Hypocrisies Hidden in Plain Sight Dept.

an ever-expanding list

Abortionists Against the Death Penalty


Anti-Oil Bumper Stickers

And the corrollary that Bush's War for Oil in Iraq Caused Gas Prices to Spike

Blacks Who Say All Whites are Inherently Racist

Countries named "Democratic Republic of" Which Never Hold Elections

Christians Defending Themselves Against Aggression is another Imperialistic Crusade, Muslim Aggression is just another Anonymous Discotheque Bombing Borne of Justifiable Frustration at Christian Imperialistic Crusading


Darfur genocide: in its 5th year without UN or Amnesty International intervention


Drawing Mohammad with a Bomb in his Turban is an Understandable Capital Offense, Depicting Mary as a Streetwalker is Art So Deal With It

Flag Burning Out of a Sense of Patriotism

Gays with Stereotypical Impeccable Fashion Sense but Butt Breath


How she's not Black enough, not Smart enough, not Hot enough, nor even a Woman, really, because she's Conservative

How that "Question Authority" Bumper Sticker Advertises Adherence to Whatever the Alphabet News Channels, Politi-Pulp Mags, and Creaky Communist Professors Authorize as the Truth, Without Question

Islam: Religion of Peace

Liberals Who Distrust Government but Want More of It

Marxist College Professors Denouncing Capitalism while Collecting 6-figure Incomes

The National Organization for Women throwing down for the all-male Obama ticket

Progressives who brought you Prohibition, Anti-Tobacco Legislation, and the Continuing Tirade against Trans-fats Refusing to Punish Hard Drug Abuse and Hardcore Drug Dealers

Tree Huggers Hoping to Get Their Picture in the Newspaper

Union Reps driving Foreign Cars

From the Huh? Graphs Dept.

That Pretty Much Covers All of Us Dept.

From the Uh, Because He Told Me In Confidence Dept.

The Dinner Table [5.51] O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

So my doctor has a story for me, about how his son married a gal from Albania, who'd gone to a christian international school there, a super gal. They get along great, she becomes a US citizen, they pump out two kids, go to church every Sunday, and she gets her medical degree.

The day after she's arrived at her American dream, after 15 years of marriage, she drops the bomb on him: she never loved him, she's out the door, she never was a christian, she was always a muslim, the koran gives her the green light to use anyone else who's an infidel to further her ends.

Here's my question, and it's a straightforward one: Since Obama isn't a pocket muslim, what is he? ... He's just another liberal secular humanist? He's an Obamaworshipper? You're so sure he's not out to send you infidels to some shallow grave somewhere. You better place your faith in something stronger than Hope, or your own psychological projections. These people play by different rules than the ones the Christians have laid down in this country.

Man Up.

Responsibility.
This short ended, I feel my heart beating with an anxious desperation in my chest. This is the type of emotional word picture that can change behavior, as the viewer is allowed to live the situation before one presents itself. Steel yourselves, would be heroes, your time for greatness approaches.

Goin' for the friggin Gold.

Honorable mention, UNICEF Photo of the Year.

Boys hang on a bar for five minutes as part of a training session at the Gymnastics Hall of the Shanghai University of Sports August 7, 2007. Students of the gymnastics class of Yangpu District Youth Sports School are all aged 5 to 9. China's future Olympic hopefuls train at one of the thousands of provincial sports schools around the country. Even though these athletes were too young to make the 2008 Beijing Games, they harbor dreams of winning Olympic gold in London 2012 or beyond.

BTW, Olympic rules state that gymnasts must be 16. Which means that the oldest of these boys should be just 13 enough to compete for China come Londontime.

All Star United's LaLa Land

The question isn't whether it's true. The question is it working for you?
Marshmallow skies and custardy pies and nothing's too hard to do.
They're five happy verses or so. They told me all I needed to know.
Ignore all the rest: Trials and tests, and threats to my comfort zone.

Well, I've got no time to find out what's real. I stick with what I happen to feel.
It feels grand when you're livin' in a lala land!

You can name a blessing yourself; stake a claim on power and wealth, and strong healthy teeth, a spot at the beach, and romance that's really swell.
All the saints and martyrs alike, well, they would have called a national strike -
Demanded less pain, more personal gain, if only they'd known their rights!

Well I take it very personally.
Yeah, I got to know what's in it for me.
Ain't it grand when you're livin in a lala land?

I've got my prayer cloth collection in a Jesus jar.
I've got the Holy Ghost ridin' in the back of my car.
Sometimes He gives a little tickle, I go "hardee har har"
Ain't it grand, when you're livin' in lala land.

My Jesus decal does quite the trick. Right above my dashboard I stick it: a good luck charm; it keeps me from harm, and saves me from speeding tickets.

Well I take it very personally.
Yeah, I got to know what's in it for me.
Ain't it grand when you're livin in a lala land?

It's All Relative.

All Star United's Wierdo

Elvis lives in Greece - has changed his name to Joe. The lunar lander filmed in Disney's Studio. God saved me, and I'm crazy? No! I'm a weirdo for knowin' what I know? I'm a weirdo? Whatever floats your boat... I'm a weirdo? I know I believe in You. Mikey died from little rocks that could go pop pop pop pop pop. The army hides what just put circles in your crop. Oh maybe and I'm crazy? No! I'm a weirdo for knowin' what I know? I'm a weirdo? And don't it get your goat? I'm a weirdo? I know I believe in You. We took a hit on the big bang. It screwed up the yin yang. If the truth is pig feed, then God is Siegfried and Roy - oh boy!

If Invading You is Wrong, I Don't Wanna Be Right

There was no hard evidence that Iraq had those stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction. There was not any evidence that Iraq was responsible for the attacks of September 11, or that Iraq had operational ties to the al Qaeda terrorists who carried them out. By launching a war based on faulty premises and bad intelligence, President Bush failed Wilson's test. - Barack Obama

We should have taken Saddam Hussein out to defend the Kurds, long before he shook hands with the Taliban. The real mistake is that we didn't stop him earlier. Anyone who thinks what Hitler did to the Jews was a crime should have no qualms about invading Iraq to depose Saddam. I think rescuing people groups from extermination is justified. I won't mention the rape rooms and tyrranical atrocities under his reign against the Iraqis. Or should I?
None of this is in answer to what the left has to say about Iraq, it's just common sense. Put out the fire while it's burning your neighbor's house, and you won't have to see your own go up in flames - that's only the selfish side of things. How about Put out the fire while it's burning your neighbor's house, because dammit, you would want him to do the same if it was your house on fire, wouldn't you?

No WMDs, right? Remind me why the UN had inspectors in the country drinking martinis in their hotels - oh yeah, ostensibly to enforce 17 UN pieces of paper on the subject. We all know Saddam had chems, he killed the abovementioned Kurds with them.
I was watching live TV during the initial attacks, and a reporter was filming next to a truckload of missile bodies. The longer-range versions that the UN had outlawed - I saw about 20 of them stacked up like firewood. Where were those missles going? Where did that footage go?

