Monthly Archives: March 2007

This just in…

Those of my readers who are able to get to Washington, D.C. this weekend, and who follow the peace witness of Jesus of Nazareth, might be interested in this:

Christian Peace Witness for Iraq will begin with a worship service on Friday, March 16 at Washington National Cathedral to be attended by more than 3,500 people of faith from 48 states, followed by a candlelight procession through the center of our nation’s capital, where thousands will surround the White House bearing the light of peace, and 700 will risk arrest by remaining in prayer in front of the White House. The service begins at 7 p.m., and the White House vigil will begin at 10:30 p.m. It will be the largest Christian peace demonstration, as well as the largest single civil disobedience action at the White House, since the beginning of the Iraq war four years ago.

More than 190 Christian and interfaith peace vigils and actions will also be held around the country in conjunction with Christian Peace Witness for Iraq– including large-scale acts of moral civil disobedience organized by Christian Peace Witness coalition member group the Declaration of Peace.

I just got an email message about this today from Katie Barge at Faith in Public Life, and am happy to pass it along to you. Want to attend, and help surround the White House with prayers? — Friday, March 16, 2007, 7 pm, at the National Cathedral, Massachusetts and Wisconsin Avenues, NW, Washington, D.C. 20016-5098. More info.

Update: My Quaker friend, Elizabeth, who lives in Washington, said she can put me up for this event, so I’ll be there. Hope to see some of you there, too!

Free wifi in North Cambridge

We’re cat-sitting again in north Cambridge, but the cat’s house only has dial-up access to the Internet. Being a cheapskate, I refuse to pay for wifi. Fortunately Carol found a great place with free wifi — Grand Prix Cafe at 2257 Mass. Ave. Good panini, huge slices of apple pie, decent coffee, and they don’t try to chase you out after an hour.

Spring watch

The incredibly warm weather this week still hasn’t melted all the ice in Cambridge — we still have to walk over a thick slab of ice when we go out the back door of the house where we’re cat-sitting. But most of the ice is gone, and I saw big fuzzy catkins on a pussywillow tree over by Alewife Brook this afternoon.

Now an unashamed intellectual

It finally hit me today. I was taking a long walk, from North Cambridge down to Lechmere Square, thinking about nothing in particular, when I realized why I have a visceral dislike of the current president of the United States. It’s not because he’s an evangelical Christian, because I get along quite well with other evangelicals. It’s not because I’m a fiscal conservative, because you can make the case that wartime calls for deficits and besides I can understand that the temptation for deficit spending is more than most politicians can resist. It’s not because I’m a pacifist, because I know full well that most politicians do not follow the non-violence teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, my spiritual leader. These are areas where I simply happen to disagree with policies that can be justified.

No, the reason I have a visceral dislike of Mr. Bush is that he is an anti-intellectual. I know, it’s ironic that he’s an anti-intellectual given that he is the product of an elite university that practically oozes intellectualism. Even so, he affects that down-home I’m-really-not-that-smart attitude, and he makes his affectation implicitly condemn anyone who claims to be smart. Not that I blame him for affecting an anti-intellectual attitude. Anti-intellectualism has always been a minor part of the United States mythos, and in the past couple of decades it has become a dominant element in the political life of this country. Mr. Bush is just one of many United States politicians who have decided to affect anti-intellectualism in order to win votes.

This prevalent anti-intellectual attitude has even managed to influence me — I’ve become more and more cautious about claiming to be an intellectual. So I’ve changed the tag-line for this blog to “Adventures of a post-Christian heretic and unashamed intellectual.”

Let’s all go out and remember to be openly smart, OK? No matter what the president says, smart is good.

A conversation you might have in Cambridge

There was only one chair open on the third floor of the Harvard Coop. I took it, sat down to read through Clear blogging: How people blogging are changing the world and how you can join them. Since I was in Cambridge, I politely ignored the man sitting in the chair on the other side of the small table from me.

A third man, a tall well-spoken man, walked up, and spoke to the other man. “Hey, how you doing? Mind if I join you?”

