Microblogs

• 17:14 Last bits and pieces are cleared from my plate, allowing me to focus my full attention for the next 3 hours on my epic adventure! #
• 18:54 Literally save a life if you live near me. Foster a cat from KC Animal Care & Control to help them expand their walls: pets@kingcounty.gov #
• 00:54 1 hour of Muay Thai, 2 of jujutsu today. Accelerade made a world of difference! At the very least, psychologically, but perhaps actually! #

Crossposted by LoudTwitter

This and That

• 16:37 Writing on spec is an entirely different kettle of fish than writing to spec. The latter is apparently quite difficult to pull off. #
• 23:00 It may be time to stop cutting your own hair when a mentally handicapped person points at you and wonders "What's wrong with that guy?" #

Crossposted by LoudTwitter

This and That

• 16:37 Writing on spec is an entirely different kettle of fish than writing to spec. The latter is apparently quite difficult to pull off. #

Crossposted by LoudTwitter

Progress To Date

I am making progress on Book 2 of the Abolethic Sovereignty trilogy. Book One, Plague of Spells, is due out this November. The second book is due out next October, in 2009.

I'm a little more than a third of the way through Book Two. My first draft is due November 1. Assuming I can keep my hand in the pie every day, so to speak, scribbling 500 words here and 500 words there, I should be home free.

Just to be on the safe side, though, I took two weeks off from Wizards at the end of October to make sure I have 10 completely free days to devote to writing. Better safe than sorry.

32,000 / 90,000 (35.6%)

This and That

• 13:50 Her eyes rested on the empty chair across the kitchen table. Her hands clutched a white coffee mug, and her mouth was grim with sorrow. #
• 14:17 Obama rally live: tinyurl.com/6g42hn #

Crossposted by LoudTwitter

From the Vault: No Kill Animal Shelters

[updated from my old blog; more relevant than ever]

You've probably heard about no-kill animal shelters, as opposed to shelters that euthanize animals. It seems pretty cut and dried--you probably prefer the idea of no-kill animal shelters.

But consider the following subtleties that you might not be aware of.

Open admission shelters take all animals, no matter their state of health, their temperament, their age, or any other factor.

On the other hand, no-kill shelters only accept highly adoptable animals, and when they're full, they don't accept any animals.

Which means people attempting to relinquish pets or strays at these places are sometimes turned away.

What do you suppose happens to stray animals turned away from "no kill" animal shelters?

Well, I guess if they're lucky, the folks who brought them in to the shelter keep looking until they find another shelter with open admission. If the animals are not so lucky, they are simply let loose again (which means starvation, being hit on a highway, or any of a number of ends that could include undue suffering). No-kill shelters know full well (or they should know full well) that when they refuse to take an animal, they've sidestepped responsibility. Despite their "no kill" status, they may even give out names and locations to the open admission shelters.

For example, the Humane Society in Bellevue has adopted political expediency and a "no kill" outward-looking face. So, when a terrier with a rough-looking demeanor showed up at their door as a stray a few weeks ago, the Humane Society refused to take the dog. Which meant the people who found him made the trek down to King County Animal Care and Control and turned the terrier over there. One of the shelter staff members, wondering if the dog were perhaps merely scared, took the dog home for a week to care for it. A dog the "no kill" Humane Society closed its doors to, kissing its fate up anyone else but itself. [At the time of this writing, I don't yet know the terrier's final outcome.]

So who has the higher 'moral' ground here? Those who pass the buck, or those willing, if necessary, to humanely euthanize an animal that has no prospect for adoption because of health or temperament? Or, in the case of the terrier I noted above, give a questionable animal a second chance?

Of course, all animal shelters have a role. Some no-kill shelters simply don't have the financial resources to employ a veterinarian to treat sick animals, so rather than take any chances, they turn all such animals away. And that's understandable--many of these shelters operate on a very small budget. They do what they can.

