What I don't like is the lack of power. Everything else I've ever done or accomplished, even writing and publishing the books up until this point, has required me to put in effort and ambition to see it through. If it didn't succeed, I could site lack of effort on my part. If it did, then usually (almost always) the opposite. This...it's been completely out of my hands for months. I'm just waiting. Anything I would do to speed the process--like pestering the publishers or goading them with blogs about why they haven't published me yet, would only make the process slower.
I mean, I could announce on my blog, Twitter, Facebook and website (shit, even Myspace if anyone uses that thing anymore) which publishers have my manuscripts and then request that they pester them. It seems like this would work: show them how much people want the books and they are likely to publish them. But, more than likely, this would--at best--elude their notice and--at worse--piss them off. And I'm sure I'm not the only writer to have this idea, so they almost certainly have ways of insulating themselves from it.
So, I wait. I have faith in my agent, her agency, and the quality of my writing. It'll happen. It's just a matter of when and where.
Don't you think it's really bad that 'Loose Change' is instant on Netflix but the History Channel / Popular Mechanics 9-11 Myths video debunking 'Loose Change' isn't even available on DVD or instant with Netflix?How Netflix chooses what to make available for instant viewing or DVD probably isn't a political process. It comes down to the distribution company in charge of the DVDs. I'm sure they have several other fine documentaries debunking 9/11 "Truther" nonsense. If not, it isn't difficult to find it elsewhere.
The Venture Bros. Start at Season 1 and work your way through. If you have Netflix, look up Archer, Season 1. They have it on instant view.
|"Are you singing Jesse's girl?"|
Do you think we'll see the end of this world as we know it in our lifetime? ( I say all signs point to yes)That question doesn't really make any sense. The "end of the world as we know it" can mean just about anything. As it is, we depend heavily on fossil fuels, and that might end so in THAT way the world "as we know it" as ended. Or it could be a personal change, as in a person might get married or have children, thereby changing their "world" as they "knew it" but not really effecting most of us all that much. I would have to know what you meant by this question. If you are asking if I think the Earth will be destroyed by god or fire from space: no. I don't believe there is any possible way I could know or predict that. And even if I could, there wouldn't really be a way to prepare for it. So, I'm just going to go on living and doing my thing.
Do you remember the green Noid? What was his deal? How did he distinguish himself from the regular Noid?Vaguely and I don't know--maybe he was more eco-friendly? I remember the Noid NES game, too.
Hey if you 'unfollowed' someone on formspring & they keep showing up on your home screen, do you think it would be too extreme a measure to delete your account & make a new one just to get rid of seeing them?Depends on how annoying this person happened to be to you.
Do vampire women menstruate? If so, then wouldn't a guy be more likely to be infected with vampirism if he has sex with a menstruating vampire woman than if he had sex with a non-menstruating vampire woman? I'm not mocking you, this will be relevant laterI'm going to go with no: vampire women do not menstruate. The voidborne infection renders them sterile, so male vampire do not produce sperm (they still produce semen) and female vamps do not ovulate.
If people are against homosexual marriage because they can't have kids, doesn't that mean they should be pro polygamy then? Because you can really pop 'em out that way.Well, logically yes. But they tend to draw the line at 1 woman and 1 man. Or, if they want to get really Biblical about it and, 1 man and 1 terrified 12-year-old village girl.
Derision aside, the argument is usually made that because homosexual couples can't procreate, they shouldn't be allowed to marry. Even if one accepts that the purpose of marriage is procreation, this argument does not stand. Homosexuals most certainly can procreate...just not with one another. But there is nothing physically preventing a married lesbian from becoming pregnant, nor is there anything that would stop a homosexual man from impregnating a woman. It isn't like they will explode if they do it with the opposite sex. They just don't like it. I can imagine that the desire to procreate is such that it would overpower whatever distaste a homosexual has for opposite-sex-intercourse, but even if it doesn't there are other ways. Ways, I might add, that are frequently employed by heterosexual couples who through no fault of their own are unable to reproduce without them.