Saddam had no ties to terrorists. Oh-kie-day. Al-Qaeda terrorists. So they were Taliban terrorists, right? I saw this live too: Geraldo Rivera got kicked out of the theater for reporting/drawing a schematic in the dirt on the battle a thousand 101st Airborne troops were having as they encircled a terrorist training camp of 800 or 700 soon-to-be murderers. They put up a good fight, as they were well armed and organized, but the Airborne guys did their jobs better. I'm glad these not-al Qaeda terrorists didn't get a chance to complete their training and subsequently ease through the turnstiles at Disneyland.

If exporting terrorism or WMDs weren't the issue, if it's just that war is the wrong thing to do...

War's a bad thing. But there are worse. Doing nothing is worse, when injustice is being done. Peace is worse, if "peace" is the liberal version where you're letting the bad guys rape/kill/pillage/enslave/do whatever they want, as long as we're not involved by trying to defend the oppressed ones. Korea was no mistake. Vietnam was no mistake - the only mistake was playing politics instead of winning there and ensuring the freedom for S. Vietnam. We rescued Kuwait - that was no mistake. A few million people in Iraq don't think what we've done was a failure or a mistake.

From the Snappy Answers to Stupid Questions Dept.

Hey, Here's a Really Funny Political Joke That I Just Made Up

Obama: Knock, knock.

Middle Class White Male: Who's there?

Obama: Obama.

Middle Class White Male: Obama who?

Obama: Obama Barack-knock Joke.

Middle Class White Male: I don't get it.

Obama: That's because you're a racist and clinging to your guns and religion.

Middle Class White Male: ... I have to get that doorbell fixed.

Obama: They didn't have doorbells in Pakistan when I was there.

Middle Class White Male: Can you get off my porch now? I have to go back to watching Fox news.

Just When You Thought it Was Safe to Tune into TBN Again Dept.

Marketing for Satan.

Oh yeah, here's my response to the call for Satan's Logo ... the challenge of how would Satan and his minions sell their brand if it was a literal mark containing the number 666?

Design Rationale was:
- "666" has to be in the logo.
- A brand name has to be developed. (Think "Zoloft", "Viagra" or "Crestor.")
- Must use "Red". (Satan owns this color. Sorry "Target" and "Coke.")
- Spend no more then 30 minutes on it. (Have work to do.)
- Approach it like a corporate client.
- No cliches. (Think "Devil Horns" and "Trident.")

Here were Von Glitschka's originals (So, Von, you would show the devil just two options?):


My 15 minute try:
And some other fun ones that followed after:





There was some futzing with God-logos, but nobody nailed anything.

Dumb as a Post.

Experiencing continuous growth as it has acquired many organizations in more than a decade, Norway Post launched a new identity that is now part of a bigger family of brands under the new parent company, Bring. A press release has all the information necessary about the set-up of the new company, along with plenty of numbers that establish the importance and relevance of Norway Post and its different branches.

There is something really off about this redesign. Sure, it feels more corporate and like a multimillion enterprise, but there is something about postal service logos that call for a more traditional approach. The old logo featured the Crown of Norway (one of only three logos allowed to use it), a post horn — Norwegian postage stamps since the nineteenth century have featured the advanced sounding arrival mechanism — and a very European sans serif— which may look like Gill Sans, but I think it's Edward Johnston's precursor for the London Underground — that gave the Posten a formal, trustworthy aesthetic.

In contrast, the new logo carries no meaning and, while in five or ten years time it will surely become ubiquitous and recognized, it doesn't stand for anything. This is a very similar case to UPS, where the company was more about its logistics superpowers than the thrill of receiving a package — resulting in a more abstract logo, devoid of meaning. Way to lead by example.

Anyway, to spite those who pinch off design without breaking new characteristic ground, and for those of us who remember the Norge Repairman, here's one implementation of the new logo. Now we know why they removed the horn.

I'm not Waffling, I'm Tilting.

"...one of many skirts. you've gone to the dark side. I hope at least you got an eyeful." - Ridgemaster

GC1EVZ0.
Yeah, I was there at Tilted Kilt and thought, "I can find this without the GPS." And I did find it, since I looked under the WORST POSSIBLE skirt in which to locate a cache at this location. When you go there for a beer, you'll see.

Anyway, I've given up on trying to encourage others to place good caches - I'll just find what's there and try to place good ones. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't keep him from taking a whizz in the river while he's there.

I found a few on my drive up to the 49'ers game over the weekend - worse and worse. It's not just Bako, it's just geocaching in general. We'd have hoped to keep Kern County a cut above in cache quality, but like the air quality here, whenever someone farts in Stockton, we get to smell it. The epidemic is here, the only way to fight it is to stay well yourself. Think healthy, place healthy. Find sick.

Walker IBA

Walker does pull down his pants and show his bared arse now and again, but this has nothing to do with that.

We're looking to make an unholy offspring of an Englishy Brown Ale and an India Pale. So, we're going to have some honey/meady smoothness, a sweet finish (FG above 1012, we hope) but with some lots of high-alpha Cascade for a long boil for India hoppiness and a touch of bitter. That's the plan.

* approx 1.5 lb. Quaker Oats (steeped)
* 1 lb. Crisp Brown Malt. 60-70° L. Green and cracked, hopefully with the high alpha Cascade, will add a touch bitterness to the final product, hopefully. (steeped)
* 6 lb. Briess Sparkling Amber DME 13L
*. 1.5 lb. clover honey
* 2 oz. Cascade Pellets 6.3% alpha. 1 oz (Boil - 66 mins.), .5 oz (Boil - 36 ), .5 oz. (Finishing - 6 mins, plus another 20 during chill, bah)
* a pair of Sabrew s-33s (EDME). Optimum temperature: 64-75° F, but I'm gonna have a hard time maintaining that with this new fridge. I'm gonna miss my in-line temp controller.

Shooting for an OG of 1044ish / FG: 1012+.

Got the yeast going in a couple of cups of honey and sugar water. We stuck in in the oven to hide it from prying hands.
Steeped up the Malt and Oatmeal in some old panty hose (where did that muslin bag go?) 50 mins from 100 to 155. It shure did impart some dark color to the wort. Dunno the lovibond, think soda brown.
Added the extract and the honey, 1 oz of the Cascade - 30 minutes.
Dropped in .5 oz of the Cascade, 30 minutes.
The finishing hops - .5 oz - 6 mins.
Took out the boiling hops, but left the tea ball with the finishing hops at the bottom durning chilling. Just didn't fish it out, but in keeping with the IPA nature of this IBA, we'll just let the bitters do their thing. 20 mins to chill down to 80.

