text:
Program Update
In 2000, The Ford Foundation, in partnership with the Advocacy Institute and the Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service at New York University, launched the Leadership for a Changing World (LCW) program. This effort developed a national network of community leaders across the country committed to working on some of the most challenging social issues facing our communities. Youth development, affordable housing, human rights, environmental justice, and living wage issues are just some of the areas where they have made a difference.
The class of 2005 will mark the completion of this path-breaking program. After seven years the awardees, finalists and nominees together form a national network of thousands whose work and determination to stand for justice has communicated a strong message of hope for what is possible through local leadership and established a basis for its continued growth.
LCW was designed to recognize, strengthen, and support leaders and to highlight the importance of community leadership in improving peoples lives. Resourceful leaders are bringing about positive change in virtually every community and on every issue nationwide. The program has recognized over 150 leaders and their organizations, earned media attention both nationally and at the state level and contributed often with awardee participation to research on leadership for practitioners and scholars.
Most importantly, the program has supported the important work of these change-makers by offering financial and developmental resources and creating spaces for them to meet, share their experiences, and engage in inquiry around leadership for social change.
We are confident that the many successes of the Leadership for a Changing World program will lead to even greater achievements, and we are committed to build on the knowledge and reach of this network as we continue to advance community leadership nationwide. Please visit this site for upcoming news and ongoing research.


