I don’t believe that anyone today truly believes that selling a house in today’s real estate market is an easy task, but I’ve been hit with some pretty mind blowing experiences in the past two months while trying to sell my place. The following are my “tips” for the war zone:
1) Have a good reason for selling your house in the first place. I have lived in my place which is a “duplex” townhome in the Congress Park neighborhood of Denver, Colorado for over 11 years. My relationship with my next door neighbors has been very strained for a long period of time and my original goal was to get into a single family house as close to downtown as possible and away from these neighbors. I completely understand that you can’t pick your neighbors, but when things go “sour” for such a long period of time, maybe it is time to move on. So, I believed I had a good reason.
2) Sell your house first, before even looking for another place. I think this was my first mistake. If you find a new place before selling your existing house, unless you have a lot of money, it puts you in the mind set to “SELL SELL SELL.” This isn’t necessarily bad, but my fear (especially in this market) of not selling, put me in a bad mind set where I don’t think I used the best judgment when the first offer came in (which ultimately failed) – which leads me to the next tip.
3) Spend the money and get a professional appraisal before you put your house on the market. I think this is smart for a couple of reasons. First, regardless of how “good” your Sales Agent is, you will most likely never get more for your house than what it appraises for since nearly all standard sales contracts have a provision that allows the Buyer to get out of the deal if the house appraises for less than the contract price, and in today’s market, this is a reality that you cannot escape. Especially if your property has unique characteristics or is in an area that comparable homes are not quite a good fit to approximate value, the value your Sales Agent comes up with, may be vastly different than what an appraiser puts the value at. In my case, most of the “comps” were for condos, and while my house has restrictive covenants with the next door neighbor similar to a condo, it actually is more like a “house.” Second, it puts you in a better position to assess just how good your Sales Agent is at recommending a good price point. In the “rush rush rush” to sell in this market, you can run the risk of giving up value. For me, I live in a very desirable neighborhood in Denver. The sales contract on my house came in within hours of the house being listed which a rocket scientist would tell you is a big red flag. Obviously, someone saw a “deal” and wanted to jump on it. A friend of mine at work is putting her house on the market and I asked her if she was going to get an appraisal. She said, "well, we trust our Real Estate Agent." Well, that is all well and good, but your house might be the biggest investment you have, so why not get a second opinion? How about trust, but verify?
4) Get a Home Inspection Before Placing Your House on the Market. My Sales Agent thought this was unnecessary and suggested that when an offer comes in, a prospective Buyer will do an inspection anyway, so why pay for one when the Buyer will do it for you? Well, this is bad for at least one important reason: If there is a big problem discovered during the inspection, chances are you will loose the sale, and that is exactly what happened to me. Turns out I had a major problem with my sewer line that I didn’t even know about (there was a “sag” in the line that eventually would have caused my line to back up.) Even though I never had problems, the inspection (which is like a colonoscopy only for your sewer line) revealed this unfortunate issue. After spending $8,500 on repairs I still have no sale – the Buyer backed out and I would have done the same thing. My Sales Agent argued that each inspector will come up with a list of different items, but what I have found is that if there is anything “major” (which is really what these inspections are about – not “pin pricks” in the walls from hanging pictures) that most all inspectors will find the “big” stuff. So, why not find out first, get it fixed, and have a smoother transaction? The other big reason for doing this is that when you put your house up for sale, you must fill out a Disclosure Report on your house where you are legally obiligated to disclose the condition of all major "components" of your house (this is ture in Colorado and Colorado is known as a "full disclosure state.) An Inspector can help "fill in the blanks."
5) Work with an Attorney on Both the Sale and Purchase of your home. This I did do, and it saved me a lot of heartache, and it kept me out of the “do do.” Buying and Selling your house is probably one of the biggest financial moves you will ever make, so trying to do it “on the cheep” can get you into a lot of trouble. There are a lot of good Attorneys that will handle the review and make recommendations on your transactions for a flat fee which is affordable. When I was looking at Buying from a “large” builder, there were two provisions in the builder’s contract that were deal breakers and my Attorney insisted that they be removed. I attempted to negotiate for two weeks with the builder on this, and he refused, so I terminated the transaction. So, listen to and take the advice of a professional!