...good thing Walker was here to help heft the boil keg, that sucker felt heavy. He earns his namesake this time. Poured back and forth into the two corneys (one of which blew out of the In valve overnight, and has a stuck fermentation after a day - bah number 2).
Rooted out the yeast from the stove, where it had bloomed out of the measuring bowl and gooped up the stove innards like pancake batter. Pitched the very happy yeast half and half into the kegs (about 4 gals each) and put them into the fridge.

OG of 1042. Fudging a bit at 75 degrees, reading at that temp was 1040. So, maybe a 1043, but we're right in the range. The amber extract (and the light yeast, granted) brought the pre-fermentation color back to a maple sugar brown. Happy days!

Day 3 update: Fridge is running cold - 60 - and try as I might, can't get it to get up to 65+ without just shutting down. Corney #1 is blowin' and goin', #2 was leaking pressure, so on day 3 I've swapped into #2 another corney with a good, oxygenating pour. Fingers crossed on #2!

Day 5: Corney #1 is done fermenting; 1011. Nothing ever happened with #2. Every pull on the relief valve has only ever produced a faint burp. I've got 5 gallons of ready-to-condition beer, and 5 gallons of still-waiting-to-ferment wort. Okay, so I have a great idea. I'll chill and carbonate #1 and rack off the yeast to #2. I know that the yeast from #1 is good - if it can wake up and get #2 going, all will be well, right? So, I rack off what's there into #2, put #1 into the chilly fridge, and wait until morning.

Day 6: Just as a thought before running the yeast from the #1 to the #2, I thought "why not run a hydrometer on #2? ... Has it fermented 25%? 50% ... at all?" So I did. It wasn't fermenting at all because it was done fermenting. 1011. Go figure. If it did all it's work in the first day and a half when the valve was leaking, so much the better. But geez.

Now on to conditioning. Day 7, running the C02 at 30 lbs for 3 hours at 45 degrees. Both show really strong coffee overtones and a backbone of honey sweetness.

Day 8: Racked yeast off the bottom of both corneys and blew off the loose C02 to let the ale rest. Bottled up a couple for Walker to try, after I tasted my way through the gradations of sediment. One day of conditioning for #2, 2 days for #1. What a difference a day makes! Both exchanged all the honey flaves for a round nuttiness, with just a splash of coffee surviving. Where did that nutty brown come from? Oatmeal, I reckon - Quaker Oats FTW? Or those cracked green malts? Time to do some brew testing in upcoming batches.

Now to really do some waiting and see just how brown this green beer can be.
___
The Bottom Line: What happened at last? Well, the fast-fermenting can grew worse with age. The mutations didn't condition out. The slower-fermenting corney was a brew for the ages, though. A perfect nutty-brown with a little hop kick. It didn't last long, although we tried to parcel it out a pint at a time.

Lesson learned: I'm just using Nottingham from now on. I want a fast fermentation, with no worries. Git 'er done! I'll leave the subtlety for the sweet mead-yeast when we bust some must.

Hope for Geocaching... Not!

I see the problem. There's not a defined goal to geocaching. Is this a competitive pursuit, or non-competitive? What's a "good" cache? Everyone knows how to start caching, but no one knows when they're finished.

I think some rules are in place on GC.com that steer cachers toward the wrong conclusions.

People get smileys for finds, and no smileys for placing, so implication #1:
Finding caches is a greater priority than placing caches.
Just look at who the heroes are. Everyone knows who the TeamAlamos and EMCs are, many cachers probably even know approximately how many finds the Finders have. But, does anyone have any idea who's the cacher with the most caches placed? How many caches does the leading Place-r have? Who cares? No one gets smileys for placing.

One Smiley for One Find. Implication #2:
Go after only the easiest caches.
How can you boost the numbers? Power cache the nearest, most accessible, easiest finds you can. Park and Grabs flourish. Hikes, Puzzles and Multis languish. When someone logs their copy/paste of all the caches they bagged on their powercaching excursion, what's your reaction?

...whose goal this weekend was to set our own personal best records. Our attempt was power cache 200 caches in 1 day -SO- we recorded our visits on the log as T200 to expedite our quest. We exceeded our goal! ~~
My# from this adventure= 251 caches in 1 day (Sat. in 17 hrs) / and 422 caches for the weekend.

Do you think that they're superhuman? Or that they bypassed the area's good caches to bag all the dreck? I feel pity, not awe.

Here's an issue: The star system for difficulty rating is veneer only. Ratings are totally subjective to the hider. Not to mention that one cache hider's 2 star is another's 4 star. That, and the question's always so easy when you know the answer. The hiders usually rate the harder ones too easy, since it's hidden just Right There, why can't ppl see it? And the easier ones? The skirt lifters still get two stars, don't ask me why.

Why can't the finders rate the difficulty after they've found it? Consensus wins the day.

Hey, while they're at it, they can rate the quality of the placement. Let the placer get some pointage for extending himself. Otherwise, a smiley a placement turns into another skirt lifter parade, polluting the supply like the demand's already been poisoned.

Anyway, I like the Terracaching rating system. I think it's underused there. The ratings make the multiple points per find/placement possible on that site, but I don't think ppl rate regularly. Don't ask me why.

I conclude that rating's the only ray of sunshiny hope for caching. Until there's a definitive gameplay goal, variable scoring for caches, some reward for placing (better) caches, and ratings for difficulty and quality, caching is gonna continue to serve the lowest common denominator.

Beeve's Cleaves.

Jarhead Brown Ale

Six pints of this and you should know everything about Military Intelligence.

So Tel Janin wanted to brew and kill on his birthday? Here's what happens when the brewing is on the back burner, and Myth/Unreal Tournament get all your conscious attentions. A rough sketch of the brew process, but will it be a smooth Brown... or a Marine Green beer? Time will tell.

Moral: Sometimes, it's best to brew in the background. Just boil and play.

Shooting for an OG of 1040ish / FG: 1012.

* 2 lbs. Oatmeal
* 1 lb Carapils cracked malts
* 3 lbs Light DME
* 3 lbs Dark DME
* 1.5 lbs clover honey
* 2 oz. Cascade plugs (6%)
* 2 Windsor / 1 Nottingham packets of dry yeast

Boil (Day 1):
Began steeping Grains and Oatmeal in gauze sack from 90° to 172°, made sure that it took a good long time, and dig a little squeezin' on the bag at the end, just to get all the goodness out. Tel stirred in all the DME and the honey, and we were on our way. Man, it was smelling good!
30 mins after a real rolling boil, tossed in the first 1 oz of the Cascade. Never boiled over or anything. What a brew with military polish.
35 mins after; added the second dose (1 oz) of the Cascade. Made certain that we got a good hour of hard boil, and a serious protein break. Not really, we just lost track of time playing on the computer.
Popped in the wort chiller about 20 mins after turning off the heat - a no-no, we know, but we were preoccupied, again. Once the chiller got to cooling, I shook it a few times, and shook the hose clean off the chiller, er, a few times (think I'd learn). We didn't get water directly into the wort, but dang.

