When last we chatted about this, Verizon owed us a check for $67 but instead, sent us a bill for $87. The good news is that the bill was inexplicably reduced to $22. The better news is that we got the $67. The bad news – you KNEW there was bad news – is that Verizon is threatening us with collection procedures if we don’t pay them the $22, which of course we won’t because WE DIDN’T ORDER ANY SERVICE FROM THEM ON SEPTEMBER 6, WE DISCONNECTED SERVICE FROM THEM ON SEPTEMBER 6.

I call today, lest our credit become besmirched. Apparently, the technician who came on September 6 was not the necessary authorization of the disconnecting of the second line, even though he disconnected the second line. That order didn’t go in until October 31, when I had my last conversation with Verizon customer service.

In any case, I was told that it would be taken care of today. As if I actually believe that. If I mention this topic again, know that my blood pressure will have gone up 20 points.

It’s the end of year, a time of reflecton. What am I doing what I’m doing with my life?

What career should you have?
brought to you by Quizilla

This is silly. I’d never be a scientist. I’m a splash of this, a jigger of that kind of guy, not an x milliliters of this and y cubic centimters of that.

I did have an old girlfriend to whom I would say, “She’s tidied up and I can’t find anything”, because she used to tidy up and I COULDN’T find anything. She diddn’t much like it when I said that, but then I didn’t much like her hiding my stuff.

(That was NOT a total non sequiter.)

As for the meme below, don’t even know where I got this. I went to Gordon’s site then a link from that, then a link from that. Definitely a European, rather than an American perspective, which I liked…

Haymaker

You are one of life’s enjoyers, determined to get the most you can out of your brief spell on Earth. Probably what first attracted you to atheism was the prospect of liberation from the Ten Commandments, few of which are compatible with a life of pleasure. You play hard and work quite hard, have a strong sense of loyalty and a relaxed but consistent approach to your philosophy.

You can’t see the point of abstract principles and probably wouldn’t lay down your life for a concept though you might for a friend. Something of a champagne humanist, you admire George Bernard Shaw for his cheerful agnosticism and pursuit of sensual rewards and your Hollywood hero is Marlon Brando, who was beautiful, irascible and aimed for goodness in his own tortured way.

Sometimes you might be tempted to allow your own pleasures to take precedence over your ethics. But everyone is striving for that elusive balance between the good and the happy life. You’d probably open another bottle and say there’s no contest.

What kind of humanist are you? Click here to find out.

This is mighty interesting, since I’m NOT an atheist, merely “liberal” (whatever that means) theologically. But I DO relate to perhaps 50% of the first paragraph, the part about having a “strong sense of loyalty and a relaxed but consistent approach to your philosophy.”

Something (obvious) that occurred to me today is that, as I age, an increasing number of people that I’ve admired will die per year, people with whom I grew up, figuratively or literally. Two that passed recently were
Jack Anderson, a reporter so tenacious in his incvestigation of Richard Nixon’s Presidency that he made it onto Nixon’s Enemies List, which many considered a badge of honor, and

William Proxmire, Senator from Wisconsin, whose savage attacks on goverment spending, especially the military industrial complex, and his entertaining “Golden Fleece” award.

I certainly won’t note every significant passing, but these two giants, for this political science major, could not go unmentioned.

You can always tell it’s the holiday season: NFL games on Saturday. (Giants won!)

Some time ago, someone asked me, just how does that quarterback ratings thing work? Being a librarian in good standing, I had to find out. Since the regular season is winding down, I thought I’d share it with you.

