text:
Mitt's Cayman Island Gift
Mitt Romney seems to have reflexively winced with embarrassment at the questions about his perfectly logical finance and tax decisions. Understandable. Of course, the subject of his wealth precedes not-so-veiled attacks coming from an unfriendly press corps and a vicious opponent who will use any means to paint him as a real-life Gordon Gekko.
But he is missing a fantastic opportunity.
"Yes, I have many offshore accounts. Yes, I take advantage of legal deductions and tax incentives in compliance with the tax code. I am a wealthy, successful man who didn't get that way by being a fool. Furthermore, one of the main reasons I am seeking the presidency is to change the disgraceful tax laws that force someone like me to go through the time, money, and effort to protect oneself from the arbitrary and bewildering maze of confiscatory taxation."
When people on the left decry the "unfairness" of federal tax laws, they are in the right -- but not in the way they intend. They mean that it is unfair in a vague way for the rich to have so much money. They want the rich to be punished. Facts about the rates and amounts of tax paid by the wealthy are of no interest to these people.
But the system is unfair. For what is fair about a system that confiscates your earnings at arbitrary and changing rates, giving privileges and breaks to people based on who they are, how much they earn, and what kind of behavior they exhibit? It is fundamentally unfair. And, to make things worse, with full force of law, the government requires its intimidated citizens to complete forms that a professor at MIT would find bewildering. The IRS itself says it takes the average taxpayer twenty-two hours of time and $290 in costs to complete a simple Form 1040. National Taxpayer Advocate Nina E. Olson in her 2011 report to Congress found that the tax code had grown to 3.8 million words as of Feb. 1, 2010 and that using the IRS's own estimated numbers, she deduced that individuals and businesses spend 6.1 billion hours each year working to simply comply with the code.
Along with promoting his successful managerial experience as preparation for the presidency, Romney should also embrace his wealth as the fruits of that success. Instead, he mitigates his argument by deprecating his obvious wealth. Perhaps this is a sign of humility and good manners, but it is nonetheless a detriment to his campaign and therefore the future of the country.
Romney has the opportunity to use the momentum of the Obama campaign against his opponents by seizing tax fairness as his theme. Radical tax simplification ought to be sold as much fairer than the current scheme. All the effort put into getting him to release his tax records now works against the Democrats, as Mitt embraces his experience exploiting loopholes to argue that he knows how to make it simple and fairer. Pundits could note that Joseph P. Kennedy, founder of the Democrats' reigning dynasty, was appointed the inaugural chairman of the SEC and did a well-regarded job cleaning up Wall Street, based on his experience as a Wall Street manipulator in the 1920s. He knew how it was done.
Romney is in an ideal position to fight this continuing injustice and gain tremendous popularity for the effort. Every American is unhappy with federal tax laws. Nobody understands them. But all agree that the system is complex and riddled with loopholes and deductions cooked up by a corrupt Congress. There are millions of votes to be had by someone credible enough to promise to reform it. Romney can do that.
His supporters are asking Romney to get tough and engage the enemy. Here is his opportunity. When asked why he moves money offshore, the worst response is to apologize. Romney should speak plainly and loud and clear. The answer: "Because our ridiculous tax laws force me too!" And the perfect follow-up. "Elect me, and I will completely revamp the tax laws, simplify the code, eliminate political influence, and, finally, end offshore incentives so that I can bring all my millions back home to this great country where they belong."


text:
Nikky Blond (* 9. März 1981 als Marianna Siman in Ungarn) ist eine ungarische Pornodarstellerin. Andere Schreibweisen ihres Namens sind Niki Blond, Nikki Blond, Nicky Blond, Nikki Blonde sowie Kombinationen daraus.

Leben
Nikky Blond begann im Jahr 1998 ihre Karriere in der Pornoindustrie. Sie kommt aus derselben Schule wie ihre Kollegin Sophie Moone. In den USA machte sie schnell Karriere und errang einige Auszeichnungen. Im Jahr 2004 erhielt sie in Berlin den Venus Award als Beste Darstellerin.

Sie trat in vielen Hochglanz-Produktionen von Michael Ninn unter dem Label Ninn Worx auf. Sie ist auch in Filmen von Evil Angel und Private Media Group zu sehen und hat mit Pierre Woodman gearbeitet.

Auszeichnungen
 Venus Award 2004 als "Beste Darstellerin – Ungarn"

Filmografie (Auswahl)
 Carolina Jones and the Broken Covenant (2008)
 Private: X-Girls: The Lost X-Teens (2007)
 The Private Story of Nikky Blond (2005)
 Robinson Crusoe on Sin Island (2005)
 Euroglam Budapest 2: Nikki Blond (2002), Regie: Michael Ninn, erschienen bei Ninn Worx
 Euroglam – An American in Europe Final Chapter (2003), Regie: Michael Ninn
 Catherine (2005), Regie: Michael Ninn, u. a. mit Audrey Hollander, Justine Joli
 Soloerotica (2003), Regie: Michael Ninn, u. a. mit Shayla LaVeaux, Jenna Haze, Nikita Denise
 Diamond Girl (2004), Regie: Michael Ninn
 Sapphic Liaisons (2005), Regie: Michael Ninn

Weblinks

Pornodarsteller
Träger des Venus Award
Ungar
Geboren 1981
Frau

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


The current employment market favors job seekers rather than recruiters, which makes maintaining appropriate communication during the hiring process essential. To succeed nowadays, hiring managers must be focused on providing a positive candidate experience. By knowing how to respond to job applicants and communicating with candidates in a timely fashion, you can make sure you don't leave prospects in the applicant black hole and avoid developing a negative reputation as an employer.
The infographic below includes a handy process map that outlines the four critical points throughout the hiring process where a recruiter or hiring manager must contact candidates to update them on their application status. You should be reaching out to prospects at each stage regardless of whether they've made it to the next step or are no longer under consideration. If this isn't part of your recruiting strategy, it needs to be.


