Rob Writes

A Quick and Shameless Plug

2012-05-16T22:02:00.002-06:00

I've been working on some search optimization for a project my mother is deeply involved in; she is an expert in the history of African Americans in the American West (do you caps west in this context?), and her most recent and ambitious release is a DVD on the history of African Americans in the LDS Church.

Check it out. The site has some good information, a 9-minute clip from the film, a trailer, and a good chunk more.

The Need for Teaching Creative Composition

2012-05-16T13:01:00.001-06:00

My Honors Thesis is going to be about creative composition. Here is the introduction I used in an oral presentation when talking to a class on the topic:

While it is incredibly easy to complain about the state of education in the United States, it is important that we always examine our situation with an awareness of how far we have progressed already. In 1870, when the National Assessment for Adult Literacy started, 20% of the adult population was illiterate, compared to just a 1% illiteracy rate today by those same standards. Just a hundred years ago, public education as we know it didn't exist. Today, according to U.S. Census Bureau data, more than a quarter of the adult population has finished a Bachelor's program or higher.

In individual fields, our understanding of how and what to teach have improved greatly. Composition is one field where we have developed tremendously. Our original concept of teaching was based on the idea of composition as a noun: a set of specific grammatical and formal rules that could be taught and mastered directly. It progressed into the idea of process writing, where we viewed writing as a linear process of pre-writing, writing, and re-writing. This moved into a recursive concept, where we see writing as jumping back and forth between a number of processes. Now, thanks to the written word serving as a medium for an impressive portion of our communication—email, text messages, blogs, Facebook posts, you name it—everyone is writing all the time.

Our current structure of education has succeeded in standardizing a form of writing that teaches students to understand at least the basic rules of academic writing. We expose our students to classical written works. Unfortunately, we have also stumbled into an unintended side effect: We have made our students hate writing.

Even amongst aspiring authors, I hear the repetition of, "I hate writing." Why? Why is there such a violent reaction to the process of writing? Well, the first element of hatred is actually built into the question: We have constructed writing as a singular process that attempts to totalize the act of writing into a set of practices that can be applied in any given context. This implicitly makes any act of writing into a test. Can you remember the correct processes? Will you be able to stay within the rules of composition?

The second problem is tied to the first: We have constructed writing as a place of judgment. We know that our work is going to be evaluated according to a set of principles that is broad, complex, constantly changing, and – as a result – often convoluted.

This awareness of judgment creates the common emotional response: stress and fear (or intimidation, if you prefer). In his book The Now Habit, Neil Fiore – a psychologist specializing in the mentality rather than methodology of getting things done – provides an elegant analogy for how we face stressful assignments. He tells the audience to envision a wooden board, fifty feet long, two feet across, and thick enough to comfortably support our weight. If we put it on the ground, can we walk across it? Of course: we can walk, skip, jump, run, or do the work on top of this board as we move from one end to the other. But what if we were to put that same board between two fifty story buildings? For most, while the task remains identical, the process is now one of terror: the consequences of misstepping are now so immense that we freeze.

This is the response that many people have when they sit down to write. Even once we're past our education, in a tragic Pavlovian continuation, we keep these associations of writing with inadequacy, confusion, stress, and fear.

We have successfully mass-murdered the muses of a generation. So, how do we get those muses back?

To be continued....

The Oxford Comma (by Chelsea Foulk)

2012-04-06T14:59:00.001-06:00

I was thumbing through a poetry chapbook made by a former student at Utah Valley University, and stumbled on a piece titled "The Oxford Comma." As you probably know from my previous entries on the topic, I'm quite a fan of our dear serial comma, so I was deeply enthused to find that the author's feelings reflected my own. It felt mandatory to track down the author and ask for permission to re-publish the work here. Chelsea Foulk, who is also the creative mind behind InClover Art, was kind enough to grant said permission.

So, without further rambling, here is "The Oxford Comma" by Chelsea Foulk.

The Oxford Comma

I would kill for the Oxford comma. If it were on a train track with a train careening to hit it, I would push the nearest fat man onto the tracks, just for the chance to give that comma a few more seconds to exist. I imagine some would cheer and carry me on their shoulders to the avenged comma, so I could take it in my arms and shout, “I love you, Comma! I love grammar, literature, and the Oxford comma!” And still others would be in shock of the carnage of the obliterated fat man. Those would be the ones who don’t understand the Oxford comma: the ones who write, “I’ll have two eggs, orange juice and toast,” those who like toast in their orange juice. Or instead of, “the strippers, Stalin, and Hitler,” they party with, “the strippers, Stalin and Hitler.” Those perverts who like to watch dictators wear pasties. Eva Braun must have been an Oxford non-believer.

I can’t say I would die for the Oxford comma, though. If it were on a track with a train careening to hit it, and a fat man stepped to me and shouted, “Jump! Jump onto the tracks in front of the train! For grammar, and literature, and the Oxford comma!” I would timidly shrink back, my head hung low, and order a glass of orange juice and toast.

Should You Use One or Two Spaces After a Period?

2012-04-05T22:25:00.001-06:00

If you're here looking for the simple answer to this simple question, here goes:

One.

That was easy, wasn't it? But, since you probably typed that question in because what you were taught at one point contradicts something you're being taught now, let me clarify the ins and outs of this particular writing rule.

Trust Me: One Is the Standard

To begin, let's look to the official rules. This comes from CMOS (i.e., the one style guide that rules them all):

Like most publishers, Chicago advises leaving a single character space, not two spaces, between sentences and after colons used within a sentence [...], and this recommendation applies to both the manuscript and the published work. (Chicago Manual of Style, 16th Edition, section 2.9)

CMOS isn't alone on this front, either. The Associated Press (AP) very clearly states the rule, and the Modern Language Association (MLA) acknowledges that most presses use one space..

Okay, okay ... but why? And why did your teachers tell you to use two spaces?!

How It Used to Be

Remember, the very idea of "spacing" (in the sense we're referring to it) originated, not with writing, but with typewriting. When you're writing something by hand, there's no such thing as uniform spacing -- at least if your handwriting is as terrible as mine, so the real point is just to make it clear that the new sentence has started.

In the age of the typewriter, the standard was two spaces after the end of a sentence. Our dear friend Grammar Girl tells us that the reason for the double space is that most typewriter fonts are "monospaced," meaning that each letter took up the same width on the page. It's easy enough to see:

This is a monospaced font.

This is a proportional font.

Now, you'll notice that the period of the monospaced font is quite far out from the final letter of the sentence, at least when compared to the proortional period. Also, dry typewriter ribbons tended to make periods almost invisible. With these shortcomings noted, there was a very good reason to create the extra space: it ensured that the sentence's conclusion was evident, without having to rely on the period's placement or even visibility.

The tendency to add two spaces became mainstream in the typewriter's era, so even after those monstrous writing machines went the way of the Zune, the "rule" of two spaces stayed the same. This was so standard that my two English professor parents taught it to me as a matter of literary law, and that was just less than two decades back. Over time, though, the issue of spacing has been hotly debated -- and those debates concluded with the single-space option as the victor.

The Advantages of a Single Space

There are those who point to a single space as having many advantages. "It looks better," they say. "It improves the sense of sentence flow," they say. "It prevents readers from getting distracted by the purgatory of an extra blank area," they say. "It cures cancer," they say.

Who says all this? Well, passionate typographers, mostly. These are the sorts of people who are preoccupied with how just a couple millimeters of white space will make or break a page. For the rest of us, the real advantages of using a single space boil down to this:

A single space has become the standard, so the second space can look like an error.
Writing in HTML (and thus almost anywhere on the web) automatically removes your second space, which further reinforces the single space standard and makes your attempts at second-spacing useless.
If you don't use a single space, your editor will probably wind up doing a find-and-replace anyway. Your work will wind up with the solitary space, and your only added benefit is a frustrated editor.

