Let's roll some dice, watch some movies, or generally just geek out. New posts at 6:30 pm ET but only if I have something to say. Menu at the top. email@example.com on Mastodon and @gsllc on Twitter.
Sundays are lazy days for me. Sometimes I post other people’s work. Sometimes, something silly. Usually both. Well, there’s nothing sillier than this. I post today only because this will become my 200th consecutive daily post. I’ve pulled this shit before, posting just to say that I’m continuing what would become a 374 day streak, but I post this to say my streak is ending. Very meta.
Okay, fine. Because you’re here, I should probably give you a stupid meme. Here’s one.
Nice mashup of two things I love. It’s not as if I had something important to say for most of the 199 before it (short of some of these).
But wait! It gets … worse? Better? Throughout those posts, if I referenced a legal concept that wasn’t critical to the theme, rather than spell it out for you, I saved space by linking to a discussion of that legal concept on my far less popular legal blog. Here are the hits for that blog over the past few days.
I don’t want to be famous, so I may have to shut down these blogs. 🙂
Also, I should have tagged John and Tales of Arcanayesterday, so I’m doing so today — with top billing — even though they have nothing to do with this post. So, there you go. If I’m going to be famous, I’m pulling those nerds into it with me.
This is a supposed excerpt from the OGL 1.1. I have no idea if it’s real.
Here’s the full-sized image:
But if it is . . .
. . . you’re welcome. Sort of. It’s clear that my concerns about the OGL are being met, for better or worse, and I know WotC Legal read my posts. This means that there’s a good chance that the OGL 1.1 will be a real license because I pointed out why 1.0 wasn’t. The speculation is that 1.1 will be arduous, but the fake OGL is no less arduous. It simply appears open because WotC is lying to you about what they’ve actually licensed to you (reminder: NOTHING!). They could always have changed their mind and done this. Some people have said to me that WotC could never pull the rug from underneath the community because they’d revolt, but now that they’re telling you the truth, they’re saying (straining the metaphor a bit) that no rug is henceforth standard operating procedure. They’re expressly doing what I told you they always could, and the community is preparing a revolt. Voila!
So, now they’re going to tell you the real story, and it’s clear you don’t like it. Maybe you shouldn’t. Either way, this may not be good for business, and this may not change WotC Legal’s status as . . . well, you know my opinion, but at least you’re going to be protected from deceit (again, assuming this is real and representative of what they’re going to do throughout the OGL 1.1).
And then there’s this:
Think about it, people, but not too hard, because . . .
With this post, I’ve posted every day for an entire year. That’s right. The last day that I didn’t post was May 1, 2021. Before that, I was last discussing Key Lime Kit Kat bars.
This blows away my current record streak.
But wait a second. Is this even real? Can the post announcing that I’ve posted every day for a year be the anniversary post itself?
I say yes, and if you disagree, just keep in mind that I posted a bonus post on April 9, April 13, April 19, and April 25, so there have already been over 365 posts in this time without this one. There may have even been a couple more bonus posts, but I’m too lazy to look.
On another note, today is the first day of May. May is hockey playoffs, college lacrosse playoffs, preparations for the summer, and — most importantly — the month when all the cool people are born. Plus, I was born in May.
So, in 11 days, the streak will die. I want to focus on other things, and consistency hasn’t led to a large number of non-spam followers. Rarely does anyone retweet the tweets linking to these posts (likes merely gauge your footprint, not increase it), and almost all comments occur on other social media platforms, so my streak hasn’t done anything to improve my online footprint (except for a brief moment). Besides, many of my recent posts have been rather lame. If I didn’t have something to say, I’d write anyway, and it shows. I have a few more posts scheduled for this week, some others in my head that will come soon, and a handful scheduled to publish as far out as December. However, going forward, if I don’t have something to say, I won’t say anything. I’ll never feel rushed, and anything goofy will have to be funny enough to be worth sharing.
Well, I’ve now published 156 posts in as many days. I missed a day, but published twice on 9/11, so my current streak is really 120 days in a row. But much like Cal Ripken, I’m choosing to end my streak. I’m not going to post today.
Oh, shit. Oops.
This still counts as a post, and it’ll probably piss off Kessel Junkie for bonus points, suckers.
A tenday ago (nerd alert!), I published my 200th post, and four days later, I was having a Twitter conversation with my cousin, Kessel Junkie. I did some quick math in response to one of his points he raised on his blog post:
Since and including April 8, I've missed only June 16, so 105 posts in 106 days with the next 7 already queued up to go and one more I'll be writing tonight. But the current streak is 36, and my current record is … 69. 😉 #bloggingmania
The reason I skipped June 16 was because I foolishly thought that I’d run out of things to say. I changed the subtitle of the blog to read that I was going to post only on Monday, Wednesday, Friday, and occasionally more, and June 16 was the Tuesday after I made that decision. But the quarantine kept the hits coming, and whenever I write something, I want it out there ASAP.
Does that make me “prolific”? Let’s see what dictionary.com says (Miriam-Webster can suck it).
TL;DC (“too lazy; didn’t click”): definition #2 is “producing in large quantities or with great frequency; highly productive,” and the example of usage is, “a prolific writer.” I’ve made a conscious decision to keep my posts short, and there’s no aspect of the definition related to quality, so I think I fit the description.
So, are you impressed? You shouldn’t be. I’m just using this observation as an excuse for another blog post, which pads my numbers. Tomorrow, I’ll be discussing the type of knot I use to tie my shoes. Spoiler: I use the same knot as everyone else. If you have any requests for my next post, let me know.
All two of you reading this are suckers, but you’ll be back.