Latest News

News

Desautels welcomes back alumni for CEO Speaker Series

by Nathaniel Finestone on

More in News:

The CEO Speaker Series, held on Friday Oct. 21 by the McGill faculty of management, introduced young business students to three successful entrepreneurs, all graduates of Desautels.

The three CEOs discussed their business successes and failures. David Segal, who graduated in 2004 with a BCom, is now the CEO of David’s Tea, and Alexandra Schwartz, who graduated with an MBA in the same year, is the CEO of Studio Breathe, a yoga studio. Samer Saab (MBA ’96) is the CEO of eXplorance Inc., a software development company.

Many students attending the talk were considering their future career prospects in business, including Maritza Godinez, a U3 general management student.

“[I came] because I have no idea what I’m going to do after graduation and so I thought it’d be beneficial to come and hear about other experiences people have,” she said.

Second year MBA student Alex Brzostowski spent the past year organizing the talk and acted as the master of ceremonies at the event.

“It’s been really great having CEOs coming in and sharing their experiences,” he said.

The three CEOs conveyed the challenges and the joys of being entrepreneurs. Saab spoke about his first experiences in the working world.

“I always wanted to sell things, [and] had to work and get jobs at other big corporations like Nortel and Bombardier,” he said. “But eventually I went out at the right time, there was no success right away, I had lots of pain first.”

Though all three eventually found success in the business world, they all described their early entrepreneurial attempts as a rollercoaster of optimistic startups that were met with disappointment.

“I was a serial entrepreneur, [was] my first business when I was 18 selling first aid kits door to door,  [then] I started a software company in my basement for two and a half years,” Segal said. “That didn’t work, then I found tea and got lucky; [I] found a phenomenal partner with deep pockets and it worked.”

Schwartz spoke about the difficulties of launching her business after 12 years of working in retail in an entrepreneurial environment with very little corporate experience.

“When I choose to pursue my MBA in my thirties, after working, I didn’t do it to learn to be an entrepreneur, which I figured I knew how to do already which was work, work, work, and just focus on how much can we sell [and] how much can we do,” she said. “Overall you need determination, patience, and resilience and to believe in what you are selling.”

“I go by the seat of my pants, you have to quickly learn to guide the ship,” Saab said. “I have a CFO, a marketing director, I have an office of 45-50 people, and 700 people in the retail guide. But I am still very involved and I read every email that comes in and every one that goes out.”

Schwartz emphasized the commitment needed to run a company. “I have two kids so my day starts at four, I want to be able to check 300 emails and to prepare nice documents and check every bank statement, but every day is just work, work, and work,” said Schwartz.

“The hours are very flexible: you can work any 23 hours you want,” Segal joked.

Despite the long hours that they work, all three CEOs still spoke about their jobs with eagerness and enthusiasm, delivering inspiration to aspiring entrepreneurs at McGill. 

News

MIGS hosts talk on role of media in genocide prevention

by Carolina Millán Ronchetti on

More in News:

Ryan Reisert

With the advent of digital media and its role in events such as the “Arab Spring,” experts around the world recognize the need to harness and manage new tools, and use them to prevent, rather than react, to mass atrocities. Concordia University’s Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies (MIGS) hosted a conference to address this issue on Oct. 20 and 21 titled, “The Promise of the Media in Halting Mass Atrocities: A Conference to Mark the 10th Anniversary of the Responsibility to Protect,” featuring 16 panelists of varied backgrounds.

The keynote speaker of the conference was Canada’s 21st Prime Minister, Paul Martin, who is credited with bringing together all 192 UN members during his tenure to sign the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) norm, a document which empowers the UN Security Council to intervene in any situation where a country does not take action to prevent mass atrocities within its borders. Martin addressed ways to mitigate current challenges in implementing R2P, such as decreasing foreign aid budgets and reducing military resources.

“In my experience, overseas development assistance budgets and emergency funding for R2P is not part of protective programs, and is therefore very vulnerable [in times of economic crisis],” Martin said. “In my opinion, this represents if not the greatest obstacle to the responsibility to protect, the greatest threat to responsibility to prevent.”

When asked by an audience member how the news media could more effectively bring attention to mass atrocities and influence policy decisions, the former prime minister noted the importance of in-depth analysis of decisions.

