Madame Madeline

"The Magnificently Marvelous Madame Madeline. 100% accurate. That's every percent. 100 of them. Never wrong! Read the future for ONLY $5!"

Thom read the sign in disbelief. That seemed to be a pretty strong guarantee. 'But seriously, how? How could anyone be so certain of anything?' To Thom, Madame Madeline already seemed like a vegan or a religious zealot preaching her mind cult - and this was just the sign.

But, then again, just $5? That seemed an acceptable expense to exchange for insight into claims of such certainty. Alright!

Thom rummaged through his wallet and found a $5 bill. Thom always imagined that carnivals aimed at entertaining the young, not 30 year olds. But, in this circumstance, Madame Madeline had hooked a slightly more mature trophy from the stream.

Madame Madeline's questionable advertisement sat ahead of a tent. It resembled a medieval troop tent from the outside. The tent was sandwiched between a ring toss over bottles game and a 3 card monty booth. Presumably the experience within Madame Madeline's fell somewhere in that line.

Thom entered the tent. Pushing aside the canvas flap gave way to a totally different world. Once he entered, the literal carnival of sounds from outside entirely disappeared. The noises were replaced with the sound of some soothing instrument Thom had never heard before. 'A harp mixed with a soft horn mixed with light rain fall?' Directly in front of Thom stood a tall mirror. Above it an arrow pointed left. Left was the only direction to go so it didn't disrupt anything for Thom.

After a turn to the left, under / through some jingly beads, and into another area, Thom encountered a tiny woman sitting behind a table, dressed in flowing robes. Her arms were outstretched and her eyes were closed. Thom's best guess placed her somewhere between 300 and 500 years roughly. In general she was just really really old. Without opening her eyes she beckoned him, "Thomas. Come in. Please sit."

This gave Thom pause. 'She may have heard him enter or might have been peeking or even had a hidden surveillance camera, but how on earth did she know his name?'

Thom, now off balance, moved toward her slowly.  He lowered himself into the single wooden chair stationed across the table.

"Hello Thomas," Madame Madeline greeted as she simultaneously opened her eyes. Her gaze pierced Thom and added to his mounting discomfort.

"Hi...Mam...Miss...I don't know what to call you?" Thom stammered as he placed a $5 bill on the table.

"Thank you!," responded Madame Madeline and she deftly removed the cash from sight with a pass of her hand like a magician. "Please, call me Madeline. Nothing else is necessary. So do you, Thomas, have a question about your future?"

"Kind of, sure. See I saw your sign outside. It seemed kind of preposterous to me I guess. That amount of certainty. I dunno. It'd be very difficult to be that confident about anything in your own life, I think, so how could you even come close to that about some stranger?"

"Because the cards never lie," she assured. "I will show you. Here, shuffle these. However you want." She pushed an extra large card deck, with about half as many cards as a deck of playing cards, across the table over to Thom.

Thom cut the deck in half, pushed the two halves back together, and returned the pile to Madame Madeline. She picked up the pile, closed her eyes, then raised the deck to her "third eye." Thom reacted by rolling his actual eyes.

Madeline opened her eyes and began flipping cards over in front of her. After the revelation of each card in her strange game of solitaire she released a soft sigh but otherwise maintained a straight face. Each card displayed a different arcane image that looked like a facsimile from some ancient religious text older than human civilization.

After a line of cards lay before her, Madeline surveyed the continuum. Then she covered her mouth, and commented aloud, "Ah yes. I see! Yes," she nodded understandingly. "Thomas, the cards reveal, and the cards are NEVER mistaken, the cards reveal that you will meet your end! Your demise is definite!"

Suddenly the skeptical Thom engrossed with interest. "How? Tell me what happens? Tell me how!?"

"That's not for me to say Thomas."

Stunned, Thomas protested. His boiling exasperation presented with louder and louder exclamations. "What? No, that's exactly for you to say! I engaged you on a lark after you enticed me in with your 'guarantees.' Then you drop this tidbit and I'm just supposed to accept it ho hum? Now you have to tell me what else you read! I, I demand it!!" Thom had lost his cool. 

By contrast Madeline responded with quiet calm. "Thomas, I understand. If you desire an additional reading I would very happily oblige you. A second reading simply costs $500."

Explosion. "Seriously!? You're serious? It's 100 times more? That's...that's...that's extortion! You didn't even tell me something I didn't already know. The whole question is HOW, not IF? I already know it WILL happen. HOW will it happen? Tell me THAT!"

