I feel like I'm being medically screwed

Not technically, literally or physically but medically.I've been going to the very same doctors since I was literally 2 years old. Today I decided that I am done with them.A few reasons.Firstly, I fucking hate receptionists whose condescention makes me feel insecure. I do not feel insecure ever but when I'm ill it's fairly easy to take advantage of me if you really try. These woman tried. They've been involved in this practice for so long that they think they own the place. They also think that they pay me to be there. I think they've got things upside down and backside front. Because if they really think about it and actually take a second to notice that they work in the FRONT of the doctor's office and that I, in fact, pay THEM to be there. So perk the fuck up and treat me with some damn respect.Next up. I am pissed off because I hate going to the doctor because I know that I'll wait at least 30 minutes before I am seen to. That's if I book. Half an hour on a good day. Today happened to be a good day that caught me in a foul mood. So someone got it.My theory goes like this: I make doctors rich. My 20 years of loyalty and cash have contributed to their three cars and three story house in wherever-doctors-live-ville. However I am aware that as an individual I haven't really contributed that much, maybe one tyre to that Hummer baby. What I do know is that to make up for the "cheap rates" that they offer me , cough cough, they book patients impossibly close together. By that I mean that I was booked at 11:15am the patient before me was booked at 11:00am and there was one directly after me who'd been waiting.What I am getting at is that with these squeezed-in time slots it is almost impossible for a doctor to diagnose a patient effectively in under 15 minutes. That's what I got. 15 minutes, I think. Now all I'm saying is that these doctors have enough money. Why not give each patient 30 minutes and halve the amount of patients they see in a day? Just give me the effective treatment that I am paying you for. Simple.Then the next thing: Internal outsourcing and diversifying.I needed X-rays today, on my chest (which turned out to be a waste anyway). Usually I am sent to a hospital for those. Today I was asked to stay at the doctor's offices and have the X-rays taken there. Which I did. The X-rays were then sent to the hospital that I would have gone to myself, assessed there and sent back to my doctors office. What's the point? All that happened was that I paid my doctor for a consultation, X-rays, a second consultation and then blood tests.The third consultation is coming tomorrow I am sure. Once I know what's wrong with me (other than the obvious) I'll be forking out for meds, more consultation and more admin.I hate illness.

New tattoo - help me create it

So I have been thinking about this for a while now. Not the actual getting of the tattoo, that's been decided, it's going to happen. What I've been thinking about is how much of this whole event to publicise on my blog.It's tricky you see. I want input and as many brilliant minds and artists to help me out. I have started on the design and have a clear idea of what I want, where it will go and what to include. But it's never enough.But at the same time, putting a tattoo design on the Internet is tricky. I am not saying that the design is going to be so wonderful that it will be downloaded and copies. But I am saying that there is a chance that happens.So my question is this; If I post it will you help?Basically, if I post the developments of the tattoo and design on here will you give me input and do you think that there is any risk of my design being hijacked? Or am I just being paranoid?I want your help to ink me, permanently. Collaborative online tattoo design. What do you think?If you are a tattoo designer, know a tattoo designer or think you can help me design my newest tattoo then leave a comment on this post and I will contact you!

I'm not dead, just uninspired

I promise I am still alive (I can hear the groans of dissapointment from some). It's not that I am over this blog or that I am finished with blogging. I'm just not interested in anything taking place at the moment.For a second I thought of blogging about the A-list issue. Then that passed. Then I thought of blogging about the blog awards and that passed too.I thought about posting some video about something or another and that got passed up by lack of enthusiasm too.So basically, it's just not happening. But so be it.There might be some very short posts coming up in the near future, a bit of experimentation, but until then you'll have to wait in anticipation for something grand to take place!

Funny Inspirational Pictures that are in poor taste - The best FB Group EVER!!!

I have managed to find almost the best use I've ever had.Please have a look at these.Disclaimer: If you are easily offended, sorry, this post isn't for you. I am not the one saying ANY of the things below, I am republishing things I've found. Laugh, or laugh it off. This is the best Facebook group ever. There are hundreds of these posters. I was chuckling to myself all evening last night. Brilliance.