Chilled to touch-temperature, mixed the 3 packs of yeast, and tossed it into uncleaned, unsterilized corneys still housing the slurries from Haley Ale. OG: 1040 dead on (!). Both corneys filled to 3/4, just enough head room. Everything looks, smells, tastes great - man, oughta think less and brew more in the future, if I get results like this all the time.

Fermentation (Day 3):
Took about 6 hours (six hours of Unreal Tournament) for the yeast to really begin its blowin' and goin'. After a too-cool night in the fridge at 50 degrees, warmed up to the 65° where we expect to finish at in about 3 more days.

Racked, Carbonating & Conditioning (Day 10):
Okay, fermentation took a bit longer than we anticipated. On day 6, we racked off some yeast and took a gravity reading: 1018 and 1020 for the two 5-gallons - surprisingly, the corney without the slurry was the one that ran to 18. Still a little higher than we would like, so a quick shake, tap on the thermostat (to 68°) and four more days of final fermentation were in order. Which, now four days later, was precisely what the doctor ordered as both corneys now check in at 1012. Perfect!
The slurry is still very yeasty (racked off as much as possible warm, after a couple of days we'll pull some more off the bottom) with a little yeasty bite that may add character, or may make for BitterBeerFace competitions. We'll see. The other batch is already very drinkable - still a touch sweet since the honey hasn't smoothed into the hops and still a bit green, but it smells great. All signs point to this 5 gals as a real winner.
Had to change out a cap on the non-slurried corney, turned on the Co2 to 22 lbs, then took everything down to 45° . We'll wait 3 days, turn off the Co2, then let everything condition cold for another week.

Final Notes (Day 18):
Well, after a little time, a couple of mild rackings and 3 more days at 20 lbs Co2, Tel came by and downed one or two from both corneys, and the verdict is in: It's good stuff, and only gonna get better with a week or two more conditioning. Surprisingly enough, the slurry, which was a bit too tangy a week ago, improved and surpassed the other corney. It's really smooth, and perfectly carbonated. The non-slurried batch sports a more substantial head, and with a week in the Lazyboy, will be simply awesome. Cheers!

Geocaching vs Terracaching: Side by Side Comparison Dept.

Navicache didn't make it into this comparison because the site just doesn't have enough caches to pursue, it's clunky as hell, and damn! it's so ugly it hurts to look at it. The site is going to be discounted here until something dramatic happens there.

A Most Excellent Mash: Chocolate Honey Porter

Trying something new this time. Using a 5-gallon recipe, and beefing it up a little to make for a 8 gallons of wort, and 13ish gallons of beer. We'll see if thin is in.

Shooting for an OG of 1030 / FG: 1002-1006:

* 8 oz. Black Patent
* 8 oz. Roast
* 30 oz. Oatmeal
* 4 lbs Amber DME
* 3 lbs Dark DME
* 5 lbs clover honey
* 2 oz. Fuggles (4.8)
* 2 oz. Cascade (6.1)
* 8 oz. Baker's Chocolate
* Struggle for Yeasty Supremacy: Part II: Using London, Windsor, and Nottingham slurry to see who can do the best with this batch, in the three 5 gallon corneys. May the best microorganism win!

Boil (Day 1):
Dropped the grains into 9 gallons at 140º and let them steep up to 160º for 35 mins. Stirred in the extracts and honey, and once the boil began (at 170mins), dropped in the first ounce of Fuggles bittering. Took that long to get a good running boil - hey, I can make good beer, but I can't afford a good system, okay? I'm also trying to heat the house by boiling on the stove... After 30 minutes of a good boil, added the chocolate and the second oz of Fuggles, and boiled for another good 50. Turned off the heat and let the brew keg cool slowly with the 2 oz of Cascade down to 140º, where we began. Evenly distributed the wort between 3 corneys; one laced with a packet of dry London, one with Windsor, and the third fresh off of a run with the last batch of American Brown Ale, slurried with second-generation Nottingham.
OG: 1042 at 70º before greedily and brainlessly cutting it into 5 gallon corneys with some Culligan water.

My prediction? Nottingham may be aggressive, but you can't beat a slurry of proven yeast. See you in a few to prove me right.

Fermentation (Day 6):
Wrong. Believe it or don't, the Windsor took right off, and was creating some good pressure in only 6 hours. Added some yeast nutrient to both the London and Nottinghams, and tapped in a packet of dry Nottingham, and at the 24 hour mark, the London was on a roll; the Nottingham of all things, hadn't. Got a little worried and added more nutirent to the Nottingham and another, new packet of dry. It took, but wasn't as aggressive as usual (maybe it's because there's more yeast than beer in that bucket).
Let 'em all run to the 5 day mark, when they all began to lose their fizz simultaneously. Dropped 'em into the fridge at 47º to arrest anymore fermentation.

Racking (Day 12):
Pulled yeast off the bottom of the corneys with a quick shot of CO2, and took a hydro of the mixture of all three types after the stuff settled: .1011. A little higher than I predicted, but a sweet beer probably won't be that bad... The chocolate might improve the density a bit, I imagine. Chilled to 40º, and will continue into conditioning, full steam ahead.

Second Guessing (Day 27):
Went in to rack a second , and what I thought would be a final, pull of yeast off the bottom of the corneys only to discover to my horror that the hydro had the gravity at .1012. I admit it. I got nervous. I got crazy. I got a screwdriver and heated the fridge up to 54º. I'll let it run for a week, then chill it back down and rack twice. Sigh.

Finally Happy.
Okay, it worked. This Porter turned out really nice, with no dramatic variation between yeasts. It's all good, baby.

Hedge's Horror Movie Survival Tips - an excerpt

If you find a town which looks deserted, it's probably for a reason. You should check it out.

If you find that the house you've considering buying is built upon or next to a cemetery, or over an ancient Indian burial ground, or it was once a site that was used for black masses, or had previous inhabitants who went mad or committed suicide or died in some bloody fashion, be sure to move in right away. Better yet, move in the day before Halloween.

When you find that book on Demon Summoning in the attic, be sure to read it aloud, just as a joke.

Keep all of your sharpened steak knives in one of those wooden block thingies on your kitchen work surface where visitors can find 'em real easy like.

People really enjoy the intellectual stimulation involved in solving puzzles that open portals to Hell. Don't give up! You can do it.

When the power goes out, and the phone suddenly decides to stop working, you should search the basement for the breaker box. You know, the one behind all the big boxes and the mannequin collection.

