Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Archives
Classifieds
Stories
Events
Contests
Music
Movies
Theater
Food
Legal Guide
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
Close
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
February 12, 2025
February 5, 2025
January 29, 2025
January 22, 2025
January 15, 2025
January 8, 2025
January 1, 2025
December 25, 2024
December 18, 2024
December 11, 2024
December 4, 2024
Close
Anchor ads are not supported on this page.
Copley La Jolla Headquarters, Library for Sale
Pete, have a look at your page. Click edit. Notice that =headline1= is formated with the "=" front and back. ==headline2== uses two "==", and so on... Use the "*" for bulleted lists Use the "#" for numbered lists Happy editing...if you have questions, contact me through the site or through the Reader. Fred (aka TWFred)— October 9, 2009 11:17 p.m.
Copley La Jolla Headquarters, Library for Sale
Pete, you are correct. The wikipedia administration and resolution process for such conflicts is quite remarkable. It's not just good IT practice, it's good social practice we can all learn from. But there is always a benevolent dictator who decides in the end. When I'm in charge of a wiki, I end up the ultimate arbitor. But I've never had to use this power yet, except blocking malicious posters.— October 9, 2009 11:02 p.m.
Copley La Jolla Headquarters, Library for Sale
For those of you who want to add to a San Diego wiki, please go to: http://www.changesandiego.org This is a wiki that requires no registration to edit. I've set up some blank pages you can add to right now: http://www.changesandiego.org/wiki/How_can_we_imp… http://www.changesandiego.org/wiki/What_are_our_c… http://www.changesandiego.org/wiki/What_are_our_p… Yes this is a wiki, and at the beginning may have errors. But it only takes you to make it better. If you like, you can even copy the wikipedia article about David Copley onto changesandiego.org and you can all add whatever additional relevant information belongs there. Maybe we should do the same for John Moores, whose wikipedia article is sadly deficient -- and tightly watched for anyone adding negative facts (even if true). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Moores_(basebal…— October 9, 2009 10:51 p.m.
Copley La Jolla Headquarters, Library for Sale
russl, I agree with you on lots of stuff, especially language. But I have to disagree on your characterization of wiki (the technology) and its most famous implementation, wikipedia. You are correct that wikipedia does not have the same rate of accuracy compared to the traditional encyclopedias such as Britanica. Wikipedia is reported to be 80% accurate as opposed to 95% for the more authoritative sources. But there is a follow up to this. Over time the wikipedia articles continue to improve. In addition, the wikipedia articles average twice as long. Best of all, when someone knowledgeable comes along, like you russl, you can edit and improve the article. I specialize in technical documentation. Frequently, when I arrive at an IT/Telco firm, the documentation is a mess of documents. When I convert this to an internal wiki and train everyone how to use it, the results within six months are dramatic. The accuracy of the company's knowledge base increases, redundant or contradictory information is merged and clarified, links are established, terminology standardized, and everyone can find the information they need when they actually need it. This is a crucial competitive advantage in the information industry. Wiki isn't the only way to do it, but in the right corporate culture it works wonders. The key is to focus on correcting mistakes rather than hiding them -- sharing and improving information instead of hoarding it. Wikipedia itself is a remarkable phenomenon. I volunteered at MediaWiki HQ in the summer of 2008 and was amazed at how few people it took to do so much. While you're right that wikipedia certainly has errors, for it's breadth and scope it remains a valuable first resource. It's not suitable for in depth research, but I look to the links at the bottom on most pages to find the way to better and finer grained detail. This is in addition to searching with Google in both English and other languages. But I do this for a living, and don't expect the normal (yes, I'm happily abnormal) guy to go through that effort to find information sufficient to satisfy his curiosity. For most people, what is found in wikipedia is good enough, and continues to get better. I think it's unreasonable to exclude wikipedia as an information resource -- especially in commentary on Reader articles. Cast doubt on any specific instance of error, absolutely, but do not declaim the entire resource ineligible for consideration as evidence. Best, Fred— October 9, 2009 10:44 p.m.
Unfriendly skies
Good to hear someone in San Diego is finally paying attention to the issue of law enforcement under the influence of steroids. If there were a random unannounced test of current SDPD officers, I bet at least 10% would show up positive. People wonder why cases of police violence are spiralling out of control...well, here's one of the reasons. They're hyped up on 'roids and are completely unable to control their tempers.— October 2, 2009 1:55 a.m.
