spacebar excerpt from oct 29scooter/ : alluring is a good word
scooter/ [Broadcast]: hi ellen. little buddy.
bong/no on 211[Broadcast]: I have seen the best minds of my generation
standardization hating Microsoft disillusioned and cold and hungry
combing the haight ashbury streets for an angry fix
ellen/mmm unagi[Broadcast]: its all normal people for once
scooter/ [Broadcast]: ellen remember the doll "my buddy"?
and this abridged:sonic/hamachi: who's there, jim? [poker at chateau maz]
iam/jim: Heidi, Fixer, Dipwick, Agro, Ert, Herf, Neck
scooter/ : say hi to heidi for scooter.
sonic/hamachi: say hi from sonic
iam/jim: heidi says high She says she won in a big way.
bong/no on 211[Broadcast]: But his concept is really neat. Takes performance
art into cyberspace
fusty/ : no one has normal names any more.
iam/jim: Everyone says "hi sonic!"
sonic/hamachi: well, we talk more online than off, become accustomed to
seeing the logons
iam/jim: Caleb and Trixie just left....
sonic/hamachi: we name ourselves, which is more fitting than what our parents named us before they knew us
now featuring: full sentences! (read on)guaranteed: full sentencesque for the remainder of this work.
monday at workbut it reminds me of what I wanted to do with my page yesterday besides explore scooter's dark side
I feel under attack
what's the status
is it ready
there's a deadline
let's have a meeting
make a decision
howard asks me,
how's your cold?
I give an answer,
ask him, how are you?
he doesn't answer,
his next question,
how's tools for thought?
there's little compassion beyond the deadline.
and it makes me wonder
will this turn into just a job?
sitting at my desk
responsible for things
months down the line
it's fune and fin when it's a cause
let's get this thing to launch
let's make new fun thing
but when it's let's keep new fun thing alive for more funding
or let's make new fun thing more popular
that, of course, could go either way
late night talk with gk sez
he respects college for challenging ego.
that you learn that there's so much to learn
and you're definitely an ignoramus
every once in a while when I think about whether to return or not
am I so far ahead of that game I'm not playing?
last night I thought of bill gates and steve jobs
those guys could stand a little ego loss perhaps
or perhaps they are successful, in their way, cuz they think they so bad
is that what I think I am? college does have a lot to teach me, and taking classes like quantum physics, social history of consumption and shamanism is a blast. but the flocks of phosphoradultlescents wondering about the meaning of life and just beginning to take drugs is a little wearing. tuff being the only dude who's heald a job for over two or three months, and had his own apartment (all just barely, but nonetheless) one dude like that in fifty. nobody knows what stock options are, nobody knows about like health care and shit.
maybe I just don't run with the right crowd. or maybe college is about subjecting yourself to the intiatory experience again. but somehow I can't but feel I spin my wheels some. especially since swarthmore costs $15k a semester. that's absurd. at least they work you for it. and that is the saving grace isn't it - that they do their work. that they don't fuck around with serious study. and they let me have a radio show.
this is how it goes in my brain.
where will I be bored in february? I imagine I could study heartily in february, but who wants to deal with that isolation of the winter months? perhaps I do.
la la la
anyways, I have until december 1st to decide, and something far more interesting actually happened today.
a few days ago, I mentioned a tree hearing that I would be attending; the city had posted some notices, actually afixed them to our aboreal friends, noting their impending demise due to "banner blockage."
so tonight I left work early and bussed across town to a public hearing on the matter in the "war memorial building."
it was 6.10 by the time I got there, I was late. the hearing room was a bunch of folding chairs under a high ceiling, a single man listening to a person at a podium in front of him, a woman taking notes, and under two dozen listeners and dozers.
oddly enough, a friend from wired was there as well. kristen spence, the second or third or fourth employee was there in her thigh high stockings and short black one piece, hair blonde like I'd never seen it, excited to see me and energized to save the trees.
the woman representing the commercial development spoke not-so-eloquently about the impinged commercial use of tree-free space (banner blocking), and the intent to really benefit some trees by killing others. kristin stood not reprenting wired, but a lot of folks who worked there; she had organized letters from her coworkers, most all of whom enjoyed the walk along third street on their way to work, and would be sad to see additional trees absent from that trip. she decried "the destruction of greenery for capitalism."
a launching off point for my brief remarks, I addressed the quality of that stretch of walk, especially granted the sparseness of foliage in the general south of market area, and suggested that the developers find another location, perhaps an otherwise concrete stretch of soma to replant, or plant anew.
so the developer lady stood and reeled off vague platitudes regarding replanting, she would donate the trees to friends of the urban forest, etc etc
fortunately, there was an expert on hand. dan mckenna, urban forester from the city department of public works, was called on by hearing officer george white to comment on the proceedings, before he announced his verdict. dan noted that the trees were 10 years old, so a replanting was really out of the question. in terms of the health of the trees, there was nothing obviously wrong with them, though the developer had noted a few brown leaves, due, she said to "wind burn," gave an appearance of ill health to her development (which charges $1100 a month for 500 square feet of residential space; that did not win her sympathy.)
the four of us were the only parties to speak, and so george announced that there had been no compelling reason given to remove the trees, and so they would remain. the decision could be appealed to another higher court; I watched the developer lady scribble down that information. and what's to stop her from feeding and watering the trees besides? letting them die of their own accord? the appearance of ill health? things became a bit more interesting when we found out the trees were planted as part of an urban renewal requirement of the st francis place development (darn, I forgot to wax eloquent over imagining saint francis' wishes in the matter)
it was settled, for now, kristin took off, I stayed to watch another polite pruning brawl. this time, the trees in question, now three pines, were responsible for blocking a view of some 18 very reasonable people. it was too expensive to ask the city to prune them (18 inches a year growth!), so they were proposing removal, and replacement with smaller foliage. other neighbors objected - this was an important noise and view barrier for them (different placement) from a major thoroughfare.
the compelling reason for removal was view - that was not compelling enough, the hearing decided against tree removal! (the neighbors were free to pool the $700-1200 required for biannual pruning by a certified arborist however) we were 2 for 2, and when I inquired about the other three trees heard before I got there, I learned they came out on top as well!
"but dan," I said, "the notices posted on the trees made them sound so close to removal! as if it had already been all but decided!"
"that is to solicit your letters!"
"how many letters does it take to bring it to a hearing?"
"only one, if I can't get the parties to agree."
and all of a sudden I had a lot more appreciation for city government