6) “Earnest Money Down” – Make Sure it is Adequate. When you sell your house, once you have signed on the line, there is next to no “wiggle” room for the Seller to get out of the transaction; however, most real estate contracts have a “liquidated damages” provision for the Buyer that allows them to walk away from the transaction even at the day of closing. What this means is that if they have put a small amount of money down like $2,500 to “tie up” your property for approximately 45 days, if they find a “better deal” they can walk away from your sale for the cost of this earnest money, or what I call an “option.” Essentially, when a Real Estate contract is initially signed that includes a liquidated damages provision, the Buyer is initially ONLY BUYING AN OPTION to BUY your house. To ensure you get a SERIOUS Buyer, make sure the earnest money that they put down on your house is sufficient to ensure they are really serious about buying your property. Looking back at what happened to me and considering the overall value of my house and the neighborhood, going forward I will not accept a contract with anything less than $10k in earnest money.
7) Transitioning into a new place. Take into account moving expenses, having to temporarily rent a house or apartment, storing your furniture, and especially if you have pets, if you will be able to keep them in a rental place until your new home is built or ready for occupancy. This point is extremely important, and you must have a good plan to accommodate your kids, pets, and family during the transition. I think this is often overlooked and is suddenly a shock when you make assumptions about temporary living arrangements that may not be true.
I still do not have a sale and my house is temporarily off the market and we are having a real "heart to heart" about moving forward on this. I’m not sure if I have scared you into just climbing back under a rock or not, but the above points are all “realities” in today’s market. If it sounds like I am “bashing” real estate agents a bit, well, I am, but not too much. They are good people – one of my best friends has been a real estate agent for years and is very ethical and a good guy. That said, their motivation is to get your house sold and get their commission check. This is a good thing, BUT, not at the expense of NOT doing the items mentioned above.
Take care and GOOD LUCK!
Friday, February 12, 2010
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Politics & Religion
So, here is the one that people will argue about - but here goes some questions to acquaint you on my views relative to the "hot" topics.
1. Abortion - for it or against it?
Without getting into the "when does life begin?" argument, let me answer this one as follows:
I would be against abortion, IF, there was adequate sex education for teenagers and young adults; if contraceptives were readily available (including the "day after" pill); and most important, if safer sex was taught as a mandatory class in high school (maybe earlier). Then, I would support banning abortions.
For those on the left that would say, well you can do all these things and you can't guarantee 100% that a pregnancy will not occur - I would respond by saying that nothing in life is a 100% guarantee except death (even taxes some people avoid.) And, life is about both risk taking and risk avoidance and sometimes you are dealt a card that you don't like and you must play the cards in your hand.
For those on the right I would say, you can't have it both ways - that is ban abortions, and not provide the other avenues (listed above) to avoid pregnancy. The right want no abortion, no sex education, and when these unwed teenage mothers wind up with babies, don't want to pay for the cost of upbringing the kid. You can either have your cake or eat it, which one is it?
Generally, there are many different contraceptive methods available and if people were educated and the information and supplies were readily available, this abortion issue, in my opinion, would most likely go away. So, I will continue to support abortion until people get real and take their head out of the sand with respect to sex.
2. Religion - I don't belong to a church, nor do I consider myself christian. With that said, I am a spiritual person and generally believe that all religions attempt to nail down what humans probably do not have the capacity to understand. Some people take scriptures literally, but, they were written a long time ago, and in such context often leads to absurd conclusions. Isn't it enough to say that these men (not women in general) attempted to describe a greater power in the context of their own times. And for those new religions, like the Mormons, isn't it really the same thing?
I am pretty much convinced that the immaculate conception never happened, so I really can't be a christian, but, I think that many of the christian traditions in today's churches are uplifting for the heart and soul. I go to the Metropolitioan Community Church here in Denver on occasion, and always come away with a good feeling in my heart. I don't know what lies ahead after death, and I am not going to spend this life obsessing over it.
3. Gay Rights - There was a beautiful speach that Julian Bond (head of the NAACP) gave at a Human Rights Campaign gathering a while back and he about summed it all up for me. Essentially, Mr. Bond said that Gay Rights are not special rights. And, that the rights (especially with respect to marriage) are unalienable rights afforded to all people in this country. Mr. Bond then went on to describe the parallels between what Africian American people fought for and what Gay people are fighting for today - equality. Mr. Bond also spoke of the early laws on the state books that banned marriage between whites and blacks, and that under such law, he would not have been able to marry his wife.
Mr. Bond heads up the NAACP - which stands for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. I think this designation speaks for itself and demonstrates the long battle for equality for what we now call Africian Americans. Colored People, as I understand it, was a derogratory term used by racist whites, that became a term ingrained in our language, much like the word fag or queer. Black people took the term Colored People and used the words to their advantage, much like the gay community has rallied around the words queer and fag by turning the meaning into something empowering.
