kareila: "Mom, I'm hungry." "Hush, I'm coding. You ate yesterday." (coding)

Changelog Digest for Fri, Mar 6

Mar. 6th, 2015 03:11 pm
[personal profile] kareila posting in [community profile] changelog_digest


faeb384: Issue #1046: Convert BML files under htdocs/support
Converts support/faq.bml to Template Toolkit.
792194a: Issue #1277: add German-language headers to the reply-by-email cleaner
Recognize as end of message any line with <$LJ::BOGUS_EMAIL>.
cfc9cb9: Issue #964: previewing too many times causes comment to be posted outside of thread
Pass in the dtid in the comment preview, to keep the reply in thread.
c7134e6: Issue #1264: Move t/config-test.pl to ext/local/etc
Separate out the database configuration for tests.
7ad1ef9: Issue #1113: make sure to show "1 comment" when we post inline from reading page to an entry which had 0 comments
Show the read comments link when going from 0 to 1 comments in QR.
2671f66: Issue #953: Label the navigation landmarks
Add labels when there are multiple navigation landmarks.


3f3885e: Issue #953: Label the navigation landmarks
Label the navigation landmarks in Tropo.
ae06249: Issue #1005: switch doctype to HTML5 instead of XHTML
Remove XHTML doctypes from journal layout headers, for HTML5 compatibility.
216b3a8: Issue #1068: Update to Foundation 5.4.7
Set a background color for the menu in mobile in Tropo Red.

Fatphobia Isn’t About Health

Mar. 6th, 2015 06:18 pm
[syndicated profile] skepchick_feed

Posted by Olivia

In the realm of weight loss, one of the phrases I see thrown around most often is “but it’s not healthy to be fat! I’m just concerned for their health!” When I bring up questions of fatphobia and weight discrimination, one of the first things I always hear is that it’s important to educate people about losing weight because being overweight is unhealthy. And more often than not, this is really just some Grade A concern trolling.

There are lots of pieces of evidence to suggest that the majority of people who promote weight loss for health aren’t actually interested in the health of the fat person. One of the first and most obvious pieces is that many of the tactics promoted for weight loss are actually incredibly unhealthy. Bariatric surgery comes with serious complications, including vomiting, inability to eat solid foods, and oh yeah, death. No worries though, it’s for your health.

There are many, many diets that are also incredibly unhealthy. Juice cleanses do nothing to actually cleanse and put the body into a starvation state because they give too few calories. People still use the BMI scale, despite the wide knowledge that it’s based on a statistician’s attempts to understand large populations, not individual health. New guidelines for doctors treating overweight patients even promote weight loss before treating whatever complaint the patient may have come in for (unsurprisingly, the doctors who worked on these appear to have close ties with pharmaceutical companies that market weight loss drugs). Basically every restrictive diet ever rests on the principle of putting the body into a starvation state so that it will start to eat away at its own fat. In the long term this doesn’t generally lead to weight loss (it changes the metabolism such that the body tends to gain back the weight plus some), and it’s simply not very healthy.

But perhaps most obvious is the fact that nobody seems to give a crap what thin people do with their bodies. I can confidently say this as a thin person: I have openly admitted to people that I eat almost nothing but sugar, that I never get enough protein, that I sometimes feel out of breath walking up a flight of stairs, and the only response I get is slight laughter and jealousy that I can eat so many sweets and stay thin. I know many people who engage in potentially unhealthy or dangerous behaviors, everything from drinking a little too regularly to rock climbing, and the number of times I see anyone express concern for their health is zero (I am sure that somewhere out there there are thin people who have been harassed about not being healthy enough, but on a regular, societal basis it does not happen in the same way).

