On Sat, Feb 06, 1999 at 10:06:07AM -0000, John Griessen wrote:
> I've been a subscriber to ME since 1991, and the low output
> doesn't bother me.  He's doing it for himself, not "us".  We are
> all different, and can't be reconciled so why try to please us all.
> I enjoy his printing press reports just as much as any
> more germain productivity or marketing article or
> the very valuable ethics article recently.

For a year or two (since I first noticed it on the
newstand) I've bought every issue as it shows up. I also
enjoy it and in fact do like the stories about the press;
it is quite a challenge and I think we can all identify
with that sort of quixotic determination to make a piece
of technology work for us. I mentioned the bit about the
ink control because it was something that seemed quite
frustrating to him, and it was difficult for me to see
how one would even attempt to automate it without severly
compromising the ability of the press to run at all. The
fact that he hadn't even taken the screws out to see what
the actual thread was (given that he had clearly been
wondering enough to guess at it in the magazine) suggested
to me that he himself was quite leary of tampering with
it. If he *did* take a stab at automating it, I could
imagine it might result in a very long lag between issues.

As for the low output, the only problem I have with that
is that he still seems to sell subscriptons that promise
a higher frequency (bimonthly). I don't think that he should
enter into contracts that he has no ability or perhaps
even intention to fulfill; that puts a little too much
emhpasis on "doing it for himself, not us" for my taste. If
the subscriptions were sold as quarterly, semi-annual,
for issues "as available", or maybe if he went to a
"subscription" model where each issue came with a bill
(impractical, I know), I think I'd have less trouble
with it. He has clearly been quite forthcoming about his
situation and the limitaions inherant in that, but still,
I buy it at the newsstand.

> He doesn't seem like a survivalist to me;  I bet he'd like a tour of my
> bronze foundry, and I know I'd like a tour of his shop.

I bet so, too, and likewise.

In the most recent issue (I don't have it at hand) he
spent some time talking about the dangers concerning
not just the Y2K stuff but also the risk of hyperinflation
in the stock market; he expressed concern about the
level of dependance that the US populace has on equity
assets. These are not ravings, they are in fact serious
concerns. He went on to recommend that people try to
arrange their lives to be more independant and able to
support themselves in the event of an economic disaster.
These are words of wisdom, IMHO, but it is also, taken
in the proper direction, the beginnings of survialism.
Still, if he is right and disaster comes, I think we'll
all be envious of the people with windmills. (Actually,
you're right about that: The windmill thing was a cheap
shot, since I don't know for a fact that he has them,
[which is why I used the word "probably"].  However,
windmills don't seem all that much of a stretch for a guy
with his own press and the know-how to run it.)

--Bob

--
============================================================
Bob Drzyzgula                             It's not a problem
bob@drzyzgula.org                until something bad happens
============================================================