Should you find someone in your party strangely absent, forget knocking on the bathroom door. Split up and look in all the darkest corners of the house first.

If you're running from a monster, expect to trip or fall down at least twice (more if you are of the female persuasion). If you don't fall enough times, be sure to look over your shoulder to see how far behind you the monster is. You'll fall more if you remember that, despite the fact that you are running and the monster is merely shambling along, it's still moving fast enough to catch up with you.

When it appears that you have finally killed a monster, always kneel down next to its face to see if it's really dead.

Okay, I Take It All Back.

[sheepishly]

I got two sponsors at the 24 hour mark on Terracaching. Seems ppl out of your area have to wait a day before they're able to step in and sponsor. So, I only waited a day. Guess I got a little melodramatic there. Sorry.

What makes TerraCaching different

Can't I just pay 30 bucks and get started as a plank premium member on my planet?

• Sponsors function as your personal cache approvers, providing you with close attention and quick approvals.
• You choose your own cache approvers (sponsors) from a list of offers. If you don't like them you can dump them and find new ones.
• Fewer "written in stone" rules allow greater creativity in cache hides.
• A cache rating system (MCE) provides the ability to rate caches, allowing each community to define their own standard of quality. Poorly rated caches are easy to ignore.
• The TerraCaching Point System (TPS) fosters an enjoyable competition.
• All caches are not worth the same value (one smiley), but are rewarded based on a measure of how challenging they are.
• Hiders are rewarded too, not just finders.
• Leaderboards provide a quick way of comparing your progress to that of your fellow cachers.
• Locationless Caches (LC) and Virtual caches are embraced, rather than considered something less than a "real" cache.
• Better information for seekers is available, such as distance and elevation gain, camouflage/mental/physical challenge estimates.
• Optional First Finder Codes and Confirmation Codes conveniently handled by web site to reduce controversy and allow creative hides that don't use a log book.
• The forums here are actually friendly.

• Oh yeah, and you can't do jack shite until you get sponsored. We did mention that, didn't we? Funny thing is, if you have no Terracachers in your sector, you're SOL until a friggin' spaceship lands on your bassackwards planet and some little green terracaching men step out of their probe and, should they decide to, glance in your direction and determine if you're a lifeform worthy of inspection. Until then, just remain in the vacuum of your impact crater and exercise patience until they do.

The Hot or Not of Appearance 3: Conclusions

I love you just the way you are. Now, who are you again?

We've learned a few things from these exercises. Let's review.

* One, as I've said, a swarm of the smallest of improvements can add up. Just make sure that the integrity of your image is maintained. Lose the dress, keep the shoes.

* Two, perfect appearance probably always requires some falsification. Even the highest-paid, most-nearly-perfect supermodels' photos get the same airbrush touch-up I've given myself here. Why not? Tens don't come naturally.

* Three, this might be a good test for those who are concerned about how they are percieved by others and who are considering surgical changes. Does it matter if you're better physique-ally or facially? Not too much. What little difference we saw was more generally accepted in facial improvements, while body-shape changes produced unpredictable reactions; either more positive or more negative, but not better on the average.
For anyone considering any kind of surgery, I suggest to find out how much a change can make in others' perceptions beforehand. Make the planned changes digitally as we've done here, and take a quick poll before going under the knife (also, see the next point). You may find that your percieved audience won't notice enough of a difference to make the pain and expense worthwhile.

* Finally, no matter what you do to improve yourself, there are a group of people out there who will rate you as lowly as they can. They just won't like you, no matter what. Take solace in the notion that they're envious of what you got, baby.
And, on the flip side of the coin, there's a segment of the population who think of you as an 8 or a 9. Maybe even a 10. These are the people who count. They're out there somewhere. Find 'em.

The Hot or Not of Appearance 2: Plastic Surgery

Better looks through digital science. Maybe even worth the effort.

Now, where were we? Oh, yes. Obsessing over our physical appearance. Our last experiment, while interesting, really didn't test for changes in the actual physical form, did it? Let's make that happen this time. Remember that nose we discussed? Let's fix it.

Sometimes, its the little things that count. Our appearance in its totality, is composed of so many minute intangibles, measured in degrees. At what point do those exposed teeth go from an average smile to knockout pearly whites? I'm not sure. I do know that a group of smallish touches to a photo of my tired self after the Marine Corps Volkslauf 10k Mud Run should make a difference in how I am perceived.

First, let's lay down some clean contact paper. Have a look at our control image and its subsequent ratings:

I'm since in better shape. Uh, kinda. Anyway, note that while this shirtless, red-faced guy is now a solid Eight, he's still not a 10 in anyone's eyes. So what if he's hotter than 77% of the other hosers on the Hot or Not site? He's still mostly just a 5 in most raters's eyes; an average Joe. Cool.

Now, let's get out the computerized scalpel and see what's tweakable.

What a change a difference makes.

We crack open Photoshop and make incremental changes everywhere, in keeping with societal norms as expressed by those supermarket-checkout-lane men's health magazines. The short list of airbrushes includes:

* drop receding hairline
* desaturate race-reddened face
* narrow jaw, temples and cheeks
* shrink ears
* tweak eyes
* lighten rings under eyes
* whiten teeth
* thicken neck and trapezoids
* round out shoulders
* boost biceps
* tighten waistline
* square off stomach
* pull in beltline

Note that I didn't change my skin tone to make myself more tan (or should I say, tan at all) which is step one in image improvement for many. Oh, and you know what? I'm kinda happy with my busted-up nose. Indulge me as I maintain its cragglinesses as trophies of milestones passed / milestones impacted. I'll keep it as is.

Otherwise, these are all the changes we're going to make shrugging at us in the image at to the right.

How much is it worth? That little No to Yes switch was worth a 1.2 incremental change. I figure that all these, while slight modifications in all their own rights, should add up to a significant increase in our panel's perception. Perhaps a point and a half increase? At the outside, perhaps an increase in ratings to an average 9.2 or 9.5.

Wishful Thinking?

What are we gonna do with you? Not much, after all.

Good thing we didn't pay some Plastic Surgeon / Liposuction Practitioner / Personal Trainer / Body Double for all that tweakage. This ain't much movement on the Tachometer.

Seems like a lot of retouching to get us from an average of 8 - with no one among 241 raters thinking that I'm a perfect 10 - to an average of 8.4 with at least some small faction of 244 finding I'm a 10. I thought that was a total image makeover, and all it was worth was a measly 4 tenths of a point - a third of what we might have predicted, and a third of the impact of merely scribbling on my hand with Magic Marker in Test 1!

On the other hand, at this point, there are now some people giving this falsified image perfect 10 ratings, and that's something. Perfection. Wow.

But what price perfection? For our final exercise here, let's see which weighs more: the body sculpting, or the facial features. I'm curious about what garnered the 10's... was it from the Neck Up, or the Neck Down?