A Couple more thoughts this Wednesday

In Episode 2 of "Couple Thinkers," (I previously introduced Episode 1) Craig and Megan interview acclaimed astrophysicist, author, host, planetarium director, science communicator, and curious dude, Neil deGrasse-Tyson. Mr. deGrasse-Tyson, my bud Neil, discusses many big picture issues - since space and human existence are fairly big picture issues. Craig summarizes why astrophysics and philosophy are so engaging and then become depressing. Then, my BFF, Neil advocates how changing perspective might enable changing the entire experience of living. Just a couple things to think about.

Couple your thinking this Wednesday

I don't know if you know who Craig Ferguson is? I actually don't know what you know at all. You may remember Ferguson as the boss on the Drew Carey Show. He's Scottish in origin but now he's an American citizen. He's a stand-up comic. He hosted the Late Late Show after David Letterman's Late Show on CBS for a number of years. Being sober is a definitive factor in his person. On the Late Late Show he shared the stage with a gay skeleton robot and a costumed horse in a faux stall. For awhile he used hand puppets during his monologue and he would often purposely jostle the main camera. Yeah, it was a weird show, but I think that his irreverence, amplified by the awareness that sobriety afforded him, contributed to his likability. He frequently tore-up the pre-show questionnaire at the desk when interviewing a guest, preferring instead to instigate a more genuine interaction.

An escalation of his popularity with me came after Britney Spears very publicly shaved her head. Most late night hosts were quick to mock, but Craig Ferguson responded differently. Understanding the burdens of fame and life and a chaotic youth, Craig Ferguson responded with compassion. I had enjoyed him before but that made me a fan. 

Ferguson left the Late Late Show around the time David Letterman departed Letterman's own earlier late show. Ferguson went on to host the syndicated game show, Celebrity Name Game. Ok, even if you don't really know anything about Craig Ferguson I guess that I kinda, sorta, do. BUT...I've never seen him in-person nor have I read either of his books. I don't go out of my way to see him generally, I'm not a fanatic. I just enjoy him. I'm a strong admirer.

Recently, on YouTube, for Gant (a clothing retailer I had before been unaware of but now am because of this), Ferguson returned to his Late Late Show roots by interviewing some interesting people for a show starring he and his wife called "Couple Thinkers." He's a natural at interviews it seems. 

In the first episode (of 6) the Fergusons speak to Kimbal Musk. Kimbal is the brother of Elon (Elon Musk is the Tesla and Space X and hyper loop etc guy). I didn't know that Elon even had a brother, but then I'm not very up to date on Musk family genealogy. This familial revelation was even more surprising to me than when I learned that Skip and Rick Bayless are brothers. (WHAT!?) While Elon seems to focus on technological, species sustainability and advancement, Kimbal Musk focuses his efforts on the agriculture. So, in essence, they are both in the business of keeping things going for humanity.

Craig Ferguson and his wife, appropriately as two humans belonging to humanity, highlighted Kimbal's work in Episode 1 of "Couple Thinkers:" 

Lost and Found

Lost.

Drifting.

Only a random scrap of the wreckage to hold.

A random scrap to help me stay afloat.

To help me breathe.

What the scrap is doesn't matter. All that matters is that it floats.

I don't swim well so I desperately need it.

I grip it tightly, literally for dear life. 

I'm floating aimlessly in the vast and broad expanse of the ocean.

What lurks below the surface? I can't tell.

Could be anything. I just don't know.

There could be a shark or a jellyfish or an eel. I mean there probably is... Or, however unlikely, I suppose there could be nothing.

But, in the end, whatever brings my end, will be what brings my end.

It could be the sharp rip of a shark bite tearing at my leg. Chomping and thrashing.

It could be the sudden searing pain of a jellyfish sting. They look peaceful until they aren't.

It could be the abrupt, paralyzing electric jolt of an eel. That's what eels do...right? I'm not sure.

I am sure the ocean's an uncertain place though. I'm sure of that.

The ocean is scary.

The ocean could easily bring an end to my floating scrap, which would, in turn, bring an end to me.

Or I could slip from my float, or I could lose my grip on my float.

Or my float could just stop floating.

For me it would bring the same result as the shark or the jellyfish or the eel.

That a lot could go wrong is a constant.

Things could always go very wrong. 

Always.

Luckily, there's this one floating scrap.

This one bit to hold on to, to leverage my head above the water, so I can breathe.

Breathing a second longer brings a second more for the chance someone could find me.

Someone could see something.

Something that stands out. A small glint amidst the wide abyss. 