People who are overweight are fully capable of having problems with restricting their intake too much. Fat individuals with eating disorders are often ignored or even praised for behaviors that would get a thin person thrown in the hospital, because the result of weight loss is so important to many people. Dangerous behaviors that border on (or even look exactly the same as) eating disorders are even promoted. Shows like The Biggest Loser promote exercising to injury, crash dieting, starvation, and for some contestants even purging. Yet amazingly, the show is viewed as inspirational and healthy because it leads contestants to lose weight.

Combined with all of this, we have strong evidence that weight loss just isn’t very effective and usually leads to gaining back more weight, and that shaming people is really bad for their health. So why do people continue to make unwanted comments under the guise of “it’s about health!”? Well probably because saying “I don’t like fat people” is really socially unacceptable at this point, and that’s a good thing. We’ve at least learned that bodies don’t determine worth well enough that you can’t say it straight out, even if we still behave as if they do in many contexts.

It doesn’t matter if you phrase your double standard as “health concern” it’s still a double standard. Fat people are expected to perform their healthy behaviors visibly and thin people are excused all sorts of unhealthy behaviors.

But where the rubber really hits the road is the question of whether we owe our health to other people, and if so how much? We all probably agree that in a society we have responsibilities to not put ourselves at completely undue risks. When other people get sick, we as a society bear some of the literal cost as well as the metaphorical costs of caring for them and trying to fill the roles that they took on when they were healthy. This is why we have requirements about seatbelts and age limitations for drinking or smoking. But how far do the expectations of “behave in as healthy a manner as possible” extend?  Does it mean that you can’t play sports like football because it has a high likelihood of causing injuries? Does it mean you can never eat dessert? Life probably isn’t worth it if we curtail people’s freedoms that far, but is the promotion of healthy eating (and fining or otherwise punishing people who don’t) too far?

There are certainly people out there who say no, but using weight as a measurement when losing weight is almost impossible does seem to be too far.

[syndicated profile] political_betting_feed

Posted by Mike Smithson

So now we have it. Number 10 has made its final offer on the TV debates which has been rejected by the broadcasters who say they are going ahead with their three events irrespective of Cameron’s view.

It is very hard now seeing the PM changing his mind. His bluff has been called and he will live with the consequences. Clearly the calculation is that the debates going ahead without him is less risky than him taking part.

From Number 10’s perspective this will be old news by the time we get to April and his absence will make the events much lesser occasions.

The danger cones if other parties manage to weave a narrative about his approach to this symbolising something very negative about his leadership.

Whatever I think this has been a big moment in the campaign – as yet I cannot decide who’ll come off better or worse.

Mike Smithson

For 11 years viewing politics from OUTSIDE the Westminster bubble

[syndicated profile] markpack2_feed

Posted by Mark Pack

The BBC reports:

Peter Robinson, leader of the DUP and First Minister of Northern Ireland, said…: “Just who do the broadcasters think they are, that they can set down a diktat?” he told Sky News.

That’s precisely the point. The media are doing what they think is right, not what politicians are telling them to do.

I’m far from a fan of how the press has abused its freedoms in the past, including widespread institutionalised law breaking, but central to the whole point of a free press is that it decides how it is going to cover a story.

Imagine how absurd it would be if the media’s format for other aspects of its election coverage was to be set by politicians rather than the media. Choice of front page stories perhaps?

It’s the job of the media to decide how they’re going to cover stories, not politicians.

[syndicated profile] el_reg_nsfw_feed

Posted by Kat Hall

Imagine it. The HORROR of meeting someone less than perfect on the internet

The hotness police at BeautifulPeople.com have reportedly booted off 3,000 ugly people, telling them "their looks no longer come up to the rigorous standards expected".

[syndicated profile] tim_worstall_forbes_feed

Posted by Tim Worstall

We’ve now got February’s job numbers and they’re a continuation of recent promising trends. The US added 295,000 jobs in February (although be careful, the error bar here is 100,000 jobs either way) and the unemployment rate ticked down to 5.5%. The joy of all of this is that we seem to be getting near to where we will start to see significant wage growth. For despite what so many people try to tell us about it being education, or unions, or having the right politicians in power, or tempering greed, that raises wages in fact the best scenario known to man for raising the workers’ wages is full employment.

