JimSwift.net

OK Clevelanders in D.C. — here is some good news. The Browns may be 1-5, but you don’t have to go back to Cleveland to get the famed Great Lakes Christmas Ale. I got word from the local representative of Great Lakes that it will be released during the second and third week of November.

I will be attempting to brew something similar, so we’ll see how mine turns out!

WKYC story.

Friends,

Thanks for entering the Bomble.com 2010 Election Prediction Sweepstakes.

The polls are now closed.

You can find and discuss the rest of the results from people’s entries here, on bomble.net!

But what about the bi-plane makers?

A gubernatorial candidate in New York is campaigning on the theme that rent is “too damn high.” He has a point.

In fact, Thomas Sowell, a famed economist agrees with him that rent is “too damn high” in New York City.

Mr. Sowell, like Jimmy McMillan, is a New Yorker and a veteran. Hopefully Mr. McMillan will see the logic of Sowell’s arguments against price controls.

So, I shared with him some good economic arguments Sowell made, so he can make them in the debate. Sowell’s implicit suggestion — that price controls be eliminated — will actually lead to lower rents and more affordable housing in New York.

My email:

Jimmy,

I enjoyed your commentary last night. I did not watch the whole debate, but here is some information you might find useful for future debates. Thomas Sowell’s book, Basic Economics, examines how rent control causes higher overall rent prices and shortages of affordable housing. Pages 20 – 32. The link is here: http://bit.ly/ctB2c9.

All the best to you,

Jim

Alexandria, VA

H/T to Famous DC for the video.

Similarly, one reason why rent is more expensive in DC than Maryland or Virginia is due to a reason similar to price controls, namely, land use restrictions. Because D.C. limits the height of its buildings, and few people will want to live underground, expansion of living space must go horizontally, and not vertically.

SOUND OFF ON MY COMMENT BOARD, BOMBLE.NET ABOUT PRICE CONTROLS (Shaq, before you get any ideas, I know my caps are on.)

Last night, I did a college fair for SLU in Fairfax.

So, I had to FedEx the box of stuff back today and I added a little drawing, ala Castaway. I suck at drawing, and it looks like the Billiken is flipping the bird, rather than a thumbs up. Oh well.

Full story here.

I’d say that this ad is a failure.

“You attract more flies with honey than salt” is what my Grandma used to say to me as a child. She knew me well.

“Calmer than you are.”

An update on the auto situation: I got my refund, but at a price. I got a stern talking to from the business owner and was asked never to return. He didn’t think my approach was gentlemanly. So, as a man of my word, I have removed the post about the whole incident and will not file any complaints about the matter. Further, I won’t reveal the name of the business, since a refund is all I sought and what’s fair is fair.

After the owner left the office, I spoke with the office manager. I apologized for how things ended up the way they did. He mentioned that the old person left, and their website and email was working sporadically. Which, as an IT guy, I understand. However, it’s not really an excuse to have non-working web contact forms. He further opined that 99% of auto shops don’t really use web and email, which I definitely believe. But, if that’s the case, don’t offer email and web forms if you’re not prepared to use it fully.

If the owner/employees of that company happen to come back to my blog, I thank you for refund. It’s all I wanted. I didn’t want to write a complaint email with the caveat that if I don’t hear back, I complain to the powers that be. I didn’t want to argue or haggle, I just wanted a refund and not be ignored. As a consumer, however, that’s my right to complain, or threaten to do so. Which is what I did.

I learned something in the process. Just because some company has a website and a contact form doesn’t mean they utilize it. Maybe not the best model to be sure, but, something to be aware of in the future.

I received a voice mail yesterday from the station I blogged about earlier. I called the gentlemen back just now and we had a very terse conversation. It was mostly one-sided, because I was actually quite calm. His main problem was that he didn’t like my tone.

On multiple occasions, I tried explaining that the reason for my tone in that email was due to the fact that on two occasions, I contacted them via their web form and heard nothing back. I was cut off and told “I don’t see what that has to do with this.” I pressed further, and was going to explain that if you provide people with an avenue to contact you and there is no response, they tend to get mad. But, I was cut off again and we’ll have the discussion in person tomorrow, and he said that I’d get a refund. I do have to bring my bill from the Capitol Hill Exxon to prove that it was indeed a botched repair attempt.

