I woke up this morning to a phone truck outside the window, and a burly telephone company representative making concerned clucking noises and buckling on a tool belt.

Apparently, there had been no active phone service at my new house since 1999, so the phone man suspected that my phone line might not actually work. He clambered around on the roof for quite some time, making ominous humming noises, and finally descended and said “I’ll be back.”

“Oh,” I said. “Er, well, ok.”

“Yes,” he said, darkly, before vanishing down the alley.

When he returned, he had even more implements, and a set expression. After rattling around with the phone box for quite some time, he emerged with an “ah-hah,” and had me plug an implement into the jack inside.

“We’re going for a light,” he explained, “either red or green, I don’t care. If it doesn’t light up…”

I plugged it into the jack, and my heart sank when the light remained unlit. However, I happened to remember a secondary jack, which was rather decayed, and hidden under a box of sweaters. I managed to dig it out, I plugged the device in, and lo and behold, the light was green. I skipped outside to relay the information and the phone man looked visibly relieved.

“Well then,” he said, “that’s that.”

Although my internet isn’t supposed to be turned on until tomorrow, I decided to give it a shot anyway, and plugged the router in. After a tense minute or two, a reassuring bank of green lights flashed and then stayed on.

I have, at last, internet. I am a little embarrassed about how happy it makes me.

We will be experiencing a service interruption for several days, gentle readers, as I am in the middle of nowhere and only have access to dialup. Once things settle down again, I’ll back for a real, honest to God update.

I had forgotten how…excruciating…dialup can be. I must say, I am impressed with the lean configuration of the Movable Type interface, yet another reason to love Movable Type. It takes around, oh, 10-15 seconds to load a page. As opposed to three minutes for my Gmail. It’s a good exercise in calmness. I am trying to view it as a chance to meditate.

At any rate, it is overcast and gloomy where I am, with thin threads of fog winding through the trees. And quiet. I had not realized that the Bay Bridge creates a dull hum in the background which whispers to me throughout the night until I wonder why the night is so quiet. The cats have been peering out the windows here, longing to come outside. It’s also a bit cold, a far cry from the blasting warmth of central heat. I imagine that I will probably go for a walk later, feet slicing through tall, damp grass.

I looked up the Chronicle’s online edition today (3 minutes to load). I see that nothing is collapsing in my absence, although I am intrigued by the trials and tribulations of Ed Jew. It’s beginning to seem like something out of some fantastic film. I am waiting for some new revelation, like a whorehouse in Noe Valley or investments in crooked toaster manufacturing companies.

Over and out.

I defy anyone to work under these conditions. Loki is a content Nazi to rival any of these new fangled filtering programs. He doesn’t like: loud noise, flashing banner ads, Republican sites, anything which requires me to type, and excessive mousing. Ideally, he lies on the mouse.

He does like: games with bouncing things, Google reader, low classical music, and the Times. As exciting as these things are, they ultimately have limited appeal, especially when I am trying to get actual work done.

You can’t see it in this picture, because he moved his head at the last second (read: 10 seconds after I clicked “take” on my cellphone), but he has a vicious set of fangs and he’s not afraid to use them. He’s also surprisingly muscular, and will wedge his legs into the desk to prevent me from shifting the keyboard to a more comfortable position.

I am curious to know when someone will develop workarounds for feline based content filtering protocols, and why more companies aren’t taking advantage of this cost effective technology. I’ve tried a number of workaround techniques including manual uninstall, but the tendency for cats to wedge where they are not wanted seems to be fairly universal, especially when they tag team. I also think that using cats for filtering would improve company morale. I mean, if your browsing is going to be censored, it might as well be censored by something soft and fluffy, to distract you from the harsh reality of life.

Our third roommate, the mysterious Z, recently announced that she is going to be moving out at the end of May. This is a source of sadness to us, because Z is a pretty cool cat. It’s also a source of sadness because now we have to look for another roommate, which is never an enjoyable task. Fortunately, the Bay Area has this nifty site called Craigslist, which you have perhaps heard of. Ah, Craigslist. How I loathe it, yet love it, at the same time. (By the way, if you or someone you know is looking for a room in San Francisco, feel free to email me—meloukhia at gmail dot com is the name of the game.)

