Two Memes Before I Go, part one

The 10 things I hate in other people

Not in order.

1) When they blame everyone but themselves for their problems. I'm sorry, but the solution to your obesity problem is not to ban MacDonalds, or even their advertising. The solution is for you to accept you have a problem, and take action. The issue is somewhat less clear when we're talking about children, and I think I do agree with a pre-watershed advertising ban here. However, even here, the issue largely lies with the parents... if they want the child to not become obese then perhaps they should not take them to MacDonalds so often?

2) When they drive badly. If you want to drive more slowly than the speed limit, then that's your prerogative. What is not acceptable is if you do so in the fast lane of a two-lane motorway, so I can't get past you legally. Pull into the slow lane, and I'll be on my way! Likewise, when making a left turn (right, outside the UK) it is not necessary to bring your vehicle to a near=-complete stop; it will swing around that arc just fine at a reasonable speed.

3) When they're bad at their jobs. Now, anyone can have a bad day, and I won't fault them for that. However, all too often it seems like everyone is having a bad day all the time. Come on, people! These are the things you do, and unless you're truly stupid you must be able to pick up the job if you're doing it all the time. So, if you haven't, and you aren't wearing a 'trainee' badge, I can only assume you haven't learned because you couldn't be bothered, and I hate the feeling that I'm drowning in a sea of slack-assed mediocrity.

4) When they say they'll do something, and then don't. If you can't help me out, then I'll accept that. It's not a problem. But if you tell me you're going to do X then chances are I'm going to assume you're going to do X. I may be relying on X being done. So, if you have no intention of doing X, or can't do X just tell me. Gah!

5) Passive-aggression. I do lots of things that are questionable, or that I know people won't like. Generally, I do these with very good reason, often reason that I have spelled out. Still, if you don't like what I'm doing, feel free to tell me. I won't be offended, and may even change what I'm doing to suit you better. Don't just accept it and then sabotage me behind my back, and don't play stupid political games to get rid of me. It's just not necessary.

6) The "wear once/take it back" thing. It's just dishonest.

7) Bad queue etiquette. If everyone is queueing, then you get to join the queue at the end. You might think your case is special and important... but so does everyone else there. Unless it's literally a matter of life and death, go to the end and wait. By the same token, when you get to the front of the queue, be ready with your order, your purchases, your money, and whatever else you need. Take the minimum amount of time to properly deal with whatever it is, so everyone else can get on with their days. Don't get to the front and then ask Little Joey what he wants for his lunch.

8) Telling me to cheer up. Like another blogger of note, if I'm not grinning like a madman then I probably look absolutely miserable. It's just the way the muscles in my face relax. So, don't bother telling me to cheer up. Conversely, if I actually am miserable, then you telling me to cheer up is about as welcome as a punch in the face. If you want me to demonstrate, just ask.

9) Small talk for the sake of filling silence. Yes, the weather sucks. Yes, I'm fine. And I know fine well that if I ask you, you'll say you're fine too. That's just the way it works - no-one actually wants to know the answer to that. No, I didn't see Big Brother/the match/that soap. Yes, kids today are terrible.

If you don't have something of substance to say, consider just saying nothing. If I have something to say, I'll say it... but the truth is I probably won't. I'm introverted by nature (really), and have to struggle really hard with people. So, if I'm not saying anything then I'm probably happy like that.

10) The way modern girls behave. Some time a few years ago (probably when Christina and Britney were battling it out to see how could be the bigger skank, a battle Britney won... and really really lost), something changed. Or perhaps it didn't, and I just noticed the way things had been for a while. But, suddenly we've reached a point where the average age at which a girl loses her virginity is 14 years and 10 months, and on average she will have had seven partners by the time she's 21. And it seems to have become the case that in order to sleep with a guy, a girl doesn't even have to like him at all, just fancy him a bit.

Now, I'm not going to tell you how you should act. That's a matter for you and your conscience. And, certainly, I can see that a person might rack up a number of partners in quick succession for a variety of reasons, without it necessarily reflecting on her character. But when those are the averages, I consider that something is badly wrong.

(Now, you may well ask why I've targetted this at girls. After all, boys are as bad if not worse, and have been for many years. Well, the reason for this is purely selfish. I'm not particularly interested in the behaviour of boys because I'm not looking for the boy of my dreams. Conversely, I'm really worried that the girl of my dreams may well have destroyed herself with copious amounts of drink, sex, and other self-destructive 'fun' before she even reaches an age where I would be interested in her.)

So, there it is, the ten things I hate in other people.

Damn fool

For various reasons too complex to go into now, I currently have a SatNav system in my house. Now, I'm probably not going to need this, but just in case I need to find a chance to use it, just to prove that I can do so.

Anyway, today I was playing at the Grangemouth Gala Day, and knew I had to meet the band at a particular place at a particular time. Which is quite good, except that I didn't know where that place was.

So, being a sensible sort of person, I went on Multimap and looked up directions. This had two weaknesses - Multimap seems rather poor with directions in and around Falkirk, and I didn't have an easy way to print out the directions. So, I carefully memorised the directions, and off I went.

It wasn't until I was just over halfway there that I realised the solution to all my problems. Can anyone else spot it?

Orange Elixir of Joy

I have officially given up on the "not drinking Irn Bru" part of my scheme for immortality. Basically, I was feeling miserable, and found that the scales denied any difference had been made. (I suspect the scales may be lying, since I now need to wear a belt with my jeans, but never mind.)

So, anyway, last Friday I bought some Irn Bru once again, and have since been reminded just how glorious it really is. (Obviously, not the Diet Irn Bru, which is pure evil in a can. How anyone can drink it is just beyond me.)

Just thought I'd share that.

Another follow-up

Sine it bears noting: I'm glad that Paris Hilton has been ordered to return to jail. It is important that the system works, and it's also important that she get the chance to learn some very important lessons from this, which house arrest in a multi-million dollar mansion would not teach.

However, much of the crowing on the internet over the last few days has been disgusting. A lot of people seem to be taking inordinate pleasure at her discomfort, and that's not right.

And that's all I have to say on that subject.

Long Comments

It has been brought to my attention that many of my posts, and in particular many of my comments on other posts, are extremely verbose. Too long, I wonder?

The thing is, though, I generally try my best to consider an issue from many sides, and prefer to not just offer and opinion (especially a controversial opinion) without supporting points, evidence, and the like. Obviously, making multiple points and providing supporting evidence takes time. And, of course, there is also the word-count associated with couching things in terms that don't cause undue offense - it would be really easy to say "U R teh suxxorz! LOL!", but that doesn't necessarily have the tone or eloquence I try to go for.

But the question is this: how long is too long? How long can a post be before you stop reading? What about a comment? Should I restrict myself to the argument of soundbites (20 words or less) in future?

Dear Microsoft...

Okay, you've heard ot NaNoWriMo, I assume: the goal is to spend a month writing a 40,000 word novel? Well, there was another challenge, entitled WoAdWriMo - the Worldwide Adventure Writing Month. The idea was that in the month of June one would write a 30-page adventure scenario for the RPG of your choice. The chosen month being June.

Why not, I thought?

So, I've spent the last few days working out details of plot, locations, and so forth, batting ideas back and forth, and so on. Today, I finally sat down to start the actual writing, with a view to first assembling all the peripheral bits of text (descriptions of the city, new rules changes, that sort of thing), so I could get on with the adventure itself over the next three weeks.

And I ran straight into the brick wall that is the new Word for Windows.

I hate the new interface. I cannot find any of the things I wanted to do to text, nothing is where it should be, and every operation consequently took much longer than it should. And the thing is, I was an expert user of the old Word. I was able to do a huge amount with the existing functionality and menus, and I liked being able to do that. They've taken all that hard-won experience and flushed it, for a new interface that looks and feels like a computer game I don't want to play.

I'm sure they've spent a huge amount of money on developing this new interface. It was not money well spent. Avoid Word 2007 like the plague.

Just how stupid would you need to be?

Let's imagine there is a television show in which contestants enter a house and are observed constantly. Let us also imagine that in a previous series of this show, some of the contestants made comments that were considered racist, and drew enormous criticism for this. Further, let's assume that the channel who broadcast this show had been forced into a humiliating apology for the events of the previous series, and were fairly clear on the consequences of racist behaviour this time out.

Under those circumstances, just how stupid would you have to be to go and make racist comments on the show?

"I should put you away where you can't kill or maim us, but this is LA and you're rich and famous!"

A few weeks back, Paris Hilton was sentenced to approx 45 days in jail for driving without a license (that was probably a bit steep, but it was the sentence imposed). Between then and actually entering prison, this was slashed to 23 days for "good behaviour", which raises the question of how exactly one can demonstrate good behaviour in jail before actually entering said jail.

But nevermind.

Now, after a mere three days in prison, she has apparently been released to house arrest, after falling ill. Or, rather "falling ill".

I try hard not to be cynical, really I do. Indeed, I consider that we have to believe that the system broadly works, or else society at large is just a joke. But if this is true, and if Paris' mystery illness isn't life-threatening, then I really have to wonder...

A bit too far gone...

For the past fifteen weeks, there have been roadworks between my appartment and the motorway, with the key road closed in the 'coming home' direction. Until this afternoon, when they completed their work and removed the diversions.

The thing is, though, I didn't notice this until just after I have turned down the diversion without thinking.

I need a holiday.

A nice try, but your logic is flawed...

This evening the church hosted an evening with John Blanchard, a noted Christian apologist, who was going to talk about science, atheism and Christianity, with an emphasis on the writings of Professor Dawkins. It was therefore with a large degree of tripidation and a sense of deep foreboding that I attended. I do so hate it when Christians talk about science, since they invariably get it wrong.

However, I was pleasantly surprised tonight. The speaker was very good, and he managed to avoid all the classic pitfalls of the Christian talking about evolution. He didn't, for example, employ the failed "a watch implies a watchmaker" analogy (or the can of Coke equivalent).