text:
Home / Insights / In re Aqua Products
Jason M. Dorsky Justin J. Oliver
In re Aqua Products: In a Divided Decision, En Banc Federal Circuit Holds That Petitioner Must Prove All Propositions of Unpatentability, Including for Amended Claims
On October 4, 2017, a divided en banc Federal Circuit issued several opinions addressing the burden of proof pertaining to a motion to amend claims in inter partes review ("IPR") proceedings. While none of the opinions garnered a full majority in all respects, the leading opinion authored by Judge O'Malley held that "in the absence of any required deference, the most reasonable reading of [35 U.S.C. § 316] is one that places the burden of persuasion with respect to the patentability of amended claims on the petitioner." In doing so, the Federal Circuit overruled its prior decisions addressing motions to amend in IPR proceedings, to the extent that those decisions conflict with this ruling. Judge O'Malley was joined by Judges Newman, Lourie, Moore and Wallach, and Judges Dyk and Reyna concurred in the result.
While the leading opinion asserts that "§ 316(e) unambiguously requires the petitioner to prove all propositions of unpatentability, including for amended claims," which would not trigger Chevron deference, that position did not garner a majority. The concurring opinion did not find the AIA unambiguous on this issue, leading to a deeper analysis concerning whether the PTO had promulgated a proper rule that placed the burden of proving patentability on the patentee, which would be entitled to Chevron deference. With this division, Judge O'Malley acknowledged that the ruling was "narrow" and that "[t]he only legal conclusions that support and define the judgment of the court are: (1) the PTO has not adopted a rule placing the burden of persuasion with respect to the patentability of amended claims on the patent owner that is entitled to deference; and (2) in the absence of anything that might be entitled deference, the PTO may not place that burden on the patentee." In addition to the leading opinion, the en banc Court generated four additional opinions, which were joined in full or in part by other Judges.
Aqua Products, Inc. ("Aqua Products") is the owner of U.S. Patent No. 8,273,183, which discloses and claims an automated swimming pool cleaner. In response to an infringement suit, Zodiac Pool Systems, Inc. ("Zodiac") filed an IPR petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("PTAB"), in which it challenged the patentability of certain claims of the '183 patent. Following institution, Aqua Products defended the patentability of the original claim and filed a motion to amend setting forth three substitute claims.
Zodiac opposed the motion to amend on various grounds. The PTAB ultimately found the challenged claims unpatentable and denied the motion to amend. In its analysis, the PTAB determined that the substitute claims satisfied the formal requirements of § 316(d) regarding claim scope and formalities for presenting the motion. However, the PTAB ruled that Aqua Products had failed to prove patentability of the substitute claims over the prior art of record. Thus, the PTAB found that Aqua Products had satisfied the patent owner's burden of production (by complying with § 316(d)), but failed to satisfy the burden of proof.
On appeal, Aqua Products argued that the plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 316(e) places the burden of proving any proposition of unpatentability on the petitioner. The initial panel rejected Aqua Products' argument. Writing for the panel, Judge Reyna held that existing Court precedent precluded revisiting the issue of whether the PTAB may require a patentee to demonstrate patentability of substitute claims over the art of record. The panel also rejected Aqua Products' assertion that the PTAB erred by failing to consider the entirety of the record when determining the patentability of the proposed substitute claims.
On August 12, 2016, the Federal Circuit vacated the panel decision and ordered rehearing en banc. The Federal Circuit requested that the parties file supplemental briefing directed to the following questions:
(a) When the patent owner moves to amend its claims under 35 U.S.C. § 316(d), may the PTO require the patent owner to bear the burden of persuasion, or a burden of production, regarding patentability of the amended claims as a condition of allowing them? Which burdens are permitted under 35 U.S.C. § 316(e)?
(b) When the petitioner does not challenge the patentability of a proposed amended claim, or the Board thinks the challenge is inadequate, may the Board sua sponte raise patentability challenges to such a claim? If so, where would the burden of persuasion, or a burden of production, lie?
The Leading En Banc Opinion
The leading opinion walked through various bases for believing that Congress intended for the burden to be placed on the petitioner for proving unpatentability of all claims, whether original or amended. Judge O'Malley noted that both Congress and the Supreme Court have emphasized the importance of a patent owner's right to propose claim amendments during an IPR proceeding. The leading opinion also noted that the claim construction standard for IPRs is predicated on the availability of claim amendments, but that patent owners largely have been prevented from making amendments. Additionally, the opinion discussed the legislative history for earlier versions of the AIA, which contemplated language that may have, if adopted, put the burden on the patentee, but ultimately excluded such language in favor of language that focused on the burden of the petitioner.
Judge O'Malley next turned to the relevant PTO rules. While the PTO asserted that 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.20 (generally referring to the burden of a "moving party") and 42.121 (setting forth the procedures for submitting a motion to amend) place the burden of persuasion on a patent owner to demonstrate patentability, the Court disagreed. Judge O'Malley explained that the PTO imposed the burden of proof through two IPR decisions (Idle Free and MasterImage). Those interpretations of the statute are not set forth in the actual regulations, and thus were not subject to the notice-and-comment rulemaking requirements.
With this framework in place, the opinion turned to a Chevron analysis, which considers two questions—(1) did Congress directly speak to the precise question at issue; and, if not, (2) did the agency resolve the question using a permissible construction of the relevant statute.
The judges on the leading opinion would have resolved the matter with the first step of Chevron, ruling that "Congress explicitly placed the burden of persuasion to prove propositions of unpatentability on the petitioner for all claims, including amended claims." Specifically, § 316(d)(1) provides patent owners with the right to file a motion to amend in an IPR proceeding, and does not impose any burden of proof regarding the patentability of the proposed amended claims. Judge O'Malley also rejected the PTO's argument that because substitute claims are introduced via a "motion," the burden of persuasion must fall on the patent owner as the moving party. As explained in the leading opinion, the statutory language only described a threshold burden for introducing substitute claims into the proceeding. If the judges on the leading opinion had their way, the patentee would need only satisfy the statutory criteria set forth in § 316(d) and any reasonable procedural obligations imposed by the PTO Director, to enter the amendment into the IPR proceeding—at which point the burden would be on the petitioner to prove unpatentability of the amended claims. The leading opinion also rejected the notion that this scheme would result in the issuance of "untested" amended claims, as amended claims must necessarily be narrower in scope than the original claims.
While those that joined the leading opinion would end the Chevron analysis at step one—finding the AIA unambiguous on this issue—there was no majority support for finding clarity in the statute. This lack of agreement necessitated step two of the Chevron analysis—determining whether deference should be given to any PTO interpretation of §§ 316(d) or (e). On this point, a majority agreed that the PTO has not adopted any rules or regulations governing the burden of proof in the context of motions to amend. The opinion stated that 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.20 and 42.121 do not address patentability determinations, and further, the Idle Free and MasterImage IPR decisions are not entitled to Chevron deference. Thus, the majority concluded that the PTO failed to make any proper determination on the ambiguity of either § 316(d) or § 316(e). With that finding, no basis existed to accord deference to the PTO's interpretation of those sections.
With no deference warranted, the Court applied a de novo review of § 316 and determined that "the burden of proving the unpatentability of all claims in an IPR—both original and amended—is on the petitioner."
This conclusion would seem to allow for the PTO to issue rules adopting its interpretation of § 316, which could be accorded deference if challenged in a later case. However, the leading opinion suggested that even if the PTO were to engage in formal agency rulemaking to establish its interpretation, it may not have the statutory authority to do so, as setting a different "burden of proof" was arguably outside the scope of Congress' direction to the PTO in § 316(a)(9) to establish "standards and procedures." This view was not expressed by a majority, but also was not entirely rejected by every judge that did not join the leading opinion.
The leading opinion also touched upon the second question of whether the PTAB may sua sponte raise patentability challenges to a proposed amended claim. Because the record did not present that precise question, the Court declined to address this question. However, Judge O'Malley did address the question of whether the PTAB may base patentability determinations concerning the amended claims solely on the face of the motion to amend, without regard to the remainder of the IPR record. The opinion held that final substantive decisions (such as the patentability of proposed amended claims) must be based on the entirety of the record. An agency's refusal to consider evidence bearing on an issue before it is "by definition, arbitrary and capricious." Thus, the PTAB's rejection of Aqua Products' proposed amended claims without consideration of the full IPR record provided an independent basis for vacating the PTAB's decision and remanding for further consideration.
Judge Moore's Opinion
Judge Moore issued a separate opinion, in which Judges Newman and O'Malley joined. Judge Moore joined in Judge O'Malley's opinion and concluded that 35 U.S.C. § 316(e) places the burden of proving unpatentability of an amended claim on the petitioner. However, Judge Moore wrote separately to address the question of whether PTAB opinions are entitled to Chevron deference in this case—concluding that Congress unambiguously required the PTO to establish standards through regulations, not other means such as IPR decisions.
Judge Reyna's Opinion
Judge Reyna also issued a separate opinion, in which Judge Dyk joined, and in which Chief Judge Prost and Judges Taranto, Chen and Hughes joined in part. Judge Reyna concurred with Judge Taranto's determination that § 316(e) is ambiguous, and that § 316(a)(9) authorizes the PTO to promulgate regulations on the burden of persuasion. He also agreed that the PTO's discussion of burdens in IPR decisions does not qualify as substantive rulemaking, although he did not believe that a full Chevron analysis was necessary to reach that conclusion. Finally, Judge Reyna concluded that § 316(d) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.121 only place a default burden of production on the patentee—i.e., meeting the burden for entry of the claims into the trial for consideration. However, he acknowledged that Chevron deference may be warranted if the PTO promulgates its interpretation through regulations under APA rulemaking procedures.
Judge Taranto's Dissent
Judge Taranto issued a dissent, in which Chief Judge Prost and Judges Chen and Hughes joined, and Judges Dyk and Reyna joined in part. Judge Taranto found that the statutory language of § 316(d) did not dictate who bears the burden of proof on motions to amend, and thus the statute is sufficiently ambiguous to clear the first step of Chevron. He further determined that § 316(a) allows the PTO Director to address who bears that burden, and that § 316(e) does not unambiguously bar assigning that burden to the patentee. He supported this interpretation by examining the context in which § 316(e) is applied (i.e., the existence of a petitioner challenge to the patentability of existing claims), the related statutory provisions requiring the PTAB to adjudicate the patentability of amended claims, and what he viewed as incorrect or improper assumptions applied in the leading opinion. Judge Taranto further stated that, in his view, 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(c) properly assigns the burden of persuasion to the patent owner when filing a motion to amend, and therefore Chevron deference should apply to the PTO's interpretation. Thus, Judge Taranto would affirm the PTAB's decision denying the motion to amend.
Judge Hughes' Dissent
Judge Hughes also issued a dissent, which Judge Chen joined. Judge Hughes joined Judge Taranto's opinion concluding that § 316(d) does not dictate who bears the burden of proof on motions to amend, and that Chevron deference should apply to the PTO's interpretation of the statutory language in view of its adoption of 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(c). Judge Hughes criticized the opinions of Judge O'Malley and Judge Reyna as suggesting that "specific magic words" are required before Chevron deference can be applied. Instead, Judge Hughes believes that Chevron's step two should be limited to testing the reasonableness of the agency's conclusions, rather than the mode of its reasoning. Judge Hughes further stated that the PTAB's application of § 42.20(c) should be accorded Auer deference, which gives controlling weight to an agency's interpretation of its own regulation unless plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation. Lastly, Judge Hughes rejected the notion that by using the word "regulation" in the statute, Congress intended to foreclose all other means of statutory or regulatory interpretation other than formal agency rulemaking. Thus, like Judge Taranto, Judge Hughes would affirm the PTAB's decision.
With this mixture of five opinions, the ultimate fate of motions to amend remains unsettled. In the short term, this de novo judgment places the burden on the petitioner to prove unpatentability of amended claims. This likely will affect a number of cases with motions to amend currently in play. However, the various opinions neither preclude the PTO from issuing proper regulations that shift the burden to the patentee, nor guarantee that any new regulations would withstand scrutiny in a later case.
PTO Contested Proceedings
Electronics, Computers, and Software
In re Cuozzo: The Federal Circuit Affirms the PTAB's Finding of Unpatentability
Supreme Court Holds That Federal Agencies Cannot Petition for Post-Issuance Review of Patents under the AIA