text:
Contact: Brian Zelasko, David Stawasz, or Barbara Moffat
The 2009 Alumni Association Elections: Seven Chosen for Board of Directors Positions
Posted June 8, 2009
Lilliam Guerra-
Tarantino '01
Adam Salerno '05
Gary Gromack
Randy Milou
Grant Ritter '05
Dawn Whitney '75
Steve Daigneau
Olalekan Adeoyin
Lilliam Guerra-Tanantino '01 (Secretary) and Grant Ritter '05 (Advancement Committee Chair) headlined a group of seven newly elected members of the Alumni Association Board of Directors during the organization's recent annual elections.
Steven Daigneau '93/G'04, Adam Salerno '05, and Dawn Whitney '75 joined the Board of Directors as Members-at-Large. Gary Cromack '80/ G'02 and Randy Milou '03/L'06 were re-elected as Members-at-Large. In addition, Olalekan Adeoyin '09 will serve as a One-year Alumni Trustee.
Guerra-Tarantino, a former member of the Alumni Association's Homecoming Committee, is a senior analyst, military programs and customer support, at United Technologies Corporation-Pratt & Whitney.
Ritter is a former member of the Alumni Association's Nominating Team, Advancement Committee, and Young Alumni Program, as well as a former Member-at-Large. He is a marketing analyst for the MassMutual Financial Group.
Daigneau, a risk management professional, was most recently a resolutions coordinator for Sun Life Financial. Salerno is a senior manager at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Whitney is a quality assurance specialist of technology for both The Hartford Financial Services Group and Hartford Technology Services Company.
Cromack, a current Member-at-Large, has also served on the Grants Committee and the Royalty Program. He is president and CFO Cromack Industries, Inc.
Milou is also a current Member-at-Large, and has headed the Alumni Association's Merchandising Project for the past year. An attorney, he is a solo practitioner at the Law Offices of Randy J. Milou.
Adeoyin, known as "Lincoln," is a 2008 Skookum Award of Excellence winner. He was the recipient of the Grand Skookum Award, the highest honor of the awards. He was also the student speaker at the 2009 undergraduate Commencement ceremony.
"I congratulate the election winners, and I want to remind alumni that it is never too early to consider volunteering for next year's Alumni Association Board of Directors," says Alumni Association President Nelson. Those interested in running for future Board openings should contact Kathy Pappas, director of alumni relations, at 413-782-1327.
Western New England University is a private, independent, coeducational institution founded in 1919. Located on an attractive 215-acre suburban campus in Springfield, Massachusetts, Western New England University serves 3,700 students, including 2,550 full-time undergraduate students. Undergraduate, graduate, and professional programs are offered through Colleges of Arts and Sciences, Business, Engineering, and Pharmacy, and School of Law.
Follow Us!
Media Contacts
Brian Zelasko
Director for Media and Community Relations
office: 413-796-2261
Dave Stawasz
AVP for Marketing Communications
office: 413-796-2026
mobile: 413-214-8001
In The Media
Professor Erin Buzuvis
The Morning Call
Professor Erin Buzuvis
The Morning Call
Dr. Michael Meeropol
Professor Erin Buzuvis
Seattle Gay News
Dr. Tim Vercellotti
Contact Information
For more information about a news item or to list an event, please email the Office of Marketing and Communications, or call 413-782-1626. For all other requests pertaining to the Western New England University, please use our contact forms.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I would like to clarify that not all squeakers have a woe-is-me attitude. I am not saying it doesn't sting a bit. But I will train harder, run faster and be there another year.
I have a better idea. There are 9000 places for charities. There are, it seems, ~3000 squeakers that will not make it… Why BAA doesn't do a compromise in proposing a fraction of the 9000 charity spots to those who worked hard (some of us very hard) to have their BQ. They can add a special registration page for squeakers who, let's say, want to donate a minimum (I have no idea – 200$?) to a charity of their choice. I think every squeaker will be happy to brag that they qualified and helped a cause in the same time... No more heartbreaking cut-offs, it's unbearable. What do you think?
except there are not 9000 charity entries. with 22000 BQ's and 4700 DNFs, there are ~9000 non-qualifier entries
in the past there were as many (and probably more) sponsor, corporate, metropolitan, and other invitational entries as there were charity entries - and i think that is where we'll see higher numbers this year
People who took heat deferrals did take up spots from people who qualified the following year even if it didn't fill after the first two weeks. I guess I never understood the entire reason of having a heat deferral. Either run the race or don't run the race. If someone who is registered for this years race tears their acl two weeks before the marathon, would the BAA let them run in next years Boston race?
Actually Yes. At least they used to, don't know now. In fact I did it once. You enter the race with your BQ then if you're unable to run due to injury you apply for an injury deferral. If granted then next year you can enter the race (and pay again) with your old BQ without having to requalify. Again this was several years ago. For the record I didn't end up using the deferral as I was not ready to race the following year.
Part Gorilla, part Cheetah, this is the runner tagged as Geetah.
It's not the one that collects the most money that wins. It's the one that collects the most Adventures.While minimizing their collection of 'Woulda', 'Coulda', 'Shoulda'. ---William Allen
There used to be injury deferrals but they did away with them a couple of years ago.
As for the heat deferrals, no question but this was a controversial one. But I think it was a no-brainer. The BAA didn't want people to feel like they had to run in the unseasonable, near 90-degree heat. Offering the deferral gave runners a choice and covered the BAA's ass in the event someone cooked their internal organs. It also (at least theoretically) reduced pressure on emergency services for the various towns. I can remember a number of years ago there was a warm marathon. I worked at one of the Longwood Medical Area hospitals and heard ambulance sirens constantly throughout the race. By offering deferrals maybe a few ambulances were left for non-marathon emergencies?
Thanks to everyone who has been doing the maths on the cut offs. I have been following the posts for the last week to see if I might get in with my -1:24 but it looks like I usually fall just the wrong side of how things may work out. Any way I also notice that quite a few people have been getting upset about the Boston process, so let me give you a bit of background to my home town marathon and their entry process....London!
London accepts about 45,000 runners a year of which about 38,000 turn up on the day. There are three ways you can get into London either through a charity place, the ballot or via running a qualifying time (or what we call Good For Age). I notice alot of people get upset about the number of charity runners at Boston well at London they now make up about three quarters of the field!!!!!!! And explains why huge numbers of the field finish between 5 and 7 hours. Because so many spots are given up to charity runners (and I have nothing against them I have got into London this way before, but it turns it into little more than a fun run with this kind of volume) its almost impossible to get in via the ballott. I would suggest you have about the same chance as you do for New York.
So the third option is to get a good for age time. For 2013 this was 3:10 (same as my BQ target). So I went to Paris and ran 3:08:36 a PB and what I thought would get me into the 2014 London Marathon. Only for them to announce after the 2013 race that the qualifying time would change to 3:05 for 2014 and you have submit your Good for age time by the end of June!!
So I accept that there will be disappointed people this year who will not get into Boston, probably me included. But trust me guys the process for Boston is far fairer and better than London.
I hope the BAA will respond by giving the people who BQed and tried to register but did not make it an automatic pass to next years race.
I think acheiving a BQ must mean one can run Boston if one wants to and I think the BAA agree.
I don't see them giving the slowest qualifiers this year priority for next year. Your idea would create chaos. Never going to happen. You will have to requalify.
I do not agree that the BAA feels that all qualifiers must be allowed to run. Clearly by their actions this year and prior years ... they do not feel that way. It is acceptance of the best runners relative to their age standard ... and the solution is to run a better time.
I doubt running a better time will be that necessary. Registration for 2014 will be an anomaly. There may be carry over into next year's registration since the interest level is still ramped up but I can see it returning to last year's level quickly.
I have been a big advocate of the BAA doing the right thing and letting everyone in this year. And as much as I want to run Boston(really I don't care what year but since this is the first time I qualified I want to run it just in case) , I think it's a terrible idea to give an automatic pass to runners who Bq this year but couldn't get in 2014. That's not fair to the people the following year who are trying to register. Just like the ridiculous heat deferrals from several years back. It messes with numbers the following year.
And how is that doing the right thing? You are one of the biggest whiners I have ever seen. Get over it and move on.
I actually answered your question in the statement. Feel free to read it. I am hoping the running community doesn't look upon many of your posts and get the wrong idea. We have an image of being supportive of each other to uphold. But I guess that's the day and age we live in, tear down people from behind a keyboard if you don't agree with them.
We would be supportive but you come in here with this view as you have a right to run Boston because you BQ'd and as if you were the only person to ever get shut out of Boston. The BAA never made any promises that a BQ would guarantee entry, only that it will allow you to put your name in the hat. On April 16th of this year, everyone knew that it was going to take more then a BQ to get into 2014. This is no suprise and you should have known that being BQ -15 seconds. This is a case of simple supply and demand and and in this case demand is stripping supply. No concessions need to be made for you as there were never any promises in the first place.
You are the one that keeps beating a dead horse to death. For some reason you keep touting do the right thing. Well, I am asking you to do the right thing and move on. Sorry you didn't get in but that's life and simple economics.
I agree that it would be unfair to complicate things for BQers next year - but we are talking about probably 3000 people - really 1500 since many would requalify anyway - so I am sure the BAA could increase the number by this small amount. I am lucky in that I was in the >5 category so am in but I feel really bad for the people who felt excited by acheiving a BQ for the first time and now might not get to experience it. BTW what would they have done if say 20000 people decide to take the heat referal.
I second this. My -0:35 isn't getting me in and I'm over it. I started training this week to BQ-5+ at CIM in December. I'm only hanging on to this thread because I'm super curious about where the cutoff is going to be and I love the speculation.
last year I ran with two guys from the Boston College Mens Track Team.
they were just there to put in a long training run - I thought it was no big deal.
Didn't seem like they were trying to take advantage of anything or get anything for free.
What really surprised me about them was I kept passing them.
It would be considerate if they didn't run the course on a day when it's jam packed with other runners, and if they didn't use the resources allotted to other runners. Just saying.
--Buckeye Marathon 12/12/15
--IMS Arizona Half Marathon 2/14/16
"2nd running life" PR's:
5K (4/5/14): 21:25 10K (2/22014): 45:24 10 Miles (11/27/14): 1:14:10
Half Marathon (5/3/14):1:38:18 Full Marathon (5/25/14):3:30:25
Running in memory of my Sister-in-Law Carol, who passed away Mother's Day 2013.
I have been a big advocate of the BAA doing the right thing and letting everyone in this year.
This is only your opinion and apparently a small minority one. That minority being comprised mostly of those who BQ'd but not by enough to be accepted.
I think BAA is doing the right thing. Demand exceeds supply. So they are allocating the supply to those that exceed the minimum standards by the largest amount. I think that is the way it should be.
I've got a friend who did and Ironman. You have to finish in 17:00 hours. He finished in 17:01. No medal. No title. They list him as a DNF. 17:01 is not 17:00. Your BQ-0:15 is unlikely to be above the acceptance line.
In endurance events, time matters. You didn't run fast enough. That is the bottom line.
At BQ-1:19, I am already plotting a strategy for a better number (and a 2015 BQ qualifier) in Chicago in 3+ weeks. Wish me luck!
Completely disillusioned with the way the whole registration process has been handled and has forever turned me off of Boston. I qualified this year. I will make it my life's goal to come in -20minutes under and flip Boston the bird when I do in May.
Completely disillusioned with the way the whole registration process has been handled and has forever turned me off of Boston.
?? I don't get this attitude at all. They have bent over backwards to be as reasonable as possible.
IMO they should consider tightening the times another 5 minutes -- that would give people a chance to get in with the big fall marathons. But maybe that's just me being selfish and wanting to be able to wait longer to decide whether to run it. I'm not a fan of having to commit to a race seven months in advance. (I'm sure I would feel differently if I thought there was a risk of me not running a BQ.)
Anyway, kudos to the BAA for handling the past few years as well as they have. And don't forget -- at one time, you had to run a 2:50 to get in. We have it very easy these days.
Love the attitude. Good luck at CIM.
Still chasing 2:xx:xx..
Good luck. If you did it once, you can do it again and hopefully faster.
Do or do not, there is no try - Yoda
Marathon - 3:04:31(10/15), 5K - 17:46 (5/25/14), 5 mile - 30:28 (5/26/14), 4 Mile - 23:03 (7/4/14), 10K - 37:54 (8/11/13), half marathon -1:24:03 (08/10/14)
And the BAA accepts qualifiers whether they're from the US or anywhere else in the world...unlike London for which the qualifying (or "good for age") is only good for UK residents...