All in all, it wasn't bad.

However, unfortunately I was unconvinced by the logic employed. I'll get to that in a minute. First, though, I'd best recap my position on faith, science and rationality before I go on, in case you happen to have not read that particular post on Chris' blog where I outlined all this.

I take the view that the existence of God cannot be proven in any meaningful way, since the primary way by which it would be done is to demonstrate the existence of something that cannot exist through any other means, bearing in mind that this must both fail to be explained by known science but also by the full extent of unknown science. So, it's understandably problematic.

But that's okay, since I'm willing to take that on faith, declare it an axiom, and work rationally from there. It's a foundation, not a conclusion.

I also take the view that when science demonstrates that the universe is several billion years old, as opposed to the six thousand or so suggested by a literal reading of the Bible, it's probably right. We know there is a significant amount of metaphor in the Bible, and we know also that there's a difference between fact and truth. So, I see no problem is suggesting that the first ten or so chapters of Genesis are largely metaphorical. Once you get to Abraham, things are significantly more solid.

Anyway, John Blanchard took a different tack. His purpose was to demonstrate the existence of God as a conclusion, not a foundation. He had four arguments for this, one of which was unabashedly not based in science, and so is ignored here.

Looking at the other three then:

The existence and nature of the universe

His argument here was that the universe must, logically, have one of three origins: either it has always been here, or it created itself in some manner, or it was created from some transcendent reality. This is fair enough.

He then quickly discounted the first two, citing certain scientific opinion on the matter, and quoting the 'odds of the universe forming' as 1 in 10^10^124. I felt this was rather a stretch, since the scientific opinion was basically just that, while the probability was calculated without knowing all the variables, and so is highly suspect (and, besides, no matter how small the odds, unless they're 0 they don't prove anything).

Still, never mind. Let's give him that one, just for the sake of argument. Logically, therefore, the universe must have been formed from a transcendent reality.

But here's where the argument falls down: logically, that transcendent reality must either be eternal, or it must be self-creating, or it must itself have been created from another higher reality. And, the same logic used to discount the first two options still applies, so we need yet another reality. And then, logically, another.

It's turtles all the way down.

Eventually, you need either a self-creating reality, or a reality that has always been there. And, indeed, that's not a problem, since we're arguing that God is exactly that. Unfortunately, our logic has now brought us back to our original problem: how do we prove that the eternal reality (or the self-creating one) isn't this reality?

The nature of life

Here he got into evolution. If you explode a whole lot of energy and matter, and you leave it for billions of years, does that mean we're going to get life? Surely not, that's just absurd!

Fortunately, evolution doesn't say that. It says instead that if you leave it for billions of years you might get life. Which is a far cry from arguing that you will get life.

Truth be told, though, his argument here wasn't bad. Where it fell down for me is when he commented on the comparison between the human brain and a computer. He rubbished this, noting that the most advanced state-of-the-art computers we have are less advanced even than the brain of an earthworm!

What irked me about this is that Charles Babbage first conceived of his 'Difference Engine' in Victorian times. The first recognisable PCs came about in the middle of the last century. So, that's less than a hundred years of development. And, of course, computing power doubles every eighteen months, while the human brain remains broadly constant. So, the comparison is strained now... but wait a hundred years.

Although, really, I doubt we'll get that far. Sooner or later we'll invent a machine that makes people clever. And that will be our last major breakthrough, since that same machine will then be used to invent a better version of the same, and so on and so forth... whereupon all problems just become one of processing. Which is quite a scary prospect, actually.

The wondrous nature of human life

Leaving aside the discussions of the various wondrous aspects of the human body (none of which actually have any weight since they're all explicable with evolution, but all of which are certainly wondrous), we arrive at some of the softer aspects of his argument. Why do so many people have a yearning for God, if there is no God? Why do we suffer pangs of guilt, when the conscience surely has no useful purpose? And where do thoughts come from anyway?

Interesting questions, and worthy of thought, but...

It can be argued (effectively) that the yearning for God is instead a yearning for understanding. The universe is a big and scary place, that we understand poorly if at all. So, rather than accept terrifying ignorance, the void is filled...

The conscience is also explicible through evolution. See, if society holds together, this allows specialisation of roles. The blacksmith can be a better blacksmith if he doesn't have to spend his time hunting for his own food, and so he can make weapons for the hunters, and so all benefit. But, this works only if everyone (or almost everyone) plays by 'the rules'... and that's where the conscience comes in.

Where do thoughts come from? Well, there's an argument that mankind's great evolutionary advantage is not our relatively huge brains, or even our opposable thumbs, but rather that we tell stories. By doing so, and passing knowledge from one generation to the next, we are no longer obligated to learn the hard lessons our ancestors learned, and can work on other things. Combine that with a permanent record (writing), and you go far. But, of course, people who think a lot don't just think about useful things. In fact, that would be almost useless, since so much of science involves seeing the links between things, and that requires a certain flexibility of thought. In short, it requires imagination.

Of course, all these things can just as readily be explained as gifts from God. Indeed, I have long since concluded that in the absence of God there is no evidence for free will, so that is the view I take. Still, that's one of the oddities that comes about when you agree with a person's conclusions, but not the steps that got them there.

That fourth argument

The fourth argument was founded on the life of Jesus. As I mentioned above, I'm not going to discuss it further, since the argument is founded on faith rather than relying on science or deduction. Ironically, it's easier to make a strong argument about matters of faith when you build from a foundation of faith, than it is when you try to argue from science. It's almost as if you're working with the wrong building blocks.

Watching it all unravel...

Gah!

Yes, it's another rant about band. This time, it's about being told we have a major concert coming up one week before time, not being told the playlist until the last practice before said concert, and then watching people try to organise the damn thing by committee, when all that's needed is a solid decision!

As I said: Gah!

The most annoying thing about all this is that I know exactly how and why it's all going wrong, I know fine well what needs to be done to fix it... and I'm not in a position to go ahead and fix it. It's really infuriating.

I'm now considering launching a coup and taking over the whole. Cos there is just about enough I actually like about the band to make me want to stay, now.

I'll say it one more time: Gah!

My Greatest Idea Ever... for today, anyway

I've just had the idea for the greatest computer game in the history of everything. Huzzah!

It's called "Eviction 2". There was no "Eviction", but as we all know, the first game in any series always sucks, so I've decided to skip it.

Anyway, it's a cross between "The Sims", "Big Brother", and an MMORPG.

Here's the idea: you create your very own online persona (let's call her, picking a name entirely at random, Jade), who will be entered into one of several themed online environs (the House, the Pirate Isle, the Space Station) with a number of other players (let's call them 'contestants'). Each week, teams are assigned a task, which they must complete using the resources of the environment and their own guile. Each week, the team members will then nominate folks for Eviction (hence the name).

Now, as a twist, the rest of the community (usually meaning the players in the other games that are running simultaneously) are able to view the events and goings on in the various games, and may, at the end of the week, vote to Evict the players they wish from the various games.

Is it not brilliant?

Bored

Very occasionally in my line of work, you hit a test that runs along the lines of:

1) Set the system running.
2) Wait until it stops.

I'm currently running one such test, and have been for the past nine (working) hours. I'm quite bored.

Stealing a stolen list

Juliet stole this list from Ellie, and I stole it from her. I would have stolen it from another source, but somewhere between reading the list and getting around to it, said blog switched to "friends-only". No matter.

It's a list of books. The ones I've read are in bold, the ones I want to read are in italics. Note that there are very few in the 'want to read' list - typically if I want to read a book I'll go and read it. There are many books on the list I wouldn't mind reading, but won't actively seek out.

