About


I’ve been an anime fan since the early 90s and started blogging on LiveJournal in late 2006. I moved Pirates of the Burley Griffin here in late 2011 when LiveJournal started having its persistent problems with DDOS attacks.

Professionally I’m a business analyst ranging from high level business process modelling to detailed requirements. I will blog about that too, but it tends to be relatively rare.

The title was inspired by a good friend as a play on Pirates of the Carribbean for a UNISFA alumni picnic held in Canberra one year.

Since I am currently based in Canberra, and an anime fan, the title just clicked for me.

The tagline reflects some bad experiences with project management many years ago that taught me to appreciate good project managers (which I’m not).

One thing I do not do is romanticise real pirates: read this for more.

Please read the site disclaimer and comment policy here.

The banner photo is a cropped version of a sunset I took at Glenelg Beach in 2002.  The full version has basically been my desktop image ever since. And, yes, I’m aware of the irony of having a South Australian banner on a Canberra centric blog written by a West Australian native.

14 thoughts on “About”

  1. I’ve nominated your blog for the Liebster award. If you’d like to participate, I have a list of questions on the below page. If not though, that’s totally okay and please just take this for the compliment it’s intended as! http://otakulounge.wordpress.com/2013/12/17/liebster-awards/

  2. Hi, thought I should say that I’ve nominated your blog for a Creative Blogger award. No obligation of course, but if you’d like to take part I have a link on the below page.
    https://doctorjhwatson.wordpress.com/2015/10/08/creative-blogger-award/

  3. Thanks, I’ll take a look at that on the weekend.

  4. Do you really close the comments section of a post when you want to ‘end’ a discussion?

    Unless your intention is to invite me to continue the issue being explored in ‘On the misuse of language: a twitter rant’ on my own blog (i.e. included in a wider post I’m thinking of making on people’s misunderstanding of etymology on the internet), I’d ask that we continue it on your site.

    Conversation ends when people have nothing more to say, not when one person censors the other person. It’s also a bit ironic to talk about freedom of speech and then close your comments section. It gives the impression that you have no interest in what the other person has to say, which is unsavoury.

  5. We had reached a point where further discussion was pointless in my opinion.

    I disagree with your position and you were not acknowledging the core point of the post with respect to Cardinal Pell.

    Please check the site disclaimer. I reserve the right to moderate here, and you are close to re-entering the moderation queue.

    I remind you that the right to freedom of speech does not include the right to an audience. You don’t have to listen to me, I don’t have to listen to you, nor is either refusal censorship.

    If you wish to start something elsewhere, fine. Don’t expect me to show up, and this topic is closed here.

  6. A rude, crude approach to moderation.

    At the very least, letting the guest on your blog who has spent the time and energy to engage with you have the ‘last word’, if you view the discussion as pointless, pays dividends. They can reply, you can ignore it and never reply and then close the chat and all’s well. Replying last yourself, and then closing the chat, does not facilitate a good image.

    The fact that right to freedom of speech does not include the right to an audience only points out these flaws. ‘Speech’ in this case is the ability to post. ‘Audience’ is the choice to read such a post. Since, considering the disclaimer, I have been relevant (the post was about whether or not one should use such metaphors in general, and the Cardinall Pell issue was, from your argument and Twitter pots, a springboard to a wider issue that no-one should use such terms for anything like the Pell issue, which was the point I targeted), the conversation smacks of you choosing to close the discussion because you wished to censor me further delving into the topic, which I was very ready to do, not because of an issue of rudeness or irrelevancy.

    Also – ‘re-entering’ the moderation queue? When did I enter it before?

    Anyway, I’ll link to your post when I get round to writing up this discussion of etymology. I don’t mind if you choose not to ‘show up’ on my blog, but I’ll certainly find it useful for my readers to show up on yours in order to continue the dialogue between our views without you.

    Thanks for the discussion so far.

  7. Your opinions on my moderation approach are duly noted. You may find it “rude, crude” but my site, my rules.

    I’m not the only person who thinks this way. Deal with it.

    http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/

    http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2008/06/moderation_policy.html

  8. Ahem! I nominated you to the one lovely blog award. You deserve it. :3

    https://yaharibento.wordpress.com/2017/02/01/lovely-blog-award-2017-yahari-bento/

  9. Thanks!

Fire a Broadside!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s