Status update, or, “cue to Bowie’s ‘Ch-Ch-Changes’ song”

Wow, June of last year.

As you can see by the date stamp of the previous entry -  – I’ve obviously fallen behind in the whole ‘commenting in my blog’ thing.  I don’t anticipate that I’m suddenly going to change that, but thought I should explain why.

It’s been quite a year of ups and downs for me, both personally and professionally.  I’m not going to enumerate them here in any great detail – suffice as to say I’ve grown a lot as a person, and hopefully, I think, as a designer.  Part of that is learning to let go of the past and the constant preparations for the future – and to remember to live in the present, something both Mindfullness and attending Burning Man has taught me.  This isn’t to say that I don’t design for the future, or immediately ignore the past; if anything, design is more about applying the right tools, the right answers, the right techniques and to balance all of these factors and so many more, both past, future and obviously present.  Hopefully consideration of all these factors can blend into an admixture we call ‘the proper solution’.

I’ve often thought blogs – and in particular, design related blogs – were part of the answer to help us find those solutions, both on a professional level, but on a personal level as well.  But my  interactions and relationship with blogs has gone from composing to consuming, from writing one to reading more – and if anything, taking more pictures rather than just being consumed by words.  Design is visual, and I must keep that sense of end purpose in what I’m doing.  I’m sure you can do both create and consume blogs – there are plenty of people who do.  And that’s just it – there are plenty of people doing it, and if anything, probably far too many.  I don’t want to contribute to the glut, the din, the massive amount of ‘blub blub’ that goes along with citizen empowerment and writing; as it is, I find it most difficult to keep up with the professional stuff that I have to read.  I don’t want to add my voice unless it’s important; for things of a more personal nature I have other venues (like my Flickr account, like personal journals) which I’ve turned to since they’re the proper venue and hold the proper context for such discussions.

I’ll still post here, from time to time, but if past posting history (of this and other journals) is any indication, it will only be with well composed posts, not these little link dump like posts or posts that link to pictures but no mention of context (hello, a random picture of fruit – why, um, it’s nice to…read you?).  Life is too hurried, and too short for context-less information; if I by some chance don’t give you enough context, please let me know.  Hopefully I’ve provided a little here in this post which explain why this blog is here in a more ‘invisible’ state.

Seems that my job in this life is to cultivate questions…

Every morning I go through my Bloglines list of blogs , and every morning I try and read what other people are saying about technology, about user experience, and about our world. I usually check off the ones I want to analyze further, and sometimes I’ll even send them to a friend or two – the ‘clip/email to’ features in Bloglines are just one of the reasons why they continue to be the best Web feed reader there is, bar none.

Two recent blog posts have been on my mind today – one from PeterMe, fellow IAer and UXer, and one from a person at a non-profit who was attending the Net2 non-profits and technology conference which sadly I couldn’t afford to attend.

The first blog post is from Kari Gray’s post on the Net2 blog entitled,
“it isn’t a lack of technology – it is a lack of resources”:

Kari writes,

i would love to figure out how to use all these new technologies to make our work easier and more effective, bu who pays for implementing all these fabulous tools and technologies? Even with open source software, low capacity and grassroots nonprofit organizations like mine still have to identify a staff person or key volunteer to implement, manage and support the technolgy. How do I identify that person? how do i motivate current staff and volunteers to add one more responsibility, one more task to an already overscheduled, overfull agenda? Where do i find qualified volunteers who are both motivated and committed to such a large task? how do I manage and supervise them?I think that many of these tools are merely tools for technoogy’s sake – without any real vison about who will actually use them.The real digital divide is between organizations – those of us who deveote all our energy to our programs just don’t have the resources to implement new technologies. At Newsdesk.org, we are desperate to start using new technologies to support our work, but we just don’t have the time to do it or the financial resources to have someone else do it for us.

In other words, it’s the implimentation, stupid. All the great social web 2.0 applications in the world are little more than great features if they aren’t in a structure that can nurture them or have the resources (people, financial, technical or otherwise) to support them. Our devices, technologies and ideas are useless unless we cultivate them properly. Will we answer Kari’s call?

And then there’s PeterMe’s post about feeling, “Tribeless” . It’s a feeling I know all too well on many, many fronts – as an expatriate Canadian living in the States, as a user experience devotee without the traditional or formal UX education or work experience, as a woman working in a field still dominated by men…and those are just the three off the top of my head.