1. The Da Vinci Code (Dan Brown)
2. Pride and Prejudice (Jane Austen)
3. To kill a Mockingbird (Harper Lee) - No, but I saw it in an actual theatre once.
4. Gone With The Wind (Margaret Mitchell)
5. The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King (Tolkien)
6. The Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring (Tolkien)
7. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (Tolkien) - technically, these should just be one book, "The Lord of the Rings". It was only split up because Tolkien's publisher insisted.
8. Anne of Green Gables (L.M. Montgomery)
9. Outlander (Diana Gabaldon)
10. A Fine Balance (Rohinton Mistry)
11. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (Rowling)
12. Angels and Demons (Dan Brown)
13. Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (Rowling)
14. A Prayer for Owen Meany (John Irving)
15. Memoirs of a Geisha (Arthur Golden)
16. Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone (Rowling) - No such beast. I have read "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" however. Another mad decision by publishers; apparently Americans don't know what a 'philosopher' is!
17. Fall on Your Knees (Ann-Marie MacDonald)
18. The Stand (Stephen King)
19. Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (Rowling)
20. Jane Eyre (Charlotte Bronte)
21. The Hobbit (Tolkien)
22. The Catcher in the Rye (J.D. Salinger)
23. Little Women (Louisa May Alcott)
24. The Lovely Bones (Alice Sebold)
25. Life of Pi (Yann Martel)
26. The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy (Douglas Adams)
27. Wuthering Heights (Emily Bronte)
28. The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe (C. S. Lewis) - oddly, the only one in the series that I haven't read!
29. East of Eden (John Steinbeck)
30. Tuesdays with Morrie (Mitch Albom)
31. Dune (Frank Herbert)
32. The Notebook (Nicholas Sparks)
33. Atlas Shrugged (Ayn Rand)
34. 1984 (Orwell)
35. The Mists of Avalon (Marion Zimmer Bradley)
36. The Pillars of the Earth (Ken Follett)
37. The Power of One (Bryce Courtenay)
38. I know this much is true (Wally Lamb)
39. The Red Tent (Anita Diamant)
40. The Alchemist (Paulo Coelho)
41. The Clan of the Cave Bear (Jean M. Auel)
42. The Kite Runner (Khaled Hosseini)
43. Confessions of a Shopaholic (Sophie Kinsella)
44. The Five People You Meet In Heaven (Mitch Albom)
45. Bible
46. Anna Karenina (Tolstoy)
47. The Count of Monte Cristo (Alexandre Dumas)
48. Angela’s Ashes (Frank McCourt)
49. The Grapes of Wrath (John Steinbeck)
50. She’s Come Undone (Wally Lamb)
51. The Poisonwood Bible (Barbara Kingsolver)
52. A Tale of Two Cities (Dickens)
53. Ender’s Game (Orson Scott Card)
54. Great Expectations (Dickens)
55. The Great Gatsby (Fitzgerald)
56. The Stone Angel (Margaret Laurence)
57. Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (Rowling)
58. The Thorn Birds (Colleen McCullough)
59. The Handmaid’s Tale (Margaret Atwood)
60. The Time Traveller’s Wife (Audrey Niffenegger) - currently sitting in my 'to read' pile
61. Crime and Punishment (Fyodor Dostoyevsky)
62. The Fountainhead (Ayn Rand)
63. War and Peace (Tolstoy) - but only if I can lay my hands on an unabridged version. I hate abridged books with a fiery passion.
64. Interview with a Vampire (Anne Rice)
65. Fifth Business (Robertson Davis)
66. One Hundred Years Of Solitude (Gabriel Garcia Marquez)
67. The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants (Ann Brashares)
68. Catch 22 (Joseph Heller)
69. Les Miserables (Hugo)
70. The Little Prince (Antoine de Saint-Exupery)
71. Bridget Jones’ Diary (Fielding)
72. Love in the Time of Cholera (Marquez)
73. Shogun (James Clavell)
74. The English Patient (Michael Ondaatje)
75. The Secret Garden (Frances Hodgson Burnett)
76. The Summer Tree (Guy Gavriel Kay)
77. A Tree Grows in Brooklyn (Betty Smith)
78. The World According to Garp (John Irving)
79. The Diviners (Margaret Laurence)
80. Charlotte’s Web (E.B. White) - a long, long time ago for this one.
81. Not Wanted On The Voyage (Timothy Findley)
82. Of Mice And Men (Steinbeck)
83. Rebecca (Daphne Du Maurier)
84. Wizard’s First Rule (Terry Goodkind) - don't. It's a bad book.
85. Emma (Jane Austen)
86. Watership Down (Richard Adams)
87. Brave New World (Aldous Huxley)
88. The Stone Diaries (Carol Shields)
89. Blindness (Jose Saramago)
90. Kane and Abel (Jeffrey Archer)
91. In The Skin Of A Lion (Ondaatje)
92. Lord of Flies (Golding)
93. The Good Earth (Pearl S. Buck)
94. The Secret Life of Bees (Sue Monk Kidd)
95. The Bourne Identity (Robert Ludlum)
96. The Outsiders (S.E. Hinton)
97. White Oleander (Janet Fitch)
98. A Woman of Substance (Barbara Taylor Bradford)
99. The Celestine Prophecy (James Redfield)
100. Ulysses (James Joyce)

Wow, only 17%! Still, it doesn't strike me as a 'must read' list, so I guess I'm probably okay. The inclusion of "Wizard's First Rule" is rather odd, and the omission of things like "War of the Worlds", "The Demolished Man" and "The Three Musketeers" strikes me as near-criminal.

Competition Two

Yesterday the band were at Bathgate. The only thing I won was a bad sunburn.

We came sixth, out of ten, instead of our previous eighth out of 25. And, in fact, all of the bands at yesterday's competition were at Dunbar, and we beat all but three of them. Which means we're getting worse!

The good news from this is that I'm not responsible for our plight. I'm one of the strongest pipers in the band, and thrive under pressure, so am doing well enough. The bad news is that I don't see the band improving any in the weeks to come - I suspect we've done about as well as we can expect to this season. Which is pretty damning comment, but I fear it's warranted. It strikes me that there isn't enough strength in depth in the band generally, and it strikes me also that the ambitions of too many of the players are rather limited.

It's all quite unfortunate.

Matalan, how you annoy me...

1) A couple of months ago, I bought a pair of jeans from Matalan. This worked quite well, until it came to pass that the assistant couldn't put through the sale until I signed up for their stupid customer card. I found this mildly annoying, but annoying all the same. After all, shouldn't one be able to just pay for things? Or is that too much to hope for?

2) Anyway, I signed up for their stupid card. Since then, they've taken to sending me a periodic update about what's new in their ranges. Hurrah!

Quite aside from the annoyance of receiving yet more junk mail that I can't recycle (since it contains name and address details), there's the annoyance that the mailing is clearly and obviously not intended for me - virtually the entire is filled with women's clothing. Which rather makes sense... but then perhaps they shouldn't send it to me! Even just having a "Don't send me your stupid mailings" option on the form would have been ideal, but no...

3) Anyway, I decided the time had come to go and buy another pair of jeans. It seemed the thing to do. So, despite not having been informed that they still sold such things (their mailing was remarkably silent on that issue), I decided to risk it, and went back to the store where I had previously bought jeans. And, behold! they still had a big rack of jeans.

Astonished as I was by this miraculous event, I went searching for the jeans I actually wanted. This was an adventure in itself, as the jeans were carefully labelled such that the size could only be read from above... and the jeans then racked above head height! Still, I persevered... and discovered that they had every single size in stock, except for the one I actually wanted!

(You know, it would be really nice if I could say this was the first time this sort of thing had happened, but no. It seems whenever I seek out trousers of any sort they never have the right size in stock. And it's not like I'm seeking a strange or obscure size. On the contrary, I wear one of the most common sizes. And yet no shop seems to bother stocking such things.)

4) Having been rebuffed by their actual store, I then struck upon another cunning scheme - I could order online! After all, surely they must have a web presence, complete with online store?

So, about two seconds of Googling, and there I was. I went into the store, had a look, and found that the store didn't list the entire range, simple as that would be. Instead, they had a small taster of their "huge range", and an entreaty to go visit one of their stores to get the thing that was actually wanted.

Of course, the small taster did not include the item I actually wanted to purchase. Gaaaaah!

Conclusion:

When I was in the Matalan store, between me and the rack of jeans, there was a man shuffling in a zombified manner, purchases in hand. At the time, I inwardly cursed him for his incredible annoyance, but now I wonder instead if I should have pitied him. Was he some previous shopper, stuck there for all eternity, his spirit broken by their nonsensical policies? Did his family know where he was, or had they given him up for dead? Just how long had he been trapped there, doomed to shamble through the store without surcease? I thought about going back, to see if he could be saved, but I feared for my own safety. Some risks are just too great to take.

Thirty years ago, to the day...

On the 25th of May 1977, Star Wars was released in the US. I didn't feel this day could pass without comment.

May the Force be with you.

Comment on a post you haven't read!

As Chris notes in his comment on the post directly below this one, there was a post that I deleted. This was because I decided one of the things said was something I really shouldn't go saying, even in jest. And, since I didn't have time to edit the post, I deleted the whole.

Anyway, the post noted that I had expected that wives suck the life out of their husbands, and then examined this question with reference to the statistical evidence. The results were certainly startling, and led to some astonishing conclusions.

So, now I open the floor to you, gentle readers. Comment on this missing post that you have not read!

No, you can't save me £20 per month

I have a Virgin Mobile pay-as-I-go mobile, and Virgin supply my internet access. I'm reasonably happy with both, although the mobile suffers from very high call charges and very spotty coverage (I don't really care about these because I almost never use my phone, so it's not worth the hassle of switching away). I get my landline supplied by BT, and have Sky TV.

So today Virgin Media phoned me and asked if I would be interested in switching my phone and TV to their service. When I said I wasn't interested, the agent was surprised. "Even though we could save you £20 a month?" he asked, to which I said yes.

Now, the telephone savings would be negligible - I would still have to pay BT line rental, and that counts for about 90% of my spending there, since I never use my phone.

No, the issue is really Sky. And, to be fair, I do spend quite a bit every month on that, what with the movie and sports packages. So, perhaps the Virgin offering really would be cheaper.

But it's not a fair comparison, because in fact Virgin can't offer the comparable product. Virgin customers don't get Sky 1, so that would mean no "24", no "Lost", no "Battlestar Galactica".

So, um, no thanks. I'll continue to spend the money, and get the product I actually want.

Now Virgin could make this a tough decision. See, they own the Bravo channel, which shows "Blade", "The Unit" and "Daybreak". So, if they pulled their channels from the Sky offering, then things become interesting. Frankly, though, I'd rather they didn't. Instead, they need to get the Sky channels back, or else they're always going to lose.

In fact, Virgin are making a mistake by putting the notion of switching in mind. See, Sky also offer an integrated package, which would save me the money I spend on Virgin's internet service each month. So, I could keep the products I like, and save quite a lot of money each month by switching... but not to them.

That, of course, raises the question: why haven't I switched? Well, the answer is quite simple. Virgin have provided me with flawless internet service for the last ten months (or however long it's been), where the Sky offering is untested. So, given the choice, I'll give them a chance to screw things up before I move away. Though perstering me to take more of their services would be a good way to start.

Gone phishing...

Well, Microsoft just cheered me up immensely. As I'm sure you know, my cousin has her own blog, which I check on a daily basis. Today, Microsoft Internet Exploder decided that this was a "known phishing site", and as such should not be viewed by anyone ever. So, it very helpfully blocked it for me.

Thanks guys, I feel much safer knowing you're on the case.

Films that aren't even worth finishing

My DVD collection has some really bad films in it. And, with the films available on Sky and elsewhere, I have seen some real stinkers. I even made it through "Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle", which was quite an ordeal.

So, my standards for watching films aren't exactly too high.

