Dear Facebook: I Don’t Want To Give Anyone A Gift Card To Starbucks/Target/Olive Garden

I know that Facebook has been scrambling like mad to try to find additional ways of making profit since they turned out to not make as much money as the IPO suggested, but this gift card thing is really ticking me off. I’m sure you’ve seen this, presuming you are on Facebook. Wish someone a happy birthday and Facebook will pop up a window suggesting you buy them a gift card to Target, Starbucks, Olive Garden, or similar.

It’s also spreading. I commented on a friend’s post the other day that had nothing to do with his birthday and Facebook ‘helpfully’ suggests: Why not buy him a Starbucks gift card?

Why? Because I don’t want to. If I wanted to, chances are I’d have done it already. Throwing up another pop up window is more likely to get in my way and screw up what I was trying to do than get me to buy something. Frankly, most people I would buy a gift for would not commonly be getting Starbucks, Target, or Olive Garden gift cards anyway.

Of course, I know that this is just the price of using Facebook and it is only going to get worse. I understand this and am trying to accept it as best as I possibly can. However, that does not mean that I won’t complain about it. I like complaining.

You Can Wear A Pocket Protector Even If You Wear T-Shirts

A friend of mine was recently bemoaning the fact that he was nerdy enough to use pocket protectors, but was unable to show it because he wore mainly pop culture themed t-shirts. I felt bad for him, but I knew for sure that our consumer driven culture had the solution for him out there. Of course, I found it.

Stick on pockets! It’s the perfect solution. After all, he only couldn’t demonstrate his nerditude because he didn’t have any pockets on his t-shirts. Now he can just stick on some pockets…and then protect those stick on pockets with pocket protectors.

Of course, I started thinking a little more and wondered just how much of a nerd my friend really was. My thought was that if he was really such a nerd…how come he hadn’t invented this product himself? The situation definitely raises a few questions, and as of yet my friend has not provided any answers (mainly because I haven’t asked).

Perhaps he is more of a geek than a nerd. Though there is a technical distinction, some people do get the two mixed up from time to time.

Waffle House: Stay Trashy

I guess it’s been a while since my wife and I went to Waffle House (maybe over a year or more, since we started trying to eat healthier). We decided to finally go again this morning and drove up in front of our normal one to see this:

Obviously, our normal Waffle House was out. Apparently, pretty much the whole block was being taken out because of a new Denver light rail line. Thinking quickly, we located one near Thornton and went there.

However, as we were eating breakfast, I saw a sign that Waffle House was having a calendar contest. You were supposed to submit a picture that captures what makes Waffle House your favorite place to eat. Remembering the picture I’d just taken, I couldn’t resist. Really, I couldn’t. I got home and submitted the above photo for the 2014 Waffle House calendar contest. I told them, along with the photo, that Waffle House is my favorite place to eat because it’s trashy.

Do I hate Waffle House? No! I love the place. However, given the way circumstances lined up this morning, I just couldn’t avoid making the joke. Hopefully Waffle House will understand and won’t ban me for life.

Uncanny Link Between Australian Politician And Jimmy Carter

I just came across an article about an Australian politician who was apparently attacked by a kangaroo and I started thinking about a possible link to former president Jimmy Carter.

Apparently, Shane Rattenbury, Australian Capital Territory municipal services minister, was out jogging when he startled a kangaroo. A squabble ensued. Rattenbury later joked about it as an attempted mugging, noting the kangaroo failed to get his wallet or watch. This is all fine and good, since neither him nor the kangaroo were seriously hurt, but does anyone remember the incident with Jimmy Carter and the rabbit?

Carter was apparently fishing from a canoe and a freaked out rabbit swam at him, hissing and all kinds of stuff like that. Carter apparently smacked at the rabbit with a paddle, though he later claimed to only have splashed water at it. Just as with the kangaroo attack, the press had a field day.

Getting to the point, I’m noticing a trend of politicians getting into squabbles with wildlife. Is there some kind of anti-human animal conspiracy link between Carter and Rattenbury?

This sort of bizarre incident doesn’t seem to happen often, but it has happened more than once. I don’t know what the link is, but there appears to be some kind of link here. Perhaps we need to consider the possibility that the animals are out to get our political leaders. They may just not be very organized yet.

