paul wheaton

There are many plants that are nitrogen fixing plants that are not legumes.  Seaberry comes to mind.

I am the publisher.  

Perhaps what you wish to express is "what do you do if someone posts information I don't agree with?"

And the answer is:  you are always welcome to share your position - which is different from the post you don't agree with.  

Pearl Sutton wrote:Paul: want another chunk of my quote files? I won't try to make them into ads this time, you do better than me on that...

Go ahead and put it up here and we'll see what I can do with it.

Tina Hillel wrote:Snowflakes: the only things more perfect and individual are tiny ads.

Hmmmm .....  

How about:   every snowflake is perfect and unique.  And every snowflake contains a very tiny ad.

??

Pearl Sutton wrote:

paul wheaton wrote:

passwords must contain 14 characters, a number, punctuation, a small bird, a bit of cheese and a tiny ad.  

Perfect!  I added it to the list verbatim!

Hahah. It IS one of yours :) I saw it in an email... duplicate, if you added it :D
Glad you like your own work :D

:)

I guess I don't remember writing that one!  

Keep the ideas coming!

If you look at some of the other badges posted, you get the general idea.  

Here are some rough ideas to get the list started.  The idea is that there needs to be artifacts created.  Something that anybody can do.  Something that is designed primarily for my property, but can also be done somewhere else (not "anywhere else", but on similar properties).


The beginning of this list:

give a tree a name.  set up a thread for it at permies.   Set up a water proof log and trinket center - possibly a mail box for the tree.  etc. etc. etc.

give a community point of interest a web page.   Add information at the point of interest.

create a private geocaching program with at least six points.   Hopefully this will someday grow into a large, self guided tour.

creating some sort of public art

city repair stuff

creating an annual holiday

name a public point; create signs and art for that point

I now have 142 in my current list.   When it gets to 200 I will add them to the server.

passwords must contain 14 characters, a number, punctuation, a small bird, a bit of cheese and a tiny ad.  

Perfect!  I added it to the list verbatim!

I know this is going to come up.  

Somebody is doing the free program and they submit a BB.  The evaluator sees it and it falls short and says "not yet" or "keep going" or "do it over."  And the student says "why?" or wants to question the evaluation.

Over at coderanch, the beginning of the site was "the java college" which was later renamed to "the cattle drive".   There were 8 assignments.  The idea was that an assignment would be sent in to the nitpicker and you would have to do it over and over until the nitpicker could find no further nits to pick.   In time, it became so popular that we had to start charging $200 per student just to thin the herd a bit.  

Most students seemed to really like this process.   But about 1 in 4 would argue with the nitpicker and basically try to change the program or attempt to move on to the next assignment by being argumentative.  

So what we did was we set up two price structures:  $200 and the nitpicker is always right.   $2000 and the student is always right.  So when this sort of arguing cropped up, we would say "No problem - just send over that extra $1800 and we will get this all sorted out for you."   It worked 100% of the time.    

Of course, it is possible that it won't work here on permies, but ....  it could be worth considering.  

I do think there will be times where a person consistently does a really poor job and will need some extra guidance.  And that individual is especially difficult/challenging.  I suppose that that student will need to hire a tutor or pay an evaluator to explain in enormous detail.  

So as much as I wish to set this framework up to be free for everybody, I do think "everybody" needs a bit of a qualification:  students that appreciate and respect the gift of evaluation by the evaluators.