Here’s the actual news itself:

U.S. nonfarm payrolls grew by a seasonally adjusted 295,000 jobs in February, the Labor Department said Friday. February’s rate is the lowest since May 2008. The economy has now added more than 200,000 jobs for 12 straight months, the longest such streak since 1995.

Job creation in prior months was slightly weaker than previously estimated, with revisions showing a net decline of 18,000 jobs for December and January.

The unemployment rate, calculated from a separate survey of households, fell to 5.5% in February, from January’s 5.7%.

That the drop in unemployment doesn’t quite match the rise in job numbers is partly because the numbers come from two different calculation methods (and given the size of the economy, a 0.1 or 0.2 either way is to be expected from different calculation methods) and also because we think that some people have left the labor market entirely rather than remaining unemployed or becoming employed.

Here’s more:

The strong job gains weren’t enough to boost wages by much. The average hourly wage rose just 3 cents in February to $24.78 an hour.

We of course like the fact that more people have jobs (more people who want to have jobs that is, forcing people who don’t want to work into work is not regarded as a good idea). But what we’d really like is to see those wage numbers start to rise. And there’s a lot of people who keep telling us how to do that. Raise the minimum wage, encourage unionization, crack down on foreign trade, stop corporate managers from being so greedy: the list goes on.

However, by far the most powerful wage raising policy we know of is full employment. And no, this doesn’t mean that the number of unemployed needs to go to zero. As Chris Pissarides and others got their Nobel for there’s something called “frictional unemployment.” This is the point that when someone loses a job (and some 13 million or so jobs are destroyed each year in the US economy, another 13 million or so being created. Changes in the unemployment level are when this creative/destructive churn becomes unbalanced) it takes some amount of time for them to find another one. And as the economy becomes more complex, as people are ever more specialized in their job skills, and as HR departments do ever more testing and interviewing this amount of time between jobs keeps increasing.

Full employment is when we’ve only got this frictional unemployment, we’ve no involuntary unemployment. And a reasonable estimate is that that’s at an unemployment rate somewhere in the 3.5% to 4.5% range. We would usually call 4% definitely full employment and we do generally think that the 3.5% at the end of the Clinton years was more than full employment. At 5.5 % we’re not quite there yet but given the rate of decrease it doesn’t look like it will take all that long to get there.

And then kicks in something which, as I never tire of mentioning, even Karl Marx was aware. Which is this thing of his about the reserve army of the unemployed. Wages just aren’t going to rise when there’s significant unemployment. Because if an employer needs more labor he can just take on more unemployed people. And if any of his current workers start grumbling for (or, heaven forfend, striking in favor of) higher wages they can be got rid of and one more of those unemployed taken on board.

But when we’re at full employment this cannot happen. There isn’t that reserve army. To find new staff an employer must tempt them away from where they are already working. Which almost inevitably means offering them more money (or at the very least better terms). And this is what drives wages upwards over time. Employers don’t actually want to pay the workers more: they’d much rather cackle with glee as they hug their excessive profits to their chests. But full employment means they have to raise wages to get the labor they want. And so full employment is the most pro worker (and pro higher wages for workers) policy we have.

All of which is why it is nice to see that full employment approaching. For it’s going to mean that wages will start rising in a reasonably serious fashion. And that has its own interesting implications for policy. Largely, that we can forget all these stories about unionization, greed, unions and the rest and simply marvel at how wages are rising nicely now that we’ve got, or are close to, full employment. You know, that policy we have always known will work.

[syndicated profile] tim_worstall_forbes_feed

Posted by Tim Worstall

One of the standard complaints about the American economy these days is that manufacturing is suffering very hard times. We really ought to do something about this therefore. Policy options we are offered include starting a trade war with declaring to be currency manipulators Japan and China and then on in to less objectionable things like making domestic policy a little easier for those who want to make things we can drop on our feet.

