Welcome to the developing, wonderful world of the vinceunlimited website, now in it's fifth iteration. More and more articles are being added every week, some on a daily basis, so please revisit and refresh the page regularly to keep up to date with the latest posts. So browse the old mouse on some words and you'll get in-site jump links or rodger your rodent on a big blue button to fly off immediately to the named specialist page.
Author: Vince Poynter Version 5.247 11 Dec 2018
Yes, I’m calling it. I have now completed the remastering of my web site. The foundations of version 5 are done.
It’s taken some major commitment from me over the past 15 months and I’ve managed it all in less time than a Brexit.
From now on it will be all new content never before seen on any previous versions of the site.
Yes, I will still need to spend a little time finally tweaking some pages and entries but perfection always needs a bit of polish so that’s just an ongoing chore.
So, tell your friends, inform your colleagues and update your associates vinceunlimited is in business. The future can begin.
Author: Vince Poynter Version 5.247 11 Dec 2018
First published: Here 5.247 11 Dec 2018
A short Film by Vince, photographed and filmed on location in Southampton, the London Motorcycle Show and the roads of Hampshire between 1961 and 2015.
The short film features photo montage clips of my brother Mark on some of his various bicycles and motorcycles from my personal collection of family photographs taken by me and my family between 1961 and 2015.
The video portion was shot on an Apple iPhone 6+ on 18 October 2105.
The motorbikes featured include Mark’s Gilera Touring 50, his Suzuki TS185, new bikes on display at the London Motorcycle Show in January 2015 and his Honda VRX400 [Japanese import model].
The editing was carried out by me on the iPhone iMovie application with sound from the camera and stock music from the application, using customised stock title cards.
This 4 minute and 14 seconds film was uploaded to YouTube, in the Auto & Vehicles category, on 24 October 2015 and has since received over 2,100 views.
Author: Vince Poynter Version 5.245 4 Dec 2018
Photographs taken between 1961 and 2015
Video Filmed by Vince 18 Oct 2015
Uploaded to YouTube 24 Oct 2015
A Film by Vince 2015
A WordPress Blog originally posted on 26 Mar 2018
I had some time this weekend to idly look at Twitter. After I had read the content of those who I follow and then browsed the interesting Twitter Trending topics I started to look for a promising subject to interact with.
The Twitter Trending topics are generally mature discussions by the time they are aired and most angles are covered by then. Twitter is very much a now thing and subject matter is quickly outdated so getting involved on anything here is mostly futile.
My next point of call may be Twitter’s own selected suggestions. However these are rarely useful. With only three suggestions made and each from an algorithm that is too narrow so I usually find these pointless.
If I’m in the mood for discussion I don’t want a viewpoint that is just like my own and I certainly don’t think a conversation with someone who mostly retweets other people’s material would be satisfactory. I appreciate an original thinker, someone prepared to do a little bit of writing.
Finally, in the absence of a genuine random Twitter Feed I look to the suggestions the service makes based on my perceived likes. In my case these subjects are cars and comedians. Naturally my tastes are wider than this of course but not according to Twitter.
So I read these offerings and often chip in with comments on the subjects that most interest me.
And, if I have some time, I seek to increase my options by looking at who else is commenting on these subjects and then possibly delve deeper into their feeds as well.
It was during a search like this that I happened upon a user who had themselves commented on a celebrity Tweet. One that is irrelevant to this tale and now long forgotten.
I checked a little deeper and discovered that this person appeared to use the service in the way that I do. That is to say original written content, not merely a lazy bunch of retweets, pictures of their food/cats or tiresome religious style quotations. And I noticed that they had pinned an interesting Tweet to the top of their feed which was a survey about whether a particular, named comedian was funny.
In the way the survey question was set out I immediately anticipated that the author didn’t actually want to know the answer but really wanted to take an opportunity to gather like minded dislikes.
But I noticed the survey was flawed as it offered up three options - Funny, Not Funny or Irrelevant. You can probably already see why I jumped to the conclusion about the bias of the survey.
Anyway, in a bid to encourage this member I opened a discussion suggesting the flaw in such a survey, positing that one could conclude two answers were correct and a conversation followed. The Tweeter even posted a 'like' on my comment.