However, if animals slip into a no-kill shelter who turn out not to be adoptable, those animals are sometimes "warehoused," which basically means the animal is kept in a kennel or cubby so long that health and temperament slip to the point can justify euthanasia (yes, even at the "no kill" shelter). More considerate "no kill" shelters send these animals to open admission shelters (allowing them to hold on to their "no kill" status despite passing direct responsibility for the animal; at least it's the ethical thing to do).

BUT, a quality open admission shelter [which is no longer the Humane Society for Seattle/King County, I'm sad to say; now it's "no-kill" see here] might have programs, policies, and services in place to make certain every animal surrendered has the absolute best chance for finding its forever home--the Humane Society once had an 80% adoption rate! Its rate is skewed now, because of its new selective intake procedures.

So, to sum-up--"no kill" shelters are merely side-stepping responsibility, rightly or wrongly. I believe wrongly, especially the "no kill" shelters that take every opportunity to denigrate open admission shelters, and for shelters that have the resources to be open admission but choose to jump on the political bandwagon for the sake of public naivete, but at a real cost to stray pets.

This and That

• 14:00 Trying to not let all the toys on internet distract me from writing. Failing. #
• 23:06 It was old when Selûne cried her glittering tears. When it fell into slumber, the world yet rang with the primordials' forge hammers. #

Crossposted by LoudTwitter

So many toys, so little time

I think I need to swear off the internet.

Or maybe just swear off twitter, Facebook, and about 3/4ths of the various RSS news feeds and podcasts I subscribe to. There is just not enough time for me to stay current on all the content out there that interests me, especially if I want to continue to read, write, and pursue side projects from time to time.

But there's more to it than just those services. The internet and all its jewel-like wonders sing to me a song of desire I can hardly ignore. In fact, my profession requires I pay attention to it! To succeed at both my day job and freelance job, I need to use a computer to write a certain number of words per day; longhand is too slow and has to be transcribed to boot. And just as important, I need to research various things I write about on the internet.

Which means that even when I am able to cull the demon internet from my attention for a whole hour, I'm right back on those greased rails looking up castle ramparts on Wikipedia, what rhymes with Faustian on rhymer, synonyms for observer on thesaurus, interesting names for villains on rarewords, or any of a hundred thousand different interesting sites that'll pull me out of the original reason I logged back on faster than a hummingbird's wings pulsate.

Yep. You and I both know I won't be swearing off the internet. So I guess I'll simply have to face facts, and learn moderation. I do the same every day for eating; looks like I may have to treat internet access the same way.

This and That

• 23:35 A 4 day virus begins to release its tendrils on my mind and body. Or is it the 2 glasses of merlot? Either way, mood trending upward. #

Crossposted by LoudTwitter

If Twitter dies...

When Twitter is over capacity, how can I post my pithy comments quickly and easily, too quickly and easily to think better of them?

Like, "For the first time in human history, ice is on course to disappear entirely from the North Pole this year."

On a slightly related note--when did Digg get overrun by lunatic climate change deniers? Just because you don't think global warming is real doesn't change reality, Digg-lunatics. Do you drive a car? Do you use the internet every day to check your email and connect to Digg? Do you go to the doctor? Do you talk on a cell phone? Do you use global positioning "beamed" down from satellites? All brought to you by science. And now, the scientific consensus among researchers who study climate say global climate change is real, and dealing with it must begin now, now ten years from now.

See? When Twitter dies, I have to post here and vent my spleen. On twitter, the 140 character limit spares you this.

Alchemical Imbalance

The latest Dragon article in the Roll vs Role column penned by me and Chris Sims is now posted at Wizards. The Roll vs Role articles are designed to give DMs some great background on a specific series of encounters, providing both roleplaying and tactical information appropriate to the encounter. Each article could be developed into a full-blown adventure, or used as more limited series of encounters, depending on a DM's desire.

The article just posted, Alchemical Imbalance, focuses on a tribe of goblins who've found power in iffy alchemical arts.

350

A number worthwhile knowing.