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
All About The Author
Well, This Is What I Think
The name of the blog says it all, really. My take on interesting stuff + useful re-posts :-)
Search Us Here!
Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of my new posts by email. And thank you!
OK! Sign me up!
Popular Now!
Ten best ever sex scenes - "Black Swan" tops poll. NSFW
The misery of life in an iron lung - why polio vaccination is STILL a must.
Bet you don't know where the term "Pillow Biter" comes from?
400 Vaginas in a row. Well, hell, why not? (Warning, explicit photography; work warning.)
Kim Kardashian and the sexualisation of women. Is it really about empowerment?
On Snooki, Chelsea, The Borgias, & Big Tits
A skeptic converted? One family's experience of naturopathy and iridology.
Saudi authorities behead another woman - warning, graphic image
Tragedy! Staring at breasts does NOT increase a man's life expectancy.
So is Rolf Harris worse than Roman Polanski? No? Yes? Why? And what to do about the art?
What the hell just happened? Chickens came home to roost.
Love Story – Highly Commended
Being a true historickal account of the women of America
The day Donald Trump defeated himself
Why do so many people get simple facts wrong? Answer: we think intuitively, not logically.
A DETERMINED WOMAN – original short story
#Lockdown Entertainment – TV shows you need to watch Part 2
Coronavirus and The Cross – a meditation on Suffering this Easter
Let's talk about Alzheimer's. Really talk.
Business Management (116)
Political musings (609)
Popular Culture et al (800)
Thinkin' wot?
Abbott advertising advertising f*** up of the year ALP America American politics Apple art Australia Australian Labor Party Barack Obama BBC blogging blogging success Britain business China climate change creative writing Creativity culture death penalty democracy Democrats economics Election 2012 election 2016 EU Europe F*** Up Facebook feminism food freedom global warming GOP Gun control health History humor humour iPhone Iran Iraq IS Israel Julia Gillard Kevin Rudd law Liberal Democrats Liberal Party Life marketing media Melbourne Mitt Romney movies music Obama opinion polls peace photography poem poetry police politics popular culture Presidential election psephology racism refugees religion Republican Republican Party Republicans Romney Russia science silly ads social media Stephen Yolland Syria Terrorism tits Tony Abbott travel Troy Davis Trump TV Twitter UK United States usa Victoria violence war Wellthisiswhatithink women's rights writing YouTube
Musings by George Polley
Draw the Blinds
matteringsofmind
wandering through her soul
The Blurred Line
Jenie Yolland Glass Artist
Rosie Waterland
READING BETWEEN THE PINES
Sweet Mother
Manage By Walking Around
Emily L. Hauser - In My Head
Speaker7
Archive Select Month January 2021 (1) October 2020 (2) September 2020 (2) June 2020 (3) April 2020 (1) September 2019 (2) August 2019 (1) July 2019 (3) May 2019 (2) April 2019 (5) February 2019 (3) January 2019 (1) December 2018 (1) November 2018 (2) October 2018 (2) September 2018 (2) August 2018 (1) June 2018 (2) April 2018 (1) March 2018 (2) February 2018 (3) January 2018 (3) December 2017 (1) November 2017 (1) October 2017 (1) September 2017 (2) August 2017 (6) July 2017 (1) June 2017 (3) May 2017 (6) April 2017 (5) March 2017 (2) February 2017 (4) January 2017 (7) December 2016 (7) November 2016 (8) October 2016 (9) September 2016 (9) August 2016 (10) July 2016 (13) June 2016 (16) May 2016 (6) April 2016 (14) March 2016 (17) February 2016 (22) January 2016 (7) December 2015 (15) November 2015 (19) October 2015 (22) September 2015 (17) August 2015 (13) July 2015 (15) June 2015 (15) May 2015 (9) April 2015 (14) March 2015 (14) February 2015 (18) January 2015 (21) December 2014 (15) November 2014 (17) October 2014 (24) September 2014 (14) August 2014 (19) July 2014 (24) June 2014 (19) May 2014 (22) April 2014 (26) March 2014 (23) February 2014 (18) January 2014 (23) December 2013 (19) November 2013 (23) October 2013 (30) September 2013 (22) August 2013 (26) July 2013 (14) June 2013 (8) May 2013 (9) April 2013 (17) March 2013 (24) February 2013 (19) January 2013 (28) December 2012 (22) November 2012 (19) October 2012 (24) September 2012 (27) August 2012 (37) July 2012 (19) June 2012 (14) May 2012 (13) April 2012 (18) March 2012 (29) February 2012 (18) January 2012 (20) December 2011 (12) November 2011 (18) October 2011 (9) September 2011 (27) August 2011 (37)
Posts Tagged 'New York'
United States Is Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading to Poor, UN Report Charges (Warning, violent video)
Posted: April 3, 2014 in Political musings
Tags: Albuquerque, America, Australia, cops shoot man on video, crimilisation of the homeless, Homeless, homelessness, James M Boyd, Jerome Murdough, mental health, mental illness, Murdough, New York, politics, UK, usa, violence towards homeless
We heard coverage of this story on the radio a little while ago, and it struck us as terribly sad then – it's good to see people with some clout taking it up.
We are forever depressed and angered by the way the poorest and least able to defend themselves are chewed up by "the system", when these are the very people we should be looking after most intensively.
Regular readers will know that we are especially concerned about the fate of "vets" in particular, most obviously in the US, where 100,000+ of them languish in jail, usually for drug abuse and minor theft issues, but also in many other countries around the world including Australia. This is just one more especially tragic and completely avoidable case of a hero falling through the cracks once he's been discarded by the services.
Homelessness is very often the result of family break-up (especially for young people), substance abuse, mental illness, (especially affecting people who were tossed out on the streets under the trendy move towards de-institutionalisation, but without anything like adequate provision for the de-institutionalised being put in place), post-traumatic stress, and other matters that a genuinely civilised system would deal with effectively.
Instead, we see an increasing reliance on anti-homelessness laws that are a weak and vindictive response that ties up the time of police who should be doing much more important work, and which victimises victims.
The UN Human Rights Committee says the U.S. should stop criminalising homeless people for being homeless.
Jerome Murdough, 56, a mentally ill homeless veteran, was just trying to stay alive during a New York City cold snap when he thought he found his spot: a stairwell leading to a roof in a Harlem public housing project. But that desperate act set in motion a nightmare ride through New York's criminal justice system that would end with Murdough dying of heat stroke in a Riker's Island jail cell. New York officials now say the system failed Murdough every which way.
When he was discovered, he should have been offered shelter.
When he was arraigned, he should not have been slapped with $2,500 bail.
When, unable to make bail, he ended up in jail, Murdough, because he was on medication for a mental condition, should have been monitored every 15 minutes, not left unwatched for at least four hours.
It was during that untended time that Murdough, as an official told the Associated Press, "basically baked to death."
Now, as New York officials discuss the "tragedy" of last month and scapegoat one Riker's Island guard for Murdough's death — suspending him for 20 days — the United Nations has taken notice. Murdough is just the latest statistic in a series of needless deaths of homeless people while under arrest for "crimes" related to being unhoused, such as loitering or trespassing.
The U.N. Human Rights Committee in Geneva on Thursday condemned the United States for criminalising homelessness, calling it "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment" that violates international human rights treaty obligations. It also called upon the U.S. government to take corrective action, following a two-day review of U.S. government compliance with a human rights treaty ratified in 1992.
"I'm just simply baffled by the idea that people can be without shelter in a country, and then be treated as criminals for being without shelter," said Sir Nigel Rodley, chairman of the committee in closing statements on the U.S. review. "The idea of criminalising people who don't have shelter is something that I think many of my colleagues might find as difficult as I do to even begin to comprehend."
The Committee called on the U.S. to abolish criminalisation of homelessness laws and policies at state and local levels, intensify efforts to find solutions for homeless people in accordance with human rights standards and offer incentives for decriminalisation, including giving local authorities funding for implementing alternatives and withholding funding for criminalizing the homeless.
Those recommendations run counter to the current trends in the nation. Laws targeting the homeless — loitering laws that ban sleeping or sitting too long in one public spot, or camping in parks overnight — have become increasingly common in communities throughout the country as homelessness has skyrocketed.
The National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty (NLCHP), a D.C.-based advocacy organization which monitors laws that criminalise homeless people and litigates on behalf of poor people regularly conducts reviews of cities criminalising homelessness and finds more and more laws banning such activities as sitting or lying in public places with each new survey.
"We welcome the Committee's Concluding Observations and call on our government to take swift action to solve homelessness with homes, not jails and prisons," said Maria Foscarinis, the NLCHP executive director, in a statement. The NLCHP had submitted a report to the U.N. Committee for review.
