Now that September is over I wanted to recap on how things went on the site compared to August. My ultimate goal for alexlandis.com is to continually improve the site by increasing the amount of traffic, the quality of my content, and the overall rank of my site on the net. As long as I make an improvement, no matter how small, I have succeeded.

     With that in mind, I am very happy with how September turned out. Traffic increased 35% since August, which I think is great! I managed to post 12 entries (including this one), compared to the 4 I wrote in August. I would like to be writing between 15-20 a month, but I think we’re on the right track so far.

     The site’s ranking in Alexa has done well in my opinion, jumping from 5,625,066 at the beginning of the month, to 3,294,869. I estimate that by next month that the site’s rank should be somewhere around 1,000,000. It’s not the best rank in the world, but like I said, the goal is to make an improvement.

     As far as user feedback, 99% of it was great, with only one comment of my use of inappropriate language in some of my writing. It’s ok, you can’t please everyone, Fuckin’ A!

     I think September turned out great, and October will be even better. Thanks for the continued support my internet-compadres!

     After writing, “Cyber Bias: The Threat of a Two-Tiered Internet” I sent a message to our congress from Save The Internet.com informing them of the threat to the net neutrality principle that many ISP’s are wanting to impose, and I received an email from Colorado’s congresswoman Diana DeGette responding to my message. This is what she had to say:

—————————

Dear Friend :

     Knowing of your interest in net neutrality, I would like to provide you with a brief update of recent events in Congress.

     As you may know, I serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee which has jurisdiction over telecommunications matters. Last year in committee, I voted for an amendment to H.R. 5252 , the “Communications Opportunity, Promotion, and Enhancement Act”, which would have preserved net neutrality. Unfortunately, this amendment failed. I believe that the concept of net neutrality is an historic one that has contributed to the success of the Internet and that it is vital to codify this concept so that access to content remains in hands of users, and not the companies that provide Internet access.

     H.R. 5252 was later voted on by the full House. Once again, I voted for an amendment to preserve net neutrality, and once again it failed. Unfortunately, the bill passed the House by vote of 321-101. The principle of nondiscrimination is critical to keeping the Internet open, equitable and free. I believe that passing this legislation without a strong net neutrality provision could seriously hinder continued innovation and economic growth in the technology sector.

     Again, thank you for letting me know your views. Please feel free to visit my website at www.house.gov/degette . There you can sign up for my e-newsletter to stay up-to-date on current events in Congress. I look forward to our continued communication.

—————————

     The H.R. 5252 amendment that Diana is referring to is part of the original Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006 (COPE Act). The COPE Act is a bill that benefitted ISP’s, while hindering the net neutrality principle. Ed Markey created an amendment that would have supplemented the COPE Act with a prohibition against service tiering. The COPE Act was passed but the Markey Amendment was turned down, so the bill has no significant network neutrality provisions.

     It’s unfortunate this happened, but it’s nice to know that our congresswoman is doing what she can keep the internet free for Americans. If you are in support of a free internet, I urge you to check out these sites dedicated to fighting the cause for net neutraility:

Save The Internet
Public Knowledge
Common Cause

     I was recently watching a video on YouTube last night that has sparked some interesting questions and responses from people, and I had to write about it because I find it interesting and I hope you will as well. The film centers around a single, yet startling question, “Are you anybody’s favorite person?”

If you have trouble viewing the video click here



     The film, based of off a Miranda July story, contains subtle satire, that shows that our point of view has a lot to do with how we acknowledge ourselves and how we think people acknowledge us. The woman for example was certain that she was her ex-girlfriend’s favorite person, which seems ironic and contradictory. Why would she be the favorite person of an ex-friend? However, when asked how sure she was of the question, she lost confidence, and seemed to grow closer to the actual truth.

     When the guy jogging was asked the same question, he gave the entirely opposite response, even though he had a girlfriend, and was considerate enough to get an orange for her as well. Why wouldn’t he think he could be his girlfriend’s favorite person? It seems that both of these people answered the question based not on the truth of the answer, but on how they saw themselves through other people’s eyes.