But in the last week, I have found myself watching two films that weren't even worth finishing... and in fact demanded that I respond by putting them off halfway through, and then deleting. The first was "Underworld: Evolution", a truly boring sequel to a really bad film. I 'watched' about an hour of that before giving up, while setting up my new PC in the foreground. The second was "Basic Instinct 2", of which I might have watched 30 minutes, become succumbing to the tedium. (This was an odd one - the first film is actually quite good, once you get past the controversy. The sequel is just dull, dull, dull.)

Now there's a disturbing thought...

I had today off, in order to get some urgent repairs done to my car. And I came to a very disturbing realisation: I actually enjoy my job, and find it rather more satisfying, than any of my actual hobbies.

This is a very disturbing realisation, not least because I really don't want to be some sort of miserable workaholic.

I think I need some new hobbies.

Competition Season Begins...

On Saturday, my band were at Dunbar, our first competition of the year. We came 8th, a marked improvement over last year when the band came 17th. As this was before I joined, I am of course going to claim the credit.

Still, it remains clear that there is still a lot of work to be done.

The day itself was pretty horrible, being grey and overcast, with occasional rain (but not when we were playing). It was also really, really cold. This combined with the horror of having the get up at 6:30 to generally make me fairly miserable all day. Plus, I had only taken one magazine to read on the bus, which would have been fine had I not finished it by the time we arrived.

They just couldn't leave it alone

I went to the post office this morning and picked up my parcel. It was a copy of Microsoft Office for my new laptop. I have just installed it, and found that Microsoft have changed the interface. They do that periodically, moving all the menus, changing the window design, and all sorts of nonsense. It's a real annoyance, since it means whenever I install a new PC I have to go through all the settings and put them back into 'Classic' view so that it looks like it always has. You know, like I actually like it to look.

Imagine my horror, then, when I found that Office 2007 has no Classic view! Yes, they've changed the arrangement unnecessarily... and made it impossible for the user to choose to do otherwise.

Thanks, Microsoft. I'll add that to my list of reasons to switch to OpenOffice.

What Use is That?

This morning, the postman attempted to deliver an item for me from Amazon, and found that it was too big for my letterbox. This is not a huge surprise, and although there is a mild annoyance that he arrived only an hour after I left for work, it's really not a big deal.

What is a big deal is the routine for me eventually getting the item. Specifically, some time in the next seven days I have to go to the local sorting office and pick up the item. And when is this alleged office open?

Mon-Fri 7:30 - 15:00
Sat 7:30 - 12:30

Honestly, three o'clock? What use is that? Grrrr!

200th post!

The 100th post on this blog was marked dedicated to David Hasslehoff. Since this is the 200th post, I feel I should dedicate it to another cultural icon, one to have had an equal impact on my psyche. I refer, of course, to Paris Hilton.

Personally, I think it's an absolute travesty that this poor innocent has been sentenced to jail time. Clearly, she is being singled out by a judge out to make a name for himself. After all, she surely cannot be expected to understand that a revoked license means you do not drive. I mean, it's not like she could read the order banning her - it was hidden away in her glove compartment! And it must be quite beyond her faculties to consider that if the license was revoked for drink driving, it might not be a good idea to drive under the influence again.

Nope, it seems obvious to me that this is a case of there being one law for the rich, and another for the poor. Free the Hilton one!

Seriously, though, I shouldn't be too hard on Paris. To be absolutely fair to her, I should point out that I did rather enjoy "House of Wax", and at least in part because of her role in it. Additionally, her musical effort "Stars Are Blind" was actually really good in almost every regard. If it weren't for the lead vocalist, it would have been great.

Best. Malfunction. Ever!

My answering machine doesn't work properly. The caller will hear me tell them to leave a message after the beep... and then there is no beep! It just says "Thank you for calling", and then hangs up.

Bwa-hahahaha!

Mayday Mayday!

I don;t get Bank Holidays off, so I was at work today. And, it being Monday, it was my day for doing the weekly shop. With it being a bank holiday, however, band wasn't on (because the centre we use was shut), so I went to Tesco an hour early... and found that it, too, was shut! Horrors!

Still, it wasn't as if I actually desperately needed anything. But the dilemma remained: did I wait a day for the weekly shop, or did I go over to the big branch in Cumbernauld, which would probably be open? In the end, my desire to go see Spiderman tomorrow won out, and so off I went to Cumbernauld.

Still, it had its advantages. First amongst these was the vastly wider selection at the big store, which allowed me to purchase a carton of Tropicana's "Raspberry and Mandarin" juice, thus completing the set (although they've introduced three new varieties since I started trying them all, so I think there's a ways to go yet...). I also bumped into a young man I knew from my days in the BB. It seems Kai now works in Tesco, although I presume that's not the sum total of his activities.

But you never gain a benefit withou a downside, it seems. The key to a nice, quick, efficient weekly shop is a carefully crafted list, with all the items ordered in a circuit from the entry point around the store, so that you circle it exactly once and pick everything up as you go past. (There are other arrangements that work, of course. There's also a zig-zag pattern where the shopper traverses each row exactly once, but I find the circle pattern works better for me.)

Of course, a carefully ordered list only works if the items are in exactly the expected places and order within the store, which obviously isn't the case when you're in an entirely different store.

Disaster!

If you've read this far, I have no doubt you are impressed that I have used so many words to say "Tesco was closed, so I went to another branch." I promise my next post will be boiled down to the barest essense of what needs to be said.

In other news...

How the Scottish Christian Party offended me

My #1 strongest-held political view is that a government must govern for all the people, and not just for the majority. My #2 most strongly-held political view is that we must have both religious freedom and freedom of speech in this country. However, freedom of speech does have some very sensible limits.

The SCP wrote to me, and being a conscientious voter I took the time to carefully read their material. On the last page, they spent several hundred words decrying a recent change to Scottish law that limits freedom speech. So, I should agree, right?

Except that the change to the law they were complaining about is that it is now illegal for a teacher to tell a teen who thinks he might be homosexual that his orientation is "offensive in the eyes of the Lord". Seriously.

Here's the thing: I absolutely maintain that a person can hold that belief if they see fit (I happen to disagree, because there's a whole lot of context that I believe renders that assessment flawed, but there we go). I also absolutely maintain that a person has the right to express that view.

But you don't go telling a scared and confused teenager something like that. And don't try feeding me the classic line about hating sin but loving the sinner, either. That's a very fine distinction, and one that our hypothetical teenager isn't going to hear. What he'll hear is the trusted adult telling him that he's some sort of freak. Good one.

There's a whole lot more I have to say on the topic of homosexuality, and especially as it intersects with my faith, but I'm not going to post them until I get my thoughts all neatly organised. Officially, since I'm straight, and therefore it doesn't affect me, I don't have an opinion. Unofficially, of course, I have an opinion on just about any topic you care to name.

Laptop

I'm posting this from my exciting new laptop, which I bought with mybonus money. It's quite a lot of fun. However, even with just the documents I'm transferring across from my main PC, I've just about filled one of the hard drives, which is a matter of some concern. I'm also really not a fan of Windows Vista, and have found that setting up a new PC so it looks and feels like I want it to is a long and drawn out process.

Still, if I ever find the time to set it up properly, it'll be great.

Elections

I am now infuriated at our political process. As of now, no Scot will ever again be able to mock the Americans for their ineptitude in running elections. Grr.

How dare they?

Doctor Who isn't on next week because of the Eurovision Song Contest! In what sort of a world is this a good thing?

The day Wikipedia let me down

Et tu Google? Then fall Stephen!

One of the more valuable lessons I learned at university was how little I know, compared with the vast bank of knowledge known to the human race. (I also learned that the vast bank of knowledge known to the human race is miniscule compared to the set of all knowledge that exists, a lesson that even some very smart academics could do with learning, but that's another rant.)

However, one of the tricks I know for always appearing more knowledgeable than I really am is the ability to research effectively. This has allowed me to work out such diverse things as the specifics of the Competition Act, the time when a particulr Welsh rubby club is on TV, and on which channel, and so forth.

Anyway, I am a firm believer in the notion that with Google available, every question is an easy question... so it was rather a shock yesterday when it failed me.

I had been invited to a birthday party, a party I had decided not to attend because I didn't actually know the person, nor she me, and I was pretty sure I was only invited out of politeness (since everyone else at the band was invited). However, on Thursday I was called by a guy at the band, who explained that they were trying to put together a mini-band for the event, and were really short on people - so could I possibly attend.

Foolishly, I neglected to ask where the "ICI club" was to be found. But no matter - with Google every question is an easy question, right?

Wrong. It turned out that the "ICI club" was more properly known by some other name, which meant the BT directory enquiries didn't get a hit. Google searches for "ICI club Falkirk" established that the club was, in fact, located in Grangemouth... but nothing more.

In the end, I did find the place, but without the assistance of the Internet. No, instead I was forced to resort to a Jedi mind-trick. I went to Grangemouth and drove around until I saw a likely sports centre, whereupon I went inside, smiled at the receptionist, and asked for directions. Problem solved.

As for the night itself... it wasn't a classic. I'm currently exhausted, having had to work long hours all week, and having had to work today and last Saturday (and, my holiday was cancelled this week :( ), so that didn't do me much good. And, as anticipated, I didn't really know anyone there, and they all knew each other, which proved something of a problem.

On the plus side, I was nominated as the Pipe Major for the evening, and did that bit of my job quite well. (My actual play was lousy though. Oh boy, was it bad.) Still, never mind.

How I voted

Just a quick follow-up to my epic post about the election.

In the event, I voted Lib-Dem for the main poll, because they were the party for whom I had the least compelling reason not to vote. I did, however, find it rather galling that they were also the only major party to completely fail to campaign in this seat; I imagine they have determined they have no actual chance of winning. (On the other hand, of the parties who did campaign, only the Tories managed to send me something that didn't offend me. Labour and the SNP spent much of the campaign insulting one another, rather than talking about issues, and the 'Christians'... well, I'll cover that in another post.)