Today's argument by the right that somehow granting marriage equality to gay and lesbians will degrade the institution of marriage makes no sense, especially since they have never been able to articulate how this would happen - isn't the fact that over 50% of marriages (by hetrosexuals) winding up in divorce a much greater harm to the fabric of society and marriange in general, than two men or two women getting married?
I think it is a christian thing to some degree to try and tell people how to live their lives, much like the Crusades. In this day and age, who really cares? And, it would seem that to foster loving relationships is what we as a society should be striving for.
Government Spending - well, this is a tough one. As I age and get nearer to retirement age, I worry about income, if I have saved enough, and especially worry about having medical insurance. With respect to medical insurance, I think we have done a terrible job adressing this problem and it is getting worse. Sure, as long as I am employed by a good company that provides these benefits, I am fine. But, if I lose this job, I "fall off a cliff." And, in retirement, is Medicare/Medicade going to cut it for us millions of baby boomers about to hit the system?
Then, with all this stimuls spending, will the result be future inflation which will further degrade my fixed retirement annuities? Like I said earlier, sometimes we have to play the cards we are delt, but when you have a "good" hand, you can certainly afford to pay it forward on your own; but, when you throw craps, I guess you/I/we will just be shit out of luck.
Ok, I took one of those quizzes earlier which described me as "Neutral" on my political views. I doubt that I'm Neutral, but maybe not crazy on either side of the fence.
1. Abortion - for it or against it?
Without getting into the "when does life begin?" argument, let me answer this one as follows:
I would be against abortion, IF, there was adequate sex education for teenagers and young adults; if contraceptives were readily available (including the "day after" pill); and most important, if safer sex was taught as a mandatory class in high school (maybe earlier). Then, I would support banning abortions.
For those on the left that would say, well you can do all these things and you can't guarantee 100% that a pregnancy will not occur - I would respond by saying that nothing in life is a 100% guarantee except death (even taxes some people avoid.) And, life is about both risk taking and risk avoidance and sometimes you are dealt a card that you don't like and you must play the cards in your hand.
For those on the right I would say, you can't have it both ways - that is ban abortions, and not provide the other avenues (listed above) to avoid pregnancy. The right want no abortion, no sex education, and when these unwed teenage mothers wind up with babies, don't want to pay for the cost of upbringing the kid. You can either have your cake or eat it, which one is it?
Generally, there are many different contraceptive methods available and if people were educated and the information and supplies were readily available, this abortion issue, in my opinion, would most likely go away. So, I will continue to support abortion until people get real and take their head out of the sand with respect to sex.
2. Religion - I don't belong to a church, nor do I consider myself christian. With that said, I am a spiritual person and generally believe that all religions attempt to nail down what humans probably do not have the capacity to understand. Some people take scriptures literally, but, they were written a long time ago, and in such context often leads to absurd conclusions. Isn't it enough to say that these men (not women in general) attempted to describe a greater power in the context of their own times. And for those new religions, like the Mormons, isn't it really the same thing?
I am pretty much convinced that the immaculate conception never happened, so I really can't be a christian, but, I think that many of the christian traditions in today's churches are uplifting for the heart and soul. I go to the Metropolitioan Community Church here in Denver on occasion, and always come away with a good feeling in my heart. I don't know what lies ahead after death, and I am not going to spend this life obsessing over it.
3. Gay Rights - There was a beautiful speach that Julian Bond (head of the NAACP) gave at a Human Rights Campaign gathering a while back and he about summed it all up for me. Essentially, Mr. Bond said that Gay Rights are not special rights. And, that the rights (especially with respect to marriage) are unalienable rights afforded to all people in this country. Mr. Bond then went on to describe the parallels between what Africian American people fought for and what Gay people are fighting for today - equality. Mr. Bond also spoke of the early laws on the state books that banned marriage between whites and blacks, and that under such law, he would not have been able to marry his wife.
Mr. Bond heads up the NAACP - which stands for the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. I think this designation speaks for itself and demonstrates the long battle for equality for what we now call Africian Americans. Colored People, as I understand it, was a derogratory term used by racist whites, that became a term ingrained in our language, much like the word fag or queer. Black people took the term Colored People and used the words to their advantage, much like the gay community has rallied around the words queer and fag by turning the meaning into something empowering.