San Diego Home Prices Continue to Improve
It's called a "dead cat bounce". After the summer house buying season, the prices will be back on their downward trend. Until we reach some kind of reasonable income/housing cost ratio, it's inevitable that prices will continue to adjust.— September 29, 2009 9:55 a.m.
Vision Restored for the Blind
It's called "bluetooth" in honor of the second King of Denmark, King Harald Bluetooth.— September 29, 2009 9:54 a.m.
Bypassing Bylaws in Golden Hill
Comment #1 has NO talk of violence. The citizens "revolution" Mr. Hunt urges is completely reasonable when you consider how your friends downtown have screwed San Diego. Comment #7 has the inevitable "illegals" bashing we find everywhere in San Diego, largely as a result of talk-radio bigots like Roger Hedgecock. I tend to ignore these rants, since they're so misinformed. But it really was a disgression from the main point that your beloved CDC is deeply corrupt...and you are defending that corruption. The "illegals" rant is a red herring. Comment #15 is personally attacking you? So your name is Pat Martin? Why don't you use it instead of hiding behind a pseudonym? What are you hiding? Comment #16 also names and shames you. Did you miss it? And...if you want to see some personal attacks, check out the responses I get from the downtowners when I call them on their corruption. Jack McGrory had the nerve to call me a "terrorist" because I testified to the council that he was bankrupting the city twelve years ago, Jim Madaffer, the notoriously unethical worm behind the theft of Grantville redevelopment money called me "disgusting"...if you can't take personal attacks, I wonder if you've ever actually done a single worthwhile thing in politics. It comes with the job, you know. Sure, you deserve credit for the "Trash Tigers", giving kids trashbags and encouraging them to clean up the neighborhood and your work for "Tiger Tales" encouraging literacy. But that's window dressing in a town where corruption has destroyed our good reputation and will soon destroy the quality of life for our communities. Comment #17 was your first comment? I guess some other Pat Martin masquerading as GHsupporter wrote posts #3 and #4 then, hey? Pat, you're just dishonest. According to online sources, "The CDC just this month presented its first “Lifetime Membership” to Pat Martin." Pat, you are turning out to be an example of what's wrong with San Diego, accepting an award from scum like Ben Hueso. http://sdnorthparknews.com/2009/09/greater-golden… If he tried to shake my hand, I'd spit in his face. That's because I truly love San Diego, and truly hate those who are doing their best to plunder my beloved city to pad their own political nests. The CDC's illegal move to block citizen input is just one example among many. If you love San Diego, as I'm sure you do, you'd stop defending that move and join with the rest of us who are simply disgusted with what's going on...instead of hobnobbing with the very people who are so very bad for San Diego.— September 28, 2009 11:24 p.m.
Chick Lit
A lot of Nabokov is tedious reading...except the book Pale Fire, which I found stunningly inventive and interesting, even though the format is totally strange. The long poem in the middle I especially admire: "I was the shadow of the waxwing slain, by the false azure of the window pane." I'm reading Pynchon's Mason and Dixon now, and finding it mostly dull, convoluted, and self-indulgent, but (occasionally) brilliant. I can't stand Jane Austin. Her stuff just gets on my nerves. A bunch of self-obsessed social climbers nattering on about their maneuverings...ugh. The best author writing today, in my never humble opinion, is Neil Stephenson. When you see how many inventions were spurred by his sci-fi novel Snow Crash, (Google Earth, Second Life, et alia), or enjoy his history of the invention of modern finance and cryptography in System of the World, or take the time to understand the ideas in his latest book Anathema, (i.e. long-term versus short-term thinking), it's easy to be impressed with this guy.— September 28, 2009 10:53 p.m.
Bypassing Bylaws in Golden Hill
GHsupporter, you've ignored my post completely. 1. I've been working on San Diego political campaigns for over two decades. I think I have more than earned the right to an opinion. 2. The issue isn't particular projects being shot down. It's the illegal dissolution of the oversight committee. This is just plain wrong, anti-democratic, bad policy, and a fraud perpetrated by city insiders who are so arrogant that they reject any and all criticism, no matter how valid, as "obstructionist". 3. You continue to rely solely on personal attacks. Instead of dealing with the others' quite reasonable arguments, you accuse them of racism, ignorance, and indolence. 4. You attack others quite fiercely, but are too cowardly to use your real name. I think we can safely dismiss any and all future comments you may care to write. Earlier I urged people to work together with you in common cause...but now I advise them to stay far away from you.— September 28, 2009 6:50 a.m.