AOL has now added, in tiny 8-point type, a disclaimer to its journals:

Ads are not an endorsement by the blog author.

(And yes, this example is bigger than the real thing!)

Then, apparently thinking that this was enough to quiet all of the concerns of its remaining journal writers, they added new animated banner ads that featured graphic elements that apparently lept out onto the journal writer’s actual entries, far outside of the banner ad’s border!

This, naturally, inspired a new outcry, and this assurance from one of AOL’s Journal Product Manager:

“OK…my mistake, we made it happen today. You may be still seeing them, for now but I assure you they will be gone ASAP.”

I never got to see one of them: apparently the complaints came in so quickly and so heavily (and the offending ad was part of such a growing rotation!) that I missed it altogether. I’m glad I did. Even this Product Manager described that ad as “Gawd Aweful!” (sic)

It’s still hard for me to fathom, after all of the uproar the ads themselves caused, and the delay in getting the disclaimer to appear (which, of course, really solves nothing at all), that they’d then add a new type of advertisement with Flash animation to extend out onto the entries.

And that’s what makes me so angry: at this late date, it shouldn’t surprise me…not at all!!

Taking advantage of the flexibility on Blogger to backdate entries…for those of us who find ourselves a day late or a dollar short, here is the Tuesday Two on Tuesday (even though it’s Wednesday!) For those who have never played, the rules are simple: I offer two different questions, both related to the same topic, but you only choose one of them to actually answer.

Last week, Chuck of “Dribble by Chuck Ferris” was first to answer the question about “The Courtroom.” Congratulations, Chuck.

Now, onto this week’s choice of questions. And remember: don’t answer both questions! You’ll find out why in December!

THIS WEEK’S TOPIC: CHARITY

QUESTION A:
Many charities are concerned about “donor fatigue,” a phenomenon that occurs when there are a series of natural disasters that increase the need for donations (and thereby increase the number of appeals from charities for help). Do you think “donor fatigue” really exists, or do you believe that only a small percentage will give no matter what, or do you believe something in between?

or

QUESTION B:
Are there any charities that you regularly donate to, and if so, did this past year’s disasters change how much you gave to which organizations?

For each pair, choose A or B, (indicate which question you’re answering!) then either answer the question in a comment or answer it in your journal and include the link in a comment. (To be considered “first to play,” a link must be to the specific entry in which you answered the question.)

Remember: choose one or the other in each pair…not both!

I found this at Wil’s “The Daily Snooze” and I couldn’t resist.

Guy Smiley You scored 66% Organization, 60% abstract, and 23% extroverted!

This test measured 3 variables. First, this test measured how organized you are. Some muppets like Cookie Monster make big messes, while others like Bert are quite anal about things being clean. Second, this test measured if you prefer a concrete or an abstract viewpoint. For the purposes of this test, concrete people are considered to gravitate more to mathematical and logical approaches, whereas abstract people are more the dreamers and artistic type. Third, this test measured if you are more of an introvert or an extrovert. By definition, an introvert concentrates more on herself and an extrovert focuses more on others. In this test an introvert was somebody that either tends to spend more time alone or thinks more about herself. You are mostly organized, both concrete and abstract, and more introverted. Here is why are you Guy Smiley. You are both mostly organized. You have a good idea where you put things and you probably keep your place reasonably clean. You aren’t totally obsessed with neatness though. Guy Smiley is your average Joe. He’ll dress up and look nice for his game show, but he’s not a neat freak. You are both a concrete and abstract thinker. Guy Smiley uses his imagination to come up with ridiculous game shows. However he’s concrete enough to stick by his rules and perform his role as host. You know when to be logical at times, but you also aren’t afraid to explore your dreams and desires… within limits of course. You are both introverted. At first glance Guy Smiley may appear to be an extrovert given he hosts a popular show. But in reality he struggles to relate with other people. His prizes tend to just be Guy Smiley merchandise. For whatever reason you are a bit uncomfortable in social settings. You may have one or two people that you are close with. You’d rather do things by yourself and you dislike working in groups where things are always so inefficient. The other possible characters are Oscar the Grouch Bert Snuffleupagus Ernie Elmo Kermit the Frog Grover Cookie Monster Big Bird The Count If you enjoyed this test, I would love the feedback! Also if you want to tell me your favorite Sesame Street character, I can total them up and post them here. Perhaps your choice will win!

Jason Calacanis, the CEO of the blogging network Weblogs, Inc., a company operating within AOL, has posted his thoughts on “Black Tuesday.” He does not speak in an “official” capacity for AOL, but definitely has a message to them:

“I’m in favor of taking the ads down for now, figuring out a way to determine who’s a paid member or not, and then adding the ads back to free blogs with something like 15 days notice. This way folks can either a) pay us and get no ads or b) take advantage of the free product with the ads. We should also apologize to the members and contact the folks who’ve left and offer them something to come back.”

It’s almost shocking to read something like that when you consider that this is someone who purports to be within AOL.

