Monday's accomplishments:

[lagilman]

woke up
wrote some
made coffee
went to the gym.
did some e-mail stuff
had lamb chop and roasted corn on the cob.
fed the cats (they insisted) (not lamb chop, although Boomer made a case for it)
did some more e-mail stuff
made some phone calls
waited for people to get back to me re: the e-mail stuff.
wrote some more stuff (about 1800 words total for the day)
ate some salad
did research trip planning
did some research on my newly-acquired silver box (I've established it's pre-1912, but not much beyond that. nothing else from the maker [Victor Silver] has the same design, although some are similar)
refilled my fountain pens (I use bottled ink, so this usually involves scrubbing my fingers afterward)
fed the cats again

Wasn't that exciting?
and now I am off to bed, still waiting on e-mails (you-all know who you are)


meanwhile, consider this from Locus, via clarkesworld...

"Results were tabulated using the system put together by webmaster Mark Kelly, with Locus staffers entering votes from mail-in ballots. Results were available almost as soon as the voting closed, much sooner than back in the days of hand-counting. Non-subscribers outnumbered subscribers by so much that, in an attempt to better reflect the Locus magazine readership, we decided to change the counting system, so now subscriber votes count double. (Non-subscribers still managed to out-vote subscribers in most cases where there was disagreement.)"

AFTER the voting, they changed the way votes were tabulated? Um...... right. Another reason why I don't really bother with Locus any more. If they don't want to count all readers equally, why open it to non-subscribers at all?

Comments

[eeknight.livejournal.com]

I have a sour grapeish relationship with Locus too. Subscribed for a few years, but they never bothered to review (and rarely mentioned) my books, so I finally just said screw it.

Though I do still read their bestseller list every month.

[dsgood.livejournal.com]

Locus has two best-seller lists; one for originals, the other for tie-ins. I would like to see them all in the same list, so I could tell what really sold better than what.

The only best-seller list I pay attention to these days is USA Today's. They don't separate books into various lists -- hardcover, trade paper, mass market paper; fiction, nonfiction; it all goes into one list.

I stopped paying attention to the New York Times list when they separated out children's fiction. Oddly enough, Harry Potter had been outselling all or most adult fiction on the hardcover fiction list.

some business-minded neepery

[lagilman]

The breakdown in lists between children's and adult fiction was actually designed to give people a better idea of what was selling outside of a few Massive Books, and as such I can't argue with the results.

Likewise, different formats sell at different rates. A 10,000 copy sale of a trade paperback or hardcover means something different from a 10,000 sale of a mass market paperback, because of the extreme difference in price points.

That said, the only list that really matters is the list that's based on actual sales, not merely a reporting-of or stocking information. The game is so rigged WRT the New York Times I don't even know where to begin...

(I've resigned myself to never being on the Locus list again because my Luna books seem to go on sale the last week prior to of the month of actual release, so my sales are split between two months. Argh. But hey, so long as people are buying and enjoying, right?)

[jhetley.livejournal.com]

In Re Locus:

My father, in his last few years of employment, used to do labor statistics for the state* government. He said that the approach consisted of deciding what answer the boss wanted, and then adjusting methodology. "Lies, damned lies, and statistics."

*Georgia, under James Earl Carter. Dad offered rude opinions about the management, rather before it went national.

[handworn.livejournal.com]

What are your pens? Got a favorite?

[lagilman]

I have three pens that are in use:

an inexpensive Aurora I bought in Italy that has a fine steel nib and is a basic grab-and-use pen (I sometimes play with ink colors on this one but mostly it's a boring blue-black).

a Waterman that one of my authors gave me, with a medium nib, that flows like sex on silk and probably suits my hand better than anything else I've ever tried (that one gets a solid blue ink, 'cause I use it for signatures a lot.)

A Mont Blanc with a fine nib that was a gift from a best-beloved, was my first-ever pen, and gets filled with all the funky colored inks (right now it's a garnet-purple) that I use to make notes with.

I keep telling myself to buy another pen, 'cause they're preeeety, but these three suit me so well, why bother?

Pens

[(Anonymous)]

All right, I must indulge in a non-political post. :) I LOVE fountain pens. I started using them years ago. Add a medium to broad nib and they put out a line of ink that is comparable to a Sharpie. Much more visible for anyone who is visually impaired and definitely more professional looking than carrying around a marker.

They are indeed VERY preeeeety.

My first, which I still have, is an old style (the new design is a thicker pen) Cross Century Medalist, medium nib.

A few years ago, the chap at the pen store convinced me to try out a Lamy. Let me just say, I would swear they're the best "starter" fountain pen. Easy to write, easy to reload and at about $30 one of the cheapest. (Medium Nib)

The "showpieces" are a Duke Shanghai and a Duke Beijing Opera (Both Fine Nib).

I think there are more than a dozen different inks in the house, but that is because we mix colors for a custom look. And for anyone who uses a fountain pen and is a fan of BPAL (Black Phoenix Alchemy Lab), their perfumes mix well with ink.

There is something special about a fountain pen with ink that is scented and a custom color. I highly suggest it if you ever get the opportunity.

Best,
Day
www.DayinWashington.com