Today's argument by the right that somehow granting marriage equality to gay and lesbians will degrade the institution of marriage makes no sense, especially since they have never been able to articulate how this would happen - isn't the fact that over 50% of marriages (by hetrosexuals) winding up in divorce a much greater harm to the fabric of society and marriange in general, than two men or two women getting married?
I think it is a christian thing to some degree to try and tell people how to live their lives, much like the Crusades. In this day and age, who really cares? And, it would seem that to foster loving relationships is what we as a society should be striving for.
Government Spending - well, this is a tough one. As I age and get nearer to retirement age, I worry about income, if I have saved enough, and especially worry about having medical insurance. With respect to medical insurance, I think we have done a terrible job adressing this problem and it is getting worse. Sure, as long as I am employed by a good company that provides these benefits, I am fine. But, if I lose this job, I "fall off a cliff." And, in retirement, is Medicare/Medicade going to cut it for us millions of baby boomers about to hit the system?
Then, with all this stimuls spending, will the result be future inflation which will further degrade my fixed retirement annuities? Like I said earlier, sometimes we have to play the cards we are delt, but when you have a "good" hand, you can certainly afford to pay it forward on your own; but, when you throw craps, I guess you/I/we will just be shit out of luck.
Ok, I took one of those quizzes earlier which described me as "Neutral" on my political views. I doubt that I'm Neutral, but maybe not crazy on either side of the fence.
Love Means Different Things to Different People
If you were a fan of the TV series Sex in the City, you know that the primary character Carrie Bradshaw loved shoes - especially Molano Blanacs (forgive me if I spelled the shoe name wrong - only my rich drag queen friends wear them.) As TV series go, and are constructed I suppose, Carrie and her friends spent several years looking for love, and most of the time in all the wrong places. Ultimately, Carrie married the one true love of her life, Mr. Big, who was there from the beginning.
A discussion of love also involves the concept of loving unconditionally. You cannot love someone or something with reservation or condition - this simply is not love. Now, that is not to say that you or I have to put up with the crap that our loved ones dish out (and we dish as well). It may very well be that you love someone unconditionally, but just can't live with that person. Quite frankly, I still don't understand how Mr. Big could ever live with Carrie Bradshaw (I certainly couldn't.)
In my own relationship, I often times take for granted the loving things that are done for me. And, rather than focus on those little wonders, I get caught up in the teasing, bickering, and the he said/he said battles. Then, I step back and see the vunerable side of this person I am with and realize that there is a complete, sensitive, attractive, and inherently good person I am looking at. When we sink to the level of objectifying our loved one, it is time for either counseling or attornies. At this point, an emotional divorce is already in full swing.
Some people are not cut out for long term relationships or just can't live with someone else. I had a friend who was with his partner for almost 20 years - but they lived in separate houses. When they finally moved in together, they broke off their relationship within 9 months! It is OK to be single - sometimes it is just better that way.
A discussion of love also involves the concept of loving unconditionally. You cannot love someone or something with reservation or condition - this simply is not love. Now, that is not to say that you or I have to put up with the crap that our loved ones dish out (and we dish as well). It may very well be that you love someone unconditionally, but just can't live with that person. Quite frankly, I still don't understand how Mr. Big could ever live with Carrie Bradshaw (I certainly couldn't.)
In my own relationship, I often times take for granted the loving things that are done for me. And, rather than focus on those little wonders, I get caught up in the teasing, bickering, and the he said/he said battles. Then, I step back and see the vunerable side of this person I am with and realize that there is a complete, sensitive, attractive, and inherently good person I am looking at. When we sink to the level of objectifying our loved one, it is time for either counseling or attornies. At this point, an emotional divorce is already in full swing.
Some people are not cut out for long term relationships or just can't live with someone else. I had a friend who was with his partner for almost 20 years - but they lived in separate houses. When they finally moved in together, they broke off their relationship within 9 months! It is OK to be single - sometimes it is just better that way.
Saturday, November 08, 2008
The View and Prop. 8 in California
I posted the following on ABC's website after watching The View yesterday:
I was very sad after watching The View yesterday. The women of The View were totally unprepared to speak (pro or con) on the controversial passing of Prop. 8.
Speaking as a gay man, I would ask that if you cannot educate yourself on issues that impact the fundamental rights of millions of citizens in this country, that you at least remain silent.