The well-spoken man pulled up a chair and they began talking in low voices. I was deep into the blogging book, but even so couldn’t help noticing when the well-spoken man pulled a tabloid newspaper out of his day pack and showed it to his friend. I became aware of the conversation.

“I asked him if he wasn’t fearful, saying this kind of thing,” said the well-spoken man.

“What do you mean?” said his friend, who had a West Indian accent.

“Well,” said the well-spoken man, shaking the tabloid newspaper, “what this says about the history of racism in the United States, and international African revolution…”

“But wasn’t he a white man?” said his friend.

“Yes he was a white man, but he should still be worried,” said the well-spoken man. “I talked for a while to his friend, who was also white, and he admitted that he felt some fear talking like that on the street.”

I saw that the tabloid was Burning Spear, the “Voice of the International African Revolution,” offering “real political analysis of the crisis of parasitic capitalism.” I wasn’t going to break in, but after all they were waving around a revolutionary newspaper and having this conversation in a public place within four feet of me. “He probably should be worried,” I said.

“Yes,” said the well-spoken man, encouragingly. From his vocabulary and manner of speaking, I had thought him to be a graduate student, but from his face I decided he was middle-aged.

Continuing with what they had just been saying, I said, “In today’s political climate, it’s not necessarily wise to assert that the slave economy in the U.S. allowed American businesses to develop the capital that led to our current economy we now have.” I smiled. “That’s the kind of thing that can win you an FBI file.”

The well-spoken man grinned back. But the man with the West Indian accent remained skeptical. “But you’re talking openly about this.”

“It’s Cambridge,” I said, shrugging. “And we’re sitting in the Harvard Coop. In some other place like, oh, Indiana I might feel differently.”

The well-spoken man said, “I’m glad those two white men were willing to talk openly about this. But what gets me is when black people deny what’s going on.”

That led to a discussion of which American intellectuals are willing to talk openly about race and racism. I said I admired Cornel West for taking a public stance in Race Matters and Democracy Matters. The well-spoken man was dismissive of West, and instead championed a professor of sociology currently at Harvard (who of course was African American), who apparently is more radical than West.

We talked a little about the current political climate in the United States, they asked where I had come from, and the man with the West Indian accent said, “New Bedford is a pretty rough place, isn’t it?” I told him that the murder rate in Boston was higher than in New Bedford. Before I went back to my book on blogging, it came out that the well-spoken man was not a graduate student, and was actually unemployed and living in a homeless shelter.

Then I said I shouldn’t interrupt their conversation any more, and I went back to the book on blogging, which at last I decided to buy. When I got up to leave, they were deep in a conversation about the nature of human intelligence, and whether intelligence could be accurately tested and quantified.

Splog!

Thanks to a link on Academic Blogs Wiki, I found an online article in the Harvard Journal of Law & Technology titled “Splog! or How to stop the rise of a new menace on the Internet.” I was particularly interested because of my own battles with comment spam on this blog. The article starts out with a concise definition of comment spam (which they call “link spam”) and spam blogs, and an overview of the extent of the problem. Then the authors explore the legal ramifications of trying to regulate comment spammers and spam bloggers. They conclude that some regulation would be both constitutionally allowable and realistically enforcable….

…Congress should enact a law proscribing the use of automated software to post to blogs, wikis, and blog comments. Because this approach would not target speech directly, the government can constitutionally attack the incentives of spammers. First, the proscription should codify the Central Hudson test for commercial speech. The government has a substantial interest in protecting the “user efficiency” of bloggers and Internet readers and the vitality of an important new method of speech. Also, this method of furthering the government’s interest is a “reasonable fit.” It directly advances the government’s interests by limiting the quantity of spam blogs and freeing up the blogosphere for productive free speech activity. Furthermore, it is not more extensive or intrusive then it needs to be, since it prevents spam blogs from proliferating in great numbers but does not prevent any particular type of speech from being posted to the Internet. In fact, the law would function much like certain portions of the CAN-SPAM Act, already enacted into law.