I started running 2-1/2 years at the age of 60. In the 42 years after running high school track and cross country I logged about 10 miles total. I BQ'd at Chicago last Fall by 2:11. Great coaching, "ancient muscle memory" and a lot of running allowed me to do it in my 2nd marathon. By chance that BQ was good for 2013 and 2014. Innumerable times I have thought "what if" about not running last April. My overriding sentiment was it could have been my spouse and kids injured on the side line. I feel lucky to register for 2014. BQ -2:11 is as they say "too close to call". I am honored, honored to the point of tears to even have the chance. This morning I ran maybe the best intervals of my 2-1/2 year running "career", determined to run Chicago at better than BQ-10 and run the Boston Marathon in 2015. You see, I've been given something really special by this experience: great health, good new friends and a rekindling of an athleticism I gave up at age 18 because the sport was "too boring".
You just had to go and tell them about international runners. I can see the posts now saying "it is unfair that BAA lets international runners take our spots".
PR's: 5K - 16:18, 10K - 35:12, HM - 1:18:39, M - 2:43:37
2013 Goals: 5K - 16:30 (7/28/2013), 10K - 35:00, HM - 1:15, M - 2:45 (4/15/13)
Absolutely! London only allocates 300 slots for U.S. runners. Tokyo also only allocates 300 slots for U.S. runners. Both give an exclusive to one company for distribution. So by comparison, Boston is very generous.
But I can see the posts now saying "it is unfair that BAA lets international runners take our spots".
This is good to know! I've been signing up for the London ballot every year for a long time (except for the 2013 and 2014 races, since I was running/planning to run Boston). I always figured if I got picked, that would be my year to run it. Guess I'd better do something else when I get serious about really running it. I had no idea it was nearly impossible to get in by ballot. I ran a 10k in London a few years back, which was along part of the marathon course, and loved it.
Btw, when I saw years ago the "Good for Age" didn't apply to US runners, I was a disappointed. But not for a second did I think it was "unfair." Their race, their rules.
That's an interesting point. To me it does seem unfair, but maybe it's a matter of perspective. Sure, their race, their rules, but the rules can be unfair. I must admit that their Anglocentrism has somewhat demotivated me from applying. (Though I would like to run all the marathon majors in a year sometime.)
I have to believe that this year is a bubble year and that next year (reg for 2015) things will go back to normal. Barring another unexpected event, we'll probably see registration for 2015 similar to that for 2013 where it didn't fill in the first two weeks. This year (for 2014), the race didn't fill at -5 even with expanded interest. If they cut the BQ times back 5 minutes and interest returns to normal, they may not even fill the race in 2015.
The new process where they let people in by fastest times ensures that they will NOT change the BQ times again unless the race repeatedly fills up in week 1. I don't know why people think that the current system is unfair; they've had it in place now for three years, and people know when they run a BQ race the time alone doesn't guarantee them a spot. Sucks that not everyone gets in, but it's still as fair as it can be.
You're probably referring to Boston 2004, which was the last time I ran, and it was one of the last years they started the race at noon. I know the heat in 2011 was bad but I well remember at mile 22 in 2004 looking at a bank sign and the temp was currently 90 and it was at least 80% humidity. Everyone I knew was at least 40 minutes off their BQ that year, but we all felt determined to finish (I walked the last 4) because there were no deferrals then and I had no idea when/if I'd be back.
This year is a bubble year for obvious reasons. But last year was also a bubble year because so few qualified at Boston due to the heat and Boston is a major major BQ qualifier and yet it filled up in just two weeks past week 2 even though the times were shifted by 5.59 compared to 2010. There are more runners and just normal folks like me (as opposed to the super speedies) train better so times are getting better.
To ejohnster and others who are already moving through the stages of grief, and to repeat something I said many pages back: if you really want to run Boston 2014, you still can by joining a charity team. In the long run you won't care how you got your bib. Yes, you will have to fundraise - there's another thread here about how to do that successfully. It's also ok to try again next year - I wish you the best in that case and I hope you still somehow get in this year. But if this year is special for you, you don't have to give up based on a cutoff line that is out of your control. It's kind of like being late in a marathon and having unexpected issues - you have a choice of dropping out or finding a way to persist on towards the finish anyway.
Or look at it this way. It's marathon Monday next April. If the 2014 race is special for you, you will be thinking one of two things:
- I dreamed of running today. I qualified but missed the cutoff so I decided to DNF on my dream.
- I dreamed of running today. I qualified, missed the cutoff, was crushed for a bit, found a charity team, raised a bunch of money towards a cause I care about, and now I'm in the starting corrals.
Compared to training for a marathon, fundraising is similar in that it's uncomfortable at times but different in that it takes much less time than the training. Anyone who has run a BQ has the commitment needed to be successful in this extra/unexpected fundraising step.
Perfectly said. Don't DNF on your dreams.
Some have speculated about the distribution of qualifiers in the BQ-0 to BQ-5 range, and its impact on determining the cut-off. So, here is some actual data on that topic, summarized in the form of charts, gathered from a number of marathons this last year.
In the first chart, each blue column groups the number of actual qualifiers from these marathons qualifiers in 10 second segments. I've modified the y-axis to reflect the assumption of 8200 Week 2 applicants (which is starting to look a little high). The red line represents what the blue columns would probably start looking like if I gathered a whole lot more data.
Or, in short, a graph showing how many more qualify at BQ-0 than BQ-5.
The second chart is a simply a cumulative of the above data (both actual, and probable) centered on 5000. In short, the distribution of actual qualifiers suggests that, if 8,200 BQ to BQ-5 qualifiers apply for 5,000 slots, the cut-off will fall somewhere near BQ-1:40.
Hang in there. I get your frustration. There should be some truth in advertising by the BAA. 30% of the field going to non-qualifiers in a race made famous for well, having to qualify reduces the credibility of the BAA.
You're not wrong to be miffed about qualifying under tougher standards only to be bumped by organizations who have discovered a way to loot a cash cow for their annual budgets/salaries and benefits.
I know, believe me I know that many of the charities do great work but many disperse only a small fraction of the money that comes in.
Interesting. I was just gathering similar data for the Ventura marathon on Sept 8.
679 finishers
Within the BQ-0 group:
Recent PRs: 5K 19:15 (2013) | 10K 39:42 (2014) | HM 1:26:19 (2013) | M 3:16:47 (2014)Goals: 10K sub-39:00 | HM sub-1:25 | M sub-3:00
Dude. I have tried to be understanding and supportive. It's just time to walk away from your computer. "I have been a big advocate of the BAA doing the right thing and letting everyone in this year", you say. How is that the right thing? It has never been the case. Many of us have qualified before and not gotten in. You are not special this regard. Please move on. The BAA has done a good job, has challenging standards, and has a clear plan. Sometimes life isn't fair.
I can't believe all this whining from people who likely will not get in and bashing on the BAA. They let every single person who was not able to finish, register this year. THAT was the right thing to do and the BAA did that and if that makes it tougher for others to get in so be it. Go look through my posts, I said this from the very beginning. If it meant I didn't get in so be it, as long as the DNFs got their day. We rode the plane back with someone who tried for 9 years to qualify and were stopped less than a mile from the finish. How's that for fair? Get over yourselves. Terrorists tried to steal everyone's day - people died, loved ones are gone, the race is full and only so many people can run in any given year. Quit being a selfish whiner and go out and train harder.
26.2 PR 3:40 (Boston 2015)
50 mile PR 9:57
I like that BQ-0 data...it says 50% of BQers in this range are BQ 0-1! Should I still have hope at BQ-1:19?
Thanks man. my buddy in my running group tonight was telling me that when he ran years ago he was amazed at how many people were in the race and just dropping out because they hadn't trained and didn't put the work in and only got in on corporate sponsors and the charity program. And Seattle, the race is important to me and I do a lot of charity work, but getting in thru the charity route for my first time would personally feel like a cheat. My goal was to qualify for and run Boston. It just wouldn't feel right.
**** - I was going to stay out of this, but this last statement is pure bull. You ran your BQ. If the BAA came to you now and said, "Oh, we're so sorry Jason honey (sic), we didn't mean to cut you out even though there were lots more qualified runners than you, so we're going to make a special exception and let you in" Would you take it? My bet is yes. So how is your statement above about feeling like a cheat by using the charity route any different? You qualified - run it any way you can. What's the difference?
I now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
Absolute PRs
Phat Old Man PR's
Waaaaay too many charity exemptions. 30% pay to play. That's BS.
I'm really hoping your analysis is right on. I have a BQ-1:45.
Hey, I'm not loving the negative tenor of some of this conversation, but I thought I'd weigh in with my experience. On a random trip to Boston sometime in the 1990s, I happened to run by the finish line. I stopped at the line, knelt and vowed that one day I would cross it (and not as a charity runner). I was in my later 20's or early 30's at the time and had run 3-4 marathons, none very close to BQ time. When I had kids, I took 6 years off from marathoning, rejoining the quest in 2005. As I approached 40, I tried to run the necessary 3:20:59 - but never really got close. It became apparent to me that I needed to get older still (45, so the BQ was 3:30:59) and just a bit faster than I then was (but not faster than I was in the 1990s). Still, I kept trying through a number of injuries, travel snafus, bad race weather, etc..., I worried that I'd fall apart before getting the chance to do this.
My birthday is right around Patriot's Day each year. It so happened that in the year when I might have run at 45, I would instead be 44 and 363 days, or something like that. I had a race where the requisite 3:30:59 was within reach, but without Boston being an option and fighting an injury that required surgery 8 weeks later, I lacked the motivation to punish myself to make that time. Were I three days older, might I have made it? Not sure.
Naturally, that was the year that Boston registration went haywire and I knew the standards would change. Just as I was going to get my needed 10 minutes, they took 6 of them away (and potentially more because of the new registration process). I was morose for about 30 minutes. Then I just kept repeating to myself, "I just need to get faster". I'd done quite well getting older.
By this point, I was fully obsessed with this task. Though I have poor eyesight, I could spot the Boston unicorn on someone's running clothing from 1/4 mile and every time I saw it, it was a dagger between my ribs. I hated seeing Boston merchandise because it made me feel like a failure.
After recovering from that one surgery and then another, I set out to make Boston under the new standards. I reinvented my gait and trained my ass off. November 2013, I ran 21 seconds under my BQ time. Friends congratulated me on my BQ. I would not accept because I didn't believe it would get me into the race and it wasn't my target.
A month later, I ran 2:22 under, pretty much meeting my goal. After 15+ years of trying, I believed I'd truly BQ'd and I shed tears. The unicorn was no longer painful to me. Then April happened and I no longer believed my time would hold up, given the new interest in the race. 3 weeks after Boston 2013, I improved my margin to 4:00 and in August, bought myself another 3 seconds. It seems I'm pretty secure on making this race at this point and I cannot tell you how much of a relief it is, how overjoyed I am.
The reason I'm boring you with this story is that I needed this on some perverted deep psychological level as much as anyone can. But as much as NEEDED to qualify for this race, and I only viewed admission into the race as qualifying (not that any time below one's BQ threshold isn't an impressive achievement), I was completely OK with missing out on the race if I didn't get in under the BAA's rules. They are what they were when I set out to do this this year - actually, the BAA had done even a bit better. Fate sucks sometimes and that's what I thought was happening, yet again after April, but it is what it is. I was prepared to accept my fate if I hadn't run fast enough and truly, going into this process, I didn't think it was going to happen. But all you can do is plow that energy and upset in a positive direction.
The BAA can't satisfy everyone. I don't understand their allocation of spots this year and I hope they find a way to get more time qualifiers in (especially those who ran in 2013 and finished and BQ'd again this year - they didn't get the experience they should have last year). I congratulate the BAA on creating more space in the race, to allow the non-finishers from 2013 to run and potentially to let more time qualifiers run.
Life is just hard sometimes and until the end of last week, I thought I was going to be there yet again with Boston. I felt this would be yet another time the carrot would be moved on me just as I was about to catch it. All I can say to those who want as desperately as I have to make Boston but who don't make it this year is - KEEP AT IT. You can make this happen and while it may suck that it isn't happening now when you've worked so hard, there's another race next year and plug all that angst into running an even better time for that one. You'll get there. But in the meantime, fingers crossed that this IS the year for you...
What person with any conscience would say yes to THAT? I am too hard headed to accept that it would count unless everyone with my same time was allowed in. There are two things I can't stand more than anything in sports and its being a quitter and a cheater. If Boston said, Jason come line up even though someone who ran faster wont get in, that's a cheat and no way would I accept that bid. Being accepted in to the race for anything other than my time is not what I dreamed of doing Boston for. If that was the case, I could have just signed up to do the charity route years ago. My wife and i raised enough money years ago for a walk we did for the preclampsia foundation. But I wanted to run the time to run Boston. I didn't dream of raising money to run Boston, even if that is a noble cause.