Something that merits a closer look through binoculars.

Something that prompts a large point toward a tiny spec in the water.

Excitedly, "There! He's there!"

For me a new floating contraption descends.

A new thing for me to latch on to.

A diver jumps in and wraps a band around me.

He gives the thumbs up signal to some hidden observer above and a wench starts to turn.

I start to rise up.

I start to separate from the unknown I have now come to know. 

Ascending gives me a new perspective. 

From above, the ocean looks less intimidating.

It looks less frightening without my legs treading in the void.

It looks less scary with the removal of some of the unknown.

Now the ocean looks peaceful and beautiful.

It's the same place that moments before instilled fear.

The exact same place. The same powerful, unpredictable place. It's hard to believe.

But, as I slowly rise up, I mostly think how happy I am for that floating scrap. 

That single piece that allowed me to keep breathing.

That allowed me to stay alive. 

In the end, that floating scrap enabled me to be found.

Wildcard Wednesday 5/18/16

It seems unlikely that I wouldn’t care about hockey. Hockey fans absolutely love it and, at the base level, I seem perfectly positioned to actively support hockey as well. I enjoy most sports and I came from the north where hockey is prevalent. But, no NHL team calls my State home and the cost of participation precluded me as I grew. Those factors combined to make me agnostic when it came to hockey, despite my other predispositions.

I arrived to college a hockey blank slate. Smooth, like the zamboni just cleaned the ice between periods. While the fantastic cheer of my college’s fans (“that’s debatable,” after the arena announcer declared that both teams were “back to full strength” with the finish of a power play for our side) alone urged me to vehemently cheer for my college, other factors did not. 

Enter other factors. Most people know a "crazy" person. Not someone dissociated with the world, but kinda. In my definition, crazy people don’t care about consequences. That complete absence of concern makes them imposing adversaries if the circumstances warrant. It just so happens that the craziest (least concerned with consequence) person I knew from high school visited someone else I went to college with (obviously he wasn’t a fellow student himself since that would conflict with the crazy status). I was happy to occupy Senior Loco’s good graces which made us allies rather than adversaries. 

Sorry, this is a long story, but I worked at a bar in my college town. Friends, including Loco that evening, came to the establishment while I finished working. When I finished work we would all head for another establishment on a meaningless but, at the time seemingly very meaningful, escapade. 

Back to direct relevance, I worked with a member of the hockey team. Some of his teammates also visited the bar. A bunch of hulking He-men, whom although they might compete with their skates for intelligence, still retained more cognizance than Loco. 

Somehow a disagreement developed over who would win a fight between our Loco and the present hockey loco (because apparently there’s some way to differentiate them - I would have guessed all the hockeys were more or less crazy). It doesn’t really matter how the conversation came to be, all that matters is that it was. The two locos exchanged some coarse words and some coarse looks but after significant efforts from others, including myself, blatant conflict was avoided. ‘Whew,’ I thought with relief.

After I finished my shift our small group, 5 or 6 or so normal humans, began our trek through the mean streets to our next destination. Unfortunately our little group unintentionally led another. A second set of at least as many hockey players…people WHO PLAYED COLLEGIATE HOCKEY and regularly athletically trained and basically fought for fun…were in tow. While I had confidence that our one crazy David could defeat their one crazy Goliath, no matter sizes, I possessed little confidence in our ability as a group to defeat their numerically and physically superior group of giants. 

They followed us, not saying anything, not needing to say anything. Just following, and in the manner of following strongly implying a desire to fight. I think that team rules probably prohibited them from clearly provoking a fight but did not prohibit them from self-defense. So, they aimed to provoke self-defense. 

I had helped avoid an outright fight earlier while I worked. Now the work induced abstinence served me well by tempering my ego. Those of us aware of the unfavorable odds guided our group into the first business possible for a drink. Where didn’t matter as long as it was somewhere that did not involve being tailed by a bunch of long-haired, thick skulled behemoths.

As if their purpose wasn’t obvious enough, the sudden absence of prey to provoke quickly led to traveling hockey mob's disappearance. “Poof” just like that, like Kaiser Soze, they were gone. 

So, a little more than a year later, when the school's Hockey team won the National Championship, I cheered. On a school pride level I was very happy. But on a personal level, not as happy as I might have been had a group of lunatics not attempted to instigate a fight involving me the previous year. 

