[awards] comment at the site

Not much blogging time this morning. Comment on the Awards is at the site [click pic in sidebar].

[thought for the day] wednesday evening

There are any number of these but this one introduces the topic fairly well:

The only failure a man ought to fear is failure of cleaving to the purpose he sees to be best.

[George Eliot]

Well, I can't completely agree. When one is failing, sometimes it is better to cut one's losses and smile; one scrutinizes the failure, works out the weakness in the idea and plans it better for the next time.

To cleave to a losing idea though seems to me the height of folly.

Of course, some say perseverance is also a fine attribute, the tenacity of the bulldog, the never-say-die attitude. So perhaps it comes down, in the end, to a question of judgement and experience.

[dillow logic] economic reasons women are crap

Flipchart Fair Tales takes the esteemed Chris Dillow to task for his Times affected article on his blog:

Since he got a regular column with the Times, Chris Dillow’s blog articles have become increasingly outlandish. His recent piece on why women are crap is a case in point.

However, although his arguments, if that’s what you can call them, are silly, they are no worse than some of the rubbish that apparently respectable columnists write about men.

Those all-men-are-hopeless articles have been around for at least the past twenty years. Some of the bullshit has been repeated so often that it has become ’stuff everyone knows’.

Chris answers, using that particular logic he's famous for:

My motivation for writing it was in my question: “am I a victim of selection effects?” and in the fact that a couple of earlier posts had discussed selection effects.

Let’s grant that my arguments are silly. Doesn’t this show that even huge samples - women I’ve met in the last 20 years - can be systematically biased, if they are drawn from non-random sources.

This being so, shouldn’t we be much less confident than we are about drawing inferences from personal experience - even a lot of it? The post was not about women, but about the nature of knowledge - a point everyone seems to have missed.

And yes, some of my posts might seem silly. But this is because I occasionally (often?) err on the side of silliness, to undermine notions of judgment, credibility and expertise.

My brain hurts.

[sarko's all right] three reasons why

There are three reasons why, despite some political decisions, Sarko is all right in my book.

Firstly:

Footage of French President Nicolas Sarkozy expressing irritation at a TV technician ahead of an interview has become an instant internet success. The video shows the employee clipping a microphone to Mr Sarkozy's tie, and not responding to a presidential "hello".

"It's a question of manners," Mr Sarkozy is heard muttering. "When you're invited, you're entitled to have people say 'hello' to you".

Mr Sarkozy has been caught several times in off-the-record videos posted on the web. One of them showed him at a farm show in February, swearing at a member of the public who refused to shake his hand.

Fair enough. And this too. Anyone Mandelson attacks has to be good in my book:

On BBC's Newsnight programme, Mr Mandelson attacked Mr Sarkozy in a row over a World Trade Organisation deal that would cut subsidies to French farmers.

"I am being undermined and Europe's negotiating position in the World Trade talks is being weakened and I regret that," said Mr Mandelson. "It's very disappointing because the mandate on which I'm negotiating…has been agreed by all the member states."

The third reason is to the left here. She's Italian, he was daring in taking on another tall woman and it seems to have annoyed so many people. I do wonder about their clinches sometimes and then manage to put it out of mind.

He's a larger than life figure [though perhaps not so large in life]and heaven knows the world needs more of those just now.

[2008 awards] progress report

Progress report on the Awards is now up at the site.

[right royal chat] the very next fad

Love this from Charon QC [the Questionable Cove]:

Last month the news broke that Gordon Brown was making phonecalls to unsuspecting members of the British public. Yesterday, the News of The World reported that The Queen had been thinking about setting up premium rate phone lines to allow the British public to call and get a message from the Royals - to help pay for the double glazing at Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle.

What then follows is a Charon podcast on the matter, replete with the meaning of "hice".

By the way, appropriate, wouldn't you say, that the Wikipic portrays the Duke together with that other great wordmaster, Dubya? I'd love to have been a fly on the wall [or guardsman's headgear] during that conversation.

I was once of the opinion that the Duke was just an alcohol swigging, foul-mouthed committee of 300 member, dedicated to population reduction and prone to gaffs but now I'm the first to admit I was wrong.

This has to be a mini-classic:

Personal remarks have annoyed singing stars. In 1969 The Duke said to Tom Jones after the Royal Variety Performance: "What do you gargle with, pebbles?"

or:

In 1995 he asked a Scottish driving instructor: "How do you keep the natives off the booze long enough to pass the test?"

Now I think you'd agree it takes a special sort of mind to dream up some of those.