Fans of Propeller-

I'd like to cordially invite you all to become fans on Propeller on Facebook! Facebook, for those living in a cave (with internet access), is the wildly popular social network that is connecting friends and family the world over. We have written about Facebook previously, in our post about Propeller's use of the Facebook Connect platform.

We have recently created a fan page on Facebook where we will post interesting links we find on Propeller, and general news about the service. Please show your support for Propeller and become our fan!

Here is the link to our brand new fan page on Facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Propellercom/97972566876

Thanks to all for your continued participation on the site, you make reading the news more fun.

Best,
Tom (tdrapeau)

P.S. There will be punch and pie.

Friends of Propeller-

I wanted to let you know about a few additions to the Propeller web site today, designed to better serve our community. The first affects the URLs that are added to our Facebook and Twitter share feature. Up until now, we have been using the TinyURL shortening service to encode Propeller story links to better fit into the message length restrictions of Twitter. As of today, we are using our own URL shortening service, which uses the domain http://pplr.us.

The pplr.us service is different from TinyURL and other shortening services in that pplr.us links will only point to Propeller story pages (we may extend this beyond Propeller story pages in the future.) For those who have used our Facebook or Twitter share already, this change will be fairly transparent--you will notice that the links that end up in your Facebook/Twitter feed have the new pplr.us domain. Beyond that, nothing has changed with story sharing.

Additionally, thanks to a great suggestion by a relative newcomer to the Propeller community btatman22, we now have 2 separate Politics categories: Political News and Political Opinion. Since its initial launch 3+ years ago, the Propeller community has been interested in both the play-by-play and the color commentary of politics. Adding this new category will help distinguish between news reporting and opinion, and (we hope) reduce any related confusion. All existing Politics posts now appear in the Political News category, so that old links can be preserved, and the Political Opinion category is now open for business--members, please begin to use it for your opinion posts.

That's all for now--let us know how we're driving.

Live Long and Prop It!
Tom (member tdrapeau)

One of the most common member requests we receive on Propeller is for members to have the ability to edit stories they have posted. Specifically, to be able to fix typos, small grammar mistakes, and errant category choices. I am pleased to announce that we now have such a feature! For all stories you have posted, you will now see an "Edit" link wherever the story is displayed. Clicking on the link will bring you to a page where you can edit the story title, description, category and/or the story tags.

Let's take a look--first, the story listing with Edit link:



Notice the Edit link at the bottom, between the Discuss and Read Full Story links. And now, the edit page:



Once the edits are done, click "Save Changes", and you should see your edited story. That's it!

As always, let us know what you think.

Happy editing,
Tom (member tdrapeau)

In its article on TinyURL, the first widely used URL shortener, Wikipedia defined the service as one "that provides short aliases for redirection of long URLs". The launch of Twitter in 2006, with its 140-character limit on posts, prompted the development of many new URL shortening services such as bit.ly and tr.im.

Some content publishers and aggregators have followed suit and integrated URL shortening into their own service to facilitate sharing of links to their content. Examples of these are tcrn.ch (TechCrunch) and digg.com (Digg). Web sharing services have also joined in the fun, a recent example being shar.es (ShareThis).

Here at Propeller we have secured the domain pplr.us and will be launching our own URL shortener shortly. However, up until today, we did not accept shortened URLs as Propeller story submissions. I'm happy to report that we now accept shortened URLs. Story submission has not changed at all to accommodate this--simply submit the shortened URL, and we will save the original ("lengthened") URL as the source of the story.

So for example, a recent Propeller Week In Review blog post has the following URL:

http://blog.propeller.com/2009/06/05/propeller-week-in-review-greatest-hits-edition/

Using the tr.im URL shortener, the alias for the above URL is:

http://tr.im/nyv6

As of today, you can now submit tr.im URLs (as well as any other URL shortening service). Simply enter the shortened URL (in this case, http://tr.im/nyv6) into the URL box. Propeller will then save the story with the lengthened blog.propeller.com URL.

And that's it! Let us know if you have any questions.

Happy shortening,
Tom (member tdrapeau)

P.S. Follow Propeller on Twitter!

Another week, another bouquet of acrimony and amicable fun at Propeller--but folks, this time around, it's different. I'm to sorry announce that this will be my last WIR feature. At the end of June I will be moving over to AOL News. It's been a privilege to know you all, and to do my weekly round-up with color commentary. Perhaps some energetic Propeller member will take up the mantle and post a weekly, informal summary of the best conversations--in fact, maybe several will, and we can witness a regular Battle of the WIRs. ("My comments can beat up your comments!") In any case, I will miss cranking it out every Thursday afternoon. It's been a pleasurable routine.

Under the circumstances, I though we could skip the last week's activity and take a longer view. We've trawled through the database and come up with the most popular stories over a two-year period, ranked by props, comments, and page views. I'm going to concentrate on those today. There are some predictable items, but also some surprises. And needless to say, some of the commentators have since moved on greener (or possibly grimmer) pastures.

LOOSE CHANGE

Which legitimate story had the greatest number of comments? That would be "Change You Can Believe In! Obama's Approval Index Down 22%," posted on March 2, 2009, with 43 props, 33 drops, and an astounding 7,431 comments. (It's possible that the last 6,000 are ads for Viagra and Acai Berry nostrums--still, that leaves plenty of genuine opinions.) NoWayMan questioned the very premise of the article, which blamed the new Democratic president for the crumbling stock market: "Anyone who knows anything about the markets knows that there are just too many variables in play, and you can't pin performance on one person's possible future actions." But injest accused Obama of having "spooked the markets. Ramming through his 'wish list recovery act' didn't impress anyone, and the markets dived again."

Said wtagg: "I am more than willing to give Obama 38.7% of the blame. Bush owns the rest." To which dmoney2318 replied: "Bush's policies had us on a sharp incline. It wasn't until the Dems took over and blocked his policies that our economy went down the toilet. Now we're paying for not listening to the Bushes [presumably both father and son], and instead letting people like Bill Clinton and now Obama lead us down a path of total destruction." Responded djn3nunez3: "Only if you own Haliburton or Raytheon stock. Bush was a disaster in foreign affairs, domestic affairs, and economic affairs." Added DaneL: "What a trifecta: Obama, Reid and Pelosi. You libs bet on them, now you can reap the rewards." AbuAmirah shot back: "Dude has to clean up a mess that started with the Contract with America and the deregulation that it wrought. Yeah, and we thought that businesses could police themselves."

