livinginbarbados // August 7, 2009 at 9:30 am

@AH
For good measure, because I do not like my friends being ambushed, I discussed the Facebook photo matter with the lady who was present at the lime. I did not mention your name so do not know if she knows you. I merely showed the relevant exchange on the blog. She laughed and said “He’s not our friend, so I guess he doesn’t understand us.” If you do make contact with her or our other friend, please treat them with the respect a stranger should and if you get to know them better then perhaps you can be a bit more at ease with how you deal with them.

She is not adept at things on the computer, but I suggested to her that she check whether things were as closed as she desired in her various accounts. We have seen what can happen when people cross the threshold uninvited, as Sgt Crowley (one of your adopted city’s finest, we read) and Louis Gates (one of your adopted city’s most learned…dare I say “titled”) will always remind us. However, I do not expect the POTUS to have to intervene here, nor is national equivalent, with or without the offer of a beer.
————————————————–

ha ha ha You are indeed a very dishonest person. My God, how do you live with yourself?

So which one is or was the Lawyer? and which one is not savy with computers?

Did you not attempt to suggest that Kofi, yourself, and the two ladies know each other?

Did not suggest that the ladies are aware of what was said and found no offence?

Did you not leave it open for interpretation that Kofi also attends your thursday get together. Probably hoping no one would notice?

You then proceed to write a blog about persons morality with regards to invading people’s privacy and access and publishing private information, knowing full well that persons can infer that it is I to whom you refer.

I have no intentions of contacting anyone to prove you to be the liar that I have to my satisfaction proven you to be, but since you think that you can lie your way out of your willingness to malign your friends simply because they are Bajans and then cast blame my way for pointing out your deception under the pretense that I invaded your privacy. I will give until monday to declare to this audiance what the security status was of your Facebook account until recently.

Tell BU what your Facebook account security was until recently. I intend to draft a letter to Facebook letting them know that you are knocking their service as you did not take advantage of their security features.

@David
Reading the BBC story that reports “A massively co-ordinated attack on websites including Google, Facebook and Twitter was directed at one individual, it has been confirmed.” see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8189162.stm, offers some salutory lessons. I know that you use Twitter and have Google accounts. It was very disruptive this morning and I am jsut seeing things get back to normal, but it is noticeable (though could be totally coincidental) that Bloomberg’s website has been frozen for about the last 4 hours.

Post this here or separately or not at all (I have not seen e-mail in my gmail account so wonder if you have similar problems.) I will also send it via Feeback.

@David
Ditto, on Twitter, though some time ago. I am getting no Gmail, pushed to BB or online. Could you send me a test message. Sorry to use the thread this way and delete after if needed.

I do periodic maintenance of my Internet presence, on a rolling basis, which includes password changes, modification of access rights, disabling of accounts, etc. Hackers and robots are very sophisticated and I am not cyber security wizard, but have contacts in that area. I have explored putting up software that toggles those who access my accounts so that I can have a trail of visitors, and various blocking devices are useful, and can be worth the inconvenience of some material then having to be reviewed from a ‘trash bin’. It’s time consuming but it has usually be effective. I have not yet had the need to install ‘attacking’ software.

Barbados does not offer the luxury of having multiple Internet providers and the cost of a server is prohibitive, but time may come to spend the extra $$ to keep matters as they should be. Hosting my own website has often proved to be the best route, but it is not easy on this blessed isle, though I may go that way and feedback into public sites, which would offer a lot more effective gate keeping.

Here is what the Auditor General had to say in his Special Report 2008.

By the Way,
For the time being stop focusing on my articles, and do your utmost in helping me find out who is the prominent West Indian who charged the international organization he worked for considerable sums of money for an ‘alleged’ office he had at home. LOL.

@LHolder
“For the life of me I can’t understand why there is this hue and cry about my cost-benefit analysis article and the use of the phrase ‘political yardfowl’.[Let me stay on topic. There is interest on my part on seeing the CBA explained fully. My concerns go to assumptions and their impact on the conclusions. One simple point, that could help both lay and trained persons, is to say why you use the starting assumption you did. I have said before I am not an expert on immigration. So, I initially wondered why 30,000 Caricom immigrants was a good starting point. Is it close to reality? If you say yes (with good reason) then that can deal with many things. When I first saw discussion on the illegal immigrant debate I saw/heard numbers that were as wide as 5,000 and 70,000. If either of these were correct and had been used as your starting point, the computations and conclusions would have been quite different. I hope that this will be among the points you address over the w/e.