Peter writes that:

Something sunk in a couple of weekends as I attended DCamp. I am without a professional tribe. This realization has grown as I attend various industry events. I’m just not really grooving with the crowds I’m part of.

DCamp was definitely a pleasant experience, and I enjoyed the chats I had, but I had to admit to myself that the subjects being discussed weren’t all that compelling to me. It felt… quotidian.

The week before, I attended a dinner meant to help generate buzz and ideas for the forthcoming Web 2.0 conference. I had very little interest in schmoozing there, and really kept to the few people I already knew. I think it was all the men in sportcoats that turned me off.

Not too long ago, I was very much engaged with many communities. I was active with AIGA and SIGCHI and ASIST; I was attended events on design and information architecture and web stuff. Now, I find myself on the periphery of a lot of groups, but none of them feel like a home for me:
- design (say, AIGA style)
- interaction design (IxDA, etc.)
- business and design (IDSC, Gain, the Overlap)
- “design thinking” (similar to above)
- web design (Webvisions and the like)
- Web 2.0/social software/social media
- “anthrodesign” (design + anthropology/ethnography)

About as close to a tribe as I get is information architects. The IA Summit continues to be my favorite event year in and year out. But I noticed that even there, this year, I wasn’t as engaged in the material as I had been in prior years. I love the people, but the subject matter remains stuck.

We’ll see how this all proceeds. In some ways, it saddens me, because I feel out of place. In other ways, it’s exciting, because it suggests opportunities for creating new groups, new connections, new communities with people who share my slice of professional interests.

In this case, it’s not a question of implementation, but rather maybe the connection needed won’t improve no matter how good the tools. In both blog posts you have people not feeling ‘connected’ (in some sense of the term) – to their peer group associations (as in Peter’s case), to their potential peers (as in Kari’s case). It’s not a case of an inability to connect, but more like a problem of how we continue to frame our conversations – about design, about philanthropy, about conversation itself. It’s not that there’s anything wrong with the conversations – but rather, that there is nothing to sustain them after they’re over.

I’ve been feeling a little burnt out from all the conferences and talks I’ve gone to over the past year. I’m incredibly appreciative for the conversational culture out here in the Bay Area, but increasingly frustrated as well. Dcamps, BarCamps and open spaces are a move in the right direction, and we’ve seen that they can be implimented with a remarkably small number of resources (in ALL senses of that term). But without the resources to sustain those ‘conversations of connections’, don’t they just become empty conversations, empty metaphors of us connecting as individuals, but little else? Is there a way to sustain the conversation and build a community of people to continue that conversation towards the building stage? If both a ‘newcomer’ (for the sake of argument) like Kari is having trouble identifying resources and connecting, and an experienced practitioner like Peter is also looking for “opportunities for creating new groups, new connections, new communities”, what do we do to serve both of their needs, and how do we do it? We know to design for both novices and experienced users – will we remember that (and a slew of other issues), when we try to design for connecting our users?

How do we implement the tools that can connect us effectively? How can we find the tribes that allow us to connect properly? My mind goes back to the monstrocity that is the tribe.net UI design failure – how a company with a remarkably committed and enthusiastic user base could so quicky squander their good will through a horrible user interface ‘makeover’ (in Jan. 2006).

In that case, clearly something had gotten in the way of properly implementing the tools – a grab at a lucrative market share (the so-called ‘MySpace Generation’? Perhaps a deep mischaracterization of their users. No matter what it is, it’s been painful to watch a company ruin a tool that had effectively connected so many. We must be careful not to ruin our technologies, to use our tools in the best possible manner, and to wherever possible listen to what people are telling us. At some point, however, there’s a time for listenning, time for talking – and time for building. The question for me still remains – are people out there who want to build the connections that sustain the conversations, or are people still in the throes of conversation for conversation’s sake?

Freakin’ cool…

LED Dining table, originally uploaded by oskay2.

 

A LED Dining Table – one of the stunning examples I saw in person at Saturday's Maker Faire. The event was an exhausting but exhilarating and inspirational assortment of homemade products, ideas, and methodologies – a mindblowing assortment of creative ideas brought to life by various "tech DIY enthusiasts, crafters, educators, tinkerers, hobbyists, science clubs, students, and authors" (so sayeth the web site). It was an interesting admixture of Burning Man folks, geeks of all persuations (computing enthusiasts, robot enthusiasts, piles of other…enthusiasts), crafsters folks, and Renaissance Faire types thrown in for good measure. A glance at the list of sponsors (including Lego!) should give you an idea of who came out. A fascinating way to spend a Saturday, and something I'm already looking forward to attending next year.