SCOOTER PIE

Another all-time hit was "Bush Spares Libby From Prison," posted on July 2, 2007. The story rang up 320 props and 1,220 comments, including this one from UnusualSuspect: "The funny thing is, Bush said all along he would not tolerate anyone in his administration leaking (ended up not being Libby, but Armitage), or hindering the investigation. I guess Bush forgot he said that." But libsRfunny dismissed the whole investigation as a tempest in a Beltway teapot: "They were trying to hang it on Rove, not Armitage. How can you possibly impede an investigation into something that never happened? The guy just didn't recall conversations made three years earlier. You have any idea how many conversations people have in DC?"

Lurch, meanwhile, tried to add some historical context: "This administration and these contemporary cons sure make Clinton look like a mix between Churchill and Alexander the Great. Dubya is Caligula to Clinton's Augustus Caesar." Then ceolmor took the classical theme and ran with it: "Hmm, [this] brings to mind Plato's comment, 'The rulers of the state are the only ones who should have the privilege of lying'." But chiefss stuck up for Bush's decision, insisting that his predecessor had given a free pass to many, many more miscreants: "Jesus, I sure didn't hear all you clowns screaming and hollering when Slick Willie pardoned hundreds of convicted felons. Bush just commuted the sentence, didn't pardon. The conviction still stands."

Other stories with impressive comment totals included "Propeller's Incorrigibles," posted on November 27, 2007, with 259 props and 968 comments. (Said Spadecaller, who posted the story: "The level of debate at Propeller matters to many of us. I'm sick of personally abusive commentary that targets member's race, age, sex, nationality, ethnic background, or disability. What about you?" Replied Endoscopy: "One of the major problems that starts this is the abusive political ranting. It starts out bashing the opposition and descends into doing the same to posters on the opposite side.") There was also "Simpsons hit for not-so-gay crack," posted on November 5, 2008, with 875 comments. And let us not forget "Texas School Board Rejects Intelligent Design," posted on August 27, 2007, with 228 props and 783 comments. Said joeblowe: "How about that, there's enough common sense and intelligence in even a ONE STAR state to realize that it's a bad idea to teach idiocy in a science class."

COPY CATS

And what about stories that inspired the most members to hit the prop button? The undisputed champ was "World should ban human cloning, except medical: U.N.," posted on November 11, 2007, with 424 props and a relatively reticent 77 comments. "Hooray!" said 1-2-Oscar. Replied Commodore1: "Yes, I agree. As long as the liberals don't use it to increase the number of votes they get." On a more serious note, reviewer saw the cloning and genetic manipulation of livestock as a definite Pandora's Box: "I wrote an article on cloning for food, and the main thing that scares me about cloning cattle just to have a larger T-Bone is the loss of genetic diversity in the species. Anyone who raises or breeds animals knows the short- and long-term health consequences." Another member, tkyrchncs, argued that this particular train had already left the station: "As to food species, it should be possible to maintain much smaller and greatly more diverse herds by cloning the desirable PARTS of an animal. To all intents and purposes modern herds and flocks ARE cloned. How much genetic diversity do you think there is in a modern egg or fryer producing population, as in comparison to an equal number of wild chickens?" But angelitobcn got in the last, theological word: "Do souls have clones?"

There was also "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales Resigns," posted on August 27, 2007, with 336 props and 754 comments. Bkumm greeted the news with a kind of victory jig: "Adios, muchacho! NOW, who's gonna protect King George? Rove? Gone. Gonzales? Gone. Rumsfeld? Gone." Said Neophile: "Now he can spend some quality time forgetting the circumstances of important decisions he makes about his family." Added searchbeam: "My first computer--a Commodore--had better memory than this bozo! To think that this guy was a Texas Supreme Court Judge makes you wonder about the quality of justice those poor souls in Texas were getting." Did the cashiered Attorney General have any defenders? Well, there was MajJohn, who accused the Democrats of conducting a bigoted witch hunt: "The Democrats can't stand a minority that's not one of their own."

Another prop-happy post concerned the site itself, right after we shed our identity as Netscape. "Propeller Lives!" was posted on September 19, 2007, and rang up 302 props and 197 comments. Searchbeam immediately urged the community to pitch in and give the new site some love: "The more the traffic to your site, the more advertising dollars, and therefore an assured existence! It is a tough world, and for us to exist as a vibrant, productive community, we must be able to pull more traffic to Propeller." Very true. Silverghost, meanwhile, thought the new site might be a spammy wolf in sheep's clothing: "Maybe I'm too infrequently involved, but I didn't have a clue & thought I was being scammed. Took me awhile to trust this change as valid." But ind06, after venting over some of the new site's defects (crappy share feature, sink option), at least knew exactly where to assign the blame: "Oh, and these problems are all George Bush's fault."

Other biggies included the cheery "You are Destroying America. Yes, You," posted on July 18, 2007, with 292 props and 516 comments. And on a slightly more salacious front, there was "Report: Governor Linked To Prostitution Ring," posted on March 10, 2008, with 261 props and 513 comments. "Politics as usual," said BronxBomber, alluding to Elliott Spitzer's serial dalliance with precisely the sort of hookers he was supposed to be driving out of business. "Couldn't happen to a nicer guy," added bobo-in-texas. What followed was a little parry-and-thrust action (sorry), beginning with a comment from Lincoln85: "Bronx, are you still worried about Bush listening to you and your mother's phone calls?" Replied BronxBomber: "I'm not worried about Bush, but please tell your wife to stop calling me." To which cowboygrandpa added: "Yeah, especially trying to call collect like that."

VIEW MASTERS

And what about the stories with the greatest number of page views? The champion here was "Mystery Surrounds Leavenworth, Kansas Underground City," posted on August 19, 2008, with 38 props, 71 comments, and 359,845 page views. One member, dirtylitlesamuel, assumed that the Kansans had unearthed a kind of subterranean Reeperbahn: "When the push came to 'clean up the town,' all the vice moved underground: the drinking, gambling, and prostitution. Leavenworth was a wild cowtown, and people hated the drovers for all the vice they brought. However, they liked the money." Another member, telernc, speculated that the tunnels were connected to the nearby (and notorious) prison: "I have a friend who grew up in a house near the prison. She has told me stories about these underground paths. In fact her father was a high-ranking military man in charge of running the prison, and she says she had a tunnel under her house to the prison." But Propeller being a hotbed of unexpected expertise, this theory was promptly demolished by KUBasketballnut: "Your friend is wrong. I worked at the federal penitentiary for twenty-five years, and at the state penitentiary before and after I worked at the federal. Both facilities have tunnels inside for utilities such as electricity and steam, but they are not accessible from the outside, and are definitely not accessible from the inside to the outside."