text:
Lindsey Brown, 38, faces charges of shoplifting and forgery, both fourth-degree felonies, after store employees detained him for attempting to steal nearly $1,500 worth of electronics and merchandise, Farmington Police Sgt. Robert Perez said.
"He loaded his cart with electronics and was walking out with a fraudulent receipt," Perez said.
Store employees, who were attempting to track more than $25,000 in losses in recent months, recognized Brown from a store surveillance camera.
Employees were alerted to be on the lookout for Brown after the store realized it was missing a lot of electronic merchandise within a short period of time, Perez said.
Police executed a search warrant at Brown's residence and recovered what they believe are numerous fraudulent receipts from area businesses.
The investigation is ongoing and police believe Brown was using fraudulent receipts to shoplift regularly at Sam's Club and possibly other area businesses, Perez said.
Also seized from Brown's home were several new televisions, electronics, blank receipts and duplication equipment.
Police also discovered a small amount of what they believe is methamphetamine, Perez said.
With the assistance of Sam's Club employees, investigators continue to identify fraudulent receipts.
"We are in the process of investigating documents we found in his residence as well as his computer and duplication equipment," Perez said. "We anticipate that there will be other charges."
The managers at Sam's Club, an affiliate of Wal-Mart, declined to comment citing company rules that prohibit employees from speaking to the media.
Wal-Mart corporate offices on Friday did not return a call for comment.
Brown was released Thursday from San Juan County Adult Detention Center after he posted a $10,000 bond, a detention center employee said.
Elizabeth Piazza: email@example.com


