Graeme

I voted for "Doesn't matter". It's more important to me that the posts are regular -- so I know when to expect a new chapter. The actual day isn't important. For authors that don't post regularly, then the day is even less important -- any day is a good day in that situation! The other thing is I rarely read a new chapter on the day it's posted. I can't find a consistent time to read so it's only when I get a chance. If the chapter has been up for a few days before I read it, does it matter? Not to me....

Happy Birthday, Dom! (Somehow I suspect that this thread is going to get really long...)

Thanks, Shannon. I had some a couple of weeks ago, but I haven't seen any recently. I thought they were odd, but decided to ignore them (given the old date).

Happy Birthday, Jared! Have a great day and an even better year Graeme

It's good to hear from you, Jakob! Drop in to say hello every-so-often, but I think everyone understand if you have a lot of other things to do with your time Cheers from Australia! Graeme

I wasn't clear enough. Naturally, there is a lot of social interaction at school in Australia, but it is NOT the centre of social activity. A lot of social interaction between peers occurs away from the school environment. One big area is sports. In Australia, the majority of organised sports are completely divorced from the education system and cover a wide range of age groups. For example, I used to be heavily involved in basketball -- which was a local organisation that played at a council-owned stadium with competitions from under 8s to over 35s and everything inbetween. It was linked to the Victorian Basketball Association, which was linked to the Australian National Basketball Association, which in turn was linked to FINA (the international body). This sporting hierarchy, from local grassroots all the way up to the top level (often international) is reflected across Australia. The education system is not involved. There are school competitions, and some schools will have teams in the local competition, but even that is more often students from the same school forming a team, rather than a school-sponsored team. Similarly, other special interest groups attract the people who are interested in that area -- and those groups will often have a wide range of ages. I knew of a guy from school who was strongly interested in ham radio, and was heavily involved with other ham-radio operators across the city.

There are two separate topics here. There are school shootings by non-students (such as the incident today) and shootings by students. The former is part of general society and has nothing to do with the school. Just like the tragedy in Chechen last year, the school is merely a venue that the perpetrator uses. The second is what I think the focus of this thread is about. The posts about profiling I found very informative, especially the comment about the attacks not being a result of a student "snapping" but that they are almost always planned. To me, it sounds like a general build-up followed by some incident that pushes the person over the line. They then make a decision and follow it through. One thing I've been wondering about is how much the school environment plays a part in this. I saw a comment from someone in another thread that they were at a small school with only 800 students. In Australia, that's a large school -- we have some that have over 1000 students, but most high schools (years 7 to 12) are in the 500-800 range. Another difference appears to be the role of the school in a student's life. My impression is that schools in the USA are also major social environments, while in Australia most social activities occur completely divorced from school -- school is predominantly for education and extra-curriculla activities are not common. Since at least part of the reason for these events appears to be social (eg. the student not being able to be part of a 'select' group or rejected socially by a large group of their peers), is it the way the school is a social focus in the USA part of the cause of the problem? Australia has not (yet) had a tragedy of this type, and I hope we never do. I don't know what to think or what we should/could do. These are just my random thoughts on the subject

I personally have very little spare time at the moment so I haven't started a reading a new novel for months. I'll read the occasional short story and I always try to read things that are put up for explicit comment and feedback, though (as distinct from things posted generally). If you are looking for constructive criticism, rather than just pats on the back, then I would suggest doing what you did earlier and ask explicitly for comment and advice in an appropriate place such as in one of the various writers' forums. Good luck! Graeme

I think you've got the answer now, because my reasons were exactly the same as shown above: ie. There was too broad a scope and therefore I didn't even attempt it. By having a broad range of authors that I haven't read, there was an immediate assumption that I wouldn't have a chance. I had expected that there would be people who'd read all of the stories involved and hence would be entering. The recommendation to narrow the scope is a good one, though it still disadvantages those who haven't read that particular author. As a suggestion, make the next scavenger hunt off the Fall Anthology collection. This will give people extra encouragement to read the stories (so they'll be ready for the scavenger hunt when it is announced) and also keeps the scope small enough while covering a range of authors (short stories are a lot easier for people to read than several novels). To clarify: Announce that the scavenger hunt will be about the anthology and then one or two weeks after the anthology is posted, start the hunt.

30K isn't large. I hope I didn't come over as complaining about anyone's signatures. I was talking generally without anyone in mind at the time.