So I posted a carefully crafted and precise ad today, and sat back to wait for the results. Within five minutes, I had a hit from someone who was wrong in every conceivable way…and they probably knew this when they were writing me, but decided to go for it anyway. Bad idea! Don’t make me grumpy when my carpal is acting up.

The thing about Craigslist is that a lot of people don’t really seem to understand how to use it. So I thought I would provide a few useful tips for using Craigslist, which apply both to the abundant personals section and the housing. Please, republish them. I entreat you. I wouldn’t mind credit, but beggars cannot be choosers.

1. Think about what you want.

Make a list of your expectations before you look at ads. Think about how much rent you want to pay, what gender you want a potential partner to be, if you need studio space, if you must date a blonde, etc. Keep this list handy while you look at ads, so that you can immediately strike down ads which are not a good fit. It’s a waste of everyone’s time to respond to an ad thinking “well, maybe it will work out. I mean, I want to live in the Sunset, but this place is pretty close to Ashby BART, so I could commute…” It’s not unreasonable to have expectations, and no one thinks less of you for it. Also use your expectations to help narrow your search, meaning less garbage to pore through. There’s a lot of garbage on Craigslist. Save yourself.

2. Read.

Read the damn ad. About half of the responses I get every time I use Craigslist to advertise anything are from people who did not bother to read the ad. If you have animals, check to see whether or not the ad says that they are ok. You might also want to establish if the person writing the ad is looking for a particular gender, sexual orientation, or age. This is particularly pertinent in the personals. If you are, for example, a disgustingly skinny forty year old, don’t respond to an ad looking for “twenty something full figured women.” That is not you.

Once you have established whether or not you meet the expectations of the person posting the ad, think about the list of questions you might ask. How much is rent? Is it possible that this information might be included in the ad? Uhm…probably. So look. You look like a complete fool if you ask “how much is the deposit” when a line in the ad clearly starts “Deposit is $X, making move in costs $Y.” Your basic lack of reading comprehension might be a turn off. Read the ad carefully to see which questions are answered, and make note of questions that come up. Read the whole ad. Please.

The ad can also give you a feel for the person writing it. If you like peace and quiet, responding to an ad for a “convivial party friendly household” is probably not a good call. If you smoke pot and an ad suggests that drugs are not welcome, do not respond. Your potential future roommates will not be impressed by your persistence. They don’t want drugs in their house, and they probably have good reasons for it. Respect that. If the ad says the house is “clean,” expect it to be clean. “Laid back” might suggest an atmosphere where your dirty dishes are more welcome.

3. Formulate a response with care.

I realize that not everyone is a grammar nazi, but taking the time to write a grammatically correct, well parsed response is worth it. First of all, clearly stating your aims eliminates potential confusion. It also shows that you have a brain and know how to use it.

Respond to specifics of the ad. Most people want to know how old you are, your gender orientation, and what you do for a living. State these up front, and then add supplemental information about how you “love cooking for your roommates” and “can’t wait to spend a romantic night out.” The people writing ads have expectations as well, so don’t waste their time by burying useful information. This is also a good place to lay out some basic expectations of your own, like “my girlfriend likes to come over a lot” and “I prefer nonsmokers.”

4. If you don’t get a response…

A. The person hates you and is too lazy to respond. Which is, I admit, pretty lame. I always respond, usually briefly, even if the person is not a good fit at all.

B. The person is really busy, and will get back to you. Don’t pester them, it will confuse their inbox.

C. The room/position of sexual partner is already taken, and the person forgot to take down the ad or is too lazy. Bummer.

Please, people. Help make Craigslist a better place for us all.

p.s. You can read my manifesto on Craigslist too! I promise to reprint any novel responses here.

[Craigslist]

As I was sorting through my comments today, trying to separate the humans and the robots, I was thinking about what makes a successful commenter. Most websites love to get comments, as they stimulate discussion, clarify issues, and get people thinking. However, many of these websites are also forced to heavily moderate their comments, thanks to spam and idiocy.