Paul Boden, executive director of the Western Regional Advocacy Project, an umbrella organization of advocacy groups in the Western U.S. that is hoping states will sign onto a Bill of Rights for homeless people, said that more and more homeless people are being arrested, prosecuted and killed for actions relating to their poverty. (See below.)
Article reproduced from Alternet.org
Meanwhile, in a tragic irony given the UN report, video has emerged in the last few days of yet another tragedy.
We warn you, this video is very distressing.
The shooting in Albuquerque of a homeless man dead has drawn attention to the city's officer-involved shootings, especially those involving the mentally ill.
Since 2010, the city's police have shot 37 people, The New York Times reports. The New Mexico Public Defender Department estimates that 75% of those shot had a mental illness, even though nationally about half of those shot by police have mental health problems.
The Albuquerque Police Department (APD) has identified the man in the recently released video as 38-year-old James M. Boyd. The Albuquerque Journal reports dispatchers informed APD officers responding to the incident that Boyd was mentally incompetent and possibly had paranoid schizophrenia.
The disturbing video from March 16 shows officers aiming their weapons at Boyd, who was camping illegally. We later learn was holding knives, but he doesn't appear to be threatening the officers.
At the beginning of the video, Boyd gathers his bags containing his belongings.
One officer then says "do it" while another throws a flash grenade that explodes as officers and a police dog charge him.
The man drops his bags and scuffles briefly with the police dog before turning his back as if to retreat, but he is immediately shot in the back.
Officers then restrain the mortally wounded man and the video reveals he has a small knife in each hand, although it is unclear from the video when he pulled the knives out.
In a press conference held shortly after the March 15 shooting, APD Chief of Police Gorden Eden said he believed the shooting was justified. According to his version of events, the man threatened APD officers with knives after they approached while he was sleeping at his illegal campsite.
Eden said officers were attempting to use non-lethal means when they threw the flash grenade. But the man pulled out two knives and threatened an officer handling the police dog, according to the police. "The officers then perceived a directed threat immediately to the canine handler who was trying to redirect the dog towards the suspect, when the shots were fired," Eden said.
While Boyd's actions in the video appear non-aggressive, Eden said he had not obeyed officers' demands. "The suspect did in fact make a decision not to follow the directions that were provided to him by the officers," he said.
According to The Times, Boyd had a history of mental illness and may not have followed the officers' directions because he believed he was a federal agent who shouldn't be bossed around.
The APD has a history of allegedly using excessive force during confrontations with civilians, spurring the U.S. Department of Justice to launch an ongoing investigation into the matter in November 2012. Of the 37 people shot since 2010 more than 20 were killed, according to the Albuquerque Journal.
In 2013 a judge ruled that the 2010 fatal shooting of an Iraq War veteran with post-traumatic stress disorder was not justified.
This week, an attorney announced he intends to file a class-action lawsuit against the APD over repeated shootings of people with mental health problems. The lawsuit would seek to guarantee additional training for officers to peacefully end confrontations with mentally ill people.
The video recently sparked a large demonstration in Albuquerque streets against recent APD shooting deaths, according to the Albuquerque Journal. Some community members have criticised the APD for making arrests and resorting to riot gear and tear gas during that 12-hour demonstration sparked by the shooting. Another demonstration followed, and another is set for Friday.
However, Albuquerque Mayor Richard Berry and Eden said the police actions were an appropriate response to some protesters who behaved like a mob committing illegal acts.
APD Chief Eden started at his position February 27. He previously spent eight years serving as the U.S. marshal for New Mexico in the same Department of Justice still investigating the APD. As the new ADP chief, Eden has vowed to begin improving the department before the investigation reaches its conclusion. He said his major priorities are community outreach, bolstering APD's leadership structure and police retention. Eden also hopes to increase the department's manpower, which currently stands at 900 officers although he said there is funding for 1,100 officers.
From Business Insider and others
Well, having viewed the video, we believe this is an unlawful or morally reprehensible killing, at best, and barefaced murder at worst. This man was clearly no threat.
The "flash-bang" is launched as he is complying with the police commands. He is further assaulted when he is clearly no threat whatsoever.
Even if he was initially considered a threat, (even though we cannot see why), why was force not used to disable him (shooting at his legs, for example) rather than to kill?
The police concerned are on "administrative leave". In our opinion, they should be in court. As for the police chief believing the shooting was justified, well, if that's what he calls "community outreach", then words fail us.
Keep the conversation going. Tell others! Feel free to print the article, too.
Don't rest in peace, Davy Jones: get up to Heaven and rock the joint
Posted: March 1, 2012 in Humour, Popular Culture et al
Tags: Beatles, Davy Jones, Davy Jones dies, Daydream Believer, humor, humour, Micky Dolenz, Monkees, New York, Peter Tork, pop music, popular culture
The same chirpy grin, the same good-natured twinkle in the eye
How sad to hear that the Monkee's Davy Jones has died of a heart attack at just 66 years young.
I was a kid in the 60s and 70s, and the Monkees were simply part of my life. Discussions about whether they were a "real" pop group or merely a manufactured confection are surely irrelevant. They were enormous fun and took to their roles with huge enthusiasm – in an era when much "popular" music was created by hard headed folks with an eye for what the public wanted. I have heard it argued they were the first "boy band". Whatever.
What mattered is the lads themselves oozed talent – you can't fake that – and none less than irrepressible young Brit Davy Jones, who instantly won a huge following in the US and elsewhere with his Beatles-style haircut, natural good looks and elfin charm.
Here's a great clip of the lads performing in New York just last year, and obviously having a great time. The reaction of the crowd reveals their genuine appeal.
They copped a lot of flak – included being called the "Prefab Four" as opposed to the Beatles, but the criticism seemed carping and mean-spirited then and still does.
That they went on to create a genuine following and deliver some of the best pop tunes of the era was their sweet revenge.
If you want to enjoy the original, too, here it is. The bit at the end where the boys vie to be in the front was kicked off by prankster Mickey Dolenz, (it starts at about two minutes in), and whilst it might have been scripted it looks spontaneous, and as this particular video became very well known it obviously explains why he and Davy and larking around in the same way in the 2011 show. And you know what? It's still funny, all these years later. I defy you to watch it and not smile.
The success of the band should not be under-rated. As David Bianculli noted in his Dictionary of Teleliteracy, "The show's self-contained music videos, clear forerunners of MTV, propelled the group's first seven singles to enviable positions of the pop charts: three number ones, two number twos, two number threes." Quite some record.
Well someone thought they were good. This is the Monkees in 1967. From left: Mike Nesmith, Davy Jones, Peter Tork and Micky Dolenz pose with their Emmy award at the 19th Annual Primetime Emmy Awards in California. It's not as well-known that Jones had previously been a child star in England and been nominated for a Tony for his role as the Artful Dodger in Oliver, on Broadway. Pic: AAP Source: AP
And though initially the Monkees weren't allowed to play their own instruments, they were supported by enviable talent: Carole King and Gerry Goffin wrote Pleasant Valley Sunday, and Neil Diamond penned I'm a Believer. Musicians who played on their records included Billy Preston (who only later played with the Beatles), Glen Campbell, Leon Russell, Ry Cooder and Neil Young. That they had their own musical talent is undoubted – Peter Tork wrote the piano arrangement of Daydream Believer himself.
The outpouring of grief at the death of this much-loved 60s icon seems entirely genuine, and of a more proportioned and thoughtful – and gentle – nature than that which greeted the news of Whitney Houston's equally untimely demise a couple of weeks back.
Rather than a wailing and a gnashing of teeth, the world simply seems to have paused for a moment and breathed a collective sigh, and to my mind that sigh reflects a wistful sadness at a symbol of the passing of a simpler and somehow less fraught era when not every media appearance was attended by a cavalcade of "fucks", messy unwanted pregnancies, world-weary cynicism, and endless stories of foolish drug-taking and idiot drunken-ness.
That this feeling is also the product of the rose-tinted spectacles that accompany any retrospective view makes it no less true. The world has become a harsher place, and the death of Davy Jones and what he stood for just makes it more so, by a tiny but perceptible increment.