     The third man, who didn’t want to be involved in the survey hits the core of why this question can be so difficult to answer, saddening to think about, and pertinent to so many people. This man immediately refused taking the survey, without understanding what it was about, and seemed annoyed at being asked. He is the perfect example of the disconnectedness that currently exists in modern society.

     It is this disconnectedness among people created by technology, social views, and egocentricity that has made a question like, “Are you anybody’s favorite person?” alien to people.


     Some would argue that technology has increased our connectedness, and in certain ways it has, but it has limited our person-to-person interactions, and in this fashion, has separated people. More and more often we talk to people through devices like phones and computers, shut out the outside world with an iPod, while at the same time removing our personal interaction, and non-verbal communication which encompasses over 90% of human communication.

     Other than the growing separation of people from each other, I think the other major issue with the question is that it’s hard to define what a favorite person is. What makes a person worth being a favorite? What qualities make this person special above all others? Do you possess any of these qualities?

     It’s hard to find the answers to these questions when they’re such personal and subjective questions. Different people may have very different answers, based on what they would determine a favorite person to be. I personally, don’t have a favorite person in my life, but there are people I like more than others, and the reason I like them has a lot to do with the quality of their character.

     A person having a high quality character in my opinion is someone who is genuine, honest, trustworthy, understanding, caring, motivated, positive, helpful, compassionate, giving, and probably several other characteristics I am forgetting to mention. I like these people because I admire them. I respect them, look up to them as a person, and want to be like them. They are role models, heroes, and all around good citizens.

     I think most people would agree with me that their favorite person, or imagined favorite person would be someone whom they admired greatly, and looked up to as a role model.

     I’m not sure if I’m anybody’s favorite person out there, and I doubt that I am, but I know that if someone did think of me in such high regard, that I would be truly honored for their consideration. You must be doing something right if someone out there thinks that about you, and you know that you’re truly appreciated.

So, are you anybody’s favorite person? Who’s you’re favorite person? Do they know?

Fell free to answer in a comment. I enjoy hearing from you!

     Fred Seibert, the creator of Channel Frederator posted a comment today on the Tribute to the Internet People (Part 2) post! That is awesome! I’m privileged that Fred took the time to comment on the post. Here is some info about the life of Fred Seibert:

     Seibert was born in 1951 and has worked as a television and movie producer who has worked for such companies as MTV Networks, Hanna-Barbera, Nickelodeon, VH1, Cartoon Network, and has co-founded animation production company Frederator Studios.

     As MTV’s first creative director in 1981, Seibert was responsible for creating the animated MTV logo shorts that have made MTV famous. Working with Nickelodeon in 1985, he helped create Nick-at-Nite, as well as dramatically boosting the ratings for the company.

If you have trouble viewing the video, click here.


     In 1992, Seibert became president of Hanna-Barbera and created the What A Cartton!/World Premiere cartoons that earned record ratings on Cartoon Network and an Academy Award Nomination. This series originated several popular cartoons on Cartoon Network such as Dexter’s Laboratory, The Powerpuff Girls, Cow and Chicken, and Johnny Bravo.

     Seibert co-founded Frederator Studios in 1997, and has produced such animated series as My Life as a Teenage Robot, ChalkZone, and The Fairly OddParents for Nickelodeon. In 2005, Seibert launched the first cartoon video podcast known as Channel Frederator.

It’s really great that Fred took the time to comment. He’s a pretty cool guy. Thanks Fred!

Links for Fred Seibert:

Fred Seibert Homepage
Biography 1
Biography 2
Wikipedia
Frederator Studios
Channel Frederator

This post references information from the Wikipedia Jena 6 page.

     Yesterday, September 20th an estimated 60,000 people rallied in Jena, Louisiana to protest the sentencing of six African American teenagers referred to in the media as the “Jena 6″. The group of young men were accused of various charges from assault to attempted second-degree murder for the beating of Justin Barker, a fellow student who attended Jena High School with them. The beating followed a rash of racially charged incidents that could have been avoided, and I wonder, what else could have possibly gone wrong in Jena? Here are the 10 reasons why the last year at Jena was a complete cluster fuckapalooza*.

*cluster fuckapalooza
military use: a situation where nothing will go right, casualties will occur, evac will not happen, often engineered by the stupid.