That's not to say a double space has no advantages. For one, it has an element of clarity in distinguishing the end of a sentence from an abbreviation. For example, "I'll have a chat with K. Kesler, then, shall I?" may, on a skim, look like two sentences -- at least if we're used to the standard of a single space at the end of a sentence. Further, the double space makes it clear a new sentence has started even if a word is not capitalized. While rare, cases of non-capitalization at the beginning of a sentence do exist. For example, "e.e. cummings" is never capitalized, nor is the "e" of "eBay."

That said, the double space advantages are few and far between, and even those of us rushing through a read can typically tell when a sentence has ended -- abbreviations and e.e. cummings notwithstanding. We might be able to lay the entire thing to rest and just switch over to one space, except ...

The Rule Is Not Universal

The MLA has this to say about single spaces after a sentence:

[M]ost publishers' guidelines for preparing electronic manuscripts ask authors to type only the spaces that are to appear in print.

[...] As a practical matter, however, there is nothing wrong with using two spaces after concluding punctuation marks unless an instructor or editor requests that you do otherwise.

So, according to MLA, you can use two spaces if you damn well please. AP and CMOS disagree. So do most publishers. But this remaining scrap of contested territory mixes blood with the old tradition of adding a second space, and the result is that students are taught different standards. The end of our current path is clear, though: the single space will become universal. You may as well start using it now.

Switching Over to a Single Space

I switched over to a single space toward the beginning of my freelance career, at the request of one of my major clients. I started obsessing over my second spaces, killing them with great displeasure -- even with a sense of loss -- as I wrote. For several weeks, I had to do a find and replace on every document I wrote, because I always left a few extra spaces in.

It took me about a month to break the my second-space habit. It will probably take you about that long as well. I don't have any grand tips or shortcuts for you: Just keep the standard in mind, delete the second space every time you notice yourself using it, and proof your completed documents to ensure that you have kept to the standard.

Good luck!

Back to the Blogginning

2012-03-29T18:20:00.001-06:00

I was going through my backlog of blogs today, when I saw the visitor count on this particular site. There have been about a thousand page views in the last month -- much to my surprise, since I had (as you know by the lack of updates) abandoned this blog some time ago.

If these items are useful enough that people keep returning, though, then there's no reason not to share more of my work, suggestions, and explanations here. I already have some really fun material to share. For example, I'm doing a presentation on writing with the right brain, I've been doing a lot of study on process and post-process theories of composition education, and I have a lot of creative work (including some items that were published elsewhere last year) to share here.

I look forward to getting this blog up to speed!

Write on,

Rob

Increasing Focus, Adoring the Chaos

2011-10-19T14:27:00.002-06:00

This blog has stagnated, largely because it was a catch-all for my freelance writing, creative, and all other works I could think of. And, as with any project that encompasses too much, it was quickly abandoned. So it's narrowing now.

This blog will be about writing, meaning my creative projects and my thoughts on the craft itself. Nothing more, nothing less.

Along with this, my web properties are being divided – though all that is in a state of chaos. You can find my SEO consulting site, my freelance writing site, and my creative writing site in separate locations – and in varying degrees of completion.

Yes, they're live and incomplete, something I tell my clients never to do. It looks terrible. It's unprofessional. It can hurt your SEO. Which is exactly why I'm doing it. Having those sites live forces me to finish them quickly or face dire consequences.

So those are my main elements right now, and then I'll get back to my various other projects, most of which will be outlined either on my main website or on this very blog. So bookmark, check back later, and leave an encouraging message to tell me it's worthwhile that I do this at all.

Cheers,

Rob

Google Docs, How I Love Thee

2011-08-12T14:17:00.000-06:00

A brief nod to Google Docs:

This morning I wrote a news piece, about three pages long, that involved direct quotes from an interviewed source, a lot of compiled data from several outside studies, etc., etc. I sent it off to my editor and, as I normally do, completely wiped the document – assuming that the copy in my "sent" box would be a good enough record. The problem was I sent an article I wrote yesterday.

From what I could tell, I'd deleted more than an hour of work, and I would need to start from scratch. Then I went into the revision history:

It had everything. My last several articles, in fact, were fully restorable. I've never used this feature before, but gee golly gosh, I'm glad it was there.

Thanks, Google Docs.

Avoiding Accidental Polyamory with the Direct Address Comma

2011-06-17T11:50:00.001-06:00

There are old jokes known as "Tom Swifties," and I'm a big fan. My favorite is this:

"I have dissociative identity disorder," said Tom, being Frank.

Obviously, the pun works better when it's spoken, but you get the idea. There are many words in the English language that can apply to a sentence ambiguously, and the direct address comma is a way to avoid confusion on the verb-subject-addressee relationship.

Example One: "Let's describe them, guys," vs, "Let's describe them guys."

The first means we should describe a previous subject (the "them"). The alternative version means that we should describe "them guys."

Example Two: "Thou shalt not kill, Christians," vs, "Thou shalt not kill Christians."

The first is a somewhat accurate paraphrase of what the Bible said. The second is what the people who ran the crusades seemed to think the Bible said.

Example Three (and this is my favorite): "You should share, Dr. Smith," vs, "You should share Dr. Smith."

The first is a prompt to have Dr. Smith share something, while the second seems to be a proposition for a menage a trois – or perhaps polyamory.

The simple direct address comma determines whether the person who comes at the end of the sentence is an addressee or is the subject directly connected to the sentence's verb. In any case where you're saying something directly to a person, you'll use this comma. It's part of the proper standards, it separates the sentence's structure nicely, and it avoids accidental polyamory.

Time as a Gateway, Not a Barrier

2011-06-13T19:00:00.001-06:00

I am a chronic procrastinator. Today, while I was at the store across the street (yes, putting off work), I ran across a shirt that said "I put the pro in procrastinator" and I almost bought it flat out. I have years and years of experience in putting off work and feeling anxious, guilty, and unproductive. By that same token, however, I have spent years trying to understand, work with, and cope with procrastination.

I'm not going to give a long lecture about why I procrastinate. Suffice it to say that habits, genetics, and less than superhuman willpower lead me to put work off well later than I should. Nevertheless, I currently get about 40 productive hours in per week – and give myself time off on the weekend and evenings. That's far better than I was doing last year at this time, and it's largely to blame on my improved perception of time.

The Lockdown

You have a project to do. It's two pages, it needs to be thoroughly researched, and it's for a very important client. How are you feeling? Well, if you're me, that really depends on the time of day and what else you have on your plate, but a project like this is certainly enough to go into lockdown.

My shoulders tense. My breathing gets shallow; sometimes I even notice I'm holding my breath. My heart rate goes up. I start thinking of doing something, anything else besides this project – which seems to be causing both emotional and physical pain. My inner dialogue starts something like this:

Me: You have to do this, Rob! It's important!
I: AAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
Me: It will only take you a half hour! You can do it! Just work for a half hour!
I: AAAAAAHHHHHHH!!!!!!
Me: Rob, just a half hour!

Okay, here's what I've figured out for me (individual results may vary): This doesn't work because what I'm hearing is this:

Me: Rob, you absolutely have to do this strenuous, difficult thing that you're not going to enjoy! And you have to do it within a half hour! If you don't accomplish this, terrible things will happen, including continued anxiety, pain, and fear! Bwahahahahaha.

In this, and most other, cases, I'm viewing time as a limitation. A "half-hour project" means that I must, right here right now, cope with all the knowledge, difficulty, and barriers of a 30 minute ordeal. I also have to keep doing this, in pain, for the half hour. For the processing portion of my brain, it's just too much.