To summarize, I don’t really follow hockey because it never held a significant place in my childhood. That, and the one group I would naturally cheer for were jerks. While I would take those hockey jerks above any other school’s hockey jerks, it might take me a while longer still to overcome the personal difficulty of it. Maybe this was just a minority clique on the team. Maybe this small faction's actions shouldn't represent the entire larger group but, like most things in life, that’s debatable.

          Slap Shot 1977 Universal

Wildcard Wednesday 5/11/16

As we shopped Unique LA the other weekend, which we tend to do a few times annually (cause we’re are unique and live in LA so it’s kinda required right?), we came across a clothing booth. We were already perusing the wears when the proprietor’s enthusiasm for the products set the hook. Except maybe that’s not quite the right analogy because we weren’t prey. It was a shared experience. But I don’t know the fitting analogy, and what I mean is that his enthusiasm intrigued us and the benefits of the product enticed us. So even though it wasn’t necessarily a predatory exchange I guess “setting the hook” works alright.

At Unique we always make rounds and then come back to necessary places to avoid the almost guaranteed impulse buy. It provides an out to escape the sales pressure otherwise.

But we came back to this place. The clothing material seemed amazing and the messages upon it evoked amazingness and the money the business received in exchange for the clothes went toward an amazing purpose. If I could sum it up in one word I would probably call it amazing. 

“For Every Shirt Sold, We Give One Bag Of Groceries To A Child In Need”

A good purchase toward a good cause. We were happy with the overall experience. Then, as I flipped the channels the other night, I saw a familiar face at the end of a news segment. The proprietor we purchased from at Unique promoting the quality of his product. I only caught the end but I already felt pride in his words. I thought to myself, “choir, he preaches the truth. Good job us.”

www.fbnw.us 

Our mission is to spread happiness; we do this by providing a bag of food to a child in need for EVERY shirt we sell.

Wildcard Wednesday 5/4/16

Here's my hardline, no-exception, absolute rule (because no compromise is the best way always!): the name of a professional sports team should stay with its place of origin. If I’m deciding a rule applicable to the ownership of a professional sports franchise I decide on that rule immediately. I believe that strikes a fair balance between the freedom of the entrepreneur and the investment of the local fans. A good name, the best names (according to me), intentionally reflect the place (sure probably in order to attract monetary gain, but ideally commerce and the broader reality seamlessly commingle. Am I right? I think I'm right).

In order to secure a consistent stream of funds the franchise needs to appeal to the people that can realistically and regularly attend the competitions. Fans in the immediate area can realistically and regularly attend consistently. Ingratiating the team to them makes good business sense. But, removing the team and the franchise history from the place removes the foundation on which the fandom rests. It’s quid pro quo. This for that. Except one side has the option to remove the “this” on a whim. To hold those who want “this” hostage, demanding extreme “that” as the ransom. Usually “that” constitutes a new stadium or building. Notice that "hostage" and "ransom" aren't particularly positive terms but I think they're probably accurate.

Now the argument can be made that a rule of that form limits the freedom of the owner who paid money for that team. Of course the one making that argument probably holds an array of personal beliefs that already conflict with my supposition. However, I would contest that the owner of a team seeks benefit from the community, and intentionally appeals to them. It seems fair then to imply a relationship between the broader community and the ownership of a franchise. But, the owner is free to leave whenever the owner decides, sticking the community with the remainder after the absence. That violates the implied relationship. Plus I’m generally supportive of a cool name over free enterprise for sport’s team owners. Power to the people!

Listing names of a few professional sports franchises and explaining what makes them good or bad demonstrates efficacy, or the lack of. The Utah Jazz. The Milwaukee Brewers. I’m from Wisconsin so that probably helps foreshadow my preferences.    

The Utah Jazz. One thing that definitely comes to mind when I think jazz music: the State of Utah. An impromptu jazz jam might erupt out of nothing down the street anywhere in Utah. Let me take you to funky town, or as some know it Salt Lake City. It is Utah after all. Oh, Utah's not funky? It's not jazzy? Not at all? In fact jazz is maybe the antithesis of the general conception of Utah? Hmmm. That seems counterintuitive. Maybe Utah is ironically jazzy? I guess they should be the popular hipster franchise or something.

The Jazz actually originated in New Orleans. Ahhh. New Orleans and jazz music. Wow. That actually makes complete sense. Those two seem to match perfectly. New Orleans, a funky, rhythmic haven? Absolutely. Knowing that, I can’t help but feel a little disappointment every time of hear something about the Utah Jazz or the New Orleans Pelicans. Oh what was and what should still be.

