If you email me by accident, this may happen

Incorrectly addressed emails in blue, my responses in black.

Clement Contract

Hi Scott,

I just wanted to let you know that Brad did refund the sofa to the value of $2383 (ish), but I did see that they had a credit on their account of which I apportioned the two new contracts that you put in today.

I would still like you to speak to Brad regarding this sale and bring him up-to-speed on why the clients decided to refund the sofa with him and then re-purchase it with you. As you are aware, no HDA owns a customer so while you have quite an extensive file with this client, this alone is not reason enough for you to have this sale.

Once you have both sorted this out I would like you to update me on where things stand.

Thanks so much.

Stephanie

RE: Clement Contract

Look, I didn't get to be where I am by being nice. Sofa sales is a cut throat business, and don't think Brad wouldn't steal away my clients given half an opportunity. It's the law of the jungle, my friend - and Brad knows this as well as I do. The next time Brad comes crying to you over a sale he lost to me, tell him to get used to it.

Honestly, maybe Brad isn't cut out for this business.

P.S. You have the wrong Scott Schafer. I do not sell sofas.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


ABBEY Product Knowledge!

Hi all,

Please come in at 8:30AM JULY 9th, for a PK on this new hard window products line. If you are scheduled to be off-it is in your best interest to be there. I hope to see everyone there and will bring in breakfast---bring your own coffee. It will be held in the design dept.

Thanks all!

Laura

Chintz & Company

Vancouver

RE: ABBEY Product Knowledge!

Bring your own coffee - are you kidding me? The old man must be spinning in his grave. He understood that this business runs on caffeine and adrenaline. I never saw him without a cup of steaming mud in his nicotine stained hands - even when he was on the can. Sure, his yellow teeth and sour breath made some customers uncomfortable, but he always closed the deal. Even if they looked a little frightened, his closure rate was the best in the business.

He looked like eighty when he kicked it at fifty, but retirement wouldn't have suited him anyway.

P.S. You have the wrong Scott Schafer. I do not sell sofas.


* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hi Scott Schafer!!!
Thankyou so much for dinner last night is was super yummy! Im sure your
enjoying the day, its another beautiful one. Its gonna be another long
day by the looks of it here so far. Kathy has been on my case about her
book that she needs back so I told her I would email you and ask for it.
Well if I dont see or talk to you before Friday I'll see ya at the beach!
Bye for now.........................Dena

RE: Hi Scott Schafer!!!
YOU - AND OTHER EMPLOYEES OF CHINTZ - HAVE THE WRONG EMAIL ADDRESS.

My name is Scott Schafer, but I do not work at Chintz. I live in California and write software for a living. While I'm mildly entertained by all the personal and confidential emails I've been getting addressed to the other Scott Schafer, this really, really needs to stop.

Please find out your Scott Schafer's proper email address and inform him that his colleagues have been sending emails to the wrong address (that is, mine).

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Steve Curtis would like to take some lessons with you

Hello. My name is Elizabeth and I’m Steve’s assistant here at SMI. I was hoping you might be able to give me some info on how much classes might be, and when you would have some time available.

As well where would you paint? I remember Steve mentioned that you have a studio but…

I would appreciate any info you could provide. Thank you so much,
Elizabeth
Vancouver phone #

RE: Steve Curtis would like to take some lessons with you
Dear Elizabeth,

Thank you for your inquiry. My fee for individual lessons is $1 for the first session, and doubling each session after that ($2, $4, etc). I require a minimum of twenty lessons.

You asked about my studio. Having explored and exhausted the limits of the conventional rectangular canvas, I have made the world both my studio AND my canvas. I paint wherever and whatever strikes my fancy: retaining walls, post boxes, trees, park benches (and their sleeping occupants). My current series is called "Fleshing the Bones", in which I have filled the chalk outlines at murder scenes with organic and inorganic forms, including fruits, insects and pistons.

As you can no doubt tell, I am involved in exciting work that pushes both artistic and legal boundaries. While I have never yet taken on a student, I believe Steve would learn much under my tutelage, and frankly I could use another watchful pair of eyes.

Finally, I've heard tell of another painter named Scott Schafer in the Vancouver area. While I believe he is engaged in far more pedestrian work, I suppose he is talented enough. If you had meant to to contact this Scott Schafer instead, I suggest you recheck your email addressing. Otherwise, I look forward to Steve starting his lessons with me.

Tell Steve to wear black clothing and - most importantly - sneakers.