Here is the comment I left:

Jason,I first want to thank you for addressing this situation in such a candid manner. If more people WITHIN AOL would have provided something close to this soul-searching a response, I suspect that many people who have chosen to relocate might have stayed. Regardless of whether corporate listens to you…and at this point, I’m assuming they won’t…your remarks are well-taken and appreciated.

The reality of the situation, as has been mentioned in earlier comments, is that the SINGLE item listed as what AOL did RIGHT actually NEVER HAPPENED! It was supposed to be part of a patch to fix myriad other problems that the same software update that brought the ads also caused, but early in the install process, when it was clear that more and more errors were appearing, this upgrade was cancelled. There are no disclaimers.

Then, kindly add one MORE thing to the “What we did wrong” section: after pulling out the planned revision, the entire AOL tech support team left for a FOUR-DAY WEEKEND, during which there were still customers who COULDN’T UPDATE THEIR JOURNALS. Re-read that last sentence! I’m not talking about just the disclaimer: there were still people having trouble posting ANYTHING, and tech support shut down for the holiday.

I tend to look for patterns of behavior when I have a problem with a company: anyone can make a mistake, and one mistake shouldn’t be the end of the world. But this is the latest in a long history of mistakes, and THAT is why many of us have chosen to relocate.

For example, I’m a Mac user. Mac users might as well forget AOL…there’s virtually no support for Macs. When one complains, AOL’s standard response is that “less than 10% of our customers are on Macs.” They do not respond to the obvious follow-up question: If you’re not supporting Mac users equally, why are you CHARGING them equally?

Now, just as with the Mac issue, there is this standard response that only a small percentage of users have any real problem with the ads, which completely ignores the REAL issue.

In the past, AOL has deleted entire FTP spaces and entire journals over complaints of TOS Violations. In at least one case, AOL acknowledged that the deletion of AN ENTIRE JOURNAL should never have happened, because the TOS violation did not exist. But there was no one to go to complain about such actions — which even violate AOL’s OWN standard operating procedure for dealing with TOS Violations as they explain them! Following the firestorm over this problem, and suggestions that AOL Journal members needed a “face” of the editors, they created “Magic Smoke,” a journal written by “Joe the Journals Editor,” with the purpose of keeping us informed. It was a good step to make sure all of us knew what was happening.

Then came the banner ads. And Joe, the person who started a blog from INSIDE AOL Journals to keep us INFORMED, wasn’t even told when the ads would appear. Back to square one again: no communication, even when we’re assured that there is plenty of it.

This is not the way I expect to be treated after ten years. AOL either values me as a customer or they don’t. There’s no one to ask, so I can only judge by their actions, and those actions speak volumes.

I wish all of the people behind the types of problems I’ve described could encounter for one month, everywhere they go, the SAME level of service some of us feel we’ve been getting. I wonder how THEY would feel.

And one more thing: the saddest part of this entire situation — sadder even than the bickering between people who previously considered themselves friends in J-land, is the fact that those of us who have relocated, are in the process of doing so, or are seriously considering it are often the ones feeling GUILTY about it…as if WE’RE the ones who’ve done something wrong!! We’re the paying customers! We’re the ones these things have been done TO, not the other way around! Extraordinary!!

It might be nice if AOL would listen to what he has to say. If more people had behaved the way he has, I imagine a lot of people would have been happy to stay put.

Here’s how mine rated. I’m a little surprised by the “Finance” rating, but then again, it didn’t ask how much I owe!

This Is My Life, Rated
Life:	4.2
Mind:	4.2
Body:	2.9
Spirit:	6.7
Friends/Family:	3.2
Love:	0
Finance:	6.6
Take the Rate My Life Quiz

I’d like to think that one of these days, with some concerted effort, I might hit 5.0!

Thanks to Random Acts of Discombobulation for this link!

There’s an old saying that all good things are fattening. Apparently, many of them are also taxable.

A new plan on the table would make owners of hybrid vehicles pay an additional tax to help the government afford to maintain our Interstate Highway system, which is on the eve of its 50th birthday. The Boston Globe reports that the country’s Highway Trust Fund is likely to reach a zero balance by 2008, and that by 2015, it will have fallen hundreds of billions short of what it would take just to maintain the current roadways.

The argument for requiring a hybrid vehicle owner to pay a higher tax is based on the presumption that their cars won’t use as much gasoline, and currently, it’s the Federal Gas Tax that raises revenue for the fund.

Another solution, one that no one will like, is that the gas tax, which has remained at just under twenty cents per gallon for more than a decade, be indexed to keep up with inflation.

I certainly don’t want to see gas prices go up again, now that there are a few stations around town that have finally dropped back down below the $2.00 mark. Still, there is something wrong with making hybrid vehicle owners pay a special tax: it’s like punishing them for doing their part to ease the energy crisis.

