A time for RE:appraisal

Yesterday was my birthday.

And amongst a few nice things (my wife has been active on FaceBook and reconnected with some old friends who it was lovely to hear from) there was one, truly horrible one.

Which, though it affected me badly, and still is a matter of upset, might have been the best thing that could have happened in a long time.

It was a truly awful, personal 'tweet' on my twitter page.

This person had got a very wrong end of a stick, and instead of thinking for a few seconds had sought offence which, as I am oft prone to quote, if you are looking for in any way, it will happily present itself easily whenever required.

I was shocked by the passion and the bile. All in 140 characters or less. And all because we are in a time poor world where people react rather than think, and cheap talk has more value than considered actions.

Well, and here's the 'good' bit, after 24hrs pondering, I have decided enough's enough.

I enjoy debate. I think I am good at it. And I do think what I say can have value.

But talk can also be very cheap. And pointless. I have valued Twitter for the information it has brought my way, but 9 times out of 10 it has been in a form that is hard to trust and hence needs a lot of checking.

But not just Twitter. At the other end of the communication spectrum, even the so-called 'MSM' (main stream media) is now so corrupted by agenda, dubious affiliations and the seduction of career-driving ratings in an already facile 24/7 'news' environment, nearly all 'reporting' now is commentary, and all commentary is only as good as the person passing it. And that, these days, is near zero.

I have seen Copenhagen as an iconic event, much as many other sincere, idealistic folk. But now it has arrived I think it will just be another jamboree of tribalism and hypocrites jockeying for personal gain, be it monetary, career or ego-boosting legacy coverage.

Maybe there will be 'a deal', and maybe it will involve some positive aspects. If so, great.

But I cannot see the juggernaut that is the various competing global lobbying groups being influenced one jot by what I might think, say or even if the latter resonates with the few I share my views with.

So all the Twittering, blog-surfing and contributing has to stop. It was, is, and I suspect will be mere exercises in futility.

To make a difference I have to get back to doing, even if it is just in the smallest of ways. Because a deed that is appreciated and inspires can lead on to more, bigger and maybe even better ones.

So to that very sad, angry person: thank you. But I am not above hoping that by your words I will be returned to actions that will one day come back to haunt you and what you stand for.

'A great person makes others feel small. A truly great person makes others feel great'

Words to live by. And act upon.

What goes up...

Junkk is not just about incentive/reward in matters green.

It is also about fun.

Hence, a big up to....

http://www.rolighetsteorin.se/?q=expriment/pianotrappan

Hat tip: Make it and Mend it

No such thing as bad publicity?

Bad reviews boost business sales

The first jummy of autumn

Iiiii wwwwwwilll resist pppputting the hhhhheating on.

Iiiii wwwwwwilll resist pppputting the hhhhheating on.

Iiiii wwwwwwilll resist pppputting the hhhhheating on.

(plus get a shave, bathe, haircut and lose 20kg)

By example

British public refuse to fly less to reduce their carbon footprint

In many ways the headline is a perfect encapsulation of what I see as a significant issue.

'The British public...' is an odd bunch.

A 'them' that another 'us' seem to see as not cooperating despite near daily nags from those who somehow still don't find it ironic to be constantly climbing aboard (usually to wallow in the front) of aircraft to fly all about (usually to nice places) to either talk about climate, raise 'awareness' or, in the case of many media, stand in front of stuff to decry how flying is doing so much damage.

Even the Guardian is not immune, and of course is famously reluctant to drop lucrative ads suggesting its readers visit far flung places before the actions 'of others' ruin them.

And only yesterday I learn that Dame Ellen MacArthur is to give up sailing for climate change (sic) promotion. I doubt she will be do this exclusively using water-borne free air, which might lead to suggestions of hot air. 'Doing one's job' has consequences, and there is a certain arrogance in a reporter or campaigner (I can concede most pols, though Mr. Prescott took his commitments a tad far... and long) somehow figuring their 'job' is necessary and others are not.

I flew a lot in my Asia days, and I did not do it for fun. Crossing time zones in a stuffy metal tube will never be.

And when it comes to social travel I think we would need to change human nature first. The desire to go other places is ingrained. Which can only mean that the trend will be to making it unaffordable to any but... yes... a grouping I think all ready well represented above. Another social divide that cannot end well.

Just in my personal case, with half our family halfway around the world, it's already an ethical dilemma for those who care about such things, on top of a financial burden enough for those with no choice.

But when the government's latest climate quangocrat reckons he and his family might have to cut back on the long hauls...which they do for fun, annually... there is already a disconnect between the 'do as we says' and the rest. We're saving up to visit in the next few years.

So long as that is not appreciated by the nannies, I don't see much changing.

Peaks and troughs

I was going to label that 'pros' and cons', but that would not be accurate.

Or, maybe, two sides to the coin?

Actually it's an amalgamation of all.

Earlier today I spotted this:

Telegraph - Half of Paris rental bikes stolen

But decided against sharing, as it was, well, a bit negative.