It would have been nice if someone had brought up the fact that the Mormon Church (and its members) spent millions of dollars in an effort to define Marriage in California as being between one man and one women -- which is very odd, since the Mormon's still believe, from a theological perspective, in plural marriage, and a man's dominion (read in domination) over multiple wives.
It would have been a great idea if The View would have scheduled a guest such as Ellen DeGeneres to talk about how, as a lesbian living in California, this denial of fundamental rights by the State of California has deeply impacted her life.
What about just fundamental and pragmatic "equalities" such as health insurance, parental rights and spousal rights to make decisions for a sick partner? Ladies, if you bring up such a topic, please talk about some "big ticket" items that could bring about "real change."
And, for the ladies of The View let me say this: One day, all of us will be a member of a "minority." So, please think about what treatment you would want for yourself and those you love, before you speak out with words that lack empathy for your brothers and sisters.
I was very sad after watching The View yesterday. The women of The View were totally unprepared to speak (pro or con) on the controversial passing of Prop. 8.
Speaking as a gay man, I would ask that if you cannot educate yourself on issues that impact the fundamental rights of millions of citizens in this country, that you at least remain silent.
It would have been nice if someone had brought up the fact that the Mormon Church (and its members) spent millions of dollars in an effort to define Marriage in California as being between one man and one women -- which is very odd, since the Mormon's still believe, from a theological perspective, in plural marriage, and a man's dominion (read in domination) over multiple wives.
It would have been a great idea if The View would have scheduled a guest such as Ellen DeGeneres to talk about how, as a lesbian living in California, this denial of fundamental rights by the State of California has deeply impacted her life.
What about just fundamental and pragmatic "equalities" such as health insurance, parental rights and spousal rights to make decisions for a sick partner? Ladies, if you bring up such a topic, please talk about some "big ticket" items that could bring about "real change."
And, for the ladies of The View let me say this: One day, all of us will be a member of a "minority." So, please think about what treatment you would want for yourself and those you love, before you speak out with words that lack empathy for your brothers and sisters.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Plagiarism
Plagiarism is the act of stealing a piece of someone’s soul. And, I would argue that such acts are usually done by individuals who are soulless. I guess this sounds a bit harsh, but I love to blog, and the thought of someone stealing my work from the Internet upsets me a great deal – although I’m not sure anyone outside my family has even read my blog!
Wheather the work product is an idea to patent a pet project, writing a poem or play, the plagiarist motive is rooted in selfishness as well as a lack of basic fundamental personal ethics. In the long term, committing such acts winds up robbing the plagiarist of her own identity. In an academic environment, especially as a student, it can become similar to a life long heroin addiction. Instead of the student developing her own set of skills and abilities to create and learn, she becomes consumed with honing a set of skills that will force her to continue stealing from others, until she is finally caught. Imagine if you will, graduating with a degree in any discipline and not having the technical ability to execute work with even a modest degree of competency – what a sad outcome that would be.
Plagiarism can occur by an act of omission. I remember I had a boss that would never give her subordinates credit for their hard work. In discussions with her boss, there was never an acknowledgement of the contributions of her staff – she received accolades and bonuses for collaborative work as though it were hers alone. I would argue that anytime you pass off someone’s work as your own, or, in the case of my former boss, you omit the fact that other’s contributed to the work product, that this constitutes an act of Plagiarism by omission. This particular individual got a negative reputation in the company very fast. She was not well liked, and as sometimes happens with large companies, she was promoted to a position way past her level of competence. We always used to say, “Watch your back – Sue is coming down the hall.” I worked for her a little over one year, and when an opening in another department became available, I applied for the new job, and got it! Had I not received the transfer, I probably would have quit the company, largely due to the fact that I knew how she operated, and as long as she was around, there would not be a career path for me.
Plagiarism is a very serious problem because we are turning out so-called “professionals” with fancy credentials that lack the skills and knowledge base to provide services and products to the public. What if you find yourself in an emergency room one day and the doctor orders 10cc’s of epinephrine, and you wind up with 10cc’s of epikak syrup on a spoon? That would make for a messy time at the very least. How often have we heard horror stories about botched plastic surgery, mechanics ripping off unsuspecting customers for unneeded work, or billed for work not even performed? While it doesn’t sound like such things are related at all to plagiarism, I argue that when you compromise your personal ethics and steal intellectual work, then, use it as your own, you cheat yourself from acquiring the skills to know how to do such things as provide quality services, weather it be fixing a car or giving a woman a new set of symmetrical boobs.