“To be honest, I don’t think that media coverage makes a political leader, in terms of foreign policy, do something,” Martin said. “What I really do believe is that political leaders take their decision based on their analyses of the facts as they seem. Where media becomes incredibly important is the quality of the media in analyzing the decisions that happen. The media needs to have the experts in foreign affairs, not to simply react in a populous way but to analyze the issue.”

Senator and Lieutenant-General Roméo Dallaire noted several scenarios in which the media has significantly influenced policy decisions in the past, but added that the volatility of such interactions poses challenges for both the media and politicians.

“We need to look at how mass atrocities are being covered … Unless journalists acquire some of the softer sciences of anthropology, sociology and philosophy, unless they are provided with more depth to what they can understand, let alone report on and analyze, they are out of their league in this era,” Dallaire said. “We are in an era of enormous complexity and ambiguity, in which we will find ethical, moral and legal dilemmas abound, but also we will find ourselves in scenarios that don’t fit any sort of pattern, that don’t fit the old military solutions or the old diplomatic solutions. If you want to influence … you need a whole new set of capabilities.”

Other panelists focused on discussing how new technologies can prevent mass atrocities.

Jonathan Hutson is director of communications for the Enough Project,  which aims to end genocide and crimes against humanity.

Hutson acquainted the audience with the Satellite Sentinel Project, which uses near-daily satellite imagery analysis and field reports to deter war between North and South Sudan by capturing possible threats to civilians [and] detecting bombed villages and other evidence of violence.

“If you want to change the world, never ask ‘What can we do?’ because then you start weighing on a reasonable level and you can do nearly nothing—it costs too much, no one will cooperate, no one has ever done this, maybe we’ll fail… Always ask ‘what needs to be done?’ and then do that, even if it’s impossible,” Hutson encouraged the audience.

Shireen Soofi, a U3 arts student and a current intern at MIGS,  found that the diversity of panelists and speakers greatly enhanced the discussion of R2P.

 “I agreed with some and disagreed with others but if you want democracy, you have to understand all the sides,” Soofi said.  

Many audience members found that they could apply what they learned to their jobs.  This was the case for Dechen Wangmo, a broadcast journalist currently in Montreal as a Sauvé Scholar working on projects to develop the emerging journalism industry and media literacy in her native Bhutan.

“[Paul Martin] really highlighted how important it is for the media to do in-depth analysis of the events,” Wangmo said. “Media in Bhutan is very young … it’s very difficult for Bhutanese [journalists] to provide in-depth analysis and that’s what I want to learn and implement as part of my Sauvé project during my co-op here in Canada. This is a gathering of very well-known people with so much expertise; it’s a great learning experience for me.”

News

Mansur on clash of civilizations

by Eric Mauser on

More in News:

Sam Reynolds

Salim Mansur, himself an immigrant to Canada from India, may seem like an unlikely candidate to talk about the dangers posed by other cultures, yet he discussed just that in his McGill lecture on Oct. 17.

Mansur, a professor of political science at the University of Western Ontario, is known to many as a critic of multiculturalism, governments in the Muslim world, and being staunchly pro-Israel. As a result of his stances, two fatwas have been issued against him.

“We are in a war, in a great global conflict in the beginning of the 21st century and we are again dealing with the question of freedom,” Mansur proclaimed at the beginning of his lecture.

Mansur argued that this war for freedom is a war of ideas and cultures, between those who favoured freedom of expression and liberal ideology, and those opposed to it. According to Mansur, the idea of the former co-existing with the latter is untenable because it implies treating all cultures and values as equal, even when they are not.

“You cannot have equality where the values of the Taliban [are] equal to the [values of] graduates of McGill University and [under law] you had better treat them as equal,” Mansur said. “Multiculturalism, as I came to experience it in Canada over the last four decades … is a delectable lie,” he added.

Marc Fortin, a U2 economics student and chief communications officer of the French section of the Prince Arthur Herald, co-sponsor of the event, found the lecture interesting.

“Multiculturalism is something that is really entrenched in our society right now. It’s something that everyone thinks is normal, but we find that there is a big problem with it,” he said.

“I think as a student, his message was to stand up for what you believe [in] and to stand up for liberty,” Fortin added.

Alexandre Meterissian, a board member of Conservative McGill and student host for the event explained that he brought Mansur to McGill because of his expertise on issues of immigration and multiculturalism.

“It’s good that we have these kind of discussions. It’s a major issue for the next generation, for our generation,” he said. “The main reason we brought the event on campus was to get more students involved.”