I’m not sure about your saying there are hidden agendas; to me that is a given. We all have them–none of us have our lives and thought spread out fully on display. But, it is also a comment that is difficult to disprove, so is a charge that anyone could use.

I’m not going to get into whether a term that can easily be viewed as offensive is being used charitably. You say that is how you are being with the use. For those who feel that they fit the term, or the term fits them, I imagine they will discuss that with you. I sought a definition of ‘political yard fowl’ and I got a local usage definition, plus a wider regional usage definition (citing the late Richard Allsopp), both of which I can hold onto.]

Hello All,
My use of the word ‘yardfowl’ or ‘yardfowlism’ sent some of you bloggers to your dictionaries to find the meaning of the terms. It also seems that my use of those terms has provoked discussion in some social circles. We also have George Brathwaite accusing me of finding invectives to be my best defence. His actual statements were as follows, “Thanks for the welcome Adrian. Now you probably realise why I have no discomfort with you. Indeed, a battle when fought must be won. I implore you to bring the best of your manly gloves but do not drop your guard. While I do not want to be your tormentor, I will take pleasure in helping you to raise your game to a level that may even be commended by persons of the ilk of Holder et al. who find invectives their best defence.”

Note that I did not state that Mr. George Brathwaite, PhD Candidate, is a yardfowl. But then again, who the cap fits should wear it.

Now, note the exact opposite with regard to comments made by Mr. Brathwaite in response to my article “Immigration Blues in CARICOM’. The comments I cite are taken from his article, ‘Reply to Lindsay Holder: Red Alert in CARICOM’. By the way, the article is unworthy of response, consisting of a bunch of terms loosely used, lacking in cohesion or clarity, and based on a set of false premises.

The quotation I cite is as follows; “Surely any well-reasoned analysis would at least make an attempt to provide relevant statistical data that can substantiate arguments being advanced. Mr. Holder prefers to follow the position of the Government of Barbados by relying on “casual observation” on which to determine that “the level of undocumented immigration is unacceptably high.” The sentiments in that statement alone appear to be sullied by bigotry: even if one could make a distinction based on race or ethnicity, how does one come to the conclusion that persons observed at any one point in time and place are undocumented CARICOM immigrants? Isn’t there an ‘Indo-population’ in Barbados originating from Trinidad and Tobago and also from the Asian continent?”

Two points I want to address from that quotation. My use of casual observation had or has nothing to do with the position of the Government of Barbados. It is based on my experience as a Barbadian, and the conclusion I reached from use of casual observation has been supported by the data provided by Senator Maxine McClean when she appeared on one of the broadcasts of ‘The People’s Business’.

The second and main point I want to address is that Mr. Brathwaite accused me of being a bigot. I invite those who overtly and covertly support the position that Barbados and Barbadians should turn a blind eye to the thousands of illegal or undocumented immigrants in the island, or that Barbados should open its borders to the thousands of dispossessed Guyanese and Jamaicans looking for a better life in other countries, to run to your dictionaries for the meaning of bigot or bigotry. Also, please discuss the meaning of the terms with your friends at social occasions.

@AH/David
“Lindsay you said prominent and not pompous, so that rules out and not in the Jamaican LIB and his side-kick, pre-PHD-GCB”[David sought to have the discussion go on without semantics; I said that was not meaningful.

A side-kick is (citing Webster’s) “a person closely associated with another as a subordinate or partner”. I’m not sure of any ‘close association’ between GCB and myself other than our being put together initially by VOB a few months ago, ahead of their planned call-in to discuss the immigration issue. I have seen GCB’s image on this blog and elsewhere. GCB agreed to two of his articles being posted on my blog (see http://livinginbarbados.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigration-matters-two-opposing-views.html, http://livinginbarbados.blogspot.com/2009/06/immigration-debate-attempt-to-clarify.html) but generally prefers his pieces to be posted on BU and I have seen several pieces on Norman Girvan’s blog (http://www.normangirvan.info/). That would put GCB in closer association with BU, ahead of George Girvan. There does not appear to be any subordinate or partnership relationship in place in any case. But, David could clarify for BU’s part.