Outdated save icons mean nothing

Have you Windows users noted what the "save" icon is in almost every programme available? It's a floppy disk.A FLOPPY DISK?!?!?I baby sat my four year old cousin, Alex, on Saturday morning. I was sitting watching TV and he was mucking about in the TV cabinet when he brought me something to look at. It was a strange, old, ancient relic that he could not figure out. He didn't understand what this thing could possibly do. He turned upside down, rightside up, backward, forward, inwards until he finally asked me,"Nic, what it is?" So I answered him with a simple, "It's a tape, VHS. It has movies on it," subtle yet calm response. "But DVD Nic, that has movie, what's this?" came his response.Basically my motivation for writing this is simple. How can Windows still be making use of the floppy disk as the icon for saving and stability when my little four year old cousin has never even seen, let alone used, a VHS tape before? It's time to move on.People under the age of 16 or even 18 simply know that that rectangular-ish thingy in the top left next to that file-looking-folder thing is meant to represent save. So they click it and it's saved.When was last time you recall using a floppy, stiffy or VHS tape for anything?

BrandsEye Online Reputation Management for Big Business ONLY

Twitter is a terrible thing. I was about to leave work when I entered in to a debate with Zoopedup, ChristopherM, Unodewaal, adii and SimoneBiz. And that was me. Writing another blog post.BrandsEye (thanks for the sneak peak Rafiq) was launched a few days ago. Online Reputation Management is the name of their game. Sounds great and I was interested immediately.However after going through the site I found nowhere for me to register. Duh. Obviously, Quirk doesn't chase cents and rands. This is what I was told on Twitter. Now that's all well and good and makes sense to me but at the end of the day, as adii noted, Technorati can manage your online rep. This is very basic, but it can be done. Then throw in basic Google searches and Google notifications for your brand or name and you are pretty good. And guess what? The services I've just mentioned are free.I do understand that Quirk is targeting larger business. Let's be honest no-one else online is going to pay US$750 for the service. So they are targeting a specific market and i grasp and respect that.But let's compare this service to other major services online.News: Many newspapers used to charge for their services (the content). That faded quickly because people can get the service elsewhere either cheaper or for free.E-mail: Gmail is free. Hotmail, free. Yahoo mail, free. All major and important services to businesses. I know of many, many larger business who use Gmail as their primary e-mail service. I also know many who forward on their paid-for e-mail to their Gmail account for simplicity reasons. Again, not a paid service.Service is currently being rendered as public property. Facebook, YouTube, Flickr (pro account costs +-US$25) are all major online sites offering great services that are free or extremely cheap for a pro account.Why hasn't BrandsEye opened with various entry level? Big Business packages all the way through to small-time bloggers looking for some brand awareness?This might be in the pipeline, but as SimoneBiz stated with such ease, don't worry they will roll out a "Lite" version for individuals in the future. Why? Why would they have to make it a "Lite" version? Why can't it be fully locked and loaded with all the bells and whistles that high-paying customers would receive?Because that's not capitalism. And if they do that then their high-paying customers would get pissed off. So basically if Quirk is planning to expand BrandsEye in to lower-end markets they will never make it a free service and if you aren't willing to pay top-dollar (yes, dollar) then you wont really be able to get the most of their services ever.Instead I am going to sit with my Google Alerts, Technorati searches, Twitter alerts and word of mouth (or sight of finger/typed word) to keep abreast of my brand online.

Has twitter increased your one-on-one IM?

It has for me.Strange to think but it's true. Through twitter and my followers I've noticed whose interested in what I have to say (my twitter "followers"). For whatever reason the people following me are interested in my movements and my thoughts. The reasons are up to them and for them to know I suppose.But what I have noticed coming out of twitter and tweets is that topics of interest spark a lot more, people are more open and receptive to reading what you have to say. Even if it is only 140 characters. On many occasions recently I have been approached in private IM (instant message) chats to continue a discussion or debate that I posted or commented on via twitter.This is extremely interesting and I think might lend towards some people's thoughts about twitter being the next big thing. Let's all be honest for a second, and it's been said before, Facebook is great, MySpace did well but are people really still looking for mass communication all the time? I think not. I think something deeper is sought after. People are inherently looking for people. People to engage with, to talk to and debate with. This can take place one-on-one and that's why we have blogs, forums and social networks. But at the end of the day nothing beats one-on-one conversation, even if it is over IM.For me first prize involves a debate that launches on my blog and carries over to the "offline world". I enjoy it when i meet people in person and they comment on and discuss something that I've blogged about or tweeted.Simply put, personal recognition outweighs mass "Digg effect" sort of recognition, at least in my world. I like to know that SA Rocks has affected one person's perception of things. I like it when one person can discuss something I blogged or commented on. I like to know that my opinion matters for longer than one day and 60+ comments.Twitter has enhanced my integration with people on a personal level not a mass level. What do you think?