The sponsors for Mansur’s talk included Conservative McGill, the International Free Press Society,  whuch promotes free speech in Canada, and Act for Canada, a group which, according to its website, seeks to protect Canada from “radical Islam.”

“I am delighted because we actually want young people involved,”  Valerie Price, member of Act for Canada, said. “I think it’s really important. I’m really nervous about what’s going on around the world and in my country.”

While Mansur’s message could be considered controversial by some, it was well received by over 100 community members, faculty, and students who came to hear him speak.

News

RIM launches next generation of blackberry smartphones

by Anand Bery on

More in News:

Research In Motion (RIM) unveiled a next generation platform for its Blackberry smartphones on Oct. 18 at a developer conference in San Francisco. The operating system, known simply as BBX, aims to merge Blackberry’s current smartphone platform with that of its PlayBook tablet, QNX.  In an attempt to encourage developers, it will support new technologies, like HTML5, which will allow programmers to easily develop for both Blackberry smartphones and tablets.  

 While Blackberry sales continue to be strong in many parts of the world, the Waterloo-based RIM has recently faced stiff competition at home in the Android and iOS platforms of rivals Google and Apple. Drawing consumers  with their intuitive applications, access to media, and full-screen touch interfaces, Android and iPhone devices have eaten into much of Blackberry’s North American market share.

 Following the announcement, RIM’s shares rose 3.6 per cent in one day, a good sign for the troubled Canadian firm. Its stock has been down around 60 per cent since the beginning of this year.

 Industry opinion of BBX, however, has been less than positive; experts have called the venture everything from “just a pipe dream” (PCWorld) to “a tall order” (AnandTech).

 Joesph Vybihal, a faculty lecturer in McGill’s school of computer science, felt RIM took far too long to realize they needed to change their game plan.

 “It’s not a little bit late, it’s late,” he said. “While they were developing their Bold and Torch, they were saying, internally, we don’t need a tablet, we don’t need a phone like iPhone. Now they’re starting from nothing. There was a clear lack of view to the future.”

 RIM is trying hard to maintain the strength of its email and messaging functionality as well as its integration with corporate servers. These have always been its core assets.  

 “BBX embraces the best of the BlackBerry platform and the best of the QNX platform to create a brand new platform that extends the BlackBerry DNA of collaboration, communication and immediacy,” RIM said in an email to the Tribune.

 The firm’s attempt to encourage the creation of more applications is a hard sell, especially given that a release date for BBX has not been set and there are rumours the platform may not be available until 2013.

 “They’re saying: develop web applications now for two years from now, but two years from now Apple is going to do something else,” Vybihal said. “I don’t know if at the last [developer conference] they convinced everybody.”

 Application availability is everything in today’s mobile industry, and for now, the Blackberry platform lags behind with far fewer applications than the iPhone and Android.

 

Opinion

Keep opt-outs the way they are

by James Gilman on

More in Opinion:

In just over a week’s time, students will have the chance to vote on the continued funding of Radio CKUT and the Quebec Public Interest Research Group at McGill. Yet in a way this is also a referendum on the current opt-out system, and whether it was a mistake to take the opt-out system online in 2007.

The referendum questions ask students to re-approve fees that support QPIRG ($3.75 per student per semester) and CKUT ($4.00) while shifting the responsibility for managing opt outs and refunds to QPIRG and CKUT. Things would more or less return to how they were before 2007, when students could get their money back by physically going to the QPIRG and CKUT offices, which very few students did, mainly because most didn’t know they could.

By the end of 2007, the Students’ Society was working on moving the opt-out system online. But the system that was launched in the Fall 2007 semester wasn’t exactly what SSMU had in mind, as McGill decided to put all opt-outable fees together on Minerva. That same semester the SSMU General Assembly passed a motion opposing the new system and supporting putting campus groups back in charge of their own opt-out processes. Needless to say, McGill ignored the GA motion, and I don’t blame them. The GA cannot possibly be construed as a democratic representation of the student body, and given some of the inane motions passed at GAs it should not be taken seriously. Plus the differences between it and the system envisioned by SSMU (and supported in principle by QPIRG) were not as significant as some would have you believe.

Yes, McGill was a bit crafty when it decided to put all the opt-outs on its own website. But if opt-outs are online, does it really matter where they’re located? Even if they had been on each group’s own website there would have been links to these pages on Minerva. The argument behind putting opt-outs online was that it would make the process more transparent and efficient. There was even support from QPIRG: Ed Hudson, a member of the QPIRG board of directors in 2007 told the Tribune that QPIRG wouldn’t be opposed to the website, and that “We wouldn’t put barriers in [students’] right to opt out.”

