Whya Duck?

William Safire strikes again.

“The original name of the cloth-backed, waterproof adhesive product was duck tape, developed for the United States Army by the Permacel division of Johnson & Johnson to keep moisture out of ammunition cases. The earliest civilian use I can find is in an advertisement by Gimbels department store in June 1942 (antedating the O.E.D. entry by three decades — nobody but nobody beats this column), which substitutes our product for the ”ladder tape” that usually holds together Venetian blinds. For $2.99, Gimbels — now defunct — would provide blinds ”in cream with cream tape or in white with duck tape.””

This is a fabulous exposition of the etymology of duct/duck tape. I am also pleased to see a reference to the beloved Gimbel’s, now long gone.

I have been getting the scout report for many years. It is a fabulous resource as it is chock full of links to really substantive material, rather than brief commentary, like you are reading right now

I have now started running MT under mod_perl.
Please note if you see an oddities, other than a speedup.

Mel Masters has a web site.
Actually he has lots, here is another one.
baystargroup
bizcrafters.com
4securewireless
webtechmedical
bizcraftersfolio
momentumnetwork
and more I am sure …
The technical contact seems to be Kevin Lancaster. It seems to be a Windows 2000 system running IIS 5.0 according to netcraft.
Anyone else know how many other sites there are at 216.219.242.81 or 216.219.242.91?
I am especially fascinated by this page which lists Mel’s accomplishments.
My favorite quote is the following.
” Masters has spent an entire career building businesses for shareholders, providing meaningful employment to thousands and operating in a highly competitive environment where attention to detail creates the delta between success/survival and failure.”
This statement may be at odds with public filings with the SEC. You be the judge.

Item 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS.
The Company has the following arrangements with certain of its directors,
executive officers or five percent shareholders;
(1) The Company leases space it currently occupies in Shady View I & II, with
Grandchildren's Realty Alternative Management Partnership I (GRAMPI), a
Minnesota limited partnership. The general partner of GRAMPI is
TimeMasters, Inc., a Minnesota corporation which is owned by Melvin L.
Masters. One of the limited partners of GRAMPI is the Masters Trust I, of
which Ralph Rolen, a director of the Company, was Trustee at the time of
the negotiations. The Company retained the services of an outside law firm
as well as an independent commercial real estate brokerage firm in
negotiating the lease. The Company leases 172,792 square feet of space
under this agreement which has a term of fifteen years and a monthly base
rate as of August 31, 1997, of $89,694. The base rate escalates
periodically over the term of the lease. The Company is also required to
pay its pro-rata share of property taxes, utilities and essentially all
other operating expenses. There is no renewal option. Rent expense under
this lease was $1,525,000 in fiscal 1997 of which $178,388 had not been
paid as of June 30, 1997.
(2) Under a Use Indemnification Agreement and certain related Board of
Directors' actions, the Company has the right to sponsor business and
business-related occasions at facilities owned by Masters Trust I and/or
Melvin L. Masters and/or TimeMasters, Inc and/or GRAMPI and/or GRAMPI #2.
In addition, the Company occasionally uses an airplane that is owned by a
Company controlled by Mr. Masters, for business-related travel. The Company
indemnifies the owners against loss or damage, reimburses out-of-pocket
expenses and pays a usage charge based on market rates. In the fiscal year
ended June 30, 1997 charges totalled $88,240.
(3) The Company has installed a campus-wide TimeMasters, Inc. wireless voice
system in its Eden Prairie facility. There are no monthly call operating
charges for unlimited use of that system. The system hardware was acquired
in fiscal 1995 for $211,000 based on competitive proposals for two other
comparable systems. Upgrades to the system amounted to $49,075 in fiscal
1997. TimeMasters, Inc. is a Minnesota corporation wholly-owned by Melvin
L. Masters.
(4) During September and October 1995, ColorSpan Corporation's (CSC's) cash
needs exceeded available cash. To cover short-term cash needs, CSC borrowed
$1,765,000 under a demand note from TimeMasters, Inc. (TMI), a corporation
controlled by the Company's Chief Executive Officer. The note had stated
interest at prime rate plus 1.75% and was satisfied in full in December
1996 through an offset of a note receivable from TMI arising from the sale
of common stock by the Company (see item (5) below). In consideration for
providing financing to CSC and executing a subordination and forbearance
agreement with the Company's senior lender, TMI was issued a warrant for
the purchase of 277,953 shares of the Company's common stock at an exercise
price of $6.35 per share. This transaction was submitted to and approved by
the shareholders at the Company's annual meeting in May 1996.
(5) In September 1996, the Company issued 914,286 shares of restricted common
stock in a private placement to TimeMasters, Inc., GRAMPI and GRAMPI #2
(together as a group known as the TimeMasters group), which is controlled
by Melvin L. Masters, the Company's CEO. The shares were issued at the
market price of $4.375
29

per share for a total of $4 million. The TimeMasters group was also
issued a warrant for the purchase of an additional 914,286 shares at
$7.00 per share with an expiration date of September 16, 2004. The
TimeMasters group has the right to require the Company to effect up to
five demand registrations under the Securities Act within ten years of
the closing date of the transaction. The agreement also provides for
incidental registration rights during this same period. In addition,
shares acquired by TimeMasters upon the exercise of the warrant or
conversion right, obtained pursuant to the $1,765,000 demand note
discussed in item (4) above, have preferential incidental registration
rights expiring September 2006. The Company offset a portion of the
proceeds from this sale with CSC's indebtedness to TMI (see item (4)
above).
(6) In addition, Mel Masters, the Company's CEO, borrowed $585,000 from the
Company in November 1996. The amount borrowed was repaid in December
1996 together with interest at 10%.

