Scott: You've been invited to this chat room! Scott: This is a group chat, apparently. me: Howdy, Yankees Clark: it did not work in eastern Montana, the part with the indian reservations, and it did not work in West Virginia, except in major towns Clark: Howdeeee Scott: I'm shocked that it didn't work well in WVA outside of major towns. Scott: Anyway, I brought out all here to better discuss. Scott: Clark has raised a good point that participation, even on the blog, has lulled excluding himself. me: sorry one moment Clark: i think one problem may be that the invite went to spam for many people, it went to spam when i sent it to myself at google Clark: in a couple of weeks barrett can re-send the invite, and it wont go to spam since almost all of them have had prior email contact with him Scott: Clark, I have my gmail forwarded to my AOL and several days ago your emails starting showing up in spam. I've since told them you're not SPAM but at least 3 went there. Scott: Agreed, that's probably a good idea. Clark: and of course, it is not clear who some of the folks who joined are since they changed their screen name when they got a new Google account Scott: That's true. Scott: Maybe at some point we can ask Barrett to make a post that request people to introduce themselves (as much as they feel comfortable) in comments to a post he makes. Clark: it was a mistake to have made the blog private, I think, so after it has a little more content to give it some gravitas, maybe we should discuss taking it public so folks will not have access chanllenges me: absolutely, I see no reason to keep it private Scott: also agreed but I see Clark's point about having a minimum level of substance first me: to some extent, I'd like to err on the liberal side in terms of making our proceedings available to anyone who'd care to see them me: yes, of course, we'll wait Clark: yeah, I totally agree, what I was worried about was publishing our discussions with various financial product sales persons, since we are not consumer reports me: I'll have time to put up a couple of posts as well soon, just been travelling and trying to finish up some late articles, should be ready to do more in a couple days Scott: Take your time, it was just a thought since you're much more popular than Clark and me. me: I'll distill a couple past articles on PM into blog post form Clark: i got a list of video topics that i am working, probably send them later today Scott: I'll work on that later this week and send via Blog as well, unless anyone prefers via email. Clark: I will put up a post telling the current Workshop PM accessors that we are going public with it, so they will will not be blindsided, thinking their comments are strictly in-house Scott: Also, I just changed the layout of the blog somewhat in terms of listings on the right. Please let me know if you agree/disagree. Clark: OK, i just looked at it, looks good to me me: sorry about that, had to have a five minute fucking conversation about whether or not I need my mom to run get me some Tinactin for some hypothetical case of athlete's foot, finally I gave in and now mommy is finally letting me play with my secret superhero club me: anywho me: Scott, what were the ideas you mentioned yesterday? me: that you thought might be controversial? Scott: Boom, Tough Actin' Tinactin me: I know, that's exactly what I think each time me: we should emulate that ad agency in all things me: like Sun Tzu Scott: Well I have a lot of ideas about the structure of the Blog to make it as self-sufficient as possible. The controversial ideas I posted to the blog. me: okay, haven't seen them yet but will take a look this afternoon Scott: To paraphrase from a popular movie, "this is not Nam. There are rules." Scott: Do either of you have a problem with me posting the Kickstarter text file and making a post about it? me: Big Lebowski Clark: I have some comments on the Rules post but I am going to wait a while to see if someone else weighs in me: nope Scott: yes, great movie. Clark: I have not read the doc you added yet, will give you some feed back or an attaboy later me: go ahead and do so, and I'll try to weigh in soon Scott: I'm fine with that. On the flipside through, Clark, especially if you disagree with some of the ideas, it may allow others to feel more comfortable being outspoken. me: also, I believe I forwarded the e-mail I got back from dir of comm at NCSE regarding our proposed plan to improve science journalism Clark: yeah if we bash each other a little, it might loosen up others Scott: yes, Barrett, I did see that. I think it's a big but important undertaking. Scott: I just don't know the past way to proceed. Scott: Clark, feel free to bash :) me: I'll talk to him by phone soon and see what he has in mind specifically regarding his counterproposal. At any rate, between the NCSE and my outlet at Skeptical Inquirer and my other connections in that general community, I believe that we can (1) acquire more than