 

technorati tags: <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/makerfaire" rel="tag" class="techtag">makerfaire</a> <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/makerfaire06" rel="tag" class="techtag">makerfaire06</a>

IA Summit wrap-up – day one

I started writing this entry on the bus on the way to Victoria, BC. – as you can see, it's taken me a while to type up the notes :p The IA summit in Vancouver had just ended. As with most events I attend, I had mixed feelings – perhaps the only consistancy is my usual skeptical, cynical, critical stance. With that note about having mixed feelings, let me go into a bit of detail about the panels I attended. While there's no way my notes and comments are complete, I hope it sheds some light on the sessions. If you've found this post via the Technorati tags or the IA Summit site, please share any notes about the sessions you attended – this year (as always, perhaps!) it was incredibly difficult to choose between which sessions to attend, so hearing details on the sessions is much appreciated.Here are the summaries – the caffeine breaks have been omitted. Warning – this is going to be one hell of a long blog post, so I've split the IA Summit days into separate posts. Without further adieu, here's Saturday. Look for my overall impressions of the conference at the end of Monday's wrap up.

Saturday March 25th

8:30-10: Opening Plenary: Dr. David Weinberger

Definitely one of the highlights of the summit – the organizers were wise to invite him, as both his content and his delivery were compelling, timely and provocative. His Powerpoint presentation was fascinating; I found that most of the presentations I enjoyed were those who also utilized Powerpoint and visuals in new and far more interesting ways. He's working at the crossroads of technology (and its ethical implications) and epistemology (how we are knowing knowledge in a context of groups), so needless to say I completely drank up all he was talking about.Here are the notes I took during David's talk:-how can something be considered 'done' on paper?-we should be be suspicious of the 'data to wisdom' hierarchy line; steven j. gould's work has taught us that the 'ape to man' hierarchy diagram explaining evolution is problematic, yet we still see the 'data to wisdom' hierarchy as valid; perhaps this needs to change.-noted the role of computer science (fitting info into databases) in shaping our anaysis of knowledge – this may not necessarily be a good thing (I'd say it's still shaping how we design, contextualize our analysis of information, but doesn't help us understand our use of that information)-falling for the 'data to wisdom' hierarchy is falling for informationalization – reduction of everything as 'information', but it isn't all information. For instance, DNA is NOT information – it's just a clump of cells, yet perhaps our visualization of it (the helix as an image, sculpture etc.) contributes to this false view of DNA.-David discussed his seven propositions of knowledge – I'd need to see his slides again to do it justice, but take t hse notes for what it's worth…1st prop of knowledge – knowledge has a knower (my note: how does the individual knower affect that knowledge? is it shaped personally?)
2nd prop of knowledge – it's the same for everyone and there's only 1 knowledge; most things aren't knowledge; knoweledge is refined, filtered
7th – knowledge is an orderly system – a hierarchy. Note some of the other points – that knowledge is the same for all, is simple, impersonal and filtered
-we preserve knowledge via physical objects
-knowledge is under attack from many sources (i.e. postmodernism contributing to knowledge (my note: the destabilizing influence of challenges to official History, official Narrative); challenges to authority come in activities like tagging, the problem being authors aren't the best judge of their work (my note: which is why communal tagging is more promising – ie. someone should be able to suggest better ways to tag my photos, like the 'recommended' autocomplete feature in delicious).
-note much of Lakoff's work is based on Rosh @Berkeley (need to look this up for more info on her)
-start w/ hierarchy and find our prototype (i.e robin is the prototypical bird, not ostrich or penguin) – so we need stop arguing about definitions and find the prototype (delicious, flickr)
-most important challenge is that we're digitizing information
-first order is organizing
-2nd is separate data (card catalogue) – note that this reduces knowledge because we're leaving out a lot at this stage; line between metadata and data often gets blurred
-3rd is that everything is digital; what can you do easily digitally that the real world makes really hard
Some summaries of all of this:
1. leaf on many branches – ie. photo equipment in lots of catagories online
2. messiness as a virtue – but this is ok in the digital world
3. unowned order – a physical store is noise because lots doesn't fit you; users own the organization of information; uni. north carolina facetted classification project;
-shift away from knowledge as tree designed by experts, and all it excludes – to a prototype of a big pile of leaves, with metadata including tagging but not tagging; more value comes from including info than excluding (which we did before) since it give more content
-blogs take ideas and complexifying