In the secondary vote, I also voted Lib-Dem, although here I was tempted by the Greens, the SNP (briefly),and also for one of the 'Christians'... but only because I had learned that that party had actually withdrawn!

For the council election, I voted SNP, both because I'm actually reasonably happy with their running of the council here, and also because the sticking point for me, independence, is a non-issue at that level. Plus, a socialist agenda at council level is actually quite a good thing, since they don't have too much power to absurdly inflate taxes to little real benefit.

So, that's that.

Cash flow... not a problem

It's always nice to find you have more money than you previously thought.

This week, Scottish Gas finally sent out my bill, which wasn't entirely nice. However, it was less than half of what they had previously attempted to charge, and was about a hundred pounds less than I had expected and set aside for that purpose.

Nice.

Then, today, I received my pay slip for this month, and found that the bonuses had been paid out. Given that I hadn't realised until recently that I might be getting a bonus, this represented a few hundred pounds that I didn't know I had.

Very nice.

Now, obviously, the sensible thing to do with this money is to take it and place it in my ISA, and keep it nice and safe, and collect lots of interest. So, I'm not going to do that.

But, on what shall I spend this windfall? A big party? A myriad of silly hats? Or perhaps a part share in that Death Star I always wanted...

(Actually, I'm going to buy a laptop, but that's probably less fun than any of the other three options.)

One year ago today...

Well, technically, it was only 52 weeks ago today, but philosophically it was a year... I started my current job. It has been an interesting year, not least because the last time I had 12 months of continuous employment was in 2002. I've also had my first pay rise in six years (as opposed to getting more money for switching job).

Things at work are actually good now. I'm really busy, and really stressed, but I'm also doing some good work, making a real difference to the team, and quite enjoying things.

Now, if only the rest of my life could be as settled...

The day they slew The Dragon

Those of my readers who know me will be aware that my #1 hobby is role-playing games, and specifically the Dungeons & Dragons game. (Yes, I am a geek; that's pretty much a matter of public record.) The major reason I haven't mentioned it here before is that I in fact had another blog entirely dedicated to the subject, the now-defunct ruleslawyers.

(There is a certain controversy surrounding the game, which has been blamed for causing suicides, and even been accused of being Satanic. Obviously, if there was a shred of truth to these accusations, I wouldn't be playing.)

I first started playing in 1988, courtesy of a club run in the school. And, of course, I got into the game in a big way. The following summer I discovered Dragon magazine, one of the two official magazines supporting the game. Since then, I have read the magazine on and off (mostly on), and between the issues I own and a CD archive they did of the rest, I now own all but a handful of issues. I even read the magazine in those spells when I wasn't actually gaming, as has happened a couple of times. So, that's almost eighteen years, and more than half my life.

Yesterday, the publishers announced the cancellation of the magazine, and also the sister-publication Dungeon.

I'm just stunned by this. The magazines were actually in a golden age, and the sales figures were doing really well. And despite this, cancellation. And to think that, come September, they'll just be gone...

Some questions answered

It being Wednesday, I thought I would take this opportunity to answer a few questions I haven't been asked lately. It may be informative, or perhaps not.

So, where are the frogs?

Currently, under my bed.

Huh?

Nope, I'm not going to explain that further at this time.

Oh, okay. What is it you do for a living, exactly?

I work in a secret government complex, where we are breeding a mutant strain of ambulatory cactii, which we then intend to train in desert warfare. I am, of course, not permitted to talk about the nature of my work. For that reason, of course, every statement in this paragraph is a lie.

Ah! Isn't that a paradox?

Actually, no. It's just a lie.

That doesn't make any sense.

I know. But that's not a question.

Fair enough. What's with the cactii?

Well, I actually do have a cactus, now called Jeremy, that really does sit on one of my shelves between Optimus Prime and Darth Tater. Other than that, there's nothing much about cactii. Chine Mieville featured a race of cactus-men in his Bas-Lag novels, and they were pretty cool, but that's about it.

And what's with the frogs?

Well, that's a long and odd story. When I was about ten, my parents decided it would be a good idea to start calling me 'Frog'. Quite why they did this is a mystery - my parents are entirely crazy. As a monument to this new and exciting form of cruelty they had elected to inflict on me, my mother and grandmother then proceeded to buy me about a dozen frogs of various sizes, shapes and constructions for each and every birthday, Christmas, and other occasion in the meantime. (Huh. Turns out I did explain the 'under my bed' comment. Oh, well.)

I did buy one item of frog-themed memorabilia, which is a green t-shirt with lots of brightly coloured frogs on it, which I wear when I really want to freak people out. I got it in Arkansas (but not from a strip club), and knew when I saw it that if I didn't buy it I would forever regret the decision. The second most interesting thing about this t-shirt is that it is 'Large', which is the same size as all my other t-shirts, yet comparing it with the others, and especially with the 'Large' t-shirt I got from the Asterix Park in France shows a quite remarkable difference in size.

Feeling especially heroic

This week, I have stridden across my world like a conquering titan. At work, I have fixed a whole raft of problems, finally got back to my 'real' task, and generally impressed (me). At band, I found myself once more in a position of significance as again the pipe major and second instructor were absent (and, curiously, the quality of the band as a whole rose...). Having cleared out my 'to-do' list last week, I've not had any niggling worries to deal with. And I started looking towards booking my holiday for next month - I'm probably off to Prague for a few days.

Yes, life is good.

Of course, this almost certainly means I'm being set up for a major fall. I fully predict that by a week on Wednesday I'll be depressed again. We'll see.

"You're looking well..."

This is something I've had said to me on more than one occasion (curiously, always by somewhat older women while in church). I'm pretty sure it's code for "you're looking fat." Oddly, people have also often been surprised when I've commented that I'm feeling under the weather, because they generally think I'm 'absurdly healthy'. Weird.

Anyway, the reason for this apparent health is largely due to my diet, which genuinely is pretty good. (Those same older women have generally added to their remarks that I'm "obviously eating right". As I said, it's a secret code.) In fact, my colleagues (and a number of other churchwomen of my acquaintance) are frequently surprised by this, because their assumption is that, as a single bloke living alone, I must eat pizza every night. The reality is that I do eat pizza about once a week, but then, I do like it a lot, and after all, why not?

But the rest of the time, I cook for myself. And, as I hate pre-packaged foods (as noted in one of the first posts in "Part Two", as it then was), that means putting in some effort. And, as with everything one does often enough, I've become pretty good at it. (Actually, I was pretty good when I started. Spectacular would be a more appropriate word now.)

But, for all that I've cooked for myself for nearly two years now, and despite the wide range of things I have turned my hand to (with mixed results - my beef stroganof was a particular failure), I have until now been denied one of my favourite foods.

But no longer! As part of my feeling especially heroic this week, and in celebration of being presented with an exciting new dish by CJ, tonight I cooked up my first lasagne.

Huzzah!

And it was good, although I did note a couple of things I should do better next time.

There is, however, one significant problem with living with such genius. As I noted in a post in January, I could probably do with losing a bit of weight. (Plus, there's the code, of course...) But, how is this to be done when the food is so good?

Who to vote for?

In a couple of weeks, Scotland goes to the polls for the third set of elections for the Scottish parliament, and while I have become extremely disillusioned with the whole concept of devolution it remains my intention to vote. Not because I hold the view that it is somehow my democratic duty (I hold the contrary view that if you can't explain why you're voting a particular way, you have no business voting at all), but rather because for the first time I'm in the novel position of having a vote that actually matters a damn (one of the dubious benefits of living in a Labour stronghold until now is that it never actually mattered before).

But, who to vote for?

This election appears to be a two-horse race between the centre-right Labour party and the left-wing Scottish National Party. We also have a centre-right Tory candidate, of course, and the Lib-Dems are in there, set to continue their roles as kingmakers in Scotland. Plus, there are a bunch of minor parties to consider.

The election around here has been particularly vicious, with the Labour people writing to me to deplore the socialist actions of the SNP-run local council, the SNP writing to me to curry my support for independence, and both teams employing crack teams of ninja to take down the other side's posters, and put up posters of their own. It's all very exciting.

My voting history is also relevant, so here it is: In 1997, I voted Labour, and regretted it. The promised new dawn didn't really materialise. I then voted in favour of Devolution, and for the Scottish Parliament to have tax-raising powers, and have come to regret that also. In the first elections to the Scottish parliament, I voted for an ex-Labour Independent, and Lib Dem for proportional representation. Since then, I have always voted Lib-Dem in every election. (As noted, I lived in a Labour stronghold, so this had the advantage of not actually mattering a damn.)

But, what of this time?

Well, let's look at the minor parties first. Probably the most relevant to me is this new Christian Party that has cropped up. But I discard them right away, because it is actually my strongest-held political belief that a government has to govern for all the people, not merely those people who believe as I do, and so I don't feel there is actually a place for a Christian party any more than there is for a Muslim party, an Atheist party, or anything else. (Plus, of course, there is the key question: are they really a Christian party, or are they just claiming to be? I don't actually care to find out, for the reason given above.)

Then there are the raft of socialist parties. Once upon a time, we had the Scottish Socialist Party, who actually had the distinction of properly believing in the principles they claimed. Then, they set about a nasty bout of in-fighting, shattered into lots of smaller parties, and ended any dream of socialism without independence in Scotland.

Which is irrelevant, since I was never going to vote for them anyway, for two reasons. The first is that the second most recognisable in the then SSP engaged in a childish publicity stunt when taking her oath of alleigance after the previous set of elections. Frankly, she should have been barred from the chamber after that until such time as she was willing to take the oath seriously. I have no respect for that sort of thing, and so they won't get my vote.

But the second is that I don't actually think socialism really works. Its great in principle, but it suffers in practice because too many people are simply lazy, and too many people are simply corrupt. It only takes a fairly small number of people to play on the system, and it falls apart.