Now, if he responded and asked for this via email based on my initial two attempts to contact them via the web form, I could have sent him a .pdf of the Exxon bill in no time flat and no time would have to be wasted in person haggling and getting angry. But no, rather than the easy route, I will have to drop by and do this tomorrow in person. It will be awkward, but I will hopefully get my $135 back.

The bottom line is: don’t offer people avenues to contact you if you don’t plan to use them effectively. Nobody likes complaining in person, and maybe they bank on it. I wonder if he’ll ask me for suggestions on setting up a better contact form.

You may or may not have noticed in your time in Washington, D.C. that we lack billboards. Really. We don’t have that many. Practically none. Some people have created illegal billboards, I remember reading about it last year.

So, if there aren’t billboards, how do candidates advertise? On public property. This is illegal in most places in the country, like in Ohio and Missouri.

So, I wanted to know if this practice was legal. I called DC’s Board of Elections, which actually answered and provided a response — unlike DDOT which is yet to respond to my repeated inquiries. It is legal. Here is the DCBOE website’s summary:

Campaign Signs, Posters, and Placards on Public Property

The Board’s ability to regulate the placement of campaign materials is limited to the 50 feet surrounding and interior of any polling place. The placement of campaign signs, posters, and placards on public property outside of the 50 feet surrounding a polling place is regulated by the District Department of Transportation.

Candidates for Elected Office:

The placement of campaign signs, posters, and placards on public property is allowed, however, a candidate must seek a proper permit from the District Department of Transportation Public Space Office. For more information, you may call the Public Space Office at 202-442-4670.

The following excerpt from the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR) Title 24 provides the rules that pertain to posting and removal of campaign materials in public space. By following these regulations, you will ensure that your campaign signs will serve their intended purpose – as civic reminders of the importance of exercising the right to vote – rather than as unfortunate signs of environmental blight and potential litter.

24 D.C. Municipal Regulations § 108

108.1	No person shall affix a sign, advertisement, or poster to any public lamppost or appurtenances of a lamppost, except as provided in accordance with this section.
108.2	The placing of any advertisement on any tree in public space is prohibited.
108.3	No poster or placard shall be publicly displayed or exhibited if it is lewd, indecent, or vulgar, or if it pictorially represents the commission of or the attempt to commit any crime.
108.4	Any sign, advertisement, or poster that does not relate to the sale of goods or services may be affixed on public lampposts or appurtenances of a lamppost, subject to the restrictions set forth in this section.
108.5	A sign, advertisement, or poster not related to a specific event shall be affixed for no more than sixty (60) days.
108.6	A sign, advertisement, or poster related to a specific event may be affixed any time prior to the event but shall be removed no later than thirty (30) days following the event to which it is related.
108.7	Each sign, advertisement, or poster shall contain the date upon which it was initially affixed to a lamppost.
108.8	Each sign, advertisement, or poster shall be affixed securely to avoid being torn or disengaged by normal weather conditions.
108.9	Signs, advertisements, and posters shall not be affixed by adhesives that prevent their complete removal from the fixture, or that do damage to the fixture.
108.10	No more than three (3) versions or copies of each sign, advertisement, or poster shall be affixed on one (1) side of a street within one (1) block.
108.11	Within twenty-four (24) hours of posting each sign, advertisement, or poster, two (2) copies of the material shall be filed with an agent of the District of Columbia so designated by the Mayor. The filing shall include the name, address, and telephone number of the originator of the sign, advertisement, or poster.
108.12	For purposes of this section, a “public lamppost” is any public post erected for the purpose of supporting electric wires.

NOTE: Even though the rules allow campaign posters to remain up 30 days after the general election, candidates are asked to remove all signs as soon as possible after the election.

Members of the Public:

To make a proper complaint regarding campaign signs, posters, and placards on public property, you should call the District Department of Transportation System Inspection Oversight Division at 202-645-7050.

Unfortunately, DDOT, and not DCBOE has jurisdiction of campaign signs on lamp posts and such. Which is sad because I believe they are ineffective and incompetent.