A lot of us are still Daydream Believers as we waddle grumpily through and past our middle age, and if the song comes on at a party or in a club are suddenly transformed into carefree teenagers again, belting out the lyrics with delighted abandon. What bigger compliment could a band want? Thanks for the memories, Davy.
Clever, clever, *bleep* clever politics. Maybe.
Posted: February 19, 2012 in Humour, Political musings
Tags: ALP leadership tensions, Australia, Australia's Prime Minister, Australian politician cursing, cursing, drunk politicians, Foster's lager, Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, Kevin Rudd swearing, New York, political tactics, politics, strip clubs, swearing
Keen students of Australian politics will recall that just prior to the Kevin07 election that saw him triumphantly elected as Australia's Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd was "outed" for having been taken along to a New York club frequented by scantily (ahem) clad ladies, some four years previously, after a late night dining and drinking too much.
Sources close to Mr Rudd told wellthisiswhatithink that the delivery of "Stop Work Choices Now, Protect My Penalty Rates" t-shirts were just running a little late*. To the best of our knowledge, no one in this photograph is Kevin Rudd.
Some reports claimed Rudd was asked to leave by the management after inappropriate touching of the dancers … although Rudd strenuously denied that component of the story, whilst admitting he'd been there, which he regretted. Presumably that was after he'd seen how much they all spent on champagne.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/kevin-rudd-hits-a-strip-club/story-e6frewt0-1111114215510
And as this report reveals, other Aussie pollies took the opportunity to fall over themselves to confess that they, too, had seen naked young ladies cavorting around on a stage at one time or another. Usually when they were young, callow yoofs who should have known better. And as nipping into a lap dancing club when sloshed is, frankly, a virtually universal Australian experience, at some time or other, this was hardly a great shock to anyone.
http://www.news.com.au/top-stories/im-not-captain-perfect-rudd-says/story-e6frfkp9-1111114215400
Now, though, when we are reliably forecast to be within somewhere between 1-3 weeks of Rudd challenging the woman who deposed him as Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, to get the top job back again, he is again in the news for the "wrong" reasons. This time for dropping the "F Bomb" (and some other choice phrases) a few times during the recording of a message in Chinese.
The video – unbleeped – is here, and I think it's truly hilarious. Go on, click it, you know you want to.
Of course, people have immediately leapt on to the internet and airwaves to accuse someone on Gillard's side of leaking the out-takes to damage Rudd. But Prime Minister Julia Gillard denies her office leaked the video, which also shows a frustrated Mr Rudd slamming the table.
It was anonymously posted on YouTube over the weekend.
"There have been some assertions today that somehow this is connected with my office. That is completely untrue," Ms Gillard told reporters in Darwin on Sunday.
"My office did not have access to the material people have seen on YouTube."
Mr Rudd said the video was embarrassing, before he flew to Mexico for a meeting of foreign affairs ministers from the Group of 20 nations. His careful remarks included:
"Anyone who's got a touch of suspicion about them would say that if this was done, somewhat embarrassingly, a couple of years ago and it suddenly emerges now, then obviously it's a little bit on the unusual side," he told Sky News.
But I wonder at the motives of whoever posted it, to be honest.
Those with long memories will recall that the almost universal reaction from the citizenry of Australia to news that Rudd had been to a strip club after chugging back a few too many tubes of the amber throat charmer** was "Bugger me, he's not a desiccated calculating machine who talks in pointy head gobbledygook after all, he's actually just an ordinary bloke like me. You know what? I'm even more inclined to vote for him now."
And yes, he duly went up in the opinion polls, and on to win a huge victory against incumbent John Howard, who even lost his own seat in Parliament, the only sitting Prime Minister ever to do so.
So I suspect the embattled current PM or her staffers might have had nothing to do with the latest leak at all. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if she is right now heading back to her hotel room in Darwin (where she has been commemorating the 70th anniversary of the bombing of that city by the Japanese in 1942) to have a lie down with a nice cup of tea and an aspirin, cursing and swearing to herself and anyone who would care to listen, somewhere along the lines of "Fuck me drunk, the fucking Milky Bar Kid has gone and fucking done it to me again."
Sadly for her, though, none of her advisers would be smart enough to release footage of her incoherent rage.
(*This is not true. I made it up. I know that's hard to believe.)
(**I do not know for sure that Kevin Rudd was drinking Fosters. I just hope, that in his role as a dinky-di Aussie, that he was.)
Art wank alive and well in New York
Posted: November 13, 2011 in Life, Political musings, Popular Culture et al
Tags: absurd art prices, America, Andreas Gursky, art wank, auctions, Christies, Cindy Sherman, Daily Mail, Expensive photo, New York, Occupy movement, photoworth $4.3 million
A digitally altered photo of a river worth more than $4 million?
Yahoo and the Daily Mail reports
A photo of an "accurate image of a modern river" has been sold for $4.38 million, earning the highest ever price for a photograph at an auction.
The photo, which depicts a bland scene of a river, was digitally altered by artist Andreas Gursky to remove pesky distractions such as dog walkers, cyclists and factory building to focus on the river itself, the Daily Mail reported.
The picture, called "Rhine It", fetched the mammoth auction price at Christie's in New York.
It was described by the auction house as "a dramatic and profound reflection on human existence and our relationship to nature on the cusp of the 21st century".
The purchaser of the expensive print is not currently known. The previous record for a photo at an auction was Cindy Sherman's 1981 print 'Untitled', which earned $3.7 million.
To which I say: this is a nonsense. The photo is little more than a happy snap, with some simple photoshopping. Millions of people do the same every day on their home PCs.
What's more, it's not merely bland, it's utterly meaningless, tedious and boring. And secondly, and much more importantly, did the investor (he/she could hardly be called an art lover) consider what that $4.38 million might have done feeding children in the Horn of Africa? Or, indeed, how it might have impacted upon any other worthy cause?
Did they pause for one moment, in their rush to acquire something which they hope will increase in value, to consider how many lives they could have changed for the better, perhaps utterly and profoundly, before buying a print to sit, presumably, in a temperature-controlled vault, somewhere?
Well may the occupy movement cry "Tax the 1%, we are the 99%". No wonder the purchaser is unknown. His house would be the next place with a tent city springing up on the front lawn.
How many people have thunk here?
Archives Select Month January 2021 (1) October 2020 (2) September 2020 (2) June 2020 (3) April 2020 (1) September 2019 (2) August 2019 (1) July 2019 (3) May 2019 (2) April 2019 (5) February 2019 (3) January 2019 (1) December 2018 (1) November 2018 (2) October 2018 (2) September 2018 (2) August 2018 (1) June 2018 (2) April 2018 (1) March 2018 (2) February 2018 (3) January 2018 (3) December 2017 (1) November 2017 (1) October 2017 (1) September 2017 (2) August 2017 (6) July 2017 (1) June 2017 (3) May 2017 (6) April 2017 (5) March 2017 (2) February 2017 (4) January 2017 (7) December 2016 (7) November 2016 (8) October 2016 (9) September 2016 (9) August 2016 (10) July 2016 (13) June 2016 (16) May 2016 (6) April 2016 (14) March 2016 (17) February 2016 (22) January 2016 (7) December 2015 (15) November 2015 (19) October 2015 (22) September 2015 (17) August 2015 (13) July 2015 (15) June 2015 (15) May 2015 (9) April 2015 (14) March 2015 (14) February 2015 (18) January 2015 (21) December 2014 (15) November 2014 (17) October 2014 (24) September 2014 (14) August 2014 (19) July 2014 (24) June 2014 (19) May 2014 (22) April 2014 (26) March 2014 (23) February 2014 (18) January 2014 (23) December 2013 (19) November 2013 (23) October 2013 (30) September 2013 (22) August 2013 (26) July 2013 (14) June 2013 (8) May 2013 (9) April 2013 (17) March 2013 (24) February 2013 (19) January 2013 (28) December 2012 (22) November 2012 (19) October 2012 (24) September 2012 (27) August 2012 (37) July 2012 (19) June 2012 (14) May 2012 (13) April 2012 (18) March 2012 (29) February 2012 (18) January 2012 (20) December 2011 (12) November 2011 (18) October 2011 (9) September 2011 (27) August 2011 (37)
Follow Well, This Is What I Think on WordPress.com
Creative Writing - Melbourne
Wondering how God could have got all this into such a short Tale
"We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are" - Anais Nin
It's the thin line between reality and fantasy. It's the thin line between sanity and madness. It's the crazy things that make us think, laugh and scream in the dark.
Showcasing the designs of an Australian glass artist
Rosie Waterland is a writer based in Sydney. She finds her own jokes particularly hilarious.
If life's about the journey, does it matter how many bathroom breaks you take along the way?
Where my Old writing lives!
Aligning Execution With Strategy
Writer, social activist, a lot of Israel/Palestine, and general mental rambling
speaks to the masses of people not reading this blog