text:
Bits Of Wisdom
Deep Fried Bits
Do It Daily
Do It And How
B&P Chat
And for those of us who would not have gotten first place: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvUZijEuNDQ
Be sure to check out the answer to the Daily Double. Better than all the cameos.
Donation Amount: (Currency: USD)
Copyright © 2015 Bits and Pieces - All Rights ReservedPowered by WordPress & the Atahualpa Theme by BytesForAll. Discuss on our WP Forum


text:
The little girl sat at the counter, in the seat never taken by
one of the regulars, acting as if she'd done this every day. On
second glance, he realized that she wasn't a little girl, she
just wasn't very tall.
"One moment," he said, attaching table five's order to the order carousel.
"Not a problem," she said, smiling at him. He froze, stopping the carousel mid-turn. Her face was more beautiful than any he'd ever seen (and he saw a lot of face), prettier than any model. He doubted that even an angel could have such a beautiful face. And yet, as he looked at it, there was something just not quite--
She looked down at the counter. He must have just been imagining it.
"Hank?" someone in the kitchen called. Without looking away, he twisted the carousel another quarter-turn.
He sidled up to the counter. "So, what'd you like, miss?"
She looked a little puzzled. "What…do I like?" she asked, looking at the menu as he pointed it out.
"If ya need a few more minutes--"
"That," she said, pointing to something apparently at random. "I'll have that."
"Chocolate malt," he said, leaning over to see, "Good choice. Nothing to eat, then?"
She sat there, so still she looked frozen, then a blank look crossed her face for just a fraction of a second.
"No, nothing like that," she said. "Not tonight."
Hmm. She was definitely an odd one, he thought as he set the glass down in front of her. She kept looking to the door, then back to her drink, stirring it sadly. He never noticed her drinking any of it, just stirring it until all of the ice cream melted.
"Not thirsty tonight?" he asked.
She winced, looked at the door, and then stared at the melted malt. "Just don't feel like…" she trailed off. He left her to herself.
"We'll be closing soon," he said, watching her stir what had, two hours ago, been a chocolate malt.
She sighed, glancing at the door again.
"That'll be a dollar sixty for the malt," he added. She pulled out a very wrinkled and slightly torn five-dollar bill and handed it to him, then headed for the door.
"Your change?" he asked. She grabbed it, leaving a quarter for tip, and left. The bell over the door jingled.
Not two minutes after his shift started the next day, she was there. She sat at the same stool, ordered a malt, and sat there, stirring it, staring at the door. He kept an eye on her as he took care of the other customers. Once, she caught him watching, and ate a spoonful of malt, keeping her eyes down.
Around three in the afternoon, during the slow period, he glanced at her and her three-hour old malt.
"You going to stay here all day?" he asked. She didn't look up.
"It's not a problem, is it?" She looked morosely at the door.
"You waiting for someone?"
She smiled. "My true love."
"Really now?" He hoped that his voice didn't betray how surprised he was. "He going to meet you here?"
"Yes," she said. "Definitely."
She sighed. "I wish I knew. Soon, hopefully."
She ate another spoonful of room-temperature milkshake and made an involuntary face.
"Ya know," he said, "If you're going to stay till closing, ya might want ta order another malt."
She turned her face up to him, keeping her eyes on the counter, and smiled. "How about I pay for one, and you don't serve me one? I don't think I'll eat it."
Mrs. Table Three motioned to him, and waved her empty ketchup bottle. "Be right there," he mouthed at her, reaching under the counter for another.
"So who's this man you're waiting for, hun?"
"He's tall and blonde," she said.
"He got a name?"
She paused. "Jasper." She said the name like a revelation, like a caress. "His name is Jasper."
Mrs. Table Three yelled, "Sir!"
"Keep your bloomers on," he muttered, stepping out from behind the counter, "I'm coming."
She was the only one there at closing time.
"Two malts?" she asked, handing him a wad of loose bills and coins. He started grabbing change out of the register, then thought of something.
"You coming back tomorrow?" he asked.
"Without a doubt," she said.
"How about I put the change on your tab? It'll be easier on the both of us."
"Sure?" she said, almost like a question.
He grabbed the pad he kept all the regular's tabs on. "Your name?"
"Alice?" This time is was certainly a question.
He shrugged. "If you say so."
The bell jingled as she opened the door and a rush of cold air blew in. "Night, Alice."
"Goodnight, Hank."
From that day onward, Alice was there, showing up just after his shift started, sitting at that same spot, the one that the lights never seemed to illuminate, and ordered a malt that he never delivered. She just sat there, looking at the door, waiting, always the last one to leave.
She added a few dollars to her tab when it was running low (the only one of the regulars to be ahead on their tab), and left every night with a "Goodbye, Hank."
It was very sad.
It might have been a few days or a week later, but she came in smiling. Rain pounded on the windows, adding a strange background noise to the usual chatter of the diners.
"Alice," he said as she sat at her stool.
"Good evening, Hank!" she practically sang.
"You're in a good mood today," he observed.
"I like rain," she said simply.
But nothing new, nothing different happened that night. Despite that, she didn't seem disappointed as she left.
"Alice? Alice?" She was staring at nothing, a blank look at her face. Was she having a fit or something? "Alice?"
"What?" she asked, finally breaking out of it.
"Whew, you gave me quite a turn there. Just dozed off, did you?"
"Of course. Sure," she said. As he went to take care of someone at table one, he thought he heard her mutter, "Wow."
"Alice, I don't mean to pry, but are you sure he's still coming?" he asked tentatively a few weeks later.
"He'll be here. It's going to rain on Thursday." This wasn't an attempt to convince herself that he was still there. She said this very matter-of-factly, as if she was saying, "the sky is blue," or "This is Monday."
And it did rain on Thursday, much to his surprise. She came skipping, almost dancing, and settled at her seat.
"it's raining," he commented.
"I know," she said. "Isn't it wonderful?"
It wasn't much later, while Hank was refilling another of the regular's decaf, that he came in. And immediately, Hank knew that this was who Alice had been waiting for.
Partly because he was tall and blonde. But mostly because Alice got off her high stool and walked over to him.
"You've kept me waiting a long time," she said.
Jasper ducked his head. "I'm sorry, ma'am," he replied.
She held out her hand, he took it, and they turned and walked, hand in hand, through the door. The bell jingled as it swung shut.
NOTE: Yeah, it's a litle weird. I was in a
Alice and Jasper are from Stephenie Meyer's Twilight series.The image for this story was made by ~angelic-ailsa of DeviantART, and can be viewed here (and was used with permission). It was the inspiration for this short story, and I thank her forletting me use it.
| Email this Short story
| Add to reading list


text:
No, Venter isn't that idiot with the two-wheeled, people-moving, 'IT' thing. He's the former Prez of Celera Genomics, the company that finished mapping the human genome a couple years ago. This week, Venter revealed that his own genome was used for the map. All sorts of problems arise from this.
First of all, look at the guy. Are you sure he's from the same species as you and I? Second, if he's weird enough to include his own genetic structure in this multi-billion-dollar experiment, you think he's not above tweaking the resulting map, so that all the clones and stuff we'll make based on Celera's research will wind up hairless and goofy? Sure: "One day, I will be the most attractive man on Earth! Hahahahaha!"
Vatican City---Following several days of unprecedented, high-level meetings this week in Rome, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has issued new guidelines regarding standards of sexual conduct for priests. A special committee of the Conference released the following statement, indicating that it was to be considered tentative:
"The Catholic Church will absolutely no longer tolerate notorious priests who have a history of repeatedly raping and sodomizing young boys and girls without using a condom. Let it be known to the faithful that from this day forward, all raping and sodomizing priests will be required to offer the child his or her choice of a 'Holy Condom.' These will be specially formed by Catholic lay workers to resemble popular saints. We understand Saint Francis of Assisi is already a big hit with the kiddies. You know how they love animals."
Crawford, TX---President Bush met with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah this week at the President's ranch in Crawford, Texas. The Crown Prince heatedly insisted that the U.S. must rein in Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon or risk sending the Middle East and U.S. interests there "over a cliff."
Mr. Bush, already upset by his last-minute realization that he would be meeting the crown prince, and not 'Fresh Prince' Will Smith, responded angrily, "Oh yeah? You wanna see 'over a cliff'? OK, dishtowel, I got one for ya: How 'bout you stop your psycho fuckwads from coming over here and killing Americans, and I'll try not to accidentally drop a couple dozen thermo-nukes on that stinking cat shitbox you call a country. You think you can handle that one, pipeline? Don't make me go solar on your ass."
Edfurt, Germany---In the central German town of Erfurt, a disgruntled teenager went on a bloody shooting spree Friday, killing 16 people before ending his own life with a bullet to the head. "I can't believe it," said Gunther Katzehund, an Erfurt resident. "This kind of thing happens in America, sure, but not here in Germany. We Germans are not a violent people." When pressed by skeptical American, French and British journalists to expand on this, Katzehund replied, "I mean, can anyone think of another time when a German citizen slaughtered countless innocents before shooting himself in the head in a small, enclosed room?"
Laughlin, NV---In national news, a motorcycle convention in Laughlin, Nevada, turned deadly on Saturday when fighting broke out between two rival, outlaw gangs. "I can't believe it," said local resident Enid Snuffbuckle, 82. "I mean, what's the world coming to when two rival, outlaw biker gangs comprised of violent, drug-dealing, liquored-up, gun-and-knife-wielding scumbags can't get along without fighting? You'd think after September 11, people would just come together as Americans. I guess it takes all kinds."
Max Ataxia


text:
Discover a selection of top forums gameplay ninja on the internet. Come to share your passion on forums gameplay ninja and meet other fans of gameplay ninja. Then, why don't you create your own forum of gameplay ninja ?
A full, thriving ninja world is set before you. Make friends, gain enemies,hunt the greatest Legendary Weapons, take part in the grand Epic Missions and save the world or destroy it!
free, forum, naruto, role, play, that, simple, join, uzumaki, fights, chat, help, jutsu, ninjutsu, save, world, destroy, enemies, friends, legendary
A shadow of the past rises unseen and unknown, poised to plunge the peaceful ninja lands into eternal war once more.
naruto, sasuke, uchiha, narutp, role, play, clans, jutsu, sharingan, rinnegan, byakugan, kekkei, genkai, technique, leaf, sand, wind, water, earth, lightning, konoha, suna, kiri, kumo, hokage, raikage, mizukage, kazekage, tsuchikag
TMNT Ninja Turtles RPG and Fandom Forums
A clean minecraft community dedicated to multiple styles of gameplay with a variety of plugins
merchants, marauders, minecraft, server, clean, community, dedicated, multiple, styles, #gameplay, with, variety, plugins
This is a D20 styled RPG based off of Naruto! Play as your favorite ninja in a balanced setting.
naruto:, hurricane, chronicles, this, styled, based, naruto!, play, your, favorite, #ninja, balanced, setting
Free forum : Next born ninja!
Naruto RPG
naruto, shinobi, story, forum, #ninja, jutsu, chakra, konoha, suna, kiri, kumo, leaf, wind, water, earth, cloud, bijuu, tailed, beasts, villages, role, play, fire, lightning, sand, sharingan, chidori, rinnengan, raseng
Free forum : Set in an alternate timeline about 100 years after the death of the Sage of Six paths.
#ninja, revolution, naruto, alternate, timeline, years, death, sage, paths
Ninja Way is a forum-based roleplaying game based in the Naruto universe. Create your own custom character and pave your own ninja way!
#ninja, forumotion, naruto, roleplay, roleplaying, game, forums, forum, text, based
Free forum : Void your decisions until the day is done. Two paths to follow but you can only choose one. Follow with Courage or Follow with freedom.
free, forum, naruto:, valor, over, liberty, naruto, shippuden, #ninja, until, done, paths, follow, only, choose, with, courage


