livinginbarbados // August 6, 2009 at 10:07 am

@AH
“it is with us lay people in mind that I make my request.” [Again the nosism (us). It is your sole voice and that of a self appointed umpire, to boot. That sounds a little dictatorial. I hear so far no chorus from the rest of the constituents. I’m sorry if I seem complex but I live in a world of complex issue, I am also not a simpleton, or despite remarks to the contrary, stupid.]
————————————————–
As LH previously said. Many Barbadians will not readily lend their voice to controversial issues, but in private they make known their opinions. You probably know this as well, and may be this is what influences your focus on me. I have to understand this issue. Rest assured that as long as I do thousands of Barbadians will also. LoL! so keep listening for the chorus.

In case do not all see/read the same things (I saw this over the weekend), please read what Minister of State in the Ministry of Education, Patrick Todd,
http://www.gisbarbados.gov.bb/index.php?categoryid=13&p2_articleid=2174, and the additional comments from Deputy Chief Education Officer, Dr. Idamay Denny, She too expressed concern at some decline in the literacy rate on the island which “once stood at 95 percent and was something to be proud of”.

Never having trained as a teacher, except for certain sports, for most of my academic life I was subjected to: “Practice makes perfect” (meaning that the more you practice, the better you will become. If you want to become great, then you should practice as much as possible).

View differ on the value of repetition, but see http://www.robertringer.com/practice-makes-perfect.html.

Some people grasp things first time around, others need a few turns. I would hope that in the spirit of no one being left behind, repetition is ok. Some prefer arguments to be free-standing (ie “I presume you know this”), but many come to the discussion late so are less informed.

If one knows/grasps the message(s) well, one can ignore their repetition.

To also be a little didactic, Malcolm Gladwell’s recent book, “Outliers’ is worth noting, especially the ‘10,000 hours rule’, claiming that the key to success in any field is, to a large extent, a matter of practising a specific task for a total of around 10,000 hours; see the summary, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outliers_(book).

FYI Gladwell is a classic modern [oxymoronic] Caribbean conundrum (English father, Jamaican mother, born in England, raised in Canada, described as British-Canadian, but thought of as Jamaican by many in the island).

AH

I also thought that Brathwaite was referring to Thompson hence my BLP column inference..

LIB

(As metaphors fly like shrapnel, the ‘economists’ have fallen in number. I have been defrocked as an economist so am now a mere layman”.

Surely you can defend your scholarship, your resume and your professional reputation?
Can’t say I didn’t warn you but welcome to the rough and tumble of Barbados debate/politics.

I think I will sit back and enjoy the debate, now if we can only get Holder and LIB in the studio. Anyone at VOB/CBC listening?

On ‘political yard fowl’, I see that Allsopp’s dictionary of Caribbean usage has a definition, but for some reason the page is not available for viewing online. If anyone has a copy and could supply the definition, I would be grateful, again, by e-mail is fine.

The use of ‘fowl’ in Jamaican parlance when referring to a person is usually offensive, hence my hesitation to jump to conclusions if the Bajan usage is very different.

Wha ge into old man Hinds? E turn mad or something? The man LIB disagree and next thing, Hinds gone off to snoop on the man on Facebook! WTF! Then threaten to spread some picture he take from the man’s account. Pure nastiness. Freeky thing. Sicko. You coming back to Dodds? What if the man LIB tek that picture you posted when you playing baseball and doctor it and start to do all kina of nastiness with it. Lawd help YOU! Photoshop you like Rihanna?

But madness now gone double crazy with Hindsy mounting a coup and taking over the blog. Long live the king. David? See you, boy. Hindsy de moderata roun here. Wuhlosssssss!

Poor Lindsay. Check your back. Hindsy gine get you nex if you start to look weak.

No such intent Anon. No photoshop or doctoring on my part. LIB made representation Koki, himself and the two ladies know each other, he further intimated that the two women are aware of what Kofi said in reference to their picture. LIB further stated that Kofi, himself and the two ladies are not offended by the term “shiftless black people”. I don’t believe him and want to know for myself. Nothing sick about it as far as I am concern.

Self Appointed moderator: What this means to owner and admin access to this blog? nothing nada. I have no more access than you anon or LIB. I just meant that I would intervene with a post of my own when I see the need to do so.