I thought that assembling a brief set of guidelines might be useful, but this should not be viewed as a “code of conduct” or any such nonsense…it’s simply a way to enhance the probability of your comments surviving on a website, and getting productive and interesting responses to them.

1. Do not be a robot.

I really cannot stress this enough. Robots somewhere may have interesting things to say, but the majority of robots that comment leave messages with contents too foul to even fully contemplate. Usually they contain improbable sex acts and advertisements for drugs. It’s annoying. If you are a robot, follow the guidelines below for much better commenting success.

2. Grammar and spelling.

A great comment has been spell checked and proof read for grammar errors. It shows other readers and the host that you care about the topic, and are not just dashing off a note. It’s also just a generally good habit. It will also make it easier for someone reading your comment to understand it.

3. Read the thread.

I know that comment threads can get long (not here, alas, yet), but take the time to actually read through the thread. See what other people are saying, and make sure that your statement will be something new. You might also want to consider responding to comments which other people have left, to up the level of conversation, rather than leaving a standalone comment.

4. Provide new information or insight.

Comments such as “I agree” or “right on” are not really contributing to the overall state of dialog. Comments like “I was reading a study about this the other day, and they said that…” or “as a member of this organization, I think it might interest you to know that…” are helpful, because they help unfold the situation a little more. Shed new light on a subject, or approach something from a new angle. If someone in the thread says “I don’t understand how…” and you know the answer, provide it.

5. Provoke discussion with responses, questions, or useful comments.

If you have questions about an issue which are not answered, pose them. Respond to comments that other people have left. Spark a dialog which expands the issue, thinks about it from multiple perspectives, and covers it on multiple levels. Link to relevant information which might benefit the conversation. Beware tangents.

6. Avoid the knee jerk.

Oh, how tempting it is. Perhaps you’ve been reading a site for a long time and something gets you riled up. Maybe you’re Googling for something and you find a post that just infuriates you. Avoid the knee jerk response. Take the time to formulate a thoughtful, constructive, respectful comment, even if you radically disagree about the issue. Disagreement does not have to be disagreeable, as has been said elsewhere, and most people enjoy hearing an alternate view on a topic. They do not, however, enjoy being insulted and treated roughly, or seeing a commenter beat up on another commenter. After you have finished a comment about a sensitive issue, read through it and ask yourself how you would feel if it was directed at you.

7. Language!

Use of profanity should be sparing and elegant, the better to make your fucking point. But you should also use language in general with care. Find the right word to express how you feel. Look it up in the dictionary if you’re not exactly sure how to use it. Make sure that your words are clear, and cannot be misconstrued. Your language is your voice, but also your face on the Internet.

8. Separate people and ideas.

A person can have an idea that you feel strongly about. But remember that you hate the idea, not the person. Attacking people does not contribute to effective dialog. Focus on picking apart the logic of the idea, rather than an ad lib attack. It only shows your ignorance, and lack of cogent arguments against the idea. In addition, a personal attack is a great way to get people to ignore your comment, or to make your comment disappear into the ether.

[comments]

There has been a great deal of discussion in the blogging community and major news media lately about the idea of a blogging code of conduct. Tim O’Reilly, a heavyweight in the community, weighed in with his own version of a blogging code of conduct, which he thinks that we should all adhere to, signaling our compliance with a little badge. Rather than bore you with my opinion on this issue, I will send you to Allan Jenkins, who says what I would say, only more succinctly, so we can skip ahead to my dissection of the blogging code. Shorts certainly need to be eaten, because I stand with Jenkins on this issue: this website is my “badge,” or personal code.

I cruised over to the blogging code of conduct today to take a closer look and formulate some criticism of my own. I am far from the first to do this, and I’m sure I’m leaving important things out of my criticism, but that’s why we have the Internet.

1. We take responsibility for our own words and for the comments we allow on our blog[s].

This is probably the most dangerous provision, in my opinion, because it goes on with a detailed list of “unacceptable material” including copyright violations, and violations of confidentiality. It also states that the boundaries of unacceptable material can be changed without notice. So, in other words, whistleblowing is not acceptable behaviour. The Pentagon Papers should never have been released. And people should be allowed to decide, on a personal and arbitrary basis, the boundaries of “unacceptable.” In a way, this seems like a maintenance of the status quo.