Alternatively, the Milwaukee Brewers. People often refer to Milwaukee as“cream city,” referring to brick color. But, more applicable here, Milwaukee also often receives another moniker, “brew city.” Laverne and Shirley (that was a TV show back in the day) lived in Milwaukee and worked at a brewery. A slogan of Schlitz beer was, “Schlitz, the Beer that made Milwaukee Famous.” Beer and Milwaukee have grown to become synonymous with each other. I remember the smell of yeast from the various breweries permeating the vehicle as we drove through Milwaukee in my childhood. So the name of the baseball team explicitly appeals to the community. Brewers make beer. Especially in a small market, the local fan base and the team must form a symbiotic relationship for the team to even survive much less thrive. 

Despite the difficulties, enough success and money can overcome the struggles a name might create. But why create unnecessary struggle if the goal is monetary gain? The Lakers originated in Minnesota. I wasn’t around when they moved or I would have railed, likely unsuccessfully, for “Lakers” to stay in Minnesota. Now the Timberwolves could be the Lakers and the L.A. Lakers could be something relevant to people in Los Angeles. Minnesota is a place where the populace identifies with the concept of lakes. Naming the basketball team after lakes appealed directly to the populace. The Minneapolis Lakers is a cool name. Really cool.

I currently live in Los Angeles. I have never heard a single person make a single utterance about L.A.’s lakes. L.A has no lakes! At least not many and certainly not prominent, dominating ones. LA’s near the ocean. Not only does the name, the LA Lakers, seem random and arbitrary when applied to L.A. but it seems extra those things because it so fittingly applies to the originating place. Since removing the team from Minnesota effectively severed any meaning from the name between the new fans and and the franchise, the ownership leveraged success and money to fill the hole. Of course, many fanbases would more than accept that trade off, but for many fanbases that option fails to exist. Especially in a small market, the franchise cannot usually afford to consistently put out a winning product - and spending never really guarantees winning anyway. 

If an owner arrives at the decision that it makes monetary sense to transfer locations, monetary concerns clearly supersede others for them. A locality from which a team departs cannot choose to make a team suddenly viable. If the the owner has chosen to place finances above all else, as most owners will, then it makes little sense to carry a previously locationally incisive name with anyway. It makes much more sense for the owner to appeal directly to the likely already extremely interested fanbase by directly tying the team name to the place. It signifies a commitment of the owner to the locality for a longer term. 

So, it seems to make the most sense for a franchise to create a new name when arriving in a new place if the franchise plans to even attempt creating any sort of connection to the new locality. And, since the old name no longer bares any relevance, it also makes sense to leave it where it came from. “What’s in a name?” Apparently a lot!

Wildcard Wednesday 4/27/16

In a previous post, on a Tuesday long long ago, I mentioned Dan Barber’s idea of responsibility and how actions metaphorically corresponded to deposits and withdrawals from a collective bank. I also mentioned that ideas of responsibility don’t always mesh since I disagreed at first with one conception of it. 

The idea of responsibility has, for a long time, dominated my thoughts. So naturally part of that analyzing involves pondering what responsibility means? I think there are actually two types of responsibility. 

On a small scale, micro-responsibility, like micro-economics, is what can be directly attributed to, or seen as a result of, your actions. This would be legal responsibility. A caused B to happen and A could guess C could potentially result. B did lead to bad result C. If not for A creating B, no C. How reasonable is the implication of C? If it’s very reasonable for C to flow from B then A is very responsible. If it is a stretch to think that C would flow from B then A is not that responsible. Legally, it’s a question of “reasonable.” You are only legally responsible for what you can “reasonably” foresee occurring. 

But, Dan Barber is discussing another, larger, type of responsibility. It opposes arguments that people don’t matter. “Why vote in elections when there are so many people? Why does one single drop of water matter in an endless ocean?” Dan Barber argues, I think, that “yes, in fact, your voice does matter.” 

If we view our actions as investments in a bank, and see that we all access that account, a global account for all people (unfortunately not a real account I have access to), we realize that every action in some way effects us. Macro-responsibility like macro-economics. You shouldn’t feel aimless and drowning. You shouldn’t feel like your actions are entirely pointless. You should feel like your actions are at least somewhat meaningful. They amount to a deposit or withdrawal that changes the account balance that some other entirely random person may confront. And they may change the balance you confront. 

In Dan Barber’s analogy the Earth, the world, our society is akin to the bank. Because you have access to the account, any action you take changes the available balance. You know that, so while you might not be legally held responsible for an action, you can reasonably assume that, because you can access the account, your actions may change the balance.