But perhaps there’s a compromise possible: in 2006, hybrid vehicle owners will receive new tax incentives for buying fuel efficient cars. A tax credit of between $400 to $3400 might be enough to entice some people to buy hybrids before that plan expires in 2009. If we’re in such bad need of money for our roads, why not take a percentage of the tax credit and roll it over into the fund? That way, the hybrid vehicle owners aren’t having to pay a new tax, and are still getting some reward for less dependance on gasoline. It won’t solve the problem…the tax credit isn’t big enough to do that…but every little bit helps.

Personally, I’d like to see the major oil companies be forced to contribute to the fund. They have a vested interest in keeping the roads driveable because that’s one of the things that keeps motorists buying their products. And considering their record profits since Katrina, I’d guess that they can afford to help out!

“Black Friday” is the day after Thanksgiving that indicates to many retailers whether they’ll be in the black or in the red after the end of the holiday shopping season. My days of getting up in time for a 5:00am sale are long behind me: I tried that once…and only once. Never again. But from this introduction, you should have at least been able to surmise that this week’s question has something to do with holiday shopping.

Before the official question, it’s time to recognize Donna of “My Country Life,” as the first person to answer last week’s question about where you’d be doing most of your shopping this year! Congratulations to Donna!

On to the next challenge!

THIS WEEK’S QUESTION:
Here’s your chance to suggest great gift ideas. Take a quick inventory around your home and select up to seven things that you’d hate to be without or that have made your life easier. They can be technological gadgets or unique spins on old mainstays, but they should be things that might just make good gift suggestions for people trying to come up with just the right idea. (You’d probably want to avoid ultra-common things like “computers” and “televisions,” which most people would already have, although if there is a specific kind or something unique about the version you have, then it might make a good response.)

Either answer the question in a comment or answer it in your journal and include the link in a comment. (To be considered “first to play,” a link must be to the specific entry in which you answered the question.)

My answers:
1. Tivo. Makes cable television worth the price.
2. iPod Nano. I was a longtime holdout on this, but I have to admit, it’s nice to be able to take music with you for those moments in which you really NEED to drown something (or someone) out.
3. Sonicare Toothbrush. Feels funny at first, but you can tell a difference.
4. Hamilton Beach Indoor Grill. I’ve tried Forman’s version, but this one seems to last longer. Always amazes me to see how much fat drips away from whatever I’m grilling.
5. DVD Recorder. DVDs take up a lot less space than that endless supply of VHS tapes you’re struggling to find a place for.
6. Homedics Desk Fountain. Sometimes, you just need that little something to help you focus and relax.
7. Digital Camera. I don’t know if this is one of those things that everyone already has or not, but I’m guessing that a lot of people still don’t have them. Most are fully automated (and the good ones allow the more experienced photographers to turn the automation off) and are easy enough to use that almost anyone can take decent pictures. Plus, there’s the instant gratification feature of not having to wait for film to be developed to make sure you “got” it.

Back around Halloween, Bill of “The Wildcat’s Lair,” posted his “Favorite Monster Novel Challenge.” I’ve been promising to do this and here it is already after Thanksgiving!

So here are my picks for five of my favorite novel monsters that I’ve read so far, in no particular order:

Dracula
I’m not a big fan of novels told mostly (or entirely) through letters and journal entries, yet this Bram Stoker’s Dracula still manages to keep the suspense up as it does so. Count Dracula has a sympathetic side in that he is a victim of a changing world. The old days of war and conquest, which resulted in his families rise to power are long gone, and he is forced to adapt to a new reality. Change is easier for some of us than for others, and I can find a way to relate to the character’s anger and fears about change, even if the way the character deals with those feelings are much different. I’m also intrigued by the religious symbolism in this novel. It is a Christian morality play, yet its supernatural themes and dark mood sufficiently mask the underlying message so that it is entertaining without being preachy.

Frankenstein
I must confess that I was surprised when I read the novel for the first time because I hadn’t realized how different the 1931 film is from the novel itself. Far less than being a dangerous imbecile who can speak only in grunts, Shelley’s monster is articulate and is himself a lover of humanity, wishing to love and be loved, and finds himself being shunned because of his appearance. I can sympathize with that, too. No matter how hard the monster tries, even when he’s trying to do good deeds, his actions and motives are misinterpreted because of his appearance alone.

Dragon Tears
On the surface, Bryan seems like a good kid, a dutiful son worthy of pity. But he has some special talents and chance encounters with people who he feels have wronged him brings the dark side out with a vengeance. Does absolute power corrupt absolutely? For Dean Koontz’s character of Bryan, it does, and he is merciless in his torture of his adversaries, despite his youth and corresponding great need for acceptance.

The Store
A retail giant threatens the ecomony of small towns by crushing all of the mom-and-pop stores and taking all of the business for itself. It’s a familiar theme in our society. In The Store, Bentley Little capitalizes on our distrust of the major corporation and the hatred of the blood-thirsty business owner who will seemingly take any step to win. Newman King, the head of a chain of Wal*Mart-esque discount outlets that call themselves The Store, is a monster in more ways than one. At first, he is a menace to the small towns he invades. But as his plans unfold, we learn that he is a monster in a real way as well, as are those who work for him with such unquestioning loyalty and devotion. By the end of the novel, much more depends on his defeat than a few “going out of business” sales.