GCB and I have never worked or studied together.

So, how has he become my side-kick? Or should I take that as a term loosely bandied around for a purpose that may become clear?

Given my limited knowledge of him, I cannot say if he is pompous, and his prominence in my eyes comes from his exposure over the past few months during the immigration debate.

As for myself, public exposure, position, and achievements do give prominence, so I would not shy from that term–albeit quite limited on both fronts. Pompous? I could handle being called that term at times, but it’s a fine line sometimes between that and just being proud.

I’m not sure that saying GCB is pre-PhD adds much. All of us are pre- something; at my age I may be approaching pre-senile dementia. If and when he gains his doctorate, we can have a discussion about its merits and his carrying the title “Dr.”]

@LIB
You were ruled out long before LH added “Fat” to the description. I can corroborate that you are indeed not fat, nor prominent or pre-eminent,….but pompous, you seem have an extra helping of.

When LH used the term “Yard Fowl” being a Bajan, a Jamaican definition or even one from a dictionary cannot be used. If you insist then you simply cannot be referencing LH use of the term.

I had no idea that you knew of GCB or appeared with him in the Media (I do not listen to VOB). I made him your sidekick and junior simply because you both object to LH CBA and seems to have similar views on this immigration mess. I have never subcribe to the use of Doctor other than for MD’s I find it an odd thing that Americans with PHD seems loath to constantly refer to themselves as Doctor this and Doctor that while elsewhere some people cannot wait to be so titled that they have to tell all without being ask that they are a “candidate for a PHD”, so to demonstrate that I have not forgotten I address him as pre-PHD-GCB. I am also poking fun at him. ha ha ha ha lol!

@AH aka Tall_Boy
I finished my writing early (and I think it’s a pretty good read today, http://livinginbarbados.blogspot.com/2009/08/holy-holey-batman.html.)

“I had no idea that you knew of GCB or appeared with him in the Media” [One of the traits of the fastidious is attention to detail. I did not say that I ‘had appeared with him’. It is really important to let the statements stand as they were written (you see the muddle because ‘intimations’ becomes ‘practice’ or ‘pratising’?).

You rationalisation of ‘sidekick’ makes no sense to me. Merely disagreeing with someone does not a sidekick make. That’s as odd as saying ‘your enemy is my friend’.

I have no time for titles and without a PhD I do not have to worry about “Dr” being appended to me. I have been called “Professor” even though I have never had a chair at a university or been tenured anywhere.

The handle is interesting, and as people wonder what drives other people, I did a quick check on usage of “tall boy”, and found the Urban dictionary definition: a beer can that holds 16 ounces. But I also found this website http://www.thetallboys.com/. One could search and find more, but I think I will amuse myself today by imagining you alongside or straddling these two ‘images’. Got to meet a Hoad for breakfast. I will ask him about ‘yard fowl’ as he has a brother who is an agricultural economist, no less.

Have fun poking.

Adrian has indicated that these are indigenous Barbadian terms.
————————————————–

Not the term, the yardfowl!
I don’t want to get in nuh spat wid yardies bout wuh dem do first or not. You might want to ask your friends if they accept Shridath Ramphals accusation Jamaicans killed the Federation.

His actual words were :

“The London Conference of 31 May 1961 had contemplated 31 May 1962 as
the date for the independence of the Federation. Well before we got there,
Jamaica’s referendum and Trinidad’s mathematics had ensured that we never
would”.

A close and dear friend of mine published a novel by the name of ‘Yardfowl’ in 2006. In the ‘prologue’ of that book, it reads: “lowly people known as clients entered into relations with influential and powerful persons to serve the interests of the influential and better off. These clients without doing anything positive to enhance their lot and to become self-reliant, became hangers-on, lackeys and sycophants.” If we are to accept this as a definitional usage of the term yardfowl, it suggests to me than many who appear included would be excluded and vice versa. I think I shall rest my case there.