Ask a Designer: How Do I Choose a Rug?
Every week, we're asking designer Scot Meacham Wood, formerly of Ralph Lauren and now owner of his eponymous design firm, a question from our readers. This week's topic is about choosing rugs for any room. Have a decorating dilemma? Comment below and yours might be featured in a future installment.
Q: "How does we choose a rug? What sizes do we choose? And what colors are best?" —Tyler and Amber F.
A: Tyler and Amber, as always, I can count on House Beautiful's readers to ask the important questions. Floor coverings are a big part of any room design, but can also be a significnat part of the budget. Let's talk first about sizes and then discuss styles and materials.
For Dining Rooms: I always take the size of the surface of your dining room table and add 6 feet to it. So, if your table is 3' x 6', I would start looking at a 9' x 12' carpet. This is important because it means that your dining chairs will still have all four legs on the rug, even when they're pulled away from the table.
For Living Rooms: Once again, take a good look at where the legs of your furniture land. At minimum, I would want the front legs of all furniture in the seating area to be placed on the carpet. Ideally, I like to have the back legs on the rug if possible, to help unify the space. It's a pet peeve of mine when I see a carpet floating in the middle of a room with only the cocktail table actually on it. It just doesn't feel "done" to me.
For Bedrooms. The best rule to keep in mind for your bedroom is that a majority of your rug will be under your bed. Depending on the layout of your room, I like to see between 3 and 4 feet of carpet exposed on all 3 sides of the bed.
Another way to determine rug size is to measure the size of the room and then subtract about 1½ feet. This will give you a 9-inch border of exposed flooring on each side. With all of these best practices, keep in mind that most rugs on the market come in standard sizes: 6' x 9', 8' x 10', 9' x 12', 10' x 14', and 12' x 15'. If you're not having something custom-made, find the one that is closest to the size you need. When in doubt, choose the larger size.
Now that we have the nitty-gritty of the size question solved, let's get to the fun part and talk about pattern and style. This doesn't involve any math or specific answers because design is not just about the math, it's often all about balance. For dining rooms, sometimes it can be a good idea to get something with pattern. Dining rooms are often dominated with a large wooden table and chairs, so the pattern gives the room some interest - and can also hide any food stains. When you're shopping for bedroom rugs, you should wear shoes that you can easily slip off because you want to be sure it feels good on your bare feet. The sales staff shouldn't mind if you ask about the carpet's "foot feel!" In your living room, it's going to be about balance. If your furnishings are upholstered with heavy pattern, I might start looking at a piece that has a subtle pattern or a solid color. If your furnishings are upholstered in a solid color, I would use a patterned rug to add some interest. In the photo above of a library that we designed, we actually used both of these ideas. Since all of the upholstered pieces are in leather, I wanted to use a patterned floor covering. But because it's all about balance, the addition of the upholstered tartan wall added a large amount of movement and pattern to the room. For our solution, we had a simple, wool, low-pile rug custom-cut to fit the room and then layered a smaller patterned carpet on top of it.
Now for fibers, the most important thing to think about is how hard you're going to be on the floors. I almost always recommend using 100% wool because I find it to be the easiest to clean and maintain. Silk and viscose are lovely and give the room a marvelous bit of shimmer, but, if you have small children or pets, it can get a little tricky to keep it looking fresh. I love using sisal in many of my projects, but I let my clients know that it will most likely need to be replaced once it begins to wear. I always keep samples and style numbers on file so that we can simply re-order as needed.