Needful Things
One of my favorite Stephen King titles because he juggles the many storylines so well, the town of Castle Rock is literally rocked when Leland Gaunt appears to open a unique antiques shop. Nearly everyone finds an item of some kind that they think they literally can’t live without, and Gaunt’s price is quite high. His true identity is revealed with a bang…actually, with a series of bangs that nearly take the town with them. Like The Store, Needful Things contains a nice parallel opening and closing scene that leaves one last chill.

I did two different five-question Friday memes this week:

First, there’s Robin’s 5er, at “These are the Days of our Lives…”

1. Do you already have your Christmas tree up? If so when did you put it up? If not when will you put it up?

My tree is not up, yet. I may put one up this year…I didn’t last year. I haven’t decided yet. With two crazy dogs in an apartment, a Christmas tree might be too much of a temptation…for a variety of reasons.

2. Do you have any particular theme when it comes to decorating your tree? Maybe you do all Disney ornaments? Only blue lights? Tell us how you decorate your tree. Kudos if you have a picture and post it.

I usually use the same kind of ornaments, just in different colors. I prefer those small white lights though.

3. What is your all time favorite ornament? Only one. Kudos again if you have a picture and post it.

I have a couple of special ornaments, but there isn’t one that I can single out as being THE fave.

4. How many stockings do you hang and are any of them for pets? And…where do you hang them? (Not everyone has a fireplace)

I don’t hang stockings at all. I’ve thought about getting a pair of them for the dogs, but again, I’m not sure that the dogs wouldn’t try to pull them down. I do have a fireplace in my current apartment, and I installed my own mantle over it, so that would be the perfect place.

5. Tell us about one of your Christmas traditions.

One of them is rapidly becoming meeting up with my best friends for Christmas Eve. That’s when we usually exchange our gifts, which leaves us Christmas Day to spend with our own families. Although this year, Christmas Eve doesn’t look like it’s going to work out…they’re in Florida, after all.

And there’s also the Friday Five over at Charley’s “Courage.”

1. On what day do you celebrate Thanksgiving?

Normally, on whatever day I can spend it with my family, but this year, it was just me and the dogs, so I celebrated it on the day itself.

2. How do you traditionally celebrate this food filled holiday?

Unfortunately for my waistline, I celebrate this food-filled holiday by filling it with food. It’s the only day of the week I get to take off in November, so the rest of the time, I surf online and watch television like a slob.

3. How do you like your stuffing cooked (in the bird, separately in a dish, store bought, etc.)?

I actually made dressing for the first time following my late grandmother’s recipe. It’s cooked in a pan outside of the bird, and while it wasn’t EXACTLY like hers, it was pretty close, especially for a first try.

4. What is your favorite dessert to eat on Thanksgiving and who makes it?

My favorite dessert for Thanksgiving is Apple Betty, but that’s one that I leave to my aunt…I haven’t been bold enough to try making that, yet.

5. Can you name five things you are thankful for?

My family (including the dogs), my health, my friends — including you, Charley; my job, and my personal relationship with God.

Remember these aren’t my questions. Please go the appropriate links for them. Just to avoid any confusion, I’m turning off comments on this entry only.

Found this over at Charley’s “Courage:”

You have the eyes of a hawk. You’re very much aware
about your surroundings and the situations that
you’re in. People can’t touch your things
because you would immediately notice what’s
been touched or what’s missing. You can analyze
people’s thoughts and actions quite well.
That’s good for you. Don’t lose that sharp
vision of yours.

What Animal Eyes Do You Have?
brought to you by Quizilla

My favorite question is the one about which situation sounds best to you: I easily chose “Observing everything from a rooftop or window where no one can see you.” It is fun — and often fascinating — to peoplewatch.

Thanks to all of those who responded to last weeks’ first permanent playing of the Saturday Six here in its new home.

For those who’d like to join in on the fun, playing is simple: you can either answer the questions in this journal or you can answer them in your own blog and leave a link. It is strongly recommended that you answer the journals in your blog and post the link…since several of the people who are playing have relocated away from AOL, it’s important that everyone knows where your new (or temporary) blogging homes are, so if you don’t mind, leave a first name and your journal’s link, just so we can find you easier!

You don’t have to have relocated away from AOL to play: AOL journal writers are as welcome as ever.

But before the questions, the tradition of the “Saturday Six” is to recognize the first one to play the week before. Meg, of “Friendship, Loyalty and Love” was the first person to play last week. Meg was also a Vivi Award nominee, so be sure to visit her journal. Congratulations, Meg.

Here are this week’s “Saturday Six” questions. Either answer the questions in a comment here, or put the answers in an entry on your journal…but either way, leave a link to your journal so that everyone else can visit! To be counted as “first to play,” you must be the first player to either answer the questions in a comment or to provide a complete link to the specific entry in your journal in which you answer the questions. A link to your journal in general cannot count. Enjoy!