I don’t believe that plagiarism is simply the act of stealing intellectual property. This is still a despicable act, but should be classified more as theft of service. Without the subsequent use of the stolen work product for your own benefit, then, in my mind, a plagiaristic act did not occur. But the act speaks to basic personnel ethics that are lacking in the individual. And, you must ask yourself, if you steal it, aren’t you going to use it? It would be sort of like buying illegal drugs, then not using them – come on, is that really going to happen?
When I was kid (in the 1960s) drug use was both stigmatized (by parents and adults), and glorified by the “hippie generation.” I remember my father used to rant and rave about using drugs, and would make me watch episodes of Dragnet (Jack Webb and Harry Morgan starred in the series.) A lot of the episodes involved showing us what would happen if we started down the path of using drugs. While I did try smoking Marijuana a couple of times, I think my Dad scared me enough that I didn’t experiment too much, and, come to find out, he was probably right: smoking weed often times did lead to using stronger drugs such as LSD, Heroine, and Cocaine. Starting down the path of compromising your personal ethics, by committing such acts as plagiarism, I believe, leads to other bad behaviors – it starts to become something that is easily rationalized and justified until the sensitivity to the impact on others becomes non-existent.
Strong personal ethics seem to be even more essential today with the vast amount of information available on the Internet. I remember when I was in college in the 1970s, and a professor would give us an assignment for a Term Paper. I would spend many hours in the school library, going though index cards, writing down book references, marching up and down the halls finding books, articles in papers, and magazines, then waiting in line to make copies of the materials, so that I could then sit down and digest the information, and become informed enough on a particular subject to write about it with some sort of clarity. And, if I used another person’s work, I spent a lot of time on a manual typewriter, creating footnotes.
Now, we just Google. And, technology makes it very east to cut and paste words and phrases written by others into our own documents. But, technology also makes it easy to footnote someone else’s work. So, even though it may have been harder to commit an act of plagiarism before the advent of the Internet and personal computing, we still have always had a choice. It is perfectly fine to incorporate ideas and facts from the work of others (largely to support your own thesis); provided that proper footnoting is used to mark up the document to clearly indicate that it was written by someone else. If you look in any professional journal, there are always painstaking references made to the work of others whenever the author is presenting her own findings of research.
The best tip that I can think of to avoid committing either a covert or inadvertent act of plagiarism is to do your best to be honest with yourself. One of the best lessons in life is to be honest, not just to others, but to yourself. It is so easy to rationalize or justify your need or want. But, step back and ask yourself often: Is this a bunch of bull? In the end, we are all our own worst enemies – I didn’t come up with that phrase on my own, but I will give credit to the anonymous wise man that said it. I really don’t know how many original ideas there are out there, but, certainly, we each have our own unique perspective on this thing we call life, so why spend needless time and energy using others ideas, thought’s and opinions?
Wheather the work product is an idea to patent a pet project, writing a poem or play, the plagiarist motive is rooted in selfishness as well as a lack of basic fundamental personal ethics. In the long term, committing such acts winds up robbing the plagiarist of her own identity. In an academic environment, especially as a student, it can become similar to a life long heroin addiction. Instead of the student developing her own set of skills and abilities to create and learn, she becomes consumed with honing a set of skills that will force her to continue stealing from others, until she is finally caught. Imagine if you will, graduating with a degree in any discipline and not having the technical ability to execute work with even a modest degree of competency – what a sad outcome that would be.
Plagiarism can occur by an act of omission. I remember I had a boss that would never give her subordinates credit for their hard work. In discussions with her boss, there was never an acknowledgement of the contributions of her staff – she received accolades and bonuses for collaborative work as though it were hers alone. I would argue that anytime you pass off someone’s work as your own, or, in the case of my former boss, you omit the fact that other’s contributed to the work product, that this constitutes an act of Plagiarism by omission. This particular individual got a negative reputation in the company very fast. She was not well liked, and as sometimes happens with large companies, she was promoted to a position way past her level of competence. We always used to say, “Watch your back – Sue is coming down the hall.” I worked for her a little over one year, and when an opening in another department became available, I applied for the new job, and got it! Had I not received the transfer, I probably would have quit the company, largely due to the fact that I knew how she operated, and as long as she was around, there would not be a career path for me.