After a career as a classical ballet dancer it was a natural progression to study media makeup and hair as I had been applying my own theatrical makeup and wigs all my professional life.
Previous work on corporate films with characters such as The Mad Hatter and a Crazy Professor were particular favourites and a painted hand as a zebra for a Cadburys advertising pitch! Freelancing for the Wig and Makeup department at The Royal Opera House for 15 years, has given me opportunities on Swan Lake, Nutcracker, Carmen, La Traviata to name a few. I have also demonstrated for the Opera House 'Open Up' days and was a makeup artist for 'World Ballet Day 2015' and a live cinema opera screening.
I have tutored media makeup courses at Bedfordshire and Aylesbury Colleges for 8 years and have an Assessors Award A1. I have also tutored at Pinewood Film Studios, Iver Academy, The Royal Opera House and summer school for NODA.
Preparing a bride and her bridesmaids is very special and after over 120 weddings I have much experience of styles, techniques and time management. Every bride is unique and I ensure she is completely calm and happy before she steps out on her wedding day. I can offer airbrushed makeup to give a delicate but durable finish. Please see my airbrushed makeup page.
I have a makeup studio in Chesham and I cover the Buckinghamshire and Hertfordshire areas.


When looking at the price and the feature list of the shared hosting plans offered by Site5 and GoDaddy, you can find a lot of same things, which could lead to complete confusion about the choice.
To make the decision easier, we have made a comprehensive comparison between the two web hosts to present their differences and the common things in a clear way. The prices, features, performance and customer support are the main aspects taken into account.
Before proceeding to the comparison details, you can read the following ratings first.
When judging from the prices only, we can hardly pick the winner because GoDaddy is cheaper for the initial term while Site5 is cheaper in renewals. The choice, then, depends on your own preferences and your needs of the refund guarantee and free extras.
Site5 offers 3 shared hosting plans, the prices of which are $5.95/mo, $9.95/mo and $12.95/mo when bills are paid annually. If you choose the longer billing cycle – 2 years, you can gain a small reduction to $4.95/mo, $8.95/mo and $11.95/mo. There is no further discount.
Besides, the cheapest hostBasic plan does not include a monthly term, while the other two plans can be paid monthly at the prices of $10.95/mo and $13.95/mo respectively.
GoDaddy provides 3 plans, too. The regular/renewal rates of these plans are $7.99/mo, $9.99/mo and $14.99/mo. However, at most times, there are up to 55% discounts available which reduce the prices to $3.99/mo, $4.49/mo and $7.99/mo.
For the low promotional prices mentioned here, you have to pay attention that they are valid for long terms like 3/5/10 years only. Shorter terms come with higher prices.
Let's take the primary Economy plan as an example. This plan is priced at $7.99/mo for 1/3/6-month terms, $4.99/mo for 1-year terms, $4.49/mo for 2-year terms, and $3.99/mo for other terms longer than 3 years.
To promote sales, Site5 is kind enough to provide a 30-day free trial for all the shared hosting plans. By using the coupon code "FREETRIAL" in the checkout and selecting the 1-month contract, you are able to enjoy the service immediately. Note that credit card information is required for the trial because services will renew automatically when the trial ends.
In terms of the refund guarantee, both web hosts provide one, but the difference is Site5 offers refunds within the first 45 days while GoDaddy only processes refund requests submitted within 30 days. The longer refund period you get, the more risk-free you will feel when trying a new service.
For all customers choosing one year or longer billing cycles, GoDaddy offers a free domain. But unlike those generous web hosts like GreenGeeks which provide a lifetime free domain, the freebie available with GoDaddy is free for the first year of signup only.
Site5 and GoDaddy provide easy-to-use control panel and many other basic hosting features. However, you must pay extra attention to their limitations, too, when evaluating their value.
For each shared hosting plan, the two web hosts offer cPanel control panel for account management and Softaculous for effortless script install. The combination of these two tools can guarantee a good hosting experience because you don't have to acquire any coding knowledge for upgrading scripts, viewing site stats, creating databases, adding email accounts, changing file permissions, etc.
Their cheapest plan supports one domain only, and the other two plans allow hosting unlimited domains.
PHP, Python, Perl, MySQL, SSH and cron jobs are available.
POP, IMAP, SMTP & webmail are all supported.
Despite these similarities, there are minor differences between their features. To show the differences clearly, we have made a comparison between Site5 hostBasic plan and GoDaddy Economy plan. And for further reference, we have also selected the Launch plan from InMotion, a recognized leading web host, for comparison.
Both of Site5 and GoDaddy claim to serve customers with global data centers so as to guarantee the performance of each hosted website no matter where their customers are located. However, so far they have not been tested to offer the best uptime and speed at the same time.
GoDaddy has a total of 9 data centers, while most of the hosting customers are served from the one located in the US. Due to the reliable equipment in the data centers and the CloudLinux operating system with CageFS, GoDaddy is able to meet the commitment of 99.9% uptime when no accident occurs.
Our monitoring has approved this, and you can see some statistics in the chart below.
Site5, however, does not seem to perform well in uptime. In the recent year, there are a lot of Site5 customers complaining the frequent downtimes of their sites. Many of those outages are caused by load spikes, while other server issues exist, too.
Generally speaking, Site5 is faster than GoDaddy because the latter is one of the slowest among the well-known web hosts. However, due to the frequent outages, Site5 servers can be very slow occasionally, too, which makes the company not a choice for those who seek fast servers.
As we have monitored the server response times of the two companies, it takes over 550ms for Site5 in usual times and more than 800ms in spikes, and the statistics for GoDaddy average over 750ms.
You can see GoDaddy monitoring in below.
Site5 and GoDaddy are different in the quality and contact methods of their technical support.
Both web hosts provide technical support through phone and an email ticket system. However, according to our tests and user reviews, GoDaddy has done a much better job in both ways.
With GoDaddy, the support services are offered through phone and tickets 24×7. For Site5, phone support is limited to 10 AM – 6 PM EST on weekdays, and it is unavailable on the weekends.
GoDaddy is able to guarantee quick responses via either support method and provide professional solutions to issues in most times. However, the ticket support of Site5 is criticized much for inconsistency and low efficiency. Tickets are usually handled by different technicians who even don't read the previous replies.
Although both companies offer a live chat entry on their websites to allow customers to contact support instantly, Site5 does a better job in this aspect.
GoDaddy live chat is available on Monday to Friday only, and there is sometimes no chat agent online even during the business hours. Comparatively, you can access Site5 live chat at anytime from anywhere and then get quick responses, which ensures that all customers including those outside the US can attain fast support.
In fact, we don't recommend either of them as your shared hosting provider because neither is good enough in the hosting performance and technical support. Their prices cannot be seen as being affordable, either.
If you want to take some more alternatives into consideration, learn some details about the following web hosts which are known to be reliable and affordable.