I've noticed.... I also noticed that it's two of the quieter members who have decided to break their silence with posts in this thread Seriously, I would personally object to a signature that includes large graphic files, as some members are still on dial-up and they can take some time to download (yes, they'll get cached, but some members also like to clear their cache regularly). If I had to put a figure on it, for MOST people, a ten-line signature is more than enough. However, there are always special cases when I've found twenty-line signatures to be reasonable. More than anything, it's the content of that signature that determines if the signature is too big or not. My opinion only, of course....

I'm sorry, but I was rushed this morning and didn't explain things clearly. Studies involving identical and fraternal twins are useful in identifying what is genetic in nature and what is environment. Fraternal twins share the same environment. Identical twins share the same environment and the same genetics. So, any traits shared by both types of twins are probably environmental in nature, but traits shared by identical twins and not fraternal twins are probably genetic in nature. Studies involved in identical twins raised apart are also very interesting, but this is a lot rarer situation and the number of twins involved makes any conclusions from these studies questionable. Wikipedia article on biology and sexual orientation

There are lots of things that can be said on this topic. Unfortunately I have to rush off so this will be short. Studies with twins are very important in the nature/nuture debate. If nature determines homosexuality (ie. it's genetic), you would expect identical twins to have the same orientation and fraternal twins to show the same ratios as in the general public. If nuture determines homosexuality (ie. it's environmental), you'd expect both types of twins to have a high degree of agreement in their orientation. Queensland University did this with the Australian Twins registry, and found neither of these two situations. Identical twins show a high degree of probability in having the same orientation, but it is not 100% (from memory, it was in the 50-60% range). This is well above the fraternal twin mark, which implies a genetic link, but it is not purely genetic. If you want the details, I think Wikipedia has the links (look up homosexuality and find the details on twin studies). Hence the latest theories which are that there is a genetic component but it is not "triggered" in all people (which also partially explains why, if it is genetic, it hasn't been bred out). Hormonal exposure in the womb is what is currently being postulated as the trigger. As a side point, some studies have suggested that homosexuality in males is linked to high female fertility. In otherwords, the same genes that increase female fertility (obviously a survival trait) increase the probablity of homosexuality in males. This would also explain why homosexuality has not been bred out -- the genes are a desirable survival trait in the female line.

I hear you and I don't know the answer. I think I said 10-12 hours per week (average two hours a night on school nights) is reasonable. More than that is, I think, too much. A student can get burnt out by studying too much. Too much of anything is harmful. My favourite example is water: you need it, but too much can kill you (it's called drowning...) PS: I'll apologise now -- I had a bottle of wine with dinner tonight so I may not be making a lot of sense....

It's also not quite true. It says that having the first and last letters in the right place are the only important thing, but it's not. You need the other letters in roughly the right order as well. I've seen this one before and what someone did was to re-write it with the first and last letters in the correct place, and reversed the order of the rest. It was NOT readable. Having said that, I think it's still amazing what the mind is able to do. I saw a theory once that the mind works like a hologram. One of the characteristics of holograms is that if you use them as a filter, they highlight what they are a hologram of. For example, if you had a hologram of the letter 'H', and viewed a page of text through that holographic film, all letter 'H's would be highlight. The fascinating thing is that they don't have to be exactly the same as the holographic image -- stylised letters would still be highlighted, but not as strongly. In a similar way, if we have a 'holographic' image of words in our mind, the ones that are 'close' (like in this example) still 'trigger' the recognition of that word in our mind. Add the ability to guess at words from the context they are in, and we are able to read something that appears to be 'garbage'.

One of the "advantages" of doing homework is that it also teaches time-management skills (which is what appears to be a major issue in this thread). Time-management is a something that everyone should learn because it will be useful throughout your life. I'm not saying doing homework is the best way to learn this, but it's one of the side-effects....

Homework appears to be a requirement for the last two or three years of school. The guidelines I've seen is the school would like the student to do around two and no more than three hours of homework a weeknight. What I find more disturbing are the schools that are starting homework from early ages. My eldest boy is in grade one and gets one piece of homework a week -- with three days to complete it (if he tried, he could do the lot in an hour). The purpose is partially to get them into the habit early, but they also try to make it relevant to their class work. Some primary schools seem to give homework for the sake of giving homework.... Balance is critical. Anyone doing more than 10-12 hours of homework a week is overdoing it, in my humble opinion, unless there are exceptional circumstances (like a student struggling with a particular subject). Other activities are equally important to being a well-rounded invidual. Oh, and James? I've got some tensor calculus somewhere -- I'll swap it from the complex polynomials, if you're interested.