They then explained it was only an attempt to measure respondents to see what sort of people they were and I replied with the point that a respondent’s Twitter avatar was not necessarily an indication of who was making the choice.
The author then clarified a point about their original Tweet and them actually seeking an Echo Chamber Effect, which is, to quote Wikipedia, 'a metaphorical description of a situation in which beliefs are amplified or reinforced by communication and repetition inside a closed system'. They then clearly pointed out that they wanted respondents to think like they did and agree that the comedian was clearly not funny.
In actual fact, although often controversial, the comedian is highly popular so on the spectrum of comedians should generally be classed as funny given such limited choices.
So I took the survey and marked them as funny. At which point I was able to note that I was the only one who had done this. Twitter surveys do not let you know the trend or votes until a vote is cast, which prevents forced bias toward a less popular choice.
I wasn't really such an outlier. In fairness only eight others had bothered with the survey, a very low, statistically unreliable number, mostly voting for Not Funny. This contravened an earlier claim by the author that the option Irrelevant was trending.
Then I re-engaged with the author noting this skew towards the idea that the comedian was Not Funny and added a comment that this was a typical response to a comedian’s work in general. To reinforce the point, I also suggested that, as opposed to comics, poor actors don’t suffer from surveys about the quality of their work.
It appears that this hit a nerve. A reply came back stating that the survey was over a week old and as I was now responding they assumed that I had actively sought out the Tweet just to be a 'spoilsport', along with a suggestion that I desist being such a person and ending the message with a firm invite to leave the conversation.
A few points to note:
The survey was still active and had another day and some hours to finish
I found it because it was pinned to the top of the user’s feed. A place Twitter users can ensure they get maximum attention
Twitter doesn’t work that way. People can join and leave when they wish to. It is a public forum
I could even claim it was my own conversation topic that I was being strongly invited to leave
I felt I had been unfairly libelled about the motive for my conversation and unfairly called a name. So I decided, as is my right, to politely reply once more.
I noted that they had misinterpreted my intention, that I didn’t seek the tweet but came across it and thought it interesting so started the conversation. I added that they now choose to terminate it, rather impolitely. And suggested that I seemingly didn’t fit their narrative. However I did finally note that I will leave them to it and finished off with a simple message - Be kind.
I had no intention of continuing a conversation that appeared to have reached an impasse.
However curiosity led to me checking to see if a response came and as I was reading the rude comments that were being fired back by the author to their followers, without including me, the feed suddenly disappeared.
I had been blocked.
Unable to see the rest of the continued libel and unable to respond.
It was the Twitter equivalent of someone steaming out of the room whilst shouting back abuse and slamming the door.
Let me be clear. I do not object to being blocked. If you can’t handle a conversation that is not feeding your own bias then that is fine. Everybody has a right to be who they choose to be.
I find it sad, however, that this person does not wish to open their mind at all to a reasoned, alternative point of view.
And downright rude to be libellous without being subject to recourse.
After all, when all is said and done, I took some time to carefully craft an interesting conversation with a low level user of a system where my only expressed opinion was that comedian’s generally get a raw deal and I had taken some of my valuable time to take part in that person’s public survey expressing an honest opinion. A survey which had hardly received any other traction from a person who I initially thought might deserve more than their handful of followers. Generally I try to support those with less followers and initially thought I may have discovered another interesting person to follow.
In continuation of my polite attitude towards this exchange I have not sought to belittle the Twitterer on this platform who I had the conversation with so will not advertise their details here.
Nor will I name the comedian who was being subjected to the initial attempted trolling. In fact it is interesting that although named in the original survey no attempt was made to involve them as no hashtag or Twitter handle was included by the original author.
However, as can be rightly conferred throughout this article I am interested in thoughts about this exchange, the merits and disadvantages of being a comedian and of learning alternative opinions. So please feel free to comment.
And I promise you, no matter what you think I will not block you. Because that way I am really blocking myself.
Plus, I know, it does hurt a little.