text:
But Who's Counting?
Page 5 of 6
Feldman and his cofounder, Paul Sutter, the company's president, do not approach the problem of audience measurement as veterans of media. Feldman, a computer scientist, was the cofounder of Searchspace (now Fortent), which developed software to help financial-services firms detect money laundering and the financing of terrorists. Sutter founded the network optimization company Orbital Data (later acquired by Citrix) as an expert on high-performance computer architectures, a background that has proved useful as Quantcast processes the thousands of terabytes of data it has collected.
When the founders first conceived the company, Sutter says, "we just asked the most simple, kindergarten questions, and it soon became clear that the language that media buyers and planners were speaking was nothing like the language of Internet advertising, with its cost-per-clicks and so forth. Media planners liked to talk about audiences, demographics, and lifestyles. So the answer was quantcasting, which means just reaching the people you want to reach." Today, the company claims that 85,000 broadly defined "publishers" have elected to be directly measured by Quantcast, including the Disney-ABC Television Group, NBC, CBS, MTV Networks, Fox, BusinessWeek, and Time's SI.com and CNNMoney.com.
Quantcast is not the only company with the bright idea of replacing panel-based audience measurement. Last June, Google announced a new service, Google Ad Planner, which uses the company's detailed knowledge of Web traffic to provide interested parties with a more accurate understanding of Web audiences. Wayne Lin, Ad Planner's product manager, demonstrated the service to me when I visited the GooglePlex in Mountain View, CA. Because Google owns DoubleClick, one of the two dominant systems for serving ads, Web audience data can be combined with the ad-serving system so that media planners know which sites are best suited for which ads. The combination should be powerfully attractive for media planners and marketers, says Lin.
How do media planners regard the two new audience measurement services? "We use Quantcast now at Mediasmith, but they are not complete enough yet to be a total solution," says David Smith, who briefly advised the startup during its formation. The difficulty, according to Smith, is that the site's audience information won't be really useful–let alone a new currency–until more publishers elect to be quantified. Jim Spanfeller agrees. "They're to be commended for working hard on the problem," he says. "But it's very much a chicken-and-egg thing."
As for Google's Ad Planner, Smith says, "the agencies will never stand for it." Smith, like everyone I spoke to, argued that media planners will resist Google's audience information because no one wants one company to be so dominant in online advertising: were Ad Planner to be widely adopted, Google would be selling keywords through its search advertising network, AdWords; selling banner advertising through its display advertising network, AdSense; serving those ads through DoubleClick; and advising media planners on where to spend their advertising dollars.
Ad Planner also lacks a number of important features that an advertising agency might expect from an audience measurement service. According to Smith, it offers neither very detailed demographics nor a full explanation of its methodologies. Patrick Viera, TechnologyReview.com's own digital strategist and West Coast advertising manager, said disdainfully when I asked his opinion: "Yeah, I looked at it. It doesn't do anything you want. It's just a tool for selling AdSense."
Still, says Smith, there's demand for something new. "Publishers have to use third-party measurements, but third parties [such as ComScore and Nielsen] may underestimate audiences, and the truth is probably somewhere in between. That's why new companies like Quantcast have a chance."


text:
Previous Episode | Next Episode
VideogamezVideogamez (2011) Season 1 Episode 103- The Problem Solverz Cartoon Episode Guide by Dave Koch
This page has been viewed 33 times this month, and 471 times total.
- The Problem Solverz Cartoon Episode GuideEpisode GuideTelevisionSeriesCartoon
- Cartoon Network Studios
- Distributed by: Cartoon Network Studios
- Cartoon Characters: Horace, Roba, Alfe.
- Voice Actors: Kyle Kaplan, Ben Jones, John DiMaggio.
- Directed By Russell Jones.
- Produced By Jamie R. Young, Dave Foligno.
- Written By Michael Yank, Ben Jones.
- First Aired on April 11, 2011.
- Originally Aired on Cartoon Network (USA).
- Running Time: 11 minutes.
- Season: 1
- Color
Cartoon Summary:
Horace becomes addicted to video games while the world is threatened by a rogue AI.
Cartoon Production Information:
Case Identification: #00101001: The Video Game That Sucks the Problem Solverz In
Cartoon Video:
Sorry, we do not have a video of Videogamez. If you have one, or know of one on Youtube, Vimeo or any other site, Let Us Know
Submit Additional Information:
Do you have anything to add to this page? Have we made any mistakes... or do you have any additional information about Videogamez? If so, we would love to hear from you. Please send us a quick note with your additions or corrections to this page, and we will make the corrections as soon as possible!
Cartoon Comments:
Do you love Videogamez, or do you think it is the worst cartoon ever? Let us know what you think! Surely you have an opinion... so share what you think. Take a minute and post your own comments about this cartoon here.


text:
Would you like to use the Baen Mobile site?
Meet George Eberhart: former journalist, professional iconoclast. Recently resuscitated from a suicide attempt by the newly perfected Han process—a scientific advance widely regarded as blasphemous—George becomes fascinated by a pattern of events that suggests a protean alien lifeform is playing sadistic games with unsuspecting Earthlings. Following a trail of mayhem that might have come from the Weekly World News headlines, George sets out to find the creature and discover exactly what its plans are for Earth.
With a new introduction by the author.
Science fiction writer John Kessel is the winner of two Nebulas, and the James Tiptree, Jr. Award. He is professor of creative writing and American literature at North Carolina State University.
". . .a black comedy of pre-millenial hysteria. . [that is] an outstandingly original work. . . [told in] in an intelligent, witty voice."—Publishers Weekly
Home | Ebook formats | Ereader Instructions | FAQs | Baen.com | Baen's Bar | Contact Us
News and Updates | Grantville Gazette | Baen Free Library
Your Account | Shopping Cart | Wish List | Member Login
Site Map


text:
Razor blades were found in two sticks of KerryGold Pure Irish Butter sold at this Best Market in Holmdel, police said.
- Filed Under
Police say Nicholas Mignosi, an employee at a Best Market in Holmdel, was responsible for sticking razor blades in two sticks of foil-wrapped Kerrygold Pure Irish Butter last month.
Lt. Keith Cannata said Mignosi, 22, of Keansburg, was charged with tampering with a food product and released on a summons.
According to Cannata, the manufacturer, KerryGold, has been cleared of any wrongdoing and as a result of the investigation is now a victim in the case. ...


