Friday, November 30, 2007

How To Say "Zoology"

I am kind of a closet word-nerd, but I'm not very good at it. I strive to use the correct word - or form thereof - for the situation and punctuate it all correctly, but, maybe because I only took one English Composition class in college, I sometimes just don't know the rules. So when I learn something new, I get a little bit nerdly-excited. (Just because I like words doesn't mean that I am above making up new ones.)

I recently learned the correct way to pronounce "zoology." I had always assumed that it was said "zoo"-"ology"... I had never really thought about it, because that is how nearly everyone says it. But if you think about it, it would take a triple "o" to make that "oo"-"o" sound. Since there are only two "o"s [now, what is the proper way of doing that?], the word must be said "zo"-"ology."

"Zo-ology." That'll take a little bit of getting used to.

Just in case you think I'm full of it,'s pronunciation says "zoh-ol-uh-jee" and the American Heritage Dictionary says "zō-ŏl'ə-jē, zōō-." So there ya go.

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Fred File: Don't Hand Over The Internet To The U.N.

Click on the title to read a great post by former Tennessee Senator Fred Thompson from a couple of weeks ago. He believes, as I do, that the U.S. should not allow the United Nations to assume control of the Internet.

The United States invented the Internet and we, through ICANN, have been doing a pretty good job of administering it as well. The U.N. would just screw it up like they do with pretty much everything else they touch.

Off topic, but related... I like that Fred Thompson blogs. I don't know if he personally does the typing or if he employs someone to do it for him (more likely), but it's still cool. Especially for an old dude.

Monday, November 05, 2007

Opposing lolcats

Okay, two completely opposing ICHC entries today:

On a positive note
lolcats and funny pictures -

And a slightly less then positive note
lolcats and funny pictures -

Friday, November 02, 2007

Thursday, November 01, 2007

Corporate Big-Wigs Are More Gullible Than Previously Indicated

Ya know what steams me? Well, okay, honestly, a lot of things steam me, but my current frustration is with well intentioned people who try to pass off spam (the email kind) as real , worthwhile information. In this case the spam in question is the "Cell Phone Do Not Call List" emails threatening that "your mobile number is going to be released to telemarketers on (insert date here) unless you call the Federal Trade Commission's Do Not Call registry and sign up before the deadline."

I know what you're thinking: "Matt, Grandma's old and relatively new to the whole email / internet thing, cut her some slack!"

But I do cut my grandma slack. When my grandma sent me that email about a year ago, I politely wrote her back, relaying the information that I had gotten from the FTC website along with a link to the site I was referring to. My 77 year old grandma wrote me back, thanking me for setting her straight and alleviating any fears she may have had. Since then she has learned to be a little bit more skeptical regarding the internet and has sent me other things she has had questions about, and we discussed it.

What I have a problem with is when a (way) higher-up in my company sends that same - obviously erroneous - email, marked "urgent" to the entire company! Field, office, administration, everyone.

Why does an otherwise smart guy feel the need to waste at least 200 people's time with this crap? It literally took me under one minute to Google "cell phone do not call," find the FTC page, and skim to the part about this being false. Of course, being a little bit ticked about this and wanting to stop him from sending anything else like this out, I sent a (very respectful) email back explaining the truth of the matter.

Then, as if I don't know what the hell I'm talking about, I get a response to my response, refuting my information as obsolete. So, not wanting to be out done, I find an FTC release from October 12 and shoot it back. A few minutes later I get another response, basically saying, "well, better safe than sorry" and that's where I left it.

The truth is though, that "better safe than sorry" is good, but "better to take a minute to check this out than waste 200 people's time" is even better.

At this day in age, and for a person is his position, there is really no excuse for this.


I must not like my job much this week. Oi.