I do not know Adrian Hinds, I do not know ‘LIB’, but I have met on more than one occasion Mr. Holder. I however do not know him personally. I respect him as a human being and I also have the tendency to allow mutual respect to obtain between myself and learned persons such as him. But if truth be told, many of the persons I gravitate to are those who remain connected to their grassroots and those that are humble. I say that to inform BU readers that it was mere coincidence that the attachment of ‘PhD Candidate’ became public. As is a customary practice by most others functioning in any official capacity in whatever climate, I have a standard email signature which not only states my name, address, and telephone numbers, but what I am currently assigned to whether it be a profession/vacation. I make no denial of my academic pursuit nor do I have to flag it so that the world knows except in the circles where academic mileage is consistent with best practice and the need for networking. I hope this would no longer be an issue as much as I am equally sure that David at BU and LIB who have both received emails from me would attest.
My final point for the morning is more specific to Mr. Holder. Currently, I am pretty busy again with academic demands. I do agree with you that if I should be critical of your position I need to detail it. With your permission and time permitting, I am hoping to do so as soon as possible. We do share some common things such as our pride in Barbados and wanting the best for our country. However, against my background and against what I see as the facts of the situation, I am more inclined to disagree with some of what you have advanced. Academic honesty is my guide and not membership to a political party. Hope you at BU have a great weekend.

vocation. I guess is should edit before I submit.

George C. Brathwaite // August 8, 2009 at 7:50 am

Rate This

A close and dear friend of mine published a novel by the name of ‘Yardfowl’ in 2006. In the ‘prologue’ of that book, it reads: “lowly people known as clients entered into relations with influential and powerful persons to serve the interests of the influential and better off. These clients without doing anything positive to enhance their lot and to become self-reliant, became hangers-on, lackeys and sycophants.” If we are to accept this as a definitional usage of the term yardfowl, it suggests to me than many who appear included would be excluded and vice versa. I think I shall rest my case there.
————————————————–

I do not accept this definition. It was not originally directed at “lowly” people. As far as I can remember, the term Yardfowl was associated with the civil service act of 1974. You had to be in the civil service and have gotten there by party affiliation or membership. The only person in here that has confirm their party membership is you. This alone makes you the most likely candidate for the title. Where you at anytime a civil servent? This would most definately seal your fate. lol!

My guess is that pre-PHD-GCB cannot be mistaken for a “lowly” person, and you say your title was disclose by mere coincidence? a thoughtful one perhaps!

Perhaps for those with a wider understanding, VOB’s putting together was/is in the form of circulating by e-mail background topical documents to a range of possible commentators so that they could be better briefed. Some of the commentators, as I am sure many are aware, are overseas or otherwise not available when the program is being produced and make contributions by phone, and are not present in the studio. I cannot recall fully, but I think GCB was linked by phone, as was I.

Anyway, I am now going to put together some lunch.

adrian hinds run to change name? wtf! first bimbro hide as 199, den heat ketch him an him run back to bimbro. adrian go jump up an harrass LIB an snooopp on de man? a body trackin you now, tallboy? whakina name dat? YMCA? luk lik yu runn inna briar patch. Yu neva read anancy story? LIB gi yu rope an yu tie up yuself an lindsy too widdim yardfowl up. all o oonu now in hot wuk. what a laff! looking fawad to de nex dance. yu all nu read how LIB ha connection? i hear a Boston posse out fi hunt fi de self happointed king of kings and lawd of lawds, an a base hit goin com befor de home run. run man!

Laaaaaaaaawwwwwwwdddd!

David I post something here around 6:25 and it did not show up, when i attempt to repost it, I am told it is a duplicate post. ????????

Went to spam!

David

@AH
“But LIB if I understand little and others perhaps have a wider understanding than me, why do you give them the details of what you meant and not I?”[It’s really because you say you are interested in annoyance rather than substantive engagement. We are not using this space as a play ground for children. There are serious issues to be discussed and doing things for annoyance is time wasting. If David needs the hits, fine, but after a certain point, everything starts to be costly.

If you wish to be a self appointed umpire then I would expect you to set a good example of what the debate should be about.

I am essentially engaging with the author from hereon, as I indicated earlier.

We do not have to tolerate everyone. My democratic views is still about freedom of choice and freedom of association.]

Le moderateur, Davide, nous a demande de nous focaliser sur le sujet et la sustance du papier de M. Holder. Mais, il n’a pas demander que on continue en anglais. Peut etre, moi, je continue mes commentaires aves les autres en francais, mais je continuerai mes interventions avec M. Holder et le moderateur en anglais. Je suis frustre.

This is to advise that Lindsay Holder has submitted his document as promised and it will be posted about 8PM.