RinkWorks has received public exposure in two areas recently that I am particularly proud of and would like to mention, in case you're interested in taking a look.

Master Developers is a new web site containing interviews with webmasters. I was asked to give an interview for it, and I did. Although the official launch date for the web site is not until February 2, 2000, the page is open and available to browse, and Sean Murphy, the webmaster of that site, gave the ok to start publicizing it. The base URL is http://masterdevelopers.com/; the direct URL to my interview is http://masterdevelopers.com/interviews/rinkworks/. (I've also got a pull quote in the 1/20 press release under "Site News" which is itself an odd sort of thrill.)

The other mention will be a little harder to track down. The full text of the At-A-Glance Film Reviews review of 1938's You Can't Take It With You is quoted in the book Critical Approaches To Writing About Film, by John E. Moscowitz. The book is a pretty comprehensive guide to film criticism, containing chapters on style, types of criticism, and so forth. My review is on page 66, and I am proud that, while open to page 66, one can also see page 67, where a Roger Ebert review is quoted. The review is not really one of my prouder moments, although I stand by my glowing praise, but having the review reprinted in this fine book is a huge thrill. If you're interested in buying a copy of the book online at amazon.com, please get to the site via Slapdash City -- the Books That Start With 'R' page. Click on the link for any book title, then search for Critical Approaches To Writing About Film or John E. Moscowitz from there. Thanks!

Stupid Day has come and gone, and I am proud to have fabricated a global event all by myself. The sheer force of will with which I introduced this holiday appears to have had more far-reaching effects than even I envisioned:

• From Martin H.: "Something funny happened yesterday. Even though most people never knew about it, MANY people in my classes were doing REALLY stupid things. One guy poked his eye with an eraser, another tripped over his laces TWICE, and a lot of my teachers were complaining, saying, 'Why is everyone asking such stupid questions today?'"

Apparently it is in my best interests to work on "Click On RinkWorks' Ad Banners Day" immediately.

Stupid Day was fun, but I'm glad it ended when it did. I had just about figured out how I could step on my own neck.

Happy Stupid Day, everyone! There isn't much to say about Stupid Day that I haven't already said in the Holidays area, so I'll leave this journal entry with just the warmhearted greeting. Be stupid.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go see if touching hot stoves actually hurts as bad as people say it does.

Wow. Once the Poetry Pool opened, the submission level of poetry increased. Maybe it inspired people to write more? I know it did for at least a couple people, and if I haven't said so enough, this is what makes being the webmaster of this site truly rewarding: I love to entertain people, and that's reward enough, but to have a hand in inspiring people, too? The content in the Poetry Pool isn't even mine (well, with the exception of two of the entries, so far). I'm just happy that it's encouraging people to be creative. So many cheers and a big "way to go!" for all you who have, are, and will participate in this with your submissions.

The Poetry Pool opened today. Let me say that it has been more fun than I would have imagined receiving submissions from people and reading their poetic efforts. There are a lot of creative people out there with a good sense of the beauty of language and the wonderful ways it can be used to express ideas. I look forward to updating this feature in the future, so keep those submissions coming.

Whew. A lot happens the last couple weeks of the year and the first week of a new one, and a lot certainly happened with me. But things have finally settled back to normal again, and this weekend is the first in a long time where I can sit back, relax, and catch up on tending to RinkWorks.

I received a letter yesterday, concerning the Reader Poll question, "What decade in the 20th century did we need the least?" which was a submission to the contest I held for the best Reader Poll question suggestion. I liked the question because it inspires thought. Those of you who read this journal regularly have no doubt gathered that I don't appreciate purely mindless entertainment: amidst all the fun, I try to interject food for thought when I can. I was pleased to see that, at least with this reader, a certain amount of reflection was triggered.

• From "Dracimas": "Just a bit of feedback on today's poll question. That was a tough one to answer. I basically just chose one without any solid reason as to why. The 60s through the 90s were not even an option to me because my mother was pregnant with me in 1969, I was born and grew up in the 70s, I graduated high school and got married in the 80s, and my children were born in the 90s. All of those were very significant to me. From 1900 on, every decade helped to shape the one that followed. The advances in industry, technology, and health care alone made every decade unique and important unto itself.

  "I chose the 50s as the one least important to me, but it was the 50s that helped my grandparents decide who they were, which helped my parents become who they are. The 30s did the same for their parents, and the teens for theirs. And so on down the line. And knowing who they were was important for them to instill values (good or bad) in their children that would let them decide who they were going to be.

  "Each decade is just as important to me as the next because without the earlier ones I would not exist, and the later ones I actively participated in. I can't honestly say that one was less important than the other. In terms of which one least affects me directly, I'd have to say 1900, because it was so long ago, but still I have to say that it was very important to my existence as I would not exist without it."

I found Dracimas' letter very interesting, because he approached the question from a viewpoint I had not considered. I was thinking about the question from more of a cultural standpoint. When the results came in, I was intrigued even further: the high scores for the 30s and 40s indicated that others were thinking of the question from a historical standpoint, citing the Great Depression and World War II as things we could have lived without. Dracimas' approach is a third way to do it: a very personal one.

Did anyone out there approach the question from still another viewpoint?