text:
Today I Hate Thread!
View Single Post
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Midwest
Posts: 285
Originally Posted by
Today I hate moron parents who cruise through the park with their kid. I almost took out a ~6 year old and his dad that were resting or slowly turning on the landing of a 30' kicker. I even sat at the top with nobody in sight changing songs and gearing up before I dropped in, they must of been there for 2-3 mins!
What do I get?
"Watch where you're fucking going, that's my kid!" Yeah, fuck you buddy. I just told him to get off the damn landing before someone gets hurt and rode away.. Some people shouldn't breed.
If I didn't stomp that 540 clean (Which I rarely do..) I would of taken them out. I just barely missed the kid as is.
Made the mistake of going out MLK day, hill was packed as expected but its not the crowd that irritated me as much as the kids that would post up on the downslope of the jumps, just chillin'. I understand if you slam and can't get out the way quick but these kids weren't even hitting anything but just fuckin' chillin' or playing with their new GoPro's trying to get footage of their buddies just crusing over the lips of jumps... and then playing it back and watching it... That or they would sit at the approach... some of us need a good takeoff for speed to get a clean jump. I said to a skiier dad in the lift line that they should open up a hot chocolate stand at the bottom of the jump then atleast the chillin' crowd would at least be single file. So irritated, I felt so old... WTF happened to etiquette. I like had to take a smoke break after that.
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Fewdfreak
Find More Posts by Fewdfreak


text:
adjective in·tro·duc·to·ry \ˌin-trə-ˈdək-t(ə-)rē\
: providing information about someone who is about to speak, perform, etc., or something that is about to begin
: providing basic information about a subject
: intended to attract customers when a new product, service, etc., is introduced
Full Definition of INTRODUCTORY
: of, relating to, or being a first step that sets something going or in proper perspective <an introductory course in calculus>
— in·tro·duc·to·ri·ly \-t(ə-)rə-lē\ adverb
See introductory defined for English-language learners
See introductory defined for kids
Examples of INTRODUCTORY
- I'd like to make a few introductory remarks before we start the program.
- a class in introductory physics
First Known Use of INTRODUCTORY
Related to INTRODUCTORY
- Synonyms
- beginning, preliminary, precursory, prefatory, prelim, prelusive, preparative, preparatory, primary
- Antonyms
- advanced
INTRODUCTORILY Defined for Kids
adjective in·tro·duc·to·ry \ˌin-trə-ˈdək-tə-rē\
Definition of INTRODUCTORY for Kids
: serving to introduce : preliminary <an introductory lesson>
Learn More About INTRODUCTORY
Next Word in the Dictionary: introflexPrevious Word in the Dictionary: introductorinessAll Words Near: introductory
Seen & Heard
What made you want to look up introductory? Please tell us where you read or heard it (including the quote, if possible).


text:
Stand By wins Cyril Collard prize
Roch Stephanik has been awarded the Cyril Collard prize for his first feature film, Stand By, which also recently won a Best actress Cesar award for its lead, Dominique Blanc.
Continue reading – simply subscribe below
It takes just two minutes and you'll immediately gain full access to ScreenDaily.com, PLUS Screen International magazine delivered to your door.
Screen International Subscribers:
If you are a Screen International subscriber please sign in with your email address and click submit:
Not a Screen International subscriber?
Sign up today for immediate and complete access to ScreenDaily.com and Screen International magazine for as little as £19.95 a month!
Find out more about all the benefits of a subscription to Screen International.


text:
Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & aakk9999 & brotherhood of lan & goodroi
We read it on several threads; Why has my site disappeared from Google? or why my site lost most of its ranking on Google´s serps?
And we guess and suggest reasons in addition to few things to avoid told by our good friend at the plex GoogleGuy.
Actually the list is growing and I can mention few of the reasons suggested by fellow members:
duplicate contents
canonical (www vs. non-www) issues
spam articles
linking to spam sites
using any "cloaking" technique
The problem at present is that we read about sites which are dropped without having the above mentioned "incidents". And as usual we suggest and guess new reasons to explain that. And maybe there is no explanation other than; occasionally innocent sites just get a hit in random keeping in mind that they already in accordance with Google´s own Quality Guidelines.
And then we still have that famous "Gaming Google" business which is a general term still not sharply defined.
In this connection I just wonder whether changing only the title or description metatags of the pages occasionally considered as gaming Google. People may do that for several reasons and mostly in good faith in an attempt to make their pages rank better on SEs if they feel that their pages contents deserve better place on the serps. Nothing "blackhat" about that, IMHO.
And how about number of internal links included in a menubar. Is there a magic number beyond which one might trigger "Gaming Google" filter?
Its therefor of importance to cover as many factors as possible related to "Gaming Google". Otherwise we shall end asking each other:
Would your site be the next to be caught gaming Google without you being aware of that?
- you only change/update the title tags of 25+ pages at once.
- you only change/update the description metatags of 25+ pages at once.
- within the page body text, you only change/update the titles (which could be within

