Salad People

We're sorry it has been a while since we have posted here, we wanted to be sure we were getting our facts straight before we revealed to you what appears to be a complex and well-funded conspiracy. We have been monitoring open communication for some time now looking for dangerous trends, and have come across some statistics that gave us pause. Salad consumption at restaurants is up 34.7% worldwide, with soup consumption experiencing a similar decline. What's more, the number of waiters assuming people want salad with their meal instead of asking is up 28.2%. Most experts have explained this trend by suggesting that people are trying to be healthier by choosing a salad over soup, but this doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Even though soup does have a much higher sodium content than salads in general it does not generally contain as much saturated fat as the salad dressing used on the salads. If healthy choices were the explanation we would assume that there would be a drop in the use of salad dressings as well, but, as our statistics show, there was a 44.3% increase in salad dressing consumption. If healthy eating isn't the motivation, we asked ourselves, what is?

We caught a break two weeks ago when we noticed some subliminal advertising promoting the choice of salads at restaurants. We followed that lead and found a whole network of ad companies, waiters' unions, chefs, and lay-people who call themselves "Salad People." They are well-funded and well-connected, and operate mostly in secret. Their mission, as stated in their own publications, is the eradication of soup as a choice at restaurants and the total supremacy of green salads. The reasons they give for wanting to eradicate soups all sound very noble, but don't stand up to scientific scrutiny. They claim, among other things, that soups are responsible for 50.22% of fatal traffic accidents, that they are involved in 90.38% of domestic abuse cases. Our statisticians assure us that these claims are absurdly precise and not backed by any real data that has been published or referred to in any reputable publications.

We still don't know their real reasons for promoting salad at the expense of soup, but all indications are that there is a nefarious purpose behind it all. At the GNU Public Dictatorship we are nothing if not tenacious, which is why we intend to find out once and for all. In the meantime we urge restaurant-goers to choose their side (whether salad or soup) and not to let the waiters or anyone else force you to choose what you don't want. If we all unite, the Salad People will find their task that much harder!

A Clarification

Many of our readers have asked whether our guest writers are given access to information that the general public does not have, and whether all of the guest writers (i.e. finalists in the applications process) have been notified. The answers are no and yes, in that order.

Our guest writers have been asked to choose topics for their posts, and once they have chosen those topics we, the GNU Public Dictatorship's Board of Dictators, have helped them find the information they need in our public archives. At the GNU Public Dictatorship we keep very little information secret, and that only for security purposes when we deal with unscrupulous parties such as the Parent Corporation. If you would like training on how to access our public archives effectively, please contact your local GPD office.

As to whether all of our applicants that are finalists have been notified, the answer is yes. We have notified all of them and are working to send notifications to those who were not accepted, although with the number of applications we received that is going to take some time.

Guest Writer: Ian Simpson

Today's guest writer is Ian Simpson of Mesa, Arizona. Ian has only been a supporter for about three months now, but before that he was closely aligned with other anti-brad organizations and has an impressive resume. In his own words, "I have always believed that certain office products weren't meant to be used by the general public, and accordingly I set up a program in my neighborhood where children were taught from an early age to just say 'no' to brads and other "adult" office tools. I figured that if we could keep kids from starting on brads that they would make the right choice when they were older and would avoid the problems so many of us have had to deal with as adults. Brad use in my community has dropped more than 83% in the last three years, and there is a lower incidence of cancer, influenza, and of acid reflux." We appreciate Ian's work. Even though he wasn't doing it for us (the GPD), he was doing it for all of us (the world). Here's Ian's piece:

Economic Models Revisited

Since this post the Board of Dictators has received many suggestions for the economic model of the New Future. In order to foster discussions about the subject, here are some more economic models:

• The "Family Feud" model. This model differs dramatically from those posed earlier. Instead of working with a broker to get the desired items, citizens must band together into clans that would then prove their superiority to other clans by being more "in tune" with society. Whenever a clan proves its superiority to another a broker would step in and offer a stipend once they prove that they are "in tune" enough with society to pass his or her test. (Note: The major difficulty in this system is that it is focused solely on obtaining money, and not on distributing goods and services.)
• The "Price is Right" model. In this model citizens attend auction events where items they may or may not want are offered for sale. They then offer what they think the item is worth and the seller reveals his or her price. The citizen who offered closest to the asking price without going over is awarded the item and the other citizens are made to foot the bill. The citizen who was awarded the item is then asked to participate in a pricing exercise. The citizen is presented with one or more items (again, the citizen does not choose what they are) and asked to complete a challenge. Successful completion of the challenge allows the citizen to get the item(s). The citizen is then given an opportunity to participate in a larger transaction much like the first.
• The "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" model. This model has many of the same problems as the "Family Feud" model. It doesn't distribute goods and services, it merely gives stipends to individuals who are lucky enough to participate and who happen to have the right knowledge.
• The "Newlywed Game" model. In this economic model producers are paired with consumers and then asked questions about each other. The producers and consumers with the best relationship will be rewarded by having the other producers provide them with goods and/or services and the consumers provide them with money. This model promotes good producer/consumer relations and is thus on the GPD shortlist.