However, having now seen this:

FoE - New cash for cycling facilities at stations

I have decided on a post, as the information is precautionary and worth bearing in mind. And does suggest an enviROI aspect.

If also being a bit depressing about the human condition, mind.

Descendants of King Tut?

Or should that be 'tat'?

I am naturally drawn to any piece that mentions 'junk', even if in less than glowing terms.

Like the Pharaohs, we’re getting buried by our own possessions

However, in my case, several years' worth of old packaging secreted around house, garden and shed might stretch to qualify as 'possessions'.

Ponderings

Don't recall signing up, but I thought this that just came in was interesting:

WHY WE STILL DON’T BELIEVE IN CLIMATE CHANGE

What I liked was the relatively measured way it was argued.

Having shared it, I'll still keep quiet on the bits I agreed with, and, possibly, do not.

New directions. Older problems.

Encouraged by helpful support from fellow bloggers, I feel more confident with the odd 'off piste' post.

Though not quite out of the woods yet (meetings with finance guys, trying to let her cottage, etc), with my dear old Mum now in a nursing home I hope to see my focus on work options returning more soon.

Not before time.

The extended competition deadline is already half gone, and I have not promoted it anywhere yet. Plus the newsletter is two weeks overdue...

Anyway, there is also the not so small matter of what to do with an aspect of my life I have not really had access to for nearly a decade. And that is my career and, more specifically, one that pays the bills.

With Mum in a home, a lot of money that stayed within the family is now redirected and, on top, requiring serious monthly supplements. Her cottage, for instance, might just generate enough rental for 5 days fees in the home.

I had always thought that, as a writer, I had skills that were relatively saleable no matter what. And as this body of work might attest, plus all that has been generated for and by Junkk.com, the spirit of creativity is still alive and well, if perhaps not of late in the cause of soap powders or sports cars.

But there have been a few reality checks, and not entirely welcome ones.

I have dabbled for a while with getting back in the ad game, but have put down any lack of interviews to not being exactly clear on my availability. Fair enough.

However, last week a forum post set me afire. It was for a job nearby and for which I was... am well qualified. It was also urgent, and encouraged the prompt submission of a CV. And hence I responded.

I even waited a day, and then called just to ask if they could confirm all had arrived safe and sound (firewalls and spam filters can prove regular spoilers). The person in question was busy, and the receptionist said they'd call right back. That was a few days ago. I do plan to chase, but it's not looking encouraging.

On a day that I read the football world is allowed to be ageist (with some justification - I don't see me dribbling round Ronaldo very effectively, at least not with a ball), I rather suspect yet more toothless, overhyped, box-ticking, 'may look good but by golly doesn't do any good' legislation (a bit like most in the world of 'green') will make much dent on an industry where you are lucky to still be employed, much less hired, if you are over 40.

Here's hoping RE:tie's patents pay off soon!

Addenda: Mind you, I could be worse, I guess....

Times - Recession threatens to create a beaten generation

Indy - You surely can't expect people to work for free

Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible

There is much to commend about home working.

The freedom to work on what you want, when you want.

The freedom to wear shorts (or nothing at all, though that can scare the postman) if it is hot.

And much more.

I am lucky. As a writer primarily, and a net based one at that, I don't 'need' to be at an office to do what I do.

That all said, it is not a role many take to. And, frankly, not a first choice for me. I am a social creature and enjoy human contact. At my agency I would be at my desk 30 minutes but then off checking and chatting with my creative guys the next.

The main reason for me to be doing this is circumstance, and this situation has allowed me to balance looking after my aging Mum and her deteriorating mental and physical conditions at the same time. A bank of screens and sensors put me a few seconds away when needed, if I was not also popping over with daily cuppas, meals, TV channel changes, etc.

Sadly, as such things do, things have started to deteriorate, and faster and faster of late.

A bad month turned into a nightmare of a week, and she is now in the hospital I ended up having to resort to very bad behaviour to get her into, in the face of a box-ticking, target-concerned, bean-counter-driven medical system (nice one , Mr. 'getting on doing the job' - there a Gordon acronym there if I work on it).

And it looks like I will now be a tad distracted getting her out of there and into something I hadn't even thought about, not having realised 'residential' homes (which I had been planning and scoped out) are not the same as 'nursing' homes (which are much fewer, and farther away).

So, the day job is taking a second seat still, and a while longer.

And, I must say, I kinda miss having colleagues and bosses (or partners) who cover for you or let you scoot off on pay to handle such duties.

And I know it won't be easy, because we made the mistake of saving for just such a rainy day, and the system only really gets interested or helps if you have nothing to your name and no one to call on. Sadly, Mum has both, so I am still pretty much on my own, or in the hands of the truly inept, a while longer.

Pity it is while I am in the thick of the competition, the next newsletter in complement, and some big decisions and strategic efforts on behalf of RE:tie.

But, while still not ideal, I see a glimmer of stability at least soon, and then I can get back to helping save the planet a bit. But family comes first.

One can but hope...

Will We Be Green in 2009?