Then there's the Green Party. They're a 'maybe'. The problem with their agenda is that I don't believe a single thing we've been told about climate change (on any side of the debate), which leads me to believe it's either being used as a cyncical vote-winner by the big parties or, more likely, we don't really know what's going on and are taking our 'best guess'... which is a really bad thing to base policy on. The other major problem with green policy is the same problem faced by socialist policy, but on a global scale - the things we would need to do to actually combat Global Warming are fairly radical, and unless the big powers in the world (the US, China and India being the most important) anything we do is a drop in the bucket. Worse still, unless every country implements the rescue package together and equally, those who do implement the policy will be at a crippling disadvantage compared to those who don't.

In short: the planet is doomed.

Which brings us to the main players: the Tories, Labour, the Liberal Democrats, and the SNP.

I'm going to discard the Tories from consideration. Ironically, when one looks at their stated principles, the Tory party is probably the closest to my own views. Unfortunately for them, I disagree with every single one of their actual policies, and don't trust a single one of the individuals involved. So, they're out.

I also have to discard the SNP. I like a lot of what they've said they're going to do. Smaller class sizes is long overdue, and the NHS badly needs more money. And I'm not fundamentally against a moderate tax-rise to pay for it... except they've claimed they're actually going to cut taxes, which leads me to the conclusion that they've got their sums badly wrong. In 1998, Gordon Brown claimed that there were huge efficiency savings that could allow more money to go into services in schools, hositals and the like without raising taxes, simply by cutting red tape, but that failed. The reason it failed was that the very people who would need to do the work cutting that red tape were the same people whose jobs existed because of that red tape. Only an idiot or an idealist will work himself out of a job.

The other SNP policy that bugs me is their idea of a local income tax to replace Council Tax. As a relatively high earner, I'm in the group of people who would actually pay more under that system. As a single man with no children, I'm also in the group who gain least from council services - I get garbage pickup and water supplies.

But, the principle is that those who earn more, and so are most able to pay, probably should pay more. And it's a principle I actually do agree with - it just sucks being in precisely the wrong group.

So, the SNP's economic policy must be wrong. But, actually, I might vote for them despite that, except for one inescapable point where my position fundamentally differs from theirs: independence.

If the SNP gain power, it is their intention to hold a referendum on independence. It is my expectation that they would win such a referendum. It is also my contention that that would be an absolute disaster for Scotland. Our economy, even if we get all of the North Sea Oil, just isn't self-sustaining. We have a tourism industry, and we export quality graduates.

But it's not even that issue that leads me to oppose independence. There's also the matter that an independent Scotland in Europe really won't amount to anything. As part of the UK, we actually have some presence on the world stage, especially with so many Scots in important roles in the current government. (I do think the UK should be a lot more involved in European matters, rather than generally standing on the sides and frequently complaining, but that's another topic for another day.)

But that's still not the reason why I oppose independence. In fact, it's a combination of two things: in terms of identity, I'm a Scotsman, but I'm also a Briton, and I don't want that to change. Plus, there's the bond of family, which is extremely important. (And which would have gone without saying, and hence would have remained unsaid, except that several members of my family read this, and would have been rightly offended at its omission.)

(I'd best note at this point that I'm also not going to vote a particular way to prevent a particular party gaining power. I really hate that approach. I'll vote for someone I do want, or I'll not vote at all. I won't be scared into voting Labour because otherwise the SNP might win.)

Which leaves Labour and the Lib-Dems. But I don't like current Labour policy at all, and I especially don't like the fact that they get so many votes from people who have always voted Labour and will always vote Labour, despite that Labour now does not stand for the things it stood for when I was at school. (I also noted, on my way back from the opticians this morning, that Labour have now stooped to bald-faced lies in their campaigning. They have a poster on the way into Falkirk that claims that the SNP will cost the average family an extra £5,000 per year. The average household income is £28k, so this represents a tax increase of 17.8%, which is utterly absurd. Even if the SNP sums are wrong, and even if the Labour calculation for the SNP promises is what they claim, the SNP wouldn't impose such a burden - they'd back off on their other policies first, not being totally insane.

And that brings me back to the Lib-Dems. Where, tragically, I run into a major problem. It is likely that this election will again lead to no party having an outright majority, which means we'll get another coalition. And, since Labour and the SNP will never form a coalition, and neither will ally themselves with the Tories, this means we'll get either a Lib-Lab coalition again or an SNP-Liberal coalition.

This would be ideal, especially the latter, and especially if the Lib-Dems were able to persuade the SNP that they should have at least a full term in office before moving to the referendum on devolution. That would be ideal. Sadly, the SNP have stated they're not interested in a coalition under those terms (and, to a certain extent, I say good on them for sticking with their principles). And the Lib-Dems have stated they won't enter a coalition unless the referendum is binned.

And that means the only coalition is a Lib-Lab one, and it means that any vote for the Lib Dems is effectively a vote for Labour.

And that brings me back to where I started? Who do I vote for? Or do I not vote at all?

What I did at the weekend

It is quite strange being at work on the Tuesday after Easter. Last year, my final day at work for my previous employer was the Thursday before Good Friday. I spent the Easter weekend driving north, and had a week of house-hunting before starting my new job. The year before that, my contract with my then-employer officially expired on Good Friday (although I had that day off). The year before that, I was unemployed, and the year before that I was working on my MSc. So, it's not since 2002 that I've had to work on 'this day'.

I had half expected to have to work on Saturday, and indeed yesterday, but the powers-that-be here were doing extensive work on the phone systems, and I therefore couldn't come in in case there was a dinosaur attack (which happens more often than you might expect in these parts). Clearly, you can't be dealing with roving velociraptors while the phones are also not working. We don't even use UNIX.

Anyway, confusing Jurassic Park references aside, Mr Hammond and I found ourselves at home. I cannot speak as to his choice of activities, but I took the opportunity to burn through my entire 'to-do' list. So, I cleaned the kitchen. I cleaned the bathroom (horrors!). I wrote a reply to the people who are handling my pension from last year's employer about what I want done with the funds. I did my weekly shop. I cooked four days' worth of food. I saw a man about getting my bagpipes fixed. I even wrote to the NHS (finally), asking them to allocate a doctor and/or dentist for me.

The rest of the weekend was spent watching TV and various films I had recorded from Sky. "Derailed" is a bad film. I knew it was a bad film when fifteen minutes into it I saw the 'big twist' coming clear as day. That it took fifteen minutes to get to the point where the two main characters are even actually talking was a bad sign, especially since the whole thing was less than two hours.

"Casanova" is also a bad film, although not as bad as "Derailed". As a hint to the film-makers: when dealing with a man who according to legend had 10,000 lovers, it might not be the best idea to shoot for a '12A' certificate. Additionally, it is probably not a good idea to hinge the plot on the question "will he get the girl?". But then, when the plot was as incredibly stupid as that one, I suppose it doesn't matter. The redeeming feature of the whole thing was that at least it was reasonably amusing in places.

Then there was "Blade: the Series", "Doctor Who", "24", "Lost", and Harry Hill, none of which disappointed.

All in all, it was quite a successful weekend.

Nedmobiles on Parade!

On my way home from band tonight, I found my way barred by a most unlikely sight. It seems the local youth had decided tonight was the night to engage in their pasttime of cruising around town in their tricked-out rides, hoping to impress the ladeez. So, there they were, a convoy of cars, replete with the fancy wheel trims, the spoilers, and the loud exhausts. Very impressive.

Sadly, they had miscalculated in two ways:

Firstly, they had neglected to realise that putting a loud exhaust, a spoiler, and alloys on a car is all well and good, but it really counts for nothing if you can't actually afford a decent car to put them on. Otherwise, it just shouts "look at me! I'm a wannabe!"

Secondly, they hadn't realised that, from a driving around perspective, Falkirk is really badly designed. So, when you have a convoy of six cars cruising around town, the mere presence of so many cars on the road causes the whole thing to grind to a halt. And, no matter how fine your ride, it tends to look rather pathetic when stopping and starting its way through the streets.

Me, I have my eye on one of those new BMW 3-Series hardtop convertibles. It's not a car I would ever actually drive, but it's fun to think "what if"?

(Why is it not a car I would drive? Well, it's about four times too expensive. I'm inclined to do much the same for my next car as I did for my current one - buy something two or three years old, and then run it until the wheels fall off. That said, I'm hoping to get three more years out of my current car before I have to make that decision.)

Sagas that Never End...

I've just phoned the optician, and I'm going to have to take the glasses in to have the measurements checked. Which is fine, except that Saturday is the earliest I can go, and then there will be however long it takes them to fix the problem, and so on. The mystery of why the sunglasses are fine has been resolved, though: the main pair were ordered in while the sunglasses were done in-house. So, it seems likely that the order was placed incorrectly. Which wouldn't surprise me in the least.

But, I did say sagas, didn't I?

Remember my incorrect gas bill? Well, the end result was that I got a letter from Scottish Gas promising that they would rectify the problem, calculate a fresh bill, and send it out to me no later than the 9th of March. When I get home, I intend to phone them to ask why I still haven't received said bill. I mean, if they don't want my money then that's fine with me, but I would quite like to know that.

Seems I'm not due a good day after all :(

Today was all set up to be a good day. True, I had to come into work, but I'm getting paid for it (unexpectedly - I was under the impression that my contract said otherwise). Plus, at work I was just getting to the bottom of the last 'distraction task' before getting back to my 'real task', which was quite nice. But first, I had an errand to run - my new glasses should have arrived, so it was time to pick them up.

When I got to the optician, it was mentioned to me that a message had been left on my answering machine. Which is nice, except that I received no such message. And, since I have no roommate, and didn't delete the message myself, that means my answering machine isn't working. This isn't a huge surprise, but does add one more annoyance.