Respectfully yours,
Scott Schafer
Sausalito, California

RE: RE: Steve Curtis would like to take some lessons with you

First, let me say “thank you” for putting the biggest smile on my face this morning.  You, Sir, are hilarious. 

Indeed I did get the address wrong, as the Scott from Vancouver (whom I’m thinking is not possibly as interesting as yourself) has a “y” at the end of his name, making him not only boring but possibly a fruitcake. :P

Second, are you really a graph writer?   Cause believe me I’ve dressed in black, ran back alleys, kept 6 and know the difference in tips.  

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Jose

Was fun spending time with you. Hope to see you again. Hugs, Keith.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hi Scotty,

Back in the fall I drove by Parkside Dr. and saw some of your art. We particulariarly liked the paintings of white birch trees in the fall, and were wondering if you may have some of those already made. Or if possible if you could make two paintings similar to the ones we saw in the fall. We took a picture. We do need big paintings... One should be about 5 feet x 3 feet, and the other 4 feet by 2.5 feet. Or if you are willing to come by our house to discuss this, that would be great.

Rui

Hi Rui,

Thank you for an interest in my art. It's good that you need large paintings. Owing to a severe case of hyperopia, or farsightedness, I've had to stand farther and farther away from my paintings just to see them. This has forced me to increase both the length of my brush handles and the size of my canvases dramatically. My current works are over thirty feet wide, and to be honest, my condition is getting worse. Instead of the 5 x 3 foot painting you requested, would you consider a significantly larger one: say 50 by 30 feet?

However, I don't think I've ever painted pictures of white birch trees, nor have I ever exhibited on Parkside Drive. My oeuvre tends to run more towards crying clowns. It's possible that you might have me confused with the fine painter Scotty Schafer, at scottyschafer@gmail.com.

If you do need an enormous painting of a weepy Bobo the Clown, please let me know, and the sooner the better. My paintings are only getting bigger, and canvas prices are starting to go up - no doubt, due in some part to my prolific output.

- Scott

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hi Scott,

Ive attached two pictures for your website. As you can see, the art looks great on the wall!

Also, R and I would like to get the other painting too.

R is out tonight, but can we come by at a time that suits us all to purchase it? Maybe one evening this week if you're available.



Dear Ms. Wilson,

Thank you for sending me the pictures of my art on your walls. If you don't mind terribly, I'd like to offer you a suggestion. Please immediately throw acid on that painting, burn it, rip the canvas from the frame for your dog to chew on, it or slash it into ribbons with razor blades. If you have any concept of mercy, you will end my torment and do it now, because I can already see the massive rip the door handle will create the minute that door is opened. 

Is there a square foot of wall space in your house that's not immediately next to a window or door? My work was very nearly shown in the Guggenheim, you know, if it hadn't been for that awful Khalid Sheikh Mohammed fellow.

I can tell you when you can pick up my other painting: never. At least, not until you demonstrate that you can provide a proper setting for the stirrings of my soul. I offered you something rare and sublime, a glimpse outside the cave of shadows where we all dwell. This isn't just a bit of paint and fabric to brighten up a forsaken corner.

My words may come as a bit of a shock to you, so I must let you know that you have the wrong email address. I'm not the painter of these paintings, or really a painter at all. You might want to suggest to him that he gets a more unique email address, because I've gotten maybe twenty emails meant for him over the years, going back to when he used to sell sofas for a living.

- Scott, the writer not the painter
P.S. Nice paintings!

The reproductive strategies of religion (or why the Pope favors gay sex)

Many Catholics around the world were mystified by Pope Benedict XVI's recent comments which justify condom use in some cases.

"There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility..."

What's interesting about his comments is that he's approving the use of condoms by male prostitutes, who are presumably engaged in gay sex, but he's not backing down from the Vatican's official position that married couples shouldn't use them. So if a male prostitute uses a condom, it's moral behavior, but it's immoral if a Catholic couple with four children uses one.

What's going on here?

There's a simple way to look at it which clears up not only this position, but also many other strange aspects of religion: a religion is not a moral code, spiritual guidance or cosmological explanation, but simply as a meme, that is, a set of beliefs and practices which is capable of reproduction and adaptive mutation.

Imagine that you put a large group of people on an island who hold a variety of religious beliefs. Which of the following beliefs will still be practiced in a hundred years?

- You shouldn't have children through sexual reproduction, but instead adopt children and teach them to do the same (which was part of the belief system of the Shakers).

- The only way to eternal salvation is to practice X (fast on certain days, say certain prayers), and it is your responsibility to save as many people as possible by converting them to your beliefs. Mormonism and evangelical Christianity contain this belief.