1. Have you ever had a dream that you felt was a message from some “higher power?” Do you think it’s possible to receive such messages through dreams?

2. How much does a person’s musical preference tell you about them?

3. What time did you get up Friday morning? Were you part of the shopping madness?

4. Take this quiz: What religion do you fit in with?

5. Is the answer you received the religion you feel you really do fit in with?

6. READER’S CHOICE QUESTION #77 from Globetrotter2: Do you have any special nicknames for your significant other when you’re annoyed or irritated with them? If so, give us a few of them (NO PROFANITY, please).

If you have a Reader’s Choice question you’d like to see asked (and answered), email it to me!

MY ANSWERS:
1. I’ve had a few dreams that seemed to have some kind of “message,” even if the message came from my own subconscious. I think there is a higher power and that it’s at least possible to receive messages this way, when the mind is most at rest and not too distracted.

2. For me, it’s not the kind of music they listen to as much as the volume: someone who blares music loud enough for everyone else to have to hear sends me a message that they’re quite selfish.

3. About 10am. Nope. Let the others get stampeded: there’s nothing I need that badly.

4. Buddism!

You fit in with: Buddhism Your ideals mostly resemble those of the Buddhist faith. Spirituality is the most important thing in your life. You strive to live by all of your ideals, and live a very intellectually focused life. 60% spiritual. 20% faith-oriented.

5. Nope. I’m a Baptist, albeit a moderate one.

6. No significant other, so I’ll pass.

While AOL’s decision to place banner ads and the resulting firestorm among their bloggers is getting some national press, such as this article from the Washington Post, others have begun debating the effectiveness of banner ads themselves.

GullSpirit, over at “Perish the Thought,” recently conducted a survey about the ads, and released the results here, which show that 70% of voters find the ads “distracting or annoying,” and another 15% call them “somewhat annoying.” But it’s the results of the question about clicking on the ads — and similar questions elsewhere — that has a lot of people stirring. According to the vote count, 75% claim they never click on banner ads. Only 13% admit to clicking when they see something that interests them, and just 10% click on a seasonal or special occasion basis. And how many click regularly on the ads? For some reason, the ads seem to much of a temptation for 2% of the voters to resist.

Looking at numbers like this on the surface, it’s almost understandable to conjecture that banner ads aren’t getting the job done: if three-quarters of the audience exposed to them refuse to click on the ads, then they’re clearly not effective, right?

Not so fast.

“Click-throughs” are a relatively minor concern for advertisers, particularly when we’re talking about the “annoying” and “distracting” animated ads that caused this uproar. There is also the concept of “Top of Mind Awareness.” This pompous term in advertising circles refers to the phenomena of being the first (or at least towards the top of the list) business that one thinks of when referring to a specific category of goods and services. In other words, when you think of fast food, who do you think of? The first couple of businesses you imagine — for whatever reason — would have your Top of Mind Awareness in that category.

The banner ads help businesses position themselves by “implanting” their name and logo into your head. Even if you don’t click on the ads, you’re still seeing their message (assuming you haven’t blocked animated graphics through your browser). Even if you don’t know the individual messages in each ad, you’re at least seeing the logo of the sponsor.

Consider this ad:

You don’t have to click the ad itself to get the specific message it’s trying to send: with the set-up of direct deposit, you can start a new free checking account. And, though I’ve blocked out the logo, is there any doubt about which bank we’re talking about? Their ads follow their brand, so it’s their “look.” It’s the “feeding” of the ad message that helps people recall that name. So, when one of those people who isn’t already one of that bank’s customers has had it with their current financial institution of choice, they’ll hopefully recall this bank when it’s time to consider alternate options.

Of course there are those who are encouraging boycotts of these advertisers. I’m not. It’s not the advertisers who are the problem; AOL placed the ads there…AOL sold the space…and if the advertisers that are now appearing are talked into backing out of their contracts, it’ll be AOL who will place someone else’s ads there.

In any case, you can’t claim that a banner ad isn’t effective just because most people won’t click on them. It’s not about the clicks: it’s about those “mental pictures” we’re all making, whether we know it or not.

CNN was forced to explain itself earlier this week when a giant black X flashed over the face of Vice President Dick Cheney during a live broadcast.

According to a statement, the network’s senior managers immediately began an investigation, and concluded that the problem came not because of operator error, but from a momentary glitch in a switcher, the device that allows television directors to switch from one shot to another. There is speculation that the X in question serves as a video cue that allows directors to set up animation that is superimposed over the images, and the playback source that displays the animation was apparently left on the cue-point, thus the X.

According to the Drudge Report, the X’s only appeared for a fifteenth of a second each, but created an “odd subliminal effect.” Drudge has still not added CNN’s official explanation to his initial report, but he asks whether the timing of the X, which came as Cheney was stating that he did not think it is wrong to criticize the administration, was meant as a message from Atlanta.