QPIRG has always referred to the ability to opt out as a “right”. If students have a right to opt out, then why shouldn’t the process be as straightforward and transparent as possible? QPIRG and CKUT point out that they’ve been hit by the QPIRG Opt-Out campaign, but no one can say that this wasn’t predictable.  When the new system went online, SSMU told groups to budget for at least a third less funding than previous years, but even with the opt-out campaign QPIRG and CKUT’s opt-out rates haven’t been that high.

Everyone who opts-out is exercising their right to do so, and the solution isn’t to make it harder, but to budget accordingly and/or raise opt-outable fees through referenda, as QPIRG has done.

Going back to the old way, and making the opt-out process as difficult and furtive as possible, ignores the original problem, dismisses the benefits of an online opt-out system, and is not the right answer to the current situation.

Opinion

Occupy where, and for what?

by Johanu Botha on

More in Opinion:

After leaving its humble beginnings in Vancouver to make a splash in the Big Apple, the Occupy movement returned to its birth country last week, hitting large Canadian cities with full force. Crowds defying any demographic classification filled streets and parks across the country to join what has become a worldwide phenomenon.

As pundits surveyed the Canuck addition to the protests, two questions were raised over and over again. First: aren’t people only upset at Wall Street, not Bay Street? Surely the problem lies in the global effect of America’s corporate beast, and the world is reacting. Second: is the movement’s message a cohesive one? Everybody is angry, but can anybody agree on what exactly they’re angry about? Yet these questions have already been answered. Let’s take ‘em one at a time.

Wall Street may be the ugliest worm in your dinner, but it’s not the only one: the whole dish is spoiled. The system that contributes to the wealth of the few—and the struggle of most—spills far over American borders, and is globally kept in place by international elites. Canada, often proud in the past of being the only legitimate social democracy outside of Scandinavia, looks more and more like its southern cousin. While its income inequality is, mercifully, still much lower than that of the United States, it’s catching up, and fast. CBC announced last week that Canada’s income gap is getting wider at a faster rate than America’s. Furthermore, in 1976 the average Canadian income was $51,100. Despite inflation, that average has made a slow increase to $59,700. Frank Groves, the President of Ekos Research Associates, has told CBC’s The National that “nobody but a narrow caste of very rich people are moving forward.” In the same interview he mentioned that “what’s shocking about Occupy Wall Street isn’t that it occurred, but that it took so long to occur.”

Sitting next to Groves at the time was Charlotte Yates, Chair of Social Science at McMaster University. And in my opinion, she effectively tackled the issue of what the protestors want:

“Although the demands of that group are very diffuse, there is a very clear message: we’re angry about the way capitalist society is organized. Too few people have too much. This is a backlash against corporations.”

Her statement needs some nuance. Brands, companies, and their leaders are not universally despised. The tragic passing of Steve Jobs, and the outpouring of affection for all things Apple, is a case in point. Rather, it’s the position of manipulative power which many corporations are allowed to be in that spark outrage. Especially when that power is purely mediated by the bottom line figures at the end of the month. Add a host of entrenched economists who only see when their neo-liberal glasses are on, and you’ve got legitimately fed up people. Their demands are many because the injustices are many.

As the Occupy movement evolves, it should continue to be subject to much talk and more scrutiny. But the media  should not patronise it by asking questions that have already been answered. The movement’s ultimate efficacy has yet to be seen, but you do not have to strain your eyes to see its causes.

Opinion

Commentary

by Cole Powers on

More in Opinion:

McGill Tribune

Madam Principal,

Your most recent communication regarding the strike, “We are all McGill,”  seems to say two contradictory things at once: both that “we are all McGill,” and “by dint of their recent actions, MUNACA members are not McGill.” It has the clear intention of rallying its readers around you and against MUNACA members while saying nothing either substantive or documented about why exactly this should be.

A university president used to be a practicing academic. You are a practicing bureaucrat and fabulist. A university president used to have an interest—and pride—in the knowledge and calibre of its graduates. You have an interest in their money and influence. You know very well that “sharp but civil” discourse is a losing tactic for anyone but yourself and your cabal of administrator cronies, since it is in fact not discourse that wins the day here at old McGill, but money and power. Your tenure as president of this university is an embarrassment, certainly to me and my parents, but also to many with whom you presume to stand in solidarity. I can hope only that you will in time come to see for yourself exactly how shameful it is.