This peculiar conception of time that makes me so anxious involves setting an imaginary barrier at the 30 minute mark. I must leap from right now (6:55pm) to that time (7:25pm) instantly. But that's not how time or my brain work. Here's the rewrite of the concept: I don't need to do a 30 minute project right now. Beyond the fact that I don't need to do it at all (I don't need any client, nor do I need to be a freelancer if it doesn't work for me), I don't need to get to the completed project. I don't have to do 30 minutes of work. I have 30 minutes, or more if I need it, to complete the work. Time is on my side, not working against me.

Let's try the internal dialogue again:

Me: I have this project to do. It's two pages, and it needs to be thoroughly researched.
I: Aaahh .. aahh .. ah?
Me: Well, I have a half hour to do this to fit it conveniently in my schedule, and I can expand that.
I: Oh, okay.
Me: So, what's the first place that I should start on this? What's the first hurdle to overcome?
I: Well, research, obviously. If it needs to be well researched, we'll need to start there.
Me: Do I have sources?
I: A couple. Let's start there.

By switching the focus to needing to have a finished project that will take me 30 minutes, I can view the 30 minutes as a tool that can come down on the project itself. That 30 minutes is a resource to be distributed amongst the various steps, including research, drafting, and editing. It's also not a set barrier of its own. If I need more time, I can get it – especially now that I peg my project completion schedule long before the actual deadlines.

I'll be writing a lot more about procrastination in the coming months. I encourage you to figure out what internal dialogue you can use to get yourself on course, and to examine whether you're currently using time as a barrier or a gateway to your projects.

A Router Ramble

2011-06-03T18:37:00.000-06:00

Shockingly enough, having stable internet access is somewhat important to me – what with 147% of all my work taking place online. So the internet in my new location being about as fast as your average land-based conquest of Russia, I had problems.

Over the last four days the router and internet issues have been my full-time job. I've spoken with nine different people in four different departments of the ISP's technical support, three staff members of the property management group where I live, and I've gone through lots of information online. My first attempt to fix the issue was to replace the old router with a new one.

That didn't work. I figured, maybe if I unplug and re-plug the residential gateway it will automatically detect the MAC address of the router and let things through. That didn't work either. So I plugged in the old router. Then we had literally zero internet access. What happened, apparently, was I had wiped the MAC registration of the old router when I reset the residential gateway. Who the hell sets up a system like that? Anyway, I contacted the support group and figured that out and I got the old router working.

The persistent issues, though, led to some additional testing that revealed my original hunches were onto something. The wireless router was the issue. So I went to attach my new router but this time register the MAC address with the technical support group directly. Unfortunately, the MAC address for the router wasn't labeled correctly on the sticker. I had to connect manually, but that didn't work because my netbook kept redirecting me to a page not found segment.

So I finagled some settings, tapped into the router with a different computer, and got the MAC addresses. Then I registered those, got the entire setup re-plugged, and bam – done. Everything works, and it's wizard.

To give an idea of the progress, the old net speed was (according to speednet) hitting a high of about 58ms ping, 1.4 down, and 1.1 up. At a low they hit about .22 down and .1 up. The new setup is yielding 24ms ping, 5.67 down, and 6.41 up.

I know this has all been tech talk, but I'm so happy that I managed to get this working. Everything is looking a lot more reliable, fast, and – perhaps most importantly – I know what's going on with the system. So we're good! Worth the 30 hours I invested? Probably not, but a great learning experience nevertheless.

Why I Don't Capitalize Internet or Web

2011-05-31T13:18:00.001-06:00

One of the corrections my final editors (typically on the client side) often make with my content is capitalizing the word "internet." After all, I am writing about the internet technologies field, so the term comes up often and I just don't capitalize it. I certainly don't mind that they go in with their proper noun I, nor am I unwilling to adjust my copy if they really want to follow the capitalization conventions for internet and web as found in the AP style guide and some other manuals. But as for me, and anyone I sub-contract with, internet and web will not be capitalized.

But why the break from a broadly accepted standard? Well, we actually have two concerns here. The first is the formal standard, as outlined in AP, CMOS, MLA, and elsewhere. The second is the public standard, as outlined by how people actually use the word. Here are three brief arguments for not capitalizing web or internet. I'll focus on "internet" as an example, since CMOS (my bible) is already on my side for "web"; however, the same arguments apply to "web" as well.

For most people the term "internet" is a common noun. Many words that were once proper nouns, even the official names branded by companies, have become common enough in usage that the officialty represented by capitalization is nonsensical (ex., "phonograph," "television," "radio," "kleenex"). The same not only should happen with internet – but is happening.
The internet capitalization conventions are gradually changing in the style guides. CMOS now believes web should be left uncapitalized, and AP has stated that when used as an adjective internet should be left with the adorable tiny i ("internet technologies," for example). I am confident in my prediction that by not capitalizing internet now you will be keeping to the conventions for a longer period of time; we really don't have many years remaining on this rule.
Capitalization in the world of modern products indicates a form of branding. That made some sense when "Internet" was a more private gig (especially prior to the release of Mosaic in '93, "Internet" was available only to a select few). But it's more than a little public these days, and has been for about the last two decades (since Mosaic, as mentioned). As part of acknowledging that public ownership we need to de-brand internet. I mean, you wouldn't capitalize "street" or "library" or "park" unless they were an official, named, branded entity ("Rose Park," sure, but not "park"; "Ash Street," sure, but not "street"). The same applies to internet.

I get the reasons why, officially, we capitalize the terms. I know that the idea of a singular internet (the world wide web) once needed to be distinguished from the idea of multiple internets. I understand that there really was once a branding element. I get that it falls into a category which sometimes is capitalized ("unique and distributed"). But let's face it! Those arguments don't hold water when you look at how language actually functions: as a living, breathing, evolving thing.

In 1990 I would have, with fervor, stood for the capitalization of the term. But it's not 1990 anymore, and the linguistic conventions need to move forward to match the technology. I know it's tricky for language when computer-age technology hops into the picture and changes everything so rapidly. However, common usage of internet and web are already here. The rules surrounding the terms should not be an attempt to constrain language but an effort to concretely and precisely indicate how language can effectively be used – in the world of today! – for clear communication.

6 Reasons Writers Will Want to Have Google Chrome's Babies

2011-05-28T13:34:00.003-06:00

It's no secret amongst my friends, family, and even readership on sites like Search Engine Journal (hi guys!) that I'm a big fan of Google. It's not as though I pretend the company doesn't have issues (this is capitalism, and thus perpetually "profits first" – with no help from GOOG's practical monopoly status). But I use Google Search, an Android phone, Gmail, Google Docs, Blogger, and – heavens help me – I even tried Buzz. While search is certainly the key to my love for Google, the second most useful element should also be discussed: Google Chrome.

And Now, a Word for the Competition

Before I delve into why I choose Chrome, I wanted to talk about IE9 and Firefox, both of which are solid browsers. (The only reason I'm not touching on Opera and Safari is that I'm not a Mac-rat, and thus don't know those mediums.)

Note that I did say "IE9," specifically. IE8 would have been fine to discuss as well, since it too is a modern browser. Versions of Internet Explorer that came prior to that were archaic and they liked to screw with web code. Their hardware acceleration, java support, and access to critical upcoming web standards like HTML 5 and CSS 3 were non-existent. It's not to be unexpected. IE was the browser for a long time, and the idea that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" can be repeated as Microsoft's common sense logic. Until, of course, the era of Firefox and Chrome.

Then IE was playing catchup, but you know what? They did. They have a very competitive browser that integrates the strengths people found in Chrome and FF. So, yes, anyone out there still using IE6, you nauseate me. Anyone using IE8 or 9? A fine choice, if not my preference.

Meanwhile, Firefox has gone through its own stages of development, but even in problematic phases FF can be seen as a critical innovator. And now it's smooth, stable, pretty, and it's got add-ons coming out of every orifice. Especially since Firefox 3, this browser has been really killer.

