Tom’s Emporium of Fun Things

Flogos

This company, based in North Alabama, has developed a machine that pumps out foam clouds in custom shapes which float in the air and last as long as an hour, depending on the weather.  The sample images on their website show Macintosh apples and Nike swooshes, among others. I think the idea is that they could be used to advertise at big outdoor events, in football stadiums, etc.  What’s the verdict? Ingenious new idea? The bane of advertising finding a new medium to irritate us with? An idea that will never take off?

This is one of those you will find either hilarious or frighteningly stupid:

Sit on you

If you don’t like it, don’t blame me, blame Will Fairhurst. He’s the one who corrupted my mind with this nonsense.

I just posted the following few paragraphs on the “whaddup athletes” thread currently on the front page, but I wanted to put it here in case that might make it more likely to be read. As a student-athlete who recently quit (or at least took a break from) my team (XC/Track), maybe my frustrations are particularly relevant. I quit partly because I felt stifled in such an insular group and partly because I felt unable to participate in interesting things happening on campus. I’d like to think I didn’t so much run away from problems with the team, but rather ran toward more exciting opportunities. Unfortunately, however, I’ve discovered that it is very difficult to break open the pre-existing groups on campus and get involved with them as a 2nd semester sophomore, so I’ve still been spending most of my time with the XC/Track team. Because none of these team members ever want to attend lectures or events on campus, I’ve been going to a lot of things on my own. Anywho, here’s my post from the main page. Hopefully, these aren’t just hollow complaints and I’m actually making some effort to break out of the cliques I talk about:

I’ve heard another complaint related to this student-athlete divide: that athletes do not attend on-campus lectures and club-sponsored events. This makes perfect sense, because most events and lectures on campus occur at that critical 4:00-6:00 time slot when virtually every team on campus is having practice. In addition, weekend panels and colloquiua frequently conflict with meets and games. It’s no wonder, then, that athletes don’t show up. Especially with the expectations that no other athletes will be present, it’s an uncomfortable experience to be the only athlete at an event.

I don’t think there is an easy solution to this divide. Even evening lectures pose problems for athletes who cannot attend because they haven’t have their afternoons free to do coursework like non-athletes have. A week or so ago, at the “Be Heard” meeting, an event attended mostly by RC’s and those who arranged it, a group of people observed that this self-segregating phenomenon occurs not only with athletes, but is in fact widespread through all the other types of cliques on campus. Whether a club, affinity group, or sports team, these cliques prefer to attend their own events and no one else’s. The attendees of pro-life week events were virtually all from the republican and newman clubs who sponsored the events. The attendees of culture-house sponsored events are virtually all members of those culture-houses. Even athletes rarely attend each others’ games. In fact even the grouping “student-athlete” fails to acknowledge the divisions within that group. Members of the track team, swim team, football team all sit at their own tables and more often than not, remain within their own social group. I don’t think the divide lies so much between students and athletes, but between individual teams, individual clubs, and individual social groups.

Also, you’re right to raise concerns about admissions benefits for athletes, but these ’slots’ are not only for athletes. Legacies, racial groups, geographical demographics, and even those deemed to have unique or interesting experiences, all receive a significant boost in the admissions process. I feel like the problem resides not with these admissions benefit in any case, but in the widespread refusal to step outside of comfort zones and to put down those defensive, competitive barriers between all of the groups. I don’t know what to do to make the campus infrastructure more amenable to unity and inclusion between members of different groups. Someone at that “Be Heard” meeting suggested funding bonuses for events co-sponsored by athletic teams and clubs or affinity groups. I think this is a clever idea, but I’m skeptical whether it would actually bring athletes and non-athletes together. Any thoughts? Maybe even this Amhpub thing will prove valuable in creating dialog and mixing these groups up. We’ve got to stop complaining and move beyond this dialog if we want to see changes on campus, though.

In the meantime, if anyone not on the track/cross country teams wants to sit together in val (gasp!), be sure to let me know.