David's main takeaway point #1
point #1 authority – why do we care about authority – because world is way too big, so authority is a shortcut; it gives you social standing, instutitional power, control conversations etc., ppersonal virtue, $$$
-wikipedia is an important development, but it doesn't have authority (my note: at least at this point – perhaps more identification of authors would help tip authority – having a respected figure read an article and give it some sort of ok (i.e. "Jean Paul Satre says this article on existentialism is about 80% correct")?
-traditional sources, when it comes to truth versus authority, opts for authority (often because it's printed on paper); they'd rather give a sense of authority rather than the info we need
-publically negotaiated knowledge occurs – but what happens if an expert doesn't post on Wikipedia, or there's disagreement – i.e. knoweldge w/o a know-er
-10 yrs. from now what happens when topics have settled down in wikipedia – ie. the content in the fact boxes – does that mean knowledge is commodotized ("here's the knowledge we agree on – it's licenseable")? (my note: huge implications on ownership – creator? licensor? will Creative Commons then be used to control ideas and definitions more so? Patentable ideas?)
-David sees these implications; separate knowledges, knowledge alliances, fragmentition of reflection (?) baseline from which controversy emerges? re-calcification?
David's main takeaway point #2
-point #2 – the new infrastructure – the metaphor of information as a pile of 'leaves' metaphor has problem but it's ok – they're all linked etc.; Note Heidigger on the metaphor of the hammer – to know a hammer you have to understand the context of nails, wood, etc. to truly get at the meaning.
-humans have a tendency to externalize things i.e. books (my note: except don't externalize their own personal knowledge a la KM – issues of power and control?)
-are we seeing the externalization of meaning? there's a problem with this!
if we tag a real jar of jam, note how this differs if we see tags on line w/ jam (i.e it's not the same). Note with labels vs. tags – it can't happen – we can't make everything explicit
-There IS value in the implicit (i.e. relationships with family)
- note that there are 100 million (!) photos on flickr
-in general, 'good enough' often is; (i.e beer, information – we don't need perfect hierarchies for these things)
-what is the outpouring of meaning? "the great tag of unknowing" (is this the title of his book? it should be – amazing title).

10:30 – 11:15 "IA: Not Just for the Web Anymore"

While this title may seem to be in reference to Rich Internet Applications (RIA), it was actually a far more interesting panel devoted to discussions of enterprise IA (RIA), how to create change in organizations so that EIA can take off and get the support and nurturing it needs. An excellent, funny group of panelists shared their wisdom, experience and ideas for the future of EIA. Another definite highlight.

Here are my notes from the panel – didn't really have a chance to note who spoke when, unfortunately.
-what qualifies as enterprise? it's not about a specific size etc. – companies often same problems regardless of size (my note: how sadly true…)
- what are the baby things you can do so you can marshall change at a larger scale? and perhaps baby steps (small victories) are the way to successfully get EIA to take off eventually
- tensions between centralized and decentralized authority will affect EIA
- Note to look up 'hype cycle' paper from gartner group
- metadata, standards are common glue – as long as each dept. is doing its thing with this common glue, they can continue doing what they're doing operationally
-speak in ceo's language – "we can't ship cellphones" – fear and loathing relationship?
-need a pattern language of solutions (my note: not only one of designs, but of solutions – this came up to me during the Business and Design BOF as well – a repository of what works in getting EIA (etc.) to be taken seriously
-my note: what is the role of UX in change management? hard enough getting all of IA community to embrace UX, let alone becoming amassadors of change management/cultural change?
-what is the role of legislation – James (the IA from Australia) says RM is never successful (my note: if that's what he's saying and he's in Australia w/ arguably the best RM advocacy and practice from the gov't), then we in the 'mainland' (i.e. rest of world) have to worry!
-note: look up the "Leading Change" book, looks interesting.

1:45-2:30: "Exploring patterns in website content structure".