Sincerely,

Cole Powers

U2 Philosophy

Opinion

Keep it off Facebook

by Iain Macdonald on

More in Opinion:

Facebook and privacy are two words with a long, tenuous relationship. At 750 million members, the site houses a lot of information about a lot of people. It is no surprise that the company has been the frequent subject of scrutiny over its privacy policies. What is often overlooked is the fact that Facebook, Twitter, and other similar websites are only media for personal information — any offensive or libelous material is posted by individuals. These individuals, not the companies, are the ones responsible for the material they post.

We’ve all heard stories about people who, after a tough day at work or school, went home and tweeted “God I hate Mr. Turner,” or posted that their students were all germbags. While these stories are generally funny, they affect real people and can cost some their jobs. In some instances, the messages sent can be considered threatening, a point that hits rather close to home here at McGill.

Many of the characters in these stories, after they realise the consequences of their actions, cite one of two excuses. Either: “I was joking.” Or: the website didn’t permit them enough control over who would be able to view their message, and they didn’t intend a certain audience to see such sensitive material.

Anyone communicating using just text must realise that most jokes are cued non-verbally. On the internet, however, these cues are absent for messages shared in text format. Sarcasm is more difficult to detect in written words than spoken ones, something any micro-blogger should know.

While it is true that many social networking sites have complex and confusing privacy settings, this is a widely known fact. It should not be a surprise when users make mistakes in these settings. It is not a good example of user-interface design, but we all know that. Additionally, many people don’t actually know what settings they would like, they only  know that Facebook did it wrong, and any improvements they make are just less wrong. It’s difficult to blame Facebook for this, as they were trailblazing when they created the site. If you don’t like the privacy settings, don’t use the site. Or, at least accept that you don’t understand how they work and proceed with caution.

Even if every website on the Internet permitted perfect control over one’s personal information, there is still a degree of insecurity in the picture: other people. When your friends see you’ve posted something funny, tearjerking, or rude on Facebook, there is nothing preventing them from taking a screenshot and posting it on Failblog, Reddit, Digg, or any other similar website. These excerpts can contain all of your identifying information accompanying the scandalous material. When this happens, it’s difficult to blame Facebook.

While the National Labour Relation Board ruled earlier this year that employees may not be fired based on things posted on Facebook, it is still not a good idea to publically call your boss a “nitwit.” You can’t be fired for it, but there is still no reason to potentially let your co-workers know your true opinion of them. While the court might protect your job in these situations, they can’t make any guarantees about working conditions, letters of recommendation, and other courtesies offered by employers.

Internet users have to realise that if there ever was a true cliché, it’s that the internet is written in ink. When you post something on any of your favorite social networks, blogs, or other publicly exposed websites, it should be considered out there for everyone to see. There are never going to be ideal privacy settings for any website, and anything you tweet that can be misconstrued, will be. Users need to prepare for the worst case scenario when posting potentially offensive material. It is up to the web user to think before they post. Only that way can you prevent yourself from becoming a “victim” in one of these unfortunate events.

Opinion

MUNACA should think beyond the strike

by on
  • Author

More in Opinion:

McGill Tribune

The formerly admirable civility of the MUNACA strike appears to have been replaced by behaviour that goes beyond the bounds of decency. Last week, according to the MUNACA website, over 600 strikers disrupted the construction of the MUHC hospital at the Glen Yards site. In addition, it has been reported that protestors harassed alumni at a homecoming event, picketed at the non-university workplaces of governors, and used intimidation tactics at the homes of senior administrators.

What were these disruptions ever supposed to accomplish? Apart from stalling the building of a new hospital, spoiling a homecoming party for alumni, and alienating students from the movement, such acts will achieve very little. Despite VP Administration and Finance Michael Di Grappa’s claims that these actions “will not affect what goes on at the negotiating table,” they undoubtedly will, and it will affect MUNACA aversely. Actions such as throwing items at Mr. Di Grappa, be they garbage or flowers, will only serve to strengthen the resolve of the administration, making compromise even more difficult to achieve, and creating an office filled with tension when the MUNACA workers finally return to the fold.