I found this video clip referenced from another site and I thought I'd share it here, too: It has English subtitles.

Happy Birthday!

Okay, I'm coming in very late, but my excuse is that I'm still a relatively new member.... I read the story last night and I was very impressed. You should be very proud. It's a lot better than my first attempt at writing. The thing that impressed me the most, though, was something that hasn't been mentioned. You had the first guy Trevor met turn out to be gay, which normally would annoy me as totally unrealistic BUT you did it in a way that made it realistic. It wasn't chance, but was just a case of one guy spotting another nodding at a rainbow sticker, and guessing that he might be gay. While the whole story was great, the way you avoided that particular cliche stood out to me. It's the mark of someone with talent that you can move beyond the typical. As for commas... my editor still has buckets of them from my early work. He's finally starting to use them by putting them back into my latest chapters. It's taking me time, but I'm starting to learn some grammar rules. Well done!

I miss him, too, but I'm pretty sure I've seen him online sometime in the last three weeks, so he's still around. It might be he's busy getting ready for a wedding....

I understand what you are saying, but that last paragraph needs clarification. Homosexuality (to whatever degree, 100% downwards) is NOT a preference. What you are saying is that if you are attracted to either sex (ie. you fall somewhere in the middle of the continuum from heterosexual to homosexual), THEN you have a personal preference for how you express your sexuality. For those at the extremes, it's not a personal preference, but part of their nature. I'm sure it wasn't your intention but I feel that a very clear distinction needs to be made between sexuality (which is part of our nature) and expressions of sexuality (which is a personal choice). I could have sex with lots of different people but I choose not to. If I were given a choice (and ignoring the fact that I'm married), I would prefer a guy -- but that preference is because by my nature I'm attracted to guys. It's not a "preference" in that I'm choosing to be attracted to guys, it's a preference in that because I'm attracted to guys, I would prefer to have a guy as my partner. I know it's a fine point, but with people out there saying homosexuality is a choice, I think it needs to be made. Graeme PS: And I have no intention of ever leaving my wife. The above comment is completely hypothetical for me.

The research for this has been done. What you are talking about is the Kinsey scale -- rating from 0 to 6, where zero is completely heterosexual and six is completely homosexual: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_scale Two, three and four would correspond to bisexual. Even so, I think it's not precise. I consider myself to be gay, but I'm in a monogamous heterosexual relationship. I am same-sex attracted, but the only person I have sex with is of the opposite sex. I've got no interest in having sex with any other women -- where do I fit into the scale? The answer to that question depends on whether you look at behaviour or desire. On behaviour, I'm a zero on the scale. On desire, I'm a five.... As a last comment, I sincerely doubt that the general population is evenly distributed on the scale. It is almost certain that the majority fit into the zero-to-two range.

I think you're correct, though it's rarely that simple. I got married, not because I wanted to lead a traditional life, or because I was pressured to get married, but simply because I met someone who loved me and I loved them back. I was emotionally starved, which was partially due to being gay and in the pre-internet era so I didn't have much chance to safely meet another gay guy near my own age, but there is no doubt in my mind that there was (and still is) genuine love between us. It's just that I'm attracted to guys.... The pressure doesn't have to be "a great deal" as you stated -- society puts an expectation on us that isn't great, but it's constant. I'm sincerely hoping that that is changing and that the number of same-sex attracted men (and women) who get married because "it's what's expected" is decreasing. Certainly, at least in Australia, homosexuality is more and more acceptable, though it's not "mainstream" yet. Two guys walking down the street holding hands still attracts attention, though most of the time it will be just stares. Some places are better than others. As a related point, when I came out to my wife she desperately needed counselling to help her cope. We were very lucky in that we quickly found a counsellor who specialises in dealing with women who have found out that their husband is gay, and had been doing it for more than ten years. I am aware that there is at least one similar counsellor in Sydney (from a magazine article a couple of years ago). My wife told me that the counsellor got into this line when she initially counselled men with AIDS. She found out that a number of them were married, and asked who was counselling the wives.... My version of this is "Putting people into neat little boxes doesn't work, unless you use a chainsaw."

I'm not sure I want to know anything more on this subject.... Echidnas wobble. It comes from having short legs, unlike goats. However, I can appreciate your point on discrimination. It means you have to come up with your own moves instead of copying everyone elses, but I'm confident you're capable of doing that. Any goat that wears sunglasses, must have enough imagination to figure some cool moves....