The problem with the basic analysis here is that manufacturing is not in fact suffering hard times. Total manufacturing output has now recovered from the recession and is at the highest it has ever been. Yes, US manufacturing output is higher than it was in the 90s, the 70s, and is some twice or more what it was in the 50s when just everyone went to work with a hammer.

What has been happening though is that manufacturing employment has been falling. This isn’t, cannot be if the above is true, because American manufacturing is shrinking. Rather, what is happening is that manufacturing is becoming more productive. Most especially it is becoming more productive in its use of labour. We now need fewer hours of human labour to make any particular volume or value of manufactured products. This is also known as making us all richer. Imagine, for example, that we have 100 units of labour in our economy. And we use them 30 in agriculture, 40 in manufacturing and 30 in services. Then manufacturing becomes more productive in its use of labour: that means we can have the same output of manufactures with only, say, 20 units of labour. That means we can assign those 20 extra units of labour to agriculture or services, however it might be that we wish to do this. We thus get the previous amount of manufactures and either more food or, say given that health care is a service, more health care.

We’ve now got more output than we did before manufacturing became more productive in its use of labour. We are thus, collectively, richer. So, increased labour productivity is a good thing, it makes us all richer.

All of which makes it something of a headscratcher that people complain so much about manufacturing employment going down while manufacturing output continues to rise. We’re getting richer through this very process so why are so many people complaining? And the thing is, this isn’t the first time this has happened.

As Tim Taylor points out today this is exactly what happened with agriculture over the past century. Instead of it being manufacturing employment that shrank it was agricultural employment. And as this chart shows it really did shrink:


As Taylor says about it:

For example, back around 1910, about one-third of all US workers were in agriculture (blue line, measured on the right-hand scale). It’s now about 2%. The absolute number of jobs in agriculture declined, too, but the big change was that more than 100% of the job growth in the U.S. was in the non-agricultural sector. I haven’t researched the point, but my guess is that many people around 1910 would have viewed these changes as somewhere between impossible and inconceivable.

The reason for this? We mechanised agriculture (primarily the tractor replacing the horse or mule). That meant that any given level of agricultural output required less labour and that extra labour could therefore go off and do something else. As it happens most of it went off to man those manufacturing plants people are mourning the loss of. But the important point is that we all became vastly richer (the usual rule of thumb is that the average American became 8 times richer over the course of the 20th century). And if we complete this mechanisation of manufacturing then we would expect the same thing to happen again. Just like those who left agriculture did not do nothing those who leave manufacturing won’t do nothing. Instead they’ll be producing services. And as we’ll still have the same amount or more of agricultural production, the same or more of manufacturing production, plus those services that newly released labour will be producing, we’ll all be collectively richer.

The policy implication of this being that we really don’t have to do anything to support manufacturing: other than, of course, the usual job of government which is not to screw up what people are already doing. We positively want each sector of the economy to use less and less labour, for this frees up that labour to do something else.

So don’t worry about manufacturing employment falling. If manufacturing output were falling then that might indeed be cause for concern but it isn’t so it ain’t. And as a matter of policy we should really be turning a deaf ear to those who bleat on about the loss of manufacturing jobs.

[syndicated profile] markpack2_feed

Posted by Mark Pack

A beer
The BBC reports:

A party leader has branded the decision to ban the group’s “offensive” name from ballot papers “political correctness gone mad”.

The Beer, Baccy and Crumpet party was told by the Electoral Commission its name could not appear on voting slips in May.

In a review of party names it said the word crumpet could be seen as describing women “in a demeaning way”.

Party leader Ray Hall denied the term was offensive.

Mr Hall, who received 235 votes in a 2013 Eastleigh by-election after Chris Huhne resigned, said he is considering a new name for the party.