What I want to make clear here is that the bar is set excruciatingly high. Due in part to Chrome's own competition, Mozilla and Microsoft have both come with their guns blazing. Check out IE or Firefox for yourself if you have any doubts. Nevertheless, Chrome is absolutely my top pick.

Why Chrome Still Kicks Their Asses

I promised you six reasons why Chrome will make your quiver with technophilic joy, and honestly, it's going to be hard keeping it to just that. This list is specifically oriented to writers, but many of these items are good for anyone who isn't connecting to the web via dial-up.

6. Six Week Release Cycle.

The world of technology moves quickly, with new web standards, options, and gaping security issues coming up on a regular basis. Obviously, all companies will try to meet the standards of the day and counter the brilliant, lovable hackers of the world. However, while Firefox and IE both run on release cycles that take three to six months, Chrome has an established release cycle of six weeks. That means that new features, stability patches, improved speed, and everything else will get a boost eight to nine times per year. Better yet, the updates don't require any action from you and have one of the best reputations for stability I've ever seen.

5. Nothing but Web.

I'm a pathological minimalist (I literally gave away rooms full of furniture last month just because I didn't want to deal with owning them anymore), so maybe I'm exaggerating the importance of this issue. However, if you like to focus on the actual web – rather than the oh-so-pretty design of the web browser – Chrome is the top choice. There's no bottom bar except when necessary, the tab bar has a reduced size, the omnibar (which allows you to do quick searches, pop into your history, or go to a new URL) takes an appropriate center stage position, and the important function-oriented buttons are easy to find. Chrome gets rid of unnecessary extras and leaves actual web pages with more space to breathe.

4. A Store Full of Goodies.

The Chrome Web Store is a great way to find neat themes to decorate Chrome, apps that give new functions (such as productivity apps, web-based photo editing software, games, and more), and extensions (see below for more on that). While some of these apps and themes come with a reasonable price (a few dollars), even many of the most impressive are completely free.

I don't use apps for productivity all the much myself (most of my necessary resources are found on cloud websites or in my Chrome extensions), but still, there's nothing quite like a game of Angry Birds in your browser.

3. Synchronization.

For writers, bookmarks represent more than "neat sites to visit." They're our research, our resources, our very lifeblood for projects. In Chrome, you can synchronize your bookmarks with your Google account, allowing you to access all the same information and resources via any computer where you have access to Chrome and the internet. Beyond bookmarks, Chrome also lets you sync up password data, extensions, and even themes – giving you the work station you're used to no matter where you're at. I've done this at college computer labs, libraries, friends' homes, and even display computers in stores.

2. Extensions.

This category honestly deserves its own entry, just because extensions are so damn useful. The extensions make small additions to your interface or add simple access to useful tools in your browser. This includes items like a notepad and calculator, but there are also critical items like an SEO evaluation tool for web pages, a word counting tool (which I use constantly), and a task list that lets me organize my time.

Right now I have 14 extensions installed. On an average day I make use of roughly half of them. It boosts my productivity and all of it synchronizes with my Google account so I can access these extensions from anywhere.

1. Speed.

Okay, so maybe you don't care about using this browser on every computer you run across. Maybe you don't give a Mac-rat's ass about extensions. Maybe you don't want to waste your time on Angry birds, oggle the release cycle, or worry about the minimalism of the design. But do you want to do things fast? Yeah, I thought so.

Chrome is the fastest browser out there, full stop. It's true that IE9 surpassed it in certain tests on the initial release of IE9, but Microsoft invented those tests – and Chrome then released a new version that exponentially increased Chrome's hardware acceleration, nullifying any advantage Microsoft may have had. Chrome lets you browse the web more quickly, even if you're visiting high-end sites with advanced Java, PHP, or Flash functionality. It may just save you a second or two with each site, but if you visit hundreds of pages per day (like I do) then it definitely adds up.

There are plenty of other "Chrome extras" to discuss (security, privacy, the Chrome OS, yada yada), but honestly they haven't come up often in my writing projects. The items above, however, have. If these six reasons don't make you sob with desire for Chrome, then I don't know what will. Meanwhile, if you think Chrome is at least worth a test drive, check it out today, and check back to this site in the coming weeks since I'll be covering some useful extensions, apps, and functions for those who live to write.

New Project: The Absolom

2011-05-13T22:05:00.000-06:00

One of the ways I stop myself from going crazy is to start a new project. Here's the one I started today:

http://theabsolom.blogspot.com

It's a creative log describing a space voyage in the semi-distant future. Since I like that genre to watch/read ("spaceship with crew having funky good times in space"), I figured I'd give it a whirl. At the very least, it's fun for me. Feel free to check it out and provide feedback!

It Came from the Web: "The Muse Most of Us Really Need"

2011-05-03T09:03:00.000-06:00

Sadly, I don't know who to reference for this image! I picked it up from a friend on Facebook who picked it up from a friend on Facebook ... and so on. If anyone knows where it comes from, let me know!

Have something awesome to show me? Leave a link in the comments, or send me a message via my contact form.

My Iago Obsession

2011-05-02T14:02:00.000-06:00

Those who know me, or who have read my posts carefully, know that I'm a student – off and on. While this isn't always the most awesome pastime on the planet, it does give me some fun opportunities. One example is my habit of obsessing over Iago. Since teachers love to focus on Shakespeare's Othello, I've been given more than one chance to talk about this complex and brilliant Shakespearean character.

My final paper for one of my courses this semester was about Iago – or, more specifically, an argument that Othello is Iago's revenge tragedy. You can read that essay online, here. It's roughly 3500 words, and it's very good (if I do say so myself). Feedback, of course, is welcome.

Fixing Apposition Fumbles

2011-05-01T17:53:00.000-06:00

The English language leaves plenty of room for communication fumbles, but one of the most hilarious happens with apposition. Apposition, the placement of a second term or phrase after a first to elaborate on the nature of that first term or phrase, is an invaluable tool – but when you don't treat it with care, it will come back to bite you.

Example the First

For this example, let's pretend I'm one of those (idiotic) people who don't use the Oxford comma. And let's pretend I have a sense of humor, and thus am telling a joke. The joke starts like this:

The lady walked into a bar, followed closely by a duck, a psychopath and a vegetarian.

There are two excellent ways to interpret this. First, a woman walked into a bar, then a duck, a psychopath, and vegetarian followed her in. Second (and I absolutely prefer this one), a woman is followed into a bar by a duck who is a psychopath and a vegetarian (like Hitler!).

Image courtesy of Shenziholic
(I am so happy that this image exists!)

But let's assume that what we really meant was that a group of four (woman, duck, psychopath, vegetarian) all came into a bar. How would we fix the ambiguity? Well, the first and most obvious way is to use the Oxford comma (so add one more reason to the list!). However, you could also re-cast the sentence as "A woman, a duck, a psychopath and a vegetarian walked into a bar." The structure of the sentence makes the lack of apposition clear (there would be a comma after "vegetarian" if we were going for apposition, after all).

By the way, now that I've started the joke, I'm ever-so-curious how to ends. Leave your punchline in the comments section below for a chance to win my favorite type of cookie, chocolate chip and giant. (I'll work on how I'll locate that giant later.)

Example the Second

Alas, the Oxford comma can't save us from all our apposition woes! For this example, let's create a fake interview.

Interviewer: Your art here is certainly revolutionary! What would you say inspires you?
Artist: I'd have to say it's my girlfriend, the blue whale, and Ghandi.

Wait just a smidge: did he just call his girlfriend "the blue whale"? Oh, he's gonna get it when he gets home, I tell you what! So, how can we fix this? Well, one solution is to use the semicolon.

Artist: I'd have to say it's my girlfriend; the blue whale; and Ghandi.