Pattern language is one of my diehard obsessions lately, so I was hoping for more of a formal discussion of the patterns in UI design. Instead, Svetlana had more of a higher level analysis of web site navigation and content structure across many sites. In doing so, she's actually creating an analysis of pattern language on a different scale – kind of like the difference between the traditional IA flat site map representations and the isotropic site map representations which stress a three dimensional landscape. It will be good to read her dissertation when it's done to see what her analysis of her findings will be when she's finished. Not what I was expecting, but definitely pleasantly surprised.

2:45 – 3:30: "International IA Slam"

I was looking forward to this because of the buzz from previous years; I have to say I was disappointed in it, although it was largely not the fault of the organizers. The buzz got the best of the organizers – the number of people who wanted to take part was well over 50, far more than I suspect they imagined. While it was good to work in an ad hoc group, the time limit was insane – 45 minutes to find a solution to the problem AND document that solution from various angle, including project plan of implementation (!). It helps if you have a group that can get on that creative wavelength; sadly I was with a group where half the people 'get' the point of the exercise, and the other half kind of stood their with deer-in-the-headlights looks. Also I got the sense that the solutions that the design teams came up with were all fairly similar because of the massive amount of information the IA Slam organizers gave us. Would that our clients would have been as prepared as them! Although the experience was not as ideal as I had expected, kudos for the Slam organizers for at least having something different at the conference. By getting rid of that usual 'expert at the podium speaking to the audience' one way conversation, they get the participants and the audience watching them to think of conferences as workshops rather than just simple 'talk, listen' events.

5:00 – 5:45: "Birds of a Feather – Business and Design".

A well attended informal discussion (physically in circular form – excellent!) about one of the critical threads that kept emerging through so many of the sessions. I hope that some attempt to compile some practical tips on the topic will be documented at some point in some sort of venue (wiki, people – I've heard they're good…). More thoughts on this in another post since it certainly merits a whole post in itself.

And that was day one. Come back later for the continuation of my notes from the summit.

Tags for technorati: <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/iasummit" rel="tag" class="techtag">iasummit</a> <a href="http://technorati.com/tag/iasummit2006" rel="tag" class="techtag">iasummit2006</a>

Brainjamming tomorrow

Just a reminder to anyone that’s interested that Saturday is another Brainjams event – this time in Bezerkeley Berkeley at UC.  As always it’ll be an interesting experiment…Chris has some radical format changes that will be fun to watch.  I find that a little knowledge sharing once a month is good for the soul   As always I’m going to volunteer but this time I hope to partake in the actual process a bit more… lord knows too much volunteering at events can make me a little cranky (see annoying ness at DUX experience).  Anyway, looks like it will be fun and informative – two great things, especially when they’re together.
technorati:  brainjams berkeley

“The Olympics We Missed”

Read this great article from The Nation on how NBC screwed up the Olympics.  Good good stuff.  Would that The Nation had more of these Salon-type articles.  In fact, if The Nation, Salon, Huffington Post, Air America and NPR all joined forces to create a mega-media dynasty, we might actually have a viable alternative to the major networks, in a variety of medium.

A girl can dream, right?

technorati codes: olympics, thenation, media, commentary

Gov’t of Ontario redesigned, too!

I love it when big 'institutions' redo their sites to make them standards compliant There's no reason why you can't have a beautiful, functional page in 2006 – and when the big guns do it, they remind the rest of us why we should (if we haven't committed to it already).

Happenned to be looking up something at one of my old employers this afternoon – and stumbled across a beautiful job done to the main Gov't of Ontario web site. Don't know when this happenned – sometime since April of last year judging by the Internet Archive – but it's great. Not only have they done a whole new look and feel, they've obviously sat down and done a proper interaction design overview. I emailed them to say how impressed I was by their efforts – it's my new drug, thanking people who've made their products better. A site like this one makes it very easy; when the site's as beautiful as the real thing it's hard not to love it. (For those not familiar with Ontario, here's an interesting quick primer from that site).
Now if only they'd get a Mac OS X compatible Ontario Parks screensaver – why should those with System 7+ get all the fun…