Can't decide on a price for your lawn mower? Try eating your beard!

At the GNU Public Dictatorship we are nothing if not committed to harmony among all people, which is why we try our best to provide useful advice to our supporters in this and other forums. One area in which we have seen significant confusion is the art of price negotiation, especially within the more "civilized" societies. Case in point: these individuals who couldn't decide on the right price for a lawn mower and made the seller eat his own beard. The Board of Dictators has long been working on this issue, and we have made some headway, although we still haven't convinced the networks that The Price is Right is part of the problem. We are making progress, with incidents such as the one mentioned earlier are down 45.9% in the last three years, but we know that we cannot rest until the price truly is right and nobody is forced at knife and gunpoint to ingest his or her own hair.

Guest Writer: Hannah Jordan

Our next guest writer is long-time supporter Hannah Jordan from Biloxi, Mississippi. She has been instrumental in many high-profile events, and has served as local GPD office leader for 14 years. She helped coordinate our response to the Brad Riots of '02 and was instrumental in the successful prosecution and conviction of the leader of the rioters. Enough about Hannah, here's what she had to say:

How not to Burglarize a House

Recent events such as this one and this one suggest that perhaps our supporters have mistaken ideas about burglary. We hope this post will disabuse them of their erroneous ideas without encouraging illegal behavior.

• Rule 1: Don't leave anything behind that could identify you. (This one should be obvious)
• Rule 2: Don't take anything that would identify you. (This one would be a problem, perhaps, if you took something that you had repeatedly told the owner you wanted and he or she repeatedly refused).
• Rule 3: Don't stay until the owner returns. (Hopefully obvious)
• Rule 4: If you use the Internet, do not use any sites that require logins. (Internet histories are fairly easy to examine)
• Rule 5: If you do use a site that requires a login, don't leave it open when you leave. (If you can't live without MySpace during your burglary perhaps you had better stay home. Or at least not leave it open so as to point the finger squarely in your direction)

We hope that these rules will help burglars avoid some of the embarrassing mistakes they might otherwise make, but please don't go robbing anyone's house.

Guest Writer: "Boris"

As we promised earlier, several of our finalists in the quest to be named a member of the Board of Dictators will be given the opportunity to write content for this blog. Our first to be considered good enough for this prestigious blog is one of our operatives that joined us last year in the middle of the scandal surrounding the apparent death of our chief operative "Viktor." For security reasons we are using his code name here rather than his real name, and we have declined to list a home town. "Boris" has had an exciting career with us and has been instrumental in stopping the nano-robotic lichen invasion and several other lesser-known campaigns. He was motivated to apply for the Board of Dictators because of his conviction that his success is limited only by his limited opportunities to serve in the fight against brads and hole punches. Without further ado, here is his piece (don't be fooled by its diminutive stature, it has some potential):

For many years scholars have wondered why the Unholy Brotherhood of the Hole Punch abandoned at least seven of its larger warehouses in the late 1970's. Many theories have been put forward, ranging from simple to complex, but there is no agreement among scholars. Recent activity in one of these sites has reignited debate, and all evidence points to the idea that perhaps they left the sites "abandoned" because they had a long-running experiment there. Passers-by have noted men in HAZMAT suits using what looked like metal detectors. You may rest assured that operatives of the GPD are keeping an eye on the developments, but we would like to urge you to exercise common sense near these sites and to report any unusual activity you may observe.

Where are the Allies?

At the GNU Public Dictatorship we were nothing if not pleased to discover earlier this year that we have some Allies in the fight against evil office products, but as of late we have been saddened to discover that it has been three months now since we have had any contact with the Allies. We would like to believe that they are up to another of their secret missions designed to thwart the evil designs of the Unholy Brotherhood of the Hole Punch, but we have no evidence to support that theory. Perhaps they are resting, or perhaps they have finished with us and moved on to other fights. Of course there is always the possibility that they aren't our allies at all, and that they just aligned themselves with us earlier this year due to a random confluence of our goals at that time. Officially we're going to state that we believe them to be organizing some grand scheme, but privately we ask each of our supporters to keep their ears and eyes open for signs of the Allies.

New information

We are pleased to announce that our investigations into recent disturbances is drawing to a close, and we have decided that we have some reliable new information regarding these disturbing occurrences. We are pleased to report that our fears that the Parent Corporation and their associates were using nano-robotic lichens to assassinate individuals are unfounded. We would like to report, as well, that we have indeed eradicated all of the extant nano-robotic lichens, but we cannot, unfortunately, yet occupy all of space to check. (In fact, our scientists tell us it would be difficult to check every location on earth, but we think they're just lazy) In any case we have concluded based on our statistical analysis that there are likely fewer than 32 lichens in the wild at this time, and our scientists have assured us that these 32 lichens could hardly be expected to organize into any useful tool for the Unholy Brotherhood of the Hole Punch.