Author: Vince Poynter Version 5.244 30 Nov 2018
First published: WordPress Blog on 26 Mar 2018
A WordPress Blog originally published on 6 Jun 2017
Politics is big right now in the UK. We have a General Election being served up soon, with something called Brexit as a dessert course later on. So it may be perspicacious to re-read my thoughts from 2005.
Though not on Brexit as I didn't foresee this in 2005. Sorry.
All now published under Archive/Politics
Author: Vince Poynter Version 5.243 29 Nov 2018
First published: WordPress Blog on 6 Jun 2017
The Archive/Political page no longer appears on the WordPress site but all the information is now on this site under Political
Red Cross Bee
A WordPress Blog published on 5 Jun 2017
The UK Elections are in full swing. Swinging from right towards left and back again dependant on the strategies playing out by the main party forces. And very interesting it is proving to be.
If you follow the machinations you would often have heard of a possibly shadowy Australian figure called Lynton Crosby. A beknighted man, his is a name associated with the Conservative Party and I refer to him as shadowy purely because he is a behind the scenes political adviser and strategist and not an electable representative. If the Conservative Party wins well he will be quietly congratulated by many in the party.
But at the time of writing the Conservatives and their leader Theresa May have not been conducting a powerful and effective campaign.
Conversely the Labour Party appears to be doing the opposite.
Despite many early criticisms, an earlier perceived unelectable shambles has matured into an apparently viable and challenging force, much due to the improving presentation of the Labour Leader.
Has Jeremy Corbyn planned and strategised all this himself or in conjunction with his team or does he have a back-room Lynton Crosby? If so, who is this genuinely shadowy Red Crosby? And why is he/she/them never mentioned.
Author: Vince Poynter Version 5.242 28 Nov 2018
First published: WordPress Blog on 5 Jun 2017
A WordPress Blog published on 2 Jun 2017
Silence is said to be golden.
But it doesn't help move things on much so I'm busting the guilt and will be shortly issuing a few key posts.
But you will have to read them aloud, as they will be delivered by page not noise. And if you don't add the sound they will remain silent. And this cannot be so as they are key matters.
But not as in door latches.
Author: Vince Poynter Version 5.241 27 Nov 2018
First published: WordPress Blog on 2 Jun 2017
The Dinger Show
"Mrs. Schrödinger. Mrs. Schrödinger! Have you let that cat out again?"
You may have heard of Schrödinger and his pussy.
It wasn't an actual cat of course but an imaginary one because potentially bad things are only allowed to happen to theoretical felines.
Schrödinger attempted to simplify the notion of a belief in something being in both one state and another by postulating that if you trapped a cat in a box containing a radioactive poison and then didn't open it, at one point the cat would die. But at any point up to then, because it is as yet unobserved, it may or may not have been an ex-cat and therefore must be considered during this period both dead and alive.
Schrödinger clearly didn't use a dog because the actual time of canine demise would be marked by a sudden but obvious silence from all the previous barking and this would give the game away.
Schrödinger assumes the cat wouldn't meow.
Perhaps it should've been Schrödinger's tortoise all along.
Schrodinger did all this to help partly explain quantum mathematics. Which is clearly unnecessary as we are obviously all familiar with those theories. And partly because he fantasised about tabby torture.
But apart from explaining complex molecule movement we could apply his findings to business.
I suggest that any powerful business person, or engineer, or specialist may have a bit of Schrödinger about them.
When in such a position you are trusted, respected, admired. And you have probably earned this air of actual belief. Either through training, study or experience. And it is easy to embrace these feelings. However, if you have ever been in this position you will know that in truth the powerful often also have feelings of being a bit, shall we say, incompetent. A bit fraudulent even.
So are all Managers Schrödingers? Discuss.
Schrödinger's theorem states there only two possible outcomes. So in conclusion you either understand what I'm saying or you don't.
Or maybe both. Or any combination in between.
Author: Vince Poynter Version 5.240 26 Nov 2018
First Published: WordPress Blog 5 Jan 2017
The photograph was taken by the author on 8 Oct 2005 and features a neighbour's cat. The name of the cat is irrelevant. Strange name for a cat. It is included because the author did a quick check and decided there were just not enough pictures of cats on the internet