Plagiarism is a very serious problem because we are turning out so-called “professionals” with fancy credentials that lack the skills and knowledge base to provide services and products to the public. What if you find yourself in an emergency room one day and the doctor orders 10cc’s of epinephrine, and you wind up with 10cc’s of epikak syrup on a spoon? That would make for a messy time at the very least. How often have we heard horror stories about botched plastic surgery, mechanics ripping off unsuspecting customers for unneeded work, or billed for work not even performed? While it doesn’t sound like such things are related at all to plagiarism, I argue that when you compromise your personal ethics and steal intellectual work, then, use it as your own, you cheat yourself from acquiring the skills to know how to do such things as provide quality services, weather it be fixing a car or giving a woman a new set of symmetrical boobs.
I don’t believe that plagiarism is simply the act of stealing intellectual property. This is still a despicable act, but should be classified more as theft of service. Without the subsequent use of the stolen work product for your own benefit, then, in my mind, a plagiaristic act did not occur. But the act speaks to basic personnel ethics that are lacking in the individual. And, you must ask yourself, if you steal it, aren’t you going to use it? It would be sort of like buying illegal drugs, then not using them – come on, is that really going to happen?
When I was kid (in the 1960s) drug use was both stigmatized (by parents and adults), and glorified by the “hippie generation.” I remember my father used to rant and rave about using drugs, and would make me watch episodes of Dragnet (Jack Webb and Harry Morgan starred in the series.) A lot of the episodes involved showing us what would happen if we started down the path of using drugs. While I did try smoking Marijuana a couple of times, I think my Dad scared me enough that I didn’t experiment too much, and, come to find out, he was probably right: smoking weed often times did lead to using stronger drugs such as LSD, Heroine, and Cocaine. Starting down the path of compromising your personal ethics, by committing such acts as plagiarism, I believe, leads to other bad behaviors – it starts to become something that is easily rationalized and justified until the sensitivity to the impact on others becomes non-existent.
Strong personal ethics seem to be even more essential today with the vast amount of information available on the Internet. I remember when I was in college in the 1970s, and a professor would give us an assignment for a Term Paper. I would spend many hours in the school library, going though index cards, writing down book references, marching up and down the halls finding books, articles in papers, and magazines, then waiting in line to make copies of the materials, so that I could then sit down and digest the information, and become informed enough on a particular subject to write about it with some sort of clarity. And, if I used another person’s work, I spent a lot of time on a manual typewriter, creating footnotes.
Now, we just Google. And, technology makes it very east to cut and paste words and phrases written by others into our own documents. But, technology also makes it easy to footnote someone else’s work. So, even though it may have been harder to commit an act of plagiarism before the advent of the Internet and personal computing, we still have always had a choice. It is perfectly fine to incorporate ideas and facts from the work of others (largely to support your own thesis); provided that proper footnoting is used to mark up the document to clearly indicate that it was written by someone else. If you look in any professional journal, there are always painstaking references made to the work of others whenever the author is presenting her own findings of research.
The best tip that I can think of to avoid committing either a covert or inadvertent act of plagiarism is to do your best to be honest with yourself. One of the best lessons in life is to be honest, not just to others, but to yourself. It is so easy to rationalize or justify your need or want. But, step back and ask yourself often: Is this a bunch of bull? In the end, we are all our own worst enemies – I didn’t come up with that phrase on my own, but I will give credit to the anonymous wise man that said it. I really don’t know how many original ideas there are out there, but, certainly, we each have our own unique perspective on this thing we call life, so why spend needless time and energy using others ideas, thought’s and opinions?
Thursday, September 04, 2008
Losing Focus
Last evening Greg and I (along with our next door neighbor Lily), went over to a community meeting that was hosted by our Neighborhood Association. The meeting was about allowing a local business around the corner a “modified” liquor license to serve spirits on a proposed outdoor patio planed for the second floor of the building.
After thinking about the meeting for a bit, I was able to reflect on how hard it is to get a group of people focused on the actual issue at hand. And, if this is difficult over something as simple as a liquor license modification, what must politicking be like on a more grander scale?
Some background: The restaurant, Shells and Sauces, has really brought some much needed class and good food to this block of businesses. I live on Elizabeth Street (for almost 10 years now) about ½ block up from where the restaurant is, so any sort of outdoor activity has the potential to affect the parking, noise, and property values on my street. George (the owner of the restaurant) along with his family have been in business on 12th Avenue between Elizabeth and Clayton streets for many, many years. This current venture seems to be their best. The food is good, the service is good, and best of all, it is right around the corner. I have no doubt that while this restaurant is operated by George and his family, that things will probably be good for everyone.