Web 2.0 in under 5 minutes - it can be done

For those of you who took part in the Carte Blanche debate, here is a video (thanks Shaun) that can explain things simply, easily and... SHOCKING...in under 5 minutes. How long was the Carte Blanche piece? No main character, no interviews, no mobile, no random pics of children holding cellphones for no apparent reason.I have seen this before a while back but it is appropriate for right now.Remember, under 5 minutes:There it is. It is simple and basic but it is one of the most succinct explanations I have seen yet.

Find a story, construct it and set it free...everywhere

Irrespective of the medium in which the story is being told the key is that the story needs to be good.That is my basic premise and that is what I stand by.In today's market stories are able to be told in various mediums with various levels of interaction, lengths, research and dedication. This can be a wonderful movement in the right direction. However if merely taken at face value story telling can be lost and misused.Good stories will prevail and let's be honest if there is anything that we learned from the Carte Blanche story on Web 2.0 it's that audiences are not stupid.Basically what I am trying to get across is that primarily journalists are just that, journalists. This is their charge in life, their career, reputation and job. I live my career and am passionate about the maintenance of my industry, the ethics and self preservation (ofcourse).The order of things is simple: The story, the building of the story, the medium used to promote the story and the audience the story reaches.I think that in the media industry today the above order has been marginalised and isolated.In other words, a journalist (whether multimedia, writer, photographer or whatever) works for a magazine for example, has an idea for a story and creates it. Then gives it to the magazine and they publish it.The magazine's target audience does not change week to week depending on the story so basically it's up to us (media producers) to make that change, not so? No, not so apparently.The other way of looking at this scenario is how the story is changed to fit the medium and target audience. In the process the story becomes twisted, warped and loses its thrust. Thus not portraying its initial and intended message effectively. Perfect example of this for me is the Carte Blanche story.The situation there was simple and in my mind two things could have changed the outcome of the story.Firstly: The medium for Carte Blanche is television. Therefore there isn't much time to get in to the nitty gritty of a subject like web 2.0. Yet they still wanted to appear to be "cutting edge" so they stuck with it. Their deadlines were tight and had three days to compose a story. The justification for their failure to find more sources was that they were in Cape Town.Considering the story is about technological developments and web 2.0 why didn't Carte Blanche really cut some edges, get on to skype, twitter, Facebook and other mediums and do interviews in that way?That's what I call using the tools to make a story. The story idea was there, their market is solidified in many years of broadcasting so all that was left was to construct a story that they could put forward effectively. Using these mediums altogether would have expressed some sense of "web 2.0" and communication developments.Furthermore, why didn't Carte Blanche push the story on to their website? Whatever could not have been done on TV could've been carried over to their website, more integration, more solutions, wider audience and effective use of the tools available to them.Secondly: Change the name of the piece of you couldn't get the right information to fill the story effectively. Simple.Back to the point. The essence of what I am trying to say is that mentality needs to shift in media organisations. Most, if not all major media houses have established and consistent audiences who use various media resources to gather information. Take a story and mould it in to three of four different beasts and set it free. More exposure from a wider audience.I have made a decision to slightly change the angle of my blog, as you can see, I am heavily embedded in the media sphere in South Africa (as many of you already know) and I believe that this is where my passion and my experience lie. So that is what I will be focusing on. The posts might be less frequent, but will hopefully be more in-depth regarding the media in SA.

