This is the main page for all of my assorted online sites. They are all currently implemented as independent subdomains under the 'radarspages.com' domain (that's this page). I think any specific individual is likely to care for - if any - only a subset of these sites, so i've organized them this way to allow you to bookmark the subdomains you care about and not be bothered clicking past any of the other sites to get to them. .
I've never been all that focused on 'design'. I know it matters, i just acknowledge that i don't have a very good eye for it. It's not that i purposely make things ugly - i'm proud to say that i have built some pages and some physical objects that were aesthetically appealing - it's just that i know i don't have either a talent for that OR a strong focus on it. I'm making these pages to convey data. I do understand that a good design can help with that goal, but again... that isn't my skill. So don't look for clever navigation systems and a flashy presentation. Where i provide graphics they are more likely to be charts and graphs instead of pretty for the sake of pretty pictures. Think of my pages - even the ones that i want you to find entertaining - as being text books and not multi-media extravaganzas and you're less likely to be disappointed here. Thanks for understanding :-).
About Box - a few things about me.
Travel - pictures and commentary on assorted journeys.
Hobbies - FUTURE EXPANSION
My friends and i have been running a continuing role-playing game since April of 1980. This section documents things the current (and potential future) players would like to know. It's broken down into subsections to allow you to find what you are looking for quickly. All of these sites will be HUGE when they are completed. All of them share a similar design and layout. Each features a navigation bar at the left that allows immediate access to each of that site's major subsections.
Mind Adventures - The sci-fi, fantasy, etc. background in which our gaming scenarios are set, and stories and related information about our past and current adventures.
M.A.R.S. - The Mind Adventures Reality Simulator - the game mechanics used for character creation, result resolution, etc. in our role playing game sessions. These mechanics are far too complex to be managed manually.
G.U.T.S - The history of and the latest updates to the Gaming Utility Tool Set, a (currently Windows-only) application that we use to automate the game mechanics of M.A.R.S. G.U.T.S is primarily focused on implementing our game mechanics, but for those who use other game system mechanics in their sessions it is a simple step to customize some of its tools to support those instead.
Service For Service - a proposal for additional branches of service in addition to the 5 militarily-focused branches. These new branches would provide infrastructure to the population of the country. Serving in any of them would entitle a person to the same types of benefits we currently give to service personnel and veterans. This project gets its own subdomain. It's separate from my blog and i hope to KEEP them separate. The socialism inherent in Service For Service will make it unpopular enough on its own without the idea being tainted by the fact that it comes from an atheist (SIGH). If you're on THIS page, you've probably already realized that, but the S4S site won't have any references to my beliefs on those kinds of topics. If anything, though, this is ironic.Iit's my opinion that anyone who claims to be a Christian who isn't mostly supportive of the S4S concept should maybe find a different person to lead their bible study.
The 'on the radar' Blog - The blog is not yet ready, there's just an example WP site there for now
I am one opinionated son of a bitch. I don't just not deny that, i fully embrace it. I don't expect anyone to care what i say, but i think that some of the ideas i have about philosophical, religious, political, and socials issues have merit, so i am taking an effort to share those thoughts with those who i know already do care and with those who MIGHT care. But be warned: Here on the rest of this page and on the blog i am not subject to anyone else's rules of censorship, and be advised that i FREQUENTLY express myself in ways that may make some of you blush.
One of my primary life goals is to 'seek truth and share that journey with anyone who cares to hear my thoughts'. I believe that 'truth speaks for itself to those who will honestly listen', but in some domains it's difficult to distinguish its voice from the other voices to which we are subject.
It's my perception that in today's 'war of ideas', there aren't enough people ensuring that a specific set of perspectives are being considered on many topics. It's also my perspective that the ideas which are getting the most notice are slightly (and often seriously) flawed, and i have taken it upon myself to be an obnoxious (but tiny) voice saying "but have you also considered this?". I know that i am not the only person who shares my view on EACH of these areas, though i know no one who shares my view on ALL of them :-). But the fact that i am NOT the only person who holds any of them, however, means that each of them can just maybe appeal to that many more people.
Let's get this out of the way. There are some areas where i don't see room for debate about what is true. 1 + 1 always equals 2 (even for very large values of 1! :-0 ). Anyone who wants to get into a debate about those kinds of things is welcome to enjoy that kind of discussion with someone else. But there are other areas where i don't agree that a single objective truth can be defined until you define the parameters far more clearly than usually occurs. "What is ethically/morally correct" can't be answered until one defines ethics and morals. I have OPINIONS on that, but i rejet anyone's claims to being the final authority. One CAN more objectively answer questions like "What type of societal structure will lead to the birth of the most (or least) children.". There's an objective criteria to measure, so after you try all the proposals there's an objective answer for which one is 'best'. However, again, usually questions are asked in ways that don't contain criteria upon which everyone can agree, so they can't get a single answer. I don't agree one can apply the term 'truth' in many of latter areas. I see one's thoughts on most of those as opinions ONLY. I specifically reject the use of the ozymoron 'my truth'. I think it is an abuse of the word 'truth' to cast it as something that can be subjective. YMMV.