- The only way to eternal salvation is to practice X, which includes prohibitions against using birth control.

- Girls should not be educated, and women should be denied professional advancement.

- There may or may not be an afterlife, but there's no Hell, and we are unified in our shared search for spiritual growth (the Unitarian position).

I think all of these belief systems spread using several basic strategies:

Evangelism, where a belief system teaches that the adherent's duty to spread it.

Fear, where a belief system teaches that there are unacceptable consequences to abandoning it, such as eternal damnation.

Practices that increase sexual reproduction, such as prohibiting birth control or preventing girls from receiving education (since educated women have fewer children). Most people become Catholics, Muslims or Hindus because they are born to Catholic, Muslim or Hindu parents. The more children people have, the more likely it is that their belief system will spread.

Inclusion, in which a belief system is easy to belong to, such as the principles of the Universalist Unitarian church, or encompasses an extremely diverse set of beliefs, such as Hinduism.

Looked at this way, the Pope has been selected by the Catholic meme as the best expression of its reproductive strategy. He won't take any position that might prevent Catholics from having more children, but of course, gay sex isn't going to lead to children...so why not make a special exception? Especially when it might save Catholic lives, say that of a married Catholic man who has sex with male prostitutes on the side?

Bakersfield needs Milk

Bakersfield, California has been in the news today: "Kern County's 24 high schools will not be observing the first statewide day of remembrance honoring the late gay rights hero Harvey Milk."

Among the arguments against honoring Milk are that he was a sexual predator.

What I find ironic is that according to the California Sex Offender registry (http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov/), one out of every 333 residents of Bakersfield is a registered sexual offender, while only one out of 1437 residents of San Francisco is a registered sexual offender.

There are many different ways to interpret this, but it seems pretty clear to me that repression leads to abuse (exhibit A: the Catholic Church), and sunlight is the best disinfectant.

Sarah Palin on Scrabble

Of three posts, I have one on Scrabble and one on Sarah Palin. coincidentally, this caught my eye:

"Everybody in the family played Scrabble and took great pride in hoarding Ks and Qs and slapping them down in long, fancy words on triple-letter scores." -- Going Rogue, p. 12.

Leaving aside the obvious (that others have already pointed out): there's only one Q and K per game, they aren't generally letters you hoard, the main point of playing a long word is to get the bingo, and triple-letter scores are nice but in this context it seems clear she meant "triple-word". You don't play a long word on a triple letter score.

No, what got me what the word "fancy". She came from a smart family, the message is, an educated family, but they never forgot how humble and folksy they truly were. Oh sure, little Sarah might play QUOKkAS on a triple "letter" score (using the blank), but then they'd all laugh about the fancy words and she'd go help with the dishes.

Perhaps after dinner they'd recite Homer in the original Greek, and then make macaroni art together.

Sarah Palin supports illegal immigration

From a Nov. 13, 2009 interview with Barbara Walters.

"I believe that the Jewish settlements should be allowed to be expanded upon," said Palin, "because that population of Israel is, is going to grow. More and more Jewish people will be flocking to Israel in the days and weeks and months ahead. And I don't think that the Obama administration has any right to tell Israel that the Jewish settlements cannot expand."

I think what she's saying is that we should ignore any concept of a Palestinian territory, international law or the two state solution that most Israelis and Palestinians want, and instead allow the extremists run the show. How else are we going to get to Armageddon in our lifetimes?

My question to Sarah Palin is this: would you care to extend the same hospitality to Mexicans illegally living in the US as you've extended to the Jewish settlers?

The only thread on the internet that ever settled an argument?

I never actually got a formal declaration of surrender from the man who goes by Baggi and who started the thread. However, after he posted that I had some good points and would reply later, he abandoned the thread and went on to start others. Eventually I posted this and did not get a reply.

"...since Baggi has not delivered a counterpoint....did this thread actually accomplish the impossible and settle an argument?"

Update: turns out he did not concede the argument, although his main rebuttal since I posted this blog entry is that he's actually a unicorn. The entire thread is here. Baggi claimed that the Bush tax cuts (which Obama plans to end and McCain wanted to continue) actually did not benefit the rich for two reasons:

1. Under the Bush tax cuts, the top 20% of earners (or "Top Quintile") got a lower tax cut than the bottom 80% (the next four "Quintiles"), as shown here:

The 2005 total effective federal tax rate as a percentage of the 2000 rate.
Top Quintile = 91.1%
Fourth Quintile = 84.9%
Middle Quintile = 85.5%
Second Quintile = 76.2%
Bottom Quintile = 67.2%

Or in other words, the top 20% of earners ("Top Quintile") saw their tax rates drop only 8.9%, while the next 20% ("Fourth Quintile") got a whopping 15.1% tax cut.