[syndicated profile] skepchick_feed

Posted by Amanda

[syndicated profile] political_betting_feed

Posted by Mike Smithson

ITV promotion for 1st debate in 2010

If this report has substance then it will throw the whole issue into the air and be a great victory for Cameron. One debate going ahead with the format laid down by the PM and according his required time-table.

Those, like me, who’ve bet on them not happening would be losers.

Clearly there’s a huge argument going on between the broadcasters.

It was ITV that hosted the first debate in 2010 and was due to host the first of the GE2015 series.

UPDATE on the debates – new statement

Mike Smithson

For 11 years viewing politics from OUTSIDE the Westminster bubble

[syndicated profile] markpack2_feed

Posted by Mark Pack

We’ve had the miracle of the empty pavement. We’ve had the encore to the miracle of the empty pavement. Now we have the encore’s encore with another empty pavement miracle:

Empty pavement, Hornsey Rise
A touch under three years ago I first tried reporting graffiti on a phone box at this location near Crouch End. I was told it wouldn’t be removed as the phone box itself was due for removal shortly. The phone box stayed, my complaints followed and the graffiti was cleaned. Round and round this cycle things went every few months: more graffiti to remove, an initial refusal due to claims the phone box was about to go any time real soon right now, and eventual cleaning after more badgering.

But lo: just before the third birthday of this cycle, the phone box has actually gone. Or been painted with super-expert camouflage paint. Either way, hooray.

Don’t worry, dear reader. This does not signal the death of such posts from me. For while this phone box may have gone, the notorious Partington Close pothole is back.

[syndicated profile] badastronomy_feed

Posted by Phil Plait

I’m fascinated by tides. Not so much the movement of the ocean, as you might think. That’s a product of tides; what I mean is the change of gravity over distance stretching things.

Say what?

Let me explain. In fact, let me explain in the latest episode of Crash Course Astronomy: Tides!

This episode was one I was looking forward to writing ever since Hank Green asked me to do the series. Tides affect everything! The length of the day, the Moon always showing one face to us, the Moon’s recession from the Earth, and yes, even the oceans’ rise and fall. These are all due to a series of interlocked steps in physical logic that starts with the simple fact that gravity gets weaker with distance. Start with that, and the rest is inevitable.

Tides affect stars orbiting each other, galaxies when they collide, and even black holes as they gobble down matter. That’s so cool!

I know the idea that the Earth has two tidal bulges confuses a lot of people, so hopefully my explanation in the video makes it clear why they both exist, and not just one bulge pointing toward the Moon. There are a lot of ways to explain this; the actual vector analysis in a nonrotating frame is the best way, but I opted not to get into that in this short, basic video. Duh.

Also? I love the graphics Thought Café did for this episode, especially the one at the very, very end. This article I wrote may help you get that joke. There is, after all, a tide in the affairs of men.

P.S. Yes, of course I’ve read Shakespeare. His work has a lot of astronomical overlap.

Correction, March 6, 2015, at 14:45 UTC: I originally misstated that this was Episode 7. Sorry about that; I forgot to correct for time dilation.

[syndicated profile] lib_dem_voice_feed

Posted by Catherine Bearder MEP

Wildlife crime is a major threat to international security. This trade is now worth an estimated $20 billion a year and has become the fourth largest illegal activity in the world after drugs, arms and people-trafficking. From Al Shabab in Somalia to Boko Haram in Nigeria, armed groups and criminal gangs are making huge profits from the illegal wildlife trade, fuelling instability and conflict.

We need to act now to stop them.

Last November, 82 MEPs co-signed my letter to the European Commission calling for an EU Action Plan against Wildlife Crime. To follow up on this, yesterday I launched the MEPs for Wildlife Interest Group, led by one MEP from each of the European Parliament’s seven political groups. This will keep the pressure on the Commission to propose a comprehensive EU Action Plan with measures proposed across all areas, from development aid to justice and home affairs.

