee.


March 31: Last color strip. Two in a row!


April 7 - April 14: Two more strips before...


May 5, 2008: Another abandonment without notice. I am proven correct yet again. What makes this last bit so delicious is that in his final comic, Sortelli pokes fun at my blog by having a character state that another character's blog "has the worst name of all blogs on the internet. Even worse than Bloviating Rhyhtmically [sic] ..."


July 10: A faithful reader (whose name is forgotten, sadly) informs me that my blog was referenced in the 5/5/08 EOI strip. I read it, chuckle to myself, and write the following message to Mr. Sortelli via his forum:

Well played, Sortelli. Well played indeed.

"Who is this stylish person that is addressing me thus," I hear you ask. Well, I am Erin Palette, the author of the blog Bloviating Rhythththtth Lurking Rythmically.

Let me say two things, right off the bat:
1. I'm not offended
2. I'm glad you're updating again

With that out of the way, let's get down to business. To whit: how should I interpret the second to last panel of your 5/5/08 comic?

You see, I noticed with my keen writer-ly powers that while you poked fun at the name of my blog, you didn't make fun of the contents therein, or even its author. So, in a display of rare discretion and logic, I figured I'd ask you for clarification of intent before I responded.

If you simply needed to make fun of a blog name and mine came up, fair enough. I'll be happy to exchange internet slaps with you and call it done. However, there is every possibility that you don't like me, in which case I'd appreciate it if you'd tell me straight up and we can begin a proper internet feud.

Or, hell, we can FAKE an internet feud. Might be good for readership on both sides.

Finally, there is the statistically unlikely yet still slightly plausible chance that you do actually read and enjoy my blog, and this was a kind of left-handed shoutout. If that's the case, I don't want to respond insultingly to a fan over a misunderstanding.

In conclusion, Mr Sortelli, please contact me at your earliest convenience so that I can reply accordingly. My steam-powered custard pie launchers are standing by, and only await the alert codes.

Bloviatingly yours,

Erin Palette

Naturally, I receive no reply to this.


November 10: Forum declared "On Hiatus" by moderator K-Dawg, pending Sortelli's return and/or Hell Freezing Over.


May 5, 2009: A year to the day that Sortelli and EOI poked fun at me, there are still no updates to the strip. Meanwhile, Bloviating Rhyhtmically here has updated 150 times. I daresay that no matter how many (or how few) readers I have, EOI has less. Therefore, I WIN.

Neener, neener, neener.


It's hard to avoid the temptation to end on a "neener." Still, I realize I should put some kind of end thesis or denouement here, if only to stave off certain attacks and/or flames.

1. I am not butthurt that Sortelli made fun of my blog's title. As I said in my letter, he carefully did not make fun of me, or any of my content. (Besides, it is rather a silly name.)
2. Similarly, I have made every effort not to insult Sortelli personally, nor his webcomic (though I may have failed in this; if so, I truly do apologize). As I hope I have made clear, my problem is with his erratic updates, frequent abandonment, and inability to communicate.
3. Finally, if it turns out that there was some kind of awful personal tragedy that necessitated this abandonment, I will publically apologize and drop a rabid weasel down my pants.
   
4. That said, I do feel a bit of artistic rivalry with the man, since he did mention me publically, and therefore a little bit of smack-talking is warranted.
   
5. Neener.
   

No Doll in this House

Dollhouse premieres tonight, but I won't be watching it.

Not because I don't like the premise, because I do. I like Joss Whedon, too, even though he does terrible, horrible things to beloved characters. And Eliza Dushku always brings the sexay to anything she's in.

No, I refuse to watch this show because it's on FOX. You may recall them as the network that seems committed to smothering new shows before they develop:

• Harsh Realm
• Brimstone
  
• Wonderfalls
• Point Pleasant
  
• Drive
  
• and, of course, Firefly

(Now I'm not claiming that all of these series were good; in fact, I didn't even see some of them. The point remains, however, that FOX has a track recording for developing geek-friendly shows and then canning them before they've found their legs.)

And this doesn't even count the series that managed to last over 13 episodes before being cancelled, like Tru Calling or Arrested Development or Dark Angel. I still expect The Sarah Connor Chronicles to get canned any moment now, seeing as it (and Dollhouse) occupies the Friday Night Death Slot.