As a "super comma," the semicolon is a savior in situations like this – although it admittedly looks a touch odd on the page to your standard (publicly educated) readers. So we could re-cast the sentence as follows:

Artist: I'd have to say it's my girlfriend, blue whales, and Ghandi.

The singular-plural non-match can redeem the sentence, lending clarity and getting the same point across. Or we could order it as "Ghandi, my girlfriend, and the blue whale," which would give us a gender mis-match that clarifies the sentence for all but the truly imaginative. Or we could do this:

Artist: I'd have to say it's three things: my girlfriend, the blue whale, and Ghandi.

The previous segment of the sentence does all our clarification work for us! Bravo.

Example the Third

Now I'll use the classic apposition example of a book dedication.

To my dad, the Pope, and the inventor of Swiss cheese.

While this book dedication may have been attempting to pay homage to the Pope, it instead made quite a major claim about a biological relationship to him! This one actually gets even more hilarious if you remove the Oxford comma:

To my dad, the Pope and the inventor of Swiss cheese.

What an accomplished parent! Both the Pope and the inventor of Swiss cheese? I daresay, I'm impressed. Again, however, we have some easy fixes. We can go the re-cast route mentioned above:

To the inventor of Swiss cheese, my dad, and the Pope.

But, oh no! leaves us with ambiguity (the "my dad" could be in apposition to the inventor). My preference here is to use the mighty tool of typography!

To my dad,
the Pope,
and the inventor of Swiss Cheese.

Since this is a book dedication, this sort of layout works perfectly well and an intuitive "one item per line" rule makes the division apparent.

Summary

Apposition fumbles can happen in the most hilarious ways. I'm tempted to say "leave them," because then I'd get a good chuckle, but it's probably best if you fix them up. Apposition fumbles can almost always be fixed with minimal effort by using one of the following tools: the Oxford comma, the semicolon (as a "super comma"), a re-cast of the sentence (re-sorting the list, rephrasing to an obvious mismatch [plural/singular, masculine/feminine], adding an introductory phrase that declares the number of items, etc.), or typography.

It Came from the Web: "Bad Ass-Comic"

2011-04-30T16:57:00.006-06:00

To fit with yesterday's hyphen theme, I've pulled in this old favorite from XKCD.

Have something awesome to show me? Leave a link in the comments, or send me a message via my contact form.

Understanding the Ever-Mysterious Hyphen

2011-04-29T23:15:00.003-06:00

Ah, the hyphen. As one of the world's most ambiguous bits of punctuation, the hyphen has become the source of confusion, despair, and bone-rattling terror for writers around the world. But the mystery of the hyphen is far from impenetrable – and by understanding why we use this little dash, you'll get a much better sense of how to use it.

The Basics of the Hyphen

Let's start with the core function of hyphens: The hyphen clarifies modifiers.

Stepping back for a moment, let's examine what I mean by "modifiers." In any given sentence you will have (at a minimum) a subject and a verb. For example: Bob vomited. And then we have our "object" possibility, such as: Bob vomited on Jill. You can also attach a setting, cause, and other details. For example: Bob vomited on Jill when asked to explain the hyphen. And finally, we can attach modifiers to any part of this sentence using adjectives or adverbs, such as with: Bob violently vomited on poor Jill when asked to explain the damned hyphen.

But what happens when we have multiple words modifying the same phrase, or multi-word modifiers? Take, for example, this sentence:

The pale red headed stepchild sat on the high quality rug.

Now, due to our familiarity with some of these phrases (and we'll talk about that more in a second), we're likely to divide up the sentence like this:

The pale red-headed stepchild sat on the high-quality rug.

In other words, the step-child, who was red-headed and pale, sat on a rug that was high in quality. But that's not the only possible interpretation. For example, we could divide the sentence like this:

The pale-red-headed step-child sat on the high-quality rug.

In this case, pale is modifying the color of the hair, not the child. Or we could do this:

The pale-red headed stepchild sat on the high quality rug.

Perhaps the pale-red headed stepchild, as a car would head east? Further, we've really mussed up our rug. While it was previously of high quality, it is now a rug that is both high and quality (probably made of hemp) or one that's made of a quality that could be described as "high" (i.e., quality modifies high rather than the other way around, which again describes a rug that's high).

Other Examples

Let's go ahead and hammer this concept into your head.

The price of corn had reached an all time low.

should be

The price of corn had reached an all-time low.

(it's not low in time, but the lowest it's been in all time)

The short skirted woman had infinite legs.

should be

The short-skirted woman had infinite legs.

(she's not a short, skirted woman – or if she is, her infinite legs might just make that acceptable)

The ambrosia like energy drink was highly addictive.

should be

The ambrosia-like energy drink was highly addictive.

(It's not ambrosia being compared to an energy drink)

The rousing victory song caused an enthusiastic riot.

should be

The rousing victory-song caused an enthusiastic riot.

(The victory song was rousing, rather than it being a song of rousing victory.)

Enter Ambiguity

Okay, let me screw with you for a second.

The ambrosia-like energy-drink was highly addictive.

Is my second hyphen wrong? Well, no. In fact, there's a pretty good argument for hyphenating it: if you don't link "energy" and "drink" directly, the "ambrosia-like" term could be describing either the energy or the energy drink. It's ambiguous. To modern readers, however, the phrase "energy drink" is fairly evident as being linked. So do we need to hyphenate it?

This sense of familiarity is the greatest cause of ambiguity in the use of hyphens. We can assume that people will read a commonly coupled phrase as being linked, even if we ourselves don't link it with a hyphen. But what about foreign readers? What about readers twenty years down the line? What about those from a different culture? What if the subject isn't what readers may automatically assume, such as if I changed the sentence above to, "Coffee, the ambrosia-like energy drink..."? Then it's not so clear, is it? In the end, it's a judgment call situation – as is, fittingly enough, the phrase "judgment call situation" – and not always an easy one. Each writer must decide if the other parts of a sentence make the meaning obvious without a hyphen.

There are some other sentence components, besides phrase familiarity, that can render a hyphen unnecessary – or at least make its appropriate use ambiguous. Next up is contextuality. If I say, for example, "the metal heroin needle," it's pretty obvious from context that the heroin needle is what's metal, not the heroin itself, so we're fairly safe in leaving out the hyphen (but, no, it's not wrong to stick it in – the hyphen, that is).

Next, we have typography. To take an example I recently found on an advertisement, there were two instances of the phrase, "Made with all natural fruit ingredients." The first was laid out just like that, and really needs a hyphen at "all-natural" (because, no, not all of their ingredients were from natural fruit). However, they also had the exact same phrase laid out like this:

Made with

All Natural

Fruit Ingredients

It's fairly obvious from the layout itself that "all natural" is linked together, and that the "all" is not intended to modify the word "ingredients." This can also happen easily in a normal sentence. For example, I could just emphasize that the blood curdling nature of the hyphen is important – and that typographical choice sets off the phrase. This can also be done with bold, quotation marks, and hyperlinks. In all of these cases, the presence of a hyphen is certainly not wrong, but it may not be necessary.

The "Re-String" Litmus Test

I'm often tempted to use a hyphen when it's not appropriate to a sentence. (We can say I err on the side of clarity – but we could also say that I'm something of a hyphen molester) One of the best tests to figure out if a hyphen really does resolve ambiguity is to re-string the line of adjectives (or words that double as adjectives). When we look at the phrase "the three hundred blue geese," we might want to put a hyphen between "three" and "hundred." But is there a difference between three sets of a hundred blue geese and three hundred blue geese? The two remain, in all practical definition, entirely identical. And we can't really say that "hundred blue" is a point of confusion; it just won't register with readers.

We can use that same test to see that "the three hundred year old men" needs several hyphens, since it could be three men who are a hundred, or a set of men who are three hundred, or three hundred men who are one year old apiece.