“Bones Buried in the Dirt” On Sale At Amazon For 10% Off

Right on the heels of another first (the first third-party seller for Bones Buried in the Dirt, which I posted about yesterday), Bones Buried in the Dirt has just had its first unexplained sale on Amazon. For whatever reason, Amazon is selling the book right now at 10% off ($11.69 instead of the $12.99 cover price, a savings of $1.30 per copy). Buy it now if you’d like to take advantage of the sale.

It’s an odd thing. I’m almost certain my publisher had nothing to do with the sale. It could be a good thing because it might get more people to pick up the book, but it might be a sign that Amazon thinks it isn’t selling well enough (whatever standards they go by, though I’m sure they have much higher demands than I do).

Do I feel happy about this? Ticked? Amused? Indifferent?

Well, I am kind of amused. I’ll admit that. I know Amazon does these sort of things all the time and I really have no idea why. I’ll just let it stay with being amused and let people know about the sale in hopes it attracts more readers. After all, Amazon is Amazon and is in the game to make the kind of money that small press, literary fiction just doesn’t tend to reach.

“Bones Buried in the Dirt” Gets It’s First Third Party Seller On Amazon

I’m trying to decide whether to be happy or not upon the discovery that Bones Buried in the Dirt has its first third party seller on Amazon. This isn’t a seller I worked to place the book at, so it means that someone who bought a copy (or someone who I sent a review copy, or even one of the Goodreads giveaway winners) must have sold their copy. That’s cool and all, as long as she/he/it read the book first, but there’s something else that puzzles me.

The seller is someone called Open Books out of Illinois. It purports to be a non-profit that uses proceeds to support literacy, which is definitely cool. More importantly, they are selling the book for $9.01 plus $3.99 shipping. To do the math, that’s a used copy for $13.00 of a book that retails new for $12.99.

Oh, I know that the price for new copies doesn’t include sales tax or shipping (though you also have to consider that Open Books will probably use media mail for the $3.99 shipping). However, you can always buy the book on Amazon and get free shipping with Prime or just get super saver shipping if you buy something else that costs at least $12.01. Whether or not they charge you sales tax right now depends on where you live.

Also, you could also buy the book at Tattered Cover in Denver or The Bookworm in Omaha in person (Tattered Cover you can also order online, but I don’t know what shipping is because I always just walk over there) and just have to pay $12.99 plus applicable sales tax for a new copy.

As such, $13.00 for a used copy just doesn’t seem like that great of a deal. I realize with taxes and/or shipping for a new copy you might save a couple of cents by going for this used one. However, that just doesn’t seem like much. I guess I just don’t understand how some of the used sellers do their pricing.

OJ Simpson Bid For Freedom?

I just heard that O.J. Simpson is set to speak in an attempt to free himself from his armed robbery/kidnapping conviction that could very well keep him in prison for the rest of his life. I don’t really understand the legal mechanism he is trying to use to reverse his conviction, but it involves alleged ineffective assistance of counsel and conflict of interest. I don’t know what his chances are, but this whole thing stuck out at me because of the public sentiment regarding O.J. Simpson.

Frankly, it seemed like a lot of people were really upset when he was acquitted of murder. They really believed he did it (my own mother when reminded of this immediately chants: “Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!”). I have to admit, I lean that way as well…though I put it to rest because the state was simply not able to persuade the jury on the charges. That’s our system and I have to live with that. I’d rather a guilty person (if he really was, which I don’t really know even if I lean that way) go free than an innocent person get wrongly convicted. Regardless, a lot of people were mad about the acquittal and then happy about O.J. losing the civil case. They were even happier when he was convicted of armed robbery and kidnapping in this case.

When I thought about all of this, I just had to consider the possibility that he really could have been innocent in this case. Maybe he really didn’t know about the guns. He could have had overzealous employees. I don’t really believe it, but I consider the possibility.

After all, given the upset some people still feel over the murder case, did we just want to see O.J. convicted of something? Even if he didn’t commit armed robbery and/or kidnapping, did we want to see him go to jail anyway because we still believed he’d gotten away with murder and this corrected that situation somewhat? If that were true and he was innocent of this particular charge but just convicted by residual public anger over the other, unrelated case…I would not feel right with that.

However, I have no more power over this case or knowledge about the specifics than I did for the murder case. I have my fears and my leanings, but I am not involved. I just have to leave this to the justice system and hope that justice is served.