(no subject)

[rm]

Is anyone else crazed by the redesign of the New York Times website? It may force me to go back to reading the actual paper. I can't find anything and my eye just wants to slide away from the page. i think it's intentional because of lost revenue. I loathe it.

BTW, bombshellbath has reformulated their shampoo. It's still very liquid, but a serious improvement over the old formulation (which was good to my hair but hard to use). Either way, I've been using both their shampoo (new and old version) and conditioner for the last month or so and the stuff is great, especially if you're sensitive to chemicals, want weird scents or have hair that tends to be very heavy -- this won't weigh it down further. Full disclosure: they have an affiliate program now, so I do get a small store credit if you order -- Bombshell Bath & Body.

So mass at St. Pat's yesterday. Two things struck me: First, that it was a good reminder on the sensation of being outside of dominant paradigm. These people had their community, and it was good for them -- I was not part of their community, and that was good for me. It also struck me, so profoundly, that it is only with gods that most people have the courage to believe in stories.

Meanwhile, no Tartan Day Parade for me -- it's too cold and wet and horrible out. I did do my Central Casting registration though, and have hopes that that, and the Grant Wilfley open call for background who can dance on Monday will mean a decent amount of work for me upcoming.

Comments

[y-llor.livejournal.com]

I'm glad I'm not the only one who hates the new Times.

[melebeth]

The new Times sucks fish eggs. I don't know where that metaphor came from...

I'm torn on attending the GW casting monday. On one hand, I can both waltz and (I can't spell today) Vienna (insert letters here) waltz, so I should attend the call. On the other hand, they have me in their database with waltz listed as one of my skills, so do I really have to? I say this particularly since I failed to ever make it to a Beatles Musical call, and I worked constantly on that film. I wish they'd specify "If you're already in our files..." so that lazy people who hate going to open calls could tell these things.

[rm.livejournal.com]

This is true. I would say go if you're feeling up to it (lord knows, that seems to be a struggle for us all lately). And I think everyone worked constantly on that damn Beatles musical thing. I started referring to Julie Taymore as Voldemort on here because of the call times. I did 3 non-union days and 2 union days on it, and then they called me for some other non-union stuff before they realized they couldn't use me again because the waivered stuff was so visible.

[melebeth]

Maybe I'll try to multitask. I've been trying to get together with someone for 3 weeks, and that would make going in a lot less aggravating. The activation energy for attending auditions is a lot higher now that I'm in Rockland. It doesn't take LONGER to get in, it just takes more motivation. Whee! Open call! Dressed "upscale"... does that mean I'm supposed to weigh 300 pounds? */lame joke*

Ahoy

[7654321b.livejournal.com]

Ahoy,


I'm a fellow LJ participant who is also an avid reader of journal:K 4 1 8 where I saw your posts a while back and decided to add you. Could you possibly add me back, at least temporarily in order that I may read the post he referenced on your journal here: http://keith418.livejournal.com/821811.html#cutid1?

Thank you for you time in considering my request.

Regards,

"7654321b"

Re: Ahoy

[rm.livejournal.com]

Sure thing!

Re: Ahoy

[7654321b.livejournal.com]

Thank you for giving me a chance,I will not give you reason to regret it. I am enjoying reading your post.

Sincerely,

"7654321b"

[darkrosetiger.livejournal.com]

The new Times page is atrocious. I saw it for the first time yesterday because I've been avoiding the news, and I just stared, wondering who designed that layout and whether someone could shoot him.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_lj_sucks_/]

It's kinda surprising that here we are in 2006, and there are companies that still don't realize that designs that work well on 2'x3' paper pages don't work well in web browser windows.

Then again, I'm not sure big empty squares of whitespace or leaving the right hand 1/3 of the page empty would look good on the front page of the newspaper either.

Anyway, HollaBackNYC (http://www.hollabacknyc.blogspot.com/) made me think of you.