) of 25+ pages at once.
But there are very legitimate reasons, as well as pure-SEO reasons to do such things.
And perhaps those things matter if you have a site that has 50 pages. I don't know.
What about sites - full original content sites, with daily updated content? I have a site where 30-50 stories go online everyday. What if I want to change the name of a section from Airlines to Aviation? That would in an instant affect not just the 25 pages you mention, it would affect close to 2500. Then what? Am I gaming Google?
How about the related stories box I have it every story on my site? It contains 25-30 links to related (really related, not just SEO-wise) stories, and every week I change them by changing an include? That's gaming?
The gaming you mention happens in every regular news website every other day for hundreds of editorial reasons.
Or do you have only highly optimized, commercial sites in mind?
>>Or do you have only highly optimized, commercial sites in mind? <<
What I have in mind are 25+ pages (could be 100 or more of course) which are already indexed with specific factors; titles, description metatags and the title of the page at body text. Then a sudden change/update happen to one of the said factors.
I´m investigating this matter because I have the impression (though not sure at present) that the "Gaming Google Filter" has been tightend recently and might cause a site to be sandboxed or drop in ranking on the serps because of such sudden changes/updates.
I have been making changes to a static site and lost my tool bar cache to the site for the first time. I wondered if I had screwed it all up because of the type of changes I was making. I was moving
 tags around and adding new navigation. I also was experimenting with my .htaccess file.
However I show a serps cache and that has shown a new cache date for the last three days. I'm hoping the toolbar is just lagging behind.
Edit your pages as much as you like, but don't do anything silly like use hidden text or keyword stuffing. (However, keyword stuffing seems to be highly effective at the moment, but eventually Google will realise they've stuffed up and fix this.)
>>It is unlikely that the editing history of pages will trip filters. To implement this would require Google to keep a history of each page in the index which would require vast resources and provide little or no benefit.<<
If we take a look at Google´s United States Patent Application 20050071741, we shouldn´t dismiss the possibility of Google keeping history of web pages (documents). And in this connection, Google just need to compare the content of a page after a sudden change in title, description metatags or title on body text with its previous cache ;-)
The resources required for this are so huge and the benefits so small, that whatever patents may say, this is not going to happen in the near future. And even if the resources are allocated, the algorithmic problems are enormouse.
If your site drops despite you having no black hat tactics, then 99% of the time it will be because you have no links in that are deemed as having any real value. The other 1% will be a technical issue.
>>2) Google cannot even distinguish the original from a copy of a page, therefore the idea that they will compare a page with old copies to see if search engines are being gamed is, in my opinion, laughable.<<
But do you agree that Google is able to:
- discover duplicate contents and classify them accordingly (supplemental results)?
- measure the keywords density in a webpage (documenet)?
- discover cross linking?
If it is capable of doing that, why it shouldn´t be capable of identifying two different, titles, description metatags or titles on body text?
>>The resources required for this are so huge and the benefits so small, that whatever patents may say, this is not going to happen in the near future.<<
If you read GoogleGuy´s and Matt Cutts posts you will see that fighting "Gaming Google" is a high priority and I don´t think that the two shall agree with you that "benefits so small".
This discussion is just proof of the lack of working google technology
Not really, this discussion is just proof that we still don't know how Google's technology works since Florida.
I don't think editing titles/descriptions of 1,000 pages at one go will trip any filter. Adding/editing 1,000 pages so that all link to another site in your ownership - definitely.
Why is it the most used search engine in the world cant deal with sites adding more than 1 page a day?
If I add 5, 10, 20, or 50 pages, the first page (the one that's linked from my home page) gets indexed within 24 hours and the rest generally make it into the index within a few days.
I´m investigating this matter because I have the impression (though not sure at present) that the "Gaming Google Filter" has been tightend recently and might cause a site to be sandboxed or drop in ranking on the serps because of such sudden changes/updates.
if you use a templating system single changes would be sitewide instantly, any subsiquent changes in serp could be due to the literal change rather than the fact that it was changed if you get what i mean
europefor visitors said If I add 5, 10, 20, or 50 pages, the first page (the one that's linked from my home page) gets indexed within 24 hours and the rest generally make it into the index within a few days.
ditto ... there is no reason why sites cannot produce 100s of new and unique pages a day - not all sites are one man operations.
>>if you use a templating system single changes would be sitewide instantly, any subsiquent changes in serp could be due to the literal change rather than the fact that it was changed if you get what i mean <>you only change/update the title tags of 25+ pages at once
If the site has 100 pages that 25% of the site changing the same day, <<
But does that mean; changing the title (or description metatags or the title on the body text) alone of 20% or 25% or X% of pages at the same day might trigger a "Google Gaming Filter"?
>>Plus, other factors might come into play, such as an overall "spam score" or profile for the site. <<
Should that mean site [A] with "clean profile" might change the titles of X% of pages at the same day without trigger a "Google Gaming Filter" while site [B] with "less clean profile" will trigger the said filter for doing the same changes?
>>Reseller: Yes, that's what I'm suggesting about filters and penalties in general. It would be a logical approach, and it would help to explain why some people get whacked for doing X, Y, or Z while others are unaffected.<<
Very interesting indeed and that makes sense.
Maybe Google have a kind of "site behavior rating" incorporated within the algos. Google might use either automatic or semi-automatic procedures for rating a site behavior.
Take a look at what Matt Cutts wrote (on his blog) in connection to link buying, especially "semi-automatic" and "reputation":
"A natural question is: what is Google's current approach to link buying? Of course our link-weighting algorithms are the first line of defense, but it's difficult to catch every problem case in adversarial information retrieval, so we also look for problems and leaks in different semi-automatic ways. Reputable sites that sell links won't have their search engine rankings or PageRank penalized–a search for [daily cal] would still return dailycal.org. However, link-selling sites can lose their ability to give reputation(e.g. PageRank and anchortext)."
But does that mean; changing the title (or description metatags or the title on the body text) alone of 20% or 25% or X% of pages at the same day might trigger a "Google Gaming Filter"?
The problem is, we're talking about a moving target - controlled by google, so all we can do is choose a set of guidlines we are happy with for our own sites.
Google is probably building profiles of what spam site activity looks like - we could accidently stray into what looks like spam activity.
I prefer to, if possible:
Drip-feed global changes
Make bigger changes after a google update, not before or during a possible update.
Keep a log of changes made to the site so that you can study dates, traffic levels, PR, etc, should there be problems later.
A possible risk in global changes to <titles> is that if the content of the page hasn't changed, then, in theory, the Title shouldn't have to change - its best to choose accurate Meta Tags when creating the page and let them mature in the serps.
Another possible factor to consider is page size, If you have two pages, one 5K and the other 10K, and you make identical changes to the meta tags. The larger file has a better "content" to "html" ratio compared to the smaller file, so it might fly under a filter rather than trigering a filter. I'im just speculating of course, but i think we learned over recent years that just about every factor needs to be considered.
Something worth doing when you work on SEO is to imagine that your're a google software engineer working on the algo/filters. That makes decisions easier.
I'm not so sure.
But for perspective, I'm ultra paranoid. ;-)
>>Over the past 12 months, I've noticed a lot of random posts from members noting that they had made sitewide/largescale changes to items like page titles, only to see subsequent drops in rankings.<<
In general we are talking about an ANTI-SEO filter (as per longen msg #:24 too)which might cause a site to be sandboxed or drop in ranking.
I guess the main key to trigger the "Google Gaming Filter" are sitewide/largescale as you mentioned correctly. Maybe we are talking about x% of the total number of a site pages.
The second key mightbe the sudden modification of ONLY ONE of the following factors:
- <title></title>
- <meta name="description" content="">
- The title in

 within the text of the area
[edited by: reseller at 7:13 pm (utc) on Sep. 6, 2005]
Drip-feed global changes
Make bigger changes after a google update, not before or during a possible update.
Keep a log of changes made to the site so that you can study dates, traffic levels, PR, etc, should there be problems later.
well, that all is definitely more gaming google than acting as you work constantly toward the users...
i have now over 170,000 pages in google and during the last 6 month i HAD to update subpage templates (everything is DB driven), maybe updated so over 20,000 pages at once, but I did that for the sake of the users, not to game anybody... if google flags this and considers it "cheating": forget about them, i have principles which can not be dictated by some search engine, only by my users! and if they think it has to be green and on the left, i think about google AFTER thinking about my users...
just 2 pennies,
It's possible that such changes could cause a short-term interruption in Google rankings, but I doubt very much Google would seek this out specifically. This sort of thing is a normal and frequent occurrence, not spammy or indicative of excessive SEO at all.
I'm not so sure."
Caveman, I'm not so sure either. We just saw this type of drop today. It's not certain that sitewide changes caused a keyword serp drop, but it's definitely high on the list of most likely culprits. Only one keyword was affected however.


text:
Anthony T. Calvelli
Position: C-G
Height: 5-10 Weight: 189 lbs.
Born: July 16, 1915 in Stockton, CA
Died: May 17, 1979 in San Mateo County, CA
High School: Stockton
College: Stanford (school history)
Drafted by the Detroit Lions in the 11th round (97th overall) of the 1939 NFL Draft.
Weighted Career AV (100-95-...): 0 (14739th overall since 1950)
Like this page? Sponsor it for $5. Your message will replace this ad.
Non-Offensive TDs
Intercept. Ret. TD


text:
Welcome to the
Country Dance World Championships
Breaking News - Special Attractions at Worlds 2016
Come join us in "Music City" - Nashville, Tennessee in January for the 24th annual UCWDC Country Dance World Championships. This year's event will be held at the beautiful Gaylord Opryland Resort and Convention Center from January 4th through the 10th, 2016. There's so much to see and do at the World Championships! Our seven day convention will be packed with social dancing, workshops, competitions, shows, shopping, parties, and more. Dancers and spectators from all over North America, Europe, Asia and beyond are already planning to be there. We'd love to see you there too! There's just no other country dance experience available that can match the fun and pageantry of Worlds.
Please click on the "Hotel" link above to access Opryland's on-line reservations page and book your hotel room today. We have a special rate of $126 per night, if booked prior to June 15th ($137 per night after June 15th) to stay at one of the most beautiful hotels in America.
If you weren't able to be with us for Worlds 2015, you missed a great show. Our New Year's Eve party was great, as was the Variety Show and Farewell Party on Saturday night. Everyone loved the expanded social dancing program, the Contestants' Reception, the huge dance floors and the general camaraderie we all experienced within our international dance community. In addition to bringing back all the great new ideas we incorporated for Worlds 2015, we're also planning a variety of new changes based on some really great input we received following the event. Don't miss out! Start making plans today to be with us in January for Worlds 2016.
Click on the video clip below for a quick peek at some of the fun we had last year…
World Championships 2015
World Championships 2014
World Championships 2013


text:
Poor Indian just can't get a break. Apparently Bing and Yahoo! have decided to censor certain keyword searches for India only. If you ask me this is a huge violation of rights of Indians, but what can you do?
Article source:
Bing and Yahoo Censors Sex & Related Keywords Search in India