The problem lies with how things work in Denver relative to the grant of this so called “modified liquor license.” Denver issues liquor licenses to the building (and owner of the property thereof) not the business. In other words, the restaurant could be sold tomorrow, and the goodwill generated by George and his family may, or may not continue.
So, my problem with allowing this to happen is definitely not with the current owners, but with the archaic way liquor licenses are issued here in Denver. Essentially, it forces me, as a property owner, ½ block up the street to initially oppose the request, because I have no idea exactly how cooperative any potential new owner would be.
At the meeting, we had a lot of discussion about the issue, and I made my concerns known to the audience. But the interesting thing was, the tone of the meeting kept heading back to how good and good for the community George and his family has been -- forgetting about the real issue, which is that the liquor license modification would be issued to the BUILDING, and not the busines “Shells and Sauces.” That fact continually got lost.
There was this lady that spoke about living in the Washington Park neighborhood and how much she enjoyed walking six blocks to the business area in the Old South Gaylord Area. At that point, I had to pipe up and let her and everyone else known that walking six blocks to enjoy such an area is much different than living ½ block away -- the potential for anything going wrong impacts me much more than someone walking from six blocks away. Then, she gets up and leaves before the vote. Nothing like putting your two cents worth in verbally, then not bothering to stay for the vote.
As we listen to all the rhetoric for the next several weeks before the General Election in November, I think we all need to forget about wheather there is a “hockey mom” running for Vice President, or there is a “community organizer” running for President. I believe that it is important that we focus on the issues such as the cost of war, the cost of health care, the cost of not working with our international neighbors, the cost of bad energy policy, the cost of teenage pregnancies, the cost of jobs being outsourced to foreign countries (did you read what Frontier Airlines is doing with maintenance for their planes?), and then you decide who it is to best run this country. Focus on the issues and not the personalities. Above all, stay for the vote!
After thinking about the meeting for a bit, I was able to reflect on how hard it is to get a group of people focused on the actual issue at hand. And, if this is difficult over something as simple as a liquor license modification, what must politicking be like on a more grander scale?
Some background: The restaurant, Shells and Sauces, has really brought some much needed class and good food to this block of businesses. I live on Elizabeth Street (for almost 10 years now) about ½ block up from where the restaurant is, so any sort of outdoor activity has the potential to affect the parking, noise, and property values on my street. George (the owner of the restaurant) along with his family have been in business on 12th Avenue between Elizabeth and Clayton streets for many, many years. This current venture seems to be their best. The food is good, the service is good, and best of all, it is right around the corner. I have no doubt that while this restaurant is operated by George and his family, that things will probably be good for everyone.
The problem lies with how things work in Denver relative to the grant of this so called “modified liquor license.” Denver issues liquor licenses to the building (and owner of the property thereof) not the business. In other words, the restaurant could be sold tomorrow, and the goodwill generated by George and his family may, or may not continue.
So, my problem with allowing this to happen is definitely not with the current owners, but with the archaic way liquor licenses are issued here in Denver. Essentially, it forces me, as a property owner, ½ block up the street to initially oppose the request, because I have no idea exactly how cooperative any potential new owner would be.
At the meeting, we had a lot of discussion about the issue, and I made my concerns known to the audience. But the interesting thing was, the tone of the meeting kept heading back to how good and good for the community George and his family has been -- forgetting about the real issue, which is that the liquor license modification would be issued to the BUILDING, and not the busines “Shells and Sauces.” That fact continually got lost.
There was this lady that spoke about living in the Washington Park neighborhood and how much she enjoyed walking six blocks to the business area in the Old South Gaylord Area. At that point, I had to pipe up and let her and everyone else known that walking six blocks to enjoy such an area is much different than living ½ block away -- the potential for anything going wrong impacts me much more than someone walking from six blocks away. Then, she gets up and leaves before the vote. Nothing like putting your two cents worth in verbally, then not bothering to stay for the vote.
As we listen to all the rhetoric for the next several weeks before the General Election in November, I think we all need to forget about wheather there is a “hockey mom” running for Vice President, or there is a “community organizer” running for President. I believe that it is important that we focus on the issues such as the cost of war, the cost of health care, the cost of not working with our international neighbors, the cost of bad energy policy, the cost of teenage pregnancies, the cost of jobs being outsourced to foreign countries (did you read what Frontier Airlines is doing with maintenance for their planes?), and then you decide who it is to best run this country. Focus on the issues and not the personalities. Above all, stay for the vote!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