And it's premiering on Friday the 13th, no less. Could this show possibly be born under an unluckier star?

(Well, yes.)

So in light of this, I will not watch Dollhouse, and will not until the following occurs:

1. It runs for a full season.
   
2. Its first season is released on DVD.
   
3. It is renewed for a second full season.
   

You're free to tell me I'm being an ass about this, but I'm tired of having my heart broken. It's not like I'm a Nielsen Femily member or something, so the success of the show is entirely independent of whether or not I watch it. I knew Drive would be cancelled, and it was; I think this one will be, too, even though I hope it won't.

Tho those folks who are brave enough to watch it: Enjoy. I mean it; there is no sarcasm. But I know that I cannot enjoy it, because in the back of my head there will be a little voice that says "If you like this show, then FOX will cancel it."

I'd like to conclude this post with a message to Joss Whedon.

Dear Joss,

After Firefly was cancelled, you once swore that you would never, ever, work for FOX again, and yet here you are.

Yes, I know that they have given you a contract for multiple episodes. I seem to recall they did the same thing for Firefly.

So while I sincerely wish you and your show well, IF Dollhouse is cancelled, don't have the gall to be surprised.

Love,
Erin Palette

An open letter to Joss Whedon

Dear Joss,

I think you have a problem with your brain being missing.

Love,
Erin Palette.

An Open Letter to Canadians

Dear Canadians:

I like you. I really do. I can't easily prove this, of course, so I hope you'll take me at my word when I say that I actually, honestly, sincerely like you and your country. In my mind, I see America and Canada as brothers, so when I say what I say, please know it's out of love and respect.

But seriously: shut the fuck up about American politics, okay? Please. You're trying my patience.

Look, I get the fact that our Conservative Republican Texan President rubs you the wrong way. I understand that American Foreign Policy essentially pisses in your poutine. I realize that as gross generalizations go, you are far more liberal and left-of-center than we, and that's why you're frequently so appalled at our actions.

But you've got to stop bitching about American politics. It's not a healthy mindset. I mean, you care more about our politics than we do, and there's precious little you can do to change our government. You can shake your fists and stamp your little feet and it will do bugger-all in the grand scheme of things.

You want to change our government? Immigrate, become an American citizen, and vote in elections. Then you can bitch all you want, and you might actually change something.

As it stands now, though? You're like the bitter ex-boyfriend who can't let go of being angry at his ex for breaking up with him years ago. You obsess about us, write screeds and diatribes and blogs about us, and it's really quite sad because, overall, we barely know you exist. Look, I'm not proud to admit my ignorance, but I will to make this point:

• I know that Felipe Calderón is the President of Mexico, a nation which doesn't share our language.
  
• I know that Gordon Brown is the Prime Minister of England, a nation which not only doesn't share a border with America but is also on the other side of the Atlantic.
  
• But Canada and America share a common language, a common border, and most (though not all) of a common culture, yet I still don't know who your Prime Minister is without Googling him.
  

In fact, I can only name two Canadian PMs at all: Trudeau and Diefenbaker, and I only know of the latter because of Due South (an excellent show which I enjoyed because it managed to poke fun at both American and Canadian stereotypes while at the same time celebrating our common bond of shared heritage).

So please, for your own mental and emotional health, let it go. Or dial it down a notch, at least. I mean, I couldn't stand Chirac, but I can count on my fingers the number of times I gave him enough thought to warrant even a slightly annoyed mood, much less a high dudgeon or good old-fashioned spleen venting. And when he lost the election to Sarkozy, I didn't throw a party; I merely nodded my head, smiled, and said, "Oh, good, I can like France again," and that's all the thought I gave it, because that's all it deserved. Much like psycho unstable exes, who are also better ignored than fretted over.

So please, Canada, I am imploring you: let it go. Let us go. We aren't going to change to suit you, much like you refuse to change on our account. Find a hobby, watch a hockey game, get drunk on your awesome Canadian beer; but if you keep obsessing about American politics, you're just going to end up on the White House lawn at three A.M., playing Peter Gabriel at top volume and begging us to take you back.

And no one wants that.

Love,
Erin Palette