Any EU plan should include three elements: a permanent fund to boost anti-poaching efforts, tougher minimum sanctions for wildlife criminals and a dedicated new Wildlife Crime Unit in the EU’s crime-fighting agency Europol. Anti-poaching patrols and customs officers in Africa are increasingly finding themselves outmanned and outgunned. Europe is still used as a major transit for the illegal wildlife trade and in some EU member states wildlife traffickers continue to be let off with a mere fine and a slap on the wrist. We need a proper strategy that addresses these problems in every area that the EU operates.

Time is against us. The illegal ivory trade has led to the slaughter of 100,000 elephants in the past two years. At this rate, African elephants in the wild could be wiped out within 10 years. I was pleased to see China has bowed to international pressure and announced a year-long ban on carved ivory imports ahead of this week’s visit by Prince William. But much more needs to be done. The fight against wildlife-trafficking will not be easy. But future generations would not forgive us if we failed to put a stop to this despicable trade.

* Catherine Bearder is the Liberal Democrat MEP for the South East

The Big Idea: Carrie Patel

Mar. 6th, 2015 01:30 pm
[syndicated profile] scalziwhatever_feed

Posted by John Scalzi

When you build on secrets you never know what you’ll find. Just ask Carrie Patel, whose novel, The Buried Life, includes secrets literally built upon. What’s going on there?


The Buried Life is about lost history, a forgotten catastrophe, and the city that springs up in its wake.

It started with the city: an underground metropolis where squalid, smoke-choked burrows nestle next to magnificent caverns framed with fire and stained glass. It was a place of glamor and grime.

I suspect that lots of speculative fiction begins with a setting. You take a mental snapshot of a new world that captures the atmosphere and the highlights. It’s a start, but it’s not enough. You need something you can walk around in.

So, you sketch the landmarks that exist just outside the frame—historical context and regional conditions. Things that anchor your new city and prevent it from drifting off into the stratosphere. Next, you sharpen the image to bring out the colors and details so that your snapshot will look just as bright and vivid to everyone else when you finally share it.

That leaves you with a fabulous backdrop, which isn’t the same thing as a story.

However, it’s the process of building the city up and out that can turn a Nifty Idea into a Big Idea. The Big Idea is what gives logic and context to the details that make up a vibrant, unique world. At some point, when you’re rooting around in the bones of your city, stringing all those tendons together and trying to get the blood flowing from one end to the other, you stumble upon its DNA.

Suddenly, you know what it’s really made of and where it’s really going.

That’s when you find your story.

For me, the “aha!” moment came when I saw Recoletta, my new city, for what it was: one civilization built in the hollowed-out corpse of another.

At that point, all of the cool flourishes and atmospheric touches were tied together by the inextricable bonds of context. Recoletta was built underground because it had started out as a city-sized bunker in more desperate times. A strict social hierarchy developed because, in the early days, people handed the reins over to individuals with practical skills—engineers, doctors, miners, and so on—and left the grunt work to the lawyers and politicians.

By the time events in The Buried Life roll around, people have stuck to their underground homes because old habits die hard. And the “whitenails,” the people with enough clout to keep their hands clean, are still at the top of the food chain. It’s the post-post-apocalypse.

But the most interesting detail for me was how these fictional citizens related to their troubled history. In the world of The Buried Life, they don’t reconstruct it. They hide it.

The widespread fear of history becomes a superstition. Ideas of the past are seen as dangerous and virulent—after all, didn’t they drive humanity to mass destruction centuries before?

And that’s where the story came from—the tension between a history that almost no one wants to face and the intrepid few who are trying to uncover it. The Big Idea is about constructing a city built on secrets and leading the heroes to its heart.