Anyway, I got my new glasses, which are much like my old glasses except with slightly darker frames. Also, being made of titanium, the frames are at once lighter and stronger, which is good to know. So, I put them on...

and immediately knew something was badly wrong. Every single thing was out of focus, and I found my vision swimming. But, of course, it could just be that my eyes needed to relax and work with the new lenses, not against them. I was advised to try them out for a couple of days, to let my eyes adapt.

Well, I wore my old glasses for the drive to work, of course, then switched to the new ones. Two hours later, I've had to switch back. Its true that my eyes adapted, and I was able to focus on things that were directly in front of me. And, it's true that those things were in slightly better focus than before.

But the peripherals, ah, the peripherals are useless. Basically, anything that's slightly off-centre is out of focus. Plus, I now have a splitting headache, and then there's the nausea. Badness.

I'll try them again tomorrow morning, to see if it makes any difference if I wear them as my only glasses for the day, but I'm not hopeful. It looks like something has gone wrong with my prescription and they'll need changed.

So, work.

I got to the office and found I have been assigned two more 'distraction tasks', both of which are adjudged to be even higher priority than the previous 'distraction task'. Looks like I'll not be doing any 'real task' work for a few more days, then.

Looking into the first of these, I was quickly able to replicate the problem, which is the first step towards solving it. Plus, I have a good idea what bit of code needs added, and even at what part of the code it needs added. But, can I find this latter location in the code? Not a chance.

Gah!

Oh well, at least the test I ran overnight worked.

My Marvellous Monde Musicale

Some time ago, my friend Graham and I were talking about how wonderful it would be to live in a muscial world - a world where the common man would spontaneously burst into song about the mundane events of his life. For example, in the morning a person might be moved to sing:

I'm drive-ing, driving to work!
Other drivers conspire, in my blind spot to lurk.
It gravely concerns me, for I cannot see them,
when I'm drive-ing, driving to work!

(Catchy, isn't it? The air guitar solo is a bit worrisome, though.)

Anyway, we both agreed that this would be a fine thing. However, I did worry that there might be some resistance. After all, given the quality of so many of our professionals, how bad must the common man be by comparison?

However, there is a solution. Clearly, attempting to convert the whole world in one go, it makes far more sense instead to convert only a small part of the world, thus creating, for example, a Town of Music. Thereafter, we could gradually expand the borders, gradually annexing outlying regions. You know, one aria at a time.

Yeah, I'm not going to touch that one...

An obsessive reader of my blog would yesterday have seen three different versions of the previous post. In the first version, I wrote something that, read in the manner intended, seemed okay. However, it could be read another way, that was very definately not something I wanted to say. So, a couple of hours later, I revised the text to say something else. But, although the new version was better, it still left me rather uneasy, and so I took down the offending paragraph entirely.

I have decided not to revisit it at all. The topic that is touched on is rather grim and depressing, and although I have strong opinions on the matter, actually expressing those opinions runs a very great risk of saying the wrong thing. And, given the nature of the topic, I feel it is therefore best to say nothing at all.

Five Fascinating Facts

The challenge: to post five facts about myself that you, gentle reader, don't know. Naturally, this is quite difficult, since some of my readers know me very well indeed, which limits the field greatly, and some of the things I haven't shared with anyone I haven't shared for rather good reason. So, tricky...

Still, I have five that I think you won't know (although some might suspect):

1) The one and only peice of careers advice I got at school said that I was underqualified for the job I am currently doing. For some reason, they omitted "go to university" as one of the options when answering the question "what do you intend to do after leaving school". This wasn't the first time I was sure some of the people at that school were muppets, but it might have been the first time my suspicion was confirmed.

2) At night, before going to bed, I have to neatly fold up the clothes I have been wearing, or I can't get to sleep. Even more ridiculous, when the time comes to drop the dirty clothes into the washing bin, I have to fold them up first before doing this!

3) Every time I have been in a strip club, I have made a profit. I should probably explain...

I was in Arkansas, visiting an old friend, and on the evening I arrived he (in concert with his brother-in-law and a random cousin) decided it would be a good idea to drag me off to a strip club. Actually, to be technical, it wasn't a strip club, but rather a titty bar. (The difference being: in Arkansas there are licensing laws for two types of clubs. Strip clubs have a strict "no touching" rule, but serve alcohol. Titty bars do not serve alcohol, although you can certainly carry in your own drinks, but you're allowed to touch anywhere the girl isn't clothed.) As we were going in, random cousin gave me a bunch of dollar bills, about $8 in all.

It was not a good night. The beers selected by random cousin for consumption that night were Miller Lite with reduced carbs, and were possibly the single worst beers in the entire world. Certainly, they were the worst I've had the misfortune to consume. For the rest of it... (I've deleted the rest of this paragraph. It bothers me a great deal. I may revisit at a later time.)

(The funny thing is, I'm not even particularly opposed to the notion of people taking their clothes off for money. It's just a business, and rather more honest than some. Though that sort of diversion is not for me - I'm an eye-man, and anyway prefer a woman I can actually have a conversation with. Shockingly, the strippers were disinclined to talk, and their eyes had all the excitement and passion of the bored professional.)

So, I forced down a couple of Miller Lite, studied the advertisement/place mat things (and hence my intimate knowledge of Arkansas licensing laws), complained of being far too tired to properly enjoy myself, and tried to ignore my senses. And, by the time we left, I found I still had one of the original dollar bills.

So, as I said, profit.

5) For many years, my CV listed a qualification in cake decoration. I still hold the qualification, since it doesn't expire, but no longer list it on my CV.

4) (You thought I was cheating, didn't you?) I have never been in a nightclub. Incidentally, this means I have been in more titty bars than nightclubs, which is slightly concerning on an academic level.

So, there we go. Anyone know any of those fascinating facts?

That's a long way!

Just a micro-post today, to announce the completion of another of my long-held ambitions. This morning as I was just moving onto the motorway on my way to work, my car hit 100,000 miles.

I cheered.

I'm now moving onto my next long-held ambition. However, I'm rapidly running out. I think I'd best develop a few more ambitions, just in case. And ideas?

Why is it...

that when I wear my BB top, people always ask me whether I was or still am in the BB, but when I wear my Kenco top nobody asks me if I was or still am a mug of coffee?

The Queen

HMV are clearly pure evil - I went in to try to find a suitable Mother's Day present (usually, Mum gives a guide as to what she would like; this year I've had to do my best without - I'll let you know how I got on tomorrow), and came out with £50 of DVDs for myself... and that was after I decided not to buy the other half dozen I wanted. When it comes to films, my tastes are many and varied. I particularly like a good action film... but I don't think anyone has made one since Con Air. But, never mind; the ones I bought were Seven Swords, which seems to be a Chinese of The Seven Samurai (also The Magnificent Seven), Borat, since it was on special offer, Pan's Labyrinth, which I wanted to see but missed in the cinema...

and The Queen. In case you don't know, this is a film starring Helen Mirren as the Queen, and deals with the events of the week following the death of Diana.

Now, normally, when a film wins lots of Oscars or Baftas, this means it's an incredibly depressing film in which really bad things happen to people who may or may not be particularly nice, and often with a hint of 'special interest group' influence. Generally, it is not an indication that the film is in any way worth watching.

But still, it was a film of interest. I distinctly remember the week in question. I was in church when I heard that Diana had died, and it was a bit of a shock, to say the least. On returning home, I found that every channel had a non-stop diet of coverage of these events, and very little real information. Then came the outpouring of public grief, which I considered largely over-the-top (I was actually with the Queen on this one), and the key statements from Earl Spencer and Tony Blair (before the dark times really began)... and then Candle in the Wind.

And I remember the attacks on the monarchy of that week. For a few days there, people really didn't like the Queen, and there seemed to be a mood that we might actually be about to get rid of them, the like of which I have never seen before or since. And then it just evaporated the moment the Queen made her live statement. Ironically, Diana may well have saved the monarchy.

(And, since I'd best address this, my politics as regard the monarchy are complex. In principle, I don't like the concept of monarchy, or inherited priviledge at all. However, I don't believe it's enough to simply clamour for the removal of the monarchy; one needs something to put in its place, and I've never seen a better idea put forward. Certainly, the last thing we need is another batch of useless and corrupt politicians to not vote for. Furthermore, for as long as we haven't gotten rid of the monarchy, I'll take the stance that she remains the Queen, she remains our head of state, and that as such she has claim on my loyalty. As I said, it's complex.)

So, anyway, how is the film?

Actually, it is excellent. The characterisations ring very true, and Mirren really sells the role of Queen. Of particular interest, however, is that none of the characters with the exceptions of the Queen and Tony Blair come off at all well. Cherie and the New Labour people are particularly unpleasant, while the Windsors seem wrapped up in this bizarre little world, oblivious to everyone and everything else.

Tony Blair is a character I've come to dislike over the last ten years. I voted for Labour in 1997, and not since, because back then I really did believe that things were going to be different. It was odd to be reminded that once upon a time he was incredibly popular, and he actually makes almost all the right calls in this film. It's also fun to watch his attitudes to the monarchy change as the film goes on, changing from enjoying his rise at their expense to finally taking direct action to prevent disaster. But the very best part of the film comes at the end, when the Queen points out to him that one day the public may turn on him as they had on her.

And then there's Helen Mirren as the Queen. This must have been a very difficult role, because she is a very private person, and she always does seem quite stoic in her manner. So, how do you portray that without seeming wooden? Well, she does.

The other odd reflection I came away with from the film centres around a scene where the Windsors have a picnic on the Balmoral estate, and the trappings of the meal, the food that was available, and some of the roles that were adopted were all hauntingly familiar. This was a scene that I could have seen playing out in exactly the same manner with my own grandparents a few years ago. Which is perhaps also telling - I have actually met the Queen on one occasion, and my overriding impression then was of how strongly she reminded me of my own grandmother. It's all a bit odd.

Anyway, I highly recommend this film.