As a general rule, if you can link all the words in a sequence in any given manner (A-B-C, A-B C, A B-C) without changing the essentially meaning, a hyphen is pointless – and, indeed, actually incorrect.

Additional Precautions

1) Check your dictionary.

There are a great many words in the English language that started out as two words, were promptly paired with such frequency that a hyphen became a part of their common construction, and were sometimes – after a few decades or centuries – combined into a single word. In cases like these, the hyphen is often left out because we're so used to the words being associated, and we've forgotten that a hyphen is part of the official spelling. And as often as this mistake happens, we err in the opposite direction – hyphenating two parts of a single, compound word (stepchild, for instance – an error I made in the original draft of this blog entry). The best solution is to check a dictionary, online or offline, whenever there's doubt.

2) Multi-word adjectives almost always need hyphens (when placed before the noun).

If you use a phrase like "high-quality," "bone-rattling," or "skull-splitting" as an adjective, you will almost always hyphenate the phrase. Sometimes these hyphens will not be strictly necessary when the descriptor is after the noun (for example, "I had a skull-splitting headache" as opposed to "the headache was skull splitting"). Some writers believe that these multi-word adjectives should still be hyphenated after the noun, but again, it's a judgment call.

3) Recasting Is Your Friend

The sentence example I used above, "Coffee, the ambrosia-like energy drink," will be unclear without a huge amount of hyphenation, and even then it's very poor communication ("ambrosia-like-energy" squirms uncomfortably in one's mind). If I really want to say the energy is like ambrosia, I'd be better off recasting to "Coffee, the drink with ambrosia-like energy." When something isn't working, recasting is often the best solution.

In Conclusion

Some people hate the hyphen. It's frightening. It's mysterious. It's sinister. Worst of all, it calls for the use of conscious awareness of your writing! How could a little blip on a page be so powerful? But as much as this piece of punctuation does evil (which, I'll admit, it does), it also does good. Without the hyphen, we'd be frightened of a man eating shark, when that man just happened to be hungry and have a taste for enormous seafood; we would suppose that life changing dates was an act of life playing with our calendar rather than having a few nights out with an exceptional new friend; and we'd think that a person with a devil may care attitude owns a devil and may care about attitude.

Hyphens are ambiguous in their use a good portion of the time, but by understanding the fundamentals you'll be in a much better position to make an educated choice – and one you can stand behind – when shoving a space off the page in favor of this tremendously effective little dash.

Defining Fluff Content

2011-04-28T18:48:00.000-06:00

Fluff: Good on Toast, Bad in Content

Each writer, and each group that hires a writer, must determine what they consider more important: quality or cost.

There are writers in this market who will offer your rates as low as $0.0067/word. That means that a 300 word document from them would cost you two dollars – and would cost you $30 using my standard rates. It seems that anyone in their right mind would choose these sub-penny-per-word writers. The problem is ... that's what they are: "sub-penny-per-word writers."

I have edited the work of these writers, I've seen it all over the web, and I know what to expect. That includes articles that:

Are generally written by those who don't speak English as a first language.
Are not easy to understand.
Lack technical (grammar, spelling, punctuation) polish.
Use incorrect conventions (e.g., where to place quotation marks) based on their region of origin.
Are about 60% "fluff."

Fluff! What a word. In fact, it's the precise word I would use to describe the content these writers (generally) produce. But let's take a moment to understand what "fluff" is. Fluff (according to the Rob D Young English Dictionary) is:

(adj) Verbiage, in word, phrase, or sentence form, that adds little to no substance to the subject in question; writing that is uninteresting, uninformative, and generally useless. Fluff is generally utilized to fill space. Synonyms: gibberish, filler, junk, drivel, nonsense, trash, bullshit, rubbish, bologna, crap, garbage.

But let's give a practical example of what I mean. I will now write for you a full 300 word article on Queen Elizabeth the Second:

When thinking of England, one of the first thing that those in the 21st century will think about is the countries royalty. Since many other countries in the new millennium do not have royal figures, England stands out due to the fact that it has maintained both royalty and all the locations, tasks, and ceremonies related to royalty.

England has had many Kings and Queens from a variety of different lines. Queen Elizabeth the Second, the second Elizabeth in England's monarchic history, is (as of the time of this writing, which is April of 2011) the current Queen of England. There have been many lines of Kings and Queens (which is to say, royal blood lineage) in England, and Queen Elizabeth the Second is of the Windsor line.

Like many of the royal blood before her, Queen Elizabeth II generally lives in Buckingham palace, although she may take up residence in a variety of other locations, based on where she is traveling. There are also numerous royal estates that the Queen will sometimes visit or live at temporarily. The Queen has lived in Buckingham palace for quite some time. She took up residence there in 1952. She moved in due to her father's, George VI's, death earlier that year. Queen Elizabeth II was coronated, officially becoming the Queen of England, the next year (1953).

The Queen isn't only the recognized royalty of England, however. Thanks to the long history of both conquest, trade arrangements, settling, and more, the country's royal family is recognized in a number of countries from around the world. Sixteen countries are part of what is known as the "Commonwealth Realms." This group of countries, often known as "the Commonwealth," makes up more than a third of all countries who have recognized a King or Queen. There are forty-four countries in all who recognize a royal family.

There you go. 307 words. It's also (with no intent to insult) a lot better than what you'll get from your average fluff content writers. Mostly, though, it's just me babbling. What I really said was fairly limited. So here's a second version of that same data:

Queen Elizabeth the Second, of the House of Windsor (the ruling family in England), is the recognized queen of the Commonwealth Realms. Only 44 nations currently recognize a monarchy, and 16 of those nations are part of the Commonwealth. Although the Queen sometimes lives at other royal estates, her primary place of residence has been Buckingham Palace since 1952; she took up residence the year her father (King George VI) died, and approximately one year prior to her coronation.

And there you go. 76 words, or roughly a quarter of the space. It's easier to read, it has fewer errors, and it wastes less of your readers' time. Unlike the first version, I only gave each fact once, and I was as precise as possible. The only disadvantage is that, as a writer, I now have to do a lot more research – and spend a lot more time writing – to get you a 300 word article.

Want a simpler compare/contrast example?

What you're reading in this sentence right now is my demonstration of what text will look like to readers (or to writers as well) in order to be longer (fill space) and, in the end, in order to be fluff.

This sentence isn't fluff.

If you didn't understand fluff before, now you do. As a writer or group hiring a writer, this sort of content must be avoided if you want to have real, long-term success – but I'll cover that in upcoming entries.

It Came from the Web: "I Wish I Was Dead!"

2011-04-22T17:28:00.000-06:00

Every so often the web provides something fantastic. This image, courtesy of Sinfest, was shown to me by my ever-anonymous friend Jane Roe.

Have something awesome to show me? Send a link in the comments, or send me a message via my contact form.

Get to the Point! (A Sentence Workshop)

2011-04-20T15:19:00.002-06:00

"You write to communicate to the hearts and minds of others what's burning inside you. And we edit to let the fire show through the smoke." ~Arthur Polotnik

As an editor, the bulk of major problems I encounter are at the sentence level. Yes, sometimes the entire submission is off (doesn't follow instructions, lacks direction, etc.), and sometimes the word choice or punctuation makes me sad inside, but most often it's those infernal sentences.

And what, precisely, is the problem with these sentences? They never get to the damned point! And by "point" I mean both the core idea of the sentence and the actual period at the end. So, rather than ranting and raving about general rules, I'm going to walk you through a sentence workshop. Here's our example:

When your old computer system is starting to see a suffering performance and you've saved up a sufficient amount of money to replace your old system then it's a good idea to explore the possibility of creating a custom-built system for yourself, as it can be both more affordable and additionally provides a system that more effectively and fully meets your needs.