enough human capital to make a measurable difference, in part simply by raising awareness of the problem, and (2) quickly move to put some of those folks in charge of that program so that we need not put much time into administrating it Clark: i dont mean to suggest we should have false histrionics as a gimmick, but when theres an actual divergence of views, i think thats ok Scott: If both 1 & 2 are possible than I say green light. Scott: I would be skeptical of actual human capital participation, but I'm always skeptical. Scott: Clark, sorry, I didn't mean to suggest a "fake" disagreement either. me: it'll be at least a week or two before I can get started on that in earnest, but I'm rather confident that we're in a particularly good position to do this, and if we can get it into play quickly, it will be a good demonstration of the advantages of our more dynamic sort of procedures Scott: If you do have differing views, please don't hold back. Scott: Barrett, do we have an official website? me: This space station will be fully operational me: we have bits of a website me: I own and have access to a couple of URLS Clark: I would be skeptical of actual human capital participation, but I'm always skeptical. <---- I kind of agree with this, I have difficulty gauging the actual interest of participants me: and we have a participant who has a server or some such thing, I've been talking to him about all that me: well, the NCSE alone can get people for it Scott: okay, i just didn't know if we should start using a more official email address when initiating communications. me: and they're interested in doing it me: meanwhile, I have loads of old contacts due to my first book and work in opposing the intelligent design movement Clark: I tried that with the blog invites, and I think it just resulted in sending stuff to spam Clark: but so would my name, probably me: as well as contacts with loads of freelancers who could work in conjunction with scientists, etc to create quality articles me: freelancers who are looking for work, of course Scott: unfortunately spam filters are problematic Scott: ok so barrett is not concerned about participation, which is good Scott: barrett, moving quickly through subjects here, will the website be intricate? i.e. databases, etc. me: Before setting it up I'll try to get the best sense of what we'll need initially and ensure that it has those things; other features may be added later as necessary, of course me: we're waiting on one of our participants anyway who says he can get it taken of for us as soon as he's done with a project of his own Scott: Okay, because I have a lot of thoughts and some of them might require more complexity than others (not saying they're all good thoughts) me: so let me know what you think of in terms of what you'd like to see Scott: plan on it :) Clark: me too me: also me: another matter me: I'm finishing up my new column for Skeptical Inquirer me: this is an open letter to literalist religious congressmen and other elected officials me: people such as Michelle Bachmann, for instance me: demanding two things me: first, that the "religion of secularism," as they keep calling it, be deemed tax exempt immediately such that secularists may write off imported coffee and Jared Diamond books Scott: I'm confused, can you give me the dummies 2-minute version? me: second, that Congress prepare a contingency plan for the Rapture and/or Tribulations as believed in by some 40 percent of the population and a number of congressmen as well me: it'll be funnier on paper. Then, I am going to follow up with phone calls to, I estimate, some 120 different U.S. congressmen me: all of which I will record me: and then edit together for maximum humor me: If the stunt is successful, I will tie it to Project PM Scott: ok good, I just quickly read about the rapture and tribulations and thought to myself that this must be a joke. me: if no one cares, I will simply move on to something else me: you didn't know about those things me: ? me: I forget that not everyone is from Texas Scott: Do Jewish people in it? me: lol, no me: but Likudnik Israelis play into it because it prompts Evangelicals to support Likud policies Scott: could partly explain why I've never heard of it, that and my ignorance me: ah, you're Jewish, of course; I also forget that not everyone is a protestant Scott: Like I said, could also be ignorance. Clark: its great to get out in America, back in the 70s I had a friend who was literally in moral agony that Jesus had instructed him to handle snakes, and wasn't doing it me: well, at any rate, it's an interesting phenomenon, worth looking into me: in fact, I can send a you a PDF of my first book if you'd like to bone up on what the great goyim horde believes me: which you should, as they are like unto so many Goths me: to our Byzantium Scott: Sure, send me the PDF Clark: I downloaded it from Amazon for less than $5 and read on this computer, worked fine me: or your