Because, well, I've always been adverse to the thought of undergoing plastic surgery (and I'm not at all certain that I'd like to imagine the process for narrowing one's skull, as we've just done), but making somototypical changes via exercise... that, I can handle.

Curious? I am.

Care to make a prediction? Face, or Flesh?

Taking everything at face value here. Shallow, I know.

Face.
First, we'll take our same image, and submit it for ratings with changes only from the neck up. These, as you recall, were

* drop receding hairline
* desaturate race-reddened face
* narrow jaw, temples and cheeks
* shrink ears
* tweak eyes
* lighten rings under eyes
* whiten teeth

Here's the image, and results:

Remember, we received an 8.4 with all changes, and here's an 8.4 with only facial changes. Seems that the bodily improvements made no difference at all in average rating. Interesting. But we're not finished unless we've seen the other side of the coin.

Flesh.
Now, we'll take our original image, and submit it for ratings with changes only from the neck down. These, as you recall, were

* thicken neck and trapeziods
* round out shoulders
* boost biceps
* tighten waistline
* square off stomach
* pull in beltline

Here's the image, and results:

Huh. An 8, just the same as our original, unretouched average rating. On the average, making all those bodily improvements didn't change our rating at all. What a waste for those poor aerobics instructors out there working tirelessly to improve their body images. Or is it?

Look again, and note the categorical responses. Ratings in the higher-end categories for our bad face/better body image were all more numerous for 6's, 7's, 8's, 9's and 10's compared to the better face/bad body image. This is to say, that the better face/bad body is higher on average simply because he's so average - scroll back up and take a second look at how far the 5 category outstrips all others. The better body/bad face is lower on the average, because he elicted so many 1's - nearly as many as the 5's - and a toiletbowl full of 2's as well. These were all unprovoked responses, by the way, from Computer Potatoes with bad bodies from the inactivity of sitting at their computers all day giving unwarranted poor ratings on Hot or Not to those with better bodies than themselves. If you'll notice, these same wanks ran the 1 ratings off the scale on our previous better body/better face total-everything makeover. See it again to confirm.

For the record, our better body/bad face guy has nothing against those with bad bodies, or, shall we say, those that are sex-appeal-impaired. They're just petty, vindictive snails and he pities them.

But we digress. All this is to say, in this instance, to attain a better appearance to the average viewer, getting a facial is the way to go. Don't ask me why another pretty face is average. Fuel for another experimental installment, perhaps.
On the other hand, if you wish to attain a much higher rating from one segment of viewers, and receive distain and hatred from the other portion, work on that body. Your keen physicality can induce admiration and adversion simultaneously.

Finally, let's examine our Final Findings.

The Hot or Not of Appearance 1: Integrity

Your lips are saying Yes, but your eyes are telling me No. ... Maybe?

Okay, first theory. There has to be some integrity, some cohesion to the whole. He'd be the next young Sinatra, except for that Ronald McDonald clown nose. This is my premise, the substandard single feature disintegrates the whole. For instance, note the oft-broken nose on the otherwise perfect face to your right. Is that a problem for you? heh.

But the opposite might well be true - that the beholder makes an assessment, then tacitly accepts, or rejects the person in his or her entirety by pointing to the subject's imperfect feature. Look at that nose! What a clown. Do we make a universal judgement, and then merely seem to base it wholly on a single feature?

Let's test for it.

No, and I mean it.

Control.
Okay, so we'll take an image and place it up for review on Hot or Not (for this experiment, an unflattering snapshot of an overworked me who'd Magic Marker'ed a NO onto his hand as proof against the time-sucking vampires of CanYouOnly - if you must, you can see the original image again above). A sour looking expression on an ordinarily-average looking guy, who's hand is saying something negative. It's little wonder he only rates a 7-point-3, and no one thinks of him as a perfect 10. That the guy is yet hotter than 69% of the men on the site is merely testament to the myriad intangibles of his pervasively positive nature.

Prognostication.
Now for the prediction. What if we make a change, one that will only serve to cripple the integrity of the image? If we change that "NO" on the hand to a "YES," would that add dissonance? Why would a sour-faced guy's hand be saying Yes to me like that?

We think it might. The face is telling me No, but the hand is telling me Yes. These cross-messages should disintegrate the image, and disintegration is a bad thing, right? The Theory of Integrity says yes. A bad thing. We predict a score lower than our original 7.3. At least among respondents who don't want sour-looking negative men saying Yes to them. Ewww. That thought gives me shivers.

Let's find out if our Hot or Not panel of judges agrees.

Well, well, we're so smart.

Hmmm.
Okay, so we're right. All that's changed in the image is the message on the hand, from NO to YES. The rating falls on average from 7.3 to 6.1, and note that the poor feller is hammered with a greater number of 1's and 2's. compared to more higher mean numbers than the previous "NO" time. I'm not saying that rating me a 1 or 2 isn't a mean thing, mind you. It stings. It stings, but I am a survivor.

So, our little test seems to indicate that an appealing appearance has something to do with the integrity of the presentation, if only syntactically. Mind that silkscreened message on that shirt of yours; all you former-joggers, throw out those old racing shirts that won't fit over your spare tire now. You don't want to send any unbecoming mixed messages.

Let's do some more interesting Plastic Surgery in experiment 2.

Hot or Not and the Psychology of Appearance: Intro

An Ongoing Attraction

Ruminating on "Shallow Hal" and the movie's fusillade of fat jokes, I began to wonder exactly what makes for an attractive external shell. How much does weight factor into the ratings game, especially in a land like America where 90% of the populace has over 30% bodyfat? Just who are these viewers who point fingers and laugh with their bowls-full-of-jelly bellies?

At this time, I had recently stumbled upon the Hot or Not website (www.hotornot.com), and was intrigued at the ratings system, my own reaction to rating others' images, and how my perceptions differed from the crowd's ratings. Why are some judged so near a perfect 10, and some, so average to my reckoning, dismissed so immediately as a perfectly imperfect 1? How is this appearance thing gauged?

And, to be honest, I poked my own self in the gut, wondering how I'd rate.

Don't we all. Why else put one's image up on a virtual bullseye like Hot or Not? I'm not seeking attention. Maybe, deep down, I still have the body image of a 13 year old. Maybe, but I don't believe so. Using my own images seemed more honest than doctoring Brad Pitt's, or any of my unsuspecting friends'. Not as much fun, but more fair.

Before continuing, take 5 minutes and visit Hot or Not to get a feel for the ratings process. The site is financed on banner ads and, I suspect, an underlying vortex into some dating service for lonely people fixated on externals. You may find it interesting, or trite, or disturbing. I find Hot or Not all of these. You have been warned.

Let the pseudo-scientific experimentation begin with, appropriately, a test of Integrity.