I know this may seem like an exaggeration of how muddled sentences get, but my editorial experience has shown me much worse.

Let's break down this sentence. What is the real point? It can be summed up as "custom-built systems are better for your needs and they cost less." The other points covered are "your old computer sucks" and "you have some money." So, let's start at the beginning.

When your old computer system is starting to see a suffering performance

What's our actual subject? It's an "old computer system" that's "starting to see a suffering performance." The point, however, is that the system isn't really working anymore. So, what words can we eliminate to make this more clear? There are several options, but let's go with this for now:

When your computer's performance starts to suffer

Same meaning, only the second version is more concise. Moving on:

and you've saved up a sufficient amount of money to replace your old system

The point here is saying that you also have to save up enough money for a new system. We've got several words that are unnecessary. First, "sufficient amount of" is very weighty, and can be made more direct by just saying "enough." We can also trim "saved up" to just "saved."

Then we have "to replace your old system." Do we need "your old system"? Didn't we just talk about the old system a few words earlier? Let's go for "it" instead.

and you've saved enough money to replace it

Okay, moving along:

then it's a good idea to explore the possibility of creating a custom-built system for yourself,

First, we don't actually need our "then." It's implied, and we can instead add a comma. This also clarifies that we're getting to the core point of the sentence.

Our next point is that you should look into creating a custom system. What verbiage is unimportant for that? "Explore the possibility of creating," is – what's the word? – nauseating. Let's trim that down to "look into creating." (We could also do "consider creating," but I don't like how those words sound when paired.)

And finally, we have the new subject: "a custom-built system for yourself. " If you're creating it, and it's replacing your old computer, I think we can safely assume that "for yourself" is implied. Our new fragment now reads:

, it's a good idea to look into creating a custom-built system

Next fragment:

as it can be both more affordable and additionally provides a system that more effectively and fully meets your needs.

First, the word "it" in this context is ambiguous (could refer to either the "idea" or "system" from above). We could say "system" or "computer" again (or find another synonym), but there's another option: swap out "as it" with "which." From there we can either keep the "can be" or switch for a stronger "are often" or "are generally." Let's go for "are often." So we start our fragment with "which are often."

Our next word is "both." That doesn't add much of anything, since it should be evident at a glance that we have two advantages here. So let's cut that. While we're at it, let's remove "additionally," which is redundant to the "both" and, again, is evident from the sentence's nature.

Now let's look at this second advantage of "providing a system that more effectively and fully meets your needs." First, we really don't need to reiterate that it's the system doing this. Let's go ahead and say "which" instead (it's not perfect, but we'll live). Next, is there a different between effectively meeting your needs and fully meeting your needs? I'm going to say "fully" covers it. So that trims us down to this:

which are often more affordable and which more fully meet your needs.

Are we done? Well, not really. We've hacked a lot, but that doesn't mean it's perfect. So now we go through the same process with our revised sentence. Here's what our current sentence looks like:

When your computer's performance starts to suffer and you've saved up enough money to replace it, it's a good idea to look into creating a custom-built system, which are often more affordable and which more fully meet your needs.

It's better. It's shorter (39 as opposed to 62 words). It's clearer. But we can do more.

First, let's examine some of these points to see how necessary they really are. Is there a way we can set up our scene (getting a new computer) more efficiently? Let's try this:

When you're ready to replace your current computer

Might this work? Well, the real question to answer is, does it change the point? And honestly, no, it doesn't. The idea of replacing a computer already implies that the old version needed replacing. Further, having saved up money for the system is implied in the act of purchasing.

Next, we have the idea of "it's a good idea to look into creating a custom-build system." Can't we just say something like:

consider building a custom system

Yes, I think we can. And then we have the advantages of custom systems. What we really mean to say is it's cheaper and better. So let's just say that:

as they often cost less and will more fully meet your needs.

You can toy with the details, but the core point remains the same. Our new sentence looks like this:

When you're ready to replace your current computer, consider building a custom system, as they often cost less and will more fully meet your needs.

Any other words we can trim out? I see "current" as unnecessary, and even the entire "you're ready" sentiment as being implied in the action. So we could say, "When replacing your computer, consider building a custom system."

When replacing your computer, consider building a custom system, as they often cost less and will more fully meet your needs.

Hmmm. We're really close to strength here. I'm still not satisfied with the second half of the sentence, though. Part of the reason is that we're working with two separate ideas: 1) Look into custom systems, 2) the reasons why. We can use some fancy punctuation to make it all into one beautiful thought.

When replacing your computer, consider building a custom system: they often cost less and will more effectively meet your needs.

You could, hypothetically, use a semicolon or dash there instead, but I like the colon in this case; the question implied by our first thought (the why? of look into custom systems) is quite evident. In any case, what we now have is a 20 word version of the 62 word train-wreck originally presented. The new version is far more clean, concise, and powerful.

We could also divide the sentence in two and accomplish the same effect.

When replacing your computer, consider building a custom system. Computers built from scratch often cost less while more fully meeting your needs.

It's two words longer (22) in total, but it divides down to two sentences of nine and thirteen words. The two sentence version, in my not-so-humble opinion, is also more clear and effective. In either the colon or two sentence version, we've gotten the exact same point across in a third of the space – which for our readers means less time wasted and less need for potent headache medicine.

The Moon Abolishes Google Street View

2011-04-15T00:21:00.004-06:00

Google has grown to the point where all but five internet-using countries now choose it as their primary search engine – and that's including China, where Google left to avoid censorship. Along with that size comes a lot of legal worry, however, especially when it comes to privacy concerns. Google Street View is among the "hot button" services offered by the company, with politicians in Switzerland and Germany prompting Google to abandon the product in those regions. Even more recently, the Google Moon rover has faced legal issues due to a hostile command from the people of the moon.

As is well-known, the people of the moon (often known as "Moonites" or "Moonians") are highly secretive, and have avoided contact with people of earth (often known as "Earthlings" or "Earthikins") for several decades. However, the Google Street View (Moon) service threatens this privacy.

"We're not interested in being seen, and the Google blur technology can't recognize our faces – not effectively," said ╓L╗█↨, a concerned citizen of the Moon. "It's not just that we want to be private. I mean, we do. There are a lot of things going on here that we don't want you Earthlings to know about until we're good and ready. But more, it's that this service was clearly not designed with us in mind." ╓L╗█↨ further states that he/she is an active user of Google, but finds the company's current insensitivity to be more than a little jarring.

Insensitivity, however, is a gentle word when compared to the terminology used by one ╘○•└, who states that Google Street View is a far greater threat. Much of the language used by ╘○•└ was so offensive and/or impossible to understand that it can't be included here, but he/she nevertheless gave a clear image of the concern. "What's to say I won't be taking a stroll near a mental institution, or hatchery, or a probing facility, and have my picture taken? People can ------ recognize you even when you're smudged by Google, and [people] will jump to all the wrong conclusions."

Orders from the Court of the Moon, however, have almost certainly put a halt to Street View, at least for the time being. ├Q╗ ZZ╚↨L, the official ambassador to Earth, stated that Google's actions were "well beyond what has been set out in the statutes of Moonian law. If you keep trying to spy on us, we'll blow you up. Like, seriously. Did you guys even pay attention to what we did to the Challenger? Or Apollo 13? You Earthikins never learn." ZZ╚↨L went on to demonstrate how his plasma-ray gun can disintegrate large portions of moon rock with only the power given by the light of the sun. "These craters," he said, motioning to the surface of the moon around him, "aren't just here for show."

Other Moonian officials have been evaluating a case against Google, either to prompt an official cease-and-desist (should Google continue Street View), issue a fine (to be paid in cloneable cells from Eric Schmidt, Larry Page, and Marissa Mayer), or obliterate all of Mountain View, California. In any case, the Moonian Government is likely to let the outcome remain a surprise up to the last moment, "Because," says ZZ╚↨L, "it's just funner that way."

