Monthly Archives: August 2005

You call this funny?

Posted on by

I rarely pass along these sorts of things, but this one I couldn’t resist because it is so completely and utterly wrong about me!

I realize, and I hope that others do too, that these sorts of things are strictly for entertainment, but the geniuses who dream these things up are, well, just dreaming.  I hope that when you do one one of these tests that you pay a bit of attention to the sorts of questions that are asked and then compare that to the results you get.  What about all those questions that you felt had absolutely no correct answer that applied to you?  What about questions such as, "Which of these movies is funniest to you? (If you haven’t seen one don’t choose it)?"  If I’ve only seen one and I have to choose it, what does the test designer really think they’re learning about me?  Especially if I don’t even consider it funny.

My friends often have no idea what the heck I’m talking about, so how in the heck can my "sense of humor [be] a guilty pleasure for [my]
friends?" 

Spontaneous?  OK, something I struggle to work on, but I have never been accused of, or complimented as, being spontaneous.

Approachable?  I want to be approachable and I strive to be, but compared to naturally charismatic people, not even close. 

Popular?   Who really cares at this point in life?  But back when it did matter, I was the smallest kid in my class until 4th grade (2nd smallest), four-eyed, and sucked at most sports.  Oh, and I was mouthy, if you can imagine that?  Add into that mix someone whose test scores were routinely much higher than my peer group, and we’ll just skip past the whole popular non-starter.

Simple?  Silly?  Sets me apart in this cynical word?  If you don’t know me then it’s all true, really!  I’m just a big-hearted lug that gets along with everyone.  If you do know me, I hope you found these results as hilarious as I did!  Oh, maybe the test designer really did nail my style of humor.  Hmmmm?

Enjoy!

 

the Ham
(39% dark, 52% spontaneous, 22% vulgar)
your humor style:
CLEAN | SPONTANEOUS | LIGHT

Your style’s goofy, innocent and feel-good. Perfect for parties and for
the dads who chaperone them. You can actually get away with corny
jokes, and I bet your sense of humor is a guilty pleasure for your
friends. People of your type are often the most approachable and
popular people in their circle. Your simple & silly
good-naturedness is immediately recognizable, and it sets you apart in
this sarcastic world.

PEOPLE LIKE YOU: Will Ferrell – Will Smith


My test tracked 3 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:
free online dating free online dating
You scored higher than 25% on dark
free online dating free online dating
You scored higher than 99% on spontaneous
free online dating free online dating
You scored higher than 75% on vulgar
Link: The 3 Variable Funny Test written by jason_bateman on Ok Cupid

Sorry, found via Pinko Feminist Hellcat

Seems I am unable to make this fit on my page.   Been trying to play with resizing it but the big image is the main issue.   I believe part of the deal of using these things is using the supplied source code, so it’s just another reason not to use them. 

I Got Dem Ol’ Kozmic Pinks Again Mama!

Posted on by

Well, if you’ve been here before you’ve probably noticed a little change already.

I have a few slices of pictures I want to use for a banner but I needed to convert them to a useful format of a decent size and get my title on them.  Experimented with some free and shareware stuff for the Mac last night and this is what I got for now.

This gif is way too grainy but I like this photo (portion of) I took several years go in Switzerland.  I need to figure out how to get it converted without so much loss of detail.  I also really liked the previous font I had used.  But I didn’t record what it was and I can’t seem to find it again.  Damn!   There are a few others I like, like this Zapfino, but they don’t seem to have the feel I was trying to convey like I thought the other did.

Now personally, as a guy, I don’t have a problem with pink…but, there is way too much pink on this page.  If anyone has any suggestions for colors that might match my little slice of photo better, even if just other shades of pink, please let me know.  Arty designer type I am not.  Of course, the pinks I see may not even be close to what you see as these are certainly non-standard, not particularly web-safe, colors.  If you have suggestions, hexadecimal codes are probably best as they can be entered easiest.

I have some other pics consisting of different colors that I’ll also be experimenting with; maybe they won’t be so hard to match in an aesthetically pleasing way.  Wow!  Someone as artistically challenged as I am shouldn’t even be allowed to say or write such things.  Heehee.  It is a free blogosphere though.  Maybe I need a Queer Eye for the Blog Guy sort of help.  Or maybe just a woman’s touch?  <sigh>  Oops, sorry!  That’s a different post altogether.  <grin>

Anyway, if you have color suggestions, or you have some idea on how or what to use to convert my jpgs so they aren’t so big, please send them to me.  Actually I just realized that my jpgs are only about 32k before adding the text.  After I added the text in Compositor it ballooned up to 3.6M!  That seems sort of wacked out; any suggestions?

Oh my, my; or It’s an OCLC world for me

Posted on by

Last week I wrote about taking "my first breath as a baby cataloger" (5th paragraph) when I was told that a patron had requested something I cataloged (i.e. made accessible).  Today I found out I took my first steps without even realizing it (see below).

I went to my practicum today to do a bunch of searching and data analysis of the cataloging I’ve done over the last 100 or so hours that I’ve been there, so I can write my paper.  I’ve cataloged 303 titles prior to today.

  • 4 articles (didn’t really enjoy doing these)
  • 299 general multimedia (broken down as follows):
    • 15 periodical titles (189 issues)
    • 98 videos (VHS or U-Matic)
    • 10 motion pictures
    • 17 slide sets/transparencies/training kits
    • 33 vertical file items
    • 132 "books"
  • 157 original cataloging
    146 copy cataloging (119 found in WorldCat)

I probably added at least 150 issues of various serials issues to previous records, but that data isn’t tracked by our system.

But the really interesting thing, from my point of view, is I found out that 29 of my records have been uploaded to OCLC.  Yikes! Deep breaths boy!  It actually makes me feel kind of gravity-challenged—just like it must’ve been when I took those first steps a "few" decades back.

I sure am glad that names are not attached to records, only institutions!  And yes, there are more than my 29 records from our institution that have been uploaded.  Actually, my records aren’t too shabby for what they are.  We are not using a MARC-based system, and I have no control over how records are converted or which records get uploaded.  If I had my druthers I may have chosen not to upload some of them, and one got the 2nd half of its title chopped off.  I will point that out to my supervisor so she can troubleshoot conversion/upload issues.

None of my records are found by WorldCat lookup, but it may be too soon and I don’t think our little stand-alone special library can be found that way anyway.

But, these 3 minimal level records were done by me (OCLC Accession No.):

  • 60641321 Fire service practices : an introductory course manual for fire service training (1942)
  • 60641379 Operational safety manual for anhydrous ammonia (1964)
  • 60641389 Rescuer’s guide for Ford Motor Company air bag supplemental restraint system (1990)

Not exactly the most timely stuff, but it may be historically relevant someday.  And I bet there are still a few 15-year-old plus Fords on the road.

Anyway, it was quite the surprise today to find that some of my records have found their way into OCLC’s database.  Actually quite pleasant; after that initial sharp intake of breath.

As our friends at OCLC would say, "It’s all good."