2. We won’t say anything online that we wouldn’t say in person.

So, gays and lesbians struggling with coming out should not discuss their fears in online forums. People fighting the stigma of diseases like hepatitis and AIDS should not seek advice and comfort from people on the Internet. Whistleblowers should not speak out about violations at their companies. Dissidents in oppressive regimes should just remain silent, eh?

3. We connect privately before we respond publicly.

Because, of course, any immediate public response to a major issue would be considered rude. Forgive me Tim, for I have sinned; I am not connecting with you privately about the very serious issues that I have with your “blogging code of conduct.” In fact, hundreds of us are violating this code at this very moment, writing posts which think critically about the issue. I should have connected with you privately, rather than participating in an open exchange of ideas and information about a public issue.

I don’t like backroom deals either. Blogging, by its nature, is a public expression. I have a problem with you, I’m going to say it publicly and to your face, as in point (2) above. I don’t need to be rude about it, by any means, but I can make my opinion known.

4. When we believe someone is unfairly attacking another, we take action.

I touched on this issue briefly elsewhere. I do believe that people should speak out about behaviour which they find unacceptable. However, I’m not so certain that this extends to cooperating with law enforcement, and turning over user records. If commenters on my website knew that I would turn their IP addresses over to the government if they upset me or someone else, they might be more hesitant to comment. I believe that this severely restricts the ability of people to speak freely about issues. The fact is that the line between “unfair” and “reasonable” can be very slippery when you are feeling attacked. If someone asks for assistance…maybe. But…danger, Will Robinson.

5. We do not allow anonymous comments.

I’m going to be hypocritical for a moment here, because I do not allow anonymous comments. Anyone who wants to comment has to include their email address with the comment, although this is not published. I do sometimes respond to comments through email, as well as posting them, so I could argue that this is for your own benefit. However, I do not police the validity of these emails very seriously, or require commenters to register. You do run the risk of getting your comment deleted if I think it is out of line and the email is invalid, because I think that’s cowardly. But if someone felt the need to comment with a fake email address to protect themselves, I’m cool with that, and will honor it.

The thing is, anonymity is an important part of discourse on the Internet. That’s why I don’t require commenters to register, because I want to encourage them to comment and share their views. Some people are in situations where providing their real identities could be dangerous, but they have a right to speak as well. This is one of the points in the “code of conduct” which has been opposed most rigorously by most critics.

6. We ignore the trolls.

This seems like a contradiction of some of the points above. What if the trolls violate policies? Threaten other commenters? We should just ignore them? Sometimes ignoring trolls is beneficial, sure…but I’m not sure it’s always the best course of action. As one critic points out, the issue here is largely with commenters, not bloggers. Perhaps we need a “commenters code of conduct,” or, better yet, websites could explicitly state their commenting policies. Oh, wait, people already do that. Ok…we need…commenters to be nice! Yeah, that’s it.

I think it’s time for me to be mean for a moment. Tim O’Reilly clearly needs a six pointed suppository, and I think his badge will fit the bill nicely.

The blogging code strikes me as a very American ideal, the thought that one person should impose their morals on everyone else, and we should all go along with it. This troubles me, and also seems rather antithetical to the very idea of the Internet. My personal code is just that, my personal code. If I was approached to write a blogging code of conduct, here’s how it would read:

Act in the way which you believe to be most ethical, undertaking whatever measures you personally feel are necessary to maintain your integrity.

For some people, this means allowing every comment onto a post, unfiltered. I delete spam, racist/sexist/just plain stupid in my opinion comments, and edit comments for grammar and spelling, personally. For others, this means rigorously controlling access to bulletin boards and comments with registration systems. I suspect that most of us fall somewhere in between, and that’s dandy. If you don’t like it, leave…you have that option. We’re all big boys and girls, and not everyone is going to play nicely. Deal.