A lot of folks are criticizing CNN, wondering why the glitch only occurred during Cheney’s speech. Some say they were trying to make a political statement. I’ve worked in television for fifteen years now, and I can tell you that there are some glitches that happen when you’d least expect them and at the worst-possible moment.

Anything is possible…but I have a hard time accepting the political agenda theory. I think that if CNN wanted to slip in some kind of political statement, they might have found something a little less obvious than a giant black X that covers Cheney’s whole head. Does anyone really think that if it had been intended as some kind of commentary, it wouldn’t have been noticed?

Robert of “From Top to Bottom” asks four important questions about the AOL Journals exodus. I wanted to answer the questions, so I’m posting this and posting a link to this entry in my AOL journal.

First and foremost, I’m not directing this to anyone specifically: I’m addressing the situation and the attitudes I’ve been reading. Don’t take my responses personally because they’re not meant to be taken that way.

Here we go…

1. Was the term “J-land” coined by someone that may wish to exercise proprietorship of the term? Have they moved to different “Land”? Should we, the steadfast, consider a new term for our Home?

I honestly have no idea where “J-land” came from. It was in use long before my first use of it, and I imagine that it became popular because it was easier to type that than “The AOL Journals Community” every time. I think the term is pretty much universally associated with AOL, so I doubt if anyone who is now blogging elsewhere has any intention of trying to take that name with them.

2. Are those whose influence is large and known to them who have fed the frenzy of relocation putting the best interests of themselves above those of newer members of this community? Are the qualified relocations, “I’ll be back if..be back when..be back maybe” while deserting the community credible in the lens of Integrity?

First, let’s define what community is. The easy definition seems to have everything to do with geography (or the online equivalent of domain name). But once you specify the boundaries, it’s still not a community until you factor in the people. They’re the ones who make a community a real community.

But there’s something very presumptuous in that question: it seems to assume that those who left are only out to hurt others, their “neighbors” in the community itself. In other words, if you’re stay, you’re “with us,” and if you go, you’re “against us.” There seems to be no third option.

The reality of life is that there is almost always that third option. For some people, the banner ads by themselves were enough to leave AOL. But I suspect that for most people, the banner ads were just the last straw in a long series of straws. This “offense,” no matter how serious others perceive it to be, was too much for them.

This begs another question: let’s assume that you reach a point of complete and total frustration with a company. How long must you force yourself to stay on as a paying customer, while completely dissatisfied with what you’re getting for your money, so that you won’t be called a “traitor” or a “deserter” to the other customers? How long do you have to just “deal with it” when you’ve already reached the point at which you’ve had enough?

Are those of us who have relocated putting ourselves ahead of others? I suppose that we are. But as someone who just produced the Vivi Awards, and put in an extraordinary number of hours behind the scenes doing so, don’t dare suggest that I never put the community first. The banner ads weren’t the first thing to make me consider leaving. Every time in the past when some issue came up that had me ready to tell AOL what it could go and do with itself, I decided that I’d stay on, partly because of the “community.” But I’m an adult. Do I ever get to make my own decision here? Or am I a slave to the “community” for life?

It sounds as if those who are criticizing writers who have relocated expect everyone who starts an AOL blog to be a lifelong member. That’s just not realistic.

Other journal writers have left over the years — for a variety of reasons — without being ostracized. So tell me: how long must one do business with a company that they feel isn’t appreciating them as a customer just so that they won’t be a villian to other customers? I’d like to understand where this is coming from.

Beyond that, I have to wonder why some of those who have decided to stay are so quick to try to control the thoughts of those who are on the fence about leaving. We all know that in the grand scheme of things, banner ads are merely a small annoyance. I know of no one who is trying to elevate banner ads to the level of importance of war, famine, poverty, etc. But we’re being told to “grow up” and “stop whining” about things that “aren’t important.” Who must one think that he or she is to dictate to others which battles they should and shouldn’t fight? Isn’t that up to the individual?

As for those of us who have previously stated that we’d put our journals on hiatus or go private until the ads go away, whether it is “credible in the lens of integrity” is entirely in the eye of the beholder. The fact that the question is even being asked tells me what the answer is to some people. You have to make up your own mind.

But I don’t mind telling you that I wonder how credible it is in the same lens of integrity to reduce someone’s attempt to take a stand and send a message to AOL as nothing more than a desertion of online friends. If you believe that, you are making quite an assumption, aren’t you? It’s entirely possible that a few of the people who are being labeled as “deserters” decided among themselves that the way to send AOL a message that it should treat its customers with more respect is to go private or relocate. Even if it means they have to remove themselves — even temporarily — they may feel that if enough people do it, AOL will reconsider its policies and that the community will benefit, even if they won’t be there to benefit.

To be fair, one should also wonder whether some who are leaving have more important reasons, but are using the banner ads as a convenient excuse to leave now. I’ll admit that I’d been considering leaving for a while…long before the ads appeared. For years, I paid $23.90 per month for AOL’s service. Earlier this year, I switched from dial-up to broadband. That lowered my AOL fee to $9.90, but then I was paying Comcast $29.95 per month for their connection. That’s an introductory offer. Soon, it will go up to about $40 or so. I can offset the ten dollar increase by cutting my AOL membership. That’s something I couldn’t do before, because when I was on dial-up, I had to have AOL to get online. Now, I can do email, blog, surf and chat without even starting the AOL program itself. Why, other than the community, should I pay for AOL when I can do virtually everything AOL gives me for free without it?

That doesn’t mean that I think the AOL community isn’t worth ten dollars a month; it does mean that I have been feeling more and more strongly that the level of service I receive as a paying customer isn’t worth ten dollars a month. With the addition of AIM journals in May, one can do that much more on AOL without paying AOL a dime. If you’re ready to make that kind of change, what’s wrong with exploring all of your options and choosing the one that you like best? The new things AOL is promising as upcoming features being worked on are features other services have had for some time.

So how long should I have to pay that monthly fee, waiting to get on AOL what I can already get elsewhere, just so that you’ll think better of me? (And follow that answer up with an answer to this: Why would anyone expect me to pay money for a service I’m not happy with just because it’ll make them feel better about me? Wouldn’t that be a case of me buying my reputation from one person by shelling out money to a third party? The person with the opinion doesn’t even get a share of the profits; does that really make sense to anybody?)

Joe has stated that there is no sign that the ads are going away, so I do think it’s time for those who have said they wouldn’t post until the ads come down to consider redefining their position: either they want to blog or not, either they want to stay with AOL or not, either they will continue posting or not. If there’s no sign that the ads will come down after a couple of more weeks at most, perhaps it’s time to either fish or cut bait.

(I’m skipping the third question for a moment.)

4. Is the thought of a positive move forward, while remembering the recent past and learning from it, attractive to you?

I hope, by now, that you’d already know my answer to this question, but in case it isn’t blatantly obvious, here it is: absolutely. I can’t speak for others, obviously, but I have no ill will against “J-land” or any of its members. I don’t want “J-land” to fold up or disappear. I hope that those who decide to remain will continue to build it. I don’t think the departure of several journal writers, even if some of them had respectable audiences, will in any way spell the end of J-land. And even if you stay with AOL yet continue to read the relocated journals on other services, what’s that hurting?

There’s that old saying about not putting all of your eggs in one basket. It sounds as if a few people have stubbornly put all of their eggs into AOL J-land. What did you think would happen when a major calamity occurred there? If you’ve been refusing all this time to step outside of AOL’s journals just to have a look around, then you have been setting yourself up for this kind of disappointment all along: if it wasn’t banner ads, it was going to be something.

Here is the rough question:

3. Have the mentions of “Blacklisting” and other repriasals, or the angry emails caused you concern?

The “Blacklisting” — on both sides — causes me a lot of concern. There are lots of journals that I love here at AOL. The fact that some of them have no intention of leaving AOL doesn’t bother me at all. I’ll continue to read their journals…but you see, I continue to read not because of where those journals are hosted but because of who is writing them.

I hope those who are so quick to proclaim that they won’t be visiting those who are leaving AOL are also “Blacklisting.”

For those people, here are some questions I’d really like for them to consider:

Let’s say that you and some of your friends are all in the same “network” in your cell phone carrier. A few of your friends decide to switch carriers, either for the same reason or for unique reasons. You don’t think their customer service complaints about the carrier are necessarily justified, but they sign their contracts with other companies.

How do you proceed? Do you stop speaking to them just because they’re with different carriers? If so, if you honestly would sever contact with them, you might want to rethink your stand about them being the petty ones and, while you’re at it, you might want to consider redefining what you think friendship is really all about. I don’t think you have a clear concept of what it is.

That would be like saying that you like some of the things on the menu at McDonald’s, so you’re only going to eat at McDonald’s. I like some of the food at McDonald’s, but sometimes, I like a Whopper. Or even a Chick-Fil-A. There’s nothing wrong with McDonald’s, but I don’t delude myself into thinking that it’s the only choice for tasty food.

Suppose someone was having budget problems…and that this someone was a “prominent” member of the community. If that person felt that the need to cut expenses, would you just brand her as a deserter, or would you try to sympathize with her financial situation (not that it’d be your business) and understand that she had made decision that is best for her?

There seems to be a widespread assumption that anyone who is leaving AOL, even temporarily, has reached this decision easily. Where did that come from?

There has been a great deal of soul searching in the community of late. Many people have decided that what’s best for them is to stay, and they have a variety of reasons that led them to this conclusion. Others have decided, with just as many reasons, that it’s time to go. Who is anyone else to criticize them for having made the best decision they felt they could…unless, of course the critic is willing to pay their membership for them? How many people are offering to pay other people’s bills?

In the blogosphere, I never limited myself to only AOL journals. I regularly visit spots on Blogger, LiveJournal, and Xanga, just to name a few. That didn’t start when the banner ads appeared. At the blogroll on the sidebar of my Blogger journal, (which is still a work in progress), you’ll find AOL journals in the list. Why? Because I like the journals I’ve listed and I intend to go on visiting them. Where the journals are shouldn’t make a difference, because in that “grand scheme of things,” they’re still just a click away, regardless of the company that is hosting them.

If you want to limit yourself, that’s your business. But really: why would you? Why would you want to close your mind to other writers? How do you know you couldn’t make one very close friend outside of AOL? And would it be so terrible — would it be the end of the world — if you did?

There are those who have insisted that anyone who leaves AOL, or even goes on a temporary silent protest, is over-reacting like a grade-schooler, throwing a temper tantrum, showing off their mammoth egos, and not thinking reasonably.

On the other side, there are a few people who are taking great pains to say, in as many blogs as they can find, that they won’t visit anyone who moves outside of AOL. That sounds pretty childish and egotistical to me, especially when you say that you wish the “drama” would end, yet talk about it everywhere you can to keep stirring it up. That’s “grade school” in my book.

Either you like the journals you’ve been reading within the AOL community…or you don’t. If you can so easily wash your hands of them if they move outside of AOL, I wonder why you’ve been wasting your time trying to get to know these people to start with.

Do those who self-righteously vow never to visit a journal of anyone who leaves appear very credible in the lens of integrity, particularly when the same people have condemned those who would dare harass them because they haven’t left? To put it another way, isn’t it a double standard to demand that those who haven’t left respect the decision of those who are staying, while at the same time not returning the favor?

I think we all know the answer to that.

Don’t assume that everyone who has relocated, is currently in the process of relocating, or is on the fence and considering it, will automatically harass you if you don’t do what they do. Don’t assume that they’re only out to “destroy” the community. Neither assumption is valid.

If you’re going to declare that you will stop visiting any journal that isn’t on AOL, perhaps you might take a moment to consider who is abandoning who!

Yeah, blacklisting concerns me. I’m going to visit the journals I like, whether they’re on AOL or Blogger or anywhere else. I expect those who have enjoyed my writing to continue to visit. I can’t force them, and I wouldn’t if I could. I want readers who want to read what I have to say, not readers who feel some unreasonable duty to do so. I suspect that this is exactly what all of us who blog want, right?

For the record, I’m not encouraging anyone to leave AOL. I’m also not encouraging anyone to boycott the businesses whose ads appear on the journals. (If you pressure a sponsor into pulling their ads, AOL will only put a different sponsor in its place. It’s not a sponsor problem.)

It’s not my place to tell you what you should or shouldn’t do with regard to specific business relationships. The only thing I have urged people to do is to consider what they’re getting: if you’re happy — and many people are — then you’d probably be crazy to leave. If you’re not, then shop around. But decide what you want to do and then do it because it is what you want to do. You won’t catch any wrath from me if you stay or if you leave if the decision you have made is what you think is the best one for you; I expect the same courtesy in return.

Surely that’s not too much to ask.

If it’s wrong to blacklist and harass — and it certainly is — then don’t do it. Period. Don’t do it to those who are staying with AOL, and don’t do it those who are going elsewhere. Respect each other and trust that each individual will have made the best choice for himself or herself and make every attempt to be supportive of those decisions and each other. That, my friends, is what a “community” is really all about.

One more important thought about the blacklisting: Here’s how to stop it, in just two steps.

Step 1: Forward every harassing email you receive to TOSReports@aol.com. It’s their job to investigate things like harassment. And if you’re sending them a note from someone who is demanding that you stop paying money to AOL, I suspect that they’ll take that fairly seriously!

Step 2: From now on, post the emails, including the name of the sender, in your blog! You want to talk about “true colors?” Let the world see who’s harassing members! Of course, it should go without saying that you should remove any obscenities or profanity: you don’t want to get TOSed yourself, but still, you get the point.

It has not been my intent to offend or alienate anyone. One of the pearls of wisdom I learned growing up from my family is that if you don’t want to know the answer, then don’t ask the question.

The questions were asked and I tried to be as honest as I could.

That’s what I’ve always tried to do at “Patrick’s Place.” And that’s what I’ll always try to do no matter where “Patrick’s Place” happens to be hosted.

I wanted to thank all of you who left comments and thought nice thoughts about Zoey, my golden retriever mix who had to spend last night at the Vet’s office.

I called first thing this morning, hoping to hear that she might be well enough to come home, because I certainly didn’t want to spend Thanksgiving at home without her. (Neither did Zack, my cocker spaniel, for that matter.)

The receptionist, who is also the vet’s wife, said that when she got there, she walked into the kennel room and Zoey immediately sat up and started wagging her tail with a big smile on her face. She could tell that she felt 100 times better.

So this morning, before work, I picked her up. She was happy to see me, and delighted to get back to her couch where she could resume her very difficult job of lounging around all day.

As I paid the bill — nearly $300 — the receptionist said she hated that it had to cost so much, even with the quick recovery. I pointed out that since today is my birthday, being able to get her back today was probably the nicest present I could have gotten.

Isn’t it funny how things work out sometimes?