When I have a new idea I fight the urge to talk about it until there is actually something to show for it. I do this because I get very frustrated when others do it. And by “it” I mean seek congratulations, press attention, and sometimes investment, before the actual thing is complete.
I only have this frustration with others because I see the same thing in myself. I despise credit before it’s due because I hate my own tendency toward it. In the past I’ve sought positive feedback (read: ego stroking) for work that was not much more than a good idea. I’ve had plenty of good ideas. But good ideas aren’t worth congratulations or accolade on their own. Good ideas are only worth a damn once they’ve come to fruition.
In my experience, this entrepreneurial jumping-of-the-gun happens in the form of landing pages, tweets, and in some cases full fledged video announcements.
New business competitions are incredibly tempting. I’ve participated in half a dozen or so in only a couple of years of entrepreneurship. I won once, came in second another time, and completely lost the rest of the times. In my experience the potential return (prize money) isn’t worth the lost productivity and wastes intra-startup networking possibilities.
This post revolves around Huntington University’s theme for the 2007–08 academic year. For information regarding it see: their theme website, coverage on a United Brethren news site (hideous site by the way), and, for more discussion, the Assistant Director of Campus Ministries’ blog. For those on Facebook and/or at Huntington, this post was duplicated for a group here.
According to the HU website, chapels exist for the purpose of “spiritual formation.” Unfortunately, in practice, this doesn’t seem to be their true purpose. The true purpose of chapels is to coerce students to certain events which they wouldn’t otherwise be interested in going to.
Consider some of the events you receive chapel credit for. Now hold that thought for a moment.
A recent happening at Smashing Magazine has sparked my interest in the issue of running a design contest in order to solicit designs to use as commercial identity. Smashing posted a request not too long ago asking for submissions in a logo design contest to create the identity of their magazine. It has since ended, and although there were over a hundred submissions, there was also those who disagreed with the process. The discussion in the comments of the first post is indication enough that there is divide among the artistic community as to the proper response when presented with this sort of opportunity.
This was originally published in Issue 6 of The Huntingtonian on March 8, 2007.
It is that season again: the season where all good Christian girls and boys sit around the table and talk about who is doing what for Lent. Popular choices include things like ice cream, fatty foods, and television. Not surprisingly, many of the things we give up are good for us to rid ourselves of anyway – bad habits, unhealthy diets, etc. Kind of makes the “giving up” process a little easier, does it not?
This post was highlighted as a guest blog entry on The Huntington Cynic on March 11, 2007.
A small group of my colleagues today (which could probably be extended into a much larger group) were unsettled by today’s chapel speaker. I’m not one to name names, but let’s just say it was insulting to us on both an academic and a theological level.
This was originally published in Issue 5 of The Huntingtonian on February 15, 2007.
The American Heritage Dictionary says “inconsistency” means “the state or quality of being inconsistent.” Helpful, right? “Inconsistent” is defined as something which is “lacking in correct logical relation,” or “incompatible.”
By this definition, then, Huntington is inconsistent.
The more I hear so called qualified Christian organizations talk about homosexuality and its place in the Bible, the more I doubt that many are equipped to make statements concerning the issue.
On the one hand, there are plenty of “Christians” (more than I like to think about) who decide that homosexuals are damned by God and going to hell. The other group lands far from the fence, creating groups like The Gay/Straight Alliance to accept and encourage those turning to homosexual lifestyles.
Which is Biblically accurate?