Turning on Lindsay Holder: We both share a common love for our country and view this immigration thing through the same lense. There isn’t any requirement for us to see eye to eye on any other matter. David will tell you that we do not see eye to eye on all things. We had some heated arguments during the last American elections. Yet we are still here willing to agree and disagree for love of country.

LIB doesn’t have anything to fear from intentions. He said so himself. lol!

Why is it that disgustingly ugly people are always wanting to attract attention to themselves?

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.

livinginbarbados wrote on // August 6, 2009 at 12:34 pm…”On ‘political yard fowl’, I see that Allsopp’s dictionary of Caribbean usage has a definition, but for some reason the page is not available for viewing online. If anyone has a copy and could supply the definition, I would be grateful”

Yard-fowl noun (Barbados) [Derogatory] A political lackey; a person who makes himself available as a party hack in return for political favours on which his livelihood depends. From [yard + fowl ‘chicken’ ‘hen’; such birds live in the enclosed yard and are fed table and kitchen scraps, hence the analogy]

Also

Yard-fowlism Noun (Barbados) The political practice of giving or receiving favours in return for toadying; sycophancy in politics.

Dictionary of Caribbean English Usage / edited by Richard Allsopp. Oxford University Press, 1996.

And living in Barbados I’ll give you a little advice. The term is extremely derogatory and you should never call anybody a yard-fowl to their face, especially if you are speaking the truth. Barbados is a small place and it will not be big enough to hold both you and the offended person.

J

And living in Barbados I’ll give you a little advice. The term is extremely derogatory and you should never call anybody a yard-fowl to their face, especially if you are speaking the truth.
***********************************

Does that mean its ok to use it if you are lying?

Are the members of the constituency councils considered yardfowls?

All of a sudden people playing they don’t know of the word yardfowl, to the point that they have to consult a dictionary. The label was well used in defining GCB.

@GCB:
You cannot aid or help me with anything. As long as your contributions takes on a partisan approach they will be easy prey for me. You at all times will be constrain to protect the image you are hoping to build and instill in others (pree-PHD bragging rights). I do not recognize and therefore cannot RESPECT such labels. In here all contributors I treat man to man, except J, who, at this time I believe to be a ghostly figure. Some times I hear it most times I don’t.

What is most fascinating about Adrian is his ability to see inside the head of all persons and to know their inner workings so well. He can even determine how people drift toward ‘needless complexity’. But, of course, we all have agendas, some well known, some lesser known, some unwitting, some explicit. In that sense, I think we are all different, and I tried to touch on this on my blog this morning. But, if one sees how Adrian has moved from being a mere commentator to the ‘commentator in chief’ (“I will be the self appointed umpire of this debate.”) you have to think about what drives someone to feel that total control of all around him is THE way to go.

Posting the comments elsewhere will be an interesting exercise. I guess the expectation is that all will run hastily to see this new posting. Reminds me a bit of Toad.

US nonfarm payrolls data coming up soon, so have to focus on future economic prospects.

Having just seen videos of Putin buffing, I hope that Adrian’s ‘stripping’ does not go to that extent and if so, please send a warning before posting. Putin’s showing off his body and its implicit strength could be his later undoing.

“All of a sudden people playing they don’t know of the word yardfowl, to the point that they have to consult a dictionary.”[Consulting a dictionary has many benefits, because it allows a true definition to be sifted from custom and practice. If you have crossed lingustic cultures you will understand this more easily: ‘Rubbers’ in England are not the same as ‘rubbers’ in the US, and the scope for serious embarrassment when trying to buy them in a store in the US is very high.

I raised the ‘yard fowl’ remarks with some people while liming last night. Interesting, and unknown to me, some of them know Lindsay from school days, and explained some things that I found surprising. I don’t know how much is public knowledge but I am not interested in searching to find out. I take LH on the basis of his presentations here and in the press. But
I will look forward to the Rotary presentation, because that may also tell me more about him and perhaps what is really going on.

The general view (from a group Bajans (7, plus 2 children), Jamaicans (3), American (1), Bahamians (1) was that ‘yard fowl’ is a highly offensive term. We discussed how it is used in Jamaica, which is news to me as I have not lived there a while, but my compatriots (women) were very clear: “Any kind of ‘fowl’ is not a nasty reference.” Overall impression of what they read on the blog: shock. Some of them may decide to weigh into the debate, in true name (positions permitting). That would be good, because I have a feeling that the discussion here is very narrow. It is a very emotive subject. I see Ricky Singh and The Lowdown columns getting a few more hits in on the matter in today’s Nation.