Beauty on the Road part deu

Sometimes, we find the most beautiful scenery on the way to paradise.

GeoNaviTerra.

I just had the 3rd of my last three caches reviewed at geo.com and denied. Each was in violation of the letter of the law there. Not the spirit of the law, grant you - but the letter of the law is what matters when you're dealing with bureaucracies. And teenage fast-food workers, but that's a thinking-outside-the-box issue. Where was I? Yes, placed geocaches. Has geo.com had to defend itself in any lawsuits because it published an "unsafe, beyond the scope of the rules" cache? Even if not, they *might* - right? So we uphold the letter of the law, in case something bad might ever happen.

The third is in place, and I'm pretty fed up, so I self-published it on navicache and, soon I hope, on terracache (I have to be sponsored there before I can do anything, besides beg for sponsorship).

My first foray beyond the bounds of the behemoth. I want to believe that monopolies can be beneficial (and dictators can be benevolent, and world peace can be attainable, and some other stuff) but in this case, the monopoly is failing me. We'll see what happens.

BTW, power corrupts so we're not gonna see any nicety-nice dictators anytime soon, and as long as there are crazies memorizing the Koran instead of bathing, world peace is right out as well.

Like I Care Dept: What's a Brick?

A brick is a double workout, usually a nice long bike ride followed by a fast run of short to medium length. The purpose is to simulate race conditions of jumping off the bike and running full speed. This is an exercise that pays large dividends, and much like speed work on a track, requires determination.

The body needs to be trained to go from biking to running without much of a warm up, because in a triathlon, this is the most taxing aspect of the race, bar none. More than likely as you progress in training you will undoubtedly train in more than one sport per day, but it's the immediacy between sessions that make a true brick workout.

You can make up your own bricks of back to back events; the transition from swim to bike is more mentally challenging, as your equilibrium will tend to continue to "swim" and you may lose focus (try to pedal away without putting on your bike shoes, for example?), but the bike/run transition leaves most triathletes' legs feeling like cement. But it's wet cement. Whether or not those legs continue to harden into immobility during the course of the run depends on training.

American Brown Ale.

What happens when you clear the cupboard and try to make beer of it.

If you were baking a cake, you'd probably get out the recipe and read it through to make sure you had all the ingredients you needed before starting to bake. Well, I'm usually that way and more so when brewing, but this time I just winged it, thinking that I had more than enough of everything on hand to have the goods there when needed.
Uh, don't brew this way. It's too stressful, and you may find, as I did, that some of your ingredients ain't up to snuff when you need to be snuffin'.

Shooting for an OG of 1048-1052 / FG: 1004-1008:

* 1 lb. Oatmeal
* 1 bag Doc's Cellar Porter Grains
* 2 lbs Light dry extract (1.5 lbs were boiled in later)
* 4.4 lbs dark liquid extract
* 3 lbs light clover honey
* 2 oz. Hallertauer hops (3.5)
* 2 oz. Cascade hops (7.8)
* 1 old Munton's, 1 old Nottingham packets of dry yeast, which was old stuff that was lying around in the garage. But hey, I figured, if Munton doesn't get after it, Nottingham will.

Boil (Day 1):
Began steeping Grains and Oatmeal in gauze sack from 120° to 180. Poured in the liquid extract at 180°. Added the dry extract, and waited for a real boil (17 mins)
15 mins after a real boil happened, bagged in 1 oz of the Hallertauer.
30 mins after; added the second oz of the Hallertauer, and 1 oz of the Cascade.
45 mins after; stirred in the honey, and popped in the wort chiller.
60 mins after; put in the last oz of finishing Cascade.
The Early Prognostication: I think that it's gonna feel a little underhopped.

Chilled to 80°, pitched the prepped yeast. OG: 1030. I had 3 corneys, one with 4 gallons, one with about 3 gallons, and a last with the bottom-of-the-boil 3 gallons. I was figuring that this last one might turn out either bitter, or the best of the three if the other two seemed underhopped.

Stuck Fermentation (Day 3):
The kicker: The old yeast was old yeast, and dead. That night, no activity. The next day, the yeast had not taken off! I freaked and chilled down to 30°, and called everyone looking for a back up, and ended up getting some from Darin at Lengthwise Brewing.
Since I was a little low on the OG, I boiled up a kettle of water and added 1.5 lbs of dry extract to about 4 gallons of water. This, with a little pouring from corney to corney, gave me about 4 gallons in 3 corneys. All three have an equal mix, equal OG at 1038 and equal head space now, and should end up tasting exactly the same.

Racking (Day 16)::
Sucked yeast off the bottoms of the corneys. Gravity is at 1006 @ 44°. Tasted like a really underhopped, really young beer. Looking good, will wait a full month before taking another sip and carbonating hard.

Carbonation (Day 28):
Okay, so I couldn't wait. I'm carbonating two of the corneys at 30 lbs pressure at 48°....
Kept em on it until Wednesday, when I switched over to the last one and ran pressure on it until Saturday.

End of Conditioning (Day 58):
Took a few tastes from two of the corneys, they're a little thin (for me -- but then, they were supposed to be) and just a little young. I need a little practice in dialing in the carbonation levels. Overcarbonated a bit, but not a problem. And yeah, it feels a little underhopped.

3 months later, this turned out to be a very good brew; smooth and amber, dark with a light body. It just took the honey an extra month to kick in. The anemic hopping turned out to be characteristically American Brown. Whaddya know.

A Big Lie.

Here's a good Big One: Second hand smoke is more dangerous than taking drags off of an actual cigarette.

Go ahead, flame me. Tell me how unattended cigarettes burn at a lower temperature and therefore don't incinerate all of the toxins before releasing them into the air. I've heard the yadda yadda, same as you. That much is true. That little itsy bit of smoke *is* more potent than an itsy bit of "heated" smoke. The big lie is that there's just so little of it compared to the lungfulls one gets via direct injection when actually smoking.

Put it this way: you've heard the same thing about car exhaust. An idling car creates more pollutant exhaust than one going full speed. But you know what? No one says that breathing the air at an intersection is more dangerous than actually wrapping your lips around an exhaust pipe and sucking in a big drag. Why not? Because it would so obviously be a Big Lie.

And He Got the Cache Published.

Geocache player broke all the rules of Internet treasure hunt

Mike Vogel
Idaho's NewsChannel 7 BOISE, ID

Tuesday’s closure of Highway 55 has brought a lot of attention to something called geocaching.
Police say this green bucket beneath the Rainbow Bridge contains trinkets for a popular Internet treasure hunt game known as geocaching. It did not contain explosives as first feared.

This was not the first time that a geocache has been mistaken for a possible bomb. Police say it was the third or fourth time the Boise bomb squad has responded to a false alarm. For people who participate in Internet treasure hunts known as geocaching, there are very specific rules and guidelines to follow. But just about every one of those rules was broken when this geocache was placed underneath the Rainbow Bridge.