Wildcard Wednesday 4/20/16

I find lists tremendously helpful. They provide a mainline of information. While the article that contains them may be perused once or so, it’s always helpful to have a list to return to. I previously posted a link to a list of the “dirty dozen.” It provides a tally of the items that harbor the most pesticides to aid in your decision making process. Sure the wisdom or logic involved in anything is open to attack but that attack doesn’t subvert the shorthand value. Critiques of the list fail to appreciate that the list doesn’t always need to be perfect to be useful. Here’s an alternative list. It’s shorter. 

Organic = Yes. 

Non-organic = No. 

It’s a much cleaner, much healthier, much simpler organizer. Unfortunately that’s not very realistic. So, if you would like to play in the real world, here is an alternative. An update to the “dirty dozen.”

http://www.takepart.com/article/2016/04/12/most-contaminated-fruits-and-veggies

Wildcard Wednesday 4/13/16

Wildcard Wednesday 4/13/16

April 13, 2016 in Wildcard Wednesday

It can be fairly difficult to maintain awareness in life. SO much happens. How can you possibly keep up with all of the goings on? Someone will surely bring up one of the day’s topics at work by the water cooler or at a cocktail party. Do you want to be the loser who can’t even summon the knowledge for light conversation? No. Of course you don’t! Well here’s the solution to all of your fears and insecurities (ok, maybe just some or one). Go to this link. Sign up for this newsletter and have a quick, fun summary of relevant daily events delivered each morning to your email inbox. I do it and I suggest you do it too. 

http://www.theskimm.com/?r=70531d0d

Wildcard Wednesday 4/6/16

Wildcard Wednesday 4/6/16

April 6, 2016 in Wildcard Wednesday

In sports, and also a lot in in general life, but particularly in sports, quality often suffers in favor of profit. For example, take baseball. Baseball used to dominate interest. Now, as looks become more fractured, individuals and teams will stop at very little to maintain some, at least a modicum, of interest. The team's grip on to what already exists ever so tightly, as viewership slowly slips through fingers, because even a small amount of attention equals a large amount of funding. 

Few individual fans will affiliate beyond one particular team. Commitment to the larger league as a whole requires an amount of time and patience not at all common. But, TV stations and team owners will never sacrifice profits by reducing the length and number of games and to, as a result, make the quality higher for the fan. The MLB, NBA, and even NFL seasons are already long, maybe too long (especially MLB). But a game and a season translates into SO much already accounted for programing that contracts are worth a small fortune to a TV station and therefore a fortune to the team owners. As long as the bottom line remains the primary concern for owners they will never choose to voluntarily lessen it.

Therefore, as a follower of a franchise, since the owners usually care the utmost about the pocketbook, the best was to harness the owner’s attention is to attack the pocketbook.

The fans provide, in one way or another, money to the teams. That means they can reinforce positive behavior by encouraging it with a reward. Likewise they can punish poor behavior by withholding the reward. In either case the ultimate power rests with the collective actions of those providing the funds, of the fans.

I don’t know the exact best course of action to suggest. While long games, seasons extending deeper and deeper, and increasingly particularized media markets may equal short term increased profit (like the housing bubble did), in the long term it means a lot less desirable and less palatable product (also like the housing bubble).

It seems the only option left to a sport's fan to really exercise any influence immediately, and really the most effective influence at all, before the sport escalates to the point of unfollowability (I made up that word!), is to deny funds. That speaks the loudest to the owners. If the league sees fans reacting negatively to avariced attempts then hopefully it responds accordingly. What else can the fans hope to do? In the end, the best way to support a team in the long term might be to cease supporting them right now.

Wildcard Wednesday 3/30/16

Wildcard Wednesday 3/30/16

March 30, 2016 in Wildcard Wednesday

And, in the vein of wildcard Wednesday, I wanted to dedicate this particular Wednesday to the current object of my curiosity, "Collider Video." I was going to post a link to video they created that detailed some of the usual happenings there. But, they've recently undergone many changes that possibly make some of the information not as accurate anymore. That, and I couldn't find it. That makes it really hard to post. Instead, I'll just go ahead and tell you a little about it (see Kramer and movie phone on Seinfeld).

The site provides a conglomeration and discussion of movie and entertainment information and happenings. They try to provide a slightly sport-like attitude in discussion. Most of the regular shows contain a side-bar of the topics to be discussed like PTI or some Sportscenters and such. It's all pretty informative and useful if that's where your interests lie. Mine do.