technorati code: governmentofontario gov.on.ca redesign

University of Toronto website redesign

I have a backlog of posts I’ve been meaning to get around to finishing, so I might as well get them out of the way, one by one. I mentioned to someone the other day that unfinished posts on one’s blog are a bit like those hungry baby birds in a nest – reminding you of their presence until you can push them out of the nest or publish them.  Perhaps reading blogs rather than writing on my own is an attempt at ignoring the constant peeping sound; such is the life of one who believes in actually crafting something worth reading (as opposed to people who just post links and call that a blog post…)
So onto the backlog.  Check out the redesign at my alma mater, the University of Toronto. Not quite as nice as the McGill redesign, but still, gotta love that blue. I’ve always thought universities have a difficult task in conveying all they need to convey on their web sites; it’s like many a site with not only many target audiences (prospective students, current students, faculty, admin, alumni, staff) but many purposes (information, solicitation, etc. etc.). And yes, Virginia, it looks to be a standard based design – good for them! Shame about the title tag still not being utilized to its full potential, though – and I don’t know if agree with all the design decisions that were made. Still, at least they’re trying – I wonder if the folks at the Faculty of Information Studies have ever even contemplated a redesign…

tags for technorati: universityoftoronto uoft utoronto

congrats to Adaptive Path…

…on the news that they’ve sold MeasureMap to Google for an as-yet undisclosed sum. I’m postponing a few posts I was working on to note a few comments on this one, because it’s a pretty damn impressive feat and something worth commenting on. A friend had mentioned it to me today, but reading the buzz I’m starting to have it just starting to sink in – and can’t help but feel happy for them. When people who care passionately about user design win one, well, it feels a bit like the good guys finished first for a change – not the temperamental clients, not the strange schedules, not the ridiculous specs. Just the people who create great user experiences, and the users who benefit from their expertise.

I’ve long been impressed by what the folks at AP do and the approach they take in doing it. No, I’m not sucking up or dropping names – I’m doing something even more scandalous and radical… I’m being honest, which might be difficult for people in this town to recognize. I like people and companies who are willing to step forward and create their own path in the wilderness when they see no one else willing to tread that path or make that vision come to fruition. Apple set out on that path with the infamous 1984 commercial, and one might argue Google set out on that path at one point. So here we have a seemingly radical notion – a consultancy saw a need, but instead of waiting for the clients to recognize the need and pay for it…well, they did it themselves, basically living out the great words from Karl Wallinger- “if you say you want a revolution, baby, well there is nothing like your own”.
Mindboggling, but not so really mindboggling if you think about it – a good product created by great professionals should win in the end. While I’ve been a little cagey about Yahoo and Google’s massive push to buy companies and their products, I’d like to think that in this case at least all the hype is worth it. As an unintended consequence perhaps user experience as a discipline will gain some publicity, and Google will gain some sense of how to incorporate UX into their work – something more than the much celebrated whitespace on their homepage. And I sincerely hope that the APers will be rewarded nicely for their work, and that this is the first of many good products from them. Consider this a proof of concept that’s been a success
As an aside, it’s kind of cute how all the APers blogged about the big news… they sound like proud parents, as well they should. Their baby’s graduated and is about to leave the nest. I hope they have a good party to celebrate the graduation. Raise a glass of fine whiskey in celebration.

Tags: measuremap adaptivepath

crossing my fingers, nervously…

Screen capture of an election related poll at kweschun.com – click for a larger image

…but resigned to some sad news on the politlcal front…The good news is I came across a great little mashup web app site called Canadian Election 2006. It’s a mixture of Google Maps (of course!), election data and online polling. It’s a good example of a ‘2.0′ technology that’s actually doing something useful that’s separate from the typical digerati uses of the technology – like restaurant listings, or tools for other tools (like, let’s say, Flock) that serve no real use to the average person. This is what the future will consist of – solutions to problems (what are they voting in x riding?), not solutions in need of a cause (like, let’s say, Flock).

Sorry, I don’t mean to be snarky about Flock – I’m just in a sad mood. The bad news? I have a sinking feeling Stephen Harper is going to win the Federal Election – so sayeth the analysis from Ipsos Reid. I know I shouldn’t trust the polls – at least the ones before, although exit polling out of the voting booth can be more accurate. But still, I look at those numbers and what seems to be an inevitable Conservative government and shudder. Oh, for the days of the past where one could have Conservative one could live with – like Bill Davies!

I know Canada does this swing to the right every couple of elections almost as a purging – kind of like a purging of the body’s toxins. And maybe that’s healthy for a democracy. Still, the good news out of it is that it will be a minority government; the thought of Stephen Harper representing my country for four long years makes me very, very sad. I hope the damage will be minimal – Lord knows what can happen to a country in four short years…