Perhaps, then, the theory about the underground rumpus room is correct. In any case, many of our stories with the highest number of page views seemed to have a definite theme of mild raunch. (Strange how these things work.) There was "Sex session at work gets municipal employees suspended," posted on August 13, 2008, with 13 props, 37 comments, and 298,384 page views. One member, bratto14, argued that the absent-minded exhibitionists had done nothing wrong: "As long as they are single, leave them alone. Try not to be so judgmental of other people--we have ALL made mistakes." LDN felt otherwise: "Mistakes are forgetting to pay a bill or losing your car keys. This was just plain rude and inconsiderate. As others have said, some things should be done in private."

There was also "Chicago dive bar scores hit with nude Sarah Palin portrait," posted on October 13, 2008, with 89 props, 156 comments, and 293,638 page views. "As they say," noted jovial, "a picture is worth a thousand words." Replied massto: "Just look at where it's coming from. Chicago is not a great place, and the idiots that go into this bar have to have their heads examined." To which Teech responded: "I'm heading to the airport right now. Chicago, here I come!" And on a (somewhat) related note, let's not forget "German Sunbathers Complain About Polish Voyeurs At Nudist Beach," posted on July 29, 2008, with 20 props, 17 comments, and a disproportionate 272,193 page views. One member, zygoter, had little patience for the Mitteleuropean whiners: "If the Poles don't like it they shouldn't look, and if the Germans don't like it they should put some clothes on! They should be glad I'm not there, I would use a 600mm lens and post the pictures on the Internet!" In one of my rare comment-thread interventions, I mused: "A nudist without a voyeur is like--what? A day without sunshine? Macaroni without cheese? There's a word for this: symbiosis." Replied pderoo1: "Beanies without weenies?" And the conversation, like all conversations, came to an end.

I am happy to announce that Propeller can now speak Twitter! Twitter is a wildly popular micro-blogging platform that allows for broadcasting short (140 characters at maximum) messages to everyone in your Twitter network. Its popularity has risen sharply of late with exposure on major TV networks such as CNN, as well as with celebrities such as Ashton Kutcher and Oprah Winfrey. Much like our integration of the Facebook Connect platform announced a few weeks back, our Twitter features are designed to encourage new member signups by allowing accounts to be created using Twitter usernames and passwords, and to facilitate sharing of great content with your Propeller and Twitter networks. Let's take a look:

Sign in via Twitter



Clicking "Sign in with Twitter" redirects you to the Twitter web site, where you are asked to verify that you do indeed authorize Propeller to access and update your data on Twitter. The authentication protocol that allows this is called OAuth, which allows users to approve an application (in this case Propeller) to act on their behalf without sharing their password.The verification screen looks like this:



If you click "Allow", Propeller will then ask you to associate your Propeller account with this Twitter account. If you are new to Propeller, you can use this Twitter information to help you create a new Propeller account. The link (or create) screen looks like this:



And that's it! It should only take a minute to do this. Once you have connected your Twitter account to your Propeller account, you can take advantage of two great new Twitter-related features:

1. Submit story via Twitter

You can submit a story to Propeller simply by sending a direct message ("DM") to the official Propeller twitter feed, @PropellerDotCom. Your direct message should just include the URL you would like to submit to Propeller. Here's an example of a direct message that leads to a story submission:



Make sure to add @PropellerDotCom to the list of feeds that you are following, and please be patient, it can take up to an hour for your direct message to be transformed into a story post. The above direct message created a story submission looking like this:



2. Share story to Twitter

You can "Tweet" a Propeller story by using the Share Story feature on a Propeller story page. If you have associated your Twitter account with your Propeller account, you will see the following share window after clicking "Share Story":



Make sure that the "Tweet on Twitter" checkbox is checked, and click "Share It!" Clicking "Share It" will add a link to your Twitter feed that looks like this:



We are excited to invite the Twitter community to check out Propeller, as well as to offer these great authentication and sharing tools to existing Propeller members. Let us know if these features don't work for you.

Happy Twittering-
Tom (member tdrapeau)

HERE COMES THE JUDGE

Barack Obama's nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court inspired several lively conversations this week at Propeller. "Obama Picks Sotomayor for Supreme Court!" racked up 79 props, 3 drops, and 147 comments, including a thumbs up from deathray: "Well, as the Republicans like to say, the president should get the judges he wants. I think Sotomayor is a good choice." There was a similar reaction from sinophil49: "That Sotomayor is a competent Latina judge should be a point of pride for all Americans. If approved, it would truly be a historical event in our Republic's gloried history."

Meanwhile, tanglang expressed some discomfort with what he saw as the nominee's judicial activisim: "She said that appeals courts are where policy is made." Replied Beau7890: "She was describing the difference between appellate and district court. She wasn't advocating making policy. Regardless, appeals courts are where policy is made, whether you like it or not." Endoscopy raised the prospect of Republicans blocking Sotomayor's confirmation, and suggested that such tactics came straight out of the Democratic bag of tricks: "The Democrats... are proud of 'Borking' people." This elicited a quick shot across the bow from Desdamona, who expressed relief that the Robert Bork had been barred from the highest court in the land: "The guy was a nut and I am exceedingly proud of the Senate for preventing his elevation to such an honored position."

A related story, "Rush Limbaugh Slams Judge Sotomayor: 'Racist' and a 'Hack'," racked up 72 props, 6 drops, and 131 comments. Charlson suggested that Limbaugh had no standing (to put it mildly) to criticize the nominee: "The racist, homophobic drug addict has no credibility when it comes to racism and hackism." Bkumm still had some doubts about Sotomayor's "wise Latina" comments: "I would not go so far as to call her a racist, but it is troubling that she would say something like that. There is no evidence that a person who has 'been there' and 'done that' is going to uphold the rule of law better than someone who has not." Yet he still felt that Obama had made a good pick. So did kobzikov, who actually applauded Sotomayor's admission that a judge's background and experience would inevitably factor into his or her decisions: "There are many theories of justice and not all of them would insist on justice being blind. And if we think that justice should serve the society as a whole and not only those who are well-connected and with the means to hire the best attorneys, then I'm not sure a blind servant is preferable to the one who can see."

STRAIGHT OUTTA GITMO

With the president dithering over his promised closure of the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, the Propeller community chimed in on both sides of the issue. "Guantanamo Bay Detainee Site Should Be Open or Closed: What Do You Want?" generated 125 props, 7 drops, and 257 comments. Pecossam thought we were worrying far too much about the rights of the prisoners: "There is no place for 'touchy-feely' when one is engaged in war; not if one wishes to defeat the enemy. As General William Tecumseh Sherman (the Union officer who marched on and burned Atlanta, GA) said, 'War Is Hell.'" And where would the detainees be housed, should the Gitmo facility be shuttered? One member, donald51, proposed a solution: "Keith Obermann interviewed a city councilmen with a totally vacant 300+ bed, high-security prison in Wyoming or Utah, which is empty and volunteering to take the detainees!" But even in that case, Klarissa saw some potential problems: "We would have to set up special kitchens and special religious accommodations wherever these prisoners are sent. Let's be smart for a change and keep them where they are."

There was agreement from prophyporcrites: "If we give them trials here, we open up a Pandora's Box that was better left closed. Heck, how many murderers, child molesters, and others get off on a simple technicality? Is it really that farfetched to think the same may happen to these people?" Replied gamahuche: "So fear of Pandora should guide US 'justice'? Tell that to the judge! The earthly one and the one upstairs if you believe in that one." Commodore1 suggested that there was some NIMBY-style hypocrisy at work: "For those of you who want Gitmo closed, I'm sure you're willing to have them detained in your state. Right?" To which jordan11 replied: "I don't have a problem with it. We already have 'terrorists' imprisoned in this country, and I've heard no one complain in the states they're incarcerated in. Stop being such a whiny baby. You don't trust our prison system? Then stay under your bed."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

On a less partisan note, there was "Couple On the Run after 'Stealing' $6 Million Credited to Their Bank Account in Error," with 75 props and 12 comments, most of them fairly cynical. Said rj3sp: "I doubt that the bank would be held at fault if they inadvertently depleted someone's bank account. Of course, that never happens." And EastwoodCarter seemed confident that the bank would recoup its losses, one way or another: "Just charge every savings account a small inactivity fee. Problem solved." Added ppt4706: "Actually, that money is the amount that I have been charged in overdraft fees through the years, so give it back!"

Elsewhere, Propeller members sounded off on waterboarding and pistol play in our national parks. And this YouTube video of Bob Dylan singing "Forever Young" rang up 131 props and 21 comments. There was a small debate over who did the best version of the Dylan chestnut, with chevydog opting for the composer's ex-main squeeze : "The Joan Baez version is among my favorites." Added Ciera-Marie: "I prefer Bob Dylan's or Joan B's versions over Rod Stewart's any day. God, I do not like Rod Stewart at all. Not here, there or anywhere." To which JoseMadre replied: "I think Rod's voice is an acquired taste." It's a terrible temptation at this point to post the "Hot Legs" video, but we'll stick with Bob Dylan after all.

HELL ON WHEELS?

This week, Barack Obama decisively regained the center ring from last week's star, Rush Limbaugh. "Obama Appoints Himself CEO of Chrysler" generated more comments than any other story: 234. It also racked up 97 props, 15 drops, and a brisk summary from Hhussk: "Socialism." Added capecoralM: "Fascism is more like it." There followed a noisy exchange about whether the corporate dog wagged the governmental tail under fascism, or the other way around. Meanwhile, acceptance wondered whether these labels weren't fogging up the real issues: "Terms like fascism, communist, [and] socialism bring emotion but no real thought to the argument--they assume a conclusion." Replied crespi, his tongue firmly in cheek: "You seem to be talking sense. There are penalties here on Propeller for that."

Meanwhile, engineer took to the president's defense: "Obama did not bring on the problems! He inherited them from the previous administration, you morons!" Said beavith1: "Now he's made the problem his. He owns the direction that GM and Chrysler have taken. He could've stood for bankruptcy early, before we poured $30B into these empty vessels." Added BB64: "To add insult to injury, he's also given [the companies] to the UAW. Not a bad trade for $13,000,000 in campaign funds. Had I known, I would have had my company do the same." To which willottica replied: "Giving Chrysler to the UAW isn't a bad idea. It means that the UAW will suffer if Chrysler makes stupid, unaffordable bargains with the union."

Another story, "Obama Confronts Abortion Debate, Urges Notre Dame Grads to Seek Common Ground," racked up 48 props, 6 drops, and 210 comments. Said fiftynine: "I'm Catholic and not angry at all [about Obama's appearance]. In fact, I think it is good that we have a president that will appear before crowds that aren't handpicked and confront an issue like this head on." Added amazed: "Like it or not, Obama is our president. To have the POTUS come to your graduation to speak is a coup and an honor--even if you have no use for this particular president's policies." And Desdamona heeded Obama's advice in seeking some common ground: "[Abortion] is about providing women a choice for how to deal with an unwanted pregnancy (no matter why or how she ended up with an unwanted pregnancy). The common ground is obvious: find more ways to limit the number of unwanted pregnancies. There is always common ground. It is when each side holds to the absolute extreme that we are caught up in a social divide."

DICK CHENEY, ROGUE DIVA

The high media profile of former VP Dick Cheney also got the Propeller community talking. For cowboygrandpa, Cheney was definitely outstaying his welcome: "This guy is a portrait of insanity, being viewed as relevant by the insane who believe him. He thinks that America is the only viable country in the world. What is scary is how many still back the raging lunatic." Why was Cheney airing his concerns on television, rather than sharing them directly with the president? Said jimdoze: "Because Obama and company have succumbed to the au courant disdain for him and have chosen to ignore him." Replied GWHayduke: "Considering that the W administration pretty much bungled every single attempt to provide security domestically and globally, I would say that ignoring Cheney's nonsense is a wise strategic move."

There was also a thumbs down from Radiofreeeuropa: "Eight years hiding in an undisclosed location, now glaring from behind the primordial ooze dripping from every TV screen, spouting the most obtuse nonsense ever concocted.... Go back to your undisclosed location, please. Darken our towels no more." Added myfairlady: "He is giving the whole [GOP] a black eye just as Jeb is out there trying to renew the party." But jimdoze stuck by his man: "Cheney has garnered the moniker 'Doomsday Dick' because he sees clearly how bad things could get when a faulty worldview produces counterproductive foreign-policy actions. As such, he is far more in tune with reality than the chattering left could ever hope to be."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

Every now and then it's nice to look further back than the 2000 election cycle, and the Propeller community stepped up to the plate with "Early skeleton sheds light on primate evolution." The story rang up 114 props and 54 comments, including this anti-evolutionary aria from AntiNeoCon: "I find it extremely funny how these fools will jump at anything to prove the Darwin theory, which is and always will be a sham. If you want to claim this bony piece of crap as your family tree, by my guest. I have to admit it looks more like one of your folks, mine are much prettier." Replied toph1973: "Evolution has been proven. It is a fact. All one needs to do is look at the bird flu to see evolution in microbiology." To which Tangent001 intelligently added: "We're not talking about 'proof,' we're talking about evidence. All of biological science could be complete and consistent, and there would still be the possibility that God 'poofed' it all into existence."

Propeller itself is prone to periodic, healthy bouts of self-examination, and that's what we got with "A Revisionist's Terms of Use at Propeller.Com," with 71 props, 14 drops, and 305 comments. One member, aceofspades1, argued against any form of censorship on the site: "The insidious posters are the ones who hide their rampant bigotry in catchphrases, and those naive enough not to see it agree with them. Are we to micromanage all that is said?"

In principle, not2needy agreed, yet she also saw a downside to the mudslinging that can easily creep into online debate: "It just seems that we should be able to discuss, debate, agree or disagree without the personal attacks. That's what runs me off." Added Klarissa: "Freedom of speech puts it all out there so we can make up our OWN minds.... The slogan for Propeller: TEFLON." This elicited a puzzled response from CRYMTYPHON: "Who wants to have skillet-skin? It wouldn't even stop bullets. I guess it would be easy to clean, though." If the community would like to suggest other nonstick synthetic fluoropolymers for a Propeller slogan, that would be just fine. In the meantime, our designers are moving ahead with the new fried-eggs-in-a-skillet logo, which is going to look very jazzy on our business cards. (PS: welcome back, deathray!)

In addition to the great news about Facebook Connect, I wanted to detail some new enhancements to Propeller Notifications. We have been making small improvements to the system for some weeks now, and as of today, they have been deployed throughout the Propeller community.

Notifications fall into the following categories:

Member Activities: Related to your own activities on Propeller, these notifications contain your submissions, props, comments, replies and props on your submissions
Group Activities: Related to activities within groups you are a member of, this notification tells you about stories submitted to any of your groups
Private Messages: Tells you about any new messages you have received on Propeller
Week in Review: Weekly summaries of the latest and greatest on Propeller by James Marcus
News about Propeller: Occasional updates about the Propeller web site

In your Propeller settings area, there is a "Manage Notifications" page, available here. On it, you can manage your preferences for each type of notification message, choosing to be notified (or not), the method (via email or Propeller's messaging system) and the frequency (immediate, daily, weekly). It looks like this:


You can also turn off all notifications at once by clicking the "Disable All" button (which requires one extra confirmation). You may start seeing email notifications from us (from the address noreply@propeller.com) almost immediately, depending on the level of activity within your Propeller network. We have tried to guess at the ideal settings, but encourage you to go to your Manage Notifications page and tune the settings to your liking.

If these notifications alert you to stories and conversations you might have otherwise missed, then they have done their job. I hope they have, and will be watching my inbox eagerly. If they haven't, let us know how we can do better.

Happy Propelling,
Tom (member tdrapeau)

Greetings-

I am thrilled to announce that Facebook Connect has been added to Propeller! Facebook Connect is a platform that allows web sites to offer authentication, friend linking, and content sharing through the wildly popular Facebook social network. As of today, new members can join Propeller by logging in with their Facebook username and password. They can invite their Facebook friends to join them as friends on Propeller. Also, Propeller stories can be added to a member's Facebook News Feed, via the Propeller Share Story feature. Let's see what we mean:

1. Sign in via Facebook

Clicking "Connect with Facebook" shows a second pop up window which confirms that you want to log into Propeller using your Facebook credentials, and wish to share information with Facebook (looks like this):

RUSH TO JUDGMENT

Not for the first time, Rush Limbaugh spent the last week at center stage. One story about the radio personality and GOP caudillo, "Limbaugh: Negro-in-Chief Obama Wants Reparations for Darkie Pals," racked up more comments than any other: 324. It also generated 54 props, 13 drops, and some harsh divisions of opinion. Said metavirus (who also posted the story): "It really is quite sad that leaders in the GOP let blatantly racist comments like this just slide by. Until they start getting ahead of patently offensive stuff like this, they are going to lose more and more young people and minorities." PsychoHosebeast agreed: "The man has sold any shred of dignity he's ever had for a buck. He's the consummate Ugly American." And even tanglang, who's often locked horns with Propeller's left-leaning cadre, called him an irrelevant eyesore: "Limbaugh represents no one. I'm so sick of people saying he represents the right and their views. I'm tired of being associated with him. And to be honest, if y'all would just ignore him, he would go away."

There were, however, a few members who thought that Limbaugh was being unfairly pilloried. Said Klarissa: "Today's liberal instructions: bad-mouth Rush, we want to shut him up, this will help to bring back the fairness doctrine." And Hhussk defended the premise of Limbaugh's original comments: "Rush suggested that these socialist policies are like the policies of reparations, where wealth, or assets, are redistributed to people who believe they deserve them but did not earn them. I agree. All we are seeing is redistribution of wealth."

But AbuAmirah wasn't buying: "What Rush does is continue the canard that all 'Blacks' sit on their asses collecting food stamps and welfare checks and think that the government owes them something. I don't know about the rest of you, but when I was growing up, my old man (who was 'Black') told me that no one owed me [anything]. It was up to me to get whatever the hell I wanted and to support my family."

Love him or hate him, Limbaugh landed several other stories in our Top Twenty. "Cheney backs 'Entertainer' Limbaugh over Patriot Powell" earned 99 props, 11 drops, 230 comments, and a blunt assessment from GWHayduke: "El Rushbo garners the support of the previous vice president and chief hawk. Cheney is becoming more of a fringe nutcase each time he opens his totalitarian mouth." And a related story, "Colin Powell/Rush Limbaugh War Rages On," generated 79 props, 4 drops, and 215 comments. There was a final, somewhat confusing defense of Limbaugh from mrdelta: "I am a staunch Rush fan and wish to leave the Republican party myself, for the party that will finally stomp liberals like [Colin] Powell out of existence." To which StevieGee replied: "Powell is a moderate. I'm a liberal. Want to come and try stomping me?

PELOSI IN THE HOT SEAT

Meanwhile, it appears that Nancy Pelosi may have some explaining to do. "Records suggest Pelosi, others were told of harsh interrogations" generated 103 props, 3 drops, and 231 comments. For cowboygrandpa, who posted the story, the House Majority Leader's record on torture was looking pretty suspect: "Me thinks there could be fire where this smoke is coming from. Never have cared for Pelosi or her scurrilous ways." There was a similar response from bruhaha: "I've never been a fan of Pelosi's and I think she's horrid as Speaker. All those who knew what was going on, especially those who are feigning outrage now, need to go. [They should] either resign or be voted out."

BB64 took it one step further: "I love Nancy. She's the perfect Democrat. She lies regularly but is never called on it by the media. She loves to do things that aren't her responsibility, but doesn't do her own job. She loves taking union funds, yet none of her businesses ever employ union staff." But sinophil49 thought this was painting Democrats with too broad a brush: "If you had talked in specifics about Pelosi and her failings, I would be in complete agreement.... All that is fair game and valid opprobrium. I do not approve of any of that. But when you use broad strokes implying all Democrat politicians are liars or greedy, then you have crossed over into excess and you lose credibility."

Spadecaller also took a whack at the Pelosian piñata: "Pelosi is an opportunist and her lack of convictions and integrity are beginning to show. She knew about the torture and she has been covering that up for too long." But rimbaud thought the folly was more widely distributed, and had a novel solution: "Me thinks there is plenty of guilt, and regret, to spread pretty thickly... A truth commission, with liberty and immunity for all, might be just the thing to bring all of these things to light. But let it be conducted by the news media (or a reality TV producer), not the government, far away from Washington--in, say Casper, Wyoming."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

Enough, you say, of these personality-driven sideshows! Let's talk about some actual policy. Well, "Senate Considers Federal Tax On Soda" rang up 50 props, 1 drop, and 111 comments. CarinEising was all for dropping the dime on Pepsi freaks: "This is a great idea. If cigarettes and booze are 'sin-taxed', then why not junk food?" Responded libsRfunny: "No. It's not a great idea. In fact, it is a wholly terrible idea that will fall on the lower and middle classes, just like the $38 billion federal cigarette tax hike." And JustTrollKing agreed: "This is what you get with leftists in charge. I used to think Bush's 'borrow and spend' was bad, but compared to Obama, the Shrub was Jack Benny. Now we will get soaked with more taxes on top of that. Pretty soon we will be envious of the peasants of Nottingham."

Let's end on a harmonious note. Here's a video of Crosby, Stills and Nash (looking remarkably spry for 2007) performing "Long Time Gone." The Propeller post notched 118 props and 17 comments, many of which focused on the charms of the mid-Sixties Ford Mustang. "I remember listening to this song regularly with my old eight-track cassette deck that I had in a '65 Mustang," said Spadecaller. Added cowboygrandpa: "I had a '66 with a built 302. Roller bearings and cam, solid lifters, holly 4 barrel, hooker headers with glass packs, and an 8-track player. I had to play the music loud to be heard over the car."

But at least one member, mark-stevens, had a more jaundiced memory of the mustachioed, roly-poly Crosby: "I met Crosby years after that group's fame. [He] had done time for drugs, than turned state witness. My friend knew the back-up musicians for Crosby when he performed at a bar in Seattle. Dave was unbelievably paranoid and refused to talk to any strangers... Long live rock and roll!" Couldn't have put it better myself.

On Sunday the New York Times ran a story about Annie Leonard, who is fighting a one-woman crusade against excess consumption and waste. Her primary tool is a 20-minute video called The Story of Stuff, which has become a viral hit in classrooms since Leonard first posted it on the Web in December 2007. Six million people have viewed it on the filmmaker's own website, while the version on YouTube has clocked many more hits (it's hard to tell the precise number, since the film has been chopped up into segments and reposted by other viewers).

Nor is the film's reach limited to the Web. According to the Times, "More than 7,000 schools, churches and others have ordered a DVD version.... It has also won support from independent groups that advise teachers on curriculum choices. Facing the Future, a curriculum developer for schools in all 50 states, is drafting lesson plans based on the video. And Ms. Leonard has a contract with Simon & Schuster to write a book based on the video."



As the Times also notes, the film has its share of detractors, who argue that Leonard applies too broad a brush to industrial society. In the opening sequence, she does admit her own addiction to the iPod and various other consumer items. But her mea culpa goes no further. Capitalism itself is depicted as a bloated, top-hatted monster, like a more dastardly vision of the Monopoly Man. And Leonard's definition of what goes on in a factory is surely a little black-and-white: "We use energy to mix toxic chemicals in with the natural resources to make toxic, contaminated products."

In Missoula, Montana, one irate parent complained when the film was shown in a science class. As reported in the Missoula Independent Online, "The controversy began in October, when Kathleen Kennedy, a science teacher at Big Sky High School, showed her class The Story of Stuff, a 20-minute video about sustainability. One student's father, Mark Zuber, thought the video was biased and ill-suited for Kennedy's Wildlife Biology class, and lobbied the school district to take action against her."

When his complaint was rejected by a curriculum committee, Zuber appealed to the school board. On January 29, after four hours of arguing, the board voted 4-3 that Kennedy's screening of the video had violated the school district's policy on the presentation of controversial issues. On Leonard's own blog, she suggests that procedural oddities plus spotty attendance by the board members--three out of ten were absent, one at his son's basketball game--explained the outcome. And in another local paper, The Missoulian, Kennedy defended her decision to show The Story of Stuff to her class.

"How many of us have ever purchased something that we badly wanted, but didn't really need?" she writes. "I know I have. I would suspect that some of the folks now in foreclosure would have to admit that they bought more house than they needed. These were the kinds of connections I was hoping students would make. The downturn in the economy was becoming news and, being a teacher who tries to make learning more meaningful by tying it to what is going on in the world, I made the decision that this was a topic worth discussing with students. I am concerned that some parents and school board members would question the motives of teachers who connect current events and their curriculum."

The comment thread following the Missoulian story included both praise and potshots. "Kathleen, I've been with you from the beginning," said Glen, "watching the video and reading the newspaper. Teachers are heroes, and I don't understand Zuber's concern. Perhaps, like his daughter, he found himself with a minority opinion for the first time and isn't used to it." Mike disagreed, and he seemed particularly peeved by the video's attack on brominated flame retardants, or BFRs: "[Y]ou had no intent to discuss with your class the merits of the video and the pros and cons in it. Nor did you point out the lies it told about the flammable retardant issue. At this time I feel [you're] a poor teacher and need to be taken to task and/or fired for your blatant disregard of discussing both sides of an issue."

There was also a busy Twitter discussion of the video and its attendant controversy. The reaction was mostly positive. Said @johnmleone: "Loved the parts about materialism & the 'work-watch-spend' treadmill of American life. That kind of life ain't worth living." Added @kkgyimesi: "How ironic. Introduced my boys to a garage sale this weekend. That was before seeing 'the story of stuff' on NYT today." But @JeffStierACSH was pleased to see the Times delivering a more nuanced view of the film: "At least there's some mention of the slant/indoctrinating kids." And @AshleyEngelman offered up a less partisan reason to avoid The Story of Stuff: "Watch this... and proceed to hate yourself."

TRIGGER HAPPY?

Which story generated the lengthiest conversation this week at Propeller? That would be "Obama Wants Gun Registration," with 62 props, 27 drops, and 264 comments. GLee saw this registration campaign as the thin edge of the anti-Second Amendment wedge: "This all is just the beginning of stuff that will have to be 'undone' in a couple of years. Socialism approaching communism." So did rimbaud: "If only 'The Man' is allowed to own really powerful weapons, we will be powerless to fight his tyranny (we will never have a 'well-armed militia'). I propose no bans on weapons of any kind, unless the cops and the National Guard are also prohibited them."

Meanwhile, Beau7890 took the discussion back to basics: "So what exactly is the problem with registering guns?" GWHayduke had a tongue-in-cheek response: "Then they'll know we have 'em. Then they'll send their liberal, fascist military police state door-to-door collectin' the guns we been totin' around pointin' at bad guys.... Or, maybe they want to reduce crime. Either way, it's a socialistic, menshevik communist, fascist, liberal conspiracy to take our guns away in order to suppress us into drones to serve the masters in DC."

DaneL argued that the guns in his own household were kept under lock and key, and that outside of the urban fleshpots they were in fact less dangerous: "Out here we use guns as tools. Unlike the cesspool of a city I'm sure you live in, we don't have drive-bys. The last burglary we had in town, someone stole a bike. You might be surprised how different people act when they don't live like rats, packed in on top of each other." This earned a shout of assent from stalemate: "Bravo, Dane. Here too we live as you do.... We just don't have the problems they do in cities."

To which fsev41 replied: "Unfortunately the majority of our population lives in cities. Somehow we need to find a way to control gun violence in the cities while still allowing for hunters (of animals, not people) and personal protection." And GWHayduke, who had earlier ridiculed the pro-registration argument, came clean about the bolt-action bonbon in his own closet: "I keep the Steyer Mannlicher SSG69 PII that my grandfather gave to me before he died in [my safe]. He shot some strange beasts with that thing. Just because you live in nowhere WY with your cows doesn't mean that you are exempt from the stupidity of others."

ONWARD, CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS

Another hotly debated story was "U.S. Soldiers Pushing Christianity on Muslims in Afghanistan," with 45 props, 3 drops, and 260 comments. "It's proselytizing," said metavirus, "and it's against Afghan law and the military's rules." Replied capecoralM: "To view your words of ignorance is truly spectacular. Muslims, Jews, and Christians believe in the same God." To which crespi replied: "Go down to Alabama and tell a church full of Baptists they actually worship Allah. Better yet, go to Pakistan and tell them they really worship Yaweh. If you have any cool old vinyl records or old comic books or anything, please leave them to me in your will."

But ChefEOD saw nothing wrong in U.S. soldiers distributing Bibles to the Afghan population: "Christians are mandated by Scripture to share and spread the Gospel. To not do so is to disobey God." Replied dissent: "Guns and Bibles.... how persuasive." There was a similar response from doggammit, who saw the Bible as one more stealth weapon deployed by the West, and compared the soldiers distributing them to military engineers (or worse): "Under such conditions, distributing religious propaganda is a sapper's job--a special commission designed by saps and performed by saps. In military hands, the Bible resembles a 9/11 box-cutter." Meanwhile, MisterX wondered if the soldiers could truly be accused of proselytizing: "If handing out Bibles is converting, then the Gideons have been after me every time I check into a hotel room."

AND DON'T OVERLOOK....

There were several stories about gay marriage in our Top Twenty this week. "Two National Polls, for First Time, Show Plurality Support for Gay Marriage" racked up 64 props, 7 drops, and 157 comments. Will1313 greeted this as good news: "They should have the right to be as miserable as hetero couples. We will have to think up a new term, [since] GAY marriage is an oxymoron." Locky12 disagreed: "Why should the state have to recognize same sex unions when there is no incentive for the state to recognize fruitless love?" Replied david_nwpa: "Pure BS! First, if marriage were for parents only, then the sterile, the elderly, and those who don't want children should be banned. They are not!"

Endoscopy wasn't buying: "You and the other people that espouse homosexual marriage never want to look at the fact that marriage is the founding block of any government, as was taught in the civics classes I took." To which Tangent001 replied: "Nope. Historically, marriage is first and foremost a contract between families regarding the disposition of property and political power and only secondarily the legitimizing of children." Other related stories included "Maine prepares to take up gay marriage bill," with 51 props, 4 drops, and 103 comments, and "Majority of Americans oppose legalizing same sex marriages," with 38 props, 11 drops, and 77 comments. Said Wolfie2007: "Marriage should be between one man and one woman. In Canada there is a movement to legalize plural marriage. What next?" Replied gamahuche: "What next? They'll be banging on your windows and breaking down your doors to force you to commit savage, vile and obscene acts against your will."