As Robert Scoble points out in his post I linked to above, there is a great deal of pressure to “get on board” with the blogging code. Part of this, I think, is due to the stratified nature of the blogosphere (sorry, won’t happen again), which is dominated by a top tier of individuals who get the majority of the attention. The bottom feeders, including myself, are stoked when we get any sort of limited attention, and although there used to be more of an effort to make the blogging community inclusive, this lofty goal seems to have fallen by the wayside. Either you’re Heather Armstrong, or you’re not. As a result, when issues like this arise, many people feel like they need to go along with them, or risk being ostracized from party time with the big kids.

Fortunately, many high profile bloggers are coming out against the need for an Interwebs hall monitor, and encouraging others to follow suit. Hopefully the blogging code of conduct is merely a flash in the pan, and will be trashcanned shortly, as it ought to be. In the meantime, the amount of talk it is generating may force a few people to consider their personal boundaries a little more carefully, and will hopefully encourage people to stand up for themselves and speak out against such a ludicrous idea.

[blogging code of conduct]

The Internet is an excellent source for all of the wide and varied forms of human emotion, but especially hatred.

There’s something about the anonymous medium that just makes it so easy to savage other people, whether through emails, bulletin boards, or public blog postings. This issue has been sort of loosely addressed over the years, with users suggesting guidelines for our global public community, but it has been highlighted for the world in general by the case of Kathy Sierra a high profile blogger who recently went public about hateful comments made about her. She also published excerpts from some of the emails which were sent to her…and I think her post was rather bold. I commend her for it. It’s also worth reading the comments below, because some of them are very, very interesting.

Cyberbullying is a big issue, and something that does not just impact children.

One of the things about existing on the Internet as a public presence is that you really do need a thick skin. People will say critical things about you or your work, and you need to be able to take it and roll with it. Sometimes criticism is helpful…and at other times, it’s just hurtful. I have certainly experienced hurtful and mean posts and comments, and dealt with them in my own way, but I haven’t gone through anything on the level of what Sierra has.

Vile commentary can become par for the course when you are well known, for a variety of reasons. Maybe you are vile yourself, like Ann Coulter, and people are responding to that. Maybe people are jealous of your popularity, or disagree violently with something you say. Either way it’s up there, out there, and hurtful.

It is often hard to know how hurtful it is, because many people remain silent rather than speaking out.

Where do we draw the line?

Certainly the Internet is a sort of fantasy land, and one could argue that as hurtful as vitriolic posts are emotionally, they do not pose a real threat. Obviously Sierra felt differently, indicating that some of the material she received suggested that she, personally, might be in danger. Clearly she feels badly enough that she is thinking about withdrawing altogether from online society, which is a great shame. Being pushed into abandoning something you love crosses a clear line, for me.

Turning such material over to the police is important in cases like this, especially ones where your personal safety is clearly being threatened. While law enforcement cannot play mommy and daddy and protect you from mean words, they can take action on decisive threats, especially if they include concrete information like your address and real name. When someone is pushing the line with you, most people instinctually want to push the offender away. Resist the temptation. Hang on to nasty things that people send you…because they could be evidence some day.

What can we do about it?

I suppose we can all start with ourselves. Readers may have noted that I am very careful about what I criticize, and that I generally try to keep personal opinions of people to myself, although I will not hesitate to speak out about wrong actions by public officials, or to criticize a business. Generally I speak from my own experience when I have something negative to say, and I ponder long and carefully before I post material which might be considered unfavorable to someone. I cannot imagine attacking someone directly, especially in such a hateful way. If I really did want someone to die, I certainly wouldn’t share that information with you, dear readers. And I see no reason to be mean and hateful, in a do as you would be done by kind of way. I don’t post anything about anyone if I feel like I would be uncomfortable if my name was substituted, if I thought my feelings would be hurt to read that about myself. The rules of common courtesy do, can, and should apply on the Internet.

I think that we can also act by speaking out when we see this kind of behaviour occurring. If we remain silent, we are part of the problem…and if you notice cyberbullying going on, talk about it. If you see hateful posts or photoshops about people, even people you don’t know, make it clear that you find that behaviour distasteful, and model a different mode of communicating about your issues. By not engaging in the behaviour yourself, and indicating that you will not tolerate it, you can help to eliminate it. Especially if you have a lot of public respect, or you run a forum…you owe it to everyone else. Or at least I think you do.

The Internet is never going to be a land of happy unicorns, but we can at least make it safer.