I spent most of my youth studying what i see as the 'objective truths'. math, history, languages, geography, and pretty much any and all of the hard sciences to one or another degree. Now i'm more focused on the areas that i realize are far more opinion that objective truth, but with the addenda that i think the ideas i propose will lead to changes that i think are improvements... and that could be tested explicitly. I'd LOVE to see those 'tests' get run.
I think the single most important trait one must possess in the pursuit of truth in the more subjective areas of opinion is to put equal focus on a search for error in what one already considers to be truth. A refusal to consider one is in error is so deeply ingrained in our basic wiring that i think one must be constantly vigilant watching for confirmation bais. Instead of starting each discussion or internal analysis of a subject from the perspective that "what i already know is no longer subject to critique", i think a better path is to remain ESPECIALLY suspicious of one's 'deeply held beliefs' and consider each challenge to them as a chance to see their flaws instead of as an attack on one's own person to be repelled. To that end, i seek out those who have different views and reasons for holding those views i have not yet considered and rejected to discuss my thoughts with. I hope that the use of bold text there ensured you got the point. I don't feel a need to prove i'm open minded by sitting and listening to some moron parroting the same drivel i've heard countless times from the other equally clueless morons who confuse their willingness to believe something for objective proof that it is true. I think the way i expressed that last sentence should convey my opinion of those who think one must give time to people who have a hole in their head to prove they have an open mind. But those aren't the only people on the planet.
I know that some people are put off by my approach to these kinds of discussions, especially if the discussion is about an area where it seems to me their 'deeply held' opinions are based more on emotion than reason. I have definitely heard many more than one such discussion end with the pronouncement that "You hate to be wrong". I have to laugh at that, though. Their IMPLICATION is always very clear: "WAHHH! You won't agree with me, and that can only come from your inability to accept being wrong." At that point i withdraw. It isn't that i don't have an answer to that, it's that i no longer consider it worth my time trying to have a meaningful discussion with that person on that topic.
WOW! That's arrogant! If you say so. Maybe you should get some arrogance for yourself if you think that. I don't subject myself to continuing to participate in what was supposed to be a debate with a person who will not abide by the rules of debate. Back up your position with more than just stamping your feet and explain the flaws in MY positions instead of ignoring them because you can't. My primary purpose for the debate is to hear your objections, NOT to convince you of my position, so if you have a REASON to disagree other than obstinance i want to hear it to improve MY opinion. If you don't have an effective counter-argument, i'm fine if you choose to continue to hold your position... really... just please stop acting like the fact that i can defend MY position explicitly somehow suggests that i'm incapable of admitting error. I'm happy to have discussions with those people on other topics, but my interest in debating them on that topic is over. Not to mention... "You hate to be wrong" is a statement that probably applies to anyone, so phrasing it that way is strange to me. Of course i "hate to be wrong". So does the speaker. So do you. But the amount that any of us hate being wrong about a topic doesn't convey any information as to whether we are or are not wrong about it, and if that's your only rebuttal i may be wrong, but you're not the one who is going to prove that to me. If i seem a bit overly sensitive here i am. Accusing me of intellectually dishonesty is for the me the equivalent of me having called you a whore, a child molester, or whatever trait with which YOU would never wish to be associated. :-)
In my real life, socially or because of jobs i have held, i have met some amazing thinkers. Here online i have added to the number of people i know whose pages challenge me to think about things they way THEY think about things. I don't have to agree with their conclusions to value hearing the reasoning that leads them to those conclusions. Often hearing how they parse the subject gives ME a new perspective. It may be insufficient to change my way of thinking to align with theirs fully, but it often does lead to mine moving somewhat in that direction. But i also know that two reasonable people can completely disagree about their conclusions even if they have the same data because they may weigh factors differently and desired outcomes differently. I do not consider those who look at data honestly and reach a different conclusion than i do as being 'objectively wrong' in many areas, though i do in some. I recognize that we may have different outcomes in mind and if both outcomes meet MY criteria for moral/ethical correctness then i weight them as equally valid. Bottom line is that i think i AM 'correct' FROM THE WAY I WEIGH THINGS about most things at age 69 because i've spent about 60 of those years correcting and re-correcting my models of what IS correct. That doesn't mean i think they're perfect now, but it does mean i think i can defend them against all known objections already. But as i get this place set up to allow feedback, if you are sure you've got something new and you can back it up with something we can agree has 'authority' in the domain, then i REALLY want to hear it.
>In years past i posted and debated with people on news groups. In its day i hosted a blog at 'on-the-radar.com' (now defunct) where i shared my opinions and discussed them with the blog's subscribers. For the last decade+ i've used FaceBook as my primary means of sharing and discussing my opinions on assorted topics.
Now i'm going to approach this in a more structured way. Rather than making random posts on FB as the whims hit me about details of the topics i care about - often repeating myself - i'm going to collect all of my assorted past commentaries on each of the subjects i tend to rant about and distill them into a more coherent whole. Over time i will tweak them, or change sections that someone convinces me i had all wrong (yes, it happens :-) ). The main page of the blog will have links for each of the major topics that are commonly discussed there, and i'll post links to here on FB as i make any real changes here. I hope that you will read, ponder, and discuss the contents i share on one or more of these topics with me, assuming any of the subjects interest you. I'll allow for discussions right on the pages when i understand how to activate that in WP, but for now i'll post links to MY pages here on Facebook as i add new content and they can be discussed there with anyone so inclined.