The Tribune consequently finds such reckless and short term tactics entirely self-defeating. It seems like some strikers have forgotten that they are, sooner or later, going to have to work shoulder to shoulder with the very people they are attempting to intimidate. MUNACA’s acts of frustration can perhaps be understood given the slow pace of negotiations and the administration’s injunction. Under these conditions it is hard to build up consistent support for the MUNACA cause and to keep up momentum. But that does not warrant the use of intimidation tactics as a response. The purpose of MUNACA’s strike should be to demonstrate to the administration the enormous value of their work, making a case for how difficult it is for the university to cope without them; it should not be to show how much they can intimidate or disrupt. As with any strike, the moral high ground is essential, and that is only gained by turning the other cheek to unjust blows, not hitting back.

Moreover, these actions are not only self-defeating, but such childish tactics also set a dismal example for students. The Tribune applauds students for standing up for MUNACA workers. But actions so selfish in their nature, and intimidating in their intent, are giving students a terrible education in how to confront grievances in the working world.

The Tribune therefore calls for such disruptive tactics to cease—for the good of McGill’s students, alumni, construction projects, administrators, and workers. The approach of bringing public figures such as Maude Barlow, Brian Topp, and Michel Arsenault behind the MUNACA cause is a far more effective one: support of elected politicians is much more likely to bear fruit than disruptive protests, and much more in accordance with acceptable norms of behaviour.

Furthermore, the focus ought to be centred on the negotiating table, not on inappropriate picketing. That is where any concessions will become concrete, not outside Michael Di Grappa’s house. Both administrators and strikers need to remember it is in both of their interests for MUNACA workers to get back to work. McGill’s research capacity is hamstrung without a great deal of its workforce, and MUNACA workers must surely be hoping to return to full pay sooner rather than later. We remain hopeful that a resolution is on the horizon, but the recent poor conduct by many surrounding the strike has led us to seriously question that hope.

Opinion

Spam off!

by Holly Stewart on

More in Opinion:

 

One of my biggest regrets in university might be how liberal I was with my email address in first year. There’s a mindset that comes from being told over and over again to broaden your horizons and get involved with university life, both valid pieces of advice, which results in a little too much eagerness and optimism when taken to the extreme.
Activities Night in particular requires self-control and discretion. Do not act like someone at a buffet after a week-long hunger strike. In first year, I wandered around and signed myself up for anything and everything I considered slightly interesting, even if only for 30 seconds. Our House Music society? Sure, there was that one time I went to a warehouse party and there was loud electronic music, I could be interested in techno and trance. McGill Rotary Club? I’ve volunteered before and had fun, so why not. SOS Tutoring? I peer tutored a few times in high school, and I’m not sure how much I helped the student in question by correcting her French pronunciation as she stumbled through Asterix comic books, but saving the world through tutoring sounds like a good deal. Origami Club? Origami is one of those mysterious skills that my cool friends know how to do and I’ve always wanted to learn but never bothered to (maybe because when I really think about it, I have better things to do with my time). Swing Dancing Club? Never tried it but it sounds fun.
Inevitablym three years later, I’ve realised not only that I am no longer interested in most of the groups and activities I thought were cool in first year, but also I was probably not all that interested in the first place. I was spurred on to sign up by the excitement of university life and the endless possibilities available in front of me.
 Writing down your email for anything that sounds remotely interesting is a good idea, in theory, allowing you to filter through the plethora of activities at McGilland find something you’re actuallyinterested in. Unfortunately, I’vefound that it’s sometimes easier to not sign up in the first place than it is to unsubscribe. As old listservs pile up and gather rust in my inbox, my desperate replies which usually say “unsubscribe” in the subject line and then “Please take me off your list serv (it’s nothing personal, I’m just not interested in your club anymore)” in the email are ignored. The self-serve unsubscribe method is often just as useless. Clicking one of those “unsubscribe” links at the bottom of a listserv leads to a labyrinthan google group where supposedly, somewhere, there is the option to remove yourself from the list-serv. Only if you have the patience and determination to find it—­­ and the secret code given to you by the elves of Rivendell or something like that—will you be able to remove yourself from the listserv.
Now, when someone asks for my email, I give them a suspicious look and ask why in my most menacing tone. I treat my email address like it’s my phone number and everyone who asks for it is a potential telemarketer. I’ve learned that, when it comes to new activities, I need to think of my email frustration before I let my eagerness overtake me.

1 … 1,182 1,183 1,184 1,185 1,186 … 1,367

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue