Kelly Krehbiel comment-50040 2011-05-02T17:35:22Z 2011-05-02T17:35:22Z Is this supposed to be good news? They've said it themselves, "if an arena plan cannot be finalized in a timely fashion, the NBA’s relocation committee has assured Maloof Sports and Entertainment that it will support an application to move the franchise to another market". Really hard to see how this isn't just our fair city being held hostage for another year; the ransom being a new arena complex we probably don't need. One would think that the city would be looking for ways to fill any void left by the kings leaving; not by begging them to stay -- but by instead capitalizing on what makes Sacramento a destination. In my mind, an NBA team has never been one of those things. Kelly Krehbiel 2011-05-02T17:35:22Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-31249 2010-06-24T20:00:06Z 2010-06-24T20:00:06Z I also agree that mentioning him by name is bad form. While I haven't had the debatable pleasure of interacting with this particular individual much, I suspect some might deem it 'Troll Food'. After all, they tend to thrive on notoriety. Kelly Krehbiel 2010-06-24T20:00:06Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-31245 2010-06-24T19:56:41Z 2010-06-24T19:56:41Z I'm a tremendous fan of self-moderated communities, and I think that if given the feature set, your readers would pull it off in fine style. You've provided the ability to rate comments, all that's left is to tie those ratings to thresholds that severely obscure comments that are consistently down-rated by the community. (The text of such entries becomes either extremely light gray, or their backgrounds become very dark.) Those who wish to read them still can, however they aren't as prevalent to those looking for comments of value. Some sites take it a step further and hide down-ranked comments, requiring a + click to display them. http://www.wow.com uses a comment system such as this -- yah, I'm one of *those* geeks. =) Such a system discourages trolls by making it 100% clear to them that their actions aren't appreciated, and that any such content will quickly become that much harder to see if it doesn't bring some value to the discussion. It also completely takes you guys out of the censorship business, which I can only imagine will eliminate any fallout from necessary actions such as this. Take it a step further to automatically ban anyone who only contributes 'Greys', and you've got yourself a system that manages everything all by itself, without making Sacpress out to be the bad guys. Pity folks can't behave themselves and act like adults. While you can't change behavior, systems such as this can at least encourage the type of community you're looking to foster here. Kelly Krehbiel 2010-06-24T19:56:41Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-22122 2010-02-12T23:43:09Z 2010-02-12T23:43:09Z Can't wait to see this on CNN. Kelly Krehbiel 2010-02-12T23:43:09Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-12325 2009-08-20T00:03:19Z 2009-08-20T00:03:19Z I don't view this as a good idea - at all. These properties would likely become centers for crime, not havens of opportunity. Kelly Krehbiel 2009-08-20T00:03:19Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-11203 2009-07-27T21:37:16Z 2009-07-27T21:37:16Z Great advice on both counts. :) True attack dogs like those used in the military and law enforcement are trained relentlessly to perfect their abilities over many months before they ever see service. These dogs then re-use their training at regular intervals to keep them sharp. In my years of experience with dogs, I've found it to be neither practical nor effective to train your household pet to attack. It's better to instead reinforce what dogs do best - Sound the Alarm. Before you can begin to teach your dog to react to unique situations (or anything else for that matter), you have to understand how dog society works. Dogs are pack animals, which means that every dog abides by a very specific hierarchy. This hierarchy starts and ends with the Alpha, who is top dog in the pack. Every pack has its one leader, which the rest follow without question. Your dog considers your family to be his pack. (Even if that 'family' is just you and the dog.) The first step to effective training is to ensure that you are that leader. If you have any question about whether you're the alpha or not, then it's probably safe to assume that you're not. This makes training incredibly difficult, because if you aren't the Alpha, then your will has no bearing on how the dog will behave - they will instead try to train you. It may seem amusing to think of a dog training its owner, but it really can lead to some very serious issues. Most dogs end up in the pound over this very problem, as their owners can't control them. All of that said, here's precisely how I reinforced this 'alertness' training with my dog Cosmo: Note: this information can be very dangerous if improperly applied. If you have any doubts about your ability to train your dog, please contact a professional. As Alpha, you have to know when your pup has reached his or her limits, and tone down your efforts when that happens. If you over-do this, your dog can quickly become stressed, which adversely effects the training process in many ways. It can also lead them to attack in situations where it's unnecessary. Be aware of the dangers, and use this information at your own risk. NEVER apply this training to every-day occurrences, such as the mailman's visit or other common events. Not only will it defeat the purpose, but is incredibly unsafe, and can cause your pooch serious mental harm. To train my dog to be more alert, I would start by modifying my temperament and body language whenever I heard a strange noise, or when someone would knock on the front door. The idea is to come across as cautiously nervous, but not frightened. (Dogs are masters of body language and can sense the slightest change of emotion.) Next, I would immediately approach the sound of the noise, asking Cosmo in a low whisper, "What's that?". I'd repeat this phrase quickly, and with great urgency, whispering or speaking in low tones all the while. (In reality, the sound comes across as 'wassat', and serves to heighten his attention in whatever we're focusing on.) The result of modifying body language and using this verbal cue is that most dogs become very nervous, and whine and/or bark in response to the situation. Any noise at all should be rewarded with praise, which will also help to calm them after the fact. I still do this occasionally to this day, but only to things that don't often occur. He's since learned to identify sounds that are unusual and immediately sounds the alarm when they occur. Anyone so much as approaching the front door usually sets him off. The other side of this training is teaching him to stand down. This starts with praise after he makes a noise, but if he continues, it's as simple as stating his name in a sharp tone of voice, then rewarding him with affection once he stops. Basically, once the threat has passed, you must immediately relax, and prompt him to do the same. If you miss this step, he can remain amped up - even when people are allowed to come inside, which can be extremely dangerous. Following this method OCCASIONALLY should increase Fido's awareness of his surroundings, making you feel safer. :) Kelly Krehbiel 2009-07-27T21:37:16Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-10986 2009-07-20T23:02:59Z 2009-07-20T23:02:59Z I definitely agree - the flip side of 'reversing inherent penalties associated with saving money' is to enact measures that penalize departments that spend more than their share. Taking accountability to the department level should have largely positive effects, allowing them as individual departments to plan for what may ail them in the future. I just hope that more discussion begins to revolve around this very crippling problem. None of the solutions either party is talking about implementing will work under the current system until this issue of waste is addressed. Kelly Krehbiel 2009-07-20T23:02:59Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-8454 2009-05-28T17:07:09Z 2009-05-28T17:07:09Z They do not however have the same rights as other homosexuals who have been allowed to marry - and whose marriages are still valid. Kelly Krehbiel 2009-05-28T17:07:09Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-8451 2009-05-28T16:30:39Z 2009-05-28T16:30:39Z Well Jim, I don't know about you, but I have enough difficulty trying to keep one spouse happy - let alone several. Allowing two people who love each other the ability to wed is hardly polygamy. I can see how you came to this point though - people who closely follow religious ideologies often have difficulty distinguishing one perceived 'sin' from another. This isn't an argument about social values - in the slightest. If we truly wanted to address that issue, we as a society would be outraged at how some people choose to parent (or not.) We would not allow homelessness, and would in fact have a moral police to lock up anyone not contributing to society (there's plenty of people like that out there, as you know...) The question is, who are you to determine what's appropriate in terms of how others live? The reality is, the union of *anyone* doesn't affect who you are, or how you live. You have direct control over you and yours, and it really is enough for you decide that it's simply not for you. Live and let live. I believe in most cases, the vehement opposition to homosexual marriage is largely grounded in homophobia. That it's been wrapped up in ideological values is convenient, but fear is driving it for the most part. The campaigns in support of Prop 8 fed this fear by lying to the public. These campaigns are another point of contention - for obvious reasons. The