Last week’s Watcher’s Winners
Bookworm on Feb 15 2010 at 7:37 pm | Filed under: Watcher of Weasels
I think this might be the third time in four weeks that I’ve taken second place at the Watcher’s Council (although I haven’t confirmed this impression). I think that’s higher than my posts deserve, so am most grateful to my fellow council members:
Winning Council Submissions
- First place with 2 1/3 points! – American Digest - Barack Obama: Imaginary Friend of Democrats. Cause and Cure.
- Second place with 2 points – (T*) – The Razor - Symbols Aren’t Leaders
- Second place with 2 points – (T*) – Bookworm Room - San Francisco mulls expanding gay rights program at expense of academic programs
- Third place with 1 1/3 points – Wolf Howling - Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, Don’t Change
- Fourth place with 2/3 points – (T*) – The Provocateur - A Conversation with Wade Rathke
- Fourth place with 2/3 points – (T*) – Right Truth - Palin’s RINO Problem
- Fifth place with 1/3 points – The Colossus of Rhodey - Why I haven’t bought a Marvel comic in a couple years
Winning Non-Council Submissions
- First place with 2 2/3 points! – Douglas Murray @ Telegraph Blogs - Geert Wilders: On Trial For Telling The Truth
- Second place with 1 2/3 points – (T*) – Doug Ross Journal - The Sublime, Timeless Wisdom of Arianna Huffington Somehow Reduced to Ashes By Anonymous Commenter at Green Room
- Second place with 1 2/3 points – (T*) – Jerome Ravetz @ What’s Up With That? - Climategate: Plausibility and the blogosphere in the post-normal age
- Third place with 1 1/3 points – Big Lizards - Here’s Exactly What We Don’t Need
- Fourth place with 1 points – Buckhorn Road - Apparently, our republic is “anti-democratic”
- Fifth place with 2/3 points – (T*) – Pajamas Media/Victor Davis Hanson - Why Fear Big Government?
- Fifth place with 2/3 points – (T*) – Zenpundit - Guest Post: Cameron on “A Response to a Most Remarkable Conversation”
- Sixth place with 1/3 points – Yaacov Lozowick’s Ruminations - Response to Naomi Paiss
(T*) – Indicates a Tie.
(D*) – The Provocateur received a 2/3 point penalty in the council submissions category for failing to vote in this week’s contest.
I won’t be participating in this week’s Council vote (too much on my plate even to pretend to the effort), but I do urge you to head over to the Council website on Wednesday to see what the submissions are. They’re sure to be good.
Related posts:
- Two weeks worth of Watcher’s winners
- Two weeks of Weasel Watcher Winners
- Last week’s Watchers winners and this week’s Watchers submissions
Email This Post To A Friend
7 Responses to “Last week’s Watcher’s Winners”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Book says:
> I think this might be the third time in four weeks that I’ve taken second place [...] I think that’s higher than my posts deserve, so am most grateful to my fellow council members:
Our Book is just laying out her alibi. Really, she goes into a rage each time. ”Second Place! AGAIN! I’ve had just about ENOUGH of this!” And she tracks them from behind the steering wheel of her 57 Chevy, parked at the curb across the street from their homes, monitoring their daily habits with that wild-eyed stare caused by twenty cups of coffee each day for days. Stalking those first-place finishers, and a couple of weeks from now, they all end up with food poisoning… just for one week… ”Just for one week,” she mutters, adding the alarming little sprinkles into their sugar bowls when they are away. ”Just one little week…”
You’re watching me, right? That’s what’s going on. I guess I’ve got another name to add to my little list. It’s a nice little list. Good people . . . who need to be taught a lesson.
Good people . . . who need to be taught a lesson.
You’re scaring me, Book. Please stop.
Hey Mike, how did you come to read Meditations on Violence? I’d like to hear more on that topic, and hopefully this one won’t be buried under the tides.
Ymar,
I don’t remember what or who clued me into the book. I ended up purchasing that one, and another called ‘The Little Black Book of Violence’, based on the commentary I read about them. I’ve always been interested in the nature of violence, and how I might survive an “escalating situation”.
I’m about half way through ‘Meditations’. It’s sobering reading. I like what he has to say so far. If he’s right, if you’ve never been in a violent situation, you have to accept that you have no idea how you *actually* are going to respond when faced with it, no matter what your training or preparation is. Though the training and preparation can’t hurt, unless it gives you unrealistic expectations – then it CAN hurt, and a lot. I hope if ever I’m faced with it I won’t be one of the “deer in the headlights’ people who just freeze and shut down. (And that can happen to the best of em, it seems, who think they never would…) I’ll try to respond more when I have more time.
By the way, Ymar, David Weber’s fourth Safehold book is supposed to be released mid-April. Two months more for me to wait. I’m going to have to reread the third soon to refamiliarize myself with all the details leading in.
<B> I don’t remember what or who clued me into the book.</b>
JKB posted a link to Rory as well as no non-sense defense. Along with TFT training, i learned quite a bit from that website, actually. I say along with because it is really hard to make use of the internet site if you don’t actually have some practical experience. Then again, that’s kind of true for every abstract knowledge base.
Decisive people who have essentially made themselves train to always go forward and be bold when they were uncertain or afraid, won’t freeze so long as they have even a half way decent solution.
People don’t live in violent circumstances as a norm, on average, so their brains aren’t wired to respond to these things. They still try to figure out which way is best and so their brain locks up unable to decide which course of action will give them the best results. Actually, the more intelligent you are, the more likely you are to overthink these things and lock up.
The dumber people just go charging through, of course, because they are either ignorant of the real ramifications or are just reckless.