The above from the sec

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio dignissim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi.
Ut wisi enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio dignissim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat.
Duis autem vel eum iriure dolor in hendrerit in vulputate velit esse molestie consequat, vel illum dolore eu feugiat nulla facilisis at vero eros et accumsan et iusto odio dignissim qui blandit praesent luptatum zzril delenit augue duis dolore te feugait nulla facilisi. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit, sed diam nonummy nibh euismod tincidunt ut laoreet dolore magna aliquam erat volutpat. Ut wisi enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exerci tation ullamcorper suscipit lobortis nisl ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.

Everyone once in a while, you run across a athlete who that makes you think maybe athletes can be role models. Kirby Puckett was one of those guys. He always flashed that big smile, never embarrassed us when he spoke, generally made people proud he way plaing on our team. The he retires and the truth comes out. Turns out the truth is different from the image we all believed in. Check out Sports Illustrated’s take on Kirby.
Now the question comes to my mind, who is responsible? I mean Kirby is responsible for his own actions, but who turned him into the icon, who created the image? Was it the Twins, was it Kirby himself, or was it us, the public? I have a feeling we all conspired to create this larger than life good guy. It’s too bad it’s going to end badly for all parties in this case. The Twins no longer have the icon as lobbyist and ambassador of goodwill, Kirby will no doubt have a long legal ordeal to get through, followed by a tarnished retirement, and the fans will live with their dissapointment.
Perhaps we should embrace Randy Moss as a model for sports ation figures. It seems like his image and actions are consistent. We all expect he will say and do things we wish he wouldn’t. Then when he says or does things we don’t like it’s not a disapointment. Randy can only surprise us with good behaviour.
Hear that faint sigh, it’s the sports fan across the nation lowering their expectations.

The Tyranny of Email. I saw this article on slashdot. I couldn’t agree more with the author. I have my most productive days when I turn off me email client, mutt and get busy typing. Additionally, I note that, as the author asserts, it is very difficult to hammer out technical decisions in email. This is unfortunate to me, as I work directly with colleagues in India. I would like to be able to have a face to face conversation, but I have to settle for con calls. I rarely have engaged in flamewars, although there were a few hot ones at lasermaster.

I did a write up of my Fall 2002 hike around Snowbank Lake in the BWCA.
Aras, did me the favor of converting what I wrote into beautiful HTML, complete with photo’s and captions.
Hiking Snowbank

O.K. for some reason I forget how to do this.
cat -s file
sed ‘/^$/d’ file
TIMTOWTDI

I found my jury duty service to be pretty interesting, so I thought I would write down my thoughts and recollection. It’s all pretty random for the moment, I’ll try and neaten it up later.
According to the material published by the Supreme Court of Minnesota, 90% of all jury trials take place in the U.S. THis is an interesting statistic. It makes me wonder if 90% of all trials take place in the U.S., thanks to our litigatious society or whether the right to a trial is just not available in the rest of the world. I have not yet been able to find a source to prove this one way or the other. (It looks like the state department web site has the material, but it’s listed by country and I cannot seem to find a summary. I suppose I could write a little web scraper to help me summarize, but with millions of moneys typing away on the web someone must have done it by now.)
At least in the United States, assumming you are not branded an “unlawful combatant”, you are gauranteed the right to a trial by jury in the consitution several times.

1. Article III, Section 2, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution
2. Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution
3. Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution
4. Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution

It’s also enshrined in documents like the Magna Carta, Federalist #83, the Declaration of Independance Section 19, and numerous other places.
The case I server on was a civil trial. Two plaintiffs were suing the manufacturer and dealer for and RV they had purchased. They experienced a problem and cuold not get the dealer to fix it, although they claimed they had tried to get it fixed eight times. They wanted to return the RV to someone.
The dealer never showed up to the proceedings at all.
The RV manufacturer put on a excellent defense.
In the end we found for the the plaintiffs. Why?

1. We found the dealer and manufacturer had a dealer/agent relationship.
2. The defense never sufficiently impeached the number of times the owners had attempted to get the RV fixed.

Was justice done? No I don’t think so. It’s too bad the owners never tried the manufacturer or another dealer. I am positive they could have been happily RV’ing around the country instead of suing people and staying in Minnesota.
I was surprised that some members of the jury didn’t care much about the facts or the judges instructions but were obsessed with how they “would like to be treated”, as if the trial were about the Golden Rule instead of the law.
The federal statute we were given, indicates that anyone who provides a warranty has a reasonable number of times to fix something or refund the money. This is handy to know. I would hate to have a dealer who fixes something every friday for three years until the warranty runs out.
Our judge was great, as he allowed us to ask questions. This was extremely helpful. I know I have read in the past that notepads aren’t allowed in some jurisdictions. I don’t know how people keep track of all the facts and timelines in a case.
If you are in a jury selection, saying your profession is “professional dancer” it’s unlikely people will think you are a ballerina.