Finally, there was "Which is Worst Addiction: Smoking or Drinking or Gambling?," with 109 props and 32 comments. "They are all bad," conceded sithmaster, "but I gotta go with smoking." For mark-stevens, all three addictions were sadly familiar: "My dad was a gambler, the whole family suffered in poverty for many years. My street-tough brother-in-law lost a lung and will spend the rest of his life in a wheel chair, due to smoking. My sister has a Jerry Springer family--all three generations--due to a serious drinking problem for twenty-some years. Pick one." Spadecaller also spoke from experience: "Truly addictive personalities change ships, from the Titanic to the Lusitania. From alcohol to gambling. Being a recovering alcoholic myself since September of 1978--over thirty years since my last drink--I quit cigarettes and before I was married (thank God) I gave up my addiction to sex. That does not mean that I gave up sex, btw."

There were also some more lighthearted responses. Said ctiedje: "Weed. Best addiction out there." Replied obiwan2112: "I'm absolutely sure that the worst addiction is smoking, and I'll bet you a fifth of Jack Daniel's and lay 10 to 1 odds that I'm right." But quicksilver0602 cut right to the chase: "Yes, they ARE all bad... but I've got to go with Propeller." That's right, folks: once you start, you can't stop. Can you?

Back in February, when her name was first floated as a possible successor to Louisiana Senator David Vitter, few voters outside of the porn-watching community--granted, a very sizable demographic--had ever heard of Stormy Daniels. The website devoted to drafting this reluctant candidate seemed like a joke. Wasn't it simply a poke in the eye at Vitter's own sexual proclivities, which included frequent stops at a Canal Street bordello and a big box of Pampers?

Maybe not. Daniels, the star of more than one hundred films, including The Witches of Breastwick and Trailer Trash Nurses 6, appears to be taking the idea very seriously. She hasn't yet agreed to run against Vitter. But yesterday Daniels began a "listening tour" of the state, which will allow her to gauge her chances and hear the concerns of potential constituents. Her first stop was in Baton Rouge, where she drew a small crowd of fans and media. Daniels was quick to assure her audience that her film career would not distract her from the business of governance.

"She said her contract with the porn studio Wicked Pictures is drawing to a close," reports Michelle Millhollon of the Baton Rogue Advocate. "She said she is only obligated to appear on camera for the rest of the year and that, at age 30, she is becoming old for a porn star." Daniels added that "entering the adult entertainment business carries a lot of responsibility."

CNN took the high road with Daniels in this video, having clearly briefed Kiran Chetry to avoid double-entendres at all cost. Daniels does acknowledge that the movement to draft her is the direct outcome of Vitter's erotic hijinks: "I hear the word karma a lot." That aside, she's not terribly impressive--she sounds like a pleasant, presentable woman who just happens to take her clothes off for a living.



And what about the reaction on the Web? There was a lively conversation over at Twitter, where Daniels has yet to attain much in the way of credibility. Said @Redstickrant: "Is the Stormy Daniels thing serious? Dunno. I think someone should, um, take a pole." Nor was @anicajeanne impressed by the aspiring candidate's appearance on CNN: "Senate hopeful Stormy Daniels sounds as aimless and disjointed as Palin when she talks. Draw your own conclusion." There was also a partisan note from @rickblanton: "Stormy Daniels should have ran during the Clinton admin. Could have traded favors and got something done."

Despite Vitter's status as damaged goods, it still seems unlikely that Daniels will end up claiming his seat (please, no jokes). Yet skeptics should be reminded of an important precedent: the 1987 election of porn star Ilona "Cicciolina" Staller to the Italian Parliament. True, she served only a single term. But Staller went on to form the tongue-in-cheek Partito dell'Amore (Love Party), whose platform included legalization of brothels, improved sex education, and the creation of "love parks" throughout the Italian peninsula.

Earlier today, the British government published a list of people barred from setting foot in the country. According to Home Secretary Jacqui Smith, the list identifies 16 purveyors of hate speech and extremism (there are another six that the government declined to make public). This rogue's gallery includes Muslim extremists, Russian gang members, an Israeli militant, a father-and-daughter team devoted to anti-gay agitation--and American talk-radio host Michael Savage.

Savage, who is based in San Francisco, has enraged multiple constituencies. He has called the Koran a "book of hate," and accused autistic children of faking it: "In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out. That's what autism is." His high profile as a shock jock notwithstanding, it's a little surprising to see Savage singled out in this way--he's hardly the only vituperative voice in our polarized political landscape. Nor does he rise to the squalid level of, say, Samir Al Quntar, a serial killer whose victims include a four-year-old girl. The real question here is how Britain has chosen to balance the opposing demands of civility and free speech.

Not surprisingly, the reaction on the Web has been divided. Over at Women on the Web, chamdas hayomim suggested that excluding Savage was an act of cowardice: "London, why are you so afraid of Michael Savage? Because he may expose [to] the world that you are not the London of the past, because you lost your way. Instead of taking on the real challenge to battle your enemies within, the Muslim extremists who are terrorizing Jews & Christans on daily basis." Responded C. Aune: "LOL, the man should be banned from the human race, not just Britain." Added Diana T.: "Too bad he can't be banned to a solitary deserted island where no one can hear him except the one he adores the most."

Over at Twitter, the conversation was similarly divided between fans and opponents of the radio host. Noted @JoeCaruso: "Muslim hate-mongers are allowed in England. Conservative American Michael Savage is banned." But @jpzenger objected for entirely different reasons: "Not a fan of Michael Savage--UK ban is absurd--now he will have reason to whine endlessly about his 'ordeal.'" Meanwhile, @wolfbreath noted some incidental ironies: "LOL, don't know if it's funnier Michael Savage is listed w/ NeoNazis & terrorists, or that his real name is Weiner."

Savage has responded with a defense of his "traditional values"--you know, the ones that are supposed to save what he has called a "homosexualized, feminized America" from limp-wristed doom. Speaking to World Net Daily, he said: "It's interesting to me that here I am a talk show host, who does not advocate violence, who advocates patriotic traditional values--borders, language, culture--who is now on a list banned in England. What does that say about the government of England? It says more about them than it says about me."