“It's not illegal to play these games, but the bridge is state property, just use common sense, put it by a tree or something,” said Scott Tollersen, Idaho State Police.

Common sense is one thing that would have avoided a lot of headaches for motorists and police on Tuesday. Idaho 55 had to be shutdown because of a suspicious looking green bucket that turned out to be part of an Internet treasure hunt known as a geocache. The other important thing police say those involved in geocaching should do is follow the rules of the game.

“What we suggest is follow the guidelines on the Web site, don't place it in historical locations, or on historical structures, don't place it on bridges or schools or other places that could potentially be a terrorist target,” said Kip Higby, Boise Police bomb technician.

Originally, the caches were placed off of trails or where there isn't normally a lot of traffic. Authorities say you should ask for permission if you place a geocache on private lands and make sure you find out the rules before hiding it in a national park. And finally, choosing the right container can help out any law enforcement that might come across them.

“We also encourage on their geochache to put it on a clear plastic container, rather than something that can't be seen into, if we can see into it we can rule it out rather easily,” said Tollersen.

Meanwhile, Valley County is still looking into filing charges against the man who placed that geocache under the bridge.

Two Naughty Brown Ales for the Price of One (and 50¢)

I entered this in a Homebrew competition. The entry needed to be an English Brown Ale: sweet and malty, low alcohol, with some hop character, but not much bitterness. If you've had a Newcastle, your tongue knows what the target should have tasted like.

I used this batch as an experiment to compare liquid (wyeast) and dry (packet Nottingham) yeasts. I boiled for a 10 gallon batch and planned to split it into two 5-gallon batches, keeping as much control as I could. I wanted the only difference to be the yeast.

Imagine my surprise when the Ales took both First and Second in the competition. I just got lucky, or the yeast did some syncronized swimming or somethin', because there were a whole lot of better-experienced brewers entered: guys who had been instructing me in the finer points of le malt only weeks before. God smiles on the stupid. Here's how it happened.

* 1 lb. Quaker Oats (steeped)
* 12oz. 50/60 (steeped)
* 4oz. Caramel (steeped)
* approx. 1.5 lb. clover honey
* 6 lb. British Pale DME
* 1.2 oz. Fuggle Hops aa:4.2% (Boil) -- 40 mins.
* .3 oz. Fuggle Hops (Finishing-5 mins)
* Nottingham dry yeast (1 packet), Wyeast 3056 (bavarian)

Added the oats and grain, in grain bag, to 10 gallons cool water in brew keg. Kept the heat on for one hour until it got up to about 150° then yanked the grains. I hoped that this would improve head retention and mouth feel. Added all other ingredients and left it for 70 mins. It finally really boiled then.
After 20 mins at a bubbling boil, I added the boil hops and left it for 40 mins. Then I put in the aroma hops, waited 5 mins, and and killed the heat. Where I screwed up: Because I was also puttering around the house and running errands (yes, shoot me here and now), I put the boil keg into a sink full of ice and hoped that it would chill. An hour and a half later, it was still 120°, and what's worse, the hops had been steeping in there the whole time.

I taste-tested when I took my hydrometer reading, and it was sweet, but then the aftertaste hit with a bitter, sharp coffee-like tang. I had steeped all of the tannins outta the hops over three hours. FYI: Don't screw up like this. Separate your wort from the hops ASAP after the boil. Use two hop bags, one for boiling, one for finishing.
Began rehydrating a packet Nottingham yeast for 25 mins; the Wyeast liquid yeast had pillowed up nicely over two days. Racked into two corneys about 3/4 full (had lost about 3 gallons during the boil), added the yeast to each, and took a reading: 1035 at 85°. Put it in the fridge set at 65° -68°.

Four days later, I turned the temp down to 40° -- when the co2 releasing had lost its oomph. Perfect timing: I carbonated at 32 lbs.for 3 and a half days, then tested it as I racked the yeast offa the bottom. The Nottingham corney came in at about 1010, and the Wyeast at 1020. Only one (guess which?) had that coffee bitter aftertaste from the hops. Not bad.

I let it condition for three weeks. By then, the bitter coffee aftertaste was gone from both, maybe because of the honey.
Any fallout from the hops oversteeping? None to speak of. The honey, I think, smoothed everything over at the three week mark. Just the right amount of bitterness for a brown. I started with a low HBU with only 2 oz of the Fuggles at 4.2%, so it's all the same.
Results of the yeast competition: when asked, taste-testers seemed undecided (about 50/50) between the two. The Nottingham seemed drier; those who know beer liked the Wyeast. The Wyeast took longer to flocculate out. All in all, go figure. The two took 1st (Wyeast) and 2nd (Nottingham) places.

Maybe the bottom line is this: the Nottingham is 50¢ a pack with no smack-time; compared to $4.00 for the Wyeast. Although the Nottingham runs through the beer faster and leaves a dry, highly alcoholic emptiness in its wake, if you don't let it overferment, or ferment too quickly, it's a hearty, no-frills no-spills yeast.

Flame On.

One of the problems with the internet is that it's always open season for
the thin-skinned to take offense. Jokes are interpreted as affronts, friendly ribbing is a stab in the side. Direct criticism is punishable by electrocution.

One of the problems with a geocache rating system, the opponents argue, is that it's open to flaming. Ppl who don't like you will rate your caches into the toilet. If that's all they do, rather than actually stealing your cache containers and physically chucking them into a toilet, that's preferable, I say. But the worry is there.

I don't see why, geocaches don't care if they're winning a popularity contest. Their owners do, though. Place a cache and hover over it like a proud parent, expecting the world to queue up and coo over your baby.

All of my (active) cache babies are available for review. Not an hour after they were up, someone [read: the only other Kern cacher with reviewable caches on the site] rated a couple of mine as lowly as possible. Granted, they're pretty sucky, but maybe not meritorious of the worst possible. Am I gonna cry? I haven't yet.

I'll take my licks at the bottom end, and try to take the best ratings with a grain of salt too. The idea is to see what's trending, what kind of caches are making ppl happy or getting just a lukewarm response. The worst, I'm predicting, will be if they get no review at all - that's mediocrity at it's uh, most mediocre.

Next up: a rubric to check before cache placement - hopefully to ensure that it's not absolutely flammable. Or, to ensure that they're the type of caches I like to find. Your opinion? Blow it out your @ss.

Geocache Rating System.

Okay, since geocaching.com won't get their act together and allow ratings, ratethiscache.com has to step in and get 'er done. Maybe if we all put ratings on our caches then the site will pony up and enter the new era. Or we can post our caches on Amazon.com and have a superior rating program at our disposal.

At the least, I'm gonna put ratings on all my caches, retro to this day and following. It's the right thing to do.