- by the urbandictionary

Come on, it was the best phrase I could find.

1. A School Divided by Racism
Before the incidents at Jena, the students at Jena high school segregated each other. Black students sat on bleachers by the auditorium, and the white students sat under a large tree known adequately as the “White Tree”. This is what lead up to the hanging of nooses from the tree after a group of black students sat under it the previous day. I can’t believe someone would do that this day in age. I mean, why try to kill yourself with a noose when your mom’s medicine cabinet is full of vicodin?

2. Hangman. Game or Hate Crime?
Three white students were found responsible for hanging the nooses, and the principle urged their expulsion. The board of education rejected the principle’s recommendation treating the incident as a prank and the student’s punishment was reduced to three days of in-school suspension even though incidents like this may be treated as hate crimes by the F.B.I. Hmmm…I want to congratulate the board of education for knowing exactly how to prevent a problem from happening, by not preventing it at all. Good job people, good job.

3. The Pen is Mightier Than the Protester
An assembly was called at Jena High school after a protest to the reduced punishment of the three boys was broken up by police. LaSalle Parish District Attorney J. Reed Walters was asked to speak to the assembly and ended up threatening the black protesters by telling them that he could, “affect lives with the stroke of a pen” if they didn’t stop making a big deal over an “innocent prank”. I’m not sure about this one Mr. Walters. When did innocent pranks start involving nooses and racism? I guess things have changed since the good ol’ 90’s.

4. Ignorance is Bliss
A few days after the assembly, a group of black students went to the school board in regards to the recent incidents, but were refused to speak to the board because the board believed the problems had been solved. I’m amazed at the incompetence from the people who had a chance to stop this problem from escalating.

5. Fires, barn parties, and shotguns. OH MY!
Incidents at Jena steadily worsened with the school being set on fire, racial fights at the Fair Barn party, and an argument at a convenience store which resulted in a white student pulling a shotgun on Robert Bailey (a black student who had been beaten in the Fair Barn party fight), and several of his friends. Bailey’s friends took the gun and refused to give it back. Bailey ended up being charged with three counts including robbery, while the white student wasn’t charged.

6. Two Wrong Charges Don’t Make a Right One
Shortly after the fight at the incident at the convenient store, 6 black students assaulted and beat Justin Barker on December 4, 2006. Barker, a white student, was supposedly bragging about how Robert Bailey had been beaten days prior at the Fair Barn party. A fight broke out shortly afterward resulting in several of the black students beating Barker by kicking him.

The 6 black students, who were eventually called the, “Jena 6″ were arrested and charged with attempted second-degree murder, which caused protests from black residents who believed the charges were unfair. The charges were later reduced to aggravated second-degree battery which requires the use of a deadly weapon, but what exactly was the deadly weapon?

7. Assault With a Deadly Tennis Shoe?
During the trial of Mychal Bell, one of the Jena 6, District Attorney Walters, argued that the shoes the students used while kicking Barker were deadly weapons and justified the aggravated second-degree battery charge. Does anyone else find this ridiculous? A shoe a deadly weapon? Although, I must say that ninjas can turn even a Kleenex into a deadly weapon, so maybe Walters was right.

8. The All White Jury and Daddy’s Friend
Bell’s trial had an all white jury. Funny thing is though, that this wasn’t the result of poor jury selection. What happened was none of the black citizens called to jury duty showed up so it ended up being all white. On top of that, one of jurors was friends with Barker’s father, which made him biased. I’m telling ya, it doesn’t get better.

9. The Worst Offense Is a Bad Defense
Bell’s public defender, Blane Williams, who is a black man himself, didn’t call a single witness in order to help defend Bell, when eye-witness reports said he may not have even been in the attack. I honestly just want to stop here.

10. Charges Not Reduced
The charges on the other students created a public outcry demanding that they be reduced because the charges didn’t fit the crime they committed, which resulted in a an online petition receiving almost 400,000 signatures and the rally of nearly 60,000 people at Jena in support of the boys.

I think Jena 6 has once again reminded us that racism is quite strong and that justice can nearly be ignored by everyone with the responsibility to fight for it.