I've had it with Carte Blanche

I'm done with Derrick Watshisname and the Carte crew. I am honestly disappointed with the quality of their stories. More and more often I am seeing one sided, ill-researched pieces that lack any semblance of coherence. I'm also not sure what Tyler was on about in his post, lauding the piece as decent and fairly accurate. Think I might have caught a different show in a parallel universe on a different tangent to the one Tyler watched.Their piece on Web 2.0 was horrific. Congratulations to Rafiq and Dave for cracking the nod and showing some sense in a show filled with rambling and jumping from topic to topic.I followed Twitter throughout the show and there were some interesting responses to it throughout. Jason from Zoopy was insistent that we should take the story from where it comes, ie: old media. Boring argument that means nothing to me.I work for an "old media" company that is moving forward in leaps and bounds. M&G have been relentless in their new media endeavors and have definitely been heading the web 2. shove in SA.Carte Blanche, it appears, searched for "blogging" using this new toy they've found called "google" or something and came up with two names. Dave and Rafiq were both interviewed and made alot of sense. But what happened to getting more than one side of the story and more than one opinion in a piece? Dave and Rafiq work relatively closely with one another and are both based in CT. Now to the average viewer in SA it appears as if there is only web 2.0 development happening in CT. What about George, JHB, Durban and developers who roam the country? What about innovation on a national level?Why did they not take a look at the gurus of web 2.0 in SA who are pushing the envelope? Props to Rafiq for doing what he does and Dave for spreading the ideals and concepts to those who don't know, but I know for a fact that UKZN is also pushing new media as well as Rhodes University. Why not talk to those people too? Why only UCT as an institution.One twitterer commented: "@rafiq @daveduarte @zoopedup nice one guys...wife still doesn't get it though LOL ;P". That reflects bad journalism.John Webb has done some brilliant stuff with 702 Talk Radio and Carte Blance but this was dismal. The story jumped from web, to Mxit, to Facebook, flashing screenshots of TED conferences, YouTube videos and a host of other irrelevant pictures to look more web 2.0. None of these things were spoken of in the actual story.Another whopper of a quote from the story: "The pace of change has exceeded our ability to keep up." What exactly does that mean and who exactly are they referring to?In essence all that I am saying is that a show like this should never have been broadcast without an actual point. In fact, an explanation of something would've been great. There was no definition of what web 1.0 was, never mind what web 2.0 is and where it's headed.Pictured in a few of the scenes were Charl Norman and his site BlueWorld. Not a word spoken about the site, its competition with Facebook or a peep from Charl. I wonder if they knew Charl was behind BlueWorld when they filmed him with Rafiq, having coffee?I'm disappointed but not surprised with the level of their reporting and hope that they read this post (if they've learned anything from their own story) and realise that there is a lot more going on out there than two gurus in one city.Please don't mistake my post for ranting. I have no value to add to the show that was broadcast so this is not a jealousy thing. It's a responsible journalism thing.Again, congratulations to Dave and Rafiq who both deserved their exposure and it's great to see some exposure around the topic.See for yourself:

Tourettes is a bitch

Please click the thumbnail below. This one made me absolutely can myself at work, in my little cubicle, all on my lonesome.Brilliant:

Jonathan Harris: The Web's secret stories

This video is long, 20 minutes, but worth every second. I have seen TED talks before. Mr Harris however, takes the cake. He speaks of data collection around feelings of bloggers. The data is collected around the words "I feel" and "I am feeling". Watch it. Brilliance.

Things that make me happy

It's been a tough year has 2008. Not in a bad way, in a trying, testing way. In a way that makes you fight for what makes you happy.I think I've started to lose that battle. I haven't slept a full night in a few weeks. I haven't played music (not on a sound system) of any kind in a long time. I think it's all tied together, I do.I passionately love my life and my job. But life has got to be about more than one passion hasn't it? I am struggling to separate my life from my work and my passion from both of those.Things need to be balanced and I don't think I'm doing a good job.Things that make me happy:Poker (playing live tournaments)Guitar (playing it)Writing musicReadingWriting (for myself)Listening to musicSpending time aloneTrainingI'm really not managing to do alot of the above things. It's tough as those of you with jobs, ambitions and busy lives will know and agree. I really can't understand how some of the people I know manage it. I struggle.This is probably the first post in a long time that I've blogged on here that has some sincerity about it. I've been extremely unmotivated to blog on here thanks to the demands of SA Rocks and Nudjit. This might not change too soon, but we can always hope!