As to a comment about VOB/CBC being interested in the debate, I flagged that to some people who may be interested and the idea is being considered. I made clear that I saw the debate on several levels. One is just a matter of what kinds of arguments were being put forward. Another was the battling between national political party views (and in that sense, I suggested that partisipants with known party allegiences should be in the discussion, whether or not they have crossed party lines at least once). It was also important that a public debate did not descend into invective: the public should not have to deal with the kind of offensive and profane language that I have seen expressed on this blog around the subject.

It’s not my agenda to control and there will be issues about whether VOB or CBC take it on and then who would be the moderator, if indeed there is one. I guess some could volunteer to be umpire, but they would need to be present in the studio not merely available on the telephone.

Those of us who can be easily located may hear more on this proposition.

@AH
“Yard fowl’s are indigenous to Barbados and are subjected to extinction every five years.”[Why would you therefore expect those who are not indigenous (I count myself, as I only know me) to know about something indigenous to Barbados that keeps dying out each 5 years, by claiming “All of a sudden people playing they don’t know of the word yardfowl?”?]

Does it worth my comment? I have not attacked Mr. Holder. I am critical of his thesis because of its baseless assumptions, flawed analysis rooted on unsubstantiated claims, and contestable conclusions that do not necessarily reflect careful evaluation. Indeed, I have pointed out that Mr. Holder does make some points that are to a large extent correct and interesting. So I have not been after the man himself, I remain quite capable of dealing with the issues. On a more sober and untainted reflection, I do have an understanding of the term ‘yardfowl’. What I find to be mind-boggling is that those sentiments have never described me. Perhaps Adrian can check out my record of work and past and present associations. It sounds to me that Adrian’s envy does him no good for clear and independent thinking, especially if such thinking may differ from popular sentiment. Hence, if I strive for something that will be of benefit to others, why should Adrian or any others attempt to knock the effort? Nevertheless, I encourage all BU readers to come to their own conclusions. That is a signal suggesting that democracy still abounds in Barbados.

We all have agendas.

The central issue here is LH’s CBA. Is it possible to discuss it without the forays? This comment is most pertinent for those with training in economics who can offer that benefit to the BU family.

@George

Is it possible for you to articulate those assumptions which you have issue with regarding LH’s CBA?

@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.

@ pre-PHD-GCB

More dishonesty. You did attack the man. Yes you did. three times and counting. lol”

You dismiss LH CBA with fancy words and then tack on that he made some correct and interesting points.

You are at risk for being labeled a pre-PHD candidate who thinks and write like a plebe leaving us to wonder about the worth of your soon to be achieved paper throphy.

You must now tell (detail for) us how so is LH CBA flawed, unsubstantiated, contestable, carelessly evaluated. When you are done tell us what those points are that you define as correct and interesting, and don’t forget to tell us why you think they are so.

My definition of a Bajan Yardfowl is all I need and will use, and you fit it’s definition well.

Until you can find something in the last 14 years of BLP government rule to critique and to do so in the manner and tone that you have done to the DLP in it’s mere 2 yrs of existence then I will remain steadfast to the believe that you are not an independent thinker, your truth is filtered, and what you strive for is partisan in nature and therefore limited in it’s scope of use and utility.

livinginbarbados // August 7, 2009 at 9:37 am

As you forget context quickly, I suggest you review the context of the ‘fowl’ and that it refers to its referencing not its consumption, or even rearing…….

The context to which i refer clearly stated

“ANY KIND OF FOWL IS A NASTY REFERENCE.”

do you remember stating this?

What does ANY mean to you? It means ANY. A dead fowl, one defeathered but alive, one baked and ready for consumption, one consumed, …..are all fowls that can be reasonably defined by “ANY KIND OF FOWL.” LOL!

@LIB:
I also get a sense that you are invasive into aspects of people’s private lives. That is just bothersome in a general sense. I am not sure if others (nationals, maybe) are bothered by this in a country where commentary is apparently limited due to fear of reprisals, etc. I cannot speak for them.
————————————————-

Lets deal with this. You are a very dishonest person, but lets try. How was I invasive? can you asnwer this? What or whose private information did I access?

@David
In keeping with your general wish, I will reserve my future comments for when Lindsay replies. Should others wish to engage me on topics off the issue, I offer again that this be done via e-mail. That may pose some a problem if they wish to preserve their anonymity, but it’s hard to keep having that cake and eating it, too.