Current Post On Trae’s Blog:
So it was literally more than twenty years ago that I first put one of my dumbest creations on the internet: The Steven Seagal Movie Generator.
Like I seriously publicly launched that dumb thing back in 2004, and for those of you who were unaware, it assembles a title, cast and plot of a fake Steven Seagal movie from elements of his (real) bad films.
I honestly got the idea from a former-friend, who in high school wrote a comedic piece about how you could mash up the titles of Seagal films in the weird underground "newspaper" that got handed out for a few years. But I took it a few steps further, and made a whole thing.
Mostly it just sat there though, a thing I made once and never went back to. I followed it up with the Sci-Fi Channel Movie Generator (later retitled the Syfy Movie Generator) in 2008. I spent more time on that one, doing a later design update that made the "Syfy" movies show up on a fake DVD back cover.
But the Steven Seagal generator just sort of sat there, untouched.
And Steven Seagal kept making (terrible) movies with (predictable) titles. Like a lot. But the generator still only spat out movies culled from the nineties and early 2000s, ignoring all of his new stuff. There was a whole library of awful movies that just weren't in there, and it made the generator feel less relevant.
So, uh, I went and did something about that today.
First off, I redesigned the page. Now it looks like the back of a VHS tape box. Then I loaded the elements of about twenty-five additional films into the generator. And that was harder than I thought it would be, since some of the films are so obscure that they're not well documented. I literally had to do some deep research to figure out a lot of the basic plot details that are now in the generator.
But I did it.
And it's done.
And the generator is now fully loaded.
It's still useless and dumb, though.
![Nerd & Tie[dot]Social Forums](https://www.nerdandtie.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/natsocial-nicepreview-square-300x300.png)
I love the alt text!
I understand the motovation, but half an hour of discussion is truly a wildly short period of time. And I agree that turning everything into a vote instead of letting the discussion run its course isn’t going to end well.
I actually remember when this was an issue with our con as well.
Although we started emphasis on focus rather than calling for a vote every 30. We’ve had our fair share of meetings get a little too carried away with several discussions (So many times I forget), its just to the point where we’re older, we try to reign it in best we can and make sure to keep focus.
Funny thing is, I was in Sarah’s shoes. But never ever took it that far. Brought it up to my friends outside of meetings and during meetings requested that we try to be a bit more organized when it came to discussions.
You may laugh, but you do enough nudging over a long period of time and it takes seed in people’s mind.
Should Sarah stop trying so hard to just get things done instead of talking it out? Or is the act of endless discussion detrimental to con business? I move that we vote on the topic.
Seconded.
they spent 4 weeks debating changing something no one wanted changed so YEA i’m with her on this
One time on the UW-Madison Student Senate I seconded everything.