Choose Life

I am not really sure what made me think of this scene. But what a ripper:

How to start each day with a positive outlook

1. Open a new file in your computer.2. Name it "Robert Mugabe".3. Send it to the Recycle Bin.4. Empty the Recycle Bin.5. Your PC will ask you. "Do you really want to get rid of "Robert Mugabe ?"6. Firmly Click "Yes."7. Feel better?Tomorrow we'll do Jacob Zuma

Amy Winehouse pisses me off

You know why she pisses me off? Because I really like her sound, her voice and her music. But I hate the bitch.I hate the fact that she is a druggy. I hate the fact that in spite of there being actual evidence that she is a user and has purchased drugs that nothing has happened to.How does an institute like the Grammy Awards allow a known flipping drug user to not only perform but win awards? There should be rules against this.Winehouses' mother was pictured hugging the "star" after she won the awards. Wasn't the mother the one telling fans not to support Amy? Hypocritical idiot. Stick to your guns. I will not purchase or support the Winehouse industry of taking money and blowing it up a nose or vein. I refuse.With all the media coverage of her addiction, abuse, rehab and marital woes, what has now happened with her winning Grammy's is that her actions have been condoned and she has become a "role model". What the fuck is wrong with people in the limelight? Are the Grammy's baked or using what Winehouse is using? Cause they must be in order to let her on stage, perform and receive 5 awards.

I hate valentines day

What a massive load of bullshit. It's a money making scheme and a day for lazy people to express "love".And any woman who believes that their spouse/significant/insignificant other should be doing something special or important is misled and actually being unpractical and overbearing.This is a day for Hallmark to make money and restaurants to charge R400 a head for a dinner. Please.Oh, and on top of it all, St Valentine was some dude who deflowered virgins. This is what we celebrate? Good on you son, good on you.

Blogging is work now

In fact, it's been a long year so far and it's only February. I hate this feeling.But things are coming right, work doesn't suck, people are settling down and becoming easier to work with at the moment, which is great. People are gathering focus. Blogging is going well (not on here) in general although if I thought that running two blogs was tough work, three is incomprehensible. I work late, really late, blog every night and on weekends and am constantly looking for now content on three different levels.But however you look at it, I have little to bitch about, so I wont bitch.No, wait, I lie, I can't not bitch. I'm tired. Was at work today before 7am. That is really early for me. Maybe not for everyone, but for me it. I feel like it's early for me because I am always working lately.Initially I really loved blogging - I still do - but now it has become work, a job, a mechanism to express opinion, earn revenue and generate hype. This is work in a nutshell. So I work a full-time job (roughly 10 hours a day) and then go home and work more. Managing three blogs is tough work, but at least I love it!Take it from me, if you are thinking about filling your empty plate, think twice before you over fill it.

More votes = More voting

I've had this theory that today has been proven. To one extent or another more votes = more voting which = more votes. It's a cycle of voting.The people on muti are there. The voters and users exist but are apathetic. When something comes along, they will vote. Once they are on the site they will peruse other posts and vote more often.This is visible today:On an average day the top post on muti can receive up to a whopping 5 or 6 votes. Today the top 5 have a massive increase on that number!Simple theory, more votes = more voting. Done.

Nudjit goes live

Justin, Gregor and I have whipped together a bit of a frenzy around our new blog, Nudjit.Put simply, Nudjit is a local gadget review blog. Put in a more complex manner: Nudjit is a blog about us as South Africans trying out gadgets and allowing our readers to know how their potential purchases will work out in South Africa. This is a personal experience for the three of us about how we interact with the gadgets we review.We might not always have the latest, greatest, bestest gadgets but what will almost certainly promise is that reviews and news will be SA-Centric.We like to think that we have filled a very predominant gap in the market with this blog and are all very, very proud of how it looks, feels and what we have put in to it.Thanks go out to a long list of bloggers who covered Nudjit yesterday:3 NEW African Websites Worth WatchingNudjit.com is a geek’s dream!Nudjit … new gadget blog on the blockLocal blogging celebs launch gadget blog, NudjitNudjit. South African Gadget Review.New gadget website launchedTo everyone above, thanks for your comments, posts and overwhelming reception of Nudjit!It is fairly obvious to me now that people have been waiting, dying, anticipating something like Nudjit. Why? Because I've been moderating comments for the entire morning!!Oh, and just a headsup on this one quickly:Nudjit (n. nudg-it) Prounced as Nudge-it.