Haiti Earthquake + Social Media = HaitiXchange.com

Posted by Bill Cammack On January - 13 - 2010

Yesterday, there was an horrible earthquake in Haiti that measured 7.0 on the Richter scale‎. We won’t know until the sun comes up how horrible it was, because electricity AND telephone service was knocked out.

Haiti National Palace destroyed in earthquake, Port-Au-Prince

My long time friend and college homeboy, Pascal Antoine is Haitian. He founded and has been maintaining a website called HaitiXchange.com for a lot of years now.

I normally don’t watch the news at all, but I’ve been fascinated by the recent trend of channels showing 3% news and 97% punditry (people giving their OPINIONS about what the news means instead of showing us a bunch more news stories). So I turn on the television around 8pm and flip to CNN, where the slot says “Campbell Brown”, so I’m like “*yawn* Here we go!”, and she has a different look on her face and the marquis below her reads something like “Hospital Collapses In Haiti”. Read the rest of this entry »

Chivalry Is Dead. Pick Up The Flag.

Posted by Bill Cammack On August - 5 - 2009

So, a couple of days ago I’m hanging out with two female friends of mine in this bar that has an outdoor area with no regulation…

By no regulation, I mean we’re all dependent upon each other’s sense of decency and self-awareness not to end up invading someone else’s personal space.

The layout lends itself to people moving chairs around and reconfiguring the layout of the small tables. It’s not like a rigidly set up rank and file of seats and tables.

Setup

So I’m sitting in a corner spot. Nobody’s going to get my space unless they sit down right next to me, which isn’t going to happen. One of the gals is sitting to my right on a corner bench space 90 degrees to my right, so it’s the same deal for her. The other one’s sitting to my left in a chair which is perfectly lined up with our small table, so basically, we’re perfectly lining three of the four sides of a small square table. Read the rest of this entry »

Doors for Michael Jackson

Posted by Bill Cammack On June - 25 - 2009

This is the end
Beautiful Friend
This is the end
My only friend, the end
Of our elaborate plans, the end
Of everything that stands, the end
No safety or surprise, the end
I’ll never, look into your eyes, again…

Can you picture what will be?
So limitless and free
Desperately in need
Of some… Stranger’s hand
In a… Desperate land…

Michael Jackson died today.
Thank You for everything.

Bernie Mac dies at 50

Posted by Bill Cammack On August - 9 - 2008

Bernie Mac dies at 50

Comedian & actor Bernie Mac died this morning, reportedly from complications due to Pneumonia. He was 50 years old. Very talented and entertaining guy.

There’s a nice writeup about him on ChicagoTribune.com -> [Bernie Mac dies at 50]

Only Date People Better Than YOU! :D

Posted by Bill Cammack On February - 8 - 2008

As you know if you’ve been following this column over the last 6 months, DatingGenius doesn’t “date”.

The term “dating” implies progression. It’s like something Richie Cunningham or Potsie Weber might do. You see a chick and you want her, but you’re not willing to let her know what time it is, so you beat around the bush taking her places in hopes that she’ll see you as the kind of guy she wants to give it up to. *yawn*

In fact, there *IS* no progression. A chick knows if she wants to mess with you off the bat. Depending on what you tell her after that, she either thinks more about giving you some or LESS about giving you some, hahaha :D … That’s all there is. You want to hook up with her, or else you wouldn’t be on a so-called “date” with her. Everybody knows it, so stop acting like you’re all sneaky and undercover and then try to surprise the chick with a “good-night kiss” when you drop her home, hoping that it works like in the movies, and all of a sudden, she’ll invite you in for…. a nightcap. :/

So, no. DatingGenius doesn’t “date”. He hangs out with chicks. Period. If they’re into DatingGenius like that, then CHA-CHINGGGG!!! :D If not, we have a good time anyway, then we go about our respective businesses.

Having said that, if you still insist on “dating”, like actually courting one person in a serial fashion with the intent of them eventually handing you a title that’s supposed to mean something, like “significant other”, then make sure you date someone BETTER. THAN. YOU! :D

Now, that might not seem to make sense, coming from the diabolical, empty-life-having (bookstore chick’s friend informed me of this a couple of weeks ago), sinister, evil, manipulating DatingGenius! :D You would think that he would advocate kicking it to the dumbest, low-brow character you can find in order to maximize your control over the situation. Dummies and lowlives are great if you’re just trying to get on ASAP and don’t intend to see them ever again in life. If you’re actually going to REPRESENT with this person, like as in let ANYONE ELSE know that you’re messing with them… That person needs to be a FANTASTIC individual. This is actually MORE IMPORTANT for the ladies than it is for the fellaz, so pay attention. :D

[Part 1: Dummies]

Let’s say the person you’re dating is a dummy. Like they’re just not intelligent. Maybe you’re on iChat with them and it takes them mad, crazy, stupid long to type a response to you, and then after all that waiting, it’s like a line and a half because they were only using their two pointer fingers to peck at the keyboard. Or maybe they can’t spell for JACK, and you’re wondering if they dropped out of school in the 5th grade to pack bags for change at the supermarket, then got hooked on drugs before making it back into the school system.

If you actually date this idiot, regardless of how good he or she looks or how good the sex is, don’t give yourself credit like you’ve pulled off some fantastic feat. In fact, anyone smarter than them will be able to manipulate them if they choose to, and you’ve “built your house on sand”… if not quicksand.

On top of that, you can’t TAKE this person ANYWHERE! :D Unless they happen to LOOK intelligent and you can convince them to not say ANYTHING around your peers, this person is an accident waiting to happen… Actually, an accident TRYING to happen, because it’s been my experience that the dumber someone is, the more they try to impress other people. Did you notice that? :D It’s like the smartest people, most of the time in a conversation, they’re listening and PROCESSING what people are saying. When they finally say something, it’s worth hearing and it’s the product of what they’ve absorbed from what’s been going on. Meanwhile, you see the dummies sitting there staring at the mouth of the person who’s talking… They seem to be trying to synchronize, like double dutch, getting ready to jump into the conversation when they perceive that the current speaker is about to finish his or her point.

The problem with this is that if you’re synchronizing, you’re not LISTENING, which becomes apparent when the dummy jumps in with something relevant to 10 minutes ago when they finally had ONE good idea, and they’ve been waiting until now to get a word in edgewise. That’s when the entire conversation stops and everyone tries to be polite. There’s this silent exchange that goes on between everyone. They’re not so much being polite to the dummy as they’re being polite TO *YOU* because it’s YOUR FAULT that this person’s in here $&%*ing up the program! :D Basically, people are embarrassed *for* you, and everyone’s trying not to mention that the emperor has no clothes on.

This is easily avoided, if you insist on dating dummies and bringing them out in public, by not giving them a title when you introduce them. We all have those friends… Every so often, they come around with a new…. person… and they introduce this person by name, but no title. Like, it’s clear that they’re out on a date, but by not declaring this person, you get to play it off down the line. Oh… That was a business partner from the Kentucky branch, my job asked me to show him around. Oh… That was my CEO’s daughter, visiting from San Diego. Who? When?… OH!… I was interviewing her for that intern position (at 11:30 pm). This only works, however, if you know you’re going to get rid of them eventually. If you end up eventually declaring them, you look like a chump for trying to play it off.

You also can’t leave people like this alone with your friends. Do NOT go to the bathroom. Do NOT go to the bar to order drinks. Do NOT pass “go” and Do NOT collect $200. Stick to this person LIKE GLUE. If you leave, and your friends ask your date “What do you think about Obama” and they reply “I think he’s still hiding in those mountains”, you’re *dead*. Laughing stock. You will NEVER live it down.

DatingGenius

Marry Rich

Posted by Bill Cammack On November - 20 - 2007

Yes, I know I said “only date broke chicks”, but now, we’re talking about marriage! :D

If you’re going to get married to a chick, make *SURE* she’s got ‘mad ducats’! :D

Don’t put yourself in the screwed-up position of having to support some deadbeat chick. That went out of style with The Flintstones and The Honeymooners. Women’s Lib is in FULL EFFECT… YA HEARD? Chicks have their own jobs… Chicks have their own money…. They’re even allowed to own land now. There’s no reason why you can’t find yourself a *RICH* chick to get married to. None.

You may have to do a little bullshitting, because chicks like to hook up with guys that are more successful than they are. Go hang out at the country club. Order an overpriced water and act like you’re drinking vodka. Drop a lot of references to your yacht and the several homes you own around the world. You know the drill. ;)

Anyway…

Now, there are two types of rich chicks you can go for. There’s the self-made rich chick that is educated and has her own career and has done what she’s needed to do to elevate her lifestyle to the lap of luxury. All props and credit to those women! :D … Then, there’s the type that’s rich because either her father or her ex-husband worked A LOT, and she’s become the beneficiary of their labor. It all depends on what you plan to do with her money, which kind of rich chick you want to go for….

If you want to keep her money to yourself, marry the rich, self-made chick. The higher she gets in her career, the more hours she’s going to have to spend working. This means you get to drive her fancy luxury car back and forth to the store to pick up the latest video games on her credit card. In this case, you’re basically the butler, Jeeves. It’s your job to pick her up from work after you chilled all day, drive her to the restaurant for dinner, since your ass probably can’t cook worth a damn, drive her back home and pamper her for about an hour before she falls asleep since she needs to get up early to go make you some more money in the morning. So, basically, by ‘working’ between 6 and 10pm every day, the equivalent of a part-time job, you enjoy all the luxuries she’s working so hard to make available to you. This works best with chicks you have no intention of having sex with.

OTOH… >:D … If you actually ENJOY her company and want to hang out with her and hit it, etc… then make sure you get one of those beneficiary-chicks. The bad thing about trust fund chicks and divorcees is that they’re spending their money faster than YOU’RE spending their money! :O The good thing about them is that they don’t actually have to waste time going to GET that money, so you have loads of time to hang out with them all day, every day! :D Paris on a Tuesday? No problem! :D Tavern On The Green on Thursday afternoon? No problem! :D

Fortunately, even though the divorce/cheating rates hover around 50% to 60%, there are still a bunch of dummies that get married without prenuptial agreements, so there are tons of divorcees around. um…. And don’t think I’m talking about old-ass chicks, either! :D Check out what Wikipedia has to say about Marriageable Age in Utah! :O

Utah: 18 generally for first marriage, 16 with parental consent, 14 with court approval or previous marriage.

… um…. Previous marriage *BEFORE* 14? :/ …. Anyway, you see what I’m getting at. By the time those chicks are divorced, they’ll just be turning legal age. By the time they’re divorced for the second or third time, they’ll be the age they would have been if they had graduated college…. *IF* they had gone to school past the 4th grade, when they got married the first time :/ So that’s two alimony checks, and the chick’s dumb as a box of rocks!…..

SWEET!!! :D

DatingGenius

Married Life = Life Over?

Posted by Bill Cammack On August - 24 - 2007

Reader Derek writes:

Bill,

I just saw part of the movie “I think I love my Wife.” I’ve always like Chris Rock ’cause the man just tells the truth about stuff, the movie was right on the cusp of what breaks up marriages.

Kerry Washington’s character kept after Chris’s character, even though she knew he was married (and of course HE knew it also). I can understand the sexual attraction, but no fling is above any marriage. She just wanted to be a friend, but friends like that are deadly to a marriage – regardless of the platonic nature.

The grass is greener, but whose to say that green ain’t astroturf…

What’s the dating genius [ DG (tm) ] have to say about this situation?

It all depends on who you are.

If you can be friends with a chick without tapping it… feel free to hang out with her as much as you want.

… however… what’s the point of THAT? :D

It all comes down to willpower. Marriage is a decision… A choice to make a public statement to people that you’re with this chick, and she’s with you. That’s why chicks take guys’ last names in marriage… It’s like those shirts that say “PROPERTY OF The New York Yankees”. People need to know “whose chick that is”.

Many people fail to calculate that by choosing one female, you’re un-choosing all the rest of the females on this planet during the rest of your lifetime. You have to have CHARACTER to stand up to a committment like that. As you can see from the cheating and divorce statistics, there are a ton of people with ZERO CHARACTER.

Married Life <> Life Over. It’s a change in the game. Instead of focusing on whatever chick’s currently within arm’s reach of you, you focus on ONE chick that you determined deserves your time and energy.

I haven’t seen the clips from the movie, but what sense does it make to go bowling with some chick you’re not having sex with when you could go bowling with YOUR WIFE?

DatingGenius

Join The Vlog Deathmatch!

Posted by Bill Cammack On May - 2 - 2007

The Vlog Deathmatch Music Video Challenge ( VlogDeathmatch.com ) is going on right now. Deadline for entries is May 14th. After that, site visitors will have a week to vote for their favorite music video, and YOU could be crowned “Vlog Deathmatch Music Video Champion”! :D

Of course… that and however much it costs for a cup of coffee will get you a cup of coffee. :) There are no prizes other than joining in in a videoblogging community event, showing off your skillZ, and generally having a good time. Feel free to drop by VlogDeathmatch.com and check out the videos as they come in. Some people are focusing on their music videos, while others are doing promos to drum up interest before their actual contest entry.

It’s a no-lose situation. No entry fee, no nothing, so join up and let’s find out who’s crowned the Vlog Deathmatch Music Video Champion!!! :D

Bill Cammack • New York City • Freelance Video Editor • alum.mit.edu/www/billcammack

ReelSolidTV Episode 47: Vlog Deathmatch

Posted by Bill Cammack On April - 27 - 2007

Click here for Quicktime Version & Embed Codes

Music Video Challenge: Official Rules The battle lines have been drawn in the vlogosphere. Use your vlog skills to make the ultimate music video the only way that matters — by videoblogging.

Music: Anything Goes
Editing: Anything Goes
Participants: Anything Goes
Props: Anything Goes
Locations: Try to showcase your normal videoblog environment, plus any other setups you like for your video
Length: up to 4 minutes
Production Date: After April 27, 2007

Canadian & International Entries welcome as well! :D

DEADLINE TO SUBMIT: May 14, 2007
Voting Deadline: May 21, 2007

Current Lineup: (eMail BillC@ReelSolid.tv to join to the lineup)

Anna Nicole?

Posted by Bill Cammack On February - 8 - 2007

re: Justin Kownacki’s STBD SOTU 2007

Posted by Bill Cammack On January - 25 - 2007

re: Justin Kownacki’s STBD SOTU 2007

Brilliant assessment & planning, Justin. :)

I’ve been watching STBD since about the middle of last season, and I’ve seen some of the archived episodes. My impression of it was “the life in general of several people that happen to know each other because of professional and personal affiliations”. Since I started watching after the show became more spread out, the radio station didnt actually have anything to do with anything for me. I saw a couple of episodes where they were saying they were selling the station or shutting down, and I saw it as more of a removal of a location than something really important to the show’s storyline.

I suppose the speed of the storylines is as dependent upon how much time the producers & editors are willing to spend crafting them as it is upon how often the actors in a particular scene (and the crew to shoot it) are available at the same time. It’s much easier and faster to cut a more slowly-paced episode than a fast-paced one that requires more cutting and therefore more continuity between the scenes. OTOH, the faster the scenes are paced, the more storylines you can fit into the same amount of time, or you can cut your show lengths down. Another consideration is the effect of changing pacing on the “feel” of the show. Regardless of the choice of pacing inside one scene or one episode, looking at the pacing over time, such as “how many episodes will it take to get this character from finding out about an issue to resolving or becoming consumed by that issue” is very important. Soap operas drop something and the resolution doesn’t happen for the next two weeks (10 episodes). Sit-coms achieve resolution within 30 minutes to an hour. I think that having the IRL timelines of plots in the script locked down is going to be crucial for STBD moving into your new production / business / community plan.

Regarding the lack of unification because of so many characters, STBD definitely needs to have a searchable way to track specific characters. One of your additions in your web site plan needs to be a text-based, searchable episode list with links and tags based on the characters in each episode. If someone watches an episode and wants to learn more about Caroline, there needs to be a way for them to quickly pull up the sequence of episodes with Caroline and/or her storyline in them. She might not be in the actual show, but something that happens in that show is relevant to the development of her character or someone involved with her. Of course, that’s easier said than done, and it’s easier to start off with a text-based cast/crew listing like IMDB has, so that at least fans can create a list of the episodes that the character they’re following is in and possibly create RSS feeds so they can follow along when that character’s next episode comes out. Overall, I think that spinning off shows based on popular storylines is a great idea. :)

The “heightened conflicts” issue is very important and IMO drives the IRL timelines of an episodic production like STBD. The show has to move quickly enough to keep people interested in the conflict. Unfortunately, this is a lot easier to deal with in a situation where the resolution is definitely going to occur “soon” like in a show that is completely done after every episode or a mini-series that’s going to be over after the sixth episode. In the HBO series “Rome”, you knew that by the end of the season, Caesar was going to be dead…. I mean, assuming you knew about these things to begin with. That leads to situations of heightened conflicts, but also “lack of conflict” as you know that Caesar’s going to be stabbed to death by people including Brutus, so there’s a complete lack of suspense in his character’s part when he’s on a campaign or in a war or something. OTOH, you never know if the other characters are going to live or die in the situations they get involved in. The heightened conflict is that even though they’re the stars of the show, they’re expendable in the grand scheme of things.

I think “The Sopranos” is more relevant to STBD. In the first season, guys were dropping like flies, because the focus was to show the struggle for posession, survival and success in organized crime. As time went on, there were fewer characters that they were able to develop to the point of being so important either to the characters in the show or to the viewer that they needed to be “rubbed out”. “The Sopranos” settled into being more “Tony’s home life” oriented and stable, which was a turn-off to many of the viewers that were originally so interested in the show because of action, violence and not knowing who was going to “go” next. It’s kind of like “Now that Tony’s made it to the top, what’s there to do? What stories are left to tell?”. STBD (at this point at least) seems to be about the ongoing lives of people that don’t really have any conflicts other than where they’re going to work or whom they’re dating. Similar to Tony Soprano’s settled life in the later seasons, it’s tough to create & heighten conflict in an environment like that. I see it more as being the “fly on the wall” as these people live their lives than watching something that’s potentially volatile.

Overall, I enjoy STBD and I’m looking forward to seeing where this new vision takes you. Much of what you mentioned requires planning, and planning takes time and time is money, so hopefully your monetization plans work out so that the people involved will be able to devote more time and energy to the show.

Good Luck! :D

oh… either way… make sure you remember that…

“women wanna SEE it & men wanna BE it!” :D

Decisions… Decisions…

Posted by Bill Cammack On October - 20 - 2006

Today is the day that makes or breaks my Halloween Videoblog entry for the festival next week.

The topic is “horror” or “scary”, but it could also be humorous horror or just something related to Halloween. The second question is how to depict horror in a way that actually gets across as scary to the viewer. The FIRST question is WHAT to make a video about in the first place. :D

There are different types of scary. There aren’t a lot of things in this city that are scary to me because I’ve been conditioned against it by the way they report news here. EVERY.SINGLE.DAY, if you happen by a newspaper or television news program, you get to hear about the most outlandish things that happened to people in the last 24 hours. OTOH, I was in Ohio one time, and the top two news stories were about who won the fishing contest and where he bought his bait! :D So that’s part of the problem. What might be scary to the average viewer isn’t scary to me, so my mind is going right past it and trying to think of something REALLY scary. Then again, I’m not a fan of horror films, so that narrows my scope even more, because I’m trying to make something realistically scary… not over-the-top, ridiculous-scary.

I can’t call it writer’s block, because I don’t have anything to write, yet. I can’t call it thinker’s block, because I’m thinking all the time. ‘Matter of fact, I’m devoting this entire day to figuring out what I’m going to do. The deadline is the 26th, including pre-production, production, post, encoding and delivery. It doesn’t have to be long, so I’m not concerned about the post part. I just really want to get to the point where I have a definite direction and I’m moving forward with this.