Material sourced from domestic wineries. Wine-touched solid oak staves are pulled directly from deconstructed barrels. Panels are designed to be attached directly to walls. Loose staves and custom designs are also available.


Monitoring of cyanobacteria bloom in reservoir systems is important for water managers responsible of water supply system. Cyanobacteria affect the taste and smell of water and pose considerable filtration problems at water use places. Harmful cyanobacteria bloom in reservoir have significant economic impacts. We develop a new method for estimating the cyanobacteria bloom using Landsat TM and ETM+ data. Developed model was calibrated and cross-validated with existing in situ measurements from Daecheong Reservoir's Water Quality Monitoring Program and Algae Alarm System. Measurements data of three stations taken from 2004 to 2012 were matched with radiometrically converted reflectance data from the Landsat TM and ETM+ sensor. Stepwise multiple linear regression was used to select wavelengths in the Landsat TM and ETM+ bands 1, 2 and 4 that were most significant for predicting cyanobacteria cell number and bio-volume. Based on statistical analysis, the linear models were that included visible band ratios slightly outperformed single band models. The final monitoring models captured the extents of cyanobacteria blooms throughout the 2004-2012 study period. The results serve as an added broad area monitoring tool for water resource managers and present new insight into the initiation and propagation of cyanobacteria blooms in Daecheong reservoir.
Cheon, S. O., J. A. Lee, J. J. Lee, Y. B. Yu, G. C. Bang, and Y. J. Lee, 2006. Relationship among inflow volume, water quality and algal growth in the Daecheong lake, Journal of Korean Society on Water Quality 22(2): 342-348 (in Korean).
Choi, S. P., and J. S. Park, 2006. Evaluation of the optimum band when estimate the density of chlorophyll-a in Landsat ETM+ image, Journal of the Korean Society for GeoSpatial Information System 14(2): 63-68 (in Korean).
Dekker, A. 1993. Detection of the optical water quality parameters for eutrophic waters by high resolution remote sensing, University of Amsterdam.
Ji, S. B. 2013. Monitoring of reservoir water quality using multi-temporal satellite imagery, The master's thesis, Cheongju University (in Korean).
Joung, S. H., C. Y. Ahn, A. R. Choi, K. Y. Jang, and H. M. Oh, 2005. Relation between rainfall and phytoplankton community in Daechung reservoir, Korean Journal of Environmental Biology 23(1): 57-63 (in Korean).
Kim, M. K., J. C. Park, and K. H. Kim, 2007. Development of early forecasting system using GIS and prediction model related to the cyanobacterial blooming in the Daecheong reservoir of Korea, Journal of the Korean association of geographic information studies 10(2): 90-101 (in Korean).
Lee, J.A., J. J. Lee, M. N. Lee, and S. U. Cheon, 2009. Result to implementing the algae alert system on the Daecheong reservoir in 2009, Geum River Environment Research Center, National Institute of Environmental Research.
National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER), 2006. Result to implementing the algae alert system on the Daecheong reservoir in 2006, Geum River Environment Research Center (in Korean).
National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER), 2008a. Algal bloom forecast operating manual, Seoul (in Korean).
National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER), 2008b. Standard test method for water contamination process, Seoul (in Korean).
Park, J. G., 2005. Developmental characteristic of cyanobacterial bloom in lake Daecheong, Korean Journal of Environmental Biology 23(3): 304-314 (in Korean).
Park J. K., and J. H. Park, 2016. Classification of radish and Chinese cabbage in autumn using hyperspectral image, Journal of the Korean society of agricultural engineers 58(1): 91-97 (in Korean).
Wheeler, S. M., A. M. Leslie, S. N. Levine, G. P. Livingston, W. and F. Vincent. 2012. Mapping cyanobacterial blooms in lake Champlain's Mississippi bay using QuickBird and MERIS satellite data, Journal of Great Lakes Research 38: 68-75.