So much for the good news. It is our duty to report that, while we don't appear to be facing a resurgent lichen invasion, all is not a blue sunny outlook. The Parent Corporation does appear to be behind the disturbances mentioned earlier, but they appear to be using other means to accomplish their dastardly crimes. It appears that they did not anticipate our development of NARLD devices, and that we discovered a signal that not only disrupts nano-robotic lichens, but also many other tools their operatives were planning on using. With no time to re-design, they have resorted to disabling (clumsily, we might add) NARLD devices before carrying out their missions. On several occasions this delay has given their targets time to react and has frustrated their purposes, but we do not believe this advantage will last long.

We continue to urge caution and recommend that you have at least two backup NARLD devices in any location you frequent, but we would also like to reassure you that things are not so bad as we initially feared!

A new economic model for the future?

At the GNU Public Dictatorship we are nothing if not saddened by the unfortunate consequences of the economic troubles the world has been dealing with in the aftermath of the financial crisis, but we are also thrilled by the opportunities that are now presenting themselves to rebuild the world's economic system in new and exciting ways. We have spent numerous Board Meetings discussing what form the new economic model should take, and we have come up with some interesting ideas. Many of our world citizens have complained that economic systems are completely beyond their grasp. Not that they don't understand the basics of capitalism and socialism, but that they cannot understand how the "market" works itself out. We think this is undesirable, especially since the New Future relies on the participation of our world citizens to keep things running smoothly. Consequently, we are proposing some ideas that may help form a basis for our future economic model. Here are some of the more interesting ideas:

• The "Wheel of Fortune" model. Supply and demand in this model are nearly separated in that the consumer and the producer never communicate with each other at all except through a broker. The producer has been paid a small stipend for dealing with the broker, regardless of whether his or her item is chosen. The broker allows a world citizen to spin a wheel to determine the current transaction's worth, then the citizen, trying to form a coherent picture of the world, asks for something that he lacks. If the broker happens to have a producer that has the item requested, he takes the item from the producer and gives it and a stipend for asking for a useful item to the citizen. This stipend, however, is conditional on future transactions. If a citizen spins "Bankrupt" the stipend is taken back by the broker and the next citizen is given a chance. If the item requested by the citizen is not immediately available he or she loses a turn. Certain common items (food, water, shelter, health care) can be purchased by a citizen without spinning the wheel. If the broker currently has access to the item he takes some of the citizen's money and connects them with their request. If he doesn't have the item, the citizen loses a turn. Wheel of Fortune is a very popular game show, so we doubt world citizens will have any trouble understanding this system.
• The "Jeopardy" model. In this economic model the citizen again deals with a broker instead of the producers themselves. The broker allows the citizen to choose a producer from a grid of producers paid by the broker to be there. The citizen is then presented with a product or service and given an answer for the service. If he or she knows the correct question that corresponds to that answer, he or she is paid to consume the product or service. Several citizens will compete to ask the question, and the one that answers correctly first will be given the reward. If a citizen asks an incorrect question, he will be charged for the product or service and not be allowed to enjoy it. In many ways this system is simpler than the aforementioned "Wheel of Fortune" model, but it lacks a safety net as access to basic services is left to be determined by the choices of the citizens and are not always available to those interested in them.
• The "Deal or No Deal" model. In this model a citizen deals with a broker who has grouped goods and services into "packets" that can be chosen by the citizen. The citizen can keep asking for more and more packets until he or she chooses a "bad" packet, which negates everything they had chosen. The advantages of this system include the fact that no penalties are assessed (producers are paid by the broker and citizens are not charged for not choosing correctly). It does not, however, provide basic goods or services free of charge, nor does it allow individuals to save money and make larger purchases. Although it sounds exciting at first, we believe this model is not worth implementing.

We know there are more economic models we could use, including capitalism, socialism, and some mix of the two, but we think the general public will understand the models made popular by game shows much more readily than the more traditional models.

Application Deadline today!

Just a reminder to future dictators who may have studied with an emphasis in procrastination that today is the last day to submit your Applications for Membership in the Board of Dictators. Don't miss this opportunity to become part of the New Future, especially since there is so much work to be done today if we are going to prevent the Parent Corporation from destroying society or causing mayhem. We look forward to hearing from you!

Time travel?

In weeks past we might have overlooked this incident, where cross-country runner Sarah Glidden was struck by a deer just 100m from the finish line, but we can no longer afford to be so complacent. We have long been skeptics of time travel, but the recent finding of a new Shakespeare play among other incidents have convinced us that there is a possibility that, just maybe, someone is travelling through time and trying to shape our present in order to change the far-distant future. Now that George Clarke has discovered photographic evidence of time travelers, we may have to reexamine a number of our case files. For instance, the aforementioned deer collision is, in light of this knowledge, more likely a successful attempt by somebody in the future to keep Sarah from qualifying for the WIAA state meet, and our simulators have been working out the likely consequences of this event for many days now. Even though we have access to excellent computing resources it will take many weeks to figure out what all of the differences will be in the near future (30 years). Our theorists have told us it wouldn't do any good to run longer since the accuracy drops off exponentially after about 30 years, so we'll report on what we do find. Oh, and for the curious, both simulators have successfully predicted everything of interest that has occurred since the collision. We'll let you know when significant differences are observed.