Sporting crisis

When it comes to sport, and England, I adopt a strict policy of 'I don't really care'. I take the view that the English team are on the field of play to represent England, and being as I am not English, therefore, they are very little to do with me. Win, lose or draw, it's all the same to me... mostly.

(Rant about the English media deleted. It would probably upset some people, and is entirely tangential to the subject at hand.)

Except cricket. Cricket is the one sport where I actually do support the English team, for two reasons. The first of these is personal, and has to do with my relationship with my father, and will not be elaborated on further in this post. The second reason is that, to all intents and purposes, there is no Scottish cricket team, largely because a test match takes five days, and the Scottish weather therefore makes just finishing a match cause for celebration. (Naturally, real cricket is test match cricket. But that's another rant for another day... and probably one I won't even bother with.)

Which brings us to the Cricket World Cup... in which Scotland are due to be roundly thrashed by Australia today. And let's make no mistake - we are going to be roundly thrashed. (Not that there's any shame in that. "Oh, no! We lost to the best team in the world!")

Which leaves me is something of a quandary. See, if Scotland actually are in the tournament, then I really have to support them. Dulce et decorum est, and all that. Yet, I can't really support two teams, because that just makes me a dirty two-timing cheat.

What to do, what to do?

Bad Science

Last night's dinner conversation was about global warming, and in particular the Channel 4 documentary that attempted to disprove it. The theory goes that climate change is on a 75-year cycle, and so the current rise in temperatures is entirely natural, and not the massive problem we currently fear.

To which my answer is: possibly.

But what is pretty clear is that the science that underlies this programme (and, indeed, virtually everything you ever hear about global warming) is bad science. The people involved have taken a subset of the available evidence, moulded it to fit their chosen hypothesis, and presented it as 'proof'. It is, of course, nothing of the sort.

But I'm not surprised. You have to work really hard to get access to good science these days. Good science is built as follows: Develop a hypothesis. Then build an experiment to try to disprove it. If your experiment fails, then that acts as a supporting point in favour of your hypothesis. If your experiment succeeds, your hypothesis is wrong. (Oh, and if you're doing a comparitive study, change one thing. Don't have your kids take a dietary supplement, and fix their diets, and take more exercise, and then claim the dietary supplement improved their brane development.)

Incidentally, this is where the saying "the exception that proves the rules" comes in handy. Testing 'normal' cases against your hypothesis isn't going to get you anywhere - you wouldn't develop a hypothesis that was obviously wrong in the first place. Instead, you try the hard cases... or, if you will, the 'exceptional' ones. If the tests at the extremes work as expected, then that serves as a very strong indicator that your hypothesis is correct. So, the saying means the direct opposite of what most people think it means.

However, all of that is a fairly lengthy aside from where I was intending to go with this. Instead, my topic of choice: evolution.

This has become a major battleground between religion and science. See, the theory of evolution does not require the existence of God for life to have come into existence (it doesn't preclude it either, but some scientist then like to refer to Occam's Razor as 'proof' therefore that God doesn't exist. That Occam's Razor proves exactly nothing, and in fact makes no claim to do so, seems to elude them). So, significant numbers of people of faith are absolutely determined that evolution must be wrong, and will stop at nothing to have it discredited. And, they are absolutely insistent that it must not, under any circumstances, be taught to children.

On the other hand, we have the scientific community. Large portions of which take this as a personal attack on their profession as a whole. And, there is therefore a significant push to see evolution regarded as a matter of incontrovertible scientific fact, to which they will brook no opposition. (And, of course, it must be taught to children because, you know, knowledge is good.)

And here are two inconvenient truths that seem to have been missed by both sides: 1) Evolution is almost certainly correct. 2) Evolution is almost certainly wrong.

The first statement is based on the incompatibility between the mass of available evidence and the nature of the God believed by the men of faith who oppose evolution. In order for evolution to be false, they must pre-suppose a God who deliberately created the world, then went to great effort to not only hide his influence and existence, but even put in huge amounts of effort to indicate to the contrary. That seems a very strange world-view to be taking.

The second statement is based on the very nature of science. Newton's theories about gravity were superceded by Einstein's relativity, which itself looks to be replaced by string theory. So it is with evolution: what we think happened is probably reasonably correct in some aspects, but will almost certainly be shown to be incomplete in several areas, and simply wrong in others. (There are also some major holes in evolution, not least the jump from an ape-like ancestor to a human-like one. There are a number of ideas on how that could have happened, but no clear evidence as yet.)

In the meantime, we're stuck between bad science on all sides. 'Creationist Science' is a joke, and a bad one at that. But so too is any excessive assurance in the correctness of evolution - it's not a matter of scientific fact, but rather the 'best fit' theory we currently have.

(At some later time I may discuss last week's Sunday conversation, in which Richard again shows his weakness with probability. And, also, in which I dissect "Deal or No Deal".)

Getting my money's worth

When I moved into my apartment in Yeovil, it being the first time I'd lived alone, I purchased two exciting new non-stick saucepans. Such was the excitement surrounding this event that I felt it could pass entirely without comment, either here or elsewhere. But, time passed, and one of the saucepans lost its non-stick property. And, as it is written "if a pan shall lose its non-stickiness, how shall it be made non-stick(y) again?"

And so, I made my way to Tesco, as is my wont, and purchased a new non-stick saucepan. Whereupon the old should have been consigned to the outer darkness, where there is wailing and clattering of condiments.

However, it was at this point that genetics got in the way. See, my father always balks at the notion of throwing away a perfectly good saucepan (or, generally, other item) just because it has been replaced and will never be used again. After all, you never know when it might come in handy. What if I can't be bothered doing the washing up for three days?

So, anyway, I have added the dead saucepan to my stack of dead cooking implements, where it joins the first frying pan I purchased.

Still, the momentousness of this event should not be over-stated. It really wasn't worthy of comment until now.

Last week, I was sent to France from Wednesday to Friday. And the hotel where I was staying was almost fully booked, so I had to change rooms after the first night. And, on that first night, I was booked into a 'luxury' room, and on the second I enjoyed a 'standard' room. All very exciting, I'm sure you'll agree.

The difference was truly remarkable. The luxury room had two televisions! Sadly, one of these wasn't plugged in, and so just took up space. Also, there was nothing on, even accounting for the language problem, and when I did discover the Manchester United match (and determined that I could just about become a Man U fan for one night, deeply shameful as that is), the channel only went and lost reception exactly fifteen seconds after kick-off!

Additionally, the luxury room had a COMFY CHAIR, presumably just in case I needed to interrogate someone or make them confess. Alas, Pythonesque as it would have been, I lacked any tea of nice biscuits to offer a potential captive at Elevenses.

But the big difference was the most difficult to deal with, for the luxury room had two single beds instead of one double bed. This caused no end of difficulty, because clearly it was my duty to ensure I got my money's worth from the room (despite that my company were actually paying), and that meant utilising the facilities to their fullest extent.

It was not much fun having to wake up a 2:30 in the morning to swap to the other bed.

The Squirrel Ballet joke

Note: Graeme has threatened that if I ever tell this joke again, he will kill me. So, if I suddenly go quiet after this, you'll know what has happened.

Anyway, for his 60th birthday celebrations, my family whisked our father off to Barend Holiday Village, a holiday park in Dunfries & Galloway where we had spent several summers in '89, '90 and, I think '91, as well as some Easter holidays a bit later on. There we spent the weekend engaged in all manner of fun and games, somehow avoiding the festive arguments that normal families seem to engage in at times like this. (Sadly, Paul wasn't able to make it, on account of working that weekend. But, other than that, the whole family was there.)

The site had a pool, complete with sauna, on it, and on the Saturday, while making my way from the pool back to the chalet, I chanced to see the local squirrel population, which was in rehearsals for their part in the site's weekly entertainment, a variety performance put on my the local fauna.

For their part, the squirrels had decided to entertain through the medium of ballet. Naturally, they were doing a selection from the Nutcracker Suite.

Making Cheese and Salad sandwiches, the Stephen way

1) Open the fridge, and take out the tomato and cucumber.
2) Realise that, being an idiot, you've forgotten something. Open the fridge, and take out the apple you're going to have with lunch, and that therefore you need to wash.
3) Then, open the fridge again, and take out the bread and cheese.
4) Make sandwiches, and hope no-one ever finds out.

Anthropomorphic Biscuits

On a whim, I bought a packet of Happy Faces biscuits in Tesco last week. Truly, they are the finest of biscuits. So sweet and tasty.

My favourite is the one with the sly mischievous grin. It looks at you as if to say "Go on! Eating a whole packet in one day won't kill you! And no-one need ever know! And we're so sweet. Mmm, biscuits!"

Mmm, biscuits!

A good night at band

Yes, it's true. Tonight, I actually had a really good night at band.

Of course, a large part of the reason for this is the Mr Instructor wasn't there. This meant I got to spend an entire evening without having faults picked in my play, such as my playing a tune I've known for fifteen years really badly (um, yeah, okay), or that my 'D doublings' were sloppy... in a tune that doesn't have any 'D doublings'. So, that was quite nice.

But the other reason was that the pipe major wasn't there, which somehow worked out to me being effectively in charge. This was quite nice, because it enabled me to use both my DEEP MIGHTY VOICE (complete with authentic Scottish accent, to make the ladies go all tingly), and also my PHENOMENAL COSMIC POWERS.

All in all, it was quite fun.

"Wonn! Two! Three! Three Leetle Vowels. Ah Ah Ah!"

I have been away, but behold! I have returned!

Sorry for not posting for a while. Work has been just mental lately, and since I can't even post details about it, I've been left without much time to post, or topics to post on.

Anyway, now it seems that work, thwarted in their attempt to get rid of me by my returning from France, are now considering sending me to a whole other continent! And not one of these friendly continents, either - one brought to you by the letter 'A'! Still, I may be able to avert this disaster, potentially by just not showing up in the office for a few days, and hoping they'll forget about me. It's so crazy, it just might work.