But before I get to that, I want to be on record that I take no responsibility for this man wearing a brassiere on his head, just because I sent him two boxes of Royal gelatin, one cherry and one strawberry. Having said that, the headwear is quite becoming, and looks like one of those old-fashioned football helmets. It’s likely to become a new fashion statement, a retro look. You read it here first.
Lefty Brown: trendsetter
Kelly Brown: there to capture it on film
Roger Green: innocent bystander

And now those QB ratings-
Since it was a while back (2001), the records may have changed, but the formula has not:

NFL quarterback rating formula
The NFL rates its passers for statistical purposes against a fixed performance standard based on statistical achievements of all qualified pro passers since 1960. The current system replaced one that rated passers in relation to their position in a total group based on various criteria.
The current system, which was adopted in 1973, removes inequities that existed in the former method and, at the same time, provides a means of comparing passing performances from one season to the next.
It is important to remember that the system is used to rate pass-ers, not quarterbacks. Statistics do not reflect leadership, play-calling, and other intangible factors that go into making a successful professional quarterback.
Four categories are used as a basis for compiling a rating:
• Percentage of completions per attempt
• Average yards gained per attempt
• Percentage of touchdown passes per attempt
• Percentage of interceptions per attempt
The average standard, is 1.000. The bottom is .000. To earn a 2.000 rating, a passer must perform at exceptional levels, i.e., 70 percent in completions, 10 percent in touchdowns, 1.5 percent in interceptions, and 11 yards average gain per pass attempt. The maximum a passer can receive in any category is 2.375.
For example, to gain a 2.375 in completion percentage, a passer would have to complete 77.5 percent of his passes. The NFL record is 70.55 by Ken Anderson (Cincinnati, 1982).
To earn a 2.375 in percentage of touchdowns, a passer would have to achieve a percentage of 11.9. The record is 13.9 by Sid Luckman (Chicago, 1943).
To gain 2.375 in percentage of interceptions, a passer would have to go the entire season without an interception. The 2.375 figure in average yards is 12.50, compared with the NFL record of 11.17 by Tommy O’Connell (Cleveland, 1957).
In order to make the rating more understandable, the point rating is then converted into a scale of 100. In rare cases, where statistical performance has been superior, it is possible for a passer to surpass a 100 rating.
For example, take Steve Young’s record-setting season in 1994 when he completed 324 of 461 passes for 3,969 yards, 35 touchdowns, and 10 interceptions.
The four calculations would be:
• Percentage of Completions — 324 of 461 is 70.28 percent. Subtract 30 from the completion percentage (40.28) and multiply the result by 0.05. The result is a point rating of 2.014.
Note: If the result is less than zero (Comp. Pct. less than 30.0), award zero points. If the results are greater than 2.375 (Comp. Pct. greater than 77.5), award 2.375.
• Average Yards Gained Per Attempt — 3,969 yards divided by 461 attempts is 8.61. Subtract three yards from yards-per-attempt (5.61) and multiply the result by 0.25. The result is 1.403.
Note: If the result is less than zero (yards per attempt less than 3.0), award zero points. If the result is greater than 2.375 (yards per attempt greater than 12.5), award 2.375 points.
• Percentage of Touchdown Passes — 35 touchdowns in 461 attempts is 7.59 percent. Multiply the touchdown percentage by 0.2. The result is 1.518.
Note: If the result is greater than 2.375 (touchdown percentage greater than 11.875), award 2.375.
• Percentage of Interceptions — 10 interceptions in 461 attempts is 2.17 percent. Multiply the interception percentage by 0.25 (0.542) and subtract the number from 2.375. The result is 1.833.
Note: If the result is less than zero (interception percentage greater than 9.5), award zero points.
The sum of the four steps is (2.014 + 1.403 + 1.518 + 1.833) 6.768. The sum is then divided by six (1.128) and multiplied by 100. In this case, the result is 112.8. This same formula can be used to determine a passer rating for any player who attempts at least one pass.

This story begins: John Spencer is one of those actors whose face you recognize right away, but the name might elude you. Before his portrayal of wrong-side-of-the-tracks lawyer Tommy Mullaney in the last four years of L.A. Law, a show I watched regularly, that would be true for me. He was on the Patty Duke Show in the mid-’60’s as Cathy Lane’s boyfriend Henry Anderson? I watched that, too, but don’t specifically remember him. The curse of the working actor.

And spooky that his character on the West Wing , Leo McGarry, should suffer a heart attack, then John should die of one just shy of his 59th birthday.

He had a great fan base; in other words, he was a hunk to persons of a certain age. The picture above is from the John Spencer Estrogen Brigade. The inscription reads: “To my gals in the Brigade, all my best, John Spencer 1/02.”