Some interesting, and encouraging (I was about to shut up shop) signs for genuine green initiatives as far as the consumer is concerned.

Quite a lot bears out what we've been banging on about anyway.

Or... we could end up with a multimillion £ recycling campaign when they have nowhere to put what they've got already, and a bunch more 'our CEO drives a 7litre hydrogen-powered limo', like that has any end-benefit value or relevance to the poor consumer trudging the aisles.

What do you reckon?

There is a free report available.

Wot 'e sed

EcoLogical

Sadly, quite a lot of the time one can discern the siren call of a target, with process rather than result being more important.

Recycling is OK (or not, if you check one of the sister articles here), but I'd still wave a small flag for reuse.

D'oh!

Brainy children ‘likely to vote Green’

...research suggests.

'Nuff said.

An insight?

As to whether it, and the responses it has garnered, bode well is another matter:

Obsessed with saving the planet? There are worse fates

Why I love research. And newspapers. And activists. And...

Maybe in different ways for different reasons, mind.

Green idealists fail to make grade, says study

Amazingly, from the Gaurdian.

In the 'no'

In many ways this is more appropriate for the more political 'El Burro Hotay' sister blog.

Especially today, as our Dear Leader articulates his vision for the future (for the next 10 years?) at the Labour Party Conference.

Thing is, I have come to feel that people, myself often included, seem 'persuaded' by those who claim to know all (and actually know sod) above those honest enough to say they are not too sure, especially about things in the future which, often, and by obvious examples in the past, are hard to predict with accuracy.

Pity.

What the guys who sell you stuff think...

Will consumers pay more to buy green?

So... who can think of a way to go green without asking anyoen to pay more?

Anyone?

Thrift usurps green at top of the new consumer agenda

Great. Now we've got past how it looks, maybe we can look at what still needs DOING!

Suddenly being green is not cool any more

Not that this has sunk into the thick, superficial skulls of the majority of most media reporters or columnists.

All These Green Taxes And Rules Are Just Witless Nods To Fashion

Do-do

A bit of Monday philosophy...

There's what's right to do.
There's what I should do.
There's what some want me to do.
There's what others want me to do.
There's what I could do.
There's what I want to do.
There's what I can afford to do.

And, there's what I will do.

It might be worth some remembering those options, especially in terms of the way they present their views to me when seeking to influence my behaviour through cooperation or coercion.

It just might help us all avoid mutual.. do-do.

Words & Deeds

It's a survey, so we grab that pinch of salt now. But, considering it's in the Observer, one does tend to take note:

Poll: most Britons doubt cause of climate change

Especially as it does rather serve what I bang on about. Which as an aside shows how polls, and consequent editorialising, can easily be selective.

I don't propose to argue one way or t'other about CC, or even the ProbablyManWorsenedNegative variant I subscribe to, but this does beg the question as to the credibility and effectiveness of all those who have taken to 'educate'/influence the public in this matter. And ask why 'they' (well, to an extent, 'we') are proving so poor in getting their messages across. Which leads me to their qualifications to be allowed to carry on, not in freedom of speech terms, but when vast amounts of public money are consumed to fund these efforts.

On my other blog I have expressed some concern at the ongoing attempts by a few in the political and chatterati firmament to blame everybody but themselves in polls that did not go the 'right' way, often taking it to the extreme of suggesting 'other' views should be suppressed and/or that the general public is not qualified to judge. Hence I crank an eyebrow at this: 'Some environmentalists blame the public's doubts on last year's Channel 4 documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, and on recent books, including one by Lord Lawson, the former Chancellor, that question the consensus on climate change.' That's 'a' programme and 'a' book, both widely dissected by those of a more climate pessimistic nature with frankly vast resources. And the notion is the people are being seduced by such as these? There is a worrying similarity with the recent and ongoing Irish EU situation, where by having a contrary opinion there seem a really rather ugly group think being engaged upon against those who do not conform with the 'consensus'. Faced with such as this my nature is almost to kick back just for the naked obnoxiousness of the stance being taken and the uncritical homage demanded.

I have to say I have sympathy with this form Bjorn Lomborg, who '..said politicians and campaigners were to blame for over-simplifying the problem by only publicising evidence to support the case.' Of course this is a critique that can apply to (and I hate such generalist terms) other 'sides'.

Hence I find this from the Department for the Environment to be making a key point: 'The IPCC... concluded the scientific evidence for climate change is clear and it is down to human activities.' Unless there's a bit left out, is it that clear, definitive... and certain? It's all due to human activity? I remain unsure, don't recall it be proven, and hence such claims do rather cause me to crank an eyebrow at anything else such entities may come up with.

Meanwhile such as this does not help either: '...six out of 10 agreed that 'many scientific experts still question if humans are contributing to climate change'.

It all seems so all or nothing, 'if you are not for us, you are against us'. And history has shown how well those stances have served.

So here is a worrying, but frankly unsurprising finding: 'More than half of those polled did not have confidence in international or British political leaders to tackle climate change'.

Whatever the message is or should be, I remain firm in my belief the current crop of messengers need to be reviewed.