Byzantium, rather, I think I'm done with that particular capital of the world Scott: I too will support the cause and download off of Amazon. Scott: I don't need a Kindle, right? me: ah, well I have the pdf on hand me: no, don't do it me: I make almost nothing off it Clark: the kindle for PC or Mac is free Scott: lol me: my publisher will just blow it all on coke Scott: sounds like your publisher is awesome me: I'll send you the PDF, I have it on hand anyway as some Moroccan fellow e-mailed to ask for it yesterday, poor guy me: no, he's a fucking criminal scumbag me: and not in a good way me: let's see, what else me: I haven't yet heard back from the bikes for world charity think I wrote to but will follow up in a couple of days Clark: did you hear anything from Felipe Farley? me: again, Clark, that was a great find, and my contacts in Austin will be able to help quite a bit on working with them me: no, but I shall call him if I don't hear back from him soon Scott: ok new post is made me: I've spoke to him on the phone already, so I know he's enthusiastic and will contribute further, I just imagine he is busy me: oh, and two more possibilities Scott: I know Clark mentioned he had spam issues, and Barrett's email address is certainly more recognizable than Clark or me, but I do think if we have a website chosen (I know not chosen yet) then we should use more official email address with outside contact. Scott: It adds credibility. me: absolutely me: I'll make that a priority for next week me: won't take very long to get site up and e-mail domain once he gets started Scott: Do you have any thoughts on a site name? Clark: Project PM.com belongs to a chamber of commerce in nowheresville, Texas, we may need to look into that kind of thing before we go too far Scott: Yea, but ProjectPM.org is available. me: ah, good Scott: stupid question, what does PM stand for? me: Purge Media Clark: Pundit Munch, I see a Tyrannosauros Rex with T. Friedman in his jaws Scott: Also, once the site is fully up and running and we have reached critical mass (let's say some time in the future) is it still a project? me: yes, as our goals will be perpetual and victory a matter of degree Scott: In other words, would ProjectPM.org be better than PurgeMedia.Com me: yep me: I prefer PM Scott: ok Scott: Barrett, I know this is on the back of your mind, but if you do end up registering ProjectPM.Org, you should keep track of the costs. I think it's only fair that you get reimbursed once we're up and running. Scott: Also, I think it might be worth registering before we make the idea too public. Unfortunately, there are people out there that squat on websites, which is illegal but difficult to prove. me: absolutely, I will indeed bump that up, we really need a website soon anyway Clark: Also need to inform ourselves of other entities using the name Project PM for any purpose, because they potentially cause problems if once we gain attention Scott: Clark raises a good point. Scott: In other words we should trademark ProjectPM if it is available. Could the patent lawyer help with this? Clark: even that may not work if some business or organization has been using the phrase and has some investment in it Scott: Yea I know but it is at least a starting point to see if someone else may have it Scott: but you're right, we'll need to dig deeper than that. Scott: We can do Google searches, but also I believe we can make an inquiry with some governmental organization. me: I'll ask him his thoughts on the matter and make other inquiries Scott: The family owned business my mom worked for when I was younger ran into that problem. Scott: Apparently even though the company she worked for was correctly incorporated, a company with a similar name had been around longer. Clark: same thing happened to a family I knew Clark: they had to change the name of their business just to avoid litigation (which they probably would have won, but not worth the cost) Scott: I have to go now, but my next three goals will be (1) post FAQs to the blog (2) do Google searches for ProjectPM, and (3) post ideas about the Network structure. Clark: Cedar Hill Chamber of Commerce could be a problem Scott: I thought about it, and only saw their website having anything in common. Scott: How did they even come up with it? me: prayer Scott: I have no expertise in this, but I don't foresee them in particular being a problem. Scott: If they were smart they would have registered the .org website themselves, especially since they're a charity, but what can you do. me: Me neither, I know of instances in which such things end up not really being a problem me: and if it becomes a problem this space station has the fire power of a thousand stat destroyers me: I mean, I'll explain that we're a charity me: get them bad press me: get us good press me: as I may have mentioned, it is my policy to turn problems, faults, enemies into advantages Clark: OK, I'll send some video suggestions later today, over&out