The Buried Life: Amazon|Barnes & Noble|Indiebound|Powell’s

Read an excerpt. Visit the author’s site. Follow her on Twitter.

jimhines: (Snoopy Writing)

Libriomancer is a Kindle Daily Deal

Mar. 6th, 2015 08:00 am
[personal profile] jimhines

Today only, Libriomancer is a Kindle Daily Deal, meaning you can head over to Amazon and pick it up for Kindle for only $1.99. This is the first time one of my books has been spotlighted as a KDD, and it’s both awesome and a pretty big deal :-)

ETA: It looks like several other ebook vendors have jumped on board as well. The book is $1.99 at Amazon, B&N, Kobo, and iBooks!

Libriomancer is the first book in the Magic ex Libris series, and remains the bestselling of all of my books. Io9 called it a “love letter to science fiction and fantasy, with real emotional weight at the center of it — except this version is a rollicking adventure story full of ridiculous little touches … a seriously fun ride for anyone who’s loved geeky books their whole life.”

The book includes:

  • A magic-using librarian from Michigan’s Upper Peninsula
  • A motorcycle-riding dryad
  • An enchanted convertible
  • Smudge the fire-spider
  • Johannes Gutenberg

For those who haven’t read it, here’s the synopsis:

Isaac Vainio has spent the past two years working at the Copper River Library in northern Michigan, secretly cataloguing books for their magical potential, but forbidden from using that magic himself…except for emergencies. Emergencies like a trio of young vampires who believe Isaac has been killing their kind, and intend to return the favor.

Isaac is a libriomancer, brilliant but undisciplined, with the ability to reach into books and create objects from their pages. And attacking a libriomancer in his own library is never a good idea.

But vampires are only the beginning. This was merely the latest in a series of attacks against members of Die Zwelf Portenære, a secret organization founded five centuries ago by Johannes Gutenberg to protect the world from supernatural threats. Among the casualties is Ray Walker, Isaac’s friend and mentor in magic.

Complicating matters further is the arrival of a dryad named Lena Greenwood. Along with a neurotic fire-spider named Smudge, Isaac and Lena set out to find and stop whoever is behind the attacks. But things are worse than Isaac imagined. An unknown killer of unimaginable power has been torturing and murdering humans and vampires alike. And Gutenberg, now more than six hundred years old, has disappeared. If Isaac is to have any hope of preventing all-out war, he will have to truly master the magic of libriomancy.

Assuming he doesn’t lose control and wipe himself from existence first.

The first three Magic ex Libris books are out. I’m working on #4, Revisionary, but the first three form a pretty complete trilogy arc. Just in case you were worried about cliffhangers or anything.

If you don’t have a Kindle, you can still pick up the book and download an app to read it on your computer or smart device.

If you’ve read and enjoyed this series and felt like signal-boosting, I’d be very grateful. If you’ve been thinking of checking out my work, today could be a very good day to pick up the e-book.

My thanks to DAW for continuing to believe in and support Isaac, Lena, Nidhi, and Smudge!


Mirrored from Jim C. Hines.

matgb: Artwork of 19th century upper class anarchist, text: MatGB (Default)

British Liberal, house husband, school play leader and stepdad. Campaigner, atheistic feminist, amateur baker. Male.

Known to post items of interest on occasions. More likely to link to interesting stuff. Sometimes talks about stuff he's done. Occasionally posts recipes for good food. Planning to get married, at some point. Enjoying life in Yorkshire.

Likes comments. Especially likes links. Loves to know where people came from and what they were looking for. Mostly posts everything publicly. Sometimes doesn't. Hi.

Mat Bowles

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

August 2014

101112 13141516

Stuff and nonsense

I'm the Chair of the Brighouse branch of the Liberal Democrats & the membership secretary for Calderdale Lib Dems and run the web campaign for the local candidates. I have a job, a stepdaughter and a life.

Here's the legal text:
Printed by Dreamwidth LLC, Maryland, USA. Published and promoted by Mat Bowles (Liberal Democrat) of Brighouse, West Yorkshire.

Page Contents

Popular Topics

Designed by

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios
Page generated Mar. 6th, 2015 09:31 pm