discrimination comes in two parts - first, the plethora of homosexual individuals who were allowed to marry - and whose marriages are still valid - have been granted a right that others of the same sexual preference cannot have. Second, 'Domestic Partnership' does not allow all of the same rights as traditional marriage does. In summary, I see no legitimate harm in allowing two people of the same sex to wed. It also seems to me that most people on the opposing side of this argument are either very closed minded, or very invested in their religious ideologies. I have no problem with the latter, until they begin using their ideological doctrine to tell others how to live. Kelly Krehbiel 2009-05-28T16:30:39Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-8433 2009-05-27T22:54:48Z 2009-05-27T22:54:48Z To me, it's not about gay people getting married (honestly, who cares?) I simply oppose the creation of a condition where discrimination became the rule of law. It's not hard to believe that 52% of California voters feel threatened by this issue. I'd ask them to live and let live. This isn't a moral issue, its one of equality. Simple as that. Kelly Krehbiel 2009-05-27T22:54:48Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-8432 2009-05-27T22:48:16Z 2009-05-27T22:48:16Z To me, it's not about gay people getting married (honestly, who cares?) it's about opposition to the creation of a condition where discrimination became the rule of law. Kelly Krehbiel 2009-05-27T22:48:16Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-8429 2009-05-27T20:48:50Z 2009-05-27T20:48:50Z To me, this issue is less about deterring crime, and more about solving crimes that have occurred. Video evidence can be difficult to refute in many cases, and has been instrumental in solving countless crimes of all types - all around the world. I believe that the concerns expressed by the ACLU are grossly exaggerated. People in public are going to be seen. Creating a record of that serves the greater good in many ways, each of which far outweigh any potential privacy concerns that may arise. Perhaps the ACLU can enlighten us as to what evil will befall us if these cameras are installed? I must be missing something - At worst, we'll be seen. In public... Kelly Krehbiel 2009-05-27T20:48:50Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-8042 2009-05-21T23:21:52Z 2009-05-21T23:21:52Z I think we're missing one glaring major problem with bureaucracy itself which is perpetuating these problems at the city, state, and federal level. The main problem as I see it is simply that fiscal budgets are allocations - not reflections of actual or necessary spending. Typically, individual department leaders are expected to spend their entire budget allocation, for fear it will be reduced next year, or eliminated altogether. The only way they feel they can justify the amounts they've been allocated is to spend more, regardless of the merit of what the money is actually being spent on. It's obscenely inefficient, and it's driving our country further and further into the hole. Instead of evaluating allocations, and making determinations on what costs are warranted, we're often stuck in this cycle of spending based on what was spent historically. It makes absolutely no sense, and reflects a fundamentally flawed system. If any individual were to handle their money in such ways, they'd be destitute in no time. This, coupled with public official's tendency to make decisions based on self preservation instead of the greater good is the root of the problem. I'm not going to champion the cause of turning every person into a tree-hugging cave dweller, however the reality is - in order for us to escape from this mess, we all have to learn to live with just a little bit less. So, if you happen to be in a position to question the practices of a state, federal, or local agency, you should do so. I find that often times things are done for no other reason than "That's how it's always been done." In this time of economic crisis, that simply isn't good enough. Questioning how things are done might bring about change, but the most effective solution will involve rewarding department leaders and staff for their savings. I can't imagine that such a program would be that difficult to implement. Kelly Krehbiel 2009-05-21T23:21:52Z Kelly Krehbiel comment-7649 2009-05-14T20:12:04Z 2009-05-14T20:12:04Z I actually had a unique story idea about this the last time I went. It basically involved a subset of locals acquiring expired bread from local bakeries, and using this bread to 'fatten up' the wildlife in the pond. They'd then come back at night during the holidays and select a few for their festivities. Twisted to be sure, but I could think of no other justification for the massive amounts of bread some people seem to show up with. That said, let's all be especially vigilant during the holidays - ok? LOL Kelly Krehbiel 2009-05-14T20:12:04Z