Suggest a Topic
RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
2012 conventions
2012 election
2013 session
arts
arts and culture
author
ballot measures
basketball
bomb
books
boy scouts
budget
bullying
business
charlie hales
children
clackamas
climate change
coal
college
courts
crime
culture
culture club
democrats
drugs
economy
education
environment
family
film
fluoride
food
gay rights
guns
handguns
health
health care
health insurance
high school
history
housing
immigration
internet
kitzhaber
law
legislature
lgbt
literary arts
living
marijuana
marriage
media
medicine
mental health
military
minor parties
mohamed mohamud
movies
music
native americans
news
newspaper
obama
olympics
oregon
our town
parenting
pers
photography
police
politcs
politics
port
portland
portland business journal
president
prevention
public safety
religion
republicans
rnc
romney
rural
salem
sam adams
sandy hook
schools
science
shooting
sports
suicide
supreme court
taxes
technology
television
terrorism
theater
third parties
transportation
union
university of oregon
washington
wildfire
women
see all tags >>
ianmcd's comments:
on Black and White and Googled All Over
A fine book on the history of media in the U.S. is All the News that's Fit to Sell by Prof. James Hamilton of Duke University, and it relates to this discussion in two ways:
1. American history has passed through many technological transitions, even in the 19th century. All of them were disruptive but eventually resolved, with new business models and a steady demand for objective news.
2. People will pay for news. We don't really know, yet, how original content on the web will monetize, but it will happen sooner or later. Someone is going to figure out how to generate original news content exclusively for the web, and make money.
1. American history has passed through many technological transitions, even in the 19th century. All of them were disruptive but eventually resolved, with new business models and a steady demand for objective news.
2. People will pay for news. We don't really know, yet, how original content on the web will monetize, but it will happen sooner or later. Someone is going to figure out how to generate original news content exclusively for the web, and make money.
posted 4 years, 3 months ago
view in context
on I-5 Rivalry
These kinds of contracts are attractive if the contract is going to expire shortly (in a year or two). At that point, the salary no longer has to be paid, and reduces the total contract amount for the team, and potentially brings the team under the salary cap by a significant amount.
Teams can then either save money by not having to pay a penalty for exceeding the cap, or they might have the ability to lure free agents.
Teams can then either save money by not having to pay a penalty for exceeding the cap, or they might have the ability to lure free agents.
posted 4 years, 10 months ago
view in context
on I-5 Rivalry
I am a Seattle native who has lived in Portland most of my adult life. As a kid, I was a devoted Sonics fan; I attended one of the first games in 1967. I have three observations:
1. Except for a few diehards, no one in Seattle will ever care or think about the Portland Trailblazers. If the Sonics leave, the NBA will be dead to them, even if the Blazers become very successful.
2. The Sonics story breaks my heart. Especially with the NBA growing stronger and more interesting. The principals (Bennett and Stern) are making it hard for me to love the NBA, even from a distance. I am a Blazers fan, but if this can happen to Seattle, eventually it can happen here.
3. For whatever reason, Seattle seems particularly unable to solve its collective action problems. In this case, private sector leaders completely failed to help. Seattle's transportation problems are legendary. I would love to hear your theories about this.
1. Except for a few diehards, no one in Seattle will ever care or think about the Portland Trailblazers. If the Sonics leave, the NBA will be dead to them, even if the Blazers become very successful.
2. The Sonics story breaks my heart. Especially with the NBA growing stronger and more interesting. The principals (Bennett and Stern) are making it hard for me to love the NBA, even from a distance. I am a Blazers fan, but if this can happen to Seattle, eventually it can happen here.
3. For whatever reason, Seattle seems particularly unable to solve its collective action problems. In this case, private sector leaders completely failed to help. Seattle's transportation problems are legendary. I would love to hear your theories about this.
posted 4 years, 10 months ago
view in context
on Burning Questions
A few general reactions:
* Arson is not just a property crime. People die in arsons, but for the dexterity and the tender mercy of the arsonist. Arson, by definition, conveys the willingness, if not the intent, to kill innocent people.
* The same goes for any of the crimes labeled (maybe imprecisely) as "eco-terrorism." I know nothing about the Tre Arrow case, but in principle, if innocent people are put at risk, the punishment should reflect that.
* The merits of the political desires of any perpetrator simply don't matter. At all. If lives are placed at risk, there is no ambiguity and there is no fine line. This isn't to say that the specifics of the situation don't matter; maybe some of these acts are just mischief and don't rise to any standard of "terrorism" (a useless word, the meaning of which isn't worth a lengthy argument). But the arsons in Woodinville are life-threatening crimes. Whoever is responsible needs to be held to that standard.
* As a practical matter: these kinds of acts completely subvert the causes they claim to support. Not just in a contingent and ambivalent way. Utterly and completely. Who do you suppose is moved to reconsider their thinking by these acts? No one. And I bet you all know this.
* Arson is not just a property crime. People die in arsons, but for the dexterity and the tender mercy of the arsonist. Arson, by definition, conveys the willingness, if not the intent, to kill innocent people.
* The same goes for any of the crimes labeled (maybe imprecisely) as "eco-terrorism." I know nothing about the Tre Arrow case, but in principle, if innocent people are put at risk, the punishment should reflect that.
* The merits of the political desires of any perpetrator simply don't matter. At all. If lives are placed at risk, there is no ambiguity and there is no fine line. This isn't to say that the specifics of the situation don't matter; maybe some of these acts are just mischief and don't rise to any standard of "terrorism" (a useless word, the meaning of which isn't worth a lengthy argument). But the arsons in Woodinville are life-threatening crimes. Whoever is responsible needs to be held to that standard.
* As a practical matter: these kinds of acts completely subvert the causes they claim to support. Not just in a contingent and ambivalent way. Utterly and completely. Who do you suppose is moved to reconsider their thinking by these acts? No one. And I bet you all know this.
posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context
on Burning Questions
I am completely unsympathetic to eco-terrorism (see other comments), and I hate conspiracy theories; nevertheless, this was exactly my reaction when I first heard about these fires.
posted 5 years, 2 months ago
view in context