A ban on automatically created spam blogs and link spam should withstand constitutional analysis even if some spam is found to be non-commercial speech. The proposed regulation is content-neutral in that it is “justified without reference to the content of the regulated speech” posted to the Internet. Any currently posted spam blog could be re-posted without offending the new law, as long as it is not reposted with automated software. As such, the law is a content-neutral manner restriction on posting material to the Internet. Furthermore, it is an acceptable manner restriction because it is narrowly tailored to the problem being addressed — the large quantity of spam blogs and comment spam — and “leave[s] open ample alternative channels for communication of the information.” As noted, the spammers can still use the same forums and avenues for spamming, just without the benefit of automated programs and open proxies. Indeed, such a regulation would be akin to laws that prevent the use of loudspeakers on city streets or limit decibel levels at concerts. Spammers can still get their “message” across, just at lower “volumes.”

[pp. 483-484, Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, vol. 19 no. 2, spring 2006.]

The authors are fairly realistic about the possibility of enforcement — such legislation won’t eliminate comment spam and spam blogs, but at least it provides a minimal level of legal protection. Or I’d say this: at least it would show that Congress is committed to protecting authentic free speech on the Internet, which would in fact mean a lot to me as a blogger.

Right now, the Bad Guys are winning the range war here in Blogger Gulch, and the Good Guys (like me) are feeling like the Marshall in our little town is more interested in catching rustlers in the next county, than catching the rustlers stealing our cattle right under his nose. It almost feels as if the Marshall isn’t really interested in protecting free speech at all, he’s just interested in shooting off his gun (to hopelessly mix metaphors).

The complete article is worth reading for anyone interested in the intersection of free speech and new technology.

Link.

Org theory and b-schools

The blog orgtheory has a good post on the recent history of organizational theory, summarizing a recent paper published in Organizational Studies: link.

What interested me most about this history of organizational studies is that since the 1980’s, most organizational theorists have migrated to the business schools. Which helps explain why the organizational theory I read seems to be permeated by free-market and business attitudes. I’m pretty comfortable with a business approach, but a congregation is not a business, a minister is something different from a chief executive, other program staff are not the same as employees, lay leaders are not the same as volunteers in a non-profit. It’ll never happen, but wouldn’t it be nice if organizational theory developed ties to the theological schools?

Can I just say…

Went to YouTube. Went through laborious sign-up process, with lots of glitches. Tried to upload video to YouTube. Didn’t work, twice. Banner ad showed woman in leopard print bikini. Gave up. Blah.

Went to blip.tv. Easy and fun to sign in. Uploaded video on first try. Got to look at banner ad that read: “Convenient Truths: A green video contest. Wanted: Inspired, pragmatic videos to help get us out of this mess.” Gave me good code to embed video in my blog. Very cool.

Friday video: Non-standard promotional video

My week of vacation doesn’t officially start until tomorrow, but because I didn’t have to be in the office today I stayed up late last night figuring out how to make a video. It turns out to be insanely easy to learn how to use iMovie, the video editing software shipped with all Mac computers. So just for fun, I made a promotional video for First Unitarian, splicing in images I happened to have on disk, and adding a soundtrack I had made a while ago in GarageBand….

(Note: video host blip.tv is defunct, so the original link to this video no longer exists. The above image is a still photo that was used in the original video. I still have a copy of this video, but have not put it online again.)

If the clicking on the picture above doesn’t work, try this: Link. (If you tried earlier and it didn’t work, try again — I uploaded a bad file at first.)

After I checked out some other videos on You Tube that promote Unitarian Universalist congregations. Most of the other videos take a documentary approach, with warm friendly shots of kids, choirs, ministers, etc. Most of their soundtracks use hymns, piano music, ministers talking, etc. From a sales and marketing standpoint, such videos are probably much better than mine. I guess maybe my video reflects a different understanding of Unitarian Universalism, more like that in the video for The First Unitarian Universalist Church of Second Life: Link (did Christine make that video?).

I’d love to hear your thoughts on what constitutes a good promotional video for Unitarian Universalist congregations. What demographic would you target? How would you get approval from your congregation’s Board (or would you even try)? Would you do a documentary, something more like a music video, or what?