On Poetic Conventions

2011-04-11T23:11:00.004-06:00

I’m not the sort to call my billiard shots, cause – truth be told – it’s hard enough to play the game. It’s just like that with language – thoughts distilled, becoming cairns for our foray into uncharted grounds. Here one false step can twist your meaning in a thousand ways, falling in love turned into painful strep, princes to paupers, lovers into strays, ball-turret gunners into fetuses. But I imagine there's some hidden route by which all sides can mend their grievances – where poets will just let their hearts spill out, forgetting form, with best thoughts flowing free ... but speak in sonnets. Accidentally.

(A note on this entry: My poetry course has been examining the purpose of form, so I wanted to play around with it. This is what I do when I bored and caught up. ^_^ I am very interested to see if anyone caught what I was doing here, and any thoughts on it.)

Update: Since no one got it, here's the snippet again.

I’m not the sort to call my billiard shots,
cause – truth be told – it’s hard enough to play
the game. It’s just like that with language – thoughts
distilled, becoming cairns for our foray
into uncharted grounds. Here one false step
can twist your meaning in a thousand ways,
falling in love turned into painful strep,
princes to paupers, lovers into strays,
ball-turret gunners into fetuses.
But I imagine there's some hidden route
by which all sides can mend their grievances –
where poets will just let their hearts spill out,
forgetting form, with best thoughts flowing free ...
but speak in sonnets. Accidentally.

My Upcoming Fiction Experiment

2011-04-11T16:36:00.003-06:00

Laura (my upcoming project)

Those who know me are aware that, though I make my living as a web content writer, it's my eventual goal to focus on creative work – short stories, novels, you name it. Freelancing sometimes makes that difficult, however, partially because of how time-consuming the creative writing, revision, and submission process can be; and, of course, you're already "creatively drained" come the end of a strenuous freelancing day.

That said, I have a project I'm excited about on the horizon. I've started work on it, and I have a good idea of where it will go. This project is unique for me in a few ways. First, because it's far more experimental than my fiction typically is (which actually does say something; it's not as though my normal fiction is tame). Second, because it's fairly short (I estimate the final version will be no more than ~90 pages). And third, because I will be publishing and publicizing it in a digital format – giving away a free preview and charging around $3.00 for the full version.

I have a lot of feelings about this form of publishing, and certainly not all of them are positive. However, this too I see as an experiment. By using my knowledge of web advertising, the mobile platform, etc., I hope to fit this project to the sort of form it will be viewed on – tablets, readers, and smartphones – and see if I can generate interest. If I can generate interest for it, who knows? Maybe it'll be profitable in and of itself, or snag the attention of some other publishing group, or give me some positive data/reviews to pitch as I take the work further.

And in any case, what do I have to lose?

More details:

What's the project about?
A girl.

What makes it so experimental?
The way I'm writing it.

Why are you being so vague?
I'm paranoid you'll steal my idea.

So, when can I read this mystery project of yours?
I'm hoping I'll have the initial set ready by the end of this Summer.

Anything else you want to tell me?
The name of the project is Laura and the image at the top of this page is incredibly telling about the nature of the experiment.

Is it going to be awesome?

It's written by me. (No, but seriously, I'm pretty excited about it. I'll enjoy it, anyhow.)

How to Become a Freelancer – The 14 Steps

2011-04-08T23:17:00.008-06:00

The Steps: Steep, Rocky, and Pretty Damn Fun

In looking through my previous entries, I discovered I'd fallen prey to one of my oldest habits: starting a giant project and abandoning it ... almost instantly. The sad thing is that teaching others how to become freelancer writers is something I genuinely care about. So I'd like to continue that project (H2BaF) now, but would like to start with the organizational skeleton.

In this entry I will outline the necessary steps, giving just a vague snippet on what each step requires. Further entries will then elaborate on the topic and be linked from this page. By resuming the project with this outline, though, I hope that those paying attention to my blog won't be left hanging.

The Step-by-Step Outline of How to Become a Freelancer

Step One: Save Up
Life as a freelancer is stressful, and it can take time to get established. Have enough in your savings account, as a bare minimum, to cover one to three months of expenses.

Step Two: Explore Sub-Fields
This industry thrives on its specialists. Before you begin building yourself in the market, you should decide where in that market you'd like to go. Articles, web content, print, translation, ad copy, legal documents, eBooks, technical writing, resume construction, and a number of other sub-fields are all viable.

Step Three: Develop a Portfolio
With a specialization in mind, put together your best work. If you don't have a great collection, explore doing pro bono work or constructing hypothetical projects to flesh out your presentation.

Step Four: Determine Your Branding Angle
Some people brand themselves as an individual (e.g., "Rob D Young"). Others brand themselves as a company (e.g., "RDY Writing"). Some, such as myself, do both. Since you'll be purchasing a domain name and setting up your initial image, you need to weigh the options now.

Step Five: Put Your Portfolio on the Web
You will be getting most of your work on the web, so an online portfolio is vital. Purchase a domain name that reflects your branding decisions,

Step Six: Set Up Your Tools
If you're going to survive the chaotic world of freelancing, you'll need to set up productivity tools now. With utilities like the Google Apps, your online tools can also improve branding opportunities and create a more professional overall presentation.

Step Seven: Set Up Additional Profiles
There are a number of freelancing sites, including eLance, constant content, job posting forums, and dozens of other sites that may be useful to you down the line. Set up at least a few of these profiles now.

Step Eight: Create an Acquisition Framework
The process of acquiring clients involves having an effective sales pitch, a solid body of work, an understanding of industry standards for pay, a tight contract, and a good timeline. Create this acquisitions backbone now.

Step Nine: Acquire Initial Clients
You will serve your time in the trenches in this industry. That means working for a penny per word, and sometimes less. Getting those clients really builds your portfolio and gets you used to the industry – and is a great way to test your ability to cope with a freelancer's life. Acquire enough projects that you're devoting 10 or more hours per week to freelancing.

Step Ten: Create Office Space
To prevent technical difficulties and maximize your overall productivity, should set up your at-home office before you push for full-time freelancing. There are some definite "dos" and "don'ts" in the office setup process, however.

Step Eleven: Quit Your Job
You're now ready. After thoroughly weighing the options (and yes, this article will largely be about this weighing), if freelancing sounds good to you, quit your job so you can focus on client acquisition.

Step Twelve: Fill Your Schedule
With an understanding that some time should be left for emergencies, personal issues, and further branding, pursue clients to fill up your time and – hopefully – your bank account.

Step Thirteen: Pick a Niche
It seems strange to save it to this late spot in the program, but I do believe that writers should experience the versatile array of project types before deciding on one or two to focus on. However, every truly successful freelancer I've worked with has chosen a niche area – allowing them to brand as a specialist and acquire higher-rate work.

Step Fourteen: Bells and Whistles
There are now a load of extras you can focus on to increase your presence and performance. These include: business cards, computer upgrades, community participation and social networking, additional software/hardware, and boat-loads of energy drinks. I'll cover some of these not-strictly-necessary extras in this entry.

Once these steps have been completed, your time in the industry will still leave plenty of questions. I'll try to cover those tricky topics – like how and when to request a rate increase, maneuvering issues with contracts, sub-contracting to other writers, budgeting issues, the oh-so-common motivation struggles, what to do when a client goes dry, dealing with some of the pitfalls of freelancing, how much to focus on quality versus quantity, what to do when you've taken on too much, etc., etc. – in future entries.

Just let me know if you have any questions! Wherever you are on these steps, and whatever your exact passion, I'm glad to help those who are seeking great self-ownership and freedom through freelancing get a better foothold in this challenging market.