[Kathy Sierra]
[cyberbullying]

I really do.

They have a stranglehold on our Internet, and it does not work half the time. I was able to get on briefly this morning before it booted me again, and I just now got back on.

Thanks for the day of lost work, Comcast! Yeah! I like it like that.

Seriously.

How is it, exactly, that they have a monopoly on the Island? Some other service provider should totally think about coming out here, because they would make bank off of us. I mean, serious amounts of money. I am fairly certain that 50% of the Island, at least, would switch services for high speed if they were given the choice. I’ve been considering satellite internet because Comcast is getting so bad…or perhaps dialup, which would be slow as hell, but a functional backup for the entire days that my internet is totally unavailable.

I wonder if they have some kind of sweet deal with the Navy, trying to keep us pacified through crappy internet.

[Comcast]

Violet Blue writes about this disturbing trend better than I can, and I recommend that you read her post along with her links to other bloggers covering the situation.

Basically the easiest way to illustrate what’s going on is to have you, my dear readers, do something for me. I’d like you to open a new tab (you are, of course, using Firefox, right?)

In that new tab, go to Google, and type in “good vibrations.” Survey the first page of search results. Then search for “good vibes.” Check again.

Notice anyone missing from the lineup?

Perhaps this will have been corrected by the time you read this…I sincerely hope so. But as it stands now, when I search for the name of the premiere woman-owned sex positive store in the Bay Area on Google, it does not appear in the first page of search results.

This is due, sex bloggers are claiming, to a change in how Google runs search algorithms. As Violet Blue says, somehow this reworking involved the drop of sex positive retailers, bloggers, and sources of information. A mistake? Possibly…mistakes do happen. But I find it highly suspicious that this change happened right around the holiday time, when people might be shopping for high quality toys from reputable stores…or just looking for information on sexuality.

As I am often reminding the people around me, the internet is not a reliable source of information. There are a lot of things wrong with the internet. In theory, though, Google should not be broken. And when Google is failing to deliver logical search results, I see that as a major flaw. Most people searching the internet for Good Vibrations, for example, are looking for Good Vibrations. Adam and Eve comes up bright and clear in the sponsored links…very interesting indeed.

As this story has begun to break, clear changes have been wrought, and Google appears to be working to rectify the problem. A search for “vibrators” now turns up Babeland, as well it should. (You might know the retailer by the former name, Toys in Babeland.)

But I don’t like the sound of this…not one bit. Why is it that sex positive sites mysteriously vanished from the Google index, even with Safe Search off? Do we need a porno Google to meet our needs now? Or is Google, as Snape would say, up to something?

[Google]

This entry is being written on my old Sony, which was recently restored to a usable state by a friend far more computer savvy than I am. I actually willed it to him, but he replaced it with a different computer and wondered if I wanted it back.

I did, actually, I realized. I sort of missed the mobility that a laptop had to offer, so I said “sure, why not.”

It actually made its way back to the Bay Area some time ago with another friend, but it took awhile for the two of us to reunite. Busy, I didn’t have much of a chance to muck about with it today until I booted it up to discover that he had installed Ubuntu on it.

Well heck, I thought, what’s a little Linux between friends?.

So far, I’m liking it a lot. Granted, I’ve only played in the Ubuntu environment for all of a day, really, but I am enjoying it immensely. Graphically, it’s very stripped down and elegant, a trait I really appreciate. Physically, it’s fast, even on this older machine, which is great. When the Sony was running Windows the system was always hopelessly bogged down—now it’s pretty quick for a laptop that I bought in 2000.

It’s also a very user friendly distribution. Given that I know absolutely nothing about it, I was surprised by how quickly I learned to navigate. (Of course, the person who installed it knew what they were doing, which is probably a big help—I’m sure the easy functionality is due to him as much as it is to Ubuntu.)

Of course, I also feel like I’m earning major geek style points, just by using it. I mean, not that this would be the primary reason…but I think I will leave the Sony running Ubuntu, and if I really like it I might see about switching the desktop over as well. There’s really no good reason not to, you know?

As it is, it’s like a neat Christmas present, a retooled old friend.

[Ubuntu]