2. The wealthy are paying a higher percentage of the total tax revenue (up two percent from 2000 to 2005)

How do you refute these arguments? Well, let's use some logic and facts of our own. Let's tackle point #1. What's the top quintile all about?

Here's some good data about the distribution of wealth in this country, including this graph:



Yikes - do the top 5% really own 60% of the wealth in the country? If so, the top 20% is meaningless as a demographic. A person in the top 1% might employ someone at the bottom of the top 20% as their driver, but otherwise these are entirely separate groups.

The bottom of the top quintile in 2004 brought home $88K as their annual household income. This is hardly upper class. And yet, using the quintile breakdown we can lump in the $88K earner with Bill Gates. Brilliant.

Why does this matter, though? Well, the very rich are not like us, according to the Washington Post from August 2004.

The effective federal tax rate of the top 1 percent of taxpayers has fallen from 33.4 percent to 26.7 percent, a 20 percent drop. In contrast, the middle 20 percent of taxpayers -- whose incomes averaged $51,500 in 2001 -- saw their tax rates drop 9.3 percent.

Okay, I think we've just about demolished the first argument. The top 1% who control some 34% of the country's wealth got a vastly higher tax break than the top 20% overall. And the lower top 20% include those pulling in the princely sum of $88K per year to support their household, which is doing well in some parts of the country and barely scraping by in others.

On to the next claim: as a result (or despite) of the tax cuts, the wealthy are paying more of their share of the total tax revenue, proving that the tax cuts hurt rather than helped them. Well, this is easy enough to demolish with this boring spreadsheet from the Economic Policy Institute.

It's too wide to fit in this blog, but it shows is that that the the top 1% went from pulling in 14.3% of the country's pretax income in 2003 to pulling in 18.1% in 2005, which is a 26.5% increase and more than their 20% tax cut. At the same time the people in the 80% to 95% range (who make roughly between $90K and $150K a year) saw their share of pre-tax income go down.

To dumb down these numbing statistics, the top 1% got a break on their taxes and got even more filthy rich while the rest of us got poorer.

I hope this clears things up. The next time someone tries to say that the rich are overtaxed because they pay most of the tax revenues, smack your hand on your forehand and point them to this page.

Words that SHOULD be in the Scrabble dictionary

Yeah, I realize that the compilers of the Scrabble dictionary had a tricky task in front of them. Real languages evolve, and it's not clear when a word jumps from slang to legitimate usage, or when a foreign word has made the jump. Then there are the nouns derived from verbs. Obviously "thinker" is legitimate, but what about "alluder"? The powers that be say no, and I can't really argue with that one.

However, every so often I feel like I'm being actively punished for having a better-than-average vocabulary. It's a bit aggravating to be told that MERKIN is not a word by the same people who decided, in their quite finite wisdom, that ZA (meaning pizza) was a word for the ages. When was the last time you heard someone say "ZA" - the early 90's? And even back when it was in occasional (mostly ironic) usage, I believe you'd write it as 'za, with the apostrophe.

Someone has to say it: ZA was simple pandering to the anti-Z lobby. And I'm sure I'm not the only one annoyed by the fact that there are two letter words that use both Q (QI) and Z (ZA, ZO in the UK dictionary), but there are no two letter words using C or V, which are worth much less.

Okay, but that's not what I'm here to rant about. What I'm here to rant about are words that should be in the dictionary but aren't. In no particular order:

RATIONER

(Noun) One parceling out supplies to others; one restricting the usage of an object.
Usage: She asked the rationer whether she would be allowed a second egg this week.
http://www.definition-of.com/rationer

Heck, even the Wall Street Journal uses this word!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574374463280098676.html

ANTERIORS

Yes, anterior is an adjective. But news flash! It's also a noun. And there's no reason it cannot be pluralized.
http://www.wordwebonline.com/en/ANTERIOR
Noun: anterior an'ti(-u)-ree-u(r)
A tooth situated at the front of the mouth
"his malocclusion was caused by malposed anteriors"

MERKIN

Ignorance of the existence of genital wigs is no excuse. Seriously...this is just a pathetic omission.

SOJU

I'm less than shocked that this tasty Korean alcoholic beverage isn't yet recognized as a legal play. But it still should be.

With more to come...